California’s largest public school system according to student numbers is Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). The school system is also the United State’s second largest district in public schools. The New York City Department of Education tops LAUSD with the largest student numbers.
There were 694,288 students, 45,473 teachers and 38,494 other staff members at LAUSD in the 2007-08 school years. The county government is the largest in Los Angeles County, but the LAUSD is only second. When it comes to the LAUSD’s school budget the district’s was $7.3 billion in 2009-10. United States urban school districts started having funding difficulties in 1978 following Proposition 13’s approval. This action changed the funds provided to California’s school districts. LAUSD is one that is known to still be able to compete with other schools, such as larger and private schools, even though it is under funded.
LAUSD has a variety of ethnic student groups represented. These include Hispanic origin students at 73%, African American students at 11%, European American students at 9%, Asian American students at 4% and Filipino students comprise 1% of the student population. The Native American and Pacific Islander students take up less than 1% combined.
Los Angeles along with many nearby Southern California area communities comprises the school district. The LAUSD even has a specialized police force, known as the Los Angeles School Police Department. This law enforcement of LAUSD started in 1948 through LAUSD school police services.
A third of Los Angeles County preschools are enrolled with LAUSD. The school district even has as many buses used as the entire Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which is in the thousands. Transit school buses seat 78 to 52 passengers as depends if there are three or two per seat. A traditional school bus carries two per seat to hold 27 passengers on each bus.
When it comes to the school districts’ construction program it compares in expenditures with the Big Dig. The Big Dig was a major construction project in Boston dealing with various interstates, highways, tunnels and bridges scheduled to be built or rerouted throughout the area. LAUSD also has cafeterias that provide around 500,000 meals daily that is similar to the food provided by local McDonald’s Restaurants.
When it comes to the reputation of LAUSD there are many elements to consider. This district is known to have poor maintenance, overcrowded schools, incompetent administration, high expulsion and drop-outs as well as poor academics. An example of the school district’s problem drop-out rates come from 2007 when grades 9 through 12 was at 26 %. These issues have been amplified even though the district has put forth efforts with bond issues as well as renovations. One of the construction projects that was part of the effort included adding Santee Education Complex and South East, which were high schools opened in 2005. Also Arleta, East Valley, Contreras Learning Complex and Panorama are high schools that open to students in 2006.
FIGHTING
for Opportunity
sCHOOL CHOICE YEARbOOk
2009 – 10
Fighting for Opportunity
School Choice Yearbook 2009–10
An Annual Publication
Published by:
Alliance for School Choice
1660 L Street, NW, Suite 1000
Washington, D.C. 20036
(202) 280-1990
www.AllianceForSchoolChoice.org
Copyright © 2010 Alliance for School Choice, All Rights Reserved
ISBN 978-0-9816482-3-1
Authors: Andrew Campanella and Ashley Ehrenreich
Book and cover design: Stacey Maloney
Printed in the United States of America
First Printing
1
School Choice Yearbook 2009–10
Fighting for Opportunity
This Yearbook is dedicated to the parents and children
who, despite seemingly insurmountable obstacles, fight each
and every day for a better, fairer, and stronger education for
their children and for access to quality schools. We fight
alongside them to make the promise of school choice
and equal opportunity a reality.
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
InTRODuCTIOn
2
InTRODuCTIOn
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
3
Introduction
The past year presented the school choice movement with unprecedented challenges and
unique opportunities.
Because of state-level budget crises and electorally emboldened adversaries, the school
choice movement fought a seven-theatre war to protect educational opportunities for low-
income children. It was a rollercoaster ride of strong advocacy, emotion, uncertainty, and
nonstop hard work for school choice supporters in every state.
The epicenter of the battle for opportunity was Washington, D.C., where school choice
advocates mounted one of the strongest defenses of an endangered voucher program
in recent memory. However, educational opportunity was also jeopardized in Arizona,
Louisiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin.
While 2009 brought setbacks—particularly in Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania—no
theatre of our battle saw complete defeat. And despite the toughest year in a decade for school
choice, advocates effectively weathered the storm, making gains in some states and realizing
several significant successes.
School choice advocates made significant gains in states like Indiana and Florida, for
example. Indiana’s legislature created a $2.5 million individual and corporate scholarship
tax credit program, and Florida approved, with record bipartisan support, a dramatic
expansion to its tax credit program—making that program the largest in the nation.
In 2009, we saw, again, a significant increase in the number of students participating
in school choice programs (5 percent, to about 180,000) and an increase in the amount of
public money allocated for school choice programs—unexpected victories in what turned out
to be the worst economic climate in decades. And despite challenges at the federal level, an
ever-increasing number of Democratic state legislators last year joined with their Republican
colleagues to support school choice.
Interestingly, the media tide shifted in favor of school choice in 2009, at least on
the national level. The epic battle over the D.C. voucher program encouraged national
newspapers—from USA Today and The Wall Street Journal to The Washington Post and the
Washington Times—to powerfully editorialize in favor of school vouchers. Even progressive
commentators like MSNBC’s Chris Matthews this year offered enthusiastic endorsements of
school vouchers in D.C.
As we begin 2010, we encourage all supporters to recommit to the continuing effort to
advance the promise of educational opportunity. If 2009 has taught us anything, it’s that if
we’re willing to fight hard for what we believe in, most of the time, we will win.
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
InTRODuCTIOn
4
Former D.C. Councilman Kevin P. Chavous, one of America’s
leading Democratic advocates for school choice, speaks at a
Capitol Hill rally on September 30, 2009.
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
5
Table of Contents
What is School Choice?
7–9
Year in Review: 2009
10–15
Growth and Expansion
16–20
Feature: Head of the Class
21–23
How It Works
24–25
Myth vs. Reality
26–29
Research Recap: School Choice
Yields Student Gains
30–31
Research Recap: School Choice
Saves Tax Dollars
32–33
Appendix A: State Profiles
34–53
Appendix B: School Choice
Organizations
54–55
Highlight: The Fight
for Real Hope in D.C.
56–59
Sources and Credits
60–61
TAbLE OF COnTEnTs
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
6
Students from Washington, D.C., participate in one of a dozen
protests to protect the District’s endangered voucher program
from Congressional elimination.
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
W
H
A
T Is
sC
H
O
OL C
H
O
IC
E?
School choice puts parents in charge of their children’s education by letting them select
the best schools for their children, public or private. Some parents exercise school choice
when they decide to move to a certain city or neighborhood because of the quality of the
traditional public schools there or the presence of innovative public charter schools. Other
parents—those who can afford it—send their children to high-quality private schools.
Many low-income and middle-class families simply cannot afford to move to better
neighborhoods or pay for private school tuition—on top of the money they already pay in
taxes to support public school systems. As a result, these families are often forced to send
their children to failing or unsafe public schools, institutions that have resisted reform
because of the powerful forces of the education bureaucracy.
We believe that low-income and middle-class parents should have stronger options—
right away — through access to private schools via school vouchers and scholarship tax credit
programs. We also believe that states should eliminate barriers preventing the creation of
more high-quality charter schools.
What is School Choice?
Types of School Choice *
School Vouchers
Voucher programs give children (usually low-income children,
children in failing schools, or children with special needs)
greater access to high-quality private schools. In voucher
programs, education dollars “follow the child,” and parents
select private schools and receive state-funded scholarships
to pay tuition.
Scholarship Tax Credit Programs
Scholarship tax credit programs provide families with greater
access to high-quality private schools, by providing incentives
for corporations and individual taxpayers to get involved in
the business of improving education. In these programs,
companies and individuals get tax credits for donating to
nonprofit organizations that provide scholarships for children
to attend private schools.
Public Charter Schools
Charter schools provide essential choices to parents and
children. Charters are public schools, run by educators,
members of the community, universities, or other bodies,
that are permitted to innovate and develop specialized
educational programs for students without the bureaucracy
that often plagues traditional public schools. States with
strong charter school laws allow these schools to operate
with a level of autonomy, so that they can avoid heavy
bureaucracy.
* This is not an exhaustive list of school choice options. Parents can also exercise school choice through public magnet
schools, inter and intra-district public school choice, virtual schools, and by homeschooling their children.
7
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
8
W
H
A
T Is
sC
H
O
OL C
H
O
IC
E?
What School Choice Means to Parents
Perhaps the finest answers to the question “What is school choice?” come not from
academics and policy wonks, but from the parents and children who participate in school
voucher and scholarship tax credit programs nationwide. School choice means different
things to different families—but most families agree that school choice provides an
opportunity for their children to excel and to thrive.
For Shayla Williams, a 13-year-old who receives a Step Up for Students Scholarship as part
of the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program, school choice means a healthier learning
environment. Of her new school, Shayla says, “There’s no drama. No one fights here.”
LeeAnn Evatt says that school choice has given her son Justin, a Georgia Special Needs
Scholarship recipient, a chance to dream again. “His first year in private school was really
about getting back to where he was,” she says. “Second semester was pretty good, but this
year he’s completely back to the old Justin — Mr. Happy-Go-Lucky. I feel like I almost
have a new child, honestly. Now he has his hopes and dreams back again.”
Cleveland mother Debby Barry, whose son receives a scholarship to attend a private
school through the Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program, says school choice
means safety for her children. “We live in the ’hood,” Debby says. “I hear gunshots every
night. The kids in our neighborhood are wild. I can’t wait to get him to school to get him
out of the neighborhood. I couldn’t afford private school tuition, so I am blessed to have
this scholarship. This is what I want for my child.”
Florida mother Patricia Allen says that school choice provides her sons with hope for a
better future. “Without these scholarships, there is no telling what would have happened
to my boys. The scholarship program gave my children the second chances they needed
for success in school and in life.” Her sons receive Step Up for Students Scholarships.
