COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, December 8, 1998 10:20 a.m. - - - RES. 980766 - Calling for the Council Committee on Education to hold joint hearings with state officials and the Philadelphia City Council on Charter Schools. - - - PRESENT: COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL, Chair COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER, Vice Chair COUNCILMAN FRANK DiCICCO COUNCILWOMAN ANNA C. VERNA COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO COUNCILMAN ANGEL ORTIZ COUNCILMAN RICHARD T. MARIANO COUNCILWOMAN AUGUSTA A. CLARK - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center Plaza, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 I N D E X RES. 980766 PAGE Dwight Evans, State Representative-------------- Derrick Spahn, PA Department of Ed., Director, Project Community Building------------------- 5 Dr. Tim Daniels, Director, Office of Educational Initiatives---------------------------------- 16 Joseph Proietta, Community Academy Charter School--------------------------------------- 23 Dr. Martin Ryder, World Communications Charter School--------------------------------------- 29 Taylor Frome, Youth Build Philadelphia Charter School--------------------------------------- 33 John Skief, Harambee Institute of Science and Technology Charter School-------------------- 38 David W. Hornbeck, Superintendent, School District of Philadelphia--------------------- 86 Germaine Ingram, Chief of Staff, Superintendent, School District of Philadelphia-------------- 117 Clarence D. Armbrister, Managing Director, School District of Philadelphia-------------- 118 Michael Horsey, State Representative------------ 151 Jackie B. Sparkman, General Counsel, School District of Philadelphia--------------------- 152 3 RESOLUTION 980766 CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Good morning. Let me thank everyone for coming this morning. And now let me formally begin the City Council Committee on Education. This is a joint hearing with state officials to discuss charter schools. Before we make a statement, let me have the clerk please read the title of the resolution.
Calling for the City Council Committee on Education to hold joint hearings with state officials and the Philadelphia City Council on charter schools, their role in relationship to the School District of Philadelphia, and their future impact on education in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. Let me say for the purpose of a quorum that we have, to my left, Councilwoman Miller, then Councilman Frank DiCicco; to my right Councilwoman Anna Verna. And let me give me opening statement. Today, Tuesday, December 8, the City Council Committee on Education is holding joint public hearings on Resolution No. 980766, with State 4 RESOLUTION 980766 Representative Dwight Evans and other state officials. This hearing is a joint efforts between the Education Committee and the state to investigate charter schools, their role in relationship to the School District of Philadelphia, and their future impact on education in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. As charter schools are a relatively new phenomenon in our city and their number is quickly increasing, it is important that we evaluate their impact both locally and statewide. I am sure that everyone here will see that this will be a very informative and productive hearing. State Representative Dwight Evans' involvement in organizing this hearing and even in giving the idea, setting forth that idea, is greatly, greatly appreciated. And we appreciate him for certainly stepping out on the charter school issue, when all elected officials were afraid to do so, and, in fact, taking a lot of heat for helping to create these wonderful schools that have become a part of 5 RESOLUTION 980766 our public school arena. With that, let me call on Representative Dwight Evans for any remarks he may have, and then other members of the committee. REPRESENTATIVE DWIGHT EVANS: I would first like to say good morning to all of you. I would like to thank the Chairperson, Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell, for, one, hosting this particular hearing, as well as the other members of the Education Committee. As the Councilwoman expressed, this is a joint effort between the city and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. In my view, too often, too many times I think that there's been unnecessary friction between the city and the state. I think it's long overdue that the policymakers at the city and the state level begin to work together for the interests of all of the children in the City of Philadelphia. Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell, my understanding, has visited all of the 13 charter schools. And she clearly understands that people need options and choices available to them. In my view, that does not mean that 6 RESOLUTION 980766 the public school system as we know it today is not functioning, but fundamentally is saying that people need to have options and choices available to them. I am prepared as the Democratic Chairman of the House Education Committee to work closely with Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell, as well as other members of the City Council, as we move forward in the next budget fiscal cycle. I have expressed to Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell that I think that this is the first in the history of not just this Council, but the city, where you really have a joint effort talking about city policy regarding education from the local and the state level. So I applaud Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell and the other members of the Council for the willingness to have this open discussion about charter policy. Thank you, Madam Chairperson. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you very much. Any other comments from members of the committee? Seeing none, we will begin our first 7 RESOLUTION 980766 panel. Let me note that representatives from all four panels are here, and that our Superintendent of Schools is certainly here, David Hornbeck. And we have you on Committee No.
2, so that we can first talk about who and what charter schools are, and then we will quickly -- we understand your time constraints, and we will try to do our best to respect that. Now will be Panel 1, State Representatives and original charter school operators. We're calling on Mr. Derrick Spahn, Pennsylvania Department of Education, Director of Project for Community Building. Thank you for coming.
Thank you, Councilwoman. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Would you pull the mike a little closer. And we would ask each speaker to identify yourself for the record and then proceed.
I am Derrick Spahn, Director of the Governor's Project for Community Building. I am delighted to have an opportunity to come here to talk about a program that Governor 8 RESOLUTION 980766 Ridge unveiled approximately two years ago, with the express purpose and interest in revitalizing our communities and investing in economic growth, creating empowerment in our communities, preventing teen pregnancy, fighting crime, and essentially giving individuals and families hope in transforming communities that have turned to wastelands into beacon lights of hope. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Excuse me one moment. All of those, I assume, who are there, if you would bring your chairs up closer to the witness table, for those of you who are on this committee, if you would. I'm sorry. We should have moved those up before we began, so that it is obvious that you are a part of this committee, this panel. And, again, we want to thank Representative Dwight Evans for even suggesting a format for us to make it a lot more organized and easier for us to explore the issue. Thank you. Please continue, Mr. Spahn.
I was appointed by 9 RESOLUTION 980766 Governor Ridge approximately two years ago to direct the Project for Community Building, which is the centerpiece of the Governor's plan to ensure that all Pennsylvanians thrive in the new economy of the 21st Century. The philosophy behind the project is that people, not government, are really the true builders of communities, and that inherent in every community across the Commonwealth is talent and potential and good will. The Project for Community Building seeks to tap into those qualities and stimulate self-help strategies and solutions. The focus of the Project for Community Building are five areas that are critical to community restoration and revitalization. Eight of the initiatives are offered under the Project for Community Building to community-based organizations in an effort to help communities build themselves from within. Let me very quickly just talk a little bit about some of those eight initiatives, one of which, pertinent to this morning, happens to be charter schools. 10 RESOLUTION 980766 The primary goal of the Project for Community Building is to build community assets, empower individuals and families, create opportunities for student achievement, prevent teen pregnancies, and improve neighborhood safety. We do that by bringing together approximately eight initiatives, which are the Pennsylvania Community Development Bank, the Self-Employment Assistance Program, the Family Savings Account Program, education mentoring, abstinence education, crime prevention and housing opportunities, and, of course, our charter school program. And we also do that through six state agencies which come together and are comprised to make up the Project for Community Building; that being the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development, the Department of Labor and Industry, the Department of Health, the Department of Education, Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, and the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency. First, just let me talk a little bit about those initiatives. 11 RESOLUTION 980766 The Family Savings Account Program is a program that uses restricted funds to help low-income families attain self-sufficiency through savings and asset accumulation. Matched savings from the state can be used to purchase a new home or pay for educational expenses or start a new business. And the program impact is to modify economic behavior in terms of creating savings accounts for poor families, self-sufficiency, and asset accumulation. The Community Development Bank is a program of the Pennsylvania Economic Development Financing Authority. The Pennsylvania Community Development Bank makes capital available for community and economic development lending and provides capacity building and technical assistance grants to promote the creation and expansion of community development financial institutions within the distressed communities. And the program impact behind the Community Development Banks are to promote new business start-ups or expansions, assist local 12 RESOLUTION 980766 CDFIs, encourage comprehensive community development plans, and support a network of nonprofit organizations. The Self-Employment Assistance Program targets workers who are likely to exhaust their own employment insurance benefits before being re-employed. And the program provides these workers with entrepreneurial assistance and training to create their own jobs through self-employment. And the impact of that program is designed specifically to create community empowerment, self-sufficiency, provide communities with products needed, and create employment opportunities. Through our Education Mentoring Program, which is also offered by the Department of Education, that program is designed to link responsible, caring adults with at-risk youth and children.
And the program works on the notion of the pool of expectancy, which suggests that a positive, respected adult can provide an admiring child or youth with the ability to recognize their 13 RESOLUTION 980766 own qualities and their own talents. And, of course, the program impact of the Education Mentoring Program is to establish positive roll models for at-risk youth, improve school attendance and performance, and eliminate potential for at-risk youths to become involved in drugs and in crime. The next program is the Community Crime Prevention Program, offered by the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency. Here we seek to design programs that allow communities and organizations to develop community-driven, community-directed strategies which eliminate the factors that contribute to juvenile crime and delinquency. It's also a program specifically designed at helping communities develop programs to inoculate themselves against the disease and ravishes of crime and violence. Our Abstinence Education and Related Services Program, offered through the Department of Health, assists communities in the development of strategies to reduce teen pregnancy, community-directed abstinence-based education 14 RESOLUTION 980766 programs are -- is created to discourage and postpone sexual activity and avoid pregnancy among children and adolescents. And, in addition to that program, helping to reduce teen pregnancy, it also seeks to -- there is a side benefit, in that it helps to lower STDs, as well, through or Abstinence Education and Related Services Program. The final program that we also offer under the Project for Community Building is our charter schools. And I'm going to read the brief bio of Dr. Timothy Daniels, who heads up the charter school. And it is for that purpose that this gathering has been convened. And Tim then will talk about charter schools under the Project for Community Building. Dr. Tim Daniels is the Director of the Office of Educational Initiatives in the Pennsylvania Department of Education. Programs currently included in this office are charter public schools and school performance funding. An experienced field administrator, Dr. Daniels has been a junior high teacher, a junior 15 RESOLUTION 980766 high assistant principal, a middle school principal, a school district business manager, an assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction, and a superintendent of schools. As part of the Pennsylvania Charter School Initiative, Dr. Daniels has visited charter schools in Pennsylvania and states throughout the country, overseeing the awarding and administration of 159 charter school planning grants in the Commonwealth, published several journal articles about the development of Pennsylvania charter schools, and spoke to numerous groups throughout the Commonwealth. Topics of the presentations include the development and operation of charter schools in Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Charter School Planning grant process, and the analysis of Pennsylvania charter school legislation. He is currently involved in assisting the six charter schools that opened in the fall of 1997 and the that have opened in the fall of 23 1998, Organizing the fourth round of education 24 charter school workshops and planning grants, and 25 administering a $9 million federal grant awarded to 16 RESOLUTION 980766 give start-up funding to Pennsylvania charter schools. 4 million for this purpose. Tim chaired the task force that designed the guidelines for school performance funding, and his office is responsible for its implementation. And so now I'm going to give the mike over to Dr. Tim Daniels.
Thank you, Derrick. An update on that fourth round planning grant announcement from the state is that 33 additional grants have been awarded. And it is noteworthy in this setting to tell you that 15 of those grants are here in the City of Philadelphia. Charter schools, a mission-driven, deregulated, independent public school choice. It is a mission, freedom, and independence with consumer choice concept. If numbers speak, Pennsylvania's charters were invented right here in Philadelphia. 17 RESOLUTION 980766 I can recall being on the Parkway on the Charter School Symposium in June of 1997 in a room that was addressed by Council President Street, Superintendent Hornbeck, Secretary Hickock, and Governor Ridge right before the bill was signed and in the Free Public Library down in Philadelphia. And with that beginning, eight weeks later in Pennsylvania we had six charter schools, four of them operating right here in Philadelphia. And to prove that I'm a Delaware Valley resident, I want to show you something I taped at home on my VCR. This is one of those moments where it worked great before the performance. And the technician is not here. And if it doesn't warm up and go on -- there we go. Sometimes technology is a little scary. It is still scary. (VCR presentation.)
