Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordham’s 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
-
Upload
jointhefuture -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordham’s 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
1/62
One Step
back
twO StepSforward
2010-11Fordham SponSorShip accountability report
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
2/62
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
3/62
2010-11Frdham Spsrship Accutability Rprt
Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
2600 Far Hills Avenue, Suite 216
Dayton, OH 45419
937-227-3368
Two STepSforward
one STep
back
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
4/62
22
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
5/62
Tabl f Ctts
Ackldgmts 5
Missi Statmt f th Thmas B Frdham Fudati 6
Yar i Rvi: Dbat Arud Chartr Quality i th Biial Budgt 7
Fordhams Charter School Portfolio: Improving Schools 8
New Fordham-Sponsored Schools 13
Th Frdham Spsrship Prgram 14
Accountability A Solemn Responsibility 14
Technical Assistance Efforts 16
Sponsorship Governance 16
Idividual Schl Prfils 19
Appdix 56
http://../FSAR%202010/yearinreview.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/yearinreview.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/yearinreview.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/yearinreview.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/yearinreview.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/yearinreview.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/schools_intro.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/appndx.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/appndx.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/schools_intro.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/section_one.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/yearinreview.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/yearinreview.pdfhttp://../FSAR%202010/yearinreview.pdf -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
6/62
44
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
7/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 5
Te Tomas B. Fordham Foundation (Fordham) would like to recognize several organizations and indi-
viduals with whom we worked in 2010-11. First and oremost, we would like to acknowledge the sta,
leadership, and governing authorities at each o our sponsored schools or their eorts and hard work.
We are also grateul to Chas Kidwell and his colleagues at Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur or their advice
and counsel; our colleagues at the National Association o Charter School Authorizers (NACSA); and the
Ofce o Community Schools at the Ohio Department o Education; our partners in the Ohio Authorizer
Collaborative; and the team at Corporate Computer.
Ackldgmts
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
8/62
6 Two STePS forward one STeP back
Te Tomas B. Fordham Foundation and its sister organization, the Tomas B. Fordham Institute believe
that all children deserve a high-quality K-12 education at the school o their choice. Te Institute is the
nations leader in advancing educational excellence or every child through quality research, analysis, and
commentary, as well as on-the-ground action and advocacy in Ohio.
Nationally and in our home state o Ohio, we advance:
n High standards or schools, students and educators;
n Quality education options or amilies;
n A more productive, equitable, and efcient education system;
and
n A culture o innovation, entrepreneurship, and excellence.
We promote education reorm by:
n Authorizing (aka, sponsoring) charter schools across Ohio;
n Producing rigorous policy research and incisive analysis;
n Building coalitions with policy makers, donors, organizations, and others who share our vision;
and
n Advocating bold solutions and comprehensive responses to education challenges, even when opposed
by powerul interests and timid establishments.
Missi Statmt f th
Thmas B Frdham Fudati
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
9/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 7
Since their inception in 1997, charter schools have
been at the center o some o the most politically con-
tentious debates about education in Ohio. Te past
year oered yet another example o charter school
controversy, but this time with a twist. Te 2010
elections were very good or Republicans in Ohio,
with John Kasich winning the governors race (replac-ing ed Strickland who had been a charter adversary
throughout his our-year term), and Republicans
taking control o the House while expanding their
majority in the Senate.
Almost immediately Republican lawmakers set out
to make the Buckeye State more inviting to char-
ter schools by removing caps, moratoria, and other
punitive restrictions on charters. In act, Governor
Kasichs budget proposals in House Bill (HB) 153oered a solid plan or not only increasing the num-
ber o charters in Ohio but improving their quality.
Crucial elements included encouraging successul
operators to clone good schools; leaning hard on
authorizers to x or close ailing schools and banning
the replication o ailure; placing schools ostensibly
independent governing boards in clear charge o
any outside organizations that they engaged to run
their education programs; creating proessional and
ethical norms or all parties; insisting on transpar-
ency around academics, governance, and nances;
channeling air unding into successul schools; and
introducing best practices and expert advice into ev-
ery step o the process. Tis was a vision that excited
us and many others in Ohio and beyond because it
sought to boost quality, not just quantity.
It seemed at the time that nally the Buckeye State
was positioning itsel to become a leader in both
charter school quality and expansion. Ten the
House version o the budget came out, and with it
an enormous risk that the charter school community
in Ohio would shoot itsel in the oot. Te Houses
budget would have done away with any meaning-ul accountability or school operators just when
it seemed like we moving in the right direction. It
would have, among many other items:
n Neutered both governing boards and authorizers
o their oversight responsibilities and authority
and given charter school operators carte blanche
authority over virtually all school decisions; and
n Exempted charter schools rom compliance
with most o the states education laws and rules,essentially transorming them into publicly
unded private schools.
We were not the only ones upset by the Houses
charter school proposals. Te National Alliance or
Public Charter Schools and the National Associa-
tion o Charter School Authorizers wrote in a joint
letter to Senate leadership, We are writing today
to express our serious concerns with HB 153 as
passed by the House. In the guise o helping charter
schools, we believe that HB 153 will actually harm
charter schools. Te letter continued, Many o
the provisions in HB 153 contradict the charter
school model, thwart eorts to strengthen charter
school accountability and quality, and will ultimately
undermine popular support or Ohios community
schools. As passed by the Ohio House, the charter
Year in review:
Db aud ChQuly h Bl Budg
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
10/62
8 two steps forward one step back
provisions o HB 153 represent a signicant risk or
Ohios community school sector.
Te president and CEO o the Ohio Alliance or
Public Charter Schools warned that the Houses bud-
get, takes the public out o public education, while
the Columbus Dispatch editorialized that School
choice is meaningless without good charter schools
rom which to choose, and that requires account-
ability and eective oversight. Te Senate agreed
with the critics and ultimately purged most o the
troubling language rom the bill, but yet again there
had been much political drama and uncertainty
around charters and their uture in the Buckeye State.
Tis time, however, the danger came not rom char-
ter oes but rom riends o school choice who had
sought to neutralize authorizers, including Fordham,and governing boards in the name o eciency or
well-heeled school operators.
But, ortunately, the larger charter school community
rallied itsel around the need or charter school qual-
ity and at the end o the day Ohios charter school
law came out o the budget process stronger on some
ronts while weaker on a ew others. Improvements
included requiring all charter schools and charter
school authorizers to be rated by their perormanceindex (PI) scores. Under the changes to law, the au-
thorizers with the lowest 20 percent o students on
the PI cannot open new schools until they improve
or close the ones they have. Further, the budget al-
lows schools to open in districts rated in the bottom
ve percent o all school districts.
Unortunately, the law also requires the Ohio De-
partment o Education to yet again sponsor charter
schools it was red rom the role in 2003 by the
General Assembly ater a blistering report rom the
Attorney General at the time chronicling the many
ailings o the department as a sponsor. Tere is no
evidence that the department or the state board
wants the job o authorizing and they now nd
themselves dealing with some troubling conficts o
interest. Te most bizarre is that the department is
now responsible or not only overseeing and rating
all sponsors across the state, but is also responsible or
authorizing schools o its own. In practice, this meansthe departments Oce o Community Schools must
now hold the departments Oce o School Sponsor-
ship accountable and report on its perormance and
take corrective actions as needed. Tis will surely be
a painul situation or the department and its leaders
to navigate moving orward.
ForDHaMs CHarter sCHooLportFoLio: img schl
Despite the uncertainty around the state budget andthe uture o charter schools authorizers in Ohio,
Fordhams sponsored schools made gains in 2010-11.
