Submitted to: Colorado State Board of Education...Ensure that every student receives the best...

Submitted to:

Colorado State Board of Education

By:

Dr. Katy Anthes, Commissioner of Education

March 2017

Colorado Department of Education

201 E. Colfax Ave., Denver, CO 80203 303-866-6600

3

HOPE Online Learning Academy Co-Op Elementary School and Middle School will enter their 6th

consecutive year of Priority Improvement or Turnaround on July 1, 2017. This report constitutes CDE’s

formal recommendation for both schools, which are multi-district online schools authorized by Douglas

County School District. The State Board of Education is required, by law, to direct action to the district’s local

school board prior to June 30, 2017.

CDE Recommendation

Pursuant to the Education Accountability Act of 2009, the

Commissioner of Education is required to provide a recommendation

to the State Board of Education. The Commissioner recommends that

the governing board of the charter school should be replaced by a

different governing board and the charter school should engage with

an external entity to support operations of the school. This

recommendation is based upon a review conducted by Department staff of the school’s data, leadership,

culture, academic systems, Unified Improvement Plans, and the history of grants and supports provided to

the school. Department staff also considered the State Review Panel’s final recommendation and the

district’s own proposal for a management partner and governing board reconstitution.

Background

HOPE Online is a multi-district online charter school that has been authorized by the Douglas County

School district since 2008-09. HOPE Online first opened in 2005-06 and was authorized by the Vilas school

district until it transferred to Douglas County in 2008. A multi-district online school is defined in C.R.S. 22-

30.7-102 as “an online school that serves a student population drawn from two or more school districts.”

HOPE’s students reside across the state attending learning centers in 11 different school districts. 1 The

model HOPE Online uses differs from the fully virtual model where students receive instruction remotely.

Students enrolled in HOPE Online attend brick and mortar learning centers every day on a set, full-day

schedule.2 In-person attendance at the learning centers is required for all HOPE students. Learning centers

provide HOPE students a facility in which to engage in a blended model of online and direct instruction for

the purpose of accessing online curriculum under the supervision of a teacher or a “mentor.” A mentor is

defined in statute (C.R.S. 22-30.7-102) as “an individual who is responsible for providing supervision at a

Learning Center.” Mentors are not required to be licensed teachers, but they must at least meet the

1 In order for a multi-district online school to operate a learning center in the boundaries of a district other than its authorizer, C.R.S. 22-30.7-111 requires the school “to enter into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with each school district in which the multi-district online school intends to provide instruction within a learning center.” 2 Statute (C.R.S. 22-30.7-111) defines a Learning Center as “a facility in which a consistent group of students meets more often than once per week under the supervision of a Teacher or Mentor for a significant portion of a school day for the purpose of participating in an Online School or Program.”

4

qualifications required for paraprofessionals. 3 Depending on the grade level, students spend varying

amounts of time receiving direct instruction from mentors or engaging with the online curriculum. At the

elementary level, for example, students spend 1 hour per day using the online learning platform and spend

the remainder of the full school day receiving instruction from a mentor. At the high school level, students

spend nearly the full school day using the online platform.

HOPE Online learning centers are semi-autonomous organizations operated by community-based

partners that contract with HOPE Online (see Appendix E for the 2016-17 contract language). HOPE Online

provides funding for each student, computer labs, core curriculum, individualized student learning plans,

student recruitment support, professional development opportunities and technical support. The

community-based partner leads the day-to-day operations of the learning center and is responsible for

hiring qualified mentors, providing an appropriate and safe facility, high speed Internet, elective courses

(approved by HOPE), classroom management and student discipline in accordance with HOPE’s policies.

HOPE Online currently has twenty six learning centers in 11 school districts in Colorado. The

elementary and middle schools enroll 1,788 students, according to the 2016 October Student Count.

Learning Centers exist within the boundaries of Aurora Public Schools, Adams 12 School District, Adams 14

School District, Boulder Valley School District, Denver Public School District, Douglas County School District,

Eaton School District, Jefferson County School District, Lake County School District, 27J School District, and

Pueblo 60 School District. The Learning Centers serve different grade ranges including: K-12, K-5, K-8, and 9-

12. Two Learning Centers serve only high school students. Prior to the 2013-14 school year, HOPE Online

operated as one K-12 school; in 2013-14, it formally divided into three schools—one elementary, one middle

and one alternative education campus (AEC) high school. Due to the reporting and governance structure,

CDE has data available at the three school levels, but not by each individual, brick and mortar learning

center. The limited information contained in this report concerning the individual learning centers was

obtained from the Hope Online website (http://www.hopeonline.org/) or from district or school staff.

Hope Online Learning Academy Elementary School earned a Turnaround rating from 2010 through

2014. In 2016, the school earned a Priority Improvement rating for the first time. Hope Online Learning

Academy Middle School has fluctuated between Priority Improvement and Turnaround over the past six

years. Persistent challenges with student performance are present at both the elementary and middle level,

in English Language Arts and Math achievement and growth.

Key Conditions for Success

Based on interactions with HOPE Online over the past several years, the diagnostic review

conducted by Mass Insight in May 2015 for the CDE Turnaround Network, and the school’s Unified

Improvement Plan (UIP), it is evident to the Department that the school continues to face core challenges in

several key areas. As such, the district’s pathway plan must address the following conditions to demonstrate

3 Statute (C.R.S. 22-30.7-102) states that “A Mentor shall not be required to be a licensed Teacher but shall, at minimum satisfy the requirements specified for a paraprofessional as such requirements are described in the federal law No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 U.S.C. §6301 et seq.”

http://www.hopeonline.org/

5

that the elementary and middle schools are on track to attaining an Improvement or Performance plan

rating.

Academic Systems. HOPE has initiated a number of changes to their academic systems in the past

two years, including new assessments and curriculum, but student achievement results remain a challenge.

Thus, it is critical that HOPE Online continue to focus on improving instruction and academic systems that

will lead to significantly better student learning outcomes. HOPE’s accountability pathway plan should:

Ensure that every student receives the best possible first instruction, differentiating for student

needs and including multiple tiers of support, to ensure that students meet the grade level

expectations.

Ensure that instruction is delivered by staff with the skills and knowledge to ensure students can

meet grade-level expectations.

Ensure that all students with specialized needs receive adequate individualized attention with

best practice instructional strategies, standards-based curricular materials, and instructors with

the proper expertise. This should include students identified with learning disabilities, as gifted

and talented, and as English language learners.

Ensure that every student is assessed on a regular basis throughout the year with assessment

tools and strategies, aligned to the content and rigor of the Colorado Academic Standards, so as

to provide actionable instructional data. Such data must be regularly analyzed and used by all

learning center and HOPE staff to differentiate instruction and meet the learning needs of every

student.

Leadership and Talent Management. While some progress has been made, there are continuing

concerns that students are not provided adequate instruction by appropriately skilled staff. The roles and

responsibilities for accountability for instructional quality and student learning between HOPE staff and

learning center staff are unclear. Thus, the following conditions need to be addressed in HOPE’s

accountability pathway plan:

Shift to a staffing model that allows HOPE to hire more highly-skilled teachers to deliver primary

instruction to students. The school has made a noticeable effort to encourage mentors to earn

their teaching licenses, and CDE encourages the continuation of those efforts.

Clarify the roles, responsibilities, and practices between all HOPE staff and learning center staff

regarding observation, feedback and evaluation of teaching staff, mentors, learning center

directors and managers. Ensure staff giving instructional feedback have the expertise to do so.

Prioritize ensuring that each learning center and classroom are staffed with skilled instructional

leaders and teachers so as to ensure that each student has access to the greatest learning

opportunities possible. HOPE seeks to staff learning centers with individuals from the local

communities, which is an important component of their model and should be coupled with

efforts to find qualified instructors for students. HOPE should further develop incentives and

resources aimed at retaining the strongest and most-effective leaders and instructors. As HOPE

notes in their plan, “students require qualified staff to close learning gaps.”

6

Further develop routines and practices and build the capacity of learning center leaders and

instructional staff to regularly analyze, discuss, and plan for student learning using all available

data.

School Culture. With numerous independently-run learning centers in various locations across the

state, the culture and climate experienced everyday by students, families and staff varies, as observed by

different CDE staff over the past three years. Thus, the school needs to ensure that every learning center

and each classroom are deliberately set up and maintained as inspiring learning environments with high

expectations for students that allow for differentiated instruction. HOPE strives to create welcoming and

supportive learning centers for students and their families, especially those who have not had positive

experiences in other schools. CDE commends this role and mission of HOPE.

The student retention rate may be a good measure to track as part of understanding the school

culture. The student retention rate at HOPE has been a historical challenge for the school (see Data Analysis

section), but it has improved lately—although it is still below the state average. The number of learning

centers has decreased in recent years, which may have impacted student retention rates in the past. As CDE

does not have individual learning center enrollment data, it is not possible to determine the extent of this

impact, and CDE encourages HOPE to continue efforts to establish consistent school cultures of high

expectations across all learning centers.

Governance and Accountability. The governance and accountability structures are critical to the

continuous improvement of HOPE Online Learning Academy and the academic achievement of its students.

CDE finds that the following conditions need to be in place at the charter school to ensure successful

outcomes for students.

Increase shared accountability for student learning across the entire organization. Clarify roles

and responsibilities for HOPE staff, learning center leadership, instructional staff, the HOPE

governing board, and district leadership.

Financial adequacy has been raised as a barrier to improvement. A financial analysis by the

governing board and/or an external organization could help determine how to maximize

resources for student learning, as well as investigate pathways for receiving full-time, brick and

mortar funding from the state.

Data from each learning center is not available to the public and is not reported to the state. It is

recommended that HOPE make such data available to the public, including parents, the

community and the state to increase transparency and accountability for each individual, semi-

autonomous learning center.

Increase accountability and supports for improvement for the performance of HOPE Online

Learning Academy Elementary and Middle Schools as a whole and for each individual learning

center, which should be a priority for the governing board and regularly reviewed at every board

meeting.

7

Rationale for Recommendation The Education Accountability Act of 2009 specifies three accountability actions for charter schools at

the end of the Accountability Clock. The State Board of Education may direct:

That the public or private entity operating the charter school or the governing board of the

charter school should be replaced by a different public or private entity or governing board (22-

11-210(5)(a)(II)); or

That the public charter school’s charter be revoked (22-11-210(5)(a)(V)).

Based on the key conditions needed for success, the State Review Panel recommendations, CDE staff

considerations and work with the school, and the school’s own proposal, CDE recommends that in the best

interest of students, the following actions should occur.

1. HOPE Online must make significant changes to ensure students receive the necessary

instruction to access and meet the Colorado Academic Standards by contracting with an

external private or public entity to operate all or targeted portions of its operations. An

external entity or entities should be identified that address the key conditions for success

articulated above. According to HOPE’s pathway proposal that was shared with CDE, HOPE

intends to contract with an external entity to address some of the conditions identified in this

recommendation. It is CDE’s assessment that the school’s plan provides sufficient detail and

rationale, although CDE has provided written feedback and some questions and concerns

remain (see page 32 of this report).

2. Governance changes are needed to ensure robust accountability for student performance. The

HOPE Online governing board is responsible for critical factors related to student success,

including but not limited to: resource allocation; instructional model; management of learning

centers; and staffing models—and, ultimately, the board is responsible for ensuring that

individual learning centers and the school as a whole are providing students with a quality

education that will prepare them for a successful life after high school. Given the consistently

low student performance, it evident to the Department that the governing board has not

sufficiently held the school accountable to ensure increased student outcomes. Thus, the

Department recommends that the governing board be replaced pursuant to C.R.S. 22-11-

210(5)(a)(II)). The new governing board should be comprised of members who can objectively

hold the learning centers and school leadership accountable for performance. To do this, the

board members will need to have appropriate content expertise and be independent of the

school. The new board should also revisit and enhance its procedures for holding the school

accountable to include reviewing interim student achievement data—at the school and learning

center level—at every board meeting. The Department’s recommendation is supported by the

2016 State Review Panel recommendation, which stated that “new board members and/or

management must represent expertise in each major area of operations and instruction at

HOPE, and demonstrate a capacity to provide increased accountability to the school leadership.

The school is in need of an outside partner(s) to hold them accountable to strategically

distribute funds and resources to impact student learning.”

8

3. For learning centers in their first two years of operation that are subject to a provisional

contract, academic as well as operational performance is required. Per the contract template

between HOPE and the learning centers, there is not explicit accountability for academic

performance for other learning centers. As the learning centers greatly impact the student

academic outcomes at each site, it is recommended that additional accountability be assigned

to each learning center. This could be built in to the contracts for all learning centers (not just

the provisional contracts). Likewise, it is recommended that contracts are not renewed

automatically each year, and that decisions about renewal include a review of academic

performance. Additionally, it may be valuable to create local “learning center accountability

committees” (similar to school accountability committees) to ensure transparency and

accountability for the communities in which the learning centers operate.

While these actions may bring about needed changes, both CDE and State Review Panel note that

there is an additional action that the state board, district, school and HOPE governing board may pursue

that could address the needed conditions for success. HOPE Online Elementary School could be

transitioned into a brick and mortar charter school which would allow the school to receive additional

resources for each student through per pupil funding, more accurately reflect its operational structure and

develop a more transparent governance and accountability structure.

In response to diagnostic reviews and internal assessments, HOPE Online shifted the instructional

model for elementary grades to focus less on computer-based instruction and more on face-to-face

instruction. This shift has had a positive impact on the early grades, as evidenced by improved growth

performance on the 2016 school performance framework. Initial reviews suggest the new instructional

model, while being a better approach for elementary students, does not qualify the elementary school as an

online school anymore. Students in grades K through 5 spend approximately 1 hour each day using the

online curriculum, with the remainder of the day spent with mentors who provide instruction. According to

1 CCR 301-71 2.05.1, students attending learning centers “must be actively participating in the curricula of

the certified online program for more than fifty-percent of the school day.” The Department commends

HOPE for adjusting the instructional model in order to better meet student needs. Between the direct

instruction and the on-site learning center resources that build the school community, students are more

likely to be able to meet the Colorado Academic Standards learning expectations. However, we know these

strategies are more resource intensive than the typical “online school,” and the current structure does not

meet the definition of an online school as specified in regulations.

A brick and mortar charter model would more accurately reflect the current operations of Hope

Online Elementary School and would provide the school with higher amounts of per pupil funding.

Additionally, it would create more local accountability and transparency for each learning center site. CDE,

however, recognizes that there are challenges with this approach, as it would require a process to transition

each learning center into individual chartered schools within the 11 districts or potentially through the

Charter School Institute. The current MOU approval process between the 11 districts and HOPE for the

operation of learning centers would not be sufficient, as that is specific to the multi-district online learning

9

center criteria. CDE can conduct additional research into possible processes for transitioning into brick and

mortar schools, if requested by the State Board of Education.

Lastly, if significant progress in student achievement is not made, CDE recommends revocation of

the charter. HOPE’s pathway plan, a draft of which was shared with CDE on March 13, 2017, also states, “the

district [Douglas County] is prepared to take all necessary actions, up to and including terminating HOPE’s

charter contract, if the management plan does not result in greater student achievement over an

appropriate time period” (p.11). As the State Review Panel notes,

“There are other online and brick and mortar programs that are serving similar students and

showing better results. Although the general sentiment from HOPE staff is that the current students

are disenfranchised from the traditional school system, the site visit and document review provided

no data to confirm this. The students who are served by HOPE are not in a remote community, and

the majority of students live in geographic areas with a variety of other academic choices.” (2016

State Review Panel Recommendation Report, p.2)

With the increased performance on the Growth indicator in 2016, CDE does not recommend this

action at this time. However, if significant progress is not demonstrated at HOPE Online Elementary and

Middle Schools within a reasonable amount of time, it will be critical for the school district to re-visit this

option.

Summary of Pathways that Meet Necessary Conditions for Improvement

Charter School Pathway CDE Recommendation

Additional Options

CDE Does Not Recommend

Replace the public or private entity operating the charter school X

Replace the governing board of the charter school

X

Revocation of charter X

CDE Recommendation Report Outline

The next sections of this report provide supporting evidence and documentation for the statements

made above. First, an analysis of school data trends is provided, followed by a review of the school’s systems

and conditions. A summary of the HOPE Online Unified Improvement Plan is included, as is an overview of

the state and federal grants provided to the school over the past several years. Lastly, the report includes an

evaluation by CDE staff of the State Review Panel’s report and the school’s proposal for a management

partnership.

10

HOPE Online Elementary School and Middle School serve just under 1,800 students in grades K-8

across 26 learning centers located throughout the state. HOPE Online also serves high schools students, but

as the high school is not currently on the accountability clock, this data analysis focuses on the elementary

and middle schools. In 2016-17, over 75 percent of students at both HOPE Elementary and HOPE Middle

qualified for free or reduced-price lunch. Both schools have earned Priority Improvement or Turnaround

ratings since 2010. Persistent challenges with student performance are present at both the elementary and

middle level, particularly in English Language Arts and Math achievement. The following section provides a

summary of school-level student enrollment, retention, and performance trends for both HOPE Elementary

and HOPE Middle School.

School Enrollment and Retention Trends

Enrollment at both HOPE Elementary and HOPE Middle peaked in 2012-13 and 2013-14 and has

declined since then (see Table 1). Both HOPE Elementary and HOPE Middle enroll a higher proportion of

students of color, students with disabilities, English learners, and students who qualify for Free and Reduced

lunch than the average elementary and middle school in the state (see Figure 1). At the elementary level,

the percent of students with disabilities enrolled at HOPE (5%) is lower than the state average (11%).

Table 1. Enrollment at HOPE Elementary and Middle, 2011-12 to 2016-17

2011-2012

2012-2013

2013-2014

2014-2015

2015-2016

2016-2017

HOPE Elementary 1,506 1,614 1,751 1,508 1,150 1,201 HOPE Middle 644 739 724 660 530 587

Figure 1. Demographic Enrollment at HOPE in 2016 by Disaggregated Student Group

84%

47%

81%

46%

5%11% 11% 11%

46%

17%

38%

19%

76%

45%

75%

43%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

HOPE State HOPE State

Elementary Middle

% Minority % IEP % ELL % FRL

11

The student retention data below tracks the percentage of students who start at HOPE elementary

in a given year and re-enroll at HOPE Elementary the next year. Table 2 displays what the pattern may look

like for a typical grade progression that begins in Kindergarten. As displayed in Figure 2, retention rates drop

by approximately half each year. Retention rates for the 2014 cohort have fallen from 51.5% to 12.1% after

four years. While retention rates for the 2016 cohort looks more promising (68.2% compared to 51.5% from

2015 and 44.9% from 2014), 68.2% is still quite low when compared to state averages. In all cases for all

cohorts, HOPE’s elementary school retention rates are consistently below the state’s average retention

rates.

Table 2. Example Retention Patterns at HOPE Elementary Starting Year Grade 1 Grade in Year 2 Grade in Year 3 Grade in Year 4 2014 K 1 2 3 2015 K 1 2 2016 K 1

Figure 2. Retention Analysis at HOPE Elementary 2014-2016

Red bars represent state-wide averages for retention at K-5 schools. Colored bars represent HOPE elementary retention

rate by cohort.

Note: Retention rate, expressed as a percentage, looks at the proportion of students returning to the same school the following year. The analysis

includes students with typical grade progression and atypical grade progression (e.g., students who were held back a grade level). State retention

analysis similarly looks at the percentage of students returning to the same school the following year. Due to data limitations, the state retention

numbers represent a conservative estimate because it does not exclude students in the following scenarios: schools that closed, schools that

changed code, district-to-district grade configuration for middle school level. In all of these cases, students were counted as not retained. Taking into

consideration all of the unaccounted scenarios, CDE’s retention numbers represent the lowest possible retention rate. CDE estimates that if it were

to take into account those scenarios, the retention rate may be up to 3% higher.

12

School Performance Frameworks

Both HOPE Elementary and HOPE Middle have earned ratings of Turnaround or Priority Improvement

for the last six accountability cycles on the state’s school performance framework, as displayed in Table 3.

Until 2014, HOPE Elementary and HOPE Middle school were included in the same school code as HOPE High

school. To determine ratings for HOPE Elementary and HOPE Middle for 2010-2013, ratings for each level

were calculated based on the points earned divided by the points eligible for elementary and middle school

results separately. Ratings for each year were created for HOPE Elementary and HOPE Middle using this

method. For 2014 and 2016, the published ratings were used, since in these years HOPE Elementary and

HOPE Middle were assigned separate school codes.

Table 3. Official School Ratings over Time

Rating 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2016

HOPE Elementary Turnaround3 Turnaround1 Turnaround1 Turnaround3 Turnaround1

Priority Improvement1

HOPE Middle Turnaround3



Priority Improvement3 Turnaround1


Note: 2010-2013 ratings were calculated from HOPE's individual school levels, as the school was considered a K-12 at that time. 2014 and 2016 results were reported by the separate school codes. 1Accountability rating derived from 1 year accountability framework. 3Accountability rating derived from 3 year accountability framework.

School Academic Performance Trends Due to the assessment transition, the trend results are best described by looking at the rating level for

each indicator on the performance frameworks. As displayed in Table 4, reading and math achievement

have been consistent challenges for both HOPE Elementary and HOPE Middle over the past six years,

earning mostly Does Not Meet ratings. While Academic Growth ratings for HOPE Middle have been

consistently Approaching for reading for the last six years, Academic Growth in math for HOPE Middle has

often been Does Not Meet. HOPE Elementary’s Academic Growth rating in both reading and math was

Approaching in 2016, but was typically Does Not Meet in all other years. This suggests that not only are

students at HOPE Elementary and HOPE Middle consistently performing lower than other schools in the

state, but they are also consistently falling behind their academic peers. The 2016 growth data, however,

shows some improvement over prior years. CDE commends this recent progress.

13

Table 4. School Trends on Academic Achievement and Growth, for English Language Arts and Math

Level Indicator Content Area 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2016 Participation Rates (2016)

Elementary

Achievement Reading DNM DNM DNM DNM DNM DNM 96.00%

Math DNM DNM DNM DNM DNM DNM 96.20%

Growth Reading DNM DNM A DNM DNM A

Math DNM DNM DNM DNM DNM A

Middle

Achievement Reading DNM DNM DNM DNM DNM DNM 96.30%

Math DNM DNM DNM DNM DNM DNM 96.70%

Growth Reading A A A A A A

Math DNM DNM DNM A DNM A

Legend DNM=Does Not Meet A=Approaching M=Meets

Note: Data from 1 year frameworks is presented for year-to-year comparability.