That says more than I could ever say about the mission. You had an operator there, a parent, student, everybody there for the same reason. Charter schools in the country 18 RESOLUTION 980766 started out in 1991, as a law in '92, with one charter in Minnesota. This chart went up to last year. S. Department of Education, second year study that was just released. And a lot of charter operators who are here have it. It shows that last year there were 800-and-some charter schools. This year there's 1,100 charter schools, with over 200,000 students, in the country. It is a national initiative and that puts the perspective in a nonpolitical one. That is, I believe, there is a difference in political parties between the national and state Administration, when I last checked. The national Administration has first of all. So this year we have all over the country as I say, over 20,000 students. In the states, 31 charter schools with 6,000 student, excess of 6,000 students. What does that mean for us here in Pennsylvania and as a consumer of education? It means last year there were six charter schools. You will notice one way out in 19 RESOLUTION 980766 here in Mercer, near the Ohio line -- which was the first charter school, which was a regional charter school of two school boards -- voted to nothing 5 for a charter school, one in Chester County, which 6 is a continuation of a Head Start Program, and four 7 in Philadelphia, whose operators are here today. 8 The second year, we have 31 charter 9 schools. You can see that the greater bulk of them 10 are still in Philadelphia, with 13 charter schools 11 operating. But they are spread throughout the 12 state. 13 For example, there are two up in the 14 State College School District, which are small 15 charter schools. They are each about 50 students. 16 One is a basic skills school, and the other is a 17 interdisciplinary unit school. 18 We have three operating in Pittsburgh, and, as I said before, 13 in the city. But that's all that's been approved. There are 35 that have been approved. And I want to point those out. Erie up in the left-hand corner there, and Philadelphia in the right-hand corner down at the bottom. There are 15 approved in 20 RESOLUTION 980766 Philadelphia, 13 operating. There's two additional approved to open next fall, Christopher Columbus and Atlas at this particular point. There's also a fourth one in Allegheny County that's approved. The Thurgood Marshal Charter, which will open next September, and the Lehigh Valley Performing Arts Charter, which has been approved north of here to open next September. 35 have been approved. And we have currently 52 applications in front of School 12 Boards in the Commonwealth, for those of you that 13 are keeping box scores there. 14 I will return briefly to the 15 definition of a charter school. Not to cover plowed 16 ground again, or plowed plowed ground again, but to 17 get our charter operators into their presentation 18 here. 19 Mission: I'm not going to talk that 20 that, when the people that can best talk about the mission of a charter school, which varies in a customed design way from school to school, the best people to describe that are the chief administrator officers of the charter schools. But freedom has to do with 21 RESOLUTION 980766 deregulation. You hear a lot about, you're not going to get anything different by doing the same thing. Well, if the rules for charter schools are the same as they are for our schools, after a while, you are going to have more of the same stuff. To get something different, you have to change the rules. It is called deregulation. There has been a lot of deregulation in services to people in our society, and right now schools are no 13 exception. Charter schools allow for deregulation. What do we mean by that? 80 percent of all state laws and regulations are waived, gone, but so is the local School Board policy.
And when I was a School Board business manager, and in charge of policy, I made sure we had two policy books that thick. They're gone, as is any contract line. Now, people have all sort of opinions about no contract, no teacher's contract, no School Board policy, no state law. But the point is that if you are waiving regulation, you are waiving it at all 22 RESOLUTION 980766 levels, not just some level. Everybody is giving it up to let charters do something different. And the last thing is independence to sustain this. When you create a chart school as an independent entity, it is a new sort of political entity in Pennsylvania. And in the eyes of the federal government it is a local education agency, which means on some maters it deals directly with the state education agency. And as we work the school districts, we found, for example, that federal money is not passed through the school district, but comes directly from the state to the charters. And that really underlines that definition of a charter school as an LEA. That is a distinction that does need to be made. And it took a little while to work that out after the bill was passed. I'm not going to say any more because you can't talk more about charters without talking about mission, and the people that do that are sitting with me at the table. And I think we're going to go with 23 RESOLUTION 980766 first school in Philadelphia first, as we're reminded by Mr. Proietta, Community Charter, High School Charter was first. And the first shall be first. And in addition to that, I am happy to say, having been there, we were there at the dedication of his new addition. So not only was it a new charter school last year, but it is growing this year. Joe.
My name is Joe Proietta, and I am the principal of Philadelphia Community Academy. Since 1990, ten -- CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Would you spell your last name for the stenographer. And, again, welcome to all of you.
Oh, sure. Thank you. Joseph Proietta, P-R-O-I-E-T-T-A. And John has asked me to remind everyone that I'm also the President of the Philadelphia Alliance of Charter Schools. And I guess before I begin also, I would like to thank Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell 24 RESOLUTION 980766 and the members of the committee for having these hearings today. And we also at our last PACS meeting, we discussed the fact that we were so proud and happy to see that newsletter that came from your office. And we were very grateful for that, and we wish to thank you for doing that. Getting back to Philadelphia Community Academy. Since 1990, ten of our students or graduates have been victims of violence. We've had ten funerals in the last eight years. Heroin, crack cocaine are sold in the public parking lot right next to the school. The Inquirer reports that over 10,000 students are truant from school every day within a one-mile radius of our school. That's our mission. The mission of Philadelphia Community Academy is to save, to re-educate, to rescue those students who have fallen through the cracks and have become victims to a society that doesn't seem to care. And caring becomes the big issue with them when they come to us. We've existed really for 20 years. We're about to have our 20th Anniversary. I'm sure 25 RESOLUTION 980766 Councilwoman Blackwell and many Councilmembers from our years of fighting in Council are aware of us as the Community High School. Because of that, we are also in a very unique situation as a charter school. And that situation is that we're the only charter school I know of in the country that is accredited. And we are a middle-states-credited high school. Part of our mission and part of the way we see the way in which we can carry out this mission is by providing a full-service high school. And our high school not only has what I think is an excellent educational program, but we also have a health clinic in the school, staffed by the Philadelphia Health Department with nurse practitioners. And, as you know, nurse practitioners act as family physicians and are able to prescribe medication, do tests, and make necessary referrals. Through our health clinic, we have recently found two young women, 16 years old, with morbidly high blood pressure and have been able to get them the proper medical care, something that might have, again, slipped through the cracks. RESOLUTION 980766 We also provide daycare within the school, and we work very closely with teen mothers. And we have young children in our daycare right 5 now who are the children of children. 6 We also provide full social services 7 for our students. We have a social worker on staff 8 who works full time and is able to provide help with 9 things like getting a house, paying the gas bill, 10 getting a protection order, all the kinds of things 11 that come up during the day. What we want to do, and the reason that we provide these kinds of services, is that we want to create an environment where a student is free to study, free to take their academic load and deal with it. Because many times -- although there are problems, and we're all aware of them, in the public schools -- one of the things that the public schools and us as an inner-city school must deal with are those problems that are going on outside the school that make it impossible sometimes for a young person to come into a building, sit down, and do their work. And on the scale that we can do that, 27 RESOLUTION 980766 I think we're doing a very good job. And I hope as that, one of the other advantages of charter schools is that we can be a model that the public school system, which, of course, will have a much greater impact, can follow. Our attendance in our school is 86 percent. That's something that we're not happy with. But compared to what we're surrounded by, and by the problems, again, of urban education, it's very high for attendance for general comprehensive high school. We're working on that.
And we have programs, including home visits, that we perform. Our registrar and our social worker go out to the homes and try to find out what's going on and encourage students to come to school. This past June we graduated 40 students. Over the almost 20-year history of the school, we've graduated a thousand students. We think they are a thousand students who would not have graduated from high school if it weren't for our school. That's our mission. We're very proud of what we do. And we're very grateful to 28 RESOLUTION 980766 Representative Dwight Evans, who pushed the charter school all through, so that we could continue the good work that we've done. And I see that Councilman Cohen is here. And I know that Councilman Cohen is very much aware of our year-to-year-to-year struggles. And one thing that the charter has done for us, has given us the freedom to expand, as Dr. Daniels said, has given us the freedom to grow. We've gone from 180 students last year, to 250 students this year. The charter has allowed us to get bank loans. Because previously with the one year-to-year-to year contract, it was difficult for us to convince lending institutions that we would be around to pay off the loan. So that's made it possible for Community High School to do construction for Philadelphia Community Academy. And thank you very much. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you very much.
Well said. Right at the mission. And open for visitors any time; right, 29 RESOLUTION 980766 Joe?
Absolutely. We love having people come in. Councilwoman Blackwell knows.
Dr. Ryder is the Chief Administrative Officer of the World Communications Charter. And I've been there a lot. And one of the things that really made an impact on me was, seeing his teachers teach, and then talking to him about his veteran staff, is, many of his staff members took significant pay cuts to teach in his building. And he still had more people that wanted to teach there than he had slots. Dr. Ryder.
My name is Martin Ryder from World Communication Charter School. And we are located about five blocks from here. And you can walk right down Broad Street, and we're open. And we invite you to come any time. The mission of World Communications Charter School is, we think, is a unique mission. And our mission is to make sure that any student graduating from that school has access, has the 30 RESOLUTION 980766 skills and competencies such that they can enter the corporate world entry level without compromising the profit margin of those corporations who are working with us. And that's a tall mission. And as part of that tall mission, what we do is to do an extensive program with corporations. We have several specific programs. We work very closely with the Graphic Arts Union and with communications agencies and corporations here. And we are working very hard to make sure that our kids have those saleable skills and the skills are there. Our curriculum is basically an academic curriculum. And we begin our students in algebra and in language in sixth grade, and we make sure that those children are proficient throughout the program. Part of what we -- part of the secret in terms of how we do that is that we have mandatory parental involvement. And we sort of rest our laurels on that. As a matter of fact, I thank the parents who came to support us. Can you sort of 31 RESOLUTION 980766 raise your hands? Okay. Thank you. (Parents stand.) (Applause.)
And these parents came out. Well, usually we have very large parent meetings in the evenings. But these parents came out in the morning, and a couple of them took off from work just to make sure they were here. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Dr. Ryder would you pull the mike a little closer.
These parents took off from work. And many of them are here in these early morning hours to show support for charter schools. Our population now is 450 students. And our grade levels go from 6th through 10th at this time, and eventually we will go from 6th through 12th. We in the school have -- I'm trying to read my own writing here. We work very closely with the concept of developing human capital in our community. And one of those concepts is sustaining community curriculum. What Derrick Spahn was talking about 32 RESOLUTION 980766 earlier here, in terms of putting together that community model, is a process that we live inside the school. And we live this by involving corporations and parents. And our major objective is to make sure that the values of the parents and community equate with those values of corporate structure so that that transition from corporate structure or to entrepreneurism is an easy one for our children and families. Thank you.
Dr. Ryder, how many students do you have on the waiting list?
I just wanted to make sure I heard that right. To my left is Taylor Frome, Chief Administrative Officer of Youth Build. 33 RESOLUTION 980766 That's a program that's often on my mind because Youth Build in York, Pennsylvania, is trying to start a charter school. And it is engendering a little bit of -- how shall I put it? -- conversation. So I know Taylor Frome has been involved there, and I have, too, in helping to create another charter school. But in her charter school, you really believe when you go out and watch them pour the footers down on Cherry Street, when she is reconstructing old houses. I have been there and done that, and I am glad I was wearing galoshes.
Good morning. As Tim, said I am Taylor Frome. I am the Executive Director of the Youth Build Philadelphia Charter School. Briefly stated, our mission is to provide career-based educational opportunities for high school dropouts. You have to put that in a context of Philadelphia, where the school districts stated dropout rate is 51 percent, to realize that 34 RESOLUTION 980766 providing opportunities for this population has to have an impact on public education. And we see our mission as broader than what our school can do, and have put a lot of time and energy into developing and maintaining relationships with the school district so that the work we do can have a larger impact. Last year, 95 former high school dropouts earned their high school diplomas at the Youth Build Philadelphia Charter School. The way that we are able to be successful with this population is a combination of providing a really high level of challenge, with high expectations, and also providing the supports that they need in order to meet those goals and expectations. The students that graduated last year had an average of 97 percent attendance for the year. And what that means is that they were absent very, very few days. That requires a huge commitment from the student and a huge commitment from the staff to deal with each absence. So each student is accountable every day. 35 RESOLUTION 980766 And we do that because we're career-based. We expect our students to be able to succeed in the workplace when they graduate. At this point our whole career-based curriculum is built around construction. And our students rebuild abandoned houses in three different parts of Philadelphia. If Councilwoman Anna Verna was here, she could talk to you about the fact that we have been doing housing in South Philadelphia since 1992, with her support. We also have been doing housing in North Philadelphia for the last three years, and in Germantown this year. We may do housing in other parts of the city as we expand. Students spend half their time in classes and half their time as part of a construction crew rebuilding houses. So it is a serious level of investment and time that they spend working on houses. Last year we built 12 houses with that group of 95 students. So in addition to earning their high school diploma, they really knew they had done something. They could see the houses, 36 RESOLUTION 980766 families moved into those houses, communities are being rebuilt. In terms of our relationship with the school district, this is our sixth year in a direct relationship with the school district around the population of high school dropouts. We were original members and continue to participate in the School To Career Work Team. And in that team we take the role of helping think about out-of-school youth and the school-to-career transition. We were on the committee that established the Next Step Centers in Philadelphia. One of our graduates sits on the task force on truancy. We're developing a curriculum that we think is much more effective with out-of-school youth and also with at-risk youth. And we have been developing a teaching model that's significantly different from what's going on in the public schools and what's going on in education in general that we're interested in offering to the school district and having piloted in other schools throughout the system. We have been doing portfolio 37 RESOLUTION 980766 assessment for the last three years and have been working with the school district on that because they see that and we see that as one of the ways to make education more concrete and more -- to make the assessment more tied to the product that a student can produce after they graduate or after they're promoted each year. So that it has to be directly tied to what they're able to do. And we're very, very interested in the larger repercussions that our program can have on the district as a whole.
When we look at the 51 percent drop out rate, there isn't any way that our school has the ambition to serve that whole population. It would require another system the size of the comprehensive high schools in Philadelphia. And that's never -- that's not our goal. Our goal is to develop the methods, develop the relationships to make it happen, and to maintain and bring the school district along with us every step of the way. Thank you.
Thank you, Taylor. Last, certainly not least, for those of you who know 38 RESOLUTION 980766 him, John Skief, Chief Administrator Officer of Harambee Charter School. Two things. One, you just, in terms of parent involvement, you know it when you go down to a meeting for a small talk and 200 people show up. It's nice to have an audience. And he does get parent turn` out for his meetings. And also as an ex-church choir director myself, hearing his student body sing at the Thanksgiving assembly was really wonderful, too. It is a wonderful school. John.
