Wake County updates Restart program: 9 of 11 cohort schools met academic-gain target; two to reapply
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
SubscribeSummary
District leaders told the board that Restart flexibilities and targeted supports helped many schools improve: 9 of 11 cohort 3— schools met the state academic-gain metric for continued authorization; Timber Drive and Riverbend Middle did not and staff will recommend reapplication and targeted supports.
At a Feb. 17 work session, Wake County Schools leaders reported progress and continuing challenges in the district's Restart program, the state-authorized model that gives recurring low-performing schools additional local flexibilities and targeted resources.
Dr. Robinson and area superintendents outlined how Restart aligns with the district strategic plan and listed common flexibilities used by successful schools: budget conversions to fund coaches and tutoring, human-resources conversions, track-out tutoring with district-provided meals and transportation, and use of opportunity-culture staffing (multi-classroom leaders). The district said those strategies helped multiple schools exit or avoid recurring low-performing status.
The presentation summarized district scale and outcomes for the 2024-25 year: Wake County operates 203 schools, 40 of which used the Restart model in 2025-26. Of 11 cohort 3— schools undergoing the state's continued-authorization review, district staff reported 9 met the academic-gain requirement used by the state for continued authorization; two did not meet that specific metric (Timber Drive and Riverbend Middle). Presenters said policy changes to the state's reauthorization rule in October 2025 (requiring academic gain twice in a five-year period) affected Timber Drive's accounting.
District leaders described next steps for the two schools that did not meet the metric: compile or revise comprehensive support plans developed with area superintendents, academics leadership and coaches; reapply for authorization where appropriate; and continue monitoring. Presenters emphasized that some schools that previously were eligible exited low-performing status by using the district's supports rather than submitting a Restart application.
Board members focused on funding and sustainability. Trustees asked for concrete dollar amounts, and presenters said allocations have varied year to year: at one point district Restart allocations were described as $8,000,000, reduced to approximately $5,200,000 in a later year; the district reported using a per-pupil allocation approach to divide available funds and offered an approximate figure of $190 per Restart pupil in some budget years. Board members noted the board's role in advocating with the General Assembly for funding and flexibility to sustain successful practices.
Trustee Edmonds raised concerns about state funding flows to private schools and contrasted those figures with public-school needs, citing voucher amounts mentioned in the presentation. Trustees asked about durability of outcomes once Restart funds end; presenters said sustaining coaching and instructional structures is essential and that exiting a Restart model removes certain flexibilities unless a school continues to meet state conditions.
District leaders asked the board to authorize continuing Restart for the nine schools recommended for continued authorization and to support reapplication and targeted supports for the two that did not meet the state metric. Board members voiced support for those next steps during the discussion.
