Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 3, 2001 Ocoee Charter School Application DEC-29-00 16:01 FROM:FOLEY 6 LARDNER ID:4076461743 PAGE 2/3 FOLEY & LARDNER . , . ORNF . , . T LAW BRUSSELS POST ORtCE BOX 2 93OR_ DO CHICAG caO ORLANDO. FLORIDA 3 2802-2 1 03 SACRAMEFRO I NOPIN ORANGE AVENUE. SURE I SOo 9aN OIEGC omenaL II Oa cs FLORIDA 4L0O I-2343 JAe$ NVIµ[ TELEPHONE: (4O7I 423- SOH PRAxO5C0 5c Los AHGEI£s J8 3 uAwsssPE MADISON FACSIMILE:190716^C- ]a3 TOMPA MILWAUKLL ESTP M a D.0 NRRER's DIRECT NNE WEST PALM (407)244-3248 EMAIL aoOgrss prosemhal@foleylaw.com cuENryM0203ATTEP NUmBER 7.0473 020377-0473 December 29, 2000 VIA FACSIMILE Frank Kruppeubacher, Esq. 790 North Orange Avenue Orlando, Florida 32801 Re: January 3, 2001 Joint Meeting between Ocoee City Commission and Orange County School Board Dear Frank: I have been advised by the Ocoee City Clerk that the City has not received the School Board's proposed agenda for the January 3 meeting. As a result, we are now unable to obtain input from the Ocoee City Commission or give them advance notice of the discussion topics. Also, we typically post an agenda at least 24-hours in advance of a meeting. If we do not receive the agenda by January 2, it may be necessary to postpone the meeting unless the City Commission agrees to meet without a published agenda. Additionally, please be advised that the School Board has not responded to our public records request. Again, the failure of the School Board to respond means that our elected officials will not have important information in advance of the meeting. Please note that the City of Ocoee promptly responded to the School Board's public records request. We are disappointed that the School Board has failed to provide the Ocoee City Commission with the information necessary to adequately prepare for the joint meeting. Please advise if the agenda will be provided in advance of the meeting and if the information requested in our public records request will also be provided in advance. 006.204632.1 ESTa9irITnf0 1142 A...fame ew..w .vn-.••..Dell O.nees..I aOLIN.Ov:M.c DR OEN,Ru.ryet LO.PN..S!NG.FOR.saoow 4M0 Seurat-ea DEC-29-00 16. 01 FROMFOLEV & LARDNER ID-40760E11743 PAGE 3/3 rOLEV Q LARONER December 29, 2000 Page 2 Finally, you should be aware that the City of Ocoee has retained counsel which has filed a formal appeal of the failure of the School Board to act on Ocoee's Charter Application. This action was necessary in order to protect the City's appeal rights. A copy of the Notice of Appeal is enclosed. Sincere Paul E. Rosenthal City Attorney City of Ocoee Enclosure PER/jh • cc: Mayor S. Scott Vandergrift Ocoee City Commissioners James W. Shim, P.E_, Acting City Manager Ellis Shapiro 00620461Z.1 DEC-29-00 1s : 03 FROM.FOLEY a LARONER ID-407E491743 PAGE 2/9 FOLEY & LARDNER MEMORANDUM C46ST-MATTER NUMEER 020 37 7-0 542 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners of the City of Ocoee FROM: Scan A Cookson, Esq., Assistant City Attorney THROUGH: Paul E. Rosenthal, Esq., City Attorney DATE: December 28, 2000 RE: Retention of Haskell for work related to Charter School Attached please fmd a letter setting forth Haskell's hourly rate of $200.00 for the services to be rendered by Haskell in connection with attending the January 3, 2001 meeting with the Orange County School Board and in preparing the paper work for the appeal of the City of Ocoec's Charter School Application- Please note that Haskell acknowledges the $2,000.00 cap imposed by the City. In addition, City Manager Ellis Shapiro authorized the City to retain Attorney William Thompson of Jacksonville for the legal work relating to preparing the actual appeal of the School Board's lack of action on the City's Charter School Application, a copy of which is also attached. Mr. Thompson has an expertise relating to Charter Schools and was recommended to us by Haskell. Mr. Thompson has acknowledged that the fee for these initial services will not exceed $1,000.00. Attachment(s) 006_204439.1 DEC-29-00 19 . 03 FROM.FOLFV & LAPDNER ID-40764E11793 PAGE a/6 FOLEY & LARDNER At1OINEVs AT LAW CHICAGO OENVER POST OFECE BOX 2193 EHTO DRLR.NOO, FLORIDA 32502.21 a3 SA.^.RAn ISCO JACKS RM ILK • • I nO panNGf AVENUE. SURE 1 BOO RANC SAN DIEco LOS ANGELE5 OR(.ANOO, FLORIDA 3$80 2386 TALLAHASSEE SAN FAHAS EE SC0 nADI$ON TELEPHONE: (407,4123-7C50 TTATTEA MILWADREE FACSIMILE (i0A sae- 743 ORLANDD Wp$NINGTON. C.c. ,KST PALM BEACH WAITER'S DIRER LINE (4071 244-3243 DATA.ADOnCSS PROSENT @NUmBER A tQ Evlaw.Com 02 CLIEM�MATO3 7OS42 70542 December 22, 2000 VIA FACSIMILE—904-269-9303 William Thompson, Jr.. Esq. 2301 Park Ave. Suite 404 Orange Park, Florida 32073-5568 Re: City of Ocoee Charter School Application Dear Bill: This letter will confirm that you are authorized by the City of Ocoee to prepare and file a Notice of Appeal for the above-referenced matter at an hourly rate of$200.00 with the fee not to exceed $1,000.00. Once the City has preserved its rights as to the appeal with the filing of the Notice of Appeal, the City may at a future date authorize further representation in pursuing the appeal. If you have any questions regarding this representation, please feel free to contact me. Siacer y, Paul E. Rosenthal, Esq. City Attorney cc: Ellis Shapiro, City Manager Stacy Miller 006.204193.1 ESTA01.,SnEo • Bn2 DEC N-00 16 . 03 FROM.FOLEY a LARDN£R ID-4076461743 PAGE 4/8 IITHE HASKELL COMPANY TOTAL FACILITY SOLUTIONS December 22,2000 Mr.Scott A.Cookson,Esq. A-sibanr City Attorney Foley&Lamina Dear Scott: Pursuant to the City Commission's request,Haskell Educational Services(Haskell)will represent the City at the School Board meeting on 1/03/00 and initiate the charts application appeal process to the State Board of Education. We will perform services for $200 per hour with an expense cap not to exceed$2,000.00. Hastrll's services do not include legal fees associated with the filing of the appeal As discussed,Haskell will prepare the appeal materials to be delivered to the law tint selected by the City. Also recognize the appeal is due to the State no late than December 28. Please advise as to bow to proceed. Pest Regards, starcer Stacy A Miller HASIELL BUILDINGSIACISONVILLE,FLDaiDA33231-4100.904/791-4500 PA1791-4699 AlmEN Moab DEC-29-00 16.03 FROM.FOLEV a LAPDN£R ID-4075491743 PAGE stet STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION ROOM 1702 -THE CAPITAL TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA In Re: Charter School Application of Ocoee NOTICE OF APPEAL NOTICE IS GIVEN that OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL, Appellant, appeals to the STATE • BOARD OF EDUCATION the failure to act by the ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD on the OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL application as required by Section 228.056, Florida Statutes. Dated this 28'"day of December, 2000. WILLIAM L THO S Ase Wiliam L. hompson. r. Florida Bar No. 298794 2301 Park Avenue, Suite 404 Orange Park, FL 32073 (904)269-4841 -Telephone (904)269-9303-Facsimile CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing = been • • 'shed to the Orange County School Board,Orange County Publi - • •fs, 445 i e Street. Orlando, Florida 32801-1127 by U.S. Mad this 28r' • - • I I . tut L' S Willi:m L.Thompson,J . DEC-29-00 16.04 FROM.FOLEY 8 LARONER ID=4076481743 PAGE 8/8 STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION 400 SOUTH MONROE STREET.ROOM 1702 TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-0400 ATTENTION:WAYNE PIERSON NO110E OF APPEAL APPLICANT: CITY OF OCOEE 150 North Lakeshore Drive Ocoee, Florida 34781-2258 SCHOOL BOARD: THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY P.O. Box 271 Orlando, Florida 32802-0271 DATE OF SCHOOL BOARD NON-ACTION: November 30,2000 APPLICANTS ATTORNEY: WILL AM L. THOMSON,JR.,P.A. 2301 Park Avenue,Suite 404 Orange Park, Florida 32073 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 228.056, Florida Statutes, applicant the CITY OF OCOEE, respectfully appeals the failure to ad by the SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY on its OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL APPLICATION, and, in support of its request,states that the SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY violated Seddon 228.056, Florida Statutes,giving the CITY OF OCOEE the right to this appeal, as follows: Page-1- DEC-29-00 16= 04 FROM•FOLEY a LARDNER 1D:4076401743 PAGE 7/B 1. The CITY OF OCOEE submitted an application for the OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL to the SCHOOL.BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY on October 1, 2000. A copy of the application is attached as Exhibit•A.• 2. Section 228.056(4)(a), Florida Statutes, states a district school board must by a majority vote approve or deny an application no later than 60 calendar days after the application is received. 3. The SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY failed to act on the application submitted by the CITY OF OCOEE within the required time. 4. The OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL application meets all requirements of Section 228.056, Florida Statutes. 5. The CITY OF OCOEE has addressed all valid questions of the SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY. 6_ A Request to Take Action on the Ocoee Charter School Application was scheduled on November 21, 2000, according to the School Board of Orange County Meeting Agenda,which we have attached as Exhibit"e•. 7. The SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY failed to act on the OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL application at the November 21, 2000, meeting or any other meeting prior to the end of the sixty day period. 8. The failure of the SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY to act upon the OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL application is tantamount to a denial due to the timing of any additional action that may be required by the SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY and the time to negotiate an acceptable charter. Page-2- DEC-29-00 16-04 FROM•FOLEY a LPRONER [D=4076491743 PAGE 6/9 e. The CITY OF OCOEE is entitled to an appeal as provided in Section 228,058(4)(a), Florida Statutes, which appeal is subject to the provisions of Section 228.058(4)(h), Florida Statutes. 10. Because the OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL application meets all requirements of Section 228.056, Florida Statutes, the CITY OF OCOEE requests the State Board of Education to remand the OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL application to the SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY with a written recommendation that the SCHOOL BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY approve the OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL application or, in the alternative, to act on the OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL application at its next meeting alter the remand. DATED this 28"day of December, 2000. Respectfully uf)rnrtted, tAstkV n, Copies to: Afl Members State Board of Education Page-3- O,© ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS P © P.O. Box 271 Orlando, Florida (4071317-3200 - 445 W. Amelia Street 32802-0271 32801-1127 January 2, 2001 Scott A. Cookson, Esq. Foley and Lardner Attorneys at Law P.O. Box 2193 Orlando, Florida 32802 Dear Sir: OCPS is in receipt of your Public Records Request dated December 20, 2000. Unfortunately, the request sent to Mr. Brian Bain was not recognized until today, January 2, 2001, as Mr. Bain was not in the office on the day of delivery nor since then due to annual leave. All items as outlined in the letter and will be delivered to Jean Grafton, City Clerk, City of Ocoee today. Sincerely, i/V.li(-i H h N^a61.2 Nicholas Gledich Associate Superintendent Education Services c: Frank Kruppenbacher, OCPS Counsel "fb., ()rouge Comas n,l 14n.rd ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Charter School Proposal Review Name of Reviewer: /Y/5,c7 T'1 / 4—� c. .1]� Date: 7/C9 —�((� - Es'0 Name of Proposed Charter School: O 7Y- Co 2 6 ( 4,QT� . Are>0L Please rate the charter school proposal by circling the appropriate number. A rating of five would indicate that the section rated was clearly understood, legal and follows best practices. 