Education Scholars Brief

8/9/2019 Education Scholars Brief

1/63

NO. 372A14 TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT

********************************************************

HART, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

ET AL.

Defendant-Appellants,

CYNTHIA PERRY, GENNELLCURRY,

THOM TILLIS, AND PHILBERGER,

Intervenor-Defendants-

Appellants.

)

)

))

))

))

))

))

))

))

))

))

)

)

From Wake CountyNo. 13-CVS-16771

**************************************

BRIEF OF AMI CI CURIAEEDUCATION SCHOLARS

**************************************


2/63

INDEX

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ii

IDENTITY AND INTERESTS OF AMICI. 2

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT:.... .. 3

ARGUMENT 5

I. Research reveals that neither private schools in general, norvoucher programs, produce better educational outcomes for

students ................. ............ 5

a.

When student demographics are taken into account, public

school students achieve at higher levels than private schoolstudents.................................... 6

b. Research studies of existing voucher programs shows thatstudents using vouchers do not achieve comparatively better

academic outcomes than students who remain in public

school... 7

i.

Milwaukee.

ii. Cleveland.. iii.

District of Columbia.

iv. Conclusion

8

1011

12

II.

As compared to other jurisdictions in which students can use a

publicly-funded voucher to attend a private school, North Carolina

has the weakest regulation of its private schools.. 13

III. Private schools in North Carolina authorized to accept vouchers areprimarily religious schools, without accreditation, without certified

teachers, and without a curriculum that parallels the statestandards

22

CONCLUSION... 27

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE .............. 28


3/63

APPENDIX:

I. ACCOUNTABILITY CHART FOR VOUCHERJURISDICTIONS... 1

II. CHARACTERISTICS OF NORTH CAROLINA PRIVATESCHOOLS 2

III.

OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM FUNDS

DISBURSED BY SCHOOLS. 22


4/63


5/63

- ii -

Ind. Code 20-51-3-6 16

Ind. Code. 20-51-4-1(f)(5)-(9) 16, App. 1

Ind. Code 20-51-4-3 16

Ind. Code. 20-51-4-9.. 16

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 17:11 18, App. 1

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 17:236(A) App. 1

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 17:4013(2) 18

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 17:4021.. App. 1

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 17:4021(A)(1).App. 1

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 17:4021(B) 18

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 17:4023.. App.

La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 17:4024.. 18

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A 290119, App. 1

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A 290219, App. 1

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A 2951-2955 19

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A 5001-A(3)(A)(1) App. 1

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A 5203(1).. 19

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A 5204(1).. 19


6/63

- iii -

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A 13003(1)(B)App. 1

.C.G.S. 115C-54715

.C.G.S.115C-547-554.. 21

.C.G.S. 115C-54915, 22

.C.G.S. 115C-55022

.C.G.S. 115C-55515

.C.G.S.115C-555-562.. 21

.C.G.S. . 115C-557 15, 22

.C.G.S. 115C-55822

.C.G.S. 115C-562.2 15, 22

.C.G.S. 115C-562.5(a)(4)15

Ohio Admin. Code3301-35-0517, App. 1

Ohio Admin Code 3301-35-12 17

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3301.0710.. 18, App. 1

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3301.0711.. 17

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3301.0711(k)(1)(a) App. 1

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3310.02(A).17, App. 1

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3310.33(a)(1). 17


7/63

- iv -

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3313.02(A). 17

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3313.60... 18, App. 1

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3313.612.18, App. 1

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3313.624.18, App. 1

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3313.976(A)(11).17, App. 1

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 331917, App. 1

Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3321.07.. App. 1

7-1 Vt. Code R. 3:224.1... App. 1

7-1 Vt. Code R. 3:2226.10... App. 1

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, 166(b) & (g) App. 1

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, 821-836. 19

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, 828.. App. 1

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, 906.. App. 1

Wis. Stat. Ann. 118.60(2)(a)(6)... 20, App. 1

Wis. Stat. Ann. 118.60(2)(a)(7).. App. 1

Wis. Stat. Ann. 118.60(2)(a)(8).App. 1

Wis. Stat. Ann. 118.60(7)(e)..App. 1

Wis. Stat. Ann. 118.165(d)App. 1


8/63

- v -

Wis. Stat. Ann. 119.23 20

Wis. Stat. Ann. 119.23(2)(a)(6).. 20, App. 1

Wis. Stat. Ann. 119.23(2)(a)(7).. 20, App. 1

Wis. Stat. Ann. 119.23(7)(e).. App. 1

Wis. Stat. Ann. 119.23(10)(a)(5) . 20

Other Authorities

Cecilia Rouse,Private School Vouchers and Studentchievement: An Evaluation of the Milwaukee Parental Choice

Program(Natl Bureau of Econ.Research, Inc., Working Paper

o. 5964,1997). 8

Ctr. on Educ. Policy,Are Private High Schools Bettercademically Than Public High Schools?(Oct.

2007). 7

Christopher Lubienski & Sarah Lubienski, The Public Schooldvantage: Why Public Schools Outperform Private Schools

(Univ. of Chicago Press,

2014) 6

Clive Belfield, The Evidence on Education Vouchers: An

pplication to the Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring

Program,Natl Ctr. for the Study of Privatization in Educ.,Teachers Coll., Columbia Univ. (2006), available athttp://www.ncspe.org/readrel.php?set=pub&cat=127..11

Erin Richards & Kevin Crowe, Voucher Students Post Gain inath, Reading; Still Lag Public Schools, MILWAUKEE-


9/63

- vi -

WISCONSIN JOURNAL SENTINEL(Apr. 8, 2014),

http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/voucher-students-

post-gain-in-math-reading-still-lag-public-schools-b99243092z1-254382141.html 9

Jay P. Green, et al.,Effectiveness of School Choice, Theilwaukee Experiment, Vol. 31, No. 2Educ. and Urban

Society (1999) 8

John F. Witte,Achievement Effect of the Milwaukee VoucherProgram, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison (1997) available at

http://www.disc.wisc.edu/archive/choice/aea97.html..8

Kim K. Metcalf, et al.,Evaluation of the Cleveland Scholarshipand Tutoring Program: Student Characteristics and Academic

chievement,Indiana Univ. Sch. of Educ.(2003)10, 11

Molly Beck, State paid $139 million to schools terminated fromvoucher program since 2004, WISCONSIN STATE JOURNAL(Oct.

12, 2014),

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/education/local_school

s/state-paid-million-to-schools-terminated-from-voucher-program-since/article_d4277f72-51ca-5da3-b63d-df2a7834569b.html ... 20

.C. Directory of Non-Pub. Schs., Conventional Schs. Ed.,http://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspx 22, 26

ews Release, Wis. Dept of Pub. Instruction, Fourth Year of

Choice Sch. Data (Apr. 8, 2014)........................... 9

Patrick J. Wolf, et al., School Vouchers in the Nations Capital,

School Choice and School Improvement, Harvard Educ. Press(2011).... 12

State Regulation of Private Schools, U.S. Dept. of Educ.


10/63

- vii -

(2009)............................................................................21

The Comprehensive Longitudinal Evaluation of the Milwaukee

Parental Choice Program: Summary of Final Reports, Univ. ofArk., Dept of Educ.Reform (Feb. 2012), available at

http://www.uaedreform.org/milwaukee-parental-choice-

program-evaluation/. 9


11/63

NO. 372A14 TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NORTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT

********************************************************

HART, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,ET AL.

Defendant-Appellants,

CYNTHIA PERRY, GENNELLCURRY,

THOM TILLIS, AND PHILBERGER,

Intervenor-Defendants-Appellants.

))))))))))))))))

))))))

From Wake CountyNo. 13-CVS-16771

**********************************

BRIEF OF AMI CI CURIAEEDUCATION SCHOLARS

********************************


12/63

- 2-

Identity and Interests of Amici

Amiciare university scholars and academics who have significant expertise

in the area of education policy, economics, and law. All are knowledgeable about

and committed to the education of the children of North Carolina, and all have

grave concerns about the voucher program at issue. Amicioffer this brief to

present an evidence-based perspective that will assist the Court as it analyzes

whether the use of tax dollars to fund private school vouchers meets the relevant

constitutional standards.

