school choice yearbook 2009–10

Fighting for Opportunity

school choice yearbook2009 – 10

Fighting for OpportunitySchool Choice Yearbook 2009–10An Annual Publication

Published by: Alliance for School Choice 1660 L Street, NW, Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 280-1990

www.AllianceForSchoolChoice.org

Copyright © 2010 Alliance for School Choice, All Rights Reserved

ISBN 978-0-9816482-3-1

Authors: Andrew Campanella and Ashley Ehrenreich Book and cover design: Stacey Maloney Printed in the United States of America

First Printing

1

School Choice Yearbook 2009–10

Fighting for Opportunity

This Yearbook is dedicated to the parents and children who, despite seemingly insurmountable obstacles, fight each

and every day for a better, fairer, and stronger education for their children and for access to quality schools. We fight

alongside them to make the promise of school choice and equal opportunity a reality.

Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choicein

tro

du

ctio

n2

intro

du

ction

School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10 3

IntroductionThe past year presented the school choice movement with unprecedented challenges and

unique opportunities.

Because of state-level budget crises and electorally emboldened adversaries, the school choice movement fought a seven-theatre war to protect educational opportunities for low-income children. It was a rollercoaster ride of strong advocacy, emotion, uncertainty, and nonstop hard work for school choice supporters in every state.

The epicenter of the battle for opportunity was Washington, D.C., where school choice advocates mounted one of the strongest defenses of an endangered voucher program in recent memory. However, educational opportunity was also jeopardized in Arizona, Louisiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin.

While 2009 brought setbacks—particularly in Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania—no theatre of our battle saw complete defeat. And despite the toughest year in a decade for school choice, advocates effectively weathered the storm, making gains in some states and realizing several significant successes.

School choice advocates made significant gains in states like Indiana and Florida, for example. Indiana’s legislature created a $2.5 million individual and corporate scholarship tax credit program, and Florida approved, with record bipartisan support, a dramatic expansion to its tax credit program—making that program the largest in the nation.

In 2009, we saw, again, a significant increase in the number of students participating in school choice programs (5 percent, to about 180,000) and an increase in the amount of public money allocated for school choice programs—unexpected victories in what turned out to be the worst economic climate in decades. And despite challenges at the federal level, an ever-increasing number of Democratic state legislators last year joined with their Republican colleagues to support school choice.

Interestingly, the media tide shifted in favor of school choice in 2009, at least on the national level. The epic battle over the D.C. voucher program encouraged national newspapers—from USA Today and The Wall Street Journal to The Washington Post and the Washington Times—to powerfully editorialize in favor of school vouchers. Even progressive commentators like MSNBC’s Chris Matthews this year offered enthusiastic endorsements of school vouchers in D.C.

As we begin 2010, we encourage all supporters to recommit to the continuing effort to advance the promise of educational opportunity. If 2009 has taught us anything, it’s that if we’re willing to fight hard for what we believe in, most of the time, we will win.

Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choicein

tro

du

ctio

n4

Former D.C. Councilman Kevin P. Chavous, one of America’s leading Democratic advocates for school choice, speaks at a Capitol Hill rally on September 30, 2009.


Table of Contents

What is School Choice? 7–9

Year in Review: 2009 10–15

Growth and Expansion 16–20

Feature: Head of the Class 21–23

How It Works 24–25

Myth vs. Reality 26–29

Research Recap: School Choice Yields Student Gains 30–31

Research Recap: School Choice Saves Tax Dollars 32–33

Appendix A: State Profiles 34–53

Appendix B: School Choice Organizations 54–55

Highlight: The Fight for Real Hope in D.C. 56–59

Sources and Credits 60–61

table of co

nten

ts

Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice6

Students from Washington, D.C., participate in one of a dozen protests to protect the District’s endangered voucher program from Congressional elimination.

School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10w

hat is

scho

ol ch

oice?

School choice puts parents in charge of their children’s education by letting them select the best schools for their children, public or private. Some parents exercise school choice when they decide to move to a certain city or neighborhood because of the quality of the traditional public schools there or the presence of innovative public charter schools. Other parents—those who can afford it—send their children to high-quality private schools.

Many low-income and middle-class families simply cannot afford to move to better neighborhoods or pay for private school tuition—on top of the money they already pay in taxes to support public school systems. As a result, these families are often forced to send their children to failing or unsafe public schools, institutions that have resisted reform because of the powerful forces of the education bureaucracy.

We believe that low-income and middle-class parents should have stronger options— right away — through access to private schools via school vouchers and scholarship tax credit programs. We also believe that states should eliminate barriers preventing the creation of more high-quality charter schools.

What is School Choice?

Types of School Choice *

School Vouchers

Voucher programs give children (usually low-income children, children in failing schools, or children with special needs) greater access to high-quality private schools. In voucher programs, education dollars “follow the child,” and parents select private schools and receive state-funded scholarships to pay tuition.

Scholarship Tax Credit Programs

Scholarship tax credit programs provide families with greater access to high-quality private schools, by providing incentives for corporations and individual taxpayers to get involved in the business of improving education. In these programs, companies and individuals get tax credits for donating to nonprofit organizations that provide scholarships for children to attend private schools.

Public Charter Schools

Charter schools provide essential choices to parents and children. Charters are public schools, run by educators, members of the community, universities, or other bodies, that are permitted to innovate and develop specialized educational programs for students without the bureaucracy that often plagues traditional public schools. States with strong charter school laws allow these schools to operate with a level of autonomy, so that they can avoid heavy bureaucracy.

* This is not an exhaustive list of school choice options. Parents can also exercise school choice through public magnet schools, inter and intra-district public school choice, virtual schools, and by homeschooling their children.

7

Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice8w

hat

is

sch

oo

l ch

oic

e?

What School Choice Means to Parents

Perhaps the finest answers to the question “What is school choice?” come not from academics and policy wonks, but from the parents and children who participate in school voucher and scholarship tax credit programs nationwide. School choice means different things to different families—but most families agree that school choice provides an opportunity for their children to excel and to thrive.

For Shayla Williams, a 13-year-old who receives a Step Up for Students Scholarship as part of the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program, school choice means a healthier learning environment. Of her new school, Shayla says, “There’s no drama. No one fights here.”

LeeAnn Evatt says that school choice has given her son Justin, a Georgia Special Needs Scholarship recipient, a chance to dream again. “His first year in private school was really about getting back to where he was,” she says. “Second semester was pretty good, but this year he’s completely back to the old Justin — Mr. Happy-Go-Lucky. I feel like I almost have a new child, honestly. Now he has his hopes and dreams back again.”

Cleveland mother Debby Barry, whose son receives a scholarship to attend a private school through the Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program, says school choice means safety for her children. “We live in the ’hood,” Debby says. “I hear gunshots every night. The kids in our neighborhood are wild. I can’t wait to get him to school to get him out of the neighborhood. I couldn’t afford private school tuition, so I am blessed to have this scholarship. This is what I want for my child.”

Florida mother Patricia Allen says that school choice provides her sons with hope for a better future. “Without these scholarships, there is no telling what would have happened to my boys. The scholarship program gave my children the second chances they needed for success in school and in life.” Her sons receive Step Up for Students Scholarships.

For sixth grader Sekou, a scholarship recipient and participant in Pennsylvania’s Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) program, school choice means smaller class sizes and fewer distractions: “My school is much different from public school, and I enjoy going there for many reasons. One reason is because there are smaller class sizes so you can hear more. Also, there are no girls to distract you or get you in trouble…. Another difference is that the classes are hard, and you have to study more, and if you don’t do your homework, you get detention,” he says.


For many students, including fourth grader Brandon, a recipient of Ohio’s EdChoice Scholarship, school choice means great teachers. “In the beginning the work was hard, harder than the work at my old school,” Brandon says. “But my teacher never gave up on me. She made sure I understood the lessons and never ignored me in class.”

Arizona father Scott’s children receive scholarships through Arizona’s Individual School Tuition Organization Tax Credit program. For Scott, school choice means a lifeline of stability for his son and four daughters. “After my wife died of cancer, I didn’t know how I would raise my kids, keep working, and make their lives normal again. These scholarships provided my children with the opportunity to continue to excel in school despite impossible circumstances at home.”

For Jessica Burhardt, a mother of children who receive vouchers through Louisiana’s Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence program, school choice means that her kids have a chance at proving their true potential. “I live in Orleans Parish, and my children were able to move from a failing Recovery District school to a private school directly because of the Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence Program,” she says. “While they attended public school, they received a less satisfactory education in an environment where not only the students but teachers didn’t care. They had no room to thrive. Now they are both honor roll students and spelling bee winners.”

For Carol, the mother of Jeremy—a recipient of a Georgia Special Needs Scholarship—school choice means that she has a chance to see the best in her son again. “They say that Jeremy is the best kid. He went from six suspensions last year in the public school to zero behavior problems this year. He’s even in the choir. Last year we had the kid who was throwing pinecones at teachers, and this year he is in the choir. This is a new kid here.”

