OFFICE OF THE STATE DISTRICT

SUPERINTENDENT

Response to Information Request from

The Joint Committee on the Public Schools
February 13, 2015

1|Page

Contents
Summary of Key Accomplishments .....................................................................................................3
Context of Challenges ............................................................................................................................... 3
Student Outcomes from 2011-2014 ......................................................................................................... 4
Educator Quality Improvements ............................................................................................................... 4
Systems Reform ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Staffing and Personnel .......................................................................................................................7
District Staffing Levels ............................................................................................................................... 7
Employees Eliminated in Last 24 Months ................................................................................................. 7
Educators without Placement ................................................................................................................... 8
Barringer Campus ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Superintendent Attendance at School Advisory Board Meetings ............................................................ 9
Consultants...................................................................................................................................... 10
Sale of 18th Avenue School .............................................................................................................. 13
Buildings and Facilities ..................................................................................................................... 18
Special Education/ELL ...................................................................................................................... 18
Teacher Certification and Evaluation ................................................................................................ 23
Student Placements ......................................................................................................................... 24
Attendance and Tardiness ................................................................................................................ 28
PARCC Readiness ............................................................................................................................. 30
Administrative Salaries and Increases ............................................................................................... 32
School visits by the Superintendent .................................................................................................. 33
Early Childhood Education................................................................................................................ 33
Charter Schools ................................................................................................................................ 35

2|Page

Summary of Key Accomplishments

Context of Challenges
Every assessment of NPS prior to the current administration pointed to stark facts that demanded a bold
response. For example, Great Expectations, the strategic plan created by the previous administration
and PENN Newark, a community engagement effort to survey families about the needs within their
schools each detailed the following challenges:
NPS was chronically underperforming
Graduation rates were just above 50%
In 22 elementary schools, primarily in the South and West Ward, only 1/3 of students were
reading at grade level with no discernible growth over a decade
Students with disabilities were being served in the most restrictive environments, at double the
national average
Families were leaving the system for charter schools
Charters were slated to grow from serving approximately 5% of students in 2008 to
approximately 40% by 2016, even if no new charters were granted
Ten thousand students attended charters and over 10,000 were on waiting lists
District schools were serving an increasingly disproportionate percentage of poor students,
English Language Learners, and students with disabilities
Facilities were literally crumbling
Newark has some of the oldest schools in the country and underinvestment had created unsafe
and unconscionable conditions
NPS deficit was mushrooming as a result of charter growth and antiquated labor practices
Approximately $30 million each year was exiting the district to charters, a sum equivalent to
over 300 jobs
NPS is the second largest employer in Newark, with 95% of staff belonging to a collective
bargaining unit. Therefore, decisions about right-sizing are made solely based on seniority
Progress
These issues were real and they existed well before the current administration assumed leadership.
Under Cami Andersons 3.5-year tenure, NPS has experienced significant improvements in student
outcomes. The summary that follows provides insight into major strides, organized according to the
following categories:
Student Outcomes from SY 2011 to SY 2014
Educator Quality Improvements
Systems Reform

3|Page

Student Outcomes from 2011-2014

Early Childhood
NPS opened 4 new early childhood centers for the 2014-15 school year
NPS became the 2nd school district in the nation to receive a $7 million Head Start grant
Early childhood seats increased by 1,000 students
Elementary Schools (K-5, K-8)
The number of good K-8 schools increased from 14 to 20, from school year 2010-11 to school
year 2012-13. The number of on the move schools increased from 6 to 12, over the same
period
Eight Renew Schools have seen gains in reading and math (5 saw gains in both); 8 more Renew
Schools launched this year
Three high performing charter partners, with a track record of success and high family demand,
took over the management of 3 schools in high-need neighborhoods
High School
Five new high school models have launched, enrolling 1,655 students between school years
2010-11 and 2013-14
The overall graduation rate has increased by nearly 10 percentage points
The percentage of students passing the HSPA graduation test has increased by 11 percentage
points
The number of high school graduates has increased by approximately 500

Educator Quality Improvements

Contract Negotiations
NPS negotiated and implemented a groundbreaking teachers contract with several core tenets
that helped to set a national standard around compensation reform, teacher involvement,
extended day, and school-based empowerment
The District recently closed a first-of-a-kind performance pay contract with the Newark Public
School Nurses, represented by the Newark Teachers Association (NTA), and we are currently in
talks with several other unions to align our labor approach to promote quality
Talent Recruitment and Development
Human Resources has been transformed into a talent team through the hiring of recruiters
and experts in professional development
NPS has retained our best educators through differentiated management
o

4|Page

From 2013-14 to 2014-15, we kept 95% of our highly effective teachers while nearly
40% of our ineffective teachers left

We have filed over 100 tenure charges; the state estimates that less than 20 were filed
in the previous 10 years

At least 50% of our principals were replaced by higher-quality candidates, carefully selected
from a pool of over 500 qualified professionals
We have made strong progress towards our goal of being the West Point of principal training
by instituting a monthly Principal Leadership Institute and intensive 2-week principal
professional development workshop series

Systems Reform
We are removing systemic barriers, building a high-performing organization, and creating a
comprehensive plan that extends across traditional public schools and charter public schools.
Important Milestones
NPS has established college-readiness as its goal, adopted the ACT as our college-ready
benchmark, and created Common Core implementation teams
Recognizing that non-academic skills matter, NPS launched new practices around student
advisory, established restorative practices through our Zero Tolerance for Zero Tolerance
initiative, and created student support teams at every school
Summary of One Newark
Portfolio Shifts for the 2014-15 School Year
NPS launched One Newark in order to respond to family demand and to create greater equity,
excellence, and efficiency throughout the system. In the absence of these portfolio shifts,
wide-scale school closures were imminent.
o Three schools were converted from NPS schools to charter schools for the 2014-15
school year in neighborhoods with high demand for charters. These conversions
redirected charter resources away from the construction of new schools downtown,
which would have forced more school closures in our poorest neighborhoods.

5|Page

Four new early childhood centers were opened at the site of increasingly under-enrolled
K-8s to prevent closures, increase early learning, and increase overall enrollment

One K-8 school was transformed into a young adult learning center

Six schools were re-sited:

Early Childhood Center-Clinton and Miller Street Elementary School were resited due to poor building quality, giving students a safe and productive learning
space

Newark Early College and Newark Vocational High School were re-sited to West
Side Campus, allowing the schools which educate over-age under-credited
students to pool resources

Girls Academy and Eagle Academy were re-sited to Weequahic, allowing

Weequahic to remain open despite declining enrollment

We established 8 new Renew Schools, all of which have benefited from re-staffing and
investment in facilities

Universal Enrollment
NPS launched the Universal Enrollment system with 85% of charter seats participating
Universal Enrollment has highlighted tremendous demand from families and has a direct focus
on equity. The system preferences neighborhood, siblings, poverty, and students with
disabilities. Below is a summary of key enrollment statistics for the 2014-15 school year:
o

15,320 Newark families submitted applications

Ninety-two percent of Newark applicants received a school match

Seventy-three percent of applicants were matched to one of their top 5 schools

Students with disabilities participated at the same rates as their peers a goal and focus
of the system
The percent of siblings united before Universal Enrollment and after remained the
same. The percent of students who live within a mile of school also remained constant

Other Successes
Family-Friendly School Snapshots were developed in order to provide families with easilyaccessible data on student demographics, absenteeism, transfer rates, and student performance
within all schools, including charters in the District
Collective action teams were created across traditional and public charter schools to tackle
educational challenges. Among these goals is to betterserve students with disabilities

6|Page

Staffing and Personnel

District Staffing Levels
Q1:

Provide current district-wide staffing levels. What is the total number of current employees?
We employ 5,599 permanent staff members and have 2,980 active per diems, which includes
critical staff such as substitute teachers and teachers aides that may be working at any given
time.

