While standardized test scores of Massachusetts students are still mostly below pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels, one education statistic that keeps rising is the cost to the state of funding teachers’ pensions.

In a new report on pension costs across six populous states including Massachusetts, we found that in the Bay State, 14 cents of every tax dollar dedicated to associated education spending went to pensions in 2022. That’s up from 9 cents in 2015 and far above the 8 cents forked over by taxpayers in our runner-up state, California.

Despite this increase in resources, the financial strength of the Massachusetts Teachers Retirement System hasn’t improved. Over this period, the percentage of assets the fund has relative to the value of its pension commitments remained consistently low, increasing from just below 57 percent to just below 58 percent.

Yes that’s right, MTRS has less than 58 cents saved for every dollar it owes, even under its assumption of a 7.15 percent return on investments every year. To put that in perspective, MTRS would consider a $100,000 payment due in 10 years as “fully funded” if it had just over $50,000 in its account today. And yet, this eye-popping increase in cash has barely kept MTRS treading water. This means that without policy reforms, Bay State taxpayers will probably pay an increasingly hefty bill.

While the MTRS funding ratio and contribution increases are worse than its peers, these trends reflect a nationwide problem. Public pensions when properly measured are underfunded to the tune of $5.12 trillion, and the cost burden on state and local governments is increasing.

To understand how the contribution increases impact education, consider that Massachusetts’ current education budget for fiscal 2024 is $7.95 billion. The fact that pension contributions have increased by 5 percentage points translates into $398 million per year of additional money going into the fund than if the share had remained at its 2015 level.

This means that the state has $398 million fewer dollars per year to dedicate to important expenditures such as salaries for new teachers, classroom resources, or support services such as counselors, technicians, or librarians.

State revenues generally rise of course, as they have in recent years, giving the state more money at its disposal to offset these increases. For example, while pension contributions per pupil in Massachusetts have risen by 109 percent since 2015, revenues per pupil have increased by 21 percent, softening the blow.

Yet this pace of revenue growth is not guaranteed. While Massachusetts fiscal 2025 budget foresees a $2 billion or roughly 3.5 percent spending increase, the incremental revenues are coming mostly from the significant Fair Share tax increase. Money to fund education, pensions, and other public priorities does not grow on trees. It comes out of taxpayers’ pockets.

Massachusetts officials could address the pension challenge through one key policy change: moving new employees from traditional defined benefit plans to defined contribution plans similar to 401(k)s.

Current teachers typically receive pensions based on a formula that uses a series of inputs including employees’ salaries, the ages of the employees, and the number of years of employees’ service. If an employee leaves their job, pension benefits are reduced or lost.

401(k)-type plans conversely require the state to contribute a flat percent of pay to a tax-deferred account as long as the employee is working in the job. Employees who leave the job can take their full accumulated retirement savings with them, and the state avoids the creation of more long-term obligations.

The mobility of 401(k)-type plans could attract more young people to the teaching profession, since they often prioritize flexibility early in their careers. While public sector defined benefit plans tend to be more generous than private sector 401(k) plans, that difference can be reduced by offering higher employer contributions. This setup would vastly improve the state’s finances while ensuring that retirement contributions do not continue to consume ever-increasing shares of education budgets.

Ultimately the burden of pension contributions will threaten the Commonwealth’s ability to remain a national leader in education. It would serve the state and its valued teachers well to move to a more sustainable model for retirement benefits before it’s too late.

Joshua Rauh is a professor of finance at the Stanford Graduate School of Business and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. Gregory Kearney is a senior research analyst at the Hoover Institution.