Paterson Collegiate Charter School Phase One Application (CO

Two Page Overview

The mission of Paterson Collegiate Charter School is to equip every student with the knowledge, confidence, and character to succeed in college and beyond. Students will, from the earliest grades, steadily build a strong foundation of learning habits, critical thinking skills, and knowledge; excel academically as they progress through the program, mastering high-level math and science; and ready themselves to graduate as confident young adults, prepared to succeed as college students, citizens, and leaders in their chosen fields. The school design marries the Sabis educational system with the “No Excuses” school culture to close the achievement gap and place every student on the path to college. The school will demonstrate that, for the same level of public spending—and without ongoing philanthropic support or relying on an exotic labor pool of teachers—the school can generate dramatically superior academic outcomes, as measured by the New Jersey Assessments of Skills and Knowledge and other objective measures, compared to the surrounding district schools. Given the demographics of the resident district, the founders expect many of Paterson Collegiate Charter School students to be from low-income families. Currently, most families have few, if any, affordable alternatives to the district public schools. Paterson City currently only has three charter schools, none of which emphasize college readiness from the earliest grades. Paterson Collegiate Charter School will offer a free, rigorously academic education, and a path to college through a program profoundly different from that used in schools in the district. Its innovative features include relatively large class sizes with explicit, whole-class instruction; frequent electronic assessment that provides teachers with immediate feedback on student mastery of concepts taught over the past week; the use of student prefects to assist their peers and the teacher; an Intensive Program to fill learning gaps quickly, including those resulting from language barriers; specific, concrete, and actionable techniques to raise academic and behavioral expectations that make the most efficient use of classroom time, create a strong and vibrant culture, and build character and trust; and powerful academic management software that relieves teachers of many time-consuming tasks, permitting them to focus on delivering clear, vibrant, and engaging lessons. An ambitious humanities and social studies program, beginning in grade 5, is modeled on the intellectually ambitious classes of top private schools in the Northeast. If these innovative approaches are successful in radically raising student achievement levels and closing the economic and racial achievement gap, as indicated by the early results of schools based on the same model, they will spur improvements in surrounding schools. The Sabis educational system includes a detailed, college-preparatory curriculum linked to an electronic assessment system, innovative pedagogical protocols, tools for building a transformative school culture, and state-of-the-art school management software. Over the course of the school year, students will receive relatively more time on task than traditional district schools, with the school day running from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm four days a week, Monday through Thursday, and 8:00 am to 2:00 pm on Friday. Each student will have eight periods of instruction a day. Through the Sabis Intensive Program, students substantially behind in English, math, or both, will receive instruction in small groups, focusing only on the essential concepts necessary to succeed in

the general education classroom with their peers. A program of Structured English Immersion will prepare English language learners (ELL) to join their peers successfully as quickly as possible. Students with little or no English will rapidly acquire English language skills in an Intensive-style classroom, taught by teachers with ELL certification. The school will use Sabis programs specifically designed for ELL that focus on phonics, reading, fluency, comprehension, vocabulary acquisition, and other English language fundamentals. The proposed design has yielded promising early results when implemented under the management of Ascend Learning, the proposed nonprofit organization based in Brooklyn. Fourth- and fifth-graders at Brooklyn Ascend Lower School and Brooklyn Ascend Middle School, the network's oldest students, posted the highest English scores on the 2012 state test of all Brooklyn schools run by charter management organizations. The results are remarkable for their consistency—in every school, grade, and subject, proficiency levels were higher than any of the three comparison groups. Eighty percent of students at Brooklyn Ascend Charter School are from low-income families, and 95 percent are black or Hispanic. According to GothamSchools, Brooklyn Ascend Charter School is among the top-performing charter schools in New York City.1 In 2012, Brooklyn Ascend Charter School earned an "A" on its annual progress report from the New York City Department of Education. The Department annually compiles progress reports to help parents, teachers, principals, and school communities understand schools' strengths and weaknesses. Burgeoning wait lists for admission also testify to the strength of the Ascend design. More than 6,200 children are on Ascend’s wait lists, and the number increases daily.

Paterson Collegiate Charter School’s founders plan to engage Ascend in a five-year management contract, under which Ascend would report to the board and be responsible for providing the school’s educational program; selecting and acquiring instructional materials; recruiting, recommending to the board for hire, and developing the school director; and day-to-day operations, including business administration, contracted services, human resources, and maintenance of the school’s facilities. Ascend would assist the school director with recruiting and training of the school’s leadership team, faculty, and staff. For these services, the school would pay Ascend annually nine percent of the sum of general education operating funds and revenues from federal special education entitlement grants.

Reporting to Ascend and the board, the school director would be ultimately responsible for the quality of instruction in the school and the academic progress of the student body; he or she will be, above all, the school’s instructional leader. The school’s leadership team, composed of a dean of instruction, a dean of students, and a director of operations, would report directly to the school director. The dean of instruction and dean of students would oversee instructional staff, with the former concentrated on academic program implementation and the latter on the implementation of the No Excuses culture; and the director of operations would oversee non-instructional staff. Teachers would be accountable for student results as they track their students’ progress in mastering required skills and concepts.

Mission

The mission of Paterson Collegiate Charter School is to equip every student with the knowledge, confidence, and character to succeed in college and beyond. Students will, from the earliest grades, steadily build a strong foundation of learning habits, critical thinking skills, and knowledge; excel academically as they progress through the program, mastering high-level math and science; and graduate as confident young adults, prepared to succeed as college students, citizens, and leaders in their chosen fields.

Applicant and Founder Information

In September 2008, the Brooklyn Ascend Charter School was founded by Ascend Learning president Steven F. Wilson and opened its doors in September 2008 to 210 students from Brownsville and Remsen Village, two of the lowest-income communities in the city. Today, it has a waiting list of more than 3,600 students. According to GothamSchools, Brooklyn Ascend Charter School is among the top ten highest charter schools in New York City.

In September 2009, Brownsville Ascend Charter School, the second school to be founded by Wilson, opened its doors. This year was the first in which the school’s students were tested by the state. The school performed better than Brooklyn Ascend did in its first two years of state testing.

Two years ago, the New York State Board of Regents awarded one of the state’s last remaining charters at the time to Ascend’s third school, Bushwick Ascend Charter School, which opened in September 7, 2010. Bushwick Ascend has had the most successful launch of all three schools. In the school’s inaugural year, more than 62 percent of first-graders were already reading above grade level in mid-November.

With each successive school launch, Ascend Learning has refined its capacity to open new schools. In October 2010, at Bushwick Ascend Charter School, every component of the Sabis curriculum was in place and, according to early observations by the Sabis president Carl Bistany, the early strength of the school culture was palpable. Additionally, Bushwick Ascend experienced dramatic academic gains in its first eight months of operations, and employed the most robust system of data retrieval and analytics in the Ascend network to date.

For three days in January 2012, Ascend Learning and instructional leadership team members of all three schools met with the academic developers of the Sabis curriculum, including representatives from all core subjects, to painstakingly discuss how to make still greater academic gains in the current version of the educational program. Among the resulting action items, Sabis agreed to realign the ELA and math curricula in kindergarten and first grade to teach more advanced state standards earlier, for research has demonstrated that top-performing elementary schools in the country challenge students in the earliest grades. To reflect the diversity of literary genres in the New York State ELA exams, Sabis also agreed to include more non-fiction passages in textbooks and assessments. Finally, Sabis pledged to introduce major changes to two core subjects: (1) a new science curriculum that will supplement learning through experiments with more direct instruction, and (2) a revised social studies curriculum, which will alter the current scope and sequence, and tap more primary source materials. Paterson Collegiate Charter School will experience the most benefit from such refinements, as it will implement the improved educational program in its inaugural year.

With each successive school launch, Wilson has refined his capacity to open new schools. Owing to the progressively better school launches is not only experience, but a developed personnel team. (See Exhibit 5a.) Before the school opens in September 2013, the new staff additions, in conjunction with the aggregated experiences of opening schools in years’ past, Wilson, the lead founder of the application, will make the Paterson Collegiate Charter School launch the strongest yet.

This will also be the first time that the proposed school will be co-founded with a stalwart community leader of the selected school district who is also a parent and teacher. Carol D. Burt-Miller, co-founder and lead teacher of Love KidsCare II, an accredited preschool center in Paterson, New Jersey, represents the interests of parents, teachers, and community members. Her connections

to parents and community stakeholders extend deeply, from her day-to-day interactions with parents (pushing them to read at home with their children or opening their eyes to the educational options available in Paterson) to her partnership with various community agencies such as the Community Food Bank of New Jersey.

Both Wilson and Burt-Miller bear high qualifications for implementing the school design successfully.

Steven F. Wilson, in addition to being founder and president of Ascend Learning, is also a senior fellow at Education Sector, a Washington think tank, and formerly, the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. He is the former CEO of Advantage Schools, an urban school management company that enrolled nearly 10,000 students, and a former executive vice president of Edison Schools.

Earlier, Wilson was special assistant for strategic planning for Massachusetts Governor William Weld and co-executive director of the Pioneer Institute, where he wrote the Massachusetts charter school law. He is the author of two books: Learning on the Job: When Business Takes on Public Schools and Reinventing the Schools: A Radical Plan for Boston. He is the board president of Building Excellent Schools, a national training program for aspiring charter school founders, and a graduate of Harvard University.

As Ascend, Wilson has built a top-performing network of urban charter schools without any significant reliance on private philanthropy. Since 2008, four schools have opened and four additional schools are in planning. The first Ascend school to be graded by the New York City Department of Education earned an “A” on the annual Progress Report and Ascend schools have achieved the highest-proficiency in English language arts on the state test of all charter management organization (CMO) schools in Brooklyn. All Ascend schools and the CMO, Ascend Learning, have operated at a surplus since inception. Waiting lists are long and parent satisfaction levels very high.

Burt-Miller is the co-founder and head teacher of Love KidsCare II, a preschool center accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). As the head teacher, Burt-Miller reviews the lesson plans of all teachers and promotes stimulating, active learning. She is also responsible for financial management and accounting and actively builds and maintains robust parent and community relationships. Burt-Miller’s college background is in education and psychology. She received a bachelor of science degree from Caldwell College and a master of science degree in early childhood education from Capella University.

Burt-Miller’s experience applying to the NAEYC for the accreditation of Love KidsCare II is applicable to her role as qualifying founder of Paterson charter school. NAEYC accreditation is a detailed process for demonstrating successful implementation of one’s young children program under the criteria of teacher and student relations, language development, effective use of time and routines, health, professional development of teachers, physical environment, leadership, and management policies and procedures.

Wilson and Burt-Miller’s resumes can be found in Exhibit 1b.

Enrollment and Admission Information

Outreach Plan

The school will embark on an extensive public information and student recruitment campaign once it is chartered and again in the fall and winter of each year. All marketing materials, which will be broadly distributed and translated into Spanish, will communicate that the school is a tuition-free public school of choice and that it welcomes and serves all children who are in the grades served by the school. The school director, once hired, will lead the enrollment campaign, assisted by school staff and staff from Ascend Learning. Until such time as the school director is hired, Ascend Learning, with key support from Burt-Miller, will coordinate the campaign. The high visibility of the school leader will give families confidence in the new school as a place where they should invest in their children’s future.