Employees Eliminated in Last 24 Months

Q1:

What is the number of personnel who have been eliminated during the past 24 month period?
Newark Public Schools (NPS) has undergone dramatic change in the past three years in order to
put the district on a path toward excellence. However, the recent growth of high-quality
schooling options outside the district for Newark students has resulted in substantial enrollment
declines at NPS. By 2016, NPS will serve approximately 30,000 studentsa 33% decline from
the 45,000 students it served in 2008. While this trend has resulted in increased choice and
opportunity for many Newark students, it has led to a significant reduction in funding to the
district. Meanwhile, the cost of maintaining and improving our district schools has not declined
at the same pace. Therefore, as the population of students served by NPS decreases but the
cost of improving struggling schools remains, NPS must make significant adjustments to its
spending. Unfortunately, because salaries account for the majority of the Districts budget, this
reduction in spending necessitates a reduction in workforce. In August of 2014, NPS laid off 167
non-instructional employees. No instructional staff were impacted by layoffs over the last 12
months. Details on the population impacted are provided below:

Position
Clerk/Secretarial
Teacher Aides and Parent Liaisons
Trades
Analysts, Technicians, and Other Assistants
Security Guards
Total Impacted Employees

# Impacted
72
56
25
8
6
167

% Position
16%
12%
15%
21%
3%
12%

Total # FTE in
Category
459
466
163
38
236
1362

Please note that we need additional time to determine the number of individuals impacted by
layoffs over the last 24 months.

7|Page

Average
$
$
$
$
$
$

Educators without Placement

Q1:

Provide a list of personnel who are currently serving under the title educators without
placement. Please indicate where each is currently serving, in what function they are serving,
and if the person is being utilized outside of their field of certification.
Please see the attached list of Educators Without Placement Site (EWPS) names and
locations. We have provided guidance to all principals that they must utilize EWPS staff in an
instructional capacity and in their certified areas wherever appropriate. For example EWPS can:
Serve in a lead teacher role for the year
Substitute as a lead teacher for other teachers with the same certification who are out
on leave
Serve as a collaborative team teacher
Provide supplemental services throughout the building as long as they are still teaching
within their content area.

Attachment 2: EWPS Roster as of 02.04.2015

Q2:

What is the total value of the current pool of educators without placement?
$20,659,386

Q3:

What was the amount allocated in the budget for the educators without placement pool?
$11,856,177

Q4:

Will NPS go over budget this year for the educators without placement pool?
While the district will exceed the initial budget established for the EWPS pool, there are systems
in place to address short and long-term concerns related to this population.

Barringer Campus
Q1:

What has been the result of the learning loss that occurred due to the lack of leadership at
Barringer High School at the start of the 2014-2015 school year? What are the current plans to
make up for this loss?
The district employed a comprehensive strategy, detailed below, to ensure that learning loss at
Barringer STEAM and Academy of Arts and Sciences as a result of challenges experienced at the
start of the 2014-15 school year was minimized. The strategy included providing additional
learning time to students, offering curricular support from the district for educators, and
assessing overall quality of instruction.

8|Page

1. Additional Learning Time

a. The district created an after school learning academy that was open to all students
in affected course sections. Students were provided two additional hours per day
for four days each week. These learning opportunities were staffed by effective
teachers in all subject areas and included both direct instruction and online learning
opportunities. This support was rolled out on December 15, 2014. Additional
learning opportunities may be provided during upcoming vacations.
2. District Curricular Support
a. Curricular support from the district, in the form of bi-weekly professional
development opportunities, provides long-term substitute instructors and those
recently hired an opportunity to better understand yearly instructional plans for
each course. This includes guidance on how to focus on power learning standards as
well as key instructional strategies for use in the 70-minute block; instructional Vice
Principals provide daily support and feedback.
b. The district has also provided vice principals and teachers in the after school
academy with access to resources from Edgenuity to introduce, re-teach, and
review content in the identified courses.
3. Assessment of Instruction Quality
a. Network leaders assess instruction in both regular class periods and after school
programs to determine effectiveness and identify additional supports needed.
Q2:

Provide data on the students who did not make it back to class due to the lack of
accommodations and include where they are currently and what they are doing.
After consulting with Barringer and the Assistant Superintendent for this network, it has been
determined that there have been no reports of students at either school on the Barringer
campus who stopped attending school because of a lack of accommodations.

Superintendent Attendance at School Advisory Board Meetings

Q1:

Provide the dates of the Newark Public Schools Advisory Board meetings you have attended
during your tenure as Superintendent.
Please see the attached document, Superintendent Attendance at School Advisory Board
Meetings, for a record of the Superintendents attendance at School Advisory Board Meetings.
It is important to note that senior administrators are present at each meeting.

Attachment 3: Superintendent Attendance at School Advisory Board Meetings

9|Page

Consultants
Q1:

Provide a list of all consultants and purveyors of educational services to the district via contract
and the total amount of dollars each.
This information was previously provided in our January 20, 2015 transmittal and is attached for
your convenience. The enclosed documents detail the total paid to consultants during the 201112, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 (YTD) school years.

Attachment 4:
Attachment 5:
Attachment 6:
Attachment 7:
Q2:

Consultant Fees 2011-12

Consultant Fees 2012-13
Consultant Fees 2013-14
Consultant Fees 2014-15

Provide a copy of your memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Policy Design Committee
The Policy Design Committee, composed of professionals from local charter schools, the New
Jersey Department of Education, Newark Charter School Fund and the Newark Public Schools
was formed in August of 2013, in order to determine all key policy and operational details of
the Universal Enrollment System. The end-product of the research and discussion conducted
by the Policy Design Committee was the full Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by
all Local Education Authorities that opted into the Universal Enrollment System.
Prior to the formation of the Policy Design Committee, Newark Public Schools conducted
extensive outreach to 18 charters, 16 of which opted into Universal Enrollment, and interviews
with districts across the nation implementing centralized enrollment. From this initial research,
NPS developed a project plan and governance structure for the Policy Design Committee.
Policy Design Committee Meeting Structure:
The Policy Design Committee convened weekly and structured decision-making around 3 key
phases of work:
1. System administrator and school-level responsibilities
2. Operations of the enrollment system
3. The high-needs preference structure
In addition to conducting meetings on a weekly basis, all members of the Policy Design
Committee regularly engaged with families and community stakeholders in order to
communicate the Universal Enrollment initiative, to gain input on key decisions and to build
support for the initiative. NPS Office of Family and Community Engagement, in collaboration
with the Office of Strategy and Innovation, held parent focus groups for feedback on the
application, online portal, and school directory design.

