Public policy and nonpublic schools: How the budget bill impacts private schools

Nominally, private schools (or “chartered nonpublic schools,” as they are known in the Ohio Revised Code) operate with a minimal amount of state oversight. Practically, however, there is a long history of state involvement with them. In exchange for added oversight, private schools receive transportation services for students (or parents can receive payment in lieu of transportation) through the district in which they are located; they can also seek state reimbursement, also passing through the district, for costs like textbook purchasing and school administration. Since Ohio began voucher programs in 1996, the bond has become even stronger.

On June 30, 2015, Governor John Kasich signed into law the new biennial budget (House Bill 64), which included a number of provisions impacting private schools. Here is a review of the most significant provisions.

Auxiliary Services (AS) and Administrative Cost Reimbursement (ACR)

As boring as their names may sound, these budget line items are the primary mechanism by which the state and private schools interact. Chartered nonpublic schools can request and receive reimbursements for textbooks, diagnostic/therapeutic/remedial personnel services, and “educational equipment” through the AS process. Transportation services provided to private school students are also funded via the AS line item. The amount available to private schools will go up 4.37 percent in the first year of the new biennium (fiscal year 2016) to approximately $144.3 million and 3.92 percent in the second (FY 2017) to approximately $150 million. Additionally, the per-pupil cap on AS will rise. The same goes for the ACR, which provides reimbursement for the administrative and clerical costs associated with mandated services incurred by private schools (although paid a year in arrears). Modest increases in the ACR will occur in both years of the biennium as well—up to approximately $65.2 million in FY 2016 and $67.7 million in FY 2017.

Voucher funding

Vouchers, defined as “scholarships” in state law, provide state funds for tuition assistance to eligible families who choose to send their children to private schools or educational providers. The funding levels for four of Ohio’s five voucher programs will see increases for the 2016 and 2017 fiscal years.

• The original EdChoice Scholarship program—for students attending chronically underperforming district schools—will see its first statutory increase in program history:

              - For grades K–8, it rises from $4,250 to $4,650 per student per year.

              - For grades 9–12, it rises from $5,000 to $5,900 per student for the 2015–16 school year
                 and to $6,000 per student per year for 2016–17.

• The newer version of EdChoice—for low-income students regardless of school assignment/attendance—also will increase from $4,250 to $4,650 per student per year.
• The Jon Peterson Special Needs Scholarship rises to a maximum of $27,000 per year for students with the highest educational needs.
• The Ohio Autism Scholarship rises from $20,000 to a maximum of $27,000 per student per year.

As we celebrate these increases, it is important to note that in many cases, the maximum funding levels for vouchers are still far less than the tuition levels at many private schools; these sometimes run upwards of $10,000 per student per year (especially in high schools). Schools accepting voucher students are forbidden from charging the neediest families (200 percent of the poverty level or below) for any tuition gap, and they can offer some form of service in lieu of payment to families above that level. In practice, the larger the gap, the less likely a private school is to open its doors to voucher students at all.

Voucher use and eligibility

While the funding levels for the Cleveland Scholarship Program (CSP) did not change—the high school amount was previously raised for the FY 2013 and FY 2014 budgets— the program was expanded geographically to allow voucher recipients to attend three additional private schools in Cleveland suburbs.[1]

The original EdChoice Scholarship program, however, bases eligibility on attending or being assigned to attend a low-performing school (with some additional intricacies). You can read a more detailed discussion elsewhere in Ohio Gadfly Daily of what significance the budget’s wide-ranging “hold harmless” protections for district schools from “sanctions or penalties” will hold in terms of voucher eligibility. But the bottom line is that eligibility for the state’s largest voucher program is frozen in place—no new schools will become eligible until the EdChoice program begins accepting applications for the 2018–19 school year. By the same token, currently-eligible schools can’t improve their way off the list until then either, which runs counter to the purpose of the scholarship: improving schools will lose students when they shouldn’t while students in real need of a better choice will once again be denied.

However, the newer income-based eligibility for EdChoice continues unabated, adding a grade level each year as per its initial structure. Second graders will be added to eligibility in 2015–16, and third graders will follow in 2016–17. Hopefully, participating private schools will continue to adjust their outreach accordingly.

High school policies

The budget bill addresses a few issues that affect private high schools and their students. First, the bill exempts all nonpublic high school students—voucher and non-voucher—from the end-of-course exams now required for high school graduation. Instead, it allows schools to substitute a test of their own choosing (from a list to be approved by the Ohio Department of Education). This allowance means that a different set of graduation requirements will be implemented for students attending private schools.

Second, Governor Kasich’s veto pen removed a provision added by the legislature that would have kept private schools from participating in Ohio's College Credit Plus program, which provides opportunities for high school students to earn graduation credits and college credits simultaneously.

Analysis

The long-term support of state policymakers has created an environment that has allowed nonpublic schools to educate more than 175,000 Ohio students this past year. State funding, in the form of AS and ACR reimbursements, has long supported services deemed vital to students even as they pursue education outside of the public schools. The new state budget only reinforces that notion by bumping up the AS and ACR amounts. Also to their credit, state lawmakers bolstered the voucher programs by increasing the value of the scholarships and modestly expanding eligibility. The considerable—and long overdue—increase in dollar value of the special needs vouchers will help to ensure that more students with significant disabilities have the opportunity to receive the educational services they absolutely deserve.

But the level of accountability for public dollars is a different kettle of fish. Are students on vouchers actually receiving a better education than they would have in their home districts? There is some cursory data, but the true answer is that we just don’t know yet. Private school students, including those on vouchers, can now graduate high school by passing assessments of the schools’ own choosing. It’s possible that these assessments will be less demanding than the state’s EOC exams. Either way, this policy change seems destined to give us even less information with which to craft meaningful comparisons.

This isn’t necessarily a problem in schools where the rigor of curriculum and assessment exceed those of the state—and there may be many of them—but there’s little transparency with which to make that judgment. Perhaps it’s time for state lawmakers and the Ohio Department of Education to consider making more robust information available about school level student outcomes, at least when it comes to schools participating in one of the voucher programs. The information is currently limited to proficiency scores, which are often misleading when students come to their school years behind academically. How can policymakers account for this? It may be time to include a measure of student growth (also known as value added) for private schools with voucher students that more accurately portrays a school’s educational effectiveness.

It may also be time for policymakers to consider consolidating and simplifying the disparate voucher programs. Having five separate voucher programs—more than any other state in the nation—is a sign of Ohio’s commitment to school choice. But it raises questions as well: Does it make it harder for parents to navigate their many options? Do differing program requirements and eligibility parameters make it confusing? Do multiple programs make it more difficult administratively for private schools to participate in the programs? Finally, are there benefits to having separate programs? The often overlapping programs, variable funding amounts, and differing requirements have almost certainly become an increasing challenge for all involved. More importantly, the impact is likely greatest on parents and families intended to benefit from the programs.

*****

Kudos to Ohio policymakers for their long and continuing history of supporting private school choice. Here’s hoping they continue to focus on expanding access while ensuring that Ohio’s voucher programs provide high-quality options to students around the state.