Reason Foundation

Sasha Volokh on the Implications of the Louisiana Supreme Court Voucher Ruling

Posted on June 5, 2013, 5:07pm | Leonard Gilroy

Sasha Volokh has a new article on Reason.org discussing the implications of the recent Louisiana Supreme Court ruling on school vouchers. Here's the intro:

This May 7, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled 6–1, in Louisiana Federation of Teachers v. Louisiana, that a statewide school voucher plan was unconstitutional. The opinion offers a fascinating glimpse into the developing field of non-religious state challenges to school voucher programs. The moral, for those following school voucher controversies, is that, while vouchers are on solid legal ground at the federal level, they can face barriers based on language in state constitutions, sometimes because of the inclusion of religious schools but sometimes for reasons entirely unrelated to religion.

The full article is available here. And all of Volokh's recent legal analyses written for Reason Foundation on an array of privatization-related topics are archived here.

77 percent of Californians Support Jerry Brown's School Funding Plan: Here Are Three Big Ideas to Make it Better

Posted on June 4, 2013, 11:58am | Lisa Snell

A new poll by the Public Policy Institute of California found that Californians continue to support Gov. Brown's Local Control Funding Formula. The poll found 77 percent of all respondents, 83 percent of public school parents and 87 percent of Democrats favored it. Even a majority of Republicans (57 percent) supported it. The level of support was 6 percentage points higher than in April.

Californians seem to fundamentally understand that the current school finance system in California is broken.

In my new policy brief, I give Governor Brown's plan a positive review and explain why it needs to go further and have the money follow the child to the school level for more accountability and transparency:  

Three Reasons Governor Brown's School Funding Plan is Better than the Status Quo and Three Big Ideas to Make the Plan Even Better

Governor Jerry Brown proposed a new school finance plan for California in the 2013-2014 budget, called "Local Control Funding Formula." It increases funding to school districts with a larger number of disadvantaged students by financially weighting those students according to need, simplifies current byzantine school finance regulations and gives school districts more autonomy over finances.

But while Governor Brown's plan distributes money to school districts with larger numbers of disadvantaged students, it does not do enough to ensure that the money gets to these students' schools or to the students themselves-aside from threatening audits or sanctions if disadvantaged students fail to meet performance targets. Brown's plan would be greatly improved in this respect by integrating the following recommendations:

If California adopted these recommendations, it would be following in the footsteps of Colorado, which recently passed comprehensive school finance reform legislation along precisely these lines. Moreover, California could easily incorporate such reforms in its school finance plan by adapting the current language in the charter school sections of Assembly bill 88 and Senate bill 69, which are legislative alternatives to Governor Brown's budget proposal.

Charter school student funding is weighted per pupil to customize to each student's needs, and individual schools are held accountable for how they spend those dollars. For true accountability and equity, every school in California should have to follow these charter-school reporting requirements.

New at Reason: Looking Back at the Last Year in Education Reform and School Choice

Posted on April 29, 2013, 9:00am | Leonard Gilroy

The rollout of Reason Foundation's Annual Privatization Report 2013 continues today with the release of the Education section—authored by Reason's Katie Furtick and Lisa Snell—which provides an overview of the latest on school choice, charter schools, student-based budgeting and more. Topics include:

• 2012 School Choice Roundup In the States
• School Choice Performance in 2012
• Charter School Market Share for 2012
• Charter Schools Nationally Recognized in 2012
• Public Opinion of School Choice in 2012
• High-Achieving Charter Schools Serve Diverse Demands of their Communities
• Weighted Student Formula in the States

» Annual Privatization Report 2013: Education
» Complete Annual Privatization Report 2013

Chicago Schools to Implement Student-Based Budgeting and Principal Autonomy

Posted on March 18, 2013, 4:45pm | Katie Furtick

In the 2013-2014 school year, the third largest school district in the country - Chicago Public Schools (CPS) - will join other districts across the country in moving from funding institutions to funding students. Student-based budgeting - also known as weighted student formula or backpacking - is a more equitable, decentralized method of funding schools where money follows the child and principals are given more autonomy over their school's budget.

For the past six years CPS implemented a pilot program on student-based budgeting covering 40 schools city-wide. CPS CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett and Chicago Mayor Rham Emanuel have recognized the success of the program and champion full implementation of student-based budgeting.

But, not everyone is a fan of student-based budgeting.

Earlier this week, Chicago Teachers Union Vice President Jesse Sharkey released a statement warning about the dangers of Chicago Public School's (CPS) decision to move away from the outdated and complex school funding formulas currently in place, and toward the simpler and more equitable per-pupil school funding.

Sharkey argues that the per-pupil funding would promote discrimination among veteran teachers by incentivizing principals to hire less expensive novice teachers, and that there are oversight concerns over principals having more autonomy over their budgets.

There is little evidence from other districts that have implemented student-based funding that principals routinely discriminate against veteran teachers. On the other hand, the current school funding formula actually discriminates against a more vulnerable demographic - students.

Under the current funding formula CPS provides a regular classroom teacher for every 28 students in K-3^rd grade, and for every 31 students in 4^th grade and higher. Also for every 750 students the district provides an assistant principal, an art or music teacher, and a librarian or gym teacher. The district simply averages salaries across schools and reports school-level resources based on a district average. In reality, schools which have more senior staff get more dollars.

Seniority and personnel costs may result in vastly different per-pupil spending from one school to another even with similar students at each school. A US Department of Education study based on the school-level reporting requirement of the ARRA stimulus funds, found that more than 40 percent of schools that receive federal money to serve disadvantaged students through Title I spent less state and local money on teachers and other personnel than schools that don't receive federal money at the same grade level in the same district. The federal analysis identified 300 Chicago public schools that were receiving less money than the average non-Title I school. These schools had an average of 89 percent poverty and these low-spending Title I schools in Chicago had average per-pupil expenditures that were 13 percent below the average for non-Title I schools ($3,780 vs. $4,329).

Student-based budgeting is an efficient and transparent way to remedy funding inequities for the most disadvantaged students by funding schools with actual dollars rather than staffing positions. Baltimore Public Schools, for example, has made great strides in terms of within-district equity from one school to another since implementing their own form of student-based budgeting in the 2008-09 school year - Fair Student Funding.

In 2008, only 52 percent of Baltimore public schools were within 10 percent of the district's median per-pupil expenditure. By 2012, 81 percent of the district schools were within 10 percent of the median-funded school. In fact, in an analysis by Education Resource Strategies, Baltimore was shown to have the highest percentage of schools within 10 percent of the median per-pupil spending when compared with several similar districts.

Not only is student-based budgeting a more equitable way of funding students, it provides a more transparent and stable way to fund schools. Rather than have many complicated budgeting formulas for different schools, student-based budgeting applies one simple formulas across all schools. Also, by allowing money to follow students rather than set enrollment numbers there is more stability in funding. Under the current CPS formula, if a school falls short on the number of students enrolled in a given year by even one student it creates a fiscal cliff where the school could lose a teacher or two. Many times principals have had to cut back on supplies and equipment to avoid losing their staff, which can be disruptive to students.

