Reformy Money Pours Into NJ

Anthony Cody makes the case that the recent resignation of Florida Education Commissioner Tony Bennett is the outcome of just one more scandal in long line of "corporate education reform" failures. This entire movement is beginning to collapse under the weight of its own mendacity; the day of reckoning has finally arrived.

That may be, but reforminess isn't going away any time soon, so long as the money to sustain the "reformers" keeps gushing. Take, for example, New Jersey: 

Newark's Teach for America is getting a boost from the Walton Family Foundation, which has pledged $2 million to the program that brings young teachers into under-served classrooms.

Newark was one of several cities that will share the $20 million donation from the foundation.

“With this critical investment, Teach For America will be able to bring effective teachers into some of the most under-resourced classrooms in the country while simultaneously working to develop more of our talented corps members as long-term champions of educational equity and excellence,” said Matt Kramer, co-chief executive officer of Teach For America.

The money headed to Newark will be able to support 369 first and second year teachers who have committed to work two yeas at high-need schools.

Leave to the Star-Ledger to report this without any context whatsoever. The truth is that there is scant little evidence that TFA's corps members - who get a total of five weeks of summer training before being thrown into a classroom - are "effective" when compared to teachers who pursue degrees in education. Gary Rubinstein shows us TFA's training is wholly inadequate, and the claims of great "learning gains" from TFAers are little better than lies. High-quality research shows TFAers are not a superior substitute to well-trained, experienced teachers; in truth, TFA's high attrition rate works against the goal of improving student achievement.

TFA stopped being about classroom effectiveness long ago; it is now a political organization. And it's expensive, spending over $38,000 for each corps member who starts teaching. School districts like Chicago and Philadelphia, reeling from massive budget cuts and school closings, continue to pay TFA to place their corps members into schools.

But not just any schools: increasingly, TFA has become a de facto staffing agency for charter schools. As EduShyster reports, TFA is sending more and more of its recruits to charters managed by the big, national chains: KIPP, Rocketship, UNO, Imagine, etc. One ancillary benefit for real estate developers is that TFA gives them a consistent, constantly churning supply of yuppies, perfect for urban gentrification. Newark's Teachers Village is only one of several projects popping up all over the country that take advantage of TFA's steady supply of college-educated renters, desperately needed to "turn around" neighborhoods and raise property values.

These nascent urban hipsters are taking away unionized teaching jobs; nonetheless, unions - including some teachers unions - support these projects (which benefit from enormous tax gifts) because they create temporary unionized construction jobs. You can certainly understand why the Waltons, who run one of the most anti-labor corporations in the nation, would want to invest in a union-busting outfit like TFA - especially when some teachers unions are willing to shoot themselves in the foot and support bringing more corps members into their cities.

The resistance to TFA has grow sharply in recent months; however, as long as they have money to burn, they won't be going away any time soon. Same with the Gates Foundation:

HOW WE WORK

GRANT 

Council of Chief State School Officers

---

Date: June 2013
Purpose: to support the Council of Chief State School Officers’ Institute for Transition and Transformation Services partnership with the NJ DOE to support the state’s efforts to support high quality implementation of the Common Core of State Standards
Amount: $799,825
Term: 12
Topic: College-Ready
Regions Served: GLOBAL|NORTH AMERICA
Program: United States
Grantee Location: Washington, District of Columbia 

Nearly $800K to imbed the Common Core into New Jersey from the Gates Foundation: they must be cheering in the Montclair school district's central office...

Common Core really means only one thing for New Jersey: testing, testing, testing. Reformy types like Andy Smarick, formerly Number 2 at the NJDOE, have already admitted the ultimate goal of these tests is to make New Jersey's excellent public schools look as bad as possible, allowing them to move their privatization agenda out to the 'burbs. Never mind these kids are already over-tested; we're going to pile more tests on top of them and stress them out further so we can implement even more innumerate test-based evaluations for teachers.

When parents and teachers learn about all this, they are going to rise up in revolt against the Common Core. Good thing the Gates people have coughed up so much money for propaganda a public relations campaign to quell the public's disgust while radically altering New Jersey's high-performing school system.

Anyone else in Jersey want our reformy money? "Cause we've got plenty!

Make Big Money Building Charter Schools: Joe Bruno Shows You How!

