Commonwealth Report Legislators Method

Plymouth County

Abington

Town · Plymouth County · 17,053 residents (ACS 2020–24)

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

State House

State Senate

School districts

Regional planning agency

Old Colony Planning Council

Fairness Index

Abington scores 42 on the Fairness Index for all state aid and 35 for discretionary money. Fifty is a fair share.

All state aid

42 / 100195th of 351 (1 = most above its share)

Equal
42
Need
46
Burden
41
Effort
38

Rank under other weightings: 187th to 201st.

Stable low: below 45 under every weighting

Abington received less than its share of state aid on all four measures; its blended score of 42 stays between 41 and 43 under every weighting tested.

Discretionary money only

35 / 100244th of 351 (1 = most above its share)

Equal
33
Need
37
Burden
42
Effort
30

Rank under other weightings: 233rd to 252nd.

Stable low: below 45 under every weighting

Abington received less than its share of discretionary money on all four measures; its blended score of 35 stays between 33 and 38 under every weighting tested.

Each bar is one way of defining a fair share: Equal, the same per resident; Need, weighted toward poverty, low income and a thin tax base; Burden, by what each program pays for (road miles, bridges, pupils and so on); Effort, by what residents already pay in property tax relative to their income. The line marks 50. The score is the average of the four. Discretionary money is competitive grants and earmarks that name the town. How the index is built.

State money, FY2017–FY2026

Abington’s town government and school districts received $181 million in formula aid and $4 million in competitive grants over ten years.

Formula aid

$181M

$10,596 per resident (162nd of 351) · gross

Competitive grants

$4M

$233 per resident (234th of 351)

Earmark-account payments

$472,000

$27.65 per resident (158th of 351)

Competitive grants to Abington peaked in FY2026 at $973,000, 24% of the ten-year total.
Formula aid$181M total · peak $23M in FY2026
Competitive grants$4M total · peak $973,000 in FY2026
Earmark-account payments$472,000 total · peak $194,000 in FY2025
FY17FY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26

Each class has its own scale. Bars show dollars paid in each fiscal year.

Formula aid is gross: Chapter 70 as DESE attributes it to the town, and cherry-sheet aid before the state deducts charges such as charter tuition and transit assessments, plus other formula programs as paid. Competitive grants and earmark-account payments are Comptroller payments to the town government and its school districts (stage: paid), the same payees as the Fairness Index. Enacted earmarks and earmark payments are different things: enacted earmarks are budget clauses, counted three ways above; earmark-account payments are Comptroller payments to the town government and its school districts from accounts classified as earmarks, which can include prior-year and statewide-program money. Either can be larger. Shared revenue, pass-through contracts, transfers to state entities and unclassified payments, $9.9M in all, are not shown. Rank 1 is the highest amount per resident among 351.

Earmarks

Abington received $662,000 in local earmarks in ten enacted budgets on all three measures.

Names the town

$662,000

$38.85 per resident (194th of 351)

Placed in the town

$662,000

$38.85 per resident (207th of 351)

Everything placed

$662,000

$38.85 per resident (210th of 351)

Losers Club

Not a member

35 municipalities had none

Local earmarks are counted three ways: clauses that name Abington; clauses placed in Abington, adding organizations located here; and everything placed, adding state facilities located here. Three ways to count a local earmark.

Placed in the town: 20 clauses in nine of ten budgets; the most recent in FY2026. Every one names Abington directly.

Largest items placed in the town, FY2017–FY2026 (the town’s share where a clause names several towns)
YearAmountBudget text (excerpt)Stage
FY2022$100,000“the town of Abington for traffic and sidewalk improvements”Enacted
names the town
FY2020$85,000“roof repairs and replacement at the council on aging in the town of Abington”Enacted
names the town
FY2023$75,000“the town of Abington for traffic and sidewalk improvements”Enacted
names the town
FY2017$50,000“the town of Abington for a public safety grant along route 18”Enacted
names the town
FY2025$30,000“the police department of the town of Abington for the purchase of a utility vehicle”Enacted
names the town

Enacted earmarks and earmark payments are different things: enacted earmarks are budget clauses, counted three ways above; earmark-account payments are Comptroller payments to the town government and its school districts from accounts classified as earmarks, which can include prior-year and statewide-program money. Either can be larger.

What the town carries

Measured against what it maintains, Abington received about its proportional share of competitive grant awards.

