differences autonomy included “efficiency” outcomes better generate

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background: Not all public schools in Milwaukee are created equal. There are traditional Milwaukee
public schools (MPS), educating 76% of all children in Milwaukee. In addition, Milwaukee has public
charter schools that – usually – have less red-tape than traditional schools, although they are still
“public” and subject to many of the legal requirements imposed on public schools. Yet, even among
charter schools, there is significant variation. Independent public charter schools are authorized by
the City of Milwaukee or University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee 1 and have complete control over the administration
of their school. Instrumentality and non-instrumentality charters are authorized by MPS.
While non-instrumentalities have the freedom to hire their own (typically non-union) teachers, MPS
hires the teachers for instrumentalities and those teachers are generally unionized.
Funding also varies significantly between these schools 2 . Traditional MPS schools receive around
$10,261 per student while, according to state law, independent charters receive $8,075 per student.
MPS – which decides how much to fund their charters – pays non-instrumentalities around $8,075
and their instrumentalities (with union employees) $10,261. The table below highlights these differences:
School Type
Category Instrumentality
Non-
Instrumentality Independent MPS
Common Council/ MPS
Authorizer MPS
MPS
UWM
Employees MPS School School MPS
Autonomy Limited High High None
Per-Pupil Funding
(excluding federal) $10,261 $8,075 $8,075 $10,261
Our Study: Most existing research has found that public charter schools earn better outcomes than
traditional public schools. But the variations between charter schools – with different funding, autonomy,
and management styles – sets up an interesting question: which public schools produce the
best outcomes per taxpayer dollars spent? It is important to note that voucher schools are not included
in this study due to a lack of data on the socioeconimic status of these schools. To date, no study
has attempted to answer that question, i.e., to examine differences in “efficiency” between different
types of charters and traditional schools. In order to test the “efficiency” between school types, we
conducted the following two analyses.
In the first analysis, we estimate the return on investment between school types for each charter
school and traditional public school in Milwaukee. We looked at the average score of the school on
two standardized tests 3 , dividing that by the per-pupil funding for the school. This gave us an “efficiency”
score. We ranked all public schools in Milwaukee based upon their efficiency score, i.e. outcomes
per dollar spent. Data on number of children with free and reduced lunch (income less than
$44,000 for a family of four) allow us to take into account whether the school educates predominately
low-income children.
Next, in order to check the conclusions of the first analysis, we utilized econometric techniques to better
control for other important variables, such as demographics and socioeconomic status. We generate
the estimated effect of each school type on test scores, and then divide that effect by the per-pupil
funding in the school-type to generate an efficiency score for each type of school. We then compare
these scores through a difference-of-means test.
Bang for the Buck
1

Results: Based on the methodology described above, we make the following conclusions about public
schools in Wisconsin (the full results begin on page 7):
1. Among schools who served at least 80% economically disadvantaged students, 4 of the top
5 schools for efficiency are independent public charter schools (Ind). The lone non-instru
mentality – and best school – is Carmen High School. Nine of the top 10 schools for efficiency
are independent (Ind) or non-instrumentality (Non-Instr) schools on the WKCE science. Put
another way, even with the most difficult students, dollars spent on independent and non-instrumentality
charter schools are much more effective.
MPS performs somewhat better on the Badger Exam but independent and non-instrumentality charters
are still disproportionately represented in the top 15. While Milwaukee traditional public schools
are 83% of the total sample, they represent only 26 % of the highest performing schools on the
WKCE and 46% on the Badger Exam.
Most Efficient Schools with more than 80% Free-or Reduced Lunch
WKCE Science
Badger Math
1. CARMEN HS (Non-Instr) 1. SEEDS OF HEALTH ELEMENTARY (Indp)
2. VERITAS HS (Indp) 2. CENTRAL CITY CYBERSCHOOL (Indp)
3. SEEDS OF HEALTH (Indp) 3. CURTIN ELEMENTARY (Trad)
4. CENTRAL CITY CYBERSCHOOL (Indp) 4. MIL COLLEGE PREP-38TH ST. (Non-Instr)
5. TENOR HS (Indp) 5. LOWELL ELEMENTARY (Trad)
6. ALBA (Instr) 6. WEDGEWOOD PARK (Trad)
7. LA CAUSA CHARTER (Non-Instr) 7. N POINT LIGHTHOUSE CHARTER (Indp)
8. WEDGEWOOD PARK (Trad) 8. ALBA (Instr)
9. MIL COLLEGE PREP-LLOYD ST (Non-Instr) 9. MIL COLLEGE PREP-LLOYD ST (Non-Instr)
10. MIL ENVIRON SCI ACAD (Non-Instr) 10. GREENFILED BILLINGUAL (Trad)
11. UNIVERSAL ACAD/COLL. BND (Non-Instr) 11. MIL ENVIRON SCI ACAD (Non-Instr)
12. MIL COLLEGE PREP-38TH ST (Non-Instr) 12. VIEAU ELEMENTARY (Trad)
13. MIL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE (Non-Instr) 13. LA CAUSA CHARTER (Non-Instr)
14. CURTIN ELEMENTARY (Trad) 14. VICTORY ELEMENTARY (Trad)
15. LOWELL ELEMENTARY (Trad) 15. MIL MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY (Indp)
Bang for the Buck
2

2. The most inefficient schools with taxpayer money are dominated by traditional MPS. The
bottom ten schools who took the Badger Exam are all traditional MPS. Eight of the least efficient
WKCE are traditional MPS schools.
3. After controlling for socio-economic status and demographic factors in econometric analysis,
independent and non-instrumentality charters are much more efficient with public money than
traditional MPS schools. These schools achieve the same—or better—outcomes at a lower
per student cost than traditional public schools. Instrumentality schools, which are tightly con
trolled by MPS with union teachers, score far worse than independent and non-instrumentality
charters and are either only marginally more efficient than MPS (in the case of the Badger
Exam) or equally efficient (in the case of the WKCE). These findings are shown in the bar
chart below. Because MPS represents the ‘0’ line on the chart, all comparisons are made to
MPS.
Bang for the Buck
3

For policymakers, questions going forward: Are we smart “investors”? Non-instrumentality charters
and independent charters receive significantly less funding per student than traditional public
schools or instrumentality charter school. Yet despite educating similar economically disadvantaged
students, these charters achieve significantly better outcomes per dollar spent. Because these
schools can do more with less, policymakers should reconsider the merit of this funding disparity.
Should we be funding our best schools at a significantly lower amount? Should we consider ways in
which more independent and non-instrumentality charters could be authorized?
Why are certain charter schools doing more with less? This research can tell us that charters are
more efficient, but it cannot fully tell us why that is the case. To be sure, a significant portion of the
added cost of traditional public education goes to paying legacy costs that cannot be easily reduced.
To that extent, these schools are not burdened by the sins of the past. But that doesn’t explain better
absolute performance in these schools. The educational community and public would benefit from a
deeper understanding of the causes of efficiency differences.
If a conclusion must be drawn, it would seem that the more autonomous a school is, the better it
performs. This is consistent with much of existing research. This model should be replicated and the
state should encourage policies that incentivize such schools.
Are instrumentality charter schools really “charter” schools? In addressing these policy questions, we
need to remember that a “charter” is not simply a “charter.” Unlike independent and non-instrumentality
charters, instrumentality charters receive the same funding as traditional MPS schools. Unlike independent
and non-instrumentality charters, they are about as inefficient as traditional MPS schools.
This could be because MPS completely controls instrumentality schools in all areas, including the
hiring of teachers and principals, opting to make school employees’ members of the public unions,
and the management of the school. In other words, on many key items that could affect school performance,
there is no difference.
Bang for the Buck
4

