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

 

TO:	EMSC-VESID Committee
FROM:	Jean C. Stevens
SUBJECT:	Charter School Renewal:  Addendum to EMSC-VESID (A) 2
DATE:	November 30 2006
STRATEGIC GOAL:	Goals 1 and 2
AUTHORIZATION(S):

 

 

SUMMARY

 

Issue for Decision

 

Should the Regents approve the staff’s recommendations concerning the proposed second renewal of the charter for the Harriet Tubman Charter School (New York City)?

 

Reason(s) for Consideration

 

          Required by State statute, Education Law §2852.

 

Proposed Handling

 

This question will come before the EMSC-VESID Committee on December 4, 2006 for action.  It will then come before the full Board for final action on December 5, 2006.

 

Procedural History

 

Under the New York Charter Schools Act of 1998, the Board of Regents is authorized to make recommendations regarding the renewal of existing charters on applications submitted directly to it as a charter entity, and on proposed charters submitted by another charter entity.   Upon receipt of an application for renewal or for the establishment of a new charter school, or receipt of a proposed charter from another charter entity, the Board of Regents shall review such applications and proposed charters in accordance with the standards set forth in the Charter Schools Act.

 

Background Information

 

We have received a proposed second renewal charter that will be presented to you at your December meeting. The proposed second renewal charter is for the following:

 

·       Harriet Tubman Charter School, New York City

 

The initial charter application for the Harriet Tubman Charter School was approved by the Board of Regents in December 1999, the initial charter was granted in January 2000, and its first renewal charter was approved by the Board of Regents in December 2004. 

 

          The Harriet Tubman Charter School (“the School”) is located in New York City. The School currently serves approximately 410 students in grades K-8. The School continues to contract with Edison Schools, Inc. as its educational management partner. This will be the second renewal for Harriet Tubman Charter School.  The Board of Regents granted the School a short-term renewal (2 years) in December 2004. The decision to grant the School a short-term renewal was based on academic performance, which was at the time superior to most of the public schools in the HTCS neighborhood, yet still below the State standard; the commitment of Edison to provide needed support to the professional staff; and the School’s strong parental support, pupil retention rate, and robust waiting list.  Staff recommend a renewal period up to and including June 30, 2007 of the School’s second renewal charter due to concerns about student achievement, fiscal viability and board governance.

 

Recommendation

         

          VOTED: That the Board of Regents approve and grant the proposed second renewal charter and extend the provisional charter from January 11, 2007 up through and including June 30, 2007 for the following charter school:

 

·       Harriet Tubman Charter School

 

Timetable for Implementation

 

The Regents action will become effective for Harriet Tubman Charter School on January 11, 2007. 

New York State Education Department

 

Summary of Charter School Renewal Information

 

Summary of Applicant Information

 

 

Name of Proposed Renewed Charter School: Harriet Tubman Charter School (HTCS)

 

Address: 3565 Third Avenue, Bronx NY 10456

 

Board of Trustees President: Cliff Frazier

 

Renewal Period: January 11, 2007 – June 30, 2007

 

District of Location: New York City Community School District 9/Region 1

 

Charter Entity: Board of Regents

 

Institutional Partner(s): New York Metropolitan Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Nonviolence

 

Management Partner(s): Edison Schools, Inc.

 

Grades Served: K–8 (K–8)                  

 

Projected Enrollment: 410 (442)

 

 

 

Renewal Application Highlights

 

Evidence of Educational Soundness/Attainment of Educational Objectives

 

• The Harriet Tubman Charter School (“the School”) has a student body that is comprised of 95.7 percent Black (not Hispanic) and 4.3 percent Hispanic children.
• Nearly 60 percent of the students are eligible for the Free- and Reduced-Lunch Program. Only one of the 410 students is identified as having limited English proficiency and eight percent of the students are classified as students with a disability.  Twenty-four percent of students are reported to be members of families receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
• For the Harriet Tubman Charter School’s (“HTCS” or “the School”) performance on State assessments, see Attachments 1 through 3. 
• In 2005-06, HTCS and CSD 9 attained a preliminary Performance Index of 118 on the State ELA exam.  When adjusted for grade enrollment, HTCS underperforms CSD 9 by 4 points, but outperforms the public schools located in the same zip code by 5 index points.  Thirty-five students tested were proficient on the ELA exam.