Student-based budgeting is not unique to Chicago Public Schools. Over 30 school systems across the country have shifted to funding their schools through a type of student-based budgeting. Principals at these schools have successfully managed their school budgets after being given the flexibility they need to make the decisions that are best for their schools and their students.

Under student-based budgeting, CPS principals will gain autonomy over 50 percent of school budgets which will be directed to core instruction including hiring teachers, support personal, supplies, and additional instructional programs. The remaining 50 percent of the schools budget will continue to be allocated through the old funding formula for non-core instruction funding, including supplemental general state aid money for special education, magnet schools, International Baccalaureate, limited English proficiency programs, STEM, bilingual students, and Title I. Once principals complete their budgets, they must submit and get them approved by the district financial offices.

As stated by CPS CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett, "Great schools are led by strong leaders. They set high standards and they know how to best support their students. They should have the autonomy to decide how to direct their resources toward the most important people in any school - their students."

CPS administrators and teachers must make their students their first priority. By implementing student-based budgeting, CPS is making a good start at increasing equity, spending transparency from one school to another, and ultimately student performance as principals have more control over using their resources to drive improvements in instruction and achievement.

Utah Needs "Backpack" Funding

Posted on March 4, 2013, 1:27pm | Lisa Snell

I take on funding inequities at the district level in Utah in the Deseret News education blog. Funding is so unequal between schools in Salt Lake City that a school board member is appealing to the federal Office of Civil Rights. I explain how the legislature should take responsibility and pass the school level "Backpack" funding bill before the legislature this session that would send dollars instead of staff members to schools.

Student Funding Inequities in Utah Schools Make the Case for the School-Based Budgeting Act

This week Michael Clara, a Salt Lake City school board member, filed a complaint with the federal Office of Civil Rights presenting evidence that the most disadvantaged students in the district have too many ineffective and inexperienced teachers. Clara told the Salt Lake Tribunethat the school board was told about the inequities a year ago, citing a report presented at a January 2012 meeting that noted, “Students in Title I schools have a five times higher chance of being with a marginal or ineffective teacher.” Since the district distributes resources based on staff positions at the school-level rather than actual dollars, if some schools are stacked with more-experienced teachers and others have a large number of new teachers, this can result in many thousands of dollars difference in terms of actual funding from one school to another. This effectively cancels out Utah’s commendable efforts to equalize funding at the state-level to ensure that every student receives fair funding in the state.

The Utah legislature is considering a school finance reform bill called the “School-based Budgeting Act” that would address these funding inequities found in Salt Lake City and other school districts around the state. The new funding model would attach education dollars to the backs of students and require districts to send 85 percent of state dollars directly to schools in a simple and transparent manner. The bill would also give principals more autonomy to make financial decisions at the school level to become instructional leaders who use their resources to drive instructional improvements.

Read the whole thing.

Innovators in Action 2012, Year in Review

Posted on December 31, 2012, 12:00pm | Harris Kenny

Reason Foundation's Innovators in Action series profiles innovative policymakers in their own words, highlighting good government efforts that are delivering real results and value for taxpayers. In 2012, these thought leaders joined us from across the United States--and even Puerto Rico--to share insight into their process. Check out our year in review, below:

• Privatizing Lottery Management in Pennsylvania
  Interview with Pete Tartline, Executive Deputy Secretary of the Budget, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
  Leonard Gilroy
  December 20, 2012
• Delivering Florida's 21st Century Transportation System Through Tolling, Managed Lanes and Public-Private Partnerships
  Interview with Ananth Prasad, Secretary, Florida Department of Transportation
  Leonard Gilroy
  November 21, 2012
• Addressing Ohio's Transportation Funding Challenges Through Streamlining, Public-Private Partnerships
  Interview with Jerry Wray, Director, Ohio Department of Transportation
  Leonard Gilroy
  November 13, 2012
• Implementing Managed Lanes in Minneapolis-St. Paul 
  Brad Larsen, MnPASS Policy Manager at the Minnesota Department of Transportation, Discusses Successfully Adopting Managed Lanes
  Baruch Feigenbaum
  September 10, 2012
• Transforming Education at the Local Level: Douglas County Leading the Way 
  Interview with Dr. Elizabeth Fagen, Superintendent of Douglas County (Colorado) School District
  Harris Kenny
  August 28, 2012
• Making Phoenix a 24-Hour City: Privatizing City Permitting to Cut Red Tape and Drive Economic Development
  Interview with Sal DiCiccio, Phoenix (AZ) City Councilman
  Leonard Gilroy
  July 31, 2012
• Looking Back at Indianapolis’ Parking Meter Lease, One Year Later
  Interview with Michael Huber, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, City of Indianapolis, Indiana
  Leonard Gilroy
  June 27, 2012
• Creating a Culture of Competition to Improve Corrections
  Interview with Gary Mohr, Director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction
  Leonard Gilroy
  May 31, 2012
• Reinventing Libraries in Osceola County, Florida: Partnering with the Private Sector to Create Standards of Excellence
  Interview with Osceola County, Florida Commissioner Frank Attkisson
  Harris Kenny
  April 12, 2012
• The Dynamic Duo of Carrollton, Texas: Creating a Culture of Competition in City Government
  Carrollton, Texas City Manager Leonard Martin and Director of Competition Tom Guilfoy
  Leonard Gilroy
  April 5, 2012
• Offering State and Local Governments New Tools for Infrastructure Delivery in Texas
  Interview with Texas State Rep. Jim Murphy
  Leonard Gilroy
  March 5, 2012
• Reforming Local Government in Colorado Springs
  Interview with Chuck Fowler, CEO and Chairman of The City Committee of Colorado Springs
  Harris Kenny
  February 14, 2012
• Tulsa: Open for Business
  Tackling city's challenges requires willingness to embrace innovation, competition and market ideas
  Dewey Bartlett, Jr., Mayor of Tulsa, Oklahoma
  January 13, 2012
• Building a World-Class Infrastructure PPP Program in Puerto Rico
  Interview with David Alvarez, executive director of the Puerto Rico Public-Private Partnerships Authority
  Leonard Gilroy
  September 8, 2011

Innovators in Action kicks off again in the new year with my interview with Michael Cheroutes, director, and Nick Farber, enterprise specialist, for the Colorado Department of Transportation's High Performance Transportation Enterprise. Visit reason.org/innovators for the latest content.

Follow Harris Kenny on Twitter @harriskenny

Why Education Reforms Fail

Posted on December 7, 2012, 4:28pm | Matt Rosenbaum

The education reform debate is filled with attacks as both sides level a prodigious amount of invective against their opposition. Meanwhile, as adults question each other's motives and name-call, children continue to sit in failing schools. They deserve better.

