Data Story

Introduction

In June 2025, Governor Ned Lamont claimed that Connecticut spends more on public education than any other state, stating “we are a state that does spend more per pupil than any other state in the country”(CT Mirror).

Although Journalists Alex Putterman and Natasha Sokoloff note that this statement is somewhat factually correct, they argue that truly meaningful comparisons between states require considering additional factors beyond raw spending totals. This data story seeks to answer the following questions:

1. How much do Connecticut public schools spend per student in comparison to other states?

2. How much does CT spend compared to other states when factoring in the cost of living?

3. How much does CT spend compared to other states from state & local sources?

Education spending and funding is a complex system in any state, so it is hard to make meaningful comparisons with the spending amounts alone. At a national level we can see larger trends and see how Connecticut ranks nationally. But there is a much larger difference in cost of living nationally than regionally, so comparing Connecticut spending within the Northeast gives us a better idea of how Connecticut ranks amongst its neighbors.

Our community partner, the School + State Finance Project, asked us to research these questions and develop a data story that shares our fiscal research in a clear and easy to understand format. Making policy research accessible for everyone helps individuals understand how their communities receive education funding. Creating accessible information is a key goal for our community partner because it enables community members to advocate and actively participate in government processes. We also focused on factoring cost of living into our analysis because Michael Morton, the Deputy Executive Director of Communications and Operations at the School + State Finance Project, emphasized how cost of living can change data analysis. Morton noted that when comparing states “the cost of living is drastically different…whenever we look at [per-pupil numbers] from a statewide perspective it tends to get skewed”(CT Mirror). Overall we created our data story with accessible language and cost of living in mind.

When diving deeper, we found that Gov. Lamont was almost correct about spending being near the top but overlooked important context when comparing per pupil expenditures. We had three main findings from our research. First, when comparing student spending across all states, we found that the Northeast region of the United States has the highest per pupil spending in the country. Connecticut was the median state within the Northeast region. This shows that while Connecticut does have a high spend on the national level, compared to other high spending states it falls in the middle. Second, when we factor in cost of living across all states it shows similar patterns. The northeast remains the top spending region and Connecticut continues to rank in the middle of all high spending states. Third, we compared how the proportion of state and local funding for schools varied across the United States. We found that Connecticut has a high percentage of local spending but a very low percentage of state spending. This shows that the Connecticut education system depends much more heavily on local funding than other states across the U.S. Overall, this means that Governor Lamont was nearly correct about CT spending being near the top, but his claim overlooked national cost of living differences and wealth inequality in Connecticut. Connecticut is among the top spending states nationally, even when factoring for cost of living, but its reliance on local funding widens the disparities between wealthy and low-income districts.

How does Connecticut’s school spending compare to other states?

The data tells us a lot about where Connecticut’s spending patterns rank both nationally and within the Northeast region. We began by comparing total education spending both nationally and regionally. Then we compared between local and state funding sources.

Comparing spending per pupil nationally and regionally

When comparing spending per pupil, it’s useful to zoom out to the national level. This map shows how per-pupil spending varies across the country and highlights how Northeastern states spend more than any other region.

Map 1a: Explore the interactive map which shows education spending per student across the United States in the 2022-23 fiscal year.

This map shows that nationally, the Northeast falls in the top end of state spending per student. With Wisconsin as the median state, spending $15,200 per student, all states in the Northeast rank well above the median. Chart 1b (found below) compares spending per pupil across the Northeast. This shows us that in comparison to other Northeastern states, Connecticut and its neighbor Massachusetts fall in the middle of the spending range, while D.C. and New York spend the most. Connecting back to Governor Lamont’s statement, he was incorrect when he said that Connecticut spends more per pupil than any other state but Connecticut is among the top spending states.

Chart 1b: Explore the interactive chart which shows education spending per student across the Northeastern United States in the 2022-23 fiscal year.

This tells us that while Connecticut ranks high nationally, as chart 1b showed, it falls in the middle of the spending range regionally. However, when looking at map 1a, we can also see that the West Coast states, like California, Oregon and Washington all spend above the median on education. Both of these regions, the West coast and the Northeast have high costs of living which could explain these high levels of spending. However, Map 2a below shows that even when adjusted for cost of living, states in the Northeast still spend significantly more on education.

Connecticut education spending while factoring in cost of living

For the second step, we will compare Connecticut education spending while factoring for the cost of living. A cost of living index takes into account housing, grocery, healthcare and transportation costs for each state. Factoring for cost of living allows us to compare expenses between different cities and normalize the data to make a more meaningful comparison. For example, the average teachers wage in Wisconsin is $65,762 while in New York it is much higher at $95,615 per year (NEA). This difference in wage reflects how basic expenses in New York such as housing and food are much more expensive than in Wisconsin. This makes education more expensive as well. Factoring for cost of living lets us compare across different states without skewing the data. We will compare these results both regionally and nationally.