10 | P a g e

MOU Key Components:

The culmination of each phase of the Policy Design Committee work resulted in the completion
of the MOU signed by all charters. The core commitments detailed in section three of that
agreement increase collaboration between NPS and participating charter schools, particularly as
it relates to increasing access for Newarks neediest students. Those core commitments, as
outlined in the MOUs, and their purpose are as follows:
1. Promotion of a common accountability system that is fair, transparent, and prioritizes
student outcomes
a. Purpose: Prior to Universal Enrollment, there was no common accountability
system across traditional public and public charter schools. By requiring that all
schools opting into the Universal Enrollment system participate in common
reporting practices, Newark Public Schools is able to ensure consistent and
equitable comparison across schools. This practice holds all schools to the same
standard of excellence and ensures that all families have access to quality
information.
2. Equitable access to high quality options for students in every ward
a. Purpose: Prior to Universal Enrollment, traditional public schools served a
disproportionately high number of students with disabilities and students on
free lunch, as compared to charter public schools. In order to distribute the
concentration of high needs students more equitably across traditional public
and public charter schools, NPS developed the Universal Enrollment system and
MOU with charters, which holds all participating schools to the same standards
and thereby enforces more equitable distribution of high-needs students across
schools.
3. Creation of a multi-year strategy that ensures students have access to 21st century
schools in every ward
a. Purpose: Charters with approved expansion plans in Newark were expanding
primarily in downtown prior to Universal Enrollment. These schools opened new
seats one grade level each year. This expansion strategy was contributing to a
higher concentration of quality school options in downtown, causing a slow but
steady exodus primarily from the south and west wards.
NPS, through the development of the Universal Enrollment MOU, successfully
collaborated with charters to re-direct the opening of charter seats where
demand for those seats existed and to do so with four grade levels, as opposed
to one grade level at a time. This recruitment of charters to high-need areas of
Newark allowed for more equitable distribution of quality school options, and
reduced impending mobility across the district.

11 | P a g e

4. Deeper collaboration between North Star Academy and NPS schools leading to the
active sharing and implementation of best practices
a. Purpose: Prior to Universal Enrollment, there was minimal sharing of best
practices across traditional public and public charter schools. In order to
enhance learning across all schools in the district, NPS created mechanisms that
allow for sharing of best practices across schools, particularly as it relates to
talent recruitment and data-driven knowledge.
Attachment 8: MOU with North Star Academy and management partner Uncommon Schools
Attachment 9: MOU with TEAM Charter Schools
Attachment 10: MOU with Newark Legacy
Q3:

Provide a spreadsheet listing all consultants, their backgrounds, the data of initial contract under
memorandum of understanding (MOU), the purpose of their service, and the total amount paid
to them to date.
This information is provided in our response to question one (Q1) of this section. If additional
information is required, we respectfully request a narrower scope so that we can allocate
our limited staff resources toward retrieving and organizing information effectively.

12 | P a g e

Sale of 18th Avenue School

Questions 1-27
Please see the timeline narrative immediately following this list of questions. It responds to each of the
questions posed by the Joint Committee related to the sale of the 18th Avenue School.
Q1:

What was your relationship with former Commissioner Cerf prior to being appointed
Superintendent of Newark Public Schools; and for how many years did the professional
relationship exist?

Q2:

Did you ever have a professional relationship with Timothy Carden as an employee of any entity
he was associated with prior to becoming the Superintendent of the Newark Public Schools?

Q3:

Did you have personal knowledge that former Commissioner of Education Christopher Cerf and
Timothy Carden had professional business associations prior to you becoming the
Superintendent of the Newark Public Schools? If so, what business associations did you know
they had?

Q4:

Did you, prior to becoming Superintendent of the Newark Public Schools and afterwards, ever
speak to Hannah Richman, Director and Secretary of the Friends of TEAM Academy Charter
School, with respect to the sale of 18th Avenue School by the Newark Public Schools to the
Friends of TEAM Academy Charter School?

Q5:

Did you know whether or not Hannah Richman had an association with a corporation called Pink
Hula Hoop, LLC?

Q6:

Did you, prior to becoming the Superintendent of the Newark Public Schools, speak to former
Commissioner Christopher Cerf about the Newark Public Schools selling or leasing Newark Public
Schools-owned school buildings to charter schools?

Q7:

Did you, subsequent to becoming the Superintendent of the Newark Public Schools, speak to
former Commissioner Christopher Cerf about the sale or lease of Newark Public School buildings
to charter schools?

Q8:

Did you ever speak with, write to, or receive communications from Timothy Carden as an
individual or member of the Friends of TEAM Academy Charter School with respect to the sale
or lease of 18th Avenue School? If so, when did these communications occur and what did they
entail?

Q9:

Did the Newark Public Schools obtain permission to close 18th Avenue School from the Essex
County Superintendent of Schools before it was closed at the end of the 2011-2012 school year
and no longer to be used for educational purposes?

13 | P a g e

Q10:

Prior to May 13, 2013, which is when the Newark Public Schools advertised the sale of the 18th
Avenue School, did the Newark Public Schools unofficially inform other charter schools or
corporate entities of the intent to sell 18th Avenue School?

Q11:

Did you know, prior to the sale of the 18th Avenue School, that TEAM Academy Charter School
had commenced site and environmental studies of the 18th Avenue School?

Q12:

Were you aware, prior to the sale of 18th Avenue School, that Timothy Carden had an interest in
corporations by the name of Kingston Education Holdings, the TEAM Academy Charter School,
and Friends of TEAM Academy Charter School?

Q13:

When the bids were advertised to sell 18th Avenue School on May 15, 2013, had either the
former Commissioner of Education, Christopher Cerf, or the Essex County Superintendent of
Education given permission to the Superintendent to sell, lease, or close 18th Avenue School?

Q14:

Is it a fact that you gave the minimum notice required by law to sell 18 th Avenue School? Did
you run any special ads, notices, or special pictures to entice bidders?

Q15:

Were you personally made aware of the bidding process to sell 18th Avenue School? If so, by
whom?

Q16:

Do you feel that the time between the resolution to sell 18th Avenue School (May 13, 2013) and
the receipt of bids (May 29, 2013) was adequate notice to bidders to review the bids and do due
diligence on the property for purpose of making a bid?

Q17:

How many bidders were there?

Q18:

Who won the bid?

Q19:

Did you receive, pursuant to the bid format, financial statements of Friends of TEAM Academy
Charter Schools? And did you review them to ascertain if Friends of TEAM Academy Charter
Schools had the financial qualifications to purchase the 18th Avenue School?

Q20:

With whom did you discuss the limitation of the use of 18th Avenue School to only 10 years for
educational purposes?

Q21:

Did you know that Timothy Carden had an interest in Kingston Education Holdings, TEAM
Academy Charter Schools, Friends of TEAM Academy, and a corporation named Pink Hula Hoop,
LLC?

Q22:

When did you find out that the Contract of Sale between the bid winner, Friends of TEAM
Academy, was assigned to a corporation called Pink Hula Hoop, LLC?

