The Center for Public Integrity

The school buildings described in Kristen Lombardi’s recent article are on-base facilities that many communities do not feel local taxpayers should be responsible for funding. Why? They primarily enroll military-dependent children only. So when an on-base school building needs repair or there is a need for a new building, the local community won’t support a bond referendum.

The federal government is responsible for providing funding to public schools serving military dependent students to build, repair or renovate buildings. That precedent was established 61 years ago when President Harry S Truman signed two laws that have become the foundation of what is now called Impact Aid.

Between 1951 and 1977, Congress appropriated more than $1.5 billion for public schools serving federally connected children — including military-dependent students — to build and repair school facilities to the tune of 6,505 projects. Congress consolidated education law in 1994 and merged school construction into the overall Impact Aid law.

But nothing is ever that simple in Washington and funding has not always flowed smoothly to local schools. The Education Law Center says: “Except for tax law that provides very favorable financing for school districts … the federal government has assumed no responsibility for the quality of public school facilities. There is no staff dedicated to this issue at the U.S. Department of Education … it is considered a local school district responsibility.”

The notion that school construction is and should be a local responsibility is a position shared by many congressional conservatives. They argue that public schools are locally controlled and financing should be decided by the communities that provide the funding.

After 10 years of war, are we neglecting the sons and daughters of U.S. military personnel? Is the decrepit shape of many of their schools adding to the strains they already feel from parents who are absent for many months if not years of their lives? Who should be responsible for the educational needs of military kids? 

These questions were at the heart of iWatch News reporter Kristen Lombardi's latest investigation into the worsening conditions of schools on U.S. military installations. On Tuesday, July 5th, Lombardi discussed her findings and their implications in a live panel discussion with readers.

Joining Lombardi on the panel was Joyce Raezer, executive director of the National Military Family Association; Ronald Walker, superintendent of Geary County Public Schools, which serve schools on the Fort Riley post in Kansas; and Norman Heitzman, former assistant schools superintendent for South Carolina-Fort Stewart-Cuba District, Department of Defense schools, which serve schools on Fort Stewart, in Georgia.

Replay the full transcript of the conversation below. If you have questions about the chat, or our investigation, you can tweet them to @iWatch using the hashtag #dodschools, or post them in the comments below. 

An investigation by iWatch News has found that tens of thousands of children attend schools on military installations that are falling apart from age and neglect, and fail to meet Defense Department standards. 

As we reported in our story, three in four of the 194 schools run by the Defense Department on military bases are either beyond repair or would require extensive renovation to meet minimum standards for safety, quality, accessibility and design. Schools run by public systems on Army installations don’t fare much better: 39 percent fall in the failing or poor categories, according to a 2010 Army report.

Have you had an experience with a school on a military base? We're interested in hearing from parents, students and teachers who have been involved with military base school overseas or in the United States. Your insights will givie us a better understanding of current school conditions and help inform our reporting.