Anonymous wrote:if i was a marylander with a kid in dc schools, i would be nervous. the politics are changing here and, while it's easy to bet against the dc government doing anything, they are going to throw the book at someone who's been cheating the residency requirements, i bet. and they will be totally screwed.

What’s even dumber is that the DC government has all the data to connect the dots. It’s just that no one has done the leg work to connect enrollment records, residency paperwork, and DC taxes filed (or not filed!) by the parents/guardian. All that must happen is a change in leadership and they could feasibly retroactively punish these families.

They are playing a dangerous game.

if i was a marylander with a kid in dc schools, i would be nervous. the politics are changing here and, while it's easy to bet against the dc government doing anything, they are going to throw the book at someone who's been cheating the residency requirements, i bet. and they will be totally screwed.

Grosso's statement - among other things taking credit for pushing OSSE to dig deeper in the 17-18 audit.

Grosso dismayed by depth of residency fraud at Duke Ellington

Washington, D.C. – The following is a statement from Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large), chairperson of the Committee on Education, on today’s release of a report on residency fraud at the Duke Ellington School of the Arts by the Office of the State Superintendent of Education:

“Today’s report not only confirms the stunning depth of residency fraud at Duke Ellington, but also that the previous two chancellors had repeatedly lied to the Committee and the Council about how profound this problem is. I continue to grow frustrated with the lack of transparency from D.C. Public Schools and the Executive and this is the latest blow to their credibility. That is why I pushed to have OSSE assume responsibility of DCPS residency investigations last year and made investments through the annual budget process to provide resources to fulfill those responsibilities.

“Through their diligent work, the agency has revealed that up to 40 percent of students at Duke Ellington, representing over $2 million in D.C.-taxpayer funded education a year, are not District residents and had no plan to reimburse the District for tuition. Under no circumstances is this acceptable.

“I appreciate the work of OSSE and Superintendent Hanseul Kang on this issue. Over the years she has acknowledged that investigating residency fraud was an area that OSSE needed to improve. Today’s report, along with the additional 111 cases of potential residency fraud from throughout the District that OSSE has referred to the Attorney General this school year, show that the agency is ensuring that D.C. schools are serving D.C. students.

“The District of Columbia is full of brilliant young artists and musicians who deserve the ability to attend Duke Ellington. One of the premiere public arts education programs in the country, the school should serve D.C. families first and foremost. Yet the breadth of these allegations shows that the school and DCPS were, at the least, extremely lax in oversight.

“I will be monitoring DCPS’ and Duke Ellington’s compliance with the corrective action plan laid out by OSSE to improve both school-level and central office compliance with our residency requirements. Additionally, I will continue to support OSSE’s role of investigating and reporting residency fraud in D.C. schools by making the necessary investments, including the four additional full-time equivalents and $300,000 for contract support approved unanimously by the Education Committee last week for FY2019.”

###

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused how people falsify records. You need two forms to prove residency, unless you have a pay stub. It’s not that easy to do. Practically, how do people falsify these forms?

Depends on your job. I could go into my self-service ADP portal at work and change my address now, and leave it that way for the next 6-8 weeks for enrollment, and then change it back.

The article listed other scenarios -- renting an apartment or room in District; claiming your child lives at the address of a friend or relative (have your name on their utility bill).

Renting an apartment or room in the District should not be a problem here. If the child physically resides in a DC rental during the week but a parent also has a non-DC house, then that child should get DC in-state tuition. There are a lot of scenarios - for example, separated parents - where this makes sense for the child. That's why the actual metric DC uses to assess a student's residency status is the physical residence of the child, not what is legally designated to be the primary residence of the parent.

In my opinion, the kids needs to have the parent/guardian who is registering them for school be a DC taxpayer. This is the crux of the issue. And, ideally, OSSE can pull this verification directly from the District's tax systems.

Plus, the law around "primary caretaker" needs to change. All that is required from grandma or auntie is writing a letter attesting that they are the primary caretaker and that the child lives with them. It's so loosey-goosey and lax. Basically any District citizen can claim to be the child's caretaker for purposes of qualifying DC residency.

I think you're way out of touch with the home situations of a lot of DC students. If the student is physically in DC during the school year, that should be (and is) what qualifies the student as a DC resident. If a grandma claims caretaker status but the kid is residing outside of DC, that clearly should not be allowed. But there are a lot of grandmas and aunties actually taking care of kids in DC while their parents live somewhere else - and these are not the cases DC should focus its limited resources on. Let's stop the cases with kids physically residing out of DC first - that's the bulk of the problem and the most blatant violations.

