Our mission: To preserve, promote, improve and strengthen public schools for both current and future generations of students.
Join the movement!
Facebook Instagram Threads Vimeo

National Center for Charter School Accountability

State Charter Laws: Analysis and Evaluation
(based on a 5 star rating)

Alabama

Has 23 charter schools. One charter with enrollment has closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 4%.

★★★★★
Community Input: District decisions regarding charter schools can be overridden by at least one agency.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: A latecomer to charter schools, Alabama has few charter schools, and no cap on growth. The Commission can overrule decisions by the school district.
★★★★★
Accountability: Review and renewals exceed five years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: No teacher certification requirement, has multiple enrollment privilege categories.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allows disclosed related party transactions. Allow for-profits to run charter schools, but has none to date.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Alabama's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There are two authorizer types, both of which are public bodies. There is a sliding fee scale. Authorizers must report on schools and are held accountable.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation funding, comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. The state receives federal funding to expand charter schools. Charters receive facilities funding.

Alaska

There are 31 charter schools. 16 charter schools that enrolled students have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 35%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Only the school district has the power to authorize a charter school. However, if a charter application is denied by the district, the school can appeal and have the decision overturned. There are two levels of appeal. The decision to revoke a charter is made at the district level and it cannot be overridden.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no restrictions on the number of charter schools.
★★★★★
Accountability: The renewal period was increased from 5 years to 10 years. However, a local district can revoke a charter and that decision cannot be overriden.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers must be certified and are generally district employees. There are no enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Alaska does not allow for-profits to run its charter schools. However, it allows related-party transactions and CMO directors and employees to sit on the charter board.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: The school district is the sole authorizer and therefore is accountable to the public. Charter schools are public schools within the district.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools are public schools in public districts. The school district is compensated for administrative costs, and the charter is funded by a budget set by the district. Even so, because the state board can overrule the district and force the establishment of a charter, it results in charters sometimes being placed in districts where they drain public school resources.

Arizona

There are 560 open charter schools. 583 charter schools with enrollment have closed since 1998. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 53%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Only the state board can authorize charter schools and make them their own local education agencies. Districts have no say.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no restrictions.
★★★★★
Accountability: The renewal period can be as long as 15 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Arizona does not require charter teachers to be certified; it allows teachers to hold only a high school diploma. There are multiple categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: More than one-third are run by a for-profit or are a for-profit themselves. Related-party transactions are allowed. Allows EMO owner to serve on the charter board or be a school employee.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Arizona's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There are multiple authorizers who receive fees for services. Given the long authorization periods (15 years), and the unwillingness to close schools, authorization responsibilities are not taken seriously. There are some reporting requirements and there are sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state along with supplementary funding, access to grants and the highest per pupil facility allowance in the country. The state actively seeks and receives federal funding for charter school expansion.

Arkansas

There are 107 charter schools. 61 charter schools had their enrollment closed or they relinquished their charters and became district public schools. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 36%

★★★★★
Community Input: Only the politically-appointed state board can authorize open enrollment charter schools and make them their own local education agencies. However, there are also conversion charter schools and they can only be approved by the district.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charters can be renewed for a term up to 20 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers do not need to be certified. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Arkansas allows for-profits to manage schools, but there presently are none. The state also allows related party transactions and charter management organization members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Some of Arkansas' charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies:: Only a charter board and districts can authorize schools. However, 20-year renewals are far too long a period for sufficient accountability. The authorizer must provide detailed information on their charter schools.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state or the district, depending on charter type. They receive access to special grants and loans, facility funding, and transportation funding. The state actively seeks and receives federal funding for charter school expansion.

California

There are 1270 charter schools. 718 charter schools with enrollment closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 36%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Community input is nearly non-existent. When a school board denies a charter, there are two levels above it that can overturn the decision.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Allows renewals that exceed five years and provided automatic extensions based on score recovery from COVID.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Requires teachers to be certified, however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: California allows EMO/CMO owners or trustees to serve on a charter board or be an employee. The state phased out for-profit management. It allows related party transactions as long as they are disclosed.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Some of California's charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: California's practice of multi-level appeals on denials, coupled with the practice of allowing districts to authorize cyber and storefront charters outside district boundaries, has led small districts to treat authorization fees as cash cows. California does not require authorizers to report on their schools' performance.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. 100% of the per-pupil funding, less administrative costs, goes to the schools. Charters also receive special funding, including transportation, facility access, per-pupil facility support, special grants and loans, and federal funding to expand.

Colorado

There are 260 charter schools. 102 charter schools with enrollment closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 28%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Although districts can authorize charters, rejected schools can appeal to the state board, which traditionally has overturned local decisions of denial. Unlike many other states, the members of the state board are elected.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Although charters can be renewed for more than five years, five years is the typical term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Requires teachers to be certified, however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allows for-profits to manage schools. Allows related party transactions and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Colorado's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Colorado restricts authorization to a state board and districts, which is positive. However, its authorization fees are exorbitant, allowing authorizing districts to see charters in their districts as cash cows. In addition, denials can be overturned by the state board on appeal. Annual reportable reviews of schools are required.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charters receive special funding, including transportation, facility access, per-pupil facility support, special grants and loans, and federal funding to expand. If the charter fails, taxpayers can be burdened with the obligation to pay off their loans.