I. Introduction
Although the public may not be aware of it, there are extensive variations in per-pupil funding among
public schools in the Milwaukee school system. For example, students in traditional MPS schools
receive significantly more funding than students in charter schools. There are even differences in
funding among charter schools. So-called “instrumentality charters” receive the same funding as
MPS schools, while independent and non-instrumentality (Ind) charters receive less. This raises the
question that is the focus of this research: which public schools produce the best outcomes per taxpayer
dollars spent?
This is not an idle question. Wisconsin ranks in the top half of states in terms of education spending
and MPS ranks 11th among all big cities in the country for per pupil funding. 4 However evidence in
prior WILL research suggests that traditional public schools in Wisconsin are receiving “diminishing
returns,” where additional dollars spent are not producing proportional benefits.
Because our goal is to educate children and not simply spend public dollars, spending smart is more
important than, or at least a precondition to, spending more. Are there more effective spending models
out there?
In addressing this question, it is important to highlight that the question of return-on-investment is
somewhat different than the question of school performance. Schools that score lower on standardized
tests may actually have a higher return-on-investment if they do so with less funding. 5
A. Existing Evidence on Charter School Efficiency
This paper is part of a larger narrative on the efficiency of public school spending around the world.
Several studies have endeavored to measure the outcomes achieved by students per resource expended.
Most of these studies show the United States to be in the bottom half of countries in terms
of efficiency. For instance, Dalton, Marcenaro-Gutierrez and Still find that the United States ranks
21st out of 30 industrialized countries in efficiency. According to these scholars, the United States
spends too much on it’s teachers for the results achieved. In other words, other countries spend less
and have larger class sizes, yet achieve similar or better outcomes.
Similarly, Leuken, Esenberg and Szafir (2015) in a report for WILL compared expenditures on education
in Wisconsin to OECD countries, and found that the state’s achievement is lower than would be
predicted for the amount of money spent.
While there are a number of studies comparing public schools in the aggregate, much less research
has focused on whether efficiency differences exist between types of public schools. We are aware
of only three existing studies that examine charter school efficiency. Grosskopf, Hayes, and Taylor
(2009) 6 examined school efficiency in Texas. They found that 74 percent of Texas charter schools are
operating at a high level of efficiency compared to only 9 percent of regular public schools. Similarly,
Gronberg, Jansen, and Taylor (2012) 7 found that Texas charter schools are able to produce better
outcomes on state-standardized tests at a lower cost, and that they are more efficient than traditional
public schools of comparable size. 8 Most relevant to our work is research by University of Arkansas
professor Patrick Wolf and colleagues, who conducted a comprehensive investigation of charter
school efficiency nationwide in 2014. 9 In this report, Wolf et. al. determined the ratio of taxpayer expenditure
to points scored on the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP). After adjusting
Bang for the Buck
5

for school demographics, they found that, on average, $1,000 invested in a public charter yielded
17 more points on the NAEP in math and reading. Specifically in Wisconsin, the paper finds that a
charter school investment yields 19 more points in those subjects.
The results from these studies should be taken as very encouraging to advocates of charter schools.
But, in Wisconsin, there is greater variety in charter school types than these nationwide analyses
were able to take into account. Charter schools in Milwaukee vary on a number of important dimensions.
These differences are explored more deeply in the following section.
B. About Public Schools in Milwaukee
State-law has created a number of different classes of charter school that vary in terms of their authorizer,
whether the employees are employees of the district, per-pupil funding and the extent to which
the charter’s curriculum tracks the district curriculum. The figure below highlights some of the key
differences between each charter school type. 10
School Type
Category Instrumentality
Non-
Instrumentality Independent MPS
Common Council/ MPS
Authorizer MPS
MPS
UWM
Employees MPS School School MPS
Autonomy Limited High High None
Per-Pupil Funding
(excluding federal) $10,261 $8,075 $8,075 $10,261
Most closely tied to traditional public schools are instrumentality charters. These schools are authorized
by the Milwaukee Public School District, and have little freedom in terms of curriculum and
administration. Their employees are unionized MPS employees. Non-instrumentality charters have
more freedom. While these schools are still authorized by Milwaukee Public Schools, they have a
greater ability to experiment with curriculum and make changes based on the state-of-the-art in the
teaching discipline. Teachers at these schools are not employees of the district and are usually not
unionized. Finally, we have independent charter schools. As their name suggests, these schools are
largely autonomously from local school boards. They have autonomy from district mandates. Like
non-instrumentality charters, independent charter employees are employed by the school. Figure 1
below highlights the percentage of schools in our sample that are each type. By far the largest share
of schools are traditional public schools (~76%). Independent charters represent the next largest
slice of the pie, followed by non-instrumentality and instrumentality in descending order.
Bang for the Buck
6

All charter schools in Milwaukee are non-religious and prohibited from discriminating or choosing their
students. Because of the relative quality of charter schools, charters often cannot meet demand. In
these situations, lotteries are held to determine admission.
Most relevant for this analysis, the amount of per-pupil funding a school receives varies by school
type. For the 2014-15 school year that is the subject of this analysis, non-instrumentality and independent
charter schools received $8,075 for each student that they enrolled. Instrumentality charters,
on the other hand, receive the same per-pupil funding as regular public schools. While determining
that funding is more complex 11 , the number is far greater regardless of the calculation method chosen.
We utilize the per pupil revenue limit for Milwaukee Public Schools provided by the Department of
Public Instruction, $10,261. 12 This figure for public and instrumentality charters is $2,186 more than
students in other charter schools receive. 13
These differences raise questions about whether all Milwaukee charters are really “charters” in the
sense that founders of the charter movement intended. Charter schools have their origin in a 1974
paper by University of Massachusetts professor Ray Budde. 14 Budde’s original conception was
somewhat different than modern understandings of school choice, focused on granting charters to
teachers with unique ideas within existing public schools. But at its core, Budde’s motivation was a
reduction of the power of school administrators to micro-manage and homogenize the process of education.
Said Budde, “No one - not the superintendent or the principal or any central office supervisors
- would stand between the school board and the teachers when it came to matters of instruction.” 15
Instrumentality charter schools in Milwaukee stand in sharp contrast to Budde’s vision. By employing
MPS teachers, enjoying limited administrative flexibility and using the traditional curriculums, the power
of these schools to be hotbeds of creativity and innovation is severely limited. Such divergence
from traditional conceptions of charter schools has led them to be called “charters in name only” by
some in the charter-school community.
Therefore, given the national findings cited above, we hypothesize efficiency differences to exist
between instrumentality charter schools and other charter schools. Because instrumentality charters
function much like traditional public schools, it is likely that the increased efficiency found in existing
Bang for the Buck
7