Q23:

Did you engage in due diligence to ascertain when Pink Hula Hoop, LLC was incorporated and
whether it supplied financial information pursuant to the bid document?

14 | P a g e

Q24:

Was the assignment to Pink Hula Hoop, LLC approved by the Newark Public Schools Advisory
Board?

Q25:

Is it a fact that you forwarded an initial application to sell 18th Avenue School to former
Commissioner Christopher Cerf on May 7, 2013 followed by a detailed application on June 7,
2013?

Q26:

Is it a fact that on July 9, 2013, nearly two (2) months after the bids went out, the Newark Public
Schools received permission from the County Superintendent of Education to sell 18th Avenue
School and it wasnt until July 19, 2013 that the Commissioner of Educations office gave
permission to sell it?

Q27:

Why in the Resolution of August 19, 2013 to sell the property to Friends of TEAM Academy was
there no mention that Pink Hula Hoop, LLC, a for-profit corporation, was to receive title to 18th
Avenue School and not Friends of TEAM Academy?

15 | P a g e

Response to Questions Regarding the Sale of the 18th Avenue School

Shortly after Clifford Janey was hired as Superintendent of Newark Public School (NPS) in August of
2009, he commenced conversations within and without the District on taking action to close 18th Avenue
School due to disrepair and fiscally draining costs to operate the building. In addition to discussions with
NPS staff, Superintendent Janey engaged the School Advisory Board and other community stakeholders
in this dialogue, which occurred until the end of his tenure.
Upon Cami Andersons arrival to NPS as the Superintendent in May 2011, she continued to explore, with
staff and outside stakeholders, if there was a viable, fiscally responsible alternative to closing 18th
Avenue School. Although NPS had consistently called for 18th Avenue to be replaced in its Long Range
Facilities Plan (LRFP) since 1999, the School Development Authority (SDA) refused to allocate funding. In
the Districts 2013 LRFP, the Facilities Condition Index (FCI) cost to repair 18th Avenue School was
$8,088,220 and the FCI replacement cost was $21,107,625. (See Attachment 1)
Therefore, faced with environmental issues, roof leaks, exterior loose masonry and fascia, scaffolding
maintenance and interior systems failures, the District took 18th Avenue School offline in July 2012.
Despite 18th Avenue School being uninhabited by staff and students, NPS still remained legally liable to
maintain costs in scaffolding, watch guard services, utilities and other related costs. Due to these
escalating costs and no relief provided by the SDA, the District obtained an appraisal for 18th Avenue
School on May 6, 2013. The building was appraised for $5,350,000. (See Attachment 2)
In its forced decision to remove 18th Avenue School from the Districts property portfolio, NPS was
committed to conducting an open and transparent process which included obtaining fair market price
and ensuring the buildings use for an educational purpose. In addition, NPS provided any bidder access
to all environmental reports conducted by NPS or a third party on 18th Avenue School.
On May 14, 2013, the District requested permission from the Department of Education (DOE) to close
and sell 18th Avenue School. (See Attachment 3) Since there is no statutory or regulatory requirement
that either the DOE Commissioner or County Superintendent approve the sale before advertising the
property for sell, NPS published the bid notice once a week for two weeks in the Star Ledger on May 15,
2013 and May 22, 2013. (See Attachment 4) The bid notice adhered to the required notice provision
pursuant to N.J.S.A 18A:20-6.
On May 29, 2013, the only bid received, from Friends of TEAM Academy (FOT), was opened at 2 Cedar
Street at 10:00 am in room 1010. (See Attachment 5) The bid submitted by FOT was $3,740,000. The
District rejected FOTs bid and thereafter entered into negotiations to sell the property, as provided
pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:7b. Following negotiations, during which due diligence was exercised by NPS in
viewing the bid package, including financial statements presented by FOT, NPS agreed to sell 18th
Avenue School to FOT for $4,300,000.
In an effort to provide FOT with the flexibility to procure bonds to fund the capital improvement costs of
18th Avenue School, the District agreed to insert an Assignment Clause within the Contract of Sale to

16 | P a g e

allow FOT the ability to assign the Contract to an entity created in connection with financing the
acquisition of the Property for the benefit of the Purchaser. (See Attachment 6)
On July 19, 2013, the District received permission from DOE to close and sell 18 th Avenue School. (See
Attachment 7) On August 22, 2013, the closing of 18th Avenue School occurred.
Prior to her appointment as the State Superintendent of NPS, Ms. Anderson was the Superintendent of
Alternative High Schools and Programs for the New York City Department of Education. During her
tenure with the New York City Department of Education, she recalls that Mr. Cerf served in the
Communications Office for the New York City Department of Education. Ms. Anderson did not work
closely with Mr. Cerf but may have met him early in her career, during negotiations between the AFT
and the New York City Department of Education. Further, approximately ten (10) years ago, Timothy
Carden served as a consultant with the New York City Department of Education and worked with Ms.
Anderson for a limited time. Ms. Anderson does not know Hannah Richman.

Attachment 11: 18th Avenue Attachments

17 | P a g e

Buildings and Facilities

Q1:

Please provide this Committee with a list of any and all buildings/facilities owned by Newark
Public Schools that have ever been sold, the buyers, and the price at which the buildings/facilities
were sold and when (day, month, year).
Our historical audit yielded the sale of Central High School and the sale of the 18th Avenue
School as described above. To the best of our knowledge, these are the only sales that we have
on record. The attachments provided below detail the sale of Central High School, whereas
those for 18th Avenue School are provided in the prior section.

Attachment 12: Central High - Cover

Attachment 13: Central High Final Executed Copy

Special Education/ELL

Q1:

As a part of One Newarks Universal Enrollment, how will struggling students be referred,
identified, evaluated, and determined eligible for special education programs and services?

One Newark does not change our process for the referral, identification and evaluation of
students with disabilities. Newark Public Schools has a Student Support Team (SST) that serves
as a school-based multidisciplinary team for all students. The SST serves as the initial step to
support students who may be struggling academically and behaviorally. Schools have a process
that outlines the function, action steps and outcomes of the SST. If a student is not
demonstrating success with strategies from the SST, a referral for special education services can
be provided to the school-based Child Study Team (CST).
Upon receipt of the referral for special education services, an identification/determination
meeting is conducted. At the identification/determination meeting, all student information is
discussed and the necessity for an evaluation for special education services is determined. If an
evaluation is deemed necessary, the CST identifies the appropriate evaluations and parental
consent is obtained. The CST has 60 days from consent to complete the evaluations and 30 days
to develop an Individual Education Plan (IEP) for placement. If an evaluation is not warranted,
the CST provides the information to the SST for additional supports to the student

Q2:

For students with disabilities (SWDs) who relocate/transfer to Newark, what is the process for
enrollment given that these students have current Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and
require placement in comparable programs in a timely manner (per NJAC 14:6A)?

18 | P a g e

If the student is from New Jersey, either their existing IEP can be accepted as is, or the Child
Study Team can choose to develop a new IEP. If the student is not from New Jersey, he/she is
immediately placed in a program that is comparable to what is on his/her existing IEP, and the
NPS Child Study Team is required to conduct an initial evaluation within 30 days.
Questions 3-4
Q3:

Will there be a centralized location for SWD registration and transfer into the district?

