ࡱ> 8PR+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOvfNEWqsup #bjbj<< D$^^)%9% . . .333:@te3&]6ooo,4       U  ..n ,.. I%I%oo,Gfff.I%Po .of 6f. ffR" +p* oh#LV3 R ]04 $<*  .* (Hf  .... #:  Texas open-enrollment charter schools Sixth-year evaluation July 2003 Prepared for Texas Education Agency Prepared by Texas Center for Educational Research Texas Center for Educational Research Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction 1 The National Picture 1 Texas Charter Schools 3 Evaluation of Texas Charter Schools 5 Methodology 5 Study Approach 5 Data Sources 6 Data Analysis 6 Study Limitations 7 Evaluation Report 7 Chapter 2: Characteristics of Texas Open-Enrollment Charter Schools 9 Charter Schools and Campuses 9 Classification by School Type and Years of Operation 11 School Type 11 Years of Charter School Operation 11 Student Demographics 12 Student Characteristics by School Type 13 Student Characteristics by Years of Charter School Operation 14 Student Characteristics Over Time 15 Staff Characteristics 15 Summary 17 Chapter 3: Charter School Revenue and Expenditures 19 Texas School Finance 19 Revenue Sources 20 Expenditures 21 Expenditures by Function 22 Expenditures by Object 23 Expenditures by Program 23 Charter School Expenditures Over Time 24 Revenue Sources 24 Expenditures by Function 25 Expenditures by Object 25 Summary 26 Chapter 4: Survey of Charter School Directors 27 Methodology 27 Director Characteristics 28 Educational Program 29 Organizational Strategies 29 Instructional Technology 31 Assessment Methods 31 Student Discipline and Behavior 32 Governance and Management 34 Staff and Governing Board Responsibilities 34 Barriers to Operating Charter Schools 35 External Support for School Operations 36 Interactions with Other Schools 38 Charter School Policies 39 Benefits of Charter Schools to Public Education 40 Recommendations to Policymakers 41 Summary 42 Chapter 5: Survey of Charter School Teachers 45 Methodology 45 Survey Procedures 45 Characteristics of Survey Respondents 46 Teacher Credentials and Experience 47 Education and Certification 47 Teaching Experience 48 Reasons for Teaching in Charter Schools 49 Educational Activities and Resources 51 Teaching Assignments 51 Instructional Methods 52 Class Size and Technology Resources 54 Assessment Methods 55 Professional Development 56 Teacher Development Opportunities 56 Teacher Appraisal 56 Student Discipline and Behavior 57 Charter School Operations 59 Summary 60 Chapter 6: Survey of Charter School Students 63 Methodology 63 Survey Procedures 63 Characteristics of Survey Respondents 64 Development of Analytic Weights 65 Previous School Experience 66 Factors Influencing School Choice 66 Comparisons by Accountability Ratings 68 Satisfaction with Charter Schools 69 Comparisons by Accountability Ratings 71 Positive Aspects of Charter Schools 72 School Problems and Concerns 73 Student Grades 73 Future Plans 75 Summary 76 Chapter 7: Survey of Charter School Parents 79 Methodology 79 Survey Procedures 79 Characteristics of Survey Respondents 80 Development of Analysis Weights 81 Parent Characteristics 81 How Parents Find Out About Charter Schools 82 Factors Affecting School Choice 83 Parent Satisfaction with Schools 85 Parent Satisfaction with Previous and Current Schools 87 Charter School Parent Satisfaction with Previous Schools 87 Parent Satisfaction with Current Schools 87 Parent Participation in Schools 88 Summary 90 Chapter 8: Student Performance 93 Methodology 93 Data Sources 94 Study Limitations 94 Campus-Level Performance 95 Accountability Ratings 95 Texas Assessment of Academic Skills 99 Charter School and TEA Peer-Group Comparisons 102 Other Performance Measures 104 Student-Level Performance 105 Limitations of Student-Level Data Analysis 105 Students Included in Analysis 106 TAAS Performance 107 Performance of Continuing and Moving Students 109 Summary 111 Comparison of Charter School Campuses with Traditional Public Schools 111 Performance of Students Who Remain In Charter Schools 112 Performance of Students Continuing in Charter Schools and Moving Students 113 Performance of Secondary Students in Charter Schools 113 Chapter 9: Effects of Charter Schools on Traditional School Districts 115 Methodology 115 Survey Procedures 115 Characteristics of Respondents 116 Survey Analysis 117 Officials Aware of Charter Schools Near Their Districts 118 District-Charter School Interactions 118 District Operations 120 Budget and Financial Operations 121 Educational Approaches and Practices 123 Effects on District Students 124 All Responding District Officials 125 Educator Perceptions of Charter Schools 125 General Comments 126 Summary 127 Chapter 10: Case Studies of Charter Schools 129 Methodology 129 Site Selection 130 Instrumentation and Data Collection 131 Data Analyses 132 Characteristics of Successful and Challenged Schools 132 Successful Charter Schools 132 Challenged Charter Schools 133 Distinctive Characteristics of Successful and Challenged Schools 135 School Mission 136 Organizational Structures 136 Student Characteristics 137 Educational Program 137 Teacher Characteristics 138 Instructional Practices 139 Management 142 Revenue and Expenditures 142 Governance 143 Parental Involvement 144 School Culture 144 Summary 144 Attributes Associated with Student Academic Achievement 145 Generalization of Findings to Charter Schools Statewide 146 Chapter 11: Commentary and Policy Implications 149 Charter School Policy Context 149 Charter School Policy Implications 150 Relationship Between Policy and Charter School Characteristics 150 Teacher Quality in Charter Schools 153 Charter School Finance 154 Charter School Autonomy 155 Charter Schools as a Form of School Choice 155 Assimilation of Charter Schools into the Public School System 157 Effects on Traditional Public Schools 157 Accountability for Student Achievement 158 Characteristics Supporting Achievement in Charter Schools 160 Additional Research 161 References 163 Appendices 167 Appendix A: Statutory Provisions Governing Texas Open-Enrollment Charter Schools 167 Appendix B: Charter School Characteristics and Demographics 183 B1: Charter School Characteristics 185 B2: Charter School Demographics 192 Appendix C: Instruments 201 C1: Survey of Charter School Directors 203 C2: Survey of Charter School Teachers 207 C3: Survey of Charter School Students 211 C4: Survey of Charter School Parents 213 C5: Survey of Public School Districts 218 C6: Classroom Observation Form 222 Appendix D: Student Performance for Charter School Campuses 227 Chapter 1  INTRODUCTION  During the past eight years, Texas charter schools have developed within the context of the growth of the charter school movement throughout the United States. This introduction describes the national picture as a way of better understanding Texas charter schools, describes the charter school movement in Texas, and then provides the organization for this report. THE NATIONAL PICTURE Public education reform in the United States has been evolving since the 1830s, but the current round was re-ignited in 1983 with the publication of A Nation at Risk. This publication by the National Commission on Excellence in Education argued that the mediocre educational performance of American students would put the country at risk of a declining position in the world economy. Quality became an issue at the national level as it became apparent that standardized test scores and other achievement indicators were lagging behind those of other nations (Clark, 1997). In many states, the broad public debate seemed to shift from determining whether the existing K-12 public schools had failed, to identifying which of the various reform movements promised better and quicker improvements (Electronic, 2002). As a form of improvement, charter schools and other choice programs were added to the public school equation. In the late 1980s, Philadelphia started a number of schools-within-schools and called them charters. Some of them were schools of choice. The idea was furthered in Minnesota where charter schools were developed according to the basic values of opportunity, choice, and responsibility for results. In 1991, Minnesota passed the first charter school law, with California following suit in 1992. The charter schools that were developed were nonsectarian, publicly-funded schools, but they operated more like private schools in a free market. For example, in Texas and other states, charter schools are exempt from many state statutes and rules related to school operations; however, they still must comply with federal and state statutes concerning health, safety, and civil rights. The charter schools that began to appear were created for many reasons, with the primary motivation being to provide a vision of schooling not available through the traditional neighborhood public school, to serve a specific student population, or to gain educational autonomy. Charter schools had the flexibility to use alternative curricula and non-standardized approaches. Since Minnesota enacted the first charter legislation, 39 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico have enacted charter school laws. The most recent are Iowa and Tennessee, both which signed their charter school laws during the 2002 legislative session. According to the Center for Education Reform, approximately 2,700 charter schools served more than 684,000 students nationwide during the 2002-03 school year. The states with the most charter schools in operation are Arizona (464), California (428), Florida (227), Michigan (196), and Texas (221). Charter schools are often issued by local school boards, public universities, or state boards of education. They are operated by a broad range of organizations, from community groups to for-profit companies. Charter schools serve students in pre-kindergarten through grade 12 using a variety of grade configurations. Typically, charter schools are smaller than most traditional public schools, having a median enrollment of 250 students. California enrolls the most charter students of any state, serving 153,935 students in 2002-03. The number of students attending charter schools, however, amounts to less than one percent of public school students in the United States. Charter schools receive tax monies that would normally go to the attending students home school, but one of the continuing common issues concerning charter schools is the difficulty of starting a school without the resources of a public school district, particularly concerning facilities. For-profit educational management organizations (EMOs) such as TesseracT or Edison have provided some charter schools with administrative and facility start-up support, although Texas state regulations prohibit charter schools from accepting start-up money from EMOs. Some states have allocated funding that may be used by charter schools toward the purchase or improvement of existing facilities, such as the School Repair and Renovation grant program. To address funding challenges, charter schools also rely on federal start-up funding, other state and federal grants, fundraising efforts, and in-kind donations. According to the Center for Education Reform (2003), the growth of the charter school movement is seen in the increase in federal support. Since 1994, the U.S. Department of Education has provided grants to support states charter school efforts, starting with $6 million in fiscal year 1995 and increasing to $300 million for 2003. Although charter schools are held accountable in very diverse ways, based on the state and/or district in which they are located, they have much more autonomy than traditional public schools. Because state regulatory practices differ greatly across the United States, there are varying degrees of monitoring. According to The State of Charter Schools 2000 (2000) report, monitoring occurred most frequently in school finance (94 percent), compliance with legislative mandates (88 percent), student achievement (87 percent), and student attendance (81 percent). Other frequently monitored areas were student instructional practices, school governance, student completion, and student behavior. Most charter schools have procedures in place to report on the schools progress to their governing boards, parents, community, funding sources, the chartering agency, and the State Departments of Education. Although most charter schools use standardized test results for accountability purposes, other assessment methods are being incorporated, such as performance assessments, parent satisfaction surveys, and student surveys. Many schools also incorporate student portfolios, behavioral indicators, and student surveys or interviews into their student assessment policies. The dialogue regarding public education reform, education choice, and charter schools continues, with longitudinal data currently allowing more meaningful evaluations. Studies are being conducted to determine whether charter schools can be the educational innovator furthering the cause of education reform, as promised, without causing the problems many critics have predicted. TEXAS CHARTER SCHOOLS As in other parts of the country, the charter school movement in Texas came about during a time when public schools were under attack. Although the public and legislators were aware of inadequacies in the Texas public education system as early as the 1960s, it was not until 1984, after the publication of A Nation at Risk, that the Select Committee on Public Education (SCOPE) produced a report of twelve recommendations for a major overhaul. The most significant recommendation was no doubt the no-pass, no-play plan, which required students to pass their academic courses in order to participate in extramural sports (Cole, 1987). Other recommendations included establishing a funding system for public education, requiring competency tests for teachers and graduating seniors, and creating a longer school year (Dallas Morning News, 1984, June 23). The reform package resulting from the committees recommendation was hailed nationally as a model for public education (Dallas Times Herald, 1984, July 18). A significant next step in the progression of education reform and the creation of charter schools in Texas was the establishment by the Texas Education Agency of the Partnership Schools Initiative in October 1991. The initiative challenged individual schools to achieve educational excellence and equity for all students (Stevens, 1999). Campuses were offered support, freedom from regulation, and empowerment in their efforts to involve all community stakeholders to restructure their schools to better meet the needs of their particular student population. More than 2,000 campuses applied for the program with the support of their districts superintendent and boards of trustees. In January 1992, Texas Education Commissioner Meno announced the initial selection of 83 schools, and shortly afterward, the number of participating schools increased to 98 (one dropped out). Many would-be reformers were frustrated by what they saw as impediments: (a)state laws, rules and regulations; (b)the state bureaucracyparticularly the Texas Education Agency, (c)school district policies, and (d)central school district administration and school boards (Stevens, 1999). Clearly, the Texas schools wanted greater local flexibility for reform, and the sunset period for the entire Texas Education Code in July 31, 1995 presented a unique opportunity to consider such reform. In redesigning the Texas Education Code, school choice was identified as one of the key issues to address. Mechanisms recommended for helping parents choose the most appropriate educational experience for their children within the public school system included the approval of home-rule for school districts, and the creation of a grant program allowing public school choice for students attending low-performance schools (Elliott, 1998; Stevens, 1999). The 74th legislative session in 1995 passed legislation establishing state charter schools. In that session, the Texas Legislature provided for the creation of 20 open-enrollment charter schools (TEC, 12.101-12.120). Open-enrollment charter schools are public schools that are substantially released from state education regulations and exist separate and apart from local independent school districts. They may be sponsored by an institution of higher education (public or private), a non-profit organization (501(c)(3)) as set out in the Internal Revenue Code, or a governmental entity. In 1997, the Texas Legislature provided for an additional 100 open-enrollment charter schools and an unlimited number of open-enrollment charter schools serving students at risk of failure or dropping out of school (75 Percent Rule charter schools). In order to qualify as a 75 Percent Rule charter school, enrollment must include 75 percent or more at-risk students. The Texas Legislature made further revisions to the education code governing charter schools in 2001. These provisions eliminated the 75 Percent Rule designation, capped the number of charter schools the State Board of Education (SBOE) may grant at 215, and allowed for an unlimited number of specialized charter schools sponsored by public senior colleges and universities. As a result of the enabling legislation, the number of Texas charter schools has increased dramatically, as shown in Figure 1.1. During the 1996-97 school year, 17 open-enrollment charter schools operated in Texas. In 1997-98, charter schools numbered 19. A total of 89 charter schools operated in 1998-99, 45 of which were awarded under the 75 Percent Rule designation. In the 1999-00 school year, 146 charter schools operated for the entire year; of these, 46 were 75 Percent Rule schools. In 2000-01, 160 charter schools operated for the majority of the school year, of which 51 held 75 Percent Rule charters. The following two years, the number of new charter schools has continued to increase at a steady pace.  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 1.1 Texas Charter Schools 1996-97 through 2002-03. The monitoring and evaluation of charter schools continued in the 78th Legislative session in 2003 as fourteen bills were filed related specifically to charter schools and with additional references to charters included in general public education bills. Bills dealt with who can receive a charter, participation of charter school teachers in pension plans, auditing of schools, fund use and recovery, plus suggestions for change as part of the public school system. At this point, no increase in the charter cap was proposed as the legislature was content to fine-tune regulations. A wait and see attitude appears to be prevailing for charter schools, especially as a school voucher pilot program in Texas is viewed as a way to further address education reform. EVALUATION OF TEXAS CHARTER SCHOOLS TEC, 12.118 calls for the Commissioner of Education to designate an impartial organization with experience evaluating school choice programs to conduct an annual evaluation of Texas open-enrollment charter schools. Acting on behalf of the commissioner, the Texas Education Agency designated the Texas Center for Educational Research (TCER) as the lead organization for the sixth-year evaluation. TCER has worked collaboratively with research consultants (Academic Information Management, Inc. and Info2 Knowledge Systems) and universities (University of Texas at Arlington and the Office of Survey Research at the University of Texas at Austin) on the current study. Responding to state statutes, the research team has considered: Student scores on assessment instruments; Student attendance, grades, and discipline; Socioeconomic data on students families; Parents satisfaction with their childrens schools; Students satisfaction with their schools; Costs incurred by charter schools for instruction, administration, and transportation; Effects of open-enrollment charter schools on school districts and on teachers, students, and parents in those districts; and Other issues, as determined by the commissioner. METHODOLOGY Study Approach This evaluation builds on and expands prior Texas open-enrollment charter school evaluations. For the sixth annual evaluation, researchers re-designed the study in order to first, reduce the paperwork burden on charter schools, and second, to maximize available financial resources. Under the new design, researchers continued to collect available data through the Texas Education Agencys Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) and Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) for all of the 180 charter schools in operation the majority of the 2001-02 school year. However, for statewide surveys of charter school directors, teachers, students, and parents, researchers randomly selected 61 charter schools (34 percent of 180 schools) and 78 associated campuses for participation in the study. In addition, from the 61 randomly selected charter schools, researchers purposefully selected 13 charter schools for intensive case studies exploring school characteristics, educational practices, and the experiences and perceptions of school directors, teachers, and students. Selected schools and campuses represent a range of higher and lower performing schools under Texas standard and alternative education accountability systems. In each chapter of the report, a detailed methodological explanation is provided for data collection events undertaken to address the studys eight research questions: What is the policy context in which charter schools operate? What are the characteristics of Texas open-enrollment charter schools and how do they differ from traditional public schools? What are the performance and achievement outcomes for charter schools and students attending those schools? What is the nature of management, governance, teaching, and learning in charter schools? What are the experiences of charter school students and their perceptions of the schools they attend? To what extent do charter schools accommodate the interests and needs of parents? How have charter schools affected traditional public schools? What are the major findings and policy implications? Data Sources The evaluation relies on a variety of data sources including: Analyses of PEIMS and AEIS data for schools and campuses; Surveys of charter school directors, teachers, students, and parents; Analyses of Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) scores and other outcome measures for charter school students and a comparison group of traditional public school students; A survey of officials in affected traditional public school districts; and Site visits to charter schools, including interviews, focus groups, and classroom observations. Some analyses consider charter schools as a group, but in many cases, an aggregate result fails to capture the wide variation among schools. In particular, additional analyses examine data by school type and length of charter school operation. Data Analysis Analysis by charter school type. Charter schools that serve a predominantly at-risk student population are often quite different from those serving less at-risk students. For this reason, the evaluation team has grouped charter schools to distinguish between those that serve more advantaged students and those serving a preponderance of students who are at-risk of failure or dropout. Because schools serving a different population often have different missions, curriculum, and pedagogy, charter schools and campuses addressed in this report are frequently divided into two distinct types for purposes of analysis: (a)charter schools serving primarily at-risk students (70 percent or more) and (b)charter schools serving less than 70 percent at-risk students. Evaluators used students PEIMS economically disadvantaged status as a surrogate for at-risk. The 70 percent cut-point, in contrast to 75 percent used in previous evaluations, was selected to ensure that charter schools serving as Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Programs (JJAEPs)which unquestionably serve a highly at-risk student populationwere included in the comparison group with predominantly at-risk students. Analysis by years of charter school operation. For this report, years of operation refers to the number of school years that a charter school has operated. All comparisons are based on operating years for the original charter school. Thus, all charter campuses associated with a particular charter will have the same length of operation regardless of when and how individual campuses were created. Analyses related to charter schools length of operation include three categories: (a)campuses associated with charters that began operation in 1996 or 1997 (in operation four or more years), (b)campuses associated with charters operating three years, and (c)campuses associated with charters operating one or two years Study Limitations Several factors complicate the analysis of charter school data. The first issue is data accuracy. With the exception of the TAAS, the majority of data are self-reported. Thus, information often reflects respondents perceptions. In some cases, the accuracy of charter school PEIMS data is an issue. For example, in 2001-02 charter schools have a higher average Person Identification Database (PID) error rate (11.6 percent) compared to the state average (1.5 percent). Second, student mobility reduces the number of charter school students included in the state accountability system. Only 60 percent of charter school students are included in 2001-02, compared to 85 percent of students statewide. Third, TEA recognizes charter schools both as campuses and districts, so analyses involve both categories. Some comparisons use campus-level data, while others rely on district-level dataas a result, reported numbers of charter schools vary. Finally, for the majority of comparisons, the school is the unit of analysis. In some instances, however, the student is the analysis unit. For school-level analyses, each school receives equal weight, whereas with the student as the unit, larger schools receive more weight in calculations. In general, the reader must consider study limitations when interpreting the reported information. EVALUATION REPORT The sixth-year evaluation is organized as follows: Chapter 1 provides the contextual background on the charter school movement in Texas and nationally. Theresa Daniel, Ph.D., of the University of Texas at Arlington prepared the literature review. Chapter 2 presents information on the characteristics of open-enrollment charter schools. Daniel Sheehan, Ed.D., of the Texas Center for Educational Research and David Stamman, Ph.D., of Academic Information Management, Inc. prepared this section. Chapter3 examines revenue and expenditures in open-enrollment charter schools. This section was prepared by Daniel Sheehan, Ed.D. and Kelly Shapley, Ph.D., of the Texas Center for Educational Research and David Stamman, Ph.D., of Academic Information Management, Inc. Chapter 4 presents findings from surveys of the directors of open-enrollment charter schools. Theresa Daniel, Ph.D., of the School of Urban and Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Arlington and Kelly Shapley, Ph.D., of the Texas Center for Educational Research prepared this section. Chapter 5 presents findings from surveys of teachers in open-enrollment charter schools. This section was prepared by Keven Vicknair, Ph.D., of the Texas Center for Educational Research. Chapter 6 presents findings from satisfaction surveys of students enrolled in open-enrollment charter schools. This section was prepared by Amy Pieper, M.S., of the Texas Center for Educational Research. Chapter 7 includes findings from satisfaction surveys of parents in charter schools and traditional public school districts. Daniel Sheehan, Ed.D., of the Texas Center for Educational Research prepared this section. Chapter 8 presents student performance data for charter school students. Daniel Sheehan, Ed.D. and Kelly Shapley, Ph.D., of the Texas Center for Educational Research and David Stamman, Ph.D., of Academic Information Management, Inc. prepared this section. Chapter9 presents results of a survey of officials in traditional public school districts in areas where charter schools operate. Todd Sherron, Ph.D., of Info2knowledge prepared this section. Chapter 10 presents findings for case studies of a representative group of 13 charter schools. This section was prepared by Kelly Shapley, Ph.D. and represents the combined efforts of a team of researchers from the Texas Center for Educational Research. Chapter 11 presents commentary on the sixth-year evaluation findings. Kelly Shapley, Ph.D., of the Texas Center for Educational Research prepared this section. Appendix A includes the statutory provisions governing open-enrollment charter schools (TEC, 12.101-12.156). Appendix B includes tables with information on the characteristics and demographics of open-enrollment charter school campuses operating in the 2001-02 school year. Appendix C includes copies of instruments used to collect information from charter school directors, teachers, and students; parents of students in charter and traditional public schools; traditional public school officials; and classrooms observed during site visits to charter schools. Appendix D includes tables with information on student performance for charter school campuses serving primarily at-risk and non-at-risk students. Chapter 2  CHARACTERISTICS OF TEXAS OPEN-ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOLS  In Texas, 180 open-enrollment charter schools and 241 charter school campuses operated for the majority of the 2001-02 school year. A sponsoring entity receives a charter to open a charter school, the rough equivalent of a traditional public school district. Under a single charter, many Texas charter schools have expanded by opening additional campuses. Thus, a single charter school may have one or more campuses associated with the approved charter. In this chapter, characteristics are reported for both charter schools and campuses. Unless otherwise indicated, the data source is TEAs 2001-02 Academic Excellence Information System (AEIS). TEA provides aggregate statistics for charter schools through AEIS reports. Evaluators conducted additional analyses to examine data by school type (schools or campuses serving 70 percent or more at-risk students and those serving less than 70 percent at-risk students) and length of charter school operation (one or two years through four or more years). In some cases, the unit of analysis is the charter school, while in other cases, the analysis unit is the campus. The chapter presents information on school/campus characteristics, student demographics, as well as staff and teacher characteristics. Information for individual campuses is provided in Appendix B. CHARTER SCHOOLS AND CAMPUSES Since the first Texas charter school opened in 1996, the number of charter schools operating in the state and students enrolled in these schools has climbed steadily. As summarized in Table2.1, 17 open-enrollment charter schools operated during the 199697 school year. In 1997-98, 19 charter schools were in operation. Table 2.1 Number of Texas Open-Enrollment Charter Schools and Students Served, 19962002 School YearTotal Charter Schools in OperationNumber of 75% Rule ChartersaNumber of Students EnrolledAverage Campus Enrollment1996-9717--2,4981471997-9819--4,1352171998-99894517,6161981999-001464625,6871562000-011605137,6961882001-02180--46,304192Source: TEA 2002 Snapshot. Open-enrollment evaluation reports, years one to five (www.tcer.org). a The 75 Percent Rule charter designation was authorized in 1997 and eliminated in 2001. By 1998-99, the number of charter schools increased to 89, of which 45 were designated as 75 Percent Rule. In the 1999-00 school year, charter schools numbered 146, including 46 designated as 75 Percent Rule schools. The number of charter schools in operation reached 160 in 2000-01, with 51 of these holding 75 Percent Rule charters. Legislative modifications eliminated the 75 Percent Rule charter school designation in 2001. In 200102, there were 180 charter schools and 241 campuses functioning. One hundred fifty (83 percent) of these charter schools consisted of a single campus, 19 (11 percent) had 2 campuses, 8 (5 percent) had 3 campuses, and 3 charter schools were made up of 6, 11, and 12 campuses, respectively. Figure 1 displays the increasing number of charter schools and charter school campuses operating in Texas across school years.  EMBED MSGraph.Chart.8 \s  Figure 2.1. Number of Texas open-enrollment charter schools and campuses, 1996-2002 The number of students enrolled in charter schools has also increased significantly, from 2,498 in 1996-97 to 46,304 in 2001-02. Yet, the total number of students enrolled in charter schools represents only a small proportion of the slightly more than 4.1 million public school students in Texas. On average, charter schools are small, with an average 2001-02 campus enrollment of 192, and a median enrollment of 143. Seventyfive percent of charter school campuses enroll 236 students or less. The 2001-02 campus enrollment ranges from 2 students to 1,235 students. To date, 5 open-enrollment charters have been revoked by the SBOE; four revocations have been for financial irregularities. In addition, 20 schools have returned their charters, and 1 has expired. Of the 20 first-generation schools, 18 have submitted renewal applications and have received renewals for a 10-year period. CLASSIFICATION BY SCHOOL TYPE AND YEARS OF OPERATION To learn more about charter school characteristics, evaluators examined data by school type and length of charter school operation. For this report, school type refers to charter schools serving primarily at-risk students (70 percent or more) and charter schools serving less than 70 percent at-risk students. The 70 percent cut point was selected to designate charter schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students and to include juvenile justice campuses in the atrisk category. PEIMS economically disadvantaged status is used as a surrogate for at-risk. While school type can be used to classify both charter schools and campuses, years of operation is a school-level variable (as opposed to campus-level). It is based on data for the original charter school; thus, all charter campuses associated with a given charter school will have the same years of operation data regardless of when and how they were started. (See methodology in Chapter 1.) School Type Table 2.2 shows that of the 241 charter school campuses in 2001-02, 100 (41 percent) served 70 percent or more at-risk students, while 141 (59 percent) served less than 70 percent at-risk students. Average student enrollment for charter school campuses (192 students) varied little by school type (serving primarily at-risk students versus serving less at-risk students) and was well less than half of average student enrollment in traditional public schools (556 students). Table 2.2 Number of Charter School Campuses by School Type, 2001-02 Campuses/ EnrollmentCS e" 70% At-RiskCS < 70% At-RiskAll Charter CampusesTexas Public SchoolsNumber of campuses1001412417,380Average enrollment176204192556Total students17,58128,72346,3044,100,344Source: Texas Education Agency and 2002 AEIS reports. Years of Charter School Operation Table 2.3 reveals that most charter campuses have existed for three or more years. Twothirds of campuses have been operating three years (90 campuses) or four or more years (71 campuses). About 12 percent of campuses (28) have been operating two years, and 22 percent (52) are in their first year of operation. Duration of charter school operation varied slightly by the type of students served on campuses. The newer campuses (one or two years of operation) served fewer atrisk students. Table 2.3 Charter Campuses by School Type and Years of Charter School Operation, 200102 Years of OperationCS e" 70% At-RiskCS < 70% At-RiskTotal CampusesN%N%N%Four or more 3715.43414.17129.5Three 3313.75723.79037.3Two 114.6177.12811.6One 197.93313.75221.6Totala10041.514158.6241100.0Source: Texas Education Agency data. a Total percent based on 241 charter school campuses. STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS Table 2.4 reports the distribution of students across grades for charter schools and traditional public schools statewide. Compared to other public schools, there are proportionately more charter school students at kindergarten/prekindergarten, at grades 9 and 10, and slightly more at grade 11. There are proportionately fewer charter school students at grades 1 through 8 and 12. Charter schools enrolling primarily atrisk students have relatively more students at kindergarten/prekindergarten and slightly more students at grades 1 through 4 and 8 and 9. Conversely, the charters enrolling primarily nonatrisk students have slightly more students at grades 6 and 7 and more students at grades 10 through 12. Table 2.4 Grade Level Disaggregation by School Type, 2001-02 Grade LevelCS e" 70% At-RiskCS < 70% At-RiskAll ChartersPublic Schools StatewideN%N%N%N%EE, Pre-K, K3,52720.53,87013.67,39716.2455,22410.91 1,1796.91,7686.22,9476.5319,6707.32 1,0306.01,6575.82,6875.9316,1997.23 9745.71,5715.52,5455.6317,2077.44 8945.21,3964.92,2905.0316,3467.85 8655.01,4225.02,2875.0314,8227.76 9645.61,6125.72,5765.6314,8637.871,0376.01,7466.12,7836.1313,3277.98 1,0356.01,4375.12,4725.4308,0547.89 2,47214.43,99214.06,46414.2357,5728.2101,5579.13,49912.35,05611.1287,0317.3119015.22,6269.23,5277.7256,4556.7127644.41,8396.52,6035.7223,0946.1Total17,199100.028,435100.045,634100.04,099,864100.0Sources: Charter school data was from 2002 individual student files. Other public school data from AEIS 2002 district files. Note. Individual student data was available for 237 campuses. Table 2.5 summarizes student demographic information for 237 charter schools (derived from individual student-level data). Major differences in student racial/ethnic group categories exist between charter schools and the state average. African American students make up about 40 percent of Texas charter schools student population, whereas this group constitutes approximately 14 percent of students in Texas public schools overall. The percentage of Hispanic students in charter schools (38 percent) is slightly less (about 4 percent) than the state average, but the percentage of White students (20 percent) is about half the state average (41 percent). The percentage of economically disadvantaged students in charter schools (58 percent) is more than the state average (51 percent). On the other hand, the percentages of students receiving special education services (9 percent) or classified as limited-English proficient (7 percent) are lower in charter schools than percentages of students receiving such services statewide (12 percent and 15 percent, respectively). Table 2.5 Student Demographic Information, 2001-02 Student GroupCharter SchoolsState Average PercentDifferenceNumber of StudentsPercentAfrican American18,31040.114.4+25.7Hispanic17,28937.941.7-3.8White9,29220.440.9-20.5Other7431.63.1-1.5Economically disadvantaged26,27157.650.57.1Special education4,1399.111.7-2.6Limited-English proficient3,1006.814.5-7.7Source: 2002 individual student data available for 237 campuses. Student Characteristics by School Type Table 2.6 compares student characteristics for all charter schools and traditional public schools as well as charter campuses serving primarily at-risk students and those serving less at-risk students. The predominance of African American students in charter schools persists when charter schools are disaggregated by school type. Not surprisingly, charter schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students have much higher percentages of economically disadvantaged students (87 percent) compared to those serving less disadvantaged students (40 percent). In addition, charter schools enrolling primarily atrisk students enroll proportionally fewer Whites (9 percent) than those enrolling less atrisk students (27 percent). Also, charters serving primarily atrisk students enroll more Hispanics (50 percent) than those with less atrisk students (31 percent). Table 2.6 Student Demographic Information by School Type, 2001-02 GroupCS e" 70% At-RiskCS < 70% At-RiskAll Charter SchoolsTexas Public SchoolsAfrican American41.2%39.5%40.1%14.4%Hispanic49.5%30.9%37.9%41.7%White8.8%27.4%20.4%40.9%Other0.6%2.3%1.6%3.1%Economically disadvantaged86.9%39.8%57.6%50.5%Special education10.1%8.5%9.1%11.7%Limited-English proficient10.4%4.6%6.8%14.5%Number of students17,19928,43545,6344,100,344Source: Analysis of 200102 individual student data from PEIMS available for 237 campuses. Student Characteristics by Years of Charter School Operation Table 2.7 contrasts student demographic information by years of charter school operation. Percentages of White students are highest in the newest (one or two years of operation) charters. Well-established charter schools (four or more years) have the highest percentage of Hispanic students (42 percent) followed by those in operation for one or two years (39 percent). The charters in operation for three years have the highest percentage of African American students. The percentage of economically disadvantaged students ranges from about 50 to 60 percent, depending on the year of operation. Special education students account for about 10 percent of charter school students. The percentage of limited-English proficient students is largest for established schools (four or more years). The average school size increases for schools with more experience, with new schools (one or two years) just over half the size of established schools (four or more years). Table 2.7 Student Demographic Information by Years of Charter School Operation, 2001-02 Student GroupNumber of Years Charter School in OperationFour or More ThreeOne or TwoAfrican American35.1%46.1%33.4%Hispanic42.1%34.3%38.6%White20.3%18.7%26.6%Other2.6%0.9%1.4%Economically disadvantaged55.1%61.8%49.6%Special education9.6%8.3%10.1%Limited-English proficient8.0%5.8%6.6%Average school size307251189Number of students17,52221,8766,236Source: 2001-02 individual student data available for 237 campuses. Student Characteristics Over Time Table 2.8 summarizes data from 1996-97 through 2001-02 evaluation reports. Across six years, charter schools have enrolled increasing percentages of African American students and decreasing percentages of Hispanic students. However, 200102 data may indicate that African American percentages have leveled off and Hispanic percentages are increasing. The percentage of White students peaked in 199798 and subsequently declined. Compared to traditional public schools, African American students have been consistently over-represented in charter schools. Hispanic students, which were initially over-represented in charter schools, are slightly under-represented in the fifth and sixth years compared to traditional public schools. Hispanic students, historically, have been more heavily concentrated in charter schools serving predominantly at-risk students. Furthermore, the percentages of White students in charter schools are consistently lower than traditional public schools, and White students are more heavily concentrated in charter schools serving primarily non-at-risk students. In sum, evidence of ethnic and socioeconomic stratification in charter schools shows that White charter school students tend to enroll in schools that serve less at-risk and higher socioeconomic students, and Hispanic charter school students tend to do the opposite. Table 2.8 Student Demographic Information, 1996-2002 (Percent) African AmericanHispanicWhiteEconomically DisadvantagedCharterStateCharterStateCharterStateCharterState1996-9727145237204651481997-9829144538244536491998-9934144338224553491999-0039143840224252492000-0141143741204254492001-024014384220415851Source: Analysis of 2002 individual student data from PEIMS. Open-enrollment charter schools evaluation reports, years one to five (www.tcer.org). Certainly, charter schools continue to evolve. Although there has been considerable growth in the number of campuses (which reached 241 in the 2001-02 school year) and students served (46,304 in 2002), these numbers pale in comparison to the more than 6,000 regular campuses in Texas and the four million-plus students they serve. STAFF CHARACTERISTICS Table2.9 shows staff data for charter schools and traditional public schools. For charter schools, 3 percent of staff is central administration and 10 percent is campus administration. This compares to 2 percent central administration and 4 percent campus administration in other Texas public schools. Because charter schools are generally smaller than most districts, percentages of staff members listed as administrators would be greater than overall public school averages, given economies of scale. Charter school central and campus administrators earn less than their peers in traditional public schools. Central administrators statewide average about $66,000, whereas central administrators in charter schools average about $52,000. Campus administrators statewide average about $58,500, while charter campus administrators average about $40,500. Likewise, charter school teachers make less (an average of about $29,000) than teachers in other Texas public schools (an average of about $38,000). Charter schools also have much smaller faculty than other public schools. The average number of teacher fulltime equivalents (FTEs) in charter schools is about 12 compared to about 39 in other Texas public schools. Although there are similar percentages of teachers in charter schools and traditional public schools (72 percent), the studentteacher ratio is higher in charters (17.8 versus 14.0). Table 2.9 also compares staff characteristics for charters serving primarily at-risk students and those serving less at-risk students. There are minor differences between these two types of charter schools in percentages of administrators and teachers, administrator and teacher salaries, and teacherstudent ratios. However, charter schools serving primarily at-risk students have slightly smaller numbers of staff (14.7 FTEs versus 17.1 FTEs) and teachers (10.1 FTEs versus 12.7 FTEs) than the charters serving less at-risk students. Table 2.9 Charter School Staff Characteristics, 2001-02 Charter SchoolsTexas Public Schools NCS e" 70%CS < 70%All CS% Central administrationa1572.7%3.6%3.3%2.0%% School administration23210.2%10.2%10.2%4.2%Average central administrator salarya100$52,669$52,057$52,308$66,100Average campus administrator salary190$40,245$40,803$40,577$58,544Average teacher salary228$29,136$29,484$29,343$38,278Average staff FTE23214.717.116.153.4Average teacher FTE23210.112.711.638.5% Teachers23270.0%74.1%72.4%72.4%Students per teacher22417.617.917.814.0Source: 2002 TEA AEIS campus report. Note. Data for Texas Public Schools exclude charters. a 2002 TEA AEIS district report. Table 2.10 shows that compared to other Texas public schools, charter schools have higher percentages of African American teachers (34 percent compared to 8 percent) and lower percentages of White teachers (43 percent compared to 74 percent). The lower average salaries for teachers in charter schools may partially be accounted for by charter teachers relative inexperience. As Table 2.10 illustrates, the percentage of beginning teachers in charter schools is much higher than the state average (21 percent versus 8 percent). On average, charter teachers have about half as many years experience as teachers statewide (5 versus 12 years). In addition, proportionately fewer charter teachers have advanced degrees (14 percent compared to 18 percent statewide). Charter teacher tenure, a measure of how much time the teacher has been employed in the district, is necessarily low (one year versus 8 years in other public schools), given the relative newness of most charter schools. The 200102 turnover rate for teachers in charter schools, 53 percent, is much higher than the state average of 17 percent, and higher than the charter school average of 46 percent in 200001. Table 2.10 illustrates differences and similarities between charters serving primarily atrisk students and those serving less at-risk students. Charters serving more atrisk students have