Washington

Statute allows a total of 40 charter schools to be established over a five-year period commencing with April 3, 2016, of which no more than eight may be approved each year during the initial five years, with any unused slots rolling forward.

After five years, the State Board of Education and the Washington Charter School Commission must submit a recommendation to the governor, the legislature, and the public at large regarding whether or not the legislature should authorize the establishment of additional schools.
The five-year authorizing window closed in April 2021. As of December 2021, the legislature has not acted to extend this time-frame for establishing new schools. The State Board of Education and the Washington Charter School Commission have not yet submitted a recommendation regarding whether or not the legislature should authorize the establishment of additional schools (and/or extend the five-year authorizing window).

Washington law allows new start-ups, but does not allow public school conversions.

Statute creates the Washington Charter School Commission, to which charter proposals for schools anywhere in the state can be directly submitted. In addition, statute allows any local school board to seek approval to become an authorizer from the state board of education.

Statute requires local school boards to seek approval from the state board of education prior to becoming an authorizer. State law requires authorizers to submit an annual report to the state board of education that summarizes their authorizing activities as well as the performance of their charter portfolio.

State law makes the state board of education responsible for overseeing the performance and effectiveness of all local school board authorizers via an approval and oversight process detailed in statute. It allows the state board of education to terminate a local school board’s contract to approve schools. The legislature and the governor can remove the ability of the Washington Charter School Commission to continue authorizing (the entities that gave it that authority).

The law requires the state board to submit an annual report that includes details such as the performance of charter schools compared to comparable groups of students in non-charter schools.

Statute requires the state board of education to establish a statewide formula for an authorizer oversight fee, which is to be calculated as a percentage of the state operating funding provided to charters. It provides that this amount may not be more than 4% and that it may involve a sliding scale that takes into consideration such factors as the number of schools per authorizer and the number of years that an authorizer has been operating. The law requires authorizers to separately account for such fees and report them annually to the state board of education.
Statute allows authorizers to provide separately contracted, fee-based services in addition to their oversight responsibilities, but such fees cannot cost more than market rates and cannot be required as a condition of being approved.

Statute requires application elements for all schools and additional elements specific to using educational service providers and replications. Statute requires authorizers to issue requests for proposals and to conduct a thorough evaluation of each application including an in-person interview and public meeting. It also requires authorizers to make all charter approval or denial decisions in a public meeting and to state reasons for denials in writing.

Statute defines a charter contract to be a fixed term, renewable contract between a charter school board and an authorizer that outlines the roles, powers, responsibilities, and performance expectations for each party. It also requires such contracts to contain a performance framework that details the academic and operational performance indicators.
The initial contract must be granted for a term of five years.

State law requires each charter school to publish annually a school performance report. Statute requires that authorizers collect and analyze data to support ongoing evaluation according to the performance framework in the charter contract, including financial accountability.
State law provides authorizers with specific authority to conduct oversight activities needed to fulfill their responsibilities.
Statute requires authorizers to notify their schools of any perceived problems and provide them with reasonable opportunity for the school to remedy the problem.
Statute allows authorizers to take appropriate corrective actions short of revocation as needed.
State law specifies that oversight activities (including data collection requests) may not unduly inhibit the autonomy granted to charter schools.

Statute requires authorizers to issue school performance renewal reports and requires schools seeking renewal to apply for it using renewal application guidance provided by the authorizer.
State law requires authorizers to have clear criteria for renewal and nonrenewal decisions and to base decisions on evidence in accordance with the performance framework set forth in the charter contract. Statute notes that a given charter may not be renewed if, at the time of the renewal application, the school’s performance falls in the bottom quartile of schools on the state’s accountability index unless the school demonstrates exceptional circumstances that the authorizer finds justifiable.

Statute requires charter contract renewals to be for five-year terms, although it allows the authorizer to vary the terms based on the particular circumstances of a charter school.

