Saving North Carolina’s Public Education System
How to Stop Those Who Would Betray the State’s Children and Future
As part of its work on public education in America, Civic Way is taking a closer look at one state—North Carolina. This is the 15th essay in Civic Way’s series on North Carolina’s primary and secondary education system (see the last essay). The author, Bob Melville, is the founder of Civic Way, a nonprofit dedicated to good government, and a management consultant with over 45 years of experience improving public agencies.
When it comes to the school your child will attend, every parent should have a choice, and every child should have a chance. – Mitt Romney
Strategies for Reforming North Carolina’s Public Education System (cont.)
We have outlined the major deficiencies of North Carolina’s K-12 public education system and the most critical threats to its long-term viability. This essay is one of several essays outlining promising strategies for reforming North Carolina’s public education system.
To ensure a sound education for all—the state’s constitutional duty—North Carolinians must work together. Not one party, but both. State and local leaders. Not just metro areas, but small rural towns and counties. A diverse state with divergent views must overcome its differences to build a public education system for everyone.
1. Protect the Public-School Choice Concept from Extremists.
Under the joint coordination of the Governor’s office, Department of Public Instruction (DPI) and North Carolina General Assembly (NCGA), the state should engage independent educational consulting firms to conduct a comprehensive school choice review of student needs, current educational offerings and opportunities for enhancing school choice options.
The school choice review should include an assessment, classification and inventory of traditional public-schools, public charter schools, private schools and homeschools operating in North Carolina. It should compile the best available evidence on student outcomes for each school type. It should assess the state’s estimated market demands and supply capacity. It also should include recommendations for upgrading the state’s approach to school choice as outlined below.
The review of public-school options should encompass traditional and charter schools. For traditional public schools, the review should include a feasibility analysis of ideas for expanding academic options for children (e.g., open enrollment, flexible boundaries and magnet programs).
For charter schools, the review should assess the most promising reform opportunities, e.g.:
Require all charter schools to be organized as nonprofit corporations, subject to state nonprofit laws (e.g., ethics, sunshine, open meetings and records laws)
Require each charter school to have a sponsor approved by the North Carolina State Board of Education
Revamp the approval process to include a local review (e.g., certificate of need)
Streamline the admission process (e.g., universal application form, procedures and schedule)
Develop standard charter contracts and terms (e.g., five years)
The also should identify opportunities for replicating proven public charter programs.
The review of private school options should include all private schools serving—or likely to serve—the North Carolina market. They're student, organizational, operational, academic and financial characteristics. Their interest in—and potential suitability for—the North Carolina Opportunity Scholarship (OS) program and their capacity for absorbing more pupils. Any policies that could affect their quality (e.g., affiliation, accreditation, teacher requirements, admission, enrollment and discipline). Any other factors that could be relevant to their suitability for the commitment of public funds and fiscal dependability.
The review of homeschools should include a survey of existing homeschools and a comparative analysis of homeschools in states with universal private voucher programs. Appropriate academic standards for homeschools and micro-schools. Potential support systems and materials. Realistic regulations, reporting requirements and enforcement programs. Potential penalties and sanctions for poor performance. Strategies for integrating homeschools with public childcare and education.
2. Assess the Voucher Program (Before Sapping Educational Options and Funds).
Before expanding its voucher or OS program and diverting more public funds to private schools, the state should conduct a thorough due diligence review of the OS program. The program has a ten-year track record which should be objectively analyzed before the state invests more public tax dollars.
That review should include the following:
An independent performance audit of the OS voucher program by the State Auditor’s Office or a private firm with experience conducting such audits
An independent financial audit of the OS program by a qualified private CPA firm
An investigation of potential voucher program fraud by the State Bureau of Investigation
A multi-county survey to gather local input from parents, educators and community leaders about the OS program in their communities
A bipartisan legislative study commission to assess the impact of the OS program to date and recommend potential strategies for improving the OS program and implementing changes
The DPI and Governor’s Office should engage an independent firm to pull together these studies, synthesize the findings and recommendations and present the summary report to the NCGA. This report, which should include an assessment of other state voucher programs, will inform the state’s decisions about the future of the OS program.
3. Institute Short-Term Changes to the OS Program.
Until the state completes its assessment of the state voucher/OS program’s impact and cost-effectiveness, the NCGA should take the following interim steps to ensure its good stewardship of public moneys.
First, the state should institute controls to minimize unwarranted spending, fraud and other abuses by current OS program schools. Tighten student eligibility rules (e.g., limit awards to needy students from public schools failing to meet their needs). Tighten school eligibility rules (e.g., private schools that meet state standards[i]). Maintain the current spending cap. Require local approval of new private schools.
Terminate funding for any private school breaching state standards.
Second, the state should impose measures to prevent or at least minimize the disruption of public schools. Freeze foundation funding for adversely impacted (Local Education Agencies (LEAs) for at least three years and provide mitigation or stabilization funds to the affected counties for at least three years thereafter. Offset any aggregate diversion of public funds to private schools with funds dedicated to public schools.
Third, DPI should develop tools to help LEAs navigate any loss of their students to private schools due to the OS program. Such tools could include digital aids (e.g., enrollment forecasting), online information (e.g., federal funding risks), downsizing guidelines and parental outreach tools.
Fourth, the state must establish a rigorous accountability system for private voucher schools. Continuing to publicly fund private interests without public oversight or reports would be irresponsible at best. Any private school recipient of public funds should be required to meet the same accountability standards to which public schools must adhere. At a minimum, every OS private school should employ the state accountability system, report all state-required assessment data and be subject to the same financial and performance audits. In turn, DPI should be required to implement an effective enforcement mechanism and publish reports of private school test scores and other data.
Finally, the state should involve counties in helping it oversee private schools. This could be done in a couple of ways. Involve counties in the vetting of prospective new public charter or private schools (like a certificate of need process). Require counties to submit annual reports to DPI on the performance of public charter and private schools in their jurisdictions and sign off on their continued public funding. Counties have a big stake in the quality of all local schools, public or private.
In this essay, we offer several measures for protecting school choice, helping parents find the right fit for their children and examining the effectiveness of North Carolina’s private school voucher program—the Opportunity Scholarship (OS) program. In the next essay, we present strategies for strengthening accountability systems for public education.