Category: Uncategorized

 

California Legislative Update and Senate Bill 126

In this CHARTER EDtalk, we are honored to be joined by Branché Jones from Branché Jones Lobbying Firm, an expert in California charter school legislation and supporter of the charter school movement. Branché shares his insights into the most recent California legislative updates and how the new SB126 is going to affect charter schools across the state of California. To learn more, please watch the video or read the transcript below for the full story.

TRANSCRIPT

Ryan Eldridge: Hello, and welcome to this episode of CHARTER EDtalks. I’m Ryan Eldridge, Charter School Advisor for Charter School Capital, and I’m honored to be joined by Branché Jones from Branché Jones Lobbying Firm. And we’re here to discuss the California Legislature and Senate Bill 126. So Branché, I know that you’ve got your pulse on things, and we just wanted to find out a little bit more about how 126 is going to impact the charter schools in California.

About Senate Bill 126

Branché Jones: Sure. SB-126 is a culmination of about 15 years of efforts to apply conflict of interest provisions to charter schools in the state. It has the Brown Act in it, the Political Forum Act, the Public Records Act, and you’ll have to comply with government code 1090, which is the governing body of law for elected officials and board members. What it’s going to do is you’re actually going to have to change your provisions, how you operate your Board. Your governing structure may have to change, who you can hire, what terms they’ll be working for you under, things of that nature.
Additionally, for non-classroom-based schools, they have some teleconferencing provisions. So when you’re having a board meeting, there’ll have to be some type of device at every location where people can testify and hear what’s going on in the board meeting.
As I said in the beginning, it was about 15 years in the making. Charter schools have been able to fight it off and different descriptions of it, different bills, Assembly bills, Senate bills. The previous governor, Mr. Brown, was very supportive of charter schools, everybody knows, and he would not sign this piece of legislation.
This governor, Mr. Newsom, said in his campaign that he was going to enact some charter school transparency laws around conflict of interest and things of that nature. So, this bill actually passed in warp speed. It took one week to get through the State Assembly. State Senate first, one week to get through the State Assembly, then it was on the governor’s desk, and he signed it. It’ll go into effect on January 1st, 2020.
In my personal opinion, this was coming in some form or another. We had lived free of those laws since the inception of the Charter School Act, so this was kind of like government creep. It was coming.
Eldridge: Inevitable. Right?
Jones: One way or the other—it was. Correct. It was inevitable. Many schools already live under these provisions and adhere to these provisions. The one thing to add is the bill also applies those same provisions to charter school management corporations (CMOs), so anybody managing or running a charter school has to comply with all those laws as well. That’ll be something that I think people really have to make sure they have a tight grip on because you don’t want to be out of compliance with the statute. That would be reasons for revocation, and that could be the case in some places.
We know there are some interesting governance models out there, but that’s the one twist they put on the bill. So it applies to the entire charter school structure. There was little to no opposition because it was inevitable. The governor wanted this on his desk. He wanted it to be the first thing he signed, and he made sure everybody knew that. We all had our meeting in the Horseshoe with the staff. That’s the governor’s office. They explained the realities of the situation to us all. So this was going to happen, and it basically … It almost went through unanimously, with a couple Republicans in the State Senate and State Assembly voting against it.

What does this mean for the rest of 2019?

Jones: What this means moving forward for 2019, this is the first bill of many that will apply to charter schools. There’s 1505 that would take away your rights to appeal and do a number of wacky things. I know there are some amendments out there to it, but everyone will be in opposition to that. 1506 has not been amended yet at this date, but it will have a cap of some kind in it for charter schools. 1507 closes a loophole that says you can put your site … if you can’t find a location for your school in the district you’re authorized in, you can put it in the district next door. And 1508 will deal with districts … It hasn’t fully been amended, kind of like 1506. They’re working on the language, but it will deal with the financial impact charters have on districts and probably allow a district to deny a charter for fiscal reasons.
Now, the last point I’ll add is the governor has not … the administration hasn’t taken a position. We know people will be fighting these measures as they go through the State Assembly. I don’t know where the State Senate will be. I don’t know that they all reached the governor’s desk, but he did not want to put a cap or a moratorium in his piece of legislation. So that might hint as to where he is on it, but we’re not clear at this point. The only other thing to add is there’s a charter school commission that’s been created to look at the fiscal impact charters have on districts and should have a report out the end of June.
Eldridge: Okay
Jones: That’s the legislative makeup.
Eldridge: So some more information may be coming in the June timeframe, so you can maybe do another one of these with us?
Jones: Yes, we’ll do another one.
Eldridge: And get some updates?
Jones: Yes. And then after June, we’ll know. The governor’s May revision will be out, so we’ll know where the budget numbers are as well.
Eldridge: We appreciate it. This wraps up this version of Charter Ed Talks. We appreciate your time, and thanks for joining us.

Charter School Capital logoSince the company’s inception in 2007, Charter School Capital has been committed to the success of charter schools. We provide growth capital and facilities financing to charter schools nationwide. Our depth of experience working with charter school leaders and our knowledge of how to address charter school financial and operational needs have allowed us to provide over $1.8 billion in support of 600 charter schools that have educated over 1,027,000 students across the country. For more information on how we can support your charter school, contact us. We’d love to work with you!

LEARN MORE

Charter School Honor RollNow Accepting Nominations for the 2019 Charter School Honor Roll

We are very excited to announce the nominations are now open for our second annual Charter School Honor Roll! The Charter School Honor Roll honors high-achieving charter schools from across the country.

About the Honor Roll

Currently, in its second year, the Charter School Honor Roll celebrates the outstanding work that charter schools around the nation are doing. We hope you’ll take a few minutes to nominate a school that exemplifies excellence in any of the following categories:
  • School growth
  • Student achievement
  • Community service
  • School leadership
  • Positive school climate
Our 2019 Charter School Honor Roll winners will be awarded a special gift package, free admission to the National Charter Schools Conference (in Las Vegas, Nevada June 30-July 3, 2019), and will be honored at an exclusive honoree awards event during the conference.
If you have a school you’d like to be considered, or if you’d like to nominate your own school, please click on the button below. We’re looking forward to reading your inspiring submission!

NOMINATE A SCHOOL

underperforming Charter Schools
Editor’s Note: This post was originally published here by ExelinEd on October 31, 2018, and written by Claire Voorhees, ExcelinEd’s National Director of Policy. We are focused on helping all students access quality education. So how do we best address underperforming charter schools? Some intervention strategies can certainly help, but what are some other options? Check out this article to learn about some other options.
We think it’s vital to keep tabs on the pulse of all things related to charter schools, including informational resources, and how to support charter school growth and the advancement of the charter school movement as a whole. We hope you find this—and any other article we curate—both interesting and valuable.

#AskExcelinEd: How can states address the challenges of school turnaround?

