MNPS board denies Rock Academy charter application after staff report flags gaps in special‑education, EL and finance plans

The Metro Nashville Public Schools Board of Education voted to deny the Rock Academy’s new‑start charter application after the district’s charter review team found multiple deficiencies in academics, operations and finance.

The board acted after a presentation from the MNPS charter office that rated the Rock Academy’s overall application as “partially meets standard.” Sharika Roby Grant, MNPS director of charter schools, told the board the application “included service models for English learners that are not fully aligned with current state identification guidelines” and “lacked clarity on diploma pathways for students with disabilities.” The report also flagged concerns about the applicant’s facility timeline, startup transportation plan, and the financial strategy for moving to a permanent facility in year five.

The Rock Academy, proposed as a grades 9–12 opportunity charter with a planned enrollment capacity of 333 students, was described by public speakers as intended to reach “opportunity youth” before they leave school. Dr. Ahmed White, identified in public comment as the founder of Rock Academy, said the school’s model “blends trauma informed care, career connected learning, and authentic relationships” and that it was meant to “get to students before they fall through the cracks.” Lakita Sims, introduced as the founding operations director, told the board, “We wanna be that place to go” for students who have been chronically absent, in foster care or involved with the court system.

Board members raising questions cited the charter office’s findings. Reviewers noted the application did not fully document how it would meet Tennessee rules for identifying and serving English learners, did not clearly describe diploma pathways and accommodations for students with disabilities, and offered limited detail about CTE programming and transportation for city‑wide recruitment. MNPS staff also pointed out the application’s budget did not adequately budget for tenant improvements or account for inflation in later years.

Several board members said they were intrigued by the concept of an “opportunity” charter targeted to high‑needs students but agreed the current application lacked sufficient detail to ensure rigorous services and fiscal sustainability. The charter office reminded the board that the state’s opportunity‑school law requires verification of at‑risk status and that an approved opportunity charter must maintain a specified share of at‑risk students over a three‑year period. Roby Grant summarized the statutory standard for authorizing: "to be eligible for approval, an application must earn a rating of meets or exceeds standard for each applicable section and on the overall application evaluation rating."

A motion to deny the Rock Academy application was made by Member O'Hara Block and seconded by Member Elrod. The motion passed; the board reported the tally as 8 yes, 2 no and 1 abstention on the motion to deny. The board provided applicants with the charter office’s written findings and identified the application sections that need revision if an amended application is submitted to the district.

The denial does not permanently bar the applicant: under state law, an applicant that receives written grounds for denial can submit an amended application within 30 days; MNPS then has 60 days to act on an amended submission.