The School Accountability Report Card (SARC), which is required by law to be published annually, contains information about the condition and performance of each California public school. More information about SARC requirements is available on the California Department of Education (CDE) SARC Web page. For additional information about the school, parents and community members should contact the school principal or the district office.
DataQuest is an online data tool located on the CDE DataQuest Web page that contains additional information about this school and comparisons of the school to the district, the county, and the state. Specifically, DataQuest is a dynamic system that provides reports for accountability (e.g., Academic Performance Index [API], Adequate Yearly Progress [AYP]), test data, enrollment, graduates, dropouts, course enrollments, staffing, and data regarding English learners).
Internet access is available at public libraries and other locations that are publicly accessible (e.g., the California State Library). Access to the Internet at libraries and public locations is generally provided on a first-come, first-served basis. Other use restrictions include the hours of operation, the length of time that a workstation may be used (depending on availability), the types of software programs available on a workstation, and the ability to print documents.
This section provides the schools contact information.
School
District
School Name
Eel River Charter
District Name
Round Valley Unified
Street
76350 Main St.
Phone Number
707-983-6171
City, State, Zip
Covelo , CA 95428-9711
Web Site
www.mcoe.us/d/schools/rvusd
707-983-6946
Superintendent
Dennis Ivey
Principal
Betty Tuttle
E-mail Address
divey@mcoe.us
eelriverschool@starband.net
CDS Code
23- 65607- 2330272
School Description and Mission Statement (School Year 2008-09)
The Eel River Charter School (ERCS) serves students K-8 in a safe school, with interdisciplinary, holistic, hands-on curriculum. The school was founded in 1994 by parents. Parents and community members continue to govern the school.
The Eel River Charter School’s mission statement was evaluated and re-written in 2006. The new mission statement is “Working with families in community through holistic teaching to develop educated, responsible, compassionate people.”
The goal of the Eel River Charter School is to engage parents/families in the educational process, thereby providing the support structure and overlapping spheres of influence necessary for students to attain an integrated perception of learning.
Opportunities for Parental Involvement (School Year 2008-09)
Parents commit to 2 parent work hours per week, per child enrolled at the school. ERCS runs on parent power: parents founded this school, and they form the final link in the chain of command. Depending on their interest, families choose how they will contribute. They do everything from administrative tasks (governing the school) to planning curriculum, teacher’s aides, facilities maintenance, cleaning facility, dumping garbage, yard duty, and general yard work. The parents are the main source of transportation for field trips. In 2007-2008 the parents from 36 families contributed three thousand two hundred nineteen (3219) hours to the school.
Parent involvement benefits the students: not only do the children see the pieces of their lives come together in coherence, but also they recognize a measure of their own worth in their parents’ efforts. Students see that education is important because their parents invest time in their school. When parents walk into their child’s school, that child feels excited, proud, and loved.
This table displays the number of students enrolled in each grade level at the school.
Grade Level
Number of Students
Kindergarten
6
Grade 1
Grade 2
8
Grade 3
4
Grade 4
Grade 5
9
Grade 6
7
Grade 7
3
Grade 8
5
Ungraded Elementary
0
Grade 9
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12
Ungraded Secondary
Total Enrollment
52
This table displays the percent of students enrolled at the school who are identified as being in a particular group.
Group
Percent of Total Enrollment
African American
%
American Indian or Alaska Native
63.46 %
Asian
1.92 %
Filipino
Hispanic or Latino
Pacific Islander
White (not Hispanic)
34.62 %
Multiple or No Response
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
100.00 %
English Learners
Students with Disabilities
5.00 %
This table displays by grade level the average class size and the number of classrooms that fall into each size category (a range of total students per classroom).
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
Avg. Class Size
Number of Classrooms
1-20
21-32
33+
K
1
2
K-3
14.0
13.0
12.5
3-4
4-8
14.5
12.0
Other
This section provides information about the school's comprehensive safety plan.
The Eel River Charter School implements a comprehensive set of health, safety, and risk management policies. The school complies with the provisions of Education Code 44237, the county building and health codes, risk management evaluations, routine fire drills, TB screening for employees, CPR and First Aid training requirements, and fire laws. ERCS is drug free and complies with safety laws. The Eel River Charter School continues to make facility upgrades and improvements to the school site as funding becomes available. The school facility is maintained at a level that protects the safety of the students, staff and general public.
