2011 Annual Report - Amazon Web Servicesedex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com › 2011 Fordham Annual...

2011 Annual Report

113891 Fordham AR2011.indd 1 4/18/12 8:16 PM

1

Contents

The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Our Mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Letter from Checker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Our Role as “Gadfly” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Rethinking Education Governance: Our Newest Priority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Stretching the School Dollar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Advancing High-Quality Choice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

High-Quality Standards & Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Ohio: In the Trenches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

What’s Ahead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Finances in Brief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

People . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22


2

The Problem

Too many American children receive an inferior education because too many U .S . schools and school systems are dysfunctional or ineffective . This situation is most dire for our neediest children, who lack high-quality education options, receive dumbed-down curricula and weak instruction, and whose school systems are too often held hostage by adult interest groups, including but not limited to teacher unions . Nor are affluent youngsters getting the education they require to succeed . As a result, U .S . students trail our international competitors and many are ill-prepared for college and career . Particularly galling is that these problems remain even though we spend more money per pupil than almost every other country .

In order for young Americans to succeed in college and the workforce, to participate knowledgeably in our democracy, and for our nation to maintain its leadership, prosperity, and security in the world, these problems must be solved . While the U .S . has made modest progress in some areas since being declared a “nation at risk,” we have a long way to go to create an education system worthy of our great country .

Cover image: Students at Sciotoville Community School, a grades 5–12 charter school serving 325 young people in southeast Ohio’s Appalachian region .


3

Our Mission

The Thomas B . Fordham Institute is the nation’s leader in advancing educational excellence for every child through quality research, analysis, and commentary, as well as on-the-ground action and advocacy in Ohio .

We advance:

• high standards for schools, students, and educators; • quality education options for families; • a more productive, equitable, and efficient education system; and • a culture of innovation, entrepreneurship, and excellence .

We promote education reform by:

• producing rigorous policy research and incisive analysis; • building coalitions with policy makers, donors, organizations, and others who share our vision; and• advocating bold solutions and comprehensive responses to education challenges, even when opposed by

powerful interests and timid establishments .

Neither the Thomas B . Fordham Institute, nor its sister organization, the Thomas B . Fordham Foundation, have any connection to Fordham University (though we hear it’s a pretty good school) .


4

Letter from Checker

Dear friends,

On behalf of the Thomas B . Fordham Institute and its board and staff, I am pleased to present our 2011 Annual Report . It’s intended to provide you with an accessible, informative overview of what we’ve been up to and where we’re heading .

We had a good year . The pages that follow provide a decent recap . From where I sit, 2011’s highlights included:

• Fifteen studies, reports, and papers from Fordham-national• Six more from Fordham-Ohio • Much media attention to our work, our ideas, and our opinions• Several bona fide education-policy gains in Ohio on the academic-standards, school-choice, and teacher-

quality fronts • A positive yield from our vigorous fundraising efforts

None of which is cause to take a break, as every one of those cliffs—and plenty more—must be scaled each year .

But quantitative measures don’t evoke the essence of Fordham, because our “core business” is the incubation (and dissemination) of provocative ideas, trenchant analyses, and responsible criticism, aimed at shaping the education-reform agenda and keeping everyone honest and focused on what’s good for kids even when it may discombobulate some of the grown-ups .

Success in that business does not lend itself to conventional bottom-line metrics . So let me reflect on two of 2011’s most consequential developments on the agenda-setting front .

At the top of the list must be our teaming up with the Center for American Progress (CAP) in a forceful effort to place education governance high up on the reform agenda . Not because we needed something else to do or because governance is a gripping topic . To the contrary . It’s far less sexy than “national standards,” vouchers, No Child Left Behind, teacher evaluations and other topics du jour . Rather, we’re doing our utmost—this venture will last several years, at least—to get people to focus on governance because it grows clearer with every passing week that our inherited public-education structures and governance arrangements may have made sense in the early twentieth century but are nowhere near adequate to the challenges of the twenty-first . In much of urban America, elected school boards have proven dysfunctional . Geographically based districts and their “local control” (and financing) don’t work in a mobile society with international-competitiveness


5

challenges . Neither does the formulaic channeling of most education dollars from state capitals and Washington . Nor do district-based curricula in a time of statewide standards and assessments and of online content streaming in from around the world . We and our partners at CAP don’t have a single grand fix for all of this today but if people don’t start paying attention to the problem it will stay with us forever and worsen with time .