higher percentages of African American (43 percent versus 28 percent) and Hispanic (26 percent versus 16 percent) teachers, but a lower percentage of White (27 percent versus 54 percent) teachers. The charters serving primarily atrisk students also have a lower percentage of teachers with advanced degrees (8 percent compared to 18 percent). There are small differences between these two groupings of charter schools in teacher tenure, experience, and turnover rate. Table 2.10 Charter School Teacher Characteristics, 2001-02 Charter SchoolsTexas Public Schools NCS e" 70%CS < 70%All CS% Minority teachers23072.7%46.4%57.1%25.5%% African American23243.3%28.1%34.4%8.1%% Hispanic23226.4%15.5%20.0%16.5% % White23226.8%53.6%42.5%74.4%Teacher average years of experience2315.45.55.411.9Teacher tenure in years2311.10.91.07.9% Beginning teachers23220.9%20.7%20.8%7.7%% 1-5 years experience23249.4%50.0%49.7%26.7%% 6-10 years experience14221.8%20.0%20.7%18.9%% 11-20 years experience23211.4%10.6%11.0%25.5%% More than 20 years experience2324.4%5.5%5.1%21.5%% Teachers with no degreea15714.7%16.3%15.7%1.0%% Teachers with advanced degreesa1567.9%17.6%13.9%18.1%Teacher annual turnover ratea15754.7%51.9%53.0%17.1%Source: 2002 TEA AEIS campus report. Note. Data for Texas Public Schools exclude charters. a 2002 TEA AEIS district report. SUMMARY Since the first 17 charter schools opened in Texas in the 1996-97 school year, the number of charter schools has climbed steadily. By 2001-02, the number of charter schools in operation reached 180. Concurrently, across the six-year period, student enrollment increased from 2,498 to 46,304. Of the 241 charter school campuses operating in 200102, 100 (42 percent) served 70 percent or more at risk students, while 141 (59 percent) served less than 70 percent at-risk students. Most charter schools, and consequently charter campuses, have existed for a brief time. Only 30 percent (71 campuses) are affiliated with charter schools operating four or more years. Compared to other public schools, charters have proportionately more students at kindergarten/prekindergarten and at grades 9 through 11. Conversely, charters have proportionately fewer students at grades 1 through 8 and 12. Charters enrolling primarily atrisk students have relatively more students at the lower grades (K-4) and fewer at the upper grades (10-12). Texas charter schools serve larger proportions of low-income and African American students than public schools statewide. Within public school districts, 14 percent of students are African American, whereas this group comprises 40 percent of the charter school student population. The percentage of Hispanic students in charter schools (38 percent) is slightly less than the state average (42 percent), and the percentage of White students (20 percent) is about half the state average (41 percent). Overall, charter schools report about nine percent of students in special education and seven percent as limitedEnglish proficient. These percentages are lower than the overall state percentages of students in these groups. Charter schools serving primarily at-risk students have higher percentages of Hispanic and economically disadvantaged students than traditional public schools. Percentages of White students are highest in the newest charters. Well-established charter schools (four or more years) have the highest percentage of Hispanic students. The charters in operation for three years have the highest percentage of African American students. African American students, however, have been consistently over-represented in charter schools compared to traditional public schools. White students tend to enroll in schools that serve less at-risk students, and Hispanic charter school students tend to do the opposite. Finally, the average school size increases for schools with more experience, with new schools just over half the size of established schools. About three percent of charter school staff is central administration, compared to about two percent statewide. While 10 percent of charter school staff is campus administration, only 4 percent is campus administration statewide. For both types of administrators and teachers, average salaries are lower in charter schools than in the state. Lower relative experience among charter school educators may partly account for the difference. Charter schools also have a higher percentage of beginning teachers (21 percent versus 8 percent) and teachers have less than half as many years experience as teachers statewide (5 versus 12 years). The teacher turnover rate in charter schools (53 percent) is considerably higher than the state average (17 percent). Finally, class size, measured at the campus level, tends to be larger in charter schools (17.8 students compared to 14.0 students statewide). Chapter 3  CHARTER SCHOOL REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES  Charter school legislation aims to grant schools greater fiscal and educational autonomy in exchange for student academic success. Research both nationally and in Texas, however, reveals that funding and financial issues pose the greatest obstacle to the establishment and success of charter schools. Yearly reports of the National Study of Charter Schools, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education, lists a lack of start-up funds, inadequate operating funds, and inadequate facilities as three of the top four barriers faced by charter schools (RPP International, 2000). Likewise, results for yearly surveys of Texas open-enrollment charter school directors have consistently identified lack of start-up funds, inadequate facilities, and inadequate operating funds as the greatest challenges directors face in opening new charters and inadequate facilities and operating funds remain key barriers in subsequent operating years (Taebel and Daniel, 2002). In recognition of this importance, Texas statute [Texas Education Code (TEC), 12.118 (c)(1)] requires that the evaluation of open-enrollment charter schools include an examination of the costs of instruction, administration, and transportation incurred by open-enrollment charter schools. This section describes revenue and expenditures of charter schools based on an analysis of actual financial records obtained through the Texas Education Agencys (TEAs) Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS). Financial data are reported from all fund sources and expenditure values represent actual expended amounts. Differences in some computed totals and other published figures may be due to calculations on amounts that have been rounded or averaged. Computations involving actual expenditures by function and object are computed totals and may differ from aggregate state totals due to rounding. In addition, in some instances, data reporting for charter schools presents anomalies and outliers that affect averages and percentages. In order to address this data-quality issue, researchers eliminated statistically improbable outliers before completing per-pupil calculations. Information is provided on revenue and expenditures for 175 charter schools with available financial data reports. As with other sections of the report, charter schools are classified into one of two categories: charter schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students and those serving less than 70 percent at-risk students. Of the 175 charter schools discussed in this section, 69 are classified as serving primarily at-risk students, and 106 as serving less at-risk students. Where practical, comparisons are made between the two categories of charter schools, as well as between other Texas public schools and charter schools. Longitudinal comparisons are also made for the last two years of charter school operation (200001 and 200102). TEXAS SCHOOL FINANCE Funding for Texas public school districts comes from three primary sources: local funds, primarily local property tax revenues; state funds from a variety of revenue sources, including the General Revenue Fund, the Available School Fund, and special fees; and federal funds. Charter schools do not have local property wealth to tax for the purposes of generating revenue and participating in the Foundation School Program. Instead, charter schools, historically, have received an amount of funding for each student in Average Daily Attendance (ADA) that is roughly equal to the amount of funding (state plus local and any applicable federal funds) that the traditional public school district in which the student resides would receive. Charter schools supplement funding with federal funds and fundraising from private and community sources (Texas Center For Educational Research, 2001). The 77th Texas Legislature modified state funding for Texas open-enrollment charter schools under House Bill 6 (HB 6). Charter schools are currently funded under a new scheme based on the statewide average funding generated by a student with the same program in which the charter student participates (e.g., special education, compensatory education). Perpupil allotments are higher if a student is eligible for career and technology education, bilingual education, compensatory education, gifted and talented education, or special education. Additionally, for the first time, charter schools will receive the cost of education index adjustment, the small and mid-size district adjustment, and the sparcity adjustment, which are included in the statewide average funding formula. Charter schools beginning operation on or after September 1, 2001 are funded under the new method. In contrast, charter schools in operation before September 1, 2001 will be phased into the new scheme over 12 years. These schools will continue to receive funding based on the calculation of the ADA each student would have earned from the sending district (TEC, 12.106-12.107). The new funding system will be phased in gradually for these charter schools, with all charter schools funded under the flat-funding scheme in the 2012-2013 school year (Texas Education Agency, Summary of Charter Laws as Amended by HB 6, 77th Legislature). HB 6 also specifies the status and use of charter school funds (TEC, 12.107). Funds received by a charter holder are public funds that are held in trust by the charter holder for the benefit of students. Funds received by a charter school must be deposited into a bank, and charter schools are required to adhere to financial accounting standards necessary to ensure uniformity in financial accounting and reporting of state funds (Texas Education Agency, 2003). To receive federal compensatory education funds, charter schools, similar to traditional public schools, must participate in the child nutrition program. Congress appropriates federal funds to schools and districts, usually for specific programs or populations of students (e.g., Title I program for low-income students), and funds must be expended for designated purposes, and must be used to supplement rather than supplant state or local dollars to fund a program. Charter schools are also entitled to receive state funding in the form of grants or other discretionary funding unless prohibited by state statute. REVENUE SOURCES Table 3.1 compares sources of revenue for traditional public schools with those of charter schools statewide for 2001. As noted previously, charter schools do not have the authority to impose taxes; therefore, all of their local funding is derived from sources other than local property taxes (TEC, 12.102 [4]). More than three-quarters of charter school funding (77 percent) is derived from state revenue, compared to only 39 percent for other public schools statewide. In contrast to the state, charter schools also receive proportionally more federal funds (15.1 percent versus 8.5 percent). Table 3.1 Comparison of Revenue Sources for Charter Schools and Traditional Public Schools for 200102 (Percent) Revenue SourceCharter Schools (N=175)Traditional Public SchoolsLocal (property tax) 0.047.3Local (other and intermediate)a8.05.4State76.938.9Federal15.18.5Total100.0100.1Source: Actual financial records provided by PEIMS for 2001-02. a Charter school funding from other local sources comes primarily from grants and donations. The comparison of the perpupil revenue for charter and traditional public schools in Table 3.2 shows the importance of state funding for charter schools. The total per-pupil revenue for charter schools was $6,762, or $1,089 less than the $7,851 for other public schools statewide. During the 2001-02 school year, charter schools per-pupil revenue from state funds, federal funds, and other local funds was over 1.5 times (1.63 times) that for other public schools. However, traditional public schools received considerable revenue ($3,712 or nearly 50 percent) from local taxes. Table 3.2 Average Per-Pupil Revenue for Charter Schools and Public Schools Statewide for 2001-02 Revenue SourceCS e" 70% (N=69)CS < 70% (N=106)All CS (N=175)Traditional Public SchoolsLocal tax$0$0$0$3,712Other locala$333$647$542$421State$5,561$5,015$5,198$3,052Federal$1,337$864$1,022$666Total revenue$7,231$6,526$6,762$7,851Source: Actual financial records provided by PEIMS for 2001-02. Note. Amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar. Statewide data do not include charter schools. a Charter school funding from other local sources comes primarily from grants and donations. Charter schools serving 70 percent or more atrisk students receive about $700 more per pupil ($7,231 versus $6,526) than charters serving less than 70 percent atrisk students. This funding difference is due to more state ($546 per pupil) and federal ($473 per pupil) monies going to the charters serving primarily at-risk populations. EXPENDITURES Texas schools report expenditures by function, object, and in some cases, by program. Functions describe the broad purpose of expenditures, such as instruction or administration; objects describe the service or item purchased, such as salaries or supplies; and program classifications are used to identify instructional areas or arrangements, such as regular, special, and bilingual education programs. Expenditures by Function The greatest expenditures by function for charter schools, as presented in Table 3.3, are for instruction (51 percent), general administration (13 percent), plant maintenance and operation (13 percent), and school leadership (8 percent). These expenditures include dollars for activities that directly relate to the interaction between teachers and students, the amount spent on charter school management and governance, and funds designated for maintaining and operating the charter school facility. Traditional public schools statewide also expend the greatest percentage of their budgets for instruction (45 percent), but lesser amounts for plant maintenance and operation (8 percent), school leadership (4 percent), and general administration (3 percent). The per-pupil total operating expenditure for charter schools is $6,783, or $1,866 less than the $8,649 for other public schools statewide. Traditional public schools also spend considerably more perpupil than charter schools in the areas of facilities construction ($1,167 versus $156) and debt services ($639 versus $29). Overall, charter schools spend more perpupil than other public schools on general administration ($865 versus $238), school leadership ($557 versus $375), plant maintenance and operation ($856 versus $707), and security/monitoring ($49 versus $43). Most charter schools are smaller than traditional public schools and school districts, which may account for the greater administrative and plant maintenance costs due to the absence of a central infrastructure coupled with an inability to take advantage of economies of scale. Table 3.3 Per-Pupil Function Expenditures for Charter Schools and Traditional Public Schools for 2001-02 Expenditure CategoryCS e" 70% (N=69)CS < 70% (N=106)All CS (N=175)Traditional DistrictsInstruction (11)$4,239$3,033$3,426$3,932Instructional resources (12)$50$18$29$131Curriculum/staff develop (13)$139$44$75$115Instructional leadership (21)$62$55$57$111School leadership (23)$670$500$557$375Guidance/counseling service (31)$148$131$137$239Social work services (32)$30$2$11$19Health services (33)$23$31$28$64Student Transportation (34)$152$85$107$205Food services (35)$361$197$252$346Co-curricular activities (36)$54$48$50$174General administration (41)$1,031$781$865$238Plant maintenance & operations (51)$886$839$856$707Security/monitoring (52)$46$50$49$43Data processing services (53)$92$72$79$93Community Services (61)$13$10$11$42Debt Services (71)$16$35$29$639Facilities Construction (81)$58$206$156$1,167Total average expenditures$8,067$6,137$6,783$8,649Source: Actual financial records provided by PEIMS for 2001-02. Note. Totals include program intent code 99 (Undistributed). Amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar. PEIMS function code is shown in parenthesis. In almost all expenditure categories (a notable exception being facilities construction), charter schools serving primarily at-risk students have higher per-pupil expenditures. This difference is largest in the area of instruction, with $4,239 perpupil expended in charters serving primarily at-risk students and $3,033 expended in charters serving less atrisk students. Overall, charter schools serving primarily at-risk students expend more per student ($8,067) compared to charter schools serving less at-risk students ($6,137). Expenditures by Object Object expenditures include payroll costs, professional and contracted services, supplies and materials, other operating expenses, debt service, and capital outlay. Capital outlay includes land, buildings, and equipment. Table 3.4 presents expenditure data for 2001-02 by object category. Table 3.4 Per-Pupil Object Expenditures for Charter Schools and Traditional Public Schools for 200102 Expenditure Category CS e" 70% (N=69) CS < 70% (N=106) All CS (N=175)Traditional Public Schools Payroll (6100)$4,242$3,556$3,786$5,414Other operating (6200)$3,786$2,482$2,918$1,587Debt service (6500)$38$98$78$640Capital outlay (6600)$0$0$0$1,239Total object expenditures$8,066$6,136$6,782$8,880Source: Actual financial records provided by PEIMS for 2001-02. Note. Amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar. PEIMS category is shown in parenthesis (e.g., 6100 includes all funds from 6100-6199). Total per-pupil object expenditures are less for charter schools ($6,782) than other public schools statewide ($8,880). This difference comes from traditional public schools spending more perpupil than charters on payroll ($1,628), debt service ($562), and capital outlay ($1,239). However, charter schools spend almost twice as much (84 percent more) on other operating expenditures including student support services, student transportation, food services, cocurricular/extracurricular activities, and curriculum and staff development. When object expenditures for charter schools are compared by category, charter schools serving primarily at-risk student populations spend $686 more on payroll and $1,304 more on other operating expenditures than charter schools serving less at-risk students. Expenditures by Program Instructional expenditures are a sub-set of operating expenditures and are categorized by program. Table 3.5 presents 2001-02 per-pupil program expenditures for charter school and other public schools statewide. Charter schools spend slightly more for basic educational services ($3,202) than the states traditional public schools ($3,106). However, in all other program categories, public schools statewide expend more per pupil than charter schools. Program expenditures for charter schools serving varying percentages of at-risk students are dissimilar. Charter schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students expend $1,930 more perpupil ($8,067 versus $6,137). Much of this difference is due to more spending in the undistributed category ($949), and for accelerated instruction ($358), special education ($291), and basic educational services ($249). Table 3.5 Per-Pupil Program Expenditures for Charter Schools and Traditional Public Schools for 2001-02 Expenditure Category CS e" 70% (N=69) CS < 70% (N=106) All CS (N=175)Traditional Public SchoolsBasic educational services (11)$3,368$3,119$3,202$3,106Gifted and talented (21)$16$9$12$82Career and technology (22)$131$106$115$200Special education (23)$642$351$448$786Accelerated instruction (24)$638$280$400$621Bilingual and special language (25)$55$18$31$205Athletics and related activities (91)$31$16$21$124Undistributed (99)$3,186$2,237$2,555$3,522Total program expenditures$8,067$6,137$6,783$8,649Source: Actual financial records provided by PEIMS for 2001-02. Note. Amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar. PEIMS category is shown in parenthesis. CHARTER SCHOOL REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES OVER TIME This section discusses changes in charter school revenue and expenditures over the past two years. Only two years of financial data are included because changes in the coding of financial data instituted in 200001 make comparisons to previous years confusing and potentially inaccurate. Revenue Sources Table 3.6 shows a comparison of charter school revenue sources for the last two years. Each year, the state was the greatest funding resource for charter schools, with 78 percent of revenue in 200001 and 77 percent in 200102. Federal revenue sources increased in 200102, from 10 percent to 15 percent. However, the percentage of local (other and intermediate) revenue that charter schools receive decreased from 12 percent in 200001 to 8 percent in 200102. Table 3.6 Comparison of Charter School Revenue for 2000-01 and 2001-02 (Percent) Revenue Source2000-012001-02DifferenceLocal (property tax)  0.0 0.00.0Local (other and intermediate)12.08.0-4.0State78.476.9-1.5Federal9.615.1+5.5Source: Actual financial records provided by PEIMS. Revenue includes all fund sources. Expenditures by Function Table 3.7 shows a comparison of the charter school per-pupil expenditures by function for the 2000-01 and 200102 school years. In 2001-02, there was a total average perpupil expenditure increase of $960 (from $5,823 to $6,783). The categories with the largest perpupil increases were instruction ($759), plant maintenance and operations ($146), and school leadership ($91). The largest perpupil decrease ($50) in 200102 occurred in general administration. Other areas with decreases (from $2 to $41 per pupil) in 200102 were curriculum and staff development, student transportation, co-curricular activities, security/monitoring, community services, and facilities construction. Table 3. 7 Comparison of Charter School Per-Pupil Expenditures by Function for 2000-01 and 200102 Expenditure Category2000-01 (N=157)200102 (N=175) DifferenceInstruction (11)$2,667$3,426$759Instructional resources (12)$31$29($2)Curriculum/staff develop. (13)$116$75($41)Instructional leadership (21)$48$57$9School leadership (23)$466$557$91Guidance counseling services (31)$131$137$6Social work services (32)$7$11$4Health services (33)$23$28$5Transportation (34)$109$107($2)Food (35)$226$252$26Co-curricular activities (36)$54$50($4)General administration (41)$915$865($50)Plant maintenance/operations (51)$710$856$146Security/monitoring (52)$51$49($2)Data processing services (53)$69$79$10Community services (61)$13$11($2)Debt services (71)$11$29$18Facilities construction (81)$165$156($9)Total average expenditures$5,823$6,783$960Source: Actual financial records provided by PEIMS. Note. PEIMS category is shown in parentheses. Totals include program intent code 99 (undistributed). Amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar. Expenditures by Object Table 3.8. displays a comparison of charter school per-pupil expenditures by object for the last two years. Total object expenditures perpupil increased by $996, from $5,786 in 200001 to $6,782 in 200102. Payroll was the largest object expenditure for charter schools each year. Payroll increased by $580 perpupil, from $3,206 in 200001 to $3,786 in 200102. Charter school expenditures for other operating expenses in 200102 increased by $431, from $2,487 in 200001 to $2,918 in 200102. Debt service was essentially the same each year, and capital outlay, which includes land, buildings and equipment, decreased from $17 perpupil in 200001 to $0 perpupil in 200102. Table 3.8 Comparison of Charter School Per-Pupil Object Expenditures for 2000-01 and 200102 Expenditure Category2000-01 (N=159)2001-02 (N=175) DifferencePayroll (6100)$3,206$3,786$580Other operating (6200)$2,487$2,918$431Debt service(6500) $76 $78$2Capital outlay (6600) $17 $0($17)Total object expenditures$5,786$6,782$996Source: Actual financial records provided by PEIMS. Note. Amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar. PEIMS category is shown in parenthesis (e.g., 6100 includes all funds from 6100-6199). SUMMARY Texas open-enrollment charter schools continue to receive the overwhelming majority of their funding from the state. In 200102, the percentage of federal revenue increased, while the percentage of other local and intermediate funding decreased. Charter schools serving primarily at-risk students receive more total revenue per pupil than charter schools serving less at-risk student populations, and these schools receive significantly more revenue from federal and state sources. Absent the authority to impose local taxes, all charter schools continue to receive no local tax funding. Over time, instruction continues to account for the greatest per-pupil expenditures for charter schools, followed by general administration, plant maintenance and operations, and school leadership. The most striking contrast between charter schools serving primarily at-risk students and those serving less at-risk students is that the former spend $1,206 or 40 percent more perpupil for instruction. In addition, in almost all other expenditure categories (an exception being facilities construction), atrisk charter schools have higher per-pupil expenditures. This probably reflects the additional expenditures required to educate special student populations, such as special education and compensatory education students, or students in residential care and treatment. As indicated in earlier reports, charter schools small size, coupled with the absence of central administrative infrastructure and an inability to take advantage of economies of scale, may be contributing factors for their relatively high general administrative costs. Among object expenditures, all charter schools expend the greatest amount of their total operating budget for payroll and other operating expenditures, and this has persisted over time. In 2001-02, charter schools per-pupil object expenditures for other operating expenses and for payroll increased substantially (by 17 percent for other operating expenses and by 18 percent for payroll). This is likely due to increased expenditures in function areas such as instruction (28 percent increase), plant maintenance/operations (21 percent increase), and school leadership (20 percent increase). Chapter 4  SURVEY OF CHARTER SCHOOL DIRECTORS  Unlike traditional public schools that are almost always headed by a district superintendent and campus principal, charter schools have varied administrative titles and responsibilities. The situation is complicated by the fact that a charter school often functions as both a district and campusthus, an administrator may perform the combined roles of superintendent and principal. Despite varying administrative configurations, each charter school is headed by a chief operating officer, who may be called the director, superintendent, head of school, chief executive officer, and so forth. Directors, as the chief officers are called hereafter, implement policies developed by governing boards and exercise direct control over the charter school. As part of the larger evaluation of Texas charter schools, the Commissioner of Education authorized a survey of charter school directors views. METHODOLOGY The survey of charter school directors, which appears in Appendix C, addresses charter school organization and operations, instruction and assessment, student discipline and behavior, parent involvement, school governance and management, interactions with other public and charter schools, and policies. Researchers collected the names of charter school directors from the Texas Education Directory (AskTED). In March 2003, surveys were mailed to a random sample of 61 charter school directors (34 percent of 180 charter schools operating in 2001-02). Of the 61 randomly selected directors, 53 returned a completed survey for a response rate of 87 percent. Because charter schools that serve a predominantly at-risk student population are often quite different from those serving less at-risk students, analyses were conducted to examine the perceptions of charter school directors overall and by school type. As shown in Table 4.1, responses are compared for schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students (21 directors) and schools serving less than 70 percent at-risk students (32 directors). Students economically disadvantaged status reported in PEIMS serves as a surrogate for at-risk. Directors of charter schools serving less at-risk students responded at a higher rate (91 percent) than their counterparts in schools with more at-risk students (81 percent); thus, those directors are somewhat over-represented in overall results. throughout the report, survey results are compared with findings from past evaluations of Texas charter schools, when applicable. Table 4.1 Distribution of Survey Respondents, by School Type School Type Number of Directors Number of RespondentsPercent of Directors RespondingCS e" 70% At-Risk262180.8CS < 70% At-Risk353291.4Total615386.9Note. CS=Charter School. DIRECTOR CHARACTERISTICS Charter school directors responded to several questions regarding their personal characteristics and background. As Table 4.2 shows, directors are more likely to be female (60 percent) than male. Schools serving less at-risk students, however, have equal proportions of male and female directors, whereas schools serving predominantly at-risk students have more female directors (76 percent). For charter schools in general, there are more White directors (53 percent), but schools with a larger proportion of at-risk students have higher percentages of Hispanics and African Americans in leadership positions. Table 4.2 Characteristics of Director Survey Respondents (Percent) CharacteristicCS e" 70% At-Risk N=21CS < 70% At-Risk N=32All Charter Schools N=53GenderMale23.850.039.6Female76.250.060.4Race/EthnicityHispanic23.83.111.3African American47.625.034.0White28.668.852.8Other (Mallese American)0.03.11.9Highest Education LevelFewer than 4 years college0.03.22.0Bachelors degree30.03.213.7BA/BS and graduate courses10.016.113.7Masters degree55.054.854.9Doctorate5.022.615.7Texas Mid-Management CertificationYes5.027.618.4No95.072.481.6Note. The number of respondents varies slightly by item due to missing data. Charter school directors are a highly educated group, with 55 percent having a masters degree and another 16 percent with a doctorate. This has stayed constant for charter schools over the six years of evaluation. Few directors hold Texas mid-management certification (18 percent), which is also similar to past years. Directors in schools serving less at-risk students are more likely to have Texas administrative credentials (28 percent) compared to those in schools with primarily at-risk students (5 percent). Table 4.3 shows that many directors have prior educational experience either in public or private schools. About a third of directors (18 individuals) have been administrators in public schools for an average of 6.4 years. Although only a few directors have prior experience as administrators in religious or non-religious private schools, those individuals, on average, bring between 7.6 and 10 years experience to their charter school positions. Overall, directors have 8.4 years experience as administrators, but directors at charter schools serving less at-risk students tend to arrive with more average years of administrative experience (10.1 years) than their counterparts in schools serving primarily at-risk students (5.9 years). As a whole, directors have 3.8 years experience as administrators in charter schools. Table 4.3 Charter School Directors Prior Experience (Mean Years) ExperienceCS e" 70% At-RiskCS < 70% At-RiskAll Charter SchoolsNMeanNMeanNMeanAdministratorPublic schools00.0186.4186.4Non-religious private48.8511.0910.0Religious private25.068.587.6Charter school213.7263.9473.8Total years215.93210.1538.4TeacherPublic schools108.7268.8368.8Non-religious private38.01013.71312.4Religious private14.031.342.0Charter school41.564.0103.0Total years215.83212.3539.7Note. In total, 53 directors responded to the survey. About two-thirds of charter school directors (36 individuals) have been teachers in traditional public schools before coming to charter schools (8.8 years, on average). In addition, a few directors have experience teaching in private and charter schools. On average, directors have 9.7 years experience as teachers, but directors of schools serving primarily non-at-risk students have almost twice as much experience as teachers (12.3 years) compared to other directors (5.8 years). EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM Charter school advocates have contended that freedom from rules and regulations should encourage the creation of more innovative and effective forms of schooling. To understand the kinds of instructional programs implemented in charter schools, directors were asked to comment on their schools organizational approaches, availability of instructional technology, and assessment methods. Organizational Strategies Each director identified the approaches used in the charter school to organize and schedule classes and group students and teachers for instructional purposes. Table 4.4 shows the percentage of directors who report using each of seven organizational strategies. Directors also specified on a 3-point scale whether the particular strategy was used for some students (1), most students (2), or all students (3)thus, mean ratings closer to 3 show that more students are affected. Nearly three-fourths of directors (72 percent) say multi-age grouping is used in the school, most often for all students. Student and teacher teams (66 percent) and an extended-day schedule (63 percent) are the second and third most prevalent strategies reported, but both are implemented less extensively than multi-age grouping. More than a third of directors say the school uses extended-week and extended-year schedules for at least part of their student population. Although credit through flexible courses is utilized in only a limited number of schools, when implemented, it typically involves all students in the school. Table 4.4 Types of Organizational Strategies Used in Charter Schools Strategy UsedaImplemented with StudentsOrganizational StrategyN%SomeMostAllMulti-age grouping3371.722.214.863.0Student and teacher teams2965.944.414.840.7Extended-day schedule2553.237.516.745.8Block scheduling2247.818.218.263.6Extended-week schedule1843.958.811.829.4Credit thru flexible courses1741.523.55.970.6Extended-year schedule1534.142.921.435.7a The number of respondents reporting a strategy was used varies between 41 and 47. Some respondents said a strategy was used but did not report the extent of implementation. In comparing schools serving different proportions of at-risk students, some important differences emerge (see Table 4.5). Directors in schools with predominantly at-risk students more often report using extended-day and extended-week schedules, block schedules, and credit through flexible courses. In contrast, directors in schools with less at-risk students report using multi-age grouping and student and teacher teams with a greater share of their student populations (most to all). Table 4.5 Types of Organizational Strategies Used in Charter Schools, by School Type CS e" 70% At-RiskCS < 70% At-RiskAll Charter SchoolsOrganizational Strategy% UseMeana% UseMeana% UseMeanaMulti-age grouping73.31.875.92.571.72.4Student and teacher teams68.41.962.12.165.92.0Extended-day schedule64.72.342.92.353.22.1Block scheduling58.82.441.42.547.82.5Extended-week schedule50.01.840.71.643.91.7Credit thru flexible courses46.72.438.52.541.52.5Extended-year schedule33.32.034.51.934.11.9Note. Percents based on the number of respondents indicating the strategy was used. Some respondents said the strategy was used but did not report the extent of implementation. a Mean use rating based on a 3-point scale: some students (1), most students (2), all students (3).  Instructional Technology In todays educational environments, the importance of computer and Internet availability as an instructional tool is assumedthus, it was important to explore the prevalence of technology in charter schools. Overall, charter schools are building an infrastructure for technology. More than 75 percent of directors indicate their schools have a computer lab, with an average of 19 computer stations available for student use. Directors in schools serving predominantly at-risk students report a higher average number of computers available in labs compared to schools serving less at-risk students (23 versus 17 computers). Although 76 percent of all charter school classrooms have Internet access, a greater proportion of classrooms in schools with less at-risk students have Internet access (82 percent) than do schools with primarily at-risk students (65 percent). Overall, 98 percent of directors report the availability of computers in the classroom. Table 4.6 Availability of Instructional Technology in Charter Schools and Classrooms TechnologyCS e" 70% At-Risk N= 21CS < 70% At-Risk N= 32All Charter Schools N=53 Computer lab available in school76%75%76%Average number of computers in lab22.516.719.0Classrooms have Internet access65%82%75%Classroom computers available95%100%98%Average class size (students)17.517.617.6Note. Some respondents did not answer all questions, so total numbers for each question differ. Even though the availability of technology in charter schools is promising, traditional public schools have more technology available. A statewide survey of public school principals in 2002 indicates that nearly all classrooms (99.7 percent) have computers available, and 99 percent of classrooms have at least one Internet connection (Benner, Shapley, Heikes, and Pieper, 2002). Research also reveals a positive relationship between small class size and student successthe smaller the class size, the better the educational opportunity. According to directors, the average class size in the sample of charter schools is 17.6 students, with little difference between schools serving varied populations. Although this figure is greater than the student-to-teacher ratio reported in AEIS 2001-02 for traditional public schools (14.7 to 1), differences in the unit of analysis (classroom or campus) may account for disparities. Assessment Methods Monitoring student educational progress is also associated with student success, so directors were asked about the methods used in their charter schools to assess students performance. As Table 4.7 shows, directors responded to two-part items asking whether a particular assessment method was used, and if used, how often the method was utilized (once a year, once a semester, or once a marking period). The vast majority of directors (between 80 percent and 98 percent) report using all types of student assessments. Student projects, writing samples, and student performances are used in the greatest proportion of schools (more than 90 percent), although the frequency of use differs for each assessment. Student writing samples are typically used at least once a marking period, whereas student projects and performances, which require a greater time investment, are used less often. Table 4.7 Methods Used to Assess Student Performance in Charter Schools (Percent) FrequencyMethod UsedOnce aOnce aMarkingaAssessmentN%YearSemesterPeriodStudent projects4797.75.057.537.5Student writing samples4197.62.917.679.4Student performances3294.115.637.546.9Criterion-referenced test4088.955.037.57.5Tests from textbooks4087.011.88.879.4Performance-based tests3384.67.719.273.1Norm-referenced test3282.165.634.40.0Student portfolios3680.013.824.162.1Other 47.50.066.733.3Note. The number of respondents reporting a method was used varies between 32 and 47. Some respondents said a method was used but did not report the frequency of implementation. Other includes teacher-made tests, TAAS released tests, and subject-area assessments (reading and math). a At least once a marking period. Some differences also emerge between schools with different concentrations of at-risk students. Directors in schools with primarily at-risk students most often report using standardized norm-referenced tests (100 percent) and criterion-referenced tests (94 percent) to assess student performance, whereas their counterparts in schools with less at-risk students most often report using alternative assessments, such as student projects (100 percent), writing samples (100 percent), and student demonstrations (96 percent). STUDENT DISCIPLINE AND BEHAVIOR Directors were also asked to identify the extent to which various student discipline and behavior issues are a problem in their school. Directors rated the severity of six items on a 4-point scale as not a problem (1), minor problem (2), moderate problem (3), or a serious problem (4). Figure4.1 illustrates that directors consider student tardiness (91 percent) and absenteeism (87percent) as the most severe discipline problems in charter schools, although almost half of respondents would consider both as only minor problems. Less than half of directors consider vandalism of school property, physical conflicts among students, or student drug or alcohol abuse as a problem, with most considering these only minor problems. Very few directors (4 percent) cite student possession of weapons on school property as a problem.  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 4.1. Percent of directors reporting student behavior problems (N=53). Directors mean, or average, ratings of student behavior problems are compared in Table 4.8 by school type. Each of the responses received a numerical value: not a problem (1), minor problem (2), moderate problem (3), or serious problem (4). Mean values calculated for all respondents are rank ordered in the table, with responses closer to 4 indicating more severe discipline problems. Rank ordering also allows comparisons between discipline problems for schools with different student populations. Table 4.8 Mean Severity of Student Behavior Problems in Charter Schools, by School Type ProblemCS e" 70% At-Risk N= 21CS < 70% At-Risk N= 32All Charter Schools N= 53Student tardiness2.12.72.4Student absenteeism2.02.62.4Student drug or alcohol abuse1.31.71.6Vandalism of school property1.61.41.5Physical conflicts among students1.41.51.5Student possession of weapons at school1.11.01.0Note. Ratings made on a 4-point scale: not a problem (1), minor problem (2), moderate problem (3), or serious problem (4). Surprisingly, directors of schools with less at-risk students consider tardiness, absenteeism, and drug or alcohol abuse as more severe problems than do directors in the comparison group. Mean ratings for vandalism, physical conflicts among students, and weapon possession are similar. Other discipline or behavior problems cited by directors in open-ended responses include difficulties with adjudicated youth and students with attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) or attention deficit disorder (ADD). Comparable to surveys conducted in previous years, directors report incidents involving drugs or alcohol and assault more often than those involving weapons. Overall, student behavior remains only a minor to moderate problem in charter schools. GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT Even though all charter schools are administered by governing boards, individual schools have freedom in determining, within applicable law, the number of members, groups represented (e.g., community members, parents, teachers), method of member selection, and board responsibilities. Likewise, charter schools have discretion in defining titles, roles, and responsibilities of school officers and staff. Sections to follow present information on the responsibilities of charter school administrators, teachers, and governing boards; barriers to operating charter schools; and the kinds of external assistance charter school directors seek to support school operations. Staff and Governing Board Responsibilities To explore the duties of charter school staff and governing boards, directors identified the level of involvement in various aspects of charter school operations for the director, the campus leader or principal, teachers, and the governing board. For each position, the director rated the extent of involvement in areas of school governance and management on a 4-point scale as not at all (1), small extent (2), moderate extent (3), or large extent (4). Mean involvement ratings displayed in Table4.9 indicate that, on average, the charter school director and campus leader/principal are involved to a large extent in all areas of governance and management. Table 4.9 Mean Involvement in Areas of Charter School Governance and Management, by Position AreaDirectorCampus Leader/ Principal TeachersGoverning BoardMaintaining focus on mission3.93.93.63.6Developing/approving budget3.83.22.13.7Setting school policies/procedures3.83.52.53.7Hiring administrators3.73.11.43.3Determining training priorities3.73.73.02.0Developing educational programs3.63.73.22.1Hiring teachers3.63.81.92.1Creating the school schedule3.53.72.81.6Monitoring student performance3.53.93.82.8Developing curriculum3.53.73.41.9Conducting teacher appraisal3.43.91.81.6PEIMS record keeping3.33.42.01.4Fundraising3.13.32.72.5Note. Mean extent of involvement based on a 4-point scale: not at all (1), small extent (2), moderate extent (3), or large extent (4). Bold text denotes the five highest areas of involvement for that position. In contrast to administrators, teachers are extensively involved in a limited range of management areas, with the greatest responsibility for monitoring student performance, maintaining focus on the school mission, and developing curricula. Governing board members responsibilities, like teachers, have a more specialized focus, with board members more extensively involved in developing and approving the budget, setting school policies and procedures, maintaining focus on the mission of the school, and hiring administrators. Barriers to Operating Charter Schools To further understand the challenges encountered in leading charter schools, directors identified barriers to operating schools by rating a list of school operational obstacles on a 4-point scale as not a barrier (1), small barrier (2), moderate barrier (3), or great barrier (4). Figure 4.2 graphically illustrates that the greatest barrier these directors face is inadequate finances for ongoing operations. The majority of directors cite inadequate finances as a barrier (86 percent), with finances considered a great barrier for almost half of schools (45 percent). The majority of directors are also challenged by the hiring of teachers (84percent), too much paperwork and excessive reporting requirements (82 percent), and inadequate facilities (81 percent); a third of directors say paperwork and reporting requirements are a great barrier. Directors perceptions are similar to results for previous director surveys in which funding and facilities led the list of challenges. The hiring of teachers, however, has become a greater hindrance to charter school operation. Public school opposition continues to be a problem for some charter schools (51 percent), but internal conflicts remain a small impediment to school operations (27 percent).  