This table displays the rate of suspensions and expulsions (the total number of incidents divided by the total enrollment) at the school and district levels for the most recent three-year period.
Rate
Suspensions
31.0
46.3
37.1
Expulsions
0.0
0.2
This section provides information about the condition of the school’s grounds, buildings, and restrooms, and a description of any planned or recently completed facility improvements.
ERCS opened its doors on rented property in 1994. The school consists of a main school building, housing the office, food service area, bathrooms, and library, 4 stand alone classrooms, a pump house, and outside bathrooms built in 2003. The school was forced to purchase the properties over the past few years. This has been accomplished, but has imposed a financial hardship on the school. The Eel River Charter School continues to make facility upgrades in accordance with county building codes, and improvements to the school site as funding becomes available. The school facility is maintained at a level that protects the safety of the students, staff and general public. Class size is limited due to space restrictions in the classrooms. Monthly safety inspections are held, and any deficits are corrected as quickly as possible. A new yard fence was completed in 2006 improving the safety of the students. Visitors are required to sign in at the office, and students are supervised before and during school hours. After school hours, the school is posted as generally unavailable for public use.
Major facilities upgrades are budgeted as necessary, and due to generous donations, ERCS has almost completed remodeling the food service area. In 2003, new pavement was added for walkways, a basketball court, and a play area for the younger students. In 2004, the school main building was painted to match the pump house, modular classrooms and new bathrooms. The library was re-roofed in 2003 and painted in 2005. The school is cleaned on a daily basis and restrooms are maintained in good repair. The garbage and recyclable materials are stored in an enclosed area which was constructed in 2004. The interior of the main building received a new coat of paint, lighting, and resurfacing of the floor in 2007, due to the hard work of parent and community members volunteering their labor and business’ donating a portion of the paint cost.
This table displays the results of the most recently completed school site inspection to determine the school facility’s good repair status.
System Inspected
Repair Status
Repair Needed and Action Taken or Planned
Exemplary
Good
Fair
Poor
Systems: Gas Leaks, Mechanical/HVAC, Sewer
N/A
X
none
Interior: Interior Surfaces
Cleanliness: Overall Cleanliness, Pest/ Vermin Infestation
Electrical: Electrical
Restrooms/Fountains: Restrooms, Sinks/ Fountains
Repair fountain
Safety: Fire Safety, Hazardous Materials
Structural: Structural Damage, Roofs
External: Playground/School Grounds, Windows/ Doors/Gates/Fences
Replace windows with energy efficient when money allows
Overall Rating
This table displays the number of teachers assigned to the school with a full credential, without a full credential, and those teaching outside of their subject area of competence. Detailed information about teacher qualifications can be found on the CDE DataQuest Web page.
Teachers
With Full Credential
30
Without Full Credential
Teaching Outside Subject Area of Competence
This table displays the number of teacher misassignments (teachers assigned without proper legal authorization) and the number of vacant teacher positions (not filled by a single designated teacher assigned to teach the entire course at the beginning of the school year or semester). Note: Total Teacher Misassignments includes the number of Misassignments of Teachers of English Learners.
Indicator
2009-10
Misassignments of Teachers of English Learners
Total Teacher Misassignments
Vacant Teacher Positions
This table displays the percent of classes in core academic subjects taught by No Child Left Behind (NCLB) compliant and non-NCLB compliant teachers in the school, in all schools in the district, in high-poverty schools in the district, and in low-poverty schools in the district. High poverty schools are defined as those schools with student participation of approximately 75 percent or more in the free and reduced price meals program. Low poverty schools are those with student participation of approximately 25 percent or less in the free and reduced price meals program. More information on teacher qualifications required under NCLB can be found on the CDE Improving Teacher and Principal Quality Web page.
Location of Classes
Percent of Classes In Core Academic Subjects
Taught by NCLB Compliant Teachers
Taught by Non-NCLB Compliant Teachers
This School
100.0
All Schools in District
92.8
7.2
High-Poverty Schools in District
Low-Poverty Schools in District
This table displays, in units of full-time equivalents (FTE), the number of academic counselors and other support staff who are assigned to the school and the average number of students per academic counselor. One FTE equals one staff member working full time; one FTE could also represent two staff members who each work 50 percent of full time.