Over the past month I've been telling the story of the misogynist rapper Pitbull, his new charter school in Miami, and his speech before the 2013 National Charter Schools Convention. I pointed out that Kevin Chavous, board chair of the very reformy group Democrats For Education Reform, apparently both embraces the values espoused by Pitbull in his music and the business practices of Pitbull's partners:

This capture from Chavous's Facebook page features Fernando "Ferny" Zulueta, the man to Pitbull's right. According to a series of reports by the Miami Herald, Zulueta runs the "richest charter school management firm" in Florida, Academica, a for-profit company with annual revenues of $158 million. Zulueta also controls, along with his brother, Ignacio, more than $155 $115 million of South Florida real estate that is exempt from property taxes as "public" schools.

Pitbull's new charter, SLAM, will be managed by Academica.

The fourth fellow in this picture is S. Joe Bruno, a man who has become increasingly influential in the charter school industry. Originally an executive in the accounting and health care sectors, Bruno started his current organization, Building Hope, in 2004. Here's how the non-profit describes its mission:

Building Hope supports high quality public charter schools in Washington D.C., Florida and other U.S. cities and states by providing technical and financial assistance for educational facilities. A non-profit organization, Building Hope supports the expansion of academically successful schools with the capacity to grow their enrollments in order to catalyze change across their local public education systems. Building Hope promotes school-centered community revitalization, and believes that excellent charter school programs and facilities will help transform economically depressed neighborhoods into places where children will thrive. [emphasis mine]

All that may be true, but it's not the complete story. Because Building Hope is also using government grants and tax-exempt foundation funds to provide capital to the for-profit charter sector, allowing charter management organizations and charter school landowners, like the Zuluetas, to maximize their profits.

Thanks to Joe Bruno, Ferny Zulueta has been able to use capital, ultimately subsidized by taxpayers, to increase the capacity at his charter schools and collect more in both management fees and rent. Here's how this plan works:


Step 1: Bruno Gathers Up a Big Pile of Money

Like a bank, Building Hope lends out funds to charter schools to help finance construction and expansion. But Building Hope needs to gather up capital to loan out to its customers. Because they are a non-profit corporation, Building Hope has access to reserves normal lenders can't tap into. Building Hope's website lists several "Investment Partners":

• The Sallie Mae Fund, the charitable arm of the student loan giant whose mission is: "to increase college access for America's students — by supporting programs and initiatives that help open doors to higher education." The fund's website documents $28 million in giving to Building Hope.
• The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, administered by the Department of Treasury: "The CDFI Fund's mission is to increase economic opportunity and promote community development investments for underserved populations and in distressed communities in the United States." Building Hope got over $2 million from the fund in 2011, and $750,000 in 2010.
• The US Department of Education, which awarded Building Hope nearly $5 million in 2001 under the Credit Enhancement For Charter School Facilities Program: "This program provides grants to eligible entities to permit them to enhance the credit of charter schools so that the charter schools can access private-sector and other non-Federal capital in order to acquire, construct, and renovate facilities at a reasonable cost."
• The Clavert Foundation: "'Impact Investing' connects caring investors with worthy causes, delivering a social and financial return. People invest in us, making it possible for us to invest in organizations around the world that empower people living in low-income communities." Building Hope claims they are receiving funds of up to $4 million from the foundation.
• The Walton Family Foundation: "The foundation invests to infuse competition into the nation’s K-12 education system by increasing the quantity and quality of school choices available to parents, especially in low-income communities, in order to inspire all schools to improve." Tax records, available through Guidestar, show Walton had two notes receivable from Building Hope, which had borrowed over $12 million.

That is a lot of money; some in grants, some in loans, but all bequeathed under the idea that charter school facilities construction is a public investment that should be subsidized - either through tax policy or direct giving - because it addresses a societal need. Keep that in mind as we continue.

Step 2: Bruno Repackages These Funds as Loans For Charter School Construction

Looking at Building Hope's tax records, it's clear their primary activity is granting loans to charter schools for facilities construction. In 2010, the group claimed it had financed over $72 million in direct loans, and another $9 million in credit enhancements, since its inception. A list of projects receiving financing includes charters in Washington, D.C. and 13 states.

Building Hope also gives grants, but many are listed as "imputed interest": the difference between the rate of the loan and the rate Building Hope ostensibly could have gotten on the market. Standard accounting practices allow the group to claim imputed interest as a grant distribution; however, a look at Building Hope's tax return from 2011 shows that there is significant variation in the rates they charge. One of the highest rates reported is a $3.2 million note issued to "Doral Academy I" in 2011; the rate is 7% in the first four years, and a whopping 12% in years five and six.

