WCS_Founding Board Capacity Interview Rubric - May 6, 2024 - DCSD Board Meeting Archive

Founding Board Capacity/Clarification Interview Rubric
The Wright Community School
February 28, 2024

The review committee will use the following criteria to rate the founding board capacity/clarification
interview. Within each category, specific criteria define the expectations for a response that meets
expectations. Reviewers will reach consensus when rating responses by applying the following guidance:

Rating Characteristics
Meets the Standard The response reflects a thorough understanding of key issues. It
addresses the topic with specific and accurate information that shows
thorough preparation; presents a clear, realistic picture of how the
school expects to operate; and inspires confidence in the applicant’s
capacity to carry out the plan effectively.
Partially Meets the Standard The response meets the criteria in some respects but lacks detail
and/or requires additional information in one or more areas.
Below the Standard The response is wholly undeveloped, demonstrates lack of preparation,
and/or is unsuited to the mission of the authorizer.
Far Below the Standard The response is significantly incomplete, raises substantial concerns
about the viability of the plan and/or the applicant’s ability to carry it
out.

Recommendations from the review committee will be based on evaluation of the written petition (narrative
and attachments), independent due diligence, and the founding board capacity interview.
Community Support and Need Standard Rating

Clarifying Questions: Meets the
Standard
1. Define the community WCS will serve. What is your
understanding of the community school model? -
The applicant makes a
pp. Executive Summary Partially
compelling case for why
Meets the
the school fills an unmet
2. Identify DeKalb community stakeholders including Standard
need in the DeKalb
families, organizations, and other community
County School District.
members, whom the founding team engaged to
The applicant Below the
learn of the aspirations and needs of the community
demonstrates an Standard
and seek input into the design of the proposed
understanding of the
school. Who are your biggest advocates in DeKalb? -
community or
Exhibit Appendix H
communities the school
is likely to serve. The
3. Who have you spoken to who has not supported
Board demonstrates
your idea? What specific input/feedback from these
cultural competency
stakeholders was used in developing the petition? -
specific to the
Appendices H&I
communities with whom
it seeks to work, Far Below
4. How did you incorporate input/feedback from
including the ability to the
students and families from diverse backgrounds,
articulate the root Standard
students with disabilities, and English learners in
causes of the needs it
your school design? What changed in your school
seeks to fill.
plan as a result of this feedback?

5. How have you engaged with the DCSD community
since you submitted the written petition?

Responses from Founding Board:
− The petitioner states that WCS will serve South DeKalb. The community was identified
using the UWA Child-Wellbeing Survey. The petitioner states that the school was co-
designed with input from the community. Of the ~1500 stakeholders
surveyed/interviewed about WCS concept, less than thirty-three percent of respondents
were from DeKalb.
− GACAN identified DeKalb as an area of need. The petitioner did not clarify upon what this
identification was based. WCS researched the current landscape and answered
questions from stakeholders around how charter schools are funded. Some members of
the WCS Founding Board live or work in DeKalb.
− The school received questions on the charter school model. Less than 5% of respondents
were not interested in the charter school model. Stakeholders shared charter schools
may conflict with traditional public schools. The WCS hosts a weekly chat/information
session. This event’s location was not specified but is included on the school’s public
calendar.
− The petitioner states that the compliance components of IDEA are included in policies.
The Founding Board Chair stated that WCS wants to create transparency with all
stakeholders and ensure FAPE through IDEA compliance.
− WCS has attended several forums through GACAN. WCS partnered with the Boys & Girls
Club, United Way, and Galileo to identify where to start the community engagement
process—parks, recreation centers, etc. The petitioner clarified that the GACAN forums
were in Atlanta but that the conveners invited South DeKalb families. The petitioner
asserts that input was gathered from all different demographics in front of grocery
stores, community events, parks, via ZOOM, and coffee chats but gave no locations. The
petitioner stated that WCS plans to get feedback from potential families but did not
indicate when or how.
- The petitioner researched charter schools like Anchor and Tapestry to see what
partnerships may look like.
- The petitioner stated that WCS spoke to students in alternative programs but did not
specify where. The petitioner stated that WCS looked at who is on the ground doing the
work.

