Find a district › North Canton City

North Canton 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 Stark County Contents

FY2026 and FY2027 models, nominal dollars

On total state support, North Canton City moved +1.0% (+$159,737) from FY2026 to FY2027: the 5th-largest rise of 17 in Stark County.

Massillon CityJackson LocalTuslaw LocalNorthwest LocalAlliance CityPlain LocalLake LocalCanton LocalFairless LocalMarlington LocalSandy Valley LocalOsnaburg LocalCanton CityPerry LocalMinerva LocalLouisville CityNorth CantonCity+3.3%+1.0%−6.8%
Massillon CityJackson LocalTuslaw LocalNorthwest LocalAlliance CityPlain LocalLake LocalCanton LocalFairless LocalMarlington LocalSandy Valley LocalOsnaburg LocalCanton CityPerry LocalMinerva LocalLouisville CityNorth Canton City+3.3%+1.0%−6.8%
Massillon CityJackson LocalTuslaw LocalNorthwest LocalAlliance CityPlain LocalLake LocalCanton LocalFairless LocalMarlington LocalSandy Valley LocalOsnaburg LocalCanton CityPerry LocalMinerva LocalLouisville CityNorth Canton City+3.3%+1.0%−6.8%
The values
  • Massillon City: +3.3% (+$1,257,433) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Jackson Local: +2.5% (+$215,215) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Tuslaw Local: +1.2% (+$76,512) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Northwest Local: +1.1% (+$106,218) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • North Canton City: +1.0% (+$159,737) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Alliance City: +0.9% (+$263,621) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Plain Local: +0.8% (+$180,269) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Lake Local: +0.4% (+$74,520) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Canton Local: +0.4% (+$40,490) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Fairless Local: +<0.1% (+$1,898) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Marlington Local: −0.2% (−$25,605) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Sandy Valley Local: −0.3% (−$27,483) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Osnaburg Local: −0.6% (−$49,439) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Canton City: −0.8% (−$737,670) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Perry Local: −2.3% (−$514,828) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Minerva Local: −2.4% (−$302,447) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Louisville City: −6.8% (−$1,131,710) in total state support, FY2026 to FY2027

On foundation aid, North Canton City moved 0.0% ($0) from FY2026 to FY2027: one of 8 of 17 in Stark County that did not move.

Massillon CityAlliance CityOsnaburg LocalCanton LocalFairless LocalLake LocalMarlington LocalNorthwest LocalSandy Valley LocalTuslaw LocalJackson LocalCanton CityPerry LocalPlain LocalMinerva LocalLouisville CityNorth CantonCity+3.4%0.0%−8.4%
Massillon CityAlliance CityOsnaburg LocalCanton LocalFairless LocalLake LocalMarlington LocalNorthwest LocalSandy Valley LocalTuslaw LocalJackson LocalCanton CityPerry LocalPlain LocalMinerva LocalLouisville CityNorth Canton City+3.4%0.0%−8.4%
Massillon CityAlliance CityOsnaburg LocalCanton LocalFairless LocalLake LocalMarlington LocalNorthwest LocalSandy Valley LocalTuslaw LocalJackson LocalCanton CityPerry LocalPlain LocalMinerva LocalLouisville CityNorth Canton City+3.4%0.0%−8.4%
The values
  • Massillon City: +3.4% (+$1,209,320) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Alliance City: +0.9% (+$229,041) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Osnaburg Local: +0.1% (+$10,773) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • North Canton City: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Canton Local: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Fairless Local: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Lake Local: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Marlington Local: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Northwest Local: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Sandy Valley Local: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Tuslaw Local: 0.0% ($0) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Jackson Local: −0.8% (−$47,228) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Canton City: −1.1% (−$864,427) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Perry Local: −3.9% (−$765,854) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Plain Local: −4.4% (−$884,029) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Minerva Local: −6.7% (−$763,138) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027
  • Louisville City: −8.4% (−$1,284,515) in foundation aid, FY2026 to FY2027

Every district the department attributes to Stark 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)$14,375,386$14,375,386$14,375,386$0
Transportation$1,150,632$1,329,637$1,488,276+$158,639
Special education transportation$131,469$179,201$147,575−$31,626
Preschool special education$380,135$399,164$384,391−$14,773
Supplemental targeted assistance (repealed by H.B. 96)$0$0$0$0
Formula transition supplement$0$0$0$0
Base funding supplement$0$110,378$161,229+$50,851
Enrollment growth supplement$0$0$0$0
Performance supplement$0$239,152$235,797−$3,355
Total state support (the wide measure)$16,037,623$16,632,917$16,792,654+$159,737

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$14,375,386$14,375,386$14,375,386
Calculated by the formula$13,722,155$11,421,744$8,917,597
Paid through the phase-in$13,939,877$11,914,116$8,917,597
Guarantee$435,509$2,461,270$5,457,789
Foundation aid$14,375,386$14,375,386$14,375,386
  • FY2025: at its base. The formula calculates $13,722,155 against a $14,375,386 base, and foundation aid is the base itself — the guarantee pays the $435,509 the phase-in leaves short. A higher phase-in rate would not reach it.
  • FY2026: at its base. The formula calculates $11,421,744 against a $14,375,386 base, and foundation aid is the base itself — the guarantee pays the $2,461,270 the phase-in leaves short. A higher phase-in rate would not reach it.
  • FY2027: at its base. The formula calculates $8,917,597 against a $14,375,386 base, and foundation aid is the base itself — the guarantee pays the $5,457,789 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 24.9% in FY2026 to 18.6% 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 $969,652,250 in tax year 2023 to $1,247,353,303 in tax year 2025 (+28.6%). 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 4,088.1 in FY2026 to 4,030.7 in FY2027, as each year's file states it (−1.4%). 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$16,037,623$16,632,917$16,792,654
Service center chargenot itemizednot published−$127,821
Other adjustmentsnot itemizednot published−$155,887
Transfers, in total−$234,770not published−$283,708
Net state funding$15,802,853not published$16,508,947