Tag: Charter School Accountability

Board Passes $4.9 Billion Budget, Community Questions Priorities

by Lisa Haver

Board of Education Action Meeting, May 28, 2026

APPS member Deborah Grill testifies at May 28 Board of Education meeting. (Photo: Lisa Haver)

As a result of the Board of Education’s speaker suppression policies, over half of the 30 public speakers were representatives of charter schools, 6 from the same school. Several charter CEOs, who have daily access to the board’s Charter Schools Office, took speaker slots, including both Global Leadership Academy CEOs. Recent IRS information shows the GLA CEO making over $500,000 in annual salary/compensation/bonus; GLA Huey CEO made $378,000. Although APPS has raised these issues for years, the board says little about exorbitant administrative salaries, questionable financial practices, and failure to reach minimum academic ratings. In fact, the board exempted the entire charter sector from its $3 billion, ten-year Facilities Master Plan. 

Board Passes $4.6 Budget
The board voted 8-0 to pass the administration’s combined $4.6 billion budget for FY 2026-27 in Item 12 (BM Wanda Novales was absent). The board passed Item 15 by a vote of 7-1, approving the Amended Capital Budget for FY 2025-26, adoption of a Capital Budget for FY 2026-27, and a Capital Program for 2027-32. BM ChauWing Lam voted No on Item 15, citing some “lingering questions”. The 5-year Capital Improvement Plan includes some projects proposed in the Facilities Master Plan (FMP) passed by the board last month. Lam questioned Deputy Superintendent of Operations Oz HIll about why the budget details as presented to the board did not include construction of the new high school in the Northeast that was proposed in the FMP. Hill responded that as yet there was no funding for the school. Actually that is true of most of the projects in the FMP. APPS’ analysis of the FMP shows that at least ⅔ of the funding would come from additional revenues from the state (even though the budget presented at this meeting shows lower revenue from the state) and from unnamed philanthropic sources. BM Whitney Jones, who voted No on the FMP, remarked that the administration’s “intentions are exceeding revenues” and asked how they would fulfill the specific promises of the FMP. He asked Board President Reginald Streater to allow for regular updates on those metrics.

Continue reading

Board Again Renews Substandard Charters

by Lisa Haver and Deborah Grill

“As a board member, I am not willing to ignore low academic outcomes,” said Andrews. “We have to hold schools accountable for outcomes.” 
Board Member Sarah Ashley Andrews, May 14 Goals and Guardrails Meeting

The Board of Education does, in fact, ignore low academic outcomes every year when it renews charter schools that fail to meet basic academic standards.  Last year, the board renewed Mastery Douglass despite its “Does Not Meet” rating in Academics with only 36% points. They are now poised to renew 9 of the 11 schools in this year’s cohort despite only one rating “Meets” in Academics. 

The board conducts most charter business in secret.. There are no public renewal hearings. All negotiations with the board and the Charter School Office take place out of the public eye. The board deems all charter business “quasi-judicial”, then deliberates in executive session. The board votes on all charter renewals without posting the content of the renewal agreements, in effect taking those votes in secret. This year and last, Board President Reginald Streater took a de facto vote after the Charter School Office presentation at the Goals and Guardrails (G & G) Committee Meeting by polling board members, then instructing CSO Director Peng Chao to draw up the renewal documents. The G & G agenda did not list the renewals on the agenda as official action items. These are all clear violations of the state’s Sunshine Act. 

Charters sold themselves over 30 years ago as the key to improving public education; ceding control of public schools to private managers, maintaining only non-union staff, and testing children every year to prove their superiority. Charter companies, in their applications, promised to educate the city’s poor and minority children in underserved communities better than the district public schools. Many even predicted that establishing charter schools would lead to a decrease in poverty and violence. Districts across the country applied the free-market ideology that had public school systems run as businesses, including placing public assets of school buildings and property in the hands of private companies. That was accomplished in some cities by appointing an Emergency Financial Manager (EMF) to usurp the duties of the elected school board. In Philadelphia, the School Reform Commission (SRC) was installed by the state to replace the city’s appointed school board. 

Continue reading about 2025-26 charter renewals here.

Board Postpones Votes on Tax Abatements for Developers

Board of Education Action Meeting: August 21, 2025

by Lisa Haver

Photo: Lisa Haver

In his remarks at the August action meeting, Superintendent Tony Watlington warned of the impending SEPTA service cuts that are scheduled to go into effect on Monday, the first day of school for students. He promised that schools would not mark students late, at least for the first week or so. Yet Watlington presented no plan for getting to school the 52,000 district students who use SEPTA if the transit system goes through with eliminating over thirty of the city’s bus routes; no member of the board asked Watlington for any plan. He encouraged parents to carpool and to make use of the district’s $300.00 allotment for driving their children to school, but he provided no details on that program. Nor did he provide any guidance for parents and guardians who do not own cars. Many parents will walk their children to bus stops at which they will see a notice that no bus will be coming–that day or ever. Is the administration coordinating in any way with SEPTA to direct students and parents to a working bus route? Is the district planning to email parents and guardians–many of whom may not be aware of the service cuts? What’s the plan? Where is the leadership?

Ilene Poses contributed to this report.

Board Hears Only One Side on KOZ Abatements
Continue reading about the meeting here:

Public School Board Bars Public School Parents, Educators from Speaking and Attending

Board of Education Action Meeting: June 26, 2025

by Lisa Haver

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” George Orwell, 1984

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is img_4150.jpeg
CASA President Robin Cooper testifies at June 26 action meeting. (Photo: Lisa Haver)

A governing body convenes an action meeting. They listen to a presentation from the director of a department they oversee. The president of the board raises each issue, and members of the board comment and question. The president then calls on each member to give their position. He tallies the responses, then directs the department chief to carry out the action that the majority of the board voted for. Except when the Philadelphian Board of Education does this, according to Board President Reginald Streater, it’s not voting. True, the terms “motion”,  “roll call” , and “vote” were not used. But the board came to decisions on the futures of six charter schools in the renewal cohort after listening to Charter Schools Chief Peng Chao and deliberating on the information presented.  Streater called on each member to state their position on whether the school would be granted a 5-year renewal, a 1-year renewal, or no renewal. He counted their responses, then directed Chao on what type of document to draw up. How is that not voting? Every time APPS members called out that the board was voting, even though none of those charter items had been placed on the agenda, Streater insisted they were not.  The dictionary definition of the word “vote”: a formal indication of a choice between two or more candidates or courses of action, expressed typically through a ballot or a show of hands or by voice. The public’s faith in this board continues to erode because of its lack of transparency and public engagement, along with its reluctance to hold the administration accountable. Now they want to tell people not to believe what they see and hear with their own eyes and ears. 

Continue reading here