4 ms·

It's very simple, just attach the money to the child and then let the parents determine what school they go to.

• acdha 5y ago
  That helps a lot but there are some challenges: e.g. you have therapists at a big school with lots of students and they’re all reasonably fully booked but a small charter needs 15% of a person in three different specialties.
  • sokoloff 5y ago
    Or worse, the charter school interview and disciplinary practices ensure that these kids are not admitted or are expelled and the small charter school then takes the full payment but needs 0% of a specialist.
    • dantheman 5y ago
      The schools, can share a specialist on different days of the week, or if there is an economy of scale then parents will choose it. Sure there may be schools that handle kids with disciplinary issues, like they do today in the public school system.
      • kristjansson 5y ago
        I think the point is that, like a lot of cost problems, a relatively small proportion of users end up accounting for a relatively large share of costs. Just excluding those expensive users (implicitly or explicitly) is a ‘neat’ way to reduce costs and improve outcomes at a particular school. Unfortunately under a funding-follows-kids system that leaves a small population with $X in funding that costs $10X to serve. Maybe grouping all of those users provides enough economy of scale, but that’s not obvious, and sounds a bit like an asylum to boot.
• analog31 5y ago
  It's not a market. There's no way for parents to make an informed choice, no way to opt out, no way for the state to opt out of serving as a backup. Also, massively inefficient in terms of minivan miles per pupil per day.