The school will impose no admissions preconditions or requirements on interested families. As such, families will not be required to attend meetings or information sessions, nor will they be required to adhere to the school’s mission or philosophy, or to sign any agreements or contracts imposing responsibilities or commitments such as reviewing homework, attending parent conferences, or volunteering for the school. The school will encourage families to learn as much about the school as possible and to participate actively in their children’s education. The school may request that parents sign a voluntary, non-binding compact, in which they, the school, and teachers pledge to do their part to help each child succeed after the child has enrolled in the school. This document would clearly state that signing is voluntary and not required as a condition of admission or ongoing enrollment and that the parent or guardian may change his or her mind at any point without consequence.

Outreach to At-risk Students

The planning team will convey to parents that the Sabis design includes specialized diagnostic tests, which will be administered at the school’s launch to all students (and each year thereafter to new students). The diagnostic tests will guide placement decisions and detect learning gaps that impede student progress. They will also identify those who are struggling students requiring remediation in the Sabis Intensive Program, designed to help students fill pre-existing gaps in their knowledge.

Students who are struggling academically or behaviorally in the general education classroom will be considered by the school’s student support team, a standing committee consisting of the special education teacher (or later, the director of special education), the dean of students, the dean of instruction, and such teachers as may be assigned by the school director. After a careful review of the data on the child the team will develop academic and/or behavioral interventions tailored to the specific needs of the struggling child to foster his or her success in the general education classroom. Behavioral modifications might include referral to a social worker or guidance counselor, the development of a behavior modification plan, meetings with parents and/or teachers, or referral to an outside mental health agency. Academic interventions could include enrollment in the Sabis Intensive Program (in which a dedicated teacher provides small-group instruction to students who are below grade level), tutoring by a peer tutor, or a change in instructional methods for the child.

Outreach to English Language Learners and Children with Disabilities

The school will make good faith efforts to attract and retain students with disabilities and English language learners proportional to the make-up of the Paterson School District. The planning team and staff of the school will recruit families of students who are learning English as a second

language and who have special education needs. To promote the school among these special populations, the planning team and staff will visit neighborhood feeder schools that serve students who are learning English as a second language and who have special education needs.

The qualifying founder has cultivated relationships with a number of businesses and organizations in Paterson, including those serving minority language communities and children with special needs. In its ongoing outreach efforts, the school will target stores that are owned by members of minority-language communities or are frequented by non-English speakers as well as churches and daycare centers that serve minority-language populations. The school will make arrangements to drop-off or distribute at these locations flyers in English, Spanish, and other languages spoken in the district. The school will document this outreach effort via letters of thanks or certificates of appreciation. The school will keep copies on file for a period of no less than two years.

As part of the admissions process, all families will be asked how they heard about the school, and the school will track such referrals as a proxy for recruitment data on special student populations.

Admission Criteria

Any child who is qualified under New Jersey law for admission to a public school is qualified for admission to the school, including students with Individualized Education Plans and English language learners. To qualify for admission to kindergarten, children will have to be five years of before October 1 of their kindergarten year. As required by law, the school will give preference to those students who are residents of the school district of location. Paterson Collegiate Charter School will give enrollment priority to students with siblings who have already been accepted to the school.

The school will not give preference to at-risk students, children of school employees, or children of members of the board of trustees or founders. Admission to the school shall not be limited on the basis of intellectual ability, measures of achievement or aptitude, athletic ability, disability, race, creed, gender, national origin, religion, or ancestry. The school’s application forms will not request student demographic data, with the exception of age and grade information. The application forms will request both a residential address and several forms of family telephone contact information.

Per New Jersey law, the school will maintain a waiting list, divided into students from the district of resident and students from non-resident districts, for admission of grade-eligible students. During the recruitment period, the school will notify parents that their children’s names remain on the waiting list for enrollment for the subsequent school year only.

Below is a summary of the school’s planned enrollment during the first charter term:

Grade Level

Year 1 2013-14

Year 2 2014-15

Year 3 2015-16

Year 4 2016-17

Pre-K K 100 100 100 100 1 112 112 112 112 2 112 112 112 3 112 112 4 112 Total 212 324 436 548

Grade Growth and Rationale

The school will open with just kindergarten and first grade. Establishing a strong school culture has proven to be among the most important factors in building successful charter schools; opening with more than two grades jeopardizes the establishment of the No Excuses culture. Each year, the school will add a grade as students are promoted. At maturity, the school will span K-12. The lower school will be composed of grades K-4, the middle school 5-8, and the high school 9-12. Extending through grade 12 is essential to realizing the mission of preparing every student for college.

The founders considered the following two constraints in developing the enrollment growth plan:

1. In the Sabis program, classrooms in kindergarten through grade 2 are self-contained, but classrooms in grades 3-6 are organized around a teaching model in which teachers specialize in either (a) math and science or (b) English language arts and social studies. This organization requires an even number of sections, either two or four; two sections would create a school too small to realize economies of scale or achieve the desired impact on the community.

2. The school will administer New Jersey Assessments of Skills and Knowledge for the first time in year three, and the results will have implications for the test-takers and for the school’s viability. The enrollment plan thus ensures that those taking the tests will have been enrolled for a period sufficient for them to benefit from the program’s strengths and perform accordingly.

Class Size

The plan assumes four classes of 28 students each beyond kindergarten. Based on the demonstrated efficacy of the Sabis instructional model and the No Excuses school culture, the founders believe that such relatively large classes will function well in the context of the school design.

The founding team does not subscribe to the conventional notion of “differentiated instruction,” and understanding our philosophy is critical to removing the negative connotations often associated with large class sizes. We believe public schools fail to achieve strong levels of achievement reliably and across the board because teachers are asked to do the impossible, which is to tailor instruction to a large number of students with different levels of preparation and inconsistent mastery of precursor skills. The problem snowballs as the children get older. Those with gaps become frustrated in school because they cannot follow instruction, while more advanced students who have been forced to bide their time to accommodate their classmates become bored. The results are as unavoidable and undesirable: alienation, disciplinary problems, academic failures, and high dropout rates.

The founders believe that if the school pays attention to instructional gaps forming in the earliest grades, then all students in the class would be ready to learn any new concept from the teacher. Such is the basic premise of the Sabis model, which places students according to their mastery of essential concepts and ensures they have the precursor concepts necessary to progress successfully. Frequent electronic assessment tells the teacher which students have not mastered an essential concept. If the class has failed to achieve mastery, the teacher knows he or she has not taught the concept properly, and it needs to be re-taught. If a small number of students fall short of mastery, prefects deliver additional instruction immediately (prefect tutoring), so they do not fall behind. Students who are substantially behind join the Sabis Intensive Program receive subject instruction in small groups, focusing only on the essential concepts necessary to succeed in the regular class with their peers.

Further, the No Excuses culture ensures order even in large classes. Large classes are affordable and will permit teachers to earn more than those in many schools that emphasize small class sizes.

Educational Program Overview

Overview

The college-preparatory design of Paterson Collegiate Charter School couples the Sabis educational system with the “No Excuses” school culture to fuel a K-12 program that will close the achievement gap and place every student on the path to college. The model is designed primarily for students from low-income families, including those with special needs and limited English proficiency.

It reflects the founders’ belief that steady advances in student outcomes can only be achieved if students’ knowledge is, from the earliest grades, built like a house, floor by floor, with the certainty that every precursor concept has been demonstrably mastered before the next concept is taught. That, in turn, requires a systematic design in which each important concept or skill is identified and taught in proper succession, from kindergarten through grade 12; students are afforded sufficient practice; and students’ learning gaps are immediately identified and promptly remediated.

Sabis Educational System

The focus of the Sabis system is the mastery of an academically ambitious, sequential curriculum that spans phonics in kindergarten to advanced placement (AP) courses in high school. Each learning objective is taught to mastery, and frequent assessments let teachers know immediately if each concept they have taught has been mastered by their students—so learning gaps do not form that impede subsequent learning. Teaching is explicit, using a distinctive Teach-Practice-Check pedagogy, and permits relatively large classes. Students serve as academic prefects, assisting the learning of their peers and checking their work, and accelerating the pace of instruction. Students who fall behind receive small-group instruction in a tightly linked “intensives” program.

Sabis, an education company based in Beirut, Lebanon, has developed and refined over 30 years this powerful, systematic approach to curriculum and assessment, and its teaching system regularly produces remarkable results abroad, even in schools with primarily low-income populations. In the United States, however, its potential has barely been tapped. In the few American schools where it has been soundly implemented, its power is confirmed.

Nearly all school managers to date have sought to produce achievement levels greater than their public school counterparts with few or no proprietary practices. Instead, the best have relied on a mix of exceptionally motivated school principals and staff and common-sense practices like using well-chosen commercial instructional materials or devoting more time to reading. Not surprisingly, results have been mixed. Schools that have achieved excellence are challenging to sustain and replicate, because their outcomes rely on near-heroic efforts by teachers with rare skills and education.

Sabis Educational System Components

At the heart of Sabis’s approach is a detailed, college-preparatory curriculum that is tightly linked to an electronic assessment system, innovative pedagogical protocols, tools for building a transformative school culture, and state-of-the-art school management software. These five elements function as a seamless whole. Rigorously implemented, the system enables students of average abilities to progress at an accelerated rate, especially in the middle- and high-school grades.

Specialized diagnostic tests, administered at the school’s launch to all students (and each year thereafter to new students), guide placement decisions and detect learning gaps that impede student

progress. More than 900 short texts—spanning kindergarten through college-level AP classes—explicitly identify the “points” teachers cover in daily lessons. After the teacher presents each point, prefects—academically able students trained to help their peers learn—ensure that their classmates have grasped the point. Weekly computer-based tests assess students’ mastery of the material; a state-of-the-art school management system reports results immediately to teachers and school administrators. Teachers address learning gaps by re-teaching material or arranging targeted peer tutoring. Crucially, the model extends through the high school grades, where it produces its most striking achievement outcomes—including, when implemented faithfully, near universal college admission.

Within one of the above elements, the school management software, consider just one module: the Sabis Exam Generator. Whether the subject is division in the third grade or second-year physics in the twelfth, by simply entering the range of pages on which students are to be tested, the generator instantly compiles a complete exam, which can be administered and scored electronically, and is not limited to multiple choice questions. Results are automatically entered into the student’s grade book and averages. The generator draws from a large database of test items tightly keyed to the sequence and idiom of the curriculum.

Another software module, the Sabis Scoreboard, shows school leaders at a glance the instructional health of each classroom, with “traffic lights” showing whether students are proceeding on pace and with sufficient levels of mastery. By clicking on a grade, section, or even an individual student, users can pinpoint problem areas.

Central to the Sabis system are prefects, students who help their peers to learn. The prefect system dramatically accelerates the education process. By establishing a universal system of cooperative learning, the prefect system helps to create a school culture in which students help one another to learn, take responsibility for their own learning, and prize academic excellence.

Career educators can deploy the Sabis tools to post achievement levels among students from educationally disadvantaged families that are at least equal to those of their more affluent peers.

No Excuses School Culture

Most of the charter schools nationwide that are closing the achievement gap are deploying the No Excuses model. A standard No Excuses school is driven by a radically distinct school culture , one that assertively shapes students’ habits, values, and aspirations. Teachers hold stark convictions: the goal for every child is college. Knowledge, the schools insist, is the ticket to a better future. Effort, not talent, is the determinant of success. Students are the masters of their own destinies. They can beat the odds. And there are no shortcuts.

