Charter schools were created to help the neediest students. Now, however, many charters skim off the most advantaged students and avoid those who are needy. This harms the public schools, removing their best students and overloading them with the students who require the most services.
It doesn’t get any clearer than this:
“Woodland Community Consolidated School District 50 in Gurnee filed a lawsuit against Prairie Crossing Charter School and two state agencies Tuesday, alleging that millions in state aid that should have been spent on instruction for low-income and at-risk students have been “siphoned away” to pay for a small number of charter school students, officials announced.”
“The district has asked a Cook County court to reverse a five-year reauthorization of Prairie Crossing Charter School approved in April by the Illinois State Charter School Commission, which is named in the lawsuit. The district also named as a defendant the Illinois State Board of Education, which authorized the charter school’s creation in 1999.”
“Woodland officials allege in the lawsuit that state funds intended for low-income or limited-English-proficient learners are mostly going toward the education of 321 charter school pupils, the majority of whom are “high-achieving Caucasian and Asian middle-class students,” Vondracek said.
“About 31 percent – or 1,997 — of the Woodland school district’s 6,425 students are considered “at risk,” compared with fewer than 2 percent of the charter school students, he said. Yet most of the $3.5 million in state aid that the District 50 was eligible to receive during fiscal 2012-13 went to the charter school, officials said.
Since 1999, the charter school has taken $30 million from the district’s budget.
The charter’s avoidance of high- needs students is blatantly unfair.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Diane,
Skimming is an historically routed policy given new life with the push for tax payer funded charter schools.
See: http://www.arthurcamins.com/?p=260
See: http://www.arthurcamins.com/?p=255
Deep seated elitist ideology and fixed-mindset belief systems are the justification for the need to find insatiable appetite for new venues for investment.
Arthur
http://www.arthurcamins.com
I’m glad someone is finally suing. I have often wondered why the ACLU has not been bringing cases against charter schools like this.
I am also happy that someone is suing. I wish it would happen in every state. Nothing makes me more angry than to hear that our children of poverty do not receive the services they should be getting. I am good friends with a lawyer, who is helping the Sudanese community. I introduced her to two boys I had in my class 5 years ago. They practically live with her and her husband. One of the boys is special ed with the most severe form of dyslexia among other things. I was told when I had him to keep trying different strategies. When my friend became involved, she made the District evaluate him. Now they are jumping through hoops to avoid a lawsuit. She has the aide of some of the best special ed people in the state. A former judge, who only dealt with special ed., a counselor, who is one of the best. The other day she told me at his IEP meeting, they tried to eliminate his aide for high school. Didn’t happen. I feel vindicated all the time, because of her. More important, these boys are receiving what they need. I wish every low income student who needed help, had someone like her.
But if Prairie Crossing succeeds in enrolling 31% of at risk students, it would presumably retain its charter and $9600/pupil state funding. At least it will test whether local school districts have standing to sue charters which cherry pick students.
I agree that would be a good study if they would randomly assigned students to this charter and the class sizes in the charters were equal to the public schools.
How is a publicly advertised lottery enrollment system equivalent to “cherry picking”?
A lottery is a way of screening out dysfunctional families and the homeless. After the lottery, the school can exclude children with disabilities and children with poor English skills (and they do). After school starts, they can counsel out those with low scores (and they do).
Here is the charter school’s response. The following letter was set by Prairie Crossing Charter School Executive Director Geoff Deigan to parents and is posted on the school’s website.
Dear PCCS Community,
We want to keep you informed of recent information we received regarding Woodland School District 50. Yesterday, District 50 filed a lawsuit against the Illinois State Charter School Commission (Commission), ISBE and PCCS in Cook County Court, asking for a reversal of our School’s most recent charter renewal approval.
We believe the complaints against the Commission, the School and ISBE are unfounded. While we recognize Woodland has a legal right of appeal – we find it unfortunate that resources to defend unfounded allegations will be used during this process instead of being utilized on our core purpose of providing a quality education to students in our respective districts.
As part of our third charter renewal, Prairie Crossing Charter School submitted to an extensive evaluation, which included an assessment of the School’s academic, financial and organizational achievements. PCCS received high marks (93%-96%) in each of the criteria evaluated. On April 15, 2014, PCCS went before the Illinois State Charter School Commission Board and presented information related to our charter renewal. Our charter was renewed that day, for a term of five years at 100% funding.
It appears the root of the issue is how schools, in general, are funded – including charter schools; Woodland’s choice to file a lawsuit to reverse our charter renewal is due to financial reasons. For years, Woodland has been trying to justify and balance their budget issues on the case that our Charter School exists.
