M E M O R A N D U M October 2, 2012 To: Members of the Charter Schools Committee From: Joseph W. Belluck, Chair, Charter Schools Committee Subject: Approval of Proposal to Grant East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School the Authority to Operate an Additional Charter School, East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School II (Manhattan) Action Requested The proposed resolution authorizes the granting of authority to operate one new charter school to an existing education corporation authorized by the Board of Trustees, East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School, pursuant to New York Education Law subdivisions 2852(9-a) and 2853(1)(b-1). Resolution I recommend that the Charter Schools Committee adopt the following resolution: Whereas the SUNY Charter Schools Institute (the “Institute”), acting on behalf of the Board of Trustees and in accordance with the New York Charter Schools Act of 1998 (as amended, the “Act”), issued a request for proposals (“RFP”) on January 3, 2012 to establish new charter school education corporations and to permit existing education corporations to operate additional charter schools; and Whereas East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School, an existing education corporation, submitted a proposal seeking authority to operate one new school to be located in Manhattan that the Institute reviewed, scored and ranked, and recommends for approval (the “Recommended Proposal”) as set forth in the Institute’s Summary of Findings and Recommendations for the proposed new school (the “Institute Report”) (copy on file in the Office of the Secretary of the University and in the Albany office of the Institute), which was made available to the Charter Schools Committee (the “Committee”); and Whereas the school district of location of the proposed new school commented on the Recommended Proposal, which comments the Institute attached to or included in the Institute Report, and the Committee considered on behalf of the Board of Trustees; now, therefore, be it Resolved that the Recommended Proposal rigorously demonstrates that the Proposal has met the following criteria: (1) the proposed charter school would meet or exceed enrollment and retention targets, prescribed by the Institute on behalf of Board of Trustees, of students with disabilities, English language learners, and students who are eligible applicants for the federal free and reduced price lunch program; and (2) that the applicant education corporation has conducted public outreach, in conformity with a thorough and meaningful public review process prescribed by the Institute on behalf of the Board, to solicit community input regarding the proposed charter school and to address comments received from the impacted community concerning the educational and programmatic needs of students; and, be it further Resolved that the Committee acting on behalf of the Board of Trustees has granted priority to the Recommended Proposal based on a scoring rubric that best demonstrates how proposed schools will achieve the objectives set forth in Education Law subdivision 2852(9-a)(c); and, be it further Resolved that the Recommended Proposal and the school described therein meet the requirements of the Act (as amended) and all other applicable laws, rules and regulations; and, be it further Resolved that the education corporation submitting the Recommended Proposal demonstrates the ability to operate the proposed school in an educationally and fiscally sound manner; and, be it further Resolved that approving the Recommended Proposal is likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes set out in Education Law subdivision 2850(2); and, be it further Resolved that the Recommended Proposal be, and hereby is, approved; and, be it further Resolved that the Institute be, and hereby is, directed to: (1) enter into a proposed amended charter with the applicant of the Recommended Proposal to reflect the authority to operate one new school, which shall include such assurances and terms as the Institute shall deem necessary and appropriate; and (2) thereafter to submit such proposed charter no later than November 1, 2012 as required by the Act to the Board of Regents for issuance by the Board of Regents on or before December 31, 2012. Background Pursuant to Resolution No. 2012-038 dated June 12, 2012, the Board of Trustees delegated to the Charter Schools Committee the authority to approve or deny applications to establish new charter school education corporations, and applications for authority to operate additional schools or sites. Amendments to the New York Charter Schools Act of 1998 (as amended, the “Act”), passed in 2010, increased the cap on the number of charter schools in New York by adding a new class of charters to be issued through requests for proposals (“RFPs”). Only the Board of Trustees and the Board of Regents may issue RFPs. Each entity may approve 130 new charters, only 57 of which may be located in New York City. Prior to approval of this resolution the Board of Trustees has approved 26 proposals for schools to be located in New York City; leaving 104 charters to be issued through the RFP process with no more than 31 to be located in New York City. RFPs may only commence on certain dates, each with a maximum number of charters set by statute. The RFP for the proposal to be approved by this resolution was posted on January 3, 2012 (the first business day after January 1st) and the maximum number of charters the Board of Trustees may still approve pursuant to the RFP is 71 (32 plus 48 remaining from prior RFPs minus 9 issued in June 2012). The Charter Schools Institute (the “Institute”) released and broadly distributed a draft RFP for public comment on November 22, 2011, held a public meeting in three locations across the state to solicit verbal comments on December 7, 2011, carefully reviewed