Does charter school funding leave taxpayers holding the bag?

CTR

September 12th, 2012
10:10 am

@sneak peak… Along with a few others, to keep insisting that Charter Starter reveal her identity is just subterfuge and unfair. Her identity, while maybe interesting, does not detract from the validity of her points. Either they stand on their own or don’t. Personally, she gives a voice to the parents of children who attend these schools and if not for her, we might be drowned out.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
10:14 am

@ Sneak Peek. I am dogmatic because I believe in this. You’re pretty dogmatic yourself. I don’t care who you are and care even less that you want to know who I am. It’s irrelevant, because everyone out here, particularly those choosing to be anonymous (I.e. you and me) are on a level playing field with our opinions and the facts we lay on the table.

As I said, I don’t need to spin or twist. People can read for themselves an make their own determination about the veracity of what you an I both say. I have answered questions posed about this amendment head on. Can’t say the same for those opposing, but I guess if you have no answer or a weak one, it’s better to say nothing. That’ what GSBA and GSSA told all f you, isn’t it? Don’t let them get you down in the details? Your tactic is to generalize an depend on those not carin enough to check to see if it’s true (and not jut “mostly true.). My tactic is to get down to where the root of the issues are ising public verifiable data and lay it out there for the public to see and make a choice based on their values and priorities. I guess we will see in Nov. whose plan worked best.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
10:15 am

Pardon typo. Sticky d key. And, not an.

sneak peek into education

September 12th, 2012
10:49 am

At Charter and CTR (the same person?)- I do think that when you clearly have something to gain by the passing of this amendment, that it is important that you reveal who you are. Others can then judge whether you are doing this out of true altruism or, as I believe, you have something to gain from a business perspective. You say you are an educator but yet you post very lengthy replies during the school days.

The only dog I have in this fight is that I hate to see public education being ripped apart on a series of lies by the big corporations who wish to privatize education not because they want to truly get into the business of education but they see the opportunity to make MONEY off the backs of our children. As I have said before, if charter schools were truly the magic bullet,I would be all for them. However, the results are in and they do not provide better educational opportunities that their traditional counterparts. Having this amendment pass in November will only lead to more corruption within the system-you need only look on educational websites, blogs, news reports etc… to see the countless examples of corruption at both the legislative level (pockets being lined for political favors) and the business model side (shady dealings by having countless family members on the payroll to name but one example). See the following link for one (of many) examples

http://truth-out.org/news/item/11424-high-performing-charter-schools-beating-the-odds-or-beating-the-test?

I do not believe we need another layer of bureaucracy to oversee charter school approval. We have a system in place that is more than adequate. By introducing this additional layer will only lead to more corruption and pocket lining at our state level-another “good ol boy” network is not needed. I also vehemently oppose the idea of giving more state tax dollars to charter schools at a time when our state coffers are ringing hollow and schools are being underfunded by millions. If there was any extra money there, I would still oppose this amendment so that the money could be used to fund the Medicare expansion for those in our population that are without insurance-shame on you Gov. Deal.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
10:58 am

Last post was awful with typos – so sorry.

Now, let’s get to what the opponents keep trying to sell to the public. Their biggest (and best) argument is that the state charter schools get more in state funding. That is absolutely true in most case.

But they only ask that 1 question. They don’t ask these 2 (which would complete the picture for the public):

1. Do DISTRICTS earn more LOCAL funds than state charters? The answer to that is yes. Districts, on average earn $3,685.74 per pupil. How much do state charters earn in local funds? $0.

2. When combining local and state revenue sources, how do districts versus state charter schools compare? And as the Governor’s Office showed (by laying out the numbers), the state charters earn 62% of what the districts earn.

The opponents will say… “State charters aren’t eligible for local funds.” True. And districts are not eligible for the state charter school supplement. Districts in higher tax base areas aren’t eligible for equalization that low property wealth districts receive.

I really hope those reading on this blog think about what you are being told – which is often untrue. I also hope you think about what you are NOT being told by the opposing side. Ask tough questions. Dig deeply. Reason it out. I think you will find the opponents of this amendment have shallow reasons for being against this amendment and all tie to power and/or money. For them, it’s never been about the kids and ensuring every child has the best education our state can offer them.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
11:00 am

@ Sneak Peak, no, I am only CharterStarter, Too. Maureen can verify that.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
11:02 am

@ Sneak Peak.

Wow, you are terribly narrow minding in your thinking. You say, “I do think that when you clearly have something to gain by the passing of this amendment, that it is important that you reveal who you are. Others can then judge whether you are doing this out of true altruism or, as I believe, you have something to gain from a business perspective. You say you are an educator but yet you post very lengthy replies during the school days.”

First of all, how does anyone know that YOU don’t have some other reason for being on here vehemently opposing the amendment. You are anonymous. Silly logic.

Secondly, I taught in K-12 education for many years. I never said I was STILL teaching in K-12. Sheesh.

