Greg Richmond, president and CEO of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers, penned a?thoughtful op-ed in Education Week about what constitutes ?quality? when it comes to charter school governing boards. Richmond's piece couldn't be more timely. Ohio has been home to recurring and nasty debates over the practices of for-profit operators (specifically, White Hat Management, which is being sued by board members of ten Northeast Ohio schools, and Imagine Schools, which has been heavily criticized recently for its practice of dominating its school boards). Richmond's op-ed highlights the backwards 2006 Ohio law that enables a charter management company to fire its governing board? the very entity to which is it's supposed to report? and? even bestows on the Buckeye State the ?award for the most breathtaking abuse in the nation.?
But despite these examples of seriously flawed systems of accountability, and the fact that charter proponents haven't done much to speak out against them (as Terry argued via Flypaper recently when he said the charter sector needs to shear its black sheep), Richmond encourages states not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. As Fordham has noted previously, some management organizations, both for-profit and not-for-profit alike, produce stellar results and create excellent educational opportunities for students who need them the most. In order to ensure quality among governing boards and maintain appropriate lines of accountability between management companies and their boards, Richmond outlines six criteria that parents, school officials, and legislators should look for to discern whether the charter school board provides appropriate leadership and oversight:
- Members of charter school boards shouldn't be employees of the management organization running their school.
- The governing board should have their own attorney, accountant and audit firm.
- The board and management organization should enter into a contract defining each party's rights and responsibilities.
- The governing board should control all public funds and then in turn pay the management organization.
- School materials and equipment should belong to the school, not the management organization.
- Loans from the management organization to the school should be appropriately documented and provided at market rates.
Fordham agrees with the criteria and we recently provided testimony about such issues to Ohio's state board of education as well as to the Ohio House Finance Subcommittee on Primary and Secondary Education.? It's encouraging to have national charter school advocates such as Greg Richmond speak out about these issues, and help the layperson understand very basic guidelines around charter school governance and management that are necessary to ensure quality and prevent conflicts of interest.
While such issues may sound convoluted and interesting only to policy wonks, Richmond is absolutely right that ?the quality of growth in the charter sector depends a great deal on the quality of these organization and the oversight they receive.? It's time folks in Ohio (and across the nation) start paying attention to these vital issues of accountability.