Supplemental funding for charter systems

Georgia Department of Audits and Accounts, Performance Audit Division

Supplemental Funding for Charter Systems Purpose This review was conducted at the request of the House Appropriations Committee. The Committee requested information on the funding defined in O.C.G.A. 20-2-165.1 that is distributed on a per fulltime equivalent (FTE) basis to charter systems. Committee members are interested in how these funds are being used and if there are direct or indirect performance results on student achievement and enhanced governance associated with the funding pursuant to the intent of House Bill 283, which was passed during the 2013 session. A draft of the report was provided to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) for its review, and pertinent responses were incorporated as appropriate.
Background In 2007, the Charter Systems Act authorized the creation of charter school systems through the simultaneous conversion of all of a system's schools to charter schools. Like charter schools, the schools within a charter system are public schools; the system is operated by parents, educators, community leaders, education organizations, and other nonprofit organizations. Each charter system signs a contract, or "charter," with the state. Charter status allows the system and its schools to be exempt from some statutory and regulatory requirements to allow the use of innovative education methods as a means of improving student achievement. In exchange for receiving increased flexibility, charter systems, like charter schools, are subject to increased accountability for improving academic achievement. If academic standards are not met, the charter may be revoked. GaDOE's Charter Schools Division oversees Georgia's 324 charter schools, including the 226 charter system schools within 19 charter systems. The State Charter Schools Commission oversees 16 state charter schools.
Approval Process and Reporting Requirements for Charter Systems A local school board seeking to create a charter system must adopt a resolution approving the proposed charter system petition and conduct at least two public hearings. The local board then submits a petition to the state board. After receiving input from the State Charter Advisory Committee, the State Board of Education may approve the petition if it is determined to comply with rules, regulations, policies, and procedures, be in the public interest, and promote school level governance. All local schools within an approved charter system are system charter schools with the exception of locally-approved start-up charter schools, conversion charter schools with separate charters (that have elected not to join the charter system), and schools with admissions criteria that would violate the open enrollment requirement, including but not limited to alternative education centers and magnet schools.1 State law (O.C.G.A. 20-2-2063.2) authorizes an implementation grant for approved systems, but GaDOE management indicated that this grant has never been funded. It should be noted that this funding is separate from the supplemental charter system funding, which is the subject of our review.
Charter contracts must include performance based goals for the system and each school, as well as the criteria for revoking the charter. State law requires each charter system to submit an annual report outlining the previous year's progress. The report should include the following: an indication of progress toward the goals included in the charter; academic data for the previous year, including state academic accountability data such as standardized test scores; unaudited financial statements; and any other supplemental information that demonstrates the system's success. State law also requires an on-site external evaluation of the system at least once every five years. If the system fails to meet its performance goals or adhere to any material term of the charter, the state board may terminate the charter and the system would revert to non-charter status.
1 Conversion charter schools are traditional public schools that convert to charter schools under the authority of a local education agency.

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

1

Charter System Funding Charter systems receive state funds through the Quality Basic Education (QBE) formula in the same manner as traditional school systems (see Exhibit 1). The main component of the QBE formula is the "base earnings" calculation that provides a foundation level of funding according the number of full-time equivalents (FTE). One FTE represents six periods, or segments, of state-funded instruction in a typical school day. Each school system's FTE projections are multiplied by a base amount and a program weight. The base amount represents the funding provided for one FTE in the Grades 9-12 program, which is the least expensive of all the 19 QBE-funded programs. Each of the other 18 instruction programs (e.g., Grades 1-3, remedial education, gifted) has a specific funding weight assigned. Onto this foundation, a Training & Experience calculation adjusts for the relative salaries of teachers, and a Central Administration Personnel Adjustment accounts for central administrative staff salaries.

