Committee Hearing, May 2, 2001

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE JOINT COUNCIL COMMITTEES ON LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT AND EDUCATION - - - Room 400, City Hall Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Wednesday, 5/2/01 10:20 a.m. - - - RESOLUTION 010131 - Authorizing City Council's Committee on Legislative Oversight and Committee on Education to hold joint hearings on how the School District of Philadelphia is cooperating with the City's charter schools, how the School District evaluates its charger school applications, and to measure the effectiveness of our currently-operating charter schools. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN JAMES F. KENNEY, Chair COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN COUNCILMAN FRANK DICICCO COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 I N D E X Page Brien Gardiner, President . . . . . . . . . . Pennsylvania Coalition of Charter Schools, CAO, Philadelphia Academy Charter School Dr. Ann Waiters, Interim CAO. . . . . . . . . 6 Franklintown Charter High School 7 D. Repsch, Student Phila. Academy Charter 36 8 Wissahickon Charter School Applicants Michael Bowman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Julie Stapleton-Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . 48 School District Witnesses Debra Kahn, Secretary of Education. . . . . . 55 Pedro Ramos, School Board President . . . . . 62 Christine James-Brown, School Board Member. . 70 Catherine Connor, Associate Superintendent. . 253 for Standards, Equity and Student Services Sharmain Matlock-Turner, President. . . . . . 147 Greater Philadelphia Urban Affairs Coalition Dr. Gail Meister, Drexel Univ. Foundation 153 Technical Assistance Center for Charter Schools John Skief, CAO, Harambee Institute . . . . . 161 Laboratory Charter School of Communications Dr. June Brown, CAO . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 Jennifer Cabrera and Maureen Hurd, Students 191 J. Proietta, CAO, Community Academy Phila. 207 D. Bailey, Office of State Rep. Dwight Evans 222 Jay Borowski, Board President . . . . . . . . 241 Independence Charter School T. Gentzel, Pennsylvania School Boards Assoc. 258 Melanie Reiser, Charter School Resource Ctr. 280 Jennifer Lowman, Esq., Education Law Center 300 3 P R O C E E D I N G S

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Please could you have a seat so we can get started. Today's Joint Committee on Legislative Oversight and Education is dealing with an issue that will not require a vote of the committee. Councilmembers are en route now, but because of the interest of the time that you've given to come here this morning, we would like to get started. As the hearing goes on, we will have more Councilmembers here but, again, there will be no vote on any legislation today so, in my opinion, the opinion of the chair, there is not a requirement for a quorum. I would like to take an opportunity to read a statement into the record prior to the beginning of our hearing. (Technical difficulty with sound system.)

I apologize for the sound system. I think you probably read something about it recently; it's not working. Any other Councilmember that is here, 4 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 after my statement, is free to make some comment of their own in regards to this issue and then we will start with the hearing in earnest. The timing of this hearing coincides with National Charter Schools Week, and nowhere is the experiment of charter schools more vibrant than here in Philadelphia. The 1997 the State charter school law has enabled Philadelphia neighborhoods to establish 34 charter schools, with over 14,000 students experiencing exciting and innovative educational opportunities. Yet recently our school board rejected 88 percent of the applications for new charter schools, despite many impressive applications, and with thousands of parents anxious for an alternative to their local public school. Meanwhile, many existing charter schools report -- and it's their report -- very little cooperation or support from the School District. Philadelphia now stands at a crossroads of opportunity to seize the initiative to reform our educational system for all of our citizens. Because the creation of a charter school requires the community to join and work together, I believe 5 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 charter schools are an ideal tool to re-energize all of our neighborhoods. This could happen if our school district and city government work with communities to establish charter schools and help them through the process until we reach a point where every neighborhoods has the type of public school it desires. Instead, an antagonistic relationship has apparently developed between the School District and charter schools and their supporters. The impression that many charter supporters have is that the School Board makes a decision in advance about how many charter applications it will approve based on available funds -- and, again, let me reiterate, this is what we're hearing from people who are advocating for charter schools, not necessarily the view of this Councilmember or other members of this committee -- and then they decide which applications to approve, sometimes based on political considerations. I do not necessarily believe that this is the case, but it does seem clear that there is no overriding strategy involved here. 6 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 I would like to hear today from the School Board the articulation of a comprehensive vision on how to utilize charter schools to improve our communities and maintain our residents, especially the middle-class and working-class residents who are most likely to leave because of our failing schools, taking with them their tax base, our tax base, and their contribution to our city. I thank everyone present for their attendance and participation today. I would like to ask each person testifying today to tell us how they foresee charter schools fitting into such a neighborhood revitalization strategy, and also if you could propose solutions as to how the School District and the charter schools can work better together to improve our city's educational alternatives. Hopefully, this hearing will mark the beginning of a new approach, and charter school will be an accepted reform model in Philadelphia. Are there any other Councilmembers that would like to say anything prior to the beginning of our hearing? 7 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 (No response.)

Thank you. In that case, the chair calls Julie Stapleton-Carroll and Brien Gardiner. (Witnesses come forward.).

Prior to the start of the testimony, I would like to have the record reflect that Councilmembers Blondell Reynolds Brown, W. Wilson Good, Jr., Frank Rizzo, and Michael Nutter are in attendance, along with myself, Councilman James Kenney. Sir, could you please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.

Good morning.

Good morning.

My name is Brien Gardiner. I'm President of the Pennsylvania Coalition of Charter Schools, and I'm the Chief Administrative Officer of the Philadelphia Academy Charter School. With me today is Dr. Ann Waiters, who's Interim CAO, Chief Administrative Officer, at the Franklintown Charter High School. Mr. Chairman, Councilmembers, thank you for inviting us to speak to the joint committee 8 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 this morning. I've been asked to address three issues: how effective are charter schools, my assessment of the recent evaluation of proposals by the School District, and how charters can be used strategically. How effective are charter schools? In the past four years, 65 schools, with over 21,000 students, have been developed across the State. Over half of them are in Philadelphia. At our school, we have 644 students, with over 3,000 children on a waiting list. There's been less than 1 percent turnover in students in our first two years of operation. It's too early to provide hard individual test score improvement data, but we also know with freedom comes accountability. To that end, we are not only looking at overall school scores, but we're looking at individual student growth on a year-to-year basis. This way, we can clearly measure our impact on each child. Each of the other charter schools are unique, and they are all striving to achieve their educational mission as well. Many of us reach out to students with the greatest academic needs and attempt to inspire those left behind. So the 9 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 short answer on this question is, I believe we are very effective, but I believe that we also have ample room to grow and improve. Okay, our assessment of the charter school application review process. Personally, we were disappointed because we had an application in for an additional school, the Total Connections Charter School, and I'm aware of several other fine proposals that were also submitted for review. But that disappointment is tempered by my recognition that we must plan growth -- we must effectively plan growth. There needs to be a cooperative dialogue and a fairer system for determining how limited financial resources are used. I believe that this forum provides a perfect forum to establish such a process. I had pleasure of meeting with Board President Ramos and Secretary Kahn recently. I was truly impressed with the profound concern that they expressed and their willingness to investigate sweeping changes in our educational system's operations. It seems obvious that this assessment process should become a part of that larger cooperative dialogue that incorporates the 10 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 needs of the City, the school districts, and the individuals proposing consider charters. And, finally, how charter schools can be used strategically in Philadelphia. And really, this area is limited only by your imagination. I think the top way is to replicate schools that are very, very successful and put them in different areas. But some additional ideas are: making educational plans part of City development and redevelopment proposals; targeting areas of the City where there is serious overcrowding problems or areas where there's specific academic or vocational needs for students; even to looking in a different way at how we set up charters, and maybe even thinking about charter class or classes for areas that cause specific difficulty within the school district such as children with significant mental health needs. It may be well to develop some charter classes within a public school that's directed at meeting those needs. The options just go on and on. But, again, I see everything that we do as being a part of an overall process that measures the needs of 11 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 both the City, the School District, and the charter school -- the people proposing charter schools. Thank you for inviting us here today.

Thank you very much. Prior to the other witnesses, I'd like to read a note from Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller, who is the Chair of the Education Committee, and she regrets at this time that she has an unavoidable 11 a.m. commitment outside of the City. And if possible, she -- it is her intention to return to these hearings immediately upon the completion of this meeting. Dr. Waiters, would you like to --

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen of Council, I appreciate this opportunity to speak to you about charter schools.

Please identify yourself for the record.

I am Dr. Ann Waiters, a former teacher, high school principal, Central Office administrator, and District Superintendent in public education -- the traditional public 12 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 education. Charter schools have become very important to me. I am filling in, as Mr. Gardiner said, at this time as the Interim Chief Administrative Officer. Since my retirement a few years ago, I've worked with a number of sponsoring groups who submitted charter applications to the District and now have three projects pending. In measuring success of charter schools, we have to look at them one at a time. In charter schools, as in traditional public schools, there are a number of variables to be considered. Student achievement is, of course, foremost. Most charter schools are in their first few years of operation, they have attracted and enrolled large numbers of students who previously suffered long-term serious academic failure, so progress in mediating such failure is central to evaluating charter schools. We need to look for students' test scores that show steady academic improvement. Such progress should be monitored closely and regularly so that mid-course corrections can be made each year based on a rigorous analysis of 13 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 student achievement. Group and individual longitudinal data should also be monitored. Another key factor in evaluating charter schools' effectiveness is parent satisfaction. After academic progress, there's nothing more compelling than the empowerment of parents that allows them to vote with their feet. While recognizing that what's good for the goose may not be good for the gander, the design of one charter school may be attractive to some parents who find that once their child is in the school, it may not be as good a fit as they had expected or that they had hoped. But as long as there are parents who want to enroll their child in a charter school, it is certain that that charter school is meeting a need. So hanging in and getting in are important signs of effectiveness. There are other signs and signals to be considered as well, including teacher quality, program diversity, student and staff attendance, parent participation, and quality and diversity and participation of the charter school board. Charter schools should be able to enjoy a strong collaborative working relationship with their host 14 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 school district, as that would bode well for their overall effectiveness too. With respect to the District's review of charter school applications, I admit to being somewhat perplexed. It often appears that the review process is an obstacle course intent on finding ways to eliminate and reject an application. With such a complicated process, charter schools would be well-served if the District staffed a charter school office so that advice could be available, even if that advice had to be given on a nominal fee for service bases. I've used widely respected authorities in special education whose writing skills are just as widely recognized as excellent, only to have the application rejected on the grounds that the special-education section of the application was not acceptable. I don't know who the reviewer was, but I would like to have an opportunity to challenge that assessor and his or her ruling. I believe that all applicants should be given an opportunity to review the proposals that were approved to get a measure of their own strengths and weaknesses. I believe that charter 15 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 schools can be an important strategic initiative for improved student achievement and make a few suggestions: 1. Target charters for areas of the City where there are overcrowded schools and classrooms. The District did identify such areas this year. 2. Encourage more secondary school charters to provide for more focused high schools.

Since high schools are more expensive to operate than elementary and middle schools, provide low-cost or no-cost supports for them such as participation in the District's interscholastic athletic programs, some technological interconnectivity, access for teachers, and so on. 3. Identify what works in charter schools and adopt some of their best practices in curriculum, instruction, administrative, and organizational interventions. Charters are, I believe, one of best and most cost-effective ways for the District to provide options for tens of thousands of students whose only other option is their neighborhood school and that neighborhood school is recognized 16 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 as being inadequate. I thank you for listening to these comments and hope to see a vastly improved and expanded charter school process in the future. Thank you.