As the ollowing achievement tables show, with the
tbl i: Fordham-sponsored Schools Results over Time by State Rating
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Dayton Liberty CampusAcademic
WatchAcademic
WatchAcademic
WatchAcademicEmergency
ContinuousImprovement
Dayton View CampusAcademic
WatchAcademic
WatchContinuous
ImprovementContinuous
ImprovementContinuous
Improvement
Phoenix CommunityLearning Center
ContinuousImprovement
ContinuousImprovement
AcademicWatch
ContinuousImprovement
Effective
Springfield Academyof Excellence
ContinuousImprovement
AcademicWatch
AcademicWatch
ContinuousImprovement
AcademicWatch
Columbus CollegiateAcademy
Effective Effective
KIPP: JourneyContinuous
ImprovementEffective
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
11/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 9
exception o one school, Fordham-sponsored schools
made academic gains last year. Tree schools were
rated Eective (a B), two Continuous Improve-
ment (a C), and one Academic Watch (a D).
Te next three exhibits use data rom the Ohio De-
partment o Education provide detail on how the
Fordham schools as a whole stack up against those
o the other major authorizers in the Buckeye State.
tbl ii: Fordham-sponsored Schools AYP and Value-Added Results over Time
2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11
Dayton Liberty Campus
Made AYP? No No No No No No
Made AYP in Reading? No No No No No No
Made AYP in Mathematics? Yes No No No No No
Rated at least Continuous Improvement? Yes No No No No Yes
Value Added of at least one year? No Yes No Yes
Dayton View Campus
Made AYP? No No No Yes Yes Yes
Made AYP in Reading? No No No Yes Yes Yes
Made AYP in Mathematics? Yes No No Yes Yes Yes
Rated at least Continuous Improvement? No No No Yes Yes Yes
Value Added of at least one year? Yes Yes No No
Phoenix Community Learning Center
Made AYP? Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Made AYP in Reading? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Made AYP in Mathematics? Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Rated at least Continuous Improvement? Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Value Added of at least one year? Yes Yes Yes Yes
Springfield Academy of Excellence
Made AYP? No No No No Yes No
Made AYP in Reading? No No No No Yes No
Made AYP in Mathematics? No No No No Yes No
Rated at least Continuous Improvement? No Yes No No Yes No
Value Added of at least one year? No Yes Yes No
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
12/62
10 two steps forward one step back
tbl iii: School Performance, Columbus Collegiate Academy and KIPP: Journey Academy
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
Columbus Collegiate Academy
Made AYP? No No Yes
Made AYP in Reading? No No Yes
Made AYP in Mathematics? Yes Yes Yes
Rated at least Continuous Improvement? NA* Yes Yes
Value Added of at least one year? Yes Yes
KIPP: Journey Academy
Made AYP? No Yes Yes
Made AYP in Reading? No Yes Yes
Made AYP in Mathematics? Yes Yes Yes
Rated at least Continuous Improvement? NA* Yes Yes
Value Added of at least one year? Yes Yes
*The Ohio Department of Education does not issue ratings for rst year schools.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Excellent & Excellent w/ DistinctionEffectiveContinuous ImprovementAcademic WatchAcademic Emergency
ah Culu C(n=1,112)
Bucky Cmmuy H Fud(n=6,188)
educl ruc Cul f oh(n=4,605)
esC f Cl f oh(n=1,285)
Kd Cu(n=1,990)
Luc Cuy(n=27,440)
Mgmy Cuy esC(n=763)
oh Cucl f Cmmuy schl
(n=32,765)
s. alyu ohg(n=8,766)
thm B. Fdhm Fud(n=1,938)
5
46
18
13 14 49 19
17
18
8 6 61
100
8
21
11
40
40
52
12
628
37
37 3
5
15 10
42
44
23
38
18
9 22 1140
48 6
Gh i: Fordham-sponsored Schools v. Portfolios of Other Ohio Sponsors, by State Rating
Ohio Department of Education Interactive Local Report Card database.Total enrollment numbers were rst gathered for the top ten sponsors in the State of Ohio by the number of students served. The enrollmentnumbers were further broken down by the number of students served in each academic designation in order to calculate the percentage ofstudents enrolled in school buildings by academic designation. Non-rated schools were not included in the enrollment totals.
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
13/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 11
Graph I shows that, while we dont currently have any
schools in Academic Emergency, 11 percent o the
students in our portolio were in a school rated Aca-demic Watch (Springeld Academy o Excellence).
Fity-two percent attended schools rated Continu-
ous Improvement, and 37 percent attended schools
rated Eective. Note also the woeul perormance
o the Ashe Culture Center in all three graphs. o
its credit, the Ohio State Board o Education voted
unanimously in September 2011 to rescind Ashes
authority to sponsor charter schools at the end o
2011-12 school year.
Graph II shows how Fordhams portolio ared against
other authorizers regarding value added. O the
10 largest Ohio authorizers studied (by number o
students), ully 57 percent o students in Fordham
schools made above expected growth in 2010-11.
Note, when a school makes above expected gains
it automatically gets an academic rating jump o
one level (rom Academic Watch to Continuous
Improvement or example). However, 38 percent
o students in Fordham-sponsored schools did notmeet expected growth in 2010-11.
Graph III examines the perormance index scores1 o
students in Fordham-sponsored schools vs. students
in other sponsors portolios. In 2010-11, 64 per-
cent o students in the Fordham-sponsored schools
attended a school with a perormance index rating
o 80 or higher; 36 percent o students attended a
school that had a perormance index below 80.
Since we rst started as an authorizer in July 2005,
our sponsorship portolio has evolved considerably.
We began in 2005 with a total o 10 schools (all in
the Dayton-Cincinnati area) that collectively served
about 2,700 students, and all but three o these
schools we inherited rom the Ohio Department o
Education as they were orced out o sponsorship
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
AboveMetBelow
ah Culu C(n=1,112)
Bucky Cmmuy H Fud(n=4,984)
educl ruc Cul f oh(n=4,223)
esC f Cl f oh(n=763)
Kd Cu(n=1,651)
Luc Cuy(n=25,306)
Mgmy Cuy esC(n=454)
oh Cucl f Cmmuy schl
(n=30,828)
s. alyu ohg(n=5,191)
thm B. Fdhm Fud(n=1,938)
60
19
3 64 33
20
4
6 77
100
7
12
38
78
5
56
57
37
10
17
31
67
49
29
3744
30 10
Gh ii: Fordham-sponsored Schools v. Other Ohio Sponsors, by Value Added Designation
Ohio Department of Education Interactive Local Report Card database.Total enrollment numbers were rst gathered for the top ten sponsors in the State of Ohio by the number of students served. The enrollmentnumbers were further broken down by the number of students served in each value added ratings in order to calculate the percentage ofstudents enrolled in school buildings by value added ratings. Non-rated schools were not included in the enrollment totals.
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
14/62
12 two steps forward one step back
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Above 10080-100Under 80
thm B. Fdhm Fud(n=1,938)
s. alyu ohg(n=8,766)
oh Cucl f Cmmuy schl(n=32,765)
Mgmy Cuy esC(n=454)
Luc Cuy(n=27,474)
Kd Cu(n=1,990)
esC f Cl f oh(n=1,285)
educl ruc Cul f oh(n=4,605)
Bucky Cmmuy H Fud(n=6,188)
ah Culu C(n=1,112)
36
52 46
100
8
2
5
23 77
29 52
49
42 51
94 6
41
7
10
19
24 68
2174
64
Gh iii: Fordham-sponsored Schools v. Portfolio of Other Ohio Sponsors, by Performance Index Score
Gh iv: Academic Performance of Ohio 8 District and Charter Schools (Fordham-Sponsored Schools
as Pull-outs), 2010-11
40
60
80
100
120
Perform
anceIndexScore
Charter Schools District Schools
Below Expected Growth Expected Growth Above Expected Growth
Columbus Collegiate
Academy
Dayton Leadership Academies:
Dayton View Campus
Dayton Leadership Academies:
Dayton Liberty Campus
Phoenix Community
Learning Center
KIPP: Journey Academy
Springfield Academy
of Excellence
Ohio Department of Education Interactive Local Report Card database.Total enrollment numbers were rst gathered for the top ten sponsors in the State of Ohio by the number of students served. The enrollmentnumbers were further broken down by the number of students served by performance index rating (under 80, 80-100, and above 100) in orderto calculate the percentage of students enrolled in school buildings by performance index score. Non-rated schools were not included in theenrollment totals.
