HARTER SCHOOLS ITUTE RENEWAL RECOMMENDATION REPORT UET CHARTER SCHOOL Report Date: December 29, 2017 Visit Date: October 16-17, 2017 SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 518.445.4250 518.320.1572 (fax) www.newyorkcharters.org Charter Schools Institute The State University of New York CONTENTS 2 Introduction & Report Format 4 Preliminary Renewal Recommendation 6 School Background and Executive Summary 9 Academic Performance 24 Organizational Performance 30 Fiscal Performance 33 Future Plans Appendices A: School Overview B: School Performance Summaries C: District Comments D: School Fiscal Dashboard In INTRODUCTION SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 INTRODUCTION & REPORT FORMAT This report is the primary means by which the SUNY Charter Schools Institute (the “Institute”) transmits to the State University of New York Board of Trustees (the “SUNY Trustees”) its findings and recommendations regarding a school’s Application for Charter Renewal, and more broadly, details the merits of a school’s case for renewal. The Institute has created and issued this report pursuant to the Policies for the Renewal of Not-For-Profit Charter School Education Corporations and Charter Schools Authorized by the Board of Trustees of the State University of New York (the “SUNY Renewal Policies”).1 THE INSTITUTE MAKES ALL RENEWAL RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON ! A SCHOOL’S APPLICATION FOR CHARTER RENEWAL INFORMATION GATHERED DURING THE CHARTER TERM ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE FISCAL SOUNDNESS LEGAL COMPLIANCE RENEWAL EVALUATION VISIT Most importantly, the Institute analyzes the school’s record of academic performance and the extent to which it has met its academic Accountability Plan goals. 1. Revised September 4, 2013 and available at: www. newyorkcharters.org/SUNYRenewal-Policies/. 2 UFT Charter In INTRODUCTION SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 REPORT FORMAT ? Additional information about the SUNY renewal process and an overview of the requirements for renewal under the New York Charter Schools Act of 1998 (as amended, the “Act”) are available on the Institute’s website at: www.newyorkcharters. org/renewal/. 2. Version 5.0, May 2012, available at: www.newyorkcharters. org/SUNY-RenewalBenchmarks/. This renewal recommendation report compiles the evidence below using the State University of New York Charter Renewal Benchmarks (the “SUNY Renewal Benchmarks”),2 which specify in detail what a successful school should be able to demonstrate at the time of the renewal review. The Institute uses the four interconnected renewal questions below for framing benchmark statements to determine if a school has made an adequate case for renewal. RENEWAL QUESTIONS 1. IS THE SCHOOL AN ACADEMIC SUCCESS? 2. IS THE SCHOOL AN EFFECTIVE, VIABLE ORGANIZATION? 3. IS THE SCHOOL FISCALLY SOUND? 4. IF THE SUNY TRUSTEES RENEW THE EDUCATION CORPORATION’S AUTHORITY TO OPERATE THE SCHOOL, ARE ITS PLANS FOR THE SCHOOL REASONABLE, FEASIBLE, AND ACHIEVABLE? This report contains appendices that provide additional statistical and organizationally related information including a largely statistical school overview, copies of any school district comments on the Application for Charter Renewal, and the SUNY Fiscal Dashboard information for the school. If applicable, the appendices also include additional information about the education corporation and its schools including additional evidence on student achievement of other education corporation schools. 3 UFT Charter RR RENEWAL RECOMMENDATION SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 4 RENEWAL RECOMMENDATION Full-Term Renewal The Institute recommends that the SUNY Trustees approve the Application for Charter Renewal of UFT Charter School for a period of five years with authority to provide instruction to students in 9 th –12 th grade in such configuration as set forth in its Application for Charter Renewal, with a projected total enrollment of 320 students. To earn a Subsequent Full-Term Renewal, a school must demonstrate that it has met or come close to meeting its academic Accountability Plan goals.3 REQUIRED FINDINGS In addition to making a recommendation based on a determination of whether the school has met the SUNY Trustees’ specific renewal criteria, the Institute makes the following findings required by the Act: 1: 2: 3: 3. SUNY Renewal Policies (p. 13). the school, as described in the Application for Charter Renewal, meets the requirements of the Act and all other applicable laws, rules, and regulations; the education corporation can demonstrate the ability to operate the school in an educationally and fiscally sound manner in the next charter term; and, given the programs it will offer, its structure and its purpose, approving the school to operate for another five years is likely to improve student learning and achievement and materially further the purposes of the Act.4 Enrollment and retention targets apply to all charter schools approved pursuant to any of the Institute’s Request for Proposal (“RFP”) processes (August 2010-present) and charter schools that applied for renewal after January 1, 2011. In 2015, the SUNY Trustees granted UFT Charter School (“UFT Charter”) a short-term renewal and gave targets at that time. Per the amendments to the Act in 2010, charter schools are required to make good faith efforts to meet enrollment and retention targets for students with disabilities, English language learners (“ELLs”), and students who are eligible applicants for the federal Free and Reduced Price Lunch (“FRPL”) program. 4. See New York Education Law § 2852(2). 4 UFT Charter RR RENEWAL RECOMMENDATION SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 As required by Education Law § 2851(4)(e), a school must include in its renewal application information regarding the efforts it will put in place to meet or exceed SUNY’s enrollment and retention targets for students with disabilities, ELLs, and FRPL eligible students. SUNY and the New York State Board of Regents (the “Board of Regents”) finalized the methodology for setting targets in October 2012. UFT Charter makes good faith efforts to meet its enrollment and retention targets. Since losing its elementary and middle school levels, the school has struggled to meet its enrollment targets. This year, the board of trustees (the “board”) has tasked the United Federation of Teachers Educational Foundation, Inc. (the “UFT Foundation” or the “network”) and the school leader to create a task force to make progress toward meeting the enrollment targets. The school plans to utilize the following strategies: • informing local families, religious institutions, businesses, recreation centers, and middle schools in the local school district through informational fliers, open houses, and social media advertisements; • hosting information sessions at recreation centers in the community; • setting a lottery preference for students with disabilities and ELLs; • conducting presentations at local middle schools, including a session for interested 8th graders to participate in high school for a day; • hosting community events, such as blood drives, health clinics, sporting events, and community service opportunities, to gain visibility within the community; and, • creating a special committee comprised of board members, leaders, network representatives, and teachers to establish strategic and targeted outreach efforts. For additional information on the school’s enrollment and retention target progress, see Appendix A. CONSIDERATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT COMMENTS In accordance with the Act, the Institute notified the district in which the charter school is located regarding the school’s Application for Charter Renewal. The full text of any written comments received from the district appears in Appendix C, which also includes a summary of any public comments. As of the date of this report, the Institute has received no district comments in response to the renewal application. A summary of public comments submitted to the Institute appears in Appendix C. 5 UFT Charter SB ES SCHOOL BACKGROUND SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SCHOOL BACKGROUND AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY UFT CHARTER SCHOOL BACKGROUND The SUNY Trustees approved UFT Charter’s original charter on July 15, 2005. It opened its doors in the fall of 2005 initially serving 138 students in Kindergarten and 1st grade. At the end of the last charter term UFT Charter served Kindergarten – 12th grade. The SUNY Trustees granted the school two short-term renewals in 2010 and 2013. Upon its application for subsequent renewal during the 2014-15 school year, the SUNY Trustees approved a shortterm three year renewal permitting the school to continue to instruct in 9th – 12th grade. The elementary and middle school programs ceased at the end of the 2014-15 school year. UFT Charter is currently authorized to serve 320 students in 9th – 12th grade. It will serve the same number of students in the same grades in its next charter term. The current charter term expires on July 31, 2018. A full five year renewal will allow the school to operate through July 31, 2023. The school is co-located in a New York City Department of Education (“NYCDOE”) building at 800 Van Siclen Avenue, Brooklyn in Community School District (“CSD”) 19. The building also houses Van Siclen Community Middle School, a district school serving students in 6th – 8th grade, and Achievement First Linden Charter School, a SUNY authorized charter school serving students in Kindergarten – 4th grade. The mission of UFT Charter is: The UFT Charter School will give all students the opportunity to achieve academic and personal excellence. We will graduate students who are fully prepared for a demanding college education and a satisfying career. We will prepare students for meaningful lives as full democratic citizens in a free society. As part of a financial support agreement, the UFT Foundation provides UFT Charter with substantial support for the school’s program. This includes the following elements: financial planning and management; procurement; human resources; grant administration; maintenance and technology services; website and email support; fund and relationship development; and, financial support. The education corporation board of trustees (the “board”) works with the UFT Foundation to review and refine these services as part of its ongoing relationship. The UFT Foundation appointed a new board liaison and expanded the role to include support with student recruitment and academic coaching. 6 UFT Charter SB ES SCHOOL BACKGROUND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY UFT Charter is an academic success, as it has consistently met its graduation goal throughout the current charter term. The school demonstrates success in the following ways: 5. When the Institute evaluates • Met its graduation goal, having exceeded the absolute and comparative targets in its Accountability Plan during the past three years. For 2016-17, the school increased its graduation rate by four points to 83%. • The school successfully identifies students at risk of academic failure early on in their high school career, and has clear systems in place to ensure they make progress toward graduation. As evidenced by the school’s strong comparative graduation data, students at the school are more likely to graduate from UFT Charter than the district options. • The school outperformed the district’s graduation rate⁵ by 11 percentage points in 2015-16, the most recent year for which comparative data is available. While district comparison data for 2016-17 is not yet available, if the district’s trend continues then UFT Charter will continue to outperform the district in graduation. • Over the current charter term, UFT Charter has consistently demonstrated strong improvements within its English language arts (“ELA”) department. Observations demonstrate high quality teaching, especially through the use of student-driven discussions. In regard to the achievement data, the school has shown clear improvement in the percentage of students performing at the college and career readiness standard in ELA, impressively increasing from 39% to 62% in the most recent year. • Notably, the school improved its performance against all measures under its mathematics goal in the final year of the Accountability Period. UFT Charter posted an eight point increase in the percentage of its Accountability Cohort students achieving the college and career readiness standard and improved its Accountability Performance Level (“APL”) by 17 points. Though the school did not meet the Accountability Plan goal for mathematics, school leaders are aware of the school’s shortcomings in this department and see mathematics instruction as a high priority area for improvement. • UFT Charter exceeded the target of 75% of students passing a Regents science exam with at least 80% of its Accountability Cohort students passing during every year of its charter term. The school also exceeded the performance of the district in from 2014-15 to 201617. • Although the school has had challenges enrolling students with disabilities and ELLs, which the school is addressing through a strategic plan with the UFT Foundation, the school does a commendable job retaining these subgroups of students, with 100% of ELLs and students with disabilities persisting from 2015-16 to 2016-17. the school’s graduation rate, it uses the 4th year Cohort as of August. Similarly, the Institute uses the district’s 4th year Cohort as of August as a comparison. 