Thank you, Doctor. May I ask just a couple questions?

Sure.

Perhaps someone with your experience in both the public-school sector and now the charter -- and I think sometimes it's a misnomer because charter schools are public schools.

I call them traditional public schools versus charter public schools.

Okay. Could you give me an idea as to the differences. What is -- what enables you to have as much what I see as much enthusiasm about what you're doing now? And what is the difference between some of the constraints you had on you and when you were in the traditional public school system and what you deal with now that gives you a little more hope that things can get better? 17 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

I sometimes think of charter schools as kind of a ship of dreams, but dreams that are based in reality of what can done. It's an opportunity to design an educational vehicle that meets specific needs for specific students. While charter schools are open to any who want to enroll, parents do have a choice among them. So that if I design a charter school that's based on, say, theories of knowledge, which is a strong academic program, there may be parents who are looking for a school that focuses more on the arts, on music and writing. So that that's one of the strong suits of charter schools, and that's why educators like myself from the traditional public schools see this as an opportunity to renew our enthusiasm for education.

Do you believe that those choices that exist in the public school system with specialized educational opportunities in the magnets and in the academies, do you believe that's why that they're so popular with parents? 18 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Absolutely.

And it's mirrored -- that system is mirrored in the charter school.

Mirrored in the charter school, absolutely.

What is the ratio in socioeconomic background generally of the parents and families that are in your school?

Right now, our population is about 35 to 40 percent minority and the balance is majority. We are located at the Frankford Arsenal in an impoverished section of the City. So we attract students who are looking for a way to improve achievement and opportunity.

How many students on your waiting list?

We have approximately 300 on our waiting list. We got started late in advertising for our school, so our numbers don't approximate Mr. Gardiner's, so we do have a solid waiting list.

Have you been able to track where your students originated from, from what system, whether it was the public system 19 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 primarily or the parochial school system or the private school system? Do you have an idea as to what the origin of those students are?

A huge proportion of our students really come from remedial disciplinary schools of the public school district of the School District of Philadelphia. The balance of our students come from public school in the area Frankford High School, Kensington. We have a few -- a very small population that would have ordinary have gone to a Catholic school and we have one student who comes from a suburban school district.

And the parents live in the suburbs?

They live in the suburb, yes.

That's a switch, isn't it?

Yes, it is.

So the argument, at least from your -- for your school's particular case that you are actually educating students who would generally be in the public school system at 20 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 a lower cost to the taxpayer than they would be if they were in their traditional public school.

No question.

I just wanted to respond to those questions as well. You know, first of all, you know, we have taken a lot of heat because of our lack of racial diversity. We are in the Far Northeast, and when we had originally designed the program, I was principal at Farrell School and we had a good mix. Unfortunately, we did not have transportation for the first four months of the school year, and many of those people had to leave because they couldn't get their children there. We finally, after not being able to get transportation from the School District, set up our own transportation company, and we're providing transportation now, and we have children from as far away as West Philadelphia, Germantown, East Mt. Airy. And we're making that a part of our thrust in the future to make sure that we take care of that issue. The other question you asked is, why is it different? And it's different because we have the ability to change immediately. If something 21 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 needs to be done, we can do it. You know, from the example of the side of the Transportation Department to simply changing classes, hiring another teacher, you know, looking at the data, seeing where your weak points are; if you have a child with specific special needs, being able to go out and secure that service quickly and expeditiously.

What is the grades -- Councilman DiCicco's interested in what the grades of the schools are as far as the --

We are -- we have kindergarten through 8th grade. And we have a class size of children in each class. And we 16 have -- of the 644 -- we have a charter for 644 17 but we have about 650 children in the school, and 18 150 of them are special-needs children. 19

Your teaching staff 20 have come primarily from where? 21

I would say we have -- I 22 haven't done the exact breakdown -- at least 50 percent from the School District, maybe 20 percent from parochial schools. And the other -- you know, we did -- we were in the planning process 22 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 for seven years and we had a lot of people that had written to us and were involved, and many of those people came. Former students teachers that I knew, that I had when I was in Philadelphia. So about half from Philadelphia and the others from other sources.

And what's the percentage of certification?

We're at about, I'd say, between 85 and 09 percent. And it's critical that we have the option, and I think the School District should be granted that option of providing programs for children with non-certified people. And I think the greatest examples are people that teach piano don't necessarily need to be music teachers. We have some wonderful community artists, we have the director of the Philadelphia murals program that teaches mural arts to kids. You know, and it gives us a great flexibility in being able to provide superior programs to children. And I think technology is another area there where you can get some very specialized trained people in to do things that you can't get 23 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 out of a certified teacher.

Thank you. Prior to the next witnesses testifying, I would like you to stay there so that other -- if any other Councilmember has questions on -- Councilwoman Brown?

Good morning, panel. Restate what currently exists with regards to certified teachers.

We have between 85 and 90 percent certified.

And are any of those -- excuse me?

And we have about 80 percent.

Are those certified teachers in core curricular areas?

Yes.

Everybody who teaches a classroom is certified, with the exception of one secondary math teacher who came from Europe and she was director of the honors math program for the Archdiocese; she's the only non-certified teacher we have teaching a core curricular area. 24 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

And our program is so diverse, there are some areas for which certification just isn't available. For instance, we offer a carpentry teacher, so we have a carpentry teacher who is an expert carpenter and is happily an expert teacher but not a certified teacher. We also have a culinary arts program for our students. And our chef is well-trained at the Philadelphia Restaurant School but has not a teaching licensure. They are all participating, though, in certification programs and are operating under emergency certification as approved by the State.

So is your goal, then, ultimate certification for all of your instructors?

Absolutely.

Okay. Could you state again your position with regards to what you believe the School Board's position should be on certified teachers or not?

Well, I think that they should have the same option that we have, and my 25 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 goal is not to have all certified teachers. And, you know, another person we have is the retired executive director of the Educational Testing Service who works a couple days a week and teaches each child how to write a state-of-the-art research paper. That's not the -- you know, you don't go out and typically find somebody that's a certified teacher that has that type of background, but he will come in and work on a six- to eight- to ten-week basis and go through the whole research process and give the children the background and the support they need to do a state-of-the-art research paper. We got that from the kids. Years ago, when I was again a principal of a K-to-8 school, we would bring the 9th-graders back the following year and ask them where we failed them, and almost in every case, they suggested that we did not give them enough background in writing research papers, and this is an outgrowth of that data.

We would likewise encourage part-time teaching, occasional experts. We would likewise encourage part-time teachers and occasional experts. City Councilmembers might 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 come and do a short course with our students, and certainly we wouldn't be looking for certification among that group. But our more permanently assigned teachers, we are working with them to get certification.

Did I hear you say in your testimony that -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- for those charter school applications that are not approved, you believe that the leaders of those charter school institutions should have the opportunity to review applications that aren't approved?

Absolutely. Because I think that they then -- it's like judging an essay; it becomes a model answer. Now, even though the application provides information as to what is expected in response to that question, to actually look at the application that has been approved, I think, can be instructive to groups who work for years and work long, long arduous hours on these applications. They don't want to give up, they want to apply the next year. Well, I would like them to have an opportunity to not 27 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 make the same mistakes again.

Is that to suggest, then, that the criteria that is provided to prospective charter-school candidates is not sufficient in terms of explaining in clear details what the expectations are?

I think that the application is clear, but I think it would be even more instructive to see the approved applications.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Councilmember DiCicco.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And good morning. I think you said your schools is grades K to 8?

That is correct.

Did you start out that way?

Yes, we did.

Did you encounter any problems with the upper grades because these are kids who came from either traditional public 28 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 schools --

Yes.

-- other schools?

We had -- and, you know, if somebody takes their child out of school and transfers them in 8th grade, they do that for a reason.

Right.

And most of the reasons were that they were looking for some specialized program to deal with some difficulties.

And how did it work out with those students who came in from --

You know, it wasn't perfect. First years are hardly ever perfect.

Right.

But all in all, I'd say it was very successful. We had excellent test scores our first year. I believe we were about 1350 in the upper grades, which is good in Philadelphia.

And how long has your school been in -- I apologize. I got here a little bit late. How long has your school been in 29 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 existence?

We opened last -- this is our second year of existence.

And I think the chairman, Councilman Kenney, asked the question that you're obviously bringing children in from all over the Philadelphia region?

We've set up our own transportation company and we are bringing children in from all over. We started -- it was difficult in the beginning; the first four months, we did not have transportation, so the majority of the kids live within about a ten-mile radius of the school. But at this point, we are capable of doing citywide transportation.

I want to ask you about transpor -- is there a special transportation that brings the kids who are from outside the area to your school?

We do it.

You do it all.

We do it.

Are there any children who come by way of public 30 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 transportation?

No. 4

None? Okay.

Some are -- you know, very few parents, you know, because of their own schedule. We do have before- and after-school kids, so some parents do bring their children to those.

Is there any difference in the manner by which -- or the portion of your funding for your school compared to the traditional public school as it relates to administrative cost? A lot is being said about the current School District budget and previous years' budgets. There's always this question that comes out of Council and from some other folks about cutting administrative costs. Do you do it at the same level of costs that the traditional public schools do it, or do you think do it at higher or lower?

Well, our funding is about 30 percent less than the Philadelphia public schools would be. Administratively, you know, really, I'm the only thing administrator of the 31 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 school. I have two secretaries and I have my NTA that came with me from public school, who I call my business manager, but, you know, she orders and does checks and orders. That's the extent of our administration. What we have done is set up a lead teacher at each grade level. They teach, but they coordinate and pace the program at each grade level so the teachers don't feel isolated. They get their questions answers, they have an hour and a half of planning time every day to resolve problems within the classrooms, and they also meet at small learning communities for K to 2, to 5, and to 8. So we've built in systems where they can manage and control much of their own destiny.

So simply put, you're able to do what a traditional public school does for a lot less money, from administrative and teaching and --

That's putting it very simply because we also have the benefit of being released from several requirements.

Right. 32 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

And I would hope the School District at some point would get that as well.

That's where I was going. Thank you. One other question in the area of teachers. When you were recruiting, did you have any difficulty in recruiting teachers?

Yeah. We had way too many.

Way too many.

We had -- we recruited our lead teachers first and they assisted us in hiring the teachers that would work with them so that we ensured that we had -- we tried to ensure that we'd have functional teams before we even opened so that the lead teacher would hire people that were --

Is there a residency requirement for teachers?

No, there's not.

There is not?

Well, I live in the City and the majority of the people do. 33 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Do you know what percentage of your teachers are non-Philadelphia residents?

I'd say it's maybe percent. 7

Out of how many 8 teachers? 9

Around 40. 10

Councilman Nutter 11 is asking a question through me. Were these 12 people already in the system, teachers? 13

Again, about half were 14 in the system. Some came from parochial schools 15 and, again, others were involved in our planning 16 process or, you know, just found us through the 17 newspaper. 18

Okay, thank you. 19 No further questions. 20

Councilmember Rizzo.