The following are before the Court as amici in this matter:

Helen F. Ladd, Ph.D., Professor of Public Policy and Economics at Duke

University who studies educational policy and has researched school

voucher programs;

William A. Darity, Jr., Ph.D., Professor of Public Policy, African and

African American Studies, and Economics at Duke University whose

research interests include education and the achievement gap;

Roslyn Arlin Mickelson, Ph.D. Professor of Sociology and Public Policy at

the University of North Carolina at Charlotte who researches and studies

educational policy and inequality in education;

Charles T. Clotfelter, Ph.D, Professor of Public Policy, Economics, and Law

at Duke University whose research includes the economics of education and


13/63

- 3-

education policy;

Sherick Hughes, Ph.D., Professor of Education at The University of North

Carolina at Chapel Hill who studies education policy, especially as it affects

marginalized youth;

Jenni Owen, M.P.A., Director of Policy Initiatives at the Duke University

Center for Child and Family Policy and Instructor at Duke University who

focuses on enhancing the use of research to inform policy and practice for

positive impact on disadvantaged and vulnerable children and families; and

The Childrens Law Clinic, a clinical education program at Duke Law

School that engages in individual and group representation of low income

children in cases involving their education.

Summary of Argument

In this Brief,Amiciprovide the Court with relevant research and data to

assist the Court in understanding the educational, economic, and legal background

of the voucher program at issue. Three main points are made:

First, contrary to representations made by voucher advocates, students

attending private schools with taxpayer funded vouchers do not have better

academic outcomes than students in public schools. Research studies from across

the country and over many years have consistently failed to find any academic or


14/63

- 4-

educational advantage to students enrolled in choice programs. In particular, the

studies done that take into account family and other demographic characteristics

show that students in public school achieve better results than do students in

private school. While it is possible to cherry-pick a few studies that show

occasional modest benefits to students using voucherstypically those done by

advocacy groups rather than independent scholarsthe overwhelming thrust of the

evidence is that voucher program do not foster academic gains for children.

Second, as compared to other U.S. jurisdictions with similar voucher

programs, North Carolina has the weakest system of accountability for the schools

that are eligible to enroll voucher students. Indeed, it is fair to say that North

Carolina has virtually no accountability system whatsoever. With only a few

qualifications, all the other jurisdictions require state approval or accreditation, a

specified curriculum, teacher qualifications, minimum days and hours of

instructions, and assessments allowing for objective evaluation and comparisons.

Because North Carolina imposes none of these requirements on the voucher-

eligible schools, the taxpayers of North Carolina have no mechanism by which to

judge whether the money is spent wisely or produces the impacts intended.

Third, as a result of the characteristics of private schools in North Carolina,

nearly all vouchers have been, and can be expected to continue to be, distributed to

children attending religious schools. Religious schools are the least likely to


15/63

- 5-

voluntarily employ certified teachers, enroll a diverse student body, or follow the

states curricular standards. The data presented also show an appreciable number

of extremely small schools enrolling voucher recipients. When viewed in light of

the sparse oversight of private schools, the enrollment of students in extremely

small schools creates even more significant concerns about the use of taxpayer

dollars.

Argument

I.

Research reveals that neither private schools in general, nor

voucher programs, produce better educational outcomes for

students.

The arguments raised by the Defendant-Intervenor Parents are consistently

based on the assumption that the voucher program makes available opportunities

for low-income children to leave failing public schools to attend private schools

where they will be better educated. Strong objective academic research reveals,

however, that the assumption is simply false. Taken together, the research

resoundingly rebukes the theory that providing vouchers to poor children gives

them the escape valve they need to attend better schools and receive a better

education. Overall, differences between the educational outcomes of students

using vouchers and students educated in public schools are nonexistent.


16/63


17/63

- 7-

public school results were superior to private school results.Id. at 78. They

conclude, After adjusting for demographic differences no charter or private school

means are higher than public school means to any statistically significant degree.

Id.at 80.

Essentially the same results were obtained in a similar, older research study.

See Ctr. on Educ. Policy,Are Private High Schools Better Academically Than

Public High Schools?(Oct. 2007). The study found that low-income students from

urban public high schools generally did as well academically and on long-term

indicators as their peers from private high schools, when key family background

characteristics were considered. There was no advantage of private school in the

areas of achievement tests, college attendance, job satisfaction at age 26, or civic

engagement at age 26. Id.at 2. As with the Lubienski study, the researchers could

attribute essentially all of the private school advantage to family background

characteristics rather than any advantage offered by a private school.

b.

Research studies of existing voucher programs show that students using

vouchers do not achieve comparatively better academic outcomes than

students who remain in public school.

Apart from looking at private school results in general, researchers have

evaluated a number of the voucher programs around the country. Among the most

important questions asked by researchers is whether the expenditure of public

money to pay tuition to private schools improves the educational outcomes for the


18/63

- 8-

children participating in the voucher program. Based on the research as a whole,

the short answer is no. Overall, the data show that private schools accepting

publicly-funded vouchers do no better than public schools in producing sustained

academic improvements for the children using vouchers. Results of the various

studies are described below.

i.

Milwaukee

The countrys longest-standing voucher program is in Milwaukee. Multiple

studies have been done on the Milwaukee Parental Choice program, which began

in 1990. Two early studies came up with conflicting results, with one finding

some positive student outcomes among the students using vouchers, and the other

finding no impact at all. See Jay P. Green, et al.,Effectiveness of School Choice,

The Milwaukee Experiment, Vol. 31, No. 2Educ. and Urban Society (1999)and

John F. Witte,Achievement Effect of the Milwaukee Voucher Program, Univ. of

Wisconsin-Madison (1997) available at

http://www.disc.wisc.edu/archive/choice/aea97. A third study showed a very

modest positive effect on math scores for voucher recipients, but no effect on

reading scores. SeeCecilia Rouse,Private School Vouchers and Student

Achievement: An Evaluation of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program(Natl

Bureau of Econ. Research, Inc., Working Paper No. 5964, 1997). Fifteen years

later, in a comprehensive review of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program,


19/63

- 9-

researchers saw no consistent positive academic outcomes for voucher students in

any subject area. For example, two carefully matched groups of students, one who

remained in the public schools (MPS students) and one who participated in the

voucher programs (MPCP students), had virtually identical scores on achievement

tests. As the study authors state, This study found no significant differences in

achievement growth between MPCP and MPS students, one, two, and three years

after they had been carefully matched at baseline. SeeThe Comprehensive

Longitudinal Evaluation of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program: Summary of

Final Reports, Univ. of Ark., Dept of Educ.Reform (Feb. 2012), available at

http://www.uaedreform.org/milwaukee-parental-choice-program-evaluation/.

Recent data reported by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction

show no benefit to current students in the choice programs. Based on score reports

for the 2013-14 school yearthe fourth year in which the voucher students have

been required to take the very same tests as the public school studentsdata show

the public school students to be achieving at higher academic levels across the

board. SeeNews Release, Wis. Dept of Pub. Instruction, Fourth Year of Choice

Sch. Data, (Apr. 8, 2014) (hereinafter News Release)

http://news.dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/eis/pdf/dpinr2014_48.pdf; Erin

Richards & Kevin Crowe, Voucher Students Post Gain in Math, Reading; Still Lag

Public Schools, Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel (Apr. 8, 2014),
http://news.dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/eis/pdf/dpinr2014_48.pdfhttp://news.dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/eis/pdf/dpinr2014_48.pdf


20/63

- 10-

http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/voucher-students-post-gain-in-math-

reading-still-lag-public-schools-b99243092z1-254382141.html. Of the students in

the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP), about 16 percent of students

were proficient in math, while 12 percent of students were proficient in reading.

See, id.;News Release. This compares with a proficiency rate of 19 percent in

math and 15 percent in reading for public school students. Id.

This trend also exists for students in the Racine Public School (RPS) system

and students in the Racine Parental Choice Program (RPCP) in 2013-14. Public

school students outperformed the choicestudents in the RPCP in both

mathematics and reading.Id.In mathematics, 28 percent of RPS students were

proficient compared to only 21 percent of the voucher students. In reading, 22

percent of RPS students were proficient compared to 20 percent of voucher

students.Id.

ii.