For sixth grader Sekou, a scholarship recipient and participant in Pennsylvania’s
Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) program, school choice means smaller class
sizes and fewer distractions: “My school is much different from public school, and I enjoy
going there for many reasons. One reason is because there are smaller class sizes so you
can hear more. Also, there are no girls to distract you or get you in trouble…. Another
difference is that the classes are hard, and you have to study more, and if you don’t do
your homework, you get detention,” he says.
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
9
For many students, including fourth grader Brandon, a recipient of Ohio’s EdChoice
Scholarship, school choice means great teachers. “In the beginning the work was hard,
harder than the work at my old school,” Brandon says. “But my teacher never gave up on
me. She made sure I understood the lessons and never ignored me in class.”
Arizona father Scott’s children receive scholarships through Arizona’s Individual School
Tuition Organization Tax Credit program. For Scott, school choice means a lifeline of
stability for his son and four daughters. “After my wife died of cancer, I didn’t know
how I would raise my kids, keep working, and make their lives normal again. These
scholarships provided my children with the opportunity to continue to excel in school
despite impossible circumstances at home.”
For Jessica Burhardt, a mother of children who receive vouchers through Louisiana’s
Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence program, school choice means that
her kids have a chance at proving their true potential. “I live in Orleans Parish, and my
children were able to move from a failing Recovery District school to a private school
directly because of the Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence Program,” she
says. “While they attended public school, they received a less satisfactory education in an
environment where not only the students but teachers didn’t care. They had no room to
thrive. Now they are both honor roll students and spelling bee winners.”
For Carol, the mother of Jeremy—a recipient of a Georgia Special Needs Scholarship—
school choice means that she has a chance to see the best in her son again. “They say that
Jeremy is the best kid. He went from six suspensions last year in the public school to zero
behavior problems this year. He’s even in the choir. Last year we had the kid who was
throwing pinecones at teachers, and this year he is in the choir. This is a new kid here.”
For Seanette, a mother of three in Cleveland, school choice means that her children
won’t fall through the cracks. “It takes a strain off me to know I can send my child to a
great school. I feel safe leaving my child at this school, which is a wonderful feeling. In
Kellisa’s public school, she was doing advanced work but she was still bored to tears. She
was slipping through the cracks. I was so happy when the principal at her new school
called and told me about the Cleveland Scholarship. I enrolled her right away, and now I
see such a difference.”
“I got involved in the fight for school
choice when my daughter Nia’s
scholarship was revoked during the
fight to save the D.C. Opportunity
Scholarship Program. My son Nico
went from getting no attention
whatsoever at a failing public school
to thriving in a private school, so I
know that vouchers work. To me,
school choice means putting kids first.
And to anyone who wants to end a
program that helps kids, I tell them:
Keep politics out of this. It’s about
our family.”
— LaTasha Bennett, D.C. mother
W
H
A
T Is
sC
H
O
OL C
H
O
IC
E?
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
10
Students rally in Phoenix, Arizona, in 2008 to support specialized
school voucher programs. These initiatives became “Lexie’s Law”
in 2009.
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
11
The start of 2009 saw the inauguration of a new president, Barack Obama, and also the
climax of the global economic crisis.
With states across the country facing unprecedented budget shortfalls and crushing
deficits, the potential for the passage of new school choice programs appeared bleak. In fact,
as 2009 began, the school choice movement braced itself for attacks from opponents who
would claim, despite economic reality, that school voucher programs and scholarship tax
credit programs cost excessive money and drained funds from public schools.
To combat these false claims, the school choice movement protected programs with
aggressive advocacy — planning rallies across the country, expanding its parental outreach
efforts, and broadening its base of support to include even more Democrats. Throughout the
following pages, you can read about the major battles, successes, and challenges of 2009—
and see how school choice advocates were able to overcome nearly insurmountable odds to
increase school choice programs and student enrollment in the school choice movement’s
most challenging year to date.
Two New Programs Signed into Law
After a long battle, Indiana legislators involved in a protracted budget debate passed a
$2.5 million corporate and individual scholarship tax credit program. In addition to having
the support of the state’s governor, Mitch Daniels, the program was passed because of
extensive public support, including a long-term letter-writing campaign targeted at key
legislative budget committee members, a comprehensive effort to place opinion pieces in
targeted newspapers, and the involvement of a wide range of religious and community
groups. The program will start providing scholarships to students in 2010.
Arizona remained a hotbed of controversy in 2009—fueled mostly by agitation by the
ACLU and the People for the American Way. Despite deploying vast resources in attempts
to kill voucher programs specifically designed to help children with special needs and
children in foster care, these special interests ultimately failed in their attempts to
undermine school choice in the state. When a court ruled that Arizona’s Blaine Amendment
created an atmosphere that wasn’t conducive for the voucher programs, school choice activists
worked with a team of legislative allies to swiftly pass Lexie’s Law, a $5 million initiative that
converted the two voucher programs for foster children and students with special needs into
a corporate scholarship tax credit program, preserved educational opportunities for more
than 470 children, and expanded access to the program for students with “504” plans.
Year in Review: 2009
YE
A
R In
R
E
V
IE
W
: 2
0
0
9
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
12
sECTIOn TWO
Five Programs Expanded or Enhanced
In addition to this victory against well-funded special interests, the Arizona school choice
coalition also succeeded in convincing lawmakers to eliminate the sunset provision in the
Corporate School Tuition Organization (STO) Tax Credit Program, to include insurance
premium tax credits in the corporate STO program, and to allow donations through payroll
deduction for the Individual School Tuition Organization Tax Credit Program.
In Florida, extensive public outreach resulted in protection of Florida’s Corporate Tax Credit
Scholarship Program—now known as the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program. Because
of the vocal and public support of Governor Charlie Crist—along with a multitude of Florida’s
Democratic legislators—the program was expanded in 2009 to allow for insurance premium
tax credits.
Iowa school choice supporters saw two significant successes in 2009, thanks to the support
of committed legislators and Democratic Governor Chet Culver. In 2009, corporations were
permitted to join individuals in making donations to support scholarships in the state. For
the first time, the state came extremely close to reaching the program’s cap—the maximum
allowable tax credits permitted for the program, $7.5 million—and 9,624 students were served.
With the help of popular Governor Bobby Jindal, along with Democratic Senator Ann
Duplessis and Democratic Representative Austin Badon (both of New Orleans), the planned
increase in funding for Louisiana’s popular Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence
Program—a voucher initiative for low-income students in failing New Orleans schools—was
preserved and expanded by $2.1 million despite some legislative opposition. Supporters of
the program rallied in Baton Rouge to convince lawmakers of the program’s positive impact.
On the enrollment front, the Louisiana chapter of the Black Alliance for Educational Options
(BAEO) worked with local advocates to mount an aggressive parental outreach and education
campaign.
Parents fight to protect Ohio’s Autism Scholarship Program at a Columbus, Ohio, rally in 2009.
YE
A
R In
R
E
V
IE
W
:
2
0
0
9
School Choice Yearbook 2009-2010
13
In Utah, legislators enacted another annual increase in funding for the Carson Smith
Special Needs Scholarship program. Under the leadership of parent groups in Utah, the
Carson Smith program continued to thrive in 2009 with $150,000 in additional funding
and overwhelming rates of parental satisfaction.
Three Programs Protected
In the Buckeye State, School Choice Ohio and its allies went on the offensive
against a governor who remains vehemently opposed to parental choice in education.
School choice allies in Ohio rallied public support and waged a full-scale enrollment
effort for the EdChoice voucher program, increasing applications by 30 percent in just
one year. In addition, the team managed to beat back the governor’s efforts to weaken
the program, and succeeded in passing key language that will improve the program’s
accountability to families and taxpayers in the future.
Faced with overwhelming state budget deficits and challenges from legislators to cut
costs, Rhode Island Governor Don Carcieri, a Republican, began the year with an effort
to eliminate all of the Ocean State’s tax credit programs. Thanks to strong efforts by the
Rhode Island Scholarship Advocates (RISA), however, Governor Carcieri reversed course—
advocating for the preservation of the program. In the end, legislators from both parties
agreed with the governor’s stance, preserving the $1 million program in its entirety.
In the battle to preserve and protect the nation’s oldest and longest-running school choice
voucher program, Wisconsin school choice advocates succeeded in beating back challenges
from a governor who has never supported the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP).
Instead of adopting a proposed regime of overly burdensome regulations proposed
by the governor and his allies—regulations that supporters believed would severely harm
Louisiana First Lady Supriya Jindal meets with two parents who support the Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence
Program in 2009.
YE
A
R In
R
E
V
IE
W
: 2
0
0
9
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
14
the program’s ability to admit students and schools into the MPCP — school choice
supporters agreed to a legislative compromise that requires additional testing and
new government oversight.
Two Programs Still under Siege
Pennsylvania—another state with strong bipartisan support—suffered one of the
most significant setbacks of 2009 because of the Keystone State’s desperate financial
situation. The program, which served nearly 45,000 children in 2008, was targeted for
complete elimination by some legislators who sought to close “budget gaps.” The support
of Democratic Governor Ed Rendell, State Senator Anthony A. Williams (D–Philadelphia),
and State Representative Dwight Evans (D–Philadelphia), however, paid off—as the
program escaped complete elimination and survived with what school choice supporters
hope will be a temporary funding reduction.
Perhaps the most prominent fight in 2009 took place in Washington, D.C. Despite
President Obama’s campaign promise to “fund what works, regardless of ideology,”
his administration sent early signals that he intended to completely eliminate the D.C.
Opportunity Scholarship Program—a voucher initiative for low-income students in
Washington, D.C., who attend predominantly failing schools. As a result, D.C. activists—led
by D.C. Parents for School Choice and local coalition leaders Kevin P. Chavous and Virginia
Walden Ford—mounted an all-out effort to save the program.