Thank you. I'd like to follow up on the issue of certification, teacher certification. I think it's important that we clarify. The impression 34 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 that I'm getting is that there might be some concern that teachers teaching in charter schools are not certified, and that doesn't exist anywhere else, and I know it does. There's the emergency state requirement in the event that there's a situation. But for the record, there are uncertified teachers teaching in both the parochial schools and the public school system. Am I correct to assume --

I spent years in 13 Philadelphia, and I can guarantee you that we have 14 uncertified teachers teaching in -- 15

So it is not 16 exclusive to the charter school -- 17

No. 18

-- that we would 19 have an. 20

And it's not necessarily 21 bad either. 22

No, I'm not 23 suggesting that. 24 But the message that we're sending that 25 this is maybe exclusive to a charter school when 35 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 you're getting a better teacher in the public or parochial school, but there are, and we'll ask the School District to identify the number of uncertified teachers that they have in the public school system. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. If there are no other questions, what I would like to do is ask -- I know you had a young man who would like to testify. And then we'll go to -- and you are not Julie Stapleton-Carroll. UNIDENTIFIED PANEL MEMBER: No, I am not. (Witness comes forward.)

Mr. Gardiner, Councilwoman Brown has one more question prior to this young man's testimony. Councilwoman Brown.

With regards to measurement of academic achievement, is any testing of any nature done for students upon entry? 36 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

We do pre-imposed tests every year, and that's our major -- what we use as our major indicator of what children need. We also assess reading and math every six to eight week so that we ensure we're on target.

Okay, very well. Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Could you please pull that microphone close to you, identify yourself for the record, and take your time.

I'm Daniel Repsch, and I'm an 8th-grade student at student at (inaudible).

Daniel, could you do me a favor for the stenographer. Spell your last name, please.

R-E-P-S-C-H.

Thank you. Please proceed.

Good afternoon, Committee Councilmembers.

Good afternoon.

My name is Daniel Repsch, and I'm a student at PACS, the Philadelphia 37 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 Academy Charter School. Students at PACS like myself agree that our school builds character and instills a sense of respect in every student. We learn to care for and help each other as students and as classmates and as friends. Even the teachers get involved with the students and help them in various ways. If the problem is school-related, then tutoring is available during recess, lunch, and after school. If it's a personal problem, the teacher will talk to the student, involving only the people necessary. When a problem does arise, no matter how minor, it is solved immediately. PACS was created with small classes in mind. There's only to students per room. 17 It is a good thing because education and 18 problem-solving can be brought down to an 19 individual level. 20 Many special programs have been added 21 such as gym, Chinese, research, art, and music. 22 These serve to better our education and give us an 23 edge over other students when applying to high schools and colleges. Also, there's a resource room that -- for children who need extra help in 38 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 some subjects and special ed. classes for students with special needs. Although we have many specialty teachers, they all care about us as much as our home room teachers. The trips we take to New York, Washington D.C., and everywhere else are great trips that serve to entertain and educate. Many of the students would never see these places if it weren't for the teachers trying so hard to get us there. Our school is designed differently from other schools. Mr. Gardiner believes that parents should not only be involved in their own kids but also be involved in the school. So our system was designed that made it mandatory for each family to donate four hours to the school per student. These four hours could be anything: working the lunchroom, helping out at fund-raiser, etc. Parents and children are given a say on how the school is run and can make changes wherever necessary. Our school is very high-tech. We have a new Dell computer in each room plus about 35 in our computer lab, all networked to several 39 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 printers. In addition, we have about new I-MACs in the library. Many, many computers were just donated and there can now be three or four computers in each room, which brings another point to mind. The school trusted several 8th-graders, including myself, to try fixing the donated computers. It was an interesting and educational experience for everyone involved to learn how a computer worked from the inside out. It was a good feeling to know that the school trusted us. I'll finish up with the fact that we have a very well-maintained school, with both our janitors and our students constantly working to keep everything clean. Thank you for your time and have a nice day.

Thank you very much 19 enter for your testimony. You said in your 20 testimony that you're an 8th-grader.

Yes.

Where did you attend school prior to your charter school?

I went to St. Cecilia's.

Okay. Thank you. 40 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 Are there any questions for Dan? (No questions.)

Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you.

You're welcome .

Please identify yourself for the record and proceed.

Good morning.

Good morning.

My name is Michael A. Bowman (ph.), and I'm here today with Julie Stapleton-Carroll and Amy (inaudible).

Could you do me a favor, sir. Could you just pull that microphone closer to you.

Absolutely.

Thank you very much.

And we are all members of the proposed Wissahickon Charter School Planning Committee. I'm going to read a statement first and then, hopefully, we can take questions from you, Councilman Kenney, and the esteemed panel. 41 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Thank you.

The intent of Act 22, the Pennsylvania charter school law, is to foster innovation and encourage educational choice for the children of the Commonwealth. The practical effect has been to provide some new educational opportunities, for the most part, in districts where the average scores on the PSSA and other standardized tests are below acceptable levels. According to the School District of Philadelphia, we are home to 35 of the Commonwealth's charter schools, and we enrolled 66 percent of all charter school students in Pennsylvania. As you probably know, the charter school concept has been praised by many in the public and private sectors. In fact, charter schools have been seen by many, including Mayor Street, as a tactic for slowing population loss in the City of Philadelphia. While it is true that the wage tax and high insurance rates are in part responsible for our population decline, for many families, the deciding factor is the quality of our schools. Unfortunately, many of our friends 42 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 have chosen to leave Philadelphia rather than to help change Philadelphia public schools. Charter schools are certainly not the cure for all educational ills but there is a demand for them. Most charter schools have waiting lists and some are quite lengthy. Each year, a significant number of groups apply to the School District of Philadelphia for charters in spite of the financial disadvantage of the charter school funding formula. Most founding groups apply because they believe that they can provide education in a way that will enhance learning for their students and are fully aware of the effort involved in the creation of a new school. However, despite the apparent need in Philadelphia, only 3 of the 27 applications in the most recent cycle were approved by the School District of Philadelphia. As an example, the application of our group, the Wissahickon Charter School Group, was denied. We have a very strong application, which we have included in your packet of information that we sent to you earlier, and have demonstrated that we can create and run a school which will 43 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 benefit the children of Philadelphia. In spite of this, we were denied a charter. However, we are committed to opening this school and we have applied for reconsideration to the Board of Education and specifically addressed the concerns outlined in the resolution by the Board. We have also collected in this process in excess of the 1,000 signatures necessary to appeal to the State of Pennsylvania Charter School Appeal Board. The Friends of the Wissahickon Charter School is an idea that was germinated among a small group of parents beginning in the fall of 1999. The planning group grew throughout the process but the vision for the school has always remained consistent: The vision is to provide a unique learning opportunity to the children of the City through hands-on experience in the natural environment and integrate learning through this theme. Refinement of the vision occurred through consultation with experts in environmental education as well as vigorous discussion within our planning group, most of whom are educators as well. Our vision is sound, academically grounded, 44 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 provides a unique use of the resources of the City and the education of our children, and teaches our children to be stewards of our community and the environment. The founding members of the Wissahickon charter school come to the planning process with significant expertise in environmental education, teaching, curriculum-building, school administration, and child development. Included in our request for reconsideration, which you also should have received last week, is a section which highlights the specific skills and experience of founding members.

We have been working on the design of the school since October of 1999, when we received the planning grant from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to support the development of our application. Since then, the group has met consistently on a biweekly basis to formulate the proposal and engage in outreach efforts to build strong community support. The level of commitment is truly impressive among an extremely diverse group of individuals with a shared vision. The proposed Wissahickon Charter School 45 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 would be located in Northwest Philadelphia in order to take advantage of the Wissahickon Valley and its watershed. As you can see from the map we've provided today, there are very few charter schools in this area. This area, however, provides many opportunities to study both the natural world and man's relation to it. We have been selected by the Fairmount Park trust as the preferred developer of Thomas Mansion as a primary site for the school. Thomas Mansion, owned by the City of Philadelphia, is located at Wissahickon and Johnson Streets, directly in Fairmount Park, and has close access to Rittenhouse Town and the Wissahickon Valley. I'd like to point out that the Inquirer actually did an article in which it referenced Thomas Mansion as one of the properties owned by the City of Philadelphia in Fairmount Park that could use renovation. Our educational approach is not one in use by any other public school in Philadelphia. While there are environmentally-themed small learning communities within schools and environmental education is a part of the science 46 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 curriculum in many schools, this approach would be unique for a public school in Philadelphia. In our application, we've provided an overview of how a curriculum based on this theme would work at our school. During testimony before the School Board of Philadelphia, we presented the results of a study completed in June 2000 in which -- which concluded that a curriculum such as ours could improve students performance in mathematics and language arts as well as science. The study also noted improved student behavior and fewer discipline problems. Most of the members of the founding groups are parents of preschool and/or school-aged children. By way of example, I am the parent of two beautiful children, one of which is about to go to kindergarten this year. As previously mentioned, a significant number of founding members have advanced degrees in education, as well as experience in that field. Also by way of an example, I -- while I am a lawyer now, I used to be a teacher in the New York City public school system. 47 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 We are all excited about this school and have worked hard to bring it to this point. The governing structure of the school ensures that the founding parents, as well as parents of children who are enrolled later, will continue to govern Wissahickon Charter School, ensuring accountability to parents and children. We have received, because of our application and because of our efforts in the community, a great deal of support from individual members of the community as well as from institutions active in environmental education. The Philadelphia Zoo, the Fairmount Park Commission, the Schuylkill Center for Environmental Education, and the Andorra Natural Area are just a few of the organizations that have offered support for our efforts. As stated previously, as parents and supporters of the City of Philadelphia, who dearly wish to have our children be a part of the public school education process in the City of Philadelphia, we are continually discouraged to witness neighbors and friends of ours, rather than stay and be a part of the process, as we choose 48 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 to, move to the surrounding suburbs.

Our vision is to develop an urban school that focuses on the environment and community stewardship, offering a great education for the children of the City of Philadelphia. We intend to move forward with our application and do whatever is necessary to start this school. While appealing to the State obviously would not be our preference, we feel strongly that our application has significant merit. Our hope is that the School Board will support us in their reconsideration. Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you very much for your testimony. Do you have any idea why you're application was rejected and what were the comments relative to the rejection and what your view of the comments were, and could you give me some idea as to what surrounded the rejection issue.

Well, I'll like to invite Julie Stapleton-Carroll actually to answer that question. 49 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

And prior to answering the question, please identify yourself for the record.

My name is Julie Stapleton-Caroll. Would you like me to spell that?

No, we have it, we have it. Thank you.

The question was. . . ?

The question was, why -- do you have any idea why your application was rejected? Were there comments in the rejection that was clear as to why it was rejected, and what are your views on those comments?

Well, the (indiscernible) from the School Board, which we also included in the packet that we sent you last week, the analysis from the School Board or the staff of the School Board, as well as the resolution by the School Board presumably -- and we take it at its word, that that's the reasons for their denial of our application. 50 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 In our reconsideration request to the School Board, we addressed those issues, we think, sufficiently. And, again, as Michael had mentioned, we hope that the School Board agrees with that.

What were their --

If I may -- this is Michael Bowman again. One of the interesting reasons given was that it may have some detrimental effects on the deseg. policy of the School District. And the reason why I found it interesting was because if you look at the planning committee of our proposed school, it is by far one of the more diverse organizations that I've ever been a part of. So it just seemed baffling to me that that would be a reason given to deny our application.

Councilmember Nutter.

Thank you. Good morning. What do you mean by that?

What do I mean by what? You mean -- 51 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

The response that was given back to you that that this might affect the deseg. policy. I'm not understanding that.

Well, let me just say that they weren't exactly as specific as they probably could have been with respect to that reason given, but the reason stated was that it may have a detrimental effect on the deseg. policies of the School District of Philadelphia.

As it relates to other schools in the area?

As it relates to other schools in the area, yes.

And the anticipated a detrimental affect would be what?

