NSBA's Voucher Strategy Center reviews new report on D.C. voucher program
February 7, 2005
Review of "Flaws and Failings" (People for the American Way special report)
The bottom line: As with the other few programs around the country, this report indicates the realities of the D.C voucher program have so far failed to match the lofty rhetoric promised by advocates. It has done little to benefit its supposed target group – low-income students attending struggling public schools. No academic evaluation on the program has been started because of the low interest among public school students. And private schools have been permitted to retain admissions standards and charge tuition and fees beyond the $7,500 voucher – policies that can effectively screen out disadvantaged students.
More details:
1. Although the legislation says students attending D.C. public schools labeled in need of improvement under NCLB are to receive first priority for vouchers, only 74 students – out of more than 1,300 vouchers awarded – attended such a school in the previous year.
2. Roughly three times as many vouchers (200) went to students already attending private schools – and many more vouchers could have been granted to private school students (more than 500 current private school students applied) but were not because of the expected political / public fallout that would create.
3. As with other voucher programs, participating religious schools can discriminate against students with disabilities. They do not have to admit such students. This has been proven to occur in Cleveland and Milwaukee’s voucher programs as well.
4. In addition to being permitted to maintain their admissions standards (a screening out process), participating private schools also are permitted to charge voucher students tuition and fees above and beyond the $7,500 voucher, which serves as another screening out system for disadvantaged students. In other words, participating private schools can still pick which students they want to take and which ones they don’t.
5. A full-blown marketing and outreach plan (including cold calls to families whose children attend D.C. public schools “in need of improvement”) failed to generate much interest among public school students and their families.
6. Because of the small number of applicants, the required academic evaluation of the program has been delayed, and officials with the Department of Education are concerned that too few applicants in future years may make any evaluation statistically invalid.