Charter Schools: Guidance Needed for Military Base Schools on Startup and Operational Issues
Published: 2013-02-05T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Many families struggle to balance their job demands with ensuring that their children have access to a high-quality education, and for military families this struggle can be exacerbated by the highly mobile nature of their service. Family concerns about education affect readiness and retention of military personnel, according to the Department of Defense (DOD). The majority of children of military families in the United States attend public schools. A 2008 DOD study recommended offering military families a public charter school option in areas with poorly-performing local schools. In response to a directive in a House Appropriations Committee report, GAO examined: (1) the characteristics and origins of charter schools on military installations, and (2) the challenges charter schools on military installations have faced in starting up and continuing their operations.
To conduct this review, GAO interviewed officials in the eight charter schools on domestic military bases and one school being planned; visited two schools; interviewed Education and DOD officials; and reviewed relevant federal and state laws, federal regulations and guidance, and school, federal agency, and other documents.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Eight charter schools were located on domestic military bases and one charter school was being developed on a base at the time of GAO's review. The military base charter schools differed in their academic focuses and served militaryconnected students to different degrees. For example, one school focused on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics while another used the arts to teach all subjects. Enrollment of military-connected students at these base charter schools ranged from 42 percent to 90 percent, and three schools used preferences to ensure a higher proportion of these students. For example, one charter school with a stated mission of educating military-connected children gave first preference to children of active-duty personnel, who represented the preponderance of enrolled students. The schools were established to address different interests, including family perceptions about the quality of education in local school districts and military officials' need to attract and retain military families to bases. In some instances the impetus for establishing a charter school on a military base originated with private entities. For example, a private developer hired to build housing on the base worked with a charter management organization to develop a charter school they thought would make living on the base more attractive to military families.
Charter school officials cited several challenges to starting up and operating on military bases, such as using enrollment preferences for military-connected students, providing civilian access to schools, and obtaining facilities. Most states require schools to be open to all students, and when organizers of one school sought to enroll solely military-connected students, state law prohibited this because of the state's open enrollment requirements. Some states have changed or interpreted their charter school laws to enable schools to give enrollment preference to military-connected students. Furthermore, two charter schools that have enrollment preferences for military-connected students have received Department of Education (Education) Charter Schools Program (CSP) grants, which require charter schools to provide all students an equal opportunity to attend the school and admit students by lottery if there are more applicants than spaces available. Although these military base charter schools have received these grants, Education has expressed concern that the use of such enrollment preferences would violate CSP program requirements. Charter schools have also encountered operational challenges. For example, access for civilians can be difficult. Nearly all the military base charter schools were located behind the base's security gate, requiring civilians to complete a background check and show a pass. Several school officials reported difficulties conducting school activities such as open houses and sporting events because each base had a limit on the number of security passes for civilians. Like other charter schools, military base charter school officials also reported obstacles to obtaining facilities, such as financing. However, they also encountered unique challenges, such as complex military facility and land leases. Several school and military base officials said that having guidance and more information sharing could help with startup and operational challenges charter schools on military bases face. However, there is currently little guidance or information sharing about military base charter schools.
section_title: What GAO Recommends
paragraphs: GAO recommends that Education clarify whether military base charter schools that use enrollment preferences are eligible for charter school grants and that DOD and Education take actions to help address startup and operational challenges for these schools. In their responses, DOD and Education agreed with GAOs recommendations.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Many families struggle to balance their job demands with ensuring that  their children have access to high-quality education, but for military  families this struggle can be exacerbated by the highly mobile nature of  their service and the consequences of their mobility on the emotional and  social well-being of their children. Military families often move every 2 to  3 years as parents are reassigned from one duty station to another, which  can be disruptive for children’s education. Military families’ concerns  about the availability and quality of public elementary and secondary  education options for their children affect readiness, job satisfaction, and  retention, according to a recent report for the Department of Defense  (DOD). While nearly 80 percent of children in military families attend  public schools, according to DOD, another DOD report recommended  that parents be allowed to form charter schools on military bases. The  report indicated that charter schools on bases could offer another   educational option for military children in geographic areas with  underperforming public schools in addition to private schools or home  schooling. Charter schools are publicly-funded, independently-operated  public schools that are allowed to operate with more autonomy than  traditional public schools in exchange for increased accountability for  student academic achievement.
In response to concerns that children of military families in  underperforming school districts have few alternatives to traditional public  schools, a House Appropriations Committee Report required that GAO  conduct a study of charter schools located on military installations. For  this study, we examined the following:  (1)   the characteristics and origins of charter schools on military  (2) the challenges charter schools on military installations have faced in  starting up and continuing their operations.
To conduct this review, we interviewed school officials at all eight charter  schools operating on domestic military bases and conducted site visits to  two of these schools. At the two site visit schools, located in Louisiana  and Maryland, we interviewed school administrators, military base  commanders and school liaison officers, charter management officials,  parent representatives, and others. We selected these schools for site  visits on the basis of years in operation, military-connected student  enrollment, local educational agency (LEA) status, and enrollment size.  For the eighth charter school at Naval Station Great Lakes, we  interviewed DOD headquarters and regional installation officials to obtain  information about the school’s origins since the school recently opened  but was under development during our period of data collection. We also  interviewed military officials knowledgeable about a charter school  currently being planned for Fort Bragg.