Local road miles

60.5

214th of 351 · 3.5 per 1,000 residents (297th of 351)

Town-owned bridges, replacement cost

$5.2M

scored exposure $1.8M · one in poor condition

Road-stream crossings

53

249th of 351 · culverts and small crossings

Town-owned hazard dams

1

high or significant hazard

Land area

10.0 sq mi

9% state-owned

Seasonal homes

0%

share of housing units

Peak service population

17,053

residents plus seasonal

Core infrastructure index

2.04

roads, culverts, dams, coast, flood, energy

The burden index divides the competitive awards Abington received from FY2017 to FY2026 by what it would have received if every program had split its money by its own measure of need: road miles for road programs, crossings for culvert grants, town-owned hazard dams for dam repair, jobs for economic development, residents for libraries. 1.0 is proportional. Abington: 1.02. State median: 0.91. Bridges count by replacement cost and condition, not by number, and only bridges the town owns. Ranks run from 1, the most among 351.

State land and growth

State land eligible for PILOT

613 acres

9.6% of land area · FY2026

State-owned land PILOT, FY2026

$248,000

payment in lieu of taxes, cherry sheet

PILOT per eligible acre

$406

statewide $117 · FY2026

New growth per resident

$11,013

FY2017–2025 · 304th of 351 · median town $20,524

State land eligible for PILOT is the Division of Local Services’ count of state-owned acres on which the state pays a payment in lieu of taxes; the payment follows the land’s assessed value, not its acreage, so the per-acre figure is a comparison, not the formula. The state-owned share on the land-area tile above is the MassGIS map of all state-owned open space, a wider count. New growth is the assessed value of new construction and improvements added to the tax base, summed FY2017–FY2025 and divided by 2020–24 residents; taxed at the prior year’s rates, it adds to the levy limit beyond 2.5%.

Costs and the 2½% limit

State aid covered 25.5% of Abington’s general-fund spending in FY2025, down from 27.3% in FY2006.

State aid as a share of general-fund spending

FY2006

27.3%

$9.2M of $33.7M · median town 14.1%

FY2016

22.0%

$9.7M of $44.2M · median town 12.2%

FY2025

25.5%

$17.6M of $69.1M · median town 11.5%

Net of state charges, FY2025

23.5%

FY2010: 24.4% · median town 10.0%

State aid is the gross cherry sheet as entered on the tax rate recap; spending is the town’s general-fund expenditures as filed with the Division of Local Services. Net subtracts the charges the state assesses on the same cherry sheet (charter and school-choice tuition, transit, county and other assessments), itemized from FY2010.

Abington’s own cherry sheet carries no Chapter 70 for pupils in its regional district; the state paid $1.1 million in FY2025 Chapter 70 to the district on its behalf, outside these figures, while the town’s assessment to the district sits in its spending. For a regional member the share understates state support for school costs.

Abington’s state aid kept pace with both price measures: FY2025 aid was 23.3% above its FY2006 aid grown by Boston-area consumer prices and 9.6% above grown by the government price index.
FY2006 aid
$9.2M
At FY2025 consumer prices
$14.3M
At FY2025 government prices
$16.1M
FY2025 aid
$17.6M

Gross state aid went from $9.2 million in FY2006 to $17.6 million in FY2025, +91.3% in dollars. Consumer prices are the Boston-area CPI-U, up 55.1% over those years; government prices are the federal price index for state and local government purchases, up 74.5%. Fiscal-year averages.

Fixed costs against the 2½% limit, FY2016–FY2025

Health insurance, FY2016–25

+35.2%

$4.4M to $5.9M · all towns +54.0%

All fixed costs, FY2016–25

+47.4%

$7.6M to $11.2M · all towns +53.0%

Years squeezed

6 of 9

fixed costs grew faster than allowed levy growth

Health insurance

4 of 9

years it grew faster than allowed levy growth

Nine years at 2.5% add 24.9%. Grown that way from FY2016, Abington’s health insurance would have been $5.44 million in FY2025; it was $5.89 million, $451,000 above the path. Its fixed costs would have been $9.52 million in FY2025; it was $11.2 million, $1.71 million above the path.

Fixed costs are employee benefits, retirement, insurance and similar costs in the general fund; health insurance comes from a separate DLS report. Allowed levy growth is 2.5% plus new growth, as a share of the prior year’s levy limit; a year counts as squeezed when fixed costs grew by a larger percentage.

