If you haven’t been paying attention lately, you may not know that BASIS, which began with a single charter school in Tucson, now has charter schools in three states as well as two U.S. private schools—three more are scheduled to open—and a private school in Shenzhen, China. My, how BASIS has grown.

This post is more a BASIS update than an analysis. A lot of this information was new to me when I started looking into BASIS’s current status, so I’m guessing it’s new to many readers as well.

According to the BASIS.ed website, “We Manage 21 Public Charter Schools, 5 Domestic Private Schools, and 1 International School.” Looking through the schools listed on the website, I count sixteen charter schools in Arizona, two in Texas and one in Washington, D.C., which only comes to nineteen, but either way, that’s a lot of charters. Of the five private schools, two are open and running—in Brooklyn, NY, and Silicon Valley, CA—two are scheduled to open this fall—in Fremont, CA, and McLean, VA—and one in Manhattan is scheduled to open in 2017. The Shenzhen, China, school has been open, I believe, for two years.

From the look of things, BASIS has been more active lately opening new private schools than new charters. The tuition for the U.S. private schools is around $25,000, and in China it ranges from $21,000 to $30,000, depending on grade level. Comparing that to the $7,000, more-or-less, Arizona charters receive per student may explain why BASIS is moving aggressively into the private school sector.

At this point, I admit, I’m entering territory where I’m completely out of my depth: the various incorporations in various places which are part of the BASIS family. So here are the facts I know with a few questions and concerns thrown in.

The three main BASIS entities are BASIS.ed, BASIS Global and BASIS Independent Schools. Riding on top of the three is BASIS Educational Ventures. According to its website,

BASIS Educational Ventures is a holding company for three subsidiaries: BASIS.ed, BASIS Independent Schools, and BASIS Global. It supports growth, facilitates efficient management and manages the BASIS brand.

In the past I’ve expressed my concern that, while the Arizona BASIS charters are nonprofits, they’re run by the for-profit BASIS.ed. Because of their nonprofit status, the schools themselves are somewhat transparent, though like all Arizona charters they should be more so, but as soon as the money flows uphill to BASIS.ed—and most of the state funding for the schools ends up at BASIS.ed—it disappears behind a for-profit wall. What happens up there with the taxpayers’ money is none of the taxpayers’ business. Now, as of December 22, 2015, we have BASIS Educational Ventures, another for-profit entity sitting on top of BASIS.ed, which may create yet another barrier to transparency.

BASIS Educational Ventures, LLC and BASIS Educational Ventures Services Corp. are both incorporated in Delaware, not in Arizona. The same is true of BASIS Educational Group, Inc., even though BASIS Educational Group, LLC is incorporated in Arizona.

Why not keep all the incorporation in Arizona, which is where BASIS has its headquarters? Let me repeat once again, I’m out of my depth here. This may just be the way business is done. But it’s worth noting that Delaware is Incorporation Central in the U.S. The state has more corporate entities than it has people. Remember the Panama papers story about 11 million leaked documents pointing to tax havens which can allow folks to hide their identities, launder money and evade taxes? Delaware is in a similar league, which, some people conjecture, is why so few U.S. entities showed up in the exposed Panama papers.

In no way am I suggesting that BASIS Educational Ventures is in the money laundering or tax evasion business. What’s troubling to me are the extra layers of privacy Delaware affords its corporations. According to a recent article on the Bloomberg website:

Delaware still stands out for its emphasis on privacy, which garnered for it the label of world’s most secretive jurisdiction twice over the past decade — once by the Tax Justice Network and another by National Geographic magazine.

As an example of the extra privacy, the BASIS Educational Ventures incorporation papers from Delaware don’t mention the names of any people or corporations connected with it. By contrast, the BASIS Educational Group incorporation information in Arizona provides public manager and member information: Michael K. Block, Olga V. Block and BASIS Educational Ventures, LLC.

Is any of this BASIS incorporation information significant? I don’t know. But I haven’t seen it written elsewhere, so I think it’s worth putting out there.

