Minnesota

lead image

1991
Year Charter School Law Was Enacted
167
Estimated Number of Charter Schools in 2016-17
53,400
Estimated Number of Charter School Students in 2016-17
178
out of
240
Total Score

Download the 1-Pager

Download Now

Minnesota’s law does not cap charter public school growth, includes multiple authorizers, and provides a fair amount of autonomy and accountability. However, it also provides inequitable funding to charter schools.

The biggest areas for improvement in Minnesota’s law are ensuring equitable operational and categorical funding, equitable access to capital funding and facilities,and strengthening accountability for full-time virtual charter schools.

Component Scores

Are there caps on the growth of charter schools in this state?

Minnesota law does not place any caps on charter school growth.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
1A
No numeric or geographic limits are placed on the number of charter public schools or students.
N/A
1B
If caps exist, there is room for growth.

Are a variety of charter schools allowed?

Minnesota law allows new start-ups and public school conversions.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
2A
New startups.
Yes
2B
Public school conversions.

Are non-district authorizers available to which charter applicants may directly apply?

Minnesota law allows the following types of entities to serve as authorizers: local school boards, intermediate school boards, cooperatives, charitable nonprofit organizations that meet certain criteria, private colleges, public postsecondary institutions, and single-purpose authorizers that are charitable, non-sectarian entities or limited liability corporations created just to authorize charter schools.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
3A
The state allows an applicant anywhere in the state to apply directly to a non-district authorizer(s).

Is an authorizer and overall program accountability system required?

Minnesota law details a comprehensive authorizer approval and review process. It requires all potential authorizers to submit an application to the state commissioner of education, detailing the applicant’s ability to implement the procedures and satisfy the criteria for chartering a school and including information on the authorizer’s capacity and infrastructure, application criteria and process, contracting process, on-going oversight and evaluation processes, and renewal criteria and processes.
Minnesota law requires authorizers to annually submit a statement of income and expenditures related to authorizing activities to the state commissioner and its charter schools. It also requires the state commissioner to establish specifications for an authorizer’s annual public report that is part of the system to evaluate authorizer performance and requires the report to at least include key indicators of school academic, operational, and financial performance.
Following approval by the state commissioner to be an authorizer, Minnesota law requires each potential authorizer to submit an affidavit for approval by the commissioner for each individual school an authorizer seeks to charter. It requires each affidavit to contain details regarding the proposed school’s operations and student performance expectations, as well as the process the authorizer will use to provide ongoing oversight and to make decisions regarding the renewal or termination of the school’s charter.

Minnesota law requires the state commissioner to review each authorizer’s performance at least every five years and allows the state commissioner to subject the authorizer to corrective actions as needed, including the termination of contracts with schools it has authorized. As part of that review, the law requires the state department of education to comment on each authorizer’s evaluation process for providing formal written evaluation of their school’s performance before renewal of a charter contract.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
4A
Registration process for school boards to affirm their interest in authorizing.
Yes
4B
Application process for other eligible authorizing entities (except a state charter schools commission).
Yes
4C
Authorizer submission of annual report.
Yes
4D
The ability for the state to conduct a review of an authorizer’s performance.
Yes
4E
The ability for the state to sanction an authorizer for poor performance, including suspending an authorizer’s authority to approve new schools.
No
4F
Periodic formal evaluation of overall state charter school program and outcomes.

Is there adequate authorizer funding?

Minnesota law allows authorizers to charge a fee. It provides that the fee that an authorizer may annually assess is the greater of: the basic formula allowance for that year; or the lesser of: the maximum fee factor times the basic formula allowance for that year; or the fee factor times the basic formula allowance for that year times the charter school's adjusted pupil units for that year. The fee factor equals .015. The maximum fee factor equals 4.0.For the preoperational planning period, after a school is chartered, the law allows an authorizer to assess a charter school a fee equal to the basic formula allowance.

Minnesota law requires authorizers to annually submit a statement of income and expenditures related to authorizing activities to the state commissioner and its charter schools.

Statute states that the granting or renewal of a charter by an authorizer cannot be contingent on the school being required to contract, lease, or purchase services from the authorizer. It also provides that any potential contract, lease, or purchase of service by a charter school from an authorizer must be disclosed to the state commissioner, accepted through an open bidding process, and be a separate contract from the charter contract. There are also further requirements in law if the contract is for management or financial services.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
5A
A uniform statewide formula that guarantees annual authorizer funding that is not subject to annual legislative appropriations.
Yes
5B
Requirement to publicly report detailed authorizer expenditures.
Yes
5C
Separate contract for any services purchased from an authorizer by a school.
Yes
5D
Prohibition on authorizers requiring schools to purchase services from them.

