FY2026-27 Biennium

Two questions define it, and they are separable in a way public argument usually does not make them. The first is the phase-in percentage — what fraction of the computed formula amount is appropriated. The second is the reference year of the cost inputs that produce the computed amount in the first place. A biennium can advance the first while freezing the second, and the result is describable both as completing the phase-in and as cutting funding in real terms, with both descriptions arithmetically correct. inference Resolving that requires holding FSFP Phase-In Percentage and Base Cost Per Pupil apart: they are two dials, and the biennium moves one and freezes the other.

This period is also the first full biennium after the federal ESSER funds expired, so district budgets in FY2026 lose a revenue source that was material for high-poverty districts and immaterial for wealthy ones. inference Separating that effect from any formula change is necessary before attributing a district’s FY2026 position to state policy. open

Enacted appropriation totals, phase-in percentages, and the cost input reference year all need to be established from the act and the LSC analysis. open

What this repository computed # ↑ Contents

Not what Ohio publishes. Figures derived here from committed fixtures, each one citing the test that reproduces it.

The appropriating act set the department’s own budget at $14.87 billion in FY2026 and $15.27 billion in FY2027. That is what was appropriated to the Department of Education across every line in its chapter, less the property tax reimbursement items that are numbered as the department’s and are carried in the State Revenue Distributions section instead. verified the appropriation series, lsc-appropriation-spreadsheet It is a ceiling rather than a payment; what districts received is dew-foundation.