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 4.2. Percent of directors reporting issues as small, moderate, or great barriers to charter school operation (N=53). Calculating the mean, or average, director response regarding barriers to the operation of charter schools on the 4-point scale, ranging from 1 (not a barrier) to 4 (great barrier), allowed comparisons between all charter schools and schools serving different proportions of at-risk students. Although statistical tests reveal no significant differences between means, notable differences highlighted in bold numbers in Table 4.10 reveal that charter school directors in schools with a greater share of at-risk students face greater challenges in hiring teachers and meeting state accountability requirements, whereas their counterparts in schools with less at-risk students view inadequate finances for operations, excessive paperwork and reporting requirements, and budgeting and accounting requirements as greater obstacles. Other barriers noted by directors include technology support and laborious audits. One director wrote,  All of these are the cost of doing business. A successful charter must have educators with TEA experience. Table 4.10 Barriers to Operating Charter Schools, by School Type BarrierCS e" 70% At-Risk N= 21CS < 70% At-Risk N= 32All Charter Schools N= 53Inadequate finances for ongoing operations2.83.23.0Too much paperwork/reporting requirements2.52.92.7Inadequate facilities2.62.62.6Hiring teachers2.82.32.5Budgeting/accounting requirements1.92.32.1Accountability requirements2.21.92.0Special education requirements2.01.92.0Local public school opposition1.71.81.8Internal conflicts in the school1.31.31.3Conflicts with the schools governing board1.11.21.2Notes. Mean rating based on a 4-point scale: not a barrier (1), small barrier (2), moderate barrier (3), great barrier (4). The number of respondents varies by item. Notable differences between CS e" 70% at-risk and CS < 70% at-risk are in bold. External Support for School Operations Directors also reported on the source and type of assistance they receive for implementing school operations (see Table 4.11). Directors could select from five potential sources of support received since the charter school openedthe Texas Education Agency (TEA), a regional education service center (ESC), a charter network or assistance center (e.g., Texas Charter School Resource Center), a management company, or a business or community group. Table 4.11 Types and Sources of Assistance Accessed by Charter Schools (Percent) Type of Assistance TEA ESCCharter Network/ Center Mgmt CompanyBusiness/ Community GroupAt Least One Source PEIMS46.273.19.619.29.694.3Curricular/instructional52.078.022.018.016.081.1Legal38.550.025.021.234.681.1Monetary 72.012.08.06.038.081.1Professional development40.082.030.018.020.077.4Business26.054.012.020.022.069.8In-kind donations7.711.59.611.555.864.2Note. The number of respondents varies by item from 49 to 52. TEA, ESC, Charter Networks/Assistance Center, Management Company, Business or Community Group. Overall, charter school directors rely extensively on support from ESCs for professional development (82 percent), technical assistance on curricula and instructional issues (78 percent), as well as technical assistance on PEIMS (73 percent), business (54 percent), and legal (50 percent) issues. Monetary support (loans, grants, donations), however, more often comes from the TEA (72 percent) and business or community groups (38 percent). Directors also turn to business or community groups for in-kind donations of materials resources (56 percent). Charter networks or support centers are used by about a quarter of directors for technical assistance on curricula and instructional issues and technical assistance with legal matters. Directors use management companies least often. It was also of interest to note the type of assistance charter schools seek most often. Almost all directors request technical assistance on PEIMS from at least one source (94 percent). Requests for help with curricula and instructional issues, legal matters, and monetary support are also common. Comparing responses of directors from schools with different student populations revealed important distinctions. Overall, directors in schools with lower percentages of at-risk students seek assistance more often and from more groups. Assistance from TEA in the areas of technical assistance on curricula and instructional issues and legal matters, and technical assistance on PEIMS was about twice as prevalent for directors in schools with less at-risk students. (See Table 4.12.) Table 4.12 Sources and Types of Assistance Accessed by Charter Schools, by School Type (Percent) Type of Assistance TEA ESCCharter Network/ Center Mgt CompanyBusiness/Comm GroupAt Least One SourceCS e" 70% At-RiskProfessional development31.678.926.310.510.571.4Technical assist/instructional36.873.726.310.521.176.2Technical assist/PEIMS35.070.010.015.010.085.7Technical assist/business26.342.121.110.526.357.1Technical assist/legal 30.040.025.020.045.076.2Monetary73.715.810.55.336.876.2In-kind assistance5.010.010.015.060.066.7CS < 70% At-RiskProfessional development45.283.932.322.625.881.3Technical assist/instructional61.380.619.422.612.984.4Technical assist/PEIMS53.175.09.421.99.4100.0Technical assist/business25.861.36.525.819.478.1Technical assist/legal 43.856.325.021.928.184.4Monetary71.09.76.56.538.784.4In-kind assistance9.412.59.49.453.162.5Note. The number of respondents varies by item: CSe"70%, 19 to 21; CS<70%, 31to 32. Texas Education Agency (TEA), Education Service Center (ESC), Charter Networks/Assistance Center, Management Company, Business or Community Group. INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER SCHOOLS Recent efforts at the state and regional levels have centered on offering charter schools greater opportunities to interact in the public education environment. Charter schools are invited to state-level meetings and conferences sponsored by the TEA. In addition, the ESCs are charged with providing the same level of services for charter schools as provided for traditional public school districts, and open-enrollment charter schools are to have representation on the boards of directors of ESCs [TEC, 12.104 (c)]. To assess progress toward the creation of a more receptive climate for charter schools, directors were asked to respond to items regarding contact between educators at their school and educators in surrounding schools during the current or previous school year. Altogether, 48 directors (91 percent) said charter school educators had contact with neighboring schools. Directors reporting contact further identified the types of contacts occurring with educators in traditional public schools and those in other charter schools (see Table 4.13). Table 4.13 Contacts with Educators in Other Charter Schools and Traditional Public Schools Traditional Public SchoolsOther Charter SchoolsType of InteractionN%N%Networked at conferences3777.14185.4Interacted with educators at ESC events3473.93678.3Interacted during regional/state meeting2860.93371.7Provided information or tech assistance1939.62858.3Received information or tech assistance1737.02145.7Observed classrooms at other schools1634.81941.3Met to discuss student placement1327.11327.1Held organizational/planning meeting714.62245.8Partnered on grant initiatives613.01123.9 Not surprisingly, charter school educators are more likely to interact with other charter schools in the surrounding area rather than with educators in traditional public schools. The one exception was meeting to discuss student placement. Equal proportions of directors (27 percent) said student placement discussions occurred with traditional public school and charter school educators. Overall, it was encouraging that the majority of charter school directors report networking with traditional public school educators at professional conferences (77 percent) and interacting at ESC-sponsored events (74 percent) and regional/state-level meetings or training sessions (61 percent). Interactions with other charter school educators, however, are far more likely to occur in more collaborative situations, such as meeting to provide information or technical assistance (58 percent), holding organizational and planning meetings (46 percent), and partnering on grant initiatives (24 percent). Consistent with previous director surveys, the overall relationship between charter and public school educators remains relatively cooperative, with interactions between charter and traditional schools primarily to receive or exchange information related to general school operationsgenuine partnerships and joint planning rarely occur. CHARTER SCHOOL POLICIES At the end of the survey, directors had an opportunity to respond to two questions: What are the primary benefits of charter schools to Texas public education? What recommendations would you offer to policymakers on charter schools? Directors responses, summarized in the sections to follow, reveal their perceptions regarding the contribution of charter schools to public education in general and suggest future directions for charter school policies. Benefits of Charter Schools to Public Education Altogether, 43 directors (81 percent) took the opportunity to comment on the benefits of charter schools to public education, with many writing more than one comment. As reported in Table4.14, qualitative analyses reveal six categories of responses. Table 4.14 Comments on the Benefits of Charter Schools to Public Education Charter schoolsNumber of DirectorsProvide school choice for students and parents.15Serve students who do not fit the traditional public school model.10Serve students who need smaller classes or schools to succeed.9Serve at-risk students, including some headed toward dropout.9Spur innovative or different approaches through educational flexibility.7Stimulate the improvement of educational quality in the state.5 Directors most often say charter schools provide school choice for students and parents. Choice, according to directors, promotes the development of innovative practices, attention to student needs, and access to alternative forms of education without charge. Charter schools, explained one director, provide an alternative educational choice for parents with more personal attention in a nurturing environmentmore direct access to the school board and administrationmore opportunity to participate in the educational process. Directors also believe charter schools benefit public education by serving students who do not fit the traditional school model. According to some directors, charter schools educate students who have been unsuccessful in the traditional public school setting by helping students on a more individualized basis or enabling students to meet state requirements and master the TEKS or complete graduation quickly. Charter schools also benefit traditional schools by providing an alternative for public schools that need a different option for some of their students, remarked one director. Several directors also think charter schools serve students who need smaller classes or schools to succeed. In particular, directors associate smaller charter school size with more personal communication with parents and students, an interactive, hands-on approach to education, more individual attention to students, smaller student-to-teacher ratios, and an alternative to students who cannot demonstrate success in the large classroom in a large high school. A number of directors believe charter schools benefit public education by serving at-risk students, including some who may be headed toward dropout. Directors say charter schools prevent some students from falling through the cracks, meet the unmet needs of certain students, or meet the needs of non-traditional students. A few directors commented on the way charter school flexibility spurs innovation or different educational approaches. Directors cite beneficial scheduling and calendars, extended and accelerated curriculum, and diversification in learning. Other directors believe charter schools stimulate the improvement of educational quality in the state. One director noted the value of competition, whereas another said charter schools compliment public schools. Another individual said charter schools improve the quality of educational programs. Other comments offered by directors related to the benefits of differing philosophies, nurturing environments, and less bureaucracy. Recommendations to Policymakers Directors also made recommendations to policymakers on charter schools, with 41 directors (77 percent) writing suggestions for policies. As Table4.15 shows, qualitative analyses revealed policy recommendations centering on five areas. Table 4.15 Recommendations for Charter School Policy Policy AreaNumber of DirectorsCharter school funding15Charter school autonomy8Funding for facilities7Provision of assistance7State accountability system5 Foremost, directors cite the need for policy changes related to charter school funding. According to two directors, funding inequities between charter and traditional public schools magnify difficulties with unfunded mandates and administrative requirements. Directors recommend adding $500 per ADA to compensate for the inability to tax, funds equivalent to traditional public schools, or small district funding formulas. In a similar way, several directors cite the need for policy changes regarding funding for facilities. Inadequate funding, according to directors, undermines the adequacy of facilities and the acquisition of properties. Directors, in general, recommend that charter schools receive funding for facilities in the same manner that traditional public schools are funded. Several directors believe the autonomy envisioned in the original charter school legislation has been diminished by excessive rules and regulations implemented under House Bill 6. One director seemed to express sentiments shared by others: Do not try to turn charter schools into small school districtsthat was not the goal. Charter schools are designed to address unique, entrepreneurial markets, not to become ISDs. Directors recommendations on the provision of assistance call for improved technical assistance by TEA; a strong network among superintendents and principals of charter schools; and training, observations, and collaboration with successful charters. In general, directors want assistance to improve weaknesses that undermine the charter school movement. Although some directors embrace the concept of accountability for student performance in exchange for freedom from rules and regulations, other directors made policy recommendations on the state accountability system. In particular, a number of directors in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students believe the alternative education accountability system must be continued in the states new accountability system so that at-risk students can be evaluated in a different manner. Other recommendations offered by directors included the need for changes or reductions in compliance monitoring and reporting, especially related to audits; calls for the closure of low-performing charter schools that undermine the credibility of other charters; a need for equal protection under law; and equal treatment of all charter schools, regardless of political connections. In comparison with comments from past years, problems with funding and facilities remain paramount. SUMMARY Charter schools have been in operation in Texas since 1997, and in that time, have increased in numbers and experience. As a group, charter school directors are highly educated and often reflect the diversity of their student populations. On average, directors bring 8.4 years experience as administrators from various kinds of schools (both public and private), but few hold Texas mid-management certification. On average, directors of charter schools serving primarily non-at-risk students have almost twice as many years experience as both administrators (10.1 years) and teachers (12.3 years) compared to directors in schools with primarily at-risk students. Charter schools appear to consider the needs of their students in selecting organizational arrangements. Nearly three-fourths of directors report using multi-age grouping in their schools; although, it is unclear whether multi-age configurations are adopted to realize educational philosophies or to simply accommodate the wide grade spans in many schools. Extended time for learning is also commonly used in charter schools, and directors in schools with predominantly at-risk students more often report using both extended-day and extended-week schedules. Multi-age grouping and teacher and student teams are more pervasive in schools with less at-risk students. Recognizing the importance of technology, charter schools are building school infrastructure. More than three-fourths of directors indicate their schools have a computer lab, with an average of 19 computer stations available for student use. Although directors report that 76 percent of charter school classrooms have Internet access, a greater proportion of classrooms in schools with primarily non-at-risk students (82 percent) have Internet access. In contrast, schools with primarily at-risk students, on average, have more computers in labs (23 computers). The characteristics of students enrolled in a school may also influence the kinds of assessments used to measure student performance. Directors in schools with primarily at-risk students most often report using standardized assessments (either norm-referenced or criterion-referenced), whereas directors of schools with less at-risk students more often rely on alternative assessments, such as student projects, writing samples, and student demonstrations. Although student discipline and behavior problems in charter schools are generally considered as only minor problems, directors most often identify student tardiness and absenteeism as problems. Surprisingly, directors of schools enrolling primary non-at-risk students consider student attendance issues as more serious problems than do directors in schools with predominantly at-risk students. Directors perceptions may reflect actual differences in the severity of the tardiness and absenteeism problems. Alternatively, directors of schools serving non-at-risk students may set higher standards for student attendancethus, they consider non-compliance as a more serious offense. The tasks that directors, principals, teachers, and governing boards perform reflect broadly held assumptions that directors and governing boards deal with policy and overarching activities, such as budgets; principals manage the day-to-day running of the schools; and teachers concentrate on curricular/instructional issues and students. One commonality, according to directors, is the high priority placed on everyoneadministrators, teachers, and board membersto maintain focus on the charter schools mission. Directors say the greatest barrier they face is inadequate finances for ongoing school operations. The majority is also challenged by the hiring of teachers, too much paperwork and excessive reporting requirements, and inadequate facilities. In response to management problems, directors are seeking assistance from a variety of sources. Directors rely extensively on support from ESCs for professional development and technical assistance. Monetary support more often comes from the TEA and business or community groups. Overall, directors in schools serving primarily non-at-risk students seek assistance more often and from more groups. Charter school directors are aware that their schools are part of a larger educational community. Recent efforts at the state and regional levels focused on connecting charter schools to public education support systems appear to be working. Much interaction is occurring with other charter schools, traditional public schools, and educational organizations. About three-fourths of directors report networking with traditional public school educators at professional conferences and ESC eventsstill, interactions with other charter school educators are more likely to occur in more collaborative situations, such as planning meetings or partnering on grants. Although keenly aware of existing problems with charter schools in the state, directors are still optimistic about the potential of charter schools. Foremost, open-ended comments suggest that directors believe charter schools have benefited public education by providing school choice for students and parents and by serving students who do not fit the traditional public school model. Consistent with surveys in previous years, directors recommend policy changes related to charter school funding and facilities. In addition, some directors believe the autonomy envisioned in the original charter school legislation has been diminished over time by excessive rules and regulations (i.e., House Bill 6). In general, directors appear eager for assistance to improve weaknesses that undermine the charter school movement and their opportunities to improve the overall quality of education in the state. Chapter 5  SURVEY OF CHARTER SCHOOL TEACHERS  Previous studies have identified teacher quality as a major determinant of student achievement (National Commission on Teaching and Americans Future, 2003; Wayne and Youngs, 2003). In view of teacher importance, this survey examines teacher quality issues within Texas charter schools. Charter schools exist under the assumption that schools unfettered by bureaucracy are better able to respond to and tailor an educational experience to the needs of students, with the result that student achievement will soar. However, if charter schools attract low-quality teachers, then the structure of the school will likely be unable to compensate for the quality of the teachers. A recently released study by the University of California at Berkeleys Policy Analysis for California Education (Fuller et al., 2003) indicates that 48 percent of charter school teachers nationwide lack a teaching certificate. Teachers are also more inexperienced than teachers in traditional public school and they instruct, on average, 20 percent more students each day. This study also found that charter schools have low instructional resources, and charter schools with predominately African American students have the fewest resources. The most recent statistics for Texas show that charter school teachers, on average, are less experienced (5.4 years) than teachers in traditional public schools (11.9 years), and they are less likely to have baccalaureate and advanced degrees. Teachers in charter schools are also paid considerably less than those in traditional public schools. In 2001-02, the average teacher salary in charter schools ($29,343) was nearly $9,000 below that for teachers in traditional public schools ($38,278). Average pay in charters and traditional public schools, however, is basically equal for teachers with less than 10 years of experience. Therefore, the lower overall average salary in charters reflects the relative lack of classroom experience of charter school teachers. Even though a substantial body of knowledge exists on Texas charter school teachers characteristics and credentials, little is known about teachers reasons for choosing charter schools, their educational practices, or the overall experience of working in charter schools. As a result, this first statewide survey of charter school teachers provides new and insightful information. METHODOLOGY Survey Procedures The survey of charter school teachers, as shown in Appendix C, addresses teachers background and credentials, reasons for teaching in charter schools, educational activities and resources, professional development, student discipline, and charter school operations. Researchers randomly selected a sample of 61 charter schools and 78 associated campuses to participate in statewide surveys. In March 2003, the administrator of each campus connected with the randomly selected charter schools received a packet including teacher surveys (enclosed in reply envelopes) for each teacher. Teacher counts were based on the number of teachers reported in 2001-02 AEIS data. Campus leaders were asked to distribute the envelopes (with the surveys enclosed) to all teachers for completion. Administrators could request additional surveys, if needed. To protect their anonymity, teachers returned surveys to the Texas Center for Educational Research in postage-paid reply envelopes. Of the 1,101 teacher surveys distributed, 432 individuals returned a completed survey for a response rate of 39.2 percent. The 432 survey respondents represent about 16 percent of the approximately 2,700 charter school teachers statewide in the 2001-02 school year. Characteristics of Survey Respondents Table 5.1 shows the distribution of teacher survey respondents. Surveyed schools were divided into two groups: charter schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students and charter schools serving less than 70 percent at-risk students. Of the 51 responding charter school campuses, 21 served primarily at-risk students, and 30 served less at-risk students. Although the overall response rate was 39 percent, teachers from charter schools serving less than 70 percent at-risk students had a higher response rate (43 percent) than their counterparts in schools with predominantly at-risk students (35 percent). To explore differences, results from the survey are presented in this chapter for all teachers and separately by school type. As a result of their higher response rate, teachers from charter schools serving less at-risk students are somewhat over-represented in the total pool of respondents compared to the sample pool. Table 5.1 Distribution of Teacher Survey Respondents, by School Type School TypeNumber of Campuses SurveyedNumber of Campuses RespondingNumber of Teachers SurveyedNumber of RespondentsPercent of Teachers RespondingCS e" 70% At-Risk362149617435.1CS < 70% At-Risk423060525842.6Total78511,10143239.2 Table 5.2 presents the characteristics of teacher respondents. Overall, about 52 percent of survey respondents are 35 or younger, 40 percent are between the ages of 36 and 55, and 8 percent are 56 or older. There is a slight variation in teacher age for the two school types. Charter schools serving more than 70 percent at-risk students have a greater concentration of older teachers, with 9 percent of teachers 56 or older. These schools also have proportionately fewer teachers between 36 and 55 years of age (37 percent). In contrast, only 6 percent of teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students are 56 or older and 42 percent are 36 to 55. Although teachers in the sample are primarily female (67 percent), there is a larger concentration of male teachers (36 percent) working in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students. Table 5.2 Characteristics of Teacher Survey Respondents (Percent) CharacteristicCS e" 70% At-Risk N=174CS < 70% At-Risk N=258All Charter Schools N=432Age 35 or younger53.851.652.436 to 5536.942.340.156 or older9.46.38.5GenderMale36.230.032.6Female63.870.067.4Race/EthnicityaHispanic20.713.216.2African American46.027.635.0White28.250.241.3Other/NA5.19.07.4Note. Number of respondents varies slightly by category due to missing data. a Survey respondents roughly approximate the characteristics of all charter school teachers in the state: 20 percent Hispanic, 34 percent African American, 41 percent White, and 3percent other ethnicities. Overall, 16 percent of teachers identified themselves as Hispanic, 35 percent as African American, and another 41 percent as White. These sample statistics roughly approximate the demographic characteristics of all charter school teachers in the state (20 percent Hispanic, 34 percent African American, and 41 percent White). African American teachers are the largest racial/ethnic group in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students (46 percent), in contrast to only 28 percent of teacher respondents in charter schools serving less at-risk students. White teachers are more heavily concentrated in charter schools with less at-risk students (50 percent) compared to schools serving primarily at-risk students (28 percent). TEACHER CREDENTIALS AND EXPERIENCE Surveyed teachers also reported on their educational credentials (higher education, certification, and their route to certification) and teaching experience. Education and Certification In contrast to statistics reported in PEIMS (see Chapter 2), teachers in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students report higher education levels. As Table 5.3 shows, only 6 percent of these teachers report fewer than four years of college, in comparison to 13 percent of teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students. Charter schools serving primarily at-risk students also have proportionately more teachers with a bachelors degree and some postgraduate work. A similar proportion of teachers across the two groups have earned a graduate degree, with 18 percent overall having obtained either a masters or a doctorate. In contrast to higher education, a larger share of teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students have obtained certification to teach in Texas. Thirty-five percent of teachers in this group have Texas teacher certification compared to 27 percent in charter schools enrolling primarily at-risk students. Overall, about 38 percent of charter school teachers are certified either in Texas or another state, which is about 10 percentage points less than the national figure (48 percent). Additionally, all but 15 percent of both groups of teachers have their teacher certification or are working towards it. Table 5.3 Current Level of Teacher Education and Certification (Percent) CS e" 70% At-Risk N=172CS < 70% At-Risk N=256All Charter Schools N=428Highest Education LevelFewer than 4 years of college5.813.410.3Bachelors degree47.141.243.6BA/BS and graduate courses29.127.127.9Masters or doctorate degree18.018.518.3Level of CertificationCertified to teach in Texas27.335.532.2Certified to teach in another statea5.86.36.1Working on Texas teaching certification51.743.046.5Not certified and not working to obtain certification15.115.215.2a Includes only teachers who are not certified in Texas. Some charter teachers hold dual certificates. Of those teachers certified to teach, the primary certification route is through the traditional college undergraduate program, but there are differences between the two types of schools. As Table 5.4 shows, 61 percent of teachers in charter schools with primarily at-risk students received their certification from an undergraduate program, whereas only 51 percent of teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students did so. In addition, teachers in charter schools serving mainly non-at-risk students more often received their certification through a post-baccalaureate program, and slightly less teachers (22 percent) in this group received their certification through an alternative certification program compared to teachers in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students (26 percent). Table 5.4 Certification Route for Certified Teachers (Percent) RouteCS e" 70% At-Risk N=61CS < 70% At-Risk N=115All Charter Schools N=176College/university undergraduate certification program60.751.354.5Alternative certification program26.221.723.3College/university post-bachelor certification program13.127.022.2 Teaching Experience Table 5.5 presents the average years of teaching experience for surveyed teachers. On average, teachers in charter schools have 7.4 total years of teaching experience. Years of experience ranges between 1 and 44 years, with a median of 5 years. Teachers in both types of charter schools have similar average years teaching experience, including the total years of experience and years spent at their current charter school. Significant differences between the two groups, however, exist in regard to the type of previous teaching experience. Teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students have more private school experience, in terms of exposure (religious and non-religious) and length of time. About a third of teachers (31 percent) in charter schools enrolling less at-risk students report some private school experience compared to 22 percent of teachers in charter schools with more at-risk students. Teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students have an average of 7.4 years experience in non-religious private schools and 5.8 years in religious private schools. Table 5.5 Average Years of Teaching Experience, by School Type Type of Teaching ExperienceCS e" 70% At-RiskCS < 70% At-RiskAll Charter SchoolsNYearsNYearsNYearsAt current charter school1672.02572.34242.1Total years1647.12517.64157.4At all charter schools1552.42422.23972.3Public schools1046.21356.42396.3Private schools153.0317.4465.9Religious private schools224.5495.8715.4 Although a larger proportion of teachers from charter school serving primarily at-risk students have public school teaching experience (63 percent) compared to their counterparts in school with less at-risk students (53 percent), teachers from both types of charter schools have an average of 6 years experience in public schools. REASONS FOR TEACHING IN CHARTER SCHOOLS Teachers rated the importance of several factors in their decision to seek employment at their charter school. Using a 4-point scale, teachers rated items as not important (1), somewhat important (2), important (3), or very important (4). Findings reported in Figure 5.1 provide a graphic interpretation of their responses, with each bar on the chart representing those respondents indicating a factor had at least some level of importance.  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 5.1. Percent of teacher reporting factors as somewhat important, important, or very important in their decision to seek employment at the charter school (N=419). Teachers most often report seeking employment at charter schools to be involved in an educational reform effort (91 percent), to work with like-minded educators (90 percent), and to work in a school with a positive academic reputation and high standards (87 percent). Many teachers are also attracted to charter schools by more favorable conditions, such as greater autonomy (85 percent), small school and class sizes (85 percent), and the high level of parental involvement (83 percent). Other administrative factors, such as the ability to teach and draw retirement pay (67 percent), the ability to teach without certification (66 percent), or less standardized testing pressure (55 percent) are of less importance in teachers decision making. Teachers decision factors for seeking employment in their charter school are rank-ordered in Table 5.6 by school type. Each of the responses on the 4-point scale (not important to very important) has been assigned a numerical value between 1 and 4. A mean, representing the relative importance of each factor, was calculated for all respondents and the two groups of schools. Comparable to findings displayed in Figure 5.1, rank-ordering of means for each factor shows that in making the decision to teach in charter schools, teachers are highly influenced by the chance to be involved in educational reform, opportunities to work with colleagues who are of like mind, high academic standards in the charter school, and other positive school conditions, regardless of school type. Of little importance to teachers is the fear of not finding another position or the desire to be in an environment with less standardized testing. Table 5.6 Reasons Teachers Chose to Teach at a Charter School, as Mean of Respondents Decision FactorCS e" 70% At-Risk N=168CS < 70% At-Risk N=251All Charter Schools N=419Involved in an educational reform effort3.03.13.1Work with like-minded educators2.93.03.0High standards of the school2.92.92.9Small class size2.82.92.9Small school size2.72.82.8High level of parental involvement2.82.62.7More autonomy2.62.82.7Work with specific student population2.62.52.6Teach without certification2.62.32.4Teach and draw retirement pay2.42.42.4Less standardized testing1.92.02.0Difficulty finding another position1.61.61.6Note. Mean ratings based on a 4 point scale: not important (1), somewhat important (2), important (3), very important (4). Although there are few differences between teachers in the two types of schools, the slight disparity regarding the desire to work in a school that allows more autonomy and the perception of greater parental involvement is interesting. Teachers attracted to charter schools with large at-risk populations place greater importance on parental involvement than their own need for autonomy. This order of importance is reversed for teachers working with less at-risk students. Teachers working with predominantly at-risk populations may believe that parental involvement is of greater importance to student success, whereas teachers working with less at-risk students may place more importance on their own ability to affect change. These teachers desire for greater autonomy could reflect a belief that bureaucratic systems restrict their ability to teach effectively. They may also assume that parents of more economically advantaged children are very likely to provide support for their children, regardless of the type school they attend. Teachers working in charter schools with primarily at-risk students also place greater importance on the ability to teach without certification. This differential result is expected given the higher percentage of non-certified teachers working in this type of charter school. EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND RESOURCES Teaching Assignments Teachers also reported on teaching assignments in charter schools, both by grade level and subject area. Because it is possible for teachers to work with multiple grade levels and subject areas, the percentages presented in Table 5.7 do not sum to 100 percent. Of the 429 teachers responding to the survey, 29 percent reported teaching primary grades (pre-kindergarten to grade2), 24 percent elementary grades (3 to 5), 35 percent middle grades (6 to 8), and 50 percent high school (9 to12). The distributions are moderately different for the two school types, with a greater concentration of teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students teaching high school, and proportionally fewer teachers in charter schools serving predominantly at-risk students teaching primary grades. These trends are consistent with student enrollment distributions reported in Chapter 2. Table 5.7 Instructional Levels Taught, by School Type LevelCS e" 70% At-Risk N=171CS < 70% At-Risk N=258All Charter Schools N=429NumberPercentNumberPercentNumberPercentPrimary (PK-2)4023.48633.312629.4Elementary (3-5)4928.75621.710524.5Middle (6-8)5934.59034.914934.7High school (9-12)7644.413953.921550.1 There are only small differences in the distributions of teachers across subject areas. As Table5.8 illustrates, there is a somewhat greater concentration of language arts and mathematics teachers, which is to be expected. There are no large differences in distributions between the two school types. As a whole, it appears that many teachers have multiple subject-area assignments. Table 5.8 Subject Areas Taught, by School Type Subject AreaCS e" 70% At-Risk N=172CS < 70% At-Risk N=254All Charter Schools N=426NumberPercentNumberPercentNumberPercentLanguage arts10158.714456.724557.5Social studies8046.513252.021249.8Reading8348.311645.719946.7Mathematics8750.613854.322552.8Science7342.412448.819746.2Other5934.39738.215636.6 Instructional Methods Charter school teachers were asked about their instructional methods and the extent to which different strategies are used in their classroom. As Figure 5.2 illustrates, almost all teachers (99 percent) have students complete individual assignments and provide one-on-one instruction. Less traditional methods, such as computer-based activities and multimedia presentations, are used far less often. Overall, teachers use a variety of instructional methods, with the extent of use reflecting the time commitment required to implement each method. For example, 81 percent of teachers use long-term projects to some extent, with 31 percent reporting they use it to a small extent and 19 percent reporting they use projects to a large extent. This is the reverse of the responses seen for directing the whole group. Such differences probably reflect the fact that long-term projects by their very structure must be used less often.  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 5.2. Percent of teachers reporting that various instructional methods are emphasized to a small, moderate, or large extent in charter school classrooms (N=426). The mean extent to which teachers report using specific instructional techniques is rank-ordered in Table 5.9 and compared by school type. The order of importance for instructional methods is similar to findings in Figure 5.2 above. Rank ordering, however, readily conveys differences in use among comparison groups. Across all teachers, individual student assignments and one-on-one instruction are used more extensively. Between school types, teachers in schools serving less at-risk students use more long-term projects and place less importance on whole-group lectures, whereas their counterparts in schools serving primarily at-risk students provide more one-on-one instruction and teacher-directed, whole-group instruction. Table 5.9 Instructional Methods Used in Classrooms, Mean Response by School Type Instructional MethodCS e" 70% At-Risk N=173CS < 70% At-Risk N=253All Charter Schools N=426Students complete individual assignments3.53.53.5One-on-one instruction3.43.23.3Guide whole-group interactive discussion3.23.13.1Students work in small groups3.23.13.1Student work with hands-on activities3.03.13.1Direct the whole group (lecture, set pace)3.12.82.9Student use computers2.62.62.6Long-term projects2.42.62.5Students present oral reports2.52.32.4Multimedia presentations1.81.71.8Note. Mean ratings based on a 4-point scale: not at all (1), small extent (2), moderate extent (3), large extent (4). Class Size and Technology Resources Classes in charter schools are typically small, with an average class size of 18.4 students. Charter schools with less at-risk students have a somewhat higher student-to-teacher ratio (19.4 to 1) compared to schools with more students at risk (16.8 to 1). On the other hand, charter school teachers generally have limited access to technology resources in the classroom. More than half of classrooms have either no computers (24 percent) or only one computer (31 percent), and only 66 percent of classrooms are connected to the Internet. Some teachers, however, report an abundance of classroom computersmore than a fifth of teachers have 5 to 10 computers (13 percent) or more than 10 computers (10 percent). On average, classrooms in charter schools have 2.3 computers, but schools serving less at-risk students have more computers (2.5) compared to classrooms in charters serving primarily at-risk students (2.1). Table 5.10 Class Size and Technology Availability, by School Type CS e" 70% At-RiskCS < 70% At-RiskAll Charter SchoolsAverage class size16.819.418.4Percent of classrooms with Internet access64.9%67.1%66.2%Average number of computers per classrooma2.12.52.3Number of computers per classroom027.7%22.0%24.3%126.5%33.3%30.6%2-428.3%17.5%21.9%5-109.6%15.0%12.8%More than 107.9%12.2%10.4%a Teachers in lab-type classrooms (15 or more computers) are excluded from average classroom numbers. Assessment Methods As with instructional methods, teachers use a variety of methods to assess student performance. Table 5.11 shows that traditional testing methods are used most often, with 89 percent of teachers reporting the use of teacher-made tests. Other methods, such as writing samples, student demonstrations, and student projects are also commonly used as assessment devices. Teachers in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students more often rely on teacher-made tests, and they use student projects to a lesser extent than teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students. Table 5.11 Methods Used to Assess Student Performance, by School Type (Percent) Assessment MethodCS e" 70% At-Risk N=171CS < 70% At-Risk N=255All Charter Schools N=426Teacher-made tests93.686.389.2Student writing samples90.585.587.5Student demonstrations or performances88.086.687.1Student projects80.291.186.7Student portfolios73.873.973.8Other11.712.112.0Note. Number of teacher respondents varies slightly by category. Table 5.12 presents the frequency of use for the various types of assessment instruments. As shown, teachers use most assessment methods frequentlyat least once a marking period. Teacher-made tests and student writing samples are used by more teachers and are used most often. A similar percentage of teachers use student demonstrations or performances and student projects, but teachers are more likely to use them only once a year or once a semester. Table 5.12 Methods Used by Teachers to Assess Student Performance in Charter Schools (Percent) Assessment MethodStrategy UsedFrequencyOnce a YearOnce a SemesterMarkinga PeriodN%Teacher-made tests38089.20.611.088.5Student writing samples36587.50.313.286.2Student demonstrations or performances36687.13.922.773.4Student projects36086.75.932.461.1Student portfolios30573.812.929.657.5Other5112.02.67.989.5a At least once a marking period. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Teacher Development Opportunities On average, surveyed teachers attended seven days of professional development in the past year, as Table 5.13 shows. Teachers in charter schools with primarily at-risk students attended about one day less of training than teachers in schools with less students at-risk. Overall, teachers participated in a variety of professional development activities. Almost all teachers attended a session sponsored by their own charter school (94 percent) and three-fourths attended a session sponsored by a regional education service center (77 percent). Teachers were less likely to attend sessions sponsored by a neighboring school district (32 percent) or to complete college coursework (32 percent). Table 5.13 Professional Development Activities Attended This Past Year, as Percent of Respondents Professional Development ActivityCS e" 70% At-Risk N=170CS < 70% At-Risk N=254All Charter Schools N=424Session sponsored by charter school92.994.994.1Session sponsored by an ESC80.074.176.5Teaming/shared conference periods56.867.663.3Professional conference55.057.556.5Peer observation and critique54.357.055.9Release time for independent training activities51.550.250.8Release time to work with other school educators38.545.042.4Session sponsored by a traditional school district28.734.532.1College or university coursework29.334.132.1Average number of days attended6.27.26.8 Teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students are more likely to participate in collaborative professional development methods, such as teaming or shared conference periods and release time to work with other school educators. Teachers in these schools also are more likely to attend sessions sponsored by an outside school district or to enroll in college or university courses. Teacher Appraisal According to teachers, more than three-fourths of charter schools have some type of formal teacher appraisal system (Table 5.14). Of those schools with an appraisal system, 22 percent use the state-developed Professional Development Appraisal System (PDAS) forms, 46 percent rely on a system of observations by administrators, and 16 percent are uncertain of the exact system that is used. Across all charter schools, 46 percent of teachers are observed at least once a marking period by school administrators. Teachers working in charter schools with less at-risk students report more frequent observation visits, with 25 percent reporting their classroom is visited on at least a weekly basis. Table 5.14 Teacher Appraisal and Observation System in Charter Schools (Percent) CS e" 70% At-RiskCS < 70% At-RiskAll Charter SchoolsPercent with a formal appraisal process78.877.678.1Frequency of administrative observationsDaily or weekly20.925.123.6Once a marking period27.019.622.3Once a semester30.429.830.0Once a year18.220.019.4Unknown3.45.54.7 STUDENT DISCIPLINE AND BEHAVIOR Student discipline problems, as perceived by teachers, are reported in Figure 5.3. Attendance, both in terms of tardiness and absenteeism, is the greatest problem. Drug and alcohol abuse is seen as only half as serious, with 7 percent of teachers reporting they believe it a serious problem at their school. The more serious the offense, the less it is seen as a general problem. In fact, no teacher reported that weapon possession is a serious problem at their school, and only two percent believe it is a moderate problem.  