Meeting of the Board of Regents | December 2007

THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234

 

TO:
FROM:	Johanna Duncan-Poitier
SUBJECT:	Charter School Initial Applications, Renewals, and Revisions
DATE:	November 16, 2007
STRATEGIC GOAL:	Goals 1 and 2
AUTHORIZATION(S):

 

SUMMARY

 

Issues for Decision

 

Should the Regents approve the staff’s recommendations concerning the applications to establish the La Cima Charter School (New York City) and the Rochester Academy Charter School (Rochester)?

 

Should the Regents approve the staff’s recommendations concerning the proposed first renewal of the charters for the Bronx Charter School for Children (New York City), the Pinnacle Charter School (Buffalo), the Syracuse Academy of Science Charter School (Syracuse), and the proposed second renewal for the Riverhead Charter School (Riverhead)? 

 

Should the Regents approve the staff’s recommendations concerning the proposed revisions to the charters for the Buffalo Academy of Science Charter School (Buffalo) and the Western New York Maritime Charter School (Buffalo)?

 

Reason(s) for Consideration

 

              Required by State statute, Education Law §2852.

 

Proposed Handling

 

This question will come before the EMSC-VESID Committee at its December 2007 meeting for action.  It will then come before the full Board at its December 2007 meeting for final action.

Procedural History

 

The New York Charter Schools Act of 1998 requires the Board of Regents (“Board”) to review applications for both new charter schools and the renewal of existing charter schools that are submitted to it in accordance with the standards set forth in subdivision two of New York State Education Law §2852.  After review, the Board may either (a) approve an application and issue a charter or a renewal charter for a term of up to five years, or (b) deny the application.

 

In addition, New York Education Law §2852(7) provides that revisions of charter school charters shall be made only upon approval of the charter entity and the Board of Regents in accordance with the provisions of the law applicable to the issuance of charters themselves.  With respect to charter schools directly chartered by the Board, it may either approve a proposed revision or deny it.  

 

Background Information

 

We have received two applications to establish new charter schools.  These will be presented to you at your December 2007 meeting.  The applications are for the following:

 

• La Cima Charter School (New York City)
• Rochester Academy Charter School (Rochester)

 

The La Cima Charter School would be located in New York City Community School District 24, in Queens.  The proposed charter school will initially serve 160 students in grades K-1 and expand to serve 480 students in grades K-5 by the fifth year of the initial charter.  The curriculum will focus on academic rigor, respect for family heritage, and dual language (Spanish/English) instruction.  Recruitment will target students of all backgrounds and admission will be open to all. With the goal of developing bilingual and bi-literacy skills by fifth grade, students will receive two language arts blocks per day, one in English and one in Spanish.  Staff recommend that the application be approved. 

 

The Rochester Academy Charter School would be located in Rochester.  The proposed charter school will initially serve 180 students in grades 7-9 and expand to serve 360 students in grades 7-12 by the fifth year of the initial charter.  The curriculum is focused on math and science, and the application essentially replicates the programs in two existing Regents-authorized charter schools, the Buffalo Academy of Science Charter School and the Syracuse Academy of Science Charter School.  Both optional and mandatory small-group and individual tutoring are a core part of the educational program, as is Saturday School. Tutoring, enrichment, and test-prep strategies are all offered during Saturday School.  Higher-order thinking competencies are a core part of the proposed school’s central set of essential methodologies.  Students will participate in math and science competitions.  Staff recommend that the application be approved. 

 

We have also received three applications for first renewal charters and one application for a second renewal charter. These will be presented to you at your December 2007 meeting. The first renewal charter applications are for the following:

 

• Bronx Charter School for Children, New York City
• Pinnacle Charter School, Buffalo
• Syracuse Academy of Science Charter School, Syracuse

 

The second renewal charter application is for the following:

 

• Riverhead Charter School, Riverhead

 

The applications for the Bronx Charter School for Children, Pinnacle Charter School, and the Syracuse Academy of Science Charter School were all approved by the Board of Regents, as the charter entity, in December 2002, and the initial charters granted in January 2003. The application for the Riverhead Charter School was approved by the Board of Regents in December 2000, the initial charter was granted in January 2001, and its first renewal charter was approved by the Board of Regents in December 2005. 

 

The Bronx Charter School for Children (“the School”) is located in New York City Community School District 7 in a primarily Spanish-speaking community in the Mott Haven section of the South Bronx.  The School currently serves approximately 330 students in grades K–4.  It plans to serve a maximum of 396 students in grades K-5 during the first and remaining years of its first renewal term.  The School integrates literacy and math skills with all other content areas and encourages inquiry based learning.  The School has no management partner.  Staff recommend that the Regents renew the School’s charter through and including June 30, 2011 (approximately three years, five months). Staff believe that this renewal is sufficient to allow the School to demonstrate improved academic performance.

 

              Pinnacle Charter School (“the School”) currently serves 520 students in grades K-8.   It plans to serve a maximum of 520 students in grades K-8 during the first year of its first renewal charter, expanding to serve 560 students in grades K-8 during the fifth year of its first renewal charter.  The School’s program emphasizes the tenets of the Coalition of Essential Schools.  The School has no management partner.  Many of the School’s initial goals cannot be measured until the end of the 2007-08 school year.  In addition, the School has recently revised several key processes for identifying and remediating student academic weaknesses.  Staff recommend that the Regents renew the School’s charter through and including June 30, 2009 (approximately one year, five months) to give the School the opportunity to meet its stated goals and demonstrate improved academic performance.

 

              The Syracuse Academy of Science Charter School (“the School”) currently serves 350 students in grades 7-12. It plans to continue to serve 350 students in grades 7-12 during the term of its first renewal charter.  The School recently graduated its first class of seniors, most of whom received at least one scholarship offer from a college or university.  The School has no management partner.  Staff recommend that the Regents renew the School’s charter through and including June 30, 2012 (approximately four years, five months) so that the last year of the first renewal charter term will be coterminous with the school year.

 

              The Riverhead Charter School is located in Riverhead, on the eastern end of Long Island.  It has Edison Schools, Inc. as a management partner.  It currently serves 286 students (based upon its most recent enrollment report), which is significantly less than its enrollment target for 2007-08 of 450 students.  The School is operating under its first renewal charter, which ends July 10, 2008.   The first renewal charter was issued for less than five years due to concerns involving leadership and governance, the provision of special education services, and fiscal stability.  The School was on probation for the period of July 21, 2004 through June 30, 2005 for issues that included not providing alternate instruction to suspended students of compulsory attendance age, not conducting the required background checks for staff, not providing required special education services to students, not complying with charter provisions regarding the identification of students with limited English proficiency (“LEP”), and not providing the LEP program as described in the charter.  The School addressed those issues and the probation was terminated June 30, 2005.  An unannounced monitoring visit in the fall of 2005 revealed that compliance had not been maintained and the same issues were once again apparent in the School’s special education program.  Similarly, prior issues surrounding leadership and governance resurfaced.  As a result, a short-term first renewal only through July 10, 2008 was approved.  The School has met only two of its four academic goals, and none of its non-academic goals.  Academic performance of students in both ELA and math declined significantly from the 2004-05 school year through the 2006-07 school year, from grade 4 to grade 6.  The School has not been able to demonstrate adequate governance or leadership throughout its first renewal term, has been significantly under-enrolled, and student retention has been weak. During the first renewal term, the School had three areas to address to the satisfaction of the Department, but only addressed two.  The School’s audit for the year ending June 30, 2007 revealed several material weaknesses and significant deficiencies, which indicate that the fiscal stability of the School remains a grave concern.  Staff recommend that the School’s charter not be renewed.   Notice of the recommendation of non-renewal was provided to the School’s trustees by letter dated November 7, 2007.  The trustees have thirty days to respond.  Upon receipt, staff will review any response submitted and report to the Board of Regents should an amended recommendation be necessary.       

 

              We have received a request to amend the charters for two Board of Regents-authorized charter schools, both located in Buffalo. 

