Georgia: Getting more than it pays for in K-12 Education

As part of the sideshow that is Governor Deal's proposal for an "Opportunity School District," I was struck by a post by Charlie Harper, "Income Inequality Begins with Education Inequality." Students deserve every opportunity for success, but it is painfully obvious that--Mr Harper's opinion notwithstanding--not all schools are equal.

Jarod Apperson on his Grading Atlanta blog provides an excellent analysis of the relationship between higher poverty and lower performance. In "Bending the Curve: Why CCRPI Mislead Educators and Parents,"  Jarod's point is not to excuse low performance due to poverty; rather, he uses his analysis to reveal outliers, those schools that outperform the trendline, despite the challenges facing their students. Those are the Georgia schools we should be seeking to emulate  Likewise, and as importantly, he shows where schools that are not "failing" are still underperforming their peers. But these schools get a free pass under the OSD proposal. It is this kind of keen analysis that is missing from Governor's Deal's appropriation of a 10-year-old Recovery School district model and its absolute 60-point failure demarcation.

Something that did particularly strike me was the statement that Georgia spends a far greater portion of its budget on K-12 education (24%) than any of the neighboring states, with the distinct implication that we are not seeing "a positive return on this sizable investment." But after a decade of K-12 education "austerity cuts," how could this possibly be? I did my own analysis using FY2013 budget numbers from the National Association of State Budget Officers [NASBO], and damn... Georgia is right there behind North Carolina in share of budget dedicated to K-12 education:

State	K-12 Share
North Carolina	24.8%
Georgia	24.1%
Alabama	20.4%
Kentucky	19.6%
Florida	19.3%
Louisiana	19.3%
Tennessee	17.8%
South Carolina	17.6%
Mississippi	16.4%
Arkansas	15.6%
Virginia	15.1%
West Virginia	10.5%

Still something didn't quite seem right, but then it struck me. I had just read this brilliant post on transportation spending: "Georgia's Budget Fat More Myth than Reality." Georgia's spending per capita is "downright lean" compared to most of our neighbors. So looking at total state expenditures and dividing by the state populations shows a uniquely different picture:

State	Per Cap State Expend
West Virginia	$12,062.74
Arkansas	$ 7,229.38
Mississippi	$ 6,182.87
Louisiana	$ 5,875.03
Kentucky	$ 5,816.98
Virginia	$ 5,493.08
Alabama	$ 5,056.32
Tennessee	$ 4,655.58
South Carolina	$ 4,595.57
North Carolina	$ 4,334.79
Georgia	$ 4,203.48
Florida	$ 3,215.71

But that then raises the question: if each state has a different population of students in K-12 education, how does Georgia's 24% of a lean state budget compare with these other states on  a per student basis?

State	State per student exp
West Virginia	$8,376.07
Louisiana	$7,386.24
Kentucky	$7,358.93
North Carolina	$7,020.79
Arkansas	$6,858.20
Alabama	$6,780.74
Mississippi	$6,211.69
Georgia	$6,003.75
Virginia	$5,458.99
Tennessee	$5,346.63
South Carolina	$5,282.89
Florida	$4,541.57

Georgia ranks 8th among 12 southeastern states in the amount of funding provided from the state.  Also note that Governor Deal's poster child for the Opportunity/Recovery School District, Louisiana, spends substantially more in state dollars per student.

Now if there was any way to quantify the outcomes.....  Of course there are many ways to assess academic achievement, but the Ed Week Quality Counts annual report does provide a rating for K-12 Achievement on its 2015 grading summary. (The Achievement Index "assesses the performance of a state’s public schools against a broad set of 18 indicators capturing: current achievement levels, improvements over time, and poverty-based disparities or gaps.") The Achievement Index scores range from Massachusetts (83.7) to Mississippi (57,1), with Georgia above the national average and third in the southeast.

State	Quality Counts-ACH	State per student exp
Florida	75.8	$4,541.57
Virginia	74.2	$5,458.99
Georgia	70.7	$6,003.75
Kentucky	70.3	$7,358.93
North Carolina	69.8	$7,020.79
Tennessee	68.8	$5,346.63
Arkansas	66.7	$6,858.20
South Carolina	62.6	$5,282.89
Alabama	62.2	$6,780.74
West Virginia	60.8	$8,376.07
Louisiana	59.8	$7,386.24
Mississippi	57.1	$6,211.69

So what is the takeaway from all this? First, citing education spending as a percentage of a very slim budget might advance a narrative, but it does very little to illustrate the reality of funding for Georgia's schools. Second, not only have Georgia's schools exceeded at doing more with less, they have continually improved overall, and rank third among 12 southeastern states in an objective, third-party measure of achievement.  Do we still have a long way to go--absolutely.  Do we have pockets where schools struggle to meet the needs of their student? No doubt.

Most importantly--the Representatives of the Georgia General Assembly should carefully consider why they would implement an Opportunity School District based on a model of Louisiana's Recovery School District when that state--after ten years of the RSD--spends the second highest amount per student for the second worst result in the southeast.

Georgia GOP doubles down on diversion of public education funds

Time is running out on Republican plans to create a voucher system in Georgia. HB 243, the "Education Savings Account Act," had poor prospects of being recommended out of the Education Committee, so yesterday leadership recommitted it to the Ways and Means Committee in an attempt to slip it through this session. That action is appropriate, as this bill is less about education than it is about steering money to a select constituency.

Not surprisingly, the bill is cribbed almost verbatim from model legislation from ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council.

The act would allow students "enrolled and attending" a public school--or of age to start kindergarten or first grade--to redirect the funds that would been allocated for their education in the public schools into "savings accounts" to be used for private school tuition, tutoring, or possible post-secondary education. The Georgia Policy and Budget institute has predicted that this subsidy for private schools would balloon to $223 million by 2028.

