1. 1 Balancing Act: A Board’s Role in Charter School Oversight Presented by: Sue Ann Evans, Dannis Woliver Kelley Moises Aguirre, San Diego Unified School District

2. 2 What is a Charter School? Public school that operates : – independent of the chartering entity – exempt from most of the Education Code – exempt from laws applicable solely to school districts – under chartering entity “oversight”

3. 3 The Charter Schools Act of 1992 Purpose -- to provide opportunities to establish and maintain schools that operate independently from the school district to: – Improve school learning – Increase learning opportunities for all pupils, with emphasis on academically low achieving – Encourage innovative teaching methods – Create new professional opportunities – Provide parents with expanded choice within the public school system – Hold charters accountable for meeting pupil outcomes – Provide vigorous competition to stimulate improvement

4. 4 “Charter schools are grounded in private-sector concepts such as competition-driven improvement..., employee empowerment and customer focus. But they remain very much a public-sector creature, with in-bred requirements of accountability and broad-based equity. Simple in theory, complex in practice, charter schools promise academic results in return for freedom from bureaucracy.” (Wilson v. State Board of Ed. (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 1125.)

5. 5 Boards are called upon to answer the BIG questions: Should this petition be granted to establish an independently operated school within our boundaries? Should this school be converted from a school of the district to an independently operated charter school? Should this charter be renewed? Should we take action to revoke the charter? How will we allocate space to the charter school and maintain district programs?

6. 6 The BIG questions are often emotional, invoke heated debate, and can be very divisive - and it all unfolds in front of you…

7. 7

8. 8 Should this petition be granted to establish an independently operated school within our boundaries? –Legal Standard for Review of Charter Petitions: The Charter Schools Act provides a governing board may not deny a charter petition unless it makes written factual findings, specific to the petition in question, setting forth specific facts to support one or more of five listed findings

9. 9 Five findings for denial of a charter petition : –Petition presents an unsound educational program –Petitioners are demonstrably unlikely to successfully implement the described program –The petition does not contain required signatures –The petition does not contain required affirmations –The Petition does not contain reasonably comprehensive description of all required elements Invokes the board’s discretion

10. 10 Considerations: –Is this educational program good for students? –Do the petitioners understand what it means to run an educational program? –What impacts will there be on district budget/programs? –Do we want to be the oversight agency? –As an oversight agency, do the terms of the charter provide us with the means to objectively measure performance? –Does our community want this and if so, why?

11. 11 Should this school be converted from a school of the district to an independently operated charter school? –Same legal standard for evaluating the charter petition, but also consider: Has the petition been signed by not less than 50 percent of the permanent status teachers currently employed at the public school to be converted?

12. 12 Considerations: –Can the program offered by the charter provide more and/or better opportunities than what is offered by the school under the district’s control? –Do the petitioners/teachers understand the change in terms and conditions of employment and loss of union representation? –What impacts will there be on district budget/programs? –Do the teachers at the site and our community want this, and if so, why?

13. 13 Should this charter be renewed? Legal standard for Renewal Petition: same legal standard for consideration of a charter petition but also consider: –Whether the charter school is eligible for renewal (Ed. Code, § 47607 (a).) –Legislative intent to “hold the schools …accountable for meeting measurable pupil outcomes, and provide the schools with a method to change from rule-based to performance-based accountability systems.” (Ed. Code, § 47601 (f).)

14. 14 S.B. 1290 (2012) “The authority that granted the charter shall consider increases in pupil academic achievement for all groups of pupils served by the charter school as the most important factor in determining whether to grant a charter renewal.” (Ed. Code, § 47607(a).)

15. 15 Considerations: –Has the charter school’s past academic, operational, and fiscal performance (as opposed to plans for future improvement) demonstrated the ability to effectively provide a quality education to students in compliance with law and the charter? –Has the charter school increased student performance? –Has academic performance increased for all groups of students served by the charter school? –Has the charter school been cooperative and compliant? –How has the oversight role impacted the district’s budget/programs? –Has the “freedom from bureaucracy” improved student performance? “… [C]harter schools promise academic results in return for freedom from bureaucracy.” (Wilson v. State Board of Education.)