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 5.3. Percent of teachers reporting student behavior as a minor, moderate, or serious problem at their charter school (N=423). There is, however, a difference in teacher perception based on the grade level taught. As Figure5.4 shows, 71 percent of high school teachers think student absenteeism is at least a moderate problem, compared to 40 percent of middle school teachers and 29 percent of elementary teachers. Forty-eight percent of high school teachers think student drug and/or alcohol use is at least a moderate problem, compared to 12 percent of middle school teachers and 5 percent of elementary teachers. These results are to be expected. The only area where high school teachers express less concern than the lower grade teachers is physical violence among students. Thirteen percent of high school teachers perceive this as a problem compared to 20 percent of middle school teachers and 14 percent of elementary teachers. From this survey, it is unknown whether this is due to less actual physical conflicts among students, or that high school teachers expect a certain amount of such behavior among their students and, therefore, find less concern in its occurrence.  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 5.4. Percent of teachers reporting student behavior as a moderate or serious problem, by grade level(N=423). Rank ordering of means in Table 5.15 highlights the extent of teachers concerns. Overall, teachers perceive student tardiness to be twice as problematic as student weapons possession. Surprisingly, teachers at charter schools serving primarily at-risk students perceive their schools to have fewer problems than teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students. Only in the area of physical conflicts among students do these teachers perceive that a larger problem exists. Table 5.15 Teachers Perceptions of Student Behavior Problems, Mean Severity by School Type ProblemCS e" 70% At-Risk N=170CS < 70% At-Risk N=254All Charter Schools N=424Student tardiness2.32.52.4Student absenteeism2.32.42.4Physical conflicts among students1.91.71.8Vandalism of school property1.61.71.7Student drug or alcohol abuse1.61.71.7Student possession of weapons at school1.21.21.2Note. Mean ratings based on a 4 point scale: not a problem (1), minor problem (2), moderate problem (3), serious problem (4). CHARTER SCHOOL OPERATIONS To gain an overall impression of charter school operations, teachers were given a list of statements and asked if each statement applied to their school. The list contained both positive and negative statements such as, This school is meeting students learning needs, and I have insufficient classroom resources. Teachers rated items on a 4-point scale as strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), agree (3), or strongly agree (4). Figure 5.5 provides a graphic representation of the percentage of teachers who either agreed or strongly agreed with each statement.  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 5.5. Percent of teachers reporting they agree or strongly agree with various aspects of their charter school (N=420). Teachers are generally satisfied with the operation of their schools. More than 85 percent of teachers either agree or strongly agree that their school has high expectations for students and the school is meeting students learning needs. Moreover, at least 80 percent believe their school provides appropriate special education services and supports the autonomy of teachers. Although teachers have generally favorable impressions of their schools missions, they also believe charter schools lack adequate resources. Approximately half of teachers either agree or strongly agree that they have inadequate classroom resources (52 percent), their school generally has insufficient financial resources (45 percent), and they are dissatisfied with their salary (53 percent). Large class size ranks as the lowest of teacher concerns, which is understandable given that the average class size is about 18 students. In addition, teachers mean responses on the 4-point scale were calculated and rank ordered in Table 5.16. Results are presented for all respondents and also by school type. Although there are only a few differences in teachers impressions across the two school groups, teachers in charter schools enrolling primarily at-risk students are more satisfied than teachers from charter schools with less at-risk students. These teachers are more satisfied with the condition of their building, report stronger community and parental support, and believe their school has more resources, both in the classroom and financially. Table 5.16 General Impressions of Charter School, Mean Responses by School Type ItemCS e" 70% At-Risk N=170CS < 70% At-Risk N=250All Charter Schools N=420School has high standards/expectations for students3.33.23.3School is meeting students learning needs3.23.23.2Schools has appropriate special education services3.13.03.0School supports teachers autonomy2.93.03.0I am satisfied with the school curriculum2.92.82.9School has effective leadership2.92.92.9The schools buildings need improvement2.63.02.8School has strong community support2.82.62.7Parents are involved in school activities2.72.62.6I have insufficient classroom resources2.42.62.5School has sufficient financial resources2.62.22.4I am satisfied with my salary2.32.32.3School has inadequate curriculum guides2.12.12.1Class sizes too large1.91.91.9Note. Mean ratings based on a 4 point scale: strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), agree (3), strongly agree (4). SUMMARY This chapter outlined important characteristics of charter school teachers and highlighted differences among teachers based on whether they taught in a charter school serving less at-risk students or serving primarily at-risk students. The majority of charter school teachers are young (under 35 years old), female, and non-white. Though the majority of charter school teachers report not having their teacher certification (62 percent), almost all teachers are working to obtain their certification. Teacher certification is no longer universally acknowledged as a necessary indicator of an effective teacher, and the move to allow uncertified teachers in the classroom is based on the belief that such a system allows highly qualified personnel to enter the teaching field by transferring from another field. Survey results suggest that, although not always certified, 47 percent of the teacher respondents have undertaken postgraduate work, with 18 percent having earned either their masters or doctorate. Teachers sought employment in a charter school for a variety of reasons. The most important reasons were to be involved in an educational reform effort, to work with like-minded colleagues, and to work in a school with high standards. These decision factors were similar for teachers across both types of charter schools. There was a slight tendency for teachers in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students to place a higher importance on parental involvement and for teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students to place more importance on teacher autonomy. Teachers utilized a variety of instructional methods and assessments, most of them traditional rather than innovative. Instructional techniques included assigning individual work, one-on-one instruction, and working in small groups. Less used were computer-based activities and multimedia presentations, which is understandable given the limited availability of classroom technology for most teachers. There were slight differences in instructional approaches depending on school type. Teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students more often utilized long-term projects, whereas teachers in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students utilized to a greater extent one-on-one instruction and teacher-directed, whole-group lecture. Teachers greatest area of concern regarding student discipline was student attendance, with about 45 percent of teachers reporting student tardiness and student absenteeism to be at least a moderate problem. There were no real differences in student discipline by school type, but a difference was found by grade level. High school teachers perceived more discipline problems in all areas, except for physical conflicts among students. Charter school teachers have a favorable impression of their school, even though a majority expressed the view that their school has insufficient financial resources. Teachers in charter schools serving less at-risk students are more concerned about their schools financial resources than are teachers in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students. Their concerns mirror directors perceptions and reflect the lower per-pupil revenue available in charter schools serving less than 70 percent at-risk students. Chapter 6  SURVEY OF CHARTER SCHOOL STUDENTS  A primary goal of the charter school movement is to provide greater parental choice in the selection of schools children attend. And, almost certainly, childrens feelings about their schools have a significant impact on parents decisions. Although few national studies have addressed students satisfaction with charter schools, one report indicates that three-fifths of students say their charter school teachers are better than teachers in schools previously attended (Vanourek, Manno, Finn, and Bierlein, 1997). Likewise, results from the fifth-year evaluation of Texas charter schools also show similarly high levels of satisfaction among students in charter schools. Over 80 percent of Texas students surveyed reported being satisfied or very satisfied with their charter school (Barrett, 2002). This study further explores the reasons students and parents seek charter schools, and students perceptions of schools currently attended. Students views also provide insight into everyday educational experiences and interpersonal relationships in charter schools that may contribute to student satisfaction. Moreover, students experiences and perspectives might also shed light on factors that influence parents school choices. METHODOLOGY Survey Procedures The student survey included objective items addressing student characteristics (gender, ethnicity, grade level, age), schools previously attended, grades earned, future plans, reasons for choosing their charter school, and satisfaction with the school. Two additional opened-ended items allowed students to comment on the most positive school features and any problems or issues students encounter. The Survey of Charter School Students appears in Appendix C. In March 2003, researchers distributed surveys to a sample of 10,386 students enrolled in grades 6 through 12. To identify survey recipients, investigators randomly selected a sample of 61 charter schools and 78 associated campuses to participate in the statewide survey. The administrator of each randomly selected charter campus received a packet including surveys for all enrolled students, with counts based on campus enrollments reported in AEIS 2001-02. Administrators were asked to distribute the surveys to all teachers in their building who teach students in grades 6 to 12. If more surveys were needed, administrators could copy the survey or request additional surveys. Instructions for each teacher asked that they administer the survey during the first period (or at the beginning of the school day) to ensure that each student responded to the survey only once. After administering the survey, teachers returned them to the campus office. Administrators then mailed all student surveys in postage-paid envelopes or boxes to the Texas Center for Educational Research. Of the 10,386 student surveys distributed, 5,159 surveys were returned, for an overall response rate of 50 percent. The student survey respondents in the sample represent about 10 percent of charter school students statewide. Characteristics of Survey Respondents Table 6.1 shows the distribution of student survey respondents. Surveyed schools were divided into two groups for comparisons purposes: charter schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students and charter schools with less than 70 percent at-risk students. Although the overall response rate was 50 percent, students in schools serving less at-risk students responded at a markedly higher rate (62 percent) than those from schools serving primarily at-risk students (36 percent). Even so, the distribution of respondents from schools serving primarily atrisk students (35 percent) and respondents from schools serving less at-risk students (65 percent) closely approximates the statewide student population in charter schools, which is 38 percent from schools serving primarily at-risk students and 62 percent from schools serving less at-risk students. Table 6.1 Distribution of Student Survey Respondents, by School Type School TypeNumber of Campuses SurveyedNumber of Campuses RespondingNumber of Students SurveyedNumber of RespondentsPercent of Students RespondingCS e" 70% At-Risk36154,9921,81836.4CS < 70% At-Risk42325,3943,34161.9Total784710,3865,15949.7 Table 6.2 displays the demographic characteristics of student survey respondents. The majority of students (70 percent) are between 13 and 17 years of age. This is expected considering only students in grades 6 through 12 were surveyed. Overall, survey respondents, similar to students statewide, are concentrated in the upper grade levels, with between 16 and 18 percent of respondents in each of the high school grade levels (9-12). Ninth graders are underrepresented, whereas eleventh and twelfth graders are overrepresented in the sample. The grade-level distribution of respondents varies only slightly between schools serving different proportions of at-risk students. Generally, males and females are equally represented among survey respondents, similar to the state as a whole. In schools serving predominately at-risk students, however, males make up a somewhat larger proportion of respondents. Table 6.2 Characteristics of Student Survey Respondents (Percent) CharacteristicSurvey SampleCharter Schools Statewide N=46,304CS e" 70% At-Risk N=1,818CS < 70% At-Risk N=3,341All Charter Schools N=5,159Age12 and under12.412.812.6--13 to 1770.469.269.6--18 and over17.218.117.8--Grade Level612.610.911.510.1713.310.111.210.9811.28.09.19.7915.116.115.825.41016.318.918.019.81117.918.718.413.81213.617.316.010.2GenderMale55.348.751.051.8Female44.751.349.048.2Race/EthnicityHispanic60.732.242.237.9African American27.126.326.640.1White5.633.623.720.4Other6.67.97.51.6 The racial/ethnic distribution of the sample respondents also differs from the statewide distribution, with African American students well underrepresented in the sample. Likewise, racial/ethnic distributions differ by the two types of schools. Among schools serving primarily at-risk students, Hispanic students make up a larger proportion of respondents (61 percent), whereas White students account for a smaller percentage (6 percent). In contrast, Hispanic (32 percent), African American (26 percent), and White (34 percent) students are almost equally represented among respondents in schools serving less than 70 percent at-risk students. Development of Analytic Weights Weighting of survey data is used to correct imbalances between the population of inference (i.e., Texas charter school students) and actual survey respondents. Analytic weights can be developed so that, when applied to the survey data, the survey responses are balanced to reflect known population distributions, thus appearing representative. The use of analytic weights, however, increases the likelihood of sampling errors. Thus, if weighted survey data do not differ substantially from raw survey data, then analytical weights may not be necessary. For this survey, researchers explored the use of analytic weights because the student survey sample respondents differed substantially from the overall student population of Texas charter schools (see Table F.1 in Appendix F). African American students are underrepresented in the survey sample respondents, whereas Hispanic and White students are slightly overrepresented. The grade-level distribution of the survey sample is comparable to charter schools statewide, with the exception of ninth grade, which is underrepresented, eleventh grade which is overrepresented, and twelfth grade which is also overrepresented. The accountability ratings for responding schools generally correspond to the statewide distribution of charter schools accountability ratings. The sample only slightly underrepresents schools rated as Acceptable (alternative education system) and overrepresents those rated as Needs Peer Review (alternative education system). Researchers determined that the race/ethnicity variable was the most salient and, thus, calculated weights based on this variable. Data analyses were completed for both the raw survey data and the weighted survey data. After comparing these analyses, it was determined that the weighted results did not differ substantially from the unweighted results. Therefore, weighted results are not utilized in this report. PREVIOUS SCHOOL EXPERIENCE To understand the previous educational experiences of charter school students, respondents were asked to identify the kinds of schools attended before coming to their current charter school. Table 6.3 shows that the vast majority of students (84 percent) indicated that they previously attended a public school. This is true of students in both types of charter schools. Students in schools serving less at-risk students were more likely to have attended a private school or to have been home schooled prior to attending their current charter school. Students in schools serving primarily at-risk students were more likely to have received other types of schooling. Table 6.3 School Attended Before the Charter School (Percent) School TypeCS e" 70% At-Risk N=1,818CS < 70% At-Risk N=3,341All Charter Schools N=5,159Public school83.584.183.9Private school5.16.56.0Home schooled1.63.93.1Did not attend school1.61.11.3Other8.34.55.8 FACTORS INFLUENCING SCHOOL CHOICE Students also identified reasons why they and their families chose the charter school. Students were asked to rate the importance of several factors on a 4point scale as not important (1), somewhat important (2), important (3) or very important (4) in their choice of a charter school. Figure 6.1 provides a graphic representation of students responses, with each bar on the chart representing those respondents indicating a factor had at least some level of importance.  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 6.1. Percent of students reporting factors as somewhat important, important, or very important in their decision to attend the charter school. Overall, students indicate that teacher quality (82 percent) and their parents opinions of the school (82 percent) are the most important factors influencing their decision to attend the charter school. Other influential factors include previous teachers not helping enough (68 percent), poor grades at a previous school (67 percent), and fewer student conflicts (65 percent). Factors considered less important in students choice of the charter school include its proximity to their home and the presence of friends at the school. Table 6.4 compares students ratings of decision factors by type of school. Generally, students in both types of schools report the same factors as important in their decision making. However, mean importance ratings for students in schools serving primarily at-risk students were generally lower than mean ratings for students in schools serving less at-risk students. Only one factor received a higher mean rating of importance from students in primarily at-risk schools. Students in schools serving primarily atrisk populations rate getting into trouble in their previous school as a slightly more important factor in their decision (2.1) than students in schools serving less at-risk students (2.0). Table 6.4 Reasons Students and Their Families Chose a Charter School, as Mean of Respondents Decision FactorCS e" 70% At-Risk N=1,818CS < 70% At-Risk N=3,341All Charter Schools N=5,159Good teachers at this school2.72.92.8Parents think this school is better2.52.82.7Previous teachers did not help me enough2.32.52.4Poor grades at previous school2.42.42.4Fewer student conflicts2.22.42.3Small class size2.02.12.1More challenging classes2.02.12.0Trouble at previous school2.12.02.0School is smaller2.02.02.0School is close to home1.81.91.9Friends attend this school1.71.81.8Note. Mean rating based on 4-point scale: not important (1), somewhat important (2), important(3), very important (4). Comparisons by Accountability Ratings Student survey responses were also compared based on the accountability rating assigned to the students campus. Campuses were organized into three groupsthose receiving highperforming ratings of Exemplary or Recognized (standard system) or Commended (alternative education system); those receiving Acceptable ratings in either the standard or alternative education system; and those receiving ratings of Low-Performing (standard system) or Needs Peer Review (alternative education system). Table 6.5 presents students mean importance ratings for each factor influencing their choice of school. Students in all three categories rated teacher quality and parental opinion factors as the most influential reasons for their choice of school. Students in more highly rated schools, however, assigned higher levels of importance to teacher quality and parental opinion than did students in less highly rated schools. Additionally, students in schools rated Exemplary, Commended, or Recognized were less likely to report that poor grades or getting into trouble at their previous school were influential factors in their choice of a school, and they cited the desire for more challenging classes as a more important factor in their choice. Table 6.5 Reasons Students and Their Families Chose a Charter School, by Accountability Rating, as Mean of Respondents Decision FactorHigh-Performinga N=678Acceptableb N = 2,081Low-Performingc N = 3,030All Charters N=5,159Good teachers at this school3.12.82.72.8Parents think school is better3.12.72.62.7Previous teachers did not help me enough2.52.52.42.4Poor grades at previous school2.02.52.52.4Fewer student conflicts2.52.32.22.3Smaller class sizes2.12.22.02.1More challenging classes2.42.11.92.0Trouble at previous school1.82.12.02.0School is smaller1.92.01.92.0School is close to home1.81.92.01.9Friends attending this school2.01.71.71.8Note. Mean rating based on 4-point scale: not important (1), somewhat important (2), important (3), very important (4). a Campuses rated as Exemplary or Recognized (standard system) or Commended (alternative system); N=5. b Campuses rated as Acceptable (standard and alternative systems); N=19. c Campuses rated as Low-Performing (standard system) or Needs Peer Review (alternative system); N=18. SATISFACTION WITH CHARTER SCHOOLS Researchers also sought to gauge students satisfaction with and beliefs about their current charter school. Students rated a variety of statements (e.g., I feel safe at this school) on a 4point scale as strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), agree (3), or strongly agree (4). Figure 2 displays students responses in order of their level of agreement. The vast majority of students (89 percent) agree or strongly agree that they work hard to earn the grades they get at the charter school. Large percentages of students also indicate that their teachers know them by name (81 percent), help them understand concepts (80 percent), and encourage them to think about their future (80 percent). Approximately three out of four students feel that the charter school is a good choice for them (77 percent), feel safe at school (73 percent), and learn more at this school (71 percent). However, only half (52 percent) of the students believe that other students help them learn and students are interested in learning (56 percent). In addition, only 39 percent agree that the school has enough extracurricular activities, and only 30 percent agree that they have more homework at their current school than at their previous school.  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 6.2. Students opinions about their charter school. Table 6.6 compares responses of students in schools serving primarily at-risk students to those serving less at-risk students. Overall, students in schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students indicate lower levels of agreement than those in schools serving less than 70 percent atrisk students. Most striking is the difference in ratings between the two groups of students for the statement, This school is a good choice for me. This statement received a lower rating (2.7 compared to 3.2) from students at schools serving primarily at-risk students, indicating these students are less satisfied with their schools. In addition, students in schools serving primarily atrisk students are less likely to feel safe at school (2.6 compared to 3.0), believe other students help them learn (2.2 compared to 2.6), think teachers know their name (3.0 compared to 3.3), feel that they learn more at this school (2.7 compared to 3.0), and believe students are interested in learning (2.3 compared to 2.6). Table 6.6 Students Opinions About Their Charter School, as Mean of Respondents Student OpinionCS e" 70% At-Risk N=1,818CS < 70% At-Risk N =3,341All Charter Schools N =5,159I work hard to earn my grades 3.23.23.2Most teachers know me by name3.03.33.2Teachers encourage thinking about my future3.03.13.1Teachers help me understand things2.93.13.0This school is a good choice for me2.73.23.0I learn more at this school2.73.02.9I feel safe at this school2.63.02.8I get a lot of individual attention2.72.92.8I wish there were more courses 2.82.82.8Computer available in my classroom2.52.72.6Students are interested in learning2.32.62.5Other students help me learn2.22.62.5Enough extracurricular activities2.12.32.2More homework at this school2.02.12.1Note. Mean rating based on a 4-point scale: strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), agree (3), strongly agree (4). Comparisons by Accountability Ratings Table 6.7 presents students responses regarding their current school, organized by campus accountability ratings. For 11 of the 14 statements, students attending Exemplary, Commended, or Recognized schools assigned higher levels of agreement to the statements than students in less highly rated schools. In particular, students in higher performing charter schools are more likely to believe they get more homework at school (3.0 compared to 1.9), feel there are sufficient extracurricular activities (2.7 compared to 2.2 and 2.1), think that other students help them learn (2.9 compared to 2.4), and sense that they learn more at the school (3.3 compared to 2.9 and 2.8). Students in the higher performing schools are also more likely to believe that they get a lot of individual attention (3.1 compared to 2.9 and 2.8), students are interested in learning (2.8 compared to 2.5), and teachers encourage thinking about their future (3.4 compared to 3.1 and 3.0), know their name (3.4 compared to 3.2 and 3.1), and help them understand (3.3 compared to 3.1 and 2.9). They are also more likely to feel safe at school (3.2 compared to 2.9 and 2.8) and wish for more courses (3.0 compared to 2.8 and 2.7). The one exception to this pattern concerns the availability of computers in the classroom. Students in schools rated Acceptable, LowPerforming, or Needs Peer Review are slightly more likely (2.7 compared to 2.6) to feel that classroom computers are available. Table 6.7 Students Opinions About Their Charter School, by Accountability Rating, as Mean of Respondents Student OpinionHigh-Performing N=678Acceptable N=2,081Low-Performing N=3,030 All Charters N=5,159More homework at this school3.01.91.92.1Enough extracurricular activities2.72.22.12.2Other students help me learn2.92.42.42.5I learn more at this school3.32.92.82.9I get a lot of individual attention3.12.92.82.8Students are interested in learning 2.82.52.52.5Teachers encourage thinking about my future3.43.13.03.1Most teachers know my name3.43.23.13.2Teachers help me understand3.33.12.93.0I feel safe at this school3.22.92.82.8I wish there were more courses 3.02.82.72.8I work hard to earn my grades3.23.23.23.2This school is good choice for me3.13.13.13.0Computer available in my classroom2.62.72.72.6Note. Mean rating based on a 4-point scale: strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), agree (3), strongly agree (4). In addition to responding to survey items, students had the opportunity to write responses to the following questions: What do you like most about this charter school? What is the biggest problem or the thing you dislike the most at this school? Students responses were analyzed to identify particular issues or themes mentioned frequently by students. Positive Aspects of Charter Schools Generally, students comments regarding the most positive aspects of their school centered on teachers and small classes. Similar to the results seen in the quantitative survey items, students overwhelmingly feel their teachers are helpful, caring, and nice. One student wrote, Most of the teachers are understanding and are willing and want to help. Many students also explained that they like the smaller classes provided by charter schools and this allows for more personal attention and one-on-one time with the teacher. One student explained this, commenting, What I like most about this charter school is that the classes are much smaller so the teachers pay more attention to you and you get better grades. Qualitative analysis revealed several themes in responses from students in particular schools. A number of schools surveyed utilize a self-paced (often computerized) educational program with an abbreviated daily schedule. Student responses in these types of schools differed from responses offered by students in other schools. For example, students in self-paced programs were more likely to indicate that the self-paced program and abbreviated schedule were the most positive aspects of their charter school. These students indicated that they preferred working at their own pace and that the abbreviated schedule offered them an opportunity to retain a job or care for their children while attending school. Students in schools offering a self-paced program were also more likely to say that the school offers them a chance to earn credits quickly, that the work is less challenging, and they have fewer distractions at their school as compared to previous schools. In contrast to students enrolled in schools utilizing a self-paced program, students in other charter schools report liking different features of their schools. These students are more likely to say they learn more in their school and that the work is more challenging. It challenges you and prepares you for college, responded one student. Students in these schools also say they like the smaller environment, they feel safe at their school, and the school offers an opportunity to build more personal relationships with teachers and students. For example, one student said he/she liked the family environment between the students, staff, and parents most at the school. School Problems and Concerns Students responses regarding things they dislike about their school were less distinctive by school type. Generally, students commented on issues that typically concern themdress codes or uniform requirements and school food. Students had general complaints about restrictions enforced by the school regarding clothing (e.g., no earrings, no facial hair) or uniforms. Many students also wrote responses about their dislike of the food provided by the school or the length of lunch periods. Other commonly mentioned issues related to school facilities or supplies. Students indicated that their schools were too small or they did not have adequate supplies such as books or computers. Similar to results from the survey items, a number of students also noted a lack of extracurricular or physical education activities at their schools. A notable number of students mentioned not receiving adequate assistance from their teachers. Analysis revealed that such comments were more common among schools receiving lower accountability ratings. Some students indicated that the lack of assistance is due to an insufficient number of teachers, while others reported that some of their teachers were not skilled in explaining ideas or concepts. One student wrote, Some teachers dont know how to help you. Less frequently mentioned issues covered a variety of topics. Consistent with students survey responses, some students requested a wider selection of courses offerings. Additionally, a few students said their schoolwork is not challenging, with comments such as Im not being challenged enough. Everything is easy. The presence of disruptive classmates was another area of concern for some students. Lastly, several surveyed schools have extended-day schedules and students at these schools disliked this part of their school. STUDENT GRADES One of the items to be considered in the evaluation of openenrollment charter schools is student grades [TEC, 12.118 (b)(3)]. On one part of the survey, students were asked to report the kinds of grades received at their previous school and at their current charter school. Students selected from among options relating to traditional grading standards: Mostly As, As and Bs, Mostly Bs, Mostly Bs and Cs, and so forth. Figure 6.3 shows that students reported grades have improved from their previous school to their current charter school. The percent of students earning mostly As or mostly As and Bs increased from 34 percent to 53 percent, while the percent of students making Cs and Ds or Ds and Fs declined from 23 percent to 7 percent.  EMBED Excel.Chart.8 \s  Figure 6.3. Percent of students reporting the kinds of grades received in their previous school and current charter school (N = 5,159). Table 6.8 compares student grades by school type. Students in both types of schools indicate their grades have improved at their current charter school. This trend is somewhat more noticeable for students in schools serving primarily at-risk students. For example, only 5 percent of students in schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students said they earned mostly As at their previous school, whereas more than twice that percentage (12 percent) say they earn mostly As at their current charter school. Lower percentages of students in both types of schools report earning Ds and Fs in their current schools as compared to their previous schools. Table 6.8 Student Grades Earned at Previous School and Current Charter School (Percent) GradeCS e" 70% At-Risk N=1,818CS < 70% At-Risk N =3,341All Charter Schools N=5,159Previous SchoolCurrent SchoolPrevious SchoolCurrent SchoolPrevious SchoolCurrent SchoolMostly A4.611.810.411.98.311.9A and B24.340.725.740.925.240.8Mostly B10.515.711.414.911.115.2B and C29.319.624.221.726.021.0Mostly C6.83.87.24.57.14.2C and D14.15.310.23.711.64.3D and F10.53.111.02.410.92.7FUTURE PLANS Table 6.9 presents students responses about their plans after high school. Overall, approximately half of students plan to attend a four-year college (36 percent) or a community college (15 percent). When comparing responses from students in both types of schools, small differences emerge. Students in schools serving primarily at-risk students are more likely to report planning to get a job, joining the military, or attending a community college compared to students in schools serving less at-risk students. A slightly lower percentage of students in schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students indicate they plan to attend a four-year college (34 percent) than students in schools serving less at-risk students (37 percent). Table 6.9 Students Post-High School Plans (Percent) Student PlansCS e" 70% At-Risk N=1,818CS < 70% At-Risk N =3,341All Charter Schools N=5,159Go to a four-year college34.036.635.7Other14.817.416.5Go to a community college16.514.215.0Get a job13.89.611.1Don t know9.111.210.4Join the military8.06.36.9Go to a technical school3.84.74.4 Students reports of their plans after high school were also analyzed by grade level (see Table 6.10). While the same general pattern of responses is apparent, some noticeable differences between middle school and high school students emerge. A significantly higher percentage of middle school students say they plan to attend a four-year college (52 percent compared to 29 percent). Conversely, more high school students report they plan to attend a community college (19 percent compared to 7 percent). While this seems counterintuitive, it may be that high school students realize the challenges they face in attending a four-year college and see community college as a more attainable option. Table 6.10 Students Post-High School Plans by Grade Level (Percent) Student PlansMiddle School Students N=1,615High School Students N=3,464All Charter Schools N=5,159Go to a four-year college51.528.635.7Other11.318.816.5Go to a community college7.418.615.0Get a job10.511.211.1Dont know10.910.110.4Join the military6.57.16.9Go to a technical school2.05.54.4Lastly, students were asked to indicate whether they would attend their current charter school the following year. As Table 6.11 shows, over half (55 percent) report that they will return to their charter school. Students in schools serving less at-risk students, however, are more likely to say that they will attend their charter school the following year than those in schools serving primarily at-risk students (63 percent compared to 41 percent). Table 6.11 Plans to Attend Charter School Next Year (Percent) ResponseCS e" 70% At-Risk N=1,818CS < 70% At-Risk N=3,341All Charter Schools N=5,159Yes40.862.555.1No35.014.021.2Not sure24.223.623.8Note. Includes responses from only those students eligible to return to the same charter school. SUMMARY Charter school students indicate that teacher quality and the opinions of their parents are the most important factors influencing their decision to attend the charter school. Other influential factors include previous teachers not providing enough help, poor grades at a previous school, and fewer student conflicts. The ratings of the factors influencing school choice were compared for students in highperforming, acceptable, and lowperforming charter schools. Students in the highperforming charter schools assigned higher levels of importance to teacher quality and parental opinion than did students in less highly rated schools. These students were also less likely to report that poor grades or getting into trouble at their previous school were influential factors in their choice of school. In addition, they were more likely to cite the desire for more challenging classes as an important factor in school choice. Students report varying levels of satisfaction with their charter schools. Almost 90 percent of students believe that they work hard to earn the grades they get at the charter school. Large percentages also indicate that their teachers know them by name, help them understand concepts, and encourage them to think about their future. Approximately three out of four students feel that the charter school is a good choice for them, feel safe at school, and learn more at this school. However, only half of the students believe that other students help them learn and students are interested in learning. In addition, only about 40 percent agree that the school has enough extracurricular activities, and only 30 percent agree that they have more homework at their current school than at their previous school. Students in schools serving 70 percent or more atrisk students are less likely to feel that this school is a good choice for me. In addition, they are less likely to feel safe at school, believe other students help them learn, think teachers know their name, feel that they learn more at this school, and believe students are interested in learning. Students in higher performing charter schools are more likely to be satisfied with their school. They are more likely to believe they get more homework at school, feel there are sufficient extracurricular activities, think that other students help them learn, and sense that they learn more at the school. They are also more likely to believe that they get a lot of individual attention, students are interested in learning, and teachers encourage thinking about their future, know their name, and help them understand. These students in higher performing charter schools also express higher levels of personal safety at school, but they wish for more courses. Charter school students reported grades have improved from their previous school to their current charter school. The percentage of students earning mostly As or mostly As and Bs has increased, while the percentage of students making Cs and Ds or Ds and Fs has decreased. This trend is slightly more noticeable for students in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students. Approximately half of charter school students plan to attend a four-year college or a community college. Students in schools serving primarily at-risk students are more likely to report planning to get a job, joining the military, or attending a community college, and slightly less likely to indicate they plan to attend a four-year college. A significantly higher percentage of middle school students say they plan to attend a four-year college. Conversely, more high school students report they plan to attend a community college. It may be that high school students realize the challenges they face in attending a four-year college and see community college as a more attainable option. Lastly, over half of charter school students report that they will return to their charter school next year. Students in schools serving less at-risk students are more likely to say that they will attend their charter school the following year than those in schools serving primarily at-risk students. The reasons why students do not return to charter schools are unknown; thus, this issue should be addressed in future surveys. Section 7  SURVEY OF CHARTER SCHOOL PARENTS  Diversity, alternative, and option are all terms used to describe a linchpin concept of the charter school movementschool choice. As Nathan (1996) states, charter schools bring, for the first time in public education, choice among public schools. Educators who work there and the families whose children attend actively select charter schools. Charter school advocates, recognizing the contributions of families to student success, always cite the additional options they offer for parents and their children (McCotter, 1995). Moreover, proponents assert that state departments of education should issue charters to break the bureaucratic logjam, create multiple providers of public education, and provide choices to families (Harrington-Lueker, 1994). Texas charter schools appear to have succeeded in providing educational choice that accommodates the interests and needs of students and families. Evaluation data for five years show that charter schools have given low income and minority parents, whose children are more likely to be at-risk, educational choices previously available only to affluent families. Increasingly, minority parents, particularly African Americans, appear eager for the opportunity to send their children to charter schools (Shapley, Benner, and Weiher, 2002). As one part of the sixth annual evaluation of charter schools, researchers surveyed a sample of charter school parents to measure their satisfaction with charter schools, as required by state statute. In addition to satisfaction, the survey attempted to gain a better understanding of parents school choices, the kinds of parents who send their children to charter schools, parent satisfaction with current and previous schools, and levels of involvement in the schools. To further understand charter school parents, researchers also surveyed a sample of parents of children currently attending traditional public schools in close geographic proximity to charter schools. These parents, if desired, could have opted to send their children to charter schools. The comparison group makes it possible to compare the characteristics, preferences, and satisfaction levels of charter school parents with parents whose children remain in traditional public schools. METHODOLOGY Survey Procedures Survey instrumentation. Comparable to past parent surveys, researchers developed protocols for telephone surveys of charter school parents and a comparison group of traditional public school parents (see Appendix B). In most cases, the two surveys included parallel items to allow comparisons between parent groups. Items on both surveys addressed parent demographic characteristics, satisfaction with the childs school, participation in school activities, and the assignment of a grade (A to F) to the current school. In some instances, items were tailored to reflect parents unique school relationships (charter or traditional). Charter school parents responded to items on their reasons for choosing a charter school, information sources utilized in decision-making, and perceptions of the school their child previously attended. In contrast, traditional public school parents identified reasons for keeping their children in traditional public schools. Charter parent sample. The Survey of Charter School Parents was administered to a random sample of 216 parents of charter school students by researchers at the University of Texas at Austin (UT) Office of Survey Research. Sampling was a multi-stage process. First, charter school directors for 61 randomly selected charter schools were asked to submit student rosters for all associated campuses, including student demographic and parent identification information. Altogether, 30 charter schools (57 percent) submitted rosters. Researchers next randomly selected a 15 percent parent sample (2,120 parents) from the combined charter school database. This sample provided a master parent list that was randomly accessed for parent telephone interviews. Traditional public school parent sample. The Survey of Traditional Public School Parents was administered to a random sample of 221 parents of students enrolled in traditional public schools. The UT Office of Survey Research also conducted this telephone survey. Sampling involved multiple steps. First, superintendents of nine districts located in close geographic proximity to the randomly selected charter schools were asked to submit student rosters for campuses within their districts that were located close enough to charter schools for student attendance at a charter school to be a parental option. Of the nine districts, four (including three large urban districts and one suburban district) complied with the request by submitting student rosters, including student demographic and parent identification information. From the combined parent database, researchers randomly selected a five percent sample (2,504 parents). This sample provided a master list that was randomly accessed for parent telephone interviews. Characteristics of Survey Respondents Table 7.1 presents data on the racial/ethnic backgrounds of charter school parents and parents in the comparison group. Most survey respondents belong to a minority group39 percent of charter parents and 55 percent of comparison parents are Hispanic, and 23 percent of charter parents and 19 percent of comparison parents are African American. The