Archives for category: Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Ohio: Denis Smith: Who Will Clean Up the Charter School Mess? Part 4

By dianeravitch
March 30, 2014 //
32

Denis Smith is a retired school administrator who worked both as a sponsor representative for charter schools as well as a consultant in the state charter school office. In this five-part series, he offers his perspective about charter school governance and how this mechanism designed to provide transparency and accountability for public entities is sorely lacking and may in fact be the “fatal design flaw” of these schools.

 

Part Four

 

Previously, we looked at the legal duties of governing board members as they serve as stewards of charter schools. In their positions, these individuals are expected to perform the duties of Care, Obedience, Disclosure, Custodian and Diligence as they were detailed in yesterday’s column. While there have been far too many scandals associated with Ohio charter schools, one school in particular serves as the perfect model for examining the importance of governance and how this element remains as the critical design flaw or broken genetic code that may ultimately end or influence long-needed radical reforms to this costly experiment with public education.

 

The Cleveland Academy of Scholarship, Technology and Leadership Enterprise, or CASTLE, was founded for the purpose of serving high school students in Ohio’s second largest school district. But there was a major problem with the school that was there for anyone to see. The governing board president just happened to be a partial owner of the building which housed the school. Did anyone – other board members, parents, the school’s sponsor, state officials – see a problem here?

 

Ultimately, the Cuyahoga County prosecutor did, when in 2013, ten individuals associated with the school, including the school’s CEO, his brother, treasurer, board president and another board member were named in a 33-count indictment for corruption and the theft of nearly $2,000,000 of Ohio tax dollars.

 

At issue was the creation of thirteen shell companies that received funds for services that were not performed or otherwise documented. The board president, a part-owner of the building, also benefitted from school payments that were in excess of the stated lease amounts. Clearly the duties of Care, Obedience, Disclosure, Custodian and Diligence were violated in every way by the board and its retinue, and there was no knight in shining armor that defended this CASTLE nor anyone that served to protect the students or serve the public interest.

 

In examining the systemic conflicts of interest and atmosphere of corruption associated with the school and its governing board, state auditor Dave Yost framed the issue very clearly. “The rules are clear – you can’t be on both sides of the transaction,” he said. “In our schools, the top priority should be the children, not the pocketbooks of the administrators.”

 

For news coverage of this story and a link to the State Auditor’s report of CASTLE that led to the 33-count indictment by the Cuyahoga County prosecutor, go to this link: http://stateimpact.npr.org/ohio/2013/04/30/indictments-filed-for-corruption-and-theft-at-cleveland-charter-school/

 

The murky dealings of the CASTLE board reminded me of several other experiences I had in assisting the public with finding out information regarding the operation of Ohio charter schools and their governing boards. One parent called to inform me that she had stopped by her son’s school and went to the office to find out information about the school’s board, when and where they met, and contact information for the members. She was told that the information was not available and then contacted the state department of education to ask if in fact a “public” school could refuse a parent such basic information.

 

In another case, a parent, upset with the lack of materials in the school, requested information about the salary and benefits for the school director. She was told that the information requested was considered proprietary by the school management company. When the school sponsor was contacted for assistance with the parent request, the management company gave the same answer.

 

Here’s what we have seen as part of this picture. Hidden boards operating in the shadows. Hidden salaries for school directors. Governing board members approving school payments and profiting from services billed to companies allegedly doing business with the school. National and state charter school chains determining who will represent them on the board rather than individuals who advocate for students and parents. What will be the scope of information that will be provided to school stakeholders and state oversight officials.

 

What’s wrong with this picture? Why have we allowed this to happen? Who is paying attention to what is happening to public schools as a result of the charter school experiment? Where do we start in cleaning up this mess? When will the public react to the sheer volume of issues created by hundreds of unregulated, ungoverned, and underperforming charter schools? How can these schools be fixed, if at all?

 

The who, what, when, where, why and how questions have now been posed. Unfortunately, complacent and compliant print and electronic media have not asked these basic questions about charter school issues that are part of reportage. The watchdogs – supposedly the media and perhaps the legislature – are not watching, nor are they hearing the sounds of growing discontent about deregulated education as represented by the charter school industry.

