On Monday, July 22, 2013, the Montgomery County Council's Education Committee claims they will be reviewing the one and only MCPS Board of Education charter school. For their meeting Council staff prepares a "packet" of information for Councilmembers.
What's in the Monday "packet" for this discussion? Fluff from the charter school vendor. Is that what Council review is about? Letting vendors put on a show?
Well, if the Council was really interested in providing some oversight they would start by reviewing the Charter School Agreement that was executed between the Board of Education and the charter school vendor. But, the Council can't review that document because they don't have it.
But, we do.
Here is the Charter School Agreement for the MCPS Board of Education's one and only charter school. Maybe its time the Council's Education Committee read this document and exercised some real oversight over the almost $700,000 in tax dollars this school will receive this year?
The Charter Application states that in addition to other staff, the school was to have part-time teachers for art, music and Spanish instruction on staff by year two. However, the School seems to think that they do not have to abide by this because it was in the Application and not the Charter. Further, MCPS keeps stating that this they will not get involved in administrative matters such as this.
ReplyDeleteHowever, please pay special attention to Section XXX - Governing Documents: "The Charter School application as approved is attached to and incorporated into this Charter Agreement..." Doesn't this mean that the school is responsible for what they promised to deliver in the Application? If MCPS is unwilling to hold the school accountable, who will?
Thanks for reminder! The Charter School Application has now been added to this posting so that readers will have the complete package.
DeleteComingling of Resources Concerns
ReplyDeleteThe integration of the proposed charter school with Crossway Community’s existing programs
blurs the boundaries between the public school and the other programs of the private
organization. This integration would make it difficult, if not impossible, for a Montgomery
County Public Schools’ (MCPS) audit to confirm that all funds were properly segregated. For
example:
Some classrooms would consist of both public and private school students being taught
by a charter school teacher who is a public school employee, thereby comingling private
and public funds.
The charter school principal would be performing tasks for both the public charter school
and for Crossway Community’s private programs.
The same concern also arises with other non-instructional personnel. The maintenance
staff, for example, would be performing their duties in both the publicly and privately
funded portions of the building.
http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/meetings/agenda/2010-11/2011-0328/4.0%20charterschools.pdf
What is the difference between what you have described above and schools that are partial Title 1 and only certain students benefit from the extra money the school is given under this program?
DeleteThe schools and teachers have to distinguish what child/children gets the use of Title 1 funds and which do not, even in the same classroom. I am sure there is a report for that......no?
Good point. Title 1 funds are audited and your issue is one that is evaluated. In addition, in this situation there is another issue.
DeleteMCPS public schools are public schools, open to all, funded with public dollars.
The MCPS Charter School is a public school being run next to a private school. The concern is that public funds might be used to fund a private school. Additional concern is that the private school might be religious based or have some other goal that is in conflict with public school education.
Cross Way is a private entity, Community Montessori Charter School is the MCPS public school. The BOE was told that the private school would be dissolved. It wasn't and now public and private funds are being co-mingled. What are public dollars supporting?