Connecticut

There are 21 charter schools. 13 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 38%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Although there is not complete local control, charter schools require both state board and legislative approval.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: Although there is not full local control, charter schools require both state board and legislative approval. This has resulted in lower expansion rates.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Connecticut requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. Limited enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Connecticut does not allow for-profits to manage schools. It allows related party transactions, if disclosed, and charter management organization members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Connecticut's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Only regional and state boards can authorize. They do not receive a fee. Authorization cannot exceed five years. Reports on school progress are not required.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state or the district at a level commensurate with district per-pupil spending. In addition, they may receive a special grant on a per-pupil basis and facility funding. They receive transportation funding from districts. The state has an active federal funding grant for charter school expansion.

Delaware

There are 24 charter schools. 10 schools that had enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 29%.

★★★★★
Community Input: A politically appointed state Board appoints the charter board that authorizes schools.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged. This has resulted in a high number of charter schools.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Requires teachers to be certified, however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Delaware allows for-profits to manage schools; however, at this time, there are none. It also allows related party transactions, if disclosed, and charter management organization members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Delaware's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies:: Only regional and state boards can authorize. They do not receive a fee. Authorization cannot exceed five years. While annual reports are not required, there are compliance and financial audits less than every three years.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state and the district. They have access to special grants and loans. Districts or the state provide transportation funds. The state has an active federal funding grant for charter school expansion. Charters receive facilities funding.

District of Columbia

There are 125 charter schools. 83 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 40%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Approval is placed out of the hands of the district and given to an independent, politically appointed board.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Schools automatically receive a 15-year renewable charter.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers do not need to be certified. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allows for-profits to manage schools. Does not allow related-party transactions for Board members or key employees however it does allow limited related party transacations between the management organization and its affiliates.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: The District of Columbia's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Only the DC Public Charter Board can authorize schools and charge no more than a 1% fee. An extensive annual report is required.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive the same funding as district schools, per-pupil facility funding, special grants and loans, and transportation funding. Charter schools have access to an active federal grant for expansion.

Florida

There are 729 charter schools. 458 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 39%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Florida has multiple authorizers including a state-wide politically appointed board.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charters can receive a 15-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Although teachers technically need certification, there are exceptions that make the requirement meaningless. Florida, under De Santis, has dramatically weakened its certification requirements across the board. Extensive enrollment privileges including workplace charters.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Related-party transactions are allowed but must be disclosed. Management company employees may not sit on the charter board or be employed by the schools. However, about half of all charters in the state are run by for-profit corporations. There are numerous instances in which Florida legislative members and their families have been involved in charter schools. Florida taxpayers can have little confidence that their interests are being protected in this state.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Florida's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Multiple authorizer types can receive a fee of up to 5%. There are no sanctions for authorizers, and the report they are required to provide is prefunctory. Charters can be authorized for up to 15 years.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation costs, comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Florida charters receive special funding, facility access to public schools at no cost, per-pupil facility support, special grants and loans, and federal funding to expand.

Georgia

There are 95 charter schools. 163 charter schools with enrollment closed. These include charter schools that relinquished their charter and became public schools. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 63%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Charters must be approved by the local and state boards; however, the state board can also award a charter, bypassing the district. Multiple authorizers exist, opening the prospect of authorizer shopping.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Generally, a five-year term which can be extended to 10, but cannot exceed 10 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Georgia requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allows for-profits to manage schools. Allows related party transactions and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Georgia's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Multiple authorizer types can receive a fee of up to 3%. There are limited sanctions and reporting requirements for authorizers. Charters can be authorized for up to 10 years.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation costs, comes from the district or the state, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charters receive special funding, facility access, facility per-pupil support, special grants and loans, and federal funding to expand.

Hawaii

There are 38 charter schools. Two charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 5%.

★★★★★
Community Input: A politically appointed state Board appoints the charter board that authorizes schools.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: A charter contract may be renewed for successive five-year terms of duration, although an authorizer may vary the terms based on performance, capacities, and circumstances.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Requires teachers to be certified, however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allows for-profits to manage schools; however, at this time, there are none. Allows related party transactions without disclosure and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Hawaii's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Hawaii allows five different authorizer types, although the Public Charter Board is the primary authorizer. Fees are determined by expenses. There are extensive reporting requirements and sanctions for authorizers who do not perform.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools are funded by the state. They receive no extra special funding.

Idaho

There are 83 charter schools. 23 schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 22%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Idaho has multiple authorizers and has approved a streamlined process that allows school replication with insufficient process and oversight.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged, resulting in a high number of charter schools. Chains are able to open multiple schools under one LEA.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter law now allows a 12-year renewal period.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Idaho requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allows for-profits to manage schools. Allows related party transactions, if disclosed, and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Idaho's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Idaho allows many entities including nonprofits to authorize charter schools. The authorization period is up to 12 years, far exceeding the recommended five year limit. While the state has good reporting requirements, there are no sanctions for authorizers who do not do a good job.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state, along with transportation aid and access to grants and loans. Charters also receive per-pupil facility funding. The state actively seeks and receives federal funding for charter school expansion through a private nonprofit that keeps a share of the CSP grant. If the charter school fails, the taxpayers can be obligated to pay off any loans.

