Facts About Vouchers

Endnotes

  1. “Educational Vouchers: Effectiveness, Choice and Costs,” Henry M. Levin, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 17, No. 3, 373-392 (1998), p. 387.
  2. ibid, p. 383.
  3. Joseph Claude Harris, cited in “The Cleveland Voucher Program: Who Chooses? Who Gets Chosen? Who Pays?” A Report by the American Federation of Teachers, 1997, p. 18.
  4. “Educational Vouchers: Effectiveness, Choice and Costs,” p. 383; “Vouchers Costing Ohio,” Akron Beacon Journal, March 28, 1998, p. 2.
  5. “What Really Matters in American Education,” White Paper prepared for U.S. Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley, for speech at the National Press Club, Washington D.C., September 23, 1997, U.S. Department of Education, p. 2. Secretary Riley derived this number from multiplying the average private school tuition of $3,116 in 1993-94 by private school enrollment (5 million).
  6. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI), Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) Facts and Figures for 2001-2002, available at http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dfm/sms/choice.html, accessed March 11, 2002.
  7. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI), Milwaukee Parental School Choice Program: Membership and Payment History, in Total, 1990 to Present, May 2001; Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) Facts and Figures for 2000-2001, May 2001, available at http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dfm/sms/mpcfnf00.html; 2001-03 Wisconsin State Budget. Summary of Governor’s Budget Recommendations. Legislative Fiscal Bureau, March 2001, p. 544 (2001-02 projections).
  8. “An Evaluation: Milwaukee Parental Choice Program,” Wisconsin Legislative Audit Bureau, February 2000, p.p. 21, 24. “State budget highlights,” Wisconsin Education Association Council, July 27, 2001. Available at www.weac.org/Capitol/2000-01/july01/highlights.htm, accessed July 27, 2001.
  9. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) Facts and Figures for 2001-2002, available at http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/, accessed July 2002.
  10. See Pathak, Holmes and Mincberg, A Painful Price, How the Milwuakee Voucher Surcharge Undercuts Wisconsin’s Education Priorities, People For the American Way Foundation, February 2002, available at http://www.pfaw.org/issues/education/reports/MilwaukeePainfulPrice.pdf.
  11. See Egen, Holmes and Mincberg, The Forty Percent Surcharge: How Taxpayers Overpay for Milwaukee’s Private School Voucher Program, People For the American Way Foundation, August 2000 for a full discussion of the Milwaukee voucher program’s funding formula surcharge.
  12. The budgeted 2001-02 school year cost for the voucher program was $58.4 million, according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau (2001-03 Wisconsin State Budget Summary of Governor's Budget Recommendations, Legislative Fiscal Bureau, March, 2001, p. 544). Forty percent of this figure exceeds $23 million; this surcharge totals over $50 million for the biennium, based on total two-year costs budgeted by LFB at $127 million.
  13. The Financial Information Reports are audits done by an independent auditor that each voucher school submits on an annual basis to the Department of Public Instruction in order for the DPI to determine how much to pay the school. Revenue is broken down by source—for example, revenue from tuition, government assistance, investment income, contributions, etc. Actual average per-student tuition for a given school can be found by dividing the number of tuition-paying students into the total revenue received from tuition. This figure is often lower than the tuition reported to the Legislative Audit bureau (found in Appendix I of the LAB Audit). The cause of the discrepancy may be due to a variety of reasons, such as school scholarships, in-kind payment by parents through volunteer work, unofficial tuition reductions, etc.
  14. For an in-depth discussion about the discrepancies between actual and reported tuition, see Nelson, Egen and Holmes, “Revenues, Expenditures and Taxpayer Subsidies in Milwaukee’s Public Schools,” Paper presented at the 2001 Annual Meeting of the American Education Finance Association, Cincinnati, Ohio, March 2001.
  15. Wisconsin Education Association Council, “Senate Bill Preserves K-12 Funding, Slashes Vouchers,” April 7, 2002; Wisconsin Education Association Council, “Assembly Passes Budget Adjustment Bill By Narrow Margin,” July 8, 2002.
  16. For a detailed explanation of the capital funding loophole, see Nelson, Egen and Holmes, “Revenues, Expenditures and Taxpayer Subsidies in Milwaukee’s Public Schools,” Paper presented at the 2001 Annual Meeting of the American Education Finance Association, Cincinnati, Ohio, March 2001. School level enrollment data from Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
  17. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, School Finance and Management Services: Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) Facts and Figures for 2001-2002; MPCP Facts and Figures for 2000-2001; MPCP Facts and Figures for 2001-2002; MPCP Facts and Figures for 1998-1999. Data available at DPI web site at http://www.dpi.state.wi.us.
  18. For the 1999-2000 year, over 50 percent of the students had attended private schools with voucher aid the year before. This is due primarily due to the fact that the voucher program was expanded in that year to include religious schools. Many of the students utilizing vouchers for the first time had previously been receiving private vouchers through the Bradley Foundation-funded PAVE program. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, School Finance and Management Services: Milwaukee Parental School Choice Program: Milwaukee Parental School Choice Facts and Figures for 1998-99, available at http://www.dpi.state.wi.us.
  19. According to MPS, there were approximately 103 schools in the 2001-02 school year; 1,993 students enrolled in the voucher program this year came from MPS the year before. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, School Finance and Management Services: Milwaukee Parental School Choice Program (MPCP) Facts and Figures for 1999-2000, available at http://www.dpi.state.wi.us.
