Between 2006 and 2020, 1.4% of schools with a grant from the Charter Schools Program closed, compared to 2.3% of schools without the funding. And within 12 years, schools with a grant were about half as likely to close as those without one. 

But echoing the results of on the program, the Government Accountability Office found that states awarded about $152 million in grants to 638 charter schools that closed or never opened — representing about 14% of those that received grants. 

Even so, charter school supporters welcomed the GAO’s main takeaway.

“This finding only underscores the need to increase funding for the [Charter Schools Program] so that more charter schools have access to start-up funds and planning grants,” said Nina Rees, president and CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. 

The report is the latest to respond to questions from policymakers about the program’s effectiveness as the Biden administration moves to implement tighter rules for grantees. Charter supporters argue the updated regulations, which seek to create more racially balanced schools and increase transparency, would limit growth. But critics say grant recipients waste taxpayer dollars when they close or never open. asked for both the GAO report and an earlier one from the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of the Inspector General. 

The Inspector General found that charter operators opened about half of the schools that they promised. Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, wrote in an that the report also drew attention to “sloppy record keeping and weak oversight” of the program. 

The GAO focused on the sustainability of schools that opened, comparing similar schools that received grants with those that did not. 

It found that the pattern of grant-receiving schools remaining open longer was consistent regardless of grade levels and student poverty and whether the schools were urban, suburban or rural. The results also held true in the three states that received the most funding from the program — California, Florida and Texas.

California saw a more dramatic spike in schools closing after nine years if they didn’t receive a grant. Ana Tintocalis, spokeswoman for the California Charter School Association, attributed the difference to additional quality measures that grant recipients must meet to receive funding. 

Increased closure rates, she added, also likely stem from demographic shifts and the high cost of living and working in the state. 

“The biggest reasons for closures across the state tend to be difficulty securing facilities and low enrollment, which impact our urban schools the most,” she said.

When GAO researchers interviewed officials in seven states, they found financial mismanagement and a lack of community support were also among the top reasons why charter schools close, whether or not they receive a federal grant.

A year ago, the National Association of Charter School Authorizers released highlighting how states have used grant funds to support school districts, mayor’s offices, nonprofits and other institutions that approve and renew charter school applications. 

Karega Rausch, president and CEO of the organization, said the GAO’s report reflects“meaningful changes” in policies since then that have “led to increased accountability.” 

In some cases, that means stopping a planned charter from opening,” he said, and “closing an existing charter school that doesn’t live up to their promises to students, communities and taxpayers.”

The U.S. Department of Education on Wednesday posted two notices for grants under the Charter Schools Program — one for and another for those charter schools. The announcements reflect new rules meant to create more racially diverse schools and increase transparency when for-profit companies are involved in running them. The deadline is Aug. 5, giving states far less than the four months they’ve had to apply in previous years.

The regulations represent a compromise between the Biden administration, which wanted to limit competition between a growing charter sector and traditional schools, and advocates who argued that such schools play an important role in meeting students’ needs after the pandemic.

Karega Rausch, president and CEO of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers, described the new rules as “workable,” but said he remains concerned about a requirement that new charters be racially and socioeconomically diverse — or explain why they’re not. The rule says operators must note how their charter school won’t “hamper, delay or negatively affect any desegregation efforts in the local community.”

The provision “places additional unnecessary and unwarranted burdens on schools proposing to serve large proportions of lower-income students and students of color,” Rausch said. “And there is no clarity on what constitutes a valid desegregation effort and how applicants will know if any effort exists.”

In March, the department posted a draft of the rule for the $440 million program, which provides start-up and expansion funding for charters. It sparked immediate backlash from the charter school community, with advocates arguing that it would squash growth, especially among smaller, independent operators unaffiliated with charter management organizations. Three Democrats in the Senate and a bipartisan group of mayors later joined opposition to the new rule, and charter supporters outside the U.S. Department of Education and the White House May 11, telling the Biden administration to “back off.” Department officials say the rule is meant to increase accountability, prevent charters from closing because of insufficient demand and promote integrated schools.

