Public Hearing Summary Charter School: Excellence Girls Charter School Hearing Date: December 3, 2012 Hearing Location: Building K191, 1600 Park Pl., Brooklyn, NY 11233 (CSD 17) Start Time: 6:10 p.m. End Time: 7:33 p.m. Background: The New York City Department of Education (“NYCDOE”) proposes to co-locate the 5th through 8th grades of Excellence Girls Charter School (“Excellence Girls”), an existing charter school that currently serves Kindergarten through 4th grades in co-located space in Building K309 in New York City Community School District (“CSD”) 16, in Building K191 (“K191”), located at 1600 Park Place, Brooklyn, New York 11233, in CSD 17, beginning in the 2013-14 school year. Excellence Girls would be co-located with P.S. 191 The Paul Robeson School (“P.S. 191”), an existing NYCDOE school that currently serves students in pre-Kindergarten through 5th grade, and would commence instruction in K191 with 5th grade girls and grow by one grade a year and ultimately serve 252-321 girls in 5th through 8th grades by 2017-2018. The NYCDOE has identified K191 as an underutilized building. According to the NYCDOE’s 2011-2012 Enrollment Capacity Utilization Report, K191 has the capacity to serve 661 students. In 2012-2013, P.S. 191 is projected to serve 223 students in Kindergarten through 5th grades and 18 students in pre-Kindergarten, for a total of 241 students. This yields a building utilization rate of approximately 36%. Under this proposal, when Excellence Girls is at full scale in 2017-2018, P.S. 191 is projected to serve 248-308 students, for a total of 500-629 students, yielding a projected utilization rate of 76%-95%. Thus, K191 should have sufficient space to accommodate the proposed co-location. The NYCDOE does not anticipate that the proposed co-location will affect the pre-Kindergarten program at P.S. 191. Hearing Notes: NYCDOE Charter Schools Office Director of Operations Laurie Price moderated the hearing. CSD 17 Superintendent Buffie Simmons read the proposal summary. * Mr. Wheeler, Community Education Council (“CEC”) 17 member and P.S. 191 parent spoke. He stated CSD 17 does not need a middle school. He stated the proposed school had obtained the names and addresses of the parents of the P.S. 191 students. He stated that CEC 17 has not asked for an all-girls school. He stated he does not see what the school is bringing they will only take. He stated the charter school will surely want to use their dance studio. He stated that the new school does not know the community and will offer no service to CSD 17. * A P.S. 191 Parent Advisory Council (“PAC”) member stated that the older kids may bully the younger children. He stated the school is not that big. He stated the school is doing well and the additional children will take away from that and they will have to share and that will cut their education short. * A CEC 17 member stated that CEC 17 will be formulating a more detailed response later (see written comments below) but wanted to state now that the council is concerned with the method used to site the school as the school did not plan to be in CSD 17. She stated there are not enough CSD 17 students in the charter school to warrant putting the school in district 17. She stated there are needs of the district and an all-girls school is not one of them. The public comment period started at 6:40. Thirty people signed up to speak. * A parent of Excellence Girls students stated she supported the co-location. She stated the school intends to offer a high quality choice for students in the community. She stated the school is a college preparatory college option. She stated seven of ten Uncommon Schools Inc. (“Uncommon”) (Excellence Girls’ not-for-profit charter management organization) high school students graduate from four year colleges. She stated the school will be a good neighbor. * A parent of an Excellence Girls student stated the school is a good neighbor in their shared space. She stated the school stresses values in her student. She stated Excellence Girls has given her daughter confidence and skills for her daughter to succeed. * A, mother of two Excellence Girls students stated she supports the co-location of the school and is appalled at the adults who do not want to share. She stated each educator is doing their best. She stated she is a nurse at Excellence Girls and P.S. 305. She stated they should work together and support all children. * A parent of Uncommon students stated that she has experienced co-locations. She stated the charter school students will respect the building. She stated the charter school was not going to take away from the existing students. * A grandparent of an Excellence Girls student stated she supports the co-location because all of the students are given a great opportunity. She stated the children at the current co-location work together and respect each other. She stated there is no bullying at the school. * Mr. Wheeler, a CEC 17 member, stated that he chose P.S. 191 for his child. He stated people should look at the projections for future occupancy. He stated this co-location will be “chopping off the head of every school in the district.” * Several staff members