Archives for category: Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Florida: Charter School Closes, Leaving Behind Academic Failure and Mountains of Debt

By dianeravitch
August 12, 2017 //
5

Another day, another charter scandal. This one is in Lauderhill, Florida, in Broward County.

“LAUDERHILL, Fla. – The Paramount Charter School was, by all accounts, a disaster for its young students, but now that the publicly financed, F-graded K-8 school is closed, there is a big question that remains: Where did the money go?

In all, taxpayers coughed up more than $3 million for the charter school in Lauderhill, which promised a first-rate education for its predominantly financially disadvantaged students.

“Now American Charter Development, the Utah-based charter school company that was Paramount’s landlord and primary investor, alleges it lost well over $1 million during the two years the school was in operation and suspects public funds were misappropriated.

“In our view, there’s been fraud,” Rob Giordano, senior vice president of business development at American Charter Development, told Local 10 News.

“Giordano said the company conducted its own examination of the school’s finances and found that, in addition to a nonprofit company that had been set up to run the school, called the Advancement of Education in Scholars Corp., there was a second for-profit company formed with an almost identical name.

“Giordano said his firm obtained Paramount bank documents showing large sums of money going to the for-profit company.

“It was tens of thousands of dollars in excess of $30,000 a month going to this shell organization,” Giordano said.”

Not to worry. This failed “public charter school” will be replaced by another. The taxpayers’ money? It’s gone, along with the time that children lost in this school.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Florida, For-Profit, Fraud, Privatization

Jan Resseger: Time to Shut Down Unqualified Charter Authorizers in Ohio!

By dianeravitch
August 12, 2017 //
7

Jan Resseger reports that Ohio charter law allows any non-profit to become a charter authorized, even if they have no education experience and even if they have no geographical proximity to the charters they allegedly oversee. The authorized collects 3% of the charters’ public funding, which can mean millions of dollars a year in found money. It certainly creates an incentive for authorizes to keep charters open and growing.

In the latest episode of a long-running drama called “How Charter Schools Fleece Taxpayers,” Resseger says that the Cleveland activists have called on the Ohio Department of Education to block the St. Aloysius Orphanage fromsponsoring charters in Cleveland. The Orphanage hired a for-profit corporation to manage the charters it sponsors from afar.

“In the news this week is charter school sponsor, St. Aloysius Orphanage—along with Charter School Specialists, the for-profit firm with which St. Aloysius Orphanage has contracted to provide all the services required of charter school sponsors by the Ohio Department of Education. St. Aloysius Orphanage was founded in Cincinnati, Ohio in 1837. It has evolved from a 19th century orphanage into a 21st century mental health agency, which also provides a local Cincinnati charter school for children needing special education services. St. Aloysius Orphanage has also become one of Ohio’s statewide charter school sponsoring agencies….

“There are some other serious problems with the new school planned by St. Aloysius at Orchard Park. Patrick O’Donnell, of the Plain Dealer, has been reporting for several weeks about the for-profit company with which St. Aloysius has contracted to open and manage the school, Cambridge Education Group. Cambridge’s Florida counterpart, Newpoint Education Partners has been indicted in Florida, as has the founder of both companies, Marcus May. O’Donnell explains: “Cambridge Education Group, the operator of 19 Ohio charter schools and of a new school about to open in Cleveland’s West Park neighborhood, is distancing itself from recent fraud and racketeering charges in Florida against founder Marcus May. But details are trickling out about how much that alleged fraud may have spread from Florida to the 19 schools Cambridge operates here in Ohio.

“And Cambridge and its counterpart in Florida, Newpoint Education Partners—a company that is itself under indictment in that state—have had a tight relationship for several years, besides just being founded by May. The school logos in both Ohio and Florida for Cambridge and Newpoint have the same theme…. and the two companies have shared the same officers at times, including Cambridge owner and President John Stack. Stack has not been charged in the case. His name does not appear in court filings against May… Stack said that he was unaware of any of the schemes to defraud schools of money that May is accused of.”

