A reader in Ohio shared this unbelievable link.
You may recall that David Hansen was in charge of monitoring charter schools in Ohio. You may recall that his wife, who was John Kasich’s chief of staff, is now running his presidential campaign. You may recall that Hansen was compelled to resign when he was caught manipulating charter school test scores to protect some big Republican donors. Well, Hansen may be gone but his legacy lives on, thanks to the U.S. Department of Education, which ignores scandals if they involve charter schools.
A top Ohio Department of Education official who resigned in July after manipulating data to boost charter schools also participated in a successful effort to obtain $71 million in federal money that could allow the wholesale takeover of urban school districts.
The U.S. Department of Education this week announced that it is providing $249 million to six states and the District of Columbia over the next five years for the expansion of charter schools.
The single-largest grant of $71 million goes to Ohio, which ranks near the bottom nationally for charter-school academic performance and has a history of financial failures. [My emphasis].
Records show that David Hansen, a longtime advocate for charter schools hired by State Supt. Richard Ross to run his school-choice office, was involved in the grant application that will facilitate the takeover of Youngstown city schools and other targeted urban districts.
The takeover of so-called “recovery school districts” such as Youngstown was secretly negotiated by Ross, Kasich’s then chief of staff Beth Hansen and Youngstown business officials and approved by the legislature in June in a stunning last-minute maneuver.
David and Beth Hansen are husband and wife, and she left Kasich’s staff in July to run his presidential campaign.
Records released by the Ohio Department of Education Sept. 3 in response to newspaper investigations of Hansen’s role in the data manipulation also show that he assembled the supporting documents for the federal grant.
In those supporting documents, charter schools, charter-school advocates and members of the U.S. Congress painted a positive picture of Ohio.
This is an astonishing story. The charter school scandals run from the state departments of education, which have been caught playing games with data to bolster politically-connected charters, right to the U.S. Secretary of Education:
In those supporting documents, charter schools, charter-school advocates and members of the U.S. Congress painted a positive picture of Ohio.
U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, in announcing the $71 million this week, cited a Stanford University report suggesting that charter schools nationwide are showing improvement.
He didn’t mention another Stanford report that says Ohio charter schools are among the lowest-performing in the country.
Instead, the federal officials gave the state a perfect score for “High-Quality Authorizing and Monitoring Processes” — or policing of charter schools — although it is the manipulation of that system that resulted in Hansen’s forced resignation.
He resigned two days after the filing deadline for the grant application. Duncan’s office reviewed the application and provided feedback on Sept. 4, months after the Ohio Department of Education rescinded the manipulated evaluations.
Kim Norris, a spokeswoman for ODE, said federal officials were notified of the flawed accountability formula. “They approved the grant with that knowledge,” she said.
The state application also lacked academic data to show whether Ohio’s charter schools, which cost taxpayers more than $1 billion annually, turn tax dollars into student success.
Education Week noted that Ohio’s charter sector was riddled with scandals and had lower performance than public schools:
Among the seven states and the District of Columbia to receive the grant money, Ohio is getting the largest grant. Charter school critics, and even some charter supporters, point to Ohio as an example of the kind of dysfunction that can arise from a lightly regulated charter sector.
The state has come under a lot of scruitiny lately following multiple federal, state, and press-led investigations into corruption among some Ohio schools and their CMOs over the last few years. And a December study by the Stanford University Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) found that Ohio charter school students on average learn less in a year than their district school peers.
So, yes, the U.S. Department of Education knew the Ohio charter data was phony but they gave Ohio $71 million anyway.
Why did ED decide to give the most money to the state with the most dysfunctional charters?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Like I said in another thread for another post here, the only way to deal with these parasites is to use DDT and Agent Orange on them.
No napalm??
Or is that too indiscriminate??
Napalm works too fast. DDT and Agent Orange kills its victims slowly over generations as their bodies deteriorate in horrible agony and pain—more like death by ten thousand cuts, and it even gets the children after at least one parent is exposed and then it gets the grandchildren too and on and on.
I was exposed to Agent Orange in Vietnam and I’m on the VA’s agent orange list. Since the oligarchs made a profit off the agent orange that was sprayed on American troops and all Vietnamese, our allies and our enemies from children to the elderly, we should return the favor. What is that old saying, “Do unto others as they would do unto you?”
Here’s a link to the VA’s Agent Orange page:
http://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/
Because they WILL have their charters, and because the people who “count” — that is to say, those with money, and those with time, who are not busy just trying to survive and keep a roof over their kids’ heads — because those who “count” WANT their publicly funded private school experience, and let the poors stay in the ravaged public schools where they belong. Because bootstraps.