Cleveland

The voucher program in Cleveland, Ohio has been in effect since 1996. It

began with just under 2,000 low-income students, who were given up to $2,250 to

apply toward private school tuition. The program has grown in size and amount

since then. Several studies have been conducted on the Cleveland voucher

program. A four-year study of achievement outcomes for students who used

vouchers showed they gained no advantage. Kim K. Metcalf, et al.,Evaluation of


21/63

- 11-

the Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program: Student Characteristics and

Academic Achievement,Indiana Univ. Sch. of Educ. (2003). The authors stated,

In general, there are no clear patterns associated with improved or diminished

achievement for students who use a scholarship to attend private schools after the

scores are adjusted for students minority status and estimated family income. The

adjusted achievement of scholarship students was roughly similar to that of

students who enrolled in public schools at the beginning of first grade, and it

remained statistically similar throughout the four years during which the data are

reported.Id.at 110. A second study confirmed that across multiple grades in

multiple subjects, voucher students showed no academic gains as compared to

comparison groups who remained in public school. In some groups, the students

suffered an academic penalty by attending private school. See Clive Belfield, The

Evidence on Education Vouchers: An Application to the Cleveland Scholarship

and Tutoring Program,Natl Ctr. for the Study of Privatization in Educ., Teachers

Coll., Columbia Univ. (2006), available at

http://www.ncspe.org/readrel.php?set=pub&cat=127.

iii.

District of Columbia

The voucher program in the District of Columbia has been studied as well.

One study showed a very small positive impact in the reading scores of some

voucher recipients, but no effect on math scores. Even the positive reading scores


22/63

- 12-

were not found across the board. There was no positive impact on students

transferring from a school classified as needing improvement, no positive impact

on students who started with scores in the lower one-third of the group, and no

positive impact on boys. See Patrick J. Wolf, et al., School Vouchers in the

Nations Capital, School Choice and School Improvement, Harvard Educ. Press

(2011).

iv. Conclusion

It is perhaps not surprising that the outcomes of public school students and

private school students using vouchers would be quite similar. In the jurisdictions

studied, the difference between private and public schools is not profound, given

that the private schools are regulated to make them essentially equivalent to public

schools in terms of quality. See Section II, infra.In North Carolina, however,

because of the limited regulation of private schools, there is a distinct possibility

that the private schools chosen by voucher recipients may be of lesser, even

dramatically lesser, quality than the public schools and will deliver inferior results.

Making meaningful comparisons of student achievement will be virtually

impossible in North Carolina, however, because the state does not require private

schools to use the same testing instruments that are used in public schools. Thus,

no valid comparative data will be available for researchers.


23/63

- 13-

II.

As compared to other jurisdictions in which students can use a

publicly-funded voucher to attend a private school, North Carolina

has the weakest regulation of its private schools.

North Carolinas law governing private schools provides particularly weak

oversight when compared to other states with voucher programs. The following

table summarizes the oversight mechanisms used by jurisdictions with state-wide

or city-wide voucher programs similar to North Carolinas2:

2The programs chosen for comparison are programs available to the general student population, rather than tostudents with special needs, and do not include tax-credit programs.


24/63

- 14-

Requirements for nonpublic schools participating

in school voucher/scholarship program

Jurisdiction StateApproval or

Accredita-tionrequired

StateRequired

Curriculum

RequiredTeacher

Qualifica-tions

RequiredParticipa-

tionin StateTestingProgram

Requiressame

number ofdays/hoursas publicschools

Arizona4

Cleveland

D.C.5

Indiana

Louisiana

Maine6

Milwaukee

NorthCarolina

Ohio7

Vermont

Wisconsin

3The statutory and regulatory citations for each of the requirements represented here are provided in the Appendix.See App. 1(created by counsel forAmici).4Any student with a voucher must be educated in reading, grammar, math, social studies and science.5Instructional days and hours must be approved by D.C. Board but the regulations do not specify the numbers.6If 60% of students are publicly funded, school must participate in the state testing program.7For all high schools and for any school in which 65% of students are getting vouchers.


25/63

- 15-

North Carolina has the fewest mechanisms of any jurisdiction to assure that

the private schools authorized to accept vouchers are providing quality education.

With the exception of Arizona, all the other states and cities with voucher

programs require that private schools be accredited by either an outside agency or

meet certain standards set by the state and administered through the department of

education.8 Similarly, all the other states and cities with voucher programs,

including Arizona, require that the voucher-eligible schools offer a curriculum that

meets specified state or local standards and require a minimum number of hours

and days of instruction.9 All other states and cities require that students be tested

using the same tests that are used for public school studentsthus allowing for

apples-to-apples comparison of achievement -- and most require that aggregated

test data be made public.10

Several have systems that withdraw voucher eligibility

from schools that cannot demonstrate acceptable educational results.11 North

Carolina, however, requires none of these oversight mechanisms. SeeN.C.G.S.

115C-562.1 et seq.; 115C-547 et seq.; 115C-555 et seq. Thus, as compared to

8These states are Indiana, Ohio, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Maine, and Vermont. The cities are Milwaukee, Racine(Wis.), Cleveland, and the District of Columbia.9

These states are Arizona, Indiana, Ohio, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Maine, and Vermont. The cities are Milwaukee,Racine (Wis.), Cleveland, and the District of Columbia.10While North Carolina requires some testing of private school students, the test results need not be made publicunless the school enrolls more than 25 voucher students. N.C.G.S. 115C-562.5(c). Otherwise, the test data mustbe submitted to the State Education Assistance Authority annually, but is not a public record. N.C.G.S. 115C-562.5(a)(4). Test data must be retained for one year by the school itself and made available for inspection by anauthorized representative of North Carolina. N.C.G.S. 115C-549, 115C-557. Maine and Ohio require the sametesting only when a certain number of students enrolled receive vouchers or, for Ohio, when students are in highschool.11Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio.


26/63

- 16-

other jurisdictions with vouchers, North Carolina is a distinct outlier in failing to

adopt a mechanism that holds participating private schools accountable to the

public.

Following is a summary of the laws in other jurisdictions that have voucher

programs:

Indiana: The Indiana Choice Scholarship Program is the countrys largest

state-wide voucher program. Vouchers are available to students in families whose

income is less than 150 percent of the guideline for free and reduced price lunches

in the public school system. Schools accepting vouchers must be accredited

through either a state process or through a recognized regional accrediting agency.

Ind. Code. 20-51-1-6(a)(3). They must teach subjects that are prescribed by the

state of Indiana. Id. 20-51-4-1(f)(9). In addition, schools must participate in the

Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational Progress program. Id. 20-51-1-4.7(5).

Schools that have three years of inadequate scores are prohibited from participating

in the Choice Scholarship program. Id. 20-51-4-9. Indiana schools enrolling

voucher students may not discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national

origin.Id. 20-51-4-3. All scholarship granting organizations must procure an

annual independent financial audit, which is publicly available.Id. 20-51-3-6.

Ohio: Ohio operates the Educational Choice Scholarship Program for

students outside of the Cleveland area; Cleveland administers the Cleveland


27/63

- 17-

Scholarship and Tutoring Program. In both programs, eligible students are those

currently attending a low-performing public school or incoming kindergarteners or

new students who would be assigned to a low-performing school. Ohio Rev. Code

Ann. 3310.33(a)(1). If the familys income is less than 200% of the federal

poverty guidelines, the school accepting the voucher may not charge tuition

beyond the scholarship amount. Id. 3313.02(A).

Private schools eligible to participate in the Educational Choice Scholarship

program or the Cleveland Scholarship program must be a chartered non-public

school.12Id. 3310.02(A). Chartered non-public schools are extensively

regulated. They must be accredited through a regional agency or through an

equivalent path. Ohio Admin. Code 3301-35-12. Teachers must be credentialed

according to state standards. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 3319; Ohio Admin. Code

3301-35-05. In the Cleveland program, all participating students must take the

same assessments as public school students take. Ohio Rev. Code Ann.

3313.976(A)(11). In the Ohio program, if 65 percent of the enrollment consists of

students participating in the state scholarship program, the school must participate

in the full statewide assessment program and report the data publicly. Ohio Rev.

Code Ann. 3301.0711. All non-public chartered high schools that accept

12Chartered non-public schools in Ohio are notthe same as charter schools. Ohio uses different terminology thanmost states. The type of school that is known in most states as a charter school in most states is called acommunity school in Ohio. Chartered non-public schools are private schools that have a special status gained byconforming to a set of standards prescribed by the state.