3 4 5 Much Less I han Les an Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable What the Reviewers Look For: 7. MISSION Clearly articulated vision for an innovative public school that will lead to improved education outcomes and greater community ownership of the local school; consistency between mission and the educational programs as a means to achieve this. 1 (3og�) 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less-Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 2. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM Innovative teaching methods and curriculum approaches; substantive overview of curriculum; consistency between mission, curriculum and student population to be served. Compliance with applicable regulations to meet the needs of limited English proficient and special needs students in the school progra .1 1 ����� e 4 5 Much Less Than Le-)�%'. Acce Se More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 3. STUDENT ASSESSMENT Commitment to high academic standards for all students; well-developed assessment mechanisms: understanding of the state assessment requirements. 1 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less an Acceptable More than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102—1/7/00 Page 1 of 4 4. ACCOUNTABILITY Method for establishing a baseline standard of student academic achievement. The outcomes to be achieved and the method of measurement that will be used. 1 Uh 4 5 Much Less Than Les ian A abe More Yhan Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 5. PROFILE OF THE FOUNDING BOARD AND/OR INITIAL INCORPORATORS A well-balanced group, which brings together people with a range of professional skills capable of the organizational, financial, pedagogical, legal and other tasks required opening a functioning public school. Local representation meets equirements of law. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 6. SCHOOL GOVERNANCE Stable, effective, and comprehensive governance model; consistency with mission; clearly defined roles of the board and its interaction with staff; appropriate teacher and parent input in school decision-making; well developed, viable administrative management structure; ekno dge of and compliance with public information laws. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Ss Than Less Than Acceptable More than Much More lhan Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7. IMPLEMENTATION TIMETABLE Adequate timetable for implementing the charter. 2 3 4 5 Mu.. Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 8. EVIDENCE OF SUPPORT Evidence that the founders inspire the confidence of their targeted community; evidence that the program provides an attractive educational alternate to students and parents; breadth of community support extending well beyond the core group of founders. 2 3 4 5 Muc - s Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 9. FACILITIES Progress toward identifying and acquiring an adequate facility. /1/ 2 3 4 5 Much L ss Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102—1/7/00 Page 2 of 4 10. FINANCES Sound financial planning, fiscal viability of the school 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than an Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 11. RECRUITING & MARKETING PLAN A solid plan to attract sufficient students to operate a school; effort to publicize the school to a broad audience in order to foster a student body representative of the local community; and recruitment efforts which seek to ensure a match between the school program and applicants educational and personal needs. 2 3 4 5 MuchkestThan Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 12. ADMISSIONS & REGISTRATION PLAN Consistency with the mission of the school; a non-discriminatory selection and admissions process; timely and realistic procedures for admitting students; compliance with charter school legislation. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than A able More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 13. RACIAL BALANCE A plan for achieving racial balances consistent with the requirements of the public school. / 2 j 3 4 5 Much Less 1 han Le n Acceptable More Than Much Mare Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 14. HUMAN RESOURCE INFORMATION High professional standards for teachers and other staff; commitment to professional development of staff; working condition; and compensation packages which will attract quality staff; compliance with labor laws, fingerprinting and background checks. 1 2 4 5 Much Less 1 han Less Than Ace ble More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 15. TRANSPORTATION A workable, fair, nondiscriminatory and cost-effective arrangement for safely transporting students to and from school. 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less an Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102— 1/7/00 Page 3 of 4 OVERALL STRENGTHS ., _. V a,Ytg --1 <7 Li4. ,e camt C�Y'� Levt-yJ! ri/ Weaknesses/ Concerns ST X Questions for Follow-up Discussions and Negotiations 7 71d102— 1/7/00 Page 4 of 4 U C0� , - ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS - -L'c' Att. c IV 7/1.'x.5;r17 Charter School Proposal Review Name of Reviewer: -1h rrie t- P fitlit4-1-\ Date: /6/0.7) Name of Proposed Charter School: ( Tc.�'-C" C -74 Y Please rate the charter school proposal by circling the appropriate number A rating of five would indicate that the section rated was clearly understood, legal and follows best practices. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less l han Less l han Acceptable Morel han Much Morel han Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable What the Reviewers Look For: 1. MISSION Clearly articulated vision for an innovative public school that will lead to improved education outcomes and greater community ownership of the local school; consistency between mission and the educational programs as a means to achieve this. 1 2 (030, 4 5 Much Less 1 han Less-Than Acable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 2. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM Innovative teaching methods and curriculum approaches; substantive overview of curriculum; consistency between mission, curriculum and student population to be served. Compliance with applicable regulations to meet the needs of limited English proficient and special needs students in the school program. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than A table More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 3. STUDENT ASSESSMENT Commitment to high academic standards for all students; well-developed assessment mechanisms; understanding of the state assessment requirements. 1 2 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Ac able More 1 han Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102—1/7/00 Page 1 of 4 4. ACCOUNTABILITY Method for establishing a baseline standard of student academic achievement. The outcomes to be achieved and the method of measurement that will be used. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Le an Acceptable More Than firucFivlom Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 5. PROFILE OF THE FOUNDING BOARD AND/OR INITIAL INCORPORATORS A well-balanced group, which brings together people with a range of professional skills capable of the organizational, financial, pedagogical, legal and other tasks required opening a functioning public school. Local representation meets requirements,,," of law. 1 2 at 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than A table More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 6. SCHOOL GOVERNANCE Stable, effective, and comprehensive governance model; consistency with mission; clearly defined roles of the board and its interaction with staff; appropriate teacher and parent input in school decision-making; well developed, viable administrative management structure; knowledge of and compliance with public information laws. ,�7 1 2 3 4 5 / Much Less I han Less I han Acceptable More 1 han Much More 1 han ' Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7. IMPLEMENTATION TIMETABLE Adequate timetable for implementing the charter. 1 2/jn ( Th 3 4 5 Much Less Than Le an Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 8. EVIDENCE OF SUPPORT Evidence that the founders inspire the confidence of their targeted community; evidence that the program provides an attractive educational alternate to students and parents; breadth of community support extending well beyond the core group of founders. Th 1t 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less an Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 9. FACILITIES Progress toward identifying and acquiring an adequate facility. 2 3 4 5 Much ess I han Less I han Acceptable More I han Much More 1 han Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102—1/7/00 Page 2 of 4 10. FINANCES Sound financial planning; fiscal viability of the school. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less I han I ess I han Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 11. RECRUITING & MARKETING PLAN A solid plan to attract sufficient students to operate a school; effort to publicize the school to a broad audience in order to foster a student body representative of the local community; and recruitment efforts which seek to ensure a match between the school program and applicants educational and personal needs. 3 4 5 Much Less Than Les3TT an Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 12. ADMISSIONS & REGISTRATION PLAN Consistency with the mission of the school; a non-discriminatory selection and admissions process; timely and realistic procedures for admitting students; compliance with charter school legislation. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Ace ble More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 13. RACIAL BALANCE A plan for achieving racial balances consistent with the requirements of the public school. 1 2 4 5 Much Less I han Less Than A pt le More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 14. HUMAN RESOURCE INFORMATION High professional standards for teachers and other staff; commitment to professional development of staff; working condition; and compensation packages which will attract quality staff; compliance with labor laws, fingerprinting and background checks. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less I han Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 15. TRANSPORTATION A workable, fair, nondiscriminatory and cost-effective arrangement for safely transporting students to and from school. /7 1 2 3 4 5 // Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More I han Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7to 102—1/7/00 Page 3 of 4 OVERALL STRENGTHS Weaknesses/ Concerns G r c(< n =gip Questions for Follow-up Discussions and Negotiations 2 7td102— 1/7/00 Page 4 of 4 ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Charter School Proposal Review Name of Reviewer: U,? ?'?te 1 < < C Date: ffr—v Name of Proposed Charter School: � ()P a. (_.,AD r .4t r �1 / Please rate the charter school proposal by circling the appropriate number. A rating of five would indicate that the section rated was clearly understood, legal and follows best practices. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than cc able More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable What the Reviewers Look For: 1. MISSION Clearly articulated vision for an innovative public school that will lead to improved education outcomes and greater community ownership of the local school; consistency between mission and the educational programs as a means to achieve this. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Accep able More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 2. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM Innovative teaching methods and curriculum approaches; substantive overview of curriculum; consistency between mission, curriculum and student population to be served. Compliance with applicable regulations to meet the needs of limited English proficient and special needs students in the school program. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable e an Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 3. STUDENT ASSESSMENT Commitment to high academic standards for all students; well-developed assessment mechanisms; understanding of the state assessment requirements. 