7 UFT Charter SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 In the final year of its charter term, UFT Charter leaders are making clear improvements to the school’s academic program. Leaders are thoughtful about the program and focus particular attention on increasing persistently low mathematics performance that mitigates higher rates of the school meeting its college and career readiness targets. With a strong emphasis on building relationships and establishing a culture of trust among staff after several leadership changes, the school’s current leaders are beginning to demonstrate strong instructional leadership traits that include improving the educational program while adhering to the teachers’ contract. Teachers and leaders agree that this current school year has started off positively in regard to the adult culture and staff morale, and leaders provide regular feedback to improve teaching and learning. Instructional leaders meet bi-weekly with teachers to analyze data, tighten systems for data review and response, and reflect upon strategies that will improve student achievement. Based on the Institute’s review of the school’s performance as posted over the charter term; a review of the Application for Charter Renewal submitted by the school; a review of academic, organizational, governance, and financial documentation; and a renewal visit to the school, the Institute finds that the school meets the required criteria for charter renewal. The Institute recommends that the SUNY Trustees grant UFT Charter a Subsequent Full-Term Renewal. NOTEWORTHY UFT Charter’s guidance department is instrumental in providing opportunities for students to participate in community service. In the past, the school participated in building homes as part of New York City’s relief efforts for homes affected by Superstorm Sandy. Students participate in annual events for charitable causes, such as walks for breast cancer awareness and Alzheimer’s disease. 8 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 ? PERFORMANCE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IS THE SCHOOL AN ACADEMIC SUCCESS? Having met or come close to meeting all key academic Accountability Plan goals in a subsequent charter term, UFT Charter is an academic success. UFT Charter’s academic program has shown some strong improvements over the charter term that led to improved academic achievement. At the beginning of the Accountability Period,6 the school developed and adopted an Accountability Plan that set academic goals in six required areas of ELA, mathematics, science, social studies, high school graduation, and college preparation. For each goal in the Accountability Plan, specific outcome measures define the level of performance necessary to meet that goal. The Institute examines outcomes on a set of required Accountability Plan measures to determine goal attainment. Because the Act requires charters be held “accountable for meeting measurable student achievement results”7 and states the educational programs at a charter school must “meet or exceed the student performance standards adopted by the Board of Regents”8 for other public schools, SUNY’s required accountability measures rest on performance as measured by state wide and nationally normed assessments, high school graduation, and college acceptance rates. Historically, SUNY’s required measures include measures that present schools’: 6. Because the SUNY Trustees make a renewal decision before student achievement results for the final year of a charter term become available, the ABSOLUTE PERFORMANCE, I.E., WHAT PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS SCORE AT A CERTAIN PROFICIENCY ON STATE EXAMS? COMPARATIVE PERFORMANCE, I.E., HOW DID THE SCHOOL DO AS COMPARED TO SCHOOLS IN THE DISTRICT AND SCHOOLS THAT SERVE SIMILAR POPULATIONS OF ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS? GROWTH PERFORMANCE, I.E., HOW MUCH DID THE SCHOOL GROW STUDENT PERFORMANCE AS COMPARED TO THE GROWTH OF SIMILARLY SITUATED STUDENTS? Accountability Period ends with the school year prior to the final year of the charter term. For a school in a subsequent charter Every SUNY authorized charter school has the opportunity to propose additional measures of success when crafting its Accountability Plan. UFT Charter did not propose or include any additional measures of success in the Accountability Plan it adopted. term, the Accountability Period covers the first four years the school provides instruction to students. In this renewal report, the Institute uses “charter term” and “Accountability Period” Accountability Plans for schools enrolling students in high school grades rely on analyzing the performance of the school’s annual Accountability Cohorts for measures of academic success and the school’s annual Total Cohort for Graduation (“Total Cohort” or “Graduation Cohort”) for measures under high school graduation and college preparation goals. Additionally, the Institute uses the Total Cohort’s Regents performance as a basis for comparison with the interchangeably. 7. Education Law § 2850(2)(f). 8. Education Law § 2854(1)(d). 9 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 district’s reported performance. The state’s Accountability Cohort consists specifically of students who are in their fourth year of high school after the 9th grade. For example, the 2013 state Accountability Cohort consists of students who entered the 9th grade in the 2013-14 school year, were enrolled in the school on the state’s annual enrollment-determination day (BEDS day) in the 2016-17 school year, and either remained in the school for the rest of the year or left for an acceptable reason. Students are included in the Total Cohort for Graduation also based on the year they first enter the 9th grade. Students enrolled for at least one day in the school after entering the 9th grade are part of the school’s Graduation Cohort.9 The Institute analyzes every measure included in the school’s Accountability Plan to determine its level of academic success, including the extent to which the school has established and maintained a record of high performance, and established progress toward meeting its academic Accountability Plan goals throughout the charter term. The analysis of high school academic performance focuses primarily on absolute and comparative measures associated with the school’s graduation and (for college preparatory programs) college preparation goals. The Institute identifies the required measures (absolute proficiency, absolute Annual Measurable Objective (“AMO”) attainment, comparison to local district, and high school graduation and college going rates) in the Performance Summaries appearing in Appendix B. 9. For further information about cohort eligibility, please refer to NYSED’s 2017-18 Student Information Repository Systems (“SIRS”) Manual at www.p12. nysed.gov/irs/sirs/. 10 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 1A HAS THE SCHOOL MET OR COME CLOSE TO MEETING ITS ACADEMIC ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN GOALS? UFT Charter is an academic success, as the school is successful in meeting its Accountability Plan goals for science, No Child Left Behind (“NCLB”), and graduation, having exceeded its absolute and comparative targets for graduation each year of the current charter term. While the school did not meet its mathematics or college preparation goals, the school met its key Accountability Plan goal in ELA and came close to meeting its social studies goal by the end of the term. UFT Charter met its ELA Accountability Plan goal in 2016-17, after coming close to meeting it in 2014-15 and not meeting it in 2015-16. In 2014-15, 51% of the school’s Accountability Cohort met the state’s college and career readiness standard, currently defined as scoring at or above 75 on the Regents Comprehensive English Exam or scoring at or above performance level 4 on the Regents Exam in English Language Arts (Common Core), which is at or above a score of 79. The majority of students in UFT Charter’s 2013 Accountability Cohort took the Regents Exam in English Language Arts (Common Core). Also in 2014-15, the school’s APL fell below the state’s AMO but surpassed the district’s by 20 points. In 2015-16, UFT Charter’s APL fell narrowly under the district in AMO attainment and did not meet the state target. The school did not meet its target of 65% of students meeting the college and career readiness standard, with 39% of the Accountability Cohort meeting or exceeding the standard. The school posted commendable improvement in ELA achievement during 2016-17, when 62% of the 2013 Accountability Cohort students met or exceeded the state’s college and career readiness standard, coming close to the target of 65%. Additionally, the school narrowed the gap between its APL and the state’s AMO to 27 points below the state in 2016-17, a 25 point improvement from the previous year. Further, after not exceeding the district’s performance in 2015-16, the school posted an APL 22 points above the district in 2016-17. UFT Charter did not meet its mathematics Accountability Plan goal over the charter term. Although the school struggles to meet the goal as measured by the absolute and comparative proportions of students meeting the state’s college and career readiness standard, its mathematics performance supports its students in meeting the requirements for high school graduation. From 2014-15 through 2016-17, the school’s percentage of students meeting the college and career readiness standard in mathematics (defined as scoring at least 80 11 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 on the Regents Integrated Algebra exam or meeting Common Core expectations on the Regents Algebra I (Common Core) exam) fell below the target of 65%. While the school outperformed the district in 2014-15, UFT Charter’s mathematics APL fell below the state’s AMO over the term and below the district’s performance during 2015-16. Additionally, after not exceeding the district’s performance in 2015-16, the school posted an APL 12 points above the district in 2016-17. UFT Charter met its science goal during every year of its charter term exceeding the target of 75% passing a Regents science exam. During those years, at least 80% of the Accountability Cohort students passed a Regents science exam by the completion of their fourth year in the cohort. Additionally, the school’s Total Cohort exceeded the performance of the district during each year of its current charter term. UFT Charter met or came close to meeting its social studies goal over the charter term. During 2014-15, 78% of the schools’ Accountability Cohort students passed the U.S. History Regents exam by the end of their fourth year. The same year, 75% of those students passed the Global History Regents. During 2015-16 and 2016-17, UFT Charter’s Accountability Cohorts exceed the absolute target for passing the U.S. History exam but fell short of the target for the Global History exam. Over all years of the school’s Accountability Period, the Total Cohorts posted passing rates that exceeded the district on both exams. The school met its NCLB goal, remaining in good standing under the state’s accountability system. UFT Charter met its high school graduation goal each year of the charter term. During 2014-15, the school exceeded its absolute target for four-year graduation by 11 percentage points, with 86% of its 2011 Graduation Cohort graduating within four years. The school also outperformed the district by 23 percentage points. During 2015-16, the school continued to exceed its absolute and comparative targets with 79% of its 2012 Cohort graduating. UFT Charter exceeded the district by 10 percentage points. During 2016-17, the school met its graduation goal with 83% of the school’s 2013 Graduation Cohort graduating. District comparison data for 2016-17 are not yet available. 