C HAIRPERSON G OVERNOR S TATE OF H AWAII S TATE P UBLIC C HARTER S - PDF document

J OHN S.S. K IM D AVID Y. I GE C HAIRPERSON G OVERNOR S TATE OF H AWAII S TATE P UBLIC C HARTER S CHOOL C OMMISSION ( ʻA HA K ULA H O ʻ ĀMANA ) 1111 Bishop Street, Suite 516, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Tel: (808) 586-3775 Fax: (808) 586-3776 RECOMMENDATION SUBMITTAL DATE OF SUBMITTAL: March 7, 2020 DATE OF MEETING: March 12, 2020 TO: Makalapua Alencastre, Chairperson, Performance and Accountability Committee FROM: Yvonne W. M. Lau, Interim Executive Director State Public Charter School Commission AGENDA ITEM: III. Presentation/Action on the Draft Performance Framework for the Next Charter School Contract I. DESCRIPTION Presentation and action on the draft performance framework for the next charter school contract. II. POLICY CONTEXT AND AUTHORITY Section 302D-16 (a), HRS provides that “the performance provisions within the charter contract shall be based on a performance framework that clearly sets forth the academic, financial, organizational, and operational performance indicators, measures, and metrics that will guide the authorizer’s evaluations of each public charter school.” III. BACKGROUND The current version of the charter contract (version 3.0) and its performance frameworks (academic, financial, organizational) have been in effect from July 1, 2017. The new version of the contract (version 4.0) and performance framework will be effective beginning July 1, 2020. Schools that have contracts that expire on June 30, 2020 will be subject to the new contract and framework. At the February 13, 2020 Performance and Accountability meeting, staff presented a draft performance framework for the Committee to review. 1

IV. INFORMATION FOR CONSIDERATION Based on the feedback that staff received at the February 13, 2020 meeting, staff is presenting another draft of the framework for review. The following are modifications to the performance framework for contract version 4.0 are proposed. Proposed performance framework is attached as Exhibit 1 . A. One framework to guide academic, financial and organizational evaluations Currently, three separate frameworks exist to guide the evaluation of academic, financial and organizational performance. Moving forward one framework is proposed that will encompass the evaluation of academic, financial, and organizational performance. The proposed framework is comprised of three sections: governance, structures for learning, and student academic outcomes. • Governance: This section includes financial and organizational performance and also considers board practices. The financial performance of a school will continue to be measured by the financial performance risk assessment that is currently used. Organizational performance will be measured by compliance tasks being submitted on time. • Structures for learning: This section examines curriculum, instruction and assessment, data- driven decision making, equity in access to learning opportunities, and continuous professional development of administrators and teachers. • Student academic outcomes: This section examines student academic outcomes including academic outcomes as reported by Strive HI and those that is selected by the school. B. Academic performance will be measured by student performance on state assessments and additional measures The current academic performance framework measures student academic outcomes on state assessments (proficiency, growth, achievement gaps, college and career readiness) and a value added measure (work that a school is doing that adds value to the school community). In addition to student academic outcomes, the proposed framework will also consider structures and conditions for learning at the school: • High-quality curriculum, instruction and assessment are coherent, connected within and across content areas, relevant and applicable, guaranteed, viable and appropriate for the instructional level of each individual student. • How the school uses assessment data to drive instructional practices and how school manages and uses the data. • School policies and practices that create a culture of caring by providing a sound process for identification, remediation and academic support, attendance support, and health and well- being programs promote access for all students to learning opportunities. 2