1 2 3 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable M an Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102— 1/7/00 Page 1 of 4 4. ACCOUNTABILITY Method for establishing a baseline standard of student academic achievement. The outcomes to be achieved and the method of measurement that will be used. 1 2 3 1 4 __ _ 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than _ Bch More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 5. PROFILE OF THE FOUNDING BOARD AND/OR INITIAL INCORPORATORS A well-balanced group, which brings together people with a range of professional skills capable of the organizational, financial, pedagogical, legal and other tasks required opening a functioning public school. Local representation meets requirements of law. 1 2 / 3 j 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Ac table More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 6. SCHOOL GOVERNANCE Stable, effective, and comprehensive governance model; consistency with mission; clearly defined roles of the board and its interaction with staff; appropriate teacher and parent input in school decision-making; well developed, viable administrative management structure; knowledge of and compliance with public information laws. 1 2 4 5 Much Less Than Less I han •,:ble More than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7. IMPLEMENTATION TIMETABLE Adequate timetable for implementing the charter. 2 3 4 5 Muc Le Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 8. EVIDENCE OF SUPPORT Evidence that the founders inspire the confidence of their targeted community; evidence that the program provides an attractive educational alternate to students and parents; breadth of community support extending well beyond the core group of founders. 1 2� 3 4 5 Much Less Than ess Th n Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable A ptabte Acceptable Acceptable 9. FACILITIES Progress toward identifying and acquiring an adequate facility. 2 3 4 5 Mu IP Than Less than Acceptable More I han Much More Than Ac -• able Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102—1/7/00 Page 2 of 4 10. FINANCES Sound financial planning; fiscal viability of the school. ffii 1 2 � 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acke3 able More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 11. RECRUITING & MARKETING PLAN A solid plan to attract sufficient students to operate a school; effort to publicize the school to a broad audience in order to foster a student body representative of the local community; and recruitment efforts which seek to ensure a match between the school program and applicants educational and personal needs. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than ss T n Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable A able Acceptable Acceptable 12. ADMISSIONS & REGISTRATION PLAN Consistency with the mission of the school; a non-discriminatory selection and admissions process; timely and realistic procedures for admitting students; compliance with charter school legislation. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less I han cce ble More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 13. RACIAL BALANCE A plan for achieving racial balances consistent with the requirements of the public school. 1 2 / 3 4 5 11vTuch Less Than Less Than Acce le More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 14. HUMAN RESOURCE INFORMATION High professional standards for teachers and other staff; commitment to professional development of staff; working condition; and compensation packages which will attract quality staff; compliance with labor laws, fingerprinting and background checks. 1 2 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Ac illle More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 15. TRANSPORTATION A workable, fair, nondiscriminatory and cost-effective arrangement for safely transporting students to and from school. 1 2� 3 4 5 s Much Less Than L l n Acceptable More I han Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7ttl102—1/7/00 Page 3 of 4 OVERALL STRENGTHS Cprnmi+1 rn 0,4 19 clr/e 4:11 :°<& s acign7S • Weaknesses/ Concerns II f/0 (Pierre net 4-0 Arc/ /,'//er , Allot p4//i riioncr 4 '7 r Coon intte G.teyporr- ?JPaf,6/// ri72 prJ'irols, ✓g CGr/6a/u e. Questions for Follow-up Discussions and Negotiations O/Orp.17 4rOntpoAr oks pruvb $ ; o ) {or CI S4r c+ +0 proVic/20u1Sut_ (9 mil 6rta. Cott ScA, 0) Gti1Fwins by rny „ /rel,/? 71d 102—1/7/00 Page 4 of 4 ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Charter School Proposal Review Name of Reviewer: ' Date: ' Name of Proposed Charter School: - �� ' �' �-- Please rate the charter school proposal by circling the appropriate number. A rating of five would indicate that the section rated was clearly understood, legal and follows best practices. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable What the Reviewers Look For: 1. MISSION Clearly articulated vision for an innovative public school that will lead to improved education outcomes and greater community ownership of the local school; consistency between mission and the educational programs as a means to achieve this. ram..- ��y 1 2 .3l 4 5 1, „.Fe.t'v Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 2. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM Innovative teaching methods and curriculum approaches; substantive overview of curriculum; consistency between mission, curriculum and student population to be served. Compliance with applicable regulations to meet the needs of limited English proficient and special needs students in the school program. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 3. STUDENT ASSESSMENT Commitment to high academic standards for all students; well-developed assessment mechanisms; understanding of the state assessment requirements. 1 2 3� 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102— 1/7/00 Page 1 of 4 4. ACCOUNTABILITY Method for establishing a baseline standard of student academic achievement. The outcomes to be achieved and the method of measurement that will be used. • 1 , (�' /,4"" - f`' .,.> 1 2 3 4 5 .3'.,;.4 4' Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 5. PROFILE OF THE FOUNDING BOARD AND/OR INITIAL INCORPORATORS A well-balanced group, which brings together people with a range of professional skills capable of the organizational, financial, pedagogical, legal and other tasks required opening a functioning public school. Local representation meets requirements of law. 1 2 3 ' 4 ? 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 6. SCHOOL GOVERNANCE If,v-4 0 Stable, effective, and comprehensive governance model; consistency with mission; clearly defined roles of the board and its interaction with staff; appropriate teacher and parent input in school decision-making; well developed, viable administrative management structure; knowledge of and compliance with public information laws. 1 2 l3/ 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7. IMPLEMENTATION TIMETABLE Adequate timetable for implementing the charter. 1 2 ;4 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 8. EVIDENCE OF SUPPORT Evidence that the founders inspire the confidence of their targeted community; evidence that the f ,c_' program provides an attractive educational alternate to students and parents; breadth of community support extending well beyond the core group of founders. 1 2 d 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 9. FACILITIES Progress toward identifying and acquiring an adequate facility. 1 (V 3 4 5 Much Less Than Leserhan Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 4 0 7td102—1/7/00 Page 2 of 4 10. FINANCES Sound financial planning; fiscal viability of the school. 1 2 .3 ' 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 11. RECRUITING & MARKETING PLAN A solid plan to attract sufficient students to operate a school; effort to publicize the school to a broad audience in order to foster a student body representative of the local community; and recruitment efforts which seek to ensure a match between the school program and applicants educational and personal needs. 1 2 .3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 12. ADMISSIONS & REGISTRATION PLAN Consistency with the mission of the school; a non-discriminatory selection and admissions process; timely and realistic procedures for admitting students; compliance with charter school legislation. 1 2 3 (41 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More'Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 13. RACIAL BALANCE A plan for achieving racial balances consistent with the requirements of the public school. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 14. HUMAN RESOURCE INFORMATION High professional standards for teachers and other staff; commitment to professional {��, -` �p -development of staff; working condition; and compensation packages which will attract quality 1 staff; compliance with labor laws, fingerprinting and background checks. �> p1 2 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 15. TRANSPORTATION A workable, fair, nondiscriminatory and cost-effective arrangement for safely transporting students to and from school. 1 2 3' 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102— 1/7/00 Page 3 of 4 OVERALL STRENGTHS (31 Jt�t..�.t.•�-t_„�_ �2.-'��—�,"'� ...1:•t_..+-•.(.,.•%...- �..�.t...q�,re�,_-'L,a;_ ��_f..<,t„J_-G-��..r{ f" Weaknesses/ Concerns /6-ter ►-CP-t-y-t moo-- T Questions for Follow-up Discussions and Negotiations 11 /3—c)-_k.,L y 1 _•t —e-l.st, s_f__�.._t t f t. .__.'� L... +..�ey- -t,e�,., a.� n._ 7td102—1/7/00 Page 4 of 4 ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Charter School Proposal Review Name of Reviewer: t l21^.r, ✓ k'J'�/ ' �rv� �. Date: QC+. <1 .1k7E-L; Name of Proposed Charter School: I )0 6-66 - 0 _ Please rate the charter school proposal by circling the appropriate number. A rating of five would indicate that the section rated was clearly understood, legal and follows best practices. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More I han Much More I han Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable • What the Reviewers Look For: 1. MISSION Clearly articulated vision for an innovative public school that will lead to improved education outcomes and greater community ownership of the local school; consistency between mission and the educational programs as a means to achieve this. TSi! 3 4 5 Much Less Than Le©n Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable u 2. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM ly tyvt, ;,. 1nc G rrt.r-Qu.vv�- Va L -A0v,I V Innovative teaching methods and curriculum approaches; substantive overview of curriculum; consistency between mission, curriculum and student population to be served. Compliance with applicable regulations to meet the needs of limited English proficient and special needs students in the school program. 5 Much Less Than Les" Acceptable M• I;lean Much More Than Acceptable Accep ..e Acceptable Acceptable 3. STUDENT ASSESSMENT Commitment to high academic standards for all students; well-developed assessment mechanisms: understanding of the state ass ssment requirements. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than cce able More 1 han Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102—1/7/00 Page 1 of 4 • 4. ACCOUNTABILITY (• \ krti? , %r,(i �".4f) Method for establishing a baseline standard of student academic achievement. The outcomes to be achieved and the method of measurement that will be used. 1 2 k3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than A., p ble More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 5. PROFILE OF THE FOUNDING BOARD AND/OR INITIAL INCORPORATORS A well-balanced group, which brings together people with a range of professional skills capable of the organizational, financial, pedagogical, legal and other tasks required opening a functioning public school. Local representation meets eq`uirements of law. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than A able More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 6. SCHOOL GOVERNANCE • Stable, effective, and comprehensive governance model; consistency with mission; clearly defined roles of the board and its interaction with staff; appropriate teacher and parent input in school decision-making; well developed, viable administrative management structure; knowledge of and compliance with public i ation laws. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than A table More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7. IMPLEMENTATION TIMETABLE Adequate timetable fo • plementing the charter. 