An editorial in today’s Houston Chronicle and an article on June 18 remind us that taxpayers support the country's youth in a multitude of ways. Public education may be the single largest expenditure, but before school there is pre and post-natal care provided by health agencies. During the school years there is breakfast and lunch funded through the U.S. Department of Agriculture. After they leave school, students may draw resources in the form of welfare, time in juvenile and criminal justice, or vocational education.  And this explanation is really just the bare outline.

But taxpayers don’t write a different check for each of these activities; they write one check for the whole thing. From their - our - position, it’s one system. Research confirms this view. If we don’t make sure our nation’s children are well cared for at birth, their education will cost more. If they aren’t fed well during the school day, they are at higher risk of learning problems. If their learning disabilities are not diagnosed properly, they won’t get the help they need. If they are not doing well in school, they are likely to drop out. If they drop out, they are likely to be seen in court, the welfare line, or jail.

Just as taxpayers bear the financial costs when a student spirals down, they reap the financial benefits when a student escapes that trap. Good natal care puts a child in a better position to learn. Good nutrition puts a student in the right frame of mind to study. Good diagnoses of learning challenges give students the best chance to make use of their talents. Kids who graduate to college or get good training in a trade not only can lead satisfying lives, they benefit the economy. It’s not just the tax savings on welfare or jail, it’s the funds contributed by a new taxpayer.

The taxpayer pays for it all or benefits from it all. Any reader of K-12Leads and Youth Service Markets Report can see the train of RFPs covering every stage of childhood and need of children. But our “youth support system” is divided into multiple agencies resulting in a less than logical mess over overlapping interests and huge service gaps. And each has an inherent interest in protecting its own budget, policy turf and in growing its’ own programs. To give just one example, education agencies are involved in the discipline of seriously problematic students, and youth detention agencies are reponsible for educatiing the children in its charge. The relationship between the two cultures runs down a very tenuous channel.  While many school improvement providers can and should be serving agencies besides public schools, as it is, it's too hard to negotiate "public education" narrowly defined in this system to invest much effort in new marketing activities.

We not only lack the money to continue down this wasteful path of bureaucratic balkanization, we are funding something that contributes to the destruction of too many children lives. Whether one is motivated by social purpose or economic efficiency, it's time to starting thinking about a more effective system.