Then the kid needs to be a dependent on Grandma or Aunty's DC tax return. It's a really easy threshold to meet and is a simple change in her withholding formula. I am totally sympathetic to that Mom and Dad may live elsewhere or totally be out of the picture, so the relative takes care of the child.

But my strong suspicion is that many middle class families are using the Grandma/Auntie attestation to say she is the main caregiver because the law on this is so loosey-goosey. And then the parents are claiming the child as a dependent on their MD taxes, while driving the kid into DC everyday.

the most obvious fix would be requiring non-parent guardianship to be validated as a dependent on tax form, but taxes are filed annually for most residents and might not overlap with enrollment period. Taxes aren't file for previous year until 3.5 months into following year, after 3/4 of a given school year has completed. Even so a legal mechanism should apply for declaring guardianship which can be validated as needed

Yeah but legal guardianship can take quite awhile to establish and meanwhile the kid is stuck in limbo. But really I don’t think DC cares about those cases. The problem is middle class people with kids living in MD or VA. My guess is mostly MD?

It's been made abundantly clear on this thread -- and reinforced by today's news -- that DCPS has no desire to address the problem. The current rules are not designed to solve the problem, but to create obstacles to it being solved. Yes, there will always be edge cases that require judgment. But that's not 40% of the kids at Ellington.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is tuition only 12k? there is no way that covers the cost for kids. Most private schools in DC start at 30k.

If DC sets the tuition for out of state students higher, they'd have to increase the per pupil allocation for DCPS and charter students.

Or they could change the rule and say that tuition is the per-pupil operating allocation plus the per-pupil facilities cost. The issue at Ellington is that the per-pupil facilities cost is through the roof.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In big picture terms, I wonder how much residency fraud impacts enrollment. To gain access as a non-resident requires some degree of fraud but there's a range of methods. Some use family, friends or non-residential addresses while some falsely claim housing instability. For the latter, does this possibly overstate the issue of student homelessness in the schools, thus impacting DC residents' decision making on if and where to enroll (DCPS or DCPCS)?

Not to minimize the difficulties for actual DC resident families struggling with housing instability, but such fraud would also impact the at-risk students who depend on every dollar allocated to the schools for support.

Most people don't want to make life difficult for kids from struggling families (even if they are bending the rules).

The situation that is emerging with the details in these successive stories is that there is significant fraud from middle class families -- often with DC or fed gov jobs -- and the myth that it's primarily at-risk kids is just played to misdirect the attention.

that's defensible on one level but for non-residents PG County taxpayers should cover this cost not DC

Sure. I'd be happy with that solution too. But the bigger picture is that if we were just discussing how to handle who pays for the at-risk population emotions wouldn't be running as hot and most people would have enough sympathy to accept most any reasonable solution. The issue here is the greedy cheaters who aren't the at-risk population.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused how people falsify records. You need two forms to prove residency, unless you have a pay stub. It’s not that easy to do. Practically, how do people falsify these forms?

Depends on your job. I could go into my self-service ADP portal at work and change my address now, and leave it that way for the next 6-8 weeks for enrollment, and then change it back.

The article listed other scenarios -- renting an apartment or room in District; claiming your child lives at the address of a friend or relative (have your name on their utility bill).

Renting an apartment or room in the District should not be a problem here. If the child physically resides in a DC rental during the week but a parent also has a non-DC house, then that child should get DC in-state tuition. There are a lot of scenarios - for example, separated parents - where this makes sense for the child. That's why the actual metric DC uses to assess a student's residency status is the physical residence of the child, not what is legally designated to be the primary residence of the parent.

In my opinion, the kids needs to have the parent/guardian who is registering them for school be a DC taxpayer. This is the crux of the issue. And, ideally, OSSE can pull this verification directly from the District's tax systems.

Plus, the law around "primary caretaker" needs to change. All that is required from grandma or auntie is writing a letter attesting that they are the primary caretaker and that the child lives with them. It's so loosey-goosey and lax. Basically any District citizen can claim to be the child's caretaker for purposes of qualifying DC residency.