For Seanette, a mother of three in Cleveland, school choice means that her children won’t fall through the cracks. “It takes a strain off me to know I can send my child to a great school. I feel safe leaving my child at this school, which is a wonderful feeling. In Kellisa’s public school, she was doing advanced work but she was still bored to tears. She was slipping through the cracks. I was so happy when the principal at her new school called and told me about the Cleveland Scholarship. I enrolled her right away, and now I see such a difference.”

“I got involved in the fight for school choice when my daughter Nia’s scholarship was revoked during the fight to save the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. My son Nico went from getting no attention whatsoever at a failing public school to thriving in a private school, so I know that vouchers work. To me, school choice means putting kids first. And to anyone who wants to end a program that helps kids, I tell them: Keep politics out of this. It’s about our family.”

— LaTasha Bennett, D.C. mother

wh

at is sch

oo

l cho

ice?

What School Choice Means to Parents


Students rally in Phoenix, Arizona, in 2008 to support specialized school voucher programs. These initiatives became “Lexie’s Law” in 2009.


The start of 2009 saw the inauguration of a new president, Barack Obama, and also the climax of the global economic crisis.

With states across the country facing unprecedented budget shortfalls and crushing deficits, the potential for the passage of new school choice programs appeared bleak. In fact, as 2009 began, the school choice movement braced itself for attacks from opponents who would claim, despite economic reality, that school voucher programs and scholarship tax credit programs cost excessive money and drained funds from public schools.

To combat these false claims, the school choice movement protected programs with aggressive advocacy — planning rallies across the country, expanding its parental outreach efforts, and broadening its base of support to include even more Democrats. Throughout the following pages, you can read about the major battles, successes, and challenges of 2009—and see how school choice advocates were able to overcome nearly insurmountable odds to increase school choice programs and student enrollment in the school choice movement’s most challenging year to date.

Two New Programs Signed into LawAfter a long battle, Indiana legislators involved in a protracted budget debate passed a

$2.5 million corporate and individual scholarship tax credit program. In addition to having the support of the state’s governor, Mitch Daniels, the program was passed because of extensive public support, including a long-term letter-writing campaign targeted at key legislative budget committee members, a comprehensive effort to place opinion pieces in targeted newspapers, and the involvement of a wide range of religious and community groups. The program will start providing scholarships to students in 2010.

Arizona remained a hotbed of controversy in 2009—fueled mostly by agitation by the ACLU and the People for the American Way. Despite deploying vast resources in attempts to kill voucher programs specifically designed to help children with special needs and children in foster care, these special interests ultimately failed in their attempts to undermine school choice in the state. When a court ruled that Arizona’s Blaine Amendment created an atmosphere that wasn’t conducive for the voucher programs, school choice activists worked with a team of legislative allies to swiftly pass Lexie’s Law, a $5 million initiative that converted the two voucher programs for foster children and students with special needs into a corporate scholarship tax credit program, preserved educational opportunities for more than 470 children, and expanded access to the program for students with “504” plans.

Year in Review: 2009

year in

review: 2009

Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice12se

ctio

n t

wo

Five Programs Expanded or EnhancedIn addition to this victory against well-funded special interests, the Arizona school choice

coalition also succeeded in convincing lawmakers to eliminate the sunset provision in the Corporate School Tuition Organization (STO) Tax Credit Program, to include insurance premium tax credits in the corporate STO program, and to allow donations through payroll deduction for the Individual School Tuition Organization Tax Credit Program.

In Florida, extensive public outreach resulted in protection of Florida’s Corporate Tax Credit Scholarship Program—now known as the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program. Because of the vocal and public support of Governor Charlie Crist—along with a multitude of Florida’s Democratic legislators—the program was expanded in 2009 to allow for insurance premium tax credits.

Iowa school choice supporters saw two significant successes in 2009, thanks to the support of committed legislators and Democratic Governor Chet Culver. In 2009, corporations were permitted to join individuals in making donations to support scholarships in the state. For the first time, the state came extremely close to reaching the program’s cap—the maximum allowable tax credits permitted for the program, $7.5 million—and 9,624 students were served.

With the help of popular Governor Bobby Jindal, along with Democratic Senator Ann Duplessis and Democratic Representative Austin Badon (both of New Orleans), the planned increase in funding for Louisiana’s popular Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence Program—a voucher initiative for low-income students in failing New Orleans schools—was preserved and expanded by $2.1 million despite some legislative opposition. Supporters of the program rallied in Baton Rouge to convince lawmakers of the program’s positive impact. On the enrollment front, the Louisiana chapter of the Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO) worked with local advocates to mount an aggressive parental outreach and education campaign.

Parents fight to protect Ohio’s Autism Scholarship Program at a Columbus, Ohio, rally in 2009.

year

in

revi

ew: 2

009

School Choice Yearbook 2009-2010 13

In Utah, legislators enacted another annual increase in funding for the Carson Smith Special Needs Scholarship program. Under the leadership of parent groups in Utah, the Carson Smith program continued to thrive in 2009 with $150,000 in additional funding and overwhelming rates of parental satisfaction.

Three Programs ProtectedIn the Buckeye State, School Choice Ohio and its allies went on the offensive

against a governor who remains vehemently opposed to parental choice in education. School choice allies in Ohio rallied public support and waged a full-scale enrollment effort for the EdChoice voucher program, increasing applications by 30 percent in just one year. In addition, the team managed to beat back the governor’s efforts to weaken the program, and succeeded in passing key language that will improve the program’s accountability to families and taxpayers in the future.

Faced with overwhelming state budget deficits and challenges from legislators to cut costs, Rhode Island Governor Don Carcieri, a Republican, began the year with an effort to eliminate all of the Ocean State’s tax credit programs. Thanks to strong efforts by the Rhode Island Scholarship Advocates (RISA), however, Governor Carcieri reversed course—advocating for the preservation of the program. In the end, legislators from both parties agreed with the governor’s stance, preserving the $1 million program in its entirety.

In the battle to preserve and protect the nation’s oldest and longest-running school choice voucher program, Wisconsin school choice advocates succeeded in beating back challenges from a governor who has never supported the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP). Instead of adopting a proposed regime of overly burdensome regulations proposed by the governor and his allies—regulations that supporters believed would severely harm

Louisiana First Lady Supriya Jindal meets with two parents who support the Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence Program in 2009.

year in

review: 2009


the program’s ability to admit students and schools into the MPCP — school choice supporters agreed to a legislative compromise that requires additional testing and new government oversight.

Two Programs Still under SiegePennsylvania—another state with strong bipartisan support—suffered one of the

most significant setbacks of 2009 because of the Keystone State’s desperate financial situation. The program, which served nearly 45,000 children in 2008, was targeted for complete elimination by some legislators who sought to close “budget gaps.” The support of Democratic Governor Ed Rendell, State Senator Anthony A. Williams (D–Philadelphia), and State Representative Dwight Evans (D–Philadelphia), however, paid off—as the program escaped complete elimination and survived with what school choice supporters hope will be a temporary funding reduction.

Perhaps the most prominent fight in 2009 took place in Washington, D.C. Despite President Obama’s campaign promise to “fund what works, regardless of ideology,” his administration sent early signals that he intended to completely eliminate the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program—a voucher initiative for low-income students in Washington, D.C., who attend predominantly failing schools. As a result, D.C. activists—led by D.C. Parents for School Choice and local coalition leaders Kevin P. Chavous and Virginia Walden Ford—mounted an all-out effort to save the program.

On the morning of a rally that brought more than 2,000 families out to Freedom Plaza in the District, the Obama administration bowed to incredible pressure and agreed to preserve the program for students already receiving scholarships. Not content with this “compromise,” school choice leaders mounted a full-scale television, radio, newspaper, and Internet campaign to save the program, culminating in two dozen protests, events, and rallies and significant national news coverage. As of this writing, the outcome of the battle to save the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program is uncertain.

Florida Governor Charlie Crist meets students who receive Florida Tax Credit Scholarships through Step Up for Students, at a 2009 rally.

year

in

revi

ew: 2

009

School Choice Yearbook 2009-2010 15

Overview: SucceSSFul SchOOl chOice legiSlatiOn in 2009

State Legislation Arizona Creation of Scholarship Tax Credit Program for Special Needs & Foster Children

Elimination of Sunset on Corporate STO Program

Expansion of Corporate STO Program

Inclusion of Insurance Premium Taxes in Corporate STO Program

Allowance of Donations to STOs by Payroll Deduction

Florida Inclusion of Insurance Premium Taxes in Corporate Tax Credit Program

Indiana Creation of Scholarship Tax Credit Program

Iowa Inclusion of Corporate Taxes in Scholarship Tax Credit Program

Louisiana Appropriation of Additional Funds for Scholarships

Ohio Academic Accountability Provisions Added to Existing Voucher Programs

Rhode Island Restoration of Corporate Scholarship Tax Credit Program

Utah Expansion of Carson Smith Special Needs Scholarship Program

District of Columbia Extension of Funding for Opportunity Scholarship Program

year in

review: 2009


Dr. Howard Fuller, founder of the Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO), poses with children from Durham Nativity School in Durham, North Carolina.