“We are at our strongest as a nation when we embrace the rich diversity across our country,” Anna Hinton, director of the program at the department, wrote in a Friday about the final version. “Federal resources should not be used to increase racial or socioeconomic segregation and isolation.”

Work from the Century Foundation contributed to the department’s revision. In 2019, the progressive think tank ways the program could increase diversity. While many urban charter schools predominantly serve Black or Hispanic students, others in suburban communities mostly white students, data shows.

Stefan Lallinger, a senior fellow at the organization, said not all charters “take proactive steps” to attract a diverse student body. 

“In some instances, particularly in what are known as ‘white flight academies,’ some charter schools actually exacerbate segregation in a given region,” he said, adding that while the new rules won’t prevent “hypersegregated” schools, they “represent real progress, and signal a growing recognition among education leaders that they should be part of the solution.” 

In her blog post, Hinton said the department recognizes that some charters exist in racially isolated communities and that such schools won’t be “at a competitive disadvantage for funding.”

Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, which is critical of charter schools, was the most outspoken in support of changes to the program.

“Unscrupulous individuals who used the program for their enrichment will find it more difficult to do so,” she wrote Monday in , highlighting requirements that charters disclose any contracts with for-profit entities and hold public hearings on proposed schools or expansions.

But in a win for the charter sector, officials won’t force charters to collaborate with district schools in order to receive funding — a requirement included in the original draft — but they still want to encourage partnerships. And they clarified that applicants can demonstrate demand for their programs in multiple ways, including waitlists. 

“The fact that they have taken some of our comments seriously indicates the power of advocacy,” said Nina Rees, CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. But she added that if the added documentation required and the small window to apply “dampens interest” in seeking the funds, that would be “victory for our opponents.”

Yomika Bennett, executive director of the New York Charter Schools Association, was among those who rallied in Washington in May. 

“As far as I’m concerned, we’re not fully heard until the broken education system is fixed,” she said. “School systems in cities across [New York state] and across the country are allowed to fail to educate students year after year, generation after generation. Officials, union bosses and critics attack charters, school choice and fight to keep students trapped in failing district schools.”

But first his staff had to respond to the “pandemic’s aftershocks,” including student learning gaps and parents’ loss of work. Now with 106 students — 99% of them Black and Latino — the school has leaned on a $1 million grant from the federal Charter Schools Program for new technology, curriculum materials and furniture.

Schools like Long’s could have a much harder time getting off the ground if the Biden administration’s plans to revamp the $440 million grant program become final. The U.S. Department of Education’s would give preference to charters that districts view as potential partners and discourage new applications in communities with voluntary integration efforts. And if districts are losing enrollment — as they are in D.C. — new charter schools might not be well-received. 

“As a Black male who leads a single-site school in Washington D.C., this is extremely concerning,” Long said. 

The rule could significantly alter a program that has given a boost to almost 4,100 existing charter schools — roughly 53%, according to the department. like KIPP and Success Academy Charter Schools are among the grantees.

Nina Rees, CEO of the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, said the funds help launch new charters, which typically don’t receive state and local funding until they begin admitting students. The program is especially important for “aspiring school leaders of color” who might not have financial backing from a foundation, she said. 

With nearly 65% of charters being single-site schools, Rees added, “these proposed regulations are a direct attack on new schools like this.”

Congress has taken note of the backlash. North Carolina Rep. Virginia Foxx, ranking member of the House education committee, said in a statement that the “administration is manufacturing authority it doesn’t have to add unworkable requirements to these charter school grants.” On Monday, the department to comment on the rule from Wednesday to next Monday after six senators for more time. In a statement to ĂŰĚŇÓ°ĘÓ, the department said the “administration recognizes that there is a place for high-quality public charter schools and supports continuing important investments.”

The debate comes amid a period of change and growth for the charter sector. Last school year, charters saw their largest jump in enrollment in six years — a 7% increase. Initial reports from states such as Alabama and Massachusetts show growth is continuing.

At the same time, Democrats have soured on charters in recent years after a long period in which they enjoyed bipartisan support. 

“The Biden administration breaks that tradition,” said James Merriman, CEO of the New York City Charter School Center. “It is clear that they looked around and decided that hewing closely to the wishes of their political patrons in the teachers unions was the way to go. Since they cannot kill us directly, they must resort to attacks on start-up funding.”

