Budget Shortages Lead to Focus on Charter School Treatment of Special-education Students

A recent article in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette (May 27, 2012) provides a good summary of the claims being made against charter schools in their efforts to educate students with special needs:

1.  Charters haven't drawn their fair share of special-needs students, especially those with more challenging disabilities to educate.  Consequently, public school boards fear they are being "left with the most challenging students, but with dwindling resources to educate them."

2.  Charters often identify students who have previously received regular education as being more suited to receive special education.

3.  Charters do not spend much of the increased tuition received to educate a special-needs student.  This allegation is made frequently against cyber charters.

4.  Charters re-classify special-needs students at PSSA test time to avoid triggering state reporting requirements and the opportunity to achieve AYP.

5.  Charters can't deny a student admission on the basis of a disability but they often subtly dissuade a student from applying for admission to the school.

6.  Charters do not spend resources on creating special classrooms for severely disabled students, instead favoring educating such students with all other students.

For Trustees and Administrators:  Given the budget deficits facing many school districts and the fact that tuition for special-needs students is nearly double the tuition charter receive for providing regular education, you should be aware that these arguments are likely to continue to be made by traditional public school officials.  It is essential to keep accurate records to support the basis for a special-needs designation and to support any change of that classification.  If, for example, a special-needs student's progress is not captured on state testing, you should be sure that other records evidence the decision to re-classify a student.  Administrators should also carefully identify the disability forming the basis for a student to receive special education.  Some students may have more than one disability and all should be captured in the students' files.      



This Charter School Alert was authored by Eric L. Silberstein, an attorney with Salvo Rogers & Elinski in Blue Bell, PA.  Mr. Silberstein, a member of Salvo Rogers & Elinski's Corporate and Real Estate Groups, has practiced law for 20 years and works closely with charter boards and administrators on governance, financing, special education, real estate, charter renewals and other charter matters.  Mr. Silberstein is admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania, New York and Connecticut.  He can be reached at (215) 653-0110 or esilberstein@salvorogers.com.  Salvo Rogers is a boutique law firm started in 1988 that is committed to providing high quality, personal service and cost effectiveness to clients pursuing business transactions, commercial real estate matters, and trusts and estates planning.
Please continue to follow other Pennsylvania charter school news of interest posted on my blog, "PA Charter School Law Forum:" pacharterlawforum.blogspot.com.  Your comments and suggestions are welcome.

School Districts Competing with Charters -- Phoenixville Targets Cybers

Losing students and associated funding to charter schools, some local school districts are fighting to win back  students that left to attend charter schools.  A May 14, 2012 article in The Times Herald profiled responses by the Phoenixville Area School District and other nearby school districts to win back students.  The schools are focusing on establishing their own cyber-schools to compete with cyber-charter models and adding activities that may not available through cyber-charters.  Aside from saving funds by not addressing what may be an outmoded school infrastructure, cyber education may also be less expensive for the school to provide-- in 2009-2010, cyber-charters spent an average of $3,000 less to educate students than their bricks-and-mortar counterparts.

For Trustees and Administrators:  Clearly cyber-charter leaders should be aware of the encroaching competition from school districts and continue to improve and keep investing in order to keep their curriculum and technology current.  More generally, we should anticipate that school districts will work to win back students enrolled in charters, whether via cyber school programs or more traditional schools.  As such, notwithstanding the success of charters and enrollment wait lists, trustees and administrators should remain inventive and enthusiastic in their efforts to educate students.



This Charter School Alert was authored by Eric L. Silberstein, an attorney with Salvo Rogers & Elinski in Blue Bell, PA.  Mr. Silberstein, a member of Salvo Rogers & Elinski's Corporate and Real Estate Groups, has practiced law for 20 years and works closely with charter boards and administrators on governance, financing, special education, real estate, charter renewals and other charter matters.  Mr. Silberstein is admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania, New York and Connecticut.  He can be reached at (215) 653-0110 or esilberstein@salvorogers.com.  Salvo Rogers is a boutique law firm started in 1988 that is committed to providing high quality, personal service and cost effectiveness to clients pursuing business transactions, commercial real estate matters, and trusts and estates planning.
Please continue to follow other Pennsylvania charter school news of interest posted on my blog, "PA Charter School Law Forum:" pacharterlawforum.blogspot.com.  Your comments and suggestions are welcome.  

