Op-Ed: How Signature became the best with less

Signature School, where I attended from 2009-2013, is the top charter school in the United States.

Congratulations are due to the students, who have managed to do excellent work, and to the teachers, many of whom have remained there since my time. The numbers are impressive, but they obscure some important information, which may leave Evansville asking why their schools aren’t performing at this level.

We have some good answers, courtesy of Signature’s annual reports. I have combined data from Signature School’s annual reports from school year 2010-11 to their most recent report for school year 2021-22. Comparing these numbers against the EVSC’s demographic and student performance data, I asked why Signature’s budget is so low. While the EVSC receives $9,404.51 per student in State Basic Tuition Grant support, Signature receives $7,158.38. What gives?

The Indiana Legislature and Department of Education wrote the Basic Tuition Grant formula that yields both numbers. This budget rightly recognizes that it costs more money to educate students with fewer resources or who face greater difficulties, namely poor and disabled students.

It turns out that factoring in Signature’s demographics explains $1,776.82 in per-student spending difference. Signature’s 2021-22 annual report states 0% of students are receiving disability services and 16% are recipients of free-or-reduced textbook subsidies. This compares to the EVSC’s rates of 53% free-and-reduced lunch rate and 16% disability rate.

Signature is a public charter with open enrollment and no tuition. How does it maintain such starkly different demographics? A lack of services, which is part of its apparent business model.

Readers may notice that Signature provides free-and-reduced textbooks, while EVSC schools provide free-and-reduced school lunches. That’s because Signature, even in a large expansion to one of its buildings in the past five years, does not maintain kitchen facilities that would allow it to distribute food aid. Parents, if you are or were low-income with difficulty finding a budget for food, would you send your child to a place where they can get free food or not?

Food is a cost center for EVSC, but one subsidized by the state. Signature does not provide that service but wants funding as if it did. Can we conclude that the state is underfunding Signature? No. Signature had a chance to expand and add a kitchen facility to support hungry students. It didn’t, and so it gets less funding. Those funds — those tax funds — are for lower-income students to receive aid for food and services. Signature serves these students at a rate less than one-third that of the EVSC.

Signature works well for some students, but it has never been a place to support every student in Evansville. Otherwise “self-motivated learners” that Signature seeks might not do well without state-subsidized breakfast and lunch. That’s why schools took it on. By choosing not to provide these meals, Signature sacrifices $1,396.75 per student.

Similarly, Signature’s support staff remain largely part-time, with a single part-time counselor and two academic advisors who also have educational roles. Is there space for students who have additional needs at Signature? Capacity in these support roles suggests otherwise, and, again, students who have these needs either must try much harder to attend or choose to go to schools where their needs are better met. With these and additional support staff missing, Signature forfeits an additional $380.07 per student.

And is Signature actually doing more with less? I’m not so sure. Sure, it receives $1,776.82 less in Basic Tuition Grant, but it’s receiving more in private grant and parent funding, leaving it spending $505.72 more per student than the EVSC.

Failure to provide a supportive environment for all students results in a school that categorically fails some students. Those that might go hungry, whatever their home circumstances, and those that need additional support due to their learning disability will find Signature an exceptionally challenging environment that may not be worth the cost. The state certainly finds that to be the case. If you found that a school chose to not provide the services that helped support your child, would you demand they be self-motivated enough to forgo that help?

Signature claims to do more with less, but that “less” is justified by its staffing and facilities decisions to not support Evansville equally. The school is hitting top marks by serving a subset of Evansville’s population, showing what is possible, but only if a school fails to meet the needs of students who need more care to rise to the challenge. The students Signature is left with are, reasonably, easier to educate.

Again, congratulations to Signature’s students and teachers. But when it comes time to debate school funding in the Indiana Legislature, it’s worth remembering that the “less” Signature receives is reasonable and prudent.

Benjamin Steele is a Masters in Public Administration candidate specializing in public finance at the Daniel J. Evans School of Public Policy and Governance at the University of Washington.

This article originally appeared on Evansville Courier & Press: Op-Ed: How Signature became the best with less