12 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 UFT Charter came close to meeting its college preparation goal over its Accountability Period. During 2014-15 and 2015-16, 68% and 69%, respectively, of the school’s graduates matriculated into a two-year or four-year college during the fall after graduation, falling slightly below the target of 75%. During 2016-17, 67% of the school’s graduates matriculated into college with 12 additional graduates confirming planned post-secondary enrollment for the spring semester of 2018. The school met its comparative target of obtaining more Advanced Regents diplomas than the district in 2014-15 with 12.9% of students obtaining a Regents diploma with advanced designation, outperforming the district by 8.7%. During 2015-16, the school did not meet its comparative measure, falling below the district by 1.9%. District comparison data are not yet available for 2016-17. Leaders acknowledge the low level of attainment for advanced Regents diplomas and so are working to increase the rigor of mathematics classes and improve Regents exam passing tracking systems to better push students to take and pass the required Regents exams to obtain an advanced Regents diploma. Notwithstanding this low level of attainment of advanced Regents diplomas, which should be a central focus for improvement in any future charter term, the school has demonstrated an upward trend in students graduating and achieving the college and career readiness standard. 13 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 PERFORMANCE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE UFT Charter UFT School CHARTER SCHOOL Brooklyn CSD 19 FOUR YEAR GRADUATION RATE 100 Comparative Measure: Graduation Rate. Each year, the percentage of the school's students graduating after completion of their fourth year will exceed that of the District. Target: 75 District School 2015 62.9 86.1 2016 68.8 79.5 83.3 2017 50 2015 2016 2017 ADVANCED REGENTS DIPLOMA ATTAINMENT College Preparation Measure: Advanced Regents Diploma. Each year, the percentage of students graduating with an Advanced Regents diploma will exceed that of the district. 20 District Adv Diploma School Adv Diploma 2015 4.2 12.9 2016 3.6 1.7 2017 1.3 0 2015 2016 2017 COLLEGE MATRICULATION 100 College Attainment Measure: Matriculation into College. Each year, 75 percent of graduating students will enroll in a college or university. Target: 75% 50 2015 2016 2017 14 UFT Charter Grad N Matriculation % 2015 31 67.7 2016 58 69.0 2017 75 66.7 SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE UFT School CHARTER SCHOOL UFT Charter Brooklyn CSD 19 ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS Comparative and Absolute Measure: District Comparison. Each year, the school's ELA Accountability Performance Level will exceed the district's Performance Index and the state's AMO. AMO District PI School APL 2015 170 123 143 2016 174 132 126 2017 178 129 151 2015 154 94 117 2016 159 101 89 2017 165 94 106 MATHEMATICS Comparative and Absolute Measure: District Comparison. Each year, the school's math Aaccountability Performance Level will exceed the district's Performance Index and the state's AMO. 2015 2016 2017 SPECIAL POPULATIONS PERFORMANCE 2015 2016 2017 ELL Enrollment 20 5 13 Tested on NYSESLAT Exam 19 5 13 31.6 s 0.0 School Percent 'Commanding' or Making Progress on NYSESLAT The academic outcome data about the performance of students receiving special education services and ELLs above is not tied to separate goals in the school's formal Accountability Plan. The NYSESLAT, the New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test, is a standardized state exam. "Making Progress" is defined as moving up at least one level of proficiency. Student scores fall into five categories/proficiency levels: Entering; Emerging; Transitioning; Expanding; and, Commanding. In order to comply with Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act regulations on reporting education outcome data, the Institute does not report assessment results for groups containing five or fewer students and indicates this with an "s." 15 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 1B DOES THE SCHOOL HAVE AN ASSESSMENT SYSTEM THAT IMPROVES INSTRUCTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS AND STUDENT LEARNING? UFT Charter implements an assessment system that improves instructional effectiveness and student learning. Leaders establish time in teachers’ schedules every two weeks to improve the school’s data analysis procedures that allow teachers to determine re-teaching strategies to improve student learning. With these efforts in place, teachers are actively utilizing data to inform daily instructional practices. • The school administers a range of assessments including: the New York State Regents; end-of-semester exams; unit assessments; bi-weekly assessments; and, daily assessments, such as exit tickets, when appropriate. The school initiated the bi-weekly assessments this year to identify and address gaps in learning as soon as possible. Teachers create the assessments using previous Regents exam questions from an online bank of questions and review the assessments as a content team to ensure they meet the expectations of the state performance standards. • UFT Charter has valid and reliable processes for scoring and analyzing assessments. Teachers collaboratively score and norm grading practices for the Regents assessments and are familiar with the state scoring procedures and the rubrics utilized to score test items. Teachers score the bi-weekly assessments individually, review sample student work to norm scoring practices, and then compare scores when another teacher has assessments for the same course. • The school makes assessment data accessible to teachers, leaders, and board members. Leaders provided teachers with high level Regents exams data at the end of last school year. Instructional leaders present Regents exam, SAT, and PSAT data to the board. While teachers are aware of overall Regents scores for students, at the time of the renewal visit, leaders had not yet provided more detailed item analyses of the June 2017 or August 2017 Regents exams to teachers. Through the use of a shared online server, leaders have access to teachers’ assessment results and can use this information to inform observations and support for teachers. • Teachers are beginning to use assessment results to meet students’ needs by analyzing assessment results more frequently and adjusting instruction. For this school year, UFT Charter has a new approach for analyzing data from bi-weekly assessments. Leaders establish a consistent meeting time once every two weeks for teachers to come together to analyze data and determine re-teaching action plans. Teachers create a data reflection sheet pinpointing standards and skills to re-teach, as well as identifying students that 16 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 need additional support with a concept or skill. Leaders have established an action that will allow them to hold teachers accountable for improvements to instruction. Leaders plan to have teachers submit action plans with detailed notes about when instruction will occur so that leaders can build time into their observation schedule to follow up on the action plans and provide teachers with feedback. With a focus on improving the school’s analysis of data and translating that analysis into strong instruction in classrooms, leaders provide professional development on how to group students based on performance, identify students that may need special interventions, and provide students individualized assistance during class. Additionally, leaders use data from midterm assessments from Algebra I and Living Environment courses to identify students who are on track to pass the Regents for the respective courses after one year or who need additional support to pass in two years. SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 1C 10. For more information, please visit www.danielsongroup.org/ • UFT Charter leaders use assessment results to evaluate teacher effectiveness. Through the Danielson framework,10 leaders use teachers’ Regents exam results and observation ratings from the previous year to produce an overall effectiveness rating at the beginning of each school year. Leaders use assessment results to determine teacher improvement plans and focus coaching and support efforts for individual teachers. • The school regularly communicates to parents and guardians about their students’ academic progress. The school provides six report cards a year as well as four conference sessions for families. The school has a dedicated time each week in teachers’ schedules for parent engagement that teachers use to reach out to families about student progress, which leaders track and review throughout the year. Families can access their children’s grades via the school’s online learning management system. Guidance counselors send letters to families of students whose promotion and/or graduation is in doubt. DOES THE SCHOOL’S CURRICULUM SUPPORT TEACHERS IN THEIR INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING? UFT Charter’s curriculum supports teachers in their instructional planning. Leaders provide teachers with semester-long pacing guides and scope and sequence documents that support teachers in planning units and lessons. • The school has a curriculum framework that provides a fixed, underlying structure aligned to state standards. The school’s curriculum is based on content from the Pearson online framework. Leaders use the Understanding by Design (“UBD”)11 framework, which is a curriculum planning process starting with the learning goals and planning backwards to ensure students are successful. In addition to the Pearson online framework, teachers framework/. 11. For more information, please visit www.authenticeducation. org/. 17 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 use resources from Glencoe and Pearson textbooks to assist in lesson planning. In designing the pacing guides, leaders ensure that the curriculum addresses the demands of state performance standards by comparing the guides to the level of questioning from the Regents exams. • UFT Charter has supporting tools that provide a bridge between the curriculum framework and lesson plans. Leaders provide teachers with pacing guides that sequence out a course over each semester, and teachers know what to teach and when to teach it based on these documents. Additionally, leaders provide teachers with unit and lesson plan templates that align with the UBD backwards planning framework. Leaders review teachers’ unit plans and provide feedback to ensure standard alignment. However, due to contractual obligations, leaders are only able to review and provide feedback on lesson plans that teachers voluntarily submit. Teachers who teach the same course collaborate on an ad hoc basis to complete lesson plans. • UFT Charter is establishing a process for reviewing its curriculum. The principal and two assistant principals each lead content department meetings weekly. During the 2016-17 school year, leaders recognized a need to provide teachers with more structure regarding the school’s curriculum. Leaders then created pacing guides for each content area and spent time during summer professional learning time with teachers to discuss expectations for curriculum development. Leaders utilize weekly meetings with teachers to debrief the effectiveness of the curriculum and incorporate any changes into future unit and lesson plans. • Teachers plan purposeful and focused lessons using UBD backwards planning to align lesson plans to the pacing guides. Leaders report the collective bargaining agreement limits lesson plan collection to direct requests rather than the systematic collection of daily lesson plans. These limitations thwart leaders’ opportunities to provide direct, specific, and consistent feedback designed to improve instructional planning and delivery. The result is inconsistent quality in lesson planning and delivery across the school. ELA and social studies teachers plan purposeful and focused lessons that include detailed higher order thinking questions, opportunities for students to discuss and debate topics, and strategic differentiation strategies. In mathematics, teachers plan lessons that highlight activities rather than including opportunities for students to discuss and defend their answers or relate the mathematics concepts to real world situations. Based on this distinction, the assistant principal responsible for the mathematics department is working closely with teachers to develop their capacity to plan stronger lessons. 18 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 1D Instruction across classrooms varies at UFT Charter. Some teachers set a high instructional bar while others fail to present rigorous content in a coherent and compelling manner. As shown in the chart that follows Institute team members conducted 29 classroom observations following a defined protocol used in all renewal visits. NUMBER OF CLASSROOM OBSERVATIONS G R A D E CONTENT AREA SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK IS HIGH QUALITY INSTRUCTION EVIDENT THROUGHOUT THE SCHOOL? 