Special Ed, For Profit
Should a private, for-profit firm run special education schools?
Mark Claypool founded Educational Services of America in Nashville in 1999; ESA is, according to the September 8th New York Times, “one of the few companies even attempting to make money by running special education private schools.” ESA has programs in more than 16 states and owns and operate 120 private and charter schools for students with learning disabilities and developmental or behavioral issues. The company generated $75 million in revenue this year. It hires its own teachers (who do not have to have state teaching licenses).
[National Education Association special education policy analyst Patti] Ralabate said she didn’t know anything specific about ESA schools, but said parents sacrifice their rights to direct their children’s education when they place them in private schools.
”They’re using these kids basically to make a profit, and that’s not something that’s in the best interest of kids,” Ralabate said.
Claypool counters that public schools are overcrowded already and can’t handle the additional challenges of special ed students. He also said ESA can charge school districts less per student than what they would get from the state.
He said ESA schools run more efficiently because they don’t deal with paperwork and bureaucracy. For instance, ESA teachers usually don’t have to have state teaching licenses, something not allowed in public schools.
There were some extensive exchanges recently here about the limits of what public schools can do for special education students vs. private schools; how “equal” an education can be provided in a public school setting?
Who benefits most—-the students, their families, or the company, and the investors—when education is no longer “.edu,” but “.com”?
22 opinions for Special Ed, For Profit
KimJ
Sep 8, 2007 at 3:07 pm
I don’t care for private schools, period. Never have, and since my son’s school troubles I haven’t changed my mind. Charter schools are a great alternative to poor performers in the district. Though, there is something to be said about parents really and truly fighting for decent standards with the existing structure.
I’ve mentioned here before that when I felt my son was in danger in the school, we kept him home. I believe parents should be trusted to do what’s best for their kid. There’s a lot of responsibility there. You can’t just sit back and expect great standards to just happen. You have to demand them.
Linda Sullivan
Sep 8, 2007 at 3:09 pm
Agencies that are non-profit proliferate the state where I live providing residential and day supports for children and adults with disabilities. Agencies providing day/educational supports to kids 18 and under are licensed by DOE. Wouldn’t we feel better if the school referenced in your post while private, was non-profit?
Liz D.
Sep 8, 2007 at 3:11 pm
Knowing what I know about (a) independent school education, from the board room (b) the increased cost of educating students with disabilities, I cannot imagine a for-profit chain of schools having long-term success.
Bob
Sep 8, 2007 at 4:51 pm
This is a pretty unnerving situation. Is it a good idea to get into the business of educationg special needs expecting to make a profit? If profits go down where will the cuts be made to tighten the belt? Do we want our kids being educated someday by a subsidary of Haliburton!?!?!?
Joeymom
Sep 8, 2007 at 5:14 pm
We’ve always said if we win the big lottery, we’re opening a school. However, I was definitely thinking of something where all the money would go back into the school and the kids. However, I can see where people want other options. We sure do.
VAB
Sep 8, 2007 at 6:13 pm
There is nothing wrong with running a school for profit. Statements such as ”They’re using these kids basically to make a profit, and that’s not something that’s in the best interest of kids,” have no basis in fact or logic. Almost every parent of a child with special needs makes at least some use of private/for-profit education, and most of it is at least as good, if not better, than similar services in the public sector (which is why we pay for them). At the same time, it is clear that education is a critical professional service that requires legislative oversight.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Sep 8, 2007 at 6:49 pm
The article did appear in the NY Times Business section: Since it was an article about education, it would have been good to have some discussion of what ESA’s teaching philosophy and curricula are. As an educator very much in non-profit sector, I am wary of for-profit schools, certainly in the case of secondary and graduate education.
Daisy
Sep 8, 2007 at 7:49 pm
“…ESA teachers usually don’t have to have state teaching licenses, something not allowed in public schools.”