Exhibit 1 QBE Funding Formula for All Types of Systems

QBE
Funding Formula =
Allotment

"Base Earnings" Calculation

FTE Projection

X

"Base"

X

Program Weights

Training and

Central

+

Experience (T&E)

+ Administration Personnel

Adjustment

Adjustment

Source: DOAA's 2010 Internal Control Review of the QBE Funding Formula
In addition to the standard QBE formula funds, charter systems receive supplemental funds. O.C.G.A 20-2-165.1 provides that charter systems receive an additional 3.785 percent of the base amount for each FTE within the system. In fiscal year 2013, the base amount was $2,744.80 per FTE, which equated to an additional $104 per FTE for the charter systems prior to austerity reductions ($2,744.80 x 3.785% = $103.89). The fiscal year 2013 amended Appropriation Act established a maximum annual amount of $4 million per charter system. House Bill 283, passed during the 2013 legislative session, increased the cap to $4.5 million per charter system.
Activity Data As shown in Exhibit 2, the number of charter systems increased from four to 16 between fiscal years 2009 and 2013. The number of schools under a charter system increased from 25 to 202, and the number of FTEs served rose from approximately 18,000 to 172,000. As a result, the charter system supplemental funds awarded increased from $1.7 million to $10.6 million. The conversion of Fulton County in 2013 accounted for a significant portion of the increase, due to its 93,000 FTEs. In fiscal year 2014, three other school systems (Banks County, Coffee County, and Haralson County) are becoming charter systems for a total of 19 systems, 226 schools, and 186,000 FTEs.

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

2

GaDOE management expects the number of charter systems to significantly increase as school systems must choose to operate as a charter system, a status quo school system, or an Investing in Educational Excellence (IE2) system2 by June 30, 2015. Six systems have submitted applications, and GaDOE anticipates six other systems applying for charter system status by the end of calendar year 2013. These systems could potentially add over 70,000 FTEs and $5.5 million in supplemental awards.

Exhibit 2

Growth in Charter Systems and Supplemental Funding

Fiscal Years 2009 2014

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014(1)

Number of Charter Systems Number of Schools(2)

4

4

8

14

16

19

25

25

60

106

202

226

FTEs

17,990

18,097

39,708

72,652

172,167

185,915

Total Charter System Supplemental Funds $1,734,614 $1,678,426 $3,654,717 $6,309,719 $10,630,843 $11,053,305

(1) FY 2014 supplemental funds is from the initial QBE allotment sheet and includes an estimated amount for the three new systems based on their FTE counts . (2) The number of schools each year is based on w hat the systems reported for the 2012-2013 annual report. It should be noted that there w ere minor discrepancies betw een these numbers and w hat had been reported in prior years. Source: GaDOE documents

Exhibit 3 shows the number of FTEs, total state funding, and the additional funding amounts for the 16 charter systems in fiscal year 2013. GaDOE allocated $639 million in total state funds to the charter systems in fiscal year 2013. The additional funding provided pursuant to O.C.G.A. 20-2-165.1 accounted for $10.6 million of the $639 million in state funds (1.7%). Most charter systems were awarded $80 - $88 per FTE after austerity reductions. According to GaDOE, the amount per FTE varies across systems because funding is not always adjusted when FTE counts change. For example, in fiscal year 2009, City Schools of Decatur was initially allotted $254,695 for 2,684 FTEs ($95 per FTE). In subsequent years, these additional funds were either reduced or unchanged as FTE counts increased. By fiscal year 2013, Decatur only received $252,071 for 3,695 FTEs ($68 per FTE). GaDOE re-adjusted the funding in fiscal year 2014 to alleviate the disparities among charter systems.

Fulton County was the only system affected by the annual award cap in 2013. Although Fulton County only received $43 per FTE, its total additional amount of $4 million accounted for 38% of the total additional funds awarded to all charter systems. With the passage of HB283, the maximum additional funding was cap was increased to $4.5 million per charter system.

2 Compared to status quo school systems, IE2 systems allow for such things as greater flexibility and local expenditure controls. However, IE2 systems are less flexible than charter systems and the sanctions for not meeting IE2 performance goals can be more severe. As of fiscal year 2014, only three school systems have chosen the IE2 option.