Review Committee’s Comments or Concerns:
− The Founding Board did not present a compelling case for the unmet need in the DeKalb
Community that its proposed school meets.
− Though the school is targeting South Dekalb, the committee raised concerns that the data
in the petition is not DCSD data but appears to have been compiled from state-level data
sources.
− The petitioner did not demonstrate an understanding of the community or communities
the school is likely to serve. The Founding Board did not demonstrate knowledge of the
needs of the South DeKalb community or articulate a plan to assess those needs.
− Responses from the Founding Governing Board regarding WCS’s targeted community
are inconsistent with publicly available information on the WCS’s website and social
media. Specifically, the school hosts weekly chats in Henry County. The website
indicates that WCS will open in Clayton County in Fall 2025. The Founding Board did not
identify substantive engagement with DeKalb community stakeholders before or since
submitting the petition.
− The Founding Board did not demonstrate understanding of the immense diversity of the DCSD
community or the root causes of the needs it seeks to fill. The petitioner did not fully
address how WCS incorporated input/feedback from students and families from diverse
backgrounds, students with disabilities, and /or English learners in its school design.
The petitioner did not identify changes to its school plan as a result of feedback.
− The petitioner did not state what DCSD stakeholders were or were not supportive of the
WCS school or model or how feedback from these stakeholders was used in the petition
development process. The petitioner stated only why stakeholders were not supportive.
− The petitioner states that WCS researched Tapestry Public Charter School and Anchor
School in developing its petition.
− The petition includes no letters of support from potential community partners. The
committee raised concerns on the viability of a community school model without any
identified potential community partners.
− The committee expressed concerns that the petitioner did not respond directly to any of
the questions in this section.
School Governance Standard Rating

Clarifying Questions: − The governance Meets the
structure is Standard
1. How did you come together as a Founding designed to (a)
Board?Why are each of you involved in this put students
endeavor? first, including Partially
being responsive Meets the
2. Why should DCDS authorize the Wright Community
to family and Standard
School? What unmet need WCS meet in the
community? - Executive Summary, pp. 15 community
input; (b) achieve
3. WCS bylaws state that the Board has established 6 the school’s Below the
committees. Indicate the committee membership of mission and Standard
each Founding Board member. Do the existing goals; and (c)
committees include members who are not on the ensure legal
Founding Board? - Exhibit 2 compliance,
particularly in
4. Provide an example of when the Board might take terms of
action through consent in lieu of a vote as described proactively
in section 2.8 of the bylaws. - Exhibit 5 preventing
financial fraud
5. What mission-specific student outcomes does WCS
and ensuring the
seek to achieve?
appropriate use
of public funds.
The governance
structure will Far Below
ensure an active, the Standard
engaged,
knowledgeable
Board that has
timely, deep, and
broad knowledge
of the school’s
operations,
finances, and
students’ needs,
and operates
independently
and
autonomously.

Responses from Founding Board:
− Per the petitioner, the Founding Board selection process was meticulous and
structured—including candidate prospecting, resume review, etc. The goal was to attract
individuals who were diverse in experiences. Most of the members of the board
are/were administrators. The Board includes parents.
− A board member expressed that they are passionate about bringing innovation to the
landscape. The petitioner stated that WCS brings forth innovative features such as
community culture, individualized pathways, and a focus on coaching/guidance.
Students will have an opportunity to take a law course. The school design includes
prioritization of restorative practices. WCS students will have access to dual enrollment
in 9th grade.
− The WCS will develop committees. Board members will serve as directors of those
committees. The WCS Board has a gap in the area of legal. The Board Chair identified
which member of the Board will lead each committee.
− Example of Consent in Lieu of a Vote – As it relates to Finance, the Board might seek
outside counsel if there is an issue that arises in the area of expenditures.
− Mission-Specific Student Outcomes – The mission is to ensure all students are
progressing academically and have access to learning. The Board is responsible for
ensuring accountability to stakeholders.
− The petitioner stated that the collegiate model does not exist in any school in DeKalb.

Review Committee’s Comments or Concerns:
− During introductions, the Founding Board members each described why they are
involved in the WCS endeavor. However, it is not clear how the Board was assembled.
Articles of Incorporation for WCS were filed by the proposed head of school. The Petition
Review Committee will request documentation of meeting agendas/minutes in the initial
memo. The Petition Review Committee raised concerns that the Board has already lost a
team member early in the planning stage.
− The Founding Board did not clearly articulate why DCSD should authorize WCS or
present a compelling case for the unmet need in the DeKalb Community that its proposed
school meets.
− WCS bylaws state that the Board has established 6 committees. The response to
Question 3 in this section was provided in the future tense and raised concerns that the
committees had not yet been established as indicated in the petition. The petitioner did
not clarify whether the committees include members who are not on the Founding
Board. The current Founding Board lacks legal expertise.
− In the start-up petition orientation and application timeline, it is stressed that all board
members must attend the Founding Board Interview. Changes were made to the
Founding Board roster after the petition was submitted. One Founding Board member
was excused for medical reasons. An additional substitution was acknowledged only
after prompting from the Petition Review Committee.
− The petitioner’s response to the question about when the WCS Founding Board might
take action through consent in lieu of a vote (as described in section 2.8 of the bylaws)
was insufficient. The example given was related to a financial decision.
− The mission-specific student outcomes WCS seeks to achieve were not clearly
articulated.

