Special education's share of school budgets increased during and after the Great Recession. That sounds like good news: districts prioritizing their most vulnerable students.[1]
But the story is more complicated than it appears.
Maintenance of effort requirements under IDEA prevented California school districts from cutting special education during the Great Recession. Between 2008-2012, special education's budget share increased from 16.7% to 21.3% not through new investment, but because general education spending dropped 15% while special education remained protected by federal law, creating a mechanical shift that concentrated budget cuts in non-protected programs.
The Share Paradox
When we say a "share" increased, we usually imagine an active choice. Someone decided to allocate more resources to special education.
That's not what happened.
Special education's share increased not because special ed spending went up faster, but because everything else could be cut and it couldn't. When the denominator shrinks and the numerator stays constant, the ratio increases mechanically.
| Year | SpEd Spending (Indexed) | GenEd Spending (Indexed) | SpEd Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 (Pre-recession) | 100 | 100 | 16.7% |
| 2010 (ARRA) | 105 | 110 | 16.0% |
| 2012 (Post-ARRA) | 108 | 85 | 21.3% |
Indexed to 2008 = 100. Sample: 958 California unified school districts. Source: California SACS financial data.
What This Shows
Special education spending was protected. The indexed values show special ed spending increased slightly (100 → 108) while general education dropped substantially (100 → 85).
The share increase was mechanical. Special education's share rose from 16.7% to 21.3% not because of increased investment, but because the denominator (total budget) shrank while the numerator (special ed) stayed constant.
The Legal Ratchet
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) includes "maintenance of effort" requirements. Districts must spend at least as much on special education as they did the previous year to keep receiving federal funds.[2]
This creates a ratchet: spending can go up, but it can't easily go down.
General education has no such protection. When budgets contract, districts have limited options.
Who Made This Choice?
Nobody, really. IDEA's maintenance of effort requirements are federal law. Districts don't get to decide whether to comply.
This isn't a critique of IDEA's goals. Students with disabilities deserve protected services. But we should be clear-eyed about consequences: protecting one category of spending during a budget crisis means other categories absorb more of the cuts.
The Policy Question
Should special education spending be protected during recessions? That's a value judgment, and reasonable people can disagree.
But the current system obscures the tradeoff. When we say districts "maintained" special education, it sounds like fiscal responsibility. When we acknowledge that maintenance came at the expense of general education resources, the picture looks different.
The policy choice has been made. Understanding its consequences helps us think clearly about what comes next.
Limitations
Aggregate patterns. These figures represent district-level aggregates. Individual schools and programs within districts may have experienced different patterns.
Composition effects. Special education enrollment changed during this period. Some of the spending stability may reflect changes in the student population receiving services, not just MOE requirements.
State context. California's school finance system differs from other states. The patterns described here may not generalize nationally.
Data and Methods
Data sources: California SACS financial reports (2006-2021); SACS Goal 5XXX (Special Education) expenditures; General education = Total minus special education.
Sample: 958 California unified school districts.
Calculations: All spending figures inflation-adjusted to 2012 dollars using CPI-U and indexed to 2008 = 100.
Notes
[1] National Council on Disability. (2018). Broken Promises: The Underfunding of IDEA. IDEA Report Series. https://www.ncd.gov/report/broken-promises-underfunding-idea/ ↩
[2] 20 U.S.C. § 1413(a)(2)(A). The maintenance of effort provision requires local educational agencies spend at least as much on special education as in the prior fiscal year. ↩
Frequently Asked Questions
How did special education's budget share increase during the Great Recession?
Special education's share rose from 16.7% to 21.3% between 2008-2012, not because special ed spending increased, but because general education spending dropped from 100 to 85 (indexed) while special ed stayed constant at 108.
What is IDEA's maintenance of effort requirement?
IDEA requires districts to spend at least as much on special education as the previous year to keep receiving federal funds, creating a legal ratchet where spending can increase but cannot easily decrease.
How did California districts maintain special education during budget cuts?
Districts had limited options: IDEA's maintenance of effort requirements protected special education from cuts, forcing general education to absorb the full impact of budget reductions during the recession.
What does the study sample include?
The analysis examines 958 California unified school districts using SACS financial data from 2006-2021, with all spending figures inflation-adjusted to 2012 dollars and indexed to 2008 baseline.
Is the rising special education share a sign of district priorities?
No, the share increase was mechanical rather than intentional. When total budgets contracted and special education spending remained protected by law, the ratio increased automatically without any active allocation decision.
How to Cite This Research
Too Early To Say. "How Protecting Special Education Shifted Cuts to General Ed." December 2025. https://tooearlytosay.com/research/education-policy/protecting-special-ed-shifted-cuts/Copy citation