Are there transparent charter application, review, and decisionmaking processes?

The law contains application elements for all schools and specific additional requirements for conversion schools.
The state’s authorizer approval process requires authorizers to demonstrate how they will evaluate any educational service provider arrangements proposed within a school’s application.

Within their affidavit sent to the state commissioner for each proposed charter school, Minnesota law requires authorizers to detail information related to the application and review process that the authorizer will use to make decisions regarding the granting of charters as well as their application requirements covering elements listed in statute and an evaluation plan for the proposed schools including criteria for evaluating educational, organization, and fiscal plans.

Following approval by the state commissioner to be an authorizer, Minnesota law requires each potential authorizer to submit an affidavit for approval by the commissioner for each individual school an authorizer seeks to charter. It requires each affidavit to contain details regarding the proposed school’s operations and student performance expectations, as well as the process the authorizer will use to provide ongoing oversight and to make decisions regarding the renewal or termination of the school’s charter.

Statute requires that traditional school district authorizers must act on chartering decisions at public meetings. It does not require other authorizers to do so. It does require all authorizers to state reasons for denials in writing.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
6A
Application elements for all schools.
Yes
6B
Additional application elements specific to conversion schools.
Yes
6C
Additional application elements specific to using educational service providers.
No
6D
Additional application elements specific to replications.
No
6E
Requirement for thorough evaluation of each application, including an in-person interview and a public meeting.
Yes
6F
Application approval criteria.
Yes
6G
All charter approval or denial decisions made in a public meeting with authorizers stating reasons for denials in writing.

Are performance-based charter contracts required?

Per statute, a written contract is required as signed by the authorizer and the charter school’s board of directors with details including a declaration that the charter school will carry out the primary purpose for charter schools in state law and how the school will report its implementation of the primary purpose, a declaration of the additional purpose or purposes for charter schools in state law that the school intends to carry out and how the school will report its implementation of those purposes, the operations of the school, specific outcomes students are to achieve, the criteria, processes, and procedures that the authorizer will use to monitor and evaluate the fiscal, operational, and academic performance consistent with state law, for contract renewal the formal written performance evaluation of the school that is a prerequisite for reviewing a charter contract under state law, the specific conditions for contract renewal that identify performance of all students under the primary purpose for charter schools in state law as the most important factor in determining contract renewal, the additional purposes for charter schools in state law related to performance obligations contained in the charter contract as additional factors in determining contract renewal, and the plan for the orderly closing of a school, if a charter is terminated.
Minnesota law provides that the initial contract may be for up to five years.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
7A
Being created as a separate document from the application and executed by the governing board of the charter school and the authorizer.
Yes
7B
Defining the roles, powers, and responsibilities for the school and its authorizer.
Yes
7C
Defining academic, financial, and operational performance expectations by which the school will be judged based on a performance framework.
Some
7D
Providing an initial term of five operating years.

Are there comprehensive charter school monitoring and data collection processes?

Statute requires charter schools to publish a fairly detailed annual report covering enrollment, student attrition, governance, staffing, finances, academic performance, innovative practices, and future plans. It requires this report to be distributed to its authorizer, school employees, and parents as well as posted on the schools’ websites.
Minnesota law also provides that charter schools are subject to the same financial audit procedures and requirements as all districts, with annual audit results submitted to the state commissioner and their authorizer.

Minnesota law requires authorizers to detail for state commissioner approval their process for ongoing oversight of the school consistent with the contract expectations, which must include the criteria, processes, and procedures that the authorizer will use for ongoing oversight of operational, financial, and academic performance.

