Taxpayers in MD may soon foot the bill for a developer to build a school in a subdivision.

[madfloridian]

They call it a "contract" school, and it would only be for the children of the people in that new development. And the public taxpayer money would pay for it.

I have been trying to find out if a "contract" school is the same as a charter school. Some say it is but limited to students of one area...some say it is just the same.

Here is more about the new neighborhood to be built in Maryland.

School tied to new development on Brock Bridge Road

Polm Companies is heading the entire $32 million development project, which includes constructing more than 1,000 single-family and multi-family units, 320 of which are reserved for workforce housing, and the new school, which will be leased back to Imagine Schools, a national charter school chain. It also involves several miles of road construction on Brock Bridge Road, including adding a traffic circle and a new, 460-foot bridge to replace the current 50-foot bridge and widening the intersections at Route 198 and Route 197.

But here's one of the sticky parts to me for sure. The developer will be partnering with Imagine Schools, schools which have had many problems lately. Also apparently this is their first "contract" school.

But the Anne Arundel County Public School System has a long waiting list for school construction projects, so to alleviate overcrowding at Maryland City Elementary and Brock Bridge Elementary, the county decided to partner with Imagine Schools, which operates 71 charter schools in different areas of the country, and build a contract school.

The proposed Imagine Global Village Academy is Imagine Schools' first contract school. Contract schools differ from charter schools primarily because with contract schools, the school system can define the areas from which students are allowed to attend.

The New York Times recently did an investigative article about Imagine Schools. This is unusual for a major paper to do this. Usually it is just a few bloggers questioning.

NYT's investigative article about Imagine Charter Schools and Dennis Bakke.

Many questionable practices.

But as Imagine continues to expand, it is coming under growing scrutiny from school boards and state regulators questioning how public money is spent and whether the company exerts too much control over the schools.

..."Because public money is used, most states grant charters to run such schools only to nonprofit groups with the expectation that they will exercise the same independent oversight that public school boards do. Some are run locally. Some bring in nonprofit management chains. And a number use commercial management companies like Imagine. But regulators in some states have found that Imagine has elbowed the charter holders out of virtually all school decision making — hiring and firing principals and staff members, controlling and profiting from school real estate, and retaining fees under contracts that often guarantee Imagine’s management in perpetuity.

Profiting from public money through their real estate arm. Controlling what should have public oversight. If public money is used..then it should be regulated.

One Imagine Charter in St. Pete has a F grade, and it is one million in debt.

Unfortunate the taxpayers will have to be responsible for their failure.

There is also controversy in Maryland over a closed-down school being reopened by Imagine Charters. This article also defines contract and charter.

Almost a year after the school closed, Morningside parents such as Call are anxious to have the school reopened as an Imagine Schools contract school, which Imagine staff members say would offer smaller class sizes and guarantee spots for the students who live in the town.

But supporters are growing concerned that unless the Prince George's County Board of Education acts soon — board members have twice delayed a vote on the proposal — Imagine will not have enough time to prepare for Morningside students to return in the fall.

..."Contract schools and charter schools are not operated by the county school system but receive funding from the system on a per-student basis. The system typically allocates $8,899 per student for charter schools, according to county schools spokesman Darrell Pressley.

Board members must approve proposals for contract and charter schools. Contract schools work more closely with the school system to develop the school's model, whereas charter schools tend to develop ideas independently and bring them to the board for consideration.

The two schools are not clearly defined, there is confusion about who will run the school operations. More definitions to follow.

Wait until you read the definitions of charter and contract schools in Colorado.

Contract or charter

Denver Public Schools has several "contract" schools that are not charter schools. In fact, a couple of the contract schools are private schools with only certain grade levels operating under a contract with DPS. The recently closed Challenges, Choices and Images Charter Schools is now operating under a contract and isn't a charter school for the remainder of this school year.

What's the difference? Very little. "Charter" and "contract" are synonymous. Charter schools can get waiver from state statute, rules and district regulations much easier than a contract school can. Although the legislation that passed last session authorizing "innovation" schools makes that easier, too.

Generally, a contract school has a closer tie with the district and doesn't have contractual autonomy guaranteed by the Charter Schools Act. However, provisions in the contract may allow for a great deal of autonomy, even autonomy in employing at-will employees.