“Charter School Specialists, the for-profit company with which St. Aloysius Orphanage contracts to fulfill its sponsorship responsibilities, is headed by Dave Cash, who is quoted in an additional article by Patrick O’Donnell about the problems at Cambridge-Newpoint, which St. Aloysius intends to hire to run its new Orchard Park charter school: “We have been aware of the legal concerns of Newpoint in Florida and have been in contact with the prosecutor in the case… The boards of each school that utilize Cambridge Education Group have also been monitoring the case and staying abreast of the issues.”

Resseger urges the state to tighten oversight of shoddy and shady charter sponsors.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, For-Profit, Ohio, Privatization

Daniel Loeb, Hedge Fund Manager and Chairman of Success Academy, Slanders African-American Legislator

By dianeravitch
August 11, 2017 //
18

Daniel Loeb, billionaire chair of the board of Success Academy Charter Schools, slandered State Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins, an African-American woman who is the Democratic leader of the State Senate.

The backstory is that Cuomo has collaborated with a group of breakaway Democrats who side with the Republicans in the State Senate. Although Democrats have the majority in the Senate at 32-31, the so-called Independent Democrats vote with the Republicans, assuring that Republicans continue to control the Senate even though they are in the minority. Charter supporters, like Daniel Loeb, know that the interests of both charters and the financial community are safe with the Republicans. If Democrats had enough votes to control the State Senate, Senator Stewart-Cousins would be majority leader. Cuomo likes having Republicans in control because it allows him to be the broker between the Assembly and the Senate. Cuomo prides himself on his fiscal conservatism, so he is happy to have Republicans running the upper chamber of the legislature. It also guarantees that Cuomo won’t be forced to veto progressive legislation.

In a private meeting with Democratic members of the State Senate, trying for unity, Cuomo noted that most of the Senate members were from New York City, and that the leader of the Independent Democrats, Jeffrey Klein (whose district is mainly in the Bronx, with a sliver in suburban Westchester), had a better understanding of the suburbs than the city representatives. At that point, Senator Stewart-Cousins objected and pointed out that she represents the suburbs of Westchester.

After this story appeared, Daniel Loeb hurled a slur at Senator Stewart-Cousins on Facebook.

The hedge fund manager Daniel S. Loeb, a prominent supporter of charter schools and a major financial backer of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo and congressional Republicans, accused the African-American woman who leads the Democrats in the New York State Senate of having done “more damage to people of color than anyone who has ever donned a hood.”

Mr. Loeb made the reference, apparently to the Ku Klux Klan, in a posting on Facebook in response to an article in The New York Times this week in which the Democratic leader, Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins, confronted Mr. Cuomo about prejudging her based upon race and gender.

In a private meeting last month, The Times reported, Ms. Stewart-Cousins said to Mr. Cuomo during a debate over who best understands suburban voters: “You look at me, Mr. Governor, but you don’t see me. You see my black skin and a woman, but you don’t realize I am a suburban legislator.”

Mr. Loeb weighed in on behalf of Senator Jeffrey D. Klein of the Bronx, the leader of a group of Democrats that has split from Ms. Stewart-Cousins.

“Thank God for Jeff Klein and those who stand for educational choice and support Charter funding that leads to economic mobility and opportunity for poor knack kids,” Mr. Loeb wrote, with “knack” apparently a typographical error for “black.” “Meanwhile hypocrites like Stewart-Cousins who pay fealty to powerful union thugs and bosses do more damage to people of color than anyone who has ever donned a hood.”

Mr. Klein leads a group of eight Democrats who in 2011 broke away from the main Democratic conference, led by Ms. Stewart-Cousins. Mr. Klein’s group, the Independent Democratic Conference, has in the past sided with the Republicans in the Senate to keep Ms. Stewart-Cousins out of the powerful post of majority leader.