 

              The Buffalo Academy of Science Charter School (“the School”) currently serves 450 students in grades 7-12.  The School’s educational program focuses on math and science.  The School seeks to amend its charter to discontinue the use of Terra Nova testing for 10th, 11th and 12th grade students.

 

The Western New York Maritime Charter School (“the School”) currently serves 400 students in grades 9-12.  It is partnered with the United States Navy and provides a Navy Junior ROTC program for all students.  The School seeks to amend its charter to reduce its authorized enrollment from 400 to 350 students for the 2007-08 school year only.

 

Recommendation

 

 

VOTED:  That the Board of Regents approves the application for the La Cima Charter School.

 

VOTED:  That the Board of Regents approves the application for the Rochester Academy Charter School.

 

VOTED:  That the Board of Regents approves the renewal application of the Bronx Charter School for Children, that a first renewal charter be issued, and that its provisional charter be extended for a term ending on June 30, 2011.

 

VOTED:  That the Board of Regents approves the renewal application of the Pinnacle Charter School, that a first renewal charter be issued, and that its provisional charter be extended for a term ending on June 30, 2009.

 

VOTED:  That the Board of Regents approves the renewal application of the Syracuse Academy of Science Charter School, that a first renewal charter be issued, and that its provisional charter be extended for a term ending on June 30, 2012.

 

VOTED:  That the Board of Regents denies the renewal application for the Riverhead Charter School.

 

VOTED:  That the Board of Regents approves the revision to the initial charter of the Buffalo Academy of Science Charter School, and the provisional charter is amended accordingly.

 

VOTED:  That the Board of Regents approves the revision to the initial charter of the Western New York Maritime Charter School, and the provisional charter is amended accordingly.

 

 

Reasons for Recommendations

 

La Cima Charter School – see attached

 

Rochester Academy Charter School – see attached

 

Bronx Charter School for Children – see attached

 

Pinnacle Charter School – see attached

 

Syracuse Academy of Science Charter School – see attached

 

Riverhead Charter School – see attached

 

 

 

Buffalo Academy of Science Charter School

 

              The proposed revision to the School’s charter, along with the other terms of the charter: (1) meets the requirements set out in Article 56 of the Education Law, and all other applicable laws, rules and regulations; (2) will permit the charter school to operate in an educationally and fiscally sound manner;  (3) is likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes set out in subdivision two of section twenty-eight hundred fifty of Article 56 of the Education Law; and (4) will have a significant educational benefit to the students expected to attend the proposed charter school.

 

Western New York Maritime Charter School

 

               The proposed revision to the School’s charter, along with the other terms of the charter: (1) meets the requirements set out in Article 56 of the Education Law, and all other applicable laws, rules and regulations; (2) will permit the charter school to operate in an educationally and fiscally sound manner; (3) is likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes set out in subdivision two of section twenty-eight hundred fifty of Article 56 of the Education Law; and (4) will have a significant educational benefit to the students expected to attend the proposed charter school.

 

Timetable for Implementation

 

The Regents action for the LaCima Charter School, the Rochester Academy Charter School, the Buffalo Academy of Science Charter School, and the Western New York Maritime Charter School is effective immediately.

 

The Regents action for the Riverhead Charter School is effective immediately.  Therefore, the School’s current charter will end July 11, 2008.

 

The Regents action for the Bronx Charter School for Children, the Pinnacle Charter School, and the Syracuse Academy of Science Charter School will become effective on January 16, 2008.  

 

New York State Education Department

 

Summary of Charter School Renewal Information

 

Summary of Applicant Information

 

 

 

 

Address:  388 Willis Avenue, Bronx, New York 10454 (Annex: 416 Willis Avenue)

 

Board of Trustees President: Dr. Eleanor Sypher

 

Requested Renewal Period: January 16, 2008 – January 16, 2013

 

District of Location: New York City Community School District 7/Region 9                  

 

Charter Entity:  Board of Regents

 

Institutional Partner(s): N/A

 

Management Partner(s): N/A

 

Grades Served per Year:    K - 5                                               

 

Projected Enrollment per Year: 396

 

 

Renewal Application Highlights

 

 

 

Evidence of Educational Soundness/ Attainment of Educational Objectives

 

• The Bronx Charter School for Children (“the School”) has a student body that is comprised of 54 percent Black (not Hispanic), zero percent Asian, zero percent White, and 46 percent Hispanic children.
• The School serves 40 (or 12 percent) students  with disabilities
• The School serves 29 (or eight percent) limited English proficient students.
• The School serves 252 (or 76 percent) students who are eligible for the Free and Reduced-Lunch Program.
• BCSC third grade student proficiency exceeded that of Community School District 7 third graders by 10 percentage points for ELA and six percentage points for mathematics in 2007.   However, the School has not yet fully attained the State standard in ELA. See Attachments 1 – 3.
• Forty-six percent of BCSC third graders earned a Level 3 on the New York State (“NYS”) ELA assessment, falling four percent below the School’s 50 percent goal.  However, 54 percent of the School’s general education students achieved a Level 3 on this assessment, exceeding the goal by four percent.  Of the 12 special education students taking the test, only one student met and eight (67 percent) approached the standard (scored in the Level 2 range).  An overview of these results is shown in Attachment 4.
• Three-quarters of the School’s third grade students (49 out of 66 students) have been enrolled since 2004, the first year of operation.  Of this cohort, the students who have been enrolled at the School for the longest period of time, 57 percent met the standard, exceeding the 50 percent goal by seven percentage points.   An overview of these results is shown in Attachment 5.
• The first class of BCSC third graders exceeded the 50 percent goal stated in the charter on the NYS Math Assessment.  Seventy-six percent of all 66 students met or exceeded the standard, with 5 percent (or 3 students) earning a Level 1.  Eighty one percent of the general education students met/exceeded the standard, while six of the 12 special education students (50 percent) met the standard, achieving at Level 3.   An overview of these results is shown in Attachment 6.
• Seventy-eight percent (18 of 23) of BCSC teachers hold NYS certification.
• The mission of the School is to establish a high performing public charter school which provides children residing in the South Bronx an opportunity to succeed academically. The School aims to provide the most rigorous and supportive educational experience to each individual child.  The School’s goal is to give inner city children as much of a chance to succeed as students in more affluent public and private schools.
• The School has maintained its commitment to small class size, i.e., 22 students per classroom.
• The School uses an inclusion model to serve its English language learners, special education, and at-risk student populations.
• The School has experienced a high rate of turnover of classroom teachers and has worked aggressively to reverse the trend.  The leadership team has instituted several structural changes to increase teacher retention and ensure routine support for teachers.  They are also working to provide more relevant opportunities for professional growth and learning. 
• Since 2004, the first year of operation, Karen Drezner has been the School’s only Executive Director/Principal.

 

Evidence of Fiscal Soundness/Projected Fiscal Impact

 

• The School’s Board of Trustees has remained relatively stable with four trustees in place since its 2004 opening.  Two trustees were members of the original founding group. 
• New trustees with variable types of expertise having been added.  Some of the new trustees include community members, tax and legal professionals, and a child psychologist practicing in the Bronx.
• The Board has played a significant role in the private philanthropy efforts both personally—100 percent of the Board made personal contributions to the School—and by reaching out to its own relationships for grants and donations to the School.
• During the fiscal year ending June 30, 2005, the School obtained a loan from a corporation requiring semi-annual payments of interest only until August 1, 2006. Commencing November 1, 2006, the School began making equal quarterly payments of $9,168, which includes interest at 6.00 percent per annum. The loan matures on August 1, 2009 and has an outstanding principal of $84,549 as of June 30, 2007.
• During the year ended June 30, 2007, the lender agreed to convert the loan into a challenge grant, whereby the loan will be forgiven at rate of one dollar for every two dollars raised over the average annual amount of the School’s private support. The “match period” runs from January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2008, during which time the principal payments have been suspended.
• The School has been operating out of a rented facility located at 388 Willis Avenue, Bronx, NY 10454.  It is the School’s intention to stay in this facility as it grows to capacity. 
• The School can accommodate student and staff growth.  It secured annex space at 416 Willis Avenue for three new classes in August 2007 and an additional three classes in August 2008.
• The School will be embarking on a building expansion plan in partnership with its landlord to build out the requisite space to house the entire school community at 388 Willis Avenue.
• The School’s landlord has purchased the 2,250 square foot lot adjacent to the school and has proposed building a four-story structure on this site with an extension that will add two floors to the School’s existing structure. The new structure will be combined via common openings to provide the school with approximately 38,000 square feet of space over four floors by August of 2008.
• Financial audits conducted by an independent accounting firm for the fiscal years ending June 30, 2004, June 30, 2005, June 30, 2006 and June 30, 2007 demonstrate the School’s strong financial health during its first charter period.  All audits were clean with unqualified opinions. 
• The School has ended each year with a significant fund balance.
• See Attachment 7 for a description of the changes in the School’s net assets.
• The annual percent impact of the School upon the District is estimated to be between 0.0263 and 0.0271 percent.