School Choice Yearbook 2009–10 17

During 2009, the school choice movement saw the addition of a new state to the school choice family: Indiana. In addition, student enrollment continued its steady growth—to 179,721, a nearly 5 percent increase over 2008–09 and an 86 percent increase over five years ago (2004-05).

There are now 18 publicly funded private school choice programs operating in 11 states and the District of Columbia. These programs are evenly divided between school voucher programs (9) and scholarship tax credit programs (9). Of the 18 programs in existence, five are specifically designed to assist children with special needs.

In 2009, Florida eclipsed Pennsylvania to become the state with the most students enrolled in school choice programs. Arizona and Ohio are now tied (with three programs each) as the states with the highest number of school choice programs.

Growth and Expansion

gro

wth

and

expan

sion

2009–10 School Choice Data at a Glance

States (Including D.C.) with School Choice Programs 12

Scholarship Tax Credit Programs 7

Public Charter Schools 40

State with Special Needs / Foster Programs 5

Total Number of School Choice Programs 18

Number of School Voucher Programs 9

Number of Scholarship Tax Credit Programs 9

Special Needs/Foster Programs 5*

Total Students in School Choice Programs 179,721

Total Students: Scholarship Tax Credit Programs 115,642

Total Students: School Voucher Programs 64,079

Total Students: Special Needs / Foster Programs 24,555*

Total Funding Expended for School Choice Programs $606,097,380

Total Funding: Scholarship Tax Credits $236,316,848

Total Funding: School Vouchers $369,780,532

Total Funding: Special Needs / Foster Scholarships $168,135,462*

Average Scholarship Amount for School Choice Programs $3,373

Average Scholarship in Scholarship Tax Credit Programs $2,044

Average Scholarship in School Voucher Programs $5,770

Average Scholarship for Special Needs / Foster Programs $6,847

* Numbers under sections highlighted in yellow do not add up to the larger sums. Data is provided for reference.


180,000

160,000

140,000

120,000

100,000

80,000

60,000

40,000

20,000

02000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10

Recent Student Enrollment Growth in Targeted School Choice Programs

29,003

55,373

81,524

90,61396,528

108,705

126,519

158,725

171,478 179,721

gro

wth

an

d

expa

nsi

on

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

199

0

1991

199

2

199

3

199

4

199

5

199

6

199

7

199

8

199

9

200

0

200

1

200

2

200

3

200

4

200

5

200

6

200

7

200

8

200

9

Growth in States with Private School Choice Programs

wi wiwi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi wi

Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh

az az az az az az az az az az az az az

Fl Fl Fl Fl Fl Fl Fl Fl Fl Fl Fl

Pa Pa Pa Pa Pa Pa Pa Pa Pa

Dc Dc Dc Dc Dc Dc

ut ut ut ut ut

ri ri ri ri

ia ia ia ia

ga ga ga

la la

in

School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10 19g

row

th an

d

expansio

n

Washington

Oregon

Arizona

New Mexico

Texas

Oklahoma

Kansas

Colorado

Utah

Nevada

California

Idaho

Montana North Dakota

South Dakota

Nebraska

Minnesota

Iowa

Missouri

Arkansas

Mississippi

AlabamaLouisiana

Florida

Georgia

Tennessee

Wisconsin

Illinois IndianaOhio

Michigan

Kentucky

New Jersey

New YorkConn. R.I.

Mass.

N.H.

Maine

Wyoming

Pennsylvania

Virginia

VirginiaWest

Delaware

Washington, DC

Maryland

Vt.

Carolina

North Carolina

South

Alaska

Hawaii

States with Targeted Private School Choice Programs

12

10

8

6

4

2

0Vouchers Scholarship Tax Credits

18 Private School Choice Programs

5 General

8 General

99

4 Special Needs

1 Special Needs / Foster

Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice20g

row

th a

nd

ex

pan

sio

n

2009–10 Scholarship Recipients by State

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000

Florida

Pennsylvania

Arizona

Wisconsin

Ohio

Iowa

Georgia

Washington, D.C.

Louisiana

Utah

Rhode Island

46,900

44,839

32,001

20,328

18,654

9,624

1,319

3,968

1,195

602

291

> Justina and Shauna Mason When Florida mother Yvette Mason noticed that her daughters, Justina and Shauna, were losing focus at their public middle school, she wasted no time in exploring what other options were available to them. Unable to attend college herself, Yvette was determined that her twin daughters would follow a different path.

Yvette learned about the Step Up for Students Scholarship, which serves students from households with incomes that meet the standard for free and reduced–price lunch, and began researching private schools in her Orlando neighborhood.

Justina and Shauna were awarded Step Up scholarships to attend Agape Christian Academy, where the small class sizes and individual attention allowed them to academically thrive. “I ask a lot of questions,” says Shauna, “and the teachers really break it down for you. If you have trouble with something, they will be there to help you.”

Four years after they entered Agape Christian Academy, Justina and Shauna graduated as co-valedictorians with 4.0 grade point averages. Their shared goal of earning nursing degrees from the University of Central Florida is well within their reach, and because their mother was able to choose a school that provided a solid educational foundation, there is no limit to their future success.

21head of the class

“She AlWAyS ShoWed US ThAT yoU cAn’T go AnyWhere

WiThoUT An edUcATion,” JUSTinA SAyS of her MoTher.

“ThAT’S The MoST iMPorTAnT Thing To being SUcceSSfUl.”

head of the class22

> Tiffany dunston Eager to help her escape the limitations of her inner-city Washington, D.C., school, Tiffany Dunston’s aunt encouraged her to apply for an Opportunity Scholarship through a federally funded voucher program that allows low-income children to escape failing public schools.

“i STArTed PrAying every dAy becAUSe i didn’T WAnT To

go To A neighborhood School,” TiffAny SAyS.

Tiffany’s prayers were answered when she enrolled in the freshman class at Archbishop Carroll High School in Washington, D.C.

Tiffany noticed a difference in the new learning environment immediately. “The way people act toward each other, the activities, the curriculum,” she says. “That’s the difference — Carroll has limited distractions.”

Unwilling to allow this opportunity to be wasted, Tiffany excelled in the classroom and on the basketball court.

Tiffany attributes her drive to honoring the memory of her cousin, James, who was shot and killed at age 17. “He was going to be the first college graduate in my family, but he died before his opportunity. Now I’m trying to step in his shoes, to finish what he started.”

In 2008, Tiffany graduated as the valedictorian of her Archbishop Carroll class. She is currently a sophomore at Syracuse University, where she is majoring in biochemistry.


Pennsylvania’s Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) Program, supported by a broad bipartisan coalition, is a huge success. Just ask Sekou, a sixth grader.

“I’m grateful I can get a good education at a private school such as Nativity School because of the scholarship support I received. If you’re smart, when you finish college, all your degrees will help you make enough money to take care of your family…” he says.

24 Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choiceh

ow

it

wo

rks

vOucher PrOgramSEducation vouchers are the method of public education funding that empowers parents

by allowing public money to follow their children to the public or private schools of their choice. There are a wide variety of targeted school voucher programs in existence today.

Types of K-12 Voucher Programs

Means-tested voucher programs are targeted to low-income families who meet specific income criteria, typically around 185 percent of the federal poverty guideline.

Existing programs for Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program low–income students (means-preferenced)

Milwaukee Parental Choice Program

Louisiana’s Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence Program (also a failing schools program)

D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program

Failing schools voucher programs are targeted to children in low-performing public schools.

Existing programs Ohio’s Educational Choice (EdChoice) Scholarship Program

Louisiana’s Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence Program (also means-tested)

Special education voucher programs are targeted to children with special educational needs. Typically, they require the student to have an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to qualify.

Existing programs Florida’s McKay Scholarship for Students with Disabilities Program

Georgia Special Needs Scholarship Program

Ohio’s Autism Scholarship Program

Utah’s Carson Smith Special Needs Scholarship

How It Works

School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10 25h

ow

it wo

rks

How It Works

Foster child voucher programs are targeted to children in foster care, who, because of their frequent changes of address, are often forced to change schools many times over the course of their K-12 education (no existing programs).

G.I. Junior voucher programs are targeted to children in military families, who often live on bases or in areas with high concentrations of failing schools (no existing programs).

Universal voucher programs allow all children, regardless of their family income, where they live, or any other criteria, to participate. In effect, this type of program serves to separate the government financing of education from the government operation of schools. It can be means-preferenced so that poorer families receive larger vouchers (no existing programs).

Scholarship Tax Credit ProgramsScholarship tax credit programs provide individuals and/or corporations with tax credits

for charitable contributions to nonprofit organizations that grant children scholarships so that they can attend the public or private schools of their parents’ choice.

Rather than being operated by the government, these scholarship programs are run by nonprofit, tax-exempt, scholarship granting organizations. The scholarships do not originate from state appropriations, but from private charitable donations made under the provisions of the tax code. Accordingly, they are not funded by public agencies.