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

3

Exhibit 3 Total State Funding by Charter System (Regular QBE Funds and Supplemental Funds) Fiscal Year 2013

Charter Systems Supplemental Funding

Total State Total FTE Funding(1)

Amount Awarded

Amount Per FTE

% of Total Funding

Barrow County Schools

12,918 60,990,384 1,106,079

86

1.8%

Calhoun City Schools

3,560 14,197,296

296,364

83

2.1%

Cartersville City Schools

4,140 16,886,568

355,610

86

2.1%

Dawson County Schools

3,472 12,870,410

296,450

85

2.3%

City Schools of Decatur

3,695 14,706,730

252,071

68

1.7%

Dublin City Schools

2,858 11,092,120

218,455

76

2.0%

Floyd County Schools

9,994 55,842,290

880,599

88

1.6%

Fulton County Schools

93,357 288,749,299 4,000,000

43

1.4%

Gainesville City Schools

7,748 31,768,247

622,969

80

2.0%

Gordon County Schools

6,593 31,128,081

578,146

88

1.9%

Madison County Schools

4,689 29,773,172

402,151

86

1.4%

Marietta City Schools

8,613 30,775,617

711,741

83

2.3%

Morgan County Schools

3,264 13,240,376

284,112

87

2.1%

Putnam County Schools

2,698 7,979,706

233,136

86

2.9%

Warren County Schools

669 3,087,129

61,758

92

2.0%

White County Schools

3,899 16,282,296

331,202

85

2.0%

Total

172,167 639,369,721 10,630,843

62

1.7%

(1) Includes QBE funds (after the local five mill deduction and the amended formula adjustment) and grants for nursing services, transportation, and equalization. Source: GaDOE's QBE Allotment Sheets

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

4

Questions and Answers How are charter system supplemental funds being used? The audit team conducted phone interviews with the 16 charter systems operating in 2013 to determine how the supplemental funds are used. Five of the 16 systems used these funds for general purposes to cover salaries, fill budget holes, and offset austerity reductions. Five systems designate the funds for specific purposes, such as instructional coaches, computer labs, teacher training, advanced placement tests, and student transportation. One system awards funds to schools that submit proposals for special projects, such as Saturday School. The five remaining systems use the funds for a combination of systemwide programs and allocations to schools and/or teachers for special initiatives. See Appendix A for more detailed responses by system.
In 2013, House Bill 283 added a provision that these funds shall be used in accordance with recommendations of the school level governing body or to advance student achievement goals and school level governance training objectives. House Bill 283 also requires charter systems to include in their annual reports an itemization of initiatives being supported with the additional funding. Prior to 2013, state law did not specify a purpose for these funds or provide any guidance on the use of funds. GaDOE management state that the supplemental funding was originally intended to promote innovation but has never formally tracked how the funds are used.
Expenditure Controls While state law establishes expenditure controls over QBE funds for traditional school systems, charter systems are not subject to QBE expenditure controls as part of the general flexibility they receive from the state.3 Likewise, there are no expenditure controls over the charter system supplemental funds or requirements for how charter systems should account for these funds.
Although there are no requirements for tracking these funds, GaDOE did establish a separate optional program code for these expenditures. Eight charter systems recorded some or all of their expenditures for these supplemental funds under this code in fiscal year 2012. According to records, approximately $2.3 million was tracked under program code 1638/1639. However, some systems reported tracking only a portion of these additional funds using this program code, while other systems appeared to include more than the current year's supplemental funds. For example, one system was awarded $252,071 in fiscal year 2012 but recorded $297,809 in expenditures under this code, which could indicate the code was used to track other fund sources as well or supplemental funds from a previous year were rolled over. As a result, this program code does not provide a reliable source for how these additional funds were expended.
GaDOE Monitoring While GaDOE does not track all of the fund expenditures associated with O.C.G.A. 20-2-165.1, it has several informal methods for gathering information regarding the supplemental funds. GaDOE has surveyed the charter systems to determine how these funds are used. In addition, GaDOE has revised its charter system application and its annual report template to collect information regarding these funds. However, the information provided is generally not detailed, supported with documentation, nor does GaDOE validate the information.

3 For example, traditional school systems are required to spend at least 90% of funds designated for direct instructional costs on the direct instructional costs of such program at the school site in which the funds were earned. It should be noted that the expenditure controls are waived through fiscal year 2015.