Second on the “agenda” front is our mounting attention to the challenges of implementing major policy initiatives and the cautionary lessons to be drawn from those challenges and applied to future policy . Whether it’s Common Core standards, Race to the Top promises, school turnarounds, widening access to vouchers, incorporating student achievement into teacher evaluations, holding schools accountable for their effectiveness, exploiting the potential of online learning, or placing education dollars into individual students’ “backpacks,” the grandest of plans and most beguiling of intentions typically amount to little unless the will and capacity to implement them are present—and sustained . This is a sobering realization for a “think tank” but it enters into more and more of our work, both in the thin (but polluted) air of Washington and on the ground in Ohio . Partly it turns us into watchdogs and whistle blowers . Partly it leads to studies and analyses of “making things actually happen” that differ somewhat from our history of focusing on “what should happen .”

2012 is already off to a peppy, ambitious start, with major attention to science education and to education via cyberspace . We’re hiring several new colleagues but we already have a terrific team in D .C ., Dayton, and Columbus—as well as a fantastic board . Our dreams continue to exceed our capacity, but that’s what gets us up in the morning .

Please read on—and take seriously our receptivity to feedback and advice, even criticism . After all, we need to catch as well as pitch .

Sincerely,

Chester E . Finn, Jr . February 2012

Chester Finn discusses teacher tenure on ABC News, February 2011


6

Our Role as “Gadfly”

“The Fordham Institute provides such a steady diet of thoughtful and provocative thinking that I never fail to read every word.”

— Chris Cerf, New Jersey education commissioner

Fordham plays a key role in keeping America’s education-policy debates honest, rigorous, and lively . We do our best to serve up thoughtful—if sometimes biting—criticism of dogmatic and lazy thinking, no matter the source . The future of the education-reform movement demands tough love and high standards, and Fordham is committed to fighting complacency with its commentary and analysis . To this end, we significantly beefed up our media outreach and online presence in 2011, taking advantage of a widening range of media and a growing stable of experts . Along with coverage of our policy priorities (reviewed in the pages that follow), we also commented on some of education’s big-deal developments, including:

Life after No Child Left Behind. ESEA reautho-rization proceeded by fits and starts—mostly the former—in 2011 . But one thing is clear: Whatever the specifics of the new legislation, it will resemble the “reform realism” that Fordham proposed in our ESEA Briefing Book in April (which calls for the feds to be “tight” on education ends but “loose” on the means to those ends) .

State-led education reform. Fordham supported and applauded the re-emergence of the “educa-tion governor” in 2011—with many state leaders

Fordham was prolific in 2011, producing:

• 21 major publications • 50 national Education Gadfly Weekly

editions and 21 Ohio Education Gadflies – The national Gadfly saw a 50 percent increase in readership

• 2,122 Flypaper blog posts• 49 Education Gadfly Show podcast

episodes• 8 D .C .-based events and 4 in Ohio • 54 Gadfly Studios videos, reaching an

audience that was 600 percent larger than in 2010

• Op-eds or articles in Education Next, National Affairs, The Washington Post, National Interest, The National Journal, The New Republic, The New York Daily News, and The Weekly Standard

• 10 national television appearances (on NBC Nightly News, Fox Business Network, and C-SPAN, among others) and 6 national radio appearances (on NPR’s All Things Considered, the Jim Bohannon Show, and the G. Gordon Liddy Show, among others)


7

advancing bold reforms in such realms as teacher evaluation, school choice, and collective bargaining . Our “Education Reform Idol” event, viewed by over 2,000 people, crowned Indiana the “reformiest” state in the nation .

