It’s been a busy year for the Ohio charter sector. The long-awaited passage of House Bill 2 is finally a reality, and Ohio charters are back on the road to national respectability. Despite this good news, the state is still dealing with the hangover caused by its reputation as the wild, wild west of charter schools. People are still talking about the recent omission of e-school grades on sponsor evaluations, and there have been calls for a review of the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) and its staff. So when the U.S. Department of Education announced the recipients of new grants through the Charter Schools Program (CSP), some folks (in Ohio and elsewhere) were shocked to find that Ohio was not only a winner but also the recipient of the largest grant—over $71 million.
While debates rage over whether or not Ohio deserved the grant, the real question should be how the Buckeye State can best use the windfall. CSP funding is intended to enable states to “run state-level grant competitions” to support new and expanded public charter schools.[1] The department has also asked grantees “to focus on establishing rigorous performance expectations for all public charter schools.” With the intense scrutiny on the allocation of these funds, Ohio has been presented with a rare opportunity to fix its maligned charter school reputation. To restore public faith in charters and spend CSP funds wisely, there are a few essentials that Ohio needs to get right.
First, require a demanding and thorough application process for access to CSP funds
The most important aspect of getting CSP allocation right is creating a rigorous application process for new schools seeking portions of the grant. Entities seeking funding should be required to show a strong business plan and marketing analysis; demonstrate community need, support, and outreach plans; have a strong, experienced board; outline their academic and curricular model as well as their plans to serve a diverse student body; and most importantly, show evidence of past success in raising student achievement. The teams that complete this rigorous process and receive CSP funds will be deserving and will benefit directly, but those that complete the process and don’t receive funds will also be better as a result of their efforts.
Second, expand high-performing Ohio charter schools
In Ohio, there are charter networks like Breakthrough and United Schools Network (USN) with a history of success. Ohio-made schools that have proven they can give Ohio kids a high-quality education should be encouraged to apply and given help to work through the rigorous application process. While this prodding could come from the state, it would be an even better role for the philanthropic community. They could ensure that these schools have the support and resources necessary to develop a winning grant application that would enable them to replicate their success. Unfortunately, even with their replication, there will still be thousands of students across the state who aren't in high-quality seats.
Third, recruit high-performing networks from out of state
Expanding Ohio’s existing stellar performers won’t be enough. In last year’s report The Road to Redemption, Andy Smarick and his Bellwether colleagues pointed out that that policymakers should “consider creating additional financial incentives” to persuade outstanding charter networks to replicate in Ohio. With CSP funds secured, Ohio is on the path to making the Buckeye State a more “hospitable” replication environment for charter networks that are achieving remarkable results in other parts of the nation. The well-documented weaknesses in Ohio’s charter law around sponsoring and governance also hurt recruitment efforts. Passage of House Bill 2 should give a boost to charter schools that initially looked past Ohio because of the lack of emphasis on quality. Recruiting these networks would add additional credibility to Ohio’s charter sector and would immediately increase the number of available high-quality seats. (For an in-depth look at some of the networks that Ohio should consider recruiting, check out this piece.)
Fourth, use competition to force low-performing charter schools to close
Ohio students will benefit from newly opened, high-quality charter schools, but they will also benefit from the increased market pressure these schools will put on charter (and district) schools that aren't measuring up. Some of these low performers will close, and that’s a good thing—research shows that closing low-performing Ohio schools improves outcomes for students. If policymakers commit to following the research, the question becomes whether the schools that close will be the lowest performers.
On that front, there is a burgeoning opportunity—and with it, a reason for optimism. Ohio has seen a growing number of city-based education advocacy groups over the past few years. These organizations include the Cleveland Transformation Alliance (CTA), the Cincinnati School Accelerator, FutureReady Columbus, and Learn to Earn Dayton. The mission and strategy of each organization varies by city. There are some similarities, however, as most have recognized the need to create more high-quality seats and reduce the number of students in low-quality seats. These groups also have significant support from business leaders, which means they understand the advantages of a competitive market. Providing parents with high-quality school information, ensuring that the best schools have sufficient access to facilities and capital funds, and helping schools secure consistent and dependable transportation are all benefits that these groups can offer to high-performing charters—benefits that will also put pressure on the lowest performers to close their doors.
***
The past few weeks have been a historic time for Ohio charters, and the sector now has an opportunity—one that may never come again—to change its reputation for the better. While not all the events leading up to this opportunity were positive, how we choose to move forward with the CSP grant will define Ohio’s future charter reputation. Ensuring that the grant application process is rigorous, expanding Ohio’s high-performing charters, recruiting strong networks from out of state, and applying market pressure on our lowest-performing schools are all necessary steps for ensuring that Ohio rehabilitates its reputation. Most importantly, though, these are the steps that will transform the sector into one that offers thousands more Ohio kids a phenomenal education. And that’s definitely worth all the hard work.
[1] Separate funding was also awarded to twelve high-quality charter management organizations that serve students from low-income families and have a history of effectively serving high-need students.