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

5

Charter System Survey GaDOE surveyed charter systems regarding the use of these funds in November 2011. Six of the eight charter systems responded; two indicated that the supplemental funds are spent on specific programs, such as virtual school, International Baccalaureate programs, and academic support programs. Three systems reported using funds for instructional salaries, security guards, and advanced placement courses. One system indicated that no funds had been received yet. See Appendix B for complete survey responses.
Charter System Application GaDOE revised the charter system application in 2012 to include a question regarding the use of funds. However, the three systems that applied following the revision (Banks, Haralson, and Coffee) did not identify specific projects. They did indicate that school governance teams or special committees would be involved in making funding decisions and that resources would support their school improvement plans, goals and objectives, and/or educational innovations.
Annual Report GaDOE revised its annual report template to address the use of these supplemental funds. The 2012 template asked systems to describe how the funds were utilized and explain if these are newly funded activities or if the funds were used to offset austerity cuts. Seven systems indicated that the funds were used for newly funded activities, including purchasing technology resources, professional development for teachers, alternative diploma programs, advanced placement and International Baccalaureate programs, and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) initiatives. Six systems indicated that the funds helped offset austerity cuts and were spent on teacher salaries, textbooks, and security guards. See Appendix C for complete responses.
The 2013 annual report template asks systems to list the essential innovative features included in their charter system contracts, indicate the implementation status, and indicate if all or part of their supplemental funds were used to implement the initiative. Charter systems are also asked to list all other uses of these funds. We reviewed the results submitted by the systems and found some discrepancies between how systems reported using these funds in our interviews and in the annual report to GaDOE. Because the information is self-reported, and the funding is not tracked discretely, there is no way to independently reconcile the differences.

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

6

Are there direct or indirect performance results on student achievement and enhanced governance associated with these supplemental funds?
There is insufficient information available to determine whether or not this supplemental funding has resulted in improved student achievement or enhanced governance. Because the supplemental funds account for less than 2% of the charter system's state funding and most systems do not account for these funds separately, it is especially difficult to tie performance results to these funds. In addition, systems reported that these funds are often combined with other funding sources to support multiple programs, making it difficult to isolate the impact of the supplemental funding. Prior to July 2013, there were no statutory provisions pertaining to the use of these funds; nor were charter systems required to report on outcomes related to this funding.
We reviewed each system's charter and found that none of the charters contain goals associated specifically with these supplemental funds. We also interviewed representatives from the 16 charter systems to determine if they evaluate the impact of these funds separately. Fourteen of the 16 systems indicated either that there were no goals and measures related specifically to these funds or that the funds are used to implement innovations which are broadly tied to their charter goals. The remaining two systems, Marietta City Schools and Fulton, indicated they do track outcomes directly related to these funds. Marietta City Schools awards mini-grants to teachers who implement innovative practices and monitors outcomes directly related to the funds. For example, one teacher purchased technology for reading materials with the goal that 3-5% more of her students would achieve at a level band higher in 2013 than 2012 on the Criterion-Referenced Competency Test (CRCT). In addition, Fulton County indicated that it will require schools to report on outcomes and is considering producing an annual report just for these funds.4
House Bill 283, which became effective July 2013, added requirements for charter systems to report on the impact of these funds. Each charter system must now include in its annual report an itemization of initiatives being supported with the additional funding and a description of how these funds have promoted school level governance or improved student achievement. In response to the legislation, GaDOE revised its 2013 annual report template. The charter systems are now asked to answer "yes" if the supplemental funding promotes school level governance and improved student achievement. However, the charter systems do not have to explain how the funds promote these goals or provide any supporting evidence or outcome data. Therefore, it will continue to be difficult to ascertain the extent to which these funds improve student achievement and enhance governance.
Although the impact of this supplemental funding is difficult to measure, charter systems operate on a condition of increased accountability in exchange for flexibility. GaDOE is responsible for monitoring the charter systems to ensure academic standards are met. While oversight has been limited up to this point, GaDOE is currently making improvements to hold charter systems accountable, as discussed below.
Performance Evaluation State law requires GaDOE to contract with an independent party to evaluate charter system performance and determine if they are fulfilling the terms of their charters. Prior to 2013, GaDOE has never contracted for an evaluation due to a reported lack of funding. Currently, GaDOE management indicated that it is working with researchers at Florida State University and Georgia State University to have a study completed.
Annual Reporting on Goals and Performance Measures State law also requires each charter system to submit an annual report that includes academic data for the prior year and an
4 Fulton County was approved in 2012; however it did not receive funds until the end of fiscal year 2013.