Fordham continues to be recognized by traditional media as a source of trenchant analysis of education issues . National and regional, mainstream and insider, journalists from outlets of many shapes and sizes turned to Fordham spokespeople and research products . Stories quoting or citing Fordham appeared in print outlets including The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, USA Today, The Economist, and many more . And as the media landscape changes, Fordham has been nimble in adapting . Along with our signature Education Gadfly Weekly and Flypaper blog, we’ve expanded into social networking . With 7,000-plus Twitter followers and a strong Facebook presence, Fordham leverages a variety of networks to raise awareness of our positions and publications .

Fordham watchers can experience—either in person or by streaming video in real-time or after the fact—expert analysis and discussion live through events held in Washington and Ohio . Whether to encounter new research or watch experts with different viewpoints duke it out over the latest policy proposals, thousands viewed our events on a range of issues . In 2011, we hosted a dozen of them, including four in Ohio . The most memorable included:

Education Reform Idol: The Reformiest State 2011, August 2011

Audience members voted Indiana the “reformiest” state in 2011 after presentations from Florida, Illinois, Ohio, and Wisconsin, as well as the Hoosier State . (2,002 online views)

When Reform Touches Teachers, August 2011

Rick Hess and Randi Weingarten discussed reforms affecting union rights, teacher accountability, and tenure . (1,772 online views)

The Other Achievement Gap, October 2011

This event illumined America’s “achievement-gap mania” and the risk of leaving our highest achievers behind in a quest to raise the bottom quartile . (1,323 online views)

Tony Bennett of Indiana claims the Education Reform Idol trophy at our August event


8

Rethinking Education Governance: Our Newest Priority

School reforms abound today, yet even the boldest and most imaginative of them have produced—at best—marginal gains in student achievement . What America needs in the twenty-first century is a far more profound version of education reform . Instead of shoveling yet more policies, programs, and practices into our current system, we must deepen our understanding of the obstacles to reform posed by existing structures, governance arrangements, and power relationships . Yet few education reformers—or public officials—have been willing to delve into this touchy territory .

So we have done just that . In March, we surveyed Ohio’s school leaders, gauging their views on education reform—including what needs to change about the current system to actualize real gains in student achievement . In April, we held an event—attended or watched online by about 800 people—questioning the role (and necessity) of local school boards in the twenty-first century .

“On key education issues—rigorous educational standards, NCLB,

quality charter schools, and much else—Fordham’s meticulous analyses

and adroit advocacy have done much to shape our understanding

and strengthen our resolve.”

— Jim Hunt, former governor of North Carolina

Jon Schnur of New Leaders at our December 2011 education-governance conference.

Fordham’s Four Core Policy Priorities

Fordham’s primary role, both nationally and in Ohio, is to frame issues, sometimes in unconventional ways; shape the terms of debate, often going against the education mainstream; identify problems that are being ignored; and offer independent, thoughtful criticism of friend and foe alike .

Currently, our main areas of focus are:

• Rethinking Education Governance• Stretching the School Dollar• Advancing Quality Choice• Successfully Implementing the Common

Core Standards


9

And, in partnership with the Center for American Progress (CAP), we commissioned fifteen first-rate analysts to poke and prod at our current governance system—and to begin offering fresh ideas and alternative solutions . We rolled their papers out at a wingding event in Washington, D .C .—with about 130 live audience members and another 800 online attendees . Brookings will publish the compilation later in 2012 .

Leading this conversation on our blog is Peter Meyer, Fordham’s resident school-board member . Throughout the year, Peter critically looked at everything from local control to democratically elected boards of ed .

Watch for much more on this topic from Fordham and CAP in months to come .

Mike Petrilli on Fox Business, September 2011


10

Stretching the School Dollar

“The sweeping education changes that we’ve witnessed in recent years owe much to the Fordham Institute and its able thinkers/advocates. In this time of major—and mostly constructive—upheavals in K-12

policy, Fordham’s tenacity, clear vision, and commitment to excellence have made a huge contribution that I hope will continue.”

— U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander

The fiscal crisis for states and schools is apt to endure . Bankruptcy and insolvency are real threats to school districts and cities across the country . While this turn of events surely creates fiscal heartburn and tough choices, it also provides opportunities . For organizations that have grown plump and flaccid over many decades of dependable, predictable, annual budget increases, tough times can serve as a needed diet and exercise regimen . Bad hires can be let go . Ill-conceived initiatives can be shelved . Overly generous compensation and benefits packages can be curtailed . Missions can be clarified . That is—if leaders have the will and political cover to embrace these difficult changes .

