IIPSC
Innovation in
Public School Choice
Universal Enrollment Systems:
Practical Considerations for
Charter Schools and Networks.
Presented by Neil Dorosin of IIPSC
April 24, 2014
Agenda
1.  IIPSC and Universal Enrollment
2.  The case for charter leadership
3.  Particularly challenging issues
2
What IIPSC does
We design and build healthy enrollment and
school choice systems.
1.  Assessment
2.  Community engagement
3.  Market Design
4.  Technology
5.  Academic research
3
The IIPSC approach
Our work is shaped by a strong belief system:
1.  Equity, efficiency, and transparency.
2.  Political neutrality.
3.  Families, and also schools and systems of schools.
4.  Rigorous research.
5.  Nonprofit.
4
Our expert team has created better enrollment and
school choice systems for over 10 years
Neil Dorosin, Executive Director, has led
IIPSC since 2007. He was previously the
Director of High School Admissions
Operations at the New York City Department
of Education from 2004 – 2007, where
overhauled and managed NYC DOE’s high
school choice process
Al Roth, Chairman of the Board of
Directors, is a Professor of Economics at
Stanford and a Professor Emeritus of
Economics and Business Administration at
Harvard. He shared the 2012 Nobel
memorial prize in Economics for his work
on market design.
Parag Pathak, Board Director, is an
Associate Professor of Economics at MIT and
a Research Associate in the NBER’s programs
on Education, Public Economics and
Industrial Organization. His research has
directly affected the lives of more than one
million public school students.
Atila Abdulkadiroglu, Board Director, is
a Professor of Economics at Duke
University. His research focuses on
efficient and effective design of student
admissions systems, as well as, on program
evaluation in education.
5
We have worked with cities and funders across
the country
Cities:
♦
♦
♦
♦
♦
♦
♦
♦♦
♦
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Chicago
Cleveland
Detroit
Denver
New York
New Orleans
Newark
Rochester
Philadelphia
Washington, D.C.
Funders
♦
= IIPSC school district
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
The Donnell-Kay Foundation
The Foundation for Newark's Future
The George Gund Foundation
The Michael & Susan Dell Foundation
The Walton Family Foundation
6
Market design
Enrollment as an allocation problem:
•  Popular seats are scare goods.
•  Public school seats must be allocated fairly, efficiently,
and transparently.
•  Cannot use price to make allocations – need policy.
•  Two-sided matching market.
•  High stakes and multi-faceted competition.
•  Public interest à healthy market.
7
School choice market failure
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Participation is cumbersome à low, and skewed participation.
Multiple offers / no offers.
Extensive use of waitlists.
Late summer “shuffle.”
Match is unstable – improvements are possible but not found.
Congested – takes too long for transactions to come to close.
“Justified envy.”
Lack of accountability.
Schools have to make too big of an investment in enrollment.
Marketing budget has outsized impact.
Schools bend enrollment and choice rules.
Unequal distribution of hard-to-educate kids.
Lots of “gray market” enrollment.
City has no real understanding of demand.
Excess seats, and perhaps excess schools.
Hard to plan the city’s portfolio of schools.
Hostile relationship between sectors.
8
Universal Enrollment
Features:
1)  One application used for all public schools.
2)  High quality information available to all families.
3)  Central clearinghouse and state-of-the-art assignment
4) 
5) 
6) 
7) 
8) 
9) 
algorithm used to create a match.
Safe for families to reveal true preferences.
Single best offer system.
Efficiency / stability trade-off.
Results can be easily explained and are audited.
Enrollment as annual cycle, not just one lottery.
Demand and enrollment data informs system-wide planning.
9
Agenda
1.  IIPSC and Universal Enrollment
2.  The case for charter leadership
3.  Particularly challenging issues
10
Charter schools should drive this work
It’s good for your school:
•  Real demand data.
•  Match quality.
•  Your rights are protected.
•  Register stability.
•  Immunity from false accusations.
•  Reduced administrative burden.
•  Frees up resources.
11
Charter schools should drive this work
It advances education reform:
•  Maximizes access and choice for families.
•  Enrollment policies are actually implemented.
•  Facilitates competition.
•  Collaboration across sectors.
•  Robust and accurate data.
•  Clarifies “education production” results.
•  Allows for wisdom in portfolio planning.
12
Agenda
1.  IIPSC and Universal Enrollment
2.  The case for charter leadership
3.  Particularly challenging issues
13
Governance
Who administrates a Universal Enrollment
system, and who is accountable?
School district as administrative body:
•  Denver, New Orleans, Newark, New York City
Another entity as administrative body:
•  Washington DC
14
Admissions priority policy
Charters are separate from district schools:
•  Neighborhood and geography.
•  Socio-economic status and other “set-asides.”
•  Prioritizing families who understand school theme.
•  Selective criteria.
15
Capacity and utilization
How many seats are available?
How will available seats be used?
•  Caps on enrollment.
•  Internal structure of grades and classes.
•  Students who arrive mid-year.
•  Weighted student funding.
16
Promotion, suspension, expulsion
Individual versus standard criteria.
17
Contact Information
Neil Dorosin
Founder and Executive Director (New York)
www.iipsc.org
Mobile: (917) 579-8691
Desk: (347) 529-5970
Email: [email protected]
18