Failure & Fraud

Records for Gateway Academy charter school too messy to audit

The financial records of Gateway Academy of Ohio, a Franklin County charter school, are incomplete, unauditable and “inexcusable,” Ohio Auditor Dave Yost said yesterday.

“Just as expected from their students, the school must follow the rules or face expulsion — or, at least the loss of their public funding,” Yost said in a statement about the school for students in grades 7 to 12 at 4500 Kimberly Parkway on the East Side.

Yost’s auditors looked at the school’s books for the period ending on June 30 and found that record-keeping was so bad that an audit could not be performed.

The school must, within 90 days of notification by the auditor, “revise its financial records and provide the necessary data,” Yost’s office said.

If that doesn’t happen, Gateway will be reported to the Ohio Department of Education, which would “immediately cease all state funding to the school.”

Attorney General Mike DeWine could subpoena school officials, requiring them to produce records and explain the confusion.

(Read more at the Dispatch)

Ohio's new charter school "reform" effort: What's all this talk about sponsors?

Ohio doesn't have a simple plan to weed out its bad charter schools.

The state instead has an indirect strategy.

It puts agencies known as "sponsors," called authorizers in most states, in charge of overseeing charter schools, of fixing struggling charters and of closing the ones that can't be fixed. We'll be hearing a lot about Ohio's 69 sponsors this year, since both Gov. John Kasich and House leadership have made them the focus of charter reform plans.

What are they, exactly? Who are they? And why is Ohio just not cleaning up the charter school mess on its own?

We talked this week to Gov. John Kasich, state Superintendent Richard Ross, and State Sen. Peggy Lehner, who heads the Senate Education Committee, about the state's focus on sponsors.

Kasich and Ross said sponsors are the best way to push for improvements at charter schools quickly, without overburdening the Ohio Department of Education. And the governor said having sponsors overseeing the schools will prevent a future governor from undermining them.

Lehner, a Republican from Montgomery County, thinks Kasich's approach may be too narrow. She said she hopes the Senate will come up with changes for other parts of Ohio's charter system this spring.

(Read more at Cleveland.com)

Charter School Failure Leaves State, Students Scrambling

The controversial sponsor of eight northeast Ohio charter schools is going out of existence and the state is trying to help the schools come up with alternatives.

Last summer, the state accused the Portage County Educational Service Center of trying to open a charter in Cincinnati. That would have violated a rule that prohibits sponsors of poor-performing charter schools from opening new ones.

The center says it’s been unfairly targeted. But Ohio Department of Education spokesman John Charlton says the state is just doing its job.

“What we’re here to do is to make sure every student in the state is getting a quality education. And if you’re not holding up your end of the deal, then we’re going to question why you’re not doing that.”

Besides sponsoring the charters, the Portage Educational Service Center provides public school districts with joint purchasing, curriculum development and other services. But all 11 public districts in the county have decided to contract with someone else, forcing Portage to dissolve, making it the first educational service center in the state to do so.

Gov. John Kasich wants to add teeth to charter school oversight rules and let charters seek local tax levies

Gov. John Kasich's budget proposal Monday would offer charter schools in Ohio two new potential funding sources -- a $25 million facilities fund and the ability to seek local tax levies from voters -- while putting a greater focus on charter school sponsors, or authorizers, as a way to improve school quality.
[...]
-- Charter schools sponsored by an "exemplary" sponsor can seek a property tax levy from voters to pay for operations.

This change is similar to a major piece in the Cleveland Plan for Transforming Schools, the 2012 state law that allows the district here to share a property tax with charter schools that it sponsors or otherwise signs a partnership agreement with.

Since voters in Cleveland passed a 15-mill levy that fall, the district has split one mill of that levy -- a little over $8 million total -- with 14 charter schools in the city.

Voters in Columbus rejected a similar proposal in 2013.

As in Cleveland, charters cannot put a levy on the ballot by themselves. Charters will have to go to the local school board and make a case for the district to put the tax on the ballot.