It’s useful to compare trends nationally first. Map 2a, found below, adjusts per-pupil expenditures for cost of living. For example, Connecticut has a high cost of living and when we factor in cost of living there is a decrease from $24,840 to $23,940. Similarly in Wisconsin, a state with a lower cost of living, spending per student increased from $15,240 to $16,260. The adjustment reveals meaningful shifts in rankings, with states like Vermont, New Jersey, and New York rising to the top. This approach highlights how the value of education dollars varies widely across the country.

Map 2a: Explore the interactive map which shows education spending per student across the Northeastern United States in the 2022-23 fiscal year.

When adjusted for cost of living, states along the West coast like California spend similarly to the median state Wisconsin, around $16,000. However, states in the Northeast remained among the highest spenders in the nation. This partially supports Governor Lamont’s claim that Connecticut spends the most in the country. While it might not be the state that spends the top amount, it certainly is among the top spenders even when factoring for cost of living.

Looking closer at the Northeast, the chart below compares per-pupil spending adjusted for cost of living across Northeastern states. It shows that Vermont invests the most per student, with Connecticut falling in the middle of the spending range.

Chart 2b: Explore the interactive chart which shows education spending per student across the Northeastern United States in the 2022-23 fiscal year.

This chart shows that even when adjusted for cost of living, Connecticut spends a median amount in comparison to other Northeastern states. This shows that Gov. Lamont remains partially right. The map and chart adjusted for cost of living demonstrate that while Connecticut is one of the highest spenders both regionally and nationally it is not the top spender.

What about state & local sources?

While the maps and charts above showed that Connecticut consistently spends high amounts on education, these numbers reflected total education spending. Which led us to wonder, how does Connecticut's spending breakdown between local and state spending compare to other states? State education budgets pull funding from three areas: federal funds, state funds and local funds. Our guiding questions asked us to focus on state and local sources because these are the funds controlled by Connecticut, federal funding has different limitations.

This table breaks down how states fund their education systems, showing the share of revenue that comes from local and state sources. About 36% of Connecticut's education budget comes from state sources, which is on the low end in comparison to other states. Connecticut’s percentage of education funding from the state is among the lowest in the country. For local sources the story is much different. 56% of Connecticut's total revenue comes from local sources, making it the 5th highest amount in the nation. This tells us that over half of Connecticut's education budget is funded by local sources. This finding helps illustrate Connecticut’s reliance on local funding and its consistently high level of total revenue compared to other states.

Table 3: Explore the interactive chart which shows education spending per student across the Northeastern United States in the 2022-23 fiscal year.

This table gives us lots of information about where Connecticut ranks in local and state sources. Large amounts of local spending can signify wealth inequality, which is true for Connecticut, a state that has some of the highest income innequality in the nation. This could impact the funding equity for students. This is because local funding comes from local sources, like property taxes, which means that wealthier districts can receive more funding that lower-income districts. On the other hand, the state spending is lower than expected, signifying that the government is contributing less money than the average state. These top money sources come from personal income taxes and general sales and use tax. Most of Connecticut’s state budget depends on people’s wages and salaries, so education spending goes up or down depending on income. The lower percentage of state revenue means there is less money to fund public services, such as institutions. According to the CT Mirror the general fund of CT is spent the highest amount on non-functional services, the biggest example being Debt service. Which is the money a state must pay each year to cover its existing debt. This means that before a state can spend money on education, health, or social programs, it must pay its debt obligations.

Overall, while Connecticut’s total education budget is among the highest in the nation, the high amount of local funding reveals Connecticut’s income inequality and could indicate unequal funding allocations within Connecticut districts.

Methods

Our guiding questions asked us to find whether CT was really a high spending education state and how public school spending varied across the United States. We began with the data our classmates Loretta and Ryan and our professor found during class activities. Through these starting points, we were able to sort and find the necessary data tables that held the information to be able to compare cost of living between states. Our main data source was the US Department of Education’s data on revenues and expenditures for public elementary and secondary schools from the 2023 fiscal year. We began our analysis with Table 4 which included the current expenditures per pupil. We cleaned and analyzed the data in a spreadsheet and moved on to finding spending per pupil adjusted for cost of living.

