Transcript MARCH 29 – APRIL 2, 2015 SAN DIEGO, CA Click here to add

March 30 – April 2, 2015
San Diego, Ca
ACT21
Charter Schools: New Rules & New Challenges
Presented by
Brianna García, Director, Management Consulting Services
Kathleen Spencer, Director, Management Consulting Services
Introduction
Charter School Facts
• A charter school is an independently run public school that is allowed greater
flexibility in its operations in exchange for greater performance based
accountability
• The number of students attending charter schools has more than tripled in
the last decade
• Average rate of growth – 12% per year
• In 2013-14, 1,100 charter schools served 500,000 students statewide
• Representing about 8% of the state’s student population
Reference: Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) 2015-16 Proposition 98 Education Analysis
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Enrollment
Charter School Growth Over Time
Year
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
State Laws
• Charter schools are exempt from “the laws governing school districts,” except:
• The Charter Schools Act (Education Code Section [E.C.] 47600 et. seq.)
• All federal laws
• All laws that are a condition of funding for a specific program in which the
charter school participates
• Specific provisions of law related to teachers’ retirement and employee relations
• State pupil testing programs
• Laws establishing minimum age for school attendance
• Laws governing nonclassroom-based programs
• The California Uniform Building Code is subject to narrow exceptions
(E.C. 47610[d] and 47610.5)
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
State Laws
• A charter school must also comply with:
• All of the provisions of its charter – which may include references to specific
provisions of the Education Code as well as local agreements
• All state laws that apply to all public agencies or are of general application, such
as:
• California Division of Occupational Safety and Health
(Cal-OSHA)
• Open Meetings Act (Brown Act)
• Public Records Act
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Funding Considerations
2015-16 Local Control Funding Formula
• Budget proposes $4 billion for continued implementation of the LCFF
• New funding is estimated to close the gap between 2014-15 funding levels and LCFF
full implementation targets by 32.19%
• When combined with 2013-14 and 2014-15 LCFF funding, implementation progress
would cover almost 58% of the gap in just three years
• Full implementation projected for 2020-21
• 2014-15 LCFF growth provides an average increase in per-pupil funding of 8.7%, or
$675 per ADA
• Individual LEA experiences will vary
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
LCFF and Charter Schools
• LCFF allocates funds to charter schools in the same way as for school districts
• However, concentration grants for charter schools will be limited to no more
than the concentration grant increase provided to the school district where the
charter school is physically located
• If a charter school is physically located in more than one school
district, then utilize the percentage of unduplicated pupils of the
school district with the highest percentage of unduplicated pupils
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
LCFF and Charter Schools
• “Gap funding” under LCFD is calculated based on the difference between the target
amount at full implementation and prior-year funding
• A newly operational charter school’s prior year per ADA funding amount equal to
the lesser of:
• The prior-year funding amount per unit of ADA for the school district
in which the charter school is physically located
• If a charter school is physically located in more than one school
district, then utilize the funding entitlement per unit of ADA of the
school district with the highest prior-year funding
• The charter school’s LCFF rate
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
LCFF and Charter Schools
• For both the concentration grant and gap funding calculation, the physical
location of the charter is required
• A charter school has to report its physical location to CDE
• For a charter school authorized by a school district, CDE will include the
authorizing school district in its determination of physical location in the
absence of a location reported by the charter school
• For a charter school authorized on appeal, the CDE will include the
sponsoring school district in its determination of physical location in
absence of a location reported by the charter school
• The physical location of the charter school will be considered
final as of P-2
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Supplemental/Concentration Grants
• Funding allocated through the base grants are flexible and can be used for
any educational purpose
• Funding allocated through the supplemental and concentration grants must
be used to increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils
• Charter schools must provide evidence in the LCAP to demonstrate that
funding apportioned on the basis of unduplicated pupils is being used to
support those pupils
• Supplemental and concentration grant dollars can be used for
charterwide purposes under certain conditions
• Charter schools must demonstrate increased or improved services for
