The Nation’s Charter Report Card: A New Ranking of States by Charter Student Performance

Figures & data

Table 1. Individual background characteristics and other variables controlled when estimating adjusted scores on national assessment for educational progress.

Variable
Odd years (2009–2019)
Subject (math, reading)
Grades (4, 8)
Age on February 1 of testing year^a
Ethnicity (white, Black, Hispanic, Asian American/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, unclassified)
Gender (male, female)
Free- or reduced-lunch eligible (not eligible, reduced-price lunch, free lunch)
Parental education level (did not finish high school (HS), graduated HS, some education after HS, graduated college)^b
Student classified as English Language Learner (Limited English Proficiency (LEP))
Student classified as having a disability (Individualized Education Plan (IEP))
Books at home (0–10, 11–25, 26–100, >100)
Computer at home^c
Locale (city, suburb, town, rural)
Charter opening year^d

Note. ^a Date of birth is estimated as of the 15th day of the birth month. Ages more than two years from the mean weighted national age are recoded to the mean.

^bParental education level is only asked of students in grade 8.

^c2019 asked two questions (Have in home: 1) Desktop/laptop computer you can use; and 2) A tablet that you can use). We combined responses from the two questions as a proxy for computer.

^dData obtained from the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools (NAPCS).

Table 2. Intercorrelations of state rankings by interest group indices of state charter and school-choice policies and by PEPG charter student performance.

Ranking organization	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(8)	(9)
NAPCS (1)	1.00
CER (2)	0.68	1.00
EdChoice (3)	0.11	0.07	1.00
Heritage (4)	0.40	0.45	−0.03	1.00
Heritage (school choice) (5)	0.32	0.47	−0.15	0.72	1.00
EFI (6)	0.14	0.08	0.24	0.19	0.17	1.00
EFI (student growth) (7)	0.11	0.11	0.05	0.07	0.32	0.69	1.00
EFI (cohort change) (8)	−0.23	−0.04	−0.14	0.05	0.06	0.62	0.28	1.00
PEPG (9)	0.19	0.06	−0.19	−0.06	−0.08	0.00	0.19	−0.03	1.00

Note. Source of rankings: NAPCS (Ziebarth, 2022, p. 3), Center for Education Reform (2022), EdChoice (Catt & Swaminathan, 2023), Heritage (2022), EFI (Scafidi & Wearne, 2021, p. 33). PEPG ranks are shown in Table 4.

Table 3. Unweighted and weighted distributions of student background characteristics and number of observations for each characteristic.

Category	Unweighted	Weighted	N
Ethnicity
White	0.287	0.315	41,820
Black	0.390	0.300	56,890
Hispanic	0.243	0.311	35,360
Asian	0.048	0.043	6,980
Native American	0.010	0.006	1,420
Unclassified	0.022	0.024	3,280
Gender
Male	0.494	0.495	71,920
Female	0.506	0.505	73,810
Free and Reduced Lunch status
Free lunch	0.536	0.519	78,140
Reduced-price lunch	0.049	0.059	7,090
Not eligible	0.381	0.380	55,480
Missing	0.034	0.042	5,030
Parent’s education level
Did not finish High School (HS)	0.064	0.074	4,780
Graduated HS	0.147	0.145	10,920
Some ed after HS	0.151	0.151	11,250
Graduated college	0.444	0.452	33,030
Missing	0.194	0.178	14,470
Locale
City	0.643	0.555	93,740
Suburb	0.216	0.299	31,540
Town	0.047	0.050	6,790
Rural	0.094	0.096	13,660
English language learner
Yes	0.077	0.093	11,180
No	0.923	0.907	134,520
Missing	0.000	0.000	30
Student disability
Yes	0.119	0.118	17,280
No	0.881	0.882	128,430
Missing	0.000	0.000	20
Books in home
0–10	0.136	0.143	19,780
11–25	0.229	0.230	33,410
26–100	0.306	0.317	44,590
>100	0.255	0.259	37,100
Missing	0.074	0.050	10,850
Computer in home
Yes	0.726	0.723	105,860
No	0.194	0.220	28,290
Missing	0.079	0.057	11,580

Note: Table displays unweighted and weighted distribution across demographic categories in the NAEP charter sample. Parents’ education is not collected at grade 4.

