Re “Why the ISPY Charter Was Turned Away, and the Reaction”
[Editor’s Note: A co-founder of the charter school petitioning the School Board for certification, responded at last night’s meeting to the staff recommendation for denial.] I’m Jessica Jacobs, lead petitioner for the Innovatory School for Professional Youth. I have read your staff report regarding our petition.
While we fully expected that the District, in an effort to protect the status quo, would seek to find flaws in ISPY's petition, intending to recommend denial, we take issue with several of the claims put forth in the review document. Most will be addressed in detail in writing, but some stark inaccuracies deserve attention immediately.
Numerous attorneys and educators intimately familiar with California charter law reviewed our petition prior to us submitting it to CCUSD. Almost all objections raised in your staff report are unreasonable and/or inaccurate, furthermore they utilize every subjective aspect of the education code.
Wandering Eyes? Not at All
For example . . . the report criticizes us for referring to CCUSD as “the District” in the latter part of our petition, and uses that as an indicator to claim we had not designed our program to meet the requirements of Culver City, that were “shopping for a charter authorizer.” This is ridiculous. Every community member we engaged with during the last month (homeschool families, families of dropouts, business members, various community organizations, parent groups, educators, Chamber of Commerce members, the City Council, non-profit partners) would concur. We chose Culver City with intention, and the city will be our home.
Another example is their criticism of the school name, stating that we clearly aren't intending to meet the needs of low-performing or socioeconomically disadvantaged students. Again, a misunderstanding…Big Picture Schools mostly serves this population of students. The “professional” in our name also refers to the “professional” real world experiences our students will have with their “professional” mentors and “professional” internships.
Additionally, the District staff reviewer misunderstood our governance structure and petition-supporting documents. You certainly could have asked us for clarification, but did not. Rather than work with ISPY in an effort to enhance Culver City’s educational opportunities, CCUSD posted the petition review report at the very last minute so that we would have no time (despite our multiple requests earlier this month) to address the concerns.
Rooted in Proven Success
I’ll continue with the important mischaracterized criticisms.
Your staff says our “Operational Plan is Not Realistic or Sound.” Not only is our plan sound, it is based on a structure of administrative services and contracted services that currently work well in actual practice for Big Picture, and has served over 100 other high-achieving charter schools throughout Southern California, including include more than 50 schools this year in Los Angeles, San Diego, Ventura and Orange counties, mostly in underserved, low-income neighborhoods.
Your staff says we don’t have a Realistic Financial Plan. Our plan is absolutely realistic and, in fact, conservative. Our CFO would have it no other way. The report comment cites $250,000 in start-up costs, funded by donors. In reality, the budget presented a fundraising target of $250,000, the actual startup costs are $150,000, based on starting payroll significantly before state revenues are received. The difference between $250,000 and $150,000 was to create a cash flow reserve in advance — a goal achieved by almost no charter schools before starting and successfully operating.
The “over-estimation” of revenue is an issue that depends on which state revenue number assumptions are used. We anticipate that there could be “cuts.” Some were, in fact, already identified after our budget was submitted. Big Picture has a positive, successful history of managing its operations to deal with the effects of reduced revenue.
The subjective search for flaws in our petition continues . . . The staff analysis states that there are no facilities. This is incorrect. An administrative facility is budgeted, as well as meeting space for student groups. The school does not budget typical public school classroom space since that is not required in our academic design.
A Profound Misunderstanding
Lastly, the staff report states that there are insufficient signatures, but this is because they did not understand that our staffing model for faculty is sufficient to operate the school, four teachers in Year One plus two administrators who both hold multiple California teaching credentials. Again why not ask? We easily could have remedied the confusion with additional descriptive material.
Other items cited in the report will be easily addressed. We remain confident we have a well thought out plan, based not only on our innovative independent study design, but on actual successful operations in Big Picture Schools.
We believe the Board had no intention of even entertaining the approval of our petition. We knew this from the start. Culver City is a small town.
Additionally, we feel the Board was quick to judge and did not give us a fair chance (refused to engage in conversation, issued a cease-and-desist, ordering us to not talk to District teachers, allegedly provided false information to our business supporters, and made premature public comments before tonight’s meeting). We understand your concern about losing some students to us but this is not grounds for denying a petition. We understand your concern about not wanting to broadcast an open door to future charter petitioners, also not grounds for denial. Most districts that follow the law would have suggested extending the voting deadline so we, together, could address all of your concerns.
We are asking that now. Because Ms. Jaffe is no longer here, Mr. LaRose has yet to start his contract, and Mr. Silbiger is absent, we request that you postpone your vote regarding ISPY approval until your next Board meeting. Before then, we will edit our petition and remedy all of your concerns. Please expect ISPY to open for students in Culver City one way or another.
As we have expressed since day one, we want to work with you and not against you. We would like to work with your middle and high school students, perhaps arranging ongoing internships for them or even create an MOU outlining a partnership with your continuation school. These are all ideas to be brainstormed. They demonstrate how we might benefit one another.
Again, we can be a school you are proud to call your own. Or we can be a source of curiosity for city residents wondering why CCUSD continues to work “inside the box.”
Please, as per Education Code, Section 47605, part 6b (which allows for a 30-day extension), please postpone your vote until your next meeting.
Thank you.
Ms. Jacobs may be contacted at ispycharter@gmail.com