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

7

indication of progress towards its charter goals. Our 2009 Charter Schools Performance Audit found that the annual report did not adequately address whether charter schools were meeting their goals and performance measures as stated in their charter terms.5 We reviewed the 20112012 annual report to determine if systems were reporting outcomes for each of their performance measures. The annual report did not outline each goal and performance measure or compare outcomes to benchmarks. In total, there was some indication of the progress (or lack thereof) for 38% of the system-wide academic performance measures. To improve oversight, GaDOE is implementing an accountability tracking spreadsheet that lists each goal and its associated performance measures, along with the performance targets and actual outcomes. GaDOE indicated that Georgia State University and Florida State University researchers will help analyze the reported data.
Agency Response: GaDOE noted that the first four charter systems have been reviewed by REL Southeast's Center at North Carolina University. The study compared charter systems to non-charter systems to determine if there were changes in student achievement potentially associated with a school system operating under a charter. According to GaDOE, the review showed a positive impact on the academic performance of these four charter systems once they began implementing their charter system contracts.

5 The first charter systems were not established until 2008-2009. Therefore, the finding in the 2009 report addressed only charter schools. However, changes to address the finding should also ensure that charter systems are meeting the goals and performance measures as required in their charter terms.

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

8

System
Barrow County Schools

Appendix A

Responses from DOAA Interviews with Charter Systems

How are grant funds used?

Are grant fund expenditures tracked separately from other QBE funds?(1)

Grant funds have never been used for a designated purpose. The funds are used wherever No they are needed and help offset austerity cuts.

Calhoun City

School governance teams consult with the system to recommend innovative practices. Recommendations are usually technology related (e.g., the high school's Innovative

No

Schools

Learning Lab). A future goal is the creation of an Online Learning Academy.

Cartersville Funds are applied to salaries. The extra revenue helps fill budget holes and offset City Schools austerity cuts.

Grant funds and QBE funds are considered one pot of money from a budgeting standpoint. They do report expenditures under a separate program code, but they just make a journal entry to apply funds to salaries.

Dawson County Schools

The funds target three areas - leadership, literacy, and technology. Some of the funds Grant funding is not tracked in detail as far as how much is

are used for special projects, such as a system website, i-Pad labs, graduation coaches, expended for various programs or line item expenses. The

leadership training, and culminating (a literacy project). Each system is also given

$10,000 given to each school is tagged under program code 1638

$10,000 for a proposal to submit to the system and the school governance council.

but this only accounts for 20% of funds.

Funds cover a portion of the salaries for instructional coaches who provide hands on City Schools professional learning. Funds also support Expeditionary Learning, Primary Years IB, 4/5 of Decatur Academy, Middle Years Program, the IB Diploma Program, and the Measures of
Academic Progress (a student growth adaptive assessment).

Only the instructional coaches' salaries are tracked separately under program code 1638.

Funds are spent on professional development with project based learning at the three

Dublin City academically themed elementary schools. Funds are also used to train teachers for the No

Schools

IB Program and to provide transportation to any student to any of the three elementary

schools.

Floyd County Schools

Grant funds are not tagged for specific projects. The funds work toward school improvement and charter system goals and help offset austerity cuts. Without the funds, No the Performance Learning Center (a computer based learning center) may be cut.

Fulton County Schools

At the beginning of calendar year 2014, schools will submit proposals to the Fulton

Grant funds are in the district's general funds but set aside with a

Education Foundation, which will make funding decisions. Examples of programs that restriction code. When the foundation awards amounts to

may be funded include Saturday School and middle school graduation coaches. Each of specific schools, they will get board action to transfer funds from

the four learning communities can receive $2 million (total of $8 million that includes last the restricted account into the school's budget for the approved

year and this year's funds).

proposal.

Gainesville City Schools

Each school receives funding for one additional teacher to deliver the services in the charter application. In total, the funding covers all instructional expenses for eight

teachers. Any remaining funds would be used for the Open Choice on Transportation.

Gordon County Schools

The grant funds supplement the general fund and have helped keep class sizes down.

Madison County Schools

1. Existing innovative programs at each school - High school academic coaches, data teams, and a career academy. 2. Unapplied funds for the schools to manage - Examples include 9th grade math and science programs at the middle school and a writing coach. Elementary schools are funded for an initial support system.

Expenditures are tracked under program code 1638. No Expenditures are tracked under program code 1638.