Figure 3 shows each school’s Achievement percentile ranks on English language arts (ELA) and math,

disaggregated by student subgroup. Small within-school gaps among subgroups are apparent for elementary

ELA and math and for middle school math. It should be noted that a percentile of 1 is the lowest possible

percentile rank a school can earn, and it indicates that 99 percent of other high schools in the state had a

higher mean scale score than this school in the specified content area.

Figure 3. Achievement Percentile Ranks at HOPE Elementary and Middle in 2016, by Subgroup

4 61

53 31 31 1 14

1 11 21 11 1

0

99

ELA Math ELA Math

Elementary Middle

Per

cen

tile

Ran

k

All EL FRL Minority IEP

50

15

85

Exceeds Expectations

Meets Expectations

Approaching Expectations

14

Figure 4 shows the school’s median growth percentiles in English Language Arts and Math by student

group. The data on gaps between groups of students is unclear. HOPE Elementary and HOPE Middle both

show growth data that is below state expectations. Within both schools, there is variance in the growth

performance across the disaggregated groups—for example, the English Learners at HOPE Elementary

School are outperforming the All Students group—but no disaggregated group is meeting state expectations

for academic growth.

Figure 4. Median Growth Percentiles at HOPE Elementary and Middle in 2016, by Subgroup

School Academic Performance Comparison

Given the high number of at-risk students HOPE Elementary serves, CDE staff analyzed the school’s

academic performance as compared to other elementary schools that also serve high populations of

minority, low-income or English Learner students. As displayed in Figure 5, HOPE Elementary falls in the

bottom quartile of student achievement when compared to other elementary schools serving high-needs

populations. Figure 6 shows the same data for HOPE Middle school.

36 3643 43

38 35.538 3740 44

3543

38 4138 41

30

43

0

99

ELA Math ELA Math

Elementary Middle

Med

ian

Gro

wth

Per

cen

tile

All EL FRL Minority IEP

50

35

65

15

Figure 5: HOPE Elementary’s 2016 English Language Arts Achievement Compared to Other Elementary Schools Serving High Proportion of High-Needs Students

Data showing the performance of other schools in the highest quartile of minority students, students in poverty and

English learners (those with the highest percentages of students compared to other schools in the state) is displayed in

each of the columns below. Each dot represents a school; HOPE Elementary is highlighted in orange whereas other

elementary schools are shaded in gray. The band in the middle of each plot represents high schools scoring in the 25th –

75th percentile on the English language arts assessment in 2016.

Note: Only schools with a valid mean scale score and students enrolled at the elementary level were included. Additionally, schools were excluded if they had fewer than 16 students or the assessment participation rate was below 90%. Schools classified as either high minority, high poverty, or high English learners represent the top quartile within each student population. The following data sources were used to create this chart: Student October 2015-16 and CMAS PARCC English Language Arts results for the 2015-16 school year.

16

Figure 6: HOPE Middle School’s 2016 English Language Arts Achievement Compared to Other Middle Schools Serving High Proportion of High-Needs Students

Data showing the performance of other schools in the second highest quartile of minority students, students in poverty

and English learners (those with the similar percentages of students compared to other schools in the state) is

displayed in each of the columns below. Each dot represents a school; HOPE Middle is highlighted in orange whereas

other middle schools are shaded in gray. The band in the middle of each plot represents high schools scoring in the 25th

– 75th percentile on the English language arts assessment in 2016.

Note: Only schools with a valid mean scale score and students enrolled at the middle level were included. Additionally, schools were excluded if they had fewer than 16 students or the assessment participation rate was below 90%. Schools classified as either mid-high minority, mid-high poverty, or mid-high English learners represent the second highest quartile within each student population. The following data sources were used to create this chart: Student October 2015-16 and CMAS PARCC English Language Arts results for the 2015-16 school year.

Data Not Available

Due to the structure of HOPE and their relationships with their learning centers, there is data that CDE does

not have available for reporting or analysis. Specifically, CDE cannot:

Provide information on the performance of individual learning centers

Analyze the qualifications of the adults that are face to face with students all day (mentors)

Provide the amount of time that students are getting instruction from HOPE teachers compared to mentors

Report on the qualifications of the managers and directors of the learning centers

Analyze information on students that transfer between different HOPE learning centers.

17

This section is designed to provide a summary of a qualitative review of district and school systems

and conditions. Research on school turnaround shows that certain conditions are essential in establishing a

strong foundation for rapid school improvement.4 Schools on track to improve student achievement are

likely to show strong evidence of highly-functioning leadership, culture, academic systems, district support

structures and board and community relationships. The data listed below were captured primarily through

CDE performance manager site visits to HOPE over the last two school years, a diagnostic school readiness

assessment completed in May 2015, and state data.

District Support

HOPE was authorized by Vilas School District in 2005. Douglas County School District began

authorizing HOPE in 2008.

Various Douglas County district staff support HOPE Online - the Grants and ESSA Coordinator, Laura

Gorman, has served as a primary contact and partner with CDE and HOPE leadership. Laura supports

HOPE in a variety of ways:

o Title funding planning, monitoring, fiscal oversight, and budgeting coordination.

o Support in grant development

o Support with Unified Improvement Planning

o Progress monitoring of school improvement efforts

o Collaboration and support with state accountability efforts

o Liaison with other district staff regarding support for the school, including: choice and

charter schools; special education; English language development; literacy and READ

coordination; professional development, homeless liaison, and district leadership.

HOPE receives Title I funding from Douglas County School District.

HOPE contracts with Douglas County School District to provide special education services, including

full or part-time positions of: special education coordinator, moderate needs teacher, building

resource teacher, speech language pathologist, school psychologist, social worker, and classified

support staff.

As a charter school, HOPE receives a high level of autonomy from Douglas County Schools.

School Leadership

Heather O’Mara is the Chief Executive Officer and is a co-founder of HOPE.

HOPE is governed by a board of directors of five individuals

4 Public Impact. (2008). School Turnaround Leaders: Competencies for Success; Mass Insight Education & Research Institute. (2007). The Turnaround Challenge: Why America’s best opportunity to dramatically improve student achievement lies in our worst-performing schools; Player, D. Hitt, D.H. and W. Robinson, W. (2014). District Readiness to Support School Turnaround. University of Virginia Partnership for Leaders in Education.

18

HOPE employs a central staff of 97 people (full-time equivalent): 8 FTE under Finance; 6 FTE under

Community Outreach; 10 FTE under Administration; 61 FTE under Academic Achievement; and 12

FTE under Student Services.

The CEO and other school leadership have sought out support from CDE and have applied for

support grants. HOPE was successful in some grant applications and not in others.

The school leadership have been open to working with a CDE Turnaround Support Manager for the

past two years by facilitating visits to learning centers, sharing school and staffing information,

sharing performance trends, and discussing grant and support opportunities. CDE’s engagement

with HOPE have led to a better understanding of the school and honest feedback to the school.

Learning Center Staff

Each learning center requires the positions of Learning Center Director, Learning Center Manager,

and Learning Center Academic Lead. “The Learning Center Director may also serve as the

Learning Center Manager, Academic Lead and/or Mentor if on site full time and if qualified to

do so based on prior background and experience.” (HOPE Learning Center contract, 5.1).

Directors/Managers are responsible for: the operations of the center to support academics;

ensuring mentors monitor online instruction and teach offline instruction; ensuring the facility is

clean, safe, and engaging; and maintaining a positive relationship with students, families, staff, and

the community.

Learning Center Managers hire mentors who provide the primary instruction to students (the

mentors are not employees of HOPE or of the school district). Mentors are not required to hold

Colorado teacher licenses, although 22% do hold licenses. Mentors are required to pass background

and fingerprint reviews. Mentors work under direct supervision of learning center directors or

managers and receive instructional support by HOPE staff. Learning center directors are not

required to have educational licenses. According to the 2016 State Panel Review report, “only 26%

of learning center directors hold teaching licenses.”

It is one of HOPE’s goals to hire learning center staff that represent the diversity of the communities

they serve.

In the past two years, HOPE has increased the frequency, amount of time, and number of teachers

and specialized support staff that work directly with mentors.

HOPE has invested in encouraging and developing pathways for their mentors to earn their licensure

through partnerships with University of Northern Colorado at Greeley.

School Culture

Observations by CDE staff have noted that there exist a range of learning conditions at different

HOPE learning centers - some have strong learning environments and some lack structure and clear

expectations for focused student learning.

The climate of each learning center appears to be partially dependent on the leadership of each

learning center director.

19

HOPE collects “affiliation” data as a means to assess student engagement, including: attendance; re-

enrollment rates; student retention rates; student affiliation rates; and mentor retention rates. This

data was shared with CDE for the 2014-2015 school year for all learning centers.

HOPE promotional materials state that learning centers are “safe, supportive environments,

operated by nonprofit community organizations.”

Academic Systems

HOPE is authorized as a multi-district online school. Observations and information from the school

indicate that HOPE elementary students are engaged in online learning for 60 minutes per day and

engaged in face-to-face instruction from mentors for the remainder of each day. In the secondary

grade levels, the face-to-face instruction is progressively less - students in the middle grades spend

approximately 50% of the day online, while high school students spend nearly 100% of each day

engaged in online curricula.

Students are expected to physically attend class for the majority of each school day.

HOPE has expanded their expectations for academic curricular materials throughout the learning

centers over the past two years.

HOPE implements interim/benchmark assessments including: DIBELS; Acuity for math and English

language arts; and assessments used with the Engage NY curricula. HOPE staff have made efforts to

utilize that data more with teachers, directors, and mentors to drive instruction. In 2015, according

to the Mass Insight diagnostic report, there was mixed evidence that interim assessment data was

used to meet student needs.

On visits to several HOPE learning centers, CDE staff have observed mixed instructional practices,

ranging from effective to poor with low levels of student engagement.

In classrooms and learning centers with lower levels of instruction, it is not clear that mentors or

center managers have awareness or understanding of what highly-effective instruction looks like. In

some cases, mentors deliver instruction that is not differentiated or engaging and rely on limited

instructional materials.

Most learning centers are unable to offer elective courses beyond physical education.

HOPE states that support interventions are provided for students identified as needing additional

academic supports. HOPE receives Title I funds ($1,327,291 in Title I funds in 2015-2016) for these

intervention services. Whereas HOPE strives to provide interventions consistently, offerings vary by

learning center.

CDE observations and conversations with HOPE and learning center staff have pointed to a lack of

adequate services and attention for students with special needs. It is not clear the full extent to

which HOPE serves these groups of students.

Operations

HOPE receives funding as a multi-district online school.

HOPE learning centers operate geographically in 11 different school districts. HOPE enters into

Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with each of these districts to operate the learning centers.

20

HOPE operates learning centers in different facilities. Many learning centers are co-located in

churches or other multi-use facilities.

Board and Community Relations

As a charter school, HOPE maintains a Board of Directors with five members

It is not clear how the HOPE Board of Directors holds the school accountable for student

performance.

Per board minutes, the board recognizes the need to expand its membership and expertise in order

to provide greater accountability for student performance

HOPE Online Elementary and Middle School submitted the UIP in January 2017 on time. CDE staff members

are currently reviewing the plan and preparing formal feedback. An initial review indicates a generally high-

quality plan that addresses feedback from CDE on past plans. A summary of past feedback from CDE is

available in Appendix B.

Current School UIP Summary

The following items were pulled directly from the school’s Unified Improvement Plan submitted to CDE in

January 2017. (The text in the boxes below is the work of the school/district, not CDE).

Where are students continuing to struggle most?

Priority Performance Challenges: Specific statements about the district’s performance challenges (not budgeting, staffing curriculum, instruction, etc.).

Elementary School Both reading and math status achievement continue to be well below expectations. The overall percentile for ELA on CMAS is up from the previous year for both reading and math. Both reading and math achievement continue to be well below expectations. HOPE elementary school students performed in the 4th percentile in reading and at the 6th percentile in math. To achieve approaching students must perform at least at the 15th percentile. Reading and math growth is not sufficient to close achievement gaps. Reading and math growth across all students and subgroups was up from previous year and approaching for all groups. Reading and math growth across all students and subgroups is not sufficient for students to meet grade-level performance and close achievement gaps. Growth at the level of Meets is needed for students to be on track for meets/exceeds. Growth was at 36 for both ELA and math. Growth must demonstrate a median percentile of 50 to demonstrate the level of growth needed to support students toward grade-level expectations. Subgroups gaps the greatest for students identified as Black and Hispanic. Achievement for students identified as those that are Black or Hispanic demonstrate the greatest achievement and growth gaps. Mean growth must at least meet or exceed a median growth percentile of 50.

21

Language growth must be accelerated to support achievement. To facilitate academic achievement, language acquisition of students must be accelerated to move students from L3 and 4 to L 5 and 6.Language acquisition growth for students moving from LEP to FEP. The 2015 growth MGP for ELL was 32, a rating of "does not meet". To make gains toward approaching, the MGP must be at least 40.

Middle School Both reading and math status achievement continue to be well below expectations. Both reading and math achievement on PARCC and on local assessments demonstrate that students are well below performance expectations as demonstrated by percentile performance on SPF and on local assessments. Reading and math growth is not sufficient to close achievement gaps. Both reading and math growth has improved on both PARCC and on local assessments. However, to ensure that students’ growth trajectory is sufficient for each to meet grade expectations, growth must be at "meets". Subgroups gaps the greatest for students with disabilities. Growth improved for all subgroups except students with disabilities on PARCC math and ELA. RIT scores on local assessments demonstrate gaps between students who are identified as Black and Hispanic as well. Language growth must be accelerated to support achievement. To facilitate academic achievement, language acquisition of students must be accelerated to move students from L3 and 4 to L5 and 6.

Why is the school continuing to have this problem(s)?

Root Causes: Statements describing the deepest underlying cause, or causes, of performance challenges, that, if dissolved, would result in elimination, or substantial reduction of the performance challenge(s).

Elementary School Lack of highly qualified staff. Learning Center staff may lack CDE requirement for highly qualified status resulting in lack of pedagogy in the subject areas they teach. Inconsistent monitoring of performance. Learning Center performance is inconsistently monitored and subsequent actions to address issues may not be timely. Lack of LC director instructional leadership to guide and evaluate performance. Learning Center directors do not have the instructional leadership skills needed to guide and evaluate Learning Center staff performance.

Middle School Lack of highly qualified staff. Learning Center staff may lack CDE requirement for highly qualified status resulting in lack of pedagogy in the subject area. Lack of LC director instructional leadership to guide and evaluate performance. Learning Center directors do not have the instructional leadership skills needed to guide and evaluate Learning Center staff performance. Inconsistent monitoring of performance. Learning Center performance is inconsistently monitored and subsequent actions to address issues may not be timely.

22

What action is the school taking?

Major Improvement Strategies: An overall approach that describes a series of related actions intended to result in improvements in performance.

Elementary School Implement a system to recruit and train quality educators from the community. By June, 2017 a Licensure and Leadership Pathway Program has been created and approved and all teachers and Learning Center staff have a plan in place By June, 2017 an External Management Organization has been contracted and has completed a professional development review, needs assessment and has created comprehensive professional development plan and schedule to be implemented starting summer 2017. By June, 2017 a cadre of teachers and director peer coaches has been selected, trained and are providing mentoring to peers in identified areas for growth and development. Restructure and refine staffing within the HOPE organization and Learning Center. By June, 2017 every Learning Center has a dedicated full time HOPE staff (general education teacher, reading teacher, reading interventionist); HOPE licensed administrators are assigned as Academic Liaisons to each LC to oversee management and academic performance and to supervise teachers, and a plan for reconfiguring staffing to place individuals in areas of academic competence in appropriate roles (e.g. teacher, interventionist, para) at each LC has been completed. By fall 2018 every Learning Center with high language needs has a teacher with CLD endorsed or in program for endorsement assigned; staffing within Learning Centers is based on student needs and LC staff qualifications. Intensify accountability and support systems and reconstitute the HOPE Governing. By June, 2017 a policy and process for Learning Center management and performance accountability has been designed and is being implemented to monitor, support and close Learning Centers as indicated; HOPE’s educator evaluation system is redesigned and piloted and includes the CDE Educator Effectiveness rubric and academic growth performance expectations with specific criteria for performance; HOPE’s governing board membership has been expanded to include educational and accountability experts; a governance committee of DCSD, EMO, HOPE leadership and board, and family/community has met to review the needs assessment, PD plan and evaluation plan and agreed upon changes as indicated.

Middle School Implement a system to recruit and train quality educators from the community. By June, 2017 a Licensure and Leadership Pathway Program has been created and approved and all teachers and Learning Center staff have a plan in place By June, 2017 an External Management Organization has been contracted and has completed a professional 2 development review, needs assessment and has created comprehensive professional development plan and schedule to be implemented starting summer 2017. By June, 2017 a cadre of teachers and director peer coaches has been selected, trained and are providing mentoring to peers in identified areas for growth and development. Restructure and refine staffing within the HOPE organization and Learning Center. By June, 2017 every Learning Center has a dedicated full time HOPE staff (general education teacher, reading teacher, reading interventionist); HOPE licensed administrators are assigned as Academic Liaisons to each LC to oversee management and academic performance and to supervise teachers, and a plan for re configuring staffing to place individuals in areas of academic competence in appropriate roles (e.g. teacher, interventionist, para) at each LC has been completed. By fall 2018 every Learning Center with high language needs has a

23

teacher with CLD endorsed or in program for endorsement assigned; staffing within Learning Centers is based on student needs and LC staff qualifications. Intensify accountability and support systems, reconstitute the Governing Board. By June, 2017 a policy and process for Learning Center management and performance accountability has been designed and is being implemented to monitor, support and close Learning Centers as indicated; HOPE’s educator evaluation system is redesigned and piloted and includes the CDE Educator Effectiveness rubric and academic growth performance expectations with specific criteria for performance; HOPE’s governing board membership has been expanded to include educational and accountability experts; a governance committee of DCSD, EMO, HOPE leadership and board, and family/community has met to review the needs assessment, PD plan and evaluation plan and agreed upon changes as indicated.

History of Supports Available from the State on UIP Development

The school has participated in universal and targeted supports from CDE on its UIP development. Universal

supports include regional trainings held each spring and fall and access to many resources (e.g., quality

criteria, UIP Handbook, online tutorials, sample plans) on CDE’s website. CDE has also worked directly with

the district and with schools on their plan development. CDE staff were invited to work with district and

school staff through multiple in-person interaction over the last couple of years.

Over the past few years, HOPE Online Learning Academy has applied for and received a number of

competitive grants to support implementation of their improvement efforts. Below is a summary of the

major grants and supports the district received over the past three years. In addition, HOPE Online

participates in the Early Literacy Assessment Tool (ELAT) project. Grant funds are not distributed to the

school, but rather the state pays the licensing fee for HOPE Online to administer state-approved reading

assessments to its K-3 students so that teachers may obtain real-time data on the reading skill levels of

students. Lastly, there were some grants HOPE applied for but did not receive; explanations of those grant

processes are also below.

Expelled & At-Risk Student Services (EARSS)

HOPE Online Learning Academy received the Expelled & At-Risk Student Services (EARSS) grant

beginning in 2014-15 to serve grade K-12. The grant program runs for a total of four years.

Grant purpose. The EARSS grant is a state-funded grant program intended to assist with providing

educational and supportive services to expelled students, students at-risk for expulsion, and students of

compulsory school age who are truant and at risk of being declared habitually truant as defined by

unexcused absences.

Funded activities. HOPE Online Learning Academy applied to use the EARSS funds to establish an

initiative they named Project Restore. It concentrates additional mental health supports to students and

their families including: 1) Process and protocol for screening and addressing mental health events and

issues centrally and at each Learning Center, 2) Behavioral support in the classroom with home connections

24

for students struggling with mental health and behavioral issues, and 3) Social/emotional curriculum

instruction to middle school students once a week to mitigate lack of impulse control, bullying and to

expand a student’s ability to think critically and plan. Funds are used for:

1 FTE Social Worker

1FTE Behavior Specialist

Year 1 only: Stipend for programmer/data specialist to develop resource and referral database

Mental Health Assessment

Brain Wise curriculum

Student incentives for behavior management

Ten Teacher's Encyclopedia of Behavior Management Manual

Additional professional development

Renewal of CPI trainer certification, conference registrations to implement CPI and other

strategies

Administrative costs charged by Douglas County School District for support to charter schools

Grant outcomes. HOPE Online reported the following results and outcomes from the grant in 2015-16.

Students Served: During the 2015-16 school year, the school served 422 at-risk students. Of the

at-risk students, 361 will continue; 21 transferred to another school district, state, or country; 14

refused services; 10 graduated with a regular diploma, 10 successfully completed, 4 dropped out

or discontinued schooling, and 2 K-6 students exited to an unknown educational setting.

Parents/Guardians Served: The grant served 98 parents of the at-risk students, and 63% of

parents reported an improvement in their ability to support their child.

Performance Measures: The school reported meeting their goals or making progress on their

goals related to parent support, academic progress and attendance. The school met or exceeded

their safety and discipline goals.

Credit Recovery: (Note: Not a specific emphasis of the EARSS grant.) The grant served 107 high

school students. 62 students began the school year behind their expected age, grade and credit

accumulation to graduate with a regular diploma, and 24 of those students (39%) earned half or

more credits toward getting back on track. Of the 45 students who began EARSS services being

on track to graduate on time, 39 (86%) remained on track.

Reading Ignite

HOPE was awarded a Reading Ignite grant in FY 2015-16. The grant covers a 1 ½ year time span; Year

1 ran from January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016 and Year 2 runs from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017. Funding for

Year 1 encompassed planning and preparation for full implementation of the Reading Ignite components in

Year 2.

Grant purpose. The Reading Ignite Literacy Grant Program is designed to distribute ESEA Title I, Part

A 1003(a) funds to schools and districts to embed the essential components of supplemental reading

instruction into all elements of the teaching structures for kindergarten up to sixth grade in eligible Title I

elementary schools. These structures include targeted and intensive instructional interventions in order to

25

assist students in achieving reading competency. These structures should be embedded into the school’s

Title I program.

