NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING of the

Board of Directors of

Doral Academy of Nevada

Notice is hereby given that the Board of Directors of Doral Academy of Nevada, a public

charter school, will conduct a public meeting on November 18, 2015, beginning at 5:30

p.m. at 9625 W. Saddle Ave., Las Vegas, Nevada 89147. The public is invited to attend.

Attached hereto is an agenda of all items scheduled to be considered. Unless otherwise

stated, items may be taken out of the order presented on the agenda at the discretion of the

Chairperson.

Reasonable efforts will be made to assist and accommodate physically handicapped

persons desiring to attend or participate at the meeting. Any persons requiring assistance

may call Kimberly Ballou at (702) 431-6260 in advance so that arrangements may be

conveniently made.

Public comment may be limited to three minutes per person at the discretion of the

Chairperson.

1

AGENDA November 18, 2015 Meeting of the Board of Directors of

Doral Academy of Nevada (Action may be taken on those items denoted “For Possible Action”)

1. Call to order and roll call. (For Possible Action).

2. Public Comment and Discussion. (No action may be taken on a matter raised under this item of the agenda until the matter itself has been specifically included on an

agenda as an item upon which action will be taken.)

3. Review and Approval of Minutes from the September 10, 2015, September 23, 2015 and October 28, 2015 Board Meetings. (For Possible Action.)

4. Review of Schools Financial Performance. (For Discussion.)

5. Review and Approval of the 2014/2015 School Year Financial Audit. (For Possible Action.)

6. Review and Approval of Teacher and Staff Holiday Bonuses. (For Possible Action.)

7. Review and Acceptance of Grant Funding (Title II and Great Teaching & Leading). (For Possible Acton.)

8. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Kindergarten Enrollment Plans for the 2016/2017 School Year. (For Possible Action.)

9. Update and Report on Academica Nevada Staffing and Support Services. (For Discussion.)

10. Executive Director and Principal Reports. (For Discussion.)

11. Public Comments and Discussion. (For Discussion)

12. Adjournment. (For Possible Action).

2

This notice and agenda has been posted on or before 9 a.m. on the third working day before

the meeting at the following locations:

(1) Doral Academy-Saddle – 9625 West Saddle Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada. (2) Doral Academy-Cactus – 9025 W. Cactus Ave., Las Vegas, Nevada.

(3) Doral Academy-Fire Mesa – 2568 Fire Mesa Street, Las Vegas, Nevada. (4) Grant Sawyer Building – 555 E. Washington Ave., Las Vegas, Nevada. (5) Henderson City Hall – 240 South Water Street, Henderson, Nevada. (6) Las Vegas City Hall – 495 S. Main St., Las Vegas, Nevada. (7) Academica Nevada – 1378 Paseo Verde Parkway, Suite 200, Henderson, Nevada

3

DORAL ACADEMY OF NEVADA

Supporting Document

Meeting Date: November 18, 2015 Agenda Item: 3 – Review and Approval of Minutes from the September 10, 2015, September 23, 2015 and October 28, 2015 Board Meetings. Number of Enclosures: 3

SUBJECT: Review and Approval of Minutes from the September 10, 2015, September 23, 2015 and October 28, 2015 Board Meetings. X Action Appointments Approval Consent Agenda Information Public Hearing Regular Adoption

Presenter (s): Board Recommendation: Proposed wording for motion/action: Motion to approve the minutes from the September 10, 2015, September 28, 2015 and October 28, 2015 Board meetings. Fiscal Impact: N/A Estimated Length of time for consideration (in minutes): 2-5 Minutes Background: The Board of Directors for Doral Academy of Nevada held meetings on September 10, 2015, September 23, 2015 and October 28, 2015. As such, the minutes from these meetings will need to be approved by the Board. Submitted By: Staff

4

MINUTES of the meeting of the

BOARD OF DIRECTORS of DORAL ACADEMY OF NEVADA September 10, 2015

The Board of Directors of Doral Academy of Nevada held a public telephonic meeting on September 10, 2015 at 10:30 a.m.

1. Call to Order, roll call.

Board Chairperson Boone Cragun called the meeting to order at 10:31 a.m. Present were Board Members Boone Cragun, Karla Zobrist, Jerrod Allen, Ed Koijane, and John McClain.

Board Members Andre Winslow and Erin Bedich were not present.

Also present were Executive Director Bridget Phillips and Academica Nevada representative Trevor Goodsell

2. Public Comment and Discussion.

None.

3. Review and Approval of Submission of Read by 3 Grant.

Ms. Bridget Phillips addressed the Board and stated that they had the opportunity to apply for the Read by 3 grant, adding that in August they had received the guidelines that the legislature put in place for K-3 students and that they are quite stringent. Ms. Phillips stated that she shared these guidelines with the principals and Judy Piccininni, who noted that it would be a full time job in itself to facilitate the new guidelines, adding that the Department of Education realized that, and the result was this grant coming available. Ms. Phillips explained that they would actually write the grant application for two literacy specialists, and an instructional assistant at each campus who would focus on the third grade intervention piece, noting that the demands for common core are such that the students are not just proficient, but highly proficient. Ms. Phillips stated that the grant does also call for some stipends, limited sub time for kindergarten (one half day per month), some tutorial summer school materials, and some software, which is estimated at about $300,000.00. Ms. Phillips explained that although this was the first year they could apply, they could additionally apply for the following three years after as well.

Ms. Phillips stated that they would like to move forward with what could be a great support to the schools, adding that she appreciated that Academica had offered the aid of Colin Seale, who helped them really crunch the data. Ms. Phillips stated that the grant talks about meeting the need of the high-end children and sustaining them as well.

Member Zobrist asked for clarification regarding the hiring of a literacy specialist. Ms. Phillips stated that they do have space issues, however, the hope would be to add two literacy specialists or add time to what someone else already does. Member Zobrist asked if the specialists would be available to all campuses, to which Ms. Phillips replied that that would be the plan for the short term, however, in the long run they would like to have a full time specialist at each campus. Member Zobrist asked for verification that they would ask for additional grant money down the road, to which Ms. Phillips replied in the affirmative, stating that they would need to keep clear records and show that there had been success in order to obtain funds from this grant in the future, which Ms. Phillips had no doubt they could accomplish. Member Zobrist asked if they would keep these literacy specialists after the extended three years. Ms. Phillips replied in the affirmative and stated that, with this new legislation,

5

they would eventually need a literacy specialist to keep up with the required guidelines, adding that even if they did not apply for this grant, which would be due on September 22, 2015, they still will be required to send a comprehensive literacy plan for K-3 to the State by December 1, 2015. Member Zobrist stated that she was asking because later on they would need to figure out a budget for a literacy specialist. Ms. Phillips stated that they had been cautious about who they brought on board, adding that with their last grant they were able to hire a science specialist who worked at the curriculum department training all the schools on math and science, however, she is working on her administrative credentials and would eventually like to become an assistant principal, which would allow her to move into that role should there not be funds in the future for her current position. Member Koijane asked if there was anything else needed from the Board in order to make the deadline, to which she stated that they just needed to have approval to proceed. Member Allen asked if there would be any overage or if the grant would cover the entirety, to which Ms. Phillips replied that it would cover the entirety.

Member McClain Moved to Approve the submission of the Read by 3 grant. Member Koijane Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

4. Public Comments and Discussion.

Ms. Phillips stated that there was a special event example calendar that she had sent out, adding that beginning October 1, 2015 they would send out a form to all the principals for them to list special event details for every campus, so that the Board can in turn notify the principal when they will be attending a specific event. Ms. Phillips stated that if there was anything they would like her to add, she would be happy to do so. Member Zobrist asked for clarification that the calendar received was just an example, to which Ms. Phillips replied in the affirmative. Member McClain asked if there was an app or other electronic method that could be used in order to add these events to their calendars. Ms. Phillips replied that they could look into that option. Member McClain stated that if an Apple calendar, Google calendar, or Outlook was being used, they could send it in a way that would allow the Board to download it to their existing calendars. Ms. Phillips stated that they would definitely look into something like that. Member Allen stated that there might be a way for the web site administrators to send it electronically if it is the same calendar from the web site. Ms. Phillips stated that this was a calendar that would be unique to the Board because of the additional details for each event. Member Allen stated that there should be a way for whomever would be dispersing the calendar to attach a link that would be downloadable to the Board’s electronic calendars. Ms. Phillips stated that they would work on that, to which Member Allen stated that he would be happy to show them how to do it if they needed help. Member Cragun stated that he feels strongly that the Board should have a presence at the schools, adding that Ms. Phillips had always been great about introducing Board members at events in the past. Member Cragun stated that the calendar should be especially helpful to those Board members who do not have children at one of the schools and would not have event information otherwise.