The reality remains that PCCS, as a public school, is entitled to public dollars to educate its students. Woodland’s claim that money is being “siphoned” to PCCS is not revealing the entire story. In Illinois, funding for public education actually follows the student. Unlike Woodland, who can issue tax referendums and receives property taxes through all residents within their district (whether they attend their school or not), PCCS’s only revenue stream from the State is in the form of Per Capita Tuition Charge (PCTC) for students that attend our School. The PCTC is derived by the current funding formula (using General State Aid) that the State created to ensure that schools receive fair and equitable funding for each student they educate.
For example, according to their Illinois District Report Card in 2013, with 6508 students enrolled, Woodland received $63,837,314 in local property tax and $474,761 in General State Aid equaling ~$9,882 per student. In contrast, Prairie Crossing received from the State’s PCTC calculations ~$ 9,620 per student for those that chose to attend PCCS over Woodland.
PCCS is confident that the Commission’s action to renew PCCS through 2019 will remain unchanged. The renewal was a transparent, thorough, and arduous process conducted by the Commission’s Accountability plan and PCCS met or exceeded standards within all categories in which we were evaluated.
PCCS is proud of our students’ accomplishments and we look forward to the opportunity to continue to provide award winning and a personalized education to the families that choose an alternative to traditional public schools through 2019 and beyond.
To viewers of this blog: always watch for the slight of hand.
One important trick in the bag of sleight-of-hand illusion is redefinition of terms. Or in the parlance of the High Holy Church of Testolatry—“decoys” and “misleads” and “distractors.” Get people looking in the wrong direction, reframe the narrative, find a way to make yourself look like a victim.
I quote from the above: “It appears the root of the issue is how schools, in general, are funded – including charter schools; Woodland’s choice to file a lawsuit to reverse our charter renewal is due to financial reasons. For years, Woodland has been trying to justify and balance their budget issues on the case that our Charter School exists.”
Now for a return to Planet Reality. 1), refer to the title of this posting, “A Textbook Case of Charter Skimming”; and 2), wahwahwah we’re being abused and pummeled by those terrible public schools aka factories of failure—this isn’t an argument, this is a whine.
In these sorts of cases those in mad dog pursuit of $tudent $ucce$$ try to put their best foot forward. And if these are the best arrows in their quiver…
I look forward to their defeat in court.
😎
Sue them. The truth needs to be told.
Somewhere online there is a list of charters that were closed, and why. The list is long, as are the abuses against the taxpayers, students, and teachers.
Have you read about this fella: http://www.eclectablog.com/2013/05/22-year-old-failed-fake-michigan-democrat-cody-bailey-now-running-a-for-profit-charter-school.html
Concerning charter schools: the original concept as has been stated many times was good but once the camel has his nose under the tent, watch out. A paraphrasing but valid observation.
Reblogged this on Reclaim Reform and commented:
On Memorial Day, we honor those Americans who sacrificed their lives in service to our country. They died to keep ALL of our children safe and sound. Unfortunately, billionaires and international investors in the Corporate Education Reform Industry do not share those values. Monetizing children for private profit is un-American. “The charter’s avoidance of high- needs students is blatantly unfair.” I, personally, have been in Gurnee, Illinois many times. I support any lawsuit that fights the appointed Illinois State Charter School Commission and its money-siphoning, unfair treatment of public schools and the neediest of its students.
All children are our children. All children need a decent education.
“The Illinois State Board of Education, in a 2009 charter renewal agreement, ordered that Prairie Crossing increase its outreach to low-income, at-risk and Limited English Proficient students, the lawsuit states.
Woodland school officials petitioned the state to revoke the charter school’s charter in 2011, citing the “demographic disparity,” and was denied, according to the suit. Around the same time, the State Board transferred its authorizing powers to the Illinois State Charter School Commission, the document states.
Despite the district’s objections, the commission voted 5-4 on April 15 to reauthorize Prairie Charter School’s agreement for five more years at the same funding rate, expected to be about $9,600 per student, Swoboda said.”
Governance issues are really, really important here. Look at what happened here, where “oversight” was transferred to entities that were less and less accountable and further and further away from the real situation of what was happening to a public school. We always focus on charters cherry-picking, but the real outrage should be focused on what that practice does to every single student who remains in a public school. Resources are stretched over a larger population of students who need extra help. That harms every single student in public schools.
What we should be outraged about is that NO consideration is given to what happens to the public schools that take ALL kids when we continue to allow a separate and unequal charter system.
People should not permit charter entities to create an alternate governing system, through a practice of deregulation and “authorization”. An “authorizing” body is not a regulator. It’s a process that allows a relinquishment of authority and accountability AWAY from elected officials and to private entities. This is lousy governance. It won’t work. It isn’t working for public schools, and public schools matter, too.