Well, again, the School Board was not as specific as maybe it could have been, and I would not -- I'm not in a position to --

Fine. I just -- it's helpful, quite honestly, to know kind of what you know and what you don't know about a question and answer. The School District will be up shortly, and we can certainly ask them that. 52 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Sure, right.

I just wanted to know what you knew or what you understood that part of the question to be.

There was a stated reason; however, they weren't really specific as to really explaining that reason.

Okay, all right. I'll follow up on that later.

Thank you very much. Are there any other questions for these witnesses?

Yes.

Councilwoman Brown.

You mentioned on of your testimony, last paragraph, and I quote: "Our educational approach is one not used by any other public school in Philadelphia." And then you cite a study completed in June 2000. Could you speak in some further detail about the study. Was the study used as the foundation upon which you built the curriculum? Was the study related to best practices in this 53 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 particular area? Tell us more about the study.

This is a study that was completed last year by -- I believe it's a group out in Portland, Oregon, and Ben Berenstein (ph.) actually had worked with us on that, but it was an assessment of additional schools similar to the design that we had and the success of the curriculum in achieving reading and math targets. It was not based -- we developed our curriculum in conjunction with that and based our curriculum development on a number of schools that we had visited and researched, not necessarily those that were covered in the research specifically, but that complemented really what the design of the curriculum was.

So did the program you had mirror an existing program someplace in the United States?

It's a compilation of a number of different curriculums that we reviewed as well as additions that we had based on the uniqueness of the Philadelphia area. So we visited a school called "The Earth School" 54 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 in New York City, which is a public school with a similar design, as well as had significant discussion with East Bay Conservation Corps, which is a conservation group out in San Francisco. We also looked at some of the internal schools here in Philadelphia that have small learning communities that are based on the environment as well as some of the schools that take the opportunity of our arboretum as well as other natural areas in the City. So it's a compilation, really, of a number of different approaches.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you very much. Any other questions for these witnesses? (No further questions.)

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The chair now calls 55 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 Secretary Kahn, President Ramos, and Board Member Christine James-Brown and anyone else that the District has with them that they would like to bring to the table. (Witnesses come forward.)

Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed.

Good morning. I'm Debra Kahn, Secretary of Education for the City of Philadelphia, and I thank you for this opportunity on behalf of Mayor Street's administration to discuss Philadelphia's public charter schools. Our administration believes that public charter schools are an important initiative in the ongoing effort to build our city's neighborhoods and to provide children with quality educational alternatives. In order to attract and retain families, all communities need to offer school choices that are a good fit for a broad variety of schools, schools in which teachers and students feel secure and in which youngsters become well-prepared to take their place in the workplace. 56 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 Charter schools that meet that vision expressed in the current charter school law are schools that innovate and improve pupil learning, they provide professional growth opportunities for teachers, and they are schools that accept accountability for their performance. These are schools that merit public support. Two weeks ago, Mayor Street unveiled a bold new vision to enhance Philadelphia's position as an economically competitive city comprised of thriving neighborhoods. The Mayor's Neighborhood Transformation Initiative sets an ambitious goal of reaching a 5 percent population increase by 2010, the first time in 50 years the City's population would have risen. To achieve this mark will require a set of strategies not only for issues pertaining to housing, commercial development, and workforce development, but certainly also for public education. And as we work to strengthen our district schools, the growth of quality public charter schools can and should be a part of those strategies. Over the past four years since the charter school law was enacted, the Philadelphia 57 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 Board of Education has assumed its new and very demanding responsibility of considering and approving charter school applications with the highest degree of professionalism and integrity. Our school board understands how challenging it is to operate a good school and how important it is that we avoid proliferating bad ones. That is why the Board has worked within the parameters of the law to make the charter application review and approval process based only on its merits. This thorough evaluation process has led to Philadelphia becoming one of the largest sponsors of charter schools in the nation. We currently have 34 schools operating in the City and one in the nearby suburbs that together serve more than 14,000 Philadelphia students. This represents about two-thirds of Pennsylvania's charter school enrollment, and by itself would constitute the sixth largest school district in the Commonwealth. With deferred approvals coming on line plus three new approvals, the number of schools in operation is expected to rise to 41 in September. Clearly, many families are responding 58 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 to charter schools' unique advantages of smaller size, greater flexibility, some special curricula, and orderly environments. The support an enthusiasm demonstrated by parents and community members involved with many applicants and in currently-operating schools is impressive and gratifying, but we have a responsibility to evaluate charter schools on their actual performance and not only on their popularity. For all of the good that charter schools may be doing to offer new educational opportunities, it is only fair, in my judgment, to recognize that the law also imposes significant operational and financial obligations on the School District. We believe that changes in the charter school law are needed to pave way for more aggressive expansion in Philadelphia. These changes should create the conditions that are right for school boards and right for charter schools to succeed.

In brief, the legislative changes would include giving school boards a more explicit direction to establish approval of criteria for each round the charter applicants so that these 59 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 schools can be used, as has been discussed here, strategically, clarifying and strengthening accountability and assessment requirements and adopting a funding formula that is cost-neutral for host districts. You will hear directly, of course, from charter operators today, but we also know that some of their concerns are about access to capital markets for facility financing, start-up funding, and perhaps a different application cycle, so that approved schools have more time to get up and running. I've testified in Harrisburg about the current law and will be working in the days ahead to try to effect some of these changes. Let me focus briefly on the financial aspects of charter schools since this subject is so connected to the School District's current financial crisis and has been an unfortunate ongoing source of tension the District and our charter schools. The simple fact is that charter schools are one of the five key expense drivers identified by the District in its multi-year financial plan, which has been shared with all of the members of Council. 60 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 5 million. By contrast, the School District bore no expense whatsoever for this purpose as recently as fiscal year 1997. For the next year, the net cost of charters is expected to equal about half of the District's projected $191 million deficit. But these facts tell only a part of the story. The impact of charter school on the School District cannot be separated from the overall problem of school funding in Philadelphia and Pennsylvania. The current under-funding situation shortchanges children in both District schools and charges. Charter schools are adding to public school enrollment and expanding constituency for public education in Philadelphia, and that's really a welcome development. However, because our State funding barely recognizes enrollment growth, we are forced to spread already limited funds around to more students. Our goal should be to work together to provide all public school students with adequate support rather than to pit 61 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 one group against another contesting for the same scarce resources. Charter schools have dramatically changed the landscape of public education in Philadelphia. They have the potential to play a role in helping to rejuvenate our neighborhoods. And the competition the charters provide and their ability to complement educational opportunities now available to public school students makes it worthwhile for all of us who care about public education to learn from one another -- and I think that's a real value of the hearing today -- to work together to help charters succeed and to address the challenges that they present to the School Board for the benefit of Philadelphia's children. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Mr. President, would you please give your testimony after identifying yourself.

Good morning.

Good morning.

My name is Pedro Ramos. 62 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 I'm the President of the Board of Education. Chairman Kenny and members of the Council, I want to thank you for the opportunity to participate in this morning's hearing. The resolution calling for this hearing stated three goals: to determine how the School District of Philadelphia is cooperating with the City's public charter schools; to determine how the School District evaluates its charter applications; and to ensure the effectiveness of our currently-operating charter schools. We will address all of these issues in our opening testimony as well as responding to other questions received in advance of the hearings. Following my opening statements, School Board Member Chris James-Brown, who's also the Chair of the Education Committee, which leads the Board on this effort, will testify to the process by which the District reviews and evaluates charter applications. I will then address, after she speaks, some of the successes and challenges of Philadelphia's charter school initiatives over the past four years, and then go beyond my written testimony to address issues you mentioned earlier 63 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 in terms of trying -- a lot of what we're going to identify are some of those challenges and talk about the ideas. Let me say at the outset that we believe that public school choice is important to the ongoing effort to build strong communities and provide children with quality public education. In order to attract and retain families, all communities need to offer school choices that are a good fit for a broad variety of students, schools in which students and teachers feel secure and in which youngsters become well-prepared to take their places as productive citizens in the working world. The School District has for many years offered a variety of school choice programs that have served thousands of students each year, including our voluntary desegregation program, our magnet and special-admissions schools, and our criteria-based small learning communities. And public charter schools that match the vision expressed in the charter law, which includes innovation, improving student learning, professional growth opportunities for teachers and 64 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 schools, and accountability for performance provide an important expansion of school choice in this district. In just the four years since Pennsylvania's charter school law was enacted, our school district has been a pioneering participant in the charter school experiment. Philadelphia is one of the largest sponsors of public charter schools in the nation and is certainly the largest in this commonwealth. There are currently 34 charter schools operating in Philadelphia and one in the nearby suburbs, that together are approved to serve more than 14,000 Philadelphia students. Three additional charter schools are approved and have delayed their opening. So far in this year's cycle, we have approved three more. This brings a total number that could currently serve our students as of now to 41. As of now meaning for next year. As of this current school year, the enrollment in the Philadelphia charter schools that are open and operating constitutes nearly two-thirds of Pennsylvania's total charter school enrollment. While in most cases it is too soon to 65 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 declare success, or failure for that matter, we do know that the schools are offering a variety of different curricula and are evidently providing more parents with a preferred alternative to School District-run schools. We also know that of the first -- of the 1st through 12th-graders enrolled in our charter schools in the current year, approximately 27 percent did not come from the public school system, and that the schools that opened this year for the first time, the proportion of schools not coming from public schools was approximately 36 percent.

Thus, public charter schools are increasingly a choice made by parents of students outside the public school system motives. Most of us would agree that parental choice is important in building support and a constituency for public schools. However, we would also agree that choice is not end in itself; we must offer choices that support the School District's objectives of increasing student achievement and satisfying our customers. Therefore, it is incumbent on the Board of Education, dealing with our public charter schools 66 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 as well as in dealing with other forms of school choice to identify and support those educational choices that have a reasonable likelihood of improving achievement and earning parent satisfaction. The charter law has afforded many families new educational opportunities and afforded the School District a chance to observe many different strategies. From my visits and other contacts with charter schools, I have seen innovation and more aggressive use of non-traditional strategies in a number of areas, including schedules and rosters, school climate, parental involvement, community involvement, special education, non-instructional (what I call "back office") services, professional development, fund-raising curriculum. I must also confess that in some cases, charters are indistinguishable from regular District schools in good as well as bad ways. While the charter law affords many families new educational opportunities, the law also imposes a significant operational and financial obligation on Pennsylvania school 67 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 districts that simply can't be ignored. million for the District in the current year. This figure includes transportation and administrative costs. million. " Students do not transfer out of a district -- out of a District school in neat packages of 30 students from a given grade in a given school, but more often in smaller numbers per class. A charter school of 300 students does not reduce our need for teachers by ten teachers, as one might suppose. Second -- this is what I call the? "General public school funding problem" in Philadelphia -- since the total State allocation to the School District is not sensitive to increased enrollment, when our charters bring us additional students, which I think most of us 68 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 would generally think is a good thing, historically, we only receive about $420 per student in additional State funding, whereas we're required to pay charter schools $5,558 per pupil from the District's budget for each regular- education student and 10,642 for each special- education student. This means that as more and more charter schools are approved, the per-pupil funds available to the regular School District schools as well as the funds available to the existing charter decrease substantially. Obviously, this flaw in the funding of this school reform effort is significant, given our projection of a very substantial operating deficit in the 2000-2001 year. We want to increase the number of educational opportunities for all public school students in the City, but we must do so in a way that is good policy and feasible, given our resources. Public charter schools also pose significant operational challenges to the District, and I'll talk more later about how we're dealing with some of this those. The annual 69 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 application renewal process and the modest level of day-to-day support provided by the District is making us devote increasing administrative time, people, and money. If the Philadelphia charters were regarded as a separate district, the 14,000 currently enrolled in charter schools would constitute the seventh largest school district in the Commonwealth.