Three years into the ESSA era, the rubber has finally met the road. All 50 states and D.C. have approved plans, identified their first set of lowest-performing schools and are now undertaking the most difficult – and most important – task of all: school turnaround.
To support states, ExcelinEd has partnered with the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools and Chiefs for Change to provide information on leveraging federal funds and promoting rigorous, evidence-based turnaround strategies.
ExcelinEd is excited to release its first contribution from this partnership: School Interventions Under ESSA: Harnessing High-Performing Charter Operators. The brief reasons that states and districts can consider a wide variety of intervention strategies, such as replacing staff, improving curriculum and instruction and providing integrated student supports that address students’ health, emotional and behavioral needs.
However, in districts where schools fail to turn around—or have already been failing for multiple years—states should consider the one option that can give students languishing in low-performing schools a higher-quality option: bringing in high-performing charter schools.
This brief also builds on our earlier findings, How to Recruit High-Performing Charter Management Organizations to a New Region, to highlight strategies states can use to attract high-quality CMOs to districts where schools are struggling the most. These strategies fall into three main categories: leveraging state and federal funding; authorizer quality and operating autonomy; and talent pipelines.
We look forward to working with states as they address the challenge of school turnaround and ensuring their students receive a quality education.

 

Florida Elections UpdateFlorida Elections: State of the State

Elections Matter.
For the last several years a common phrase has been used by winning candidates everywhere. Elections matter. And that could not have been any more significant for school choice advocates in Florida than the most recent statewide elections.
In 1996, Jeb Bush partnered with community leaders and opened Florida’s first charter school in Liberty City in Miami-Dade County under legislation signed by then Democrat Governor, Lawton Chiles. Bush, a Republican, would go on to become Florida’s Governor in 1999 and together – with the Republican-controlled state Legislature – would control two of three branches of Florida’s state government for the next nineteen years. This Republican control resulted in legislation advancing school choice, particularly charter schools and charter school expansion.
During this time of Republican control, school choice opponents sought relief in the state’s court system to attack and beat back legislative policies favorable to school choice and charter schools. Over the past several years, the liberal-leaning Florida Supreme Court has been a major stumbling block to expanding school choice and charter schools in Florida. That all changed this past November.
Former Republican Congressman Ron DeSantis was elected Governor in November, and with it came the opportunity to appoint three new members of Florida’s Supreme Court. These appointments resulted from the vacancies created by three justices reaching the mandatory retirement age just as DeSantis was inaugurated as Florida’s newest Governor. These retiring justices were first appointed by previous Democrat Governors and helped keep the Court a more liberal body that routinely sided with school choice opponents in a number of high-profile cases it heard.
Most recently, the Court struck down a proposed constitutional amendment that would have set term limits on elected school board members. The amendment would also maintain the school board’s duties to public schools it establishes but would permit the state to operate, supervise, and control public schools not established by school board (charter schools or other schools of choice).
Shortly after his inauguration, Governor DeSantis appointed three very qualified, conservative justices to the Court, and as some observers have said, created one of the most conservative state Supreme Courts in the country.
When speaking about these appointments, newly elected Lt. Governor Jeanette Nunez said, “(these appointments) will single-handedly be the most important thing for the future of this state that we have ever seen.”
Shortly after naming the three new justices, Governor DeSantis also selected former Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives Richard Corcoran, a staunch charter school proponent, as the new Commissioner of the Florida Department of Education.
These executive appointments signal a sea change in the state’s political landscape and send a clear message that Florida’s new Governor is serious about K-12 education, and even more serious about advancing school choice options in the state. His rhetoric on the campaign trail has translated into action, and charter school proponents in Florida should be very pleased with what they see over the next several years.
The recent Florida elections – and subsequent changes in leadership – are a great example of how much elections indeed matter.
About the Author: Larry Williams is the owner/principal at Larry Williams Consulting LLC. They offer comprehensive consulting and lobbying services in the legislative and executive branches of state government as well as state agencies. Larry Williams Consulting LLC has established a network of relationships within the legislative, executive, cabinet and government agency arena as well as extensive knowledge of the issues.

Charter School Capital logoSince the company’s inception in 2007, Charter School Capital has been committed to the success of charter schools. We provide growth capital and facilities financing to charter schools nationwide. Our depth of experience working with charter school leaders and our knowledge of how to address charter school financial and operational needs have allowed us to provide over $1.8 billion in support of 600 charter schools that have educated over 1,027,000 students across the country. For more information on how we can support your charter school, contact us. We’d love to work with you!

LEARN MORE

 

 

California Charter School LegislationCalifornia Legislative Update: The Governor’s 2019 Budget

California Legislative Update: Thursday, Governor Gavin Newsom released the first budget of his administration. At the beginning of his press conference, he admitted that his presentation would be longer than most other Governor’s performances—and he did not disappoint, holding court for around 50 minutes. His budget includes a large reserve and lays out what will be the administration’s objectives over the next three years. It also includes a brief discussion of the need for charter school transparency, which he mentioned in his presentation. Below is an excellent description of the budget’s details by Gerry Shelton of Capitol Advisors. Gerry is an expert on California’s education laws and one of the most knowledgeable people that I know.

We’ve done a review and analysis of Governor Gavin Newsom’s 2019-20 Budget Proposal sent to you earlier today. While the proposed budget essentially includes the same amount of Proposition 98 spending as estimated by the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) in November, there is some very good news in the budget for schools. Governor Newsom is providing significant assistance to school employers struggling with increases in the pension contribution rates. This assistance is outside of Proposition 98, so does not reduce expenditures for other priorities, including providing a 3.46% cost of living adjustment (COLA) for LCFF and other programs.

Highlights of 2019-20 Budget Proposal

  • $143 billion in General Fund (GF) revenues in 2019-20
  • $18.5 billion total state budget reserves ($15.3 billion in the Rainy Day Fund)$80.7 billion Prop 98 guarantee
  • $3 billion one-time (non-Prop 98) payment for school employer CalSTRS liabilities
  • 3.46% COLA applied to LCFF and categoricals
  • Over $1 billion increased investment in early childhood services (details below)
  • $576 million in Prop 98 GF ($186 million of which is one-time) for expanded special education services and support
  • $1.5 billion in additional released school facilities bond funds authorized under Prop 51

Governor Newsom’s Approach

At his press conference earlier today, Governor Newsom repeatedly recognized former Governor Jerry Brown’s efforts to eliminate budget deficits, create a new budget surplus, and build a Rainy Day Fund to mitigate future economic downturns. He provided a more collaborative tone than Brown, giving credit to individual legislators who championed various issues (such as early learning, health care, pension costs, housing, etc.) that he highlighted in his press conference. Overall, Newsom was focused on finding the right balance between continued fiscal responsibility and increased investments in programs.
With respect to fiscal responsibility, Newsom slightly lowered revenue projections for future years, prioritized paying off debts and decreasing liabilities, increased reserves and provided additional “Safety Net” funding. The Governor also highlighted several areas in which he hopes to see significant investments, including a $1 billion investment in a rebranded Earned Income Tax Credit (now the “Working Family Tax Credit”), subsidies to ensure middle-class Californians can afford health insurance, emergency and disaster preparedness and response, and of course, K-14 education.
Below we provide a brief summary and analysis of the budget proposal, including revenues, Proposition 98 spending, and policy and funding changes to K-12 programs.

