Archived Information

II. State Approaches to the Charter Concept

The charter concept envisions not only improved individual schools, but also the possibility of an alternative system of public education. At the individual charter school level, schools are given autonomy from regulations in exchange for accountability for results. But as our First-Year Report (1997) showed, state chartering statutes differ dramatically from one another as to the extent and nature of the autonomy they allow. State statutes also vary greatly with respect to the number of charter schools allowed, the conditions of accountability and renewal, and the types of charter schools permitted. Thus, different charter approaches are being tried simultaneously across the country that may have profound implications for how systemic change may--or may not--result from chartering. This chapter updates our analysis of state legislation regarding both the autonomy that individual charter schools have in law and the extent to which state statutes enable significant alternatives to the public education system.^[1]

CHAPTER HIGHLIGHTS The number of charter schools is growing. The number of charter schools in operation continued to grow rapidly in the 1997-98 school year, with 279 additional charter schools becoming operational. Taking into account 19 charter school closures, 693 charter schools were in operation in the 1997-98 school year in 23 states and the District of Columbia. If the various branches of charter schools in Arizona are counted as separate charter schools, the number of charter schools in operation was approximately 781. During the 1997 legislative session, four states passed charter legislation, and as of September 30, 1997, 29 states and the District of Columbia had charter laws. Fewer than one in twenty charter schools have closed. By the beginning of the 1997-98, 19 charter schools of the 433 operational until that time had ceased operation. They closed voluntarily, had their charters revoked, or merged their operation with other charter schools. Potential legislative trends. Several states amended their charter legislation during the 1997 legislative session, and two trends may be emerging. Some states with older charter legislation are increasing their limits on charter schools, and come are providing increased flexibility in the charter-granting process. Legislation in the four new charter states reflect great differences in state approaches, with two states allowing greater opportunity for charter developers and the other two having more restrictions.

A. The Growth and Spread of Charter Schools

The charter concept continues to spread across the country, with four new states (Mississippi, Nevada, Ohio, and Pennsylvania) enacting legislation during 1997^[2] and several states continuing to consider charter legislation.^[3] By September 30, 1997, 29 states and the District of Columbia had enacted charter laws.

No consensus exists on how to define charter schools; the Study defines charter schools as schools established within the provisions of state charter school laws. The Study examines schools created under state laws intended to allow the creation of schools by means that depart from the previously established process of starting a school and/or allow schools to operate in a fashion that departs from established practices, often in combination with a performance-based contract.^[4]

Exhibit 2-1 shows states with charter legislation and the year the legislation was enacted in each. The largest number of states passed charter legislation in 1995 and 1996--a total of 14 states and the District of Columbia passed legislation in those two years.

EXHIBIT 2-1

STATES WITH CHARTER LEGISLATION, BY YEAR OF FIRST ENACTMENT
AS OF SEPTEMBER 1997

1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997
Minnesota	California	Colorado Georgia Massachusetts Michigan New Mexico Wisconsin	Arizona Hawaii Kansas	Alaska Arkansas Delaware New Hampshire Louisiana Rhode Island Wyoming	Connecticut District of Columbia Florida Illinois New Jersey North Carolina South Carolina Texas	Mississippi Nevada Ohio Pennsylvania

Even more dramatic than the growth in the number of states with charter school legislation has been the increase in the number of charter schools across the country. Exhibit 2-2 displays the number of charter schools in operation as of September 1997 and shows the growth in their numbers over time.^[5] In the 1993-94 school year, 34 charter schools opened. The number of charter schools doubled in each of the next two years, while the biggest increase occurred in 1997, with 279 charter schools opening. As of September 1997, 693 charter schools were operating in 23 states and the District of Columbia.^[6] Arizona, California, and Michigan have the largest number of operational charter schools, accounting for 54 percent of the charter schools in operation as of September 1997. Charter schools are few relative to the approximately 85,000 other public schools in the country, but the growth in charter schools has been steady since the first school opened in Minnesota in 1992.

EXHIBIT 2-2

ESTIMATED NUMBER OF CHARTER SCHOOLS IN OPERATION
AS OF SEPT. 1997 BY STATE^[1]

State	Number charter schools starting in the year					Cum. schools closed as of Sept. 97[2]	New schools starting as of Sept. 97	Total schools in operation Sept. 97
	1992-3	1993-4	1994-5	1995-6	1996-7
MN	2	5	7	3	3	[1]	7	26
CA		28	37	30	21	[5]	19	130
CO		1	13	10	8	[1]	19	50
MI			2	41	33	[1]	29	104
NM			4		1			5
WI			2	3	6		6	17
AZ				47	48	[10]	45	140
GA				3	9		9	21
HI				2				2
MA				15	7	[1]	3	24
AK					2		13	15
DE					2		1	3
DC					2		1	3
FL					5		28	33
IL					1		7	8
LA					3		3	6
TX					17		21	38
CT							12	12
KS							1	1
NJ							13	13
NC							34	34
PA							6	6
RI							1	1
SC							1	1
Yearly Total	2	34	65	154	178	[19]	279	---
Cum. Total	2	36	101	255	433	414	---	693