·       The School’s preliminary performance index was 109 on the 2005-06 State math exam.  Only 39 percent of the students tested were proficient.  CSD 9/Region 1 had a preliminary performance index of 110. When adjusted for grade enrollment HTCS underperforms CSD 9 by 9 points and underperforms the public schools listed in the same zip code by 1 index point.

• In 2005-06, fourth graders performed strongly on both the math and ELA State assessments with 64 percent scoring Levels 3 and 4 in ELA and 76 percent scoring Levels 3 and 4 in math.  Since 2002-03, this represents a 34 percent increase in the percentage of students proficient in Grade 4 ELA and a 19 percent increase in Grade 4 math.  Students in grades 3, 5, 6 and 7 performed less well on both tests in 2005-06.
• Each student at HTCS has an individual learning plan, which allows teachers to provide guidance and support to help students master concepts and skills at his/her pace.
• The School design incorporates positive learning environments, community services and support, high performance management, and parent and community engagement. 
• HTCS maintains a safe learning environment for students through the implementation of Martin Luther King’s “Six Steps of Nonviolence.”  Students continue to learn to diffuse violence and bring about positive societal interaction and social change through the use of these principles.
• Some staff turnover at the School is evident and has fluctuated over four years.  Most staff relocation is due to geographic relocation.
• The School has had two principals since its inception:  Michele Pierce, founding principal and Gwen Stephens, the current principal in her second year at the school.  Notably, prior to her appointment at HTCS, Ms. Stephens headed another New York City charter school that performed successfully on State exams and received a five-year renewal period shortly after her departure.
• Under the guidance of the new principal, data-driven decision-making is becoming integral to the work of the School.  There is cohesive, consistent school-wide professional development to enable instructional staff to analyze assessment data and use the results to make instructional decisions.

 

Evidence of Fiscal Soundness/Projected Fiscal Impact

 

• Inadequate financial practices and Trustee oversight have adversely impacted the fiscal viability of the School.  Consequently, the School has incurred a sizeable budget deficit in excess of $900,000. 
• The Board of Trustees is extremely committed to the mission of the School; however, it failed to ensure that the School’s accounting practices are in alignment with federal, State and school guidelines.  In order to rectify the situation, the Board has recruited new members with fiscal and legal expertise.
• During the second renewal period, Edison Schools, Inc. will take on a more active role with the daily fiscal operations of the School, and will provide specific performance-based management necessary to implement the mission, curriculum and policies set forth by the Board of Trustees.
• The School’s Board of Trustees and Edison, Inc. have negotiated agreements to ensure that sufficient funds will be available during the second renewal period to implement the educational program described in the charter application.
• The School has completed construction on the second phase of its facility.  The School facility size doubled with new classrooms that are on average 150 square feet larger than the original classrooms.  

• Audits of all previous years have shown an operating deficit.  See Attachment 3.
• Projected fiscal impact for the 2007-08 school year is provided in Attachment 4.
• The annual percent impact of the School upon the District for a one-year renewal is estimated to be 0.0289 percent.

 

Evidence of Parent and Student Satisfaction

 

• The School is fully enrolled and has a waiting list.
• Parents express great satisfaction and enthusiasm for the School in the renewal visit parent interview session.
• Parent survey results from the past two years also indicate high levels of satisfaction on a variety of indicators.
• Student turnover is evident from the fluctuation in enrollment history.  The primary reasons students withdraw from the School are attributed to geographic relocation and attendance in other City schools.

 

Recommendation

 

          Staff recommends that the Board of Regents approve the proposed second renewal to the charter and grant an extension to the provisional charter up through and including June 30, 2007.