Building Hope also claimed income in 2011 of nearly $2 million for providing "professional services" to charters; they describe that work as "accounting and IT services."

Step 3: Charter Operators - Including FOR-PROFIT Operators - Build Facilities On Land They Own

This is the part of the plan that gets a little trickier to follow. The only reference to the Doral Academy loan I could find on Building Hope's website is this:

Doral Academy
Doral, FL
$3,200,000
Construction Loan
1,800 seats

That doesn't tell us much about Doral Academy, or how the loan was used. Let's take a closer look:

As the Miami Herald reported in their blockbuster series, Cashing In On Kids, Doral is one of four networks of charter schools in South Florida managed by Academica, a for-profit company led by the Zulueta brothers, Fernando and Ignacio. As the Herald reported, the Zuluetas don't just provide "management services" for their client charters:

But the Zuluetas’ greatest financial success is largely unseen: Through more than two dozen other companies, the Zuluetas control more than $115 million in South Florida real estate — all exempt from property taxes as public schools — and act as landlords for many of Academica’s signature schools, records show. 

These companies collected about $19 million in lease payments last year from charter schools — with nine schools paying rents exceeding 20 percent of their revenue, records show. [emphasis mine]

IRS records, filings with the Florida Department of State, and financial audits from the Florida Auditor General confirm Doral Academy schools do, in fact, rent facilities from School Development, LLC, a company also controlled by the Zuluetas. 2011 tax records show Doral Academy, Inc. paid nearly $3 million in rent to the Zuluetas; however, the schools also paid over $900,000 to Carlos Albizu University, home of Doral Academy Elementary.

So it's hard to say, based on public records, just how the loan from Building Hope may have been used to enhance the properties controlled by the Zuluetas. What is clear is that the schools have been expanding, and a big part of that expansion has been the construction of new facilities. The school's newspaper described a new building project in 2011 that would accommodate an additional 800 students. Clearly, Building Hope's financing helped make that new building - a building sitting on property owned by the Zuluetas - a reality.

Step 4: The Taxpayer Foots the Bill

As "public" schools, the charters in the Doral network receive taxpayer funds for each child they enroll. According to Doral Academy High School's 2012 audit, Academica receives a $450 yearly management fee for each student enrolled. That makes expansion a good deal for Academica: more students, more fees.

As the Herald also reported, South Florida charter schools are far less likely to serve students with special needs, which keeps costs low:

Fernando Zulueta, whose firm, Academica, manages more than 60 charter schools in South Florida, said any employee who denied access to a student with disabilities would be fired. He said special needs students rarely apply to Academica­ managed schools because they are better served at private schools that take McKay scholarships, state funding that helps children with disabilities attend private schools. 

“We want to serve them,” he said. “We haven’t gotten there yet.” [emphasis mine]

I'll be taking a look at the student populations of Miami's charter schools later this summer; for now, let's just say that Zulueta admits his student population does not include many special needs students, which would keep his costs down.


So that's how this system, set up by Bruno and the Zuluetas, works. To make it all a little easier to follow, here's a flowchart:

Taxpayers directly fund grants to Building Hope through the Departments of Treasury and Education, and indirectly through the tax code, which allows the Sallie Mae Fund and the Walton Family Foundation to donate as non-profit organizations. Keep in mind that the Walton Foundation will get back all the money it loans Building Hope, and list any imputed interest as a grant.

Building Hope then loans millions to Doral Academy, which pays back the loan using the funds it collects for each student, courtesy of Florida's taxpayers. As the student body grows, more fees go to Academica to manage the school. And rental fees flow to School Development, LLC. Both groups are controlled by the Zuluetas.

Let me stress something here (and keep in mind that I'm not a lawyer nor an accountant): as far as I can tell, every transaction here is perfectly legal.

Once again, from the Miami Herald:

PARADISE ISLAND, Bahamas On a sun­drenched weekend in September, a group of South Florida charter school principals jetted off to a leadership retreat at The Cove, an exclusive enclave of the Atlantis resort. A Friday morning meeting gave way to champagne flutes, a dip in the pool and a trip down a waterslide. The evening ended at the casino. 

Leading the toast by the pool: Fernando Zulueta, the CEO of Academica Corp., which manages the principals’ schools. 

