Testimony of Shantelle Wright, Board Chair DC Public Charter School Board

Hearing on Charter School Review and Renewal in the District

Committee of the Whole

October 22, 2025

Good afternoon, Chairman Mendelson, Councilmembers, staff, and members of the public. My name is Shantelle Wright, and I serve as Chair of the DC Public Charter School Board. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on charter school reviews and renewals, and I echo Dr. Walker-Davis’s thanks for accommodating us remotely.

Let me start with a simple truth: the relationship between the DC PCSB Board and each school’s board is built on a commitment—a compact, a
charter. It’s a promise of greater autonomy in exchange for clear expectations of academic, financial, and operational success.

The DC PCSB Board takes that promise seriously. We evaluate each school’s performance against its commitments and hold schools accountable—not to punish but to ensure they deliver on the promise they made to their students and families.

As part of a review or renewal, DC PCSB staff evaluate whether a school has met its agreed-upon charter goals. Staff review performance data, meet with school leaders, visit classrooms, examine student work, and carefully assess academic, financial, and compliance performance over the past five years. Based on that analysis, staff then make a recommendation to the DC PCSB Board.

For five-year reviews, the staff recommendation may be to: (1) continue the school without conditions; (2) continue the school with conditions; or (3) move to revoke the school’s charter. It’s important to note, as Dr. Walker-Davis shared, that the School Reform Act does not grant the same discretion at the fifteen-year renewal. If a public charter school violates the law or fails to meet its charter goals at renewal, the DC PCSB cannot renew that school’s charter.

If anyone believes our role is to close schools unnecessarily, let me be clear: nothing could be further from the truth. My fellow Board members and I are parents, DC residents, and civic leaders with years of experience in education. We are deeply invested in the success of every school, and our goal is to celebrate, support, and strengthen them—while ensuring every student has access to the quality education they were promised and that they deserve.

Speaking personally, I know what this conversation feels like from the other side of the table. I founded and led a public charter school network here in the District for years. I’ve been there—pouring my blood, sweat, and tears into building a school and realizing a dream for young scholars and their families. And I’ve also had DC PCSB hold me and my team accountable for our outcomes, even issuing conditions for our continuance when we didn’t meet the bar we set for ourselves and agreed to with this Board.

So when I talk about accountability, I do so as someone who’s lived it—who understands both the weight of leading a school and the responsibility of ensuring every student has access to a high-quality education.

No one opens a school to fail. No one sets out to be the lowest-performing school in the city. As much as we want every school to succeed—to keep its promises—history tells us that some will not. So let me talk about what happens in that scenario.

Coming out of a five-year review, as I shared, the DC PCSB Board can vote to continue a charter with time-bound conditions for improvement. Let me say a few words about conditions, because I don’t want folks to get the wrong impression. Conditions are not new goals or added requirements. They’re the same goals a school already has—made more specific and time-bound to ensure real progress toward meeting them.

The Board uses these tools only when a school has fallen significantly off track, and only as a means of supporting improvement while maintaining
accountability. In that sense, conditions are an alternative to closure—a way for the Board to signal both its concern about performance and its continued belief in a school’s potential to improve. They reflect our commitment to keeping schools open when possible, but not without clear, time-bound conditions. Because not taking action when a school isn’t meeting its goals would mean failing both our students and the promise of accountability we made to them.

The last option coming out of a five-year review, when a school has not met its goals or satisfied conditions, is revocation of the school’s charter.

While those are DC PCSB Board actions, schools can also choose to voluntarily relinquish their charter when their leaders determine they will be unable to meet their goals or fulfill conditions for continuance. During the most recent school year, two schools made that difficult decision. When a school’s board reaches that point, we stay closely engaged to manage the transition in a way that minimizes disruption for students, families, and staff.

Our commitment to students and communities does not end with relinquishment or revocation. We understand the uncertainty these moments
create, and we work to provide as much stability as possible—helping families find their next school of choice and supporting affected staff as they transition following a school’s closure.

Having outlined the DC PCSB Board’s role in reviews and renewals, I want to turn to the steps we’ve taken to strengthen our processes—drawing on our own reflections as well as feedback we’ve received, including from this Committee.

You urged us to begin the review and renewal process earlier, and we heard you. This year, we moved the process forward by three months to minimize disruption for families and schools, and to ensure the most critical decisions are made before the lottery closes.

You also asked for greater clarity on our timelines and the steps involved in reviews and renewals. In response, we’ve improved our communications and strengthened our engagement with school leaders and their boards to make each phase of the process more transparent and predictable.

You asked us to strengthen how we communicate difficult feedback to school leaders, and we agree. Dr. Walker-Davis and I have had several conversations about ensuring those interactions are marked by respect, empathy, and professionalism.

Before I close, I want to highlight one final effort—our work to create alternatives to closure for low-performing schools. At the direct request of
charter leaders and sector partners, DC PCSB is developing a formal policy to guide how the Board considers requests from schools to combine or restructure in ways that strengthen their programs. Working in collaboration with these leaders, we’re establishing clear, predictable guidelines that
promote transparency for school leaders, staff, families, and students. We welcome the Committee’s feedback when the public comment period opens on October 27 at our monthly Board meeting.

I hope my testimony has helped to clarify the DC PCSB Board’s role in charter reviews and renewals and to pull back the curtain on our decisions, expectations, and the responsibilities that come with this work.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. I look forward to your questions.