Today the State Senate debates the charter school bill its Ways and Means Committee released last week.
The Senate declined to take up a House bill increasing the current cap on charter schools during the last legislative session, and so is under some pressure to advance a proposal of its own. The Senate Ways and Means bill increases the cap, but it also imposes more requirements on how charter schools operate, addressing the concerns of charter school critics that these schools are currently able to cherry-pick those students who are already most likely to succeed.
(Mass Budget has prepared a useful guide to charter school funding, which will help you pick your way through this polysyllabic thicket by defining terms like foundation budget rate, above foundation rate, facilities aid rate, and charter reimbursement formula.)
The Senate proposal got an immediate thumbs down from Governor Charlie Baker and other charter school advocates. And the Globe editorial board, while giving the Senate a “thanks for playing” pat on the back, says that the conditions the Senate wants to impose on charter schools are too onerous.
So it is looking increasingly likely that a proposal to increase the cap that does not include the Senate’s additional conditions will be on the ballot in November. This proposal has the backing of not only the Governor but also of a coalition of business interests who say that our low-income urban communities are in crisis. The coalition feels so strongly about our low-income urban communities that it is planning to spend $18 million (an amount that the Globe’s Jim Sullivan says will “obliterate state campaign spending records”) to ensure the ballot question’s success.
Hive mind, have at it.
Although charter schools in Massachusetts are required to be non-profits, they are still allowed to funnel profits to connected for-profit corporations.
Here is the 2014 independent audit of the SABIS International Charter School in Springfield; their budget is included.
SABIS received $17m in tuition (i.e. from public funds) and $1.3m in state and federal grants. They got $84,920 in “educational fees” (not sure where that comes from, but it sounds like it comes from students).
Here’s an interesting line: Instructional Management Fee: $1,993,000. Later, it reveals that this is a contract with “Springfield Education Management LLC, a related corporation”.
It also noted that the school “purchases a majority of their text books from Sabis Educational Systems”. It mentions they spent $683,554 in 2014 for those textbooks. They spent $7.8m on salaries, so that means they spend about 8.7% of the cost of their teaching staff on textbooks annually. I don’t know if that is reasonable or not, but it sounds high to me.
This is one of the better-run charter schools, and there it is, in plain sight, 10% of their operating budget goes to a related for-profit corporation for “services” and another 4% on books purchased from a related for-profit corporation.
What an amazing coincidence that out of all the management corporations in the world, out of all the textbook vendors in the world, this private-public school determined that the best choice was themselves!
Oh, and the best part is SPRINGFIELD EDUCATION MANAGEMENT LLC is a Foreign Limited Liability Corporation based in Lebanon! So much for “local control” of our education, huh?
Can you imagine the outrage if the principal of a public school selected her husband’s corporation as the cleaning service for the school? Or if a public school purchased unspecified “management services” from a company owned by the mayor?
People in Springfield support SABIS precisely because it allows some students to “escape” the general school population. I totally understand that – it’s another choice, and people love choice. It is, in many ways, an ideal bunko scheme, because as more and more charter schools are created, skimming more and more “better” students from the public schools, the dollars necessary to teach the remaining students in the public schools must increase, and that means the money going to the charter schools will increase too! And I’m willing to bet that those “management fees” will increase proportionally.
Thank you for the link and the explanation of the SABIS budget. When I see that a coalition of business interests is spending $18 million on the ballot question, I can only think that we need to follow the money. Their primary interest in the “crisis in education” is how they can profit from it.
There is a crisis in urban schools, and part of that crisis is the systematic disinvestment from publicly governed schools, combined with the perpetual drive to increase funding, lift the cap, and increase the privileged status for the privatization movement.
Governor Charlie baked in a -0.22 percent DEFLATION rate into the FY17 foundation budget for schools, and is pushing hard for the removal of all charter school caps. The combination of cuts to public schools, and more money taken for charter schools, will lead parents to look at the difference in offerings and want the new Cadillac instead of the used Chevy.
