PCSB Monday meeting agenda is up

[Anonymous]

I watched the meeting last night and was really appalled that Capital Village is allowed to continue operating given the issues there. Does anyone know how long they are allowed to conditionally operate? Is it another 5 years or 3 years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I watched the meeting last night and was really appalled that Capital Village is allowed to continue operating given the issues there. Does anyone know how long they are allowed to conditionally operate? Is it another 5 years or 3 years?

I believe they have to meet annual performance metrics. So it's year by year.

I Dream has also provided a letter which is in the board book, explaining why they think the evaluation is unfair. But their scores were so egregiously low it's hard to see what's really that unfair about it.

[Anonymous]

Shouldn’t DC close some of these low enrollment, poor performing charters just for economies of scales issues? The budget is going to get tighter and tighter and perhaps centralizing the operations at DCPS is the way to save some money. And these schools aren’t educating anyone at the moment (before any commenter points out, yes I know DCPS has similar educating issues. But we are legally required to offer schooling to these kids, might as well house the operations costs at central office where I think there is more experience and support than at many charters).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn’t DC close some of these low enrollment, poor performing charters just for economies of scales issues? The budget is going to get tighter and tighter and perhaps centralizing the operations at DCPS is the way to save some money. And these schools aren’t educating anyone at the moment (before any commenter points out, yes I know DCPS has similar educating issues. But we are legally required to offer schooling to these kids, might as well house the operations costs at central office where I think there is more experience and support than at many charters).

I think they are hoping the performance and financial rationales for closure will close enough schools that it isn't necessary.

Economies of scale definitely is playing a role in the application process for new charters, where they have to do multiple draft budgets and the enrollment projections and already-approved future capacity in the city is part of the review.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn’t DC close some of these low enrollment, poor performing charters just for economies of scales issues? The budget is going to get tighter and tighter and perhaps centralizing the operations at DCPS is the way to save some money. And these schools aren’t educating anyone at the moment (before any commenter points out, yes I know DCPS has similar educating issues. But we are legally required to offer schooling to these kids, might as well house the operations costs at central office where I think there is more experience and support than at many charters).

I think they are hoping the performance and financial rationales for closure will close enough schools that it isn't necessary.

Economies of scale definitely is playing a role in the application process for new charters, where they have to do multiple draft budgets and the enrollment projections and already-approved future capacity in the city is part of the review.

PP and thanks for the response. I’m glad to charter board is considering these issues now. I think they are giving too much autonomy to these schools to close on their own. There is a psychological element to this- I’ve worked in charters and I can’t imagine any of the ones I have closing on their own accord, even when they didn’t have enough money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn’t DC close some of these low enrollment, poor performing charters just for economies of scales issues? The budget is going to get tighter and tighter and perhaps centralizing the operations at DCPS is the way to save some money. And these schools aren’t educating anyone at the moment (before any commenter points out, yes I know DCPS has similar educating issues. But we are legally required to offer schooling to these kids, might as well house the operations costs at central office where I think there is more experience and support than at many charters).

I think they are hoping the performance and financial rationales for closure will close enough schools that it isn't necessary.

Economies of scale definitely is playing a role in the application process for new charters, where they have to do multiple draft budgets and the enrollment projections and already-approved future capacity in the city is part of the review.

PP and thanks for the response. I’m glad to charter board is considering these issues now. I think they are giving too much autonomy to these schools to close on their own. There is a psychological element to this- I’ve worked in charters and I can’t imagine any of the ones I have closing on their own accord, even when they didn’t have enough money.

If you read I Dream's letter, they didn't really close on their own. They closed because it was clear they were going to be shut down, and they wanted to avoid an embarrassing and difficult hearing and get the news out to families without waiting for the hearing.

My understanding is the PCSB cannot legally prevent a school from closing. It's not a matter of "giving" autonomy. The schools have the autonomy without the PCSB needing to give it to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn’t DC close some of these low enrollment, poor performing charters just for economies of scales issues? The budget is going to get tighter and tighter and perhaps centralizing the operations at DCPS is the way to save some money. And these schools aren’t educating anyone at the moment (before any commenter points out, yes I know DCPS has similar educating issues. But we are legally required to offer schooling to these kids, might as well house the operations costs at central office where I think there is more experience and support than at many charters).

I think they are hoping the performance and financial rationales for closure will close enough schools that it isn't necessary.

Economies of scale definitely is playing a role in the application process for new charters, where they have to do multiple draft budgets and the enrollment projections and already-approved future capacity in the city is part of the review.

PP and thanks for the response. I’m glad to charter board is considering these issues now. I think they are giving too much autonomy to these schools to close on their own. There is a psychological element to this- I’ve worked in charters and I can’t imagine any of the ones I have closing on their own accord, even when they didn’t have enough money.

If you read I Dream's letter, they didn't really close on their own. They closed because it was clear they were going to be shut down, and they wanted to avoid an embarrassing and difficult hearing and get the news out to families without waiting for the hearing.

My understanding is the PCSB cannot legally prevent a school from closing. It's not a matter of "giving" autonomy. The schools have the autonomy without the PCSB needing to give it to them.

PP and I understand that. I was responding to the comment that the charter board seems to hope these schools will make the decision on their own. I think that is too much autonomy and most schools won’t close on their own. Years ago there was a school that just ran out of money and stopped paying teachers. They didn’t just close, they lost all of their staff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn’t DC close some of these low enrollment, poor performing charters just for economies of scales issues? The budget is going to get tighter and tighter and perhaps centralizing the operations at DCPS is the way to save some money. And these schools aren’t educating anyone at the moment (before any commenter points out, yes I know DCPS has similar educating issues. But we are legally required to offer schooling to these kids, might as well house the operations costs at central office where I think there is more experience and support than at many charters).

I think they are hoping the performance and financial rationales for closure will close enough schools that it isn't necessary.

Economies of scale definitely is playing a role in the application process for new charters, where they have to do multiple draft budgets and the enrollment projections and already-approved future capacity in the city is part of the review.

PP and thanks for the response. I’m glad to charter board is considering these issues now. I think they are giving too much autonomy to these schools to close on their own. There is a psychological element to this- I’ve worked in charters and I can’t imagine any of the ones I have closing on their own accord, even when they didn’t have enough money.

If you read I Dream's letter, they didn't really close on their own. They closed because it was clear they were going to be shut down, and they wanted to avoid an embarrassing and difficult hearing and get the news out to families without waiting for the hearing.

My understanding is the PCSB cannot legally prevent a school from closing. It's not a matter of "giving" autonomy. The schools have the autonomy without the PCSB needing to give it to them.

PP and I understand that. I was responding to the comment that the charter board seems to hope these schools will make the decision on their own. I think that is too much autonomy and most schools won’t close on their own. Years ago there was a school that just ran out of money and stopped paying teachers. They didn’t just close, they lost all of their staff.

Oh I agree, they should be more willing to close without giving so many extensions. I thought you meant somehow prevent schools from closing voluntarily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched the meeting last night and was really appalled that Capital Village is allowed to continue operating given the issues there. Does anyone know how long they are allowed to conditionally operate? Is it another 5 years or 3 years?

I believe they have to meet annual performance metrics. So it's year by year.

I Dream has also provided a letter which is in the board book, explaining why they think the evaluation is unfair. But their scores were so egregiously low it's hard to see what's really that unfair about it.

Capital Village is approved to continue for the next five years. They didn't get the same conditions as IDEA or Hope which were the ones that got year by year annual performance metrics to meet and if they don't they have to relinquish or will be revoked. The Capital Village review simply said that the PCSB would review their performance "over the coming years" and may conduct an out of cycle review.