GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Ken Hirsh

Charter School Expenses 2009

Like we did last year, Ken Hirsh and I used the 2008-2009 financial audits to calculate charter school expenses per pupil for the 77 charter schools operating during the year. This provides a sense of how much charter schools are spending, using funds from philanthropy and other sources, above the $12,432 per pupil provided by the city Department of Education. We’ve found this number is often elusive or non-existent, so we’ve tried to rectify that situation here.

Our main findings were that while total charter school expenses increased over the past year by 8 percent per pupil, the average amount spent by each charter school above the base level provided by the DOE was 13 percent less than in 2007-08. This could be partly be due to the decline in per pupil philanthropy, a trend we detailed in an earlier post, but we can’t be sure. The workbook with all our calculations is available here.

The total expenses for the 77 schools were $342,825,475 compared to $236,230,149 in 2007-2008 — a 45% increase, largely reflecting the significant increase in the number of charter school students. The per-pupil expenses for 2008-2009 were $14,456 — $1,095, or 8 percent more, than in 2007-2008. For the 2008-09 school year, the “base funding” per pupil, i.e. the fixed amount per pupil received from the DOE regardless of demographics, was $12,432. So spending on the average student was $2,024 above the base amount. This is $314 less than the $2,338 spent above the base in 2007-2008. Thus, while the base funding amount increased by 13 percent, from $11,023 to $12,432, the amount charter schools spent above these numbers was actually 13 percent less in 2008-09. Unlike in our philanthropy analysis, if you analyze  charter schools by those with CMOs, EMOs, or CGOs, the numbers are similar across the board.

These expense numbers include an estimated value of the services rendered by charter management organizations for the benefit of the school as well as other in-kind services, such as free legal help or subsidized rent.  Since DOE space is given free to traditional public schools, it is not included in expense calculations for schools that are housed in public space. (It should be noted that some schools, such as the Carl C. Icahn Charter School in the Bronx, do estimate the value of the space provided to them by the DOE.) CMOs may also incur some fundraising expenses that are not listed in the annual financial reports of individual charter schools, so the fundraising numbers we list in our spreadsheet are, at best, incomplete.

Similarly, the numbers do not include the value of other services provided free by the DOE to both charter and traditional public schools like transportation, custodial services, and utilities. Additionally, we did not consider the demographics of the population served (i.e. ELL, Special Education, etc). A school like Opportunity Charter School, which serves a large special education population, spent $27,844 per pupil —almost twice the average. In the future we hope to perform an analysis that takes these characteristics into account.

Obviously it would be interesting to compare these numbers to traditional public schools; however the comparison is complicated by some of the same issues discussed above.

Some additional notes:

1. We subtracted out KIPP To College costs because these amounts are not used for current students. This is their alumni program.

2. We averaged across KIPP schools for per pupil expenses. KIPP seems to run some network-wide expenses through KIPP Academy.

3. We removed the New York Center for Autism.

4. We included fundraising expenses (although we broke them out on our spreadsheet for those who are curious to see how much charter schools spend on fundraising).

As always, we’d love to get feedback from charter school operators and informed readers so that we can improve this analysis!

UPDATE: This post has been updated to note that the fundraising numbers in the spreadsheet are likely to be incomplete.

  • http://www.classsizematters.org leonie haimson

    question: did you look at the area of management fees? Some EMO’s charge large per pupil fees, some not. Some also charge for their curriculum and/or training which goes back into their operations. This would be an interesting area to explore. Also can you explain the difference between CMOs, EMOs, or CGOs? thanks!

  • Kim Gittleson

    Leonie -
    We’re going to be publishing a survey of management fees soon, so stay tuned!
    As for CMOs, etc – apologies for not explaining. A Charter Management Organization (CMO) is a non-profit set up to help charter schools with backroom support–finances, HR, etc. CMOs include KIPP and Achievement First. An Educational Management Organization (EMO) is a for-profit enterprise that provides many of the same services as a CMO. These include Victory Schools and Edison Schools. The difference in services varies between CMOs and EMOs–each contract is different. A Community Grown Organization (CGO) is a charter school without a larger management organization that is usually founded by parents or teachers in a community. CGOs make up the bulk of charter schools in New York City. Hope that helps!

  • http://www.classsizematters.org leonie haimson

    thanks! very helpful.
    Two more questions: are recruitment expenses considered part of the operating costs? and how much did Carl C. Icahn Charter School in the Bronx estimate for the value of the space provided to them by the DOE — and was this included in its operating costs?

  • Kim Gittleson

    Hi Leonie -
    Recruitment costs are included in operating costs. For instance, St. Hope Leadership Academy lists $3,144 for advertising and recruitment costs. Some schools break this out, whereas other schools presumably include it but don’t list it on a separate line.
    The Carl C. Icahn Charter school estimated the value of the space that the DOE gives them to be worth $14.7 million dollars and listed it as an in-kind donation. This is depreciated over a period of 30 years. They therefore list as part of their operating expenses $489K in depreciation. We did not subtract this out of their overall expenses. If you subtract the depreciation, the cost per pupil at Icahn 1 (this does not apply to the other two Icahn schools) is $13,543 instead of $15,102. Thanks for pointing it out!

