Feds going too far in plan to oversee private voucher schools?

I have dedicated my life to helping disabled students – first as a special education teacher and, for the last many years, as an attorney for parents of disabled children. As strongly as I support the rights of disabled students to be educated on an equal playing field with their typical peers, I do not completely agree with the kind of heavy governmental oversight of private schools that the U.S. Department of Justice mandated last month in its much-publicized letter to the Wisconsin superintendent of public schools.

Hertog

Hertog

In that letter, the DOJ finds the State of Wisconsin is obligated to “eliminate discrimination” against students with disabilities in its private school voucher program, regardless of whether the private schools accept federal funds.

Because they take federal funds, states are of course charged with meeting certain federal civil rights mandates in their administration of public schools. I am not an expert in school choice law, or the Americans with Disabilities Act for that matter. But what appears to be new here is that because Wisconsin administers a school choice program, it must “ensure” that participating private schools, regardless of whether they take federal funds, adhere to some of the most important mandates of the ADA.

The private and religious status of the individual voucher schools does not absolve DPI of its obligation to assure that Wisconsin’s school choice programs do not discriminate against persons with disabilities as required under Title II [of the Americans with Disabilities Act.]

The letter was precipitated by a complaint filed in June 2011 by the American Civil Liberties Union and Disability Rights Wisconsin. It alleged the Milwaukee voucher program discriminates against kids with disabilities and segregates them in public schools. It claimed that of the 21,000 students enrolled in private voucher schools, 1.6 percent had plans that specified special needs services, compared to about 20 percent of students in the Milwaukee public school system. Voucher advocates such as Patrick Wolf, who completed a study in 2012, have found less discrepant rates of disability in the Milwaukee program.

An important note: Wisconsin’s voucher programs are not designed specifically to serve children with special needs, such as Florida’s John M. McKay Scholarship for Students with Disabilities. They are designed to serve all students with family incomes up to 300 percent above the poverty level.

Nonetheless, the result of the DOJ letter is the state must seriously ramp up its oversight of the private secular and religious schools participating in its voucher programs, including the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, the oldest voucher program in the country.

Some oversight is, of course, warranted. In our country, private schools can’t discriminate against students based on their race for instance, regardless of whether the schools take government funds. And private schools which don’t take federal funds shouldn’t discriminate in their admissions and suspensions process against students who can meet the demands of the school if provided with reasonable accommodations and supports.

However, not all private entities in our society have a public purpose. Some private schools choose to forego the benefits of federal monies because they want to provide a certain type of education to a certain type of student population – be it a nunnery or a secular feeder high school to the Ivies. In the later case, even a private school which takes federal funds is totally within the confines of the ADA to discriminate against a child applicant with intellectual disabilities who cannot meet its academic demands. When a private school foregoes government money, it should not be subject to the same government oversight as a school which reaps the benefits of it.

Here’s another thing to consider: Discrimination under the ADA in the school context is not often as cut and dry as it is with other protected classes. In the case of a kid with learning disabilities or ADHD, the government might have to review in great detail the demands and curricula of the private school as well as extensive school records, including psycho-ed evaluations, to determine if the kid could make it in the private school program with or without reasonable accommodations and support. That is not an appropriate level of government oversight for a private school, or even a voucher school; the Supreme Court has ruled under Zelman that parents have the right to apply their state tax dollars to private school tuition. And I fear the additional oversight might scare some states from passing new voucher laws and/or scare private schools from participating in programs which can change the course of children’s lives for the better.

If it complies with the mandates of DOJ letter and does not pursue a legal challenge – at this stage there is no indication of such a challenge but it wouldn’t surprise me – Wisconsin would surely be regulating its voucher schools more heavily than any other state in the U.S. According to the DOJ, Wisconsin not only must monitor various administrative activities of participating private schools, including case-by-case admissions and expulsion decisions of students with disabilities, but also report reams of data to the feds – at least in the short-term. (See all the oversight requirements on pages 3-4 of the DOJ letter here.)

What are the implications for other states which administer school choice programs?