On the morning of a rally that brought more than 2,000 families out to Freedom Plaza
in the District, the Obama administration bowed to incredible pressure and agreed to preserve
the program for students already receiving scholarships. Not content with this “compromise,”
school choice leaders mounted a full-scale television, radio, newspaper, and Internet campaign to
save the program, culminating in two dozen protests, events, and rallies and significant national
news coverage. As of this writing, the outcome of the battle to save the D.C. Opportunity
Scholarship Program is uncertain.
Florida Governor Charlie Crist meets students who receive Florida Tax Credit Scholarships through Step Up for Students,
at a 2009 rally.
YE
A
R In
R
E
V
IE
W
:
2
0
0
9
School Choice Yearbook 2009-2010
15
OVERVIEW: SUCCESSFUL SCHOOL CHOICE LEGISLATION IN 2009
State
Legislation
Arizona
Creation of Scholarship Tax Credit Program for Special Needs &
Foster Children
Elimination of Sunset on Corporate STO Program
Expansion of Corporate STO Program
Inclusion of Insurance Premium Taxes in Corporate STO Program
Allowance of Donations to STOs by Payroll Deduction
Florida
Inclusion of Insurance Premium Taxes in Corporate
Tax Credit Program
Indiana
Creation of Scholarship Tax Credit Program
Iowa
Inclusion of Corporate Taxes in Scholarship Tax Credit Program
Louisiana
Appropriation of Additional Funds for Scholarships
Ohio
Academic Accountability Provisions Added to Existing
Voucher Programs
Rhode Island
Restoration of Corporate Scholarship Tax Credit Program
Utah
Expansion of Carson Smith Special Needs Scholarship Program
District of Columbia Extension of Funding for Opportunity Scholarship Program
YE
A
R In
R
E
V
IE
W
: 2
0
0
9
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
16
Dr. Howard Fuller, founder of the Black Alliance for Educational
Options (BAEO), poses with children from Durham Nativity
School in Durham, North Carolina.
School Choice Yearbook 2009–10
17
During 2009, the school choice movement saw the addition of a new state to the school
choice family: Indiana. In addition, student enrollment continued its steady growth—to
179,721, a nearly 5 percent increase over 2008–09 and an 86 percent increase over five years
ago (2004-05).
There are now 18 publicly funded private school choice programs operating in 11 states
and the District of Columbia. These programs are evenly divided between school voucher
programs (9) and scholarship tax credit programs (9). Of the 18 programs in existence, five
are specifically designed to assist children with special needs.
In 2009, Florida eclipsed Pennsylvania to become the state with the most students
enrolled in school choice programs. Arizona and Ohio are now tied (with three programs
each) as the states with the highest number of school choice programs.
Growth and Expansion
G
R
O
W
TH A
n
D
E
X
PA
n
sIOn
2009–10 School Choice Data at a Glance
States (Including D.C.) with School Choice Programs
12
Scholarship Tax Credit Programs
7
Public Charter Schools
40
State with Special Needs / Foster Programs
5
Total Number of School Choice Programs
18
Number of School Voucher Programs
9
Number of Scholarship Tax Credit Programs
9
Special Needs/Foster Programs
5*
Total Students in School Choice Programs
179,721
Total Students: Scholarship Tax Credit Programs
115,642
Total Students: School Voucher Programs
64,079
Total Students: Special Needs / Foster Programs
24,555*
Total Funding Expended for School Choice Programs
$606,097,380
Total Funding: Scholarship Tax Credits
$236,316,848
Total Funding: School Vouchers
$369,780,532
Total Funding: Special Needs / Foster Scholarships
$168,135,462*
Average Scholarship Amount for School Choice Programs
$3,373
Average Scholarship in Scholarship Tax Credit Programs
$2,044
Average Scholarship in School Voucher Programs
$5,770
Average Scholarship for Special Needs / Foster Programs
$6,847
* Numbers under sections
highlighted in yellow do
not add up to the larger
sums. Data is provided
for reference.
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
18
180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10
Recent Student Enrollment Growth in Targeted School Choice Programs
29,003
55,373
81,524
90,613
96,528
108,705
126,519
158,725
171,478
179,721
G
R
O
W
TH A
n
D
E
X
PA
n
sIOn
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
19
9
0
19
9
1
19
9
2
19
9
3
19
9
4
19
9
5
19
9
6
19
9
7
19
9
8
19
9
9
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
3
2
0
0
4
2
0
0
5
2
0
0
6
2
0
0
7
2
0
0
8
2
0
0
9
Growth in States with Private School Choice Programs
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
WI
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
AZ
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
FL
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
PA
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
UT
UT
UT
UT
UT
RI
RI
RI
RI
IA
IA
IA
IA
GA
GA
GA
LA
LA
IN
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
19
G
R
O
W
TH A
n
D
E
X
PA
n
sIOn
Washington
Oregon
Arizona
New Mexico
Texas
Oklahoma
Kansas
Colorado
Utah
Nevada
California
Idaho
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Nebraska
Minnesota
Iowa
Missouri
Arkansas
Mississippi
Alabama
Louisiana
Florida
Georgia
Tennessee
Wisconsin
Illinois
Indiana
Ohio
Michigan
Kentucky
New Jersey
New York
Conn. R.I.
Mass.
N.H.
Maine
Wyoming
Pennsylvania
Virginia
Virginia
West
Delaware
Washington, DC
Maryland
Vt.
Carolina
North Carolina
South
Alaska
Hawaii
States with Targeted Private School Choice Programs
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Vouchers
Scholarship Tax Credits
18 Private School Choice Programs
5 General
8 General
9
9
4 Special Needs
1 Special Needs / Foster
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
20
G
R
O
W
TH A
n
D
E
X
PA
n
sIOn
2009–10 Scholarship Recipients by State
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
Florida
Pennsylvania
Arizona
Wisconsin
Ohio
Iowa
Georgia
Washington, D.C.
Louisiana
Utah
Rhode Island
46,900
44,839
32,001
20,328
18,654
9,624
1,319
3,968
1,195
602
291
> Justina and Shauna Mason
When Florida mother Yvette Mason noticed that her daughters, Justina and Shauna,
were losing focus at their public middle school, she wasted no time in exploring
what other options were available to them. Unable to attend college herself, Yvette
was determined that her twin daughters would follow a different path.
Yvette learned about the Step Up for Students Scholarship, which serves students
from households with incomes that meet the standard for free and reduced–price
lunch, and began researching private schools in her Orlando neighborhood.
Justina and Shauna were awarded Step Up scholarships to attend Agape
Christian Academy, where the small class sizes and individual attention allowed
them to academically thrive. “I ask a lot of questions,” says Shauna, “and the
teachers really break it down for you. If you have trouble with something, they
will be there to help you.”
Four years after they entered Agape Christian Academy, Justina and Shauna
graduated as co-valedictorians with 4.0 grade point averages. Their shared goal
of earning nursing degrees from the University of Central Florida is well within
their reach, and because their mother was able to choose a school that provided a
solid educational foundation, there is no limit to their future success.
21
HEAD OF THE CLAss
“She AlWAyS ShoWed US ThAT yoU cAn’T go AnyWhere
WiThoUT An edUcATion,” JUSTinA SAyS of her MoTher.
“ThAT’S The MoST iMPorTAnT Thing To being SUcceSSfUl.”
HEAD OF THE CLAss
22
> Tiffany dunston
Eager to help her escape the limitations of her inner-city Washington, D.C.,
school, Tiffany Dunston’s aunt encouraged her to apply for an Opportunity
Scholarship through a federally funded voucher program that allows low-income
children to escape failing public schools.
“i STArTed PrAying every dAy becAUSe i didn’T WAnT To
go To A neighborhood School,” TiffAny SAyS.
Tiffany’s prayers were answered when she enrolled in the freshman class at
Archbishop Carroll High School in Washington, D.C.
Tiffany noticed a difference in the new learning environment immediately.
“The way people act toward each other, the activities, the curriculum,” she says.
“That’s the difference — Carroll has limited distractions.”
Unwilling to allow this opportunity to be wasted, Tiffany excelled in the
classroom and on the basketball court.
Tiffany attributes her drive to honoring the memory of her cousin,
James, who was shot and killed at age 17. “He was going to be the
first college graduate in my family, but he died before his opportunity.
Now I’m trying to step in his shoes, to finish what he started.”
In 2008, Tiffany graduated as the valedictorian of her Archbishop Carroll
class. She is currently a sophomore at Syracuse University, where
she is majoring in biochemistry.
School Choice Yearbook 2009–10
23
Pennsylvania’s Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC)
Program, supported by a broad bipartisan coalition, is a huge
success. Just ask Sekou, a sixth grader.
“I’m grateful I can get a good education at a private school such
as Nativity School because of the scholarship support I received.
If you’re smart, when you finish college, all your degrees will help
you make enough money to take care of your family…” he says.
24
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
HOW IT WORks
VOUCHER PROGRAMS
Education vouchers are the method of public education funding that empowers parents
by allowing public money to follow their children to the public or private schools of their
choice. There are a wide variety of targeted school voucher programs in existence today.
Types of K-12 Voucher Programs
Means-tested voucher programs are targeted to low-income families who meet specific
income criteria, typically around 185 percent of the federal poverty guideline.
Existing programs for
Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program
low–income students
(means-preferenced)
Milwaukee Parental Choice Program
Louisiana’s Student Scholarships for Educational
Excellence Program (also a failing schools program)
D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program
Failing schools voucher programs are targeted to children in low-performing
public schools.
Existing programs
Ohio’s Educational Choice (EdChoice)
Scholarship Program
Louisiana’s Student Scholarships for Educational
Excellence Program (also means-tested)
Special education voucher programs are targeted to children with special educational needs.
Typically, they require the student to have an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to
qualify.
Existing programs
Florida’s McKay Scholarship for Students
with Disabilities Program
Georgia Special Needs Scholarship Program
Ohio’s Autism Scholarship Program
Utah’s Carson Smith Special Needs Scholarship
How It Works
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
25
HOW IT WORks
Foster child voucher programs are targeted to children in foster care, who, because of
their frequent changes of address, are often forced to change schools many times over the
course of their K-12 education (no existing programs).