CTR

September 12th, 2012
11:12 am

Yes I have something to gain… My child can continue to go to his school, that will otherwise close if this amendment fails. However, just because I stand to gain, along with every other child that attends his school, doesn’t mean this amendment isn’t altruistic, or what’s best. There is NO SILVER BULLET. Are you suggesting the current system of public schools is a magic bullet? Those don’t exist. My child also stands to lose if he has to return to his old traditional public school. And again, it doesn’t affect the status quo, other than make it look like the lesser alternative. Please, keep what you have, just don’t take what we have away.

Prof

September 12th, 2012
11:55 am

@ Charter Starter, Too. I’ve been reading your posts on these blogs for some time now. I note that you’ve now moved to the logical fallacy of Argumentum Ad Hominem (attack the man not the argument). This is in addition to Shifting the Grounds of the Argument where you fail to address the questions of critics such as John Konop, Sneak Peek, Mary Elizabeth, etc., relating to state charters receiving public tax funds, but instead ask your own off-topic ones about public school funding and the taxpayers. When your critics refuse to answer these off-the-topic questions, you pour scorn on them. Note for example the very last comments of yours here to Mary Elizabeth, when your question she won’t answer relates to public alternative schools. None of this persuades me to vote for the charter school amendment!

CharterStarter, Too, on this blog-thread:
September 10th, 5:44 pm :”@ Konop – Let me try this again, as you are apparently struggling with direct questions that counter your claims.”

…Sept. 10, 6:38 pm. @ John Konop. “You and others like you (i.e, Mary Elizabeth) have no argument that can be substantiated. Your argument does not hold water when you scratch the surface. I didn’t even have to scratch.”

…11:04 pm. @ John Konop.” It is a complete waste of time to debate with someone who can’t hold up their end of the argument and has yet to answer a SINGLE question I’ve posed.”

Sept. 11, 8:09 am: “Look at the many, many times I asked Mary Elizabeth and John Konop DIRECT questions that they refused to answer…over…and over…and over…”

September 12th, 9:05 am: “@ Middle Grades Math Teacher – Let me be very clear, as you have now entered the realm of absurdity with your interpretation of my comments about central office expenditures.”

… 10:14 am. @ Sneak Peek… “Your tactic is to generalize and depend on those not carin enough to check to see if it’s true (and not just “mostly true.). My tactic is to get down to where the root of the issues are ising [?] public verifiable data and lay it out there for the public to see and make a choice based on their values and priorities.”

On the earlier blog-thread, “Another Skirmish in charter school war of words.”
September 5th, 7:05 am. “@ Mary Elizabeth – With all due respect, if you believe the districts have no motivation other than the “good of the whole”, you are very naive. I believe that comes in large part from you being somewhat protected in the classroom and at the school level from central office politics.”

On the earlier blog-thread, “Use of Words Escalates in charter school amendment fray”:
Aug. 21, “@ ME: see you’ve moved to insults yourself, Ms. Southern Belle. Is that because you can’t respond to the fact that districts use for-profit MANAGEMENT companies (with their whole focus being to manage alternative schools)?”

John Konop

September 12th, 2012
12:13 pm

Charter,

I would happy to do a public debate on this issue with you and or your supporters.

Prof

September 12th, 2012
12:17 pm

Also, Charter School, Too, there is this subterfuge.

You stated on September 10th, 6:38 pm: “@ John Konop – I have a private agenda? That’s very, very funny. I’m an educator and a mom, John.” Present tense, designed to lead all who read this to think that you still are an educator. But then today you post to Sneak Peek at 11:02 am: “I taught in K-12 education for many years. I never said I was STILL teaching in K-12. Sheesh.”

Sheesh, yourself.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
12:32 pm

@ Prof – Just stating the obvious. 1) Their arguments ARE illogical (and I’ve shown how) and thus, they do not hold water (if A=B, and B=C, then A=C.) 2) They do not answer direct questions that are RELEVANT to the argument over and over and over.

I have answered directly and backed up my answers. My points about district spending are VERY on point because the opposing side makes 2 arguments:

1. “Your tax dollars: Allows the state to siphon money from Georgia’s public schools.”
2. “Bureaucrats choose, you lose: More budget cuts to public schools, larger classes, shortened school years, teacher furloughs and layoffs.”

Both are flat lies. I have SHOWED you the law that prohibits money from being taken from Georgia’s traditional public schools. Let’s keep in mind that charters are public schools, too.

They are trying to make the claim that charters are the reasons for furloughs, layoffs and shorter school years. To begin with, these are district decisions. They choose these places to cut – they are not the only places to cut. I have SHOWED you that DISTRICT WASTE has accounted for their financial woes. Furthermore, I have SHOWED you how, despite the lies told to the teachers in Cherokee County about the charter school causing furloughs in the upcoming year, not one dime of district local funds left and they STILL furloughed their staff. Second, as shown in HB 797, charters cannot reduce local funds, so what they are saying couldn’t happen anyway.

If you all who oppose this amendment are going to talk finances and funding, then we’re going to talk finances and funding. But we’re not going to do it by the rules YOU set, which include information that is inaccurate, illogical reasoning (yes, illogical), and omitted data that the public has a right to know. We are going to lay it ALL out on the table and let the public see the macro and the micro of both sides. They can then make their own decisions.

