After Hurricane Katrina drowned New Orleans in 2005, the city rebuilt its school system and became the nation’s first nearly all-charter, all-choice district. Two decades later, the results vindicate the reforms. According to the Education Research Alliance for New Orleans, the city has achieved “impressive results” in test scores, graduation rates, and college enrollment following its post-Katrina changes. New Orleans schools ranked at the bottom of the state when the hurricane hit but have since advanced to the middle on most academic outcomes.
The latest Education Scorecard, produced by researchers at Harvard, Stanford, and Dartmouth, places Louisiana near the top nationally for growth between 2022 and 2025: second in reading improvement, third in math, and the only state to exceed its pre-pandemic performance in both subjects. New Orleans was the state’s most important reform laboratory.
Finally, a reason to check your email.
Sign up for our free newsletter today.
This is all the more remarkable because Louisiana sits in the bottom third of states in per-pupil funding—about $17,300 per student, some $2,600 below the national average. The city thus rebukes the familiar claim that bad results mainly reflect inadequate funding. Institutions and incentives matter more than money spent.
Before the hurricane, New Orleans ran some of the worst schools in America. Of all district schools, 61 percent were rated failing, barely half of students graduated, and corruption and financial mismanagement were endemic. By 2024, Tulane University’s Cowen Institute reported no failing schools in New Orleans for the first time since Louisiana began rating schools.
I saw the turnaround from the inside because I helped lead it. Nearly two years after the storm, Governor Kathleen Blanco, Senator Mary Landrieu, and Superintendent of Education Paul Pastorek recruited me to help reopen schools for returning families, despite fierce opposition from much of the city’s legislative delegation.
At the time, only a handful of campuses had reopened, most school buildings were unusable, and much of the federal “restart” funding had already been squandered, largely on management consultants. We had just three months to create seats for tens of thousands of returning students. By building modular campuses, recruiting teachers, and launching 34 new schools—22 operated by the state’s Recovery School District (RSD) and 12 charters—we increased the total number of open schools to 54.
The improvements were immediate, substantive, and sustained, both for charters and direct-run schools. From 2008 to 2013, the share of RSD students scoring basic or above rose 29 points, against nine statewide. Failing schools fell from 47 percent of the city to 7 percent. Each year, I conducted my own test-score comparisons, observing over time that charter and direct-run schools improved in close parallel, for the same reasons.
First, families were no longer trapped. Parents could apply to any school in the city—by lottery when seats ran short—instead of being consigned by zip code to a failing neighborhood school. That single change transformed the system’s culture. Schools had to attract families, keep them, and show results.
Second, the city gutted the central bureaucracy. That meant that per-pupil dollars followed students directly to schools, and the district’s job shrank to a few things done well: vetting operators, providing facilities, giving parents clear information, and enforcing academic and financial accountability. Authority and responsibility moved close to the classroom.
Third, school leaders gained real control over budgets, staffing, and academics. Principals could build teams, reward excellence, intervene quickly when students fell behind, and choose models suited to their students rather than to a distant bureaucracy or union contract. Accountability made that autonomy meaningful by subjecting weak schools to replacement or closure. Because direct-run schools were effectively treated as charters, once school leaders recognized the benefits of independence, many moved to obtain charter status.
Finally, schools made better use of time. We implemented longer school days and years, creating more opportunities for tutoring, remediation, and enrichment—no small advantage in a high-poverty city where many students arrive below grade level.
Importantly, New Orleans’s academic gains occurred as Louisiana was raising standards and steadily increasing proficiency cut scores on state tests. In other words, the city’s schools were clearing a rising bar. That sustained push for higher standards has helped produce some of the nation’s fastest K–12 academic improvement in recent years.
While it would be an oversimplification to credit the success solely to most schools becoming public charters, it would also be incorrect to claim it occurred because all the NOLA teachers were replaced. Around 4,300 public-school teachers fired by the old school board after Hurricane Katrina hit were invited by the RSD to return to the district. By fall 2007, over half had returned to teaching either in New Orleans or in other Louisiana districts. At the end of the day, the gains came from the system’s structure: autonomy, choice, accountability, and a willingness to replace persistently ineffective school models.
The latest Cowen Institute report shows how far the city has come. Seventy-three of its 74 public schools are now charters; graduation and college enrollment far exceed Katrina-era levels; and no failing school was slated to operate ahead of the 2025–26 school year. It’s not perfect—enrollment is declining and teachers are in short supply—but next to the pre-Katrina system, the change is remarkable.
New Orleans demonstrates that children benefit most when adults lose the power to preserve failure. Other cities should find the courage to emulate the NOLA model.
When families can choose, schools must compete. Leaders gain the freedom to lead. The system closes what doesn’t work. And student outcomes improve—even in a poor city, even after catastrophe, and even without additional funding.