5. Adjournment.

Member McClain Moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:48 a.m. Member Allen seconded the Motion, and the meeting adjourned.

Approved on: _____________________ _______________________________ Secretary of the Board of Directors Doral Academy of Nevada.

6

MINUTES of the meeting of the

BOARD OF DIRECTORS of DORAL ACADEMY OF NEVADA September 23, 2015

The Board of Directors of Doral Academy of Nevada held a public meeting on September 23, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. at 2568 Fire Mesa Street, Las Vegas, NV 89128.

1. Call to Order, roll call.

Board Chairperson Boone Cragun called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. Present were Board Members Boone Cragun, Karla Zobrist, Erin Bedich, and Ed Koijane.

Board Members Andre Winslow, Jerrod Allen and John McClain were not present.

Also present were Executive Director Bridget Phillips, Principal Danielle Marshall, Principal Debbie Tomasetti, and Principal Kelly Rafalski, and Academica Nevada representatives Clayton Howell, Ryan Reeves, Trevor Goodsell, Heidi Hermansen, Jake Smoot, and Carlos Segrera.

2. Public Comment and Discussion.

Mr. Justin Mott and Mr. Greg Spears from ABM addressed the Board and stated that they had been working with Mr. Smoot and were back to reintroduce themselves to the Board and restate their interest in the HVAC service contract, adding that they had received contracts for both Somerset and Pinecrest and were anxious to work with another school system in the Academica family.

3. Review and Approval of Minutes from the August 6, 2015 and August 19, 2015 Board Meetings.

Member Zobrist Moved to Approve the minutes from the August 6, 2015 and August 19, 2015 board meetings. Member Bedich Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

4. Review and Approval of the Lease Agreement for Red Rock Campus.

Mr. Clayton Howell addressed the Board and stated that the lease was contained in the support documents, adding that, after reviewing the lease, there were a few things they would like to see changed. Mr. Howell noted that the rent schedule payment seemed a little high given the projected enrollment (especially ninth grade), adding that Mr. Arthur Ziev was reviewing the recommendations made by Academica and would be going back to Turner-Agassi for possible adjustments. Mr. Howell asked that the Board table this agenda item until the necessary changes could be made, which may necessitate a special meeting.

Member Koijane Moved to Table this agenda item. Member Bedich Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Table this item.

5. Review of School’s Financial Performance.

Mr. Carlos Segrera addressed the Board and stated that the Financial Summary as of July 2015 could be found in the support documents on page 143, noting that it was only one month of financial and that there is typically

7

very little activity during July. Mr. Segrera stated that there was a DSA true-up for the 2014/2015 fiscal year of $200,198.00, which was received in September. Mr. Segrera stated that one item not contained in the support documents was the Doral surplus for the last fiscal year which went up to $968,444.00; and that number was submitted to the auditors for audit, which had just begun that week, adding that they anticipated the audit being done by the second or third week of October. Mr. Segrera stated that the per-pupil funding for this coming year remained the same at $6,506.00 per students. Mr. Segrera further stated that they might notice in the surplus breakdowns for each campus that Fire Mesa’s was slightly higher, and that was because they had a break in rent as well as no staff in the building.

Mr. Segrera stated that there were projected deficits for the first month because of the consumables purchases which were, in some cases, $60,000.00 and $70,000.00; this was mostly at Cactus and Saddle as existing schools, and these were renewable consumables and licenses that occur at the first of the year, adding that the budgeted surpluses do increase as the months go on. Mr. Segrera explained that the variance breakdown showed a pending funding confirmation of $18,952.61 for July, adding that SPED funding would be handled differently this year, in that discretionary funding had been paid up front in the past, however, it will be held back along with special education Part B funding until the special education student counts come in. Mr. Segrera stated that there were savings in salaries, benefits, rent, SPED contracted services, curriculum purchases, and janitorial/maintenance, adding that they were over budget in special projects for the kiln room at the Saddle campus, which accounts for the variance in the projected profits and loss versus the actual.

Mr. Segrera noted that all the support materials beyond the first page until page 161 describe how they arrived at the financial summary, and pages 162-163 are the balance sheets which illustrate that, as of July 31, 2015, Doral had slightly over 2 million in cash with a DSA deliverable of about $900,000.00, adding that the largest liability continues to be accrued payroll. Member Koijane asked if the income statement differences between Cactus and Saddle will equalize over time, to which Mr. Segrera stated that they will, noting that a large majority of Fire Mesa’s initial purchases were part of the furniture and fixtures and are accounted for as part of the lease as opposed to cash for Cactus and Saddle.

6. Review and Approval of Revised Enrollment Policy.

Ms. Heidi Hermansen addressed the Board and stated that located in the support materials they could find the revised enrollment policy with the highlighted changes, adding that the first change was previously presented to the Board and it is regarding transfer students and states: In years when Doral Academy opens a new campus; students attending an existing Doral Academy campus will be given first priority of acceptance to the first year of enrollment at the new campus.

Ms. Hermansen stated that the next change to the enrollment timeline was made due to a recent senate bill that was passed stating that open enrollment must last for forty-five days, adding that Academica recommend keeping it open from January until the end of February, especially in light of the fact that the community would already expect it to begin in January, and that Doral would stay in line with the other charters as well.

Ms. Hermansen stated that another change would be in regards to the waitlist, stating that: In order to ensure a current and accurate waitlist, applications do not carry over from school year to school year. Each January the School begins a new open enrollment process. As such, an applicant’s waitlist number assignment will only be valid until the last day of school for the applying year. Ms. Hermansen noted that communication with parents would be key so that there would not be any confusion. Member Zobrist asked if the lottery would be run at the end of the two months, to which Ms. Hermansen replied in the affirmative, adding that those students with a seat will find out right away, and those on the waitlist will receive their waitlist number about three weeks later. Principal Kelly Rafalski addressed the Board and clarified that some students might have two waitlist numbers: one for the current school year and one for the upcoming school year. Member Zobrist stated that in section D3 of the enrollment policy, it states that “priority will be given to the child of a teacher,” noting that it should be changed to “child of an employee,” which had been discussed in a previous board meeting.

8

Ms. Hermansen stated that an additional change would be that once parents of students had been notified of acceptance via email, they would have seventy-two hours to supply their supporting documents (child’s ID, immunization record, proof of address, and parent ID), as well as their online registration packets which would complete their registration. Ms. Hermansen further stated that, once registered, they must begin school the following week.

Ms. Hermansen stated that another requirement as a result of that senate bill requires any new charter school, one that is growing more than 10%, or adding a new grade level to send out mailers to every home within a two mile radius with a school-age children, adding that it must go out at least forty-five days before open enrollment begins. Member Bedich asked if mailers would still need to go out if the lease is not complete, to which Mr. Howell stated that the lease would be ready.

Member Cragun Moved to approve the revised enrollment policy as presented with the wording change in section D3 to indicate an “employee” of the school. Member Koijane Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to approve.

7. Discussion and Action to Approve Grade-Level Enrollment Targets for All Campuses and Initial Enrollment Dates for the 2016/2017 School Year.

Mr. Howell stated that the support documents contained the projected enrollment for the 2016-2017 school year, noting that there would not be much of a change considering that most of the numbers will be natural growth within the system. Mr. Howell stated that there will be some changes to the projections for the Red Rock campus, adding that, to afford the size as well as the lease payment, it was recommended that they open with about 1,100 students at the Red Rock site in order to carry the lease. Mr. Howell explained that originally it was proposed that they begin with 100 per grades K-5, however it will be built to hold 125 in K-5; 150 for grades 6-8; and 900 for grades 9-12 for a total of 2,400 students that will be phased into, adding that where the lease was described as Phase I would carry the student load in the first two years; and that Phase II and Phase III would come on in the years after that. Mr. Howell asked that they look at the projected enrollment for the first year, knowing that they could be subject to change.