Advocates say the department didn’t consult with them before writing the regulation. North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr’s letter noted that the department turned down his staff’s request to meet. 

“It doesn’t feel like charter school leaders are a valued part of the process,” said Sonia Park, executive director of the Diverse Charter Schools Coalition, which promotes efforts to create charters that are more racially balanced. As written, the regulations would “make it very challenging for even a diverse charter to get approval if enrollment is declining in a district,” she said.

She pointed to Prospect Schools in Brooklyn, New York, which opened in September 2020, and Atlas Public Schools in St. Louis, which opened last fall. Both designed their schools to reflect the make-up of their communities, but because enrollment is declining in their , the schools “would have had extreme difficulty in being approved” today, she said.

The department stressed that U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona spoke last year at the National Charter Schools Conference and has gathered input from charter leaders throughout the pandemic. 

One organization the department heard from was The Century Foundation, a progressive think tank that in 2019 for ways the program could promote integration. Halley Potter, a senior fellow at Century and a co-author of the report, said she had a call with the education department before the draft of the rule was issued March 14.

Her report cited showing that charters are more likely than district schools to have student bodies that are more than half Black or Hispanic. In some pockets of the country, however, charter schools are more likely to draw higher-income, white families away from district schools, contributing to racial segregation. Studies have borne this out in and .

Derek Black, a law professor at the University of South Carolina, said in communities with long-standing integration efforts, charters often “operate as an exit strategy for white families who are resistant  — consciously or subconsciously — to more diverse environments.”

Potter called the department’s proposal an effort to make sure charter schools “fit in with the context of [their] local community.” 

“I really hope that we could see a broad base of charter supporters getting on board with this,” she said.

‘A lifeline’

The , begun in 1994 under the Clinton administration, is a competitive grant that provides funding for start-up expenses. Smaller networks have also used funds to add more schools. When Uplift Education, based in Texas, expanded from Dallas to Fort Worth, where it would serve another 2,000 to 3,000 students, the federal grant program supported planning, expanding staff and family engagement efforts, said Rich Harrison, formerly the network’s chief academic officer. 

Under the proposed rules, states applying for the funds would have to prove that there is “sufficient demand” for charters, including support from the local community and evidence that district schools have more students than they can serve. 

In districts with declining enrollment — a trend across most urban districts nationwide — new charters would face a tougher time getting approved, said Harrison, now CEO of Lighthouse Community Charter Schools in Oakland. 

“The anti-charter rhetoric in Oakland is at an all time high,” Harrison said, after the district voted in February to close seven schools. 

Community impact

Charter opponents argue that the grant program has been a vehicle for and financially benefiting for-profit entities. In a commentary for , Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, called the new requirements “sensible rules of the road” and downplayed the rule’s impact. 

In a comment to the department, she pointed, for example, to Torchlight Academy, a North Carolina school and grant recipient operated by for-profit Torchlight Academy Schools. The state voted in March to revoke the school’s charter, citing alleged that benefited the family operating the school. The charter is appealing the state’s decision, saying it has cut ties with the family.

The proposal would require schools receiving the grant funds to pledge that they won’t contract with a for-profit organization to assume most or all of the operation of the school. Grantees would also have to make those agreements public.

Karega Rausch, president and CEO of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers, said he appreciates the focus on transparency. But he and other charter advocates have problems with a requirement that states applying for the funds conduct a “community impact analysis.” Such a process would have to take “into account the student demographics of the schools from which students are, or would be, drawn to attend the charter school.” 

Rausch said local authorizers, not state officials, should be responsible for determining whether there is adequate demand for a charter school. He added that the department is sending a mixed message.

“You can’t simultaneously say that it’s a good thing to listen to communities and families and then federally impose specific kinds of schools on communities,” he said.

The education department would give preference to charter applications in which current and former educators are deeply involved in leadership and development of the schools. Another priority for the department is that districts and charter operators work together on issues such as joint teacher training or transportation. At least one district school would have to provide a letter in support of working with the charter. 

Rausch said that provision gives the districts leverage, adding that charter demand has increased because they “meet the needs of families” who feel their children aren’t being well-served in traditional schools.

