MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS
Amal Z. Yamusah*
I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................1
II DEFINING LOW PERFORMING AND HIGH PERFORMING SCHOOLS........................................................2
A. Core of Teachers is Ready to Undertake Dramatic Improvement in Schools.........................3
B. Schools are not Completely Dysfunctional............................................................................4
III. MISALLOCATION OF RESOURCES...................................................................................................5
A. Misappropriation of Educational Funds.................................................................................5
B. Unspoken Pipeline between Inner City Schools and City Prisons.........................................6
IV. DISPLACEMENT OF STUDENTS ......................................................................................................8
A. Overpopulation in Classrooms...............................................................................................8
B. Lack of Internal Support from School....................................................................................9
V. DIRECT IMPACT ON MINORITY AND LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES.............................................10
VI. IMPACT ON TEACHERS....................................................................................................................11
VII. APPLICATION OF TITLE I OF THE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT..............................................12
A. Improve Literacy through School Libraries ..........................................................................13
B. Institute Prevention and Intervention Programs for Children and Youth................................14
Who are Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk
C. School Dropout Prevention....................................................................................................15
VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................................................15
IX. CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................................17
X. APPENDIX .........................................................................................................................................1
*

Amal Zakari Yamusah, Founding Editor-in-Chief, Morehouse College Pre-Law Journal,

Morehouse College Graduate 2014, Political Science and English Double Major. The premise for
this article was first conceived this past summer in New York City and I appreciate the guidance
from Derrick Davis, 2L at Harvard Law, in choosing a topic. I appreciate as well the comments I
received from Amina A. Yamusah, a recent graduate of Princeton University; Zari Watkins,
Director of Project Coordination at Jackson Health System; and Joshua Combs, a 2L at Emory
Law when I presented my article topic. I appreciate, most especially, the help I received from my
advisor, Professor Jennifer Romig, who was integral in the journals production. I also benefited
greatly from discussions on the topic from Morehouse Professor Albert Turner who provided
helpful commentary. Finally, Id like to thank Aaron M. Francis, Taylor Ridley, Ben McKinnon,
Kendall Wells and Kelvin Caldwell for their critiques on my earlier drafts and continued
dedication to the journal.
1

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

[Vol. 1

I. INTRODUCTION
Imagine angered parents outside the Liberty Bell with signs in hand that read,
Pennsylvania libraries in prisons, not in schools and you can silence our teachers, but you
cant silence us!1 Forward proclamations like these, and outward displays, now characterize the
city of Philadelphia in the aftermath of a citywide school budget cut. Worsening matters is the
controversial announcement of a $400 million plan to fund a state prison.2 This adds turbulence
to an already sensitive topic.
The past two decades have undoubtedly brought about significant budget problems in the
Philadelphia school system. In 2002, the state took control over the citys school budget and
committed itself to providing adequate funds and resources.3 Eleven years later, the state has
failed to fulfill this initiative. After years of decreasing state funds and waning support, the
Pennsylvania School Reform Commission recently voted to cut school budget spending in
Philadelphia to mollify the states $304 million deficit.4 This controversial vote has inspired a
whirlwind reaction, evidenced by a manifold of parent protests, teacher rallies and student relief
efforts. While parents protest the streets in opposition of the recent cut, teachers and students
look for new schools. The states justification for such an excessive cut?
The financial pressure and the need to transform as quickly as possible from low
performing seats to high performing seats. But what happens when the high performing seats are
targeted as well? In fact, of the twenty-three schools to be closed, six were making successful
progress and slowly transforming to high performing schools. This article will: (1) determine
what qualifies a low performing and high performing school; (2) discuss the misallocation of
resources and displacement of students; (3) highlight the budget cuts direct impact on minority
and low income communities; (4) discuss the impact on teachers; (5) lay out the legal
implications through Title 1 of the No Child Left Behind Act; and (6) make recommendations for
moving a new, revised budget plan.

II. DEFINING LOW PERFORMING AND HIGH PERFORMING

Julie Zauzmer, Parents, Teachers Complain about School Cuts, THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER
(September 17, 2013), http://articles.philly.com/2013-09-18/news/42151985_1_school-cuts-artteacher-hall-monitors.
2

Joseph N. DiStefano, Work Underway to build Graterford Prison Replacement, THE

PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER (June 1, 2013), http://articles.philly.com/2013-0602/news/39692959_1_michael-wenerowicz-new-prison-state-prison.
3

Martha Woodall, New Philadelphia Schools Chief Outlines an Ambitious Agenda; He is Aiming
to have a Financial Plan and a Timeline for Changes within a Month, THE PHILADELPHIA
INQUIRER (July 18, 2002).
4

Trip Gabriel, Budget Cuts Reach Bone For Philadelphia Schools, THE NEW YORK TIMES (June
17, 2013), http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/17/education/budget-cuts-reach-bone-forphiladelphia-schools.html?_r=0.

MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

Schools qualify as low performing or failing when they persistently produce subpar
scores on standardized tests, along with low graduation and high dropout rates. 5 In a full list of
Pennsylvania low achieving schools, Philadelphia schools accounted for over half the list. 6 By
extension, the stated schools have limited resources, less qualified teachers and insufficient
facilities. To circumvent this, states and districts devise intervention plans to transform these low
performing schools into high performing ones. Recently, Pennsylvania proposed a new plan and
evaluation system to help low performing schools improve. The question still exists: how can
you evaluate schools that do not have financial support or resources?7
As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, President Obama
created the Race to the Top contest, designed to spur innovation and reforms in state and district
K-12 education.8 Section 5 of the selection criteria outlines ways to turn around the lowest
achieving schools.9 The two methods are; (1) classic turnarounds and (2) starting fresh, the latter
of which is a last resort.10 Emily Hassell outlines that classic turnarounds have the best chance of
success when:
-

Turnaround leaders who can drive rapid change and influence stakeholders are available.
The district has the will to provide significant autonomy to turnaround leaders to innovate
and deviate from district policies and practices required of other principals.
A core of teachers is ready and willing to undertake dramatic improvement in the school
(since turnarounds typically maintain a large portion of existing staff).11

20 U.S.C. 6631 (referring to schools identified in 20 U.S.C. 6316(b)(1)(A)); see also 20

U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)-(vii) (defining adequate yearly progress by measures including
graduation rates and other academic indicators).
6

Dale Mezzacappa, Poorly Rated: Philadelphia Dominates New Pa. Priority Schools List, THE
NOTEBOOK (October 8, 2013), http://thenotebook.org/blog/136521/philadelphia-dominates-newpa-priority-schools-list.
7

Mike DeNardo, Phila. School District Cancels Public Meetings on School Evaluation Design,
PHILADELPHIA CBS PHILLY (August 1, 2013), http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/08/01/philaschool-district-cancels-public-meetings-on-school-evaluation-design/.
8

Emily A. Hassel and Bryan C. Hassel, The Big UTurn: How to Bring Schools from the Brink of
Doom to Stellar Success, Education Next (vol. 9, no. 1, Winter 2009); Julie Kowal and Emily A.
Hassel, School Restructuring Options under No Child Left Behind: What Works When?
Turnarounds with New Leaders and Staff (Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates, 2005).
9

Id.

10

Id.

11

Emily A. Hassel et al., School Restructuring Under NCLB: What Works When? A Guide for
Education Leaders (Washington, DC: Center for Comprehensive School Reform and
Improvement, 2006); Andrew Calkins et al., The Turnaround Challenge (Boston, MA: Mass
Insight Education and Research Institute, 2007).
3

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

[Vol. 1

Schools start fresh when they are rendered completely dysfunctional, with no traction
for improvement and have capable fresh start providers that can operate schools for the students
served.12 There are two fundamental issues regarding the decision to start fresh with twenty-three
schools.
A. A Core of Teachers is Ready and Willing to Undertake Dramatic Improvement in the School
The school district is reassigning capable teachers to other schools to circumvent the
enrollment fluxes from the budget cuts.13 2013 represented a 70 percent increase in teacher
transfers and teachers are unable to improve schools as a result. 14 According to Kristen Graham,
and by the numbers, 139 teachers moved to new schools, compared with 82 the year before and
29 were hired, compared to 42 the year prior.15 This means that a core of teachers is being
moved, and less are being hired. The disproportion means that capable and willing teachers are
being moved too much to improve their schools, and other capable and willing teachers are not
being hired to substantiate improvement. Properly interpreted, teachers are willing and ready to
mobilize, but cannot without the financial support of the city and state.
B. Schools are not Completely Dysfunctional
A total of 23 Philadelphia schools started fresh this year and were closed. In order to
start fresh, a school must classify as completely dysfunctional. Schools that closed before this
school year were;
12 elementary schools: Fairhill, Joseph C. Ferguson, Robert Fulton, Leslie P. Hill, Joseph Leidy,
John L. Kinsey, Anna B. Pratt, General John F. Reynolds, Walter G. Smith, George Washington,
John G. Whittier, and Alexander Wilson; three middle schools - George Pepper, Anna H. Shaw,
and Sheridan West Academy; and eight high schools - Edward Bok Technical, Charles Carroll,
Communications Technology, Stephen A. Douglas, Germantown, Robert E. Lamberton,
University City, and Roberts Vaux.16
Per Title I of the No Child Left Behind Act, which will be discussed later in greater
detail, seven of the stated schools achieved Adequate Yearly Progress and were moving towards
12

Id.

13

Martha Woodall, Leveling at City Schools is Raising Anxiety, THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER
(October 15, 2013), http://articles.philly.com/2013-10-15/news/43029847_1_combined-gradessplit-grades-jerry-jordan.
14

Kristen A. Graham, Scores of Philadelphia Teachers Reassigned, THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER

(October 30, 2013), http://articles.philly.com/2013-10-30/news/43497919_1_two-teachersphiladelphia-teachers-139-teachers.
15
16

Id.

Dan Stamm, 23 Philly Schools Slated to Close, NBC PHILADELPHIA (March 8, 2013)
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/politics/School-Closing-Protest-196120921.html?
akmobile=o.

MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

high performance. They include Robert Fulton, Edward Bok, Stephen A. Douglas, General John
F. Reynolds, Alexander Wilson School, Sheridan West Academy and Robert E. Lamberton. As
outlined in the No Child Left Behind Act, Adequate Yearly Progress is a uniform measurement to
determine how every public school and school district is performing academically. 17 Schools
achieve the title when they perform at National standard level and well in academic assessments,
intense academic environments and teacher preparation. The state is in violation of the Title I
clause; all the schools that started fresh were not completely dysfunctional and were improving
their performance based on NCLB.

III. MISALLOCATION OF RESOURCES

Do we just want a building that houses children until they get to the new prison they are
building?18 Philadelphia purports a lack of school funding but supports the funding of a $400
million state prison in the same period. This decision to appropriate money is in direct violation
of students rights to quality education. Joseph DiStefano outlines the problem here.
The crews are putting up the second-most expensive facility Pennsylvania has ever built. Only
the Convention Center cost taxpayers more, according to the state General Services spokesman
Troy Thompson. When finished in 2015, the new cell blocks, classrooms, and support space,
surrounded by twin 40-foot fences and LEED-certified earth berm, will replace the old prison
and its reinforced-concrete walls as home to 4,000 offenders, including 700 serving life
sentences. The new prison will have two complexes, Phoenix I and II. Plans call for buildings to
house women and death-row inmates, who currently are bused to prisons on the
other side of the state.19
Parents have interpreted the decision to build a $400 million, lucrative prison in the
following ways.20 (1) It is misappropriating funds for education and (2) it is creating an unspoken
pipeline between inner city schools and city prisons. The following will provide context for these
interpretations.
A. Misappropriation of Educational Funds
The School District of Philadelphia Operating Budget reports a total operating revenue,
and other financing sources of $2,357,053,000.21 There are provisions within the budget that
account, specifically, for low performing schools. They include the Reauthorization of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Improving Teacher Quality Act.

17

Hassell, supra note 11.

18

Gabriel, supra note 4.

19

DiStefano, supra note 5.

20

Max Rivlin-Nadler, Philadelphia Closes 23 Schools, Lays Off Thousands, Builds Huge Prison,
POPULAR RESISTANCE (October 13, 2013), http://www.popularresistance.org/philadelphia-closes23-schools-lays-off-thousands-builds-huge-prison/.
21

School District of Philadelphia FY13-14 Budget Book.

5

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

[Vol. 1

Per the school improvement stimulus, schools that are persistently low achieving receive
new funding under section 1003(g) of Title I of the Reauthorization of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act.22 The stimulus funding establishes rigorous academic standards,23
creates new qualification requirements,24 and implements comprehensive accountability
systems.25 The state has failed to establish such standards, and has redirected the funding for
school reform. The question that logically follows is if low achieving schools are closed, where
will the stimulus funding go? According to Pennsylvanias governor, Tom Corbett, the state has
$45 million in funds for education purposes to Philadelphia school system. 26 Corbett has yet to
release the funds as of October. Rather than provide funding to other low to mid performing
schools, to prevent school closings in the future, the state is acting and spending improperly.
Philadelphias school budget also appropriates money for teachers and educators. Title II,
Part A of the Improving Teacher Quality Act outlines it here:
The Improving Teacher Quality Act prepares, trains and recruits high-quality teachers and
principals capable of ensuring increased academic achievement for all students and to provide inservice and retraining for teacher-leaders and support staff through workshops,
conferences, higher education credits and professional development sessions in elementary,
middle and high schools the areas of math and science.
Teachers have experienced an adverse shift. They are not receiving the adequate
development or compensation to sustain growth in classrooms. Instead, the school district asks
them to take up to a 13 percent pay cut and forgo any raises until 2017.27 The reality on the
ground is that the Pennsylvania School Board does not prioritize teachers. Even though the city
of Philadelphia expects to save roughly $24 million in its closure process, it is hiring fewer
teachers and offering fewer classroom materials. 28 Another reality is, state funding will not reach
students and schools in need effectively. The state of Pennsylvania should require school boards
to provide budget reports, with ample compensation for schools in need of help.
B. Unspoken Pipeline Between Inner City Schools and City Prisons
22

Id.

23

ESEA Reauthorization: A Blueprint For Reform, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (March 13,
2010), http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/index.html.
24

Id.

25

Id.

26

Kathy Matheson, Gov. Corbett To Release $45-Million For Philadelphia Schools, ABC NEWS
(October 16, 2013), http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/local&id=9289197.
27

Elaine Quijano, Budget Woes Plague Philadelphia School System, CBS NEWS (September 12,
2013), http://www.cbsnews.com/news/budget-woes-plague-philadelphias-school-system/.
28

James Jack and John Sludden, School Closings In Philadelphia, PENN GRADUATE SCHOOL OF
EDUCATION PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN EDUCATION (October 21, 2013),
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?
q=cache:VMMkdtBQtxAJ:www.urbanedjournal.org/archive/volume-10-issue-1-summer2013/school-closings-philadelphia+&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari.

MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

The school budget crisis and announcement of a $400 million prison in the same period
reinforces a pipeline between inner city schools and city prisons. As it stands already,
disciplinary policies push youth into the legal system too quickly.29 The Juvenile Law Center
outlines ways to effectively dismantle this one-way track.
Dignity Schools, a national campaign that unites youth, parents, advocates and educators to
challenge the systemic problem of push out in our nations schools.
Pennsylvania Academic and Career/Technical Training Alliance (PACTT), which strives to
improve the educational options available to delinquent youth both in residential placement and
in their home communities.
Community Responses to Zero Tolerance, a collective of local parent, student, and community
advocacy organizations who work to reduce the use of exclusionary discipline in Philadelphia
public schools.
Pennsylvania School Climate Coalition (PSCC), which utilizes legal, rational, and ethical
leverage to disassemble the school-to-prison pipeline in Pennsylvania and improve educationrelated policies and practices from the federal to the local levels.
The National Working Group on Juvenile Justice and Education, launched by Juvenile Law
Center in 2011, through which advocates from across the nation work to ensure youth receive a
high-quality education while placed in juvenile detention and correctional facilities.
School-to-Prison Pipeline Legal Strategies Collaborative, a national working group that
develops legal strategies to dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline. 30
The school district of Philadelphia needs to address students as individuals to reverse this
school to prison pipeline. 31 The lack of quality education for minority students, specifically, and
the high incarceration rate for minorities and minority groups creates a cycle by which students
enter the judicial system too readily.32 The stated items show that there is a direct correlation
between education and the lack of provided resources, and the high prison rates. Statistics
corroborate that the unfair distribution of educational resources pushes students, especially
minority students, into crime. This, in turn, affects the community the more people in
disadvantaged communities that go to prison, the more disadvantaged their respective
communities become.33
In particular, Philadelphias Zero Tolerance Policy puts minorities at risk. 34 In her
research, Cherri Gregg takes data from over 500 districts to reveal the policys disparate impact
on minority students.35 According to this research, over the past 15 years, removing kids from
29

School-to-Prison Pipeline, JUVENILE LAW CENTER (Jan. 2013), http://www.jlc.org/currentinitiatives/minimizing-court-and-systems-involvement/school-prison-pipeline.

30

Id.

31

Id.

32

Id.

33

Id.

34

Cherri Gregg, Study: Pa. Public Schools Zero Tolerance Policy Puts Some Minorities At
Risk, CBS PHILLY (November 18, 2013), http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/11/18/study-papublic-schools-zero-tolerance-policy-puts-some-minorities-at-risk/.
35

Id.
7

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

[Vol. 1

school through out of school suspensions has become a widely used disciplinary practice for
infractions as severe as fighting to as minor as violating a dress code. 36 These minor infractions
disproportionately place students outside of the classroom, and into the streets. It also places
students at risk of potential jail time and criminal activity. Even though the Philadelphia School
District eliminated its zero tolerance policy in late 2011, on average, 1800 students are expelled
from Philadelphia schools a year.37 The school district needs to adopt a standard for infractions
one where they discipline students in school, not outside of it.

IV. DISPLACEMENT OF STUDENTS

Students in low performing schools face an almost impossible situation. They are
relocating schools without a definite answer as to why and without consideration for their stable
learning environments. As a result, parents fear that budget cuts will make their children less
productive and perform worse.38 This section will review how the cuts affect students, and when
so enumerated, how they compromise students abilities to learn.
A. Overpopulation in Classrooms
Students affected by school closings now enter new schools with bigger classrooms and
less resource and staff. Certain schools, with classes in first grade, have classes approaching forty
students.39 Not only do students struggle to focus in such large classes, they struggle to focus
outside of it; most students do not have textbooks to study from, in class and at home. This poses
a real threat to quality and effective education. 40 Despite the $24 million annually the state stands
to save from budget cuts, it is still not feasible for students to get what they need. 41 Recently, K-4
schools in certain Philadelphia schools combined multiple grade-levels in one classroom. 42
Specifically, combo classes affect students in the third grade, where students take a state
standardized Keystone exam. 43 The reality, on ground, is that students in the third grade will not
receive enough attention to perform well with combo classes.
36

Id.

37

Id.

38

Susan Snyder, Parents, Teachers Concerned about Readiness, THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER
(September 4, 2013),
http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20130904_Parents__teachers_concerned_about_readines
s.html.
39

Id.

40

Dan Staam, 3 Philadelphia Schools Slated to Close, NBC PHILADELPHIA (March 8, 2013),
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/politics/School-Closing-Protest-196120921.html
41

Id.

42

Kevin McCorry, Robbing Peter to pay Paul: Leveling Philly schools in the time, NEWS
WORKS (October 10, 2013), http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/local/the-latest/60708robbing-peter-to-pay-paul-leveling-philly-schools-in-the-time-of-budget-crisis.
43

Id.

MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

These overpopulated classrooms are a result of a process called leveling. According to

Kevin McCorry, the school district employs leveling every October to align its staffing
projections with enrollment reality.44 The school district asks teachers to move and accommodate
smaller classrooms to keep student-to-teacher ratios within the contracted maximums. 45 This
places students at a disadvantage and creates an unstable environment; one where the school
district asks teachers to shift schools regularly and still accommodate the needs of children.
B. Lack of Internal Support from School
Act 89 of the Non-Public School Student Program provides for auxiliary services for the
benefit of children attending Non-Public Schools in the Commonwealth. 46 Services to be
provided are: Testing and Evaluation, Guidance and Counseling, Remedial Services, and Speech
and Hearing Services. The Philadelphia Intermediate Unit receives an allocation based on a
standard rate of each non-public student. 47 The school is in direct violation of this Act. As it
currently stands, the school district has cut full time guidance counselors, nurses and health
services, art and music programs, teachers for every grade, and libraries.
Specifically, the lack of full time nurses poses a serious threat to students. Nick
Barrickman outlines the problem here:
A Philadelphia, Pennsylvania student died September 25th from an asthma attack
she likely suffered at William C. Bryant Elementary School, which had no nurse
on duty that day. The death of Laporshia Massey, 12, highlights the human cost of
the sweeping budget cuts imposed this year on Philadelphia schools, which have
cut nursing staff by a third since 2011. . . . After Massey was brought home by a
faculty member, her father, Daniel Burch, took her to the Childrens Hospital of
Philadelphia, where she was later pronounced dead. Mr. Burch said he believes
his daughter died because the school did not have a nurse on duty who could have
diagnosed that his daughter was having a severe asthma attack, and has hired an
attorney.48
Certain Philadelphia schools have nurses on duty two out of five days in the school week.49 This
year, the Philadelphia School District employed only 197 nurses for 200,000 children, nearly 100
less than in 2011.50 This reflects a citywide failure to watch and accommodate all the students in
the district. The school district also forces nurses to attend between two and three buildings each

44

Id.

45

Id.

46

Rivlin,supra note 20.

47

Id.

48

Staam, supra note 40.

49

Id.

50

Id.
9

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

[Vol. 1

week, also noting that unqualified staff treats nearly 70 percent of injuries. 51 The Philadelphia
School District puts students at risk with the lack of health services in schools. Nurses are
severely understaffedthe ones that are staffed move too frequently to treat all the students in
need. This links to other resources and services that the school district has cut such as library
staff, counselors and performing arts programs. 52
The school district recently cut the entire library staff at Central High School and
Masterman School, two of Philadelphias top schools.53 Even though both schools survived the
classic start over, and are high performing, these cuts represent another threat to quality
education and the school districts financial troubles.54 The ability to provide quality education is
chipping away, and students, again, do not have outlets to study and focus after school. The same
argument extends to performing arts programs; without them, students do not have opportunities
to express and communicate creatively. As shown supra in section II.B, these very items
contribute to incarceration and crime rates. In order to reverse these rates, the school district
must first, have counselors to guide students, and two, programs to protect and develop students.

V. DIRECT IMPACT ON MINORITY AND LOW INCOME COMMUNITIES

The cuts to public school spending put the education of poor and minority students at
risk. In twenty-one of the schools that were cut, the percentage of black and Hispanic students is
over eighty percent.55 These percentages represent black and Hispanic students that are low
income and at risk.56 More specifically, black students represent at least seventy percent of the
population in eighteen of the twenty-three closed schools. 57 By contrast, whites make up fewer
than 3 percent of the population in twenty schools.58 These demographics raise serious questions
about the state of Philadelphia schools and whether the cuts are discriminatory. Studies show that
lower income students and minority races, specifically black and Hispanic, are affected in
significantly greater amounts than others. The Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia
outlines the problem here:
Recent PDE data reveal that the low-income students on average lost 50 percent
more in state funding than higher income students: $615 in spending reductions
compared to $401. The disparity in cuts based on race is even more dramatic.
Caucasian students lost on average only $366 per student while non-white
51

Id.

52

Susan Synder, Budget Crisis Shutters Libraries at Top 2 Schools, THE PHILADELPHIA
INQUIRER, http://articles.philly.com/2013-09-14/news/42064126_1_new-library-central-highschool-marjorie-neff
53

Id.

54

Id.

55

Great Philly Schools.

56

Id.

57

Id.

58

Id.

MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

students lost on average $728 per student, twice the amount of funding cut from
the average Caucasian student. Although the restoration of $39 million to
distressed school districts last year helped minority and low income students, the
impact of the disproportionate cuts continues. The remaining cuts, for example,
are still 188 percent greater for minority than white students.59
The targeting of minority communities reflects a nationwide problem, as school closures
across the country disproportionately hurt black and low-income students.60 In Philadelphia,
eighty one percent of students affected by budget cuts are black. By contrast, blacks only make
up fifty six percent of Philadelphia K-12 students. In Chicago, 81 percent of students affected by
city budget cuts are black, even though they make up forty three percent of the citys student
demographic. In New York City, fifty nine percent of students affected by cuts are black; only
thirty percent of students, K-12, are black.