Moreover, I really don’t care if you vote no. You are entitled to your vote. I guess we’ll just cancel each others’ votes out then. I’m not on here to change YOUR mind, as that’s not likely. A few people in the “no” corner may swap (and vice versa), but those for/against are pretty steadfast. However, there are people who read this blog who are on the fence and are thinking about where they stand. It is with these people that it is critical to share comprehensive, balanced, and accurate information, as they are seeking to know. As I said, you can try your approach with scare tactics of using emotive words (”dismantle public education”, “desegregate”, “siphon money”, etc.) and your generalizations. And I will keep on with laying out the facts and giving readers a place to go and check those facts. I will keep on blowing holes in your generalizations and pointing out the fallacy in your logic. We’ll see in November.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
12:36 pm

@ John Konop – You should contact who ever is heading up the pro amendment campaign and request one. Bet they’d be delighted to participate in a debate.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
12:40 pm

@ Prof – Lord have mercy. You live in a box – there is evidently only one possibility for an educatorIs it just POSSIBLE that I don’t teach children? There are all sorts of possibilities…

I could teach homeschool kids.
I could teach preschool kids.
I could teach ESOL to adults in an evening program.
I could teach university students.
I could be a stay at home mom that works with her kids, tutors as a volunteer at the school and still considers herself an educator.
The list goes on.

I am an educator and have been for a very long time. I love teaching, the art of teaching, and adore children.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
12:42 pm

Let me restate my first paragraph, as I cut and pasted wrong and didn’t finish my thought.

@ Prof – Lord have mercy. You live in a box – there is evidently only one possibility for an educator, and that that is K-12 students working from 8-3. Is it just POSSIBLE that I don’t teach children or teach on a different schedule? There are all sorts of possibilities…

Prof

September 12th, 2012
12:55 pm

@ Charter, Etc.

The questions that your critics are raising don’t really deal with the value of charter schools as opposed to public schools–which seems to be all that you discuss– but rather the issue of public tax funds being used by those charter schools without proper accountability…. without, as John Konop says above, taxpayer protection through fiscal controls.

That’s very different from what you state above are their two arguments: “1. Your tax dollars: Allows the state to siphon money from Georgia’s public schools. 2. Bureaucrats choose, you lose: More budget cuts to public schools, larger classes, shortened school years, teacher furloughs and layoffs.”

You’re arguing about two different things!

And of course you don’t care about my own individual vote…but I can’t imagine that you’re putting all this time and energy into blogging on behalf of the amendment if you aren’t trying to influence votes. These are holes in your logic that I think all voters should consider.

Prof

September 12th, 2012
12:58 pm

@ Charter, etc. But you’re the one who posted to Sneak Peek, ” I never said I was STILL teaching in K-12.”

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
1:14 pm

@ Prof – Yes, you are right, I did.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
1:22 pm

@ Prof – I AM trying to influence votes. I said that clearly I wanted those undecided voters to see the full picture. I just happen to believe when you lay it all out there, that they will see the truth and the value of voting yes. That may not happen, but I hope it will.

Secondly,

1. Konop is arguing against Cherokee’s management company getting funds without accountability.
a. I showed you a whole list of ways charters are accountable for tax dollars.
b. He is bringing up “start up funding” that is put out there erroneously, so I clarified.
c. I showed you that districts are NOT accountable for their lack of prudence in spending – and there are even less checks and balances in place for this than the charters have. For him to cast a stone (which I showed was not accurate) at the charters’ lack of accountability and to ignore the mess we have with district spending and massive waste is wrong. To further that point, I showed you where that waste is and how it ties in to their ridiculous campaign arguments listed above.

You don’t want these things to all be related – but they are. I am QUITE certain the districts would prefer for me not to point them out, but it’s their data and their decision making.

Dr. Monica Henson

September 12th, 2012
1:25 pm

Prof posted his concern about “the issue of public tax funds being used by those charter schools without proper accountability…. without, as John Konop says above, taxpayer protection through fiscal controls.”

I am the executive director of a state-chartered special school (which is the charter school way of saying superintendent of a public school district). My School Operations Manager and I are working on our submission to the GaDOE of a detailed budget update for our Implementation Grant for their approval. We are preparing to submit our revised General Operating Budget to our Board of Directors in a couple of weeks. All of our finance and accounting procedures must follow the identical systems and checks & balances as any other public school district. Between the State BOE and our school BOD, along with GaDOE, I’d say that the taxpayers are enjoying MORE fiscal controls of our school’s spending than any traditional public school district in the state–and we’re receiving 38% less per student than they are, yet we are still able to operate in the black with a lean central office because of our partnership with one of those evil for-profit education service providers, the bulk of whose income is derived for traditional public school districts.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
1:27 pm

And by the way – anyone on this blog arguing for or against is trying to influence votes. Why else would you be on here?

Dr. Monica Henson

September 12th, 2012
1:34 pm

“derived FROM.”