» Typically, laws require that eligible families meet certain income criteria. » Scholarship granting organizations use their own criteria for distributing scholarship monies

to eligible students. » States monitor these organizations to ensure financial accountability. » Depending on the state, these organizations are referred to as Scholarship Organizations (SOs),

School Tuition Organizations (STOs), Scholarship Granting Organizations (SGOs), Student Scholarship Organizations (SSOs), or Scholarship Funding Organizations (SFOs).

» Scholarship tax credit programs are available in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island.


Silas and Shayla, pictured with their grandmother, Maria, are now students at Victory Christian Academy in Lakeland, Florida, through a Step Up for Students Scholarship.


Myth vs. Reality

ho

w it w

orks

In their efforts to preserve the status quo and protect their political power, opponents spend a lot of money perpetuating myths about school choice. Take a few minutes and read the truth! Then, join with the Alliance for School Choice as we fight the distortions and work to bring school choice to your state.

myth School choice drains funds from public schools.

reality School choice helps public schools. Studies have consistently demonstrated that public schools benefit from the existence of voucher and tax credit programs. In addition, with private school choice programs, school districts retain a portion of the funding for each child who leaves the public system — even though the district no longer has to educate the student.

myth Private school choice violates the separation between church and state.

reality The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that appropriately designed private school choice programs are fully constitutional.

myth School choice is just a Republican, right-wing issue.

reality School choice is truly a bipartisan issue. Prominent Democratic supporters of private school choice include: Senator Dianne Feinstein, Senator Robert Byrd, Senator Joe Lieberman, Newark Mayor Cory Booker, former D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams, Louisiana State Senator Ann Duplessis, and former U.S. Representative Carrie Meek. Furthermore, a majority of school choice programs enacted over the past five years have been approved by a Democratic legislative body or signed by a Democratic governor.

myth Students don’t learn more because of school choice.

reality When you look at the credible research available on several school choice programs in places like Milwaukee, Washington, D.C., Florida, and Cleveland, you will see that in every case, students who participate in these programs produce higher academic achievement than their peers in public schools. Parent satisfaction is extremely high, and students love their new schools.


myth There is no accountability in school choice programs.

reality The vast majority of private schools have rigorous evaluation criteria, and every private school choice program has accountability provisions — such as testing and reporting — in addition to being continually accountable to parents. Schools also have to qualify for participation in most school choice programs. School choice advocates also support smart accountability provisions in state laws—such as fair testing and program assessment — to ensure that the academic successes of students are measured and reported.

myth The problem with private school choice is that schools won’t be required to accept children.

reality The people who run private schools want to help children, especially disadvantaged children and children with disabilities. Many private schools are built just to help children and families who are most in need. Several successful private school choice programs are designed specifically to provide much-needed support to children with special needs, and most other school choice programs focus on children from low-income families.

myth School choice means abandoning public schools.

reality Public schools are an integral part of American society and, in many cases, offer a quality education for our children. But when public schools don’t work—or don’t work for your child—don’t you deserve another option? In reality, school choice does not always mean that people have to choose private or religious schools. Public schools, including charter schools, are an important part of the school choice movement. The school choice movement seeks access to better schools for children, whether traditional public schools, charter schools, or private schools.

myth School choice hurts (or is opposed by) teachers.

reality No matter where students are being educated, there will always be a need for high-quality teachers. And more choices in schools also means more choices for teachers. School choice could likely lead to more teaching jobs as schools hire more teachers to lower class sizes to make their schools more attractive to students and parents. And studies demonstrate that a plurality of public school teachers actually support well-designed school choice programs.

myth School choice allows the best students to abandon the public schools.

reality Students who are doing poorly in public schools are most likely to take advantage of school choice programs. Generally, students who succeed in a school see no need to switch schools. Studies also demonstrate that most parents—regardless of their income—make good choices when provided with school options.

ho

w i

t w

ork

s


Louisiana Sen. Ann Duplessis (D-New Orleans, right) and Rep. Austin Badon (D-New Orleans, left) meet with families who benefit from the Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence Program at a 2009 Baton Rouge rally.


Milwaukee Voucher Students Graduate at Higher Rates than Public School PeersStudents who receive vouchers from the nation’s oldest school voucher program — the

Milwaukee Parental Choice Program — graduate at an 18 percent higher rate than students in the Milwaukee Public Schools.

“The findings, from a leading national expert who analyzed six years of data, estimate that 3,352 additional Milwaukee students would have received diplomas between 2003 and 2008 if public school graduation rates had matched those of low-income students using educational vouchers,” School Choice Wisconsin said.

The graduation rate for voucher students was 77 percent, compared with 65 percent for public school students.

The Wall Street Journal hailed the report and said that President Obama, who has promised to “fund what works” in education, should “take another look at Milwaukee, where the nation’s oldest and largest publicly funded school voucher program is showing academic gains.”

D.C. Voucher Program Yields “Largest Achievement Impact” for Any Federal Education ProgramStudents who receive D.C. school vouchers demonstrated “the largest achievement impact of

any education policy program yet evaluated” by the U.S. Department of Education, according to studies released in 2008 and 2009 by the Institute for Education Sciences (IES) and education next. Specifically, students who received vouchers made statistically-significant gains in reading. In fact, voucher students gained approximately 3.1 months of additional learning in reading over their public school peers.

As education Week’s Debra Viadero wrote, “What’s missing from all the media coverage, though, is the fact that this study is another one of the randomized controlled studies that the IES has been rolling out in recent years…[M]ost of those studies are finding few, if any, program effects. So the fact that the D.C. program is beginning to yield positive academic results may be especially noteworthy.”

Florida Scholarship Recipients Make the Grade for a Third the Cost of Public SchoolsDespite costing “less than any other K-12 option that Florida funds,” the Florida Tax Credit

Scholarship Program is educating some of Florida’s students at strong levels. In fact, students who receive scholarships from the tax credit program are keeping pace with their public school peers in the state.

School Choice Yields Student GainsreSearch recaP

rese

arch

rec

ap


According to a June 2009 report by University of Florida professor David Figlio, “The typical student participating in the program tended to maintain his or her relative position in comparison with others nationwide. It is important to note that these national comparisons pertain to all students nationally, and not just low-income students.”

New Study Reveals Private School Teachers More Satisfied than Public CounterpartsPrivate school teachers are likely to feel safer, be more satisfied with their jobs, and have

more influence over their teaching environment than public school teachers, according to a recent study conducted by the Foundation for Education Choice.

According to the teachers themselves, those working in private schools are more than twice as likely as those in public schools to feel that they have “a great deal of influence on performance standards for students.” And 60 percent of private school teachers say they have “a great deal of control” over what they teach, compared to 36 percent of public school teachers.

School Choice Yields Student Gains

Alexanne would like to attend Villa Joseph Marie High but knows that her family does not have the money to send her there without a scholarship through Pennsylvania’s Educational Improvement Tax Credit program. “I hope that someday I will have the privilege to attend this high school, which would help me achieve my future goals,” she says.

research recap


School Choice Saves Tax Dollars

rese

arch

rec

ap

With America recovering from the worst economic crisis in decades, voters across the country are becoming increasingly wary of education plans with steep price tags—especially when the majority of U.S. states face overwhelming budget shortfalls. In addition, legislators and families are understandably worried about how tightening state budget belts will impact education.

According to research, however, school choice programs can provide a workable solution to states that want to improve the quality of education and save tax dollars. In fact, there exists a significant body of research demonstrating that existing and proposed school choice programs save millions of dollars for taxpayers each year. Here are just six examples:

Arizona Arizona is saving $11.4 million annually because of the corporate tax credit scholarship program, according to a study sponsored by the Institute for Justice. The report was based on an analysis by the state’s Joint Legislative Budget Committee and showed that every student who would transfer from a public school to a private school because of the program would save the state’s general fund $5,000 in one year.

Florida The Corporate Tax Credit Scholarship Program saved $1.49 in state education spending for every $1.00 of tax credits awarded to businesses that donated funds to Scholarship Funding Organizations in 2007–08, according a legislatively required fiscal analysis of the program. This latest analysis of the program is the third showing that it saves money.

Georgia & Indiana The two-year-old Georgia Scholarship Tax Credit Program is estimated to save taxpayers approximately $5.9 million a year, and the Indiana Scholarship Tax Credit Program is slated to save the state anywhere from $6.4 million to $17.6 million per year after five years of operation, according to studies by the Indiana-based Foundation for Educational Choice.

Pennsylvania Taxpayers directly saved $144 million over six years because of the Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) program, according to a study by the Indiana-based Foundation for Educational Choice. In addition, the Commonwealth Foundation for Public Policy Alternatives estimates that if all the children receiving scholarships between the 2001-02 school year and the 2006-07 school year attended public schools instead, it would have cost the state an additional $1.5 billion dollars over those years.

reSearch recaP


School Choice Saves Tax Dollars

research recap

Wisconsin The Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) saved taxpayers between $24.6 million and $37.2 million each year from 2007–09, according to a state analysis. In addition, the state’s nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimated that school districts outside of Milwaukee received a net of nearly $86 million in additional state funding for the 2007-08 school year because of the MPCP. In other words, if the program was eliminated, districts would have had to raise property taxes if they wanted to recoup the lost funding.