Statute details causes and processes for nonrenewal or termination, but does not specifically require authorizers to notify their schools of concerns until renewal time nor does it give them the ability to impose corrective actions short of revocation. However, the law has been interpreted to allow authorizers to ask for corrective actions short of revocation. In addition, the law gives the state commissioner the authority to reduce state aid if a school fails to correct a violation of law.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
8A
Required annual school performance reports.
Yes
8B
Financial accountability for charter schools (e.g., generally accepted accounting principles, independent annual audit reported to authorizer).
Yes
8C
Authorizer authority to conduct oversight activities.
No
8D
Authorizer notification to its schools of perceived problems, with opportunities to remedy such problems.
Yes
8E
Authorizer authority to take appropriate corrective actions or exercise sanctions short of revocation.
No
8F
Authorizer may not request duplicative data submission from its charter schools and may not use performance framework to create cumbersome reporting requirements.

Are there clear processes for renewal, nonrenewal, and revocation decisions?

Minnesota law requires authorizers to provide a formal written evaluation of each school’s performance before renewal of its contract.
Statute does not require a formal renewal application, but instead requires authorizers to detail for state commissioner approval their process for making decisions regarding the renewal or termination of a school’s charter based on evidence that demonstrate the academic, organizational, and financial competency of the school, including its success in increasing student achievement and meeting the goals of the charter school agreement. It also requires such items to be detailed in the actual charter school contract, including the performance evaluation that is a prerequisite for renewing a charter contract. The law does not require authorizers to provide an opportunity for schools to augment their performance record and discuss improvements and future plans.

Minnesota law provides that charter renewals may be made for up to five years.

Minnesota law requires the authorizer to provide timely notification of potential revocation to the school’s board of directors in writing, including the grounds for the proposed action. It allows the school to request an informal hearing.

Statute requires that traditional school district authorizers must act on chartering decisions at public meetings. It does not require other authorizers to do so.

Minnesota law requires each charter contract to have detailed provisions regarding what would happen if the school closed, including student notification and transfer and financial issues. There are also specific provisions in statute regarding the transfer of records and the disposition of property and assets.

According to the law, if an authorizer and a charter school board of directors mutually agree not to renew a contract, or if the governing board of an approved authorizer votes to withdraw as an approved authorizer, a change in authorizers is allowed. The state commissioner of education must approve such transfers.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
9A
Authorizer must issue school performance renewal reports to schools whose charter will expire the following year.
No
9B
Schools seeking renewal must apply for it.
Some
9C
Authorizers must issue renewal application guidance that provides an opportunity for schools to augment their performance record and discuss improvements and future plans.
No
9D
Ability to have a differentiated process for renewal of high-performing charter schools.
Yes
9E
Authorizers must use clear criteria for renewal and nonrenewal/revocation.
Yes
9F
Authorizers must ground renewal decisions based on evidence regarding the school’s performance over the term of the charter contract in accordance with the performance framework set forth in the charter contract.
No
9G
Requirement that authorizers close chronically low-performing charter schools unless exceptional circumstances exist.
Yes
9H
Authorizers must have the authority to vary length of charter renewal contract terms based on performance or other issues.
Yes
9I
Authorizers must provide charter schools with timely notification of potential revocation or nonrenewal (including reasons) and reasonable time to respond.
Yes
9J
Authorizers must provide charter schools with due process for nonrenewal and revocation decisions (e.g., public hearing, submission of evidence).
Some
9K
All charter renewal, nonrenewal, and revocation decisions must be made in a public meeting, with authorizers stating reasons for nonrenewals and revocations in writing.
Yes
9L
Authorizers must have school closure protocols to ensure timely parent notification, orderly student and record transitions, and property and asset disposition.
Yes
9M
Any transfer of charter contracts from one authorizer to another are only allowed if they are approved by the state.

Is there transparency regarding educational service providers?

Minnesota law specifies that charters may contract with outside entities to manage all or some aspects of the school.
The state department authorizer application and approval process requires all authorizers to have evaluation criteria for any educational service provider arrangements, but it does not specify the specific criteria.

The law requires the charter contract to include the terms of the school operations, including any educational service provider arrangements.

Minnesota law requires charter schools’ annual audits to include a copy of all charter school agreements for corporate management services and include detail the terms of the agreement, including the services provided and the annual costs for those services.

The law prohibits an individual from serving as a member of the charter school board of directors if the individual, an immediate family member, or the individual's partner is a full or part owner or a principal with a for-profit or nonprofit entity or independent contractor with whom the charter school contracts, directly or indirectly, for professional services, goods, or facilities. The law prohibits an individual from serving as a board member if an immediate family member is an employee of the school. The law provides that a violation of this prohibition renders a contract voidable at the option of the commissioner or the charter school board of directors and that a member of a charter school board of directors who violates this prohibition is individually liable to the charter school for any damage caused by the violation. The law prohibits authorizers from serving on the boards of their schools.