 

Projected

Fiscal Impact of the

Bronx Charter School for Children

(New York City CSD 7/Region 9 – Bronx)

2008-09 through 2010-11

 

School Year	Number of Students	Projected Payment*	Projected Impact
2008-09	396	$4,054,463	0.0263
2009-10	396	$4,236,914	0.0267
2010-11	396	$4,427,575	0.0271

*Assumes a 4.5 percent annual increase in the district’s budget and a 3 percent annual increase in the average expense per pupil.  Projections are subject to fluctuation in actual enrollments, FTE enrollments, AEP, and district budgets.

 

Evidence of Parent and Student Satisfaction and Community Support

 

• In 2007, with four out of five parents or guardians responding, the average satisfaction rating (percentage agreeing or strongly agreeing with items) was 96 percent.
• The School’s student attendance rate has been above 90 percent each year, and was highest (93 percent) during the 2006-07 school year.
• Student turnover at BCSC has been low across the terms of the charter. There has been little fluctuation in enrollment history at most grade levels.
• The School received 682 applications for the 2007-08 school year. 
• Interest in the School has remained strong during the first charter period, as evidenced by enrollment levels exceeding the School’s 95 percent goal each year and extremely healthy application numbers.
• Six hundred children are currently on the waiting list.
• The School has a Parent Trustee who is a full-voting member of the Bronx Charter School for Children Board of Trustees.
• A public hearing for the School’s renewal application was held on Monday, October 29, 2007 at which comments were generated.  Eleven statements in favor of renewing the charter were received.  One of the eleven statements was submitted by New York State Senator José M. Serrano.

 

Recommendation

 

Staff recommends that the Board of Regents renew the School’s charter through and including June 30, 2011 (approximately three years, five months).

 

The School’s academic performance, which is comparable and slightly exceeding that of the CSD 7, strong fiscal viability, the commitment of the leadership team to provide continued support to the professional staff, the School’s strong parental support, low pupil turnover rate, and robust waiting list warrant approval of the application.  However, the fact that the School has not fully met all of the goals outlined in its charter and that the students have not fully met one criterion on New York State assessments precludes a recommendation of a full five-year extension until better academic results are demonstrated.

 

Reason for Recommendation

 

(1) The charter school meets the requirements set out in Article 56 of the Education Law and all other applicable laws, rules, and regulations; (2) the charter school has demonstrated the ability to operate in an educationally and fiscally sound manner; (3) approving the proposed renewal is likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes set out in subdivision two of section twenty-eight hundred fifty of Article 56 of the Education Law; and (4) granting the application would have a significant educational benefit to the students expected to attend the proposed charter school.

 

 

Attachment 1

New York
State
English Language Arts Assessment Results

Bronx
Charter School
for Children

Grade 3, Spring 2003

 

NYS ELA Assessment	BCSC	CSD 7	Difference
Performance Index	132	114	+18

 

 

 

 

Attachment
2

New York
State
Mathematics Assessment Results

Bronx
Charter School
for Children

Grade 3, Spring 2007

 

NYS Math Assessment	BCSC	CSD 7	Difference
Performance Index	171	160	+11

 

 

 

Attachment
3

New York
State
Assessment Results Summary

Bronx
Charter School
for Children

Grade 3, Spring 2007

Percent at Level 3 or 4

 

NYS Assessment	BCSC	District 7	Difference
English Language Arts	46%	36%	+10%
Mathematics	76%	70%	+6%

 

 

 

Attachment
4

NYS English Language arts Assessment Results

Bronx
Charter School
for Children

All, General Education and Special Education Students

Grade 3, Spring 2007

 

Performance Level	Scale Score Range	All Students		General Education		Special Education
		Mean scale: 649		Mean scale: 652		Mean scale: 633
1	475-615	14%	9	11%	6	25%	3
2	616-649	41%	27	35%	19	67%	8
3	650-729	46%	30	54%	29	8%	1
4	730-780	0%	0	0%	0	0%	0

 

 

 

Attachment
5

New York
State
English Language Arts Assessment Results

Bronx
Charter School
for Children

 Grade 3, Spring 2007

Results by Enrollment Date Cohorts

 

Performance Level	Scale Score Range	Enrolled in 2004		Enrolled in 2005		Enrolled in 2006
1	475-615	8%	4	50%	4	11%	1
2	616-649	35%	17	50%	4	67%	6
3	650-729	57%	28	0%	0	22%	2
4	730-780	0%	0	0%	0	0%	0

 

 

 

Attachment
6

New York
State
Mathematics Assessment Results

Bronx
Charter School
for Children

Grade 3, Spring 2007

All, General Education and Special Education Students

 

Performance Level	Scale Score Range	All Students N=66		General Education N=54		Special Education N=12
		Mean scale: 667		Mean scale: 670		Mean scale: 653
1	475-615	5%	3	2%	1	17%	2
2	616-649	20%	13	17%	9	33%	4
3	650-729	70%	46	74%	40	50%	6
4	730-780	6%	4	7%	4	0%	0

Attachment 7

 

Bronx Charter School for Children

Change in Net Assets 2003-04 Through 2006-07*

 

Year	Change in Net Assets
2004-05	82,754
2005-06	(25,916)
2006-07	337,870

*Source: Audited Financial Statements provided as a part of each Annual Report.

 

 

 

 

New York State Education Department

 

Summary of Proposed Charter School

 

Summary of Applicant Information

 

 

Name of Proposed Charter School: La Cima Charter School

 

Address:  96-18 43rd Avenue, Corona, New York, 11368

 

Applicant(s):  Andrea Zayas

 

Anticipated Opening Date: August 18, 2008

 

District of Location: New York City Community School District 24

 

Charter Entity:  Board of Regents

 

Institutional Partner(s): N/A

 

Management Partner(s): N/A

 

Grades Served:        2008-09: K-1

2009-10: K-2

2010-11: K-3

2011-12: K-4

2012-13: K-5.

                         

Projected Enrollment:         2008-09: 160

2009-10: 240

2010-11: 320

2011-12: 400

2012-13: 480

 

 

Application Highlights

 

Applicants

 

Andrea Zayas earned a Masters degree in Administration, Planning and Social Policy from Harvard University.  Beginning her career in education in January 2000, she most recently served as the Acting Co-Executive Director for Charter Schools in the New York City Department of Education’s Office of New Schools.  She has experience in teaching, school leadership, and the start up and establishment of charter schools.

