KEEPING TABS ON PUBLIC DOLLARS
More monitoring urged, less monitoring OK’d
Many problems at charter schools go undetected until they become debilitating — if they’re discovered at all.
Charter schools are required to file financial statements with their local school districts. The reports are among the most important monitoring tools districts have to assess the financial health of charter schools.
Still, the statements don’t always show the complete picture. The law does not require operators to provide details on day-to-day spending — and governing boards can sometimes be left in the dark.
In 2007, the board of Sunshine Academy in Miramar went to police after discovering that the school’s principal, Alcira Manzano, had made unauthorized withdrawals from the school’s account — including $5,200 for a down payment on an SUV, court records show. The board closed the school, and Manzano was arrested on theft charges.
Investigators later found that Manzano had also made loans to the school and personally paid the rent. Broward County prosecutors dropped the charges against Manzano in June.
“The record keeping at the school and oversight of the school by the board of directors was virtually nonexistent,” prosecutor Kathryn Heaven wrote in a memo after dropping the case. “The school appears to have been poorly run.”
In 2008, a legislative report said the state should adopt stronger monitoring methods to detect struggling schools before they reach the brink of closing.
Instead, lawmakers relaxed the rules even more. Earlier this year, Gov. Rick Scott signed a bill allowing some high-performing schools to file financial reports quarterly, instead of monthly. The Legislature also reduced the amount of money that high-performing charter schools must pay to school districts to cover the costs of oversight.
Even when school districts detect problems, their ability to assess charter schools’ conduct and demand compliance is limited.
For example, state law does not spell out clear conflict-of-interest rules for charter schools or their governing boards — a shortcoming highlighted by legislative analysts in 2008, but never changed. Nor does the law clearly define how much control a management company should have.
Earlier this year, Miami-Dade school district auditors questioned whether four schools — two Life Skills charter schools and two Renaissance charter schools —were operating as mere pass-throughs to their for-profit management companies.
The Life Skills schools each paid 97 percent of their money to White Hat Management of Ohio, which in turn paid the school’s expenses — including lease payments to another White Hat company. White Hat officials did not return phone calls seeking comment.
The school district’s audit committee considered asking the schools to modify their contracts, but the district’s attorney determined that the district could not take action.
School districts can deny an application for a new charter school or refuse to renew a school’s charter. But the state Board of Education has overturned those decisions 30 times since 2003, state records show. (The state upheld 53 denials over the same time period.)
School districts can also close a school that has received consecutive failing grades or has persistent financial problems. But some districts, including Miami-Dade, have had that power questioned, too.
In 2010, the Miami-Dade School Board voted to close Rise Academy in Homestead after the school ended the year $250,000 in the red. Questionable expenses included $8,300 at retail clothing stores; $2,800 at hotels and Orlando theme parks; and $2,145 at restaurants, according to bank records. Meanwhile, teachers had gone unpaid and textbooks were in short supply.
Weeks later, the decision to close Rise was overturned by the state Board of Education. State education officials said the school, which had boosted its state-issued grade from F to A in a single year, had not received a fair hearing.
Rise never reopened.
Charter school advocates insist the law and state rules provide for enough oversight.
“There is absolute accountability,” said Lynn Norman-Teck, a spokeswoman for the Florida Consortium of Public Charter Schools. “Parents, if they see something wrong, will call the school, the district, Tallahassee.”
But district officials say it is a frustrating exercise.
“School districts are limited in their authority over charter schools,” said Schuster, the Miami-Dade spokesman. “They have minimal ability to impose effective consequences.”
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/09/19/v-fullstory/2541051/florida-charter-schools-big-money.html#ixzz1gK0EHPMt
No comments:
Post a Comment