We reviewed charter school applications and other documentation as  appropriate for the eight schools as well as available documentation on  the one school in development. We focused on charter schools on  domestic installations because charter schools are authorized by  individual states and do not exist outside the United States. We also  interviewed Department of Education (Education) and DOD officials about  charter school program requirements, the educational needs of military- connected children, and federal funding for these schools and reviewed  federal agency data and reports on these issues. We interviewed experts  from relevant educational and military organizations. The most complete  data set available at the time of our review—Education’s Common Core  of Data Public Elementary/ Secondary School Universe Survey (CCD)— was collected for school year 2009-2010, and three of the eight military  base charter schools we reviewed opened after that school year.  Therefore, to develop current information on the characteristics of these  military base charter schools, we first obtained school data reported in  DOD’s Report on Charter Schools on Military Installations (July 2012).  Because these data had been compiled from multiple sources, including  military base charter schools, we contacted military base charter school  administrators to confirm the accuracy of their charter school  characteristics, including year established, grade range, LEA status,  enrollment level of military-connected students, and other characteristics  and to obtain supplemental information as needed. We determined that  the steps we took ensured that these data were sufficiently reliable for our  purposes. We also used data from Education’s CCD and the Private  School Universe Survey for school year 2009-10 to develop maps  showing schools surrounding the military bases that have charter schools.  Finally, in addition to reviewing charter school literature and other  background materials, we reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations,  and guidance, as well as state laws on charter schools, including the  eight states that had existing or planned military base charter schools:  Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, and  North Carolina.
We conducted this performance audit from April 2012 through February  2013 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: There are about 1.2 million school-age children of military-connected  families, and the majority of students attend public and private schools  located off military bases. In addition to these off-base options, several  school options are available on military bases for military-connected  children, including traditional public schools, DOD-operated schools, and,  more recently, public charter schools. These options are described  below.    Traditional public schools: Approximately 160 traditional public  schools operated by local school districts are located on military  bases in the United States. According to DOD, 94 percent of students  attending public schools on military bases are military-connected  children. Traditional public schools are generally open to all students  in the geographic area they serve.    DOD-operated schools: Although the majority of DOD schools are  located overseas, 64 DOD schools currently operate on military bases  in the United States, and these domestic DOD schools enroll about  28,000 students. DOD schools—open only to eligible dependents of  active duty military and DOD civilians who reside on military  installations—constitute a separate school system administered by  the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA). Domestic  DOD schools were established to educate military children in  communities where the local schools were deemed unable to provide  a suitable education, among other reasons. DOD school systems  depend almost entirely on federal funds, unlike public schools, which  are funded primarily with local and state taxes and for which federal  funding constitutes a small portion of total resources. As we noted in  an earlier study, questions have been raised periodically concerning  the continuing need for DOD schools. DOD has commissioned  various studies since the 1980s exploring the possibility of transferring  DOD schools to local school districts, and over the years, DOD has  transferred some DOD schools to local public school districts.    Charter schools: Charter schools are a relatively new option for  students. These schools are public schools created to achieve a  number of goals, including encouraging innovation in public  education, providing an alternative to poor performing schools, and  giving families an additional educational option to traditional public  schools. Charter schools operate with more autonomy than traditional  public schools in exchange for agreeing to improve student  achievement, an agreement that is formalized in a contract or charter  with the school’s authorizing body. A school’s charter defines the  specific academic goals and outlines school finances and other  aspects of operation. Charter schools provide students and parents  with increased educational options. However, research has found  considerable variability in charter school performance on student  achievement.
Enrollment and interest in charter schools has grown rapidly in the past  few years. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the  number of students enrolled in public charter schools more than  quadrupled, from 0.3 million to 1.6 million students between school years  1999-2000 and 2009-2010, while the percentage of all public schools that  were public charter schools increased from 2 to 5 percent. In the 2009- 2010 school year, about 5,000 charter schools operated in 40 states and  the District of Columbia. Meanwhile parental interest in this public  school option has also grown. According to a survey conducted by one  national charter school organization, nearly two-thirds of charter schools  across the nation reported having children on their waiting list, with an  average waiting list totaling 228 students.
The 2008 DOD report on military compensation recommended that  military-connected parents be allowed to form charter schools on military  bases. The 2008 DOD report indicated that offering a charter school  option in areas with underperforming local public schools would give  parents stationed in those locations another choice in addition to the  private school or home schooling options that may currently exist. This  recommendation was part of the report’s broader emphasis on the need  to increase service members’ choices in order to enhance recruiting and  retention efforts in the uniformed services and, ultimately, support military  readiness.
subsections: section_title: Charter School Operations and Funding
paragraphs: Charter schools are established according to individual state charter  school laws, and these state laws determine how schools operate and are  funded. Depending on the state, a range of groups and organizations can  establish a charter school, including parents, educators, private nonprofit  organizations, and universities. A significant portion of charter schools  nationally are established or operated by private management  organizations, such as charter management organizations (CMO).  According to one research institute, in the 2010-2011 school year, 35  percent of all public charter schools were operated by such private  management organizations, and these schools accounted for almost 42  percent of all students enrolled in charter schools. States also set  requirements for how charter schools operate. For example, most state  charter school laws generally require that charter schools be open to all  students within a specified boundary (commonly referred to as “open  enrollment” requirements). In addition, most state charter school laws  generally require that charter schools that receive more student  applications than have available classroom spaces must enroll students  based upon a lottery or some other random selection process to ensure  that enrollment to the school is fair and does not favor particular groups of  students. States also specify which entities can authorize the  establishment of a charter school, including state departments of  education, state boards of education, school districts or local educational  agencies (LEA), institutions of higher education, and municipal  governments. Authorizers are responsible for monitoring school  performance and have the authority to close schools or take other actions  if academic goals and state financial requirements are not met. States  also define how charter schools are structured. For example, unlike  traditional public schools that are generally part of a larger LEA, some  states establish charter schools as their own LEA while others allow  schools to choose between being a distinct LEA or part of a larger LEA  for certain purposes, such as special education. In general, schools that  operate as separate LEAs may be able to directly obtain federal funds or  apply for federal grants that would otherwise be distributed among  schools in a larger LEA. It may, therefore, be financially advantageous  for schools to be separate LEAs, although this advantage also comes  with the added responsibility associated with LEAs. Finally, states  determine how charter schools will be publicly funded. In most states,  charter schools are largely funded according to the formula states use for  traditional public schools, usually a per-pupil allocation based on student  attendance. As public schools, charter schools are also eligible to receive  formula funding from some federal programs, such as those authorized  by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Title I of the  Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
section_title: Federal Resources Available to Charter Schools on Military Bases
paragraphs: DOD and Education have had a formal memorandum of understanding  (MOU) since 2008 to collaborate on addressing the educational needs  and unique challenges faced by children of military families, including  serving as a resource for communities exploring alternative school  options, such as charter schools.
