Report 2016-141 Recommendation 13 Responses

Report 2016-141: Charter Schools: Some School Districts Improperly Authorized and Inadequately Monitored Out‑of‑District Charter Schools (Release Date: October 2017)

Recommendation #13 To: Acton-Agua Dulce Unified School District

To ensure compliance with state law, Acton-Agua Dulce Unified should immediately review petitions to ensure they include all of the requirements in state law at the time of their approval.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2021

The District has always thoroughly reviewed charter petitions to determine whether they contain all of the requirements in state law.

This recommendation arose from a filing error during the State Audit that was brought to the Auditors attention before the Audit Report was finalized and released. As the District supplied the Auditors with many thousands of pages of records, the signature page to one charter petition approved four years earlier had become attached to another charter petition approved four years earlier. The Auditors incorrectly concluded that years earlier (in 2013) the District had approved a charter petition without any signatures - a "requirement in state law" at the time of approval.

The mistake was caught and quickly explained to the Auditors. Nonetheless, the draft Audit Report still incorrectly stated that the District had approved a charter petition without signature pages, and expanded on that to explain that this was also a 'failure to obtain community support." This was the only instance in which the Auditors alleged that the District approved a charter petition without "all of the requirements in the state law at the time of approval." This was again explained to the Auditors before the Report was finalized and published, but they declined to correct the Report.

In any event, the mixed-up signature page involved two charter schools that closed in 2015 and 2018. None of the operative charter petitions in effect in the summer fo 2017 when the State Audit was conducted are still in effect. Those charter schools either subsequently closed or submitted new renewal petitions which were reviewed by the District. Copies of operative charter petitions are being submitted with this response. However, the District will not go back and re-review expired charter petitions as this recommendation seems to suggest.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Not Currently Feasible

We disagree with the district's description of the finding. The district's previous director of charter schools provided a signature page that was filed under a different charter school location. Because the document did not explicitly identify the charter school location for which the signatures were collected, we could not accept the signature page as evidence that the charter school had obtained the required signatures. Moreover, the signatures on that document were dated one month after the district received the charter petition on January 1, 2014. As a result, the district provided no evidence that it had reviewed its petitions to ensure they included all requirements in state law.

Because the involved charter schools have since been closed, we will close this recommendation as it is no longer feasible.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2020

The District refers the State Auditor to its 2019 response to Recommendation 11.

The District refers the State Auditor to its 2020 response to Recommendation 11

Recommendation 13 was to "immediately review petitions to ensure they include all of the requirements in state law at the time of their approval."

This Recommendation arose from a filing error during the State Audit that was brought to the Auditors attention before the Audit Report was finalized and released. As the District supplied the Auditors with many thousands of pages of records, the signature page to one charter petition approved four years earlier had become attached to another charter petition approved four years earlier. The Auditors incorrectly concluded that years earlier the District had approved a charter petition without any signatures - a "requirement in state law" at the time of approval. The mistake was caught and quickly explained to the Auditors. Nonetheless, the draft Audit Report still incorrectly stated that the District had approved a charter petition without signature pages, and expanded on that to explain that this was also a "failure to adequately consider . . . failure to obtain community support." This was the only instances in which the Auditors alleged that the District approved a charter petition without "all of the requirements in the state law at the time of approval." This was again explained to the Auditors before the Report was finalized and published, but they declined to correct the Report.

As demonstrated in previous responses and as acknowledged by the State Auditor, the District's Charter School Policy incorporates the 2013 revisions to the Charter Schools Act regarding measurable pupil outcomes.

The District has and continues to review charter petitions for all of the requirements in state law. The District has also voluntarily incorporated the SBE criteria.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

The district failed to provide evidence supporting its assertions.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From November 2019

The District refers the State Auditor to its 2019 response to Recommendation 11.

Recommendation 13 was to "immediately review petitions to ensure they include all of the requirements in state law at the time of their approval."

