Meeting of the Board of Regents | December 2008

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

 

TO:
FROM:	Johanna Duncan-Poitier
SUBJECT:	Charter Schools: Proposed Third Renewal Charter for COMMUNITY Charter School
DATE:	December 8, 2008
STRATEGIC GOAL:	Goals 1 and 2
AUTHORIZATION(S):

 

SUMMARY

 

Issue for Decision

 

Should the Regents approve the staff’s recommendation concerning the proposed third renewal to the charter for the COMMUNITY Charter School (Buffalo)? 

 

Reason(s) for Consideration

 

              Required by State statute, Education Law §2852.

 

Proposed Handling

 

This question will come before the EMSC Committee in December 2008 for action.  It will then come before the full Board for final action in December 2008.

 

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 an application from the Board of Trustees of the COMMUNITY Charter School (the “School”), a Board of Regents authorized charter school located in Buffalo,  for a third renewal charter.  The Board of Education of the City School District of the City of Buffalo held the required public hearing on this proposed third renewal charter on September 3, 2008.  Board members, school district staff, and community members were present.  Questions regarding the rationale for the change in textbooks, class size, certification for teacher aides, provision of special education services, Title I funding and the facility were asked, and answered satisfactorily by School personnel.  No comments were noted in the hearing minutes.

 

The Board of Regents granted the School its initial charter on September 14, 2001.  It commenced instruction in September 2003 serving 246 students in grades K-4.  It currently is authorized to serve 348 students in grades K-6.  The School’s first renewal charter was granted on May 23, 2006 for the term of October 7, 2006 through and including July 31, 2007.  A second renewal charter was granted by the Regents on May 22, 2007 for a term ending July 31, 2009.  The School is now requesting a third renewal from August 1, 2009 to June 30, 2014.  Staff recommends that a third renewal be granted, but only for a term up through and including June 30, 2013.

 

Recommendation

 

VOTED: That the Board of Regents approves the renewal application of the COMMUNITY Charter School, that a third renewal charter be issued, and that its provisional charter be extended for a term up through and including June 30, 2013.

 

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) approving the proposed renewal would have a significant educational benefit to the students expected to attend the charter school.

 

Timetable for Implementation

 

The Regents action for the COMMUNITY Charter School will be effective on August 1, 2009.

New York State Education Department

 

Summary of Charter School Renewal Information

 

Summary of Applicant Information

 

 

 

Address:   404 Edison Avenue, Buffalo, New York 14215-2936

 

Board of Trustees President:  Kevin Helfer

 

Requested Renewal Period:  August 1, 2009 – June 30, 2014

 

District of Location: City School District of the City of Buffalo                

 

Charter Entity:  Board of Regents

 

Institutional Partner(s): None

 

Management Partner(s):  None

 

Grades Served per Year:    K – 6                                              

 

Projected Enrollment per Year:  332

 

 

Renewal Application Highlights

 

Evidence of Educational Soundness/ Attainment of Educational Objectives

 

1. The School has shown generally steady academic progress. It has outperformed the Buffalo Public Schools on most State assessment variables in most years.  For example, 2005-06, COMMUNITY outperformed the Buffalo Public Schools in ELA grade 3 and ELA and math grade 4; in 2006-07, COMMUNITY outperformed the Buffalo Public Schools in all but one area; and in 2007-08, in all but two.  See student achievement results below.
2. In 2006-07, 71 percent of the grade 3 students scored at or above Level 3 on the State ELA assessment (36 percent of grade 3 students in the Buffalo Public Schools so scored), and 95 percent of the School’s grade 3 students scored at or above Level 3 on the State math assessment (43 percent of grade 3 students in the Buffalo Public Schools so scored). 
3. In 2007-08, 76 percent of the grade 3 students scored at or above Level 3 on the State ELA assessment (47 percent of the grade 3 students in the Buffalo Public Schools so scored), and 100 percent of the School’s grade 3 students scored at or above Level 3 on the State Math assessment (66 percent of the grade 3 students in the Buffalo Public Schools so scored).
4. From its initial year of operation to the present, the School has shown significant improvement in its State assessment scores.  In 2003-04, less that seven percent of grade 4 students scored at or above Level 3 in ELA, and less than 13 percent scored at or above level 3 in math.  At the time of the 2007-08 State assessments, ELA scores at or above Level 3 were 76 percent in grade 3, 51 percent in grade 4, 47 percent in grade 5, and 21 percent in grade 6.  Math scores at or above Level 3 were 100 percent at grade 3, 85 percent at grade 4, 77 percent at grade 5, and 73 percent at grade 6.
5. The School attributes its significant increases in math scores to a plan that staff, with input from the Board of Trustees, had implemented, based on student assessment data analyzed to ascertain specific student needs.  A similar plan has been developed to address identified needs in the ELA program to build upon current successes and to provide additional supports to students, especially in the upper grades.  An effect similar to that of the math plan is expected to occur over the next charter term for ELA.
6. The School develops Individual Learning Plans for all students, as well as individual data charts for all assessments, and conducts a mid-October projection as to where the students will be at test taking time.
7. The School provides teacher aides in each classroom to keep the student/adult ratio low. 
8. The School is making extensive use of multiple sources of data on a master spreadsheet, with a log for each student.  The spreadsheet will provide disaggregated data, by class, by specific populations, and then by student.
9. Membership on the Board of Trustees has been stable since the School’s  

      inception, with little turnover.