Thank you, Tim. And good morning to the Councilmembers and the State Representative. And thank you for the parents that came out in support of what we're trying to do. As was said before, my name is John Skief. I am the Chief Administrative Officer of Harambee Institute of Science and Technology Charter School. We are located at the Penn Memorial Church, which is at 54th and Wynnefield Avenue. We have 240 students from Grade to 8. Harambee's mission is based on the needs of our community. Our first parent interest 39 RESOLUTION 980766 meeting was one that consisted not of us telling the parents what we were going to do, but we put a microphone and a video camera in front of the parents and we asked them two questions: What are the needs of our community? The second question was, if we were to establish a school, what is it that you feel we should teach these children in order to meet the needs of our community? That became the basis of our mission. Because Harambee, and based on what the parents and community have responded to us, Harambee believes that education should lead to self-reliance. Harambee also believes that our children should leave that institution with an identity, who they are; a purpose, why they are in school; and a direction, what they're going to do with the information and the knowledge and the resources once they have it. Harambee also seeks to empower parents to see themselves as equal partners in this goal and struggle of education. So we have empowered parents and we 40 RESOLUTION 980766 also offer to those parents seminars in terms of how to deal with their youth in these very, very difficult times of trying to develop their children. We also believe that all of our children, regardless of where they live, should have the opportunity to have a challenging educational program. Because I lived in the West Philadelphia community. My children went to a neighborhood school. Although they may have made the honor roll in these schools, unfortunately their test scores weren't high enough to make it into some of the better schools. This educational Apartheid, as I call it, needs to be addressed. So Harambee offers a very challenging educational program, irrespective of what their so-called test scores were previously, as long as the children are educationally ready. I have worked in the Philadelphia public schools for 28 years before Harambee was established. And in spite of what you heard, I believe in the system. And I believed in public school and I believed in change. 41 RESOLUTION 980766 So much so that in 1989, I became the first of the restructuring leaders at West Philadelphia High School. The 9th grade initiative at West Philadelphia was led my me. The Philadelphia Schools Collaborative, which was set up to push change within the public schools, employed me in many cases to do workshops. 1 million grant, which was given to Philadelphia because it pushed high school reform and community revitalization. I believed in the system. Both evaluations of the U Grant, as well as the Philadelphia Schools Collaborative Initiative, the evaluations reported that the Administration of the Philadelphia school system has been ambiguous when it came to supporting reform. The teachers' union was looked upon as being an impediment to school reform. 1 million was poured into the West Philadelphia 42 RESOLUTION 980766 community, that the middle-level leadership, including the principal, did not really support reform in the public schools. I've always been about reform because I've always been a resident of Philadelphia, particularly of West Philadelphia, where I taught. And it was only through the frustration of attempts to reform the school system from within, and the dissolution of the Philadelphia Schools Collaborative when they pushed too hard in the Philadelphia school system, and it was dissolved, only through that, and once I saw the opportunity of charter schools, I jumped on the band wagon.
Much of what's supposed to go down in the charter schools was supposed to go down in the Philadelphia school system, had they listened to the Pew Foundation's suggestions and had they gone along with the ideas that were set forth by the Philadelphia Schools Collaborative. It was only in the failure of reform that I switched over to charter schools. But, I must say, I was very, very naive. Because I've always seen charter schools as 43 RESOLUTION 980766 public schools. " And I am the first. I am West Philadelphia cluster's first charter school. I really believed that we were going to have a partnership as far as education within my community. But I found very early on through the chartering process, with the Philadelphia School Board, it became more of an adversarial relationship. We talked less about education and much more about finances and money. My issue with charter schools is for us and for this community to see charter schools as a choice in public education, in which we would work hand in hand with the Philadelphia public school system because we had the opportunity and the freedom and the independence to do some innovative things. Hopefully, that these innovative initiatives that we had sponsored would be replicated in the public schools. But I guess I was very, very much 44 RESOLUTION 980766 naive about that. Because I do not see a partnership going on with the charter schools, as well as the Philadelphia public school system. My issue today is one of equity. The children who attend Harambee Institute and all the other charter schools in Philadelphia are public school children, but they do not receive the equity that the Philadelphia public school receives of the $6800 and change that go to or follows a child into the public school system. The charter schools get 5200 of that money. Our special ed subsidies, which we need desperately to handle our children with special needs, have been denied, delayed, held up because of implied mistrust and basically bureaucratic impediments. Regardless of the ambiguities of the law, regardless of that, our children are still not receiving equal resources when it comes to education. The most troubling situation to me is the fact that if you choose, if a parent chooses, to send their children to a private school, they will get busing from the Philadelphia school system. 45 RESOLUTION 980766 If parents choose to send their children to a Catholic school, they will get busing from the Philadelphia school system. And, more recently, if parents choose to send their children to Bucks County to the Mosaic School, they will get busing from the Philadelphia school system. But if parents choose to send their children to a charter school in Philadelphia, the buses run right by them. At 54th and Wynnefield, there are a number of private and Catholic schools right around there, and our children watch as the buses ride by. It's troubling to me because we have and elementary school, from -- and we service children from Grades 1 to 8. And because I have the economic means, I can drive my ten-year-old daughter to Harambee for education. Because the parents of Devon Smith, who live in East Falls, they don't have the economic means, so Devon, a ten-year-older, has to get on the bus with his 8-year-old brother, his 7-year-old twin brother and sister. That ten-year-older is in 46 RESOLUTION 980766 charge. They have to take three buses on the way to and from school. Sometimes the buses pass them by going home from school, and it takes these children hours to get home. I don't know what the law is or what it shouldn't be and how the law should be interpreted. The final results are, our children get less resources and are put in a dangerous situation of trying to find their way to and from school. It is the idea of equity that I'm really talking about. Because grants that are sent in Philadelphia from the federal government and private foundations, unfortunately we're locked out of those grants.
The after school program initiative that has been voted on, and I understand the school system enjoys, we hardly even knew about it. If we do not provide a choice in public education, then we will be forced to deal with those new initiatives that we do not like. I would like to paraphrase a statement by the late John F. " Thank you. ) CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And let me say, I think, Mr. Skief, that you got to the heart of the matter about why we need these hearings, to talk about what charter schools are and even why you, all of you, are involved. Let me ask you, if all of you, it seems to me, came from the heads of schools, came from the school district, and/or why you chose to get involved in the charter school system, as opposed to a regular public school or maintain your direction in education as it was going. Mr. Proietta, let me ask you first what made you pick charter and the others.
Well, I wasn't a public schoolteacher. The community high school was a contractor with the school district. And I had been committed for well over 20 years to the idea of alternatives and the 48 RESOLUTION 980766 idea that every kid just isn't going to fit into the same system. So back in 1980 -- and Councilman Cohen was there when we first started in 1980 -- we were looking for ways in which those kids that fell through the cracks would have a way of getting back into school and back into education. So, basically, my whole professional career has been committed to the idea of alternatives and the idea that over the last probably ten years or so, that the children of Philadelphia deserve more than what they've been getting. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. Let me, before we continue, introduce the other members of the panel who are here. To my extreme left, Councilman Angel Ortiz. Next to him is Councilwoman Augusta Clark, who before I assumed Chairperson of this committee, held it for about a dozen years, as she says. Next to her is Councilman David Cohen to whom you just referred. Next to him is Councilman Rick Mariano. To my right, again, we introduced them, the co-chair, as State Representative Dwight 49 RESOLUTION 980766 Evans. To his right, certainly he's one of our State Representatives in West Philadelphia, my district, and we're absolutely very happy to have -- I am getting ready to call you Councilman. State Representative Michael Horsey. We thank you so much for being part of this committee. And again Councilwoman Donna Miller, who we introduced earlier. And sitting there, who has also been a part of all the hearings we have and always comes out, Councilman Frank Rizzo. Thank you. With that, let me ask Dr. Ryder what made you go this route, as opposed to the traditional educational system.
Jannie, as you well know, I had a son, I have a son, and I was in the Philadelphia educational system. And we -- and my wife and I decided to use public education, and so we did. And although my son did finally get a scholarship and went on to college, the problem was that we were not satisfied with his education once he left 8th grade. And we found that my son was, in fact, cheated. 50 RESOLUTION 980766 And how I say cheated is because, in fact, that in his educational system, he wasn't given the opportunities and the support to do a lot of things that we thought he ought to do. So I sort of made up my mind at that point that parents needed choice. And even though we had the means for choice, this system did not offer other parents choice. And we had talked to many, many parents there. As a matter of fact, I can sort of tell you, I was working as the principal of a middle school when several parents came to me, knowing that at that point I was getting ready to leave and go to a charter school. And those parents asked me could they come. And they -- and probably a few of the first students we had were the students that came with those parents and the students that came with the people who were planning with us in the charter group. Choice is a very, very important aspect. If choice is not allowed in our system, we are going to fail these children. If you look straight across this 51 RESOLUTION 980766 board, and you can look at even your magnet schools, you can take Central and Girls High and also look at Engineering Science, and what you're going to find is that the playing field is not equal, and it is not equal for our children. And I'm not going to mention any statistics, but I'm going to tell this panel to go up and take a look at how many minorities drop out of the 9th and 10th grade at Central. I didn't say West Philly, and I didn't say Bartrum, and I didn't say University City; I said Central. Now, if you take a look at that, then you will understand why choice is the most important factor that our parents have in the Philadelphia community. And if you take that choice away, you will fail, you will continue to fail, generations of our children. And that dropout rate that Taylor was talking about of 51 percent is only modest when you look at comprehensive high schools. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. Taylor Frome.
I also never worked for the School District of Philadelphia. I came into 52 RESOLUTION 980766 educating high school dropouts from working in Crisis Intervention Network and the Philadelphia Anti-drug and Anti-violence Network, where I was working with the young people involved in gangs and youth violence and found that -- that was how I discovered what the dropout rate was in Philadelphia and discovered how few opportunities there were for those young men and women to get off the streets once they had made the mistake of leaving school and getting into trouble. And in forming the organization Youth Build Philadelphia, we established a relationship with the school district from the very beginning. So that we were originally in partnership with Bartrum high school. Because we knew from the beginning that the problem was way too big for any small nonprofit, and that it needed to be deeply connected to the school district and feeding what we learned into the district. So it's always been, I guess, part of the vision to be doing exactly what we're doing. But charter school status has given us the ability to really step up our activities, take further -- 53 RESOLUTION 980766 take larger steps towards developing the curriculum and the teaching model, set our own standards, and expand. So we're very pleased to be able to be a charter school at this point. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. Let me ask John Skief. Because all of us know Harambee that has been around a long time. It wasn't a charter school initially, but I know you had an after-school program, also. But I know you've been fighting for Harambee Institute I guess as long as I have known you, and that's a long -- I don't remember when I didn't know you, so it's a long, long time. You mentioned several things. One, you said that the school district provides -- and we say this because our next panel will be the Superintendent of Schools and people from the Board who deal with charter schools. And we want to ask them if they will try to respond to some of these issues so we all have a better understanding of where we are and where we are going in this arena. You mentioned $6800 per child, but the charter schools get 5200. But you mentioned 54 RESOLUTION 980766 other issues, as well, special ed money and busing money. And I've heard charter school operators complain about issues like tokens and all of that. And when I tried to check on these issues, I've been told at the board level that charter schools sign a contract, and they kind of know what they're getting before they come, and that's the long and short of it. Can you give a little insight into what you mean by equity or inequity?
Well, if that's the answer that you got, that was really an unacceptable answer, the last statement that you said. Because we have to look at charter schools as another example of school reform. And as far as I'm concerned, in a community where we know and it is proven that our children are educationally deficient, every cent of the educational subsidy should follow the child. I don't know what happens to the 1600 or the 1400 that the school district keeps. I don't know what happens to that. But I do know that we are expected to do the same, if not more, with less. 55 RESOLUTION 980766 The aspect of special education was tied to mistrust. Because at first it was believed that charter schools did not have the integrity to properly tag a student for special ed. And then the means of getting charter school funds have always been ambiguous, and the recordkeeping and following the records and even obtaining records. Because we have had children to matriculate into Harambee Institute that were on behavior modification, but we didn't know that. We have had children that matriculated into Harambee Institute that were illegally written off or taken off of special education, and we had to deal with that. So regardless of the problems we may have obtaining records, obtaining resources for our children of special needs, we are held accountable by the state to make sure that we provide free and appropriate education for these children. And regardless of the ambiguities of the law, thank you, from what I have heard, Philadelphia is one of the only cities that have a problem busing children across the state. 56 RESOLUTION 980766 So it became very, very obvious to me that we were into an adversarial relationship, fighting over the little bit of crumbs that were brought down as far as education is concerned. And I initially did not see the school district as my enemy in that. I thought that we needed to get together and show the public that we can produce a quality educational program, and in that way the public would be with us when we came as a group to Harrisburg to ask for more funds. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Let me ask another question. And we will ask one of the other panels to respond. When a charter school -- obviously, and I guess, Mr. Daniels and Mr. Spahn might in part respond to this. If a person decides they want to take advantage of a charter school opportunity, they want to start a charter school, what they first have to do is get -- where do they get and file their proposals? Because we know charter means you get a charter from the state, which means you get permission from the state to have your own school. 57 RESOLUTION 980766 How does that start?