The ultimate purpose of education reform efforts is to improve education for millions of students who are stuck in a school system that, for various reasons, does disservice to students in thousands of districts. Obviously, there are divisions over how to improve education. Propositions range from charter schools to online learning to privatizing all schools to doubling down on the existing public school system and contributing even more resources to it.

With such differing opinions, disagreement is inevitable. How advocates handle those disagreements will help determine how effective their reforms will be and how much progress they make.

Teachers and administrators should try to understand that efforts to increase accountability are not intended to restrict them or make their lives miserable, but to ensure kids are taught by motivated and talented teachers. Calls for shifting to a weighted-student funding model, or backpack funding, are not designed to undercut public schools, they are attempts to get more money into the classrooms and to improve how districts use their resources to help students. Public school officials, after decades of increased education spending, should recognize that sending even more money to chronically failing schools is difficult for reformers to accept, especially in tough economic times.

Similarly, school reform advocates should try to realize that most teachers chose their career to help kids. Reformers' calls for more accountability should recognize that much of teaching is an art, not a science, and teachers need time and freedom to improve their craft. It often takes years to become a great teacher. Pressure to raise standardized test scores at all costs makes it increasingly difficult for good teachers to teach in ways they believe would be much more effective. Some of the additional benefits a quality teacher provides, such as being a good role model and supporting students during tough times in their lives, will not show up on a test.

There are no instant cures to the nation's education woes. Education reform is a long, slow process that requires compromise and cooperation. Respect can help any collaboration to succeed. Both sides in the education debate want the same thing: to educate and prepare students for life in this complex, wonderful world in which we live. A little civility goes a long way.

How the War Between Proposition 30 and Proposition 38 Makes the Case for Proposition 32

Posted on November 1, 2012, 2:54pm | Lisa Snell

In today's Orange County Register, I argue that the teachers union opposition to Prop. 38 makes the case for Prop. 32.

While there is a long list of reasons to be skeptical of both propositions, the big thing that's puzzled me since the debate is this: How could any rational member of the California Teachers Association or any teacher possibly endorse Prop. 30 over Prop. 38? Molly Munger's Prop 38, hands down, offers students and teachers more money, more control, and more job security. In fact, Munger's proposal is so much better that, for once, the state PTA split with the teacher's union to back Prop. 38 . . . 

For reasons that include the bargain the teachers unions have made with Gov. Brown to keep pensions for teachers largely intact, as well as the threat by Gov. Brown to cut $6 billion from schools this year if Prop. 30 fails, the teachers unions have revealed their true colors, yet again, siding with Gov. Brown over the best interests of students and teachers.

From the very beginning, public employee unions and their allies have circled the wagons in opposition to Prop. 38. They've spent tens of millions in direct support of Prop. 30, while simultaneously funding direct attacks using organizations such as Democrats Against Proposition 38.

The war between Prop. 30 and 38 provides the case for Prop. 32, the initiative that prohibits corporations, unions, and government employers from deducting union dues that are used for political purposes from their workers' paychecks without their consent.

If given the opportunity and direct control over their political contributions, some teachers would have been more likely to support Prop. 38, which protects jobs and guarantees a funding stream to their individual schools.Yet, as it is in every political issue in California, the teachers union makes the political choice for each individual teacher.

Data on Teacher Class Size Not Settled yet

Posted on October 10, 2012, 8:12am | Matt Rosenbaum

In yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, George W. Bush Institute fellow Jay Greene argues that expanding the number of teachers in the U.S. education system is an ineffective and expensive waste of precious school funds. Unfortunately, his weak analysis makes this article an unreliable resource for anyone interested in changing how schools use their own resources.

Greene states:

"For decades we have tried to boost academic outcomes by hiring more teachers, and we have essentially nothing to show for it. In 1970, public schools employed 2.06 million teachers, or one for every 22.3 students, according to the U.S. Department of Education's Digest of Education Statistics. In 2012, we have 3.27 million teachers, one for every 15.2 students.... [Despite employing more teachers,] math and reading scores for 17-year-olds have remained virtually unchanged since 1970."

Part of that is right. An examination of the U.S. Department of Education's most recent study of long-term trends in U.S. education (released in 2008) reveals that 17-year-olds' scores remain largely unchanged from 1971 to 2008. However, the same data shows notable academic gains have been made among 9- and 13-year-olds. In fact, during the same 1971 to 2008 time period the average reading score for 9-year-olds rose 12 points (from 208 to 220). For 13-year-olds over the same period, the score rose 5 points (from 255 to 260).

In math, the 9-year-old's average score rose 24 points from 1973 to 2008 (from 219 to 243). The 13-year-old's average score rose 15 points over the same period (from 266 to 281), but the 17-year-old's average score only rose 2 points (from 304 to 306).

Using 17-year-olds' test scores as evidence of national academic stagnation ignores the gains made in younger age groups, undercutting Greene's argument-which might be why he ignored them.

Where the Greene piece really loses strength is assuming the low changes in 17-year-olds show the failure of small class size. At most his argument shows correlation, and it is far from proving causation. For instance, it is quite plausible that the discrepancy in test scores is related to efforts to reduce class sizes in earlier grades. According to the Center for Public Education, most programs to reduce class size take place in earlier grades "because earlier research... suggested that these are the optimal years for such programs." This may be evidence favoring the hiring of more teachers to reduce class sizes. Unfortunately, Mr. Greene's article lacks the necessary depth to even acknowledge this intriguing possibility, preferring the glib use of statistics to support a superficial analysis.

If it turns out that more teachers really are the best approach to changing education, this does not mean the federal government should fund them. In a best-case scenario, the expansion of private schools would provide that influx of new teachers.

21st Century Schools Require 21st Century Finance

Posted on September 20, 2012, 2:04pm | Harris Kenny

Today my colleague Leonard Gilroy and I had a piece on Real Clear Markets entitled, "21st Century Schools Require 21st Century Finance." The piece begins:

Recent teacher protests in Chicago show that students and parents suffer when public employee unions and elected officials fight over how to run schools. But there is one issue that should unite both sides: Tapping private sector capital to build schools - whether traditional or alternative - and other education-related infrastructure, leaving more public dollars for the instructional needs of children. Yonkers, a school district in New York State, is doing just that by deploying a solution that has worked well for transportation and other types of public infrastructure: Public-private partnerships (PPPs).

We go on to explain that school districts are out of money, so they can't simply finance, build and operate the new capacity they need on their own. Meanwhile taxpayers are unwilling to approve tax increases. PPPs are an emerging third strategy that addresses these issues. The piece continues:

PPPs usher in private sector capital upfront, which is repaid in exchange for maintenance of the facilities over the course of the contract. Maintenance costs over the long-term are lumped in and included as a payment for a set period. Schools use the resources they would have used to repay municipal bonds and maintain the facility to repay a private partner instead, and more cost effectively. Rigorous procurement allows competing private firms to drive down costs within a framework that protects taxpayers.