esearch on charter schools will not be realized. We test this hypothesis through an examination of
the rate of return per tax dollar invested in each Milwaukee school type.
II. Individual School Analysis on Efficiency
a. Methodology
The first step is to calculate an efficiency score for every school. In order to do this, we need an outcome
measure that is utilized in every school and is comparable across schools. The 2014-15 administration
of the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Exam (WKCE) and the Badger Exam meets
this criteria. The WKCE was the primary standardized test used for assessing Wisconsin students
through the 2012-13 school year. For the year of our analysis, the WKCE began to be phased out in
favor of the Badger Exam, which better aligned with new federal Common Core standards. For 2014-
2015, students took the WKCE for science and the Badger Exam for math. While these separate
tests do not allow for comparability across academic subjects, they are reasonable for the comparisons
within tests which we utilize here. Because the WKCE was taken in 4th, 8th, and 10th grade,
we only use the 4th and 8th grade results from the Badger Exam to increase comparability as much
as possible. 16
WKCE scores are reported by the Department of Public Instruction in four categories: “minimal performance,”
“basic,” “proficient,” and “advanced.” We create a four-point scale from these categories
where ‘1’ is equivalent to “minimal performance” and ‘4’ is equivalent to “advanced.” These scores
are then averaged across the students in the school who participated in the exam.
Our main independent variables are several binary variables that take on a value of ‘1’ or ‘0’ for
school type (instrumentality charter, non-instrumentality charter, and independent charter). Analysis
#1 uses this information to create efficiency scores at the individual school level. This school-level
efficiency score is the average of Badger Exam scores at the school divided by the level of funding
that school receives, which is determined by school type.
In order to ensure that we are making ‘apples to apples’ comparisons, in Analysis #2, we include
a number of control variables that could plausibly offer alternative explanations for student performance.
These variables that we control for include the grade level of the students (4th, 8th or 10th
grade), the percentage of the students in the school who are non-white, the percentage of the student
in the school receiving free or reduced lunch, and the percentage of the students in the school who
are English language learners. Disabled students take a separate version of the WKCE and Badger
Exam, and are excluded from these analyses. An efficiency score by school type is calculated
through a two-step process in Analysis #2.
First, our key variables highlighted above are regressed on the school’s average exam score in each
grade level studied:
(1)
The coefficient estimates are interpreted as relative to the excluded baseline group, traditional public
Bang for the Buck
8

schools. These coefficient estimates are divided by the funding level at each school to create the
efficiency scores that are then compared between school types. Mathematically, consider the comparison
of the efficiency of independent charter schools and regular public schools:
(2)
where β 0
and β 1
represent coefficients derived from equation 1, κ1 and κ0 represent the constant
per-pupil expenditure in each school type, and σ2 represents the combined variance derived through
the equation:
(3)
Where Ϫ represents the covariance of β 0
and β 1
, the estimated parameter for the indicator of school
type. If there is no difference in the efficiency of independent charters and regular public schools, the
expected value of Z is 0, and the variance of Z will equal σ 2 .
If any of the three types of charter schools are more efficient than traditional public schools, we expect
to observe a positive, significant difference in the t-test. A negative difference would indicate that
the school type is less efficient, while an insignificant difference would indicate that performance in
that school type is approximately equally efficient as traditional public schools.
b. Summary Statistics
Table 1 below presents the summary statistics for the data in our analysis. 17 In both science and
math, one can observe a high degree of variability in the school-grade test average. In science, the
average ranges from 1.33 to 3.57 while in math, the range is from 1.0 to 2.92. It is notable that the
average scores on the Badger Math exam tend to be lower than those for the WKCE science, though
we cannot determine here whether this is due to differences in the difficulty of the exam or the difficulty
of the subject matter for students. One can also note the high levels of non-white students on
average (more than 80 percent) in the schools under study, as well as the high level of students (also
more than 80 percent) receiving free and reduced lunch.
Bang for the Buck
9

Table I. Summary Statistics of the Key Variables
Variable Mean (SD) Minimum Maximum
Test Average-Science 2.3556 (0.4451) 1.3333 3.5714
Test Average-Math 1.6767 (0.4471) 1.0000 2.9286
Percent white 0.1642 (0.2106) 0.0000 0.9500
Free/Reduced Lunch 0.8139 (0.1939) 0.0000 1.0000
English as a Second
Language 0.0707 (0.1314) 0.0000 0.6800
Traditional Public School 0.7638 (0.4256) 0.0000 1.0000
Instrumentality Charter 0.0276 (0.1640) 0.0000 1.0000
Non-instrumentality Charter 0.0787 (0.2699) 0.0000 1.0000
Independent Charter 0.1300 (0.3369) 0.0000 1.0000
Note: Table 1 depicts the mean, standard deviation and range of each key variable in our analysis.
c. Analysis #1: School-Level
Table 2 presents the top fifteen schools in efficiency in Milwaukee on both the WKCE and Badger
Exam. The efficiency measure is averaged across grades 18 at the school level, while the efficiency
measure in Analysis #2 is aggregated over all schools of each type. Note also that 10th graders did
not take the Badger exam, and thus high schools do not appear in the Badger top 10 list. As a robustness
check, we can see a great deal of similarity between these lists. Downtown Montessori, for
example, ranks first on both lists.
Table 2. Most Efficient Schools
1. DOWNTOWN MONTESSORI (Indp) 1. DOWNTOWN MONTESSORI (Indp)
2. WOODLANDS (Indp) 2. WOODLANDS (Indp)
3. MIL COLLEGE PREP-38TH ST. (Indp) 3. ROCKETSHIP S COMM PREP (Indp)
4. HIGHLAND COMMUNITY (Non-instr) 4. MIL GERMAN IMMERSION (Trad)
5. CARMEN HS (Non-Instr) 5. SEEDS OF HEALTH (Indp)
6. MARYLAND MONTESSORRI (Trad) 6. BRUCE GUADALUPE (Indp)
7. BRUCE GUADALUPE (Indp) (Indp) 7. MARYLAND MONTESSORRI (Trad)
8. VERITAS HS (Indp) 8. GOLDA MEIR (Trad)
9. MIL GERMAN IMMERSION (Trad) 9. WHITMAN ELEMENTARY (Trad)
10. 21ST CENTURY PREP (Indp) 10. MIL SPANISH IMMERSION (Trad)
11. GOLDA MEIR (Trad) 11. CENTRAL CITY CYBERSCHOOL (Indp)
12. SEEDS OF HEALTH (Indp) 12. HAPA-AMERICAN PEACE (Non-instr)
13. HAPA-AMERICAN PEACE (Non-Instr) 13. WHITTIER ELEMENTARY (Instr)
14. HONEY CREEK ELEMENTARY (Instr) 14. MIL COLLEGE PREP-38TH ST. (Indp)
15. WHITTIER ELEMENTARY (Instr) 15. HONEY CREEK ELEMENTARY (Instr)
Bang for the Buck
10

These results are supportive of our hypothesis that independent and non-instrumentality charters are
better stewards of taxpayer money. Of the top 15 schools in WKCE efficiency, 9 are independent
or non-instrumentality charters. Public schools perform somewhat more competitively on the
Badger Exam, but independent and non-instrumentalities still hold a disproportionate share of the top
fifteen spots. Despite representing less than 15% of schools in our sample, independent charter and
non-instrumentality charters hold down 53% of the top 15 spots on the Badger Exam.
Recognizing that poverty is an important predictor of educational outcomes, Table 2 presents the top
15 schools in Milwaukee where more than 80% of students receive free-or-reduced lunch. 19 This
sample is a bit more MPS dominated, with few instrumentality charters and slightly fewer independent
charters. Figure 2 provides a pie-chart of this smaller sample.
Similar to the pattern identified in Table 2, we see that instrumentality and non-instrumentality schools
represent a much larger share of the top 15 than their share of schools in our sample. 73% of the top
15 on the WKCE and 53% of the top 15 on the Badger Exam are independent or non-instrumentality
charter schools. That said, several public schools, such as Curtin Elementary, rank relatively high on
the list, and ALBA is a strong representative for instrumentality charters.
Bang for the Buck
11