Illinois

There are 130 charter schools. 69 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 39%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Most Illinois charters are authorized by local Boards of Education. Now that the Chicago Board is an elected Board, there may be a more conservative view regarding the opening of charters. The State Board of Education can also authorize charter schools. That Board is politically appointed.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: Although there is a cap, it allows for considerable growth in the number of schools.
★★★★★
Accountability: Initial five-year term with renewals up to 10 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Illinois requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Employees of an Education Service Providers are prohibited from serving as voting members on the charter boards, and existing and potential conflicts of interest between the two entities must be disclosed. Allows for-profits to run schools, but none do.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Illinois' charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There are two authorizer types, both of which are public bodies. Fees are up to 3% and authorizations are up to 10 years.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state and the district. They receive transportation funding from the state and have access to special grants and loans. They receive facility funds, and some charters are in district schools rent-free. The state has an active federal funding grant for charter school expansion.

Indiana

There are 133 charter schools. 62 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 32%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Indiana allows public four-year universities, the Mayor of Indianapolis, a state charter board, and a nonprofit college or university governing board to authorize charters in addition to local school boards. Charters have ample opportunity to bypass local opinion and to authorizer shop.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: The maximum charter renewal was raised by the legislature from seven to 15 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Requires teachers to be certified, however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Employees of an Education Service Providers are prohibited from serving as voting members on the charter boards, and existing and potential conflicts of interest between the two entities must be disclosed. Allows for-profits to run schools.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Indiana's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Indiana allows many entities including nonprofits to authorize charter schools. The authorization period is up to 15 years, far exceeding the recommended five year limit. The state has some reporting requirements and there are sanctions for authorizers who do not do a good job. The state allows cash-strapped, small religious colleges to authorize charter schools and like all authorizers, receive a 3% fee.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state and the district. They receive transportation and facility funding from the state on a per-pupil basis. They have access to special grants and loans, and districts provide transportation. If a charter school wishes to lease a vacant building or classrooms from a public school, the public school must comply and charge the school only $1. The state has an active federal funding grant for charter school expansion.

Iowa

There are 7 charter schools. 14 charter schools with enrollment have closed or become a public school. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 50%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Charters are authorized by a politically appointed State Board of Education or local districts.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged. At this time, there is a relatively low number of charter schools.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Requires teachers to be certified. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allows for-profits to manage schools, however at this time there are none. Allows related party transactions without disclosure and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Some of Iowa's charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policy: Iowa does not have an authorizer fee. Only the State Board of Education and districts can authorize charter schools.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state, along with access to grants and loans, as well as facility funding. The state actively seeks and receives federal funding for charter school expansion. The present Governor is currently pressing for even more charter school special funding.

Kansas

There are 7 charter schools. 59 charter schools with enrollment have closed or become district public schools. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 89%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Charter schools exist as initially envisioned - they belong to the school district and are locally controlled.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: While there is no cap, growth is naturally controlled by local control.
★★★★★
Accountability: Renewals are under the authority of the public school district.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers must be certified. There is no enrollment privilege. Demographics should reflect the demographics of the district.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Kansas is silent on issues of related party transactions and for-profits. While this is not an issue at present, it should be addressed by the legislature.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: The school district is the sole authorizer and therefore is accountable to the public. Charter schools are public schools within the district.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools are public schools in public districts. Because the power to authorize charter schools resides exclusively with the district, they exist only where they are needed and affordable.

Kentucky

There are no charter schools in Kentucky.

★★★★★
Community Input: At this time, no charters are permitted to be funded.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: At this time, no charters are permitted to be funded.
★★★★★
Accountability: At this time, no charters are permitted to be funded.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: At this time, no charters are permitted to be funded.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: At this time, no charters are permitted to be funded.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: At this time, no charters are permitted to be funded.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Kentucky's charter funding was struck down in the courts. There are no schools.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: The State Supreme Court struck down the charter funding law.

Louisiana

There are 146 charter schools in Louisiana. 107 schools with enrollment have closed. The number of closed schools is an undercount because schools shut down and then reopen under the same name but with different operators at the same site or nearby in New Orleans, the center of charter churn. We did not include these schools in our count. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 42%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Charter schools are authorized by local school boards and the state board (BESE), which has a majority of elected members. However, New Orleans lost true local control after Hurricane Katrina, becoming an all-charter district. In addition, BESE elections have seen large cash donations from out-of-state billionaires, including the Waltons, Bloomberg, and Reed Hastings, all promoting charter schools. Local control is being slowly restored to New Orleans.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged. This has resulted in a high number of charter schools. All of the schools in New Orleans that are not private schools are charter schools.
★★★★★
Accountability: After an initial term of four years, charters can be renewed for up to 10 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers do not need to be certified. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allows for-profits to manage schools. Allows related party transactions, if disclosed.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Some of Louisiana's charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There are two authorizer types, both of which are public bodies. Fees are capped at 2%, and authorizations can extend for up to 10 years. There are minimal reporting requirements for authorizers and no sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation costs, comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charter schools receive special funding, facility access, grants and loans, and federal funding to expand.