Member Cragun asked for clarification that the projected number to open Red Rock was 900, however, they would like to open at 1,110 in order to carry the lease, to which Mr. Howell replied in the affirmative. Member Cragun asked how they suggested accomplishing the increase. Mr. Howell stated that they would increase K-5 to 125 per grade level versus 100; 120 in sixth grade; 90 in seventh grade; 80 in eighth grade, and 90 in ninth grade, adding that the 90 for ninth grade is considering the students who would come from Saddle and possibly some Cactus, however, that number could be increased based upon demand. Member Bedich asked why the number for eighth grade is lower, to which Mr. Howell replied that eighth grade students in a brand new school are typically tough to get, as well as fourth, fifth, and seventh due to the fact that students were usually in their last years at a school they had been attending for a while, adding that wait list numbers for K-6 are typically very strong.

Member Zobrist asked if Red Rock middle school would get priority for the high school and if there would have to be a lottery for the other campuses. Mr. Howell replied that it is their plan to build the high school in such a way that it would accommodate all students from within the system, including those that may want to commute from Cactus, adding that the high school will accommodate 300 students per grade level ensuring that they will not have that issue. Member Zobrist stated that her impression was that Red Rock could fill up rather quickly and there might be an issue. Mr. Howell replied that, as it stands, only 150 per grade level could possibly roll up and that they would be prepared to grow to whatever the demand within the system required, adding that the hope would be that they eventually have a high school in the Cactus area by the time the full 150 are rolling up into the Red Rock campus in ninth grade.

Member Cragun asked Ms. Phillips if a parent survey had gone out to determine the interest level, to which Ms. Phillips replied that they did send them out last year, adding that there had been some discussion regarding

9

middle school recruitment and possible events that could foster enthusiasm and draw students to the school. Assistant Principal Steve Phillips addressed the Board and stated that it is a matter of creating excitement, even bringing in the renderings of the building and allowing students some input on the colors or possibly making the dragon more high schoolish, adding that these things encourage them to buy into it and embrace the school as their own.

Ms. Phillips asked if the transfer of students would happen before open enrollment or if it would be something that would happen around the time of the lottery. Mr. Howell stated that it will be during the same time that they send out recommitments for each school, because current students will not be entering a lottery as they are already enrolled in the system. Member Cragun asked if Mr. Arthur Ziev had gone over the new enrollment numbers, to which Mr. Howell replied in the affirmative, adding that Sky Pointe also opened with 1,100 in its initial year. Mr. Howell further stated that they were building on an expensive piece of land and it had been established that 1,110 is a number they had been working on with Mr. Ziev to alter the rent schedules within the lease. Member Cragun stated that he wanted to make sure they were good there because he knew there were occupancy numbers they had to abide by as well as the size of the classrooms.

Member Koijane asked if the increased class size in fourth and fifth grades would need to continue for the next school year. Ms. Phillips stated that it was their hope that they would revert to the normal class size the following year, noting that most teachers actually prefer twenty-six students per class because it makes cooperative learning easier, however, their goal was to bring it down from twenty-eight. Mr. Howell stated that those class sizes were increased so that the teachers could be compensated for the fine work they are doing, adding that they would most likely phase that increase out over the next couple of years unless there was a significant increase in funding.

Member Bedich Moved to Approve the grade-level enrollment targets and the initial enrollment dates for the 2016/2017 school year as presented. Member Koijane Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

8. Review and Approval of HVAC Service Provider.

Mr. Jake Smoot addressed the Board and apologized for not attending the last board meeting when this item was tabled, adding that they had taken a look at the bids and realized that some of the companies who proposed bids did not have accurate unit counts, and that corrections had been made and proposals had been resubmitted. Mr. Smoot pointed the Board to the summary sheet on page 181 of the support documents where they could find the top three bids, explaining that although Comfort Masters was the lowest bid, they were recommending ABM. Mr. Smoot stated that the reason they were recommending ABM was due to the level and quality of service they would provide over either of the other two companies, and their ability to help reduce costs.

Member Cragun stated that ABM was the low bid for Cactus and asked Mr. Smoot why it was so much higher at the Saddle campus. Mr. Smoot explained that they base the price per unit and Saddle has a lot more units. Member Cragun asked if the numbers in red were the monthly numbers that were budgeted for HVAC service, to which Mr. Smoot replied in the affirmative, and Member Cragun noted that each proposal is over budget. Mr. Smoot stated that he had discussed the matter with the accounting team who stated that they could adjust the budget to account for that increase. Member Koijane asked where that money would come from, to which Mr. Trevor Goodsell addressed the Board and stated that when the budget was established they did not have the bids for HVAC service, and so it had been based on last year, however, the bids came in a little bit higher. Member Koijane asked if it would come out of the projected surplus, to which Mr. Goodsell replied in the affirmative.

Member Cragun asked who they had used the previous year, to which Mr. Smoot stated that they had been with No Sweat Mechanical. Member Cragun asked if there had been issues with No Sweat Mechanical, to which Mr. Smoot replied that there had not been issues at the Doral sites, however, there had been issues at some of the other sites Academica manages, adding that they had done a good job and that he was recommending ABM because it was his opinion that ABM would do a better job. Member Koijane asked if anything could be done to

10

lower the fee at the Saddle location, to which Mr. Smoot replied that once the bids had been presented, that could not be negotiated. Member Cragun asked the administrators if they had any issues with the current provider, to which they responded in the negative. Member Cragun stated that for the yearly cost No Sweat Mechanical would only be about $100.00 higher than ABM, and asked if $35,385.00 is what they were currently paying No Sweat Mechanical, or if it was an amount they were proposing for the coming year. Mr. Smoot replied that they had not been in a contract previously, so these were quotes for the upcoming year. Member Koijane asked for verification that they paid about $12,000.00 in the previous year without a service contract, to which Mr. Smoot replied in the affirmative, stating that most of that went to the Saddle campus due to the age of the units. Member Koijane stated that it would basically be an insurance policy, to which Mr. Smoot agreed. Member Koijane stated that they would be paying more than twice as much for a service agreement, to which Mr. Smoot replied that, per the lease agreement, they have to have a service contract in place for preventative maintenance. Member Koijane asked what kind of arrangement they had the previous year, to which Mr. Smoot replied that he did not have the exact number, however, it was discovered about half-way through the year that the lease agreement required a service contract, which they then entered into with No Sweat Mechanical.

Member Cragun asked the representatives from ABM if they had something to add to the discussion. Mr. Greg Spears from ABM addressed the Board and asked if the questions were regarding ABM and Comfort Masters or No Sweat, to which Member Cragun stated that it was between all three. Mr. Spears stated that they were able to look at what they and Comfort Masters proposed in regards to cost per unit and cost per ton and they did notice that costs were fairly close for Cactus and Fire Mesa, however, the cost for Saddle inexplicably dropped on the Comfort Masters bid. Mr. Spears further stated that Comfort Masters averaged about $210.00 per unit, however it drastically dropped to about $176 per unit at Saddle, noting that he assumed this was some sort of clerical error. Mr. Spears added that Comfort Masters had a bid limit of $10,000.00 on their Nevada Contractors license per bid as well as a $2,000.00 bond. Mr. Spears stated that ABM had tried very hard to give the best value and make each dollar effective, adding that there is a specific scope and that they had priced it as competitively as they could in order to fulfill their goal of preventing issues, yet they will often go above and beyond.

Member Koijane stated that, looking at it from a numbers perspective, they would probably only end up spending around $18,000.00 on an as needed basis for this year. Mr. Smoot reminded them that last year Cactus was a brand new building and that most of the issues they had were covered by the one year building warranty. Mr. Spears noted that the maintenance program is a filter change, a belt change, a coil cleaning, and a brief heating and cooling inspection, summarizing that it is a quick, to the point inspection that tries to prevent those types of expensive repairs you would typically see if that maintenance was not taking place. Member Cragun asked if each of those items would be performed at each visit, to which Mr. Spears stated that they would not occur at every visit, however they would be scheduled at various intervals throughout the year. Member Cragun asked Mr. Smoot if all of the bidders would be maintaining the same way at the same frequency and intervals, to which Mr. Smoot replied in the affirmative. Member Bedich asked if the contract was for one year, to which Mr. Smoot replied that it would be for three years, however, they had the option of cancelling at any time with a 30 day notice, which would need to be added to the contract.

