Policy Briefs

Policy Brief #1: Autonomy

What do we mean by private school autonomy?

The goal of educational choice is to provide families with a wide array of options to allow them to choose schools that align with their values and the needs of their children.

To achieve that goal, schools require freedom in the areas of curriculum and instruction, in religion and religious practices, and other core elements of educational programming.

School Choice Wisconsin and School Choice Wisconsin Action have put a premium on educating elected officials and others regarding the significance of preserving school autonomy and will work to defeat proposals that threaten it.

Why does it matter?

Loss of autonomy will make parental choice programs unsustainable.

Private schools will choose not to participate in parental choice programs if their freedom to achieve their mission is compromised. That will limit severely options available to students and families.

Less autonomy also means less innovation.

What is the nature of the threat?

Debate last year on the literacy bill exposed serious threats to parental choice programs. An early version required private religious choice schools to replace faith-based curricula with state-approved curricula. Some private schools and school networks likely would have withdrawn from parental choice programs or declined to participate.

While the literacy bill was the canary in the coal mine, SCWA also reviewed an estimated 200 bills that would have had some impact on private schools in parental choice programs.

Notably, many legislators who support parent choice sponsored these bills. This is a reversal from the program’s earlier years, when supporters correctly understood state interference in instructional programming as part of the opposition’s strategy to impede private school participation.

This is not the first session in which legislative allies have endorsed actions that would impede growth. In 2015, some allies sponsored a major state regulatory intrusion. Thanks in part to the efforts of School Choice Wisconsin, the bill was not enacted.

Separately, others have proposed that test scores be used to identify “low-performing” schools that they argue should be disqualified from receiving public dollars.

Finally, educators’ concerns are heightened by controversies involving cultural matters in public school districts. The Wisconsin Watch, a self-styled “nonpartisan” news source, has published a series of pieces that inaccurately cast private religious schools as practicing discrimination. Program opponents advanced one bill that would have swept private schools into the gender discussion.

What does the future hold for issues relating to educational autonomy?

Several other states have included language in their choice programs aimed at preserving private school independence. SCW plans to work with WILL and the Institute for Justice to develop language suitable for Wisconsin.

Without aggressive efforts to educate legislative leaders and others, this pattern of intrusion into school curricula and operations will persist and grow.

While proposals are well-intended, they threaten the viability of parental choice in the long-term. Opponents who have no sympathy for the programs will continue to advance proposals that threaten growth.

Advocates must vigorously resist this trend and teach others why educational freedom matters.

Policy Brief #2: Strengthen and Simplify

What is the “Strengthen and Simplify” bill?

The goal of this bill is to simplify administrative processes for families and schools that participate in Wisconsin’s parental choice programs.

Enacted at different times, these programs include a variety of statutory provisions that create unnecessary challenges for parents and schools and a burdensome workload for the Department of Public Instruction (DPI).

How was this proposal developed?

DPI approached School Choice Wisconsin (SCW) in 2023 with the goal of developing a bill that could be presented with joint support to the Legislature and Governor. DPI and SCW staff worked cooperatively for months to develop a 108-page proposal.

SCW had long sought to simplify statutes governing the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP), the Racine Parental Choice Program (RPCP), and the Wisconsin Parental Choice Program (WPCP).

DPI wished to shrink its workload as program growth outstripped staff capacity and do so in advance of the 2026-27 repeal of the WPCP enrollment cap.

What does this proposal do?

The proposal would replace the administrative provisions of the MPCP, RPCP, and WPCP with a single statewide program.

Notably, the proposal does not change income eligibility or other limits on participation such as grade point entry levels.

Key provisions include: automatic re-enrollment for continuing students; expansion of open enrollment period; and simplification of the process for participation of new schools. One significant benefit is intangible. SCW has strengthened its ties with DPI when it comes to day-to-day program administration. The willingness of most schools to voluntarily pay dues demonstrates their view of SCW as a problem-solving resource. The cooperative process employed to develop this proposal gives SCW great credibility when it approaches DPI to resolve problems.

Where does this proposal stand?