No Excuses schools reject excuses for under-achievement and poor behavior. Drawing on Doug Lemov’s taxonomy of effective instructional practices, the school will train teachers in specific, concrete, and actionable techniques to raise academic and behavioral expectations, make the most efficient use of time, create a strong and vibrant culture, and build character and trust. By explicitly teaching classroom procedures and insisting on 100-percent adherence to these practices, teachers at Williamsburg Ascend will build classroom environments where learning can flourish and behavioral problems are infrequent. As at other schools managed by Ascend, low-level misbehavior and incessant verbal corrections, which typically plague urban classrooms, will be replaced with a “warm/strict” embrace that conveys respect, confidence, and clear direction. As the year progresses,

success will build on success and students will develop a new conception of themselves and their futures.

Research Supporting the Design Elements

Significant evidence powerfully shows that each component of the proposed design has raised student achievement with diverse populations.

Research Supporting the Sabis Educational System

At a Sabis school in Springfield, Massachusetts, serving 1,500 racially and economically diverse students in K-12, every senior has gained college admission in each of the past eleven years. In 2011, 90 percent of tenth-graders passed the English and math portion of the MCAS (considered among the most rigorous state tests in the nation). Compared to the Sabis school, the percentage of Springfield district tenth-graders found proficient on the exam was 30 percentage points lower in English and 49 percentage points lower in math. Still more impressive is that the Sabis school’s low-income and minority tenth-graders achieved very high proficiency in reading and math, beating district and statewide averages and closing the achievement gap. In 2008, Newsweek named the Sabis school one of three urban “top U.S. high schools” in Massachusetts.

The results of the Sabis International Charter School in Springfield do not depend on faculty with exceptional educational backgrounds working unusually long hours. In 2008, just 21 percent of teachers attended a “very competitive” undergraduate institution or better, compared to 72 percent of teachers at recently studied KIPP schools. Teachers work an eight-hour day, five days a week, and turnover is low. They are experienced educators, having taught on average for nearly nine years. The school has reported that 28 teachers have been teaching at the school for ten or more years. None is affiliated with Teach For America.

Research Supporting the No Excuses Culture

Evidence of the achievement effects of the No Excuses culture is growing rapidly, as low-income black and Hispanic students at some schools deploying the model (including those managed by KIPP, Achievement First, and Uncommon Schools) are not only beating state averages but are also outperforming their peers in surrounding affluent districts.

KIPP now has 82 schools nationally serving more than 21,000 students. A study by Mathematica Policy Research found “educationally substantial” impacts on state scores among 22 KIPP middle schools. Three years after entering KIPP schools, many students are experiencing achievement effects that are approximately equivalent to an additional year of instruction, enough to substantially reduce race- and income-based achievement gaps.2

While the Mathematica study offers the most rigorous examination of the No Excuses model, other charter management organizations employing the No Excuses approach cite evidence of closing the achievement gap. Uncommon Schools has 21 affiliated schools in New York and New Jersey. In 2011, on average across the network’s eleven New York schools tested by the state, 52 percent of K-8 test-takers (98 percent of whom were black or Hispanic) scored proficient or advanced on state tests in ELA, compared with the New York City District’s average of 44.3 In math, 85 percent of students achieved at this level, compared with 73 percent of white students statewide. Achievement First, which manages 20 schools in New York and Connecticut, has posted similar results at its New

York schools: 70 percent of fourth-graders scored proficient or advanced in ELA and math, compared with 62 percent statewide.

A Harvard/MIT research study of Boston’s charter schools compares the performance of students in four No Excuses middle schools and two high schools with students who applied in the enrollment lottery but were not admitted. With an experimental design eliminating selection effects and establishing a true control group, this study found “strong evidence that the charter model has generated substantial test score gains” in the No Excuses schools in comparison to students who remained in the Boston Public Schools.

As commonly applied, however, the No Excuses model relies on two factors that make it difficult to sustain and bring to scale: (1) teachers from elite colleges who work extraordinary hours and (2) additional funding (largely to support small class sizes, team teaching, and extended school days and years).

KIPP has reported that 45 percent of the faculty members in Washington, D.C. are alumni of Teach For America, a highly selective program that recruits graduates of top colleges. At these schools and others like them, teachers not only deliver but also develop curricula, assessments, and other tools. Backward planning from state standards, they devise pacing charts and plan units. The approach taps their intellectual capacities but also contributes to the job’s unmanageable demands. Teachers work very long hours and faculty turnover is high. One study found that at KIPP middle schools in the San Francisco Bay area, teachers work an average of 65 hours per week, and teacher turnover at these schools was 49 percent between the 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 school years.4

While these figures may represent an extreme, the Report on Interim Findings of The National Study of Charter School Management Organization (CMO) Effectiveness, published by the Center on Reinventing Public Education and the Mathematica Policy Research Institute, reveals high turnover is a common challenge for charter school operators nationwide. The report concludes that CMOs, with their reliance on scarce human capital, were tapping out local hiring markets. More than four in ten CMO hires, the study found, come from non-traditional sources, such as other charter schools, parochial schools, and alternative certification programs. About a third of CMOs in the study reported that 20 percent or more of their 2008-2009 teacher workforce came from the ranks of Teach For America.

At No Excuses CMOs, the reliance on scarce labor is even greater. An analysis of five KIPP schools found that 72 percent of their teachers and leaders had attended top undergraduate institutions ranked “very competitive” to “most competitive” in Barron’s Profiles of American Colleges, compared to 19 percent of public school teachers generally. The labor pool of such elite college graduates is small, and the pool of gifted educational missionaries is smaller still. Even if one in every ten graduates of top colleges entered teaching for two years (the average tenure at KIPP-like No Excuses charter schools) before moving to other careers, they would provide only six percent of the some 450,000 teachers currently working in the nation’s largest urban public-school systems. The U.S. might have enough of these teachers to staff a few hundred more No Excuses schools, but not a few thousand, and certainly not enough to reach every disadvantaged child in America. “Extreme schooling” works, but it is difficult to sustain or scale, which raises questions about whether it offers a solution to underachievement in American education.

In contrast, the proposed school’s model permits capable career educators to achieve gap-closing results while working at a sustainable pace by equipping them with the powerful tools of Sabis and the No Excuses school culture.

The second key challenge most No Excuses schools face is their unsustainable cost, at both the school and network levels.

At the school level, the educational and business model must be highly productive—that is, it must generate superior outcomes without relying on ongoing philanthropic support or “in kind” supports from local or state government (such as the provision of space in public school buildings) that may not be politically sustained. Yet most high-performing charter schools rely on small class sizes and team teaching, which are expensive and leave few resources available for securing private space or defraying the cost of the network office. CMOs moreover commonly incur deficits undertaking the costly development and provision of academic management tools and other school supports that swell their central office expenses.

According to the National Study of CMO Effectiveness survey, “the average CMO relies on philanthropy for approximately 13 percent of its total operating revenues, but the number is much higher when central office revenues are isolated. Those CMOs funded by NewSchools Venture Fund report that 64 percent of their central office revenues come from philanthropy. The variation is significant, ranging between 32 percent and 100 percent of CMO central office revenues.” Of the CMOs studied, none had yet reached even its own definition of financially “sustainable.”

Early Results

New York State Tests Each year, New York State tests all students in grades three through eight in both English language arts (ELA) and math. In 2011-2012, three Ascend schools, Brooklyn Ascend Lower School, Brooklyn Ascend Middle School, and Brownsville Ascend Lower School, enrolled students in a tested grade.

Fourth- and fifth-graders at Brooklyn Ascend Lower School and Brooklyn Ascend Middle School, the network's oldest students, posted the highest English scores on the 2012 state test of all Brooklyn schools run by charter management organizations.

Sixty-seven percent of Brooklyn Ascend fifth-graders demonstrated proficiency in ELA; in math, 85 percent scored proficient or advanced. Brooklyn Ascend’s fourth-graders also topped their peers in this cohort on the ELA exam, with 76 percent scoring in the proficient and advanced range. These results also significantly exceeded the average for all schools in New York State, the community school district in which the school is located, and New York City. The results are remarkable for their consistency—in every school, grade, and subject, proficiency levels were higher than any of the three comparison groups.

In 2012, on average, 58 percent of all students statewide (of all family incomes) were proficient in English and 67 percent in math. Eighty percent of Ascend's students at Brooklyn Ascend Charter School are from low-income families, and 95 percent are black or Hispanic. At Brownsville Ascend 93 percent are from low-income families, and 99 percent are black or Hispanic.

In 2012, Brooklyn Ascend Charter School earned an "A" on its annual progress report from the New York City Department of Education. The Department annually compiles progress reports to help

parents, teachers, principals, and school communities understand schools' strengths and weaknesses. The reports grade each school with an A, B, C, D, or F, based on student progress (60 percent), student performance (25 percent), and school environment (15 percent). Scores are determined by comparing results from each school to a peer group of up to 40 schools with the most similar student populations and to all schools citywide. Brooklyn Ascend earned an "A" for both student progress and student performance.

Reading Gains Ascend school scholars’ strong reading performance is especially notable given the correlation between reading mastery in the early elementary grades and long-term academic achievement.

At each school, students arrived performing below 70 to 80 percent of their peers nationally—between the 20th and 30th percentile on the TerraNova, a respected, nationally normed reading test. By spring of their first year with Ascend, they surpassed the national average.

During the first year of operation at Brooklyn Ascend Charter School, every grade made gains of at least 30 percentile points in both reading and math. Second-graders arrived reading at the 24th percentile in the fall, and advanced to the 62nd percentile by the spring. In math, they jumped from the 24th percentile to the 55th percentile. As fifth-graders, these students read The Tempest and excerpts from The Odyssey and Frederick Douglass's autobiography (among other works) in a humanities course as challenging as offerings at the nation’s top private schools. That spring, they posted the highest scores of Brooklyn CMO-run charter schools on the state test of English Language Arts—nearly as high as students in Scarsdale, New York, where family income is on average ten times that of the Ascend community (see below).

Scholars at Ascend’s other schools have made achievement gains at least as impressive. At the newest school in the network, Bushwick Ascend, which opened in September 2010, students climbed from the 22nd percentile in reading to the 52nd percentile in just eight months.

The student population at each Ascend school is almost entirely black and Hispanic, with the vast majority of students qualifying for free or reduced-priced lunch (77 percent at Brooklyn Ascend, 93 percent at Brownsville Ascend, and 87 percent at Bushwick Ascend).

Parent Satisfaction Annual independent surveys commissioned by the New York City Department of Education have found exceptionally high levels of parent satisfaction across Ascend’s three schools. In 2011, at least 97 percent of respondents at each school indicated they “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that:

• My child is learning what he or she needs to know to succeed in later grades or after graduating from high school

• The school has high expectations for my child • I feel welcome in my child’s school • My child is safe at school

Likewise, at least 97 percent of respondents at each school reported that they were “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with:

• The quality of their children’s teachers • The level of assistance their children receive when they need extra help with class work or

homework • The opportunities to be involved in their children’s education

Wait Lists Burgeoning wait lists for admission also testify to the strength of the Ascend design. More than 6,200 children are on Ascend’s wait lists, and the number increases daily.

Demonstration of Need

Community Description

Over the course of a lifetime, a college graduate will earn more than $1 million more than a high school graduate. Over the past decade, jobs not requiring college have been vanishing. Six hundred thousand jobs have been eliminated for those without a high school degree; more than 10 million jobs have been created for those with a four-year degree. College is the ticket out of poverty. Just as importantly, college introduces us to intellectual and cultural riches that forever change our lives.

