Board Meeting Agenda - February 28,2000

RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATION - February 28, 2000

Charter School Application - Vitalistic Therapeutic Regional Charter
School of the Lehigh Valley

INFORMATION:

On or about November 15, 1999, the Vitalistic Therapeutic Regional Charter School of the
Lehigh Valley (Vitalistic) submitted a charter school application to the administration of this
district. As this applicant seeks approval as a regional charter school, they have also
submitted an application for approval to the Board of School Directors for the Allentown
School District.

Thereafter, the charter school applicant submitted answers to the Hurdle and Additional
Criteria as requested by the district. Subsequently, a public hearing before the board of both
the Bethlehem Area School District (BASD) and the Allentown School District was held
regarding this charter school application on January 31, 2000. After reviewing all of the
information presented and furnished by Vitalistic, the administration submits that the
following deficiencies exist in the application materials and supporting information, thus
failing to warrant a positive recommendation of this charter school to the Board of School
Directors.

By way of some background, Vitalistic first applied to this district for alocal charter to
operate a charter school on November 13, 1997. This application was subsequently denied
on March 6, 1998. Thereafter, Vitalistic submitted a revised application on April 30, 1998.
Again, the application was denied on July 27, 1998. Vitalistic appealed the decision of the
BASD Board of School Directors to the Charter School Appeals Board (CAB). The CAB
upheld the findings of the board. Vitalistic shared a similar experience in Allentown, the
exception being that the primary reason for the CAB supporting the denial in Allentown, was
that the school was not physically located within the district. This finding of the CAB appears
to have been the main impetus for Vitalistic pursuing a regional charter at this time.

With regard to the Vitalistic application for a regional charter, the administration submits the
following findings and observations:

Demonstrable and Sustainable Community Support:The application and
proposal lacks demonstrated sustainable support among residents, teachers, and
students for the charter school plan within the Bethlehem area. With regard to
demonstrable support within the community, only 3 of the 12 people (who were
not employed with Vitalistic) who spoke in favor of the charter school application
were residents of the Bethlehem Area School District. Finally, the applicant has
failed to specifically identify any potential students within the school district who
may enroll in the charter school.

Enrollment and Admission Concerns:Vitalistic indicated during its presentation
that if they were granted a charter, in order to accommodate children from the
respective districts, non-district children presently attending the center would have
to be displaced to make room for the children entitled by statute to attend. This is
quite disconcerting, and appears to be an ill-advised plan as far as the children are
concerned. This plan also appears to contradict the intent of the charter school
law as expressed by the legislature.

Additionally, Vitalistic's plan to limit its admissions as proposed and solely target
"at-risk" students appears to contradict the enrollment provisions set forth in the
charter school law.

Separation Between the Proposed Charter School and the Existent Therapeutic
Center:Concerns as to the separation of administration and function between the
proposed charter school and the present operations of the therapeutic center
permeate all facets of the application and proposed charter school plan. The
proposed plan does not adequately set forth that there are sufficient measures to
prevent the commingling of public funds between the charter school and the
therapeutic center. This lack of planning and forethought indicates that necessary
safety measures have not been set in place. This concern was reinforced when
Ms. Grossman indicated that the one board would oversee the operations of the
charter school and the therapeutic center.

Concerns With the Adequacy of the Proposed Site and Facility:The applicant
has indicated that in order to operate as a charter school, and accommodate
incoming students, they would have to shift existing students to another facility.
This raises concerns over the adequacy of the proposed facility to house a fully
functional charter school.

Special Education:The special education plan within the application is
inadequate because it does not identify or specify exactly how and by whom
exceptional children will be provided for or evaluated. Additional concerns
related to special education are more fully set forth in the attached memorandum
of Mr. Richard Agretto, director of special education.

Curriculum and Testing Concerns:The administration is concerned with the
fact that the proposed curriculum does not encourage or necessarily increase
learning opportunities for all pupils or encourage the use of different and
innovative teacher methods. Neither the proposed charter school nor the
curriculum provides an opportunity for teachers to be responsible for the creation
of the learning program at the school site. Additionally, many specific concerns
also surround important and detailed aspects of the proposed curriculum.