This is in contrast to the traditional approach, which requires school districts to fulfill many duties that are beyond the scope of their mission and core competencies, specifically:

Under the traditional model, school districts are responsible not only for overseeing education, but also for finance, building/property maintenance and asset management. In contrast, well-structured PPPs can drive down construction costs and lower life-cycle maintenance costs, freeing up resources that can be deployed in the classroom. These benefits should unify school administrators and unions, not to mention parents and children. Superintendent of Yonkers Public Schools Bernard P. Pierorazio recently explained, "(The PPP allows us to) concentrate on what we do best - preparing students to achieve."

We go on to detail success stories in Yonkers and Puerto Rico. For example in Yonkers, the district hired PPP advisors to determine the feasibility of a $1.7 billion procurement to rebuild 38 schools. The district's buildings are in dire disrepair, with over 95 percent labelled "unsatisfactory" by the State. In Puerto Rico, Governor Luis Fortuño's PPP Authority is overseeing a partnership for approximately 100 schools in 78 municipalities across the island. It's easy to understand why this tool is so appealing to policymakers:

Yonkers, Puerto Rico and others are using PPPs because they tap the strength of the private sector to deliver and maintain facilities (which is not a strength of school districts, whose core mission is academic), based on the public sector's need for good learning environments. Their approach is based on rigorous, well-structured PPP contracts that often span hundreds of pages that transfer key financial, project delivery and operational risks from the public sector (read: taxpayers) to the private sector. Exemplary PPP contracts incorporate enforceable provisions that make the private vendor responsible for everything from future repairs and maintenance, to the scope and timing of projects. Policymakers also sometimes include language to incentivize private partners to finish on (or even ahead of) schedule or hedge against both predictable and unpredictable changes in circumstances like inclement weather or fluctuating commodity prices.

The piece later explains other benefits of PPPs and concludes by saying that PPPs represent an opportunity to improve - if not reinvent -the American education system. Read the full piece, available here on Real Clear Markets.

UC Salaries and Administrators Grow Rapidly Despite Huge Budget Shortfalls

Posted on September 11, 2012, 10:58am | Lisa Snell

Even as California suffers through huge ongoing budget deficits and raises tuition at UC campuses across the state, the Orange County Register finds that salaries in the UC system have climbed by 29 percent in the last six years.

One area that seems to be recession-proof is employment in the UC system. The Register reported, "Spending on University of California salaries has climbed nearly 29 percent over the past six years, even as the public system grapples with ballooning retiree expenses that have created a long-term $24.6 billion shortfall.

"The 10-campus system paid $10.6 billion for 259,043 jobs last year, up from $8.2 billion in 2006, according to an Orange County Register analysis of the latest UC pay data. Staff numbers grew by about 6 percent over the same period, and student enrollment increased by about 10 percent."

I argue in the Orange County Register story that while large salaries could be a problem, the larger problem is the rapid growth in school administrators in the UC system.

The real problem with UC is not the high salaries of marquee teachers and coaches, Lisa Snell told us, but the "huge evidence that the number of administrators has grown astronomically in recent years." Snell is the director of education at the Los Angeles-based Reason Foundation.

She pointed us to a study by Keep California's Promise, a project of the Council of UC Faculty Associations. It found that, from 1994-2009, faculty rose about 33 percent, from about 6,500 to 8,669. But the number of senior managers rose 194 percent, from about 3,000 to 8,822 in the same period, a near-tripling of managers.

Indeed, the 8,822 managers in 2009 were more than the 8,669 faculty. Does every professor need his hand held in class by a manager?

California Legislature Mandates that "Public Service" Be Required for University Tenure

Posted on September 6, 2012, 2:53pm | Lisa Snell

As Dan Walters reports in the Sacramento Bee:

A third element would be required in the hiring and promotion of faculty members. It's called "service." The specifics of Assembly Bill 2132 appear to give great weight to political, or at least semi-political, activities favored by those on the political left.

They include, in the words of a legislative bill analysis, "developing programs for underserved populations" and "outreach programs developed to promote cultural diversity in the student body."

The California State University system would be required to make "service" an element with teaching and the bill "encourages" the constitutionally independent University of California to include "service" in its evaluations.

It is a mistake for the state of California to "legislate" faculty requirements for tenure and promotion even at public universities. This is a one-size-fits-all policy and it politicizes "public service" and ignores legitimate reasons why in some disciplines public service may not be a priority for promotion. Is a faculty member completing research on breast cancer also required to complete public service in addition to their basic research? The emphasis on "public service" for future employment should be at the discretion of the University and faculty and should not be a matter for the California legislature to even consider, much less enforce. 

Innovators in Action: Transforming Education in Douglas County, Colorado

Posted on August 29, 2012, 11:00am | Harris Kenny

Everybody’s talking about education reform and it’s easy to understand why. America’s education system is outdated and broken. While national leaders opine on the subject, a groundbreaking transformation is underway at the local level in Douglas County, Colorado. Douglas County is a short drive south of Denver, but its education community (including students, parents, teachers and administrators) is stealing the spotlight from Colorado’s capital city.

There are no simple answers to reforming the education system, so I sat down with Douglas County School District Superintendent Dr. Elizabeth Fagen to discuss in detail what's happening on the ground in her district. This interview is the latest in Reason Foundation's Innovators in Action 2012 series, highlights from the interview include:

• The first-ever district-led school choice program, known as the Choice Scholarship Pilot Program, for 500 students in the 2011-12 school year;
• The subsequent legal battle with the American Civil Liberties Union over the Choice Scholarship Pilot Program;
• The district's decision to not sign an exclusive bargaining agreement with a teacher's union that would represent the entire district;
• The broader twenty-seven strategy approach to reforming the education system, including things like performance-based pay and principal empowerment; and much more.

Simply put, this interview is a must-read -- check it out online here.

[Note to readers: In previous years, we have published Innovators in Action in an annual report format, the last edition having been released in early 2010. The publication has been on a temporary hiatus since then, but we have resumed publication in a slightly different format. In order to deliver timely content to our readers on a more frequent schedule, we're publishing one Innovators article per month on reason.org. Other articles featured in the Innovators in Action 2012 series are available here.]

What has "Doomsday" Education Spending in California Wrought: Higher Graduation Rates and Test Scores

Posted on June 29, 2012, 12:05pm | Lisa Snell

After what public school advocates have called a decade of "disinvestment in California public education" and predicted every kind of doomsday scenario for California kids--consider what the moderate spending cuts have wrought--test scores and graduation rates are up.

