Abramson: Moving Forward and Improving Policy
By: Laura Mogg | August 9, 2011
Background
Over the past few weeks, the Times-Picayune and other news outlets have provided us with stories about alleged inappropriate contact between students and violations of state law, and even attempted bribery at Abramson Science and Technology Charter School. The school’s charter was recently revoked by the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education based on some of these allegations. (You can read a full timeline of the events with links here.)
The Cowen Institute, in an effort to act as a resource and provide support to the Louisiana Department of Education and its Office of Parental Options, wanted to know whether it was ineffective policy or practice that contributed to the failure of the authorizer (in this case, BESE) to hold Abramson accountable for its deficiencies and the allegations against the school in a timely manner. Based on our review of events, we found that the facts of this case indicate that the problem lay not with BESE, but with the decision to withhold from BESE a full copy of the investigative audit of Abramson. The policy as written does not address the procedural handling of complaints and leaves significant discretion in the hands of the leadership of the Louisiana Department of Education’s Office of Parental Options to deal with problems that arise in non-renewal or extension years. While this may not normally have caused problems, in an office with significant leadership turnover over the last two years, the lack of procedure seems to have contributed to the problem.
In our opinion, the critical moment in this case occurred when BESE was not provided the documentation from the 2010 audit of Abramson for consideration in making their decision whether or not to grant an extension to the school’s charter that summer, but was only given the same single-page form provided for all schools undergoing their third-year extension review.
According to published reports, teachers at Abramson what they believed to be inappropriate behavior on the part of school leadership and they reported it to the Office of Parental Options, which conducted an investigation. Through multiple site visits, the audit team confirmed the teachers’ allegations.
BESE, charged with holding schools accountable as their authorizer, made the decision to extend the school’s charter based on the information that they received from the Office of Parental Options, which, in this case, was limited. Based on what they knew to be the school’s deficiencies included in the single page summary they were given, board members placed Abramson on a corrective action plan to address its failure to comply with special education law and regulations. At the extension meeting board members were not provided with the full audit report that revealed other problems at Abramson.
The Cowen Institute believes the problem lies with the discretion given to the Office of Parental Options to provide BESE with only the information that is relevant, in this case the standard single page form provided for every school that was up for their third-year extensions. Even without the bribery allegations (or the rape and sexual misconduct accusations that came to light in 2011), the findings against the school that are in the audit reports are serious enough to warrant mentioning at a charter extension or renewal hearing.
Recommendations
We believe that two changes to BESE policy could strengthen the charter school accountability system and prevent what occurred with Abramson from happening again.
First, BESE policy or Office of Parental Options (OPO) procedure should specify how complaints from whistleblowers and parents are handled. While all complaints should be looked into, certain types of allegations should trigger a thorough investigation of the type conducted at Abramson. This was not a problem in this case, as former OPO director Ken Campbell called for an audit when he received an email from Abramson teachers that raised concerns. However, this decision should not be left solely up to the discretion of Office of Parental Options staff. There should be standards that guide these decisions so that complaints are not overlooked and allegations do not go uninvestigated.
Second, BESE policy should dictate that all supporting evidence be given to the board when the Office of Parental Options makes a recommendation relating to the extension, renewal, or revocation of a charter or when an investigation into a complaint finds that the complaint was valid and that a school and its employees are engaging in behavior that is illegal, unethical, or putting children at risk. There is no way to determine what BESE’s decision regarding Abramson’s extension might have been if they had been supplied with the findings of the audit. However, the responsibility to close schools that are not adequately serving children – or those that are breaking the law – lies ultimately with BESE. Board members should be provided with any information that may affect their decision to grant, extend, renew, or revoke a charter.
We believe the Abramson incident to be an isolated one and the result of a poor decision or accidental oversight by leadership, not a failure of policy on a grand scale. However, with some minor policy and procedure changes, BESE and the Office of Parental Options can prevent problems like this in the future. Stricter guidelines for staff to follow when a complaint is received and when conducting an investigation will mean that key decision makers will be equipped with all relevant information necessary to hold charter schools accountable in a timely manner.
The Cowen Institute worked closely with the staff at the Office of Parental Options last year to review the policies on charter schools from the application process through the renewal or revocation decision. We participated in the Louisiana Charter Authorizer Excellence Conference in August 2010 and presented the conference’s findings at the Louisiana Public Charter School Association’s annual meeting. Erin Bendily, former head of the Office of Parental Options, and RSD Superintendent John White recently released a memo that noted that they are currently engaging in an internal review process of their policy and procedure in light of this recent issue. The memo also mentioned a desire to engage experts in conducting an external review once the internal review is complete. The Cowen Institute has reached out to the LDE and RSD to express our interest in assisting with this review process and hope that we can work with them in the near future to undertake this project.
