Jason Bedrick and I published a piece at the Daily Signal about the Roosevelt Elementary School District in South Phoenix. The Roosevelt district has experienced enrollment loss for decades, and the school board of the district has announced plans to close five schools.
I first learned of Roosevelt Elementary School district some 20 years ago when a Roosevelt student brutally assaulted a co-worker’s child. The staff’s response was far less than satisfactory, but at the time, it was difficult to locate mid-year transfer spots for my co-worker’s children, even after we enlisted the aid of a person who specialized in such situations.
I’m happy to report that in 2025, it is less difficult for desperate parents to execute a mid-year transfer.
Multiple factors explain the decline of Roosevelt’s enrollment, including a nationwide baby bust that began around 2007. Students living in the boundaries of Roosevelt but attending other public schools, both districts and charters, outnumber ESA students approximately 10 to 1. So, Arizona’s open enrollment and charter statutes deserve more credit than the ESA program. An examination of the reviews of Roosevelt Elementary schools left by students, parents and staff on private school navigation websites made my co-worker’s experience from 20 years ago seem to be far from an isolated, unfortunate incident. Here are some examples:
“Please do not take your children here. Almost every child is bullied, and the staff won't do anything. If you truly care about your kid's school experience, don't sign them up.”
“This school makes kids act out by tolerating relentless bullying and cruel treatment by teachers for special needs kids.”
“The kids get bullied, my son got a Black eye the 1st day of school and they told me that because he didn't know who the kid was there was nothing they could do.”
“This school should be shut down.”
“…They don’t take care of bullies; they just ignore the problem and leave the kids (to) fend for themselves; it seems that this is a safe place for bullies not for other kids. I would recommend that you should never enroll your kid here, and if you do, be prepared to endure what seems to be a never ending bully problem, and its not only the teachers that don't do anything about bullies.”
“I would rate it ZERO stars. This school is not SAFE NOR ORGANIZED. Roosevelt school district needs to step up their game or close this school down.”
“Students are constantly fighting or involved in some type of confrontational altercation with each other. Teachers behave more as peers than educators. My grandchild has attended this school for the past five years. I have seen very little improvement. If it were my choice, they would not attend.”
People who work for school districts have organized, and they use the fact that Americans dislike school closures. I would submit, for your consideration, that it is not wicked legislators or dastardly choice supporters who have forced the looming closures of Roosevelt schools. Rather, it has been due to the action of thousands of families who live in the boundaries of the district, who desire safe schools that will equip their children with the knowledge, habits and skills necessary for success. They have chosen to prioritize the long-term interests of their children over the short-term preferences of Roosevelt staff in increasing numbers for decades.
This is a thumbs up for Roosevelt students, whose interests the community has collectively put first, more than a thumbs down for the district schools. Roosevelt district schools will remain the best funded option on a per-pupil basis and might just stage a comeback if they can secure the confidence of families regarding safety and academics. Some of my friends in Arizona’s K-12 reactionary community would prefer that Roosevelt schools receive unconditional immortality. It is difficult to view these folks as engaged in anything other than macabre traffic in other people’s children. Perhaps I judge too harshly; the Phoenix area K-12 industrial lobbying complex is probably large enough to delay the need for difficult decisions in Roosevelt. If they are willing to enroll their own children in Roosevelt schools through open enrollment or otherwise, they might be able to stave off the need for safety and academic improvements.
Opponents of choice in Phoenix have been avid users of choice. One of your humble author’s children graduated from a South Phoenix charter school just a few miles away from Roosevelt. He attended with the children of two gubernatorial nominees who campaigned against choice (including Gov. Katie Hobbs), a child of the president of the Arizona Education Association and a co-founder of Save Our Schools Arizona, among others. Rather than choosing safe and academically performing charter and district schools, this community could instead put their families where their mouths are and lead the renaissance of Roosevelt district schools by enrolling their own children and grandchildren.
While this noble project gets off the ground, we in the Arizona choice community will continue to prioritize the interest of families above those institutions.
Longtime NextSteps readers know that your humble author has been holding forth on the Baptist and Bootlegger problem that helped throttle the growth of the charter school movement. The term “Baptists and Bootleggers” comes from economics and references prohibition, which Baptists supported out of religious conviction, and bootleggers supported to limit competition in their manufacture and sale of alcohol. In the context of charter schools, it describes how elements of the charter school movement, in this case large charter management organizations, or CMOs, partnered with the anti-charter usual suspects to limit competition through 900-page applications and charter laws hewing closely to sponsored “model” bills that mysteriously produced few charter schools. This, of course, was not the only problem to afflict the charter movement in recent years; see Robert Pondiscio’s recent account for example.