Funded activities. Funds may be used to embed the essential components of reading instruction

into all elements of the K-6 teaching structures in eligible Title I elementary schools. Required activities

(funded by the grant) include:

Using a Literacy Coach;

Purchasing or using DIBELS Next or Indicadores Dinámicos del Éxito en la Lectura (IDEL)

Assessment Materials;

Using a DIBELS compliant online data collection tool (e.g., Amplify mCLASS, DIBELSnet);

Attending Networking Days (two per year/Denver area); and

On-going, on-site implementation coaching/consulting assistance selected from the READ Act

resource bank advisory list of professional development (at least monthly).

Funds could also be used for:

Purchasing Supplemental Reading Materials;

Providing staff stipends to attend Professional Development if not occurring within the school

day, or substitute pay if the Professional Development occurs during the school day.

Grant outcomes. The grant is designed to achieve the following outcomes (listed below). The Year 1

progress report indicated that HOPE is in the process of achieving these conditions and will work toward full

implementation in Year 2 of the grant.

That a Reading Ignite School Leadership Team (SLT) has been established, meets regularly, and

has been providing oversight of the grant implementation;

That the established instructional systems related to the teaching of reading for all K-6 students

are based on Scientifically Based Reading Research (SBRR);

That the reading professional development provided is significantly more frequent than the year

prior to implementation and ensures all principals and teachers, including teachers providing

interventions for students, have the skills necessary to understand the infrastructure that

enable increased reading achievement for K-6 students and consequently effectively teach all

children to read;

That interim and diagnostic assessments as listed in the CDE READ Act State Board approved

lists of interim and diagnostic assessments pursuant to the READ Act

(www.cde.state.co.us/coloradoliteracy/ReadAct/resourcebank) are being used to inform

instruction;

That the SLT has provided support in implementing universal/core programs and programs

designed for targeted and intensive instructional interventions, as listed in the CDE READ Act

advisory list of instructional programming

(www.cde.state.co.us/coloradoliteracy/ReadAct/programming);

That the SLT has provided assistance in scheduling testing of students and interpreting

assessment data, including scheduling of progress monitoring of students that are reading

below grade level; and,

http://www.cde.state.co.us/coloradoliteracy/ReadAct/resourcebank

http://www.cde.state.co.us/coloradoliteracy/ReadAct/programming

26

That implementation of the Reading Ignite Literacy Grant Program has been and continues to be

monitored through the use of the Literacy Evaluation Tool.

School Improvement Support

HOPE Online Elementary and Middle schools were both awarded School Improvement Support (SIS)

planning and implementation grants in 2014.

Grant purpose. The purpose of this grant is to provide funds to eligible Title I schools to support a

focused approach to improvement in the following areas:

Planning: Evaluation by external provider and action planning; or data analysis and action

planning.

Implementation: Activities related to best first instruction; leadership; positive climate and

culture; and/or extended learning opportunities.

Funded activities. The SIS grant supported a diagnostic review for HOPE Online Elementary and

Middle as a part of the planning portion of the grant. The SIS grant also funded curriculum specialists and

the development of curriculum materials.

Title I Multi-District Online Learning Pilot Program

While Title I funds are formula funds (and not competitive grants), it is important to note that the

State Board of Education ensured additional Title I funding for HOPE through the Title I Multi-District Online

Learning Pilot Program (initiated in May 2014 for a pilot starting in the 2014-15 school year). As the majority

of students enrolled at HOPE are not residents of Douglas County, the Title I allocation for Douglas County

was not calculated based on HOPE students. (Title I allocations are based on the census data of the

geographic district.) The State Board noted this issue and created a two year pilot program to explore

alternate Title I allocation methods that might result in greater alignment between the districts that are

providing services to Title I students and the Title I funding they receive. As a result, starting in 2014-15,

Douglas County’s Title I allocation was based on inclusion of HOPE students. As displayed in the table below,

the district, and HOPE Online received significantly more funding starting in 2014-15 with the beginning of

the pilot project.

Table 5. Title IA Funding for Douglas County School District

Year Douglas County Total Allocation

Title I Funding for HOPE Schools

Title I Funding for Other Douglas County Schools

Title IA Set Aside/Admin Costs

2012-13 945,644 737,480 - 208,164

2013-14 933,431 727,285 - 206,146

2014-15* 1,669,062 1,239,174 259,394 170,494

2015-16 1,833,725 1,228,107 268,256 337,362

2016-17 1,815,425 1,020,837 336,915 457,673

* Start of the pilot project

27

The pilot project has not only allowed HOPE to better serve students with over $500,000 additional dollars,

and expanded services to the middle and high school levels, but has also enabled Douglas County to serve

additional students in two schools in the district with Title I funds. In 2016-17, Douglas County School

District allocated Title IA funding as follows:

HOPE Elementary = $780,118

HOPE Middle = $138,798

HOPE High = $101,921

Two (2) additional elementary schools

The funding for HOPE Online is being used for:

15 FTE (Salary and benefits) for ELA/math teachers to provide additional instructional time in

reading for students to supplement general classroom and online instruction. Mileage, cell phones

and laptops are provided to support their work.

4.5 FTE (Salary and benefits) for instructional Paraprofessionals to support additional instructional

time in reading for students to supplement general classroom and online instruction. Mileage, cell

phones and laptops are provided to support their work.

Supplies to support this program.

Turnaround Network

The purpose of the Turnaround Network is to provide support, professional development and grant

resources for schools with Priority Improvement and Turnaround Plan types. Schools participating in the

network are required to engage their district in all of the improvement activities. Schools in the network

typically use grant resources to pay for diagnostic reviews, professional development opportunities for

teachers and leaders, and additional time for teachers and staff to engage in PD and planning.

The Turnaround Network application process has two phases – an initial application and a follow-up

diagnostic review to ensure the school’s needs were a good match for the Turnaround Network support.

HOPE online applied for the Turnaround Network in the spring of 2015 and was accepted for the first phase.

The school received a grant of $30,000 to engage in a diagnostic review and additional planning time. The

diagnostic review was conducted by Mass Insight Education and a summary report was generated and

shared. After the diagnostic review, CDE and the school determined that the support provided by the

Network would not be a good fit for HOPE’s school structure. The Network structure and professional

development is largely geared towards developing school culture and intensive teacher coaching by

principals, and principal coaching by principal supervisors. Given HOPE’s staffing model, this support

structure provided by the Network would be less relevant for HOPE. As a result, HOPE did not participate in

the Turnaround Network, but was able to leverage the feedback from the diagnostic review to focus their

improvement plan.

School Turnaround Leaders Development grant

The School Turnaround Leaders Development grant program is a competitive grant through which

districts and charter schools can apply for funds to support teacher leaders, principals, and district staff to

28

attend identified turnaround leadership development programs. HOPE applied for this grant in 2016.

Through the review process, it was determined that HOPE’s application did not earn enough points to be

funded. Written feedback was shared with the school and articulated the primary reasons for denial being

that the school and learning center staffing structure did not match with the designed training targets of the

chosen leadership provider programs. With the lack of clarity about HOPE’s accountability and support

structures between the school and the learning center staff, the application was not clear or specific enough

to describe how a training program would address the school’s needs.

CDE staff have reviewed the State Review Panel’s reports from 2015 and 2016, which were based on

document reviews and site visits. The State Review Panel reports recommend management by a public or

private entity for HOPE Online Elementary School and Middle School. The 2015 reports rate HOPE’s

elementary and middle schools as “Developing” in all areas except for adequacy of infrastructure in the

elementary school, which was rated as “Effective” (see Tables 6 and 7). Both HOPE Elementary and Middle

Schools received lower ratings on the 2016 State Review Panel reports. The Panel found the schools to be

“Developing” on three criteria and “Not Effective” on two criteria—the adequacy of infrastructure and the

likelihood of positive returns on investments of assistance and supports (see Tables 8 and 9).

The 2016 report for the elementary school states, “the instructional leadership at the learning

center level continues to be a concern. Despite efforts to increase the presence of HOPE leadership at the

centers during the 2015-2016 school year, HOPE lacks evidence of high quality instruction as observed

during the site visit.” As such, the 2016 State Review Panel “believes that the school would benefit from an

external management company to assist with all areas of operational and instructional leadership and/or a

reconstituted Board of Directors.” The 2015 Panel report also recommended management to provide, in

particular, support for HOPE leadership in training, developing, and retaining effective instructional staff.

Table 6: 2015 State Review Panel Site Visit Summary for HOPE Online Elementary School

SRP Site Visit Summary Capacity Level*

1. The leadership is adequate to implement change to improve results. Developing

2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Effective

3. There is readiness and apparent capacity of personnel to plan effectively and lead the implementation of appropriate action to improve student academic performance.

Developing

4. There is readiness and apparent capacity to engage productively with and benefit from the assistance provided by an external partner.

Developing

5. There is likelihood of positive returns on state investments of assistance and support to improve the performance within the current management structure and staffing.

Developing

6. There is necessity that the school/district remain in operation to serve students. Yes

*Capacity levels include: Not Effective, Developing, Effective and Highly Effective

29

Table 7: 2015 State Review Panel Site Visit Summary for HOPE Online Middle School



2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Developing


Developing


Developing


Developing

6. There is necessity that the school/district remain in operation to serve students. Yes

*Capacity levels include: Not Effective, Developing, Effective and Highly Effective Table 8: 2016 State Review Panel Site Visit Summary for HOPE Online Elementary School



2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Not Effective


Developing


Developing


Not Effective

6. There is necessity that the school/district remain in operation to serve students. No


Table 9: 2016 State Review Panel Site Visit Summary for HOPE Online Middle School



2. The infrastructure is adequate to support school improvement. Not Effective


Developing


Developing


Not Effective

6. There is necessity that the school/district remain in operation to serve students. No


30

The 2015 Panel made additional suggestions for the management pathway. They concluded that

implementing the pathway could also mean restructuring the school to identify as a blended learning model,

as opposed to an online model. The report states,

The school is currently categorized as an online charter school, but the model for both elementary

and middle school is not truly online. The model includes centers where students are required to

attend and receive both offline and online teaching. Shifting the management entity by removing

the online charter authorization and re-establishing the school as a blended learning program could

result in an increase in state funding and support. (2015 SRP, p 2)

The 2015 Panel also envisioned a management pathway whereby the school’s authorizer

relationship is restructured. The report suggested that exploring a charter through a state authorizer instead

of Douglas County “could benefit students throughout the state, as resources can be more equitably

distributed and additional supports provided outside of the bounds of Douglas County.” The Panel stated,

however, that they found the relationship between Douglas County and HOPE to be strong.

The 2015 State Review Panel found that there is a necessity for the school to remain in operation,

noting that “the school has a high number of ELL, transient, at-risk and low income students and has

successfully implemented services and academic programming to support the needs and gaps of this group.”

The Panel also cited the school’s ability to serve as community-based centers for families. The 2016 State

Review Panel report came to a different conclusion. That report notes,

“The State Review Panel found that there is not a necessity that the school remain in operation to

serve students. There are other online and brick and mortar programs that are serving similar

students and showing better results. Although the general sentiment from HOPE staff is that the

current students are disenfranchised from the traditional school system, the site visit and document

review provided no data to confirm this. The students who are served by HOPE are not in a remote

community, and the majority of students live in geographic areas with a variety of other academic

choices.” (2016 SRP, p 2)

31

The Department used the following rubric to evaluate the proposed management plan from HOPE Online Learning Academy. The rubric was developed

to assess whether the plan, if implemented, will have significant, rapid and positive impact on student learning. A check mark indicates the

management plan met the stated criteria.

Management Plan Overview X Meets expectations □ Partially meets expectations □ Does not meet expectations

Plan Component Rating of Evidence Notes

Need for Management Partner

Meets Expectations Comments

Plan provides a clear and compelling rationale for pursuing a management partnership.

Provides clear rationale for why the district is selecting the management accountability clock pathway for the identified Priority Improvement/Turnaround school(s) or district.

Gives in-depth description of the district and/or school’s most pressing areas of need that the management partner will help address and support.

Explicitly explains how the management partnership will result in a greater level of success for student learning.

The plan provides rationale for their focus on management and governance as pathway options. The plan states that “HOPE will not achieve a dramatic increase in student achievement without the support of a Management Partner. The level of planning implementation and evaluation that is required is beyond the scope of current HOPE leaders and staff.”

The plan identifies talent management, academic systems, and accountability for student learning as the most pressing areas of need, and describes why focusing on talent management in particular is their strategy.

Whereas the plan describes much about the management partnership, the plan does not explain why the current HOPE staff need the management partners in order to accomplish this work.

Mission & Vision Meets Expectations Comments

Plan articulates a vision and mission that reflects high expectations for student learning and

States a mission and vision that provides a clear and concise picture of what the school/district aims to achieve.

Demonstrates how the management partner will help the school/district advance its vision and

The school’s mission and vision articulate their desire to serve underrepresented students by engaging with adults and resources from local communities. The plan includes a thoughtful theory of action.

32

sets goals for improving academic outcomes as a result of the management partnership.

mission. Outlines the district’s plan for providing

differentiated support to the school, including changes to organizational structures, routines, or systems.

Identifies actionable goals for student academic achievement

Establishes a vision for how the district and/or school will earn its way off the accountability clock.

HOPE is proposing that the management partner focus on one of the major improvement areas of the school – talent management – to help the school advance its mission and vision.

District Systems Meets Expectations Comments

Plan describes district flexibilities and resources that will be granted to allow for the agreed upon scope of work.

Describes any flexibility or changes in district policies and practices that will be granted to the school(s) as a result of the management partnership.

Outlines the district’s plan for providing differentiated support to the school, including changes to organizational structures, routines, or systems.

Describes the district’s plan or changes in allocating resources (financial or personnel) to ensure the success of the management plan.

The plan states that the “district relies on the HOPE Governing Board to provide oversight and accountability,” but given that the charter school is at the end of the clock the district will also support and provide oversight for the HOPE management plan. The management partner will provide reports to the district, HOPE administration and the HOPE governing board. The district will work to provide an appropriate balance between autonomy and accountability. Further, the district will base renewal of HOPE’s charter contract contingent upon greater student achievement. Specific expectations for student achievement improvements should be delineated in reference to the DCSD’s decision to continue HOPE’s charter contract in 2018.

These details around the district’s involvement are helpful and demonstrate a willingness of the district to play the authorizer’s role of holding the school accountable to student outcomes. The documents provided to CDE outline some details about the board’s functioning and reporting processes. The plan indicates the formation of an “Academic Excellence Committee” which will “help the full board evaluate HOPE’s ‘bottom line,’ its student achievement data.” The plan would be stronger if it included clear

33

criteria about what will define success at HOPE and at each learning center. CDE will be very interested to see what the board and this committee articulate in the coming months.

The plan describes the “reconstitution and re-engagement” of the governing board to include adding two additional members to the board that have experience in education and accountability. This change may not be sufficient to meet the Commissioner’s recommendations nor the statutory pathway of replacing the governing board. It will be important that the HOPE governing board and the district play an objective accountability role as the school enters into year 6 on the accountability clock.

School Design Plan □ Meets expectations X Partially meets expectations □ Does not meet expectations


Academic Systems Meets Expectations Comments

Plan articulates what strategies, the school will focus on that are related to academic systems.

For schools or districts implementing changes to academic systems, please address the following elements. If a school or district is not making changes in these areas, provide rationale for not making changes. Articulate proposed changes to curriculum and

instruction at the school in response to school needs. Discusses any special academic/curricular themes and addresses how the chosen instructional methods are expected to improve school performance and student achievement and are necessary for the school to achieve its mission

Provides an overview of the school’s proposed assessment plan, including a description of any assessments that will supplement those required

The plan recognizes significant needs around academic systems and articulates the multiple steps the school has already taken to improve curriculum, instruction and assessment. The management partner will not oversee academic systems, however HOPE’s plan draws connections between the academic needs of the school and the talent challenges that will be addressed by the management partner. The management partner is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the UIP, which contains many of the action steps needed to continue improvement of the academic systems.

The plan begins to describe differentiated instruction and the need to better serve all students, in particular students with special needs and English language learners. Given that academic achievement rating for each sub-group on the SPFs are all “does not meet,” it is recommended that serving special populations of students be addressed more directly.

34

by the district and the state Describes the school’s approach to provide

personalized and differentiated instruction that best meets the needs of all students, especially students with disabilities and English Language Learners.

Describes what changes to the school schedule or calendar will occur and articulates how the changes will address current barriers and lead to increased student achievement.

The plans to enhance academic accountability do not provide sufficient description. How will an additional position at HOPE serve this need? What might a tiered process of interventions for underperforming learning centers look like? Why has this not been developed to date? What can be done to ensure learning centers see greater student gains?

Culture of Performance


Plan articulates what strategies, the school or district focus on that are related to culture of performance.

For schools or districts implementing changes to school culture, please address the following elements. If a school or district is not making changes in these areas, provide rationale for not making changes.

NA Articulates changes to the systems, programs, structures, rituals, and routines the school will use to foster a positive school culture for all students and teachers.

Describes plan to engage regularly, frequently, and effectively with parents and guardians, external stakeholders and the community at large.

HOPE’s management proposal does not include oversight related to Culture of Performance, and does not offer changes in this area. The plan, however, does describe some practices HOPE is using to engage parents. HOPE manages learning centers indirectly and thus has more limited control of the day-to-day climate and culture than in a traditional school. A culture of high expectations and accountability for high quality instruction and student learning is something HOPE is striving for, but it remains inconsistent across learning centers. While this area is somewhat addressed in the management plan, it is not an area of focus for the proposed partnership.

Talent Management Meets Expectations Comments

Plan articulates what strategies, the school or district will focus on that are related to talent management.

For schools or districts implementing changes to talent management systems, please address the following elements. If a school or district is not making changes in these areas, provide rationale for not making changes.

The management plan focuses on talent management as a challenge.

The school’s goal of recruiting from local communities is admirable.

35

Provides an overview of the school’s recruitment and staffing plan and explains how these changes will produce gains in academic achievement.

Explains how plans for professional development differ from the school’s current practice and/or district requirements and why these changes are necessary.

Describes changes to the processes and criteria used to support the strategic evaluation and retention of highly effective teachers and staff, including incentives and compensation.

The plan includes plans to conduct an assessment of professional learning needs across HOPE and learning center staff. This assessment will drive professional development offering. Consider adding more detail about what specific professional development is needed to bring current staff to a higher level of instructional practice.

The plan lacks details about systematic observation, evaluation, and feedback cycles. Including the further detail on the evaluation of teachers and mentors and clarifying the management partner’s role in those processes would strengthen the plan.

The plan builds on the assumption that the school will/must continue to operate by recruiting and hiring the instructional staff with the same skill level as they currently have. Are there other methods to staff the school with instructors with the needed skills?

The plan would also be more compelling if recruitment, selection, and qualifications of learning center leaders was considered, along with the higher standards sought for mentors.

Management Partner □ Meets expectations X Partially meets expectations □ Does not meet expectations


Selection of Partner Meets Expectations Comments

Plan describes the process the district used to select the partner and ensure management partner has a track record of success in supporting schools in identified areas of need.

❏ Plan describes a rigorous process of recruitment, vetting and selection of partner.

❏ Selection process demonstrates verifiable, quantitative data that demonstrates the partner’s past effectiveness in improvement in schools with similar needs and similar demographics. Where appropriate, names and qualifications of key staff members assigned to the school are provided.

The plan states that the management partners were selected by the CEO and Board President. A systems-wide objective selection process including more staff and/or district staff may have ensured broader commitment to the partners. The plan identifies two individuals to serve as management partners. Whereas they will have decision-making roles, they appear to act more as consultants than embedded partners.

36

Justifies why the scope of work is appropriate given school/district needs (e.g., if only seeking a targeted management partnership, why and how is the targeted approach appropriate?).

Articulates how the partner’s services and approach will align to and support current district needs. Explains how the partner will directly support the school or district’s plan for improvement.

The plan briefly describes a process of searching, recruiting and vetting the individual partners. The plan includes criteria used to identify partners as well as the selected partners’ resumes.

The plan identifies talent management (recruitment, professional development, staffing quality, and accountability) as a focus area. Increasing the quality of instruction is the ultimate goal so the talent management partners need to ensure they focus their work on attaining this goal.

Scope of Work Meets Expectations Comments

Plan describes one or more targeted areas the management partner will focus on in the district and/or school. Plan also provides a timeline for the implementation of the management partnership activities.

Includes a clear and concise overview of the scope of services to be implemented by the management partner.

Provides detailed explanation of the agreed upon targeted areas for support for the school/district.

Includes a timeline that thoroughly outlines implementation of the scope of services. Plan should be practical but also demonstrate urgency for pulling the school/district off the accountability clock.

The Scope of Work includes key services to be provided by the partners. The plan begins to address accountability for learning but lacks compelling detail as to how this will be addressed. The tasks identified in the plan for the partners and school staff begin to describe key services and timelines for implementation. Questions remain from these descriptions about the work of the partners and immediate outcomes. The focus on professional development seeks to provide more training to an already under-skilled instructional staff. An additional focus on recruiting skilled staff is recommended.

Performance Contract/MOU


The district and management partner should enter into a comprehensive performance contract/memorandum of understanding

The plan includes a copy of the contract/MOU between the district and the management partner. It clearly outlines the terms of the performance partnership, including (where applicable):

Comprehensive Services • Length of contract (suggested to be 2-4 years)

The plan includes a copy of the draft contract between the school and the management partners. The draft contract outlines decision-making responsibilities that the partners will have. It would be helpful, however, to know the actual activities expected of the partners on a weekly/monthly basis.

37

(MOU) that specifically outlines the terms of the performance partnership.

• Management fees, budget autonomy and fundraising

o Includes description of resources necessary to sustain the partnership for duration of the contract

• Terms of termination initiated by the district or the management partner. Description of process the district and partner will follow in the case of disagreements of judgment or scope of work as outlined in contract/MOU.

• Relevant responsibility for Non-Academic Operations (e.g., facilities, maintenance and operations, accounting, payroll and HR, technology infrastructure, dining services, transportation, school security, procurement.)

Responsibilities, rights, and authorities of the management partner and the district • Articulates what specific management authority

the partner will hold that will be significant and meaningful to addressing the identified school/district needs.

• The management partner’s rights and responsibilities should include any autonomies around academic systems, talent management and culture as specified above in the school design plan. The plan should describe the degree and type of decision-making control that the partner may exercise.

• Establishes clear lines of reporting, responsibility, and supervision of district-partner relationship.