This Recommendation arose from a filing error during the State Audit that was brought to the Auditors attention before the Audit Report was finalized and released. As the District supplied the Auditors with many thousands of pages of records, the signature page to one charter petition approved four years earlier had become attached to another charter petition approved four years earlier. The Auditors incorrectly concluded that years earlier the District had approved a charter petition without any signatures - a "requirement in state law" at the time of approval. The mistake was caught and quickly explained to the Auditors. Nonetheless, the draft Audit Report still incorrectly stated that the District had approved a charter petition without signature pages, and expanded on that to explain that this was also a "failure to adequately consider . . . failure to obtain community support." This was the only instances in which the Auditors alleged that the District approved a charter petition without "all of the requirements in the state law at the time of approval." This was again explained to the Auditors before the Report was finalized and published, but they declined to correct the Report.

As demonstrated in previous responses and as acknowledged by the State Auditor, the District's Charter School Policy incorporates the 2013 revisions to the Charter Schools Act regarding measurable pupil outcomes.

The District has and continues to review charter petitions for all of the requirements in state law. SBE criteria are not law and are only self-imposed criteria that the SBE uses to guide its charter petition review. The District has also voluntarily incorporated the SBE criteria, and go far beyond what is required by state law.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: No Action Taken

We disagree with the district's description of the finding. The district's previous director of charter schools provided a signature page that was filed under a different charter school location. Because the document did not explicitly identify the charter school location for which the signatures were collected, we could not accept the signature page as evidence that the charter school had obtained the required signatures. Moreover, the signatures on that document were dated one month after the district received the charter petition on January 1, 2014. As a result, the district provided no evidence that it had reviewed its petitions to ensure they included all requirements in state law.

Because the district did not provide any new evidence to support its assertions, we conclude that it has taken no action.

1-Year Agency Response

- District Staff continues to implement a rigorous review process for all charter petitions submitted for approval, renewal, or material revision. The Charter Review Matrix has been revised and is fully implemented. The Charter Review Matrix covers all elements of Education Code 47605 and incorporates the State Board of Education's standards for assessing charter petitions contained at Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 11967.5.1. The Staff's recommendation and the completed Matrix are submitted to the Board for its review and consideration before the Board takes action.

Implementation Date: approximately May 2012.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: No Action Taken

Although Acton-Agua Dulce Unified states that it fully implemented our recommendation, our audit determined that the district's charter school policy did not fully address several of the elements required by the State Education Board's criteria for evaluating petitions. Further, the district's revised Charter Review Matrix does not contain requirements in the 2013 amendments to state law regarding measurable student outcomes. Specifically, state law requires that pupil outcomes include outcomes that address increases in pupil academic achievement, both schoolwide and for all groups of pupils served by the charter school. In addition, the matrix does not address the requirement that pupil outcomes align with state priorities,

6-Month Agency Response

The District continues to implement a rigorous review process for all charter petitions submitted for approval, renewal, and material revisions. The district matrix is followed to check that all elements are met. All petitions to date have been reviewed for compliance.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Pending

Although Acton-Agua Dulce Unified stated that it fully implemented our recommendation, the district did not provide any new evidence to support its assertion.

60-Day Agency Response

District Staff has continued to implement a rigorous review process for all charter petitions submitted for approval, renewal, or material revision. A Charter Review Matrix is used which covers all elements of Education Code 47605 and incorporates the State Board of Education's standards for assessing charter petitions contained at Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 11967.5.1. The Staff's recommendation and the completed Matrix are submitted to the Board for its review and consideration before the Board takes action.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: No Action Taken

Although Acton-Agua Dulce Unified states that it fully implemented our recommendation, our audit determined that the district's charter school policy did not fully address several of the elements required by the State Education Board's criteria for evaluating petitions. In addition, the referenced Charter Review Matrix does not make any reference to the State Education Board's criteria nor does it require petitions to include all of the elements listed within the matrix. Further, the district did not provide any new evidence to support its assertion.

All Recommendations in 2016-141

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.