ABSTRACT
Two adequacy cases against the State of New Mexico were brought by MALDEF and the New Mexico Center for Law and Poverty. The two cases were eventually consolidated for discovery and trial. Plaintiffs in both cases alleged that the state did not provide adequate funds so that economically disadvantaged children attained the same proficiency levels as non-disadvantaged students.
Using statewide achievement data from 2010 to 2014 as well as school resource and student background data for the same period, the state experts did extensive analyses showing that, once student background characteristics were taken into account, school resources had very small relationships with achievement. The analyses showed that even sizeable increases in resources would decrease achievement gaps by at most a few points.
The Court concluded that the defendant’s main argument, that achievement gaps are caused primarily by socioeconomic backgrounds, was not a sufficient defense because, according to a plaintiff expert, steps can be taken by the school systems to overcome these adverse effects occurring mainly in the home. The decision was not appealed, and later the state government passed substantial increases to the state education budget.