Given the demographic and the performance data on schools in Paterson, it is expected that proposed school’s student population will be predominantly low-income. The applicants also expect that many students will arrive to school performing below state standards, with unique needs and learning deficits (including limited English proficiency).

The New Jersey Department of Education (NJDOE) website provides the most recent student demographic profile of Paterson. According to the data, of the 24,249 students enrolled during the 2011-2012 school year, 86 percent qualified for free lunch or reduced priced lunch.5 On the whole, families in Paterson with school-age children are working hard to make ends meet, and the struggles of many have intensified with the recent economic downturn. Census data reveal 30 percent of families with related children under 18 living below the poverty level.

Statistics also reveal a population that is remarkably diverse in ethnicity, culture, and language. According to the NJDOE website, Hispanics comprise 62 percent of the student population in Paterson, African-Americans 28 percent, Caucasians six percent, and Asians or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islanders four percent.6 Twenty percent of the district’s students are also English language learners and thirteen percent of students had Individualized Education Plans in conjunction with general education classes.7

For many adults in the target community, college has remained an unattainable goal. The NJDOE website indicates that the adjusted cohort graduation rate in 2011 was 64 percent in Paterson. The founders expect that the great majority of the school’s students will be first-generation college aspirants, and as such they will likely require special support in preparing for higher education. The founders are dedicated to providing a rigorous, vibrant college-bound curriculum and culture that includes families and all members of the school community.

Need for the Proposed School

Paterson currently lacks a sufficient number of charter schools to serve the burgeoning demand for quality public education alternatives. The founders have chosen Paterson because of the underperformance of the district schools, the high rate of poverty in the community, and the relatively low number of charter schools. The combination of these factors has left many families trapped in failing schools. Paterson City currently only has three charter schools, none of which emphasize college readiness from the earliest grades. There are also private school options in the Paterson School District. Of the nine non-public schools all are parochial schools and enroll less than 800 students, which add only 0.03 percent to the student population enrolled in public school.8

In 2010-2011, Paterson students performed on average well below the statewide average on both the New Jersey English language arts (ELA) and exams in grades 4 and 8, as illustrated in the following table:9

2010-2011 New Jersey State Test Results

Proficient or Advanced Performance

Paterson Public School District Statewide

ELA, Grade 4 33% 63%

Mathematics, Grade 4 56% 80%

ELA, Grade 8 54% 83%

Mathematics, Grade 8 41% 72%

(See Exhibit 4a for a comprehensive academic performance list of the Paterson District’s public schools in grade 4.)

Paterson Collegiate Charter School has been designed specifically to serve the students of the district, mainly economically disadvantaged children of color, who are caught in underperforming schools yet aspire to college and successful adulthood.

Community and Parent Involvement

To inform stakeholders in the Paterson District about the proposed school, Hannah Njoku, Ascend Learning’s community organizing consultant, led a preliminary outreach effort to speak to parents and the community about the proposed charter school.

On July 9, 2012, Njoku spent a full day in the district visiting multiple day care centers (Friendship Corner Day Care, Boys and Girls Club, and Dorothy’s Little Tots), an after-school program center (Paterson Community Gymnasium), and a church (Saint Joseph Catholic Church). On July 12, 2012, Njoku spent another fully in the school district, visiting four more day care centers: the YMCA, El Mundo Del Nino, Passaic County Community College Child Care Center, and Saint Joseph’s Child Care.

Reaction to the proposed school ranged from indifferent to positive. The indifference mostly stemmed from the lack of thorough understanding and/or awareness of charter schools. Lily Sanchez, the director of operations of Friendship Corner Day Care Center, perceived a charter school to be a hybrid of private and public schooling. Three parents and one of the program coordinators at the Boys and Girls Club came to the consensus that their only knowledge of charter schools was the school of thought that they are a “public school take-over.” Other leaders and parents supported the idea of the proposed school. At the YMCA, the program director Michael Moro and two program coordinators, Lynn Kitchings and Latasha Harris, welcomed the idea of the proposed school, acknowledging the need for more charters schools in the community and bearing witness to parents’ desire to have their children attend one. At Saint Joseph Catholic Church, an active church member and parent, Madeline Suarez stated that she has done significant research into charter schools and welcomes more, believing that they provide parents with more educational options.

If the Phase One application is approved, the founders will proceed with further ongoing community engagement for the purpose of soliciting community feedback and addressing any concerns directly in the application. To start, the founders will post on the main page of the Ascend Learning website a link to an announcement regarding the initiative to establish Paterson Collegiate Charter School and solicit community feedback. The announcement, will describe the proposed location, school district, enrollment plan, school’s mission, and education model. Visitors to the website will be welcome to submit comments to a specified email. A similar announcement will be posted in the local newspapers or news channels.

While preparing the Phase Two application, the founders will also host a public hearing to serve as another platform to introduce the school and solicit feedback. A brief presentation in English and Spanish on the school design will be conducted, followed by a brief question and answer session. Finally, the founders will distribute comment cards on which community residents will be able to leave questions or comments, should any be left unaddressed.

Education Service Provider or Replicating Entity Information

Ascend Learning’s targeted districts for developing schools in New Jersey is Paterson and Trenton. During the 2011-2012 school year, 86 percent of Paterson students qualified for free or reduced priced lunch (FRPL); and 82 percent of Trenton students qualified for FRPL. Census data reveal 30 percent of Paterson families with related children under 18 are living below the poverty level and 37 percent in Trenton. In Paterson, Hispanics comprised 62 percent of the student population, African-Americans 28 percent, Caucasians six percent, and Asians or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islanders four percent; in Trenton, it is 37 percent, 59, 2, and 1, respectively. Twenty percent of Paterson students are also English language learners (ELL) and thirteen percent of students had Individualized Education Plans (IEP) in conjunction with general education classes. In Trenton, the ELL data is not available on the NJDOE website, but 26 percent of students have an IEP in conjunction with general education classes. For many adults in the target community, college has remained an unattainable goal. The NJDOE website indicates that the adjusted cohort graduation rate in 2011 was 64 percent in Paterson and 48 percent in Trenton. The founders expect that the great majority of the schools’ students will be first-generation college aspirants, and as such they will likely require special support in preparing for higher education.

Ascend Learning’s vision for developing schools in Paterson, New Jersey is to systematically implement the Ascend educational model and close the achievement gap and set students on a path to college. Ascend plans to launch one Paterson charter school in the fall of 2013 and another in the fall of 2015; and one Trenton school in 2014 and another in 2016. The central objectives for each school are as follow: (1) enroll by lottery at each school a student population representative of its surrounding community, (2) close the achievement gap at each school by demonstrating the achievement levels on state exams equal to or greater than the percentage of students in comparison districts serving affluent, primarily white students, (3) place virtually every student on the path to college, and (4) demonstrate financial and staffing sustainability at each school by executing the model without relying on philanthropic gifts or experiencing excessive staff turnover. Ascend Learning aims to demonstrate a scalable model for urban education. Our schools rely neither on philanthropic support nor on an exotic teaching force. All schools and Ascend Learning have operated at a surplus from inception. None of the schools benefit from free space in district-run schools—all are housed in leased, private space. The schools’ teachers are not primarily scarce Teach for America corps members but rather career educators. Each school will begin its first operational year serving kindergarten and first grade. Each consecutive year, the school will grow by one grade until grades span kindergarten through twelve at maturity. Below is a table of projected numbers of students at each school, assuming an attrition rate of 15 percent in grades 8 and 9, and 5 percent in grades 10 through 12.

Grade Growth Plan

Grade Yr 1 Yr 2 Yr 3 Yr 4 Yr 5 Yr 6 Yr 7 Yr 8 Yr 9 Yr 10 Yr 11 Yr 12

K 100 100 100 100 100 110 110 110 110 110 110 110

1 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112

2 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112

3 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112

4 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112

5 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112

6 112 112 112 112 112 112 112

7 112 112 112 112 112 112

8 95 95 95 95 95

9 81 81 81 81

10 77 77 77

11 73 73

12 69

Total 212 324 436 548 660 782 894 989 1070 1146 1219 1289 In the proposed relationship between Ascend Learning and the school, Paterson Collegiate Charter School would license curricular elements from Sabis. Under the agreement, Ascend would have responsibility for providing the school’s educational program; selecting and acquiring instructional materials; recruiting, recommending to the board for hire, and developing the school director. Ascend would also be responsible for day-to-day operations, including business administration, contracted services, human resources, and maintenance of the school’s facilities. Ascend would assist the school director with recruiting and training of the school’s leadership team, faculty, and staff. Such support from Ascend would allow the leadership team to focus on support of teachers, and filling and forestalling achievement gaps in students. The school director would oversee the leadership team: dean of instruction, dean of students, and director of Operations (who oversees non-instructional staff). The school director would hold her team, faculty, and staff accountable for the performance of their job responsibilities through weekly meetings, semi-annual reviews, and annual performance reviews. Teachers would be held accountable for student results as they track their students’ progress in mastering required skills and concepts. Electronic pacing charts will describe a clear course toward year-end standards, and electronic curriculum tests will measure students’ mastery of the material just taught. In assessing teachers, students’ progress will be supplemented by rigorous and frequent classroom observations. Ascend would assist the board of trustees in holding the school director accountable for his or her responsibilities described in the job description. On behalf of the board, Ascend’s president will closely monitor the director’s performance and formally evaluate her annually using the instrument attached to the charter application. The school director is ultimately responsible for the quality of instruction in the school and the academic progress of the student body; he or she is above all the school’s instructional leader.

Ex1a-24

Ex1a-25

Ex1a-26

Ex1a-27

Ex1a-28

Ex1a-30

Ex1a-31

Ex1a-32

Ex1a-33

Ex1a-34

Exhibit 1b – Founder Resumes

Steven F. Wilson

1 Main Street, Brooklyn, New York 11201 (617) 388-5474

[email protected]

Founder and President, Ascend Learning 2007–present

Formed non-profit organization to forge a scaleable, sustainable model for urban schools to close the achievement gap; negotiated partnership with Beirut-based Sabis to exclusively license its educational system for use in urban markets in the Northeastern U.S.; formed charter school boards; led efforts to obtain charters from NYC Department of Education to open Brooklyn Ascend Charter School in September 2008, Brownsville Ascend Charter School in September 2009, and Bushwick Ascend Charter School in 2010; secured leases for the three schools; in farmed highest ELA scores on NY state tests of CMO schools (flagship school named among top 10 charter schools in NYC); and oversaw architectural planning, building construction, hiring, and student enrollment.

Executive Vice President—Product Development, Edison Schools Inc. 2006

Conceived and led development of a second-generation managed school design and business model for the nation’s largest private manager of public schools, a $400 million operator, intended to radically boost achievement levels and bring the company to profitability.

Senior Fellow, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University 2002–2006

Led research project on private management of public schools at the Center for Business and Government, culminating with Learning on the Job: When Business Takes on Public Schools (Harvard University Press, 2006), which offers a detailed analysis of the first decade of private management of public schools. The book received the Virginia and Warren Stone Prize for an outstanding book on education and society, and was reviewed in the Washington Post, the London Times, and Fast Company, among many other publications. Subject organizations include Edison Schools, KIPP, National Heritage Academies, Sabis, Chancellor Beacon Academies, Advantage Schools, and Mosaica Education.