G.I. Junior voucher programs are targeted to children in military families, who often live on
bases or in areas with high concentrations of failing schools (no existing programs).
Universal voucher programs allow all children, regardless of their family income, where they
live, or any other criteria, to participate. In effect, this type of program serves to separate
the government financing of education from the government operation of schools. It can be
means-preferenced so that poorer families receive larger vouchers (no existing programs).
Scholarship Tax Credit Programs
Scholarship tax credit programs provide individuals and/or corporations with tax credits
for charitable contributions to nonprofit organizations that grant children scholarships so that
they can attend the public or private schools of their parents’ choice.
Rather than being operated by the government, these scholarship programs are run by
nonprofit, tax-exempt, scholarship granting organizations. The scholarships do not originate
from state appropriations, but from private charitable donations made under the provisions of
the tax code. Accordingly, they are not funded by public agencies.
» Typically, laws require that eligible families meet certain income criteria.
» Scholarship granting organizations use their own criteria for distributing scholarship monies
to eligible students.
» States monitor these organizations to ensure financial accountability.
» Depending on the state, these organizations are referred to as Scholarship Organizations (SOs),
School Tuition Organizations (STOs), Scholarship Granting Organizations (SGOs), Student
Scholarship Organizations (SSOs), or Scholarship Funding Organizations (SFOs).
» Scholarship tax credit programs are available in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa,
Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island.
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
26
Silas and Shayla, pictured with their grandmother, Maria,
are now students at Victory Christian Academy in Lakeland,
Florida, through a Step Up for Students Scholarship.
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
27
Myth vs. Reality
HOW IT WORks
In their efforts to preserve the status quo and protect their political power, opponents
spend a lot of money perpetuating myths about school choice. Take a few minutes and read
the truth! Then, join with the Alliance for School Choice as we fight the distortions and work
to bring school choice to your state.
mYTH
School choice drains funds from public schools.
REALITY School choice helps public schools. Studies have consistently demonstrated that
public schools benefit from the existence of voucher and tax credit programs. In
addition, with private school choice programs, school districts retain a portion
of the funding for each child who leaves the public system — even though the
district no longer has to educate the student.
mYTH Private school choice violates the separation between church and state.
REALITY The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that appropriately designed private school
choice programs are fully constitutional.
mYTH
School choice is just a Republican, right-wing issue.
REALITY School choice is truly a bipartisan issue. Prominent Democratic supporters of
private school choice include: Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Robert Byrd,
Senator Joe Lieberman, Newark Mayor Cory Booker, former D.C. Mayor Anthony
Williams, Louisiana State Senator Ann Duplessis, and former U.S. Representative
Carrie Meek. Furthermore, a majority of school choice programs enacted over the
past five years have been approved by a Democratic legislative body or signed by a
Democratic governor.
mYTH
Students don’t learn more because of school choice.
REALITY When you look at the credible research available on several school choice
programs in places like Milwaukee, Washington, D.C., Florida, and Cleveland,
you will see that in every case, students who participate in these programs
produce higher academic achievement than their peers in public schools.
Parent satisfaction is extremely high, and students love their new schools.
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
28
mYTH
There is no accountability in school choice programs.
REALITY The vast majority of private schools have rigorous evaluation criteria, and every
private school choice program has accountability provisions — such as testing and
reporting — in addition to being continually accountable to parents. Schools also
have to qualify for participation in most school choice programs. School choice
advocates also support smart accountability provisions in state laws—such as
fair testing and program assessment — to ensure that the academic successes
of students are measured and reported.
mYTH
The problem with private school choice is that schools won’t be required to
accept children.
REALITY The people who run private schools want to help children, especially disadvantaged
children and children with disabilities. Many private schools are built just to help
children and families who are most in need. Several successful private school
choice programs are designed specifically to provide much-needed support to
children with special needs, and most other school choice programs focus on
children from low-income families.
mYTH
School choice means abandoning public schools.
REALITY Public schools are an integral part of American society and, in many cases, offer a
quality education for our children. But when public schools don’t work—or don’t
work for your child—don’t you deserve another option? In reality, school choice
does not always mean that people have to choose private or religious schools.
Public schools, including charter schools, are an important part of the school
choice movement. The school choice movement seeks access to better schools for
children, whether traditional public schools, charter schools, or private schools.
mYTH
School choice hurts (or is opposed by) teachers.
REALITY No matter where students are being educated, there will always be a need for
high-quality teachers. And more choices in schools also means more choices
for teachers. School choice could likely lead to more teaching jobs as schools
hire more teachers to lower class sizes to make their schools more attractive to
students and parents. And studies demonstrate that a plurality of public school
teachers actually support well-designed school choice programs.
mYTH
School choice allows the best students to abandon the public schools.
REALITY Students who are doing poorly in public schools are most likely to take advantage
of school choice programs. Generally, students who succeed in a school see no
need to switch schools. Studies also demonstrate that most parents—regardless
of their income—make good choices when provided with school options.
HOW IT WORks
School Choice Yearbook 2009–10
29
Louisiana Sen. Ann Duplessis (D-New Orleans, right) and
Rep. Austin Badon (D-New Orleans, left) meet with families
who benefit from the Student Scholarships for Educational
Excellence Program at a 2009 Baton Rouge rally.
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
30
Milwaukee Voucher Students Graduate at Higher Rates than Public School Peers
Students who receive vouchers from the nation’s oldest school voucher program — the
Milwaukee Parental Choice Program — graduate at an 18 percent higher rate than students in the
Milwaukee Public Schools.
“The findings, from a leading national expert who analyzed six years of data, estimate that
3,352 additional Milwaukee students would have received diplomas between 2003 and 2008
if public school graduation rates had matched those of low-income students using educational
vouchers,” School Choice Wisconsin said.
The graduation rate for voucher students was 77 percent, compared with 65 percent for public
school students.
The Wall Street Journal hailed the report and said that President Obama, who has promised
to “fund what works” in education, should “take another look at Milwaukee, where the nation’s
oldest and largest publicly funded school voucher program is showing academic gains.”
D.C. Voucher Program Yields “Largest Achievement Impact” for Any Federal Education Program
Students who receive D.C. school vouchers demonstrated “the largest achievement impact of
any education policy program yet evaluated” by the U.S. Department of Education, according to
studies released in 2008 and 2009 by the Institute for Education Sciences (IES) and education
next. Specifically, students who received vouchers made statistically-significant gains in reading.
In fact, voucher students gained approximately 3.1 months of additional learning in reading over
their public school peers.
As education Week’s Debra Viadero wrote, “What’s missing from all the media coverage,
though, is the fact that this study is another one of the randomized controlled studies that the
IES has been rolling out in recent years…[M]ost of those studies are finding few, if any, program
effects. So the fact that the D.C. program is beginning to yield positive academic results may be
especially noteworthy.”
Florida Scholarship Recipients Make the Grade for a Third the Cost of Public Schools
Despite costing “less than any other K-12 option that Florida funds,” the Florida Tax Credit
Scholarship Program is educating some of Florida’s students at strong levels. In fact, students
who receive scholarships from the tax credit program are keeping pace with their public school
peers in the state.
School Choice Yields Student Gains
RESEARCH RECAP
REsEARCH RECAP
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
31
According to a June 2009 report by University of Florida professor David Figlio, “The
typical student participating in the program tended to maintain his or her relative position in
comparison with others nationwide. It is important to note that these national comparisons
pertain to all students nationally, and not just low-income students.”
New Study Reveals Private School Teachers More Satisfied than Public Counterparts
Private school teachers are likely to feel safer, be more satisfied with their jobs, and have
more influence over their teaching environment than public school teachers, according to a
recent study conducted by the Foundation for Education Choice.
According to the teachers themselves, those working in private schools are more than
twice as likely as those in public schools to feel that they have “a great deal of influence on
performance standards for students.” And 60 percent of private school teachers say they
have “a great deal of control” over what they teach, compared to 36 percent of public school
teachers.
Alexanne would like to attend Villa Joseph Marie High but knows that her family does not have the money to send her there
without a scholarship through Pennsylvania’s Educational Improvement Tax Credit program. “I hope that someday I will have
the privilege to attend this high school, which would help me achieve my future goals,” she says.
REsEARCH RECAP
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
32
School Choice Saves Tax Dollars
REsEARCH RECAP
With America recovering from the worst economic crisis in decades, voters across the
country are becoming increasingly wary of education plans with steep price tags—especially
when the majority of U.S. states face overwhelming budget shortfalls. In addition, legislators
and families are understandably worried about how tightening state budget belts will impact
education.
According to research, however, school choice programs can provide a workable solution
to states that want to improve the quality of education and save tax dollars. In fact, there
exists a significant body of research demonstrating that existing and proposed school choice
programs save millions of dollars for taxpayers each year. Here are just six examples:
Arizona Arizona is saving $11.4 million annually because of the corporate tax
credit scholarship program, according to a study sponsored by the Institute for
Justice. The report was based on an analysis by the state’s Joint Legislative Budget
Committee and showed that every student who would transfer from a public school
to a private school because of the program would save the state’s general fund
$5,000 in one year.
Florida The Corporate Tax Credit Scholarship Program saved $1.49 in state
education spending for every $1.00 of tax credits awarded to businesses that donated
funds to Scholarship Funding Organizations in 2007–08, according a legislatively
required fiscal analysis of the program. This latest analysis of the program is the
third showing that it saves money.
Georgia & Indiana The two-year-old Georgia Scholarship Tax Credit Program
is estimated to save taxpayers approximately $5.9 million a year, and the Indiana
Scholarship Tax Credit Program is slated to save the state anywhere from $6.4
million to $17.6 million per year after five years of operation, according to studies by
the Indiana-based Foundation for Educational Choice.