The law provides that contractors providing facilities, goods, or services to a charter school cannot serve on the board of directors of the charter school.

According to the law, all teachers employed or contracted to work within charter schools must be certified, with background checks being a required aspect of that.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
10A
All types of educational service providers (both for-profit and nonprofit) are allowed to operate all or parts of schools.
Some
10B
The charter application requires (1) performance data for all current and past schools operated by the ESP, and (2) explanation and evidence of the ESP’s capacity for successful growth while maintaining quality in existing schools.
Yes
10C
A performance contract is required between the independent charter school board and the ESP, with such contract approved by the school’s authorizer.
Yes
10D
School governing boards operate as entities completely independent of any ESP, individuals compensated by an ESP are prohibited from serving as voting members on such boards, and existing and potential conflicts of interest between the two entities are required to be disclosed and explained in the charter application.
No
10E
Provides that charter school governing boards must have access to ESP records necessary to oversee the ESP contract.
Some
10F
An ESP must annually provide information to its charter school governing board on how that ESP spends public funding it receives when the ESP is performing a public function under applicable state law.
Yes
10G
Requires that similar criminal history record checks and fingerprinting requirements applicable to other public schools shall also be mandatory for on-site employees of ESPs who regularly come into contact with students.

Are the schools fiscally and legally autonomous with independent charter school boards?

Minnesota law provides that charter schools are fiscally and legally autonomous schools with independent school boards. Statute includes conflict of interest provisions regarding employees, agents, and board members of authorizers serving on any charter school’s board of directors.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
11A
Fiscally autonomous schools (e.g., schools have clear statutory authority to receive and disburse funds; incur debt; and pledge, assign, or encumber assets as collateral).
Yes
11B
Legally autonomous schools (e.g., schools have clear statutory authority to enter into contracts and leases, sue and be sued in their own names, and acquire real property).
Yes
11C
Independent school governing boards created specifically to govern their charter schools.

Are there clear student enrollment and lottery procedures?

Minnesota law requires charter schools to be open to all in the state.According to the law, a charter school may not limit admission to pupils on the basis of intellectual ability, measures of achievement or aptitude, or athletic ability and may not establish any criteria or requirements for admission that are inconsistent with state law.

Minnesota law provides that enrollment preferences must be given to siblings of enrolled pupils and any foster children of enrolled pupil’s parents. While the law does not explicitly provide enrollment preferences for previously enrolled students within conversions and prior year students within chartered schools, once a student is enrolled in a school in Minnesota, the law provides that they are enrolled as students until they are withdrawn.
Minnesota law allows charter schools to give preference for children of the school’s staff. The law allows a charter school to give an enrollment preference to children currently enrolled in the school’s free preschool or prekindergarten program who are eligible to enroll in kindergarten in the next school year. It also requires that a charter school located in Duluth Township of St. Louis County give an enrollment preference to students residing within a five-mile radius of the school and to the siblings of enrolled children.
Minnesota law requires a random selection lottery process to be used if interest exceeds capacity.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
12A
Open enrollment to any student in the state.
Yes
12B
Anti-discrimination provisions regarding admissions.
Yes
12C
Required enrollment preferences for previously enrolled students within conversions and for prior-year students within charter schools.
Yes
12D
Lottery requirements.

Is there automatic exemption from many state and district laws and regulations?

Minnesota law provides that charter schools are exempt from all statutes and rules applicable to traditional public schools or districts unless a statute or rule is made specifically applicable to a charter school or is included in the charter school law.
Minnesota law does not exempt charter schools from state teaching license requirements.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
13A
Exemptions from all laws, except those covering health, safety, civil rights, student accountability, employee criminal history checks, open meetings, freedom of information, and generally accepted accounting principles.
No
13B
Exemption from state teacher certification requirements.

Is there an automatic collective bargaining exemption?

Minnesota law provides that a charter school’s teachers are at will employees and may organize for collective bargaining similar to teachers in other districts. It also provides that a bargaining unit at a school authorized by a traditional school district must negotiate as a separate unit with the charter school governing body or remain part of the school district unit if certain conditions and approvals are agreed upon.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
14A
Charter schools authorized by nonlocal board authorizers are exempt from participation in any outside collective bargaining agreements.
Yes
14B
Charter schools authorized by local boards are exempt from participation in any district collective bargaining agreements.