unduplicated pupils by using funds to upgrade the entire
educational program for the charter school
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Supplemental/Concentration Grants
• In order to expend supplemental and concentration grants funds on a
charterwide basis, the charter school must:
• In the LCAP, identify those services that are being funded and provided
on a charterwide basis
• In the LCAP, describe how such services are principally directed toward,
and effective in, meeting the charter school’s goals for its unduplicated
pupils in the state and any local priority areas, as applicable
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Common Core State Standards
• $1.25 billion in one-time funds provided in 2013 for implementation of the
Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
• Professional development, technology, and instructional materials
• For use in 2013-14 and 2014-15
• These funds are subject to the annual independent audit:
• In 2014-15, charter schools will be required to expend all funds by the
end of the fiscal year, and report detailed information to the CDE,
including, specific purchases made and the number of teachers,
administrators, or paraprofessional educators that received
professional development
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Discretionary Funds
• The Governor’s State Budget proposal provides more than $1.1 billion in
discretionary one-time Proposition 98 funds,
• The allocation amounts to about $180 per ADA for LEAs
• The Governor suggests the one-time funds may be used to further
investments in the implementation of Common Core State Standards
• Other uses detailed in the proposal are:
• To support the implementation of newly adopted English language
development and California’s Next Generation Science standards
• To support expenditures that occur due to the evolving
accountability structure of the LCFF
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Mandated Programs
Participation Data by LEA Type
LEA Type
School District
COE
Charter School
Totals
Total
Count
Participating in MBG
Percentage
Count
Percentage
Not Participating in MBG
Count
Percentage
947
100.00%
831
87.75%
116
12.25%
58
100.00%
47
81.03%
11
18.97%
1,078
100.00%
1,063
98.61%
15
1.39%
2,083
100.00%
1,941
93.18%
142
6.82%
• In 2014-15 over 90% of charter schools opted into the
Mandate Block Grant (MBG)
• The MBG apportionment in the 2014-15 State Budget
Act, totaling $208.1 million, paid 100% of each LEA’s
MBG entitlement for 2014-15
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Mandated Programs
• LEAs that opt into the MBG can plan for the below rates per ADA in all three
years of the multiyear projection (MYP)
Grade Span
School Districts Charter Schools
COEs
K-8
$28
$14
$29
9-12
$56
$42
$57
• We recommend LEAs weigh the benefits of receiving money now versus an
unfunded receivable with no time-certain reimbursement
• For 2015-16, the Governor proposes an additional $1.6 million for the MBG for
Pertussis
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Independent Study
• On February 27, 2015, the CDE released information regarding
SB 858 which changes the way Independent Study ratios are calculated
• Calculations are based upon grade span rather than LEA-wide
• For 2014-15, because the law and requisite instructions were delayed, LEAs
may choose to calculate ratios by grade span or LEA-wide
Beginning 2015-16 LEAs, will be required to calculate the ratio by grade
span (E.C. 51745.6)
BUT . . . there is proposed language to amend the bill
• Check before calculating by grade span to see
If it was reverted back to LEA-wide!
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Independent Study
• SB 858 also included the following changes to independent study
effective 2014-15:
• Comparative grade span ratios can be negotiated
• (E.C. 51745.6(a)(2))
• Independent study agreements can cover one year
• (E.C. 51747(c)(5))
• Signed agreements can be maintained electronically
• (E.C. 51747)
• Pupil work products need not be dated and signed
• (E.C. 51747.5)
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
2014-15 Audit Regulations
• After the LCFF certification in 2013-14, 2014-15 is the first year that many
requirements of the LCFF and LCAP will be tested
• Unduplicated LCFF Pupil Counts
• LCAP – Expenditure of Funds
• Auditors will select samples of the actions or services in LCAP’s
Sections 3A and 3B that the LEA has identified as having actual
expenditures
• Auditors will verify that expenditures were made for the sample
actions or services noted by the LEA
• LEAs will work with their respective auditors to
identify the actions or services for review
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
2014-15 Audit Regulations
• CCSS Implementation Funds:
• As in 2013-14, auditors will determine if the LEA complied with
the planning process and expenditure requirements of the CCSS
funds
• Including expenditure plan approved by the governing
board in a public meeting
• Sample expenditures to ensure use for qualifying purposes
• In addition to the 2013-14 regulations, in 2014-15, auditors will
be reviewing whether an LEA submitted the detailed expenditure
report to the CDE as required in statute
