Abstract
Statement of the problem. Public education is under siege from many directions to improve in the delivery of educational services and be more efficient. A limited amount of financial resources is available for public education, yet the expectations and demands are numerous. Some believe privatization of school support services will improve operations and save money, which is needed for more direct educational expenditures. Others believe privatization of school support services will not work, does not save money, and will have negative ramifications. The public's demand for more without tax increases requires a close examination of privatization of school support services in order to determine its viability for education as one answer to efficiency and cost savings. Methodology. The researcher used descriptive and ex post facto research. A questionnaire was sent to (CBOs) of all 122 districts between 2,500 and 50,000 ADA that currently or have within the last five years contract for one or more of eight services. Findings. Saving money was the primary expected outcome for districts in privatizing services. The majority of school districts attain some degree of success in contracting but is dependent upon the district's desired goal(s). Certain impacts/outcomes have a greater possibility of success than others. Contracting for expansion of services has the least likelihood of being successful, while providing skilled personnel and meeting workload fluctuations have higher probabilities of success. Expanding services provided, improving services and operations, and saving money were impacts most frequently cited as not meeting districts' desired outcomes in contracting services. Other than for computer services, there were no significant differences in achievement of district goals when contracting services for four years or more compared to those contracting for less than four years. Significant differences were found for five of the twelve impacts/outcomes based on length of time districts contracted for services. The level of involvement of the CBO in the decision to privatize was not a factor in achieving district outcomes. Length of service as the CBO did not result in a significant difference in the achievement of the desired district outcomes for the services. Conclusions. Privatizing support services does work in most school districts. However saving money and improving operations, the two primary reasons for privatizing, are not always achieved. In almost all cases, variables such as years of contracting, CBO involvement in the contracting decision, and tenure in the district were not significantly different in attainment of goals. Districts contracting for services for four years or more were not as positive about their impacts/outcomes.