I was shocked when I read Cami Anderson’s One Newark Plan and saw that several charter schools are simply DECLINING to be assigned students with Anderson’s elaborate effort to make this more equitable with her algorithm that assigns students to schools .
This is now voluntary? Charter schools can simply pretend they have NO responsibility to the other students in the system? How are they “public schools”, then?
You do not understand. This funding system will not change because this is about educating the semi- privileged or those who cannot afford a real Private education or they wish to save their money for other luxuries and have tax payers pay for their children to attend a Charter or semi-private school where you can have your children be with LIKE looking and thinking children from Higher income families! The judge will probably have children in the same type of school or a real private school. The lawyers for both sides may also be in the same situation. You already know the politicians are for this system of Re-Segregation because they passed it in the first place and their people approved the renewal. Are any renewals rejected? Good Luck.
“Illinois State Charter School Commission”
I’d like to see the minutes of the discussion by this quasi-public entity that approved the school over objections.
Was any consideration at all given to the effect on the existing public schools and their students, or were they completely ignored? Why don’t they have an advocate in government?
We have “agnostics” and then we have charter promoters and advocates. When do public schools get an advocate? Were public schools even at the table when this new system was designed? They’re affected by the charter school, negatively. Shouldn’t the kids in those public schools have some voice?
“Charter schools were created to help the neediest students”. False from the very first sentence. They exist to provide CHOICE.
MM,
Read the history of charters. It is in my book “Reign of Error.” One of the founders was Albert Shanker, president of the AFT. He envisioned charters for dropouts, the unmotivated, the neediest. NOT to provide choice.
Perhaps it was the history of charter schools but this charter school was started as a neighborhood school to provide a choice to families. A choice between an environmentally focused school where students can be out of the classroom and learning with a constructivist curriculum rather than be in a school where there are 400 kindergarteners alone (rather than 400 students k-8) and parents are discouraged from being involved. At PCCS parents are encouraged to be involved – that is a significant point in my decision as to where I want to send my children. All your sinister talk about “skimming” sensationalizes a situation where people simply want a choice for their individual children. Many families have students in both Woodland and PCCS because, as we all know, children are individuals and thrive in different environments.
Also, it is a LOTTERY SYSTEM. Students are not “cherry picked”. People are making assumptions about a situation they know nothing about.
MM,
A lottery system excludes those who don’t apply. Homeless families seldom apply. Even after a lottery, charters cherry pick by discouraging students with disabilities or pushing out those with low scores.
This charter school actually has more students with IEPs per capita than the school that is suing.
We live really close to this school and I considered applying for my daughter who is in the Autism spectrum and could benefit from a smaller setting.. the website was very discouraging of special needs students applying. I clearly got a senses that lottery aside, if your kid is “special”, this is not the school for you.
Angie, could you find where in the website it discourages special needs students from applying? Many people would be interested in knowing what discouraged you.
I agree with MM. The charter school that is being sued should not be lumped with other privately run charter schools, such as in Chicago. Prairie Crossing is one of 2 charter schools run by the state of Illinois. Therefore, they have the same standards and common core pushes as the rest of the public schools in Illinois. To put this in the same realm as some of the corruption going on in MI or even the mass exodus of Indianapolis School teachers to charter schools would be greatly remiss. If anyone looked closely into the Woodland School District, you would find an atmosphere ripe with mistrust, misuse of funds, etc. It is a diverse school district with a huge population. In any perfect world this school would struggle to make ends meet, to have children make AYP, and to not have high turnover of staff and administration. This is a great diversion trick and has even brought the great Diane Ravitch into the mix. The other issue that NO ONE speaks of is that this is a TWO district Charter School. Where are the complaints from the Fremont School District (79) that shares Prairie Crossing with Woodland School District? They are not in existence. So, I charge the Woodland School District with some very important responsibilities: If you win this lawsuit, Woodland, you better have a great plan. Poverty is poverty. IEPs are IEPs. No matter how much money you throw at these issues, you also need to have innovative staff who are willing to do whatever it takes to bring these students to their individual potential. So far I have only seen complaining and finger pointing. Where are the plans???? If I were a Woodland District parent, I would start asking questions now.
Just thought I would bring in some facts into some of the arguments here. The real issue here is the Woodland School District. Having the charter school $$ back in their coffers will solve NOTHING.
Nobody here has addressed the actual reason this school was issued a charter in the first place. The developer of the Prairie Crossing neighborhood had a friend that also happened to head up the state board of education. Said friend approved the charter one day before he left office (this, after the two effected districts declined the charter application). At the time, this was the first charter to get approved in this fashion.
This is good old politics at its best. The school was formed to help the home developer sell more homes at higher prices, period. Had nothing to do with filling an unmet educational need. I’m really pleased that my tax dollars were used to help a rich guy get richer.