Prof

September 12th, 2012
1:50 pm

@ Dr. Henson. It is reassuring to know that your state-chartered special school is as fiscally transparent as you state. But I still think that John Konop is arguing a larger point than whether or not some charter schools use taxpayer funds in responsible ways.

His concerns relate to the “lack of fiscal controls in the charter school amendment” itself. And I have to say that I share his concerns here. A well-drafted law should account for every possible situation that is relevant to the law’s subject. He is pointing out some possible situations that could arise with less scrupulous state charter school operators than you are, especially important since public tax monies are involved.

3schoolkids

September 12th, 2012
2:03 pm

Are you referring to the same fiscal controls and transparency that led to the expansion and extra funding voted on by the then existing State Charter Commission for our flagship virtual academy while they were in non-compliance with special needs funding and program deficiencies?
The same academy that sent MANY emails to parents for assistance lobbying for the extra funding and expansion so they could provide expanded curriculum like Art, Music and Foreign Language, but did not send ONE email to parents indicating they might really need the money to help bring their academy into compliance? Even the special needs parents whose children might be impacted? Somehow I must have missed that transparency.

WHO will be left holding the bag if they cannot correct their non-compliance by October 31st and they lose their charter for next year? It will be taxpayers, but even more so the students they are supposed to be serving.

John Konop

September 12th, 2012
2:05 pm

Prof,

I agree!

Charter,

….@ John Konop – You should contact who ever is heading up the pro amendment campaign and request one. Bet they’d be delighted to participate in a debate….

I have no idea but Maureen could make this happen!

CTR

September 12th, 2012
2:09 pm

@Prof. I think what Dr Henson points out is that b/c charter schools are public, they are subject to the same measures of accountability as traditional public schools, so having language in the amendment which reflects that would be redundant right?

Prof

September 12th, 2012
2:13 pm

@ Charter etc. 1:22 pm:” For [John Konop] to cast a stone (which I showed was not accurate) at the charters’ lack of accountability and to ignore the mess we have with district spending and massive waste is wrong.”

This mess with district spending may be due to a lack of accountability in the laws about the ways that school districts fund their public education. But don’t you see? John Konop is trying to prevent this from happening with state charter schools which are now to be regulated with this amendment. I think he’s said elsewhere that he actually supports the idea of charter schools. I am certainly no businessman. But he sounds quite prudent to ask that this law have safeguards for the taxpayers supplying money to these charter schools to assure that the profit-making charter school doesn’t wind up holding the profit while the taxpayers are left holding the bag.

3schoolkids

September 12th, 2012
2:13 pm

CS2 your posts are informative and I appreciate that as a voter. However, you too ignore questions you don’t want to answer, or don’t have a fact to counter with. Do you agree that Corporal Punishment has no place in any school, even charters? Pataula Charter Academy has such a policy in place-do you agree with it?

John Konop

September 12th, 2012
2:24 pm

Prof,

You are right again. That is why a real debate should be a panel of at least three people one for charter with limited rules, myself for controls that protect tax payers and 1 person against charters. That would truly represent all three sides.

Prof

September 12th, 2012
2:25 pm

@ 3schoolkids, 2:03 pm. I think you mean, LACK of fiscal controls and transparency, don’t you? You seem to prove John Konop’s point!

@CTR. But if the traditional schools lack sufficient measures of accountability—as Charter Etc. has abundantly showed us– then such language of accountability is not at all redundant. (And maybe next amend the laws regarding traditional districts and their funding of public education so they will be more accountable!)

3schoolkids

September 12th, 2012
2:28 pm

@Prof: Yes, I was being sarcastic.

Hypothetical Situation: Charter Referendum passes and we are suddenly looking at having to fund the $430 million dollar experiment which in theory is not supposed to impact local schools. Where will the legislature get the funds without ticking off their constituency?

Video Lottery. Do you think it was coincidence that question ended up on the Republican Primary Ballot?

CTR

September 12th, 2012
2:40 pm

@Prof. So are we saying let’s vote down the charter amendment because the state lacks sufficient laws to hold schools accountable for spending?

Prof

September 12th, 2012
2:56 pm

@ CTR. Well, I’m saying to vote it down because it’s a poorly drafted law doesn’t take into consideration all the possible eventualities. As John Konop is saying here, it fails protect tax payers when tax monies are used to fund state special charter schools. As John Barge said, it will create an expensive level of state bureaucracy that’s unnecessary. I don’t think either one is attacking the amendment because they disapprove of charter schools, but rather because of the hasty, sloppy, ill-considered way in which the amendment was created.

Maybe the solution is simply to redraft a better amendment relating to the creation of charter schools. At least all this controversy has made folks aware of possible problems that it will need to address.

3schoolkids

September 12th, 2012
3:01 pm

The “startup fund” confusion stems from the supplement money Mr. Deal extended to the state special charters last year and this year as well. The money is shown on the qbe reports as the state special charter supplement line item. The confusion comes from the appearance of a “bucket of money” the school can use where they need it. Charter Starter, Too has pointed out some of this money is used to supplement programs that were never funded by the state (like transportation) and the money is budged and reported just like it would be for a public school.