Next year, the approximately 18,000 Philadelphia students in public charter schools will constitute the third largest school district, beyond only Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. We want to expand the number of quality public charter schools we can offer, but we must do it in a way that is manageable for the District and responsive, considering the many students and parents being served. It's now my pleasure to introduce Christine James-Brown, a School Board member and Chair of the Education Committee of the Board of Education, who is going to address issues regarding the process by which the Board evaluates charter applications. Then I'll come back to talk more about the -- 70 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Thank you very much. Please identify yourself for the record.

Yes. Good morning, Chairman Kenny and other Councilmembers.

Good morning.

I'm Christine James-Brown, a member of the Board of Education and current Chair of the Education Committee. I am pleased to have the opportunity to discuss Philadelphia's public charter school application process. This is obviously not the most exciting component of this presentation, but I think it's important and I ask you to bear with me. As you know, the Commonwealth passed Act 22, the charter school law, in the summer of 1997. Because the School District, like you, believes in many of the underlying principles of the charter school movement, such as accountability for results, community ownership, local control, and deregulation, we have led the state in supporting charter schools. The School District has received a 71 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 total of 100 charter school applications since Act was passed, 38 of which have received the 4 Board's approval. In comparison, the other 500 5 school districts in Pennsylvania combined have 6 granted charters to only 41 applicants, but these 7 numbers should not be interpreted to mean that 8 it's easy to get a charter school approved in 9 Philadelphia. We, the Board, believe it's our job 10 to approve only those charter schools that will 11 offer clear and needed alternatives to the 12 District and that will have the potential 13 leadership and know-how necessary to operate 14 successfully. 15 In addition to establishing charter 16 schools in Pennsylvania, Act 22 also sketches out 17 the process by which school districts must review 18 charter school applicants. The law outlines basic 19 criteria that must be met by all charter school 20 applicants as well as the timelines that must be 21 observed by both applicants and school districts 22 throughout the process. Beyond that minimal amount of guidance, however, the responsibility rests with the school districts to supplement and define the application process to best meet the 72 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 needs in their communities. We in Philadelphia have taken this responsibility very seriously. The Board has adapted the generic one-size-fits-all charter school application published yearly by the Pennsylvania Department of Education so as to craft an application that more accurately reflects what it takes to be a successful charter school here in Philadelphia. The most important aspect of Philadelphia's charter school application process is a set of high standards to which the Board hold each application submitted to the School District. When the Board examines the application, we don't just look for the best five or ten in any given year; instead, we use a review process that is criteria-referenced, which supports our goal to grant charts only to those proposals that will offer Philadelphia's children an educational choice that is worth making and to insist on accountability measures that will allow parents to make their comparisons about the track records of charter schools versus the track records of regular public schools. 73 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 Also, we have supplemented our application with a comprehensive and detailed set of guidelines that assist the applicants in planning their school and in completing the application. These guidelines explain the selection criteria that the Board will use, and beginning this past year, they also laid out a set of priorities that the District established for where charter schools are most needed in the City of Philadelphia. Specifically, the guidelines state that the Board will show competitive preference for applications to established charter schools that are: 1. Located and serve public school students in over-crowded areas, specifically students in elementary and middle schools in the following clusters: Edison, Fels, Kensington, and the southern half of Bartram. 2. Will serve students from under-performing schools. 3. Will offer an alternative to students in comprehensive high school. 4.

Offer an alternative to students 74 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 with disciplinary problems. The Board recognizes the potential of charter schools to strengthen our all of our neighborhoods and to help stem middle-class flight. At the same time, the current charter schools already have a median poverty rate that is points less than the School District as a 9 whole, and three of the charters have poverty 10 rates below those of any regular District school, including are special-admissions schools and an those located in the highest-income area of the City.

Could I interrupt for one second?

Yes.

You had given me four clusters -- well, I don't know if we even use those terms anymore, but we will for the sake of argument. Four clusters in each criteria -- this was overcrowding which was the one you gave for Edison, Fels, Kensington and. Bartram.

Yes.

Then there was under-performing -- 75 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

From anywhere in the District under-performing.

So there's no 5 specific clusters that are identified as either under-performing or disciplinary issues.

Right. The under-performing criteria is citywide; it's just the schools that are under-performing. And, frankly, they're the schools that have now been identified as part of our empowerment plan for needing increased attention.

And do they reflect any specific cluster group?

I think there's a different -- with respect to the under-performing schools, what we're saying -- what we were saying in the competitive preferences was, for example, if you're near a poorly performing school and you want to set up a charter in her that area that is likely to serve that community, we would give that -- you know, that should count in favor of the application.

But the under-performing and -- 76 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

(Unintelligible; parties talking over each other.)

Have you identified either the under-performing and the disciplinary issues? Are they also reflective of the overcrowded clusters?

Well, in some situations, there may be a relationship between the two, but we were looking in particular at how to relieve the burden on very overcrowded schools and we could those schools and those clusters.

Okay.

But then we also wanted to address parents who may want to give their children a choice if their neighborhood school is a school that's under-performing educationally.

Okay. I'm sorry to interrupt. Please proceed.

We will work hard to continue to ensure that the charter initiative serves all our neighborhoods and all of our student to the maximum degree. Looking ahead to the future cycles, our 77 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 charter school application will purposely remain a work in progress, as the Board will continue to use each year's experience with the charter school initiative to inform and refine the questions and criteria that make up the following year's application. The charter school application process, as mandated by the charter school law, is a vigorous one, both for the applicants and the School District. There are, however, a number of ways charter applicants can receive support from the School District, the State, and from other organizations. By state law, the School District's principal role in the charter application process is that of an evaluator of charter school applications. However, the School District has also made an ongoing effort to provide assistance to the charter applicants. The School District holds an information session for Philadelphia charter school applicants each year in the early fall, and District staff are available to answer applicants' question via telephone and e-mails year-round. 78 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 It should be noted, however, that extensive support to the applicants would be inappropriate for two reasons: First, more active support for the development of the application could create a conflict of interest with our role as evaluator of these applications; and, second, all resources we put toward these efforts come at the expense of the District's other schools because the charters receive their full share of all administrative dollars in their per-pupil application. State support for applicants comes from two forms: First, the Pennsylvania Department of Education provides start-up funding in the form of planning grants ranging from 10,000 to 25,000 to dozens of prospective charter school applicants each year. Applicants are free to use this money in a variety of ways as they attempt to pull together their charter school applications. The State also supports applicants by conducting workshops that guide applicants through the process. Finally, applicants in Philadelphia have access to one of the two State-endorsed 79 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 charter school technical assistance organizations: Drexel University's Foundation, Inc. is one of the few groups that has been working with Philadelphia charter schools since 1997. Foundations is able to provide applicants with a wide range of Philadelphia-specific resources and suggestions. Each year, many applicants utilize the technical assistance services provided by Foundations, and we have also seen an increase in applicants that have received support from education management organizations. This year's application cycle, the School District's fourth, resulted in 27 charter school applications. The applications proposed charters that would serve a wide variety of students, from elementary, middle, and high school students, to at-risk students and students interested in learning about technology and other issues, to make a few. We have received two applicants that propose to serve students in their homes by using the Internet. Once the School District receives the application, we are required by Act 22 to adhere 80 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 to an extraordinarily tight schedule. The Board requested that School District staff read each application and prepare a report assessing whether it met the selection criteria outlined in the application guideline. As required by State law, the Board then led public hearings, accepted any additional information that the applicants chose to provide after those hearings, reviewed the complete applicant and stat summaries, and voted on whether to grant or deny charters. All of this is done within roughly a four-month period.

The School District takes this process seriously and we commit the resources necessary to remain in compliance with the law's tight, tight frame. Over the past four years, the Board has approved, as I said earlier, 38 out of 100 applicants. While it would not be appropriate for us to discuss the merits of any particular charter proposal in this setting, I believe it is helpful to give you a general sense of the kinds of reasons that the Board may disapprove a charter request. I will do so using the applications received for the fall of 2000 as an example. 81 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 As you know, only applicants of 27 3 were approved this year. While the proportion of the approved applications was lower than in previous years, there are reasons: Two applicants withdrew before completing the process; Two were from groups based outside of Philadelphia and had no demonstrated ties to the communication, which they must have, according to State law; Six were resubmissions of applications that were rejected in previous years, and the new submissions did not show significant improvement to warrant approval; Among the remaining applicants, reasons for rejection may have included an applicant's failure to indicate that it would be able to obtain a building to house the program, lack of evidence of a sound financial plan, lack of broad, sustainable community support, concerns about impact on the District's desegregation plan, and/or inadequate descriptions of the curriculum assessment and instructional program. As I have said earlier, the Board of 82 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 Education values the potential of charters to give our students and parents solid educational choices. At the same time, founding a new school is a very complex venture -- logistically, financially, and educationally. And we want to be sure that each charter will be on solid ground. The Board take very seriously our responsibility to ensure that charters that we do approve have a real chance of succeeding. The final step that Act provides at 12 the District level is to permit applicants who are 13 not granted a charter by the Board to resubmit 14 their applications to the School District. This 15 year, we received a total of 13 requests from 16 applicants to reconsider their application. 17 According to the charter school law, the Board 18 must take action on the resubmitted applicants on 19 May 7th. Any applicants who are denied approval 20 at this stage may appeal to the State. 21 In closing, let me say that I look 22 forward to receiving comments on the charter school application process. As I stated earlier, the process is, and will remain, a work in progress as the School District continues to learn 83 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 more about charter schools and their important role in the education of Philadelphia as's children.

Thank you very much. Mr. President, you had more additional comments?

Yeah. I'm going to ask you, Mr. Chairman, whether you would prefer to do questions on the process before going on to my recapping of the --

Yeah. I have a few process questions that I -- I don't know if other members of Council do, but I'd like to talk a little bit about the process. My understanding currently when a potential charter applicant applies, they make a presentation and a panel of the School Board writes up an evaluation, which is ultimately used by the Board in its final deliberations. Could you explain what the charter applicant actually does -- I mean, who they appear in front of, what they put forward, do they do an oral presentation, what happens? 84 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Councilman Kenney, let me clarify one thing. Two years ago, we -- in an attempt to make sure that we were approaching the review process in the most appropriate way, we actually asked a panel of educational experts to work with us to evaluate the proposals and to share the results of their evaluation with the Board. We discontinued that approach for this year.

That was my next question, but you can tell us -- well, I guess I'll allow you to answer my next question, which is, why did you discontinue that approach?

Okay. We found that many of the questions and concerns that were identified by the review panel could have also been identified by District staff in a much more efficient and effective way. It was very difficult to attract a group of people and ask them to volunteer a very substantial amount of time in a very tight time frame to the District. So that was one problem, the ability to attract and retain volunteers to the process. But in addition to -- 85 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Without questioning the motivation of any School District employee, and certainly there's a lot of wonderful people working for the District and there's no doubt about that, isn't there -- considering the District's concern, just general philosophical concern over the loss in their view of resources, economic resources, as a result of the charter school phenomenon and Act 22, would there not indicate at least maybe some slight prejudice against approving too many of these, and that would not an independent panel of educators, despite the difficulties surrounding that, give the charter applicants a little more believe that the process is being handled in a fair and unprejudiced way?