• And, if the LEA was not in compliance with these requirements,
the LEA will be deemed ineligible to receive the funds
• A finding will be issued showing the full amount of the
CCSS implementation funds received as disallowed
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
2014-15 Audit Regulations
• California Clean Energy Jobs Act (Proposition 39)
• Auditors will be examining in more detail:
• The types of expenditures made and compliance with the Energy
Expenditure Plan
• Completed projects to determine if the LEA submitted the
appropriate reports to the Citizens’ Oversight Board
• Facilities requirements
• See the Audit Regulations for more information:
http://eaap.ca.gov/audit-guide/current-audit-guide-booklet
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
LCAP Similarities and
Differences
Charter Schools and the LCAP
• Like school districts, each charter school with a petition must prepare an
LCAP
• The charter school cannot be included in the chartering authority’s LCAP
• The charter school or its operator must prepare a separate LCAP for each
charter school that has a separate charter petition
• Charter schools must adopt an LCAP by July 1, 2014, and update it annually
thereafter
• Charter schools that file an initial charter petition or renewal after
July 1, 2013, need to incorporate a description of the annual goals
and actions, in the applicable eight state priority areas, into
their petition
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Charter Schools and the LCAP
• On or before July 1, 2015, and each year thereafter, a charter school must
update the goals and annual actions to achieve those goals identified in the
charter petition
• The update must use the template adopted by the SBE and include:
• A review of the progress towards the goals included in the charter
• An assessment of the effectiveness of the actions described in the
charter toward achieving the goals
• A description of changes to be implemented as a result
of the review and assessment
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
LCAP Requirements
LCAP Requirements
School Districts and COEs
Charter Schools
Eight State Priorities
All eight state priorities
COE’s – two additional state priorities
Only include those priorities that apply
to the grade levels served or the nature
of the program operated
Consultation
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Review and Comment
•
•
•
LCAP Template
Teachers
Principals
Administrators
Parents
Pupils
•
•
Other School
Personnel
Local
Bargaining Units
Parent Advisory Committee
English Learner Parent Advisory
Committee
Superintendent must respond in
writing to comments received
Use template as provided with each
section filled in
Teachers
Principals
Administrators
Parents
•
•
Pupils
Other School
Personnel
No review and comment requirements
May adjust Section 2 to align with the
term of the charter budget
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
LCAP Requirements
LCAP Requirements
School Districts and COEs
Charter Schools
Use of Supplemental and
Concentration Grants
Use of funds on districtwide basis if
unduplicated count exceeds 55% or
schoolwide if unduplicated count exceeds
40% with justification
No minimum threshold to use
charterwide, must simply provide
justification
Adoption
During a public meeting held after, but not on
the same day as, the public hearing
No public meeting required, but
encouraged
Posting Requirements
•
•
Approval
•
•
Any LCAP approved by the governing
board of a school district must be posted
on the district’s website
Any LCAP approved by the CBE and all
LCAPs submitted by school districts
must be posted by the county
superintendent
•
District LCAP must be approved by the
county superintendent
County office LCAP must be approved by
the SPI
Must be submitted to chartering
authority and county superintendent,
but not approved by either party
•
No posting of LCAP by charter
schools or their chartering
authorities required, but
encouraged
County superintendents not
required to post charter school
LCAPs, but encouraged
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Annual Update
2015-16
2016-17
2017-18
Update
needs
assessment
to include
2014-15 data
Update
needs
assessment
to include
2015-16 data
Update
needs
assessment
to include
2016-17 data
Complete
Annual
Update
measuring
progress on
2015-16
actions and
goals
Complete
Annual
Update
measuring
progress on
2016-17
actions and
goals
Complete
Annual
Update
measuring
progress on
2017-18
actions and
goals
• LEAs must continuously measure
progress in order to make
effective program and service
decisions
• The template approved by the
SBE in November 2014 requires
LEAs to measure progress on
actions and services implemented
in the current fiscal year
• However, LEAs should review
trend data prior to revising
goals, actions, and services
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Annual Update
Source: California
Department of Education
§ 15497.5. Local Control
and Accountability Plan
and Annual Update
Template
(http://www.cde.ca.gov/B
E/ag/ag/yr14/documents/
sep14item18a3.doc)
• The Annual Update template requires LEAs to compare
expected outcomes and budgeted expenditures to actual
outcomes and estimated actual annual expenditures in order
to measure progress
