The Florida legislature is debating a Republican proposal that would increase accountability for charters while making it easier to open new ones. The proposal, pushed by conservative Republicans, cleared a subcommittee on choice and innovation in the House. The state has more than 600 charters. It is a haven for flim-flam operators because of low accountability, lack of transparency or oversight. Florida charters are rife with conflicts of interest.
“The proposal…aims to weed out “bad actors” by requiring charter schools to disclose their finances on a monthly basis and to provide quality learning for their students. Any charter school that receives two consecutive “F” grades would be “automatically terminated.”
“The measure also would create the Florida Institute for Charter School Innovation to help charter school operators submit good applications to school districts and to better navigate the approval process.
“New this go-around: The proposal would establish a “High Impact Charter Network” to encourage charter schools to set up in “critical needs areas,” or those where traditional public schools have received school grades of “D” or “F” in four of the past five years. The bill includes a financial incentive to do so by automatically waiving a 5 percent administrative fee — roughly $87,000 for 250 students — that charter schools typically pay school districts.
“Another new provision would allow “high-performing” charter schools an easier way to replicate their model anywhere else in Florida. Instead of submitting their applications to local school districts, school operators could get them vetted by the new state-level institute instead.
“It would create opportunities to allow high-performing charter schools in other parts of the state. We want to make sure we encourage that as much as we can,” said Rep. Bob Cortes, R-Altamonte Springs, who is again heading up the proposal for the 2016 session.
“Charter contracts would still have to be negotiated by local school boards, but Democrats worry diverting applications to the institute might take away districts’ local control.
“Republicans countered that approving a charter school application isn’t a subjective decision — either the applicant’s proposal complies with state standards, or it doesn’t — and they want to start penalizing school districts that reject new charter schools for “arbitrary” reasons, such as simply not wanting more in their districts.
“You can’t just willy-nilly this approval because you think you don’t need anymore schools,” said Rep. Manny Diaz Jr., R-Hialeah, the committee chairman.
“Under the committee bill, the administrative fee owed to school districts would be waived for any operator whose charter school application is denied by the district but approved on appeal.
“The bill is troubling to me,” Rep. Cynthia Stafford, D-Miami, said. “I believe it takes money away from traditional public schools. … We’re trying to solve a cash-flow problem for charter schools while ignoring traditional schools.”
And THIS is the legacy Jeb Bush brags about?
Less Tar, More Taste …
Same Old Smoke …
More flim-flammery fro Flori-i-Duh!
The public school PTAs should campaign against this bill. If they take away local control of authorization, the state could push public districts over the brink causing public schools to go bankrupt. Maybe that is their intent! Parents of public school children and other concerned citizens should contact local representatives to urge them to vote against this. They should also let them know they are tired of charter partiality, especially since the results of Florida charters have been dismal. While some measure of accountability is a step in the right direction, citizens should remind legislators of all the rampant waste, mismanagement and fraud in the state already. http://interactive.sun-sentinel.com/charter-schools-unsupervised/investigation.html
Ah…the FOXES are watching the HENS. GROSS. Flori-DUH is right. It’s about $$$$$; it’s always about $$$$$.
This is a state-specific analysis on “who runs charter schools?”. It’s why one can’t make the generalizations that charter promoters in government make and why you can’t run on assumptions, like a state statute that specifies “no profit”. It’s easy to get around. You need to look at the whole package- the “charter”, the contract between the charter entity and the state is just the first layer. There’s the contract between the charter and the authorizer and then the contract between the charter and the “management” company. That doesn’t even include subcontractors- the contract between the management company and the for-profit “services” subcontractors.
https://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2015/07/22/whos-actually-running-americas-charter-schools/
I think they would understand the opposition to charters in the states that are dominated by charter promoters in government if they would look at the reality of what’s going on in these states, instead of talking about select charter chains in Boston or NYC.
The NY analysis alone may surprise you, because NYC isn’t all of NY.
There’s the other half of the equation, too, and that’s what happens to the public schools in states dominated by “choice” advocates. That’s completely and utterly ignored. No one ever bothers to ask if PUBLIC schools are benefiting from these schemes. which is amusing, since they were sold to the public as “improving public schools”. Read some of the charter promoters in ed reform sometime. Public schools aren’t even mentioned. It’s as if the schools don’t exist.
I think Ohio is trying this same gambit- open more and more charter schools (with the help of the Obama Administration) in the hope they’ll knock out the bad operators.
As usual in ed reform, the effect on existing public schools of this “flood the market” strategy is completely ignored. The much-maligned public sector schools will be there to pick up any downside of this “market” experiment being conducted by politicians. The chaos and discord will stay in the affected communities and “our leaders” will remain completely insulated from the risk inherent in blowing up the system, again.
“Flood the market” is exactly what is happening now. The charter pushers have decided to go into overdrive, to make the “facts on the ground” so they are harder to regulate. How else to explain that sudden nationwide push to expand a sector that does not outperform public schools unless it skims those it wants and kicks out those it doesn’t’ want.
Charters in Ohio are running radio ads to dodge Ohio’s (weak) new charter school regulations.
If they were forced to reveal their finances we could find out if the public is paying for these ads, but they aren’t, so we won’t. Our state government is so completely and utterly captured no one will even ask who is paying for this political campaign.
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/12/tart_last-minute_radio_campaign_to_avoid_bad_grades_for_report_cards_and_sponsor_evaluations.html
This is an example of why ESSA is a bad idea: giving more “flexibility” to States like FLA and OH will facilitate the proliferation of for-profit charters….
League of Women Voters reported the following that Broward charter schools are complaining of too much competition.
http://lwveducation.com/a-state-of-the-charters-report-from-broward/
–“Most District charters are under-enrolled, but the applications for new ones keep coming, said Jody. This year, the District received 20 applications, down from nearly 50 just a few years ago.
“Saturation has set in,” Leslie explained. Of the 20 applicants, the School Board approved seven, due to open in August, 2016. That’s the same number that closed in 2014.
She added in an ironic note that her office has started to receive calls from charter school companies objecting to the competition from each other.”–