• District responsibilities should include providing the partner with a direct contact/advocate

The plan provides some details about the roles and responsibilities the management partners will play with school staff, the governing board, and the district liaison. This description can be strengthened by adding more details about the decision-making body that spans the school, partners, governing board, and district. The plan does not include details about how the management partner or HOPE will be held accountable for the outcomes related to the scope of work.

The plan provides more detail about how HOPE might intervene if a learning center does not meet outcome expectation, but additional detail about how learning centers are evaluated is needed. The plan also indicates that the district liaison will have oversight, reporting, and dispute-resolution responsibilities. More detail is needed here with explanation as to how that shift will impact the time and role of the district liaison. How would such dispute resolution occur? The plan indicates that the management partner will “recommend the removal of teachers from the licensure pathway if adequate progress is not being made”. How is adequate progress defined? Management partners will “carry equal weight as that of the HOPE staff” in hiring and firing of learning center staff. Does this include all learning center staff? Is this a function that HOPE staff already have with personnel decisions at learning centers? The plan describes a “school-level decision-making body” to “provide overall governance of the PD planning.” This group and their decision-making process should be described further.

38

within the district system, continuing services as needed (e.g., purchased services), and ensuring compliance of the partner and school.

• Partner responsibilities should include the number and qualifications of partner staff who will be embedded within the district or school(s) and should articulate their roles and responsibilities.

Accountability for student achievement and assessment of success: • Addresses performance accountability, including

fidelity of implementation and effectiveness at raising student achievement.

• Includes specific benchmarks and timelines for program implementation and performance outputs.

• Includes agreements on shared access to data and leading and lagging indicators of performance.

• Identifies supports and interventions for deviating performance, and remedies available to either party if there is failure to make reasonable progress toward mutually agreed-upon performance benchmarks.

The management partners will have oversight of implementing the UIP. The UIP includes improvement areas outside of the scope of what is described in this plan. The scope of and process for oversight over the UIP implementation needs to be clarified and detailed.

39

Summary Overall Rationale

CDE has determined that

the proposed

Management Plan draft

dated 3/13 has been

improved from the

2/27/17 draft and

partially meets the

standards described

above.

The plan provides enough detail to begin to understand how HOPE intends to use a management partner to address talent and accountability challenges. The plan’s focus on human capital challenges lays out some major areas on which to focus this work, namely recruitment, professional development, and evaluation of instructional staff.

The plan begins to address the need for greater accountability for student learning throughout the HOPE organization. This area needs to be developed in greater detail and should explain relationships between the school, learning centers, the governing board, the district and the management partners, and the criteria and data that they use to determine sufficient progress.

The specifics of the restructuring the governing board needs to be addressed more. Additionally, as various reporting cycles are named in the plan, it would be helpful to have one table describing the reporting that will occur, what data shall be reported, to whom it shall be reported, by whom, and on what cycle and frequency.

With the multiple revisions and addenda, this plan begins to address CDE’s standards, as outlined in this rubric, to address the improvement efforts needed to meet the educational needs of the students at HOPE Online.

40

State law requires that the Colorado State Board of Education and the Colorado Department of

Education hold all districts and schools accountable for student performance (C.R.S. 22-11-101 et al.).

The state annually evaluates student performance in districts and schools through a set of consistent,

objective measures, and then uses this information to inform rewards, sanctions, and supports. Districts

and schools assigned to a Priority Improvement or Turnaround plan have the lowest performing student

outcomes of all districts and schools in Colorado, according to the state’s primary accountability tool—

the District and School Performance Framework (DPF/SPF) reports. The DPF and SPF reports are based

on key Performance Indicators that the state has determined to be most indicative of how prepared

students are for college and career: achievement, growth, and postsecondary and workforce readiness,

which each indicator including the disaggregated results for different student groups. Districts and

schools on Priority Improvement or Turnaround plans tend to be falling short of state expectations for

students in each of these areas. Guidance on the 2016 School and District Performance Frameworks can

be accessed at: http://www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/performanceframeworksresources.

Pursuant to the Education Act of 2009, Article 11 of Title 22, C.R.S., a district or the Charter

School Institute (Institute) may not remain Accredited with Priority Improvement Plan or Accredited

with Turnaround Plan for longer than five consecutive years before the State Board removes the

district’s/Institute’s accreditation. In State Board of Education rules, 1 CCR 301-1, section 5.07, the

calculation of the five consecutive years begins July 1 of the summer immediately following the fall in

which the district/Institute is notified that it is Accredited with Priority Improvement Plan or Accredited

with Turnaround Plan.

The Education Act of 2009, Article 11 of Title 22, C.R.S., outlines similar consequences for

schools. Schools may not implement a Priority Improvement or Turnaround Plan for longer than five

consecutive years before the district or Institute is required to restructure or close the school. According

to State Board of Education rules, 1 CCR 301-1, section 10.05, the calculation of the five consecutive

years begins July 1 of the summer immediately following the fall in which the school is notified that it

must implement a Priority Improvement or Turnaround Plan.

These statutory timelines are referred to as the “Accountability Clock.” The processes associated

with each typical year of the clock, from the notification/planning Year 0 to the final Year 6, including

actions directed by the State Board of Education at the end of the Accountability Clock, are detailed in

the timeline below.

Following the passage of HB15-1323, accreditation ratings and school plan types were not

assigned in Fall 2015. As a result, the 2015-16 school year was removed from the calculation of five

consecutive school years for both school districts and individual schools. This one year pause means that

the 2016-17 school year resumes where the 2014-15 school year left off in terms of the accountability

clock.

The Accountability Clock is in effect for a district or school as long as it is assigned a Priority

Improvement or Turnaround Plan. The Accountability Clock stops for a district or school once the State

Board adopts an SPF/DPF with a rating of Improvement or higher. At that point, the district or school

would be considered to have exited Priority Improvement or Turnaround status. If a district or school is

on Turnaround and moves to Priority Improvement the Accountability Clock continues and is not reset.

http://www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/performanceframeworksresources

41

If a school or district receives a plan type of Priority Improvement or Turnaround for more than

five consecutive years, then the State Board of Education must direct an action to the local board of

education. The State Board has discretion to take action prior to the end of the Accountability Clock for

schools and districts with Turnaround plans.

Schools and districts on the Accountability Clock for any period of time should be implementing

research-based strategies of appropriate scope and intensity to improve student outcomes. After five

consecutive years, the local board will be directed by the State Board of Education as to which strategy,

or pathway, to pursue. This may include school closure, converting schools to a charter school, working

with an external management partner, seeking innovation status for a school or group of schools, or

district reorganization. In considering appropriate actions, the State Board will refer to

recommendations from the State Review Panel and from the Commissioner of Education. School

districts may also provide a proposal for their preferred pathway to the State Board.

For more information on the accountability clock, please visit: http://www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/accountability_clock.

Since 2010-11, CDE has reviewed HOPE Online’s UIP and provided feedback to the school. The school

has a history of addressing most of the Quality Criteria, with revisions recommended and in a few cases,

required changes needed. As the school progressed on the accountability clock, the feedback shifted

from emphasis on prioritizing performance challenges and root causes to strengthening the action plan

to ensure implementation would result in dramatic enough change.

School Year

Required Changes

Summary of Required Changes

2016-17 Changes recommended.

Overall, the plan addresses last year’s feedback and is more effective in all areas. The plans includes a variety of local data to supplement state data and includes in-depth analysis that lays the foundation for later sections of the plan. The school effectively described the history of their improvement planning efforts, including past strategies and an explanation of why the school is shifting to different strategies for the 2016-17 and 2017-18 school years. The plan includes reflections that are both informative and transparent and demonstrate the school’s sense of urgency for improvement. The chosen major improvement strategies may be strong enough to pull schools from the accountability clock, if implemented well. The associated action steps (including resources and personnel needed for implementation) suggest that it is manageable approach. As improvement efforts continue, the school should revise implementation benchmarks as some listed are action steps.

2015-16 Changes needed -- increased concern because of advancement on clock

While the middle school and elementary school submitted separate plans addressing individual needs, the action steps are similar and it is not clear whether the plan, if implemented as written, will result in dramatic enough change for a school entering Year 5 of Turnaround. Although similar action steps are appropriate in many areas, both plans would be strengthened by differentiating the needs of the elementary school verses the middle school. In both plans, the data narrative includes a thorough data analysis and clear identification of the school's performance challenges. The plan effectively provides context for the schools and describes improvement efforts currently underway as well as results from external reviews.

http://www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/accountability_clock

42


As written, the UIP reflects a thorough and thoughtful data analysis including effective use of local data. The plan makes connections between the data analysis, priority performance challenges and root causes and provides updates on implementation progress. The major improvement strategies provide an ambitious, yet reasonable, plan to address the identified root causes, and the associated action steps provide adequate detail to guide implementation. Continue to closely monitor implementation to ensure the plan is being carried out as intended and that actions are leading to the desired improvements in student outcomes.

2013-14

Changes needed.

The plan provides a description of the school and indicates staff and parent involvement. The plan also provides analyses of TCAP achievement and growth data. However, the data narrative does not specifically address the low achievement of subgroup students that led to the Title I Focus school designation. The plan includes too many priority performance challenges, making it difficult for the school to prioritize the most urgent needs to address. Similarly, too many root causes have been identified. Major improvement strategies appear to be appropriate and have the potential to create the necessary change for the targeted population. The plan states that the school will begin a separate planning process to create three plans in 2014-15. This change could strengthen the school's ability to focus on the differing challenges at each grade span. Conduct a more detailed root cause analysis.


The plan mostly met critical Quality Criteria and should provide a solid foundation for improvement planning. However, the recommended revisions found within the Feedback Form could strengthen improvement efforts. These include, but are not limited to: effectively identifying growth gaps; strengthening Priority Performance Challenges to appropriately reflect the magnitude of the schools challenges; reducing the number of listed root causes to narrow the focus of the plan; improving action plans to specific steps that can be progress monitored.

2011-12

Changes needed

Although the plan mostly meets critical Quality Criteria, there are areas where revisions could strengthen improvement efforts. The action plans only address the current school year and do not include steps for the 2012-13 school year. The plan includes numerous performance challenges. Consider narrowing the number by looking for overall trends in the data, combining those that are similar, and then prioritizing the list. The targets for increasing performance over time might not be set sufficiently high in order to, at a minimum, result in the school meeting state expectations within four years. Consider identifying how much the targets must increase each year in order for students to be proficient within four years and create more incremental targets.

2010-11

Changes needed.

The plan reflects a comprehensive data narrative. Consider digging deeper into root causes as this would likely yield higher leverage issues to improve student achievement. There is a description of stakeholder involvement. The plan reflects a thorough data analysis. The plan includes priority needs for a large variety of disaggregated groups in each indicator area. Consider making more explicit connections between root causes and significant trends. Although you have identified broad root causes, it is difficult to determine the degree to which your academic challenges will be addressed if you take these actions. Consider describing in more detail how your performance challenges will be eliminated or substantially dissolved if you address your root causes. The major improvement strategies listed do not have enough clarity to determine if they are research-based for your student population. The plan must explicitly address a turnaround strategy as a major improvement strategy.

43

Grant Name

Year Awarded & Award Amount

2011- 2012 2012- 2013 2013- 2014 2014- 2015 2015- 2016 2016- 2017

Reading Ignite $141,217 (funding continued from 2015-

16)

School Improvement Support (SIS)

$86,207

Turnaround Network $28,242

Expelled & At-Risk Student Services (EARSS)

$140,000 $129,115 $91,500

Title I-A funding for the elementary and middle school (this is not included in grant totals as this is formula funding)

$737,480 $727,285 $1,144,174 a $1,128,445 $918,916

Total $226,207 $298,574 $91,500

a Start of the Multi-District Online Pilot

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

Percent

17.0%

61.1%

16.3%

5.7%12.0%

71.5%

13.7%

72.1%

16.0%

9.5%

ENROLLMENT BY ETHNICITY2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

English Learners Percent

Free and Reduced LunchPercent

Special Education Percent

Gifted Percent

50.4%

71.6%

3.5%

48.3%

78.3%

4.2%

0.1%

45.7%

75.9%

4.7%

ENROLLMENT BY STUDENT GROUP

Attendance and Mobility RatesInformation includes calculated attendance rate and district mobility rate. Orange line indicates state average rate. Mobility rate calculation revised for 2013. Please reference SchoolView for additional

details.Data Source: CDE Education Statistics Page

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

1,508

1,751

1,150

TOTAL STUDENT ENROLLMENT

Percent Other Percent Black Percent Hispanic or Latino Percent White

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

95.8%93.4% 93.3%

Attendance Rate

2013-14 2014-15

10.1

24.0

Mobility Rate

Data notes: Information includes percent of students by race/ethnicity student group. ELL is defined as students who are NEP, LEP and FEP M1 and M2.Data source: October 1 Student Count

STUDENT DATA

SELECT A SCHOOLHOPE ONLINE LEARNING ACADEMY ELEMENTARY - DOUGLAS COUNTY RE 1

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS MATH

650 700 750 800 850Mean Scale Score


ALL GRADES ALL STUDENTS 714 712

CMAS PARCC - MATH AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTSThe following visual displays CMAS PARCC mean scale scores for math and English language art by grade and student group for 2015-16 school year. The visual includes the following elements: (1)state mean scale score presented as a vertical line in orange, (2) school mean scale score presented as a plus sign, (3) school mean scale score color coded based on the proportion of students whotook the assessments, and lastly (4) color band that identifies scores meeting assessment benchmark/state standards.

Category/S..Grade Year SCIENCE

300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900Mean Scale Score

ALLSTUDENTS

05 2014

2015

2016

493

491

521

CMAS - SCIENCEThe following visual displays of CMASS science mean scale scores by student group, grade, and year. The visual includes the following three elements: (1) state mean scale score presented as avertical line in orange, (2) school mean scale score presented as a plus sign, and finally (3) the school mean scale score color coded based on the proportion of students who took the assessment.

COLORADO ACTThe chart below displays the results from the Colorado ACT, including the overall (composite) score, English, Math, Reading and Science disaggregated by student group. The plussigns represent the school's ACT results and the orange lines represent the state average. For groups that meet the minimum N-count threshold (i.e., at least 16 students took andreceived a valid test score), the results are displayed below. Cursor mouse over each bar to see detailed results.

SUBJECTCOMPOSITE

ENGLISH

MATH

READING

SCIENCE

CATEGORYALL STUDENTS

ASSESSMENT DATA - SCHOOL RESULTS


Particpation Color Key95% or greater, High Particpation

Between 85% and 94%, Caution

No Participation Data

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTSSCHOOL

2016DISTRICT

2016STATE

2016

MATHSCHOOL

2016DISTRICT

2016STATE

2016

ALL STUDENTS All Students

GRADE LEVEL 04

05

ENGLISH LEARNERS English Learners (NEP, LEP, FEP)

Non-English Learners

FREE AND REDUCEDLUNCH (FRL)

FRL-Eligible

Non-FRL

GENDER Female

Male

GIFTED Gifted and Talented

Non-Gifted and Talented

INDIVIDUALIZEDEDUCATION PLAN (IEP)

On IEP

Non-IEP

MIGRANT Migrant

Non-Migrant

MINORITY Minority

Non-Minority

PERFORMANCE LEVEL At or Above Benchmark

Below Benchmark

RACE/ETHNICITY American Indian or Alaska Native

Asian

Black

Hispanic

White

Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

Two or More Races

36.0 46.0 50.0 36.0 48.0 50.0

41.0

32.0

45.0

46.0

50.0

50.0

40.0

32.5

47.0

50.0

50.0

50.0

29.5

43.0

45.0

50.0

50.0

49.0

28.0

43.0

49.0

47.0

51.0

47.0

29.5

38.0

46.0

40.0

53.0

47.0

40.0

35.5

49.0

42.0

53.0

46.0

32.0

38.0

42.0

49.0

46.0

54.0

38.0

33.5

48.0

49.0

49.0

51.0

36.0 44.0

54.0

49.0

61.0

36.0 48.0

55.0

49.0

60.0

38.0 46.0

33.0

52.0

36.0

36.0 49.0

46.0

51.0

41.0

36.0 46.0 50.0

45.0

35.5 48.0 50.0

42.0

28.0

38.0

46.0

45.0

51.0

48.0

24.0

37.0

49.0

47.0

52.0

47.0

38.0

28.0

47.0

43.0

50.0

50.0

37.0

22.0

50.0

46.0

50.0

50.0

28.0

39.5

45.0

46.0

43.0

36.0

57.0

38.0

52.0

52.0

51.0

47.0

48.0

59.0

47.0

24.0

38.0

45.0

49.0

45.0

37.0

53.0

50.0

51.0

58.0

52.0

46.0

45.0

60.0

45.0

Growth metrics provide another view of the performance of a school, district or group of students. While achievement is focused on the performance at a point in time, growth provides an indication ofwhat happens in-between the assessments. Looking at both achievement and growth results provides a more in-depth picture of performance.

Growth rates for individual students are calculated by analyzing students’ Colorado Measures of Academic Success (CMAS) scores in English Language Arts and Math over consecutive years. Astudent's growth percentile (ranging from 1 to 99) indicates how a student’s performance changed over time, relative to students with a similar score history on the state assessments. School and districtgrowth rates are determined by the growth percentiles from individual students, specifically the median (or score in the middle) student growth percentile. Median Growth Percentiles (MGP) arecalculated for the whole school, by grade, and by different student groups. Higher median growth percentiles indicate higher growth rates for the typical students in those groups. Please note that growthrates are independent of achievement levels (students at all achievement levels are just as likely to have high growth as low growth). As a point of reference, the state median growth percentile for anygrade, overall, is 50. In rare cases, state median growth percentiles may vary slightly.

Missing data in the table reflect fewer than 20 students in the group; their data is not shown in the table (the cells are blank) to ensure data privacy and appropriate interpretation of results. Foradditional definitions and information go to: www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/coloradogrowthmodel


1.0 99.0Median Growth Percentile

50

ACCOUNTABILITYSelect a SchoolHOPE ONLINE LEARNING ACADEMY ELEMENTARY - DOUGLAS COUNTY RE 1

Please note that the displays on this tab will not be updated with new data in 2015-16, but will remain in the dashboard forreference. Because of the state assessment transition and the passage of H.B. 15-1323, school accountability measuresare affected. The following website provides additional details on the accountability system during the transition:http://www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/impact-of-assessment-transition-on-school-and-district-accountability

Select a data time span(For longitudinal data analysis, select either 1-year or 3-year)1 Year

SPF Key Indicator Ratings OverallNumber indicates percentage points earned on key indicator. Color of bar represents key performance indicator rating. Drop down menu at top of page indicates data time span. Data

Source: School Performance FrameworkColor Key

Exceeds Meets Approaching Does Not Meet

Achievement DataPercent of students scoring Proficient and Advanced. Color of bar represents rating for

sub-indicator. Drop down menu at top of page indicates data time span. Data Source: SchoolPerformance Framework

Growth DataMedian student growth percentile. Color of bar represents rating for sub-indicator. Drop

down menu at top of page indicates data time span. MAGP can be found onPerformance tab. Data Source: School Performance Framework

Growth Gaps DataUse the Performance Tab forinteractive diagnostic on growthgaps. View median and adequategrowth percentile by sub-group,by EMH level, and by subject for2008-2014 academic years.

Post Secondary and Workforce Readiness Data

Graduation Rating

ACT Rating

Dropout Rating

2014

A. OVERALL

B. ELEMENTARY

25.0

25.0

Achievement %

2014

28.6

28.6

Growth %

2014

26.7

26.7

Growth Gaps %

2014

Postsecondary %

2014

B. ELEMENTARY

42.2

Ach - Read

2014

36.2

Ach - Math

2014

19.6

Ach - Write

2014

Ach - Science

2014

B. ELEMENTARY

39

MGP - Read

2014

29

MGP - Math

2014

34

MGP - Write

2014

31

MGP - ELP

SPF Plan Type2014

A. OVERALL

B. ELEMENTARY Turnaround

Turnaround

2014

A. OVERALL

B. ELEMENTARY 27.3

27.3

SPF % Points Earned

The data in this tab relates to the traditional School Performance Framework. Data forschools that are AEC is not available. For AEC schools, please reference your SPF reporton SchoolView.org. The display below will indicate whether the school you've selected isan AEC.

2014NO

The below table indicates the plan type used (1-year or 3-Year)

2014A. OVERALL

B. ELEMENTARY 1 Year

1 Year

Year 5

Year Entering Priority Improvement or Turnaround

2014

STUDENT PERFORMANCESelect a SchoolHOPE ONLINE LEARNING ACADEMY ELEMENTARY - DOUGLAS COUNTY RE 1

Please note that the displays on this tab will not be updated with new data in 2015-16, but will remain in thedashboard for reference. Because of the state assessment transition and the passage of H.B. 15-1323, schoolaccountability measures are affected. The following website provides additional details on the accountabilitysystem during the transition: http://www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/impact-of-assessment-transition-on-school-..

Achievement: Percentage of Students Scoring Proficient or AboveThis interactive visual allows users to compare percentage of students proficient and advanced by sub-group.

Data Source: Data Lab; School-level inclusion/exclusion rules

2013-140.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Percent Proficient Advanced

36.1

33.8

28.1

8.1

30.5

Use the quick filters tocontrol what data is shown

on the chart.

Select a Subject:(choose one)Math

Reading

Writing

Select a Sub-group(choose one or many)All Students

ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority

Sub-group Color KeyAll Students

ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority

Growth: Median and Adequate Growth PercentilesThis interactive visual allows users to view MGP and AGP by Sub-group, by Subject, and by EMH level. Yellow bar should exceed green bar.

Data Source: Data Lab & CDE Calculated; School-level inclusion/exclusion rules

2013-140

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Growth Percentile

27

50

Use the quick filters tocontrol what data isshown on the chart.


Reading

Writing

Select a Sub-group(choose one)All Students

ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority

Growth Color KeyMedian Growth Percen..

Adequate Growth Perc..





2013-140.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0


41.9

36.5

33.3

13.5

34.7


on the chart.


Reading

Writing


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority



2013-140

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Growth Percentile

36

50



Reading

Writing


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority







2013-140.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0


19.5

16.9

12.5

5.4

15.1


on the chart.