Title
Number of FTE Assigned to School
Average Number of Students per Academic Counselor
Academic Counselor
Library Media Teacher (Librarian)
Psychologist
Social Worker
Nurse
Speech/Language/Hearing Specialist
Resource Specialist (non-teaching)
This table displays information about the quality, currency, and availability of the standards-aligned textbooks and other instructional materials used at the school, and information about the school’s use of any supplemental curriculum or non-adopted textbooks or instructional materials.
Core Curriculum Area
Quality, Currency, and Availability of Textbooks and Instructional Materials
Percent of Pupils Who Lack Their Own Assigned Textbooks and Instructional Materials
Reading/Language Arts
State approved reading materials purchased for all grades K-8 in 03-04,04-05, 05-06, 06-07, 07-08, and 08-09 *
Mathematics
State approved Algebra books purchased 03-04 for 7th and 8th grade students. Other instructional materials correlated to State Standards for grades K-8.*
Science
State approved Science books purchased in 03-04 for 6th, 7th, and 8th grade students. Other instructional materials correlated to State Standards for grades K-5.*
History-Social Science
Instructional materials correlated to State Standards of instruction for all grades K-8.*
Foreign Language
School goal is introduction to foreign language grades K-8*
Health
Instructional materials correlated to State Standards of instruction for all grades K-8*
Visual and Performing Arts
Instructional materials correlated to curriculum and State Standards for all grades K-8*
Science Laboratory Equipment (grades 9-12)
NA
*ERCS Charter document supports varied styles of traditional and project based learning therefore the school does not teach from textbooks, but uses textbooks to augment the curriculum as deemed beneficial. All students have access to the instructional materials offered.
This table displays a comparison of the school’s per pupil expenditures from unrestricted (basic) sources with other schools in the district and throughout the state, and a comparison of the average teacher salary at the school site with average teacher salaries at the district and state levels. Detailed information regarding school expenditures can be found on the CDE Current Expense of Education & Per-pupil Spending Web page and teacher salaries can be found on the CDE Certificated Salaries & Benefits Web page.
Level
Total Expenditures Per Pupil
Expenditures Per Pupil (Supplemental / Restricted)
Expenditures Per Pupil (Basic / Unrestricted)
Average Teacher Salary
School Site
$9707
$1223
$8484
$36890
$18107
$51,439
Percent Difference – School Site and District
LEA Provided
28% less
State
$5,512
$56,376
Percent Difference – School Site and State
35% more
35% less
This section provides information about the programs and supplemental services that are available at the school and funded through either categorical or other sources.
In 08-09, ERCS chose to receive Title I, Title II Part A, and REAP categorical funding. ERCS employs a Title I aide who works directly with students identified as qualifying for Title I services. In addition, educational materials were purchased with Title I funds. Title II funds were used for staff recruitment and credential renewal, meeting NCLB credential compliance. The REAP funding helped support an aide position that had been cut because of state budget cuts and the remainder was spent on educational materials.
This table displays district salaries for teachers, principals, and superintendents, and compares these figures to the state averages for districts of the same type and size. The table also displays teacher and administrative salaries as a percent of a district's budget, and compares these figures to the state averages for districts of the same type and size based on the salary schedule. Detailed information regarding salaries may be found on the CDE Certificated Salaries & Benefits Web page.