VI. IMPACT ON TEACHERS

Perhaps no other group, aside from students, has been affected by budget cuts more than
teachers. According the New York Times, 19 percent of the school-based workforce, including
127 assistant principals, 646 teachers and more than 1,200 aides, were cut from Philadelphia
schools.61 Philadelphia Mayors spokesman, Mark McDonald outlines the attitude of teachers
here: So far the new revenues fall far short of what is needed to recall the 3,8783 laid-off school
staff members and reverse the cuts to supplies and programs. The morale of teachers and
principals ranges from grim resolve to near despair.62
The cuts also affect teachers that remain and were rehired. Current salaries for teachers
range from $46,000 for a starting teacher to $83,900. The district is asking for pay cuts of 5 or 10
percent; 13 percent for teachers making $55,000.63 Teachers are losing money in more ways than
one. The cuts fail to account for the money teachers spend out of pocket. This school year,
teachers who were rehired, and to schools running without librarians or sufficient counselors,
secretaries and nurses, say they are paying more than ever out of pocket and taking on more extra
work than ever before.64 The School District allocates $100 to schoolteachers each year in

59

Barb Macholz, New Study Shows State Cuts to Education Highly Discriminatory, PUBLIC LAW
CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA, http://www.pilcop.org/new-study-shows-state-cuts-to-educationhighly-discriminatory/.
60

Rania Khalek, The Systematic Murder of Philadelphia Public Schools, TRUTHOUT NEWS
(September 12, 2013) http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/18610-the-systematic-murder-ofphiladelphia-public-schools.
61

Supra note 4.

62

Supra note 4.

63

Sandra Shea, Cmon teachers. Theres Some Room to Give, THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER
(August 30, 2013)
http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20130830_C_mon_teachers__There_s_some_room_to_g
ive.html.
11

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

[Vol. 1

reimbursements.65 With a lack of resources and supplies in schools, teachers are spending
substantially more than $100 and will not be reimbursed.
In comparison to other districts, Philadelphias salary for classroom teachers is low.66 The
average salary for teachers in the 2012-13 school year was $70,790, nearly $4,000 below
neighboring districts such as Pittsburgh.67 Though Philadelphias average salary for teachers is
still competitive, it does not accurately reflect or account for miscellaneous costs that teachers
pay for out of pocket. This includes classroom supplies, textbooks, cleaning supplies and other
school related items. To maximize teacher efficiency, the School District needs to increase its
annual salary or reimburse them for out of pocket fees.

VII. APPLICATION OF TITLE I OF THE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT

The United States Department of Education created the Title I provision in 1965 under
the then Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 68 The No Child Left Behind Act of
2001 (NCLB)69 amended Title I to allocate funding for improving the academic achievements of
disadvantaged children. It seeks to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant
opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on
challenging state academic achievement standards and state academic assessments. Specifically,
the clause addresses academic funding for delinquent, neglected, and at-risk youth 70, and grants
state educational agencies authority to create programs for these students.71
In 2013, the government dedicated over $13 billion to Title I grants. 72 In the states new
School Performance Profiles, it gave designations based on achievement to all schools that
qualify for federal Title I funds, which are allotted to schools that are low-income and low
achieving. The entire Philadelphia School District qualified for Title I. 73 Specifically, Title I
targets persistently low performing schools for intervention, through school closure or
64

Samantha Melamed, Philly Teachers Dig Deep to Fill in Gaps as Budget Crunch Continues,
PHILADELPHIA CITY PAPER (September 26, 2013) http://citypaper.net/article.php?Phillyteachers-dig-deep-to-fill-in-gaps-as-budget-crunch-continues-16308.
65

Id.

66

Holly Otterbein, Are Philly Teachers Underpaid?, THE NOTEBOOK (September 3, 2013)
http://thenotebook.org/blog/136382/are-philly-teachers-underpaid.
67

Id.

68

Pub. L. 89-10, 79 Stat. 27.

69

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. 6301-7941 (2012) (amending Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, Pub. L. No. 89-10, 79 Stat 27 (1965) (as amended)).
70

20 U.S.C. 6302(2).

71

20 U.S.C. 6303(a).

72

Federal Budget Project, No Child Left Behind Funding.

73

Dale Mezzacappa, Poorly rated: Philadelphia dominates new Pa. priority schools list, THE
NOTEBOOK (October 8, 2013) http://thenotebook.org/blog/136521/philadelphia-dominatesnew-pa-priority-schools-list.

MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

reconstitution; the ultimate goal is to prepare students for state examinations in reading and
mathematics.74 The questions arises, is school closure the most effective means to prepare
students?
As shown supra in sections III.A & B, school closures disproportionately place students
in worse environments. In context, the cuts affect about one in every 10 public schools and over
10,000 students in the district.75 Helen Gym questions the effect school closures have in her
axiom, no achievement gains;
No achievement gains: Local researchers found that there was no significant difference in
academic quality between closing schools and receiving schools. More than 80 percent of the
dislocated students will transfer to a school no better than the one they currently attend,
according to Research for Action. Moreover, the districts unprecedented cuts to local school
budgets25 percent across the boardmake already fragile receiving schools even more
vulnerable amidst a massive effort to merge student populations.76
There is an issue as to whether the state violated Title I of the No Child Left Behind Act when it
abruptly closed 23 Philadelphia schools even though reconstitution was an option and certain
schools were high performing.
The state of Pennsylvania has violated Title I of NCLB by failing to: (1) improve literacy
through school libraries77 (2) institute prevention and intervention programs for children and
youth who are neglected, delinquent, or at-risk78 and (3) prevent school dropouts.79
A. Improve Literacy through School Libraries
Subpart 4, Sec. 1251 of the Improving Literary Through School Libraries provision seeks
to improve literacy skills and academic achievement of students by providing students with
increased access to up-to-date school library materials, a well-equipped, technologically
advanced school library media center, and well-trained, professionally certified school library
media specialists.80 Pennsylvania violated this provision when it made cuts to library and
classroom funds. Without the stated items, students literary skills and academic achievements
are at risk of declining. The issue at hand is that the state of Pennsylvania has failed to provide
Philadelphia schools with (1) up-to-date school library materials, (2) well equipped,
technologically advanced school library media centers and (3) well-trained, professionally
74

Id.

