Using the MOU to strengthen charter oversight T


By Melanie A. Petersen


he old expression “the devil is in the details” rings true for charter school MOUs. Indeed, when the creation of an MOU


is guided by the mission of educating all students, and if you pro- vide the necessary time and attention to this document, you will help strengthen and guide the charter oversight process. The following guide may assist authorizers as they prepare


their MOUs; however, all MOUs must be created to address the unique circumstances of the charter and the authorizer. Be sure to check with your counsel when drafting an MOU. While the petition sets out the general standards for all of the


necessary elements, the MOU can – and should – discuss all the operational issues, from shared playground and library time to monitoring the progress of students in the classrooms. The agree- ment can address the operational details that will set the expectations and help avoid disagreements between the parties.


Finances and timelines Unfortunately, the downfall of many


charters is the managing of the business and finance operations of the school. The Education Code has deadlines for financial docu- ments that are due to the district. In addition, the MOU could: • Establish additional timelines or fiscal standards to assist


both the charter and the district in assessing the financial viabil- ity of the charter. • Agree to have district staff look at the books monthly. This


can be especially helpful to both parties during the first two years the charter is in operation. • Consider the charter school’s use of district facilities and an-


ticipate third-party use and who will get the benefit of those fees. • Set expectations for notification to the district should the charter incur additional obligations (loans, leases, etc.).


Student academic progress and well-being The district and charter can also agree to provide periodic up-


dates or reports on academic progress. If specific timelines are established it will avoid disagreement as to how, when and where the reports are due. • Staff or your board should meet to review progress on stu-


dent outcomes as the year progresses. This hands-on oversight will let the charter staff and parents know that everyone is fo- cused on academics. • Consider outlining the authorizer’s right for site visits. • Consider specifying which of the authorizer’s board meet-


ings the charter must attend and present at in order to demon- strate compliance with state academic standards.


• Consider outlining shared professional development. Will


you allow (encourage) the charter school staff to attend autho- rizer-hosted professional development? • Outline authorizer’s expectations to monitor and assess charter-provided health and food services.


Serving special-needs students As the law imposes ultimate responsibility to the authorizer


for the education of the charter school’s special education stu- dents, one of the most important areas of oversight is the opera- tion of the special education program. Especially if the charter is providing its own special education services, the MOU should detail every element of the program, includ- ing these items: • Consider requiring the charter staff to


attend a comprehensive special education “boot camp” training, which will ensure they have been provided full information on the basics of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, from identification and as- sessment to IEP development and delivery.


• Detail the responsibilities from child find through due pro-


cess hearings. • Specifically set out the encroachment fee and formula.


Collaborate from the start While many leaders and teachers in the traditional education


setting continue to see threat and insult in charter schools, more and more education professionals are open to the notion that, under certain circumstances, charter schools can provide a vi- able educational option for some students. Our challenge is not to promote or demote one form of edu-


cation delivery over another. For some families, home-study is a great fit; for others, a blend of independent and traditional schooling meets the child’s needs. Charter schools are not the “revolution” that some thought


they might be, but they most certainly are part of the “evolution” of public education. It is clearly our responsibility to make sure that authorizers step up and provide solid, detailed MOUs, and then vigilantly follow through on oversight. The children in charter schools are our children; the dollars


funding charter schools are our tax dollars. For these reasons, it is essential we provide the necessary planning and oversight to these public schools. n


Melanie A. Petersen is a partner at Fagen Friedman & Fulfrost and co-chair of the Charter School Practice Group.


November/December 2011 33


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40