State law requires authorizers to provide schools with timely notification of potential revocation and due process, including the requirement to conduct a public hearing. It requires all charter renewal, non-renewal, and revocation decisions be made in a public meeting, with authorizers stating reasons for non-renewals and revocations in writing.

Statute requires authorizers to develop a charter school termination protocol to ensure timely notification to parents, orderly transition of students and student records, and proper disposition of public funds, property, and assets.

The law provides that a charter contract may not be transferred from one authorizer to another or from one charter school to another before the expiration of the charter contract term except by petition to the state board of education by the charter school or its authorizer. The state board of education must review such petitions on a case-by-case basis and may grant transfer requests in response to special circumstances and evidence that such a transfer would serve the best interests of the charter school's students.

Washington statute allows for educational service providers (ESPs) to provide substantial educational services, management services, or both, but specifically states that these must be non-profit entities. For those schools proposing to use such ESPs, state law requires them to include in their charter application evidence of the ESP’s success in serving student populations similar to their targeted population and evidence of past performance and their capacity for growth.
Within their application, statute requires them to provide a term sheet setting forth the proposed duration of the service contract, including things like the roles and responsibilities of the school board and the service provider, the scope of services, the performance evaluation measures and timelines, the compensation structure, the methods of contract oversight and performance, and the conditions for renewal and termination of the contract.
Statute provides that school governing boards operate as entities completely independent of any educational service provider. Statute also requires applications to disclose and explain any existing or potential conflicts of interest between the charter school board and the proposed service provider, but it does not specifically prohibit individuals compensated by an ESP from serving on the board, now provide governing boards with access to ESP records and funding reports..
Public charter schools are subject to the Public Records Act. Public record is very broadly defined to include “any writing containing information relating to the conduct of government or the performance of any governmental or proprietary function prepared, owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics.” ESP records related to the oversight of the ESP contract would meet definition of public record and thus the school would have access via the Public Records Act.
The background check law made applicable to charter schools requires that any employees who will have regularly schedule unsupervised access to children are subject to criminal history record check and fingerprinting.

Statute describes charter schools as independently managed public schools operated by qualified nonprofit organizations. It provides that such schools are governed by a board of directors appointed or selected under the terms of their charter application. It states that such boards have clear statutory authority to operate a fiscally and legally autonomous school, including things like receiving and disbursing funds and entering into contracts.

Washington law provides that charter schools are open to all students. Schools must comply with all nondiscrimination laws applicable to school districts. The law notes that a lottery is used only if capacity is insufficient to enroll all students who apply to a charter school. Prior-year students do not apply or re-apply to a school each year and thus do not participate in the lottery and so would not need a preference. These students remain enrolled from year to year.
The law requires all charter schools to give enrollment preference to siblings of already enrolled students and allows weighted preferences for at-risk students and children of full-time employees.
Washington law provides that students must be selected by lottery if more students apply than a school can accommodate.

Statute indicates that charter schools must comply with all state statutes and rules made applicable to the charter school in the schools’ charter contract and are subject only to the specific state statutes and rules identified in the charter law. It states that such schools are not subject to and are exempt from all other state statutes and rules applicable to school districts and school district boards. It also provides that they are also exempt from all school district policies except those made applicable in the school’s charter contract.
Charter schools are not exempt from the state teacher certification requirements, except they may hire non-certificated instructional staff of unusual competence and in exceptional cases.