28/63

- 18-

vouchers must participate in the state assessments and are prohibited from

awarding diplomas to students who have not scored at a specified level. Id.

3313.612, 3313.624, 3301.0710. The state dictates the curriculum for chartered

non-public schools. Id. 3313.60.

Louisiana: Louisianas Student Scholarships for Educational Excellence is

open to low-income students in certain geographic areas who would otherwise be

assigned to a low-performing public school. La. Rev. Stat. Ann. 17:4013(2).

Participating private schools must be approved by the State Board of Elementary

and Secondary Education; approval is contingent upon a showing that the school

offers a curriculum that is of quality at least equal in quality to that prescribed for

similar public schools.Id.17:11, 17:4021(B). Schools must submit a financial

audit to the state; schools are prohibited from racial discrimination. Id.

Participating private schools must administer the state tests, or approved alternate

tests, to all scholarship students, and the aggregate scores must be reported to the

department of education.Id. 17:4024.

Maine: Maine operates a program that is similar to a voucher program

through which certain students attend private schools with public funds. The

Town Tuitioning Program, which has been in effect since the 1800s, requires

municipalities to either offer public school to its school-aged children or pay their


29/63

- 19-

tuition at private schools.13

Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 20-A, 5203 (1), 5204 (1).

The private schools that participate must be either accredited by the regional

accrediting agency or must meet an alternate set of requirements regarding

curriculum, teacher qualifications, and other standards. Id. tit. 20, 2901, 2902.

A private school eligible to accept public tuition payments must be non-sectarian

and must participate in the statewide assessment system if it enrolls more than 60%

or more publicly-funded students. Eligible schools must file reports as required by

the State Commissioner of Education, and are subject to an audit as required by the

State Commissioner of Education. Id. 295155.

Vermont: Like Maine, Vermont has a Town Tuitioning Program that

allows Vermont students to attend independent schools with tuition paid by their

school districts when the district does not offer public schooling. Independent

schools are extensively regulated by the state and must be approved to receive

publicly-funded tuition. Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 16, 82136. They must offer a state-

prescribed curriculum, meet certain financial standards, hire only qualified faculty,

and offer specified physical facilities. Id. In addition, they must follow anti-

discrimination laws. Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 9, 4502.

Arizona: Arizona offers the Empowerment Scholarship Program for

students assigned to underperforming schools. Ariz. Rev. Stat. 15-2401.

13Due to the sparse population in some areas in Maine, some municipalities do not offer public schools for all gradelevels.


30/63

- 20-

Schools that accept voucher students must educate them in reading, grammar,

math, social studies and science.Id. 15-2402. Otherwise, Arizona does not have

quality control measures for its private schools and does not require testing for

voucher recipients, although it does require that private schools be in session the

same number of days and hours as public schools.Id. 15-802B.1. Private schools

that accept vouchers may not discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national

origin. Id. 15-2401(5).

Wisconsin:Two municipalities in Wisconsin, Milwaukee and Racine, along

with the state as a whole, have voucher programs, known as Parental Choice

programs. Wis. Stat. Ann. 119.23. In all those jurisdictions, low-income students

may attend private schools with a publicly-funded voucher. Schools eligible to

receive vouchers must be accredited by an independent accrediting agency. Id.

119.23(2)(a)(7). Teachers must meet prescribed qualifications. Id.

119.23(2)(a)(6),118.60(2)(a)(6). Schools must administer state assessments to all

students receiving a voucher and can lose eligibility for program participation if

their students scores fall below a set minimum. Id. 119.23(10)(a)(5).14

14As a result of the law allowing schools to lose eligibility, 50 schools have been terminated from the statesvoucher program since 2004. The state paid about $139 million to private schools that were subsequently barredfrom the program for failing to meet requirements related to student achievement, inadequate curriculum, studentsafety, and finances. Molly Beck, State paid $139 million to schools terminated from voucher program since 2004,Wisconsin State Journal (Oct. 12, 2014), http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/education/local_schools/state-paid-million-to-schools-terminated-from-voucher-program-since/article_d4277f72-51ca-5da3-b63d-df2a7834569b.html.


31/63

- 21-

District of Columbia: The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program provides

a voucher to low-income students for private school attendance. Eligible schools

must follow a core curriculum, as defined under 20 U.S.C. 7801(11) (English,

reading or language arts, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and

government, economics, arts, history, and geography.). Teachers must have a

baccalaureate degree or equivalent degree in the subject matter taught. D.C. Code

38-1853.07(a)(4)(F). The students who receive vouchers must be tested so that

their educational performance can be evaluated. Id. 38-1853.09. Reports of

assessment data must be made public. Id. Participating schools may not

discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, or sex. Id. 38-

1853.08(a) (except that single-sex schools may discriminate on the basis of sex and

religious institutions may discriminate on the basis of religion when hiring).

Schools operating for fewer than five years are subject to a financial review to

assure sustainability. Id. 38-1853.07(a)(4)(C).

In contrast to these other states, North Carolina (along with Arizona)

exercises very few controls over its private and religious schools, choosing instead

to give them free rein to educate as they see fit. SeeN.C.G.S.115C-547-554

(Private Church Schools and Schools of Religious Charter); 115C-555-562

(Qualified Nonpublic Schools). North Carolina has not had an approval process

for private schools since 1979. See State Regulation of Private Schools, U.S. Dept.


32/63

- 22-

of Educ. (2009). It has no requirements for the curriculum or teacher

qualifications. SeeN.C.G.S.115C-547-562 . It does not require that students

participate in the statewide accountability system that allows parents and the public

to gauge the academic achievements of the enrolled students and compare those

achievements to other students. SeeN.C.G.S.115C-549, 550, 557, 558. This

hands-off approach was developed during a time when private and religious

schools received no public money. In light of the voucher program, however,

which provides taxpayer support of these schools, these limited standards have

significantly more consequence to the citizens of North Carolina.

III.

Private schools in North Carolina authorized to accept

vouchers are primarily religious schools, without accreditation,

without certified teachers, and without a curriculum that

parallels the state standards.

According to the North Carolina Division of Non-Public Schools, there are

715 non-public schools in North Carolina. SeeN.C. Directory of Non-Public

Schools, Conventional Schools Edition,http://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspx.

These private schools vary dramatically on nearly every characteristic, except for

one: they are all eligible to accept a voucher. SeeN.C.G.S. 115C-562.2

(extending eligibility to any nonpublic school. )

To better understand the nature of the schools that will be eligible to accept a

voucher under the new North Carolina program, the Childrens Law Clinic at Duke
http://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspxhttp://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspxhttp://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspx


33/63

- 23-

Law School undertook a study in late 2013 and early 2014 of North Carolina

private schools. See Characteristics of North Carolinas Private Schools, App. 2-

20.Information was gathered from public sources, such as the N.C. Division of

Non-Public Education (DNPE) and from the websites of the private schools.

Additional data were generated through an extensive phone survey of the private

schools listed in the DNPE directory. Although not every school was reached by

phone, and not all provided answers to all the survey questions, seventy percent of

the schools in the directory provided at least some information. Following is a

summary of some of the most pertinent information about private schools that are

eligible to receive vouchers:

Overall characteristics: The 71515non-public schools listed in the

DNPE directory are located throughout the state, although 11 counties

have no private schools.16Seventeen counties have just one religious

private school and no independent schools.17 Twenty-three of the schools

are boarding schools, and 34 are special schools, such as treatment

facilities, wilderness programs, and schools focused on children with

particular special needs. The remaining schools include various grade

15At the time of the initial study, the directory listed 685 nonpublic schools. The directory now lists 715 nonpublicschools.16These counties are: Ashe, Camden, Caswell, Edgecombe, Gates, Jones, Martin, Pender, Perquimans, Tyrrell, andWashington.17These counties are: Alexander, Alleghany, Anson, Cherokee, Chowan, Clay, Currituck, Davie, Franklin, Graham,Granville, Greene, Hyde, Lincoln, McDowell, Pamlico, Polk, Surry, and Warren. In each of these counties, the oneprivate school that exists is a Christian school.


34/63

- 24-

levels, with some offering education at just a few grade levels and others

offering the full range from kindergarten through twelfth grade.

Enrollment: A quarter of the private schools in North Carolina have

enrollments of fewer than 20 students. Another 20 percent have

enrollments of fewer than 50 students. The remainder, just over half,

range from 51 to 1,500 students.

