Florida’s Charter Schools Program Grant Award Information Session August 2011

CSP Grant Award In July 2011, USDOE announced that Florida was one of two states to receive a five-year Charter Schools Program (CSP) Grant Award.

Overview Purpose: Provide financial assistance to expand the number of high quality charter schools and build a better national understanding of public charter schools.  95% of funding will be distributed in subgrants to charter schools (45 start-up/year and dissemination)  Administrative funds will be used to provide training and professional development and for subgrant recipient monitoring activities.

Objective 1 Increase access to high-quality charter schools for educationally disadvantaged students. Activities:  Preference points and increased funding for charter school developers opening schools in the feeder patterns of PLA public schools or rural low-income districts  Coordination with Race to the Top initiative supporting management organizations opening charter schools in feeder zones of PLA public schools  New applicant trainings and outreach activities targeting rural districts

Objective 1 Expected Outcomes:

Objective 2 Improve the authorizing practices and capacity of Local Education Agency Authorizers. Activities:  Training activities related to authorizing best practices.  Workshops for authorizers on using the model charter school evaluation instrument  Partnership with FACSA to create principles and standards for high-quality authorizing in Florida and an online charter school monitoring tool  Distribute Title I regulation, eligibility, and allocation information to all LEAs each year

Objective 2 Expected Outcomes:

Objective 3 Increase the number of high-quality charter schools in Florida. Activities:  Award Planning and Implementation subgrants to high-quality charter schools selected through a rigorous peer review process  Conduct monitoring visits (50%) and desk audits (100%)  New applicant training  Annual needs assessment, develop training plan, and conduct training activities (5 trainings, 1000 people)  Dissemination grants

Objective 3 Expected Outcomes:

Objective 4 Increase the academic achievement of charter school students. Activities:  Dissemination grants  Charter Support Unit (CSU)  Trainings related to highly-effective instructional practices

Objective 4 Expected Outcomes:

Dissemination The Department will fund projects for the purpose of disseminating information related to the following:  Highly-effective instructional practices (2+)  Best and promising practices for increasing graduation rates, with emphasis on at-risk students (1+)  Best practices amongst charter schools and LEAs through the development of an online learning community (1)  Accelerated learning options, such as advanced placement and dual enrollment (1+)  Teacher evaluation systems (1+)  Instructional improvement systems (1+)  Teacher recruitment and retention (1+)

Support The Department plans to provide comprehensive and ongoing support for charter schools through the following types of training: Charter Schools  New Applicant  Highly-Effective Instructional Practices, including partnership with the Department of Environmental Protection  Need-Based, determined by annual needs assessment Authorizers  Authorizing Best Practices, including timely distribution of federal funds and monitoring academic performance  Model Forms  Adoption and Implementations of Authorizing Principles and Standards

Waivers The Department requested and was granted several waivers to statutory and regulatory provisions:  Extend CSP Grant project period to 5 years  Allow charter schools to receive more than one planning and implementation grant (for significant expansion)  Allow eligible charter schools to receive more than one dissemination grant  Extend dissemination grant project period to 3 years

External Evaluation Thorough assessment and evaluation to determine if the Department has the appropriate systems in place to sustain and grow a high-quality charter school sector.  What are the strengths and weaknesses in the Department’s CSP sub-grant application and review process?  How can the Department improve its CSP application and review process to better screen for quality?  What is the impact of the CSP funding on student achievement?  What is the impact of each of the dissemination grants funded by the Department?

Questions?