Two developments in Texas public education news on Wednesday highlight an interesting contrast in the conversation about administrative spending.  

The State Auditor’s Office released an audit of the Texas Education Agency (TEA) that found the agency is not complying with the state’s statutory management-to-employee ratio. According to the audit, TEA had one manager for every 3.5 full-time employees as of August 2025, compared with the statutory standard of one manager for every 11 employees. TEA’s management staff also grew by 38% between 2021 and 2025, compared with 12% growth among nonmanagement employees.  

TEA, in an appeal to the Legislative Budget Board, explained that many of its managers also perform significant individual-contributor work and has asked for approval to operate outside the statutory ratio. Still, the audit provides a critical look at the explosion of management and full-time employees within TEA and could lead to questions about whether TEA is providing managerial titles to non-managerial roles to artificially boost pay for those employees at taxpayer expense. 

Hours later, Gov. Greg Abbott (R) announced plans to have the state comptroller investigate the finances of independent school districts. The goal, according to the governor, is to ensure that at least 70% of taxpayer dollars are reaching students and teachers and to identify unnecessary administrative spending and other costs that don’t directly benefit classrooms.  

There is certainly value in looking carefully at how education dollars are spent. School districts, like any public entity, should be accountable for and transparent with their use of taxpayer resources. At the same time, this raises another important question: What drives administrative spending in public education? 

For school districts, much of the work that falls under “administration” is connected to compliance with state and federal requirements, which change often. Districts must manage special education services, accountability and testing requirements, school safety rules, student records, teacher certification, grants, curriculum requirements, and many other mandates. Those responsibilities require staff to manage, document, and report on compliance. Many of these mandates are unfunded by the state, and districts must search their budgets to find additional funds to close gaps in their budgets.  

Per figures put out by the Texas Association of School Boards, independent school board currently only spend 4 cents of every education dollar on central administration. However, if Texas wants to further reduce administrative costs and direct more resources toward classrooms, examining district spending is only one piece of the conversation. Another is examining the rules and requirements that create that administrative workload in the first place.  

The release of the TEA audit is a timely reminder that administrative growth is not simply a school district issue, but rather a broader question about how we structure and manage public education at every level of government. If we want to find and cut bloat, we should probably start at TEA.