Nearly 30 years since their inception in the United States, charter schools are now a well-established educational option for parents and students. Although they are an important education provider schooling more than 3.1 million students nationwide, we know little about their ability to accumulate fiscal savings for weathering rainy days and sustaining smooth service. Unlike most other fiscal savings studies focusing on the unrestricted fund balance, we examine both restricted and unrestricted fund balances across Pennsylvania charter schools, this study's unit of analysis. Using a Newey-West regression and data spanning the years 2011-2019, we show that charter schools consider all fund balance classifications when making savings decisions; albeit the unrestricted was their primary savings vehicle. Given their limited revenue portfolio, they are left with only a few options for accumulating fiscal savings. Surplus from tuition payments and additional revenues from private funding sources appear as main fund balance boosters. Surprisingly, special education enrollment significantly increases the unrestricted fund balance, a finding that requires further attention from legislators and policy makers. Concerns are also raised about participation in the state pension system as it absorbs a significant amount of slack that otherwise could be used for other purposes. Overall, most charter schools retain inadequate fiscal savings not capable of insulating their operation from revenue volatility and other contingencies. Statutory fund balance minimums and the adoption of formal fund balance policies articulating how savings are accumulated, used, and replenished should, therefore, be considered.