District hears plan for Rivers Virtual Academy partnership; board plans June action item

Josh, the district staff member leading the proposal, told the board the Rivers Virtual Academy model would operate “under the authority of the school board and superintendent” but that students enrolled in the virtual charter would not be Prescott School District students and instead would be governed by a separate governance council. He said the district would serve in defined operating roles — program administration, finance, counseling and enrollment — and that EdOptions (the contracted virtual-provider partner) would supply daily instructional supports.

The proposal describes a funding structure driven by state per‑pupil revenue. Josh said the initial funding requirement is a 70%/30% split — “70% of revenue brought in per pupil needs to go to the virtual charter,” with the remaining 30% available to the district; unspent funds at year‑end become district general funds. Board members pressed for clarity on whether district staff time (for example, a counselor working 20% on REVA duties) would be paid from the charter’s portion of funds; Josh said those costs can be charged to the charter within the 70% operating allocation.

Board members focused questions on governance, special education, admissions and accountability. Josh said every REVA student would get an individual learning plan and that a district special‑education teacher would serve as the case manager while EdOptions would provide daily instructional support; he underscored that a student’s individualized education program remains a legal document and would be honored. On accountability, Josh said small virtual charters do not always receive a separate state report card until they reach a larger enrollment threshold; when large enough, REVA would receive its own report card and its metrics would be calculated separately from Prescott’s on-site schools.

Several trustees raised process and policy questions: which district policies would apply to off‑site students, how open enrollment rules would be applied outside the regular state window, whether the governance council would be appointed initially, and how the district would manage testing obligations. Josh said the governance council should be appointed at startup, that state open‑enrollment rules still apply (emergency open enrollment would be required outside the normal window), and that testing and travel costs (vehicles, hotels, rented testing sites) are allowable charter expenses under the 70% allocation.

The board did not take a final vote. Trustees directed staff to return with additional policy clarifications; administration said it would place a formal action item on a June agenda (targeted June or July) to seek authorization to proceed with next steps and contract components.