Abramson: Moving Forward and Improving Policy
By: Laura Mogg | August 9, 2011
Background
Over the past few weeks, the Times-Picayune and other news outlets have provided us with stories about alleged inappropriate contact between students and violations of state law, and even attempted bribery at Abramson Science and Technology Charter School. The school’s charter was recently revoked by the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education based on some of these allegations. (You can read a full timeline of the events with links here.)
The Cowen Institute, in an effort to act as a resource and provide support to the Louisiana Department of Education and its Office of Parental Options, wanted to know whether it was ineffective policy or practice that contributed to the failure of the authorizer (in this case, BESE) to hold Abramson accountable for its deficiencies and the allegations against the school in a timely manner. Based on our review of events, we found that the facts of this case indicate that the problem lay not with BESE, but with the decision to withhold from BESE a full copy of the investigative audit of Abramson. The policy as written does not address the procedural handling of complaints and leaves significant discretion in the hands of the leadership of the Louisiana Department of Education’s Office of Parental Options to deal with problems that arise in non-renewal or extension years. While this may not normally have caused problems, in an office with significant leadership turnover over the last two years, the lack of procedure seems to have contributed to the problem.
In our opinion, the critical moment in this case occurred when BESE was not provided the documentation from the 2010 audit of Abramson for consideration in making their decision whether or not to grant an extension to the school’s charter that summer, but was only given the same single-page form provided for all schools undergoing their third-year extension review.
According to published reports, teachers at Abramson what they believed to be inappropriate behavior on the part of school leadership and they reported it to the Office of Parental Options, which conducted an investigation. Through multiple site visits, the audit team confirmed the teachers’ allegations.
BESE, charged with holding schools accountable as their authorizer, made the decision to extend the school’s charter based on the information that they received from the Office of Parental Options, which, in this case, was limited. Based on what they knew to be the school’s deficiencies included in the single page summary they were given, board members placed Abramson on a corrective action plan to address its failure to comply with special education law and regulations. At the extension meeting board members were not provided with the full audit report that revealed other problems at Abramson.
The Cowen Institute believes the problem lies with the discretion given to the Office of Parental Options to provide BESE with only the information that is relevant, in this case the standard single page form provided for every school that was up for their third-year extensions. Even without the bribery allegations (or the rape and sexual misconduct accusations that came to light in 2011), the findings against the school that are in the audit reports are serious enough to warrant mentioning at a charter extension or renewal hearing.
Recommendations
We believe that two changes to BESE policy could strengthen the charter school accountability system and prevent what occurred with Abramson from happening again.
First, BESE policy or Office of Parental Options (OPO) procedure should specify how complaints from whistleblowers and parents are handled. While all complaints should be looked into, certain types of allegations should trigger a thorough investigation of the type conducted at Abramson. This was not a problem in this case, as former OPO director Ken Campbell called for an audit when he received an email from Abramson teachers that raised concerns. However, this decision should not be left solely up to the discretion of Office of Parental Options staff. There should be standards that guide these decisions so that complaints are not overlooked and allegations do not go uninvestigated.
Second, BESE policy should dictate that all supporting evidence be given to the board when the Office of Parental Options makes a recommendation relating to the extension, renewal, or revocation of a charter or when an investigation into a complaint finds that the complaint was valid and that a school and its employees are engaging in behavior that is illegal, unethical, or putting children at risk. There is no way to determine what BESE’s decision regarding Abramson’s extension might have been if they had been supplied with the findings of the audit. However, the responsibility to close schools that are not adequately serving children – or those that are breaking the law – lies ultimately with BESE. Board members should be provided with any information that may affect their decision to grant, extend, renew, or revoke a charter.
We believe the Abramson incident to be an isolated one and the result of a poor decision or accidental oversight by leadership, not a failure of policy on a grand scale. However, with some minor policy and procedure changes, BESE and the Office of Parental Options can prevent problems like this in the future. Stricter guidelines for staff to follow when a complaint is received and when conducting an investigation will mean that key decision makers will be equipped with all relevant information necessary to hold charter schools accountable in a timely manner.
The Cowen Institute worked closely with the staff at the Office of Parental Options last year to review the policies on charter schools from the application process through the renewal or revocation decision. We participated in the Louisiana Charter Authorizer Excellence Conference in August 2010 and presented the conference’s findings at the Louisiana Public Charter School Association’s annual meeting. Erin Bendily, former head of the Office of Parental Options, and RSD Superintendent John White recently released a memo that noted that they are currently engaging in an internal review process of their policy and procedure in light of this recent issue. The memo also mentioned a desire to engage experts in conducting an external review once the internal review is complete. The Cowen Institute has reached out to the LDE and RSD to express our interest in assisting with this review process and hope that we can work with them in the near future to undertake this project.