Some of the confusion would be cleared up if the revenue and expenditure reports for the State Special Charters were available as they are for the local school districts. But there is no data available yet on the DOE website, even for schools that have been open for more than one year.

Will this data be available prior to voting day?

Ron F.

September 12th, 2012
3:22 pm

After reading the comments made in this thread, I still can’t vote for the amendment in November, and here’s why:
While I believe many in the charter schools movement have the best of intentions, sadly I think their movement has been hijacked by legislators whose intentions are anything but altruistic. Politics has taken over, and in the end both traditional public and charter schools will suffer.

Our legislature has openly admitted to NEVER fully funding public schools with the formula that very body created in the 1980’s. At a time when state revenues are down and showing little growth, the legislature has to continue cutting funding. For the past ten years, austerity cuts have been imposed to the point that now the state only provides 38% of education funding. That same body now wishes us to allow them to appoint a commission charged with approving charter schools at the state level. The legislature is breaking its own laws in current school funding, so why should we trust that they’ll honor anything else they put into law? They seem to be able to pick and choose which laws they follow. School systems should be suing the legislature.

They seem to want school systems to suffer and fail, and they will continue to reduce state funding until we are all bankrupt and begging. Recent actions by the Cherokee county delegation in the state house clearly proves that they are more than willing to manipulate in any way they can to help create chaos in what is currently a successful system while other systems like Dekalb and APS are allowed to continue to crumble. They want school systems to fail, to look bad, to fall apart. They delight in the misery of parents in failing systems because that misery makes them more willing to accept the state’s “solution”; and that solution is clearly privatization. Louisiana offers a glimpse at what our own legislature is aiming for: public tax dollars doled out in vouchers. While some support such an idea, privatization has been proven in the long run to be a bigger drain on taxpayer dollars. It just succeeds in removing citizen voters from decision-making roles.

I truly think charter schools, magnet schools, and virtual schools all have a role to play in education, and while I believe we would clearly benefit from more options tailored to the niches that need them, I don’t believe the state legislature is being anywhere near honest with us about why the constitutional amendment is needed. The “gray areas” of state law could be addressed via legislation. They’ve proven that by already passing the bills needed to fund the schools the commission might create. If they can do that, they can clarify current law and make the process for approving charter schools work as it is. Why won’t they do that? The obvious answer is that they want a way to circumvent the current system, not fix it.

Until I hear from my legislators that they plan to honor their legal commitment to funding education in this state and until they stop breaking the law and actually producing that funding, I refuse to believe pretty much anything they say. I’m also not committing my vote to allow them to create another state bureaucracy that will give them even more control over a sector of education in this state. At some point, they need to live up to current state law if they want to get my support for anything else.

Prof

September 12th, 2012
3:32 pm

Sorry. Should have proofread better. That’s–

CTR. Well, I’m saying to vote it down because it’s a poorly drafted law that doesn’t take into consideration all the possible eventualities. As John Konop is saying here, it fails to protect tax payers when tax monies are used to fund state special charter schools. As John Barge said, it will create an expensive level of state bureaucracy that’s unnecessary. I don’t think either one is attacking the amendment because they disapprove of charter schools, but rather because of the hasty, sloppy, ill-considered way in which the amendment was created.

Maybe the solution is simply to redraft a better amendment relating to the creation of charter schools. At least all this controversy has made folks aware of possible problems that it will need to address.

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
3:36 pm

3schoolkids –

I am very sorry I missed this. I saw it awhile back and intended to check into it and frankly forgot. I have looked into it now.

I was not aware we had a charter offering corporal punishment. I called and inquired about it, and it is one of the methods the school employs. The principal said they have a form they send out notifying parents of the policy and which allows them to approve or disapprove of corporal punishment for their child. The principal said it is a common practice in the counties the school serves. I checked Calhoun County, Baker County, Randolph County,and Early County and indeed, it is practiced in all of these and they all have a policy (under Students) in their policy manuals. Clay County did not have their policy manual on their website, so I couldn’t check that one.

I am both personally and professionally not a fan of corporal punishment; however, it appears to be part of the culture in that area of Southwest Georgia.

Mary Elizabeth

September 12th, 2012
3:54 pm

Ron F, 3:22 pm

I compliment you on your well thought through and well written post. Thank you for sharing your on-target insights.

Lyn Carden

September 12th, 2012
4:19 pm

My name is Lyn Carden I am the board chair of the Georgia Charter Educational Foundation. I posted this early but for some reason it didn’t not land in the comment section so I am trying again. In light of the conversation I wanted to take a minute to respond.