My head is spinning. But wait, yet another definition.

'Contract schools' on the rise around the world

Private firms or community-based organisations operating public schools under a management contract with the local school board are a growing global phenomenon. We highlight some prominent schemes and look at recent reports out of the United States.

'Contract schools' remain publicly owned and publicly funded, but are managed by a private sector operator in return for a management fee.

As part of the contract, the firm or organisation is generally required to meet specific benchmarks in areas such as student attendance and performance, and community involvement.

Often these schools are not required to meet the same criteria as public schools. And that management fee means a private company is getting big money from taxpayers.

That money going to those companies is NOT going to public schools.

Here is yet another description of contract schools at ERIC publications.

This article examines contract schools and their influence on U.S. education. Schools that are contracted out may be viewed as a privatization development that both parallels and builds upon the charter-school movement. They can be defined as publicly funded schools operated by an independent group of teachers and administrators under a contract with a public agency. This paper focuses on trends in education businesses over the past several years and discusses pioneering education management ventures, such as the Edison Project and TesseracT Group Inc. Education management organizations (EMOs) have found that the fast-growing charter movement creates a hospitable environment for entrepreneurial efforts. Although private-management efforts have generated intense scrutiny, it is difficult to judge their success or failure. The article describes the mixed results with these schools in Massachusetts, Michigan, and Arizona. Other issues that are examined include contract schools' profitability, efficiency, and the competition they face. Research has shown that many contract schools attempt to make a profit by eliminating extracurricular activities and by streamlining curricula. They also have a tendency to weed out at-risk students to boost test scores, particularly in those states that do not fund special-education students at higher levels than mainstream students.

We could take all that money going to a developer to build a neighborhood school, and support and nourish the public schools we have already.

We could pay attention to the charter/contract management companies and avoid those with a bad history of financial problems and lack of accountability.

We could treat public education with respect and fund it accordingly.

But this privatization movement is way too far down the road, I fear.

[madfloridian]

1. Development puts 1000 homes on 50 acres.

That is a lot for a community to absorb.

""I think that the developer and elected officials did a good job in clarifying the issues that are here," resident Tim Mical said, though he believes "1,000 homes on 50 acres is a level of development unheard of here" and the current "infrastructure can't support it."

http://www.explorehoward.com/education/72141/parents-tired-waiting-new-school/

[Hannah Bell]

2. per the article, it's a public school built by a private developer.

but from that explanation, leasing the building to imagine makes no sense whatsoever.

something's fishy --

richard polm, the developer, likes rudy giuliani:

http://fundrace.huffingtonpost.com/neighbors.php?type=name&lname=Polm&fname=Richard

[madfloridian]

3. That is what Imagine does. They sell schools and have them leased back to them.

I don't understand it, but I know too much public money is involved.

Imagine Charter Schools sells 5 schools for 44 million...will have them leased back to them.

Doesn't make sense, but involves their real estate arm way too much.

[Hannah Bell]

4. i wonder if polm & imagine have business ties. i also wonder who will own the school.

mr polm has a family "charitable foundation" -- lol.

the first sign of a tax cheat.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:UBr5uFhtU3YJ:www.taxexemptworld.com/organizations/anne-arundel-county-md-maryland.asp%3Fspg%3D6+%22richard+e+polm%22&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us


what'd i tell you? the irs questioned the charitability of his charitable foundation:

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2008cv0514-18

Mr. Polm is disqualified person as defined by § 4946. See Pl.'s Mem. at 12-13; Administrative Record at 144. Nonetheless, Mr. Polm has the power to appoint all directors, including managing directors, to the Foundation's Board, Pl.'s Mem. at 12; Administrative Record at 160, serves as the President of the Foundation, see Administrative Record at 55, 163 (stating that the President "shall have general charge and control of all the affairs and properties . . . shall have the powers and duties of supervision and management generally incident to the officer of president"), and is initially in control of the business and affairs of the Foundation in conjunction with two other directors, one of whom is also a disqualified person under § 4946, see id. at 144, 187 (The amended Articles of Incorporation filed with the State of Maryland on March 6, 2008 state that the business and affairs of the Foundation will be "managed under the direction of . . . Richard E. Polm, Theresa E. Polm, and Lew Schrumm" even though both Richard and Theresa Polm are disqualified persons.).



well, the developer is a scammer, point 1.

can't find anything on the net tying him to bakke or imagine though.


but this article says the school would be operated by imagine, the charter school operator: which makes it seem like the school will be a charter, not a public school per se -- even though enrollment will be limited to the developer community --

this sounds like a new twist on the charter thing -- a kind of pseudo private gated community school.