Religious affiliation: Approximately 70 percent of North Carolinas

private schools are religiously affiliated. The remaining 30 percent are

independent.

Tuition: The average tuition of private elementary schools is $6,500; for

middle schools it is $7,035; and for high school it is $7,736. Only 35

percent of schools offer tuition that could be fully paid by a voucher at

the maximum level of $4,200 per year. Nearly all (92%) of the schools

with tuition at or under the amount of the voucher ($4,200 per year) are

religious schools.

Accreditation: A large majority of private schools (69%) are not

accredited by any type of accrediting agency.

Certification: Twenty percent of private schools have no state certified

teachers on their staffs. In another 25 percent of private schools, fewer

than half of all the schools teachers are certified. Approximately a third


35/63

- 25-

of private schools employ all certified teachers. Of the schools that will

be available to voucher students (those with tuition at or under $4,200),

45 percent have either no or less than 25 percent certified teachers.

Curriculum: Only a quarter of the private schools follow the North

Carolina standards with regard to curriculum.

Integration: The typical private school in North Carolina is not

significantly integrated. Seventy percent of private schools are

predominately of one race (i.e., at least 80 percent of the students are of

the same race); 30 percent enroll more than 90 percent of the same race.

Much is unknown about the private schools that are available to students

with vouchers. Because private schools have no obligation to report publicly on

the academic outcomes of the children who attend, such data are unavailable.

Because curricular standards, teacher qualifications, and outside accreditation are

not required by state law, the public has few tools to judge whether the money

spent on vouchers is accomplishing the purpose for which it was appropriated.

Given that the voucher program was started during the course of this

litigation, additional information is now available about the actual distribution of

vouchers.18 See Total Voucher Funds Disbursed to NPS Schools, App. 21. An

analysis of the information provided by the State reveals the following about the

18The information was current as of 9/29/14.


36/63

- 26-

students and schools that actually received vouchers during the first distribution of

state funds:

A total of 568 students received a voucher, with the average amountof $2,016 for the first semester. The total expenditure was$1,145,091.

Of the total, 552 students (97%) are enrolled at religious schools; 16(3%) are enrolled at independent schools.

A total of 112 nonpublic schools now enroll students with vouchers.

Of the 112 nonpublic schools currently enrolling voucher students,

five schools have enrollments of 10 or fewer students; another twelvehave enrollments between 11 and 25 students. The median enrollmentis 100, with 56 schools having enrollments of more than 100 and 56schools with enrollments of less than 100.

These data confirm what was largely predicted when the voucher program

was proposed: the vast majority of students using the vouchers would enroll in

religious schools, many of them small. Some very small schools are apparently

using the voucher program to increase their enrollment. For example, the Created

for You Learning Academy in Red Springs, N.C., had an enrollment of one student

in 2010-11; two students in 2011-12; no students in 2012-13, and two students in

2013-14. See DNPE Directory, 2011-2014. Nevertheless, five students were

awarded vouchers to attend the school in 2014-15. SeeApp 21.


37/63

- 27-

CONCLUSION

Amicihope their Brief will assist the court in evaluating the issue of whether

the use of public money to pay tuition to private schools serves a constitutionally

valid public purposeand meets other constitutional standards. The independent

research on school vouchers fails to support the claims of those who seek to justify

the use of public money for private school education. Neither the students using

the vouchers nor the students left behind in the now-diminished public schools

gain any demonstrable educational advantage. The absence of a regulatory scheme

in North Carolina to assure the quality of private schools accepting publicly-funded

vouchers puts voucher recipients here at an even greater risk than students in other

states of falling behind academically. Based on their extensive expertise and

research of North Carolinas voucher program,Amici urge the Court to affirm the

decision of the Superior Court.

Respectfully submitted, this 2nd day of February, 2015.

Electronically submitted

Jane R. Wettach, NC Bar No. 10101Box 90360Durham, NC 27708-0360Tel: 919-613-7169Fax: [email protected]

Counsel for Amici Helen F. Ladd, William A. Darity, Jr., Roslyn Arlin Mickelson,

Charles T. Clotfelter, SherickHughes, Jenni Owen, and the Duke Childrens Law

Clinic


38/63

- 28-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have served the foregoing Brief of Amicus Curiae upon the

following counsel by United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as

follows:

Counsel for Plaintiff/AppelleesBurton CraigePATTERSON HARKAVY LLP1312 Annapolis Dr., Suite 103Raleigh, NC 27608

Narendra K. GhoshPATTERSON HARKAVY LLP100 Europa Dr., Suite 250Chapel Hill, NC 27517

Christine BischoffCarlene McNulty

NORTH CAROLINA JUSTICE CENTER224 S. Dawson Street

Raleigh, NC 27601

Counsel for State of North Carolina

Lauren ClemmonsMelissa L. Trippe

N.C. Attorney General's OfficeP.O. Box 629Raleigh, NC 27602

Counsel for State Board of Education

Laura E. CrumplerTiffany Y. Lucas

N.C. Attorney General's OfficeP.O. Box 629Raleigh, NC 27602


39/63

- 29-

Counsel for Defendant-Intervenors Tillis & Berger

Noah H. Huffstetler IIIStephen D. Martin

Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough, LLPGlenLake One, Suite 2004140 Parklake AvenueRaleigh, NC 27612

Counsel for Defendant-Intervenors Perry & Curry

Richard D. KomerRenee FlahertyInstitute for Justice901 N. Glebe Road, Suite 900Arlington, VA 22203

John E. BranchShanahan Law Group, PLLC128 E. Hargett Street, Suite 300Raleigh, NC 27601

This the 2nd day of February, 2015.

Electronically SubmittedJane R. Wettach, NC Bar # 10101Box 90360Duke University School of LawDurham, NC 27708-0360(919) [email protected]

Counsel for Amici Helen F. Ladd, William A. Darity, Jr., Roslyn Arlin Mickelson,

Charles T. Clotfelter, SherickHughes, Jenni Owen, and the Duke Childrens Law

Clinic

The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Duke Law students Jenna

Goldberg and Peter Wyman in the preparation of this Brief.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


40/63

CONTENTS OF APPENDIX

REQUIREMENTS FOR NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS PARTICIPATING

IN SCHOOL VOUCHER/SCHOLARSHIP

PROGRAM.. 1

CHARACTERISTICS OF NORTH CAROLINA PRIVATE

SCHOOLS2

OPPORTUNITY SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM FUNDS DISBURSED

BY SCHOOLS. 22


41/63

Appendix

Requirements for nonpublic schools participating

in school voucher/scholarship program

Jurisdiction

StateApproval or

Accreditationrequired

StateRequired

Curriculum

RequiredTeacher

Qualifications

Required

Participationin State

TestingProgram

Requires

same numberof days/hours

as publicschools

ArizonaAriz. Rev. Stat.

Ann. 15-

2402(B)(1)

Ariz. Rev. Stat.

Ann. 15-

802(G)(3)

ClevelandOhio Rev. Code

Ann.

3310.02(A)

Ohio Rev. Code

Ann. 3313.60

Ohio Rev. Code

Ann. 3319;

Ohio Admin.

Code 3301-35-05

Ohio Rev. Code

Ann.

3313.976(A)(11)

Ohio Rev. Code

Ann. 3321.07

D.C.D.C. Code 38-

202(d)D.C. Code 38-

202(b), (d)D.C. Code 38-

1853.07(a)(4)(F)D.C. Code 38-

1853.08(h)

D.C. Mun. Regs.

tit. 5-A,

A2100.3

IndianaInd. Code 20-

51-1-6(a)(3)

Ind. Code 20-

51-4-1(f)(5)(9)

511 Ind. Admin.

Code 6.1-6-

1(a)

Ind. Code 20-

51-1-4.7(5)

Ind. Code 20-

30-2-2, 3

LouisianaLa. Rev. Stat.

Ann.

17:4021(A)(1)

La. Rev. Stat.

Ann. 17:11,

17:4021

La. Rev. Stat.

Ann.

17:236(A)

La. Rev. Stat.

Ann. 17:4023

La. Rev. Stat.

Ann.

17:236(A)

MaineMe. Rev. Stat.

Ann. tit. 20-A,

5001-A(3)(A)(1)

Me. Rev. Stat.

Ann. tit. 20-A,

2901, 2902

Me. Rev. Stat.