Are multischool charter contracts and/or multicharter contract boards allowed?

Minnesota law allows authorizers to permit a school that meets certain criteria to expand operation to additional school sites as approved by the state commissioner following the submission of a supplemental affidavit. These additional sites however, are considered additional campuses of a given school, not separate schools.
The state department of education allows each individual campus to receive separate federal charter start-up funds and requires that the contract between the authorizer and the charter school include specific fiscal and academic accountability measures for each campus. While under one charter, each campus that is self-identified as being distinct by the charter school receives its own site number from the state department of education and receives a separate rating under the state's accountability system.

The law provides that each charter school must have its own charter board, with such board only allowed to hold one charter contract.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
15A
Oversee multiple schools linked under a single contract with independent fiscal and academic accountability for each school.
No
15B
Hold multiple charter contracts with independent fiscal and academic accountability for each school.

Is there eligibility and access to extracurricular and interscholastic activities?

Minnesota law provides that charter high schools are eligible to participate in Minnesota High School League Activities if the charter school joins the League.Minnesota law provides that charter schools and traditional school districts may enter into agreements for charter school students to participate in their resident district if the charter school does not provide an interscholastic activity. The decision on whether to enter into such an agreement is at the discretion of the resident district.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
16A
Laws or regulations explicitly state that charter school students and employees are eligible to participate in all extracurricular and interscholastic activities available to noncharter public school students and employees.
Yes
16B
Laws or regulations explicitly allow charter school students in schools not providing extracurricular and interscholastic activities to have access to those activities at noncharter public schools.

Is there clear identification of special education responsibilities?

Minnesota law provides that charter schools are the LEAs for special education services and any such funds flow directly to them. In addition, it provides that charter schools may bill a student's resident school district for any additional funds needed to cover excess costs over and above the state and federal funds allocated for that student. Minnesota law provides that charter schools with at least 90% special education students are eligible for accelerated regular special education aid payments. The law also provides that schools have to pay 10% of the excess cost that’s billed back to districts.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
17A
Clarity regarding which entity is the local education agency (LEA) responsible for providing special education services.
Yes
17B
Clarity regarding the flow of federal, state, and local special education funds to the designated LEA.
Yes
17C
Clarity regarding funding for low-incident, high-cost services for charter schools (in the same amount and/or in a manner similar to other LEAs).
No
17D
Clarity that charter schools have access to all regional and state services and supports available to traditional districts.

Is there equitable operational funding and equal access to all state and federal categorical funding?

Minnesota law provides that a charter school earns general education revenue on a per pupil unit basis just as though it were a school district. Charter schools in rural areas also qualify for transportation sparsity aid as if they were school districts. If a charter school chooses to have the district in which it is physically located provide transportation services, then 4.66% of the per pupil basic formula allowance plus the transportation sparsity aid for each charter school student is transferred to the providing district for transportation expenses.
The law provides that charter schools as LEAs have equal access to all applicable categorical funding.

Minnesota law's funding formula provides dollars for transportation to charter schools and gives charter schools the option of providing transportation and keeping the transportation funds or requesting the traditional district to provide transportation and then paying those funds to that district in which the school is physically located.

In a national study of charter school funding (University of Arkansas, Charter School Funding: Inequity Expands, 2014), Minnesota charter schools were receiving on average $10,937 per pupil in public funds, while traditional public schools would have received $13,918 for those students. As a result, the state's charter schools were receiving $2,981 per pupil - or 21.4% - less than what the traditional public schools would have received for those students. This figure includes all sources of funding, and the analysis reveals some continued inequities for both operational and capital funding (see component #19 for information on capital issues).

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Some
18A
Equitable operational funding statutorily driven.
Yes
18B
Equal access to all applicable categorical federal and state funding and clear guidance on the pass-through of such funds.
Yes
18C
Funding for transportation similar to school districts.
No
18D
Annual report offering district and charter school funding comparisons and including annual recommendations to the legislature for any needed equity enhancements.

Is there equitable access to capital funding and facilities?