Q4:

What staff will be responsible for this?

When students with disabilities transfer to Newark Public Schools, they go to our Enrollment
Center at 301 West Kinney, which is the centralized location for registration of all students. At
the Enrollment Center, an Office of Special Education representative responsible for placing all
students with disabilities facilitates the determination of programming comparable to what the
student formerly received. The student is then placed in a comparable program and a new
Individualized Education Program is developed within the mandated 30 days.

Q5:

The parents of special education students have complained that their children are not receiving
transportation, and that in many cases, their IEPs have been changed without due process or
simply ignored. What do you know of these complaints and what have you done to correct these
problems?
Transportation is provided to students with disabilities when the disability affects a students
ability to get to school. This decision is made by the IEP team. IEPs can only be amended when
all parties of the IEP team meet to determine any changes. Once a determination is made that a
student with disabilities should receive transportation, a request goes to the transportation
department. The transportation department then works with the Commission to arrange
transportation accordingly. The IEP team connects with families if a students need for
transportation changes as included in their IEP.
We take complaints regarding transportation for students with disabilities seriously, and
investigate accordingly.

Q6:

Please provide this Committee with an analysis of the special education problem, including
numbers of how many IEPs were changed in the last year.
Every students IEP must be updated on an annual basis. However, they may be amended
throughout the course of the school year.
Determining the number of IEPs that were changed during the course of the last year requires a
time-intensive process. Details on these numbers will be submitted in the coming weeks.

19 | P a g e

Q7:

Has a list of projected Newark Public Schools special education programs and their respective
school locations for 2015-2016 school year been developed? If so, what data was utilized in
doing so?
All schools are required to serve students with disabilities. However, students with lowincidence disabilities, such as those who are medically fragile, must be served in specialized
classrooms. For a list of specialized classrooms, please see the attached One Newark Guide for
information on special education programs.

Attachment 14: Presentation - Enrollment Process for Students with IEPs

Questions 8 14
Newark Public Schools cannot comment on charter school policies. Therefore, we are not able to
respond to these questions.
Q8:

Is there a projected list of specialized education programs and related services (i.e., speech,
counseling, transportation, occupational therapy, physical therapy, assistive technology, nursing
services, feeding clinic, etc.) that is currently available to the parents of SWDs who have enrolled
in One Newark charter schools?

Q9:

Are One Newark charter schools required to offer the range of special education programs?

Q10:

Will all said programs and services be delivered as delineated in each students respective IEP as
required by NJAC 6A:14?

Q11:

Will One Newark charter schools service special educations low-incidence population (i.e.,
Auditory Impaired, Autistic, Cognitively Impaired, Deaf/Blindness, Orthopedically Impaired,
Traumatic Brain Injury, Multiply Disabled, etc.)? If so, are their respective school locations in
barrier-free locations?

Q12:

How are staff certified, trained, and deemed qualified to meet the needs of these and other
special education populations?

Q13:

What is One Newarks retention policy for SWDs for its participating charter schools?

Q14:

Currently, what assurances exist to ensure these charter schools will retain students with
disabilities?

Q15:

As a number of SWDs are projected to attend non-Newark Public Schools under the One Newark
plan, what is the projected financial loss for the district as related to the Special Education
Medicaid Initiative (SEMI) reimbursements?
Our response to this question requires data analysis that will be submitted in the coming weeks.

20 | P a g e

Q16:

Is there an identified data management system for the purpose of tracking and monitoring the
quality of special education programs and services that will be utilized under the One Newark
plan?
We currently have a data management system for tracking and monitoring IEPs. However, we
are developing a new IEP system that will be in place next school year.
This new system will improve the quality of data available on students with disabilities, including
the ability to track and monitor progress on student goals, student placement in least restrictive
environments and the delivery of transportation and related services (e.g. paraprofessionals,
occupational and physical therapy).

Q17:

Parents have been told that special education Resources InClass (RCI) and Resource Pullout
(RCO) will be available in every school and in every grade for SWDs. Taking into account the
number of students who are currently enrolled in Newark Public Schools in need of IEPmandated services for these same supports (and are not receiving them), how does the Newark
Public Schools plan to better ensure that all children will receive these and other special
education services under the One Newark Plan?

As detailed in the first response submitted, students with disabilities participated in Universal
Enrollment for the 2014-2015 school year and were able to take advantage of school choice in a
manner that they had not been able to access in the past. In fact, the algorithm used to
equitably enroll students in the Newark Public Schools gives a preference to those with
disabilities. In order to meet special education program requirements, all schools provide special
education services in the general education class or with resource services.
Families of students who receive a more specialized program, one that is self-contained, are
afforded the opportunity to choose a school with that program or work with a school of their
choice to develop a program to meet their individual needs.
In order to ensure that all students with disabilities received appropriate placement, enrollment
office staff were trained appropriately, and then worked diligently to contact each family to
ensure placement in a school with the resources to address their students specific needs.
Additionally, 36 schools hosted meetings for families with students with disabilities throughout
the application period to provide personalized support.
The Office of Special Education provides extensive guidance to all schools on how to provide
appropriate resource services to students with disabilities through October of each school year.
Training sessions and materials have also been developed to ensure that principals are able to
provide guidance to their staff on the special education process, from prior to evaluation to
when a student receives special education services, as well as mandated timelines.

21 | P a g e

Q18:

Provide this Committee with a comparison from 2012-2013, 2013-2014, and now into 2015, of
how many classified students were mainstreamed in that year?
The core goal driving special education programming at the Newark Public Schools is to serve all
students according to their IEPs in the least restrictive environment possible. The Newark Public
Schools pushes this goal by tailoring special education services to the individualized needs of
children.
Since 2012, we have increased the time students are in general education for more than 80% of
the school day from 35%-40%. We have also decreased the time students are in general
education less than 40% of the day from 48%-43%.
As we move into next school year, we will have a new special education data system that will
track more detailed movement to less restrictive environments.

Q19:

When a classified student becomes mainstreamed, or when a student with an IEP is determined
to no longer require an IEP, does their performance record follow them to the mainstream
teacher?
If a teacher works with a student who has an IEP, they have access to the students IEP. This is
the case no matter if the student receives all of their special education services in a special
education class or in a general education class. If a student has been declassified and no longer
receives special education services, there is no longer an IEP for a teacher to use.

Q20:

How many NPS students who have an IEP are operating in a more inclusive environment?
Please see response to question 18 (Q18) in this section.

Questions 21 22
We are currently reconciling information from the IEP database and the PowerSchool system to ensure
that we are able to provide you with high quality data. We anticipate providing this information to you
in the coming weeks.
Q21:

Show the differences between ELL placements the year prior to One Newark to the ELL
placements in this current cycle. Provide the same information for special education students.

Q22:

How many schools have never had an ELL placement prior to One Newark? Provide the same
information for special education students.

22 | P a g e

Teacher Certification and Evaluation

Q1:

Why were the positions of subject matter supervisors and department chairpersons who had
subject matter expertise and certification eliminated in the high schools?
The Newark Public Schools eliminated certain supervisory instructional positions due to reasons
of economy and organizational effectiveness.

