Charter Schools Being Shortchanged in Federal Poverty Aid

19293579Despite no change in student population, many charter schools across the state are experiencing a sharp decline of federal Title 1 funding, with little to no explanation from the DOE. Title I funding assists poverty-stricken students meet educational goals.

For example, Christel House Academy experienced a 20% drop in funding this year, to the tune of $121,743. Meanwhile, IPS (which has experienced student numbers going down) received an 8% increase, close to a $1.5 million bump. Similarly, Indianapolis Metropolitan High School, a charter school where 94% of students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, took a budget hit of $36,000 this year.

Federal rules state that schools cannot have more than a 15% drop in Title 1 funding in any one year. However, all of the schools that received more than a 15% decrease were charter schools.

The DOE response was that the charter schools must have made a mistake, but it is still gathering information. The federal government has since stepped in and is requiring DOE to provide information on calculations of Title 1 funding for the past few years. This story is far from over.

There was a significant decrease in Title 1 funding across the board in Indiana, but it is extremely important that this reduction is allocated equitably among the schools. These charter schools are public schools and provide education and resources to students of poverty means across Indiana. It is extremely important that this issue be resolved accurately and swiftly to provide Hoosier students with the education they deserve.

The Indiana School Matters blog also took a further look at why Title 1 funds were cut for our charter schools.

Purdue Charter School to Help Inner-City Students

purdue-black-and-goldPurdue University President Mitch Daniels has called the low number of Indianapolis Public School students who are prepared for success at Purdue “unacceptable.”

In an effort to combat this, Purdue is launching a polytechnic charter school in Indy to create a direct path for these students to ultimately graduate from the university. It’s a bold move, and if it succeeds, there would be an effort to take it statewide.

Inside INdiana Business has more information, and reveals the charter school is expected to be located in downtown Indianapolis and will be a collaboration among Purdue, the city of Indianapolis, its EmployIndy program and Indianapolis-based USA Funds.

“We applaud President Daniels and Purdue University for this opportunity for low-income and minority students to have the opportunity to have a strong foundation in the STEM areas,” explains Caryl Auslander, vice president of education and workforce development for the Indiana Chamber. “This will provide students with incredible opportunities to learn using curriculum produced by Purdue faculty and provides direct admittance to the university after graduation. We are pleased to see community and business partnerships in this endeavor and know that it will provide not only unique experiences for students but also create an even stronger workforce in the future.”

Graduation Rates Take Center Stage — Again

Since the mid-1990s, the Indiana Chamber has helped lead efforts to secure a more accurate reporting of our state and local graduation rates. Without question, we have made significant progress from the days when school districts like Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) would claim a 90% graduation rate, despite graduating less than a quarter of the ninth graders that had been enrolled four years previously. 

But even as the data have improved, so have the "tricks" being utilized. This time, the primary culprit of the manipulation is an excessive use of waivers from the state’s high school graduation exam. As reported July 1 by the Indianapolis Star, 27% of IPS graduates in 2011 received a waiver from the state’s graduation requirements.  

Now let’s not lose sight of what this means. The current state requirement is for students to pass tests covering 10th grade English and Algebra I, a course that most students take in either the eighth or ninth grade. So the expectations are not very high. Nonetheless, a school can waive students from these low level requirements if there is evidence – through coursework or other exams – that the student has genuinely mastered the material. In other words, the waivers are intended for those extremely rare instances when, due to test anxiety or some other extreme circumstance, the repeated failure of these tests really does not reflect the student’s abilities. 

Instead, some districts like IPS are using the waivers to pass through students whom they have deemed as having "tried hard enough." Let us not worry how those young adults will be received in the real world, where "trying" – and failing repeatedly – will not be sufficient.  There are no "waivers" in the real world – especially for such low expectations.

But alas, IPS is certainly not the only culprit in this mess. Statewide, over 5,000 students (about 8% of all graduates) received waivers from these minimal diploma requirements in 2011. That’s up dramatically from 2004, when the statewide number was just a few hundred – and even those numbers were likely higher than they should have been. 

Additionally, we keep hearing about high schools that are counseling families to withdraw from school with the stated intention of being home schooled – thereby removing those students from the high schools’ student count, regardless of any evidence that any home schooling actually occurred. In 2009, for example, 97 students left Kokomo High School supposedly to be homeschooled – nearly 5% of the entire school. At Michigan City, the number was 87 (4.5% of total enrollment); at Muncie South, it was 83 (over 8%); at Warren Central, it was 94 (2.5%); and so on. 