Fordham has worked—via our publications and online and media presence—to clarify smart ways forward for states and districts . In January 2011, we published a policy brief—with the help of super school-budget analyst Marguerite Roza—detailing fifteen concrete policies that states can enact to reduce their education costs . Nor are these mere fantasies . Led by Wisconsin, a number of states axed or amended some of these previously untouchable

Featured Publications

Stretching the School Dollar: A Brief for State Policymakers (January 2011)

This policy brief lists fifteen concrete ways that states can get more bang from

available education bucks in difficult financial times .

Charting a New Course to Retirement: How Charter Schools Handle Teacher Pensions (June 2011)

This short paper examines how public-charter schools handle pensions for their

teachers, using six charter-heavy states as case studies .


11

policies in 2011—from ending “last hired, first fired” laws to revamping pension plans . On the pension front, we also produced two major publications and numerous blog posts articulating what states can learn from other sectors—including charter schools and the federal government—to streamline their pension plans . And on our Flypaper blog, school-finance expert Chris Tessone offered astute counsel for state and local education officials faced with tough fiscal choices .

The era of big spending on American education is over . Fordham has emerged as a leader, lighting the way toward right-sized district and state education budgets as well as improved student achievement . Expect more research and analysis from us on this front in 2012 .

Featured Publications, cont.

Halting a Runaway Train: Reforming Teacher Pensions for the 21st Century (October 2011)

When it comes to reforming public-sector pensions, a few places have undertaken

revealing—and encouraging—steps forward . This study draws on examples from diverse fields to provide a primer on successful pension reform .

School Finance in the Digital-Learning Era (November 2011)

Our current school-funding system could cripple the promise of digital learning . This paper proposes

innovative solutions based on America’s charter-school funding model .


12

Advancing High-Quality Choice

No single type of school can match the needs and values of all families . Nor should it have to . Expanding quality education options for parents is a core part of Fordham’s mission . Both nationally and in Ohio, we press for charter-school policies that focus on academic achievement, accountability, and transparency; we promote school-choice plans (including vouchers) with similar qualities; we favor online (and “blended”) learning that brings opportunity, innovation, and quality into education; and we welcome other approaches that provide parents and children solid options and the capacity to make maximum use of them . (The healthy competition that these schools of choice afford traditional district schools is beneficial, too .)

2011 brought much progress on this front . (The Wall Street Journal and others dubbed it the “year of school choice .”) Almost a dozen states expanded their choice programs—from lifting caps on charters to starting or expanding their voucher and scholarship programs . But programs didn’t just grow; states also paid attention to their quality . Ohio, for example, both expanded its choice portfolio and tightened its accountability for charter schools, including its “death penalty” criteria for low-performers .

Fordham also pushed for thoughtful implementation of digital and blended learning (developing a whole new “mini-strand” of our research) . Through three deep-thought papers (and two others published in early 2012), we helped shape the conversation around quality control, cost, financing, governance, and the changing role of the teacher in online and blended learning .

As 2011 drew to a close, we also identified a full-time “school-choice czar” to join our staff team . (More on that in the “What’s Ahead” section below .)

“The Fordham Institute provides a clear and consistent voice in favor of quality educational options and strong accountability for all stakeholders.

Its commitment to closing the achievement gap and fostering a long overdue national discussion on education reform should be applauded. Fordham will continue to be a key force on the education-reform scene for years to come.”

— Tony Bennett, Indiana state superintendent for public instruction


13

High-Quality Standards & Accountability

“Fordham is a Washington, D.C. think tank dedicated to raising the country’s educational standards. The think tank leans conservative but prides itself

on its independence. Their reports are well-written, well-regarded, and recommended reading for business recruiters and policy wonks alike.”