Daniel Loeb is a major player in the charter world because of his chairmanship of Success Academy. He is also a major player in politics because he is a big donor. When Ivanka Trump visited New York City, Loeb escorted her on a tour of one of Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy charter schools.

Mr. Loeb and his wife have donated more than $170,000 to Mr. Cuomo in recent years, state records show. He has also supported Republicans, with contributions including $500,000 to a super PAC that supported Jeb Bush in 2015, $150,000 to the Republican National Committee that year and $700,000 to a super PAC supporting House Republicans in 2016.

Carol Burris wrote recently that Loeb had given even more money to Cuomo than the Times reported:

Success Academy Chairman Daniel Loeb, founder and chief executive of Third Rock Capital, and his wife, have directly contributed over $133,000 to Cuomo. Since 2015, Loeb has added $300,000 to Moskowitz’s PAC, and another $270,000 to other PACs that support Cuomo. That’s more than $700,000.

Daniel Loeb shows the true colors of the charter industry in New York City. He doesn’t pretend to be a liberal. He has the nerve to call an African-American legislator “worse” than the Ku Klux Klan. What do you call a man like this? Indecent? Shameless? Arrogant?

For many reasons, I place billionaire Daniel S. Loeb on this blog’s Wall of Shame.

Categories Billionaires, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Cuomo, Andrew, Education Reform, New York, Privatization, Wall of Shame

Cuomo Wants to Find Rich Sponsors for Subway Stations; de Blasio Wants to Fix Them

By dianeravitch
August 10, 2017 //
39

Donald Cohen of “In the Public Interest” lives in California but has been following the debate about repairing the NYC subways.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_598c9d3fe4b0caa1687a5e6f

A couple weeks ago, Governor Andrew Cuomo announced that New York City subway stations could soon be renamed after corporate sponsors under a new “adopt-a-station” program. Sponsors, which already include MasterCard, BlackRock, and the private equity firm Blackstone (whose CEO, Stephen Schwarzman, happens to be a key advisor to President Donald Trump), would also help Cuomo “develop private-sector solutions to problems facing the system.”

“We’ve done this in the parks system, and it worked,” Cuomo said.

Actually, it hasn’t, and that’s exactly why the “adopt-a-station” idea is dangerous. New York City’s public parks are suffering from what ails many of the country’s public goods: chronic underfunding. Yet some, like Bryant Park and the High Line, appear to be thriving. What’s going on?

While parks in the poorer outer boroughs fall into disrepair, those in the wealthiest areas rake in massive private donations for improvements and maintenance. Hedge fund billionaire John Paulson—also a Trump backer—gave $100 million to Central Park a few years ago on the condition that none of it be spent on other parks.

When funded by the whims of corporations and Wall Street, public goods meant to serve everyone become separate and unequal systems that further divide communities and perpetuate inequality. One can imagine sponsors lining up for the busiest subway stations, while those in poorer areas continue to suffer the brunt of budget cuts.

Now, New York City’s subway system, like much of America’s infrastructure, needs substantial investment—but funding must be sustainable and with no private strings attached.

Luckily, such funding is on the table. On Monday, Mayor Bill de Blasio proposed a “millionaire’s tax” to help fund repairs. A portion of the ongoing revenue, collected from an estimated 32,000 wealthy New Yorkers, would even go to subsidizing fares for the 800,000 city residents living in poverty.

Whether the tax will pass will depend on the people of New York that want a fair and prosperous city and state. But the choice between a handful of New Yorkers paying their fair share for a world-class transit system and selling sponsorships to multi-national corporations is clear.

One supports a thriving city in which everyone, no matter which neighborhood they live in or how much money they have, can get to and from work, the doctor’s office, and the grocery store. The other is, well, just another ‘America for Sale’ sign.

