Funding Special Education by Capitation: Evidence from State Finance Reforms
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines responses to state capitation policies for special education finance between 1991–92 and 2003–4. Capitation refers to distributing funds based on the entire student enrollment. We find that disability rates tended to fall following capitation reforms, primarily in subjectively diagnosed categories and in early and late grades. The association appears immediately in less severe categories but gradually in severe categories. More frequent program exiting partly accounts for falling disability rates among high school students. Capitation also is associated with a rising local share and a falling state share of funding. The evidence supports an increased use of outside school placements among severe disabilities, consistent with an incentive-based response. We find weaker evidence of a relationship between capitation and higher request rates for dispute resolution. Finally, we present evidence of differential effects based on both the pre-reform funding system and the presumed strength of the policy change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it