Federal funding to help low-income children in public schools does not necessarily aid all of them. Under Title I, the biggest such initiative at about $14.4 billion a year, Washington doles out money to states based on complex formulas that take into account the numbers of low-income students in individual schools.

But schools with higher proportions of low-income students get more money. Funds are not distributed strictly on a set amount for each low-income child in a school. And private charter schools often are left out entirely.

Congress is debating renewal of the No Child Left Behind law, and one issue is “portability” of funding to help low-income children. One proposal is that federal funding should be allocated to each low-income child, who should be able to take that money with him if he changes schools.

Some in Congress hate the idea. But it makes sense and lawmakers should keep it in the renewal bill.

Individualized instruction is the best way to educate a child. What’s wrong with individualized funding for those who may need more help?