How much of the U.S. Dept. of Education’s $71 million gift to Ohio charter schools will go to waste and fraud?
Grant to Ohio raises questions over the federal Charter School Program’s grant making process
CPD ...
Grant to Ohio raises questions over the federal Charter School Program’s grant making process
CPD report on fraud, waste and abuse in charter schools
Following an announcement that the U.S. Dept. of Education will give $157 million in taxpayer funds to charter schools, Kyle Serrette, director of education at the Center for Popular Democracy, released the following statement:
“As our 2015 national report on the charter school fraud demonstrates, there are regulatory shortcomings that foster fraud, waste and abuse in charter schools. It is alarming that Ohio is the largest grantee. One would think that the sheer volume of fraud, waste, and mismanagement that has been documented in the state would have disqualified them from receiving this federal windfall. Our research has documented over $15 million in fraud, waste, or mismanagement, which means that thousands of children are being robbed of a quality education. Giving the Ohio charter schools $71 million makes no sense.
Some cases of Ohio fraud, waste, and mismanagement include:
Auditor Investigation: In January 2015, the state auditor released a report of the results of unannounced visits by inspectors to 30 charter schools. In nearly half of the schools, the school-provided headcount was significantly higher than the auditors’ headcount.
Greater Achievement Community Charter School: An Ohio state audit found that administrators at the Greater Achievement Community Charter School egregiously mismanaged public funds, sometimes using money for personal expenses. Between 2003 and 2010, the auditors found that Greater Achievement developer Elijah Scott diverted over $46,000 of public funds into his personal account. The school’s financial records could not adequately account for excessive cash withdrawals from ATMs and other sources and the school overall was found to have misspent at least $570,000. Source: http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index. ssf/2012/03/audit_finds_more_than_570000_i.html
Cincinnati College Preparatory Academy Charter School: After receiving an anonymous tip, the Ohio Auditor of State’s office investigated the Cincinnati College Preparatory Academy Charter School and found that administrators stole at least $148,000 of taxpayer money. Superintendent Dr. Lisa Hamm and school treasurer Stephanie Millard were indicted in March of 2013 on multiple criminal charges. The two are alleged to have used school funds to pay for things such as sightseeing tours through Europe, a $20,000 tour of California, and a Chicago trip to a Tina Turner concert, all under the guise of visiting schools to identify best practices or for professional development. Source: http://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/charterschool-officials-to-appear-in-court-for-allegedly-spending- 148k-in-school-funds
Many more instances of Ohio fraud, waste, and abuse can be found in our report.
Recently U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown blasted
Ohio's charter school system for having rampant waste and fraud. In a statement he said, "We want to make sure these charter schools effectively educate children," "Right now they're not.”
“It’s time to fix our broken charter oversight system. Sending millions of more dollars to states with broken charter schools laws will only exacerbate the fraud problem.” said Serrette
###
The Center for Popular Democracy promotes equity, opportunity, and a dynamic democracy in partnership with innovative base-building organizations, organizing networks and alliances, and progressive unions across the country. CPD builds the strength and capacity of democratic organizations to envision and advance a pro-worker, pro-immigrant, racial justice agenda.
Simplify Investments to Keep Them Clean
New York Times - May 11, 2014, Room for Debate: Connie Razza - Public pensions are under threat from outright fraud as well as the financial sector’s drive to generate higher profits for itself,...
New York Times - May 11, 2014, Room for Debate: Connie Razza - Public pensions are under threat from outright fraud as well as the financial sector’s drive to generate higher profits for itself, regardless of the cost to our communities. The public can take simple steps to eliminate this danger. Investments should be put in index funds, which typically outperform actively managed portfolios. A recent comprehensive study of the performance of state pension funds found that the 46 state funds studied could save $6 billion in fees annually, while achieving returns as good or better than their actively managed portfolios. Most privately managed pensions already pursue indexing strategies, through vehicles like Amalgamated Bank’s LongView Funds, and successfully secure strong retirement savings for participants. Public pension funds should index a significant portion of their funds under management to save billions while still generating first-rate returns.
Index funds outperform managed portfolios. Relying on them would save on fees and avoid underhanded behavior.
