Find a district › Eaton Community City

Eaton Community City

What moved this district's funding from FY2025 to FY2027, line by line — on total state support, and on the foundation aid this site models — and where it sits among its county's districts.

Across Preble County Contents

FY2026 and FY2027 models, nominal dollars

On total state support, Eaton Community City moved +0.4% (+$39,557) from FY2026 to FY2027: the 2nd-largest rise of 6 in Preble County.

College Corner LocalPreble ShawneeLocalTwin ValleyCommunity LocalNational Trail LocalTri-County NorthLocalEaton CommunityCity+8.6%+0.4%−7.5%
College Corner LocalPreble Shawnee LocalTwin Valley Community LocalNational Trail LocalTri-County North LocalEaton Community City+8.6%+0.4%−7.5%
College Corner LocalPreble Shawnee LocalTwin Valley Community LocalNational Trail LocalTri-County North LocalEaton Community City+8.6%+0.4%−7.5%
The values
  • College Corner Local: +8.6% (+$198,285) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Eaton Community City: +0.4% (+$39,557) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Preble Shawnee Local: −1.7% (−$154,750) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Twin Valley Community Local: −3.0% (−$202,307) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • National Trail Local: −3.3% (−$265,420) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Tri-County North Local: −7.5% (−$376,804) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027

On foundation aid, Eaton Community City moved 0.0% ($0) from FY2026 to FY2027: the only one of 6 in Preble County that did not move.

College Corner LocalPreble ShawneeLocalTwin ValleyCommunity LocalNational Trail LocalTri-County NorthLocalEaton CommunityCity+8.5%0.0%−9.0%
College Corner LocalPreble Shawnee LocalTwin Valley Community LocalNational Trail LocalTri-County North LocalEaton Community City+8.5%0.0%−9.0%
College Corner LocalPreble Shawnee LocalTwin Valley Community LocalNational Trail LocalTri-County North LocalEaton Community City+8.5%0.0%−9.0%
The values
  • College Corner Local: +8.5% (+$196,826) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Eaton Community City: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Preble Shawnee Local: −2.0% (−$161,043) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Twin Valley Community Local: −3.0% (−$179,716) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • National Trail Local: −3.7% (−$262,125) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Tri-County North Local: −9.0% (−$400,346) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027

Every district the department attributes to Preble County, as a percentage of its own FY2026 figure, so a city and a village can be read on one scale. The two measures can rank the same county in different orders: a district held at its base does not move on foundation aid at all, whatever its other lines do.

By line Contents

Every line the department pays this district through, in the three years. Total state support, the last row, is all of them; foundation aid, the first, is the narrow measure — core foundation funding and the guarantee, the part this site models. FY2025 is the department's final payment report; FY2026 and FY2027 are its models of those years, not payments. Every figure is in nominal dollars.

Line FY2025 paidFY2026 modelFY2027 model FY2026 to FY2027
Foundation aid (the narrow measure)$9,164,993$8,961,115$8,961,115$0
Transportation$884,184$956,042$999,544+$43,502
Special education transportation$38,558$49,489$77,201+$27,711
Preschool special education$198,457$211,017$203,395−$7,622
Supplemental targeted assistance (repealed by H.B. 96)$0$0$0$0
Formula transition supplement$60,087$192,107$148,605−$43,502
Base funding supplement$0$47,045$68,311+$21,267
Enrollment growth supplement$0$0$0$0
Performance supplement$0$90,604$88,805−$1,800
Total state support (the wide measure)$10,346,279$10,507,419$10,546,977+$39,557

The lines sum to total state support in every year, to within cent rounding. Supplemental targeted assistance keeps its row after FY2025 because its going is part of the change: H.B. 96 repealed it, and the base funding and enrollment growth supplements it created are separate lines, not its replacement under another name.

The phase-in Contents

Foundation aid is paid as the funding base plus the The share of the gap between what the formula computes and a district's older base that is actually paid. A district below its base is held at the base, so a higher phase-in does not reach it.'s share of the gap between what the formula calculates and that base, and the guarantee holds it up where the result would fall. These are the department's own three figures for each year. FY2025 is the department's final payment report; FY2026 and FY2027 are its models of those years, not payments. Every figure is in nominal dollars.

Stage FY2025 paidFY2026 modelFY2027 model
Funding base$8,961,115$8,961,115$8,961,115
Calculated by the formula$9,266,917$8,782,606$7,839,015
Paid through the phase-in$9,164,993$8,812,364$7,839,015
Guarantee$0$148,752$1,122,100
Foundation aid$9,164,993$8,961,115$8,961,115
  • FY2025: +$203,878 above its base. The formula calculates $9,266,917, $305,802 over a $8,961,115 base, and the phase-in pays $203,878 of that gap.
  • FY2026: at its base. The formula calculates $8,782,606 against a $8,961,115 base, and foundation aid is the base itself — the guarantee pays the $148,752 the phase-in leaves short. A higher phase-in rate would not reach it.
  • FY2027: at its base. The formula calculates $7,839,015 against a $8,961,115 base, and foundation aid is the base itself — the guarantee pays the $1,122,100 the phase-in leaves short. A higher phase-in rate would not reach it.

The phase-in statewide counts the districts paid exactly their base in each year, which a higher rate does not reach, and what it paid above everyone else's.

What moved underneath Contents

Three inputs and the measure each reaches the dollars through. The files publish the inputs and the payment but not how much of the payment's change each input is, so nothing here divides the change between them. The FY2025 payment report carries no capacity inputs at all, so state share and enrollment start at FY2026. Dollar figures are in nominal dollars.

  • State share went from 40.7% in FY2026 to 34.7% in FY2027. It is the part of base cost the state pays after the district's local capacity is charged, so it reaches the dollars through foundation aid, which moved $0 over the same two years. Reappraisal and the state share sets the fall beside every district's valuation change, by the share it started at.
  • Assessed valuation went from $469,200,840 in tax year 2023 to $472,257,251 in tax year 2025 (+0.7%). Valuation is the larger part of local capacity, which is what sets the state share above — the route by which a reappraisal reaches foundation aid at all.
  • Enrolled ADM went from 1,742.4 in FY2026 to 1,707.8 in FY2027, as each year's file states it (−2.0%). Base cost is computed per pupil, so enrollment reaches the dollars through the formula's calculated figure on the phase-in card.

This district is at its base in FY2027, so none of the three reaches its foundation aid that year: whatever they did, the guarantee paid the difference.

Transfers and net funding Contents

What the department deducts from total state support before it pays the district — the educational service center's charge and other adjustments — and what is left. FY2025's report publishes the transfers as one total; FY2027's itemizes them; FY2026's publishes none, and that column says so rather than showing a zero. FY2025 is the department's final payment report; FY2026 and FY2027 are its models of those years, not payments. Every figure is in nominal dollars.

FY2025 paidFY2026 modelFY2027 model
Total state support$10,346,279$10,507,419$10,546,977
Service center chargenot itemizednot published−$1,648,932
Other adjustmentsnot itemizednot published−$96,128
Transfers, in total−$2,657,843not published−$1,745,060
Net state funding$7,688,436not published$8,801,917