This letter was also sent to each Council member and staff on May 11th. from C4DC Members

Dear Chairman Mendelson,

We understand that there is currently a concerted push to put all funds that go to DCPS and DC Public Charter Schools through the Uniform Per Student Funding Formula (UPSFF).  We are writing now to underscore that this is simplistic and fails to account for the variety of programs that support our schools. Simply put, sending all funds through the UPSFF would entail costs to our students that are not being considered.  While this move purports to address equality, in fact it will contribute to an inequality of service to DC students and families. 

We need to be clear: the current funding is not equal but neither is the oversight, responsibility or policy governing the two systems.  The prompt on this move to the UPSFF for all funds – that charter schools are underfunded by $2,000 per student, totalling $96 million for the system –ignores many factors.  For example: Ed Forward just announced a DC Charter Facilities Fund, a$250 million revolving loan fund specifically designed for DC public charter school facilityneeds.  While this is not single-year funding, it is substantial. This will be in addition to the $187,262,111 in the FY27 budget for the charter schools facility allowance. Yet this funding, along with the demand to have a 3.1% increase per year every year in the charter facility allowance, is happening while the capital budget for DCPS is projected to decrease going forward.(1) Charter facility funds are not tracked and they are operating funds (not capital) so that funding can be used for anything.  To date, there is no government analysis of the need by LEA for facility funding.

In addition, the uniform facility allotment and the equal distribution of UPSFF funds do not take into account gross inequity between charters, from administrative costs to building costs. Instead, constant focus on DCPS funding and its availability for the charter sector masks this inequity.  We request better fiscal discipline than adding to each individual LEA’s a lump sum regardless of need or even basic understanding of inequalities between LEAs. 

Our lottery approach to providing education, with 67 different publicly funded school systems, does not allow us to have a good grasp of where there is fiscal and programming duplication and other inequity.  For instance, while some small charter LEAs may struggle with finances and an inability to pay teachers competitive salaries, many larger LEAs can (and do) tap into huge outside, private funding sources that are not available to smaller charters and DCPS.

Because of the work we have yet to do to examine the equity of funding that flows outside of the UPSFF – and even the flow of UPSFF facility allotments for charters – it would be ill-advised now to end effective programs currently operating outside the formula. We urge you to fund these programs now because they continue to effectively address issues of equality and equity across sectors, to respond to an identified need and, importantly, can be evaluated.  

For instance: a more equitable response to the current push by the charter sector for additional funds can be an educator retention fund to help smaller, less-resourced LEAs that struggle with educator retention. Retention is a problem in both sectors and historically higher in DC charters. Such a fund would permit schools to use additional dollars for specific, proven retention strategies like implementing permanent substitutes, co-teaching, flexible scheduling, educator wellness programming, teacher leadership initiatives or mentorship programs. Never forget that as charter advocates point to the new WTU contract and IMPACT bonuses outside the formula, collective bargaining is available to DC charter school educators and remains largely unused.  And though millions resulting from recent WTU gains have been passed on to charters, we know that bonuses are an ineffective retention tool. So, rather than lump sum payments to schools through the UPSFF without regard for the differences between LEAs with respect to resources, an educator retention fund would be more efficient and equitable.

In fact, there are many programs funded outside the UPSFF that are successful and support families in both sectors. Retaining the following programs is an immediate and fiscally wise path forward for equity and equality:

1. Funding for Community schools has been effective and goes across sectors.  We ask that you restore the $4 million to the OSSE Competitive Grants for Community schools and restore DCPS central funding for Connected Schools.  These coordinators and their staff can respond to the draconian federal cuts to lifeline programs like TANF and housing support as well as cuts to the health infrastructure DC had in place.  

2. Advanced Technical Centers (ATCs) are existing programs piloted by grant funds.  Students have been accepted and are enrolled for the fall. While technically new DC funding, it is not a new program. These serve students in both sectors as a supplement to high school programming. They have successfully enabled students to remain at their school as enrollees, getting job training and dual credit.  The full cost (including filling in for the grant funds that helped get ATCs off the ground) is about $7.4 million.

3. Truancy programming addresses one of the most stubborn and concerning problems in DC’s publicly funded schools. Yet new data on the Truancy Pilot through The Department of Human Services (DHS) revealed a 71% reduction in truancy in the pilot schools. This is a promising approach that supports schools, operating outside the UPSFF formula.

4. Educator wellness programming supports the wellbeing and retention of educators such as OSSE’s Educator Wellness grants; previous flexible scheduling pilots also provide money to schools outside the UPSFF formula. These programs have been proven to be a wise investment given the high cost (and long duration) of teacher turnover in DC’s publicly funded schools.

5. A school-based behavioral health (SBBH) system allocates funding to support mental health clinicians in all schools. While more funding and substantial structural work is needed to strengthen the program, this support provided to schools outside the UPSF formula has been a real success and has provided clinicians through CBOs to 90 schools plus clinicians through DBH. The DBH plan to move this all in-house is deeply misguided and DC leaders should restore funding to FY26 levels ($25.4M) for SBBH in FY27. 

It is imperative that the DC government recognizes that it will never be inherently equal or equitable when all dollars flow through a single formula to all schools. These systems have different responsibilities and also different sources of outside funding.  Proceeding as if our complicated education system is simple by pushing all funding through the UPSFF will actually increase inequity and inequality; in fact, awarding a large sum of money to each LEA wouldexacerbate inequity.  You have a chance to maintain successful projects and to address what is perhaps the largest complaint:  teacher turnover.  

Sincerely, 

The Coalition for DC Public Schools and Communities

(1) Going forward, the capital budget for DCPS school buildings is projected to decrease with each year – $177,871,000 in FY31. DC charter schools are requesting that the escalation of 3.1% per year through FY31 be kept in place. If the number of nonresidential students remains stable at 47,657, the facilities allowance cost to the city in FY31 would then be $213,716,863. This is not tied to need, not limited to facilities, and there is little transparency, accountability or oversight on these funds.https://www.c4dcpublicschools.org/