So while the new "official" graduation rate has inched up to 85%, these and other concerns suggest, once again, that we are dealing with false numbers. Indeed, our own estimates, using several national calculation methods, suggest that the real graduation rate (without waivers) remains at a dismal 70%. That actually is an improvement over the last several years and appears to be a reversal of a steady decline that had occurred since the early 1990s. But it is a far cry from the 85% that is reported officially by the state. 

Representative Bob Behning (R-Indianapolis), chair of the House Education Committee, has already announced that he will have legislation in 2013 to address these issues. Having worked with Rep. Behning 10 years ago to address the previous problems with our state data, we are pleased to see his leadership again. Meanwhile, be leery of the claims that you may be hearing. We sure wish that those gains were real. Indeed, we need them to be real, but the true data strongly suggest otherwise.

Brinegar: “A” through “F” Grading System for Indiana Schools Warrants High Marks

Indiana Chamber President Kevin Brinegar explains how the State Board of Education’s new analysis process for Indiana schools will benefit education in the state. He notes that removing ambiguous labels with a simple "A" through "F" grading system will make the process much clearer and more understandable for all involved.

Chavous: Time for Education is Now

Kevin Chavous doesn’t mince words when it comes to education. And if a few more people shared his passion for truly leaving no child behind, all of us (particularly our students) would be the beneficiaries.

During his Wednesday speech to the Economic Club of Indiana, the Indianapolis native and Wabash College graduate said (and backed up the opinions):

  •  “Nothing is more important to the future of this country than the education of our young people.”
  • “Public education is, by and large, failing our children.” He called it unconscionable that as many as 80% of African American males that enter the Indianapolis Public Schools system eventually are dropouts
  • “It’s intolerable to accept mediocrity (in our schools), and that is what we do.”
  • “Innovation and creativity need to be tailored toward kids’ best interest, not the systems’ best interest.”
  • “The system snuffs the lifeblood out of the best and brightest teachers.”
  • “No bureaucracy has reformed itself from within. It has to come from citizens and parents.”

Need proof of a system that is broken? Chavous offers New York’s “rubber room,” where incompetent teachers sit (and get paid, sometimes for years) while in the process of being fired; California teachers get automatic tenure for life with no reviews after two years on the job (while the union itself admits it takes five to seven years to know if a teacher is capable of doing a good job); and a Washington, D.C. union negotiating plank that all teachers must leave the building by 3:15 p.m. or police will be called (no more working or helping students than the minimum).

A lawyer in Washington, Chavous has been an education reformer within the city and around the country. He gives three reasons why Americans should be outraged at our country’s declining education performance:

  1. A moral imperative to not abandon the many students who are not given a chance to succeed beyond their early years
  2. A public safety analysis that revealed a 10% high school graduation increase would lead to a 20% reduction in the murder rate, fewer incarcerations and more productive citizens
  3. An economic report that showed closing the achievement gaps of students of color, poor students and students compared to their international peers would result in gross domestic product increases of billions and trillions of dollars

Chavous served on President Obama’s education policy team during the campaign, but vehemently opposed the administration’s decision to cut funding for the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. His guiding principles on education policy: “The question I ask myself is, ‘Will this proposal help a child or group of children learn? If the answer is yes, I support it.’" And his closing comment on what all need to focus on moving forward – "what’s in the best interest of children, not adults?"

Education makes an encore appearance at the February 23 Economic Club luncheon with Tom Snyder, president of Ivy Tech Community College.

Focus on Dollars for Students, Not Districts

The following is a column penned by Derek Redelman, our VP of education and workforce policy, that appeared in several Indiana newspapers. The piece continues to draw attention; see it here in the Muncie Star Press.

It is a myth that suburban and charter schools are favored by the state budget that was just adopted, while Indianapolis Public Schools and other urban districts "took it on the chin,” as the Indianapolis Star article elsewhere on this page phrases it.

In reality, the winners of this state budget are overwhelmingly urban districts like IPS. Sure, some of those districts will face funding cuts; but those cuts are disproportionately small compared to their losses in enrollment. Conversely, growing districts will receive increases, but those increases are disproportionately small compared to their increases in enrollment.

IPS, which is projected to lose nearly 4,000 students over the next two years, will start with $8,580 per student, or $9,429 when federal funds are included. Over the next two years, those amounts rise to $9,014 and $10,254, respectively. (These numbers include all state funding but do not include funds from property taxes).