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
15/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 13
by state law in 2003. For the most part, our initial
crop o schools were troubled academically with
ve being rated Academic Emergency, one being
rated Continuous Improvement, and one being rated
Excellent (three new start-up schools were unrated).
Over the last six years weve had six schools leave
our portolio either through closure or by jumping
to other sponsors; weve opened one new school -
Learning Without Limits, a pilot project to launch
a hybrid model - only to see it close ater a year; and
weve birthed two new schools. We currently sponsor
only our o the ten schools that originally signed
with Fordham in 2005.
Tis year, Fordham-sponsored schools serve approxi-
mately 2,500 children and as the data above shows
these schools have made progress. Tis is a refectiono the hard work and dedication o the educators,
school board members, and students in each build-
ing. But, more work remains to be done. We know
it and we wont hide rom the challenge, but more
importantly the teachers, school leaders, and board
members working in the schools we sponsor are com-
mitted to making a dierence in the lives o children
who need it and they are making progress.
new ForDHaM-sponsoreD sCHooLsIn 2011, Fordham signed sponsorship agreements
with Sciotoville Elementary Academy and Sciotoville
Community School (ormerly East High School).
Both schools are located in rural southern Ohio, and
serve a student population o approximately 75 per-
cent economically disadvantaged students. We look
orward to working with the governing board o the
schools to help them improve the achievement in
both schools while also assisting in the development
o a long-term plan or rmly establishing the schools
as high-quality options or students and amilies.
In addition to signing contracts with the two Sci-
otoville schools, we are excited to move orward
with expansion o the highly successul Colum-
bus Collegiate Academy, Dayton Early College
Academy (DECA), KIPP Columbus, and Village
Preparatory School. Columbus Collegiate Academy
plans to open a second middle school in Colum-
bus in 2012; DECA will launch DECA Prep, a
school serving grades K-6 in Dayton in 2012; KIPP:
Central Ohio is in the early stages o an expan-
sion strategy; and we currently have a preliminary
agreement to support Village Preparatory SchoolII, a K-5 elementary that is part o Cleveland-based
Breakthrough Schools.
Finally, last year we reported on a fedgling eort
to ound a new, statewide sponsor that would be a
consolidation o current sponsors and ascribe to the
gold-standards or charter school sponsorship, the
Principles and Standards o the National Association
o Charter School Authorizers (NACSA). A legisla-
tive change was needed or this entity to be able tosponsor schools itsel, and, unortunately, the lan-
guage that would have established the entity became
a casualty o the budget bill process. However, the
past year has been successul in developing relation-
ships and sharing resources among the membership;
as such, the ounding members moved orward with
incorporation and have ormed the Ohio Authorizer
Collaborative.
1 Tis measure rewards the achievement o every student, not just those who score procient or higher. Districts, buildings andcommunity schools earn points based on how well each student does on all tested subjects in grades 3-8 and the 10th-gradeOhio Graduation ests. All tests have ve perormance levels advanced, accelerated, procient, basic, and limited. Tepercentage o students scoring at each perormance level is calculated and then multiplied by the point value assigned to thatperormance level. Te percentage o students perorming at the advanced level is multiplied by 1.2 points. Te percent atthe accelerated level is multiplied by 1.1 points. Te percent at the procient level is multiplied by 1.0 point. Te percent atthe basic level is multiplied by 0.6 points. Te percent at the limited level is multiplied by 0.3 points. Untested students areincluded in the calculation and are assigned a value o 0 points. Ohio Department o Education, Guide to UnderstandingOhios Accountability System 2010-2011, available at http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/emplates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?Page=3&opicRelationID=115&ContentID=13147&Content=110365.
http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?Page=3&TopicRelationID=115&ContentID=13147&Content=110365http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?Page=3&TopicRelationID=115&ContentID=13147&Content=110365http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?Page=3&TopicRelationID=115&ContentID=13147&Content=110365http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?Page=3&TopicRelationID=115&ContentID=13147&Content=110365 -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
16/62
14 two steps forward one step back
Accuabiliy A slmRibiliyFordham believes that a successul charter school is
academically eective, fscally sound, and organi-
zationally viable, and that such schools should be
allowed to operate reely and without intererence.
In return or these essential reedoms, however, char-
ters are to be held accountable or their academic,
fscal, and operational results. Holding schools ac-
countable or results is the sponsors most solemn
responsibility.
Fordham ocuses its sponsorship eorts on overseeing
and evaluating the perormance o the schools we
sponsor, a view o sponsorship that is also supported
by the National Association o Charter School Au-
thorizers (http://www.qualitycharters.org).
Fordhams OversightResponsibilitiesTe essential responsibilities o Fordham as a charter
school sponsor include:
n monitoring and evaluating the compliance o
each Fordham-sponsored school with all laws and
rules applicable to it;
n monitoring and evaluating the educational and
scal perormance, organizational soundness, and
eective operation o the school;
n monitoring and evaluating the contractual
commitments that the schools have made with
Fordham, above all their academic perormance;
and
n providing technical assistance to Fordham-
sponsored schools in complying with all laws and
rules applicable to community schools
In 2010-11, Fordham had sponsorship responsibility
or seven charter schools in our communities:
Each school has entered into a perormance contract
with Fordham detailing what it will accomplish,
how student perormance will be measured, and
what level o achievement it will attain. Te contract
incorporates the schools education, accountability,
th Frdham
srhi prgram
tabl IV: Fordhams Portfolio of SponsoredSchools, 2010-11
schlCharr
trmLcai sau
ColumbusCollegiateAcademy
2008-2013 Columbus Open
DaytonLibertyCampus
2010-2011 Dayton Open
Dayton View
Campus2011-2013 Dayton Open
KIPP:JourneyAcademy
2008-2013 Columbus Open
LearningWithoutLimits
2010-2011 Columbus Closed
PhoenixCommunityLearningCenter
2011-2013 Cincinnati Open
Springfield
Academy ofExcellence
2011-2013 Springfeld Open
http://www.qualitycharters.org/http://www.qualitycharters.org/ -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
17/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 15
governing, and business plans and spells out theschools mission and perormance indicators.
Accountability PlanTe accountability plan is the crux o each schools
contract and establishes the academic, nancial, and
organizational perormance standards that Fordham
uses to evaluate the schools. ransparent accountabil-
ity plans allow all school stakeholders to understand
the minimum required perormance measures o the
school. Te Profles section o this report shows
the perormance to date o each Fordham-sponsored
school.
Annual Review ProcessPursuant to Fordhams contracts with the Ohio De-
partment o Education and its sponsored schools,
Fordham conducts an annual review o each schoolsperormance.
Te academic perormance o all Fordham-sponsored
schools is published in this annual sponsorship report
and also summarized or the governing authority o
each school in the twice yearly site visit reports that
are issued to all board members o each Fordham-
sponsored school. I a school is in danger o non-
renewal or Fordham has other serious concerns,
we document those issues in letters to the schoolsboard, and meet with board members in person so
that any problems and potential consequences are
transparent.
