Our frequent commentator Laura H. Chapman, whose wise analyses so frequently inform all of us, has done some research on the billionaire class. I would add that her second category of schools, public in name only (PINO), includes for-profit charters.
Many of the billionaires in Forbes 2015 list claim to be self-made and to come from a low to moderate income family. Those are self-reports with no backup data worthy of mention by Forbes.
According to the Forbes 2015 list of the wealthiest people in the world, The United States has 536 billionaires worth $2.6 trillion.
In 2014 Warren Buffet made $14.5 billion.
Among the wealthiest in the US, 23 % of the billionaires claim to have been raised in a household that was “poor,” 17% in a “working class” family. Here are some of the top billionaires and major source of wealth.
Bill Gates, Microsoft, $ 79.2 billion…
Warren Buffet, Berkshire Hathaway, $72.7 billion…
Larry Ellis, Oracle, 54.3 billion…
Charles Koch, Diversified, $42.9 billion…G. Davis Koch, Diversified, $42.9 billion… Christy Walton, Walmart $41.7 billion…Jim Walton, Walmart $40.6 billion…Alice Walton, Walmart $39.4 billion… S. Robert Walton, Walmart $39.1 billion…
Michael Bloomberg, Bloomberg, $35.5 billion…Jeff Bezos, Amazon, $34.8 billion…Mark Zuckenberg, Facebook, $33.4 million….Sheldon Adelson, Casinos, $31.4 billion…Larry Page, Google, $29.7 billion…Sergey Brin, Google, $29.2 billion…
Forrest Mars, Jr., Candy, $26.6 billion….Jacquelin Mars Candy, $26.6 billion….John Mars, Candy, $26.6 billion….
George Soros, Hedge funds, $24.2 billion…Carl Icahn, Investments, $23.5 billion…Steve Ballmer, Microsoft, $21.5 billion… Phil Knight, Nike, $21.5 billion… Len Blavatnik, Diversified, $20.2 billion…Charles Ergen, Dish Network, $20.1 billion…Lauren Powell Jobs, Apple & Disney, $19.5 billion…Michael Dell, Dell, $19.2 billion…
So far as I know, only a few analytical studies have been done on the interconnections among grants flowing into K-12 education and the major foundations, many set up by billionaires. Here are some recent findings.
In 2010, the top 15 grant makers for K-12 education (based on IRS filings) were: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Walton Family Foundation, W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Michael and Susan Dell Foundation, Silicon Valley Community Foundation, Robertson Foundation, Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Broad Foundation, GE Foundation, The James Irvine Foundation, Doris and Donald Fisher Fund, Communities Foundation of Texas, and Ford Foundation.
In 2010, the top “convergent grantees”–beneficiaries of multiple funders were:
Charter School Growth Fund $46 million, 6 funders;
Teach for America, $44.5 million, 13 funders;
KIPP, $24 million, 9 funders;
D.C. Public Education Fund, $22 million, 5 funders (set up for merit pay) ;
New Schools Venture Fund, $18 million, 10 funders.
The researchers noted a dramatic increase in convergent grant making between the first year they studied, 2000, and the last, 2010. The increase was not only in dollars but also in the proportion groups that received funds from two or more foundations. As one example, funding for traditional public schools dropped from 16% of grant dollars in 2000 to 8% in 2010 while charter school funding rose from about 3% in 2000 to 16% in 2010.
Source: Reckhow, S & Snyder, J. W. (2014, May). The expanding role of philanthropy in education politics. Education researcher, 43, 4, pp.186-195. Or see Sarah Reckhow, (2013). Follow the money, How foundations dollars change public school politics. NNY: Harvard Education Press.
Plenty of money is around, and it is increasingly used to create a tripartate system of education.
One is truly public, tax-supported with governance by democratically elected school boards.
One is public in name only, tax subsidized, but with governance that is not fully public or democratically determined.
The third is private education, including for-profit-by-design education.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
More like Public In Funding Only (PIFO) …
Is there anyone who still argues that incredibly wealthy people DON’T have too much influence in the US?
That position is the outlier. That’s fringe.
“More than four in five Americans say money plays too great a role in political campaigns, the poll found, while two-thirds say that the wealthy have more of a chance to influence the elections process than other Americans.
Those concerns — and the divide between Washington elites and the rest of the country — extend to Republicans.”
I don’t know; they can continue repeating that this is a “conspiracy theory” but they are in the minority by a mile. I think the inability to see what’s obvious and what nearly everyone sees is ITSELF and indication of the bubble.
Are people wrong when they say the wealthy have too much influence in US politics (and I would argue POLICY because one is the other), yes or no? The response to that is just a denial? Okay! Carry on, elites!