To Konop’s first point:
Any “start-up” capitol being discussed would actually be the Federal Implementation Grant which goes to all start up schools and was actually $620,819 (not over a million). The funds were used to pay for things like desks and books. A GCEF board member sat with the GADOE official and the principal of CCA to review the use of that grant at the end of last year. The expenditures were reviewed line by line.
As a State Chartered Special School CCA receive NO MONEY from the district. The GADOE/State Board of Education is the authorizer to which CCA (and all state charter schools) are under a performance contract. Mr. Konop clearly lacks the facts and understanding of the authorization and accountability process.
As to his second point:
CSUSA receives a payment for services delivered – that is called a management fee. This fiscal year that fee is budgeted to be $891,848 equating to approximately 11% of budgeted revenue. The national average for EMOs varies but a typical rate is between 10-15%. Some EMOs charge more (upwards of 17-20%) and some less (5-7%) but for the most part, the 10-15% is the range.
Having said that, many large EMOs try (and succeed) to do what is called a “sweep agreement” which means they take all revenue that remains after the school’s annual expenditures are complete (including their management fee). Some companies request all revenues as a gross management fee but promise to reserve 2% of the state revenue for the school. CSUSA, one of the two educational management companies with schools in Cherokee County is one of the few that will only charge their management fee (approximately 11%) after ALL expenditures are covered and will donate to the school if it cannot be made whole with the revenue the school generates.
Last year in Cherokee County not only did Charter Schools USA not take a fee, they donated over a million dollars to ensure Cherokee Charter Academy was financially whole at the end of the year. This was due to the uncertainty of particular funding streams for state chartered special schools; however, the management company (CSUSA) was aware that the school was going to be in a deficit situation and made the decision they would rather take the financial hit themselves than impact what was happening in the classroom.
Only in the world of GA politics does a company investing millions IN Georgia public schools gets accused of taking millions out!!
EMOs (Educational Management Organizations) and CMOs (Charter Management Organization) can operate in several ways. They can offer a variety of services to a school. These can be back-end HR, or offer curriculum and schools can choose al-a-carte services. Other EMOs offer what is called a whole management agreement where the operation of the school is handled by the EMO and oversight is the responsibility of the board. This is the arrangement the Georgia Charter Educational Foundation has with Charter Schools USA.
CSUSA is responsible to everything from HR & finance (ensuring the bills and teachers get paid, the budget is correct, the lights stay on and staffing oversight) to curriculum and education (writing the curriculum, getting the proper text books, making sure the model is properly delivered, coordinating and/or delivering teacher training and almost everything in between) to compliance (ensuring the proper paper work gets to the GADOE and Federal in a timely manner, making sure we are meeting requirement and standards, making sure the building and kids are safe), to facilities (assisting in the identification of the building we eventually moved into, assisting in the negotiation with the lender and ensuring the facility is in compliance) to everything in between. The GCEF board is responsible for oversight (ensuring those things are properly executed) and CSUSA is responsible for everything else.
The budget and financials are approved by both the Local Governing Council (LGC) of the school and the GCEF and CSUSA can only spend within those guidelines. Monthly reports are provided to both governing entities as well as the provision of an annual audit.
As to Konop’s final point:
The final point is ridiculous but for argument’s sake let us indulge him for a moment. First and foremost it would be illegal for them to ‘take the money and run’ which is Konop’s implication. There is a management contract in place outlining appropriate “separation” process and procedure in the event that either party decides to walk away – if there would ever be a separation, it would never happen mid-year as it would breach the management contract.
As a matter of sheer business there is no way CSUSA could/would “take the money and run.” CSUSA is a national operator working with many boards like GCEF as well as local school districts in turnaround situations – something illegal like “taking the money and running” would kill its business. CSUSA manages over $300M in revenue annually so why would they risk reputation and legal ramifications for the funding Konop calls into question.
Since Konop has a)never spoken to any member of the GCEF board, our principal or EMO, b)never attended one or our meetings, or c)never requested a budget or any information on our school (for that matter) his source for “knowledgeable information” should be called into question. One might assume hearsay which is supported by the fact he went to one of CCA’s parents for his sourcing of information rather than to an official with the school – much the same way the media did when they were covering this story.

Lyn Carden

September 12th, 2012
4:41 pm

I am the chair of the Georgia Charter Educational Foundation, we are the non-profit organization that holds the charter for Cherokee Charter Academy. I’d like to clear some things up.