 

Tomorrow, in the concluding part of this series, we’ll look at some remedies aimed at providing needed safeguards that can improve school governance and better protect the public.

 

Categories Charter Schools, Privatization

New York Legislature: Billionaire-funded Charter Schools Will Not Have to Pay Rent for Public Space

By dianeravitch
March 29, 2014 //
71

The following just in as the New York State Legislature responds to the pressure of a $5 million advertising campaign demanding free space for privately-managed charters. Also, the billionaires behind this ad campaign have given handsome sums to Governor Cuomo and other key politicians. Cuomo has received at least $800,000 from the charter advocates. Under the legislation below, the charters are given the right to expand as much as they want, without paying rent, pushing out the public school that once was sited in the building. The charters can afford to pay their “CEO” half a million dollars, but they can’t pay the rent. They can pay millions for attack ads on television, but they can’t pay the rent. They can hire the politically-hot public relations firm SDK Knickerbocker more than $500,000 a year, but they can’t pay the rent. Their biggest boosters are billionaires, like Paul Tudor Jones, whose Robin Hood Foundation raises $80 million in a single night, but the charters can’t pay the rent. The charters are proving to be public parasites in New York City, invading the host and doing harm to the 94% of children who are not in charters.

***

One more point: When the Common Core tests were given a year ago, students in charter schools got the same average scores as students in public schools, even though the charters have few if any students with severe disabilities (and the public schools in poor neighborhoods have nearly 15%), and the charters typically have half as many English language learners. There were a few high-flying charter schools, but even more high-flying public schools. On average, there was no difference between the public schools and the charter schools.

 

***
Looks like the City is forced to offer either space or rent to new or expanding charter schools.

http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A08556&term=2013
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=A08556&term=2013&Summary=Y&Text=Y

(E) IN A CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT IN A CITY HAVING A POPULATION OF ONE
24 MILLION OR MORE INHABITANTS, CHARTER SCHOOLS THAT FIRST COMMENCE
25 INSTRUCTION OR THAT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SPACE DUE TO AN EXPANSION OF
26 GRADE LEVEL, PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE, APPROVED BY THEIR CHARTER ENTITY
27 FOR THE TWO THOUSAND FOURTEEN–TWO THOUSAND FIFTEEN SCHOOL YEAR OR THER-
28 EAFTER AND REQUEST CO-LOCATION IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL BUILDING SHALL BE
29 PROVIDED ACCESS TO FACILITIES PURSUANT TO THIS PARAGRAPH FOR SUCH CHAR-
30 TER SCHOOLS THAT FIRST COMMENCE INSTRUCTION OR THAT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL
31 SPACE DUE TO AN EXPANSION OF GRADE LEVEL, PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE,
32 APPROVED BY THEIR CHARTER ENTITY FOR THOSE GRADES NEWLY PROVIDED.
33 (1) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW TO THE CONTRARY, WITHIN
34 THE LATER OF (I) FIVE MONTHS AFTER A CHARTER SCHOOL’S WRITTEN REQUEST
35 FOR CO-LOCATION AND (II) THIRTY DAYS AFTER THE CHARTER SCHOOL’S CHARTER
36 IS APPROVED BY ITS CHARTER ENTITY, THE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SHALL
37 EITHER: (A) OFFER AT NO COST TO THE CHARTER SCHOOL A CO-LOCATION SITE IN
38 A PUBLIC SCHOOL BUILDING APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF EDUCATION AS PROVIDED
39 BY LAW, OR (B) OFFER THE CHARTER SCHOOL SPACE IN A PRIVATELY OWNED OR
40 OTHER PUBLICLY OWNED FACILITY AT THE EXPENSE OF THE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
41 AND AT NO COST TO THE CHARTER SCHOOL. THE SPACE MUST BE REASONABLE,
42 APPROPRIATE AND COMPARABLE AND IN THE COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT TO BE
43 SERVED BY THE CHARTER SCHOOL AND OTHERWISE IN REASONABLE PROXIMITY.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Reform, New York City, Privatization

Experts: (Sir) Michael Barber Is Wrong about Massachusetts

By dianeravitch
March 29, 2014 //
19

Andy Hargreaves, Pasi Sahlberg, and Dennis Shirley are noted for their scholarly, articulate, and outspoken opposition to the Global Education Reform Movement (GERM), which is spreading like a virus.