Zulueta had reason to cheer. During the past 15 years, Zulueta and his brother, Ignacio, have built Academica into Florida’s largest and richest for­profit charter school management company, and one of the largest in the country. In Miami­Dade and Broward counties, Academica runs more than 60 schools with $158 million in total annual revenue and more than 20,000 students — more pupils than 38 Florida school districts, records show. [emphasis mine]

Let's be frank: the United States is full of examples of private companies growing fat off of the public trough. Academica is, in many ways, no different than Halliburton or General Electric. The real question is whether the nation, and Florida in particular, is getting enough value out of these transactions that they justify the large profits the Zuluetas enjoy.

Also: while we can debate the relative merits of charter schools, one thing is quite certain: any notion that the charter industry is "all about the kids" needs to be dismissed, because there are adults who are clearly making a lot of money off of charter expansion. And it's not just people like the Zuluetas: Bruno himself, according to Building Hope's 2011 tax return, earned $388,709 in compensation and another $56,865 in benefits for a year's work. In contrast, the average Florida teacher salary is $45,723.

When Chicago's public school teachers went on strike, DFER's Kevin P. Chavous, the man who posted the picture above, wrote a piece where he questioned whether those teachers were putting the best interests of their students first:

In essence, teachers are striking over salary issues, work hours and teacher evaluations. I agree that many of our teachers are underpaid and I have always respected the collective bargaining process and the right to strike, but I have to agree with the Mayor Rahm Emmanuel on the need to upgrade or elevate the discussion on what collective bargaining for teachers means in 2012 as opposed to 1962. 

In nearly every aspect of education in America, strangely, the interests of children are always secondary to the interests of adults. All of the major education decision-makers instinctively weigh adult considerations before thinking about the impact on kids and their academic achievement. Just as the auto industry in Detroit refocused their priorities from their workers' interests to improving the quality of their cars, we must also shift the paradigm to achieve effective outputs and deliverables for kids. [emphasis mine]

Zulueta and Bruno, however, are wealthy men who have been made wealthier by the charter school "movement." It strikes me as more than a little hypocritical that Chavous is so quick to question the motives of public school teachers, but not the motives of men who are making piles of money from charter school construction, with financing subsidized by the American taxpayer.

Pitbull and Walmart: Selling Charters & Caffeine Shots!

I swear, I couldn't make this stuff up:

Today, the misogynist rapper Pitbull gave the opening speech at the 2013 National Charter Schools Conference. Pitbull is "founding" a charter in Miami that will be managed by the for-profit company Academica, which has already made gobs of cash by building school facilities and then renting them to the "non-profit" charters they manage. There is no reporting on what kind of deal Pitbull structured with Academica, although he is well-known for managing and licensing his "brand."

During the same conference, the Walton family was inducted into the National Charter Schools Hall of Fame (yes, there is such a thing - oy). The Waltons, of course, owe their vast fortunes to Walmart, one of the least labor-friendly corporations in the world (their less-than-admirable employee practices, it turns out, are costing them a boatload of money). They've used part of that funding to promote a pro-charter school agenda, which includes funding the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, who, of course, gave the Waltons the award (least they could do).

Well, guess what else Pitbull and Walmart have in common?

6/29/12 -- Pitbull met with residents at a Walmart in the small (population 6,130) Alaska town today—a stop Mr. Worldwide probably never thought he'd be making until a promotional campaign with the big-box store, in which he agreed to appear at the Walmart with the most "likes" on Facebook, became the target of a concerted effort to "exile" the rapper.

But it appeared to be a win-win situation as the "Give Me Everything" rapper performed at the local Coast Guard base and posed for photos, the fans being the unwitting winners after Boston Phoenix writer David Thorpe started a Twitter campaign to get Pitbull as far off the beaten path as possible.

Yes, that's right: Pitbull teamed up with Walmart to sell "Energy Sheets." You'll remember that Pitbull's mother gave him this advice:

I would learn during our conversation that his mother advised him to look like “old money,” meaning no gaudy bling blinding you from the sparkling glare. She told him that if he decked himself out in expensive clothes and ostentatious jewelry he would look like “new money,” and the sycophants would want to bleed him dry of cash. [emphasis mine]

Mama must be so proud...

Despite the fact that AdWeek called this the "Worst Ad Campaign of the Year?", Walmart must have loved it. But how about pediatricians?