Member Cragun stated that they had budgeted $27,000.00 for this service agreement and that this would put them at $8,000.00 over, however, Member Bedich noted that it would only be an overage for the 2015/2016 school year and that they could budget differently for the next year. Member Koijane asked Mr. Spears why they would be the better choice, to which Mr. Smoot stated that many months ago he was approached by ABM who expressed a great interest in servicing the schools and they had demonstrated more effort and shown a greater desire in obtaining these contracts than any of the other companies, adding that it would be more of a partnership with the schools than a service company. Member Bedich asked if they had contracts with other Academica schools, to which Mr. Smoot stated that they had contracts with Somerset and Pinecrest. Member Koijane asked what they would do when a unit fails and if they would be the best ones to make sure it would be taken care of in a timely manner, to which Mr. Smoot replied that he thought they would. Member Zobrist asked how long they had been servicing the Pinecrest and Somerset schools, to which Mr. Smoot replied that they had just been awarded those contracts. Member Zobrist stated that there was not any experience to base the decision on, to

11

which Mr. Smoot stated that they had not yet begun service. Member Koijane stated that he was inclined to take the recommendation.

Member Koijane Moved to Approve the hiring of ABM as the HVAC service provider for Doral Academy of Nevada, amending the contract to include the 30 day cancellation notice. Member Bedich Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

10. Executive Director and Principal Reports.

Ms. Phillips stated that there was a difference in the way that information was being shared with the Board, in that the Saddle campus was using the student growth percentile and Cactus was using the student growth equivalency because the percentile was not available at Cactus, adding that the reason for that was because they had limited data from last year due to the problems with the SBAC tests, however, they still wanted to share data in a fair manner. Ms. Phillips further stated that literacy specialist Ms. Piccininni had detailed conversations with STAR regarding literacy because there is a challenge when students come in above grade level in maintaining effective growth which, unfortunately, when they tried to pull the percentage data, it had already been affected by new information. Principal Marshall addressed the Board and clarified that the reason they did not have the appropriate data was due to evaluations being administered to incoming new students, which affected the outcome of the student growth percentile in that it included new students.

Principal Tomasetti addressed the Board and stated that the Board had copies of the DIBELS data for the Saddle and Cactus campuses for K-1 in regards to the national percentile ranking, adding that both schools ranked highly effective in kindergarten; also, Saddle ranked highly effective in first grade and Cactus ranked effective in first grade. Principal Tomasetti stated that the second DIBELS report showed the national growth percentile that showed how much the students grew in the past year for kindergarten and first grade, adding that at both campuses kindergarten and first grade were both at the effective growth level. Principal Tomasetti further stated that kindergarten and first grade at both campuses made wonderful academic achievement for the schools. Principal Tomasetti added that they also had data showing the reading levels for grades K-8 and that every grade level made positive growth, and finally; STAR Math for grades K-8, which had some substandard scores in the past, showed a tremendous amount of growth that was very pleasing.

Principal Marshall reiterated that it can be difficult to gauge growth with the high-achieving students, where the lower students usually experience a higher rate of growth that is easier to see, adding that the grade-level equivalency was not something they want to base their pay per performance on, that said, they did experience positive growth when first graders in reading came in at 9 months; second graders came in at 1.4 months; third graders came in at 1.1 month; fourth grade came in at 8 months; fifth grade had one year growth; adding that the sixth and seventh graders struggled with ELA, which are issues that will be addressed with a grant. Principal Marshall stated that in math they had the following: first was 9 months; second was 9 months; third was 1.2 months; fourth was 1.2 months; fifth was 1.3; and sixth and seventh were at1.6. Principal Marshall further stated that the K-2 teachers will be going through extensive training in the stages of literacy with Ms. Piccininni in order to meet the needs to the students at every grade level, adding that they also do data chats to make sure they are grouping students correctly. Principal Marshall stated that the math coach is doing a book study titled Ensuring Mathematical Success for All, adding that they were making parents aware of the book as well so that they might better understand how to teach and learn math conceptually.

Ms. Phillips stated that included in the support documents was a comprehensive time-line of events and due dates for the Great Teaching and Leading grant and Title 2 funds, and that it is in the form of a step-by-step road map that shows how those funds will be used. Ms. Phillips stated that they had also been working on the beginnings of an application to use Charlotte Danielson (which is more extensive and research based) for supervision because they had been made aware that not using the state framework for supervision might be an issue. Ms. Phillips further stated that they were working on one consistency in the organization, including several

12

items that would most likely come before the Board at a future date for approval, stating that additionally they had been working on a three-year plan for arts integration.

9. Evaluation of Administrator Danielle Marshall

Member Cragun Moved to move to a Closed Session. Member Bedich Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

Member Cragun Moved to move to an Open Session. Member Koijane Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

Member Cragun Moved to Approve the recommendation of Academica to adjust the salary for Principal Danielle Marshall. Member Bedich Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

11. Public comments and discussion.

None.

12. Adjournment.

Member Zobrist Moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:45 p.m. Member Koijane seconded the Motion, and the meeting adjourned.

Approved on: _____________________ _______________________________ Secretary of the Board of Directors Doral Academy of Nevada.

13

MINUTES of the meeting of the

BOARD OF DIRECTORS of DORAL ACADEMY OF NEVADA October 28, 2015

The Board of Directors of Doral Academy of Nevada held a public meeting on October 28, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. at 9025 Cactus Ave., Las Vegas, Nevada 89178.

1. Call to Order, roll call.

Board Chairperson Boone Cragun called the meeting to order at 4:11 p.m. Present were Board Members Boone Cragun, Karla Zobrist, Jerrod Allen, Ed Koijane (via telephone at 4:16), John McClain (via telephone), and Erin Bedich (via telephone).

Board Member Andre Winslow was not present for the meeting.

Also present were Executive Director Bridget Phillips, Principal Danielle Marshall, Principal Debbie Tomasetti, and Principal Kelly Rafalski, and Academica Nevada representatives Clayton Howell, Ryan Reeves, Trevor Goodsell, and Arthur Ziev.

2. Public Comment and Discussion.

Liz Whaley, a parent of a fourth grade student, stated that one of the reasons her family chose Doral was for the class size in elementary school of twenty-five students, and that she was concerned about the fact that there are more than twenty-five students in her son’s fourth grade class. Ms. Whaley asked if the Board could give her any information on when that number would decrease and hoped that it would be soon. Member Cragun expressed appreciation for Ms. Whaley’s concerns and stated that, for financial reasons, they did have to increase class size, adding that the Board was committed to reducing that class size as soon as possible. Ms. Bridget Phillips addressed the Board and stated as a reminder that all the middle school classes have at least thirty students and that some of them might go as high as thirty-two depending on the needs of the students, adding that the administration was also committed to reducing the class sizes as soon as possible.

3. Review and Approval of Revised Mission and Vision Statement.

Ms. Phillips stated that there had been a few revisions to the mission and vision statements that were mostly grammatical, and that it was ensured that there was a better flow to the document. Ms. Phillips further stated that the word “all” had been included to reflect Doral as a system of inclusivity, explaining that there was not any change to the content or intent the Board had for the document.

Member Allen Moved to Approve the changes to the Mission and Vision Statement as presented. Member Zobrist Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

4. Discussion and Approval of Hiring a Principal for the Doral Academy Red Rock Campus.

Mr. Reeves stated that with an Executive Director, Ms. Phillips was now able to form a committee and make a decision for a recommendation for a principal for the Red Rock Campus, adding that when this person is hired, he will not be employed by the school but by an outside entity, however, he will report to the Board for review in

14

his performance as protocol dictates. Ms. Phillips stated that she was fortunate to work with Mr. Scott Ober in the district when he was principal of Wingert Elementary, which was given the distinction of a Blue Ribbon School. Ms. Phillips further stated that he then opened Ober Elementary, which was named after his parents, adding that he is very well respected and has worked extensively with members of the Summerlin community, which are skills that would bring expertise to the Doral system. Ms. Phillips stated that he went on to publish a book about how to find the best teachers and acknowledge those teachers, adding that he had also been a consultant in the Special Education arena.