To Konop’s first point:
Any “start-up” capitol being discussed would actually be the Federal Implementation Grant which goes to all start up schools and was actually $620,819 (not over a million). The funds were used to pay for things like desks and books. A GCEF board member sat with the GADOE official and the principal of CCA to review the use of that grant at the end of last year. The expenditures were reviewed line by line.
As a State Chartered Special School CCA receive NO MONEY from the district. The GADOE/State Board of Education is the authorizer to which CCA (and all state charter schools) are under a performance contract. Mr. Konop clearly lacks the facts and understanding of the authorization and accountability process.
As to his second point:
CSUSA receives a payment for services delivered – that is called a management fee. This fiscal year that fee is budgeted to be $891,848 equating to approximately 11% of budgeted revenue. The national average for EMOs varies but a typical rate is between 10-15%. Some EMOs charge more (upwards of 17-20%) and some less (5-7%) but for the most part, the 10-15% is the range.
Having said that, many large EMOs try (and succeed) to do what is called a “sweep agreement” which means they take all revenue that remains after the school’s annual expenditures are complete (including their management fee). Some companies request all revenues as a gross management fee but promise to reserve 2% of the state revenue for the school. CSUSA, one of the two educational management companies with schools in Cherokee County is one of the few that will only charge their management fee (approximately 11%) after ALL expenditures are covered and will donate to the school if it cannot be made whole with the revenue the school generates.
Last year in Cherokee County not only did Charter Schools USA not take a fee, they donated over a million dollars to ensure Cherokee Charter Academy was financially whole at the end of the year. This was due to the uncertainty of particular funding streams for state chartered special schools; however, the management company (CSUSA) was aware that the school was going to be in a deficit situation and made the decision they would rather take the financial hit themselves than impact what was happening in the classroom.
Only in the world of GA politics does a company investing millions IN Georgia public schools gets accused of taking millions out!!
EMOs (Educational Management Organizations) and CMOs (Charter Management Organization) can operate in several ways. They can offer a variety of services to a school. These can be back-end HR, or offer curriculum and schools can choose al-a-carte services. Other EMOs offer what is called a whole management agreement where the operation of the school is handled by the EMO and oversight is the responsibility of the board. This is the arrangement the Georgia Charter Educational Foundation has with Charter Schools USA.
CSUSA is responsible to everything from HR & finance (ensuring the bills and teachers get paid, the budget is correct, the lights stay on and staffing oversight) to curriculum and education (writing the curriculum, getting the proper text books, making sure the model is properly delivered, coordinating and/or delivering teacher training and almost everything in between) to compliance (ensuring the proper paper work gets to the GADOE and Federal in a timely manner, making sure we are meeting requirement and standards, making sure the building and kids are safe), to facilities (assisting in the identification of the building we eventually moved into, assisting in the negotiation with the lender and ensuring the facility is in compliance) to everything in between. The GCEF board is responsible for oversight (ensuring those things are properly executed) and CSUSA is responsible for everything else.
The budget and financials are approved by both the Local Governing Council (LGC) of the school and the GCEF and CSUSA can only spend within those guidelines. Monthly reports are provided to both governing entities as well as the provision of an annual audit.
As to Konop’s final point:
The final point is ridiculous but for argument’s sake let us indulge him for a moment. First and foremost it would be illegal for them to ‘take the money and run’ which is Konop’s implication. There is a management contract in place outlining appropriate “separation” process and procedure in the event that either party decides to walk away – if there would ever be a separation, it would never happen mid-year as it would breach the management contract.
As a matter of sheer business there is no way CSUSA could/would “take the money and run.” CSUSA is a national operator working with many boards like GCEF as well as local school districts in turnaround situations – something illegal like “taking the money and running” would kill its business. CSUSA manages over $300M in revenue annually so why would they risk reputation and legal ramifications for the funding Konop calls into question.
Since Konop has a)never spoken to any member of the GCEF board, our principal or EMO, b)never attended one or our meetings, or c)never requested a budget or any information on our school (for that matter) his source for “knowledgeable information” should be called into question. One might assume hearsay which is supported by the fact he went to one of CCA’s parents for his sourcing of information rather than to an official with the school – much the same way the media did when they were covering this story.

Ron F.

September 12th, 2012
5:36 pm

“So are we saying let’s vote down the charter amendment because the state lacks sufficient laws to hold schools accountable for spending?”

I’d say that’s a big YES. As much as they’ve cut funding in the last ten years for public education, and since they don’t have a revenue stream I can identify to fund more schools, then they don’t need to be considering this anyway. Any ambiguities need to cleared up and all schools that receive state funding need to be held to the same standards of accountability (and yes, I include current public school systems in that list).

CharterStarter, Too

September 12th, 2012
5:40 pm

@ 3schoolkids – I could not agree more about having the same reports available on charters. In addition, the allotment sheets should look the same. If you look at the charters, they never have categorical grants, etc. calculated. That would help with transparency so much.

@ Ron – You say, “School systems should be suing the legislature.” Ironically, they would probably lose in court due to the very reading of the Constitution that has caused this mess. With local school systems having “exclusive” control over public education now, it could be that our QBE law is a moot point anyway, since the state has potentially lost their role in public education. That’s pretty radical, but it is something to consider…and something brought up by people smarter then you and me. You know, the legislature and State Board can pretty much do whatever they want to do until someone presses the envelope and sues. And that is exactly why the Constitution has to be clarified.

On another note, you know I disagree with you, but I respect your stance on the matter. All the best to you.

Ron F.