Maine

There are 11 charter schools. 35 with enrollment has closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 33%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Local school boards or a group of school boards can approve a charter school. In addition, the charter commission can approve a charter school, however, it is limited to 10 approved schools.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: The Commission's limit of 10 charter schools, along with the cap of enrollment in the online charters, has been effective in limiting the number of schools not wanted by communities.
★★★★★
Accountability: An initial term of five years; however, following that, charters can be renewed for up to 15 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Requires teachers to be certified, however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allow for-profits to manage schools, but only two online schools with limited enrollment are run by for-profits. Allows for related party transactions if disclosed.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Maine's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Only local boards and the Maine Charter School Commission can authorize charter schools. Authorization is for eight years, and fees are 3%. There are strong reporting requirements as well as strong sanctions for authorizers.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding comes from the district of residence, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb if charters are authorized by the district. Otherwise, they are funded by the state. Transportation costs are covered by the state.

Maryland

There are 50 charter schools. 29 charter schools that had enrollment closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 37%.

★★★★★
Community Input: While only districts can authorize charter schools, if an application is denied, the state Board of Education can overturn the denial. That Board is politically appointed.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chains are not allowed to open more than one school on one application or charter.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charters have an initial term of five years; however, following that, charters can be renewed for up to eight years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Maryland requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Maryland does not allow for-profits to run its charter schools. However, it allows related-party transactions and CMO directors and employees to sit on the charter board.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Local boards are the only authorizers of charter schools, with an appeal on denial to the State Department of Education. Fees are 2% but can rise to 5%. There are County reporting requirements, but no state requirements. There are no authorizer sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state and the district. The state has an active federal funding grant for charter school expansion.

Massachusetts

There are 73 charter schools. 32 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 30.5%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Charters can be authorized by the district (Horace Mann school) or by the State Board of Education whose members are politically appointed.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There is a hard cap of 120 charter schools.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: No students beyond siblings and district residents have enrollment privileges. Charter schools must fill seats when a student leaves. Teachers must be certified.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allow for-profits to manage schools, but only a few exist. Allows related party transactions if disclosed. As public officials, board members are ethically bound to regulations and disclosures not found in other states.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Massachusetts' charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; however, board members are public officials appointed by the State Education Commissioner
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Only the State Board of Education and individual districts can authorize charter schools. There are no fees. There are no reporting requirements for authorizers, and there are no sanctions, but each school must provide a report that is public and shared with parents.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation costs, comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb, although the state provides some compensation in the early years. Charters receive special funding, high per-pupil facility support, facility access, special grants and loans, and federal funding to expand.

Michigan

There are 366 charter schools with enrollment. 226 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 38%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Michigan has multiple authorizers including cash strapped colleges who receive fees for authorizing charters schools. This has resulted in no local control and a majority of schools being run by for-profits.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged. This has resulted in a high number of charter schools.
★★★★★
Accountability: Although the typical renewal is five years, Michigan law does not dictate the renewal contract length, so authorizers can grant renewal contract term length.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Requires teachers to be certified, however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: The vast majority of charter schools in the state are run by a for-profit corporation. Related-party transactions are allowed and do not require disclosure.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Michigan's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Multiple authorizers receive fees for services (3%), making charters cash cows for small colleges. Authorization is open-ended and determined by the authorizer.. There are reporting requirements and sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state and the district. Charter schools have access to special grants and loans. The state has an active federal funding grant for charter school expansion.

Minnesota

Has 295 charter schools. 137 charter schools that had enrollment closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 32%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Minnesota has multiple authorizers, including nonprofits, formed solely for the purpose of authorizing. At the same time, charter boards are elected boards composed of parents and teachers, making them more accountable and giving at least internal democratic control.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Minnesota requires teachers to be certified. The state allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Allows for-profits to manage schools, but only a few exist. It allows related party transactions if disclosed.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Minnesota's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There are too many authorizers, including nonprofits. There is a formula fee: Formula: fee factor × 0.015 × basic allowance × APU (cap 4.0). Authorization is for five years. Authorizers must submit an annual report and there are authorizer reviews and sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state, along with special funds as well as funded transportation. More than $1,000 a student is provided in facility funding. The state actively seeks and receives federal funding for charter school expansion.

Mississippi

There are 10 charter schools. One school with enrollment has closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 9%.

★★★★★
Community Input: The Mississippi Charter School Authorizer Board authorizes charters. All members are politically appointed.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: The Board is limited to 15 approvals each year, and all must be in districts rated D or F. At present, there are only eight schools in the state.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Mississippi requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Mississippi does not allow for-profits to run its charter schools. It allows related-party transactions but does not allow CMO directors and employees to sit on the charter board.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Mississippi's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There is only one authorizer board, five-year terms, and a 3% fee. There are reporting requirements but there are no sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charters receive special funding and federal funding to expand. The state pays for transportation.