Table 3. Most Efficient Schools with more than 80% Free-or Reduced Lunch
WKCE Science
Badger Math
1. CARMEN HS (Non-Instr) 1. SEEDS OF HEALTH ELEMENTARY (Indp)
2. VERITAS HS (Indp) 2. CENTRAL CITY CYBERSCHOOL (Indp)
3. SEEDS OF HEALTH (Indp) 3. CURTIN ELEMENTARY (Trad)
4. CENTRAL CITY CYBERSCHOOL (Indp) 4. MIL. COLLEGE PREP-38TH ST (Non-Instr)
5. TENOR HS (Indp) 5. LOWELL ELEMENTARY (Trad)
6. ALBA (Instr) 6. WEDGEWOOD PARK (Trad)
7. LA CAUSA CHARTER (Non-Instr) 7. N POINT LIGHTHOUSE CHARTER (Indp)
8. WEDGEWOOD PARK (Trad) 8. ALBA (Instr)
9. MIL COLLEGE PREP-LLOYD ST (Non-Instr) 9. MIL. COLL. PREP-LLYOD ST (Non-Instr)
10. MIL. ENVIRON SCIENCE ACAD (Non-Instr) 10. GREENFIELD BILLINGUAL (Trad)
11. UNIVERSAL ACAD/COLL BND (Non-Instr) 11. MIL ENVIRON SCI ACAD (Non-Instr)
12. MIL COLLEGE PREP-38TH ST (Non-Instr) 12. VIEAU ELEMENTARY (Trad)
13. MIL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE (Non-Instr) 13. LA CAUSA CHARTER (Non-Instr)
14. CURTIN ELEMENTARY (Trad) 14. VICTORY ELEMENTARY (Trad)
15. LOWELL ELEMENTARY (Trad) 15. MIL MATH AND SCIENCE ACAD (Indp)
These rankings strongly suggest that independent and non-instrumentality charters are better stewards
of taxpayer money. While there are a number of public schools in both lists, independent and
non-instrumentality charters represent a far higher share of this top 15 list than their share of all Milwaukee
schools. But, to check these findings, we must simultaneously account for a number of other
important factors that might effect school performance, such as school demographics. To do this, we
turn to econometric analysis.
d. Analysis #2: School Type
i. Stage 1: Test Score Regression
Step 1 of our process is to regress the average test score for the school on school type and several
other control variables. These are not the efficiency results, as taking account of expenditure at this
stage of the analysis would result in potential bias because it would create dependencies between
school type and the outcome measure. Though these results are not the major point of this research,
they are informative in making comparisons between Milwaukee’s varying types of public schools.
These results are shown in Table 4 below. At this stage, we find similar results to previous analyses 20
that have shown independent charter schools to produce better educational outcomes than the baseline
group, traditional public schools. The effects on test scores in independent charters are quite
dramatic, representing a 6% increase in average test scores on the Badger exam.
That said, this preliminary analysis shows small or non-existent effects for other types of charter
schools. Non-Instrumentality charter schools appear to be approximately equal in performance to the
baseline group, and instrumentality charters are better to a very small extent (p

Table 4. Effect of School Type and Controls on Test Scores, Badger and WKCE
VARIABLES WKCE Average Badger Average
Instrumentality 0.0738 0.261*
(0.119) (0.135)
Non-Instrumentality 0.0859 -0.0340
(0.0912) (0.110)
Indpendent 0.148** 0.240***
(0.0598) (0.0679)
Free and Reduced Lunch -1.146*** -1.284***
(0.154) (0.178)
English-Language Learners 0.752*** 0.760***
(0.154) (0.168)
Non-White -0.379*** -0.152
(0.139) (0.155)
Constant 3.144*** 2.704***
(0.105) (0.103)
Grade 4 0.461*** 0.100**
(0.0614) (0.0454)
Grade 8 0.426*** --
(0.0633)
Constant 3.144*** 2.704***
(0.105) (0.103)
Observations 243 207
R-Sqaured 0.548 0.493
Standard errors in parentheses
*** p

Table 5. Difference of Means: WKCE Science and School Type
School Type Public Independent Non-Instrumentality Instrumentality
WKCE Science 0.036 0.408 0.399 0.314
Difference from Public ---- 0.102*** 0.093*** 0.008
Note: Table represents the difference of mean efficiency scores between each type of charter school in Milwaukee on the
WKCE Exam. The difference from public row represents the difference of means between each school type and traditional
public schools (i.e. [independent efficiency mean=public efficiency mean] ***p

IV. Limitations
A few limitations of this research warrant mentioning. While the school type comparisons we have
made in this analysis are statistically valid, we cannot claim to have proven a causal relationship
between school funding and school type. A strong correlation can imply causation, but cannot prove
it. That said, short of an unlikely experiment where school funding is randomly assigned, we make
the case that this research utilizes the best possible approach by accounting for socioeconomic and
demographic factors that could also impact school efficiency.
A second limitation is that we have not utilized multiple years of data in this study in overtime, longitudinal
data. This one year “snapshot” may not capture trends in testing that occur over multiple years.
As existing research shows that charter schools are better at closing achievement gaps, this suggests
our study provides a conservative estimate of the efficiency gains of charter schools.
Finally, we could not examine private schools in the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program for this
study, a large and important component in the education landscape of Milwaukee. Currently, the
limited availability of demographic information regarding choice schools makes this far more difficult
than comparisons among MPS public and charter schools. As more data becomes of available in the
future, we may replicate this analysis for the choice programs in Wisconsin.
Bang for the Buck
15

V. Conclusion
The common refrain to increase school funding will no doubt be heard throughout the halls of the capitol
during the next legislative session. During such times, it is important for legislators to be careful
stewards of the taxpayers’ money and insure that our investment is not wasted. In this report, we
have shown that independent charter schools are far more efficient in their expenditures than public
schools. Similar levels of increased efficiency are found in non-instrumentality charter schools. This
is not a call to convert all public schools to independent charters, but a call for an examination of the
comparative inefficiencies of traditional public schools and public charter instrumentality schools.
There are a number of policy suggestions that might flow from this report. First, because instrumentality
charters are so different from other types of charter schools in terms of efficiency, it might be
appropriate to reclassify them as something other than charter schools. Second, given the growing
evidence of charter school effectiveness from this study and others, it is important for the state to
increase the access of Wisconsin’s children to these schools. This can be accomplished by expanding
the number of charter-school authorizers, as well as the purview of existing operators. Finally, the
econometric projections in this report suggest that charter schools might be able to further outperform
traditional schools if given more equal funding. If tax dollars are allowed to follow students regardless
of where they attend school, charter school students may stand to benefit tremendously.
Bang for the Buck
16