Table 4. Ranking of states on average adjusted 4th and 8th grade performances of charter students on national assessment of educational progress, 2009–2019.

Rank	State	Coefficient	SE
1	Alaska	0.321	0.042
2	Colorado	0.237	0.012
3	Massachusetts	0.232	0.015
4	New Hampshire	0.197	0.066
5	New York	0.171	0.011
6	Oklahoma	0.150	0.033
7	New Jersey	0.131	0.015
8	Florida	0.090	0.007
9	Utah	0.076	0.015
10	Rhode Island	0.056	0.039
11	Georgia	0.054	0.014
12	Louisiana	0.048	0.014
13	Delaware	0.047	0.026
14	Arkansas	0.024	0.029
15	Texas	0.016	0.007
16	North Carolina	−0.012	0.011
17	Idaho	−0.027	0.025
18	Illinois	−0.035	0.015
19	Connecticut	−0.053	0.033
20	DC	−0.061	0.018
21	Indiana	−0.081	0.019
22	Minnesota	−0.105	0.014
23	Arizona	−0.115	0.009
24	Maryland	−0.115	0.021
25	California	−0.126	0.006
26	Missouri	−0.127	0.024
27	Ohio	−0.128	0.010
28	Wisconsin	−0.137	0.017
29	Nevada	−0.171	0.021
30	South Carolina	−0.201	0.024
31	New Mexico	−0.202	0.023
32	Pennsylvania	−0.214	0.010
33	Oregon	−0.246	0.021
34	Michigan	−0.311	0.008
35	Tennessee	−0.328	0.022
36	Hawaii	−0.537	0.030

Note. Estimates are adjusted for covariates displayed in Table 1. Table displays predicted coefficient and standard error (SE) for each state. Scores standardized to place all tests on a common scale. Positive score indicates above average state performance. Negative score indicates below average state performance. Estimates use survey weights. Imprecise estimates with standard error >0.099 for Alabama, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, North Dakota, Virginia, and Wyoming have been excluded for Tables 4–5, 7 –11, and A2–A9. Very similar results are obtained when fixed effects for charter school’s opening year is excluded from the estimating equation (correlation between two rankings = 0.99).

Table 5. Ranking of states on average adjusted 4th and 8th grade performances of black charter students on national assessment of educational progress, 2009–2019.

Rank	State	Coefficient	SE
1	Massachusetts	−0.035	0.025
2	Colorado	−0.121	0.039
3	Oklahoma	−0.182	0.063
4	Rhode Island	−0.192	0.080
5	New York	−0.193	0.012
6	Florida	−0.223	0.013
7	New Jersey	−0.238	0.017
8	Georgia	−0.302	0.020
9	Louisiana	−0.307	0.015
10	Arizona	−0.327	0.027
11	Connecticut	−0.361	0.037
12	North Carolina	−0.375	0.020
13	Texas	−0.414	0.014
14	Illinois	−0.438	0.017
15	Delaware	−0.450	0.035
16	DC	−0.472	0.017
17	Indiana	−0.473	0.023
18	Arkansas	−0.493	0.045
19	Ohio	−0.494	0.011
20	Minnesota	−0.508	0.025
21	California	−0.516	0.014
22	Maryland	−0.534	0.021
23	Nevada	−0.597	0.042
24	Missouri	−0.602	0.025
25	South Carolina	−0.604	0.036
26	Pennsylvania	−0.607	0.013
27	Wisconsin	−0.664	0.026
28	Tennessee	−0.717	0.020
29	Michigan	−0.784	0.010

Note. We do not control for the variable used to classify the specific subgroup in question. See Table 4. Imprecise estimates for Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon, and Utah excluded.

Table 6. Coefficients of correlation among state rankings of performances of all charter students and subgroups on national assessment of educational progress, 2009–2019.