 

Institutional Partner(s)

• None

 

 

Management Partner

• None

 

Curriculum/Assessment/Instruction

 

• The educational philosophy of La Cima Charter School (“the School”) is grounded in three areas: the behavioral psychology of Dr. Carol Dweck; the research base surrounding dual-language schooling; and the theories of Paolo Freire and Lisa Delpit, which identify education as key for social and political change.
• Special features of the School’s program will include alternate immersion instructional delivery (English and Spanish) and data-driven instructional decision making.
• Students will be provided with a combination of standards-based and research-based programs that are grounded in the New York State Learning Standards.  
• The School’s curricular standards will match those of New York State Learning Standards.
• For English Language Arts, the school will implement a balanced literacy approach, using Good Habits and Great Readers.
• For Spanish Language Arts, the school will use the Lectura curriculum.
• For math, the school will implement the TERC Investigations of Number, Data and Space.
• The School will implement the New York State social studies core curriculum.
• The testing program will include: Terra Nova CTBS Basic Battery Plus, DRA2, EDL2, all New York State assessments, school-wide interim assessments and classroom-based assessments.  The SUPERA, a parallel version of the Terra Nova for Spanish speakers, will also be given to assess student achievement. 
• Special education students’ Individual Education Plan (“IEP”) requirements will be met via the services of the New York City Department of Education or an independent provider. Initially, a .5 FTE special education teacher will be on staff and external service providers will be contracted.  In the following years, staffing will be increased incrementally to adequately meet the needs of students and the requirements of their IEPs. 
• The program for limited English proficient students will include a daily block of standards-based Spanish language arts, the use of English as the language of instruction for all content areas, the use of English language development strategies, an English Language Development teacher pushing into classes to support specific language needs, and additional support in English during the daily skills block.
• • The School will have an extended school day, from 8:15 AM to 5:00 PM, and an extended school year, from August 18, 2008, to June 29, 2009.
  • The School will have reduced class sizes of 1:20 teacher/student ratio in grades 1-5, and 1:10 in kindergarten.

 

Governance

 

• The proposed Board of Trustees is composed of five members.   These trustees will be divided into three classes for the purpose of staggering the expiration dates of each of their terms of office. At each trustee’s expiration date, that trustee will begin a new three-year term. 
• During the 2008-2009 school year, four additional board seats will be created in order to increase parent/guardian, teacher, fundraising and community representation/expertise on the Board. 
• The Board will maintain a membership of between five and 15 trustees. 
• A trustee having any kind of business relationship with the School involving the provision of educational management services may not serve as a voting member of the Board. 
• The Principal may not serve as Board Chair.
• The initial Board of Trustees, as an aggregate, holds expertise in real estate development, education, finance, law and charter school development.

 

Students

 

• In the first year of operation, the School will serve grades K-1 and the projected enrollment will be 160 students. 
• For each grade level there will be four classes of twenty.  In each subsequent year of operation, one grade level with four classes will be added, resulting in grades K-5 in the fifth year, with a total enrollment of 480 students.  
• The School has developed an outreach and recruiting strategy with an emphasis on English language learner (“ELL”) students and the goal of meeting or exceeding the percentage of ELL students in the neighboring host district schools.  The strategy will include presentation of all written material in English and Spanish, working with local organizations to target immigrant communities, visiting local pre-kindergarten programs that serve high immigrant populations, and implementing a dual language program that promotes bilingualism and biliteracy. 
• The School expects to serve students living primarily in the immediate surrounding neighborhoods. This area encompasses Community Boards 3 and 4, including East Elmhurst, Elmhurst, Jackson Heights, North Corona and Corona.  Sixty percent of Community Board 3 and 52.4 percent of Community Board 4 census respondents age five and older live in Spanish speaking households and are not proficient in English.  Sixty-one percent of Community Board 3’s population is foreign-born.

 

Budget/Facilities

 

• First year revenue is expected to total $2,089,922.  Expenditures are expected to total $2,087,208, most of which will go toward staff salaries.
• The School’s trustees will privately fundraise to help support the School.  Such funds will not be earmarked for core operations. It is expected that fundraised dollars will be used to build cash reserves, supplement school materials, expand programs, purchase technology or other equipment, provide field lessons and trips and/or support home learning environments.  A fundraising strategy is being developed that targets family foundations, as well as individuals, corporate foundations, and other non-profits.
• At the end of Fiscal Year 08, the expected net revenue (surplus) is $2,714.  This figure assumes a first-year cash reserve of $10,000 and a $75,000 dissolution escrow fund.  In the following four years, the expectation is an increasing annual reserve fund in amount of $175,000, $200,000, $225,000 and $250,000 respectively. 
• The School will assume a loan to build out facilities as needed in each year during the first five years of operation.  The anticipated loan amount will be $4,000,000, effectuated in increments as needed.
• The School’s proposed Board of Trustees has identified a facility that will allow year over year growth until the School has reached full capacity.   The proposed site is located in CSD 24, at 98-06 43rd Avenue, Corona, NY. The space is currently zoned for light manufacturing, city code M-1-1. The space has working utilities, including plumbing, heating, ventilation and air conditioning, electricity and sprinklers.
• Using an estimate of 85 square feet per student, the School expects to begin its first year with 12,000 square feet, encompassing eight classrooms and flexible-use spaces for counseling, therapy, parent use, and offices.
• In each year following the initial year, four classrooms will be added to accommodate the eighty students of the newly added grade level.  In the fifth year, two floors using 42,000 square feet will hold 24 classrooms, bathrooms, flexible space and offices.
• The School has begun to negotiate the terms of the lease, currently standing at $11/sq. ft., with the landlord, Montague-Lee Limited Partnership.
• Space will be rented only according to the school’s need on a year by year basis. 
• The potential fiscal impact upon the District is represented below.  These projections are based upon several assumptions, which may or may not occur: that all existing charter schools will also exist in the next five years and serve the same grade levels as they do now; that the charter schools will be able to meet their projected maximum enrollment; that all students will come from New York City and no other districts; that all students will attend everyday for a 1.0 FTE; that the District’s budget will increase at the projected rate; that the per pupil payment will increase (and not decrease); and that the per pupil payment will increase at the projected rate.

 

Projected

Fiscal Impact of the

La Cima Charter School

(New York City CSD 24 – Queens)

2008-09 Through 2012-13

School Year	Number of Students	Projected Impact
2008-2009	160	0.0089
2009-2010	240	0.0135
2010-2011	320	0.0183
2011-2012	400	0.0232
2012-2013	480	0.0283

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Assumes a 4.5 percent annual increase in the District’s budget from the base of $20.12 billion in 2007-2008 and a 3 percent annual increase in the average expense per pupil per year.

 

Personnel

 

• In the first year of operation, the School will employ a Principal, Assistant Principal for Instruction, Operations Manager, Business Manager, eight teachers, .5FTE special education teacher, and additional instructional support staff.
• In the following years, the School will add to its staff an Assistant Principal for School Culture, five assistants to the Business Manager, five assistants to the Operations Manager, sixteen new teachers and additional instructional support staff.

 

Community Support

• The School provided parent petitions of interest with approximately 125 signatures representing a potential enrollment of 160 students during the School’s first year of instruction.
• The application also provides six letters of support from community representatives and organizations.
• A public hearing was held on September 25, 2007, at the Community Education Council 24 meeting convened at PS 58, 72-24 Grand Avenue, Maspeth, NY.  No public comments were submitted following presentation by the School.

 

Recommendation

 

That the Board of Regents approves the application for the La Cima Charter School.

 

Reason for Recommendation

 

1) The charter school described in the application meets the requirements set out in Article 56 of the Education Law, and all other applicable laws, rules, and regulations; (2) the applicant demonstrated the ability to operate the school in an educationally and fiscally sound manner; (3) granting the application is likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes set out in subdivision two of section twenty-eight hundred fifty of Article 56 of the Education Law; and (4) granting the application will have a significant educational benefit to the students expected to attend the proposed charter school. 