Endnotes
1. New legislation has expanded this authority to the UW System and certain Technical Colleges.
2. For some examples, see Grosskopf, Shawna, Kathy Hayes and Lori Taylor. 2009. “The Relative
Efficiency of Charter Schools.” Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics 80: 67-87, and Wolf,
Patrick J., Albert Cheng, Meagan Batdorff, Larry Maloney, Jay May and Sheree Speakman. 2014
“The Productivity of Public Charter Schools.” School Choice Demonstration Project.
3. The 2014-15 WKCE in 4th, 8th, and 10th grade Science and 2015 Badger Exam in 4th and 8th
grade Math (See page 12 for limitations on these tests).
4. Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary School Districts: School Year
2011-12. National Center for Education Statistics.
5. Previous research by WILL indicates that charter schools perform better than traditional public
schools when appropriate controls are included: Leuken, Marty and CJ Szafir. 2015. “Apples to
Oranges? When comparisons are made between MPCP and MPS Schools.” Wisconsin Institute
for Law and Liberty Policy Brief Vol. 2.
6. Grosskopf, Shawna, Kathy Hayes and Lori Taylor. 2009. “The Relative Efficiency of Charter
Schools.” Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics 80: 67-87
7. Gronberg, Timothy, Dennis Jansen and Lori Taylor. 2012. “The Relative Efficiency of Charter
Schools: A cost frontier approach.” Economics of Education Review 31: 302-317
8. These efficiency differences dissipate when comparisons are made to the average non-charter
campus.
9. Wolf, Patrick J., Albert Cheng, Meagan Batdorff, Larry Maloney, Jay May and Sheree Speakman.
2014 “The Productivity of Public Charter Schools.” School Choice Demonstration Project.
10. Much of the information here comes from publicharters.org
11. When federal, state, local and other sources are taken into account, MPS receives more than
$14,000 per member. Because we cannot completely account for these sources for charter
schools, we use a more conservative estimate of MPS funding. This decreases the likelihood of
finding significant differences between MPS and charter schools.
12. https://apps4.dpi.wi.gov/sfsdw/Agency_Financial_profile.aspx
13. The details of this calculation can be found in the “methodology” section of this manuscript.
14. Budde, Ray. 1974. “Education by Charter: Restructuring School Districts.” Unpublished manuscript.
15. Budde, Ray. 1996. “The Evolution of the Charter School Concept.” Phi Delta Kappan.
16. Badger Exam results are not available for 10th grade, meaning High Schools are not included in
our Badger analyses.
17. Note that data from a small number of schools was not available online and is thus missing from
this analysis. A full list of the included schools and their efficiency scores is found in appendix B
and C of this manuscript.
18. It would be possible to average scores at the grade level. This analysis produces very similar
results.
19. The 80% cutoff was chosen because it approximately represents schools at or above the mean
free-and-reduced lunch in our sample, 81.3%.
20. Leuken, Marty and CJ Szafir. 2015. “Apples to Oranges? When comparisons are made between
MPCP and MPS Schools.” Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty Policy Brief Vol. 2.
Bang for the Buck
17

Note: Below is a list of all schools in our sample in descending order of their efficiency score. Non-MPS schools have their
charter school type in parentheses.
Appendix A. Efficiency Scores: All Schools
WKCE
School name Efficiency
Badger Exam
School name Efficiency
DOWNTOWN MONTESSORRI (Indp) 0.402581 DOWNTOWN MONTESSORRI (Indp) 0.333347
WOODLANDS (Indp) 0.378849 WOODLANDS (Indp) 0.32309
MIL. COLLEGE PREP -36TH ST (Indp) 0.348164 ROCKETSHIP S. COMM. PREP (Indp) 0.275704
HIGHLAND COMMUNITY (Non-Instr) 0.335793 MIL. GERMAN IMMERSION 0.273134
CARMEN HS CAMPUS (Non-Instr) 0.330105 SEEDS OF HEALTH ELEMENTARY (Indp) 0.270492
MARYLAND MONTESSORRI 0.327987 BRUCE GUADALUPE (Indp) 0.270173
BRUCE GUADALUPE (Indp) 0.327146 MARYLAND MONTESSORRI 0.265533
VERITAS HS (Indp) 0.319887 MEIR 0.260628
MIL. GERMAN IMMERSION 0.315451 MIL. SPANISH IMMERSION 0.259884
21ST CENTURY PREPATORY (Indp) 0.314315 WHITMAN ELEMENTARY 0.259884
MEIR 0.313533 CENTRAL CITY CYBER (Indp) 0.259209
SEEDS OF HEALTH ELEMENTARY (Indp) 0.310309 HAPA-AMERICAN PEACE ACAD. (Non-Instr) 0.253931
HAPA-AMERICAN PEACE ACAD. (Non-Instr) 0.301613 WHITTIER ELEMENTARY (Instr) 0.251335
HONEY CREEK ELEMENTARY (Instr) 0.298725 MIL. COLLEGE PREPATORY -36TH ST (Indp) 0.248899
WHITTIER ELEMENTARY (Instr) 0.297498 HONEY CREEK ELEMENTARY (Instr) 0.242647
KING INTERNATIONAL 0.296689 CURTIN ELEMENTARY 0.236363
BURDICK ELEMENTARY 0.296282 COOPER ELEMENTARY 0.22732
MIL. FRENCH IMMERSION 0.295415 ACAD. OF ACCELERATED LEARNING 0.225368
ROCKETSHIP SOUTHSIDE COMMUNITY PREP (Indp) 0.29485 HUMBOLDT PARK ELEMENTARY 0.224421
CENTRAL CITY CYBER (Indp) 0.293941 MIL. COLLEGE PREP -38TH ST (Non-Instr) 0.219764
FAIRVIEW ELEMENTARY 0.292991 LOWELL ELEMENTARY 0.219277
MIL. SPANISH IMMERSION 0.292369 WEDGEWOOD PARK 0.213762
CLEMENT AVENUE ELEMENTARY 0.292369 FAIRVIEW ELEMENTARY 0.208498
COOPER ELEMENTARY 0.289933 FERNWOOD MONTESSORI 0.208219

TENOR HS (Indp) 0.287191 IDEAL (Instr) 0.207604
ACADEMY OF ACCELERATED LEARNING 0.286636 N. POINT LIGHTHOUSE CHARTER 0.207519
REAGAN COLLEGE PREPATORY 0.285535 21ST CENTURY PREPATORY 0.205097
ALBA (Instr) 0.28515 BURDICK ELEMENTARY 0.203466
MIL. OF LANGUAGES 0.284346 ALBA (Instr) 0.202815
WHITMAN ELEMENTARY 0.283509 MIL. COLLEGE PREP -LLYOD ST 0.201762
CAPITOL WEST ACADEMY (Indp) 0.282964 GREENFIELD BILLINGUAL 0.200505
LA CAUSA CHARTER (Non-Instr) 0.281919 MIL. French IMMERSION 0.198273
WEDGEWOOD PARK 0.281046 HIGHLAND COMMUNITY (Non-Instr) 0.193649
MIL. COLLEGE PREP -LLYOD ST (Non-Instr) 0.281043 NINETY-FIFTH ST. ELEMENTARY 0.192839
ALLCOTT ELEMENTARY 0.279657 MIL. ENV. SCIENCE ACADEMY (Non-Instr) 0.191461
MIL. ENV. SCIENCE ACADEMY (Non-Instr) 0.277618 GARLAND ELEMENTARY 0.188426
NINETY-FIFTH ST. ELEMENTARY 0.27465 MIL. OF LANGUAGES 0.188416
UNIVERSAL ACAD. FOR THE COLLEGE BOUND (Non-Instr) 0.274364 VIEAU ELEMENTARY 0.188043
MIL. COLLEGE PREPATORY -38TH ST (Non-Instr) 0.271781 CLEMENT AVENUE ELEMENTARY 0.186914
KINGS ACADEMY (Indp) 0.271727 LA CAUSA CHARTER (Non-Instr) 0.186633
MIL. ACADEMY OF SCIENCE (Indp) 0.270737 VICTORY ELEMENTARY 0.185448
HUMBOLDT PARK ELEMENTARY 0.269692 MIL. MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY (Indp) 0.183802
CURTIN ELEMENTARY 0.268923 KLUGE ELEMENTARY 0.183775
LOWELL ELEMENTARY 0.268005 MIL. PARKSIDE 0.181775
GARLAND ELEMENTARY 0.267364 LINCOLN AVE. ELEMENTARY 0.17979
IDEAL (Instr) 0.266485 PARKVIEW ELEMENTARY 0.179625
MIL. PARKSIDE 0.2657 CAPITOL WEST ACADEMY (Indp) 0.177383
FERNWOOD MONTESSORI 0.26136 SILVER SPRING ELEMENTARY 0.176865
BURBANK ELEMENTARY 0.261082 KILBOURNE ELEMENTARY 0.17635
TROWBRIDGE ELEMENTARY 0.258116 GRANT ELEMENTARY 0.17408
URBAN DAY 0.255233 EMERSON ELEMENTARY 0.173256
GREENFIELD BILLINGUAL 0.254776 MORSE MARSHALL 0.171776
EMERSON ELEMENTARY 0.254234 MIL. ACADEMY OF SCIENCE (Indp) 0.170939
CRAIG MONTESSORI 0.253603 ALLCOTT ELEMENTARY 0.170206
ZABLOCKI ELEMENTARY 0.253045 MIL. SCHOLARS CHARTER (Indp) 0.169939