These funds would also save significant amounts in management fees by hiring talented in-house investment managers for significant portions of actively managed pension assets.
Any investment should be presented in plain language in a standardized, easy-to-read template, so trustees and pension participants know exactly what the product does, how it makes money and what its fees and risks are. Like cell phone agreements, all fees should be disclosed up front. Like credit card bills, actual returns and long-term, historical performance should be clearly presented. Oversight of fiduciaries should be bolstered and any who violate their responsibility to retirement funds should be pursued legally. When the State Employees Association of North Carolina hired a pension forensic investigator, they found that the state treasurer Janet Cowell had invested $30 billion in illegal, high-risk funds, causing $6.8 billion in losses. A more robust standing oversight body could have prevented much of that improper investment. The state should aggressively prosecute both pension trustees and private investment managers who put their own benefit above the interest of pension participants. More eyes on the management of retirement assets would help ensure responsible investment strategies and management. Creating a publicly managed pool of retirement funds would invest more residents in pension management, while ensuring that fewer workers would find themselves insecure in retirement. And, increased pension funds make possible more diverse, responsible investments for the actively managed portions of the funds. For instance, funds can take a decisive role in infrastructure investments that will both improve their communities and provide steady, long-term returns.
Source
Here Are the City Policies That Democrats Need to be Talking About
Here Are the City Policies That Democrats Need to be Talking About
This has been an incredibly disturbing election year: to a degree unprecedented in our lifetimes, hatred and xenophobia are being marshalled to support a reactionary nationalistic agenda. As...
This has been an incredibly disturbing election year: to a degree unprecedented in our lifetimes, hatred and xenophobia are being marshalled to support a reactionary nationalistic agenda. As leaders of Local Progress, a network of more than 500 progressive elected officials from cities and towns across the country, we stand together in support of a positive vision to make America great: economic inclusion, racial and gender equity, sustainable communities, and good government that serves the public interest.
This week, as Republicans and Democrats gather for their national conventions, Local Progress is releasing a national platform of our own. We adopted the platform on July 9 in Pittsburgh at our Fifth Annual Convening, which was attended by over 100 local elected officials from around the country and hosted by Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto.
Our platform lays out a series of practical and transformational steps that the federal government can take to promote strong, equitable cities. On an array of issues – from affordable housing and environmental protection to workers’ rights and police reform – we’ve identified strategies Congress and the executive branch can take to support, incentivize, and collaborate with local government officials like us who are trying to help our constituents build dignified and secure lives. You can read our full platform here.
With conservatives in control of Congress and a large majority of statehouses, many of the most important policy developments in recent years have come from the local level. In our cities of Minneapolis and New York, for example, we’ve passed paid sick days laws that guarantee workers time off to care for themselves and their loved ones. Earned sick time is a worker rights issue, but it’s also about gender and racial equity, because those previously lacking paid sick days are overwhelmingly women and people of color. Our cities are also confronting the affordable housing crisis with inclusionary housing laws; pushing for reform of our police departments to eliminate discriminatory policing and keep our communities safe; and shifting budget priorities to invest in the infrastructure, programs and services that help all of our constituents thrive.
These city policies have transformed the national discourse. Hillary Clinton’s support for a higher federal minimum wage is a testament to the power of the workers, community-based organizations, and policy advocates who set such a worthy goal and to Sen. Bernie Sanders, who did so much to build momentum for the issue and pull her along. But it’s also a testament to Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Washington DC, and other cities that have actually passed $15 minimum wages and are shifting the boundaries of mainstream discourse. The members of Local Progress have been at the frontlines of these fights in cities around the country, and we are proud to stand in the trenches with constituents who are working so bravely to build a more just society.
But the fact is that we cannot do it alone. The devastation wrought by the water crisis in Flint brought national attention to a reality being felt across the country: localities are starved of the resources they need to provide crucial services for their residents, particularly for low-income families and communities of color. As public servants, we believe in the power of government to improve the lives of our constituents. However, too often federal and state governments are an obstacle, not an aid, to advancing local policies that address these urgent issues.
