Lower Spending Schools, Higher Need Students: Where CT Places School-Based Health Centers

Introduction: Access and Equity: Where School-Based Health Centers Are and Are Not

SBHC = Student Based Health Center.

Over the course of the semester, we have worked with our community partners at the Connecticut Association of School-Based Health Centers to gather data around questions regarding school-based health centers (SBHCs). SBHCs are clinics located inside schools that provide medical and mental health services to students, which helps clarify why we’re comparing the schools that have them to those that do not. We will be using visualizations to show you our findings regarding our research question.

The question that we are exploring is: How do schools with and without SBHCs vary by demographics and resources? To answer this question, we are examining two sub-questions regarding racial demographics and student expenditures. Our questions are: How do schools with and without SBHCs vary by percent of Black, Indigenous, Latino/a/e, and other students of Color (BILPOC) student enrollment? How do schools with and without SBHCs vary by school expenditures per pupil?

First, we looked at how schools with and without School-Based Health Centers differ in their percentages of Black, Indigenous, Latino/a/e, and other students of color, because we wanted to gain an understanding of equity in the school system. Overall, we found that schools with School-Based Health Centers enroll substantially higher percentages of BILPOC students. SBHCs are often explained as tools to reduce health disparities and remove barriers to learning, but the only way to confirm that this is actually happening is to evaluate has access to them. Since schools with high BILPOC enrollment are more likely to have SBHCs, it suggests that districts are intentionally targeting health services toward communities with barriers to care. By contrast, if we had found the opposite: schools with a high percentage of BILPOC students are less likely to have SBHCs, it would expose a gap, meaning the students who carry burdens from racism, under-resourcing, or unmet health needs may be the least supported.

School expenditures per pupil share a strong story about resource inequality. Because per-pupil spending reflects how much money a school has available for staffing, services, and support, its commonly used as a measure of how well-resourced a school is. When we compare spending in schools that do versus those that do not have SBHCs, we’re asking whether health services are being added as an equity tool or layered onto already well-resourced campuses. Its also important to note that SBHC placement is not random. Schools receive them based on funding decisions, district needs, and broader policy priorities. If SBHCs mostly appear in high-spending schools, that suggests that healthier outcomes may be another benefit tied to wealthier or politically advantaged districts. But if SBHCs are more common in lower-spending schools, that suggests an intentional strategy to invest in students who need additional support because their schools cannot afford health staffing or services. For community partners, understanding public policy and educational equity is crucial. It helps them see whether SBHC deployment is mitigating resource gaps or reinforcing them, and provides evidence for where advocacy and funding are most needed.

Our findings show that schools with School-Based Health Centers enroll substantially higher percentages of BILPOC students and have lower per-pupil expenditures than schools without SBHCs, indicating that SBHCs are more commonly located in high-need, lower-resourced educational settings..

Expenditure Per Pupil

We found that traditional public schools without SBHCs spend slightly more per student than those with SBHCs. The median per-pupil expenditure is higher in schools without SBHCs, suggesting that schools offering these health services are not necessarily the ones investing the most money per student. This finding reveals an interesting pattern: even though SBHCs provide additional support for students, the schools that house them tend to operate with lower median spending per pupil than schools without them.

The data reveals that traditional public schools without SBHCs have a higher median per student ($17,700) than schools with SBHCs ($16,813). This difference suggests that having an SBHC may help schools operate more cost-effectively. This matters because it implies that supporting student health can strengthen a school’s overall budget by improving attendance and reducing other non-instructional costs. Ultimately, the data points to SBHCs not just as health resources, but as strategic investments that can improve both educational and financial outcomes for schools.

Sources and Methods

Percent BILPOC of Students With and Without SBHCS:

To analyze differences in BILPOC enrollment between schools with and without SBHCs we used the dataset and pivot table provided to us by our partners at Connecticut Association of School-Based Health Centers (SBHCs), and then cleaned up by Jack and Alison, his research assistant. The pivot table displays the median of per-pupil expenditure of schools with and without SBHCs. The pivot table allowed us to clearly view the median percentage of BILPOC students in each category. Using that table as our foundation, we created a bar chart in Google Sheets to visually compare the data. We chose a bar chart because it clearly highlights the large gap in BILPOC enrollment between schools that do and do not have SBHCs. A point of uncertainty could be using medians because we can’t see the full range of schools in each group which means we might not see the outliers or uneven patterns. However even with this, the overall trend is clear and the chart gives that picture.

Expenditures Per Pupil:

The data that we used for this question was provided by EdSight. We got the data by going to the Instructions and Resources tab on the dashboard and clicking on Per Pupil Expenditures by Function (School), and downloaded this data. After downloading the data and uploading it into our drive, we created a pivot table that represents expenditure per pupil for public schools with and without SBHCs. The data was specifically analyzed to perform a comparison of the financial profiles between public schools that have SBHCs and those that do not. This involved calculating and comparing the median of the expenditure per pupil for each group. Another reason for analyzing the data by comparing the median expenditure per pupil between schools with and without SBHC’s is to assess the policy impact of the SBHC initiative. This approach directly challenges the assumption that adding a health service must increase a school's operating budget. The results of the visualizations act as a financial tool for administrators and policymakers, using the median to represent the typical school's budget profile. The pivot table is designed to quickly answer the question: How is school spending different for traditional public schools with and without an SBHC? The median was used instead of the average so that unusual spending outliers wouldn’t change the results, giving a more accurate picture of typical spending. By using only two groups (schools with SBHCs and those without) and one measure (median spending), the table makes the comparison clear and easy to read, directly showing whether health services might affect per-pupil costs.

Works Cited

CT Department of Education. “Enrollment Dashboard.” EdSight: CT.Gov, https://public-edsight.ct.gov/students/enrollment-dashboard. Accessed 19 Nov. 2025.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iz1VUZ8uMjdtbgWhDyklnMOjNmJzc5fw8DgcQMrlEFY/edit?usp=sharing