Reading

Writing


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority



2013-140

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Growth Percentile

30

50



Reading

Writing


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority



2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

Percent

14.5%

64.0%

17.1%

70.8%

17.7%

8.2%

68.1%

19.4%

8.1%

ENROLLMENT BY ETHNICITY2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

English Learners Percent

Free and Reduced LunchPercent

Special Education Percent

Gifted Percent

48.9%

73.9%

7.0%

0.1%

43.3%

75.6%

8.3%

0.2%

37.7%

74.9%

10.6%

0.2%

ENROLLMENT BY STUDENT GROUP

Attendance and Mobility RatesInformation includes calculated attendance rate and district mobility rate. Orange line indicates state average rate. Mobility rate calculation revised for 2013. Please reference SchoolView for additional

details.Data Source: CDE Education Statistics Page

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

660724

530

TOTAL STUDENT ENROLLMENT

Percent Other Percent Black Percent Hispanic or Latino Percent White

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

95.2%92.2% 91.2%

Attendance Rate

2013-14 2014-15

13.9

21.5

Mobility Rate

Data notes: Information includes percent of students by race/ethnicity student group. ELL is defined as students who are NEP, LEP and FEP M1 and M2.Data source: October 1 Student Count

STUDENT DATA

SELECT A SCHOOLHOPE ONLINE LEARNING ACADEMY MIDDLE SCHOOL - DOUGLAS COUNTY RE 1

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS MATH



ALL GRADES ALL STUDENTS 711 709

CMAS PARCC - MATH AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTSThe following visual displays CMAS PARCC mean scale scores for math and English language art by grade and student group for 2015-16 school year. The visual includes the following elements: (1)state mean scale score presented as a vertical line in orange, (2) school mean scale score presented as a plus sign, (3) school mean scale score color coded based on the proportion of students whotook the assessments, and lastly (4) color band that identifies scores meeting assessment benchmark/state standards.

Category/S..Grade Year SCIENCE

300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900Mean Scale Score

ALLSTUDENTS

08 2014

2015

2016

487

472

467

CMAS - SCIENCEThe following visual displays of CMASS science mean scale scores by student group, grade, and year. The visual includes the following three elements: (1) state mean scale score presented as avertical line in orange, (2) school mean scale score presented as a plus sign, and finally (3) the school mean scale score color coded based on the proportion of students who took the assessment.

COLORADO ACTThe chart below displays the results from the Colorado ACT, including the overall (composite) score, English, Math, Reading and Science disaggregated by student group. The plussigns represent the school's ACT results and the orange lines represent the state average. For groups that meet the minimum N-count threshold (i.e., at least 16 students took andreceived a valid test score), the results are displayed below. Cursor mouse over each bar to see detailed results.

SUBJECTCOMPOSITE

ENGLISH

MATH

READING

SCIENCE

CATEGORYALL STUDENTS

ASSESSMENT DATA - SCHOOL RESULTS


Particpation Color Key95% or greater, High Particpation

Between 85% and 94%, Caution

No Participation Data

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTSSCHOOL

2016DISTRICT

2016STATE

2016

MATHSCHOOL

2016DISTRICT

2016STATE

2016ALL STUDENTS All Students

GRADE LEVEL 06

07

08

ENGLISH LEARNERS English Learners (NEP, LEP, FEP)

Non-English Learners

FREE AND REDUCEDLUNCH (FRL)

FRL-Eligible

Non-FRL

GENDER Female

Male

GIFTED Gifted and Talented

Non-Gifted and Talented

INDIVIDUALIZEDEDUCATION PLAN (IEP)

On IEP

Non-IEP

MIGRANT Migrant

Non-Migrant

MINORITY Minority

Non-Minority

PERFORMANCE LEVEL At or Above Benchmark

Below Benchmark

RACE/ETHNICITY American Indian or Alaska Native

Asian

Black

Hispanic

White

Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

Two or More Races

40.0 46.0 50.0 44.0 51.0 50.0

46.0

39.0

34.0

43.0

41.0

54.0

50.0

50.0

50.0

46.0

49.0

35.0

42.0

43.0

62.0

50.0

50.0

50.0

44.0

35.0

47.0

46.0

50.0

50.0

44.0

43.0

51.0

48.0

51.0

46.0

44.0

38.0

47.0

40.0

52.0

48.0

49.0

41.0

52.0

43.0

54.0

45.0

37.0

44.0

41.0

53.0

44.0

56.0

49.0

40.0

49.0

54.0

48.0

52.0

40.0 45.0

57.0

48.0

60.0

43.0 50.0

65.0

49.0

60.0

40.5

30.0

47.0

39.0

51.0

39.0

44.0

43.0

52.0

43.0

51.0

39.0

40.0 46.0 50.0

45.0

44.0 51.0 50.0

41.0

51.0

38.0

46.0

46.0

51.0

49.0

51.5

41.0

52.0

50.0

53.0

47.0

40.0

34.0

47.0

46.0

50.0

50.0

44.0

30.0

53.0

49.0

50.0

50.0

51.0

38.5

28.0

48.0

46.0

42.0

36.0

60.0

48.0

50.0

49.0

51.0

48.0

47.0

59.0

47.0

51.5

41.5

45.0

53.0

52.0

46.0

43.5

58.0

46.0

52.0

50.0

53.0

46.0

45.0

58.0

47.0

Growth metrics provide another view of the performance of a school, district or group of students. While achievement is focused on the performance at a point in time, growth provides an indication ofwhat happens in-between the assessments. Looking at both achievement and growth results provides a more in-depth picture of performance.

Growth rates for individual students are calculated by analyzing students’ Colorado Measures of Academic Success (CMAS) scores in English Language Arts and Math over consecutive years. Astudent's growth percentile (ranging from 1 to 99) indicates how a student’s performance changed over time, relative to students with a similar score history on the state assessments. School and districtgrowth rates are determined by the growth percentiles from individual students, specifically the median (or score in the middle) student growth percentile. Median Growth Percentiles (MGP) arecalculated for the whole school, by grade, and by different student groups. Higher median growth percentiles indicate higher growth rates for the typical students in those groups. Please note that growthrates are independent of achievement levels (students at all achievement levels are just as likely to have high growth as low growth). As a point of reference, the state median growth percentile for anygrade, overall, is 50. In rare cases, state median growth percentiles may vary slightly.

Missing data in the table reflect fewer than 20 students in the group; their data is not shown in the table (the cells are blank) to ensure data privacy and appropriate interpretation of results. Foradditional definitions and information go to: www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/coloradogrowthmodel


1.0 99.0Median Growth Percentile

50

ACCOUNTABILITYSelect a SchoolHOPE ONLINE LEARNING ACADEMY MIDDLE SCHOOL - DOUGLAS COUNTY RE 1

Please note that the displays on this tab will not be updated with new data in 2015-16, but will remain in the dashboard forreference. Because of the state assessment transition and the passage of H.B. 15-1323, school accountability measuresare affected. The following website provides additional details on the accountability system during the transition:http://www.cde.state.co.us/accountability/impact-of-assessment-transition-on-school-and-district-accountability

Select a data time span(For longitudinal data analysis, select either 1-year or 3-year)1 Year

SPF Key Indicator Ratings OverallNumber indicates percentage points earned on key indicator. Color of bar represents key performance indicator rating. Drop down menu at top of page indicates data time span. Data

Source: School Performance FrameworkColor Key

Exceeds Meets Approaching Does Not Meet

Achievement DataPercent of students scoring Proficient and Advanced. Color of bar represents rating for

sub-indicator. Drop down menu at top of page indicates data time span. Data Source: SchoolPerformance Framework

Growth DataMedian student growth percentile. Color of bar represents rating for sub-indicator. Drop

down menu at top of page indicates data time span. MAGP can be found onPerformance tab. Data Source: School Performance Framework

Growth Gaps DataUse the Performance Tab forinteractive diagnostic on growthgaps. View median and adequategrowth percentile by sub-group,by EMH level, and by subject for2008-2014 academic years.

Post Secondary and Workforce Readiness Data

Graduation Rating

ACT Rating

Dropout Rating

2014

A. OVERALL

C. MIDDLE

25.0

25.0

Achievement %

2014

39.3

39.3

Growth %

2014

40.0

40.0

Growth Gaps %

2014

Postsecondary %

2014

C. MIDDLE

42.4

Ach - Read

2014

19.3

Ach - Math

2014

28.4

Ach - Write

2014

Ach - Science

2014

C. MIDDLE

45

MGP - Read

2014

30

MGP - Math

2014

52

MGP - Write

2014

35

MGP - ELP

SPF Plan Type2014

A. OVERALL

C. MIDDLE Turnaround

Turnaround

2014

A. OVERALL

C. MIDDLE 36.0

36.0

SPF % Points Earned

The data in this tab relates to the traditional School Performance Framework. Data forschools that are AEC is not available. For AEC schools, please reference your SPF reporton SchoolView.org. The display below will indicate whether the school you've selected isan AEC.

2014NO

The below table indicates the plan type used (1-year or 3-Year)

2014A. OVERALL

C. MIDDLE 1 Year

1 Year

Year 5

Year Entering Priority Improvement or Turnaround

2014

STUDENT PERFORMANCESelect a SchoolHOPE ONLINE LEARNING ACADEMY MIDDLE SCHOOL - DOUGLAS COUNTY RE 1




2013-140.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0


19.2

15.8

13.1

2.2


on the chart.


Reading

Writing


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority



2013-140

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Growth Percentile

26

50



Reading

Writing


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority







2013-140.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0


42.3

34.1

13.3

38.3


on the chart.


Reading

Writing


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority



2013-140

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Growth Percentile

42

50



Reading

Writing


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority







2013-140.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0


28.3

23.222.1

2.2

26.0


on the chart.


Reading

Writing


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority



2013-140

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Growth Percentile

51

50



Reading

Writing


ELL

FRL

IEP

Minority



HOPE Online Learning Academy Co-Op

2016-2017 Learning Center Contract between

«Full_Legal_Name_of_LC»

and HOPE Online Learning Academy Co-Op

2016-2017 Learning Center Contract

Page 2 Learning Center Director: _____

This Learning Center Contract is entered into this _______ day of _____________, 2016, by and

between HOPE Online Learning Academy Co-Op (“HOPE”), a Colorado not-for-profit

corporation, and «Full_Legal_Name_of_LC», hereafter «Abbreviated_Name_of_LC» or

“Learning Center,” a «Type_of_Corporate_Entity_of_LC», located at «Address_of_LC».

RECITALS

WHEREAS HOPE is a Colorado public charter school that is authorized by the Douglas

County School District RE-1 (“DCSD”) under a charter school contract with an effective date of

July 1, 2013 and any subsequent amendments and renewals;

WHEREAS HOPE is authorized and certified to provide public online and offline

education to students in grades K through 12 in the State of Colorado through a unique and

proprietary educational system;

WHEREAS «Abbreviated_Name_of_LC» wishes to establish a Learning Center that will

provide a public education opportunity to students through HOPE;

WHEREAS «Abbreviated_Name_of_LC» understands the importance of ensuring the

quality of public education that is delivered through HOPE;

WHEREAS «Abbreviated_Name_of_LC» understands that the availability of public

education is an important function in the State of Colorado that is subject to state and federal law

as well as HOPE and DCSD policies and procedures;

WHEREAS HOPE and «Abbreviated_Name_of_LC» wish to formalize their relationship

to ensure the proper delivery of high quality public education through the use of the HOPE

educational system to enrolled students in full compliance with state and federal law;

HOPE and «Abbreviated_Name_of_LC» agree as follows:

I. DEFINITIONS

1.1 “Academic Year” means that portion of the school year during which public

schools are in regular session, beginning in August of and ending in May of the current school

year, or that portion of the school year which constitutes the minimum period during which a

pupil must be enrolled.

1.2 “Board” means the Board of Directors of HOPE.

1.3 “Charter Contract” means the charter school contract entered into by HOPE and

DCSD with an effective date of July 1, 2013, and any subsequent amendments and renewals.



1.4 “Confidentiality Agreement” means the Confidentiality, Non-Compete and Non-

Solicitation Agreement attached as Addendum 5.

1.5 “DCSD” means Douglas County School District RE-1, HOPE’s authorizing

district.

1.6 “Enrolled Student” means a student that satisfies the criteria set forth in Title 22

of the Colorado Revised Statutes and the requirements of HOPE and has been enrolled in HOPE.

1.7 “HOPE” means HOPE Online Learning Academy Co-Op.

1.8 “HOPE Educational System” means the sequential program of instruction,

developed and utilized by HOPE, for the purposes of providing public education in compliance

with Colorado law. The HOPE Educational System is comprised of instructional and

educational content including online core curriculum, offline curriculum, and HOPE approved

supplemental and elective curriculum, as well as any other curriculum approved by HOPE.

1.9 “Instructional Day” means a minimum of six (6) hours of combined online and

offline curriculum per day for students in grades K-12.

1.10 “Instructional Location” means the physical location(s) operated by a Learning

Center where students will access public education through the HOPE Educational System.

1.11 “Key Personnel” means the individuals accepted by HOPE to be responsible for

the leadership of the Learning Center, as identified in Addendum 1.

1.12 “Learning Center” means a facility approved by HOPE in which a consistent

group of students meets more often than once per week under the supervision of a teacher or

Mentor for a significant portion of a school day for the purpose of participating in online and

offline programs. A group of parents and students meeting repeatedly, occasionally, and

informally, even if facilitated by a school, shall not constitute a "learning center", and a private

home shall not be considered a "learning center" under any circumstances. If this Contract

applies to more than one Learning Center, Learning Center will complete Addendum 4 to this

Contract.

1.13 “Learning Center Contract” or “Contract” means this Learning Center contract

between HOPE and the Learning Center for the 2016-2017 academic year, and, in the event of

automatic renewal pursuant to Section 2.1.1 below, any subsequent academic year(s) to which

the terms of this Contract apply.

1.14 “Learning Center Director” means the individual responsible for executing the

Learning Center Contract and with overall responsibility for ensuring compliance with the terms

of this Learning Center Contract, and who is an employee of the Learning Center, as identified

on Addendum 1, which is subject to approval by HOPE.



1.15 “Learning Center Manager” means the individual responsible for overseeing the

day-to-day operations, academics, staff, and students of the Learning Center, and who is an

employee of the Learning Center, as identified on Addendum 1, which is subject to approval by

HOPE.

1.16 “Learning Center Academic Lead” means the individual responsible for ensuring

that the HOPE academic direction is implemented in the Learning Center and followed on a

consistent basis, and who is an employee of the Learning Center, as identified on Addendum 1,

which is subject to approval by HOPE.

1.17 “Learning Center Mentor” or “Mentor” means an individual who is responsible

for providing student supervision and support at a Learning Center under the guidance of HOPE

and DCSD certificated staff. A "mentor" must meet all requirements as defined by CRS 22-

30.7-102(5).

1.18 “Learning Center Staff” means each person, whether a paid employee,

independent contractor or volunteer of the Learning Center, who interacts with HOPE students at

the Learning Center in connection with the delivery of the HOPE Educational System.

1.19 “Non-HOPE Learning Center” means a learning center as defined by Colorado

law under C.R.S. § 22-30.7-102(4), and which supports a public school or private school and

which is operated by an entity other than HOPE.

1.20 “Participation” means active participation in the HOPE Educational System as

verified through system logins that make evident that each student is taking part in the course

content in the HOPE Educational System via the Internet for a minimum of one hour per day for

students in Kindergarten and one and one-half hours per day for students in grades 1-12. Each

student must also take part in the HOPE directed offline instruction daily.

1.21 “PPR” means the per-pupil allocation of state educational funds as determined by

the Colorado Department of Education (“CDE”) for the Academic Year for which this Contract

is in effect.

II. TERM AND STATUS OF LEARNING CENTER

2.1 Term. Except as otherwise provided in this Contract, the term of this Contract

shall be from July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017, subject to automatic renewal as provided in

Section 2.1.1 below.

2.1.1 Automatic Renewal. Beginning July 1, 2017, and on each July 1 thereafter,

this Contract shall automatically renew for an additional one-year term, unless a

notice of intent to terminate is provided by either party no later than February 1 of

the current Contract year (“Notice to Terminate Contract.”) The Notice to

Terminate Contract must comply with the provisions set forth in Section 10.14

below.



2.2 Public School Status. HOPE is a public charter school authorized by DCSD.

HOPE will be subject to the same state and federal laws that apply to all public schools in the

state of Colorado. Importantly, the Learning Center will not discriminate on the basis of race,

color, creed, ethnicity, national origin, sex, marital status, religion, ancestry, disability, or any

other applicable status protected by state or local law.

2.3 Charter School Status. By executing this Contract, the Learning Center is not

considered an independent charter school. The Learning Center will not represent itself as an

independent charter school that is recognized by the school district in which the Learning Center

is located or by DCSD. Learning Center agrees to refer to itself as “a HOPE Learning Center” in

communications with the public, including but not limited to communications with students,

prospective students, and parents of students and prospective students.

2.4 Certified Multi District Online Program. HOPE is certified by the State Board of

Education as a Multi-District Online Program.

2.5 Required Documents.

2.5.1 The Learning Center shall submit to HOPE Required Documents for each year

that this Contract is in effect as follows:

a. The Learning Center’s Employer Identification Number (EIN) or

Federal Tax Identification Number;

b. A certificate of good standing from the Colorado Secretary of State’s

office as a Colorado Non-Profit Corporation;

c. A current fire inspection certification for each and every Instructional

Location;

d. Evidence that the Learning Center has met the zoning and building code

requirements of the local jurisdiction (Certificate of Occupancy showing

“E” class occupancy);

e. A certification of health inspection for each and every Instructional

Location if required by the local health department;

f. Proof of Liability insurance for the organization at each and every

Instructional Location sufficient to provide coverage in the amount of

$1,000,000/2,000,000 occurrence/aggregate with HOPE and DCSD

named as Additional Insureds;

g. Proof of Workers’ Compensation insurance for all employees of the

Learning Center;

h. A completed Key Personnel List for each and every Instructional

Location (see Addendum 1);

i. A complete staff list for each and every Instructional Location;

j. A completed Learning Center Experience form and Criminal History

Certification with fingerprint card for all new Learning Center Staff; in

addition, the Learning Center Director shall complete the Confidentiality

Agreement (Addendum 5);



k. A completed Bell Schedule for each and every Instructional Location;

l. A completed Learning Center Budget for each and every Instructional

Location;

m. A completed Supplemental Fee Schedule;

n. A completed Banking Information Form; and

o. A completed Learning Center Standard Response Protocol.

2.5.2 The Required Documents are incorporated into this Contract by reference. To

the extent the Learning Center failed to submit any of the required documents

prior to execution of this Contract, such documents must be submitted to

HOPE no later than the deadlines set forth in Addendum 3 to this Contract.

2.5.2.1 The Learning Center acknowledges and agrees that it is required to

provide the documents identified above to ensure that HOPE and the Learning

Center are in compliance with all federal and state laws and regulations and

that the failure to provide such documents could reasonably lead to HOPE

suffering damages if such breach is not cured. To mitigate such damages, the

Learning Center acknowledges and agrees that the payment provisions set

forth in Addendum 3 are reasonable and necessary to help HOPE mitigate

any losses that could be suffered by HOPE as a result of the Learning Center’s

failure to provide such documentation or attend required trainings.

2.5.2.2 The Learning Center also acknowledges and agrees that HOPE is

authorized to deduct the amount of payments due to HOPE under Addendum

3 from the next Learning Center Allocation Payment after HOPE has given

the Learning Center at least thirty (30) days notice of its intent to make such

deduction.

2.5.2.3 In the event any of the information provided in the Required

Documents changes, the Learning Center will provide notice to HOPE of such

change at least ten (10) days prior to making such change to the extent

possible. If advance notice is not possible, the Learning Center will provide

notice to HOPE of such change immediately thereafter.

2.5.3 The Learning Center represents and warrants as part of this Contract that the

factual representations in the Required Documents are true and accurate to the

best of the Learning Center’s knowledge and belief.

2.5.4 If the Learning Center learns at any time that the factual representations in the

Required Documents are not true and accurate, the Learning Center must

immediately notify HOPE and correct any and all inaccuracies. The Learning

Center acknowledges and agrees that approval to operate a Learning Center

was conditioned upon the representations made in the Required Documents.

In the event HOPE discovers that any factual representations contained therein

were false or inaccurate at the time of prequalification or if such facts become

false or inaccurate at any time during the Term of this Contract, HOPE may



invoke its remedies under Article IX of this Contract.

III. UTILIZATION OF THE HOPE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

3.1 Provision of HOPE Educational System and Materials. HOPE agrees to make the

HOPE Educational System available to the Learning Center for the education of Enrolled

Students during the Academic Year. The provision of the HOPE Educational System under this

Section 3.1 shall be subject to the terms of this Contract. In the event this Contract is terminated

for any reason, or at the natural expiration of the Contract if a subsequent Contract is not entered

into by HOPE and the Learning Center, the Learning Center shall immediately return to HOPE

all books, supplies, materials or other items relating to the HOPE Educational System that have

been provided to the Learning Center, either directly or indirectly by HOPE, DCSD, or any other

entity that has provided items to the Learning Center on behalf or at the request of HOPE,

including, but not limited to those items identified in Section 10.3 below. Additionally, as more

fully detailed in Article VII below, the Learning Center acknowledges and agrees that the HOPE

Educational System is either the intellectual property of HOPE or of other third parties from

whom HOPE has acquired the right to use. The Learning Center shall not use any materials

provided by HOPE in connection with the HOPE Educational System for use in a non-HOPE

affiliated learning center or school.

3.2 Delivery of Education. The Learning Center agrees to use the HOPE Educational

System to deliver public education to Enrolled Students who are enrolled in HOPE and attending

and participating in the Learning Center during the Academic Year. The Learning Center agrees

that the HOPE Educational Program is directed by the HOPE Academic Department and that the

program is delivered in partnership between HOPE personnel and the Learning Center staff.

3.2.1 Calendar. The Learning Center agrees to operate according to the approved

HOPE calendar for each school year this Contact is in effect. The approved

calendar will be provided to the Learning Center no later than July 1 of each

school year. The calendar is subject to change by HOPE with thirty (30) days’

notice to the Learning Center.