The Legislative Analyst's Office explains how California K-12 schools have cut spending in the last three years: 

Total expenditures (excluding capital outlay projects) dropped by $3.3 billion between 2007-08 and 2010-11, which equates to a statewide average reduction of $565, or 4.7 percent, per pupil. (While statewide data are not yet available for 2011-12, our survey responses indicate about half of districts made additional reductions to per-pupil expenditures in the current year.) The figure shows the most significant spending change has been to certificated staff salaries-the largest operational expense in district budgets. Certificated salary expenditures have decreased by $2.3 billion, including a $1.4 billion drop between 2008-09 and 2009-10. As discussed below, districts have reduced these costs both by employing fewer teachers and administrators and by having them work fewer days. 

California Graduation Rates UP

The new data is based on a system that tracks students from the time they enter ninth grade, even if they transfer to another public school in California. It's the second year the tracking system was used, which allowed a comparison with 2010 figures. School districts in Los Angeles County racked up a graduation rate of 71.6 percent in 2011, a 1.1 point increase from the prior year. The dropout rate improved from 18.9 percent in 2010 to 15.7 percent in 2011, figures show.Statewide, 76.3 percent of students who started ninth grade in 2007 graduated with their class in 2011, a uptick of 1.5 percent. The dropout rate dipped 2.2 points to 14.4 percent.

"We're heading in the right direction," Tom Torlakson, state superintendent of public instruction, said in a conference call. "We want 85 to 90 percent (graduation rates) in the future." Torlakson noted gains statewide among Hispanic and African-American students, as well as English-learners. The improvements were especially noteworthy, he said, given budget cuts that resulted in larger class sizes, shortened school calendars and limited summer school offerings.

California Student Achievement UP

California's students continue to steadily improve their performance across the board, with a larger proportion than ever scoring proficient or higher on the 2011 Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program exams in English-language arts, mathematics, science, and history-social science, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson announced. 

The percentage of students in grades two through eleven scoring at the proficient level and above increased approximately 19 percentage points between 2003 and 2011. The one-year increase in 2011 was 2 percentage points.

Between 2003 and 2011, the increase in the percentage of students in grades two through seven taking the grade-level mathematics CSTs and achieving the proficient level and above reached double digits: grade five, 28 percentage points; grade four, 26 percentage points; grade three, 22 percentage points; grade seven, 20 percentage points; grade six, 19 percentage points; and grade two, 13 percentage points. During the same time period, the increase in the percentage of students achieving the proficient level and above on the CST for Algebra I and Summative High School Mathematics also reached double digits, with an increase of 11 percentage points and 12 percentage points respectively.

Why the GAO Study on Special Education in Charter Schools Gets It Wrong

Posted on June 20, 2012, 2:36pm | Lisa Snell

As the New York Times reports a new GAO study finds that charter schools enroll 3 percent fewer students labeled as special education than traditional public schools: 

Across the country, disabled students represented 8.2 percent of all students enrolled during the 2009-10 year in charter schools, compared with 11.2 percent of students attending traditional public schools, according to a Government Accountability Office analysis of Department of Education data.

The basic premise of the GAO report is questionable. The assumption that schools with higher rates of special education are some how doing a better job of serving special needs children is suspect--just because you label students does not mean you are serving them.  This type of analysis implies that a higher rate of special education designation proves that certain schools are serving special needs children better.

In fact an alternative explanation might be that public schools are better at gaming the funding system by labeling a larger number of children as special education. There has been significant debate over the degree to which the largest special education category of specific learning disability (SLD) reflects a true disability or an instructional failure in reading in the early grades. As education researcher Jay P. Greene has long  pointed out in articles such as the "The Myth of the Special Education Burden," specific-learning disabilities has been the fastest growing category of disability and has grown at a rate much faster than other categories of special education.

A 2002 report from the President's Commission on Special Education estimated that 80 percent of students who receive an SLD diagnosis-two out of five special education students-are assigned to the program "simply because they haven't learned how to read." In a similar vein, an in-depth analysis in Rethinking Special Education for a New Century, a 2001 report published by the Fordham Foundation and the Progressive Policy Institute, estimates that nearly 2 million children would not have been classified as learning disabled if the public schools they attended had provided proper, rigorous, and early reading instruction. A plausible explanation for the 3 percent differential between charter schools and traditional schools is that many charter schools do a better job of teaching students to read, have agressive early-intervention programs, and simply do not label as many children as special education in the first place. 

In a 2003  study, Special Education in Charter Schools and Conventional Public Schools, RAND researchers speculated that charter schools may have a philosophical difference and "choose not to give marginal students an IEP out of a belief that the stigma of special education may cause more harm than benefit to the child."  Congruently, my Reason Foundation study, Special Education Accountability: Structural Reform to Help Charter Schools Make the Grade, surveyed California charter schools and found that school directors reported using aggressive early intervention strategies and remediation strategies to help reduce the rate of special education.

One strategy used by charter schools is "neverstreaming" which is designed to avoid special education placements in the first place. Education researcher Robert Slavin defines neverstreaming as "implementing prevention and early intervention programs powerful enough to ensure that virtually every child is successful in the first place." The purpose of this approach is-as the name implies-to provide early intervention and services so the child never leaves the general education classroom.

Elk Grove Unified in California is a pioneer of the neverstreaming model. At Elk Grove the neverstreaming model was first implemented during the 1994-95 school year. The goal was to decreasethe number of students referred for special education assessment, improve schoolwide performance,improve staff collaboration, and improve school attendance. In 1999 a California Department of Education evaluation found that special education referrals dropped from about 1,300 during the 1996-97 school year to about 500 during the 1998-99 school year. Schoolwide performance on standardized tests and attendance also improved. Elk Grove has reduced its special education rate from about 17 percent in 1995 to approximately 6 percent of students. In the Reason study several California charter schools replicated this approach to special education.

Ironically, public schools and charter schools that offer services early on and actually reduce their special education population through approaches like "neverstreaming" or other early intervention strategies are often criticized as not properly serving special education students. Schools are often judged by their special education percentagesor rates as evidence of meeting special education obligations rather than their actual academic outcomes for students enrolled in their schools.

There is at least anecdotal evidence that charter schools are working to help students learn on the front end and avoid the special education designation altogether. The GAO report is wrong to suggest that if charter schools and traditional schools had identical special education rates, this would somehow say something about the quality of special education services in either charter schools or traditional schools. Low special education rates are not automatic evidence of a failure to serve students. In fact the opposite may be true. Schools with the highest rates of special education may be failing students early on.

With School Choice Everyone Wins: Including Kids Taking Care of Their Sick Mothers.

Posted on June 14, 2012, 2:49pm | Lisa Snell

Keven Teasley from the GEO Foundation in Indianapolis, which incubates high-quality charter schools and then supports their growth, sends word of their positive outcomes for charter school students and one student's story makes the compelling case for why we need school choice instead of  a one-size-fits all education. Kevin writes:

We are also celebrating the overwhelming community response to our new charter, Gary Middle College.  We planned to open this fall with 100 students but have received more than 225 applications.  We will be expanding our enrollment to 125 and planning to enroll more next year.  One young scholar applied because she can't go to a traditional school.  She needs to take care of her mother during the day because her father works during the day.  She can go to school at night--when GMC is open--while her father takes care of her mother.  