1.  Staff retention has been fairly stable.  Staff attrition for the 2008-09 school year  

       was only eight percent. 

11.  The School has made great strides in its math results and, though its                              grade 5 and 6 ELA scores remain relatively low (less than one half of the

students scored at Level 3 in grade 5, and only 21% of the students scored at Level 3 in grade 6, with no students scoring at Level 4 in grade 6), it has certainly shown a great deal of progress in its ELA program.  As a result, staff recommend that the School’s charter be renewed for a term up through and including June 30, 2013 (approximately 3 years and 11 months).

 

 

 

 

COMMUNITY
Charter School

Longitudinal ELA & Math Data

2003-04 through 2007-08

 

School and Grades	2003-04				2004-05				2005-06				2006-07				2007-08
	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4
CCS ELA Grade 3	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	23	41	36	0	4	24	64	7	0	25	68	8
Bflo . ELA Grade 3	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	25	38	36	2	26	39	34	2	13	41	43	4
CCS ELA Grade 4	57.8	35.6	6.7	0.0	25.6	41.9	30.2	2.3	16	44	40	0	9	29	58	4	12	37	46	5
Bflo . ELA Grade 4	16.0	49.8	30.0	4.3	17.1	43.6	32.9	6.3	27	35	35	3	22	39	38	2	21	37	40	2
CCS ELA Grade 5	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	31	60	7	2	2	49	49	0	0	53	44	3
Bflo . ELA Grade 5	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	22	43	31	3	16	46	37	2	5	42	51	2
CCS ELA Grade 6	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	21	74	6	0	3	73	24	0	0	79	21	0
Bflo . ELA Grade 6	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	21	48	29	2	7	58	33	2	4	52	43	1
CCS Math Grade 3	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	7	26	47	21	0	4	53	42	0	0	85	15
Bflo . Math Grade 3	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	29	31	37	3	24	33	40	3	9	25	60	6
CCS Math Grade 4	22.5	65.0	12.5	0.0	6.8	36.4	36.4	20.5	16	20	59	5	2	17	54	26	2	2	71	14
Bflo . Math Grade 4	6.4	31.1	51.4	11.1	7.4	26.0	50.6	15.9	23	30	42	6	23	33	39	6	18	29	46	7
CCS Math Grade 5	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	53	35	13	0	0	33	67	0	0	23	71	6
Bflo . Math Grade 5	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	40	32	24	3	25	37	34	4	17	33	44	6
CCS Math Grade 6	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	50	44	6	0	16	22	63	0	0	27	67	6
Bflo . Math Grade 6	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	38	35	25	3	27	35	34	4	18	33	42	7

 

                                                       

 

Evidence of Fiscal Soundness/Projected Fiscal Impact

 

1. The School’s annual fiscal audits have shown no material weaknesses.
2. The School has increased its unrestricted net assets from $925,746 in 2005-06 to $1,794,217 in 2006-07, and to $1,966,173 in 2007-08.

 

 

 

 

Projected*

Fiscal Impact of the

COMMUNITY
Charter School

2009-10 Through 2013-14

School Year	Number of Students	Projected Impact (Percent of Total District Budget)
2009-10	332	0.44
2010-11	332	0.44
2011-12	332	0.45
2012-13	332	0.46

 

*Assumes a 3.0 percent annual increase in the district’s budget and a 4.5 percent annual increase in the average expense per pupil.  Projections are subject to fluctuation in actual enrollments, FTE enrollments, AOE, and district budgets.  Further assumes all students will come from the district of location.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Projected*

Fiscal Impact Of All Charter Schools In Buffalo

2009-10 Through 2013-14

School	2009-10	2010-11	2011-12	2012-13
Aloma D. Johnson Fruit Belt Community Charter School	0.30	0.39	0.39	0.40
Buffalo Academy of Science CS	0.57	0.58	0.59	0.60
Buffalo United CS	0.89	0.90	0.91	0.93
CS for Applied Technologies**	1.90	1.90	1.90	1.95
COMMUNITY CS	0.44	0.44	0.45	0.46
Elmwood Village CS	0.22	0.23	0.23	0.23
Enterprise CS	0.50	0.52	0.53	0.54
King Center CS	0.13	0.13	0.14	0.14
Oracle CS	0.46	0.46	0.47	0.48
Pinnacle CS	0.61	0.62	0.63	0.64
South Buffalo CS	0.79	0.80	0.81	0.82
Tapestry CS	0.52	0.61	0.66	0.67
Western NY Maritime CS	0.41	0.42	0.42	0.43
Westminster Community CS	0.70	0.81	0.72	0.73
Total Projected Impact	8.44	8.71	8.85	9.02

*Assumes a 3.0 percent annual increase in the district’s budget and a 4.5 percent annual increase in the average expense per pupil.  Projections are subject to fluctuation in actual enrollments, FTE enrollments, AOE, and district budgets.  Further assumes all students will come from the district of location, and that all other charter schools will still be in operation from 2009-10 forward.

** Located within Kenmore-Tonawanda CSD but receives approximately 85 percent of its student enrollment from Buffalo.   Impact is therefore calculated upon 85 percent of its anticipated enrollment.

 

 

Evidence of Parent and Student Satisfaction and Community Support

 

1. The School has met its goal of 90 percent student re-enrollment annually.
2. The School has met its parent satisfaction goal, with a majority of the parents rating the School as a 3.0 on a scale of 1 – 4 (average score for 2007-08 was 3.36).