Shelby County Schools

Shelby County Schools approves two charter applications, foreshadows district-wide performance system

Gestalt Community Schools will soon be running two new charter schools in Memphis—one in Hickory Hill, and one in the renovated Crosstown building—while 11 other groups that had hoped to open new schools are back to the drawing board after the Shelby County school board’s business meeting on Tuesday.

Shelby County Schools chief innovation officer Bradley Leon presented the status of all charter school applications the district had received and introduced a plan to take a new approach toward evaluating charter and non-charter schools. 

In his presentation to the board, Leon demonstrated a performance framework used to evaluate schools in the district’s Innovation Zone, a group of turnaround schools that aim to bring schools ranked in the bottom 5 percent in the state up to the top 25 percent. “We need something like this for charter schools, and for every school in the district,” he said. Using the current Innovation Zone template, he said, it’s clear that “some [charter] schools are making progress, others are not.” 

He said having that framework would also help evaluate applications from organizations that already run schools.

As the number of charter schools in Shelby County, and the number of students attending those schools, has grown dramatically in recent years, Shelby County Schools officials—and state and national advocacy groups—are starting to discuss ways to ensure the quality of the publicly-funded, independently-operated schools and even close low-performing schools.

This year, the district received 13 applications for charter schools, and three more letters of intent to apply that were never completed, Leon said. Each application was ranked based on its financial, academic, and operations plans and capacity and additional information.

Applicants whose charters were not approved got feedback on their plans, Leon said. Applicants have until June 26, 2014 to resubmit their applications to Shelby County Schools. The board will then hear the district’s next recommendation in July.

It’s not unusual for applicants rejected in the initial round by Shelby County Schools to later apply successfully after responding to feedback and questions, said district spokeswoman Stefani Everson.

This is not the last step for organizations hoping to open charter schools in Memphis: A new law means that even those applications that are rejected after resubmitting their applications can appeal the decision to the state’s board of education. And the state-run Achievement School District also authorizes charter schools in the city.

Shelby County Schools received charter applications from local groups such as Memphis Goodwill Industries and national operators such as Aspire Public Schools, which runs schools in California and is part of the Achievement School District.

Leon referred to Memphis-based Gestalt’s application as a “replication”—Gestalt already runs several charter schools in the district. That means Shelby County can evaluate the performance of existing Gestalt schools in Memphis when considering whether to open new schools. Leon said Gestalt is the highest-performing charter school in the state of Tennessee.

Crosstown Academy plans to open a 9th grade in 2015-16 and eventually enroll 700 high schoolers. Power Center Academy Elementary would operate a kindergarten and first grade in 2015-16 and eventually enroll 750 elementary schoolers. 

The board unanimously approved the district’s recommendations to approve Gestalt’s applications and deny the rest.

 

Hello Again

Debora Scheffel chosen by acclamation to fill State Board of Ed vacancy

State Board of Education member Debora Scheffel at a campaign event in 2016. (Photo by Nic Garcia/Chalkbeat)

A Republican vacancy committee unanimously selected Debora Scheffel to fill the opening left by Pam Mazanec on the State Board of Education.

Mazanec, a staunch defender of parental rights and school choice who represented the 4th Congressional District, resigned at the end of January to focus on her other obligations. Scheffel previously represented the 6th Congressional District on the board but lost that seat in 2016 to Democrat Rebecca McClellan.

McClellan’s narrow victory gave control of the board to Democrats for the first time in 46 years. Scheffel, who serves as dean of education at Colorado Christian University, moved to Douglas County, and ran unsuccessfully for school board there in 2017.

Scheffel’s selection does not change the balance of power on the state board because she replaces another Republican. Scheffel faced no opposition at the vacancy committee meeting, which took place Saturday in Limon.

Scheffel has said she wants to continue Mazanec’s work on behalf of rural schools and in support of parent and student choice, as well as work to protect student data privacy, a cause she previously championed on the board.

The district takes in all of the eastern Plains, as well as the cities of Longmont, Greeley, and Castle Rock.

