Portland Public Schools officials reviewed annual performance frameworks for five district‑authorized charter schools at a charter schools committee meeting, reporting enrollments, state assessment results, facility updates and next steps on equity and oversight.

Sunita Sandoz, director of charter schools for Portland Public Schools, said the office’s “mission is to support and monitor a high performing and innovative PPS charter school portfolio, to promote equity and learning for all students,” and described the office’s roles in oversight, fiscal pass‑through and school support.

The presentation covered the Emerson School; Kairos PDX Learning Academy; Le Monde French Immersion; Portland Arthur Academy; and Portland Village School. Staff said the five PPS‑sponsored charter schools enroll just under 1,300 students in total and that two additional state‑sponsored charter schools in district boundaries enroll about 475 students, for roughly 1,800 students statewide who attend charter schools within the district’s footprint.

Enrollment and recent assessment highlights included:

- Emerson School (K‑5): enrollment about 130. In the 2023–24 Oregon state assessment (OSAS) results cited by staff, 62% of Emerson students met or exceeded in English language arts (ELA) and 56% met or exceeded in math for tested grades 3–5. Staff noted Emerson moved into a renovated downtown facility in January and has a 15‑year lease with a five‑year option.

- Kairos PDX Learning Academy (K‑5): enrollment about 205. Kairos met or exceeded at 35.4% in ELA and 23.2% in math on 2023–24 OSAS; staff noted Kairos’s student population includes a majority from historically underserved racial groups, and that Kairos’s Black students outperformed district Black students in ELA by roughly 3 percentage points in the cited grades. Timothy Rogers began as principal in December and staff said leadership turnover in recent years has been a factor under consideration.

- Le Monde French Immersion (K‑8): enrollment about 376. Staff reported strong OSAS performance for tested grades (about 89% meeting/exceeding in ELA and 75% in math for cited grades) and noted that 100% of its eighth‑grade graduates meet high‑school language credit requirements before ninth grade.

- Portland Arthur Academy (K‑5): enrollment about 162. State data cited by staff show roughly 70% meeting/exceeding in ELA and about 50% in math for grades 3–5; Arthur’s English language learners substantially outperformed district ELL peers in the cited measures. Staff noted Arthur is part of a consortium of Arthur Academies and uses a highly structured Direct Instruction model.

- Portland Village School (K‑8): enrollment about 421. Staff said Portland Village moved into a new South Waterfront facility last September; 2023–24 data showed increases from the prior year (ELA up from 49% to 56%, math up from 42% to 47%).

Staff also addressed two state‑sponsored charters located within Portland: Cottonwood (about 200 students) and The Ivy School (about 275 students). Portland Public Schools provides special education services and pass‑through state funds to those schools but does not perform ODE’s oversight role for state‑sponsored charters.

Committee members pressed staff on demographic comparability and data controls. Board members repeatedly asked whether the reported school outcomes were “controlled for demographics” such as family income and parent education. Staff and board members agreed the district does not collect parent income or education level as part of standard reporting. As a proxy, staff pointed to direct certification and Title I eligibility: staff said Portland Arthur Academy and Kairos qualified for Title I intervention, and Emerson and Portland Village use weighted lotteries (described by staff as a “triple weight” for race and socioeconomic status) to influence enrollment diversity.

On special education and funding, staff noted that charter school students are PPS students for special education services and that those services and pass‑through fiscal responsibilities are included in PPS reporting. A board member referenced a state cap on special education funding (mentioned in discussion as 11%), and staff confirmed the district’s overall special education rate reported to the board includes charter and state‑sponsored charter placements.

The committee discussed facility stability: staff reported several charter schools have moved into new or more stable leases, which staff said has produced a moment of relative facility stability for charter schools.

Several board members asked about using high‑performing charters as sources of instructional practice. Staff described prior examples of charter schools opening trainings to district teachers and said some charter leaders have shared practices in the district’s “community of practice.” Staff said they hope to expand learning exchanges and noted ongoing weekly charter directors meetings as a venue where practices and outreach are discussed.

Board members also raised next steps and oversight questions. Staff said the next charter renewal the district will consider is Emerson in 2029, and that annual frameworks and site visits continue each year. Staff agreed to provide additional data requested by the board, including discipline and suspension data broken down by demographics and a list of Portland high schools offering French programs (requested in the meeting). A board member offered to explore a university partnership to conduct controlled research on charter outcomes that adjusts for family income and parent education.

No formal board votes or charter renewal decisions occurred during the meeting; the session was a staff briefing and question‑and‑answer period.

The committee discussed meeting cadence for ongoing oversight. Staff suggested meeting at least annually to meet statutory requirements and recommended more frequent meetings when applications, renewal work, or other time‑sensitive items arise. Several board members said they favored a modest recurring cadence (for example, three times per year) with the option to cancel if not needed.

The presentation and discussion highlighted two persistent issues for future work: limits in district data for controlling outcomes by family income or parent education, and the district’s continuing role in special education and fiscal pass‑through for state‑sponsored charters. Staff framed those limits and responsibilities as reasons to continue regular engagement between the board and the charter schools office.