Anonymous wrote:There is certainly blame enough to go around, but could the PCSB have screwed this up more if they tried?

- PCSB staff missed obvious red flags over a period of YEARS.

- PCSB board approved school for another 5 years despite red flags.

- PCSB board approved financial corrective action plan in July, allowing the school to continue operating, and urged the school to explore a merger

- Eagle board chair brought merger proposal and told PCSB board that they would not make it through the year if the merger was not approved.

- PCSB board voted against the merger they encouraged, leaving the school with no choice but to close only 3 days before students and teachers were set to start the year. PCSB board acts surprised that school decided to close.

Am I missing something?

Shameful!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don’t have strong opinions on the charter model as policy over all, but according to the theory, this is what’s SUPPOSED to happen. The authorizing board is supposed go approve a bunch of schools and close the ones that don’t perform. The intention was never really to “support” them. That’s what school districts do. Charters are supposed to sink or swim. The timing sucks but I think a purist would say that that’s on the school, not the board. The board has to wait for them to be insolvent or whatever the conditions are to close it. They can’t declare it dead when it’s not quite dead yet.

Come on that's insane. It's not supposed to be sink or swim. It's supposed to be that warning signs and poor financial data means being put on a corrective action plan. Which the PCSB has the right to do, but failed to do until very late in the process. The PCSB does not have to wait for the conditions to be unfixable. It can, should, and does intervene. It just missed the boat on this one.

I was swimming in the pro-charter policy waters 20 years ago when this all was catching on, and I think you’re wrong. That’s probably what it has become, but that wasn’t the concept.

Well, that was 20 years ago. In the present, the PCSB has various ways to intervene, and they failed to use them.

DP. Obviously the best intervention would have been to close the school before the school year started, before the lottery. But the school wasn't insolvent then, do closing it would not have been the right thing to do at that time.

People view charter schools in DC as regular public schools, as another branch of DCPS. But they aren't.

How do you know it wasn't insolvent? And schools can also be closed for a pattern of financial mismanagement or failure to meet charter goals. It sounds like both of those things occurred.

People are not necessarily saying the school should have been closed in the spring, btw. If the PCSB had intervened earlier and more aggressively, it might have gotten Eagle back on track.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very sad. Eagle should have faced consequences much earlier to give families time to plan and make alternate arrangements. As it stands, the families have 48 hours to find a new school. Some are reporting that they've called many schools and none have space for their children.

Parents on twitter - https://x.com/NickMinock/status/1826299238893912315?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

WJLA story - https://wjla.com/news/local/charter-school-dc-scrambling-eagle-academy-public-board-rejected-plan-merge-friendship-congress-heights-campuses-southeast-capitol-riverfront-southwest-parents-children-reachtions-schools-rush-academic-year-crisis#

This is a terrible situation, but for kids in K and up, they absolutely have a school to go to.

Yeah, it's been annoying to see the reporting on this. It's feel misleading and false. Kids are always welcome to enroll at their IB school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don’t have strong opinions on the charter model as policy over all, but according to the theory, this is what’s SUPPOSED to happen. The authorizing board is supposed go approve a bunch of schools and close the ones that don’t perform. The intention was never really to “support” them. That’s what school districts do. Charters are supposed to sink or swim. The timing sucks but I think a purist would say that that’s on the school, not the board. The board has to wait for them to be insolvent or whatever the conditions are to close it. They can’t declare it dead when it’s not quite dead yet.

Come on that's insane. It's not supposed to be sink or swim. It's supposed to be that warning signs and poor financial data means being put on a corrective action plan. Which the PCSB has the right to do, but failed to do until very late in the process. The PCSB does not have to wait for the conditions to be unfixable. It can, should, and does intervene. It just missed the boat on this one.

I was swimming in the pro-charter policy waters 20 years ago when this all was catching on, and I think you’re wrong. That’s probably what it has become, but that wasn’t the concept.

Well, that was 20 years ago. In the present, the PCSB has various ways to intervene, and they failed to use them.

DP. Obviously the best intervention would have been to close the school before the school year started, before the lottery. But the school wasn't insolvent then, do closing it would not have been the right thing to do at that time.