3.2.2 Instructional Day. The Learning Center shall ensure that the HOPE

Instructional Day includes a combined total of a minimum of six (6) hours of

online and offline curriculum per day for students in grades K-12 as follows:

Minimum instruction time. The Learning Center must ensure the availability

of instruction through the HOPE Educational System to Enrolled Students in

grades K-12 in such a way that each Enrolled Student receives a minimum of

90 minutes of instruction in Language Arts, and one hour of instruction each

in Social Studies, Math and Science per day. Enrolled Students in grades K-12

must also have a minimum of 45 minutes of instruction in each of two

additional HOPE approved elective courses and a minimum of 30 minutes of

physical activity per day. Each Enrolled Student in kindergarten must have a

minimum one (1) hour of “active login” time per day during which the student



is participating in online instruction through the HOPE Educational System.

Each Enrolled Student in grades 1-12 must have a minimum of one and one-

half (1.5) hours of “active login” time per day during which the student is

participating in online instruction through the HOPE Educational System.

HOPE, in its sole discretion, may make changes to the instructional day if

student data is such that an increase in instructional time is warranted to best

serve the needs of the student. All decisions regarding changes to the

instructional day will be made by the HOPE Chief Executive Officer. Any

such change will be effective upon five (5) business days’ notice of the

change.

3.2.3 Supplemental and Elective Curriculum. Prior to using any additional

curriculum (“Supplemental and/or Elective Curriculum”), the Learning Center

must submit the proposed Supplemental and/or Elective Curriculum to HOPE

for prior review, consideration and approval. The review will ensure that the

Supplemental and/or Elective Curriculum is consistent with HOPE’s non-

sectarian policy, that the Supplemental and/or Elective Curriculum tracks with

the Core Curriculum, and that the Supplemental and/or Elective Curriculum

aligns with content standards and enriches the education of HOPE students.

Upon express written approval and adoption by HOPE, the Learning Center

may then use the approved Supplemental and/or Elective Curriculum.

3.3 Non-sectarian instruction and Instructional Location. All of the instruction

provided to Enrolled Students through the HOPE Educational System, including Supplemental

and Elective Curriculum, must be delivered to Enrolled Students in a non-sectarian environment.

This means the following:

3.3.1 A classroom where Enrolled Students receive instruction will not

contain any religious symbols, including, but not limited to,

decorations, illustrations, images or writings, computer icons,

wallpaper or screensavers;

3.3.2 Religious services, including prayers, will not be conducted or led

during the HOPE Instructional Day;

3.3.3 Instruction of Enrolled Students will be done in a religious-neutral

manner;

3.3.4 Instructional materials used to instruct Enrolled Students will not use

religion as an instructional tool, unless reviewed for academic intent

and pre-approved by HOPE;

3.3.5 Religious texts, such as the Bible, Koran, Torah, etc., will not be used

for the purpose of proselytizing and/or indoctrinating Enrolled

Students in a particular religion, or promoting religious belief; and



3.3.6 Uniforms for Enrolled Students must be approved in advance by

HOPE.

3.4 Marketing. The Learning Center agrees to use best efforts to make eligible

Students and their parents/guardians aware of the availability of a public education at HOPE.

Where appropriate, HOPE will provide the Learning Center with certain marketing materials.

3.4.1 Timeline. The Learning Center agrees to comply with the recruitment process

as determined by HOPE following the execution of this Contract.

3.4.2 Approval of Non-HOPE Materials. Any materials used to recruit students that

are not provided by HOPE must be expressly approved in writing by HOPE

prior to use.

3.4.3 License. HOPE’s trademark is registered with the United States Patent and

Trademark Office. The Learning Center shall have a limited license to utilize

the HOPE mark, including the name, logos and other intellectual property that

are the property of HOPE, provided that the use is reasonably necessary to

recruit students and has received prior written approval from HOPE. Any use

of HOPE’s mark or other intellectual property rights without HOPE’s prior

written authorization, or that is not sued in conjunction with marketing

materials provided under Paragraph 3.5, is strictly prohibited.

IV. PHYSICAL FACILITY AND TECHNOLOGY

4.1 Physical Facility and Reconfiguration. During the entire Academic Year, the

Learning Center must have a fully operational physical facility where it will ensure the

availability of instruction to students utilizing the HOPE Educational System. The requirements

for the Learning Center’s Physical Facility are set forth in Addendum 2, and are incorporated by

reference herein.

4.2 Facility Relocation. Any plan to move the Learning Center to a new location or

to relocate computers within an existing Learning Center must be pre-approved in writing by

HOPE. Requests to relocate the Learning Center must be made in writing to the HOPE Help

Desk and received no later than 45 days in advance of the proposed move. Each Learning Center

may request one relocation/reconfiguration per year at no charge to the Learning Center, subject

to the availability of the technical team. Moves may only be executed by HOPE staff and will

only be considered during breaks scheduled in accordance with the approved HOPE calendar.

All costs associated with a Learning Center mid-year move, including significant computer

moves within an existing Learning Center, will be paid by the Learning Center. Costs will

include labor at a rate not to exceed $125.00/hour.

4.3 Technology. HOPE will make available to each Instructional Location of the

Learning Center a predetermined (by HOPE) number of computers that will be sufficient to

allow each Enrolled Student access to the HOPE Educational System.



4.3.1 Student Access to Computers. During the entire Academic Year, the Learning

Center will follow the HOPE recommendation to provide adequate space, as

well as appropriate student rotation, to ensure that each Enrolled Student has

adequate access to a computer and that the Learning Center is in compliance

with all applicable fire, safety and health codes.

4.3.2 Internet Access. During the entire Academic Year, the Learning Center will

provide high-speed broadband Internet access to the Instructional Location,

which has been verified by HOPE to be adequate to serve the number of

Enrolled Students at the Learning Center location. Internet access, bandwidth

and all other Internet related services must be approved by HOPE, as well as

other Internet-related services as set forth by the HOPE Technology

Department.

4.3.3 Computer Terms of Use. All computer equipment and accessories (including

any cabling provided and/or installed by or at the direction of HOPE)

provided to the Learning Center by HOPE shall be the property of HOPE, and

the Learning Center shall not sell, convey, lease, assign, or otherwise

encumber any HOPE computer. HOPE computers may not be used by any

person other than an Enrolled Student, approved Learning Center staff and

Key Personnel. HOPE computers may not be used for any purpose other than

instructing HOPE students in the HOPE Educational System. In addition,

HOPE Students may not use computers during the Instructional Day in the

Learning Center that are not the property of HOPE.

4.3.4 Lost or Stolen Computers: The Learning Center is responsible for the

replacement cost of lost or stolen computer equipment. HOPE may reduce or

adjust any fund disbursement payable under the terms of this Contract to

repair or replace lost or stolen computer equipment.

4.3.5 Negligent Use and Vandalism. The Learning Center is responsible for

computer damage(s) resulting from negligent use and/or vandalism by

Enrolled Students or Learning Center staff. HOPE may reduce or adjust any

fund disbursement payable under the terms of this Contract to repair or

replace damaged or destroyed computer equipment.

4.3.6 Computer Return. The Learning Center will assist HOPE in ensuring that all

computer equipment is returned upon termination of this Contract. In

addition, the Learning Center will fully cooperate with HOPE in the event

computers need to be picked up from the Learning Center for any reason.

HOPE may reduce or adjust any disbursement payable under the terms of this

Contract to repair or replace damaged or destroyed computer equipment.

Additionally, as detailed in Section 10.3 below, the Learning Center

understands that the issuance of final disbursement is contingent upon all

equipment being returned and reviewed for damage and negligent use by the



HOPE Technology Department. If the Learning Center is not entitled to

receive a final Learning Center Allocation, within ten (10) days of the date on

which it receives an invoice from HOPE, the Learning Center will reimburse

HOPE for the replacement value of the items lost, damaged or destroyed.

4.3.7 Computer Moves. Learning Center personnel shall not move any HOPE

computer equipment installed in the Learning Center without prior written

approval from HOPE. Requests to move HOPE computer equipment must be

made through a Help Desk request. Costs incurred to correct problems

associated with the unauthorized move of computer equipment will be the

responsibility of the Learning Center.

4.4 Furniture and Miscellaneous Equipment. The Learning Center will assist HOPE

in ensuring that all furniture, fixtures, miscellaneous equipment and/or appliances provided to the

Learning Center directly or indirectly by or through HOPE (“Furniture and Fixtures”), are

returned to HOPE upon termination of this Contract. In addition, during the term of this

Contract and upon termination, the Learning Center will fully cooperate with HOPE for the

return of any or all Furniture and Fixtures for any reason. As detailed in Section 10.3 below, the

Learning Center understands and agrees that the issuance of final disbursement of any remaining

Learning Center Allocation is contingent upon the return to HOPE of all Furniture and Fixtures

in good and working order. HOPE will inspect the Furniture and Fixtures for damage and

negligent use, and HOPE, in its sole discretion, may reduce or adjust any remaining Learning

Center Allocation otherwise payable under the terms of this Contract to repair or replace

damaged or destroyed items, after taking into account normal wear and tear. If the Learning

Center is not entitled to receive a final Learning Center Allocation, within ten (10) days of the

date on which it receives an invoice from HOPE, the Learning Center will reimburse HOPE for

the replacement value of the items lost, damaged or destroyed.

4.5 Insurance. The Learning Center will obtain and maintain Liability insurance for

each Instructional Location in the amount of $1,000,000/2,000,000 occurrence/aggregate. The

Learning Center will name HOPE, 373 Inverness Parkway, Suite 205, Englewood, CO 80112,

and Douglas County School District RE-1, 620 Wilcox St., Castle Rock, CO 80104, as

additional insureds on the liability policy. The Learning Center shall also obtain and maintain

Workers’ Compensation insurance for every employee of the Learning Center.

4.6 Security and Safety. The Learning Center shall follow the safety and security

requirements of HOPE as follows:

4.6.1 Security and Communications. The Learning Center will comply with all

of the Safe School Plan requirements of C.R.S. § 22-32-109.1(2), and all related HOPE

policies, including but not limited to HOPE Policy HA-011. The Learning Center will

maintain a land line telephone connection at each Instructional Location with the ability

to receive incoming telephone calls and make calls to the 911 emergency response

system. The telephone receiver for the land line will be in a location where incoming

calls may be readily heard by Learning Center personnel. The telephone number for the



land line will be provided to HOPE prior to the commencement of classes in the fall

semester of the Academic Year.

Learning Center Directors, Managers, Mentors, and Key Personnel will be

assigned individual email accounts from which communications may be transmitted

between the Learning Center and HOPE personnel. Learning Center personnel will

access the assigned email account no less than two times per school day.

V. LEARNING CENTER PERSONNEL

5.1 Mandatory Positions. The Learning Center shall hire or appoint persons to fill the

position of Learning Center Director, Learning Center Manager, and Learning Center Academic

Lead. The Learning Center Director may also serve as the Learning Center Manager, Academic

Lead and/or Mentor if on site full time and if qualified to do so based on prior background and

experience. The Learning Center Director, Manager and Academic Lead shall satisfy the

screening and retention requirements and restrictions set forth in this Article V and those set forth

in Exhibit B. To ensure that all tasks and responsibilities required under this Contract are

properly performed by the Learning Center, the Learning Center shall identify the Key Personnel

responsible for each task or area of responsibility identified in Addendum 1 hereto, which is

incorporated by reference herein.

5.1.1 Mentors. The Learning Center shall have no fewer than two full time

Learning Center Mentors to assist with the delivery of instruction and to

ensure the safety of students. All Mentors must meet the requirements as

outlined in section 1.17 of this Contract. The Learning Center shall submit

verification of the Mentor’s educational background in the form of a transcript

from an institution of higher education or a certificate of completion of a

paraprofessional program. Each Mentor shall satisfy the screening and

retention requirements set forth in this Article V, as well as the qualifications

set forth in Exhibit B. The Learning Center Mentor shall meet all

requirements of the HOPE job description for a Learning Center Mentor.

5.1.2 Collaboration. The Learning Center staff shall work collaboratively with the

HOPE teacher(s) assigned to the Learning Center, HOPE staff and Special

Education staff to ensure that the HOPE Educational System is implemented

with fidelity. It is expected that weekly meetings be held between Learning

Center staff and HOPE staff, including Special Education Learning

Specialists, for planning purposes and to address issues that may arise.

5.1.3 Changes to Learning Center Personnel. The Learning Center shall provide

notice to HOPE of any change in Learning Center personnel within one

business day of such change. In the event of a change in Key Personnel, as

identified in Addendum 1, the Learning Center shall, to the extent possible,

provide advance notice of any such change, and if advance notice is not

possible, then the Learning Center shall provide notice of any change in Key



Personnel within twenty-four hours of such change. In the event any of the

Key Personnel identified on Addendum 1 ceases to hold the position

identified thereon at any time during the Term of this Contract, the Learning

Center shall appoint a qualified replacement to perform all tasks or

responsibilities previously held by former Key Personnel. Within 1 business

day of appointment or replacement of Key Personnel, the Learning Center

shall present to HOPE the name and contact information of the Key

Personnel. Before the Key Personnel is allowed to be in contact with Enrolled

Students or have access to funds allocated to the Learning Center by HOPE,

the Learning Center shall submit to HOPE a completed Employee Experience

Form with the accompanying notarized Criminal History Certification for the

Key Personnel. Upon approval from HOPE, which approval shall not be

unreasonably withheld, the Learning Center may allow the Key Personnel to

commence work at the Learning Center. The Learning Center must submit

the New Hire’s fingerprint card to the HOPE Learning Center Support &

Development Office within five (5) days of the Key Personnel’s start date.

5.2 First Aid/CPR. It is the responsibility of the Learning Center to ensure that a

minimum of two full-time employees of the Learning Center shall certified in CPR and First Aid

training and at least one certified person shall be on site at all times when Enrolled Students are

present. In order to ensure that this requirement is met, the Learning Center is encouraged to

train multiple staff members. The name and certification for the designated employees shall be

provided to HOPE.

5.3 The Learning Center will comply with the Fingerprint and Comprehensive

Background Checks Policy, attached as Exhibit B, for all Learning Center Staff (which shall

include personnel and other individuals including contractors, employees of other organizations

associated with the Learning Center, and regular volunteers) who are in contact with Enrolled

Students, including but not limited to the Learning Center Director, Learning Center Manager,

Key Personnel, Mentors, and all Learning Center personnel who have access to funds allocated

to the Learning Center by HOPE. The Learning Center also shall provide to HOPE an executed

Confidentiality Agreement, attached as Addendum 5, for each Learning Center Staff, which

must be executed by the Learning Center Staff member prior to working with HOPE students

and/or receiving any confidential information or trade secrets of HOPE.

5.3.1 Screening Procedure. No later than August 15 of each school year covered

under this Contract, the Learning Center shall submit to HOPE a list of all

Learning Center personnel for the Academic Year who are subject to the

Fingerprint and Comprehensive Background Checks Policy. For each person

listed, the Learning Center shall provide a completed Employee Experience

Form with the accompanying notarized Criminal History Certification, as set

forth in Exhibit C. Any and all staff changes must be immediately reported

to HOPE (see sections 5.1.3 and 5.3.3).

5.3.2 Fingerprint Checks. No later than August 15 of each school year covered

under this Contract for each person identified on the list provided under



Section 5.3.1, the Learning Center shall submit to the HOPE Learning Center

Support & Development Office a completed fingerprint card for the purposes

of obtaining a Comprehensive Background Check. The fingerprint card shall

be filled-out as described in Exhibit B. The Learning Center shall ensure that

the taking of the fingerprints for each person is performed by qualified law

enforcement personnel.

5.3.3 New Hire Screening Procedure. A New Hire is a person who is hired after

August 15 of each school year covered under this Contract and is subject to

the Fingerprint and Comprehensive Background Checks Policy (the “New

Hire”). Before the New Hire is allowed to be in contact with Enrolled

Students or have access to funds allocated to the Learning Center by HOPE,

the Learning Center shall submit to HOPE a completed Employee Experience

Form with the accompanying notarized Criminal History Certification. Upon

approval from HOPE, the Learning Center may allow the New Hire to

commence work at the Learning Center. The Learning Center must submit

the New Hire’s fingerprint card to the HOPE Learning Center Support &

Development Office within five (5) days of the New Hire’s start date. If,

subsequent to the start date, HOPE learns that the New Hire does not qualify

for employment under the Fingerprint and Comprehensive Background

Checks Policy, HOPE will notify the Learning Center, and the New Hire will

be immediately terminated.

5.3.4 Volunteers. Volunteers, including parent volunteers utilized by the Learning

Center on an occasional basis, must undergo a background check through the

Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Internet Criminal History Check

System (ICHC). A copy of the ICHC report for each volunteer must

accompany the Learning Center Volunteer Application and be forwarded to

the Learning Center Support and Development Office. If an ICHC report is

not included, HOPE will generate the report and the per-person cost for the

ICHC will be charged to the Learning Center. Volunteers utilized by the

Learning Center on a regular basis, even if part-time, must follow the

background check procedures outlined in Sections 5.3.1 and 5.3.2.

5.3.5 For each person on the list provided under Section 5.3.1, the authority to hire

or not to hire is that of the Learning Center, based upon the qualifications

outlined in Article V of this Contract. The Learning Center shall follow all

applicable federal and state labor and employment laws in hiring Learning

Center personnel.

5.3.6 Retention of Learning Center Personnel. Once Learning Center personnel

have been hired or appointed, the Learning Center agrees to comply with the

policies set forth in Exhibit B. If at any time the Learning Center learns that a

current staff member or employee has engaged in conduct that is in violation

of the policies, or that may be in violation of the policies, the Learning Center



shall notify HOPE of the violation and of the action being taken by the

Learning Center.

5.4 Mentor-Student Ratio. The Learning Center acknowledges and agrees that for the

safety and security of the Learning Center employees and HOPE students, as well as the quality

of education provided, the Learning Center must have a minimum of two approved adults on site

at all times the Learning Center is open to students. In addition, the Learning Center will employ

a sufficient number of Mentors to ensure a Mentor-Student ratio of no more than 1:20 for grades

K-5, and a Mentor-Student ratio of no more than 1:25 for grades 6-12. It is the responsibility of

the Learning Center to provide a qualified substitute Mentor in the event of the absence of a

Mentor employed by the Learning Center. HOPE personnel cannot be expected to assume a

Mentor role when there is a staffing shortage in the Learning Center.

5.5 Training. Learning Center staff and employees shall attend all HOPE trainings

prior to the commencement of and during the Academic Year. Trainings will be held in

accordance with the approved HOPE Calendar. Additional trainings will be scheduled as needed

with advance notice to the Learning Center.

VI. FINANCES

6.1 PPR Calculation. CDE annually establishes the PPR for the Academic Year. In

the event there is a rescission, HOPE reserves the right, but not the obligation, to adjust the

Funding Allocation described in Section 6.2 on a proportionate basis.

6.2 Funding Allocation. Subject to the terms of this Contract, for each Enrolled

Student in attendance, the Learning Center shall receive a funding allocation (the “Learning

Center Allocation”), which is based upon the enrollment and student participation for the

Learning Center. Except as otherwise provided herein, the Learning Center Allocation will be

paid to the Learning Center in twelve (12) monthly installments commencing in August and

ending in July of the current school year. The total annual Learning Center Allocation for each

Enrolled Student will be $3,700.00. The Learning Center Allocation and the amount of the

monthly installments shall be based upon the actual participating student count at the Learning

Center each month, as detailed in the HOPE Learning Center Allocation Manual, the terms of

which are incorporated by reference herein. Any changes in the amount of the Learning Center

Allocation shall be made pursuant to an amendment to this Contract as described in Section 10.7.

6.2.1 Minimum Number of Students. The Learning Center certifies that it will enroll

a minimum of twenty (20) HOPE students who will participate in the HOPE

Educational System for the Academic Year at the Learning Center, and that it

will ensure there is capacity at the Learning Center to accommodate a

minimum of thirty (30) students.

6.2.2 Replacement Students. If an Enrolled Student withdraws from HOPE, the

Learning Center may replace the student in accordance with the procedure

outlined and approved by HOPE, as described in the HOPE Learning Center



Allocation Manual. If the Enrolled Student transfers to another HOPE

Learning Center, the Learning Center Allocation transfers with the student.

6.2.3 Termination of Payments in Material Breach and/or Event of Early

Termination of Contract; Right to Recovery by HOPE. If the Learning Center

is in material breach and/or if this Contract is terminated by HOPE pursuant to

Article IX below, HOPE, in its sole discretion, may withhold and/or terminate

all outstanding payments of the Learning Center Allocation. In the event the

Contract is terminated by HOPE, it may seek reimbursement from the

Learning Center of some or all of the Learning Center Allocation paid as of

the date of Termination.

6.2.4 Payments Contingent on Disbursement. Any and all payments of the

Learning Center Allocation will only be paid by HOPE upon the disbursement

of the PPR by DCSD to HOPE. If there is a delay in disbursement that will

cause a delay the payment of the Learning Center Allocation, HOPE will

notify the Learning Center.

6.2.5 Payments Contingent on Material Compliance with Contractual Obligations.

Any and all payments of the Learning Center Allocation will be paid by

HOPE only if a Learning Center is in material compliance with the terms and

conditions of this Contract. In the event of a Material Breach, in addition to

any other remedies provided hereunder or authorized under law, HOPE may,

in its sole discretion, withhold or delay payment of some or all of a Learning

Center Allocation until the Learning Center cures the material breach.

6.2.6 Repayment of Learning Center Allocation. The Learning Center

acknowledges that its initial Learning Center Allocations (paid in August and

September of each school year) are paid prior to Count Day on October 1 of

each school year. In the event (a) the Learning Center terminates this

Contract prior to October 1 of the school year or shortly thereafter; or (b) fifty

percent (50%) or more of the students for which the Learning Center received

a Learning Center Allocation in August or September withdraw or dis-enroll

in HOPE prior to Count Day on October 1, the Learning Center agrees to

reimburse HOPE for any and all Learning Center Allocations paid by HOPE

for the Contract year.

6.3 Enrolled Student Verification. The Learning Center shall assist HOPE in

identifying all Learning Center students who are Enrolled Students. Upon request by HOPE, the

Learning Center will provide to HOPE the records of attendance and participation of all Enrolled

Students for the period requested. If attendance and participation records are not so provided,

HOPE can withhold payments of the Learning Center Allocation to the Learning Center until

attendance and participation records are so provided. If the attendance and participation records

show that an Enrolled Student has not satisfied the requirements set forth in Sections 3.2.2 and

8.2.1 of this Contract, the Learning Center will not receive the Learning Center Allocation for

any such student. Under no circumstances shall anyone of compulsory attendance age as defined



in C.R.S. § 22-33-104, other than an Enrolled Student, be on the Learning Center premises

during the Instructional Day. Prospective Students may not be on the Learning Center premises

during the Instructional Day until he or she has been officially enrolled by HOPE.