Revenues, General Fund, Debts and Liabilities, and Budget Reserves

Due to continued growth in California’s economy, the Department of Finance (DOF) estimates approximately $143 billion in total 2019-20 GF revenues (including transfers pursuant to Prop 2), and has revised its estimates upward for 2017-18 by $3 billion and for 2018-19 by $2.7 billion. Before transfers, this amounts to an $8.1 billion increase in GF revenues over the three fiscal years, as compared to the 2018 Budget Act. In addition to allowing an increase in state GF spending, this significant influx of revenue generates additional 2019-20 Prop 2 transfers to the Rainy Day Fund budget reserve, and an equivalent amount to pay down state debts and liabilities.
Though this budget is based on the assumption of continued economic growth, it does note that economic uncertainties, and even the likelihood of a future economic downturn, have been increasing. As a result, Governor Newsom proposes a $700 million increase to the Safety Net Reserve created in the 2018 Budget Act, bringing the total in this reserve to $900 million.
The budget also includes a $1.77 billion mandatory transfer to the Prop 2 Rainy Day Fund, as well as $2.3 billion in the discretionary Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties. Combined, this brings total state GF budget reserves to $18.5 billion by the end of 2019-20. The budget also projects that the Prop 2 Rainy Day Fund alone will rise to $19.4 billion by 2022-23.
Under Prop 2, the $1.77 billion transfer to the Rainy Day Fund also triggers an equal $1.77 billion payment toward reducing state debts and liabilities; the budget proposes to meet this requirement by paying down the state’s retiree health and unfunded pension liabilities by that amount. In addition, Governor Newsom is proposing $4 billion to eliminate other state budgetary debts. Those actions include the full repayment of loans from special funds made during the Great Recession, and elimination of deferrals of state payroll and CalPERS payments also implemented during the recession.

Proposition 98 and LCFF

The DOF calculates the 2019-20 Proposition 98 guarantee to be $80.7 billion, an increase of $2.8 billion over the 2018-19 Prop 98 guarantee provided in the 2018 Budget Act. The DOF’s Prop 98 calculation is consistent with the estimate provided by the LAO in November 2018.
Due to continued declines in both average daily attendance (ADA) and GF revenue growth, the Prop 98 guarantees for both 2017-18 and 2018-19 are adjusted downward by $120 million and $526 million, respectively, in the Governor’s proposed budget. However, the Governor also proposes to hold K-14 education harmless with respect to those adjustments, by over-appropriating the guarantee in 2017-18 and using $686 million in Prop 98 settle-up funds to cover what could have been a reduction in funding for 2018-19.
Growth in Prop 98 allows the Governor to cover a 3.46% COLA, providing a $2 billion increase to district and county office of education LCFF allocations and a $187 million increase for certain categoricals. This growth also allows additional funding to expand special education services, further support the state’s new accountability system, begin to rebuild the state’s education data systems and support his early learning agenda.
Despite this growth in spending and the one-time funding to “buy-down” employer contribution rates in CalSTRS, there remains a growing interest among school advocates to focus on addressing California’s woefully insufficient per-pupil spending. Concerns about funding levels are particularly acute given the rapid increase in the costs of running schools, including everything from pension to health benefits to transportation to education technology expenses.
Discussions continue to focus on creating new funding goals, perhaps a new LCFF target that moves California closer to the per-pupil funding provided by the top 10% of states. Even after all of the increases in the Prop 98 guarantee since the Great Recession, “full implementation” of the LCFF, and continued growth in Prop 98, California remains in the bottom 10% of states in cost-adjusted per-pupil spending.

Immediate Reduction in CalSTRS Employer Contribution Rate

By proposing to invest $3 billion in one-time funds towards K-14 pension liabilities, the Governor hopes to free up billions of dollars in operational funds for school districts: $700 million over the next two years and approximately $6.9 billion over the next three decades.
For years, school districts and county offices have underscored the need to bolster the financial sustainability of not only the underfunded pension systems but local education agencies (LEAs) themselves, due to rising pension costs. Governor Newsom’s first budget validates and responds to those concerns.
In the short-term, a total of $700 million from the non-Proposition 98 side of the budget will be provided to buy down the employer contribution rates in 2019-20 and 2020-21, the final two years of the CalSTRS funding plan’s statutory rate increases. By offsetting these rate increases, the Governor will keep an equivalent amount of money in the classroom.
The Budget also proposes to invest $2.3 billion towards school employers’ long-term unfunded liability at CalSTRS. The prepayment is expected to reduce contribution rates by 0.5 percent (ongoing), or approximately $6.9 billion over the next three decades.
Elsewhere, the Budget proposes $5.9 billion in GF expenditures to address the state’s long-term pension liabilities—including a one-time $3 billion cash supplemental pension payment to CalPERS and $2.9 billion (using Proposition 2 funds) over the next four years to CalSTRS. These supplemental pension payments are intended to curb the growing costs of the state’s retirement programs and are estimated to result in $14.6 billion in savings over the long term.

Early Childhood Expansion

As promised on the campaign trail, Governor Newsom proposes to expand child care and early learning programs.
State Preschool – As a step towards his goal of universal preschool in California, the Governor proposes to increase access to the existing State Preschool Program for all low-income four-year-olds. Specifically, the Administration proposes to:

  • Provide $124.9 million non-Prop 98 GF in 2019-20 and additional investments in the next two state budgets to fund a total of 200,000 preschool slots by 2021-22.
  • Eliminate the existing requirement that families of four-year-olds provide proof of parent employment or enrollment in higher education to access full-day programs.
  • Shift $297.1 million Prop 98 GF for part-day State Preschool Programs at non-LEAs to non-Prop 98 GF, to allow non-LEA providers to draw down full-day, full-year reimbursement from a single funding source and to provide the flexibility to make better use of their contract funding.

Full-Day Kindergarten – The Governor proposes $750 million one-time non-Prop 98 GF for eligible school districts to build or retrofit facilities for full-day Kindergarten programs. See the Facilities section below for additional information.
Child Care – The Administration proposes $500 million one-time non-Prop 98 GF to expand subsidized child care facilities in the state and improve the education and professional development of child care providers. The Governor also proposes $247 million in one-time funds to the California State University to be used for child care infrastructure for students on college campuses.
CalWorks Stage 2 and 3 Child Care – The Governor proposes a net increase of $119.4 million (non-Prop 98) to reflect an increase in the number of CalWORKs child care cases. Total costs for Stage 2 and 3 are $597 million (Stage 2) and $482.2 million (Stage 3).
Child Savings Accounts (CSAs) – The Administration proposes $50 million one-time GF (non-Prop 98) to support pilot projects and partnerships with First 5 California, local First 5 Commissions, local government, and philanthropy to increase access to CSAs for incoming kindergartners.