That’s an increase of five percent in base funding and 8.2 percent when federal funds are included. Cumulatively, that means that continuing students in IPS will receive an increase of more than $13.6 million in baseline funding and more than $26.5 million when federal funds are included.

Contrast that with Hamilton Southeastern, which is projected to gain more than 1,600 students. The district starts with only $5,762 per student and just $5,784, including federal funds. Over the next two years, those funding levels actually fall to $5,701 and $5,772, respectively.

That’s a decline of 1.1 percent in base funding and 0.2 percent when federal funds are included. Cumulatively, Hamilton Southeastern students will lose more than $1 million in baseline funding or just under $300,000 including federal funds.

By the logic of urban school leaders, these enrollment changes are irrelevant. Based solely on changes to district-level funding, they suggest that urban districts will "suffer" while suburban districts and charter schools will be "the winners." Continue reading

Final Takeaways on New State Budget

Great, we have a state budget for the next two years, but what’s to make of it?

Foremost, the budget sticks to Gov. Daniels’ request to maintain a $1 billion surplus in the state’s reserve funds.   According to Indiana Chamber tax lobbyist Bill Waltz, this prudent amount is significant and important for the state to stay on track financially.

“With the revenue stream being so incredibly uncertain in the coming months and the federal stimulus dollars that are built into the two-year budget going away in 2012, it is critical that we not just cross our fingers and simply hope for the revenue stream to return.  Because if the economy fails to rebound or falters only slightly longer than the revenue projections, we will be in a hole at the end of the budget cycle.

“And then the only way to avoid a tax increase of some kind would be to utilize the surplus balance as that final bridge out of the troubled economy. In other words, it is at that time – not now or next year – that we (the state of Indiana) may want to use those funds,” he explains.

Waltz also believes the budget strikes a good balance between “spending desires and reasonable fiscal constraint on many issues (not just in the education area).”

A number of positive provisions that fell by the wayside via the regular session budget collapse had better fortune this time around.  Among them, the bulk of what was House Bill 1447, an all-inclusive piece of tax legislation, and a multi-million-dollar financial rescue for Indianapolis’ Capital Improvement Board (CIB).

The CIB situation simply had to be dealt with, Waltz says.

“Many from outside the Central Indiana area are reluctant to acknowledge the economic contribution that the CIB facilities (the convention center, Lucas Oil Stadium, Conseco Fieldhouse and Victory Field) make to the state’s economic vitality and coffers. Indiana, not Indianapolis, could not afford to see these operations and the tax revenue that their attractions bring be put in jeopardy,” he asserts.

Indiana Chamber education lobbyist Derek Redelman believes the budget bill also produced one of the best sets of education reform in the state’s history.

Heading that list of accomplishments is the new K-12 school funding formula that gives greater focus to students, rather than school districts, than any previous budget of the last couple decades. 

“The bill also included a scholarship tax credit that will generate private donations to help low- and moderate-income families to attend the schools of their choice – while also saving money for the state.  It also eliminated a longstanding statute that had prohibited schools from using the results of state tests to evaluate teachers,” Redelman notes.

“This budget avoided caps and other controls on charter schools, despite a session-long full-court press by Indianapolis Public Schools, House Democrats, teacher unions, school administrators and other charter school opponents.  Plus, it will allow virtual charter schools to finally get started, after a two-year moratorium created by the 2007 state budget.” 

Correction: The budget passed the Republican-controlled Senate 34-16.  A total of 30 of the 33 Republicans voted for the bill and were joined by four Democrats (Hume, Young, Arnold and Mrvan). Republican no votes were from Leising, Delph and Becker.

Crunch Time: Action from House Floor

Mercifully, we’re nearing the end (hopefully).

Members of the House are currently taking turns on the floor voicing their opinions on the budget bill, which is expected to be voted on (relatively) soon.

Regarding the contents of this budget, Rep. Craig Fry (D-Mishawaka) says he’s embarrassed by it.  Rep. Vernon Smith (D-Gary) stated that Democrats were getting only “a teaspoon while Republicans walk away with a truckload.”  Still, not all Republicans were pleased.  Representative Mike Murphy (R-Indianapolis) voiced his concern that the budget didn’t do enough to help homegrown Hoosier companies, many of which he feared would be forced out of business.

Leading up to and including today, much of the wrangling centered on K-12 education – be it funding (districts vs. students), charter schools, the scholarship tax credit program or virtual schools. 

