When the federal government allotted $190 billion to school districts throughout the nation in an attempt to address learning loss caused by Covid-19, Newark Public Schools was a big beneficiary of what are called ESSER funds, or Elementary and Secondary Schools Emergency Relief. 

Suddenly district officials in New Jersey’s largest school district found themselves with an unexpected $287 million, amounting to an extra $7,560 per student and almost a third of its annual operating budget, currently $1.53 billion for the 2024-2025 school year.

In Newark, big spending hasn’t resulted in marked increases in student achievement and some of the spending has had nothing to do with improving instruction. NJ Ed Report’s deep dive into one $1.4 million proposal to impact student achievement using an uncertified consultant with very little experience illustrates the ways in which hundreds of millions of Covid dollars were allocated in Newark without accountability for closing academic gaps. For that contract, the Board approved the work, but the work never happened according to the consultant.

“Technically the district would have to be tracking this money through its grant reporting system. But the states are responsible for oversight and gathering that information and have not asked hard questions,” said Chad Aldeman, former Policy Director of Edunomics Lab at Georgetown University. 

“New Jersey is only reporting the total amount of ESSER money spent,” in contrast to other states that are far more forthcoming as seen in Edunomics’ ESSER Expenditure Dashboard, Alderman added. 

Others also call out New Jersey for lax oversight. Education Reform Now says the New Jersey Department of Education (DOE) is one of ten state agencies that “fail to mention or cite any evidence to support their learning loss intervention strategies.” 

The lack of detail also means that observers can’t determine which buckets district spending is coming from–-the state and local bucket or the federal monies. State taxpayers outside of Newark pay over $1.2 billion of the Newark school district’s costs. 

Some of that spending has raised the ire of elected officials in New Jersey–most recently a $50,000 “Superintendent Fun Day” that paid for staff and their families to party at an upscale suburban wedding venue. “The type of outing they do is often found in the private sector,” said Marc Pfeiffer, senior policy fellow at Rutgers’ Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, told TapInto Newark last month. 

“But doing that in the public environment creates perception issues and can be abused,” Bloustein said. “That’s why there is a state law on how public funds can and cannot be used in these circumstances.” 

The event occurred just as the state was wrapping up its annual budget process and districts across the state–-unlike Newark-–were facing hundreds of millions of dollars in cuts. 

“I’ve been saying it for years that school districts receiving massive, unnecessary funding increases were going to find ways to shovel the ridiculous excess out the door. It’s outrageous,” said Senate Republican Budget Officer Declan O’Scanlon (R-13). “Newark school district is thumbing its nose at the more than 150 school districts that are facing educationally damaging cuts this year, as well as their own students who need air conditioning.” 

Meanwhile, Assemblyman Alex Sauickie (R-Ocean) wrote an open letter to New Jersey Department of Education’s Acting Commissioner Kevin Dehmer demanding a response to Newark’s Fun Day spending. “I have constituents in my legislative district who work in the Newark City School District who have told me that they have ‘more money in the budget than they know what to do with,’” Sauickie wrote to the acting commissioner. 

Even before the Fun Day brouhaha, the district has been called out for spending $4.5 million to refurbish a school in a deal with a private developer that didn’t go out to bid, and trips for staff members and school board members to  Las Vegas, New Orleans, Orlando, Atlanta, Palm Springs, Puerto Rico and Honolulu. 

The federal government, meanwhile, using state education agencies as pass-throughs, let districts decide how to spend the money, with just a few strings attached: Districts were told to spend at least 20% of their allotment on “evidence-based interventions” to address learning loss and were urged to jumpstart specific interventions, including summer programs, longer school days, and high-dosage tutoring. 

The district website promises ESSER money allocations are aligned with its ten-year strategic plan yet specific purchases appear poorly-defined, with no estimates of their projected impact on student learning. For example, a powerpoint promises the district will “bridge students’ learning gaps with 1-to-1 tutoring and extended learning time at all school sites,” a research-based intervention that is considered essential for accelerating learning. 

However, according to earlier reporting by Patrick Wall, the spending plan “sets aside more money for office computers than tutoring” and, after trumpeting the afterschool program (one of the few requirements issued by the U.S. Education Department), NPS only served 16% of eligible students. Superintendent Roger León “has said some schools also offer tutoring during the day,” Wall continues, “but it is unclear whether it is the “high-dosage” tutoring, with multiple small-group sessions per week, that federal officials have called for and research shows is most effective.”

More recently, regarding the essential intervention of high-dosage tutoring, TapintoNewark filed an Open Public Records request in order to uncover that “15,803 Newark Public School students were recommended for tutoring last year, but only 1,938 actually attended, or 12% of those recommended.”

Photo courtesy of NJ Spotlight.