Michigan

Michigan law is generally free of caps. However, it does contain caps on charter “schools of excellence” and cyber charter schools.
Michigan law allows charter “schools of excellence” - of which the first 5 must serve high school students. With the exception of statewide cyber schools, schools of excellence may only be approved within districts having a graduation rate of less than 75% for the most recent three school years for which the data are available. Michigan law includes a cap of 15 on the total number of contracts that may be issued by all statewide authorizing bodies for schools of excellence that are cyber schools. The law provides that a board of a school district, an intermediate school board, the board of a community college that is not a statewide authorizing body, or two or more public agencies acting jointly according to state law may not act as the authorizing body for more than one school of excellence that is a cyber school.

The law allows a cyber school to serve up to 2,500 students in its first year of operation, not more than 5,000 students in its second year of operation, and not more than 10,000 students in its third and subsequent years of operation. The law provides that the total statewide enrollment in cyber schools may not exceed 2% of the state’s public school student population.

Michigan law allows new start-ups and public school conversions.

Michigan law allows local school boards, intermediate school boards, community colleges, and state public universities to serve as authorizers, all subject to state board of education review for compliance with law. There is considerable authorizing activity by these authorizing entities.

The law requires that an authorizer must be accredited in order to approve additional schools in Detroit.
While the statute does not require a regular review process by an oversight body, it does provides that if the state superintendent of public instruction finds an authorizer is not engaged in appropriate continuing oversight, then it can suspend the ability of that authorizer to issue future charters.

Michigan law requires the state board of education to submit an annual report to the legislature, offering detailed information on the overall charter school program, as well as individual charter school data.

Via an assessed fee, Michigan law allows authorizers to receive up to 3% of the total state school aid to be received by their charter schools.
Michigan law provides that as public entities, all public fund expenditures for authorizers are a matter of public record. However, the law does not require specific separate reporting of authorizer fee expenditures.

Statute allows authorizers to charge a fee for other services, but states they cannot require such arrangements as a condition to issuing a contract to a school.

Michigan law includes a detailed list of items to be covered in a charter proposal. For those schools seeking to replicate the same grades at multiple locations, the law requires them to demonstrate compliance and measurable progress toward meeting goals for their existing charters if they are a current operator or provide evidence that a proposed educational model has resulted in a school making measurable progress if they are a new operator.
It should be noted that the Michigan Council of Charter School Authorizers has adopted a common set of standards. While such standards are great practice and address many of the missing requirements in our analysis, they are not required per statute or regulation.

Per statute, authorizers must issue a contract for each approved charter school, with a copy of that contract (along with a copy of the application) being sent to the state superintendent of public instruction.
Michigan law requires each contract to contain educational goals and how they will be assessed using at least the state assessment program, methods to monitor the school’s compliance with applicable laws, a process for amending the contract, all matters set forth in the application, the renewal process and standards which must include student growth as a major factor, procedures and grounds for revoking the contract, description of and address for the physical plant, and requirements and procedures for financial audits.

However, the law does not require the contract to include details regarding the responsibilities for each authorizer.

The law provides that the initial charter term may be up to 10 years, with a mandatory review at least every seven years.

Statute requires the state board of education to submit an annual report to the legislature, including detailed outcome data for each charter school (attendance statistics, dropout rate, aggregate assessment test scores) as well as financial stability and number of, and comments on, supervisory visits by the authorizing body. Although not required by statute, this information is collected through and reviewed by authorizers.
Michigan law requires an annual financial audit to be completed for each school.

Michigan law requires each authorizer to monitor their charter schools for both outcome performance and compliance with applicable laws and allows authorizers to take corrective actions.

Michigan law requires all charter contracts to detail the process and standards for renewal which must include increases in academic achievement of all groups of students as measured by assessments or other objective criteria as the most important factor in all renewal decisions. The law lists the standard grounds for revocation and also requires that procedures and grounds for revocation be included in each charter’s contract. In addition, the law requires the revocation of any charter school operating for at least four years that is in the lowest achieving 5% of all public schools in the state and in their second year of restructuring sanctions.
Michigan law does not dictate the length of renewal contracts, so authorizers are allowed to grant renewal contract term lengths based on performance.

Statute contains closure provisions regarding assets and student placement for urban high school academies. It also contains closure provisions regarding student placements and funds for other types of charter schools, but nothing about required parent notification, record transfer and asset disposition.

The law prohibits a new charter being granted to a school to open in the same location, if that school’s previous charter was revoked for performance issues or if the school would have substantially the same board of directors, leadership and curriculum offerings as the closed school.

It should be noted that the Michigan Council of Charter School Authorizers has adopted a common set of standards. While such standards are great practice and address many of the missing requirements in our analysis, they are not required per statute or regulation.

Michigan’s statutes grant the board of a charter school the ability to enter into binding legal agreements with persons or entities as necessary for the operation, management, financing, and maintenance of the charter schools.
The law requires authorizers to review – and allows them to disapprove – any agreement between a charter school and an educational management company before such an agreement is final and valid. The law provides that disapproval may only occur if the agreement is contrary to the contract or applicable law.

Statutes prohibit specifically identified family relations between members of the board of directors and officers and members of any educational management company involved in the operation of the school (with such provisions detailed in charter contract). However, it does not require existing and potential conflicts of interest between the two entities be disclosed and explained in the charter application.

The law requires authorizers to ensure that charter school governing boards operate independently of any educational management organization.

The law requires that management agreements must require the ESP to provide the charter school board at least annually all of the same information that a school district is required to disclose under law, with such information being made available to the public via the school’s website.