In too many states, cities do not receive the financial resources they need to build strong schools, run proper public transit systems, or keep parks clean and safe. And we are often prohibited from passing laws to raise the revenue we need. Beyond financial constraints, many states are preempting cities’ ability to pass common sense regulations: smart gun safety laws, livable wages for workers (a limitation that affects New York City), and a just transition to a clean energy economy.
In short, we need the federal government to help us. Here are a few examples, drawn from our platform, that show how the next Congress and Administration can help city governments make a huge difference in our constituents’ lives:
The Department of Education can double down on investments in community schools that have been proven to reduce inequities, as well as restorative justice programs to help end the school-to-prison pipeline. And it can evaluate for-profit charter schools to determine whether they are exacerbating segregation and adhering to basic standards of accountability.
Congress can support the creation and preservation of affordable housing with a significant expansion of the Section 8 voucher program and public housing, as well as a stronger commitment to programs that prevent homelessness. And the Department of Housing and Urban Development can ensure the distressed mortgages it sells help the community – rather than Wall Street speculators.
The Department of Transportation can partner with cities to strengthen Vision Zero and “complete streets” initiatives that improve access to public transit and prioritize safety, sustainability, and racial and economic equity.
The Department of Labor can collaborate with cities to enforce labor standards and respond to the challenges created by the on-demand economy.
And, of course, the federal government must help eliminate the racially disparate impact of local policing and criminal justice systems. The Department of Justice should strengthen its oversight of local police departments, ensure that special prosecutors conduct investigations of alleged police misconduct, and curtail the transfers of military equipment to local departments. And it should incentivize the creation of alternatives to incarceration such as mental health and addiction services in both states and localities.
More than ever, we need strong cities and strong city leaders. The truth is that, right now, Congress is not working for the American people. Cities are leading the way, and will continue to do so. We hope that next year, with a new Congress and a President committed to inclusion, equity, and shared prosperity, Washington DC will give our nation’s cities the support we need to promote genuine social justice for America.
By RITCHIE TORRES AND LISA BENDER
Source
So-Called 'Common Sense' Immigration Plan Denounced as 'Mass Deportation Bill'
So-Called 'Common Sense' Immigration Plan Denounced as 'Mass Deportation Bill'
Following news on Wednesday that a bipartisan group of senators known as the "Common Sense Caucus" reached a deal on an immigration measure that would grant President Donald Trump's demands for...
Following news on Wednesday that a bipartisan group of senators known as the "Common Sense Caucus" reached a deal on an immigration measure that would grant President Donald Trump's demands for border wall funding and cuts to family reunification programs, immigrant rights groups denounced the proposed plan as a "mass deportation bill" and implored Democrats to vote against it.
Read the full article here.
Pennsylvania Groups Press For Quicker Action on Immigration Reform
CBS – September 5, 2013, by Cherri Gregg -
PHILADELPHIA (CBS) — As Congress gets ready to head back to Washington, a coalition of Pennsylvania advocates for immigration reform is holding a...
CBS – September 5, 2013, by Cherri Gregg -
PHILADELPHIA (CBS) — As Congress gets ready to head back to Washington, a coalition of Pennsylvania advocates for immigration reform is holding a series of events to send a clear message to area elected officials.
The events include town hall meetings, business roundtables, prayer vigils, and rallies in Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, Montgomery and other counties.
“This last week of events is just to send them back to Washington with a big push,” says Sundrop Carter, the lead organizer for Pennsylvania United for Immigration Reform. “Now is Congress’ opportunity to do the right thing — to pass comprehensive immigration reforms that provide a pathway to citizenship, workers’ rights, and reunification of families.”
Bucks County resident Celia Sharp came to the United States 40 years ago from Colombia because of civil unrest in her home country. Now a US citizen, she says reforms are necessary — especially in Pennsylvania, where immigrant populations are growing.
“This is a critical human rights matter, a national security issue,” she says.