 

Reason for Recommendation

 

          A renewal up through and including June 30, 2007 instead of the maximum of five years is recommended because of concerns related to the School’s academic performance and its fiscal viability.  A preliminary audit conducted by the NYSED Office of Audit Services has found a lack of fiscal controls and substantial deficiencies in the Board of Trustees oversight of the School.  During the prior renewal period, there have been increasing negative balances in the School’s fund balance and general fund balance which are an indication of serious fiscal stress.  A corrective action plan to address the issues raised in the Preliminary Audit Findings will be put in place.  This short-term renewal, therefore, will allow the current student population to finish out the 2006-07 school year and allow the School to begin implementation of the corrective action plan to address its fiscal problems.  Thereafter, the school can submit another application for renewal before the end of the second renewal charter term, and once it can provide evidence that the corrective actions have been implemented, the Board of Trustees is providing appropriate oversight, fiscal controls are in place, and revenues are sufficient to cover the School’s short- and long-term expenses.  In the alternative, the Trustees could commence dissolution proceedings and close at the end of this short-term renewal period.

 

In light of the foregoing, the School should be able to meet the requirements set out in Article 56 of the Education Law and all other applicable laws, rules, and regulations and operate in an educationally and fiscally sound manner up through and including June 30, 2007.  In addition, granting this short-term renewal/extension is likely to improve student learning and materially further the purposes set out in subdivision two of section twenty-eight hundred fifty of Article 56 of the Education Law.

 

 

Attachment 1

 

Harriet Tubman Charter School

Performance on State ELA Assessments

2002-03 through 2005-06

School and Grades	2002-03				2003-04				2004-05				2005-06
	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4
HTCS ELA Grade 3													20	53	28	0
CSD 9 ELA Grade 3													18	36	43	2
HTCS ELA Grade 4	25.0	45.0	15.0	15.0	40.0	20.0	30.0	10.0	7.5	40.0	45.0	7.5	8	28	56	8
CSD  9 ELA Grade 4	13.7	49.0	30.5	6.8	14.5	55.3	27.3	2.8	10.1	42.3	39.2	8.4	17	38	43	2
HTCS ELA Grade 5													18	40	42	0
CSD 9 ELA Grade 5													14	49	35	2
HTCS  ELA Grade 6													20	52	25	2
CSD 9 ELA Grade 6													14	51	32	3
HTCS ELA Grade 7													11	74	16	0
CSD 9 ELA Grade 7													18	52	28	2

 

Attachment 2

 

Harriet Tubman Charter School

Performance on State Math Assessments

2002-03 through 2005-06

 

School and Grades	2002-03				2003-04				2004-05				2005-06
	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4	L1	L2	L3	L4
HTCS Math Grade 3													15	35	43	7
CSD 9 Math Grade 3													16	24	49	12
HTCS Math Grade 4	14.3	28.6	47.6	9.5	18.2	27.3	45.5	9.1	2.6	31.6	52.6	13.2	8	16	60	16
CSD 9 Math Grade 4	12.2	29.8	44.0	14.0	13.4	38.4	40.1	8.2	9.1	28.1	47.9	14.9	18	30	45	8
HTCS Math Grade 5													36	24	40	0
CSD 9 Math Grade 5													25	37	34	4
HTCS  Math Grade 6													48	39	11	2
CSD  9 Math Grade 6													33	37	28	2
HTCS Math Grade 7													37	42	21	0
CSD 9 Math Grad 7													33	42	24	1

Attachment 3

 

 

Harriet Tubman Charter School

Change in Net Assets 2003-04 Through 2004-05*

 

Year	Change in Net Assets
2003-04	($250,437)
2004-05	($240,371)

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

 

 

Attachment 4

 

Projected Fiscal Impact of the

Harriet Tubman Charter School

(New York City CSD 9/Region 1 – Bronx)

2004-05 Through 2009-10

School Year	Number of Students	Projected Payment*	Projected Impact
2007-08	442	$4,330,561	0.0289

* Assumes a 3 percent annual increase in the district’s budget from a 2001-2002 base of $12.5 billion and a 4.5 percent annual increase in the average expense per pupil, per year from the 2003-2004 final average expense per pupil of $7,848.