Pennsylvania Taxpayers directly saved $144 million over six years because of the
Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) program, according to a study by the
Indiana-based Foundation for Educational Choice. In addition, the Commonwealth
Foundation for Public Policy Alternatives estimates that if all the children receiving
scholarships between the 2001-02 school year and the 2006-07 school year
attended public schools instead, it would have cost the state an additional $1.5 billion
dollars over those years.
RESEARCH RECAP
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
33
REsEARCH RECAP
Wisconsin The Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) saved taxpayers
between $24.6 million and $37.2 million each year from 2007–09, according
to a state analysis. In addition, the state’s nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau
estimated that school districts outside of Milwaukee received a net of nearly $86
million in additional state funding for the 2007-08 school year because of the
MPCP. In other words, if the program was eliminated, districts would have had to
raise property taxes if they wanted to recoup the lost funding.
When analyzed in the abstract, school choice proposals also save money.
For example, the CATO Institute recently revealed a new tool that allows individuals to
determine the savings that states would realize if they instituted statewide scholarship tax
credit programs. Looking at five states in particular—Illinois, New York, South Carolina,
Texas, and Wisconsin—authors Andrew Coulson and Anca M. Cotet demonstrate that over
a 10-year period, each of the states would have a net savings ranging “from $1.1 billion for
South Carolina to $15.9 billion for Texas.”
Florida Step Up for Students scholarship recipients with legendary football coach and school choice supporter Don Shula and
his wife, Mary Ann.
34
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
A Washington, D.C., mother attends a protest at the U.S.
Department of Education to raise awareness about the need
to save the endangered D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program.
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
35
sTATE PROFILEs
State Profiles
Arizona
36–38
Florida
39–40
Georgia
41–42
Indiana
43
Iowa
44
Louisiana
45
Ohio
46–48
Pennsylvania
49
Rhode Island
50
Utah
51
Wisconsin
52
Washington, D.C.
53
A nOTE On mETHODOLOGY
The following pages contain data and research regarding each of the publicly funded private school choice
programs operating in the United States. The information on these pages was generated through rigorous
research into state laws and regulations, updated most recently in February 2010. Enrollment and expenditure
data was provided by state officials, who were contacted on several occasions by Alliance researchers for
information, clarification, and updates. In instances when this information was not available from a state agency
or organization, numbers were estimated—using historical averages and trend data—by Alliance for School
Choice researchers in collaboration with other national school choice leaders. Please see the Sources and Credits
section for a state-by-state breakdown of data sources, uses, and estimations.
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
36
Arizona
sTATE PROFILEs
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL TUITION ORGANIZATION TAX CREDIT
Program Type
Individual scholarship tax credit
Student Eligibility
» None specified in law
» May be determined by School Tuition Organization (STO)
» Private school students also eligible
STO Requirements
» Use at least 90 percent of contributions for scholarships
» Make scholarships available for more than one school
» Annually report to the state data on accepted contributions, grants awarded, and
participating schools
School Requirements
Comply with state private school regulations, including nondiscrimination and health
and safety requirements
Scholarship Cap
None
Tax Credit Value
100 percent of donation
Donor Tax Credit Cap
» $500 single
» $1,000 married couple
Statewide Cap
None. $55.2 million expended
in 2009-10 school year
Year Enacted
1997
Student Participation
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000 25,000
30,000
1998–99
1999–00
2000–01
2001–02
2002–03
2003–04
2004–05
2005–06
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
128
3,365
15,081
18,049
19,559
20,134
21,146
22,529
24,678
27,153
28,321
28,933
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 28,933
Schools Participating 373
STOs Operating 55
2008 Donations $55,269,528
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
37
CORPORATE SCHOOL TUITION ORGANIZATION TAX CREDIT
Program Type
Corporate scholarship tax credit
Student Eligibility
» Family income cannot exceed 185 percent of the federal free or reduced-price lunch
program limit ($75,467 for a family of four in 2009)
» Attended public school the previous year or entering kindergarten
STO Requirements
» Use at least 90 percent of contributions for scholarships
» Make scholarships available for more than one school
» Annually submit to the state:
∏ Data on accepted contributions, grants awarded, and participating schools
∏ Proof of independent review of financial statements by a certified public accountant
School Requirements
» Comply with state private school regulations, including nondiscrimination and health
and safety requirements
» Require teachers to be fingerprinted
» Annually administer and make publicly available the aggregate results of nationally
norm-referenced, standardized achievement test
Scholarship Cap
» $4,400 – grades K-8
» $5,700 – grades 9-12
» Limits increase by $100 each year
Tax Credit Value
100 percent of donation
Donor Tax
Credit Cap
None
Statewide Cap
» $17.28 million
(FY 2010)
» 20 percent annual
increase each year
Year Enacted
2006
Arizona
Student Participation
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
35
1,947
2,967
2,596
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 2,596
Schools Participating 176
STOs Operating 19
2009 Expenditures $6,575,907
sTATE PROFILEs
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
38
LEXIE’S LAW
Program Type
Corporate scholarship tax credit program for children with special needs and foster children
Student Eligibility
» Students who received vouchers under Arizona’s two previous voucher programs (for foster
children and children with disabilities) receive priority in scholarships
» Students must have attended a government-run public school as a full–time student for
100 days prior to the fiscal year
» Students must:
∏ have been placed in foster care at any time before the student graduates from high school
or obtains a GED, OR
∏ have been identified as having a disability under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act or
identified by a school district as a child with a disability, or a student eligible to receive
disability services from a school district
School Tuition Organization (STO) Requirements
» STOs must use 90 percent of contributions for scholarship
» STOs must be nonprofit organizations and have a 501(c)(3) designation by the Internal
Revenue Service
» An STO cannot limit the scholarships it provides under the program to children attending
a particular school or group of schools
School Requirements
» Schools must not discriminate on the basis of race, color, handicap, familial status, or national
origin, and that satisfies the requirements prescribed by federal law for private schools
Scholarship Cap
» Shall not exceed the cost of tuition for the student to attend a private school
» Scholarships cannot exceed the amount that it would cost the state to send the child to
an applicable public school
Donation Cap
None
Tax Credit Value
» Donors will receive a 100 percent credit for their donations,
allowing for $5 million in credits allowed if $5 million is donated
» Tax credits are provided on a first-come, first-served basis.
» Tax credits can be carried over from year to year.
Statewide Cap
$5 million
Year Enacted
2009
sTATE PROFILEs
Student Participation
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
40
359
439
472
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 472
Schools Participating 107+
2009 Expenditures $2,859,800
Arizona
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
39
Florida
Student Participation
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
1999–00
2000–01
2001–02
2002–03
2003–04
2004–05
2005–06
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
2
970
5,013
9,130
13,739
15,910
17,300
18,273
19,852
20,530
19,913
JOHN M. MCKAY SCHOLARSHIP FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES PROGRAM
Program Type
Special needs voucher
Student Eligibility
» Have Individualized Education Program (IEP)
» Attended a Florida public school the previous year
» Children of U.S. military personnel transferring are
exempt from prior year public school attendance
requirement
School Requirements
» Be approved by state department of education
» Submit to the state annual sworn compliance reports regarding all local and state health and
safety codes
» Comply with federal nondiscrimination requirements of 42 U.S.C. s. 2000d
» Teachers and other school personnel working with scholarship recipients must have federal
background check
» Teachers must have a bachelor’s
degree, three years of teaching
experience, or special expertise
» Schools in operation less than three
years must obtain a surety bond
or letter of credit to cover value of
the scholarship payments for one
quarter
» Annually report student’s progress
to parents
Enrollment Cap
None
Scholarship Cap
» Whichever is less:
∏ amount of public school funding
student would have received, or
∏ selected private school’s tuition
and fees
Program Funding
» No specific program appropriation
» $129.8 million spent in 2009-10
school year
Year Enacted
1999
sTATE PROFILEs
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 19,913
Schools Participating 920
2009 Expenditures $129,815,632
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
40
Student Participation
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
2002–03
2003–04
2004–05
2005–06
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
15,585
11,550
1o,549
15,123
17,819
21,493
24,871
26,987
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 26,987
Schools Participating 975
SFOs Operating 2
2009 Expenditures $96,166,715
FLORIDA TAX CREDIT SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM
Program Type
Corporate scholarship tax credit
Student Eligibility
» Qualify for the federal free or reduced–price lunch program
($40,793 for a family of four in 2009)
» Attended a Florida public school the previous year or entering
kindergarten or first grade
Scholarship Funding Organization (SFO) Requirements
» Use at least 97 percent of donations for scholarships
» SFOs with less than three years worth of audits must use 100 percent of donations for
scholarships
» Make scholarships available for more than one school
» Submit to the state:
∏ Financial and compliance audit performed by certified public accountant
∏ Quarterly reports on number of scholarship recipients and participating schools
School Requirements
» Be approved by state department of education
» Submit to the state annual sworn compliance reports regarding all local and state health and
safety codes
» Comply with federal nondiscrimination requirements of 42 U.S.C. s. 2000d