Slightly differently than just stated. But it starts with, we have planning grants of up to $25,000. We have awarded now 192 planning grants of between and thousand. 8 Right in Project Community Build is 9 the application, with Mr. Spahn. He has the 10 applications here, if anybody's interested. 11 CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. 12
And that is the state 13 involvement. That's a competitive grant. 14 Usually we award about between 50 and 15 60 percent of the grant applications grants. So it 16 is competitive. Of the 192 awarded, we've had well 17 over 300 groups apply. 18 However, once the group gets the 19 grant, they work as a group and apply to a local 20 School Board, as happened here in Philadelphia. 21 I believe 25 have applied before the 22 deadline of November 15 to open in September of 23 '99. And it's really, a charter is a contract with 24 the school district and the local chartering group. 25 It's not with the state. 58 RESOLUTION 980766 The state receives a copy of that contract, we keep it in our archives, just as we receive the annual report of the charter school. That's a little sidebar on accountability. People say, what about the accountability of charter schools. You are going to read a lot in the papers pro and con on that. Studies say they are doing well, studies say they are doing poorly. But, at any rate, it is the only school an annual report is required. It goes to the school district and also to the Secretary of Education. And I will throw in the fact that charter schools must also take the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment, and the results will be published on a profile. Derrick, in terms of starting a charter school, do you have anything add on that? CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: You said the contract is between whom and whom? It is not the state; it is between whom?
The school district and the chartering group. 59 RESOLUTION 980766
Dr. Daniels has clearly indicated -- CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Please pull the mike. We didn't hear one word you said.
Dr. Daniels has clearly indicated the process of starting the charter school. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: We still can't hear you. Pull the mike closer.
Dr. Daniels has spoken adequately and accurately in terms of how to start a charter school. And, of course, again, the process is a competitive one. Once an application reaches our office, we glean information from it, from the project office. And within 48 hours those applications are sent over to the Department of Education, where we then wait for that department to convene a review committee to begin reviewing those applications, or those applicant's application who are requesting a planning grant. Much of the project office is involved in that reviewing process. After which, 60 RESOLUTION 980766 those allocations are made. But Dr. Daniels has adequately indicated the process by which you get underway to start one. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. Let me ask that the parents again, for Councilmembers who might not have seen you, would the parents please, this is Work Communications Charter parents, would you stand up so other members of Council can see who you are, people who have taken off work and made a commitment to be here. We thank you again for coming. (Parents stand.) (Applause.)
There are also some Harambee parents here, also. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Yes, Harambee parents, we can't ignore you. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. Thank you all for coming. Taylor, and then we will take questions, Councilman Cohen and Councilman Ortiz.
I just wanted to make a 61 RESOLUTION 980766 point, because in the last couple of questions you touch on an issue which I think for the charter school operators is part of the confusion and complication in dealing with the school district, which is that in the state's commitment to deregulation and freedom, they turned over the regulation of charter schools to the school district without a lot of defining parameters. So that, for us, we are told that we are a local education agency with the same standing as the school district, and yet we are basically regulated by the school district. And it turns into a lot of tension and confusion, which is, I think, a piece of what Mr. Skief is talking about, also, in that the state will say, well, we didn't -- this is not our regulation, it is the school district's. And yet as an LEA, we basically are supposed to be a school district, each of us, each charter school. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. We will field questions from the panel. Councilwoman Clark.
Thank you for the opportunity. I know that we have a chock full 62 RESOLUTION 980766 schedule this morning. Do charter schools consider themselves to be public schools?
Do you consider yourself to be equal to the school district or a subunit of the school district in the locality where you reside?
I'm not sure the question is what we consider ourselves to be. The state considers us to be equal to the school district and subordinate to the school district both.
But you can't be both. You can't be both equal to and subordinate to. First I want to know what you think of yourself as being, and then I will ask the school district what they think of you as being. And the more we define who and what you are, the easier it is going to be for your consuming public to understand and know who to ask for what.
We do see ourselves as a 63 RESOLUTION 980766 public school and we see ourselves as a choice, another alternative, in public education.
I think that's even more important. In order for us to survive, if you look behind you, we have to have freedom and independence. And as you well know, Ms. Clark, in terms of looking at the freedom to develop our curriculum and to make those relationships and partnerships, we have to mate with business, industry, parents, and community. Then to say that we are subordinate to and therefore governed by regulations that have already proven to be failure would limit our successes. The fact that we are charters and can do things that are slightly different and offer alternative educational designs and processes to the school district is extremely important. And in order for that to happen, we have to maintain that independence. 64 RESOLUTION 980766
One other point should be noted. And that is, another question may be, not necessarily what they feel themselves to be. I think an important question is what they feel themselves not to be. And, that is, competitors of the school district, or even enemies of the school district. And certainly the Governor's intent here is to create schools of choice. Not necessarily making charter schools opponents or in competition with public school systems, but rather providing an opportunity for choice and empowering parents and teachers and communities to design custom-designed educational programs to meet the specific needs of children and, indeed, specific talents of children. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Councilman.
We have two classes here from Roberto Clemente School, one over there and one over there. Kids, will you stand up. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Welcome. (School students stand.) 65 RESOLUTION 980766 (Applause.) CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you very much. Councilman Cohen.
Thank you. I think these hearings are very important because I know of no other subject that's been as confusing for the public and for me personally. For example, right at the moment, I would say I'm opposed to charter schools, I'm opposed to vouchers, but my mind is open. But I've always been supportive of what Mr. Proietta did, and that seems to have been a very early example of the charter school. His case was very clear and easy, because he was dealing with children who had fell through the cracks, they were out of school and somehow, miraculously, his faculty, he himself, put together a curriculum, put together a lot of side issues that helped educate a group of children that the public schools said were not educable because they had dropped out. That was a very clear case. These other cases are not so clear to me, and it may be because I don't understand them. 66 RESOLUTION 980766 So I have a few questions I would just like to direct to different members of the panel in an effort to get a better understanding. To Mr. Ryder, I think it was you, sir, who spoke of the Central High dropouts. And that would be a matter of very deep concern. Let me ask you, does your charter school, have you accepted Central High dropouts? And, if you have, what has been the record in your case?
Okay. My charter school, first, has only been in business for two years. I'm not Joe and John and Taylor here, who have 10 to 15 years or better behind them. I'm -- at the time this was organized, I was the new kid on the block. So we haven't had that many Central students apply to us, because last year we only went to 9th grade. This year we are going to 10th grade. And I'm sure if they would apply, I would be happy to accept them.
Well, and if they do apply, and I hope they do, we would like to hear what happens to them, how you fill in the gaps which 67 RESOLUTION 980766 caused them to drop out of Central High School. That would be very important. The word "choice" is not a word that attracts me because I'm for choice and I'm against choice. For example, when it comes with respect to women's right to choose, I'm for choice. When it comes to choice moving away from public school education, I'm against choice. So the word "choice" itself is a very difficult one. Under some circumstances choice seems to me good, and other cases I find myself in opposition. What I would like to know from any member of the panel is, how does the charter school differ from the vouchers as a potential threat to the public school system?
One of the things -- I'm going to take that one from my colleagues. One of the things about charter schools, you have to understand, is that it is a public school, it is not a voucher school. The second thing about the concept of choice is that while you may be able to say whether 68 RESOLUTION 980766 or not you are against it or for it, most parents don't have that choice. They can't say whether they are against it or for it. If the public school fails that child, guess where that child ends up? You know, he ends up with that parent. That family will continue to carry the economic burden of that child whether or not the public school is successful or fails. And, incidentally, when you look at a charter school, if a charter school fails to provide that educational choice, fails to provide that quality education, or doesn't make its mission, they close down. Now, I would like for you to understand that. What we're saying here is that if a charter school fails to provide a quality education, they will be made to close down. And --
And it is that parent's choice that either makes it or break it, and it is those -- and it is that concept that it is a performance-based program that allows charter schools to survive or not to survive. 69 RESOLUTION 980766
Could I hear from the other members of the panel? Mr. Proietta? CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: And I will note that in my experience with meeting all the charter school directors and principals, they have absolutely the parental input and support that, unfortunately, many of our neighborhood public schools lack.
I think that's a very important factor. (Applause.) CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Yes.
I think that throughout American history, we have come to the conclusion that monopolies don't work. And, as John mentioned, and he was quoting President Kennedy, there are two ways to go about breaking up monopolies. And one way is that you can go a very radical route. And as you mentioned vouchers, that might be the most radical route, or supporting private schools. Or you can go with a kind of controlled, temperate reform. And charter schools present that 70 RESOLUTION 980766 because charter schools are public schools, are regulated by the state in the way the public schools are. And I know we've talked a lot about deregulation, but most of the essential rules apply, health, safety, discrimination. Those laws all apply to us in the same way that they do to the public schools. And, therefore, I think, we are able to offer an alternative, offer something that challenges the public schools, as well as supports the parents.
Yes. I would also like to add that since 1967, there have been many reform initiatives within the public schools, such as the Parkway Program. There's nothing new in what's going on with charter schools. When the Pew Foundation put in, I guess, around $16 million into the Philadelphia school system for reform, if you look at the mission of what supposedly was reformed, you will find that the charter schools meet that. 71 RESOLUTION 980766 But I'd also like to remind you that the Clark report, which was the evaluation team of the Pew Foundation money into the Philadelphia school system, stated that under Dr. Constance Clayton, her leadership and promotion of that school reform was ambiguous. They said that a major impediment were the work rules that were established through the PFT. Now, these impediments, both administratively, as well as through the workplace, were impediments to the change that was supposed to go on within the system. And it seemed that the system was not able to reform from within. One of the things that you'll find within the school system today is that we have clusters of schools and we have small learning communities in which teachers come together as teams. Well, a team is just that, people who have common missions, people who have the same type of commitment. But when that team is made up of seniority and the work rules that have been set up, 72 RESOLUTION 980766 they become impediments to change. And, once again, through the failure of change from within, we get charter schools. And charter schools are the last effort in public education to provide a meaningful alternative in public education. The failure of charter schools, along with the failure of public education, will give you the very thing that you don't want, and that's vouchers.
Mr. Skief, just one question. Could you be specific on the impediments? You have referred several times to them, the impediments created by the union.
Well, in terms of the union, when you have seniority as being the reason why teachers are coming together, or the only way teachers can come together -- let's look at the one that I had in West Philadelphia High School, the Community Development Charter. That's what we called it when I was at teacher at West. We never had a science teacher. Never had one. Because every time one came in, they were either a substitute. We didn't have the choice 73 RESOLUTION 980766 of choosing a science teacher. Every year we had a different one because of the work rules. We had a good one, but she couldn't stay because she had to pick another school because someone was more senior to her. These are just some of them. Now, as a leader in the school restructuring effort, I would go to the school district collaborative meetings, and I would hear about all of the wonderful innovations and changes that we could do. But then I would bring it back to my school and try to do it, and my principal really wasn't interested in that. And sometimes department heads weren't interested in that. So --
But the principal's action was not governed by the union, was it?
No, it wasn't. But as I said, in that Clark report, that evaluation said, it stated, that the Administration was not clear in its support of the reform. Because, you see, once that reform 74 RESOLUTION 980766 was suggested, that means that the power basis of many of those entities like department heads were all gone, that the principals had to share power with community and parents, and listen to teachers, share decisionmaking. You know, these were the changes that were bantered about, but the reality never came. And in my situation, I've been out and out suspended because -- in my own school because I believed in what was said at these meetings.
A very persuasive man. May I just ask Ms. Frome for her version.
I can understand your concern about vouchers and the ways that charter schools and vouchers are often mentioned in the same phrase in terms of ways to give parents more choice about charter schools. From the school operator's point of view, I think that there are substantial differences, in that we are a part of the -- we are a public school, and we are part of what I would 75 RESOLUTION 980766 consider to be the school system's education reform efforts. And I think that, for me, that's the substance of the difference, is that, as far as I can tell, the voucher system really just gives the parent a choice, but does not create a relationship between the institutions that then get those public funds and the larger system. There's no impact on the group as a whole. We have an opportunity where we are now, which we still haven't completely actualized, for charter schools to become a resource for the school system in terms of systems and ideas and grass-roots-generated assessment of what parents can contribute. I think that that's part of the goal of charter schools that's been difficult to implement, partly because of the struggles over money. But I think that, for me at least, that that's a big piece of what the potential for charter schools is.
Did that cover the suburban school in Bucks County that's a for-profit 76 RESOLUTION 980766 school, and I think it's considered a charter school? Is there anybody here that --
Pennsylvania requires that the schools be not-for-profit. So, therefore, the way that those schools are set up is that they hire Mosaica as an administrative body to run the school on a contract. But the school is not a for-profit school; it is a nonprofit school.
The board of directors, the board of trustees of that charter, is not a for-profit. And the provider of instructional services is the Mosaica Corporation. I want to say something about choice, and it has to do with a personal perspective. Both of my children went K through 12 through West Chester area school district. I am very proud of what they did. But as a lifetime public school employee myself, my satisfaction was increased by choice. My wife happens to teach at the Westtown School, the oldest continuously operating public school in the country. 77 RESOLUTION 980766 And as a spouse, we get almost a zero tuition option for our children. I had the choice, and I kept my kids in the public school. But I felt better about it because I had the choice. When Dr. Ryder points out the fact that some people don't have the choice because their spouses don't teach in alternative, if you choose the public schools, you are going to feel a lot better about it. So if there is choice, people that remain in the public schools by choice, their consumer satisfaction comes up too, because people want to be there. And when you want to be there, then achievement is bound to come up, if everybody agrees on that.
For the record, I have four children. They are all adults. Every one of them went K through 12 through the public school system.