1. Funds are allocated to schools based on FTE, but schools must submit a grant

proposal and funds can only be used for approved projects (e.g., portable science labs,

inquiry based learning, expanded advisement programs, etc).

Marietta City 2. Teachers submit proposals to board for innovation grants. One example is a teacher

Schools

buying laptops for research-based learning. Grants are now being awarded for 21st

century classrooms, which serve as best practices for other teachers.

3. Funds are used by central office for innovation, such as upgrading the student

information system and purchasing special software.

Expenditures are tracked in a separate account.

Morgan County Schools

1. Provide mini-grants for teachers with innovative practices For example, special

education teachers purchased i-Pads for speech and language development.

No

2. Professional learning Advanced courses and IB Programs for elementary and middle

school students are funded.

Putnam County Schools

Funds are used for various purposes including producing a quarterly publication of charter

activities, adding a theatre/drama teaching position, providing school governing authority

training, and hiring and training teachers. The system will continue to fund these

No

programs and will add a new program this year that awards grants to teachers to provide

extended learning during the summer. Teachers will apply for grants, and the school

governing authority will make recommendations.

Warren County Schools

In previous years, funds paid for the security officers. For FY 2014, funds will be used for a computer lab in the elementary school, a computer lab in the middle school, and to Expenditures are tracked under program code 1638. cover salaries and benefits for the in-school suspension staff.

White County Schools

Funds are used for a variety of purposes, including new teacher set-up and supplies, AP

tests, a Career Technical and Agricultural Education marketing position, a counselor,

Not in the past, but the system plans to use program code 1638

Warrier TV at the high school, and high school credit classes at the middle school.

going forward

(1) The information reported in this Appendix is based solely on interviews with charter system representatives. It should be noted that there were discrepancies between what was reported during the interviews and the expenditure data obtained through DOAA's Education Audit Division for several charter systems. Source: Charter System Representatives

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

9

Charter System Barrow County Schools Cartersville City Schools Dawson County Schools
Gainesville City Schools
Gordon County Schools
Marietta City Schools
Warren County Schools Source: GaDOE www.audits.ga.gov

Appendix B GaDOE's Charter System Funding Use Survey Results
November 2011
(6 of 8 Charter Systems Responding)

What was the total additional funding you received by becoming a charter system?

What do you spend that additional funding on? Please include previous years' expenditures, if applicable.

Do you spend the additional funding on specific programs?

This is our first year as a charter

district, and we have not

N/A

No

received additional funding yet.

$363,852.00

Instructional Salaries to assist with class size

No

We are looking at the following (as this is our

If we receive $100 per student, first year): instructional programs, professional

it will equal $340,000.

development, dual enrollment, technology and

Yes

support, and possible leadership programs.

*Providing additional Advanced Placement

courses

$100 per FTE (subject to austerity) FY 11 = $645,434

*Providing blended learning classrooms for remedial middle and high school instruction

No

*Providing Gifted endorsement classes to

teachers

No funds have been received-- should be 100 per FTE, approximately $700,000.

No funds have been received. Governance training for stakeholder groups, establishment of new career pathways, innovative programming, professional learning.

N/A

$2,304,000 as of 6/30/2011

Professional learning for Choice Academies,

laptops, smartboards, document cameras, smart

responders, i-pads, digital displays, digital

Yes

subscriptions, mobile science labs, LEGO

robotic sets, additional instructional materials.

$125,000 plus additional FTE funds per year.

We only receive about $61,000 now. We have used and continue to use this to pay our security No officer and for security at school events.

If you spend the additional funding on specific programs, please list them here.
N/A
N/A We are looking to possibly spend funds on: NovaNet SuccessMaker different virtual school opportunities
N/A
No funds have been received.
Online learning initiative, Primary Years and Middle Years International Baccalaureate Programs, After School academic support programs, ArtsNOW program.
N/A

Report No. 13-24

10

Charter System Barrow County Schools Calhoun City Schools Cartersville City Schools
City Schools of Decatur

Appendix C Use of Charter System Funds Compiled by GaDOE from 2011-2012 Annual Report
Please describe how the additional $100 per student was utilized. Please give concrete examples and explain if these are newly funded activities or if the $100 per student was used to replace state funding due to austerity cuts.
We received a portion of the $100 per student ($87). This money was folded into the budgeting process to help with keeping a lower class size and to offset some of the austerity cuts for the year.
Additional funds allocated through the Charter contract for the 2011/2012 school year will be spent to support continuous improvement plans by purchasing needed technology resources to support the mission and vision of the district and our goal of engaging our students to perform at higher rates as we work to prepare these digital natives to be successful after graduation.
All funds were used to replace state funding due to austerity cuts.
The amount was not $100/student; it was less due to austerity cuts. We purchased a growth assessment measure called "Measures of Academic Progress". This measure is an adaptive assessment given on computers, thus we used these funds to purchase additional laptop computers. We also used charter moneys for IB diploma Program fees as well as Expeditionary Learning professional learning expenses. Finally, to combat the math achievement gap, a position was funded at the 4/5 academy to teach high math achievers that are not labeled gifted and coach teachers in development and implementation of the math curriculum.

Dawson County Schools

The three areas of focus for the system charter are literacy, leadership, and technology. Funds were spent judiciously during this first year. Since the 2011-12 school year was our first, the charter system funds were not included in the initial state allotment sheet. Thirteen individuals were chosen to lead the process of organizing, researching, and implementing charter initiatives in the three focus areas. Those individuals were compensated from the charter funds. Based on the approved charter application, the Literacy Committee focused on the development of culminating projects that are to take effect in the fifth, eighth, and twelfth grades. Efforts were directed in the area of leadership at developing systemic student leadership programs that were pervasive throughout the system in all grade levels. In the focus area of technology, the committee looked at the possibilities surrounding implementing a science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) Program or program that incorporated STEM skills. Also, this committee reviewed a redesign of the system and individual school websites to improve communication with parents. Additionally, an assessment of future direction for the implementation of advanced technologies occurred. Local funds have been made available to ensure each classroom has an interactive board, all teachers have laptops, and many computers have been added in the classrooms and labs. The network capability was enhanced to provide increased access to web-based online resources and instructional tools. These initiatives have set the foundation for the system to attain the goals of the charter in the three focus areas.

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

11

Charter System Dublin City Schools Floyd County Schools Gainesville City Schools

Please describe how the additional $100 per student was utilized. Please give concrete examples and explain if these are newly funded activities or if the $100 per student was used to replace state funding due to austerity cuts.
We used our additional charter system funding to help pay for the academic theme programs at the elementary schools (Learning.com, ArtsNow, and The Leader in Me) as well as for professional development with the teachers to properly implement these programs. We also used the money to help us in our costs of starting international Baccalaureate programs. The balance of the money was used to transport students to their school of choice. None of this money replaced state funding.
Floyd County Schools used the additional FTE funding to implement an alternative diploma program. These funds did not replace existing funds. They were used in conjunction with a grant that we received from Communities in Schools to fund a Performance Learning Center that served students in grades 9-12.
Gainesville City Schools used the Charter System funding to support Advanced Placement classes in the high school and to support the STEM initiatives in the school. The austerity reduction for GCSS was $4.5 million. The additional $100 per student (which was also subject to austerity reductions) would obviously be insufficient to replace state funding.

Gordon County Schools

The additional funding was used to purchase textbooks, K-12. The reasons for this decision were 1) it was in the best interest of the students; 2) state funding was reduced due to austerity cuts.

Marietta City Schools

Teacher innovation grants and performance incentives for piloting new materials and/or delivery models; purchase instructional software to facilitate on-line/ virtual instruction; fund professional learning activities; fund purchase of interactive white board, iPads, Student Information System Implementation and first year costs, as well as other technology related purchases; fund instructional consultants and a behavior specialist consultant. These purchases are newly funded activities. School level purchases were determined by the School Governance Team (SGT).

Morgan County Schools No funds received

Putnam County Schools

Used funds to keep class size reduced by off-setting revenue shortfall and able to keep staff. Provided quarterly publications concerning charter activities as a newspaper insert and located in community centers. Provided salary for creating a liaison with the paper to design, develop, and publish quarterly flyers. Provided a teaching position shared by middle and high school to enhance their drama and theater program.

Warren County Schools A security officer was hired using these funds because we did not have enough state funds to cover the expense

White County Schools

The additional $100 per student was utilized to replace state funding due to austerity cuts.

Source: GaDOE

www.audits.ga.gov

Report No. 13-24

12