The bill, 2023 Assembly Bill 1042, was approved by the Wisconsin Senate. The bill was on track to be approved by the Assembly but was withdrawn from the Assembly calendar when Governor Evers would not pledge to sign the bill without line-item vetoes. Last-minute opposition from WEAC appeared to have a negative impact.

The need for AB 1042 continues. SCW is working with DPI to determine which provisions it will include in its 2025-27 budget request to Governor Evers or advance as separate legislation.

The Governor’s position will determine the fate of these provisions. If little or nothing happens in the next legislative session, administration of the programs will remain challenging.

Policy Brief #3: Decoupling

What is decoupling?

Decoupling is shorthand for a policy to fund private school choice and independent charter school students with state taxes instead of property tax dollars.

Currently, state aid to school districts outside of Milwaukee is reduced to pay tuition for resident choice and independent charter students. Districts may raise property taxes to offset the reduction. Most do.

Decoupling eliminates the aid reduction and the resulting property tax increase. It removes private choice and independent charter students from the school funding formula and funds them instead with state general purpose revenue (GPR).

Why does it matter?

Opponents seek to weaken support for school choice by pointing to property tax increases. Decoupling removes this political liability.

It also neutralizes a major claim in an October 2023 lawsuit. The suit asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to block Wisconsin’s private school choice and charter programs. The Court denied original jurisdiction. Plaintiffs must file in circuit court if they want to continue.

What impact would decoupling have on public and private schools?

Decoupling benefits public school districts and property taxpayers.

According to the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau, decoupling would result in more state aid for nearly all school districts and a corresponding reduction for property taxpayers.

An LFB report shows that a decoupling bill passed by the Assembly earlier this year would have increased state aid to local districts by $293 million; cut property taxes by $220 million; and increased local district spending authority by $73 million. Those fiscal impacts were for 2022-23.

Private choice and charter schools would receive no additional funding.

What is the future of decoupling?

The future likely depends on whether the benefits of decoupling are sufficient to allow school choice supporters and Governor Evers to agree on changes.

The Assembly approved decoupling during the last session, but the Senate decided not to take it up, fearing a veto by Governor Evers.

While Governor Evers favored decoupling as DPI Superintendent, he declined to negotiate on the issue, likely because of WEAC and Democrat opposition.

Recent increases in funding for choice and charter students, coupled with enrollment growth, will make the property tax impact more visible as school districts approve 2024-25 budgets. That could lead to renewed interest among school choice supporters and possibly, public school districts, in a solution.

Decoupling would cost hundreds of millions in GPR to replace property taxes, meaning a phase-in might be necessary.

This is what occurred in Milwaukee where a multi-year phase-in will be complete in 2024-25.

Policy Brief #4: Review of DPI Report Card

Should the Report Card be revised? Should it be used to close schools?

SCW and SCWA do not oppose an objective evaluation of the Report Card methodology. We strongly oppose using the Report Card to disqualify private schools.

Parents choose schools for many reasons. Imposing test scores as the critical screen would limit their choices.

What Does the Report Card Measure?

Test scores are the primary means of evaluation. Two categories are measured:

• Achievement: students’ absolute (raw) test scores in English language arts (ELA) and mathematics.

• Growth: year-to-year progress in ELA and math achievement in comparison with average growth for similar students.

Two other categories are measured:

• Target Group Outcomes: outcomes for students with the lowest test scores in their school – the Target Group. Outcomes are displayed for achievement, growth, chronic absenteeism, and attendance or graduation rate.

• On-Track to Graduation: how successfully all students are achieving educational milestones that lead to later success.

The Report Card weights these factors differently. See the table below, which shows the weighting for schools with large populations of students from low-income families. This includes 70 of the 88 private schools in the MPCP.

Categories	Weighting
Achievement	5.00%
Growth	45.00%
Target Group Outcomes	25.00%
On-Track to Graduation	25.00%

Why Place So Much Emphasis on Growth?

Students entering the choice program are at or often below achievement levels of public school students. Their raw scores (a snapshot of where they enter) will be low, making many choice schools appear ineffective. What matters most for them, and low-scoring students in general, is growth. DPI discusses this in detail at https://dpi.wi.gov/accountability/growth.

