Tab 2e-Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools

Given the importance of a rigorous renewal process in ensuring the continuation of high quality charter schools, SUNY makes the Handbook available to the managing organizations and schoo

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 1

For Charter Schools Authorized by the SUNY Board of Trustees

Renewal Handbook for Replicated

Schools

August 2013

SUNY Charter Schools Institute

41 State Street, Suite 700 Albany, New York 12207 518/433-8277, 518/427-6510 (Fax)

www.newyorkcharters.org

Table of Contents

A Rationale

B Statutory Context

A Purpose of School Evaluation Visits

B Monitoring and Renewal Visit Cycles

A Visit Team Composition: Roles & Responsibilities

B Summary of Visit Team Preparation and Activity

i Steps in Pre-School Visit Preparation

ii On-site Review and Feedback

C Developing Evidence Based Conclusions

A Overview

B Evidence Collection Tools

i SUNY Renewal Benchmarks

ii Evidence Array iii Interview Protocols

a Managing Organization Leader

b School leader

c Teacher

d Compliance and Fiscal

e Education Corporation

iv Classroom Observation Form

BACKGROUND: SUNY’S OVERALL RENEWAL POLICY AND PRACTICE

The State University of New York (SUNY) is the largest charter school authorizer in New York and the largest university-based authorizer in the country In 2010, the National Association of Charter School Authorizers recognized SUNY’s new school application process as being the “Best Application Process” for Approving New Charter Schools and in 2011, the CfBT Education Trust and the World Bank identified SUNY’s Authorizing Practices as an international model and featured them in a new online toolkit

SUNY-authorized charter schools lead the state’s charter sector in student achievement on state assessments in mathematics and English language arts Besides its rigorous new school application review process, this success is also attributable to the manner in which SUNY holds school’s

accountable through its charter renewal practices While the SUNY Trustees have the obligation and authority to hold charter schools accountable through a number of means during the term of operation (including revocation of an education corporation’s charter), the requirement that a school apply and be approved for renewal on a periodic basis is at the core of the New York Charter Schools Act of 1998 (as amended) (the “Act”) The SUNY Charter Schools Institute’s (the

“Institute’s”) renewal review is, therefore, a high-stakes process for charter schools

In return for their independence and autonomy, the Act requires that charter schools demonstrate that they are educationally sound and capable of improving student learning and achievement as measured by objective assessment outcomes Upon initial approval, charter school education corporations receive a provisional charter (certificate of incorporation) under which they have the authority to operate for a term of up to five years Prior to the end of the five-year term (and the expiration of the provisional charter), a charter school has the right to apply for renewal of its initial charter for another term of up to five years

While the Act provides grounds for revoking a school’s charter at any time during its term of

operation (See the Practices, Policies and Procedures for the Renewal of Charter Schools Authorized

by the State University Board of Trustees (the “SUNY Renewal Policies”),12 the specific grounds for revocation are such that the renewal review is the principal point at which the Institute assesses the school’s academic performance and the SUNY Trustees decide on permitting the school to continue

to operate Unlike the requirements for an application to establish a charter school education corporation, which the Act sets out in great detail, the Act prescribes only a few specific

requirements for a charter school renewal application.3

1 The SUNY Renewal Policies are available on the Institute’s website at:

http://newyorkcharters.org/documents/SUNYRenewalPolicies.pdf They provide more detail on charter revocation For most schools, the renewal process would be the first time that a charter school faces high stakes consequences for its academic performance outcomes, rather than as a result of its long-term status as a low performing school This process is in contrast to legal, financial and operational failures, which may result in the school’s charter being terminated at any time if such failures are sufficiently material

The policies were last updated on June 25, 2012 to reflect the reconstitution of the SUNY Trustees’ Charter Schools Committee and its authority with respect to renewal

3 See the SUNY Renewal Policies for the renewal application requirements, as well as required findings for charter renewal and the New York State Board of Regents review process

During a school’s first year of operation, the Institute works with that school to develop an

Accountability Plan, which contains the general goals that the charter school obligates itself to meet and delineates very specific measures to determine whether, or to what extent, the school has met such goals To ensure high standards among schools that the SUNY Trustees authorize,

comparability to other public schools, and compliance with No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the

Institute prescribes a set of specific academic achievement measures The core function of the Accountability Plan is to set forth the academic goals by which the Institute will judge the school at the time of renewal

Institute staff and consultants visit the school and evaluate the school’s academic and

organizational progress on a periodic basis during its term of authority to operate Depending on the nature of a visit, the Institute provides the school a written review of the visit Where possible, the Institute discusses with the education corporation board and school leadership team the visit conclusions To assist schools in determining whether they are making appropriate progress

towards a successful renewal review, the Institute’s visit protocols, reports and oral feedback center

on a school’s performance under the same measures and performance indicators, the SUNY

Renewal Benchmarks (see below), that the Institute employs during a renewal review

The SUNY Renewal Benchmarks provide a framework for the Institute to gather and evaluate

evidence while considering applications for renewal The SUNY Renewal Benchmarks contain four key questions that reflect the interwoven nature of schools from an academic, organizational, fiscal and/or legal perspective and align to the required findings for charter renewal delineated in the Act

To be renewed, a school must demonstrate the ability to operate in an educationally and fiscally sound manner in the next charter term, be likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes of the Act Thus, unlike school evaluation visits which focus mainly

on the school’s academic program, renewal visits address all of the SUNY Renewal Benchmarks

Consistent with the SUNY Renewal Policies, the Institute uses all the evidence submitted during the

Accountability Period contained, in or submitted with, the Application for Charter Renewal and collected during renewal evaluation visit to form the basis for Renewal Recommendation to the SUNY Trustees The SUNY Trustees’ Charter Schools Committee makes all final charter renewal decisions

For a school coming to renewal for the first time, the SUNY Renewal Policies define three potential outcomes: Full-Term Renewal (five years), the statutory maximum; Short-Term Renewal (typically three years); or Non-Renewal (closure) Schools that have already been renewed at least once face only two potential outcomes: Full-Term Renewal (five years) or Non-Renewal (closure) The SUNY Renewal Policies specifically do not provide a Short-Term Renewal outcome for schools in

subsequent charter terms

Considering the limited standardized assessment data available at the time of an initial renewal

review and the challenges that a start-up charter school faces, the Institute puts more weight on the implementation of the school’s academic program by evaluating its strength and effectiveness based on the SUNY Renewal Benchmarks The depth of the Institute’s review of the academic program, the level of quality required, and the weight accorded to the evidence collected using the

SUNY Renewal Benchmarks, varies depending on the school’s record of meeting its academic Accountability Plan goals

In subsequent renewal reviews, and in contrast to initial renewal reviews, the SUNY Trustees evaluate the strength and effectiveness of a school’s academic program almost exclusively by the degree to which the school has succeeded in meeting its academic Accountability Plan goals during the Accountability Period This approach is consistent with the greater time that a school has been

in operation and a concomitant increase in the quantity and quality of student achievement data that the school has generated It is also consistent with the Act’s purpose of moving from a rules-based to an outcome-based system of accountability in which schools are held accountable for meeting measurable student achievement results

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE HANDBOOK

This Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools (“Handbook”) provides guidance for conducting renewal reviews of replicated charter schools Because of the overlap in the procedures and

evidence collection for evaluating schools throughout their term of operation and at the time of renewal, the Handbook also serves as an aid in conducting oversight and evaluation activities of replicated schools during the term of their operation before renewal Given the importance of a rigorous renewal process in ensuring the continuation of high quality charter schools, SUNY makes the Handbook available to the managing organizations and school leaders of replicated schools in order to make expectations clear, and the evaluation and renewal process transparent The Charter Schools Institute at SUNY also hopes other authorizers will use the Handbook as a resource to support the development of their practice