75

Helen Gym, School Closures Rock Philadelphia, RETHINKING SCHOOLS BLOG (June 13,
2013), http://rethinkingschoolsblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/13/layoffs-and-school-closures-inphiladelphia/
76

Id.

77

Supra note 71.

78

Supra note 71.

79

Supra note 71.

80

Supra note 71.

13

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

[Vol. 1

certified school library media specialists. Moreover, the state has cut centers and specialists in
schools with struggling students. Certainly students cannot improve through school libraries
when there are no libraries at their schools. The state must make a more consistent effort to
maintain systems, such as libraries and specialists that effectively improve literacy and
achievement.
B. Institute Prevention and Intervention Programs for Children and Youth who are
Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk
Section 1401. Part A of the stated provision seeks to:
a. improve educational services for children and youth in local and state institutions
for neglected or delinquent children and youth so that such children and youth
have the opportunity to meet the same challenging state academic content
standards and challenging state student academic achievement standards that all
children in the state are expected to meet. to improve educational services for
children and youth in local and State institutions for neglected or delinquent
children and youth so that such children and youth have the opportunity to meet
the same challenging State academic content standards and challenging State
student academic achievement standards that all children in the State are expected
to meet;
b. to provide such children and youth with the services needed to make a successful
transition from institutionalization to further schooling or employment; and
c. to prevent at-risk youth from dropping out of school, and to provide dropouts, and
children youth and youth returning from correctional facilities or institutions for
neglected or delinquent children and youth, with a support system to ensure their
continued education.
Statistically, the state of Pennsylvania has failed to provide the stated provisions. As
shown supra in sections II. B and III. B, delinquent and neglected students presently receive and
have less services and resources than Section 140 requires. Students abilities to meet the same
challenging state and academic standards are compromised by the following systems: (1) combo
classes, (2) overpopulation, (3) rotating teachers, (4) closure of school libraries and (5) lack of
textbooks and school materials. These stated items threaten students abilities to graduate and
achieve post-secondary and employment opportunities, and therefore, violate the third purpose of
Section 1401 of NCLB.
C. School Dropout Prevention
Title I, Part H, Subpart 2, Sec. 1825 of NCLB outlines ways to effectively prevent school
dropouts. This is achieved through (1) early intervention programs designed to identify at-risk
students, (2) effective programs serving at-risk students, including racial and ethnic minorities
and pregnant and parenting teenagers, designed to prevent such students from dropping out of

MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

school; and (3) effective programs to identify and encourage youth who have already dropped
out of school to reenter school and complete their secondary education.
As shown supra in Section IV, at-risk, specifically ethnic minority students represent the
majority of students affected by school closures. The state of Pennsylvania has violated the stated
provision by failing to identify and provide adequate resources for at risk students. It has also
failed to attrite dropout rates for at risk students. According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, 33
percent of first year students in 2006 did not graduate by 2012. 81 By zip code, 7 Philadelphia
schools had drop out ranges of 41 to 50 percent. 82 These percentages stand to increase with the
recent budget cuts.
As shown supra in section II. B, the pipeline created by the states new prison
discourages at-risk youth from finishing high school. This directly violates the clause in Sec.
1825 that requires schools to provide effective programs for youth that have or are in jeopardy of
dropping out to complete their secondary educations.
The reality is that school closures hurt students more than they help them. In one case, a
school received less than 60-day notice to close.83 This constant flux limits students abilities to
learn and prepare effectively for state exams and other assessments. It also limits teachers
abilities to teach effectively. Per Title I of NCLB, schools targeted for intervention should be
reconstituted, not closed. While the effectiveness of reconstruction is not certain, it is a better
option than school closure. The problems with school closures, as enumerated above, show that it
places students, on average, in worse environments than before. By extension, students learn
less, and are thereby unprepared for assessments.

VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS
Although groups affected by the budget crisis have been vocal about the cuts
unlawfulness, there has been little to no movement or resolution in the subsequent months. Much
of this is linked to the state and school districts inadequate enforcement of certain laws and
policies. It is also due to the stated parties failures to institute reforms and protective measures
for students. The following recommendations provide ways for the state and the school district -and other actors -- to improve the state of Philadelphia public school education and prevent such
excessive cuts in the future.
Philadelphia School District
Create a uniform standard or criterion to judge high performing and low
performing schools.
Allocate district funded stipend for teachers to account for miscellaneous costs
and money spent out of pocket.
Require annual reports to school district to gauge school performance and
ensure schools are meeting standards.
81

Joseph Kemp, Mapping Philadelphias Dropouts, THE NOTEBOOK, (April 2, 2013)

http://thenotebook.org/april-2013/135776/mapping-philadelphias-dropouts.
82

Id.