Missouri

Has 80 charter schools. 53 charter schools that had enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 40%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Multiple groups are permitted to sponsor charters in Missouri, including mayoral sponsorship of a "workplace" charter.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no restrictive caps on the number of schools. However, there are geographical limitations.
★★★★★
Accountability: Although the typical renewal is five years, Missouri law does not dictate the renewal contract length, with some charters granted longer renewals.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Missouri requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Missouri allows for-profits to manage schools; however, at this time, there are none. It allows related party transactions without disclosure.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Missouri's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There are far too many authorizers. They receive a 1.5% fee. Charter renewal is open-ended. There are extensive reporting requirements and sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charters receive special funding and federal funding to expand. The state pays for transportation.

Montana

Montana recently passed a charter school law. It did not have charter schools during the 2022-23 school year.

★★★★★
Community Input: The Board of the charter school is an elected board. Approval is granted by the state board.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: No restrictive caps.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Montana requires teachers to be certified. The state allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: The law is silent on related party transactions, thus allowing them to occur. Montana allows profit management and the employment of board members by companies that service the charter school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools. There is a second charter law that would establish independent charters, however, that is being challenged in the courts.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: This law is influx due to an ongoing lawsuit. Presently, districts can authorize charter schools. They do not receive a fee.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state--80% of what public schools receive. Charters have access to state transportation funds.

Nebraska

Has no charter schools.
★★★★★
Community Input: Nebraska has no charters.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: Nebraska has no charters.
★★★★★
Accountability: Nebraska has no charters.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Nebraska has no charters.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Nebraska has no charters.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Nebraska has no charters.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There are no charter schools.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: There are no charter schools.

Nevada

Has 104 charter schools. 21 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 16%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Community input is nearly non-existent. When a school board denies a charter, there are two levels above it that can overturn the decision.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Initial five-year term with renewals up to 10 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers do not need to be certified. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Nevada allows for-profits to manage schools. It also allows related party transactions, if disclosed, and charter management organization members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Nevada's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There are far too many authorizers. They receive a fee of up to 2%. Charter renewal is for 10 years. There are extensive reporting requirements and sanctions. There are some reporting requirements and sanctions for some authorizer types.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charters receive special funding and federal funding to expand. Charters receive facilities funding. The state pays for transportation.

New Hampshire

There are 42 open charter schools with enrollment. 14 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 25%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Approved by the politically appointed State Board of Education.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: No restrictive caps.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers do not need to be certified. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: New Hampshire allows for-profits to manage schools, related party transactions, if disclosed, and charter management organization members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: New Hampshire's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: State boards and local boards can authorize charter schools. There are no fees with the state board, while fees to local boards are determined by contract. There are no reporting requirements or sanctions. Charter renewal is for five years.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation costs, comes from either the district or the state, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charters receive facilities funding. Schools receive special funding and federal funding to expand.

New Jersey

There are 86 charter schools in New Jersey. 65 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 43%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Approved by the politically appointed State Board of Education.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: No restrictive caps.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: New Jersey requires teachers to be certified and has no objectionable enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: New Jersey allows for-profits to manage schools because the law is silent. It also allows related party transactions and charter management organization members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: New Jersey's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Only the State Board of Education can authorize charter schools. There are no fees. Terms were recently increased to 10 years. There are no reporting requirements or sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation costs, comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charters receives special funding, low-cost loans for facilities, special grants and loans, and federal funding to expand.

New Mexico

There are 98 charter schools. 35 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 26%.

★★★★★
Community Input: School districts and a commission whose members are elected can authorize charter schools in New Mexico.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: No more than 15 new charters can be authorized each year.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: New Mexico requires teachers to be certified. It allows enrollment privileges for employees' children but not for board members, founders, etc.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: New Mexico allows for profits to run schools, although there are few. It allows related party transactions.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: New Mexico's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: The Public Education Commission and school districts are the authorizers of charter schools and receive fees up to 2%. There are some reporting requirements but there are no sanctions for insufficient supervision by authorizers. There are five-year renewals.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charters receive special funding and federal funding to expand. The state pays for transportation and provides high per-pupil facilities support.

New York

There are 350 charter schools with enrollment. 78 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 19%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Charters are approved by two politically appointed boards--the State Board of Education and the SUNY Charter Schools Committee. There is no local say or control.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There is a cap, but room for growth outside NYC exists. In addition, the legislature approved the expansion of charters in NYC, by allowing charters from schools never opened or closed to now be used.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: The state requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: New York does not allow for-profits to run schools anymore, except for schools grandfathered in before the law changed. Related-party transactions are allowed if disclosed. New York allows EMO/CMO owners or trustees to serve on its charter board or be employees.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: New York's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Charter school authorizers are the Board of Regents and the State University of New York. Members of both are political appointees. SUNY is known for its pro-charter stance, and charter schools will apply to SUNY if they are unsure the Board of Regents will approve them. Authorizing fees are 3%. There are some reporting requirements, and no sanctions. There are five-year renewals.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation costs, comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charters in NYC can move in and take over school district facilities, or force the district to pay for their buildings. Charters receive special grants, loans, per-pupil facility support, and federal funds to expand.

North Carolina

There are 211 charter schools. 64 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 23%.

