The Deputy Executive Director (COO) presented the SCSC's updated strategic plan, highlighting updates made to comply with the state standards, including reducing the number of objectives from 6 to 3 and aligning the new objectives to the SCSC mission. 

In addition, SCSC leaders completed an environmental scan and identified the following critical issues for FY26: (a) CSP grant transfer; (b) implementation of new legislation; and (c) improving organization infrastructure. Staff action plans were discussed. Staff will provide informal updates to commissioners quarterly, with a final report at the end of the year to summarize FY26 outcomes and plan new actions. 

Fiscal and Operational monitoring tasks opened on September 15, 2025, in the Epicenter platform. Schools were provided with a recording of the monitoring webinar, handbook, and staff and Epicenter contact information. The monitoring submission deadline is October 31, 2025.

The Director of Research & Evaluation shared the results of the SCSC's third Principles and Standards of Quality Charter School Authorizing review. She discussed how the SCSC's staff values are evident in the SCSC's review. Many recommendations from NACSA were well underway at the time of evaluation. The details of this report are contained in the linked presentation materials.

Commissioner Sweeny asked for more clarity on NACSA's recommendation to be mindful of how the pace of change may impact schools. 

Commissioner Scafidi remarked that we should continue to decrease the burden on schools performing well and applauded the staff for their work. Chairman Dudgeon agreed with Commissioner Scafidi and noted the difference in responses from schools last year and this year with respect to the authorizer respecting charter school autonomy.

Chairman Dudgeon discussed the history of schools using the credit recovery model, specifically, models similar to the district collaborative schools formerly authorized by the SCSC and now under GaDOE supervision. The question posed for commissioners is whether credit recovery models are appropriate for state charter school authorization, given their reliance on support from local boards of education.

Commissioner Brockway added that district collaborative schools tend to function as networks, adding new districts/sites to the existing network. Commissioner Brockway agreed with Chairman Dudgeon and added that these schools should be treated like district collaboration schools, which are overseen by GaDOE.

Commissioner Millan sought clarity as to why district collaborative schools are no longer state charter schools. Chairman Dudgeon referenced the bill that identified these district collaborative schools as separate types of schools with their own funding. 

Commissioner Good recused herself from the conversation, noting a potential conflict of interest.

Commissioner Scafidi asked, and Chairman Dudgeon confirmed, that the SCSC has received petitions for these types of models, specifically one last start-up petition cycle. That school was approved by a local board of education, so the SCSC did not have the authority to act on the petition.

Commissioner Sweeny noted the difficulty in supporting schools whose strategies rely heavily on local district support for implementation- agreeing with prior commissioner comments. Commissioner Scafidi noted that if SCSC approval is off the table, local board approval may be less likely. Chairman Dudgeon agreed and noted that approving this type of school over the local board's denial could make the local collaboration needed to implement the model more difficult. 

The Executive Director noted the SCSC's history of being model agnostic. The Director of Research & Evaluation noted the difference between completion schools and credit recovery, which refers to a wide variety of educational strategies. She noted that completion schools should not be state charter schools, regardless of their implementation of a credit recovery strategy. 

Chairman Dudgeon acknowledged that accurate terminology will be critical. He further clarified that this question relates to schools whose target students are those needing to complete courses for their diploma rather than schools implementing credit recovery, among other strategies, within their educational programs. Chairman Dudgeon asked staff to consider how to clarify that completion schools (or those schools that specifically exist to allow students to make up credits) are not appropriate for SCSC authorization because of the local support needed to implement the educational plan successfully.

Chairman Dudgeon discussed how the SCSC should approach multiple pre-opening deferrals. The Chairman noted prior ideas to address this, including ways of limiting the number of pre-opening deferrals. During the policy retreat, there was a general consensus that schools should not defer more than 2 years.

The General Counsel suggested contract language to address this issue. All commissioners agreed with the General Counsel's recommendation.