Such letters are intended in part to inorm the
schools governing authority and sta o issues as-
sociated with school perormance and, in part, to
H Frdham Charr Crac Dfi Acadmic effciv
The academic accountability plan for each Fordham-sponsored school outlines three sets of indicators
that mark the foorof academic achievement for schools. Attainment of those requirements and goals is
expected of all Fordham-sponsored schools on an annual basis, and such performance is heavily weighted
in decisions about probation, suspension, school closure, or contract renewal.
Acadmic achivm idicar
The rst, and most important, set of indicators requires that the school:
n make overall Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP);
n make AYP in reading participation and achievement; and
n make AYP in math participation and achievement.
The second most important indicator is that the school will:
n be rated at least Continuous Improvement by the Ohio Department of Education (and be making
progress toward earning Effective and Excellent ratings).
Additional contractual goals call upon the school to:
n meet or exceed expected gains in reading on the Ohio value-added metric.
n meet or exceed expected gains in math on the Ohio value-added metric.
Additional contractual goals include outperforming similar neighborhood schools and charter averages.
These goals are spelled out further in Section II of this report.
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
18/62
16 two steps forward one step back
serve as ormal reminder that the school must meet
the academic perormance terms o its contract. I,
over two or more years, the school ails to meet the
basic contractual requirements o making Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) and earning a state rating o
(at least) Continuous Improvement, the school will
ace consequences.
tchical Aiac effrSponsors in Ohio are required by law to provide their
sponsored schools with technical assistance. Section
3301-102-02 (AA) o the Ohio Administrative Code
defnes technical assistance as providing relevant
knowledge and/or expertise and/or assuring the pro-
vision o resources to assist the community school or
sponsor in ulflling its obligation under applicable
rules and laws, including, but not limited to, guidance,inormation, written materials and manuals.
echnical assistance rom Fordham includes provid-
ing schools with inormation on issues that aect
them as a group (e.g., charter school unding, pend-
ing legislative action, changes to laws and rules).
Fordham also undertakes a substantial amount o
customized technical assistance each year. Custom-
ized technical assistance occurs when Fordham sta
work on a project, conduct research, or navigate a
particular issue or a single school. Our goal in pro-
viding technical assistance is to provide each school
with inormation and tools so that i the issue arises
in the uture the school has the knowledge to handle
it in-house.
As noted in previous annual sponsorship reports, Ford-
ham, rst and oremost, is a charter-school sponsor
and not a vendor o services to the schools it spon-
sors. Further, Fordham does not require any schools
it sponsors to purchase or utilize any specic servicesrom any specic vendors or school operators.
Fordham receives no unding or payments rom
schools or the state beyond the sponsorship ees
paid by the schools (which under state law cannot
exceed three percent o a schools per-pupil unding).
We believe that an inherent and improper confict
o interest arises whenever a sponsor is also a paid
vendor o services to the schools that it sponsors.
Te sponsors appropriate role is to point schools
seeking specic services to competent providers o
such services but to play no role in a schools deci-
sions about which services (i any) to procure rom
which providers.
srhi Gvrac
Decision-makingStrategiesAll ormal sponsorship decisions are made by the
trustees o the Tomas B. Fordham Foundation. o
keep up with the complexities and ever-changing
landscape o sponsorship, to provide regular over-
sight o Fordhams sponsorship activities, and to
advise Fordhams ull board, a board-level commit-
tee on sponsorship meets quarterlymore oten i
necessaryto discuss pressing sponsorship issues.
Tis committeeormally known at the Ohio Policy
and Sponsorship Committeeis also interested in
policy issues aecting education in the Buckeye
State. As needed, Fordham also utilizes ad hoc ad-
visory councils and outside experts. Sta plays an
important role in inorming sponsorship activities
and decision-making.
Fordhams Ohio Policy and Sponsorship Committee
consist o the ollowing individuals:
nDavid P. Driscoll, Chair Former
Commissioner o Education, Commonwealth o
Massachusetts
nChester E. Finn, Jr. President, Tomas B.
Fordham Foundation and Tomas B. Fordham
Institute
nTomas A. Holton, Esq. Partner, Porter,Wright, Morris & Arthur
nBruno V. Manno (emeritus non-voting member)
Senior Education Advisor to the Walton
Family Foundation
nDavid H. Ponitz President Emeritus o Sinclair
Community College
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
19/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 17
Te Fordham Foundations sponsorship program
is staed by Kathryn Mullen Upton (director o
sponsorship) and Teda Sampson (assistant direc-
tor o sponsorship). Fordhams vice president or
Ohio programs and policy (erry Ryan) oversees the
sponsorship operation. Te sponsorship program
also receives part-time support rom the Tomas
B. Fordham Institutes Emmy Partin (director o
Ohio policy and research), Jamie Davies OLeary
(senior Ohio policy analyst and associate editor), and
Michael Petrilli (executive vice-president).
For more details on individual committee members or
Fordham sta, please visit our website at http://www.
edexcellence.net/about-us/ordham-sta.html .
Sponsorship
Financial OverviewBecause Fordham is a nonproft organization, it
makes no proft rom school sponsorship and expects
to continue subsidizing with grant dollars its sponsor-
ship activities into the oreseeable uture.
tabl V: Fordham Foundation Sponsorship Financials (July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2011)
Rvu Amu prc
School Fees $210,584 50%
Foundation Subsidies $206,392 50%
Total Revenues $416,976 100%
ex Amu prc
Staff $208,094 50%
Consultants/Grants $87,042 21%
Professional/Legal Fees $36,588 8%
Office/Technology/Other $85,252 21%
Total Expenses $416,976 100%
http://www.edexcellence.net/about-us/fordham-staff.htmlhttp://www.edexcellence.net/about-us/fordham-staff.htmlhttp://www.edexcellence.net/about-us/fordham-staff.htmlhttp://www.edexcellence.net/about-us/fordham-staff.html -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
20/62
18 two steps forward one step back
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
21/62
19
2010-11Frdam Spsrsp Autabty Rprt
School PRoFileS
Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
2600 Far Hills Avenue, Suite 216
Dayton, OH 45419
937-227-3368
Two STepS
forward
one STep
back
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
22/62
20
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
23/62
21
Tab f ctts
itrdut 23
cumbus cgat Aadmy 25
Dayt lbrty campus 31
Dayt Vw campus 35
KiPP: Jury Aadmy 39
larg Wtut lmts 44
Px cmmuty larg ctr 48
Sprgfd Aadmy f ex 52
http://cca.pdf/http://cca.pdf/http://cca.pdf/http://dlc.pdf/http://dlc.pdf/http://dlc.pdf/http://dvc.pdf/http://dvc.pdf/http://dvc.pdf/http://kipp.pdf/http://kipp.pdf/http://kipp.pdf/http://lwl.pdf/http://lwl.pdf/http://lwl.pdf/http://pclc.pdf/http://pclc.pdf/http://pclc.pdf/http://sae.pdf/http://sae.pdf/http://sae.pdf/http://sae.pdf/http://pclc.pdf/http://lwl.pdf/http://kipp.pdf/http://dvc.pdf/http://dlc.pdf/http://cca.pdf/ -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
24/62
22
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
25/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 23
Te Ohio Department o Education requires that
all sponsors monitor and evaluate the education,
fnance, governance, and academic components o
a community school and assign each component a
rating o overall compliant (1), partially compliant
(2), or non-compliant (3).2
Although sponsors must report on the components
o a charter schools operations as noted above, each
sponsor is ree to defne what comprises the education,
fnance, governance, and academic components o
their sponsored schools programs. Additionally, spon-
sors are also ree to dene what overall compliant,
partially compliant and non-compliant mean.