Now, one of the chief exponents of GERM–(Sir) Michael Barber–has delivered a report to Boston informing the business community that the schools are mediocre and need a strong infusion of privatization and (of course) more testing. (Sir) Michael Barber previously worked for McKinsey, and he is now the thought leader of that esteemed pusher of testing, Pearson.

Hargreaves, Sahlberg, and Shirley write here about why (Sir) Michael Barber is wrong. (Sir) Michael Barber made his reputation as a creator of the UK’s system of standards and assessments; because of his love of “targets,” he is known as Mr. Deliverology when he is not known as (Sir) Michael Barber. However, the authors point out that there has been no educational renaissance in England and that Massachusetts scores higher on the targets than the nation that last took (Sir) Michael Barber’s advice.

 

They write:

 

What’s wrong with the report? First, its grudging acknowledgement of positive educational outcomes in Massachusetts and grim portrait of the state’s shortfalls have little to do with the facts. Massachusetts is the leading state in the United States on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. It is the only state in the United States with an “A” grade in the highly regarded Quality Counts 2014 State Report Card. It is also one of the world’s top-performing systems on a number of international assessments. Its rate of recent progress may be slower than some countries, but they’ve started from farther behind — Massachusetts literally has less room for improvement. To view the state’s school system as suffering from “complacency,” as the report claims, confounds all the findings of United States and international research on school achievement.
Moreover, the report draws many of its recommendation from the United Kingdom, where its lead author, Michael Barber, once worked as an advisor on education to former Prime Minister Tony Blair. England has made massive investments in “academies,” similar to government-supported charter schools here. It has explored various ways to prepare new teachers outside of a university setting. There have been targets and tests galore. Yet, results from the 2012 Program of International Assessment put England merely at the international average, 499, compared to Massachusetts students’ score of 524. For Bay State policymakers to follow England’s lead in education would be like the Red Sox taking coaching tips from the lowly Kansas City Royals.

 

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Global Education Reform Movement (GERM), International, Massachusetts, Pearson, Privatization

Here is the Bill Moyers Interview in Full

By dianeravitch
March 29, 2014 //
37

Bill Moyers is one of my heroes. He is one of the few people in the media who is as concerned about the privatization and monetization of the public sector as I am. He has a long memory, and he has not forgotten that a good society needs both a strong public sector and a strong private sector. Nor has he forgotten that the real civil rights movement was about tearing down the walls of a segregated society and creating equal opportunity for all, not the current effort on the part of billionaires to promote school choice and decimate public education.

I enjoyed talking to him. Here is the full interview as it aired on PBS.

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, For-Profit, Privatization, Race to the Top

“The Roar of the Charters”: My Post in the New York Review of Books

By dianeravitch
March 28, 2014 //
17

This article, which I wrote for the New York Review of Books, connects the dots that I have been writing about these past few weeks.

It shows how the charter lobby spent $5 million to attack Mayor de Blasio, completely derailing his own progressive reform agenda of universal pre-kindergarten and afterschool programs for adolescents.

The charter schools serve 6% of New York City’s children, 3% of New York state’s.

Yet because of the power of the billionaires funding their movement, they are on the verge of getting state law changed to guarantee that can get free space in public schools.

The charter lobby’s generous campaign contribution to Governor Cuomo made him their ally.

All in all, a shabby demonstration of the power of money in politics, now intruding into education, where the wants of the few trump the needs of the many.

 

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Privatization

Watch Bill Moyers Tonight and This Weekend

By dianeravitch
March 28, 2014 //
22

I will be discussing privatization this weekend with Bill Moyers.