Under circumstances where many other parents were 78 RESOLUTION 980766 making -- we didn't call it choice then, but making other choices. But I believe if a case can be demonstrated that charter schools strengthen the public school system, it is clear to me it is a very positive movement. If, on the other hand, if the evidence indicates that charter schools weaken the public school system, then I think it's as strong a negative. And it's that that I am struggling, and I think most people in the city are struggling to understand. We don't know enough. And your panel that is been very, very helpful in beginning to define the parameters. And I thank the Chair for the privilege of asking these questions. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you.
Can I respond very quickly? And my very quick response is that whether or not charter schools will strengthen the public school system is up to the public school system. 79 RESOLUTION 980766 We're here, we're doing a good job. And if we get the cooperation and if we work as a team, then I think that will happen.
I think all of you ought to stay here for the next panel, because we'd like to have your response to what the public school system tells us. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. We will hear from Co-chair, State Representative Dwight Evans, and then Councilwoman Clark. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Thank you, Madam Chairperson. I want to again thank the Chairperson for convening this particular hearing. Because, as Councilman Cohen and Councilwoman Clark and Councilman Ortiz said, this is a great exchange and it is important. And I guess the question I want to ask, because this charter school is going into its second year, I want to ask the question about the friendliness of the city school district, as well as the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. And I hear that question. The School Board will always say that this school district is the most friendliest charter school school district 80 RESOLUTION 980766 of the 501 school districts. I hear that constantly of the school district saying how friendly it is. I'm curious to know that when the School Board votes to approve charters, and you have the policymakers saying one thing, what happens when you begin to deal with the people who are within the process, below the policymakers of the Board, when it comes down to how friendly they are first. And secondly I ask that same question, even though Dr. Daniels sat at the table and everyone else, because this is helpful as we deal with the budget in Harrisburg next year and as we move to the whole review of this particular legislation, how friendly are people in terms of being child centered, the school district as well as the state. How child friendly are they?
Well, as President of the Philadelphia Alliance of Charter Schools, I hear a lot of complaints. And my own experiences with the school district have not always been good. And friendly is not the tone that I would use to describe what has happened. I believe that there's no discussion, no consultation, no input when it comes to dealing 81 RESOLUTION 980766 with the school district. That decisions, as you said, that on the highest levels appear to be very charter friendly. That when they work their way down through the system, that they don't become that way any longer, that they're not carried out in a way that would be considered charter friendly. The issue of input, the issue of consultation, is something that really, I feel, is important. Because it seems sometimes that people are sitting around in their offices downtown at 21st and the Parkway, where there are no children, and they're making up rules and they're making up regulations and they're coming up with new ideas of things that we should do. Very often we have to change them after they come out. I made up a list of things, I made an appendix to the annual report. It turned out that the appendix wasn't correct. It asks for personal information about special education students in a public document. It amazes me that nobody saw that. What happened is, we happened to get it in our mail at the same day that the Director of 82 RESOLUTION 980766 Special Education from the state was in our building. I took it over to him and showed it to him, and he immediately called the school district to tell them, "You can't put this on a public document." I don't know how these things happen. We are sent a memo from the school district telling us that if we exceed the cap, that that's a violation of our charter. And so I have to go and call members of the School Board, talk to people, try to get them to back off from that. And after I've been told by the School Board that it's not a violation of our cap, we won't get paid for anyone over the cap. But if we have 250 students in our cap, we have 251 students in our school, we haven't violated our a charter. I then get the memo resent to me again. We put our attendance on the computer. We send in requests for change of records. But then they come up with a brand-new form just for charter schools that we have to fill 83 RESOLUTION 980766 out and send in to them. Again I talk to the School Board. The School Board says, well, we really didn't authorize that. I don't really see why you have to do it. Then they come around again a few months later and ask for it. They send us a completely unintelligible financial summary. I don't -- you know, we get this thing, we give it to our auditor, the auditor doesn't quite understand what it is about. The law seems to say that they're supposed to pay us 12 equal payments over the year, with the right to reconcile in quarters, at the end of the quarters. But they are reconciling daily. They asked us to go on their computer system, which we did. They then said to us that they wanted us to put our attendance on it. And as independent LEAs, we didn't think that was right. So we had to fight that, and then they backed down from it. As John has pointed out, they don't pay for transportation. I don't think any of the current charter schools have ever received 100 84 RESOLUTION 980766 percent of the special ed money that they have requested. I know right now that we haven't. We have gotten some since the beginning of the year, but we haven't been paid for every student. We're not sure whether those students who they did eventually decide to pay for, whether they went back to July 1 and paid for them or not. That's going to be very difficult to figure out. And I think -- CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Mr. Proietta, if you would keep your points, and we will have the opportunity to ask those questions.
Okay. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Mr. Hornbeck has to leave, he has told me twice. Councilwoman Blackwell is ready to bang me on the head. But we want to get your points. Don't lose them. We want to ask all those questions. And certainly we want to have the opportunity to ask Mr. Hornbeck, while he is here.
Briefly, and into the mix and into the discussion, this relationship that we're talking about, in any change of delivery of 85 RESOLUTION 980766 services of this magnitude, you have regulatory groups. The PIC, the Pennsylvania Insurance Commission; the PUC; the Federal Trade Commission; the Securities and Exchange Commission. The full definition of this bill will not be complete until our regulatory body, the Charter Appeal Board, the CAB, sits on July 1, when some of these things can be sorted out. Until that time -- and the bill was written that way with a moratorium. Until that time, the full independent nature of an LEA and a charter can't be defined because it's more of a local deal. Once the appeal board is in place, then, as with any delivery of services changes with a regulatory board, we'll see the full impact of the bill. And some of these questions can be more adequately resolved at this time. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: All right. We really want to, and we want to hear more. We hope that you will stay so that we will have an opportunity to explore. We are really, really at an important 86 RESOLUTION 980766 part of this hearing. We want to have Panel 2 come forward before they leave, and certainly want to thank all of you for where the rubber hits the road. ) CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. All right. We understand the Superintendent's schedule, and we want to give him an opportunity to begin right away. We thank you and all the members of the committee. We would ask you, Mr. Hornbeck, to begin immediately, as we understand the constraints under which you function. And with that, Mr. Hornbeck. SUPERINTENDENT DAVID W. HORNBECK: Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman, members of the Council, Mr. Evans, Mr. Horsey. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you to testify about charter schools and commend the Chair for, as Chairwoman of the Education Committee, constantly being on top of the really crucial issues of this city. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: It is an 87 RESOLUTION 980766 important leadership that you provide. I think as has been noted before, that the impetus for charter schools, along with vouchers and home schooling, arise primarily from dissatisfaction with the public schools. Thus, I begin this testimony with a brief report on the achievement status of Philadelphia's public schools. That's where the vast majority of our children will attend school, whatever forms of alternative opportunities might be created. Two years ago, the Philadelphia Board of Education set a goal of 95 percent of our students reaching carefully defined world-class standards in reading, math, and science in one student generation of 12 years. I am happy to say that we're on our way to meeting that goal. The district has exceeded the two-year performance targets set by the Board in our first accountability cycle. Moreover, the results from our own testing program were corroborated recently by our students' participation and achievement on the Pennsylvania state tests, as well. 88 RESOLUTION 980766 That fact is that our students read better, do math better, and know more science. In the context of the higher standards and the tougher tests, 241 of the 249 schools made progress, and 145 of our schools exceeded the very high two-year performance targets set for them. Moreover, these 145 schools included our lowest-income schools, our racially isolated schools, and our schools with the highest proportions of youngsters whose first language is not English, as well as students in schools at the higher end of the income scale. But what is most notable are not the 145 individual school stories and the thousands of individual classrooms in these schools, although they are wonderful stories to tell. What is most notable is that we have been able to bring success to scale. There are more than 103,000 students and 6,000 teachers in those 145 schools.
I'm not describing the hot house effect of carefully calibrated experimentation. I am describing the remarkable progress resulting from 89 RESOLUTION 980766 hard and smart work by ordinary students and teachers and principals and parents who, if you just counted the 145 Philadelphia public schools exceeding their performance targets, would constitute the 23rd largest school district in the United States. , Detroit, Boston, Denver, or Cleveland. With that as prelude, let me make three specific points about charter schools. First, the School District of Philadelphia supports the underlying principles of the charter school movement because these principles form the basis of our own reform agenda, children achieving. That's the reason I was present on the day that the bill was announced at the Free Library, to which Mr. Daniels referred. We are in favor of accountability for results, for community ownership, for local control, for deregulation, and I might add some of the other areas of flexibility that have been held up. I hope, in fact, that the state legislature will consider extending some freedoms to this Administration that you have deemed appropriate 90 RESOLUTION 980766 for another Administration, should the state decide to want to run the schools themselves. The facts about our support speak louder than any rhetoric. In less than two months, after the state's charter bill was signed into law, Philadelphia approved four out of the five charter school applications it had received for 1997-'98, making Philadelphia home to more than 90 percent of the state's charter school enrollment for that year. And in '98-'99, Philadelphia approved an additional 11 charters, 2 of which have been deferred until 1999-2000. Philadelphia is now home to almost half of all the charters in the state and more than half of the state's charter school enrollment. And we have accomplished that without any increase in administrative staff. Second, the school district does have some very real concerns about flaws in the state legislation. When we speak out about these flaws, we are seen as anti-charter. But we must be aware that a drain on the school system translates into 91 RESOLUTION 980766 less money for the students who choose to stay in the Philadelphia public schools. Charter schools create an overall financial drain on the district. During the 1998-'99 school year, our payments to charter schools will result in a net cost to the children remaining in the district of approximately $12 million. There are three main reasons for this drain. The legislation is based on the premise that dollars follow the child, which might work in theory, but not in practice, at least for a large school district. Students don't leave the school district in neat packages of 30 students from a classroom. They come from across the city, here and there, making it virtually impossible for us to reap savings on a one-to-one basis by eliminating the bulk of our costs, which are teacher salaries. Even with 11 charters in operation, we haven't yet reached the scale where we have equal offsetting savings on which the legislation's financial theory is based. Number two, the school district pays 92 RESOLUTION 980766 charter schools for every student enrolled, even if that student was formerly enrolled in a parochial or private school, and for which we never had any corresponding expenditure which could be reduced even if they did leave in groups of 30. In Philadelphia's charters, approximately out of every students enrolled in a charter school was not formerly enrolled in one of our public schools. The school district never paid to educate those children before, but it is paying now, which means we have less money to spend on the students still in the system. The theory is that we would have had to educate them in our schools, if they had come to us. But the fact, not the theory, is that most do not.
Moreover, when children do come into the school district, since the change in the school finance formula in the early '90s, we have to educate them without a corresponding increase in the state's subsidy. Three, while the district is capped on how much money it receives from the state for 93 RESOLUTION 980766 services to special education, charters are not. Furthermore, charters receive a payment that is based on an average of what the district spends on all its special ed students, including the severely disabled. It may cost the school district ten times more to educate a severely disabled child than a mildly disabled child. No charters currently enroll severely disabled students, yet we pay the charter schools an amount built on an average expenditure that assumes they enroll severely disabled students in the same proportion that we do. But our concerns are about the flaws in the legislation, not the charter schools, per se. This leads me to my third and final point. Charter schools should be our natural allies, particularly around the larger issue of funding for public education. More money for public education in Philadelphia means more money for Philadelphia's charter schools. Consequently, we should be forging alliances on school funding, not fighting over the same small pie of funds. 94 RESOLUTION 980766 I'd like to turn your attention to the kinds of information contained in the Citizens Guide to the Philadelphia School Budget, produced by Greater Philadelphia First to the Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition. The publication was produced to help citizens have a clear picture of where school funds come from, where they go, and how Philadelphia's funding compares to that of other school districts. The data shown in the Citizens Guide is compelling in many ways for both charters and traditional public schools. First of all, it shows a growing funding gap across Pennsylvania since the state placed a freeze on its formula for education funding. In 1995-'96, for example, using the Pennsylvania Department of Education's own calculation of selected expenditures, the average Philadelphia area suburb spent almost $1600 more per pupil in '95-'96 than Philadelphia did. Even the statewide average is $600 more per pupil than Philadelphia. I emphasize the $1600 figure because 95 RESOLUTION 980766 Southeastern Pennsylvania is our marketplace where we compete for teachers, for example, not rural Pennsylvania. Lower Merion spends $4196 more than Philadelphia, and Radnor $5721, almost twice as much as Philadelphia. In the past, the amount the state gave to school districts in Pennsylvania depended on a formula that took into account the number of students, special needs of the district, its ability to raise local taxes, and other factors. However, in 1993, the state placed what is, in effect, a spending freeze on that formula. The freeze means that no matter how fast enrollment grows, state subsidies do not keep pace with enrollment. 9 percent for the rest of the state. 9 percent. All this happened while enrollment in Philadelphia went up by 11 and a half percent. 96 RESOLUTION 980766 So the legislative belief in money following the child is reflected in the charter school legislation, but it does not follow new children coming into the Philadelphia School District. 4 percent in '97-'98, as a reason why it shouldn't provide more, implying that Philadelphia should fix the problem by raising local taxes. But we need to put this in a larger context. In order to enlarge the local share of education funding, Philadelphia would have to raise property tax or cut funds from other city services; such as, police protection, transportation, and trash removal, to name a few of the key services that are funded by the city. This simply doesn't make sense, in my judgment. Philadelphia residents already pay more of their income in local taxes than residents anywhere else in Pennsylvania. , or Los Angeles.