In addition, a number of federal resources are available that may be used  to assist in starting and operating charter schools, some of which focus  on schools serving military-connected students, among others:  Impact Aid: Education and DOD administer Impact Aid programs  that provide qualifying LEAs—encompassing both traditional public  schools and charter schools—with funds to compensate LEAs for  revenue losses resulting from federal activities and to help students  connected with these federal activities—which may include military- connected students—meet state academic standards.  Appropriations for Education’s Impact Aid program were almost $1.3  billion in fiscal year 2010, and Congress appropriated $40 million in  additional funding for DOD Impact Aid in 2012. One type of Impact Aid  grant is designed to support the construction and repair of school  buildings and is awarded to LEAs on a competitive basis.    DOD provides discretionary grants—about $50 million in grants to  38 military-connected school districts for fiscal year 2012—for  enhancing student learning opportunities, student achievement,  and educator professional development at military-connected  schools, as well as about $9 million for math, science, English,  and foreign language programs affecting military-connected  students.    DOD is authorized to provide up to $250 million to make grants,  conclude cooperative agreements, or supplement other federal  funds to construct, renovate, repair, or expand elementary and  secondary public schools on military installations in order to  address capacity or facility condition deficiencies at such  schools. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, provided  an additional $250 million for DOD to continue addressing  capacity and condition issues of public schools on military  installations.    Charter Schools Program resources: Education also provides  supports and resources through its Charter Schools Program (CSP).    CSP provides funds—about $255 million in fiscal year 2012—to  create high-quality charter schools, disseminate information about  effective schools, and support the replication and expansion of  successful schools, among other purposes. In applying for grants  for state education agencies, state agencies must describe,  among other things, how they will disseminate information about  effective schools and how students in the community will be given  an equal opportunity to attend the charter school. A 2011 White  House report details an agency-wide effort to develop a  coordinated approach to supporting military families. One  specific administration commitment is for Education to make  supporting military families one of its supplemental priorities for its  discretionary grant programs. This priority, which has been  implemented, favors grant applications to meet the needs of  military-connected students.    CSP funds a number of organizations, including the National  Charter School Resource Center and the National Resource  Center on Charter School Finance and Governance, which  provide a diverse range of information on charter schools.
section_title: Charter Schools on Military Bases Enrolled Military- Connected Students to Varying Degrees and Were Started in Response to Family, Military, and Private Interests
paragraphs: While most schools located on military bases were traditional public  schools or DOD schools, eight were charter schools at the time of our  review. The military base charter schools differed among themselves in  their academic focuses and in the number of military-connected children  they served. In addition to the eight schools, most of which were located  on Air Force bases or on joint Air Force/Navy bases, another charter  school was being developed on the Fort Bragg Army base at the time of  our review (see fig. 1).
Most military base charter schools opened after 2008, following DOD’s  Quadrennial Review that recommended parents be allowed to form  charter schools on bases to provide another educational option for  military children in geographic areas with underperforming public schools,  in addition to private schools or home schooling options (see fig.2).
Like many charter schools located in public school districts across the  country, many of the eight schools on military bases offered a program  with a particular academic focus (see table 1). For example, Sonoran  Science Academy, the only charter school currently on a military base  that serves children from grade 6 through grade 10, offers a college  preparatory program with a focus on science, technology, engineering,  and mathematics subjects (STEM). In school year 2011-12, Sonoran  Science Academy served 185 children in grades 6 through 10 and plans  to expand through the 12th grade by adding a grade each year.  Manzanita Public Charter School offered a program for children learning  English in which classes are taught in both English and the children’s  home language, known as a dual immersion language program. The  program’s goal was to support bilingualism and bi-literacy. Located on  Vandenberg Air Force Base, but outside the base’s security gate,  Manzanita Public Charter School served 438 students in school year  2011-12. Sigsbee Charter School in Key West draws on the school’s  location to offer an environmental education program with a focus on  marine studies. The only one of the eight schools on a military base to  offer a pre-kindergarten program, Sigsbee served 410 children through  grade 7 in school year 2011-12. In Arkansas on the Little Rock Air Force  Base, Flightline Upper Academy chose a curriculum in which the arts are  used to teach all subjects. The school served 164 students in grades 5  through 8 in school year 2011-12. Both of these schools—Sigsbee and  Flightline—are located behind the security gate on their respective  military bases. Table 1 provides information on the characteristics of the  eight charter schools.
While the charter schools’ academic focuses differed considerably, most  military base charter schools served predominantly children of military- connected families and some of these schools took various steps to  attract these students. For example, the largest charter school operating  on a base, the Belle Chasse Academy, serves more than 900 elementary  and middle school children. To address the needs associated with high  mobility and parental deployments that military-connected students  experience, Belle Chasse Academy offers psychological and other  counseling services, welcome clubs, and a buddy program to ease an  incoming student’s transition to Belle Chasse Academy. With 90 percent  of its students coming from military families, Belle Chase Academy has  the largest percentage of military-connected children of the schools  currently in operation. While the children of civilians can attend the  school, which is located inside the security gate on the Naval Air Station  Joint Reserve Base New Orleans, Belle Chase Academy officials told us  they initially took several steps to attract children of military personnel.  For example, they held multiple town meetings for military families,  distributed flyers on the base, and posted notices on the school’s website  encouraging military-connected families to enroll their children as soon as  the service member receives his or her orders (see text box.) Belle  Chasse Academy officials said the Academy is well-known now and they  no longer have to conduct as much outreach.