Minnesota law prohibits charter schools from using any state funds to purchase land or buildings, although charter schools may do so with non-state funds. It allows charter schools to lease space from a public or private owner or from a private nonprofit, nonsectarian, nonprofit, and with approval of the state department of education from other sectarian organizations. It is illegal for authorizers to lease space to their authorized schools.
Minnesota law provides lease aid to charter schools in the amount of 90% of lease costs, up to $1,314 per-pupil.

Minnesota law provides that beginning in Fiscal Year 2017, public charter schools will be getting long-term facilities maintenance revenue like all school districts, except that charters will have the freedom to use the revenue for any purpose of the school.

Minnesota law specifies that charter schools that own their own facilities may not receive lease aid. However, it allows charter schools that meet certain requirements (e.g., have net unreserved general fund balances) to, with state commissioner approval, create an affiliated nonprofit building corporation, which may renovate or purchase an existing facility or expand an existing building or construct a new school facility. The law allows such nonprofit building corporations to secure financing through various sources available to other nonprofits (e.g., municipal bonds, mortgages), and allows charter schools to use their lease aid for facilities owned by nonprofit building corporations.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Facilities Funding
Yes
19A
A per-pupil facilities allowance that annually reflects actual average district capital costs.
No
19B
A state grant program for charter school facilities.
No
19C
Equal access to existing state facilities programs available to noncharter public schools.
Access to Public Space
No
19D
A requirement for districts to provide school district space or funding to charter schools if the majority of that schools’ students reside in that district.
No
19E
Right of first refusal to purchase or lease at or below fair market value a closed, unused, or underused public school facility or property.
Access to Financing Tools
No
19F
A state loan program for charter school facilities.
Some
19G
Equal access to tax-exempt bonding authorities or allowing charter schools to have their own bonding authority
No
19H
Pledging the moral obligation of the state to help charter schools obtain more favorable bond financing terms.
No
19I
The creation and funding of a state charter school debt reserve fund.
No
19J
The inclusion of charter schools in school district bonding and mill levy requests.
No
19K
A mechanism to provide credit enhancement for charter school facilities.
Other
Yes
19L
Charter schools allowed to contract at or below fair market value with a school district, a college or university, or any other public or for-profit or nonprofit private entity for the use of facility for a school building.
No
19M
Certain entities allowed to provide space to charter schools within their facilities under their preexisting zoning and land use designations.
No
19N
Charter school facilities exempt from ad valorem taxes and other assessment fees not applicable to other public schools.

Is there access to relevant employee retirement systems?

Minnesota law provides that the employees of charter schools are considered public employees for retirement purposes and the schools and employees must contribute to the appropriate retirement system.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
Yes
20A
Charter schools have access to relevant state retirement systems available to other public schools.
No
20B
Charter schools have the option to participate (i.e., not required).

Are there provisions for full-time virtual charter schools?

Minnesota law includes a small number of the model law’s provisions regarding full-time virtual charter schools.
For a student enrolled in an online learning course, the law provides that the state department of education must calculate average daily membership and that no online learning average daily membership shall be generated if the student does not complete the online learning course.

Minnesota law also requires that a charter school offering online courses or programs must comply with some additional statuary requirements including approval of their on-line learning programs by the state department of education initially and then every three years. The online learning provider must give the commissioner written assurance that: (1) all courses meet state academic standards; and (2) the online learning curriculum, instruction, and assessment, expectations for actual teacher-contact time or other student-to-teacher communication, and academic support meet nationally recognized professional standards and are described as such in an online learning course syllabus that meets the commissioner's requirements.

Subcomponents

Key
Yes
Some
No
No
21A
An authorizing structure whereby full-time virtual charter schools that serve students from more than one district may be approved only by an authorizer with statewide chartering jurisdiction and authority, full-time virtual charter schools that serve students from one school district may be authorized by that school district, and a cap is placed on the total amount of funding that an authorizer may withhold from a full-time virtual charter school.
No
21B
Legally permissible criteria and processes for enrollment based on the existence of supports needed for student success.
No
21C
Enrollment level provisions that establish maximum enrollment levels for each year of a charter contract, with any increases in enrollment from one year to the next based on whether the school meets its performance requirements.
No
21D
Accountability provisions that include virtual-specific goals regarding student enrollment, attendance, engagement, achievement, truancy, and attrition.
No
21E
Funding levels per student based on costs proposed and justified by the operators.
Yes
21F
Performance-based funding whereby full-time virtual charter schools are funded via a performance-based funding system based on meeting the accountability performance provisions.