97 RESOLUTION 980766 A little more than 75 percent of city taxes collected from schools are property taxes. 2 percent in Philadelphia, more than 30 percent in the rest of the state. 7 percent. Furthermore, while public school enrollment has gone up in the last eight years, overall city population has gone down. We have a dwindling tax base to work with. While the number of families living in poverty across the state has dropped almost 18 percent in the last five years, it has actually 19 increased by almost 10 percent in Philadelphia, 20 stretching the resources of this city already. This problem will only worsen when the public assistance changes begin to take effect in March. I close with the following observation: There is a connection between the 98 RESOLUTION 980766 expectations we have for our children, all children -- those in public schools, charter schools, parochial schools, and private schools -- and funding policy. Disadvantaged children are at a cross-roads. Those with whom we have historically failed, those from low-income homes, children of color, and those for whom English is not a first language, need our collective support in all of those schools and political power exercised on their behalf, giving them reason for hope in the future. Anyone who cares about all the children, in my judgment, cannot limit their efforts to experiments with vouchers, charters, home schooling, or other efforts that serve only a few. While those initiatives have their place, our policies and our practice must extend real opportunity to all of our children. Madam Chairwoman, the reason that I have to leave is that I have a speech at a foundation going again with a tin cup in my hand. And I apologize for that. I have with me the people who actually address the day-to-day issues that 99 RESOLUTION 980766 particularly were beginning to be raised at the end of the last panel. Germaine Ingram, who is the Chief of Staff; Clarence Armbrister, who is the Managing Director; Jackie Sparkman, who is the General Counsel of the District; and Dianne Castelbuono, who is my Special Assistant, who, among other duties, has the responsibility for overseeing the administration of the charter program in the school district. And they will, of course, be glad to answer any of those detailed questions that any members of the panel may have. If there are a couple of things that are of an over-arching policy character that I can be helpful with initially, let me stay for another five minutes and try to respond to those, and then, with your permission, skidaddle to see if I can't put another couple of bucks in the till. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: I will ask one, and open it up to everyone else, since we have time constraints. My question is, I have visited all the charter schools. And I have always felt, as I feel from your testimony, that the charter states 100 RESOLUTION 980766 are in the middle of this state/local funding fight. And they kind of feel like the child who gets pushed every way and don't know how to survive, and feel victims of something that's bigger than they are. That's my impression from visiting all of them. I have heard them complain about tokens and money for busing. And we know they're funded 76 percent, and the rest they're supposed to raise. But they seem to have problems even with that, albeit they have some kind of contract, a contract that they signed with you. They still seem to have problems getting what John Skief called equity, and even with the contract they sign. I know that's a very general question. But in terms of those issues that go under equity, like busing and tokens and special ed, can you give us an answer about that? SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: Well, let me start that answer and leave perhaps some of the details of it to Clay and to others after I have to leave. 101 RESOLUTION 980766 But I think you're absolutely right, which is a part of what I was trying to say in my testimony.
That this is another one of those examples where those of us, in my judgment, who are each of us too poor, fuss with each other, rather than focusing attention where it really belongs. And I think, that's the reason I think, that charters and the school district ought to be natural allies in this process. In terms of the specific amounts of money that make up the whatever it is $5300, and the 90-something-hundred-dollars, those numbers are simply derived, from our judgment, as to what the law says. They're not made-up numbers. They are an assessment from our perspective on what the law says about transportation, what the law says about food services, what the law says about these other things. There is the observation from time to time that we make money off of charter schools. I would be pleased to open those books to anyone, for you to discover that, in fact, this year we lose $12 102 RESOLUTION 980766 million. And what we've got to do, both in the public schools, in the charter schools, if vouchers ever come to pass, is to be about the business, on behalf of all kids, to delivering for them. And that's why I appreciate your leadership in convening this panel. Because I do believe, even though we obviously have differences among and between us, that the folks who are committed to charter schools -- because it is a tough business to run a charter school -- are also committed to children. So the issue is not about kids; it is about a law which, in my view, had good intentions, but also has some essential flaws in it. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Questions? Representative Evans. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Mr. Hornbeck, you indicated a policy question, and I would like to ask you somewhat of a global policy question. And I guess the question I would like to ask you is, you indicated that the School Board, yourself, have certainly been the most friendliest to charter schools in terms of its growth and 103 RESOLUTION 980766 opportunity in the state. My question to you is, have you or the School Board in some very specific way used the charter schools in terms of research analysis? Because it would appear to me if you indicated and the School Board indicated how friendly you are, then I would think in the year or two years that it's been in existence, that either you or your Administration would look at those charter school and say what works, what doesn't work, what can we do better. I am asking you the question. SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: Well, I think that's right on target. Because one of the reasons the charter schools make sense is, when they actually do begin to produce some results, we will have a basis for looking at what works. As a couple of the operators just indicated, it's been -- they have not even had at this point the three years of outcomes that permit me to say that 145 of our schools have made dramatic gains. It's not their fault; they just came into existence two years ago. 104 RESOLUTION 980766 Certainly one of the things that I'm extremely interested in is to see the growth patterns in the charter schools in reading, math, and science. And as soon as that data exists, in a way that it does for public schools, then we will want to take advantage of that. It is my hope, for example, that in the spring, we will have identified a half a dozen or more public schools that should become demonstration schools for various instructional practices. And I would hope that we would see the opportunity, if they would like to do that, in which one or more of the charter schools would also become demonstration schools not for charters or for private or for public, but for kids, so that we can grow together. So as soon as there is data so we know whether it works or not, then absolutely that will be something we want to look at.
REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: In other words, are you saying to me you either have a mechanism in place currently or you do not have a 105 RESOLUTION 980766 mechanism in place, although the charter school law is relatively new and this is only the second year, do you within your office or does the Board itself have any type of mechanism in place to do evaluation or is tracking what's taking place in the charter schools? SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: Sure. It is the same accountability system, in effect, that we have got in the public school system. Because we wouldn't want to compare apples and oranges. And in each of the charters is the requirement that the same outcome measures be used as in the public schools. So that when, for example, in these 145 schools, the reason I say that they made dramatic improvements and have done it faster than Chicago or Houston or any of these other big cities that get touted, it is because we have a systematic way of looking at reading, math, and science. And the same will exist-, when we have the data from the charter schools. All we've got at this point is the baseline data in four of the charter schools. We don't even have the first year of the comparative 106 RESOLUTION 980766 data. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: I guess my question is, who is in charge? When you said that it is under -- it is already under the accountability, who is in charge of that accountability regarding the charter schools? SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: The office that would track that would be Catherine Connor's office. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Second question. Have you encouraged as a policy, you or the Board, any conversions of existing public schools or any clusters, have you encouraged any conversions? Have you, for example, gotten your people to organize, going to a school and saying to a particular school that we would like for you to become a charter school. We are going to organize the parents, we are going to organize the teachers we are going to organize the staff, and we are encouraging you to become a conversion. Have you set that as a policy? SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: For the 107 RESOLUTION 980766 first two or three years, even before the law passed, while people were talking about it, the answer is yes, particularly initially with the cluster leader Karen DelGursio and the Strawberry Mansion cluster. In the last six months, the last round, the answer is no. Because I've reached the conclusion that, at this point, the conversion to charters and the additional expenditures that are necessary out of charters, we can't afford it. " I may have some great $12 million ideas; I just don't have $12 million. And so the notion of conversion, both of clusters, as you and I in fact have talked about, both at the cluster level and at the school level, is in theory a very attractive one. Indeed I've said before, I would like to have what, in effect, are 259 charter schools in 108 RESOLUTION 980766 the public school system. I think the kind of flexibility and setting standards and dealing with equity and all that belongs to the central part, but people ought to have the flexibility and the freedom at the local level. So when we get -- if we could get the flaws in the law straightened out, so that it doesn't end up with some of the problems that exist, I think that makes a lot of sense. And, in fact, if we extend some of the things that arise out of collective bargaining agreements, so that it is more attractive to the half of the teachers voting, and so on, then I think that's going to begin to happen. And I think that's all to the good. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Last question, Madam Chairperson. You tried to reconstitute two high schools. And, unfortunately, you, as you know, you certainly was not successful as you went through the labor issue.
In those particular high schools, which obviously you talked about your -- you measured your success in the numbers, and obviously 109 RESOLUTION 980766 high school reform leaves something to be desired, in my observation, my sense is, why don't you try to get those high schools to be converted to charters, since you were not successful in terms of reconstituting those particular schools? Because I would think those schools, in the case of Olney and Audenried, would be prime to be converted. Obviously you thought it should be changed, and obviously, you know, it didn't seem like you put any resources. And I'm talking about resources. I'm not talking about fiscal resource. I'm talking about resources of manpower of your office to say, "We're going to go in that school. " SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: In the case of Audenried, I'm happy to say there has been real progress there. And so I guess while we might have lost the battle there, we've, in my judgment, won the war. And there is a faculty there that's 110 RESOLUTION 980766 moving ahead, kids are moving up, they are performing better, and so on. In the case of Olney, I would be enormously interested in the percentage of faculty necessary to convert being lowered. Because I think that there might be some very interesting things that go on at Olney. As you sort of alluded to -- and certainly people have noticed from the newspapers - I've not been enormously successful with the faculty at Olney. And the prospect of 51 percent of that faculty voting to convert because I ask them to, I confess, I think at this point is somewhere between remote and nonexistent. But very radical changes there, as you have also noted, I think, need to take place. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: But in the meantime, I guess my only concern, if you are talking about a child-centered system, children achieving, and you are saying that you haven't been successful in a particular high school, children and parents are caught in the middle. They are caught in the middle, with 111 RESOLUTION 980766 adults who may not be focused or interested in the children. It seems like, are you giving up in terms of fundamentally trying to do something with that particular high school? SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: No, not at all. And I think that you will begin to see additional things take place at Olney even during the course of the spring. And it may even be that the state legislature can strengthen our hand in some of those ways that I alluded to a little while ago, and as we've talked about in other settings. Madam Chairwoman -- thank you very much, Mr. Evans -- I really have to go pretty soon. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Mr. Hornbeck, just one question from Representative Horsey. SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: Absolutely, Representative Horsey. REPRESENTATIVE HORSEY: We don't want to do this, and that is make a comparison, but I am going to ask you to make a comparison today by asking you, are charter schools at an advantage or disadvantage relative to public schools? SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: Well, I 112 RESOLUTION 980766 think in terms of substance, I think an awful lot that's going on in the charter schools is very good for the children that are in charter schools. And that's the reason that I support charter schools. I think that there are two ways in which charter schools, in the way they've been treated so far in Pennsylvania, are bad for public schools. One is, I illustrate with the fact that it takes $12 million out of the 259 schools, of kids that are left, and puts it someplace else. And I don't begrudge that to the charter schools; it just ends up hurting the kids that are left behind. And, secondly, I fear that there are people who are in favor of charter schools that, having passed charter schools, think that they've really done something for the large number of children. When, in fact, they have done something very important for some children.
And we have a long history in this city of doing things for some children, but not enacting policies that are good for all children. And if folks could join together and 113 RESOLUTION 980766 be in favor, as the School District of Philadelphia is, and has demonstrated, in my view, both charter schools and the kids in public schools, then I think that we can solve these problems together, and I think good things could happen. So on the whole, I think, we continue to think, we are reviewing however many applications this year. How many did we get? applications. 10 We are plunging ahead with this. 11 We are trying to have the two things 12 come together because the kids are the same in the 13 final analysis, and that's our focus. 14 May I be excused, Madam Chairwoman, 15 please? 16 CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Yes. 17 Councilwoman Clark has agreed to waive her 18 question. 19 SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: Thank you 20 very much. 21
The rest of you 22 get triple. 23 SUPERINTENDENT HORNBECK: Thank you 24 all very much. 25 CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. 114 RESOLUTION 980766 Let me add that --
I am going to ask my questions of Germaine and Clay and the other panel from the school district. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: But let me say, to kind of flip the Superintendent's remark about charter schools being helpful for some students, I think public schools can only be helpful to the students in those schools, and that goes both ways. So I am sure that since charter schools are public schools, that when they talk about the dropout rate being 51 percent, that somehow that will be better this year when they average in now the excellent attendance that takes place in charter schools. So it seems to me we are still in a position, since we are still all public schools, of rising or sinking together. And that out of this hearing, we begin to see the problems that one can feel the back and forth, the antagonistic feelings and activities and actions that are taking place as charter schools try to be creative enough to not only come up with a 115 RESOLUTION 980766 building and figure out architecturally what you do and try to order books and try to put programs together with less money, but feel kind of like a stepchild of the system. I think that these hearings have made that, all of that has come out in the open, which is very, very important for the public to realize so that we can begin hopefully to set up some mechanism. When Tim Daniels talked about an appeal process, we didn't have an opportunity to go further into that. But at some point before this hearing is over, we would like to revisit that question, and who that appeal process involves. Is it the charter schools somehow with the Board or with the state? But that's another question that we kind of cut you off, Mr. Daniels, that we would like to revisit further. Any questions from the panel? Councilwoman Clark.