Q2:

Why are high school teachers being evaluated by individuals who do not have subject matter
expertise?
State regulations require that teachers be evaluated by supervisors who hold the appropriate
supervisory certifications. Specifically, supervisors are defined as staff who are "employed in the
school district in a supervisory role and capacity, and possessing a school administrator,
principal, or supervisor endorsement as defined in N.J.A.C. 6A:9-1.1." We ensure that staff who
are evaluating our teachers have both the appropriate credentials and a deep understanding of
the state-approved Newark Public Schools Framework for Effective Teaching.

Questions 3-4
Our response to questions three and four is as follows: we monitor the quality of evaluations and our
compliance with state regulations.
Q3:

How extensive is this practice in the Newark Public Schools?

Q4:

How many teachers in Newark Public Schools high schools are being evaluated by
individuals who do not have subject matter certification in the instructional area they are
evaluating?

Q5:

How many teachers in the entire Newark Public Schools district are currently teaching outside
their certified field?
According to the district's centralized files, 64 of the approximately 3000 teachers are in a
budgeted position that requires a certification that they do not currently hold. However, there
are several reasons why these 64 teachers may actually hold the appropriate certification but
are not reflected as such in the system. For example, we have historically coded all teaching
positions for grades 1 through 8 as "Teacher Elementary." However, an 8th grade math teacher
may hold a math endorsement and therefore may be teaching within their certification area, but
we have them listed as "Teacher Elementary." In these cases, the system identifies them as
working out of certification but they do hold the correct certification. We are currently working
to confirm the accuracy of this data.

Q6:

What are your current plans to stop this practice?

23 | P a g e

We are reviewing the data quality to determine whether there are actually teachers that are
working out of certification. If we find any cases of this, we will move the teacher to a position
they are certified to teach.

Student Placements
Q1:

Are there children in the city still awaiting placement in schools? How many are there and what
is the reason for this?
There are no students at this time awaiting placement who do not currently have a school seat.
There are, however, families that work with our team throughout the course of the school year
to change their current school placement for a variety of reasons. At no point during the
process of finding a new placement for a child does that child go without a seat at a school.

Q2:

Provide a spreadsheet, taking privacy issues into full account, showing each applicant in the One
Newark process, list their choices 1-8, and give us the outcomes of where each student was
eventually placed.

The Newark Public Schools received over 15,000 applications through One Newark Enrolls for
the 2014-15 school year. We have conducted significant analysis on the data, and have
attached the report titled One Match Summary Rounds 1 and 2 for your reference.
This report also includes comprehensive information on family demand for schools across the
districti.e. those schools that were selected most frequently by families.

Attachment 15: One Match Summary Rounds 1 and 2

Q3:

Provide the algorithm used to place students under the One Newark Plan.
Please note that the following response was provided in the previous report submitted.

Preference Structure
NPS Universal Enrollment Algorithm is built on an extensive preference structure, developed to
ensure that the enrollment process is equitable and corrects the historical process in Newark,
which created unfair disadvantages for families without access to information.

24 | P a g e

The criteria upon which the preference structure is determined are explained in detail below.
This language is pulled directly from the Memorandum of Understanding, signed by all Local
Education Agencies who opted into NPS Universal Enrollment System.
Criteria 1: Family Rankings
The primary criteria used to place students in the Universal Enrollment System are school/LEA
rankings that are submitted by each family. All other preferences apply only when the number
of students who rank a school/LEA exceeds the number of available seats at that school/LEA in
that grade.
Criteria 2: Preference for Siblings
1. Students who have a sibling currently attending a school they rank in their application will
receive a preference to be admitted to that school.
2. The student will receive preference if a sibling attending a given school will continue to be
enrolled in that LEA in the following school year.
3. If two (or three, etc.) siblings are in different grade levels and apply to attend a new LEA in
the same school year, they will not receive a preference to that school in the initial student
assignment process.
4. Multiples (twins, triplets, etc.) who submit identical LEA rankings on their applications will
be treated as one offer in the assignment process. If one multiple receives an offer, the
other multiple(s) will receive an automatic offer to the same school.
Criteria 3: Preference for High Need Students
Additional Explanation: Please note that most students with Individual Education Plans (IEPs)
participate in the Universal Enrollment match process, (per item #7 below) but that those that
have low-incidence disabilities work directly with an NPS enrollment officer to ensure
appropriate school placement, given available programming. Please see details on the
preference structure, below, as well as information on page 11 on guidance provided to families
of students with disabilities.
1. After all siblings have been assigned, high need students will receive a preference in the
student assignment process for a portion of all remaining available seats. For the purposes
of the Universal Enrollment System, "high need" students are defined as:
a. Students with IEPs
b. Students who are eligible for free lunch
c. Students who are currently enrolled at a school that is closing and are not in the
terminal grade of that school
2. For students who have not been eligible for free lunch in the past - e.g. students applying to
Pre-K for the first time -the Universal Enrollment System will attempt to collect data that
mirrors the criteria for free lunch eligibility, and will assign students a high need preference

25 | P a g e

3.
4.

5.

6.

7.

based on that data. The specific parameters of this data collection will be developed in
collaboration with participating LEAs.
For students who have not been eligible for an IEP in the past, participating LEAs may elect
to consider alternative criteria that allow students to receive this high needs preference.
For a given LEA, the high needs preference will apply only to high need students who have
ranked the school on their application, maintaining the overall prioritization of student and
family choice as a guiding principle.
To ensure that no participating LEA is assigned to serve a disproportionately high number of
high need students, the algorithm will include caps on the percentage of available seats that
are assigned to students eligible for free lunch and students with IEPs. Each participating
LEA will be subject to the same cap. These percentages will be differentiated by grade level,
and will exceed the citywide average of the demographic at each grade. The exact numerical
targets will be established in collaboration with participating LEAs.
Magnet schools will be allowed to rank students based on their own admissions criteria,
which will be designed in the spirit of equity. Magnet student placements will adhere to
high-need preferences established in the MOU. These criteria will be disclosed prior to the
student assignment process.
Students with a limited set of low-incidence disabilities will be able to work directly with the
System Administrator to express their preferences and ensure they receive an assignment to
a school with the appropriate services to meet their needs. These students may include but
are not limited to: students with autism, students who are blind or deaf, students who are
medically fragile, students with multiple disabilities, and students with cognitive
impairments. For these students, participating LEAs share a vision that some schools including both district and charter - should develop expertise around serving particular lowincidence disabilities, and that students with these disabilities would be given specific
preference to attend those schools.