— Austin American Statesman

What feels like a long time ago, Fordham helped spark a national conversation about the need for clearer, more rigorous academic standards for our schools and pupils . We were pleased when our analysts found that the new Common Core State Standards for English language arts and math were solid . And we were pleasantly surprised when all but a few states signed onto them . But that’s only the beginning . Rigorous academic standards are important . But, in and of themselves, they don’t cause learning . They need to be accompanied by well-aligned assessments and forceful accountability systems, as well as much sophisticated implementation on the ground . (We are monitoring their progress; in 2012 and beyond we’ll be costing out implementation and studying strong accountability systems, among other things .) The move to create those assessments began in 2011; led by our standards guru, Kathleen Porter-Magee, Fordham offered guidance and feedback to individual states and assessment consortia—as well as public critique when warranted—throughout the process .


The State of State U.S. History Standards 2011 (February 2011)

States’ U .S . history standards are discouraging . Most deserve D or F grades . South Carolina earns the lone straight A .

Review of the National Research Council’s Framework for K-12 Science Standards (October 2011)

This review of the new NRC science framework, on which

the next-generation science standards will be based, applauded its content while raising concerns about some of its emphases .


14

But there’s more to the curriculum than reading and math . Our comprehensive 2011 review of states’ U .S . history standards helped rekindle efforts to update Texas’s ideology-riddled standards . And our review of the National Research Council’s K-12 science-education framework offered needed feedback and commentary on a document that may help shape American science education for years to come . (In early 2012, we published a major review of current state science standards, as well as major national and international assessment frameworks .)

We also added a “mini-strand” to our accountability work, targeting how the U .S . educates—and neglects—its best and brightest . Our seminal study, Do High Flyers Maintain Their Altitude, indicated that America’s commitment to “leaving no child behind” may be coming at the expense of our “talented tenth”—and America’s future international competitiveness .


Do High Flyers Maintain Their Altitude? Performance Trends of Top Students (September 2011)

This study found that many high-achieving students struggle to maintain their

strong performance over the years, raising the troubling question: Is our obsession with closing achievement gaps and “leaving no child behind” coming at the expense of our “talented tenth”?

The Accountability Plateau (December 2011)

This analysis warned that the testing-and-accountability movement as we know it might have run out of steam .


15

Ohio: In the Trenches

A distinguishing feature of Fordham is our hands-on work to transform schools, educate students, and improve education policy in Ohio . As an authorizer of going-on-ten charter schools in the Buckeye State, for example, we struggle every day with real challenges facing educators and students . We are, simultaneously, a state-oriented policy-research and reform-advocacy organization, working toward smart and necessary solutions to Ohio’s education problems .

In 2011, the schools we authorized served some 2,300 students . Our lean Ohio team helped guide some of their governing boards through tough decisions about their futures (including helping one school close); and joined in efforts to replicate and expand high-performing schools . Fordham’s

Students hard at work at the Fordham-sponsored KIPP Journey Academy in Columbus


Yearning to Break Free: Ohio Superintendents Speak Out (March 2011)

This statewide survey of Buckeye superintendents (and other education leaders) elicited their opinions on the

most critical issues facing K-12 education in Ohio, including budgets, school effectiveness, and troublesome laws .

After the Budget, What Next? Ohio’s Education Policy Priorities (August 2011)

To what extent have Ohio’s leaders met the challenges and opportunities before

them in K-12 education? What needs to happen next?

2010-11 Ohio Report Card Analysis (August 2011)

In this annual analysis of student achievement in Ohio’s major urban school systems, we looked at annual performance and

growth, recapped previous years’ performance, and compared students in district schools, charters, e-schools, and more .


16

existing portfolio of schools has evolved into one of the strongest in the state, with three new—and likely high-performing—start-ups and expansion schools on the horizon for 2012 and a good chance of more thereafter .

“Fordham not only talks reform but lives it, and for me there is no organization I trust more when it comes to advocating and pushing smart education reforms.”

— Matt Diggs, Dayton-area philanthropist and board chair of Dayton Early College Academy

We also worked with the Educational Service Center of Central Ohio, Columbus City Schools, Dayton Public Schools, Reynoldsburg City Schools, Loveland City Schools, and other partners to explore a new, high-quality statewide authorizer that would utilize best practices and economies of scale to improve charter authorizing in Ohio . This effort received support from the National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA) and hopes to be up and running in 2012 .