GRANT ELEMENTARY 0.251762 ZABLOCKI ELEMENTARY 0.168484
FRATNEY ELEMENTARY 0.251615 MITCHELL ELEMENTARY 0.168014
BARTON ELEMENTARY 0.250602 LONGFELLOW ELEMENTARY 0.167857
LONGFELLOW ELEMENTARY 0.250147 MANITOBA ELEMENTARY 0.167591
MANITOBA ELEMENTARY 0.249376 BURBANK ELEMENTARY 0.167244
MIL. COMMUNITY CYBER HS (Non-Instr) 0.248454 BRYANT ELEMENTARY 0.164926
VIEAU ELEMENTARY 0.24841 HAWLEY ENV. (Instr) 0.164284
MORGANDALE ELEMENTARY 0.247746 TROWBRIDGE ELEMENTARY 0.163072
LINCOLN AVE. ELEMENTARY 0.247539 PIERCE ELEMENTARY 0.162427
SILVER SPRING ELEMENTARY 0.247122 MORGANDALE ELEMENTARY 0.160128
VICTORY ELEMENTARY 0.24669 CRAIG MONTESSORI 0.1589
HARTFORD AVE. ELEMENTARY 0.245065 URBAN DAY (Indp) 0.158639
AUDOBON TECH & COMM MS 0.244243 FOREST HOME ELEMENTARY 0.156881
DOERFLER ELEMENTARY 0.243817 BARTON ELEMENTARY 0.156443
RIVERSIDE HS 0.243335 ROGERS ST. ACADEMY 0.155248
MIL. MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY (Indp) 0.242745 GOODRICH ELEMENTARY 0.153681
MIL. SCHOLARS CHARTER 0.241179 HAYES BILLINGUAL 0.153331
KILBOURNE ELEMENTARY 0.240392 KING IB MIDDLE 0.152744
KING IB MIDDLE 0.239963 CONGRESS ELEMENTARY 0.1512
MITCHELL ELEMENTARY 0.239887 KAGEL ELEMENTARY 0.150361
CARMEN MS/HS (Non-Instr) 0.2396 HARTFORD AVE. ELEMENTARY 0.150245
KAGEL ELEMENTARY 0.239211 NOVA 0.146185
NORTH POINT LIGHTHOUSE CHARTER (Indp) 0.23859 MIL. ACAD. OF CHINESE LANGUAGE 0.146092
ALLEN-FIELD ELEMENTARY 0.238072 BUS. AND ECON. ACAD. OF MIL. 0.146043
HAWLEY ENVIRONMENTAL (Instr) 0.23755 THURSTON WOODS ELEMENTARY 0.14562
NEESKARA ELEMENTARY 0.23668 RILEY ELEMENTARY 0.145411
AUDOBON TECH & COMM HS 0.233628 STUART ELEMENTARY 0.14519
KLUGE ELEMENTARY 0.233305 DOERFLER ELEMENTARY 0.1445
FOREST HOME ELEMENTARY 0.231974 AUDOBON TECH & COMM 0.14328
GOODRICH ELEMENTARY 0.230351 HAWTHORNE ELEMENTARY 0.143139
SIEFERT ELEMENTARY 0.228811 CARSON ACADEMY 0.143077

BUSINESS AND ECON ACAD OF MIL. (Non-Instr) 0.227503 FIFTY-THIRD ST ELEMENTARY 0.141144
MORSE MARSHALL 0.225052 METCALF ELEMENTARY 0.14093
CONGRESS ELEMENTARY 0.22504 STORY ELEMENTARY 0.139773
RILEY ELEMENTARY 0.224899 GAENSLEN ELEMENTARY 0.139365
MIL. HS OF THE ARTS 0.22415 RIVER TRAIL ELEMENTARY 0.138792
PARKVIEW ELEMENTARY 0.223886 SHERMAN ELEMENTARY 0.137348
HAWTHORNE ELEMENTARY 0.223338 FRANKLIN ELEMENTARY 0.137274
RIVER TRAIL ELEMENTARY 0.222797 NEESKARA ELEMENTARY 0.137235
ROGERS ST. ACADEMY 0.221651 UNIVERSAL ACAD/COLLEGE BOUND (Non-Instr) 0.137228
BAY VIEW HS 0.219417 ALLEN-FIELD ELEMENTARY 0.136204
BRYANT ELEMENTARY 0.219277 MAPLE TREE ELEMENTARY 0.135591
THOREAU ELEMENTARY 0.218194 STARMS DISCOVERY 0.134435
LINCOLN MS 0.218038 LINCOLN MS 0.134134
STUART ELEMENTARY 0.215796 MIL. SIGN LANGUAGE ELEMENTARY 0.133227
GAENSLEN ELEMENTARY 0.214424 BRUCE ELEMENTARY 0.132895
BRUCE ELEMENTARY 0.214404 BETHUNE ACADEMY 0.132311
HAYES BILLINGUAL 0.213626 CLEMENS ELEMENTARY 0.132108
TOWSEND ELEMENTARY 0.213518 KEEFE AVE ELEMENTARY 0.131794
PIERCE ELEMENTARY 0.212865 DANIELS PREPATORY ACADEMY 0.131566
EIGHTY FIRST ST ELEMENTARY 0.212865 JACKSON ELEMENTARY 0.131354
HAMPTON ELEMENTARY 0.212632 KINGS ACADEMY (Indp) 0.131287
CASS ST ELEMENTARY 0.21235 SIEFERT ELEMENTARY 0.131191
CLARKE ST ELEMENTARY 0.21178 CLARKE ST ELEMENTARY 0.130735
DANIELS PREPATORY ACADEMY 0.211466 FRATNEY ELEMENTARY 0.129942
MIL. ACADEMY OF CHINESE LANGUAGE 0.210023 LAFOLLETTE ELEMENTARY 0.129739
HAMILTON HS 0.208835 GRANTOSA DR ELEMENTARY 0.128981
AUER AVENUE ELEMENTARY 0.20724 THOREAU ELEMENTARY 0.128465
FIFTY-THIRD ST ELEMENTARY 0.207095 HOLMES ELEMENTARY 0.127032
HOLMES ELEMENTARY 0.20601 EIGHTY FIRST ST 0.126972
MACDOWELL MONTESSORI 0.205496 WIS. CONS OF LIFELONG LEARNING 0.126229
STARMS DISCOVERY 0.204725 BROWNING ELEMENTARY 0.125301

