BCS Underenrollment of Economically Disadvantaged Students - Letter to SCCOE Board
From: Steve Brown
Several weeks ago, I sent to you an email regarding the renewal of the BCS charter petition.
I have received several questions related to the material presented. This email is an effort to respond to one set of questions related to the relative enrollment of economically disadvantaged students.
Charter Development Process: 47605 - Required Charter Elements (7)
The means by which the school will achieve a racial and ethnic balance among its pupils that is reflective of the general population residing within the territorial jurisdiction of the school district to which the charter is submitted.
In 2023-24, enrollment of economically disadvantaged students, students eligible for Free and Reduced-price Meals (FRPM) was:
LASD: 234 students or 87% of the combined LASD+BCS students eligible for FRPM
BCS: 36 students or 13% of the combined LASD+BCS students eligible for FRPM
To just achieve proportional enrollment, between LASD and BCS, BCS would need to increase enrollment by approximately 27 students eligible for FRPM. BCS has never enrolled a proportionate share of students eligible for FRPM.
Students who are eligible for FRPM are considered “academically low achieving.”
To fulfill the “Legislative Intent: 47601 (b)” of the charter act, to ‘Increase learning opportunities for all pupils, with special emphasis on expanded learning experiences for pupils who are identified as academically low achieving”, greater than 27 students who qualify FRPM would need to be enrolled.
Why has BCS, over the last 20 years, never enrolled a proportionate (relative to LASD) number of students who qualify for FRPM? A good question! The literature suggests:
Does the community “trust” the school?
Is there a critical mass of representation?
Can students see other students like themselves in the student body?
Can students see leaders (teachers and administrators) like themselves?
Is there a sincere, active, and intentional outreach?
Does the school culture create a welcoming environment in which families and students feel that they “belong”?
Are there school “test score” disincentives? (Economically disadvantaged (FRPM) students score lower then not-economically disadvantaged students.)
Are there various financial disincentives?
Each of these, and other potential causes of under enrolling students who qualify for FRPM, are worthy of further exploration. The following material focuses on just one financial disincentive.
A current BCS expectation, but not as explicitly stated today as it was as in the past, is parents who are considering enrolling their children in BCS, for the family of each student to make substantial annual contributions, each year, for each student.
A substantial annual contribution is one example of an enrollment disincentive to parents of students who qualify for FRPM.
The California Department of Education website titled “Income Eligibility Scales for School Year 2023–24” https://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/nu/rs/scales2324.asp indicates for a family of three, the family’s income would need to be below $32,318, and for a family of four, the annual income needs to be below $39,000.
Any contribution, particularly a multiple thousand-dollar contribution, would probably be very difficult for a family trying to make ends meet on an annual income of $32,318 to $39,000.
The most recent (2022) IRS Form 990’s indicate that contributions per BCS student ($4,408) were 4 times greater than LASD contributions per student ($1,058).
The BCS cultural expectation of a substantial annual contribution, per student, per year, was set when the charter was approved 20 years ago.
The long shadow of this BCS cultural norm was highlighted in the 2011 Bloomberg magazine article “Taxpayers Get Billed for Kids of Millionaires at Charter School”. The article begins “In Silicon Valley, Bullis elementary school …... asks families to donate $5,000 per child each year.”
At that same time, a member of the Santa Clara County Board of Education, mentioned receiving about 20 phone calls from parents who felt pressured to give, because of repeated solicitation in school parking lots, e-mails and phone calls and community members recall hearing that BCS had a “Wall of Shame”, which posted the names of those parents who did not donate $5,000.
Another snap shot in time, 5 years later, in the 2016 BCS Petition to SCCOE, which mentions the school receives $4,500 per student per year.
In 2022 the average donation per student was $4,408. It seems empirically, not much has changed over the last decade.
The online SCCOE General Library indicates a SCCOE Board Norm is “Look upon history as lessons learned; focus on the present and the future.”
Focusing on the present and the future, the current BCS Foundation website indicates that the expectation for parents considering enrolling their children in BCS, is a substantial annual contribution, each year, for each student.
The current Bullis-Purissima Elementary School Foundation website indicates https://www.bcsfoundation.com/why-donate “Our suggested donation amount is $5,500 per BCS learner”
Multi-thousand-dollar annual contribution expectations are a disincentive to families with students qualifying for FRPM. If the BCS Board explicitly removed this disincentive for parents of students eligible to receive FRPM, the financial impact would be insignificant to BCS finances.
The IRS publishes the Form 990 filed by non-profits, the latest available is for 2022. This filing indicates the BCS Foundation, which raises funds to support the BCS School, had a balance of approximately $10 million.
BCS currently enrolls 36 students to qualify for FRPM, adding 27 similar students, for a total of 63, which would for the first time in the 20-year history of BCS, be proportionate enrollment with the district (LASD) of this group of students considered “academically low achieving.”
What would be the financial consequence of removing this financial disincentive, approximately $300K (63 times $5,000 equals $315,000) or 3% of the $10M foundation fund balance. This seems to be insignificant compared to the annual growth of the foundations fund balance of an average $1M per year for the last three reported years.
A sincere effort to remove the multi-thousand-dollar annual contribution expectation for the parents of children who qualify for FRPM, might be to publicly waive all expectations of a contribution.
Early BCS “school culture” seems to have perpetuated over time and continues to influence the current perception of families considering schools for their children.
BCS has not, and continues to not, enroll its share of the “academically low achieving” students, resulting in harmful unintended consequences to LASD and its larger community.
I encourage the SCCOE Board to reject BCS current charter renewal petition, and suggest to the BCS Board they resubmit a petition containing:
Firm commitments to achieving annual enrollment metrics academically low achieving students,
Explicit consequences for not achieving the metrics,
Removing disincentives for parents and students eligible for FRPMs, and
Adding incentives for the parents and students of students eligible for FRPM.
Thank you for your service to the community and for your time in reading this letter.
If you have questions or comments, please let me know.
Steve Brown
650-996-4895