People view charter schools in DC as regular public schools, as another branch of DCPS. But they aren't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don’t have strong opinions on the charter model as policy over all, but according to the theory, this is what’s SUPPOSED to happen. The authorizing board is supposed go approve a bunch of schools and close the ones that don’t perform. The intention was never really to “support” them. That’s what school districts do. Charters are supposed to sink or swim. The timing sucks but I think a purist would say that that’s on the school, not the board. The board has to wait for them to be insolvent or whatever the conditions are to close it. They can’t declare it dead when it’s not quite dead yet.

Come on that's insane. It's not supposed to be sink or swim. It's supposed to be that warning signs and poor financial data means being put on a corrective action plan. Which the PCSB has the right to do, but failed to do until very late in the process. The PCSB does not have to wait for the conditions to be unfixable. It can, should, and does intervene. It just missed the boat on this one.

I was swimming in the pro-charter policy waters 20 years ago when this all was catching on, and I think you’re wrong. That’s probably what it has become, but that wasn’t the concept.

Well, that was 20 years ago. In the present, the PCSB has various ways to intervene, and they failed to use them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very sad. Eagle should have faced consequences much earlier to give families time to plan and make alternate arrangements. As it stands, the families have 48 hours to find a new school. Some are reporting that they've called many schools and none have space for their children.

Parents on twitter - https://x.com/NickMinock/status/1826299238893912315?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

WJLA story - https://wjla.com/news/local/charter-school-dc-scrambling-eagle-academy-public-board-rejected-plan-merge-friendship-congress-heights-campuses-southeast-capitol-riverfront-southwest-parents-children-reachtions-schools-rush-academic-year-crisis#

This is a terrible situation, but for kids in K and up, they absolutely have a school to go to.

Yeah, it's been annoying to see the reporting on this. It's feel misleading and false. Kids are always welcome to enroll at their IB school.

Anonymous wrote:Here is the letter from Mendelson: https://dcogc.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/8.23.24-PCSB-Eagle-Academy-Letter.pdf


And a blog post which I found informative, as to the many compliance failures that presaged Eagle's collapse. Seems like there was plenty of smoke before there was fire.

https://dcogc.org/blog/eagle-charter-school-sudden-closure-again-raises-transparency-questions/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very sad. Eagle should have faced consequences much earlier to give families time to plan and make alternate arrangements. As it stands, the families have 48 hours to find a new school. Some are reporting that they've called many schools and none have space for their children.

Parents on twitter - https://x.com/NickMinock/status/1826299238893912315?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

WJLA story - https://wjla.com/news/local/charter-school-dc-scrambling-eagle-academy-public-board-rejected-plan-merge-friendship-congress-heights-campuses-southeast-capitol-riverfront-southwest-parents-children-reachtions-schools-rush-academic-year-crisis#

This is a terrible situation, but for kids in K and up, they absolutely have a school to go to.

Anonymous wrote:Very sad. Eagle should have faced consequences much earlier to give families time to plan and make alternate arrangements. As it stands, the families have 48 hours to find a new school. Some are reporting that they've called many schools and none have space for their children.

Parents on twitter - https://x.com/NickMinock/status/1826299238893912315?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

WJLA story - https://wjla.com/news/local/charter-school-dc-scrambling-eagle-academy-public-board-rejected-plan-merge-friendship-congress-heights-campuses-southeast-capitol-riverfront-southwest-parents-children-reachtions-schools-rush-academic-year-crisis#

Anonymous wrote:Poor families and teachers. What on earth was the school administration doing? Couldn't they see this coming?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly don’t have strong opinions on the charter model as policy over all, but according to the theory, this is what’s SUPPOSED to happen. The authorizing board is supposed go approve a bunch of schools and close the ones that don’t perform. The intention was never really to “support” them. That’s what school districts do. Charters are supposed to sink or swim. The timing sucks but I think a purist would say that that’s on the school, not the board. The board has to wait for them to be insolvent or whatever the conditions are to close it. They can’t declare it dead when it’s not quite dead yet.

Come on that's insane. It's not supposed to be sink or swim. It's supposed to be that warning signs and poor financial data means being put on a corrective action plan. Which the PCSB has the right to do, but failed to do until very late in the process. The PCSB does not have to wait for the conditions to be unfixable. It can, should, and does intervene. It just missed the boat on this one.

I was swimming in the pro-charter policy waters 20 years ago when this all was catching on, and I think you’re wrong. That’s probably what it has become, but that wasn’t the concept.