 

 

New York State Education Department

 

Summary of Charter School Renewal Information

 

Summary of Applicant Information

 

 

Name of Proposed Renewed Charter School:  Pinnacle Charter School

 

Address: 115 Ash Street, Buffalo, New York 14204

 

Board of Trustees President:  Frederick Zazycki

 

Requested Renewal Period:  January 16, 2008 – January 15, 2013

 

District of Location:  Buffalo City School District

 

Charter Entity:  Board of Regents

 

Institutional Partner(s):  None

 

Management Partner(s):  None

 

Grades Served per Year:  K-8

 

Projected Enrollment per Year:   2008-09   520

2010-11   560

 

 

Renewal Application Highlights

 

Evidence of Educational Soundness/Attainment of Educational Objectives

 

• For the Pinnacle Charter School’s (“the School”) performance on State assessments, see Attachment 1.
• The School has not yet been able to meet the student achievement goals as stated in its charter; however, many of these goals cannot be measured until the end of the 2007-08 school year.
• Longitudinal data show a substantial increase in the percent of students scoring at or above level 3 on the State English Language Arts (“ELA”) assessment from 2004-05 to 2006-07, from grade 4 to grade 6 (i.e., 19 percent in 2004-05 in grade 4 to 29 percent in 2006-07 for the same group of students in grade 6).  Likewise, in 2005-06, five percent of the grade 6 students scored at or above Level 3, while 29 percent of these same students so scored in 2006-07, in grade 7. 
• Data over two years show a substantial increase in the percent of students scoring at or above Level 3  of the State mathematics assessment from 2005-06 to 2006-07, from grade 5 to grade 6 (i.e., 20 percent in 2005-06 in grade 5 to 44 percent in 2006-07 for the same group of students in grade 6).  Likewise, in 2005-06, 25 percent of the grade 5 students scored at or above Level 3, while 53 percent of these same students so scored in 2006-07, in grade 7.
• There also has been a significant decrease in the percent of students scoring at Level 1 on State assessments.
• Thus, student assessment results are showing a positive trend. 
• The Board of Trustees has made it a priority to ensure all students reach State standards, including responsive academic intervention services and other prevention programs.
• The recent addition of the Harcourt Reading Program will enable the School to identify and address individual student weaknesses; this has also led to further integration of differentiated instruction and analyzing daily multiple assessments and observations.
• There is a high level of staff retention.
• The use of data by teachers provides immediate feedback to inform instruction.
• Students “loop” with their teachers in a two-year cycle, which helps with relationship building and adds to the overall feeling that the School is a “family.”
• The School operates on a year-round trimester system, with month-long breaks in between.  This lessens the amount of time of “down time” in the instructional year.
• The School leadership provides sound management and instructional oversight.

 

Evidence of Fiscal Soundness/Projected Fiscal Impact

 

• The Board has provided effective financial oversight and the School is fiscally sound as a result.
• The School has maintained appropriate internal controls and procedures.
• Audits by an outside firm have been satisfactory.
• Projected fiscal impact on the district of location is shown below.

 

 

Potential

Cumulative Fiscal Impact* of Charter Schools

On the Buffalo City School District

Percent Impact

2008-13

 

Charter School	Percent Impact 2007-08	Percent Impact 2008-09	Percent Impact 2009-10	Percent Impact 2010-11	Percent Impact 2011-12
Buffalo Academy of Science CS	.57	.56	.55	.55	.54
Buffalo United CS	.89	.88	.86	.85	.84
CS for Applied Technologies	1.87	1.84	1.82	1.80	1.77
COMMUNITY CS	.44	.44	.43	.42	.42
Elmwood Village CS	.22	.22	.22	.21	.21
Enterprise CS**	.77	.76	.75	.73	.72
King Center CS	.13	.13	.13	.13	.13
Oracle CS	.46	.45	.44	.44	.43
Pinnacle CS	.61	.60	.60	.58	.57
Sankofa CS	.46	.45	.44	.44	.43
South Buffalo CS	.84	.88	.87	.86	.84
Tapestry CS	.52	.75	.62	.50	.60
WNY Maritime CS	.76	.75	.74	.73	.72
Westminster Community CS**	.70	.69	.68	.67	.66
Total	9.24	9.40	9.15	8.91	8.88

*Assumes a 4.5 percent annual increase in the District’s budget each year and a 3 percent annual increase in the average expense per pupil each year. Also assumes all charter schools currently operating in Buffalo will also be operating five years from now.

 **Authorized by the Buffalo Board of Education as the charter entity.

 

 

Evidence of Parental and Student Satisfaction and Community Support

 

• During the renewal review, a focus group of parents reported high levels of satisfaction with all facets of School life. 
• Parents report open and ongoing communication with School leaders.  Each teacher has a School-issued cell phone and the number is shared with parents to foster increased communication.
• Parents may also communicate with teachers via e-mail and in person daily, at drop-off and pick-up times.
• The student perception survey given to K-3 students in Spring 2007 showed a high percentage of students feeling that they are a part of the School, safe at School and liking the School; students in grade 4-8 responses were somewhat lower for the same period.
• There is a strong enrollment history and there are waiting lists.
• The results of the hearing held by the Buffalo City School District, pursuant to §2857(1-a) of the Education Law as amended by Chapter 57 of the Laws of 2007, showed no objection to the proposed renewal of this charter from the community or the District.

 

Recommendation

 

Staff recommend that the Regents renew the School’s charter through and including June 30, 2009 (approximately one year, five months).

 

Reason for Recommendation

 

(1) The charter school meets the requirements set out in Article 56 of the Education Law and all other applicable laws, rules, and regulations; (2) the charter school has demonstrated the ability to operate in an educationally and fiscally sound manner; (3) approving the proposed renewal is likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes set out in subdivision two of section twenty-eight hundred fifty of Article 56 of the Education Law, and (4) granting the application will have a significant educational benefit to the students expected to attend the proposed charter school.

 

 

Attachment 1

Pinnacle
Charter School

Performance on New York State Assessments

 

ELA

 

Charter School / District of Location	Grade 3   L1   L2   L3   L4	Grade 4   L1   L2   L3   L4	Grade 5   L1  L2   L3   L4	Grade 6   L1   L2   L3   L4	Grade 7   L1   L2   L3   L4	Grade 8   L1   L2   L3   L4
2004-05 Pinnacle Charter School Buffalo CSD		32   50   16   3   17   44   33   6
2005-06 Pinnacle Charter School Buffalo CSD	41   36   21   2   25   38   36   2	24   57   16   3   27   35   35   3	20   60   20   0   22   43   31   3	25   70   5    0   21   48   29   2	25   63   13   0   24   50   25   2
2006-07 Pinnacle Charter School Buffalo CSD	12   45   41   2   26   39   34   2	21   49   30   0   22   39   38   2	13   60   28   0   16   46   37   2	3    69   29   0   7    58  33   2	0   71   29   0   18   55   26   1	6   65   29   0   12  55  32   2

 

Percentages of students performing at Levels 1-4 are rounded to nearest whole number.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MATH

 

Charter School / District of Location	Grade 3   L1   L2   L3   L4	Grade 4   L1   L2   L3   L4	Grade 5   L1  L2   L3   L4	Grade 6   L1   L2   L3   L4	Grade 7   L1   L2   L3   L4	Grade 8   L1   L2   L3   L4
2004-05 Pinnacle Charter School Buffalo CSD		8    33   57   3   7    26   51   16
2005-06 Pinnacle Charter School Buffalo CSD	31   34   32   3   29   31   37   3	11   39   47   3   23   30   42   6	44   36   17   3   40   32   24   3	35   40   25   0   38   35   25   3	59   18   24   0   35   43   20   2
2006-07 Pinnacle Charter School Buffalo CSD	10   33   52   5   24   33   40   3	20   36   39   5   23   33   39   6	8    55   38   0   25   37   34   4	18   38   44   0   27   35   34   4	0   47   53   0   22   49   26   3	38   38   25   0   27   47   24   1

 

              Percentages of students performing at Levels 1-4 are rounded to the nearest whole number.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attachment 2

Pinnacle
Charter School

Enrollment Plan

 

GRADE	2007-08 Projected Enrollment	2008-09 Projected Enrollment
Kindergarten	50	70
First	50	70
Second	60	60
Third	60	60
Fourth	60	60
Fifth	60	60
Sixth	60	60
Seventh	40	40
Eighth	40	40
TOTAL	480	520

 

 

Attachment 3

Pinnacle
Charter School

Change in Net Assets 2003-2004 through 2005-2006*

 

Fiscal Year	Change in Net Assets
2003-2004	$291,261
2004-2005	$376,989
2005-2006	$166,050
2006-2007	Not yet available

*Source: Audited Financial Statements provided as a part of each Annual Report.