Belle Chasse Academy: Promoting Early Enrollment of Military- Connected Students  The Belle Chasse Academy includes the following announcement on its   website:  … Active-duty personnel are enjoined to register their child(ren) to attend  Belle Chasse Academy as soon as they are in receipt of orders. This enables  the school to plan effectively and ensures that your student has a space in the  appropriate grade and setting. BCA is space-limited, and we cannot ensure  that every dependent of active-duty personnel has space unless you assist us  in planning. We are an open-enrollment school, so unless we have reserved a  spot for your student, we must admit students who apply if there is a vacancy.  Thanks for your cooperation.
Imagine Andrews and Sigsbee charter schools also considered educating  the children of military-connected families an integral component of their  mission. Sigsbee Charter School officials described the children of  military-connected families as “central to the school’s mission” and said  they offered services geared to the needs of this transient population. For  example, the school has a military life counselor available to children with  an active-duty parent, who holds small group sessions that address family  stress, deployment, and issues related to moving. Sigsbee officials also  told us they work closely with a professional organization that provides  services to educators working with military-connected children and send  the school’s staff to professional development sponsored by this  organization. Imagine Andrews, where two-thirds of its students come  from military-connected families, offers a range of services for these  children: for example, according to the school’s website, Imagine  Andrews staff receives in-depth professional development on how to  recognize the warning signs of the stressors faced by students in military- connected families and how to help those students deal effectively with  the challenges they encounter. While Sonoran Science Academy does  not specifically state that serving the children of military-connected  families is part of its mission, it enrolled a high percentage of these  children and provided services geared to their needs. For example, the  school provides a full-time counselor and offers a buddy program for  military-connected students transferring into the school, a self-esteem  program, and a support group for students with a recently-deployed  parent. Located inside the gate on the Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in  Arizona, Sonoran Science Academy has a student body that includes 76  percent military-connected students. (See fig. 3).
In addition, three schools used enrollment preferences to ensure the  children of military-connected families had a greater chance of securing a  place in the school: Belle Chasse Academy, Imagine Andrews, and  Sigsbee. These schools were among the five schools with the highest  enrollment of students from military-connected families.
subsections: section_title: Family and Military Needs and Private Interests Were Among Key Reasons for Establishing Charter Schools
paragraphs: While all of the charter schools on military bases serve a large  percentage of military-connected students, they were started for various  reasons, including family perceptions about the quality of education  available for their children in local school districts and military officials’  need to attract and retain military families to bases. Moreover, in some  instances the impetus for establishing a charter school on a military base  originated with private housing developers on military bases and charter  management organizations.
At Imagine Andrews and other schools, school officials told us some  parents expressed reservations about enrolling their child in local public  schools due to the perception that those schools were of poor quality. As a  result, many military families chose to live off-base, which allowed their  children access to other districts they believed had higher quality schools.  For example, one Belle Chasse Academy parent we interviewed said his  concerns about the quality of schooling available in New Orleans led him to  consider refusing assignment to the base. Belle Chasse Academy officials  also said that some personnel accept assignment to the base, but leave  their families behind in communities they believe provide better educational  opportunities for their children. In these cases, leaving family behind often  negatively impacted service members’ job readiness and happiness, Belle  Chasse Academy officials and others noted. Navy officials who helped  develop LEARN 6 in North Chicago said quality is important because  parents want assurance that their children will “keep up” in the school in  which they are currently enrolled and will at least be on grade level when  they have to transfer to a new school.  Additional parental concerns  included children’s safety and the schools’ convenience or proximity to  home, according to school officials and others.
Military interests were also significant in the creation of some of the  charter schools we reviewed. Officials at several schools said that base  commanders recognized the important role of quality schools in attracting  and retaining service members on base and that commanders’ support  was critical to charter school development on base. For example, at  Sonoran Science Academy and Imagine Andrews, school officials  credited the base commander with being a driving force behind the vision  of creating a charter school. Furthermore, the military Base Realignment  and Closure (BRAC) process may contribute to growth in the number of  military-connected families living on certain bases and heighten demand  for more schooling options on bases, including charter schools. At  LEARN 6 in North Chicago, military and state interests both contributed to  the creation of the charter school. Partly in response to declines in the  military population at Naval Station Great Lakes, the state board of  education, which approved the charter school application, noted that the  district stood to lose millions of dollars in federal Impact Aid if it did not  take immediate action to attract and retain military families. The state  board further noted that a charter school could help ensure the district’s  continued eligibility for federal Impact Aid funds while offering another  public school option for the district’s students.
Housing developers and charter management organizations (CMO) also  led moves to establish some charter schools on military bases, according  to some school officials we interviewed. For example, housing developers  at Joint Base Andrews that were hired by the military to privatize on-base  housing believed that having a charter school on base would attract more  families to on-base living. The housing developers worked with Imagine  Schools, the CMO, to develop a charter school that would make living on  base more attractive. In another case, the CMO Lighthouse Academies  decided to open a new charter school campus—Flightline Upper  Academy—when demand for spaces in its existing charter school  exceeded capacity. Although the new charter school was ultimately  located on a nearby military base, the CMO’s original plan was to provide  more options for children in the community, not to target the children of  military-connected families for enrollment in the school.
