Charter School Authorizers

Two types of charter schools exist in Arkansas: open-enrollment charter schools, which operate independently of any district, and district conversion charter schools, which operate within an existing school district. Charter schools have more autonomy on certain rules and regulations than traditional public schools; however, charter schools are held accountable for academic results and fiscal matters, as defined by the charters contract. Charter schools are approved and held accountable by a charter authorizer. In the 2013 General Assembly, a law passed to change Arkansas’ charter authorizer from the State Board of Education to a newly created panel within the Department of Education. The purpose of this policy brief is to provide a snapshot of charter authorizing across the United States and provide detailed information about Arkansas’ newly created Charter Authorizing Panel

Separation of Church and School: Guidance for Public Charter Schools Using Religious Facilities

Public charter school leaders and advocates are dedicated to growing the number of high-quality public charter schools available to all families, especially those in communities where there are very few opportunities to attend a high-quality public school. To realize the promise that public charter school expansion can bring, public charter schools need reasonable access to facilities in every community.This is a guidebook to help public charter school leaders -- and the advocates, attorneys, and others who support them -- navigate the increasingly complicated legal landscape surrounding public charter school use of a facility owned or operated by a religious organization. By presenting an analysis of the legal standards that govern application of the Establishment Clause and offering practical advice on how to ensure compliance with the it when a public charter school decides to locate in a religious-owned facility, this guidebook will help charter school leaders protect their access to an important facilities option and foster continued public charter school growth

The True Cost of Boston's Charter Schools: Charter Expansion Has Not Been a Revenue Issue for Boston Public Schools

As Boston approaches its cap on charter schools seats, and long wait lists remain at many of the Commonwealth charter schools serving Boston residents, efforts have begun to lift the charter cap and expand the number of seats available to Boston residents. This situation raises questions about whether the increase in charter seats is the reason for the annual budget problems facing the Boston Public Schools (BPS). Is the growth in charter school seats taking state Chapter 70 school aid away from the BPS schools? How is Chapter 70 education aid allocated to cities and towns and charter schools? Do Commonwealth charter schools receive an unfair share of public resources for education? The purpose of this report is to answer these questions and more by explaining the structure of educational aid in Boston and analyzing the effect that charter seat expansion, and the resulting increased cost of the charter school assessment has had on the City and the operations of the BPS. The number of Boston resident students attending Commonwealth charter schools is currently 9,260 or 14% of all Boston resident students attending a public school. In this report, "charter schools" refer to Commonwealth public charter schools. Also, all fiscal 2016 financial information is budgeted not actuals

2015 State Legislative Session Highlights for Public Charter Schools

2015 has proved to be another successful year for public charter school legislation across the country. Some of the biggest developments of the 2015 state legislative sessions include:Alabama became the 43rd state to enact a public charter school law.Connecticut defeated a proposed two-year moratorium on opening of new charter schools.Indiana increased school autonomy, strengthened school and authorizer accountability, and funded facilities and finance programs.Nevada improved funding opportunities and modified its automatic closure requirements for low-performing public charter schools.New York increased flexibility for teacher certification and adjusted its cap to allow more public charter school growth in New York City.Ohio increased per-pupil funding for charter facilities and expanded the ability of traditional districts to levy taxes for charter schools that are sponsored by "exemplary" sponsors.Oklahoma overhauled law, including provisions to allow charter schools statewide, strengthening school and authorizer accountability, and allowing charter schools to borrow money.Wisconsin overhauled its law to allow more entities to authorize independent public charter schools, strengthening school and authorizer accountability, and providing additional funding to independent public charter schools

Unchartered Territory for the Bluegrass State : Lessons to be learned from over a Quarter-century of State Charter School Legislation

Charter school success or failure is not simply a matter of chance. Both the existence and aggregate quality of charter schools in a state depend on the provisions of state charter school laws. These laws address a wide range of issues and vary from state to state. But the experiences of states with significant charter sectors, as well as those with innovative charter policies, provide important lessons for the charter school movement as a whole

Better Choices: Charter Incubation as a Strategy for Improving the Charter School Sector

The twenty years since Minnesota passed the nation's first charter school law have seen a great expansion in school choice, with charters operating in all but ten states and enrolling nearly two million students nationwide. Yet while parents now enjoy more schooling options for their children, a disappointing number of charter schools fail to provide excellent educations. As an authorizer of charter schools in Ohio, we struggle daily with birthing and growing high-quality charter schools -- which is why we find promising and underutilized approaches like charter incubation so appealing

The Jurisdictional Difficulties of Defining Charter-School Teachers Unions Under Current Labor Law

As charter schools have flourished in form, they have also evolved in variety: parents can send their children to a trilingual immersion school or a school whose classes meet entirely online. The same flexibility that charters offer as an alternative to traditional public schools also makes them difficult to classify for purposes of labor law. When charter-school teachers form a union, it is not clear why the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), and not a state labor analogue, should have jurisdiction over a charter-school labor dispute. And yet, the NLRB has asserted jurisdiction in most charter-school cases. This Note examines the NLRB’s test for determining whether the broad protections of the National Labor Relations Act apply to a group of workers in the context of charter-school employees. It proposes a more robust test for differentiating between charter schools for purposes of the Act, and it applies the test to two charter schools

Avoiding Accountability: How Charter Operators Evade Ohio's Automatic Closure Law

Ohio's charter-closure law is touted as one of the toughest in the nation because it requires the automatic closure of charter schools that consistently fail to meet academic standards. The law has been showcased by the National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA) in its "One Million Lives" campaign, which calls for tougher state laws to close failing charter schools.The widespread attention and support of the NACSA campaign has pushed Ohio's closure law into the spotlight as a model of accountability for low-performing charter schools. However, The Plain Dealer's editorial board, in a commentary on NACSA's praise of Ohio's charter school accountability standards, pointed out what NACSA did not: Ohio's charter school laws, while they may have stronger mandates for closure than those of other states, are still replete with loopholes. Since the charter-closure law went into effect in 2008, 20 schools across the state have met closure criteria, and all are currently listed as closed by the Ohio Department of Education (ODE). But an investigation of the schools by Policy Matters revealed that eight schools -- and the management companies that run them -- have found ways to skirt the closure law and remain open, severely undermining the law's effectiveness and highlighting the lax accountability that prevails in Ohio's charter sector. For-profit managers -- the Leona Group, Mosaica Education and White Hat Management -- operate six of the reopened schools

A Closer Look at the Charter School Movement: Charter Schools, Students, and Management Organizations, 2015-16

Enrollment in charter public schools has grown by 250,000 students in the 2015-16 school year, and more than 400 new charter public schools have opened their doors, according to, A Closer Look at the Charter School Movement: Schools, Students, and Management Organizations, 2015- 16. The report also estimates that the total number of students currently attending charter public schools is nearly 3 million, representing a sixfold increase in charter school enrollment over the past 15 years.While more than 400 new charter schools opened this school year, the report finds that about 270 schools ceased operations. These schools closed for a variety of reasons, including low enrollment, inadequate financial resources and low academic performance. More than 6,800 charter public schools are now open across 42 states and the District of Columbia