Some of the upcoming regional events include the following:
Business Roundtable by Pennsylvania Immigration and Citizenship Coalition, Partnership for a New American Economy, Center for Popular Democracy, Welcoming Center for New Pennsylvanians:”Immigration Reform: Growing Pennsylvania’s Economy.” Thursday, Sept. 5, 12 noon, 200 S. Broad St., G. Fred DiBona Jr. Room, Philadelphia, PA Vigil for Immigration Reform and End Deportations Now by Pennsylvania United for Immigration Reform, JUNTOS. Monday, Sept. 9, 6:30pm, at 354 W Elm St, Norristown, PA March and Rally for Comprehensive Immigration Reform by Organizing for Action, Keystone Progress. Thursday, Sept. 12, 1pm, at Delaware Canal State Park, New Hope, PA Community Forum on Comprehensive Immigration Reform by Center for Popular Democracy, Grupo de Apoyo e Integración Hispanoamericano, Muhlenburg College. Thursday, Sept. 12, 7pm, at Muhlenberg College, 2400 W. Chew St, Seegers Union, Allentown PA.Source
Yet Another Subsidy for the Big Banks
But there’s a bigger risk-free payout the Fed makes to big banks, one set to rise exponentially as the economy improves. In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office, hundreds of billions...
But there’s a bigger risk-free payout the Fed makes to big banks, one set to rise exponentially as the economy improves. In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office, hundreds of billions of dollars that would otherwise go into the federal Treasury will leak out to banks, including branches of foreign banks, in the coming years. If Congress needs to find money to pay for new programs, they could cancel the Fed’s recent practice of paying interest on bank reserves.
For nearly 100 years, the Federal Reserve managed the nation’s monetary policy without paying interest on reserves, including the 10 percent of the value of loanswhich banks are required by law to park at the Fed. But in 2006, Congress passed the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act, authorizing interest payments. It was actually an old idea first promoted by conservative economist Milton Friedman.
Friedman thought that required reserves without compensation constituted a hidden tax on the financial industry. He also believed the strategy would make it easier for central banks to engage in monetary policy. If the Fed offered an interest rate on excess reserves just above the federal-funds rate (a.k.a. the rate banks use to lend to each other), then it makes more financial sense for banks to leave their money there. It sets a floor for the federal-funds rate, in other words, giving the Fed more control over its range. It also helps the Fed expand its balance sheet, critical to engaging in monetary interventions like quantitative easing.
Under the 2006 law, interest on reserves wasn’t supposed to kick in until 2011, but Congress moved up the date three years when it passed the law authorizing the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). The Fed set the interest rate on all reserves at a skinny 0.25 percent, which produces a small payout on required reserves. But excess reserves above the 10 percent requirement, which banks never left at the Fed until 2008, exploded as the Fed’s balance sheet expanded. From virtually nothing seven years ago, excess reserves hover around $3 trillion today.
Who owns these excess reserves? As the Cleveland Fed noted in a report last week, more than 80 percent come from the top 100 largest banks. U.S. branches of foreign banks, primarily from the European Union, have about $1 trillion in excess reserves parked at the Fed.
The Fed’s audited financial statement indicates that they have paid banks $25.2 billion in interest on reserves from 2008 to 2014. That number jumped from $2.1 billion in 2009 to $6.7 billion in 2014, a three-fold increase. The entire time, the interest rate has been the same: 0.25 percent. But that’s subject to change.
As the economy improves, the Fed is clearly angling to raise the federal-funds rate, which has been stuck around zero since 2008. Fed officials have already indicated they will accomplish this mostly through recalibrating interest on reserves. At theirSeptember 2014 policy meeting, Fed Chair Janet Yellen said the central bank would “move the federal-funds rate into the target range … primarily by adjusting the interest rate it pays on excess reserve balances.” While the interest rate on required reserves may stay constant, the Fed would raise the interest rate on excess reserves, allowing interbank lending only to rise so far.
In effect, interest on excess reserves is equivalent to the federal-funds rate. And the higher the interest rate goes, the more money banks make from the Fed. You can see this most clearly in Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projections of Fed remittances.
Any money the Fed makes on investments gets returned to the federal Treasury. And business has been good for the Fed of late. They remitted $99 billion in 2014 and a projected $102 billion this year. But CBO’s latest update predicts that number will fall drastically, to $76 billion in 2016, $40 billion in 2017, and just $17 billion in 2018. The lion’s share of the difference comes from the Fed paying out their earnings to banks, with higher interest on reserves as they hike rates.