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Annual Update
In addition, the Annual Update template requires LEAs to explain the changes
in actions, services, and expenditures that will be made as a result of the
progress review
While the Annual Update provides LEAs with an
opportunity to measure progress, the state will also be
measuring progress through the use of evaluation rubrics –
and intervening under certain circumstances
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Evaluation Rubrics
Assist LEAs in
evaluating its
strengths,
weaknesses, and
areas that require
improvement
Assist county
superintendents in
identifying school
districts and charter
schools in need of
technical
assistance and the
specific priorities
upon which the
technical
assistance should
be focused
Assist the SSPI in
identifying school
districts for which
intervention is
warranted
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Measuring Progress
Improved Outcomes
The school district or COE does not improve outcomes
in regard to more than one state or local priority in three
out of four consecutive school years for three or more
identified subgroups (if less than three subgroups all
must show improvement)
California Collaborative for Educational Excellence
(CCEE) Assistance
State Superintendent
of Public Instruction
Intervention
With SBE approval, if
both of the following
occur
CCEE provided advice and assistance and:
• The school district or COE has failed or is unable to
implement the recommendations
• Inadequate performance of the school district or
COE, based on the SBE-adopted evaluation rubrics,
is so persistent or acute as to require intervention
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Measuring Progress
Possible
Intervention
Possible
Intervention
Make changes to the
district or COE LCAP
Stay or rescind an
action, if not required
by a local collective
bargaining agreement,
that would prevent the
improvement of student
outcomes
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Measuring Progress
• Charter Schools
• A chartering authority can revoke a charter for a school that has received
advice from the CCEE and has either:
• Failed, or is unable, to implement its recommendations; or
• Has inadequate performance so persistent or acute as to require
revocation
• The chartering authority must consider increases in pupil academic
achievement as the most important factor in determining whether to
revoke
• While charter schools can normally appeal a revocation, a
charter school may not appeal a revocation made pursuant
to E.C. 47607.3
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
California Collaborative for Educational Excellence
Tom Torlakson
Sue Burr
Michael Watkins
Tim Sbranti
SSPI or designee
President of the
SBE or designee
County
Superintendent
appointed by the
Senate Rules
Committee
Teacher appointed
by the Speaker of
the Assembly
Sandra
Thorstenson
Superintendent of
a school district
appointed by the
Governor
• The California Collaborative for Educational Excellence
(CCEE) was developed to advise and assist school districts,
county superintendents of schools, and charter schools in
achieving LCAP goals
• The Riverside COE is the fiscal agent for the CCEE
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
California Collaborative for Educational Excellence
1
If the governing board of a
school district, county
board of education, or
governing board of a
charter school requests
advice and assistance
2
If the county
superintendent determines
advice and assistance is
necessary to help the
school district or charter
school accomplish its
LCAP goals
3
If the SSPI determines
advice and assistance is
necessary to help the
school district, county
superintendent of schools,
or charter school
accomplish its LCAP
goals
• SSPI can direct CCEE to advise and assist a school
district, county superintendent of schools, or charter
school under the above circumstances
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Policy Changes
Other Revenue Sources
• CSFG Program
• Public Charter School Grant Program
• Provides up to $575,000 in start-up funding to plan and implement new
charter schools
• Provides dissemination grants to charter schools to disseminate best
practices likely to significantly improve academic achievement
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Governor’s January State Budget
• To be consistent with the tenet of targeting resources to areas of need, the
State Budget suggests expanding state funding assistance to charter schools
by changing the Charter School Facility Grant (CSFG) Program
• CSFG Program provides assistance with facilities rent and lease
expenditures for charter schools
• Funding available to charter schools either serving or located in
attendance areas where at least 70% of students qualify for free or
reduced-price meals
• Provides $750 per unit of classroom-based ADA, up to 75% of the charter
schools annual facilities rent and lease costs
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
Governor’s January State Budget
• The Governor proposes to:
• Permanently reduce the free and reduced-price meal
eligibility criteria to 55% (the percent threshold that determines eligibility
for the LCFF’s concentration factor grant) from 70%