Well, I do want to go back to the prior statement about the independent panel and I want to come to this too.

Okay.

This is a work in progress and we want to get it right and we want to get it right for ourselves as well as for the children in Philadelphia answer that in a couple 86 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 of ways. I think the first way is that the reason that we decided to establish an independent panel was that concern, that we wanted to make sure that people understood that the Board wanted to approach this in the most objective way. But I also want to say that this school board believes that charters are in fact part of our public education system, and we are very committed to the success of charters. There is a great deal of detail in the charter law, in the requirements, in the criteria that it is important for people who are reviewing to go understand and have at their disposal quickly. We thought we were shortchanging the charters in many ways to ask people to come in and to work on the process on a very limited time basis without the substance of information that they needed to do it effectively. In addition to that, we felt that by laying out criteria in a very, very clear, objective way and asking a certain list of questions of all applicants and asking for that information in the same way, that we could make sure that the process was as fair and as objective 87 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 as possible.

I mean, I'm not trying to recreate the wheel and certainly not second-guessing your decisions; you're an independent board appointed by the Mayor and you make your own decisions as you see fit, but could that not same thing have been accomplished by using the independent board along with staff from a technical standpoint? Could a combination of that -- a hybrid combination of that independent and staff actually been more fair?

And, Chairman Kenney, if I may, I think you really underline, you know, one piece of what Chris said, which was that this is a work in progress for us. I mean, every year, we're learning something else from the process. And, you know, certainly, one of the things -- once we're through the reconsideration process, one of the things we have to do is sit back, you know, and take -- especially given, you know, some of the issues, we have, you know, more perception problems this year, look at the whole process and address some of those concerns. And that may mean going through some hybrid form -- or 88 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 yet invent another form, you know, and maybe that -- and, you know, looking forward to next year, try to, you know, improve.

In that reevaluation process that's ongoing, one of the things that has been brought up to us continually, as far as our investigation into this whole thing, has been that it's almost as if you give your presentation, you submit your application, and then you're either rejected or approved. There's no, Well, maybe we -- it's almost like dealing with L&I sometimes, where you go with your plans and you sit down, and L&I says, No, it's disapproved. And then you come back again and -- but no one tells us what it is you're doing wrong or what needs to be improved or what needs to be fleshed out or what needs to be evaluated better. And then come back, maybe a phase process -- I understand the timeline is tight, but is there any way to get comments prior to the formal rejection so they know where they messed up?

Well, I do want to go back to the prior statement about the independent panel and I want to come to this too. 89 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Okay.

This is a work in process, and we want to get it right, and we want to get it right for ourselves as well as for the children in Philadelphia. We have been meeting with representatives from the charter school movement and there are lots of ideas on the table as to how we can improve the process, including a peer review, where the other charters are involved in looking at potential charter applicants. There are issues there in terms of, you know, the intent and closing it and those kinds of things, but we want to get it right. So we are going to look at information that you collect as a part of this hearing and other things to try to get it right. But what I wanted to explain to you is, the independent panel was an experiment. We may reinstate it or we may look at another way to look at the issue.

You also pointed out another thing, Councilman, which is, it's a little bit more than put it in and then hear back.

Right. 90 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Because there's the hearing process. You know, I think Chris mentioned the risk of getting entangled, and the other one is just sheer capacity. One of the things we're looking at in the context of the reorganization, which, you know, folks started hearing about yesterday, I guess, is looking at whether the District would be well-served by having somebody that's reporting to the CEO or to the CAO that is in charge of alternative schools, you know, a high-level person responsible for the relationship and for dealing with services not just of charter schools, but the array of alternatives to School District-run schools is increasing; for example, community education partners, some other type of contractual relations. So we would -- you know, one of the things that Phil Goldsmith is looking at on the managerial side is how to better manage the relationship.

And I know you didn't want to talk about any specific applications that were rejected or approved, but I 91 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 need to explore a little bit so that I have a better understanding as to what generally was much better or better for the three that were approved than the who were rejected. If you could give 6 me some ideas as to what it was about those three 7 that made them far and above the other 22 and then 8 led to their approval. 9

I think, in summary, 10 when we look at charters, the primary focus is on 11 the curriculum and instruction and the plan and 12 whether or not there is a research base to that 13 curriculum and how well-thought through it is and 14 how well it matches the vision for that school. 15 That, I would say, is number one. It's the amount 16 of care and thought that the applicants gave to 17 the curriculum and instruction component of their 18 application process. 19 The other two that tend to be the 20 Achilles Heel are the soundness of the financial 21 plan and simply the facility and whether it looks 22 to us that they will be able to go through the tremendous effort that it takes to move from the time that the charter is conditionally awarded to the time that they have to open. 92 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 And I think that this Council needs to understand that one of the things that the District has been committed to is not requiring that charters come into the process, as some districts do, with everything signed, sealed and delivered. In other districts, they're able to say, If you don't have a building and if you don't have all of your finances in order before you submit the application, don't even bother. We felt that that would take away from the community nature of the charters that we wanted to see. But by doing that, we set them up for potential failure if we don't see evidence in their application that they know how to go through the process, that there's a good chance that they'll find a building and a facility and go through with L&I and everyone else and everything that's required to be able to open a school with a safe building for the students.

Do you expect that all three that have been approved will be open in September 2001?

At this point. . .

The best information we 93 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 have is that they're planning to open on time.

But I do need to say that at any point in time, a building could disappear for charters. You know, charters are competing for a limited number of buildings that are out there. And they can, with all good intentions, have gone pretty far down the road and then the building disappears on them, and that's not through anything that they've done incorrectly.

Or you can hit a wall and find an "oops," which is going to cost you several months of environmental --

Yes.

Another piece of the process, I just wanted to point out, Councilman, that I'm not sure Chris hit on is that in the resubmission process for these 13 schools that applied for resubmission, the Board -- I mean, there are two ways the Board could handle that. One is to say that it's a resubmission and all we will consider is the original record in a very legalistic way. And if, you know, unless you're clarifying something about the existing record, 94 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 we're not going to consider new information. Our posture has been, we do consider new information that's submitted in the reconsideration process.

What's the percentage of reconsiderations that are ultimately approved by the Board? And then what percentage -- again, if you don't have the information, we can get it. And what percentage of those are ultimately -- ultimately those that are turned down are instituted on appeal?

On reconsideration, I don't know the history.

No. 15

I don't know that we had done any yet. On appeal, I think there have been. . . 3 of 6.

Okay, of have been --

Granted by the Appeal Board.

By the Appeal Board, but we don't know how many have been granted -- or have any been granted on reconsideration by the Board? 95 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

No. 3

No. I don't --

We can get that to you, but I don't recall.

Okay.

And I do need to say that we were much more specific about the opportunity for resubmitting in this past cycle than we had been in the past, so we were much more specific about the opportunity to resubmit this time.

Do we know of the 14,000 charter school students currently in the system what percentage have come from the traditional public school and how many have come from sources outside of the traditional public school?

We can get you more detailed information. The testimony I gave said that with respect to 1st through 12th-grade students, the percentage that were previously not in public schools was 27 percent, I believe. And for the new schools that opened this year, that percentage was. . . 96 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

36.

36?

36.

It was 36 percent. So it is -- they are students coming from schools other than School District of Philadelphia.

But two-thirds approximately of the students are coming from traditionally public schools.

Yes.

Around two-thirds, around two-thirds?

Yes.

I'm not great at math but I'm just. . . And I understand from your testimony that that two-thirds moving from the public to the charter doesn't necessarily mean a reduction in teaching staff.

Yes -- it does some.

It does some, but not -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.) 97 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

We currently budget around $10 million worth of savings, but that is up against around $76 million worth of --

See, that's -- part of what I need to understand is how 27 to 36 percent of new students in the charter system creates a $70 million burden, when two-thirds of the loss of students out of the traditional public school system creates a $10 million savings. How does -- in my mind, that doesn't compute. I mean, we're saving $10 million by losing two-thirds of the students who went to traditional public schools, but we're taking on a burden of 60 to $70 million for one-third of the students coming in from outside of the system. How does that work?

I guess my question is, how much detail do you want and do want it here or in writing?

No, just the -- the perception is that charter schools --

We have to be general.

Yeah.

And I won't purport to -- 98 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 because this is -- a lot of this, just for me anyway, was very counter-intuitive. You know, how do you --

Yeah.

You know, how do you -- when you're paying out 75 percent of your average per-pupil expenditure, how do you not generate savings from that? And there are, you know, a couple -- and so this has been my own learning process. You know, first of all the lower percentage is taken into account that is pulling out things like categorical funding, transportation, special ed., each of which the charter public schools have an opportunity to get kind of on their own. And then you have the two problems -- two flaws, really, in the funding consume. One is that when you get approved as a charter school, now you're in the same financial boat as the rest of the public schools of Philadelphia, and to the extent that enrollment increases, we all know over the last 12 or so years that what happens is, the pie gets just cut up thinner, because while your 99 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 average, you know, revenues from the State may be, you know, between 3 and 4,000, the average new revenue from the State per student is 400-something dollars. So that's one that you're kind of in the same flawed funding system that affects all public school students in Philadelphia.

Is it safe to say -- I'm sorry, go ahead.

And that's more about, I guess, the 30-something percent. The second piece is the stranded -- you know, the stranded overhead issue. If you'd like, you know, I can call somebody up to, you know, give a slightly more detailed --

Is it safe to say in general -- and this is not your fault because you've inherited this system -- that the traditional public schools are simply more expensive to run for other non-academic reasons than the charter schools are, in that you have contractual obligations, you have traditional customary ways of spending, and the things that you do in general, because the system is what it 100 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 is and is as old as it is and is as cumbersome as it is, that it actually costs you more money per pupil to educate a kid in the traditional public school than in the charter. Because if they're doing it for 30 percent less dollars and you guys are not realizing the savings of a loss of two-thirds of the students involved in the charter school system or originally in the public school system -- and there's lots of reasons for that -- it would seem that in general, because of history, tradition, contractual obligations, that it's more expensive to run the traditional public school than it is the charter school.

Councilman Kenney, I would -- and, again, not strictly in financial terms, I think I'd want to say two things: One is that the assumption that was made in the charter law that there would be a dollar-per-dollar exchange, that as a student moved into a charter school, we would realize the whole savings, is not a valid assumption.

I agree with that.

And we know that and 101 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 we've talked about that. I think that whenever you compare one school to a system, the costs are either greater or less, and one of the things that the District is doing is spreading costs across. You know, high schools are more expensive, middle less. So those kinds of things are going on. As a city, as a community, as we think about the charter school movement, and one thing we have to get on top of as a community is that each one of those charter schools are not benefitting from the economy of scale. So that as each one of them starts to have to hire one of everything, and we don't look at how we can collectively as a city allow them to benefit from economies of scale, we're going to end up with a massive, massive problem, which is one of the reasons that, from a District perspective, we've been looking at a few things. One is, how can we structure ourselves to be more attractive and to provide opportunities for the charter schools to come to the District for services, and some of them -- in some places, that's already happening; food services, for 102 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 example. The other thing that we are doing is looking at where are the students coming from, what's been the impact on those schools, and how can we make sure realizing all the savings that we need to, and how can we really step back as a district and proactively start to look at how we can rethink where our kids are going to school and where schools are located so we can benefit from the savings of charters. You know, we really do have to realize it better, but at this point in time when you have overcrowded schools, you have to address that.