In 2015, School Choice Wisconsin was successful in gaining legislative approval of a policy that emphasizes growth in Report Card rankings. More recently, in 2021 a bill passed but was vetoed that would have deemphasized growth.

Is the current weighting of 45%growth to 5% achievement appropriate?

SCW believes it should participate in an objective, data-driven examination of the issue. It would involve working with DPI and scholars knowledgeable in the field of “value-added” K-12 measurement.

Apart from whether changes in weighting are warranted, we strongly oppose using the Report Card as a means for qualifying or disqualifying private schools. Our reasoning is spelled out in SCW and SCWA Guiding Principles.

How Do Private Choice Schools Rank?

Private schools in Wisconsin’s parental choice programs outrank public schools, both in achievement and in growth. If a revision to the weighting were deemed appropriate and applied uniformly, a favorable relative ranking would be maintained.

Do Current Statutes Provide Guardrails that Protect Parents and Taxpayers?

Current statutes require private schools to be accredited. Accreditation is a rigorous process repeatedly regularly. Schools that fail to achieve and maintain accreditation may not participate in programs.

Public schools are not required to attain accreditation.

DPI also has statutory authority to close private schools that are failing financially.

Policy Brief #5: Uniform Eligibility Requirements

What is the issue?

Eligibility varies for the Milwaukee, Racine, and Wisconsin Parental Choice programs, based solely on residence. The programs have different income and other eligibility limits that result in unequal access to educational options.

How do income limits differ?

Family income for a pupil in the Milwaukee or Racine programs must not exceed 300% of the federal poverty level. In 2024-25, 300% of the federal poverty level is $97,000 for a married family of four.

In the statewide program, family income must not exceed 220% of the federal poverty level. For new pupils in 2024-25, 220% of the federal poverty level is $73,000 for a married family of four.

If the pupil’s parents or guardians are married, family income eligibility is reduced by $7,000.

If a pupil in the Milwaukee or Racine program moves to another school district, the pupil may participate in the statewide program even if his or her family income exceeds 220% of the federal poverty level.

After the first year of pupil participation, there is no family income limit, a provision termed “once in, always in”.

What are the other limits?

For the Wisconsin and Racine programs, any public school student or student who was not enrolled in school the previous year who meets income requirements is eligible.

For private school students who meet income requirements, however, statutes also include a prior year enrollment restriction, commonly referred to as grade point entry limits. Only students in grades K4, K5, 1, or 9 are eligible.

Those restrictions were adopted to counter fears of significant, immediate growth; they cause significant hardship for families.

For the Wisconsin program, there is a district enrollment cap that expires in 2026-27. The Milwaukee and Racine programs have no cap.

Recommendation

Wisconsin students should have equal access to the Milwaukee, Racine, and Wisconsin programs.

The income limit for the Wisconsin program should be increased to 300% of the federal poverty level. Grade point entry levels should be eliminated.

Policy Brief #6: Protect Funding Gains

What is our goal regarding funding?

The 2023-25 legislative session saw historic increases in the funding of private school choice programs and independent charter schools to lessen the gap in funding with traditional public schools. We want to protect those increases.

School Choice Wisconsin (SCW) and School Choice Wisconsin Action (SCWA) fully achieved goals set in the fall of 2022, thanks to a partnership with the Wisconsin Coalition for Education Freedom (Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, Americans for Prosperity, the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, Badger Institute, and various charter advocates). SCW founded and co-chaired the coalition.

What are the components of these historic increases?

Growth in Per-pupil Funding

	FY 23	FY24	FY 25	% Growth Over FY 23
Choice (K-8)	8,399	9,893	10,237	22%
Choice (9-12)	9,045	12,387	12,731	41%
Independent Charter Schools	9,264	11,385	11,729	27%
Special Needs Scholarship Program	13,076	15,065	15,409	18%

Bifurcation

SCW and the statewide coalition sought higher funding increases for high schools than for K-8 schools, widening bifurcation that already existed in the statutes. This reflected documented higher costs for high schools and the reality that prominent Milwaukee high schools doubted

their continued viability at FY 23 levels. Independent charter advocates chose not to seek bifurcation of K-8 and 9-12 funding amounts.