 

 

 

New York State Education Department

 

Summary of Charter School Renewal Information

 

Summary of Applicant Information

 

 

 

 

Address:  3685 Middle Country Road, Calverton, NY 11933-1801

 

Board of Trustees President: Kathryn Liddle

 

Requested Renewal Period: July 11, 2008 – July 10, 2013

 

District of Location: Riverhead Central School District

 

Charter Entity:  Board of Regents

 

Institutional Partner(s): None

 

Management Partner(s): Edison Schools, Inc.

 

Grades Served/ Projected Enrollment per Year:         

 

2008-09:          K-6, 369

2009-10:          K-6, 395

2010-11:          K-6, 423

2011-12:          K-6, 454

2012-13:          K-6, 483

Renewal Application Highlights

 

Evidence of Educational Soundness/ Attainment of Educational Objectives

• The Riverhead Charter School (“the School”) has not met its academic goals in Science or Social Studies.
• The School has met its goals in English Language Arts and Math: to increase by five percent annually the percent of students reaching the proficiency level on State Assessments in English Language Arts and Math.
• However, longitudinal student achievement data show a significant decline in the percent of the students achieving proficiency on the State English Language Arts and Math assessments, between 2004-05 and 2006-07 from grade 4 to grade 6. See below.
• The School made AYP and its 2005-06 Accountability Status is “Charter School in Good Standing.”
• Recordkeeping regarding student attendance, re-enrollment and retention at the School is inadequate.  As a result, the School’s precise student retention rate (student retention having been identified as a significant problem at the School) cannot reasonably be determined due to insufficient data, and the School has been unable to demonstrate that it has met its re-enrollment goals.
• The School has not been able to meet any of its annual enrollment targets and has thus been significantly under-enrolled.   
• The School has had three principals in seven years, and the focus of their stewardship has mostly been on issues of operation and management, not instructional leadership.  Instructional leadership at the School has not been strong.
• The School has also not been able to demonstrate that its parent satisfaction goals have been met.
• The School has failed to comply with its charter requirement that the Board of Trustees consist of seven persons, which is a material and substantial violation of the charter per §2855 of the Education Law.

 

Evidence of Fiscal Soundness/Projected Fiscal Impact

• The School’s connection with its management partner, Edison Schools, Inc., has provided ongoing financial support as well as permitted the School to expand its facilities from a single building to three buildings on the same site.  The buildings consist of a two story former schoolhouse, a single-story modular facility, and a single-story building housing administrative offices.  The School has consistently desired to build a larger facility that would house all its students and permit expanded enrollment, but that facility has not yet materialized.
• The School’s audit for the year ending June 30, 2007 revealed the existence of several material weaknesses and significant deficiencies in areas such as:  having negative working capital, preparation of financial statements, segregation of financial duties, bank reconciliations, missing financial transactions, lack of password-protected accounting software, lack of a separate general ledger from that of its management company, having the majority of expenditures being paid for and recorded by the management company,  the lack of a fixed asset ledger, the School does not properly tag its fixed assets, not obtaining permission before disposing of assets purchased with federal funds,  inability to easily ascertain whether or not any invoice has been paid, not having cash balances in interest-bearing accounts, accounting records are not reflective of the full operations of the School, and not recording or making adjustments as noted in the School’s own audit for the year ending June 30, 2006.
• The School has accumulated debt in the amount of $4,060,773 yet is considering capital construction to expand its facility which would significantly increase that debt by approximately $1.2 million.
• The Board of Trustees has been unable to effectively monitor the School’s finances and is not sure the School could continue as a going concern if the partnership with Edison Schools, Inc. were to end, at least without partnering with another management company.
• The Board has developed no plan for generating any discretionary funds. 
• As noted above, the School has not been able to meet any of its annual enrollment targets, and as a result has been significantly under-enrolled. 
• Original hard copy of student attendance records are not maintained at the School, and hard copy records do not always comport with the data in the School’s electronic attendance tracking system, resulting in at least four instances where students left the School but their districts were billed, with an overcharge of approximately $16,000.
• Projected fiscal impact for the School, and its change in net assets, are shown below.

2008-2013

District		Percent Impact*
			2008-09		2009-10		2010-11		2011-12		2012-13
Riverhead CSD		5.08		5.36		5.66		5.98		6.28

*This assumes that all students will come from the Riverhead Central School District, which has historically not been the case.  Students have been reported to have been enrolled from as many as 11 other districts.  However, it cannot be predicted with any accuracy how many students may continue to enroll from other area districts.  Projections are based on requested enrollment, AEP per district (inflated three percent annually), and the District’s 2007-08 budget (inflated 4.5 percent annually).  Projections are subject to fluctuation in actual enrollments, FTE enrollments, AEP, and district budgets.

 

Riverhead
Charter School

Change in Net Assets 2004-05 Through 2005-06*

 

Year	Change in Net Assets
2004-05	($593,928)
2005-06	($150,086)

*Source: Audited Financial Statements provided as a part of each Annual Report.  2006-07 data not yet available.

 

Evidence of Parent and Student Satisfaction

• The School has not been able to demonstrate that its parent satisfaction goals have been met.
• The School has not been able to demonstrate that it has met its goal of 90 percent re-enrollment, due to poor recordkeeping.
• The School has not been able to meet any of its annual enrollment targets and has thus been significantly under-enrolled.
• The School does not have a student waiting list for any of the grades where there are open seats.

 

Recommendation

 

Deny the renewal application.

 

Reason for Recommendation

 

All of the required findings pursuant to Education Law §2852 have not been met, in that: (1) The charter school does not meet the requirements set out in Article 56 of the Education Law and all other applicable laws, rules, and regulations; (2) the charter school has not demonstrated the ability to operate in an educationally and fiscally sound manner; and (3) granting the proposed renewal is not likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes set out in subdivision two of section twenty-eight hundred fifty of Article 56 of the Education Law. 

 

 

 

 

 

Riverhead
Charter School

ELA Results

 2001-07

 

Charter School and District of Location	Grade 3				Grade 4				Grade 5				Grade 6				Grade 7				Grade 8
	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4
2001-02
Riverhead CS Riverhead CSD					29 6	36 33	29 46	7 15
2002-03
Riverhead CS					12	33	46	9
Riverhead CSD					5	25	47	23
2003-04
Riverhead CS					8	46	42	4
Riverhead CSD					5	29	55	11
2004-05
Riverhead CS					5	32	58	5
Riverhead CSD					4	25	52	20
2005-06
Riverhead CS	11	18	68	3	35	29	32	3	13	47	27	13
Riverhead CSD	11	30	56	3	10	23	60	6	8	29	56	7
2006-07
Riverhead CS	8	36	57	0	6	31	61	3	4	39	54	4	0	56	33	11
Riverhead CSD	9	26	58	7	6	26	60	8	5	30	59	6	2	34	56	8

 

In 2004-05, 63 percent of the grade 4 students scored at or above Level 3 on the State ELA Assessment.  The next year, in grade 5, 40 percent of the same students scored at or above Level 3.  By grade 6 in 2006-07, only 44 percent of these same students scored at or above Level 3 on the State ELA Assessment.

Math Results

 2001-07

 

Charter School and District of Location	Grade 3				Grade 4				Grade 5				Grade 6				Grade 7				Grade 8
	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4
2001-02 Riverhead CS Riverhead CSD					23 5	46 25	15 53	15 18
2002-03
Riverhead CS					9	31	44	16
Riverhead CSD					3	17	50	31
2003-04
Riverhead CS					4	39	48	9
Riverhead CSD					4	22	50	25
2004-05
Riverhead CS					0	21	63	16
Riverhead CSD					2	13	48	37
2005-06
Riverhead CS	8	13	49	31	35	24	35	6	47	13	33	7
Riverhead CSD	7	19	52	22	8	14	51	26	11	19	51	20
2006-07
Riverhead CS	2	17	62	19	3	18	61	18	4	36	52	8	25	50	13	13
Riverhead CSD	4	13	57	25	6	10	55	29	8	17	54	21	9	16	54	21

In 2004-05, 79 percent of the grade 4 students scored at or above Level 3 on the State Math Assessment.  The next year, in grade 5, 40 percent of the same students so scored.  By grade 6 in 2006-07, only 26 percent of these same students scored at or above Level 3 on the State Math Assessment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RCS Performance on state English Language Arts Assessment
Grade Level	Percentage of Students Scoring at Level of Proficiency (Levels 3 and 4)		Percentage Change (+/-)	Met Target?
	2005 – 2006	2006 - 2007
3	71.0	56.6	- 14.4	No
4	35.3	63.9	+ 28.6	Yes
5	40.0	57.6	+ 17.6	Yes
6	N/A	44.4*	N/A	N/A

 

              *Represents baseline scores for 6th grade in this charter term, since there was no 6th grade in the 2005-06 school year.