While it’s hard to pinpoint the totals because the CBO doesn’t separate out interest on reserves, by marking the difference between 2015 and subsequent years we can estimate that the Fed could deliver anywhere from $20 billion to $50 billion a year to banks, risk-free. That’s an enormous amount of money, based on the claim that interest on reserves is somehow an indispensible strategy for monetary policy, even though the Fed thrived for 91 years without such a tool.
This shift in how monetary policy is conducted occurred with practically no debate. Fed officials are reportedly worried about the “optics” of their exit plan, with its unjust enrichment of the largest banks. But outside of a few libertarians, nobody has raised alarms yet.
One progressive group that’s challenged the Fed from the left was stunned to learn that, in addition to depressing the economy, an interest-rate hike would have a secondary effect as a silent bank bailout. “Clearly this is under-covered, because I haven’t heard about it,” said Ady Barkan with the Center for Popular Democracy, director of Fed Up, a grassroots organization pushing the central bank to adopt pro-worker policies. “But we shouldn’t be shocked. It is the rule that the Fed prioritizes helping banks, and has over the last seven years.”
There are other ways to control monetary policy besides interest on excess reserves, unless you believe that the Fed was impotent from 1917 to 2008. For instance, the Fed could reduce their balance sheet, rather than letting it contract through attrition, the current strategy. That would reduce the money supply, which shows what a pickle the Fed has gotten itself into with its expanded balance sheet. But the Minneapolis Fed, at least, downplayed the risks of gradual asset sales into a global market.
Another option is to hold off on raising rates, allowing the balance sheet to slowly contract and encouraging banks to recirculate excess reserves into the economy by creating favorable conditions for more profitable investments. “It’s incomprehensible to us to think that the economy is getting too healthy too quickly,” said Barkan of Fed Up.
Members of Congress, who created this mess by authorizing interest on reserves, could take it away too, and in so doing could create a large pay-for that could be transferred into productive projects. You could potentially fund an entire six-year highway bill simply by eliminating interest on reserves.
We don’t even know if the Fed’s rate-raising strategy will work without drawbacks, as it’s never been tested. But if “working” equals paying the largest banks hundreds of billions in unearned money, the Fed should figure out something else.
A Job Guarantee and the Federal Reserve Board
The idea that the government would commit itself to act as an employer of last resort and guarantee a job to everyone has been getting more attention in recent months. While many on the left have...
The idea that the government would commit itself to act as an employer of last resort and guarantee a job to everyone has been getting more attention in recent months. While many on the left have long pushed this position, the Clinton-linked Center for American Progress (CAP) recently embraced the idea in a conference last week. It is good to see ideas outside of the mainstream getting attention, but there are a couple of issues worth keeping in mind to ensure that the effort does not end up being counterproductive.
The first is to recognize that a job guarantee is a huge lift, not only politically but in its implementation. In effect the guarantee is not only going to be providing jobs to workers who do not currently have one, but it will also end up offering a potentially more attractive alternative to millions of people now in low-wage jobs. How attractive the alternative is will of course depend on the wage offered in the government supported jobs.
Read the full article here.
Woman who confronted Flake 'relieved' he called for delaying Kavanaugh vote
Woman who confronted Flake 'relieved' he called for delaying Kavanaugh vote
Maria Gallagher, who on Friday confronted Sen. Jeff Flake with her story of sexual assault, said she was "relieved" when the Arizona Republican called for an FBI investigation into allegations...
Maria Gallagher, who on Friday confronted Sen. Jeff Flake with her story of sexual assault, said she was "relieved" when the Arizona Republican called for an FBI investigation into allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
Gallagher, a resident of New York, stood next to Ana Maria Archila, co-executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy, earlier Friday as the two held open the doors of an elevator Flake was taking on his way to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Soon after, Flake said he would vote to advance Kavanaugh's nomination to the Senate floor, but he said he wanted a vote in the full body delayed for one week while the FBI investigated the allegations.
Read the full article here.
Why Charter Schools Are a Bad Idea: Guest Opinion
AL.com - March 17, 2014, by Rep. Craig Ford - Other than the $700 million hole in the state's General Fund budget, no issue has been more talked about than the charter school bill.
