I have been reading tax forms -- 990s, the form of the nonprofit organization (no 1040s for them).
It might sound boring, but I guess that all depends upon whose tax forms they are.
Two 990s are the subject of this post. The first is the 2011 (August 2011 to July 2012) 990 for Michelle Rhee's reform lobbying organization, StudentsFirst (SF). The second is the 2011 990 from the lesser-known SF sister organization, StudentsFirst Institute (SFI). Both forms were signed by Michelle Rhee on June 13, 2013 and filed with the IRS in Ogden UT on June 18, 2013.
The Best of Both Worlds: 501(c)3 and 501(c)4
Both SF and SFI are nonprofits. However, SF is a 501(c)4, and SFI, a 501(c)3. A 501(c)3 is limited in the percent of its budget that it can devote to lobbying. (Violation of this restriction is the reason that Common Cause filed its whistleblower complaint with the IRS against the American Legislative Exchange Council [ALEC] in April 2012.) However, a 501(c)4 does not have such a restriction. Therefore, SFI needs SF in order to unleash as much lobbying as it likes in statehouses around the country. Here is the 501(c)4 freedom that causes reformer faces to light up:
501(c)(4) organizations can engage in unlimited lobbying so long as it pertains to the organization's mission. 501(c)(3) organizations are not permitted to engage in political activity, endorse or oppose political candidates, or donate money or time to political campaigns, but 501(c)(4) organizations can do all of the above. [Emphasis added.]
One might wonder why Rhee is operating both 501(c)3 and 501(c)4 organizations. After all, why not just operate SF, the 501(c)4, if the goal is unregulated lobbying?
Tax deductions. As a 501(c)3, SFI allows for deductions not allowed to the SF 501(c)4:
In regards to supporting these organizations, donations made to 501(c)(3) organizations are deductible to the full extent of the law as charitable contributions. Donations made to 501(c)(4) organizations are not deductible, though some businesses who make these contributions often write them off as advertising or business expenses...
If you want the best of both worlds, you can have two separate but affiliated organizations -- one a charitable 501(c)(3) and the other a 501(c)(4) lobbying arm. Many trade organizations lobby extensively on behalf of their members, but have an affiliated 501(c)(3) foundation for charitable giving and educational purposes. [Emphasis added.]
Rhee wants "the best of both worlds."
(Rhee has a second 501(c)4, the Hartford, CT-based Great New England Public Schools Alliance (GNEPSA). GNEPSA portrays itself as "grass roots." However, it contributors include NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the self-proclaimed "most trusted educator" Steve Perry, and, of course, SF.)
Rhee Is on a Mission
Each of Rhee's two tax forms requires the respective organization to state its mission. Here's the SF mission as stated on its 2011 990:
Our mission is to build a movement to defend the interests of children in public education and pursue transformative reform so that America has the best education system in the world.
And the SFI mission, as noted on its 2011 990:
Our mission is to research and develop model policies that defend the interest of children in public education and pursue transformative reform, so that America has the best education system in the world.
One should realize that StudentsFirst was founded by the same Michelle Rhee who made children's mouths bleed and spoke casually (and fondly) of the incident years later to an audience of new teachers. This is the same Michelle Rhee seriously implicated in cheating during her time as DC chancellor and who was never thoroughly and competently investigated. I note as much in my post on the highly-questionable DC IMPACT study. (Whistleblower and former DC principal Adell Cotherne discusses the shoddy nature of DC teacher evaluation in this interview.)
In order to gain a better sense of the SF "mission," consider this excerpt from Reuters reporter Stephanie Simon:
Schools don't need more money, Rhee says; they need to be held accountable for how they spend it.
Rhee wants all teachers to be evaluated in large measure by how much they can boost their students' scores on standardized tests. Scores are fed into a formula that rates how much "value" a teacher has added to each student over the year. Rhee says teachers who consistently don't add value should be fired; those who do well should be rewarded with six-figure salaries.
She has also successfully pushed legislation in several states, including Florida, Michigan, Nevada and Tennessee, to abolish seniority systems that protect veteran teachers and put rookies first in line for layoffs without regard to job performance.
Also high on Rhee's agenda: giving parents more choices. She calls for expanding charter schools, which are publicly funded but often run by private companies. She wants to let parents seize control of failing public schools and push out most of the staff. She also supports tax-funded vouchers, which can be used to pay private and parochial school tuition, for families living in neighborhoods with poor public schools. [Emphasis added.]
In short, Rhee is full speed ahead for "reforms" that in no way touch her life. She has millions. She has not been held accountable for cheating in DC. Via her TFA experience, Rhee exited the classroom before she faced any evaluation- and she was never held accountable for taping her students' mouths. She has been politically elevated by philanthropic reform money- no seniority issues for her. And she is for charters, vouchers, and "parent trigger" -- the consequences of which do not touch her privileged children.
Rhee is also connected to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), which SF endorses.
And now for those 990s.
The 990s: Overall Revenue and Top Three Program Services
In 2010, SF reported $4.6 million in revenue. The amount rose to $15.6 million in 2011.
In 2010, SFI reported $3 million in revenue, which rose to $13 million in 2011.
In 2012, SF reported the following as its first of its "three largest program services":
StudentsFirst has an active presence in state legislatures where they work to address legislative policies that promote transformative reform concerning teacher quality, parental empowerment, and fiscal responsibility. The team works to ensure proposed legislation meets the goal of transformative education reform. StudentsFirst conducts research, prepares policy briefings, hosts forums for the public and meets with legislators and members of their staff to discuss specific education strategies. Expenses: $4,116,572 [Emphasis added.]
In the second "program service," SF dares to write that its goal is to "empower teachers," among others, to "create awareness about education issues and policies." The expense: $3,300,635.