Academic Plan Standard Rating

Clarifying Questions: Meets the
Standard
1. What data did you use to create your academic
baselines and projections? Upon what data and The applicant Partially
assumptions are your projections based? - pp. 37- demonstrates the Meets the
capability to design or Standard
38
select a comprehensive,
high-quality curriculum
2. What is your understanding of GaDOE’s most Below the
(standards, resources,
recent changes to CCRPI? - Question 11, pp. 37 methods of instruction, Standard
and formative
3. How will WCS serve students with disabilities assessments for each
whose IEPs require pull-out, small group, and/or core, electives, and
co-taught instruction? How does your staffing plan mission-specific
address the provision of these services? - Appendix subjects). The
D pp. 755-757 curriculum is inherently
inclusive and designed to
4. Describe a day in the life of an English Learner at be responsive to
WCS. How will WCS ensure that teachers serving students’ needs; clearly
English Learners have the appropriate interrelated between its Far Below
certifications and endorsements? - Question 7, components; and the Standard
pp. - 25-27 directly aligned to the
school’s goals, mission,
5. The petition mentions Edmentum, HMH (a and educational
purchased curriculum), and Common Core philosophy.
standards. Discuss the alignment of these 3
components of your academic plan to Georgia
standards. - Question 1 pp. 1-8 Exhibit 10

Responses from Founding Board:
− The goal would be to exceed the District’s CCRPI. The data in the UWA Child-Wellbeing
Study was used to establish baselines. CCRPI no longer includes a single score. The
schools across the state have made adjustments.
− Families will be informed if there is a shortage of teachers for students with disabilities.
The process will involve reviewing IEPs. The school will adhere to the IEP. WCS
researched the schools that have opened this year. Based on student enrollments, the
school will pivot. WCS will contract teachers for students with disabilities. A part of
staffing correctly for SWDs is a part of understanding FTE (Full Time Equivalent) count.
− The WCS will look to hire teachers who have an ESOL endorsement. The schedule
includes a flexible block. ESOL services will be provided during the flexible block. The
flexible block can also be used as an intervention period. WCS will utilize partnerships
like MRESA.
− Edmentum has programs under it. Edmentum allows teachers to meet student needs.
The petitioner states that their research indicates that the curriculum is aligned to GA
Standards. The curriculum will allow the students to take AP courses and a law course.

Review Committee’s Comments or Concerns:
− The committee expressed concerns about the petitioner’s capability to design or select a
comprehensive, high-quality curriculum (standards, resources, methods of instruction, and
formative assessments for each core, electives, and mission-specific subjects).
− The petitioner did not provide compelling evidence that the curriculum is inherently inclusive or
designed to be responsive to students’ needs; clearly interrelated between its components; or
directly aligned to the school’s goals, mission, and educational philosophy.
− The petitioner used data from the UWA Child-Wellbeing Study to establish academic
baselines. It is unclear upon what assumptions projections in the petition are based.
− The school’s responses in this section raised concerns about Tier I instruction and
WCS’s overreliance on a flex period to meet students’ needs. The committee expressed
concerns about the rationale for ninth grade dual enrollment.
− Reliance on external vendors for special education teachers and other support staff was
raised as a concern. It is unclear from the budget template how WCS would fund this
expense. It is unclear how contracting teachers for SWD will lead to better outcomes
for students.
− The petitioner did not mention monitoring students who exited ESOL services in its
responses in this section. What delivery model will be used? How will English Language
Learners with disabilities be served in this model? This concern is also raised during
the performance task. If assignment to the flex block will be based on choice, how will
WCS ensure that all ESOL students are served?
− A plan for how students’ MTSS needs will be met was not articulated.
− Peer Advocate Group – Who will supervise the groups given limited staff?
− Exceptional Education – The petitioner’s response on how teachers will implement IEPs
was vague.
− ILPs – Who will be responsible for implementing the ILPs given limited staff?
− Collegiate auditing of schedules will be difficult with limited staff.
− What is the end goal for individualized pathways? How will the school implement
individualized pathways for students with limited staff?
− How would WCS facilitate restorative justice?