I think you're way out of touch with the home situations of a lot of DC students. If the student is physically in DC during the school year, that should be (and is) what qualifies the student as a DC resident. If a grandma claims caretaker status but the kid is residing outside of DC, that clearly should not be allowed. But there are a lot of grandmas and aunties actually taking care of kids in DC while their parents live somewhere else - and these are not the cases DC should focus its limited resources on. Let's stop the cases with kids physically residing out of DC first - that's the bulk of the problem and the most blatant violations.

I might go down that path with you a bit if the kid is truly living at grandmas and she is financially supporting the kid, but if the kid is going home to MD to sleep and grandma is just providing aftercare til parents get off work it's clearly fraud.

I think the poster who suggested that this is mostly happening on a friends and family level is correct. That is generally the way things in DC have worked for a very long time. If you go to any DMV office you will find that many of the people are related to each other. I think the same thing is probably happening with school enrollment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused how people falsify records. You need two forms to prove residency, unless you have a pay stub. It’s not that easy to do. Practically, how do people falsify these forms?

Depends on your job. I could go into my self-service ADP portal at work and change my address now, and leave it that way for the next 6-8 weeks for enrollment, and then change it back.

The article listed other scenarios -- renting an apartment or room in District; claiming your child lives at the address of a friend or relative (have your name on their utility bill).

Renting an apartment or room in the District should not be a problem here. If the child physically resides in a DC rental during the week but a parent also has a non-DC house, then that child should get DC in-state tuition. There are a lot of scenarios - for example, separated parents - where this makes sense for the child. That's why the actual metric DC uses to assess a student's residency status is the physical residence of the child, not what is legally designated to be the primary residence of the parent.

In my opinion, the kids needs to have the parent/guardian who is registering them for school be a DC taxpayer. This is the crux of the issue. And, ideally, OSSE can pull this verification directly from the District's tax systems.

Plus, the law around "primary caretaker" needs to change. All that is required from grandma or auntie is writing a letter attesting that they are the primary caretaker and that the child lives with them. It's so loosey-goosey and lax. Basically any District citizen can claim to be the child's caretaker for purposes of qualifying DC residency.

I think you're way out of touch with the home situations of a lot of DC students. If the student is physically in DC during the school year, that should be (and is) what qualifies the student as a DC resident. If a grandma claims caretaker status but the kid is residing outside of DC, that clearly should not be allowed. But there are a lot of grandmas and aunties actually taking care of kids in DC while their parents live somewhere else - and these are not the cases DC should focus its limited resources on. Let's stop the cases with kids physically residing out of DC first - that's the bulk of the problem and the most blatant violations.

Then the kid needs to be a dependent on Grandma or Aunty's DC tax return. It's a really easy threshold to meet and is a simple change in her withholding formula. I am totally sympathetic to that Mom and Dad may live elsewhere or totally be out of the picture, so the relative takes care of the child.

But my strong suspicion is that many middle class families are using the Grandma/Auntie attestation to say she is the main caregiver because the law on this is so loosey-goosey. And then the parents are claiming the child as a dependent on their MD taxes, while driving the kid into DC everyday.

the most obvious fix would be requiring non-parent guardianship to be validated as a dependent on tax form, but taxes are filed annually for most residents and might not overlap with enrollment period. Taxes aren't file for previous year until 3.5 months into following year, after 3/4 of a given school year has completed. Even so a legal mechanism should apply for declaring guardianship which can be validated as needed

Yeah but legal guardianship can take quite awhile to establish and meanwhile the kid is stuck in limbo. But really I don’t think DC cares about those cases. The problem is middle class people with kids living in MD or VA. My guess is mostly MD?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In big picture terms, I wonder how much residency fraud impacts enrollment. To gain access as a non-resident requires some degree of fraud but there's a range of methods. Some use family, friends or non-residential addresses while some falsely claim housing instability. For the latter, does this possibly overstate the issue of student homelessness in the schools, thus impacting DC residents' decision making on if and where to enroll (DCPS or DCPCS)?

Not to minimize the difficulties for actual DC resident families struggling with housing instability, but such fraud would also impact the at-risk students who depend on every dollar allocated to the schools for support.

Most people don't want to make life difficult for kids from struggling families (even if they are bending the rules).

The situation that is emerging with the details in these successive stories is that there is significant fraud from middle class families -- often with DC or fed gov jobs -- and the myth that it's primarily at-risk kids is just played to misdirect the attention.

that's defensible on one level but for non-residents PG County taxpayers should cover this cost not DC

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused how people falsify records. You need two forms to prove residency, unless you have a pay stub. It’s not that easy to do. Practically, how do people falsify these forms?