When analyzed in the abstract, school choice proposals also save money.

For example, the CATO Institute recently revealed a new tool that allows individuals to determine the savings that states would realize if they instituted statewide scholarship tax credit programs. Looking at five states in particular—Illinois, New York, South Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin—authors Andrew Coulson and Anca M. Cotet demonstrate that over a 10-year period, each of the states would have a net savings ranging “from $1.1 billion for South Carolina to $15.9 billion for Texas.”

Florida Step Up for Students scholarship recipients with legendary football coach and school choice supporter Don Shula and his wife, Mary Ann.

34 Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice

A Washington, D.C., mother attends a protest at the U.S. Department of Education to raise awareness about the need to save the endangered D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program.

School Choice Yearbook 2009 – 10 35state pro

files

State Profiles Arizona 36–38

Florida 39–40

Georgia 41–42

Indiana 43

Iowa 44

Louisiana 45

Ohio 46–48

Pennsylvania 49

Rhode Island 50

Utah 51

Wisconsin 52

Washington, D.C. 53

a note on methodology The following pages contain data and research regarding each of the publicly funded private school choice programs operating in the United States. The information on these pages was generated through rigorous research into state laws and regulations, updated most recently in February 2010. Enrollment and expenditure data was provided by state officials, who were contacted on several occasions by Alliance researchers for information, clarification, and updates. In instances when this information was not available from a state agency or organization, numbers were estimated—using historical averages and trend data—by Alliance for School Choice researchers in collaboration with other national school choice leaders. Please see the Sources and Credits section for a state-by-state breakdown of data sources, uses, and estimations.


Arizona

stat

e pr

ofi

les

inDiviDual SchOOl tuitiOn OrganizatiOn tax creDit

Program TypeIndividual scholarship tax credit

Student Eligibility » None specified in law » May be determined by School Tuition Organization (STO) » Private school students also eligible

STO Requirements » Use at least 90 percent of contributions for scholarships » Make scholarships available for more than one school » Annually report to the state data on accepted contributions, grants awarded, and

participating schools

School RequirementsComply with state private school regulations, including nondiscrimination and health and safety requirements

Scholarship CapNone

Tax Credit Value100 percent of donation

Donor Tax Credit Cap » $500 single » $1,000 married couple

Statewide CapNone. $55.2 million expended in 2009-10 school year

Year Enacted1997

Student Participation

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

128

3,365

15,081

18,049

19,559

20,134

21,146

22,529

24,678

27,153

28,321

28,933

Data Update

Scholarships Awarded 28,933

Schools Participating 373

STOs Operating 55

2008 Donations $55,269,528


cOrPOrate SchOOl tuitiOn OrganizatiOn tax creDit

Program TypeCorporate scholarship tax credit

Student Eligibility » Family income cannot exceed 185 percent of the federal free or reduced-price lunch

program limit ($75,467 for a family of four in 2009) » Attended public school the previous year or entering kindergarten

STO Requirements » Use at least 90 percent of contributions for scholarships » Make scholarships available for more than one school » Annually submit to the state:

∏ Data on accepted contributions, grants awarded, and participating schools ∏ Proof of independent review of financial statements by a certified public accountant

School Requirements » Comply with state private school regulations, including nondiscrimination and health

and safety requirements » Require teachers to be fingerprinted » Annually administer and make publicly available the aggregate results of nationally

norm-referenced, standardized achievement test

Scholarship Cap » $4,400 – grades K-8 » $5,700 – grades 9-12 » Limits increase by $100 each year


Donor Tax Credit CapNone

Statewide Cap » $17.28 million

(FY 2010) » 20 percent annual

increase each year

Year Enacted2006

Arizona Arizona


0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

35

1,947

2,967

2,596

Data Update



STOs Operating 19

2009 Expenditures $6,575,907

state profiles


lexie’S law

Program TypeCorporate scholarship tax credit program for children with special needs and foster children

Student Eligibility » Students who received vouchers under Arizona’s two previous voucher programs (for foster

children and children with disabilities) receive priority in scholarships » Students must have attended a government-run public school as a full–time student for

100 days prior to the fiscal year » Students must:

∏ have been placed in foster care at any time before the student graduates from high school or obtains a GED, OR

∏ have been identified as having a disability under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act or identified by a school district as a child with a disability, or a student eligible to receive disability services from a school district

School Tuition Organization (STO) Requirements » STOs must use 90 percent of contributions for scholarship » STOs must be nonprofit organizations and have a 501(c)(3) designation by the Internal

Revenue Service » An STO cannot limit the scholarships it provides under the program to children attending

a particular school or group of schools

School Requirements » Schools must not discriminate on the basis of race, color, handicap, familial status, or national

origin, and that satisfies the requirements prescribed by federal law for private schools

Scholarship Cap » Shall not exceed the cost of tuition for the student to attend a private school » Scholarships cannot exceed the amount that it would cost the state to send the child to

an applicable public school

Donation CapNone

Tax Credit Value » Donors will receive a 100 percent credit for their donations,

allowing for $5 million in credits allowed if $5 million is donated » Tax credits are provided on a first-come, first-served basis. » Tax credits can be carried over from year to year.

Statewide Cap$5 million

Year Enacted2009

stat

e pr

ofi

les


0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

40

359

439

472

Data Update

Scholarships Awarded 472

Schools Participating 107+


Arizona


Florida


0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

2

970

5,013

9,130

13,739

15,910

17,300

18,273

19,852

20,530

19,913

JOhn m. mcKay SchOlarShiP FOr StuDentS with DiSabilitieS PrOgram

Program TypeSpecial needs voucher

Student Eligibility » Have Individualized Education Program (IEP) » Attended a Florida public school the previous year » Children of U.S. military personnel transferring are

exempt from prior year public school attendance requirement

School Requirements » Be approved by state department of education » Submit to the state annual sworn compliance reports regarding all local and state health and

safety codes » Comply with federal nondiscrimination requirements of 42 U.S.C. s. 2000d » Teachers and other school personnel working with scholarship recipients must have federal

background check » Teachers must have a bachelor’s

degree, three years of teaching experience, or special expertise

» Schools in operation less than three years must obtain a surety bond or letter of credit to cover value of the scholarship payments for one quarter

» Annually report student’s progress to parents

Enrollment CapNone

Scholarship Cap » Whichever is less:

∏ amount of public school funding student would have received, or

∏ selected private school’s tuition and fees

Program Funding » No specific program appropriation » $129.8 million spent in 2009-10

school year

Year Enacted1999

state profiles

Data Update




Arizona



0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000

2002–03

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

15,585

11,550

1o,549

15,123

17,819

21,493

24,871

26,987

Data Update



SFOs Operating 2


FlOriDa tax creDit SchOlarShiP PrOgram


Student Eligibility » Qualify for the federal free or reduced–price lunch program

($40,793 for a family of four in 2009) » Attended a Florida public school the previous year or entering

kindergarten or first grade

Scholarship Funding Organization (SFO) Requirements » Use at least 97 percent of donations for scholarships » SFOs with less than three years worth of audits must use 100 percent of donations for

scholarships » Make scholarships available for more than one school » Submit to the state:

∏ Financial and compliance audit performed by certified public accountant ∏ Quarterly reports on number of scholarship recipients and participating schools

School Requirements » Be approved by state department of education » Submit to the state annual sworn compliance reports regarding all local and state health and

safety codes » Comply with federal nondiscrimination requirements of 42 U.S.C. s. 2000d » Teachers and other school personnel working with scholarship recipients must have federal

background check » Teachers must have a bachelor’s degree, three years of teaching experience, or special expertise » Schools in operation less than three years must obtain a surety bond or letter of credit to cover

value of the scholarship payments for one quarter » Scholarship students must take a nationally recognized norm-referenced test or the state public

school assessment

Scholarship Cap » $3,950 for private school scholarship » $500 scholarship covering transportation

to another public school

Tax Credit Value 100 percent of donation

Donor Tax Credit Cap75 percent of state income tax liability

Statewide Cap $118 million

Year Enacted 2001

stat

e pr

ofi

les

Florida


geOrgia SPecial neeDS SchOlarShiP PrOgram

Student Eligibility » Attended a Georgia public school the previous year » Have Individualized Education Program (IEP)

School Requirements » Notify state regarding intention to participate » Demonstrate financial viability » Comply with federal nondiscrimination requirements of 42 U.S.C. s. 2000d » Comply with state health and safety requirements » Be accredited or in the process of becoming accredited » Teachers must have bachelor’s degree or three years’ experience in education or health » Provide parents with teachers’ credentials » Report to parents and state regarding students’ academic progress


∏ amount of public school funding student would have received, or ∏ selected private school’s tuition and fees

Enrollment CapNone

Program Funding » No specific appropriation » $7.1 million spent in 2009–10

school year

Year Enacted2007 Student Participation

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

899

1,596

2,068

Data Update




state profiles

Florida Georgia


Data Update


Schools Participating Not available

SSOs Operating 11


geOrgia SchOlarShiP tax creDit PrOgram

Program Type Corporate and individual scholarship tax credit

Student EligibilityAttended a Georgia public school in previous year or entering pre-kindergarten or kindergarten

