The Echo

Okay, folks, we are up to page 17/35.  Here's that link again: http://blogs.delawareonline.com/delawareed/files/2011/06/NACSA_DE_Eval_REPORT_FINAL.pdf
If you haven't visited the report, you really should.  We are just posting highlights (or lowlights depending on who you are.)

The following is from Page 17:

The Delaware Department of Education (DDOE) does not execute charter contracts per se, nor are charter contracts required by statute. By law and by practice, the charter application, as submitted, is the approved charter document. Because there is no executed charter contract, the material terms for the school's existence, educational program, and operations are not defined in specific, legally binding terms. Arguably, some educational, operational, and financial material terms are contained in the approved charter contract, but the articulation of such terms has varied significantly from application to application.

• "DDOE executes a Performance Agreement for each newly approved and renewed school. However, the Performance Agreement is not used to annually or periodically monitor school academic and non-academic performance, nor is it the basis for making renewal decisions. In fact, most elements of the Performance Agreement are not examined during the renewal process."
• "Data on academic growth and progress are compiled for renewal review purposes but do not drive renewal decisions which are based, in large part, on whether schools are meeting state performance requirements."
• "There is no consensus within DDOE or the Charter School Office (CSO) on how to monitor academic performance or about whether the authorizer has the flexibility to establish performance-based academic and non-academic goals other than those prescribed by statute. Current and prevailing interpretation of statutes that speak to academic performance inhibit the authorizer from engaging in quality practices that specifically define academic performance goals against which schools will be measured, and ensure academic performance and progress are the primary considerations for charter renewal decisions."

NACSA's document review and site visit elicited little evidence of systematic monitoring and of any aspect of school operations. Though school reporting requirements are largely by statutes and spelled out in detail in the DDOE Technical Assistance Manual, the authorizer does not have a systematic approach for verifying statutory or charter terms compliance, sufficiency of school operations, or the financial viability of schools. Its review of annual reports, which charter schools are required by law to submit to DDOE, is cursory and not guided by policies, processes, or monitoring tools or instruments. The authorizer does not conduct formal site visits or utilize any site visit protocol. Schools receive little feedback on academic, operational or financial performance, except when problems arise. Communication with school operators is largely restricted to correspondence following up of concerns flagged by DDOE staff (often pertaining to enrollment or financial activity) or concerns that have been brought to the authorizer's attention from the school community or other external sources. State law requires the authorizer to prepare and submit an annual report. However, this requirement has not been met since 2006.

Fortunately for Delawareans, a concerned tax payer previously addressed the very last issue with the head of the Charter School Accountability Committee.  Although we've previously printed Mr. Carwell's reponse, we'll post it again:

"I am following up on your request for a copy of the most current Charter School Report. My apologies for the delayed response. You are correct that no reports have been issued since 2007. The reason is that a lot of the charter school information provided in past reports is now available on the Department’s web site under School Profiles (see http://profiles.doe.k12.de.us/SchoolProfiles/State/Default.aspx). When I joined the department in August one of the priorities I was asked to focus on was to republish the annual report. It is an important tool for improving authorizer and charter school accountability and provides a higher level of transparency. The annual report needs to be completely revised. We are developing a new performance framework for charter schools. Clearly, it will be important for the new report to align with our new charter performance metrics. Our goal is to republish the new report in the fall. "

Okay - Mr. Carwell joined the Department in August 2010.  Seven months later, NACSA sees little to no evidence of progress regarding bringing the department into complaince with state law.  According to Mr. Carwell's timeline, such a product should be available this fall.  The question has to be asked - If DOE had abided by state laws in the last five years and authored said report, Would Pencader and Reach be facing closure?