Te Tomas B. Fordham Foundation defnes the
our components required by the Ohio Department
o Education as:
n
Education: whether the school delivered theeducation plan as contained in its contract
or sponsorship with the Tomas B. Fordham
Foundation, as evidenced by site visits;
n Academic: how the school perormed in the
context o its Accountability Plan (Fordham
Contract Exhibit IV);
n Financial: whether the school was nancially
healthy and auditable; and
n Governance: whether the school complied with
laws, regulations, record keeping compliance,3
and guidance rom the Ohio Department o
Education.
Te Tomas B. Fordham Foundation defnes the
three ratings required by the Ohio Department oEducation as:
n Overall compliant (OC): the school met 90
percent or more o the requirements in a
particular category;
n Partially compliant (PC): the school met 70
percent to 89 percent o the requirements in a
particular category; and
n Non-compliant (NC): the school met 69
percent or ewer o the requirements in aparticular category.
n Note: a designation o unauditable rom the
Ohio Auditor o State automatically results
in nancial and governance ratings o non-
compliant.
itrdut
Tab Vi: Ohio Department of Education School Monitoring Summary
eduat Aadm Faa Gvra
Columbus Collegiate Academy OC(1) PC(2) PC(2) OC(1)Dayton Liberty Campus OC(1) NC(3) PC(2) OC(1)
Dayton View Campus OC(1) NC(3) PC(2) OC(1)
KIPP: Journey Academy OC(1) NC(3) OC(1) OC(1)
Learning Without Limits NC(3) NC(3) OC(1) OC(1)
Phoenix Community Learning Center OC(1) OC(1) OC(1) OC(1)
Springfield Academy of Excellence OC(1) NC(3) OC(1) OC(1)
OC(1)= Overall compliant PC(2) = Partially compliant NC(3) = Non-compliant
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
26/62
24 TWo STePS forward one STeP back
Te results in the school profles that ollow are based
on each schools contract or sponsorship; reporting
requirements; documentation stored in the Fordham
Foundations online compliance database, AOIS;
school-specifc inormation available rom the Ohio
Department o Education (ODE); and inormation
obtained during the site visits conducted at each
school.4
2 First Notice Regarding 2010-2011 Sponsor Annual Reports, Ohio Department o Education, Ofce o Community Schools
(June 28, 2011).
3 Te rating or record keeping compliance is based on whether documents were accurate/complete and timely submitted to
the Fordham Foundations Authorizer Oversight Inormation System (AOIS).
4 Specic sources are as ollows: student composition and attendance rate (ODE individual school local report cards); individual
school academic achievement data, teacher demographics, and highly qualied inormation (ODE Interactive Local Report
Card database); school calendar/days in session (individual school proles led with ODE); records compliance (Authorizer
Oversight Inormation System and individual school site visit reports).
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
27/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 25
Contact Nae
Andrew Boy, Founder and Co-Director
Aress
1469 E. Main St.
Columbus, OH 43205
IRN
009122
Teeone
(614) 299-5284
Contact Eai
Website
http://www.columbuscollegiate.org/
Began Oerating
2008
Goerning Atorit
Andrew Boy, Ex Officio (7/2008 NA)
Jackie Messinger, Chairperson
(7/2008 7/2011)
Chad Aldis, Treasurer (1/2009 7/2011)
John Shockley, Member (6/2010 7/2013)
Chris Malinoski, Member (6/2010 7/2013)
Amber Merl, Member (9/2010 7/2013)
Jack Windser, Member (4/2010 - 4/2013)
Rick McQuown, Member (5/2011 5/2014)
missionThe mission of Columbus Collegiate
Academy is to prepare middle-school
students to achieve academic excellence
and become citizens of integrity. High
expectations for scholarship and behavior
and an achievement-oriented school
culture ensure all students are equipped to
enter, succeed in, and graduate from the
most demanding high schools and colleges.
educational philosophy
The central focus of Columbus Collegiateseducational program is college preparation.
All children should be expected to achieve
success in school and be prepared to
achieve success in college.
Columbus Collegiates educational
philosophy and program is built on four
core values: (1) all students have the ability
to achieve academic excellence; (2) all
students thrive in a highly disciplined
environment; (3) all students must be
prepared to excel in demanding high
schools on their way to selective colleges;
(4) all students deserve outstanding
teachers that produce outstanding results.
ClumbuCllgia Acadmy
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion
http://www.columbuscollegiate.org/http://www.columbuscollegiate.org/ -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
28/62
26 two steps forward one step back
SChOOl CAlENdAR
In 2010-2011, students at Columbus Collegiate
Academy attended school or 180 days, rom August
16, 2010 through May 27, 2011.
dEmOGRAphICSStudent Composition 2010-11
Grad srvd 6-8
erllm 103
sud Dmgrahic % f sud
African American 85
White NC
Hispanic NC
Asian NC
Economically Disadvantaged 93
Students with Disabilities 10
GOvERNANCE
schl Ladr
Andrew E. Boy is the ounder and director at Co-
lumbus Collegiate Academy, overseeing the nance
and operations o the organization. Prior to joiningColumbus Collegiate, Andrew completed the Build-
ing Excellent Schools (BES) Fellowship. During
the BES Fellowship, Andrew studied the highest
perorming urban charter schools across the country,
completed a school and leadership residency at a
high-perorming urban middle school, and received
extensive training in governance, nance, operations,
school organization, curriculum development, and
school culture. Andrew holds bachelors degrees in
education and communication rom the University
o Cincinnati and a masters in education adminis-
tration rom Xavier University.
FACulTy
numbr f tachr
Te school employed six teachers in 2010-11.
tachr Dmgrahic % f achr
Male 0
Female 100
White 17
Not specied 83
Highly qualifid tachr
Columbus Collegiate Academy employed 100 percent
highly qualied teachers in 2010-2011.
COmplIANCE REpORT
SummARy OF COmplIANCE ASSESSmENT
educai Raig: ovrall cmlia
Site visits to Columbus Collegiate Academy during the
2010-11 school year conrmed that the Education Plan
as set orth in the contract or sponsorship between
Fordham and the governing authority o Columbus
Collegiate Academy was being implemented.
Acadmic Raig: parially cmlia
Columbus Collegiate Academy met 13 out o 16
academic perormance requirements in 2010-11.
Fiacial Raig: parially cmlia
Columbus Collegiate Academy is rated partiallycompliant in the fnancial category. Te schools
most recent audit, FY10, was released without nd-
ings or recovery. A copy o the audit is available at
http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.
aspx?ReportID=86736.
Gvrac Raig: ovrall cmlia
Columbus Collegiate Academy is rated overall com-
pliant in the governance category. Te school met
all annual report requirements and a majority ocompliance requirements in 2010-11.
SChOOlpERFORmANCE RESulTS
All Fordham-sponsored schools must meet academic
accountability requirements under state and ederal
NC: not calculated when there are fewer than 10 in a group
http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=86736http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=86736http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=86736http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=86736 -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
29/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 27
law and pursuant to the sponsorship contract with the
Fordham Foundation. Federal requirements include
meeting Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) minimum
perormance standards. State requirements include
ensuring 75 percent or more o students in grades
kindergarten through eight are profcient in tested
subjects. Tese requirements are considered annually
by Fordham when evaluating the perormance o the
school and when making renewal and non-renewal
decisions regarding the contract. Detailed inormation
on Ohios accountability system is available at http://
www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/emplates/Pages/ODE/
Compliance Reporting
educai Raig: ovrall cmlia (100%)
Did the school deliver the education plan as contained in its contract for sponsorship with theThomas B. Fordham Foundation?