Category
District Amount
State Average For Districts In Same Category
Beginning Teacher Salary
$41,989
$38,000
Mid-Range Teacher Salary
$51,211
$55,721
Highest Teacher Salary
$69,386
$71,548
Average Principal Salary (Elementary)
$71,146
$85,858
Average Principal Salary (Middle)
$91,479
Average Principal Salary (High)
$80,775
$93,937
Superintendent Salary
$90,700
$115,980
Percent of Budget for Teacher Salaries
25.40 %
34.80 %
Percent of Budget for Administrative Salaries
5.50 %
6.50 %
The Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program consists of several key components, including the California Standards Tests (CSTs); the California Modified Assessment (CMA), and the California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA). The CSTs show how well students are doing in relation to the state content standards. The CSTs include English-language arts (ELA) and mathematics in grades two through eleven; science in grades five, eight, and nine through eleven; and history-social science in grades eight, and ten through eleven. The CAPA includes ELA, mathematics, and science in grades two through eleven, and for science for grades five, eight, and ten. The CAPA is given to those students with significant cognitive disabilities whose disabilities prevent them from taking either the CSTs with accommodations or modifications or the CMA with accommodations. The CMA includes ELA and mathematics for grades three through eight and science in grade five and is an alternate assessment that is based on modified achievement standards. The CMA is designed to assess those students whose disabilities preclude them from achieving grade-level proficiency on an assessment of the California content standards with or without accommodations. Student scores are reported as performance levels. Detailed information regarding the STAR Program results for each grade and performance level, including the percent of students not tested, can be found on the CDE Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Results Web site. Program information regarding the STAR Program can be found in the Explaining 2008 STAR Program Summary Results to the Public guide. Note: Scores are not shown when the number of students tested is ten or less, either because the number of students in this category is too small for statistical accuracy or to protect student privacy. In no case shall any group score be reported that would deliberately or inadvertently make public the score or performance of any individual student.
This table displays the percent of students achieving at the Proficient or Advanced level (meeting or exceeding the state standards).
Subject
English-Language Arts
42
26
18
21
19
43
46
50
32
17
24
40
*
64
23
15
16
38
14
11
33
36
41
Note: Scores are not shown when the number of students tested is 10 or less because the number of students in this category is too small for statistical accuracy or privacy protection. In no case shall any group score be reported that would deliberately or inadvertently make public the score or performance of any individual student.
This table displays the percent of students, by group, achieving at the Proficient or Advanced level (meeting or exceeding the state standards) for the most recent testing period.
Percent of Students Scoring at Proficient or Advanced
13
20
35
Male
Female
31
Economically Disadvantaged
Students Receiving Migrant Education Services
The California Physical Fitness Test is administered to students in grades five, seven, and nine only. This table displays by grade level the percent of students meeting fitness standards for the most recent testing period. Detailed information regarding this test, and comparisons of a school’s test results to the district and state levels, may be found on the CDE Physical Fitness Testing (PFT) Web page. Note: Scores are not shown when the number of students tested is ten or less because the number of students in this category is too small for statistical accuracy or privacy protection. In no case shall any group score be reported that would deliberately or inadvertently make public the score or performance of any individual student.
Percent of Students Meeting Healthy Fitness Zones
Four of Six Standards
Five of Six Standards
Six of Six Standards
The Academic Performance Index (API) is an annual measure of the academic performance and progress of schools in California. API scores range from 200 to 1,000, with a statewide target of 800. Detailed information about the API can be found on the CDE Academic Performance Index (API) Web page.
This table displays the school’s statewide and similar schools API ranks. The statewide API rank ranges from one to ten. A statewide rank of one means that the school has an API score in the lowest ten percent of all schools in the state, while a statewide rank of ten means that the school has an API score in the highest ten percent of all schools in the state. The similar schools API rank reflects how a school compares to 100 statistically matched “similar schools.” A similar schools rank of one means that the school’s academic performance is comparable to the lowest performing ten schools of the 100 similar schools, while a similar schools rank of ten means that the school’s academic performance is better than at least 90 of the 100 similar schools.
API Rank
2006
2007
2008
Statewide
5 *
6 *
Similar Schools
"N/A"
means a number is not applicable or not available due to missing data.
"B"
means this is either an LEA or an Alternative Schools Accountability Model (ASAM) school. Schools participating in the ASAM do not currently receive growth, target information, or statewide or similar schools rankings on this report in recognition of their markedly different educational missions and populations served. ASAM schools are covered under the Alternative Accountability system as required by Education Code Section 52052 and not the API accountability system. However, API information is needed to comply with the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law. Growth, target and rank information are not applicable to LEAs.
"C"
means this is a special education school. Statewide and similar schools ranks are not applicable to special education schools.
" * "
means this API is calculated for a small school or a small LEA, defined as having between 11 and 99 valid STAR Program test scores included in the API. APIs based on small numbers of students are less reliable and therefore should be carefully interpreted. Similar schools ranks are not calculated for small schools.