Washington requires non-charter public school teachers to collectively bargain wages, hours, terms and conditions of employment, leave, and dismissal. In addition, they may bargain management rights and grievance procedures. No items are expressly excluded from bargaining.State law provides that charter schools are exempt from participation in any outside collective bargaining agreements. Statute indicates that any bargaining units established at a charter school must be limited to employees working in the school and must be separate from other bargaining units in school districts, educational service districts, or institutions of higher education.
Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, Washington allowed mandatory agency fees. The Supreme Court decision renders that state law unconstitutional. Three reactive statutes have been enacted. The first requires employers to provide exclusive bargaining representatives reasonable access to new employees for the purposes of presenting information about their exclusive bargaining representative. The second requires the office of financial management to maintain a website that is accessible to the public of all agreements collectively bargained with state employees. And the third provides that upon written authorization of an employee within the bargaining unit and after certification or recognition of the union, the employer must deduct from the employee’s dues certified by the secretary of the union and must transmit the amounts to the treasurer of the union. If a collective bargaining agreement includes a union security provision, the employer must enforce the agreement by deducting from the payments to bargaining unit members the dues required for union membership, or, for non-members, a fee equivalent to the dues.
In Washington, any employee organization may file a request to be the exclusive representative. Such a request shall allege that a majority of the employees in an appropriate collective bargaining unit wish to be represented for the purpose of collective bargaining by such an organization, shall describe the grouping of jobs or positions that constitute the unit claimed to be appropriate, and shall be supported by credible evidence demonstrating that at least 30 percent of the employees in the appropriate unit desire the organization requesting recognition as their exclusive representative. The exclusive representative is then determined by secret ballot election. If only one employee organization is seeking certification as exclusive bargaining representative of a bargaining unit for which there is no incumbent exclusive bargaining representative, the commission may, upon the concurrence of the employer and the employee organization, determine the question concerning representation by conducting a cross-check comparing the employee organization’s membership records or bargaining authorization cards against the employment records of the employer, and forgo an election.

Statute provides that a single charter contract may govern one or more charter schools and that a single charter school board may hold one or more charter contracts. It also provides that each school must be separate and distinct from any others and must report its performance as separate schools, being held independently accountable for its performance.

Statute notes that a charter school is eligible for state or district-sponsored interscholastic programs, awards, scholarships, or competitions to the same extent as other public schools. Statute explicitly states that the eligibility of a charter school student to participate in interscholastic activities is governed by the same oversight organization and subject to the same rules as students in traditional public schools. These rules allow for a charter school student in a charter school without athletics to participate at the resident public schools that the student would otherwise attend.

Statute notes that charter schools function as a local education agency and are responsible for meeting the requirements related to individuals with disabilities. The law notes generally addresses supplemental funding for all students with disabilities. The law provides that charter schools have access to the same special education “safety net” funding for low-incident, high-cost service as do traditional public schools.

While it appears that this law has many of the model law components related to equitable operational and categorical funding, there is no evidence yet of the actual level of equity.
Statute provides that the legislature must appropriate funding from the Washington opportunity pathways account (funded from the state lottery) for charter schools in accordance with the provisions of the charter school law, with the legislative intent that such funding should be distributed equitably with state funding provided for other public schools.

The law requires the state superintendent to transmit to each charter school an amount based on the statewide average staff mix factor for certificated instructional staff, including all categorical programs and supplemental instruction and services, as well as any enrichment to those statutory formulae as specified in the appropriations act.

Statute requires that distributions for pupil transportation is to be calculated on a per student basis based on the allocation for the previous school year to the school district in which the charter school is located.

As part of its annual report on charter schools, the law requires the state board to assess the successes, challenges, and areas for improvement in meeting the purposes of this chapter, including the board's assessment of the sufficiency of funding for charter schools, the efficacy of the formula for authorizer funding, and any suggested changes in state law or policy necessary to strengthen the state's charter schools.

Statute provides that charter schools are eligible for state funds school construction.
It also provides that charter schools have the right of first refusal to purchase or lease at fair market value a closed public school facility or property or any unused portions located in a school district from which it draws its students if the district decides to sell or lease such facility or property. The law also notes that a charter school may negotiate and contract with various entities for the use of a facilities at fair market rent and that various entities can provide space to charter schools within their facilities under their preexisting zoning and land use designations.

Statute includes charter schools as members of relevant state retirement and health care systems as long as the state department of retirement systems receives determinations from the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Department of Labor that such participation does not jeopardize the status of the state’s retirement systems.

Washington law does not contain any of the model law’s provisions for full-time virtual charter schools.