Philadelphia School Reform Commission Seeking to Reform Charter Renewal Process

The Phliadelphia School Reform Commission (SRC) is playing hardball with the 20 charter schools whose charters are up for renewal within the next few months.  In light of on-going budget difficulties within the Phladelphia School District and a recent charter school court decision costing the District an additional $1,300,000, the SRC is using the significant leverage that comes with being the arbiter of charter renewal to hold the charters seeking renewal captive unless they agree to various conditions.  In the process, the SRC is seemingly trying to re-write the charter school law. 

The SRC will consider issuing charter renewals if the operators of the schools argree to negotiated enrollment caps and other conditions such as requiring charters to recruit from specific District schools and underserved neighborhoods.  Also, charters should use existing District faciliities where practical.  None of these conditions are specified in the charter renewal provisions of the existing charter law.  Moreovoer, Pennsylvania legislation has expressly outlawed enrollment caps absent charter agreement and the recent Palmer charter school decision upheld that law.

The SRC's actions shows how strong of an impact charter schools are having in Philadelphia.  As a consequence of their success, they are being put in the untenable position of agreeing to capping enrollment under duress-- put simply: "No cap, no charter renewal." 

Trustees and administrators of more than a few of the 20 charters up for renewal will likely voice their disapproval of the SRC's efforts and there may be some compromise by both sides.  That may be why the SRC imposed other conditions on charter renewals in addition to the enrollment caps.  For example, the requirement that charters to recruit from specific Districts with poor academic performance is likely a recipe for the charters to not achieve AYP and many of them may object to this condition.  In addition, charters looking to move or expand may push for the independence of locating where they believe is most attractive and not necessarily in existing District facilities.

Trustee and Administrator Action Items:  The charter renewal process within Philadelphia is fluid.  Continue to watch the SRC's renewal procees unfold in Philadelphia and be aware that similar actions may be sought by school districts throughout the Commonwealth.  It may be an opportune time to meet with other charter trustees to develop a plan of action to address these changes collectively as a group.  Speaking with a united voice may be critical for charters to prevent the SRC and perhaps other school districts from re-writing the charter laws.     

This Charter School Alert was authored by Eric L. Silberstein, an attorney with Salvo Rogers & Elinski in Blue Bell, PA.  Mr. Silberstein, a member of Salvo Rogers & Elinski's Corporate and Real Estate Groups, has practiced law for 20 years and works closely with charter boards and administrators on governance, financing, special education, real estate, charter renewals and other charter matters.  Mr. Silberstein is admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania, New York and Connecticut.  He can be reached at (215) 653-0110 or esilberstein@salvorogers.com.  Salvo Rogers is a boutique law firm started in 1988 that is committed to providing high quality, personal service and cost effectiveness to clients pursuing business transactions, commercial real estate matters, and trusts and estates planning.
Please continue to follow other Pennsylvania charter school news of interest posted on my blog, "PA Charter School Law Forum:" pacharterlawforum.blogspot.com.  Your comments and suggestions are welcome.    

Charter Schools Must Comply with Pennsylvania’s Right to Know Law

The press, public school districts have shown considerable interest in wanting to review what may appear to be confidential charter school records concerning enrollment, performance, financial and other matters.  These   third parties have ample latitude to request such documents given the rights provided to document requesters in Pennsylvania’s Right to Know Law, 65 P.S.  67.101, et. seq., applicable to charter schools (“RTK Law”).  

The RTK Law requires, among other things, that a requestor denied by a public party (e.g. a charter school) the opportunity to review certain records has a right to appeal to the Office of Open Records (“Office”).  The Office reviews the records requested to be provided by the charter school and determines whether or not they are public records subject to disclosure within the ambit of the RTK Law.  The charter school has the right to provide timely its reasons for objecting to the records' request along with the specific reference to legal authority supporting its decision, and the Office has 30 days from receipt of the request for records to issue its decision, unless the requestor agrees to extend the date of the Office’s decision.