MAPLE TREE ELEMENTARY 0.204658 HAMPTON ELEMENTARY 0.124866
ESCUELA VERDE (Indp) 0.204225 CASS ST ELEMENTARY 0.124592
WESTSIDE ACADEMY 0.203858 HI-MOUNT ELEMENTARY 0.124469
HI-MOUNT ELEMENTARY 0.202409 WESTSIDE ACADEMY 0.124396
STORY ELEMENTARY 0.202079 KING JR. ELEMENTARY 0.124329
KEEFE AVE ELEMENTARY 0.200801 HOPKINS-LLYOD 0.122633
ELM CREATIVE ARTS ELEMENTARY 0.20076 ROOSEVELT MS 0.121512
LAFOLLETTE ELEMENTARY 0.200327 ENGLEBURG ELEMENTARY 0.120761
ENGLEBURG ELEMENTARY 0.200327 MACDOWELL MONTESSORI 0.120479
GRANTOSA DR ELEMENTARY 0.199971 TOWSEND ELEMENTARY 0.117741
WIS. CONS OF LIFELONG LEARNING 0.19792 CARVER ACADEMY 0.115077
BETHUNE ACADEMY 0.19784 BROWN ST ACADEMY 0.113321
SHERMAN ELEMENTARY 0.197233 AUER AVENUE ELEMENTARY 0.109832
MIL. COLLEGIATE ACADEMY (Indp) 0.195966 BARBEE ELEMENTARY 0.109638
CARSON ACADEMY 0.195374 ELM CREATIVE ARTS ELEMENTARY 0.107367
ALLIANCE 0.194913 LANCASTER ELEMENTARY 0.106256
KING JR. ELEMENTARY 0.193354 OBAMA SCH. OF CAREER AND TECH 0.105931
MIL. SIGN LANGUAGE ELEMENTARY 0.193241
METCALF ELEMENTARY 0.192206
CLEMENS ELEMENTARY 0.192206
BROWNING ELEMENTARY 0.191015
THURSTON WOODS ELEMENTARY 0.189637
FRANKLIN ELEMENTARY 0.18929
ROOSEVELT MS 0.188876
LANCASTER ELEMENTARY 0.18352
NOVA 0.17983
JACKSON ELEMENTARY 0.177193
CARVER ACADEMY 0.176948
BROWN ST ACADEMY 0.17352
SHALOM HS 0.172764
GRANDVIEW HS 0.169763

WHS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 0.167557
BARBEE ELEMENTARY 0.162427
JAMES MADISON ACADEMIC CAMPUS 0.1622
SOUTH DIVISION HS 0.162106
TRANSITION HS 0.161178
NOVA TECH (Non-Instr) 0.160827
HOPKINS-LLYOD 0.159772
ASSATA 0.159179
OBAMA OF CAREER AND TECH. ED. 0.158367
PULASKI HS 0.158275
GROPPI HS 0.15593
BANNER PREPARATORY (Non-Instr) 0.153169
COMMUNITY HS (Instr) 0.149665
VINCENT HS 0.148134
NORTH DIVISION HS 0.144111
BRADLEY TECHNOLOGY HS 0.143275
PROJECT STAY 0.132262

Note: Below is a list of schools in our sample with 80% or greater free and reduced lunch students in descending order of their
efficiency score. Non-traditional MPS schools have their charter school type in parentheses. A small number of schools for
which data was missing are omitted from this analysis.
Appendix B. Efficiency Scores- 80% Plus Free and Reduced Lunch
WKCE
School Name Efficiency
Badger
School Name Efficiency
CARMEN HS (Non-Instr) 0.330105 SEEDS OF HEALTH ELEMENTARY (Indp) 0.270492
VERITAS HS (Indp) 0.319887 CENTRAL CITY CYBER (Indp) 0.259209
SEEDS OF HEALTH ELEMENTARY (Indp) 0.310309 CURTIN ELEMENTARY 0.236363
CENTRAL CITY CYBER (Indp) 0.293941 MIL. COLLEGE PREPATORY -38TH ST (Non-Instr) 0.219764
TENOR HS (Indp) 0.287191 LOWELL ELEMENTARY 0.219277
ALBA (Instr) 0.28515 WEDGEWOOD PARK 0.213762
LA CAUSA CHARTER (Non-Instr) 0.281919 NORTH POINT LIGHTHOUSE CHARTER (Indp) 0.207519
WEDGEWOOD PARK 0.281046 ALBA (Instr) 0.202815
MIL. COLLEGE PREPATORY -LLYOD ST (Non-Instr) 0.281043 MIL. COLLEGE PREPATORY -LLYOD ST (Non-Instr) 0.201762
MIL. ENV. SCIENCE ACADEMY (Non-Instr) 0.277618 GREENFIELD BILLINGUAL 0.200505
UNIVERSAL ACAD./College Bound (Non-Instr) 0.274364 MIL. ENV. SCIENCE ACADEMY (Non-Instr) 0.191461
MIL. COLLEGE PREPATORY -38TH ST (Non-Instr) 0.271781 VIEAU ELEMENTARY 0.188043
MIL. ACADEMY OF SCIENCE (Indp) 0.270737 LA CAUSA CHARTER (Non-Instr) 0.186633
CURTIN ELEMENTARY 0.268923 VICTORY ELEMENTARY 0.185448
LOWELL ELEMENTARY 0.268005 MIL. MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY (Indp) 0.183802
BURBANK ELEMENTARY 0.261082 KLUGE ELEMENTARY 0.183775
URBAN DAY (Indp) 0.255233 LINCOLN AVE. ELEMENTARY 0.17979
GREENFIELD BILLINGUAL 0.254776 PARKVIEW ELEMENTARY 0.179625
EMERSON ELEMENTARY 0.254234 SILVER SPRING ELEMENTARY 0.176865
ZABLOCKI ELEMENTARY 0.253045 KILBOURNE ELEMENTARY 0.17635
GRANT ELEMENTARY 0.251762 GRANT ELEMENTARY 0.17408
BARTON ELEMENTARY 0.250602 EMERSON ELEMENTARY 0.173256
LONGFELLOW ELEMENTARY 0.250147 MORSE MARSHALL 0.171776

