Falls Far Below Target Sample Clauses

Falls Far Below Target.  Upon further review following a preliminary Pending rating, the Commission identifies significant financial risk and has concerns about financial viability such that heightened monitoring and/or intervention are necessary. 2.b.

Falls Far Below Target.  Upon further review following a preliminary Pending rating, the Commission identifies significant financial risk and has concerns about financial viability such that heightened monitoring and/or intervention are necessary. EXHIBIT B.2 .‌ ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK The purpose of the Organizational Performance Framework is to communicate to the charter school and public the compliance-related standards, which the charter school must meet. The Organizational Framework includes the standards that the charter school is already required to meet through state and federal law, rules or the charter contract. NACSA Principles & Standards (2012) states that, “A Quality Authorizer implements an accountability system that effectively streamlines federal, state, and local…compliance requirements while protecting schools’ legally entitled autonomy and minimizing schools’ administrative and reporting burdens” (p. 16). For each measure a school receives one of three ratings. For the purposes of defining organizational performance accountability, “material” means whether the information would be relevant and significant to decisions about whether to renew, non-renew, or revoke a charter contract. Meets Standard: The school materially meets the expectations outlined. Does Not Meet Standard: The school has failed to implement the program in the manner described; the failure(s) were material, but the board has instituted remedies that have resulted in compliance or prompt and sufficient movement toward compliance to the satisfaction of the authorizer.

Falls Far Below Target.  Upon further review following a preliminary Pending rating, the Commission identifies significant financial risk and has concerns about financial viability such that heightened monitoring and/or intervention are necessary. 1.b. Unrestricted Days Cash: Unrestricted Cash divided by ((Total Expenses-Depreciation Expenses)/365) Preliminary Rating Final Rating (Following Additional Analysis) Meets Target:  60 Days Cash or Meets Target:  Indicates sound financial viability based on the overall financial record. Either the school has already met the

Falls Far Below Target.  Upon further review following a preliminary Pending rating, the Commission identifies significant financial risk and has concerns about financial viability such that heightened monitoring and/or intervention are necessary. 2.d. Unrestricted Fund Balance Percentage: Fund balance / Total Expenses Preliminary Rating Final Rating (Following Additional Analysis) Meets Target:  Fund balance percentage is greater than or equal to 25% Meets Target:  Indicates sound financial viability based on the overall financial record. Either the school has already met the target based on the financials under review, or previous financial concerns that produced a preliminary Pending rating have been adequately remedied based on more current financial data or addressed adequately based on additional information such that the Commission concludes that performance against the target indicates sound financial viability. Pending Further Analysis:  Fund balance percentage is less than 25% Does Not Meet Target:  Upon further review following a preliminary Pending rating, the Commission concludes that there is financial risk such that heightened monitoring and/or intervention may be warranted. A Does Not Meet rating means that even based on more current financial information, the school is not currently meeting the target or concerns previously identified, although not currently manifested, have been of a depth or duration that warrants continued attention.

Falls Far Below Target.  Upon further analysis, the school’s performance on this component signals a significant financial risk to the school. 2.e.

Falls Far Below Target. 🞏 Upon further analysis, the school’s performance on this component signals a significant financial risk to the school. 2.e. Change in Total Fund Balance: Multi-Year= (𝐘𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝟑 𝐅𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐁𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞) − (𝐘𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝟏 𝐅𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐁𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞); One-Year= (𝐘𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝟐 𝐅𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐁𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞) − (𝐘��𝐚𝐫 𝟏 𝐅𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐁𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞) Preliminary Rating Final Rating (Following Additional Analysis)

Falls Far Below Target. A Falls Far Below rating indicates that upon further review following a preliminary Pending rating, the Commission identifies significant financial risk and has concerns about financial viability such that heightened monitoring and/or intervention are necessary. The school’s rating will be based on both the most recent audited financials and more current unaudited financials. The Commission will also consider any relevant context for the school’s financial position that informs the causes of the school’s substantial shortcomings for the area in question. Appropriate monitoring and/intervention will be determined, in part, by how the rating on the standard in question fits within the school’s overall performance on the framework.

Falls Far Below Target.  Upon further review following a preliminary Pending rating, the Commission identifies significant financial risk and has concerns about financial viability such that heightened monitoring and/or intervention are necessary. 2. SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS 2.a. Total Margin: Net Income divided by Total Revenue Aggregated Total Margin: Total 3 Year Net Income divided by Total 3 Year Revenues Preliminary Rating Final Rating (Following Additional Analysis)