Records are deemed public records and required to be disclosed by the charter school so long as they directly relate to the school’s governmental function.  As governmental function has been interpreted, the scope of the RTK Law is very broad.  In addition, any decision to deny a requesting party the right to access certain records must be based on a preponderance of the evidence that the records are exempt from public access.  The broad scope of documents that fall within the ambit of the RTK Law coupled with the high burden on the Office to deny access to documents makes it not surprising that most records’ requests are upheld by the Office.  Even public records held in the custody of a private entity such as a party retained by a charter to provide management or education services on behalf of the school are subject to disclosure under the RTK Law.  See Chester Community Charter School v. Hardy, No. 1427 C.D. 2010, Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania (filed February 29, 2012). 

Tips for Trustees and Administrators:  It is imperative that any charter school objection to the disclosure of information sought by a third party be provided promptly to the Office of Open Records and that the objection specifies the legal basis for withholding the records.  In addition, charter school trustees and administrators should presume that all or nearly all of the records requested will be subject to disclosure and, consequently, should have clear procedures in place for recordkeeping and records retention. 

This Charter School Alert was authored by Eric L. Silberstein, an attorney with Salvo Rogers & Elinski in Blue Bell, PA.  Mr. Silberstein, a member of Salvo Rogers & Elinski's Corporate and Real Estate Groups, has practiced law for 20 years and works closely with charter boards and administrators on governance, financing, special education, real estate, charter renewals and other charter matters.  Mr. Silberstein is admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania, New York and Connecticut.  He can be reached at (215) 653-0110 or esilberstein@salvorogers.com.  Salvo Rogers is a boutique law firm started in 1988 that is committed to providing high quality, personal service and cost effectiveness to clients pursuing business transactions, commercial real estate matters, and trusts and estates planning.

Please continue to follow other Pennsylvania charter school news of interest posted on my blog, "PA Charter School Law Forum:" pacharterlawforum.blogspot.com.  Your comments and suggestions are welcome.    

Harrisburg School for the Arts Seeking Charter School Status

Capital Area School for the Arts ("CASA") will seek charter school status beginning with the 2013-14 school year, a move allegedly resulting from the breakdown of the financial model that the school has used since its founding 11 years ago.  If CASA's charter application is  granted, the school would no longer need to rely on voluntary tuition funding from school districts and private donors that send students to the magnet arts school in downtown Harrisburg. 

CASA draws gifted students interested in pursuing the arts from 24 school districts.  Many of those districts are not in good financial shape and have reduced or eliminated payment of CASA's $5,500 annual per student fee, leaving students to rely on tuition help from CASA, outside donors or their parents.  CASA enrollment has dropped to 83 this year, down nearly 50% from a few years ago. 

The 24 school districts have tried to come up with a funding plan to continue sending students to CASA but, with only three of the 24 school districts eligible to send students to CASA willing to cover the $5,500 tuition, no solutions seemed satisfactory and the school, through the board of directors for the Capital Area Intermediate Unit, CASA's operator, voted unanimously to seek charter school status in the Harrisburg School District beginning next school year. 

If the charter is granted, the curriculum at CASA will change markedly since CASA would be required to provide a full academic program in addition to the half-day training in art, music, dance, theater and film that the school currently offers.  

*************************************

What does it mean for Charter Boards and Administrators: The financial allure of converting to charter status may embolden other magnet schools to become charters.  If charters are granted, the PA DOE will consequently be paying more of the cost to operate these new charters than it had previously when they were magnet schools and existing charter budgets will be squeezed further.   

One other important lesson:  Continue to nurture private donors.  With charter budgets being impacted by the budget deficit in the Commonwealth and further eroded by moves by CASA and other magnets, it is critical to maintain excellent relations with donors and potential donors as the financial climate will inevitably lead school officials to ask supporters to contribute funds to help  charters meet their various missions.   

This Charter School Alert was authored by Eric L. Silberstein, an attorney with Salvo Rogers & Elinski in Blue Bell, PA.  Mr. Silberstein, a member of Salvo Rogers & Elinski's Corporate and Real Estate Groups, has practiced law for 20 years and works closely with charter boards and administrators on governance, financing, special education, real estate, charter renewals and other charter matters.  Mr. Silberstein is admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania, New York and Connecticut.  He can be reached at (215) 653-0110 or esilberstein@salvorogers.com.  Salvo Rogers is a boutique law firm started in 1988 that is committed to providing high quality, personal service and cost effectiveness to clients pursuing business transactions, commercial real estate matters, and trusts and estates planning.

Please continue to follow other Pennsylvania charter school news of interest posted on my blog, "PA Charter School Law Forum:" pacharterlawforum.blogspot.com.  Your comments and suggestions are welcome.    