In recent years, drinks that combine alcohol with caffeine, such as Four Loko, have been blamed for the deaths of teens and college students. But a new epidemic involves younger children: elementary school students are drinking highly caffeinated energy drinks to catch a buzz. Even without alcohol, these drinks are dangerous to kids' health. 

"Energy drinks are gateway for elementary school kids," said Mike Gimbel, a national substance abuse educator. "They drink it like it's water. Nurses have kids coming in with heart palpitations." 

Gimbel said he has also observed a growing fascination among elementary school students with caffeinated gel strips that you place on the tongue, such as ones made by the brand Sheets.  

"One strip is equal to a cup of coffee, but kids are putting five or six in their mouth at once," he said. "You can overdose on caffeine by taking three or four." 

Overconsumption of caffeine, especially in young children who have smaller bodies, can cause seizures, strokes or even sudden death, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics. [emphasis mine]

And:

The power of sports heroes is powering a new kind of energy supplement. But pediatricians say parents should be careful their kids aren't using it.

The compact 2.5 ounce "quick energy" drinks have competition and some big name competitors are pushing them.

"Anytime you use an athlete who is well known, that's obviously going to catch the attention of kids," said Dr. Dan Kraft, Riley Children's Hospital.

But should kinds be paying attention to sheets of energy strips?

Eyewitness News found them at one store for $6 a box, along with an explanation from the store clerk.

"It has a lot of B12 in it. That's a good, healthy energy and also has some caffeine. Not a lot," the clerk said.

"Two of these things have twice the caffeine of Mountain Dew," Dr. Kraft said. "You can get some palpitations, where you feel your heart is racing and there can be some side effects to that."

Encouraged by sports role models, student athletes may take the caffeine strips, not realizing they make users lose body fluid. In a game, that could mean dehydration and cramping.

The size of the strips are of concern, as well.

"They can very easily take this product at halftime, if people are not watching," Dr. Kraft said.

"I don't even like my kids drinking energy drinks. I don't know what the long-term effects are. No clue," said parent Doug Holder.

"It's not good then, especially in the heat," said another parent.

Some of the products come with specific warnings, not to take it if you're under 12 and that the strips are not FDA approved. [emphasis mine]

And:

A new form of getting that caffeine boost is an energy strip that dissolves in your mouth.

But a local health expert says they're a risk.

Sheets brand Energy Strips can be found in gas stations across Champaign Urbana.

University of Illinois Food Science and Human Nutrition professor Dr. Margarita Teran says consuming too much caffeine is dangerous.

Consuming too many of these energy strips or energy drinks can cause harm to the body, affecting sleep, mood, anxiety, gastrointestinal issues and causing severe headaches.

Each energy strip contains 100 mg of caffeine.

The Academy of American Pediatrics recommends people under 21 years old should have no more than 100 mg of caffeine in one day.

Taking 4 of the energy strips in one day puts people at a toxic level of caffeine consumption. [emphasis mine]

So let's be clear: Pitbull and the Waltons have teamed up not only to sell charter schools to the American public, but to also sell a caffeine-laden product that doctors warn could be harmful to children.

It's worth noting that Pitbull is also a spokesman for Bud Light, which can also be purchased at Walmart. Of course, that's not what the rapper himself drinks:

The watery Anheuser-Busch product is nowhere to be found on the 31-year-old performer’s tour rider. Instead, Pitbull (real name: Armando Christian Perez) requires promoters to provide him with a case of Corona beer, a product of Crown Imports.

Click here for a rider excerpt detailing Pitbull’s backstage hospitality demands.

In addition to the 24 Coronas, the rapper’s booze requirements include three bottles of Ketel One vodka, and single bottles of Patron tequila, Hennessy cognac, and champagne (either Moët Rose Imperial or Moët Nectar Imperial).

Hey, he's an adult: he can drink whatever he wants. I'm sure he and Walmart join with me and educators across America in doing whatever we can to stop minors from drinking.

Because we wouldn't want to hurt kids, would we?


ADDING: Pitbull also endorsed Dr. Pepper, another drink laced with caffeine that you can purchase at your local Walmart.

Just wondering: is there anything these two sell together that's healthy for kids?

ADDING MORE: More on Sheets and children:

Teens already consume too many daily doses of caffeine, from the morning Joe to cokes and energy drinks that can cause palpitations, anxiety and sleep disturbances, just at the age when they need their sleep for growth, experts say. 

