THE HARVARD STUDY
Massachusetts' Investment in the METCO Program
Returns Big Dividends
For 41 years, the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts has been underwriting a portion of the
cost of educating more than 3,400 students annually who are affiliated
with the voluntary integration program known as METCO. Since 1966, more
than 10,000 METCO students have graduated from these participating
suburban districts and most have gone on to higher education, degrees
and professional jobs.
A closer look at the program, though, highlights the value the State has
obtained by choosing to fund a program that utilizes existing resources,
such as existing schools, teachers, administrators, and guidance staff
to educate a group of students and increase the diversity and decrease
the racial isolation of primarily white schools.
The METCO program, a voluntary effort that pre-dates, by 8 years, Judge
Garrity's court order in Boston, was founded by leaders in suburban
districts, Boston and Springfield, and was an attempt to not only open
up educational opportunities for urban students of color, but to
integrate suburban districts that even today remain primarily white.
From a modest beginning of 250 students, funded first by the Carnegie
Foundation and the federal Government, the State became involved in the
funding of the program in the early 1970's and was the catalyst to
significant growth to more than 3,500 students at its peak. Funding cuts
and 20 years of level funding have reduced the numbers of students to
present enrollments of about 3,300 statewide. Today, the program places
the majority of its 460 annual placements in grades Kindergarten, One
and Two. Approximately sixty percent are African American, 30% Hispanic,
and 10% Asian. So, what are the dividends of this program that founders
never dreamed would be around 37 years later? What are the dividends
that legislators can defend as justification for annual expenditures?
Educational results lead the list. Last year, 92% of the program's
graduating seniors (238) indicated their intent of going on to higher
education. This compares to less than 70% of their siblings and friends
in Boston, with less than 80% state-wide. Also of significance
academically is the retention rate of students in the program, with less
than 8% of the students annually leaving the program for all reasons,
including moving from Boston, which makes them ineligible for further
participation in the program.
How about the impact of integration in the suburban districts that
participate in the program? In a 1996 report about suburban Boston
districts participating in the program, METCO students represented from
16% to 98% of the non-white students in these districts, with the
average being more than 40%. Massachusetts' Investment in the METCO
Program Returns Big Dividends in terms of increasing diversity and
decreasing racial isolation!
Without METCO, these districts
would be primarily white and economically homogenous. Equally important to the
integration of these districts is the fact that the funding from the METCO
grant, 93% of which goes to the suburban districts, allows these districts to
employ nearly 200 staff members, the majority of whom are African American and
Hispanic.
What about the continued demand for the program? Are there interested students
not being placed? Is there continued support in participating districts? Are
there possibilities for expansion of the program? The program's waiting list
exceeds 15,500 and continues to grow. There are many students for every grade
level awaiting placement, with over 600 placed annually. Only two METCO
participating districts have ever withdrawn from participating in the program
over the past 43 years, and six districts which intended to start participation
but were thwarted in the 1970's when no increased funding and expansion became
state policy.
Finally, how about the cost to the Commonwealth? Are they getting a deal? Are
they overspending? The cost to the State is approximately $3,880 per student,
including transportation, supportive services and the cost of all direct program
staffing. If these students were in Boston, or in Charter Schools, or residents
of the districts where they attend schools, the cost would be nearly double in
all cases, and possibly three times that in other cases. Special Education
services would also drive those cost significantly higher, acknowledging that in
METCO districts receive only a small percentage of the cost they expend on
Special Education services for METCO students.
In makes one wonder why a program that has such modest costs and known positive
results annually comes under a barrage of accusations, rumors and demands for a
study pending increases in funding. It also makes one wonder why educational
policy makers and legislators never come forth with funds for the study.
METCO undoubtedly pays high dividends to the State in student achievements,
efficiency of cost and impact on integration of suburban districts, but critics
of public policies that conflict with personal ideologies will always attempt to
distort the facts and attempt to kill successful programs at any cost.