We joined forces with local philanthropists, educators, and community leaders to recruit Teach For America to southwestern Ohio . (Legislation that we helped champion to make this possible was signed by Governor John Kasich in March 2011 .) At least three of the schools TFA is targeting for placement are authorized by Fordham .

The 2011 Ohio legislative session, including the biennial budget debate, provided Fordham with the opportunity to deepen our relationships with others in the policy and advocacy sector . We collaborated with the Greater

Fordham-sponsored schools at a glance, 2011-12

School Grades Served Enrollment

Columbus Collegiate Academy 6-8 159

Dayton Leadership Academies – Dayton Liberty Campus K-8 317

Dayton Leadership Academies – Dayton View Campus K-8 470

KIPP: Journey Academy 5-8 301

Phoenix Community Learning Center K-8 344

Sciotoville Community School 5-12 326

Sciotoville Elementary Academy K-4 124

Springfield Academy of Excellence K-6 236

Total students served 2,277


17

Cleveland Partnership, Ohio Business Roundtable, Ohio Grantmakers Forum, and School Choice Ohio—and with national groups including StudentsFirst—to promote crucial policy reforms . During the heated debate over Ohio’s biennial budget, Fordham staffers testified on multiple occasions on a host of issues, including the reform of teacher-personnel policies (e .g ., eliminating “last-in, first-out” and “step-and-lane” salary schedules and implementing a data-driven teacher-evaluation system), strengthening the state’s charter-school law, and maintaining rigor in its academic-accountability system . Ohio implemented many education reforms in 2011 that Fordham supported, although much work still needs to be done .

The budget debate also created opportunities to bring national education experts to Ohio to advise lawmakers and others on reforms under consideration . With financial help from other Ohio philanthropists, we were able to invite Stanford economist Eric Hanushek, former Massachusetts Commissioner of Education (and current Fordham trustee) David Driscoll, Indiana State Superintendent Tony Bennett, education-budget expert Marguerite Roza, District Management Council’s Nate Levenson, and former D .C . schools chancellor Michelle Rhee to help inform and improve public policy in Ohio .

Students at Fordham-sponsored Sciotoville Community School


Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordham’s 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report (November 2011)

This sixth-annual review reflects on Ohio’s

charter-school-policy environment and the performance of Fordham-sponsored charter schools—as well as developments in state law . Despite tough policy battles, Fordham and its schools had an overall-encouraging year, with Fordham-sponsored charters making achievement gains and positioning themselves to do even better in the future .

Better Choices: Charter Incubation as a Strategy for Improving the Charter School Sector (December 2011)

This policy brief examines the merits of the incubation

model, outlines specific strategies for supporting it, and profiles organizations around the U .S . putting it into practice .


18

What’s Ahead

“Thanks to the Thomas B Fordham Institute, more students and parents in Ohio have access to a high-quality education. Because of Fordham’s insightful research and analysis, educators, leaders, and policymakers

across the nation are able to make education reform a reality.”

—Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida and founder and chairman of the board of the Foundation for Excellence in Education

At the beginning of 2012, we launched a thorough makeover of Fordham’s online presence . We’ve redesigned our website with an eye to connecting our audience more easily with the diverse but interrelated threads of our work . We’ve moved our publications, blog commentary, videos, and podcasts under one roof while simultaneously breaking our blog into six topical ones, bringing readers content tailored to their interests . We’ve kept Flypaper, curated by Mike Petrilli, and added Stretching the School Dollar (Chris Tessone), Common Core Watch (Kathleen Porter-Magee), Board’s Eye View (Peter Meyer), Choice Words (Adam Emerson), and an Ohio Gadfly blog . (For those who like the old way, don’t fret—we’ve created a “Gadfly Daily” to showcase the best of each day’s total blog roll .) We’ve also got big plans for our event series and videos (newly branded “Fordham Live!”) this year .

We’ve also expanded our school-choice presence . Adam Emerson joined the Fordham team as director of this part of our program and we also intend to expand our catalog of school-choice-related studies and reports in the coming months . Adam—an accomplished journalist—is a former policy and public affairs expert at Step Up for Students, where he launched the RedefinED blog . With Adam at the helm, we’ve already embarked on the

New website; same great content. In January 2012, we unveiled a brand new website and approach to blogging. Learn more, or read individual publications, at: www.edexcellence.net.