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/03/us/politics/poll-shows-americans-favor-overhaul-of-campaign-financing.html?_r=0
Laura…..good choice of sources….really good.
It’s too bad we couldn’t take the money and stock our school libraries with appropriate books and professional staffing (i.e. Certified School Librarians) so that ALL children could have access to lots and lots of free choice reading material (and not necessarily those selected by the CC committee).
Ellen #BooksAreTreasuresToBeOpenedAgainAndAgain
History will have the last laugh on folks like Bill and Melinda Gates
“Legacies”
The legacy of Carnegie
Is libraries inspiring
The legacy of Gates, we see
Is testing, VAMs and firing
Dam straight!
2010 was a VERY good year for TFA and KIPP. Each of them also got $50M from Duncan’s DoE that year.
50 million for each of those very well connected organizations and 450 million for every worker “displaced” by the trade deal.
Just to put that number in context.
Excellent comparison, Chiara. See the Dem traitors who voted for TPP.
All that money could have been spent on smaller class sizes, more counselors per student, improved professional development and more stringent credentialing requirements. Then we would actually have better education, but no, greed and hubris are blocking the path of human improvement.
Sure, Bill Gates pulled himself up by his own bootstraps…
That’s why he was able to pay his own way through Lakeside School.
He got through based solely on his own grit and determination and strength of character.
😏
That’s why he’s an “impatient optimist.”
Because if he could do it so can anyone else.
End of discussion.
Or so he says…
😎
I like (well, maybe like is not the right word) to picture Bill Gates pulling himself up by his own jockstrap.
I think it explains quite a few things.
How easy it is to forget the starting line. In the race to “success,” Bill Gates started just a lap or two short of the finish. Even those who truly started with few of the outward trappings of success have to acknowledge that they owe their success to the agency of many other people who believed in them for whatever reason. What incredible ignorance and arrogance it must take to think that you have the right (and the noble responsibility) to dictate the course of the lives of so many other people.
This message cannot be hammered home long or hard enough. People are starting to get a clue.
I thank you for this post re: how grant funding opportunities are converging on beneficiaries of the corporate reform or privatization movement. I am a teacher educator and have directed a grant-funded professional development program for six years with secondary educators that has been praised by practitioners and promotes deep and meaningful student inquiry learning for high-needs school districts. The grant is a state grant (not private money) but I have noticed how the RFP has changed over the years to align ideologically with the predominant discourse.. When I first went for renewal after three years, the RFP included a separate process for “for-profit entities.” This year, the RFP included that as well as new regulations requiring a certain percentage of money to forward towards “minority and woman-owned enterprises.” I had a strange conversation with a state officer when I sought clarification on this requirement since most of my grant money goes towards paying salaries, stipends for teacher participation, payment to districts to reimburse for substitute costs, and classroom materials (like lab kits, technology, art materials) often for districts that are not well-resources. Basically, the state official urged me to massage my budget so that more funds were diverted away from public schools and towards private consultants who were, of course, woman and minority-owned. The list provided was a true joke! Needless to say, I did not change my budget to divert public funds (this is a state grant drawing from federal dollars) away from high-needs public schools in a program that has shown true results towards for-profit enterprises, whoever owns them! It is sad to see the funding sources, public or private, for truly meaningful curriculum and professional development work for public education be diverted increasingly for ideological purposes.
I have seen enough grants-based programs ( RFPs, proposals, programs enacted, reports on these) to understand the strings that get attached to them, often midstream and from unseen sources. This is one reason I have come to favor home-grown programs, context specific, teacher inspired and directed, no obligation for a formal scale-up, and with multi-year renewals and/or spread across venues not mandated but possible.
In many communities, grant-based funding has become the norm for arts education in schools, no full time and certified teachers–just a dose of the arts now and then, exposure equated with education (preferably scheduled on a Friday afternoon).
“Philanthropy” has a new meaning !
To make one billion dollars, you have to make $532,000 per hour! (14 billion equates to over $2,000,000 per hour!) These guys make more in one afternoon than I made in 35 years of teaching.
Allowing them to dabble in education reform is a big mistake. What do you think is going to happen when they, inevitably, get bored and move on to do something else? The devastation they will leave in their wake will be massive.
Most of these guys made their fortune by gaming the system (look up “carried interest” if you don’t believe me) and accrued wealth that they are now turning into political power (one dollar, one vote?). If we don’t do something to curb their influence, we are in for a very bumpy ride into the future.
Reform is exactly that.
Re-forming. In this case something beautiful into something grotesque.
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
My tripartate system is 1. wealthy parents’ kids in elite public schools & private schools, 2.Regular kids in neighborhood schools who haven’t been creamed off to a “better world,” most of whom need career education, 3. poor kids in poor schools who need tutoring and many of whom need career ed.
I believe a better focus would be financial support for career education