1 fT 3 4 5 Much Less Than Le h Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 8. EVIDENCE OF SUPPORT Evidence that the founders inspire the confidence of their targeted community; evidence that the program provides an attractive educational alternate to students and parents; breadth of community support extending well beyond the core group of founders. 1 / 2 I 3 4 5 Much Less Than ss T h_ari Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 9. FACILITIES Progress toward identifying and acquiring an adequate facility. /--- , 1 (r 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Uess T n Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Ac ep able Acceptable Acceptable I 7td102— 1/7/00 Page 2 of 4 10. FINANCES Sound financial planning, fiscal viability of the school. 1 ( 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than L s Mart Acceptable More Than Much-More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 11. RECRUITING & MARKETING PLAN A solid plan to attract sufficient students to operate a school; effort to publicize the school to a broad audience in order to foster a student body representative of the local community; and recruitment efforts which seek to ensure a match between the school program and applicants educational and perss aLneeds. 1 (/ 2 / 3 4 5 Much Less Than L ss Tyafi Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 12. ADMISSIONS & REGISTRATION PLAN Consistency with the mission of the school; a non-discriminatory selection and admissions process; timely and realistic procedures for admitting students; compliance with charter school legislation. rTh 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less 1 han Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Zs: Acceptable Acceptable 13. RACIAL BALANCE A plan for achieving racial balances consistentt with the requirements of the public school. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than l cc�epta More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 14. HUMAN RESOURCE INFORMATION High professional standards for teachers and other staff; commitment to professional development of staff; working condition; and compensation packages which will attract quality staff; compliance with labor laws, fingerprinting and background checks. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Lea Thth Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 15. TRANSPORTATION A workable, fair, nondiscriminatory and cost-effective arrangement for safely transporting students to and from school. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Le s l hap' Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102—1/7/00 Page 3 of 4 OVERALL STRENGTHS n r. u�► cu&-«- c)3 act_c.G, v 'L'( 2(41)4- tk:i 0-4-2 0 tsvk_k_IAALut L C. GL-6 CO A cA t. . . IC (..) va!,(44 i c IN ;76 1-), - 1 i rir aLl-ft ESE C-hil itlzkic . 1). I " 1 ' ke-cp • Weaknesses/ Concerns • c 7/(,(;_ t_._ ,p C.� /tti.r .Vel.il9. Gi 677,te,4-0 vf-epoC2-, 1/1Ii t; Cv ----,,Gt-d-e:, /74 f-c..P-filer".. -kr/v�.rfz;'. e- 47.-e -c _. .P-c Ii 7(L L ;G ey A-Zyrfrril ,lug 6 fa--- cry /t-e C0l%-' h-- ��J/ C�'7 6z2_ �.(4 �LC Questions for Follow-up Discussions and Negotiations ji Lam— ' �-� �J --c.e-4_(•,l_ 4 c-- -'e.i.,1� /41.. 4,6krz_. 2 2.. .5-44- ' vrr./,-. INI, /L- ,i0),1/i(L' 4,4., C ti (7).29 ) (eleA--A__. _,,a e,(:::2‘i-e-^,F117.r.en_1, _Ak-66-44CA 7121 ?Citerx-1 1 XIC"161 ,(' ' 7td102—1/7/00 Page 4 of 4 ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Charter School Proposal Review Name of Reviewer: '--l1 r 7 ��, �S Y . ( uJo I 9' Q S Date: /U U Name of Proposed Charter School: 0 C 0 e Please rate the charter school proposal by circling the appropriate number. A rating of five would indicate that the section rated was clearly understood, legal and follows best practices. /i ;) 1 2 3 4 5 pit Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than 4 Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable J What the Reviewers Look For: 1. MISSION Clearly articulated vision for an innovative public school that will lead to improved education outcomes and greater community ownership of the local school; consistency between mission and the educational programs as a means to achieve this. 1 2 (372 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acde..ale More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 2. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM Innovative teaching methods and curriculum approaches; substantive overview of curriculum; consistency between mission, curriculum and student population to be served. Compliance with applicable regulations to meet the needs of limited English proficient and special needs students in the school program. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Ace ble More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 3. STUDENT ASSESSMENT Commitment to high academic standards for all students; well-developed assessment mechanisms; understanding of the state assessment requirements. 1 2 i 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acp ble More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable I I7td102— 1/7/00 Page 1 of 4 4. ACCOUNTABILITY Method for establishing a baseline standard of student academic achievement. The outcomes to be achieved and the method of measurement that will be used. 1 2 /".3 1\ 4 5 Much Less Than Less-Than A cephabte More I han Much-More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 5. PROFILE OF THE FOUNDING BOARD AND/OR INITIAL INCORPORATORS A well-balanced group, which brings together people with a range of professional skills capable of the organizational, financial, pedagogical, legal and other tasks required opening a functioning public school. Local representation meets requirements of law. 1 2 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than A cep ble More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 6. SCHOOL GOVERNANCE Stable, effective, and comprehensive governance model; consistency with mission; clearly defined roles of the board and its interaction with staff; appropriate teacher and parent input in school decision-making; well developed, viable administrative management structure; knowledge of and compliance with public information laws. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More f han Much More I han Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7. IMPLEMENTATION TIMETABLE Adequate timetable for implementing the charter. 2 3 4 5 Muc /1-14 than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much Mare Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 8. EVIDENCE OF SUPPORT Evidence that the founders inspire the confidence of their targeted community; evidence that the program provides an attractive educational alternate to. stugents and parents; breadth of community support extending well beyond the core group of founders. 2 3 4 5 Mu Less han Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Ac e Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 9. FACILITIES Progress toward identifying and acquiring an adequate facility. 1 2 3 4 5 Muc es han Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102-1/7/00 Page 2 of 4 10. FINANCES Sound financial planning; fiscal viability of the school. 1 (3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Apttkle More-Titan uc oreThan Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 11. RECRUITING & MARKETING PLAN A solid plan to attract sufficient students to operate a school; effort to publicize the school to a broad audience in order to foster a student body representative of the local community; and recruitment efforts which seek to ensure a match between the school program and applicants educational and personal needs. /1 2 3 4 5 Muchfhan Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 12. ADMISSIONS & REGISTRATION PLAN Consistency with the mission of the school; a non-discriminatory selection and admissions process; timely and realistic procedures for admitting students; compliance with charter school legislation. 1 72Z 3 4 5 Much Less Than Lekejn Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 13. RACIAL BALANCE A plan for achieving racial balances consistent with the requirements of the public school. 1 3 4 5 Much Less Than Les02 Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 14. HUMAN RESOURCE INFORMATION High professional standards for teachers and other staff; commitment to professional development of staff; working condition; and compensation packages which will attract quality staff; compliance with labor laws, fingerprinting and background checks. 1 2 li1 4 5 Much Less-Than Less Than Acceptille More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 15. TRANSPORTATION A workable, fair, nondiscriminatory and cost-effective arrangement for safely transporting students to and from school. ice\ 1 2 3 4 5 Much LessThan Less\I haq Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102- 1/7/00 Page 3 of 4 OVERALL STRENGTHS Weaknesses/ Concerns 2/6-3 cl/a4 ' Questions for Follow-up Discussions and Negotiations 7td102—1/7/00 Page 4 of 4 ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Charter School Proposal Review Name of Reviewer: tr. /'--z/r.t.I' Date: /U - i-0O Name of Proposed Charter School: G / 7v o F o f Please rate the charter school proposal by circling the appropriate number. A rating of five would indicate that the section rated was clearly understood, legal and follows best practices. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable What the Reviewers Look For: 1. MISSION Clearly articulated vision for an innovative public school that will lead to improved education outcomes and greater community ownership of the local school; consistency between mission and the educational programs as a means to achieve this. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 2. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM Innovative teaching methods and curriculum approaches; substantive overview of curriculum; consistency between mission, curriculum and student population to be served. Compliance with applicable regulations to meet the needs of limited English proficient and special needs students in the school program. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 3. STUDENT ASSESSMENT Commitment to high academic standards for all students; well-developed assessment mechanisms; understanding of the state assessment requirements. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102— 1/7/00 Page 1 of 4 4 • 4. ACCOUNTABILITY Method for establishing a baseline standard of student academic achievement. The outcomes to be achieved and the method of measurement that will be used. 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 5. PROFILE OF THE FOUNDING BOARD AND/OR INITIAL INCORPORATORS A well-balanced group, which brings together people with a range of professional skills capable of the organizational, financial, pedagogical, legal and other tasks required opening a functioning public school. Local representation meets requirements of law. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 6. SCHOOL GOVERNANCE Stable, effective, and comprehensive governance model; consistency with mission; clearly defined roles of the board and its interaction with staff; appropriate teacher and parent input in school decision-making; well developed, viable administrative management structure; knowledge of and compliance with public information laws. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less I han Less I han Acceptable More I han Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7. IMPLEMENTATION TIMETABLE Adequate timetable for implementing the charter. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 8. EVIDENCE OF SUPPORT Evidence that the founders inspire the confidence of their targeted community; evidence that the program provides an attractive educational alternate to students and parents; breadth of community support extending well beyond the core group of founders. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 9. FACILITIES Progress toward identifying and acquiring an adequate facility. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102—1/7/00 Page 2 of 4 10. FINANCES Sound financial planning; fiscal viability of the school 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than /Less 1 han Acceptahle More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 11. RECRUITING & MARKETING PLAN A solid plan to attract sufficient students to operate a school; effort to publicize the school to a broad audience in order to foster a student body representative of the local community; and recruitment efforts which seek to ensure a match between the school program and applicants educational and personal needs. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 12. ADMISSIONS & REGISTRATION PLAN Consistency with the mission of the school; a non-discriminatory selection and admissions process; timely and realistic procedures for admitting students; compliance with charter school legislation. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 13. RACIAL BALANCE A plan for achieving racial balances consistent with the requirements of the public school. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 14. HUMAN RESOURCE INFORMATION High professional standards for teachers and other staff; commitment to professional development of staff; working condition; and compensation packages which will attract quality staff; compliance with labor laws, fingerprinting and background checks. 1 2 3 4 5 Much Less-Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 15. TRANSPORTATION A workable, fair, nondiscriminatory and cost-effective arrangement for safely transporting students to and from school. 2 3 4 5 Much Less Than Less Than Acceptable More Than Much More Than Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable 7td102—1/7/00 Page 3 of 4 OVERALL STRENGTHS Weaknesses/ Concerns (1) Nor A,) 4-cpc su At. teo e•syt - ✓lkro e.tY ZosNr/t A-r- T-, (, rid ,o 0 kite. 4*A 1 6/fir Mats - .. & k/oSe- P2OPa 3 Az- ,y s r Vny [ANUry LY ro 57A/ r IN pro coo sruo EN7S — Tits fS Ari cu7irrlta1 tsti esr/e4- te- - BxPtn,ses w/tt. ,.)C&7) nonnvri Or Gob S'ru 4r,rrs .Btt T' 2GNGA/otr Ut+UKtt' ro NA reti Questions for Follow-up Discussions and Negotiations ( ;IN( ( /rko'03ktc of 3 u Tr t-'3 /, c et,/trs r 30 the /"Y C0Hne1u75) 71d102- 1/7/00 Page 4 of 4 ORLANDO, FLORIDA T� November 21, 2000 The School Board of Orange County, Florida, met in special session on Tuesday, November 21, 2000 at 11:11 a.m. Present were: Berton R. Carrier, chairman; Susan Landis Arkin, vice-chairman; Barbara Trovillion Rushing, Linda H. Sutherland, Judge Richardson Roach, William C. Spoone; Kattie J. Adams, school board members; Henry R. Boekhoff, chief financial officer; Frank C. Kruppenbacher and Andrew B. Thomas, school board attorneys; and Ronald Blocker, superintendent. A moment of silence was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Carrier stated that the charter applicants would be addressed one at a time. He outlined the following procedure. Mr. Blocker reads the recommendation, the applicant has five minutes to address the board and staff has five minutes to state why the charter application was recommended for approval or denial. If desired, the applicant has an additional two minutes to respond, and then staff has an additional two minutes to present additional information or answer any questions the applicant might bring up. The board then discusses and votes. At the request of Mr. Blocker, Dr. Nicholas Gledich, associate superintendent, education services, gave an overview of the charter school application process. Nonconsent #1 — Request Denial of the Cyber High Charter School Application: Leona Rachman, 2650 Danielle Drive, Oviedo, Florida, 32765, expressed that she was surprised with the superintendent's recommendation and described the inconsistencies she saw. Dr. Gledich stated that there was sufficient reason to believe that Cyber High School would not be capable of successfully implementing and operating its program. The specific reasons, based upon good cause, include the lack of true innovation and an overall negative rating of the review committee, especially in areas of the profile of the founding board and community support. The elements of statutory purpose and/or criteria necessary for approval which are inadequate include improve student learning, increase learning opportunities for all students, encourage the use of different and innovative learning methods, increase choice of learning opportunities and the governance structure of the school. He also shared information regarding the current charter in Seminole County. Mrs. Rachman responded to Dr. Gledich's comments. It was moved by Mrs. Arkin and seconded by Mr. Spoone to deny the Cyber High School Charter application. There was discussion by board members. The motion failed 6-1(with Mrs. Arkin voting yes) to deny the charter application. It was moved by Mr. Roach and seconded by Mrs. Sutherland that the Cyber High Charter School application be approved. 90 Minutes November 21, 2000 The motion passed 6-1 (with Mrs. Arkin voting no). SMB VOL. V P. 316 Nonconsent #2 — Request Approval of the Hope Charter School Application: Crystal Yoakum, 763 West Plant Street, Winter Garden, Florida, 34787, thanked the board. Dr. Gledich stated that there was sufficient reason to believe that the Hope Charter School would be capable of successfully implementing and operating its program. The following strengths would contribute to its success: strong collaboration with Princeton House Charter School, record of applicant working successfully in an existing charter school, and a strong commitment of the church for use of its facility in Winter Garden. It was moved by Mrs. Arkin and seconded by Mrs. Rushing that the Hope Charter School application be approved. The motion passed unanimously. SMB VOL. V P. 317 Nonconsent #3 — Request Denial of the Hunter's Creek Charter School Application: Tina Testani, D & D Educational Consulting, 5113 Bellthorn Drive, Orlando, Florida, 32837, requested that the board abate the decision to deny the application and allow them time to sit down with district staff to discuss details of the charter school application and amend any area that remained deficient. Mr. Kruppenbacher recommended that the board accept the applicant's request to abate the decision to give the applicant the opportunity to discuss issues identified by staff with the staff. It was moved by Mrs. Sutherland and seconded by Mrs. Arkin to abate the decision to deny the Hunter's Creek Charter School application. There was discussion by board members. The motion passed unanimously. SMB VOL. V P. 318 Nonconsent #4 — Request Approval of the KOTA Charter School Application: Nick Constantine, 87 N. Winter Park Drive, Casselberry, Florida, 32707, expressed his appreciation to staff for their assistance. Dr. Gledich stated that the KOTA Charter School would be capable of successfully implementing and operating its program. This charter school would fulfill a need within the school community. It was moved by Mrs. Sutherland and seconded by Mrs. Arkin to approve the KOTA Charter School application. 91 Minutes November 21, 2000 There was discussion by board members. The motion passed unanimously. SMB VOL. V P. 319 The meeting recessed at 12:30 a.m. and reconvened at 1:00 p.m. Nonconsent #5 — Request Denial of the Learning Excellence Foundation of Pine Hills Charter Elementary School Application: Alan Oakes, 3250 Marion Way, Coconut Creek, Florida, 33133, requested that the board pass the application and allow the applicant to work with staff to develop a contract. Dr. Gledich stated that there was sufficient reason to believe that the Learning Excellence Foundation of Pine Hills Charter Elementary School would not be capable of successfully implementing and operating its program. The specific reasons, based upon good cause, include the potential negative impact on surrounding schools, the lack of evidence of any local support for the application or desire for the school; the lack of progress made to identify a facility; the lack of innovation; and the overall negative rating of the initial application. The element of statutory purpose and/or criteria necessary for approval, which are inadequate, include improve student learning, increase learning opportunities for all students, encourage the use of different and innovative learning methods, increase choice of learning opportunities, establish a new form of accountability, the school's mission, the current incoming baseline of student academic achievement, the methods used to identify the educational strengths, the admissions and dismissal procedures, including the school's code of conduct; and the ways by which the school will achieve its racial/ethnic balance reflective of the community. Mr. Oakes stated that they had opened and filled other charter schools. It was moved by Mrs. Adams and seconded by Mrs. Sutherland to deny the Learning Excellence Foundation of Pine Hills Charter Elementary School Application. There was discussion by board members. The motion passed unanimously. SMB VOL. I P.320 Nonconsent X6 — Request Denial of the MESTA Charter School Application: Linton Morris, 10151 University Boulevard, Orlando, Florida, requested abatement because he had just received the information regarding the denial of the charter application. It was moved by Mrs. Adams and seconded by Mrs. Arkin to abate the decision to deny the MESTA Charter School Application due to circumstances. The motion passed 6-1(with Mr. Spoone voting no). SMB VOL. V P. 321 92 Minutes November 21, 2000 Nonconsent #7 — Request Denial of the Orlando Montessori Charter School Application: Julie Sanborn, 105 Coral Bell Court, Orlando, Florida, stated that she had submitted a revised application which addressed the weaknesses identified by staff. Dr. Gledich stated that there was sufficient reason to believe that the Orlando Montessori Charter Schools would not be capable of successfully implementing and operating its program. The specific reasons, based upon good cause, include the lack of evidence illustrating progress toward identifying and acquiring an adequate facility; the budget is unclear; the lack of significant community support that extends well beyond the core group of founders, and the overall negative rating of the initial application. The elements of statutory purpose and/or criteria necessary for approval which are inadequate include increase choice of learning opportunities; establish a new form of accountability; the financial and administrative management of the school, including a reasonable demonstration of the professional experience or competence of those individuals or organizations applying to operate the charter school or those hired or retained to perform such professional services; the facilities to be used and their location, and the governance structure of the school. Ms. Sanborn addressed Dr. Gledich's comments. It was moved by Mrs. Rushing and seconded by Mrs. Arkin to deny the Orlando Montessori Charter School application. There was discussion by board members. Mrs. Rushing stated that this charter application was innovative and offered opportunities. She moved that action for this charter application be tabled. The motion died for lack of a second. There was more discussion by board members. The motion passed 6-1 (with Mrs. Rushing voting no). SMB VOL. V P. 322 Mrs. Arkin stated since a Montessori program would be a wonderful public school, but this application was not acceptable, perhaps there would be an opportunity, if staff takes it to create a Montessori magnet program in a school that was under capacity. Nonconsent#8— Request Denial of the City of Oakland Charter Elementary School Application: Mr. Blocker stated that it had come to his attention that the City of Oakland would like to have further discussions with staff. Therefore he requested that the board abate the decision to deny the charter. It was moved by Mrs. Adams and seconded by Mr. Roach to abate the decision to deny the City of Oakland Charter Elementary School application. The motion passed 6-0 (with Mrs. Arkin out of the room). SMB VOL. V P. 323 93 Minutes • November 21, 2000 Nonconsent #9 — Request Denial of the Ocoee Charter School Application: Mr. Blocker stated that Mayor Scott Vandergrift requested that the board abate the decision to deny the Ocoee Charter School application. It was moved by Mrs. Sutherland and seconded by Mrs. Adams to abate the decision to deny the Ocoee Charter School application. Mr. Kruppenbacher stated that this gives the superintendent the opportunity to work with the City of Ocoee. Mayor Scott Vandergrift requested abatement with a given period of time to have a joint meeting the Ocoee City Commission and the board members to discuss how this charter could move forward. Mr. Blocker stated that there was only one board meeting scheduled for December and was not sure what needs to take place for this issue to be ready prior to December 4. Mr. Kruppenbacher requested that the board abate this issue so that staff could meet immediately next week with the City of Ocoee Commission. If the issues could be worked out, there could be a special meeting in December, but at the latest it would the beginning of January. There was discussion by board members. Mrs. Arkin had reservations about a municipal charter that could set a cap of no more than 500 students. Since the municipalities have the power to deny or approve growth, she was concerned that a municipal charter, well intended by Ocoee to relieve overcrowding, might have the opposite effect. If Ocoee continued to approve new development, because they had contributed to student seats, it would impact all the other schools that serve Ocoee students. Mr. Blocker stated that staff would investigate if the board could legally allow no cap on the enrollment of a charter school. The motion passed unanimously. SMB VOL. V P. 324 The meeting recessed at 2:05 p.m. and reconvened at 2:10 p.m. Nonconsent #10 — Request Approval of the Passport High School Application: It was moved by Mrs. Sutherland and seconded by Mr. Roach to approve the Passport High School Application. Dr. Gledich stated there was sufficient reason to believe that the Passport High Charter School would be capable of successfully implementing and operating its program. The following strengths would contribute to its success: the history of the successful operation of Passport Charter School; the commitment to extend the inclusion model from a K-8 school to high school; the emphasis on personal development, integration of curriculum and academic projects. 