Madam Chair, I think, first of all, these hearings are enormously important. Because this is an issue that has been simmering that needs the bright light of day. 116 RESOLUTION 980766 Where people ask the question that's on their mind, and then evaluate the concept in the light of the answers that you get to the questions that you ask. What is clear from the language, from both the school district and the charter operators, is that while you say that you are one system, you speak of yourselves as being separate and different. Even the Superintendent speaks of charters as being separate from public schools. So you need, I think, to determine whether you are fish or fowl. And while fish is not better than fowl, we need to know what you are. And we need to be consistent in our language as to what you are, and what we can expect of you so that we end forever the "we they" kind of push and shove that is going on now. I think some of this pushing and shoving is because of the newness of the concept. And there's probably no group more resistant to change, if you will pardon me, Madam Chair, than educators. They love yesterday better than they love today and tomorrow. And so they look so fondly on the way 117 RESOLUTION 980766 it always was, and it is very difficult to see the bright tomorrow. It may well be that the charter organizers have not done as good a job as they hoped to in positioning the school as an asset and resource, and not a competitor. Now, if you will just accept that this might be a fair assessment of where you are, then there is a chance of solving the problems without having bodies all over the floor, like the third act of a Shakespearean tragedy. Give me some numbers as to how many students have left the Philadelphia Public School System for charter, and how many have come from other sources to charter schools. Now, the superintendent says something like two out of three, didn't he, or was it one out of three?
About one-third of the charter school enrollment, as we understand, come from parochial or private school. The other two-thirds come from traditional public schools.
Now, he speaks of not being able to reap the savings of the reduced 118 RESOLUTION 980766 population because the students don't come in neat blocks of 30 and, therefore, you are not able to reduce the teacher load by having one child less in a classroom. Is that a fair assessment?
When do you see yourselves being able to recoup this year's losses of one out of this class and three out of that school? How does that one day work itself out?
We have actually start today recoup some of those savings. I think the point that the Superintendent made, for example, is that we have in total enrollment in charter schools about 3,000 students, let's say. And let's say if you had an average class of 30 students, you know, one might conclude that you might be able to reduce the school district's teachers by 100, let's say one teacher for every class. Unfortunately, as the Superintendent indicated, that does not -- the students don't leave in neat packages of 30, so for every 30 students you can reduce a class. 119 RESOLUTION 980766 But we did and we have taken into account, there are some savings because of the reduced population in the charter schools.
Mr. Armbrister, at some point we are going to need you to put some numbers.
I am going to give YOU A number right now. The number THAT we have calculated with respect to the current fiscal year for savings for teachers that we didn't have to budget is about $3.6 million. And that's included -- when the Superintendent talks about the net costs of charter schools to the district, that has been taken into account.
So but for the 3.6, the cost would have been 15, and not 12?
All right. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: I am absolutely trying to figure out why there is all this fighting over 3,000 students out of almost 214,000, and why charter school operators -- I don't 120 RESOLUTION 980766 agree with my colleague that charter school operators have maybe done all they can. I think they have done all they can and all everybody else can do.
I was only speaking for myself. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Right. 3,000 students out of 214,000, for people to have to suffer and go through what charter school operators are going through, to me, is just kind of unbelievable.
But some of this is growing pains, Madam Chair. And I don't want to have a back and forth with you. Because I know that just because we disagree wouldn't make either one of us right or wrong; it would just make us different. But I am just now trying to get a record as to what has been the experience of the school district, and what you can expect when the growing pains level itself out, as it surely will, when the newness wears off and you become just another institution providing education in Philadelphia under the broad umbrella of the public 121 RESOLUTION 980766 school system. Because I'm still seeing it as public school. I do not see it as two competing systems.
I think it's very difficult to answer your question at this point in part, and in large part, because of the newness. You know, to what expect there will be the -- we will continue the significant increase in the number of charter schools, three years, five years, ten years from now, that's hard to say. There are -- charter schools aren't disbursed throughout the district evenly. So there are some geographic areas of the district that have larger concentrations of charter schools than others. Those are --
Ms. Ingram, introduce yourself to the record, so that the transcript will be clear.
Germaine Ingram, Chief of Staff, School District of Philadelphia. So those are types of factors. Charter schools are different sizes. They are diverse in the great organization that they accommodate. Most of the charter schools at this 122 RESOLUTION 980766 point serve elementary school students. So those are the types of variations and factors that will, to a great extent, determine the degree to which we can get to a point where there is a corresponding reduction in outlay for the school district, as there is an increase in the use of charter schools as a choice.
But isn't that a reasonable way for charter schools to develop? Shouldn't they start off educating primary grades, and then, as that need progresses, then go to middle school, senior? Does that make sense?
I think it depends on where the need is within a community. As Representative Evans says, has indicated, there are people who may look to charter schools as an alternative to addressing some of the needs of our high schools. And we wouldn't want to deny those communities the opportunity to do that. It also depends on the particular expertise of the people who want to start a charter school. We would want to see people apply their expertise in the area where they are most capable. 123 RESOLUTION 980766
So each charter is granted based on an assessment by some panel of the abacus ability to do the job they say they want to do; is that correct?
That's where we look first. And what's the intention, and how, what's your capacity to reach that intention of providing effective education.
And we certainly haven't gotten anywhere near maxing out on meeting the defined educational deficiencies in Philadelphia. But what is the school district's concern, what is your gut concern, about the proliferation of charter schools?
Our principal -- you know, I don't know whether you want to call it a concern. Our principal desire is to have charter schools serve as a vehicle for expanding instructional options for parents and communities. 124 RESOLUTION 980766 And we have an interest in seeing that charter schools provide effective education, provide equity, and deliver on the promise that is indicated in the legislation, to expand those opportunities.
I would like to follow up on Representative Evans' question. Who and where in the district is this ongoing assessment taking place? And when problems are encountered, what is offered, and what praise is offered? How do we lower the adversarial tone and fling open the welcome gates?
Well, let me say this: We aren't -- we don't take, the school district does not take, an adversarial posture towards charter schools.
So let's just establish that you think you are not, and they think you do. And now I am asking you to tell me 125 RESOLUTION 980766 what steps and what process you have in place that integrates them as part of the growing Philadelphia Public School offerings.
No, please don't. And listen, Germaine, you respond to me. Okay?
Well, I just expect a level of respect from people that we are trying to --
We have devoted a great deal of administrative capacity to try to bring this system, which, as you say, is new. We have been -- we have not been provided with funding for administrative support of the process and the program that we have had to mount in order to approve charter schools, in order to fund charter schools, in order to provide the type of ongoing recordkeeping and assessment that's occurring in this process.
Somehow you have provided the funds and somehow they are here. 126 RESOLUTION 980766 Now, how will you assess how well they do what they say they're going to do?
Part of our process is, part of the charter obligation of every charter school, is to take the Stanford 9. That is our essential mechanism for determining whether charter schools are progressing in their student achievement.
But that's test scores; that's one. What's another measure?
That is our principal measure. What you need to -- that's our principal measure. In addition to that, the state requires that each charter school submit an annual report that covers a number of areas with regard to the instructional program, the facilities. All the principal areas of the legislation are addressed in the annual report that charter schools submit to the state in the school district.
What would be an indicator to you that they were not doing well? 127 RESOLUTION 980766 Would attendance? Would dropout? What other things do you look to?
That's one thing that we look at for traditional public schools, and that's what we would look for in charter schools. We would want to look to see how many children were leaving or are being suspended or being expelled from charter schools, and the reasons for that. We would certainly look at attendance, look at persistence, how many children who start in a charter school progress to graduation or the culminating grade of that charter school. We would want to look at climate indicators; you know, to what degree children and staff and parents feel that the school provides a safe and supportive environment. 128 RESOLUTION 980766
How would you test the last thing you just said, the degree to which children, staff, and parents believe that they have been provided a safe environment? How would you test that?
I think principally you have to talk with those constituents, those children and staff and parents.
-- the law states that charter schools are independent schools. And part of the difficulty here is that when we have asked questions of charter schools, very often the response we get back is that, "We aren't responsible to the school district. We are independent." And so I think that part of -- one thing that needs to be clarified by the state or by whatever mechanism the state uses to followup this process is to bring greater clarity as to just what 129 RESOLUTION 980766 accountability charter schools have, and to whom, and --
That's exactly point my. And until we get that cleared up, we are always going to be bumping into whether you are fish or fowl, whether you are in, out, whether you are part of us or an adversary.
Clarence Armbrister, and I just wanted to piggyback on the point that Germaine was making. I think it is a point that Mr. Tim Daniels made that really should be underscored. Which is that, I think he said that the state is now preparing regulatory guidance that might be available in July. So we have been working with a statute, but without the fill-in, the regulatory guidance, to interpret many of the gray areas that both the charters on one side of that had to interpret and we on the school district have had to interpret. So that's been a very difficult problem, to try to go through this mine field to try 130 RESOLUTION 980766 to interpret the legislative intent of a bill that was passed rather quickly, and which we attempted, quite frankly, somewhat miraculously, to implement in that very short period of time in the first round in which we actually got four charter schools approved. So we are looking forward to the regulatory guidance and the interpretations that come out which will help answer a lot of these questions. But there is this tension, a very significant tension, between our regulating the charter schools, to the extent that we can, and their independence, which in many respects we try to honor. And it is something that's not just between the charters and the school district. We have it in the school district. I mean, we have people within the school district who misinterpret, who misunderstand. And it is a constant vigilance on our part as the senior staff to try to make sure where we are not trying to step on the charter's toes and give them the independence. 131 RESOLUTION 980766 So we have had, quite frankly, some of the instances that Mr. Proietta identified are -- have resulted because there have been confusion among our own staff, quite frankly.
There is confusion in this room as to what is and what is not a proper role and relationship between the two entities of the public school system. Okay? And I listened to your language, I listen to provider's language. And you could hear that we/they language that I'm dealing with because it is new. When the regs are finally written -- and lawyers know that between writing the law and implementing, you have to have the regulations to say what is permitted and what is expressly prohibited. You will at least have the benefit of these years of experience that will go into the regulations, hopefully. If we can keep from getting so fiercely adversarial that we start to protect turf, we can come up with regulations that are good for all of us. 132 RESOLUTION 980766 (Applause.)
But I think we are going to have to work at that. And until we do that, I am going to ask everybody to kindly sheath your sword, okay, put the safety on your gun, lock the safety, let's try to get through this test period -- which all of us have to admit this is a test period -- to see. We're testing a concept. And I think that that's our best shot. Madam Chair, I will not go further at this point. Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Thank you. Representative Evans. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Thank you, Madam Chairperson. I would like to deal with the issue which I've heard a great deal about, this cost question of this number. And I want you to correct me if I make a mistake. I think the number you talked about, I heard you and the Superintendent talk about, $12 million is what the school district has lost. And I guess my question is a couple of 133 RESOLUTION 980766 things. Obviously when this law went into effect, which was 1997, and the school district certainly has its fixed costs, and the school district at that particular time already had contracts in place, so obviously you did not have the flexability, there were changes made, so you couldn't just turn around and make changes in the system as a result of the fixed costs. Can you explain in a very specific way, very specific, what exactly do you mean by you have lost $12 million? Because I heard Councilwoman Clark indicate that after some conversation, that you have a savings of 3.8, yet I heard the Superintendent say you are losing money. I am very curious. Tell me. And the numbers I heard -- and, Gussie, I have not always been too good at math -- I heard one-third comes from the parochial and the private schools, two-thirds comes from within the system. And I am trying to figure out if one-third comes from the outside and two-thirds come from within the system, then are you saying as a 134 RESOLUTION 980766 result of that one-third, that's the loss of the million? You have to explain that.
I would be happy 5 to. And bear with me, if you can. Let's start on 6 the expenditure side. 7 As you know, the state provides a 8 formula -- and I have copies of the calculation of 9 how we arrived at the per-pupil expenditure that we 10 provide to the charter schools. 11 For the current fiscal year that 12 number is $5,246. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: For the charter school?
For the charter school. So for every student who is enrolled in a charter school, the school district is required to provide -- and this is a regular ed -- we are required to provide $5246 for each of the students, the regular ed students. If you bear with me in terms of the pro forma that I have here with me -- CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Excuse me. Councilwoman Clark asked that you repeat that figure 135 RESOLUTION 980766 and the class of people.
Certainly. It is $5246. And that figure is derived from a state formula based on total expenditures of the school district. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Is this per charter school child?
Yes. It is basically a calculation for regular ed children -- nonspecial-education children is probably the best way to describe it. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: But for charter schools?
This is for all students, actually. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Because you mentioned 6800 -- REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: One thing Mr. Armbrister should explain, there is no specific language in the law that says $5200 per child. What he is describing is, there are criteria that follows the child driven by a formula. And then from the analysis that the 136 RESOLUTION 980766 school district has done, they make a transaction of the 6800. And then they -- there is a gap between the 6800 to the 5200, that I am interested also in that gap between that 52 to that 68, and how do you come to the interpretation. Because you are either come to the interpretation based on law or regulation. And I would be very interested in how you make that determination, since there is no specific language that says 52 versus 68.
The clerk is handing out to you -- REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: 52 is their number.
Right. The clerk is handing out to you right now the forms that we used to calculate the per pupil revenue for the charter schools. And maybe that's the best place to start on this. You have one -- I will wait until he finishes passing that out.
Mr. Armbrister, it is our practice to provide materials to the committee. 137 RESOLUTION 980766 If there are additional requests, we will try to provide them. That is not yours to explain; that's ours to explain.