School Facilities

School Facilities Bonds – In a major reversal from the prior administration, Governor Newsom proposes to issue $1.5 billion in Proposition 51 (2016) bonds next year and increase the Office of Public School Construction’s funding by $1.2 million to speed the processing of applications. This shift reflects—almost exactly—the requests by the educational advocacy community over the past two years. It also reflects a $906 million year-over-year increase in bond sales compared to the current fiscal year.
Facilities Funding to Implement Universal Full-Day Kindergarten – Citing the long-term academic benefit of children attending full-day, high-quality early primary education programs, the Governor proposes $750 million in one-time, non-Prop 98 GF to eligible school districts to construct new or retrofit existing facilities for full-day kindergarten programs or “to fund other activities that reduce barriers to providing full-day kindergarten.” This would build on last year’s $100 million grant program for full-day kindergarten facilities.
Potential Threat to District Developer Fees – In response to the housing crisis—both supply and affordability—the Governor has highlighted the need to address local developer fees, which he believes contribute substantially to the cost of development. It is not clear the Governor was referring to developer fees used to cover the costs of building new schools, incurred when home construction creates local demand for educational facilities. The Governor stated in his budget presentation that he will create a task force on the subject.

Accountability, Data, and the Statewide System of Support

County Offices of Education – COEs were given a major role to play in the overhaul of the state’s accountability system. To support the role COEs play in supporting their districts, the proposal provides an increase of $20.2 million Prop 98 GF dollars, consistent with the formula that was adopted in last year’s budget.
Improved and Expanded Data Systems– Governor Newsom put a high priority on improved educational data systems throughout his campaign. Reflecting that priority, the budget proposal provides $10 million to plan and begin development of a longitudinal data system that would integrate existing data systems to provide more comprehensive information on how students are progressing from cradle to career.
Promoting User-Friendly Accountability Systems – To promote community interaction with the electronic pieces of the accountability system, the Budget Proposal provides $350,000 one-time money to merge the Dashboard, the LCAP electronic template, and other reporting documents, including the School Accountability Report Card.

Special Education

The administration proposes an infusion of $576 million Proposition 98 GF dollars, of which $186 million is proposed as one-time. This is more than likely a response to annual calls from special education advocates that the system is administratively burdensome, underfunded, and too often ineffective at increasing academic performances of those it serves.
These new grants will be focused on LEAs with high concentrations of either special education students or unduplicated pupils. Allowable expenditures of these dollars appear to be fairly broad, and can range from special education supports outside of an existing individualized education program to preventive measures that might lessen future needs. The Administration is not proposing any major structural shifts in the way special education services are provided across the state.

Charter School Capital logoSince the company’s inception in 2007, Charter School Capital has been committed to the success of charter schools. We provide growth capital and facilities financing to charter schools nationwide. Our depth of experience working with charter school leaders and our knowledge of how to address charter school financial and operational needs have allowed us to provide over $1.8 billion in support of 600 charter schools that have educated over 1,027,000 students across the country. For more information on how we can support your charter school, contact us. We’d love to work with you!

LEARN MORE

 

 

public charter schoolsNew 2018 Survey Shows Support for Public Charter Schools is Strong

Note: This post from the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools was originally published on December 5, 2018, and can be found here. It is a summary of a new report “2018 Schooling in America Survey” by EdChoice. We thought sharing it was a great way to wrap up this year!
This annual survey—developed and reported by EdChoice and interviews conducted by their partner, Braun Research, Inc.—measures public opinion and awareness on a range of K–12 education topics, including parents’ schooling preferences, educational choice policies, the federal government’s role in education and more. They report response levels, differences (“margins”) and intensities for the country and a range of demographic groups. And this year, the survey includes an additional sample of current public school teachers to gauge whom they trust and how they feel about their profession, accountability, standardized testing and more.
We think it’s vital to keep tabs on the pulse of all things related to charter schools, including informational resources, and how to support charter school growth and the advancement of the charter school movement as a whole. We hope you find this—and any other article we curate—both interesting and valuable.

61 Percent of Americans Support Public Charter Schools in “2018 Schooling in America Survey” by EdChoice

*Today [*on December 5, 2018] EdChoice released the 2018 Schooling in America Survey, which measures public opinion, awareness and knowledge of K-12 education topics and reforms.
This year’s results confirm that support for charter schools is strong. While parent satisfaction among home school, private school, and district school students decreased, satisfaction increased among charter school parents. Additionally, 43 percent of parents surveyed indicated that they were “very satisfied” with charter schools, compared to just 26 percent of parents at district schools.
National Alliance for Public Charter Schools President and CEO Nina Rees said,
“The EdChoice survey findings put data behind what we hear from parents all the time: They love public charter schools and they want more children to have access to them. Seeing that six out of 10 Americans (61 percent) support public charter schools, while just 29 percent oppose them should convince lawmakers at every level of government to work together to ensure that students have access to high-quality, free public-school options.”
About 62 percent of parents surveyed would rate their local charter schools with an A or B grade, 10 percent higher than the rating parents would give to their local district schools. Furthermore, 13 percent of current and former school parents said they would prefer to send their child to a public charter school if it was an option. Among the surveyed teachers, 61% of teachers favored charter schools when provided with a basic description of a charter school. The report findings clearly indicate that parents want to have the opportunity to choose the best school for their child, and that the majority of public school teachers recognize charter schools put kids first.

Charter School Capital logoSince the company’s inception in 2007, Charter School Capital has been committed to the success of charter schools. We provide growth capital and facilities financing to charter schools nationwide. Our depth of experience working with charter school leaders and our knowledge of how to address charter school financial and operational needs have allowed us to provide over $1.8 billion in support of 600 charter schools that have educated over 1,027,000 students across the country. For more information on how we can support your charter school, contact us. We’d love to work with you!

LEARN MORE

nbsp;

charter school funding

Charter School Funding Reaching Schools in 38 States

Editor’s Note: This post on charter school funding originally ran here, on November 6, 2018. It was written by Christy Wolfe, a Senior Policy Advisor for the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools (NAPCS)and was published by The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. We are always inspired by the outstanding content disseminated by the NAPCS and are proud to share their valuable information.
We think it’s vital to keep tabs on the pulse of all things related to charter schools, including informational resources, and how to support charter school growth and the advancement of the charter school movement as a whole. We hope you find this—and any other article we curate—both interesting and valuable.

FY 2018 PROGRAM UPDATE: CHARTER SCHOOLS PROGRAM FUNDS REACHING SCHOOLS IN 38 STATES

In September, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) awarded grants in four of the six Charter Schools Programs (CSP): State Entities, Developers, Credit Enhancement, and Dissemination.
charter school funding map
Congress appropriated a total of $400 million for these awards for FY 2018, including funds for active awards previously awarded. Due to increased funding in recent years, more states than ever have access to start-up funding—31 states have State Entity grants and charter schools in an additional seven states were successful in receiving Developer grants. Many states are also seeing charter school growth through grants to Charter Management Organizations for the Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools, but awards were not made for that program during FY 2018.
This year, the program awards are a bit more complicated because, for the first time, two competitions were run under the new requirements in the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). Let’s take a closer look at where the money went:

State Entity Grants: Funds to Open Charter Schools and Build Statewide Sector Quality

The State Entity grant program plays a key role in not only awarding subgrants to schools, but also providing funding for technical assistance and strengthening the quality of authorizers in a state.