Indexing for Future Growth

The Legislature and Governor approved two forms of indexing by which per-pupil payments could grow. One is tied to growth in per-pupil revenue limits for public schools. This does not reduce the funding gap.

A second mechanism – a key achievement – ties further growth to changes to what is known as the low revenue limit, a minimum revenue limit or floor below which public school districts cannot drop. For many years, a group of school districts at the low revenue limit has pushed to raise that limit.

What happens next?

The fact that the Governor signed these increases infuriated teacher unions and other opponents of school choice.

The outcome of the November elections will influence the extent to which efforts to roll back those increases may occur in the 2025-27 budget.

SCW and SCWA will focus on retaining both indexing measures. Especially if one house of the Legislature changes hands, those measures may face threats.

Dissenting Views

The new round of policy development described in Policy Brief #7 will examine this issue.

Policy Brief #7: Closing the Funding Gap

Overview

Guiding principles adopted by SCW and SCWA boards include the following language.

Student-based funding. Per-pupil funding varies based on the type of schooling a family chooses. Private schools in the Milwaukee, Racine, and Wisconsin (statewide) programs receive substantially less than traditional public schools. The same is true for independent charter schools. Funding should follow students equally regardless of the sector a family selects.

In 2022, after a year of extensive research that included a survey of all schools, focus groups, and individual interviews with school leaders, both boards approved plans to narrow funding gaps. Changes very close to our proposals were enacted.

What was the goal?

In 2021-22, average per-pupil payments for private choice students were 61 percent of average per-pupil support for public school students.

Our strongest legislative allies said a goal of 100 percent parity was not attainable. They cautioned it would be a non-starter that would weaken support for any action to reduce the gap.

SCW/SCWA and its and partners in the Wisconsin Coalition for Education Freedom (WCEF) set a goal of 80 percent, knowing it could not be achieved in one session.

The result was the largest increase in funding in the program’s history. In one session and with divided government, we got halfway to about 70 percent of public school funding or about halfway to the established goal.

Will we seek additional changes in funding?

We remain committed to our guiding principles and to working to continue to narrow the gap. Our next effort will take into account concerns we hear now about the impact of recent changes and others that we may not understand.

To prepare, we need to address two issues: what policy do we believe will serve our mission to expand parent choice and what tactical issues must we take into account to achieve our goals.

Our assessment is that we have no chance of making changes to funding during the 2025-2027 session. As noted in PB#6, we may need to defend not just funding gains, including critical indexing provisions, but other important provisions.

We propose instead to prepare for the 2027-2029 session. Our prospects then likely will depend on having a Republican governor and at least one house in control of supporters.

How do we go about this?

SCW has a proven method of policy development that has produced results for three decades.

At its heart is research that starts with extensive school engagement to identify problems and determine options for resolving them. We also develop fiscal information: a credible proposal that will gain traction must withstand scrutiny by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau and by staff for key legislative allies.

Once our organizations agree on how to proceed, we seek to build broader coalitions because we know that lack of unity dramatically reduces changes for success. We also apply a tactical lens to assess what we believe is feasible.

The effort that led to funding gains began on August 21, 2021, almost exactly three years ago, and reflects the demanding advance planning needed to advance a major proposal that has broad support and is backed by sound data.

What are next steps?

We propose to start planning for 2027 in September of this year.

Our first step will be to survey schools as we do almost every year to assess their needs. The survey will provide some direction on appropriate next steps that are likely to include focus groups and interviews. The survey would include an assessment of the impact of the increases approved in 2023.

The 2023 funding increases provide for different payments for K-8 private schools, private high schools, and independent charters. We understand that not all schools support these changes. Our research will help inform an understanding of impact and whether additional changes are needed.

What about public school referenda that increase the gap in specific communities?

The SCWA board has begun a discussion of whether and how it should be involved. This may be an issue for the new Policy Committee.