Shannon Hodge: All public school students need more investment, but charter students come off worse
In a January opinion piece, Matthew Frumin rightly argues for additional resources for DC Public Schools — but wrongly claims that the government-run school system is underfunded compared to DC public charter schools.
Public education in the District is provided by a mixture of DCPS and charter schools. Charters are public schools, providing a free education to DC resident students. Entrance is open and non-selective, with admissions typically administered through DC’s public school lottery system. By law, District charters are operated by nonprofits; currently, 66 of these run 128 campuses.
Unlike traditional public schools, charters are free to develop their own educational programs while being held accountable for improved student performance and sound governance by the DC Public Charter School Board, which has the power to award charters and revoke them. About half of District public school students attend charters, with DCPS accounting for the other half.
District law requires public school operating costs to be funded equally on a per student basis for charters and DCPS. The Uniform Per Student Funding Formula (UPSFF) was created to achieve equal per student funding regardless of school type. Consequently, it is simply untrue that “the way the city funds our schools structurally underfunds educational operations for DC Public Schools,” as Mr. Frumin asserted.
In fact, charter students are consistently underfunded by the city, despite DC law. Sadly, equal funding has never materialized, as DCPS receives funding for school operations and facilities outside of the UPSFF that the DC government doesn’t make available to charters.
Several studies confirm that District public charter school students are routinely underfunded compared to DCPS counterparts. One report by Mary Levy, a DC school funding expert, found in 2012 that DCPS received from $72 million to $127 million annually above what the funding formula provides.
Research from Ball State University also found that charter students were underfunded, compared to DCPS equivalents, to the tune of $12,238 in city funds per student for the 2006-2007 school year. Moreover, a University of Arkansas study recently found charters received $10,289 less per student than DCPS schools.
Charter underfunding occurs when funds are appropriated by the city to cover DCPS overspending its budget — a luxury charters don’t have. Another cause is that DC government agencies provide the school system with free services, such as building maintenance, that aren’t available to charters.
The city also allows DCPS to use projected enrollment numbers, whereas charters are funded by the formula for actual enrollment counts. DCPS’ enrollment projections are often overestimates. When this happens, the school system retains the funds, allowing DCPS to take on students midyear. Obviously, there is some movement in enrollment during each school year, but this discrepancy unfairly discriminates against charters.
This unfortunate anti-charter school student disparity also occurs in city school facilities funding, which falls outside the UPSFF. Unlike traditional public schools, charters do not receive a school building upon opening. They must instead buy or lease and then renovate what often initially is non-school space, including office, retail and warehouse property. To do this, charters usually have to obtain high-interest loans and compete for high-priced commercial real estate. The city provides charters a facilities allowance for this purpose, but it amounts to only about $1 for every $3 allocated for DCPS per student.
Such underfunding means that charters frequently struggle to acquire appropriate school space. DC law stipulates a “right-of-first-offer” for charters to buy or lease surplus school buildings from the city, but acquiring such a building is difficult in practice. Even when they have buildings, charters spend significant funds creating playing fields, playgrounds, cafeterias, gymnasiums and library spaces. Continuing to grow charters’ facilities allotment by adding 3.1% each year for five years would ensure these schools receive much-needed city funds to secure and maintain school buildings.
At the same time, more needs to be done to direct financial resources to vulnerable students in both charters and DCPS. Students designated as “at risk” — of whom DC charters enroll a slightly higher share than DCPS — are experiencing homelessness, are in foster care, receive government income or nutritional assistance, or are at least one grade level behind where they should be based on their age. While the graduation rate for these students is 18 points higher in charter schools than in city-run schools, the rates in both sectors lag far behind those of students not designated as at risk. To help schools close these gaps, the city must provide adequate funding in both sectors.
The District also should invest a further $6.4 million to expand the DC Department of Behavioral Health’s school-based mental health program to every school in the District. That would be enough to pay for a city-funded clinician at 80 schools that do not currently have one. Now more than ever, the District of Columbia’s most vulnerable children and families need strong, consistent access to high-quality and affordable mental health care services.
All public school students — including those at risk of academic failure or experiencing mental health challenges — need more resources. By any valid measure, however, charter students receive fewer city dollars than DCPS peers. It’s past time to end this inequity.
Shannon Hodge is founding executive director of the DC Charter School Alliance.
About commentaries
The DC Line welcomes commentaries representing various viewpoints on local issues of concern, but the opinions expressed do not represent those of The DC Line. Submissions of up to 850 words may be sent to editor Chris Kain at chriskain@thedcline.org.
Comments are closed.