Portland Public Schools has operated its Racial Educational Equity Policy and Equity Funding Policy for more than a decade without ever evaluating whether they improved student achievement, according to analysis published June 11, 2026 by the Cascade Policy Institute. The organization's president, John A. Charles, Jr., presented testimony to the PPS Board on June 9 criticizing the policy as unworkable and unsupported by evidence. The report argues the district's equity framework treats unequal outcomes as proof of discrimination while providing no documentation of systemic bias and pursuing goals that can't be achieved simultaneously.
When Cascade Policy Institute requested documentation of systemic bias to support the equity policy, PPS produced nothing beyond generic national reports from activist organizations. The district continues to demand "equal outcomes" for all students—a standard the report calls impossible because no parent can guarantee identical outcomes for their own children. Meanwhile, the District has operated an Equity Funding Policy for more than a decade without evaluating real outcomes, even as they face a federal civil-rights lawsuit. The policy's implementing initiatives, including Restorative Justice discipline and Equitable Grading, have never been shown to improve academic performance, according to the analysis.
The report highlights what it describes as a fundamental contradiction in the policy's objectives. The policy demands that PPS "raise achievement for all students" while also narrowing achievement gaps, goals the authors say cannot be met at the same time. According to Charles, the policy treats unequal outcomes as proof of discrimination without providing evidence, and it claims that adults are at fault for all disparities rather than acknowledging student agency or factors like family structure, student effort, strong teaching, and disciplined classrooms. The institute argues that declaring achievement gaps "unacceptable" guarantees staff will always be branded as failures for an impossible metric.
The analysis explains that the policy's flaws stem from a misunderstanding of what schools can control. Parents provide equal opportunities and support so each child can reach their unique potential—the same approach should guide schools, the report argues, because they control instruction, not the innumerable variables that shape achievement. By erasing student agency and ignoring external factors that research shows matter most to outcomes, the district has created a framework that can't be implemented, measured, or defended. The report notes this creates an impossible standard where educators are held responsible for variables entirely outside their influence.
Charles concludes that when a policy cannot be implemented, cannot be measured, and cannot be defended, it should be repealed or rewritten. The institute's position is clear: more than ten years of operating an equity funding system without once checking whether it works represents a failure of accountability. Without evidence that current approaches improve student learning, the district can't justify continuing them—especially while facing federal civil rights litigation and ongoing achievement challenges.