FOCUS DC News Wire 2/27/12

D.C.’s Charter Schools Deserve Fairer Funding

The Washington Post

By Editorial Board

February 24, 2012

 

The special commission charged by the D.C. Council with examining funding for the city’s traditional and charter public schools released its report late on a Friday afternoon before the start of a three-day weekend. Little wonder the group didn’t want to call attention to its work: It essentially punted on all the core issues of school funding. That means there is more urgency than ever for Mayor Vincent C. Gray (D) to resolve the inequities that disadvantage the growing number of students in the city’s charter schools.

 

Mr. Gray campaigned on a pledge to fairly fund all D.C. public schools, traditional and charter, and it was hoped the Public Education Finance Reform Commission would help that effort by examining the equity and adequacy of the per-pupil formula and other city funding practices. Alas, the panel — handicapped by a lack of time and seemingly deadlocked by warring partisans of charter and traditional schools — recommended only further study in its 78-page report.

 

Ostensibly, students who attend public charter schools and the traditional system should receive the same investment of public funds through the Uniform Per Pupil Funding Formula. But the problem, as advocates for charters have convincingly argued, is that the public school system receives a lot of extras — such as additional appropriations when it overspends its budget and in-kind services from other city agencies. A recent report by Mary Levy, a longtime analyst of D.C. public education, found that the school system has received $72 million to $127 million annually above what the formula provides over the past four to five years.

 

To some degree, the charters are victims of their own success; they came into being with the boast that freed from the constraints of large school bureaucracies, they would be more nimble and could do more with less. They’ve largely delivered on that promise — enrolling a student population that is perhaps more challenging than that of the school system but producing improved test scores and graduation rates. The perverse result is that charters — unlike the still-struggling school system — aren’t seen as being in dire need and have fewer advocates making their case for a larger share of city resources.

 

Perhaps a case can be made that a dollar-for-dollar match between the two systems may not always be appropriate. But there are glaring inequities that Mr. Gray can fix without the need for further delay or more expensive studies. That includes a stop to the practice of requiring the charters to repay monies if they don’t meet enrollment projections, while giving the traditional school systems a pass. More vacated or underutilized public school buildings should be opened for use by charters. There is simply no excuse for letting these buildings sit unused while successful charters are operating in cramped and crowded conditions. An astounding 41 percent of public school students attend charters, and there is no sign of that abating. Indeed, Mr. Gray’s administration is exploring whether to give the school system its own chartering authority so that it can enjoy the same flexibility and independence. It’s time to resolve these fundamental funding issues.

 

 

 

 

School Enrollment and the $18 Million Question [Carlos Rosario and Cesar Chavez PCS are mentioned]

The Washington Post

By Bill Turque

February 23, 2012

 

The D.C. public school system projected an enrollment of 47,247 students for the 2011-12 year when it put together its budget. And through the uniform per-pupil funding formula, which provides a minimum of $8,945 for each student, the school system received money for that many students.

 

But this month’s audited enrollment showed it with 45,191 students, or 2,056 fewer than forecast. That means the system got $18.4 million for new students who are either ineligible for residency reasons or who never materialized.

 

So is the refund check to the D.C. treasury in the mail?

 

Not likely. DCPS routinely — some critics say systematically — overestimates enrollment projections built into its annual operating budgets. In fiscal 2010 and 2011, the system also received more money than it would have if payments had been based on actual enrollment: a total of $29 million, most of it in special education, according to research by the Public Education Finance Reform Commission (PEFRC).

 

Not so for the city’s public charter schools. Although the school system is fully budgeted in the spring on the basis of enrollment projected for the following school year, charters receive their allocations on a quarterly basis, beginning July 1. If audited enrollment falls below spring projections, allotments can shrink in the third or fourth quarterly payment.

 

PEFRC staff report that public charter schools collectively would have received $5.2 million more in fiscal 2010 and 2011 if they had been budgeted on projected enrollment instead of actual audited numbers.

 

This was an issue raised by charter representatives to the commission tasked by Mayor Vincent C. Gray (D) to study equity issues. Three members — Allison Kokkoros, chief academic officer for Carlos Rosario PCS; Irasema Salcido, founder and chief executive of Cesar Chavez PCS; and Jeremy Williams, director of business oversight for the D.C. Public Charter School Board — recommended that ultimate funding for both the school system and charters be tied to audited enrollment. But their position made it only as far as PEFRC’s minority report.

 

Enrollment is, as system spokeswoman Melissa Salmanowitz said, “a moving target.” On Feb. 14, according to the enrollment and attendance database, the system was serving 46,512 students. That’s 735 fewer than the spring projection but 1,321 more than the annual Oct. 5 count that was the basis for the enrollment audit. Enrollment historically rises after Oct. 5, Salmanowitz said, and the system receives no extra money to support it.

 

 

 

 

Should District Get Back into the Business of Authorizing Charter Schools? [St. Coletta, Elsie Whitlow Stokes, Latin American Montessori Bilingual, IDEA, and Community Academy PCS are mentioned]

The Washington Post

By Bill Turque

February 27, 2012

 

Last week’s disclosure that Mayor Vincent C. Gray and Chancellor Kaya Henderson may seek to regain the District’s status as a charter authorizer received a tepid response, including this from D.C. Council Chairman Kwame R. Brown (D):

 

“I do not have plans to introduce any legislation that would give DCPS chartering authority at this time. I will bring all of the relevant parties to the table before making any final decisions regarding whether this is an appropriate role for DCPS.”

 

Perhaps that’s because it didn’t work out so well the last time.

 

For the first 10 years of the city’s charter movement (1996 to 2006) the old D.C. Board of Education and the D.C. Public Charter School Board both authorized the opening of charters. But the Board of Education, which had a whole other traditional public school system to run, struggled to exercise proper oversight of the fledgling charters.

 

A 2005 GAO report concluded that the board didn’t regularly review information from its charter school office and allowed problems at some schools to go unresolved for too long. Some school board members agreed that it wasn’t a good fit.

 

“The amount of time we spend on charter schools is debilitating. I want the board to focus on its core mission,oversight of D.C .public schools,” then-school board member Tommy Wells told my colleague Dion Haynes in 2006. Interestingly it was Wells, now Ward Six council member, whose questioning at last week’s agency performance hearing created the opening for Henderson to publicly reveal her interest in chartering authority.

 

Scott Pearson, executive director of the charter school board, who indicated that he doesn’t oppose DCPS becoming a second authorizer, pointed out that many public school districts have encountered the same problem, with charters relegated to “priority number 25” in the crush of other business.

 

The Board of Education voted to relinquish its chartering authority in 2006. It transferred oversight of its 16 schools to the Public Charter School Board before its extinction with the advent of mayoral control 2007.

 

The D.C Council, and possibly Congress, would ultimately have to approve any plan to return chartering authority to the District. Officials say the details are still in flux, but it is highly unlikely that any new plan would include a provision for the D.C. Council to handle charter applications. Authorizing power and accountability would almost certainly be held by DCPS and the chancellor.

 

Of the 16 Board of Education charters inherited by the PCSB, 11 are still around, among them a few of the city’s best: St. Coletta, Elsie Whitlow Stokes and Latin American Montessori Bilingual. They also include some of the lowest performers. Five were closed by the PCSB or relinquished their charters for academic or financial reasons: Kamit Institute for Magnificent Achievers, Barbara Jordan, Young America Works, City Lights and Washington Academy. Another two, Integrated Design and Electronics Academy, a Ward 7 high school, and Community Academy’s Rand campus, a PS-5 in Ward 5, may close at the end of the school year.