Ann. tit. 20-A,

2902(5),

13003(1)(B)

Me. Rev. Stat.

Ann. tit. 20-A,

2951(6)

Me. Rev. Stat.

Ann. tit. 20-A,

2902(6)(A),

(B)

MilwaukeeWis. Stat. Ann.

119.23(2)(a)(7)

Wis. Stat. Ann.

118.165(d)

Wis. Stat. Ann.

119.23(2)(a)(6)

Wis. Stat. Ann.

119.23(7)(e)

Wis. Stat. Ann.

119.23(2)(a)(8)

North

Carolina

OhioOhio Rev. Code

Ann.

3310.02(A)

Ohio Rev. Code

Ann. 3313.60

Ohio Rev. Code

Ann. 3319;

Ohio Admin.

Code 3301-35-

05

Ohio Rev. Code

Ann.

3301.0711(K)(1)

(a), 3313.612,

3313.624,

3301.0710

Ohio Rev. Code

Ann. 3321.07

Vermont

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.

16, 828; 7-1

Vt. Code R.

3:2224.1

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.

16, 166(b),

906

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.

16, 166(b)

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.

16, 166(g)

7-1 Vt. Code R.

3:2226.10

WisconsinWis. Stat. Ann.

118.60(2)(a)(7)

Wis. Stat. Ann.

118.165(d)

Wis. Stat. Ann.

118.60(2)(a)(6)

Wis. Stat. Ann.

118.60(7)(e)

Wis. Stat. Ann.

118.60(2)(a)(8)


42/63

Characteristics of

North Carolina

Private Schools

February 2014

A report issued by:

Childrens Law Clinic

Duke University School of Law

Durham, North Carolina

- 2 -


43/63

Characteristics of North Carolina Private Schools Page 2

Introduction

In 2013, the North Carolina General Assembly created a school voucher program. Through this

program, known as the Opportunity Scholarship program, low-income school children can apply

for a voucher of up to $4,200 per year to apply toward tuition at a private school. Theapplication period opened February 1, 2014; the first vouchers are scheduled to be available for

the 2014-15 academic year. The program is administered by the State Education Assistance

Authority.

The law allows a voucher to be used at any nonpublic school. In North Carolina, nonpublic

schools are subject to just a few regulations by the state, most related to health and safety.

Nonpublic schools may be religious or independent. They are free to determine the type of

curriculum that will be offered and the credentials of the teachers that will be hired. They are

required to administer nationally-standardized tests annually at certain grade levels and report

the performance data to the State Education Assistance Authority.

Because nonpublic schools will be supported with public money through the voucher program,

the public will benefit from knowing more about them. Thus, this study was undertaken to

make available to the public information about the nonpublic schools that will be eligible for

voucher payments.

Methodology

The study began by accessing the Directory of Non-Public Schools maintained by the N.C.

Division of Non-Public Education (NCDNPE) and available on its website at

(http://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspx). The most recent Directory was published in June 2013,

containing information from the 2012-13 school term. For each school, this directory provides

the name, address, county, name of chief administrator, grade levels offered, status as either

religious or independent, accreditation status, enrollment (by sex), and the number of staff.

The study proceeded by using volunteer law students1to conduct an internet search and phone

survey of all the schools listed in the Directory, during December 2013 and January 2014. The

students were instructed to gather whatever data was available on the school website, and

then follow up with a phone call and/or an e-mail to an administrator at the school. Website

information was confirmed by phone or e-mail.

1The law students were enrolled at either Duke Law School or the University of North Carolina Law School. They

were instructed and supervised in the data collection by either Jane Wettach, director, Duke Childrens Law Clinic

or Christine Bischoff and Matt Ellinwood, staff attorneys at the North Carolina Justice Center. All data was

analyzed by the Childrens Law Clinic.

- 3 -
http://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspxhttp://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspxhttp://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspxhttp://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspx


44/63


In the phone survey, the callers sought information about the schools tuition, its plan to accept

voucher payments, enrollment criteria, teacher certification, curriculum, and racial

composition.

More than 70 percent of the private schools in the NCDNPE Directory responded to the survey,

providing answers to at least some of the questions posed. Eleven of the schools had closed.

The surveyors recorded the answers and correlated it with the data in the Directory of Non-

Public Schools.

An initial analysis of a portion of the collected data is contained in this report of Preliminary

Findings. Further analysis will be presented in a later report.

Key Findings

A total of 696 private schools are registered with the State Division of Non-Public

Education. Of those, 70 percent are religious and 30 percent are independent.

Of the 696 schools, 38 are boarding schools and 35 are special schools such as

treatment facilities, wilderness programs, and schools focused on students with

particular special needs. The remainder are day schools. Some serve just a few grade

levels and others serve up to 13 grade levels (kindergarten through grade 12).

North Carolinas private schools operate throughout the state, though there are 13

counties with no private schools and another 18 counties with just one private school.

In those 18 counties, the single private school is religious. A large majority of the private

schools, particularly independent schools, are concentrated in the urban areas of the

state.

Approximately half of the schools have enrollments of 50 or fewer students; a quarter of

schools have enrollments of 20 or fewer students. Eighty nine schools13 percent of

the totalenroll ten or fewer students.

The average tuition of private schools in North Carolina, excluding boarding schools and

special schools, is $6,690. Approximately 38 percent of schools charge tuition at some

grade level that could be fully paid by a voucher (i.e., $4,200 per year or less). Of those

schools whose tuition could be met with a voucher payment, 92 percent are religious

- 4 -


45/63


schools. At the middle school and high school levels, nearly 95 percent are religious

schools.

About 70 percent of private schools indicated a willingness to accept voucher payments.

About 30 percent of the private schools in North Carolina have some type of

accreditation from an independent agency. Of the schools with tuition at or below the

$4,200 voucher level, less than five percent of high schools have any type of

accreditation and less than 10 percent of grade schools and middle schools have

accreditation.

About 30 percent of the private schools in North Carolina employ only certified

teachers. Twenty percent of schools have no certified teachers; another 25 percent

have fewer than half certified teachers.

About 25 percent of the private schools follow the North Carolina curriculum standards.

More than 30 percent of the private schools reported that more than 90 percent of the

students are of one race. Twenty-nine percent reported that more than 90 percent of

the students are white, and 4 percent reported that more than 90 percent of the

students are black.

About 40 percent of private schools have academic criteria for admission; about 20percent have religious criteria for admission.

As noted, the information presented here is preliminary. We hope, however, that it will be

useful as the state embarks on its school voucher program.

Childrens Law Clinic

Duke University Law SchoolBox 90360

Durham, NC 27708-0360

(919)613-7169

February 2014

- 5 -


46/63


Tables

1. Overall Characteristics of Private Schools ........................................................................... 6

2. Enrollment at North Carolina Private Schools ..................................................................... 7

3. Grade Levels Offered by Private Schools ............................................................................ 84. Average Tuition of North Carolina Private Schools.............................................................. 9

5. Religious/Independent Schools by Tuition and Grade Level .............................................. 10

6. Number and Percentage of Private Schools that Plan to Accept Vouchers ......................... 11

7. Percentage of Schools with Tuition $4200 that Plan to Accept Vouchers......................... 12

8. Percentage of Schools with Tuition >$4200 that Plan to Accept Vouchers ........................ 12

9. Teacher Certification Distribution .................................................................................... 13

10. Percentage of Certified Teachers in Schools with Tuition $4200................................... 14

11. Accreditation Status ....................................................................................................... 15

12. Accreditation Status by Tuition and Grade Level ............................................................. 16

13. Implementation of the North Carolina Curriculum .......................................................... 17

14. Racial Integration ........................................................................................................... 18

15. Enrollment Criteria...19

- 6 -


47/63


1.

Overall Characteristics of Private Schools

The North Carolina Division of Non-Public Education (DNPE), within the Department of

Administration, publishes an annual directory of non-public schools. It can be found at

the divisions website:http://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspx. The most recent

directory, from 2012-13, includes 696 non-public schools. The table below reflects thebreakdown of schools included in the directory.

Day Schools Boarding Schools Special Schools

Religious 455 17 8

Non-Religious 171 19 26

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Overall Characteristics of Private Schools

- 7 -
http://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspxhttp://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspxhttp://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspxhttp://www.ncdnpe.org/hhh118.aspx


48/63


2.