With the active replication of successful charter schools, SUNY has rapidly increased the number of charter schools it authorizes Because of the ever-diminishing resources to support its authorizing activities and with an unrelenting desire to provide as many quality seats as possible to New York’s students, SUNY has developed the replication renewal Handbook with the guiding principle of creating increased efficiencies and economies of scale in its oversight work and its renewal process, maximizing resources of the school and the Institute while maintaining quality

The replicated school renewal model is a customized application of the established general SUNY Renewal Policies First and foremost, the approach adapts the renewal process for single operating schools, namely that a school – whether a replicated or single school – is the unit of analysis and must in and of itself meet the required findings for renewal stated in the Act including being likely

to improve student learning achievement and meet the criteria for renewal under the SUNY

Renewal Policiesthat apply to all schools the SUNY Trustees have chartered SUNY annunciated this

principle in its Policy Framework for Charter School Replication4 in January 2012

The SUNY Trustees base their renewal decisions primarily on two sources of evidence First, renewal depends on a school’s measurable student academic outcomes as determined by the extent to which the school has met its key Accountability Plan goals Second is the school’s performance as

on the SUNY Renewal Benchmarks As a school matures, the SUNY Trustees place greater weight

on student performance outcomes than on implementation of the school’s educational program in making a renewal decision As such the Institute’s oversight process shifts – whether single,

operating schools or replicated schools In general, consistent with the school’s record of success, the frequency, breadth and depth of the Institute’s visits decrease While this change in focus supports efficiencies in monitoring the implementation of educational programs in all schools, by the same token it requires that the Institute examine student outcomes with the same level of detail whether a replicated or single, independent school Therefore, the discussion in this

Handbook does not center on interpreting student outcome data for determining the attainment of Accountability Plan goals or on the evidence for generating a renewal recommendation, as these policies are the same for all SUNY-authorized schools The focus in this Handbook is on methods for collecting the qualitative evidence that contributes to making renewal recommendations for

replicated schools

4 Available on the Institute’s website at: http://www.newyorkcharters.org/conference/PolicyMatters.htm

After presenting general background on SUNY’s charter renewal practices, the Handbook in its introduction offers a rationale for developing a customized model for the renewal review of

replicated charter schools as well as providing the statutory context that now makes such

specialized renewal practices possible

Beyond the introduction, the Handbook presents a methodology for conducting replicated school renewal reviews Because schools may vary by the managing organization’s stage of development,

by the locus of control of the instructional delivery systems and by the replication model, the

Handbook opens with a discussion of a methodology sensitive to variation in the overarching role of the managing organization, its performance management and the extent of school-to-school

corporation, whether for making renewal or expansion recommendations to the SUNY Trustees, is ultimately based on individual school performance However, in contrast to evaluating the

academic and operational functions at the school level, the Institute’s examination of fiscal

soundness and board oversight will consistently be at the managing organization and education corporation level, providing inherent efficiencies in the evaluation of schools in any multi-school managing organization irrespective of type of replication

The next section of the Handbook addresses the process for conducting monitoring and renewal visits It details a model for preparing for, and carrying out, a set of specific visit activities in

replicated schools, including a sequence of actions, roles and responsibilities of visit team members,

a schedule and an evidence array

The Handbook offers a set of practical standalone tools for conducting renewal reviews of

replicated schools The first section contains guidance and protocols for the visit team; the second section provides information for the replicated school to prepare for the visit The most important item is the SUNY Renewal Benchmarks, which explicitly establish the academic, operational, legal and fiscal parameters of an effective school worthy of renewal Because the Benchmarks drive the evidence collection, the Institute has updated the SUNY Renewal Benchmark document to capture a replicated school’s evidence for charter renewal

With ten years of experience in the charter school renewal review process, the Institute has closed

a notable number of schools all fundamentally for poor academic performance Further, some schools have opted not to seek renewal and to cease operation themselves because of their

leader’s own realization that they did not meet SUNY’s high, and consistently applied, standards In applying the same standards for making renewal recommendations to the SUNY Trustees, this Handbook systematizes the renewal review process specifically for replicated schools

The Institute developed and piloted the Handbook’s methodology and tools during the renewal review of existing successful replicated schools from a number of different kinds of managing organizations including a network under a highly centralized charter management organization (“CMO”), a less-centralized network under a CMO with multiple networks and an association of replicated schools with shared services and a common board but without a CMO Notwithstanding variations in education corporations and their management structures, the Handbook uses the term

managing organization to refer to all overarching support organizations

The Institute views the current tools as a work in progress SUNY will refine the protocols included

in the Handbook as it learns through analyzing the success of a range of replicated schools in the future

INTRODUCTION: DEVELOPING A REPLICATED CHARTER SCHOOL RENEWAL MODEL

Despite steady growth in the number of authorized schools, demand from New York State families for more seats in SUNY authorized charter schools has far outpaced the rate at which new schools are opening In fact, the number of students on waiting lists for admission to SUNY authorized charter schools has increased six fold in the last five years

The Institute sought a way to be responsive to this demand without sacrificing the rigor and quality

of its existing new school application review process The Institute focused on the replication of existing successful schools as a possible area where it could increase efficiency in its review process

In addition to demand for high quality seats, other factors also supported SUNY’s focus on

replication The 2010 amendments to the Act provided new pathways to charter replication As a result, charter managing organizations and single successful independent schools across the state now seek to replicate on a larger scale and at a faster pace than envisioned by SUNY’s previous authorizing practices While the SUNY Trustees have already approved nearly 40 replications of existing, successful schools, they have largely done so one at a time, generally using the same

application, contract, monitoring, and renewal policies and practices as they use for single

operating schools Given current trends, the Institute will face increasing constraints on the

investment of time, resources and personnel it can devote to individual schools

In overseeing in excess of 100 SUNY authorized schools, while still focusing on boosting the number

of high quality seat available to New York’s students, the Institute must modify its oversight and evaluation processes for replicated schools by streamlining and integrating its practices, while maintaining SUNY’s rigorous authorizing standards In doing so, the Institute can apply the resource gains made through efficiencies in the oversight and evaluation of replicated schools to monitoring and evaluating the traditional education corporation with one operating school to promote

innovation and program diversity and to increase the monitoring of schools facing academic or organizational difficulties

In order to continue granting charters to only the most worthy applicants, SUNY has begun to

differentiate its authorizing practices to accommodate authorizing replicating organizations while maintaining the thorough accountability for which SUNY is nationally-known Through these

differentiated practices, SUNY has the opportunity to build portfolios of high performing schools by enabling highly-successful schools to increase the number of high-quality seats for students

Essential to this process is continued vigilance in closing low performing schools through the SUNY renewal review process to sustain quality of the charter schools it authorizes

The Institute’s renewal practice for all schools continues to center on student achievement

outcomes and to hold replicated schools accountable in the same manner schools that are not replications To the extent that SUNY bases subsequent charter renewal decisions almost

exclusively on whether a school has met or come close to meeting its Accountability Plan goals, the renewal practice for all schools in later stages of development is different from all schools –

whether single operating or replications that are facing renewal for the first time In addition to these differences, however, the differentiated practice for replicated schools provides another

dimension besides success at meeting Accountability Plan goals, namely the opportunity to monitor educational program implementation across a managing organization rather than just at one

school Evidence of the development and persistence of instructional delivery systems may be manifest at the managing organization level and confirmed at other replicated schools without collecting as much evidence from the particular school that is up for renewal By monitoring

program development and modification across the managing organization AND carefully tracking the school’s individual academic performance, the Institute can harness an economy of scale to check for school progress toward renewal in a streamlined fashion

In using this approach, the Institute does not simply generalize about school quality across a

managing organization, but rather continues to hold each school under the managing organization accountable by carefully monitoring its attainment of the requisite Accountability Plan goals and being fully cognizant of its implementation of the managing organization’s instructional delivery systems through ongoing documentation of the managing organization’s implementation practices SUNY chose not to use an authorization system that simply aggregated data from all schools

operated by a managing organization because it could mask poor performance at individual schools

Separate from a managing organization’s cohesive academic support for its replicated schools, efficiencies may also accrue at the education corporation level Because of changes in the Act (see Statutory Context below), the fiscal functions for a charter school education corporation operating multiple schools consolidates operations and enables the Institute to examine finances across multiple schools within an entire managing organization Similarly, this economy of scale may also apply to other managing organization operations Finally, because a board of trustees in this

framework may now oversees a multi-school education corporation, the Institute need not evaluate the education corporation board’s role each time a school comes to renewal; rather, the Institute would examine its performance as part of its monitoring of the education corporation itself

STATUTORY CONTEXT

By allowing a single charter school education corporation to operate more than one school, the Act allows SUNY at least four new replication/multi-school/multi-site pathways:

• Adding a new school to an existing charter SUNY can allow the addition of a new school or

schools to an existing education corporation whether or not that additional school is an exact replication of the existing school

• Merging or consolidating existing charter schools As the Act permits an existing charter to

operate another charter school, it follows that the additional charter school could be an existing charter school (Several New York education corporations have already merged into one education corporation operating multiple schools.)

• Initially chartering of multi-school networks Combining by design the ability of an

education corporation to operate more than one school with the new school charter

issuance process, SUNY has the ability to replicate high performing managing organizations that do not currently operate in New York or create sub-networks of schools intended to be replications that are legally separate from the schools upon which they are modeled

• Permitting multiple sites for existing or new schools An individual school can serve the

same grade or all of its grades (essentially another school) at another site so long as SUNY is willing to reduce the number of charters available to accommodate such a request The Act formerly prohibited this structure making increases in enrollment within a single school the only pathway for more seats within an existing school

Initially, when the Act went into effect, the term “charter school” was used interchangeably for both the education corporation formed to operate a charter school and the school itself However, the changes in the Act in May 2010 allowing one charter school education corporation to operate more than one school required SUNY to use more precision SUNY now refers to “not-for-profit charter school education corporations” or “education corporations” to refer to the corporate entity that can operate one or more “chartered schools” or “schools.”

A New York, charter school education corporation comes into existence through the initial issuance

of a provisional charter (certificate of incorporation) by the New York State Board of Regents and the formation of a corporation pursuant to Article 56 and §§ 216 and 217 of the New York

Education Law In other words, the provisional charter is the legal document issued to memorialize the creation of the not-for-profit education corporation Each education corporation has only one provisional charter even if it operates multiple schools The Act permits authorizers to allow the same education corporation to operate more than one charter school so long as the Board of Regents “issues,“ or uses a separate charter from the New York cap, for each school Rather than create another corporation to operate the new school, the Board of Regents amends the existing provisional charter of the existing education corporation and its authorizer similarly amends it charter agreement or contract to reflect the operation of multiple schools The charter of the education corporation is “provisional” because by law it is issued for a term of five years or less and

is not perpetual – giving rise to the need for its renewal

A SINGLE SCHOOL EDUCATION CORPORATION

The formation of a single-school education corporation entitles it to operate one school in one or more sites so long as it does not instruct the same grade level at more than one site Thereafter, through merger with another education corporation or through the granting of additional charters

to it, the education corporation may operate a school for each charter issued to it The charter agreement, or the contract signed by the education corporation’s board of trustees, defines the relationship between the authorizer and the education corporation, and sets forth the authority of the corporation to operate schools and programs including feeder patterns The initial charter agreement attaches the original the charter application The charter agreement details the terms

of operation of both the education corporation itself and the terms of operation of each school the education corporation may operate This level of detail, which includes the promises made to students and their families, is not contained in the provisional charter

Prior to the 2010 amendments to the Act, a charter in New York permitted only one education corporation to operate one school SUNY replicated successful schools within this framework, largely one at a time and largely by the same process used to approve the initial school SUNY also replicated good governance by allowing the same persons to serve on the boards of multiple schools, albeit wearing multiple school board hats The May 2010 amendments to the Act permit a charter school education corporation to operate more than one school or the same grade at more than one site Adding new schools to an existing education corporation allows SUNY to provide more high quality charter school seats and provide new pathways (feeder patterns), with more efficiency than was previously possible The practices in this Handbook reflect SUNY’s effort to be effective and efficient at the authorizer level exercising oversight over these (sometimes) rather large corporate structures

One education corporation that operates multiple schools which may have begun operation at different times, and therefore are at different stages of their accountability plans, necessarily presents challenges to any renewal process SUNY designed its current renewal process for one school with one accountability plan even if it operated multiple campuses (of different grades) in multiple locations The high stakes closure decision at the center of renewal turns on whether the school has met the student performance goals in its Accountability Plan SUNY does this at the

school level (as opposed to the site or education corporation level) and will continue to do so for replicated schools SUNY puts the framework of this process into its charter contract

Under SUNY’s existing policies, the renewal of the education corporation’s certificate of

incorporation and the school’s high stakes closure/renewal decision are always intertwined

Replication presents a challenge because different schools within the same education corporation

could need to be reviewed pursuant to their individual accountability plans every year; and the

corporate existence of the school would not need to be reviewed except once every three or five years The amendments to the Act and conservation of authorizer resources necessitate a system where every school receives its high stakes closure decision at an appropriate time and the

corporate renewal (so long as it is justified) takes place only once before the end of the corporate charter term

As indicated above, both provisional charters (the document issued to create the education

corporation) and charter agreements are not perpetual Prior to the 2010 amendments to the Act, the provisional charter of an education corporation, the charter agreement and the authority of the

education corporation to operate its school were all renewed simultaneously In light of the merger

of education corporations, as well as single education corporations being granted the authority to operate multiple schools, the Institute, acting on behalf of the SUNY Trustees, found it prudent and necessary to separate the renewal of the provisional charter granted to an education corporation (“corporate renewal”) from the renewal of a authority to operate a particular school (‘school

renewal) is consistent with the SUNY Trustees’ Policy Framework for Charter School Replication,

which indicates a preference for school-level accountability It also takes advantage of the fact that corporate renewal does not have to take place every year and is relatively a low stakes decision

In cases where the charter school education corporation operates more than one school, when the authorizer renews the authority to operate one school the provisional charter may not be renewed Rather, the charter agreement would be amended to reflect the period of time the education corporation may operate that school and to reflect any new terms of operation from that school from its renewal application (such as its ability to serve new middle school grades)

On the corporate side of the ledger, an education corporation may have its provisional charter renewed for a full-term (five years), for a shortened term (to align with the term of the last, longest

or only permitted term of operation of a school it operates), or may face non-renewal (corporate dissolution) For example, and education corporation currently operates two schools, one whose term of authority was renewed last year for a short term of three years and another which just received a non-renewal The education corporation’s provisional charter also currently needs to be renewed SUNY would renew the provisional charter for two years to allow the remaining school all

of the time permitted in its Accountability Plan

In addition, when severe violations of law, conditions that would allow charter revocation exist, or when the SUNY Trustees cannot make the findings required by the Act for the corporate renewal, the SUNY Trustees may not renew the provisional charter regardless of student performance at individual schools Conversely, poor conditions at one school can cause the education corporation’s authority to operate that school to be revoked without jeopardizing the existence of the entire education corporation The charter agreement also permits SUNY to close programs shared

between schools within the education corporation, such as special education programs

METHODOLOGY

PURPOSE OF SCHOOL EVALUATION VISITS

The SUNY Trustees’ policy to deemphasize qualitative evidence of program implementation as schools mature begs the question: why not just rely on the quantitative student outcome data which epitomizes the charter school autonomy-for-accountability bargain? When a school is in its formative stage of development the need for qualitative evidence is manifest in the limited amount

of quantitative data available at the time of renewal: a high school or K-4 school coming to renewal for the first time has only one year of student achievement data for its highest grade

When a school reaches subsequent renewal terms of operation, it has typically developed its full operation and has multiple years of a variety of student achievement data In these circumstances, the Institute has a great deal of data on which to draw in evaluating the school’s attainment of Accountability Plan goals To the extent that student achievement gains directly represent the quality of the educational program, why continue to visit schools?

Even in the case of high achieving schools which consistently meet or come close to meeting their Accountability Plan goals, the Institute finds benefit in conducting periodic visits Such visits

validate the student outcome data and can help explain anomalies in results They provide an opportunity to scrutinize and verify documents and activities related to school compliance issues School visits afford the Institute the opportunity to evaluate the prospects of the school in the next charter period accounting for succession plans, leadership development plans and future facility arrangements The qualitative data collected on a school visit provides evidence of the managing organization’s support and performance management of the school which offers insight into the education corporation’s organizational capacity and the feasibility of its plans for additional

replications

When a school presents a record of not consistently meeting or coming close to meeting its

Accountability Plan results during the charter period or when a high achieving school has had an inflection point and is unexpectedly trending down, the qualitative data puts the quantitative data into perspective, either validating the results or providing an explanation for the programmatic factors that have led to the short-term downturn, giving the SUNY Trustees evidence to make the required renewal finding under the Act that, despite the temporary results, the school is likely to improve student learning and achievement in the next charter period

MONITORING AND RENEWAL VISIT CYCLES

Institute practices embrace the differences in the organization and structure of each charter school education corporation and managing organization while at the same time maintaining SUNY’s commitment to holding every individual charter schools accountable to the same set of standards Specifically, the Institute does not expect education corporations and managing organizations to function in the same manner and therefore be able to provide evidence that they have met the SUNY Renewal Benchmarks in the same way; to the contrary, the Institute anticipates that each organization addresses the SUNY Renewal Benchmark s through varying approaches The Institute

has adapted its oversight and renewal practices to address differences in the organizational

structures and approaches of the various managing organizations within the SUNY portfolio

However, regardless of this flexibility, one constant remains – the Institute approaches its ongoing oversight and evaluation with the goal of ensuring that each school operates effectively by

preserving the SUNY Trustees’ mandate that high stakes decision-making about charter renewal occur at the individual charter school level

During the term of each school’s initial charter agreement, the Institute currently conducts at least two full evaluation visits; the Institute generally conducts one brief evaluation visit prior to renewal

in subsequent charter terms This change in relative frequency, discussed above with respect to all charter schools, is consistent with the greater weight placed on student performance outcomes rather than on implementation of the school’s educational program as the school moves through later stages of development Insofar as the Institute has concerns about a school’s academic performance, it may opt to increase the number and scope of visits where appropriate or necessary during any charter cycle

All evaluation visits focus on the benchmarks contained within SUNY Renewal Benchmarks’

Question 1: Is the Organization an Academic Success? The Institute determines the scope of the evaluation visit depending on the strength of the instructional delivery systems underlying the Benchmarks (e.g., curriculum, assessment, teacher evaluation and coaching) and the consistency of the managing organization’s implementation of these delivery systems across managing

organization schools If the Institute has determined from previous evaluation visits conducted at other managing organization schools that the instructional delivery system addressed in a particular SUNY Renewal Benchmark is strong, it may infer that it also represents strength at the school under review

In addition to differentiating by frequency of visits and scope of inquiry, the Institute also accounts for the cohesiveness of the managing organization’s implementation of its replicated instructional delivery systems across schools, as well as the rigor of the education corporation’s performance monitoring of its organization of schools The greater the fidelity to the replicated program and the more comprehensive the performance management system, the greater the opportunities for efficiencies in conducting school evaluation visits

Efficiencies accrue in the collection of evidence for determining SUNY Renewal Benchmark results when the managing organization is consistently implementing revisions to its educational program Under these circumstances, the Institute can monitor each school’s education program to at least some extent by continually documenting educational program development at the managing organization level As such, the Institute can shorten school evaluation visits by collecting evidence that confirms the continued faithful replication of the managing organization program and noting any local adaptations, as appropriate This approach is flexible and responsive to the empirical details of each managing organization’s replication Thus, in evaluating a school, the Institute may rely on the documented strength of particular benchmarks at other managing organization schools and may determine the degree to which the school under review successfully replicates the

instructional delivery systems of that benchmark based on the Institute’s documentation of

managing organization activity and the school’s achievement results

The following chart, delineating the Institute’s school evaluation and renewal reviews of a group of replicated schools, assumes a framework in which the managing organization actively engages in performance management of its schools and implements a consistent set of instructional delivery systems Because most of the schools in this hypothetical organization are mostly high achieving, the Institute would generally conduct a minimal number of school evaluation visits aside from the renewal reviews; in the case of one low-performing school, the visits would be more frequent In evaluating the flagship school (in the first row), the Institute would conduct more frequent visits during its initial term of operation, because is not a replication, and then rely more on managing organization-wide evidence as the school matures and the number of schools in the managing organization expands To ensure the viability of each school, the Institute would conduct a visit in its first year, but would increasingly count on managing organization evidence to monitor its start-

up The triangles within circles represent a reliance on some managing organization evidence in

evaluating schools once a number of the schools have been established

A Five-Replicated School Charter Organization

The chart identifies managing organization evidence collection (as triangles) for each year in which

the Institute conducts a school evaluation or renewal The Institute regularly monitors the

managing organization in order to track its overall program development and implementation, as

well as its performance monitoring of schools The intensity of the evidence collection may vary

(represented by the triangles with solid and broken lines), depending on the previous track record

of the managing organization, its oversight activities and the consistency of its program

implementation The Institute may rely on brief interviews with key managing organization leaders

and submitted document updates, based on the Institute’s progress monitoring of the managing

organization itself (triangles with broken lines) The Institute is likely to have to devote more

attention to a managing organization in its first few years of operation in order to ascertain that it

has the capacity to replicate its instructional systems across schools, that its program

implementation is consistent and that its performance management of schools is effective

Years

Evaluation visits are brief and more confirmatory when implementation fidelity is high.

The chart shows the frequency of monitoring evaluation visits and renewal visits, as well as the instances of

managing organization evidence collection.

Managing Organization Evidence Collection

Original School: High Achieving

4th replicated school: Low Achieving

1st replicated school: High Achieving

2nd replicated school: High Achieving

3rd replicated school: High Achieving

School evaluation visit Renewal Visit Managing Organization (MO) Evidence Collection School evaluation visit utilizing evidence collected from the MO Renewal visit utilizing evidence collected from the MO Corporate renewal utilizing evidence aggregating school data

In the case of a merged education corporation, the Institute would also engage in a corporate renewal process at least every five years For illustrative purposes the chart shows a five-year interval, but based on the application review process for chartering replicated schools, the Institute monitors the education corporation and managing organization activity as a matter of course each time the Institute approves a charter for an additional replicated school In the chart’s example, under these circumstances, the corporate renewal would not take place until the ninth year In contrast to the high stakes renewal decision for schools, the corporate renewal is low stakes,

consisting of determining that the education corporation satisfies the required findings of the Act, based on an aggregation of school evidence, in order to demonstrate that the education

corporation can operate in an educationally and fiscally sound manner, that parents are satisfied with the schools and that the education corporation is likely to improve student learning and

achievement and materially further the purposes of the Act To represent corporate renewal, the chart displays large triangles at five-year intervals containing school-level evidence

If schools are high achieving and the managing organization has an effective performance

management system, the Institute can keep its evidence collection from the corporate board to a minimum, interviewing the board possibly as infrequently as only at the time of the corporate renewal However, special consideration is given to one aspect of education corporation

responsibility: the determination of fiscal soundness Unlike other aspects of managing

organization and school operations, financial activity remains at the corporate level As such the required finding of fiscal soundness for both school and corporate renewal is made at the corporate level

In summary, at the conclusion of each school’s term of operation, the Institute conducts a renewal visit If students are consistently meeting or coming close to meeting Accountability Plan goals, the Institute may utilize evidence collected over the course of the school’s charter term from other replicated schools operating under the education corporation as a source of evidence (thereby eliminating the need to conduct a comprehensive, extended renewal visit at each operating school), especially when the managing organization implements its educational program with fidelity across its replicated schools Again, this model is fluid and responsive to both student performance and tightness of program implementation: if and when a managing organization’s school is struggling, the Institute will increase the frequency and scope of its evaluation visits and intensify the evidence collection at renewal This change in approach for the particular school may extend to the entire managing organization, because of an increased concern about the education corporation’s ability

to monitor its schools and take corrective action to improve performance Setting this qualification aside, by relying on managing organization evidence as appropriate, while still holding the school accountable for high achievement, the Institute can conduct the renewal process effectively and efficiently

PREPARATION, EVIDENCE COLLECTION AND REPORTING

VISIT TEAM COMPOSITION: ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

In order to develop an accurate portrait of a school, all members of the visit team have key roles in preparing for and conducting the visit This section explains appropriate team composition and the roles and responsibilities of the team members The size and composition of a team varies by the school’s size, grade levels, school mission, focus and design, as well as the extent to which the school is a faithful replication, school performance, the documented track record of the managing organization’s

performance management of its schools and of the education corporation’s oversight of the school

1 Academic Staff

• Team includes at least two academic staff to conduct pedagogical observations and interview instructional leaders and teaching staff at the school level as well as to interview staff and review documents at the managing organization level

• Team includes staff with expertise in the school’s particular grade spans, and if possible, its pedagogical model and curriculum Staff that has previously participated in visits to the school

as well as other schools under the managing organization also adds a longitudinal perspective

2 Legal and Compliance Staff

• Team includes one member of the Institute’s legal team to ensure that school has upheld all the legal requirements of its charter Legal and compliance staff interviews school leaders,

operations staff and special services coordinators, in addition to reviewing school records and documents

3 Finance Staff

• Team includes one member of the Institute’s finance team to conduct interviews with financial and operations staff at the management organization and operations staff at the school, and to

a limited extent, with the head of school (or principal) The school’s financial documents,

budgetary practices and internal controls are reviewed in order to determine the fiscal health of the school

4 Team Leader

Because of the focus on the implementation of the academic program, the team leader is typically an academic staff member In addition to the responsibilities indicated above, the team leader plays a large role in coordinating, scheduling and producing the final visit report In addition, the team leader serves as the primary contact person for both the managing

organization and the school(s) Specific details regarding the team leader’s role in the

coordination and report production process are detailed in the Visit Team Preparation and Activity and Reporting sections below

SUMMARY OF VISIT TEAM PREPARATION AND ACTIVITY

Steps in Pre-School Visit Preparation

The following sequence of actions provides an outline of visit team preparation for a replicated school’s renewal visit with accompanying managing organization evidence collection Following the outline, a summary of visit activity and a team schedule are presented

1 The Institute determines the availability of internal team members to fill the roles and

responsibilities described above for the school visit team

2 The Institute designates a team leader to coordinate the visit

3 The team leader contacts a representative from the managing organization to determine dates for visiting the school and schedule a pre-visit conference call with managing organization leaders to discuss possible interviewees at both the organization and school levels The visit team may spend a half day with managing organization staff collecting evidence the day before the school visit, if necessary, and should take this into consideration when scheduling the visit with the school

4 The team leader requests that the managing organization and the school provide a variety of documents in advance of the pre-visit conference call, as well as on the day of the visit The table below provides a summary list of the types of documents the Institute requests from the managing organization and the school A detailed list of school documents along with tasks for school leaders in preparing for the school visit appear at the end of this handbook

Requested Documents

Pre-Visit

Due before the initial

conference call takes

place

Dashboard and Performance Management Tools

Renewal Visit Data Collection Form Personnel Files for School Staff if

housed at the managing organization

Teacher Certification Form Curriculum Description School-Specific Professional Development

Calendars Shared Professional Development

Calendar

Teacher Schedules

Board Minutes and Policies Shared Policies

• Fiscal Policies and Procedures

Available for the

team’s review on-site

Shared Curriculum Documents Teacher Evaluations Shared Assessment Documents Internal Professional Development Calendars Shared Professional Development

Calendars

Lesson Plans

School Leader Evaluations

Map of School Student Work Samples FERPA List

5 The team leader receives requested documents, organizes and archives them, and distributes them to visit team members and consultants The team leader follows up with the managing organization in the event that documents are missing or the team needs additional information

6 Each member of the visit team reviews submitted pre-visit documents, particularly organization charts and staff rosters to determine what evidence to collect from interviews

7 The visit team conducts the conference call with key managing organization leaders to identify managing organization and school staff to interview and outstanding documents to collect The Institute will then take one of two pathways in collecting evidence from the managing

organization depending on previously gathered evidence

 If the Institute has already created a profile on the managing organization and the

managing organization communicates that is has not greatly changed the support and services it provides:

 The Institute may choose to discuss any changes during the conference call and confirm that previously gathered evidence is still relevant

 The Institute does not visit the managing organization at this time, having determined that it has sufficient information on hand

 If the Institute has already created a profile on the managing organization, but the

managing organization communicates, or the Institute determines that it has made notable changes to the its staffing, organization, support and/or services

 The Institute spends a half day at the managing organization offices to gather additional evidence and update the organization’s profile

If the Institute is unfamiliar with the managing organization and has not yet created a profile of the support and services it provides to the school(s),

 The Institute spends a half day at the managing organization offices to gather additional evidence and update the organization’s profile

Sample overviews for these two pathways appear below under On-site Review and Feedback

The following schedule provides a sample of a visit to the managing organization, if needed,

including examples of specific interviews for Institute staff members The Institute would adapt the schedule based on the unique aspects of the managing organization, including the number of schools it operates, as well as the Institute’s experience with managing organization’s program implementation and performance management

Sample Managing Organization Renewal Visit Schedule Based on Institute’s Specific Needs

8:00-9:15 Interview with Managing Organization Chief

9:15-10:15 Interview MO ELA

instructional coach

Interview MO math instructional coach

Interview Associate COO

Senior Director of Finance 10:15-11:15 Document Review Interview MO Leader on At-Risk Student

Document Review/ Follow-

Up with COO

Interview Finance Associate/ Accountant

8 Based on conference call information about school staff roles and responsibilities, the visit team informs the managing organization whom the team would like to interview and the time for each interview at the school It also indicates time needed in the schedule to review identified documents and to hold team meetings, as well as providing general parameters for classroom observations and team meeting time

Sample Renewal Visit Schedule Prepared by Managing Organization Based on Institute’s Specific Needs

Interview

Interview Director

of Operations 9:00–9:45 AM Staff Developer Interview Interview Teacher Dean of Students Interview Business Manager Interview School 9:45-10:30 AM Observations Classroom Observations Classroom School Leader Interview School Leader Interview

Interview ELL Teacher

Off site

10:45-11:30 AM Observations Classroom Document Review

11:30–12:00 PM Document review Interview Teacher Document Review

Interview

Special Education Coordinator Interview

2:30–5:00 PM Team debrief; Generating Benchmark Conclusions

5:00-6:00 Reporting Benchmark Conclusions to School Leadership

Documents for Review

Visit Team Desk Review

Managing Org/ School Submissions

Institute Reports and Previous Submissions

Documents Collected On-Site at the Managing Organization

Performance Summaries and

Reviews Managing Organization Profile

Application for Charter Renewal

11 After collecting additional documents from, and conducting additional interviews of, the

managing organization (if needed), team members complete a desk review of relevant

documents in order to prepare for the visit (See Documents for Review below)

12 Team members prepare for individual interview by identifying topics from the Benchmark indicators that need clarification, confirmation or elaboration when conducting the interviews and reviewing documents at the school

On-Site Review and Feedback

Depending of the Institute’s determination of whether or not to visit the managing organization, a typical visit day for a replicated school will appear similar to one of the two overviews depicted below These overviews reflect conducting renewal visits for one school;

however, depending on team size and number of schools up for renewal, Day 2 may constitute fielding two school visit teams for different managing organization schools up for renewal Alternatively, the same single team could visit schools on multiple days The one-day school visit assumes that the managing organization implements its program consistently and that the school is high achieving

Renewals Including Managing Organization Visit

Team Travels to School

8:30-10:00 Team Conducts

Document Review

Document Review and/or Classroom Observations

10:00-1:00 5 Individual Team

Members Interview Various MO Staff Members

Staff Interviews and Continued Classroom Observations

1:00-2:00 Team Members Break

for Lunch and Travel Back to Home Office

Working Lunch and Document Review

2:00-2:30

Team Members Develop Profile of MO Services

Necessary Follow-Up with School Leader

Benchmark Conclusions with Supporting Evidence

3:30-4:30 Team Reviews Selected

School Documents and Identifies Key Questions

in Interview Protocols to Reflect Information Gathered at MO

Team Travels to School

Classroom Observations

1:00-2:00

and Continued Classroom Observations Working Lunch and Document Review 2:00-2:30

Team Reviews Past Profile of MO and Other

MO Documents

Necessary Follow-Up with School Leader 2:30-3:30

Team Generates Benchmark Conclusions with Supporting

Evidence

3:30-4:30 Team Reviews Selected

School Documents and Identifies Key Questions

in Interview Protocols to Reflect Information Gathered at MO

4:30-5:00

Team

Steps in On-Site Review Process

Managing Organization The goal of the visit to the managing organization is to develop a profile of

the support and services that the managing organization provides to all schools in its portfolio This will create efficiencies as the Institute evaluates other schools served by the same managing

organization, allowing the visit team to confirm information provided by the managing organization, rather than having to build an understanding of each school’s academic model from scratch

The Institute does not seek to evaluate the managing organization itself, but rather use the

information about the support provided to each individual school to evaluate the quality of its academic program in and of itself

2 The team returns to the Institute’s home office to create a profile of the managing organization

by briefly summarizing evidence for the academic Benchmark indicators

3 The visit team discusses pre-visit documents, the managing organization profile and the desk review in advance of the visit (See Documents for Review Table above.)

a The academic members of the team should identify areas of focus depending on their scheduled activity during the visit

b All members should note adjustments to the visit schedule

c The members should select documents for review on-site and determine key interview questions based on managing organization interviews and documents as well as the desk review

Individual Schools The goal of the visit to individual schools is to evaluate the quality of the

school’s academic program, organizational viability, legal compliance and fiscal soundness To the extent that the team is well informed about the managing organization’s support and monitoring, the team can confirm the managing organization’s instructional systems and operational supports and focus on the quality of school leadership, classroom instruction and services to at-risk students

Day 2

4 The team reviews documents and conducts interviews and classroom observations in

accordance with the visit schedule The team meets regularly during the visit to share evidence

5 The team leader keeps the organization’s leadership informed of the team’s progress

throughout the visit, providing updates on schedule changes and requesting additional

information as necessary

6 The team formulates consensus findings that respond to the SUNY Renewal Benchmarks, based

on interviews, document review and classroom observations Based on consensus findings, the

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 27

team leader assigns team members to write to specific benchmarks and team members begin drafting

7 At the end of the visit, the team presents a brief verbal report of its conclusions to the

managing organization (if on-site) and school leadership For a renewal visit, the report out includes a summary of the team’s conclusions, but not a renewal recommendation

DEVELOPING EVIDENCE-BASED CONCLUSIONS

At the conclusion of Day 2, the site visit team develops evidence-based conclusions aligned to the SUNY Renewal Benchmarks The conclusions form the basis of a Renewal Recommendation Report

to the SUNY Trustees Besides the required findings specified in the Act, the conclusions, derived from the SUNY Renewal Benchmark s, provide the basis for the Institute’s recommendation Examples of full Renewal Recommendation Reports are available on the Institute’s website:

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 28

format (such as on chart paper or a shared electronic document), organizing it as it relates

to each benchmark indicator Once evidence is gathered by indicator, team members

analyze the evidence and create an overall benchmark conclusion

3 The team leader then facilitates a process of generating a set of summative statements relating to each indicator to describe the strengths or deficiencies of the school’s programs

or operations based on the related evidence

4 Each emergent summative statement relates to managing organization activity, consistently represents school-wide evidence, supports the overarching benchmark statement and uses the language of the indicators/bulleted statements under the benchmark in question Note: not all indicators rise to the level of a summative statement included in the final product

5 Based on the selected summative statements, the team crafts an overall benchmark

conclusion See an example conclusion paragraph for Big City Charter School 3 for the Instructional Leadership benchmark in the table below on the left On the right of the table, the Instructional Leader benchmark and indicators are shown for comparison and reference

Big City Charter School 3 demonstrates notably

strong instructional leadership

The school’s new principal has maintained an

environment of high expectations for both student

and teacher performance Its school-based

leadership team comprises the elementary and

middle grades principals, deans, grade team leaders

and the student achievement manager Teacher

effectiveness, which continues to be a priority for

the school, is evident in the managing organization’s

and school leaders’ systemic real-time coaching,

focused walkthroughs, peer reviews, and modeling

All coaching, classroom observations and teacher

evaluations derive from the Qualities of Excellent

Teaching (“QET”) rubric used managing

organization-wide

With two common prep periods each day, teachers

have ample time to plan instruction and improve

their practice All professional development

activities provided by the network and by the school

focus on improving instructional effectiveness

Instructional leaders regularly conduct teacher

evaluations by assessing teachers in classroom

observations using the QET rubric School leaders

put ineffective teachers on performance

improvement plans for targeted improvement using

contract-like agreements with time limits as well as

specified expectations and outcomes

The school has strong instructional leadership

The following elements are generally present:

• the school’s leadership establishes an environment of high expectations for teacher performance (in content knowledge and pedagogical skills) and in which teachers believe that all students can succeed;

• the instructional leadership is adequate to support the development of the teaching staff;

• instructional leaders provide sustained, systemic and effective coaching and supervision that improves teachers’ instructional effectiveness;

• instructional leaders provide opportunities and guidance for teachers to plan curriculum and instruction within and across grade levels;

• instructional leaders implement a comprehensive professional development program that develops the competencies and skills of all teachers;

• professional development activities are interrelated with classroom practice;

• instructional leaders regularly conduct teacher evaluations with clear criteria that accurately identify teachers’ strengths and weaknesses; and instructional leaders hold teachers accountable for quality instruction and student achievement

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 29

RENEWAL VISIT RESOURCES OVERVIEW

The Handbook offers a set of practical standalone tools for conducting renewal reviews of

replicated schools The first section contains guidance and protocols for the visit team; the second section provides information for the replicated school to prepare for the visit

Evidence Collection Tools

SUNY Renewal Benchmarks The SUNY Renewal Benchmarks, presented below, provide a

framework for the Institute to gather and evaluate evidence to determine whether a school has made an adequate case for renewal In turn, the evidence assists the Institute in deciding if it can make the required legal and other findings in order to reach a positive recommendation for

renewal For example, the various benchmarks that the Institute uses to determine whether the school has had fiscally responsible practices in place during the last charter period allow the

Institute to determine with precision whether the school will operate in a fiscally sound manner

during the next charter period, a finding that the Act requires the SUNY Trustees to make