  • Eight states received awards: Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Idaho, Michigan, North Carolina, New York.
  • Five states were not successful: Alabama, D.C., Guam, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico.
  • Two Charter Support Organizations (CSOs) were funded: The new changes in ESSA unlocked CSP funding for non-state educational agency applicants, including CSOs. This year, two funded applicants from Arkansas and Idaho were CSOs.

At the close of this competition, 31 states (including D.C.) have a current CSP grant in their state (14 states with charter school laws are unfunded). Next year, nine states will likely have expired grants, which leaves a potential (although unlikely) pool of 24 applicants. If Guam and Puerto Rico are included, there will be 26 potential applicants.

Charter School Developer Grants: The Safety Net Program

This is the first year the competition has been run since the passage of ESSA. What is new is that there were two sub-competitions: one for replication/expansion grants, and the other for new charter school operators. There were 22 replication/expansion awards and 10 single site applicants. This year there were 32 funded applicants for a total of $30.2 million.
Ideally, this program would be obsolete. It is a safety for charter schools that wish to open in states that do not have a state entity program. If there was enough funding – and state capacity – for every state with a charter school law to have funding, new charter schools could simply apply to their state. Instead, after obtaining their charter contract, schools need to jump through the hoops required by federal grants to access funding. So, until every state has adequate funding for start-ups in their state, this program will continue to play a key role in advancing charter school growth.
BUT—you may have noticed that some developer grants went to states that also got a state-entity award (Idaho, Illinois, Michigan, North Carolina, and New York). The reason for this is, in part, because ED ran the State Entity and Developer competitions at the same time this year, so Developer applicants didn’t know if their state would receive a State Entity grant prior to applying. ED did not deem those applicants ineligible even when their state ended up receiving a State Entity grant. In addition, some developers were awarded a grant for replication and expansion because their state didn’t have a State Entity grant that permits them to make such awards, such as Ohio (NCLB-era grants don’t permit such awards unless a state has an approved waiver).
Of states that don’t have a CSP State Entity grant, seven have schools that received Developer grants: Alabama, Hawaii, Maine, Missouri, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Utah have charter schools that received Developer grants. Eight states with charter school laws have neither State Entity nor Developer grants (not including Guam and Puerto Rico).

Current Charter Schools Program Grants: State Entity and Developer Grants

Charter School Funding

Credit Enhancement: Reducing Facility Costs for Charter Schools

The Credit Enhancement program awards grants to organizations to “enhance” charter school credit so that they can access private-sector and other non-Federal capital in order to acquire, construct, and renovate facilities at a more reasonable cost. This year early $40 million was awarded to four entities.
This is a significant decrease from the $56.2 million in awards for 2017. More funds were awarded last year, in part, due to the large pool of high-quality applicants and the needs of the sector. This year, appropriators restricted ED’s flexibility to fund additional applicants, so they were limited to $40 million. Unlike the other CSP programs, Credit Enhancement funds are a one-time allocation so there aren’t any continuation awards—the amount appropriated is the amount that goes out the door.

Dissemination: Advancing Accountability and Facilities Access

Like the Developer program, this was the first competition year for the new National Dissemination program under ESSA. Previously, this program was known as the National Activities program and had a somewhat broader focus. Under ESSA, the program is focused on the dissemination and development of best practices. This year, 8 grants were awarded to organizations and charter school operators for a total of $16.2 million over the grant period. There were two “buckets” of funding to which applicants could apply: charter school authorizing and charter school facilities. For FY 2019, we anticipate that ED will propose new priorities for this program.
The National Alliance is pleased to be a recipient of a Dissemination grant to establish the National Charter Schools Facilities Center to develop and disseminate best practices and reduce the burden of obtaining and financing charter school facilities.

Grants to Charter Management Organizations for the Replication and Expansion of High- Quality Charter Schools: A Delayed Competition

ED did not run a competition for the CMO Replication and Expansion program because the agency is required to propose and take public comments on new program rules under ESSA. Comments for the new competition closed on August of 2018 and the competition will open later this year or in early 2019. Congress knew that ED would need extra time, so FY2018 funds for this program didn’t expire on September 30—ED has until March 2019 to make awards. ED’s “forecast” indicates that the competition for this program will be announced in late November 2018 and applications will be due around the start of the New Year. $120 million is available, and a little more than half of that amount will likely be available for new awards.

Charter School Capital logoAt Charter School Capital, our dedicated team of finance professionals works with you to determine funding and facilities options based on your school’s needs. If you are trying to meet operational expenses, expand, acquire or renovate your school building, add an athletic department, enhance school safety/security, or buy new technology, complete the online application below and we’ll contact you to set up a meeting.


GET STARTED

nbsp;

Charter School FacilitiesExpert Advice on Accessing and Funding Charter School Facilities

In this CHARTER EDtalk, we sat down with Mike Morely, Founder and Principal at American Charter Development to talk about charter school facilities. Mike shares his years of experience in working with charter schools and supporting charter school success. Learn some insights on how to know when you’re ready for a new facility, what your funding options are, some pitfalls to avoid, and how to set yourself up for success whether building from the ground up or renovating your charter school facility.

Janet Johnson (JJ): Good day. This is Janet Johnson with Charter School Capital at the National Charter School Convention in Austin, Texas, and we’re honored today to be talking with Mike Morely with is ACD, who is a developer of charter schools.
Mike Morely (MM): That’s correct, yes.
JJ: John Dahlberg from Charter School Capital, and we’re going to have a conversation about charter school facilities. Take it away gents.
Jon Dahlberg (JD): Thank you. Hey Mike, thanks for making the time.
MM: My pleasure.

Why Charter Schools?

JD: We’re doing a campaign, We Love Charter Schools, can you share what you love about charter schools in less than 20 minutes.
MM: That may be hard, but I can sure try. You may know, in fact I know you know that we’ve got a large family. I come from 13 kids and have nine children of my own and so we’re into kids, and so we’re into whatever is good for kids. Several years ago I was in the legislature in Utah and was introduced to charter schools, didn’t really know much about them. A wise senator told me, as I was looking at that in terms of policy decision, that if parents can vote with their feet we’re going have a lot less administrative and regulatory needs for schools.
I got into charter schools, started looking at them, seeing that they were doing more with less, and in many cases outperforming schools that were run by districts with seemingly unlimited funds. Not obviously that, it is something that is debatable, but certainly on less funds that are being provided for district schools and being successful. We fell in love with the choice in education. We started a couple charter schools, started doing facilities for charter schools, and they were accepted well and been successful. My children, at least those that were growing up during the years that we were in charters schools and been in them, and we’ve been really pleased with the outcome. We love philosophically the choice option and we also are committed to providing that opportunity for others.