94 Minutes November 21, 2000 There was discussion by board members. The motion passed unanimously. SMB VOL. V P. 325 Nonconsent#11 — Request Approval of the UCP Charter School Application - Ilene Wilkens, 1006 Marisol Court, Orlando, Florida, 32828, thanked the board. Dr. Gledich stated that the UCP Charter School would be capable of successfully implementing and operating its program and the charter fills a gap. It was moved by Mrs. Rushing and seconded by Mr. Spoone to approve the UCP Charter School application. Mr. Kruppenbacher stated how well staff worked with the charter applicants. The motion passed unanimously. SMB VOL. V P. 326 The meeting adjourned at 2:25 p.m. Chairman Secretary dmm 95 OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL Summary of Review November 6, 2000 Stre 2- 41 y n ths: • Education philosophy progressive and well communicated • Same general educational program as (similar to) OCPS • Commitment to serve all students • Admissions procedure well done Issues/Weaknesses: • Lack of specifics - Applications - Instructional methods - Finances- Governing board , - Accountability • No mention of facilities or site location • No mention of marketing plan • No timeline for opening school • No evidence of community support especially for progressive philosophy • No names of companies involved • Curriculum not described • Advisory Committee oversees operations Questions/Clarifications: 1. Clarify revenues separate from projected FTE and submit documentation that revenues will be guaranteed. 2. Clarify district (sponsor) requirement to provide transportation 3. Clarify 70 percent. Ocoee, 30 percent. Orange County student population 4. Can school uniforms be required? 5. What is the distinct mission or innovation? 6. Clarify 401 K for a public entity 7. What is the accountability plan? 8. What is state of the art technology? 9. Can parent agreement be enforced? 10. Who will run school? 11. Who will build facility? 12. What are relationships with service providers? 13. Explain after-school tutorial. Is it mandated? 14. What is the management fee? 15. What is your transportation plan? 16. How is discipline plan different OCPS? 17. What is the school's marketing plan? 18. Does the applicant have a problem with the district's conflict resolution language? Date given to applicant //�6-00 • Written response due by I/'g'ao 144e` Nicholas M. Gledich, Associate Superintendent, Education Servides, Orange County Public Schools Ocoee—„isioo Cg07— 1/7- 3 369 isi//-, r C ANrELLUR CHARTtR Sa,00i c T 305 6g8.5950 3250 MAar Srncrr, Strut 202 F 305.60 5951 COCONUT GROVE, Ft 33r}3 chi nc ellorcharmr5.com CHANCELLOR CHARTER SC tf 00 L Set November 7,2000 Mr.Nicholas M. Gledich Associate Superintendent Orange County Public Schools PO Box 271 Orlando, FL 32802-0271 Re: Ocoee Charter School Application Dear Mr. Gledich: Enclosed is our response to the request we received from you yesterday. The depth of detail that is being requested in the issues/weaknesses section for the application appear to be more than is customary for this early stage of the process. Applicable statutes clearly state that the terms and conditions for the operation of a charter school shall be set forth by the Board and the applicant and the parties shall have six(6)months in which to mutually agree to the provisions of the charter performance contract. Observations such as lack of details in the accountability plansare items that are usually worked out by the parties during negotiations of a performance contract between the non-profit and the School Board. As an example, after preliminary approval of The City of Kissimmee charter application by the School Board of Osceola County, an extensive performance agreement was negotiated and agreed to by the parties which included items such as the following: • Timelines for site development and completion • Timelines for all applicable health and safety facilities inspections • Specific measurable accountability standards that include testing of students with the Stanford 9(pre and post tests)and FCAT • Detailed financial analysis utilizing latest information provided by the local school board • Detailed explanation of community out reach efforts While Chancellor Academics, on behalf of our clients, is prepared to provide you with as much information as possible; it is important to note that few traditional public schools could answer many of these same inquiries with high levels of accuracy a year before opening. Furthermore, it is our belief that we have provided the Board with substantive and specific information both verbally and in writing on the following: O. CHANCELLOR CHARTER SCHOOLSA • Instructional Methods • Class Size • Instructional Technology • Sample Pro-Formas • Evidence of community support (i.e., action by a local government entity to sponsor a charter) Additionally, Chancellor Academies believes that the submittals for this charter application comply with the spirit of the statutes which among several issues states that the purpose of charter schools should include but are not limited to the following: • Improve student learning • Increase choice of learning opportunities for students • Establish a new form of accountability for schools • Create new professional opportunities for teachers Nonetheless, in the spirit of providing you with as much information as possible we have prepared attachments to answer each of your questions. Sincerely, adoat-)e Executive Vice President Attachments: Questions and Answers Sample of Chancellor Curriculum Chancellor Academies' Employee Handbook OCOEE CHARTER SCHOOL Summary of Review Questions/Clarifications: I. Clarify revenues separate from projected FIE and submit documentation that revenues will be guaranteed. The only revenues identified in the budget apart from projected FIE are grants and charter capital funding. The grant assumed is the State Planning Grant currently awarded to new charter schools for up to 2 years at$90,000 per year. Regarding the charter capital funding, Chancellor Academies has been advised through various sources including Ms. Cathy Wooley Brown of the Florida Charter School Resource Center that the capital funding recently authorized by the Florida Legislature for charter schools has been established as a recurring funding source. While all levels of funding in the State of Florida are subject to annual appropriation,the legislative action establishes a recurring source of capital funding charter schools. 2. Clarify district(sponsor)requirement to provide transportation. The school would contract with the most competitive transportation service provider available. Based on Orange County's interest in providing transportation,we would include Orange County in our request for proposals. 3. Clarify 70 percent. Ocoee,30 percent. Orange County student population. The proposed charter is a municipal charter that estimates 70%enrollment by local students,namely residents of Ocoee. Of course,as an Orange County charter school,the school will be open to any applicant from the county. 4. Can school uniforms be required? This is a school policy matter subject to the recommendation of the schools Advisory/Governing Board. A special fund will be established for students who cannot afford uniforms. 5. What is the distinct mission or innovation? We use a curriculum designed to support various learning styles enhanced with strong support of technology-based instruction. Our charter school offers an opportunity to improve student learning through the Chancellor curriculum, provides increased educational options for area students, is accountable through a regular assessment regime and provides new professional opportunities for teachers. 6. Clarify 401K for a public entity. The charter school manager would hire the school employees and as a private employer would offer benefits consistent with those of its other employees, including a 401K. There is also precedent for 401(k) benefits being offered to public employees. Numerous school districts offer their employees a 401(k)plan. The only difference between our proposal and what school districts are already doing is that we intend to offer 401(k) benefits as our main retirement program, To our knowledge,school districts that have implemented a 401(k)program to date offer it as supplemental to another retirement benefit option. 7. What is the accountability plan? (a) Given school wide attention to literacy and the importance of reading, at least 70%of students in grades 3 to 5 will perform above the State minimum criteria on Reading Comprehension of the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test administered in 2002. (b) Given school wide attention to writing across curriculum, at least 70% of students in grade 4 will perform above the State minimum criteria on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test, Writing administered in 2002. (c) Given school wide attention to high-order thinking skills and hands on instruction, at least 70%of students in grades 3 to 5 will perform above the State minimum criteria on Mathematics of the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test administered in 2002. 8. What is state of the art technology? The school will be equipped with six multimedia computers in every classroom networked throughout the school. Scanners and printers will be available for every classroom. Appropriate software for instruction and instructional management will be available to every teacher. Teachers and parents will have e-mail access to facilitate parent-teacher communication. 9. Can parent agreement be enforced? Parents are encouraged to sign a parental agreement so they fully understand that they have a responsibility in the education of their child. No penalties will be imposed on the student for the parent's failure to live up to the contract. 10. Who will run school? Chancellor Charter Schools has been selected through an RFQ process and will be contracted and responsible for daily operations of the school through an assigned principal. In addition, the administrative staff will include a full-time counselor. An nov. LI , Clani o. C. „ ii r,i uawuN..� • ��.... , a Advisory Committee of parent and other representatives will act as a policy-making oversight body,providing regular advice regarding operational matters. 11. Who will build facility? The City Ocoee has conducted an RFQ process and selected Haskell Educational Services, a division of The Haskell Company and Florida's largest developer of charter schools,to design and construct the school. 12. What are relationships with service providers? The manager will contract with outside service providers for activities such as janitorial and building maintenance, intemet and communication services, food service,and transportation. 