September 12th, 2012
9:23 pm

“You know, the legislature and State Board can pretty much do whatever they want to do until someone presses the envelope and sues. And that is exactly why the Constitution has to be clarified. ”

We may have different angles of approach, but I think our intents are often very similar. I agree that the state’s role should be clarified, and their responsibilites enforced. It galls me that the legislature inserts itself in local issues like they did in redrawing the Cherokee BOE district lines. Their ability to choose to do that while providing less than 40% of funding is appalling at best. That’s ironic when the idea of local control is what they say they want.I don’t understand why they haven’t legislatively cleared their role up in all of this. It seems to me that they’re using the charter schools commission as a means of increasing their role and authority while potentially creating a parallel system they can’t afford to fund without taking money from somewhere else. They have legislation in place to outline funding for those schools, but can’t or won’t do the same to clarify their role in the current system. It makes me wonder if they’ll follow the law in any circumstance and what the consequences will be if they don’t.

3schoolkids

September 12th, 2012
9:38 pm

Charter Starter, Too: Given Ron F.’s comments I’m curious why you believe a State Charter Commission is necessary? There has been much argument about why taxpayers need another option than the local school board, but why set up a separate commission to do it if we have a State BOE that is already doing the job?

Mary Elizabeth

September 12th, 2012
10:11 pm

Ron F, 9:23 pm and 3schoolkids, 9:38 pm

The answer to both of your musings and queries, imo, lies in a deeper political understanding of what has been occurring. I have tried to point the way toward that understanding. You might want to read “bigbill’s” post, on this thread, Sept. 10th at 11:54 pm.

Ron F.

September 12th, 2012
10:36 pm

Mary Elizabeth: it’s the deeper political motivations in this and numerous other issues that bother me. Understanding it all is like looking at a kaleidoscope: pieces mirrored and turned every which way to the point that you have a hard time finding what turn out to be a few important pieces behind it all. The sad reality is that it’s becoming increasingly clear to me that the charter schools movement is being used as another pawn in the heavily influenced legislature’s game to catch up with Louisiana. I think a lot of the supporters of that movement are genuinely concerned about and offering up some good alternatives that could help supplement and improve public education. I just wish I felt that was the true motive of the legislature, but I just don’t.

3schoolkids

September 12th, 2012
11:01 pm

Thank you Mary Elizabeth for your information I was aware of the national trend but am curious as to Charter Starter, Too’s opinion on WHY we need a state charter commission instead of the GA DOE. Does she feel the GA DOE is not doing a good job with assisting the existing State Special Charters? If not, why not? Since she said has been involved in the process of a startup charter school I would like to know.

BTW I found the pdf outlining closed charter schools for the whole country listed by state. Here is the link:
http://www.edreform.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/CER_FINALClosedSchools2011-1.pdf

The list is quite staggering.

Mary Elizabeth

September 13th, 2012
1:52 am

Ron F and 3schoolkids,

Google the words, “ALEC and Charter Schools,” for a wealth of listings of valuable information, including the link below. Be sure to read the Wall Street Journal article and Huffington Post article regarding ALEC’s ties to the charter school movement in state legislatures across the nation, especially those that are Republican dominated, from the list of resources provided when you “google.”

http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/05/09/how-alec-is-quietly-influencing-education-refor/184156

Pardon My Blog

September 13th, 2012
8:26 am

NO MORE CHARTER SCHOOLS!

CTR

September 13th, 2012
8:45 am

@3schoolkids. One of the major reasons that we need an amendment is because of the ruling by the state supreme court in which they clarified that all control really lies with the local BOE’s and that the state BOE’s power remains is only because that suit didn’t call it in to question. The state’s power to grant charters could likely be disbanded with another legal challenge. Another reason we need this amendment is because the handful of schools granted under the commission will lose over 50% of their funding next year, the local portion, to the tune of nearly $4000 per child and to expect these charters to operate at that disadvantage is impossible.

I do hear some of you that believe this movement has been hijacked by politicians in which they are manipulating the issue to advance their agendas. To them, I would say, put a face on the issue. Go visit either Cherokee of Coweta Charter Academy as see the children and see the tremendous work these teachers, who are pouring their hearts and souls in to this. Speak to the parents and ask WHY they chose to pull their children from their local traditional school and fore-go the conveniences, in order to improve their kids chances at a better education. There is a real face to this issue, my kid included. I guess I’ve had the luxury on being on both sides of the fence, the traditional public, and now the public charter, and I can honestly say that the alternatives provided by public charters is a necessary component to the education system. Don’t take it away.

305 comments Add your comment

About Get Schooled

Search this blog

Recent Posts

Archives

More from the AJC

Are You or Your School the ‘Best In Class’?

Categories

College resources

All AJC blogs »

Tell us what you think about the site

Subscribe »

Customer Care »

AJC Services

Sections

Other Editions

Guides

Affiliates

Advertising

AJC Sites

Special Reports

Blogs

Opinion

Blogs

Topics

Features

Blogs

Topics

Features

Topics

Features

Features

Blogs

Topics

Features

Does charter school funding leave taxpayers holding the bag?

305 comments Add your comment

About Get Schooled

Search this blog

Recent Posts

Archives

More from the AJC

Are You or Your School the ‘Best In Class’?

Categories

College resources

All AJC blogs »

Tell us what you think about the site

Subscribe »

Customer Care »

AJC Services

Sections

Other Editions

Guides

Affiliates

Advertising

AJC Sites