★★★★★
Community Input: The Charter School Review Board (CSRB), a politically appointed board, has the sole authority to approve charter schools.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Ten-year charter renewal for most schools.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: North Carolina requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: The state allows for-profits to manage schools. It also allows related party transactions, if disclosed, and charter management organization members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: North Carolina's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: After the North Carolina Board rejected a for-profit-run school's application, authority was given to the politically appointed NC Charter Schools Review Board. It receives 1% of costs. Given the rubber-stamp nature of that board, it receives a low rating. There are ten-year renewals.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding flows through the district, with charter schools receiving both state and local funds. As funding exits with the child, it leaves stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Charters receive special funding and federal funding to expand. Transportation funds are not provided, but transportation is not required. No facility funding is provided.

North Dakota

North Dakota does not have charter schools yet. A law was recently passed to allow them.

★★★★★
Community Input: There is minimal community input. Only the state Superintedent of Instruction authorizers charters and he is elected.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps or limitations.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools cannot be renewed for more than a five year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers must be certified. There is minimal enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: North Dakota allows for profit management of its schools. Related party transactions are allowed if disclosed. CMO members can sit on the board if approved by the State Superintendent of Instruction.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: North Dakota's charter schools cannot be fully integrated into school districts. They must be privately governed by law, therefore students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public school districts.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: This is a new law. Only the State Superintendent can approve charter schools. At this point, we award four stars; however, final judgment is reserved until the new law is implemented. Renewals are not specified in law.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools are funded by the state. They receive no special funding.

Ohio

There are 339 charter schools in Ohio. 327 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 49%.

★★★★★
Community Input: The state has multiple authorizers, including cash-strapped colleges and nonprofits that receive fees for authorizing charter schools. This has resulted in no local control and half of all schools being run by for-profits.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: After an initial term of five years, Ohio charters can be renewed for up to 10 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Ohio requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Ohio allows for-profits to manage schools--about 50% of all charters in the state are run by for-profits, encouraged by multiple authorizers. Ohio allows related party transactions if disclosed, and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Ohio's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Ohio has multiple authorizers, including nonprofits that use authorizing at the 3% rate as a cash cow. Review of the 990s of some of these authorizers shows income exceeding authorizing expenditures. Several specialize in charter schools run by for-profits. There are reviews, ratings and consequences, but the bar is so low that it is without merit. Renewals are up to 10 years.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive funding from the state, along with special funds, as well as district-funded transportation. Facility funding is provided on a per-pupil basis, and additional facilities funding is provided. The state actively seeks and receives federal funding for charter school expansion.

Oklahoma

There are 72 charter schools. 38 charter schools have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 34.5%.

★★★★★
Community Input: There are multiple groups permitted to sponsor charters beyond school districts.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are caps that have no impact on charter growth.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers do not need to be certified. Oklahoma allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: The state allows for profits to run schools. It allows undisclosed related-party transactions.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Oklahoma's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Oklahoma has multiple authorizers that can receive an exorbitant fee of up to 5%. There is no requirement for review. There are sanctions. Renewals are five years.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation costs, comes from the state. Charters also receive special funding for facilities as well as facility per-pupil support, special grants and loans, and federal funding to expand.

Oregon

There are 126 charter schools with enrollment. 60 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 32%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Local districts and the State Board can authorize charter schools. The State Board can overturn the decision of a district to reject a charter school, thus overruling local control.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are caps that have no impact on charter growth.
★★★★★
Accountability: After an initial term of five years, the charter may be renewed for an additional five years. Following that, charters may receive up to a 10-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Oregon requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. There are no enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Oregon allows for-profits to manage schools. It allows related party transactions and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Oregon's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Local districts are the authorizers of charter schools, with the State Board on appeal. Fees can be up to a whopping 20%. There are neither formal reviews nor sanctions of authorizers. Renewals are up to ten years.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: The state funds charter schools on a proportional basis. The district provides transportation. They have access to some special funds.

Pennsylvania

There are 175 charter schools. 59 charter schools have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 25%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Local districts and the State Board can authorize charter schools. The State Board can overturn the decision of a district to reject a charter school, thus overruling local control.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: No restrictive caps.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: The state requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Pennsylvania allows for-profits to manage schools. It also allows related party transactions and charter management organization members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Pennsylvania's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Local school districts and the Department of Education, on appeal, authorize charter schools. The rules require districts to approve even when they have serious doubts. There is no explicit % fee (costs reimbursed via state formula). Renewals are for five years. There are neither formal reviews nor sanctions of authorizers.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation costs, comes from the district, leaving stranded costs behind for the district to absorb. Cyber charters received exorbitant funding. Charter schools receive special funding and per-pupil facilities support from the state. They receive federal funds to expand.

Rhode Island

There are 42 charter schools. 7 charter schools enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 14%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Districts, the mayor, and universities propose and supervise charters, but the approval process of authorization is delegated to political appointees, The Rhode Island Council on Elementary and Secondary Education.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: Charters in Rhode Island are capped at 35, however, there are presently 41 charter schools.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Rhode Island requires teachers to be certified. It allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Rhode Island does not allow for-profits to run its charter schools. However, it allows related-party transactions and CMO directors and employees to sit on the charter board.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Rhode Island's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: The Council on Elementary & Secondary Education is the only authorizer of charter schools; they can be "sponsored," however, by various agencies, including districts, the Mayor, universities, and nonprofits that provide oversight. There are neither reporting requirements nor sanctions. Renewals are for five years.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: State and local funding follows the student from the district to the charter school, leaving stranded costs behind. Charters have access to special funds and/or grants as well as federal expansion funds. Districts do not have to pay for transportation. They receive facility support.