1 The number of charter schools is a moving target. New schools open and existing schools move, change their names, and close. Throughout the Study we will continue the process of tracking the number of charter schools and Exhibit 2-2 represents our best estimate of the number of charter schools as of September 1997. There are several discrepancies between this chart and a similar exhibit in the First-Year Report (Exhibit 2). First, the number of charter schools that opened in California in 1993-94 was actually 28, not 26 as reported last year and in 1994-95, the number was 37, not 36 California charter schools opened. Second, also in California, one of the schools that opened in the 1993-94 school year closed before the Study began. That school's closing was not reported in last year's report. Third, in Minnesota, we reported last year that one school opened in the 1992-93 school year but the actual number that opened in that year was two--one of them closed before we began the Study and was not reported as closed in last year's report. Finally, in Minnesota, we reported last year that four schools opened in the 1995-96 school year, but one school delayed its opening until the 1996-97 school year, reducing the total in the 1995-96 school year to three schools and increasing the total in the 1996-97 school year to three.

2 The column "Total Schools Closed as of September 1997" reflects the cumulative number of charter schools closed since the 1992-93 school year.

B. Charter Closures

Of the 712 charter schools that have opened since 1992, 19 had ceased operation as charters by September 1997. The 19 schools were located in six states: Arizona (with ten), California (five), Colorado (one), Massachusetts (one), Michigan (one), and Minnesota (one).^[7] Twelve of the schools actually closed their doors, while seven continued their operation in some form. In some cases, charter schools closed because their charters were revoked for one or more violations of their charter contracts. In other cases, schools closed voluntarily because of financial problems or because of the difficulties they encountered in translating a vision into a reality. Finally, a group of charter schools relinquished their charters or merged with other schools. More specifically:

• Four schools, three in California and one in Arizona, had their charters revoked, two because of financial mismanagement. The remaining two schools--both in California--had their charters revoked because their district found them to be in violation of provisions of their charters.^[8]
• Two Arizona schools rescinded their charters--one school because it was denied permission to operate on the reservation where it was located.
• Five schools closed voluntarily--three in Arizona, one in Michigan, and one in Minnesota.
• Two Arizona schools that operated as separate charters merged with other charter schools. One school had received two separate charters to operate branches of their school; they were ultimately merged under one charter. Another school merged with an existing charter school that had a similar educational program and philosophy.
• Five schools discontinued their charters but remained open as schools. Four of them--one in California, two in Arizona, and one in Colorado--had converted from previously existing schools to charter schools and so continued to operate after relinquishing their charters. The remaining school, located in California, reconstituted in a different district under a new charter.
• One Massachusetts school's charter was suspended by the state after one year of operation. The school is working to meet state requirements for documentation of its program and hopes to reopen in the fall of 1998.

Charter school closures represent a very small proportion of the number of schools granted charters--less than three percent--and there are too few closures to provide evidence of a clear pattern at work. Some charter school proponents point to the closure of charter schools as evidence that the charter concept works--that schools that don't live up to their charters will be closed. Other proponents argue that schools that are unable to attract enough students to be fiscally viable will be forced to close their doors--a demonstration that market forces are at work. Throughout the Study, we will continue to track charter school closures and, as part of our policy research, explore patterns associated with school closures.

C. Charter Renewals

Charter schools operate under limited-term contracts, the length of which are typically specified in state legislation and range from Pennsylvania, with an annual review, to Arizona and the District of Columbia with 15-year terms (with five-year interim reviews). The periodic, formal review process is a hallmark of the charter school accountability process--one indication that charter schools are living up to their end of the autonomy/accountability bargain is whether or not their charters are renewed at the end of their term. The length of the renewal is an indication of the belief that the charter-granting agency has in the viability of the charter school.^[9]

Twenty-nine of the charter schools responding to the phone survey (in California, Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin) reported that their charters had come up for renewal; all reported that their charters had been renewed. Of the 29 schools, 23 were newly created and six were pre-existing schools. Nineteen schools were renewed for three years, three schools for two years, and six schools for one year. Of the 29 schools that have come up for renewal:

• Eleven Minnesota schools reported that their charters had been renewed; of those, eight are newly created schools and three are pre-existing schools. Two had their charters renewed for two years and nine had their charters renewed for three years.
• Eight California schools reported that their charters had been renewed; of those, seven are newly created schools and one is a pre-existing school. Three of the schools had their charters renewed for one year, one for two years, and four for three years.
• Seven Colorado schools reported that their charters had been renewed; all of the schools are newly created. One school reported that its charter had been renewed for one year, while six had their charters renewed for three years.
• Two Michigan schools reported that their charters had been renewed; one school is newly created and one is a pre-existing school. One of the schools had its charter renewed for one year and one for three years.
• One Wisconsin school reported that its charter was renewed for one year; it is a pre-existing school.

There are too few cases across the five states to draw any real conclusions about patterns of charter renewals. As is the case in at least one district, the variability in the length of the charter renewals of schools within that district seems to suggest that some charter-granting agencies are giving serious consideration to some set of criteria and distinguishing among charter school renewals based on those criteria. As part of our policy work, the Study will examine the process of charter renewal from the perspective of the charter sponsors. We will investigate what criteria sponsors are using to decide on charter renewal.
-###-

[I. Charter Schools in Perspective]

[II. State Approaches to the Charter Concept (part 2 of 3)]