2/2
Fall Site Visit Yes
Spring Site Visit Yes
Acadmic Raig: parially Cmlia (82%)
Academic Performance Requirements 13/16
Adequate Yearly Progress Requirements 5/5
Goals for Academic Performance Using Common Indicators 4/7
Goals for Academic Performance Relative to Comparable Schools 2/2
Goals for Value-Added Performance 1/1
The Community School is Attaining Its Own Distinctive Education Goals 1/1
Columbus Collegiate Academy has developed its own distinctive education goals. Yes
Fiacial Raig: parially cmlia (75%)
Fiscal Reports Required 3/4
Audit (most recent): FY10 (no ndings for recovery) Status: FY11 started 1/1
IRS Form 990 (submitted annually) 0/1
Bi-monthly Financial Reports 1/1
Five-Year Budget Forecast 1/1
Gvrac Raig: ovrall cmlia (100%)
Governance Requirements 6/6
Annual Report (2010-2011) 4/4
Performance standards Yes
Method of measurement to determine progress Yes
Activities/progress toward performance standards Yes
School nancial status Yes
Records Compliance 2/2
Accurate and complete Yes (98%)
Submitted on time Yes (96%)
http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115 -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
30/62
28 two steps forward one step back
ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&opicRelationID=115.
Te ollowing tables provide a detailed breakdown o
school perormance in subjects tested in 2010-11.
Columbus Collegiate Academy has developed itsown distinctive education goals, as ollows.
Academic Goal saemen 3: Students at Columbus
Collegiate will become competent in the understand-
ing and application o scientic reasoning.
75% o students who have attended the school or
two or more years will score procient or better on
the on the Science OAA in 8th grade. Metric: Sci-
ence OAA. Yes
A greater percentage o students enrolled in theschool or two or more years will score procient or
better in the 8th grade Science OAA than students
rom Columbus City Schools.Metric: Science OAA.
Yes
8th grade students will design, conduct, and report
on an independent science experiment. Students will
present this experiment to a panel o at least three
expert evaluators, 95% o students will demonstrate
competence and o those, 50% will demonstrate
advanced work as measured by a standards-driven,
commonly applied rubric. Metric: Standards-based
Rubric. No
orgaizaial Viabiliy Gal sam 4: Co-
lumbus Collegiate will be ully enrolled and dem-
onstrate high levels o daily attendance and student
retention.
Academic Performance Requirements
Idicarschl prfrmac
pariciai Achivm
Rquirm 1:Made AdequateYearly Progress
(AYP)?
Yes
Rquirm 2:Made AYP inReading?
Yes Yes
Rquirm 3:Made AYP inMathematics?
Yes Yes
Goals for AcademicPerformance Using Common Indicators
Idicar schl prfrmac
Gal 1: Received ratingof at least ContinuousImprovement?
Yes
Gal 2: Averaged at least5% growth on READINGportions of state tests?
No
Gal 3: Averaged at least5% growth on MATHportions of state tests?
No
Gal 4: Averaged at least3% growth on SCIENCEportions of state tests?
NA
Gal 5: Averaged at least3% growth on WRITINGportions of state tests?
NA
Gal 6: Averaged at least3% growth on SOCIALSTUDIES portions of statetests?
NA
Gal 7: Outperformedhome district average on allportions of state tests?
Yes
Gal 8: Outperformed statecommunity school average
on all portions of state tests?
Yes
Gal 9: Met or exceeded theExpected Gain in Readingon the Ohio Value-AddedMetric.
Yes
Gal 10: Met or exceededthe Expected Gain in Mathon the Ohio Value-AddedMetric.
No
excll ih Diici
excll
effciv
Ciuu Imrvm(Frdham Gal)
Acadmic wach
Acadmic emrgcy
http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115 -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
31/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 29
Columbus Collegiates student enrollment will be
at 100% o projected enrollment described in the
charter application at the beginning o each school
year.Metric: Te community school will track enroll-
ment numbers and provide detailed analysis in annual
report. No
Te Columbus Collegiate waiting list will be equal
to 50% o the 6th grade enrollment during each
year.Metric: Te community school will track enroll-
ment numbers and provide detailed analysis in annual
report. No
90% o students who begin the school year at Co-
lumbus Collegiate will remain in the school through-
out the academic year.Metric: Te community school
will track enrollment numbers and provide detailedanalysis in annual report. No
90% o students who complete the school year at
Columbus Collegiate will re-enroll or the ollowing
school year.Metric: Te community school will track
enrollment numbers and provide detailed analysis in
annual report. No
Average daily student attendance at Columbus Col-
legiate will be at or above 95% over the course o
each school year.Metric: Te community school will
track enrollment numbers and provide detailed analysis
in annual report. Yes
orgaizaial Viabiliy Gal sam 5: Co-lumbus Collegiate will ensure parent approval and
support that demonstrates the schools long-term
viability and eectiveness.
Average parent satisaction with the academic pro-
gram, as measured by an annual survey at the conclu-
sion o the school year, will exceed 85% o respon-
dents.Metric: Te community school will administer
parent surveys annually. Yes
Average parent satisaction with the clear and opencommunication by the aculty and staf, as measured
by an annual survey at the conclusion o the school
year, will exceed 85%.Metric: Te community school
will administer parent surveys annually. Yes
orgaizaial Viabiliy Gal sam 6: Co-
lumbus Collegiate will demonstrate scal viability
that ocuses on student achievement and responsible
use o public monies.
School Performance on Reading, Math and Science Tests
% f sud
Mig ReADInG
sadardprc
Chag
% f sud
Mig MAtH
sadardprc
Chag
% f sud
Mig sCIenCe
sadardprc
Chag
09-10 10-11 09-10 10-11 09-10 10-11
6th Grade 73 85 16% 80 72 -10% NA NA NA
7th Grade 93 83 -11% 100 89 -11% NA NA NA
8th Grade NA NC NA NA NC NA NA NA NA
ovrall 77 84 9% 84 79 -6% nA nA nA
*Note: sixth graders were not tested in writing, science or social studies in 2010-11.
Percent Meeting State Standards Comparedto Home District and State Community School Average, 2010-11
Clumbu
Cllgia Acadmy
Clumbu Ciy
schl DiricDiffrc
sa Cmmuiy
schl AvragDiffrc
Reading 84 63 21 68 16
Math 79 55 21 55 24
Science NA NA NA 46 NA
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
32/62
30 two steps forward one step back
Approved school budgets or each school year will
demonstrate sound allocation o resources in support
o the schools mission.Metric: Te Board o rustees
will create a Finance Committee that will monitor and
approve all monthly and annual budgets. Yes
Each year, the school will provide annual balancedbudgets with consistent cash reserves. Metric: Te
Board of rustees will create a Finance Committee
that will monitor and approve all monthly and annual
budgets. Yes
Yearly audits perormed by the ofce o the Auditor
o Ohio will show the schools sound scal manage-
ment o public resources meet or exceed GAAP. Te
ndings o these audits will be submitted in a timely
manner to the sponsor and the Legislative Ofce o
Education Oversight or any other requesting stateagency or ofce. Metric: Te Board o rustees will
create a Finance Committee that will secure an audit
perormed by the ofce o the Auditor o Ohio. Yes
Faihfulne o term of Charer Goal saemen
7: Students at Columbus Collegiate will be prepared
or success in college preparatory high schools.
50% or more o students who attend Columbus
Collegiate or three consecutive years will enroll
in college preparatory high schools. Te numbero students attending college preparatory schools
will increase, on average, ve percent per year until
100% is achieved. Metric: Te Community School
will track the high schools into which the graduating
eighth graders enroll. High schools in which 75% o
their graduates matriculate to college will be considered
college preparatory. Yes
In a survey given to parents o 8th grade students
who have attended Columbus Collegiate or three
consecutive years, 80% will agree or strongly agreewith the statement, Columbus Collegiate Academy
prepared my child or success in high school.Metric:
Te Community School will administer parent surveys
annually. Yes
OThER pERFORmANCE INdICATORS
Attenance Rate
96.5 percent.
Te perforance Inex Score
Te Perormance Index (PI) score at Columbus Col-
legiate Academy was 97.7.
96.1
97.7
95.0
95.5
96.0
96.5
97.0
97.5
98.0
2010-112009-10
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
33/62
31
Contact Name
Dr. T.J. Wallace, Principal
Aress
4401 Dayton Liberty Road
Dayton, OH 45418
IRN
133959
Teeone
(937) 262-4080
Contact Emai
Website
http://www.edisonlearning.com/custom/
schools/dayton/
Began Oerating
1999
Goerning Atorit
Mary Karr, Chairperson (1/2008 12/2011)
Ellen Ireland, Secretary (4/2008 3/2011)
David Greer, Treasurer (1/2009 12/2012)
Dixie J. Allen, Member (1/2007 12/2010)
Richard Penry, President
Vanessa Ward, Member (9/2009 8/2012)
Doug Mangen (7/2009 6/2012)
Management ComanEdisonLearning, Inc.
missionThe mission of Dayton Liberty Campus
is to provide an exemplary education
to all its students. The school intends
to offer a world-class education and to
develop understanding, inquiry, and good
citizenship. The school seeks to provide a
richer curriculum in reading, math, science,
social studies, and the arts than is the
norm in the Dayton City School District.
educational philosophy
The schools educational philosophy isthat all children should be provided with
strong educational foundations in the early
years, especially in reading and math, and
that critical thinking skills are essential as
well. All children should have a varied and
rich educational experience and exposure
to the arts and technology. The school
also believes that parental involvement is
important to the achievement of children
and to the culture of the school.
DayLibry Camu
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion
http://www.edisonlearning.com/custom/schools/dayton/http://www.edisonlearning.com/custom/schools/dayton/http://www.edisonlearning.com/custom/schools/dayton/http://www.edisonlearning.com/custom/schools/dayton/ -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
34/62
32 two steps forward one step back
SChOOl CAlENdAR
In 2010-11, students at the Dayton Liberty Campus
attended school or 188 days, rom August 9, 2010
through June 7, 2011.
dEMOGRAphICSStudent Composition 2010-11
Grad srvd K-8
erllm 485
sud Dmgrahic % f sud
African American 95
White NC
Hispanic NC
Multi-Racial NC
Economically Disadvantaged 100
Students with Disabilities 21
GOvERNANCE
schl Ladr
During the 2010-11 school year, J Wallace served
as the principal o Dayton Liberty Campus.
FACulTy
numbr f tachr
Te school employs 40.2 teachers.
tachr Dmgrahic % f achr
Male 15
Female 85
African-American 14
Hispanic 5White 75
Highly qualifid tachr
In 2010-11, 100 percent o core academic subjects
were taught by teachers considered highly qualifed as
defned under the ederal No Child Left BehindAct.
COMplIANCE REpORT
SuMMARy OF COMplIANCE ASSESSMENT
educai Raig: ovrall Cmlia
Site visits to the Dayton Liberty Campus during the2010-11 school year evidenced that the school was
implementing the education plan as set orth in theschools contract or sponsorship.
Acadmic Raig: n-cmliaTe Dayton Liberty Campus met 2 o 7 academic
perormance requirements in 2010-11.
Fiacial Raig: parially cmliaTe Dayton Liberty Campus is rated partially com-
pliant in the fnancial category. Te schools most
recent audit, FY10, was released without fndings
or recovery. A copy o the audit is available at
http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.
aspx?ReportID=87981.
Gvrac Raig: ovrall cmliaTe Dayton Liberty Campus is rated overall compli-
ant in the governance category.
SChOOlpERFORMANCE RESulTS
All Fordham-sponsored schools must meet academicaccountability requirements under state and ederal
law and pursuant to the sponsorship contract with the
Fordham Foundation. Federal requirements include
meeting Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) minimum
perormance standards. State requirements include
excll ih Diici
excll
effciv
Ciuu Imrvm
(Frdham Gal)
Acadmic wach
Acadmic emrgcy
NC: not calculated when there are fewer than 10 in a group
http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=87981http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=87981http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=87981http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=87981 -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
35/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 33
Compliance Reporting
educai Raig: ovrall Cmlia (100%)
Did the school deliver the education plan as contained in its contract for sponsorship with theThomas B. Fordham Foundation?
2/2
Fall Site Visit Yes
Spring Site Visit Yes
Acadmic Raig: n-cmlia (29%)
Academic Performance Requirements 2/7
Requirement 1: Made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)? No
Requirement 2: Made AYP in both reading participation and achievement? No
Requirement 3: Made AYP in both math participation and achievement? No
Requirement 4: Rated at least Continuous Improvement and making marked progresstoward a state rating of Effective, Excellent and Excellent with Distinction?
Yes
Requirement 5: Outperform the home district average on all reading, math and science portionsof the Ohio Achievement Assessments?
No
Requirement 6: Outperform the state community school average on all reading, math and scienceportions of the Ohio Achievement Assessments?
No
Requirement 7: Received an overall composite score on Ohios value added measure thatindicates more than one year of progress was achieved in both reading and math? Yes
Fiacial Raig: parially cmlia (75%)
Fiscal Reports Required 3/4
Audit (most recent): FY10 (no ndings for recovery) Status: FY11 started Yes
IRS Form 990 (submitted annually) No
Bi-monthly Financial Reports Yes
Five-Year Budget Forecast Yes
Gvrac Raig: ovrall cmlia (100%)
Governance Requirements 6/6
Annual Report (2010-2011) 4/4
Performance standards Yes
Method of measurement to determine progress Yes
Activities/progress toward performance standards Yes
School nancial status Yes
Records Compliance 2/2
Accurate and complete Yes (98%)
Submitted on time Yes (98%)
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
36/62
34 two steps forward one step back
ensuring 75 percent or more o students in grades
kindergarten through eight are profcient in tested
subjects. Tese requirements are considered annually
by Fordham when evaluating the perormance o theschool and when making renewal and non-renewal
decisions regarding the contract. Detailed inorma-
tion on Ohios accountability system is available at
http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/emplates/Pages/
ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&opicRelation
ID=115. Te ollowing tables provide a detailed
breakdown o school perormance in subjects tested
in 2010-11.
OThER pERFORMANCE INdICATORS
Attenance Rate
92.9 percent.
Te performance Inex Score
Te Perormance Index (PI) score at Dayton Liberty
Campus was 72.4.
54.9
69.1
71.5
88.8
75.871.5 72.4
68.5
73.2
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2010
-11
2009-10
2008-09
2007-08
2006-07
2005-06
2004-05
2003-04
2002-03
School Performance on Reading, Math and Science Tests
% f sud
Mig ReADInG
sadardprc
Chag
% f sud
Mig MAtH
sadardprc
Chag
% f sud
Mig sCIenCe
sadardprc
Chag
09-10 10-11 09-10 10-11 09-10 10-11
3rd Grade 40 47 18% 44 50 14% NA NA NA
4th Grade 44 51 16% 29 46 59% NA NA NA
5th Grade 40 36 -10% 17 26 53% 38 17 -55%
6th Grade 72 64 -11% 52 57 10% NA NA NA
7th Grade 56 55 -2% 44 70 59% NA NA NA
8th Grade 51 72 41% 18 50 178% 7 20 186%
ovrall 50 54 8% 35 49 40% 25 18 -28%
*Note: sixth graders were not tested in writing, science or social studies in 2010-11.
Percent Meeting State Standards Comparedto Home District and State Community School Average, 2010-11
Day Libry
Camu
Day public
schl DiricDiffrc
sa Cmmuiy
schl AvragDiffrc
Reading 54 55 -1 68 -14
Math 49 45 4 55 -6
Science 18 26 -8 46 -28
http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=115 -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
37/62
35
Contact Nae
Amy Doerman, Principal
Aress
1416 W. Riverview Avenue
Dayton, OH 45407
Teeone
(937) 567-9426
IRN
133454
Contact Eai
Website
http://www.edisonlearning.com/custom/
schools/dayton/index.html
Began Oerating
2000
Goerning Atorit
Mary Karr, Chairperson (1/2008 12/2011)
Ellen Ireland, Secretary (4/2008 3/2011)
David Greer, Treasurer (1/2009 12/2012)
Dixie J. Allen, Member (1/2007 12/2010)
Richard Penry, President
Vanessa Ward, Member (9/2009 8/2012)
Doug Mangen (7/2009 6/2012)
missionThe mission of Dayton View Campus is to
provide an exemplary education to all its
students. The school is also focused on
equal access to a world-class education .
educational philosophyThe schools educational philosophy is
that all children should be provided with
strong educational foundations in the early
years, especially in reading and math, and
that critical thinking skills are essential as
well. All children should have a varied andrich educational experience and exposure
to the arts and technology. The school
also believes that parental involvement is
important to the achievement of children
and to the culture of the school.
DayVi Camu
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion
http://www.edisonlearning.com/custom/schools/dayton/index.htmlhttp://www.edisonlearning.com/custom/schools/dayton/index.htmlhttp://www.edisonlearning.com/custom/schools/dayton/index.htmlhttp://www.edisonlearning.com/custom/schools/dayton/index.html -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
38/62
36 two steps forward one step back
SChOOl CAlENdAR
In 2010-11, students at Dayton View Campus at-
tended school or 188 days, rom August 9, 2010
through June 7, 2011.
dEmOGRAphICSStudent Composition 2010-11
Grad srvd K-8
erllm 517
sud Dmgrahic % f sud
African American 94
White NC
Other NC
Economically Disadvantaged 100
Students with Disabilities 12
GOvERNANCE
schl Ladr
Amy Doerman served as the principal or Dayton
View Campus during the 2010-11 school year. She
holds a bachelors degree in elementary education
and a masters degree in educational leadership. Shehas been the principal at Dayton View Campus since
2005 and prior to becoming principal taught for many
years including fve years at Dayton View Campus.
FACulTy
numbr f tachr
Te school employed 28 teachers in 2010-11.
tachr Dmgrahic % f achrMale 0
Female 100
African-American 14
White 82
Not specied 4
COmplIANCE REpORT
SummARy OF COmplIANCE ASSESSmENT
educai Raig: ovrall cmlia
Site visits conducted at the Dayton View Campus
during the 2010-11 school year indicated the Dayton
View Campus was ollowing the Education Plan
as set orth in its contract or sponsorship with the
Fordham Foundation.
Acadmic Raig: n-cmlia
Te Dayton View Campus is rated non-compliant in
this category because it met 4 out of 7 of its academic
perormance requirements.
Fiacial Raig: parially cmlia
Te Dayton View Campus is rated partially compliantin this category. Te schools most recent audit, FY10,
was released without fndings or recovery. A copy
o the audit is available at http://www.auditor.state.
oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=87959.
Gvrac Raig: ovrall cmlia
Te Dayton View Campus is rated overall compliant
in the governance category. Te school met all an-
nual report requirements and 100% o compliance
requirements in 2010-11.
SChOOlpERFORmANCE RESulTS
All Fordham-sponsored schools must meet academic
accountability requirements under state and ederal
excll ih Diici
excll
effciv
Ciuu Imrvm
(Frdham Gal)
Acadmic wach
Acadmic emrgcy
NC: not calculated when there are fewer than 10 in a group
http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=87959http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=87959http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=87959http://www.auditor.state.oh.us/auditsearch/detail.aspx?ReportID=87959 -
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
39/62
Thomas B. Fordham FoundaTion 37
Compliance Reporting
educai Raig: ovrall cmlia (100%)
Did the school deliver the education plan as contained in its contract for sponsorship with theThomas B. Fordham Foundation?
2/2
Fall Site Visit Yes
Spring Site Visit Yes
Acadmic Raig: n-cmlia (58%)
Academic Performance Requirements 4/7
Requirement 1: Made Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)? Yes
Requirement 2: Made AYP in both reading participation and achievement? Yes
Requirement 3: Made AYP in both math participation and achievement? Yes
Requirement 4: Rated at least Continuous Improvement and making marked progresstoward a state rating of Effective, Excellent and Excellent with Distinction?
Yes
Requirement 5: Outperform the home district average on all reading, math and science portionsof the Ohio Achievement Assessments?
No
Requirement 6: Outperform the state community school average on all reading, math and scienceportions of the Ohio Achievement Assessments?
No
Requirement 7: Received an overall composite score on Ohios value added measure thatindicates more than one year of progress was achieved in both reading and math? No
Fiacial Raig: parially cmlia (75%)
Fiscal Reports Required 3/4
Audit (most recent): FY10 (no ndings for recovery) Status: FY11 in progress Yes
IRS Form 990 (submitted annually) No
Bi-monthly Financial Reports Yes
Five-Year Budget Forecast Yes
Gvrac Raig: ovrall cmlia (100%)
Governance Requirements 6/6
Annual Report (2010-2011) 4/4
Performance standards Yes
Method of measurement to determine progress Yes
Activities/progress toward performance standards Yes
School nancial status Yes
Records Compliance 2/2
Accurate and complete Yes (98%)
Submitted on time Yes (64%)
-
8/3/2019 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Fordhams 2010-11 Sponsorship Accountability Report
40/62
38 two steps forward one step back
law and pursuant to the sponsorship contract with the
Fordham Foundation. Federal requirements include
meeting Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) minimum
perormance standards. State requirements include
ensuring 75 percent or more o students in gradeskindergarten through eight are profcient in tested
subjects. Tese requirements are considered annually
by Fordham when evaluating the perormance o the
school and when making renewal and non-renewal
decisions regarding the contract. Detailed information
on Ohios accountability system is available at http://
www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/emplates/Pages/ODE/
ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&opicRelationID=115.
Te ollowing tables provide a detailed breakdown o
school perormance in subjects tested in 2010-11.
OThER pERFORmANCE INdICATORS
Attenance Rate
93.9 percent.
Te perforance Inex Score
Te 2010-11 Performance Index (PI) score at Dayton
View Campus was 86.9, an increase of just over four
points rom the previous year.
61.170.4
58.2
73.8 70.5
77.886.9
82.8
72.4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2010
-11
2009-10
2008-09
2007-08
2006-07
2005-06
2004-05
2003-04
2002-03
School Performance on Reading, Math, and Science Tests
% f sud
Mig ReADInG
sadardprc
Chag
% f sud
Mig MAtH
sadardprc
Chag
% f sud
Mig sCIenCe
sadardprc
Chag
09-10 10-11 09-10 10-11 09-10 10-11
3rd Grade 75 94 25% 83 94 13% NA NA NA
4th Grade 91 85 -7% 70 81 16% NA NA NA
5th Grade 35 43 23% 33 30 -9% 19 28 47%
6th Grade 74 89 20% 58 71 22% NA NA NA
7th Grade 67 68 1% 55 71 29% NA NA NA
8th Grade 67 81 21% 29 50 72% 23 25 9%
ovrall 70 76 9% 58 67 16% 21 27 29%
Percent Meeting State Standards Comparedto Home District and State Community School Average, 2010-11
Day Vi
Ca