This article appears in Aug 4-10, 2016.

19 replies on “BASIS Schools: On Beyond Charters”

  1. No it isn’t significant. Only if you are trying to denigrate them because they out compete public schools like the biggest one in Tucson. BASIS does a great job.

  2. David, I’m genuinely saddened and disappointed by your 8/10/16 “news story” — and in fact, am actually embarrassed for you.

    In the past, I may not have agreed with your POV or your continual whipping of all things BASIS, but at least the data on which you constructed your arguments was in most instances reasonably (or at least directionally) accurate.

    Again, I’ve never subscribed to your conclusions, but have always welcomed your calls for transparency on how BASIS (and all state supported charter schools) spend tax dollars, impact educational access and how they serve (and/or don’t serve) all students. I genuinely valued your voice as part of an important, open and honest discussion around a very real and important issue.

    Today’s column though, is intellectually weak, dishonest and ultimately, makes very clear your agenda.

    Simply disclaiming multiple times that you “are out of your depth” doesn’t then give you permission to cast aspersion (Panama Papers — really?) sans any facts.

    David, you are better than this – and you know it.

  3. Mike,

    The sad truth is that David is not better than this. He has demonstrated his repeated inability to conduct even basic statistical analysis and investigative reporting from day one. He has an agenda and his only goal is to ‘prove’ it, no matter what lines he crosses in the process.

    On the bright side, at least he is not in the classroom teaching anymore because he does not appear to be competent enough and I would hate for his students to think that his methodology is in any way an appropriate or objective way of arriving at any kind of conclusion.

    David puts the cart before the horse, and that why the cart ain’t moving.

  5. “At this point, I admit, I’m entering territory where I’m completely out of my depth”
    “Let me repeat once again, I’m out of my depth here.”
    “Is any of this BASIS incorporation information significant? I don’t know.”

    Well, at least one thing is clear….ignorance of a topic (business law in this case) should never stand in the way of commenting on it.

    Thanks again Captain Obvious.

  6. Since Basis is an educational institution, how are they doing in the primary mission of educating ? Corporate organization strategies are often done to minimize taxes, enhance compensation, handle regulations, separate profitable from ” investment” divisions etc. It tends to be a means to an end…fulfilling the mission . So I guess the real question does Basis educate and do the folks footing the bill ( tax payers, parents, contributors) think they are getting good value for the money ? And most importantly, is it better than the next best alternative ?

  7. A reporter’s job is to find more sources/data/explanations so that they aren’t out of their depth in reporting or issuing opinions. Is anyone else out there asking these questions? Did he call Basis and ask them?

  8. Calling Basis and asking question doesn’t usually yield answers. Try it some time.

    I’m not a fan of Safier’s commentary on some topics (TUSD being the most notable example of an area where his “coverage” has been questionable at best), but I’m a little puzzled by the comment stream responses to this piece.

    Whether or not a school receiving and applying public funds makes the operations of its governance and how it applies public funds transparent is an important issue. To have parent companies of schools receiving and applying tax dollars in Arizona filing parent company incorporations in Delaware — and David has linked a reputable source that confirms that Delaware is indeed a state where laws do not favor public disclosure — is a relevant fact, worth reporting.

    It would be helpful to revisit the set of ideas associated with PUBLIC institutions and then do two things:
    1) compare the actual operational practices of local school systems like TUSD to these ideas to see if they are operating as public institutions are legally required to do
    2) compare BOTh the deficient legal requirements and the actual operational practices of school systems like BASIS to these ideas to see if either the legal framing or actual operations of corporate charter entities using public tax dollars meet public institution standards.

    If we don’t do BOTH of these things, we may end up losing the protections public institutions are supposed to provide which ensure PROPER USE of the tax funds appropriated to support their operation. In the former case we risk losing these protections through negligence and failures of oversight, in the latter case through deliberate legislative undermining of the foundations on which public institutions should be built.