Consultant 2004–2006

Consultant to leading-edge education organizations, including Edison Schools, Charter School Institute of SUNY, and New Leaders for New Schools.

CEO and Chairman, Advantage Schools, Inc. 1996–2001

Founded and built a charter school management company to create high-quality urban public schools for children from economically disadvantaged families. Realized strong and consistent gains in student achievement across the network of new schools and brought the company to its first quarter of profitability.

• Opened 20 schools educating more than 9,000 students in nine states

• Grew annual revenues to $65 million and achieved first quarter of profitable operations, a first for K-12 management companies

• Oversaw the recruitment and training of more than 900 employees

• Realized annual student gains on national standardized tests of 9.1 percentile points in 1999-2000 across all schools, subjects, and grades (no exclusions)

• Oversaw the development of an ambitious, research-based school design intended to provide a scalable solution to urban underachievement at existing public spending levels; saw gains in some schools of 19 percentile points in seven months; for example, in the Houston school, students rose on

Ex1b-35


average from the 31st percentile to the 50th in their first year, with students in K-2 gaining 43 percentile points in reading.

• Raised $80 million in equity capital from leading venture and institutional capital sources, including Kleiner, Perkins; Chase Capital; Credit Suisse.

• Built or leased and renovated 600,000 square feet of school space.

• Recruited professional management team, including the former superintendent of San Francisco and Dallas.

• Advantage merged with Mosaica Education, a competitor, in August 2001.

Special Assistant to the Governor and Director of Strategic Planning, Commonwealth of Massachusetts 1993–1996

Responsible for Governor William Weld’s key government reform initiatives, including government reorganization and reform of contracted social services. Advised governor on education reform during the period of sweeping changes in the state’s K-12 system; drafted and drove the passage of a strong charter school law; assisted first schools in opening; pressed successfully for tough new academic standards, curricula, and corresponding state assessments.

• Conceived, staffed, and managed governor’s reorganization proposal for $16 billion Massachusetts state government, which identified annual savings of half a billion dollars and reconfigured the state secretariats and agencies. Portions were enacted by the legislature or implemented administratively, including the reorganization of the governor’s cabinet and the state’s education agencies.

• Served as governor’s advisor on education issues and shepherded key initiatives, including charter schools, through an often hostile legislature. Represented governor to numerous audiences. Assisted first charter schools in opening; obtained lease of former University of Massachusetts Boston campus and $10 million public loan for first Edison school in Boston.

• Pressed successfully for tough new academic standards, curricula, and corresponding state assessments; recommended three new appointments to state board of education to uphold these demanding standards. As a result of the new board’s vigilance, the state’s curricula and MCAS tests are regarded as among the best of the states.

• Led a public campaign, including media, to preserve the practice of contracting for services where quality would be improved and costs reduced.

Executive Co-director, Pioneer Institute for Public Policy Research 1990–1993

Co-led Massachusetts’ leading think tank, established its focus on education, doubled its size, and drafted the state’s charter school law.

• Researched and wrote book on urban public education and the Boston Public Schools that recommended the establishment of new, semi-autonomous public schools within the district.

• Proposals in book led to the establishment of the city’s “pilot” schools that are today among the city’s most popular and highest achieving.

• Drafted legislation that became the state’s charter school law and that implemented the book’s principal policy recommendations. Assisted an area business leader in forming a 300-member group of area CEOs that successfully pushed the charter school bill through the legislature and into law.

CEO and Chairman, Data Acquisition Systems, Inc. 1981–1989

Founded and ran this venture capital-backed scientific and industrial automation company. Developed two ambitious hardware and software product lines that transformed their product categories.

• Raised seed venture capital, generated a 150% annual return on investment from creation of joint venture with a leading instrumentation company.

Ex1b-36


• A.B., Harvard College, 1981/90, Sociology

“Rethinking Education Governance for the Twenty-First Century,” chapter in Paul Manna and Patrick McGuinn, eds., Education Governance for the Twenty-First Century, Brookings Institution Press, 2012

“The Efficient Use of Teachers,” chapter in Frederick M. Hess and Eric Osberg, eds., Stretching the School Dollar: How Schools and Districts Can Save Money While Serving Students Best, Harvard Education Press, 2010

Learning on the Job: When Business Takes on Public Schools (book), Harvard University Press, 2006

“Realizing the Promise of Brand Name Schools,” chapter in Diane Ravitch, ed., Brookings Papers on Education Policy: 2005, Brookings Institution Press, 2005

“Opportunities, but a Resistant Culture,” chapter in Frederick M. Hess, ed., Educational Entrepreneurship: Realities, Challenges, and Possibilities, Harvard Education Press, 2006

Reinventing the Schools: A Radical Plan for Boston (book), Pioneer Institute for Public Policy Research, 1992

With Richard Cross and Theodor Rebarber, “Student Gains in a Privately Managed Network of Charter Schools using Direct Instruction” (article), Winter 2002, Journal of Direct Instruction

Annual Report on School Performance, 1999-2000 School Year (report), Advantage Schools, 2001

“The Government We Choose: Lean, Focused, Affordable” (report), Governor’s Office, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1995

“Strengthening the Commonwealth’s Purchase of Service System” (report), Executive Office of Administration and Finance, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1995

Ex1b-37

Carol D. Burt-Miller

64 Warren Street, Paterson, NJ 07524 (201) 349-3826

[email protected]

Co-founder and Head Teacher, Love KidsCare II 2003–present

As head teacher, in charge of creating and implementing preschool lesson plans for teachers. Make learning engaging for children by encouraging and developing various stimulating activities. Supervise a team of teachers.

Co-director, KidsCare USA 1998-2003

Responsible for managing infants and toddlers in the classrooms. Managed a staff of seven and performed administrative duties. Offered pre-natural care and encouraged learning through music, movement, and visual images.

Group Teacher, Bergen Community College 1995-1998

Responsible for managing the classroom, planning lessons. Supervised student teachers and evaluated field students in accordance with criteria established by the Early Childhood Education Faculty. Organized scheduling and meals.

• M.S, Capella University, 2010, Early Childhood Education

• B.S., Caldwell College, 2008, Psychology

• A.S., Oakwood University, 1987

Ex1b-38

Name

Actual Enrollment 2011 -2012

School Type

(Trad’l Public, Public

Charter, Private)

NJASK4 ELA and Math

Performance (% Proficient for SY 2010-2011 or 2011-

2012)

% FRPL

% SPED

% ELL

Racial Composition (% African American, % Hispanic, % White, % Asian American)

Alexander Hamilton Academy

374 Traditional Public

71.7% 87.0% 86.4% 19.7% 25.2% 48.7% 50.3% 1.1% 0.0%

Edward W Kilpatrick


15.9% 53.6% 97.7% 14.9% 0.0% 37.8% 65.2% 1.8% 0.0%

Number 1 280 Traditional Public

58.8% 88.2% 77.9% 19.9% 26.1% 49.3% 47.5% 3.2% 0.0%


19.7% 47.5% 92.9% 21.4% 38.4% 20.0% 72.9% 1.2% 5.4%


43.1% 84.3% 94.4% 9.6% 23.0% 17.4% 92.3% 3.0% 1.1%


44.8% 73.7% 90.3% 12.6% 5.4% 8.4% 53.0% 4.4% 26.8

%

Number 6, Acad Perf Arts


N/A 17.6% 93.7% 10.9% 30.4% 67.2% 21.7% 1.7% 0.2%


28.8% 46.6% 96.9% 11.2% 27.0% 31.8% 88.4% 4.6% 0.2%


47.3% 76.3% 91.7% 8.5% 18.6% 3.0% 53.0% 42.5

%

1.5%


22.4% 36.2% 90.0% 13.9% 28.1% 26.3% 53.5% 1.2% 0.2%


35.3% 47.0% 93.1% 14.0% 11.6% 58.5% 86.6% 0.0% 0.0%


31.6% 56.6% 94.0% 14.5% 16.7% 28.5% 51.1% 2.1% 0.8%


24.6% 34.4% 87.1% 9.0% 12.6% 36.2% 60.2% 0.9% 0.3%


44.4% 61.1% 92.9% 10.0% 31.5% 61.3% 66.0% 3.8% 2.1%


36.0% 43.0% 88.4% 13.2% 29.5% 14.5% 81.3% 0.7% 1.4%


18.8% 46.1% 88.4% 9.0% 12.0% 11.5% 82.8% 3.3% 0.4%


60.9% 68.8% 89.5% 8.8% 9.2% 29.9% 55.0% 12.5

%

16.0

%


16.7% 22.3% 81.2% 22.3% 21.4% 30.5% 46.8% 2.1% 0.2%


23.4% 60.9% 85.2% 8.0% 28.2% 42.6% 52.2% 0.3% 0.0%


41.0% 51.8% 87.5% 10.1% 18.6% 22.4% 93.2% 1.0% 0.2%


42.2% 78.2% 91.6% 10.1% 9.9% 6.7% 76.4% 15.4

%

0.9%


25.4% 33.3% 75.2% 9.7% 8.9% 31.2% 46.1% 0.5% 0.3%


32.7% 63.3% 92.4% 10.1% 9.7% 26.0% 64.3% 5.2% 12.2

%


13.5% 16.9% 92.0% 21.9% 32.1% 42.4% 39.7% 1.7% 1.1%


38.5% 59.1% 89.2% 17.5% 17.8% 50.6% 76.5% 6.8% 7.1%

Martin Luther King


26.7% 65.6% 90.6% 16.5% 35.2% 18.8% 60.0% 4.7% 0.5%

Roberto Clemente


67.4% 93.5% 95.7% 9.4% 18.8% 50.7% 83.4% 1.7% 0.0%

New Roberto Clemente


17.4% 54.7% 89.6% 14.5% 2.3% 11.6% 81.7% 1.6% 0.1%

Norman S. Weir


95.5% 95.5% 82.6% 37.1% 9.3% 52.5% 33.6% 3.0% 0.8%

Napier School of Tech

N/A Traditional Public

46.2% 64.1% N/A 15.3% 25.2% N/A N/A N/A N/A

Community CS of Paterson

455 Public Charter

35.3% 56.4% 50.1% 8.8 0.0% 41.5% 54.3% 1.8% 1.8%

Paterson CS for Science and Technology

733 Public Charter

41.5% 61.0% N/A 7.2 2.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A

John P. Holland CS

165 Public Charter

N/A N/A 98.2% N/A 0.0% 61.8% 38.2% 0.0% 0.0%

Alhuda School

104 Private N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Blessed Sacrament School


Compassion House Outreach Ministry and Christian Education Center

N/A Private N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Dawn Treader School


DR. F. H. Lagarde, Sr. Academy


Future Scholars Learning Center


Gilmore Memorial Chris Acad


Great Commission Christian Acad


Saint Gerard School


Below is an organizational charter of Ascend Learning.

Steven F. Wilson is president and chief executive officer of Ascend Learning. Wilson founded Ascend Learning in 2007, and today he manages Ascend’s central office and supervises the directors of Brooklyn Ascend Charter School, Brownsville Ascend Charter School, and Bushwick Ascend Charter School. He also is responsible for securing the private facilities in which all the schools operate. Currently, the director of student services, director of talent and recruitment, director of strategic planning and legal affairs, chief financial officer and manager of new school development and regulatory affairs or managed by and/or report to Wilson.