9 10 11 12 Total ELA 4 4 4 1 13 Math 2 3 2 1 8 Science 2 1 Soc Stu 1 1 3 5 Total 9 8 5 29 7 3 • A majority of the lessons observed had clear objectives and were aligned to the school’s curriculum (20 of 29 lessons observed). Leaders identify crafting strong objectives as the main priority area for the beginning of the school year, and the Institute’s renewal observations demonstrate an improvement with this indicator from previous evaluation visits. At the opening of each lesson, teachers discuss the learning objective with students. Additionally, teachers post objectives on the board and have students record the objective in notebooks. Lesson activities and questions align to the posted objective. • About half of teachers regularly and effectively use techniques to check for student understanding (14 of 29 lessons observed). During direct instruction, teachers often ask procedural questions to gauge understanding. In some observations, teachers circulated through the class during independent work times checking in with students, correcting their work and cajoling them to work harder. In other classrooms, teachers remained at the front of the room and failed to monitor student understanding or engagement during lessons. 19 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 1E • At the behest of instructional leaders, many teachers focus on planning cogent lessons containing aligned objectives and activities. While leaders recognize it as a priority for this year, teachers are not yet fully including opportunities to challenge students with questions and activities that develop higher-order thinking skills (8 of 29 lessons observed). While the school has focused on aligned objectives and activities, teachers miss opportunities to engage students in deep and meaningful thinking about lesson content, especially in mathematics lessons. In classrooms that challenge students’ thinking skills, teachers utilize a student-led Socratic seminar in which the teacher facilitates a meaningful discussion about a text or historical event. In these instances, students challenge one another to explain and defend responses, and other students observe behaviors and provide feedback to students that participate in the discussion. Some teachers utilize well-planned higher-order thinking questions and use multiple modalities for learning. For example, one teacher facilitated a rich discussion of the Civil War through both texts and movies. • Most teachers maintain a classroom environment with a focus on academic achievement (19 of 29 lessons observed). Teachers deliver lessons that allow students to stay on task and engaged in the activities. Teachers demonstrate strong pacing through the use of timers and clear time expectations for students. In a few classrooms, teachers do not demonstrate urgency. For example, in one classroom, the teacher finished the lesson 13 minutes early with no clear directions or activities for students to complete once the lesson was complete. In another classroom, students texted during instruction and were not directed to put away their phones, allowing for significant inattentiveness. DOES THE SCHOOL HAVE STRONG INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP? UFT Charter continues to develop and sustain a strong instructional leadership team. Over the course of the school’s existence, the high school has faced a multitude of leadership turnover, with five leaders in the period of six years. The current leadership team is beginning its second year as a consistent team, and the current principal has been in place since the beginning of this charter term and was previously a teacher at the school. Leaders prioritize developing a strong sense of collaboration across the school that is beginning to build a strong level of trust amongst the teaching staff. • UFT Charter’s leadership team sets clear, schoolwide expectations for teachers based on specific priorities for the school that leaders developed over the summer. Leaders identify a need to improve the school’s data analysis process, curricular planning, and 20 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 supports for at-risk students. Leaders consistently identify specific steps for the school’s processes for data analysis and curricular planning; however, teachers do not consistently identify the same expectations for the school’s priorities. • UFT Charter’s instructional leadership supports the development of the teaching staff. Leaders have spent time over the charter term building strong and trusting relationships with teachers that allow the leaders to create systems for supporting teachers’ development, with extra time and energy made with the mathematics department to address low performance. The school’s principal and two assistant principals supervise specific content area departments and lead those department’s weekly meetings. • Instructional leaders provide sustained coaching and supervision to teachers. In addition to the school’s evaluation process, leaders conduct consistent non-evaluative observations once a week to provide teachers with feedback that improves teachers’ instructional effectiveness. Leaders facilitate department meetings for teachers to review data and plan units and lessons. Despite these supports in place, some teachers do not consistently implement feedback that leaders provide, which limits leaders’ ability to affect change at a rapid pace of improvement across all classrooms. • Instructional leaders provide opportunities and guidance for teachers to plan curriculum and instruction within and across grade levels and content areas. Over the summer, the principal and assistant principals created pacing guides and provided teachers with time to establish unit plans for the first semester. During weekly department meetings, teachers share unit and lesson plans with one another for feedback. During weekly grade level meetings, teachers select from a menu of topics including analyzing student work and discussing individual students. Leaders attend meetings to work with teachers on the selected topic. Additionally, leaders provide a two hour block twice a month for teachers to meet as a school and in departments to analyze student data. • UFT Charter instructional leaders implement a comprehensive professional development program that develops the competencies and skills of all teachers. Based on the school’s priorities, leaders map out the professional development topics for the year including a cycle of data, pedagogy, special populations, and teacher choice time. Before the start of the school year, leaders provide teachers with a summer institute to prepare for the upcoming school year. This year, leaders focused primarily on curriculum development. • The school’s professional development activities connect with classroom practice. Before each professional development session, leaders meet to discuss observations of classrooms and unit plans to determine a specific agenda and objective for the upcoming session. For example, during the Institute’s renewal visit, leaders provided training for teachers on how to use accommodations and modifications for at-risk students based on leaders’ observations of differentiation. 21 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 • SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 1F UFT Charter instructional leaders regularly conduct teacher evaluations with clear criteria from the Danielson framework that accurately identify teachers’ strengths and weaknesses. Leaders provide a set number of informal or formal observations based on each teacher’s tenure status. Leaders determine an overall rating for each teacher based on observations, professional attributes, and student performance on the Regents assessments. Through the evaluation process, instructional leaders hold teachers accountable for quality instruction and student achievement. DOES THE SCHOOL MEET THE EDUCATIONAL NEEDS OF AT-RISK STUDENTS? UFT Charter meets the educational needs of students with disabilities and ELLs. The school has clear supports to identify students who are at risk of not graduating in four years. • UFT Charter has clear procedures for identifying students with disabilities, ELLs, and students at risk of failure for graduation. The school’s special education coordinator monitors the clear processes for referring students for special education evaluation. In order to identify ELLs, the school administers the New York State Identification Test for English Language Learners (“NYSITELL”), as necessary. While the school still relies on teachers’ self-initiated referrals based on informal information to identify students struggling academically, instructional leaders have begun implementing some systematic ways to identify these students. During weekly data meetings, teachers use data analysis templates to identify students who may need targeted academic interventions. The school has not yet codified the process to ensure that the process is consistently effective. For students at risk of not graduating, the guidance counselor team closely monitors students’ Regents exam passing rates and credit accumulation to identify students that need additional counseling services to get on track for graduation. • UFT Charter has at-risk program staff members and programs to address the needs of ELLs and students with disabilities, and counselors work closely to support students struggling academically. After the school’s ELL teacher left at the end of 2016-17, a veteran teacher served as the ELL teacher until the school filled the vacancy in October 2017. The new ELL teacher has English to Speakers of Other Languages (“ESOL”) certification and supports ELLs through push-in and pull-out services. With the teacher 22 UFT Charter Ac Pf ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 new to the school at the time of the renewal visit, leaders had not yet identified if the supports provided by the ELL teacher are effective. The special education coordinator and one additional special education teacher deliver special education teacher support services (“SETSS”) to students with disabilities through pull-out and push-in lessons. The school lacks urgency in delivering academic interventions for struggling students. For example, at the time of the renewal visit, the school had yet to begin delivering its afterschool tutoring program. Teachers make adjustments to their lessons to accommodate the needs of struggling students, and school counselors review students’ progress toward graduation and provide resources to support students who are not on track to graduate. Leaders recognize a need to develop a system to ensure consistent delivery of targeted interventions. • The school’s at-risk program staff monitor the progress of ELLs and students with disabilities, disseminating information to general education teachers as needed. The ELL teacher uses New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (“NYSESLAT”) and interim assessment data to monitor and adjust interventions for ELLs. The special education coordinator and SETSS teacher meet quarterly to surface areas of concern in students’ Individualized Education Programs (“IEPs”) goal attainment. General education teachers meet with at-risk program staff to check on student progress, though this is informal and inconsistent. The school does not yet disaggregate data by subgroup, and leaders recognize this as an improvement to the newly established data analysis process. • UFT Charter provides time for at-risk program staff and general education teachers to coordinate lesson planning. Teachers use their daily common planning period to collaborate with at-risk program staff by sharing lesson plans and modifying activities. However, the school lacks a sufficient structure to review lesson modifications. • Leaders identify a need to provide more professional development to equip teachers with skills to identify and support at-risk students. At the time of the visit, leaders conducted a professional development session for planning and identifying accommodations for students. Leaders plan to build in more strategic sessions like this throughout the school year and have designated one professional development session a month to working with special populations. 23 UFT Charter Og Pf ORGANIZATIONAL SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 ? SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 2A SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 2B PERFORMANCE ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE IS THE SCHOOL AN EFFECTIVE, VIABLE ORGANIZATION? UFT Charter is an effective and viable organization that remains faithful to its mission. The board is thoughtful in supporting the school’s leadership team and is aware of its role in supporting the school in meeting its Accountability Plan goals. IS THE SCHOOL FAITHFUL TO ITS MISSION AND DOES IT IMPLEMENT THE KEY DESIGN ELEMENTS INCLUDED IN ITS CHARTER? UFT Charter is faithful to its mission and key design elements. These can be found in the School Background section at the beginning of the report and Appendix A, respectively. UFT Charter values the voice of families in its educational program with two parent seats on the board of trustees and a strong family-school partnership program. Teachers utilize the CREST (Community, Respect, Excellence, Scholarship, Trustworthiness) core values throughout lessons and discussions with students. ARE PARENTS/GUARDIANS AND STUDENTS SATISFIED WITH THE SCHOOL? To report on parent satisfaction with the school’s program, the Institute used satisfaction survey data, information gathered from a focus group of parents representing a cross section of students, and data regarding persistence in enrollment. Parent Survey Data. The Institute compiled data from NYCDOE’s 2016-17 NYC School Survey. NYCDOE distributes the survey every year to compile data about school culture, instruction, and systems for improvement. Only 25% of families who received the survey responded. The majority of survey participants (92%) indicated strong satisfaction with the UFT Charter program. However, the survey data may not be useful in framing the results as representative of the school community given the low response rate of 25%. 