The purpose of this study was to advance our understanding of the original legislative intents of the Instructional Facilities Allotment (IFA) and to evaluate the IFA policy in achieving its goals. The study seeks to identify the original legislative intents of the bill that led to the creation of this program. The study also describes the evolution of the program from the passing of the bill through inception of the program to gauge whether the policy satisfied those intents since its inception. Interviews were conducted with state-level officials, leaders, and legislators, as well as those affiliated with the litigation that led to the drafting of this legislation. These interviews were conducted to identify the original legislative intents of the bill that led to the formation of the policy. More specifically, this study sought to address the following questions: 1) What is the social political history of school finance in Texas in context with which the Instructional Facilities Allotment (IFA) policy was developed? 2) What were the legislative intents of the IFA? 3) Were the legislative intents achieved? A mixed method approach, employing both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies, was used in this study to evaluate the IFA policy. The data analysis yielded two over-arching themes from the interview responses relating to the research question “what were the original legislative intents of the IFA?” A policy that was both legally defensible and politically responsible were two emerging themes identified in this study. Legislators aimed to keep the state out of court or have a policy that would be considered constitutional should facilities funding be challenged again through litigation. In addition, there was a desire among legislators to act in a manner that satisfied both their moral responsibility and political obligation. While the themes are two separate ideas, the analysis seems to support that one was possibly dependent on the other. The theme of politically responsible seems to be in response to, or in conjunction with, the notion that the primary motivator was to introduce a facilities funding program that was ultimately legally defensible. Furthermore, responses and data collected in regards to the third research question illustrated how both legislative intents seemed to be achieved initially, but the efforts deteriorated over time leading to a decline in it continuing to meet the intents.