A public-schools committee assigned to refigure the new weighted student formula appears to be teetering on the brink of diluting it, which eventually could make the whole enterprise meaningless.

The plan to award schools a minimum amount unrelated to student need — called a "foundation grant" — is not final, which is a good thing. There's a lot of room for improvement before school officials give the plan the go-ahead.

As currently drawn up, the grant scheme tends to siphon money away from larger schools, including some campuses in disadvantaged communities. Smaller schools would tend to gain money while larger schools could lose. This reverses the scenario under the original formula.

Such an outcome would negate a principal purpose of the weighted student formula: to give schools serving needier students extra resources.

The grants themselves would amount to nearly a quarter of total school funding, which means that student need is greatly reduced as a factor to consider.

The Legislature appropriated an extra $20 million this year to offset what would have been cut from smaller school budgets under the original formula. This was a reasonable concession, giving schools time to plan how to best find ways to adapt to the new fiscal reality.

Proponents maintain that the foundation grant would be a transitional allowance, diminishing over time. Sounds nice and easy, but does anyone really believe that will happen?

Public school officials need to change the way they spend money to improve services to Hawai'i kids. Pressing ahead with this agenda could hasten the use of innovative methods in more schools.

Putting too much stock in "transitional" schemes may sound the death knell for such innovation.