Criteria 4: Neighborhood Preference

1. The neighborhood preference applies for grades pre-K through 8 only.
2. For seats with more demand than availability given all other preferences, the geographic
preference will apply such that up to 75% of the available seats in any school-district and
charter-will be preferenced for students who live in the zone in which the school is located
and who have ranked the school on their application.
3. The other 25% of seats (or more than that if a school does not receive applications from its
zone equal to 75% of seats) will not consider zone as a factor. Students from all zones will
have an equal chance relative to any other applicant for these seats, given all other
preferences.
4. Zones will be defined based on recognized neighborhood boundaries, and each zone will
consist of a combination of existing Newark Public Schools catchment areas.
5. The neighborhood preference will not take priority over the preference for high need
students. In any case where the algorithm that assigns students cannot meet both the

26 | P a g e

targets for high need student preference and the 75% target for neighborhood preference,
priority will be given to meeting targets for high need student preference. In other words,
the 75% of seats from the local zone will only be filled if doing so does not interfere with the
ability to achieve equitable access for high need students.
6. The existing Newark Public School policies on the availability of transportation will not
change as a result of this preference.
7. In the event that any student does not receive an assignment to one of his/her ranked
schools, he/she will be given the option to accept a default placement in a school within
his/her zone, based on proximity to his/her home and the availability of seats. NPS reserves
the right to exceed the match target of any individual district school as required to respect
families' choice to attend a neighborhood school.
8. LEAs would be able to opt out of the neighborhood preference for any school that is not in a
permanent location.
Other Districts with Universal Enrollment
The Universal Enrollment Algorithm itself is a complex computer code that mathematically
integrates the above-detailed preference structure. Other districts that use a similar algorithm
are:
1.
2.
3.
4.

New York City Department of Education

Denver Public Schools
New Orleans Public Schools
Washington DC Public Schools

Compliance with the Charter School Program Act

It is also important to note that in order to secure buy-in from local charters, Newark Public
Schools conducted significant research and outreach to prove compliance of weighted lotteries
with the Charter School Program Act, and to communicate the power of Universal Enrollment
to increase equal representation of Newark students at local charters.
These efforts resulted in 16 out of 21 charter schools participating in Universal Enrollment in
our first year, resulting in participation by 85% of charter seats. These numbers have shifted,
as one participating charter school closed, two consolidated into one, and another officially
became a charter in the summer of 2014.

Attachment 16: Universal Enrollment MOU with Local Education Agencies

27 | P a g e

Attendance and Tardiness

Q1:

In 2013, you launched the Attend Today, Achieve Tomorrow Campaign with the goal of cutting
absenteeism by 50 percent. At the same time, attendance counselors were eliminated by the
District. The NPS website says that there were 300,000 absences during the 2012-2013 school
year. Did the Attend Today, Achieve Tomorrow Campaign meet the benchmark of a 50 percent
reduction of absenteeism?
Severe chronic absence is defined as more than 20 days out a school year, chronic absence is
defined as 10-20 days per year, and low absence is defined as less than 10 days in the school
year.
Data on absenteeism for the 2013-14 school year demonstrate that we still have far to go in our
goal to drastically decrease the number of chronic and severe chronic absences across the
Newark Public Schools. While the average percent of days absent during the 2013-14 school
year remains similar to the 2012-13 school year, the percentage of students who are suffering
from severe chronic absenteeism has grown slightly.
Our High Schools are of particular concern, as 60% of our students were absent more than 20
days during the 2013-14 school year. Of our high schools, magnets have the lowest levels of
absences, and saw a modest decline in the percentage of severe absences last school year.
Chronic absenteeism declined modestly in our Comprehensive high schools.
These statistics are concerning, however, NPS has worked diligently over the last year to lay a
strong foundation from which to improve student outcomes. That foundation is built on the
following:
Data analysis, which for the first time disaggregates absences by ward, allowing for
more nuanced evaluation of trends and the identification of appropriate solutions
Revision of the District attendance policy, built in partnership with schools, in order to
align expectations, consequences and solutions with a unified, district-wide emphasis on
attendance
An increased awareness of the absenteeism issue within Newark Public Schools, and a
collective commitment within our schools and communities to improve the issue
An enhanced focus on school culture, particularly in our lowest performing schools
We are working hard to build off of the structures put in place during the 2013-14 school year,
to build a reliable pattern of improvement. Below are some steps that we are currently taking
towards that end:

28 | P a g e

We are refining our data reporting system to more accurately capture reasons (e.g.,
health, transportation, etc.) for absences and tardiness, in order to help schools target
interventions
We are helping schools identify and develop incentives for rewarding active student
attendance
Our staff are training student support teams (SSTs) on restorative practice, the
development of tools for proactive, early, and targeted interventions, and
reengagement strategies to address school absence and tardiness
We still have much work to do, but were making strides towards achieving our critical goal to
decrease absences, and improve both academic and social outcomes for our students.

Q2:

What was the cumulative number of absences for the 2013-2014 school year?
The number of cumulative absences for the 2013 -2014 school year is not available at this time.
This information will be provided to the Joint Committee within two weeks.

Q3:

How did attendance and tardiness rates compare under One Newark with those experienced in
previous years?
Please see the attached attendance presentation for this answer.

Q4:

Have you analyzed those figures in relationship to the distance children must travel to get to
school?
No.

Q5:

Provide numbers of first-day attendance versus prior years and first day attendance versus
attendance a week later.
This information was provided in our previously submitted response, and is attached for your
convenience.

Attachment 17: Attendance Presentation

Attachment 18: September 2013 Data
Attachment 19: September 2014 Data

29 | P a g e

PARCC Readiness
Q1:

Are Newark Schools Ready to Implement PARCC?

Yes. NPS has been preparing for the transition to PARCC since New Jersey adopted the
standards in 2010 and we are on target with preparation for the 2015 PARCC assessments.
The Newark Public Schools assembled a cross functional teamrepresenting principal areas of
workto prepare the Districts infrastructure and organizational capacity to support PARRC
testing in the spring of 2015. An extensive system-wide PARCC readiness plan was created along
these distinct areas of work Testing Protocols, Training, and Technologybased on extensive
evaluation of current school facilities and instructional practices, as well as on feedback
ascertained from the PARCC Field Test in the spring of 2014. Below is a summary of the
progress made along each bucket of work in the current year, in order to ensure PARCC
Readiness:

Testing Protocols:
Materials: Clear testing protocols were developed during the 2014-15 school year, in order to
guide principals through the process of preparing their schools for test administration. Specific
materials distributed to principals are described below:
7-Point Checklist for PARCC: This document was designed in collaboration with school leaders,
assistant superintendents, and instructional and technology administrators, and guides
principals towards readiness across the below-listed core indicators. Schools are required to
complete and submit responses to this checklist to their network contacts on a weekly basis
leading up to PARCC administration.
o
o
o
o
o
o

Testing space
Test coordinator readiness
Test administrator readiness
Parent PARCC Knowledge
Testing Compliance
Student Readiness

Testing Space and Schedule Plan: This document was designed to collect and sign-off on which
rooms will be used for PARCC testing, to confirm schools have the correct number of devices,
and to confirm a secure Chromebook storage location.

School Readiness Tracker: The Newark Public Schools developed a PARCC Readiness Tracker, to
aggregate responses to the 7-Point Checklist and Testing Space and Schedule Plan submitted
by all schools and managed by the network contacts. This tracker creates a heat map and a
number of charts and graphs based on the readiness indicators for all schools, so that

30 | P a g e

administrators can focus efforts where specific issues are present in the weeks leading up to
PARCC administration.
PARCC Infrastructure Trial: NPS designed a district-wide PARCC infrastructure trial to pressure
test our network and provide an opportunity for schools to implement a computerized test in
the same PARCC format and environment weeks before the actual test. This trial was
implemented on February 13th and will provide an opportunity to identify areas that need
additional attention.