And this is supposed to be good for kids? What kind of training do they require, if any, for their teachers?
joycemocha
Sep 8, 2007 at 9:42 pm
I would be very cautious about this entire setup, especially from a company that claims it can run special ed for cheaper than the public school system.
Additionally, there’s enough of a problem in public school teaching when you get a critical mass of sped kids with behavioral issues and have no typical kids handy to provide typical peer examples. How are they going to serve kids who should have relationships going with non-disabled kids so they can learn to function in the real world?
My concern is that this just sets up kids for failure in adult life. They need to learn to function in non-disabled society to the best of their ability. This reeks of warehousing to me, and a step back to the era where kids with disabilities were isolated from the general population. That’s the only way I can think of where the education provided can be cheaper than what’s available in the public school system.
joycemocha
Sep 8, 2007 at 9:55 pm
So I just went and looked at the website, including the open teaching positions.
Several things: no benefits until you work 32 hours, and there’s a number of half-time positions offered (now I might have missed something, but I notice they’re being a bit evasive about that).
No salary range listed, applicants are requested to send salary requirements.
Basic education requirements–bachelor plus 1-2 years experience, teacher certification preferred but does not have to be certified in the state you’re applying for.
Methinks I’m overqualified for their schools, with a Master’s degree in Special Education, and 3 years experience, unless I apply as an administrator. This does not sound like a good prospect–so I suspect that saving money on salaries and benefits is one way that this company is planning to cost less to school districts (if you read the article carefully, they’re marketing their program to school districts as being cheaper restrictive placements than existing private non-profit programs). This means their major market is not parents but school districts.
Additionally, if this is the case, then that means that the school district in question will still need to draw up an Individual Education Plan and have a case manager from the district itself. A district can’t place a kid in that restrictive environment, so they’re still doing the paperwork. A bit of glossing over the reality for people who don’t know the system, I think. By the time you count in the paperwork that the district has to do, the cost should probably come out at about the same.
joycemocha
Sep 8, 2007 at 9:57 pm
Oops. Correction.
I meant to say “a district can’t place a kid in that kind of restrictive environment *without* the paperwork, so they’re still doing the paperwork.”
amy
Sep 9, 2007 at 1:12 am
There’s an example of this in business that I just can’t recall. Argh. But I bet Joyce is right, that the company founders see a way of making money through contracting out sped services. The market exists for the same reasons test prep markets exist: Onerous regs exist, there are huge penalties for getting it wrong or noncompliance, and the DIY approach is very, very expensive. It makes sense in that circumstance to contract out. You’re still going to pay an arm and a leg, but you shift some risk, and overall you’ll save while complying. Parallels already exist all over K-12. When you have entire cities essentially contracting out K-12 ed — and they have been for a while now — I think it may be a little wishful to talk about .edu and .com as though they’re distinct.
I would think that these businesses are a very good argument for working with school districts and taking budgetary concerns very, very seriously. Doing outside fundraising. Backing off from demands and becoming much more conciliatory activists for inclusion. Because if one of these schools comes in near you and the district uses it as it SE facility, and you have problems with it, I’d guess you’ll be facing tougher and leaner opposition, and that they’re not going to give you the kind of access you have in public schools. All problems with the SE facility will be met with “We are doing as the law requires and this is as far as we can go. You’re welcome to withdraw your child if you feel he or she can do better elsewhere.”
You’ve created a market, see. So it’s not surprising that someone’s come to fill it. If it were me, I’d try to remove the market and retain control over the education. Make it small, make it unprofitable, create homegrown competition with voting rights. You can shoot for legislation, and you may win some small battles over many years, but governments won’t bar districts from contracting services generally; it’s endemic to govt itself.
Linda Sullivan, there is no angel status automatically conferred up on non-profits. After 20 years of working on/off for lefty, green, and social-justice-minded outfits, I much prefer frank capitalists. They play by the rules better, maybe because they expect that people work for money (rather than social heroism — it’s amazing, how easily organizations can exploit the well-meaning) and because there’s not that nearly religious sense that the end justifies all means.