» Teachers and other school personnel working with scholarship recipients must have federal
background check
» Teachers must have a bachelor’s degree, three years of teaching experience, or special expertise
» Schools in operation less than three years must obtain a surety bond or letter of credit to cover
value of the scholarship payments for one quarter
» Scholarship students must take a nationally recognized norm-referenced test or the state public
school assessment
Scholarship Cap
» $3,950 for private school scholarship
» $500 scholarship covering transportation
to another public school
Tax Credit Value
100 percent of donation
Donor Tax Credit Cap
75 percent of state income
tax liability
Statewide Cap
$118 million
Year Enacted
2001
sTATE PROFILEs
Florida
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
41
GEORGIA SPECIAL NEEDS SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM
Student Eligibility
» Attended a Georgia public school the previous year
» Have Individualized Education Program (IEP)
School Requirements
» Notify state regarding intention to participate
» Demonstrate financial viability
» Comply with federal nondiscrimination requirements of 42 U.S.C. s. 2000d
» Comply with state health and safety requirements
» Be accredited or in the process of becoming accredited
» Teachers must have bachelor’s degree or three years’ experience in education or health
» Provide parents with teachers’ credentials
» Report to parents and state regarding students’ academic progress
Scholarship Cap
» Whichever is less:
∏ amount of public school funding student would have received, or
∏ selected private school’s tuition and fees
Enrollment Cap
None
Program Funding
» No specific appropriation
» $7.1 million spent in 2009–10
school year
Year Enacted
2007
Student Participation
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
899
1,596
2,068
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 2,068
Schools Participating 175
2009 Expenditures $7,161,363
sTATE PROFILEs
Georgia
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
42
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 1,900
Schools Participating Not available
SSOs Operating 11
2009 Expenditures $13,046,381
GEORGIA SCHOLARSHIP TAX CREDIT PROGRAM
Program Type
Corporate and individual scholarship tax credit
Student Eligibility
Attended a Georgia public school in previous year or entering pre-kindergarten or kindergarten
Student Scholarship Organization (SSO) Requirements
» Use at least 90 percent of contributions for scholarships
» Make scholarships available for more than one school
» Annually submit to the state:
∏ Data on accepted contributions and tax credits approved
∏ Independent review of financial statements by certified public accountant
School Requirements
» Be accredited or in the process of becoming accredited
» Comply with the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964
» Comply with all state private school regulations, including health and safety codes
Scholarship Cap
Tuition and fees
Tax Credit Value
100 percent of donation
Donor Tax Credit Cap
» $1,000 single
» $2,500 married couple
» 75 percent of corporation’s state
income tax liability
Statewide Cap
$50 million
Year Enacted
2008
sTATE PROFILEs
Student Participation
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2009–10
1,900
Georgia
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
43
Indiana
CORPORATE & INDIVIDUAL SCHOLARSHIP TAX CREDIT PROGRAM
Program Type
Corporate and individual scholarship tax credit
Student Eligibility
» Eligible families must have an income at or below 200 percent of the free or reduced–price
lunch level ($81,586 for a family of four in 2009)
» Eligible students will have to have been enrolled in a public school the prior year or be
entering kindergarten
Scholarship Organization (SO) Requirements
» SOs must be nonprofit organizations and have a 501(c)(3) designation by the Internal
Revenue Service
» An SO cannot limit the scholarships it provides under the program to children attending
a particular school or group of schools
School Requirements
» Non–public schools must be accredited by a national or regional accreditation agency that
is recognized by the state board
» Schools must administer a nationally recognized and norm-referenced assessment of the
school’s students
» The Department of Education will publish an annual list of accrediting agencies and an annual
list of nationally recognized and norm-referenced assessments
Scholarship Cap
None
Donation Cap
None
Tax Credit Value
» Donors will receive a 50 percent credit for their donations, allowing for $2.5 million in credits if
$5 million is donated
» Donors cannot carryover credits from year to year
Statewide Cap
$2.5 million in credits
Year Enacted
2009
PLEAsE nOTE that the Indiana Department of Education and the State Department of Revenue are
promulgating additional rules on how the Scholarship Tax Credit program will operate, including
interpretations of program components.
sTATE PROFILEs
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
44
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL TUITION ORGANIZATION TAX CREDIT
Program Type
Individual scholarship tax credit
Student Eligibility
» Family income must not exceed 300 percent of federal poverty guideline ($66,150 for a family
of four in 2009)
» Private school students also eligible
School Tuition Organization (STO) Requirements
» Use at least 90 percent of contributions for scholarships
» Make scholarships available for more than one school
» Annual review of financial statements by public accounting firm
» Submit data to the state on accepted contributions, grants awarded, and participating schools
School Requirements
» Be accredited
» Comply with federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Iowa Chapter 216
» Comply with state health and safety codes
Scholarship Cap
School’s tuition
Tax Credit Value
65 percent of donation
Donor Tax Credit Cap
None
Statewide Cap
$7.5 million
Year Enacted
2006
Iowa
Student Participation
0
2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
116
7,527
8,737
9,624
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 9,624
Schools Participating Not available
STOs Operating 11
2009 Donations $11,394,228
sTATE PROFILEs
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
45
STUDENT SCHOLARSHIPS FOR EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE PROGRAM
Program Type
Means-tested and failing schools voucher
Student Eligibility
» Family income cannot exceed 250 percent of federal poverty guideline ($55,125 for a family of
four in 2009)
» Entering grades K-3
» Attended an underperforming public school in previous year or entering kindergarten
» One additional grade level of eligibility will be added each year
School Requirements
» Be approved by the state to participate
» Comply with state nondiscrimination and health and safety requirements
» Administer state exams required under the Louisiana School and District System
to scholarship recipients
» Schools in operation less than two years cannot have more than 20 percent of students
receiving scholarships
» Submit to the state an annual independent financial audit conducted by a certified public
accountant
Scholarship Cap
» Whichever is less:
∏ 90 percent of state and local per pupil funding, or
∏ tuition, fees, and costs associated with testing
Enrollment Cap
None
Year Enacted
2008
Louisiana
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 1,195
Schools Participating 32
2009 Expenditures $4,797,738
Student Participation
0
500
1,000
1,500
2008–09
2009–10
640
1,195
sTATE PROFILEs
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
46
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 5,469
Schools Participating 39
2009 Expenditures $14,960,506
Ohio
Student Participation
0
2,500
5,000
7,500
1996–97
1997–98
1998–99
1999–00
2000–01
2001–02
2002–03
2003–04
2004–05
2005–06
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
1,994
2,914
3,674
3,797
4,523
5,281
5,887
5,813
6,116
6,273
5,849
5,469
5,710
3,406
CLEVELAND SCHOLARSHIP AND TUTORING PROGRAM
Program Type
Means-preferenced voucher
Student Eligibility
» Students living in the Cleveland Metropolitan
School District
» In grades K-8 when first applying
» Priority given to students living below 200 percent of
the federal poverty guideline ($44,100 for a family of
four in 2009)
» Scholarship may continue throughout high school
» Private school students also eligible
School Requirements
» Be registered to participate and chartered by the Ohio
Department of Education
» Meet state minimum standards for chartered
non-public schools, including administering
the Ohio Graduation Test
» Comply with state laws regarding
nondiscrimination and health and safety codes
Scholarship Cap
» 90 percent of $3,450 for low-income students ($3,150)
» 75 percent of $3,450 for other students ($2,587.50)
Enrollment Cap
None
Program Funding
$14.9 million spent in 2009-10 school year
Year Enacted
1995
sTATE PROFILEs
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
47
AUTISM SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM
Program Type
Special needs voucher
Student Eligibility
» Student must be identified
as autistic through assigned
school district
» Must be assigned an
Individualized Education
Program (IEP)
» Private school students
also eligible
School Requirements
» Register with the state
» Demonstrate fiscal soundness
» Have properly credentialed staff
» In operation one full year
» Have adequate liability, property,
and casualty insurance certified
by a certified public accountant
» Obtain surety bond or letter
of credit to cover value of
scholarships
» Teachers and other staff working
with children must undergo
background checks
» Comply with state nondiscrimination
and health and safety codes
» Provide regular student progress
reports to parents and school
Scholarship Cap
$20,000
Enrollment Cap
None
Program Funding
» No specific appropriation
» $25.6 million expended in 2009-10 school year
Year Enacted
2003
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 1,500
Schools Participating Not available
2009 Expenditures $25,628,472
300
475
734
1,005
1,500
sTATE PROFILEs
Ohio
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
48
Student Participation
0
2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
15,000
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
2,713
7,144
10,432
11,685
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 11,685
Schools Participating 298
2009 Expenditures $42,564,225
EDUCATIONAL CHOICE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM
Program Type
Failing schools voucher
Student Eligibility
» Current public school students assigned to a school that has been in Academic Watch or
Academic Emergency for two years of a three–year period
» Students scheduled to enter kindergarten in one of these schools also qualify
» Priority is given to returning and low–income applicants
School Requirements
» Be chartered by the Ohio Department of Education
» Meet state minimum standards for chartered non-public schools, including administering
the Ohio Graduation Test
» Administer state tests in grades 3-8
» Comply with state laws regarding nondiscrimination and health and safety codes
Scholarship Cap
» $4,500 – grades K-8
» $5,300 – grades 9-12
» Scholarship must be accepted as full tuition for students living under 200 percent of
federal poverty guideline ($44,100 for a family of four in 2009)