Budget and Financial Plan Concerns:The financial plan is suspect in that all
budgetary calculations are based on projected enrollment figures. As such, the
proposed financial planfails to demonstrate the viability of the charter school
application in the event projected enrollments are not met. Furthermore, the
budget plan fails to indicate how resources will be divided between the charter
school and the therapeutic center. A detail of the financial concerns of
Vitalistic's financial plan is set forth in the attached memorandum of Mr. Stanley
Majewski, director of business affairs/board secretary.

Insurance Concerns:The charter school applicant has failed to identify what
insurance coverage it plans on purchasing or provide any price quotes for said
coverage. Serious liability concerns exist between the charter school and the
existent therapeutic center, especially in the face of a lawsuit arising from
resources shared by the two entities.

Failure to Serve as a Model:For the foregoing reasons, this application does not
serve as a model for other public schools. In addition, this application does not
serve as a model program for assisting "at-risk" or exceptional children because
the district currently offers a wide array of programs which are targeted at those
student populations and serves a larger number of children than the anticipated
student enrollment of the charter school.

Failure to Conform to the Legislative Intent:For the foregoing reasons, this
application does not conform to the legislative intent of the charter school law.

It is now time for the Board of School Directors to vote on whether or not to grant the
submitted charter school application of the Vitalistic Therapeutic Regional Charter School of
the Lehigh Valley, pursuant to the Charter School Law, Act 22 of 1997.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Board
application of
pursuant to the

Table of Contents

Minutes

Director Leeson stated that she and several other board members had the
opportunity to go to both Vitalistic  and to view our partial hospitalization
program for socially and emotionally disturbed children at Governor Wolf.  She
stated that the board members did not view the program, but spoke with the
teachers and mental health workers.  Director Leeson stated she has been
struggling with this issue.  She sees very good things happening at Vitalistic. 
She thinks they are people who care about children who have been in operation for
28 years.  Unfortunately, upon researching the program at Governor Wolf, there is
too much similarity to the program Vitalistic provides.  There are only minor
differences.

Director Leeson also commented regarding Enrollment and Admission Concerns on
page 30.  It states that, if granted a charter, Vitalistic would displace current
children for district children to be admitted.  She stated that, in reading that,
she had not heard that, although other board members had.  She called Mrs.
Grossman for clarification, and she did clarify that new "incoming" students
would be given preference if Vitalistic is granted charter school status from
Bethlehem.  Current students would not be displaced for Bethlehem incoming
students.

Director Craig stated he, too, attended the Vitalistic visit.  They are wonderful
people and do a great job in an area that a lot of children need help.  He stated
he struggled with this as an ex-special education teacher.  He also visited
Governor Wolf this morning and talked with the staff working with our students in
a like situation.  He felt better about what we are doing.  He found out that if
you add S.P.A.R.K. plus the programs that are available to Bethlehem Area School
District children, we can accommodate children in a program very similar to
Vitalistic from prekindergarten through twelfth grade between our district and
the intermediate unit which also serves our district.  He sees a lot of
repetition of services.  He wanted to make it very clear that he is not
questioning the dedication and hard work of the Vitalistic staff.  They are truly
hardworking and dedicated people.  He thinks their motives are different from the
other charter school the board is going to act on tonight.  He truly believes our
district provides a very solid program for these students.  He saw four adults
full-time in that program, all professionals.  He feels real good about what the
district is doing with the IU and our own programs for these students.

Director Williams stated she agrees with Director Craig.  She wants to make very
clear that the board has spent an inordinate amount of time individually and as a
board listening to the hearings for the charter schools, reading through huge
wads of paper, and trying to come to grips with all the information presented. 
There is not one board member that sits here and lightly votes either for or
against such a proposal.  The board had tried very hard to come to terms with all
the information presented.  She stated she agrees that Vitalistic is providing a
very much needed service, but they have been operating independently for 28
years.  This makes her question why we should now be granting them a charter,
when they have independently existed for that length of time.


ROLL CALL RECOMMENDATION 16

Director Craig made a motion to DISAPPROVE the application for Vitalistic
Therapeutic Regional Charter School of the Lehigh Valley.  Director Venanzi 
seconded the motion.  The question was called and roll call was as follows:  Yea,
Directors Williams, Koch, Amato, Craig, Gallagher, Leeson, and Venanzi - 7. 
Motion passed 7 - 0. 
[an error occurred while processing this directive]