Student Scholarship Organization (SSO) Requirements » Use at least 90 percent of contributions for scholarships » Make scholarships available for more than one school » Annually submit to the state:

∏ Data on accepted contributions and tax credits approved ∏ Independent review of financial statements by certified public accountant

School Requirements » Be accredited or in the process of becoming accredited » Comply with the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 » Comply with all state private school regulations, including health and safety codes

Scholarship Cap Tuition and fees


Donor Tax Credit Cap » $1,000 single » $2,500 married couple » 75 percent of corporation’s state

income tax liability

Statewide Cap $50 million

Year Enacted2008

stat

e pr

ofi

les


0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

2009–10 1,900

Georgia


Indiana

cOrPOrate & inDiviDual SchOlarShiP tax creDit PrOgram

Program TypeCorporate and individual scholarship tax credit

Student Eligibility » Eligible families must have an income at or below 200 percent of the free or reduced–price

lunch level ($81,586 for a family of four in 2009) » Eligible students will have to have been enrolled in a public school the prior year or be

entering kindergarten

Scholarship Organization (SO) Requirements » SOs must be nonprofit organizations and have a 501(c)(3) designation by the Internal

Revenue Service » An SO cannot limit the scholarships it provides under the program to children attending

a particular school or group of schools

School Requirements » Non–public schools must be accredited by a national or regional accreditation agency that

is recognized by the state board » Schools must administer a nationally recognized and norm-referenced assessment of the

school’s students » The Department of Education will publish an annual list of accrediting agencies and an annual

list of nationally recognized and norm-referenced assessments

Scholarship CapNone

Donation CapNone

Tax Credit Value » Donors will receive a 50 percent credit for their donations, allowing for $2.5 million in credits if

$5 million is donated » Donors cannot carryover credits from year to year

Statewide Cap$2.5 million in credits

Year Enacted2009

please note that the Indiana Department of Education and the State Department of Revenue are promulgating additional rules on how the Scholarship Tax Credit program will operate, including interpretations of program components.

state profiles

Georgia


inDiviDual SchOOl tuitiOn OrganizatiOn tax creDit

Program TypeIndividual scholarship tax credit

Student Eligibility » Family income must not exceed 300 percent of federal poverty guideline ($66,150 for a family

of four in 2009) » Private school students also eligible

School Tuition Organization (STO) Requirements » Use at least 90 percent of contributions for scholarships » Make scholarships available for more than one school » Annual review of financial statements by public accounting firm » Submit data to the state on accepted contributions, grants awarded, and participating schools

School Requirements » Be accredited » Comply with federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Iowa Chapter 216 » Comply with state health and safety codes

Scholarship CapSchool’s tuition


Donor Tax Credit Cap None

Statewide Cap $7.5 million

Year Enacted 2006

Iowa


0 2,500 5,000 7,500 10,000

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

116

7,527

8,737

9,624

Data Update



STOs Operating 11

2009 Donations $11,394,228

stat

e pr

ofi

les


StuDent SchOlarShiPS FOr eDucatiOnal excellence PrOgram

Program TypeMeans-tested and failing schools voucher

Student Eligibility » Family income cannot exceed 250 percent of federal poverty guideline ($55,125 for a family of

four in 2009) » Entering grades K-3 » Attended an underperforming public school in previous year or entering kindergarten » One additional grade level of eligibility will be added each year

School Requirements » Be approved by the state to participate » Comply with state nondiscrimination and health and safety requirements » Administer state exams required under the Louisiana School and District System

to scholarship recipients » Schools in operation less than two years cannot have more than 20 percent of students

receiving scholarships » Submit to the state an annual independent financial audit conducted by a certified public

accountant


∏ 90 percent of state and local per pupil funding, or ∏ tuition, fees, and costs associated with testing

Enrollment CapNone

Year Enacted 2008

LouisianaIowa

Data Update





0 500 1,000 1,500

2008–09

2009–10

640

1,195

state profiles


Data Update




Ohio


0 2,500 5,000 7,500

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

1,994

2,914

3,674

3,797

4,523

5,281

5,887

5,813

6,116

6,273

5,849

5,469

5,710

3,406

clevelanD SchOlarShiP anD tutOring PrOgram

Program TypeMeans-preferenced voucher

Student Eligibility » Students living in the Cleveland Metropolitan

School District » In grades K-8 when first applying » Priority given to students living below 200 percent of

the federal poverty guideline ($44,100 for a family of four in 2009)

» Scholarship may continue throughout high school » Private school students also eligible

School Requirements » Be registered to participate and chartered by the Ohio

Department of Education » Meet state minimum standards for chartered

non-public schools, including administering the Ohio Graduation Test

» Comply with state laws regarding nondiscrimination and health and safety codes

Scholarship Cap » 90 percent of $3,450 for low-income students ($3,150) » 75 percent of $3,450 for other students ($2,587.50)

Enrollment CapNone

Program Funding$14.9 million spent in 2009-10 school year

Year Enacted1995

stat

e pr

ofi

les


autiSm SchOlarShiP PrOgram


Student Eligibility » Student must be identified

as autistic through assigned school district

» Must be assigned an Individualized Education Program (IEP)

» Private school students also eligible

School Requirements » Register with the state » Demonstrate fiscal soundness » Have properly credentialed staff » In operation one full year » Have adequate liability, property,

and casualty insurance certified by a certified public accountant

» Obtain surety bond or letter of credit to cover value of scholarships

» Teachers and other staff working with children must undergo background checks

» Comply with state nondiscrimination and health and safety codes

» Provide regular student progress reports to parents and school

Scholarship Cap $20,000

Enrollment CapNone

Program Funding » No specific appropriation » $25.6 million expended in 2009-10 school year

Year Enacted 2003

Ohio

Data Update




300

475

734

1,005

1,500

state profiles

Ohio



0 2,500 5,000 7,500 10,000 15,000

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

2,713

7,144

10,432

11,685

Data Update




eDucatiOnal chOice SchOlarShiP PrOgram

Program TypeFailing schools voucher

Student Eligibility » Current public school students assigned to a school that has been in Academic Watch or

Academic Emergency for two years of a three–year period » Students scheduled to enter kindergarten in one of these schools also qualify » Priority is given to returning and low–income applicants

School Requirements » Be chartered by the Ohio Department of Education » Meet state minimum standards for chartered non-public schools, including administering

the Ohio Graduation Test » Administer state tests in grades 3-8 » Comply with state laws regarding nondiscrimination and health and safety codes

Scholarship Cap » $4,500 – grades K-8 » $5,300 – grades 9-12 » Scholarship must be accepted as full tuition for students living under 200 percent of

federal poverty guideline ($44,100 for a family of four in 2009)

Enrollment Cap 14,000

Program Funding » No specific appropriation » $42.5 million spent in 2009-10 school year

Year Enacted 2005

stat

e pr

ofi

les

Ohio


Pennsylvania


0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000

2001–02

2002–03

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

**Includes SOs that provide Pre–K scholarships.

17,350

20,204

25,875

26,701

29,638

36,730

43,764

44,839

Data Update



SOs Operating 353**

2009 Donations $49,274,290

eDucatiOnal imPrOvement tax creDit


Student Eligibility » Family income cannot exceed $60,000, with an additional $12,000 allowed for each

additional dependent » Private school students also eligible

Scholarship Organization (SO) Requirements » Use at least 80 percent of

contributions for scholarships » Make scholarships available for

more than one school » Submit to the state an annual

report detailing donations received and scholarships awarded

School Requirements » Comply with the federal Civil

Rights Act of 1964 » Teachers and other employees

working with children must undergo background checks

» Meet state health and safety codes

Scholarship CapTuition and fees

Tax Credit Value » 75 percent of one-year

donation » 90 percent of two-year

donation

Donor Tax Credit Cap $300,000


Year Enacted2001

state profiles

Ohio


Rhode Island


0 100 200 300

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

278

291

291

rhODe iSlanD cOrPOrate SchOlarShiP tax creDit


Student Eligibility » Family income cannot exceed 250 percent of the federal poverty guideline ($55,125 for a family

of four in 2009) » Other criteria determined by Scholarship Granting Organization » Private school students also eligible

Scholarship Granting Organization (SGO) Requirements » Use at least 90 percent of contributions for scholarships » Provide annual report to state detailing number and value of scholarships awarded, ZIP codes

of recipients, and criteria used to award scholarships

School Requirements » Comply with federal and state laws regarding nondiscrimination » Teachers must have bachelor’s degrees » Teachers must undergo background check » Meet state health and safety codes

Scholarship CapNone

Tax Credit Value » 75 percent of one-year donation » 90 percent of two-year donation

Donor Tax Credit Cap$100,000


Year Enacted2006

stat

e pr

ofi

les

Data Update



SGOs Operating 3



carSOn Smith SPecial neeDS SchOlarShiP


Student Eligibility » Be identified as disabled and learning under Individualized Education Program (IEP), or » Currently attending eligible private school and be determined in need of specialized services