Andrew Epstein, chief financial officer, oversees all financial matters, including financial policies and planning, budgeting, accounting, regulatory compliance and financial reporting, payroll, employee benefits, insurance, equipment leasing, purchasing systems and controls, and real estate borrowing. Currently, the director of information technology, director of school operations, and data and analytics associates are managed by and/or report to Epstein.

Zvia Schoenberg, director of strategic planning and legal affairs, oversees Ascend Learning’s school board relations and governance, authorizer relationships, legal affairs, strategic planning, transactions, school safety, and issues related to Ascend families and scholars. Before assuming this role, Schoenberg fulfilled many of these important functions, including the support of school boards, as a consultant to schools within the Ascend network and to Ascend.

Jennifer Young, director of student services, works with the leadership teams and faculties at Ascend schools to provide the structure and support services needed to help every student succeed. Young

oversees the provision of additional services required by students with special needs and limited English proficiency and coaches teachers in the deployment of Sabis’s remediation program (“Intensives”), which is intended to fill students’ learning gaps.

Kevin Barry, director of information technology, manages and maintains the technological infrastructure for the Ascend Learning network of schools to support the Ascend design, and supports and configures system-wide data systems.

Neibaur McCarrey, director of school operations, manages student recruitment, staff recruitment, enrollment, and regulatory affairs, and supports the directors of operation at each school.

Jaclyn E. Vargas, director of talent and recruitment, oversees the recruitment and development of Ascend leaders and educators by building and maintaining pipelines for those who share our commitment to closing the achievement gap, and by developing strategies to cultivate talent across the network.

Nina Ivory, data and analytics associate, manages data and analytics for all schools in the Ascend network. Swearingen is responsible for the full deployment of information systems at the schools and the network office, Sabis’s School Management System (SSMS); coordinating the development of new strategic data systems initiatives, including the lesson and resource bank project with Sabis; and, in conjunction with the schools’ leadership teams, ensuring that the deans of instruction and faculties use academic data to adjust and improve their instructional practices.

Josue Cofresi, manager of new school development and regulatory affairs, manages the organization’s grant-writing and charter application processes, performs research and analysis of issues affecting Ascend Learning and Ascend schools, and assists in community outreach efforts, student enrollment campaigns, and special projects.

By the end of the year, Ascend Learning aims to bolster its employee capacity by forming new departments led by senior positions. The chief operating officer (COO) will have operational responsibility for Ascend and its client schools. Once hired, the COO will manage the director of operations, director of talent recruitment, and director of legal affairs and strategic planning. The chief academic officer (CAO) will be responsible for managing and coaching the directors of the schools, fostering the No Excuses school culture in every school, and improving and implementing Ascend Learning’s educational model to drive student achievement. Once hired, the CAO will manage the director of student services, data and analytics associate, and Sabis Partnership Manager. The director of real estate will be responsible for Ascend Learning’s facilities development, including identifying candidate sites, negotiating leases with developers, securing financing, partnering with Ascend’s architects, and overseeing construction. Once hired, he or she will manage the commercial broker(s), real estate counsel, and architect(s). This will leave the president free to focus on vision, executive management, fundraising, real estate development and financing, and school oversight.

Enclosed as Exhibit 5b are Ascend Learning’s last three years of audited financial statements. No management letters were included with the audit reports as there were no adverse findings.

Enclosed as Exhibit 5c, are Ascend Learning’s most recent internal financial statements, including balance sheets and income statements.

Not applicable

Not applicable

Geoff Decker, Gotham Schools, “For some charters, 2012 reading test gains began with a struggle,” http://gothamschools.org/2012/07/18/for-some-charters-2012-reading-test-gains-began-with-a-struggle/. Christina Clark Tuttle, Bing-ru The, Ira Nichols Barrer, Brian P. Gill, Philip Gleason, “Student Characteristics and Achievement in 22 KIPP Middle Schools: Final Report,” Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., June 2010. 3 http://www.uncommonschools.org/results, accessed May 16, 2012. 4K.R. Woodworth, J.L. David, R. Guha, H. Wang, and A. Lopez- Torkos, San Francisco Bay Area KIPP Schools, p. 33, 35, 66. 5 New Jersey Department of Education: DOE Data: 2011-12 Enrollment, http://www.nj.gov/cgi-bin/education/data/enr11plus.pl. 6 New Jersey Department of Education: DOE Data: 2011-12 Enrollment7 New Jersey Department of Education: Office of Special Education Programs: 2011 Special Education Data, http://www.nj.gov/education/specialed/data/2011.htm. 8New Jersey Department of Education: Office of Special Education Programs: 2011 Special Education Data, http://education.state.nj.us/directory/nonpublic.php. 9 New Jersey Department of Education: Report Cards, http://education.state.nj.us/rc/rc11/index.html.

Ex5a-50

Ex5a-51

Ex5a-52

Ex5b-53

Ex5b-54

Ex5b-55

Ex5b-56

Ex5b-57

Ex5b-58

Ex5b-59

Ex5b-60

Ex5b-61

Ex5b-62

Ex5b-63

Ex5b-64

ASCEND LEARNING, INC. (A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION)

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

JUNE 30, 2010

Ex5b-65

ASCEND LEARNING, INC. (A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION)

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS JUNE 30, 2010

CONTENTS

PAGE

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT 1 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Statement of financial position 2 Statement of activities 3 Statement of cash flows 4 Notes to the financial statements 5 - 8 Independent auditors’ report on supplementary information 9 Schedule of functional expenses 10

Ex5b-66

FRUCHTER ROSEN & COMPANY, P.C. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

156 WEST 56TH STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10019

_________

TEL: (212) 957-3600 FAX: (212) 957-3696

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT

TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF ASCEND LEARNING, INC. We have audited the accompanying statement of financial position of Ascend Learning, Inc. (a not-for-profit corporation) as of June 30, 2010 and the related statements of activities, and cash flows for the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of Ascend Learning, Inc.’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Ascend Learning, Inc. as of June 30, 2010 and the change in its net assets and its cash flows for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

New York, New York February 24, 2011

Ex5b-67

ASSETSCurrent assets:

Cash and cash equivalents 6,243$ Due from related party 62,209 Prepaid expenses 5,644

Total current assets 74,096

Property and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation of $477 34,706

TOTAL ASSETS 108,802$

LIABILITIES AND UNRESTRICTED NET ASSETSCurrent liabilities:

Accounts payable and accrued expenses 176,225$ Due to officer 121,580

Total current liabilities 297,805

Unrestricted net assets (189,003)

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND UNRESTRICTED NET ASSETS 108,802$

ASCEND LEARNING, INC.

STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITIONJUNE 30, 2010

(A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the financial statements.

- 2 - Ex5b-68

Revenue and support:Management service fees 481,303$ Grants 60,000 Facility development fees 95,000

Total revenue and support 636,303

Expenses:Program services 441,773 Management and general 130,682

Total expenses 572,455

Change in unrestricted net assets 63,848

Unrestricted net assets - beginning of year (252,851)

Unrestricted net assets - end of year (189,003)$

ASCEND LEARNING, INC.(A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION)

STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIESFOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2010


- 3 - Ex5b-69

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:Change in unrestricted net assets 63,848$ Adjustments to reconcile change in unrestricted net assets

to net cash provided by operating activities:Depreciation 477

Changes in certain assets and liabilities(Increase) in prepaid expenses (5,644) (Increase) in due from related party (60,929) Increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses 63,758 (Decrease) in due to officer (22,920)

NET CASH PROVIDED BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES 38,590

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:Purchases of property and equipment (35,183)

NET INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS 3,407

CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS - BEGINNING OF YEAR 2,836

CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS - END OF YEAR 6,243$

ASCEND LEARNING, INC.(A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION)

STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWSFOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2010


- 4 - Ex5b-70

ASCEND LEARNING, INC. (A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION) NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

JUNE 30, 2010 NOTE 1 - PRINCIPAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING

POLICIES Nature of Organization Ascend Learning, Inc. (“Ascend”) was incorporated under the laws of the State of New York on

August 6, 2007. Ascend is a non-profit organization exempt from federal income tax under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code and a similar provision under New York State income tax laws.

Ascend operates as a charter school management organization based in New York City. It provides

management services and facility development to its charter schools. Brooklyn Ascend Charter School opened in September 2008. Brownsville Ascend Charter School opened in September 2009. Bushwick Ascend Charter School opened in September 2010.

The mission of Ascend is to develop a scalable solution to the underachievement of economically

disadvantaged children- a system of urban, college preparatory charter schools that operate with widely available resources to post achievement levels equal or superior to suburban schools educating students from middle-class families.

Basis of Presentation

The financial statement presentation follows the requirements of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) in its Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) No. 958-205 which provides guidance for the classification of net assets. The amounts for each of the three classes of net assets are based on the existence or absence of donor-imposed restrictions described as follows:

Unrestricted

Net assets of Ascend whose use has not been restricted by an outside donor or by law. They are available for any use in carrying out the operations of Ascend.

Temporarily Restricted

Net assets of Ascend whose use has been limited by donor-imposed stipulations that either expire with the passage of time or can be fulfilled and removed by actions of Ascend. When such stipulations end or are fulfilled, such temporarily restricted net assets are reclassified to unrestricted net assets and are reported in the statement of activities and changes in net assets, as net assets released from restrictions.

Permanently Restricted

Net assets of Ascend whose use has been permanently limited by donor-imposed restrictions. Such assets include contributions required to be invested in perpetuity, the income from which is available to support charitable purposes designated by the donors.

Ascend had no temporarily or permanently restricted net assets at June 30, 2010.

- 5 -Ex5b-71


JUNE 30, 2010 NOTE 1 - PRINCIPAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING

POLICIES (Continued)

Revenue and Support Grants and other contributions are recognized when the donor makes a promise to give that is, in substance, unconditional. Grants and other contributions of cash are reported as temporarily restricted support if they are received with donor stipulations. Restricted contributions and grants that are made to support Ascend in current year’s activities are recorded as unrestricted revenue. Contributions of assets other than cash are recorded at their estimated fair value.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates.

Cash and Cash Equivalents For the purpose of the Statement of Cash Flows, Ascend considers all highly liquid debt instruments

purchased with a maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

Concentration of Credit Risk Financial instruments which potentially subject Ascend to concentrations of credit risk are cash and cash equivalents. Ascend, places its cash and cash equivalents on deposit in what it believes to be highly credited financial institutions. Cash balances may exceed the FDIC insured levels of $250,000 per institution at various times during the year. Ascend believes that there is little risk and has not experienced any losses in such accounts. Property and Equipment Purchased property and equipment are recorded at cost. Maintenance and repairs are expensed as incurred. Depreciation is provided on the straight line method over the estimated useful lives as follows:

Computers 3 years

Recent Accounting Pronouncements In June 2009, the FASB issued FASB ASC 105, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, which

establishes the FASB Accounting Standards Codification as the sole source of authoritative generally accepted accounting principles. Pursuant to the provisions of FASB ASC 105, Ascend has updated references to GAAP in its financial statements issued for the year ending June 30, 2010. The adoption of FASB ASC 105 did not impact Ascend’s financial position or results of operations.

- 6 -Ex5b-72


JUNE 30, 2010

NOTE 1 - PRINCIPAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued)

Recent Accounting Pronouncements (Continued) Ascend adopted the provisions of ASC 740, Income Taxes, as of July 1, 2009. This standard

clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an organization’s financial statements and prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement standard for the financial statement recognition and measurement of income tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. Ascend has reviewed its tax positions for open tax years and has concluded that the adoption of this standard did not have an impact on the financial statements of Ascend.