If it can be proven that he falsified information on a federal application, he should be charged with fraud. As Part of the Problem implies, this is not likely to happen because our country is an oligarchy.
The U.S. Justice Dept. has shown for some time, that it has zeal to prosecute people at the bottom, but not those, who are politically connected.
Did the U.S. Dept. of Ed. have any influence in the charges brought against the Atlanta teachers?
Money For Nothin’ (parody of Dire Straights)
Now look at them yo-yo’s that’s the way you do it
You vote for charters on the D-O-E
That ain’t workin’ that’s the way you do it
Money for nothin’ and yer rent for free
Now that ain’t workin’ that’s the way you do it
Lemme tell ya them guys ain’t dumb
Maybe get a blister on your texting finger
Maybe get a blister on your thumb
We gotta install charters — and dozens —
Custom charter deliveries
We gotta remove these charter haters
We gotta move these Acadamies
The schoolboard member with the charters on the rake-up
No buddy, that sure ain’t fair
That schoolboard member got his own jet airplane
That schoolboard member he’s millionaire
We gotta install charters — and dozens
Custom charter deliveries
We gotta move these manipulations
We gotta move these Acadamies
I shoulda’ learned to play them Board-games
I shoulda’ learned to bend them rules
Look at that fella, he got it pilin’ in the bank-account
Man we’re a bunch of fools
And he’s up there, what’s that? “Kachinkin” noises ?
Feedin’ off the public, that is plain to see
That ain’t workin’ that’s the way you do it
Get your money for nothin’ get your rent for free
We gotta install charters — and dozens —
Custom charter deliveries
We gotta remove these bad regulations
We gotta move these Acadamies
Now that ain’t workin’ that’s the way you do it
Money for nothin’ and yer rent for free
Now that ain’t workin’ that’s the way you do it
Money for nothin’ get yer rent for free
Money for nothin’ get yer rent for free
I want my, I want my, I want my rental free…
Especially like the scansion between “deliveries” and “Academies,” SDP.
This is amazing too:
“The state application also lacked academic data”
What possible metric could they be using? The state with the laxest laws gets the money?
When public schools apply for grants do they have to provide academic data?
“Guess who also got a federal award this week? That’s right. Nevada.
So the two worst performing charter states in the country got awards from the USDOE to increase the number of charter schools in those states.”
I can’t tell from the piece who reviews the grant applications. It looks like it’s a contractor, not the USDOE. Why would they hire a contractor to review charter school grants?
http://www.10thperiod.com/2015/09/bizarro-world-ohio-wins-big-usdoe-award.html
More proof that the entire charter concept lacks a moral center, or soul, and more reasons to be wary of Kasich.
https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/07/20/18775131.php
Does anyone else believe part of this privatization is an attack to segregate or eliminate special education ?Charters are allowed to exclude these students . In addition these students have been mandated to take the same test as everyone else.
Now, instead of funds going to support our neediest students grants are handed out to states for charter expansion. Parents need to wake up and realize how it took a march on Washington to get PL94-142. It appears to me they are using back door tactics to make it disappear.
Aaaand, they punted on the charter reform bill. Again.
“More negotiations” means “give lobbyists another crack at gutting it”
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/09/ohio_house_rejects_charter_school_reform_bill_sends_it_for_more_negotiations.html
Ohio lawmakers are now approaching a full year where they have done nothing for schools besides NOT regulating charter schools. This is in a state where 93% of the children DO NOT attend charter schools. We’re all paying them for this.
Dr. Steven Tate, Ohio Department of Education, sent the following undated cover letter in support of Ohio’s application for a Charter Schools Program SEA Grant. There is no specific person to whom it is addressed. Notice the pitch that claims the grant will serve “underprivileged students” in urban districts and fix Ohio’s corrupt system of charter authorizing.
Letter begins——-
“I have a chance to show what it means to…have a compassionate side, a caring side, to help lift people up.” Ohio Governor John Kasich’s quote highlights the state’s continued priority to support the most disadvantaged Ohioans. The means through which this fundamental vision can be achieved includes better serving the educational needs of Ohio’s underprivileged students through charter schools.
Under Governor John Kasich’s leadership, policies have been enacted that are leading to the creation of new, high-quality charter schools and improving the academic and fiscal performance of existing charter schools. This includes Ohio’s new law instituting a first in the nation, high stakes quality reviews of all state authorizers.