Training:
Staff Training:
The Newark Public Schools organized a series of PARCC Test Administration Workshops to guide
development of the student test environment and staff preparedness for PARCC. As mentioned
above, test simulations are scheduled to take place at all Newark Public Schools prior to the
March administration of PARCC, in order to allow for practice along the training received and so
that all schools have an opportunity to determine and properly address pain points prior to the
exam date.

Student Training
Over the last few years, the Newark Public Schools has invested significantly in instructional
technology. This gradual integration of technology into our classrooms over the last few years
has allowed students to gradually build their capacity to navigate technologyprimarily
computersfor the successful completion of instructional tasks.
In the current school year, we developed a series of lessons for teachers and students called the
Digital Reboot that embeds the technical skills required for PARCC within our content. All
lesson plans and descriptions along three strands (ELA, Math, and PARCC) can be located at the
following two links:
Teacher facing:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rZFwQ9l8xc4DAvdZ6RXRM2eOuPONEfQ20fxpRGpp61g/
pub
Student facing:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HO6flauG6HJ_AzsvCVHSl4CvI4pWesatZlr7T0EPiV8/pub

31 | P a g e

Technology:
NPS has invested over $8 million in student and administrator devices such as
Chromebooks and SmartBoards since 2011.
Approximately $5 million of the $ 8million was expensed on Chromebooks for our students
during the 2014-15 school year.

Attachment 20: PARCC Workshop Part I Agenda

Attachment 21: PARCC Workshop Part II Agenda
Attachment 22: 7-Point Checklist for PARCC Math
Attachment 23: Testing Space and Schedule Plan
Attachment 24: School Readiness Tracker Template

Administrative Salaries and Increases

Q1:

Over the past year, raises were received by 80 percent of your top administrative
assistants, with many of them now earning approximately $175,000 per year. Can these
salaries be justified in light of the deficit facing the District and the lack of appreciable
improvement in overall graduation rates?
All salaries and salary increases are aligned with the approved job descriptions and with the
district's priorities.

Q2:

Is NPS the source of payment or is it some other entity?

All salaries of the Leadership Team are paid for by Newark Public Schools dollars.

Q3:

Provide a diagram of your cabinet structure and a detailed job description for each member.

Superintendent
Cami Anderson

Assistant
Superintendents

K-8 Network
Peter Turnamian
High School
Network
Brad Haggerty

Executive Director,
Family &
Community
Engagement
Ruben Roberts

Executive
Director, Strategy
and Innovation
Gabrielle Wyatt

School Business
Administrator
Val Wilson

Please see File #1 for all job descriptions.

32 | P a g e

Chief Talent
Officer
Vanessa
Rodriguez

Executive Director,
Strategic
Partnerships &
Superintendents
Office
Shauwea Hamilton

Special
Assistant,
Curriculum
Services
Caleb
Perkins

Executive
Director,
Policy and
Planning
Maria Orozco

Chief of Staff
& General
Counsel
Charlotte
Hitchcock

Questions 4-6:
The Newark Public Schools is currently in the budget review process and will have solid projections and
plans in the coming quarter. Answers to questions 4-6 are forthcoming.
Q4:
Q5:

Q6:

What is the NPS budget deficit?

How did you get there?
How do you plan to rectify the deficit?

School visits by the Superintendent

The Superintendent is committed to working with students, parents, teachers, and school leaders onthe-ground. The attached document details her school visits during the current school year.
Attachment 25: List of school visits 2014-15

Early Childhood Education

Q1:

Provide a list of all early childhood education programs that NPS contracts with for the provision
of Abbott pre-k education. Please identify who has a contract, the number of children served by
the contract, the duration of the contract, the location of the programs, and the amount of
each.
Please refer to the attached spreadsheet, NPS Pre-K Site Source. It highlights all district Pre-K
providers and the number of children served. The 2014-2015 budget spreadsheet outlines
contract amounts. All contracts are renewed annually.

Attachment 26: 2014-2015 Budgets

Q2:

Identify the number of children NPS serves directly with the provision of Abbott pre-k and the
location of these programs.
Please refer to the attached spreadsheet, NPS Pre-K Site Source.

Attachment 27: NPS Pre-K Site Source

Q3:

Identify any other early childhood program or initiatives operated by NPS.

In addition to the districts existing pre-K programs, NPS now provides Head Start services. Head
Start seats are considered part of the districts overall early childhood program.

33 | P a g e

Q4:

Did NPS acquire some of the funding that had previously been appropriated to the Newark
Preschool Council? If yes, how much of that money was appropriated?
The federal government makes all determinations about funding for Head Start in the city of
Newark, including allocations to various providers. In 2014 the federal government opened
Head Start bidding to a competitive process. The Newark Public Schools submitted an
application for Head Start funding and was selected through a competitive process to receive $7
million dollars. With this funding, NPS was able to expand quality Pre-K options to additional
NPS students.

Q5:

Provide identification as to how NPS is utilizing the $7 million appropriation for Head Start that
you recently received. Please list how many slots there are, where the classrooms are located,
and whether the District will operate these classrooms themselves or are they subcontracted?
NPS was approved to serve 1,000 Head Start seats. 700 of these seats are filled by existing NPS
students who meet Head Start eligibility criteria. The remaining 300 seats were added to NPSs
overall population. The $7 million in funding is primarily appropriated to build Head Start
services for families in these seats, such as family advocates and health care screenings. A
portion of the funds was allocated to establishing new classrooms to serve the projected 300
additional students. All allocations are set per the rigorous federal Head Start performance
standards, so that the NPS program meets mandated requirements. Head Start classrooms are
at the following sites: Early Childhood Center West at Old Speedway, Early Childhood Center
South at Chancellor Annex, Early Childhood Center Central at Samuel J. Berliner, Early Childhood
Center North at Gladys Hillman Jones, 13th Avenue Elementary, Camden Elementary, Lafayette
Elementary, McKinley Elementary, and Quitman Elementary. The District is operating all Head
Start classrooms

Attachment 28: Decade Comparison

Q6:

If subcontracted, please identify with whom, the number of slots subcontracted, and the amount
awarded within each subcontract.
N/A

Q7:

Provide full details on the scope of the grant, how it is going to be used, where the children will
be served. Highlight the increasing educational opportunities that will help Newarks most
disadvantaged students.
The Office of Head Start (OHS) awarded Newark Public Schools a federal grant to provide Head
Start services to 1000 students based on the application we submitted in the fall of 2013. Since
then, there have been some modifications to this proposal that have been reviewed and
approved by OHS.

34 | P a g e

The application will be forwarded in the coming weeks.

Q8:

During your tenure as Superintendent, have we seen an expansion in the early childhood
nonprofit network?
No.

Q9:

Are we appropriating the same level of funding to that nonprofit network as we have a decade
ago?
Yes. Please see the Decade 10 Year Comparison chart. Under the column labeled Providers,
you will notice funding has remained relatively constant with very little variance over the years.

Charter Schools
Q1:

Provide the Committee with what the actual number of charter school growth was for 2014-15
school year. Provide the actual number that NPS had budgeted for.
The attached document details all payments to charter schools since Fiscal Year 2010.

Attachment 29: Charter School Payments 2010-2014

35 | P a g e