Board reviews first set of performance frameworks, debates raising academic weighting and approves application to federal facilities grant

Board staff presented the first set of performance framework evaluations under the board’s new authorization role, covering five schools: Dove Virtual Academy, LeMans International School, Oklahoma Connections Academy, Academies of Oklahoma (formerly Academy of Seminole) and Virtual Preparatory Academy of Oklahoma (BPrep). The evaluations covered academic, financial and organizational domains for school year 2023–24 and will be sent to each school's governing board for review.

Key overall scores presented by staff were: - Dove Virtual Academy: overall score 66.8 (academic portion constrained by available tested grade levels) - LeMans International School: overall 85.7 - Oklahoma Connections Academy: overall 79.65 - Academies of Oklahoma: overall 91.55 - Virtual Preparatory Academy of Oklahoma (BPrep): overall 56.75

Staff and board members discussed several recurring themes. For virtual schools, staff noted that academic indicators rely heavily on state assessment results and that small enrollment spread across many grade levels can leave schools without the 10‑student subgroup counts required by the framework for some indicators. Staff also reminded the board that the framework will include internal assessment data beginning with the next cycle, which will give a fuller picture of academic performance.

Several board members expressed concern that academic results are too low across multiple schools and proposed revisiting the administrative rules that set the framework weights (currently 40 percent academic, 35 percent financial, 25 percent organizational). Board members asked staff to compile comparative information and benchmarks used by other authorizers and national organizations and to place a rule‑weight discussion on the July meeting agenda with a proposed timeline for any rule changes. Staff said the agency will prepare drafts in time for consideration in August if the board wishes to pursue changes this year.

On governance and finance, staff noted strong financial and organizational ratings for several schools. Dove and Connections each scored highly on financial and organizational measures, though some audits and corrective action plans produced minor point reductions in several brick‑and‑mortar schools. Staff flagged that some schools inherited from the State Department of Education were given interim credit where no evidence of noncompliance existed, and the division will follow up with documentation and oversight as those schools transition to the board’s authorization.

The board also discussed federal and state legislative developments. Staff described the recently enacted Senate Bill 674 (language consolidated from earlier legislation) that permits mid‑year funding for newly opened sites or added grade levels — a change charter leaders said reduces the strain of opening new facilities. Staff reported the board’s $3.3 million state‑agency budget request was funded but that $3.4 million requested for a specific program (Horizons) was not funded (see separate Horizons coverage). Staff recommended, and the board approved, staff moving forward with an application for the U.S. Department of Education “Expanding Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools” (State Charter School Facilities Incentive Grants) program to support charter facilities needs; the board approved the motion by roll call.

Votes at a glance (recorded during the meeting): - Motion to approve minutes of May 12, 2025 regular board meeting — motion carried (several board members recorded as "Yes"; Kitty Campbell, Don Thomas and David Mercakos were recorded as abstaining in the roll call provided in the minutes presentation). - Motion to authorize staff to apply for the Expanding Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools (state facilities incentive grants program) — motion passed by roll call (multiple board members recorded as "Yes" on the roll call).

Board members asked staff to prepare detailed comparisons of other authorizers’ frameworks and the administrative rule language that sets weights so the board can review whether the academic share should be increased. Staff said it will place the rules discussion on the July agenda and, if the board decides to pursue revisions, work toward a proposed rule change in time for the fall rule cycle.