Categories Bill de Blasio, Cuomo, Andrew, Education Reform, Privatization

Alan Singer: How Charter Schools Buy Political Support

By dianeravitch
August 10, 2017 //
12

Alan Singer pulls together the threads of charter school corruption across several states in this post. The corruption is pay-to-play. Give money to a politician and turn him or her into your advocate. Florida presents a different twist on the story: charter owners and employees and family members are elected legislators who shamelessly vote to enrich themselves. In Ohio, charter owners contribute to legislators who then turn on the money spigot and shower their benefactors with riches. In New York, Governor Cuomo accepts millions from billionaires who love entrepreneurial schools and hate public schools–and Voila!, Cuomo becomes a charter champion.

“In Arizona charter schools routinely receive exemptions from state oversight requirements, despite a history of misusing tax dollars. They also receive over 25% of state education funds, although they only enroll 15% of Arizona’s school age students. The right-wing Republican governor of Arizona was accused by the even further right-wing elected Superintendent of Arizona schools of establishing a “shadow faction of charter school operators” committed to “moving funds from traditional public schools to charter schools.”

“The reasons for the lack of accountability and the disproportionate state funding are examined in a report by Arizonians for Charter School Accountability. Among other things, they found that Benjamin Franklin, a for-profit charter school, is owned by Arizona State Representative Eddie Farnsworth (R). In 2016, the charter school spent $155,106 more on facilities than on classroom instruction. It leases its schools from LBE Investments, a for-profit real estate company also owned by Farnsworth.

“Arizona has a state board that grants charter status to “qualifying applicants” and is supposed to “oversee charter schools.” The President of the board is a political lobbyist who defines her role as promoting school “choice” and “sponsoring charter schools,” not regulating them. The Board Vice-President is founder of a charter high school. Other members include the operator of a charter school, a charter school teacher, a lawyer for charter schools, a building company CEO who also serves on the Board of Directors for the local Teach for America chapter, and the CEO of a charter school network.”

For the links, open the article.

In Atlanta, teachers were sentenced to prison under the RICO statute (racketeering) for cheating on tests and are out on appeal.

When, if ever, will public officials round up the criminals who are engaged in buying influence for the enrichment of charter schools? In too many states, the public officials who should enforce the law are charter operators or receive millions from charter operators. The charter industry starts to look like the Tweed Ring. Will it clean up its own act or is public corruption now woven into its fabric?

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, For-Profit, Fraud, Privatization

Gary Rubinstein: The Alum-Lie Spreads About College Completion Rates for Charter Students

By dianeravitch
August 10, 2017 //
60

Gary Rubinstein has been bothered by the lies spread about the college completion rates of charter students. He has pointed out that it is unfair to say that X% of your students in twelfth grade finished college without admitting that twelfth grade is not the right place to begin, since it excludes the attrition that may have occurred earlier.

Among charters, KIPP has been honest in stating that it counts the students who completed eighth grade and persisted to high school graduation. Others say they just can’t find the data to learn when their senior started in their school. Can you believe that?

Gary posts a twitter exchange he had with Richard Whitmire, who clearly did not want to engage with Gary. Whitmire wrote a fawning bio of Michelle Rhee, then a book praising Rocketship Charters. Not a high success rate.

What Gary is looking for is candor, not boasting.

It seems the public is beginning to understand that charter school boasting is built on cherrypicking students and pushing out the ones that get low scores.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Data, Education Industry, Higher Education, KIPP Charter Schools, Privatization

New York City: Why Eliza Shapiro Should Read “Reign of Error”

By dianeravitch
August 9, 2017 //
28

Eliza Shapiro writes about New York City for Politico.

She wrote a somewhat wistful article about why New York City was no longer “the nation’s education reform capital.”

For one brief shining moment, she suggests, New York City had the chance to expand its privately managed charter schools and to break the grip of the teachers’ union. It came “this close” to evaluating teachers by test scores. It was near to a point where it might have eliminated tenure and seniority.

All of this is supposedly reform?

Well, as she well knows, this is the agenda of hedge fund managers and others on Wall Street. This is the agenda of the billionaires who never set foot in a public school and whose children will never go to public school.

What stopped the headlong rush to crush public schools and teachers’ unions?