all comments amending the draft RFP as appropriate, and posted a document detailing its evaluation and response to public comments on January 3, 2012. The Institute received the proposal to be approved by this resolution on or about July 3, 2012, and then reviewed, scored (in accordance with a rubric required developed in accordance with Education Law subdivision 2852(9-a)), and ranked it. Prior to recommending the proposed charter school for approval, the Institute, acting on behalf of the Board of Trustees, conducted a rigorous review of the proposal and published its findings and recommendations in a Summary of Findings and Recommendations (“Institute Report”) (copy on file in the Office of the Secretary of the University and in the Albany office of the Institute, and available at: http://newyorkcharters.org/SUNYTrusteesCommitteeMaterials.htm), which was made available to the Charter Schools Committee. In addition to meeting all of the application requirements for non-RFP charters, the amended Act requires additional RFP findings that are reflected in the resolution. For the proposal listed above, the Institute, pursuant to Education Law subdivision 2857(1), notified the school district in which the charter school proposes to be located as well as public and non-public schools in the same geographic area of the school regarding the receipt of a proposal to have an existing charter school education corporation operate one new school (copy on file in the Albany Office of the Institute). On September 18, 2012, the New York City Schools Chancellor provided comments on the proposal, which were attached to or included in the Institute Report. Summary of Findings and Recommendations Proposal to Authorize East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School to Operate the Proposed East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School II September 21, 2012 Executive Summary The proposal to allow the existing SUNY authorized East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School (“East Harlem Scholars I”) to operate the proposed East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School II (“East Harlem Scholars II”) was submitted to the SUNY Charter Schools Institute (the “Institute”) on July 2, 2012 in response to the Institute’s Request for Proposals (“RFP”) that was released on behalf of the Board of Trustees of the State University of New York (the “SUNY Trustees”) on January 3, 2012. The board of trustees of East Harlem Scholars I education corporation, which currently operates one charter school, seeks to add the authority to operate one additional school. The 2010 amendments to the New York Charter Schools Act of 1998 (as amended, the “Act”) permit such an expansion so long as a charter is issued for each new school. As this legal structure is relatively novel, if the East Harlem Scholars I education corporation is not permitted to directly add the new school, then it seeks to merge with any newly formed education corporation for East Harlem Scholars II, such that East Harlem Scholars I would survive and have the authority to operate two schools. In either event, the resultant education corporation would partner with East Harlem Tutorial Program, Inc. (“EHTP”), a New York not-for-profit corporation with deep educational roots in the East Harlem area. EHTP would provide financial and in-kind support to the school. East Harlem Scholars I is seeking facility space from the New York City Department of Education (“NYCDOE”) for the new school in New York City Community School District (“CSD”) 4 (Harlem). New York City Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott provided a letter in support of the proposal to the Institute dated September 18, 2012 (copy at Appendix A) which indicated that available space in Harlem is limited: This proposal is a replication of an existing high-performing charter school. Chancellor Dennis Walcott recommends this charter application to support the children of New York City. With limited space in Harlem, we recommend that they continue to look for private space. We will work with them on identifying public space options if available. The Institute asks applicants seeking potentially no-cost public space from NYCDOE to provide alternate facility plans and two sets of program budgets; one should the school receive public space and a second should the school need to secure private space. The Institute staff thoroughly analyzed plans and both budgets and finds that the school can be operated in a fiscally sound manner whether it locates in public or private facility space. The new school would open on August 26, 2013 with 110 students in Kindergarten and 1st grade and would add one grade each year until it reached its enrollment capacity of 334 students in Kindergarten through 5th grade in the final year of the proposed charter period. The school plans to expand through the 12th grade in subsequent charter periods, if granted. The school would admit new students to fill available open seats in all grades throughout the initial charter period. East Harlem Scholars II charter school proposes to replicate East Harlem Scholars I. Institute evaluation of the performance of East Harlem Scholars I indicates the academic program, organizational, governance and fiscal performance of the existing school warrants replication as it is likely to provide additional high quality options for children and families. The charter school education corporation would add a superintendent position to provide organizational and academic support to both schools. East Harlem Scholars I was approved by the SUNY Trustees in 2010 and commenced operation in the fall of 2011. The founding board and EHTP successfully opened the school; the school is in compliance with all fiscal and legal requests; and a first-year school evaluation visit by Institute staff found the school has robust systems in