83

Supra note 75.

15

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

[Vol. 1

Implement a tier system that denotes high performing, performing, and

low performing schools.
Incentivize teachers to perform by creating a performance map for them;
teachers who perform the best will receive an annual bonus.
Approve a peer-to peer system for high performing and low performing
students that encourages high performing students to tutor lower performing ones.
Renovate and transform schools that were closed into libraries and study spaces.
Create a uniform checklist, to be distributed to each student in the district, to
ensure students have necessary recourses and school items.
Encourage parents to seek weekly correspondence with schools to ensure their
children are receiving proper attention.
State of Pennsylvania
Honor the release of $45 million to educational funds.
Disclose, for public access, a full account of expenses saved from school
closures.84
Require each school in the state to have full time nurse and medical service for
students.
Increase state funding for school districts to adequately provide students with
tools and resources.
Provide compensatory transportation to students who have to travel out of town
to school and are without home public schools.
Create accountability charts for districts in need of assistance, for which districts
will be held responsible for growth.
Seek outside sourcing to fund and help school districts, particularly ones with
low performing schools.
Delegate representatives from each school district to report on weekly progress
Consider allocating specific funds to schools in low performing and minority
communities.

IX. CONCLUSION
NCLB seeks to increase accountability in schools through provisions and standards
unique to individual states. Title I of this very act seeks to provide students with quality and
equal education. The states recent cuts (1) question the provisions and standards set in place for
students and (2) threaten the quality and equality of education for students in Philadelphia. When
the state compromises the quality of education instead for a state prison and other noneducational costs, the federal government has a responsibility to intervene and ensure that the
costs are justified.
The first priority for the state and school district is to develop and provide for students.
This Comment argues that the state of Pennsylvania has failed to do this. It also argues that the
stated parties have targeted specific groups in their cuts. These cuts, in turn, put students at
extreme risk. These risks include overcrowded classrooms and unfavorable teacher to student
ratios, and reinforce notions of inferiority. While it is not certain whether increased funds will
84

Id.

MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

curtail these risks, there is probable reason to believe it will. This provides added reason for
government actors to institute educational policy reforms, aimed at serving and providing for
public school students.
Finally, it is irresponsible and impractical for the state of Pennsylvania to withhold and
redirect educational funds. It is the federal governments responsibility to monitor states with low
performing schools and to sanction states that do not meet standards. As it currently stands, the
federal government does not hold states accountable for improper spending. As a result, students
are underperforming and experiencing too much instability in the classroom to develop.
Teachers, nurses and guidance counselors are not performing at all because they are either
unemployed, due to the budget overhaul, or moving between schools to level classrooms with
maximum students. Parents, particularly low-income parents, are also disadvantaged. They must
now find ways to transport children to out of town schools. This Comment shows that budget
cuts affect all parties involved, and seriously threaten and bring into question the quality of
Philadelphia schools. The federal government should take a more active stance in this matter and
consider (1) allocating funds to the Philadelphia school system and (2) sanctioning the state of
Pennsylvania for school closings that disenfranchise Philadelphia students and low income
communities.

X. APPENDIX
TABLE 1: Appropriation vs. Authorization: Title I Part A Funding

17

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

[Vol. 1

TABLE 2: Effects of Education Funding Cuts on Individual Students by Demographic

MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

TABLE 3: No Child Left Behind Major Programs

19

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS
No Child Left Behind Major Programs
($ millions)
Program

FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
FY
2006 2007 2008 2009* 2010 2011 2012 2013

Title I Grants to Local

Educational Agencies

12,71312,83813,89914,492 14,49214,44214,51613,760

Improving Teacher
Quality State Grants

2,887 2,887 2,935 2,948 2,948 2,465 2,467 2,338

Impact Aid

1,228 1,228 1,241 1,265 1,138 1,274 1,291 1,224

21st Century Community 981

Learning Centers

1,081 1,131 1,131 1,166 1,154 1,152 1,092

English Language
Acquisition

669

669

700

730

750

734

732

694

Safe and Drug--Free

Schools and
Communities, State
Grants

569

577

513

295

--

--

--

--

School Improvement
Grants

--

125

491

546

546

535

534

506

State Assessments

408

408

409

411

411

390

389

369

Reading First State

Grants

1,029 1,029 393

--

--

--

--

--

Education Technology
State Grants

272

272

267

270

100

--

--

--

Math and Science

Partnerships

182

182

179

179

180

175

150

142

Teacher Incentive Fund

99

200

97

97

400

399

299

284

*Excludes economic stimulus funding under the American Recovery and

Reinvestment Act.
Source: U.S. Department of Education

[Vol. 1

MOREHOUSE COLLEGE PRE-LAW JOURNAL

[Vol. 1

TABLE 4: Number of full-time employees in Philadelphia school district

21

THE CITY OF BROTHERLY CUTS:

DIRECT IMPLICATIONS OF PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL BUDGET CUTS

[Vol. 1

TABLE 5: Mapping Philadelphias Dropouts

Graphic by Joseph Kemp

SHARE ON EMAILMORE SHARING SERVICES
COMMENTS (9)PRINT