19

spending strategies of high-quality charter schools and “segmenting” the school-parent market to better understand whether our current school supply matches demand .

Our other pipelines are full, too . We kicked off 2012 with a blockbuster review of states’ science standards (as well as the international assessment frameworks on which students are now judged) and will soon follow with an early-draft appraisal of the multi-state “next generation” science standards under development at Achieve, Inc . And soon we’ll release a paper on state accountability systems—a prelude to long-term work tracking states’ fidelity to robust accountability . (This project compliments a similar long-term district-accountability study we have in the cooker .)

2012 finds Fordham vigorously pushing concrete and rational ways not only to “stretch the school dollar,” but also to turn lean budgets into opportunities for reform . Linking back to our monitoring of the Common Core, we’ll analyze how much implementing it will cost . We’ll survey people’s views on “doing more with less,” and take a hard look at how pensions affect district budgets .

Our joint work on governance with the Center for American Progress is going strong . We’re publishing a major volume that frames the problems with today’s K-12 structures and governance and begins to suggest alternatives . Several additional policy briefs and papers on governance will emerge this year as we move closer to concrete—and provocative—ways forward .

We have also adopted three “mini-strands” of research: giving overdue attention to America’s highest-performing students, quality digital learning, and special-education reform . Already in 2012, we’ve released two papers explaining the costs and governance challenges surrounding online education—and what we can do about the latter . And we’ve started eying lessons that we may be able to draw from other countries regarding the education of high achievers .

In Ohio, we continue to help set the future direction of education via analysis, insight, advice, and criticism, as well as robust connections with state policymakers and key figures in education reform . As Common Core implementation ramps up, and Ohio’s newly enacted pieces of education-reform legislation get absorbed, this role will become even more important .

Plenty more is coming . Please keep abreast of Fordham’s goings-on via our Gadfly weekly newsletter, our lively website, our quickening use of Twitter, and our Fordham Live! events . All information is available at www .edexcellence .net .


20

Finances in Brief

Fordham’s budget is projected to be about $6 million in 2012, of which about 35 percent will be supported by our own endowment and 65 percent must be raised from private donors . Our charter-school-sponsorship operation is largely supported by school fees . (For a host of reasons, we don’t chase other government funding .)

Operating revenues 2010 (actual) 2011 (actual) 2012 (budgeted)

Fordham endowment $1 .8 M $2 .1 M $1 .9 M

External funding $2 .5 M $2 .8 M $4 .2 M

Total revenues $4.3 M $4.9 M $6.1 M

How quickly is Fordham growing?

Prudently, but somewhat more quickly than in the recent past . We experienced modest growth in 2011, keeping our overhead steady while increasing our output of research, studies, news analysis, and policy briefs . We added an online editor to improve our blogs in 2011 (as well as extend our outreach to traditional media), and engaged a school choice “czar” in early 2012 . This new growth follows a 2009-10 belt-tightening occasioned by the nationwide recession and its painful impact on our endowment and the resources of other funders .

Isn’t Fordham also a foundation? Does it make grants?

The Thomas B . Fordham Foundation is a “Type I supporting organization,” controlled by the Thomas B . Fordham Institute . These sister organizations are both tax-exempt public charities under section 501(c)3 of the tax code . Today, most of our work is conducted under the Institute name, ordinarily with partial funding from the Foundation’s endowment which, combined with the Institute’s tiny endowment, reached $58M in late 2007 before falling to a low of $34M in early 2009 . It has since rebounded somewhat to $44 .6M as of January 2012 .

Fordham does make a few grants each year, but these are targeted and small . We made approximately $215,000 in grants in 2011 and expect to fund just a bit more ($225,000) in 2012 . Recent grantees include Common Core, the Philanthropy Roundtable, Parents Advancing Choice in Education (Dayton), and several promising Ohio charter schools .


21

How much does Fordham spend on management and staff versus project costs?