place to support the academic program, strong instructional leadership that would be extended to East Harlem Scholars II through the superintendent position, and a partnership with EHTP that supports the school in achieving its goals. Consistent with the May 2010 amendments to the Act, the Institute finds: 1) that the proposal to allow East Harlem Scholars I to operate East Harlem Scholars II rigorously demonstrates the criteria detailed in the Institute’s RFP including the mandatory criteria set forth in Education Law subdivision 2852(9)(b)(i) (that the proposed charter school would meet the enrollment and retention targets for students with disabilities, English language learners (“ELLs”)and students who qualify for the federal Free and Reduced Price Lunch (“FRPL”) program); 2) that the proposed school has conducted a thorough and meaningful public review processes to solicit community input regarding the proposal in accordance with the requirements in the RFP, which conform with Education Law subdivision 2852(9)(b)(ii); 3) the proposal is one that best satisfies the objectives contained within the RFP based on the content of the proposal and its supporting documentation, and is therefore qualified within the meaning of Education Law subdivision 2852(9-a)(d); and 4) the Institute has scored the proposal pursuant to Education Law subdivision 2852(9-a)(c), and there are enough charters to be issued by the SUNY Trustees pursuant to the January 2012 RFP to accommodate the proposal and all other RFP applicants the Institute is recommending for approval. Based on the foregoing: The Institute recommends that the SUNY Trustees approve the proposal to allow East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School the authority to operate East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School II as an additional school within the one, existing education corporation. Background and Description While SUNY may still award a small number of charters pursuant to its traditional application process, amendments to the Act in 2010 made additional charters to create new education corporations available only through an RFP process. The Institute received 25 Letters of Intent to submit proposals resulting in 19 total proposals to create new charter schools in response to the Summer Cycle of the 2012 RFP. The current review cycle could legally result in a maximum of 71 new charters approved by the SUNY Trustees, 31 of which could be located in New York City, per Education Law subdivision 2852(9). Note that 48 of the 71 charters were available but not awarded in response to the August 2010 and January 2011 RFPs. The 71 remaining charters reflect nine that were approved in June 2012 in response to the Spring Cycle of the 2012 RFP. The Institute conducted a rigorous evaluation of the East Harlem Scholars I proposal including academic, fiscal and legal soundness reviews. Pursuant to its protocols, the Institute met with the applicant, the board of trustees that will oversee the proposed and existing school, other members of the founding team and representatives of EHTP. In addition, one or more members of the SUNY Trustees’ Charter Schools Committee interviewed the lead applicant and members of the education corporation board. The mission of East Harlem Scholars II would be, “to prepare students with the academic skills, strength of character and social and emotional well-being to excel in high school and college, to lead in their communities and to realize their best possible selves.” Key design elements of East Harlem Scholars II include: * establishing a culture of excellence and commitment to high expectations to guide each student to achieving his or her academic potential; * use of Gradual Release of Responsibility as an instructional model to ensure that students are actively engaged in learning and develop higher order thinking skills; * a staffing model with two certified teachers in each classroom; * a high quality curriculum aligned to the Common Core with an intense focus on literacy and math, a challenging, performance-standards aligned curriculum in science and social studies, and high quality instruction in music, health/physical education and Spanish; * strong instructional leadership with a principal focused on instruction, time for teachers to collaboratively plan, and ample professional development; * a longer school day (7:30 am-4:30 pm) and year (190 days) than traditional public schools; * a school culture of achievement, caring, excellence and respect; * commitment to engaging parents; and * support by the partner organization (EHTP) for student tutoring, academic program development, access to educational experts, and non-academic support to free the school to focus on teaching and learning. The proposed school would offer 190 days of instruction with the first day of the 2013-14 school year on or around August 26, 2013 and the last day on or around June 26, 2014; subsequent years would follow a similar calendar. The described longer school day would be scheduled every day except Friday when students would be dismissed at 1:00 p.m. to allow for teacher professional development. As noted above, the proposed education corporation’s board would partner with EHTP, which would support East Harlem Scholars II through both academic and administrative services. EHTP would support academic planning, providing access to the educational experts and institutions with which EHTP has established relationships over its 50 year history, and providing additional and appropriate academic support and assistance that the school may require. Additionally, EHTP would provide a variety of non-academic supports that would free the leadership and staff of East Harlem Scholars II to focus their efforts on implementing and continuously improving the instruction and academic programs. These supports range from financial management and human