percentage of White parents is higher in the charter sample, 33 percent versus 24 percent. There are also racial/ethnic differences between parents whose children attend charters serving primarily at-risk students and parents whose children attend charters serving less at-risk students. There are proportionately more Hispanics (61 percent versus 33 percent) and less Whites (12 percent versus 38 percent) among the parents whose children attend charters serving primarily at-risk students. Compared to the population of charter school students, the overall parent sample has proportionately too many Whites (33 percent compared to 20 percent) and too few African Americans (23 percent compared to 40 percent). Table 7.1 Race/Ethnicity of Parent Samples (Percent) Race/EthnicityCharter School SampleComparison Sample (N=221)CS e" 70% (N=44)CS < 70% (N=172)All CS (N=216)African American25.622.523.118.6Hispanic60.533.138.755.2White11.637.932.524.0Other2.36.65.62.2Note. The ethnic distribution of the statewide student population in charter schools is 40 percent African American, 38 percent Hispanic, 20 percent White, and 2 percent other. Development of Analysis Weights Weighting of survey data is used to correct imbalances between the reference population (i.e., all charter school parents) and actual survey respondents. Analytic weights can be developed so that, when applied to the survey data, the survey responses are balanced to reflect known population distributions, thus appearing representative. Evaluators explored analysis weights because, compared to the charter school student population, the parent survey respondents had proportionately too many whites and too few African Americans. To determine weights, researchers used an ethnicity control vector which is related to the survey responses. Weights were calculated by determining the ethnic breakdown of student enrollment in the charter schools and then dividing the percentage of the population that falls into each category by the percentage of the survey respondents that falls into the corresponding category. So, for example, 40.1 percent of charter school students are African American, while 23.1 percent of parent survey respondents were also African American. Thus, a weight of 1.74 would be applied to the parent survey cases with these characteristics. After calculating weights for the parent survey, researchers completed data analyses on both the raw survey data and the weighted survey data. Comparisons of results showed differences for certain survey items. Thus, the raw data results were not completely representative of the population and were used with analytical weights applied. PARENT CHARACTERISTICS As Table 7.2 indicates, there is a tendency for charter parents to have higher socioeconomic status (SES) than the comparison group parents. Twothirds (66 percent) of charter parents have family incomes of $25,000 or more, whereas the corresponding figure for comparison group parents is approximately 16 percentage points less (50 percent). In addition, 59 percent of charter parents have at least some college experience, whereas 39 percent of comparison group parents have attended at least some college. Table 7.2 Educational Achievement and Income Levels of Parent Samples (Percent) Socioeconomic IndicatorCharter School SampleComparison Sample (N=221)CS e" 70% (N=44)CS < 70% (N=172)All CS (N=216)Income LevelLess than $10,00030.05.711.011.4$10,000  14,99912.59.910.519.3$15,000  24, 99927.57.812.219.3$25,000  34, 99912.518.417.113.6$35,000  49, 99912.516.315.511.9$60,000 or more5.041.833.724.4Educational Achievement LevelLess than high school44.212.218.639.4Completed high school23.322.722.821.3Less than 4 years college16.330.227.420.4College graduate14.028.525.612.2Graduate courses, no degree0.01.20.91.4Graduate or professional degree2.35.24.75.4 Further examination of charter school and comparison parents indicates that parents who choose charter schools are more likely to speak English in their homes. While 72 percent of charter parents identify English as the primary language spoken in the home, only 59 percent of comparison parents report this. The relationships between the two groups in terms of language, as displayed in Table 7.3, persist over survey yearscharter parents are consistently more likely to say that they speak English in the home. Table 7.3 Percent of Parents Who Speak English in the Home Study YearCharter SampleComparison Sample390.277.2484.265.4573.865.5671.859.3 HOW PARENTS FIND OUT ABOUT CHARTER SCHOOLS The kinds of informational sources parents use to select charter schools may affect their choices; thus, it is important to determine how parents learn about the charter schools they chose for their children. In particular, what types of information do they use to make the decision to send their child to a charter school? Do different kinds of parents find out about charter schools from different sources? Parents were read a list of information sources. They responded yes or no to indicate if they gathered this type of information prior to enrolling their child in a charter school. The results are presented in Table 7.4. Table 7.4 Charter School Parents Informational Sources in School Selection (Percent) School Information Source CS e" 70% (N=44) CS < 70% (N=172)All Charter Schools (N=216)Information from parents69.069.569.4Academic performance of students61.961.661.7The charter s accountability rating69.054.957.8Information from charter brochures50.051.851.5Information from the charter website21.434.131.6Approximately 70 percent of charter school parents rely on information from other parents having children at the charter school. Over half of charter school parents also collect data about the academic performance of students in the charter school (62 percent) and the accountability rating of the charter school (58 percent). Half (52 percent) use written brochures or descriptions of the charter school. The least frequently used source of information is the charter schools website (32 percent). The parents of children attending charter schools serving primarily atrisk children are less likely to use a charters website (21 percent versus 34 percent), but more likely to consider the charters accountability rating (69 percent versus 55 percent). FACTORS AFFECTING SCHOOL CHOICE Parents of charter school students answered a series of questions regarding the factors that were important in the decision to enroll their child in a charter school. Parents were read a list of factors. They responded using a 4-point scale including not important, somewhat important, important, and very important to indicate whether or not the factor was influential in their school choice decision. Table 7.5 indicates that good teachers and the schools education program are the main school selection factors for charter school parents. Other important factors for charter school parents include the schools academic reputation, the teaching of moral values similar to their own, the approach to discipline, the ability to serve their childrens specific education needs (e.g., special education, dyslexia, dropout recovery), and the reputation of the school staff. The parents of children attending charter schools serving primarily atrisk children are more likely to cite performance at a previous school (70 percent compared to 50 percent), dissatisfaction with a previous school (76 percent compared to 60 percent), and small school size (85 percent compared to 75 percent). Table 7.5 Percent of Parents Perceiving School Selection Factors As Important School FactorCharter School SampleCS e" 70% (N=44)CS < 70% (N=172)All CS (N=216)Good teachers97.997.497.5Education program93.897.396.5Academic reputation91.789.189.7Teaching of moral values92.588.889.6Discipline approach86.887.487.3Serve specific education needsa90.285.986.9Reputation of administrators or staff81.985.384.6Small school size84.774.576.8Recommendations from a friend74.768.369.7Dissatisfaction with previous school75.760.063.5Convenient location67.459.561.3Performance at previous school70.250.254.7Recommendations from previous school52.943.345.4Note. Percents include parents who consider factors as important or very important. a Specific needs such as special education, dyslexia, dropout recovery. Parents of students in traditional schools also answered a series of questions regarding the factors that were important in their decision to keep their child in their current school. Parents were read a list of factors. They also responded using a 4point scale ranging from not important to very important to indicate whether or not the factor was influential in their decision to remain with traditional schools. Figure 7.1 compares the school continuation responses of parents having students in traditional schools with the school selection responses of parents having students in charter schools. Small school size appears to be more important to charter school parents (77 percent compared to 40 percent). In addition, the teaching of moral values (90 percent compared to 80 percent) and the quality of the education program (97 percent compared to 87 percent) are more important factors for charter school parents. On the other hand, a convenient location is more important to the parents with children in traditional public schools (79 percent compared to 61 percent).  EMBED MSGraph  Figure 7.1. Percentage of parents perceiving school factors as important: Charter parentsfactors important in choosing their current school; Traditional parentsfactors important in keeping their child in their current school. PARENT SATISFACTION WITH SCHOOLS To gauge their level of satisfaction, parents were read a list of statements about their childs school. They responded on a 4point scale to indicate their agreement about each statement as strongly disagree, disagree, agree, or strongly agree. Table 7.6 shows that the overwhelming majority of charter school and comparison group parents are satisfied with (a) the instruction offered, (b) the basic educational program, (c) the high expectations and standards, (d) the teachers and school leaders being accountable for student achievement, and (e) being regularly informed about their childs academic performance. Both groups of parents are least positive about their school having sufficient financial resources. Table 7.6 Percent of Parents Agreeing With Statements About Their Childs School Statement About SchoolCharter School SampleComparison Sample (N=221)CS e" 70% (N=44)CS < 70% (N=172)All CS (N=216)Satisfied with instruction92.995.194.791.0Satisfied with basic educational program88.195.193.790.0High expectations and standards85.793.391.782.4Child receives sufficient attention83.392.790.874.2Teachers accountable for achievement85.790.289.385.1Regularly keeps me informed88.188.488.387.3Small class sizes88.187.887.956.6Education over TAAS or TAKS73.889.686.473.3Meets needs not previously addressed84.287.486.7--Satisfied with enriched program78.681.781.186.9Childs grades have improved90.577.480.1--Acceptable rate of staff turnover76.275.075.266.1Satisfied with extracurricular activities83.369.572.389.6Buildings need improvement66.771.370.4--Provides adequate support services69.072.671.884.2TAAS scores improved59.557.357.8--Sufficient financial resources71.453.757.361.5Satisfied with buildings and grounds------80.5Note. Percent of parents who agree or strongly agree with statements. Overall, charter school parents are more positive about their childs school than the parents of children who attend traditional public schools (9 of the 13 comparisons favor charter parents). In particular, charter school parents are more likely to agree that their child receives sufficient attention (91 percent versus 74 percent), the school has small class sizes (88 percent versus 57 percent), and the school emphasizes educational content over test preparation (86 percent versus 73 percent). Conversely, comparison group parents are more likely to be satisfied with enrichment programs including music, art, and foreign language (87 percent versus 81 percent); extracurricular activities (90 percent versus 72 percent); and support services like counseling, healthcare, and social services (84 percent versus 72 percent). There are several interesting differences in the perceptions of the parents of children attending charter schools serving primarily more and less atrisk children. The parents whose children attend charters serving less atrisk children are more likely to feel that their child receives sufficient attention (93 percent versus 83 percent) and the school emphasizes educational content over test preparation (90 percent versus 74 percent). On the other hand, the parents whose children attend charters serving more atrisk children are more likely to agree that their childs grades have improved (91 percent versus 77 percent) and the school has sufficient financial resources (71 percent versus 54 percent). They are also more likely to be satisfied with the schools extracurricular offerings (83 percent versus 70 percent). PARENT SATISFACTION WITH PREVIOUS AND CURRENT SCHOOLS Charter School Parent Satisfaction with Previous Schools Table 7.7 reports the grades charter parents give the schools their children previously attended. Overall, 49 percent of charter parents give their childrens previous schools an A or B, while 12 percent assign a failing grade. Parents of children in charters serving less at-risk students assign higher grades to their childrens previous schools (51 percent assign A or B versus 39 percent for parents of children in charters serving primarily atrisk students). Table 7.7 Grades Assigned by Charter Parents to Children s Previous Schools (Percent) GradeCS e" 70% (N=39)CS < 70% (N=151)All CS (N=190)A15.223.722.0B24.227.426.8C39.424.427.4D6.113.311.9F15.211.111.9 Over four years of the evaluation of open-enrollment charter schools (years one, three, five, and six), as shown in Table 7.8, the relative satisfaction levels of charter parents have varied little. Forty to 50 percent of parents assign an A or B, and 20 to 30 percent assign a C or assign a D or F. Table 7.8 Grades Assigned to Previous Schools by Charter Parents Over Time (Percent) Year 1Year 3Year 5Year 6GradeCharter (N=480)Charter (N=1,103)Charter (N=1,071)Charter (N=190)A17.221.822.622.0B25.524.135.326.8C31.824.121.827.4D13.315.110.911.9F10.414.69.311.9Parent Satisfaction with Current Schools Charter school parents and comparison parents of students attending traditional public schools, as displayed in Table 7.9, graded their satisfaction with their childrens current schools on a scale from A to F. Charter school parents are more approving of their childrens current schools (50 percent assigning an A) than the previous school their children attended (22 percent assigning an A). Charter school parents also express higher satisfaction levels than comparison parents (87 percent assigning an A or B versus 71 percent of comparison parents), although few parents in either group offered failing grades to their current schools. Additionally, parents of children in schools serving primarily at-risk students are slightly less likely to provide A or B ratings than those with children in schools serving less at-risk students. Table 7.9 Grades Assigned by Parents to Their Childrens Current Schools (Percent) GradeCharter School ParentsComp.aCS e" 70%CS < 70%All CSPreviousCurrentPreviousCurrentPreviousCurrentCurrentA15.248.823.750.022.049.840.7B24.234.127.438.326.837.430.3C39.44.924.48.027.47.412.2D6.19.813.31.911.93.48.1F15.22.411.11.911.92.03.2N3944151172190216221a Only current ratings are provided for the comparison group because these parents have not removed their children from traditional public schools. PARENT PARTICIPATION IN SCHOOLS Previous studies of school choice have found that parents who actively choose their childrens schools (as opposed to sending them to the neighborhood public school) are more likely to participate in educational and school programs (Godwin, Kemerer, and Martinez, 1998; Martinez, Godwin, and Kemerer, 1996; Vassallo, 2000). This finding is supported by participation data from the parent survey when participation rates are compared for charter school parents and a sample of parents whose children attend traditional public schools. Table 7.10 shows that in all eight comparisons, participation rates are higher for charter school parents. Differences range from 3 to 16 percentage points. The largest differences are for volunteering for school activities, visiting classrooms, and attending PTO meetings. The smallest differences are for attending school board meetings and helping to make curricular decisions. Parents of children in charters serving less at-risk students are more likely to participate in activities at their childs school. In particular, they are more likely to be involved with fundraising (67 percent compared to 50 percent), and they are also more likely to serve as a board member (15 percent compared to 7 percent), volunteer for school activities (60 percent compared to 52 percent), and attend PTO meetings (62 percent compared to 55 percent). Table 7.10 Percent of Parents Participating in Activities at Their Child s Current School School ActivityCharter School SampleComparison Sample (N=221)CS e" 70% (N=44)CS < 70% (N=172)All CS (N=216)Visited classroom88.186.686.973.8Attended parent/teacher conferences78.686.084.577.4Signed contract about participation71.465.967.0--Helped with fundraising50.067.163.654.3Attended PTO meetings54.862.260.748.0Volunteered for activities52.460.458.743.0Attended school board meeting40.537.237.934.4Helped make curricular decisions19.016.517.014.0Served as board member7.115.213.68.6 Table 7.11 reports the participation rates of charter school parents at their childrens previous schools. These rates are essentially the same as the parents participation rates in the current charter schools their children are attending (see Table7.10). There are, however, two important differences. First, parents of charter school children are much more likely to sign an educational participation contract at their childs current charter school (67 percent) than at the previous school their child attended (35 percent). Second, parents are more likely to visit a classroom at their child s current charter school (87 percent) than at their previous school (75 percent). Table 7.11 Percent of Charter School Parents Participating in Activities at Their Child s Previous School School Activity CS e" 70% (N=44) CS < 70% (N=172)All Charter Schools (N=216)Attended parent teacher conferences73.788.185.1Visited classroom76.374.174.6Attended PTO meetings63.266.465.7Helped with fundraising34.266.459.7Volunteered for activities44.760.857.5Signed contract about participation23.738.535.4Attended school board meeting44.730.833.7Served as board member7.914.713.3Helped make curricular decisions10.511.911.6 In contrast to year five and year six findings, results for the first four years of the charter school evaluation do not show that charter parents are more likely to participate in their childrens education. For example, data for the fourth-year evaluation (Table 7.12) show no clear differences in overall participation between charter parents in charter schools and comparison parents in traditional public schools. In the fourth year, comparison parents are more likely (by a considerable margin) than charter parents to attend a parent-teacher conference, attend a PTO meeting, and help with fund-raising. Charter parents are more likely to attend school board meetings than comparison parents by a small margin in the fourth year, and volunteering at school and helping to make program and curriculum decisions are comparable. However, data from the fifth-year, and especially the sixthyear, do indicate that the charter school parents participated at higher levels than corresponding comparison group parents. Table 7.12 Charter Parent Participation in Charter School and Comparison Parent Participation Over Time (Percent Responding Affirmatively) ActivityYear 4Year 5Year 6CharterComp.CharterComp.CharterComp.Attend parent-teacher conference75.488.680.079.784.373.8Attend PTO meeting65.178.169.468.460.248.0Help with fund-raising50.060.260.247.463.054.3Volunteer at school45.743.859.341.858.843.0Attend school board meeting27.924.940.531.737.034.4Help make program decisions20.619.023.617.417.114.0SUMMARY Parents learn about a charter school primarily from other parents having children at the charter school. Over half of charter school parents also collect information about the academic performance of students in the charter school and the schools accountability rating. Half of the parents use written brochures or descriptions of the charter school. The least frequently used source of information is the charter schools website. The major factors that influence school choice for charter school parents are good teachers and the schools education program. Other important factors include the schools academic reputation, the teaching of moral values, the approach to discipline, the ability to serve specific education needs, and the reputation of school staff. The parents of children attending charter schools serving primarily atrisk children are more likely to cite dissatisfaction with a previous school as an influence over school choice. The responses of parents having students in traditional public schools pertaining to keeping their children in those schools were compared with the school selection responses of charter school parents. Small school size is more important to charter school parents, along with the teaching of moral values and the quality of the educational program. On the other hand, a convenient location is more important to the parents with children in traditional public schools. Charter school parents are more positive about their childs school than comparison group parents. In particular, charter school parents are more likely to feel that their child receives sufficient attention, class sizes are small, and the school emphasizes content over test preparation. Conversely, comparison group parents are more likely to be satisfied with enrichment programs, extracurricular activities, and support services. There are differences in the perceptions of parents of children attending charter schools serving primarily more and less atrisk children. The parents whose children attend charters serving less atrisk children are more likely to feel that their child receives sufficient attention and emphasis is placed on educational content, not test preparation. On the other hand, the parents whose children attend charters serving more atrisk children are more likely to be satisfied with extracurricular offerings, feel that their childs grades have improved, and perceive that the school has sufficient financial resources. Charter school parents are more approving of their childs current school than the previous school their child attended. They also express higher satisfaction levels than comparison parents. Additionally, parents of children in schools serving primarily at-risk students are slightly less approving of their childs school than parents with children in schools serving less at-risk students. Parent participation rates are higher for charter school parents than for comparison sample parents. Specifically, in all eight comparisons, participation rates are higher for charter school parents, with differences ranging from 3 to 16 percentage points. The largest differences are for volunteering for school activities, visiting classrooms, and attending PTO meetings. The smallest differences are for attending school board meetings and helping to make curricular decisions. Parents of children in charters serving less at-risk students are more likely to participate in activities at their childs school. In particular, they are more likely to be involved with fundraising, and they are also more likely to volunteer for school activities. The fifth and sixth study years are the only years in which it appears that charter parents are more likely to participate in their schools than comparison parents are to participate in traditional public schools. In particular, first-year, third-year, and fourth-year comparisons indicate that participation rates between charter parents and comparison parents are similar. Yet, data from the last two years indicate that charter school parents participate at higher levels than corresponding comparison group parents. These differences may reflect changes in the parent population as a result of growth in the number of charter schools or the development of more effective parent outreach efforts as charter schools have matured. Chapter 8 STUDENT PERFORMANCE  Student achievement remains a vital concern as the charter school movement continues to grow. Texas, like most states, holds charter schools to the same accountability standards as traditional public schools. Charter schools are included in the Texas public school accountability system. Mandated by the Legislature in 1993, the system relies on the states student-level information system (PEIMS) and Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) to accredit districts and rate schools. Through 2002, Texas districts and campuses have received annual accountability ratings based primarily on TAAS performance and dropout rates. Charter schools in the first year of operation are not rated unless requested; however, newly opened charter campuses administered by operating charter schools receive ratings. Academic outcomes for charter schools nationally have been mixed, with scores in some states significantly exceeding state averages, whereas charter schools in other states have lower scores (Fitzgerald et al., 2001, Horn and Miron, 1999). Rand researchers found inconclusive evidence, with no studies conclusively establishing whether charter school student achievement outcomes were significantly better or worse than those of traditional schools. (Gill, Timpane, Ross, and Brewer, 2001). In Texas, however, a five-year longitudinal evaluation establishes that charter schools, on average, have lower state assessment scores, lower attendance rates, and higher dropout rates compared to traditional public schools in the state (Texas Open-Enrollment Charter Schools Fifth-Year Evaluation, 2002). This evaluation further explores student performance in Texas charter schools. The chapter describes charter school achievement for the 2001-02 school year and changes in student achievement over time (1997-98 to 2001-02 school years). In particular, the study examines how students in charter schools are performing in relation to students in traditional public schools, student achievement differences by type of charter school (serving more or less at-risk students), and the effects on student performance of remaining in or moving between charter and traditional public schools. Appendix F provides data for individual campuses, including enrollment, grade levels served, annual dropout rates, attendance rates, and TAAS reading and mathematics passing rates. METHODOLOGY Charter school campus- and student-level data are used to compare the performance of Texas charter schools with traditional public schools. The study centers on the 241 charter school campuses operating for the entire 2001-02 school year. The 241 charter campuses served 46,304 students, with an average of 192 students per campus and enrollment ranging from 2 to 1,235 students. Additional data are derived from openenrollment charter school evaluation reports for years one through five (www.tcer.org) and longitudinal data for a matched cohort of students with three years of test scores. Throughout this chapter, data analysis procedures are described in detail along with evaluation results. Data sources and study limitations follow. Data Sources Two Texas Education Agency (TEA) data systemsthe Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) and the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS)provide quantitative information. Data from these sources include TAAS results, accountability ratings, and other student performance measures. Texas Assessment of Academic Skills. The TAAS is a series of criterion-referenced tests with three primary subtests: reading, mathematics, and writing. Students in grades 3 through 8 and 10 currently take TAAS reading and mathematics subtests; writing is administered at grades 4, 8, and 10. TAAS data, drawn from AEIS and PEIMS, were analyzed at both the campus and student level. Accountability ratings. Districts and campuses receive annual accountability ratings based primarily on standardized test results and dropout rates. Charter school campuses may be rated using the standard accountability system that includes TAAS performance and dropout standards for the following ratings: Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable, and LowPerforming. Campuses may also petition to be rated under the alternative education (AE) system. This system has lower TAAS and dropout standards, but campuses under this rating system must meet one additional performance standard along with attendance standards. AE ratings are Commended, Acceptable, and Needs Peer Review. Other measures. Quantitative analyses also included the following AEIS data elements: retention/promotion rates, advanced course completions, end-of course examination passing rates, and student attendance and dropout rates. Study Limitations Several factors complicate the analysis of charter school data, including the growing number of charter schools, data accuracy issues, student population changes, and confusion regarding units of analysis. Number of charter schools. The number of charter schools and campuses has increased each year. Likewise, the numbers of students available for analysis varies widely across years. Still, over the past three years, the pace of charter school growth has slowed and the number of schools in operation is now adequate to allow more viable comparisons. Throughout this chapter, descriptive information about the number of charter schools and the number of students is reported to provide a context for data interpretation. Data accuracy. With the exception TAAS outcomes, the majority of data are selfreported by school districts and charter schools through PEIMS. In some cases, the accuracy of charter school PEIMS data is an issue. For example, charter schools in 2001-02 continue to have a higher Person Identification Database (PID) error rate (11.6 percent) compared to the state average (1.5 percent). In contrast to PEIMS data, information for TAAS is generally regarded as accurate. Student mobility and growth. Student movement in and out of charter schools (i.e., mobility) and population growth impacts outcomes. The impact of student instability on academic performance is especially acute for charter schools because many charter schools have small student enrollments and may enroll highly mobile at-risk student populations. Although longitudinal analyses involving matched students are used to help control for student population changes, this approach reduces (sometimes significantly) the number of students included. In addition, charter schools are enrolling disproportionally more high school students than traditional public schools, and TAAS outcomes are available only for high school students in grade 10. Designating a charter school as a school or campus. TEA uses county-district and county-district-campus numbers to identify traditional public school districts and campuses, respectively. Likewise, charter schools and campuses are also identified at two levels. Charter schools, which may have one or multiple campuses, have TEA-assigned county-district numbers and aggregate statistics are generated in AEIS reports for charter schools (similar to traditional public school districts). Charter schools, however, are not considered school districts and do not receive district accountability ratings. In 2001-02, 180 charter schools were in operation, with 241 charter campuses associated with those charter schools. Each charter school campus also has a unique county-district-campus number. AEIS statistics are reported for each charter campus, and each eligible campus receives an accountability rating. Reporting data for both charter schools and charter school campuses results in different numbers of charter schools reported in data tables. For example, campus numbers are used to obtain data such as accountability ratings, whereas charter school numbers are used in some cases to establish comparison groups. Unit of analysis. Both campus-level data and student-level data are used in this chapter to describe charter school performance. Results of performance calculations may vary (usually slightly), depending on whether the campus or student is the unit of analysis. Also, when the campus is the unit of analysis, each campus receives equal weight, regardless of the number of students enrolled. When the student is the unit of analysis, larger schools receive more weight in the calculations. CAMPUS-LEVEL PERFORMANCE Accountability Ratings Performance standards. Table 8.1 summarizes the 2001-02 performance standards for the four standard ratings categories. In reading, mathematics, and writing each performance standard must be met by each of five student groups: African American, Hispanic, White, and economically disadvantaged, and all students. In social studies, the performance standard must be only be met by the all students group. TEAs Division of Performance Reporting is responsible for the calculation of ratings and distribution of summary performance reports, including AEIS reports. Some standards have increased in rigor for 2002. (2002 Accountability Manual, TEA.) Table 8.1 2001-02 Standard Accountability Rating Categories for Campuses RatingSpring 2002, Reading, Writing, MathematicsaSpring 2002, Social StudiesbAnnual Dropout RateaExemplaryAt least 90% passing each TAAS subject area At least 90% passing TAAS 1.0% or less RecognizedAt lest 80% passing each TAAS subject area At least 80% passing TAAS 2.5% or less AcceptableAt least 55% passing each TAAS subject area At least 50% passing TAAS 5.0% or less Low-PerformingBelow 55% passing any TAAS subject area Below 50% passing TAAS Above 5.0% Source: 2002 Accountability Manual, TEA. Note. Student groups include African American, Hispanic, White, and economically disadvantaged, all students. a Performance standards met for each student group. b Performance standard met for all students only. A campus serving primarily at-risk students may apply to be rated under alternative education (AE) accountability procedures. AE ratings utilize the categories listed in Table 8.2. A students TAAS scores are attributed to the alternative campus if a student has been enrolled at least 85 days on the day of testing. In addition to indicators listed in Table 8.2, an alternative campus must select one of eight additional indicators on which to be rated; these indicators include, among others, GED certificate completion, courses passed, and credits earned. Details can be found in the 2002 Alternative Education Accountability Manual. Table 8.2 2001-02 Alternative Education Rating Categories Rating TAAS Passing RateAnnual Dropout RateAttendance RateAE: Commended30% or more passinga 85% increasing TLI scoresb6% or lessa94%bAE: Acceptable30% or more passingb10% or lessb80%bAE: Needs Peer ReviewLess than 30%bGreater than 10%bNot usedSource: TEA 2002 Alternative Education Accountability Manual. a Performance standards met for each student group. b Performance standards met for all students only. Some charter campuses are not rated. These campuses may receive a not rated label due to the grade levels served (i.e., untested students), status as a new school, or when too few students are reported to calculate a rating. Inclusion in standard or alternative education rating system. Table 8.3 and Figure 8.1 show that, of all campuses in the state, 97 percent received standard ratings in 2002, whereas only 47 percent of charter campuses received standard ratings. Thus, the percentage of charter school campuses rated under the alternative education system is much higher than the figure for traditional public schools (53 percent versus 3 percent). Furthermore, over the past four school years, an increasing percentage of charter school campuses have applied for ratings under the alternative accountability system (29, 34, 39, and 53 percent, respectively). Table 8.3 Charter and Traditional School Campuses Included in Accountability Systems, 1999-2002 Accountability System Charter SchoolsTraditional Public Schools19981999200020012002200020012002StandardPercent5971666147--9397N rated10156396946,3636,6166,447Alternative EducationPercent4129343953--73N rated763362106----230Source: TEA AEIS reports. Note. -- indicates data are unavailable.  EMBED MSGraph.Chart.8 \s  Figure 8.1. Percent of charter and traditional campuses included in accountability systems. Standard and alternative education accountability ratings. Standard and alternative education accountability ratings for charter school and traditional public school campuses are compared in Table 8.4. Campus-level ratings are presented to allow comparisons with the alternative ratings (districts are not rated using the alternative system). In 2002, 35 charter school campuses included in the standard system were not rated: 7 campuses had insufficient data, 16 were new charter campuses, 1 served only prekindergarten and kindergarten students, and 11 others were not rated with no reason given. Reported percentages exclude campuses that were not rated. As a result, percentages included for charter school standard ratings do not match those posted on TEAs web site. Table 8.4 Campus Performance Ratings for Charter and Traditional Public Schools, 1999-2002 RatingCharter SchoolsTraditional Public Schools19992000200120021999200020012002StandardaExemplary13%8%5%16%18%20%24%30%Recognized20%11%9%10%30%32%36%37%Acceptable47%49%42%34%51%46%38%32%Low-Performing20%32%44%40%2%2%2%2%N rated156396946,2066,3636,6166,444N not ratedb45813134160140149659Alternative EducationCommendedn/a0%2%3%n/a2%5%17%Acceptable83%27%38%58%--88%84%77%Needs Review17%73%61%39%11%11%7%N rated63362106------230Source: TEA Division of Student Performance Reporting. Note. The Commended rating was instituted in 2000. -- indicates unavailable data. Results for AE traditional exclude charter campuses; standard results include charter campuses. a Percentages based on four ratings. b Includes campuses not rated for data quality, grades PK-K, new charter, and insufficient data.  EMBED MSGraph.Chart.8 \s  Figure 8.2. Percent of charter campuses rated Low-Performing or Needs Peer Review. Table 8.4 reveals that the number of campuses receiving standard accountability ratings increased from 15 to 96 charter campuses between 1999 and 2001, but decreased slightly to 94 campuses in 2002. Because the small numbers of charter schools included in the accountability systems in 1999 distort percentages, conclusions to follow are limited to 2000 through 2002 ratings. Notable findings for the past three school years show that charters rated Low-Performing or Needs Peer Review increased in 2001 from 46 percent to 51 percent, but dropped in 2002 to 40 percent (see Figure 8.2). In comparison, the percentages for traditional public schools in the Low-Performing and Needs Peer Review categories in 2002 were 2 percent and 7 percent, respectively. Moreover, while the combined percentage of traditional schools rated as either Exemplary or Recognized increased from 52 percent to 67 percent between 2000 and 2002, the percentage of charter schools in the two high-performance categories increased from a much lower 19 percent in 2000 to 26 percent in 2002. In each of the last three years, increasing numbers of charter school campuses applied for, and received, ratings under the alternative accountability systemcharter campuses included in the AE system increased markedly from 33 to 106. Of charter campuses rated under the alternative system in 2002, less than half required a Peer Review (39 percent). This percentage is much lower than the 73 percent in 2000 or the 61 percent in 2001. However, it does exceed the 7 percent of traditional campuses needing review. Other positive results for charters included increasing percentages of charter school campuses rated as Commended (3%) and Acceptable (58%) under the alternative system in 2002 compared to the previous two years. Accountability ratings by years of charter school operation. An additional analysis revealed that campuses affiliated with charter schools operating four or more years (72charter campuses) performed better on accountability ratings compared to charter school campuses as a whole. Combining the standard and AE rating systems, 15 campuses (21 percent) were rated as either Exemplary, Recognized, or Commended; 41 campuses (57 percent) were Acceptable, and 16 campuses (22 percent) had either LowPerforming or Needs Peer Review ratings. Although these charter school campuses outperformed charter schools overall, they still lag behind traditional public schools in accountability ratings. Texas Assessment of Academic Skills TAAS, a series of criterion-referenced tests, is used for accountability purposes and instructional decision making. A Texas Learning Index (TLI) score of 70 is used to set corresponding percent passing scores. TAAS currently includes three primary subtests: reading, mathematics, and writing. To receive a diploma, students must pass all three subtests at the exit level (grade 10) in addition to meeting other coursework requirements. The reading subtest encompasses 6 objectives; mathematics has 13 objectives; and writing consists of a composition and multiple-choice items covering language usage. Students in grades 3 through 8 and 10 currently take TAAS reading and mathematics subtests, whereas writing is administered at grades 4, 8, and 10. Considerations for interpreting campus-level TAAS performance. In this section, student TAAS performance in charter schoolsand change in performanceis compared with state averages. Additional factors should also be considered in interpreting TAAS results. First, campus-level TAAS comparisons over time involve different sets of students from year to year (i.e., non-matched students). Campus-level analyses are generally reported as the percent passing TAAS for all grade levels combined. In most cases, the analyses are restricted to all tests taken, reading, writing, and mathematics. Science and social studies subtests are administered at selected grades, but since change over contiguous grade levels cannot be measured, results are not reported. In addition, student economic disadvantage (i.e., qualifying for the federal free- or reduced-price lunch program) is used as a state-level surrogate to identify and make comparisons for at-risk students in charter and traditional public schools. This allows the most reasonable comparisons between charter school campuses serving primarily at-risk students and state averages. For charter school campuses serving less at-risk students, comparisons involve state scores for all students in the state. This seems appropriate, given the relatively small percentage of economically disadvantaged students attending those charter schools (40 percent). TAAS participation rates. TAAS participation rates for charter school campuses and the state are compared in Table 8.5. For 2001-02, percentages of students tested, absent, and exempted by special education Admissions, Review, Dismissal (ARD) committees are comparable for charter schools and the state overall. However, percentages of students included in the accountability subset are very different. Only 60 percent of charter school students were included in the accountability rating system compared to 85 percent of students statewide. The accountability subset includes students who were enrolled for the fall PEIMS snapshot and tested in the same school. Charter schools high student mobility and Person Identification Database (PID) error rates may contribute to this variance with the state. In any case, lower percentages of charter school students included in the accountability system undoubtedly impact campus performance outcomes. Table 8.5 2001-02 TAAS Participation Group Tested AbsentSpecial Education ARD Exempt Accountability Subseta SDAACharter94.5%1.5%1.3%60.4%8.2%State96.2%0.7%1.1%85.0%6.7%Source: 2002 TEA AEIS reports. ARD=Admission, Review, and Dismissal. SDAA=State Developed Alternative Assessment. a Students included in the fall PEIMS snapshot and tested in the same school. TAAS performance. Table 8.6 compares TAAS performance for students in charter school campuses with student performance statewide. In all areas, TAAS performance in charter schools is well below state averages. Table 8.6 2002 TAAS Performance for All Charter Schools and State Average CategoryCharter SchoolsState AverageDifferencePercent of Students Passing TAASAll tests taken57.785.3-27.6Reading76.991.3-14.4Mathematics69.192.7-23.6Writing66.188.7-22.6Social Studies61.583.7-22.2Percent of Students Passing All Tests TakenAfrican American55.477.2-21.8Hispanic55.079.7-24.7White67.992.5-24.6Economically disadvantaged55.478.2-22.8Source: 2002 TEA AEIS reports. Table 8.6 shows, for example, that charter school passing rates are 14 percentage points lower in reading, 24 points lower in mathematics, 23 points lower in writing, and 22 points lower in social studies. Moreover, the charter school differences with statewide averages are consistent across ethnic and economic comparison groups. Consistent with state patterns, White students in charter schools outperform minority students, although they are 25 percentage points below the state average. As Figure 8.3 illustrates, TAAS passing rates (on all tests taken) for charter schools serving primarily at-risk and non-atrisk students are about 31 and 25 percentage points, respectively, below the 2002 state average (85 percent). The TAAS achievement gap between charter schools and the state average is smaller in reading than in writing or mathematics. The gap is about 15 percentage points in reading and 24 percentage points in both writing and math. The gap between the charter schools serving primarily at-risk and non-atrisk students is 4 percentage points in reading and mathematics and 3 percentage points in writing. In general, the TAAS achievement gap between charter schools and state averages remains large, although somewhat less so for charter schools serving less at-risk students.  EMBED MSGraph.Chart.8 \s  Figure 8.3. 