Mr. Scott Ober addressed the Board and stated that he relished the opportunity to open a school, which he had done before and it was one of the highlights of his life, adding that it would be a great opportunity to build that culture, and learning together with the staff is something he was looking forward to. Member Cragun stated that the members of the Board have had the opportunity to become acquainted with Mr. Ober and understand that he comes highly recommended by Ms. Phillips, and asked the Board if they had any further discussion before a motion was entertained.

Member Zobrist Moved to Approve Scott Ober as the principal of the Red Rock campus. Member Allen Seconded the Motioned, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

Ms. Phillips stated that they had a letter with Principal Ober’s resume ready to blast out to the Doral community the following day. Mr. Arthur Ziev addressed the Board and requested that they not make that announcement until November 17, 2015; to which Ms. Phillips replied that they would wait until then.

5. Discussion Regarding Student Recruitment, National School Lunch Program, and Enrollment

Policies.

Mr. Howell stated that in the application three of the areas they are looking to target are: a grass roots campaign to reach students with mailers and some door-to-door contact; the National School Lunch Program would be another way to attract students that would not otherwise come to Doral because a free or reduced lunch is not offered to families who cannot afford it; also, moving to a weighted lottery which would take schools in the local areas and give a quasi-preference to students who would make Doral more reflective of the surrounding communities.

Ms. Phillips stated that the process for the National School Lunch had begun and that she will be working extensively with Ms. Becca Fitzgerald on that. Member Allen suggested that as they possibly roll out these new enrollment policies, they make those on the wait list who are continually reapplying aware of what is happening, because there will certainly be some back-lash, adding that because of the demand they could possibly offend people. Mr. Reeves stated that this subject does affect the next agenda item, however he stated that these concerns will not necessarily affect the application for expansion, and they will most likely need to be addressed before the renewal of the Doral charter in about three and a half years, adding that the State will eventually make these requests. Mr. Reeves further stated that, when speaking of demographics, Doral is not very different than the surrounding schools, and when a recent analysis was done, Doral was within a single-digit percentage points of the district schools in regards to minorities, however, when special education and the free and reduced lunch populations were compared, there was a drastic difference. Mr. Reeves stated that what they would be putting in place is a willingness to do a weighted lottery, not necessarily going to one immediately, however, expressing that willingness could result in a need to implement very soon.

Member Cragun stated that the last time he was in front of the State Charter Board he could see that the SPCSA Board would like to see Doral Academy be more reflective of the surrounding community. Member

15

Cragun stated that the State Charter Authority will be monitoring Doral’s student make up to verify that they are falling in line with serving minority populations. Member Allen stated that he liked the proposed approach. Member Cragun stated that they will remain aware of this going forward.

6. Review and Approval of Doral’s Application for Growth and Expansion.

Mr. Reeves stated that, for background, Doral began with interested parents and professionals in the southwest area who were determined to bring an arts integration charter school to the southwest portion of town, and that became the Cactus campus. Mr. Reeves further stated that they are now going to realize a full K-12 system that will include the Saddle (K-8) and Fire Mesa (K-8) campuses and will feed into the new Red Rock (K-12) campus, however, the Cactus campus is still quite a drive from the new Red Rock campus, which was probably not the best long-term plan for that campus. Mr. Reeves stated that there is an additional population that still would like to attend a Doral campus in the southwest area, adding that the plan which would be proposed by staff and discussed with the Board would be to apply for expansion and add another campus that would serve as a feasible solution for the K-12 system in the southwest where Doral Academy began. Mr. Reeves stated that the application for expansion process was new and required a broad plan, and also a depiction of how a new facility fits into that plan. Mr. Reeves further explained that the application would be due on November 1, 2015 which, if missed, would necessitate waiting until the next application window and possibly forfeiting taking action on potential sites for at least seven to eight months.

Mr. Howell stated that the original due date was November 1, 2015; however they pushed it to November 2, 2015; adding that the team working on the application has been Mr. Howell, Ms. Becca Fitzgerald, Colin Seal, and Mrs. Bridget Phillips. Mr. Howell explained that Mrs. Phillips had been wonderful in donating her time in helping to determine how Doral as a system would accommodate new growth and new campuses because she had done that with Saddle, Fire Mesa, and now Red Rock, which had been a valuable part of drafting the application.

Mr. Howell stated that they were requesting in the application that they expand to the Pebble site in 2017, which will be a K-8 site opening K-7 with 750 students and expanding to full capacity within three to four years with 960 students (the same model as Cactus and Fire Mesa). Mr. Howell further stated that they will be proposing a second campus which would serve as the third feeder into the high school which would come online in 2018, adding that this campus would also open as a K-7 and grow to a K-8. Mr. Howell stated that the application was written for the Cactus and the two proposed campuses to eventually feed into a High School Campus opening in 2019. Mr. Howell stated that, although they do not have a property selected for the 2018/2019 school year, this application would allow the State Public Charter Authority to see what the Board’s vision is in creating a feeder pattern for a high school in the southwest as it had been done in the west.

Mr. Howell stated that they were looking for the Board’s approval to move forward with the application process and make sure it is the vision of the Board to eventually create a feeder system in the southwest similar to what is on the west side. Member Zobrist asked if this was required in order to build the high school and another school that would feed into it along with Cactus. Member Allen stated that the State was also requiring this application and plan so that they could plan accordingly in terms of their development and education plans as well. Mr. Howell clarified that this application would gain approval for the Pebble site as well as provide for growth plans in the following four years. Member Cragun stated that these are things that have been discussed by Board members with Academica and that this is necessary for them to show the State that there are feasible plans for growth, adding that the Board should be cognizant that with the growth, the quality of the Doral Charter School system must be maintained as they look forward, however, this is the framework that needs to be in place for them to attempt to grow in the future.

Member Cragun Moved to Approve Doral Academy of Nevada’s application for growth and expansion. Member Allen Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

16

7. Review and Approval of Academica Nevada Contract.

Mr. Reeves stated that Academica initially entered into a two-year contract and that they were now into the third year which necessitated a renewal, adding an apology for the late submittal of the contract which required updates due to SB-509, which also put in limitations on renewal clauses and provisions within management organization contracts. Mr. Reeves stated that there was some language clean up, however the only substantive changes were with the term of the agreement, which provides that the initial term back-dates to July 1, 2015 and will go until the end of the charter granted, meaning that it will be through the remaining three and a half years of Doral Academy’s charter, adding that they would then come before the Board with a new contract for review and approval. Mr. Reeves further stated that the other change falling under the heading of “Term” is that the language stating that within the first year the contract could be terminated “for any reason” was removed, and termination “for cause” remained. Mr. Reeves stated that, in essence, they would be approving a contract with Academica for four years (three and a half of which remain) under the same terms with the same services provided, to be terminated only should there be dereliction of duty on Academica’s part, otherwise that contract would be good for four years, at which time Academica must come before the Board with a new contract.

Mr. Reeves stated that the base compensation rate is $450.00 per unit and that the current contract states that the fee shall be adjusted annually at each anniversary based upon the consumer price index or based upon the year to year percentage change in the full-time funding of students, adding that Academica had not raised the fee at all and it is not their hope to increase it in the future. Therefore Mr. Reeves stated that he had changed the wording from “shall” to “may” adjust the fee to more accurately depict the situation, which may be increased in the future at their discretion. Mr. Reeves reiterated that it is their hope and expectation based on growth in the system and Academica’s financial abilities that the clause never be needed, however, it does need to be in there to provide for unknown contingencies that might occur within the next four years, although that is not expected. Mr. Reeves stated that they had had a very successful relationship together that worked well and had seen a great school be developed with good finances and good operations, and so it was Academica’s hope and request that the Board would renew that contract. Member Cragun asked for verification that the changes Mr. Reeves spoke to had already been added to the new contract, to which Mr. Reeves replied that the changes previously spoken of were reflected in the new contract.