I think what you’re really worried about is publicly-held companies where the legal obligation is to serve shareholders’ interests. In that case, maybe your best remedy is to stack the school board.
Oh. Kristina, higher ed is not non-profit, whatever the tax documents may say. There is polite collusion between higher ed and banks, and I’m not talking about kickbacks. I’m talking about the fact — and universities/colleges are well aware of it — that dumb kids with no money experience can borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars just by saying “I’m a student and I want money.” I don’t think it’s at all accidental that we’ve had unprecedented tuition inflation at the same time that we’ve had unprecedented student/parent access to loans. My hands aren’t clean either; I live in a college town because it’s awash in money and the quality of life is delightful. Where does the loan money go? Well, colleges must compete, no? A this building, a that building, three tenure lines in this burgeoning specialty (will there be jobs in the specialty for the PhDs that emerge? Well, now, that’s a tricky one)….If higher ed actually operated in students’ interests, it would close down many programs and turn to persuading industry that BAs are not necessary for most jobs, let alone advanced degrees. Possibly it would turn to vocational training.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Sep 9, 2007 at 1:19 am
Amy, I am very aware of the situation you describe regarding financial aid and a lack of disclosure about how higher ed gets paid for, the quality of teaching, and so forth. My college is very much a vocational school, in many senses of the term, and, even though I can only do a few things for a few students, I try to give them a real, individualized, personal and caring education and it is partial. The colleges you describe are not of the sort I work at.
Dan
Sep 9, 2007 at 1:50 am
I won’t say the ‘for-profit’ wont work, but, as was mentioned in a previous comment, their “market” is not us “moms & dads” - it’s school districts. School districts may or may not mind “test drives” and “what ifs” and “let’s sees”…but, parents…we’ll, we kind of want to get it right the first time. Because it’s not a class/group/population…it’s our child(ren)! As I said, I won’t say it won’t work, but I will say that I won’t volunteer my child for the ‘experiment.’ And, I’m concerned that (again) the marketing of this means my child (or someone else’s) WILL BE the experiment subject, and mom & dad have no say. I’m concerned.
amy
Sep 9, 2007 at 11:58 am
Dan, that’s exactly why I suggest parents become easier and cheaper to work with (thus shrinking the market) or find a way to enter the market yourselves. Otherwise you’re going to be in the position of having to prove that such corporations either don’t comply with IDEA or do criminal harm to kids with disabilities, and you’ll have to do it with limited access to the schools themselves. The defense will be well-organized and well-funded, with glossy brochures and its own experts.
But then it may turn out that they don’t do such a terrible job, so you may want to reserve judgment.
(As someone who was an adult caregiver, btw, I appreciate the cruelty in saying “find a way to enter the market yourself.” I know that for the most part parents do not have time, energy, or money for themselves, let alone a new project. I’m just sayin’ that this is the setup.)
Joyce, I’m guessing the corporations are well aware of LRE restrictions and have boilerplate ready for districts to use, maybe even access to a lawyer who specializes in IDEA. Economy of scale. Yeah, here’s the text from ESA’s Ombudsman site:
“School districts refer students to Ombudsman using specific criteria created in partnership with the Ombudsman implementation team.” Here’s the page:
http://ombudsman.com/our-results/for-school-districts
It’s not unusual for ed contractors to work with districts & smooth the way, btw.
Joyce: Looks like ESA classifies many teachers as temp, so that’s a huge benefits saving. Their benefits package for fulltimers is also much slimmer than most state-employee packages will be — remember, state employees still have AFSCME. They’d be happy to have you, I bet. Salaries are probably also low; check the “you are their last hope” rhetoric in the position descriptions. It does look like they have their own buildings, which surprised me a little, because that’s a lot of overhead, but I would be really, really careful about building quality. You can cheat there and no one will know for a long time. ESA looks to be privately held, which is a good thing, though if they make enough money they’ll attract suitors — again, parents need to be aware that they’re creating a market.