Parents. The New York State Allies for Public Education, a coalition of 50 parent and educator groups (not the union), that organized the mass opt outs from testing.

When twenty percent of the parents in the state with children in grades 3-8 refused to allow their children to take the tests, Governor Cuomo stopped in his tracks. He had been gung-ho to evaluate teachers by student test scores; he boldly claimed to be the state’s charter school champion (even though only 3% of the state’s children were enrolled in charter schools). But when the opt out started, he realized he had a political problem. He hired Jere Hochman, the thoughtful superintendent of the Bedford Central public schools, to advise him, and for the first time, he had an experienced educator calming his passions. He formed a commission and grew silent.

Sheri Lederman, a much-loved teacher in the Great Neck public schools, challenged her evaluation, and the judge agreed with her that it was arbitrary and capricious.

The American Statistical Association said that the test-based evaluations in which Cuomo put so much stock were inappropriate for evaluating individual teachers.

Shapiro seems unaware of most of these developments. Her framework is: charter supporters=good; unions=bad; firing teachers at will without cause=good; tenure=bad.

She insists on seeing the New York City story through the framework of “reformers vs. union.” It would have made more sense to look at the NYC story as “parents (in New York State, not New York City) vs. high-stakes testing. Research vs. Cuomo.

Now that the reform laurels are no longer in New York City, she suggests that readers look to Louisiana and D.C. instead, both of which are among the lowest performing jurisdictions in the nation.

I want to suggest to Eliza Shapiro that she read my last two books: The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education (rev., 2016); and Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools. She should read Mercedes Schneider on John White in Louisiana and John Merrow on the subject of the D.C. “miracle” that wasn’t. (John Merrow and Mary Levy will have an article in the next issue of the Washington Monthly that takes apart the D.C. “miracle.” but in the meanwhile Shapiro can read this post that Merrow wrote: https://themerrowreport.com/2017/08/08/touching-the-elephant/comment-page-1/

If she contacts me, I will send her both books at my expense. If she reads them, she will be a better education writer. Certainly better informed.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, New York City, Privatization, Testing

Ohio: “It’s Not About the %&*%$% Kids, It’s About the Money”

By dianeravitch
August 9, 2017 //
2

Denis Smith once worked in the charter office of the Ohio State Department of Education. Now that he is retired, he writes often about the scams and frauds in Ohio’s charter sector.

In this article, he points out that political contributions by its founder William Lager have greased the way for ECOT to claim hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money for a very low-performing cyber-charter.

The good news that he brings is that the Columbus Dispatch, an influential newspaper in the state, is all over the charter scams and is acting as a guardian of the public interest. Some Republicans even felt impelled to return charter money because it has become “radioactive.”

Smith says he once took a series of proposals for charter reform to a key legislator and the legislator was not interested.

That one proposal he thought would never happen was an outright ban on political contributions by charter schools and their management companies to state political parties and candidates, as they use public funds to craft state law to their liking, including more than 150 exemptions from the educational requirements provided in Section 3314 of the Ohio Revised Code.

Unless we’re terribly naïve about the corrupt, indeed corrosive effects of money on the legislature, the great Swedish pop group Abba said it best: Money, money, money/Always sunny/In the rich man’s world.

But with ECOT in seeming eclipse, perhaps things right now aren’t sunny in that rich man’s charter world. Indeed, the upcoming solar eclipse might in some way serve as a metaphor for the twilight of ECOT, and, hopefully, the mysterious, gloomy, overcast charterworld, where for nearly 20 years, anything goes.

Could it be that the corruption in the charter industry in Ohio has reached a tipping point?

Has ECOT finally gone too far?

This is a very positive development, if true.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, For-Profit, Ohio, Privatization

Who Cares More About Black Children: The NAACP Or Rightwingers?

By dianeravitch
August 9, 2017 //
90

The NAACP bravely spoke out in favor of regulating charter schools to make them accountable, transparent, and subject to the same standards as public schools.