2002 campus-level TAAS passing rate for charter schools (CS) with 70% or more at risk students, CS with less than 70% at-risk students, and state averages. TAAS performance across years. Table 8.7 compares TAAS performance over time. Because of the small numbers of charter schools operating, TAAS data for 19971999 are excluded. Also, as explained previously, charter school results include different groups of campuses each year, whereas the base of schools in the state has remained relatively stable. Moreover, because TEA requires at least five students in a category before a schools performance is reported (to protect confidentiality), the actual number of charter campuses included in each TAAS category varies. Considering cited limitations, charter schools, like the state, show improving TAAS passing rates over time. Charter school passing rates are considerably below statewide rates, and the achievement gap between charter and traditional schools remains. However, as the passing rate changes between 2000 and 2002 show, charter schools are closing the achievement gap with traditional public schools (see Table 8.7). Table 8.7 Percent Passing TAAS for All Charter Schools, 2000 to 2002 TAAS All Charter SchoolsState Average200020012002Change200020012002ChangeAll tests taken43.146.757.714.679.982.185.35.4Reading64.270.276.912.787.488.991.33.9Writing58.461.066.17.788.287.988.70.5Mathematics52.559.369.116.687.490.292.75.3Source: 2000, 2001, and 2002 TEA AEIS reports, non-matched students. Progress of prior TAAS failers. Examining the progress of prior TAAS failers is another way to analyze student performance. If charter schools provide a remedy for school failures, then the progress of TAAS failers should be an appropriate measure. Interestingly, data in Table 8.8 reveal that students who failed TAAS the previous year generally fared better in traditional public schools compared to charter schools. About 47 percent of students in charter schools who failed TAAS reading in 2001, passed reading in 2002. This percentage was about 12 points lower than the 59 percent of prior failers in traditional public schools who passed TAAS in 2002. For mathematics, the difference is slightly larger, with 14 percent more students now passing statewide. Table 8.8 2001-02 Progress of Prior TAAS Failers CS e" 70% At RiskCS < 70% At-RiskAll Charters State Subject% Pass Prior FailTLI Gain% Pass Prior FailTLI Gain% Pass Prior FailTLI Gain% Pass Prior FailTLI GainReading44.212.049.511.247.411.558.911.8Math45.78.748.69.347.59.161.610.5Source: TEA 2002 AEIS Report. The Texas Learning Index (TLI) is a scale score used to measure the growth of prior failers (i.e., the difference between TLI values for students with TAAS test scores for both 2001 and 2002). Results in Table 8.8 show that TLI gains for prior failers in charter schools are similar to state gains in reading and slightly less in mathematics. An exception is the slightly higher reading TLI gain for prior failers in atrisk charters. Overall, considering passing rates and TLI gains, results for prior TAAS failers suggest that charter schools are no more, and perhaps even less, effective than traditional public schools in providing TAAS remediation for students. Charter School and TEA Peer-Group Comparisons The TEA has created a procedure for examining comparable improvement based on using school comparison groups. Comparison groups of campuses are selected on the basis of school and student demographic characteristics. Comparisons are made between student performance in charter schools and TEAcreated peer campuses with similar enrollment, grades served, region, and student demographics. Peer groups allow more equitable comparisons of student performance. To further ensure fairness, comparisons are made for three groups: all charter schools with peers, charter schools serving 70 percent or more at-risk students with peers, and charter schools serving less than 70 percent at-risk students with peers. Findings on the percentage of students passing the TAAS reading and mathematics subtests and on attendance and dropout rates are presented in Table 8.9. Table 8.9 TAAS Passing Rates and Dropout and Attendance Rates, by Peer-Group Comparisons Outcomes20012002 CharterTEA Peer CharterTEA PeerN%%N%%Passing TAAS ReadingAll charter schools10273.286.312378.290.2Charter School e" 70% At-Risk4969.484.25475.887.8Charter School < 70% At-Risk5376.688.56980.191.7Passing TAAS MathAll charter schools10265.887.312372.991.7Charter School e" 70% At-Risk5063.285.55469.490.0Charter School < 70% At-Risk5268.389.26975.692.6Attendance RateAll charter schools9794.996.011893.696.0Charter School e" 70% At-Risk4995.295.85594.196.0Charter School < 70% At-Risk4894.696.26393.196.0Dropout RateAll charter schools681.90.4831.50.3Charter School e" 70% At-Risk333.00.5371.30.3Charter School < 70% At-Risk350.80.3461.70.3Source: TEA 2002 AEIS Reports Note. 127 of 237 (54 percent) charter schools had both campus data and peer-group data on at least one TAAS variable. Dropout rates are only computed for schools that have grade 7 or higher. As Table8.9 shows, peer groups have been created for slightly more than half of charter school campuses (123 of 237 charter campuses had peer data on at least one TAAS variable in 2002). Thus, reported findings represent only a limited number of charter schools. Still, based on available evidence, peer campuses outperformed charter schools across all comparison groups. First, comparisons for all charter schools with peers show that TAAS passing rates for charter school students are substantially below peer-group averages, particularly in math (22 percentage points lower in 2001 and 19 points in 2002). Although TAAS performance differences between all charters and peers remained large across years (2001 and 2002), the performance gap narrowed slightly in 2002 (by 1 percentage point in reading and by 3 percentage points in mathematics). Additionally, TAAS passing rates for charter school students are below average rates for peer campuses for both reading and math, regardless of the percentage of at-risk students enrolled in a charter school. However, for both years, the performance gap between charter and peer campuses was slightly larger for charter schools serving more than 70 percent at risk students compared to charter schools serving less than 70 percent at-risk students. Consistent with results for TAAS, student dropout and attendance trends favor peer campuses. Although there are only small attendance rate differences (1 to 2 percentage points) between charter and peer campuses, peer-campus rates are consistently higher, and the attendance rate for charter schools decreased (by 1.3 percentage points) in 2002. Dropout rates for charter schools are over 1 percentage point higher than rates for peer campuses across both years. The overall dropout rate for charter schools decreased slightly (by 0.4 percentage points) in 2002. The dropout rate for charters serving more than 70 percent at risk students decreased by almost 2 percentage points in 2002, yet the rate for charters serving less than 70 percent at-risk students increased by nearly 1 point. Other Performance Measures End-of-course and advanced course performance. Table 8.10 presents information on the percentage of advanced courses completed and end-of-course (EOC) examination passing rates for charter campuses that enrolled students in grades 7 or higher. Advanced course completion is calculated by dividing the number of students who complete at least one advanced academic course by the number of students who completed at least one course during the school year. Advanced courses include higher-level core content area courses (e.g., Calculus, Physics) as well as advanced elective courses (e.g., Computer Science, French IV, Music Theory). Students completing Algebra I, Biology, English II, or U.S. History are required to take the EOC examination. Table 8.10 2001-02 Advanced Course Completions and End-of-Course Passing Rates MeasureCS e" 70% At-RiskState Eco. Dis. StudentsCS < 70% At-RiskState All StudentsN%N%Advanced course completion477.112.8758.019.3Passing Biology EOC1552.467.54962.379.8Passing Algebra I EOC1915.845.15226.457.8Passing English II EOC1538.558.34947.869.0Passing U.S. History EOC1446.558.84147.873.9Source: TEA 2002 AEIS reports. Note. N refers to the number of campuses, % refers to the percentage of students. State Eco. Dis. refers to the statewide percentage of economically disadvantaged students either completing or passing. Compared to analogous state averages, charter schools have lower percentages of advanced course completions (between 11 and 12 percentage points). Similarly, charter school students, regardless of the percentage of at-risk students enrolled, passed the four end-of-course examinations (administered and scored by TEA contractors) at rates considerably below statewide averages. In addition, charter school students in schools serving primarily at-risk students had much lower passing rates (from 12 to 29 percentage points lower) than the state averages for economically disadvantaged students. School attendance and dropout rates. School attendance is generally viewed as critical to academic success. Likewise, successful school completion is also an important outcome. For this study, the school completion measure is the annual dropout rate, defined as the number of students in grades 7 through 12 who dropped out during a school year divided by the number of students in those grades who were in membership at any time during that school year. Table 8.11 shows that the charter school attendance rate for campuses serving primarily at-risk students (93 percent) is about 3 percentage points below the state average (about 96 percent), and the attendance rate for charter schools serving less then 70 percent atrisk students (89 percent) is about 7 percentage points below the statewide average. The charter school dropout rate of 3 percent is above the state average of 1 percent. Unexpectedly, the dropout rate is higher for charter schools with less at-risk students (4 percent versus 2 percent). Table 8.11 2001-02 Student Attendance and Dropout Rates MeasureCS e" 70% At RiskCS < 70% At-Risk All Charters StateAttendance 92.788.890.495.6Annual dropout rate 2.03.52.91.0Source: TEA 2002 AEIS Reports. STUDENT-LEVEL PERFORMANCE Analyses reported in this section involve performance data for individual students (i.e., the student is the unit of analysis). Data include more than 63,000 students who were enrolled in a charter school at some time during the 1997-98 through 2001-02 school years. However, because matching students over time relies on accurate student identification, it is likely that errors have excluded some students. Limitations of Student-Level Data Analysis Longitudinal student-level analysis is informative because it allows examination of student performance across timenevertheless, several issues complicate data analysis. First, consistent student identification numbers are required to match students over time. As noted previously, the PID error rate for charter schools is much higher than the rate for traditional public schools. For this study, problems matching scrambled identification numbers for charter school students across years reduced student numbers in analyses. Second, survivorship also complicates student-level analysis. Student cohort membership declines over time through student attrition. Third, some comparison groups have small numbers of students. Thus, the reader should carefully note the student numbers available for comparisons. Finally, the group of students who can be matched longitudinally is always a smaller subset of the total student population. Students in a particular school who have longitudinal test scores (i.e., showing continuous enrollment) may or may not resemble the schools entire student population. This is especially true when considering schools with high turnover rates, such as dropout recovery alternative education programs. Many charter schools fit this category. Students Included in Analyses Students by school characteristics. Between the 1997-98 and 200102 school years, the number of students in charter schools increased steadily: 1,606, 7,150, 25,321, 37,636, and 46,304. In total, the student-level data analyses included 63,785 students who enrolled in charter schools at some time during the five-year period. As Figure 8.4 illustrates, about 38 percent of students in 2001-02 are enrolled in charter schools serving primarily atrisk students (17,581), and 62 percent are enrolled in charter schools serving less atrisk students (28,723). The proportion of students with TAAS scores roughly approximates the student distribution by school type. About 33 percent of students with TAAS scores are enrolled in charter schools serving primarily at-risk students, and 67 percent are enrolled in charters serving less at-risk students. The proportion of charter school students with TAAS scores, however, is small regardless of school type. This is due, in part, to the prevalence of untested students in primary grades (early childhood, pre-kindergarten, kindergarten) and high school (grades 9, 11, and 12).  EMBED MSGraph.Chart.8 \s  Figure 8.4. Number of students enrolled in charter schools in 200102 and number with TAAS scores. (Students may or may not be included in the accountability subset.) Students by grade level and retention. Table 8.12 reports student enrollment and retention rates for grades 1 to 12 students in charter schools and traditional public schools. Through grade 8, similar percentages of charter school students are enrolled at each grade level (6 to 8 percent) compared to state averages (about 8 percent). On the other hand, compared to traditional public schools, greater proportions of charter school students are enrolled in high schools (grades 9 to 12). Differences are especially large for ninth grade (17 percent versus 9 percent) and tenth grade (13 percent versus 7 percent). Table 8.12 also contrasts the percentages of charter school students retained in grade from 200001 to 200102 with state averages. At the elementary and middle school levels, repeating a grade is called retention and is reported in AEIS. Repeating a grade level in high school is labeled failure to be promoted (i.e., inadequate credits earned) and is currently not reported in AEIS. However, statistics can be calculated using 2002 PEIMS data. For grades 1 through 3, charter school retention rates are below state averages. Notably, public school first graders are more likely to be retained than their charter school counterparts (5.8 percent versus 2.2 percent). For grades 4 through 8, charter school retention rates are slightly above state averages. Also, significantly more traditional public school ninth graders fail to earn adequate credits to be promoted to tenth grade (14percent) compared to ninth graders in charter schools (10 percent). Yet in grades 10 through 12, more charter than traditional public school students fail to earn a sufficient number of credits to be promoted. Table 8.12 200102 Student Enrollment and Retention Rates by Grade Level Grade LevelCharter SchoolsStateNumber of StudentsPercent in GradeNumber RetainedPercent RetainedPercent in GradePercent Retained12,9477.7652.27.85.822,6877.0552.07.73.532,5456.7481.97.72.542,2906.0341.57.71.452,2876.0311.47.60.862,5766.7421.67.71.572,7837.3833.07.62.582,4726.5883.67.51.996,46416.968810.68.814.2105,05613.251110.17.05.9113,5279.22767.86.33.8122,6036.81706.55.42.9Source: Analysis of individual student data from PEIMS and 2002 TEA AEIS reports. TAAS Performance In this section, student-level TAAS reading and mathematics passing rates gauge student performance over time. As noted previously, numbers of students available in some comparison groups are small. Analyses reported in Tables 8.13 through Table 8.15 involve longitudinal student-level data spanning three years (2000 to 2002). Data are for grades 3 to 8 students with three years of TAAS scores, and 2002 grade 10 students with two years of data (2000 and 2002). TAAS passing rates by school type. As Table 8.13 shows, there are differences in 2001 and 2002 TAAS performance by school type. Students attending charter schools with primarily at-risk students have lower reading passing rates (79 percent versus 85 percent) and slightly smaller gains (10 versus 11 percentage points) than students in charter schools with more advantaged students. Similarly, students attending the charters with primarily at-risk students have slightly lower mathematics passing rates (79 percent versus 81 percent) and smaller gains (10 versus 15 percentage points) than students in charters with more advantaged students. Table 8.13 TAAS Percent Passing for Students Attending Charter Schools by School Type SubjectCharter School e" 70% At-RiskCharter School < 70% At-RiskN20012002Diff.N20012002Diff.Reading1,20868.978.69.72,38673.784.610.9Mathematics1,24368.978.59.62,40865.981.215.3Source: Analysis of individual student data from PEIMS; includes students in grades 3-8 and 10. Note. Students attended charter school in 2000-01 and 2001-02 and had TAAS scores for both years. TAAS passing rates by grade level. Grade-level comparisons reveal that grade 3 had the lowest passing rates in both reading and math for state and charter students (see Table 8.14). The relative performance of charter school students was better in reading than math. The gap between charter school students and their state counterparts was larger in math than reading at all grade levels except 5. Likewise, the relative performance of charter school students was better at grades 6 through 8 than at grades 3 through 5 and 10. Notable is the dramatic grade 10 exit-level TAAS score drop for charter school students. At grade 10, charter school students reading and math passing rates were 15 and 26 percentage points, respectively, below the state averages. Charters serving less at-risk students had higher TAAS passing rates in reading and mathematics at all grade levels. Yet, the gap between school types was smallest at grades 8 and 10. Table 8.14 2002 TAAS Percent Passing for Students Attending Charter Schools, by Grade Level GradeCharter School e" 70% At-RiskCharter School < 70% At-RiskAll Charter SchoolsState AverageN% PassN% PassN% Pass% PassReading374363.01,35872.52,10169.188.0466369.41,18276.61,84574.092.5570471.21,20381.01,90777.492.7676473.51,31683.02,08079.588.2771476.31,41985.82,13382.691.3858185.51,06088.41,64187.494.31051478.21,27980.31,79379.794.5Mathematics375152.31,36064.92,11160.487.4467470.21,18476.11,85874.094.1570878.81,20583.31,91382.696.2675077.51,31986.12,06983.093.8772475.81,41583.02,13980.692.2857779.21,04782.01,62481.092.91053161.41,39068.01,92166.292.2Source: State data are from AEIS reports. Charter school data are from individual student records. Performance of Continuing and Moving Students TAAS performance for elementary and middle school students. An additional analysis compares the academic performance of students continuously enrolled in charter schools with student cohorts who moved between the traditional public school system and charter schools. Results reported in Table 8.15 involve charter school students in grade 8 or lower in 2002 with TAAS reading and mathematics scores for 2000, 2001, and 2002. Traditional public school students include those enrolled in charter schools some time between 1997-98 and 2001-02. Table 8.15 TAAS Percent Passing, by School Category Over Three Years School CategoryStudentsPercent PassingGain/Loss1999-002000-012001-02N20002001200220012002ReadingCharterCharterCharter1,44865.078.185.113.17.0CharterCharterPublic1,25472.374.682.72.38.1CharterPublicPublic2,12176.476.980.50.53.6PublicPublicCharter1,16662.182.687.820.55.2PublicCharterCharter63763.675.586.211.910.7PublicCharterPublic75176.375.885.2-0.59.4PublicPublicPublic61581.588.692.87.14.2MathematicsCharterCharterCharter1,46254.476.184.321.78.2CharterCharterPublic1,30069.673.582.13.98.6CharterPublicPublic2,19170.675.579.54.94.0PublicPublicCharter1,19052.582.487.229.94.8PublicCharterCharter63352.471.285.018.813.8PublicCharterPublic76670.274.785.94.511.2PublicPublicPublic63778.089.592.011.52.5Source: Analysis of individual student data from PEIMS. Note. Public refers to traditional public schools. A number of factors limit data interpretation. First, student numbers in comparison groups are small due to attrition, and a limited number of students have TAAS scores for three years. In addition, there are no available data to explain why students move between charter and traditional schools. Although it is difficult to make definitive statements, the following observations are worth mentioning. First, continuous enrollment in charter schools may have a positive influence on academic performance, with students enrolled in charter schools in both 2001 and 2002 having two-year gains in both TAAS reading and mathematics exceeding 20 percentage points. On the other hand, first-year charter school students in 2002, who were enrolled in traditional public schools in 2000 and 2001, had much smaller reading and mathematics gains. Second, students who moved to traditional public schools in 2002 from charter schools generally had larger TAAS reading and mathematics gains upon returning to traditional public schools. Yet, students who moved to traditional public schools in 2001 from charter schools had low TAAS gains. As stated earlier, the unknown reasons for student mobility between charter and traditional schools makes it impossible to draw definitive conclusions about student achievement trends. Third, the students who spent all three years in traditional public schools recorded positive TAAS gains, and they had the highest passing rates, 93 percent passing in reading and 92 percent passing in mathematics. Finally, there is a relationship between passing rate gains and initial passing rates. Larger passing rate gains tend to be associated with lower initial passing rates, irrespective of the school enrollment pattern. High school TAAS performance. Assessing TAAS performance change for high school students is complicated by the lack of contiguous grade-level scores. Currently, TAAS is administered in grade 8 followed by the grade 10 exit-level TAAS. Thus, students in comparisons have a 2000 TAAS score (grade 8), a 2002 score (grade 10), and students were promoted from ninth-to-tenth grade in the interim year. Unfortunately, many ninth graders fail to earn adequate credits for promotion, and as previously mentioned, charter schools enroll larger percentages of ninth graders (17 percent) compared to state (9 percent). Because many students are excluded from high school performance comparisons, inferences regarding TAAS outcomes presented in Table 8.16 must be carefully considered. In most cases, the number of students is quite small due to cited data restrictions. Table 8.16 Grades 8 and 10 TAAS Percent Passing Reading and Mathematics, by School Category School Type Students NTAAS Percent Passing 1999-00 2000-01 2001-021999-00 Grade 82001-02 Grade 10Gain/ LossReadingCharterCharterCharter15662.884.621.8CharterCharterPublic12666.781.715.0CharterPublicPublic34383.184.00.9PublicPublicCharter20061.096.035.0PublicCharterCharter7767.597.429.9PublicCharterPublic8179.092.613.6PublicPublicPublic17585.196.611.5MathematicsCharterCharterCharter15962.974.811.9CharterCharterPublic13664.773.58.8CharterPublicPublic35772.572.3-0.2PublicPublicCharter20455.992.236.3PublicCharterCharter7561.381.320.0PublicCharterPublic8773.679.35.7PublicPublicPublic17384.494.29.8Source: Analysis of individual student data from PEIMS. Note. Public refers to traditional public schools. Table 8.16 compares TAAS passing rates for reading and mathematics. Important findings show that, consistent with results for grades 3 to 8, continuous student enrollment in charter schools results in strong TAAS gains. Students who were enrolled in charter schools for three years (between 2000 and 2002) or two years (2001 and 2002) had double-digit gains in TAAS reading (22 and 30 percentage points in reading, respectively) and mathematics (12 and 20 percentage points in mathematics, respectively). However, unlike grades 3 to 8, students who spent 2002 in charter schools and 2000 and 2001 in traditional public schools had the largest TAAS gains (35 percentage points in reading and 36 percentage points in mathematics). The students who returned to traditional public schools from charter schools had stronger gains in reading than mathematics. Also notable were the positive gains (12 percentage points in reading and 10 percentage points in mathematics) coupled with the highest performance levels (97 percent passing in reading and 94 percent passing in mathematics) for the students who spent all three years in traditional public schools after attending charter schools. SUMMARY As the charter school movement continues to grow, student achievement is both a national and state concern. For this study, evaluators have examined student performance in a variety of ways in an attempt to fairly and accurately assess the status of student achievement in Texas charter schools. Analyses involved campus accountability ratings, campus performance, and longitudinal data for matched students. Overall, conclusions regarding student performance in Texas charter schools are confounded by the continual evolution of schools and campuses, and consequently, the student population. In-depth examination of student data reveals that at least three factors impact the availability of data to assess charter school performance and must be considered in interpreting results: (a) students mobility reduces the number of students with outcome measures, (b)many students are excluded from analyses due to untested grade levels or Texas accountability system requirements, and (c)students included in analyses represent a more stable and higher achieving subset of the overall charter school population. Comparison of Charter School Campuses with Traditional Public Schools Yearly campus-level results reflect only one testing occasion, so larger numbers of students are included. For charter schools, however, rapid student population growth and student mobility results in vastly different sets of students enrolled in schools from year to year. To illustrate the point, student enrollment in charter schools increased by nearly 25 percent between the 2000-01 and 2001-02 school years (8,608 students). Additionally, in 2001-02, only 60 percent of charter school students who were enrolled for the fall PEIMS count participated in TAAS testing in the same charter schools compared to 85 percent of students continuing in the same schools statewide. Considering those limitations, the following campus-level findings are offered. Based on AEIS annual accountability ratings, traditional public schools outperform charter schools on both standard and alternative education rating categories, and an increasing number of charter schools campuses are being rated under the alternative system. In 2001-02, only 47 percent of charter school campuses were rated in the standard accountability system compared to 97 percent of campuses statewide. Under the standard system, the percentage of Low-Performing charter schools decreased from 44 percent to 40 percent, but remains considerably higher than the 2 percent in traditional public schools. In addition, the combined percentage of charter schools in the highperforming categories (i.e., Exemplary, Recognized) has increased (to 26 percent) along with state percentages (to 67 percent). Over the past four years, an increasing percentage of charter schools (from 29 to 53 percent) have been rated under the Alternative Education (AE) rating system. In 2001-02, there was a substantial decrease in the percentage of charter campuses rated under the AE system as requiring a Peer Review (from 61 percent to 39 percent). Campus-level TAAS performance for students in charter schools is well below state averages, particularly in mathematics (24 percentage points lower) and writing (23 percentage points lower). Moreover, lower TAAS passing rates are consistent across all student comparison groups. In addition, the TAAS achievement gap between charter schools and state averages remains large regardless of school type (enrolling primarily atrisk or less at-risk students). Yet, TAAS performance across years indicates that although charter school passing rates are considerably below statewide rates, charter schools are closing the achievement gap with traditional public schools. Analyses for TAAS prior year failers reveal that students who failed TAAS the previous year fared better in traditional public schools compared to charter schools, although Texas Learning Index (TLI) gains are comparable. Comparisons were also made between student performance in charter schools and TEAcreated peer campuses with similar enrollment, grades served, region, and student demographics. The comparisons show that TAAS passing rates for charter school students are substantially below peer-group averages. However, the performance gap between charters and peers narrowed slightly in 2002. Across all charter school groups, passing rates for TAAS mathematics were consistently lower than rates for reading, whereas subject-area differences were relatively small for peer campuses. Undoubtedly, charter schools are challenged to prepare students in mathematics. Consistent with TAAS results, dropout and attendance trends favor peer campuses. Although there are only small attendance rate differences (1 to 2 percentage points) between charter and peer campuses, peer-campus rates are consistently higher, and the attendance rate for charter schools decreased (by 1.3 percentage points) in 2002. Dropout rates for charter schools are over 1 percentage point higher than rates for peer campuses across both years. However, the overall dropout rate for charter schools decreased slightly (by 0.4 percentage point) in 2002. Performance of Students Who Remain in Charter Schools Longitudinal student-level analyses allow the examination of student performance over time. However, the number of available students represents a much smaller subset of the total charter school population. Outcomes for student-level data are heavily influenced by these factors: (a)the small number of charter school students with TAAS scores for multiple years (approximately 10 percent of 45,634 students); (b)longitudinal TAAS scores limited to grades 3 to 8 students, except for a few students re-tested on the exit-level TAAS; and (c)the exclusion of highly mobile students (e.g., in alternative education programs). Considering cited limitations, longitudinal student-level results reveal that the type of charter school (serving more or less economically disadvantaged students) is not strongly associated with student TAAS success. Students attending charter schools with primarily at-risk students have TAAS passing rates only three or four percentage points lower than students in charter schools with less at-risk students, and their passing rate gains are comparable. Grade-level passing rates for charter school students are considerably below state passing rates. In addition, the gap between charter school students and traditional public school students tends to be larger in mathematics than reading. Performance of Students Continuing in Charter Schools and Moving Students Additional analyses involving student transitions from charter to traditional public schools and traditional public schools to charters reveal that continuous student enrollment in charter schools appears to positively influence academic performance, with students making strong gains in the second or third year of charter school enrollment. In contrast, first-year charter school students, had much smaller reading and mathematics gains. Students who moved to traditional public schools from charter schools had larger TAAS gains upon returning for both reading and mathematics. In addition, students who had been enrolled in a charter school and then spent three years in traditional public schools had positive TAAS gains along with the highest passing rates. As might be expected, large passing rate gains tended to be associated with lower initial passing rates, irrespective of the school enrollment pattern. Performance of Secondary Students in Charter Schools An examination of student enrollment and retention/promotion patterns shows that, compared to traditional public schools, greater proportions of charter school students are enrolled in high schools (grades 9 to 12). Differences are especially large for grades 9 (17 percent versus 9 percent) and 10 (13 percent versus 7 percent). Unfortunately, student performance measures for high school students are limited. Based on available evidence, however, outcomes for charter school students enrolled in secondary schools are discouraging. Compared to analogous state comparison group averages, charter school students in grades 7 through 12 have lower course completion rates, lower performance on end-of-course exams, lower attendance rates, and higher dropout rates. Based on 2002 student-level data for charter schools, grade 10 exit-level TAAS scores (66 percent passing in mathematics, 80 percent passing in reading) are well below state averages (92 percent passing in mathematics, 95 percent passing in reading). Taken as a whole, instances of improving student academic performance exist for charter schools, but overall outcomes favor traditional public schools. In general, if students in charter schools maintain their current rates of progress, they will reduce the gap with traditional public schools. Chapter 9  EFFECTS OF CHARTER SCHOOLS ON TRADITIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS  Some charter school advocates and policymakers see charter schools as a lever for public school reform, with competition spurring traditional schools and districts to higher levels of efficiency and enhanced academic achievement for students. Entrepreneurial opportunities created through charter school legislation, they assume, should promote widespread improvement in public schools (Nathan, 1996). Other theorists argue there is little evidence that school choice options will produce the kinds of educational improvement envisioned (Elmore and Fuller, 1996). A recent U.S. Department of Education study on the impacts of charter schools, however, suggests there is a ripple effect on other public school districts. An examination of 49 districts in 5 states with high concentrations of charter schools concludes that districts change their educational services and district operations as a result of charter schools (Erickson and Silverman, 2001). Since the first Texas charter school opened in 1996, the number of schools and the number of students attending those schools has increased each year. Findings from annual surveys, however, indicate that many Texas public school officials are unaware of charter schools in or near their districts boundaries, and, in general, districts report little impact on educational approaches and practices. Still, large traditional public school districts and those with declining enrollments are more likely to report financial effects of lost students (Benner, 2002). As charter schools continue to become more prevalent in the Texas educational arena, traditional public schools are more likely to be affectedthus, the Texas Education Code [TEC, 12.118 (c)(2)] requires an evaluation of the effects of open-enrollment charter schools on traditional school districts and on teachers, students, and parents in those districts. To determine these effects, researchers conduct an annual survey of traditional public school officials. METHODOLOGY Survey Procedures The survey of traditional public school officials, which was redesigned in 2000-01 to incorporate emerging key issues and effects of charter schools, was modified slightly for the current study. The survey gauges the effects of charter schools on district enrollment, general and financial operations, educational approaches and practices, and on district personnel and students. In addition, the survey solicits district officials overall views on charter schools. The Survey of Public School Districts appears in Appendix C. State regulations require charter applicants to identify the geographic area from which they will draw students. Applicants must provide a Statement of Impact form to every school district within their geographic area. Through the Statement of Impact, districts have the opportunity to inform the State Board of Education whether the charter school will adversely impact their districts to a significant degree. To assess the effects of charters schools on traditional public schools, evaluators surveyed 328 superintendents of traditional public school districts located within the geographic boundaries of one or more charter schools. Each survey packet included a cover letter explaining the purpose of the survey, a survey, and a postage-paid return envelope. Characteristics of Respondents A total of 247 individuals (superintendents or their designees) responded to the charter school effects survey, for a response rate of 75 percent. Respondents are well distributed across the state. As Table 9.1 indicates, the proportion of responses from each of the 20 regions corresponds roughly with the location and concentration of charter schools in Texas. Region 11 (41 districts) and Region 4 (36 districts) have the largest numbers of respondents. Table 9.1 Districts Surveyed and Response Rates by ESC Region ESC RegionLocationNumber of RespondentsNumber SurveyedPercent RespondingRegion 1Edinburg162080.0Region 2Corpus Christi131587.0Region 3Victoria--0--Region 4Houston364678.2Region 5Beaumont3475.0Region 6Huntsville2540.0Region 7Kilgore294367.0Region 8Mt. Pleasant11100.0Region 9Wichita Falls81173.0Region 10Richardson334180.4Region 11Ft. Worth415279.0Region 12Waco101377.0Region 13Austin203067.0Region 14Abilene3475.0Region 15San Angelo020.0Region 16Amarillo22100.0Region 17Lubbock7888.0Region 18Midland11100.0Region 19El Paso7978.0Region 20San Antonio152171.4Total24732875.3 Table 9.2 shows the distribution of respondents by district size (as measured by student enrollment). Overall, respondents are well distributed across size categories. A slightly higher percentage of large-size districts responded to the survey, but this was to be expected given that charter schools are primarily located in major urban areas. Table 9.2 Districts Surveyed by Student Enrollment Student EnrollmentNumber of RespondentsNumber SurveyedPercent RespondingLarge (10,000 or more)607777.9Mid-size (3,000 9,999)7410272.5Small (fewer than 3,000)11314975.8Total24732875.3Source: District enrollment from TEA 2001-02 AEIS Report.On the charter school effects survey, districts identified their student enrollment trends as increasing, stable, or decreasing. The majority of districts (61 percent), as shown in Table 9.3, report experiencing growing student enrollments, while 22 percent report stable student enrollments, and 17 percent note declines. Table 9.3 Responding Districts by Student Enrollment Trends Enrollment TrendResponding DistrictsN%Increasing14761.3Stable5221.7Decreasing4117.1Total240100.0Note. Enrollment trend data are self-reported. Data are missing for 7 districts.  Districts have varying numbers of charter schools within or near their geographic boundaries. Table 9.4 displays the range of charter schools within responding and non-responding districts. The vast majority of responding and non-responding districts have five or less charter schools in or near their boundaries. Respondents, on average, have more charter schools near their districts. As a whole, responding districts average 3.7 charter schools in or near their boundaries (range: 1 to 42). In contrast, non-responding districts have 3.5 charter schools, on average (range: 1 to 26). Table 9.4 Charter Schools within or near Surveyed District Boundaries Charter Schools within or near District Boundaries1(56-10More than 10MeanN%N%N%MemberRespondents20081.02510.1228.93.7Non-respondents6782.767.489.93.5Source: Charter school applications. Note. N=328 (247 respondents and 81 non-respondents). Overall, responding districts were well distributed across the state as well as student enrollment categories (small, mid-size, and large). About three-quarters of district officials responded to the survey, with large districts having the highest response rate (78 percent). The majority of districts are experiencing growing student enrollments (61 percent). Although the vast majority of responding and non-responding districts have fewer than six charter schools in or near their boundaries, respondents, on average, had more charter schools near their districts. Survey Analysis The survey gauged the effects of charter schools on the following aspects of traditional public school districts: general operations, budget and financial operations, and educational approaches and practices. It also requested information on district-charter school interactions, effects on district students, and educator perceptions of charter schools. Finally, the survey provided district officials with the opportunity to provide additional comments about Texas open-enrollment charter schools. Survey respondents also reported whether they were aware of charter schools that have opened in or near their districts. Even though every district that received a survey has one or more charter schools within or near its boundary, only 134 (54 percent) stated that they were aware of charter schools in their area. This could be due, in part, to the fact that some charter schools may have identified districts so far from the actual charter school location that district officials may not have been aware of their presence. District officials who were aware of charter schools in or near their districts answered all survey questions. Those who were unaware of charter schools in their area were directed to only answer questions related to their overall perceptions of charter schools. These officials also had the opportunity to provide general comments about charter schools. OFFICIALS AWARE OF CHARTER SCHOOLS NEAR THEIR DISTRICTS District-Charter School Interactions Of the 247 survey respondents, 134 district officials (54 percent) who were aware of charter schools in or near their districts responded to a number of questions regarding interactions between the district and local charter schools. Officials from 51 districts (38 percent of those aware of charter schools in their area) reported contacts between district and charter school educators during the 2001-02 school year. This contact, as displayed in Table 9.5, most frequently involves interactions at ESC-sponsored events (37 percent), interactions during regional or state meetings or training sessions (26 percent), or networking at professional conferences (12 percent). A number of districts describe other interactions with charter schools, including discussions of student issues, such as student transfers, dropout recovery, or student records (7), general meetings in person or by telephone (6), or assistance and support to charter schools by district staff (3). Compared to survey results for 2001, districts more often report interactions with charter school personnel at ESC-sponsored events or a state/regional meeting. Table 9.5 Interactions between Districts and Charter Schools Types of InteractionResponding DistrictsN20022001Interacted at ESC-sponsored events1937.316.7Interacted during regional/state meetings or training sessions1325.520.0Observed charter school classroom35.923.3Networked at professional conferences611.810.0Held joint organizational/planning meetings 59.810.0Partnered on state/federal grant initiatives12.06.7Other interactions1529.446.7Note. Percentages based on 51 respondents reporting contact between the district and local charter schools. Officials in traditional school districts also reported whether students and teachers had left the district for charter schools as well as whether students had returned to the district from charter schools. In total, 84 district officials (63 percent) report that students left for charter schools, whereas 27 (20 percent) cite no students leaving, and 22 (17 percent) are unsure whether district students have transferred to charter schools (see Table 9.6). Further examination of the data reveals significant differences in responses based on district size. Large and mid-size districts (80 percent and 74 percent, respectively) are most likely to report their students are leaving for charter schools, whereas small districts more often report their students are not leaving for charter schools (45 percent). Both large and mid-size districts are also more likely to be unsure whether students in their districts have transferred to charter schools. Table 9.6 Students Leaving Districts for Charter Schools, by District Size District SizeStudents Left District to Attend Charter SchoolsYesNoNot SureN%N%N%Large (10,000 or more)3579.500.0920.5Mid-size (3,000 9,999)2873.7410.5615.8Small (fewer than 3,000)2141.22345.1713.7Total8463.22720.32216.5Note. N=134 respondents aware of charter schools near their districts. Data are missing for one district. As Table9.7 shows, more than half of respondents (84 districts, 63 percent) report that students have returned or transferred to their districts from charter schools. Only 26 respondents (19 percent) note that this has not occurred, whereas 24 (18 percent) are unsure. Differences also emerge in the responses among districts of varying sizes. Overall, large districts (82 percent) most often report students transferring to their districts from charter schools, and mid-size districts (68 percent) report this more often than small districts (41 percent). Table 9.7 Students Returning to Districts from Charter Schools, by District Size District SizeStudents Transferred to District from Charter SchoolsYesNoNot SureN%N%N%Large (10,000 or more)3782.200.0817.8Mid-size (3,000 9,999)2668.4513.2718.4Small (fewer than 3,000)2141.22141.2917.6Total8462.72619.42417.9Note. N=134 respondents aware of charter schools near their districts.  