NOTE 2 - RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS Charter Schools

Ascend is affiliated with three charter schools: Brooklyn Ascend Charter School, Brownsville Ascend Charter School and Bushwick Ascend Charter School. Ascend supports the charter schools by providing educational materials, recruiting, professional development, start-up funding, and operational support. Ascend entered into an agreement with Brooklyn Ascend Charter School (“Brooklyn Ascend”) on May 1, 2008 to provide the Brooklyn Ascend with its educational management services and designs. Pursuant to the Management Agreement, Ascend is to select and implement Brooklyn Ascend’s educational program, the professional development activities for all Brooklyn Ascend personnel, and manage Brooklyn Ascend’s business administration. As compensation to Ascend for these services, Brooklyn Ascend shall pay an annual fee of 9% of Brooklyn Ascend’s general operating revenues. Management fee revenue for the year ended June 30, 2010 was $285,528. There were no balances due to/from the affiliate at June 30, 2010. Ascend entered into an agreement with Brownsville Ascend Charter School (“Brownsville Ascend”) on March 23, 2009 to provide Brownsville Ascend with its educational management services and designs. Pursuant to the Management Agreement, Ascend is to select and implement Brownsville Ascend’s educational program, the professional development activities for all Brownsville Ascend personnel, and manage the Brownsville Ascend’s business administration. Brownsville will pay Ascend, an annual fee of 9% of Brownsville Ascend’s general operating revenues. Management fee revenue for the year ended June 30, 2010 was $195,775. There were no balances due to/from Brownsville Ascend at June 30, 2010. On September 14, 2009, Ascend entered into an agreement with Brownsville Ascend Charter School (“Brownsville Ascend”) to provide real estate development services for school facilities. As compensation for all services performed by Ascend under this agreement, Ascend shall be paid a total of $120,000, paid in monthly installments of $10,000. Facility development fee for the year ended June 30, 2010 was $95,000.

- 7 -Ex5b-73

ASCEND LEARNING, INC. (A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION) NOTES TO FINANIAL STATEMENTS

JUNE 30, 2010

NOTE 2 - RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS (Continued)

Charter Schools (Continued) In September 2009, Ascend began to pay various costs on behalf of Bushwick Ascend Charter School (“Bushwick Ascend”) for start-up funding to be later reimbursed by Bushwick Ascend. At June 30, 2010, the net balance due from the related charter school was $62,209. Management expects the remainder of the balance to be collected in full by June 30, 2011. Due to Officer Due to officer of $121,580 consisted of professional fees payable of $144,500 incurred in prior years and net payroll advances receivable of $22,920. Payroll advances was applied against payroll in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011.

NOTE 3 - PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT Property and equipment consist of the following at June 30, 2010: Computers $ 2,903 Construction in progress 32,280 35,183 Less: Accumulated depreciation 477 $ 34,706 Depreciation expense was $477 for the year ended June 30, 2010. Construction in progress consists of soft costs associated with development of school facilities.

NOTE 4 - FUNCTIONAL ALLOCATION OF EXPENSE

Directly identifiable expenses are charged to programs and supporting services. Expenses related to more than one function are charged to programs and supporting services on the basis of periodic time and expense studies. Management and general expense includes those expenses that are not directly identifiable with any other specific function, but provide for the overall support and direction of Ascend.

NOTE 5 - SUBSEQUENT EVENT Ascend has evaluated its subsequent events through February 24, 2011, the date that the

accompanying financial statements were issued. Ascend has no material subsequent events requiring disclosure.

- 8 - Ex5b-74

FRUCHTER ROSEN & COMPANY, P.C. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

156 WEST 56TH STREET NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10019

_________

TEL: (212) 957-3600 FAX: (212) 957-3696

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF ASCEND LEARNING, INC. Our report on our audit of the basic financial statements of Ascend Learning, Inc. (a not-for-profit corporation) for the year ended June 30, 2010 appears on page 1. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The schedule of functional expenses is presented for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole.

New York, New York February 24, 2011

Ex5b-75

ManagementProgram andServices General Total

Salaries 368,360$ 40,929$ 409,289$ Payroll taxes and benefits 40,958 4,552 45,510 Staff development 2,585 - 2,585 Audit fees - 12,500 12,500 Legal fees - 30,052 30,052 Other professional fees 1,952 38,505 40,457 Office supplies and materials 12,907 721 13,628 Food 4,483 498 4,981 Communication and technology 1,214 135 1,349 Marketing and recruiting 1,111 124 1,235 Insurance 4,353 484 4,837 Bank fees - 723 723 Travel 3,850 427 4,277 Depreciation - 477 477 Miscellaneous - 555 555 441,773$ 130,682$ 572,455$

ASCEND LEARNING, INC.

SCHEDULE OF FUNCTIONAL EXPENSESFOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2010

(A NOT-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION)

- 10 - Ex5b-76

Ex5b-77

Ex5b-78

Ex5b-79

Ex5b-80

Ex5b-81

Ex5b-82

Ex5b-83

Ex5b-84

Ex5b-85

Ex5b-86

Ex5b-87

Ex5b-88

Ex5b-89

Ex5b-90

Actual Budget Variance Actual Budget Variance

Income

4100 Revenues

4101 Management Service Revenue 173,112 175,204 (2,092) 346,223 350,408 (4,185) 1,720,530 2,066,754 2,102,448 (35,694)

4102 Real Estate Revenue 10,000 7,500 2,500 20,000 15,000 5,000 60,000 80,000 90,000 (10,000)

4103 Salary Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 4100 State Grants 183,112 182,704 408 366,223 365,408 815 1,780,530 2,146,754 2,192,448 (45,694)

4200 Federal Grants

4201 Individual Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4202 Corporate Contrbutions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4203 Foundation Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4204 In-Kind Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4205 Capital Campaign 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 4200 Federal Grants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4300 Fundraising

4400 Interest Revenue 0 29 (29) 0 58 (58) 0 0 350 (350)

4500 Revenue Suspense 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4600 Legal Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Income 183,112 182,733 379 366,223 365,466 757 1,780,530 2,146,754 2,192,798 (46,044)

Expenses

5000 Personnel Expenses

5001 Executive Salaries 23,980 53,595 (29,615) 63,097 107,190 (44,093) 224,663 287,760 643,136 (355,376)

5001 Executive Salaries 23,980 53,595 (29,615) 63,097 107,190 (44,093) 224,663 287,760 643,136 (355,376)

5002 Admin Salaries 40,013 38,825 1,188 64,297 77,650 (13,353) 415,863 480,160 465,900 14,260

5003 Recruiting & Outreach Salaries 8,223 0 8,223 15,307 0 15,307 83,373 98,680 0 98,680

5004 Director of School Culture 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5050 Salaries Reimbursement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 5000 Personnel Expenses 72,217 92,420 (20,203) 142,700 184,840 (42,140) 723,900 866,600 1,109,036 (242,436)

5400 Benefits

5401 Social Security-EE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5402 Social Security-ER 2,414 5,730 (3,316) 5,302 11,460 (6,158) 48,428 53,729 68,760 (15,031)

5403 Medicare-EE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5404 Medicare-ER 1,032 1,340 (308) 2,036 2,680 (644) 10,530 12,566 16,081 (3,515)

5405 Federal Income Tax-Clearing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5406 State Income Tax-Clearing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5407 Local NYC Income Tax-Clearing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5408 FUTA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5409 SUI/DIS 350 703 (353) 1,070 1,406 (336) 5,351 6,421 8,432 (2,011)

5410 Commuter Tax 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5411 403(b) Contribution-EE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5412 403(b) Contribution-Match 525 1,386 (861) 875 2,772 (1,897) 15,761 16,636 16,636 0

5413 NY Surcharge 0 32 (32) 0 64 (64) 0 0 380 (380)

5414 Transit Check-Clearing (208) 0 (208) (520) 0 (520) 520 0 0 0

5415 Transit Check Expense 331 0 331 662 0 662 3,308 3,969 0 3,969

5416 403b Fees 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5417 Aflac 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5500 Insurances 0 0 0

5501 Medical 2,543 5,940 (3,397) 7,206 11,880 (4,674) 54,870 62,076 71,280 (9,204)

5502 Dental 56 563 (507) 524 1,126 (602) 558 1,082 6,754 (5,672)

5503 Vision 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5504 HRA 260 138 122 260 276 (16) 2,600 2,860 1,650 1,210

5505 Life and AD&D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5506 Workers Compensation 286 370 (84) 571 740 (169) 2,856 3,427 4,436 (1,009)

5507 Disability 15 0 15 29 0 29 0 29 0 29

5508 New Fee 0 0 0 690 0 690 0 690 0 690

Total 5500 Insurances 3,159 7,011 (3,852) 9,281 14,022 (4,741) 60,884 70,165 84,120 (13,955)

Total 5400 Benefits 7,603 16,202 (8,599) 18,705 32,404 (13,699) 144,781 163,486 194,409 (30,923)

6100 Curriculum and Classroom

6101 Classroom Supplies & Materials 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6102 Textbooks 0 417 (417) 0 834 (834) 0 0 5,000 (5,000)

Ex5c-91


6103 Library Books 0 167 (167) 0 334 (334) 0 0 2,000 (2,000)

6104 Assessments 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6105 Field Trips 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6106 After School Program 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6107 Phys. Ed. Supplies & Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6108 NYSTL Expense 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6109 NYSSL Expense 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6110 NYSLIB Expense 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6111 Student Life Organizations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6112 Student Food 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6113 Audio-Visual Expense 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6114 Summer School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6115 Saturday School 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 6100 Curriculum and Classroom 0 584 (584) 0 1,168 (1,168) 0 0 7,000 (7,000)

7000 Administrative Expenses

7001 Supplies & Materials 2,109 1,667 442 2,871 3,334 (463) 17,129 20,000 20,000 0

7002 Phone & Internet Expenses 468 500 (32) 850 1,000 (150) 5,150 6,000 6,000 0

7003 Printing & Copying 13 417 (404) 26 834 (808) 4,974 5,000 5,000 0

7004 Dues & Subscriptions 248 167 81 293 334 (41) 1,707 2,000 2,000 0

7005 Postage & Delivery 265 250 15 574 500 74 2,426 3,000 3,000 0

7006 Copier Leased 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7008 Equipment-Non Capitalized 0 167 (167) 0 334 (334) 2,000 2,000 2,000 0

7009 Computers-Non Capitalized 0 125 (125) 0 250 (250) 1,500 1,500 1,500 0 7009 Computers-Non Capitalized 0 125 (125) 0 250 (250) 1,500 1,500 1,500 0

7010 Furn & Fixtures-Non Capitalized 0 125 (125) 45 250 (205) 1,455 1,500 1,500 0

7011 Software-Non Capitalized 0 83 (83) 0 166 (166) 1,000 1,000 1,000 0

7012 Food Services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7013 Furniture and Equipment Lease

7015 Kingsbridge Lease 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7016 NewStar Lease 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 7013 Furniture and Equipment Lease 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7100 Insurances 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7101 Directors & Officers 210 210 0 421 420 1 2,103 2,523 2,523 0