Enrollment at North Carolina Private Schools

The following information is drawn from the Directory of Non-Public Schools published

by the Division of Non-Public Education. Not every school reported its enrollment.

Eighty nine schools enroll between one and ten students.

0: 1-20: 21-50: 51-100:101-

250:

251-

500:

501-

1000: >1000:

Schools Within Range 6 167 126 100 122 56 40 9

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

North Carolina Private School Enrollment

Numbers

- 8 -


49/63


3.

Grade Levels Offered by Private Schools

The following information regarding the grade levels offered is drawn from the

Directory of Non-Public Schools published by the Division of Non-Public Education. The

total is greater than the total number of schools (696) because some schools offer grade

levels in more than one category.

Elementary Schools Middle Schools High Schools

Number of Schools 570 528 420

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Grade Levels Offered by Private Schools

- 9 -


50/63


4.

Average Tuition of North Carolina Private Schools

This table reflects the average tuition of private schools at each grade level. In

calculating these averages, the boarding schools and special schools were excluded.

These amounts are the average for day schools. Responses came from 403 elementary

schools, 372 middle schools, and 282 high schools.

Elementary School Middle School High School

Average Tuition $6,445 $6,687 $7,060

$6,100

$6,200

$6,300

$6,400

$6,500

$6,600

$6,700

$6,800

$6,900

$7,000

$7,100

$7,200

Average Tuition in NC Private Schools

- 10 -


51/63


5.

Religious/Independent Schools by Tuition and Grade Level

This table shows the average tuition at private schools broken down by whether they

are religious or independent, by grade level, and by whether the tuition could be met by

using a $4,200 voucher. Responses came from 398 elementary schools, 361 middle

schools, and 267 high schools.

Of Schools

$4200, Percent

Religious

Of Schools

$4200, Percent

Non-Religious

Of Schools

>$4200, Percent

Religious

Of Schools

>$4200, Percent

Non-Religious

Elementary School 90.9% 9.1% 58.5% 41.5%

Middle School 94.1% 5.9% 63.6% 36.4%

High School 94.8% 5.2% 65.1% 34.9%

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%

80.0%90.0%

100.0%

Religious/Independent Schools by Tuition and

Grade Level

- 11 -


52/63


6.

Number and Percentage of Private Schools that Plan to Accept Vouchers

Private schools will have the choice of whether to accept a voucher for payment of

tuition. This table reflects the number and percentage of schools that reported an initial

determination of whether they would accept vouchers. Responses were obtained from

320 schools. Schools are not restricted from either 1) discounting their tuition so that itcould be fully met with a voucher; or 2) charging the family for the tuition that exceeds

the voucher amount.

Yes Maybe No


Percentage of Schools 51.9 12.5 35.6

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140160

180

Number and Percentage of Private Schools that

Plan to Accept Vouchers

- 12 -


53/63


7.

Percentage of Schools with Tuition $4200 that Plan to Accept Vouchers;

8.

Percentage of Schools with Tuition >$4200 that Plan to Accept Vouchers

The following two tables show the percentage of private schools that plan to accept

vouchers, separated by grade level and tuition level. The demarcation line of $4,200 is

used because that is the maximum annual voucher that will be available. Responsescame from 270 elementary schools, 245 middle schools, and 187 high schools.

Accepting VouchersMaybe Accepting

Vouchers

Not Accepting

Vouchers

Elementary School 53.4% 9.3% 37.3%

Middle School 53.3% 8.4% 38.3%

High School 54.2% 6.3% 39.6%

0.0%

10.0%20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Of Schools with Tuition $4200, Percentage

Accepting Vouchers

Accepting VouchersMaybe Accepting

Vouchers

Not Accepting

Vouchers

Elementary School 52.6% 14.5% 32.9%

Middle School 52.9% 13.8% 33.3%

High School 54.9% 14.3% 30.8%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Of Schools with Tuition >$4200, Percentage

Accepting Vouchers

- 13 -


54/63


9.

Teacher Certification Distribution

This table reflects the number and percentage of certified teachers employed by the

school. A total of 287 schools responded. Note: North Carolina does not regulate the

qualifications of teachers in private schools.

0% 1-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-99% 100%

Number of Schools 57 43 28 20 34 105

Percentage of Schools 19.86 14.98 9.76 6.97 11.85 36.59

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Teacher Certification Distribution

- 14 -


55/63


10.

Percentage of Certified Teachers in Schools with Tuition $4200

This table reflects the distribution of certified teachers in schools with tuition that could

be fully met with a voucher payment. Responses came from 104 elementary schools, 89

middle schools, and 77 high schools.

0% Certified1-25%

Certified

26-50%

Certified

51-75%

Certified

76-99%

Certified

100%

Certified

Elementary School 30.8% 13.5% 15.4% 6.7% 12.5% 21.2%

Middle School 30.3% 12.4% 16.9% 9.0% 13.5% 18.0%

High School 33.8% 13.0% 15.6% 3.9% 14.3% 19.5%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

Certified Teachers in Schools with

Tuition $4200

- 15 -


56/63


11.

Accreditation Status

The following information is drawn from the Directory of Non-Public Schools published

by the Division of Non-Public Education. It reflects the accreditation status at 685 non-

public schools. Accreditation can come from any one of the following accrediting

agencies: Association of Christian Schools International; North Carolina Christian School

Association; Southern Association of Independent Schools; Middle States Commission ofElem/Secondary Schools; National Council for Private School Accreditation; Southern

Association of Colleges and Schools. Note: No independent accreditation or state

approval is required for a private school to operate in North Carolina.

YesSpecial School

AccreditationNo


Percentage of Schools 31.1 5.0 63.9

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Accreditation Status

- 16 -


57/63


12.

Accreditation Status by Tuition and Grade Level

The table correlates the information on accreditation with tuition level and grade levels

offered. Responses were from 398 Elementary Schools, 361 Middle Schools, and 267

High Schools. Note: No independent accreditation or state approval is required for a

private school to operate in North Carolina.

Of Schools

$4200, Percent

Accredited

Of Schools

$4200, Percent

Not Accredited

Of Schools

>$4200, Percent

Accredited

Of Schools

>$4200, Percent

Not Accredited

Elementary School 8.4% 91.6% 59.3% 40.7%

Middle School 8.1% 91.9% 63.6% 36.4%

High School 4.3% 95.7% 68.4% 31.6%

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

120.0%

Accreditation Status by Tuition and Grade Level

- 17 -


58/63


13.

Implementation of the North Carolina Curriculum

This table reflects the number and percentage of schools that implement the North

Carolina curricular standards. A total of 349 schools responded. Note: North Carolina

law allows private schools to choose their own curriculum.

Yes No

Number of Schools 99 250

Percentage of Schools 28.37 71.63

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Implementation of the North Carolina

Curriculum

- 18 -


59/63


14.

Racial Composition

Schools were asked to report the racial composition of the school. The table shows the

number that reported more than 90 percent of students were of a particular race, and

those that reported a majority of students were of one race. This latter category

included any school that did not report a particular percentage, but used a term such asmostly, predominantly or majority. A total of 284 schools responded to this

question.

50-90% White 50-90% Black 90% White 90% Black OtherNumber 154 16 81 11 22

Percent 54.2 5.6 28.5 3.9 7.7

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140160

180

Racial Composition

- 19 -


60/63


15.

Enrollment Criteria

Schools were asked if they had particular admission standards or other criteria for

enrollment. This chart reflects the following the various criteria that were reported.

Religious qualification means that students (or their parents) must ascribe to certain

religious beliefs to be admitted. Academic requirementsmeans that admittedstudents must have certain test scores or meet other academic standards to be

admitted. Excludes Disabled Children refers to schools that reported they do not

accept students with disabilities. Requires disability refers to schools that exclusively

provide education to children with certain disabilities and do not accept typical learners.

Discretionarymeans that the head of school uses personal discretion in selecting

students. Behavioral refers to schools that reported they do not accept children with

behavioral problems. Miscellaneous includes various other criteria for acceptance.

Some schools have two or more of the various enrollment criteria.

Religious

Qualification

Academic

Requirements

Excludes

Disabled

Children

Requires

DisabilityDiscretionary Behavioral Miscellaneous

Number 80 157 8 21 94 22 13

Percent 19.9 39.0 2.0 5.2 23.3 5.5 3.2

0

20

40

6080

100

120

140

160

180

Enrollment Criteria

- 20 -


61/63


The Childrens Law Clinic gratefully acknowledges the contributions of all the law

students who assisted in gathering and analyzing the data contained in this report.

