Executive Summary

Well into their second decade, charter schools have carved out a niche for themselves across the country and many are achieving their mission. Yet, in spite of their promising record, many charter supporters fear that these reforms may never realize their full potential because of the challenges of deciding who gets, keeps, and loses the right to run a charter school. The tradition of local control over public schools often leads to a messy and undesirable authorization process. As a result, states have begun turning to "alternative" charter authorizers outside of the traditional realm of public school governance.

In a new Progressive Policy Institute paper, "'Alternative' Charter School Authorizers: Playing a Vital Role in the Charter Movement," author Louann Bierlein Palmer assesses the quality of alternative charter authorizers including independent state-level charter boards, higher education institutions, municipal offices and nonprofit groups. By analyzing charter authorizing practices in Arizona, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, Ohio, South Carolina, Utah, and Wisconsin, Palmer determines that the best authorizers share three traits:

1. They desire their jobs as authorizers;

2. They are relatively insulated from politics; and

3. They have the ability to create the adequate infrastructure necessary to achieve high quality outcomes.

Alternative authorizers are increasingly seen as a way to add value to the charter school movement, and public education as a whole. However, Palmer cautions that policymakers should only create new types of authorizers if their current system is producing undesirable results.