Enrollment Cap
14,000
Program Funding
» No specific appropriation
» $42.5 million spent in 2009-10 school year
Year Enacted
2005
sTATE PROFILEs
Ohio
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
49
Pennsylvania
Student Participation
0
10,000
20,000 30,000
40,000 50,000
2001–02
2002–03
2003–04
2004–05
2005–06
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
**Includes SOs that provide Pre–K scholarships.
17,350
20,204
25,875
26,701
29,638
36,730
43,764
44,839
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 44,839
Schools Participating Not available
SOs Operating 353**
2009 Donations $49,274,290
EDUCATIONAL IMPROVEMENT TAX CREDIT
Program Type
Corporate scholarship tax credit
Student Eligibility
» Family income cannot exceed $60,000, with an additional $12,000 allowed for each
additional dependent
» Private school students also eligible
Scholarship Organization (SO) Requirements
» Use at least 80 percent of
contributions for scholarships
» Make scholarships available for
more than one school
» Submit to the state an annual
report detailing donations received
and scholarships awarded
School Requirements
» Comply with the federal Civil
Rights Act of 1964
» Teachers and other employees
working with children must
undergo background checks
» Meet state health and
safety codes
Scholarship Cap
Tuition and fees
Tax Credit Value
» 75 percent of one-year
donation
» 90 percent of two-year
donation
Donor Tax Credit Cap
$300,000
Statewide Cap
$38 million
Year Enacted
2001
sTATE PROFILEs
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
50
Rhode Island
Student Participation
0
100
200
300
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
278
291
291
RHODE ISLAND CORPORATE SCHOLARSHIP TAX CREDIT
Program Type
Corporate scholarship tax credit
Student Eligibility
» Family income cannot exceed 250 percent of the federal poverty guideline ($55,125 for a family
of four in 2009)
» Other criteria determined by Scholarship Granting Organization
» Private school students also eligible
Scholarship Granting Organization (SGO) Requirements
» Use at least 90 percent of contributions for scholarships
» Provide annual report to state detailing number and value of scholarships awarded, ZIP codes
of recipients, and criteria used to award scholarships
School Requirements
» Comply with federal and state laws regarding nondiscrimination
» Teachers must have bachelor’s degrees
» Teachers must undergo background check
» Meet state health and safety codes
Scholarship Cap
None
Tax Credit Value
» 75 percent of one-year donation
» 90 percent of two-year donation
Donor Tax Credit Cap
$100,000
Statewide Cap
$1 million
Year Enacted
2006
sTATE PROFILEs
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 291
Schools Participating 25
SGOs Operating 3
2009 Expenditures $1,730,000
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
51
CARSON SMITH SPECIAL NEEDS SCHOLARSHIP
Program Type
Special needs voucher
Student Eligibility
» Be identified as disabled and learning under Individualized Education Program (IEP), or
» Currently attending eligible private school and be determined in need of specialized services
School Requirements
» Be approved by the state
» Comply with federal nondiscrimination requirements of 42 U.S.C. s. 2000d
» Comply with state health and safety codes
» Submit to the state an audit and financial report completed by a certified public accountant
» Possess adequate working capital to maintain operations for the first year
» Disclose to parents the special education services to be provided and the cost of those services
» Administer annual assessment of student’s academic progress and report results to the
student’s parents
» Teachers of recipients must have bachelor’s degrees, three years of teaching experience,
or special skills
» Provide parents with teacher’s credentials
Scholarship Cap
» Based on state’s public school funding
formula
∏ $6,442.50 – three or more hours
of services
∏ $3,865.50 – less than three hours
of services
Enrollment Cap
None
Program Funding
$3.5 million
Year Enacted
2005
Utah
Student Participation
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2005–06
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
107
340
548
582
602
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 602
Schools Participating 43
2009 Expenditures $2,670,195
sTATE PROFILEs
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
52
Wisconsin
Student Participation
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
1990–91
1991–92
1992–93
1993–94
1994–95
1995–96
1996–97
1997–98
1998–99
1999–00
2000–01
2001–02
2002–03
2003–04
2004–05
2005–06
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
337
504
591
718
786
1,320
1,606
1,501
5,740
7,596
9,104
10,391
11,209
12,788
14,427
15,274
17,126
18,550
19,414
20,328
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 20,328
Schools Participating 111
2009 Expenditures $130,182,400
MILWAUKEE PARENTAL
CHOICE PROGRAM
Program Type
Means-tested voucher
Student Eligibility
» Students living in the Milwaukee Public
School district
» Family income below 175 percent of the
federal poverty guideline ($38,587 for a
family of four in 2009)
» Private school students also eligible
School Requirements
» Meet state nondiscrimination policies
» Allow students to opt out of religious
programs
» Administer a nationally normed test
to scholarship recipients in grades 4,
8, and 10 and provide scores to School
Choice Demonstration Project
» Receive accreditation within three years
of participating in MPCP
» Annually submit to the state a financial
audit conducted by a certified public
accountant
» Provide the state evidence of sound
fiscal practices and financial viability
» School administrator must undergo
financial training
» Meet all state health and safety codes
Scholarship Cap
$6,442
Enrollment Cap
22,500
Program Funding
$130.1 million for 2009–10
Year Enacted
1990
sTATE PROFILEs
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
53
Washington, D.C.
Student Participation
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2004–05
2005–06
2006–07
2007–08
2008–09
2009–10
1,022
1,712
1,799
1,933
1,716
1,319
Data Update
Scholarships Awarded 1,319
Schools Participating 45
2009 Expenditures $12,000,000
D.C. OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM
Program Type
Means-tested voucher
Student Eligibility
» Qualify for the federal free or reduced–price lunch program ($40,793 for a family of four
in 2009)
» Priority to students who attend schools deemed in need of improvement, corrective action, or
restructuring under the federal No Child Left Behind Act
» Low-income students in other public schools are given second priority
» Students currently attending private school are given third priority
» Scholarship recipients are required to participate in standardized assessments as part of a five-
year federal evaluation of the program
School Requirements
» Must not discriminate
» Comply with district health and safety codes
Scholarship Cap
$7,500
Enrollment Cap
None
Program Funding
$12 million
Year Enacted
2004
sTATE PROFILEs
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
54
Alliance for
School Choice
AllianceForSchoolChoice.org
American Federation for Children
FederationForChildren.org
American Legislative Exchange Council
ALEC.org
Black Alliance for Educational
Options (BAEO)
BAEO.org
The CATO Institute
CATO.org
Center for Education Reform
EdReform.org
Council for American Private
Education (CAPE)
CapeNet.org
Democrats for Education Reform
DFER.org
The Foundation for
Educational Choice
FriedmanFoundation.org
Heartland Institute
Heartland.org
Heritage Foundation
Heritage.org
Hispanic Council for Reform &
Educational Options
HCREO.org
Institute for Justice
IJ.org
National Alliance for Public Charter Schools
PublicCharters.org
State Policy Network
SPN.org
National School Choice Organizations
nATIOnAL
sCHOOL CHOICE ORGAnIZATIOns
School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10
55
Arizona
AZ School Tuition Organization Association
ASTOA.com
Florida
Step Up for Students
StepUpForStudents.com
Georgia
Center for an Educated Georgia
EducatedGeorgia.org
Indiana
School Choice Indiana
SchoolChoiceIndiana.org
Iowa
Iowa Alliance for Choice in Education
IowaACE.org
Louisiana
Louisiana BAEO
Louisiana.BAEO.org
Maryland
BOAST
BOASTMaryland.org
Minnesota
Coalition for Kids
Misf.org/coalition-for-kids.php
Missouri
Children’s Education Alliance of Missouri
ChildrensEducationAlliance-MO.org
New Jersey
Excellent Education for Everyone
NJE3.org
New Mexico
Educate New Mexico
EducateNM.org
North Carolina
Parents for Educational Freedom in NC
PEFNC.org
Ohio
School Choice Ohio
SCOhio.org
Pennsylvania
REACH Foundation
PASchoolChoice.org
Rhode Island
Rhode Island Scholarship Alliance
RIScholarshipAlliance.org
Utah
Parents for Choice in Education
ChoiceInEducation.org
Virginia
School Choice Virginia
SchoolChoiceVA.com
Washington, D.C.
D.C. Parents for School Choice
SaveSchoolChoice.com
Wisconsin
School Choice Wisconsin
SchoolChoiceWI.org
State School Choice Organizations
sTATE
sCHOOL CHOICE
ORGAnIZATIOns
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
56
Throughout 2009, the school choice movement generated more publicity for school
voucher programs than any other time since the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark case
Zelman v Simmons Harris in 2002.
The reason? School choice was placed in a national spotlight when Congress and
President Obama announced their intention to eliminate the highly successful D.C.
Opportunity Scholarship Program, a move that sparked massive backlash in the District and
across the country.
Backed by local Democrats and national supporters — including Senators Joseph
Lieberman (I-CT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Robert Byrd (D-WV), former Mayors Anthony
Williams and Marion Barry—the D.C. coalition immediately responded to the president’s
decision to eliminate the OSP, launching a yearlong campaign to save the program.
An estimated 6,000 attendees participated in more than a dozen D.C.–area events,
including a May 6 rally on Freedom Plaza, demonstrations in front of the U.S. Department
of Education, and a major rally on Capitol Hill. In addition, parents made trips to visit key
members of Congress on an almost daily basis, and school choice supporters launched a
$700,000 advertising program to support the program, featuring former D.C. Councilman
and Alliance board member Kevin P. Chavous.
As a result of the heightened attention, newspapers across the country came together in
support of school choice. For example, The Washington Post and The Washington Times were,
for the first time in recent memory, on the same side of an issue, as were USA Today and the
Wall Street Journal.
The following editorial, reprinted with permission from USA Today, provides a good
example of how one newspaper can move — in just two years — into a favorable position
on school choice.
The Fight for Real Hope in D.C.
HIGHLIGHT
A student from Washington, D.C., participates in one of a dozen protests to protect the District’s endangered voucher
program from Congressional elimination.
HIGHLIGHT:
THE FIGHT FOR
REAL HOPE In D.C.
School Choice Yearbook 2009–10
57
May 19, 2009
Few national images are more shameful than those of innocent, low-income kids milling through
decrepit public schools, uncared for, unsafe and barely educated. In Washington, D.C., alone, 173 schools —
67% — fail to meet federal standards of learning.
So it was curious that when President Obama recently allowed 1,716 of Washington’s neediest
schoolchildren to keep, until graduation, the vouchers they use to escape their failed public schools for
higher-quality private ones, he also closed the program to new applicants. All this occurred as the Education
Department reported that voucher participants show superior skills in reading, safety and orderliness. The
news was buried in an impenetrable study released without a news conference.
Why the ambivalence? Because teacher unions, fearing loss of jobs, have pushed most Democrats to
oppose vouchers and other options that invite competition for public schools. Put another way, they oppose
giving poor parents the same choice that the president himself — along with his chief of staff and some 35% of
Democrats in Congress — have made in sending their children to private schools.
Vouchers have improved the math and reading of inner-city children from Dayton, Ohio, to Charlotte,
N.C., various studies show. The Washington vouchers improved the reading of girls and younger kids by about
half a school year, though results for other groups were iffier. Yet opposition is so fierce that few voucher
experiments survive past the seedling stage.
