Private foundations are now the drivers of much education policymaking. This Article takes that empirical fact as a point of departure, and uses it to crack open three bigger, interrelated problems. First, though scholars have critiqued and mostly moved on from the public/private law binary, that binary becomes critical in the private policymaking context because of the Supreme Court’s continued adherence to the state action doctrine, which the Article demonstrates is a wholly insufficient frame for thinking about nominally governmental decision-making when so much public policy is now, rather, private policy. But this fact also requires a rethinking of the education law literature’s focus on public law and public entities, and administrative law’s treatment of public-private delegations, both of which might at first seem to be ways to theorize private policymaking in the realm of public education. The Article instead argues for a new problematic, in which the law must grapple with private action that is upstream from the critical, legally cognizable moment of public decision-making, yet is almost wholly determinative of that decision. Second, building on the literature on heterarchical governance and problem definition, the Article argues for a new conception of state action, using theoretical models from political anthropology and sociology to map a more functionalist and fluid conception of the state, and its acts, onto legal doctrine. Third, the Article examines private mechanisms of accountability — private law, private politics, and private ordering — and concludes that they are insufficient to legitimize private policymaking, at least in the context of education. The Article concludes by calling for a renewed focus on legislation and political advocacy as a means of ensuring a high-quality and equitable education for all students.