resources/talent to fundraising. EHTP’s Executive Director would also serve as the Executive Director of both charter schools and be charged with oversight of a superintendent of both schools. Pursuant to a shared services agreement, EHTP would charge the education corporation cost allocations of approximately eleven percent of school per pupil revenue. The proposed curriculum of East Harlem Scholars II focuses on individualized instruction, with a very low student to teacher ratio of 14:1, and on using the Gradual Release of Responsibility technique, which includes students gradually taking more responsibility for their own learning. For English language arts, the school would adopt Scott Foresman’s Reading Street supplemented by Pearson’s Word’s Their Way and would use Lucy Calkin’s Writing Workshop for writing instruction. For mathematics, the school would adopt the University of Chicago’s Everyday Mathematics program. For science, the school would use Foss Delta Science kits and for social studies, the curriculum would rely on the New York State core curriculum. Students would be formally assessed twice a year using the Terra Nova reading and math assessments, and multiple times per year using the Fountas and Pinnell reading assessments. The results would be immediately reviewed and utilized by teachers and administrators to track individual student progress and the effectiveness of school program. Students would also receive instruction in music, Spanish, health and physical education. Using a Response to Intervention system, students’ learning needs would be assessed and students placed into or graduated out of Tier I (in-class differentiation), Tier II (pullout and push-ins with the general education teachers, teaching assistants, and learning specialists as appropriate), or Tier III (intensive supplemental small group instruction provided by qualified staff). Students who do not respond to Tier 3 interventions would be referred to the CSD’s Committee on Special Education, which would evaluate the need for special classes, settings or related services. School-based strategies and specific goals would be set every six to eight weeks. Teachers would receive ample quality professional development, beginning with an intensive professional program before school starts, which would continue with additional professional development including professional development every Friday for 3.5 hours throughout the year. In addition, teachers would be given opportunities to visit and observe excellent teachers at East Harlem Scholars I and attend workshops designed to master effective teaching techniques. The school would establish a mentor program to support new and struggling teachers and provide new professional opportunities for experienced and highly effective teachers. East Harlem Scholars I and East Harlem Scholars II would share a superintendent to provide oversight of the entire education program and instructional leadership support to the schools’ principals. Each school will have a principal with academic and operational oversight responsibilities, an assistant principal to support school culture and provide professional development and a director of operations to manage site based operations. A special education coordinator would coordinate and provide special education services, while the principal and an ELL teacher would coordinate the English as a Second Language Program. Additionally, each school would also employ a reading specialist to assist in meeting the needs of students at-risk of academic failure. The by-laws of the education corporation indicate that its board consists of not less than five or more than fifteen voting members. In addition, EHTP would be the sole corporate member of the school board. This is not a novel arrangement, and the Institute made certain that procedural safeguards were in place to help ensure the independence of the education corporation board. In May 2010 when East Harlem Scholars 1 was approved by the SUNY Trustees, the education corporation was granted a waiver from the SUNY charter provision that prohibits more than 40 percent of the charter school board from being affiliated with any other entity (with the exception of another charter school education corporation) so that up to 60% of the education corporation board could be affiliated with EHTP. During the interview for the proposed school, the Institute reviewed how the arrangement was working in practice and the need for its continuation. Based on the responses at the interview and the lack of any problems to date associated with the arrangement, the Institute finds the wavier should remain in place. The eight current trustees of the education corporation are set forth below. 1. Michael Brown – Partner and Director of Wealth Management at Dynasty Financial Partners; former financial consultant at Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns where he formed the Special Equity Transactions Group; current board member of EHTP. B.A. Columbia University. 2. Iris Chen – Executive Director of the I Have A Dream Program; formerly served as Teach For America's New York City Executive Director, where she led a major expansion and grew the local corps from 250 to 1,000 teachers; former management consultant with McKinsey & Company. J.D., Harvard Law School and M.B.A., Harvard Business School. 3. Brian Gavin – Chief Operating Officer of Blackstone Alternative Asset Management (BAAM) and a Senior Managing Director of The Blackstone Group; former Partner in Arthur Andersen’s Hedge Fund Advisory and Capital Markets Group; Certified Public Accountant. B.S. Accounting, New York University. 4. Lili Lynton – Senior Vice President of the New York City Investment Fund; former partner with chef Daniel Boulud, co-founding Dinex Group; former financial analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein; current board member of EHTP. M.B.A., Harvard Business School. 