13. Explain after-school tutorial. Is it mandated? The after-school tutorials are not mandated but offered as a service to students and parents. 14. What is the management fee? The management fee is an administrative allocation and fcc for services to the management company selected for the school. It is to be negotiated between the City of Ocoee and Chancellor Academies. Typical fees for these services range from 10-15%of the total revenue of the school. 15. What is your transportation plan? Students residing within two (2) miles of the school will be expected to furnish their own transportation. Students living outside the two miles but within service areas consistent with Orange County Public Schools' established practices will be eligible for transportation. We will also issue an RFP for private companies wishing to furnish transportation services. Negotiations for transportation services will be held with Orange County Public Schools' Transportation Department if it is interested and selected as a provider. All buses will meet all appropriate safety regulations, and some will be specially equipped for handicapped services, insuring that there is not a barrier to equal access for all students. 16. How is discipline plan different from OCPS? Should the Advisory Committee deem it advisable to deviate from the Orange County Code of Student Conduct, such changes will be transmitted to Orange County School Board staff for review prior to implementation. 17. What is the school's marketing plan? Recognizing that this is a school of choice, Chancellor Academies will develop and implement a marketing plan designed to create awareness in the community and recruit students. A local representative from Chancellor Academies will carry out the marketing plan and serve as a liaison to the school board,reporting back to the board the progress of student enrollment and other issues pertinent to the charter school. When the principal is hired he/she will also assist in this effort. The marketing initiatives will include advertisements in local newspapers and publications,parent information sessions,direct mail drops,press releases,ground breaking and other local events,website access, and other targeted events as needed. Chancellor will also work with Orange County Public Schools in an effort to ensure a diverse student body representative of the community. 18. Does the applicant have a problem with the district's conflict resolution language? No. Orange County Public Schools MEMO November 21, 2000 TO: Ronald Blocker, Superintendent FROM: Nicholas Gledich, Associate Superintendent, Education Services SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM: Request Denial of the Ocoee Charter School Application BACKGROUND: Charter school applicants submitted their applications by October 1, 2000 for review. The school board has 60 days after the application deadline to review and decide whether to approve or deny each application. The Florida Legislature authorizes the creation of charter schools, which are part of the state's program of public education. All charter schools in Florida are fully recognized as public schools. Approval or denial is based the Florida Statute 228.056. This statute provides school districts with the guidance and legal responsibilities for authorizing charter schools and states that the purpose of a charter shall be to: • Improve student learning • Increase learning opportunities for all students • Encourage the use of different and innovative learning methods • Increase choice of learning opportunities • Establish a new form of accountability • Require the measurement of learning outcomes and create innovative measurement tools • Make the school the unit for improvement • Create new professional opportunities for teachers In addition, the Florida Statute 228.056 (9) (a) provides that the criteria for approval of a charter shall be based on meeting necessary components to properly administer and operate a charter school. They are: • The school's mission, the students to be served, the ages and grades of students • The focus of the curriculum, the instructional methods to be used and any distinctive instructional techniques to be employed • The current incoming baseline of student academic achievement, outcomes to be achieved, and the methods of measurement to be used • The methods used to identify the educational strengths and needs of students and how well students meet educational goals and standards. At a minimum, the students will participate in the statewide assessment program • In secondary charter schools, a method for determining that a student has satisfied the requirements for graduation in s. 232.246 • A method for resolving conflicts between the governing board of the charter school and the sponsor • The admissions and dismissal procedures, including the school's code of student conduct • The ways by which the school will achieve a racial/ethnic balance reflective of the community it serves or within the racial/ethnic range of other public schools in the school district • The financial and administrative management of the school, including a reasonable demonstration of the professional experience or competence of those individuals or organizations applying to operate the charter school or those hired or retained to perform such professional services • The manner in which the school will be insured, including whether or not the school will be required to have liability insurance, and, if so, the terms and conditions thereof and the amounts of coverage • The term of the charter • Provision for cancellation of the charter if insufficient progress has been made in attaining the student achievement objectives and if it is not likely that such objectives can be achieved before expiration of the charter • The facilities to be used and their location • The qualifications to be required of the teachers • The governance structure of the school, including the status of the charter school as a public or private employer as required in subsection (7) • A timetable for implementing the charter which address the implementation of each element A process has been established in the Orange County Public Schools to thoroughly review each application prior to recommending a decision to the school board. This process consists of a review of the application by a review committee, an interview with the applicant, a school board work session, and an opportunity for the applicant to clarify and respond to issues or questions that the district has with the application. Each of these steps has been completed with each applicant. The review process is summarized below. A committee was formed to review the charter school applications. The committee consisted of administrators with experience reviewing charter school applications as well as expertise in specific areas involving charter schools, such as exceptional education, budget, curriculum, assessment and accountability. Each application was reviewed using a rating scale that was based on the state's application for charter schools. In addition to rating each application on a numeric scale, strengths, weaknesses and questions for follow-up were developed. The rating scale had a 5-point scale and a rating of 3 was the midpoint rating. Any score above 3 was a positive score, and any score below 3 was a negative score. The ratings were averaged for each category for each rater. The average overall score for this application was 2.4, a negative rating. The next step in the review process was to hold an interview with a representative of each applicant. The interview followed the format used in the district to identify and select assistant principal candidates. The interview committee consisted mostly of principals, who were experienced interviewers. The rating scale ranged from 1-4. A rating of 1 was unacceptable, 2 was marginal, 3 was acceptable and 4 was superior. The candidates were rated on dimensions of leadership, and their ratings were averaged for an overall score. Even though many of the candidates interviewed would not be the principal of the school, it was still important to get an idea of the leadership ability of the applicant planning to open the charter school. The overall rating for this applicant was 3.4 a positive rating. From both committees, strengths, weaknesses, and questions for follow-up were developed and made available for the next step in the review process, a school board work session. Each applicant was invited to a work session of the school board to present the application and to answer questions. From the work session, questions were compiled and synthesized. Each applicant was then invited to a follow-up meeting with district staff, in which the applicant was presented the list of questions. Any questions from the applicant were clarified to ensure that the applicant understood what was expected. Each applicant was given a deadline to return a response to the questions. Additionally, a council of independent budget analysts reviewed each applicant's proposed budget to determine its viability and appropriateness. Based on the complete review process and the responses provided by the applicant, there is sufficient reason to believe that Ocoee Charter School would not be capable of successfully implementing and operating its program. The statute's purpose and components necessary to properly administer and operate a charter benefiting students have not been addressed. Clarification provided did address several issues. However, responses were not sufficient to overcome the low overall rating obtained during initial review. The following are the specific reasons that we think, based upon good cause, support the recommendation for denial of this charter application: • Lack of progress made to identify a facility • Potential negative impact on surrounding schools • Lack of innovation • Overall negative rating of the initial application, especially in the areas of governance, community support, facilities, recruiting and marketing, and transportation These reasons are too great to reasonably recommend an acceptance of this proposal at this time. Specifically, the following elements of statutory purpose and/or criteria necessary for approval are inadequate as follows: • Improve student learning • Increase learning opportunities for all students • Encourage the use of different and innovative learning methods • Increase choice of learning opportunities • The facilities to be used and their location • The governance structure of the school However, the application contains several strengths, which may be worth further study. Ocoee Charter School is encouraged to refine the application and address the outstanding issues. A resubmission for the 2002-2003 school year would be appropriate after these issues are addressed adequately. FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT: None RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Deny the Ocoee Charter School Application. SUBMITTED AND PREPARED BY: Nicholas Gledich, Associate Superintendent, Education Services Lee Baldwin, Senior Director, Program Services • Orange County Public Schools MEMO zH November 21, 2000 TO: Ronald Blocker, Superintendent FROM: Nicholas Gledich, Associate Superintendent, Education Services SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM: Request to Take Action on the Ocoee Charter School Application BACKGROUND: Resolution documentation will be provided on November 20, 2000. 