 

 

RCS Performance on state MATHEMATICS Assessment
Grade Level	Percentage of Students Scoring at Level of Proficiency (Levels 3 and 4)		Percentage Change (+/-)	Met Target?
	2005 – 2006	2006 - 2007
3	79.5	80.7	+ 1.2	No
4	41.2	78.9	+ 37.7	Yes
5	40.0	60.0	+ 20.0	Yes
6	N/A	25.0*	N/A	N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Represents baseline scores for 6th grade in this charter term, since there was no 6th grade in the 2005-2006 school year.

 

 

 

RCS Performance on state SCIENCE Assessment
Grade Level	Percentage of Students Scoring at Level of Proficiency (Levels 3 and 4)		Percentage Change (+/-)	Met Target?
	2005 – 2006	2006 - 2007
4	60.0	62.5	+ 2.5	No

 

 

 

RCS Performance on state SOCIAL STUDIES Assessment
Grade Level	Percentage of Students Scoring at Level of Proficiency (Levels 3 and 4)		Percentage Change (+/-)	Met Target?
	2005 – 2006	2006 - 2007
5	82.4	65.4	- 17.0	No

 

 

 

New York State Education Department

 

Summary of Proposed Charter School

 

Summary of Applicant Information

 

 

 

 

Address:  To Be Determined

 

Applicant(s): Mahmut Gedemenli, Cheryl A. Sampson, William D. Middleton, Alfred Geier, Marat Khafizov, Esra Gedemenli

 

Anticipated Opening Date: September 9, 2008

 

District of Location: Rochester City School District                     

 

Charter Entity:  Board of Regents

 

Institutional Partner(s): None

 

Management Partner(s):  None

 

Grades Served:                      2008-09: Grades 7-9

2009-10: Grades 7-10

2010-11: Grades 7-11

2011-12: Grades 7-12       

 

Projected Enrollment:         2008-09: 180

              2009-10: 240

2010-11: 300

2011-12: 360

 

Application Highlights

 

Applicant(s)

 Mahmut Gedemenli is the lead applicant.  He has a master’s degree in geography, and in Teaching English as a Second Language K-12.    Currently he is the manager of the Spring Learning Center in Rochester, where he coordinates after-school classes in Math, English Language Arts, Science, and SAT preparation.

 

 Cheryl A. Sampson has a master’s degree in computer science.  She retired from the Xerox Corporation in May 2005, where she worked for 24 years. She is a parent with children enrolled in the Rochester City School District.

 

William D. Middleton is an archeologist and assistant professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, and the Department of Material Culture Science, where he is also the acting chair. 

 

Alfred Geier is a professor of classics in the Department of Classics at the University of Rochester.

 

 Marat Khafizov has a master’s degree in physics, and is currently conducting research at the Laboratory for Laser Energetics at the University of Rochester. 

 

 Esra Gedemenli is an English as a Second Language teacher in the Greece Central School District. 

 

Institutional/Management Partner

• None.  The Rochester Academy Charter School (“the School” or “RACS”) will have relationships with a variety of community-based organizations, institutions of higher learning, and other local businesses/associations to provide programs and community-based experiences for the students.

 

Curriculum/Assessment/Instruction

• The instructional focus will be on Math and Science. 
• National competition and science fairs will be used to motivate students.  A key strength will be the non-traditional classroom settings in which teachers are either “a coach in procedures for interpreting a literacy text or as an expert examiner.” 
• Saturday School will be available to provide more specific instruction for students who are in danger of not meeting the State standards. 
• Community-based projects will help the students develop their social skills.

Beginning in 10th grade, each student will have an Individualized Learning Program (“ILP”), to ensure and track a program for the college entrance of each student. 

Mandatory tutoring will be provided for students who perform low in courses, based on diagnostic tests given to the students on a monthly basis.  Optional tutoring will be provided as part of the Saturday School program.  Activities may include tutoring for at-risk students, student-requested tutoring, SAT tutoring, and Science and Math competition training. 

Authentic activities will be designed by the teachers in order to allow the students to make real-world connections. 

Assessments will include monthly diagnostic Terra Nova tests, state-mandated assessments, individual student assessments, portfolios, and anecdotal records.

 

Governance

The Board of Trustees (“BOT”) will not have fewer than five members and shall not exceed nine members. 

The initial BOT members have qualifications in the areas of education, scientific research, human resources, nonprofit administration, building renovation, financial services, real estate, business administration, human resources, and technology.

 

Students 

In 2007-08, Rochester Academy Charter School will have 60 students in each of the grades 7, 8, and 9, 180 students in total. 

Increments of 60 students will be added each year for the next three years, by adding grades 10, 11, and 12. 

• By 2011-12, the School will serve 360 students in grades 7-12.

 

Budget/Facilities

• The location of the school is to be determined.  The applicants are in negotiations for a particular site.
• The start-up budget is proposed to be $115,000, all of which will be supported by promised private donations.
• The first-year budget is projected to be $2,015,261, with total expenses projected to be $2,006,255, with a projected first-year balance of $9,006.
• The potential cumulative fiscal impact of all charter school on the Rochester City School District is shown below.

 

 

on
the Rochester City School District from 2008-2012

Charter School	08-09	09-10	10-11	11-12
Genesee Community CS	.33	.32	.32***	.31***
Eugenio Maria de Hostos CS	.50	.49	.48***	.48***
Rochester Academy CS**	.28	.37	.45	.54
True North Rochester Prep CS	.35	.46	.45	.44***
Urban Choice CS	.56	.62	.61***	.60***
Rochester City School District	2.02	2.26	2.31	2.37

*Projections subject to fluctuation in actual enrollments, FTE enrollments, AEP, district budgets, continuation and/or renewal of extant charter schools, and establishment of additional charter schools in the District and/or nearby.  Assume a 4.5 percent increase in the RCSD’s budget each year, and a 3 percent increase in the AOE per pupil each year. 

** Rochester Academy CS will not open until September 2008.

***Dependent on charter renewal

 

Personnel 

• Personnel include a School Director, Dean of Academics, Dean of Students, Business Manager, Administrative Assistant, Technologist, and a Special Education Teacher/Coordinator.
• The School will commence instruction with 14 teachers for 2008-09 (with an additional 12 by the end of the fourth year of operation), two classroom aides (with an additional three by the end of the fourth year of operation), a custodian, and 10 tutors (with an additional 30 by the end of the fourth year of operation).    

 

Community Support 

• Rochester Academy Charter School conducted a survey which asked for petition of interest/support for a college-pre, and math and science oriented charter school in the Rochester City School District area.  About 900 parents signed this survey. 
• In addition, 16 letters of support have been provided from leaders of community organizations and directors of educational programs.

• The Rochester City School District held a public hearing pursuant to §2857(1-a) of the Education Law as amended by Chapter 57 of the Laws of 2007, and no objection to this proposed application was raised by the community or the District.

 

Recommendation

 

That the Board of Regents approves the application for the Rochester Academy Charter School.

An initial charter term period of four years, five months is recommended so that the final year of the charter will be coterminous with the 2011-2012 academic year.

