@HideYourKids0
🧵
1/
Marco Rubio is a clear advocate for targeted public-private partnerships (PPPs) as a key tool within his “Common Good Capitalism” framework.
Philanthropists and foundations like Arnold Ventures routinely provide grants for university research, including at public institutions such as the University of Oklahoma (OU) or similar schools in Utah and elsewhere, strengthening public-private partnerships (PPPs).
Through its Evidence & Evaluation team, Arnold Ventures funds rigorous, causal research—primarily randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies—in areas like higher education, criminal justice, health, infrastructure, and public finance.
They award millions annually in research grants, often to universities (e.g., University of Texas at Austin, University of Utah, University of Chicago, and University of California schools) for projects on education outcomes, career pathways, and policy impacts.
Critics of Arnold Ventures (AV) grants to universities for research—primarily in states like Texas (e.g., UT Austin), California (e.g., UC Irvine, UCLA), Michigan, Colorado, Indiana, and others.
influencewatch.org
Key criticisms include:
• Lack of transparency and circumvention of traditional institutions: William Schambra and others argue AV’s LLC structure allows the Arnolds to bypass public disclosure rules of 501(c)(3)/(c)(4) entities, enabling direct pursuit of policy goals with less accountability. Grantees (including university-linked projects) sometimes fail to prominently disclose AV funding in outputs like articles, lawsuits, or advocacy letters, creating perceptions of hidden influence.
influencewatch.org
• Pushing ideological or reform agendas through “evidence-based” research: In higher education, critics claim AV-funded studies and evaluations advance priorities like greater institutional accountability, performance metrics, restrictions on for-profit/online program managers (OPMs), student debt protections, and pension/public finance reforms. This is seen as tilting toward progressive or technocratic solutions that undermine traditional university autonomy, faculty governance, or public institutions (e.g., favoring certain criminal justice or economic mobility evaluations that align with AV’s views).
onedtech.philhillaa.com
• Coordinated influence campaigns: In states with AV-supported university research (e.g., on college outcomes or policy evaluations), some allege it fuels litigation, regulatory pushes, and media narratives without balanced counterviews, potentially pressuring institutions or shaping state policy debates.
onedtech.philhillaa.com
A example of a Oklahoma P3 partnering with TK Health (formerly Turn Key Health Clinics) — a for-profit private contractor providing medical/mental health services in county jails —
Flow Summary (AV Research Guides Practice)
AV RCT Evidence (proves value)
↓
Strengthens/Incentivizes NCCHC Accreditation (gold standard)
↓
Contracts Mandate TK Health Compliance (operational requirement for bids, payments, liability protection).
↓
Improved (or targeted) Jail Healthcare Outcomes
Key Takeaway: AV doesn’t directly fund or partner with TK Health. It funds independent research validating the NCCHC standards that TK Health (and other contractors) must follow under government contracts. This creates an evidence-based feedback loop: research → standards → contractor performance.
This model is common in regulated sectors where philanthropy backs rigorous evaluation of existing best practices.
RESULTS are jails primarily allege systemic deficiencies in care quality, driven by cost-cutting measures that endanger detainees. = COUNTLESS LAWSUITS