The funding is both unfair and confiscatory, hurting public schools students. Using my beloved Arlington as an example, the per-pupil charter garnishment out of Arlington’s Chapter 70 aid is $12,393. Compared to DESE’s calculation of FY16 per-pupil spending of $12,473, it seems reasonable. However, that per-pupil calculation includes the $7.4 million Arlington spends on out-of-district special education (SPED) costs, and $12.4 million in in-district SPED costs.
While Arlington looks like it is well-resourced, spending 131.9% of foundation, the reality is that after deducting the expences for out-of district SPED (526.8% of foundation) and in-district SPED (240.0% of foundation), the rest of our budget is only 106.4% of foundation. Result: You are looking at spending (based on 106% of foundation) for an average non-SPED student in Arlington as $8,699 (elementary), $7,761 (middle), and $9,633 (high school). Add on an average $2,333 per pupil for in-district SPED costs, noting that many of those costs are for expensive substantially-separate students who never find their way to a charter school.
Arlington is not at ground zero in the charter school wars, but we lose 8 students to charters. Deduct $99,784 from our Chapter 70 aid for the charter students. Does that reduce Arlington’s costs. when children are scattered across different grades? No, but we do lose the funding for a teacher in a district with increased enrollment and a state funding formula that doesn’t keep pace with costs.
Also bear in mind that most of Arlington’s education funding comes from local funds. With $10.7 million in Chapter 70 aid, making 16.2% of our net school spending of $66.3 million, the state is garnishing a lot more money for that charter school student than it is paying into Arlington.
What does the RISE act do to help? It’s not nirvana, but it is the first genuine attempt by the legislature to institute meaningful reform for charter schools since the enactment of the Education Reform Act of 1993. It adds some accountability and oversight for charter schools. While the charter school industry is squawking ferociously about these horrible provisions, they are nothing more than the oversight required of every other public agency and public school in the state.
The RISE act recognizes the havoc that a charter school can play as cities and towns make choices and plan for the future. As Arlington looks to add additional classrooms for a surge in enrollment, we are meeting with the community and town officials to devise a plan we can afford to meet our needs. Any plan must get approval from the school committee, the finance committee, and Town Meeting. An override or debt exclusion must go before the voters. It’s a complicated and highly accountable process.
However, a group of out-of-town activists have decided that what we need is a Waldorf charter school in neighboring Medford. They can totally ignore the financial constraints of the town, the local oversight, the collective will of Town Meeting, and get the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to impose it on us. If the state imposes an expensive charter school on us, in a district where 83.8% of school spending comes from local funds, with no local oversight or accountability, is that right? Shouldn’t Arlington have a voice? Shouldn’t Town Meeting have a vote on a significant expenditure out of limited town resources?
Arlington, like any town in the Commonwealth, has a tradition of highly-accountable local governance. We appropriate relatively small amounts of money on the floor of town meeting. We approved $3160 for the Arlington Commission on Arts and Culture, $2,160 for the Arlington Historical Commission, and $0 for the Capital Planning Committee and the Transportation Advisory Committee (Arlington Annual Town Meeting, Article 29). Shouldn’t we have a say on major expenditures? Shouldn’t we be able to decide how our education funds are spent?
Massachusetts, particularly in a town government structure, sets a high standard for accountable local governance. Commonwealth charter schools don’t meet this standard.
The RISE act is an attempt to bring charter schools closer to the level of accountability we expect from our local governments. While not perfect, it’s an excellent start.
In that it leaves both sides deeply unhappy. I won’t go over the problems with charter schools after the above commenters do it so well, but it is difficult to see how this doesn’t go on the ballot. Baker’s people bankrolled his campaign to get this change. The resulting election will be the starkest example of money v. people in an election our state has seen. (Which is appropriate, because it is a vote about which of those our education system needs to serve).
In no particular order,
1. Enabling gentrification
2. Education policy made by billionaires (Walton Family, Bill Gates)
3. Foreign ownership (Hampden Charter School of Science and Pioneer Charter School of Science are owned by the organization of Fetullah Gulen, a Turkish cleric
4. Privatization
5. Corruption. Not so much in Massachusetts where only Robert B.Hughes Charter School in Springfield was shuttered due to corruption
6. Anti-Union Jobs