REFORMS TO FUNDING EDUCATION IN FOUR CANADIAN PROVINCES - analysis of provincial vs school board authority

Oct 15, 2026

Analysis of reforms to primary and secondary education funding across Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba over the past two decades. The study examines features, determinants, and effects, emphasizing shifts in authority for setting education property tax mill rates and funding responsibility between school boards and provincial governments. Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan centralized authority under provincial ministries, while Manitoba reduced its role for certain property classes and reduced overall funding responsibility. The article considers future trends in alignment between governments and school boards.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages38

Reading Time1 h 36 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Centralization vs. Manitoba’s reduced role

Factors That Provided Impetus for and Shaped Reforms

Pressure on the property tax base

Equity and fairness demands across divisions

REFORMS TO FUNDING EDUCATION IN FOUR CANADIAN PROVINCES Joseph Garcea, University of Saskatchewan, and Dustin Munroe, Institute on Governance This article provides an analysis of the features, determinants, and effects of a series of reforms to funding the primary and secondary education systems in Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba during the past two decades. The principal focus is on the reforms that have shifted the authority for setting property tax mill rates for education and responsibility for funding the education system between school boards and provincial governments. The article reveals that, whereas Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan have followed the lead of six other provinces in centralizing such authority and responsibility in the provincial ministry of education, Manitoba has moved slightly in the opposite direction by reducing its role in setting property taxes for some classes of property and reducing its level of responsibility for funding the education system. The article concludes with some questions regarding potential future trends in relation to alignment of authority for funding education between provincial governments and school boards. Introduction During the past two decades significant reforms have been implemented in funding the primary and secondary education systems in the three Prairie provinces and Ontario that have shifted the authority for setting the property tax mill rates for education and responsibility for funding between the school boards and the provincial governments. Whereas reforms in Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan have increased the authority of provincial governments and diminished the authority of school boards in setting those mill rates and, by extension increased the responsibility of the provincial governments for funding their respective education systems, reforms in Manitoba had the opposite effect at least with respect to setting the mill rates. The increased authority and responsibility of provincial governments in Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan is part of the general trend in recent decades toward centralization for funding and governing the education systems in Canadian provinces, which has been described in the extant literature (e.g., Dibbon, Sheppard, & Brown, 2012; Galway, Sheppard, Wiens, & Brown, 2013; Lessard & Brassard, 2005; Lawton, 1987; Lawton, 1996; Sattler, 2012; Tindal, Tindal, Stewart,& Smith, 2013, pp. 258–262). By centralizing the authority and responsibility for funding education under the aegis of the provincial governments, Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan followed the lead of six other provinces that had already done this by 1990 (i.e., Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, and British Columbia) . By 1990 provincial governments in those six provinces provided between 90% and 100% of funding for education, and in none did the percentage of revenues generated by education taxes levied by school boards constitute more than 10% of the budget for their respective education systems (Langlois & Scharf, 1991) . The result of the reforms prior to 1990 in those six provinces, and in Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan in subsequent decades, has been a convergence in funding the education systems among all provinces, except Manitoba where school boards are still responsible for raising a substantial portion of their funding by imposing their own property taxes. The central objective of this article is to provide an analysis of the reforms implemented during the past two decades that have increased the authority and responsibility of provincial governments in funding the education systems in Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, and diminished it slightly in Manitoba. More specifically, the objective is to analyze the factors that provided the impetus for and shaped those reforms, the key elements of the reforms, and the position of various governmental and non-go

FAQs

Which four Canadian provinces are examined in the article?

The article analyzes reforms in Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba.

What major governance change do the reforms involve?

They shift authority for setting education property tax mill rates and responsibility for education funding between school boards and provincial governments.

How did Manitoba’s direction differ from Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan?

Manitoba moved slightly in the opposite direction by reducing its role in setting property taxes for some property classes and reducing its level of responsibility for education funding.

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by Alexandar