Section 180-19-040. Evaluation and approval or denial of authorizer applications.

(Effective until May 15, 2015)

(1) The board shall evaluate an application submitted by a school district seeking to be an authorizer and issue a decision approving or denying the application by April 1st of each year.

(2) In evaluating each application, the board will rate each part of the application as set forth in WAC 180-19-030 (3)(a) through (e) as well-developed, partially developed, or undeveloped, based on criteria for evaluation included in the authorizer application developed and made publicly available pursuant to WAC 180-19-030(1).

(a) "Well-developed" shall mean that the application response meets the expectations established by the board and the NACSA Principles and Standards in material respects and warrants approval subject to execution of an authorizing contract with the board.

(b) "Partially developed" shall mean that the application response contains some aspects of a well-developed practice, is limited in its execution, or otherwise falls short of satisfying the expectations established by the board and the NACSA Principles and Standards.

(c) "Undeveloped" shall mean that the application response is wholly inadequate in that the applicant district has not considered or anticipated the well-developed practice at all, or proposes to carry out its authorizing duties in a way that is not recognizably connected to the expectations established by the board and the NACSA Principles and Standards.

(3) In its evaluation the board will consider whether the district's proposed policies and practices are consistent with the NACSA Principles and Standards, as required by RCW 28A.710.100(3), in at least the following areas:

(a) Organizational capacity: Commit human and financial resources necessary to conduct authorizing duties effectively and efficiently;

(b) Solicitation and evaluation of charter applications: Implement a comprehensive application process that includes clear application questions and rigorous criteria, and grants charters only to applicants who demonstrate strong capacity to establish and operate a charter school;

(c) Performance contracting: Execute contracts with charter schools that articulate the rights and responsibilities of each party regarding school autonomy, funding, administration and oversight, outcomes, measures for evaluating success or failure, performance consequences, and other material terms;

(d) Ongoing charter school oversight and evaluation: Conduct contract oversight that competently evaluates performance and monitors compliance, ensures schools' legally entitled autonomy, protects student rights, informs intervention, revocation and renewal decisions, and provides annual reports as required by chapter 28A.710 RCW; and

(e) Charter renewal and revocation processes: Design and implement a transparent and rigorous process that uses comprehensive academic, financial and operational performance data to make merit-based renewal decisions, and revokes charters when necessary to protect student and public interests.

(4) The board shall develop and post on its public web site rubrics for determination of the extent to which each criterion for evaluation has been met.

(5) The board may utilize the services of external reviewers with expertise in educational, organizational or financial matters in evaluating applications.

(6) Prior to approving any application, the board shall require an in-person interview with district leadership for the purpose of reviewing and evaluating the application. The in-person interview will be used to supplement or clarify information provided by the district in the written application. The information received in the in-person interview shall be considered in formulating the overall ratings of the application under subsection (2) of this section.

(7) For an application to be approved, the board must find it to be well developed in each part of the application as set forth in WAC 180-19-030(3). A determination that an application does not meet standards of quality authorizing in any part, shall constitute grounds for disapproval. If the state board disapproves an application, it shall state in writing the reasons for the disapproval, with specific reference to the criteria included in the authorizer application.

(8) The board shall post on its public web site the applications of all school districts approved as authorizers. A school district approved as an authorizer shall post its application on a public web site.

(Effective May 15, 2015)

(1) The board shall evaluate an application submitted by a school district seeking to be an authorizer and issue a decision approving or denying the application by February 1st of each year.

(2) In evaluating each application, the board will rate each part of the application as set forth in WAC 180-19-030 (3)(a) through (e) as well-developed, partially developed, or undeveloped, based on criteria for evaluation included in the authorizer application developed and made publicly available pursuant to WAC 180-19-030(1).

(a) "Well-developed" shall mean that the application response meets the expectations established by the board and the NACSA Principles and Standards in material respects and warrants approval subject to execution of an authorizing contract with the board.

(b) "Partially developed" shall mean that the application response contains some aspects of a well-developed practice, is limited in its execution, or otherwise falls short of satisfying the expectations established by the board and the NACSA Principles and Standards.

(c) "Undeveloped" shall mean that the application response is wholly inadequate in that the applicant district has not considered or anticipated the well-developed practice at all, or proposes to carry out its authorizing duties in a way that is not recognizably connected to the expectations established by the board and the NACSA Principles and Standards.

(3) In its evaluation the board will consider whether the district's proposed policies and practices are consistent with the NACSA Principles and Standards as required by RCW 28A.710.100(3), in at least the following areas:

(a) Organizational capacity: Commit human and financial resources necessary to conduct authorizing duties effectively and efficiently;

(b) Solicitation and evaluation of charter applications: Implement a comprehensive application process that includes clear application questions and rigorous criteria, and grants charters only to applicants who demonstrate strong capacity to establish and operate a charter school;

(c) Performance contracting: Execute contracts with charter schools that articulate the rights and responsibilities of each party regarding school autonomy, funding, administration and oversight, outcomes, measures for evaluating success or failure, performance consequences, and other material terms;

(d) Ongoing charter school oversight and evaluation: Conduct contract oversight that competently evaluates performance and monitors compliance, ensures schools' legally entitled autonomy, protects student rights, informs intervention, revocation and renewal decisions, and provides annual reports as required by chapter 28A.710 RCW; and

(e) Charter renewal and revocation processes: Design and implement a transparent and rigorous process that uses comprehensive academic, financial and operational performance data to make merit-based renewal decisions, and revokes charters when necessary to protect student and public interests.

(4) The board shall develop and post on its public web site rubrics for determination of the extent to which each criterion for evaluation has been met.

(5) The board may utilize the services of external reviewers with expertise in educational, organizational or financial matters in evaluating applications.

(6) Prior to approving any application, the board shall require an in-person interview with district leadership for the purpose of reviewing and evaluating the application. The in-person interview will be used to supplement or clarify information provided by the district in the written application. The information received in the in-person interview shall be considered in formulating the overall ratings of the application under subsection (2) of this section.

(7) For an application to be approved, the board must find it to be well developed in each part of the application as set forth in WAC 180-19-030(3). A determination that an application does not meet standards of quality authorizing in any part shall constitute grounds for disapproval. If the state board disapproves an application, it shall state in writing the reasons for the disapproval, with specific reference to the criteria included in the authorizer application.

(8) The board shall post on its public web site the applications of all school districts approved as authorizers. A school district approved as an authorizer shall post its application on a public web site.

[Statutory Authority: RCW 28A.710.090, 28A.710.130, 28A.710.140, and 28A.710.150. WSR 14-19-107, § 180-19-040, filed 9/16/14, effective 10/17/14. Statutory Authority: RCW 28A.710.090. WSR 13-07-065, § 180-19-040, filed 3/19/13, effective 4/19/13.]

RCW 28A.710.090, 28A.710.130, 28A.710.140, and 28A.710.150. WSR 14-19-107, § 180-19-040, filed 9/16/14, effective 10/17/14. Statutory Authority: RCW 28A.710.090. WSR 13-07-065, § 180-19-040, filed 3/19/13, effective 4/19/13.

Rules

180-19-030,180-19-030,180-19-030,180-19-030,180-19-030,180-19-030,