from P.S. 191 spoke in support of P.S. 191 and against the co-location. * A member of the P.S. 191 School Leadership Team (“SLT”) stated a charter school is not a good match for P.S. 191. She stated they are trying the keep P.S. 191as it is. She stated the charter school will take away from P.S. 191. She stated its gym period would be cut and it is not safe to go to the park. * A P.S. 191 teacher stated both sides are passionate about their cause and that is a good thing. She stated the P.S. 191 principal has worked tirelessly to build the school. She stated P.S. 191 will have to make concessions. * The PAC member spoke again. He stated his sons could not go to the charter school. He stated that the P.S. 191 girls will be offended by the new girls coming here. * The P.S. 191 social worker stated he is used to working with hard to reach children. He stated that it breaks his heart that the building will have to be shared. * A parent of an Excellence Girls student stated every child deserves a good education. She stated they do not have problems with the current co-location. She stated there is not a lot interaction between the schools but she feels they can be great neighbors. * Several more staff members of P.S. 191 spoke of the problems with sharing space and how the co-location would take away from the children of P.S. 191. * A parent of P.S. 191 children stated that the school is a B school and it will be an A school before the year is over. * A P.S. 191 parent stated her student came from Haiti and did not speak any English. She stated the charter school would not fit here and they don’t need them here. * Several Excellence Girls parents spoke highly of the school and the success of their co-location. Summary of Written Comments: CEC 17 submitted the following written comments via email: * A major concern regarding the co-location of an all-girls charter middle school with P.S. 191 is safety. There is ongoing gang activity in the immediate neighborhood of P.S. 191 and co-locating an all-girls school is not considered wise. * The original charter application indicated CSD 16 as the preferred district to be sited in. There are under-utilized schools in CSD 16. The middle school should be sited in the same district for continuity and to alleviate transportation hardships which might occur. * The percent of students attending the Excellence Girls elementary school who reside in CSD 17 is not large enough to warrant being placed in CSD 17. * Although an all-girls charter school might be of interest and supported by some families, they are not the gender most at risk in CSD 17. A needs assessment of the CSD 17 indicates boys as the target population which is lagging behind. Preliminary Determination: The SUNY Charter Schools Institute reviewed the Educational Impact Statement (“EIS”) and the Building Utilization Plan (“BUP”) prepared by the NYCDOE for the space at issue. The Institute also inspected the space at the time of the hearing and found it to be a typical NYCDOE building that appeared to be in compliance with applicable law. The P.S. 191 principal indicated there are acoustical, air conditioning and heating issues with the building, which the Institute would follow-up on prior to the charter school’s occupancy. Based on the documentation prepared by the NYCDOE and the information in the charter school’s application, the Institute also finds that the proposed use of the space by the charter school would not violate applicable law. Based on the site review, the physical space allotted to the charter school was safe and adequate. It was noted on the inspection that there were classrooms identified as storage rooms for work books. In addition, there appears to be sufficient common space and resource space to be shared by the charter school and the district school in the building. The Institute notes that the BUP, at the time of the co-location hearing, was in draft form. Pursuant to New York Education Law, leadership teams from the co-located schools are required to agree on a plan to utilize common spaces at K191. As such, the BUP will not be finalized until the co-location is finalized. With respect to public comments, the Institute thanks the members of the community for their candor. The Institute notes that SUNY has no authority over NYCDOE decisions regarding the physical locations of NYCDOE schools, grants or programs. The Institute also notes that SUNY only has the ability to approve or deny a new facility location of a charter school authorized by SUNY once the NYCDOE approves the space for use by the charter school. SUNY has no positive authority to place schools into NYCDOE space. As the charter school proposes to add facilities, the Institute, on behalf of the SUNY Trustees, needs to determine whether to allow the school to use the district school space, but may deny the request only for good cause. Based on the foregoing, and as the Institute has held the hearing required by the New York Charter Schools Act of 1998 (as amended), the Institute proposes to approve the NYCDOE facility for use by the charter school subject to compliance with the terms of its charter agreement regarding facilities. Page 1 of 4