South Carolina

Has 103 charter schools. 51 charter schools that enrolled students have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 33%.

★★★★★
Community Input: South Carolina allows multiple authorizers, including cash-strapped private colleges. Instances of one authorizer refusing to renew a charter and another one picking it up are not uncommon. South Carolina does require that charter board members serve for two year terms, be South Carolina residents and be elected by parents.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are caps that have no impact on charter growth.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter renewal is mandated to be for 10 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: South Carolina requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: South Carolina allows for-profits to manage schools. It allows related party transactions and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: South Carolina's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Local districts, the South Carolina Public Charter School District, and public and private colleges can be authorizers, and small, cash-strapped religious colleges in the state do so, collecting the 2% fee. Renewals are for ten years. There are neither reporting requirements nor sanctions for authorizers.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: State and local funding follows the student from the district to the charter school, leaving stranded costs behind. Charters have access to special funds and/or grants as well as federal expansion funds. Districts do not have to pay for transportation, and facilities are not funded.

South Dakota

Has no charter schools.

★★★★★
Community Input: There are no charters.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no charters.
★★★★★
Accountability: There are no charters.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: There are no charters.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: There are no charters.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: South Dakota has no charter schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There is no charter school law.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: South Dakota does not have a charter school law.

Tennessee

Has 114 charter schools. 63 charter schools that enrolled students have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 35.5%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Local districts and the State Board can authorize charter schools. The State Public Charter School Commission can overturn the decision of a district to reject a charter school, thus overruling local control.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are caps that have no impact on charter growth.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter renewal is mandated to be for ten years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Tennessee state requires teachers to be certified. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Tennessee does not allow for-profits to run its charter schools. However, it allows related-party transactions and CMO directors and employees to sit on the charter board.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Tennesse's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Both the Commissioner of Education and school districts can authorize charter schools (campus charters). Renewals are ten years. Each authorizer must provide the Department of Education and the State Board of Education with a performance report for each charter school it oversees, along with information on each school's operating status and the oversight and contracted services provided by the authorizer. Each authorizer receives 3% of all student state aid or $35,000, whichever is less. Sanctioned authorizers can have their fee reduced.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive state and local funding at a 100% rate. Charters have access to special funds and/or grants as well as federal expansion funds. Facilities are funded on a per-pupil basis. Transportation costs are paid by the district.

Texas

Has 1054 charter schools. 529 charter schools that enrolled students have closed. Closed schools include district charters that were converted to district public schools. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 33%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Local districts can grant and authorize charters. The Texas State Board of Education, with elected members, approves or rejects charter applications for non-district charters. The Commissioner then has the power to allow "campuses" of the charter school to open, resulting in the spread of charter chains.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: Caps on certain charter authorizers has no impact on charter growth. Charter chain growth is encouraged. This has resulted in a high number of charter schools.
★★★★★
Accountability: After an initial term of five years, Texas charters can be renewed for up to 10 years.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Texas state requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Texas allows for-profits to manage schools. It allows related party transactions if disclosed, and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Some of Texas' charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: The State Charter School Board, districts, or higher-ed institutions can authorize charter schools. Authorizing is loose. Charter chains can expand by opening campuses without a rigorous review. There are no authorizing fees. Renewals are for 10 years. There are reporting requirements, but there are no sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Funding, including transportation costs, comes from the state. Charters also receive special funding for facilities as well as facility per-pupil support, special grants and loans, and federal funding to expand. Texas charters are generously funded at rates higher than public schools.

Utah

Has 141 charter schools. 18 charter schools with enrollment have closed. Utah has the most lax accountability standard in its charter law in the nation. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 11%.

★★★★★
Community Input: The politically appointed Utah State Charter Board, local school boards, and some colleges and universities can authorize charter schools in Utah.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: In Utah, the budget bill provides the total authorized enrollment in charter schools. The difference between authorized enrollment and the actual enrollment makes the cap meaningless. The growth of charter chains is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Utah has the most lax accountabilitiy standard in the country. Schools receive evergreen renewals - that is, they never expire unless they are revoked.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Utah requires teachers to be certified; however, there are extensive exceptions. The state also allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Utah allows for-profits to manage schools. It allows related party transactions if disclosed, and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Some of Utah's charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Utah authorizers include local school boards, the Utah State Charter School Board, a board of trustees of an institution of higher education, and a board of trustees of a private, nonprofit college or university. Fees are up to 3% years 1–2; 1% thereafter. There is a fast-track approval process. After the initial term, there is an evergreen renewal process. There are no reporting requirements or sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive both state and local funding, including local facility funding. In addition, facility funding is allocated on a per-student basis. Charters receive special funds to "equalize" their funding. If a charter school fails, taxpayers can be obligated to pay off their loans. Charter schools have access to expansion funds through the federal CSP program.

Vermont

Has no charter schools.
★★★★★
Community Input: There are no charters.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no charters.
★★★★★
Accountability: There are no charters.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: There are no charters.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: There are no charters.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Vermont has no charters.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: There is no charter school law.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Vermont does not have a charter school law.