How to Know When You’re Ready for a New Facility

JD: That’s great. Well, so let’s take that to our listeners here. How do you know when a school is ready for a new facility?
MM: Well, we have been in the business of trying to help schools get facilities from the beginning, and we initially started back in the early 2000s trying to figure out how to bring construction and development funds into the charter school. Because obviously, it’s not available through state funding, they get funded based on the kids that they have in the seats. It’s kind of cart before the horse because they don’t have any kids in the seats when they’re starting out. We have funded schools from inception or even before inception and help them get their charters, help them establish a board, help them move through the process and having a school, a brand new school, ready for them to start in the first year.
Not all schools are able to do that, and it may not even be wise for all schools to do that. It really has a lot to do with the demand in the area, what the curriculum is going to be. I mean we’ve helped schools from project-based, sports, STEM and STEAM. We’ve helped classical education schools, and there are schools that are focused on a particular niche that may not be as widely accepted as maybe some other schools.
We look at the experience of a board. We like to see a wide diversity of experience on a board. We like to see the somebody that has accounting experience, marketing experience, legal experience business experience, school experience, but usually, that’s not the problem. Usually, most of them have good education experience, but we like to see a really diversified board with experts in many areas so that they can pull from that. We like to see some experience in the charter school world now. In the beginning not many had it, but now there’s usually good experience to be had on a board from the charter world. If we’ve got that, and we are comfortable with their curriculum, and their focus, and their direction, we may take them on right out of the chute.
If not, we like to see them have a year or two in maybe a rental facility, and it’s hard sometimes to find. But they may have to start out a little small and rent some space from a church, or some other local facility that’s not going to be maybe the best situation for the first year or two, but to build a little bit of a track record to see if they’re going to be successful. It really is ultimately a business and ultimately it’s pretty risky. We’ve had a few of those, as you know, that hasn’t been quite as stellar and so we’re trying to make sure that we don’t repeat those that are not quite as well prepared as others.
JD: Well, I think to the point about the risk, I think that proof of concept starting in any space where you can get your school open and get the kids coming and prove your operation of success and your academic success, that momentum builds and builds and creates opportunity in the future.
MM: It does.

Avoiding Mistakes

JD: When you talk about the business aspect of it, right? The education is not hard. What are some of the avoidable mistakes that a school should be mindful of as they’re building and growing in to their next facility project?
MM: You know, to be honest, most of the mistakes that we have seen have been very preventable and most of them have been friction within the board, within the founding boards. When the schools have the most trouble it’s typically when the board itself gets heavily in two separate directions and end up in a collision course with each other, and end up destroying what they created or trying to change direction from what was originally envisioned. Because of that they lose half the parents, they pick sides, and it becomes a disaster. Cohesiveness on board is really key and to avoid that they need good board training, they need to recognize what a board does, how a board operates and the way that a board should function with regard to the administration, and the product that they’re proving. They’re really providing an education product, and they need to be on board with that and need to understand how a board effectively is to run, so that’s been our biggest problem.
There are mistakes. They get into a building that doesn’t meet their needs, they get into a building that they didn’t really clearly think out what their program was or growth options. They could then be unable to grow in that position in that particular building and then be tied into either a long-term lease, or they purchased the building, and it isn’t suitable for their current needs or expanding needs. It’s really important that you really sit down with somebody that understands and lay out a long-term vision of the school.
Have the board be on board with that decision as well. Make sure that everybody is kind of firing with the same cylinders and moving in the right direction. Recognizing that, “Hey, we want to be a 400-student school forever. We want to grow to a K-12, or we’re going to stay at K-6, or we want to grow to 600.” Come up with what your ultimate vision is because if you’re in a place that can’t be expanded and you’re tapped out at 200 kids and you got a long-term commitment and you want to grow, you’ve contract yourself. Those are some concerns that need some-
JD: I think the advice that you gave to our audience about making sure that your building and your charter are in sync is really, really sound advice here. The building is going to create the culture of your school. We do speak with leaders who are very intentional, and we also speak with leaders who have that aha moment that goes, “Oh, a stem school but I don’t have a science lab.” That’s a good …
MM: A sports school and don’t have a gym or a …
JD: Right.
MM: … or a performing arts school and no place to perform. Yeah, those are a lot of the issues.
JD: If you’ve got a board that’s cast division and everybody’s on board, what are some of the guidelines and guiding principles that schools should pay attention to when they’re thinking about that next facility?
MM: Well, if everybody’s locked stamp, then I think it’s important to maybe look at what’s the most economical and formal way to provide those facilities. It always seems to be the vision of every school to bond. That’s the goal. We just come out of a situation not too long ago where the school was ready to bond, they were so excited about it. They were saying, “Hey the cost of this building is too high, we can’t really bond because we’re going to be paying $106,000 a month for our facility.” I said, “Whoa, what are you paying for it now?” In a lease scenario, they were paying $65,000 and they were expanding with the bond. They were going to add on a gymnasium and some other classroom, but we’d already priced that out, and under the lease scenario they were going to be at $85,000 a month with total expansion taken into account. I said, “Why are you so anxious to bond and pay $20,000 more a month for a facility that you can control and have long-term security for $85,000.” That was the A-ha moment.
“But their interest rate is lower than your PACT rate.” Okay, let’s look at that, what that means. Interest rates are easy to talk, but they were adding on several million dollars in reserves, they had the cost of issuance, they had attorneys fees that were building up this huge amount that they would have to bond and pay interest on. Then it was advertised rather than just an interest only, so by the time you take all that into account the interest rate of the bond had very little to do with the cost of the facility on a monthly basis. Be careful that you’re not misled by some arbitrary interest rate or some lost leader kind of thing, and becoming so consumed with owning the facility.
Ownership is great and there are some times when it is a good decision, but ultimately if you own it you really own it. You’re responsible for all of the future expansions, you’re responsible for whatever taxes or insurance or other things, and you may have those kinds of things in the lease agreement as well, but you’re amortizing the facility and the ultimate goal is to own it, and if it’s a 30-year bond you own it just in time to completely refurbish it and start over. I’m not saying ownership is not a good thing, but it’s not the only way to do it.
JD: What’s in the middle? There’s the bond, which historically meets the need of about 12% of the charter schools since the exception. Then we talk about the lease. You’re in the market, are there other options besides the lease or beside a bond that you’re seeing schools take advantage of right now?
MM: Well, you know, there are organizations like the CSC that have purchased facilities and leveled the lease market and created an option for schools. That we have worked together on a couple of schools where you would’ve been able to purchase the school and put them in a better position than they would’ve been in a bond situation. It’s an interesting dynamic because right now the cost of constructions is going up.
JD: And so is the cost of money.
MM: And so is the cost of money, which is hard. You got the cost of construction, cost of land skyrocketing in this market which is … The fed just raised the rates again last week, and so we’ve got interest rates going up. And they’re indicating that there will probably a couple more bumps, in trying to cool inflation. In a market where cost and money are going up even though we are seeing increases in education funding that are a much lower rate, you may get a two or three percent bump each year, while we’re seeing double digit increases in funding cost and in construction cost. We are in a kind of a paralysis market right now, and it is hard. We’re struggling to try and balance those things and make sure that schools are getting affordable facilities for themselves. It’s a bit of a challenge.
JJ: It’s a dance.
MM: It is.
JD: It’s a dance.
MM: We’re in that dance, and you’re in that dance, and we’re all trying to …
JD: It’s a fun place to be.
MM: It is.
JD: It’s work, because if it was easy they would call it a PTO.
MM: A while back it was kind of easy you know because the cost were fair. Right now, we’ve talked about this multiple times, there is a point where the school can’t pay any more than maybe 20% max of their gross revenue. If the cost of facilities goes beyond that then it really does make it difficult, if not impossible, for them to go for owning. There are places in the country like that.
JJ: But you’re here to help.
MM: We’re here to do what we can.
JJ: Right, yeah. That’s right. That’s great. Well, we’re very grateful for your time today Mike, and John thank you for facilitating this discussion and I know you guys speak a lot on the road so I’m sure that our viewers will see you again soon. Thanks for your time.
MM: You’re welcome. My pleasure, thank you for inviting me.