5. Carlos Morales – Chief Compliance Executive-North America with Banco Espirito Santo, S.A.; former counsel to Schiff Hardin LLP; current board member of EHTP. J.D., Columbia University and M.P.A., Princeton University. 6. Ilana Ruskay-Kidd – Director of the Saul and Carole Zabar Nursery School at the JCC in Manhattan; former co-founding teacher at the Ella Baker School, an alternative public school in Manhattan; former early childhood curriculum consultant for the Children’s Aid Society. M.Ed., Bank Street College. 7. Joan Solotar – Senior Managing Director in the Public Markets group of Blackstone Group; former Managing Director and Head of Equity Research at Banc of America Securities; current chair of the board of the EHTP. M.B.A., New York University. 8. Thomas L. Webber, PhD – Special Advisor to the President of Bank Street College; former acting director for the Center of Educational Leadership and Substitute Guest Lecturer at Hunter College Graduate School of Education; current board member of EHTP. Ph.D., Education Administration, Columbia Teachers College. As noted above, the NYCDOE has indicated that there may not be space available for East Harlem Scholars II in an under-utilized public school building. In the event that such space is not available, the applicant is in negotiation on a lease for a building to house a tutoring program for EHTP that would also be able to house East Harlem Scholars II. The building is located at 304 East 104th St., which previously housed the St. Lucy School, a former Catholic school. The applicant has submitted a contingency budget that has been deemed sound by the Institute, for the provision of private facility space in the event that public space is unavailable. Should public space become available, any NYCDOE space would have to be separately approved by the NYC Panel for Educational Policy through provisions of the Education Law related to the co-location of charter schools. That process culminates in the right of aggrieved persons to file an appeal of the use of the space with the New York State Commissioner of Education. In addition, the Institute reserves the right to review and approve all facilities in accordance with the charter agreement, and, pursuant to the Act, would have to hold a hearing on behalf of the SUNY Trustees prior to the school occupying district school space. The fiscal impact of East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School II on the district of residence, the New York City School District, is summarized below. Expected Number of Students (A) Basic Charter School Per Pupil Aid (B) Projected Charter Per Pupil Revenue (C = A x B) New York City School District Budget* (D) Projected Impact to District (E = C / D) 110 (2013-14 – Year 1) $13,527 $1,487,970 $19,720,913,110 0.01% 334 (2017-18 – Year 5) $13,527 $4,518,018 $19,720,913,110 0.02% *The NYCDOE budget was derived from and can be found on the NYCDOE’s website: http://schools.nyc.gov/AboutUs/funding/overview/default.htm. The calculations above assume the current basic per pupil aid will not increase during the term of the charter. While it is likely that the NYCDOE budget will grow over time, the Institute is also being conservative by leaving it unchanged over five years. Based on these assumptions, and projections that the charter school will have full enrollment, East Harlem Scholars II will have minimal fiscal impact on public schools in the New York City School District: less than .01% in the 2013-14 school year and .02% in the 2017-18 school year. The estimates used by the Institute to conduct its analysis are subject to unpredictable changes in the NYCDOE budget in any given year, changes in charter school per-pupil funding, and the actual enrollment in the charter school. For example, in the event that the budget of the district increases 5% in five years (assumes a 1% increase each year) to $20.7 billion and the basic per pupil aid to charter schools remains unchanged, the impact to the district would still be minimal: .02% in the 2017-18 school year. While the school has included in its proposal estimated calculations accounting for special education revenue, federal Title I funds, other federal grants and/or funds provided by the district and to be received by the charter school, the Institute’s calculations and analysis do not account for these sources of potential revenue. The Institute finds that the fiscal impact of the proposed schools on the New York City School District, and public charter, public district and nonpublic schools in the same geographic area would be minimal. In the event that the school opens with slightly larger enrollment, the Institute has determined that the fiscal impact of the proposed schools on the district, public charter, public district and nonpublic schools in the same geographic area would also be minimal. The Institute reviewed the charter school’s proposed operating plans for each year of the proposed charter term and supporting evidence. The Institute finds the school’s budgets and fiscal plans are sound and that sufficient start-up funds will be available to the new charter school. The Institute notified the school district as well as public and private schools in the same geographic area of the proposed school about the receipt of the proposal. A public hearing was duly held by the NYCDOE on August 13, 2012 following notice from the Institute on behalf of the SUNY Trustees. The proposal was posted on the Institute’s website for public review and SUNY provided notice to education and parent organizations in the area. Comments from the District were received on September 18, 2012 (Appendix A). The Institute received no public comments (Appendix B). The applicant has conducted public outreach, in conformity with a thorough and meaningful public review process prescribed in the RFP, to solicit community input regarding