1 / 18

STEM High and Middle School Charter Application

STEM High and Middle School Charter Application. Board of Education Meeting Tuesday, November 3, 2009 Pat McGraw, Executive Director of Enterprise Solutions Kindra Whitmyre, Director of Charter School Partnerships. Application Process. September 8- STEM application received

tanisha-soto
Download Presentation

STEM High and Middle School Charter Application

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. STEM High and Middle School Charter Application Board of Education Meeting Tuesday, November 3, 2009 Pat McGraw, Executive Director of Enterprise Solutions Kindra Whitmyre, Director of Charter School Partnerships

  2. Application Process • September 8- STEM application received • September 22- October 5- DCSD staff reviewed application components and completed feedback rubric • October 15- STEM team received staff feedback, with the exception of financial and legal feedback* • October 15- Meeting with STEM team about staff feedback and first reading presentation

  3. Application Process, continued • November 3- First Reading to the BoE • November 6- Revisions by STEM team to their application returned back to DCSD staff • November 9- DCSD staff review STEM application revisions and give their final recommendation • November 11- DCSD staff recommendation prepared for the BoE • November 17- Second Reading to BoE • Financial feedback was provided to the STEM team on Tuesday, October 27, and a financial meeting with the STEM team and DC financial staff is pending.

  4. Areas Satisfactory or Needing Improvement • Satisfactory • Dispute Resolution Plan • Discontinue Operation of School Plan • Assurance that the STEM team have never operated as an education program

  5. Areas Satisfactory or Needing Improvement • Needs Improvement • Mission Statement Evaluating Pupil Performance Standard • Evaluating Pupil Performance Standards • Curriculum • At-Risk Student Plan

  6. Areas Satisfactory or Needing Improvement, continued • Needs Improvement • Evidence that Students, Parents and Staff Support the Formation of STEM • Insurance Coverage • Governance Policy • Employment Terms and Relationship • Enrollment and Admissions Policies • Discipline and Attendance Policies

  7. Example: Needs Improvement STEM should also have specified (1) Educators’ Legal Liability Coverage; (2) Automobile Liability Coverage, including owned, hired and non-owned vehicles as applicable, with excess coverage to apply to employees using their personal vehicles on STEM business; and (3) more clearly defined “Workers’ Compensation coverage as required by statute” instead of “Blanket Occupational Accident” coverage. • Insurance Coverage

  8. Example: Needs Improvement • Discipline and Attendance Policies The applicant speaks to academic watch and various high level expectations but it is not clearly stated at what point a student will be “dismissed” from enrollment or how the list of possible infractions on the top of page 101 aligns to state statutes for mandatory expulsion. There was not a plan included for services for students that may be expelled from school.

  9. Unsatisfactory • Overall Goals and Objectives • Pupil Performance Standards • Academic Accountability Plan • Financial Plan/Fiscal Accountability Plan • Transportation • Facility

  10. Example: Unsatisfactory • The proposed budget for technology and computers does not seem to be adequate to support a STEM school. • The budget does not reflect start-up funds from CDE, and currently the grant funding is not substantiated to any degree. • Financial Plan/Fiscal Accountability Plan

  11. Example: Unsatisfactory • The current budget is not sustainable without the previously mentioned grant funding. The budget is incomplete, as revenues are overstated due to PPR being trended with inaccurate growth numbers. • Operating reserve is inadequate considering that roughly 10% of operating revenues come from non-PPR sources. • Financial Plan/Fiscal Accountability Plan

  12. Example: Unsatisfactory • Financial Continued • The 3% Tabor Reserve has no line item in the budget, and language on pg 92 regarding capital reserves is outdated. • PERA is understated at 10%, and purchased service costs for special education and assessment need to be clarified. • The Line of Credit (LOC) is an unfounded assumption that would need to be vetted by the Board of Education (BoE) and DCSD Legal based on the financing plan. Currently this would require a draw on district operating funds to provide for the LOC.

  13. Example: Unsatisfactory • Facility • The description of the facility was vague with little specifics with regard to learning spaces. • There was no mention of a lease or lease agreement included. • There was not a plan of how the facility will be maintained.

  14. Example: Unsatisfactory • Pupil Performance Standards • The goal regarding information literacy standards mentions “familiarity” with the information literacy standards. This expectation would not meet or exceed the expectation of the District. As a STEM model high school, it would be anticipated that the expectation would be higher. • Some indicators need to be rewritten to reflect current CDE language. • Eleventh and 12th grade student requirements are not mentioned in any of the indicators.

  15. Example: Unsatisfactory • Pupil Performance Standards • Some indicators are not written to meet or exceed student proficiency and performance standards, adopted by the Douglas County Board of Education, asrequired by law. • There is no progress monitoring plans for students placed on an ILP.

  16. Staff Recommendation • At the time of the first reading, the staff is unable to make a recommendation to the Board of Education, as the application is incomplete. • Given the incomplete nature of the application, the staff recommends ‘No Action’ by the Board of Education on November 3, 2009.

  17. Next Steps • The STEM team must complete the areas of the application by Friday, November 6, 2009. • The Charter School Review Team (CART) will review the completed areas of the application by Tuesday, November 10, 2009. • The Charter Office will prepare the review matrix for the BoE in order to provide a staff recommendation on each area of the charter application and an overall staff recommendation by the Tuesday, November 17, 2009 Board Meeting. • The STEM team will be notified of staff’s recommendation prior to the November 17, 2009 Board of Education meeting.

  18. In Conclusion Thank You: We will take additional questions after the presentation from STEM Introduction: STEM High and Middle School and Academy Charter Team

More Related