Categories Privatization

Ohio: Denis Smith Explains the Charter Movement: Part 3

By dianeravitch
March 28, 2014 //
36

Denis Smith is a retired school administrator who worked both as a sponsor representative for charter schools as well as a consultant in the state charter school office. In this five-part series, he offers his perspective about charter school governance and how this mechanism designed to provide transparency and accountability for public entities is sorely lacking and may in fact be the “fatal design flaw” of these schools.

 

Part Three

 

Ohio charter school governance and management issues aren’t exclusive to national chains like Imagine. Here is a case history of one school that was operated by the founder and who hand-picked the board, treasurer and school staff.

 

In 2010, an attorney from a law firm in Wilmington, Delaware that represented an educational publisher called to ask my help in collecting payment from a charter school that had an overdue debt of more than $50,000. The attorney also told me the bill was more than three years old.

 

That’s not the only beef he had with the school. “Do you know how much the school administrator is being paid”? he asked. When I replied that I didn’t know because the state did not maintain a database containing compensation for charter school administrators, he told me. “She pays herself $156,000 to run a school with 175 students and there doesn’t seem to be anything left to pay my client.”

 

When I looked further into the situation and contacted the school sponsor for more information, a tale quickly unfolded of a school with no internal and external controls. The treasurer, a family member of the school head, had ignored invoices sent from the company demanding payment, and the attorney, who wanted to personally bring the situation to the board, could not find any information about where or when they met to discuss school business.

 

As it turned out, the president of the governing board was a close friend of the school’s director, as were several other members of the board. When the attorney contacted the school and asked about the board and their meeting schedule, he was denied this basic information. Stonewalled by the school at every turn, it was at that point that he contacted the state department of education.

 

A phone call to the State Teachers Retirement System soon revealed that no salary information had been sent by the school treasurer to determine payments owed by the school. The school, which had been open for about four years, was ultimately closed by the sponsor.

 

Although the school was operated by two family members and thus not part of a national chain like Imagine, it still contained the same fatal genetic flaw prevalent in too many charter schools – a non-functioning governing board serving not the students and families but the school directors who appointed them. In the post-mortem conducted with the closure of the school, it was apparent that the board was invisible and displayed no curiosity about how the school director and treasurer – family members – required some observation of their performance as well as collective visioning so that the board itself could affirm its role and purpose. In addition, the long-term friendship between the governing board president and the school director prevented the board from functioning and providing the oversight necessary for guaranteeing a free and appropriate education for the students as well as the stewardship necessary for protecting public funds.

 

Sadly, the tale related here has occurred again and again in Ohio since the inception of the charter school program more than fifteen years ago. It is entirely possible that some of the board members had no idea about the size and scope of the compensation that two members of the same family received when compared to the size of the school and the share of state revenue it received. But when a person serves as a member of a board, they must accept that as a trustee for the school, they assume several legal responsibilities which include these basics:

 

Duty of Care – Exercise reasonable care when making decisions as a steward of the school and ensure that all those associated with the school will be held accountable for their actions.
Duty of Obedience – In fulfilling the public’s trust, ensure that the State’s funds will be used to fulfill the educational mission of the school and not for a private purpose.
Duty of Disclosure – Disclose any transactions in which a governing authority member may be involved and where an actual or perceived conflict of interest situation exists.
Duty of Custodian of a Public Trust – Manage public funds for public purposes and not private benefit, comply with Open Meetings requirements and respond to citizen and media request for information about the school and its management.
Duty of Diligence – Determine that deadlines for all required reporting are met, including monthly financial reports, and closely examine reports to determine any trends or variances in the condition of the school.
It should come as no surprise that when problems occur at the governance level – and we have already made the point that by their very design, charter schools contain some fatal design flaws – symptoms of other problems will soon become evident, including poor academic results, financial issues, and staff turnover. Tomorrow, let us examine another case study to see how another governing board fared in meeting its duties and responsibilities.