“We are all in favor of collaborative efforts, but it’s got to go both ways,” he said. “We don’t want us versus them. That is old politics.”

Citing the pandemic’s disproportionate impact on Black, Latino and low-income students — and reports that charters were quicker than traditional schools to provide virtual instruction during school shutdowns — Bloomberg’s statement said, “Charter schools can help spread opportunity more equitably to students of all backgrounds nationwide.”

With plans to add 150,000 new seats for students, Bloomberg Philanthropies will award grants to new and existing nonprofit, non-virtual charter schools in 20 metro areas, provide funding to launch new models, and support efforts to create more racial diversity among charter teachers and leaders. Grants can also be used to build and upgrade facilities. 

Michael Petrilli, president of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute, which published on the charter sector’s response during the early months of the pandemic, called the news encouraging and “potentially transformative.”

“The evidence base continues to build showing that urban charter schools are highly effective, and that their growth has positive impacts on students in nearby traditional public schools as well,” he said. “It’s the closest thing we have in education to a win-win proposition. Thank you, Mayor Mike.”

As New York mayor from 2002 to 2013, Bloomberg supported exponential growth in the city’s charter sector, opening more than 150 charter schools. The foundation’s announcement follows recent data showing that during the pandemic, the charter sector has seen its highest period of growth since 2015. Charter schools, however, continue to face criticism from Democrats, who argue they drain resources — and students — from district schools. The Biden administration recommended no increase in funding for the $440 million federal Charter School Program for fiscal year 2022, while the House proposed a $40 million cut from the budget for charters. The Senate has not yet acted on the budget. Some states, such as California, have also taken steps to limit charter growth in recent years. 

Aside from the New York City region, the foundation is not yet confirming the other sites slated to receive grants. But according to the announcement, the cities chosen “offer a strong opportunity for serving the most in-need children coupled with conditions that could facilitate charter growth.” 

James Merriman, CEO of the New York City Charter School Center, which supports new and existing schools, said Bloomberg’s policies, such as allowing charters to co-locate in public school buildings, allowed the sector to flourish. 

“I’m thrilled to see that their focus will be on high quality,” he said. “It’s about having more great schools — not just having charters for the sake of charters.”

In cities such as Los Angeles, however, co-location arrangements have and are among the reasons teachers unions have lobbied against charter growth.

In his , which ran Wednesday, Bloomberg took shots at teachers unions, recalling United Teachers Los Angeles President Cecily Myart-Cruz’s that “kids didn’t lose anything” because of remote learning. 

“What nonsense. How about reading, writing and arithmetic, the critical skills we are funding schools to teach?” Bloomberg wrote, adding that because charter schools generally don’t have union contracts, they have more flexibility and can “create a culture of accountability for student progress week to week that many traditional public schools are missing.”

Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education and a leading critic of charters, countered Bloomberg’s praise of the charter sector, noting that Success Academy, New York’s largest charter network, last school year. Her two grandchildren, she said, were able to return to in-person learning in district schools.

“I am deeply disappointed that Mr. Bloomberg would take the tragedy of COVID and use it as an excuse to undermine public schools,” she said.

United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew added his concerns that charter schools “pick and choose their students, rather than … take the responsibility to educate children.” He that few students who enrolled in Success Academy in 2007 as first graders remained at the school to be part of its first graduating class.

While the announcement doesn’t mention charter authorizers, it does mention partnering with local and national organizations. Karega Rausch, president and CEO of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers, said there’s room for improvement in the way authorizers evaluate new applications so the process isn’t so “burdensome and bureaucratic” but also ensures a school has a “high chance of doing great things.”

Nina Rees, president and CEO for the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, said Bloomberg’s announcement is timely, not only because of increasing parent demand, but also due to efforts in many states to limit growth and the federal government’s flat funding of the charter program for the past five years.

But Merriman said whether the federal government is supportive of charters is less important than the climate at state and local levels. 

When former President Barack Obama was in office, and John King and Arne Duncan were education secretaries, that “didn’t make a difference to Democrats in statehouses,” he said. 

“Charter policy has always been at the state and local level. That’s what has mattered.”