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&tbs=nws%3A1&q=polm+school&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&fp=ca671eb9cdff8fa3

[madfloridian]

7. Interesting research on Polm. And IRS never gave Imagine non-profit status.

They just claim to have it.

I am wondering why more people are not up in arms about taxpayer money going to these people.

Sets up a scenario in which they can claim ownership of the property and the building paid for with public money.

Another charter/contract school did that.

Ohio White Hat Charters....what was bought with public money now belongs to them.

The suit charges that White Hat lobbied the state legislature for changes to the charter school law in 2006 that made it possible for White Hat to fire any school board that tries to sever ties with the management company.

Nor is it financially feasible for a charter school to switch operators because White Hat's contracts state that it owns the school's property, furniture and equipment — even though they were all paid for with tax dollars, according to the complaint.

''Essentially, White Hat created an educational model where tax dollars flow to the private corporation with little room for oversight or control by the schools' governing bodies,'' said a news release accompanying the filing of the lawsuit.

"Further, the law makes White Hat's receipt of tax dollars hard to stop."

Every state is different in their rules, but in every case private business profits.

[Hannah Bell]

5. Looks like there's some kind of regulatory exception involved:

Furthermore, the schools and County Council have embraced - without long-term consideration - a relatively new concept: giving developers exceptions to adequate facilities ordinances in exchange for those developers building new schools and roads.

One such deal would have the developer Polm Cos. Ltd. building a $20 million elementary school to be operated by Imagine Schools, a national charter school chain. It's a terrific concept that would benefit the community. But what would be the impact on school capacity as the students who go to that school reach their high school years?

http://www.hometownannapolis.com/news/opn/2010/06/20-15/Our-Say-Officials-need-a-common-school-expansion-strategy.html


Also looks like the school would actually be a charter school of a special type -- one that limits enrollment to the kids living within the development --

built with public money by a private developer to serve a gated community & make profits for a private company.

this is a new spin -- sounds like a further step down the road to privatization.

who will own the building?

[Ernesto]

6. Wasn't that the Walmart Academy?

Maybe I can get a job as a kid/parent greeter!

[madfloridian]

8. Report funded by Gates said "contract schools" are "charter schools writ large"

This is from February and gives more of what is involved. Bill Gates funded the research.

I just felt hopeless when I read it.

Replacing public schools with contract schools

Did I say something about union sellouts earlier today? Bracey just posted at ARN the Ed Week link below that announces the NEA, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the National Association of Manufacturers have split the spoils from the corporate charter school blitzkrieg that is now being unleashed against public education. They have agreed to support the Tucker Plan (Tough Choices or Tough Times) that was pumped out of the sludge tanks in 2006. See here and here and here for reviews of the plan. Here is the beginning of the evaluation by Miller and Gerson:

"The "Tough Choices or Tough Times" report of the National Commission on Skills in the Workplace, funded in large part by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and signed by a bipartisan collection of prominent politicians, businesspeople, and urban school superintendents, called for a series of measures including:

(a) replacing public schools with what the report called "contract schools", which would be charter schools writ large;

(b) eliminating nearly all the powers of local school boards - their role would be to write and sign the authorizing agreements for the "contract schools;

(c) eliminating teacher pensions and slashing health benefits; and

(d) forcing all 10th graders to take a high school exit examination based on 12th grade skills, and terminating the education of those who failed (i.e., throwing millions of students out into the streets as they turn 16).

It's amazing how far down this road we have gone.

[madfloridian]

9. In our area when a school serves a community it is built by the school district...

not by the developer. That bothers me in a way, that the developer and the community might claim ownership of the school in some way.

The school district contracts the construction out mostly to local companies, and they are public schools....not run by private companies. Services are subcontracted like cleaning, etc. but they answer to the district.

The schools in the OP sound different. I think we are rushing headlong into too much mixing of private and public money.