Categories Charter Schools, Ohio, Privatization

Billionaires Buy Charter Success in New York Legislature, with the Help of Governor Cuomo: UPDATE

By dianeravitch
March 28, 2014 //
18

Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters describes the deal to benefit the billionaire-funded charter schools  that is being negotiated right now by the New York legislature and will be voted on next week.

It is not too late to make your voice heard!

Governor Cuomo, who received $800,000 for  his re-election campaign from charter school advocates, is making good on his promise to take care of charters. These privately operated schools, supported by billionaires like Paul Tudor Jone, Rupert Murdoch, Michael Bloomberg, and a long list of hedge fund managers, will never have to pay rent for their use of public facilities; they will get additional public fund; and a guarantee that they can never be moved out of their public space. The billionaires proved in the past month that they are willing to spend $5 million or so on attack ads, but they will not pay rent to the city for their use of public space. The Robin Hood Foundation, founded by billionaire Paul Tudor Jones, is able to raise $80 million in a single night. But the charters can’t pay the city rent for use of public space. According to Forbes, Paul Tudor Jones manages $13 billion in assets, and he has decided to “save” public education. He and his fellow hedge fund managers have determined to privatize public education. With the help of New York’s feckless legislature and cold-hearted Governor, they are on their way.

 

Leonie Haimson writes:

 

According to today’s NY Post, the legislature is about to make the worst possible deal imaginable: considerably more per pupil funding for charters, including more than $1100 per student over three years, and free space or rent paid for by NYC for any new or expanding NYC charter going forward – just in NYC, by the way, where we have the most overcrowded schools in the state, with more than half our students sitting in extremely overcrowded schools by the DOE’s own metrics, which we know are an underestimate.

Thousands of kids on waiting lists for Kindergarten each spring, thousands more sitting in trailers, and the capital plan provides less than one third of the seats needed to eliminate current overcrowding and address future enrollment growth. But charters will be guaranteed the space to expand – paid for by city taxpayers, while our public school students are crushed into larger and larger classes with less space to learn.

Call the Speaker’s office now: tell him to say NO to the deal forcing the city to pay for facilities forever for new or expanded charters, while public school students will sit in increasingly overcrowded buildings.

Speaker Silver: (518) 455-3791

Then call your Assemblymember and urge them to say NO to this deal as well; find their contact info here:

If this deal goes forward, this will truly create a two tier system in which the charter schools will be the only ones in uncrowded facilities, with the rent paid for by NYC taxpayers, and all parents will be forced to apply to charter schools whether they want to or not, just to guarantee a seat for their child in a school that is not hugely overcrowded.

Please call the Speaker’s office and your Assemblymember now.

Thanks,

Leonie Haimson
Executive Director
Class Size Matters
124 Waverly Pl.
New York, NY 10011
212-674-7320

Categories Charter Schools, Education Reform, New York, New York City, Privatization

Hedge Funders Spend Over $4 Million on TV Ad Campaign to Slam de Blasio

By dianeravitch
March 27, 2014 //
10

The front group misleadingly called “Families for Excellent Schools” has added nearly another $1 million to the $3.6 million it has spent on television advertising to slam Mayor Bill de Blasio and to press Albany to expand funding for charter schools. Of course, none of the families of the children in the ads are paying for the ads. Four of the five founding board members of “Families for Excellent Schools” are Wall Street hedge fund managers. Other major contributors to the group are Los Angeles billionaire Eli Broad and the far-right Walton Family Foundation. The ads were paid for by hedge fund managers and allies, including the billionaire Paul Tudor Jones, on behalf of Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy. According to Forbes, Paul Tudor Jones manages $13 billion in assets; he has decided that he wants to “save” public education by privatizing it. His Robin Hood Foundation raises as much as $80 million in a single night for his causes.

 

The goal of the negative TV ads is to intimidate Mayor Bill de Blasio and make sure he never rejects another charter school proposal. It is focused on de Blasio’s decision not to allow Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy is to expand into a middle school in a Harlem public school where it currently has an elementary school. De Blasio rejected the proposal because the expansion of Harlem Success Academy 4 would have required the eviction of students with disabilities from the public school.

