Evaluation of the Public Charter Schools Program: Year One Evaluation Report
Appendix H
CRITERIA FOR FUNDING DECISIONS
Exhibit H-1 shows the criteria used by states to make PCSP funding decisions. State respondents were given the option of distinguishing between different types of subgrant when considering each criterion. The "nonspecific subgrants" column includes data from states that did not make a distinction between subgrant types when answering this question.
- Whether a state has set priorities or not, most states apply some criteria in making subgrant awards and determining funding levels. The state coordinator survey offered respondents a list of possible factors that might have been used in making funding decisions.
- As in most analyses concerning charter schools, there was clearly no consensus among PCSP grantee states about how to select subgrantees and determine funding levels, especially when broken out by type of award.
Exhibit H-1
CRITERIA FOR FUNDING DECISIONS
(n=30 States)
|
Criterion |
Planning Subgrants |
Implementation Subgrants |
Dissemination Subgrants |
Nonspecific Subgrants |
|
Quality of subgrant proposal |
20% |
20% |
7% |
30% |
|
Funding level requested |
20% |
23% |
10% |
30% |
|
State ceiling on subgrant award level |
17% |
20% |
0% |
37% |
|
Justification for funds requested |
20% |
23% |
10% |
30% |
|
Start-up needs greater than in other charter schools |
13% |
20% |
10% |
10% |
|
Negotiation of funding level with subgrantee |
13% |
13% |
3% |
10% |
|
Student enrollment or projected student enrollment |
7% |
17% |
7% |
7% |
|
Number or percentage of educationally disadvantaged students |
3% |
3% |
3% |
13% |
|
Funds available for subgrants divided by the number of eligible charter school applications |
27% |
23% |
13% |
20% |
|
Recommendations of peer reviewers/field reviewers |
13% |
17% |
3% |
27%
|
|