Virginia

Has 7 charter schools. 7 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 50%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Charter schools can only be authorized by districts and are therefore under democratic control.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: While there is no cap, growth is naturally controlled by local control.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers must be certified. There is no enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Virginia allows for-profits to manage schools. It allows related party transactions if disclosed, and charter management organization's members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: Local school boards are the only authorizers of charter schools. There is an up to 1% administrative fee of per-pupil allocation.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools are public schools in public districts. Any excess funds must be returned to the district. Because full authorization power remains with the district, only affordable charters are approved.

Washington

Has 17 charter schools. 7 charter schools with enrollment have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 29%.

★★★★★
Community Input: The Washington State Charter Commission is the only authorizer of charter schools. All but one member (the Superintendent of Public Instruction) is politically appointed. Districts must get their permission to start a charter school.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There is a strong cap on charter growth.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers must be certified; however, exceptions are allowed. There are groups with enrollment privileges beyond siblings and economic disadvantages, but only a few.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Washington does not allow for-profits to run its charter schools. However, it allows related-party transactions if disclosed and CMO directors and employees to sit on the charter board.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Washington's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: The State Charter School Commission is the primary authorizer, and local boards may also apply to serve as authorizers. Terms are for five years. Fees can be up to 4% of state funds. There are strong reporting requirements and strong sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: The state funds charter schools on a proportional basis. Charters receive facilities funding. The state provides transportation funding and some supplementary funding.

West Virginia

Has 6 charter schools. All have recently opened, and none have closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 0%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Although charters were under local control when the law was first passed, it was quickly amended and now county school boards and the Professional Charter School Board are the authorizers. Board members are politically appointed.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: The West Virginia pilot program allows for the approval of 10 charter schools every three years and limits online charters to two.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Teachers do not need to be certified. Allows several categories of enrollment privilege.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: West Virginia allows for-profits to manage schools. It allows related party transactions, if disclosed.Charter management organization's members cannot sit on the charter school's board nor be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: West Virginia's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: The State Charter School Commission, the State Board of Education, and local boards can authorize charter schools. Presently, the authority of the state commission is being challenged in the courts. Authorizers receive a 3% fee. Renewals are for five years.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter schools receive both state and local funding, including local facility funding as well as additional state funding. Remarkably, charter schools receive transportation funding via the district, even if they do not provide transportation.

Wisconsin

Has 225 charter schools, including district-run charter schools. 307 charter schools with enrollment have closed, including district charter schools that converted to public schools. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 58%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Although the majority of charter schools are part of districts and under district control, there are growing numbers of independent charter schools authorized by selected colleges and other organizations. This leads to authorizer shopping, with rejected charters appealing to another agency for authorization.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: There are no caps. Charter chain growth is encouraged.
★★★★★
Accountability: Charter schools can be renewed for no more than a five-year term.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Wisconsin requires teachers to be certified, however, there are extensive exceptions. Allows several categories of enrollment privileges.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Wisconsin allows for-profits to manage schools. It allows related party transactions and charter management organizations' members to sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Most of Wisconsin's charter schools are fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts are operated via public governance; therefore, students and staff enjoy the rights of their counterparts in public schools
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies: The Department of Public Instruction, UW System, Milwaukee, districts, tribes, technical colleges, and one county can authorize charter schools and receive a 3% fee. There are five-year renewals. There are extensive reporting requirements but no sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Depending on whether they are a district instrumentality or an independent charter school, they are entitled to both local and state funds or only state funds. In the latter case, additional state funding support is provided. District charters have transportation costs paid by the district. Some independent charters, depending upon their location, have transportation costs paid by the state.

Wyoming

Has 8 charter schools. 1 charter school that enrolled students has closed. The charter churn rate (closed/ever open) is 11%.

★★★★★
Community Input: Previously, only districts could authorize charter schools. In 2023, the legislature created the Wyoming Charter School Authorizing Board, whose members are politically appointed.
★★★★★
Controlled Growth: No restrictive caps. There is some enabling of the growth of chains.
★★★★★
Accountability: After the initial five year term, there are no restrictions on term length.
★★★★★
Protections for Students: Wyoming requires teachers to be certified. It does not allow enrollment privileges beyond siblings, prior enrollees, and district residents in the case of district charters.
★★★★★
Protections for Taxpayers: Wyoming allows for-profits to manage schools. It allows disclosed related party transactions. Charter management organizations' members may not sit on the charter school's board or be employed by the school.
★★★★★
Public Status and Protections: Wyoming's charter schools are prohibited by law from being fully integrated into the public school district. Charters in these districts operate via private governance; therefore, students and staff do not enjoy the full rights of their counterparts in public schools.
★★★★★
Responsible Authorizing Policies : The State Authorizing Charter Board and local boards can authorize charter schools. The fee is 3%. After an initial five-year term, renewal is open-ended and not term-limited. There are reporting requirements, but no sanctions.
★★★★★
Financial Drain on Districts and Taxpayers: Charter school funding is provided by the state. Wyoming is extremely generous with facility funding for charter schools. Unused district facilities must be provided for free. The state provides additional funding for charter schools Transportation costs are covered by the state.