As I click around ESA’s employment pages, it looks to me like they hire a fairly motley assortment of backgrounds, and that the main difference between them and the districts is that they aren’t looking for people who’ve come through some narrow range of ed/ed-psych backgrounds. This is not necessarily a bad thing. Ed schools in general recruit from the bottom quartile of college students, and you may get considerably more energy, empathy, creativity, and brights if you move outside that, so long as the teachers are well-supervised. It also looks like it’d be popular employment for artists-turned-teacher, who may connect with the kids in ways that traditionally-trained teachers don’t. And who will also try to raise the ed to the level of art.
Kristina: I don’t think you’d find many t-t humanities profs who don’t really try to give to students. That’s not the point. Consider what happens when a prof says in a meeting, “But that’s going to harm the quality of the teaching and the kids will be hurt.” Who wins, the prof or the admin? Probably the admin, which (politics aside) is trying to keep the school afloat in a competitive environment.
I think the funding is actually pretty transparent at a lot of schools — certainly the state institutions. Budgets are out there for viewing, and you can get an idea of what the private schools are doing from what the public schools do. Historical tuition data is also available. It’s just that most students and parents won’t bother or don’t have the education to interpret it themselves. And the kids are naive enough that you really don’t have to hide anything. They’ll persuade each other that it’s really smart to borrow $120K for a BA from a name school, or that you “have to” borrow to get through this vocational program. I don’t know what’s going to happen to all the single moms out there borrowing like crazy for OT/PT/nursing/BSW programs and using the money to raise their families.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Sep 9, 2007 at 1:51 pm
Amy, thank you much for your comments. Perhaps you have noted this earlier, but (if I may ask) what is your occupation?
amy
Sep 9, 2007 at 2:26 pm
I’m a writer, with non-writing background in govt, IT, higher ed, and business. Through my ex, I have more personal experience than I’d like with social service agencies and service funding; I keep track of gifted ed issues for my daughter and out of curiosity.
Why do you ask?
Special Ed, Not For Profit
Sep 9, 2007 at 2:28 pm
[…] the wake of yesterday’s post about Educational Services of America, a Nashville-based for-profit company and the issues […]
AutismParent
Sep 15, 2007 at 11:23 pm
We were repeatedly told by our school that they were “NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A CADILLAC” when it comes to a Free Appropriate Public Education. OK. So what if I want a Cadillac and am willing to pay for it?
KimJ
Sep 15, 2007 at 11:38 pm
AutismParent, that is a script those people read from because they all say it. The district rep garbled that to husband and he said, “We’re not talking about that, I just want my son in the classroom.”
The answer to “no Caddy” is “Least Restrictive Environment”.
Dan
Sep 17, 2007 at 1:14 am
AutismParent, my recommendation to that situation is variant on KimJ’s statement. Innumerate very clearly what it is your asking of the school (ST/OT/in-class support/etc), and ask them to identify which line items they consider to be excessive for a child with this dx, and why. If the push-back continues, our ‘coach’ on this matter has suggested having an attorney’s name (and card) handy. Sometimes just requesting their presence at the ‘next meeting’ does wonders.
I’m hoping to not have to go that route, but, we have a friend (an attorney) who’s willing to be fore-runner, if a bluff is all that’s required. If it comes down to it, we’d need someone who has experience in this field. But, that stats on what happens with a lawyer present are so disgusting, it’s obvious that ANY lawyer present with you is better than going alone.
Best of luck to you!
Dan
Kristina Chew, PhD
Sep 17, 2007 at 2:21 am
One could also note that one has sought “legal counsel”—communicating this sense that we were “lawyered up” got things moving a bit, for us, in a previous school placement dispute.
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: