Colorado Charter School Institute

Application Evaluation Packet for New Charter Schools

 

For each section, please rate the response then explain your rating by specifying strengths and weaknesses in the space provided.  Where applicable, you should elaborate on concerns by specifying additional information you would request or follow-up questions that you have. 

 

Each section presents key characteristics of an “excellent” response.  In general, the following definitions should guide your ratings.

 

§  Poor:                The response lacks meaningful detail; demonstrates lack of preparation; or otherwise raises substantial concerns about the applicant’s understanding of the issue in concept and/or ability to meet the requirement in practice.

§  Satisfactory:      The response indicates solid preparation and grasp of key issues.  It contains many of the characteristics of an excellent response although additional support or information may be needed in places.

§  Excellent:          The response demonstrates a thorough understanding of key issues and the ability to start a charter school successfully.  It addresses the topic with clear, specific and accurate information that reflects thorough preparation.

 

Questions are phrased broadly to allow the evaluator appropriate latitude to make all relevant observations. 

 

 



Financial Plan

An excellent proposal will present a Financial Plan with the following characteristics:

§    budget assumptions and financial planning based on realistic revenue and expenditure projections for the term of the contract including based on minimum enrollment needed for solvency as well as at 100% enrollment

§    spending priorities that align with the school’s mission, curriculum, and plans for management, professional development, and growth.

§    3% reserve as required by law

§    budget format as prescribed by the Institute Board

§    realistic cash flow projection for the first year of operation including a plan for funding cash flow shortfalls

§    sound financial management systems

§    plan for making required school and employee contributions to the Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association

§    adequate and reasonable plan to manage start-up costs

§    description of how the school will conduct an annual audit of the financial and administrative operations

 

Poor

Satisfactory

Excellent

X

 

Financial Plan:

Strengths

Reference

     

     

 

Concerns and Additional Questions

Reference

  • Concerns about the enrollment projections.  Seem aggressive and the bottom line will not tolerate even one less student. The applications references 209 letters of intent to enroll; 121 letters of intent represent a commitment to enroll during the next four years. This represents 27 percent of projected enrollment needed to make budget for an enrollment of 444.
  • Applicants indicate 39 letters of intent represent next year’s 9th-grade enrollment – about 31 percent of the targeted opening enrollment of 125 students.
  • Historically, charter school enrollment – even at the height of their popularity in Durango – never exceeded 260 students or 5.2 percent of the total district enrollment. (See attached charts.)
  • Charter school proposes to enroll 8.6 percent of total District 9-R population
  • Charter school proposes to enroll 18 percent of total 9-12 enrollment in Ignacio, Bayfield, Mancos, and Durango.
  • Charter school enrollments in secondary grades statewide equal 1.92 percent of total student enrollment in those districts that charter secondary programs.
  • Currently, 9 out-of-district students from Bayfield, Ignacio, or Mancos are enrolled in 9th grade in Durango.
  • Applicants hope to attract students from four school districts. Historical enrollment data indicate few high school students from the Ignacio, Bayfield, and Mancos communities enroll in Durango High School.
  • Applicants cite graduation rates and drop-out rates to indicate a need for an alternative to serve at-risk students. Applicants used the “district” graduation rate in their analysis. The district rate includes all students enrolled in the Adult Education Center, which serves students from throughout the Four Corners.
  • A more accurate indication of the district’s graduation rate may be found in the Durango High School graduation rate of 91.4 percent in 2005-06. Bayfield’s graduation rate is higher and drop-out rate lower than Durango’s. Both Ignacio and Mancos have lower graduation rates and higher drop-out rates than Durango High School, but those factors have not resulted in a significant amount of out-of-district students from those communities.
  • Charter applicant cites strong population growth in Durango and La Plata County; that growth has not been seen in the district’s secondary schools. Total district population has grown less than 1 percent per year during the past 13 years for a total growth rate of 8.5 percent since 1994.
  • Charter estimates an 8 percent attrition rate as students matriculate to next grade level. Historically, charter school turnover in student population has been up to 40 percent per year. Durango charter students tend to “try out” charter schools for a year, then return to the high school to be with friends.
  • Durango has a significant transient population. New student population at the high school has ranged from 7 to 13 percent of enrollment during the past six years. Highest turnover is in Native American community – as much as 50 percent. If AHS experiences historical attrition rate or turnover, and if entry is limited to ninth-graders only, it may see a much lower enrollment in 11th and 12th grades than currently estimated.
  • Page 120 Free and Reduced lunch requires the lunch to be free to the students or at a reduced price.  Is AHS going to pay the additional costs and where is that in the budget?  AHS will want to count the students as free and reduced in the October count. 

 

Budget Appendix M

 

·         The start-up grant is budgeted to be expended in the first year.  What monies will be used for the actual expenses that will be required before July 1, 2008? 

·         The district is not required to provide mill levy override dollars to the charter school.  The $2.4 million mill levy override monies that were approved in 2002 have been imbedded in the district budget to increase salaries, add facility and technology staff for the increased size of the buildings, and for additional programs.  All of the funds have been allocated to the district schools.  The district would be required to reduce programs in order to give AHS the amount that they have reflected in their budget.  AHS needs to provide a budget without the mill levy override revenues for comparison.

·         The PERA benefit calculation did not reflect the increase in January 2008, health insurance reflected 2007-2008 costs, and benefit costs appear to be understated.

·         What does Animas High School expect to purchase with the 5% administrative costs?

·         Student records would require the purchase of the software to interface with our system and buy-back of student data, including all of the student data for the October count, end-of-year report, CSAP test scores, etc. The $4,000 budgeted will not buy the software and pay for the buy-back. (See student information comment sheet.)

·         Audit costs appear low.  The charter school must prepare a GASB 34 audit that adds costs.  Did they get an estimate from an accounting service?  Perhaps CSI has access to accountants that will be able to provide the service for $3,000.

·         I have concerns that $120,000 does not reflect the true costs of a building.  It appears that AHS is projecting 80 square feet per student that would require a building of at least 10,000 square feet for the first year (pg 91). The building must be built or renovated to meet school specifications for fire code and AHERA. (See Facilities comments.)

·         In comparison, the district-built modular buildings constructed in 2000 were 5,000 square feet and cost approximately $500,000 for the buildings alone. This may be an item for which the charter school may seek donations.

·         Utility expenses appear low compared to the district’s.  Our smallest building, at 53,000 square feet, spent $30,000 in electricity and $39,000 in natural gas last year.  The budgeted amount for the charter’s proposed 40,000-square-foot building is $8,490 in electricity and $2,122 in natural gas.  It does not appear that the size and utility needs for a 40,000-square-foot building that accommodates 444 students were appropriately factored into the utility costs.

·         Under goals on Page 12, AHS states that advanced technology is fully integrated into AHS and incorporated daily as part of the curriculum.  The budget does not appear to support this model.  (See H. DiBlasi comments.)

·         Contingency loan. I was not aware that a charter school could borrow money unless voters approve it.