In 2024, I sounded the alarm that the private school choice movement was far from immune to this danger. Alas, Bootleggers’ tactics have indeed appeared in recent school choice legislation. For example, Iowa’s “ESA” law requires students who choose to spend their funds on private school to attend an accredited one. The new Texas legislation makes only accredited private schools eligible, and in a late amendment, a provision was added that requires private schools to have been operating for two years before becoming eligible to participate. Competition is apparently good for Texas public schools, but not terribly desirable for established private schools in Texas. Sigh. Stay on the lookout; accredited Texas private schools that have been operating for more than two years might just start selling some illicit liquid products at their bake sales...
There are other examples, but you get the point. Why does this matter? Well, if you stimulate demand for a product but restrict the supply of new entrants, you hang a sign on your back that says:
Luckily, this does not need to be the case, but the devil is in the details of bill design. Some make the mistake of assuming any choice program will automatically lead to cost inflation, but this is not the case if supply can rise to meet expanded demand. EdChoice has a new study out on the supply side of school choice, in which they examined the purchasing data from Arizona’s ESA program for years one and two of universal eligibility. Arizona’s ESA program had a very large increase in participation during these years. Without a corresponding increase in schools and vendors, cost inflation could get underway.
Fortunately, Arizona’s program saw a healthy increase in the supply of new schools to accompany expanded eligibility:
Not only did the number of participating schools increase from 510 to 661, but Arizona also saw broad increases in the types of schools accessed by families, including large increases in private religious schools, non-religious private schools, special education focused schools, co-ops and post-secondary schools. Baptist and bootlegger anti-competitive provisions would have prevented this flourishing, but fortunately, Arizona lawmakers wisely avoided it. When the Goldwater Institute examined private school tuition trends after the universal expansion, they found no evidence of a demand induced inflationary spiral.
Arizona vendors other than schools also increased their participation in the program, increasing competition.
Don't look now, but dance and art studios, dojos and a whole lot more have entered the Arizona ESA chat:
Choice supporters with a vision beyond trying to fill a limited supply of empty seats and/or creating a tuition inflation spiral must create bills allowing supply to increase with demand.
The story: With less than a week to go before the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments about the constitutionality of religious charter schools, supporters and opponents are making wildly different predictions about the possible effects.
Supporters, who include advocates for religious education, are framing a win for their side as a victory for religious freedom and a logical extension of recent rulings that affirmed faith-based schools’ right to participate in publicly funded programs.
“This is a way of getting new choice options in the context of performance accountability,” said Andy Smarick, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, during a recent debate about religious charter schools sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute. “A small number of religious organizations might apply to run charter schools, and I think that’s wonderful and not going to change the world.”
The Manhattan Institute is among the organizations weighing in on the side of religious charter schools.
Opponents, which include the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, are sounding the alarm over what they say could cripple a movement that began more than 30 years ago to launch innovative new public schools.
The other side: The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools warned that a ruling allowing religious charter schools could carry “catastrophic consequences” for the nation’s existing charter schools.
For religious charter schools to exist, they argue, the high court would have to redefine charter schools as private. That would overturn laws in 46 states, plus Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico, that define charters as public and thus threaten their ability to be funded under the same per-pupil formulas as school districts.
Yes, and: Charter supporters also point out the potential for ripple effects, such as charter schools losing facilities funding, questions about teacher participation in state benefit programs, or more drastically, calls to halt the approval of new schools or even funding of existing ones.
“This could lead to the destruction of chartering or limiting of chartering,” said Kathleen Porter-MaGee, a managing partner at Leadership Roundtable, an organization that brings together laity and clergy to support the Catholic church.
Instead of extending charters to religious groups, she encouraged a doubling down on private K-12 scholarship programs, which are now established in 29 states, with Texas poised to become the 30th.
Expanding scholarship programs for private education would let faith-based schools maintain instructional and employment practices that align with their beliefs, free from government interference, while allowing them to serve families who would not have access without private funding.
Catch up: The legal and political battle rocketed to the Supreme Court shortly after two Catholic dioceses won approval from Oklahoma’s statewide virtual charter review board in 2023 to open St. Isidore of Seville Catholic School, an online charter school that would include the same Catholic teachings as the church’s in-person schools.
The fight pitted Republicans against one another, with the current Oklahoma attorney general taking a position opposite his GOP predecessor and filing a lawsuit. It also divided the charter school movement, with national groups forcefully opposing a legal argument that could redefine their status as public entities and some charter schools arguing they would welcome the change.
While Oklahoma has a refundable tax credit that pays up to $7,500 per child for private school tuition, the program was not available until January 2024, about six months after St. Isidore applied for charter school authorization.
Possible upsides of a win for St. Isidore:
“Catholic schools have been doing things on the cheap for far too long,” Smarick said. “This is the opportunity to say you can remain private for as long as you want…but if you think you can do more for your mission in the charter school context, you can.”
Possible downsides:
Charter groups preparing: In case the court rules in favor of St. Isidore, advocates of established charters are working on model legislation that would allow states to maintain funding. A finding that says charter schools are not state actors also raises many questions, such as whether the ministerial exception, a legal doctrine that shields religious organizations from non-discrimination laws in the hiring of staff with ministerial duties, would apply to faith-based schools.
“No one knows what the court is going to say,” Smarick said. “State legislatures need to step up fast and answer these questions.”
Tune in: The U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments in the case for 10 a.m. April 30. Audio will be livestreamed.
If you look at enrollment trends in the Arizona districts with the largest total enrollment losses, look at the Arizona Open Enrollment report and the Quarterly ESA report, you get Figure 1. In Figure 1, both the gains from open enrollment (blue columns) and the losses to other districts and to charter schools (red columns) are presented. The purple columns represent the ESA enrollment of students who live in each of these districts.
Note that the ESA students reside in these districts; many of them were never enrolled in the district where they reside when they enrolled in the ESA program. Some students were already attending private schools, in which case they effectively transferred from the private scholarship tax credit program to the ESA program. Others were in those red columns, attending charter schools and other district schools through open enrollment. Others enrolled in kindergarten straight into the ESA program; others moved in from other states. Others, of course, transferred into ESA directly from their resident district. The purple columns, however, undoubtedly overstate the impact of the ESA program on district enrollments.
Even if they did not, I invite you to compare the red and the purple columns. The financial impact to a district school is identical whether they transfer to another district school, to a charter school, to the ESA program, or move out of the state.
In examining the 2024 NAEP results for Arizona, a rather stark picture emerged that Arizona charter and Arizona districts had strongly diverged- Arizona charter schools show academic recovery, whereas Arizona district scores sank, in some cases, to all time lows. This came despite district spending standing not only higher than charters on a per pupil basis and standing at or near record high levels. Arizona charter schools still have an incentive to attract students, whereas during the federal money printing extravaganza districts of the COVID-19 debacle often spent a lot more money even as their enrollments shrank. The NAEP shows the scale of the academic gulf between Arizona charter school students and Arizona district students placed into context with statewide average scores on the 2024 eighth grade math exam:
Drowning districts in cash even as their enrollments shrink may have turned off the positive competitive impact of choice programs, and data published by the Common Sense Institute Arizona shows just how stark this has been. Kamryn Brunner and Glenn Farley of the Common Sense Institute Arizona have been tracking the enrollment and expenditure trends of school districts that have announced school closings since January 2025. I used their data to make Figure 1:
So, the word cloud that pops in my head when looking at this data prominently features “RECKLESS” and “IRRESPONSIBLE” and “UNSUSTAINABLE.” A few months ago the Arizona State Board of Education put the Isaac School District into financial receivership. This enrollment loss was not driven by Arizona’s ESA program, as the state’s open enrollment report shows 2,319 students who reside within the borders of Isaac attend public schools outside of the district (through open enrollment and charter schools) and the ESA quarterly report shows only 82 ESA students reside within the Isaac school district. The number of students who transferred from an Isaac district school to the ESA program will be smaller still, as these students may have previously been attending other districts, charter schools or private schools.
The districts in Figure 2 have announced a total of 13 school closings. Another chart from the Common Sense Institute Arizona shows far more is needed. The Arizona district system has physical capacity to serve almost 1.3 million students, but only 850,000 enrolled.
So how did Arizona districts wind up with a spare 450,000 spaces? There is not a single culprit. A baby bust started in 2008, but this seems not to have informed the decisions of districts. Part of the story is that Arizona families have less demand for district schools. The main culprit however is the usual suspect: politics. The Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting (AZCIR) and KJZZ reported in 2017 on financial relationships between a small group of architects, construction companies and subcontractors and the school districts in Maricopa County. They found that architects, construction firms and subcontractors accounted for nearly all the financial contributions made to Maricopa County districts’ bond and override campaigns from 2013-2016. This is dubious enough in a fast-growing district with clear facility needs, but it has also been happening in districts with shrinking enrollments.
Arizona should collect K-12 capital funding statewide, rather than on a local basis and provide it on an equitable per pupil basis to students. District and charter schools should be free to spend these funds in whatever fashion they feel furthers their educational mission, whether that is building a new school, patching a leaky roof, or paying their teachers. Districts with large amounts of underused space should, however, not receive these funds until such time that they return or offload such space to some sort of productive use.
Arizona is likely not the only state where the positive impact of competitive effects drowned in a sea of COVID cash. With the 2024 election having hinged largely upon an inflationary spiral coinciding with federal money printing, and 10,000 Baby Boomers reaching the age of 65 per day until 2030, the reckless level of spending on K-12 seems all but certain to reverse.
When Florida lawmakers established the first statewide Charter School Review Commission in 2022.
The National Association of Charter School Authorizers also weighed in, saying that forcing school districts into sponsorship of schools they didn’t authorize would cause district officials to disengage, weakening charter oversight.
That was before Susie Miller Carello showed up. Before becoming executive director at the newly established Florida Charter Institute, she spent 12 years leading the Charter Schools Institute at SUNY, the largest higher-education authorizer in the country, and earned the moniker “America’s Authorizer.”
Under her leadership, New York choices, quadrupled enrollment, and significantly improved student achievement. By the end of her term, she helped authorize 221 schools that enrolled 120,000 students.
A 2023 study by the Center for Research on Educational Outcomes (CREDO) showed that New York, known for highly acclaimed charter networks such as Success Academy and Uncommon Schools, led the nation in outperforming their district school peers by the largest margins.
Susie Miller Carello, executive director of the Florida Charter Institute
Carello’s job as chief of the Florida Charter Institute is to recommend to the seven-member statewide charter review commission whether to approve a proposed charter’s application or send the founders back to work on a plan that passes muster.
Since this institute began its work in 2023, would-be charter schools have submitted 22 applications. Just two made it to the commission for a vote. One of those was approved by the commission, the other rejected. Those who filed the other 20 withdrew their proposals after hearing Carello’s feedback.
“We’ve been very choosy,” Carello said. “We are committed to being very thorough and investigating the people who want to affect the lives of Florida children and gain access to millions in public funds to make sure they have not only a good design, but also that they have the capacity to put that good design in place.”
Statewide process more than a decade in the making
Efforts to establish a statewide review process that bypasses sometimes hostile local school boards stretch back nearly two decades. In 2008, a state appeals court struck down efforts to create a statewide charter school board like the ones in Massachusetts or Arizona.
In 2022, the Florida Legislature established the Florida Charter Schools Review Commission, with the institute as its administrative arm. The commission reviews applications from charter operators and authorizes them to operate. Once authorized, the local school district becomes the sponsor and supervisor for the charter school and is responsible for monitoring the school’s progress and finances and providing certain services.
The state also has now allowed state colleges and universities to authorize and operate charter schools.
Multiple pathways reduce the chances that school board politics could block a new school. State charter commissions also have specialized staff who evaluate charter schools full time, while school district officials are often burdened with other responsibilities.
The main charge from detractors was that allowing multiple pathways for charter schools would roll out the welcome mat for questionable operations. Two years in, that hasn’t been the case.
A statewide process also allows one-stop shopping for charter networks that seek to open locations in multiple counties instead of forcing them to file separate applications in each school district.
Newberry community rallies to support proposed new charter school
Carello’s and the commissioners’ high standards were on display at their first official meeting last month.
Carello presented two applications. The first came from the Newberry Community School in Alachua County, where a group of parents and teachers narrowly to turn the district elementary school to a charter school.
The Alachua County School Board opposed the application and has since voted to appeal the state Charter Review Commission’s unanimous approval to the state Board of Education.
However, Newberry city officials expressed strong moral and financial support. Former state Rep. Chuck Clemons, who represented the local House district, and other local leaders laid out the school plan, including a $2 million loan from the city and $180,000 in private donations. Teachers and staff would also receive pay raises that matched the district’s as well as the same benefits offered to city employees, including health insurance and a retirement plan. School employees enrolled in the Florida Retirement System would be allowed to remain.
The level of community support impressed commissioners.
“It was awesome to see the partnership that they have with the city of Newberry,” said Commissioner Sara C. Bianca, one of seven commissioners appointed by the state Board of Education in 2023. “The mayor of Newberry and two city commissioners were there, and they were just excited.”
Other Florida cities, like Cape Coral and Pembroke Pines, operate municipal charter networks, but Bianca said the structure of the Newberry partnership “feels unique,” and she’s curious to see if other cities follow suit.
‘Inconsistent and incomplete’
The second application, which commissioners unanimously denied, came from Bradenton Classical Academy, proposed as a Hillsdale College Barney Charter School. While Carello listed the Hillsdale affiliation as a strength, it wasn’t enough to give Bradenton the green light.
The evaluation form, signed by Carello, included concerns about its educational program design, which it said aligned poorly with state standards, and described staffing and budget plans as “inconsistent and incomplete.” The evaluation also cited the safety plan as “lacking in detail” and potentially jeopardizing student safety.
“Collectively, these gaps highlight the need for significant improvements before the school can be deemed operationally and academically viable,” the evaluation said.
Carello explained later that this was the second time Bradenton Classical had applied through the Florida Charter Institute after being denied by the Manatee County School District.
“They were victims of many different versions of the application,” Carello said. When leaders first applied, she said the institute offered advice and sent them back so they could improve the plan and resubmit for a better chance of approval.
She likened the best business plan to a spider web, where every strand is connected. When touched, the web might jiggle but still holds together.
The Bradenton Classical officials resubmitted a plan that didn’t “hang together.”
Though charter applicants must clear a high bar, the institute provides resources and support for a successful outcome. However, Carello never lowers that bar once a school wins approval.
“The charter initiative was to allow people to try out innovations. They got five years to try them out and if they made progress, that was great. And occasionally, there was a school that didn’t, and we closed them down.”
Gevrey Lajoie visited a School Choice Safari event to learn about options for her son, Elijah. The event was sponsored by GuidEd, one of the many organizations springing up in states that have granted parents the flexibility to choose the best educational fit for their children.
TAMPA, Fla. — Parents, many pushing babies in strollers with school-age children in tow, made their way through the covered pavilion as they surveyed the brightly decorated tables representing 28 local schools.
Their goal: To gather as much information as possible as they try to figure out the best educational fit for their children, either for the 2025-26 school year or beyond.
“We’re all over the place with which school,” said Gevrey Lajoie of South Tampa. Her son, Elijah, is only 3, but she said it’s not too early to begin looking at options. A mom friend told her about the School Choice Safari at ZooTampa at Lowry Park. It would give her a chance to check out many schools all in one place and learn about state scholarship programs.
Lajoie isn’t alone. For this generation of Florida families, gone are the days of simply attending whatever school they’re assigned based on where they live. Families actively shop for schools; schools actively court them, and districts perpetually create new programs.
And while the benefits are clear, some families end up feeling adrift in a sea of choices.
New organizations are springing up to help families find their way. "A variety of options are out there, and the number is growing, but families don’t know how to navigate them. There was no place for them to go to get help,” said Kelly Garcia, a former teacher who serves on Florida’s State Board of Education.
In 2023, the Tampa Bay area resident and her brother-in-law, Garrett Garcia, co-founded GuidEd, a nonprofit organization that provides free, impartial guidance to help families learn about available options so they can find the best fit for their children.
The organization hosts a bilingual call center where families can get information about all options in Hillsborough County, from district and magnet schools to charter schools, private schools, religious schools, online schools and even homeschooling. GuidEd also helps families sift through the various state K-12 scholarship options. The group also hosts live events, such as the School Choice Safari, to connect families and schools.
Organizations are cropping up all over the country, especially in areas with lots of choices. Their specific missions and business models vary, but they are united by a common theme: They help families navigate an evolving education system where they have the power to choose the best education for their children
Jenny Clark, a homeschool mom and education choice advocate, saw the need for a personal touch in 2019 when she launched Love Your School in Arizona.
“One of the most important aspects of our work is knowing how to listen, evaluate, and support parents who want to talk to another human about their child's education situation,” said Clark, who had seen parents struggle with the application process surrounding the state’s new education savings accounts program. The program has since expanded to West Virginia and Alabama.
Clark’s nonprofit provides personalized support through its Parent Concierge Service, which offers parents the opportunity for phone consultations with navigators. Love Your School also provides free online autism and dyslexia guides and details about the legal rights of students with disabilities, and it hosts an online community where parents can get support.
“Our services are unique because we pride ourselves in being experts in special education evaluations and processes, which are required for higher ESA funding, public school rights and open enrollment, experts in the ESA program law and approved expenses, and personalized school search and homeschool support,” Clark said.
Kelly Garcia, GuidEd’s regional director, has hosted several in-person events that feature free snacks, face painting, magicians, and prize giveaways in addition to booths staffed by schools and other education providers. During the recent event, parents could visit a booth to learn more about the state’s K-12 education choice scholarship programs.
Garcia, whose organization prioritizes neutral advice about all choices, including public schools, advises parents to start by assessing their child’s needs and then identifying learning options that would best serve them. GuidEd’s philosophy is to trust parents to determine the best environment for their kids.
At the School Choice Safari, families got to check out private schools, magnet schools and charter schools.
“There’s a school out there for everyone,” she said.
Students at New Springs Schools, a STEM charter school that serves students ages 5-14, show off some recent class projects at the School Choice Safari in Tampa.
During the zoo event, Garcia personally escorted parents with specific questions to the tables where they could get answers.
One of them, Hugo Navarro, recently moved to Tampa from Southern California to start a new job for a national investment firm. His wife, who had remained with their three kids in California, had already started researching schools online, but Navarro wanted to get an in-person look at providers and learn more about state education choice scholarships before their 7-year-old son starts school in August.
On his wish list: academic rigor, a focus on the basics, and a diverse student body.
“Academic ratings, that’s our number one thing,” he said.
A Catholic school that offers academic excellence was also a contender, though a secular school wouldn’t be a dealbreaker if it had a reputation for strong academics.
Garcia and Clark both said that as new generations of parents grow more comfortable selecting education options, they see the navigators’ role becoming more relevant, not less.
“Parents can use online tools like google to search for schools, but the depth of what parents actually want, and our highly trained knowledge of a variety of educational issues means that as choice programs grow, the need for our parent concierge services will continue to grow as well,” Clark said. “There are exciting times ahead for families, and those who support them.”
As the number of schools and a la carte learning options grows, Garcia said, families will need information to better customize learning for their children.
“This is a daunting task, even for the most seasoned parents,” she said. “At GuidEd, we see a growing need for unbiased education advisers to ensure a healthy and sophisticated market.”
Garcia compared the search for educational services to buying a home.
“A family is not likely to make a high-stakes decision, like buying a home, by relying on a simple Zillow search,” she said. “Instead, they use the Zillow search to help them understand their options and then rely on a Realtor to help guide them through the home- buying process, relying on their trusted, yet unbiased expertise. We see ourselves as the "Realtor" in the school choice or education freedom landscape.”
I received some interesting responses to last week’s post where I showed some math on how few votes it could have swung control of the Arizona State Senate in the 2024 elections and noted that one of the Arizona political parties having proposed eliminating five popular choice programs may have helped Republicans expand their previous narrow majority. One response focused on a relative who voted for Kamala Harris for president but only voted for state legislative Republicans because her grandchildren participate in the Empowerment Scholarship Program. I had not even considered grandparents and relatives (other than parents) of students participating in choice programs, but they are indeed out there and are registered to vote.
Another response noted that the potential coalition against private choice was much larger than that in favor of private choice in Arizona, given that far more students attend school districts than participate in choice programs. The latter part of this is of course true, but I noted that both absolute and per pupil spending in Arizona school districts stands at or close to all-time highs, making it a fairly latent constituency. Notwithstanding a whole lot of windy rhetoric, no one is proposing to eliminate district schools in Arizona (or anywhere else).
Supporters of private choice programs, on the other hand, have watched as Gov. Katie Hobbs proposed eliminating the programs that they rely upon, making them more of an active constituency. I had a couple of readers inquire as to why I did not include charter school students and families. To my knowledge no one has proposed eliminating Arizona charter schools, so I view them as a mostly latent constituency, at least until someone is reckless enough to threaten their existence.
I put together the chart below based on a few different sources of information. Some numbers are from 2025; the tax credit numbers are from the state’s 2023 report. The tax credit donor numbers only count donations, rather than the number of members of the families who made the donation. There is certainly some double counting going on with the original and switcher credits, as many people claim both. The parent figure is an estimate that assumes 1.5 parents per ESA student in 2025 and does not consider the possibility of other relatives. The below list is by no means exhaustive, or even close to it. Also included are the number of swing votes each losing candidate would have needed to win in the swing Arizona Senate races.
Here goes:
By November 2026, these numbers are going to look even less forgiving than they do now. There are a whole lot of registered Democrats in those larger numbers. It might not be a great idea to give them an incentive to split their tickets to vote in their kids’ interests in legislative races.
By the way, did I mention that the margin of victory in Arizona’s 2022 governor’s race was 17,117 votes and, in the attorney general race, the margin was 280 votes?
Horizon Learning microschool receive immersive science lessons at a la carte provider Saltwater Studies. Photo by Silver Media
Three decades ago, dozens of Black families in the Liberty City neighborhood of Miami enrolled their children in Florida’s first charter school. They didn’t know it, but they were kickstarting the most dramatic, statewide, educational shift for Black students in America.
Today, 140,000+ Black students in Florida are being educated outside district schools. They’re either in charter schools, in private schools using state choice scholarships, or outside full-time schools entirely using education savings accounts.
More details on this overlooked migration can be found in a new brief co-authored by Black Minds Matter founder Denisha Allen and myself. It’s a quick update to our 2021 report, “Controlling the Narrative: Parental Choice, Black Empowerment & Lessons from Florida.”
Over the past decade, the number of Black students in Florida enrolled in non-district options grew 86%, to 142,384. That’s more than one in five Black students in the state. For context, 31 states have fewer Black students in their public schools than Florida has in these options.
The numbers are a strong rebuttal to those who claim choice is aimed at helping wealthy, white families.
They’re also a good indicator of what’s next.
As choice programs continue to expand across America, look for even more Black families, educators and communities to embrace them.
At the annual Florida School Choice Conference and School Choice Summit, attendees got their customary sendoff from Jim Horne, a former state senator, state education commissioner and pioneer of the state’s charter school movement.
“We were charged to be laboratories of innovation,” he told the audience of school leaders in his keynote speech. “I challenge you to step out of the proverbial box. If you don’t innovate, you will stagnate.”
So far, charter schools have resisted the forces of stagnation. A report from the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools shows charter schools added 83,000 new students during the 2023-24 school year, as enrollment in other public schools shrank.
This school year, they added thousands more students in Florida. Recent figures from the state Department of Education show statewide charter school enrollment topped 400,000 during the 2024-25 school year.
Source: State Department of Education
That growth comes two years after state lawmakers passed House Bill 1, which allowed universal education choice scholarship eligibility and created the Personalized Education Program, a flexible scholarship for parents who fully customize their children’s education.
The legislation unlocked new opportunities for charters to heed Horne’s call to serve as laboratories of innovation by providing a la carte classes and services to scholarship students who did not attend public or private school full time. Need AP chemistry or calculus? No problem.
So far, five charter school organizations have partnered with Step Up For Students to offer individual courses to scholarship families, with more in the works.
“I think it’s a great idea and something that fits right into the charter school realm,” said Karen Seder, director of educational standards at Kid’s Community College, which operates three schools, including one that includes middle school, in Riverview, a southeastern suburb of Tampa.
The schools expect to begin offering courses soon after leaders decide what might work best. Seder said it might be easier to offer electives first and add core academics after seeing how things work out.
Though she sees the ability to help part-time students as a win for everyone, she sees the need to protect charter schools’ uniqueness, which comes from their ability to offer strong organizational cultures and coherent, specialized programs, for example, STEM, music or programs for students with learning differences. However, she called the push to maximize options for as many students as possible “the right mindset” for society.
“Ultimately, when you and I are no longer working and need somebody to take care of us, all these kids are going to be the ones responsible, so it shouldn’t matter to us if they’re homeschool or private school or public school or charter school or wilderness school, she said. “We need to make sure we’re raising kids that have the best education that we can, and our public dollars should be going to all of our kids.”
