Charter Renewal, Expansion & Closure

A look at what authorizers with strong portfolios do differently

Academic performance expectations for renewal represent the bar for a quality school, not the minimum expectations to avoid closure.
Ensure schools are not held accountable for expectations that are not present or known throughout the charter term (i.e., “no surprises”).
To ensure renewal decisions are unambiguous, authorizers have clear alignment of renewal documents, renewal criteria, renewal rubrics, renewal application ratings, performance frameworks, charter contract clarity on renewals, and recommendations.

Authorizer’s criteria and standards for school operator past performance is exceptionally clear. Schools seeking to replicate or expand know if they should even apply or not.
Replication application is not automatically approved, even for schools that meet past performance criteria and standards. The review for potential replicators is different but never automatic and never without a thorough review. Decisions for replication are based on a number of factors (e.g., capacity to replicate, potential location), but are most heavily weighted on past academic, financial, and organizational performance.

Authorizers provide incentives for replication or expansion (e.g., reducing per-student oversight fee and expedited application process, charter amendment process rather than new or expedited application process, access to facilities).

In-portfolio replicators (i.e., those already in the authorizer’s portfolio) have an expedited application review process.
Potential replicators, particularly in-portfolio replicators, are not required to submit any information the authorizer already possesses or can easily acquire.

When a school’s performance meets the authorizer’s standards for closure, authorizing staff prefers to work with the school’s board to relinquish the charter rather than initiate a formal closure by the authorizer.
Authorizer informs the school and its board of underperformance years in advance of the end of the school’s charter term. Through multiple feedback loops described in other sections, including formal face-to-face meetings with the school leader and school’s board, the authorizer ensures the school is aware of performance that may lead to non-renewal, typically multiple years in advance of the school’s renewal cycle.

Authorizer takes an active role when a school is closed. This can include trying to find a replacement operator and project managing (either directly or through other organizations) the process of ensuring students have access to another school.

Additional Report Content