public charter schoolsUnderstanding The Value And Importance Of Public Charter Schools
Todd Feinburg with Amy Wilkins

In this informative podcast, Todd Feinburg from Radio.com interviews Amy Wilkins, Sr. Vice President Advocacy National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.
They answer the question if charter schools are the only alternative for poor, minority and urban students to find alternatives to public schools, why aren’t there more of them, and why don’t Democrats fight for them? They go on to discuss the need for more charter schools as well as the benefits of charter schools in a failing public school system. Finally, they’ll dispel some common myths around charter schools and the charter school movement.
Please listen to the podcast or read the transcript below to learn more.
We think it’s vital to keep tabs on the pulse of all things related to charter schools, including informational resources, and how to support charter school growth and the advancement of the charter school movement as a whole. We hope you find this—and any other article we curate—both interesting and valuable.

TRANSCRIPT
Todd Feinburg:  WTIC. You know I love Charter Schools. I want everybody to get a great educate in America and we are far from that point. Joining us now to talk about it is Amy Wilkins, Senior Vice President at the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. How about that? Amy, welcome to WTIC. Thanks for talking to us.
Amy Wilkins: Hi, Todd, how are you this afternoon?
Feinburg: I’m psyched to have you here, so let’s talk Charter Schools and what’s going on. What are the trends going on in the choice world in providing alternatives, particularly in poor communities where it would be nice if people had Charter School options and more choices for their kids for schools. What’s your assessment of where we’re at right now?
Wilkins: Demand far outstrips supply, especially in communities of color. There are far more families who would choose Charter Schools for their kids than currently can, just because of limited space and really, the biggest obstacle we face, to opening more high quality Charter Schools for kids, whether they’re low income, urban, rural, wherever they are, is the facilities question, the school building question. You know, if you’re a district-operated school, the district just gives you a building, right? You get a school building. Charter Schools have to finance their own buildings and finding appropriate and adequate space is really among the things that are holding back growth for these much-needed schools.
Feinburg: And what is the … well, before I ask you that, I’m surprised by what you’re saying about the facility. I understand. I’ve seen Charter Schools that are in church basements and in what were industrial buildings, where they throw up some dividers and make classrooms and those aren’t ideal, but what you find out when you see those schools in action is that the facilities maybe are over-emphasized in our public schools. And what’s really important is having a great education in whatever kind of walls you can find.
RELATED ARTICLE: BEST PRACTICES FOR CHARTER SCHOOL FACILITIES FINANCING 
Wilkins: Oh, absolutely. You know, what matters most, what is the heart of any school are the teachers and the curriculum, I would agree with you 100% on that, Todd. But, I also think the kids whose families choose Charter Schools deserve libraries, labs, playing fields, all of those facilities as well. So, yes, better to go to a strip mall and get a really strong educate, than to go to a palace where you get a not so strong educate. In the best of all worlds, you go to a high-quality Charter School that has a lab, a library, a playing field, all of those facilities.
Feinburg: So, how do Charter Schools get the buildings?
Wilkins: Well, you know, too often they have to buy a building and then they face the same mortgage problems that all of us face when we want a mortgage and the problem, as you know, is Charter Schools, when they’re looking for a building, are often brand new and don’t have much of a track record to stand on, so it’s hard for them to get financing or they pay rent for a building. And what happens then, as you know, you have district-operated schools where their building is just free, it’s given to them by the district. Charter Schools, when they’re paying rent or financing a mortgage are having to take funds that would otherwise be directed to their instructional programs and pay building costs.
Feinburg: Have Charter Schools proven to be worth the investment? We hear all this conflicting information about whether they’re actually a successful alternative or not.
Wilkins: I think like anything, we have some really great Charter Schools and we have some Charter Schools that I think should be closed. But, in general, the general trend suggests particularly for urban kids and for kids of color, Charter Schools are their very best bet. We have solid evidence that kids, those kids in particular, gain months of learning over their peers in district-operated schools. So, the trend seems to be telling us, yes, this is really important from a data point of view, from a student achievement point of view, they are absolutely the right answer. From a parenting point of view, they are the right answer as well. I mean, parents deserve a choice. Not every school fits every child, you know? You may want a different type of curriculum for your child. Your child may have special needs that the district schools are unable to meet. So, both from an academic point of view and from the point of view of parents having some control over the kind of educate their kids get, Charter Schools are absolutely a vital part of kind of a healthy public education ecosystem.
Feinburg: We’re talking to Amy Wilkins on Charter Schools. I love talking about Charter Schools because my belief is, particularly in urban areas, that there is a crisis going on, and I don’t feel, Amy, as a country that we can afford to have millions of kids, rich, poor, minority, white, whatever … we can’t afford to have millions of kids not getting a great education.
Wilkins: Absolutely not. I mean, at bottom, it’s sort of inhumane and, you know, no adult should look at a child who’s not getting an education and feel good about it. But, I mean, there are certainly strong implications for our future economy, including who’s going to pay your Social Security and mine, Todd. There are big implications for national security. Educating our kids is the foundation of our future and Charter Schools are a proven sort of winner in that for our kids and so, to me, it’s a no-brainer, that we just have to do it. We have to do well and we have to do more of it.
Feinburg: Do you see a way to make this argument, though, for cities? So, in Connecticut, we have so many cities and they’re not particularly large, but they are part of a pattern of a city being a place where minority kids, poor kids are essentially stored and not given an opportunity to get out. It just strikes me, as you say, as some kind of human rights violation, if you want to argue from the humanity point of view, that the system is rigged to be mediocre, at best and oftentimes worse and there’s no economic opportunity. There’s really not a way out and that drives a lot of minority kids into gangs and bad behavior that puts a lot of boys into prison. And how does that pattern get broken through education, because that’s the only tool I think we have available?
Wilkins: No, you’re absolutely right. Education is the surest way out of poverty and the strongest weapon, I think, we have against racism. It really is up to … I hate to say this, it’s up to communities. You know, they have to stand up on behalf of their kids and demand something better, demand something different. Now, you could also … I don’t know, this is like being really kind of out there … you know, you saw the kids at Parkland saying, “We’re not happy with the kind of safety of our schools and we’re afraid of guns in our schools.” I think, you know, the kids know when they’re being short-changed. We really sort of have to start talking to the kids about how they feel about the schools they’re going to and, unfortunately, they’re not old enough to vote, but I think conversations … if elected officials had conversations with kids at some of these schools, some of the kids I talk to and hear what goes on in their schools, I think that would spur some action that we’ve yet to see.
Feinburg: Have you ever seen that kind of thing going on where there are public displays of rebellion or unrest over the idea that oppression, the educational oppression of minority students?
Wilkins: Well, I don’t know if I would call it unrest. I have seen groups of students in various parts of the country … I know it’s happened in Wisconsin. I know it’s happened in California, who do lobby days and go to their state legislatures to lobby and testify about the conditions in their schools. One could certainly see the same things happening at School Board meetings and City Council meetings in Connecticut, if there were folks willing to help these kids begin to organize.
Feinburg: Yeah, but there has to be a spark of something bigger because the rigged education system, the partnership between the Democratic party and the Education Unions, there is this fixed system that says this is the only way education can happen, and we live in times where we need educational agility, where policy can change quickly, where schools can adapt over the very short term to the needs of the kids. How do we get from here to there if there’s no model if there’s nothing for people to look at and say, “We want that.”
Wilkins: Well, there are models. I mean, that’s the thing. In Connecticut, for example, you have the Amistad Charter Schools which are among the best in the country and people should really go see them. They have done a wonderful job with those schools. So there are things … part of this … part of the challenge here is people don’t … and I’ve been doing education for years, and years, and years. What’s so sad is that people really don’t see schools beyond the schools that they attended and the schools their children have attended and they don’t know that something else is out there, that something else can be better and you know, part of the responsibility of groups like mine, in doing interviews like this one, is to let people know there are better alternatives and to say that it’s easy to create one, it’s easy to sustain one, I would be lying. But you know, there are better things, but like most better things, they require work and commitment.
Feinburg: Amy Wilkins is the Senior Vice President at the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. So, what exactly do you folks do?
Wilkins: We represent in Washington, primarily. The Charter Schools out there in America, we lobby Congress to ensure that there’s funding to start more and better Charter Schools.
Feinburg: So, the Federal dollars are a critical part?
Wilkins: The Federal dollars really are start-up dollars. Once you’ve started, then you really are reliant on state and local funding, but the Federal government does supply … it’s a program called the Charter Schools Program and it supplies seed money for new Charter Schools to get started.
Feinburg: What are the … can you shoot down the basic arguments against Charter Schools, the kind of superficial ones that have appeal to people who aren’t very involved, and they hear about how, for example, that Charter Schools are taking dollars away from the public schools, it’s an attempt to destroy the public schools.
Wilkins: Well, that just doesn’t make any sense because Charter Schools are public schools. Charter Schools are part of the public school system, so I don’t understand how they could take money away from a system that they’re already a part of. It’s just a nonsensical argument that the Teacher’s Unions have sort of … it’s a catchy phrase, but it means nothing.
Feinburg: How about Charter Schools just have to … they get to pick whatever kids they want. They don’t have to worry about the special ed kids?
Wilkins: That’s not … in fact, Charter Schools currently are serving a slightly higher percentage of special needs kids than our traditional public schools, so that’s just not true. Charter Schools serve as many and, in some cases, a few more special needs kids than do traditional public schools.
Feinburg: I forget what else the arguments are. Is there one more you can give us?
Wilkins: Yeah, that they’re a plot to tear down the traditional public school system. At this point, Charter Schools make up less than 5% of all schools in the country.
Feinburg: So it’s a failing plot?
Wilkins: Yeah, we’re doing a pretty bad job. I mean, if the traditional public schools, which are educating 95% of the children are so scared of something that only represents 5%, there’s something deeper going on there, you know? And I think that that’s one of the things we really have to understand about Charter Schools. The demand for Charter Schools, to me, reads like an indictment of the traditional public school system. If everything were hunky-dory in traditional public schools, there wouldn’t be this enormous demand for Charter Schools. And so when the traditional public schools point to Charter Schools and say, “Oh, they’re a problem, they’re a problem, they’re a problem,” they really should turn and look more in the mirror to say, “Why are these schools even existing? Why do people demand them?” They demand them because public schools have fallen so far short for so many kids.
Feinburg: Amy Wilkins, National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. What’s the website?
Wilkins: It’s www … I have to get some help here, www.publiccharters.org.
Feinburg: What is it?
Wilkins: It’s publiccharters.org.
Feinburg: Publiccharters.org. Amy, thank you so much. Great to talk with you.
Wilkins: Thank you so much. It’s great to talk to you. Have a good afternoon. Bye-bye!
Feinburg: Bye-bye. I hit her with a tough surprise question at the end.