Financial Plan Standard Rating
Clarifying Questions: The financial and facilities
plans, including the Meets the
1. Discuss in detail the assumptions that underly proposed budget, are Standard
your five-year budget projections. Address both thoroughly developed and
the 100% and 50% budgets. - Exhibit 22 aligned with the proposed
school’s mission and
2. What funding has WCS received? What funding education program. The Partially
has been pledged? - Exhibit 22a budget is balanced and Meets the
conservative; reflects all Standard
3. How will WCS obtain the funds to purchase/build necessary outlays,
the facilities listed in Question 45? What including any unique
challenges does WCS anticipate with programs described in the
purchasing/renovating each of the various facility academic plan; ensures
options? - Appendix 5 adequate levels on cash Below the
on hand, including cash Standard
4. What would be your first steps post-approval for reserves and/or
the WCS facilities plan? - Appendix contingencies for
unexpected shortfalls;
and contains no
accounting errors. The
revenue projections are
realistic and sufficient to
meet school Far Below
expenditures. Both the the
finance and facilities Standard
plans are realistic and
informed by accurate
assessment, including key
funding opportunities and
facilities availability.

Responses from Founding Board:
− Assumptions – Total revenue is anticipated at $2 million in Year 1. As revenue
increases, expenses will increase. The goal is to not be cash deficient. The WCS will
grow a surplus year over year. The goal is to always carry cash on hand. The goal is to
obtain resources (grants).
− WCS has secured a pledge of $500k+ unrestricted funds upon approval. No funds have
been received.
− The Facilities Resource Group is the partner supporting WCS with identifying a facility.
Some of the facilities are not education ready. The WCS is prioritizing facilities that can
be expanded after Year 1.
− First Steps Post-Approval – Work with the Facilities Resource Group and DCSD. The
priority is ensuring the facility is accessible. The goal is also to stay within the budget.
One Board member described their financial background.
Review Committee’s Comments or Concerns:
− The financial and facilities plans, including the proposed budget, lack detail. Alignment with the
proposed school’s mission and education program are not clear. The budget is balanced. All
necessary outlays, including unique program features described in the academic plan, are not
delineated in the notes of the budget template. The Founding Board’s assumption that it
will grow a surplus year over year is not realistic. The budget does not include notes on
underlying assumptions or funding sources.
− The WCS’s plan to ensure adequate levels of cash on hand, including cash reserves and/or
contingencies for unexpected shortfalls, is not evident.
− The revenue projections are unrealistic or sufficient to meet school expenditures. Both the
finance and facilities plans are unrealistic and do not appear to be informed by accurate
assessment.
− The Year 0 budget does not include an explanation of how the school would fund the
purchase of land to build a new facility—one of its four proposed facility options. The
other 3 facility options are not adequate for the number of students the Founding Board
anticipates at maximum capacity. There is no financial plan for a facility. The petitioner
stated that the facilities will grow over time. However, the petitioner does not present a
financial plan to fund this growth. The petitioner did not provide evidence of a capital
campaign.
− The petitioner’s response to the question regarding its first steps post-approval for the
WCS facilities plan lacked detail and did not demonstrate understanding of
operations/facilities management.

Organizational Plan Standard Rating

The organizational plan
Clarifying Questions: aligns with and supports Meets the
the school’s mission and Standard
educational philosophy, is
1. What is WCS’s theory of action (“If we..., then...”) designed to support the
for its educational program? How does WCS’s school’s goals and Partially
organizational plan support the school’s logic academic achievement Meets the
model? expectations and is Standard
accurately reflected in the
2. What is WCS’s plan for recruiting and retaining budget. The staffing and
Below the
teachers qualified to teach both 6th and 9th grade recruitment plan provides
Standard
students in Year 1? What are WCS’s Year 1 and sufficient academic, non-
beyond target(s) for percentage of certified academic, and mission-
teachers? - Question 3 pp. 14-15 critical staff to cover all of
the courses and programs
3. How will WCS support students’ counseling and described in the
social work needs in Year One? - pp.52-55 Academic Plan. The
Board has all areas of
4. Describe a student’s experience during the knowledge and expertise
8:00am–8:25am advisory/flex period block. - pp. necessary to operate a Far Below
10 and Exhibit 9 successful charter the Standard
school, and the school
leader(s) have or will have
the expertise and
resources to fulfill the
school’s mission and
goals.