Member Koijane stated that he would be comfortable approving the contract subject to a review, unless Member Cragun had reviewed it and was ready to proceed. Member Cragun stated that he had reviewed it and noted the changes and felt comfortable moving forward at that time. Mr. Reeves stated that they would obviously like to have it approved and signed as soon as possible, however, they did not have a problem with Member Koijane or others reviewing the contract and allowing Academica to answer any questions. Member Cragun asked Member Koijane how he would like to proceed, to which Member Koijane stated that if Member Cragun was comfortable from a legal standpoint then he was fine to proceed.

Member Cragun Moved to Approve the Academica Nevada contract. Member McClain Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

8. Review and Approval of Lease Agreement for the Doral Academy Red Rock Campus.

Mr. Ziev stated that the was presenting for the Board’s approval, the lease for the Doral Academy Red Rock Campus which will be a K-12 on seventeen acres, adding that it would be designed for 2,400 students: 125 students per grade in elementary; 150 per grade in middle school; and 300 per grade in high school. Mr. Ziev further stated that a campus of that size in an area like Summerlin would only be possible because of the fine folks at Howard Hughes who are selling this property at well below market value, otherwise it would never have been possible.

17

Mr. Ziev stated that lease was basically identical to the other leases they had signed with a few changes for the Board’s consideration. Mr. Ziev further stated that the project, when it is completed (not including the gymnasium and the auditorium) will be about 150,000 square feet, as a result the project is designed in six phases and this lease covers potentially four of those phases: phase one is the elementary school and half of the middle school (including middle school administration offices); phase two is the second half of the middle school (including the middle school multi-purpose room; phase three is the first half of the high school wing; and phase four is the second half of the high school wing (including the high school multi-purpose room). Mr. Ziev stated that phases five and six, which are not covered under this lease, are the gymnasium and the auditorium. Mr. Ziev further stated that the site plan had undergone extensive review in order to comply with the Summerlin development code, which is very detailed, adding that it is a three phase approval process and that they had completed the first two and that they expected final approval on the plan and the design of the buildings and all the roads within the next week or two. Mr. Ziev stated that they had had a meeting and expected final site plan approval from the City of Las Vegas that day or the next. Mr. Ziev stated that closing on the property was scheduled for November 16, 2015; which is why he asked for nothing to be overtly announced until that has been closed, also with the assumption that the Howard Hughes Company might also want to make their own announcements.

Mr. Ziev explained that on the seventeen acre property the Howard Hughes Company will be building all the roads at their cost, which is often unheard of this these situations. Mr. Ziev stated that it is anticipated that phase one will project 1,110 students in 2016; and phase two will increase to 1,350 in 2017; no new buildings opening in year three because once the middle school is complete it will bring capacity to up to 1,600 students; and in the following year the first half of the high school will be built. Mr. Ziev explained that these projections are what the lease includes, however, there is some flexibility such that because the middle and high schools numbers are unknown, they may speed up construction if it is found that those numbers are higher than expected, in essence allowing enrollment numbers to drive construction.

Ms. Phillips asked for clarification on whether or not the “auditorium” is referring to the theater, because all of the schools were anxious to have a theater where performances could take place by all the campuses, adding that the auditorium is in phase six and that enrollment could be increased if there was a place for students to be highlighted in the community. Mr. Ziev replied that the auditorium is not contained in the lease agreement because auditoriums do not generally generate revenue to cover the lease payments, adding that the school will not have the revenue until it is close to its 2,400 student capacity. Mr. Ziev added that the gymnasium does not have to be built or can be built after the auditorium, and also that they have the option to purchase which had been accelerated by the Turner-Agassi group to the 27th month after opening (rather than 36 months in previous leases) and extends through the 45th month. Mr. Ziev explained that they would have the flexibility to buy the property and then take on proceeds to build something new if the interest rate is low enough on the bonds, adding that, however, the multi-purpose rooms in each of the buildings will have a stage.

Mr. Ziev stated that another change in the lease is a clause that states that the property can only be used as a school and nothing else, adding that if construction does not begin by January 31, 2016; the school does not open in September of 2016; or if the school is used for any other purpose in the next ten years; the Hughes Company can repurchase the property paying just the property costs, and also require a penalty provision of $200,000.00 from Doral Academy if the Board takes any actions that prevent the previously stated situations from occurring (construction beginning, school opening, and use other than a school). Mr. Ziev further stated that in addition to the rent, Doral would be subject to a special assessment of 1.2 million over the course of 25-30 years, however, Hughes Company instead decreased their purchase price by 1.2 million because that special assessment could not be avoided, adding that it comes out to a monthly rent that is even with what is being paid at the other campuses, although the per-student rent might look a little low because the $100,000.00 special assessment payment was taken into account.

Member Cragun asked where the high school students would be housed until their wing is completed, to which Mr. Ziev replied that they would be housed in the middle school wing. Some discussion ensued regarding projected numbers in the middle and high schools, including the fact that construction could be accelerated.

18

Member Allen asked if the lease agreement would be based on incremental growth, to which Mr. Ziev replied in the affirmative. Some additional discussion ensued regarding the costs of each phase, which could be found in the support documents. Mr. Reeves stated that he would echo Mr. Ziev’s comments about the flexibility and reiterated that this is a deal that is built around benefiting the school.

Member Cragun asked if there was anything in the lease agreement precluding them from acquiring the funds to build an auditorium and get it up and going. Mr. Ziev stated that it was a question of where those funds would come from, however, if they could show where those funds were coming from, there would not be an objection. Ms. Phillips stated that it might be possible to work collaboratively with the Summerlin community in using the auditorium as a revenue source and be a win-win for the school and the community that would pay for itself. Mr. Ziev suggested finding an affluent group who would like to donate to a cause such as this, adding that they need to determine what size theater they are looking to have. Ms. Whaley asked if there would be enough space planned for a large theater, to which Mr. Ziev stated that there is space allotted for the auditorium/gymnasium that can be used however they see fit. Mr. Howell stated that there are some constraints that would require any group renting the facility to be non-profit. Mr. Trevor Goodsell addressed the Board and stated that there are even requirements about it being educational to a point, however, it would depend and would need to be discussed according to the law. Mr. Ziev stated that realistically if some folks were found to support that, they could find a way with bond counsel to get past the private use laws. Mr. Ziev stated that they were asking for approval for the lease subject to review by legal counsel, adding that there could not be any changes pertaining to rents, just legal clarification.

Member Cragun Moved to Approve the Lease agreement for the Doral Academy Red Rock subject to final approval by legal counsel. Member Koijane Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

9. Discussion and Approval to Proceed with the Doral Academy West Pebble and Torrey Pines

Kinder-8th Grade Campus.

Mr. Ziev stated that in order to proceed on the Pebble campus, the State Charter Board needed to approve an amendment to approve the site, adding that there was a signed purchase contract to buy five acres south of Pebble and easy of Torrey Pines. Mr. Ziev stated that it will be built in conjunction with a church that will be built on five acres north of the school, and will be mutually beneficial because it will extend parking for both entities, which will be the only relationship between the two parties. Mr. Ziev further stated that this will be a typical K-8 campus with a floor-plan almost identical to Fire Mesa and would open in 2017 because there are currently no utilities to the property, adding that they need approval now so that they can proceed with the sewer. Mr. Howell stated that the motion should be to proceed with the campus. Member Cragun stated that the Board had already indicated the intent to proceed. Mr. Ziev clarified that the Board would not be bound until they approve the lease agreement which would probably be after the first of the year. Member Zobrist asked if they would be bound to building on the land, to which Mr. Ziev replied that they would not be bound until they approve the lease agreement stating that they would take occupancy by fall of 2017. Some discussion ensued regarding the process of proceeding in this instance.

Member Cragun Moved to Approve proceeding with the Doral Academy West Pebble and Torrey Pines K-8 Campus. Member Koijane Seconded the Motion, and the Board voted unanimously to Approve.

10. Public Comments and Discussion.

No members of the public requested to make comment.

19

Ms. Phillips announced that Doral Academy of Northern Nevada had been approved, adding that Principal Tomasetti had some news. Principal Tomasetti stated that their art teacher, Randee Davidson, was selected as the Nevada Art Teacher of the Year by the Art Educators of Nevada, which is a very prestigious award, adding that, as part of her recognition, she will be able to travel to the National Art Council conference in Chicago in 2016 and that they are very proud of her. Ms. Phillips asked if they could present Ms. Davidson at the next board meeting to be recognized by the Board, to which Member Cragun replied in the affirmative.

11. Adjournment.

Member Cragun Motioned to adjourn the meeting at 5:26 p.m. Member Allen seconded the Motion, and the meeting adjourned.

Approved on: _____________________ _______________________________ Secretary of the Board of Directors Doral Academy of Nevada.

20

DORAL ACADEMY OF NEVADA

Supporting Document

Meeting Date: November 18, 2015 Agenda Item: 4 – Review of Schools Financial Performance. Number of Enclosures: 1

SUBJECT: Review of Schools Financial Performance. Action Appointments Approval Consent Agenda X Information Public Hearing Regular Adoption

Presenter (s): Carlos Segrera Recommendation: Proposed wording for motion/action: Fiscal Impact: N/A Estimated Length of time for consideration (in minutes): 5-10 Minutes Background: Review of Financial Review Summary, Balance Sheet and Profit and Loss Statements. Submitted By: Staff

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

DORAL ACADEMY OF NEVADA

Supporting Document

Meeting Date: November 18, 2015 Agenda Item: 5 – Review and Approval of the 2014/2015 School Year Financial Audit. Number of Enclosures: 1

SUBJECT: Review and Approval of the 2014/2015 School Year Financial Audit. X Action Appointments Approval Consent Agenda Information Public Hearing Regular Adoption

Presenter (s): Trevor Goodsell Recommendation: Proposed wording for motion/action: Fiscal Impact: N/A Estimated Length of time for consideration (in minutes): 10-15 Minutes Background: Review of the financial audit performed for the 2014/2015 school year. Submitted By: Staff

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

DORAL ACADEMY OF NEVADA

Supporting Document

Meeting Date: November 18, 2015 Agenda Item: 6 – Review and Approval of Teacher and Staff Holiday Bonuses. Number of Enclosures:

SUBJECT: Review and Approval of Teacher and Staff Holiday Bonuses. X Action Appointments Approval Consent Agenda Information Public Hearing Regular Adoption

Presenter (s): Clayton Howell / Trevor Goodsell Recommendation: Proposed wording for motion/action: Motion to approve the issuance of holiday bonuses to the teachers and staff of Doral Academy for the 2015/2016 school year. Fiscal Impact: N/A Estimated Length of time for consideration (in minutes): 5-10 Minutes Background: cAs a token of gratitude to the faculty and staff of Doral Academy, it is proposed that the Board approve year-end gifts of $50 (aides), $100 (teachers), $150 (12 month office staff), $150 (lead teacher and counselors) $250 (assistant administrator) and $500 (Principal). The total cost of those gifts would be approximately $23,000. Submitted By: Staff

84

DORAL ACADEMY OF NEVADA

Supporting Document

Meeting Date: November 18, 2015 Agenda Item: 7 – Review and Acceptance of Grant Funding (Title II and Great Teaching & Leading) Number of Enclosures:

SUBJECT: Review and Acceptance of Grant Funding (Title II and Great Teaching & Leading) X Action Appointments Approval Consent Agenda Information Public Hearing Regular Adoption

Presenter (s): Executive Director Phillips Recommendation: Proposed wording for motion/action: Motion to accept the grant funding received from Title II and Great Teaching & Leading. Fiscal Impact: N/A Estimated Length of time for consideration (in minutes): 2-5 Minutes Background: Doral Academy of Nevada applied for funding under Title II and Great Teaching and Leading Grant. Doral Academy has been awarded the following funding: Title II - $21,000 Great Teaching and Leading - $196,056. The total received so far for the 2015/2016 school year is $217,056.

85

As such, the Doral Academy Board of Directors would need to accept this funding granted to Doral Academy of Nevada. Submitted By: Staff

86

BRIAN SANDOVAL Governor

STATE OF NEVADA SOUTHERN NEVADA OFFICE 9890 S. Maryland Parkway, Suite 221

STEVE CANAVERO, Ph.D. Interim Superintendent

of Public Instruction

Las Vegas, Nevada 89183 (702) 486-6458

Fax: (702) 486-6450 www.doe.nv.gov/Educator_Licensure

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 700 E. Fifth Street

Carson City, Nevada 89701-5096 (775) 687 - 9200 · Fax: (775) 687 – 9101

http://www.doe.nv.gov

TO: Bridget Phillips Doral Academy of Nevada DATE: October 13, 2015 FROM: Dena Durish, Deputy Superintendent

Division of Educator Effectiveness and Family Engagement SUBJECT: 2015-2016 Great Teaching and Leading Fund Award Notification _________________________________________________________________________________ Congratulations! On September 3, 2015, the State Board of Education approved funding in the amount of $196,056 to be awarded to Doral Academy of Nevada for implementation of the work outlined in your 2015-2016 Great Teaching and Leading Grant Application. Pursuant to SB474 (2015), these grant funds may be used for activities carried out between July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2016 and are to be expended to meet the priorities, timeline, budget, and action plan outlined in the application submitted. On or before October 31, 2016, in direct alignment with the priorities described in your application, a Program Completion/Effectiveness Report must be submitted to the Superintendent of Public Instruction on a form prescribed by the Department including, but not limited to,

a) a final budget detail of all expenditures; b) all activities/programs for which the grant funds were used; and c) the effectiveness of the grant money in

i. improving the achievement of students; ii. assisting teachers, administrators, and other licensed educational personnel;

iii. changes in instructional or administrative practices; and/or iv. improving the recruitment, selection, and retention of effective teachers and principals.

Thank you for your commitment to the preparation and professional development of Nevada educators. Please feel free to contact me at any time at 702-668-4308 or ddurish@doe.nv.gov with any questions/concerns.

87

mailto:ddurish@doe.nv.gov

DORAL ACADEMY OF NEVADA

Supporting Document

Meeting Date: November 18, 2015 Agenda Item: 8 – Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Kindergarten Enrollment Plans for the 2016/2017 School Year. Number of Enclosures:

SUBJECT: Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Kindergarten Enrollment Plans for the 2016/2017 School Year. X Action Appointments Approval Consent Agenda X Information Public Hearing Regular Adoption

Presenter (s): Clayton Howell Recommendation: Proposed wording for motion/action: Fiscal Impact: N/A Estimated Length of time for consideration (in minutes): 10-15 Minutes Background: Discussion regarding the plans for Kindergarten enrollment for the 2016/2017 school year. Submitted By: Staff

88

DORAL ACADEMY OF NEVADA

Supporting Document

Meeting Date: November 18, 2015 Agenda Item: 9 – Update and Report on Academica Nevada Staffing and Support Services. Number of Enclosures: 2

SUBJECT: Update and Report on Academica Nevada Staffing and Support Services. Action Appointments Approval Consent Agenda X Information Public Hearing Regular Adoption

Presenter (s): Clayton Howell Recommendation: Proposed wording for motion/action: Fiscal Impact: N/A Estimated Length of time for consideration (in minutes): 5-10 Minutes Background: Update on Academica staffing and support services. Submitted By: Staff

89

1378 Paseo Verde Pkwy, Suite 200 P: 702-431-6260Henderson, NV 89012 F: 702-431-6250

Academica NevadaName Email Address Department

Bob Howell bob.howell@academicanv.com CEORyan Reeves ryan.reeves@academicanv.com COOClayton Howell clayton.howell@academicanv.com Director of Growth & DevelopmentStacie Gibson stacie.gibson@academicanv.com Internal Accounts ManagerBrooke Reeves brooke.reeves@academicanv.com ACE FoundationJoani Williams joani.williams@academicanv.com MarketingSam Gibson File ClerkTrevor Goodsell trevor.goodsell@academicanv.com CFOAllison Salmon allison.salmon@academicanv.com Procurement DirectorAndy Leyva Andy.Leyva@academicanv.com Accounts Payable-AssistantBecca Fitzgerald becca.fitzgerald@academicanv.com Grants and NSLPCarlos Segrera carlos.segrera@academicanv.com Director of School AccountsEjona Lindsay ejona.lindsay@academicanv.com Accounts Payable DirectorJacob Smoot jacob.smoot@academicanv.com Facilities ManagementJames Kenyon james.kenyon@academicanv.com School Data AnalystManny Mayorga jose.mayorga@academicanv.com Payroll CoordinatorColin Bringhurst colin.bringhurst@academicanv.com Chief Legal Officer-CLOCrystal Thiriot crystal.thiriot@academicanv.com Human Resources & RecruitingDawn Robinette dawn.robinette@academicanv.com Office Manager & TravelJennifer Elison jennifer.elison@academicanv.com Board Meeting SupportHeidi Hermansen heidi.hermansen@academicanv.com Assistant RegistrarKaty Foley katy.foley@academicanv.com Event PlanningKim Ballou kim.ballou@academicanv.com Director of State ReportingKristie Fleisher kristie.fleisher@academicanv.com RegistrarNatalie Kennedy natalie.kennedy@academicanv.com ReceptionistNell Howell nell.howell@academicanv.com Registrar

IntellatekName Email Address Department

JJ Christian jj@intellatek.net COOMary Jo Collingwood maryjo@intellatek.net Office ManagerRobert Boske robert@intellatek.net Help DeskLuke Campbell luke@intellatek.net Director of Server & Internet SupportCasey Hoffman casey@intellatek.net Director of School Equipment SupportBill Jefferson bill@intellatek.net Infinite Campus SupportJohn Damgo john@intellatek.net School Support

Special Education (SESS)Name Email Address Department

Nancy Fitzgerald nancy.fitzgerald@sessnv.com DirectorRebecca Norton rebecca.norton@sessnv.com SPED FacilitatorJaime Adams jaime.adams@somersetnv.org SPED FacilitatorTracy Fisher tracy.fisher@sessnv.com SPED FacilitatorScott Ober scott.ober@sessnv.com SPED Facilitator

Aprende (PreK)Name Email Address Department

Nicole Nichol nicole.nichol@aprendenv.com Director

Jennifer Lucas jennifer.lucas@doralpreknv.org

OtherBob Ranney rranney@cox.net Community Outreach

Academica Nevada

** Each individual color denotes which of the executive officers they report to.

90

mailto:bob.howell@academicanv.commailto:ryan.reeves@academicanv.commailto:clayton.howell@academicanv.commailto:stacie.gibson@academicanv.commailto:brooke.reeves@academicanv.commailto:joani.williams@academicanv.commailto:trevor.goodsell@academicanv.commailto:allison.salmon@academicanv.commailto:Andy.Leyva@academicanv.commailto:becca.fitzgerald@academicanv.commailto:carlos.segrera@academicanv.commailto:ejona.lindsay@academicanv.commailto:jacob.smoot@academicanv.commailto:james.kenyon@academicanv.commailto:jose.mayorga@academicanv.commailto:colin.bringhurst@academicanv.commailto:crystal.thiriot@academicanv.commailto:dawn.robinette@academicanv.commailto:jennifer.elison@academicanv.commailto:heidi.hermansen@academicanv.commailto:katy.foley@academicanv.commailto:kim.ballou@academicanv.commailto:kristie.fleisher@academicanv.commailto:natalie.kennedy@academicanv.commailto:nell.howell@academicanv.commailto:jj@intellatek.netmailto:maryjo@intellatek.netmailto:luke@intellatek.netmailto:casey@intellatek.netmailto:bill@intellatek.netmailto:john@intellatek.netmailto:nancy.fitzgerald@sessnv.commailto:rebecca.norton@sessnv.commailto:jaime.adams@somersetnv.orgmailto:tracy.fisher@sessnv.commailto:scott.ober@sessnv.commailto:nicole.nichol@aprendenv.commailto:jennifer.lucas@doralpreknv.orgmailto:rranney@cox.net

5.88% 1

35.29% 6

29.41% 5

5.88% 1

0.00% 0

23.53% 4

Q1 Processing of requisitions, invoices,purchase orders, check requests,

payments, etc., in a timely manner.Answered: 17 Skipped: 0

Total 17

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

1 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

91

5.88% 1

35.29% 6

35.29% 6

0.00% 0

0.00% 0

23.53% 4

Q2 Resolving vendor issues and concerns.Answered: 17 Skipped: 0

Total 17

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

2 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

92

11.76% 2

29.41% 5

29.41% 5

5.88% 1

0.00% 0

23.53% 4

Q3 Preparing quarterly financial reports(e.g. monthly accruals, bank

reconciliations, account reconciliations andaccount closures).

Answered: 17 Skipped: 0

Total 17

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

3 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

93

11.76% 2

29.41% 5

23.53% 4

11.76% 2

0.00% 0

23.53% 4

Q4 Guiding and explaining financial andaccounting reports to empower principalsin the oversight of their school's finances.

Answered: 17 Skipped: 0

Total 17

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

4 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

94

6.25% 1

62.50% 10

18.75% 3

6.25% 1

0.00% 0

6.25% 1

Q5 Developing and managing schoolbudgets and forecasts.

Answered: 16 Skipped: 1

Total 16

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

5 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

95

6.25% 1

50.00% 8

12.50% 2

12.50% 2

0.00% 0

18.75% 3

Q6 Guiding and explaining budgets andforecasts to empower principals in the

oversight of their school's finances.Answered: 16 Skipped: 1

Total 16

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

6 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

96

20.00% 3

33.33% 5

13.33% 2

13.33% 2

6.67% 1

13.33% 2

Q7 Coordinating and monitoring grants,financial reporting and management (e.g.assisting with grant applications, grant

compliance, and monitoring and reportingon grant budget spending).

Answered: 15 Skipped: 2

Total 15

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

7 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

97

13.33% 2

46.67% 7

26.67% 4

0.00% 0

0.00% 0

13.33% 2

Q8 Facilitate school's compliance withfederal, state, and applicable Sponsor

mandates (e.g. Class Size, High Performingstatus, Compliance Reporting Support,

monthly enrollment and attendancereporting, etc.).Answered: 15 Skipped: 2

Total 15

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

8 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

98

0.00% 0

33.33% 5

26.67% 4

20.00% 3

0.00% 0

20.00% 3

Q9 Providing data analysis, designed toinform classroom instruction and improve

academic performance.Answered: 15 Skipped: 2

Total 15

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

9 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

99

26.67% 4

40.00% 6

13.33% 2

6.67% 1

0.00% 0

13.33% 2

Q10 Hosting leadership retreats andprincipal chats in order to share "bestpractices" throughout the network of

schools.Answered: 15 Skipped: 2

Total 15

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

10 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

100

20.00% 3

53.33% 8

13.33% 2

6.67% 1

0.00% 0

6.67% 1

Q11 Assisting with the process foraccreditation including quality assurance

and/or continuous improvement assistanceand/or intervention(s).

Answered: 15 Skipped: 2

Total 15

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

11 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

101

6.67% 1

40.00% 6

46.67% 7

6.67% 1

0.00% 0

0.00% 0

Q12 Assisting and/or coordinating schoolswith facilities and maintenance issues and

concerns.Answered: 15 Skipped: 2

Total 15

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

12 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

102

6.67% 1

73.33% 11

20.00% 3

0.00% 0

0.00% 0

0.00% 0

Q13 Ensuring compliance with fire/safetyand all other regulatory requirements.

Answered: 15 Skipped: 2

Total 15

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to Rate

13 / 27

2014-15 Survey of Academica's Services SurveyMonkey

103

13.33% 2

66.67% 10

13.33% 2

6.67% 1

0.00% 0

0.00% 0

Q14 Assisting in addressing future facilitiesneeds.

Answered: 15 Skipped: 2

Total 15

5 - HighlyEffective

4 -Effective

3 -Satisfactory

2 - NeedsImprovement

1 -Unsatisfactory

UTR -Unable toRate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Answer Choices Responses

5 - Highly Effective

4 - Effective

3 - Satisfactory

2 - Needs Improvement

1 - Unsatisfactory

UTR - Unable to R