The law requires all teachers and administrators working at a charter school comply with the criminal background and records checks.

Michigan law requires charter schools to be organized as a non-profit corporation and clearly states that the school is a body corporate and a governmental agency.
Michigan law requires charter schools to be organized and administered under the direction of a board of directors in accordance with law and with bylaws adopted by the board of directors. Statute also requires each authorizer to adopt a resolution establishing the methods used to select board members, length of terms, and the number of members for the board of directors of each school it oversees, which means authorizers have great influence over the composition of a given charter school board.

Michigan law requires charter schools to be open to all students within the state.
Michigan law provides that charter schools cannot discriminate on the basis of intellectual or athletic ability, measures of achievement or aptitude, status as a student with a disability, or any other basis that would be illegal if used by a school district.

Michigan law provides that students enrolled in a charter school the previous year must be given enrollment preferences for future years. It also allows charter schools to give enrollment priority to siblings of existing students and to children of employees and board members.

Michigan law requires that if a charter school receives more applications than space available, then a random selection process must occur.

Michigan law requires that charter schools must abide by all laws required of traditional public schools, except being part of the collective bargaining agreement of the district in which they reside. Like traditional districts, Michigan law allows charter schools to seek waivers from the state department of education.
Michigan law requires teachers within charter schools to meet the same state certification as all traditional public schools, except that schools authorized by public universities or community colleges may hire full-time faculty from such institutions who meet certain criteria (e.g., tenured or tenure-track or five years experience in the community college).

Michigan state statute requires collective bargaining for non-charter public school teachers. There are seven topics that collective bargaining must address: wages, insurance or fringe benefits, pension or retirement benefits, hours, terms and conditions of employment, leave, and grievance procedures. Another six topics are expressly prohibited from collective bargaining: length of the school year, management rights, transfers or reassignments, layoffs, dismissals, and evaluation processes or instruments. Michigan law provides that charter schools are exempted from required participation in the collective bargaining agreement of the district in which they reside.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s Janus v. AFSCME decision, Michigan state law prohibited unions from charging agency fees to non-union members of any collective bargaining unit. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision did not have any effect on unions in the state. There has not been any reactive legislation enacted.
Employers in Michigan may directly certify a labor organization as an exclusive representative. If 30 percent of employees believe that the employer is not recognizing their desired representative or asserts that the current representative no longer has majority support among employees, they may petition the Public Employee Labor Relations Commission (PELRC) to hold a hearing. An employer may also petition the PELRC for a hearing if there is a question of representation. The PELRC will determine the need for an election, which will be held by secret ballot.

Per statute, a charter school applicant can request to be approved to operate the same grade levels at more than one site, but there is no fiscal and academic accountability for each site.

Michigan law is silent about charter eligibility and access. Although charter schools are LEAs with all the rights and responsibilities associated with other district LEAs, silence on these provisions results in a level of uncertainty.

Michigan law provides that charter schools are entities independent from traditional school districts and are thus the LEA for special education purposes.
The law requires intermediate school districts (ISDs) to ensure that all districts, including public charter schools, located within their geographic boundaries have equitable access to ISD coordination activities, services, regional meetings, superintendent meetings, programming, events, and other coordination or collaboration activities.

Per statute, charter schools receive a “foundation allowance” (that is, basic, per pupil operating revenue) from the state and generally have equal access to categorical funding. These provisions should result in 100% of state and school district operations funding following each student. In reality, the amount of foundation allowance is dependent on the district in which the charter school is located, as Michigan law provides that charter schools must receive the same foundation as the district in which they are located or a state maximum foundation allowance, whichever is less. This approach results in the majority of charters receiving a smaller foundation allowanceed from the state than the local district in which they are located. Michigan law requires intermediate school districts to share regional enhancement property tax dollars with charter schools on an equitable basis.
Michigan law does not provide transportation funding to either school districts or charter schools.
In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Persists, 2014), Michigan charter schools were receiving on average $9,270 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $12,700 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $3,430 per pupil - or 27% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and analysis reveals some continued inequities for operational, but the significant inequities exist for capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Michigan law provides that charters sponsored by school districts can access district bond levy funds for facilities as determined by their charter. It also provides that all charter schools are eligible to access tax-exempt financing and technical assistance through the Michigan Public Educational Facilities Authority’s bonding and loan programs.
Michigan law prohibits the state from pledging its moral obligation for charter school facility financing.
Statute states that property occupied by a charter school and used exclusively for educational purposes is exempt from a portion of school property taxes.

Michigan law provides that participation in the state retirement system is dependent on employee status. If an employee is employed by a charter board of directors, he or she must participate in the state retirement system. If an employee is not employed by a charter board of directors, they are prohibited from participating in state retirement system. Thus, charter schools have access and an option by virtue of how they hire their employees.

Michigan’s law does not include any of the model law’s provisions regarding full-time virtual charter schools. However, it includes other provisions concerning these schools.
The law allows a cyber school to serve up to 2,500 students in its first year of operation, not more than 5,000 students in its second year of operation, and not more than 10,000 students in its third and subsequent years of operation. However, the enrollment increases are not based on performance.

The law also provides that any entity applying for a school of excellence charter school that is a cyber school must demonstrate experience in delivering a quality question program that improves pupil academic achievement, with the authorizing body using the standards for quality online learning established by national associations.

The board of any charter school that offers online learning must submit a report to the state that details per-pupil costs, including those related to textbooks, computers, salaries, purchased courses, fees associated with oversight and regulation, travel costs associated with school activities and testing, facilities costs, and costs associated with special education. Monthly reports on the number of students enrolled are also required.