Councilman, I'd like to answer --

But at this point in time, the District's position is, not only are you not benefitting from the savings associated with charters, but there's actually more of a burden on the District because of the funding --

And I think you raise -- I mean, there's two issues here. One is -- and both of them are complex but also very interesting. One is, why is it that the School District loses 103 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 money? And that we can talk more about in as much depth as we want. The other one, which is more intriguing to me, is the question of -- 'cause I've already been talked to death about the other one -- is how is it that from the other perspective, from the charter school perspective, how is it that some of them can do some of the things that they do with the money that they have? And there's, I think, a lot of variables that, you know, it would be dangerous to try to oversimplify it. Some of the issues may be just with the, you know, with cost of labor and things like that. There are other -- a lot of other nuances, and I'm just toss some examples out just to give a flavor, because this is something we've been looking at and are very interested in. I went on a spying mission of Brien Gardiner's school to try to look at -- specifically in special ed. because I heard about some of the stuff they were doing and I was trying to see what ideas we could steal. But some nuances. Elementary versus high school, for example. We often talk about our average per-pupil expenditure. In fact, 104 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 elementary schools are cheaper, high schools are more expensive. The formula for charter schools is, you know, it needs to be simple, so it's based on an average. So, for example -- and there are, at least in one state, and I don't remember whether it was Illinois, the issue arose, should you be paying elementary schools less and high schools more? One of our experiences and one of the things you heard when we talked about preferences is, we would like generally to see good high school -- good-quality high school applications. And maybe one of the reasons we're -- you know, maybe one of the reasons elementary schools are being able to do some things and high schools -- and we're not getting more high school applications is because really in comparison, you're not talking apples to apples. Maybe elementary schools get relatively too much, although I think charter schools, because they're part of our public school system, are under-funded the way the School District schools are. But relatively speaking, elementary are cheaper than high schools, you've got more 105 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 elementary schools out there and fewer high schools. Special education. And many, many schools have fewer special-education students, certainly fewer that -- I mean, we have special-education students that could easily bankrupt a charter school in a day. We did a resolution about a month ago for one service -- one of the services that one child needed that cost $145,000. I mean, I don't know which charter school could sustain on $10,000, which is what we would give them, you know, that kind of hit. So that student's going to be in a School District school. Or it's not really in the School District school; it's someplace else and it's being paid for by the School District. Poverty rates. The -- as a group, charter schools have a lower poverty rate than the School District. With that, we all think comes some additional challenges, although they, as we, can apply for Title funding. And some of the other issues. You know safety is a -- you know, safety's an issue, and we're trying to do a lot there. That's 106 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 $25 million in security this year for the School District. And it's easier to manage when you're doing one school as opposed to a system. And that's just --

And maybe we're moving towards an argument that we should be decentralizing and maybe chartering the entire city. (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)

And we're trying to learn, you know, first of all, whether, you know, look at the whether and then look at the how. And, you know, one of the issues that's a little bit easier to grasp is the difference of the cost between running an elementary school and a high school. But some of the other issues, you know, there are some areas --

But a lot of these charters are running both elementary and middle schools, too. So, I mean, they're not -- there's a --

Well, high schools are expensive. 107 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

And high schools are expensive, I assume, because of the teaching, the labor costs by tenured, more experienced teachers who are making more money in the high schools than -- what's the issue relative to the larger expensive high school versus elementary or middle?

I mean, I would be going far beyond my level of knowledge. But I expect, you know, issues are seniority. There's less -- you know, you have departmental responsibilities, you've got programmatically a lot more that's going on in the high school than in the elementary school. You've got the football team, you've got other things.

And activities.

So that high schools -- I know it's a fact that they are -- I would need help to explain more in depth why --

Well, I'll be interested in making a request for information in the future that if you could give us an idea as to what the difference in cost is between elementary, middle and high and what factors into that 108 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 inflative cost of high school versus the other two.

We'll get you that, Chairman.

Okay. Just one more question. I don't want to monopolize, but I just wanted to get one more question in relative to the initiative or the belief of the District, of the Administration that charter schools in some way will help us maintain middle-class, working-class families in the City. As I understood the testimony, and correct me on the testimony and on whether or not my assumption is correct, that charter school applications get additional points or get additional credit towards approval if they are doing a number of things, and that is relieving overcrowded situations in various schools, dealing with schools that are underachieving in their test scores, and schools that are experiencing disciplinary problems. So if you're establishing a charter around one of those schools, you have more of a chance or get a better score, I guess, as a result -- as it moves towards approval. 109 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 How does that reflect -- how do those three needs reflect the demographics and the socioeconomic status and the middle-class status and the working-class status of various neighborhoods? Are we not in some ways -- and this may be just my confused logic as I move to the end of this. If we weight the approval on those three issues, are we not naturally going to have less approved in more stable working-class, middle-class neighborhoods? And aren't we then -- (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)

. . . remedial mode as opposed to holding on.

Correct. And in the end, are we not addressing the needs to maintain our middle- and working-class by refusing to approve charter schools in areas that are middle- and working-class.

I think that I can not disagree with the problem, and it's not as scientific as extra points awarded. We wanted to be very clear with the applicants that this is 110 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 where we really need some help, and it is where we knee some help. We also realize we need some help in certain communities that, you know, you could see the middle-class flight. That up against our responsibility related to deseg. and everything else that we do --

Can I make it clear just for my own protection here.

Mm-hmm.

We're not talking about middle-class, working-class flight; I'm talking about every socioeconomic, every ethnic and racial group. When people get to a certain level, no matter what their background is or what their race or ethnicity is, when they get to a certain level of income and education, they are likely to consider moving, and they have the opportunity to move. So this isn't a white flight issue; this is more a middle-class, working-class flight issue. And I wanted to make sure that that's where I'm --

And that's how we're 111 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 taking it.

Okay.

It is a balancing act for us just like it is for you, in terms of how do you make sure that where our services are most needed, you get them, but not at the expense of where you want to try to maintain the population and commitment.

And is it more likely, though, that in neighborhoods that are struggling, you will have less of an opportunity to have more people engaged in the educational process that you need to support both economically and socially and educationally what you're looking for in a charter school that you think is going to be successful. So the poor or the more deprived and more struggling the neighborhood, the less likely they may be able to meet the criteria necessary to say, yes, in fact, this charter school could work.

Not necessarily.

Okay. I'm just --

But, but, not necessarily, but it is indeed another one of the 112 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 challenges that we dealing with that -- and this is not a process where we can say that, you know, these are the rules, this is the waiting -- we're trying to, number one, make sure that we provide a variety of opportunities and are responsive to parents and what they want to see for their children.

Well --

But at the same time, we're trying to manage the fact that we are also struggling with schools that are tremendously overcrowded, that are under-performing. We also have to give those parents options. So it's a constant balancing act for us.

One of the things that we would seek in terms of legislative changes would be the ability to make this a less reactive process, 'cause one of the challenges is you end up -- you know, you have ideas about what you'd like to see happen, but the role you have is pretty -- you know, is just you responding to proposals. And one of the things that would make a lot of sense would be to be enabled to do a 113 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 strategic plan for charters that takes into -- weighs the issues of what areas are more neglected and what areas are more -- almost the way you did with the blight plan, and Debbie could talk about that. But getting the flexibility --

I'm sorry, the blight plan?

The Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, I'm sorry.

Oh, okay. (Inaudible parties talk over each other: )

I'm glad somebody knows about the plan.

But I think what your point is, is that it really raises the question. We're all saying using charters strategically; what does that mean? And I think there are two aspects to using them strategically. One is the global sense that has to do with maintaining neighborhoods and keeping population and potentially even growing population in the City. The other area to think about is how to use them strategically for the sake of the 114 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 School District, meaning how do we complement what's already available within the School District, how do we use charters to be able to operate more efficiently and effectively. So I think there are really two roads and I think we can maybe get to both places, but I think you point out, you know, what those two roads are.

Councilmember Brown.

Thank you. You mentioned that that discussions are underway with regards to doing what can be done to amend the existing charter school law. How optimistic are you? I mean, the discussion has pointed out a number of flaws. Where are we with that process?

I think that, Debra, you really need to speak to it. But let me just say in general that there's a lot more support statewide so that the District does not have to be out in the lead on this and get ourselves isolated. A number of the districts are experiencing and a number of the 115 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 charters are now experiencing similar issues and similar concerns that will make it easier for us, I think, to move it forward. I do want to take this opportunity to thank you, Chairman Kenny, for having the hearing. And you did know in advance that I have a commitment.

Yes.

I will read the transcript carefully, and it will be an important piece in our decision-making about how we can make the process much smoother for the future, and I think the need to focus on it strategically and a proactively, as you pointed out, is absolutely critical. And we'll make a commitment that that will be the way that we'll approach it moving forward, and that's been the way we've wanted to approach it, without the constraints.

Thank you very much. Councilmember Nutter has -- I'm sorry.

Yeah, I would just note that I know that Tom Gentzel is here from the Pennsylvania School Board Association, and he can 116 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 speak to this issue as well. We -- a number of committees in the General Assembly have held hearings on this, and as I mentioned in my testimony, I did go up, I don't know, a couple of months ago now, and speak to the Senate Education Committee, and it was really an interesting experience because we were one of about, I don't know, seven or eight school districts that had spoken at the time, and we actually came up last. And there were a wide variety of school districts -- Bensalem, Bethlehem, tiny Wilkinsburg, State College, and (indiscernible). They discussed really similar experiences. On the one hand, looking at charters as having the potential to provide, you know, complementary educational offerings for their students, but getting caught up in the difficulties of the application process, the fuzziness surrounding the accountability issues, and last, but not least, the financial aspects. And we talk about big numbers here, and they're a lot for people to absorb, but in a tiny school district, when you haven't anticipated or 117 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 counted on, you know, that kind of outlay either, I think, you know, that the consequences can be equally serious. So, you know, we're doing it, there may be several options to open up the law but we're going to pursue that as part of and in addition to the budget process as well.

I must tell you, I've been in a big way enlightened and better informed about your process. And two things I wanted to do mention that helped me as you're bounded by the State Department of Education with regards to application, correct?

(Nods head.)

And the additional criterion you developed are on top of what the State Department requires, correct?

That's correct. And I think that's the issue is that right now, the local school boards can, in fact, establish, as I think the Board called them, you know, "preferences" or "competitive advantages," but the local school boards are not permitted to limit their consideration of applications to those competitive 118 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 advantages. And that's when the Appeals Board would kick in and applicants would have the right, one, to ask for reconsideration; but, two, also to go to the Appeals Board. So that's right, it's something you can do as part of what is already a prescribed process, but it is not something that you can do only; it must be more open than that.

Finally, on of your testimony, you mentioned that reasons why an application -- or one reason why an application may be rejected is concerns about impact on the District's desegregation. Plan speak to that, please, further. What does that mean?

It was a part of Chris James-Brown's testimony. There are two general issues to my -- and this is one of the areas where, I guess, we have our equity and our legal folks weigh in on the application and review process.

Okay.

But there are two general issues that I believe are reviewed: One is, what's impact on the neighboring schools and their 119 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 -- and their racial deseg. stability -- I don't know what the jargon is.

Okay.

And the second is whether any -- what -- for the school itself, whether there are concerns about the school being racially isolated.

Okay.

One of the concerns that has arisen generally is that many of the charter schools do have -- I mean, they're -- the charter schools, to some extent, reflect communities in which they're located. And because we're a city that is often fragmented by race, that's reflected in the charter school applications. One of the things going forward that, you know, that I've thought about in terms of things we could do differently is perhaps encouraging charter schools or perhaps requiring charter schools, and maybe even applicants, to say what they -- we already asked them what they're going to do to recruit.