"It's a really bad idea," said Rosalind Cartwright, professor emeriti in neurological sciences in the Graduate College at Rush University Medical Center. "One hundred milligrams is not that much. But if used repeatedly, it can cause all kinds of trouble. 

"It will give them a jolt and somewhat better focus and attention for a short while, but it has a pretty steep dropoff, and if you keep taking it, you get enormously sleepy afterwards." 

[...] 

Purebrands CEO Warren Struhl was unavailable for an interview but told ABCNews.com in an email that, "Sheets has been very clear on their packaging in terms of discouraging usage by kids under 12." 

But caffeine can be hazardous for any age in teens who are sensitive or those with heart conditions or attention-deficit disorder. 

The American Academy of Pediatrics issued a report this month recommending that teens and children avoid energy and sports drinks, which carry no benefit and some risk. That includes all caffeinated drinks, including colas and coffee. 

"Caffeine is very safe; it's used in newborns to increase arousal," said John Herman, professor in sleep medicine at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas. 

"But nothing should be packaged that could appeal to children," Herman said. "It should specify dosage and instructions on how to use it and what is the maximum. A high dose of anything -- sugar or salt -- becomes harmful. 

"If it's red-colored and it's sweet, kids might take three, four or five of them and go into an anxiety attack and palpitations," he said. "Kids get anxious when they take caffeine and it could put them over the top." [emphasis mine]

Just to reiterate: the people making money from selling this stuff are now directing our education policy.

Everyone OK with that?

Define "Charity"

This time of year affords me the luxury of taking a few days to just read, write, and think. And it's at times like this that I can pull a few threads together to make a larger tapestry (yeah, the summer seems to be straining my metaphors a bit...).

Yesterday, I detailed the rapper Pitbull's foray into the wacky world of for-profit charter schooling. One thing that struck me, as I watched him make his little pre-scripted appearances in the media, is how badly the corporatized media wants us to believe that the rich and famous are doing good through their "charitable" works. Katie Couric, for instance, gushed over "Mr. 305" for "giving back to the community" by opening a charter school.

Well, how exactly is he "giving back"? His charter school, SLAM, will receive taxpayers funds for its operation. A hefty portion of those funds will go to a company called Academica, which has a documented history of enriching itself at the public trough by controlling charter school real estate, which is exempt from property taxes, while collecting rental fees from the charters it manages.

Maybe Pitbull is actually donating some money for the start-up or operations; I wouldn't know, because it appears no one in the press has bothered to ask - that includes "journalists" like Katie Couric. But if SLAM follows the pattern of other Academica schools, someone is going to make money off of this thing.

Does this sound like "charity" to you?

Today, Pitbull gave a speech at the 2013 National Charter Schools Conference, extolling the virtues of "choice" in education. At the same conference, the Walton Family Foundation is scheduled to be inducted into the National Charter Schools Hall of Fame:

Walton Family Foundation

The Arkansas-based Walton Family Foundation has provided an unprecedented level of financial support to schools and education organizations across the country over the past decade. Founded and run by the family of billionaire businessman Sam Walton, the foundation supports a wide range of causes but education organizations are its top funding priority and received over $158 million in grants in 2012 alone.
The foundation’s core strategy is “to infuse competitive pressure into America’s K-12 education system by increasing the quantity and quality of school choices available to parents, especially in low-income communities.” To do so, it spreads its education funding across three distinct initiatives: shaping public policy, creating quality schools, and improving existing schools. Charter schools have especially benefitted from the second initiative: to date, the Walton Family Foundation has invested over $300 million in start-up schools and is now the largest single funder of new charters. Additionally, the foundation has funded state charter organizations, local charter networks, national advocacy groups, teacher training programs, and research initiatives.[emphasis mine]

OK, look: maybe you're for charter schools, and maybe you aren't. Personally, I'd feel a lot better about their proliferation if the charter cheerleaders were at least somewhat honest about how they get their "successes." Regardless, I've always felt that there could be a place for charters if they are tightly regulated and if the communities they serve agree to have them.

But that's my opinion. You can agree or disagree, and that's fine; let's have the debate. But when did we decide that spreading the Walton family's opinion about charters was a "charitable" act? 

If the Waltons want to fund credentialed scholars to engage in high-quality, peer-reviewed research in public policy, I can see that as charitable giving. But giving money to think tanks and advocacy groups - like NAPCS - isn't funding policy development; it's promoting an agenda. It's really no different from giving money to a political candidate because he or she will vote the way you want on issues - and, yes, that includes issues that may not affect you directly. It really doesn't matter much why the Waltons want more charters; it's enough that they do, and that they are willing to spend gobs of money to get them.