The GEO Foundation is an example of the kind of third party organiations that compete with school districts to govern and develop schools when the money is decentralized and follows students. The GEO Foundation is setting a high standard for charter schools in Indiana and shows that competition and choice can hep students and teachers but can also lead to competition between the best models for school governanace and human capitol development. Some more good news from GEO Foundation includes:

In Colorado Springs, we are partnering with Peter Hilts, former principal of the Classical Academy, one of the state's largest, oldest and BEST charter schools.  Peter is helping us bring Core Knowledge to Pikes Peak Prep, and lead the enrollment growth at the school.  With Peter's assistance, the school just received a donation of 8 2-classroom portables that will help the school double its enrollment over the next few years. 

Pikes Peak Prep received a "Governor's Award" from the Colorado Department of Education this year for its academic excellence, too.    

In Gary, we are celebrating having the only "A" charter school in all of Gary, Indiana. The school also boasts a 100% graduation rate and is the highest performing charter school in Gary.  The school is 94% poverty and received a $1.25 million renewable three-year grant this year to help grow and improve the high school opportunities.

The more we decentralize the funding at every level of school finance, the more organizations like the GEO Foundation have the opportunity to take on the status quo of school governance.

Teacher Pension and Healthcare Reform Extends to Michigan

Posted on June 14, 2012, 1:12pm | Lisa Snell

Building on the national momentum from Wisconsin and California cities, today the Michigan legislature is posed to pass a pension and healthcare reform package that will save school districts money and still offer teachers reasonable and even generous benefits. As Michigan Live reports:

State House members signed off on a pension reform bill that Republics said “saves” the system, but Democrats said breaks promises made to public employees.

The 57-47 vote sends the bill back to the state Senate, which is expected to take action this afternoon.

Republicans said the changes are historic, and will save school districts $300 million this year – and tackles a system they said built up $45 billion in unfunded liabilities.

And while the pension reform agreement does not move new K-12 workers into a strict 401 K plan as originally proposed, it does significantly reform the retirement system.

There is agreement, for instance, on doubling health insurance premiums for school retirees; eliminating health coverage in retirement for new workers hired after July 1 and instead putting an extra 2 percent of their compensation into a 401(k) plan; and "prefunding" retiree health benefits.Prefunding requires more money upfront from the state (and continues a 3 percent salary deduction for school workers that has been in effect for two years), but saves money in the long run because that money can be invested over 30 years.

Republicans said the changes are historic, and will save school districts $300 million this year - and tackles a system they said built up $45 billion in unfunded liabilities."We're not trying to attack teachers, we're trying to save the system," said state Rep. Chuck Moss, R-Birmingham. "System is unsustainable. The system is about to crash. This is not the time to flinch from reality."

These ongoing wins to get public employee costs in education under control, can only continue to make the Chicago teachers demands more laughable.

Chicago Teaches 30 Percent Raise or STRIKE Ultimatum

Posted on June 13, 2012, 6:34pm | Lisa Snell

Ignoring the economic crisis and the political reality facing teachers and unions this week more than 90 percent of Chicago teachers voted to authorize a strike if they cannot reach an agreement with the school board and Mayor Rahm Emanuel by the fall.

The Chicago teachers are demanding close to a 30 percent pay raise and class size capped at 23 students. As Allysia Finley pointed out in the Wall Street Journal: 

The union is demanding a 30% raise over the next two years and class sizes capped at 23 students. Mr. Emanuel wants to give teachers a 2% raise next year and establish a merit pay pilot program. The unions say they're entitled to more money since the district is requiring teachers to work 90 more minutes a day and 10 more days a year. A new law—which the state legislature passed almost unanimously last year—allows the district to impose such changes unilaterally.

The average Chicago teacher makes $76,450, nearly 30% more than the typical private sector worker in Cook County—and teachers work two months less a year. Their last five-year contract called for 4% annual raises. However, the district rescinded teachers' raises last year because its deficit ballooned to $700 million. Its deficit is projected to grow to more than $1 billion in the next two years due to soaring pension costs. Teachers can retire at age 60 with an annuity equal to 75% of their highest average salary, meaning that teachers earn more in retirement than most Chicagoans do on the job.

And Lindsey Burke at the Heritage Foundation describes just why the teachers believe they deserve the 30 percent raise:

The union argues that Mayor Rahm Emanuel (D) wants to extend the school day, and that the requested salary increase would compensate them for extending the school day from 5.5 hours—among the nation’s shortest school days—to 7.5 hours. Chicago Public Schools states that under the extended school day:

On average teachers will provide 5.5 hours of instruction (an increase of 54 minutes), receive a 45-minute duty-free lunch and 60-minute prep period and supervise the passing period. They will also be required to be on-site for 10 minutes before and after school.

The HORROR Never Stops. Oh for a 7.5 hour day, 10 months a year.

The Chicago teacher hard-line seems ill advised given where popular opinion about teachers unions is these days. The Wisconsin recall outcome notwithstanding, a new poll by Harvard's Program on Education Policy and Governance and the journal Education Next found that the share of the public with a positive view of union impact on local schools has dropped by seven percentage points in the past year. Among teachers, the decline was an even more remarkable 16 points.

And it’s not just public opinion; union membership has been falling at an alarming pace. According to the Education Intelligence Agency:

You have to go all the way back to 1999-2000 to find an NEA budget with membership projections as low as the ones for 2013-14. NEA is planning for a cumulative loss of 346,000 full-time equivalent active, working members from its high-water mark just three years ago. That would be a drop of almost 15 percent.

While there is still a good chance a strike will be averted, the Chicago teachers willingness to threaten a strike as the main negotiating chip for demands that far exceed the compensation and pensions of the average Chicago worker, will not be the strategy they need to bolster the public employee union image nationwide. All indicators point to the fact that regular people, who make less money and have far less attractive benefits, are tired of paying more  to support unsustainable compensation and benefits for teachers. 

Federal Public School Food Police Fine Utah School $15k for Leaving Vending Machine Plugged in During Lunch.

Posted on May 17, 2012, 1:05pm | Lisa Snell

As "The Blaze" reports: 

A Utah high school is learning the hard way that the government is serious about nudging students away from food it doesn't want them to consume. Davis High School in the Salt Lake City area is having to fork over a whopping $15,000 in fines to the Feds because it accidentally sold soda through a vending machine during lunch.

Federal law requires the school to turn off its soda machines during the lunch period, which is 47 minutes a day. And Davis High school did turn off the machines in the lunch room. However, the school didn't realize that there was another machine in the school bookstore that wasn't being turned off. And when the food police realized it, the school was hit with a $0.75 fine per student for the duration of the offense. 

