Due to committee attendance, this item was tabled.

Meghan presented.  There is not a lot of news.  We are projecting higher revenues than originally anticipated due to higher E-rate funding; we are using this to purchase additional chromebooks.  

Amy asked if there was anything noteworthy or if there were any challenges.  We just submitted our SIMS report and enrollment is on target with no issues to note.

Meghan noted that the state has a new grants management system and that we are seeing some lag in grant receipts due to the new system.  This is a timing issue, not an issue about final amounts.

Amy highlighted the dashboard and Meghan outlined key metrics.  She noted that the percentage of program paid by tuition is in the “yellow” because ESSER funding is impacting this metric this year.  The percentage of total revenue expended on facilities is in the “yellow” in part due to the new lease accounting standard.  In short, while we are in “moderate risk” in two areas, we don’t see these as areas of concern.  

Ron asked about E-rate funding.  Meghan outlined the program, a federal grant program.  This funding is allowing us to have a one-to-one ratio of chromebooks and “pre-buy” for next year.

Meghan summarized our rationale for an RFP process.  AAF has been our auditor since we opened and while we have been happy with their services, it is good practice to seek proposals on occasion.  Meghan noted that the majority of charter schools use AAF, but there are some others who are used by charter schools.  Meghan has three firms that we could submit this to directly.   Ron asked about the timeline for this and Meghan provided an outline.  Amy shared that this is a good step from a governance perspective, noted how much of a leader in charter school accounting they are, and asked how we intend to notify them.  Bill noted the tension between wanting to use local providers while also wanting to have firms with sector-specific expertise. Next steps include moving this to the full board for approval at next week’s meeting.

Marelin presented the updates to the FPP.  These are small changes, eg., changes of who in the finance department plays certain roles and a move to electronic time-keeping for hourly employees.  Mary Kate asked about how the payroll process works.  Marelin explained how we manage it and then work with HR Knowledge and ADP to process payroll.  

Meghan shared why we are doing an RFP and that we are planning to move forward with Pioneer Landscapes since we have had a positive experience with their landscaping work.  Amy asked whether there was any chance to leverage city services and Meghan explained that this was procured and managed separately.    

Given the ESSER decrease next year, we are beginning to think about our budget needs earlier than usual.  Meghan noted that expected Student Opportunity Act funding over time will compensate for the loss of ESSER funds.  She outlined a number of scenarios.  She explained why we may want to consider projecting not to be fully hired.  Amy noted that socializing this will be important so stakeholders (board, staff, etc.) understand some of the processes and some of the tradeoffs. She asked about our planned next steps.  

Ron thanked Meghan for putting this together because it makes it easier to talk about.  He said that cutting COLA could hurt on the staff side but he knows (as a parent and board member) how important programming is so advocates cutting around the “edges” as much as possible instead of reducing core programming.  

Mary Kate asked about whether there are rules about how much we can hold. Bill discussed teacher salary scale and the different ways a COLA increase could impact the budget. Bill reviewed the difference between how we have budgeted in terms of what would be ideal for program and how we can approach budgeting differently with a lean lens, without having significant impact on program.

Amy discussed connecting this work to the long term strategic planning and creating a calendar of when we will get additional information on inputs.  Bill shared that we would also consult other school committees, such as the Team Chair Counsel to get additional inputs on what program areas feel most important to preserve.  Amy suggested using this as an initial preview.  She also suggested emphasizing that this is a very initial draft of preliminary thinking.  

We will cancel the November meeting and will not meeting until January unless we need.  We may need to extend the January meeting to review RFP responses.