Category	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(8)	(9)	(10)	(11)	(12)
Overall (1)	1.00
White (2)	0.84	1.00
Black (3)	0.92	0.74	1.00
Hispanic (4)	0.77	0.62	0.64	1.00
Male (5)	0.99	0.84	0.93	0.75	1.00
Female (6)	0.99	0.83	0.89	0.76	0.96	1.00
FRL eligible (7)	0.95	0.75	0.91	0.73	0.94	0.94	1.00
FRL not eligible (8)	0.92	0.90	0.78	0.75	0.90	0.91	0.79	1.00
First generation (9)	0.92	0.75	0.86	0.80	0.90	0.93	0.88	0.85	1.00
Parents with college degree (10)	0.93	0.78	0.85	0.76	0.91	0.92	0.82	0.90	0.90	1.00
City (11)	0.97	0.76	0.90	0.78	0.95	0.96	0.92	0.88	0.91	0.93	1.00
Suburban Town Rural (12)	0.74	0.79	0.67	0.46	0.72	0.75	0.69	0.73	0.61	0.62	0.60	1.00

Note. All correlations are based on adjusted state rankings based on the variables listed in Table 1. Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, and Wisconsin contribute to this table.

Table 7. Ranking of states on average adjusted 4th and 8th grade performances of Hispanic charter students on national assessment of educational progress, 2009–2019.

Rank	State	Coefficient	SE
1	Louisiana	0.161	0.066
2	Oklahoma	0.060	0.050
3	Colorado	0.058	0.025
4	Florida	0.037	0.013
5	Massachusetts	0.012	0.034
6	New York	−0.018	0.025
7	Arkansas	−0.050	0.086
8	New Jersey	−0.067	0.032
9	Missouri	−0.086	0.068
10	Indiana	−0.095	0.079
11	Rhode Island	−0.102	0.057
12	Ohio	−0.105	0.055
13	Utah	−0.115	0.043
14	Illinois	−0.127	0.030
15	Texas	−0.128	0.010
16	Delaware	−0.141	0.096
17	North Carolina	−0.153	0.044
18	Wisconsin	−0.168	0.046
19	Maryland	−0.190	0.082
20	Georgia	−0.218	0.033
21	Minnesota	−0.242	0.046
22	DC	−0.270	0.060
23	Idaho	−0.276	0.094
24	Nevada	−0.302	0.048
25	California	−0.306	0.010
26	Michigan	−0.310	0.033
27	Connecticut	−0.329	0.072
28	Arizona	−0.349	0.017
29	New Mexico	−0.382	0.035
30	Oregon	−0.388	0.065
31	Tennessee	−0.482	0.089
32	Pennsylvania	−0.527	0.024

Note. See notes to Tables 4 and 5. Imprecise estimates for Alaska, Hawaii, New Hampshire, and South Carolina excluded.

Table 8. Ranking of states on average adjusted 4th and 8th grade performances of white charter students on national assessment of educational progress, 2009–2019.

Rank	State	Coefficient	SE
1	DC	0.703	0.090
2	Massachusetts	0.695	0.028
3	Alaska	0.590	0.054
4	New Jersey	0.580	0.054
5	Colorado	0.578	0.017
6	Delaware	0.576	0.042
7	New Hampshire	0.570	0.078
8	Rhode Island	0.532	0.098
9	Arkansas	0.497	0.043
10	Georgia	0.489	0.026
11	Missouri	0.473	0.069
12	New York	0.470	0.053
13	Maryland	0.467	0.053
14	Louisiana	0.466	0.029
15	Florida	0.446	0.011
16	North Carolina	0.429	0.016
17	Idaho	0.421	0.028
18	Minnesota	0.417	0.023
19	Indiana	0.401	0.037
20	Utah	0.401	0.019
21	Wisconsin	0.379	0.027
22	Hawaii	0.366	0.058
23	Oklahoma	0.354	0.080
24	Pennsylvania	0.332	0.021
25	Arizona	0.321	0.015
26	Ohio	0.312	0.023
27	California	0.308	0.013
28	Texas	0.302	0.025
29	New Mexico	0.300	0.041
30	Illinois	0.259	0.095
31	Nevada	0.239	0.033
32	Michigan	0.237	0.016
33	South Carolina	0.233	0.034
34	Oregon	0.219	0.025

Note. See notes to Tables 4 and 5. Imprecise estimates for Connecticut and Tennessee excluded.