24 UFT Charter Og Pf ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 Parent Focus Group. The Institute asks all schools facing renewal to convene a representative set of parents for a focus group discussion. A representative set includes parents of students in attendance at the school for multiple years, parents of students new to the school, parents of students receiving general education services, parents of students with special needs, and parents of ELLs. The six parents in attendance at the focus group indicated strong satisfaction with the school’s program. Parents appreciate the various methods, such as emails, phone calls, and online portals, that the school uses to communicate with families. Families appreciate the communication regarding college readiness including the focused efforts of guidance counselors to communicate students’ progress toward graduation requirements and options for college. Persistence in Enrollment. An additional indicator of parent satisfaction is persistence in enrollment. In 2016-17, 87% of UFT Charter students returned from the previous year. Student persistence data from previous years of the charter term is available in Appendix A. The Institute derived the statistical information on persistence in enrollment from its database. No comparative data from the NYCDOE or the New York State Education Department (“NYSED”) is available to the Institute to provide either district or state wide context. SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 2C DOES THE SCHOOL’S ORGANIZATION WORK EFFECTIVELY TO DELIVER THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM? The school is establishing systems and structures to improve the delivery of the educational program. Instructional leaders have made progress in codifying some support systems over the charter term. • UFT Charter has established an administrative structure that mostly supports teaching and learning. The instructional leadership team consists of the principal and two assistant principals. For operational support, the principal relies on office staff members with dedicated support from the network for actions like purchasing and compliance reporting. The principal has made progress toward building and codifying more systems to support the delivery of the academic program. As the school’s three leaders carry out a mix of instructional and operational responsibilities, they have limited capacity to focus on providing high quality instruction. 25 UFT Charter Og Pf ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 • Teachers at UFT Charter understand the roles and responsibilities of the school’s leadership team and support staff. Instructional leaders leverage personal relationships and transparency to create a school culture amenable to programmatic changes. While contractual work rules hamper the leaders’ ability to hold teachers accountable in some respects, they have been successful in strategically building buy-in for some of the school’s key pedagogical changes, such as weekly data cycles. • UFT Charter has a clear discipline system at the administrative level with staff devoted to supporting teachers in managing student behavior. The policy includes clear student consequences and a system for escalating management strategies. Teachers understand whom to contact for management support and can clearly articulate the referral process. Some teachers implement the system with fidelity, but others inconsistently manage behaviors or expectations across classrooms. • UFT Charter retained the majority of staff from last year and had high levels of teacher retention during the charter term. While the school’s teachers are appropriately certified, the quality of staff is mixed. To retain high quality teachers, leaders utilize praise and offer teacher leadership positions, when available. Due to contractual restrictions, leaders are limited in their ability to make staffing decisions, especially regarding lower quality teaching staff. • The school has struggled to maintain adequate student enrollment in the last two years of its charter term after losing its ability to retain students from its previously operated middle school. At the time of the renewal visit in October 2017, UFT Charter enrolled 265 students, well under its approved 320. In order to address the downward enrollment trend, leaders are establishing relationships with community liaisons in order to boost recruitment into the school’s 9th grade. The board is considering establishing a task force for recruitment and is working to revise the school’s authorized enrollment. • The school has informal procedures to monitor its progress towards meeting its enrollment and retention targets for special education students, ELLs, and students who qualify for FRPL. The principal works with the school secretary to track applicant data and monitors enrollment of the school’s at-risk population. Each of the instructional leaders has some responsibility for overseeing the school’s recruitment efforts including digital advertising and postings in key community newspapers. The school and board are aware of the district’s changing demographics and plan to adjust their recruitment efforts to target specific language minorities new to the community. • UFT Charter has an evaluation process for the school’s programs, with the three instructional leaders devoting substantial time to identifying and analyzing the school’s areas of need. This year, leaders implemented several structural changes aligned to clear pedagogical priorities. For example, they modified the schedule to allow time for teachers to analyze student data and codified a lesson planning template. 26 UFT Charter SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 2D DOES THE SCHOOL BOARD WORK EFFECTIVELY TO ACHIEVE THE SCHOOL’S ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN GOALS? UFT Charter’s board works to achieve the school’s Accountability Plan goals. Members are active in supporting the school’s leadership and provide tight oversight over the school’s financial position. • UFT Charter’s board members possess diverse skills including the areas of K-12 and higher education, human resources, labor relations, and finance. Although the board has some standing committees, the majority of decisions and discussions occur at the full board meetings. The board considers creating additional committees to target specific needs at the school, such as a student recruitment committee to work on developing strategies to recruit additional students to the school. • Board members request and receive information to inform oversight of the school’s program and finances. The finance committee has consistent communication with the school and the partnering UFT Foundation organization to ensure the school is in good financial standing. While members receive regular updates regarding academics and other school data, the principal plans to create a formal dashboard for this school year and shared a timeline for specific data reporting points for the board. As of the first board meeting, the principal reviewed the school’s Accountability Plan Progress Report with members, which led the board to establish clear priorities for the school year. • UFT Charter’s board establishes clear priorities for the instructional leaders. Based on a consultant’s feedback from the previous school year and the school’s performance data, the priorities include providing more support for teachers, especially in the mathematics department; providing instructional leaders with more support through a consultant; and, graduating more students that are college ready. For long-range plans, members recognize that the school is facing issues with low student enrollment. To address this, the board plans to increase recruitment efforts by engaging with the larger UFT Foundation organization to strategize. • The board is responsible for hiring and retaining the school’s principal. Members work closely with the principal to ensure that the educational program has sufficient resources to function effectively. At the end of last year, a consultant provided the board with an evaluation of the principal, and the board plans to conduct the evaluation using the same evaluation tool moving forward. Additionally, the school provides incentives like the official UFT Foundation contract and allows teachers’ development time to count toward continuing teacher and leader education (“CTLE”) requirements. 27 UFT Charter Og Pf ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 2E • While the board does not have a formal process for evaluating itself, members are seeking out training and other methods of support to build their knowledge of effective oversight of the school’s program. Currently, the board has regular conversations with the school leaders to hold them accountable for student achievement. • UFT Charter’s board effectively communicates with the school community. Members are active with the school and effective with inviting parents and teachers to board meetings. Members visit the school regularly and have an open door policy with leaders, teachers, and parents. DOES THE BOARD IMPLEMENT, MAINTAIN, AND ABIDE BY APPROPRIATE POLICIES, SYSTEMS, AND PROCESSES? The board materially and substantially implements, maintains, and abides by adequate and appropriate policies, systems, and processes to ensure the effective governance and oversight of the school. The board demonstrates a clear understanding of its role in holding the school leadership accountable for academic results while holding leadership and its partner organization accountable for fiscal soundness. In addition, the board leverages its partner organization as a resource for its staff. • The board has materially complied with the terms of its by-laws and code of ethics. • The board has avoided creating conflicts of interest, and where conflicts exist, the board has managed those conflicts in a transparent manner. • With the elimination of the elementary and middle school programs at the beginning of the current charter term, the board decreased in size which has worked well for governance. The board, while still using a committee structure, is cohesive, thoughtful, and acts with greater urgency on plans for continued improvement. • The board has worked with school leadership to ensure needed changes have had buy-in from staff members, allowing those changes to take place more effectively. • The partner organization provides a board liaison to ensure continued communication with the UFT Foundation, school leadership, and the board. This relationship works well in allowing the liaison to leverage the resources of the partner organization for the goals of the board and school leadership. • Throughout the current charter term, the board receives at its monthly meetings academic information aligned with the accountability goals, and the school leader has created a timeline and detailed measurable dashboard of information to implement this school year. 28 UFT Charter Og Pf ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 • SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 2F Even though the board has vast experience in education, there is a clear willingness to learn how to make the school accountable for academic results. Board members frequent the school and provide a hands-on perspective with leadership. HAS THE SCHOOL SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIED WITH APPLICABLE LAWS, RULES AND REGULATIONS, AND PROVISIONS OF ITS CHARTER? The education corporation substantially complied with applicable laws, rules and regulations, and provisions of its charter with certain, minor exceptions. • Complaints. The Institute received no formal complaints regarding the school. • Compliance. The Institute issued one violation letter in the first year of the charter term for failure to timely submit the school’s annual report. Documents were eventually submitted and the education corporation has been in compliance for the remainder of the charter term. • Conflicts of Interest. The education corporation’s code of ethics needs to be updated to comply with provisions of the New York General Municipal Law and to incorporate necessary conflicts of interest provisions. The Institute will ensure this is updated prior to the start of the next charter term. • FOIL. Minor deficiencies were noted in the areas of Freedom of Information Law compliance wherein the school had posted a FOIL guidance document as opposed to its FOIL policy. 