Depends on your job. I could go into my self-service ADP portal at work and change my address now, and leave it that way for the next 6-8 weeks for enrollment, and then change it back.

The article listed other scenarios -- renting an apartment or room in District; claiming your child lives at the address of a friend or relative (have your name on their utility bill).

Renting an apartment or room in the District should not be a problem here. If the child physically resides in a DC rental during the week but a parent also has a non-DC house, then that child should get DC in-state tuition. There are a lot of scenarios - for example, separated parents - where this makes sense for the child. That's why the actual metric DC uses to assess a student's residency status is the physical residence of the child, not what is legally designated to be the primary residence of the parent.

In my opinion, the kids needs to have the parent/guardian who is registering them for school be a DC taxpayer. This is the crux of the issue. And, ideally, OSSE can pull this verification directly from the District's tax systems.

Plus, the law around "primary caretaker" needs to change. All that is required from grandma or auntie is writing a letter attesting that they are the primary caretaker and that the child lives with them. It's so loosey-goosey and lax. Basically any District citizen can claim to be the child's caretaker for purposes of qualifying DC residency.

I think you're way out of touch with the home situations of a lot of DC students. If the student is physically in DC during the school year, that should be (and is) what qualifies the student as a DC resident. If a grandma claims caretaker status but the kid is residing outside of DC, that clearly should not be allowed. But there are a lot of grandmas and aunties actually taking care of kids in DC while their parents live somewhere else - and these are not the cases DC should focus its limited resources on. Let's stop the cases with kids physically residing out of DC first - that's the bulk of the problem and the most blatant violations.

Then the kid needs to be a dependent on Grandma or Aunty's DC tax return. It's a really easy threshold to meet and is a simple change in her withholding formula. I am totally sympathetic to that Mom and Dad may live elsewhere or totally be out of the picture, so the relative takes care of the child.

But my strong suspicion is that many middle class families are using the Grandma/Auntie attestation to say she is the main caregiver because the law on this is so loosey-goosey. And then the parents are claiming the child as a dependent on their MD taxes, while driving the kid into DC everyday.

the most obvious fix would be requiring non-parent guardianship to be validated as a dependent on tax form, but taxes are filed annually for most residents and might not overlap with enrollment period. Taxes aren't file for previous year until 3.5 months into following year, after 3/4 of a given school year has completed. Even so a legal mechanism should apply for declaring guardianship which can be validated as needed

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused how people falsify records. You need two forms to prove residency, unless you have a pay stub. It’s not that easy to do. Practically, how do people falsify these forms?

Depends on your job. I could go into my self-service ADP portal at work and change my address now, and leave it that way for the next 6-8 weeks for enrollment, and then change it back.

The article listed other scenarios -- renting an apartment or room in District; claiming your child lives at the address of a friend or relative (have your name on their utility bill).

Renting an apartment or room in the District should not be a problem here. If the child physically resides in a DC rental during the week but a parent also has a non-DC house, then that child should get DC in-state tuition. There are a lot of scenarios - for example, separated parents - where this makes sense for the child. That's why the actual metric DC uses to assess a student's residency status is the physical residence of the child, not what is legally designated to be the primary residence of the parent.

In my opinion, the kids needs to have the parent/guardian who is registering them for school be a DC taxpayer. This is the crux of the issue. And, ideally, OSSE can pull this verification directly from the District's tax systems.

Plus, the law around "primary caretaker" needs to change. All that is required from grandma or auntie is writing a letter attesting that they are the primary caretaker and that the child lives with them. It's so loosey-goosey and lax. Basically any District citizen can claim to be the child's caretaker for purposes of qualifying DC residency.

I think you're way out of touch with the home situations of a lot of DC students. If the student is physically in DC during the school year, that should be (and is) what qualifies the student as a DC resident. If a grandma claims caretaker status but the kid is residing outside of DC, that clearly should not be allowed. But there are a lot of grandmas and aunties actually taking care of kids in DC while their parents live somewhere else - and these are not the cases DC should focus its limited resources on. Let's stop the cases with kids physically residing out of DC first - that's the bulk of the problem and the most blatant violations.