One difficulty in our research process was identifying which cost of living source worked best for our research. We compared both the Missouri cost of living index and the index from the US Bureau of Economic Analysis. At first, we wanted to use the Missouri source, this is because the information was clear and it explicitly identified the different levels of expenses. It also provided the most recent data from 2025. However, our per pupil expenditure data was from 2022-23. With this, we decided that the US BEA source was a better option for us because the data was from 2023. Even though the Missouri source was newer data, the BEA data was more meaningful to our findings. To find the cost of living that aligned with our current data, we used the BEA Cost of Living Index to calculate an adjusted per pupil expenditure. Our ultimate goal was to make sure our data matched correctly and was meaningful. To calculate adjusted spend per pupil we followed the formula below:

To calculate cost of living we followed the formula below:

Adjusted Spend per Pupil = (Spend per Pupil / BEA Cost of Living Index) *100

For example New York is a high cost of living state and in the 2022-23 school year they spend $29,588 per student. The cost of living index for New York in 2023 was 107.626. When we plug these values into the formula our adjusted spend per pupil is $27,491.

$27,491 = (29,588 / 107.626) *100

Let's do another example with Arkansas, a state with a lower cost of living. In the 2022-23 school year Arkansas spent $12,764 per student. The cost of living index for Arkansas in 2023 was 86.508. When we plug these values into the formula our adjusted spend per pupil is $14,755.

$14,755 = (12,764/ 86.508) *100

These examples show what happens with states that are higher than the median and lower than the median. In Arkansas the spend per student was raised and in New York the spend per student was lowered. This formula allowed us to normalize the data and find the adjusted spending per pupil which made our comparisons across states more accurate.

Our next step was to find local and federal funding per pupil through the US Department of Education’s Data, from fiscal year 2022-23 table 1. Converting this data into a spreadsheet and cleaning it up was less difficult because most of the information given to us was necessary for our next steps. One of the columns we decided to remove was federal funding because it was not relevant to our research questions. Next we calculated the percentage of local revenue and the percentage of state revenue. After we were able to calculate these percentages and meaningfully interpret the data, we returned to our research question, “How does Connecticut's breakdown between local spending and state spending compare nationally and regionally?” To answer this question in a clear and accessible way we created an interactive chart that showed local and state funding across the United States. With the use of this chart, readers are able to better understand the information we are giving them because they can visualize revenue between state and local sources.

When converting these tables to google sheets and beginning the process of normalizing and cleaning the data from the original table, it was important to know which information needed to be kept in our sheet and which information was fine to be deleted. Analyzing which data was needed was crucial because unnecessary data can cause confusion and also misinterpretation of the main question. This process of cleaning data and calculating necessary percentages was the most tedious because we had to figure out which columns of data were significant for our findings and which columns were unnecessary. For example, when converting the table that held spending per student across the US data, we only kept four columns of data and got rid of almost 10 columns of data. We felt that this was the best way to make use of the data we were given and not get carried away from the main question we are answering.

Sources

(1) “CT Spent $50 Billion Last Year — Where Did It All Go?” The Connecticut Mirror, 16 Aug. 2024, https://ctmirror.org/2024/08/16/ct-spent-50-billion-last-year-where-did-it-all-go/ (accessed 2 Dec. 2025).

(2) Sacchetti, Maria. “Connecticut Education Funding Disparities Persist, Data Show.” CT Insider, 15 Oct. 2024, https://www.ctinsider.com/news/education/article/connecticut-education-funding-disparities-data-20349937.php (accessed 2 Dec. 2025).

(3) U.S. Department of Education. “Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary Education: School Year 2022-23.” IES – National Center for Education Statistics, 2025, https://ies.ed.gov/ies/2025/04/revenues-and-expenditures-public-elementary-and-secondary-education-school-year-2022-23-fiscal-year (accessed 2 Dec. 2025).

(4) U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Regional Price Parities by State and Metro Area — 2023. BEA, 2023, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (accessed Thursday, December 4, 2025).

(5) Missouri Economic Research and Information Center. Cost of Living Data Series. MERIC, https://meric.mo.gov/data/cost-living-data-series (accessed 2 Dec. 2025).

(6) Phaneuf, Keith M. “Does Connecticut Have the Most Income Inequality of Any State?” The Connecticut Mirror, 7 Nov. 2025, https://ctmirror.org/2025/11/07/does-connecticut-have-the-most-income-inequality-of-any-state/ (accessed 2 Dec. 2025).

(7) Putterman, Alex and Sokoloff, Natasha. “Lamont says CT leads in school funding. The truth is more complicated.” The Connecticut Mirror, 7 June. 2025,https://web.archive.org/web/20250602024035/https://www.ctinsider.com/news/education/article/connecticut-education-funding-disparities-data-20349937.php Archived Link. (accessed 2 Dec. 2025).