29 UFT Charter Fc Pf FISCAL SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 ? FISCAL PERFORMANCE IS THE EDUCATION CORPORATION FISCALLY SOUND? Based on review of the fiscal evidence collected through the renewal review, UFT Charter is fiscally sound. The SUNY Fiscal Dashboard presents color-coded tables and charts indicating that the education corporation has demonstrated fiscal soundness over the majority of the charter term. 12 UFT Charter operates under a financial support agreement with the UFT Foundation, which includes financial planning and management, procurement, human resources, grant administration, service bureau, website and email technology, fund and relationship development, meeting space, and financial support. Annually the school reimburses the UFT Foundation approximately $300,000 to cover salaries, payroll taxes, and employee benefits for allocation of staff time spent working on the charter school operations. SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 3A DOES THE SCHOOL OPERATE PURSUANT TO A FISCAL PLAN IN WHICH IT CREATES REALISTIC BUDGETS THAT IT MONITORS AND ADJUSTS WHEN APPROPRIATE? UFT Charter maintains fiscal soundness through conservative budgeting practices, routine monitoring of revenues and expenses, and by making appropriate adjustments when necessary. • Under the financial support agreement with the UFT Foundation the school leadership and board finance committee develop the school budget in collaboration, and then present the draft budget to the full board for budget approval. The leadership team routinely analyzes budget variances, discusses material variances with the board, and revises the budget as necessary. • The next charter term projections reflect a flat enrollment of 320, which will maximize the available space within the facility. The next charter term provides for steady budgets with costs based on historical actuals. • The school is located in a NYCDOE co-located facility and not responsible for rent, utilities, janitorial, or security costs. 12. The U.S. Department of Education has established fiscal criteria for certain ratios or information with high – medium – low categories, represented in the table as green – gray – red. The categories generally correspond to levels of fiscal risk, but must be viewed in the context of each education corporation and the general type or category of school. 30 UFT Charter PERFORMANCE Fc Pf FISCAL SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 3B SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 3C DOES THE SCHOOL MAINTAIN APPROPRIATE INTERNAL CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES? The education corporation generally establishes and maintains appropriate fiscal policies, procedures, and internal controls throughout the charter term. • UFT Charter is in the process of updating the written policies to address key issues including internal controls, authorization levels, financial reporting, cash disbursements and receipts, payroll, bank reconciliations, petty cash, credit cards, fixed assets, grants/ contributions, capitalization and accounting, procurement, and investments. Once completed, the board will review and approve the revised manual. • The education corporation accurately records and appropriately documents transactions in accordance with established policies. • The leadership team and the board ensure that the school follows established policies and procedures. • The education corporation’s most recent audit report of internal control over financial reporting related to compliance and other matters disclosed no material weaknesses, or instances of non-compliance that were required to be reported. DOES THE SCHOOL COMPLY WITH FINANCIAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS? The education corporation complies with financial reporting requirements. • The education corporation’s annual financial statements are presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and the independent audits of those statements have received unqualified opinions. • The education corporation’s independent auditor meets with the board to discuss the annual financial statements and answer any questions about the process and results. • The Institute received the June 30, 2017 audited financial statements as required by the due date of November 1, 2017. Based on a review of the documents, the Institute finds that the school maintains positive fiscal health. 31 UFT Charter PERFORMANCE Fc Pf FISCAL SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 SUNY RENEWAL BENCHMARK 3D DOES THE SCHOOL MAINTAIN ADEQUATE FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO ENSURE STABLE OPERATIONS? The education corporation maintains adequate financial resources to ensure stable operations. • UFT Charter posts a fiscally strong composite score rating on the Institute’s financial dashboard indicating a consistent level of fiscal stability over the charter term. • The school relies primarily on recurring operating revenues and accumulated surpluses and is not dependent upon variable income for its financial needs. • UFT Charter prepares and monitors cash flow projections, maintains sufficient cash on hand to pay current bills and those that are due shortly, and retains a healthy 7.2 months of cash on hand. UFT Charter maintains a healthy balance sheet with net assets in excess of $2.4 million as reported in the June 30, 2017 audited financial statements. • In 2015-16 and into 2016-17 the school experienced operating losses because of the downsizing of the school and related staffing adjustments to accommodate the revised grade configuration. The accumulated surpluses were utilized to offset the deficits. • As required by the charter agreement, UFT Charter has established the separate bank account for the dissolution fund reserve of $75,000. 32 UFT Charter PERFORMANCE FP FUTURE PLANS SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 ? FUTURE PLANS IF THE SUNY TRUSTEES RENEW THE EDUCATION CORPORATION’S AUTHORITY TO OPERATE THE SCHOOL, ARE ITS PLANS FOR THE SCHOOL REASONABLE, FEASIBLE, AND ACHIEVABLE? UFT Charter is an academic success supported by an effective and viable organization. The education corporation is fiscally sound, and the board works strategically to support the school in meeting or coming close to meeting its Accountability Plan goals. As such, the plans for a future charter term are reasonable, feasible, and achievable. Plans for the School’s Structure. The education corporation has provided all of the key structural elements for a charter renewal and those elements are reasonable, feasible, and achievable. Plans for the Educational Program. UFT Charter plans to implement the same core elements that have led to the school meeting or coming close to meetings its Accountability Plan goals. Plans for Board Oversight & Governance. Board members express interest in continuing to serve UFT Charter in an additional charter term. The board may add more trustees in the future. Fiscal & Facility Plans. Based on evidence collected through the renewal review including a review of the five-year financial plan, UFT Charter presents a reasonable and appropriate fiscal plan for the next charter term including budgets that are feasible and achievable. CURRENT END OF NEXT CHARTER TERM Enrollment 320 320 Grade Span 9-12 9-12 Teaching Staff 21 20 Days of Instruction 180 180 33 UFT Charter FP FUTURE PLANS SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, NY 12246 The school intends to continue instruction for 9th – 12th grade in its existing NYCDOE colocated facility. The education corporation intends to continue its relationship with the UFT Foundation. The school’s Application for Charter Renewal contains all necessary elements as required by the Act. The proposed school calendar allots an appropriate amount of instructional time to meet or exceed instructional time requirements, and taken together with other academic and key design elements, should be sufficient to allow the school to meet its proposed Accountability Plan goals. 34 UFT Charter UFT Charter Ax APPENDICES PAGES Ax 1-12 A B C D SO PS DC FD SCHOOL OVERVIEW PERFORMANCE SUMMARIES DISTRICT COMMENTS FISCAL DASHBOARD PAGE Ax 1 PAGE Ax 6 PAGE Ax 8 PAGE Ax 9 SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX A: School Overview UFT CHARTER SCHOOL BOARD OF TRUSTEES CHAIR Evelyn DeJesus TRUSTEES Jackie Bennett TREASURER Burton Sacks Selena Vargas Shirnette Oliver SECRETARY Monique Davy SCHOOL LEADERS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PRINCIPAL Justin Davis (2015-16 to present) Michael Frank (2014-15) Shep Brown, Interim Principal (2013-14) Martin Weinstein (2011-12 to 2012-13) Shep Brown, Interim Principal (2010-11) Danny Wilcox (2009-10) Shelia Evans-Tranumn (2010-11 to 2014-15) SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS ACTUAL ENROLLMENT ACTUAL AS A PERCENTAGE OF CHARTERED ENROLLMENT PROPOSED GRADES ACTUAL GRADES 360 339 94% 9-12 9-12 2016-17 360 300 83% 9-12 9-12 2017-18 320 265 83% 9-12 9-12 SCHOOL YEAR 2015-16 CHARTERED ENROLLMENT Ax- 1 UFT Charter SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX A: School Overview The UFT Charter School CSD 19 Student Demographics: Special Populations English Language Learners Students with Disabilities 2014-15 2015-16 District 10.3 12.3 12.3 School 1.2 2.1 3.3 District 22.8 21.5 22.0 School 10.5 10.0 8.0 2015-16 2014-15 2016-17 2016-17 Student Demographics: Free/Reduced Lunch Economically Disadvantaged Eligible for Reduced Price Lunch Eligible for Free Lunch 2014-15 2015-16 District 85.3 79.3 82.4 School 89.4 83.1 84.7 District 3.5 3.6 4.2 School 8.3 5.8 7.3 District 81.7 79.7 81.3 School 81.0 78.7 82.3 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2016-17 Student Demographics: Race/Ethnicity 2014-15 District 7 49 42 1 School 1 79 18 0 District 4 59 34 1 School 2 78 20 0 2015-16 District 5 57 35 1 School 2 76 21 0 Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander Black or African American Hispanic White 2016-17 Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander Black or African American Hispanic White Ax- 2 UFT Charter SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX A: School Overview The UFT Charter School % of students suspended Brooklyn CSD 19 2015 2016 School ISS Rate School OSS Rate District OSS Rate 2015 0.0 6.3 4.5 2016 0.0 9.8 2017 0.0 10.0 2017 Although Community School District ("CSD") and school suspension rates are presented on the same graph, a direct comparison between the rates is not possible for three primary reasons. Available CSD data includes Kindergarten through high school grades and school data includes only the grades served by the school. CSD data are not available that show multiple instances of suspension of a single student, the overall number of suspensions, the duration of suspensions, or the time of year when the school administered the suspension. CSD data showing the difference between in-school and out-of-school suspensions are not available. The percentage rate shown here is calculated using the method employed by the New York City Department of Education ("NYCDOE"): the total the number of students receiving an in school or out of school suspension at any time during the school year is divided by the total enrollment, then multiplied by 100. Persistence in Enrollment: The percentage of students eligible to return from previous year who did return Expulsions: The number of students expelled from the school each year. 2015 2016 2017 0 0 0 95.4 2014-15 97.2 2015-16 87.3 2016-17 The UFT Charter School's Enrollment and Retention Status: 2016-17 District Target School 84.5 91.7 13.3 4.0 Students with disabilities 17.9 8.3 Economically disadvantaged 89.5 87.4 English language learners 89.8 100.0 Students with disabilities 87.8 100.0 Economically disadvantaged Enrollment Retention English language learners Ax- 3 UFT Charter SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX A: School Overview PARENT SATISFACTION: SURVEY RESULTS RESPONSE RATE EFFECTIVE SCHOOL STRONG FAMILY LEADERSHIP COMMUNITY TIES TRUST 25% 97% 94% 86% TIMELINE OF CHARTER SCHOOL RENEWAL SCHOOL VISIT HISTORY SCHOOL YEAR 2005-06 VISIT TYPE First Year DATE March 23, 2006 2006-07 Evaluation April 12, 2007 2007-08 Evaluation May 5-6, 2009 2009-10 Initial Renewal December 8-10, 2009 2010-11 Evaluation February 9-10, 2011 2011-12 Evaluation December 6-8, 2011 2012-13 Subsequent Renewal October 9-11, 2012 2015-16 Evaluation April 5-6, 2016 2016-17 Evaluation May 2-3, 2017 2017-18 Subsequent Renewal October 16-17, 2017 CONDUCT OF THE RENEWAL VISIT DATE(S) OF VISIT October 16-17, 2017 EVALUATION TEAM MEMBERS TITLE Susie Miller Carello Executive Director Andrew Kile Director of School Evaluation Sinnjinn Bucknell Senior Performance and Systems Analyst Barbara Acenowr Managing Director for Operations and Finance Carrie Gee General Counsel Jenn David-Lang External Consultant Ax- 4 UFT Charter SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX A: School Overview KEY DESIGN ELEMENTS: ELEMENT CREST (Community, Respect, Excellence, Scholarship, and Trustworthiness) values; Academic program with increased foundational supports and opportunities for advanced coursework; Frequent and aligned assessments; Co-curricular classes and extracurricular activities; and, Teacher collaboration and growth. Ax- 5 UFT Charter EVIDENT? + + + + + UFT Charter Ax- 6 170 APL 143 117 94 Comparison: Brooklyn CSD 19 School District 154 117 15.0 20 AMO % Low Performing Entrants N APL % 25.7 35 123 2011 Cohort N 143 Comparison: Brooklyn CSD 19 School District 45.2 AMO 31 % Low Performing Entrants N % 51.4 35 2011 Cohort N 2014-15 YES NO NO NO YES NO NO NO MET 2015-16 % 174 AMO 35.0 % 38.9 89 68 Low Performing Entrants N 87 2013 Cohort N 151 178 AMO 62.5 % 165 AMO 8.8 % 14.9 % 129 106 94 Comparison: Brooklyn CSD 19 School District 106 NO % 62.1 Comparison: Brooklyn CSD 19 School District 151 APL 72 Low Performing Entrants N 87 159 101 2016-17 2013 Cohort N APL NO NO NO NO NO NO NO MET AMO 2.3 % 6.9 % 132 Comparison: Brooklyn CSD 19 School District 89 APL 44 Low Performing Entrants N 72 2012 Cohort N 126 Comparison: Brooklyn CSD 19 School District 126 APL 60 Low Performing Entrants N 72 2012 Cohort N Data Sources: New York State and City data, workbooks submitted by schools and databases compiled by the Institute. 