Indeed, Rep. Smith spent most of his floor time on this subject and denounced the education policies contained in the budget.  Like the vast majority of Democrats, Smith had wanted the K-12 dollars to continue to be awarded on a school district basis, while Republicans were adamant the money follow the students.  The problem with Smith’s argument: Large urban districts like Indianapolis and Gary continue to see declining enrollment.  To Rep. Smith, however, Gary is being “treated like a stepchild.”

Smith and many other D’s also still haven’t warmed to the idea of charter schools and see them – as well as the tax credits to allow for school choice – as a threat to traditional public schools. 

Meanwhile, Rep. Bob Behning (R-Indianapolis) pointed out that both the Gary and Indianapolis Public School (IPS) districts receive more funding per student than any other district in the state.  In fact, IPS gets nearly $2,300 more per student than the state average.

Later on, fiscal stalwart Rep. Jeff Espich (R-Uniondale) implored legislators to do the right thing and vote "yes" on the budget.  “We’ve all had our say; we’ve all had to compromise.  I think we’ve done the best we can do.  Anyone can find a reason to vote ‘no,’ but you can also find a reason to vote ‘yes’ … one reason being not having to raise taxes.”

Stay tuned for more …

K-12 Funding Crucial in Budget Debate

Money money money money MONEY. Some people got to have it.
 
For Democrats working on the state budget, that last lyric has been amended to: Some districts got to have it.   
 
The D’s are pushing hard to protect K-12 school funding for districts rather than students. In other words, enrollment numbers be damned; urban districts, which have historically received higher funding levels than others, should stay that way regardless!
 
Thanks to items called the “minimum guarantee” and the “deghoster,” declining districts like Indianapolis Public Schools (IPS) have continued year after year to receive annual funding increases – even as enrollment levels have declined dramatically. Today, most of these urban districts get far more funding per student than rural or suburban schools. 
 
The Indiana Chamber’s education expert, Derek Redelman, notes that the state currently provides IPS with over $8,500 per student – far more than the $6,500 state average. When federal funds are included, the total for IPS rises to more than $9,400 per student, while the state average is just over $6,700. The numbers are even higher – over $15,000 for IPS – when local property taxes are included.
 
Yet, IPS Superintendent Eugene White today (one of a seemingly endless stream of testifiers, most of whom can now venture to the Statehouse committee rooms in their sleep) came before the budget conference committee with his hands out for more. Despite fewer and fewer students and additional increases in per pupil funding, White contends the money IPS gets from the state is still not enough. 
 
White had no answer for Rep. Brandt Hershman (R-Monticello) when asked what districts should be cut to give IPS more money or whether he would support a tax increase to give his district more money. 

According to Redelman, “This is the epicenter of our current budget debate. Democrats firmly back districts while Republicans want to fund students.”
 
Just how wide is the gap?
 
After it was noted that IPS funding would take a cut under the Senate budget bill (though it would get one of the largest increases per pupil) while the growing Hamilton Southeastern district would see an increase (but a cut on a per pupil basis), Rep. Bill Crawford (D-Indianapolis) imparted this bit of logic:

“We (the Democrats) are looking for a way to make K-12 education (funding) more equitable. If we have to bring the top (funded schools in the Senate plan) down to bring the bottom up, I’m for it.”

Charter School Amendment Puts Dollars at Risk

Despite professing he was concerned over the perception that the House Democrat budget proposal puts a moratorium on charter schools, Rep. Ed Delaney of Indianapolis introduced an amendment today in the House Ways and Means Committee that is, well, another moratorium. 

In short, the amendment states: for a school district in which 10% of its buildings are charter schools, the local school board and recognized authority (mayor and universities in some cases) must approve any additional charter schools. 

The amendment passed 15-10 along a party-line vote.

The impact for the Indianapolis Public School (IPS) system is obvious, says Indiana Chamber education lobbyist Derek Redelman, “This would put an immediate halt to any future charter schools since IPS Superintendent Eugene White has stated repeatedly that he doesn’t want any more.”

For smaller counties with one charter school but few overall schools, it could have the same effect, depending on local sentiment on charter schools – something that Rep. Jeff Espich of Uniondale pointed out to the committee.

What’s more, the amendment puts Indiana’s potential to earn federal Race to the Top Fund dollars in jeopardy.
 
“This is just another example of House Democrats ignoring multiple warnings from President Obama’s secretary of education to allow charter schools to flourish.  They may think this backdoor attempt is clever, but really it’s very transparent,” Redelman asserts.

“This moratorium puts at risk more than $100 million in federal money for all public schools … we can’t afford that.”