the proposed schools (Educ. Law §2852(9-a)(b)(ii)). The Institute has determined that the applicant has appropriately demonstrated community support for the school. The RFP also contained minimum eligibility and preference criteria to reflect the requirements of Education Law subdivision 2852(9-a). The proposal met the eligibility requirements, as evidenced by the following: * The proposal met the following basic criteria: ­ submitted by the appropriate deadline; ­ was complete, i.e., included a Transmittal Sheet, Proposal Summary and responses to all RFP requests; ­ individual responses adequately addressed each specific request; and ­ the proposal was coherent. * The proposal met the standard for describing a quality educational program and provided sufficient evidence that the proposed school is likely to operate in an educationally and fiscally sound manner, to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes set out in Education Law subdivision 2850(2) as well as demonstrated a rigorous commitment to student achievement. * The proposal included a viable plan to meet the enrollment and retention targets established by the SUNY Trustees for students with disabilities, ELLs, and students who are eligible to participate in the FRPL program (as detailed in Request No. 17 of the proposal). For purposes of responding to the RFP, SUNY directed applicants to address overall targets for the school district of location, and in the case of New York City, the Community School District of location as identified by the Institute and available at: http://www.newyorkcharters.org/documents/DistrictLevelDataonSubpopulations.pdf. As set forth in the proposed revised charter agreement, SUNY intends to revise such targets with more specific targets during the first year of operation of the proposed school. * The proposal provided evidence of public outreach that conforms to the process prescribed by the SUNY Trustees in the letter of intent and RFP for the purpose of soliciting and incorporating community input regarding the proposed charter school. As the East Harlem Scholars II proposal met the eligibility criteria, the Institute’s evaluation continued with a full review of the proposal, an interview of the founding team and proposed board of trustees and the partner organization, and requests for clarification and/or amendments to the proposal. The review process then continued with an evaluation of the proposal in relation to the eleven Preference Criteria contained in the RFP for which proposals can earn credit as described in the RFP’s Scoring Rubric. The purpose of the Scoring Rubric was to prioritize proposals in the event that the number of proposals meeting the SUNY Trustees’ requirements exceeded the maximum number of charters to be issued in 2012. In the event of a tie for the last charter, both proposals will be rejected unless one applicant agreed to withdraw his or her proposal for consideration in a subsequent RFP. The preference criteria, which in addition to eligibility criteria and the overall high standards established by the SUNY Trustees, included the demonstration of the following in compliance with Education Law subdivisions 2852(9-a)(c)(i)-(viii): * increasing student achievement and decreasing student achievement gaps in reading/language arts and mathematics; * increasing high school graduation rates and focusing on serving specific high school student populations including, but not limited to, students at risk of not obtaining a high school diploma, re-enrolled high school drop-outs, and students with academic skills below grade level; * focusing on the academic achievement of middle school students and preparing them for a successful transition to high school; * utilizing high-quality assessments designed to measure a student's knowledge, understanding of, and ability to apply, critical concepts through the use of a variety of item types and formats; * increasing the acquisition, adoption, and use of local instructional improvement systems that provide teachers, principals, and administrators with the information and resources they need to inform and improve their instructional practices, decision-making, and overall effectiveness; * partnering with low performing public schools in the area to share best educational practices and innovations; * demonstrating the management and leadership techniques necessary to overcome initial start-up problems to establish a thriving, financially viable charter school; and * demonstrating the support of the school district in which the proposed charter school will be located and the intent to establish an ongoing relationship with such school district. While the Institute received a total of 19 proposals in response to its January 2012 RFP Summer Cycle, only six have been recommended for approval. All of the six proposals recommended for approval met the eligibility criteria and were therefore assigned a score using the rubric contained in the RFP. The proposal for East Harlem Scholars II earned a score of 40 preference points out of a possible total of 64. Based on this score and the other information and findings set forth herein, the Institute recommends that the SUNY Trustees approve the proposal to allow East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School to operate East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School II, which would not exceed the statutory limit in Education Law subdivision 2852(9-a)(a). Findings Based on the comprehensive review of the proposal and interviews of the applicant and the education corporation’s board of trustees, the Institute makes the following findings. 