 

Reason for Recommendation:

(1) The charter school described in the application meets the requirements set out in Article 56 of the Education Law and all other applicable laws, rules, and regulations; (2) the applicant demonstrated the ability to operate the school in an educationally and fiscally sound manner; (3) granting the application is likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes set out in subdivision two of section twenty-eight hundred fifty of Article 56 of the Education Law; and (4) granting the application will have a significant educational benefit to the students expected to attend the proposed charter school. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York State Education Department

 

Summary of Charter School Renewal Information

 

Summary of Applicant Information

 

 

 

 

Address:  1001 Park Avenue, Syracuse, NY 13204-2125

 

Board of Trustees President: Dr. Ehat Ercanli

 

Requested Renewal Period: January 16, 2008 – January 15, 2013

 

District of Location: Syracuse City School District                      

 

Charter Entity:  Board of Regents

 

Institutional Partner(s): None

 

Management Partner(s): None

 

Grades Served/Projected Enrollment per Year:          

 

2007-08:          Grades 7-12: 350 students   

2008-09:          Grades 7-12: 360 students

2009-10:          Grades 7-12: 360 students

2010-11:          Grades 7-12: 360 students

2011-12:          Grades 7-12: 360 students

 

 

Renewal Application Highlights

The School is applying for a five year renewal charter term period and increasing its enrollment by 10 students in 2008-09, and remaining with an enrollment of 360 students during the renewal phase of the charter.  Staff recommend a four year, five month renewal period during the renewal phase of the charter.

 

Evidence of Educational Soundness/Attainment of Educational Objectives

Academic Performance

• In 2004-2005, 78 percent of the students taking the Math A Regents Exam at the Syracuse Academy of Science Charter School (“the School” or “SASCS”) passed, with 33 percent of the students scoring at 85 or higher. 
• Also in 2004-2005, 73 percent of the students taking the Physical Setting/Earth Science Regents exam passed, with six percent of the students scoring at 85 or higher.
• In that same year, 93 percent of the students taking the Comprehensive Spanish Regents Exam passed, with 29 percent of the students scoring at 85 or higher. 
• The renewal visit site report showed compelling evidence that the School has met its academic goals, made Adequate Yearly Progress (“AYP”) and is a charter school in good standing. For each of the years of operation, the School has exceeded the State Performance Index for every State exam. The School has also been designated as a “rapidly improving/closing-the-gap school.”
• The renewal visit site report also showed that two of the School’s four non-academic goals have been found to be meaningful and measurable.  The program office has been working with the School to strengthen the remaining two goals during the submission of its renewal application.
• Attachments 1 and 2 depict the comparison between the School and the Syracuse CSD on the ELA and Math assessments.

 

Instruction

• Results from the renewal site visit report found that the School has developed Personalized Education Plans for all students in grades 7-12 that focus on student areas of need in English/Language Arts and Mathematics. These plans are designed to keep track of standardized and State test scores.  Classroom teachers are required to fill out areas of “prescription” for students as well as required interventions for students who are at-risk.
• There is compelling evidence that school-based academic assessments are available and used in the School’s daily practice.  Student assessment information is used frequently and accurately to make instructional decisions and to promote student learning both at the classroom level and at the individual student level.  

 

Organizational Viability

• Board:  The renewal site visit report found compelling evidence that the Board provides competent stewardship and oversight of the School.
• Principal: The report showed that there is compelling evidence that school leadership provides sound management and instructional oversight.  The current Director has expanded the leadership team at SASCS and has created a safe atmosphere conducive to student learning.  Structures have been put in place to support teaching and learning.
• Staff/Teacher: The report showed that the staff retention rate is high.  The staff retention rate has increased from 33 percent to 69 percent from 2003-2004 to 2007-2008.  The majority of staff turnover occurred between charter years one and two.  The majority of teaching staff at the School has been employed for three years or more.  

 

Other

 

Evidence of Fiscal Soundness/Projected Fiscal Impact

• The renewal site visit report found that the Board provides competent stewardship and oversight of the School.
• The School has attained unqualified, independent financial audits for years ending 2005 and 2006. 
• Projected fiscal impact for the School is shown below.

 

on
the Syracuse City School District from 2007-2012

	Percent Impact*
Charter Schools	07-08	08-09		09-10		10-11		11-12
Southside Academy CS	2.2		2.3		2.2		2.2		2.2
Syracuse Academy of Science C S	1.2		1.2		1.2		1.1		1.1
Syracuse City School District	3.4		3.5		3.4		3.3		3.3

*Projections subject to fluctuation in actual enrollments, FTE enrollments, AEP, district budgets, continuation and/or renewal of extant charter schools, and establishment of additional charter schools in the District and/or nearby. Assumes a 4.5 percent increase in the District’s budget each year, and a 3 percent increase in the AEP per pupil each year.

 

 

Syracuse
Academy of Science Charter School

Change in Net Assets 2002-2006*

Year	Change in Net Assets
2003-2004	$121,786
2004-2005	$130,652
2005-2006	$75,429
2006-2007	Info not yet available

*Source: Audited Financial Statements provided as a part of the Annual Reports.  Note: Changes in net assets indicate changes in available cash; such changes do not necessarily imply deficits.

 

Evidence of Parent and Student Satisfaction

Parent Satisfaction

• The renewal site visit report showed compelling evidence that parent satisfaction at the School is, and has been, consistently high over time. 
• Parents report that the School provides a safe environment for students that is conducive to learning.

 

 

 

 

Wait List

• The renewal site visit report showed some evidence of the viability of the School as demonstrated by its enrollment history. The School has been nearly fully enrolled since its opening in 2003-2004. 
• The number of applicants has exceeded the number of available seats this year, resulting in a wait list in grades 7-11 during the 2007-2008 academic year. 

Student Retention

 

Recommendation

Staff recommend that the Board of Regents renew the School’s charter through and including June 30, 2012 (approximately four years, five months). A renewal of four years and five months is recommended so that the last year of the first renewal charter is coterminous with the 2011-2012 academic year.

 

Reason for Recommendation

(1) The charter school meets the requirements set out in Article 56 of the Education Law and all other applicable laws, rules, and regulations; (2) the charter school has operated in an educationally and fiscally sound manner; (3) granting the extension is likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes set out in subdivision two of section twenty-eight hundred fifty of Article 56 of the Education Law; and (4) granting the application will have a significant educational benefit to the students expected to attend the proposed charter school. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attachment 1

 

Syracuse
Academy of Science Charter School

ELA Results

 2003-07

 

Charter School and District of Location	Grade 3				Grade 4				Grade 5				Grade 6				Grade 7				Grade 8
	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4
2003-04
SASCS Syracuse City Schools																					0 17	85 62	10 19	5 3
2004-05
SASCS																					10	53	35	2
Syracuse City Schools																					16	61	20	3
2005-06
SASCS																	9	50	39	2	9	38	49	3
Syracuse City Schools																	21	51	27	2	26	52	20	1
2006-07
SASCS																	2	43	51	4	2	55	42	2
Syracuse City Schools																	15	58	27	1	16	56	27	1

 

The School outperformed the District in grade 8 in 2004-2005, 2005-2006, and 2006-2007, and in grade 7 in 2005-2006, and 2006-2007. 

 

The cohort data are:

• The 7th graders in 2005-2006 were 8th graders in 2006-2007.  The level of proficiency increased from 41 percent to 44 percent.

 

Attachment 2

 

Syracuse
Academy of Science Charter School

Math Results

 2003-07

 

 

Charter School and District of Location	Grade 3				Grade 4				Grade 5				Grade 6				Grade 7				Grade 8
	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4
2003-04 SASCS Syracuse City Schools																					35 37	43 38	20 23	2 2
2004-05
SASCS																					34	32	33	1
Syracuse City Schools																					33	46	20	1
2005-06
SASCS																	37	45	18	0	12	40	43	5
Syracuse City Schools																	41	43	15	1	37	42	19	2
2006-07
SASCS																	2	29	57	12	8	29	54	8
Syracuse City Schools																	26	48	24	2	36	44	19	1

 

 

The School outperformed the District in grade 8 in 2004-2005, 2005-2006, and 2006-2007, and in grade 7 in 2005-2006 and 206-2007. 

 

The cohort data are:

• The 7th graders in 2005-2006 were 8th graders in 2006-2007.  The level of proficiency increased from 18 percent to 62 percent.