An Analysis Of The Charter School Facility Landscape In Arkansas PDF Download

In the spring of 2012, the Massachusetts Charter Public School Association, the Colorado League of Charter Schools, and the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools worked to collect data that would reveal and accurately portray the adequacy of charter school facilities and the average spending for facilities out of charter schools' operating budgets in Massachusetts. As described more fully in this report, the results of the data collection efforts provide evidence that charter schools in Massachusetts pay more for facilities compared to traditional public schools, yet charter school students do not have access to many of the same facilities and amenities as compared to their peers in traditional public schools. In order to ensure that the recommendations of this effort were research-based and supported by reliable data, Hutton Architecture Studio--a leader in educational facilities architecture--consulted on the project to provide a set of reasonable expectations for school facilities' size and amenities. In order to ensure that the policy recommendations of this report are research-based and supported by reliable data, Cuningham Group Architecture, Inc. consulted on the project to provide a set of reasonable expectations for school facilities' size and amenities. Given the alignment of the Facilities Initiative and the goals and data needs of the U.S. Department of Education's (ED) Charter Schools Program (CSP), ED procured additional state surveys, including Arkansas. The National Charter School Resource Center at American Institutes for Research (AIR) has been subcontracting with the Colorado League of Charter Schools to collect the research and data on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education since October of 2011. To date, AIR has subcontracted for the data collection and research of charter school facilities in four states: Idaho (ED561933), Michigan (ED561921), Massachusetts, and New Jersey (ED561926). This report is based on facilities survey and measurement data plus enrollment and operating revenue data collected for the 2012-2013 school year. The following are appended: (1) Methodology; and (2) School Facility Standards.