Does this sound like "charity" to you?

Bill Gates has been pouring millions of dollars into educational "research." One of the groups he funds is the National Council on Teacher Quality, which, amazingly, put out a report recently that shores up his belief that something is very wrong with the way we train teachers. It doesn't much matter that just about every prominent education policy scholar has ripped this piece of hack-junk to shreds, including:

• Jack Hassard*
• Bruce Baker
• Linda Darling-Hammond
• Richard Allington
• Aaron Pallas
• Jon Eckert
• Sherman Dorn
• Michael Feuer
• Diane Ravitch
• Ed Fuller

I could go on, but I can already hear the objection that all of these people have a vested interest in keeping the "status quo" in college-based teacher preparation programs. Well, that's a really stupid point, but if you want to make it, OK. But how in the world does spending millions of dollars to prop up an organization that produces universally poorly-received "research" like this qualify as "philanthropy"?

Does this sound like "charity" to you?

So here's why I bring this up: Lauryn Hill, the singer, apparently didn't pay her taxes and is going to jail. She also recently put out music some find homophobic, which stirred up a bit of controversy. In the wake of all this, she went on to Tumblr (huh, I guess people do use it...) and posted a long essay about racism and her sentencing.

I'm sympathetic to some of her thoughts; less so to others (I guess I'm old-fahsioned, but it seems to me that everybody's got to pay their taxes). But this part of Hill's post really struck me:

The prosecutor, who was a woman, made a statement during sentencing about me not doing any charity work for a number of years during my ‘exile.’ A) Charity work is not a requirement, but something done because someone wants to. I was clearly doing charitable works way before other people were even thinking about it. And B) Even the judge had to comment that she, meaning I, was both having and raising children during this period. As if that was not challenging enough to do. She sounded like the echo of the grotesque slave master, who expected women to give birth while in the field, scoop the Baby up, and then continue to work. Disgusting.

Yeah, OK, that last part's a bit over the top for me - your mileage may vary. But I think Hill's got a serious point here: since when did "charity" work become a "Get Out of Jail Free" card (either actual or metaphorical) for the rich and famous?

We see this all the time: athletes, pop stars, actors, business titans - all happily smiling in front of the camera as they go about their "charitable" works. Except we rarely, if ever, get a true look at what exactly those "works" are. Yes, we get some nice press releases and photo-ops that, as Hill points out, can be quite valuable when the star is in trouble with the law or building his brand. But is what they are doing properly defined as "charity"?

When Mark Zuckerberg fell victim to an embarrassing movie, he rushed on to Oprah Winfrey's show and declared that his new "charity" would be education "reform" in Newark.

It turns out his COO at Facebook, Sheryl Sandberg, was intimately involved in managing the optics of the giving - most likely because she knew an IPO was in Facebook's future, and she wanted lots of happy-happy press about Zuckerberg before the offering. But what happened to the money? Turns out a good deal of it was used to settle a contract with Newark's teachers that introduced merit pay for the first time into this high-performing state with strong teacher unions.

Maybe you think merit pay is a good idea; I certainly don't, but that's because I read. Whatever: no matter how you come down on the issue, how can anyone seriously suggest that pushing teachers into this direction was an act of "charity"? That Zuckerberg should be lauded for putting up the dough for the deal - especially when there's no reason to believe he will do so again in the future - strikes me as more than a little bizarre.

I understand that there's a continuum here, and that many celebrities and magnates have done good work with their fame and fortune. I'm sure one of you will send me something to burst my bubble, but I always thought Paul Newman was a good guy and doing the right thing (and I like the salad dressing). And there's nothing wrong with these people advocating for their causes: I freely admit Ted Nugent has the right to advocate for whatever crazy idea pops into his head. It's a free country, he earned his money, and he can say whatever he wants. God Bless America.

But let's not pretend that a lot of what the wealthy try to sell to us as "charity" is just that. Pitbull, the Waltons, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and many others are pushing their points of view on to the public stage, gaming the political system to create policies that match their ideological proclivities, and setting up non-profits that are little more than shells that funnel public money to for-profit corporations.

Does this sound like "charity" to you?

Yes!

* This is actually a critique of a 2012 report on teacher preparation put out by NCTQ. I regret the error.