And this is especially unfair because all the evidence suggests that soda and snack bans in schools don't work. As the Washington Post and many others have reported:

Jennifer Van Hook and Claire Altman looked at a sample of 20,000 students who began kindergarten in 1998, and checked in on their height and weight in fifth and eighth grade. They couldn't find any significant link between higher obesity rates and schools that allowed vending machines selling snacks and soda. "The results suggest that the sale of competitive foods [which compete with traditional school foods, such as soda and snacks] in school is unassociated with weight gain among middle school children," they write.

Policies that limit the availability of candy bars, chips and soda have become popular in recent years; 23 states place some kind of restriction on what foods can be sold in schools. Why does this study find that such policies don't necessarily reduce childhood obesity? A lot of factors could be at play. Students that don't have access to soda in schools tend to increase their consumption of sugary drinks at home, a 2011 study in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine found.

In addition, it turns out that like everyone else school kids are good at developing black markets when soda and snacks are banned. As this article explains: LA school district lunch program spawns thriving junk food black market. 

School Districts in Wisconsin Saved $30 million on Health Insurance Costs Since Collective Bargaining Relief

Posted on May 17, 2012, 12:35pm | Lisa Snell

A competitive environment for health insurance is already saving school districts money in Wisconsin.

As the Wisconsin State Journal reports:

WEA Trust, the not-for-profit insurer that covered about two-thirds of Wisconsin school districts last year, has seen its revenue decline almost $70 million after the state gave districts more freedom to switch insurers. . . .

The data, from 52 school districts that changed health insurance carriers, show total savings of more than $30 million. Walker said the savings are good news for taxpayers, and also free dollars for teacher wages and classroom development.

And even those districts that did not switch health insurance plans are now getting a more competitive deal:

However, other districts said even with the increased freedom to switch, they preferred to stay with WEA Trust. They said the insurer offered them a competitive price along with the secondary benefit of strong customer service.

One example is the School District of La Crosse, which insures about 1,000 people. Its premiums actually went down 3 percent last year.

Puerto Rico's Infrastructure Renaissance Continuing in 2012

Posted on May 15, 2012, 4:40pm | Leonard Gilroy

Under the leadership of Gov. Luis Fortuño, Puerto Rico continued to emerge as a leader in attracting private investment in public infrastructure in 2011, with public-private partnerships (PPPs) undertaken or underway that include a modernization of 100 K-12 schools, a $1.5 billion toll road lease and an ongoing procurement for a long-term lease of San Juan's international airport. As I wrote in Reason Foundation's recently released Annual Privatization Report 2011 (see Puerto Rico excerpt here):

In two short years, the administration of Governor Luis Fortuño has turned Puerto Rico into a privatization leader among its state peers. To address the territory's chronic deficits and unsustainable debt, the administration has advanced a range of reforms that include major spending reductions, optimization of government operations and the enactment of a new law in 2009 inviting private investors to modernize or develop new infrastructure across a variety of sectors.

That law, Act No. 29, is now bearing fruit. It authorized government agencies to enter into public- private partnerships (PPPs) with private firms for the design, construction, financing, maintenance or operation of public facilities, with a set of priority projects that include toll roads, transit, energy, water/wastewater facilities, solid waste management and ports. The law also established a new Public Private Partnership Authority (PPPA), a new center of excellence within the Puerto Rico Government Development Bank responsible for identifying, evaluating and selecting PPP projects and for monitoring and enforcing the terms of PPP contracts.

Despite its short life, the PPPA has built a world-class PPP program utilizing global best practices, and it has already seen some major successes advancing projects through the procurement pipeline.

Read the rest of the Annual Privatization Report 2011 article here for more on Puerto Rico's schools, toll road and airport PPP initiatives that advanced in 2011.

I'm pleased to report that momentum has continued into 2012. Earlier this year, Puerto Rico's Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Authority announced what will become the next PPP project in their infrastructure pipeline—a design-build-finance-maintain project for a new 600-bed, privately-financed juvenile correctional detention and treatment facility, a project estimated to potentially save the commonwealth over $4 million annually. This will be Puerto Rico's first social infrastructure project in corrections, and upon completion, operations of the facility will remain in the public sector (though the private developer will continue be responsible for ongoing facility maintenance). The PPP Authority decided to move forward into procurement for this project based on the results of a feasibility and value-for-money analysis prepared for the project, available here. Statements of qualification from interested bidders were due last week. More information on this project is available here.

Also, earlier this month, the PPP Authority and the Ports Authority announced two consortia— Grupo Aerpuertos Avance (a team combining Ferrovial and Macquarie) and Aerostar Airport Holdings (a team combining Aeroportuario del Sureste and Highstar Capital)— as finalists for a long-term lease of San Juan's international airport. Six consortia were shortlisted last September out of 12 applicants, and the winning bidder is expected to be announced next month.

For more on Puerto Rico's robust and impressive PPP program, see:

• My February 2012 live, video interview with PPP Authority director David Alvarez at Reason Weekend in San Juan.
• My August 2011 print interview with Alvarez.
• Puerto Rico's PPP Authority website.

For more of the latest in state and local government privatization, see the full Annual Privatization Report 2011.

Green Dot Charter Schools Raise Performance for Long-Suffering Locke High School

Posted on May 14, 2012, 4:10pm | Lisa Snell

Reason first told the story of the struggle of Locke high school parents and teachers to have their school run by Green Dot charter schools in the Drew Carey piece: Education Revolt in Watts.

Now there is good news out of Locke high school. Students are doing much better on multiple indicators under Green Dot management. As this new UCLA study reports:

Students at historically low-performing Locke High School in South Los Angeles, which recently was transformed into five smaller charter schools, are now performing better than their traditional-school peers in a number of key academic areas, according to a multi-year study conducted by the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing at UCLA (CRESST). 

CRESST's evaluation, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, looked at two groups of ninth graders who started in 2007 and 2008 - just after the charter-school group Green Dot Public Schools assumed operational control of Locke from the Los Angeles Unified School district and initiated a series of major curriculum and faculty changes. The UCLA researchers followed the students for three years. 

The study found that the Green Dot Locke students were more likely to stay in school, to take and pass important college preparatory classes, and to score higher on the state high school exit exam on their first attempt than students at demographically similar high schools in the LAUSD. The study authors called the transformation of Locke "an impressive success story" and found that the charter had achieved "consistent, positive effects on a range of student outcomes." The UCLA CRESST evaluation is ongoing. 

The full UCLA report is here.

And Fast Company has an extensive story on the news and other positive results at Locke:

Rather than centrally manage every school, each Green Dot charter is run like a startup: the staff is given broad discretionary powers over finance, faculty are given the reins to innovate with new curriculum, and the union contract is performance-based rather than a guarantee of minimum work requirements. To maintain its unusual level of collaboration, a Green Dot overhaul physically splits schools into autonomous units of around 500 students (in some cases, by using chicken wire for temporary walls).

