Key legislative objectives for the US Federal educational policy over the past several decades relied heavily on quasi-market strategies (such as school rating, school closure, the contracting out of schools) as central levers in "reforming" public schools. Using financial data on 11 national for-profit firms contracting with schools and districts, I argue that for-profit firms continue to benefit from significant public revenues made available through policies that seek to align public education with market place values. This trend precedes and continues in the wake of the global financial crisis of 2007. Even as public school districts across the USA struggle to pay for core instructional services (reasonable pupil-teacher ratios), for-profit firms display increased sales in the absence of any evidence of cost savings or improved student achievement--the main objective of the current Federal education policy. These developments press for closer scrutiny of activities of these firms and a more assertive Federal role in evaluating the performance of these firms, many of which rely on public funds to support their operations. (Contains 1 table and 6 notes.)