An award from the Charter Schools Program SEA Grant will allow Ohio to significantly increase access to effective charter education opportunities for Ohio’s most disadvantaged boys and girls, particularly from low-income and minority families, who are currently poorly served by the urban schools districts in which they live.
The key strategies in our use of the SEA Grant include:
– Open more high quality charter schools and close poor-performing schools. Aggressively target new high-quality charter schools in areas where poor-performing schools are closing or likely to close.
– Provide for more schools serving targeted students where no effective options exist.
– Target supply and quality increases toward low-income and minority families.
– Partner with Community Educational Development Organizations (CEDOs) to accelerate charter development and success.
– Integrate quality charter development into the State’s new authority to create achievement school districts serving the children of the most dysfunctional school districts.
– Increase accountability and autonomy in the charter marketplace by strengthening the guardrails of quality authorizing and hold state authorizers rigorously accountable for protecting student trust and public investment in Ohio charter schools.
With the creation of new schools and the replication of those that are high quality, ODE’s ultimate goal is for Ohio to have 70% of charter school seats in effective schools by 2020, contributing to an overall state charter sector of 100,000 seats and 400 schools.
——end of the undated letter
Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan just awarded over $71 million to expand charters in Ohio, one of the most corrupt charter authorizing states. Duncan chose to ignore red flags from three reviewers of Ohio’s grant application. The maximum points for thie grant application was 120. Ohio’s application received scores of 99, 100, and 102.
I have looked through the reviewers comments and conclude that they tried to flag big problems. Arne Duncan ignored them. He has approved the corruption and misrepresentations of charter school performance and offered the state a big bonus for bad performance. You can find the criteria and full reviews of the grant application at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/charter/awards.html
Here are direct quotes about the weaknesses cited by the reviewers, lightly edited for jargon, not spelling, and regrouped by issues.
Scale of Charter Expansion:
Ohio’s plan to award 23 planning grants, 12 year-one and year-two implementation subgrants in first year of the award and 23 year-one and year-two implementation subgrants per year after that seem to be overly ambitious given the rate of growth in the past and the potential for market saturation over time.
The state’s plan to grow to 400 charter schools appears to be overly-ambitious given the state’s historical growth rate of charter schools combined with their rate of school closures. The numbers are very aggressive and not adequately informed by data, especially Past Performance.
The anticipated growth is not predicated on the research and dissemination of best practices. Growth overshadows quality.
Given the large number of extant charters and the anticipated growth, there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that replication and growth should be supported to the degree requested.
Over ambitious with regard to a goal of 400 total charter schools to be established by the end of the grant cycle. Data sets suggest a focus on how to scale quantity (rather than quality).
Current efforts are focused in metropolitan areas. No clear plan for initiating these efforts throughout the state to include rural areas.
Authorizing Issues:
Ohio’s proposal is predicated on authorizer capacity. There is no mention of this aspect.
The application makes assertion that the authorizers are key (to) success. There is no mention of …efforts to fund the capacity building efforts required in the authorizing community.
No clear plan is provided for ensuring that the state’s 65 authorizers have the capacity to support this ambitious increase in the total number of schools within the proposed project period.
(Plan) is predicated on the assumption that there is capacity in the current and/or planned authorizer community. Yet, with increased accountability, authorizers will need to build capacity and the addition of new schools that require approval and oversight requires some documentation regarding capacity.
It is unclear whether or not Ohio’s authorizing process includes determining if the developer has been successful in establishing and operating one or more high-quality charter schools.
Does not have clear and measurable checks and balances for ensuring that authorizers approve charter school petitions…that incorporate evidence-based school models and practices as requested by the Charter School Program.
Does not have clear and measurable checks and balances for ensuring authorizers’ accountability of charter schools new assessments and accountability systems.
Issues in State-level Management.
Contractual non-compliance issues have resulted in 60 school closures in the past five years. There is no evidence that this data has been used to shape the work moving forward so that these deleterious numbers are reduced significantly, either by not opening marginal schools and/or increasing the oversight by authorizers.
Does not describe how it will use measures of efficacy and data in identifying best and promising practices… The SEA simply states, “ODE will assess impact by reviewing the prior year’s activities and use the results to inform future plans.”
Data sets suggest a focus on how to scale quantity (rather than quality).
Does not clearly describe specific ways in which the model and management plan is likely to ensure an increase in high quality schools.
Does not indicate what specific elements will be targeted within the dissemination plan (or) guide decisions to renew, revoke, or place a charter in a probationary status.