4. Each year, the APL of students in the high school Accountability Cohort will exceed the APL of students from the local school district. COMPARATIVE MEASURE 3. Each year, the Accountability Performance Level (APL) on the Regents math exam will meet the Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) set forth in the state’s NCLB accountability system. 2. Each year, 65 percent of students who scored at Level 1 or 2 on their NYS 8th grade math exam will score at least 80 on the Regents math exam. ABSOLUTE MEASURES 1. Each year, 65 percent of students will score at least 80 on a Regents math exam. Mathematics 4. Each year, the APL of students in the high school Accountability Cohort will exceed the APL of students from the local school district. COMPARATIVE MEASURE 3. Each year, the Accountability Performance Level (APL) on the Regents English exam will meet the Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) set forth in the state’s NCLB accountability system. 2. Each year, 65 percent of students who scored at th Level 1 or 2 on their NYS 8 grade ELA exam will score at least 75 on the Regents English exam. 1. Each year, 65 percent of students will score at least 75 on the Regents English exam. ABSOLUTE MEASURES English Language Arts SCHOOL PERFORMANCE SUMMARY UFT Charter High School YES NO NO NO YES NO NO NO MET SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX B: Performance Summaries Ax- UFT Charter 7 71 156 2013 2014 All % Graduating 96 2010 Cohort N 50 31 % 31 67.7 NO % 58 N 58 67.7 N 58 N % 2% % 54 N 54 79 79 17.0% School 31 NO YES N 58 N School Math Reading Math Reading 79 N 7% % YES NO % Graduating 86.1 68.9 % 62.1 % % NA % 4% District NA N 854 N 501 State 489 NA NA State District 361 School 371 389 393 School 69 Comparison: Brooklyn CSD 19 School District 2011 Cohort N 36 % 79.4 73 63 78.7% % passing ≥ 3 Regents 80 77 % Promoted 2012 Cohort N 83 % 95 District 4% 863 N % N District 502 NO NO NO YES YES YES 150 79 71 N 2015-16 2014 Cohort N All YES NO 2015 2014 Cohort YES YES MET N 19.0% School 13% 31 N % N School 30 Math 387 School 378 N 30 Reading State 489 46.9 35 94 State 45.0 School 63 34 Math N 94 Reading 86 Comparison: Brooklyn CSD 19 School District % 86.1 36 70 76.3% % passing ≥ 3 Regents 77 75 % Promoted 2011 Cohort N 85 2013 Cohort N N 85 Cohort 2014-15 Data Sources: New York State and City data, workbooks submitted by schools and databases compiled by the Institute. Each year, 75 percent of students in the fourth year graduating class will enroll in a college or university in the year after graduation. 5. Each year, 75 percent of graduating students will pass an AP exam, CLEP exam, or successfully complete college-level coursework. 6. College Attainment and Achievment 4. The percent of graduating students who meet the state's APM will exceed the district average. 3. College Preparation The percent of students graduating with an Advanced Regents diploma will exceed that of the local school district. SCHOOL DESIGNED MEASURES 2. Each year, the average performance of students in the 12th grade will exceed the state average on the SAT or ACT tests in reading and mathematics. COMPARATIVE MEASUREs 1. Each year, the average performance of students in the 10th grade will exceed the state average on the PSAT tests in Critical Reading and Mathematics. College Preparation 4. Each year, the percent of students graduating after the completion of their fourth year will exceed that of the local school district. COMPARATIVE MEASURE 3b. Each year, 95 percent of students will graduate after the completion of their fifth year. 3a. Each year, 75 percent of students in the Total Graduation Cohort will graduate after the completion of their fourth year. 2. Each year, 75 percent of students in the second year high school Total Graduation Cohort will score at proficient on at least three different Regents exams required for graduation. 1. Each year, 75 percent of students in the first and second year high school Total Graduation Cohort will earn at least 10 credits. ABSOLUTE MEASURES High School Graduation SCHOOL PERFORMANCE SUMMARY UFT Charter High School NO NO NA NA NO NO NA NA YES NO YES NO YES YES YES MET N 119 40 79 % Graduating 95 83.3 % 53 84.9% % passing ≥ 3 Regents 95 80 % Promoted 75 N 75 N 75 N 75 N N % 1% % 73 N 73 60 60 16.0% School School Math Reading Math Reading 83.3 NA N N 66.7 % 64.0 % % NA District % 523 State 528 NA NA State District 438 School 454 386 384 School Comparison: Brooklyn CSD 19 School District 2012 Cohort N 71 90 2013 Cohort N 78 2015 Cohort N All 2016 2015 Cohort 2016-17 NO NO NA NA NO NO NA NA NA YES YES NO YES YES YES MET SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX B: Performance Summaries SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX C: District Comments SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS The NYCDOE held its required hearing on UFT Charter’s renewal on October 19, 2017, at the school. Eight people were present, and four people spoke in support of the school’s renewal. The school’s principal spoke to the many successes of the school. The other attendees spoke to the achievements of the principal, school, and students while praising its collaborative workspace. Ax- 8 UFT Charter SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX D: Fiscal Dashboard  UFT CHARTER SCHOOL  SCHOOL INFORMATION Opened 2005‐06 BALANCE SHEET Assets Current Assets Cash and Cash Equivalents ‐ GRAPH 1 Grants and Contracts Receivable Accounts Receivable Prepaid Expenses Contributions and Other Receivables Total Current Assets ‐ GRAPH 1 Property, Building and Equipment, net Other Assets Total Assets ‐ GRAPH 1 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 2015‐16             121,419            302,409                           ‐                           ‐                     307             424,135             685,309                43,398          1,152,842             566,309            473,805                           ‐                           ‐                  5,380          1,045,494             470,400                36,288          1,552,182         3,140,116           685,134                         ‐              29,635                         ‐         3,854,885            356,818              41,871         4,253,574          4,840,321             603,330                           ‐                15,608                  3,734          5,462,993             364,858                           ‐          5,827,851          2,898,927             974,730                           ‐                  5,088                     595          3,879,340             302,115                           ‐          4,181,455 Liabilities and Net Assets Current Liabilities Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses Accrued Payroll and Benefits Deferred Revenue Current Maturities of Long‐Term Debt Short Term Debt ‐ Bonds, Notes Payable Other Total Current Liabilities ‐ GRAPH 1 L‐T Debt and Notes Payable, net current maturities Total Liabilities ‐ GRAPH 1             228,772             357,043                           ‐                           ‐                           ‐          1,948,146          2,533,961                           ‐          2,533,961             160,932             362,756                           ‐                           ‐                           ‐                78,859             602,547                           ‐             602,547            506,140            271,047                         ‐                         ‐                         ‐            312,571         1,089,758                         ‐         1,089,758             559,090          1,109,136                           ‐                           ‐                           ‐             320,740          1,988,966                           ‐          1,988,966             273,324             861,321                           ‐                           ‐                           ‐             264,402          1,399,047                           ‐          1,399,047 Net Assets Unrestricted Temporarily restricted Total Net Assets         (1,450,760)             856,592         3,054,037          3,740,547          2,707,614                69,641                93,043            109,779                98,337                74,794         (1,381,119)             949,635         3,163,816          3,838,884          2,782,408 Total Liabilities and Net Assets          1,152,842          1,552,182         4,253,574          5,827,850          4,181,455 ACTIVITIES Operating Revenue  Resident Student Enrollment Students with Disabilities Grants and Contracts    State and local    Federal ‐ Title and IDEA    Federal ‐ Other    Other Food Service/Child Nutrition Program Total Operating Revenue        12,359,914        13,978,869       13,347,835        13,324,839          4,656,692             868,259             946,333         1,055,714             918,488             297,590                           ‐             355,084                29,074                           ‐                  2,558        13,614,888                           ‐             594,930                33,917                           ‐                  1,885        15,555,933                         ‐            682,150              24,305                         ‐                         ‐       15,110,004                           ‐             606,656             187,095                           ‐                           ‐        15,037,078                           ‐             537,382             136,257                           ‐                           ‐          5,627,921 Regular Education SPED Regular Education & SPED (combined) Other Total Program Services Management and General Fundraising Total Expenses ‐ GRAPHS 2, 3 & 4        11,585,928          1,313,628                           ‐                           ‐        12,899,556          1,555,137                15,195        14,469,888        10,953,512             803,187                           ‐                           ‐        11,756,699          1,760,503                10,332        13,527,534       10,402,214            714,114                         ‐                         ‐       11,116,328         1,824,091                 9,872       12,950,291        11,626,750             789,005                           ‐                           ‐        12,415,755          2,013,270                10,286        14,439,311          5,263,775             250,576                           ‐                           ‐          5,514,351          1,179,741                11,674          6,705,766 Expenses Surplus / (Deficit) From School Operations            (855,000)          2,028,399         2,159,713             597,767         (1,077,845) Support and Other Revenue Contributions Fundraising Miscellaneous Income Net assets released from restriction Total Support and Other Revenue             241,570                           ‐                75,259                           ‐             316,829 Total Unrestricted Revenue Total Temporally Restricted Revenue Total Revenue ‐ GRAPHS 2 & 3        13,940,299        15,834,886       15,147,736        15,125,822          5,672,832                 (8,582)                23,402              16,736              (11,442)              (23,543)        13,931,717        15,858,288       15,164,472        15,114,380          5,649,289 Change in Net Assets Net Assets ‐ Beginning of Year ‐ GRAPH 2 Prior Year Adjustment(s) Net Assets ‐ End of Year ‐ GRAPH 2            (538,171)            (842,948)                           ‐         (1,381,119) Ax- 9 UFT Charter             236,748                           ‐                65,607                           ‐             302,355          2,330,754         (1,381,119)                           ‐             949,635                 1,000                         ‐              53,468                         ‐              54,468         2,214,181            949,635                         ‐         3,163,816                  1,000                           ‐                76,302                           ‐                77,302             675,069          3,163,815                           ‐          3,838,884                           ‐                           ‐                21,368                           ‐                21,368         (1,056,477)          3,838,885                           ‐          2,782,408 SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX D: Fiscal Dashboard  UFT CHARTER SCHOOL  SCHOOL INFORMATION ‐ (Continued) Functional Expense Breakdown Personnel Service    Administrative Staff Personnel    Instructional Personnel    Non‐Instructional Personnel    Personnel Services (Combined) Total Salaries and Staff Fringe Benefits & Payroll Taxes Retirement Management Company Fees Building and Land Rent / Lease Staff Development Professional Fees, Consultant & Purchased Services Marketing  / Recruitment Student Supplies, Materials & Services Depreciation Other Total Expenses 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14          1,599,006          7,254,937                           ‐                           ‐          8,853,943          2,135,856             964,660                           ‐                           ‐                39,007             131,615                38,513          1,527,245             329,158             449,891        14,469,888          1,502,016          6,864,381                           ‐                           ‐          8,366,397          1,868,547          1,018,957                           ‐                           ‐                29,174             444,215                27,922          1,107,252             254,429             410,641        13,527,534         1,534,670         6,067,778                         ‐                         ‐         7,602,448         1,792,961         1,313,128                         ‐                         ‐              39,947            536,296              18,338            955,651            207,876            483,646       12,950,291 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15          1,862,388          7,335,370                           ‐                           ‐          9,197,758          1,952,057          1,144,727                           ‐                           ‐                28,699             155,314                  5,689          1,020,649             160,714             773,704        14,439,311 2015‐16             794,271          2,966,533                           ‐                           ‐          3,760,804          1,181,223             812,040                           ‐                           ‐                20,200             186,070                23,993                87,051             111,654             522,731          6,705,766 SCHOOL ANALYSIS ENROLLMENT Chartered Enroll Revised Enroll Actual Enroll ‐ GRAPH 4 Chartered Grades Revised Grades Primary School District: No Per Pupil Funding (Weighted Avg of All Districts) Increase over prior year                  1,074                  1,170                 1,156                           ‐                           ‐                         ‐                     905                  1,028                    983 K‐11 K‐12 K‐12                   ‐                   ‐                  ‐ 2014‐15 2015‐16                  1,114                     360                     961 K‐12                   ‐                     339 9‐12                   ‐                13,527                13,527              13,527                13,877                13,877 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.5% 0.0% PER STUDENT BREAKDOWN Revenue Expenses Operating Other Revenue and Support TOTAL ‐ GRAPH 3 Program Services Management and General, Fundraising TOTAL ‐ GRAPH 3 % of Program Services % of Management and Other % of Revenue Exceeding Expenses ‐ GRAPH 5                15,044                 15,137                15,371                 15,647                 16,602                       350                       294                        55                         80                         63                 15,394                15,431              15,427                15,728                16,665                14,254                 11,440                11,309                 12,920                 16,267                    1,735                    1,723                  1,866                    2,106                    3,514                 15,989                 13,163                13,174                 15,025                 19,781  89.1% 86.9% 85.8% 86.0% 82.2% 10.9% 13.1% 14.2% 14.0% 17.8% ‐3.7% 17.2% 17.1% 4.7% ‐15.8% Student to Faculty Ratio 6.6 8.4 9.0 9.9 7.0 Faculty to Admin Ratio 7.7 7.6 7.1 6.2 5.7 Financial Responsibility Composite Scores ‐ GRAPH 6 Score Fiscally Strong 1.5 ‐ 3.0 / Fiscally Adequate 1.0 ‐ 1.4 / Fiscally Needs Monitoring < 1.0 Working Capital ‐ GRAPH 7 Net Working Capital As % of Unrestricted Revenue Working Capital (Current) Ratio Score Risk (Low ≥ 3.0 / Medium 1.4 ‐ 2.9 / High < 1.4) Rating (Excellent ≥ 3.0 / Good 1.4 ‐ 2.9 / Poor < 1.4) (0.8) 1.9 2.7 2.8 2.2  Fiscally Needs   Fiscally Strong   Fiscally Strong   Fiscally Strong   Fiscally Strong  Monitoring  (2,109,826) ‐15.1% 0.2 442,947  2.8% 1.7 HIGH Poor Quick (Acid Test) Ratio Score Risk (Low ≥ 2.5 / Medium 1.0 ‐ 2.4 / High < 1.0) Rating (Excellent ≥ 2.5 / Good 1.0 ‐ 2.4 / Poor < 1.0) Debt to Asset Ratio ‐ GRAPH 7 Score Risk (Low < 0.50 / Medium 0.51 ‐ .95 / High > 1.0) Rating (Excellent < 0.50 / Good 0.51 ‐ .95 / Poor > 1.0) Months of Cash ‐ GRAPH 8 Score Risk (Low > 3 mo. / Medium 1 ‐ 3 mo. / High < 1 mo.) Rating (Excellent > 3 mo. / Good 1 ‐ 3 mo. / Poor < 1 mo.) Ax- 2,765,127  18.3% 3.5 3,474,027  23.0% 2.7 2,480,293  43.7% 2.8 MEDIUM LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM Good Excellent Good Good 0.2 1.7 3.5 2.7 2.8 HIGH MEDIUM LOW LOW LOW Poor Good Excellent Excellent Excellent 2.2 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 HIGH LOW LOW LOW LOW Poor Excellent Excellent Excellent Excellent 0.1 0.5 2.9 4.0 5.2 HIGH HIGH MEDIUM LOW LOW Poor Poor Good Excellent Excellent 10 UFT Charter SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX D: Fiscal Dashboard  UFT CHARTER SCHOOL  GRAPH 1 GRAPH 2 Cash, Assets and Liabilities Revenue, Expenses and Net Assets  18,000,000  7,000,000  16,000,000  6,000,000  14,000,000  12,000,000  5,000,000  10,000,000 Dollars   4,000,000 Dollars  8,000,000  6,000,000  3,000,000  4,000,000  2,000,000  2,000,000  ‐  1,000,000  (2,000,000)  ‐ Cash Current Assets 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 For the Year Ended June 30 Current Liabilities Total Assets  (4,000,000) 2015‐16 2011‐12 Total Liabilities This chart illustrates the relationship between assets and liabilities and to what  extent cash reserves makes up current assets.  Ideally for each subset, subsets 2  through 4, (i.e. current assets vs. current liabilities), the column on the left is taller  than the immediate column on the right; and, generally speaking, the bigger that  gap, the better.   GRAPH 3 Revenue & Expenses Per Pupil Revenue Expenses 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 For the Year Ended June 30 Net Assets ‐ Beginning 2015‐16 Net Assets ‐ Ending This chart illustrates total revenue and expenses each year and the  relationship those subsets have on the increase/decrease of net assets on a  year‐to‐year basis.  Ideally subset 1, revenue, will be taller than subset 2,  expenses, and as a result subset 3, net assets ‐ beginning, will increase each  year, building a more fiscally viable school.   GRAPH 4 25,000 Enrollment vs. Operating Expenses 1,200 16,000,000 14,000,000 Operating Expenses 20,000 Dollars 15,000 10,000 1,000 12,000,000 800 10,000,000 600 8,000,000 6,000,000 400 4,000,000 5,000 200 2,000,000 - Enrollment 2011‐12 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 - 2015-16 For the Year Ending June 30 Rev. - Reg. & Special ED Rev. - Other Support Exp. - Other Program 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 - For the Year Ended June 30 Rev. - Other Operating Exp. - Reg. & Special ED Exp. - Mngmt. & Other Program Expenses Total Expenses Enrollment This chart illustrates the breakdown of revenue and expenses on a per pupil  basis.  Caution should be exercised in making school‐by‐school comparisons  since schools serving different missions or student populations are likely to  have substantially different educational cost bases.  Comparisons with similar  schools with similar dynamics are most valid. Ax- Management & Other This chart illustrates to what extent the school's operating expenses have  followed its student enrollment pattern.  A baseline assumption that this data  tests is that operating expenses increase with each additional student served.   This chart also compares and contrasts growth trends of both, giving insight  into what a reasonable expectation might be in terms of economies of scale. 11 UFT Charter SUNY Charter Schools Institute SUNY Plaza 353 Broadway Albany, New York APPENDIX D: Fiscal Dashboard  UFT CHARTER SCHOOL  Comparable School, Region or Network: All SUNY Authorized Charter Schools (Including Closed Schools) GRAPH 5 GRAPH 6 % Breakdown of Expenses 100.0% 2011‐12 Composite Score 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 2015‐16 3.00 80.0% 2.50 60.0% Percentage 2.00 1.50 40.0% 1.00 Score 20.0% 0.0% 0.50 0.00 ‐0.50 ‐20.0% ‐1.00 ‐40.0% 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 For the Year Ended June 30 ‐1.50 2015‐16 ‐2.00 For the Year Ended June 30 Program Services ‐ School Program Services ‐ Comparable Management & Other ‐ School Management & Other ‐ Comparable REV. Exceeding EXP. ‐ School REV. Exceeding EXP. Comparable This chart illustrates a school's composite score based on the methodology  developed by the United States Department of Education (USDOE) to  determine whether private not‐for‐profit colleges and universities are  financially strong enough to participate in federal loan programs.  These  scores can be valid for observing the fiscal trends of a particular school and  used as a tool to compare the results of different schools. This chart illustrates the percentage expense breakdown between program  services and management & others as well as the percentage of revenues  exceeding expenses.  Ideally the percentage expense for program services will  far exceed that of the management & other expense.  The percentage of  revenues exceeding expenses should not be negative.  Similar caution, as  mentioned on GRAPH 3, should be used in comparing schools. Working Capital & Debt to Asset Ratios GRAPH 7 Fiscally: Strong = 1.5 ‐ 3.0 / Adequate = 1.0 ‐ 1.4 / Needs Monitoring < 1.0 Composite Score ‐ School Composite Score ‐ Comparable Benchmark Months of Cash GRAPH 8 WORKING CAPITAL RATIO ‐ Risk = Low > 3.0 / Medium 1.4 ‐ 2.9 / High < 1.4 DEBT TO ASSET RATIO ‐ Risk = Low < 0.50 / Medium 0.51 ‐ .95 / High > 1.0 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 2015‐16 6.00  2.50 4.00 5.00 3.50  2.00 3.00 Working Capital 4.00 2.50 Debt Months  1.50 2.00 3.00  1.00 1.50 2.00 1.00  0.50 0.50 1.00  ‐ 0.00 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 2015‐16 For the Year Ended June 30 Working Capital ‐ School Working Capital ‐ Comparable Debt Ratio ‐ School 0.00 For the Year Ended June 30 Cash ‐ School Debt Ratio ‐ Comparable This chart illustrates working capital and debt to asset ratios.  The working capital  ratio indicates if a school has enough short‐term assets to cover its immediate  liabilities/short term debt.  The debt to asset ratio indicates what proportion of  debt a school has relative to its assets. The measure gives an idea to the leverage  of the school along with the potential risks the school faces in terms of its debt‐ load. Ax- 12 UFT Charter Cash ‐ Comparable Ideal Months of Cash This chart illustrates how many months of cash the school has in reserves.   This metric is to measure solvency – the school's ability to pay debts and  claims as they come due.  This gives some idea of how long a school could  continue its ongoing operating costs without tapping into some other, non‐ cash form of financing in the event that revenues were to cease flowing to  the school.