At Manzanita Charter School, public school educators were the planners  because they perceived a need for better educational options for the  children of economically disadvantaged families and English language  learners. The school’s planners told us they had not considered the  children of military-connected families as a target population for  enrollment. They said the decision to locate the school on a military base  was one of necessity—it was the only facility the local authorizer offered  the charter school organizers.
section_title: Charter Schools on Military Bases Faced Challenges with Enrollment Preferences, Civilian Access to Schools, and Facilities
subsections: section_title: Enrollment Preferences for Military-Connected Students Posed Hurdles for School Planners
paragraphs: While charter schools on military bases encountered some of the same  challenges as other charter schools around the nation—such as acquiring  facilities and startup funding—they also experienced challenges unique to  starting up and operating a charter school on a military base. One of  these challenges is maintaining slots for military students whose parents  may move more frequently. Specifically, because the high turnover rate  among military-connected students at military base charter schools could  limit enrollment access of these students, three charter schools provided  military-connected students with an enrollment preference (see table 2).
Planners for Imagine Andrews wanted all of the slots at the school to be  reserved for military families, according to a CMO representative.  However, Maryland law requires charter schools to be open to all  students. In 2010 the Maryland legislature revised the law to provide an  exemption to the open enrollment requirement for military base charter  schools, as long as students with parents who are not assigned to the  base constitute at least 35 percent of enrollment.  However, children of  military parents who are assigned to the base, but live off the base, are  grouped with civilians because Imagine Andrews also requires residency  on the base for enrollment preference. Despite the school’s military  student enrollment preference, an Imagine Andrews official said that the  school would likely encounter concerns about enrollment from military- connected parents whose children are not able to enroll in the school due  to limited slots. Similarly, a representative of Belle Chasse Academy said  the school also explored how they could maintain slots for military- connected children. In addition to a stated mission to educate military- connected children and its efforts to encourage military-connected  parents to register their children as soon as they are assigned to the  base, the school uses a hierarchy of admission preferences, with the top  six tiers for military-connected students, the seventh tier for the children of  staff, and the final and eighth tier for civilian students (see table 3).  According to the official, these preferences were allowed as an admission  standard under an interpretation of the law by the state Attorney  General’s office, which determined that it was acceptable as long as the  mission, academics, and programs of the school were targeted to military- connected students. The preferences have enabled the school to  maintain high military student enrollment—approximately 90 percent in  SY 2011-12. The official said the school does not generally conduct a  lottery because it could lead to higher levels of civilian enrollment and  undermine the school’s mission to educate military-connected children.
Sigsbee Charter School also encountered a challenge to ensuring  enrollment slots for military-connected students. Created prior to recent  changes in Florida state law that now permit charter schools to give  enrollment preference to children of an active duty member of any branch  of the United States Armed Forces, the school utilized a provision in  state law that allows a charter school to give enrollment preference to  children of workplace employees. A school official explained that the  school considered the base a workplace but could not establish a formal  business partnership with the base because the base does not provide  the school with funds. As a result, school officials established a formal  partnership with the base through a memorandum of understanding,  which it considered a business partnership for the purposes of satisfying  the state requirement for using the school’s enrollment preference.
Two other schools that wanted to focus on enrolling military-connected  students, including one school currently in development, did not plan to  use an enrollment preference because officials said they either believed  or were told by state education officials it was not allowable under state  charter school law. For example, a Navy official involved with establishing  LEARN 6 in North Chicago at Naval Station Great Lakes explained that,  while planners for the school wanted to focus on enrolling military- connected students, Illinois state law required the school to be open to all  students. According to the official, this requirement could pose a long- term challenge to maintaining enrollment access for military-connected  families. He indicated that school stakeholders are currently working to  propose changes to Illinois state law that would enable the school to use  a preference for military-connected students at a minimum of one-third of  the school’s enrollment. Similarly, Fort Bragg military officials involved  with establishing a charter high school on the base said that school  planners wanted an enrollment preference for military-connected students  but were told by state education officials that North Carolina’s charter law  does not allow for such a preference. One official indicated the CMO  planned to challenge the state’s interpretation of the law. However, even  without such a preference, base officials noted that the school’s  prospective location on the base would ensure high military-connected  student enrollment. Officials said that the school did not plan to include  transportation in its budget. However, they said the school may consider  offering fee-based busing to students living on base—but not to students  living off base. Doing so could also result in higher military-connected  student enrollment.
Of the three schools currently using an enrollment preference for military- connected students, Sigsbee Charter School and Imagine Andrews  received CSP subgrants from their state departments of education. As  previously noted, both schools used lottery-based preferences to enroll  military-connected students at higher rates than civilian students. The  statute authorizing CSP grants requires charter schools, as a condition of  receiving funding, to admit students on the basis of a lottery if more  students apply than can be accommodated, and to provide a description  of how students in the community will be given an equal opportunity to  attend the charter school. Education, in its non-regulatory guidance,  states that a charter school receiving CSP funds must hold one lottery  that provides qualified students with an equal opportunity to attend the  school, but also provides for certain exemptions to the lottery  requirement. For example, the guidance allows certain categories of  applicants to be exempted, such as the siblings of students, children of a  charter school’s founders, and children of employees in a work-site  charter school. However, the guidance does not specifically address  whether schools may exempt military-connected students from a lottery.  Further, the guidance also states that schools may use weighted lotteries,  which are lotteries that give preference to one set of students over  another, but only when they are necessary to comply with certain federal  laws, such as Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or applicable state  laws. CSP officials told us that there were limits to how lottery  preferences can be used. For example, a CSP official said that the  practice of holding separate lotteries for enrolling civilian and military- connected students is not consistent with CSP requirements. The official  also stated concern about enrollment preferences that would significantly  limit civilian enrollment access to a school. However, another CSP official  stated that they would not necessarily be aware of the specific enrollment  practices of Sigsbee Charter School and Imagine Andrews at the time the  awards were made, in part because both were subgrantees of state  educational agency (SEA) grants and, under federal regulations, the SEA,  not Education, is primarily responsible for monitoring subgrant activities  and ensuring that subgrantees comply with applicable federal program  requirements. However, the official said that CSP does not require  SEAs to describe the enrollment preferences of school subgrantees in  their grant applications.
