| Opinion
& Essays
-
Aug, 1993 Issue #23 |
FOR PROFIT VS. NONPROFIT
SCHOOLS AND PROGRAMS
by: Lon Woodbury
For years, we have been told
nonprofit schools and programs have the advantage over for
profit ones in terms of cost and service. Indeed, there are
many people, especially in education, who refuse to deal with
or support a school or program unless it is nonprofit. Some
of these people have explained to me they believe a nonprofit
program is freer to emphasize helping children, while for
profit programs are forced to concentrate on making money.
A few with even more extreme views have even gone so far as
to claim that greed is the underlying characteristic of for
profit programs, and public service is the underlying characteristic
of nonprofit programs.
The other day I received a flyer
from a program I had never especially thought of as being
low cost (It is not one contained in my Directory). The flyer
explained they were able to keep costs low by being nonprofit
and consequently didn't have to distribute profits to owners.
To me, this was a challenge to test the claim of the cost
advantage of nonprofit programs.
I started with my Directory of
Outstanding Special Purpose Schools and Programs since inclusion
there was based on reputation and results, irregardless of
legal organization status. Since there is a wide range of
types of programs included, I settled on the backbone type
of Special Purpose Program, the long-term, year-round school
and/or program which focuses on structure and emotional growth
experiences, with formal therapy being supplementary. This
eliminated all the short-term outdoor and wilderness programs,
as well as those which are a type of Residential Treatment
Center (i.e. having an intensive care unit and/or emphasizes
intensive disease model therapy).
I also eliminated Christian schools
for the reason their tuition does not reflect true costs.
i.e. staff often serve as missionary type volunteers, and
church contributions are usually a regular and significant
portion of their operating income. These are unique advantages
that come from religious affiliation rather than from being
nonprofit.
What was left was 33 schools/programs,
operating year-round, working predominately with psychologically
intact at-risk children, and surviving by meeting the needs
and wants of individual families rather than an agency's guidelines
or some other criteria.
True, this was only a quick survey,
and factors such as add-on costs might change the results.
Changing the criteria for selection of course might also change
the results. Nevertheless, these results were interesting
and food for thought.
The average daily tuition of
the 24 for profit schools and programs was a little over $100.
The average daily tuition of
the nine nonprofit schools and programs was a little over
$105.
This quick survey did not support
the idea that nonprofit status saves the families money. It
does suggest the difference in cost to the family is minimal
between nonprofit and for profit.
There was another interesting
pattern. Using the same 33 programs, and arranging them by
date of founding, there is an indication that Special Purpose
School founders moved away from choosing nonprofit status
after the year 1980. Eight of the nine nonprofit schools were
founded before 1981, and only one was founded after 1981.
On the other hand, 17 of the 24 for profit schools were founded
after 1980, and only 7 were founded before 1980.
Many observers have claimed that
a sea-change in American attitudes occurred during the eighties.
This change seems to also be reflected in Special Purpose
Schools and Programs. It is reflected in a tendency for new
Special Purpose Schools and Programs to prefer for profit
status since 1980.
Admittedly, this is only a cursory
examination, and I would welcome comments or other observations,
or even some detailed research on the subject of the differences
between for profit and Nonprofit Schools and Programs.
Copyright
© 1993, Woodbury Reports, Inc. (This article may be reproduced
without prior approval if the copyright notice and proper
publication and author attribution accompanies the copy.)
|