  • Matthew

    Kim,

    I wonder about these data when I see that Dream Charter had 99 kids and reportedly spent $21,000 per pupil (above what they got from the DoE in public finding?) in 2009.  

    I know this school – maybe not perfectly – but there’s no way this place looks like Trinity or Phillips Exeter.  Yet that’s the level that this kind of spending would suggest, no?  They are co-located in a public elementary school in East Harlem (PS 38) , they have  staff that probably costs them $1.2 to $1.5 mil, plus benefits. So I wonder how could they be spending that kind of money.

    I’m certainly not try to shoot the messenger or dump on Dream. But if you find one exception, you start to question the broader data set. Keep up the good work, but watch out for outliers.

  • ugh

    One thing this does confirm is that charters spend far LESS per pupil than traditional schools at $18000+ BEFORE capital expenses. Charters thus SAVE NY Taxpayers money AND deliver better performance. Ms Haimson, if you support reduced class size and Charters have lower class size for less money, why don’t you strongly support more public charter schools, the savings could go to straight to UFT coffers and everyone would be happy.

  • http://www.classsizematters.org leonie haimson

    Ugh (great name!) I believe that all NYC chldren deserve the benefits of smaller classes — not just those who happen to attend charter schools. We need systemic improvement of our public schools — including class size reduction, which our state’s highest court said was necessary for NYC children to receive their consitutional right to an adequate education. To the extent that more and more school organizations are shoved into overcrowded school buildings, this becomes increasingly difficult to achieve.

  • Pingback: SBC Charter Roundup 81 – Schools Building Communities

  • dirk

    Useful data, but I would again argue towards trying to understand the nuance, for instance the issue of DREAM Charter, which had high alloaction per pupil. Part of that is the school is designed to be a fully inclusive school that can support a range of special education needs. Practically this means very low staff/student ratio with a high percentage of Sped certified teachers and lots of support staff. They also drew a very high needs population, based on IEPs, and receive higher reimbursements for those children receiveing extensive services, finally and arguably most importantly they are engaged in a capital campaign for a private building eventually, which I assume is included here, though it will not really go towards operations in the way it is typically thought of. There are also some somewhat structural distortions, in that there is a large federal gratn available to most new schools (historically 450-750K) so that should level the palying field some between cmo and cgo schools (for the first 2 years), and it will also generally mask the differences in fundraising capaicity between young schools and older ones. Would be great to see more analysis of the data, though, as I caution I think sometimes there are issues behind it that you need to understand to really see what is going on.

  • GGW

    Do you have any data on what are the main cost drivers that explain the nyc charters spending $14,456 per kid and nyc traditional district schools spending about* $18,000 per kid?

    Ie, is it lower salaries for younger teachers, or lower salaries for same age teachers, or fewer non-teachers, or fewer non-core teachers (gym, art, health, etc)? Is it that the district holds on to big chunks of the $18,000 so regular schools get less than $14,456 per kid? What are the biggies?

    Thank you.

    *I don’t know the right number. I see $18.34 billion for 2007-08 for 1,042,100 kids on the state website.

  • dirk

    To the point of big cost savers, I would argue against generalizing but. According to an analysis done by empowerment schools, charters spend significantly less on back office services per pupil. In terms of staffing, generally I would say that charters hire younger teachers, pay them a little more than the UFT scale but have slimmer benefit packages. There are some charters that have very experienced teaching staffs and obviously some are union. Charters often get services through third party CBOs (arts providers, etc) which are often at least partly subsidized.

  • Matthew

    Education Sector did a pretty good analysis of the primary cost categories for charter schools.  

    It is not as detailed as Kim and Ken’s work on NYC but the report is a good compliment and might inform this discussion further.  Their goal was to assess the challenges to scalability among charter operators, rather than determine if the playing field between charters and traditional public schools is level or not. 

    I imagine many of the regular posters ot this site will find points with which they agree (for example that educating more challenging student populations is costly).

    http://www.educationsector.org/research/research_show.htm?doc_id=1090702

      

  • http://sleepingmask.us/ Karl Beckius

    thanks!You made some good points there. I did a search on the topic and found most people will agree with your blog

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Follow GothamSchools

RSS

Feb. 10: You’re invited!

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

35 comments so far today

Our Twitter Updates

  • Tension seen among diff protest grps Says #OWS organizer: "We're letting the UFT do its own thing." Union organizing "People's PEP" #nycpep 11 mins ago
  • We've started our #nycpep liveblog: Stay tuned here: http://t.co/ai26enhL 19 mins ago
  • Edu-Tweeples, is there a hash tag everyone is using for tonights PEP meeting? Suggestions? #0209PEP ? 1 hr ago
  • Conflict of Interest Board "could have lost the power to enforce the City’s ethics law against all unionized employees of the City." 2 hrs ago
  • Tenured teachers and principals can now be fined by the city's ethics board, a judge ruled today. Previously, only DOE could fine violators. 2 hrs ago
  • More updates...

Archives

February 2012
M T W T F S S
« Jan  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829  
?>