Mm-hmm.

But one of the vehicles the 120 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 School District uses for desegregation is something we call the "desegregation lottery," which, in essence if the applicant pool of students is not -- doesn't reflect the School District's demographics, that having, you know, a system so that, you know, perhaps a deseg. lottery that ensures a higher representation of minority students or, you know, whatever the case may be.

And you say there's conversation to --

What I'm saying is one of the questions -- and this is very informal -- that I've asked is, you know, how do you do your lottery? And I've asked charters at least -- you know, I've asked at least one charter school whether they thought they had the power and the right to do a deseg. lottery the way the School District does the deseg. lottery. And I was pleased with the answer of that school, which was that they're not -- no 22 one's told them they can't, so one of the plans they have is to do that.

Okay, thank you very much. 121 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Councilmember Nutter.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think it was morning when you started and you've now crossed the dividing line. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Let me just ask a couple fundamental questions for my own understanding of this. Who's in charge of charter schools for the District?

Well, the approval process is one that is under -- because it's a very Board thing --

Right, I understand that.

-- because it's under the direction of the Education Committee.

But you approved the 34 schools --

In terms of staffing, it's been run -- the primary hub has been the Office of Policy and Planning -- I don't know if that's the 122 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 right name -- headed by Diane Castle Bono, and she's got two staff people, Judy Castle and I don't know Jason's last name, and Jason has the distinction today of being here. Judy just had -- Diane just had a baby and Judy's been very ill, so we've got the last man standing here. But there are responsibilities, you know, when issues come up that obviously tap into the School District. One of the -- we have a couple concerns about how we do it now. One is that we need to -- I mean, it's morphing. It started off as policy and planning because it was something new, and the people that were analyzing it became the people that ended up becoming the operational people.

Right. I just --

And one of the things we're looking at now is --

I just often wondered who was in charge of that part of the operation. (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)

One of the things that's 123 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 going on is Phil Goldsmith and his planning for reorganization is looking at where that office should report, whether to the CAO or to him, given the higher profile and looking to that office to be also a relationship office.

Right.

Rather than --

I mean, I understand that. And, obviously, the District has to organize in a way that it feels comfortable. You know, when it was three or four schools, or however many, you know, we initially kind of came out of the box with, I guess that's one thing. But, you know, as we've continued to evolve in these various management structures -- I think when I initially got here, we were still in regions, then we moved to cluster, and they, I think, expired the other day. (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)

And now we're going to -- what are we doing, academic centers?

Excuse me?

What we are doing 124 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 next is academic centers; is that the new game plan?

Well, there's a different structure in which we would have eight area academic units that are in charge of instruction and the people they have are people that are instructional, moving kind of the parallel administrative functions to other places.

Yeah. I mean, whether it's going from the 34 plus in operation today, approved but delayed, 3 approved and possibly going forward, so I mean, somewhere in the, you know, it's definitely 35, it's upward of 41. I mean, even in the old cluster model, I mean, that's got to be at least 2 going on maybe 3 clusters worth of schools just, you know, in total.

Right.

You know, sometimes you kind of know where you stand in an organization depending on where you are on the organizational chart, and I don't have any issue with -- what is it, policy and planning, planning and administration, planning and planning, 125 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 whatever the office is. But someone does have to try to figure out what you're going to do with something new. It might be time in a reorganization -- I'm sure you'll address this. I mean, they need to be somewhere.

Yeah, and that's where --

And I often have wondered, for instance, who do they call if they have a problem in the region system, cluster system, academic center system, you know, somebody's in charge of X-number of schools, you have an issue. I mean, I believe in a chain of command like everybody else. If you have an issue, you talk to the first office; if don't like that answer, you know, you go to the next office. I don't even know what it is in this thing, 'cause, I mean, it moved fairly rapidly, and before you know it, in the last three or four year, boom! 40-some schools, and now it's like a serious thing.

That's a good point.

That's our plan for next year, is to do something like that. 126 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

It will be interesting to see how my last statement shows up in the notes of testimony. That would be B-O-O-M with an exclamation point. THE STENOGRAPHER: Thank you.

Let's talk about the issue that was raised earlier, and I made some notes to myself, and then I want to talk about enrollment and formulas and a couple of different things. The -- what was it, the Wissahickon School, I think, which was turned down, and it's technically across the street from the district that I represent, the location they were looking at, Thomas Mansion, which is on Wissahickon Avenue and in the 8th across, from the 4th District. The statement that was made by the gentleman that one of the reasons for the refusal was that it may affect the desegregation policy of the District. He said he wasn't particularly clear what that really meant. I mean, you were here, you heard that. What did that mean? What's that all about? 127 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

Well, Councilman, you know, one thing, we've -- it probably would not be a good idea, which I can't do, is get into the specifics of any one charter application. We do have -- this is an ongoing thing.

Forget about Wissahickon. (Unintelligible, parties talking over each other.)

Do we have concerns about charters as it relates to --

Generally a comment like that, as I said before, could have to do with two things or either or both of two things. One is the impact on deseg. of schools around them, and the other is any concerns at the time of the decision that were unaddressed about whether a school's population is predictably going to result in being racially isolated or having some other kind of deseg. problem. One of the things just in terms of process, you know, and I don't want to talk about any individual case --

Right. 128 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

But one of the things that the representatives from the Wissahickon School said in the testimony was that they had submitted information that they thought was responsive. They've testified this morning that they've submitted additional information, which they believe is responsive to all of the concerns that the District has raised. And we -- although a strict meaning of the law probably wouldn't require it, our policy has been to consider that new information when we make decisions on a reconsideration. So we will -- you know, we will take a look at how that is addressed in their request.

Well, again, not to -- I don't want to talk about the specifics of anyone's application but really more the policy issue at hand. When you say that you're concerned that any school -- again, forget about who testified or what they said. It seems like there is a policy issue for District as it relates to the charter school approval, that it may, quote/unquote, affect the desegregation policy. 129 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 Can you give me an example of what you think this negative -- potential negative effect may be by any particular charter school on the rest of the surrounding schools. I don't completely understand what problem we're trying to avoid.

I can do one of the things we do in law school, which is make up an extreme example just to demonstrate the point.

Well, keep it as within the bounds of reality as possible.

Well, I mean, let's just say, you know, let's say that, you know, 100 neighbors are getting together and creating a school. And under charter school law, the founding -- the founding coalition can have -- I think it has an automatic right to have their kids in that school. And the founding coalition's members are all white. One of the questions will be, you know, apart from are you trying to serve, you know, is this really an application to serve the public or is it to serve a private group -- a grouping of private interest is how do you further the 130 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 requirement, the need to have a -- you know, not to start racially isolated by definition up front. And we would want to know what your plan for trying to attract, you know, a broader constituency is, and to the extent that there are vehicles available for deseg., you know, you've addressed the other issues, we would want you to make efforts at desegregation. So the example there is, let's say it's 100 folks, you know, and you're all white and the enrollment of the school is going to be 100, I mean, that's an easy case.

Well, I get that one but, I mean, are you just also concerned that the establishment of this particular school may draw -- I mean, I think most of us basically understand what our desegregation problems are as it relates to the total composition of the School District. There are only, you know, so many folks to kind of go around as you try to have more integrated schools. Are you also concerned that a particular school may draw too many out of -- might potentially draw too many white students out 131 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 of the surrounding schools that maybe have a relatively decent balance so as to make the other schools more racially isolated and the reverse? Is that a part of the problem.

Yes, right, yes.

Okay, all right.

And we would also point out that there's another issue we're struggling with 'cause it's in the charter school law and we've got, you know, mandates of our own. And we're, you know, trying to make a good-faith effort as we go along in grappling with the issue.

Do you also recognize the one thing you don't really have any control over, which while it may, you know, upset some of your sensitivities on the one hand, you know, those same theoretical, hypothetical 100 people could just move.

Right.

And that's the history of the City.

And totally destabilize all of the rest of the schools around and you never a charter school. I think you lose 132 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 -- I think we, not you, I think we lose twice in that scenario --

Mm-hmm.

-- because the population was destabilized for all the surrounding schools and we just that's a stone lost 100 families.

Right.

And that's a stone loser right there.

And I'm venturing beyond my area of expertise as a School Board member, but an observation is that the Philadelphia community is also, you know, when you take a snapshot now, there is a diverse population socioeconomically and racially, and class and race don't correlate the way they used to necessarily.

Okay. Let me ask both of you about what seems to be somewhat of a theme stated in different ways in both of your respective testimonies. Mr. Ramos, your testimony says on the bottom of , going into 3: Second, since the total State allocation to the District is not very 133 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 sensitive to increased enrollment, when our charters bring us additional students, historically, we receive only about $420 per student in additional State funding, whereas we are required to pay the charter school $5,558 per student from the District budget for each regular-education. And then you go on to talk about special ed.

Right.

Miss Kahn, on of your testimony, you say: However, because our State funding barely recognizes enrollment growth, we are forced to spread already-limited funds around to more students. Now, does this go back to some kind of funding formula change? And I mean, these things only kind of come up periodically, so I have to admit that I can't always remember completely what the specifics are. We don't get a per-student allocation from the State. And, I mean, I know the answer is no, and on the City side, it's all driven by tax rates and the like.

Right. 134 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131

So no matter what our student population is --

Well --

I mean, what is the formula and how are we going to respond to that?

I'll answer and if my answer's too general, then we can call somebody up for more specifics 'cause I can only give you to my kind of level of understanding of the issue. Back in 1992-1993, the State changed its basic educational subsidies to (indiscernible). People called it the ESB.

Right, ESB.

And up to that time, there was -- as Philadelphia grew, you have proportionate increases in funding. What happened then was that the -- in effect, what happened was that the funding was frozen at that level of enrollment, and every year, you get, you know, every year, it's almost like a grant-type of process where you get additional funding that, and that formula changes. And the net effect of that is that when you take the increased enrollment and get your 135 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 additional new dollars divided by additional new kids roughly, rather than getting what you would think you get intuitively, which is the per-pupil revenue from the State is -- I don't know what it is, $4,000 or $3,000 -- that you would get that amount. Under the funding formula over the last eight or nine years, we don't get what amounts to the average per-pupil expenditure; you get, you know, some fraction of whatever's put in that year, and that average for us around 420. It's not a uniquely charter-school problem. I mean, the point is --

What happens with a new student to the system who --

It's the same --

Same problem.

The point is that while most of us, you know, we want to build a constituency appear for public schools over time, and one of the challenges we have, one of the pressures we have working the other way is, as you increase the public school enrollment, and charter schools are helping to do that, the funding 136 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 mechanism isn't keeping pace because it's not enrollment-sensitive, although intuitively, you would think that it's a lot more enrollment- sensitive. So what happens is, you get more and more students, and (indiscernible) each getting, including the existing charter schools, each getting thinner and thinner slices of the pie because of this problem that affects all Philadelphia public schools.

And when you combine that, and this goes back to the other question Councilman Kenney was asking earlier too, the amount that gets paid out to charter schools is based on student spending, not revenue.

Right.

AND so if we already have a hole, in effect, we're not getting dollars in for so many of those students, because it was when that formula changed that our enrollment growth really occurred in Philadelphia. Now it's occurring for other reasons really as a result of charter schools. There are a whole bunch of schools -- maybe 20,000 or so -- for whom we're 137 5/1/01 LEG. OVERSIGHT/EDUCATION RES. 010131 essentially not being, you know, provided really adequate revenue.

All the other districts are facing the same situation?