  9. Taxpayers in Arizona should not care one iota if the various BASIS entities run private schools–with no public money. But when they receive taxpayer money all should be revealed. By the way charter schools ARE NOT PUBLIC SCHOOLS. They are privately operated schools receiving public money. Until they answer to the public taxpayers like REAL public schools, they are not public schools. The taxpayer has no say in who runs all the BASIS schools but they are sure on the public dime. There are plenty of critics on here about TUSD, but at least you can criticize them, vote for their candidates, examine their books, and get your questions answered, even if you don’t like the answers. You can’t do that with BASIS or any charters.

  10. I think you folks are confusing the fact that public schools now answer to no one. maybe that would be a good place to start. Looks like the elephant in the room to me.

  11. Go to a School Board Meeting in a Public School District and you have an Agenda, a line-by-line Budget Report (including executive/administrative salaries, at that time of year), Robert’s Rules of Order (e.g., “I second the motion.”), attendance permitted to the press and public. Some sensitive matters (e.g., Personnel Matters) may not be openly discussed, but actual salary amounts are always reported/revealed. Just about every Public School District has this information right on its website. Now – where do we go to find out, specifically, how charter schools are spending taxpayer money? Please include exactly how much money, and what perquisites, are given to executives and/or administrators in charge.

  12. That sounds wonderful Thinking, but how do you explain the mess at TUSD? There has been decades of misuse of deseg money.

  14. I agree. Throwing up TUSD (again) is a false equivalence. TUSD may well be a big, messy operation, but not all public school districts are. HOWEVER – we all know how much the TUSD super earns, was well as his free car, etc., etc., etc. because it is reported. The larger issue is that comparing (taxpayer supported) public school salaries and (taxpayer supported) charter school salaries is impossible. Charter schools can conceal and quite legally refuse to reveal how much they pay their executives and/or owner-operators. Nothing wonderful about that. Nada. Zip.

  15. ​Thinking_Allowed:

    TUSD is relevant because it highlights the fact that it’s not just HAVING laws ensuring transparency in public institutions on the books that matters. It is also enforcing them. This brings us to the heart of the issue: electing a governor and legislators who understand and value the proper functioning of public institutions.

    It doesn’t help to have laws on the books regulating public schools that are not enforced. It doesn’t help to have court decisions in favor of public schools that are not enforced. What will make the difference in our public institutions is who is in elected office.

    So let’s not obscure that important fact by arguing that changing the laws governing charter schools is all that’s needed to improve publicly funded education in Arizona. It’s not.

  16. There seems to be a trend on here, no matter what you ask about charter school transparency (little or none) is always met by, “oh yeah what about TUSD.” Of course in this area you also have Flowing Wells and Amphi and Vail and Marana, etc, et. Al. But all if them don’t equal charter school non-transparency, or diverting tax payer revenue intended for public schools to pay for PRIVATE school tuition,. According to the Arizona legislature, if you just launder it enough times it comes out pure.

  17. That’s odd. I thought the trend was, “the worse public schools got, the more the left attacks alternatives.” It IS about the money. That’s why the NEA funds lawsuits rather than education.

  18. What most of you are missing is the “fact” that BASIS is NOT outperforming the public district schools but they are using public tax dollars. If you are not aware of that fact then you have no business commenting on this article. They simply wittle down the student population to weed out those that do not perform at the highest standards, which they do quite effectively. Public schools cannot do that and BASIS is using our tax dollars in their charter schools, which is what the writer is concerned with. What they do with their private schools is fine but what they do with our money should be completely transparent. The person who said that is not transparent in public schools doesn’t know much about them so you should refrain from commenting. Again, do your research on who is doing the best job of education “all” children, not just the ones they pick and choose, then you will see that BASIS is unnecessary in the first place. We should put those dollars to work in our public district schools.

  19. So Robert has decided who can and can’t comment on this article. Does that thinking ring a bell with anybody?

Comments are closed.