This legislation represents another recurrence in a pattern of diverting funds from the public schools. When the Georgia Qualified Education Expense Tax Credit Program was passed in 2008, Georgia GOP Rep David Casas bragged that the wording of the legislation was deliberately twisted so that students could qualify by enrolling while not attending public schools. It took a very public shaming from the New York Times, the Southern Education Foundation, and even Rolling Stone magazine before the legislation was amended to actually require that recipients had actually attended public schools before they were "rescued." [Props to Rolling Stone for best title: "What a Scam: Poor Kids' Money Snatched by Private Schools!"]

What is most telling are the deviations that Rep Hamilton et.al. have made from the corporatist ALEC template.

The "model" ALEC legislation at least purports to consider the needs of impoverished students.  The ALEC bill suggests a full subsidy equal to what the public school would have expended IF a child qualifies for the free/reduced lunch program, dropping to 75% for a family earning 1.5 times the free/reduced qualifying income, ultimately scaling to 25% of public school funding amount if earning 2 to 2.5 times the free/reduced qualifying income. Earn three times the free/reduced qualifying income? No subsidy for you!

ALEC even includes an explanatory footnote that Rep Hamilton takes to heart:

iv] This particular set of proportions represent a framework for one approach to means-testing the scholarship amount.  Legislators should develop a formula that makes sense for their state.

Rep Hamilton neatly removes any reference to qualifying incomes or sliding scales. What "makes sense for Georgia" in Rep Hamilton's  estimation is to provide the same benefit to the offspring of millionaires as to the children of the poor.  No worries though.  The bill still includes language that the state should  "ensure that low-income families are made aware of the program and their options." More troubling is that I see nothing in the bill to indicate how recipients for this largesse will be selected.

At least there is a measure for accountability, right?  Looking back again at the Georgia GOP's record with the Opportunity Scholarship Program, Jay Bookman observed "Ga.’s private-school scholarship program is a mess," lacking any accountability measures for student learning.

ALEC included limited accountability measures to make their raid on public school funding taste less bitter: "Each year [PARENTS shall ensure that ]their eligible student takes either the state achievement tests or nationally norm-referenced tests that measure learning gains in math and language arts, and provide for value-added assessment." So how does that translate into HB 243? Like this:

The parent of a participating student shall:
Ensure that such student participates in all math and English/language arts nationally norm-referenced assessments administered by the participating school. 

While I hate to disagree with GBPI, there is NO requirement that these ESA students will take a state assessment. As the Georgia Milestones assessment is a state, not a nationally norm-referenced test, there can be NO comparison with performance in the public schools. Particpating private schools can shop around for the most favorable test while ensuring there will be no apples-to-apples comparison with public schools. And that growth model that is imposed on public schools for their evaluation?  Well, evidently growth models and value-added measurement are for suckers, not for the elite.

Incredibly, if a school taking these "scholarship" students performs poorly, there is no mechanism for eliminating them from participation in this funding bonanza due to poor academic performance.

The citizens of Georgia should recognize HB 243 for what it is, an absolutely shameless charade intended to divert funds from public school students to create a new entitlement for a very select constituency with very limited to no accountability.

Governor Deal's bandaid for hemorrhaging rural hospitals

After acknowledging the failure of Governor Deal's plan to convert rural hospitals to stand-alone emergency departments, the Rural Hospitalization Stabilization Committee has announced this year's new bandaid: a $3 million telemedicine pilot to link school nurses and EMTs to 4 locations that can still afford to have physicians and hospitals.

The RHSC report proposes that little to nothing be done to ensure lifesaving medical access for rural Georgians served by hospitals teetering on financial collapse.

The committee did acknowledge that rural hospitals are in a precarious state:

The Committee heard testimony that four rural hospitals have closed in recent months with total of eight having closed or attempted to reconfigure in last two to three years. Additionally, fifteen rural hospitals are considered financially fragile, with six operating on a day-to-day basis.

Governor Deal and the Georgia GOP refuse to consider a federally-funded expansion of Medicaid, while Georgia hospitals--particularly those in rural Georgia--are facing huge costs for reimbursed care:

• Phoebe Putney Health System of Albany-Dougherty County reported "$76 million in charges foregone and $28 million in estimated unreimbursed costs in 2014."
• In FY2014 Floyd Medical Center provided $64.9 million in unreimbursed care: $28.1 million of indigent charity care, $12.4 million in unreimbursed Medicaid, and $24.4 million in unreimbursed Medicare,
• South Georgia Medical Center in Valdosta reported $52 million in indigent and unreimbursed costs for 2013--up substantially from $44 million in 2012.

What is the result of the obstinacy of the governor and the Georgia GOP? A February 2015 Gallup poll marks Georgia with the second highest uninsured rate in the nation at 19.1%. Arkansas and Kentucky expanded Medicaid and led the nation in reduction of uninsured, with Arkansas dropping from 22.5% to 11.4% uninsured and Kentucky from 20.4 to 9.8% uninsured (Largely rural states that didn't expand Medicaid have highest number of uninsured residents).

The RHSC telemedicine pilot is a diversion--not a solution. It will not preserve access to healthcare for rural Georgians. Accepting the expansion of Medicaid would provide essential medical coverage for 288,000 Georgians, vastly improve the viability of rural hospitals, and provide $33 billion in increased federal funding to the state over the next 10 years (at a cost to the state of $35 million per year, according to GBPI). The grim reality is that hundreds of Georgians will die prematurely and needlessly if our state continues to adhere to this governor's failed vision for healthcare in Georgia.

****************************************************

Final note, as I worked on this post I found Jay Bookman's excellent post, Georgia Abandons its Rural Hospitals.  Jay makes a superb case for expansion in his post.