In our audited 2010 financials (the most recent available), 22 percent of total spending supported management (and minor fundraising outlays) and personnel, but the bulk of the staff’s time is devoted to substantive project work, conducting direct research and coordinating, editing, and disseminating the studies that we commission .

Are your finances audited? Are additional details available?

Yes . Fordham’s books are audited by Lane & Company, in Washington, D .C ., and we’ve had clean audits every year since commencing this process in 2003 . Copies of our audited statements are available on request . Fordham’s 990 and 990-PF IRS filings are also available by request or online at www .guidestar .org .


22

Rod PaigeFormer United States Secretary of Education, Houston

David H. Ponitz, ChairmanPresident Emeritus, Sinclair Community College, Dayton

Caprice YoungVice President for Education, The Laura and John Arnold Foundation, Los Angeles and Houston

Bruno Manno (emeritus)Senior Advisor, Walton Family Foundation, Washington

David P. DriscollFormer Massachusetts Commissioner of Education, Boston

Chester E. Finn, Jr.President, Thomas B. Fordham Institute, Washington

Thomas A. Holton, Esq.Partner, Porter Wright Morris & Arthur, Dayton

Michael W. KellyPresident and CEO, Central Park Credit Bank, New York City

Craig KennedyPresident, German Marshall Fund of the United States, Washington

People

Trustees


23

Terry RyanVice President for Ohio Programs and Policy

Chester E. Finn, Jr. President

Michael J. PetrilliExecutive Vice President

Chris TessoneDirector of Finance and Operations; Bernard Lee Schwartz Policy Fellow

Amber M. Winkler, PhDVice President for Research

National Staff John HortonStaff Assistant

Peter MeyerBernard Lee Schwartz Senior Policy Fellow

Kathleen Porter-MageeSenior Director, High Quality Standards Program; Bernard Lee Schwartz Policy Fellow

Joe PortnoyNew Media Manager

Janie ScullResearch Analyst and Production Associate

Dara Zeehandelaar, PhDResearch Manager

Ohio Staff

Tyson EberhardtOnline Editor and External Relations Manager

Adam EmersonDirector, Program on Parental Choice

Daniela FairchildDevelopment Manager and Policy Analyst

Marvin HardenAccounting and Office Manager

Hanif AbdurraqibStaff Assistant

Emmy L. Partin Director of Ohio Policy and Research

Theda SampsonDeputy Director of Ohio Sponsorship

Bianca SperanzaPolicy and Research Associate

Kathryn Mullen Upton, Esq.Director of Sponsorship


24

2011 Funders

The Achelis and Bodman Foundations

The Laura and John Arnold Foundation

The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation

The Brookhill Foundation

The Louis Calder Foundation

Carnegie Corporation of New York

The Cleveland Foundation

Educational Service Center of Central Ohio

The Farmer Family Foundation

The Doris and Donald Fisher Fund

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

The Gund Foundation

The Hoover Institution

The Joyce Foundation

The Edward A. and Catherine L. Lozick Foundation

The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation

The Kern Family Foundation

The Koret Foundation

The Kovner Foundation

Mathile Family Foundation

National Association of Charter School Authorizers

The Nord Family Foundation

Ohio Grantmakers Forum

The Lovett and Ruth Peters Foundation

The Charles and Helen Schwab Foundation

The Bernard Lee Schwartz Foundation

Searle Freedom Trust

The William E. Simon Foundation

The Stuart Foundation

The Walton Family Foundation


Website: www .edexcellence .net

Email: thegadfly@edexcellence .net

facebook/educationgadfly

educationgadfly

@educationgadfly

feedburner/flypaper

Washington, DC

1016 16th St NW, 8th FloorWashington, DC 20036(202) 223-5452(202) 223-9226 (fax)

Columbus, OH

37 W . Broad Street, Suite 400Columbus, OH 43215(614) 223-1580(614) 223-1494 (fax)

Dayton, OH

2600 Far Hills Ave #216Dayton, OH 45419(937) 227-3368(937) 660-3338 (fax)


2011 Annual Report - Amazon Web Servicesedex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com › 2011 Fordham Annual...

Documents

Transcript of 2011 Annual Report - Amazon Web Servicesedex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com › 2011 Fordham Annual...