Special thanks go to Duke Law students Kristi Lundstrom, Nichole Davis, Shamus Hyland,

and Susan Walker.

- 21 -


62/63

Opportunity Scholarship Program

Funds Disbursed by School

School Students Funds Average Sch 9/29/2014

Alamance Christian School - Graham - NC 6 12,600 2,100

Al-Huda Academy - Durham - NC 2 4,200 2,100

Al-Iman School - Raleigh - NC 16 32,922 2,058

An-Noor School - Raleigh - NC 5 10,500 2,100

Avonlea Learning Community - Weaverville - NC 3 6,300 2,100

Bailey`s Grove Baptist School - Asheboro - NC 4 6,140 1,535

Bal-Perazim Christian Academy - Fayetteville - NC 16 33,600 2,100

Benaja Christian Academy - Reidsville - NC 3 3,650 1,217Berean Baptist Academy - Fayetteville - NC 6 12,600 2,100

Bethany Christian School - Thomasville - NC 2 2,562 1,281

Bethel Christian Academy - Kinston - NC 7 13,910 1,987

Bethel Christian Academy - Spruce Pine - NC 11 16,250 1,477

Bethesda Christian Academy - Durham - NC 3 6,300 2,100

Bible Baptist Christian School - Matthews - NC 4 8,400 2,100

Caldwell Academy - Greensboro - NC 5 10,500 2,100

Calvary Christian School - Wilmington - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Calvary Education Center - Lemon Springs - NC 5 8,420 1,684

Canterbury School - Greensboro - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Cape Fear Christian Academy - Erwin - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Carolina Baptist Academy - Reidsville - NC 3 4,349 1,450

Charlotte United Christian Acad - Charlotte - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Christian Faith Center Acad. - Creedmoor - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Community Baptist School - Reidsville - NC 5 10,488 2,098

Concord First Assembly Academy - Concord - NC 17 34,025 2,001

Concordia Christian Day Sch. - Conover - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Cornerstone Christian Academy - Fayetteville - NC 6 12,340 2,057

Cornerstone Christian Academy - Statesville - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Cramerton Christian Academy - Cramerton - NC 5 9,713 1,943

Created for You Learning Acad - Red Springs - NC 5 8,730 1,746

Crossroads Chr Sch of Statesville - Statesville - 4 8,400 2,100

Daniel Academy - Concord - NC 1 1,700 1,700

Dream Big Christian Academy K-12 - Dunn - NC 5 10,198 2,040

Emerson Waldorf School - Chapel Hill - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Faith Assembly Christian Academy - Durham - NC 3 5,090 1,697

Faith Assembly Christian Academy - Raleigh - NC 1 2,100 2,100Faith Christian School - Rocky Mount - NC 1 600 600

Fellowship Baptist Academy - Durham - NC 3 5,955 1,985

First Wesleyan Christian School - Gastonia - NC 3 6,120 2,040

Flaming Sword Christian Academy - Fayetteville - 2 4,200 2,100

Freedom Christian Academy - Fayetteville - NC 14 29,400 2,100

Gospel Light Christian School - Walkertown - NC 16 26,597 1,662

Grace Academy - Rockwell - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Greenfield School - Wilson - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Greensboro Islamic Academy - Greensboro - NC 43 90,300 2,100

Harvest Time Christian Academy - North Wilkesboro 1 2,095 2,095

Haw River Christian Academy - Pittsboro - NC 1 2,100 2,100

High Point Christian Academy - High Point - NC 10 21,000 2,100

Hobgood Academy - Hobgood - NC 1 2,100 2,100Holy Trinity Catholic Middle School - Charlotte - 1 2,100 2,100

Immaculate Heart of Mary Cath Sch - High Point - 2 4,200 2,100

Jarvisburg Christian Academy - Jarvisburg - NC 3 6,300 2,100

Johnathan`s House Chr School - Fayetteville - NC 11 23,100 2,100

Knowledge is Power Early Lrng Prog - Charlotte - 1 2,100 2,100

Lake Norman Christian School - Davidson - NC 3 6,300 2,100

Liberty Christian Academy - Richlands - NC 10 21,000 2,100

Living Water Christian School - Jacksonville - NC 1 1,770 1,770

Male Leadership Academy of Charlotte - Charlotte 1 2,100 2,100

Mintz Christian Academy - Roseboro - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Page 1 of 2

- 22 -


63/63

Opportunity Scholarship Program

Funds Disbursed by School

Miracle Tabernacle Christian Sch - Roanoke Rapids 1 2,100 2,100

Mount Zion Christian Academy - Durham - NC 11 23,100 2,100

Mountain Island Day School - Charlotte - NC 6 12,600 2,100

National Child Care Institute - Matthews - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Neighbors Grove Christian Acad - Asheboro - NC 2 3,740 1,870

New Bern Christian Academy - New Bern - NC 3 6,300 2,100

New City Christian School - Asheville - NC 2 4,200 2,100

New Hope Christian Academy - Thomasville - NC 2 4,200 2,100

New Life Christian Academy - Rocky Mount - NC 3 4,950 1,650Northside Christian Academy - Charlotte - NC 5 10,500 2,100

Oasis Performing Arts School - Charlotte - NC 4 8,400 2,100

Our Lady of Assumption Cath Sch - Charlotte - NC 4 8,400 2,100

Our Lady Perpetual Help Cath Sch - Rocky Mount - 1 2,100 2,100

Pope John Paul II Catholic School - Southern Pine 1 2,100 2,100

Raleigh Christian Academy - Raleigh - NC 8 16,800 2,100

Rhema Christian Academy - Goldsboro - NC 4 7,800 1,950

Rockfish Christian Academy - Raeford - NC 3 6,300 2,100

Rockwell Christian School - Rockwell - NC 3 5,313 1,771

Rocky Mount Academy - Rocky Mount - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Sacred Heart Catholic School - Salisbury - NC 2 4,200 2,100

Salem Academy - Winston-Salem - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Scotland Christian Academy - Laurinburg - NC 3 4,530 1,510

Shining Light Academy - Greensboro - NC 2 4,188 2,094

Shining Light Baptist Academy - Monroe - NC 4 8,400 2,100

South Charlotte Baptist Academy - Pineville - NC 8 16,800 2,100

Southpoint Academy - Durham - NC 6 10,500 1,750

St. Ann Catholic School - Fayetteville - NC 6 12,537 2,090

St. Mary Catholic School - Goldsboro - NC 2 4,200 2,100

St. Paul Catholic Educ Cntr - New Bern - NC 5 10,500 2,100

St. Pius X Catholic School - Greensboro - NC 4 8,400 2,100

St. Raphael`s Catholic School - Raleigh - NC 5 10,500 2,100

Star Christian Academy - Smithfield - NC 7 14,250 2,036

Stedman Christian Academy - Stedman - NC 3 6,207 2,069

Stevens Prep Academy - Raleigh - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Tabernacle Christian School - Monroe - NC 17 35,189 2,070

Teaching Achieving Students Acad - Charlotte - NC 3 6,300 2,100Temple Christian School - Rockingham - NC 4 6,480 1,620

Triad Baptist Christian Academy - Kernersville - 2 3,890 1,945

Tri-City Adventist JR Academy - High Point - NC 16 32,483 2,030

Trinity Christian School - Fayetteville - NC 18 37,800 2,100

Union Grove Christian School - Lexington - NC 2 3,174 1,587

Unity Christian Academy - Chocowinity - NC 2 4,200 2,100

Upper Room Christian Academy - Raleigh - NC 13 27,300 2,100

Vandalia Christian School - Greensboro - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Victory Christian Academy - Gastonia - NC 13 27,171 2,090

Victory Christian Center School - Charlotte - NC 13 27,246 2,096

Wake Christian Academy - Raleigh - NC 6 12,600 2,100

Westchester Country Day School - High Point - NC 1 2,100 2,100

Willow Tree Community School - Boiling Springs - 2 4,119 2,060Winston Salem Christian School - Winston-Salem - N 13 27,300 2,100Word of God Christian Academy - Raleigh - NC 26 54,600 2,100

- 23 -

Documents

Education Scholars Brief