A UCLA-Gates Foundation study released today shows that Green Dot's prescription is paying off, with 25% higher graduation rates (80% vs. 55%) and 35% higher college readiness (48% vs. 13%). Green Dot even managed to bring sanity to one of LA's worst schools, Locke, where rival gangs maintained control over bathrooms and students regularly set hanging artwork on fire.

Green Dot was able to achieve these positive results without cherry picking students and they were able to have better outcomes while enrolling students in more challenging classes. 

And as Dr. Jay P. Greene recently argued when we look at gold standard randomized studies charter school benefits are proven by the best evidence.

24 High-Performing Los Angeles Unified Schools Plan to Become Charter Schools

Posted on May 14, 2012, 3:35pm | Lisa Snell

In "The School District is Dead, Long Live the Schools," I wrote about the emerging trend of high-performing traditional schools converting to charters schools  to get more flexibility and control of their financial resources. This growing trend is distinct from the traditional trajectory of charter schools that have developed to serve students in poor performing public schools. Los Angeles Unified is embracing this trend. As the Los Angeles Times reports:

Two dozen high-performing Los Angeles schools are seeking to become charter campuses in search of more money and increased flexibility.

The list reads like an honor roll of academic excellence. Every school has surpassed the state's target score of 800 on the Academic Performance Index, which is based on standardized tests.

Although many of the schools considered the move in hopes of greater funding, campus officials said they also began to see the benefits of increased freedom over such things as curriculum, testing and schedules. "Finance is one key factor but not the only one," said Jose Cole-Gutierrez, who directs the charter school division of the L.A. Unified School District.

The interesting twist is that Los Angeles Unified appears to be encouraging these schools to become charters. This again begs the questions are central offices and school districts going to become obsolete?  Why not have all charter districts like New Orleans? As I said in the earlier Reason piece:

The bottom line is that charter schools give school leaders, teachers, and parents much more control over staffing and finances while also freeing them from the economic consequences of belonging to a district that has been in financial distress for decades. A school district may become financially bankrupt, but individual schools can live on through the charter school process. It raises the question: As a nation, should we continue to support large school districts at the expense of individual schools and students?

Osceola County, Florida Library Partnership "Paying Dividends"

Posted on May 1, 2012, 8:48pm | Harris Kenny

In a recent Around Osceola op-ed, Osceola County, Florida Commission chairman John Quiñones writes, "A bold, ground-breaking partnership with a private company to operate the Osceola Library System passed its 100-day mark Sunday (April 15) and is already leading to reduced costs, a flow of new books and more access for all residents."

The piece continues:

Osceola County was the first in the state to enter into a relationship with a private company (Library Systems and Services Inc.) to manage the system. For this reason, I believe that funding and the future of the operation of our libraries are secure because of the Board of County Commissioners’ action. Residents need to know that there is plenty of good news about the Osceola Library System.

First, it’s about the books. Orders for materials have been going out regularly for the last eight weeks and shelves are filling up with bestsellers and new releases. More than 4,200 new items have arrived and more than 8,500 books have been ordered. 

Next, it’s about the people. The “Hot off the Press” program expands the availability of new books and bestsellers to library patrons, while maintaining the popular hold system.

Denise Galarraga, the new director, has already held meet-and-greets at each library branch. Library amnesty week included a “Fees for Food” program in partnership with the Green Bag Project that helped the community’s children in need.

What about the employees? I’m pleased to say that all of the Osceola Library System employees were offered positions with the new company and the majority accepted those offers. And all of the employees were hired at the same salary they had with the county.

The piece ultimately concludes, "Overall, I am confident that the Osceola Library System will continue its role of serving residents in a progressive and inclusive manner."

John Quiñones' op-ed is a must-read for anyone interested in understanding why public-private partnerships are a useful tool for local governments. Not only can they help cash strapped governments keep libraries open, they have proven to be an effective tool for improving the quality of library services too. For more on this issue, see my recent Innovators in Action interview with Osceola County commissioner Frank Attkisson here; and this excerpted section on library partnerships in California from Reason Foundation's Annual Privatization Report 2011.

Philadelphia Schools to Follow New Orleans Market Education Lead Without a Hurricane?

Posted on April 25, 2012, 11:44am | Lisa Snell

Philadelphia plans to revolutionize its school system by closing schools, moving to an all-charter or autonomous school district, ditching the central office, and privatizing school services with outside vendors.

As the Philadelphia Inquirer reports:

So, at the SRC's direction, Chief Recovery Officer Thomas Knudsen on Tuesday announced a plan that would essentially blow up the district and start with a new structure.

The plan - subject to public comment and SRC approval - would close 40 schools next year and 64 by 2017, move thousands more students to charters, and dismantle the central office in favor of "achievement networks" that would compete to run groups of 25 schools and would sign performance-based contracts. . . .

Forget the command-and-control district structure. It's archaic and it doesn't work, officials said.

Instead of orders coming from a large central office that runs 249 schools, much of the power would be concentrated in the new achievement networks.

Those would represent "a breaking-apart of the district," Knudsen said. They would be "a group of people who choose to do business with the SRC and the central office to run" from 20 to 25 schools organized either by geography or by some other theme.

Successful principals or district staff could apply to run an achievement network. So could charter organizations, or universities, or a combination of those groups.

Principals would answer to the achievement networks, although they would remain district employees. The achievement networks would have contracts with the SRC, and would have to meet performance goals or risk being replaced.

The achievement network structure "creates an entrepreneurial approach, a flexibility, a nimbleness, a willingness to experiment," Knudsen said.

The current academic divisions - formerly called regions, clusters, and districts - will be gone as of this summer. Pilot achievement networks will be in place this fall, with a formal rollout in 2014.

Schools would have much more autonomy, with the ability to choose their own curriculums.

Though there is some precedent for this kind of work - officials pointed to the decentralization in New York City public schools - Ramos noted that what Philadelphia is proposing "is different from what many other places are doing."

The central office, already half the size it was a year ago, will shrink further, from over 1,000 employees a few years ago to about 200 in the new model. 

This model has been working well in New Orleans where more than 80 percent of students are in charter schools without a central office and in several other districts that have decentralized control to the parents and the schools. Philadelphia is moving toward the sea change in school governance and school funding that is happening across the United States.  More than 30 "school funding portability" funding systems are funding students through a student-based budgeting mechanism in cities like New York, Baltimore, Denver, Hartford and Cincinnati. In 2011, Rochester, Newark and Boston have moved to full weighted student formula systems where the money follows the child. Los Angeles Unified is moving from 100 pilot schools being funded based on per-pupil basis to all 800 schools funded based on where the student enrolls. In Louisiana, 7 school districts are piloting a student-based budgeting system, including the largest school district in the state, Jefferson Parish, with 50,000 students. New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Indiana have all recently changed their statewide school funding systems to a state formula where the money is attached to the child. These kind of systems support a level playing field for charters and district schools and do not give schools a residential advantage. 

There are many interesting details of the plan at the Philadelphia Inquirer so read all about it here.