section_title: Civilian Access to Schools Limited by Base Security Requirements
paragraphs: When charter schools are located on military bases, base security  requirements can limit access for civilians. Of the eight charter schools,  six are currently located inside a protected security perimeter, which  generally requires that civilians pass a background check and carry a  base pass to access the school. The background check for one base  school, Imagine Andrews, consists mainly of checking the validity of the  applicant’s driver’s license and reviewing any recorded criminal history.  For this base, passes take about two days to process, are valid for one  year, and applicants who are denied access can appeal the decision. At  another charter school, Flightline Upper Academy, some civilian parents  did not pass the background checks required for base access, according  to a school official. When this happens, however, the official said that  school staff can escort children to the school.
Base security requirements can also limit community participation in  school events and activities. For example, an Imagine Andrews official  stated that the base restricts each civilian family to three passes, which  can create a challenge for them during school events, such as an honors  breakfast or awards ceremony. He noted that military-connected families  on the base have no such restriction. Further, the official noted that the  base does not permit civilian access to the school on weekends, which  would prevent the school from holding extracurricular activities, such as  morning tutorials or enrichment programs, during this time. The official  also explained that the school conducted certain community outreach  events, such as open houses, off-base to give off-base civilian families an  opportunity to learn about the school without requiring access to the base.  Similarly, an official with Sonoran Science Academy Davis-Monthan said  that base restrictions on civilian access on weekends prevented them  from holding community events on the school grounds. As a result, the  school rented off-base facilities, such as a YMCA. According to the  official, the base’s limitations on public access was the school’s most  significant challenge because it limits the school’s ability to establish  relationships with the community and inform the public about the school.
Two base schools—Manzanita Public Charter School and LEARN 6 in  North Chicago—were located outside the base security gate and  therefore did not require base access for civilians. According to a military  official who assisted with establishing LEARN 6 in North Chicago at Naval  Station Great Lakes, school organizers and stakeholders considered the  issue of civilian access to the school prior to its opening and were  concerned about the possibility that parents of some civilian students  given slots at the school through the lottery would not pass the  background check and would not be allowed access to the school. As a  result, the base command, the school’s charter management company,  and the Illinois State Board of Education jointly agreed that the school  should be located outside the base security perimeter in order for the  school to operate on the base. Because the school was slated to occupy  a former military hospital training facility inside the perimeter, the base  command arranged to move a section of the perimeter so that the school  would be located outside it and fully accessible to the public.
Some schools, including Wheatland Charter Academy, Manzanita Public  Charter School, and LEARN 6 in North Chicago, were located on bases  that also hosted a traditional public school. While we did not examine  these or other district-run public schools on bases, we believe civilian  access to them may similarly be limited as a result of military base  security requirements.
section_title: Obtaining Facilities on Bases Can Be Challenging and Complex for Charter School Planners
paragraphs: Like charter schools generally, military base charter schools encountered  difficulties obtaining facilities for school use, and they may face additional  challenges because of their location on military bases (see table 4). As  we previously found, securing adequate school facilities is one of the  greatest challenges for new charter schools because they typically are  not able to rely on the same resources for facility financing—such as local  taxes and tax-exempt municipal bonds—as public schools that are  operated by school districts. We also previously reported that charter  schools’ access to other facility financing options, such as private lending,  can also be limited. Charter schools are often considered credit risks  because they may have limited credit histories, lack significant cash  flows, and have short-term charters that can be revoked. As a result,  private loans are not easily accessible to charter schools for facility  financing, so they often rely on state or district per-pupil allocations to  finance their facilities.
Two schools we examined encountered challenges initially securing  financing for the construction of new facilities. According to a Belle  Chasse Academy official, the school struggled to find a bank that could  underwrite a long-term loan to build a facility on Naval Air Station Joint  Reserve Base New Orleans. School planners were eventually able to  secure a loan after receiving a loan guarantee through the U.S.  Department of Agriculture Rural Development Community Facilities  Guaranteed Loan Program. Similarly, construction of a school facility for  Imagine Andrews was able to start on Joint Base Andrews after a loan for  this work was secured by the Charter School Development Corporation  (CSDC)—a non-profit group that helps finance charter schools. A  representative for the CMO, Imagine Schools, indicated that CSDC  secured the loan because the CMO had limited capacity to finance the  construction. CSDC cosigned the loan with the CMO, and a private real  estate developer guaranteed the loan.
Securing financing to renovate facilities for charter schools on bases was  another obstacle for some schools. For example, Sigsbee Charter School  moved into a former public school facility on Naval Air Station Key West  that required significant renovation. The local district provided funds to  defray the renovation cost, but these did not fully cover the needed  repairs. Because none of the grant funds the school received could be  used to renovate its facility, the school relied extensively on local  volunteers, including military personnel and parents of students who  would attend the school, to make many of the essential repairs to the  facility. According to a school official, there are no funds to complete the  remaining renovation work. For Flightline Upper Academy on Little Rock  Air Force Base, school planners converted a base facility previously used  as a conference center and that was slated for demolition. Renovations  included removing asbestos, replacing old pipes, and repairing the roof.  The cost of the renovations was paid for primarily through donations from  a private housing developer and foundations—with no financial  contributions from the Air Force. A school official noted that the school  was able to address its main financing needs for facility repair prior to  opening. However, he stated that the school’s significant investment in  renovating a building it leases from the base comes with risk because the  Air Force could decide not to renew the 5-year lease and take back the  building.