Charter schools could ask for a tax as a single school, or as a group of schools.

"The proposal would give the community the choice to partner with charter schools and help those schools that are positively contributing to the public education of the students in their communities," Ross said. "Voters should have the opportunity to provide local funds to support the education of students who attend charter schools."

(Read more at Cleveland.com)

Charter bill is just "tweaking" and "window dressing" that ducks real issues with charter schools, says key Democrat in Ohio House

The new House Bill 2 is just window dressing and a distraction while the core issues with charter schools in Ohio aren't touched, State Rep. Teresa Fedor said today.

Fedor, the ranking Democrat on the House Education Committee, said the bill isn't the major charter school reform bill it's being trumpeted as. Instead, she said, House Republicans are avoiding taking on tough issues because many receive significant campaign donations from charter management companies, like White Hat Management of Akron.

"We need to put their feet to the fire," she said, using a play on the word entrepreneur. "These educaneurs are feeding Republicans million of dollars into their campaigns to keep their heads in the sand."

(Read more at Cleveland.com)

What's in the new House charter school bill?

The new House Bill 2, introduced Wednesday as a charter "reform" bill, has several detailed changes in how the charter schools are managed and operated, as well as how finances are to be reported.

We discussed the bill with State Rep. Kristina Roegner, a Hudson Republican, who is co-sponsoring it.

To understand the proposed changes, remember how charter school management is organized in Ohio. Sponsors, known as authorizers in most states, help charter schools start and then oversee them. Sponsors have primary responsibility for policing schools to make sure they meet standards.

Then a governing board acts like a typical school board and decides how the school should be run. The governing bodies are required to be non-profit, but many hire for-profit companies to manage the schools.

That's the case with some of the statewide online schools and with all of the schools run by White Hat Management -- the local boards hire the companies to provide education in the schools.

In recent years, there have been complaints that sponsors or management companies control the governing boards, that schools cannot easily fire management companies and that finances of private operators are kept secret.

Roegner said she divides the changes in the bill into three categories: Accountability, transparency and responsibility, with several changes for each.

Accountability:

• Roegner said she hears complaints of school districts creating dropout recovery charter schools just to "off-load" struggling kids into them. Then the kids with low test scores don't drag down district report card results.

The bill calls for district-created dropout recovery schools to be included in report cards.

"If you've got students who aren't performing very well, you can't prop up your report card by offloading students."

• Contracts between schools and their sponsors, or authorizers, must include more detail about expected academic performance of the schools and details about schools facilities, rental or loan costs.

• Poor charter schools can't "hop" from one sponsor to another if a sponsor, the organization respoinsible for making sure they do a good job, cracks down on them.

"Schools that are failing...they do what's called sponsor hopping," Roegner said. "They switch from one sponsor to another."

The law requires any charter with a D or F grade for its "performance Index" score and a D or F grade on its overall value-added score showing student academic progress to receive approval from the Ohio Department of Education to change sponsors.

Transparency:

• To make conflicts of interest known, the bill requires members of charter school boards to disclose if they have any family members or business associates doing business with the school.

• Charter school sponsors receive three percent of a school's revenue to monitor the school, advise it and make sure it meets standards. The bill would require sponsors to report annually how it spends that money.

• Starting in 2016, the state would start reporting the performance of charter management companies or organizations, not just the results of individual schools.

Right now, for example, there is no state measure of how well all the Breakthrough charter schools in Cleveland or all the Constellation charter schools are doing as a group. While there are state report cards for individual schools, the management groups are not rated.

Responsibility:

• The bill prohibits charter school sponsors from selling goods or services to the schools they oversee.

• Employees of school districts or vendors serving a school district may not sit on the governing board of a charter school sponsored by the district.

• Treasurers of charter schools can no longer be hired by the schools' sponsor. A school's governing board will have to do those hirings, under the bill.

(REad more at Cleveland.com)