Table 9. Ranking of states on average adjusted 4th and 8th grade performances of lower-income charter students on national assessment of educational progress, 2009–2019.

Rank	State	Coefficient	SE
1	Alaska	0.068	0.085
2	Massachusetts	0.030	0.022
3	Colorado	−0.053	0.021
4	New York	−0.086	0.013
5	Oklahoma	−0.096	0.037
6	Florida	−0.123	0.010
7	Utah	−0.124	0.027
8	New Jersey	−0.136	0.018
9	North Carolina	−0.190	0.022
10	Rhode Island	−0.196	0.046
11	Idaho	−0.228	0.049
12	Louisiana	−0.241	0.016
13	Texas	−0.256	0.008
14	Delaware	−0.259	0.045
15	Illinois	−0.266	0.017
16	Georgia	−0.278	0.018
17	Connecticut	−0.298	0.039
18	Nevada	−0.342	0.039
19	Indiana	−0.350	0.024
20	Arkansas	−0.351	0.037
21	DC	−0.387	0.021
22	California	−0.421	0.009
23	Ohio	−0.431	0.011
24	Minnesota	−0.443	0.019
25	Missouri	−0.445	0.026
26	Maryland	−0.454	0.028
27	Arizona	−0.461	0.014
28	Wisconsin	−0.467	0.022
29	New Mexico	−0.489	0.032
30	Pennsylvania	−0.527	0.012
31	South Carolina	−0.531	0.035
32	Oregon	−0.596	0.032
33	Tennessee	−0.599	0.026
34	Michigan	−0.643	0.010
35	Hawaii	−0.959	0.046

Note. See Tables 4 and 5. Imprecise estimate for New Hampshire excluded.

Table 10. Ranking of states on white-black differences in adjusted 4th and 8th grade performances of charter students on national assessment of educational progress, 2009–2019.

Rank	State	White-Black gap	SE
1	Oklahoma	0.536	0.102
2	Arizona	0.648	0.031
3	New York	0.663	0.054
4	Florida	0.669	0.017
5	Illinois	0.697	0.097
6	Colorado	0.699	0.043
7	Texas	0.716	0.024
8	Rhode Island	0.724	0.127
9	Massachusetts	0.730	0.038
10	Louisiana	0.773	0.033
11	Georgia	0.791	0.033
12	North Carolina	0.804	0.026
13	Ohio	0.806	0.025
14	New Jersey	0.818	0.057
15	California	0.824	0.019
16	Nevada	0.836	0.053
17	South Carolina	0.837	0.050
18	Indiana	0.874	0.044
19	Minnesota	0.925	0.034
20	Pennsylvania	0.939	0.025
21	Arkansas	0.990	0.062
22	Maryland	1.001	0.057
23	Michigan	1.021	0.019
24	Delaware	1.026	0.055
25	Wisconsin	1.043	0.037
26	Missouri	1.075	0.073
27	DC	1.175	0.092

Note. Alaska, Connecticut, Hawaii, Idaho, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon, Tennessee, and Utah are excluded due to lack of sufficient observations for both ethnic groups.

Table 11. Ranking of states on white-Hispanic differences in adjusted 4th and 8th grade performances of charter students on national assessment of educational progress, 2009–2019.

Rank	State	White-Hispanic gap	SE
1	Oklahoma	0.294	0.094
2	Louisiana	0.305	0.072
3	Illinois	0.386	0.100
4	Florida	0.409	0.017
5	Ohio	0.417	0.060
6	Texas	0.430	0.021
7	New York	0.488	0.059
8	Indiana	0.496	0.087
9	Utah	0.516	0.047
10	Colorado	0.520	0.030
11	Nevada	0.541	0.058
12	Michigan	0.547	0.037
13	Arkansas	0.547	0.096
14	Wisconsin	0.547	0.053
15	Missouri	0.559	0.097
16	North Carolina	0.582	0.047
17	Oregon	0.607	0.070
18	California	0.614	0.016
19	Rhode Island	0.634	0.113
20	New Jersey	0.647	0.063
21	Maryland	0.657	0.098
22	Minnesota	0.659	0.051
23	Arizona	0.670	0.023
24	New Mexico	0.682	0.054
25	Massachusetts	0.683	0.044
26	Idaho	0.697	0.098
27	Georgia	0.707	0.042
28	Delaware	0.717	0.105
29	Pennsylvania	0.859	0.032
30	DC	0.973	0.108

Note. Alaska, Connecticut, Hawaii, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Tennessee and Utah are excluded due to lack of sufficient observations for both ethnic groups.