Does not fully explain a clear plan of action for violations such as probation or timelines to correct issues.
Focus on “compliance” to the neglect of demonstrable evidence of “successful” schools that will be replicated.
Does not ensure schools are meeting the terms of their contracts according to state and federal laws.
Insufficient Data on Student Performance.
Applicant does not provide overall academic performance data, specific results in reading or mathematics, nor graduation rates. Therefore, it is difficult to determine the extent to which the performance of charter school students equals or exceeds the attainment of similar students in other public schools.
Insufficient data to determine the extent to which the academic achievement and academic attainment (including high school graduation rates and college and other postsecondary education enrollment rates) of charter school students equal or exceed the academic achievement and academic attainment of similar students in other public schools in the State over the past five years.
Accountability for High Quality:
The state has not demonstrated a steady decrease in the percentage of poor-performing charter schools over the past five years.
The percentage of high-quality charter schools is lower than the percentage of high-quality traditional Ohio 8 schools (the eight largest urban districts in the state) in three of the five reported years. Especially for at-risk students (compared to the Ohio 8), performance (especially graduation rates) has been disappointing since this is a priority focus.
Does not clearly articulate targeted training or resources or support for new charters as an effort to build school capacity to function as a high quality charter school.
Lacks examples of extant innovation in the high-quality schools.
Does not fully describe strategies to ensure the establishment of high quality schools…throughout the state.
Does not clearly articulate how academic and performance expectations are specifically consistent with the definition of high-quality charter schools.
Accountability for “Educationally Disadvantaged Students:”
Lacks detail regarding access to schools for educationally disadvantaged youth.
Does not clearly articulate a specific plan for ensuring school instructional and programmatic innovation to meet the needs of educationally disadvantaged students.
Not clear how the… State Education Agency expects the models to impact racial and ethnic diversity in (schools for) educationally disadvantaged students.
Lack of detail regarding “identifiers” that will be used to determine what is worthwhile to disseminate, especially in reference to educationally disadvantaged students.
Lacks references to data collected from past experiences (about) the “Social” and Climate” in focus schools.
Does not describe a specific plan regarding the dissemination of information regarding diversity or school discipline/climate.
Lack of detail regarding “identifiers” to determine what is worthwhile to disseminate, especially in reference to student discipline and school climate.
“Innovation and Collaboration:”
Does not clearly indicate a rigorous process to support ongoing, effective collaboration between charter schools and public schools throughout the state.
Lacks a specific plan to promote the dissemination of innovative practices or (concept of) what “innovation” means.
This is Arne Duncan’s idea of sufficient accountability for charter school expansions worth $17 million, and in a state where the cover letter from Dr. Steven Tate is designed to make everything look perfectly fine.
Wrong, wasteful, and unethical….even if legal.
And now a “new” charter scandal for Ohio. Maybe with the power of OSU behind this complaint we will finally get some relief?! I’m not holding my breath.
http://www.plunderbund.com/2015/09/30/state-employees-report-significant-retaliation-after-revealing-contract-failures-with-charter-school-company/
The reason this newest scandal may get attention is it goes outside the “charter sector” and affects every public school, statewide- they’re putting the for-profit garbage “online learning” into every public school.
Public school parents will have to object if they try to replace standard courses with the failing “cybercharter” model. They’ll be essentially sticking a “cybercharter” INSIDE public schools, so we won’t be able to avoid it.
It’s tough, because public school parents will have to be really vigilant – if the for-profit virus infects every public school there won’t be any way to escape it. If they start shunting kids to online courses in low or middle income schools they’ll have to be some outcry or it will spread and we won’t get live classes back once we lose them.
“You read that correctly. Bill Lager’s companies not only have the contract to implement iLearnOhio, they also have their CEO on the task force to define the strategy for Ohio’s online learning initiatives. And at least one former Lager employee now working for the state is silencing critics of the company’s failures and missteps, according to allegations in the OSU investigation.”
So they took the charter profiteer and allowed him to direct policy for all PUBLIC schools. Now it”s no longer just about the “charter sector”- they’re now letting this corrupt industry infect the public schools 93% of kids attend.
Duncan united the right and the left, against the U.S. Dept. of Education. Giving taxpayer money to the worst states, suggests two possibilities, first, crony capitalism and, second, fanning popular support for federal government dismantlement. The national government, is the only power, capable of thwarting oligarch plots. IMO, the objectives of Gates, Walton’s and the Koch’s are likely interchangeable.