Pennsylvania Charter Law Analyzed by National Alliance for Public Charter Schools

The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, a leading proponent of the charter sector, recently released its annual review of charter laws in the 42 states that provide for the creation of charter schools.  The Alliance rated each state's charter laws based on 20 "essential components" found in the Alliance's model law such as:  no caps on the number of charters, authorizer accountability, transparent charter application, review and decision-making processes, clear student recruitment procedures, clear special education responsibilities and equitable access to capital funding and facilities.

The good news is that Pennsylvania's laws ranked 16th of the 42 states' laws reviewed.  Last year, however, the Alliance rated Pennsyvania 12th.  The Commonwealth dropped in the rankings because its laws remained unchanged while other states amended their charter laws and moved ahead.  According to the Alliance, Pennsylvania fared best on having a transparent charter application, review and decision-making process, having fiscally and legally autonomous schools with independent public charter school boards, and providing for an exemption from collective bargaining.  Our feeling is that the decision-making process is not tranparent since the authorizers are largely local school boards with agendas that may be at odds with furthering the innivative spirit of charters.  Moreover, funding to charters needs to pass through the local school district before reaching the charter. 

Pennsylvania, according to the Alliance, needs to improve on allowing multi-school charter contracts, having authorizer and overall program accountability and adequate authorizer funding.  The Alliance gave the Comonwealth no points on each of these essential components.  Indeed, the current charter law prohibits multi-charter contracts and there is no additional funding for authorizers.

The bottom line is that Pennsylvania's 1997 charter law is becoming outdated and in need of reform.  The legislature's failure to move forward with significant improvements to the law is unfortunate and the entrepreneurial educators looking to start charters may look outside Pennsylvania and to other states that foster a more attractive climate to develop charter schools.

Mifflinburg School Board Stacks the Deck Against Charter Approval

                                                   CHARTER SCHOOL ALERT

The proposed New Berlin Charter School in Pennsylvania's Union County is facing roadblocks in its efforts to gain a charter to operate from the Mifflinburg Area School District.  New Berlin filed its charter application by the Commonwealth's November 15, 2011 deadline.  The founders envision 100 students in kindergarten through fourth grade and 40 students have pre-enrolled in the charter school.

The Mifflinburg Area School Superintendent, Dan Lichtel, is not impressed with the school's application.  Lichtel has been quoted as saying that New Berlin lacks a curriculum, has not identified staff, has no collateral,and no plans for special-needs students or for student achievement.  To be sure, this is the first charter application in the Mifflinburg area and Lichtel may not appreciate that New Berlin is not able to hire teachers or enroll children until the charter is granted by the School District.  Or perhaps he is aware of the proposed school's limited ability to provide information during the application process and instead is focused on cutting the School District $1.3 million deficit.  The timing is seemingly not right for, as Lichtel put it, New Berlin Charter School's "experiment."

Lesson for Trustees:  Trustees need to be mindful of the application process and provide as much information as possible when making the initial filing with the charter authorizer.  In this time of budget uncertainty and fiscal austerity, however, that may not be enough.  Authorizers also need to know that the proposed charter has the support of a large portion of the community.  The loud voice of the community seems to be the real check on the power of the school district authorizers to do their job of evaluating charter school applications fairly.  Charter trustees would be wise to do what they can to develop public support in advance of filing a charter application or for seeking charter renewal.


This Charter School Alert was authored by Eric L. Silberstein, an attorney with Salvo Rogers & Elinski in Blue Bell, PA.  Mr. Silberstein, a member of Salvo Rogers & Elinski's Corporate and Real Estate Groups, has practiced law for 20 years and works closely with charter boards and administrators on governance, financing, special education, real estate, charter renewals and other charter matters.  Mr. Silberstein is admitted to practice law in Pennsylvania, New York and Connecticut.  He can be reached at (215) 653-0110 or esilberstein@salvorogers.com.  Salvo Rogers is a boutique law firm started in 1988 that is committed to providing high quality, personal service and cost effectiveness to clients pursuing business transactions, commercial real estate matters, and trusts and estates planning.

Please continue to follow other Pennsylvania charter school news of interest posted on my blog, "PA Charter School Law Forum:" pacharterlawforum.blogspot.com.  Your comments and suggestions are welcome.