Responses from Founding Board:
− WCS – The key elements of the organizational plan are the coaching programs and
support for teachers. Teachers function as advisors. The WCS has goals around the
organization that are connected to the school culture. Identifying needs will lead to
higher attendance. If students are in the building, they can explore pathways that will
lead to student success. An additional law course credit supports this plan. Expulsions
are connected to retention. Reseach shows that having a connection to an adult
supports student retention.
− Staff Recruitment – The hiring process will be similar to the process used for the Board
(including social media and LinkedIn). WCS will go into the community to identify
teachers and utilize GPSC. The ELA teacher will be certified 6-12. The goal is to have
100% of teachers certified by the end of Year 1 by using alternative certification
pathways. The starting salary is competitive. The WCS would like to mirror DeKalb’s
IGNITE Program.
− WCS is in discussion with Hope Bound for virtual mental health/SEL support and
group/individual therapy. The program can be aligned to the needs of WCS students.
Hope Bound can ensure the mental health needs of students.
− The goal of the flex block is to ensure that students receive individualized support. The
block is structured, and students select each semester what they will do during this
block. Support is based on the student’s needs identified with the advisor. The advisors
will also be coached. The period is also planned alongside the student’s schedule.

Review Committee’s Comments or Concerns:
− The committee raised concerns that the staffing/recruitment plan does not provide
sufficient academic, non-academic, and mission-critical staff to cover all of the courses
and programs described in the Academic Plan.
− The petitioner stated that upon opening staff will be in-serviced. The petitioner
mentioned MRESA as a potential partner for teacher certification. However, the
committee raised concerns about the petitioner’s timeline as alternative certification
pathways take more than 1 year.
− The 6-12 general or broad field certification no longer exists in some content areas. The
petitioner did not adequately address the staffing/teaching of grades 6-12 social and
natural sciences at WCS in the absence of this broad certification.
− Who will provide professional development? Who will train on all the elements of the
essential features, Restorative Justice, etc.?
− The petitioner spoke about mirroring the district’s IGNITE program. How would the
school afford to mirror the IGNITE program? The budget does not include a line item
for such a program.
− The petitioner’s anticipated cost of Hope Bound ($30/hour) may not be realistic. Will
the parents be asked to contribute to the cost?
− Social Work was not addressed by the petitioner.

Performance Task Standard Rating

Founding Board Performance Task: Meets the
Standard
DeKalb County School District’s student demographics
The Board demonstrates
include ~10% students with disabilities (SWD) and Partially
the capacity to confront
~19.6% English language learners (ELL). Using the WCS’s Meets the
potential pitfalls in
staffing matrix (Appendix B) and budget template (Exhibits Standard
opening and/or operating
22) as resources, develop a Day 1 plan of action for
a school by identifying the
addressing the specific needs of these student
root causes of plausible Below the
populations.
challenges and solutions Standard
to those challenges.
Questions:
a. How will WCS ensure that the needs of students Far Below
with disabilities and ELLs are met? the Standard
b. What additional info would be helpful in order to
deliver a quality analysis and clear
communication to the school community?
c. Which budget line items would you recommend
revising in order to help achieve this solution?
How would the Founding Board determine the
budget line items that are off limits for revision?

Responses from Founding Board:
− The prospective head of school reviewed the student demographic data with the group.
The school would consider additional staff.
− The school may utilize contracted special education services depending on student
needs. For ESOL, the school would push-in and utilize the flexible block.
− The school would begin by understanding each student’s plan. A general education
teacher endorsed in ESOL will be hired. WCS has $25,000 in the budget for this area.
The budget can also support additional material resources.
− WCS would schedule SWD based on IEPs. Meet with Treasurer about potential revisions
to budget line items. The first step is to understand the level of need at enrollment.
Funds can be reallocated.
− The proposed plan is to start the enrollment process to make sure students’ needs are
met. The second step is to understand the severity of the needs to determine whether
contracted SPED teachers are needed.
− The WCS would have an additional ESOL teacher. WIN block would be leveraged. Money
from marketing and contracted teachers is in the budget.

Review Committee’s Comments or Concerns:
− The Board seems to collaborate and communicate effectively with each other. However, the
Founding Board does not demonstrate the capacity to confront potential pitfalls in opening
and/or operating a school by identifying the root causes of plausible challenges and solutions
to those challenges.
− The committee raised concerns regarding the Founding Board’s discussion of salaries. The
petitioner’s response implied that the school may be staffed by less inexperienced teachers.
− The petitioner did not articulate a strategy for ensuring that general education teachers would
also be ESOL certified, as discussed during the performance task.
− The rationale for not utilizing a media specialist is unclear. WCS did not explain how it would
offer specials or CTAE pathways as these teachers and supplies are not noted in the budget.
− Edmentum has been utilized as a resource for credit recovery and full courses in the district.

Agenda Item