6.4 Learning Center Allocation Reconciliation. At the conclusion of the Academic

Year, HOPE will analyze (1) the attendance and participation records of all Enrolled Students;

and (2) the Learning Center Allocation payments made to the Learning Center for each Enrolled

Student. If HOPE determines that the Learning Center received a Learning Center Allocation

payment in error, resulting in an underpayment or an overpayment of the Learning Center

Allocation, HOPE will notify the Learning Center and will adjust the final Learning Center

Allocation.

6.5 Learning Center Allocation Accounting. The Learning Center may only use

Learning Center Allocation funds received as part of the Learning Center Allocation for the

payment of facility costs, staff and materials that are related to the delivery of the HOPE

Educational System. Misuse of Learning Center Allocation shall be considered a Material

Breach for which HOPE may pursue remedies in Article IX of this Contract. Pursuant to Section

9.3 below, Learning Center shall provide access to financial records requested by HOPE to

ensure compliance with this provision within two (2) business days of a request by HOPE.

HOPE reserves the right to conduct an onsite audit of financial records at any time without

advance notice to the Learning Center.

VII. PROPRIETARY MATERIALS

7.1 Name and Marks. HOPE’s trademark is registered with the United States Patent

and Trademark Office. As such, the names “Hope Online Learning Academy Co-Op” and

“HOPE” and any use of the names, in any medium of expression, with any logo, or without logo,

as a whole or any derivation thereof, is the intellectual property of HOPE. The Learning Center

will have no right to use the name of HOPE except as expressly provided in this Contract or

agreed to otherwise between HOPE and the Learning Center in a written document executed by

HOPE and the Learning Center.

7.2 A HOPE Learning Center.

7.2.1 The Learning Center acknowledges and agrees that it is a HOPE Learning

Center, and not a school or DCSD charter school. Accordingly, the

Learning Center agrees to refer to the learning center as “a HOPE

Learning Center” in communications with students, parents, prospective

students and parents, as well as the general public. Under no

circumstances shall Learning Center refer to itself as a school, a

charter school or a DCSD charter school.

7.2.2 The Learning Center acknowledges the nature of relationship between

HOPE (as the charter school), DCSD (HOPE’s authorizing district) and

CDE. Accordingly, Learning Center acknowledges and agrees to the



following escalation process with regard to communication with DCSD

and/or CDE about HOPE and matters relating to this Contract, HOPE

and/or the Learning Center:

7.2.2.1 In the event the Learning Center desires to communicate directly

with DCSD, any other school district, the Charter School Institute,

any other public school, and/or CDE on any matter, the Learning

Center will provide at least five (5) business days written notice to

HOPE of any issue that it believes should be communicated to

DCSD and/or CDE. HOPE will have a reasonable period of time,

and in no event less than five (5) business days, to discuss the issue

with the Learning Center and identify a proposed resolution.

7.2.2.2 In the event of a dispute between HOPE and the Learning Center

that cannot be resolved by the Parties and the Learning Center

wishes to contact DCSD and/or CDE about the dispute, the

Learning Center will contact the DCSD Director of Student and

Parent Choice and will work with DCSD to resolve the issue

before contacting CDE. Learning Center agrees to provide DCSD

a reasonable period of time (and in no event less than five (5)

business days, to discuss the outstanding issue before contacting

CDE.

7.2.2.3 In the event Learning Center contacts DCSD or CDE regarding

matters relating to this Contract, HOPE and/or the Learning

Center, the Learning Center will copy HOPE on any such

communication.

7.2.2.4 In the event Learning Center desires to communicate (either

verbally or in writing) with HOPE students and/or parents of

HOPE students about an issue that a reasonable person would view

as in conflict with HOPE and its interests, then the Learning Center

shall give HOPE at least ten (10) business days’ advance notice of

the proposed communication.

7.3 Content. The HOPE Educational System and/or all offline academic products

and materials, including but not limited to the HOPE Education System, HOPE Operations

Manual, and HOPE professional development materials, (“HOPE Content”) are either the

intellectual property of HOPE or of other third parties from whom HOPE has acquired the right

of use. At no time shall the HOPE Content be deemed the intellectual property of the Learning

Center. The Learning Center will not use the HOPE Content except as allowed under this

Contract and will not otherwise use, lease, encumber, market, capture, convert or pass-off the

HOPE Content unless developed by the Learning Center with approval from HOPE. As detailed

in Section 10.3 below, all HOPE Content shall be returned to HOPE upon termination of this

Contract.



VIII. ENROLLED STUDENTS

8.1 Enrollment. Each Enrolled Student shall be enrolled in HOPE, and will not be

enrolled as a student in any other public, independent, private or parochial school (that provides

a basic academic education) in a program of instruction that satisfies the compulsory attendance

provisions of C.R.S. § 22-33-104.

8.1.1 Enrollment Eligibility. The Learning Center will require each prospective

student to complete the HOPE student enrollment application in accordance

with the enrollment policy, for all prospective students to HOPE. The

Learning Center understands that no applications will be accepted after the

third Friday of September for each school year covered under this Contract.

HOPE will review the completed enrollment applications for each student and

will inform the Learning Center in writing when the student is accepted and

enrolled as a HOPE Enrolled Student. If HOPE determines that a prospective

student is unlikely to qualify as an Enrolled Student, HOPE will not enroll the

prospective student, and the Learning Center will not receive any Learning

Center Allocation funds for any such student. Children with disabilities that

qualify for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities

Education Act (IDEA) will be accepted in HOPE unless the nature and severity

of their disability is such that they require more services than can be provided

in order to receive a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) as determined

by the IEP team. Under no circumstances shall the Learning Center allow

anyone of compulsory attendance age, other than an Enrolled Student, to be on

the Learning Center premises during the Instructional Day.

8.1.2 Special Education Placement. For Enrollment applications designating special

education student applicants, the DCSD Special Education Learning Specialist

will ensure that a proper Individualized Education Plan (IEP) team meeting is

held in accordance with the HOPE and DCSD Enrollment Process. Written

notification of the enrollment application determination will be sent to HOPE

and the Learning Center Director within 24 hours of the team meeting. If the

team finds that HOPE is able to provide a free and appropriate public

education for the student then the student will be accepted and enrolled.

8.2 Attendance. The Learning Center will take daily attendance and will input

attendance data into the designated HOPE Student Management System in accordance with

HOPE requirements. Attendance data may also be maintained by the Learning Center in paper

form. Attendance data will be provided to HOPE by the Learning Center immediately upon the

request of HOPE.

8.2.1 Attendance Requirements. Each Enrolled Student must comply with the

compulsory school attendance laws of Colorado, as described in the HOPE

Attendance Policy HS-017.



8.3 Student Conduct and Discipline. The Learning Center will implement and

enforce the student code of conduct, as set forth on HOPE’s website. The Learning Center will

ensure that the parents or guardian of each Enrolled Student can access the Code of Conduct and

the Parent/Student Handbook on the HOPE website. In the event the parents or guardian do not

have access to the electronic version of the Code of Conduct and the Parent/Student Handbook,

the Learning Center will provide a copy of same. The Learning Center will work with HOPE to

ensure consistent enforcement of the Code of Conduct. The division of responsibility between

the Learning Center and HOPE regarding enforcement and discipline will be as described in the

HOPE discipline plan included in the Code of Conduct.

8.4 Student Achievement. Assessment of student progress in the HOPE Educational

System, including state-mandated assessments and other required assessments, will be performed

by HOPE in conjunction with Learning Center personnel. The Learning Center must ensure that

all students are available for assessment at times and dates set by HOPE. The Learning Center

will assist HOPE when assessments are monitored and the data must be used for the educational

improvement of HOPE students. All assessment records will be maintained by HOPE.

8.5 Training and Supervision. The Learning Center will ensure that Mentors attend

training and supervise the administration process for state-mandated assessments. The Learning

Center is responsible for compliance with all state-mandated assessment requirements.

8.6 Student Records. HOPE shall maintain records for each Enrolled Student in

accordance with state and federal law.

IX. BREACH AND REMEDIES

9.1 Material Breach Defined. If the Learning Center, by any act or omission, or by

the act or omission of any of the Learning Center’s employees or invitees, or licensees, and/or

guests, violates any of the terms or conditions of this Contract or any other document made a part

hereof by reference or attachment, the Learning Center shall be considered in Material Breach of

this Contract.

____ : Initials of Learning Center Director.

9.2 Remedial Action Upon Material Breach. In case of such Material Breach, HOPE

will provide written notification to the Learning Center.

9.2.1 For any material breach that may be cured, the Learning Center will have a

reasonable period of time to remedy the breach, to be determined in the sole

discretion of HOPE. The Learning Center acknowledges and agrees that what

is a “reasonable period of time” will vary depending upon the circumstances

of the material breach. Due to the nature of this Contract, the Learning Center

acknowledges and agrees that under some circumstances, a reasonable period

of time may only be one business day.



9.2.2 If the Learning Center does not remedy the breach within the time frame

identified by HOPE, or if the material breach is of a type which cannot be

cured by the Learning Center, HOPE shall determine what additional remedial

action must be taken, if any. Such action will be taken at the sole discretion of

HOPE, and will be guided by Colorado and federal law, as well as the best

interest of the Enrolled Students at the Learning Center. Additional remedial

action may include, but is not limited to:

9.2.2.1 The provision of status reports by the Learning Center to HOPE in such

a manner that will allow HOPE to monitor the Learning Center’s

compliance with this Contract, including but not limited to the Learning

Center’s use (or misuse) of the Learning Center Allocation;

9.2.2.2 Imposition of one or more of the damage payments identified on

Addendum 3;

9.2.2.3 Placement of HOPE employees in the Learning Center to monitor the

Learning Center’s compliance with this Contract and to ensure the

delivery of a quality education consistent with the HOPE Educational

System;

9.2.2.4 The assumption of Learning Center Operations by HOPE;

9.2.2.5 The removal of some or all Enrolled Students from the Learning Center

and placement at an alternative Learning Center;

9.2.2.6 The closing of the Learning Center;

9.2.2.7 The withholding and/or the termination by HOPE of any or all

outstanding payments of the Learning Center Allocations that might

otherwise be due to the Learning Center at the time of such Material

Breach;

9.2.2.8 Recovery from the Learning Center of any or all Learning Center

Allocation paid to the Learning Center as of the date of such Material

Breach; and/or

9.2.2.9 The seeking of temporary, preliminary and/or permanent injunctive

relief or other legal relief under this Contract from a Court of

competent jurisdiction.


9.3 Access to Records and Information. The Learning Center will provide access to

HOPE of any and all records required to be kept by federal or state law or regulation, by this

Contract, or which are reasonably related to the Learning Center’s compliance with the terms of



this Contract. Within ten (10) days of termination of this Contract, regardless of the cause, the

Learning Center will provide to HOPE all student records and other documents required to be

kept by federal or state law or regulation, by this Contract, or which are reasonably related to the

Learning Center’s compliance with this Contract.

The Learning Center will also provide to HOPE upon request any and all information needed by

HOPE to respond to a request for information from or an audit by CDE, DCSD or any other

entity that may require student information or other data that is in the possession of the Learning

Center and/or its staff. Additionally, the Learning Center shall also maintain and provide to

HOPE, if requested, all financial records of the Learning Center that would enable HOPE to

conduct an audit of the Learning Center’s usage of the funds it received as part of the Learning

Center Allocation, as provided in Section 6.5 above. The Learning Center shall provide all

requested records to HOPE within two (2) business days upon a request by HOPE. Nothing in

this Contract precludes HOPE from conducting an on-site audit of the Learning Center at any

time without advance notice to the Learning Center. These provisions regarding the Learning

Center’s obligation to provide access to records and information survive the termination of this

Contract for a period of no less than four (4) years from the date of termination of this Contract.


X. MISCELLANEOUS

10.1 Non-Disparagement: During the Term of this Contract and thereafter, Learning

Center agrees to take no action which is intended, or would reasonably be expected, to harm

HOPE or its reputation or which would reasonably be expected to lead to unwanted or

unfavorable publicity to HOPE. Additionally, HOPE and Learning Center agree that they will

not disparage or comment negatively about the other party, their respective officers and

management, and/or current or former employees. “Disparaging” remarks, comments or

statements are those that impugn the character, honesty, integrity, morality or business acumen

or abilities in connection with any aspect of the operation of business of HOPE or the Learning

Center. This non-disparagement agreement is intended to and shall survive termination of this

Contract, regardless of the reason for such termination.

10.2 Non-Compete; Non-Solicitation. Except as authorized by Section 10.2.1 below,

during the term of this Contract, Learning Center covenants not to engage in or open any

business (including, but not limited to, a charter school, a private school, or a non-HOPE

Learning Center), at any location, which provides educational services that compete with HOPE.

The purpose of this covenant is to encourage the Learning Center and its employees to use their

best efforts to promote HOPE Educational Model, to serve HOPE students, to protect HOPE’s

confidential information and trade secrets, and to generate a successful partnership between

HOPE and the Learning Center for the school year to which this Contract applies. The Learning

Center agrees that it will require each of its Learning Center Staff to execute the form set forth in

Addendum 5, which acknowledges the Learning Center employee’s agreement to comply with

this Non-Compete provision, including each subpart below, as a condition of his/her employment

by the Learning Center.



10.2.1 Notice of Intent to Operate a School or non-HOPE Learning Center.

During the term of this Contract, Learning Center shall not operate a

charter school, a private school, or a non-HOPE Learning Center without

providing advance written notice to HOPE. Additionally, in the event

Learning Center decides to apply to open its own charter school, it will

provide written notice to HOPE thirty (30) days before submitting an

application to its Authorizing District. In addition, in the event Learning

Center decides to open a private school or a non-HOPE Learning Center,

which is expected to or will open at any time during the academic school

year immediately following the termination of this Contract, Learning

Center shall provide written notice to HOPE no later than February 1 of

the pending Contract year. Learning Center acknowledges and agrees that

such advance notice is reasonable and necessary so that HOPE and

Learning Center may work together to ensure that all students enrolled in

HOPE at the Learning Center can be made aware of the choices of public

and private schools available to such students and, if necessary, assist any

students in a smooth transition to support the best interests of the children

currently enrolled in HOPE at the Learning Center. The Learning Center

shall have no contact with CDE, DCSD, the Charter School Institute, any

other school district or any public school organization about the opening

of a charter school or private school without first providing to HOPE the

notice required under this Section of the Contract. Under no

circumstances shall a Learning Center and another school or non-HOPE

Learning Center operated by a Learning Center, its current and/or former

employees or its affiliate be co-located at the same address as a HOPE

Learning Center.

10.2.2 Non-Solicitation Covenants.

10.2.2.1 Covenants relating to students: During the term of this

Contract, Learning Center will not, directly or indirectly, solicit

students or parents of students enrolled in HOPE to enroll in

another charter school, a private school, or a Learning Center

for another public school that provides educational services

that compete with HOPE. Upon termination of this Contract,

Learning Center will not, directly or indirectly, solicit students

or parents of students enrolled in HOPE using any confidential

information obtained by the Learning Center during the course

of its performance of the Learning Center’s obligations under

this Contract (including, but not limited to, documents

containing the name, address, telephone number, email of any

students enrolled in HOPE). The Learning Center

acknowledges and agrees that all obligations regarding the use

and protection of confidential information and trade secrets

survive the termination of this Agreement.



10.2.2.2 Covenants relating to employees of HOPE and/or Learning

Center. During the term of this Contract and thereafter, the

Learning Center shall not threaten, intimidate or take any

adverse action against a Learning Center employee who

communicates with HOPE regarding any issue, including, but

not limited to, issues involving students, the operation of the

Learning Center, the Learning Center’s partnership with

HOPE, and/or a Learning Center employee’s decision to accept

employment with HOPE or an alternative HOPE Learning

Center.

10.3 Return of HOPE Equipment and Materials. Learning Center will return to HOPE

within ten (10) days of termination of this Contract, regardless of the reason for termination, all

HOPE equipment and materials provided to the Learning Center, including, but not limited, to:

Educational materials, including books and other educational supplies, including

manipulatives;

Technology, including computers, printers, copiers and associated cabling; and

Furniture and fixtures (including, but not limited to, any items donated to HOPE

and/or directly or indirectly provided to the Learning Center for use therein).

In the event the Learning Center fails to return all HOPE equipment and materials,

Learning Center authorizes HOPE to deduct from its final Learning Center Allocation, if any, the

replacement value of the items not returned by the Learning Center. If the Learning Center is not

entitled to receive a final Learning Center Allocation, within ten (10) days of the date on which it

receives an invoice from HOPE, the Learning Center will reimburse HOPE for the replacement

value of the items not returned.

10.4 Student Records. Learning Center acknowledges that documents containing

confidential student information (including student names, addresses, contact information,

academic history, parent information), student applications and/or enrollment forms, and/or other

information protected by law, including, but not limited to the Family Educational Rights and

Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99), (“Student Records”) are the sole

property of HOPE and may be used only in connection with the Learning Center’s performance

of its obligations under this Learning Center Contract. The Learning Center shall not use

Student Records for any other purpose. Learning Center shall return all Student Records to

HOPE within ten (10) business days of termination of this Learning Center Contract. Learning

Center shall not retain a copy of any Student Record or any information derived therefrom. The

Learning Center agrees that it will require each of its employees to sign a form acknowledging

his/her obligation to keep confidential any information obtained from a Student Record and the

prohibition on the Learning Center employee’s use of any such confidential information for any

purpose other than to perform the Learning Center’s obligations under the terms of this Contract.



10.5 Representations and Warranties. HOPE and the Learning Center each represent

and warrant to the other as follows:

10.5.1 Each party has received, or has had the opportunity to receive, independent

legal advice from its attorneys regarding this Contract;

10.5.2 No party relies or has relied on any statement, representation, omission,

inducement, or promise of any other party (or any officer, agent, employee,

representative, or attorney for any other party) in executing this Contract,

except as expressly stated in this Contract;

10.5.3 Each party to this Contract has investigated the facts pertaining to this

settlement and this Contract, and all matters pertaining thereto, to the full

extent that party deems necessary;

10.5.4 Each party has carefully read and reviewed with its attorneys (or has had the

opportunity to review with its attorneys), and knows and understands, the full

contents of this Contract and is voluntarily entering into this Contract; and

10.5.5 Each term of this Contract is contractual and not merely a recital.

10.6 Interpretation and Construction. Each of the parties has had an adequate

opportunity to read and review, and to consider with its own retained counsel, the effect of the

language of this Contract and has agreed to the use of the particular language of this Contract.

Any question of interpretation or construction shall not be resolved by any rule providing for

interpretation or construction against the party who causes the uncertainty to exist or against the

drafter of this Contract.

10.7 Merger. This Contract constitutes and comprises the entire Contract between the

parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. It supersedes all prior and contemporaneous oral

and written Contracts and discussions. It may be amended only by a Contract in writing, signed

by the parties hereto.

10.8 Severance. If any provision of this Contract is held to be invalid by a court or

tribunal of competent jurisdiction, that provision shall be deemed to be severed and deleted, and

neither that provision, nor its severance and deletion, shall affect the validity of the remaining

provisions.

10.9 Persons Bound. This Contract is binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of,

the parties hereto and their respective agents, employees, representatives, officers, directors,

subsidiaries, assigns, heirs, executors, administrators, insurers, and successors in interest.

10.10 Authority of HOPE. HOPE is a Colorado not-for-profit corporation validly

existing, and in good standing under the laws of the State of Colorado. HOPE has all requisite

power and authority to execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Contract. The

undersigned individual has the authority to execute this Contract on behalf of HOPE.



10.11 Authority of Learning Center. «Full_Legal_Name_of_LC» is a

«Type_of_Corporate_Entity_of_LC», validly existing, and in good standing under the laws of

the State of Colorado. «Full_Legal_Name_of_LC» has all requisite power and authority to

execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Contract. The undersigned individual has

the authority to execute this Contract on behalf of «Full_Legal_Name_of_LC».

10.12 No Third Party Rights. Nothing contained in this Contract shall be deemed to

create any rights in any person or entity that is not a party to this Contract.

10.13 No Assignment. The Learning Center acknowledges and agrees that this Contract

is personal in nature and that HOPE’s agreement to enter into this Contract is based, in part, on

the qualifications of the persons identified in the Key Personnel Addendum 1, as well as all

other Required Documents. As such, the Learning Center acknowledges and agrees that it may

not assign this Contract, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of HOPE. Any

assignment by the Learning Center of this Contract without HOPE’s prior written consent shall

be void and unenforceable. In the event of such unauthorized assignment, HOPE may

immediately rescind this Contract and shall have no further liability to Learning Center,

including, but not limited to, payment for any outstanding payments of the Learning Center

Allocation.

10.14 Notices, etc. All notices and other communications required or permitted

hereunder shall be effective only if in writing and (i) delivered personally, or (ii) sent by

nationally-recognized overnight courier, postage prepaid, in each case, addressed as follows:

HOPE Online Learning Academy Co-Op

Attn: Heather O’Mara, CEO

373 Inverness Parkway, Suite 205

Englewood, CO 80112

With a copy to HOPE’s attorneys:

Kimberly A. Smiley

Armstrong Teasdale, LLP

Regency Plaza

4643 S. Ulster Street

Suite 800

Denver, CO 80237

Learning Center: «Full_Legal_Name_of_LC»

Attn: ____________________________________________

Address: «Address_of_LC»



10.15 Choice of Law. This Contract and the rights and obligations of the parties to this

Contract shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of the

State of Colorado.

10.16 Attorneys’ Fees & Costs. Each of the parties agrees to bear its own costs,

attorneys’ fees, and other expenses associated with the negotiation and preparation of this

Contract. In the event that there is a dispute between the parties regarding this Contract, the

substantially prevailing party in any action arising under this Contract shall be entitled to all

costs incurred, including reasonable attorneys’ fees.

10.17 Forum Selection. If any action is brought arising out of or in any way relating to

any of the terms, covenants, or conditions of this Contract, whether such action is in law or in

equity, the parties agree that the exclusive forum for such action or actions shall be the District

Court in and for the County of Douglas, Colorado.