 

The billionaires supporting the charter movement see an opportunity not only to drive down de Blasio’s poll numbers and end his “tax-the-rich talk,” but to bully the legislature into increasing funding for charter schools and guaranteeing by law that they can never be moved from whatever public space they have and never have to pay rent.

 

Last Sunday, de Blasio held out the olive branch to charters, pleading that charters and public schools should work together. He doesn’t understand that the charter schools are not in a mood to compromise. De Blasio followed up his conciliatory speech by creating a committee to discuss how to utilize space in the public schools. He added to the committee a representative of Paul Tudor Jones’ Robin Hood Foundation and David Levin from KIPP. (Recall that a KIPP school in Washington Heights has a padded closet where children are placed when they misbehave, a practice that would not be permitted in public schools.) Public school parents howled in outrage on blogs and saw this as pre-emptive surrender, considering that the very people paying for the ads are now on a committee to decide how much space to give to charter schools.

 

If they can pay more than $4 million for a negative TV campaign, why can’t they afford to pay rent for use of public space. In light of the recent court decision won by Moskowitz saying that her schools cannot be audited by public authorities, it is clear that her schools are not public schools. The judge agreed with her contention that Success Academy is not “a unit of the state.” Like charters elsewhere, she claims that the schools are run by a private corporation with a government contract. Why shouldn’t this private corporation pay rent for use of public space? Why should they be allowed to be squatters when they can afford the rent? Why should their desire for more space take precedence over the well-being of children with the greatest needs, who have no billionaires to lobby for them?

 

 

Categories Charter Schools, Education Reform, Privatization

NYC Elected Officials Rally Today to Denounce “Corrupt Budget Deal” with Charter Lobbyists

By dianeravitch
March 27, 2014 //
20

As the New York Daily News broke the news that hedge fund managers behind a front group called “Families for Excellent Schools” spent more than $4 million for attack ads against de Blasio and for protection of privately managed charter schools–which are not subject to public audit because they are not public schools–parent advocates announced an emergency rally to protect the public schools and the 94% of children who attend them.

Media Contacts:
Julian Vinocur. 203.313.2479. julian@aqeny.org
Dan Morris. 917.952.8920. dlmcommunications@gmail.com

 

*** Media Advisory for Today, March 27, 12:15pm, Steps of Dept. of Education, 52 Chambers St. , Lower Manhattan***

 

BREAKING: Rally Against Corrupt State Budget Deal Being Made with Charter School Lobbyists
*At 12:15 today, Elected Officials Will Condemn a Deal that will Give 5 X More Money to Charter Schools Per Pupil than to Traditional District Schools in New York City*
***The Pay-to-Play Deal is the Result of a $5 Million Charter School Lobbying Campaign Funded by Top Donors to Cuomo, Klein, the IDC, and Senate Republicans***

 

WHAT: At a major rally today, elected officials, parents, and advocates will condemn a state budget deal orchestrated by charter lobbyists, who are top donors to Cuomo, the IDC, and Senate Republicans, to give charter schools 5 times more money per pupil than traditional district public schools. They will speak out against the $ 5 million ad campaign lobbyists used to get charter schools a sweetheart deal in the budget and to open the door to gubernatorial control of schools.
=> Participants will Tweet using the #NoGovControl hashtag

 

WHO: Councilmember and Chair of the Education Committee Daniel Dromm; Council Members Carlos Menchaca, Laurie Cumbo, Ruben Wills, Jimmy Van Bramer, Antonio Reyonoso, Helen Rosenthal, Mark Treyger, Daneek Miller; Public school parents co-located with Success Academy, at PS 149/811, Soundview Academy, Seth Low; parents and advocates from the Alliance for Quality Education, New York Communities for Change and Make the Road New York.

 

WHERE: Steps of the Dept. of Education, 52 Chambers St., Lower Manhattan
WHEN: Today, Thursday, March 27, 12:15pm.
# # #

Categories Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »