Proposed Missouri school funding overhaul could reshape future for rural districts  

ST. JOSEPH, Mo. (KQTV)-- According to the National Rural Education Association, Missouri ranks seventh in the nation among states where rural education is considered an urgent priority for lawmakers, school districts and local communities.  

Right now, the state’s Adequacy Target sits at $7,145 per student.

Rural districts in Missouri currently receive an average of just $6,449 per student in state funding—one of the lowest levels in the country. On top of that, for every $1 raised locally through taxpayers, the state contributes 71 cents. 

The state's funding contributions make Missouri one of the five states most dependent on local property taxes to fund rural schools. For small communities with limited tax bases, doing so can stretch budgets thin.  

Travis Dittemore, the superintendent of the Buchanan County R-IV School District, said his focus is less on political headlines and more on proposed legislation and what it would mean for his schools.  

“Our point is we look mostly at how it affects us directly. What kind of cuts we would see, and for the first time...We started to get some numbers on potentially what those cuts could mean to us,” Dittemore said.  

Dittemore said if funding changes go into effect, stakeholders probably wouldn’t notice major differences right away.

Over the next three to five years, changes in district operations and offerings would likely be gradual.  

Dittemore also reassured families that the district is currently in a solid financial position. Major cuts to programs or services aren’t on the table right now. However, he said long-term changes—especially to the state’s foundation formula—would be a bigger concern.  

"As far as cutting programs go, it would have to be something long-term and in terms of house bills. Perhaps we are more worried about whether there would be any major changes to the foundation formula that we receive from the state,” Dittemore said.  

He said most of the challenges would come to personnel and keeping staff paid according to what they deserve.

Like many rural districts, the district's budget is largely tied to fixed costs—utilities, transportation and other operational expenses—which typically account for 75% to 85% of total spending.

After the fixed costs, that leaves only 15% to 20% left of the budget to move money around where it may be needed.

"That would be the concern if that number were to grow even higher, of what we are required to spend,” Dittemore said.  

Josh Barker, superintendent of the North Andrew R-VII School District, shared similar thoughts.

Barker said the district hasn’t faced major financial issues in recent years, thanks in part to small-school grants aimed to help bridge gaps.  

Barker said recent conversations at the state level have caught his attention. He specifically pointed to conversations surrounding Senator Rusty Black’s (R-District 12) school consolidation plan and efforts to rewrite the state’s foundation formula.  

“They are working to rewrite the foundational formula currently, and some of the task force conversations have led to some changes in how the formula would be. We have done some research on what those changes could be, and it could impact the small rural school districts,” Barker said.  

One of his biggest concerns is staying competitive when it comes to teacher pay. Smaller districts often struggle to match the salaries offered in larger city schools.  

Barker also mentioned that the “Hold Harmless” provision has helped stabilize funding for their district. The idea of eliminating it, however, is troubling.  

“Right now, the task force is just having conversations, so nothing set in stone, but some of the conversations with getting rid of some of those things are concerning, and as an advocate for our school district, I hope that isn’t the route they take,” Barker said.  

Much of North Andrew's special education funding comes from federal sources, which could also be affected. 

“Things get tougher with less money. Federal funding, which is where most of our special education money comes from, might be negatively impacted. But we will do what we need to do to provide the services that we need to,” Barker said.  

For now, both superintendents are watching closely, running the numbers, and preparing for different possibilities. While no immediate changes are in place, the long-term future of rural school funding in Missouri remains a key concern for the communities that rely on it most.  

Tune into KQ2 News at 6 p.m. Thursday to watch this full Special Report.