Then the kid needs to be a dependent on Grandma or Aunty's DC tax return. It's a really easy threshold to meet and is a simple change in her withholding formula. I am totally sympathetic to that Mom and Dad may live elsewhere or totally be out of the picture, so the relative takes care of the child.

But my strong suspicion is that many middle class families are using the Grandma/Auntie attestation to say she is the main caregiver because the law on this is so loosey-goosey. And then the parents are claiming the child as a dependent on their MD taxes, while driving the kid into DC everyday.

It comes down to the location of the parent/caregiver as a proxy for the location of the child. I think DC is more concerned with the kids being driven in from out of the District than anything else. As it should be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused how people falsify records. You need two forms to prove residency, unless you have a pay stub. It’s not that easy to do. Practically, how do people falsify these forms?

Depends on your job. I could go into my self-service ADP portal at work and change my address now, and leave it that way for the next 6-8 weeks for enrollment, and then change it back.

The article listed other scenarios -- renting an apartment or room in District; claiming your child lives at the address of a friend or relative (have your name on their utility bill).

Renting an apartment or room in the District should not be a problem here. If the child physically resides in a DC rental during the week but a parent also has a non-DC house, then that child should get DC in-state tuition. There are a lot of scenarios - for example, separated parents - where this makes sense for the child. That's why the actual metric DC uses to assess a student's residency status is the physical residence of the child, not what is legally designated to be the primary residence of the parent.

In my opinion, the kids needs to have the parent/guardian who is registering them for school be a DC taxpayer. This is the crux of the issue. And, ideally, OSSE can pull this verification directly from the District's tax systems.

Plus, the law around "primary caretaker" needs to change. All that is required from grandma or auntie is writing a letter attesting that they are the primary caretaker and that the child lives with them. It's so loosey-goosey and lax. Basically any District citizen can claim to be the child's caretaker for purposes of qualifying DC residency.

I think you're way out of touch with the home situations of a lot of DC students. If the student is physically in DC during the school year, that should be (and is) what qualifies the student as a DC resident. If a grandma claims caretaker status but the kid is residing outside of DC, that clearly should not be allowed. But there are a lot of grandmas and aunties actually taking care of kids in DC while their parents live somewhere else - and these are not the cases DC should focus its limited resources on. Let's stop the cases with kids physically residing out of DC first - that's the bulk of the problem and the most blatant violations.

Then the kid needs to be a dependent on Grandma or Aunty's DC tax return. It's a really easy threshold to meet and is a simple change in her withholding formula. I am totally sympathetic to that Mom and Dad may live elsewhere or totally be out of the picture, so the relative takes care of the child.

But my strong suspicion is that many middle class families are using the Grandma/Auntie attestation to say she is the main caregiver because the law on this is so loosey-goosey. And then the parents are claiming the child as a dependent on their MD taxes, while driving the kid into DC everyday.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused how people falsify records. You need two forms to prove residency, unless you have a pay stub. It’s not that easy to do. Practically, how do people falsify these forms?

Depends on your job. I could go into my self-service ADP portal at work and change my address now, and leave it that way for the next 6-8 weeks for enrollment, and then change it back.

The article listed other scenarios -- renting an apartment or room in District; claiming your child lives at the address of a friend or relative (have your name on their utility bill).

Renting an apartment or room in the District should not be a problem here. If the child physically resides in a DC rental during the week but a parent also has a non-DC house, then that child should get DC in-state tuition. There are a lot of scenarios - for example, separated parents - where this makes sense for the child. That's why the actual metric DC uses to assess a student's residency status is the physical residence of the child, not what is legally designated to be the primary residence of the parent.

The issue with rentals is that they rent an apartment to get the IB address, and then sublet it to someone else (who then also uses the school). They don't live there, they just use the address.

Yes, that is a problem because the child is not physically in DC. That should not be allowed. Same with designating a DC relative as caretaker while the kid is not physically in DC. Both are illegal. But the physical location of the parents is not, and should not be, the qualifier. This is about the child's welfare and education. A lot of these kids have very different family situations than the typical DCUM-er. But if the kid doesn't wake up in DC every weekday morning, that kid should not be going to a DC public school without tuition.

Anonymous wrote:why is tuition only 12k? there is no way that covers the cost for kids. Most private schools in DC start at 30k.

If DC sets the tuition for out of state students higher, they'd have to increase the per pupil allocation for DCPS and charter students.