The ability of public organizations under fiscal stress to achieve their goals and maintain public service delivery warrants attention. Using an eleven-year panel of school-district data from New York State, this study examines how different dimensions of financial condition affect district performance. The findings indicate that increasing debt burdens have immediate negative impacts on school-district performance. These adverse impacts may be driven by the cutback strategies that districts choose in response to declining financial conditions. These findings have practical implications for how public organizations can best cope with rising debt while maintaining high performance.
BloomHoward S.HillCarolyn J.BlackAlison R.LipseyMark W.. 2008. Performance trajectories and performance gaps as achievement effect-size benchmarks for educational interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness1:289–328.
2.
BoyneGeorge A.2003. Sources of public service improvement: A critical review and research agenda. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory13:367–94.
3.
ChaneyBarbara A.CopleyPaul A.StoneMary S.. 2002. The effect of fiscal stress and balanced budget requirements on the funding and measurement of state pension obligations. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy21:287–313.
4.
CohnElchanan. 1968. Economies of scale in Iowa high school operations. Journal of Human Resources3:422–34.
5.
DuncombeWilliamHouYilin. 2014. The savings behavior of special purpose governments: A panel study of New York school districts. Public Budgeting & Finance34:1–23.
6.
DuncombeWilliamYingerJohn. 2008. Measurement of cost differentials. In Handbook of research in education finance and policy, edited by HelenLadd F.FiskeEdward B., 238–56. New York: Routledge.
7.
Education Commission of the States. 2018. Accountability and reporting: Current system. 50-State Comparison. Denver, CO: ECS.
8.
GorinaEvgeniaMaherCraigJoffeMarc. 2018. Local fiscal distress: Measurement and prediction. Public Budgeting & Finance38:72–94.
9.
GreenwaldRobHedgesLarry V.LaineRichard D.. 1996. The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research66:361–96.
10.
GuoHaiNeshkovaMilena. 2018. Fiscal severity and the choice of budget gap closing strategies. Public Money & Management38:305–14.
11.
HanushekEric A.1997. Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: An update. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis19:141–64.
12.
HendrickRebecca. 2004. Assessing and measuring the fiscal heath of local governments: Focus on Chicago suburban municipalities. Urban Affairs Review40:78–114.
13.
JacksonC. KiraboJohnsonRucker C.PersicoClaudia. 2015. The effects of school spending on educational and economic outcomes: Evidence from school finance reforms. The Quarterly Journal of Economics131:157–218.
14.
JacksonC. KiraboWiggerCoraXiongHeyu. 2018. Do school spending cuts matter? Evidence from the Great Recession. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
15.
JimenezBenedict S.2009. Fiscal stress and the allocation of expenditure responsibilities between state and local governments: An exploratory study. State and Local Government Review41:81–94.
16.
JohnsonCraig L.KiokoSharon N.Bartley HildrethW.. 2012. Government-wide financial statements and credit risk. Public Budgeting & Finance32:80–104.
17.
KoganVladimirLavertuStéphanePeskowitzZachary. 2017. Direct democracy and administrative disruption. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory27:381–99.
18.
LaddHelen F.1996. How school districts respond to fiscal constraint. In Selected papers in school finance, ed. FowlerWilliam J., 39–59. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
19.
LafortuneJulienRothsteinJesseSchanzenbachDiane W.. 2018. School finance reform and the distribution of student achievement. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics10:1–26.
20.
LavertuStéphaneSt. ClairTravis. 2018. Beyond spending levels: Revenue uncertainty and the performance of local governments. Journal of Urban Economics106:59–80.
21.
LevineCharles H.1978. Organizational decline and cutback management. Public Administration Review38:316–25.
22.
MarloweJustin. 2005. Fiscal slack and counter-cyclical expenditure stabilization: A first look at the local level. Public Budgeting & Finance25:48–72.
23.
MatkinDavid S. T.KimYoungsungParkYoung Joo. 2018. The emergence of public financial management. In Handbook of American Public Administration, edited by StazykEdmund C.FredericksonH. George, 428–41. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
24.
MeierKenneth J.O’TooleLaurence J.. 2002. Public management and organizational performance: The effect of managerial quality. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management21:629–43.
25.
MeierKenneth J.O’TooleLaurence J.. 2009. The dog that didn’t bark: How public managers handle environmental shock. Public Administration87:485–502.
26.
MoynihanDonald P.2006. Managing for results in state government: Evaluating a decade of reform. Public Administration Review66:77–89.
RothsteinJesse. 2009. Student sorting and bias in value-added estimation: Selection on observables and unobservables. Education Finance and Policy4:537–71.
29.
SchickAllen. 1986. Macro-budgetary adaptations to fiscal stress in industrialized democracies. Public Administration Review46:124–34.
30.
StipakBrianO’TooleDaniel E.. 1993. Fiscal stress and productivity improvement: Local government. Public Productivity & Management Review17:101–12.
31.
StoneSamuel B.SinglaAkheilComeauxJamesKirschnerCharlotte. 2015. A comparison of financial indicators: The case of Detroit. Public Budgeting & Finance35:90–111.
32.
TalbotColin. 2008. Performance regimes—The institutional context of performance policies. International Journal of Public Administration31:1569–91.
VanyolosIstvan. 2005. Fiscal reaction to state aid uncertainties: Evidence from New York State. Public Budgeting & Finance25:44–58.
36.
WangXiaohuDennisLyndaTuYuan S. (J.). 2007. Measuring financial condition: A study of U.S. states. Public Budgeting & Finance27:1–21.
37.
ZhangZhiweiGibsonBryanSchaferJosephine G.. 2018. Reexamining the relationship between fiscal stress and outsourcing. Public Performance & Management Review41:22–46.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