31 Orange County Public Schools MEMO November 21, 2000 TO: Ronald Blocker, Superintendent FROM: Nicholas Gledich, Associate Superintendent, Education Services SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM: Request Approval of the Passport High Charter School Application BACKGROUND: Charter school applicants submitted their applications by October 1, 2000 for review. The school board has 60 days after the application deadline to review and decide whether to approve or deny each application. The Florida Legislature authorizes the creation of charter schools, which are part of the states program of public education. All charter schools in Florida are fully recognized as public schools. Approval or denial is based the Florida Statute 228.056. This statute provides school districts with the guidance and legal responsibilities for authorizing charter schools and states that the purpose of a charter shall be to: • Improve student learning • Increase learning opportunities for all students • Encourage the use of different and innovative learning methods • Increase choice of learning opportunities • Establish a new form of accountability • Require the measurement of learning outcomes and create innovative measurement tools • Make the school the unit for improvement • Create new professional opportunities for teachers In addition, the Florida Statute 228.056 (9) (a) provides that the criteria for approval of a charter shall be based on meeting necessary components to properly administer and operate a charter school. They are: • The school's mission, the students to be served, the ages and grades of students • The focus of the curriculum, the instructional methods to be used and any distinctive instructional techniques to be employed • The current incoming baseline of student academic achievement, outcomes to be achieved, and the methods of measurement to be used • The methods used to identify the educational strengths and needs of students and how well students meet educational goals and standards. At a minimum, the students will participate in the statewide assessment program 32 ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Charter School Indicator Results October 9, 2000 Ocoee Charter School LEE JENNIFER PORTER- SHIRLEY S. GENE I HARRIET P. BOB GERRY TOTALS BALDWIN SMITH COWANS PICKLER , BROWN MILSTEAD SAULNY 1/Mission 3 2 3 3 3 2 2.7 21Ed Program 3 2 3 4 3 3 3.0 3/Student Assessment 3 3 3 4 3 2 3.0 4/Accountability 3 3 3 3 2 2 2.7 5/Profile 4 3 3 3 3 3 3.2 6/Governance 3 3 3 1 2.5 7/Length Of Contract 3 2 1 1 2 1 1.7 8/Support 3 2 1 2 2 1 1.8 9/Facilities 2 2 1 1 1 1 1.3 10/Finances 3 2 3 3 2 2 2.5 11/Recruiting 3 2 1 2 2 1 1.8 12/Admissions 4 2 2 3 3 3 2.8 13/Racial Balance 3 3 2 3 3 2 2.7 14/Human Resource 3 2 3 3 3 2.8 15/Transportation 3 2 2 2 2 2.2 TOTALS 3.1 2.3 2.2 2.7 2.5 1.9 2.0 2.4 7TD1 old- 11/13/00 / 7 :.C• Interview Guide poi� Charter School Candidates Orange County Public Schools Orlando, Florida 2000-2001 DIMENSION RATING GRID Charter School Candidate:/1a -LA (�c:L ' d-4�a. 214 ) EL v�f•z -- Charter School: A-- ,c-c c L-k--. g70 0.2Z) Date: 10 l (T� (90 ,e„) Instructions: Indicate below how well the applicant effectively der ns ra ed the specific behaviors in his/her responses? 1 = unacceptable, 2 = marginal, 3 = acceptable, 4 = superior Dimensions A B C D E F Consensus Leadership and Communication ( tI14- 5,s- 4 _ Commitment to Vision ,-, - z� ) 1� 4 � 4/ 1 Decision Making 5. q - 3 5 3 3 Organizational Ability ', '�1 '�) J� ��� �I Goals and Standards is --- aS j 0,5 Managing Information 6, iii' 5,5 5,s 3,- 0 Interview Team - List chairperson* and members below: Q iii,-.0-i) A_ AA", - ,-'- LF„,.11 (..�e- ice, :., — l.-C/^i '.... /.4,- ,. _tit,„_ ,6 Letz&1/4, -fizz , Giez,-Lo__ A}-411-e. ,50'44-0 , Note: The chairperson should collect all individual notes and rating forms from the interview team members. I ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS INTERVIEW GUIDE CHARTER SCHOOL CANDIDATES 1999-00 Leadership and Communication Tell me about a specific situation when you led a task force,committee or group that did not report to you i/ but from whom you had to obtain a work product. C ''��u_ Situation Candidate's Action Result ( •` �2 — cam Ataij l � AtjA-" Alt �. Example Rating Describe a meeting in which you were able to help solve a problem. • Situation Candidate's Action Result Example Rating Tell me about a situation in which you had to help two or more individuals who did not work well together to do so. Situation Candidate's Action Result Example Rating DIMENSION RATING171 di 01/14/00 1 • Commitment to Vision Describe a time when you felt it was necessary to enhance the image of your work group or the professional organization you were affiliated with. What actions did you take under these circumstances? Situation Candidate's Action Result lf-LIAted- (A1/9-1-11---w--7.7C G /("CFI; tom. ► - � Example Rating Tell me about a situation when your behavior had a significant impact on the decisions made by others in your immediate work group to implement an important change. Situation Candidate's Action Result • Example Rating Provide for me an example of a time when you were responsible for a project that was not progressing according to the established plan and you needed to take action to get things back on track. Situation Candidate's Action Result Example Rating DIMENSION RATING n dl 01/14/00 2 • Organizational Ability Describe for me a situation at work in which you were responsible for a set of important work actually being done by others. How did you monitor the progress of the work? Situation Candidate's Action Result 11 ✓ ; �:1 c` t Z i Lt,I.C' &. // l .IT n Cil-t"vvv" Example Rating Provide for me an example of a time when you were responsible for implementing a new project or procedure. What did you do to design action plan and follow-up strategies for moving the project forward? Situation Candidate's Action Result Example Rating Give me examples of the types of work activities you routinely need to monitor and keep organized. What do you do to keep track of work activities when many things are taking place at he same time? Situation Candidate's Action Result • Example Rating DIMENSION RATING !_ 71 dl 01/14/00 3 Goals and Standards Describe for me a time when you were responsible for putting in place a system for ensuring that rules and regulations were being followed at an acceptable level. Situation Candidate's Action Result 1+ !. 'l • ! .1", c nn /- � 't t'L- t' . it, , IV7-%! -J, jiL14).L ,,,,i,,y±,..., .......A-4"....... / ‘it i 70" pa-:"..c...---,!) .1 1-4)13---- / / ---- f"--7/t)--VLA-4--tii‘;('' lj .frt,`'t "J '-- Example Rating Sometimes the goals of work groups are not found to be at a high enough level for the organization to be successful. Tell me about a time when you led a group to set higher achievement expectations. Situation Candidate's Action Result Example Rating Share with me a time when due to special circumstances an established work goal needed to be modified. What special action did you take to plan and implement these increased or decreased expectations? Situation Candidate's Action Result Example Rating DIMENSION RATINGIl• dl 01/14/00 4 Decision Making Sometimes we need to make very quick decisions under pressure. Give me an example of a work-related decision you made very rapidly in the last six months? Situation Candidate's Action Result Example Rating Tell me about a time that you had to make a decision about a very controversial issue. What factors did you consider and what decision did you make? • Situation Candidate's Action Result / II ,F p eti rvL L L'1' OZAJ i J yG�'w rY ej' Example Rating Occasionally we have to make decisions that affect others we work with daily. Share with me an example of a decision you had to make recently that negatively affected your colleagues at work. Situation Candidate's Action Result • Example Rating DIMENSION RATING ! 1 dl 01/14/00 • 5 Managing information Provide me with a work-related example of a time when you needed to gather information from multiple sources in order to implement a strategy to solve an important problem. Situation Candidate's Action Result •_ Example Rating Sometimes at work we experience information overload. Tell me about a time when more information was available to you than you could personally digest and analyze. What did you do to remedy this situation? Situation Candidate's Action Result • Example Rating Describe for me a situation when the performance outcomes of a work group were not at the expected levels. How did you go about identifying causes of the unacceptable performance as you took corrective action? Situation Candidate's Action Result • tiV-'‘'jLgt'S c ed,(,;t rY ai)-thxample Rating DIMENSION RATING dl 01/14/00 6 ORANGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS BANK ORDER OF DIMENSIONS FOR PRINCIPAL(ELEMENTARY/MIDDLE/HIGH) Leadership And Communication Enables persons to participate in processes to achieve change and reach goals; uses personal influence and various leadership styles to effect change and bring about continuous improvement; resolves problems and conflicts. Specific behaviors associated with this dimension are: • Interpersonal Sensitivity. The ability to determine, understands, verbalize accurately and respond empathetically to the perspectives, thoughts, ideas and feelings of others. • Managing Interaction. Getting others to work together effectively through the use of group process and facilitator skills. • Impact/Persuasiveness. Influencing and having an effect upon the school stakeholders by a variety of means-persuasive argument, setting example or using expertise. • Self-Presentation. The ability to present one's ideas to others in an open, informative, and non- evaluative manner. • Tactical Ability. The ability to adapt one's interaction and behavior to fit the situation. Commitment To Vision Holds a set of values about what the school can become;holds self responsible for total school function; is aware of the effect his/her decisions make on the organization. Specific behaviors associated with this dimension are: • Commitment to Vision and Mission. A pledge to develop and act in accordance with the shared vision and mission of the school. • Organizational Sensitivity. An awareness of the effects of one's behavior and decisions on all stakeholders,both inside and outside the organization. • Concern for School's Reputation. Caring about the impressions created by self,students,faculty,staff, and parents,and how these are communicated both inside and outside the school. Decision Making Initiates action, acts as a catalyst with others to cause things to happen and uses methods such as shared decision making,comparative analysis and making judgments;being decisive. Specific behaviors associated with this dimension are: • Decisiveness. The readiness and confidence to make or share decisions in a timely manner, using appropriate levels of involvement so that actions may be taken and commitments made by self and others. • Proactive Orientation. The inclination and readiness to initiate action and take responsibility for leading and enabling others to improve the circumstances being faced or anticipated. dl 01/14/00 • Organizational Ability Organizes cooperatively with teachers, staff and other stakeholders to design and implement ways to reach the vision of the school, including resources;attends to and is skilled in accurately evaluating the progress of the total school toward its goals;effectively uses professional/technical knowledge. Specific behaviors associated with this dimension are: • Organizational Ability. The knowledge and skills to design, plan and organize activities to achieve goals. • Management Control. The establishment of systematic processes to receive and provide feedback about the progress of work being done. • Delegation. Entrusting of jobs to be done, beyond routine assignments, to others, giving them authority and responsibility for accomplishment. Goals And Standards Stimulates the human resources of the school to achieve high goals and develops all stakeholders; clearly expresses an attitude and belief in the potential of the individual and self to grow. Specific behaviors associated with this dimension are: • Developmental Orientation. Holding high and positive expectations for the growth and development of all stakeholders through modeling self-development,coaching and providing learning. • Achievement Orientation. Having to do things better than before by setting goals that encourage self and others to reach higher standards. Managing In formation Uses data to implement curriculum and instructional supervision; gathers, analyzes and uses data from multiple sources to build relationships,solve problems and make decisions. Specific behaviors associated with this dimension are: • Information Search and Analysis. The gathering and analysis of data from multiple sources before arriving at an understanding of an event or problem. • Concept Formation. The ability to see patterns and relationships and form concepts, hypotheses and ideas from the information. • Concept Flexibility. The ability to use alternative or multiple concepts or perspectives when solving a problem or making a decision. • Written Communication. The ability to write clearly and concisely using Standard American English. dl 01/14/00 8