The Institute has revised the Benchmarks to include two additional benchmarks It has also

changed the responsible organization for some benchmarks from the school to the education

corporation The two additional Benchmarks are Performance Management and Academic Support,

two important dimensions in the long term viability of any school and particularly pertinent for understanding a managing organization’s support and oversight of a replicated school, insofar as monitoring performance and developing leadership are essential for sustaining an effective

educational program

While the Institute may collect a large amount of evidence at the managing organization level and rely on evidence from other replicated schools as representative of the school under review, the Benchmarks are still for the most part formulated as holding the school under review accountable for meeting all the academic benchmarks and some organizational benchmarks In contrast to earlier versions of the Benchmarks, the Institute conceptualizes the board as representing the education corporation with the locus of responsibility for board oversight, governance and legal compliance resting with the education corporation Similarly, in the context of a merged education corporation, the fiscal benchmarks and the determination of fiscal soundness rest at the education corporation level As such, the Institute has revised these benchmarks to hold the education

corporation, rather than the school, accountable

Evidence Array The evidence provides a road map for identifying the source of evidence for each

benchmark It organizes the evidence into managing organization documents, school documents and interviews, specifying which interview protocol to refer to

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 30

Interview Protocols The interview protocols are formatted to correspond to the specific

indicators under each benchmark The interview protocols address a particular category of

interviewee or a functional area: managing organization leader; school leader; teacher; legal

compliance and fiscal operations; and education corporation The three leader and teacher

interview protocols cover academic and organizational benchmarks with different questions in each protocol depending on the interviewee’s level of responsibility In contrast, the fiscal and legal protocol establishes a common set of questions for both the managing organization and school levels, as the division of labor for carrying out these functional responsibilities can vary between managing corporation and school depending on the structure of the education corporation The board of trustees protocol covers board responsibilities for governance and academic oversight, and it overlaps with fiscal and legal to the extent that the board is also ultimately responsible for the education corporation’s fiscal soundness and legal compliance

Following from the methodology discussion above on data collection pertaining to the managing organization and the school, the default evidence collection is at the managing organization level,

as the managing organization can be the primary source for certain qualitative replicated-school academic data As such, many school leader and teacher interview questions are largely

confirmatory, validating the managing organization’s implementation practices, especially with respect to performance management, academic support and instructional delivery systems (e.g., assessment and curriculum) Other academic benchmarks, however, generally require mostly school-based evidence collection (e.g., pedagogy and at-risk students)

The school leader interview includes the school’s chief academic leader, which may be an executive director, academic director, principal or other key instructional leaders who can provide evidence that adequately addresses particular benchmarks Depending on the scope of responsibilities and division of labor among out-of classroom school staff, it may be necessary to interview such

personnel as an assistant principal, a staff developer or special education coordinator During the conference with the managing organization, the Institute visit team members discuss with the managing organization leaders who in the school can best address particular benchmark issues Because the relevant personnel are less clear, this discussion is particularly important when

determining who to interview about operational issues (Organizational Capacity benchmark) and at- risk students (At-Risk Students benchmark)

If the managing organization is more loosely coupled and the education corporation decentralizes aspects of its educational program or a school adapts managing organization material in divergent ways, the interview protocols may revert at least partially to those used in education corporations with single operating, stand-alone schools

Classroom Observation Form The classroom observation form is a tool for addressing the five

indicators in the pedagogy benchmark For the purpose of the renewal of a school with consistently high achievement results, it serves, in the renewal process, as a means of validating the

achievement results by affirming the quality of teaching and learning

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 31

SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARKS

The SUNY Renewal Benchmark s specify in detail what a successful school should be able to

demonstrate at the time of renewal To assist schools in determining whether they are making appropriate progress towards a successful renewal review, the Institute’s visit protocols, reports and oral feedback center on a school’s performance under the same measures and performance indicators that the Institute employs during the renewal review In particular, the Institute reviews with a charter school on a periodic basis the goals and specific measures set forth in its

Accountability Plan as well other benchmarks concerning the educational program and the school’s organizational and fiscal soundness

Renewal Question 1 Has the Organization Demonstrated a record of

• high school graduation;

• college preparation (if applicable); and

• optional academic goals included by the charter school

SUNY Renewal Benchmark 1B

Performance Management

There are systems in place to monitor the effectiveness of academic programs and make adjustments where appropriate

The following elements are generally present:

• systems to collect data on student achievement and growth;

• monitoring the performance of the school and its programs;

• addressing underperformance where appropriate;

• systems and structures to support continual improvement; and

• systems and structures to promote sharing of effective practices, collaboration, and communication across school leaders and

teachers

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 32

Renewal Question 1 Has the Organization Demonstrated a record of

Academic Success?

SUNY Renewal Benchmark 1C

Academic Support

There are structures and systems in place to support meeting student achievement goals through the development of strong instructional leadership, curricula, instructional planning, instruction and assessment

The following elements are generally present:

• the development of school leadership bench depth, including

prospects for successor and new school leaders;

• providing school leaders with ongoing professional development; and

• providing teachers with purposeful and targeted professional development opportunities in instructional planning and

instructional strategies, resulting in strong classroom instruction

The following elements are generally present:

• the school administers valid and reliable assessments aligned to the school’s curriculum and state performance standards;

• the school has a valid and reliable process for scoring and analyzing assessments; and

• the school regularly communicates to parents/guardians about their students’ progress and growth

• teachers, school leaders and board members easily access assessment data;

• teachers use assessment results to meet students’ needs by adjusting classroom instruction, grouping students and/or identifying students for special intervention; and

• school leaders use assessment results to evaluate teacher effectiveness and to develop professional development and coaching strategies

SUNY Renewal

Benchmark 1E

Curriculum

The curriculum supports teachers in their instructional planning

The following elements are generally present:

• the school has a curriculum framework with student performance expectations that provides a fixed, underlying structure, aligned to state standards and across grades;

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 33

Renewal Question 1 Has the Organization Demonstrated a record of

Academic Success?

• in addition to the framework, the school has supporting tools (i.e., curriculum maps or scope and sequence documents) that provide a

bridge between the curriculum framework and lesson plans;

• the school has a process for selecting, developing and reviewing its curriculum documents and its resources for delivering the

High quality instruction is evident throughout the school

The following elements are generally present:

• teachers deliver purposeful lessons with clear objectives aligned to the school’s curriculum;

• teachers regularly and effectively use techniques to check for student understanding;

• teachers include opportunities in their lessons to challenge students with questions and activities that develop depth of understanding and higher-order problem solving skills;

• teachers maximize learning time (e.g., appropriate pacing, on-task student behavior, clear lesson focus and clear directions to students); transitions are efficient; and

• teachers have effective classroom management techniques and routines that create a consistent focus on academic achievement

SUNY Renewal

Benchmark 1G

Instructional Leadership

The school has strong instructional leadership

The following elements are generally present:

• the school’s leadership establishes an environment of high expectations for teacher performance (in content knowledge and pedagogical skills), in which teachers believe that all students can succeed;

• the instructional leadership is adequate to support the development

of the teaching staff;

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 34

Renewal Question 1 Has the Organization Demonstrated a record of

Academic Success?