School Requirements » Be approved by the state » Comply with federal nondiscrimination requirements of 42 U.S.C. s. 2000d » Comply with state health and safety codes » Submit to the state an audit and financial report completed by a certified public accountant » Possess adequate working capital to maintain operations for the first year » Disclose to parents the special education services to be provided and the cost of those services » Administer annual assessment of student’s academic progress and report results to the

student’s parents » Teachers of recipients must have bachelor’s degrees, three years of teaching experience,

or special skills » Provide parents with teacher’s credentials

Scholarship Cap » Based on state’s public school funding

formula ∏ $6,442.50 – three or more hours of services

∏ $3,865.50 – less than three hours of services

Enrollment CapNone

Program Funding $3.5 million

Year Enacted2005

UtahRhode Island


0 100 200 300 400 500 600

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

107

340

548

582

602

Data Update



2009 Expenditures $2,670,195 state profiles


Wisconsin


0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000

1990–91

1991–92

1992–93

1993–94

1994–95

1995–96

1996–97

1997–98

1998–99

1999–00

2000–01

2001–02

2002–03

2003–04

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

337

504

591

718

786

1,320

1,606

1,501

5,740

7,596

9,104

10,391

11,209

12,788

14,427

15,274

17,126

18,550

19,414

20,328

Data Update




milwauKee Parental chOice PrOgram

Program Type Means-tested voucher

Student Eligibility » Students living in the Milwaukee Public

School district » Family income below 175 percent of the

federal poverty guideline ($38,587 for a family of four in 2009)

» Private school students also eligible

School Requirements » Meet state nondiscrimination policies » Allow students to opt out of religious

programs » Administer a nationally normed test

to scholarship recipients in grades 4, 8, and 10 and provide scores to School Choice Demonstration Project

» Receive accreditation within three years of participating in MPCP

» Annually submit to the state a financial audit conducted by a certified public accountant

» Provide the state evidence of sound fiscal practices and financial viability

» School administrator must undergo financial training

» Meet all state health and safety codes


Enrollment Cap22,500

Program Funding$130.1 million for 2009–10

Year Enacted1990

stat

e pr

ofi

les


Washington, D.C.Wisconsin


0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

2004–05

2005–06

2006–07

2007–08

2008–09

2009–10

1,022

1,712

1,799

1,933

1,716

1,319

Data Update




D.c. OPPOrtunity SchOlarShiP PrOgram

Program TypeMeans-tested voucher

Student Eligibility » Qualify for the federal free or reduced–price lunch program ($40,793 for a family of four

in 2009) » Priority to students who attend schools deemed in need of improvement, corrective action, or

restructuring under the federal No Child Left Behind Act » Low-income students in other public schools are given second priority » Students currently attending private school are given third priority » Scholarship recipients are required to participate in standardized assessments as part of a five-

year federal evaluation of the program

School Requirements » Must not discriminate » Comply with district health and safety codes


Enrollment CapNone

Program Funding$12 million

Year Enacted2004

state profiles


Alliance for School ChoiceAllianceForSchoolChoice.org

American Federation for ChildrenFederationForChildren.org

American Legislative Exchange CouncilALEC.org

Black Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO)BAEO.org

The CATO InstituteCATO.org

Center for Education ReformEdReform.org

Council for American Private Education (CAPE)CapeNet.org

Democrats for Education ReformDFER.org

The Foundation for Educational ChoiceFriedmanFoundation.org

Heartland InstituteHeartland.org

Heritage FoundationHeritage.org

Hispanic Council for Reform & Educational OptionsHCREO.org

Institute for JusticeIJ.org

National Alliance for Public Charter SchoolsPublicCharters.org

State Policy NetworkSPN.org

National School Choice Organizations

nat

ion

al

sch

oo

l ch

oic

e o

rgan

izat

ion

s


ArizonaAZ School Tuition Organization AssociationASTOA.com

FloridaStep Up for StudentsStepUpForStudents.com

GeorgiaCenter for an Educated GeorgiaEducatedGeorgia.org

IndianaSchool Choice IndianaSchoolChoiceIndiana.org

IowaIowa Alliance for Choice in EducationIowaACE.org

LouisianaLouisiana BAEOLouisiana.BAEO.org

MarylandBOASTBOASTMaryland.org

MinnesotaCoalition for KidsMisf.org/coalition-for-kids.php

MissouriChildren’s Education Alliance of MissouriChildrensEducationAlliance-MO.org

New JerseyExcellent Education for EveryoneNJE3.org

New MexicoEducate New MexicoEducateNM.org

North CarolinaParents for Educational Freedom in NCPEFNC.org

OhioSchool Choice OhioSCOhio.org

PennsylvaniaREACH FoundationPASchoolChoice.org

Rhode IslandRhode Island Scholarship AllianceRIScholarshipAlliance.org

UtahParents for Choice in EducationChoiceInEducation.org

VirginiaSchool Choice VirginiaSchoolChoiceVA.com

Washington, D.C.D.C. Parents for School ChoiceSaveSchoolChoice.com

WisconsinSchool Choice WisconsinSchoolChoiceWI.org

National School Choice Organizations State School Choice Organizations

state sch

oo

l cho

ice o

rgan

ization

s


Throughout 2009, the school choice movement generated more publicity for school voucher programs than any other time since the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark case Zelman v Simmons Harris in 2002.

The reason? School choice was placed in a national spotlight when Congress and President Obama announced their intention to eliminate the highly successful D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, a move that sparked massive backlash in the District and across the country.

Backed by local Democrats and national supporters — including Senators Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Robert Byrd (D-WV), former Mayors Anthony Williams and Marion Barry—the D.C. coalition immediately responded to the president’s decision to eliminate the OSP, launching a yearlong campaign to save the program.

An estimated 6,000 attendees participated in more than a dozen D.C.–area events, including a May 6 rally on Freedom Plaza, demonstrations in front of the U.S. Department of Education, and a major rally on Capitol Hill. In addition, parents made trips to visit key members of Congress on an almost daily basis, and school choice supporters launched a $700,000 advertising program to support the program, featuring former D.C. Councilman and Alliance board member Kevin P. Chavous.

As a result of the heightened attention, newspapers across the country came together in support of school choice. For example, The Washington Post and The Washington Times were, for the first time in recent memory, on the same side of an issue, as were USA Today and the Wall Street Journal.

The following editorial, reprinted with permission from USA Today, provides a good example of how one newspaper can move — in just two years — into a favorable position on school choice.

The Fight for Real Hope in D.C.highlight

A student from Washington, D.C., participates in one of a dozen protests to protect the District’s endangered voucher program from Congressional elimination.

hig

hli

gh

t:

the

fig

ht

for

re

al h

ope

in

d.c

.

The Fight for Real Hope in D.C.


May 19, 2009

Few national images are more shameful than those of innocent, low-income kids milling through decrepit public schools, uncared for, unsafe and barely educated. In Washington, D.C., alone, 173 schools — 67% — fail to meet federal standards of learning.

So it was curious that when President Obama recently allowed 1,716 of Washington’s neediest schoolchildren to keep, until graduation, the vouchers they use to escape their failed public schools for higher-quality private ones, he also closed the program to new applicants. All this occurred as the Education Department reported that voucher participants show superior skills in reading, safety and orderliness. The news was buried in an impenetrable study released without a news conference.Why the ambivalence? Because teacher unions, fearing loss of jobs, have pushed most Democrats to oppose vouchers and other options that invite competition for public schools. Put another way, they oppose giving poor parents the same choice that the president himself — along with his chief of staff and some 35% of Democrats in Congress — have made in sending their children to private schools.Vouchers have improved the math and reading of inner-city children from Dayton, Ohio, to Charlotte, N.C., various studies show. The Washington vouchers improved the reading of girls and younger kids by about half a school year, though results for other groups were iffier. Yet opposition is so fierce that few voucher experiments survive past the seedling stage.

Florida vouchers were blocked by a party-line vote in the state Supreme Court. In Utah, they were killed by a union-funded anti-voucher campaign.

This serves only to protect failing schools.By federal measures, students at 12,978 U.S. schools are failing to improve adequately — 13% of the

total. Giving them another option, by vouchers or by other means, provides an escape route and pressures public schools to improve.

Charter schools are another well-proven option for attaining the same goal, and they are gaining in popularity. About 1.2 million students now attend the schools, which are taxpayer-funded and publicly chartered but run by independent operators. The ones requiring strict order, regular testing and more school time have succeeded in raising their low-income students’ academic performance above public-school peers.Yet 26 states restrict either the number of charter schools or charter students, and many local authorities and unions hobble their formation and funding.

In time, the success of the school choice movement might change the political dynamics. Meanwhile, public schools are at least being held accountable under the federal No Child Left Behind Act. The federal requirement that schools make testable, yearly progress in student performance has driven improvements in math and reading for most age groups, the latest National Assessment of Educational Progress shows. Measuring teacher performance is the next step. Expanded by President Obama, Bush-era “pay-for-performance” is sure to improve schools — as long as requirements aren’t weakened.As an Education Department spokesman says, “The unions are not happy.” But 20 million low-income school kids need a chance to succeed. School choice is the most effective way to give it to them.