At the very least, all states administering private school choice programs should take a hard look at the proportion of students with disabilities being served in those programs, and carefully review their responsibilities under the ADA. Though some tax credit scholarship programs, such as Florida’s Step Up for Students, are not “voucher” programs and arguably are not “administered” by the state because the public monies never reach state coffers, there is language in the DOJ letter which may give pause to states which legalize tax credit programs. The letter appears to cite case law indicating a state must enforce ADA law “regardless of whether services are delivered directly by a public entity of provided through a third party.”

The DOJ letter may present less urgency for states such as Florida, Ohio, Utah and Georgia, which administer special needs vouchers in addition to other private school choice programs. From a legal perspective, those states’ voucher programs as a whole probably serve a greater proportion of students with disabilities than state programs without a special needs voucher. In addition, those states may receive fewer complaints from parents and disability rights groups that their disabled children are not being equitably served by the school choice programs.

Wisconsin has been trying to pass into law, in the face of enormous opposition from unions and disability rights groups, a special needs voucher program for years.  Ironically, those groups oppose the very remedy which would alleviate the “segregation” of Wisconsin students with disabilities in public schools.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Responses to Feds going too far in plan to oversee private voucher schools?

  1. RC May 18, 2013 at 5:56 pm #

    Good Afternoon Allison,
    Had the opportunity to read your post regarding the Wisconsin ruling… Very well written!
    My name is R.C. I am the parent of a 6 yo who has been descriminated against by a private parochial school. S.c. has epilepsy. Thankfully she has been seizure free for 2.5 years. Initially the accepted her admission and one day prior to the start of school they refused to allow her to start school. Sadly they were very proud of the fact that they were ADA exempt. After a month of attorneys involvement they accepted her into school. For two years she has been doing awesome! She is on the principals honor roll and no social or behavioral issues have been identified. This all changed when the school was informed of a IEP draft done when she 4 yo. When we applied for readmission, they denied her referring back to a draft that the school board provided stating the possibility of autism. “We don’t take autistic kids.” Sienna is under careful care of a pediatrician & neurologist and has never been diagnosed with autism. The school agreeing that she needs absolutely no modifications. In other word, they are diagnosing her based on the battery that makes note of the fact that it should not be used solely… But once again, “we are exempt from ADA.” Thankfully they accept School Readiness, a program funded by the US dept of health, so this is the basis for our upcoming OCR complaint. They indirectly receive federal funds….
    For this reason the Wisconsin ruling was music to my ears. This would stop prohibit schools from discriminating against kids on the basis of their “title” rather than the required modifications, which in our case is none. Schools that make millions from state funds… Vpk, McKay & Step up…
    I am concerned, not for the purposes for introducing federal involvement in voucher schools… But in order to keep my daughter in school. They accept McKay, VPK, School Readiness & Step Up. She has never been enrolled in public school so though she has an IEP draft, she does not have an executed IEP. Her evaluation was through Child Find. We’re the ACLU is trying to enforce their purposes for God knows what purpose… I would love to see the same voucher school oversight in Florida in order to stop this school from further bullying parents while hiding under the umbrella of ADA exemption. Thanks for listening!!

    • Allison Hertog May 19, 2013 at 1:46 pm #

      Dear R.C.,

      Thanks so much for your comment. When you contacted me via Facebook I was able to get additional details about your situation, and let me just say that what happened to you and your family is not right. In my line of work, I hear a lot of bad stories about things which happen to kids with disabilities in private and public school, and it seems that in your case the private school engaged in some pretty awful intentional discrimination against your daughter. Based on what you told me they may have violated laws other than laws prohibiting discrimination and that kind of behavior should not be tolerated. I think that the Florida Department of Education office of school choice would be interested in hearing your story and taking some appropriate action.

      What’s particularly unusual in your case is that this school takes the McKay Scholarship for students with disabilities – though your daughter was not on it – and you would think they would be hospitable to students like your daughter. I’m so sorry to hear about your experience and wish you all good things in the future.