Most people would say that the NAACP’s concerns and recommendations are reasonable.

But supporters of charter schools are outraged and hysterical.

The Center for Education Reform, which has advocated for charters for more than 20 years, astonishingly called the NAACP “opportunity’s opponent.” This is a breathtakingly insulting slur coming from a conservative organization that has long been hostile to public education.

CER provides a link to other rightwing organizations that oppose the NAACP’s criticism of public schools.

Who cares more about black children?

The NAACP or the Heritage Foundation?

The NAACP or CATO?

The NAACP or Betsy DeVos?

The NAACP or hedge fund managers?

The NAACP or the Walton Family Foundation?

The NAACP or the Center for Education Reform?

The NAACP or the Thomas B. Fordham Institute?

The NAACP or the Koch brothers?

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Civil Rights, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Privatization

The NAACP Report: Why Are Charter Supporters Complaining?

By dianeravitch
August 8, 2017 //
14

Please read the NAACP report on charter schools.

Ever since it was released, charter supporters have complained bitterly about the report and accused the NAACP of being paid off by the unions.

This is ridiculous. It is a sound and sober report.

Consider its recommendations.

1. There should be more equitable and adequate funding for schools serving children of color. The school finance system is extremely unfair and inequitable over states, districts, and schools. School funding in 36 states has not returned to its pre-2008 levels, when budgets were slashed. Federal funds in real dollar amounts have declined for Title I and special education over the same period.

Do charter supporters disagree?

2. School finance reform is needed to ensure that dollars go where the needs are greatest.

Do charter supporters disagree?

3. Invest in low-performing schools and in schools that have a significant opportunity to close achievement gaps. “Students learn in safe, supportive, and challenging learning environments under the tutelage of well-prepared caring adults.” Authorities must invest in incentives to attract and retain “fully qualified educators”; they must invest in creating instructional quality that provides a stimulating and challenging learning environment; they must invest in wraparound services that meet the need of children, including early childhood education, health and mental services, extended learning time, and social supports.

Do charter supports disagree? What would they object to? Maybe they would reject the idea that teachers should be “fully qualified,” since that might be a slap at Teach for America’s teachers, who are never fully qualified when they begin teaching.

4. Mandate a rigorous authorizing and renewal process. States with the fewest authorizers have the best charters. Only local school districts should be allowed to authorize charters, based on their needs.

This would be a problem for many charters, because they like it when there are many authorizers, and they can go shopping to find one that will give them an okay. They hate being overseen by local districts, because they see themselves as competitors to public schools, not collaborators. But that is part of what makes charters obnoxious.

5. Eliminate for-profit charter schools and for-profit charter management companies that control nonprofit charters. Not a dollar of federal, state or local money should go to for-profit charters. The report notes that the widespread reports of misconduct of for-profit charters and their for-profit managers is reason enough to forbid them. As for-profits, they have an “inherent conflict of interest,” and may well put the interest of their investors over those of students.

Do charter supporters disagree? Obviously, this is a sticking point for many charter supporters, including Betsy DeVos, who welcomes for-profit charters. More than 80% of the charters in her home state of Michigan operate for profit, and they get poor results. That doesn’t bother her at all. It bothers the NAACP.

Now, I ask you, what part of these five recommendations suggests that the NAACP is wrong? That it was doing the bidding of teachers’ unions? Is it so objectionable to charter advocates to propose that children should be taught by fully qualified educators? Are they prepared to fight for teachers who are not fully qualified?

Later in the report, on page 26, is an expanded discussion of the recommendations, including a recommendation that charters hire only certified teachers and that charters abide by common standards for reporting on disciplinary practices and admitting and retaining students.

I commend the NAACP for its common sense proposals to reform the charter sector.

Are charter advocates prepared to go to the mat to defend for-profit operations?

What part of this report and its recommendations has lit a fire of outrage in charter land?

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Civil Rights, Discipline and Suspensions, Education Industry, Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »