HomeMy Public PortalAboutJanuary 9, 2009 KBReport_Draft.pdfFeasibility Draft Report for
Key Biscayne Charter High School
A Report by Fielding Nair International
and EdVisions
for the Village of Key Biscayne
January 9, 2009
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
2
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
2
Acknowledgements
FNI would like to acknowledge all of the parents and community members
of Key Biscayne that participated in the October and November Workshops.
Your contribution was invaluable in the creation of this report. We would also
like to acknowledge the key officials of the Island, many of whom were able
to meet one-on-one with Prakash Nair:
Village Council
Robert L. Vernon, Mayor
Michael W. Davey, Vice Mayor
Enrique Garcia
Robert Gusman
Michael E. Kelly
Jorge E. Mendia
Thomas Thornton
Village Attorney
Weiss, Serota, Helfman, Pastoriza, Cole & Boniske, P.A.
Administration
Genaro “Chip” Iglesias, Village Manager
Jud Kurlancheek, AICP, Building, Zoning, and Planning Director
Office of the Village Clerk
Conchita H. Alvarez, CMC
We graciously thank everyone involved for their time, interest
and commitment in this process.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
2
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
3
December 31, 2008
Re: Key Biscayne Charter High School Feasibility Report
Dear Mayor Vernon and Members of the Key Biscayne Village Council
Thank you for giving us this opportunity to analyze and respond to Key
Biscayne’s interest and need for a charter high school feasibility study. FNI
and EdVisions have provided this joint Feasibility Report to the Village of
Key Biscayne as requested, with the hope that it will guide further planning
for a charter high school on the Island.
Our team is extremely appreciative of the warm hospitality and
cooperation from all of the residents and Village Officials we have met with
in Key Biscayne. It has been a pleasure to work with your community.
If you have any further questions regarding the Feasibility Report or need
information or research that will assist with the project, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Prakash Nair, REFP
President
Innovative
Learning
Communities
Florida Studio
16605 Windsor Park Drive
Lutz, Florida 33549
Tel: 718-520-7318
Fax: 813-909-2509
Mobile: 917-406-3120
Email:
Prakash@FieldingNair.com
Minneapolis Studio
4937 Morgan Ave. South
Minneapolis, MN 55419
Tel: 612-925-6897
Fax: 612-922-6631
Mobile: 612-735-1221
Email:
Randy@FieldingNair.com
Websites:
www.FieldingNair.com
www.DesignShare.com
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
4
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ................................................................... 2
Section 1: Introduction ................................................................... 5
Section 2: Executive Summary ......................................................... 7
Section 3: Project Feasibility Study .............................................. 10
a. Educational Model Feasibility ............. 11
b. Financial Feasibility ................................... 17
c. Facilities Feasibility ................................... 20
d. Social Feasibility ................................... 25
e. Cultural Feasibility ................................... 27
f. Additional Feasibility Concerns ............. 28
Section 4: Next Steps And Timetables ................................... 32
Appendix ......................................................................................... 36
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
4
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
This report was commissioned by the Village of Key Biscayne for the purpose of
determining the feasibility of establishing and operating a Municipal Charter High School
in Key Biscayne. Fielding Nair International and its sub-consultant EdVisions have been
charged with the responsibility of collecting, analyzing and making recommendations with
regard to several basic “threshold” questions about feasibility. Among them:
Why? Given the demographic
makeup of the Island, is there a strong
rationale for the establishment of a
Charter School? Is there strong com-
munity support for a charter high
school?
Who? Do the potential enrollment
numbers of students suggested by the
demographic analysis justify the cre-
ation of a school and if a Charter
School were created, what is the
likelihood that eligible students would
attend?
To What End? What is the main purpose of the school? For Key Biscayne as a
community to control their own educational destiny? To reduce commuting time for those
who have to go off the Island to attend high school? To provide a less expensive option for
those who may otherwise have to send their children to private school? To serve as a
community asset? To increase property values? To spur economic development within the
Island? To raise Key Biscayne’s profile and prestige? All or some of the above?
What Kind? What kind of school should the Village pursue? Should it be based on a
traditional academic program or should it be based on a program derived from educa-
tional research and best practices supporting 21st century skills development? What are the
ramifications of either of these choices on budget and space needs?
Where? If there appears to be sufficient justification to proceed with a Charter School,
where should it be located? And what is the rationale for the recommended site? What are
the pros and cons of locating the school there?
How? How should Key Biscayne approach the process of establishing the school? Is
the Municipal Charter School route the most preferred option and if so, why? What is the
likelihood that an application for a Municipal Charter School filed by the Village Key
Biscayne will be approved by the Miami-Dade School Board?
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
5
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
6
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
6
How Much? How much money would the school
be entitled to receive from Miami-Dade County
School District? Beyond the amounts received from
the County, how much would a preferred solution cost
the Village in operating expenditures and in the ex-
penditure of other resources such as capital construc-
tion money? Would these expenses be amortized over
the short term or long term? If the school is able to
support itself, how long would it take for it to become
self-sustaining? Would it need to do fundraising? If so,
would these additional funds be needed for basic pro-
grams or for enhanced programs?
Next Steps and Timetable: If the basic require-
ments related to feasibility are met by virtue of an-
swering the above questions, what are the next steps
needed to bring the project into fruition? What is a
realistic timetable for designing, constructing, and
opening the school?
In order to answer these questions and prepare
suitable recommendations, the Consultants have
studied hundreds of pages of existing documents,
met individually with various members of the commu-
nity including several Council members, conducted
a series of surveys and community workshops, toured
the Village extensively to look at potential sites, and
examined the various rules and regulations pertaining
to the establishment of a Municipal Charter School.
This report contains the results of the Consultant’s find-
ings and recommendations to answer all the threshold
feasibility questions raised above.
The issue of charter
schools was undoubtedly
a hot topic in the 2008
Presidential campaign.
In fact, the single issue
that Senators John Mc-
Cain and Barack Obama
agreed upon was the
issue of charter schools.
Obama stated in de-
bates, “Sen. McCain and I
actually agree on char-
ter schools. I doubled the
number of charter schools
in Illinois despite some
reservations from teach-
ers unions. I think it’s
important to foster com-
petition inside the public
schools.” McCain con-
curred, “Charter schools
aren’t the only answer, but
they’re providing compe-
tition. They are providing
the kind of competitions
that have upgraded both
types of schools.”
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
6
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
7
SECTION 2: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Village of Key Biscayne has a rare opportunity to create its own high school
from the ground up. Most community high schools have been in place for decades (if not
centuries) and have an established culture and educational program, making it difficult to
change and innovate. Key Biscayne is a thriving community with an abundance of resourc-
es and a rich knowledge base to create an excellent school, taking the best of traditional
schooling and adding the most innovative learning strategies and technology. The result: a
truly unique and 21st century learning center that schools around the world will emulate. It is
potentially one of the most exciting school development efforts going forward in the coun-
try.
Our initial scan of the Key Biscayne situation told us three things. First, it is rare to find
a community the size of Key Biscayne that doesn’t already have a high school, meaning
there are most likely enough students to support a strong enough enrollment base. Second,
there is ample community interest and involvement to set this effort apart from other charter
school development efforts. Finally, because of the strong involvement possibilities and the
lack of an entrenched existing school culture, this was a special opportunity to overcome
the institutional inertia that keeps K-12 education from innovating.
Why? We found in Key Biscayne an active and interested base of parents and com-
munity members who truly want to create a terrific community-based learning program, one
that reflects the expectations and outcomes of local citizens, as well as produce graduates
who can be successful at any college or work level. As you can see in the list of program
recommendations, there is a strong sense of place and support for activities that have local
implications as well as worldly results.
Who? Key Biscayne children will have
top priority for enrolling at KBHS. Based on
extrapolated data from the 2000 census,
we estimate that there are potentially 3,000
children under the age of 18 on the Island. It
would make sense to open the school with
9th and 10th graders, adding a grade yearly
to reach a total of 400 students. The revenue
and expense projections indicate the first and
second years will be critical and may require
some additional fundraising to provide for a
full academic and extra-curricular program.
Estimates are for 400 children to be enrolled in
the community learning center at its 6th year
of operation.
To What End? Without question, the local creation and support of its own high school
would add value to the entire island, both economically by potentially increasing property
values on the Island by as much as 10% and in terms of additional quality of life value (See
Appendix v). Most importantly it enhances the issue of autonomy in terms of local manage-
ment and community input. The school will also significantly reduce commuting and traffic
flow required by students attending off-Island middle and high schools.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
8
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
8
What Kind? We envision a world-class 21st century high school that focuses on edu-
cating the whole child. The school would facilitate instruction that will prepare students to
succeed and prosper in life, in school and in their careers. The school would likely offer a
rigorous hybrid program delivered through Project-Based Learning and the Advanced Place-
ment or International Baccalaureate Program, recognized high academic level options.
Furthermore, we envision the school as a major focal center of the community, building
inter-generational connections and providing for life-long learning, cultural and recreational
opportunities for residents of all ages. Families attending schools off the Island will also ben-
efit from after-school programs at the community learning center. This community learning
center would require far less square footage as it would inhabit existing spaces such as the
Village Hall and Community Center. In turn, this would significantly reduce costs for the new
school.
Where? The new school would need a facility of approximately 25,000 sf to accommo-
date up to 400 students, whereas a traditionally designed school uses approximately 150 sq.
ft. per student, requiring about 60,000 sf. This dramatic reduction in space needs for a new
High School can be achieved by 1) Innovative Architectural Design that maximizes avail-
able space for teaching and learning and, 2) by taking advantage of existing community
resources and facilities that are under-utilized during the day. A number of sites were investi-
gated and analyzed in June 2008 and rejected due to prohibitive costs, architectural oppor-
tunities, unavailability and a variety of other reasons.
The most suitable site option on Key Biscayne is 530 Crandon. The site would offer a
prime location on Key Biscayne’s main boulevard and offer the opportunity to build a world-
class school from the ground-up, meeting all of the community’s specifications. The creative
possibilities are endless, and there is potential to make a personalized statement about the
community’s commitment to 21st century education within the architecture of the new
school. We understand that the Village is undergoing a formal planning process to deter-
mine the eventual use of the Village Green. That said, we believe that if developed with
sensitivity towards sustainability and open space, the school would provide the community
with even more green space that it would take away. A number of ideas are presented in
the Facilities Feasibility section, such as developing the McIntyre Street as an active commu-
nity center and preserving Monaco Fountains and utilizing them as an instructive tool for art
appreciation. Creating a green roof on the new building could be used for garden space,
while a green amphitheater space would be enjoyed by the whole Key Biscayne commu-
nity. A combination of both, as well as relocating Village’s administration, or part of it, to a
commercial building is another possibility.
Another suitable location for the new school is Village Hall. The location is ideal due to
its close proximity to the Community Center and Village Green. It would require certain mod-
ifications to the building in order to add the required square footage needed to accom-
modate the school and the existing administrative users. One option would entail relocating
some existing administrative functions which could be done by in-filling the first floor court-
yard. The Police Department could have an exclusive entrance through the back parking
lot or a new entrance be built on the east side of the building. The building has the potential
for creating a 21st century state-of-the-art facility that would achieve the standard of excel-
lence that the Key Biscayne community expects. Village Hall could also be ready within a
relatively short time frame.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
8
How will the school be operated? Currently, there are no issues that are insurmount-
able, or that we fear will not be approved by the Miami-Dade School Board. A best-case
scenario is the option of authorization by a municipal government. In the case of Key Bis-
cayne, it seems to be an even more desirable option as Key Biscayne has the resources, po-
tentially the community support and the community facilities to be very successful. Municipal
chartering is the best-case scenario in terms of community ownership and acquiring learning
program resources, and would likely equate to better access to resources, even broader
community support, and the requirement of local management and an operations plan.
Operations can be flexible and it is recommended that the community further explore
governance models most appropriate for Key Biscayne.
How Much? The projections for start-up expenses, not including facilities, are in the
range of $375,000. This amount will be off-set by the federal start-up grant of $325,000 (year
1 and 2). Additional funds will have to come from private donations, local public funds,
some in-kind community services and other grants from private sources. We do not believe
the start-up costs will be a deterrent to the chartering process for Key Biscayne. No tax in-
crease will be needed.
The facility costs are estimated to be in the vicinity of $5,024,579 and $7,579,579 range,
depending on the site. It would take an additional revenue of between $450 and $750 per
year per child, depending on site selection, to cover these expenses. Costs required to relo-
cate Village Hall administration are not included in this report, but would need to be taken
into consideration should this option be selected. Additional funding would be expected to
be obtained from a combination of parents, private donations, and after-school programs
run in the facilities. Assuming full enrollment, the school should be fully self-sustaining after
year 6 and require no subsidy from the Village of Key Biscayne. We assume the debt service
coverage for construction will be picked up by the Village, using a similar model as was used
for the Community Center.
Next Steps and Timetable: Two
upcoming phases will occur between
January and July 2009, and January and
August 2010. The first phase will involve
planning for the application to Miami-
Dade and developing a world class con-
cept design for the school at the selected
site. The second will involve planning for
the school start-up. This first phase is criti-
cal, as the community will need to come
up with the most detailed and definitive
plan to both create a successful school
and planning process and to gain the
support of the Miami-Dade Public Schools
charter office. We will not be proposing
a traditional school so it will be critical to
establish a clear educational model and have a very complete and understandable ap-
plication. Based on demand and resources available, the school’s first freshman class should
be able to enroll in August 2010.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
9
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
10
SECTION 3: PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY
Consultants from FNI and EdVisions have examined the following feasibility compo-
nents for a charter high school in Key Biscayne. The needs, goals and purpose of the project
were broadly identified in the October workshops (surveys, results, and feedback can be
found in the Appendix). We concentrated on a specific zone of focus when considering the
feasibility of a charter high school for Key Biscayne. This zone of focus was identified between
workshops, based on survey responses, conversations and workshop activities. Five primary
areas of concern arose in terms of feasibility, labeled as:
educational model•
financial•
facility•
social •
cultural •
In addition, we consider factors such as
green space preservation, traffic con-
cerns and community signature. If any of
these areas are found to be not feasible,
then the project as a whole would also
be deemed not feasible.
Is a Traditional High School Feasible on Key Biscayne?
Various alternatives for the charter high school project were briefly analyzed in order
to address or mitigate concerns about a public, non-traditional school on the Island. The
first option examined for Key Biscayne was a traditional high school for 400 students. The
square footage needed for such a school ranged between 60,000 and 65,000 square feet.
This includes other ancillary buildings such as a gymnasium, cafeteria, auditorium, and other
spaces dedicated to circulation, sports and extracurriculars. In total, five to six acres of space
would be needed to accommodate this type of high school building, which was clearly not
readily available in Key Biscayne. Traditional schools have also not proven to be optimal for
today’s educational needs. For this reason, we began examining non-traditional options for
the Island. Not only did we find that a non-traditional high school would be more in keep-
ing with 21st century learning skills, but this type of facility would be far less expensive than its
traditional counterpart. This report explains in detail the rationale of the project and attempts
to outline for the community what must be completed before the approval stages.
The final section of the Feasibility Report provides recommendations for next steps and
provides conceptual design ideas for the facility itself, as well as a plan for operational phas-
ing options.
Project Feasibility Summary:
Currently, there are no issues that are insurmountable, or that we fear will not pass the
threshold of feasibility.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
10
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
10
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
11
a. EDUCATIONAL MODEL FEASIBILITY
This list of recommendations came about through a series of workshop and feedback
sessions in October and November, in addition to small group and individual conversations
from early summer through early fall. We presented information that spanned both the 21st
century and the traditional school programs. Key Biscayne residents who participated were
quick to point out that they want outcomes that are both rigorous and engage their young
people in new and different ways. Therefore, you see in the list a cross-section of personal-
ization, technology, active learning and value-added content programs. The design of the
school program for Key Biscayne will ultimately include a strong emphasis on all four areas.
What might that look like?
Personalization will most likely come in the form of: 1) small advisory groupings to address the
interests and planning for more focused learning; 2) personal learning and post-secondary
plans for all students; 3) small learning communities such as academies of 100-150 students.
Technology will be enhanced by: 1) personal technology for every student with full time
use and access; 2) electronic personal learning management tools; 3) outcomes centered
around students’ ability to use current communication and presentation technology; 4) re-
search, computation and analysis skills related to technology.
Active learning will take many forms but will likely be seen most often in: 1) learning beyond
the walls of the school facility; 2) formal and informal periodic presentation/demonstration of
learning (including the arts); 3) service learning to help the community in numerous ways; 4)
real world work with various agencies and businesses; 5) focused interactive projects within
seminars or courses; 6) interactive technology-based programs; 7) national and international
travel opportunities.
Value-added programming will be provided through: 1) selective learning enhancement,
high-standard programs such as International Baccalaureate and Advanced Placement; 2)
dual enrollment collaboration with colleges; 3) self-directed project-based learning; 4) on-
line learning opportunities.
These features will require an active and informed community prepared to contribute
their expertise, involvement and resources to help create a truly responsive learning model.
First and foremost, the community will need to supply a facility that will serve as the gathering
place for young people in the most open and interactive fashion; a place that is as inviting
to the community as it is interesting and stimulating to students. Second, the community will
have to be prepared to step up and into the learning process as active participants, men-
tors and facilitators of learning activities. Key Biscayne has a talented resident and retired
population that could be tapped as community experts and mentors. And third, there may
be a need for some additional resources beyond the funds that will be provided by Miami-
Dade County to support value-added and extra-curricular activities. Partnerships with Univer-
sity of Miami and Florida International University should be explored.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
12
Today’s learning involves a complex web of accountability, funding, community and
parent involvement, and teaching. Our summary concludes that Key Biscayne is clearly ca-
pable of creating and maintaining a quality charter school. The type, size and place of this
school will depend upon the interest, involvement and support of the Key Biscayne commu-
nity. We sincerely acknowledge the community effort so far and look for even greater future
support. We encourage the planners and Village Council to continue moving forward with
this charter school and recommend a planned opening in fall, 2010.
The recommendations are in no particular order and are meant to be a working list
requiring further study and local decisions to place in the larger plan.
Personalized Learning
The hallmark of top high school education programs is
the degree to which a school can be personalized or
customized, giving both students and parents a variety
of options from which to choose. This personalization
can come from the curriculum, pedagogy, technology,
physical space, even the daily schedule and amount of
time allowed for personal interaction with staff and oth-
er students. Examples of personalized learning include
having a student advisory program, Personal Learning
Program (PLP) for each student, personal work space,
one-to-one tutoring and parent-student-advisor communication.
Clearly, the participants in the Key Biscayne workshops see personalization as a high
priority and want their high school to feature components compatible with individualized
learning, interest-based programming and future focus. We feel confident this can be
achieved in the design of a new Key Biscayne High School if personalized learning is inte-
grated with other features (cost per student less). This will not be a feasible option however if
it is placed in a conventional program.
Community-Based Learning Programs
Key Biscayne is blessed with many resources
and there is a definite interest in making those re-
sources available to the new high school. The ex-
pectation is that the world is a place to learn and
if the program is designed as such, students will be
using community amenities as a part of their learning
program. In addition, the greatest resource in Key
Biscayne is the talent and knowledge of its residents.
An extensive volunteer and mentor program could
also be a part of the learning program. The school
could forge several valuable partnerships with both
private and public entities to also enhance learning opportunities for students. Depending
on the design of the learning program, this could be a distinguishing feature of Key Biscayne
High School, one that becomes a true value-added feature. Various partnerships, real world
learning experiences and use of community organizations, facilities, businesses and parks
would be entirely feasible at little extra cost, if only they are integrated with other features.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
12
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
12
Emphasis on 21st Century Skills
What does it truly mean to become an educated person? The emphasis on 21st cen-
tury skills is a must if students are going to be able to navigate in this new age of technology
and communication. Key Biscayne High School would be remiss if it did not pay close at-
tention to these skills and develop programs that allow students to learn these skills - decision
making, learning responsibility, networking, communication, technology, critical thinking.
We heard from many attendees at the workshops that intentionality toward these practices
must be part of the plan for the new school. We agree and for starters, we think community
members should read William Cronon’s piece called “Only Connect” at:
http://www.williamcronon.net/writing/Cronon_Only_Connect.pdf. This emphasis on 21st cen-
tury skills is not only feasible, it is a natural outcome of other innovative practices.
Shared Facilities
The most feasible facility plan would be one
that includes a central school but also allows for
flexible use of other community facilities, such as
government agencies, the Village Hall and spac-
es dedicated to other organizations. The wisest
choice would be to integrate such facilities as the
new community center into the learning program
of the school. Other facilities that might be useful
are the public library, state park, village athletic
fields and any natural resource sanctuaries nearby.
It is also important to note that some facilities can be used on a very temporary basis,
for example a week long seminar may be held off campus. Sharing facilities does not mean
full time use or lease and one should be cautious not to over-use available facilities. In the
long run, the multi-flexi-facility idea should be an important part of the learning program and
learning space plan. This notion of shared facilities would compliment the learning program
and community involvement. Students in Key Biscayne need not be isolated (see informa-
tion about School of Environmental Studies’ travel program in Section e).
Extra/Intra-Curricular Activities
Many people also reported a strong interest in extra-curricular programs for students
(sports, arts, drama, academic teams such as speech, etc.), although not all felt it neces-
sary to fully compete in the traditional high school leagues. We recommend a combination
of activities both competitive with other schools and the ‘club’ varieties. The key is the level
of involvement by students (one of the best predictors of post-high school success). Some
of these activities should be for credit toward graduation as well (intra-curricular), especially
those that involve interdisciplinary learning and leadership development. Such activities
may be community-based with a focus on small teams and individual activities. KBHS might
also pair with other schools for larger group activities. The level and type of activities chosen
will come with a price and this may require raising additional funds, especially for large team
sports. Most traditional high school programs cost from 5-7% of the general fund budget so
this will have to be well thought out before implementing.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
13
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
14
Project-Based Learning
(At least part-time)
Project-based learning (PBL) is a
pedagogy that shifts away from the class-
room practices of short, isolated, teacher-
centered lessons and instead emphasizes
learning activities that are long-term, inter-
disciplinary, student-centered, and inte-
grated with real world issues and practices.
Students apply and integrate the content
of different subject areas at authentic mo-
ments in the production process, instead of
in isolation or in an artificial setting. In the
school and beyond, PBL also provides opportunities for teachers to build relationships with
each other and with those in the larger community.
PBL has developed to an extent that it is now feasible in terms of meeting standard
outcomes and financial integrity. At the core of innovation, the cost per student can be 10-
20% less than in traditional settings. PBL allows students to follow their interests and excel at
their own pace. It also means more personalization and customization and supports service
learning, which benefits the entire community. There are several professional development
providers and models that are successful and well recognized around the country. The most
flexible and personalized schools are using some form of PBL in their learning program. We
think Key Biscayne should include PBL in their program and recruit and train staff to imple-
ment the best features of PBL. Depending upon the size of Key Biscayne enrollment, it might
also be the most economically feasible model.
Enhanced Learning Programs (IB, AP, Dual
Enrollment, etc.)
It was clear from our feedback from various
meeting attendees that some Key Biscayne resi-
dents desire to have a value-added feature in their
new high school. We recommend that such pro-
grams as Advanced Placement, International Bac-
calaureate and Dual Enrollment be considered to
some degree. All have advantages and disadvan-
tages but all carry some post secondary attraction
and esteem. Done right, the programs will lead to
greater individualization, higher expectations, a
focus on college preparation, online learning op-
portunities and potential accreditation benefits.
The difficulty here will be financial feasibil-
ity as there may be an addition or change to the program that would make it less efficient.
Dual enrollment seems to be entirely feasible, while IB may depend on school size, IB cost
and acceptance, and AP may depend on program design. In any case we think they
should all be considered for inclusion in the program design.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
14
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
14
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
15
Parent and Community Involvement
There is no substitute for quality
parent involvement. Due to the level of
education of its citizens and their eco-
nomic status, Key Biscayne has a definite
advantage here. It is not only a high
priority but also weighs in on the school
design priorities. Parents want a school
where they can be highly involved and
influential in the learning program of
their children, as well as helpful to the
school overall. This in itself will make Key
Biscayne High School more successful
than many other schools. The high level
of involvement will also have a positive
influence on the young people in gen-
eral, limiting harmful behaviors, creating
greater community pride and support-
ing activities that enhance community-building across generations. This type of involvement
is feasible and will enhance local resources and contribute to overall support and success,
with definite potential for additional resources.
Technology-Infused Program
Schools without ample technology
today are like schools without pencils a
hundred years ago. The tools of the age
are absolutely necessary. Key Biscayne
should be a model for 21st century tech-
nology. This will enhance the personal-
ization and customization of the learning
program and create a greater effi-
ciency in overall operation. We antici-
pate some online learning, an individual
learning management system (including
personal learning plans and post-high
school plans), readily accessible com-
puters for all students, and greater com-
munication between home and school.
All three of these components are still
relatively new to high school education. Depending upon the program design and use of
technology, this may require some additional funding. However, it was clear from our study
that technology is a priority.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
16
Interest and Career Based Academies
Many of the questions during our
visits were related to various models and
the degree to which the models would
integrate innovation and tradition. Our
summation of those conversations and
surveys led us to recommend possible
‘academies’ that would essentially be
small learning communities (of no more
than 125 students) with varying degrees of
traditional teaching and innovative activi-
ties. This will depend on the number of stu-
dents who enroll during the first 3-5 years
of the school and the level of interest by
students, parents and the community. We
anticipate that KBHS will evolve into possibly three or four academies with distinctive features
(from traditional to full interest-based, self-directed project-based learning), innovations and
characteristics. Academies will allow for greater thematic focus for staff and community
(such as environment, business, art, world culture, language) and will allow students to follow
their interests. For example, one might be a math/science/IB/duel enrollment academy and
another, a project-based/hands-on/arts-focused/community-based program. The feasibility
of these academies will depend greatly upon good planning, enrollment levels and program
design.
Educational Model Feasibility Summary:
The Key Biscayne community identified ten priorities for a new educational model and
operations plan for KBHS: Personalized Learning, Community-Based Learning Programs,
Emphasis on 21st Century Skills, Shared Facilities, Extra/Intra-Curricular Activities, Project-
Based Learning, Enhanced Learning Programs, Parent and Community Involvement,
Technology-Infused Program, and Interest and Career Based Academies.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
16
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
16
b. FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY
After considerable study of Florida’s financial support for charter schools and related
local factors such as enrollment projections, facilities, district nuances and programmatic
recommendations, we find that a charter high school for the Island community of Key Bis-
cayne is a viable effort and financially feasible. Charter schools in Florida are for the most
part funded much like traditional district schools. Per pupil and compensatory revenue are
both at or near full funding assuming proper applications and reporting are completed. In
addition, there is startup funding to support planning, initial personnel and fixed asset (equip-
ment and furnishings) acquisition.
To make the case for feasibility we think it is best to approach this summary from sev-
eral important key factors and assumptions: (Note: for the purpose of this summary analysis
we used the conservative draft budget prepared earlier this fall. This budget is part of the
addendums to this report.)
1. Start-up costs. The projections for start-up expenses, not including facilities, are in the
range of $375,000. This amount will be off-set by the federal start-up grant of $325,000 (year
1 and 2). Additional funds will have to come from private donations, local public funds,
some in-kind community services and other grants from private sources. We do not believe
the start-up costs will be a deterrent to the chartering process for Key Biscayne.
2. Enrollment. In the analysis of projected students that may attend Key Biscayne High
School, we think it makes the most sense (as previously planned) to start the school with 9th
and 10th graders and add a grade yearly to a total of approximately 400 students. Based
on the student population available and some open enrollment, we also think it is reason-
able to expect from 100-150 students to enroll in the first year with subsequent growth of 100-
125 in the following 2-3 years. Revenue and expense projections (using the M-DCPS school
calculator) indicate the first and second years will be critical and may require some ad-
ditional fundraising to provide for a full academic and extra-curricular program. Assuming
full enrollment, the ensuing years should be sustainable. This is consistent with other charter
development in Florida and other states.
3. Revenue and expense integrity. We have looked at several budget drafts and find the
revenue and expense calculations to be correct and appropriate, leading to a sustainable
education program with reasonable reserves for contingencies and value-added program-
ming. Totals show reserves building to approximately $550,000 after year five. This is a com-
mendable goal and represents a 20% fund balance, consistent with other quality managed
charter schools. These figures are based on a conservative average weighted per pupil
revenue amount of approximately $6,350. Other key factors include the number of special
education students (10%-based on current local averages), use of start-up grants during the
first two years and a possible limited extra-curricular program for years 1-3. In addition, it is
important to note the school will attempt to maintain an adult to student ratio of 1:13.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
17
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
18
4. Capital outlay. This feasibility finding does not include estimates for essential facilities
outlay. Budgets do include expense estimates for utilities, maintenance and insurance. The
school will have access to state facilities funding after three years of operation. The facilities
issue is addressed in another section of this final report.
5. Program definition. As stated in the program summary, the educational program has
much to do with the feasibility of a high school for Key Biscayne. It is unlikely (and presumed
unwanted) that a purely traditional program is feasible as with most small schools. Costs
per student in a school of under 500 students rise considerably (10-20%) when a pure course
and class program is adopted due to low enrollment class offerings deemed ‘necessary’. As
indicated in the program summary, the most effective model recommended for KBHS would
be an ‘academy’ model with varying degrees of ‘classes’ and value-added programming.
Using the draft budget cited above we recommend a hybrid model of project-based learn-
ing with seminars for the first two years, moving to the academy model as enrollment grows
and a full student body of 9th-12th graders are enrolled.
6. Community support. As with most start-up programs, this effort will take a significant con-
tribution from the community of Key Biscayne. From students to senior citizens, everyone
will have to pitch in to make this school successful, both programmatically and financially.
Much can be contributed in-kind but a significant fundraising effort should be expected and
necessary to ‘value-add’ the school. Our estimates are that the community should attempt
to raise about $94,000 in the first year and increase annual contributions to around $300,000
from a variety of private sources and foundations by the fifth year of operation to ensure a
school of utmost quality and breadth. This would virtually guarantee a complete curricu-
lar and extra-curricular program as well as enhance the community ownership of the new
school.
All of the above factors will contribute to making Key Biscayne High School a school
of first choice for many young people. It should also be mentioned that without first rate
management little can be accomplished. We highly recommend that the Village of Key
Biscayne and school officials team up to provide quality oversight and financial manage-
ment of the new school. As a municipal charter it seems logical that the Village should play
a significant role in this area, including possibly provided such services.
Substantial Gains in Property Values Likely
In addition, although not directly related to the financial feasibility, KBHS should be
viewed as an investment by the Village citizens. A preliminary study of property values shows
that due to the presence of a high school, real estate values should gain at least 10% (Refer
to the addendum in Appendix v). Communities with a full slate of public school offerings (K-
12) tend to have a higher overall value, both residential and commercial. Also, merchants
can expect to increase sales as students, parents and others attending school and school
functions will bring significant spending to the area adjacent to the school.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
18
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
18
All of these factors contribute to the big picture feasibility of a high school in Key
Biscayne. Although not often described as such, starting a new school in a community
should be viewed in the truest sense as community development. It brings new money into
a community, enriches the fiscal life of both residents and businesses, and contributes to
the economic investment, both long and short term. Ultimately it creates a sense of place
for students and encourages them to stay or come back to the community where they are
more likely to continue to invest their time and resources. We see it as a win-win for the
community and highly encourage involvement by everyone in the effort to bring a new
charter high school to the Island.
Financial Feasibility Summary:
Ultimately, the financial feasibility is dependent on a complex set of factors but the
most important is the support and involvement of the community. We have deter-
mined that the project is financially feasible.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
19
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
20
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
20
c. FACILITIES FEASIBILITY
On June 18th 2008, FNI con-
sultants had the opportunity to ex-
plore 24 potential location options
for a new charter high school. What
became especially apparent on this
tour was the abundance of resources
that the small Island of Key Biscayne
has in their own backyard. We see
a real potential to have a school in
which there is no physical school, one
where the whole Island becomes the
school campus. However, we rec-
ognize that it is unlikely that the com-
munity is ready accept such a radical “no walls” approach. Nevertheless, the community
is looking for a dramatic change in their educational ideologies, and must be prepared to
take full advantage of their rich resources by forming partnerships with other forward-think-
ing organizations. Through these valuable partnerships, students can have unique learning
experiences throughout the Island and the school becomes their “home base”, a facility out
of which the school operates and administrates. Some of the resources that FNI identified
that could complement the education within the main school were the following:
Community Center (gymnasium, pool)•
Village Center•
Key Biscayne Beach Club•
Rowing Club•
Rosentiel School of Atmospheric & Marine Sci-•
ences
Village Green•
Crandon Park Visitors & Nature Center•
Calusa Park•
Tennis Center•
NOAA•
Local •
Hotels & Restaurants
Rosentiel School of Marine and Atmospheric •
Science
Yacht Club •
Golf at Crandon Park•
Bill Baggs Cape Florida State Park•
Key Biscayne K-8 Center•
There are two options that seem most appro-
priate for the new school facility location: 530
Crandon and Village Hall. We discuss here the
advantages and disadvantages for each location
and the determined feasibility of both.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
20
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
21
OPTION 1: 530 CRANDON
The best choice for the school is 530 Crandon. The site would offer a prime location
on Key Biscayne’s main boulevard and offer the opportunity to build a world-class school
from the ground-up, meeting all of the community’s specifications. The creative possibilities
are endless, and there is potential to make a personalized statement about the community’s
commitment to 21st century education within the architecture of the new school.
One potential problem with 530 Crandon is the green space requirement for the Vil-
lage. We recognize that the Village seeks to preserve as much open green space as pos-
sible. However, we recommend that this site be developed with a sensitivity to this green
space issue and would in turn provide the community with even more green space than it
would take away. For example, green space can be returned to the Village by providing a
green roof which would provide the same amount of green space as the allowable building
footprint.
Another plan of action is to
capitalize on the amenities
that are located in this area
with which to enhance the
Civic Center - the Commu-
nity Center, Village Hall/Police
Station, Fire Rescue Station,
and the Charter High School.
The Civic Center would be
complemented by the Village
Green to the north. During
the school day, West McIntyre
Street could be closed to allow
for more usable green space
that is inviting and welcom-
ing to all in the community,
with the Sarah Morris Monaco
Fountains serving as a signature element. This active Civic Center could boast a coffee shop
with student-run kiosk businesses throughout offering various services, while providing unique
entrepreneurial learning opportunities. Every week a Farmer’s Market could be open to the
public selling produce that the students grow and harvest. Music, dance, and theatrical
performances could even be accommodated here.
One way to preserve green space on the site is to develop an amphitheater or some
type of public “green” amenity on the site which would provide usable space to the com-
munity rather than just a piece of open land making the green spaces more utilitarian and
functional.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
22
In the end, the Village may end up with more open usable green space because they
are reclaiming and making West McIntyre Street more accessible to pedestrians (including
opening up the area surrounding Monaco Fountains which presently is not being used due
to traffic), developing an amphitheater or some type of public outdoor meeting space, and
creating a green roof on the new building which can be used for gardening and learning
while at the same time providing beautiful vistas to the surrounding waterways. Therefore,
when all of these areas are added up, a great deal of green space would be reclaimed
and restored to the Village in spite of the development. In addition, we would suggest plac-
ing the building footprint on the east side of the site, with the open green space on the west
side. This placement allows for passers-by to feel more welcome to the space and provides
an opportunity to showcase the Civic Center, including the green space, and all of its ame-
nities.
When the high school meets the threshold capacity of 400 students, an additional
8,000 sf of classroom spaces would be potentially needed to meet the ideal square footage
allotment of 25,000 sf. We believe that this would be easily rectified by reclaiming under-
utilized space in both the Village Hall and the Community Center, such as portions of confer-
ence rooms for short-term use during the day. Ideally, the school should have approximately
25,000 sf and this could be met by using the other resources throughout the Island.
A facility (or facilities) containing approximately 25,000 sf would support 400 students
in a best-practice, 21st century educational environment, including a state-of-the-art facil-
ity and all of the resources that currently exist on Key Biscayne. Traditionally, a school facility
would provide, on average, 150 sf per student, which would amount to a 60,000 sf facility.
Of that 60,000 sf, 40% would be made up of academic facilities (labs and classrooms) and
60% would be made up of other facilities, such as a cafeteria, auditorium, gym and other
athletic facilities. Of that 40% reserved for academic facilities, typically 40% is allocated for
circulation, utilities, and egresses (9,600 sf), leaving only 14,400 sf for classrooms.
And What Do Traditional Classrooms Usually Look Like?
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
22
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
22
Our Proposal
We propose that Key Biscayne can and deserves to do better than that by making
greater use of each square foot to be more effective and sustainable. One of the key strat-
egies is to reduce the 40% requirement for circulation and utilities down to 20% by eliminating
hallways and instead creating active social commons so that learning happens throughout
the whole school facility. This active commons can be transformed on a daily basis so that
it can be used as a cafe, study area, small group project workspace, and even a place for
large gatherings around a small portable stage.
Since 530 Crandon only allows for about 17,000 sf to be built on site based on existing
zoning codes, the school would need to find additional space in the Community Center or
Village Hall. One idea is to create a Lifelong Learning Center on the second floor of the Vil-
lage Hall which could be a wonderful resource not only for the school but also for the entire
community. The Lifelong Learning Center would serve as the new public library for the Island
and would be open to the public while also serving the students. In addition, it would be
an active library that incorporates study areas, classrooms, galleries, a cafe, and meeting
rooms. Development of this Global Learning Center on the second floor of the Village Hall
could potentially happen in Phase II of the project since we do not expect the school to
reach 400 student capacity until at least the third year after its opening. During Phase I, the
second floor of the Village Hall and the spaces in the Community Center could temporarily
house the students while their school is being constructed. Although, a potential alternative
option is to amend local zoning regulations and the Master Plan to provide sufficient square
footage allowances for a 25,000 sf building. This way, all school functions are under one roof.
In summary, we propose that 530 Crandon would be the ideal location for the school
with the following contingencies:
1) Build a school on a part of the site not to exceed a third of the site’s footprint.
2) Keep the remainder available for use as an amphitheater and other outdoor uses as
space allows.
3) During the school day, close off the adjacent under-utilized street during school hours. This
will make the area of the street as well as the adjacent island with its reflecting pond avail-
able for use by the school and by the community during the day. This restoration of public
open space for community purposes far exceeds the small portion of 530 Crandon that will
be developed for the school footprint.
4) Build a green roof on the school with after hours community access -- thus restoring the
small footprint back to public usable open space. With activities, gardening clubs, and pub-
lic sittable space, this could become a heavily used portion of the facility.
5) Student entrepreneurship projects such as retail booths and a cafe can service the newly
created amphitheater and adjacent open space.
6) In the end, our proposal will more than double the available usable open space while at
the same time, providing valuable assets the community currently lacks.
Our proposal addresses the concerns of all the individual interest groups in a way that
creates true synergies. In a community with diverse opinions and priorities such as Key Bis-
cayne, this is much preferred to a “winner-take-all” approach that may satisfy the needs of
only one interest group while jeopardizing the interest of the community at large.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
23
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
24
OPTION 2: VILLAGE HALL
If in the event that 530 Crandon is
not a viable location for the school, the
next best option is to renovate the Vil-
lage Hall to accommodate the new high
school. By in-filling the existing courtyard,
thereby increasing the square footage on
the ground floor, some of the existing sec-
ond floor administrative functions can be
relocated to the ground floor. The existing
second floor space, the space created by
in-filling the courtyard on the second floor,
and the potential addition of a third floor
would more than meet the school’s 25,000
sf space needs. We recognize from an
operations standpoint some of the administrative functions currently located at Village Hall
may need to be relocated. Our budget estimates include the cost for renovating Village Hall
to accommodate both the school and the administration but not for an actual relocation of
administrative facilities to another site. In other words some of the budget currently allocated
to renovating Village Hall could be applied towards the relocation costs of administrative
functions.
When the high school meets the threshold capacity of
400 students, an additional 8,000 sf of learning spaces would
be potentially needed. Building another floor on top of this
building would garner another 13,000 SF as part of a phase
two project. If the atrium was enclosed, an additional 3,500
sf could be available to house some of the Village offices
relocated from the second floor to make room for the new
school. For at least the first three years of operation, the
school could function without a third floor, decreasing costs
significantly. Eventually, the top floor could be enclosed with
a glass dome or a double or half-double-height space to allow maximum natural light to filter
through.
The Village Hall location is not as favorable a site as it does not offer the fresh palette
for building a state-of-the-art school that 530 Crandon does. However, with suitable modi-
fications there is every reason to believe that the existing building can be reconfigured to
function as a 21st century school.
Facility Feasibility Summary:
We recommend the development of 530 Crandon as the most suitable location for
the new school. We believe that this site offers the best potential to create a world-
class school in Key Biscayne. If this site is unavailable, our second recommendation is
to renovate and make use of Village Hall which also has a potential to be designed as
a 21st century school.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
24
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
24
d. SOCIAL FEASIBILITY
FNI and EdVisions are confident
that the Key Biscayne Charter High
School will receive sufficient, if not over-
whelming support from all of the interest
groups, age groups, and constituencies
involved.
The Key Biscayne Community
Center is a prime example of a once
controversial facility that is now ac-
cepted and heavily used by community
members of all ages and backgrounds.
Activity rooms, fitness studios, the large
gymnasium and outdoor lap pool are
populated with adults while school is in
session. But the center truly comes to life in late afternoon when youth head to the center to
catch up with friends and play sports. Just outside the Community Center, the Village Green
beckons soccer players and lively audiences alike to enjoy the large outdoor recreation
area. These are just two examples of spaces that have improved the quality of life for Key
Biscayne residents. A charter high school on the Island could further
increase the number of services and activities available to all.
When thought of as a shared facility, rather than strictly a
high school, the possibilities for student and non-student involve-
ment are endless. With an array of interests in the community, this
shared facility could serve as a home base for student-run
businesses – imagine a pedestrian-friendly café run by high school
students. It could also host a weekly farmer’s market, a dinner
theater guild or intergenerational programming. Life skills courses
might offer computer training, sewing, gardening or ceramics. Such
scenarios allow the entire Village to benefit.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
25
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
26
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
26
Contrary to some beliefs, having students on
the Island strengthens the community, rather than
weakens. A community-based school will keep stu-
dents, and guardians, from driving off the Island
and could offer previously unavailable, local ex-
tracurriculars and community service projects. The
community-based school will become as asset in
many respects. By having a pedestrian-friendly envi-
ronment surrounding the school, community will be
more possible than ever. Less car traffic will reduce
driving-related safety concerns. The project-based
educational model proposed will engage students
in their own community in ways traditional schools
have failed to do, reducing the likelihood of drug use
and other negative behaviors often associated with
disengaged teenagers. Finally, the issue of economic
development could perhaps benefit most from a
community-based school in Key Biscayne. By having
fewer students and parents leave the Island each
day, business for local shops and restaurants would
be boosted significantly.
Social Feasibility Summary:
Allowing high school students to remain on the Island for their four years will enrich the
community of Key Biscayne in a number of ways. An increase in available activities will
benefit whomever from the village that chooses to take advantage - art, music, fitness,
and technology courses are among the endless possibilities. Opportunities to engage
students with the diverse, multi-generational population on the Island will boost moral,
local economics and quality of life.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
26
e. CULTURAL FEASIBILITY
In addition to financial, facilities and social viability, the culture of Key Biscayne has
been analyzed in order to make appropriate recommendations for a new Charter High
School on the Island. Because of the cultural factors that exist in Key Biscayne, there is a fear
that a public charter school won’t be as prestigious as a private school. However, a well-de-
signed charter school with 21st century learning components could actually be more presti-
gious. Over time, we expect the stigma associated with public schooling to be erased in the
community. It is not anticipated that the school will reach full occupation in its first years.
A prestigious example of a new paradigm public school that has received a tremen-
dous amount of positive press is School of Environmental Studies (SES) in Apple Valley,
Minnesota. SES is known for its innovative, interdisciplinary, and experiential curriculum.
Thematic Studies, also referred to as “House”, combines English, environmental science, and
social studies into a three-hour long daily class which is team-taught. These courses are con-
nected by broad themes related to essential understanding of the environment and related
issues. As students work to gain understanding of the themes, they complete projects and
assignments that lead to relevant, real world assessment of their progress. SES also offers
many strong elective courses including chemistry, physics, art, photography, video/multi me-
dia, Spanish, French, German, and mathematics.
Every trimester each student enrolls in an Intensive Theme course. During the seven-
day intensive theme time period all other courses are discontinued allowing SES students to
study one subject in-depth. Some Intensive Theme course are also Field Experiences to such
locales as South Africa, New Zealand, Boundary Waters of Minnesota, Costa Rica, France,
Spain, Yucatan Peninsula, Curacao, Belize, Scotland, France, Florida, Alaska, Iceland,
Australia, Glacier Park, and the American South West.
Once at SES, some students may take a small number of courses at their home high
school (usually music). Although SES has many activities, students may also elect to
participate in athletics and activities at their home high school. SES maintains strong partner-
ships with many private and non-profit organizations. Many joint projects exist throughout the
year between SES and the Minnesota Zoo whose campus is adjacent to the school. Zoo staff
help teach some SES courses. SES partners often provide excellent volunteer, research, and
internship opportunities for our students.
In 1999 SES received, in a ceremony at the White
House, the U.S. Department of Education’s prestigious
“New American High School Award.” The award rec-
ognized SES’s outstanding work in preparing students
for college, its high graduation rate, its many successful
partnerships, and its community oriented focus.
The participatory nature of the school creates
many opportunities for community members to under-
stand each other. Opportunities include the all-school
Socratic Seminars, overnight camping in the fall, winter
and spring, and an annual Earth Day celebration.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
27
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
28
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
28
From the feedback we received at the workshops, we understand the Key Biscayne
community is concerned about the relationship between 21st century learning skills and col-
lege acceptance. The model we’re recommending does not preclude high scores; it is not
an either/or situation. A reality is that there exists an increasing move in the higher education
community to find more well-rounded students.
What Are Colleges and Universities Looking For?
A recent article in Newsweek identified a number of reasons
why top medical schools value students with more diverse back-
grounds. “Even as breakthroughs in science and advances in tech-
nology make the practice of medicine increasingly complex, medi-
cal educators are looking beyond biology and chemistry majors
in the search for more well-rounded students who can be molded
into caring and analytic doctors. “More humanities students have
been applying in recent years, and medical schools like them,” says
Gwen Garrison, assistant vice president for medical-school services
and studies at the Association of American Medical Colleges. “The
schools are looking for a kind of compassion and potential doctor-
ing ability. This makes many social-science and humanities students
particularly well qualified.”
The number of science majors applying to medical school has been steady for the
past decade—about 65 percent of applicants major in biology or another physical science.
What’s changing is who gets in. When Gail Morrison, who runs admissions at the University of
Pennsylvania School of Medicine, sorts through the school’s 6,500 yearly applicants, she is not
looking for students who spent their undergraduate years hunched over biology and physics
textbooks. “It doesn’t make you a better doctor to know how fast a mass falls from a tree,”
she says. Approximately 40 percent of the students that U-Penn accepts to its medical school
now come from non-science backgrounds. That number has been rising steadily over the
past 20 years. “They’ve got to be happy and have a life outside of medicine,” says Morrison,
“otherwise they’ll get overwhelmed. We need whole people.”
In 1999, a national survey of first-year medical students found that 58 percent took a
social-science class for personal interest. In last year’s entering class, the number was more
than 70 percent. Humanities students also fare better on the MCAT, the standardized test for
medical-school admissions. Among the 2006 applicants to medical school, humanities ma-
jors outscored biology majors in all categories.”
Cultural Feasibility Summary:
KBHS will become a world-renowned model of 21st century learning. Innovative teach-
ing and community-based learning techniques will add to the vitality that Key Bis-
cayne already displays. Not only this, the students from KBHS will be more engaged
with their peers and courses on the Island, subsequently raising interest and test scores,
leading to top choice university entrances for all graduates.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
28
f. ADDITIONAL FEASIBILITY CONCERNS
Preservation of Green Space
Acknowledging the fact that concerns exist over developing precious space in Key
Biscayne, FNI’s proposal to ideally develop 530 Crandon will more than double the available
usable open space while at the same time, providing valuable assets the community cur-
rently lacks. There is concern that placing the school on the 530 Crandon site will rob the Vil-
lage of the much-needed functional open space. We believe, however, that the operative
word is “functional.” We propose that the school be constructed within the confines of the
allowable maximum 8,000 sf footprint on the west side of the site allowing for the majority of
the site on the east side to remain as open space. In addition, we propose a green amenity
be developed on this east side, such as an ampitheater, providing a valuable asset to the
community that does not currently exist on the Island today. The amphitheater could work in
conjuction with the school, but will also serve as a community facility. Designing a green roof
on the school with after hours community access would also restore green open space for
the Island. Additionally, by developing the area surrounding Monaco Fountains on McIntyre
Street as part of an active community center so that it is pedestrian-friendly during the day,
the school can actually give back more green space than it would occupy. This restoration
of public open space for community purposes far exceeds the small portion of the site that
will be taken up by the school footprint.
The perhaps more feasible option of developing Village Hall will also allow for sustain-
able architectural techniques to be employed, such as the green roof and development of
McIntyre Street as a community center.
In both settings, student entre-
preneurship projects such as retail
booths and a cafe can service the
newly created amphitheater and
adjacent open space.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
29
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
30
Traffic concerns
The issue of increased
traffic on Key Biscayne from
teenage drivers is one that
could be alleviated dra-
matically with a community-
based high school. Currently
the main thoroughfare on
the Island (Crandon) is bot-
tle necked with off-Island
student and professional
commuters in the morn-
ing and early evening, with
steady traffic throughout
the day as well. By having
a community-based school
for students in a 3-mile ra-
dius, a number of safe, less
expensive and greener solu-
tions are possible.
Walking and biking to school will be the most viable, positive option. With plentiful bike
parking, and potential incentives for non-motorized transport to and from the school, this
option could benefit the entire community by reducing automobile traffic, decreasing family
energy costs, promoting health and fitness, and assuaging parking congestion in the Village
center.
A bus, trolley or shuttle system is an alterna-
tive mode of transportation that the commu-
nity may need to consider. The costs required
to run such a program could be substantial,
though beneficial in the long run. A deter-
rent may be that the incentive to walk or bike
would be curbed.
Finally, the issue of car parking will need
to be considered by the community. There
is no reason the school would be required to
provide more than 30-40 additional parking
spots for teachers and administrative staff
over the next 5 years as building and occupa-
tion phases progress. Parking for school’s staff, of concern with any proposal, could be easily
resolved by utilizing the parking spaces at Calusa Park, Crandon Park, Bill Baggs or the Tennis
Center, with a shuttle system to school.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
30
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
30
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
31
Community Signature
Key Biscayne is a nationally recognized paradise for residents and tourists alike. Its
signature qualities – the lighthouse, beautiful stretches of beach, and marine life – make this
one of the most breathtaking locations in the country. Yet, even with the expanding num-
ber of families taking up residence here, there is no public high school on the Island, forcing
many to go off the Island to nearby Coral Gables High School, or to attend a private high
school.
The question exists whether a public high school would have a negative impact on
the Island for the images associated with such an institution. We see just the opposite effect
taking place in Key Biscayne however. Built sensitively and in an architecturally appropriate
manner, an innovative, world-class school would provide the community with a stronger,
more positive ethos. It could become a more meaningful and powerful signature for the
community, that would have a deeper, more visceral connection to the residents as a basis
with which people would choose to live here.
Finally, based on the survey and activity responses we received in October and No-
vember, Key Biscayne is both forward-thinking in terms of education and willing to take a
more innovative path for their children’s future. The Planning Preference Survey by EdVisions
(see all Signature Workshop results in Appendix iii) indicated that Key Biscayne is far more
prepared for 21st century educational models compared to communities with similar cultural
and socioeconomic demographics. Likewise, the Ideal vs. Actual surveys by FNI measured
the satisfaction of parents and the innovation level of current schools versus the types of
learning environments they would prefer (see survey results in Appendix iii).
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
32
SECTION 4: NEXT STEPS AND TIMETABLES
FNI and EdVisions offer a number of recommendations to the Village of Key Biscayne
to accompany this Feasibility Report. Firstly, we believe that the Feasibility Report will serve
the community best through a presentation by FNI to the Village Council and key commu-
nity members.
The best way to describe the effort thus far with Key Biscayne is as if we were design-
ing and building a new automobile. After a false start last summer, hastily putting a bunch
of parts together and calling it a car, we re-started the process, guiding the community
towards the “car” of their dreams in terms of performance, appearance, size, cost, etc.
Now that it is ready to be built, we need a step-by-step process to transform the commu-
nity’s dreams into a reality. All of the recommendations presented in this study need to be
reviewed in detail. From there, a plan needs to be established to move the process forward
by submitting a new application with Miami-Dade, establishing a budget, and selecting a
site on which the school will be located.
This next phase will be most critical, coming up with the most detailed and definitive
plan to both create a successful school and planning process and to gain the support of the
Miami-Dade Public Schools charter office. We will not be proposing a traditional school so it
will be very important to get the model right and have a very complete and understandable
application. The second phase of this project will entail several important features. From Ed-
Visions standpoint, we think this will involve 60 work days between January 15th and July 31st,
culminating with the writing of the application to Miami-Dade.
The following are timelines and action plans for implementing the facilities planning
and ‘planning for application’ phases:
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
32
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
32
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
33
Year 2009
Year 2010
FNI submits Feasibility Report
Hire architect by May 1st
Schematic design begins *
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1
5
3
0
Design Development begins
Construction Documents
Bidding Process
Construction may begin**
New School Opens
Facilities Timetable:
* FNI would be available to do the
Schematic Design and would provide
ample amount of information for the
chosen architect-of-record to carry forth the
community’s vision.
** The school has the option of opening
in August 2010 to serve a maximum of
125 students in temporary classrooms
at the Village Hall and the Community
Center while construction of their new
school is under way, assuming a 9-month
construction schedule. This timetable
assumes such a schedule, but could be
delayed.
Should the Village choose to delay the
design/construction process until after the
school is approved by Miami-Dade County,
then temporary facilities to accommodate
students who begin in August 2010 would
need to be selected and approved by the
county and the construction of the school
would start at a later date. Temporary
facilities that would be approved by the
county could house students, should the
Village decide to delay hiring an architect
until after the school is approved.
Post RFP for architect search
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Aug
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
34
Operations Timetable:
The time table is further illustrated on the
following page, including details as to
EdVisions involvement.
Assuming these action steps are self-
explanatory at this point, we can detail this
plan even further upon request but suffice to
say we will break down each recommended
components and provide, with the help
of the 20-30 member workgroup and in
conjunction with Fielding Nair International, a
concise integrated plan for implementation
of all the program design components and
how they will work in KBHS. We will also work
with Miami-Dade officials and KBHS planners
to supply budget and financial plans, an
accountability/assessment framework and a
marketing/recruitment plan.
This proposed effort would take on all
responsibility for preparing the learning and
operational/management plan for KBHS
and writing the complete application to
Miami-Dade Public Schools. We would take
no active role in the facilities approval and
financing process.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
34
Research and complete design
elements/working model
Convene 20-30 member work-
group and create work plan
Meet with Miami-Dade charter
officials, Meet with workgroup
Meet with Village officials to
update, Meet with workgroup
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
1
5
3
0
1
Write first draft of plan design
Public presentations of plan
design
Assist with public information
meetings
Application writing
Meet with Miami-Dade charter
officials, Meet with workgroup
Final application writing
Meet with workgroup, present
design elements and draft plan
Meet with Miami-Dade charter
officials, Presentation of draft
application to workgroup
Additions and re-writes to
application
Formal presentation of plan and
application, Meet with workgroup
Final meeting and delivery of
application
FNI submits Feasibility Report
Year 2009
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
34
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
35
Action App. Dates Days of EdV.
Service
(On-site)
Convene 20-30 member workgroup and Mid-January 2 X
create the work plan
Research and complete design elements/ Late January 5
working model (based on recommendations)
Meet with workgroup and present design Early February 3 X
elements and draft plan
Meet with Miami-Dade charter officials Mid-February 2 X
Meet with workgroup
Meet with Village officials to update Late February 2 X
Meet with workgroup
Write first draft of plan design Late Feb/early March 8
Public presentations of plan design Early/mid-March 2 X
Meet with Miami-Dade charter officials Mid-March 2 X
Meet with workgroup
Assist with public information meetings Mid-March to Mid-April 6 X
Application writing Late April to Mid-May 15
Meet with Miami-Dade charter officials Late May-early June 2 X
Presentation of draft application to workgroup
Additions and re-writes to application Early/mid-June 3
Formal presentation of plan and Early July 2 X
application/meet with workgroup
Final application writing Mid/late July 4
Final meeting and delivery of application Late July 2 X
It is crucial that the educational vision outlined in this report be interpreted by an
architect who has experience developing 21st century spaces in both new and
renovated buildings. Square foot calculations assume a new model for laying out
small learning communities that is more efficient than the traditional “cells and
bells” plan.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
36
APPENDIX
i. Key Biscayne Overview
ii. Workshop Process
iii. Findings
iv. Budget
v. Property Value Research
vi. Recommended Book List
vii. Miami-Dade Response to Application for Approval of Key Biscayne Charter High
School
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
36
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
36
i. KEY BISCAYNE OVERVIEW
The Island
The Island itself is seven miles long and
two miles wide. Incorporated as a Village in
1991, the Village of Key Biscayne covers 1.25
square miles bordered by Bill Baggs Cape
Florida State Park to the south and Cran-
don Park to the north. Key Biscayne offers a
wide variety of outdoor recreational activi-
ties, from golf and tennis to windsurfing and
sailing. In addition, the unsurpassed safety
of this island paradise and the people of the
community, make Key Biscayne not only
a popular vacation destination, but also a
beautiful place to live. The Village Green is
adjacent to the brand new multi-million dol-
lar Key Biscayne Community Center which
has meeting rooms and classrooms, a gym,
indoor basketball, a heated pool and more. The lighthouse, newly restored, stands watch on
the southern end of the island as it has for over 170 years.
Key Biscayne offers a small-town, island
culture. The Village’s Master Plan states that
by 2020 they hope to have maintained
this character by managing the scale and
density of development on a neighbor-
hood-by-neighborhood basis. Other goals
include enhancing the Islands streetscapes,
parks, civic realm and open spaces with a
well-maintained subtropical plant palette
suited to the Island, and practicing respon-
sible stewardship of natural environment by
protecting the tree canopy, natural habi-
tats, beaches, dunes, and near shore water
quality. They wish to expand the array of
parks, open spaces and recreation facilities,
cultural facilities, activities, special events
and historic preservation efforts. Of great importance is to enhance local high-quality edu-
cation from early childhood programs to lifelong learning for adults, in close coordination
with public and private schools.
The 2000 U.S. Census describes the racial makeup of the Village as 95.46% White,
0.46% African American, 0.01% Pacific Islander, 0.14% Native American, 0.92% Asian, 1.49%
from other races, and 1.52% from two or more races. In the year 2000, 49.79% of the Village’s
population was classified as “of Hispanic origin of any race.” This represents an increase of
38%, or 1,441 persons of Hispanic or Latino origin, since 1990.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
37
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
38
Based on Census 2000, and conservative growth calculations, it is estimated that Key
Biscayne has potentially 3,000 children under the age of 18 in our community - 640 of them
in high school age. This segment of the population had a 55% growth from the 1990 Census
to the 2000 Census. About 100 Key Biscayne children graduate from 8th grade at our KB K-8
Center, or about 56% of their age population. Another 30 children graduate from middle
school at St. Agnes each year. An additional 40 to 50 children graduate from out of the Is-
land private middle schools each year. The great majority of children attending KB K-8 Cen-
ter and their families are estimated to seriously consider attending the proposed charter high
school. In addition, many families sending their children out of the Island to attend middle
school, and secure a spot for high school days, will seriously consider proposed school. Esti-
mates are for 375 children to be enrolled in the school at its 5th year of operation.
Inventory of Local Schools in 2008
There is a total of five public and private schools in the immediate vicinity of Key Biscayne.
1. Key Biscayne K-8 Center (Public, K-8th grade)
2. Key Biscayne Presbyterian Church School (Private, Pre-K through Kindergarten)
3. St. Agnes Academy (Private, Catholic, Pre-K through 8th grade)
4. St. Christopher’s By-the-Sea Montessori School (Private, Pre-School through 6th grade)
5. MAST Academy (Public magnet school focused on marine science and technology; not
physically in Village, but rather in Virginia Key; 9-12th grade)
All high school students commute to schools outside of the Village boundaries by pub-
lic school bus, private vehicle, or private van service. Coral Gables Senior High is the feeder
pattern (default) public high school for the Village. Students may apply for magnet public
high schools where admissions are merit-based and lottery. Applications are made in the 8th
grade for 9th grade admission. MAST Academy, located on nearby Virginia Key, is a desir-
able magnet school whose combined merit-based and lottery admissions process does not
give preference to Key Biscayne residents. Many students attend private high schools locat-
ed in Miami-Dade County.
Changes in School Demand
Key Biscayne’s demand on
the public school system at large
is growing. According to Census
figures, the proportion of young
children in Key Biscayne is increas-
ing: in 1990, five to thirteen year-
olds comprised 9.0 percent of
the population, while in 2000 they
made up 13.1 percent. Enrollment
figures from Key Biscayne K-8 Cen-
ter reflect this trend. Total school
enrollment for the 2005 through
2006 school year is 1,028, up from 981 students during 2004-2005 and 976 during 2003-2004. To
address deficient capacity (enrollment was at 155% of capacity during the 2004-2005 school
year and at 122% of capacity between 2003-2004), the facility was expanded.
The Village has initiated a planning process to determine the feasibility of establishing
a municipal charter high school in Key Biscayne.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
38
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
38
ii. WORKSHOP PROCESS
The October Visioning Workshops conducted by FNI and EdVisions were both repeat-
ed twice to insure maximum exposure and flexibility for community members. The sessions
focused on an exploration of what charter schools.
October 29-30: Visioning Workshop
The Visioning Workshop was initiated with a quick presentation about charter schools
- what they are and are not - as well as some of the benefits of chartering. This was followed
with an informal question and answer session between FNI and EdVisions consultants and
Key Biscayne community members. Essentially, a charter school is an independent public
school with a new and different mission and purpose, accountable to a sponsor and com-
munity but operated by its own board. Chartering is not a type of school, nor is it completely
exempt from regulations. It is not subject to district authority or run by an outside entity. Most
importantly, chartering is not meant to destroy the public system but rather serves to provide
competition in the public and private sector.
So why charter?
More independence•
Create a local school for students and families•
Give teachers more flexibility and accountability•
Create more local control of governance, hiring, etc.•
Get a better handle on finances- control and incentives•
Better use of facilities•
With this knowledge on the table, the consultants aimed at understanding why the commu-
nity of Key Biscayne desires a new high school, as well as what they hope to accomplish and
what their aspirations for a new school are. The group analyzed two over arching questions
throughout the sessions: What is education? And what is 21st century education?
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
39
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
40
Intersecting Community & Schools
1. School as Community Center
Offering adult education classes•
Sharing facilities with the community: dance studio, gym, pool, learning studios•
School is open after-hours for events, lectures, meetings•
Students partner with local agencies or businesses and offer supplemental services•
Recreational Activities•
Internet access•
Community events•
Day care•
Summer Camp•
Facilities for community and student group•
2. Community as Classroom
3. School-based Enterprise (Local business partnerships & student initiative)
5 Case Studies were shared:
North Central Shared Facility, Regina, Saskatchewan,
Canada
A 300,000 square foot campus is planned for North
Central Regina, connecting a high school to dozens
of services, including a health care center, police sta-
tion, childcare center and library. Rather than simply
offer such joint-use
facilities however,
the community
seeks to offer more
meaningful integration of services. The campus will
feature state-of-the-art safety and security measures in
keeping with Crime Prevention Through Environmental
Design (CPTED) principles.
Reece High School, Tasmania, Australia
The redesigned community school has become a
powerful model of school / civic engagement that
enhances educational opportunities for every resident
while serving as a symbol for what can be achieved
when communities work together to realize a shared
vision. This building can house 500 guests and a distance
learning program but can also be used for dance and
music and catering and sewing and various other
programs on a daily basis. The building also has strong
outdoor connections.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
40
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
40
Harbor City, Duluth, MN
Collaboration and project-based learning were
identified as key objectives in the planning of
this learning environment; these methods foster
creative connections and synthesis, skills that
students need to succeed. The school utilized
surrounding community buildings as part of its
campus.
School of Environmental
Studies, Apple Valley, MN
With a focus on mentorship/
internship programs devel-
oped through the Zoo and
the community, the building
incorporates environmental
products, energy efficient sys-
tems and with the surround-
ing site serves as both an
interpretive center and living
laboratory for students and
visitors alike.
Minnesota New Country School, Henderson, MN
Unconventional in almost every regard, MNCS
is a teacher-owned, public charter school, part
of EdVisions. Approximately 110 students, grades
7 - 12, travel as many as 100 miles round trip to
attend this modern, one-room, 17,000-square-
foot “schoolhouse.” Students keep a daily log
of how they spend their time and complete
detailed self-assessment rubrics. They also clean
the school every day.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
41
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
42
Doug Thomas of EdVisions presented principle differences between traditional and more in-
novative, 21st century learning environments:
Programs of interest in Key Biscayne were further defined:
The International Baccalaureate aims to develop in-
quiring, knowledgeable and caring young people
who help to create a better and more peaceful world
through intercultural understanding and respect. To this
end the organization works with schools, governments
and international organizations to develop challenging
programmes of international education and rigorous
assessment. These programmes encourage students
across the world to become active, compassionate
and lifelong learners who understand that other people,
with their differences, can also be right.
The AP Program is a collaboration between motivated students, dedicated teachers, and
committed high schools, colleges, and universities. Since 1955, the AP Program has enabled
millions of students to take college-level courses and exams, and to earn college credit or
placement while still in high school.
EdVisions Schools use student-centered teaching and learning strategies. A democratic
governance system helps manage schools more efficiently, especially small, decentralized
schools. They use new teacher preparation partnerships, leadership opportunities, exemplary
practices and research based models.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
42
Traditional Schools:
rigid schedules•
adversarial relationships•
compartmentalization•
classes and bells•
forward planning •
disciplinary boundaries•
one way communication•
surface connections•
group learning•
technology labs•
desks and rows•
Innovative Schools:
flexible scheduling•
cooperative relationships•
interdisciplinary•
scheduled work time•
backwards planning •
interdisciplinary•
networking•
deep connections•
personalized learning•
immersion of technology •
individual workspace•
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
42
November 19-20: Signature & Feasibility Workshops
In November, FNI and EdVisions
consultants returned to Key Biscayne
to report back with feasibility study
results and recommendations based
on data collected and conversations
had in October. The two workshops,
both repeated twice to insure maxi-
mum exposure and flexibility for com-
munity members, focused on site
and facility recommendations and
educational model recommenda-
tions. The facilities recommendations
are also based in part on an analysis
of possible sites that was conducted
in June 2008 by FNI.
Signature Workshop:
FNI conducted a Signature Workshop as a means of delving deeper into the commu-
nity ethos to begin to create a school signature, regardless of where the facility goes. The site
and facility recommendations were then discussed based upon the community’s responses
to the October workshop. Responses were drawn from the various activities and surveys,
including the Blink exercise, the Ideal vs. Actual surveys, and recorded comments related to
the facility.
FNI used the morning and evening sessions to present recommendations and field
questions from the community. The session was concluded with The Six Thinking Hats activity,
which is typically used for large participatory groups to explore a problem through the lens of
different emotions and viewpoints. The Key Biscayne participants were given the following
definitions for each of the six hats:
White Hat: The facts & figures hat
With this thinking hat, you focus on the data available. Look at the information you have,
and see what you can learn from it. Look for gaps in your knowledge, and either try to fill
them or take account of them. This is where you analyze past trends, and try to extrapolate
from historical data.
Red Hat: The emotional hat
Wearing the red hat, you look at the decision using intuition, gut reaction, and emotion. Also
try to think how other people will react emotionally, and try to understand the intuitive
responses of people who do not fully know your reasoning.
Black Hat: The pessimistic hat
When using black hat thinking, look at things pessimistically, cautiously and defensively. Try
to see why ideas and approaches might not work. This is important because it highlights the
weak points in a plan or course of action. It allows you to eliminate them, alter your
approach, or prepare contingency plans to counter problems that arise.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
43
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
44
Yellow Hat: The positive hat
The yellow hat helps you to think positively. It is the optimistic viewpoint that helps you to see
all the benefits of the decision and the value in it, and spot the opportunities that arise from
it. Yellow Hat thinking helps you to keep going when everything looks gloomy and difficult.
Green Hat: The creative hat
The Green Hat stands for creativity. This is where you can develop creative solutions to a
problem. It is a freewheeling way of thinking, in which there is little criticism of ideas.
Blue Hat: The big picture hat
The Blue Hat brings everything together and helps us realize what we have discovered. The
Blue Hat stands for process control – when running into difficulties because ideas are running
dry, you direct activity to Green Hat thinking. When contingency plans are needed, Black
Hat thinking is used.
Feasibility Workshop: Creating A Successful Model For Your Community
Doug Thomas of EdVisions reported
back to the group with survey results,
responses and comments related to
a new school model for the Key Bis-
cayne Charter High School. The
session was used primarily to present
his educational model recommenda-
tions (see Section 3).
Following the presentation, each
table of participants was given a
large sheet of paper with one recom-
mendation. They were asked to jot
down ideas and concerns for their
particular recommendation, then
circulate the room writing down more
of their ideas. When everyone was finished, the ideas were once again voted on using green
stickers. Each participant was to vote for their top three most preferred recommendations
(see Section 5 for workshop findings).
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
44
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
44
iii. FINDINGS
A variety of methods were used to assess the community of Key Biscayne in the Oc-
tober and November workshops. This was often referred to as “taking the group’s tempera-
ture” or gaining perspective as to the community ethos. The data collected in October was
processed and presented at the November workshops. Here the findings are consolidated
and explained accordingly.
October Workshop Data:
In October, FNI used two surveys to gauge the community’s preferences. The Blink
exercise survey consisted of 65 slides, each presented for roughly 3 seconds. Participants
were asked to rate each of the slides in a 0-10 rank order based on their instinctual reaction
to the images. A rank of “0” indicated lowest preference and “10” indicated highest prefer-
ence. The images included classroom scenes, indoor and outdoor learning, lighting tech-
niques, teacher and student participation and a variety of other school scenes.
The top scoring images for Key Biscayne participants were:
#1 Social/Emotional Learning
#2 Hands-On Learning
#3a Modern Physical Fitness (tie)
#3b Social Commons (tie)
#4 Modern Use of ICT
#5a Outdoor Learning Spaces
(tie)
#5b Hands-on Project Based
Learning (tie)
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
45
#1
#2 #5a
#3a #3b #4
#5b
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
46
The lowest scoring images for Key Biscayne participants were:
#1 Traditional Classroom
#2 Traditional Classroom
#3 Hallways
#4 Traditional Cafeteria
#5a Traditional Cafeteria (tie)
#5b Hallways (tie)
The workshop also included two score card surveys, one of which was labeled Actual,
the other Ideal. The Ideal and Actual surveys were identical other than their titles. The Actual
survey was used to assess a school that each community member currently had a child at-
tending, or recently had a child attending, or would soon be sending a child to attend. The
score for each question ranged from 0-3 (3= true; 2 = mostly true; 1 = partially true, 0 =not
true) The final score measured whether the school was a “21st century school” or not. The
Ideal survey used the same measurement system but was instead gauging preferences for
a school that community members would like to send their children to. The scores for both
surveys were tabulated and showed a stark contrast in scored. The Actual survey score was
11.8%. The Ideal survey score was 79.95%. These scores are based on a scale of -50 to 100,
as the thinking is that if a school is so low-performing (with regards to 21st century skills), the
numbers could actually be negative.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
46
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5a #5b
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
46
The EdVisions workshop included a Planning Preference Survey that was taken and returned
by 56 community members. The participants rated characteristics of a preferred school
environment from 1-10, with 10 being most preferred. The results of the Planning Preference
Survey were as follows:
Personalized, interest-based learning plan 9.13
Strong student advisory program 9.11
Project-based learning (at least part time) 9.06
Community based learning & involvement 9.05
Outdoor & environmental education program 9.00
Student business internship & mentorships 9.00
Strong community connections for both students 9.00
Service learning/community service programs 8.96
Interdisciplinary learning or classes 8.91
Flexible multi-use facility 8.45
Multiple assessments of student work 8.41
Personalized technology for every student 8.40
Student opportunities to take college classes 8.34
Enhanced academic programs (i.e. IB, AP) 8.27
Demonstrated senior project before graduation 8.07
Student involvement in governance 7.66
Grades and GPA 5.98
Full traditional extracurricular program 5.38
Extended day or year 4.76
Traditional course and class system 3.76
The scores indicated that the communities highly values student-centered learning,
with the top three scores being personalized interest-based learning plans, strong student
advisory programs and project-based learning (at least part time). That seven of the twenty
questions ranked 9 or above shows that the community is both forward-thinking and willing
to take a more innovative path for their children’s education. In comparison to other com-
munities with similar demographics as Key Biscayne, the scores were quite high, and offered
FNI and EdVisions consultants a sense of confidence in recommending a charter high school
for the Island.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
47
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
48
During the course of the FNI and EdVisions workshops, questions and comments from
the community were both audio-recorded and written on large presentation boards to later
be transcribed. The most commonly asked questions from the workshop sessions were:
For college entrance, is an academy too narrowly focused? •
Does this mean traditional thinking goes out the window?•
Can we get outside funding? Can we levy taxes?•
Could a charter school offer IB and AP programs and do you need minimum numbers of •
students?
What are colleges looking for, such as Big 10 schools and Ivy League?•
Explain how various modalities of learning could fall into place here?•
How do you hold teachers accountable?•
Is it evolutionary or do we jump right into something?•
How will the adult community be affected by a high school building, and how will inter-•
actions between kids and adults come to play out in such a model?
Why do charter schools get a bad rep and why might they fail?•
Highlighted comments from the workshops were:
We have a great resource – the community – on the Island but we are stuck in a box.•
There is fear of tossing out tradition.•
Test-taking is a reality we can’t forget. Philosophically we can be in favor of a holistic •
education but we can’t forget we have benchmarks and somehow must insert that into
a portfolio.
It’s all about cost so if you put the money in, you can offer these programs like IB and AP •
to compete with the private schools (otherwise what’s the point?).
The audience should not to be dissuaded by their own personal experiences in schools. •
I want to see my kids get up in the morning excited about a day at school, a day of •
learning. Right now that isn’t happening.
The biggest problem now is getting teachers who can work in these innovative schools •
and can think outside the box.
We can’t just be advocates, we really have to go out and make it happen.•
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
48
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
48
Additionally, comments and suggestions for 21st century learning in Key
Biscayne were written down and voted on by the community using red and green stickers.
The red stickers indicated disfavor while the green stickers indicated popular favor. These
contributed greatly to the EdVisions recommendations at the November workshop.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
49
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
50
November Workshop Data:
The community contributed the following pieces of data, emotions, concerns and
hopes for a charter high school on the Island in the 6 Hats Activity:
White Hat:
How many high school students we have on the Island
How many go to public system versus private system in Key Biscayne
How many are in home schooling that could use these facilities
Resources that are available that the school could use
The $50 million + in taxes that we already send out to the school district
Physical resources we have
Distance between each of the facilities
Growth trends and population trends to determine enrollment
Commute time to private schools and Coral Gables
Financial resources
Economic trade-off and impact on families
What does the labor department want in employees – what skills
Island’s diversity – the makeup of the community as it exists now
Budget per student
The professional human resources on the Island
Information about other schools that have developed similar programs
Red Hat:
Like concept of having best school in the US
My kids will be excited about learning
I feel totally happy about this and feel others that aren’t here are fearful of steering away
from tradition
I feel we haven’t built enough community support
I feel adults aren’t supporting this because they don’t feel the school supports them
I think we need to hire teachers who really know how this can work
I feel my kids will have a sense of community
I feel this will be a great success from day one
I feel both kids and parents will be happier
I feel privileged that we can decide our children’s futures
I feel very enthusiastic
I feel passionate and excited about giving our kids these opportunities
Black Hat:
When we review the numbers, I’m not confident we’ll have enough money per student to
create a 21st century school
I think Miami-Dade won’t be happy about KBHS
My fear is adults and elderly won’t see that it offers them anything
I fear people won’t contribute enough towards fundraising
I fear that the beginning period of adjustment is going to be rocky
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
50
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
50
Black Hat Cont’.
I fear that people think the good students will continue to go off the Island and the discipline
problems will become our problem – drugs, loitering, etc. will all increase. The leftovers
I fear sabotage from the status quo
I’m concerned about finding the right teachers
Yellow Hat:
We have a lot of feasible partnerships – U-Miami, Rosenthiel School, etc.
I feel good that my students will adjust and be happier
I feel I won’t have to send my kids off the Key and feel good that I’ll have four more years to
instill positive values in them
I feel if we have happy families that will attract good teachers and a better environment
I feel good that we have an affluent community that can help if we have a dollar problem
building a 21st century school
I feel good that we can also help the retail businesses on the Island
I feel parental involvement will be much higher here when parents don’t have to travel to
get involved
I feel good that we’ll be developing whole children, critical thinkers
I will feel great that my kids don’t need to go through a lottery. I’m not a gambler with edu-
cation.
I feel that this is what I’ve been waiting for for years.
Green Hat:
Kids can use bikes – no buses
We have talented parents that can serve as guest speakers
A lot of time is wasted commuting and can be instead used on community service projects
and community engagement
I have an idea that kids’ community service learning can benefit the whole community
We should tap into existing foundations
I think we can get involved with a healthier lunch program
Maybe there’s a naming opportunity to help sponsor the school
Maybe we can get more federal funding once Obama is in office
I think kids will have more stake in their learning because right now they’re unengaged and
this is what causes problems, boredom, etc.
I feel by adopting a non-traditional system we stretch the kids’ horizons
I think we should invite teachers to react to these non-traditional systems and see how they
feel
We could bring in teachers from international destinations for a period of time
Blue Hat:
What is the decision point for why families choose the schools they do
I think if we had a high-quality education where we knew students would be prepared, yes
we would not want to pay as much for private education and KB has all the resources to
make that happen
We’re all here for a reason but we need to go out and recruit for these workshops so we’re
not just preaching to the choir
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
51
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
52
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
52
During the course of the FNI and EdVisions workshops in November, questions and
comments from the community were both audio-recorded and written on large presenta-
tion boards to later be transcribed. The most commonly asked questions from the workshop
sessions contributed to our list, called Taking the Community’s Temperature:
One woman is concerned about teachers and the accountability system. •
Another asks about the assumption that we’d be able to reduce the square footage in •
the KBHS.
Another asks if he and others can visit a model school and tour and ask questions of the •
teachers and students.
A mother asks could the schools be used after hours? Can hours be extended all day so •
all community members can use the building?
We still need to meet the state and federal requirements. How do you meet these •
requirements when the program is student-driven?
As far as security and transferring students back and forth, aren’t there requirements by •
law that you have certain things in place with transportation?
If we’re using certain facilities off-campus, are these considered field trips? Or is this •
labeled part of the campus? How do you get around the issue of what’s part of the
learning environment?
Lastly, participants were asked to complete a 5-question survey. Questions and repre-
sentative responses were as follows:
1. How do you imagine a new school on Key Biscayne will affect you?
It will give my son a public school he can attend and I would like to teach there and be •
able to teach in Florida as a constructionist educator in an innovative, non-traditional 21st
c. school.
The charter high school will allow us to continue to live here. We are considering moving •
to NJ to enroll our 3 girls in the public school system since we cannot afford 60k (total) per
year for private schools here.
Having my kids close by will make it easier to relate and to manage their path. If people •
in the community know who they are they can help guide them and keep them safe.
It will bring my children back to the Key, give them a sense of community and get them •
excited about school and learning
My children will be taught in an environment encouraging life long learning and focusing •
on the whole community, creating productive and happy citizens.
My kids will stay in the community, close to home, time will not be wasted in commute •
and will learn to “think” not memorize data.
Educating my children in a community-school family context. Not having to move to •
another community for my children to obtain this education.
Kids will be apart of the community. Less commute and more family time.•
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
52
2. Can you think of any specific ways you personally can become more actively involved in
the new school?
Offering participation to students in my professional activities•
Curriculum Development; Marketing towards the community; Student workshops; •
Community organizer
Fund raise, Network, Mentor, Create opportunities to create and improve the school.•
I would love to teach, volunteer, I can help with the lunches, planning them, nutritionally •
analyzing them, and proposing new ideas.
3. After attending EdVisions and FNI’s workshops in October and/or November, do you have
any new hopes or concerns for a new school on Key Biscayne?
Education and access to education in Florida is sub-standard and the refusal to •
acknowledge out deficiencies in this affluent community is distressing.
Education and knowledge is the base for a better future.•
Let’s create a world-class school that other communities want to emulate!•
Concern about if it will happen and that the community will bend more towards out- •
dated traditional models. Hope is it will happen in the next 2 years and will be innova-
tive, based on project based learning and be the best in the US and world. It will bind
the community together and help make happier families through happier kids and
parents.
I have high hopes of a wonderful “open horizons” school becoming a reality, where •
youngsters will enjoy learning and exceed theirs and ours expectations. My concerns
are that we will miss this opportunity.
I hope this project goes forward. My concern would be where to find the high caliber •
teachers needed for this endeavor.
4. Is there anything else you’d like to share with EdVisions and FNI team members that you
were unable to express during any of the workshops?
Coming from a Montessori pre-school/elementary school setting at St. Christopher’s, I •
know that all of the concepts for learning, structure of the classroom setting and the
ability to attract teachers is all there.
My hope is there will be diversity from outside the community including students from •
different races (African American especially) and socio-economic backgrounds.
I’m enthusiastic and excited about the new direction “school education” is going!•
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
53
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
54
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
54
iv. BUDGET
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5 Years
Students 125 200 300 350 375
Revenue 794,783$ 1,303,444$ 2,004,045$ 2,396,504$ 2,631,875$ 9,130,652$
Total Expenses (excl. facil.)860,854$ 1,209,064$ 1,840,249$ 2,232,313$ 2,456,981$ 8,599,462$
P&L Operations (66,071)$ 94,380$ 163,796$ 164,191$ 174,894$ 531,190$
Other Potential revenue
PTSA / Parents ($500/stu.)93,750$ 153,750$ 236,391$ 282,684$ 310,447$ 1,077,022$
Foundation(s) ($250/stud.)31,250$ 51,250$ 78,797$ 94,228$ 103,482$ 359,007$
State Grants 250,000$ 75,000$ -$ 300,000$ -$ 625,000$
Total Other Potential Revenue 375,000$ 280,000$ 315,188$ 676,912$ 413,930$ 2,061,029$
P&L + Other Potential Revenue 308,929$ 374,380$ 478,983$ 841,103$ 588,824$ 2,592,219$
Facilities. Village Hall Option
4,324,579$
Building amortization 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 1,367,674$
Maintenance 30,000$ 30,750$ 31,519$ 32,307$ 33,114$ 157,690$
Total Facilities 303,535$ 304,285$ 305,054$ 305,842$ 306,649$ 1,525,364$
Operating results Village Hall 5,394$ 70,095$ 173,930$ 535,261$ 282,175$ 1,066,855$
Facilities. 530 Crandon Option
8,479,579$
Building amortization 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 2,428,968$
Maintenance 30,000$ 30,750$ 31,519$ 32,307$ 33,114$ 157,690$
Total Facilities 515,794$ 516,544$ 517,312$ 518,100$ 518,908$ 2,586,658$
Operating results 530 Crandon (206,865)$ (142,164)$ (38,329)$ 323,002$ 69,916$ 5,561$
Cash Flow (using Village Hall)
FTE Revenue 794,783$ 1,303,444$ 2,004,045$ 2,396,504$ 2,631,875$ 9,130,652$
Other revenue 375,000$ 280,000$ 315,188$ 676,912$ 413,930$ 2,061,029$
Adjustment depreciation 79,365$ 94,260$ 152,670$ 188,970$ 202,995$ 718,258$
Operating Expenses (860,854)$ (1,209,064)$ (1,840,249)$ (2,232,313)$ (2,456,981)$ (8,599,462)$
Facilities (303,535)$ (304,285)$ (305,054)$ (305,842)$ (306,649)$ (1,525,364)$
Net Cash Flow 84,759$ 164,355$ 326,599$ 724,231$ 485,169$ 1,785,113$
Other Incremental revenue:15 years NPV
Tax on property apprec. 5%142,079$ 285,578$ 430,513$ 576,897$ 724,745$ $6,703,750
Tax on property apprec. 10%284,158$ 573,998$ 869,636$ 1,171,186$ 1,478,767$ $13,651,898
Tax on property apprec. 15%426,236$ 865,260$ 1,317,454$ 1,783,214$ 2,262,947$ $20,851,393
After school programs ??????
Facilities rental ??????
530 Crandon Blvd. Option Village Hall Option
Sq. ft. 25,000 3rd floor Sq. ft. 8,500 School Planning 300,000$
$ / sq. ft.300 $ / sq. ft.250 Const. drawings 300,000$
Construction 7,500,000$ 3rd floor 2,125,000$ Start up 379,579$
School Planning 300,000$ 1st floor sq. ft. 3,500 Total 4,324,579$
Const. drawings 300,000$ $ / sq. ft.200
Start up 379,579$ 1st floor 700,000$ P&I 30 years 273,535$
Total 8,479,579$ 2nd floor sq. ft.13,000 P&I 15 years 423,804$
$ / sq. ft.40
P&I 30 years 485,794$ 2nd floor 520,000$
P&I 15 years 752,669 Total Construction 3,345,000
KBCHS - Draft Budget Summary
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5 Years
Students 125 200 300 350 375
Revenue 794,783$ 1,303,444$ 2,004,045$ 2,396,504$ 2,631,875$ 9,130,652$
Total Expenses (excl. facil.)860,854$ 1,209,064$ 1,840,249$ 2,232,313$ 2,456,981$ 8,599,462$
P&L Operations (66,071)$ 94,380$ 163,796$ 164,191$ 174,894$ 531,190$
Other Potential revenue
PTSA / Parents ($500/stu.)93,750$ 153,750$ 236,391$ 282,684$ 310,447$ 1,077,022$
Foundation(s) ($250/stud.)31,250$ 51,250$ 78,797$ 94,228$ 103,482$ 359,007$
State Grants 250,000$ 75,000$ -$ 300,000$ -$ 625,000$
Total Other Potential Revenue 375,000$ 280,000$ 315,188$ 676,912$ 413,930$ 2,061,029$
P&L + Other Potential Revenue 308,929$ 374,380$ 478,983$ 841,103$ 588,824$ 2,592,219$
Facilities. Village Hall Option
4,324,579$
Building amortization 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 1,367,674$
Maintenance 30,000$ 30,750$ 31,519$ 32,307$ 33,114$ 157,690$
Total Facilities 303,535$ 304,285$ 305,054$ 305,842$ 306,649$ 1,525,364$
Operating results Village Hall 5,394$ 70,095$ 173,930$ 535,261$ 282,175$ 1,066,855$
Facilities. 530 Crandon Option
8,479,579$
Building amortization 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 2,428,968$
Maintenance 30,000$ 30,750$ 31,519$ 32,307$ 33,114$ 157,690$
Total Facilities 515,794$ 516,544$ 517,312$ 518,100$ 518,908$ 2,586,658$
Operating results 530 Crandon (206,865)$ (142,164)$ (38,329)$ 323,002$ 69,916$ 5,561$
Cash Flow (using Village Hall)
FTE Revenue 794,783$ 1,303,444$ 2,004,045$ 2,396,504$ 2,631,875$ 9,130,652$
Other revenue 375,000$ 280,000$ 315,188$ 676,912$ 413,930$ 2,061,029$
Adjustment depreciation 79,365$ 94,260$ 152,670$ 188,970$ 202,995$ 718,258$
Operating Expenses (860,854)$ (1,209,064)$ (1,840,249)$ (2,232,313)$ (2,456,981)$ (8,599,462)$
Facilities (303,535)$ (304,285)$ (305,054)$ (305,842)$ (306,649)$ (1,525,364)$
Net Cash Flow 84,759$ 164,355$ 326,599$ 724,231$ 485,169$ 1,785,113$
Other Incremental revenue:15 years NPV
Tax on property apprec. 5%142,079$ 285,578$ 430,513$ 576,897$ 724,745$ $6,703,750
Tax on property apprec. 10%284,158$ 573,998$ 869,636$ 1,171,186$ 1,478,767$ $13,651,898
Tax on property apprec. 15%426,236$ 865,260$ 1,317,454$ 1,783,214$ 2,262,947$ $20,851,393
After school programs ??????
Facilities rental ??????
530 Crandon Blvd. Option Village Hall Option
Sq. ft. 25,000 3rd floor Sq. ft. 8,500 School Planning 300,000$
$ / sq. ft.300 $ / sq. ft.250 Const. drawings 300,000$
Construction 7,500,000$ 3rd floor 2,125,000$ Start up 379,579$
School Planning 300,000$ 1st floor sq. ft. 3,500 Total 4,324,579$
Const. drawings 300,000$ $ / sq. ft.200
Start up 379,579$ 1st floor 700,000$ P&I 30 years 273,535$
Total 8,479,579$ 2nd floor sq. ft.13,000 P&I 15 years 423,804$
$ / sq. ft.40
P&I 30 years 485,794$ 2nd floor 520,000$
P&I 15 years 752,669 Total Construction 3,345,000
KBCHS - Draft Budget Summary
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5 Years
Students 125 200 300 350 375
Revenue 794,783$ 1,303,444$ 2,004,045$ 2,396,504$ 2,631,875$ 9,130,652$
Total Expenses (excl. facil.)860,854$ 1,209,064$ 1,840,249$ 2,232,313$ 2,456,981$ 8,599,462$
P&L Operations (66,071)$ 94,380$ 163,796$ 164,191$ 174,894$ 531,190$
Other Potential revenue
PTSA / Parents ($500/stu.)93,750$ 153,750$ 236,391$ 282,684$ 310,447$ 1,077,022$
Foundation(s) ($250/stud.)31,250$ 51,250$ 78,797$ 94,228$ 103,482$ 359,007$
State Grants 250,000$ 75,000$ -$ 300,000$ -$ 625,000$
Total Other Potential Revenue 375,000$ 280,000$ 315,188$ 676,912$ 413,930$ 2,061,029$
P&L + Other Potential Revenue 308,929$ 374,380$ 478,983$ 841,103$ 588,824$ 2,592,219$
Facilities. Village Hall Option
4,324,579$
Building amortization 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 1,367,674$
Maintenance 30,000$ 30,750$ 31,519$ 32,307$ 33,114$ 157,690$
Total Facilities 303,535$ 304,285$ 305,054$ 305,842$ 306,649$ 1,525,364$
Operating results Village Hall 5,394$ 70,095$ 173,930$ 535,261$ 282,175$ 1,066,855$
Facilities. 530 Crandon Option
8,479,579$
Building amortization 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 2,428,968$
Maintenance 30,000$ 30,750$ 31,519$ 32,307$ 33,114$ 157,690$
Total Facilities 515,794$ 516,544$ 517,312$ 518,100$ 518,908$ 2,586,658$
Operating results 530 Crandon (206,865)$ (142,164)$ (38,329)$ 323,002$ 69,916$ 5,561$
Cash Flow (using Village Hall)
FTE Revenue 794,783$ 1,303,444$ 2,004,045$ 2,396,504$ 2,631,875$ 9,130,652$
Other revenue 375,000$ 280,000$ 315,188$ 676,912$ 413,930$ 2,061,029$
Adjustment depreciation 79,365$ 94,260$ 152,670$ 188,970$ 202,995$ 718,258$
Operating Expenses (860,854)$ (1,209,064)$ (1,840,249)$ (2,232,313)$ (2,456,981)$ (8,599,462)$
Facilities (303,535)$ (304,285)$ (305,054)$ (305,842)$ (306,649)$ (1,525,364)$
Net Cash Flow 84,759$ 164,355$ 326,599$ 724,231$ 485,169$ 1,785,113$
Other Incremental revenue:15 years NPV
Tax on property apprec. 5%142,079$ 285,578$ 430,513$ 576,897$ 724,745$ $6,703,750
Tax on property apprec. 10%284,158$ 573,998$ 869,636$ 1,171,186$ 1,478,767$ $13,651,898
Tax on property apprec. 15%426,236$ 865,260$ 1,317,454$ 1,783,214$ 2,262,947$ $20,851,393
After school programs ??????
Facilities rental ??????
530 Crandon Blvd. Option Village Hall Option
Sq. ft. 25,000 3rd floor Sq. ft. 8,500 School Planning 300,000$
$ / sq. ft.300 $ / sq. ft.250 Const. drawings 300,000$
Construction 7,500,000$ 3rd floor 2,125,000$ Start up 379,579$
School Planning 300,000$ 1st floor sq. ft. 3,500 Total 4,324,579$
Const. drawings 300,000$ $ / sq. ft.200
Start up 379,579$ 1st floor 700,000$ P&I 30 years 273,535$
Total 8,479,579$ 2nd floor sq. ft.13,000 P&I 15 years 423,804$
$ / sq. ft.40
P&I 30 years 485,794$ 2nd floor 520,000$
P&I 15 years 752,669 Total Construction 3,345,000
KBCHS - Draft Budget Summary
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5 Years
Students 125 200 300 350 375
Revenue 794,783$ 1,303,444$ 2,004,045$ 2,396,504$ 2,631,875$ 9,130,652$
Total Expenses (excl. facil.)860,854$ 1,209,064$ 1,840,249$ 2,232,313$ 2,456,981$ 8,599,462$
P&L Operations (66,071)$ 94,380$ 163,796$ 164,191$ 174,894$ 531,190$
Other Potential revenue
PTSA / Parents ($500/stu.)93,750$ 153,750$ 236,391$ 282,684$ 310,447$ 1,077,022$
Foundation(s) ($250/stud.)31,250$ 51,250$ 78,797$ 94,228$ 103,482$ 359,007$
State Grants 250,000$ 75,000$ -$ 300,000$ -$ 625,000$
Total Other Potential Revenue 375,000$ 280,000$ 315,188$ 676,912$ 413,930$ 2,061,029$
P&L + Other Potential Revenue 308,929$ 374,380$ 478,983$ 841,103$ 588,824$ 2,592,219$
Facilities. Village Hall Option
4,324,579$
Building amortization 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 273,535$ 1,367,674$
Maintenance 30,000$ 30,750$ 31,519$ 32,307$ 33,114$ 157,690$
Total Facilities 303,535$ 304,285$ 305,054$ 305,842$ 306,649$ 1,525,364$
Operating results Village Hall 5,394$ 70,095$ 173,930$ 535,261$ 282,175$ 1,066,855$
Facilities. 530 Crandon Option
8,479,579$
Building amortization 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 485,794$ 2,428,968$
Maintenance 30,000$ 30,750$ 31,519$ 32,307$ 33,114$ 157,690$
Total Facilities 515,794$ 516,544$ 517,312$ 518,100$ 518,908$ 2,586,658$
Operating results 530 Crandon (206,865)$ (142,164)$ (38,329)$ 323,002$ 69,916$ 5,561$
Cash Flow (using Village Hall)
FTE Revenue 794,783$ 1,303,444$ 2,004,045$ 2,396,504$ 2,631,875$ 9,130,652$
Other revenue 375,000$ 280,000$ 315,188$ 676,912$ 413,930$ 2,061,029$
Adjustment depreciation 79,365$ 94,260$ 152,670$ 188,970$ 202,995$ 718,258$
Operating Expenses (860,854)$ (1,209,064)$ (1,840,249)$ (2,232,313)$ (2,456,981)$ (8,599,462)$
Facilities (303,535)$ (304,285)$ (305,054)$ (305,842)$ (306,649)$ (1,525,364)$
Net Cash Flow 84,759$ 164,355$ 326,599$ 724,231$ 485,169$ 1,785,113$
Other Incremental revenue:15 years NPV
Tax on property apprec. 5%142,079$ 285,578$ 430,513$ 576,897$ 724,745$ $6,703,750
Tax on property apprec. 10%284,158$ 573,998$ 869,636$ 1,171,186$ 1,478,767$ $13,651,898
Tax on property apprec. 15%426,236$ 865,260$ 1,317,454$ 1,783,214$ 2,262,947$ $20,851,393
After school programs ??????
Facilities rental ??????
530 Crandon Blvd. Option Village Hall Option
Sq. ft. 25,000 3rd floor Sq. ft. 8,500 School Planning 300,000$
$ / sq. ft.300 $ / sq. ft.250 Const. drawings 300,000$
Construction 7,500,000$ 3rd floor 2,125,000$ Start up 379,579$
School Planning 300,000$ 1st floor sq. ft. 3,500 Total 4,324,579$
Const. drawings 300,000$ $ / sq. ft.200
Start up 379,579$ 1st floor 700,000$ P&I 30 years 273,535$
Total 8,479,579$ 2nd floor sq. ft.13,000 P&I 15 years 423,804$
$ / sq. ft.40
P&I 30 years 485,794$ 2nd floor 520,000$
P&I 15 years 752,669 Total Construction 3,345,000
KBCHS - Draft Budget Summary
Building amortization &
maintenance
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
54
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
55
KBHS enrollment targets:
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Notes
Grade 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 2012 - 2013 2013 - 2014
9 75 75 100 100 100
10 50 75 75 100 100
11 50 75 75 100
12 50 75 75 $ / student
Total 125 200 300 350 375 6,358$
Principal 1 1 1 1 1
Teachers 5 8 13 16 18
Assist Teacher 2 3 4 5 5
ESE Teachers 2 2 3 3 3
ESE Assistants 0 1 2 3 3
Total faculty 10 15 23 28 30
Students/Faculty ratio 13 13 13 13 13
Students / Cert. Teach 18 18 18 17 16
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 1 - 5
FTE Revenue 794,783$ 1,303,444$ 2,004,045$ 2,396,504$ 2,631,875$ 9,130,652$
Expenses Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 2.5%
M-DCPS Admin. Fee 39,739$ 65,172$ 100,202$ 119,825$ 131,594$ 5%
Teachers 235,000$ 385,400$ 641,932$ 809,822$ 933,826$ 47,000$
ESE Teacher 104,000$ 106,600$ 163,898$ 167,995$ 172,195$ 52,000$
ESE Teacher Assist -$ 25,625$ 52,531$ 80,767$ 82,786$ 25,000$
Principal 95,000$ 97,375$ 99,809$ 102,305$ 104,862$ 95,000$
Admin. Assistant 30,000$ 30,750$ 31,519$ 32,307$ 33,114$ 30,000$
Teaching Assist.50,000$ 76,875$ 105,063$ 134,611$ 137,977$ 25,000$
Fringe Benefits 116,000$ 161,438$ 247,422$ 298,299$ 331,696$ 25%
Professional Develp.10,000$ 16,000$ 26,000$ 32,000$ 36,000$ 2,000$
Contract Serv. Counsel 12,500$ 20,000$ 30,000$ 35,000$ 37,500$ 100$
Subst. Teachers 11,750$ 19,270$ 32,097$ 40,491$ 46,691$ 5%
Capital / Tech. Amort.79,365$ 94,260$ 152,670$ 188,970$ 202,995$ 33%
Books 6,500$ 14,000$ 24,000$ 35,000$ 37,500$ 100$
Class & Office Supplies 14,000$ 20,000$ 32,000$ 38,000$ 42,000$ 2,000$
Phone / Comm.5,000$ 6,000$ 7,500$ 10,000$ 11,000$
Utilities 12,500$ 20,000$ 30,000$ 35,000$ 37,500$ 100$
Insurance (prop. & Liab.)10,000$ 12,000$ 14,000$ 16,000$ 18,000$
Ind. Fin. Audit 5,000$ 6,000$ 7,000$ 8,000$ 9,000$
Other 12,500$ 20,000$ 30,000$ 35,000$ 37,500$ 100$
Parking Suttle 12,000$ 12,300$ 12,608$ 12,923$ 13,246$
Total Expenses 860,854$ 1,209,064$ 1,840,249$ 2,232,313$ 2,456,981$ 8,599,462$
P&L (66,071)$ 94,380$ 163,796$ 164,191$ 174,894$ 531,190$
Other Potential revenue Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 1 - 5
PTSA 62,500$ 102,500$ 157,594$ 188,456$ 206,965$ 718,015$
Fundraising Foundations 31,250$ 51,250$ 78,797$ 94,228$ 103,482$ 359,007$
Plan. & Prog. Design 25,000$ 25,000$
1st year impl. Grant 225,000$ 225,000$
2nd year impl. Grant 75,000$ 75,000$
Construction Grant 300,000$ 300,000$
Total Other Potential. Rev.343,750$ 228,750$ 236,391$ 582,684$ 310,447$ 1,702,022$
P&L + Other Potential
Revenue 277,679$ 323,130$ 400,187$ 746,875$ 485,342$ 2,233,212$
Accumulated P&L + Other
Potential Revenue 277,679$ 600,809$ 1,000,995$ 1,747,870$ 2,233,212$
Key Biscayne Charter High School - DRAFT Budget
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
56
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
56
* Administration Services such as Payroll, H&R, etc. will be supported by Village's existing administrative personnel
Capital equipment
Startup 240,500$
Class equip. / technol.-$ 112,500$ 150,000$ 75,000$ 37,500$ 1,500$
Science labs -$ 10,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$
Office Equipment -$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 10,000$ 5,000$
New Capital equipment 240,500$ 124,500$ 177,000$ 110,000$ 42,500$
Value of Capital equipment 161,135$ 285,635$ 462,635$ 572,635$ 615,135$
Accumulated - Deprec.79,365$ 173,625$ 326,294$ 515,264$ 718,258$
Budget assumptions:
Revenue:FTE calculations are based on minimum revenue with 10% ESE
Capital outlay.No capital outlay funds have been included. The school will have access to capital
funds after 3 years of operation.
State Start up grants Estimated at $325,000. No grants have been included. In budget
Start up expenses:
Pre-opening operating
Start up coordinator 6 months 26,664$ Feb - July
Principal - 6 months 57,950$ Feb - July
Teachers - 1 month 34,465$
Recruitment / Advertisement 15,000$
Office supplies 5,000$
Sub-Total operating 139,079$
Capital equipment
Class equip. / technol.187,500$ 1500
Science labs 15,000$ 15000
Office Equipment 20,000$
Books 18,000$
Sub-Total Cap. Equip.240,500$
Total start up expenses 379,579$
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
56
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
57
v. PROPERTY VALUE RESEARCH
How would the school impact real estate property values in our community?
Based on scientific data produced by many research projects in communities across our
country confirm what most people sense: good schools command higher real estate proper-
ty premiums, and excellent schools much higher prices. Proposed High School - Community
Learning Center would increase real estate property values by an estimated 5% to 10% in a
short time frame. Additional upside potential would be expected as school initiates opera-
tion.
Property Value Research Resources:
The Impact of School Quality on Real House Prices. By David Brasington. Department of Eco-
nomics. Ohio State University. A scientific study of 134 communities concludes that schools
quality is the most important cause of the variation in property prices.
School Quality and Property Values In Greenville, South Carolina. Kwame Owusu-Edusei and
Molly Espey. Clemson University Public Service Activities. This study of Greenville, South Caro-
lina, concludes high-ranked schools have values capitalized into single-family house prices.
Further, greater distance to assigned K-12 schools has a negative impact on the value of the
property.
Neighborhood School Characteristics: What Signals Quality to Homebuyers? By Kathy J.
Hayes, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas and Professor of Economics, Southern Methodist Uni-
versity, and Lori L. Taylor, Senior Economist and Policy Advisor, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
This study suggests that this premium for school quality can be among the most important
determinants of housing prices.
An exclusive USA TODAY study finds that in city after city, it’s customary for a house to be
worth at least 10% more than a comparable house across the street if that street is the
boundary line between a highly rated school district and a laggard. In some cases, houses in
the best school districts cost almost twice as much as those nearby. (See article in the follow-
ing pages.)
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
58
Location, location, location Better schools mean higher property values Home buyers go
shopping for schools
USA TODAY (pre-1997 Fulltext) - McLean, Va. Author: Del Jones Date: May 15, 1996 Section: MONEY
Abstract (Document Summary)
An exclusive USA TODAY study finds that in city after city, it's customary for a house to be worth at least
10% more than a comparable house across the street if that street is the boundary line between a highly
rated school district and a laggard. In some cases, houses in the best school districts cost almost twice as
much as those nearby.
Tremendous upheaval is the result. More people are house shopping almost exclusively for the right
schools, putting proximity to schools ahead of proximity to work -- even ahead of taxes. That leads to
overcrowding at schools with the best reputations, while the halls of others echo half-empty.
Throughout the country, homes take weeks or months longer to sell just for being on the wrong side of
the boundary. Home builders say they rarely bother breaking ground these days where schools aren't
good.
Childless house hunters are increasingly asking for houses in quality school districts because of greater
appreciation and pride in ownership. Only one-third of households have school-age children. Yet, 80% of
house hunters strongly consider schools vs. 50% 20 years ago, according to Weichert Realtors.
Location, location, location Better schools mean higher property values Home buyers go shopping for
schools
The three rules of real estate remain in stone: Location, location, location. But real estate agents,
appraisers, home builders and tax authorities overwhelmingly agree that proximity to high-quality
schools is now the No. 1 factor in determining what a home is worth in any given market.
For instance, two comparable houses in the same Dallas neighborhood were sold five months apart. One
went for $155,000, the other for $276,000. The difference? The more expensive house was in the
Highland Park public school district where college entrance test scores rank in the top 1% in the country.
An exclusive USA TODAY study finds that in city after city, it's customary for a house to be worth at least
10% more than a comparable house across the street if that street is the boundary line between a highly
rated school district and a laggard. In some cases, houses in the best school districts cost almost twice as
much as those nearby.
Tremendous upheaval is the result. More people are house shopping almost exclusively for the right
schools, putting proximity to schools ahead of proximity to work -- even ahead of taxes. That leads to
overcrowding at schools with the best reputations, while the halls of others echo half-empty.
Throughout the country, homes take weeks or months longer to sell just for being on the wrong side of
the boundary. Home builders say they rarely bother breaking ground these days where schools aren't
good.
The great migration puts school boards under constant fire to redraw school district boundaries. And,
that makes board members more vulnerable to coercion from real estate developers, builders and angry
homeowners with a stake in property.
School board meetings have become a ``community bloodletting played out in the public arena,'' says
E.E. ``Gene'' Davis, a former school superintendent in Alaska and Virginia, who now prepares boards for
the mire of controversy that awaits those attempting boundary changes.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
58
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
59
Childless house hunters are increasingly asking for houses in quality school districts because of greater
appreciation and pride in ownership. Only one-third of households have school-age children. Yet, 80% of
house hunters strongly consider schools vs. 50% 20 years ago, according to Weichert Realtors.
Obviously, schools have long been important. What's changed is that, to many well-educated baby
boom parents, little else matters more than finding the best school to prepare their children for college.
Fifteen years ago, the average college graduate earned 50% more than those with high school
educations. Today they earn almost twice as much.
Baby boomers have lived through a decade of downsizing and want every possible advantage for their
children. Many parents are willing to live in high-priced cracker boxes with no closet space to be near
good schools, as they do in the 80-year-old neighborhood of Whitefish Bay on the east side of
Milwaukee.
Where parents used to rely on real estate agents and word-of-mouth to find good schools, now more
are demanding hard data: test scores, per-student spending, teacher-student ratios, the percentage of
high school graduates to go on to college. Moore Data Management Services, which sells such
information to real estate agencies, says demand is up more than 500% in five years.
More than 350 large companies, including Allstate Insurance, Honda of America and Johnson & Johnson
supply detailed comparative information about schools as part of their relocation packages, Moore says.
The information serves to narrow the choices for house hunters to a handful of schools in every city.
House hunting winds up tightly focused on neighborhoods surrounding the best public schools, driving
up prices in those areas and creating a growing chasm in home values.
It also creates tremendous pressure on schools to get test scores up. Employees of prize-winning
Stratfiel Elementary School in Fairfield, Conn., are being accused of changing test answers to enhance
the school's reputation. There's controversy in Milwaukee, where the school board is accused of
releasing good news about improvements, while suppressing bad news.
The most dedicated house hunters go beyond test data. They sit in on school classes and interview
principals and teachers. Police departments get calls from house hunters looking for the schools with
the fewest drug busts.
``I want to see the curriculum, the books and computers,'' says Tracy Migliozzi of Pittsburgh, who is
visiting schools while plotting a move to a better district. She has a 5-year-old daughter about to enter
kindergarten and an 8-year-old son who will be switching from parochial school.
Good-school premium
USA TODAY conducted a survey in April, enlisting the help of SchoolMatch, a Westerville, Ohio, company
that sells information about the USA's 16,665 public school systems to house hunters and real estate
agencies.
SchoolMatch suggested cities where a school district with high college entrance test scores and other
measures of quality bordered districts with worse performance. USA TODAY then asked real estate
agents in those cities to find houses that recently sold along the boundaries. They were told to find
houses that were in all other ways comparable, except that they were in different school districts.
In Milwaukee, Remax Lakeside Realtor David Delahunt found 16 houses that sold since November 1993
within an area of two square blocks. All had eight rooms, four bedrooms and between 11/2 and 21/2
bathrooms. The eight in Milwaukee School District, where performance on college entrance tests is in
the bottom 20% in the nation, sold for an average $170,625.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
60
The eight in the Shorewood School District, where performance is in the best 1%, sold for an average
$240,563 -- 41% more.
``Visually, in most cases, you won't see a difference (between houses),'' says Steve Lauenstein, a
Milwaukee appraiser, ``which really proves that it has to do with schools.''
The value gap might be greater if Milwaukee quit requiring its 8,346 city employees to live in the
Milwaukee School District.
``There would be a huge sucking sound when all those people sold at depressed prices,'' Delahunt says.
``I have a brother-in-law who teaches in Milwaukee. His kids went to parochial school. He'd love to live
in the outlying area.''
Near Atlanta, 88 new ranch-style homes between 1,500 and 2,000 square feet sold since January in
Rockdale County for a median $115,000, or $64.16 per square foot, says Brian Stafford, co-owner of
Peachtree Appraisal. In neighboring Newton County, fewer than half that many homes sold for a median
$92,450, or $55.95 per square foot. Rockdale SAT scores average 60 points higher.
In San Diego, the Poway Unified district has a big word-of-mouth advantage over San Diego Unified
district among military transferees. In particular, they shun San Diego's Mira Mesa High School, says
Remax agent Ken Davis.
The districts are separated by a canyon, but Davis found two 2,000-square-foot houses on either side,
both built in 1993 with four bedrooms, 21/2 bathrooms, nice yards and a view of the hills. The one on
the Poway side sold in February for $227,000. The one on the San Diego side sold in December for
$197,000.
In Baltimore, a 67-year-old house on Pinehurst Road just sold for $209,900. But it sits within the
Baltimore City Public School System, where college entrance scores are in the bottom 20% nationwide.
A 65-year-old house, also on Pinehurst Road, sold for $280,000. Despite the proximity, it's in the
Baltimore County Public School district, where scores are in the top 21%.
``They are very similar, less than a block away,'' says Dawn Covahey, corporate sales manager with
Coldwell Banker Grempler.
Recent academic studies support USA TODAY's findings. Enrollment (kindergarten through 8th grade) in
Massachusetts public schools that rank in the state's top 10% by test scores swelled 14% between 1990
and 1994, says Wellesley College real estate economist Karl Case. Based on 1990 census data of children
then between the ages of 1 and 9, enrollment at those schools should have gone up just 4%. Meanwhile,
enrollment fell 2% at schools testing in the bottom 10%, when it should have risen 13%.
``It's people moving, there's no question,'' Case says.
In Ohio, students must pass a proficiency test to graduate high school. Cleveland State University
finance professor Michael Bond found that houses sold in 1994 fetched $471 more for every percentage
point increase in passing rates at the schools near them. More than 90% of students passed the test at
some Cleveland high schools, while barely 20% passed at others. The difference of 70 percentage points,
multiplied by $471, means as much as a $33,000 difference in home values.
Although test scores strongly mirror parents' income, property values are influenced by test scores even
in poorer districts, Bond says. ``We had to use fairly sophisticated techniques to weed out the influence
of income,'' he says. ``The evidence is overwhelming. Independent of income, better schools mean
higher property values.''
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
60
Home buyers, at least those with children, aren't being irrational. Each extra $20,000 paid for a house
and financed over 30 years at 8.35% interest adds $1,820 a year to a mortgage payment. Private school
can easily cost three times that much -- per child -- and is not tax deductible.
For childless households, the right financial decision is less clear. Kathleen Niesen would have had to pay
about $255,000 for a comparable house in the Shorewood district bordering Milwaukee. She paid
$226,000 in the Milwaukee school district and is happy with her decision.
Schools also drive rental rates. Milwaukee landlord Gerald Sobczak says he rents two- and three-
bedroom apartments in the Shorewood School District for $500 a month. Similar apartments two blocks
away in the Milwaukee district rent for $350 to $400. El Paso Realtor Ed Kot says he could get another
$150 a month for a house that he rents for $1,250 if it were a block over in the Polk Elementary district.
That rental premium materialized suddenly in 1994 when Polk Elementary won a Texas award for high
test scores that was well-publicized locally.
When El Paso was building Franklin High School three years ago, Kot says he warned house buyers in
writing that school boundaries were subject to change. ``I didn't want to get sued,'' he says.
The great migration
Parents say they have no regrets about paying more for less house as long as they wind up in the right
school district.
Schools were the top priority for Alice Li when her family moved to Wayne, N.J., from Pennsylvania 10
years ago. Her daughter Winnie ``was very little, but we knew the district had a talented and gifted
program.'' Winnie has scored perfectly three straight years on the national Latin exam, is editor of the
school newspaper, will graduate Wayne Valley High with a 4.0 grade point average and will attend
Harvard.
Victoria and Gerald Sobczak say their deaf son Chris wasn't getting adequate attention in the Milwaukee
district. Three years ago they moved a few blocks to a much smaller house in the Shorewood district
where the school provides an interpreter, who accompanies Chris to every class. ``We decided we
wanted more out of life than just a house,'' Victoria Sobczak says.
When Debbie and John Roesner moved from Chicago to Milwaukee, they could have spent $30,000 less
on a comparable house three blocks away. But they have two children now reaching school age and
willingly paid the difference.
Some parents admit that they just stumbled upon good schools. David and Pat Marin had no plans to
have children when they were house hunting in the San Francisco area in 1975. They found more house
for the money in the Los Altos High School district because it had a worse reputation than others
nearby.
Then, David Jr. came along, the high school improved markedly and became the public school of choice
among Japanese immigrants to the area. The baby grew up to score perfectly on his SATs. The house has
appreciated nearly 1,000%, more than area houses near other schools.
Meanwile, special property tax laws sharply limit tax increases on some California homes. That acts to
limit the supply of houses for sale in the face of higher demand for the school. The result: It's hard to
find a modest three-bedroom house for less than $500,000. ``We were really very, very lucky,'' Pat
Marin says.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
61
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
62
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
i
m
p
a
c
t
o
n
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
'
s
r
e
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
L
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
C
e
n
t
e
r
/
H
i
g
h
S
c
h
o
o
l
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
'
s
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
A
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
u
n
d
e
r
w
a
y
1s
t
y
e
a
r
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ne
w
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
r
o
l
l
o
u
t
Va
l
u
e
Y
0
Y
1
Y
2
Y
3
Y
4
Y
5
Ta
x
a
b
l
e
r
e
a
l
r
e
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
$6
,
4
3
4
,
7
2
7
,
4
1
8
$6
,
4
7
9
,
1
2
7
,
0
3
7
$6
,
5
2
3
,
9
7
0
,
6
5
3
$6
,
5
6
9
,
2
6
2
,
7
0
4
$6
,
6
1
5
,
0
0
7
,
6
7
6
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
Ho
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
V
a
l
u
e
(
5
)
31
%
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
No
n
-
H
o
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
e
d
V
a
l
u
e
(
5
)
69
%
$4
,
4
3
9
,
9
6
1
,
9
1
8
$4
,
4
8
4
,
3
6
1
,
5
3
8
$4
,
5
2
9
,
2
0
5
,
1
5
3
$4
,
5
7
4
,
4
9
7
,
2
0
5
$4
,
6
2
0
,
2
4
2
,
1
7
7
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
To
t
a
l
T
a
x
a
b
l
e
V
a
l
u
e
$6
,
4
3
4
,
7
2
7
,
4
1
8
$6
,
4
7
9
,
1
2
7
,
0
3
7
$6
,
5
2
3
,
9
7
0
,
6
5
3
$6
,
5
6
9
,
2
6
2
,
7
0
4
$6
,
6
1
5
,
0
0
7
,
6
7
6
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
A
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
N
o
n
-
H
o
m
e
s
t
.
0%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
Ho
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
e
d
t
a
x
R
e
v
.
(
3
)
3.
2
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
No
n
-
H
o
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
e
d
T
a
x
R
e
v
,
(
3
)
3.
2
$1
4
,
2
0
7
,
8
7
8
$1
4
,
3
4
9
,
9
5
7
$1
4
,
4
9
3
,
4
5
6
$1
4
,
6
3
8
,
3
9
1
$1
4
,
7
8
4
,
7
7
5
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
To
t
a
l
t
a
x
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
$2
0
,
5
9
1
,
1
2
8
$2
0
,
7
3
3
,
2
0
7
$2
0
,
8
7
6
,
7
0
6
$2
1
,
0
2
1
,
6
4
1
$2
1
,
1
6
8
,
0
2
5
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
Ne
w
t
a
x
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
$0
$1
4
2
,
0
7
9
$2
8
5
,
5
7
8
$4
3
0
,
5
1
3
$5
7
6
,
8
9
7
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
Y
6
Y
7
Y
8
Y
9
Y
1
0
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
Y
1
1
Y
1
2
Y
1
3
Y
1
4
Y
1
5
Y
1
-
5
N
P
V
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
$4
,
6
6
6
,
4
4
4
,
5
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
$6
,
6
6
1
,
2
1
0
,
0
9
8
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
$1
4
,
9
3
2
,
6
2
3
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
$2
1
,
3
1
5
,
8
7
2
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
$7
2
4
,
7
4
5
$6
,
7
0
3
,
7
5
0
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
62
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
63
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
i
m
p
a
c
t
o
n
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
'
s
r
e
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
L
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
C
e
n
t
e
r
/
H
i
g
h
S
c
h
o
o
l
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
'
s
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
A
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
u
n
d
e
r
w
a
y
1s
t
y
e
a
r
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ne
w
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
r
o
l
l
o
u
t
Va
l
u
e
Y
0
Y
1
Y
2
Y
3
Y
4
Y
5
Ta
x
a
b
l
e
r
e
a
l
r
e
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
$6
,
4
3
4
,
7
2
7
,
4
1
8
$6
,
5
2
3
,
5
2
6
,
6
5
6
$6
,
6
1
4
,
1
0
1
,
8
8
0
$6
,
7
0
6
,
4
8
8
,
6
0
7
$6
,
8
0
0
,
7
2
3
,
0
6
9
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
Ho
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
V
a
l
u
e
(
5
)
31
%
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
No
n
-
H
o
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
e
d
V
a
l
u
e
(
5
)
69
%
$4
,
4
3
9
,
9
6
1
,
9
1
8
$4
,
5
2
8
,
7
6
1
,
1
5
7
$4
,
6
1
9
,
3
3
6
,
3
8
0
$4
,
7
1
1
,
7
2
3
,
1
0
8
$4
,
8
0
5
,
9
5
7
,
5
7
0
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
To
t
a
l
T
a
x
a
b
l
e
V
a
l
u
e
$6
,
4
3
4
,
7
2
7
,
4
1
8
$6
,
5
2
3
,
5
2
6
,
6
5
6
$6
,
6
1
4
,
1
0
1
,
8
8
0
$6
,
7
0
6
,
4
8
8
,
6
0
7
$6
,
8
0
0
,
7
2
3
,
0
6
9
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
A
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
N
o
n
-
H
o
m
e
s
t
.
0%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
Ho
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
e
d
t
a
x
R
e
v
.
(
3
)
3.
2
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
No
n
-
H
o
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
e
d
T
a
x
R
e
v
,
(
3
)
3.
2
$1
4
,
2
0
7
,
8
7
8
$1
4
,
4
9
2
,
0
3
6
$1
4
,
7
8
1
,
8
7
6
$1
5
,
0
7
7
,
5
1
4
$1
5
,
3
7
9
,
0
6
4
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
To
t
a
l
t
a
x
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
$2
0
,
5
9
1
,
1
2
8
$2
0
,
8
7
5
,
2
8
5
$2
1
,
1
6
5
,
1
2
6
$2
1
,
4
6
0
,
7
6
4
$2
1
,
7
6
2
,
3
1
4
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
Ne
w
t
a
x
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
$0
$2
8
4
,
1
5
8
$5
7
3
,
9
9
8
$8
6
9
,
6
3
6
$1
,
1
7
1
,
1
8
6
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
Y
6
Y
7
Y
8
Y
9
Y
1
0
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
Y
1
1
Y
1
2
Y
1
3
Y
1
4
Y
1
5
Y
1
-
5
N
P
V
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
$4
,
9
0
2
,
0
7
6
,
7
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
$6
,
8
9
6
,
8
4
2
,
2
2
1
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
$1
5
,
6
8
6
,
6
4
6
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
$2
2
,
0
6
9
,
8
9
5
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
$1
,
4
7
8
,
7
6
7
$1
3
,
6
5
1
,
8
9
8
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
64
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
64
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
i
m
p
a
c
t
o
n
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
'
s
r
e
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
t
a
x
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
L
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
C
e
n
t
e
r
/
H
i
g
h
S
c
h
o
o
l
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
'
s
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
A
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
u
n
d
e
r
w
a
y
1s
t
y
e
a
r
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ne
w
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
r
o
l
l
o
u
t
Va
l
u
e
Y
0
Y
1
Y
2
Y
3
Y
4
Y
5
Ta
x
a
b
l
e
r
e
a
l
r
e
a
l
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
$6
,
4
3
4
,
7
2
7
,
4
1
8
$6
,
5
6
7
,
9
2
6
,
2
7
6
$6
,
7
0
5
,
1
2
1
,
0
9
9
$6
,
8
4
6
,
4
3
1
,
7
6
7
$6
,
9
9
1
,
9
8
1
,
7
5
5
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
Ho
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
V
a
l
u
e
(
5
)
31
%
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
No
n
-
H
o
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
e
d
V
a
l
u
e
(
5
)
69
%
$4
,
4
3
9
,
9
6
1
,
9
1
8
$4
,
5
7
3
,
1
6
0
,
7
7
6
$4
,
7
1
0
,
3
5
5
,
5
9
9
$4
,
8
5
1
,
6
6
6
,
2
6
7
$4
,
9
9
7
,
2
1
6
,
2
5
5
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
To
t
a
l
T
a
x
a
b
l
e
V
a
l
u
e
$6
,
4
3
4
,
7
2
7
,
4
1
8
$6
,
5
6
7
,
9
2
6
,
2
7
6
$6
,
7
0
5
,
1
2
1
,
0
9
9
$6
,
8
4
6
,
4
3
1
,
7
6
7
$6
,
9
9
1
,
9
8
1
,
7
5
5
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
A
p
p
r
e
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
N
o
n
-
H
o
m
e
s
t
.
0%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
Ho
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
e
d
t
a
x
R
e
v
.
(
3
)
3.
2
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
No
n
-
H
o
m
e
s
t
e
a
d
e
d
T
a
x
R
e
v
,
(
3
)
3.
2
$1
4
,
2
0
7
,
8
7
8
$1
4
,
6
3
4
,
1
1
4
$1
5
,
0
7
3
,
1
3
8
$1
5
,
5
2
5
,
3
3
2
$1
5
,
9
9
1
,
0
9
2
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
To
t
a
l
t
a
x
R
e
v
e
n
u
e
$2
0
,
5
9
1
,
1
2
8
$2
1
,
0
1
7
,
3
6
4
$2
1
,
4
5
6
,
3
8
8
$2
1
,
9
0
8
,
5
8
2
$2
2
,
3
7
4
,
3
4
2
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
Ne
w
t
a
x
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
$0
$4
2
6
,
2
3
6
$8
6
5
,
2
6
0
$1
,
3
1
7
,
4
5
4
$1
,
7
8
3
,
2
1
4
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
Y
6
Y
7
Y
8
Y
9
Y
1
0
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
Y
1
1
Y
1
2
Y
1
3
Y
1
4
Y
1
5
Y
1
-
5
N
P
V
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$1
,
9
9
4
,
7
6
5
,
5
0
0
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
$5
,
1
4
7
,
1
3
2
,
7
4
3
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
$7
,
1
4
1
,
8
9
8
,
2
4
2
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$6
,
3
8
3
,
2
5
0
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
$1
6
,
4
7
0
,
8
2
5
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
$2
2
,
8
5
4
,
0
7
4
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
$2
,
2
6
2
,
9
4
7
$2
0
,
8
5
1
,
3
9
3
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
64
vi. RECOMMENDED BOOK LIST:
An Ethic of Excellence: Building a Culture of Craftsmanship with Students
Berger, Ron (2003)
Mindshifts
Caine, Renate, et al. (1999)
The Innovators Dilemma
Christenson, Clayton (2001)
The Schools Our Children Deserve
Kohn, Alfie
Passion for Learning: How a Project-Based System Develops Students for the 21st Century
Newell, Ronald J. (2002)
A Whole New Mind
Pink, Daniel
Horace’s Compromise
Sizer, Ted
Horace’s School: Redesigning the American High School
Sizer, Theodore (1992)
The Coolest School in America: How Small Learning Communities are Changing Everything
Thomas, D., W. Enloe & R. Newell, eds. (2005)
Making the Grade: Reinventing America’s Schools
Wagner, T. (2003)
One Kid at a Time
Washor, Elliot & Litky, Dennis
Future Search: An Action guide to Finding Common Ground in Organizations and
Communities
Weisbord, Marvin & Janoff, Sandra (1995)
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
65
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
66
vii.
MIAMI-DADE RESPONSE
TO APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF
KEY BISCAYNE CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
66
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
66
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
67
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
D
U
E
:
T
h
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
1
1
,
2
0
0
8
In
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
s
Th
e
r
o
l
e
o
f
t
h
e
T
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
T
e
a
m
(T
A
T
)
i
s
t
o
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
o
f
t
h
e
c
h
a
r
t
e
r
s
c
h
o
o
l
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
,
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
t
e
c
h
ni
c
a
l
a
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
t
o
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
,
a
n
d
m
a
k
e
a
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
b
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
R
e
v
i
e
w
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
(
D
R
C
)
.
U
s
i
n
g
t
h
i
s
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
,
th
e
D
R
C
w
i
l
l
v
o
t
e
t
o
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
o
r
de
n
y
t
h
e
c
h
a
r
t
e
r
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
m
a
k
e
a
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
S
u
p
e
r
i
nt
e
n
d
e
n
t
o
f
S
c
h
o
o
l
s
.
A
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
b
y
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
,
F
.
S
.
,
f
i
n
a
l
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
r
d
e
n
i
a
l
w
i
l
l
b
e
m
a
d
e
b
y
t
h
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
B
o
a
r
d
.
Fo
r
y
o
u
r
c
o
n
v
e
n
i
e
n
c
e
,
t
h
e
T
A
T
h
a
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
fe
e
d
b
a
c
k
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
o
f
t
h
e
ch
a
r
t
e
r
s
c
h
o
o
l
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
T
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
h
a
s
t
h
e
o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
t
o
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
t
o
a
n
y
f
e
e
d
b
a
c
k
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
T
A
T
,
p
r
i
o
r
t
o
su
b
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
c
h
a
r
t
e
r
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
t
h
e
DR
C
f
o
r
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
.
A
l
l
f
e
e
d
b
a
c
k
m
u
s
t
b
e
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
C
h
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
O
p
e
r
a
t
io
n
s
d
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
b
y
t
h
e
d
e
a
d
l
i
n
e
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
e
d
i
n
o
r
d
e
r
t
o
b
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
.
T
o
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
t
o
th
e
f
e
e
d
b
a
c
k
,
p
l
e
a
s
e
d
o
s
o
i
n
t
h
e
s
p
a
c
e
s
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
i
n
t
h
i
s
i
n
st
r
u
m
e
n
t
.
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
,
s
h
o
u
l
d
y
o
ur
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
t
o
th
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
,
p
l
e
a
s
e
d
o
s
o
b
y
ut
i
l
i
z
i
n
g
t
h
e
“
t
r
a
c
k
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
”
o
p
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
M
S
Wo
r
d
(
e
.
g
.
s
t
r
i
k
e
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
s
a
n
d
u
n
d
e
r
l
i
n
e
s
f
o
r
d
e
l
e
t
e
d
a
n
d
a
d
d
e
d
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
)
.
Al
l
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
s
u
b
m
it
t
e
d
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
a
l
l
y
v
i
a
e
m
a
i
l
(
T
o
:
tp
a
u
l
i
n
e
@
d
a
d
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
s
.
n
e
t
a
n
d
C
C
:
el
g
a
r
c
i
a
1
@
d
a
d
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
s
.
n
e
t
,
a
n
d
cq
b
u
l
l
a
r
d
@
d
a
d
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
s
.
n
e
t
)
o
r
p
l
a
c
e
d
o
n
C
D
a
n
d
h
a
n
d
-
d
e
l
i
v
e
r
e
d
t
o
C
h
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
1
2
0
0
N
W
S
i
x
t
h
Av
e
n
u
e
,
R
o
o
m
3
3
1
,
M
i
a
m
i
,
F
l
o
r
i
d
a
3
3
1
3
6
.
De
t
a
i
l
e
d
b
e
l
o
w
a
r
e
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
.
A
B
C
D
E
Strengths
Reference
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
co
m
plete
d
b
y R
eview
er
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
nd
A
dd
i
t
i
o
nal
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
l
u
m
n
A
:
Th
e
r
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
s
’
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
y
o
u
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
.
(R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
l
u
m
n
B
:
Th
e
r
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
s
’
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
t
h
e
p
a
g
e
n
umb
er
(
s
)
i
n
t
h
e
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
v
e
r
s
i
on
o
f
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
(A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
)
Co
l
u
m
n
C
:
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
sh
o
u
l
d
re
s
p
o
n
d
to
an
y
Co
nc
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
nal
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
p
rov
i
d
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
r
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
s
i
n
c
o
l
u
m
n
A
.
A
l
s
o
,
p
l
e
a
se
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
i
n
t
h
i
s
se
c
t
i
o
n
w
h
et
h
e
r
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
m
a
de
t
o
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
(
Re
m
e
m
b
e
r
:
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
su
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
s
t
r
i
k
e
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
s
an
d
u
n
d
e
r
l
i
nes
)
(A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
)
Co
l
u
m
n
D:
If
t
h
e
o
r
i
g
i
n
a
l
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
a
n
d
i
s
b
e
i
n
g
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
a
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
,
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
t
h
e
ne
w
pa
g
e
n
u
m
b
e
r
i
n
t
h
e
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
t
re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
.
(Reviewer)
Co
l
u
m
n
E
:
Re
v
i
e
w
w
i
l
l
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
i
f
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
i
s
s
a
t
i
sf
a
c
t
o
r
y
o
r
u
n
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
.
Da
t
e
o
f
R
e
v
i
e
w
b
y
D
R
C
:
Th
i
s
i
s
a
r
e
v
i
e
w
o
f
o
n
e
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
ch
a
r
t
e
r
s
?
Ye
s
X
No
OVE
RA
L
L
A
SS
ESS
ME
NT
–
CO
MP
L
E
T
E T
H
I
S
SECTI
ON
L
A
ST
Wo
u
l
d
y
o
u
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
f
t
h
i
s
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
a
p
u
b
l
i
c
ch
a
r
t
e
r
s
c
h
o
ol
?
E
x
p
l
a
i
n
y
o
u
r
r
e
c
o
m
men
d
a
t
i
o
n
i
n t
h
e
S
u
m
m
ar
y
C
o
m
m
e
nts
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
b
e
l
o
w
.
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
68
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
2
DE
N
Y
AP
P
R
O
V
E
DR
C
C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
:
(
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
i
f
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
i
s
t
o
D
E
N
Y
)
Da
t
e
o
f
R
e
v
i
e
w
b
y
T
A
T
:
Mo
n
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
2
5
,
2
0
0
8
TA
T
C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
:
(
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
i
f
t
h
e
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
i
s
t
o
D
E
N
Y
)
Cu
r
r
i
c
u
l
u
m
:
Th
e
s
e
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
,
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
l
l
y
,
c
u
r
r
i
c
u
l
u
m
p
l
a
n
a
n
d
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
ts
.
S
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
c
o
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
s
t
o
t
h
e
l
a
ck
o
f
d
e
t
a
i
l
a
n
d
l
a
c
k
o
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
g
o
v
e
r
n
i
n
g
b
o
a
r
d
w
h
i
c
h
is
t
h
e
b
a
s
i
s
o
f
t
h
i
s
e
n
t
i
r
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
p
l
a
n
i
s
n
o
t
c
l
e
a
r
.
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
:
T
h
e
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
s
t
o
th
e
D
R
C
d
e
n
i
a
l
o
f
t
h
i
s
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
u
n
l
e
ss
a
r
e
a
s
o
f
w
e
a
k
n
e
s
s
e
s
a
r
e
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
l
y
i
mp
r
o
v
e
d
.
Op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
S
u
b
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
:
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
:
T
h
i
s
C
o
m
m
i
t
t
e
e
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
s
t
o
t
h
e
D
R
C
d
e
n
i
a
l
o
f
t
h
i
s
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
u
n
l
e
s
s
a
r
e
a
s
of
w
e
a
k
n
e
s
s
e
s
a
r
e
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
l
y
im
p
r
o
v
e
d
.
Pl
e
a
s
e
r
e
v
i
e
w
t
h
e
f
e
e
d
b
a
c
k
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
i
n
e
a
c
h
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
68
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
69
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
3
I.
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
P
l
a
n
Th
e
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
f
i
n
e
w
h
a
t
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
w
i
l
l
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
;
h
o
w
t
h
e
y
w
i
l
l
a
c
h
i
e
v
e
i
t
;
a
n
d
h
o
w
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
w
i
l
l
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
e
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
an
c
e
.
I
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
c
l
e
a
r
p
i
c
t
ur
e
o
f
w
h
a
t
a
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
w
h
o
a
t
t
e
n
d
s
t
h
e
sc
h
o
o
l
w
i
l
l
e
x
p
e
r
i
e
n
c
e
i
n
t
e
r
m
s
o
f
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
cl
i
m
a
t
e
,
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
,
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
o
u
t
c
o
m
e
s
.
1.
M
i
s
s
i
o
n
,
G
u
i
d
i
n
g
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
a
n
d
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
Th
e
M
i
s
s
i
o
n
,
G
u
i
d
i
n
g
P
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
a
n
d
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
i
n
d
i
c
a
te
w
h
a
t
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
i
n
t
e
n
d
s
t
o
d
o
,
f
o
r
w
h
o
m
a
n
d
t
o
w
h
a
t
d
e
g
r
e
e
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
s
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
2
)
(
a
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
2
)
(
b
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
33
(
2
)
(
c
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
6
)
(
a
)
(
1
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
1
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
A
c
o
m
p
e
l
l
i
n
g
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
t
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
t
h
a
t
d
e
f
i
n
e
s
t
h
e
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
a
n
d
v
a
l
u
e
s
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
.
A
s
e
t
o
f
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
m
e
a
n
i
n
g
f
u
l
,
m
a
n
a
g
e
a
b
l
e
an
d
m
e
a
s
u
r
a
b
l
e
,
a
n
d
f
o
c
u
s
o
n
i
m
p
r
o
v
i
n
g
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
o
u
t
c
o
m
e
s
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
2.
T
a
r
g
e
t
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
B
o
d
y
Th
e
T
a
r
g
e
t
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
B
o
d
y
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
t
h
e
a
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
t
a
r
g
e
t
p
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
a
n
d
e
x
p
l
a
i
n
h
o
w
th
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
w
i
l
l
b
e
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
e
d
b
y
g
r
a
d
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
,
c
l
a
s
s
s
i
z
e
a
n
d
t
o
t
a
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
en
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
o
v
e
r
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
c
h
a
r
t
e
r
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
1
0
)
(
e
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
6
)
(
b
)
(
2
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
1
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
3
.
0
3
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
An
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
o
f
t
h
e
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
t
h
e
ch
a
r
t
e
r
s
c
h
o
o
l
i
n
t
e
n
d
s
t
o
s
e
r
v
e
.
A
m
a
n
a
g
e
a
b
l
e
p
l
a
n
t
i
e
d
t
o
e
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
a
l
l
o
w
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
t
o
m
e
e
t
i
t
s
c
o
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
l
a
s
s
s
i
z
e
o
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
70
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
4
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
En
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
a
l
i
g
n
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
t
a
t
u
t
e
as
i
t
r
e
l
a
t
e
s
t
o
m
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
e
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
.
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
1
0
)
Pa
g
e
1
7
&
94
3.
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
P
h
i
l
o
s
o
p
h
y
Th
e
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
t
h
e
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
f
o
u
n
d
a
t
i
on
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
a
n
d
t
h
e
t
e
a
c
h
i
n
g
a
n
d
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
wi
l
l
b
e
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
d
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
2
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
n
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
p
h
i
l
o
s
o
p
h
y
t
h
a
t
:
Is
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
d
c
o
h
e
r
e
n
t
;
Is
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
,
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
-
b
a
s
e
d
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
,
te
a
c
h
i
n
g
m
e
t
h
o
d
s
a
n
d
h
i
g
h
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
;
Al
i
g
n
s
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
s
t
o
t
h
e
n
e
e
d
s
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
t
a
r
g
e
t
p
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
,
a
n
d
Pr
e
s
e
n
t
s
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
w
i
l
l
l
e
a
d
t
o
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
d
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
t
a
r
g
e
t
p
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
4.
C
u
r
r
i
c
u
l
u
m
P
l
a
n
Th
e
C
u
r
r
i
c
u
l
u
m
P
l
a
n
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
e
x
p
l
a
i
n
n
o
t
o
n
l
y
wh
a
t
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
w
i
l
l
t
e
a
c
h
b
u
t
a
l
s
o
ho
w
a
n
d
wh
y
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
6
)
(
a
)
(
2
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
6
)
(
a
)
(
4
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
2
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
4
)
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
70
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
71
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
5
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
c
u
r
r
i
c
u
l
u
m
p
l
a
n
t
h
a
t
:
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
a
c
l
e
a
r
a
n
d
c
o
h
e
r
e
n
t
f
r
a
m
e
w
o
r
k
f
o
r
t
e
a
c
h
i
n
g
a
n
d
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
;
Is
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
-
b
a
s
e
d
;
Is
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
,
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
p
h
i
l
o
s
o
p
h
y
a
n
d
i
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
;
Wi
l
l
e
n
a
b
l
e
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
t
o
a
t
t
a
i
n
S
u
n
s
h
i
n
e
S
t
a
t
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
a
n
d
re
c
e
i
v
e
a
y
e
a
r
’
s
w
o
r
t
h
o
f
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
f
o
r
e
a
c
h
y
e
a
r
e
n
r
o
l
l
e
d
,
a
n
d
Wi
l
l
b
e
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
a
t
a
l
l
l
e
v
e
l
s
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
As
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
i
s
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
n
a
r
r
a
ti
v
e
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
’
s
ve
r
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
C
R
R
P
i
s
b
e
i
n
g
m
o
d
e
l
e
d
.
I
f
s
o
,
t
h
e
r
e
In
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
r
e
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
wr
i
t
i
n
g
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
o
f
t
h
e
K
-
1
2
C
R
R
P
.
(
M
i
n
u
t
e
s
f
o
r
re
a
d
i
n
g
/
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
b
l
o
c
k
s
)
.
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
,
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
in
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
r
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
pr
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
a
s
a
l
i
g
n
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
K
-
1
2
C
R
R
P
.
Pg
4
3
Li
s
t
i
n
g
o
f
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
c
o
u
r
s
e
s
i
s
n
o
t
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
,
c
l
e
a
r
o
r
ac
c
u
r
a
t
e
.
(
e.
g
.
,
A
l
g
e
b
r
a
,
I
B
,
G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
,
C
h
e
m
i
s
t
r
y
(g
r
a
d
e
-
l
e
v
e
l
a
n
d
s
o
m
e
d
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
s
l
i
s
t
e
d
a
r
e
n
o
t
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
)
;
C
h
e
c
k
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
f
o
r
H
i
g
h
Sc
h
o
o
l
s
f
o
r
a
l
l
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
.
[
U
s
e
a
c
t
u
a
l
c
o
u
r
s
e
co
d
e
s
a
n
d
n
u
m
b
e
r
s
f
o
r
b
e
t
t
e
r
c
l
a
r
i
t
y
.
]
Pg
3
7
ES
O
L
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
r
e
n
a
m
e
d
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
l
y
a
t
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
La
n
g
u
a
g
e
L
e
a
r
n
e
r
s
(
E
L
L
)
.
Ne
e
d
i
n
c
l
u
s
i
o
n
o
f
f
u
t
u
r
e
S
u
n
s
h
i
n
e
S
t
a
t
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
(M
a
t
h
,
L
a
n
g
A
r
t
s
,
S
c
i
e
n
c
e
)
…
”
20
0
7
N
e
x
t
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Su
n
s
h
i
n
e
S
t
a
t
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
”
Th
i
s
se
c
t
i
o
n
No
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
h
o
w
t
h
e
c
u
r
r
i
c
u
l
u
m
i
s
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
-
ba
s
e
d
.
M
e
n
t
i
o
n
o
f
S
S
S
a
n
d
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
w
e
b
s
i
t
e
s
i
s
no
t
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
o
f
a
r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
-
b
a
s
e
d
c
u
r
r
i
c
u
l
u
m
.
Pg
4
6
Ca
n
n
o
t
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
t
h
e
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
o
n
p
a
g
e
4
6
t
o
t
h
e
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
D
e
s
i
g
n
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
Pg
4
6
No
m
e
n
t
i
o
n
o
f
S
P
E
D
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
e
n
g
a
g
e
d
i
n
cu
r
r
i
c
u
l
u
m
i
n
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
r
e
l
a
t
e
d
–
“
E
x
p
l
a
i
n
h
o
w
ex
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
…
e
n
g
a
g
e
d
i
n
a
n
d
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
f
r
o
m
…”
.
Pg
4
6
Ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
o
f
C
u
r
r
i
c
u
l
u
m
i
s
n
o
t
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
l
l
y
ad
d
r
e
s
s
e
d
.
H
a
v
e
n
o
t
a
n
s
w
e
r
e
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
ye
a
r
’
s
w
o
r
t
h
o
f
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
.
Pg
4
7
Ma
t
h
e
m
a
t
i
c
s
s
t
r
a
n
d
s
n
o
t
r
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
d
c
o
r
r
e
c
t
l
y
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
mo
s
t
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
Pg
3
5
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
72
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
6
5.
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
,
As
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
Th
e
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
,
A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
fi
n
e
w
h
a
t
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
a
t
t
e
n
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
s
h
o
u
l
d
k
n
o
w
a
n
d
b
e
a
b
l
e
t
o
d
o
a
n
d
r
e
f
l
e
c
t
h
o
w
t
h
e
a
c
a
d
e
m
i
c
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
o
f
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
,
co
h
o
r
t
s
o
v
e
r
t
i
m
e
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
a
s
a
w
h
o
l
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
d
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
6
)
(
a
)
(
3
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
3
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
4
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
5
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
Me
a
s
u
r
a
b
l
e
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
g
o
a
l
s
a
n
d
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
t
h
a
t
s
e
t
h
i
g
h
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
f
o
r
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
.
Pr
o
m
o
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
g
r
a
d
u
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
h
i
g
h
e
x
p
e
c
t
a
ti
o
n
s
a
n
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
c
l
e
a
r
c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
f
o
r
p
r
o
m
o
t
i
o
n
f
r
o
m
o
n
e
l
e
v
e
l
to
t
h
e
n
e
x
t
,
a
n
d
f
o
r
g
r
a
d
u
a
t
i
o
n
.
Ev
i
d
e
n
c
e
t
h
a
t
a
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
v
a
l
i
d
a
n
d
r
e
l
i
a
b
l
e
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
u
s
e
d
t
o
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
.
An
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
p
l
a
n
t
h
a
t
i
s
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
l
y
f
r
e
q
u
e
n
t
a
n
d
d
e
t
a
i
l
e
d
to
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
m
a
k
i
n
g
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
.
Ev
i
d
e
n
c
e
t
h
a
t
d
a
t
a
w
i
l
l
i
n
f
o
r
m
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
s
a
b
o
u
t
a
d
j
u
s
t
m
e
n
t
s
t
o
t
h
e
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
Pl
a
n
s
f
o
r
s
h
a
r
i
n
g
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
k
e
e
p
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
p
a
r
e
n
t
s
w
e
l
l
i
n
f
o
r
m
e
d
o
f
t
h
e
i
r
a
c
a
d
e
m
i
c
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
72
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
73
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
7
6.
E
x
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
St
u
d
e
n
t
s
Th
e
E
x
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
St
u
d
e
n
t
s
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
sh
o
u
l
d
d
e
m
o
n
s
t
r
a
t
e
an
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
o
f
th
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
o
f
th
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
t
o
s
e
r
v
e
al
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
a
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
pl
a
n
f
o
r
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
br
o
a
d
s
p
e
c
t
r
u
m
o
f
ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
n
e
e
d
s
an
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
a
l
l
st
u
d
e
n
t
s
w
i
t
h
a
qu
a
l
i
t
y
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
1
6
)
(
a
)
(
3
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
Cr
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
me
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
wi
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
De
m
o
n
s
t
r
a
t
ed
un
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
ng
o
f
s
t
a
t
e
an
d
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
re
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
e
x
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
.
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
In
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
e
x
p
e
c
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
e
d
,
mo
r
e
f
o
c
u
s
o
n
w
h
o
l
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
.
(
Me
a
s
u
r
a
b
l
e
ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
)
Pg
4
8
-
4
9
Ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
f
o
c
u
s
e
d
a
t
e
v
e
r
y
g
r
a
d
e
l
e
v
e
l
f
o
r
ev
e
r
y
y
e
a
r
.
F
o
c
u
s
i
s
F
C
A
T
o
n
l
y
w
h
i
c
h
w
i
l
l
n
o
t
pr
o
v
i
d
e
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
d
a
t
a
t
o
a
s
s
e
s
s
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
i
o
n
i
n
ot
h
e
r
c
o
n
t
e
n
t
a
r
e
a
s
&
a
c
a
d
e
m
i
c
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
.
Pg
4
8
-
4
9
(C
h
a
r
t
)
I
n
S
c
i
e
n
c
e
,
F
C
A
T
n
o
t
m
e
n
t
i
o
n
e
d
.
Pg
5
1
Ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
–
n
o
m
e
n
t
i
o
n
o
f
m
e
t
h
o
d
s
o
f
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
us
e
d
.
(
E
x
a
m
p
l
e
,
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
6
)
(
c
)
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
c
o
m
p
a
r
a
b
l
e
st
u
d
e
n
t
p
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
)
Pg
5
2
Ho
w
a
r
e
t
h
e
b
a
s
e
l
i
n
e
g
o
i
n
g
t
o
b
e
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
a
n
d
ex
a
c
t
l
y
h
o
w
t
h
i
s
d
a
t
a
w
i
l
l
b
e
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
d
?
Pg
5
2
Wh
a
t
i
s
t
h
e
“
b
a
s
e
l
i
n
e
d
a
t
a
a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
”
.
N
o
t
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
.
Pg
5
3
In
s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
a
s
t
o
h
o
w
t
h
e
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
o
l
s
(a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
s
)
w
i
l
l
b
e
u
s
e
d
t
o
i
n
f
o
r
m
i
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
…
wh
e
r
e
d
o
y
o
u
g
o
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
d
a
t
a
.
T
h
e
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
i
s
ve
r
y
v
a
g
u
e
.
Pg
5
3
Th
e
d
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
h
o
w
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
pe
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
w
i
l
l
b
e
s
h
a
r
e
d
i
s
n
o
t
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
…
r
e
a
l
l
y
ne
e
d
t
o
k
n
o
w
“
h
o
w
”
–
t
h
e
t
r
u
e
l
o
g
i
s
t
i
c
s
o
f
t
h
e
pr
o
c
e
s
s
.
Pg
5
3
FC
A
T
N
R
T
n
o
l
o
n
g
e
r
e
x
i
s
t
s
,
t
h
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
;
t
h
i
s
i
s
n
o
t
a
va
l
i
d
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
t
h
a
t
m
a
y
b
e
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
d
.
Pg
5
0
-
5
2
Gr
a
d
u
a
t
i
o
n
–
S
t
a
t
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
t
o
b
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
e
d
a
r
e
n
o
t
cl
e
a
r
i
n
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
i
n
c
o
m
i
n
g
9
th
g
r
a
d
e
r
s
i
n
2
0
0
7
-
20
0
8
.
Pg
4
9
A
c
o
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
t
o
s
e
r
v
i
n
g
t
h
e
f
u
l
l
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
n
e
e
d
s
o
f
e
x
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
.
So
u
n
d
p
l
a
n
s
f
o
r
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
n
g
e
x
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
t
h
a
t
r
e
f
l
e
c
t
t
h
e
f
u
ll
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
a
n
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
l
l
s
t
u
de
n
t
s
w
i
t
h
a
h
i
g
h
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
De
m
o
n
s
t
r
a
t
e
d
c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
t
o
m
e
e
t
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
o
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
t
e
a
n
d
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
l
a
w
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
e
x
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
t
u
d
e
nt
s
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
74
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
8
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Un
d
e
r
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
…
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
d
b
u
t
u
n
c
l
e
a
r
a
s
t
o
me
a
n
i
n
g
.
Pg
5
9
La
c
k
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
f
o
c
u
s
o
n
g
i
f
t
e
d
i
n
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
t
t
a
l
k
s
sc
h
o
o
l
’
s
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
.
Pg
6
1
Fu
r
t
h
e
r
e
x
p
l
a
i
n
h
o
w
a
n
c
i
l
l
a
r
y
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
w
h
o
w
i
l
l
b
e
a
r
t
h
e
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
c
o
s
t
.
Pg
5
8
7.
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
L
e
a
r
n
e
r
s
(
E
L
L
)
Th
e
E
x
c
e
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
m
o
n
s
t
r
a
t
e
a
n
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
in
g
o
f
t
h
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
t
o
s
e
r
v
e
a
l
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
a
nd
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
c
o
n
c
r
e
t
e
p
l
a
n
f
o
r
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
b
r
o
a
d
s
p
e
c
t
r
u
m
o
f
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
n
e
e
d
s
an
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
a
l
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
w
i
t
h
a
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
1
6
)
(
a
)
(
3
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
De
m
o
n
s
t
r
a
t
e
d
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
o
f
s
t
a
t
e
a
n
d
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
l
e
a
r
n
e
r
s
.
A
c
o
m
m
i
t
m
e
n
t
t
o
s
e
r
v
i
n
g
t
h
e
n
e
e
d
s
o
f
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
l
e
a
r
n
e
r
s
.
So
u
n
d
p
l
a
n
s
f
o
r
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
n
g
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
l
e
a
r
n
e
r
s
t
h
a
t
r
e
f
l
e
c
t
t
h
e
f
u
l
l
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
a
n
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
l
l
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
w
i
t
h
a
h
i
g
h
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
De
m
o
n
s
t
r
a
t
e
d
c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
t
o
m
e
e
t
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
o
b
l
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
te
a
n
d
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
l
a
w
r
e
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
l
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
le
a
r
n
e
r
s
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
CE
L
L
A
n
o
t
m
e
n
t
i
o
n
e
d
Pg
6
3
La
c
k
s
sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
f
o
c
u
s
o
n
g
i
f
t
e
d
a
s
i
t
r
e
l
a
t
e
s
t
o
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
.
(
T
i
e
s
b
a
c
k
t
o
m
e
a
s
u
r
a
b
l
e
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
a
n
d
ex
p
e
c
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
)
Pg
6
3
8.
S
c
h
o
o
l
C
l
i
m
a
t
e
a
n
d
D
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
e
Th
e
S
c
h
o
o
l
C
l
i
m
a
t
e
a
n
d
D
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
e
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
t
h
e
l
e
a
r
ni
n
g
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
a
n
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
sc
h
o
o
l
w
i
l
l
e
n
s
u
r
e
a
s
a
f
e
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
c
o
n
d
u
c
i
v
e
t
o
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
7
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
1
1
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
9
)
(
n
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
A
s
c
h
o
o
l
c
a
l
e
n
d
a
r
a
n
d
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
t
h
a
t
m
ee
t
s
t
h
e
m
i
n
i
m
u
m
s
t
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
74
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
75
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
9
An
a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
t
o
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
d
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
e
t
h
a
t
c
r
e
a
t
e
s
a
n
d
su
s
t
a
i
n
s
a
s
a
f
e
a
n
d
o
r
d
e
r
l
y
l
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
.
Le
g
a
l
l
y
s
o
u
n
d
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
f
o
r
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
d
i
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
e
,
s
u
s
p
e
n
s
i
o
n
,
d
i
s
m
i
s
s
a
l
a
n
d
r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
e
x
p
u
l
s
i
o
n
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ex
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
d
a
i
l
y
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
i
s
t
o
o
v
a
g
u
e
;
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
,
u
n
a
b
l
e
t
o
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
e
t
h
i
s
e
n
t
i
r
e
se
c
t
i
o
n
.
I
n
c
l
u
d
e
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
m
i
n
u
t
e
s
o
f
in
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
.
Pg
6
6
Me
n
t
i
o
n
o
f
d
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
t
h
e
C
o
d
e
o
f
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
a
n
d
di
s
c
i
p
l
i
n
e
p
l
a
n
s
;
h
o
w
e
v
e
r
,
t
h
e
s
e
d
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
cl
e
a
r
l
y
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
t
e
d
a
n
d
m
u
s
t
b
e
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
i
n
t
h
i
s
pr
o
p
o
s
a
l
f
o
r
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
o
r
t
h
e
r
e
n
e
e
d
s
t
o
b
e
s
o
m
e
pr
o
c
e
s
s
t
o
e
n
s
u
r
e
t
h
e
S
p
o
n
s
o
r
a
n
d
c
o
n
f
i
r
m
co
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
l
a
w
p
r
i
o
r
t
o
a
d
o
p
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
Pg
6
9
II
.
O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
P
l
a
n
Th
e
O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
P
l
a
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
n
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
o
f
h
o
w
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
w
i
l
l
b
e
g
o
v
e
r
n
e
d
a
n
d
m
a
n
a
g
e
d
.
I
t
s
h
o
u
l
d
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
c
l
ea
r
p
i
c
t
u
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
g
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
ce
a
n
d
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
,
w
h
a
t
re
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
g
r
o
u
p
s
a
n
d
p
e
o
p
l
e
w
i
l
l
h
a
v
e
an
d
h
o
w
t
h
o
s
e
g
r
o
u
p
s
w
i
l
l
r
e
l
a
t
e
t
o
o
n
e
a
n
o
t
h
e
r
.
9.
G
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e
Th
e
G
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
h
o
w
t
h
e
p
o
l
i
c
y
-
m
a
k
i
n
g
a
n
d
o
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
f
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
w
i
l
l
b
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
d
a
n
d
o
p
e
r
a
t
e.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
1
5
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
1
6
)
(
5
)
(
b
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
Do
c
u
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
p
r
o
p
e
r
l
e
g
a
l
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
g
o
v
e
r
n
i
n
g
b
o
a
r
d
.
Ad
e
q
u
a
t
e
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
a
n
d
p
r
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
s
f
o
r
b
o
a
r
d
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
.
Ev
i
d
e
n
c
e
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
g
o
v
e
r
n
i
n
g
b
o
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
c
o
n
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
t
o
t
h
e
wi
d
e
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
a
n
d
s
k
i
l
l
n
e
e
d
e
d
t
o
o
v
e
r
s
e
e
a
c
h
a
r
t
e
r
s
c
h
o
o
l
.
A
c
l
e
a
r
,
s
e
n
s
i
b
l
e
d
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
r
o
l
e
s
a
n
d
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
i
n
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
g
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e
a
n
d
s
c
h
o
o
l
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
.
A
p
l
a
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
m
e
a
n
i
n
g
f
u
l
i
n
v
o
l
v
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
p
a
r
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
i
n
t
h
e
g
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
76
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
1
0
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Or
g
.
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
n
o
t
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
.
W
a
i
t
i
n
g
f
o
r
e
x
e
c
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
th
e
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
i
s
n
o
t
a
c
c
e
p
t
a
b
l
e
f
o
r
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
as
t
h
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
i
m
p
a
c
t
s
m
a
n
y
o
f
t
h
e
r
e
v
i
e
w
c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
ab
o
v
e
(
e.
g
.
,
b
o
a
r
d
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
&
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
,
p
o
w
e
r
,
re
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
,
d
u
t
i
e
s
)
P
e
r
h
a
p
s
,
e
a
c
h
s
c
e
n
a
r
i
o
c
a
n
b
e
ex
p
l
a
i
n
e
d
a
n
d
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
a
c
c
o
r
d
i
n
g
l
y
.
(
m
a
n
y
c
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
i
n
g
st
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
s
p
e
r
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
t
o
t
h
i
s
m
a
t
t
e
r
)
Pg
7
3
Cl
a
r
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
e
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
o
f
a
c
t
u
a
l
i
n
p
u
t
f
r
o
m
p
a
r
e
n
t
s
an
d
i
n
p
u
t
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
s
m
s
t
h
a
t
m
i
g
h
t
d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y
i
m
p
a
c
t
go
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e
i
n
a
t
i
m
e
l
y
m
a
n
n
e
r
.
Pg
7
8
No
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
s
t
o
p
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
i
n
t
h
e
g
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e
o
f
s
c
h
o
o
l
.
Pg
7
8
10
.
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Th
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
h
o
w
t
h
e
d
a
y
-
t
o
-
d
a
y
a
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
ol
’
s
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
d
a
n
d
f
u
l
f
il
l
e
d
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
9
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
1
4
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
A
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
t
h
a
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
c
l
e
a
r
d
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
ro
l
e
s
a
n
d
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
f
o
r
a
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
e
r
i
n
g
t
h
e
d
a
y
-
t
o
-
d
a
y
a
c
t
i
v
it
i
e
s
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
.
A
s
o
u
n
d
p
l
a
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
r
e
c
r
u
i
t
m
e
n
t
,
s
e
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
l
e
a
d
e
r
.
A
v
i
a
b
l
e
a
n
d
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
s
t
a
f
f
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
.
A
s
o
u
n
d
p
l
a
n
f
o
r
r
e
c
r
u
i
t
i
n
g
a
n
d
r
et
a
i
n
i
n
g
q
u
a
l
i
f
i
e
d
a
n
d
c
a
p
a
b
l
e
s
t
a
f
f
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
76
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
77
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
1
1
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
11
.
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
s
Th
e
t
e
r
m
“
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
”
(
E
S
P
)
r
e
f
e
r
s
t
o
a
n
y
n
u
m
b
e
r
of
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
h
a
t
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
w
i
th
t
h
e
g
o
v
e
r
n
i
n
g
b
o
a
r
d
o
f
a
s
ch
o
o
l
t
o
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
.
T
h
e
t
h
r
e
e
m
a
j
o
r
t
y
p
e
s
o
f
E
S
P
s
t
h
a
t
se
r
v
e
c
h
a
r
t
e
r
s
c
h
o
o
l
s
a
r
e
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
,
c
o
m
p
re
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
s
,
a
n
d
v
i
r
t
u
a
l
s
c
h
o
o
l
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
en
t
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
T
h
e
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
S
e
r
v
i
ce
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
,
i
f
ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
,
t
h
e
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
u
a
l
a
r
r
a
n
g
e
m
e
n
t
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
g
o
v
e
r
n
i
n
g
b
o
a
r
d
a
n
d
s
u
c
h
a
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
9
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
A
p
e
r
s
u
a
s
i
v
e
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
r
e
a
s
o
n
s
f
o
r
c
on
t
r
a
c
t
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
a
n
e
d
u
c
at
i
o
n
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
.
A
p
e
r
s
u
a
s
i
v
e
e
x
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
ed
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
E
S
P
w
i
l
l
f
u
r
t
he
r
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
A
c
l
e
a
r
d
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
t
o
b
e
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
E
S
P
A
c
l
e
a
r
d
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
r
o
l
e
s
a
n
d
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
be
t
w
e
e
n
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
g
o
v
e
r
n
i
n
g
b
o
a
r
d
a
n
d
t
h
e
E
S
P
.
A
c
l
e
a
r
l
y
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
-
b
a
s
e
d
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
be
t
w
e
e
n
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
g
o
v
e
r
n
i
n
g
b
o
a
r
d
a
n
d
t
h
e
E
S
P
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
12
.
E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
Th
e
E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
f
i
n
e
t
h
e
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
a
n
d
p
r
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
s
t
h
a
t
f
r
a
m
e
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
w
i
t
h
i
t
s
s
t
a
f
f
.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
78
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
1
2
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
1
4
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
1
2
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
A
c
o
m
p
e
n
s
a
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
a
t
t
r
ac
t
a
n
d
r
e
t
a
i
n
q
u
a
l
i
t
y
s
t
a
f
f
.
Po
l
i
c
i
e
s
a
n
d
p
r
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
s
t
h
a
t
h
o
l
d
s
t
a
f
f
t
o
h
i
g
h
p
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
13
.
P
a
r
e
n
t
a
n
d
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
a
n
d
P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
s
Th
e
P
a
r
e
n
t
a
n
d
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
a
n
d
P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
s
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
de
s
c
r
i
b
e
h
o
w
p
a
r
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
w
i
l
l
b
e
e
n
g
a
g
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
.
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
Me
a
n
i
n
g
f
u
l
p
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
s
w
i
t
h
p
a
r
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
t
h
e
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
t
h
a
t
f
u
r
t
h
e
r
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
a
n
d
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
s
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
78
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
79
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
1
3
14
.
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
E
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
Th
e
S
t
u
d
e
n
t
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
E
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
h
o
w
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
w
i
l
l
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
a
n
d
e
n
r
o
l
l
i
t
s
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
b
o
d
y
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
7
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.3
3
.
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
8
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
1
0
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
A
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
r
e
c
r
u
i
t
m
e
n
t
p
l
a
n
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
e
n
a
b
l
e
th
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
t
o
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
i
t
s
t
a
r
g
e
t
e
d
p
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
An
e
n
r
o
l
l
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
a
d
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
t
h
a
t
i
s
o
p
e
n
,
f
a
i
r
a
n
d
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
l
a
w
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Re
f
e
r
t
o
t
h
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
t
o
n
a
d
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
m
a
d
e
i
n
t
h
e
St
u
d
e
n
t
T
a
r
g
e
t
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
Pg
9
2
II
I
.
B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
P
l
a
n
Th
e
B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
P
l
a
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
n
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
o
f
h
o
w
t
h
e
c
h
a
r
te
r
o
p
e
r
a
t
o
r
s
i
n
t
e
n
d
t
o
m
a
n
a
g
e
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
f
i
n
a
n
c
e
s
.
I
t
s
h
o
u
ld
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
c
l
e
a
r
p
i
c
t
u
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
v
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
so
u
n
d
n
e
s
s
o
f
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
;
e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
;
a
n
d
ho
w
w
e
l
l
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
b
u
d
g
e
t
a
l
i
g
ns
w
i
t
h
a
n
d
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
s
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
.
15
.
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
Th
e
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
n
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
ho
o
l
’
s
a
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
n
e
e
d
s
a
n
d
h
o
w
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
p
l
a
n
s
t
o
m
e
e
t
t
h
o
s
e
n
e
e
d
s
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
1
3
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
1
8
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
A
r
e
a
l
i
s
t
i
c
p
l
a
n
f
o
r
s
e
c
u
r
i
n
g
a
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
t
h
a
t
i
s
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
te
a
n
d
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
a
n
d
t
a
r
g
e
t
e
d
p
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
80
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
1
4
Ev
i
d
e
n
c
e
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
h
a
s
a
c
c
e
s
s
t
o
t
h
e
n
e
c
e
ss
a
r
y
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
t
o
f
u
n
d
t
h
e
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
p
l
a
n
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Th
e
r
e
e
x
i
s
t
s
n
o
r
e
a
l
i
s
t
i
c
p
l
a
n
f
o
r
s
e
c
u
r
i
n
g
a
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
t
h
a
t
is
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
a
n
d
a
d
e
q
u
a
t
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
an
d
t
a
r
g
e
t
e
d
p
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
T
h
o
u
g
h
a
n
a
c
t
u
a
l
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
ne
e
d
n
o
t
b
e
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
,
t
h
e
r
e
s
h
o
u
l
d
b
e
s
o
m
e
kn
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
o
f
t
h
e
t
y
p
e
o
f
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
as
w
e
l
l
a
s
t
h
e
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
e
s
t
o
s
e
c
u
r
e
t
h
e
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
i
n
a
ti
m
e
l
y
f
a
s
h
i
o
n
f
o
r
b
o
t
h
a
p
e
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
o
r
t
e
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
Pg
9
7
-
9
8
16
.
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
F
o
o
d
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
Th
e
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
F
o
o
d
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
h
o
w
th
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
w
i
l
l
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
t
h
e
s
e
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
f
o
r
i
t
s
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
b
o
d
y
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
2
0
)
(
a
)
(
1
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
A
t
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
s
e
r
v
e
a
l
l
e
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
.
A
f
o
o
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
p
l
a
n
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
s
e
r
v
e
a
l
l
e
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
No
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
a
s
t
o
h
e
a
l
t
h
d
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
re
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
f
o
o
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
st
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
.
Pg
9
9
No
t
p
r
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
f
o
o
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
,
e
v
e
n
f
o
r
n
o
n
F
R
L
e
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
st
u
d
e
n
t
s
,
i
s
n
o
t
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
b
l
e
u
n
d
e
r
t
h
e
l
a
w
a
n
d
m
a
y
b
e
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
a
d
i
s
c
r
i
m
i
n
a
t
o
r
y
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
e
.
Pg
9
9
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
80
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
81
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
1
5
Fr
e
e
a
n
d
R
e
d
u
c
e
d
L
u
n
c
h
P
l
a
n
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
n
o
t
d
e
f
i
n
e
d
,
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
.
Pg
9
9
La
c
k
o
f
n
e
i
t
h
e
r
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
a
s
t
o
w
h
a
t
i
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
b
y
la
w
(
e
.
g
.
,
r
e
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
e
d
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
)
n
o
r
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
o
f
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
o
r
q
u
a
l
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
o
f
t
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
pr
o
v
i
d
e
r
s
.
Pg
9
9
No
c
o
n
t
i
n
g
e
n
c
y
i
n
t
h
e
b
u
d
g
e
t
t
o
m
e
e
t
t
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
ne
e
d
s
.
Bu
d
g
e
t
17
.
Bu
d
g
e
t
Th
e
B
u
d
g
e
t
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
on
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
o
v
e
r
t
h
e
t
e
r
m
o
f
i
t
s
c
h
a
r
t
e
r
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
6
)
(
a
)
(
5
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
6
)
(
b
)
(
2
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
Bu
d
g
e
t
a
r
y
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
w
h
i
c
h
a
r
e
c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
w
i
t
h
a
l
l
p
a
r
t
s
o
f
t
h
e
ap
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
,
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
,
e
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
p
r
o
g
r
am
,
s
t
a
f
f
i
n
g
p
l
a
n
a
n
d
f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
.
A
r
e
a
l
i
s
t
i
c
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
s
o
u
r
ce
s
o
f
r
e
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
e
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
t
h
a
t
e
n
s
u
r
e
t
h
e
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
v
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Th
e
b
u
d
g
e
t
n
a
r
r
a
t
i
v
e
h
a
s
n
o
t
b
e
e
n
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
;
t
h
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
,
a
r
e
a
l
i
s
t
i
c
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
e
d
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
o
f
re
v
e
n
u
e
a
n
d
e
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
t
h
a
t
e
n
s
u
r
e
t
h
e
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
v
i
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
of
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
c
a
n
n
o
t
b
e
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
.
T
h
e
n
a
r
r
a
t
i
v
e
i
s
ne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
t
o
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
a
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s
m
a
d
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
o
f
e
a
c
h
l
i
n
e
i
t
e
m
(
e
.
g
.
,
b
a
s
i
s
f
o
r
f
r
i
n
g
e
be
n
e
f
i
t
s
(
%
&
/
o
r
b
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
)
,
q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y
/
t
y
p
e
o
f
bo
o
k
s
)
Bu
d
g
e
t
Sp
e
n
d
i
n
g
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
s
u
c
c
i
n
c
t
,
t
o
o
v
a
g
u
e
.
Pg
1
0
1
Th
e
r
e
a
r
e
n
o
c
a
s
h
f
l
o
w
s
t
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
18
.
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
Th
e
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
s
i
g
h
t
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
ho
w
t
h
e
s
c
h
o
o
l
’
s
f
i
n
a
n
c
e
s
w
i
l
l
b
e
m
a
n
a
g
e
d
a
n
d
w
h
o
w
i
l
l
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
si
b
l
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
a
n
d
f
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l
r
e
c
o
r
d
s
.
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
82
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
1
6
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
6
)
(
a
)
(
5
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7)
(
a
)
(
9
)
;
s
.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
1
1
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
:
A
f
i
s
c
a
l
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
y
s
t
e
m
t
h
a
t
i
s
a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
f
o
l
l
o
w
s
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
a
c
c
e
p
t
e
d
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
p
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
a
n
d
p
r
o
p
e
r
l
y
s
a
f
e
g
u
a
r
d
s
a
s
s
e
t
s
.
Ev
i
d
e
n
c
e
o
f
p
r
o
p
e
r
i
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
c
o
v
e
r
a
g
e
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Re
m
o
v
e
I
n
d
e
m
n
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
Pg
1
1
1
19
.
A
c
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Th
e
A
c
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
s
h
o
u
l
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
c
l
e
a
r
r
o
a
d
ma
p
o
f
t
h
e
s
t
e
p
s
a
n
d
s
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
b
e
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
d
t
o
p
r
e
p
a
r
e
t
o
b
e
r
e
a
d
y
o
n
t
h
e
fi
r
s
t
d
a
y
o
f
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
t
o
s
e
r
v
e
i
t
s
s
t
u
d
e
n
t
s
w
e
l
l
.
St
a
t
u
t
o
r
y
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(
s
)
:
s.
1
0
0
2
.
3
3
(
7
)
(
a
)
(
1
6
)
Ev
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
:
A
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
t
h
a
t
m
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
w
i
l
l
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
n
a
c
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
t
h
a
t
:
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
t
h
o
u
g
h
t
f
u
l
a
n
d
r
e
a
l
i
s
t
i
c
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
p
l
a
n
t
h
a
t
c
o
ve
r
m
a
j
o
r
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
t
e
m
s
a
n
d
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s
f
l
e
x
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
f
o
r
a
d
d
r
e
s
s
i
n
g
u
n
a
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
e
v
e
n
t
s
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
82
Fielding Nair International Feasibility Report for Key Biscayne Charter High School
83
Ch
a
r
t
e
r
S
c
h
o
o
l
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
I
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
Na
m
e
o
f
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
:
KE
Y
B
I
S
C
A
Y
N
E
C
H
A
R
T
E
R
H
I
G
H
S
C
H
O
O
L
MI
A
M
I
-
D
A
D
E
C
O
U
N
T
Y
P
U
B
L
I
C
S
C
H
O
O
L
S
Pa
g
e
1
7
IV
.
S
t
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
A
s
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
s
Th
e
S
t
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
A
s
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
s
m
u
s
t
b
e
s
i
g
n
e
d
b
y
a
d
u
l
y
a
u
t
h
o
r
i
z
e
d
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e
o
f
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
g
r
o
u
p
a
n
d
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
a
p
pl
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
Me
e
t
s
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
M
e
e
t
s
t
h
e
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
Do
e
s
N
o
t
M
e
e
t
t
h
e
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
St
r
e
n
g
t
h
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
’
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
(n
e
w
p
a
g
e
#
)
Sa
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
S
)
Un
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y
(
U
)
(T
o
b
e
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
b
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
)
Co
n
c
e
r
n
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
Q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e