Yes, ma'am. If we look at the one entitled, on the third line, Total 1997-'98 expenditures, and then it has parenthesis at October 1997, this is the calculation that the state provides us to calculate the per-student expenditure for charter school students. We start out with the total expenditures of the school district, which is on that top line of $1.5 billion, $1,529,822,300 -- REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Excuse me. That's the school district's budget?
That's correct. And this is in the law. This is explicitly set forth in the law. And, in fact, I have a copy -- and I have multiple copies -- of the form that we actually file with the state that includes these numbers. And what the formula tells you to do is to take a total number of expenditures, and deduct from those expenditures those items listed 138 RESOLUTION 980766 below, which include monies for special education programs, which is noted on the form as $153.8 million. They tell you to deduct nonpublic school programs. The school district did not have any expenditures in that category, for example. Adult education programs, for which the school district spends $1.7 million. Community junior college education programs, for which we have no expenditures in that column. Student transportation services, $50 million. Facilities acquisition, construction, and improvement services, for which we have no 15 expenditures. Debt service, the amount that we pay on the bonds that we borrowed to build schools, and et cetera, of about $53 million. Internal fund transfers. These are fund transfers among what we call our enterprise funds. So food service funds, things like that, that the general fund supports from time to time of a half a million dollars. And then the federal expenses which are, in effect, the Title grants that we receive, 139 1 RESOLUTION 980766 which are noted here as about $144 million. Now, these are the categories based on the state form that we are required to deduct from our total expenditures. Then the total deduction -- REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Let me stop you. When you say deduct the federal, you are deducting the federal because the federal money is going directly to the charters?
Are intended to go directly to the charters, that is correct. So they should not receive the -- and my philosophy. Excuse me. But I think the philosophy of all of these deductions, quite frankly -- and maybe Mr. Daniels can speak on behalf of the state -- but we interpret the philosophy of these deductions is that it would not be appropriate for the school district to pass on the revenue because these are not generally expenses which the charter schools are going to incur. That is my interpretation of what the state law provided. But that's the basis for the 140 RESOLUTION 980766 deductions. So when you get down, the total amount of those deductions total $405 million. And you come up with a net expenditure of $1.1 billion. The formula then tells you to go forward and to take what we call the ADM, or the Average Daily Membership, which is basically the enrollment of students to use a --
This is average daily membership, so it is effectively enrollment. It is enrollment. So 214,397 students, as we report to the state. And you basically divide that number into the net expenditures, and you come up with $5,246. Now, what the math will -- and then the bottom half of the table reflects -- excuse me, reflects the calculation for the additional amounts that charter school students who are deemed to be special education students would receive. And that calculation is based on the special education program expenses versus the 141 RESOLUTION 980766 average daily membership based on those numbers. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: One thing I would like to, if I could, say to the members of the Council. You heard the Superintendent make a statement about special education. And the statement was made that the difference between charter schools and regular special ed was that in 1993, special red was changed. And the reason that the state changed special ed from what was called excess costs is because school districts were abusing special ed and was dumping individuals in special ed to get more money. And the reason that the state changed the formula is, basically, it hasn't come up with a formula that it can strike a balance between school districts dumping individuals in special ed, and gaining $10,000 more, versus to how they figure they strike a balance. So if you hear local school districts scream about, well, you don't pay us for special ed, and there is some question about decisionmaking by local school districts in terms of where they put 142 RESOLUTION 980766 kids in special ed and do those kids stay in special ed for their entire existence there in the education institution, and the problem is, it doesn't seem those kids are coming out of special ed, and the state and the General Assembly is taking the position, people need to figure out a better system. It is an issue we will probably address this year. But I want you to be clear. When the statement is made, well, the state just put a cap on it, it is driven by local school districts who just didn't, in my view, deal with it in an honorable way.
If I could address the last point, which is the difference. I would call your attention to that $405,000. And this is where I think charter schools, who indicate that there is this difference between what the school district spends per child, which is the total cost, would be the $1.5 billion, versus what they receive, which is the base on the $1.1 million. And if you divided the 214,000 students into the $405,000, you would have just 143 RESOLUTION 980766 under $2,000, maybe or hundred dollars, which I think represents the difference that many of the -- you know, that was represented here today as the difference between what the charter schools get and what the school district actually spends. But, again, you would have to ask the state as to the rationale for the deductions that they required us to make in calculating the formula. So that, in fact, is the basis for that distinction. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: But it seems to me, Mr. Armbrister -- I understand what you are doing is, basically what you are doing is, you are bringing the gross amount down of the Philadelphia School District, and then you are dividing in the number of 3,000 in a less amount. So you figure that's basically why they should receive less.
We're not doing it. We are doing -- REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: I understand you are saying that the state. But my question is, when you say student transportation services, which is $50 million, how is that line item listed? 144 RESOLUTION 980766
That is what we report to the state as to what we spend every year for student transportation. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: And you are saying that charter schools do not necessarily, based on state law, this is what you're saying, do not necessarily qualify for state transportation, so you, in a sense, are removing them from being eligible for that.
I am not saying anything. I am following the rules that the state provided. And I think you would have to ask the state for the rationale. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Do you have specific language either in some type of regulation or law that says --.
Actually, I have a form that the state requires us to fill out that tells us what to deduct. Do you have a copy of the law with you? Because the law is pretty clear, and it is not ambiguous. This is one of the few places in the law where it really is not ambiguous. This is not 145 RESOLUTION 980766 left to interpretation at all. We are following the exact edict of the state law. We are going to find that for you. We have a copy of the law with us. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Madam Chairperson, if I could at some point, Dr. Daniels, I think it would be appropriate if we brought him to get some clarity between the Department of Ed's interpretation, if we could bring him up to the panel. Dr. Daniels, can you come up to the panel. I would like to get some clarity on this issue of these line items that Mr. Armbrister has described. Have you seen a copy of this?
Yes, I have; both here and in my office. So I had pre-knowledge. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Do you have a copy with you? DR. DANIELS; I can share. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Can you respond to what Mr. Armbrister just described?
Mr. Armbrister, you were about to share a form with us which you 146 RESOLUTION 980766 said required certain reports.
Sure. We have the form, and we have also found the appropriate reference in the legislation. We don't have multiple copies.
We have Xerox, obviously. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Go ahead.
The $50 million for transportation. Basically, the law was set up to not pass through to the charters costs that school districts were incurring that weren't relevant for charters. For example, in many counties in the Commonwealth, school districts pay a significant contribution to community colleges, whatever line that is, Function No. 1700, whatever. I am an old business manager, but the memory is fading. So they don't pass it through. Now, that's not relevant to Philadelphia. But there are some other costs that aren't passed through because the district would still provide the services; therefore, the district 147 RESOLUTION 980766 should retain the money. So specifically on transportation, since the law envisions charter school public students having access to transportation, as they have now for public schools and nonpublic schools, Section 1361 of the law was specifically put into the bill by reference to bus miles beyond a 9 border of any district. 10 And I can tell you there are some suburban districts west of the city whose kids are coming into charters. And in some cases they are arranging transportation, if it is within 10 miles. They are following the law. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: So you are saying --
They retain the obligation, as well; is that what you're saying? They keep the money.
Let me clarify for myself. 148 RESOLUTION 980766 They retain the money, and they retain the obligation to transport students to a reasonable district. And according to 1361, that reasonable district is miles of the city's 6 boundaries? 7
Correct. 8 So transportation funds are deducted 9 and kept in the school district because any 10 transportation services provided to the charter school are provided by the school district. And if you look at the common practice in interpreting this law throughout the Commonwealth, whether it be Erie, whether it be State College where they considered this issue very carefully, they are providing busing both to charter schools beyond 10 miles and to charter schools within their district at the same level of service that they provide to the other students of their age range. Now, in terms of the state point of view on this, we issued over a year ago a basic education circular to that effect. Every other school district --
Do you have that 149 RESOLUTION 980766 circular with you, or a copy of it?
I don't. It is in every charter's operators manual. And I believe all our school districts have a copy of that manual. I can get you a copy.
Representative Evans has seen a copy of that, where we clarified that it should be provided at the same level. And I am not being disagreeable for the sake of being disagreeable.
The school district is providing transportation in that fashion. And there is a difference in the outlook between the Commonwealth and the School District of Philadelphia in that regard. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Dr. Daniels, I would like to say this particularly to my colleagues to the Council. As Councilwoman Clark said earlier, I think that the purpose for this hearing is to really 150 RESOLUTION 980766 figure out a way that it is not we versus us. It is really a process to try to figure out if we can do clarity. I don't think that court is the way to solve things, and I don't think that, obviously, getting into these legislative battles. So there does seem to be a difference of opinion. The state did put out a particular position that clearly stated throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania -- and obviously the school district has to answer to the state. I would like to have the school district answer in a very specific way why haven't you, if every other school district around the issue of transportation, why haven't you in a very specific way adhered to what the Department of Education has stated, which is the organization which we in the General Assembly empower to oversee 501 school districts, why haven't you in a very specific way adhered to what came down from the Department of Ed without going to court?
We didn't take ourselves to court on this; we were sued by someone else on this issue. 151 RESOLUTION 980766 But I am going to allow Jackie Sparkman, our General Counsel, to address this issue. REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL HORSEY: Excuse me. May I ask the same question in a different way? Why hasn't the school district developed a funding process for charter school children? (Applause.)
I am sorry; I am not sure I understand the question. REPRESENTATIVE HORSEY: The gentleman stated that you are bound to provide transportation under a formula for children in Philadelphia; isn't that correct?
It is issued on a basic education circular over a year ago, that is correct. REPRESENTATIVE HORSEY: We have a new educational structure known as charter school. This involves children. Why hasn't the school district developed a process for getting those kids to those 152 RESOLUTION 980766 charter schools? If they fall into the process in public school, or parochial school, and they are now members of charter schools, why hasn't the Philadelphia School District developed a formula to get them to those charter schools?
Basically because -- REPRESENTATIVE HORSEY: Which is the same question that Mr. Evans asked.
And I understand that now. I didn't understand that when it was asked originally. Basically our answer to that is because we feel that the bulletin that Mr. Daniels refers to is not consistent with the charter school legislation itself. And I will let our General Counsel respond further. JACKIE B. SPARKMAN, ESQ.: Jackie Sparkman, General Counsel, School District of Philadelphia. CHAIRWOMAN BLACKWELL: Pull the mike closer. We can't hear you. We know Panel 3, you are pushed. 153 RESOLUTION 980766 We are going to try to tie this up and ask all of you to stay for more questions, get Panel 3 before we lose one of the main participants, and then we are still going to tie all this up. Thank you. Talk a little louder into the mike. And identify yourself first.
Jackie Sparkman, General Counsel, School District of Philadelphia. And my answer is somewhat constrained by the fact that we are in litigation over that issue. But the law very clearly says to all school districts, you are to provide charter school students within your borders transportation on the same basis that you provide your own students. The Philadelphia School District does not transport all of its students. We have definite rules about who gets transportation and under what circumstances. We provide transportation. We don't provide transportation, for example, to most of our kindergarteners because we try to provide them an education facility within their communities. 154 RESOLUTION 980766 We transport children for desegregation purposes. We transport special education students, when that's required by their IEPs. We cannot afford to transport all of our students. And, in fact -- REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Can I interrupt you? Isn't that really the issue about costs? Because what I heard you say is that you have rules. Obviously your rules, your policy, which is established by your School Board, is derived from -- where are your rules derived from?
If the question goes to if you have a pie and ten groups of expenditures, and your pie only satisfies eight, within what you have, you divy up to satisfy as much as you can. So if your question was going to is money part of the reason for your rules? No doubt. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: That's what I hear. But what I'm trying to get a sense of is, I heard one thing from the state department, which is the department that regulates every school 155 RESOLUTION 980766 district. You would agree with that? You would agree that the department regulates every school district; right?
Absolutely. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Since you agree that the department regulates every school district, then I do not understand how, if you tell me about some rules, and I'm trying to figure out what's the basis of the rules. Is the basis of the rules the school district's policy or is the basis of the rules the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania? Which one is it?
No. No. No. 18 REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: The rules regarding transportation.
To the extent that State College might be transporting everyone, the law as passed, as announced by the Supreme Court of this Commonwealth, is that no public school district has any obligation whatsoever to transport any child. So every school district in this 156 RESOLUTION 980766 Commonwealth creates its own transportation rules and guidelines. Some school districts don't transport any students. So the state doesn't require every school district to transport. To the extent that you transport, you have to treat charter schools and public schools the same. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: I yield to the Councilperson.
Ms. Sparkman is it your interpretation that the state regulation requires you to extend to every charter school student the same transportation as you would to every noncharter school student, not more and not less?
Yes. We are to provide -- well, first, when the statues were first written, they were in written in terms of public and nonpublic. And we are required to provide nonpublic school students transportation on the same basis as we transport public school students.
So that pulls it into one system. Whatever you provide for your own 157 RESOLUTION 980766 system, you provide for them in terms of transportation?
But we already established that charter schools are public schools.
Yes. And they are two prongs of a public school system today. They are separate prongs. Sometimes when you're talking about it, you are trying to say that they are an offshoot of our prong. They are not. The state law makes them separate, independent schools.
But however they got here, they are here, and they are now a part of you. They are a part of -- everybody I ask says charter schools are public schools.
They are public schools, but they are not part of the School district Of Philadelphia. REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Well, why are they in other districts across in Commonwealth, 158 RESOLUTION 980766 which the Philadelphia school district is a part of this Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, why is this being treated somewhat different than other locations?