10.18 Compliance with Changes in Governing Law. HOPE and the Learning Center

expressly acknowledge that legislation could be passed by the Colorado General Assembly that

may impact, alter, or otherwise modify Colorado law regulating on-line public education. If

such legislation passes and is signed into law, to the extent that a provision of this Contract no

longer complies with Colorado Law, that provision shall be deemed to be severed and deleted,

and neither that provision, nor its severance and deletion, shall affect the validity of the

remaining provisions. Further, the parties recognize that CDE may adopt rules or regulations

that may impact, alter, or otherwise modify existing rules governing online public education. If

such rules or regulations are adopted, to the extent that a provision of this Contract no longer

complies with the rule or regulation, that provision shall be deemed to be severed and deleted,

and neither that provision, nor its severance and deletion, shall affect the validity of the

remaining provisions. In the event that legislation or rule/regulation so substantially alter the

regulatory framework governing online education that this Contract is no longer practicable, the

Learning Center and HOPE will work together in good faith to execute a new Learning Center

contract or addendums to this Contract as may be necessary.

10.19 Counterparts. This Contract may be executed in counterparts, and each

counterpart shall have the same force and effect as an original, all of which shall be considered

one and the same Contract and shall become effective when the counterparts have been signed

by all Parties. Photocopies, facsimiles or other electronically transmitted copies of the signature

page of this Contract shall be treated as originals.

** SIGNATURES APPEAR ON FOLLOWING PAGE **



HOPE ONLINE LEARNING ACADEMY CO-OP

By: ___________________________________

Heather O’Mara, Chief Executive Officer


By: ___________________________________ ___________________________________

Name (Signature) Position



ADDENDUM 1 TO LEARNING CENTER CONTRACT

Key Personnel Learning Center Director

Name: ____________________________________________

Cell/Direct Number: _________________________________

Learning Center Manager

Name: ____________________________________________


Learning Center Academic Lead

Name: ____________________________________________


Finance Administrator

Name: ____________________________________________


Technology Administrator

Name: ____________________________________________


Crisis Management Coordinator

Name: ____________________________________________


Graduation Coordinator

Name: ____________________________________________


Activities Coordinator

Name: ____________________________________________


Other

Name: ____________________________________________

Title: _____________________________


** SIGNATURES APPEAR ON FOLLOWING PAGE **

HOPE ONLINE LEARNING

ACADEMY CO-OP

By: ___________________________

Heather O’Mara

Chief Executive Officer


By:______________________________

Name:________________________

Position:______________________




PHYSICAL FACILITY REQUIREMENTS

The Learning Center’s physical facility will comply with the fire and building codes

required for an educational use in the local jurisdiction in which the Learning Center is located.

The Learning Center will comply with all other applicable safety and health codes as required by

HOPE, including adherence to the HOPE Asbestos Management Plan in accordance with

Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment regulations. The Learning Center will

comply with all other applicable safety and health codes for schools as required by HOPE. The

Learning Center will ensure full access to the Learning Center at all times for HOPE and/or

DCSD representatives. In the event the Learning Center breaches any of the physical facility

requirements set forth herein, such breach shall constitute a Material Breach for which HOPE

may invoke the remedies set forth in Article IX of the Contract.

A-2.1 Adequate Instructional Space. During the entire Academic Year, the Learning

Center will provide adequate classroom and/or instructional space sufficient for

delivery of the HOPE Educational System, HOPE computers, and offline work.

A-2.2 Certification of Availability of Physical Facility. By signing this Contract, the

Learning Center certifies and warrants that it (1) owns the real property in which

the Instructional Location will be situated and that such property will be available

as a HOPE Learning Center for the entire Academic Year; or (2) has a valid lease

for the real property where the Instructional Location will be situated for the

entire Academic Year. Any Learning Center move that takes place during the

Academic Year must be pre-approved in writing by HOPE in accordance with

Article IV of this Contract. In addition, a copy of the new lease or proof of

ownership for the new location must be submitted to HOPE at least 45 days prior

to the approved move.

A-2.3 Physical Facility Review. Prior to the time that HOPE installs the computers as

described in Section 4.3 of the Contract, HOPE will review the suitability of the

Physical Facility in light of the requirements of this Contract. If the Physical

Facility does not comport with the terms of this Contract, HOPE may invoke its

remedies under Article IX of this Contract.

A-2.4 Facility Relocation. Any plan to move the Learning Center to a new location

(“Facility Relocation”) or to relocate computers within an existing Learning

Center (“Computer Relocation”) during the Academic Year must be pre-approved

in writing by HOPE. Requests for Facility Relocation and/or Computer

Relocation must be made in writing to HOPE and received no later than 45 days

in advance of the proposed move. Approval for Facility Relocation and/or

Computer Relocation may only be executed by HOPE staff and will only be

considered during breaks scheduled in accordance with the approved HOPE

calendar. All costs associated with a Learning Center Facility Relocation or



Computer Relocation will be paid by the Learning Center. Costs will include

labor at a rate not to exceed $125.00/hour.


ACADEMY CO-OP

By: ___________________________

Heather O’Mara



By:______________________________

Name:________________________

Position:______________________




CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS / DAMAGE PAYMENTS

Required Employee and Facility Paperwork

Contract Requirement and Description Due Date

Final Deadline Date before

Damage Payments are

applied

Amount of Damage Payment

Subsequent Action

Learning Center Annual Required Documents:

The Learning Center’s Employer Identification Number (EIN) or Federal Tax Identification Number;

A certificate of good standing from the Colorado Secretary of State’s office as a Colorado Non-Profit Corporation.

A current fire inspection certification for each and every Instructional Location;

Evidence that the Learning Center has met the zoning and building code requirements of the local jurisdiction;

A certification of health inspection for each and every Instructional Location if required by the local health department;

Proof of Liability insurance for the organization at each and every Instructional Location sufficient to provide coverage in the amount of $1,000,000/2,000,000 occurrence/aggregate with HOPE and DCSD named as Additional Insureds.

Proof of Workers’ Compensation insurance for all employees of the Learning Center;

A completed Key Personnel List for each and every Instructional Location (see Addendum 1);

A complete staff list for each and every Instructional Location;

A completed Learning Center Experience form and Criminal History Certification with fingerprint card for all Learning Center staff;

A completed Bell Schedule for each and every Instructional Location;

A completed Learning Center Budget for each and every Instructional Location;

One (1) week prior to the first day of school for each school year covered under the terms of this Contract) unless HOPE has a current document on file.

For all paperwork due during the school year, HOPE will notify the Learning Center Director, who will be given three (3) business days to submit the paperwork before the damage payment is applied

$100.00 Damage Payment will be automatically taken out of the Learning Center monthly allocation following notice by HOPE to the Learning Center

In addition to a Damage Payment and/or any other remedies provided in the Contract, HOPE, in its sole discretion, may withhold some or all of the Learning Center Allocation until the Learning Center fully complies with its obligations to provide the Required Documents.



A completed Supplemental Fee Schedule; and

A completed Banking Information Form.

A completed Learning Center Emergency Response Plan

Employee Experience Form

Notarized Criminal History Certification

Transcripts (all mentors)

Fingerprint Card

August 12th (1 week prior to the first day of

school)

Fines will be imposed for each employee in the Learning Center that has not completed all required paperwork

$100.00 Damage Payment for each employee will be automatically taken out of the Learning Center monthly allocation following notice by HOPE to the Learning Center


New Hire Personnel (hired during school year)

Employee Experience Form

Notarized Criminal History Certification

Transcripts (mentors)

Fingerprint Card All paperwork is to be received by HOPE before the New Hire is allowed to be in contact with HOPE students

Fingerprint cards are due five (5) days after the New Hire’s start date

For all paperwork due during the school year HOPE will notify the Learning Center Director, and be given three (3) business days to submit the paperwork before fines are applied

$100.00 Damage Payment will be automatically taken out of the Learning Center monthly allocation following notice by HOPE to the Learning Center




Attend Professional Development Trainings throughout the year

Contract Section and Description

Training Dates Amount of Initial Damage Payment

Subsequent Damage Payment

Learning Center Staff shall attend all mandatory HOPE trainings. HOPE, in its sole discretion, may allow an excused absence if the circumstances warrant.

On or before July 15 of each school year covered under the terms of this Contract, HOPE will provide to each Learning Center Director/Manager a calendar of scheduled mandatory trainings, which will identify all persons who are required to attend each training session. Except for emergency situations and/or inclement weather, HOPE will provide 48 hours advance notice of any necessary changes to the training schedule. Additional mandatory trainings may be scheduled as necessary and adequate advance notice will be provided.

$100.00 Damage Payment will apply to each LC staff who fails to attend required training; Damage Payment will be automatically taken out of the Learning Center monthly allocation

N/A

HOPE ONLINE LEARNING ACADEMY CO-OP «Full_Legal_Name_of_LC»

BY: __________________________________________ BY: __________________________________________

Heather O’Mara

Chief Executive Officer Name: _________________________________

Position: _______________________________




(Applicable to Learning Centers with Multiple Locations)

The Parties acknowledge and agree that the terms and conditions of the Learning Center Contract apply equally to

each of the following locations and legal entities:

_________________________

Learning Center Name

«Additional_Addresses»

Street Address

_________________________

City/State/Zip

_________________________

Telephone Number

_________________________


_________________________

Street Address

_________________________

City/State/Zip

_________________________

Telephone Number

_________________________


_________________________

Street Address

_________________________

City/State/Zip

_________________________

Telephone Number

_________________________


_________________________

Street Address

_________________________

City/State/Zip

_________________________

Telephone Number


ACADEMY CO-OP

By: ___________________________

Heather O’Mara



By: ______________________________

Name: _______________________

Position: ______________________




(To Be Executed By Each Learning Center Director)

LEARNING CENTER EMPLOYEE

CONFIDENTIALITY, NON-COMPETE AND NON-SOLICITATION AGREEMENT

Whereas, HOPE Online Learning Academy Co-Op (“HOPE”) and

«Full_Legal_Name_of_LC», a HOPE Learning Center (the “Learning Center”), have entered

into a Learning Center Contract (“Contract”) dated _____________, by which the Learning

Center agrees to employ certain personnel to assist the Learning Center in fulfilling its

obligations under the Contract; and

Whereas, pursuant to the Contract, the Learning Center has agreed to keep certain

information provided by HOPE confidential, and to assure the confidentiality of particular types

of information supplied to personnel hired by the Learning Center, including each person,

whether a paid employee, independent contractor or volunteer of the Learning Center, who

interacts with HOPE students at the Learning Center in connection with the delivery of the

HOPE Educational System (“Learning Center Staff”);

Whereas, the undersigned acknowledges receipt of a copy of the Contract, and

Whereas, as a material term of the Contract, the Learning Center has agreed to require as

a condition of employment by the Learning Center and/or as a prerequisite to access to HOPE’s

Confidential Information, that each Learning Center Staff agree to and execute this

Confidentiality, Non-Compete and Non-Solicitation Agreement (the “Agreement”); and

Whereas, the undersigned has agreed to be bound by the terms of this Agreement;

Now, therefore, in consideration of the undersigned’s employment or continued employment

by the Learning Center, and in exchange for access to HOPE’s Confidential Information, and

other good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is acknowledged, the undersigned agrees

as follows:

1. Confidential Information: As used herein, the term “trade secrets and other confidential

information” shall include, without limitation: all knowledge and information that the

undersigned may receive from HOPE, its employees or consultants, its students or

parents, or by virtue of the performance of services under and pursuant to the Contract,

relating to the HOPE Educational Model, the HOPE Operations Manual, HOPE

professional development materials, lists or other documents containing confidential

information (including student names, addresses, contact information, academic history,

parent information), student applications and/or enrollment forms, and/or other

information protected by law, including, but not limited to student information protected

by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR

Part 99).



2. Confidentiality: The undersigned agrees that all trade secrets and other confidential

information shall for all time and for all purposes be regarded as strictly confidential and

held in confidence, and solely for HOPE and/or the Learning Center’s benefit and use in

connection with the delivery of the HOPE Educational Model to HOPE students per the

terms of the Contract, and shall not be used by the undersigned or directly or indirectly

disclosed by the undersigned to any person whatsoever except in connection with the

undersigned’s performance as Learning Center Staff to fulfill the Learning Center’s

obligation under the Contract. The undersigned understands and agrees that HOPE, not

the Learning Center, is the school for purposes of determining when or how confidential

student information may be disclosed under FERPA, and that the undersigned shall not

use and/or release trade secret or other confidential information to a person not associated

with HOPE or the delivery of the HOPE Educational Model without HOPE’s prior

written consent

3. Non-Compete; Non-Solicitation. During the time that the undersigned is a member of the

Learning Center Staff, and during any school year in which the Learning Center is a party

to a Learning Center Contract with HOPE, the undersigned shall not engage in or open

any business (including, but not limited to, a charter school, a private school, or a

Learning Center affiliated with another public school), at any location, which provides

educational services that compete with HOPE. The purpose of this covenant is to

encourage the Learning Center and its employees and/or volunteers to use their best

efforts to promote HOPE Educational Model, to serve HOPE students, to protect HOPE’s

confidential information and trade secrets, and to generate a successful partnership

between HOPE and the Learning Center for the school year to which this Contract

applies.

4. Notice of Intent to Operate a School or Learning Center. In the event the undersigned

decides to apply to open a charter school (directly or indirectly through another entity),

the undersigned will provide written notice to HOPE thirty (30) days before submitting

an application to its Authorizing District. In addition, in the event the undersigned

(directly or indirectly through another entity) decides to open a private school or a

Learning Center for another public school, which is expected to or will open at any time

during the academic school year immediately following the termination of this Contract,

the undersigned shall provide written notice to HOPE on or before February 1 of the

preceding school year. The undersigned acknowledges and agrees that such advance

notice is reasonable and necessary so that HOPE and Learning Center may work together

to ensure that all students enrolled in HOPE at the Learning Center can be made aware of

the choices of public and private schools available to such students and, if necessary,

assist any students in a smooth transition to support the best interests of the children

currently enrolled in HOPE at the Learning Center. The undersigned shall have no

contact with CDE, DCSD, the Charter School Institute, any other school district or any

public school organization about the opening of a charter school, private school or

Learning Center for another public school without first providing to HOPE the notice

required under this Section of the Contract. Under no circumstances shall a Learning

Center and another school operated by a Learning Center or its affiliate be co-located.



5. Non-Solicitation Covenants. Covenants relating to students: During the time that the

undersigned is a member of the Learning Center Staff, and during any school year in

which the Learning Center is a party to a Learning Center Contract with HOPE, the

undersigned will not, directly or indirectly, solicit students or parents of students enrolled

in HOPE to enroll in another charter school, a private school, or a Learning Center for

another public school that provides educational services that compete with HOPE. Upon

termination of the undersigned’s employment with the Learning Center and/or upon

termination of the Contract between HOPE and the Learning Center, the undersigned will

not, directly or indirectly, solicit students or parents of students enrolled in HOPE using

any trade secret or other confidential information obtained by the Learning Center during

the course of its performance of the Learning Center’s obligations under this Contract

(including, but not limited to, documents containing the name, address, telephone

number, email of any students enrolled in HOPE). The undersigned acknowledges and

agrees that all obligations regarding the use and protection of trade secrets and other

confidential information survive the termination of the undersigned’s employment with

the Learning Center and the termination of the Contract between HOPE and the Learning

Center.

6. Conflicts of Interest. During the time that the undersigned is a member of the Learning

Center Staff, and during any school year in which the Learning Center is a party to a

Learning Center Contract with HOPE, the undersigned shall not, directly or indirectly,

take any action which a reasonable person would view as to be in conflict with the

interests of HOPE. The obligation to avoid conflicts of interest with HOPE includes, but

is not limited to, communications with HOPE students and/or parents of HOPE students.

7. Relation to Learning Center Contract: The undersigned acknowledges and agrees that

this Agreement is made between the Learning Center and the undersigned pursuant to the

Learning Center’s obligations under the Learning Center Contract between HOPE and

the Learning Center, with the understanding that this Agreement is a material condition

of the Contract between HOPE and the Learning Center. The undersigned also

acknowledges and agrees that he or she is not an employee of HOPE.

8. Enforcement. The undersigned agrees that, in the event of a breach or threatened breach

by the undersigned of any of the provisions or covenants contained in paragraphs 2, 3, 4,

5 and/or 6 of this Confidentiality Agreement, HOPE shall be entitled to the entry of a

temporary, preliminary and/or permanent injunction (without any bond or other security

being required) against the undersigned in any suit in equity brought for the purpose of

enforcing such provisions or covenants. The consent to and the availability of an

injunction as set forth above shall not preclude or prevent HOPE from seeking or

recovering money damages under appropriate circumstances, or pursuing other

appropriate remedies. The provisions of this Confidentiality Agreement shall not be

construed as limiting any of HOPE’s rights under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, as

adopted, or under any other laws (whether statutory or common law), including, but not

limited to, laws relating to confidential information, unfair competition, computer

misconduct.



9. Miscellaneous Provisions:

(a) This Confidentiality Agreement shall be governed by the laws of Colorado.

(b) The undersigned agrees that the covenants and restrictions contained herein are both

reasonable and necessary.

(c) The undersigned hereby acknowledges and represents that he or she (i) has fully and

carefully read this Confidentiality provision prior to signing it; (ii) has been, or has

had the opportunity to be, advised by independent legal counsel of his/her own choice

as to the legal effect and meaning of each of the terms and conditions in this

Confidentiality Agreement; and (iii) is signing and entering into this Confidentiality

Agreement as a free and voluntary act without duress or undue pressure or influence

of any kind or nature whatsoever and has not relied upon any promises,

representations, or warranties regarding the subject matter hereof other than as set

forth in this Confidentiality Agreement.

(d) If any provision or portion of this Confidentiality Agreement shall be deemed not to

be valid, such invalid provisions or portions shall be deemed severed from this

Confidentiality Agreement, and the remaining terms shall remain in full force and

effect without reference to such invalid provisions.

(e) Any termination, amendment, change, or modification of this Confidentiality

Agreement shall not be deemed effective unless evidenced by a writing signed by the

undersigned and the Learning Center with a copy provided to HOPE.


By: ______________________________

Name: ______________________

Position: ______________________

Date: ______________________




(To Be Executed by Each NEW Learning Center Director)

NEW LEARNING CENTER

PROVISIONAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

1. Provisional Contract. Subject to the Term set forth in Section 2.1 of the Learning Center

Contract, during the first two (2) years of operation of the Learning Center (“Provisional

Term”), Learning Center is subject to the following additional requirements:

a. Mid-Year Review. The Learning Center shall be subject to a Mid-Year review

during the months of December and January. The review will consist of both

academic and operational measurements to assess the progress of the developing

Learning Center, and gathering data to assist in future development and training.

Information and data gathered at the Mid-Year Review and End-of-Year

Evaluation will be weighed to determine the Learning Center’s eligibility for

renewal of the Learning Center Contract.

b. End-of-Year Evaluation. The Learning Center shall be subject to an End-of-Year

Evaluation during the month of May. The evaluation will consist of both

academic and operational measurements to assess the success of the new Learning

Center, and gathering data to assist in future development and training.

Information and data gathered at the Mid-Year Review and End-of-Year

Evaluation will be weighed to determine eligibility for contract renewal for year

two.

c. HOPE’s deadline for providing Notice To Terminate Contract as provided in

Section 2.1.1 of the Learning Center Contract is extended during the Provisional

Term from February 1 to May 31.

2. Year One - Intensive: Development and Induction. During the first year of a new

Learning Center, the undersigned agrees as follows:

First Year Required New Learning Center Development and New Learning

Center Director Induction

Requirement Description Timeline

HOPE

Orientation

Learning Center Director must attend

HOPE Orientation at the HOPE office,

which is designed to provide new

Directors with vision and history of

HOPE.

Prior to opening the

Learning Center to

students.

Operations

Training


Operations Training at the HOPE office,



which will cover all aspects of operating

a HOPE Learning Center including but

not limited to: enrollment, recruiting,

funding, budgeting, HR, technology

management, state and HOPE

compliance, etc.

Facility

Development

Learning Center Director must work

with HOPE to design an appropriate

facility. This may include search and

development of suitable space to

provide a safe, nurturing, and

academically rich environment within

the target community.

Academic and

Instructional

Professional

Development


Academic and Instructional Professional

Development Training at the HOPE

office. This will include an introduction

to the curriculum and instructional

expectations for all HOPE learning

center staff.

Peer Mentor

Assignment

Learning Center Director will be

assigned a peer mentor to establish a

support relationship within the field.

Prior to opening the

Learning Center to students

and throughout the first

school year.

Weekly Site

Visits

Learning Center Director will

participate in weekly visits at the

Learning Center and meetings at the

HOPE office to discuss progress and

support needs with the HOPE Director

of New Learning Center Development.

Approximately once per

week throughout the first

school year.

Quarterly

Partnership

Visits

Learning Center Director must

participate in visits to other HOPE

Learning Centers to facilitate cross

Learning Center collaboration and meet

with other Directors/Managers and see

how other Learning Centers operate.

Approximately once per

quarter throughout the first

school year.



3. Year Two - Supportive. During the second year of a new Learning Center, the

undersigned agrees as follows:

Second Year New Learning Center Support

Requirement Description Timeline

Peer Mentor

Assignment

Learning Center Director will be

assigned a peer mentor to establish a

support relationship within the field.

Continuation from the 1st

year and throughout the

second school year.

Monthly Site

Visits

Learning Center Director must meet

with HOPE Director of New Learning

Center Development at the Learning

Center and at the HOPE office to

discuss progress and support needs.

Approximately monthly,

throughout the second

school year.

4. Relation to Learning Center Contract: The undersigned acknowledges and agrees that

this Addendum modifies the Learning Center’s obligations under the Learning Center

Contract. In the event of a conflict between this Addendum and the Learning Center

Contract, the terms of the Learning Center Contract shall prevail. Nothing in this

Addendum limits HOPE’s rights under the Learning Center Contract, including but not

limited to Section 9 regarding Breach and Remedies.

Full Legal Name of LC

By: ______________________________

Name: ______________________

Position: ______________________

Date: ______________________

Submitted to: Colorado State Board of Education...Ensure that every student receives the best...

Documents

Transcript of Submitted to: Colorado State Board of Education...Ensure that every student receives the best...