1. The charter school described in the proposal meets the requirements of Article 56 of the Education Law (as amended) and other applicable laws, rules, and regulations as reflected in (among other things): * the inclusion of appropriate policies and procedures for the provision of services and programs for students with disabilities and ELLs; * the required policies for addressing the issues related to student discipline, complaints, personnel matters and health services; * an admissions policy that complies with the Act, federal law and the U.S. Constitution; * the inclusion of the proposed by-laws for the operation of the education corporation’s board of trustees; and * the inclusion of an analysis of the projected fiscal and programmatic impact of the school on surrounding public and private schools. 2. The applicant has demonstrated the ability to operate the school in an educationally and fiscally sound manner as reflected in (among other things): * the provision of an educational program that meets or exceeds the State performance standards; * the articulation of a culture of self-evaluation and accountability at both the administrative and board level; * the student achievement goals articulated by the applicant; * an appropriate roster of educational personnel; * a sound mission statement; * a comprehensive assessment plan; * the provision of sound start-up, first-year, and five-year budget plans; * a plan to acquire comprehensive general liability insurance to include any vehicles, employees, and property; * evidence of adequate community support for, and interest in, the charter school sufficient to allow the school to reach its anticipated enrollment; * the inclusion of descriptions of programmatic and independent fiscal audits, with fiscal audits occurring at least, annually; * the inclusion of a school calendar and school day schedule that provide at least as much instruction time during a school year as required of other public schools; and * the inclusion of methods and strategies for serving students with disabilities in compliance with all federal laws and regulations. 3. Granting the proposal is likely to: a) improve student learning and achievement; and b) materially further the purposes of the Act. This finding is reflected by (among other things): * the inclusion of a curriculum framework document that specifies how the proposed curriculum will ensure that students will meet or exceed the performance standards of the Board of Regents reflecting the adoption of the Common Core State Standards; * a comprehensive plan to assess student achievement through the use of State tests, externally-verifiable standardized tests and other diagnostic assessments; * robust programs to meet the needs of students at-risk of academic failure, students with disabilities, and ELLs; * an intensive focus on literacy and mathematics, with 600-700 minutes of weekly English language arts instruction, and 465 minutes of weekly mathematics instruction for each student; * the inclusion of significant opportunities for professional development of the school’s instructional staff prior the start of each school year and throughout the year; * a commitment to providing an educational program focused on outcomes, not inputs; and * an organizational structure that provide ample instructional leadership and sharing of best practices between the schools under the same education corporation. 4. The proposed charter school would meet or exceed enrollment and retention targets, as prescribed by the SUNY Trustees, of students with disabilities, ELLs, and students who are eligible applicants for the FRPL program as required by Education Law subdivision 2852(9-a)(b)(i). The data upon which to base specific enrollment and retention targets mandated by the amendments to the Act was not fully available at the time the statute mandated the RFP be issued. As a result, the Institute developed internal evaluation criteria regarding the enrollment and retention of each class of student referenced in the amendments to the Act such that the Institute could make the determination that the applicant would meet or exceed the enrollment and retention targets when developed. The Institute also developed initial targets based on school district or CSD averages to use in making the determination required to approve the proposal. Before the first year of the charter term, SUNY will develop final targets, and shall ensure: “(1) that such enrollment targets are comparable to the enrollment figures of such categories of students attending the public schools within the school district, or in a city school district in a city having a population of one million or more inhabitants, the community school district, in which the proposed charter school would be located; and (2) that such retention targets are comparable to the rate of retention of such categories of students attending the public schools within the school district, or in a city school district in a city having a population of one million or more inhabitants, the community school district, in which the proposed charter school would be located.” The Institute will conduct separate analyses for setting enrollment and retention targets, respectively. Based on the foregoing, the Institute finds that the proposal has rigorously demonstrated that the proposed charter school would meet or exceed the enrollment and retention targets, set by the Institute to evaluate proposals and to be prescribed by SUNY during the first year of the charter in accordance with the Act. 5. The applicant has conducted public outreach for the school, in conformity with a thorough and meaningful public review process prescribed by the SUNY Trustees, to solicit community input regarding the proposed charter school and to address comments received from the impacted community concerning the educational and programmatic needs of students in conformity with Education Law subdivision 2852(9-a)(b)(ii). 