Table 12. Ranking of PEPG-ranked states on average adjusted 4th and 8th grade performances of public-school students on national assessment of educational progress, 2009–2019 by urban institute.

Rank	State	Score
1	Massachusetts	256.542
2	Texas	254.542
3	New Jersey	254.375
4	Florida	253.458
5	Colorado	253.333
6	North Carolina	253.000
7	Delaware	252.917
8	Maryland	252.042
9	Connecticut	251.125
10	Pennsylvania	250.792
11	Ohio	250.750
12	Indiana	250.708
13	Minnesota	250.458
14	New York	250.458
15	Illinois	250.250
16	South Carolina	250.208
17	New Hampshire	250.125
18	Wisconsin	248.458
19	Oregon	248.000
20	Louisiana	247.958
21	Oklahoma	247.792
22	Missouri	247.667
23	Arizona	247.625
24	California	247.417
25	Georgia	247.292
26	Rhode Island	247.208
27	Nevada	247.167
28	Arkansas	247.125
29	Idaho	246.917
30	New Mexico	246.708
31	Tennessee	246.458
32	Utah	245.708
33	Alaska	245.583
34	Michigan	244.333
35	Hawaii	237.458

Note. The scores have been pooled together for 2009–2019 using the “adj_raceclunclepspedageenlang” variable available at https://apps.urban.org/features/naep/data/NAEP_fulldata.xlsx

Source: Chingos et al. (2019).

Table 13. Charter school characteristics and adjusted 4th and 8th grade performances of charter students on national assessment of educational progress, 2009–2019.

Variable	Coefficient	SE
Authorizer type
Local Education Agency (school district)	−0.094	0.006
Independent Charter Board	−0.103	0.011
Higher Education Institution	−0.187	0.008
Others	−0.146	0.012
Baseline category: State Education Agency
Management type
EMO	−0.059	0.007
CMO	0.105	0.007
Baseline category: Freestanding
Specialized Charter school foci and models
Share of student in specialized schools within a district	0.085	0.013
Collective bargaining	−0.072	0.046

Note. See footnotes 12, 13, and 14. Each estimate controls for covariates but not for charter characteristics or environment. N for each estimation as follows: authorizer type= 98820, management type = 98180, specialization = 64430, collective bargaining = 145,730.

Ziebarth, T. (2022, January 25). Measuring up to the model: A ranking of state public charter school laws. National Alliance for Public Charter Schools. https://publiccharters.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/2022-model-law_rd3.pdf

 Google Scholar

Center for Education Reform. (2022). National charter school law rankings & scorecard—2022. https://edreform.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/cer-charterlaws-scorecard-2022.pdf

 Google Scholar

Catt, D., & Swaminathan, M. (2023, January 19). 2023 EdChoice share: Where are America’s students educated? EdChoice. https://www.edchoice.org/engage/2023-edchoice-share-where-are-americas-students-educated/

 Google Scholar

Heritage. (2022). 2022 education freedom report card: All state scores. https://www.heritage.org/educationreportcard/pages/all-state-scores.html

 Google Scholar

Scafidi, B., & Wearne, E. (2021, December 1). EFI charter school ecosystem rankings. Education Freedom Institute. https://secureservercdn.net/45.40.149.34/n5e.cd2.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/EFI-ECER2022.pdf

 Google Scholar

Chingos, M., Blagg, K., & Luetmer, G. (2019). America’s gradebook: How does your state stack up? appendix. Urban Institute. https://apps.urban.org/features/naep/naep-technical-appendix.pdf

 Google Scholar