Some school representatives said they also had to navigate complex  facility and land lease arrangements. With Imagine Andrews, the non-profit  CSDC will own the completed facility and lease it to Imagine Schools. The  Air Force leased the property to a nonprofit joint venture between the Air  Force and a private housing developer, which in turn leased it to CSDC.  Imagine Andrews stakeholders also received assistance in structuring the  facility financing and land-lease agreements from an agency that oversees  the housing privatization program for the Air Force. A Navy official involved  with establishing LEARN 6 in North Chicago stated that the real estate  arrangements, such as the lease for the school site and facility, were  complex and required the involvement of multiple stakeholders, including  the CMO, the Navy, and the local municipality. In particular, the official said  understanding the appropriate support role for the Navy was a significant  challenge to acquiring the facility for the school. For example, the official  said it was unclear whether the Navy could provide funds for the school  site, such as paying for its utilities. He noted that guidance on developing a  lease agreement for charter schools on military bases would be beneficial  and could potentially have saved school planners significant resources  during startup.
Similarly, other military and school officials cited the need for federal  guidance and information sharing on starting and operating a charter  school on a military base. For example, base officials at Fort Bragg said  that they unsuccessfully sought information from the Army that would  have helped guide their efforts to establish a charter high school on the  base, such as liability issues related to operating a charter school on  federal property. North Carolina state education officials denied the  school’s application because school planners revised it after the deadline  in order to replace most of the founding members on the school’s  governing board with new members. According to state education  officials, school planners told them they removed these members  because a military regulation made them ineligible to serve on the  school’s board. As a result of the application denial, the school will not  open in 2013 as planned. We also found that currently, little guidance and  information sharing exist for guiding the development of military base  charter schools and addressing their startup and operational challenges  and the guidance that does exist is not DOD-wide. While the Air Force  produced guidance to support community efforts to develop charter  schools on its bases, it does not apply to other military service bases.  Army officials said they are currently developing charter school guidance  for bases, which they plan to distribute in January 2013. Further, while  Education and DOD have taken initial steps to support information  sharing on developing charter schools on military bases—such as  Education conducting outreach efforts with school planners and  stakeholders at Naval Station Great Lakes and DOD and Education  providing online information—some school officials suggested more  information sharing could be helpful. For example, according to an official  at Sigsbee Charter School, which opened 2 years ago, school planners  found the information Belle Chasse Academy representatives provided on  establishing on school on a base to be valuable for their own efforts. The  official noted that more information sharing in this area would be useful.
section_title: Conclusions
paragraphs: Against the backdrop of a growing and diverse charter school landscape,  charter schools on military bases have emerged as one additional option  for military-connected parents. How rapidly charter schools will spread to  other military bases is difficult to predict, but demand among military  families and base communities for more military base charter schools will  likely increase, especially in light of residential growth on bases affected  by military Base Realignment and Closure. While the number of charter  schools operating on military bases is currently small, they present a  novel set of challenges for charter school founders and operators as well  as an opportunity for Education and DOD to be in the forefront of  emergent issues for these charter schools. One issue that the various  stakeholders may well confront is the tension between preserving the  public mission of charter schools of being open to all students and the  desire in military base communities to ensure enrollment of military- connected students. This tension is already emerging as some charter  schools use enrollment preferences to ensure continued enrollment  access for highly mobile military-connected students. Using such  enrollment preferences could have implications for whether or not a  charter school is eligible for federal CSP grant funding. Although  Education officials have expressed concern to us over some charter  schools’ enrollment preferences and practices, CSP guidance does not  specifically address the issue of enrollment preference for military- connected students. Moreover, in two cases, CSP subgrants were  awarded by states to charter schools about which Education expressed  concerns because of the nature of their enrollment preferences. However,  Education does not require SEA applicants for CSP grants to indicate  whether schools use enrollment preferences and, if so, to describe those  preferences. Such a requirement would allow Education and the states to  better determine if an applicant is eligible to receive CSP funds.
Finally, as charter school planners, authorizers, and military base  commands consider adding schools on bases, they could benefit from  having information to help them better weigh the tradeoffs of locating  charter schools on bases, including the need for community outreach and  civilian access to schools. The 2008 MOU between DOD and Education  was intended, in part, to facilitate this kind of information development.  Such information would also help them address the types of challenges  current schools have encountered. As existing charter schools have  discovered, determining DOD requirements and allowable practices— such as the role of base command—was often difficult. Having guidance  from DOD on appropriate ways to establish and operate charter schools  on military bases may help mitigate these common challenges and  smooth school startups and operations. Military base charter schools that  have experienced some of these stumbling blocks could share useful  information with planners of charter schools in other military base  communities—such as information about making facilities and lease  arrangements, and building effective working relationships between  school administrators and base command.
section_title: Recommendations for Executive Action
subsections: section_title: Education
paragraphs: To ensure that Charter Schools Program grants are provided only to  schools that meet eligibility criteria, we recommend that the Secretary of  Education direct the Charter Schools Program office to revise the Charter  Schools Program guidance to    Clarify CSP grant requirements regarding charter school enrollment  preferences, including preferences for military-connected students,  such as whether schools can hold separate lotteries for military- connected and civilian students and the extent to which schools can  enroll military-connected students under work-site exemptions, and    Require applicants for CSP grants and subgrants to describe any  enrollment preferences in their applications.