This table displays, by student group, the actual API changes in points added or lost for the past three years, and the most recent API score. Note: "N/A" means that the student group is not numerically significant.
Actual API Change
Growth API Score
2009
All Students at the School
-8
-137
623 *
"*"
means this API is calculated for a small school, defined as having between 11 and 99 valid Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program test scores included in the API. The API is asterisked if the school was small either in 2008 or 2009. APIs based on small numbers of students are less reliable and therefore should be carefully interpreted.
The federal NCLB Act requires that all schools and districts meet the following Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) criteria:
Detailed information about AYP, including participation rates and percent proficient results by student group, can be found on the CDE Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Web page.
This table displays an indication of whether the school and the district made AYP overall and whether the school and the district met each of the AYP criteria.
AYP Criteria
Overall
No
Participation Rate - English-Language Arts
Yes
Participation Rate - Mathematics
Percent Proficient - English-Language Arts
Percent Proficient - Mathematics
API
Graduation Rate
"Yes"
Met 2009 AYP Criteria
"No"
Did not Meet 2009 AYP Criteria
Schools and districts receiving federal Title I funding enter Program Improvement (PI) if they do not make AYP for two consecutive years in the same content area (ELA or mathematics) or on the same indicator (API or graduation rate). After entering PI, schools and districts advance to the next level of intervention with each additional year that they do not make AYP. Detailed information about PI identification can be found on the CDE Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Web page.
Program Improvement Status
Not in PI
In PI
First Year of Program Improvement
2007-2008
Year in Program Improvement
Year 3
Number of Schools Currently in Program Improvement
Percent of Schools Currently in Program Improvement
50.0
This section provides information on the annual number of school days dedicated to staff development for the most recent three-year period.
Staff development is done by request and recommendation. There are no days dedicated to staff development on the school calendar.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a nationally representative assessment of what America's students know and can do in various subject areas. Assessments are conducted periodically in mathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts, civics, economics, geography, and U.S. history. Student scores for reading and mathematics are reported as performance levels (i.e., basic, proficient, and advanced) and the participation of students with disabilities and English language learners is reported based on three levels (identified, excluded, and assessed). Detailed information regarding the NAEP results for each grade, performance level, and participation rate can be found on the National Assessment of Educational Progress Web page (Outside Source).
Note: Only a sample group of California's schools and districts participate in the NAEP testing cycle. Therefore, students in any particular school or district may not be included in these results. The NAEP reflects state test results and is not reflective of either the LEA or the individual school. Comparisons of student performance on the NAEP and student performance on the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program assessments cannot be made without an understanding of the key differences between the two assessment programs. For example, the NAEP only assesses grades four, eight and twelve and for long-term trends assesses grades nine, thirteen, and seventeen. Additionally, the NAEP only provides state test results for grades four and eight. The California Standards Tests (CSTs) are based on a different set of standards than the NAEP assessments. For example, the NAEP is not aligned with California academic content and achievement standards and, therefore, does not necessarily reflect the curriculum and instruction to which students are exposed in the classroom. The NAEP assesses reading and writing separately, while the CSTs assess English-language arts (ELA), encompassing reading as well as writing conventions, spelling, and grammar. Scores on the CSTs and other assessments are not directly comparable to those on NAEP. The averages and percentages presented are estimates based on samples of students rather than on entire populations. Finally, the questions students respond to are only a sample of the knowledge and skills covered by the NAEP frameworks. Information on the differences between NAEP and CST can be found on the CDE National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Web page.
This table displays the scale scores and achievement levels on the National Assessment of Educational Progress Results for reading (2007) and mathematics (2009) for grades four and eight
Subject and Grade Level
Average Scale Score
State Percent at Achievement Level
National
Basic
Proficient
Advanced
Reading 2007, Grade 4
209
220
Reading 2007, Grade 8
251
261
Mathematics 2009, Grade 4
232
239
25
Mathematics 2009, Grade 8
270
282
This table displays the state and national participation rates on the National Assessment of Educational Progress for reading (2007) and mathematics (2009) for students with disabilities and/or English language learners for grades four and eight.
State Participation Rate
National Participation Rate
Students With Disabilities
English Language Learners
74
93
65
80
78
92
66
77
79
96
84
94
85