16. 16 Should we take action to revoke this charter? Legal Standards for Revocation: A charter may be revoked by the authority that granted the charter if the authority finds, through a showing of substantial evidence, that the charter school did any of the following: –Committed a material violation of any of the conditions, standards or procedures set forth in the charter –Failed to meet or pursue any of the pupil outcomes identified in the charter –Failed to meet generally accepted accounting principles –Violated any provision of law

17. 17 Revocation Procedure Notice of violation issued by the Board If notice of violation process does not address concern to authorizer’s satisfaction: –Written notice of intent to revoke and notice of facts in support of revocation to charter school –Public hearing before the governing board with 30 days of notice of intent –No later than 30 days after the public hearing, the chartering authority shall issue a final decision to revoke or decline to revoke the charter (Ed. Code, § 47607(e).)

18. 18 Notice of Violation When is the time right to issue a notice of violation? An authorizer should issue a notice of violation whenever it has evidence to show: –material violation of charter –failure to meet pupil outcomes –fiscal mismanagement –violation of law

19. 19 Revocation Decision Where evidence shows that: –charter school committed material violation of the charter; failed to meet pupil outcomes; engaged in fiscal mismanagement; and/or violated provisions of law, and, –failed to remedy or demonstrate to the Board's satisfaction the ability to remedy Decision to revoke may be in the best interests of the students and the oversight agency. –students are entitled to quality education in a safe and stable environment –district may be held liable for debts and obligations of the charter school if it fails to meet its oversight obligations

20. 20 In order for an oversight agency to protect itself from liability for the charter school’s debts, obligations, acts, errors or omissions, it must meet all of the oversight duties including taking action to revoke where charter school fails to remedy material violations.

21. 21 Considerations: Will students be better off even if displaced? Do we have systems in place to address transition including special needs students? Are we willing to take on the charter school’s liability? Are we prepared to close the school in the face of student, parent, community upset?

22. 22 How will we allocate space to the charter school and maintain district programs? Legal Standard for Allocation of Facilities: A district must allocate reasonably equivalent facilities to a charter school that has at least 80 ADA “in-district” students. The facilities must be reasonably equivalent to the facilities the students would be provided if they attended the (comparison) district schools and must be “contiguous, furnished and equipped” as those terms are defined in statute and the implementing regulations.

23. 23 "[W]e conclude a school district’s exercise of its discretion in responding to a Proposition 39 facilities request must comport with the evident purpose of the Act to equalize the treatment of charter and district-run schools with respect to the allocation of space between them." (Ridgecrest v. Sierra Sands Unified School District (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 986.)

24. 24 "A holding that the District must provide facilities a charter school requests, on demand and without regard to overcrowding or the impact on other public school students, would tip the balance too far in favor of the charter school." (Los Angeles International Charter High School v. Los Angeles Unified School District (2013) 209 Cal.App.4th 1348.)

25. 25 Considerations: –Does the allocation of space strike a fair balance between the needs of students attending the charter school and the needs of district students? –Though maybe not perfect, does the space comport with the size and kind of space the charter students would be housed in if they attended the district schools? –Is this a safe environment for charter students and district students? –If co-locating, do we have systems in place to ensure cooperative sharing arrangements? –What are the impacts on the district’s budget/programs of allocating space to the charter school?

26. 26 What information should I have to make this important decision? –Consider study session for petition review, renewal, and allocation of facilities –Clear explanation on the process the district will follow for each of the areas under consideration before the process is initiated –Impacts and legal analysis of the specific petition, conversion, renewal, revocation, allocation of facilities –Analysis of Board’s options and consequences for each option, including impacts on district budget/programs

27. 27 Sue Ann Evans Dannis Woliver Kelley sevans@DWKesq.com (562) 366-8500 sevans@DWKesq.com Moises Aguirre San Diego Unified School District maguirre@sandi.net