The U.S. Department of Education recently introduced new rules on federal funding for charter schools. The agency argued that its new rules are meant to stop for-profit companies from opening charter schools with federal funds, as well as to prevent premature school closures.
Meanwhile, opponents of the new rules argue that they are burdensome and could prevent some schools from receiving federal funding through grants. Charter schools are publicly funded, tuition-free schools established and run by private groups. These groups create contracts — or charters — with state and local governments to establish a school’s mission and academic goals as well as its financial and accountability requirements.
The state has the authority to shut the school down if it does not adhere to the agreement. Federal funding for these schools stems back to 1994 when the Federal Charter School Program was established during the Clinton administration. Under the Education Department’s new rules, groups applying for federal grants to support charter schools would have to prove that the schools are not managed by for-profit companies.
Applicants would also have to prove community need, an attempt to cut back on early closures that can be disruptive for students. Fifteen percent of charter schools that receive federal funding either never open or close within the three-year grant period, department officials told Education Week.
“We are all working toward the same goal of ensuring students from all ages, backgrounds, and communities have access to high-quality education, including through high-quality public schools,” Anna Hinton, director of the Education Department’s charter schools program, wrote in a blog post announcing the new rules. “These final rules will support high-quality charter schools and the students and families they serve.”
Many school-choice advocates, however, have come out against the new rules, arguing that they are burdensome to the point of being prohibitive. In a letter to the Education Department, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools argued that the number of proposed changes would dissuade state entities and charter school management stakeholders from applying for aid.
“Many will read the priorities and requirements as making it less likely they will receive funding, and thus discourage applicants who desire to meet the needs of students from some of our country’s most vulnerable populations,” the group wrote. The group also argued that this would negatively affect minority and disadvantaged communities, as two-thirds of the 3.5 million students served by U.S. charter schools are from low-income Black or Hispanic communities. “This is a sneak attack on charter schools that is politically motivated by special interests seeking to benefit the adults in the system and not the children and families in our country who are clamoring for better education opportunities,” the Alliance said in a statement.
In Congress, Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and 21 other Republicans introduced a resolution under the Congressional Review Act to undo the rules, attempting to employ a little-used power of Congress to overturn executive rules.
“Time and time again, this administration has bowed to big-labor unions and liberal extremists at the expense of children’s futures,” Scott said in a statement. “Now they are outdoing themselves with rules that will undermine charter schools — tuition-free, top-notch public education options that serve primarily disadvantaged students.
Support for these schools has never been a partisan issue. It’s time the administration put politics aside and joined parents in the fight for quality education.” Teachers’ unions, many of which have publicly supported President Biden, have historically argued that charter schools take funds away from public schools as tax dollars follow the students. In other words, if a student enrolled at a public school elects to attend a charter school instead, the tax money associated with that student would now be directed to the charter school.
“What winds up happening is there is a downward spiral because as the money goes out with kids, the services the district can provide become less and less,” Carol Burris, executive director of the anti-charter school Network for Public Education, told CNBC. “So more parents leave for charter schools. And it puts some districts in critical places where they’re really not able to service the kids that they have. Right now we’re operating parallel school systems and at some point it’s going to break.”
The debate around management of charter schools has run for decades, and the Biden administration’s rules are unlikely to be the end of the line.
For more background, see the April 2014 Congressional Digest issue on “Early Childhood Education.”