• instructional leaders provide sustained, systemic and effective coaching and supervision that improves teachers’ instructional effectiveness;

• instructional leaders provide opportunities and guidance for teachers to plan curriculum and instruction within and across grade levels;

• instructional leaders implement a comprehensive professional development program that develops the competencies and skills of all teachers;

• professional development activities are interrelated with classroom practice;

• instructional leaders regularly conduct teacher evaluations with clear criteria that accurately identify teachers’ strengths and weaknesses; and

• instructional leaders hold teachers accountable for quality instruction and student achievement

SUNY Renewal

Benchmark 1H

At-Risk Students

The school meets the educational needs of at-risk students

The following elements are generally present:

• the school uses clear procedures for identifying at-risk students including students with disabilities, English language learners and those struggling academically;

• the school has adequate intervention programs to meet the needs

of at-risk students;

• general education teachers and specialists utilize effective strategies

to support students within the general education program;

• the school adequately monitors the progress of at-risk students;

• teachers are aware of their students’ progress toward meeting IEP goals, achieving English proficiency or program-based goals for struggling students;

• the school provides adequate training and professional development to identify at-risk students and to help teachers meet students' needs; and

• the school provides opportunities for coordination between classroom teachers and at-risk program staff including the school nurse, if applicable

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 35

Renewal Question 2

Is the Organization Effective and Viable?

The following elements are generally present:

• the school faithfully follows its mission;

• the school has implemented its key design elements

• the school has made a demonstrably positive impact on the communities it serves; and

• stakeholders share an understanding of, and commitment to, the mission and key design elements of the school

SUNY Renewal

Benchmark 2B

Parents & Students

Parents/guardians and students are satisfied with their experience

The following elements are generally present:

• families are satisfied with the school; and

• parents keep their children enrolled year-to-year

• allocates sufficient resources to support the achievement of goals;

• maintains adequate student enrollment; and

• implements procedures to monitor progress toward meeting enrollment and retention targets for special education students, ELLs and students who qualify for free and reduced price lunch, and

adjusts its recruitment efforts accordingly

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 36

Renewal Question 2

Is the Organization Effective and Viable?

The following elements are generally present:

• board members possess adequate skills and have put in place structures and procedures with which to govern and oversee management of day-to-day operations of the school in order to ensure it is an academically successful, financially healthy and legally compliant organization;

• the board requests and receives sufficient information to provide rigorous oversight of its academic program and finances;

• it establishes clear priorities, objectives and long-range goals, (including Accountability Plan, fiscal, facilities and fundraising), and has in place benchmarks for tracking progress as well as a process for their regular review and revision;

• the board successfully recruits, hires and retains key personnel and managing organizations, and provides them with sufficient resources

to function effectively;

• the board regularly evaluates its own performance and that of the school’s leaders and the managing organization (if applicable), holding them accountable for student achievement; and

• the board effectively communicates with its stakeholders, including

school leadership, staff, parents/guardians and students

• takes effective action when there are organizational, leadership, management, facilities or fiscal deficiencies; or where the managing organization fails to meet expectations; to correct those deficiencies and puts in place benchmarks for determining if the managing organization corrects them in a timely fashion;

• regularly reviews and updates board and charter school policies as needed and has in place an orientation process for new members;

• effectively recruits and selects new members in order to maintain adequate skill sets and expertise for effective governance and

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 37

Renewal Question 2

Is the Organization Effective and Viable?

structural continuity;

• implements a comprehensive and strict conflict of interest policy (and/or code of ethics)—consistent with that set forth in the charter and with the General Municipal Law—and consistently abides by them throughout the term of the provisional charter;

• generally avoids conflicts of interest; where not possible, the board manages those conflicts in a clear and transparent manner;

• implements a process for dealing with complaints consistent with that set forth in the provisional charter, makes the complaint policy clear to all stakeholders, and follows the policy including acting on complaints in a timely fashion;

• abides by its by-laws including, but not limited to, provisions regarding trustee election and the removal and filling of vacancies; and

• holds all meetings in accordance with the Open Meetings Law and records minutes for all meetings including executive sessions and, as

appropriate, committee meetings

The education corporation:

• compiles a record of substantial compliance with the terms of its contract and applicable state and federal laws, rules and regulations including submitting items to the Institute in a timely manner, and meeting teacher certification (including NCLB highly qualified status), background check, FOIL and Open Meetings Law requirements and enrollment and retention targets;

• substantially complies with the terms of its contract and applicable laws, rules and regulations;

• abides by the terms of its monitoring plan;

• implements effective systems and controls to ensure that it meets legal and charter requirements;

• has an active and ongoing relationship with in-house or independent legal counsel who makes recommendations on relevant policies, documents, transactions and incidents and who also handles other legal matters as needed; and

• manages any litigation appropriately and provides litigation papers

to insurers and the Institute in a timely manner

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 38

Renewal Question 3

Is the Organization Fiscally Sound?

SUNY Renewal Benchmark 3A

Budgeting and Long Range

Planning

The education corporation operates pursuant to a long-range financial plan

in which it creates realistic budgets that it monitors and adjusts when appropriate

The education corporation:

• has clear budgetary objectives and budget preparation procedures;

• ensures that board members, school management and staff contribute to the budget process, as appropriate;

• frequently compares its long-range fiscal plan to actual progress and adjusts it to meet changing conditions;

• routinely analyzes budget variances; the board addresses material

variances and makes necessary revisions; and

• ensures that actual expenses are equal to, or less than, actual revenue with no material exceptions

SUNY Renewal Benchmark 3B

Internal Controls

The education corporation maintains appropriate internal controls and procedures

The board and staff:

• follow a set of comprehensive written fiscal policies and procedures;

• accurately record and appropriately document transactions in accordance with management’s direction, laws, regulations, grants and contracts;

• safeguard assets;

• identify/analyzes risks and take mitigating actions;

• have controls in place to ensure that management decisions are properly carried out and monitor and assess controls to ensure their adequacy;

• adhere to a code of ethics;

• ensure duties are appropriately segregated, or institutes compensating controls;

• ensure that employees performing financial functions are appropriately qualified and adequately trained;

• have systems in place to provide the appropriate information needed by staff and the board to make sound financial decisions and to fulfill compliance requirements;

• review grant agreements and restrictive gifts and monitor compliance with all stated conditions;

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 39

Renewal Question 2

Is the Organization Effective and Viable?

• prepare payroll according to appropriate state and federal regulations and school policy;

• ensure that employees, trustees and volunteers who handle cash and investments are bonded to help assure the safeguarding of assets; and

• take corrective action in a timely manner to address any internal control or compliance deficiencies identified by its external auditor, the Institute, and/or the State Education Department or the Comptroller, if needed

The education corporation has filed the following reports in a timely, accurate and complete manner:

• annual financial statement audit reports including federal Single Audit report, if applicable;

• annual budgets and cash flow statements;

• un-audited quarterly reports of income, expenses, and enrollment;

• bi-monthly enrollment reports to the district and, if applicable, to the State Education Department including proper documentation regarding the level of special education services provided to students; and

• grant expenditure reports

The education corporation:

• maintains sufficient cash on hand to pay current bills and those that are due shortly;

• maintains adequate liquid reserves to fund expenses in the event of income loss (generally three months);

Charter Schools Institute Renewal Handbook for Replicated Schools 40

Renewal Question 2

Is the Organization Effective and Viable?

• prepares and monitors cash flow projections;

• monitors progress toward its development goals on a periodic basis (if it includes philanthropy in its budget);

• pursues district state aid intercepts with the state education department to ensure adequate per pupil funding (if necessary); and

• ensures that each school accumulates unrestricted net assets that are equal to or exceed two percent of the school's operating budget for the upcoming year

Renewal Question 4 Are the Organization’s Plans for the Future Reasonable, Feasible and Achievable?

Based on elements present in the Application for Charter Renewal/Business Plan, the school:

• is likely to fulfill its mission in the next charter period;

• presents a reasonable enrollment plan;

• presents a school calendar and daily schedules clearly provide sufficient instructional time to meet all legal requirements, allow the school to meet its proposed Accountability Plan goals and abide

by its proposed budget;

• presents key design elements that are consistent with the mission statement and are feasible given the school’s budget and staffing;

• presents a curriculum framework for added grades aligns with the state’s performance standards (if applicable); and

• presents plans in the other required Exhibits indicate that the organizational structure is likely to support the educational program