District officials also had the opportunity to provide additional comments on the effects of students leaving for or returning from charter schools. Several district officials reported that students had left their district for charter schools, but many also stated that these students return to district schools. In citing reasons for students leaving for charter schools, officials stated that students perceive charter schools as less academically rigorous and are able to attain quick and easy credits and/or students leave for charter schools to avoid disciplinary action. One noted the financial effects of losing students, while another expressed concern about losing talented students and involved parents. Finally, when describing the effects of students returning from charter schools, district officials worried about the students academic preparation, describing these students as being behind other students academically, significantly below our [districts] students, and not well prepared. To quote one district official, When students return to our district from our local charter school, they bring multiple credits earned in a very short period of time, and they are behind in their academic preparation. In discussing whether teachers in their districts had left to teach at charter schools, 98 district officials (73 percent) report that this has not occurred (see Table 9.8). Twenty-two districts (16 percent) are unsure, whereas only 14 (10 percent) note that teachers have left their districts for charter schools. Consistent with student results, significant differences arose among districts of varying sizes. Mid-size and large districts are more likely than small districts to report teachers leaving for charter schools. Teachers may be leaving large districts at a higher rate, however, because 40 percent of officials from large districts are unsure if any of their teachers have left to teach in charter schools. Table 9.8 Teachers Leaving Districts for Charter Schools, by District Size District SizeTeachers Left District for Charter SchoolsYesNoNot SureN%N%N%Large (10,000 or more)511.12248.91840.0Mid-size (3,000 9,999)513.23181.625.3Small (fewer than 3,000)47.84588.223.9Total1410.49873.12216.4Note. N=134 respondents aware of charter schools near their districts Few districts commented on the effects of teachers leaving for or returning from charter schools. Five officials reported that teachers had left district schools for charters. One noted that the teachers left to teach for more money. Another stated that two former teachers who lost certification due to not passing the exit exam left to teach at charter schools. A district official, commenting on hiring teachers from charter schools, reported that one teacher never knew if she would be receiving a paycheck. District Operations District officials who were aware of charter schools in or near their districts were asked whether their districts had recently implemented a variety of changes in district operations. If changes did occur, officials noted whether charter schools served as a primary or contributing reason or did not influence the decision. Table 9.9 presents district responses. Table 9.9 Changes to General District Operations Change to District OperationsChange OccurredCharter as ReasonaN%N%Track students leaving for or returning from charter schools5238.83669.2Compare district student achievement with charter schools3123.12064.5Increased marketing to inform parents of district programs5742.51526.3Improved responsiveness to parent needs and concerns7858.2810.2Promoted parent involvement activities8764.944.6Increased communication with parents8865.744.5Other10.7--Note. Percentages based on the 134 respondents aware of charter schools near their districts. a Charter as Reason is an aggregate measure (Primary Reason + Contributing Reason). Although a majority of districts have implemented changes in activities targeting parents though increased communication (66 percent), promotion of parent involvement activities (65 percent), and improved responsiveness to parents needs (58 percent), few district officials report these changes were due to charter schools. In contrast, even though fewer districts made changes in marketing for district programs (43 percent), tracking students moving between charter and district schools (39 percent), and comparing charter school and district student achievement (23 percent), these changes, when implemented, were more likely to be influenced by the presence of charter schools. Further analysis revealed variability by district size and by enrollment trends. Large districts more often lead marketing efforts to inform parents of district programs. Districts with increasing enrollments indicated higher levels of tracking students (leaving for or returning from charter schools) in comparison to districts with stable or decreasing enrollments. Budget and Financial Operations District officials had the opportunity to identify the effects of charter schools on their districts budget or financial operations. Of the 134 district officials who were aware of charter schools in their area, 73 (54 percent) report that district budgets and financial operations were unaffected by charter schools, whereas 61 districts (46 percent) cite financial effects. Table 9.10 presents information for the 61 districts reporting financial effects due to charter schools. In addition, results are compared with survey results for the previous year. Table 9.10 Effects on District Budget and Financial Operations EffectTotal Districts20022001N%%The district lost ADA funding5183.648.6The district lost federal funding3455.731.4Changing enrollments made budget estimates for personnel difficult1829.518.6District had to downsize teaching staff1325.418.6District had to downsize administrative staff69.88.6District had to close school(s)34.91.4The need to build additional schools was reduced23.34.3Other financial effects58.27.1Note. Percentages based on the 70 and 61 districts reporting effects in 2001 and 2002, respectively. District officials most often report that charter schools affect their districts financially through losses in average daily attendance (ADA) funding (84 percent) and federal funding (56 percent). More than a quarter of districts also report that changing enrollments make it difficult to estimate the budget for personnel (30 percent), and their districts have had to downsize the teaching staff (25 percent). Fewer report downsizing administrative staff, closing district schools, or a lessened need to build new schools. Other financial effects identified by responding districts include challenges with charter schools in the area closing, students leaving the district for charter schools, and difficulties in getting charter schools to pay for services provided by the district. Moreover, comparisons with the previous years survey results reveal increases in the percentages of districts reporting lost ADA funding, lost federal funding, budgeting difficulties, and downsizing teaching staff. Further analysis revealed additional data trends. Not surprisingly, districts with decreasing enrollments are significantly more likely to report losses in ADA and federal funding and downsizing in teaching and administrative staff than districts with stable or increasing enrollments. Consistent with these findings, districts with increasing or stable student enrollments are significantly more likely to report that budgetary and financial operations have been unaffected by charter schools. Respondents noting ADA losses (51 districts) or federal funding losses (34 districts) were asked to estimate the amount lost. On average, districts report losing approximately $1.2 million in ADA funding and $108,000 in federal funding due to charter schools. Estimates for lost ADA appear in Table 9.11. All districts citing lost ADA funding of $1 million or more are large districts enrolling more than 10,000 students, and half have more than 10 charter schools in or near district boundaries. No clear trends emerged in districts reporting less ADA funding losses. Table 9.11 Estimates of Lost ADA Funding Estimate of Lost ADA FundingTotal DistrictsN%$100,000 or less1530.0$100,001 to $500,0001836.0$500,000 to 1,000,000816.0$1 million or more918.0Note. Percentages based on 50 districts. One district did not provide an estimate. Educational Approaches and Practices Respondents who were aware of charter schools in their area identified the changes their districts had recently implemented in educational approaches and practices. For each change, they reported whether charter schools had been a contributing reason. As Table 9.12 indicates, district officials report implementing a number of changes in educational approaches and practices; however, few attribute these changes to charter schools. For example, approximately 60 percent of districts have expanded current district educational programs, developed new educational programs (e.g., after school programs, at-risk student programs), or changed or expanded curricular offerings (e.g., character education, Core Knowledge); however, 6 percent or less report that charter schools contributed to these changes. Charter schools are more likely to influence the less frequently reported educational changes, including the establishment of campus charters and decreased class sizes. Table 9.12 Changes to Educational Approaches and Practices Change to Educational ApproachesChange OccurredCharter as ReasonN%N%Established campus charter school(s)32.2133.3Decreased class sizes1813.4211.1Changed/expanded curricular offerings7959.056.3Established an alternative ed. program3425.425.8Developed new educational program(s)8563.444.7Increased class sizes2317.214.3Expanded current district program(s)8563.433.5Changed school organizational structure2820.900.0Instituted smaller schools2317.200.0Adopted practice(s) similar to charter10.700.0Note. Percentages based on the 134 respondents aware of charter schools near their districts. Additional analyses revealed one important difference among districts of varying sizes. Large districts (3) most often reported establishing campus charter schools; no mid-size or small districts reported having campus chartershowever, only one district cited the presence of charter schools as a reason for change. Although district officials also had the opportunity to provide additional comments on educational approaches or practices, no respondents attributed changes to charter schools. Five officials reported that charter schools pose no competition and have not significantly impacted their districts, and six expressed concerns with charter schools preparing students academically, offering quality programs, and serving the student populations identified in their charters. Three district officials identified current financial conditions as their change motivator. Effects on District Students District officials aware of charter schools in or near district boundaries also reported on effects of charter schools on students currently attending district schools (see Table 9.13). Results reveal that only 26 district officials (19 percent of those aware of charter schools near their districts) believe the districts students have been affected by local charter schools. Most frequently, atrisk students in 16 traditional school districts (62 percent) are informed about alternative learning programs in charter schools, and teachers, counselors, or administrators in 11 districts (42 percent) inform students about charter school opportunities. Students are less often informed about special charter school programs or practices (e.g., Montessori, half-day programs, flexible scheduling) or receive general information about charter school opportunities. In describing other effects on students, district officials report that dissatisfied students leave to attend charter schools, and school counselors inform students dropping out of school of the charter school option. Notably, comparisons between the current survey and the one administered the previous year show districts are currently informing at-risk students about alternative learning programs in charter schools more frequently, and school personnel are more often informing students about charter schools. Conversely, students are less often informed about special school programs or practices. Table 9.13 Effects of Charter Schools on District Students EffectTotal Districts20022001N%%At-risk students are informed about alternative learning programs in charter schools1661.557.1Teachers, counselors, and administrators inform students about charter school opportunities1142.328.6Students are informed about special charter school programs or practicesa726.938.1Other effects on students519.223.8Note. Percentages based on the 26 districts reporting effects on students. a For example, Montessori, half-day program, flexible scheduling. Additionally, district officials could provide written comments on the effects of charter schools on district students. Three officials comments centered on the same discipline issuestudents leave district schools because they have discipline problems. One official explained, Charter schools are alternatives for dropouts and an option for problem, atypical students. A different official stated, Charter schools provide an option for students who do not function well in the structure of the public format. And, another official reported, Some students are simply more comfortable in a charter school environment. ALL RESPONDING DISTRICT OFFICIALS Educator Perceptions of Charter Schools All district officials (247 respondents) described their overall perceptions of charter schools. As Table 9.14 shows, many public school officials have concerns with charter schools. More than three-fourths of district officials (83 percent) are concerned about the quality of instruction in charter schools and approximately two-thirds (67 percent) express concerns about charter school grading standards (e.g., standards for assigning grades and course credits). In addition, 63 percent report that special needs students in charter schools may not get an appropriate education. Although about half of the district officials (51 percent) believe that charter schools provide alternatives for dissatisfied parents, few district officials assert that charter schools are a source of good ideas or that these schools provide better opportunities for parent involvement. Moreover, comparisons between the two survey years show district officials are increasingly concerned about the quality of instructional opportunities, grading standards, and opportunities for students with special needs in charter schools. Districts are also more likely to regard charter schools as disruptive; and less likely to believe charter schools have provided alternatives for dissatisfied parents. Table 9.14 Educator Perceptions of Charter Schools PerceptionTotal Districts20022001N%%Are concerned with the quality of instruction in charter schools20683.477.3Are concerned with charter school grading standards 16566.860.8Worry that special-needs students in charter schools may not get an appropriate education15663.256.4Believe charter schools have provided alternatives for dissatisfied parents12751.460.8Regard increased mobility between district and charter schools as disruptive to education process8233.226.0View charter schools as a challenge/competition5321.523.2Believe charter schools provide opportunities for students not appropriately served in district schools4417.818.8View charter schools as providing more personalized instruction for students135.36.1View charter schools as sources of good ideas40.82.2Believe charter schools provide better parent involvement opportunities20.81.1Other perceptions176.97.7Note. Percentages based on 181 and 247 survey respondents in 2001 and 2002, respectively. Seventeen district officials described other perceptions of charter schools. Three expressed concerns with charter schools lack of fiscal responsibility and fiscal accountability. Two cited issues with charter school oversight, with one official saying the charter school does not follow its charter, and another citing little oversight from TEA. In contrast, one official described the positive effects of charter schools, saying that the charter school has functioned as a dropout recovery or alternative. Other district officials say their districts typically do not focus attention on charter schools. General Comments At the end of the survey, responding districts could provide additional comments about Texas open-enrollment charter schools. Officials comments, as shown in Table 9.15, most frequently center on educational quality issues and financial concerns. Overall, traditional school district officials expressed negative attitudes regarding charter schools in their general comments. Many are highly concerned about educational quality and financial issues and believe charter schools are not living up to their commitments. Table 9.15 Additional Comments about Charter Schools TopicTotal DistrictsEducational quality issues27Financial concerns25Inadequate governance and administration10Positive effects10No impact on district7Teacher quality issues5Note. Based on 247 survey respondents. Educational quality issues. Overall, 27 traditional public school officials expressed concern about the educational quality of charter schools. Several said that charter schools are not meeting students needs. One respondent stated, The charter school in our community is an embarrassment to education. Non-certified staff, inadequate instruction, disciplinary problems, low standards, and no fiscal responsibility are all characteristics of this program. Others said students returning to public school classrooms from local charter schools bring multiple credits earned but are behind in their academic preparation. District officials also commented on the lack of educational accountability standards for charter schools, inconsistent standards, and the poor quality of instruction. Financial concerns. Altogether, 25 districts expressed concerns with the financial accountability of charter schools. The majority of district officials cite a need for increased financial oversight of charter schools, with one respondent stating, I have serious concerns about the financial oversight and educational accountability. Others suggest that the money invested in charter schools should instead be given to traditional public schools. One respondent stated, Millions of dollars are wasted in charter schools; more children could be helped if that money was directed to public schoolsI resent public funds being directed to these make-shift setups that do not have to comply with the mandates issued to public school districts. Other officials commented on charter schools effects on traditional public school districts funding, and the financial struggles of charter schools, including public money being mishandled and misspent. In general, district officials believe charter schools siphon funds that could be better used if given to traditional public schools. Inadequate governance and administration. Ten district officials commented on charter school governance and administration. Some officials describe charter administrators as poorly trained and paid, whereas others thought of them as poorly trained and highly paid. Four officials believe charter schools need to be governed by the same guidelines as public schools if they receive state funds. One official called for a moratorium on granting new charters until sufficient data on effectiveness is published. Positive effects. Ten district officials offered positive comments about Texas charter schools. Three cited charters schools as a good alternative school program, with one explaining, Our most challenged behavior problems and below-level students attend charter schools. Others supported charter schools for accommodating students who need flexible schedules. One official said, Educators believe charter schools provide an option for students who do not function well in the structure of the public format. No impact on district. Seven district officials say charter schools have little or no real impact on their districts. In the words of one official, The charter factor has impacted enrollment less than one percent overall. Teacher quality issues. Five districts expressed concerns with staffing in charter schools. Officials described charter schools as having high teacher turnover, low-quality teachers, and ineffective instruction. SUMMARY To assess the effects of charters schools on traditional public schools, researchers surveyed 328 superintendents of public school districts located within the geographic boundaries of one or more charter schools. Of the 247 survey respondents, only 134 district officials (54 percent) were aware of charter schools in or near their districtsthus, many districts are unaffected by charter schools. Of the 134 officials aware of charter schools in their area, 51 districts (38 percent) reported contact with charter schools during the 2001-02 school year. Interactions most often occurred at ESC-sponsored events (37 percent), during regional or state meetings or training sessions (26 percent), or through networking at professional conferences (12 percent). Compared to survey results for 2001, districts more often reported interactions with charter school personnel at ESC-sponsored or state/regional events. Officials also reported on student and teacher movement between districts and charter schools. In total, 84 district officials (63 percent) report the loss of students to charter schools, whereas 27 officials (20 percent) cite no students leaving, and 2 (17 percent) are unsure whether district students have transferred to charter schools. Mid-size and large districts are more likely than small districts to report students and teachers leaving for charter schools. More than half of respondents (84 districts) report students return to their districts from charter schools. When describing the effects of students returning, district officials expressed concerns about students academic preparation, describing these students as being behind other students academically, significantly below our [districts] students, and not well prepared. Although the majority of districts report implementing changes in district activities targeting parents though increased communication, promotion of parent involvement activities, and improved responsiveness to parents needs, few district officials report these changes are due to charter schools. Charter schools are more likely to influence the tracking of students, comparing student achievement in charter and district schools, or increasing marketing efforts to inform parents of district programs. Districts are implementing a number of changes in educational approaches and practices, but few district officials attribute these changes to charter schools. Charter schools are more likely to influence less frequently reported educational changes, such as establishing campus charters or decreasing class size. Even though 73 district officials (54 percent) report that budgetary and financial operations are unaffected by charter schools, it should be noted that nearly half (46 percent) cite financial effects. District officials most often report that charter schools affect their districts financially through losses in average daily attendance (ADA) funding (84 percent) and federal funding (56 percent). Districts with decreasing enrollments are significantly more likely to report losses in ADA and federal funding and downsizing in teaching and administrative staff than districts with stable or increasing enrollments. On average, districts report losing approximately $1.2 million in ADA funding and $108,000 in federal funding due to charter schools Only 26 district officials (19 percent of those aware of charter schools) believe their districts students are affected by local charter schools. Most frequently, at-risk students in traditional school districts are informed about alternative learning programs in charter schools and teachers, counselors, or administrators inform students about charter school opportunities. Students are less often informed about special charter school programs or practices (e.g., Montessori, half-day programs, flexible scheduling) or receive general information about charter school opportunities. Many public school officials have concerns with charter schools. More than three-fourths of district officials are concerned about the quality of instruction in charter schools, and approximately two-thirds express concerns about charter school grading standards (e.g., standards for assigning grades and course credits). In addition, two-thirds report that special needs students in charter schools may not get an appropriate education. General comments further support these trends. Most comments related to concerns with educational quality issues (27) or financial concerns (25), whereas only 10 district officials cite positive effects of charter schools in their areas. Chapter 10  CASE STUDIES OF CHARTER SCHOOLS  The diverse accountability systems, assessment practices, and educational programming philosophies in charter schools nationally has made it difficult to compare academic performance across schools and states. Thus, findings on student academic achievement in charter schools are inconclusive (Firzgerald et al., 2001; Gill, Timpane, Ross, and Brewer, 2001; Horn and Miron, 1999). In Texas, however, consistent charter school data are more readily available, and across six school years, traditional public schools have consistently out-performed charter schools on both standard and alternative education accountability ratings. Still, noteworthy findings for the past three school years reveal steady progress by some charter schools toward higher performance levels. In 2002, for example, the percentages of charter school campuses rated as Exemplary (standard system) or Commended and Acceptable (alternative education system) rose markedly. Even though progress is evident, there is a clear difference between the prevalence of higher and lower achieving charter schools. While about 14 percent of charter schools earn the highest ratings (Exemplary, Recognized, or Commended), the majority (86 percent) receive one of the lower ratings (Acceptable, Low-Performing, or Needs Peer Review). Although few studies have attempted to link charter school characteristics with student performance, it is important to understand why some charter schools are more successful than others. One study of successful charter schools in California found that those operating as high performing learning communities had more autonomy in fiscal and curriculum decisions, sought support from state charter school groups or other support networks, and had parents who supported the school (Wohlstetter and Griffin, 1998). In a review of Texas charter school proposals and performance data for successful and struggling charter schools, the Texas Center for Educational Research also identified a number of factors that appear to support student achievement in charter schools, including enriched curriculum and instruction, supportive organizational structures, philosophical and pedagogical coherence, financial resources supporting student learning, and teacher quality (Shapley and Benner, 2002). Considering the need for knowledge relative to the academic effectiveness of charter schools, the purpose of this chapter is to examine the conditions and instructional practices that can be associated with student achievement in higher and lower achieving charter schools. METHODOLOGY Researchers conducted case studies to provide an in-depth look at a select group of charter schools. The purpose was to explore educational conditions and the different types of instructional practices charter schools employ to meet the specific needs of their students. Charter schools identified for site visits included 13 sites purposefully selected to represent a broad range of performance levels under the Texas standard and alternative education accountability systems. Site Selection Site selection was a multi-stage process. As a first step, researchers randomly selected 61 open-enrollment charter schools for participation in sixth-year evaluation activities. For the case studies, school selection began with the elimination of six charter schools in operation less than two school years. This ensured that selected charter schools had achieved a degree of institutional stability. As a next step, researchers reviewed Texas accountability system ratings awarded for 2000, 2001, and 2002 for all campuses associated with the 55 remaining charter schools. Researchers also considered each charter schools location, teacher turnover rate, student enrollment, grade span served, and student demographic characteristics. The final case study sample included 13 purposefully selected charter schools (a sub-sample of about 25 percent of the random charter school sample) representing both accountability systems (standard and alternative education) and a range of accountability ratings (higher to lower performing) as well as varied geographic locations, school sizes, school levels (elementary, middle, and secondary), and student characteristics. This cross-section of schools allowed a multi-dimensional examination of charter school characteristics (see Tables 10.1 and 10.4). Table 10.1 Charter School Case Study Sites School PseudonymESC Region Location2002 Accountability RatingSuccessful (N=7)North Star Academy4SuburbanExemplaryaGalaxy Learning Academy13UrbanExemplaryaGalileo Charter School10SuburbanExemplaryaAntares Secondary School4UrbanExemplaryaPerseus Academy11SuburbanRecognizedaVega Preparatory Academy10UrbanCommendedbCapella Charter School20UrbanCommendedbChallenged (N=6)Poseidon Charter School13UrbanAcceptableaAgean Academy4UrbanAcceptablebPacific Charter School20UrbanAcceptablebIonian Academy4UrbanLow-PerformingaAtlantis Preparatory School18Central cityNeeds Peer ReviewbNeptune Academy19UrbanCommendedca Campuses rated under the standard accountability system. b Campuses rated under the alternative education accountability system. c Although this charter high school received a Commended rating under the alternative education accountability system, it is currently struggling to achieve its original mission. As Table 10.1 illustrates, the 13 selected sites (identified by pseudonyms) included schools located in various regions of the state. Like charter schools overall, case study sites were mainly in urban and suburban locations. Selected schools had also received varied accountability ratings under the standard or alternative education systems: 8 schools and associated campuses were rated as either Exemplary (4), Recognized (1), or Commended (3); 5 campuses were rated as Acceptable (3), Low-Performing (1), or Needs Peer Review (1). Based on accountability ratings, qualitative evidence gathered during site visits, and data from PEIMS and AEIS reports, researchers further categorized the 13 charter schools as either relatively successful or challenged in achieving their educational missions and high academic standards for students. The seven sites categorized as relatively successful included North Star Academy, Galaxy Learning Academy, Galileo Charter School, Antares Secondary School, Perseus Academy, Vega Preparatory Academy, and Capella Charter School. The six sites considered relatively challenged included Poseidon Charter School, Agean Academy, Pacific Charter School, Ionian Academy, Atlantis Preparatory School, and Neptune Academy. Even though Neptune Academy received a Commended rating under the alternative education system in 2002, researchers categorized the school as challenged because of the modification of its original vision, unstable staffing conditions, and the small number of students tested at the campus (8 students). Instrumentation and Data Collection Current research on charter schools informed the identification of primary areas of interest (e.g., school founding and mission, administrator and teacher roles, educational program, parent involvement, and governance). Structured protocols assigned questions to respondents who could provide the most accurate or insightful information on a topic. The classroom observation form allowed evaluators to document basic descriptive information (e.g., number of students, grade, content area), characteristics of the physical environment, the teachers role, and student activities (see Appendix C). Teams of two to three researchers conducted one-day site visits to the 13 selected charter schools in December 2002 and January 2003. As Table 10.2 indicates, site visits included structured interviews with charter school administrators, teachers, and in some cases, board members; focus groups of teachers and students, and observations conducted primarily in core content-area classrooms. In addition, researchers toured charter school facilities and collected documents. The number and type of participants varied according to the size and complexity of the charter school. In total, researchers conducted interviews with 26 administrators, 9 governing board members, and 43 teachers. Researchers also observed in 43 classrooms, conducted 12 teacher focus groups involving 70 teachers, and facilitated 13 student focus groups including 81 secondary students (grades 6 through 12). In addition to qualitative data, researchers also gathered information on selected charter schools from 2001-02 PEIMS actual financial data as well as additional information from PEIMS and AEIS reports. Table10.2 Case Study Data Collection Methods Data Collection TypeSuccessful Schools N=7Challenged Schools N=6 Total N=13InterviewsCharter school director/superintendent8715Charter school principal/campus leader6511Governing board members549Teachers261743Focus Groups and ObservationsTeacher (number of teachers)7 (47)5 (23)12 (70)Student (number of grades 6-12 students)7 (44)6 (37)13 (81)Classroom observations271643Data Analyses Data analyses involved the triangulation of qualitative and quantitative data from multiple sources. Guided by major topics of study, researchers used a constant comparative method to identify major themes and relationships across the seven charter schools categorized as successful and six charter schools as challenged in achieving educational and academic success. Quantitative information provided contextual and demographic data within which to interpret qualitative findings. Vignettes for individual schools are presented below. In addition, researchers conducted a cross-site analysis to identify prevailing trends that help to explain student achievement. CHARACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL AND CHALLENGED SCHOOLS Successful Charter Schools North Star Academy. Located in a suburb near a large city, North Star Academy is a pre-kindergarten through grade 8 school serving a predominately African American population (284 students). The schools educational program focuses on a core knowledge curriculum, with emphasis on reading and math. Students are taught to read in pre-kindergarten and middle school students are encouraged to take courses for high school credit. North Star students are actively involved with the local community through numerous service and volunteer activities. North Star has gradually improved its accountability rating, from Acceptable in 2000 to an Exemplary rating in 2002. Galaxy Learning Academy. With two urban campuses, Galaxy Learning Academy serves 262 students in grades pre-kindergarten through 11. Galaxy offers a rigorous curriculum and innovative teaching strategies, with the goal of building personal power in students. The school has a number of non-traditional features, such as multi-age grouping and thematic instructional units. Field trips play an important role in the educational program, and teachers are encouraged to expose students to experiences that will support classroom learning. The school has improved its accountability ratings from Acceptable in 2001 to Exemplary in 2002, and high percentages of Galaxy secondary students pass end-of-course exams. Galileo Charter School. Established to serve a suburban community in a major urban area, Galileo Charter School enrolls 799 students in grades 1 through 12. Although over half the schools students are White, Galileo also serves a significant proportion of Asian (23 percent), Hispanic (8 percent), and African American (9 percent) students. Galileo provides a challenging college preparatory curriculum with an international focus. The school is currently awaiting its International Baccalaureate (IB) status and offers a number of Advanced Placement (AP) courses in five academic areas. Galileo has been rated Exemplary for the past three years, with Gold Performance Acknowledgements for attendance, enrollment in advanced coursework, and AP/IB test results. Antares Secondary School. Founded on the belief that all students, regardless of race or socioeconomic background, can succeed academically, Antares Secondary School serves a predominately Hispanic population in a major urban area. Antares enrolls 423 students in grades 6 through 12 and uses an extended schedule (day, week, and year) as well as a rigorous curriculum to prepare students for their ultimate goalenrollment in a four-year college or university. All Antares students must be accepted to a four-year institution of higher education in order to graduate. Spring trips to major historical sites or universities expose Antares students, including many who are economically disadvantaged, to new experiences. Antares has consistently received Exemplary accountability ratings, with almost all students passing the math and reading sections of the TAAS. Pegasus Academy. Pegasus Academy is a kindergarten through grade 6 school that provides a liberal arts education for students. Located in a major suburban area, the schools student population is primarily White (66 percent) and African American (22 percent). Pegasus enhances the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) curriculum with Hirschs Core Knowledge Sequence. Teachers use a classical or Trivium instructional approach that incorporates grammar, logic, and rhetoric. The curriculum also includes a comprehensive art and music program and classes in art history. Pegasus improved from a 2001 accountability rating of Acceptable to Recognized status in 2002. Vega Preparatory Academy. Vega Preparatory Academy enrolls a predominately African American student population in a major urban city. Although Vega specializes in working with students with learning disabilities, the school welcomes all children and has an enrollment of 381 students in kindergarten through grade 7. The schools curriculum is based on the TEKS and teachers use a variety of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic instructional strategies to accommodate students varied learning styles. Students with reading challenges participate in a three-year alphabetic phonics program. Due to the characteristics of the student population served by Vega, the school is rated under the alternative education accountability system. Vega improved its accountability rating from Low-Performing in 2001 to Commended in 2002. Capella Charter School. Located within a residential treatment facility in a major urban city, Capella Charter School primarily serves the educational needs of adjudicated, residential students receiving treatment for emotional or behavioral issues. The school enrolls 135 students in grades 6 through 12 and has an ethnically diverse population. Capella utilizes a one-room schoolhouse approach in which each classroom is composed of approximately 16 students of varying grade levels, along with a teacher and an assistant. The schools curriculum is based on the TEKS and teachers rely on individual instruction to meet students needs. Despite the emotional and behavioral challenges of its students, Capella has received Commended ratings (under the alternative education accountability system) for the past two years. Challenged Charter Schools Poseidon Charter School. Poseidon Charter School was originally founded to accommodate the educational and scheduling needs of student athletes involved in intensive training regiments such as figure skating or gymnastics. The school serves a predominately White student population with 142 students in grades 1 through 12. Although Poseidon now serves a broader student population, the school operates on an abbreviated daily schedule (to accommodate student training or other activities), with students attending a four-hour session in either the morning or afternoon. Small class sizes and an accelerated curriculum enable students to cover the required elements in a condensed time period. Poseidon teachers also enhance learning beyond the minimum requirements and provide AP-level coursework to meet the needs of more advanced students. Poseidon has received an Acceptable rating for the past three years, along with Gold Performance Acknowledgements for advanced courses and college admissions. Agean Academy. Agean Academy is an elementary and middle school located in a major urban city (grades pre-kindergarten through 7) that was founded to serve disadvantaged students who are not succeeding in traditional public schools. The majority of the schools 413 predominantly African American students are economically disadvantaged. Although Agean Academys curriculum is primarily TEKS-based, teachers utilize an accelerated teaching process in which concepts are repeated several times over the course of the instructional period. Teachers also rely on periodic assessments and profiling of students progress to determine individual strengths and weaknesses. Agean Academy improved its accountability rating from Low-Performing in 2001 to Acceptable in 2002 (under the alternative education accountability system). Pacific Charter School. Founded as part of an urban youth center, Pacific Charter School seeks to provide educational services for troubled youth and their families. The school enrolls 162 students in grades 9 through 12, most of whom are either Hispanic or African American. The schools educational program is based on a self-paced curriculum and multi-age classrooms. To help meet students needs, an individualized education plan (IEP) is developed for each student. In 2002, Pacific Charter School received an Acceptable rating. Ionian Academy. The goal of Ionian Academy is to serve the educational needs of highly at-risk students in a major urban city. The schools student population reflects this goal, with the majority of the 233 students classified as economically disadvantaged. Students are predominantly African American, and the school has a student mobility rate of 83 percent. Ionian Academy implements a self-paced academic curriculum, with teachers offering individual assistance to students as needed. The school operates on a four-hour daily schedule and open-entry/open-exit coursework allows students with other interests or responsibilities (e.g., jobs, children) to remain in school. In spite of recent improvements in test scores, Ionian Academy has struggled with poor accountability ratings for several years and received a Low-Performing rating in 2002. Atlantis Preparatory School. Atlantis Preparatory School is one of several charter schools across Texas governed by one organization. Serving grades 5 through 12, the school has a total enrollment of 148, with most students being Hispanic (64 percent) or White (33 percent). Atlantis uses a TEKS-based, self-paced curriculum that is administered in either paper or computerized format. Students work at their own pace on packs of assignments, with teachers available for assistance. Atlantis Preparatory School, located in a central city, has faced challenges with low TAAS passing and attendance rates and high dropout rates. In 2002, the school was rated as Needs Peer Review under the alternative education accountability system. Neptune Academy. One of two charter school campuses in a major urban city, Neptune Academy enrolls 39 students in grades 9 through 12. The relatively diverse student population includes Hispanic (56 percent), White (33 percent), and African American students (8 percent). Although originally designed as a humanities-based secondary school, the schools mission now centers on serving at-risk students. Neptune Academy uses a mastery-based approach in which a student cannot fail an assignment. Material is repeated until a student achieves at least 75 percent mastery. Neptune is rated under the alternative education accountability system, and in 2002, received a Commended rating. Even so, the school currently struggles to maintain a stable faculty and deliver its envisioned curriculum. Distinctive Characteristics of Successful and Challenged Schools Table 10.3 contrasts the characteristics of successful and challenged charter schools emerging from the cross-site analysis. These charter schools differ in their school mission, organizational structure, student characteristics, educational program, teacher characteristics, instructional practices, administrative management, revenue and expenditures, governance, parent involvement, and school culture. Detailed explanations are provided in sections to follow. Table 10.3 Distinctive Characteristics of Successful and Challenged Charter Schools FeatureCharter Schools Successful in Achieving Missions N=7Charter Schools Challenged in Achieving Missions N=6School missionFocused educational mission guides coherent practices supporting student learningFocus on meeting needs of unique student population that was served unsuccessfully by traditional public schoolsOrganizational structureSmall schools with developmental grade spansSmall schools, with most attempting to serve high school studentsStudent characteristicsVaried ethnic characteristics, with about a third economically disadvantaged;Varied ethnic characteristics, with about half economically disadvantaged;High attendance, moderate mobility, and low dropout ratesLow attendance, high mobility, and high dropout ratesEducational programWell-defined, enriched curriculum builds a strong foundation for increasingly advanced learningBasic curriculum often delivered through an individualized plan and student self-paced learningTeacher characteristicsFew without degree (5%), relatively inexperienced (6.5 years), higher salaries ($34,846), lower student-to-teacher ratio (13:1)Substantial number with no degree (14%), relatively experienced (8.5 years), lower salaries ($26,850), higher student-to-teacher ratio (24:1)Instructional practicesTeacher: Uses whole-group, individual, and small-group instruction; directs interactive discussions; facilitates and coaches Students: Listen to discussions, engage in problem solving/investigation, notetakingTeacher: Either instructs whole-group or individual students work alone, manages behavior or materials Students: Listen to a presentation, complete worksheets/short-answer activities, do oral/choral readingManagementHighly engaged administrative leaders who assume a variety of roles to ensure school successAdministrative leaders are often located off-site; many provide oversight for multiple charter schools or campusesRevenue and expendituresSubstantial local revenue (18%); higher expenditure for instructionSubstantial federal revenue (18%); lower expenditure for instruction; larger share of dollars for administrationGovernanceLarge boards (9.4 members), blend of professionals, assist with fund raising and accessing resourcesSmall boards (5 members), blend of professionals, involved in personnel decisionsParent involvementCommitted to student academic supportMaintain contact with school and receive progress reportsSchool cultureSupports student success by communicating high expectations and academic standards along with supportSupports student success by providing positive, caring relationships and individual assistanceSchool Mission A schools stated mission describes its purpose, values, and reason for existence. Although both successful and challenged charter schools could be described as mission-driven organizations, the nature of their missions differs markedly. Successful charter school, by and large, are founded to achieve a clearly defined educational vision leading to valued student outcomes. Wide-ranging missions may focus on a college preparatory curriculum, a classical education, an innovative curriculum designed to fulfill each childs potential, a multi-sensory instructional approach addressing learning differences, or student preparation for participation in family, employment, and the community. In contrast, challenged charter schools are often founded to serve a specific, and often at-risk, student population. Schools aim to serve students who do not fit the traditional public school model or have not succeeded in traditional schools. Varied purposes include providing a basic but accelerated educational program for disadvantaged students not succeeding in traditional schools, serving troubled youth and families, educating hard-to-serve kids that nobody else wants to work with, and meeting the educational needs of students involved in intensive training regiments. In general, these schools founders were driven by a vision of who would be served rather than the outcomes to be accomplished. Organizational Structures Table 10.4 contrasts the organizational structures that differentiate successful and challenged schools. Compared to traditional public schools, all charter schools are relatively small. On average, successful charter schools are somewhat larger than challenged schools because these schools serve a wider grade span. Positive outcomes reported by charter school administrators, teachers, and students in both categories of schools are often associated with small school size. Table 10.4 Organizational and Student Characteristics School PseudonymSchoolPercent of StudentsEnroll-GradeEthnicity EcoAttend- anceDrop- out MobilitymentLevelsAAHWSuccessful (N=7)North Star Academy284PK-890634798016Galaxy Learning Academy262PK-10131371149606Galileo Charter School7991-129860297015Antares Secondary School4236-127893559809Perseus Academy246K-622767496024Vega Preparatory Academy381K-795325097019Capella Charter School1356-121844379397<193Average316--3624353897<126Challenged (N=6)Poseidon Charter School1421-1211082096036Agean Academy413PK-7973<19196030Pacific Charter School1629-1246431173818.767Ionian Academy2339-129730918012.683Atlantis Preparatory School1485-12264330897.670Neptune Academy399-128563328n/an/an/aAverage190--42302747884.852All charter schools192--40382058902.959Traditional public schools556--14424151961.026Note. AA=African American, H=Hispanic, W=White, Eco=Economically disadvantaged. n/a=not available.Successful charter schools typically have a vertically-aligned grade span supporting a developmental educational continuum, with the foundation for learning laid in earlier grades (elementary or middle) leading to targeted outcomes at higher grade levels (middle or high school). Small school size along with continuity achieved through contact with students over multiple years are frequently viewed as contributors to positive interpersonal relationships between students and staff, a disciplined learning environment, a vertically-aligned curriculum, and enhanced communication and collaboration. Although grade-level configurations in challenged schools vary, most schools are attempting to serve secondary students, particularly those in grades 9 through 12. Small size also contributes to positive relationships between students and staff and enhanced communication and collaboration. However, these schools are challenged to meet extensive curricular and learning needs, especially for high school students. Student Characteristics As Table 10.4 shows, both successful and challenged charter schools are ethnically/racially diverse, with each group of schools serving substantial proportions of African American, Hispanic, and White students. Some schools are predominantly one race (70 percent or more), whereas others include a multicultural blend of various