America's Top Corporate Education Welfare Queen, Joanne Weiss

Joanne Weiss is an active exemplar for corporate welfare exploitation in education.  Just a few years ago, she moved from a tech firm to become COO for the New Schools Venture Fund, which grew to be a massive slush fund for vulture philanthropists, following Bill Clinton's undercover operation that made it possible to earn really big bucks by backing charter schools and other ed industry bad ideas:

Thanks to a little discussed law passed in 2000, at the end of Bill Clinton’s presidency, banks and equity funds that invest in charter schools and other projects in underserved areas can take advantage of a very generous tax credit — as much as 39 percent — to help offset their expenditure in such projects. In essence, that credit amounts to doubling the amount of money they have invested within just seven years. Moreover, they are allowed to combine that tax credit with job creation credits and other types of credit, as well collect interest payments on the money they are lending out — all of which can add up to far more than double in returns. This is, no doubt, why many big banks and equity funds are so invested in the expansion of charter schools. There is big money being made here — because investment is nearly a sure thing.

Then in 2009 Weiss was named to oversee Team Obama/Gates Race to the Top, a REALLY big slush fund used to bribe states to adopt corporate education reform's agenda, which demanded state commitments to bigger data collection capacity and teacher evaluation schemes that be impossible to maintain without more tech toys to manage the the flood of surveillance data on kids and teachers.

And now with the path cleared away for a high tech assault on the weakened body of public education, Joanne has pivoted to take on a number of projects that will use her connections in and out of government to help corporate welfare investors find new prey, acting always as that great "vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money" (Taibbi, 2009).

One of Joanne's new projects will be with a new total surveillance educational data management startup, BloomBoard, where she will smooth the way for 1) Cloud based data collection and storage [all you need is PC and a Web connection], 2) professional development pieces and evaluation rubrics for charter CEOs who don't know what those words mean, and 3) lesson plans for corporate missionaries who have never taught.  And at BloomBoard they are hiring!:

If you want to invent what’s possible in the rapidly-growing EdTech sphere and be part of a transformative industry, we’d love to get to know you already. Scale systems and build a product that millions of educators the world over could benefit from. Work with a diverse team in a fast-paced environment, collaborating with colleagues who are professionals and thought leaders in the education, technology, and business spaces. We also have the support of premier education investors, including Learn Capital, Imagine K12, and Birchmere.

Millot Asks About Conflict of Interest in Duncan's DOE

From Dean Millot over at ThisWeekInEducation (Three Data Points: Unconnected Dots, or Warning?):

I have now heard the same thing from three independent credible sources - the fix is in on the U.S. Department of Education's competitive grants, in particular Race to the Top (RTTT) and Investing in Innovation (I3). Secretary Duncan needs to head this off now, by admitting that he and his team have potential conflicts of interests with regard to their roles in grant making, recognizing that those conflicts are widely perceived by potential grantees, and explaining how grant decisions will be insulated from interference by the department's political appointees.

...

We do know that the Secretary benefited from a strong relationship with the new philanthropy in Chicago. We know that the Secretary is high on charter management organizations and the new teacher development programs that benefited from the new philanthropy. We know that RTTT czar Joanne Weiss was senior staff member at New Schools. We know that Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and Improvement Jim Shelton was a senior program education officer at the Gates Foundation and NewSchools. We know that both managed investments in the organizations' Duncan favors.

Be sure to read the entire entry (here) - it's good and juicy.

Millot compares this situation to the disastrous Reading First fiasco - but this time we're talking about $5 billion stead of simply $1 billion (note: the Race to the Top/i3 fund was $15 billion in earlier drafts of the ARRA; it was eventually cut to $7.5 billion and then trimmed again to $5 billion). The parallels between the two programs are striking.

Part of the eligibility requirements laid out in the ARRA for i3 funding includes this:

(4) demonstrate that they have established partnerships with the private sector, which may include philanthropic organizations, and that the private sector will provide matching funds in order to help bring results to scale.

It has all the language Duncan and the philanthrocapitalists love: public-private partnerships, heavy (over)involvement from the private sector, and taking things to scale. And, of course, this dressed-up business language is a slick way of directing funds specifically to the charter school crowd supported by Duncan and his philanthrocapitalist pals bowing at the alter of the market.

Millot could add in the other ties between Gates and the DOE, particularly the selection of Margot Rogers, Vicki Phillips' former assistant from the Gates Foundation. He could add that NSVF is an almost entirely owned by the Gates/Broad/Walton/Fisher clan; that nearly every one of NSVF's grantees could benefit from the i3 fund; that NSVF allegedly approached states asking for 5% of their RttT winnings; and that the RttT and i3 fund is practically a duplication of NSVF's strategy of expanding education markets for edupreneurs, upping the competition, and increasing the dosage of testing abuse.

Millot ends with this:

Whatever is or is not going on at the Department, the principled response is for the Secretary to address the fear head on, explain how the feared outcomes cannot take place, and then make sure he and his people keep several arms lengths removed from the process.

While Duncan should listen to Millot's suggestions, it's highly unlikely the Secretary will address these concerns. He's too busy making obscene comments about Katrina, blabbering on about the no excuses charter chaingangs, or playing a bit of basketball with the Prez. Principled responses? Duncan will take a pass.