Roseburg board denies Phoenix Charter School renewal after OSBA audit finds compliance and performance gaps

The Roseburg School Board voted unanimously to deny Phoenix Charter School’s request to renew its charter after receiving a summary of a 72‑page audit from the Oregon School Boards Association (OSBA).

OSBA Director of Board Development Kristen Miles summarized her review and told the board the audit examined academic trends, student assessments, financial performance, organizational performance and program alignment against the charter contract and applicable state law. "I am not an attorney, and nothing I say here either verbally or in my recommendation should be construed as legal advice," Miles said before describing findings.

The audit identified multiple areas of concern. Miles reported problems with teacher credentialing: at several points during the review some instructors were on restricted sublicenses or not found in the Teacher Standards and Practices Commission database, and at least one teacher’s registration occurred only after the auditor raised the issue. The district also reported missing paperwork for students on abbreviated schedules under SB 819 and apparent gaps in services to English learners and special education, including a requirement in the contract for a licensed special education teacher the auditor said the school did not have at the start of the year. Miles concluded the school did not meet statutory or contract criteria across the academic and organizational standards she reviewed.

On academic measures, Phoenix trailed Roseburg High School and comparable schools on multiple metrics in the 2023–24 school year, including attendance, four‑ and five‑year completer rates, graduation and dropout rates. The auditor noted the school’s internal STAR 360 results showed mixed growth by grade and subject; some cohorts improved in reading while others declined in math.

Financially, the auditor reported the school met the contract’s numeric financial indicators but flagged a negative net position (negative $265,000 as of June 30, 2024), months with negative net income in 2024–25, and district reports that Phoenix did not bill for special education services for earlier years totaling about $350,000 per year. OSBA staff consulted district financial personnel and recommended taking the negative net position seriously if renewal were considered.

Miles also documented inconsistencies between Phoenix’s public materials and on‑site practices, including descriptions of CTE programs that staff said did not exist in the form promoted on the school website and a handbook enrollment form that listed urinalysis testing — a policy school staff told the auditor was not being implemented. The auditor found a required annual survey of families, staff, and students could not be produced when requested.

After the presentation, the board debated whether the district had the authority to close Phoenix (it does not) and whether the audit’s findings left the district able to continue sponsorship. A board member moved to deny renewal, a second was made, discussion followed and the motion carried unanimously. The motion directs the board chair to work with the superintendent to send a non‑renewal notice to Phoenix School stating the reasons for denial.

The auditor outlined next steps under state rules: if the board denies renewal Phoenix may seek other sponsorship or resubmit its request; the decision may be appealed to the State Board of Education within 30 days, which would then review the district’s action. The district noted that if no new contract is executed but the current contract remains in effect until a replacement contract is signed.

Board members who spoke during discussion cited repeated concerns raised in quarterly check‑ins over several years and said the OSBA report crystallized the decision. Board members and staff emphasized the distinction between the board’s authority to renew sponsorship and any future decisions by Phoenix’s governing board about the school’s operation.

The board instructed the superintendent and chair to draft and send a written non‑renewal notice to Phoenix that lists the statutory and contract criteria on which the denial is based.