Future of Schools

Indianapolis struggles to balance how much money schools need with what people will pay

PHOTO: Dylan Peers McCoy
Lewis Ferebee

Without a massive influx of cash from taxpayers, Indianapolis’ largest school district could be in dire financial straits. But the fate of the referendums asking voters for more money is in limbo.

Even as the Indianapolis Public Schools board revealed plans to reduce how much money it is seeking from voters, the administration portrayed the district’s financial future as precarious. During a board discussion Thursday, officials underscored how critical it would be for the tax increase to pass. It’s unclear, however, whether the district will get the extra cash it needs to avoid making painful cuts.

Critics have suggested the request — $936 million over eight years — is too high and that the district has not offered enough detail on how the money raised would be spent. With only tepid support for the tax plan, district leaders appear poised to reduce the amount they are seeking. That move could win over new allies, but it could also undercut their efforts to gain support.

Next year, the administration is expecting spending could outpace income by more than $45 million. The plan for filling that gap hinges on raising more than $46 million from a referendum that will go before voters in May.

Without that extra money, Superintendent Lewis Ferebee said, the district would have to burn through its savings or make vast cuts that could include freezing teacher pay, cutting school budgets, and reducing transportation.

The district would need to begin making cuts immediately, said board member Kelly Bentley. “It’s just going to get worse the next year, and the next year,” she added.

The district’s future will look brighter if leaders are able to win public support for more funding, although it’s no longer clear how much money they will ask for. The original plan, which was approved by the board in December, includes two referendums to raise property taxes. One would ask voters to give the district as much as $92 million more per year for eight years for operating expenses such as teacher pay. Another measure, which the district is not expected to change, would pay for $200 million in improvements to buildings.

Ferebee said the amount he originally proposed was based on what the district needs rather than what would be politically feasible. In the face of community feedback, however, the district is crafting a plan that would have a lower price tag. Next, the district will need to explain what services will be cut to keep down costs, he said.

“I anticipate people will want to know, ‘what are the tradeoffs?’ ” Ferebee said. “We owe it to the community to provide that explanation, and we will.”

Indiana districts have pursued more than 160 property tax referendums since 2008, when state lawmakers created the current school funding system. About 60 percent of those referendums have been successful, according to data from Indiana University’s Center for Evaluation and Education Policy.

Stephen Hiller, who has been studying referendums with the center for nearly a decade, said that it’s likely that many districts have had to reconcile how much money they would ideally want with how much taxpayers might be willing to pay. But that conversation likely happens before a referendum is announced and approved by the board.

“I think IPS has it a little more difficult here that it’s happening in the open after they’ve approved it in a very public way,” he added.

School board president Michael O’Connor said that the district’s willingness to change the plan is a sign that local government works.

“We live in the community within which we serve, and all of us have heard pretty plainly and clearly, ‘we think that number might be too big,’ ” he said. “We are being responsive to our constituents.”

Reducing the referendum could be enough to win over many supporters. Several groups that have supported the current administration in the past have not yet taken a stand.

Tony Mason of the Indianapolis Urban League said in a statement that the district needs more money to pay high-quality teachers and meet the needs of its diverse students. But he raised concerns about the potential impact of the tax increase on residents with fixed- or low-incomes.

“IPS will still need to continue in its efforts to make the case for the substantial amount it is requesting,” Mason said. “The IUL is an avid supporter of education, particularly for urban schools that struggle with unique challenges.”

Chelsea Koehring, who taught in the district and now has two children at the Butler Lab School, shares the view that the district needs more money. But leaders have not offered enough details about how the money would be spent, she said, and changing the request raises red flags.

“People, you should’ve had this together before you asked,” she said. “Lowering it at this point — I don’t know that that’s going to instill confidence in anyone that they have any clue what they are doing.”

Correction: February 17, 2018: This story has been corrected to reflect that Indiana districts have pursued more than 160 property tax referendums since 2008. Some districts have held multiple referendums.