Position Paper

Private/Public Partnerships in Education

Since 1997, the J.A. and Kathryn Albertson Foundation has worked to measurably improve education in Idaho. Working with schools, school districts, higher education and state education agencies has convinced us that effective public/private partnerships are a critical part of lasting positive change.

But, effective public/private partnerships are tough to get right. In the last decade, we have invested more than $300 million in education programs to boost student reading scores, provide computers and technology, offer cutting-edge professional development, build a statewide data system, and more.  Much of what we invested in taught us what not to do when working within the model of public/private partnerships. Key lessons:

• The blended certificate program started in 2000 provided scholarships. Unfortunately, money was left on the table, because the criteria was too narrowly defined, preventing students from applying.  We also expected our higher education partners would market and recruit for the scholarships, which in some cases didn’t happen.
• In 1998, the Foundation offered the Waterford Reader, an animated software program to improve reading, to Idaho Kindergarten classes – public and private. If effective, we required school districts to sustain it by incorporating costs into existing budgets or by eliminating less effective programs. Evaluations proved the Waterford was very effective, but most schools did not maintain the software.
• The Foundation’s Community College Initiative (2006) included our pledge of financial support for a new, independent community college. For 25 years state officials tried to build one in the Treasure Valley, with no success. With the support from businesses and a bold grassroots get-out-the-vote effort by citizens and businesses in the valley, the College of Western Idaho was created. Due to political delays and detours, the goal of creating increased access was set back another two years. Treasure Valley students were forced to put their education on hold for 29 years due to the lack of access to a community college. 

Why did these and other efforts not work or suffer significant setbacks? Is Idaho not ready for success? We don’t think this is the case. Success is possible, but it requires accountability, political will and breaking down the “status quo” culture in our current education system.

Working with the Education Alliance of Idaho we analyzed five successful model states—Utah, North Carolina, Texas, South Dakota, and Minnesota–all had experienced success in areas that Idaho needed to improve. We identified what they used to reach their goals and found they had the following fundamentals for success in common:

1: They used data. When international data comparisons became available for science and math, Minnesota took the bold step to participate in the TIMSS testing – not only as a state, but as a “nation.” Nation status meant more sampling and analysis of student test data. The data convinced Minnesota to revise its math standards. Today, the state is able to compete nationally and internationally in science and math.

2: They put a bold plan in place and made it public. South Dakota 2025 includes strong collaboration between the Governor’s Office, Public Television, Department of Labor, and the Department of Education. The plan also points out the necessity to think at least 10 years out.

3: They didn’t wait for money to act. To help increase college participation, Utah education officials told school district superintendents they would be required to hire more counselors. When cash-strapped districts balked, the state listened. Instead of mandating that districts hire anyway, or at the opposite extreme have the state abandon its goal, their superintendents had to submit a business plan in the interim. In this way, Utah would be ready to implement and achieve their goal, once the economic situation improved.

4: They were transparent and accountable to the public and stakeholders. Texas releases its TAKS test (equivalent to Idaho’s ISATs) to the public every three years. Everyone has the chance to view and comment on the test, better understand levels of difficulty, what’s taught, and helps teachers and districts determine if they need to teach differently. The result is increased public satisfaction and trust in the testing process.

5: They had a continuous improvement process in place. North Carolina’s Former Governor, Jim Hunt, established a cabinet of non-partisan education leaders and stakeholders, which has remained past his administration. They address big-ticket items and have systems in place to accommodate ongoing improvements. Minnesota, Utah, Texas, and South Dakota each had a process in place, and each was entirely different.

These fundamentals aren’t complex. In fact, these usually save money and time and are tied to real reform. With these types of fundamentals in place, Idaho will be able to change when change is called for, and without them, we won’t. Programs will come and go, but lasting reform will not be attained. Unfortunately, public funding for education will continue whether these fundamentals are in place or not, but until real signs of reform are in place, will the private sector continue to invest?