6. The Institute has determined that the proposal rigorously demonstrates the criteria and best satisfies the objectives contained within the RFP, and, therefore, is a “qualified application” within the meaning of Education Law subdivision 2852(9-a)(d) that should be submitted to the Board of Regents for approval. Conclusion and Recommendations Based on its review and findings, the Institute recommends that the SUNY Trustees approve the proposal to allow East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School to operate East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School II in September of 2013. In the event the Board of Regents does not approve the structure of a single education corporation with authority to operate the two schools set forth in the proposal, the Institute recommends that the SUNY Trustees approve in advance, to the extent necessary, a merger of the two education corporations as described in the proposal as soon as possible after corporate formation of the new charter school education corporation. East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School II Basic Identification Information Lead Applicant(s): Jeff Ginsburg for East Harlem Scholars Charter School Management Co.: None Other Partners: East Harlem Tutorial Program, Inc. Location (District): New York City Community School District 4 Student Pop./Grades: Opening with 110 students in K - 1st grade; growing to 334 students K -5 Opening Date: August 2013 School District of Proposed Location Profile Manhattan District 4 Enrollment (2010-11): 13,831 Percent (2010-11): African-American: 29 Hispanic: 62 Asian, White, Other: 9 Percent Qualifying for Free or Reduced Priced Lunch (2010-11): 79 English Language Arts (2010-11) Mathematics (2010-11) Grade Percent Proficient Grade Percent Proficient 3 41 3 48 4 51 4 58 5 43 5 55 6 38 6 48 7 29 7 47 8 26 8 45 Source: Demographic data are from the New York State Accountability and Overview Report 2010-11; test data are from the 2010-11 results released on the New York City Department of Education’s website. September 18, 2012 Susan Miller Barker Executive Director Charter Schools Institute State University of New York 41 State Street, Suite 700 Albany, New York 12207 Dear Ms. Barker, The New York City Department of Education’s Office of Portfolio Management has reviewed four charter school applications submitted to SUNY’s Charter School Institute’s 2012 round 2 process that have requested public space. I genuinely commend the passion and commitment of these founding groups for wanting to serve New York City’s school children and provide more high quality options. Attached are my recommendations for the charter schools that have requested public space and whom I would like to see move forward at this time. During the last few months, the Office of Portfolio Management evaluated applications that were submitted. After reviewing each application, meeting with many of the founding groups and evaluating with the Planning teams within the Office of Portfolio Management, we have decided on the attached recommendations. For high quality applicants aligned to the needs of the community, we try to provide public school space when it is available. The identification of viable public school space is an ongoing and complex process. Support for an application does not guarantee the availability or viability of public school space and all applicants should have private facility plans in place. We plan to invite all of the recommended applicants who are approved by SUNY into our offices this Fall to discuss their space needs. I look forward to many more collaborations between SUNY and the NYCDOE in the near future. Sincerely, Dennis M. Walcott Chancellor 2012 SUNY New Charter Applications – NYC Chancellor Recommendations Applicant Desired CSD Proposed School Name: Achievement First Central Brooklyn Charter School Applicant Desired CSD: 17, 23, 32 Overall Comments: This proposal is a replication of existing high-performing charter schools. Chancellor Dennis Walcott recommends this charter application to support the children of New York City. Comments on Space Availability: There is need for higher quality seats in Brooklyn and we will work with the applicant on space availability in their identified CSDs and in other CSDs with performance concerns. We will work with the applicant to consider split siting schools and modifying enrollment to tailor to space availability. Proposed School Name: East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School II Applicant Desired CSD: 4 Overall Comments: This proposal is a replication of an existing high-performing charter school. Chancellor Dennis Walcott recommends this charter application to support the children of New York City. Comments on Space Availability: With limited space in Harlem, we recommend that they continue to look for private space. We will work with them on identifying public space options if available. Proposed School Name: Explore Enrich Charter School Applicant Desired CSD: 17,18 Overall Comments: This application is proposing to offer students and families a high quality option within a building that also houses a school that is phasing out due to performance concerns. It is a replication of an existing high-performing charter school. Chancellor Dennis Walcott recommends this charter application to support the children of New York City. The DOE has not made any decisions regarding potential phase-outs for the 2013-14 school year. However, we do see a need for higher quality elementary and middle school seats in the identified CSD’s and in other CSDs. We will work with the applicant to identify space, if available Appendix B Summary of Public Comments Received During SUNY Public Comment Period Proposal to Establish East Harlem Scholars Academy Charter School II A public hearing was held by the New York City Department of Education on August 13, 2012. All attendees were affiliated with the proposed school or its proposed partner. The Institute received no comments via e-mail or in writing about this proposal. Committee Resolution -4- October 2, 2012 2 1 21