To address the specific needs of military communities that charter  schools on bases serve while preserving the public mission of charter  schools, we recommend that the Secretary of Defense develop and set  standards for operating charter schools on military bases and require the  appropriate military services to create guidance based on those  standards. The guidance should describe the requirements and allowable  practices for establishing and operating charter schools on military bases.  At a minimum, this guidance should address the following areas:    The appropriate role of military base command and other DOD offices  and agencies in supporting the creation and operation of charter  schools;    Reasonable base access and security arrangements for civilian  children, parents, and others involved in a military base charter  school; and    Military lease arrangements and other property-related issues for a  charter school on a base.
section_title: DOD and Education
paragraphs: To serve as a resource for military base communities exploring  educational options, as stated in their 2008 Memorandum of  Understanding, we also recommend that the Secretaries of DOD and  Education facilitate the sharing of information among interested parties— such as base commanders and school planners and officials—on how  military base charter schools have addressed startup and operational  challenges.
section_title: Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
paragraphs: We provided a draft copy of this report to DOD and Education for review  and comment. DOD’s comments are reproduced in appendix III and  Education’s comments are in appendix IV. The agencies generally agreed  with our recommendations, and Education described its plans for  implementing them. Specifically, in response to our recommendation to  clarify CSP grant guidance, Education stated that it will review its current  non-regulatory guidance to determine how it can clarify admissions and  lottery requirements for military-base charter schools that receive CSP  funds. With respect to the two charter schools noted in our report that had  enrollment preferences but received CSP grants from their states,  Education said that the schools’ receipt of these grants raises compliance  questions. Education has asked the states to conduct reviews of these  instances and report back to the Department. Education also agreed with  our recommendation to require CSP applicants to describe enrollment  preferences in their applications. Education said it intends to revise its  CSP grant application notices to require descriptions of any enrollment  preferences. Furthermore, Education plans to request that SEA grantees  require CSP subgrant applicants to describe recruitment and admissions  policies and practices, including any enrollment preferences they plan to  employ.
Education acknowledged the importance of working together with DOD to  enhance awareness of the unique challenges involved in locating charter  schools on bases and indicated steps they would take to continue this  work. For example, Education stated that the Working Group established  under the DOD and Education Memorandum of Understanding will  continue to facilitate the sharing of information on challenges through  shared newsletters, outreach, conference participation, panel  discussions, and websites.
The agencies also provided technical comments that were incorporated,  as appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of DOD and  Education, relevant congressional committees, and other interested  parties. In addition, this report will be available at no charge on GAO’s  website at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have any questions  about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-7215 or  scottg@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional  Relations and Public Affairs can be found on the last page of this report.  GAO staff who made major contributions to this report are listed in  appendix V.
section_title: Appendix I: Charter School Profiles
paragraphs: Mission statement  The mission of Belle Chasse Academy is to educate our military- dependent children, no matter what their background or previous school  experience, to fully achieve their personal and academic potential through  the acquisition of core knowledge and the skills of analysis, problem- solving, communication, and global responsibility.
section_title: Charter Schools Program grant: No
section_title: Total students SY 11-12: 942
paragraphs: Military-connected student  enrollment SY 11-12: 845 (90%)
Mission statement  Imagine Andrews Public Charter School (PCS) was established … to  provide outstanding educational opportunities for military and community  students.  Our mission is to serve our nation by providing the students of  the Andrews Community with a “world class” education, while meeting the  needs of military families.  Our vision is to create a school environment  that prepares students for high school and beyond, develops their strong  moral character, and provides them with the skills necessary to lead and  advance our nation.
section_title: Total students SY 11-12: 265
paragraphs: on the military base.
Mission statement  We prepare our students for college through a rigorous arts-infused  program.
section_title: Charter Schools Program grant: Yes
section_title: Total students SY 11-12: 164
paragraphs: Military-connected student  enrollment SY 11-12: 82 (50%)
Mission statement  To provide children with the academic foundation and ambition to earn a  college degree.
section_title: Charter Schools Program grant: No
section_title: Title I: Yes
paragraphs: Free-reduced lunch eligible: 66%  School Year 2011-12 student  demographics  School was not open in SY 2011- 12 .
Mission statement  We are dedicated to advancing academic excellence in Lompoc by  providing students in kindergarten through sixth grade with the intellectual  capacity to participate and work productively in a multi-cultural society.
section_title: Charter Schools Program grant: Yes
section_title: Total students SY 11-12: 438
paragraphs: Military-connected student  enrollment SY 11-12: 184 (42%)
section_title: Charter Schools Program grant: Yes
section_title: Total students SY 11-12: 410
paragraphs: Mission statement  The mission of Sonoran Schools is to provide a rigorous college prep,  STEM-focused education through a challenging and comprehensive  curriculum, continuous assessment, and dedicated teachers who inspire  their students to become the leaders of tomorrow.
section_title: Charter Schools Program grant: Yes
section_title: Total students SY 11-12: 185
paragraphs: Military-connected student  enrollment SY 11-12: 140 (76%)
Preference for  military-connected: No  Adequate Yearly Progress for SY  10-11: Met  Free-reduced lunch eligible: 21%  School Year 2011-12 student  demographics  White: 55%  Asian/Pacific Islander: 1%  American Indian/Alaskan: 1%  Two or more races: 1%  .
section_title: Charter Schools Program grant: No
section_title: Total students SY 11-12: 104
paragraphs: Military-connected student  enrollment SY 11-12: 74 (71%)
Preference for  military-connected: No  Adequate Yearly Progress for SY  10-11: Did not meet  Free-reduced lunch eligible: 38%  School Year 2011-12 student  demographics  Did not receive complete  demographic data, but school is  predominantly White.
section_title: Appendix III: Comments from the U.S. Department of Defense
section_title: Appendix IV: Comments from the U.S. Department of Education
section_title: Appendix V: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Staff Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition to the contact named above, Sherri K. Doughty, Assistant  Director; Sandra L. Baxter; Edward F. Bodine; and Deborah A. Signer  made significant contributions to this report. Also contributing to this  report were James Bennett, Deborah Bland, Jessica A. Botsford,   Ying Long, James M. Rebbe, Terry L. Richardson, Laura L. Talbott, and  Kathleen L. van Gelder.