Florida vouchers were blocked by a party-line vote in the state Supreme Court. In Utah, they were killed
by a union-funded anti-voucher campaign.
This serves only to protect failing schools.
By federal measures, students at 12,978 U.S. schools are failing to improve adequately — 13% of the
total. Giving them another option, by vouchers or by other means, provides an escape route and pressures
public schools to improve.
Charter schools are another well-proven option for attaining the same goal, and they are gaining
in popularity. About 1.2 million students now attend the schools, which are taxpayer-funded and publicly
chartered but run by independent operators. The ones requiring strict order, regular testing and more school
time have succeeded in raising their low-income students’ academic performance above public-school peers.
Yet 26 states restrict either the number of charter schools or charter students, and many local
authorities and unions hobble their formation and funding.
In time, the success of the school choice movement might change the political dynamics. Meanwhile,
public schools are at least being held accountable under the federal No Child Left Behind Act. The federal
requirement that schools make testable, yearly progress in student performance has driven improvements
in math and reading for most age groups, the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress shows.
Measuring teacher performance is the next step. Expanded by President Obama, Bush-era “pay-for-
performance” is sure to improve schools — as long as requirements aren’t weakened.
As an Education Department spokesman says, “The unions are not happy.” But 20 million low-income
school kids need a chance to succeed. School choice is the most effective way to give it to them.
Our view on improving education:
Despite success, school choice
runs into new barriers.
Obama, Democrats deny D.C. kids
option they exercise themselves.
The Fight for Real Hope in D.C.
HIGHLIGHT
58
Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice
“Thousands of children use the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program to go to better schools. The program lets
President Obama, I’ll do anything to make
sure my child gets a good education.
Why won’t you help?
» D.C. Parents for School
Choice Executive Director
Virginia Walden Ford
addresses a crowd of
35 reporters at a press
conference outside the
U.S. Department of
Education on September
8, 2009. The event was
covered by FOX News.
» CNN anchor Kyra Phillips
shows viewers how to use the
“Save School Choice” Web
site, August 20, 2009.
» D.C. Parents for School
Choice criticized President
Barack Obama and
Congressional appropriators
in a series of television,
radio, and newspaper
advertisements.
HIGHLIGHT:
THE FIGHT FOR
REAL HOPE In D.C.
School Choice Yearbook 2009–10
59
The authors of fighting for opportunity: School choice yearbook 2009–10 utilized information from a
variety of sources in developing this annual publication. To maintain the flow of the document without
interruption, the sourcing for the book is provided in this section.
The authors remain enormously grateful, specifically, to the state officials and school choice organizations
that participated in our rigorous information-gathering and data mining process. Their dedication and
hard work have helped to make the Alliance for School Choice’s information and data unparalleled in
its accuracy. In addition, we are incredibly thankful for the assistance and support of Greg Brock, Scott
Jensen, and John Schilling through the research and writing process.
PHOTOGRAPHS AND TESTIMONIALS
All of the photographs and testimonials that appear in fighting for opportunity: School choice yearbook
2009–10 were provided by school choice organizations across the country. We are enormously grateful
to the following organizations for providing photographs and stories for use in this publication:
TOPS for Kids (Harry Miller), Step Up for Students (Jon East), Center for an Educated Georgia (David
Pusey), Iowa Alliance for Choice in Education (Trish Wilger), Louisiana BAEO (Shree Medlock), Parents
for Educational Freedom in North Carolina (Darrell Allison), School Choice Ohio (Chad Aldis), REACH
Foundation (Erin Loudenslager), Rhode Island Scholarship Alliance (Kate Nagle), Parents for Choice
in Education (Judi Clark), D.C. Parents for School Choice (Virginia Walden Ford, Kevin P. Chavous),
School Choice Wisconsin (Susan Mitchell, George Mitchell, Mike Ford), and the Institute for Justice (Lisa
Knepper, Bob Ewing, and Christina Walsh). We would also like to credit and thank the national review for
use of some of Tiffany Dunston’s quotations in our “Head of the Class” feature.
RESEARCH RECAP: SCHOOL CHOICE YIELDS STUDENT GAINS
Milwaukee “graduation rates for choice and Public School Students in Milwaukee, 2003-2008,” John Robert
Warren, University of Minnesota, Study, February 2010. “new Study: graduation rate for Milwaukee
voucher Students 18 % higher Than for Public School Students,” School Choice Wisconsin, News Release,
February 2, 1010. “Milwaukee’s Voucher Graduates,” The Wall Street Journal, Editorial, February 7, 2010
D.C. “The evaluation of the dc opportunity Scholarship Program: impacts After Three years,” Institute of
Education Sciences, Study, March 2009. “lost opportunities,” education next, Article, August 2009. “d.c.
voucher Students begin to nudge Ahead,” Debra Viadero, education Week, Article, April 6, 2009.
Florida “evaluation of florida’s corporate Tax credit Scholarship Program,” David N. Figlio, University of
Florida, Study, June 16, 2009. “florida Tax credit Scholarship: let the evidence speak,” Florida Tax Watch,
Article, 2010
Teachers “What America’s Teachers Say about Teaching in Public and Private Schools,” Foundation for
Educational Choice, Study, 2009
RESEARCH RECAP: SCHOOL CHOICE SAVES TAX DOLLARS
“fiscal Analysis of Arizona’s corporate Tax credit Scholarship Program,” Vicki Murray, Institute for Justice,
Study, September 26, 2006. “School choice by the numbers: The fiscal effect of School choice,” Susan Aud,
Foundation for Educational Choice, Study, April 2007. “The dollars and Sense of School choice,” Mary
Yoder and Jared Walczak, Commonwealth Policy Brief, Article, July 2007. “The florida corporate income
Tax credit Scholarship Program: Updated fiscal Analysis,” Collins Center for Public Policy, Study, February
2007. “The fiscal impact of Tax-credit Scholarships in georgia,” Brian Gottlieb, Foundation for Educational
Choice, February 2008. “The fiscal impact of a large-Scale education Tax credit Program,” Andrew
Coulson, Cato Institute, July 1, 2008. “The fiscal impact of the Milwaukee Parental choice Program: 2009
Update,” Robert Costrell, University of Arkansas, Report, March 2009
STATE PROFILES
Arizona individual School Tuition organization Tax credit. Amount of funds donated is for 2008, provided
by state revenue office; student enrollment number is an ASC estimate based on historical average
scholarship amounts. State contact: Georganna Meyer, Arizona Department of Revenue. corporate School
Sources and Credits
60
sOuRCEs AnD
CREDITs
Tuition organization Tax credit. Amount of funds donated is for 2009, provided by state revenue office;
student enrollment number is an ASC estimate based on historical average scholarship amounts and
spending by STOs, reflecting an approximate 12 percent decline in donations. State contact: Georganna
Meyer, Arizona Department of Revenue. lexie’s law. Numbers for expenditures and student enrollment
are based on the assumption that students were covered by Lexie’s Law when the two previous voucher
programs were concluded.
Florida John M. McKay Scholarship for Students with disabilities. Student enrollment data is for 2009,
provided by state department of education’s school choice Web site and program quarterly reports; funds
expended is an ASC estimate based on historical averages multiplied by current enrollees. State contact:
Laura Harrison, Florida Department of Education. florida Tax credit Scholarship Program. Student
enrollment data is for 2009, provided by state department of education’s school choice Web site and
program quarterly reports; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historical averages multiplied by
current enrollees. State contact: Laura Harrison, Florida Department of Education.
Georgia georgia Special needs Scholarship Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009 and was provided
by the state department of revenue via the Center for an Educated Georgia (CEG); expenditures are ASC
estimates based on historical average scholarship amounts. georgia Scholarship Tax credit Program Student
enrollment numbers were provided by the Center for an Educated Georgia for 2009, based on a survey of
STOS; funds donated is for 2009 and is based on information provided via CEG from the state department
of revenue.
Iowa individual School Tuition organization Tax credit. Student enrollment numbers and expenditure/
donation information provided by the State Department of Revenue for 2009. State Contact: Jim McNulty,
Taxpayer Services and Policy.
Louisiana Student Scholarships for educational excellence Program. Student enrollment numbers and
expenditure/donation information provided by the State Department of Education for 2009 via ASC staff.
State Contact: Mary Cavalier, Louisiana Department of Education.
Ohio cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by state
department of education; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historical averages multiplied
by current enrollees. State Contact: Susan Cosmo, Ohio Department of Education. Autism Scholarship
Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by the state department of education via School
Choice Ohio; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historic averages multiplied by current
enrollees. educational choice Scholarship Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by state
department of education; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historical averages multiplied by
current enrollees. State Contact: Susan Cosmo, Ohio Department of Education.
Pennsylvania educational improvement Tax credit. Student enrollment numbers and expenditure/
donation information provided by the State Department of Education for 2009. State Contact: Ted Knorr,
Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development.
Rhode Island rhode island corporate Scholarship Tax credit. Information provided by the Rhode Island
Scholarship Alliance (RISA); this program is fully subscribed.
Utah carson Smith Special needs Scholarship. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by state
department of education; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historical averages multiplied by
current enrollees. State contact: Travis Rawlings, Utah Department of Education.
Wisconsin Milwaukee Parental choice Program. Student enrollment numbers and expenditure/donation
information provided by the State Department of Education for 2009. State contact: Molly Koranda,
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
Washington, D.C. d.c. opportunity Scholarship Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided
by the Washington Scholarship Fund (WSF); expenditure information is for 2009 provided by WSF and
Congressional appropriation.
School Choice Yearbook 2009-10
61
sOuRCEs AnD
CREDITs
allianceforschoolchoice.org
1660 L Street, NW
Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20036
Phone 202.280.1990
Email info@AllianceForSchoolChoice.org
Recent Comments