Finally, its third "service" is "to engage in electoral activity through direct support... and paid media campaigns including independent expenditures in support of candidates to further education reform." [Emphasis added.] The expense: $3,289,994.
In other words, SF is purchasing its will in public education.
SF is a lobbying machine.
As for SFI, its top three program expenses do not include the language of lobbying; however, SFI does report on "public policy development methods and analyses"; "oped articles," and "meetings, events, and workshops." The total top three expense: $6,987,719.
Let's talk about "the" board.
SF and SFI: Two Organizations; One Board; Same Employees
Both SF and SFI share the same 23-member board and the same employees. Listed below are the paid board members/employees, including their titles and combined compensation. The combined SF and SFI hours for all listed below total 40 per week.
Michelle Rhee, Founder, CEO, and Director $306,063
Dmitri Mehlhorn, Chief Operating Officer $230,019
Enoch Woodhouse, VP of Operations $89,027
Talya Stein, VP of Development $187,221
Eric Lerum, VP of National Policy $120,566
Mayyappan Sevugan, VP of Communications $115,893
Timothy Melton, VP of Legislative Affairs $59,829
Ximena Hartsock, Director of Outreach $163,249
Kathleen Delaski, Senior Advisor $166,906
Katherine Gottfredson, National Policy/Legislation Manager $134,476
Dana Peterson, State Director, $126,295
Mafara Hobson, Manager, National Marketing $123,835
Bridget Davis, State and Issue Manager $119,178.
Do not confuse "nonprofit" with "volunteer." There is money to be made as a compensated nonprofit board member.
Amid public questioning regarding Rhee's "Democrat" status, in 2013, three Democrat board members -- Stein, Sevugan, and Hartsock -- resigned from SF.
Some additional noteworthy information on SF/SFI compensated employees: Mehlhorn is the chief operating officer of Bloomberg Law; Woodhouse is a former DC Public Schools Office of Data and Accountability employee, and Eric Lerum, author of the SF position article on CCSS, is VP of National Policy for the Fordham Institute.
As for the non-compensated SF/SFI board members, a number are celebrities: Connie Chung, Bill Cosby, Jennifer Johnson, Jalen Rose. Blair Taylor is chief community officer for Starbuck's Coffee and a member of the National Assessment Governing Board (as in the Nation's Report Card). Joel Klein, the Bloomberg-appointed, former NY schools chancellor, is on the SF/FI board. It is only fitting since Klein influenced former DC Mayor Adrien Fenty to hire Rhee as chancellor.
Three non-compensated SF/SFI board members remain: David Coleman, Jason Zimba, and Ann-Margaret Michael.Both the SF and SFI FY2011 990s allude to three board members "sharing a common employer" and that such "did not impact the organization's decision to choose them as members of the board of directors."
The "common employer" is not named in either tax document.
For a detailed account of the highly nondemocratic choreography that is CCSS, see the post in which I examine the CCSS Memorandum of Understanding.
Student Achievement Partners is at the center of CCSS. They even refer to themselves as "lead architects" of CCSS on their website.
All three Student Achievement Partners "employees" left the SF/SFI boards effective June 30, 2012.
I think they were there in the first place in order to lobby for their product- CCSS.
SF 2011 Campaign Contributions
SF inserts itself in local political races by sending cash to reform-friendly candidates. As such, SF is doing its best to purchase democracy.
Below is a partial list of individuals/ organizations receiving SF campaign contributions and the amounts given. I have restricted my list to the first 15 SF campaign contributions on the list. However, the full list includes 170 contributions ranging from $300 to $2 million. (See pages 41 thru 53 of the SF 2011 990 for the full list.)
Parents and Teachers for Putting Students First (San Rafael, CA) $2 million
Better Education for NJ Kids, Inc. (New Brunswick, NJ) $200,000
MI Republican Admin Account (Lansing, MI) $40,000
Ferrell Haile for Senate (Gallatin, TN) $10,000
House Republican Caucus (Nashville, TN) $10,000
Senate Republican Caucus (Nashville, TN) $10,000
Steve Dickerson for State Senate (Nashville, TN) $10,000
Friends of Dolores Gresham (Somerville, TN) $8500
Friends of Joey Hensely (Hohenwald, TN) $8500
Aspire Michigan (China, MI) $7500
Principle Centered Leadership Committee (Miami, FL) $7000
Citizens to Elect Jamilah Nasheed (St. Louis, MO) $6700
Barry Doss for State Representative (Covington, TN) $6500
Bill Spivey for State Representative (Lewisburg, TN) $6500
Committee to Elect Richard Montgomery (Sevierville, TN) $6500
A quick read of the full list shows that SF focused its 2011 contributions to political races in Tennessee, Florida, Missouri, and Georgia.
How Much to Buy America?
In reading these tax documents, I cannot help but wonder if our democracy is such a farce that it will crumble beneath the weight of the wallets of the wealthy removed. I wonder what it will take for them to realize that they are foolishly destroying the foundation upon which they themselves stand. In their arrogant fiscal elevation they forget that even they require the foundational institutions that form our democracy -- public education being one such institution.
Handing millions over to the likes of Michelle Rhee is idiocy. Rhee is nothing more than some Frankenstein creation of bored philanthropy. Be careful, mainstream America. In promoting Rhee, you are confusing cash flow for substance.
Here's a hint: When you hear that a candidate in a local election is being outspent by 10- or 20-to-1, vote for that candidate.
Originally posted on 10-23-13 at deutsch29.wordpress.com
How will Donald Trump’s first 100 days impact YOU? Subscribe, choose the community that you most identify with or want to learn more about and we’ll send you the news that matters most once a week throughout Trump’s first 100 days in office. Learn more