The 5 Essential Steps to Charter School Facilities Planning

Charter school facilities planning can be daunting. If you think that finding the perfect facility for your charter school seems like a huge, complicated undertaking, you’re in good company. This handy, information-packed guide, will help as you move towards realizing your facility expansion or relocation goals.
In it, we cover these five essential charter school facility planning steps—in detail:

  1. Charter School Facilities Planning Plan – Begin planning at least one year in advance
  2. Fund – Understand your options to make savvy decisions
  3. Acquire – You know what you can afford and how you’ll pay for it … now go get it
  4. Design – Partner with experts to design your new space
  5. Execute – Let the construction begin and get ready to move in
DOWNLOAD NOW

 

Top 5 Financial Mistakes Charter Schools Make and How to Avoid ThemHow To Avoid The Top Financial Mistakes Charter Schools Make

If you missed this information-packed webinar on how to avoid the top mistakes charter schools make, don’t despair! We’ve got the recording for you to watch at your convenience. In this webinar, we were joined by some phenomenal charter school leaders from Desert Star Academy, SALTech, and Wayne Preparatory – and they generously and bravely shared the mistakes they’ve made as charter leaders, and of course, how they solved those problems for the future.
Watch the video recording to understand the five mistakes and walk away armed with the tools you’ll need to avoid them.
Our esteemed panelists:
Tricia Blum Head of Business Consulting, Charter School Capital
 
 
Margie Montgomery Founder, Desert Star Academy
 
 
Sharon Thompson, Chairman of the Board, Wayne Academy
 
 
Michael LaRoche Founder/Executive Director, SALTech

 
 

Watch the video of the live presentation, here.

And, to download a printable PDF datasheet, click here.

charter school financingThe Charter Leader’s Definitive Guide to Budgeting Best Practices
Over the past decade, we’ve reviewed thousands of charter school budgets and helped guide countless schools through their charter school financing processes. Year after year, we see many charter schools make the same mistakes when budgeting for the academic year. To help you achieve your goals, we’ve put together this informative and thorough guide to share best practices and call out common pitfalls to avoid.
It covers:
• Planning for long-term financial health
• Implementing best practices for achieving buy-in and setting internal controls
• Understanding key financial metrics to watch
• Utilizing tips on cashflow planning and more!
Download it now and get the tools to be more strategic about your budgeting practices!
GET THE RESOURCE