VIEAU ELEMENTARY 0.24841 MIL. ACADEMY OF SCIENCE (Indp) 0.170939
LINCOLN AVE. ELEMENTARY 0.247539 MIL. SCHOLARS CHARTER 0.169939
SILVER SPRING ELEMENTARY 0.247122 ZABLOCKI ELEMENTARY 0.168484
VICTORY ELEMENTARY 0.24669 LONGFELLOW ELEMENTARY 0.167857
AUDOBON TECHNOLOGY & COMMUNICATION MS 0.244243 BURBANK ELEMENTARY 0.167244
DOERFLER ELEMENTARY 0.243817 BRYANT ELEMENTARY 0.164926
MIL. MATH AND SCIENCE ACADEMY (Indp) 0.242745 PIERCE ELEMENTARY 0.162427
MIL. SCHOLARS CHARTER (Indp) 0.241179 URBAN DAY (Indp) 0.158639
KILBOURNE ELEMENTARY 0.240392 FOREST HOME ELEMENTARY 0.156881
CARMEN MS/HS (Non-Instr) 0.23960 BARTON ELEMENTARY 0.156443
KAGEL ELEMENTARY 0.239211 ROGERS ST. ACADEMY 0.155248
NORTH POINT LIGHTHOUSE CHARTER 0.23859 GOODRICH ELEMENTARY 0.153681
NEESKARA ELEMENTARY 0.23668 HAYES BILLINGUAL 0.153331
AUDOBON TECHNOLOGY & COMMUNICATION HS 0.233628 CONGRESS ELEMENTARY 0.1512
KLUGE ELEMENTARY 0.233305 KAGEL ELEMENTARY 0.150361
FOREST HOME ELEMENTARY 0.231974 NOVA 0.146185
GOODRICH ELEMENTARY 0.230351 MIL. ACADEMY OF CHINESE LANGUAGE 0.146092
SIEFERT ELEMENTARY 0.228811 BUSINESS AND ECON ACAD. OF MIL. (Non-Instr) 0.146043
BUSINESS AND ECON ACAD OF MIL. (Non-Instr) 0.227503 THURSTON WOODS ELEMENTARY 0.14562
MORSE MARSHALL 0.225052 RILEY ELEMENTARY 0.145411
CONGRESS ELEMENTARY 0.22504 STUART ELEMENTARY 0.14519
RILEY ELEMENTARY 0.224899 DOERFLER ELEMENTARY 0.1445
PARKVIEW ELEMENTARY 0.223886 AUDOBON TECHNOLOGY & COMMUNICATION MS 0.14328
HAWTHORNE ELEMENTARY 0.223338 HAWTHORNE ELEMENTARY 0.143139
RIVER TRAIL ELEMENTARY 0.222797 CARSON ACADEMY 0.143077
ROGERS ST. ACADEMY 0.221651 FIFTY-THIRD ST ELEMENTARY 0.141144
BAY VIEW HS 0.219417 METCALF ELEMENTARY 0.14093
BRYANT ELEMENTARY 0.219277 STORY ELEMENTARY 0.139773
THOREAU ELEMENTARY 0.218194 GAENSLEN ELEMENTARY 0.139365
LINCOLN MS 0.218038 RIVER TRAIL ELEMENTARY 0.138792
STUART ELEMENTARY 0.215796 SHERMAN ELEMENTARY 0.137348

GAENSLEN ELEMENTARY 0.214424 FRANKLIN ELEMENTARY 0.137228
BRUCE ELEMENTARY 0.214404 NEESKARA ELEMENTARY 0.137274
HAYES BILLINGUAL 0.213626 UNIVERSAL ACAD/COLLEGE BOUND (Non-Instr) 0.137235
TOWSEND ELEMENTARY 0.213518 ALLEN-FIELD ELEMENTARY 0.136204
PIERCE ELEMENTARY 0.212865 MAPLE TREE ELEMENTARY 0.135591
EIGHTY FIRST ST ELEMENTARY 0.212865 STARMS DISCOVERY 0.134435
HAMPTON ELEMENTARY 0.212632 LINCOLN MS 0.134134
CASS ST ELEMENTARY 0.21235 MIL. SIGN LANGUAGE ELEMENTARY 0.133227
CLARKE ST ELEMENTARY 0.21178 BRUCE ELEMENTARY 0.132895
DANIELS PREPATORY ACADEMY 0.211466 BETHUNE ACADEMY 0.132311
MIL. ACADEMY OF CHINESE LANGUAGE 0.210023 CLEMENS ELEMENTARY 0.132108
HAMILTON HS 0.208835 KEEFE AVE ELEMENTARY 0.131794
AUER AVENUE ELEMENTARY 0.20724 DANIELS PREPATORY ACADEMY 0.131566
FIFTY-THIRD ST ELEMENTARY 0.207095 JACKSON ELEMENTARY 0.131354
HOLMES ELEMENTARY 0.20601 SIEFERT ELEMENTARY 0.131191
STARMS DISCOVERY 0.204725 CLARKE ST ELEMENTARY 0.130735
MAPLE TREE ELEMENTARY 0.204658 LAFOLLETTE ELEMENTARY 0.129739
WESTSIDE ACADEMY 0.203858 GRANTOSA DR ELEMENTARY 0.128981
HI-MOUNT ELEMENTARY 0.202409 THOREAU ELEMENTARY 0.128465
STORY ELEMENTARY 0.202079 HOLMES ELEMENTARY 0.127032
KEEFE AVE ELEMENTARY 0.200801 EIGHTY FIRST ST ELEMENTARY 0.126972
ELM CREATIVE ARTS ELEMENTARY 0.20076 WIS. CONSERVATORY OF LIFELONG LEARNING 0.126229
ENGLEBURG ELEMENTARY 0.200327 BROWNING ELEMENTARY 0.125301
LAFOLLETTE ELEMENTARY 0.200327 HAMPTON ELEMENTARY 0.124866
GRANTOSA DR ELEMENTARY 0.199971 CASS ST ELEMENTARY 0.124592
WIS. CONSERVATORY OF LIFELONG LEARNING 0.19792 HI-MOUNT ELEMENTARY 0.124469
BETHUNE ACADEMY 0.19784 WESTSIDE ACADEMY 0.124396
SHERMAN ELEMENTARY 0.197233 KING JR. ELEMENTARY 0.124329
CARSON ACADEMY 0.195374 HOPKINS-LLYOD 0.122633
KING JR. ELEMENTARY 0.193354 ROOSEVELT MS 0.121512
MIL. SIGN LANGUAGE ELEMENTARY 0.193241 ENGLEBURG ELEMENTARY 0.120761

METCALF ELEMENTARY 0.192206 TOWSEND ELEMENTARY 0.117741
CLEMENS ELEMENTARY 0.192206 CARVER ACADEMY 0.115077
BROWNING ELEMENTARY 0.191015 BROWN ST. ACADEMY 0.113321
THURSTON WOODS ELEMENTARY 0.189637 AUER AVENUE ELEMENTARY 0.109832
FRANKLIN ELEMENTARY 0.18929 BARBEE ELEMENTARY 0.109638
ROOSEVELT MS 0.188876 ELM CREATIVE ARTS ELEMENTARY 0.107367
LANCASTER ELEMENTARY 0.18352 LANCASTER ELEMENTARY 0.106256
NOVA 0.17983 OBAMA SCH. OF CAREER AND TECH 0.105931
JACKSON ELEMENTARY 0.177193
CARVER ACADEMY 0.176948
BROWN ST ACADEMY 0.17352
GRANDVIEW HS 0.169763
WHS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 0.167557
BARBEE ELEMENTARY 0.162427
JAMES MADISON ACADEMIC CAMPUS 0.1622
SOUTH DIVISION HS 0.162106
HOPKINS-LLYOD 0.159772
ASSATA 0.159179
PULASKI HS 0.158275
OBAMA OF CAREER AND TECH. ED. 0.158367
GROPPI HS 0.15593
BANNER PREPARATORY (Non-Instr) 0.153169
COMMUNITY HS (Instr) 0.149665
VINCENT HS 0.148134
NORTH DIVISION HS 0.144111
BRADLEY TECHNOLOGY HS 0.143275