7102 Business Interruption 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7103 Facility Insurance (P&C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7104 Student Accident Insurance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7105 Catastrophic Accident 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7106 Accident Access 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7107 General Liability 0 158 (158) 0 316 (316) 0 0 1,892 (1,892)

7108 Commercial Umbrella 99 101 (2) 199 202 (4) 993 1,191 1,212 (21)

7109 Business & Owners 175 170 5 350 340 10 1,748 2,098 2,034 64

7110 New Fee 0 0 0 (7) 0 (7) 0 (7) 0 (7)

Total 7100 Insurances 484 639 (155) 962 1,278 (316) 4,843 5,805 7,661 (1,856)

Total 7000 Administrative Expenses 3,588 4,140 (552) 5,621 8,280 (2,659) 42,184 47,805 49,661 (1,856)

7200 Professional Services

7201 Auditing Services 0 1,833 (1,833) 0 3,666 (3,666) 22,000 22,000 22,000 0

7202 Payroll Services 282 292 (10) 573 584 (11) 2,865 3,438 3,500 (62)

7203 Special Education Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7204 Admin & Temp Staffing 0 833 (833) 0 1,666 (1,666) 10,000 10,000 10,000 0

7205 Financial Management Services 9,799 3,750 6,049 15,908 7,500 8,408 29,093 45,000 45,000 0

7206 Recruiting Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7207 Technology Services 0 417 (417) 156 834 (678) 4,844 5,000 5,000 0

7208 Security Services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7209 Legal Services 0 4,167 (4,167) 527 8,334 (7,808) 49,474 50,000 50,000 0

7210 Management Fees 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7211 Licensing Fees 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7212 Custodial Services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7213 Substitutes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7214 Matron Services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7215 Architect Services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7216 Executive/Temp Consultants 125 667 (542) 125 1,334 (1,209) 7,875 8,000 8,000 0

Ex5c-92


7217 Facilities Consultants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7218 Development Consultant 0 667 (667) 0 1,334 (1,334) 8,000 8,000 8,000 0

7250 Legal Service Reimbursement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 7200 Professional Services 10,205 12,626 (2,421) 17,288 25,252 (7,964) 134,150 151,438 151,500 (62)

7300 Professional Development

7301 Leadership Consultants & PD 0 8,333 (8,333) 5,000 16,666 (11,666) 95,000 100,000 100,000 0

7302 General Education Consultants & PD 1,006 11,583 (10,577) 1,006 23,166 (22,160) 137,994 139,000 139,000 0

Total 7300 Professional Development 1,006 19,916 (18,910) 6,006 39,832 (33,826) 232,994 239,000 239,000 0

7400 Marketing & Recruitment

7401 Student Recruitment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7402 Staff Recruitment 2,760 4,167 (1,407) 5,614 8,334 (2,720) 44,386 50,000 50,000 0

7403 Marketing Expenses 1,866 0 1,866 1,877 0 1,877 (1,877) 0 0 0

7404 Advertisements & Job Fairs 0 1,000 (1,000) 0 2,000 (2,000) 12,000 12,000 12,000 0

Total 7400 Marketing & Recruitment 4,626 5,167 (541) 7,490 10,334 (2,844) 54,510 62,000 62,000 0

8100 Facilities

8101 Rent 0 2,025 (2,025) 0 4,050 (4,050) 24,300 24,300 24,300 0

8102 Utilities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8103 Repairs & Maintenance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8104 Waste Removal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8105 Custodial Supplies 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8106 Moving Expenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8107 Real Estate Fee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 8100 Facilities 0 2,025 (2,025) 0 4,050 (4,050) 24,300 24,300 24,300 0

8800 Miscellaneous Expenses 8800 Miscellaneous Expenses

8801 Meals & Hospitality 14,053 2,917 11,136 15,255 5,834 9,421 19,745 35,000 35,000 0

8802 Travel Expenses 75 833 (758) 543 1,666 (1,123) 9,457 10,000 10,000 0

8803 Board Expenses 0 167 (167) 0 334 (334) 2,000 2,000 2,000 0

8804 Bank/Misc Fees 50 167 (117) 50 334 (284) 1,950 2,000 2,000 0

8805 Suspended Expenses 11,598 0 11,598 11,680 0 11,680 0 11,680 0 11,680

8806 Temp Due From 45,377 0 45,377 88,114 0 88,114 (88,114) 0 0 0

Total 8805 Suspended Expenses 56,975 0 56,975 99,794 0 99,794 (88,114) 11,680 0 11,680

Total 8800 Miscellaneous Expenses 71,153 4,084 67,069 115,642 8,168 107,474 (54,962) 60,680 49,000 11,680

8900 Depreciation Expense 0 0 0 0 0 0 16,000 16,000 16,000 0

Total Expenses 170,397 157,164 13,233 313,452 314,328 (876) 1,317,857 1,631,309 1,901,906 (270,597)

Net Income 12,714 25,569 (12,855) 52,771 51,138 1,633 462,674 515,445 290,892 224,553

Fixed Assets

1501 Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1502 Furniture & Fixtures 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,000 5,000 5,000 0

1503 Comuters 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,500 8,500 8,500 0

1504 Telephone Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1505 Software 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1507 Construction in Progress 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1509 Leasehold Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1510 Website 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Fixed Assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 13,500 13,500 13,500 0

Other Assets

1601 Intellectual Property 0 0 0 0 0 0 60,000 60,000 60,000 0 Total Other Assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 60,000 60,000 60,000 0

Ex5c-93

Total

ASSETS

Current Assets

Bank Accounts

1000 Primary Checking-5995 87,560.36

1001 Primary Savings-0299 0.01

Total Bank Accounts $ 87,560.37

Accounts Receivable

1100 Accounts Receivable 0.00

1101 Due from Brooklyn 141,706.62

1102 Due from Brownsville 157,485.60

1103 Due from Bushwick 583,922.79

1104 Loans Receivable 0.00

1105 Due From Canarsie 16,474.85

Total 1100 Accounts Receivable $ 899,589.86

Total Accounts Receivable $ 899,589.86

Other Current Assets

1200 Total Current Assets

Total 1200 Total Current Assets $ 15,388.57

12000 Undeposited Funds 0.00

Total Other Current Assets $ 15,388.57

Total Current Assets $ 1,002,538.80

Fixed Assets

1500 Total Fixed Assets

1501 Equipment 2,325.00

1502 Furniture & Fixtures 17,490.91

1503 Computers 11,933.06

1507 Construction in Progress 32,280.13

1510 Website 32,579.25

Total 1500 Total Fixed Assets $ 96,608.35

1700 Accumulated Depreciation (21,808.07)

Total Fixed Assets $ 74,800.28

Other Assets

1600 Other Long-Term Assets

1601 Intellectual Property 179,260.45

Total 1600 Other Long-Term Assets $ 179,260.45

1701 Accumulated Amortization (15,630.87)

Total Other Assets $ 163,629.58

TOTAL ASSETS $ 1,240,968.66

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY

Liabilities

Current Liabilities

Accounts Payable

1800 Accounts Payable 131,954.47

Total Accounts Payable $ 131,954.47

Other Current Liabilities

2200 Total Current Liabilities

2201 Accrued Expenses 10,000.00

2202 Accrued Payroll 64,590.01

2204 Unearned/Deferred Revenue 0.00

2206 Due to Brownsville 0.00

Net Income 52,770.95

Total Equity $ 1,034,424.18

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY $ 1,240,968.66

Ascend Learning

Balance Sheet

As of August 31, 2012

Ex5c-94

July 12 August 12 September 12 October 12 November 12 December 12 January 13 February 13 March 13 April 13 May 13 June 13

Projected Amounts

Remaining in A/R or

A/P or Accrued

Expenses as of June

30, 2013

4100 Revenues

4101 Management Service Revenue 316,903 145,524 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 0

4102 Real Estate Revenue 50,000 0 10,000 10,000 0 40,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4103 Salary Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 4100 State Grants 366,903 145,524 174,666 174,666 164,666 204,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 0

4200 Federal Grants

4201 Individual Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4202 Corporate Contrbutions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4203 Foundation Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4204 In-Kind Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4205 Capital Campaign 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 4200 Federal Grants 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4300 Fundraising

4400 Interest Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4500 Revenue Suspense 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4600 Legal Revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Revenue 366,903 145,524 174,666 174,666 164,666 204,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 0

Expenses

5000 Personnel Expenses

5001 Executive Salaries 39,117 23,980 22,466 22,466 22,466 22,466 22,466 22,466 22,466 22,466 22,466 22,466 0

5002 Admin Salaries 24,283 40,013 41,586 41,586 41,586 41,586 41,586 41,586 41,586 41,586 41,586 41,586 0

5003 Recruiting & Outreach Salaries 7,083 8,223 8,337 8,337 8,337 8,337 8,337 8,337 8,337 8,337 8,337 8,337 0

5004 Director of School Culture 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5050 Salaries Reimbursement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 5000 Personnel Expenses 70,483 72,217 72,390 72,390 72,390 72,390 72,390 72,390 72,390 72,390 72,390 72,390 0

Total 5400 Benefits 7,599 13,816 13,730 13,600 13,600 13,600 13,600 13,600 13,600 13,600 13,600 13,600 0

Total 7000 Administrative Expenses 3,927 3,415 4,046 4,046 4,046 4,046 4,046 4,046 4,046 4,046 4,046 4,046 0

Total 7200 Professional Services 5,735 21,576 10,213 10,213 10,213 10,213 10,213 10,213 10,213 10,213 10,213 10,213 22,000

Total 7300 Professional Development 12,204 5,016 0 24,642 24,642 24,642 24,642 24,642 24,642 24,642 24,642 24,642 0

Total 7400 Marketing & Recruitment 3,774 4,626 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 0

Total 7400 Marketing & Recruitment 3,774 4,626 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 5,360 0

Total 8100 Facilities 0 0 0 0 0 24,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 8800 Miscellaneous Expenses 1,920 20,754 3,801 3,801 3,801 3,801 3,801 3,801 3,801 3,801 3,801 3,801 0

Total Expenses 105,642 141,420 109,539 134,052 134,052 158,352 134,052 134,052 134,052 134,052 134,052 134,052 22,000

Net Revenue 261,261 4,104 65,126 40,614 30,614 46,314 30,614 30,614 30,614 30,614 30,614 30,614 (22,000)

Capital Expenses

1500 Total Fixed Assets

1501 Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1502 Furniture & Fixtures 0 0 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1503 Comuters 0 0 0 8,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1504 Telephone Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1505 Software 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1507 Construction in Progress 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1509 Leasehold Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1510 Website 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Fixed Assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1600 Other Assets

1601 Intellectual Property 0 0 0 0 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 0

Total Other Assets 0 0 0 13,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 0

Ending Cash Balance as of August 31, 2012: 87,560

Beginning Balance Sept 1, 2012: 87,560 152,687 179,801 202,915 241,729 264,844 287,958 311,072 334,186 357,300 380,415

Cash In-Flow 174,666 174,666 164,666 204,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 164,666 0

Cash Out-Flow 109,539 147,552 141,552 165,852 141,552 141,552 141,552 141,552 141,552 141,552 22,000

Total Cash Flow (In + Out Flow) 65,126 27,114 23,114 38,814 23,114 23,114 23,114 23,114 23,114 23,114 (22,000)

Ending Balance: 152,687 179,801 202,915 241,729 264,844 287,958 311,072 334,186 357,300 380,415 358,415

Ex5c-95

Documents

Paterson Collegiate Charter School Phase One Application (CO