Flag: health insurance changed by more than 30% in one year in FY2018 (+153%) and FY2020 (−40%). Swings this size usually mark costs moving between budget lines, into or out of trust funds, or into the state’s Group Insurance Commission, so the comparison may reflect accounting as well as cost. Flag: in FY2018 and FY2019 reported health insurance exceeded all general-fund fixed costs; the health-insurance report includes the employee share for self-insured towns.

Local earmarks against the health-insurance increase

Over the nine budgets, earmarks naming Abington came to $624,000, 40.7% of the $1.53 million rise in its health insurance.

Local earmarks FY2017–FY2025 (enacted, nine budgets) against the FY2016–FY2025 rise in health insurance
MeasureEarmarksShare of the increaseAll towns, pooled
Names the town$624,00040.7%28.2%
Placed in the town$624,00040.7%42.3%
Everything placed$624,00040.7%45.2%

An earmark is a one-year appropriation; a health-insurance increase recurs in every later budget. Earmarks are counted on the three measures and are not adjusted for the January 2024 mid-year cuts or the FY2026 hold. All towns: pooled over the towns that reported health insurance in both years. All dollars nominal. Method.

Schools

Abington’s required school contribution is 2.5% of median household income, 219th highest of 351.

Chapter 70 aid, FY2026

$15.8M

to the town’s district

Required local contribution

$20.1M

FY2026

Share of household income

2.5%

219th of 351 (1 = highest)

Real aid per pupil, FY2017–26

+32%

after inflation

Abington runs its own school district and also belongs to South Shore; Abington accounts for 15% of that district’s foundation budget.

Real figures use the CPI-U, fiscal-year average, in FY2026 dollars. The required contribution is the local share the state sets under the Chapter 70 formula; the share of income divides it per household by the town’s median household income.

Expected and actual

Abington received $4.6 million in earmarks placed in the town and competitive grants over ten years, 82% of the $5.6 million its size, need and institutions predict.

Expected
$5.6M
Received
$4.6M

The expectation comes from a statewide model of all 351 municipalities that uses population, road miles, jobs, poverty, income, tax base, school-aid share and the presence of hospitals, colleges and nonprofits. Those factors explain about 55–60% of the differences between towns. The model leaves out many legitimate reasons a town may receive more or less, such as a single large project, so a gap is a starting point for questions, not a finding about anyone’s conduct.

Earmarks here are placed in the town, the second of three measures (enacted); competitive grants are Comptroller payments (paid). Method.

Peers

Abington ranks 7th of 11 on earmark dollars placed in the town per resident among itself and its ten nearest peers.

Peers are the ten municipalities nearest to Abington on population, income need and tax-base need. The best and lowest performers are the highest and lowest on earmark dollars placed in the town per resident in the wider class of 30 nearest, the second of three measures.

MunicipalityFairness IndexFormula aid per residentCompetitive per residentEarmarks placed in the town, per resident (enacted)Burden indexSchool contribution, share of income
Abingtonthis town42$10,596$233$38.851.022.5%
Lunenburgpeer40$10,667$157$54.360.422.7%
Bellinghampeer39$9,082$546$24.671.243.0%
Nortonpeer44$10,594$69.10$29.560.743.1%
Graftonpeer36$9,020$459$36.421.972.9%
Wilbrahampeer44$12,134$123$1090.423.1%
East Bridgewaterpeer48$11,873$303$82.761.192.4%
Millburypeer44$9,909$648$53.291.092.5%
Auburnpeer43$11,124$134$47.460.322.6%
East Longmeadowpeer · lowest in class of 3042$11,619$224$13.700.723.2%
Somersetpeer47$11,729$136$41.530.732.4%
Winthropbest in class of 3040$8,903$365$1580.602.4%
East Longmeadowlowest in class of 3042$11,619$224$13.700.723.2%

Formula aid per resident is the ten-year gross total; competitive grants are ten-year totals paid, FY2017–FY2026; earmarks are enacted clauses placed in the town over the same ten budgets. Add up to ten towns to the table; adding needs JavaScript.

Sources

Every figure traces to a public record.

Every figure on this page is built by script from these public sources. Method and limits.

Parcenomics helps towns turn numbers like these into a plan. Municipal services · Contact