DN Editorial: Rules at last

REVIEWING the set of proposed policy changes from the School District that establish new ground rules for authorizing and overseeing charter schools in the city, we were struck with the troubling picture that emerges of the current situation.

To find a real-life analogy of how the District has historically dealt with charters, you'd have to find a collection of independent colonies, some of which operate well, some of which are political renegades and some criminal renegades, all of whom are barely watched over by their governing country. That's hard to come up with, since such a situation couldn't exist for long without devolving into chaos.

Yet, that's been the model for too long of the charter schools under District oversight. The new policies issued last week would tighten the rules and regulations under which charter schools operate, get renewed or get closed.

Charters were introduced to the state in 1997; they have since grown dramatically, with 84 schools educating over 60,000 students in the city. They are public schools designed to have more independence than district schools, with the hope of providing new models for education. But the calibration of that independence hasn't quite been figured out; the SRC approves and authorizes charters, but the state also has powers that sometimes work counter to the district. For example, the state prohibits enrollment caps, but, since every charter student represents about $6,000 taken out of the district budget (more for special education), the inability to control enrollment means an inability for the district to control its budget. Last year, the bill for charters was $700 million.

The new policies would allow the SRC to consider the financial health of the district. It also establishes new academic standards that charters must meet or face losing their charter. The new policy also requires charters to sign charter agreements before they can operate; inexplicably, as of last month, 29 charters had failed to sign their agreements - seven dating back to 2010 - and yet they still operate.

These are great improvements, although it's troubling that they are currently absent. That's in part due to the fractured nature built into the charter law.

While many charters are exemplary, as a sector of education charters need improvement. Many perform well, but many perform worse than district schools. And the landscape is littered with disgraced charter-school operators who saw charters as personal ATM machines. Eight charter officials have pleaded guilty to federal fraud charges, the latest being Masai Skief, sentenced for embezzling from the Harambee Institute of Science Technology Charter School, which he ran.

So, stronger oversight is clearly needed. That, by the way, is not likely to happen under Senate Bill 1085, now under consideration in Harrisburg.

The district also needs to make sure that it has enough people to do the job; it has eight in its charter office now, but since charters constitute the second largest district in the state, is that enough?

Go to www.philasd.org/aqi to review the policies and comment; public comment ends March 7.