  20. See Pathak, Holmes and Mincberg, Five Years and Counting: A Closer Look at the Cleveland Voucher Program, People For the American Way Foundation, September 2001, available at http://www.pfaw.org/issues/education/epromises/.
  21. “Vouchers Costing Ohio,” Akron Beacon Journal, March 27, 1998.
  22. “State Aid to Private Schools Up: Public Districts Feel Slighted,” Cincinnati Enquirer, 3/29/98.
  23. “Voucher System Falls Far Short of Goals,” Akron Beacon Journal, December 14, 1999; “State Aid to Private Schools Up: Public Districts Feel Slighted,” Cincinnati Enquirer, March 29, 1998.
  24. “Charter Schools Seek Boost,” Akron Beacon Journal, April 5, 2001.
  25. “Voucher System Falls Far Short of Goals,” Akron Beacon Journal, December 14, 1999.
  26. “Enrollment Booms, But Buildings Implode,” The Blade, September 1, 2001.
  27. Doug Oplinger, “Court to State: Spend More, Legislators Balk at Cost; Showdown is Possible,” Akron Beacon Journal, September 7, 2001.
  28. “Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program: Final Management Study,” Prepared by KPMG LLP, September 9, 1999, p. 9-2; “The Cleveland Voucher Program: Who Chooses? Who Gets Chosen? Who Pays?” A Report by the American Federation of Teachers, 1997, p.p. i-iii.
  29. “Cleveland School Vouchers: Where the Students Come From,” Cleveland OH: Policy Matters Ohio, September 2001.
  30. “Vouchers Costing Ohio,” Akron Beacon Journal, March 27, 1998, p. 3.
  31. “State Aid to Private Schools Up: Public Districts Feel Slighted,” Cincinnati Enquirer, March, 29, 1998, pp. 3-4.
  32. “Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program: Final Management Study,” Prepared by KPMG LLP, September 9, 1999, p. 9-15.
  33. Enrollment data and district per student expenditure averages for the 82 potential voucher schools were calculated from the “Florida School Indicators Report 1999-2000” CD-ROM, Bureau of Education Information and Accountability Services, Florida Department of Education, Tallahassee FL.
  34. Daniel A. Grech, “State Judge Strikes Down Voucher Law,” Miami Herald, August 5, 2002.
  35. “Voucher Program Quietly Enrolls Disabled Students,” Tallahassee Democrat, February 5, 2001.
  36. “McKay’s Bad Apple,” St. Petersburg Times, October 29, 2001; Florida Scholarship Programs, McKay Scholarships for Students With Disabilities Program, available at www.schoolchoiceinfo.org, accessed July 2002.
  37. “Voucher Program Quietly Enrolls Disabled Students,” Tallahassee Democrat, February 5, 2001.
  38. Florida Scholarship Programs, McKay Scholarships for Students With Disabilities Program, available at www.schoolchoiceinfo.org, accessed July 2002
  39. Student Achievement Guarantee in Education Program, State Department of Public Instruction program description (http:www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/oea/sage/index.html); SAGE Program Guidelines- 1998-99, p. 1: Guidelines initially set Milwaukee eligibility at 10 schools even though DPI’s data demonstrated that many more schools would have qualified for aid (SAGE Program Expansion, MPS Eligibity, Department of Public Instruction).
  40. “SAGE Schools in 1998-99,” from Milwaukee Public Schools, Office of Gov. Relations, 1999.
  41. 1999-2000 Results of The Student Achievement Guarantee In Education (SAGE) Program Evaluation. Center for Education Research, Analysis and Innovation, School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Executive Summary, December 2000.
  42. Correspondence with Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, SAGE administrator, June 2001.
  43. 2001-03 Wisconsin State Budget Summary of Governor's Budget Recommendations, Legislative Fiscal Bureau, March, 2001, p.p. 537, 544. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction Memo from Janice Zmrazek, SAGE Program Coordinator to SAGE School Principals and District Administrators. RE: SAGE Budget Update and Notice of Aid Transmittal, March 1, 2001. Increases in funding were calculated with respect to expanding the program to include the approximately 400 new schools that joined SAGE in 2000-01 in K-3 class size reduction. This increase is added to the base funding for the program of $58.7 million. For a fuller discussion of the Governor’s proposed budget on SAGE, see Punishing Success: The Governor’s Proposed Education Budget and the SAGE and Voucher Program, People For the American Way Foundation, April 2001. Available at www.pfaw.org.
  44. Steven Walters, “Budget deal expected to retain stem cell work, school choice program,” Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, July 25, 2001; “State budget highlights,” Wisconsin Education Association Council website, available at: www.weac.org/Capitol/2000-01/julyl01/highlights.htm, accessed July 27, 2001.
  45. “The Cleveland Voucher Program: Who Chooses? Who Gets Chosen? Who Pays?” A Report by the American Federation of Teachers, 1997, pp. ii, 28.
  46. Ohio Stat. §3317.029
  47. “A Voucher Plan Full of Holes,” St. Petersburg Times, March 28, 1999.
  48. “Editorial: An Educational Fraud,” St. Petersburg Times, October 11, 2001.
  49. Rae Osborne, Letter to the Editor, “Leaving No Child Behind? DOE Looks the Other Way, Editorial,” St. Petersburg Times, October 11, 2001.
Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious