#devosfacts

This is fantastic follow up reporting by Linda Lutton in Illinois.  Her piece titled “Illinois Struggles To Expand Charter Schools Despite Giant Pot Of Federal Money” is a journalistic primer on how any local ed beat writer - or gadfly - can localize the federal charter school program.

The feds give these awards for charter school start-up to state ed agencies (and under the DeVos ED interpretation to “state entities” of many kinds not just SEAs) EACH AND EVERY YEAR.  And yet there is no investigation after the press announcements are released by the charter cheerleaders on how the money is spent, what school operators applied, what applications were rejected, which applications were awarded and ultimately what were the academic outcomes at the awarded schools or impact on those communities of this federal money.

It is economic stimulus for the charter sector exclusively and with no accountability.

The ED Dept Charter School Office published its SEA awardees (and other CSP awardees) only in response to a deliberate FOIA program to obtain the underlying data.  And ED Dept charter grant administrators haven’t updated the underlying data of individual school recipients since the original “Commitment to Transparency” released on Dec. 23 2015.  Because nothing says commitment to transparency than a Day Before Christmas Eve news dump.

Reporters or just activists of any kind could do what Linda Lutton did, run down the sub-awards to individual schools and turn around and drop that info on their elected officials for not just transparency but accountability.

Riffing off Mercedes Schneider’s post on peer reviewers inside ESSA, I submitted comment there & below for my own memory:

There is deep vein of corruption running through all the ‘peer reviewed’ grants and awards over the Obama years and into this first Trump/Devos year. The family and genus of varmin is the same but the species is different. Employees of one CMO or EMO, think tankers, relatives, consultants, etc of Dem or Repub genus wiil jump into peer role for a year then applicant another year, then peer again. This whole revolving door is worth a lawsuit to pry the historic/present lists out of their hands.

It is just as clear in the Federal Charter School grants program too:

CSP grants to “state entities”:

https://innovation.ed.gov/files/2017/03/FINAL-State-Entities-Call-for-Peer-Reviewers-FY2017.doc

NOTE: Even if you applied to be a peer reviewer in the past, please complete the Peer Reviewer Interest Survey as directed below by 5:00 p.m. (EST) on Friday, March 3, 2017 to be considered for a peer reviewer position for the 2017 State Entities competition. *If you have served as a CSP peer reviewer in the past and prefer to instead serve as a panel monitor, please note your interest in the peer reviewer interest survey.

WHO: We are seeking peer reviewers from various professions and backgrounds with an understanding of the charter school sector and expertise in at least one of the following areas: Charter School Authorizing and Accountability; Charter School Policy; Charter School Research and Evaluation; Charter School Development and Implementation; or Charter School Grant Administration. Peer reviewers may have expertise in various geographies, including urban, suburban, rural, and tribal communities.

WHAT: Peer reviewers will independently read, score, and provide timely, well written comments for State Entity grant applications submitted to the U.S. Department of Education under the CSP and travel to Washington, D.C., to participate in one week of in-person panel discussions.

CSP Replication grant “call for peer reviewers”:

https://innovation.ed.gov/what-we-do/charter-schools/charter-schools-program-grants-for-replications-and-expansion-of-high-quality-charter-schools/

2017 Peer Reviewers

If you would like to be considered as a peer reviewer, please register yourself in our online peer reviewer database at http://www.g5.gov (G5). To serve as a reviewer you will need to register in G5. The online registration requires you to submit your resume; please ensure your resume (maximum of 5 pages) includes a brief list of career highlights and/or outlines your specific expertise in the areas outlined above. Please do not exceed the five-page limit for resumes. When the system prompts you for your areas of specialization, please ensure you select “charter schools”, along with any other relevant areas.

“An indictment merely alleges that crimes have been committed, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”  yadda yadda yadda

Some clear-headed investigator within IRS must have won a huge bureaucratic fight to convince all the political appointees above her to make this case.  It is commonly known practice for many charter schools to pay leases (and other fees) to companies privately held by related persons.  This case must hinge on the “concealed” allegation; I can only conclude that if he had said “I DID THIS” than perhaps it is ok under that same mail fraud code.

FROM THE PRESS RELEASE: “The indictment alleges Chavis caused the schools to apply for more than $2.5 million in competitive federal grant funds for the purpose of paying the costs of leasing facilities that Chavis owned or controlled through his companies American Delivery Systems and Lumbee Properties, LLC.  Chavis allegedly concealed his interest in the facilities in the grant applications.  The indictment further alleges that the schools obtained more than $1.1 million in federal grants as a result of this fraud, and that Chavis used fraud proceeds to promote the fraud scheme as to each school.”

Someone should call California Treasurer John Chiang what his office has done to determine if others have defrauded the California School Finance Authority in the same manner.

Below is the actual indictment language.  Big deal and shows a road map to any state or federal investigator how to look into charter school applications to the biggest federal pot of money out there.

I don’t have the time to make one of these for each of Trump’s picks for dismantling America his cabinet. However, watching Democrats actually standing up to Betsy DeVos, that’s kind of cool.

Especially since the Clinton wing of the party is for DeVos’s policy.

But first I just have to say, I don’t know if I’ve ever read a piece by D. Watkins before, but he is someone I will pay attention to now. The Salon piece I got this quote from is good. I look forward to making one of these for him without a cross-eyed white woman on it. (I suspect she has a lazy eye. As one of my friends said about his lazy eye you don’t notice it in person, but in photos, you can see it. I don’t want to eye-shame her, just saying it’s a picture of a cross-eyed white woman.)

Nikki Haley, someone who is vocal for defending images of white supremacy, Elaine Chao, who has connections to a drug smuggling operation, John Kelly, who’s the reason people flee from Central America as refugees, James Mattis, an unprosecuted War Criminal, should not have about 90-95% of the Senate voting for them. Every vote should look like Betsy DeVos’s.

Now, I should give a shout out to Kamala Harris who had the courage to vote against John Kelly, Mike Pompeo, and Rex Tillerson, Richard Blumenthal for voting against Kelly and Tillerson (For shame for voting yes on the rest and not showing up for the Pompeo vote, I don’t know the reason why), Chris Coons for voting against Pompeo and Nikki Haley (For shame voting yes on the rest and not showing up for the Tillerson vote, I don’t know the reason why), Chris Van Hollen for voting against Kelly, Pompeo, and Tillerson, Elizabeth Warren for voting against Kelly, Pompeo, and Tillerson (She’s my senator, she voted for Haley and Mattis, Ed Markey, my other senator has only voted against Tillerson and Pompeo. Looks like we need to have a conversation with them.) Catherine Cortez Masto for voting against Kelly, Pompeo, and Tillerson, Cory Booker for voting against Kelly, Pompeo, Tillerson and Chao (I guess the pharmaceutical companies didn’t want the competition from Chao?), Tom Udall for voting against Kelly, Pompeo, Tillerson and Haley, Martin Heinrich for voting against Kelly, Pompeo, Tillerson and Haley, Chuck Schumer for voting against Chao and Tillerson, Kirsten Gillibrand for voting against Kelly, Pompeo, Tillerson, Chao, and Mattis (The only person to vote against Mattis), Ron Wyden for voting against Kelly, Pompeo, and Tillerson, Jeff Merkley for voting against Kelly, Pompeo, Tillerson and Chao, and Bernie Sanders for voting against Pompeo, Chao, Haley, and Tillerson.

Those with the smug satisfaction of living in California, remember, Dianne Feinstein has only voted against Rex Tillerson and now Betsy Devos so far. She and 12 other Democrats voted for Mike Pompeo. Y’all are going to have to collect your people. I only listed the 14 Democrats who voted against 4 of Trump’s nominations. There are 48 Democratic Senators. That isn’t even close to half on the list who are resisting.

Donald Trump is not a normal president and we can’t treat him like he is one. Sadly, most Democrats in elected office right now don’t seem to understand this. Recently I posted an image around Elizabeth King which said “Any contribution to the idea that Trump is “business as usual”—or worse, palatable—is unethical.” She was criticizing the media, but I would say that this also goes for those in elected office.

Those 14 senators failed us when it was their job to delay the ratification of the electoral college and they failed us when they, for example, like Bernie Sanders voted for James Mattis and John Kelly. There is not a single Democrat in the Senate who’s taken up the mantle of completely obstructing Trump’s agenda. To me, that is unethical.

It is unethical because most people in Trump’s Cabinet are unqualified or will try to profit off the backs of the American people. Let’s be honest, that is why that minority of Americans who voted for Trump voted for him! They were tired of the neo-liberal agenda of extracting wealth from the poor to help those at the top. Sadly, since 1980 (And yes, you can argue that this went back to 1968) America has been governed as a neo-liberal state. All presidents since Reagan (And you can argue since Nixon) have been a part of neo-liberalism. That scam that is neo-liberalism is encapsulated in the scam of Amway, it’s a pyramid scheme in which only those at the top can get rich.