Exhibit 1 Proposed Draft Performance Framework (effective July 1, 2020) 3

SPCSC Draft Performance Framework for Contract 4.0 Introduction This version of the framework has shifted away from an assessment of learning - looking only at lag measures - toward an assessment for learning by examining both student outcomes and the conditions for learning at each school. By analogy, it is a shift from capturing only how tall the plants have grown, to a reflective assessment and discussion of the conditions of the soil and its impact on plant growth. Overview: The Performance Framework is a unified framework to guide the Commission’s evaluation of the governance, operational management, fiscal management, and academics of each school. The Framework is composed of the following sections: I. Governance – 3 domains of effective oversight, 9 standards that schools are expected to meet within those domains . II. Academic Framework - 3 domains of effective structures for learning, 10 standards within those 3 domains. III. Student Learning Outcomes - Strive HI indicators appropriate for the grade-level divisions served and optional measures that serve as additional valid and reliable measures for an area already captured by or related to an existing Strive HI indicator (e.g., NWEA literacy, five-year graduation rate). Mission-aligned measures are also optional student outcomes intended to capture the mission and vision of the school’s innovative model. The Process The process for assessing the school’s governance and structures for learning will take place through a collaborative effort that includes: ● a reflective self-assessment from the school ● a desk review (documents and evidence binder) ● structured school visits (at least two times within the five-year contract, one of which will be during the final year of the contract) ● a collaborative debriefing session (summary of findings) The result will be an assessment based on this process that describes the school’s conditions for learning in each of the Academic Framework topic areas, as well as a narrative providing highlights of the school’s exemplary practices and recommendations for growth or improvement.

The Framework: I. Governance Each domain in Governance describes standards for effective fiduciary oversight, operations oversight, academic oversight, and effective board practices, respectively. 1 The Governance Section provides standards within the three domains, and provides an opportunity to develop and share practices of effective governance: 1.1 Effective fiduciary oversight 1.2 Effective operations oversight 1.3 Effective board practices Domain 1.1 Effective Fiduciary Oversight Standard 1: Demonstrates low to moderate risk on the Financial Risk Assessment Framework (Current Ratio x 0.10) + (Unrestricted Days Cash x 0.35) + (Debt to Asset Ratio x 0.10) + (Cash Flow x 0.10) + (Total Margin x 0.25) + (Budget Variance x 0.10) = Risk Assessment Low Acceptable Moderate High Significant 1 2 3 4 5 Standard 2: Generally Accepted Standards of Fiscal Management The Commission ensures that the school complies with applicable laws, rules, regulations and provisions of the charter contract relating to financial reporting requirements, and to financial management and oversight expectations as evidenced by an annual independent audit or review. The school demonstrates effective fiduciary oversight and implements (at a minimum) the following financial controls: 2 1 HRS Section 302-D1 2 (Adapted from Governing for Greatness: Ten Fundamentals Every Charter School Board Member Needs to Know, by Brian L. Carpenter )

Financial Controls 1. Separation of duties This policy defines which individuals (by position) are responsible for the processes in the accounting cycle (e.g., recording journal entries, posting to the ledger, reconciling the bank statements, etc). For example, the person who maintains the school’s general ledger should not be the person who reconciles the monthly bank statement. 2. Procurement. The procurement policy and procedure consists of four functions as follows: a. authorizing a transaction, b. executing a transaction, c. recording a transaction, and d. safeguarding a transaction. 3. Debit cards. The policy prohibits the use of school debit cards unless they are coded to block cash withdrawals, and is aligned with the procurement policy. Credit cards. The policy prohibits the use of school credit cards for personal purchases or expenses or to circumvent the procurement policy. Additionally, credit cards must be paid in full before incurring any interest or debt and in accordance with HRS 37D-2. 4. Cash handling procedures. The policy ensures the control and safekeeping of business cash assets and incorporates the existing procurement and separation of duties policies and procedures. Domain 1.2 Effective Operations Oversight Standard 1: Demonstrates effective operations oversight demonstrated by 100% of compliance tasks submitted on time. Document Management System Submissions 1. Current executed school lease/ Memorandum of Agreement 2. Annual List of Key School Officials 3. Current Charter School Policies and Procedures 4. UIPA Annual log for the current school year 5. 4 th Quarter Financial Report 6. Current Board Bylaws 7. Current Governing Board Membership Roster