• Provide additional resources to support the consequent expansion of a
charter schools facility program
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
The “Other” Proposition 39
• Proposition 39 (2012) – California Clean Energy Jobs Act
• Funding for eligible projects that create jobs in California improving
energy efficiency and expanding clean energy generation
• As of February 17, 2015, $164.2 million in grants have been approved for
248 LEAs encompassing 765 schools
• $4.2 million has been approved for 23 charter schools
• Funds must be spent for allowed purpose and in compliance
with the LEA’s expenditure plan
• All funds must be encumbered by June 30, 2018
• Projects must be completed by June 30, 2020
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
The “Other” Proposition 39
• Governor proposes to allocate
$368 million in 2015-16
• $320.1 million for K-12 agencies
(i.e., school districts, COEs, state
special schools, and charter
schools)
• $39.6 million for community
colleges
• $5.3 million for the California
Conservation Corps
• $3 million for the Workforce
Investment Board
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
The “Other” Proposition 39
• For new charter schools commencing instruction after fiscal year 2013-14,
energy planning funds are available in the first year of Proposition 39 funding
eligibility
• As long as prior year P-2 ADA was reported
• May retroactively pay for energy planning activities dating back to July 1
of the prior fiscal year, from the first year of Proposition 39 (2012) funding
eligibility
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
The “Other” Proposition 39
Publicly-owned
leased facilities
Occupying leased
facilities that are publicly
owned—no additional
cost-effectiveness criteria
requirements
Privately-owned
facilities
Occupying their own
privately owned
facilities— existing
cost-effectiveness
determination, with an
additional condition*
*Projects for charter schools that have not renewed their charter term at least
once prior to applying for funding must have a simple payback within the
remaining period of the charter petition
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
The “Other” Proposition 39
• On December 10, 2014, the California Energy Commission adopted changes
to the Proposition 39: California Clean Energy Jobs Act - 2015 Program
Implementation Guidelines
• A new Online Energy Expenditure Plan Application System was released
on February 27, 2015
• The newly approved 2015 Guidelines became effective with the
release of the new online application system
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
SB 854 – Contractor Registration Program
• SB 854 (Chapter 28/2014)
• Labor Code Section 1770 et. seq. requires the payment of prevailing wage
to all workers employed on public works projects
• Establishes a new public works contractor registration program to limit
the performance of public works projects to eligible contractors
• The Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) will no longer charge
awarding bodies for prevailing wage compliance monitoring and
enforcement services
• The DIR will post a list of registered contractors and subcontractors
on its website
• Must notify the DIR within five days of awarding a contract
for a public works project
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
SB 854 – Contractor Registration Program
• All contractors and subcontractors intending to bid or perform work on
public works projects will be required to meet minimum qualifications
and register online annually for the program for a non-refundable fee of
$300
• Public work is defined in the Labor Code as any construction,
alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work done under
contract and paid for in whole or in part out of public funds, which is
defined as the payment of money or the equivalent of money by the
state or political subdivision (e.g., school districts) directly to or on
behalf of the public works contractor
• Applies to all public works regardless of contract amount
or source of funds
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
SB 854 – Contractor Registration Program
New public works
contractor registration
program established
June 20, 2014
Contractor and
subcontractor
registration began
July 1, 2014
The DIR will no longer
charge for prevailing wage
compliance monitoring and
enforcement
LEAs must begin using only
registered contractors and
subcontractors on public
works projects awarded
Mar 1, 2015
April 1, 2015
Contractors and
subcontractors
registration deadline
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
SB 854 – Contractor Registration Program
• In general, charter facilities are not considered a public work as they are
typically constructed with private funds
• However, to the extent that a charter school utilizes public funds, the
charter school project would be considered a public work
• This is particularly true if the charter school is utilizing state or other
public funding as charter schools are required to meet all requirements
regarding public school construction in those circumstances
© 2015 School Services of California, Inc.
916.446.7517
[email protected]
[email protected]
http://www.sscal.com/
1121 L. Street, Suite 1060
Sacramento, CA 95814