Our view on improving education: Despite success, school choice runs into new barriers.

Obama, Democrats deny D.C. kids option they exercise themselves.

The Fight for Real Hope in D.C.highlight

58 Fighting for Opportunity Alliance for School Choice

Paid for by D.C. Parents for School Choice

“Thousands of children use the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program to go to better schools. The program lets

D.C. parents like me choose the best schools for our kids. But President Obama and Congress want to end this

program, even though it works. Why does President Obama—who used a scholarship to go to private schools

himself—want to deny low-income children the same opportunities he enjoyed? It makes no sense. President

Obama and Congress can do the right thing and save the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program. My daughter

deserves the chance to realize her dreams, just like President Obama saw his come true.” — Sheila Jackson

President Obama, I’ll do anything to make sure my child gets a good education.

Why won’t you help?

It’s not about politics. It’s about their dreams. www.SaveSchoolChoice.com

Speak Up. Tell President Obama and Congress:

ASC_ExpressAd_1026.indd 1 10/26/09 9:33 PM

» D.C. Parents for School Choice Executive Director Virginia Walden Ford addresses a crowd of 35 reporters at a press conference outside the U.S. Department of Education on September 8, 2009. The event was covered by FOX News.

» CNN anchor Kyra Phillips shows viewers how to use the “Save School Choice” Web site, August 20, 2009.

» D.C. Parents for School Choice criticized President Barack Obama and Congressional appropriators in a series of television, radio, and newspaper advertisements.

hig

hli

gh

t:

the

fig

ht

for

re

al h

ope

in

d.c

.

The Fight for Real Hope in D.C.


The authors of fighting for opportunity: School choice yearbook 2009–10 utilized information from a variety of sources in developing this annual publication. To maintain the flow of the document without interruption, the sourcing for the book is provided in this section.

The authors remain enormously grateful, specifically, to the state officials and school choice organizations that participated in our rigorous information-gathering and data mining process. Their dedication and hard work have helped to make the Alliance for School Choice’s information and data unparalleled in its accuracy. In addition, we are incredibly thankful for the assistance and support of Greg Brock, Scott Jensen, and John Schilling through the research and writing process.

PhOtOgraPhS anD teStimOnialS

All of the photographs and testimonials that appear in fighting for opportunity: School choice yearbook 2009–10 were provided by school choice organizations across the country. We are enormously grateful to the following organizations for providing photographs and stories for use in this publication:

TOPS for Kids (Harry Miller), Step Up for Students (Jon East), Center for an Educated Georgia (David Pusey), Iowa Alliance for Choice in Education (Trish Wilger), Louisiana BAEO (Shree Medlock), Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina (Darrell Allison), School Choice Ohio (Chad Aldis), REACH Foundation (Erin Loudenslager), Rhode Island Scholarship Alliance (Kate Nagle), Parents for Choice in Education (Judi Clark), D.C. Parents for School Choice (Virginia Walden Ford, Kevin P. Chavous), School Choice Wisconsin (Susan Mitchell, George Mitchell, Mike Ford), and the Institute for Justice (Lisa Knepper, Bob Ewing, and Christina Walsh). We would also like to credit and thank the national review for use of some of Tiffany Dunston’s quotations in our “Head of the Class” feature.

reSearch recaP: SchOOl chOice yielDS StuDent gainS

Milwaukee “graduation rates for choice and Public School Students in Milwaukee, 2003-2008,” John Robert Warren, University of Minnesota, Study, February 2010. “new Study: graduation rate for Milwaukee voucher Students 18 % higher Than for Public School Students,” School Choice Wisconsin, News Release, February 2, 1010. “Milwaukee’s Voucher Graduates,” The Wall Street Journal, Editorial, February 7, 2010

D.C. “The evaluation of the dc opportunity Scholarship Program: impacts After Three years,” Institute of Education Sciences, Study, March 2009. “lost opportunities,” education next, Article, August 2009. “d.c. voucher Students begin to nudge Ahead,” Debra Viadero, education Week, Article, April 6, 2009.

Florida “evaluation of florida’s corporate Tax credit Scholarship Program,” David N. Figlio, University of Florida, Study, June 16, 2009. “florida Tax credit Scholarship: let the evidence speak,” Florida Tax Watch, Article, 2010

Teachers “What America’s Teachers Say about Teaching in Public and Private Schools,” Foundation for Educational Choice, Study, 2009

reSearch recaP: SchOOl chOice SaveS tax DOllarS

“fiscal Analysis of Arizona’s corporate Tax credit Scholarship Program,” Vicki Murray, Institute for Justice, Study, September 26, 2006. “School choice by the numbers: The fiscal effect of School choice,” Susan Aud, Foundation for Educational Choice, Study, April 2007. “The dollars and Sense of School choice,” Mary Yoder and Jared Walczak, Commonwealth Policy Brief, Article, July 2007. “The florida corporate income Tax credit Scholarship Program: Updated fiscal Analysis,” Collins Center for Public Policy, Study, February 2007. “The fiscal impact of Tax-credit Scholarships in georgia,” Brian Gottlieb, Foundation for Educational Choice, February 2008. “The fiscal impact of a large-Scale education Tax credit Program,” Andrew Coulson, Cato Institute, July 1, 2008. “The fiscal impact of the Milwaukee Parental choice Program: 2009 Update,” Robert Costrell, University of Arkansas, Report, March 2009

State PrOFileS

Arizona individual School Tuition organization Tax credit. Amount of funds donated is for 2008, provided by state revenue office; student enrollment number is an ASC estimate based on historical average scholarship amounts. State contact: Georganna Meyer, Arizona Department of Revenue. corporate School

Sources and Credits

60so

urc

es a

nd

cr

edit

s

Sources and CreditsTuition organization Tax credit. Amount of funds donated is for 2009, provided by state revenue office; student enrollment number is an ASC estimate based on historical average scholarship amounts and spending by STOs, reflecting an approximate 12 percent decline in donations. State contact: Georganna Meyer, Arizona Department of Revenue. lexie’s law. Numbers for expenditures and student enrollment are based on the assumption that students were covered by Lexie’s Law when the two previous voucher programs were concluded.

Florida John M. McKay Scholarship for Students with disabilities. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by state department of education’s school choice Web site and program quarterly reports; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historical averages multiplied by current enrollees. State contact: Laura Harrison, Florida Department of Education. florida Tax credit Scholarship Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by state department of education’s school choice Web site and program quarterly reports; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historical averages multiplied by current enrollees. State contact: Laura Harrison, Florida Department of Education.

Georgia georgia Special needs Scholarship Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009 and was provided by the state department of revenue via the Center for an Educated Georgia (CEG); expenditures are ASC estimates based on historical average scholarship amounts. georgia Scholarship Tax credit Program Student enrollment numbers were provided by the Center for an Educated Georgia for 2009, based on a survey of STOS; funds donated is for 2009 and is based on information provided via CEG from the state department of revenue.

Iowa individual School Tuition organization Tax credit. Student enrollment numbers and expenditure/donation information provided by the State Department of Revenue for 2009. State Contact: Jim McNulty, Taxpayer Services and Policy.

Louisiana Student Scholarships for educational excellence Program. Student enrollment numbers and expenditure/donation information provided by the State Department of Education for 2009 via ASC staff. State Contact: Mary Cavalier, Louisiana Department of Education.

Ohio cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by state department of education; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historical averages multiplied by current enrollees. State Contact: Susan Cosmo, Ohio Department of Education. Autism Scholarship Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by the state department of education via School Choice Ohio; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historic averages multiplied by current enrollees. educational choice Scholarship Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by state department of education; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historical averages multiplied by current enrollees. State Contact: Susan Cosmo, Ohio Department of Education.

Pennsylvania educational improvement Tax credit. Student enrollment numbers and expenditure/donation information provided by the State Department of Education for 2009. State Contact: Ted Knorr, Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development.

Rhode Island rhode island corporate Scholarship Tax credit. Information provided by the Rhode Island Scholarship Alliance (RISA); this program is fully subscribed.

Utah carson Smith Special needs Scholarship. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by state department of education; funds expended is an ASC estimate based on historical averages multiplied by current enrollees. State contact: Travis Rawlings, Utah Department of Education.

Wisconsin Milwaukee Parental choice Program. Student enrollment numbers and expenditure/donation information provided by the State Department of Education for 2009. State contact: Molly Koranda, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.

Washington, D.C. d.c. opportunity Scholarship Program. Student enrollment data is for 2009, provided by the Washington Scholarship Fund (WSF); expenditure information is for 2009 provided by WSF and Congressional appropriation.

School Choice Yearbook 2009-10 61so

urces an

d

credits

allianceforschoolchoice.org1660 L Street, NWSuite 1000 Washington, DC 20036 Phone 202.280.1990Email [email protected]

school choice yearbook 2009–10

Documents

school choice advocates

school choice movement

favor of school choice

school choice supporters

promise of school choice

favor of school vouchers

opportunity alliance

educational opportunity