...
AL.com - March 17, 2014, by Rep. Craig Ford - Other than the $700 million hole in the state's General Fund budget, no issue has been more talked about than the charter school bill.
Republicans in the Alabama legislature have made charter schools a part of their legislative agenda, and a priority in this legislative session (which is ironic, given these same Republican legislators campaigned on stopping President Obama's agenda, but President Obama has been one of the strongest advocates for charter schools).
The charter school bill was passed out of the state senate last week, and will most likely be voted on in the state House of Representatives this week.
Because the Republicans hold a Supermajority (nearly 70 percent of legislators in the House of Representatives), they will certainly force this bill through, and it will be up to Gov. Bentley to decide whether to veto the bill.
There is no doubt that something needs to be done in some of our school systems. But charter schools are not the answer, and will not give our children the better quality of education that proponents of charter schools have claimed.
Researchers at Stanford University conducted two studies on charter schools, in which they reviewed test scores from charter schools in 26 states. The results they found undermine the argument that charter schools outperform existing public schools.
In all, only 25 percent of charter schools performed better than traditional public schools in reading, while only 29 percent performed better in math. More troubling is that 19 percent of charters performed worse in reading, while 31 percent performed "significantly worse" in math. The rest performed at the same level as the existing public schools.
So after about two decades of experimenting with charter schools, the test results have proven that charter schools are not likely to give our children a better quality education. In fact, there's a pretty high chance that our children will get a lower quality education at a charter school than they would at the school they are already attending.
Charter schools also have a very real problem with fraud, waste and abuse of tax dollars.
The Center for Popular Democracy and Integrity In Education, both non-profit organizations, released a report that found more than $100 million in fraud, waste and abuse by fraudulent charter operators in just 15 of the 42 states that have charter schools.
Another report conducted by Integrity In Education found that, just in Pennsylvania, charter operators had fraudulently misused more than $30 million!
The authors of Alabama¹s charter school bill have claimed their bill addresses the accountability issues. But it does not.
The charter school bill that came out of the Alabama Senate does not require that ³Education Service Providers² be non-profit organizations. What this means is that, while the organization that applies for the charter might have to report to the state, the companies that it subcontracts to do not and have no accountability to the taxpayers.
The reason charter schools are hotbeds for fraud and waste is because the for-profit companies that provide education services, such as financial and operation management, managing the facilities and even designing the curriculum, are not held accountable.
In fact, in the reports I referenced earlier, government regulators were not the ones who have discovered the fraud in charter schools. The fraud was only discovered by an investigative reporter, or when a whistle blower came forward or someone filed a lawsuit.
The fraud has come in many forms, including charter operators using school funds illegally to buy personal luxuries for themselves and to support their other businesses.
Investigative reporters have also found that education service providers are typically non-compliant with request for information required by law under the Freedom of Information act. The Washington Post reported that, during their own investigation of charter schools, 70 percent of Education Management Organizations refused to respond to the request for a copy of their contract with Charter Operators, while another 10 percent claimed they were not legally required to publicly provide a copy of their contract.
So even if the Alabama legislature passes a provision requiring them to make their contracts and finances publicly available, 80 percent of these organizations have proven that they will ignore the law and refuse to provide the information.
The sad thing is these are not even all the arguments that can be made against charter schools. But these are more than enough to prove that charter schools are a scam, and a bad idea. Yes, something needs to be done in some school systems. But charter schools are not the answer.
Source
Dumpster Tapes showcases local Latinx talent at the second annual Demolición
Dumpster Tapes showcases local Latinx talent at the second annual Demolición
One of America's largest banks, JPMorgan Chase, is quietly financing the immigration detention centers that have detained an average of 26,240 people per day through July 2017, according to a new...
One of America's largest banks, JPMorgan Chase, is quietly financing the immigration detention centers that have detained an average of 26,240 people per day through July 2017, according to a new report by the Center for Popular Democracy and Make the Road New York. Through over $100 million loans, lines of credit and bonds, Wall Street has been financially propping up CoreCivic and GeoCorp, America's two largest private immigration detention centers.
Read the full article here.
2 days ago
4 days ago