Ten Questions Louisiana’s New MFP Task Force Should Answer

For the first time in years, Louisiana is taking a comprehensive look at how it funds K-12 education. Earlier this year, lawmakers created a Minimum Foundation Program (MFP) Task Force to examine the state’s school funding formula and recommend reforms before the next formula is adopted in 2027. Governor Jeff Landry has called the effort an opportunity to ensure education dollars are being spent effectively and in ways that improve student outcomes.

That review could not come at a better time.

The current $4 billion MFP has grown into a complex formula with numerous weights, adjustments, and funding streams. At the same time, Louisiana is experiencing declining public school enrollment, increasing demand for educational choice, and growing expectations that taxpayer dollars produce measurable results.

If the task force is going to modernize the formula, it should focus on more than adequacy and structure. It should ask whether the system is the best way of using taxpayers’ dollars to meet the educational needs of students and whether dollars are being used in the best way to help students make solid academic gains.

Here are ten questions policymakers should answer.

Should Louisiana require administrative consolidation where independent school districts no longer make financial sense?

Louisiana operates 69 separate local public school systems, each entitled to run its own locally elected school board, superintendent, and full complement of central-office functions—human resources, transportation, finance, and academic leadership. For the state’s largest districts, spreading these fixed costs across tens of thousands of students keeps administrative overhead a small share of the budget. For the smallest, the same duplicated positions and offices are spread across a fraction of the students, meaning a much larger share of every education dollar goes toward keeping a central office running rather than toward classrooms. As Louisiana’s overall public school enrollment continues to decline, this problem will only grow more pronounced in the state’s smallest systems. The task force should examine, on a case-by-case basis tied to enrollment and local revenue capacity, when it makes financial sense for a district to operate a fully independent administrative structure, and whether the state should require shared-services agreements, regional administrative consortia, or full consolidation once a district falls below a defined threshold. This doesn’t have to mean erasing local school identity or forcing a single model on every parish; it means asking whether taxpayers in the smallest systems are getting a fair return on every administrative dollar.

Is the formula keeping pace with declining enrollment, and are dollars reaching the classroom?

Louisiana has lost tens of thousands of public school students over the past decade, yet education spending has continued to grow, driven in part by special allocations from the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) and the Legislature layered on top of base and weighted student funding. The formula should better reflect changing enrollment so funding follows students rather than preserving outdated allocations or the duplicated administrative structures described above. New priorities state leaders wish to encourage should be pursued by working with school system leaders to redirect existing funds, not by continually adding more taxpayer dollars during periods of enrollment decline—and policymakers should weigh the ongoing costs of state mandates added onto public schools each year. At the same time, Louisiana requires districts to devote a minimum percentage of funding (at least 70%) to instructional spending; the task force should examine whether those requirements are actually being met and whether administrative spending—including the district-level overhead described in Question 1—has grown faster than classroom investment. That review should include a fresh look at what counts as “instructional” and how money is being spent across all revenue sources (local, state, federal, and private), not merely whether a district meets the current MFP spending requirement on paper.

Has the MFP become too complicated?

Over time, the formula has accumulated numerous weights, supplements, and funding components—with some of them addressing the same needs. Weighted funding tied to individual student characteristics (economically disadvantaged, gifted and talented, disabled, etc.) has not been reviewed for some time and differs substantially across states. The formula also includes over $583 million in “legislative allocations” (which includes school employee pay raises and stipends) and over $400 million in “supplementary funding” that reflects add-ons over the past few decades. The task force should determine whether these components still serve their intended purpose and how to minimize the formula being unnecessarily difficult to understand and administer.

Are local and state taxpayers sharing costs appropriately?

The MFP relies on both state and local funding, although public schools also receive significant federal funding. Policymakers should examine whether the current state-local balance empowers local leaders and fairly reflects the fiscal capacity of their communities. Public schools are governed and operated locally: their funding should begin with local effort followed by consideration of what is needed in the form of a state supplement to ensure that students statewide have equitable access to a quality education.

Is the formula being honored through spending discipline?

The MFP formula is intended to equitably allocate state funds across Louisiana for the education of students. But each year, lawmakers steer millions in line-item appropriations to favored schools and school systems, distorting and disregarding the formula and its intent per the state’s constitution. If school systems have significant funding needs beyond the formula, that’s an argument to revisit the formula—not to fund projects to some and not others through the political system.

Are local school leaders prioritizing competitive compensation to drive better student outcomes?

Teacher pay matters, but compensation systems should also consider critical needs and encourage excellence. The task force should evaluate whether the MFP provides districts sufficient flexibility to meet personnel shortage needs and reward effective educators while ensuring local school systems remain accountable for personnel decisions. The state should undertake a rigorous review of local school system compensation policies and their recent pay raise efforts before making personnel compensation decisions for them.

Should career and technical education funding be modernized?

Career and technical education (CTE) has become increasingly important as Louisiana attracts major manufacturing, energy, and technology investments. CTE is no longer a shop class; students need to learn early on about multiple career opportunities, practice hard and soft skills, and pursue courses and credentials valued by employers in addition to earning a high school diploma. The formula should ensure the various CTE and workforce training funding streams are consolidated to the fullest extent possible, work in tandem, reflect employer demand, and support high-quality career pathways for students planning to go to college and directly into the workforce.

Does the formula recognize the changing role of high school?

Many students now pursue college credit and workforce credentials before graduation. Others don’t take a full course load during their senior year and enter the workforce, yet the formula funds them as a full-time student cost. Dual enrollment is funded through several different mechanisms, not just the MFP. The task force should examine these actual costs and consider how best to allocate funding for upper-grade students’ needs.

Is student and family choice adequately supported?

Parents increasingly expect education funding to be student-centered and support the learning environment that best meets their child’s needs. As Louisiana expands educational options, the MFP should be evaluated alongside state-sponsored options like public school choice and LA GATOR to ensure that a commensurate level of funding can follow students to the educational environment that best meets their needs. The State of Louisiana has committed to support the educational needs of children—not institutions—and the way the state funds education should better reflect that principle.

Should Louisiana reward outcomes instead of just funding inputs?

Finally, the task force should examine whether a portion of education funding should be tied to measurable results. Several states have incorporated performance incentives that reward improved student achievement, academic growth, literacy, and college and career readiness. Louisiana should consider whether similar approaches could serve as an additional motivator to accelerate improved student outcomes.

An Opportunity for Lasting Reform

The MFP Task Force has an opportunity and moral obligation to do more than scrutinize the mechanics of the current funding formula. Its aim should be positioning Louisiana’s next generation for success.

A modern funding system should be transparent, student-centered, fiscally responsible, and focused on results—and that includes being honest about whether the state’s smallest districts can keep running fully independent administrations at all. If policymakers ask the right questions now, Louisiana can build an education finance system that better serves families, rewards excellence, and ensures every education dollar works as hard as the taxpayers who provide it.