ethnicities. Compared to successful charter schools, challenged schools, on average, serve a somewhat higher percentage of economically disadvantaged students (47 percent compared to 38 percent). Three challenged charter schools, however, have more than 70 percent disadvantaged students. Two schools that have half-day programs do not identify students for free or reduced-price lunch (i.e., economically disadvantaged students). Other characteristics also differentiate charter schools. Students in challenged schools have lower attendance rates (88 percent versus 97 percent), higher dropout rates (4.8 percent versus less than 1 percent), and a higher mobility rate (52 percent versus 26 percent). Notably, the average student mobility rate for successful charter schools is similar to traditional public schools (26 percent), whereas the average mobility rate for challenged charter schools (52 percent) mirrors charter schools overall (59 percent). Educational Program Although successful charter schools use a variety of curricular and instructional approaches to support student learning, all schools concentrate on building a strong foundation of knowledge and skills that allows students to succeed at increasingly higher levels. Reading comprehension, mathematics, writing, thinking skills, and problem solving are viewed as critically important to advanced learning. Successful schools often see the TEKS as a starting point, with some schools supplementing the basic curriculum with Hirschs Core Knowledge Sequence, college preparatory coursework (e.g., Advanced Placement, International Baccalaureate), foreign language, and fine arts. Schools serving disadvantaged student populations commonly enrich the curriculum to build students background knowledge through field trips, service learning, clubs, and real-world activities. Educators speak of teaching for success instead of remediating failure. Challenged charter schools concentrate on a basic, TEKS-based educational program featuring reading, mathematics, and required coursework. Student work, however, is more often delivered through an individualized education plan tailored to each students identified skill level. In many cases, students are allowed to work at their own pace, and the school day may be abbreviated to accommodate students interests (e.g., athletic or artistic training) or responsibilities (e.g., job, child rearing). In one case, self-paced, computer-based instruction allows students to progress at their own rate. Students enrolled in challenged charter schools have fewer opportunities for curricular enrichment or extracurricular activities. For two schools, the four-hour schedule does not allow time for extracurricular activities. Extra activities offered in the other four schools more often include sports (basketball, track, volleyball), student council, or cheerleading rather than academic clubs, fine arts, service learning, or field trips. Teacher Characteristics Because Texas charter school statute exempts schools from teacher degree and certification requirements, examining teacher characteristics in charter schools reveals school priorities regarding qualifications, benefits, and roles. Notably, teacher quality issues distinguish successful and challenged schools (see Table 10.5). Compared with successful charter schools, teachers in challenged schools more often have no degree (14 percent versus 5 percent), and although they have more average years experience (8.5 years versus 6.5), teachers receive substantially lower salaries ($26,850 versus $34,846). Teachers in challenged charter schools also work with smaller teaching faculties (9 teachers versus 24), and face a student-to-teacher ratio (24:1) almost twice the ratio in successful schools (13:1). Even though the majority of teachers in challenged charter schools hold degrees, teachers in schools with small facilities that serve high school students must teach courses in multiple content areas (e.g., English/language arts and social studies). Thus, many teachers almost certainly have to teach subjects outside their content-area specialization. Table 10.5 Teacher Characteristics School PseudonymNoYears ExperienceS:TTurn-AverageNDegreeAverage% 1-5RatiooverSalarySuccessful (N=7)North Star Academy180%7.958%17:153%$33,710Galaxy Learning Academy307%5.141%12:135%$34,497Galileo Charter School664%7.141%12:132%$31,890Antares Charter School3013%4.573%14:144%$37,655Perseus Academy181%5.628%14:169%$30,928Vega Preparatory Academy368%7.157%11:121%$33,097Capella Charter School20%9.550%n/a83%$44,501Average245%6.555%13:146%$34,846Challenged (N=6)Poseidon Charter School120%5.167%12:168%$34,579Agean Academy205%3.890%21:10%$29,150Pacific Charter School103%17.144%20:146%$24,358Ionian Academy714%10.414%33:146%$33,000Atlantis Preparatory School457%9.657%42:133%$22,286Neptune Academy34%4.650%13:183%$17,851Average914%8.553%24:146%$26,850All charter schools--16%5.450%18:153%$29,343Traditional public schools--1%11.927%14:116%$39,232Source: AEIS reports 2001-02. n/a = not available.Although teacher characteristics vary by charter school category, there are also similarities across schools. Charter school teachers interviewed in all types of schools report having opportunities for professional development, being involved in school-based decision making, working collaboratively with other teachers, having a substantial degree of curricular and instructional autonomy, and being appraised at least annually by a school administrator. Teachers also give similar reasons for deciding to teach in charter schools. Many teachers were motivated by a desire to serve the schools special student population, some welcomed the opportunity to teach without certification, a few had a child enrolled in the charter school, and others reported various personal reasons. Instructional Practices Classroom observations provided a means for comparing the instructional strategies and practices of teachers in successful and challenged charter schools. Researchers conducted observations in 43 core-content area classrooms, including 27 observations in successful schools and 14 observations in challenged charter schools. Observations lasted approximately 45 minutes. The observation instrument, which appears in Appendix C, allowed researchers to document the characteristics of the physical environment (e.g., classroom space and resources), class organization, teacher and student activities, and higher order thinking indicators. Adequacy of physical environment. Table 10.6 shows that successful charter schools have more adequate physical classroom space, and teachers have greater access to resources such as computers, science equipment, and math manipulatives. Moreover, classrooms are more often arranged to facilitate student interactions, with pairs or groups of students sitting at tables or with desks moved together for shared conversations and work. Although student work was seldom displayed in any charter school classroom, it was least likely to be seen in classrooms in challenged schools. Table 10.6 Adequacy of Physical Environment CategoryRatingMean Rating1234Classroom spacecrowded (1) to adequate (4)Successful3.733.337.025.92.9Challenged31.318.818.831.32.5Classroom resourcessparsely equipped (1) to rich in resources (4)Successful7.444.433.314.82.6Challenged50.037.56.36.31.7Room arrangementinhibited interactions (1) to facilitated interactions (4)Successful14.822.225.937.02.9Challenged37.525.012.525.02.3Student work displayednot at all (1) to a great extent (4)Successful48.137.011.13.71.7Challenged68.818.812.50.01.4Note. Observations included 27 classrooms in successful charter schools and 16 in challenged charter schools. Notable differences highlighted in bold. Classroom organization. Researchers also recorded information on classroom organizational patterns at 10-minute intervals during observations (whole class, individual students working alone, small groups, student pairs). Information summarized in Table 10.7 compares the percentages of classrooms in successful and challenged charter schools in which a teacher was observed using the organizational strategies. Additionally, the table shows the mean percentage of time the strategy was used. Results, with important differences highlighted in bold, show that teachers in successful charter schools rely on a combination of organizational approaches, including whole class instruction, students working independently, and students working in pairs or groups. In contrast, instruction in challenged charter schools was either teacher centered, with the teacher directing the whole class, or students worked independently on assignments. Table 10.7 Classroom Organization Organizational ConfigurationPercent of Classrooms ObservedMean Percent of Observed TimeSuccessfulChallengedSuccessfulChallengedWhole class81.575.071.371.5Individual students working alone63.062.553.262.8Small groups (3+ students)18.50.061.60.0Pairs of students14.80.058.80.0Note. Observations included 27 classrooms in successful charter schools and 16 in challenged charter schools. Notable differences highlighted in bold. Teacher and student activities. Observers also noted the kinds of activities in which teachers and students engaged at 10-minute intervals. Again, important differences emerged between teachers and students in successful and challenged charter schools (see Table 10.8). In all charter school classrooms, teachers often directed the whole group, monitored student work, and provided one-on-one instruction for studentsalthough time allocations differed by school category. Teachers in successful charter schools, however, were more likely to guide interactive whole-group discussions or facilitate/coach during small-group instruction. In contrast, teachers in challenged charter schools were more often engaged in non-instructional activities such as managing behavior or materials or sitting at their desk. Compared to challenged schools, students in successful charter schools classrooms were more likely to listen to a class discussion, engage in interactive discussions, participate in problem solving activities or investigations, or take notes. In contrast, students in classrooms in challenged schools more often listened to a presentation, completed worksheets or short-answer activities, or participated in whole-group oral or choral reading. Table 10.8 Classroom Activities ActivityPercent of Classrooms ObservedMean Percent of Observed TimeSuccessfulChallengedSuccessfulChallengedThe teacher isDirecting whole group 74.162.548.359.2Monitoring student work44.443.841.670.6Providing one-on-one instruction 22.218.869.138.3Guiding interactive discussion with whole group 22.26.359.025.0Modeling (strategy) for whole group11.16.349.525.0Facilitating/coaching25.912.537.317.1Giving test 3.76.320.025.0Facilitating checking/grading of student work0.06.30.025.0Managing behavior or materials0.031.30.022.5Sitting at desk0.012.50.053.3The students areListening to a presentation40.756.330.254.5Listening to a discussion33.312.540.862.5Engaged in interactive discussion33.30.040.90.0Completing worksheets/short-answer activities22.243.852.566.1Engaged in problem solving/investigation22.212.544.277.5Taking notes14.80.049.20.0Writing communication related to lesson14.818.878.530.0Engaged in individual reading/reflection11.118.858.358.3Oral/choral reading3.725.020.045.0Using technology7.46.396.8100.0Making a presentation7.46.357.585.7Taking a test7.46.338.625.0Checking/grading student work7.46.326.725.0Non-academic activity/off task7.46.315.525.0Note. Observations included 27 classrooms in successful charter schools and 16 in challenged charter schools. Notable differences highlighted in bold. Teachers questioning strategies. During observations, researchers also recorded notes describing teachers questioning strategies. Using Blooms Taxonomy as a guide, observers categorized teachers questions as lower order (factual) or higher order (e.g., comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis). After completing observations, researchers rated teachers use of six higher-order questioning strategies on a 4-point scale as not at all (1), small extent (2), moderate extent (3), and large extent (4). Mean ratings in Table 10.9 show that teachers in successful charter schools are far more likely to ask questions requiring higher-order thinking. In particular, these teachers ask more open-ended questions, ask students to explain key concepts in their own words, ask students to justify their ideas, and ask questions that require reasoning. Table 10.9 Higher Order Questioning StrategiesMean Level of Teacher Use The teacherSuccessful N=27Challenged N=16Asks open-ended questions with multiple answers2.31.4Relates subject matter to other contexts or to everyday life1.71.3Asks students to explain key concepts, definitions, and attributes in their own words2.71.5Asks students to justify ideas and explain their thoughts2.41.6Asks questions that require reasoning2.21.4Has students think about and relate examples from their own experience1.51.2Note. Ratings based on a 4-point scale: not at all (1), small extent (2), moderate extent (3), and large extent (4). Notable differences are highlighted in bold. Management Successful charter schools have highly engaged administrative leaders who assume many roles to ensure school success, such as academic leader, teacher/substitute teacher, tutor, community and family liaison, and, occasionally, janitor. Most schools have only one campus, so the chief operating officer (e.g., director, superintendent) and campus leaders have offices on-site and maintain a highly visible presence in the school. Educators speak of ongoing staff meetings that support collaborative planning and decision making, and teachers look to school administrators for assistance and guidance. In contrast, chief operating officers for challenged charter schools commonly serve multiple charter schools or campuses, and administrators are often located off-site or in a different city. These officials maintain oversight through intermittent visits to the charter school campus. Campus leaders, or principals, typically oversee the day-to-day management of the school. Although teachers in these schools say their voices are heard and their input is valued, they are less likely to be involved in personnel decisions, and they are more likely to describe informal networks rather than formal structures supporting collaboration and teamwork. Revenue and Expenditures As Table 10.10 shows, successful schools, as compared to challenged, get a substantial proportion of their funding from local revenue sources (18 percent compared to 1 percent). Because local funding comes primarily from grants or donations, this finding suggests that successful schools are proactive in seeking grant funding, and schools receive stronger family and community support. Conversely, challenged charter schools get a greater share of funding from federal sources (18 percent compared to 8 percent). This most likely reflects extra dollars accompanying services for at-risk student populations. Successful charter schools, on average, spend more per pupil for education ($8,228) compared to challenged schools ($6,357), all charter schools ($6,762), and traditional schools ($7,851). Average per-pupil expenditures for successful charters, however, are inflated by the per-pupil figure for one residential treatment center ($13,305). Charter schools also spend their money in different ways. Compared to challenged schools, successful schools spend more for instruction ($4,099 versus $2,684) and a greater proportion of their dollars for instruction (0.50 versus 0.42). Moreover, successful schools spend a smaller proportion of their funds for school leadership and general administration (0.20 versus 0.25 for challenged schools). Table 10.10 Actual Revenue and Expenditures for Charter Schools (District) School PseudonymPer-Pupil Expenditure% Revenue SourceAverageInstructionAdministrationLocalStateFedExp.DollarsRatioDollarsRatioSuccessful (N=7)North Star Academy75231$9,848$3,669.37:1$2,765.28:1Galaxy Learning Academy14833$7,104$3,714.52:1$860.23:1Galileo Charter School10891$5,506$3,946.72:1$519.09:1Antares Secondary School145630$8,886$3,310.37:1$1,102.33:1Perseus Academy7903$5,201$2,939.57:1$1,025.20:1Vega Preparatory Academy68312$7,744$4,412.57:1$1,184.15:1Capella Charter School0955$13,305$6,705.50:1$3,880.29:1Average18748$8,228$4,099.50:1$1,619.20:1Challenged (N=6)Poseidon Charter School2908$5,537$3,781.68:1$843.15:1Agean Academy0964$4,835$1,453.30:1$1,694.35:1Pacific Charter School25544$9,334$1,751.19:1$1,360.15:1Ionian Academy37522$6,128$2,377.39:1$2,679.44:1Atlantis Preparatory School0955$7,087$4,342.61:1$1,529.22:1Neptune Academy17722$5,220$2,397.46:1$1,292.25:1Average18118$6,357$2,684.42:1$1,566.25:1All charter schools77617$6,762$3,426.51:1$1,422.21:1Traditional public schools52399$7,851$3,932.50:1$613.08:1Source: Actual financial data for all funds, PEIMS 2001-02. Fed=Federal. Administration includes funds expended for School Leadership and General Administration. a Campus rated under alternative education system. Governance Successful charter schools receive strong support from relatively large governing boards (9.4 members, on average). Governing boards generally include a blend of professionals (e.g., business, law, finance, health, higher education), community members, and parents. Boards typically are not involved in day-to-day school management but instead provide guidance, oversight for financial activities, expertise needed by the school, and assistance with fund raising and resource acquisition. Overall, these schools have strong community connections that contribute to their success. Governing boards for challenged charter schools are smaller (5 members, on average). These boards are also composed of a variety of professionals, including representatives from public and higher education, business, and attorneyshowever, only one of six boards included a parent representative. Like governing boards for successful charter schools, these entities provide guidance, financial oversight, and expertise, but they are less likely to be engaged in fund raising activities and more likely to be involved in personnel decisions. Parental Involvement Parents in successful charter schools are committed to student academic support. Although parents may or may not be involved in the day-to-day activities of these charter schools due to time and work constraints, they almost invariably lend strong support for their childrens academic achievement through actions such as assisting with homework, checking on progress, visiting the school, communicating regularly with teachers, and supporting disciplinary actions. Compared to successful charter schools, parents of students attending challenged charter schools are involved in different and more limited ways. Across all schools, educators report that they maintain contact with parents or guardians. Much like traditional public schools, parents receive regular progress reports and are notified by email or telephone regarding academic or discipline problems. Only one school mentioned regularly scheduled parent conferences, and parent organizations, volunteering, and fundraising were also far less prevalent in challenged charter schools. School Culture Successful charter schools create a culture that communicates high expectations for student success. Foremost, one belief was pervasive across schoolsgiven appropriate educational opportunities, all children, regardless of background, can achieve high academic standards. Schools, however, used a variety of approaches to create a culture supporting achievement: motivational slogans, visual symbols, commitments to excellence, goal-setting and rewards for performance, school uniforms, interpersonal connections, individualized attention, and caring and readily available teachers, for example. Challenged charter schools also have a distinctive school culture. Schools are characterized by a family-like atmosphere that reduces the anonymity and isolation that many students felt in traditional public schools. Educators and students describe one-on-one support, personal closeness, bonds, attachments, and positive interpersonal relationships. Although teachers often speak of students lack of basic skills, self-discipline, and motivation to learn, they believe the charter schools small school size allows more individualized student attention and support that enables students to achieve previously unfulfilled potential. To create a culture supporting achievement, schools allow students greater choices in learning tasks, more flexible time frames for learning, and personalized attention, patience, and respect from caring teachers. Motivational rewards are more likely to involve applause or praise from fellow students, a certificate for completion of a unit of work, or a pat on the back. SUMMARY This study provides new information describing the conditions and practices supporting student achievement in charter schools. Although the case studies are based on a very limited number of higher and lower performing charter schools, the themes that emerge provide potential explanations, beyond the demographic characteristics of the students served, for why students in some charter schools perform better than others. Although successful and challenged charter schools do serve somewhat different student populations, it is the differences in their approaches to educating students that are most striking. Themes emerging from findings suggest attributes that may foster student academic success in charter schools. Attributes Associated with Student Academic Achievement Supportive organizational structures. Successful charter schools typically have a grade span supporting a developmental educational continuum, with the foundation for learning laid in early grades leading to targeted outcomes at higher grade levels. Small school size along with continuity achieved through contact with students over multiple years are frequently viewed as contributors to individualized learning, positive student-teacher relationships, a disciplined learning environment, a vertically-aligned curriculum, and enhanced communication and collaboration. In addition, many successful schools extend the school day, week, or year to reinforce or enrich student learning. In contrast, challenged charter schools are more likely to serve secondary students who, according to educators, often arrive at the school lacking basic academic skills. Although challenged schools are also small, schools have higher student-to-teacher ratios. Furthermore, abbreviated schedules in some schools reduce the available time for student learning. Enriched curriculum and instruction. Successful charter schools have high expectations for all students. The states standards-based curriculum is considered a minimum, so schools enrich learning through the core knowledge curriculum, service learning, field trips, foreign language, fine arts, Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses, and extracurricular activities. Challenged schools, on the other hand, are highly committed to student learning, but curriculum and instruction typically focus on basic skills, GED preparation, credit accrual, and remediation of student deficiencies. Teacher and instructional quality. Teachers in successful charter schools are more likely to have college degrees, and although they are less experienced than teachers in challenged schools, they are paid higher salaries. More importantly, classrooms in successful charter schools are more conducive learning environments. Teachers have more available space and instructional resources, and they arrange their classrooms to facilitate student interactions, shared conversations, and collaborative work. These teachers also create more learner-centered environments by combining opportunities for whole-group, independent, and small-group learning. Moreover, they advance student thinking and problem solving through a greater emphasis on higher-order questioning strategies that allow students to verbalize, explain, justify ideas, and reason. In contrast, challenged charter schools employ more experienced teachers but pay their teachers substantially less, and these schools are also more likely to hire teachers without degrees. Classrooms have limited space and resources, and rooms are more likely to be arranged in traditional rows with desks facing the teacher. Accordingly, instruction is primarily whole group or students working on assignments independently. Teachers in some classes spend time managing behavior or materials or just sitting at their desk. Students often learn by listening to teacher presentations or by completing worksheets or short-answer exercises. Overall, the quality of learning opportunities in successful and challenged charter schools may, at least partially, explain achievement differences. Financial resources supporting student learning. Successful charter schools also invest more resources in student learning. A greater proportion of expenditures is allocated for instruction, with approximately $1,400 more for instruction per pupil. Additional instructional expenditures include higher salaries for teachers (approximately $8,000 more, on average, than teachers in challenged schools). Challenged charter schools, conversely, invest a greater proportion of their funds in school leadership and general administration. Parent commitment to academic support. Parents of students attending successful charter schools may or may not be involved in day-to-day school activities due to time and work constraintshowever, they almost invariable lend strong support for their childrens academic achievement through actions such as assisting with homework, checking on progress, visiting the school, communicating regularly with teachers, and supporting disciplinary actions. In contrast, in challenged charter schools, parents are expected or required to at least maintain contact with the school. Although parents receive regular progress reports and are usually notified by email or telephone regarding academic or discipline problems, parents, in general, are not expected to be partners in the educational process. Strong organizational supports and community connections. Successful charter schools have highly engaged administrative leaders who assume many roles to accomplish school goals. These schools also receive strong support from governing boards that generally include a blend of professionals, community members, and parents. Boards are typically not involved in day-to-day school management but instead provide guidance, financial oversight, and expertise needed by the school. Moreover, fund raising and resource acquisition assistance provided by governing boards of successful schools substantially enhances access to local resources that augment state funds. In contrast, chief operating officers (e.g., directors/superintendents) of challenged schools spend less time on individual charter campuses because they often supervise multiple charter schools or more than one campus. Thus, these administrators have a less visible presence and they typically delegate day-to-day leadership to a campus leader or principal. Challenged schools also have smaller governing boards, which narrows the range of viewpoints on school operations and lessens the availability of board expertise and community support. Generalization of Findings to Charter Schools Statewide While results for these case studies are compelling, researchers wondered whether identified trends for this small group of charter schools would generalize to higher performing and lower performing charter schools statewide. To further explore the issue, Tables 10.11, 10.12, and 10.13 contrast PEIMS and AEIS data for school and student characteristics, teacher characteristics, and revenue and expenditures for higher performing and lower performing charter schools. Higher performing charter schools received Exemplary, Recognized, or Commended ratings in 2002, whereas lower performing charter schools were rated as Acceptable, Low-Performing, or Needs Peer Review. In general, data trends replicate those for successful and challenged charter schools included in the case studies. Data in Table 10.11 show that student ethnicity is an insignificant factor in distinguishing higher and lower performing charter schools. Lower performing charter schools, however, like challenged schools, have slightly more economically disadvantaged students, substantially lower student attendance rates, and notably higher student dropout and mobility rates. Table 10.11 Characteristics of Schools and Students IndicatorAccountability RatingAlla Charters N=241Stateb AverageHigher Performing N=27Lower Performing N=173Student enrollment231.7213.9194.9555.5Student ethnicityAfrican American30.934.334.213.7Hispanic37.038.237.439.8White28.226.227.044.4Economically disadvantaged46.155.556.452.3Attendance rate96.688.790.495.4Dropout rate<1.03.53.2<1.0Mobility rate21.961.459.425.7a Includes some charter campuses that did not receive accountability ratings. b Excludes charter schools. Consistent with case-study findings, Table 10.12 shows that teacher quality indicators are strongly associated with charter school performance statewide. Higher performing charter schools have proportionally fewer beginning teachers and fewer teachers without a degree, more teachers with advanced degrees, and higher teacher salaries. A lower student-to-teacher ratio also indicates that these teachers have fewer students in their classrooms. Considering important salary and student teaching load differences favoring teachers in higher performing charter schools, teacher turnover, not surprisingly, is lower in these schools. Table 10.12 Teacher Characteristics Accountability RatingAlla Charters N=236Stateb AverageHigher Performing N=27Lower Performing N=170Mean teacher FTE14.912.311.639.4Average years experience6.55.45.411.9Tenure in years% Beginning teachers11.022.721.07.7% 1-5 years experience52.248.749.526.7% More than 20 years4.65.55.021.5% Teachers with no degree5.917.215.20.8% Teachers with advanced degree21.812.714.518.0Teacher annual turnover rate40.151.546.217.5Teacher salary$32,217$29,041$29,263$38,575Student-to-teacher ratio16.818.717.714.0% instructional aides12.411.811.816.2a Includes some charter campuses that did not receive accountability ratings. b Excludes charter schools. Higher-performing charter schools statewide, like the successful case study sites, get a greater proportion of their revenue from local sources (15 percent) compared to lower performing schools (4 percent). On the other hand, statewide results show that the average per-pupil expenditure for lower performing charter schools ($9,277) is almost $2,500 more than the per-pupil expenditure in higher performing charter schools ($6,796). Even so, expenditure trends replicate case study findings. Higher performing charter schools spend a greater proportion of their dollars for instruction, whereas lower performing charter schools spend a greater share of funds for campus leadership and school administration. Table 10.13 Charter School Revenue and Expenditures Accountability RatingAlla Charters N=175Stateb AverageHigher Performing N=22Lower Performing N=134Revenue SourceLocal15%4%8%53%State69%79%77%39%Federal16%17%15%8%Per-Pupil ExpenditureAverage per-pupil$6,796$9,277$6,783$8,649Instruction (11)$3,617$4,320$3,426$3,932Instruction/average per-pupil ratio.54:1.51:1.51:1.50:1Administration (23, 41)$1,270$2,092$1,422$613Administration/average per-pupil ratio.18:1.23:1.21:1.08:1Note. Administration includes school leadership (23) and general administration (41). a Includes some charter schools that did not receive accountability ratings. b Excludes charter schools. In sum, statewide quantitative data for higher performing and lower performing schools seem to substantiate the validity of themes emerging from case studies on the attributes supporting student achievement in charter schools. Chapter 11  COMMENTARY AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS  Texas state statute (TEC, 12.118) calls for the Commissioner of Education to select an impartial organization with experience evaluating school choice programs to conduct an annual evaluation of charter schools. Acting on behalf of the commissioner, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) contracted with the Texas Center for Educational Research (TCER) to conduct the sixth annual evaluation. TCER collaborated with research consultants and university researchers (University of Texas at Arlington and the Office of Survey Research at the University of Texas at Austin) on the current study. Researchers have tried to provide accurate, unbiased, and comprehensive information on charter schools by examining multiple data sources and varied perspectives. The triangulation of data from surveys of charter school directors, teachers, students, and parents; surveys of traditional public school officials; case studies of higher and lower performing charter schools; and the Texas school accountability system reveals much about the current status of charter schools in the state and has implications for Texas charter school policy. CHARTER SCHOOL POLICY CONTEXT Charter schools, and other choice programs, have emerged as one approach to overall school improvement. Since Minnesota enacted the first charter school legislation in 1991, 39 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico have enacted charter school laws. During the 2002-03 school year, approximately 2,700 charter schools served more than 684,000 students nationwide, and Texas was one of five states with the most charter schools in operation (Center for Educational Reform, 2003). Nationally, charter schools are held accountable in very diverse ways, based on the state and/or district in which they are located. Although the vast majority of states monitor student achievement in charter schools, differences in accountability systems and assessment methods make national comparisons difficult. Even though student performance outcomes for charter schools are currently inconclusive, evidence continues to accumulate. The Texas charter school movement also arose in response to perceived deficiencies in the public education system. At first, school reformers and policymakers sought greater local flexibility and mechanisms to help parents chose the most appropriate educational experience within the public school system. Efforts such as the Partnership Schools Initiative offered freedom from regulation in exchange for restructuring to better meet student needs (Stevens, 1999). Subsequent revisions to the Texas Education Code also expanded choice within the public system through home-rule for school districts and grants allowing public school choice for students attending low-performing schools (Elliot, 1998; Stevens, 1999). The passage of charter school legislation in 1995 further advanced the Texas school choice movement through the creation of 20 open-enrollment charter schools that were substantially released from state regulations. Charter schools, statute purported, would increase choice within the public system, attract new teachers to public education, establish a new form of accountability, encourage different and innovative learning methods, and improve student learning [TEC, 12.001(a)]. Legislative provisions enacted in 1999, which were also predicated on optimistic prospects for charter schools, raised the cap on the number of open-enrollment charters from 20 to 120 and allowed an unlimited number of charter schools serving 75 percent or more at-risk students (75 Percent Rule)thus, the numbers of charters awarded by the State Board of Education (SBOE) increased sharply. Despite hopeful expectations for charter schools, myriad problemsespecially financial irregularitiesaccompanied rapidly increasing numbers of schools. In response to public concern with the academic and financial performance of charter schools, Texas lawmakers further revised state statutes governing charter schools in 2001. House Bill 6 (HB 6) capped the number of charter schools the SBOE may grant at 215, allowed for an unlimited number of schools sponsored by public senior colleges and universities, gave the Commissioner of Education expanded oversight, and specified other regulatory provisions. Key provisions defined the applicability of state laws to charter schools in areas such as government records, public purchasing and contracting, conflicts of interest, nepotism, and immunity from liability; changed the state funding system applicable to charters; clarified the commissioners authority for modification, probation, revocation, denial of renewal, sanctions, and audits; clarified permissible relationships between a charter holder and a management company; and articulated provisions for property purchased or leased with state funds. Taken as a whole, changes to the education code through HB6 substantially reduced, in some areas, charter school flexibility and autonomy that are a hallmark of the charter concept. CHARTER SCHOOL POLICY IMPLICATIONS In the sections to follow, evaluation findings for year six are discussed in relation to the purposes and assumptions driving Texas charter school policies and school choice in general. Relationship Between Policy and Charter School Characteristics Charter schools, according to one of the creators of the concept, are an institutional innovation, with laws allowing schools to create different organizational structures (Kolderie, 1990). In Texas, charter school statute has certainly influenced the institutional characteristics of charter schools. The passage of laws in 1997 encouraging the formation of charter schools for at-risk students dramatically altered fundamental assumptions underlying the charter concept. While the choice movement originally assumed that charter schools would lead to more innovative forms of schooling for all students, the new policy stimulated the formation of schools serving a specifically defined student population. The 75 Percent Rule presumed that concentrating large proportions of at-risk students in a charter school (75 percent or more) would lead to more innovative forms of schooling for at-risk students, who were known to more likely be economically disadvantaged and minority. Largely as a result of the 75 Percent Rule, distinctly different types of charter schools have emerged in Texas. Besides enrolling different proportions of at-risk students, these schools also have different organizational features. As explained below, schools serving higher and lower percentages of at-risk students vary by school and student characteristics, administrative leadership, revenue and expenditures, teacher quality, educational approach, parents and students reasons for choosing the school, student and parent satisfaction with the school, and by student outcomes. School and student characteristics. Through the 2001-02 school year, about two-fifths of Texas open-enrollment charter schools (100 schools, 41 percent) have been created to serve primarily at-risk students (87 percent, on average). These charter schools, in comparison to other charter schools, serve a disproportionately greater share of primary students (early childhood, pre-kindergarten, kindergarten) and Hispanic students. In contrast, other charter schools (141 schools, 59 percent) serve smaller proportions of at-risk students (40 percent, on average) and enroll a greater share of White students and secondary students (grades 10, 11, and 12). Regardless of the characteristics of the student population, charter schools are relatively small. The average student enrollment for charter school campuses (192 students) is well less than half of average student enrollment in traditional public schools. Small campus size also means smaller faculty to deliver instruction. The average number of teacher full-time equivalents (FTEs) in charter schools is about 12 compared to approximately 39 in other Texas public schools. While school size is generally considered a positive school feature, the small size of schools and faculties has important implications, considering the increasing tendency of charter schools to serve high school students who have more diverse subject and course requirements. Administrative leadership. Charter schools serving predominantly at-risk students have a higher percentage of Hispanics and African Americans in director positions. These leaders have fewer years of administrative experience (5.4) than their counterparts in charter schools with primarily non-at-risk students (10.1), and they are less likely to hold Texas mid-management certification. These school leaders, who may be less familiar or comfortable with Texas school bureaucracy and resources due to inexperience, are less likely than their peers to seek external assistance from sources such as the TEA or education service centers (ESCs). In contrast, administrators in schools with less at-risk students are more experienced, more likely to hold Texas mid-management certification, and more likely to seek external assistance from a greater number of support groups. Revenue and expenditures. Compared to other charter schools, schools serving primarily at-risk students have more per-pupil revenue ($7,231 versus $6,526) and expend more per student ($8,067 versus $6,137). In almost all expenditure categories, charter schools serving mostly at-risk students have higher per-pupil expenditures. This difference is largest in the area of instruction, with $4,239 per-pupil expended in charters serving primarily at-risk students and $3,033 expended in charters serving less at-risk students. Charter schools serving less at-risk students rely on substantial revenue from local sources to support school operations (e.g., grants and donations). Thus, not surprisingly, directors in these schools more often cite inadequate finances for operations, budgeting and accounting requirements, and excessive paperwork and reporting requirements as obstacles to school operation. Teacher quality. In schools with a larger share of at-risk students, directors report greater challenges in hiring teachers, and those hired, according to AEIS statistics, are more likely to belong to a minority group and are less likely to have advanced degrees than teachers in other charter schools. In schools with a smaller share of at-risk students, teachers are more likely to be White, to hold advanced degrees, and to be certified. Educational approach. Evidence from both director and teacher surveys suggests that policies promoting the creation of charter schools for at-risk students have also encouraged very different approaches to educating children. Directors in schools serving primarily at-risk students more often report using extended-day and extended-week schedules, block schedules, and credit through flexible courses. Many of the same directors also report a higher average number of computers in labs (23 computers versus 17 in other schools), and programs that include self-paced, computer-based instruction. Directors in schools with less at-risk students more commonly report using multi-age grouping and student and teacher teams with a greater share of their students. In addition, a greater proportion of these directors report that classrooms in their schools have Internet access (82 percent compared to 65 percent in schools serving predominantly at-risk students). Teacher reports generally confirm administrators views. Teachers also differ in their reported instructional methods and professional development. Teachers in schools serving a smaller percentage of at-risk students use more long-term projects and place less importance on whole-group lectures, whereas their counterparts in schools serving primarily at-risk students provide more one-on-one instruction and teacher-directed, whole-group instruction. Teachers in schools with primarily at-risk students attend one day less of professional development (6.2 days) than teachers in schools with less at-risk students (7.2 days). Teachers serving a smaller share of at-risk students are also more likely to participate in collaborative professional development methods, such as teaming or shared conference periods and release time to work with other school educators. Reasons for choosing charter schools. The parents of children attending charter schools serving primarily at-risk students are more likely to cite dissatisfaction with a previous school (usually a traditional public school) as a reason for choosing a charter school. Moreover, surveys of traditional public school officials indicate that at-risk students are increasingly informed by teachers, counselors, and administrators about alternative learning programs in charter schools. Open-ended comments also confirm that some officials in traditional public schools view charter schools as a desirable option for students with discipline problems, those headed for dropout, or those who do not function well in traditional schools. Parent satisfaction. There are also differences in the perceptions and actions of parents of children attending charter schools serving different proportions of at-risk students. Parents whose children attend charter schools serving a greater proportion of at-risk students are more likely to be satisfied with extracurricular offerings, feel that their childs grades have improved, and perceive that the school has sufficient financial resources. In contrast, parents whose children attend charters serving less at-risk students are more likely to feel that their children receive sufficient attention and that emphasis is placed on educational content, not test preparation. These parents are also more likely to participate in activities at their childrens schools, such as fundraising or volunteering. Student satisfaction. Students attending charter schools with primarily at-risk students are less satisfied with their charter schools compared to students enrolled in other charter schools. In particular, students are less likely to agree that the charter school is a good choice for me. Moreover, students attending these schools less commonly feel safe, believe other students help them learn, feel they learn more, or believe students attending the school are interested in learning. Student aspirations also differ according to the preponderance of at-risk students at the school. Students in schools serving primarily at-risk students are more likely to report that they plan to get a job, join the military, or attend a community college compared to students in schools serving less at-risk students. Academic performance. Students attending charter schools with primarily at-risk students are more likely to attend schools rated under less rigorous standards and to have lower achievement. Compared to students attending other charter schools and traditional peer campuses with comparable percentages of economically disadvantaged students, these students have lower TAAS passing rates, lower attendance rates, and higher dropout rates. Furthermore, although nearly twice as many secondary students in these schools report earning Mostly As or Mostly As and Bs in their charter school than in their previous school, students passing rates on state-scored end-of-course exams for core subjects are much lower than state averages for economically disadvantaged students attending traditional public schools (between 12 and 29 percentage points lower). In summary, considerable evidence raises doubts about the appropriateness of concentrating high percentages of at-risk students in a school unless there is a well-conceived plan and resources supporting high academic standards. Some evidence, however, indicates that the impact of the 75 Percent Rule is diminishing. Newer charter schools (in operation one or two years) whose charter proposals have been subject to more rigorous and systematic award criteria instituted by the SBOE are less commonly created to serve primarily at-risk students. Only half of students in newer schools are economically disadvantaged (50 percent), and these schools, on average, enroll similar proportions of African American (33 percent), Hispanic (39 percent), and White (27 percent) students. On the other hand, the policy incentive for the creation of an unlimited number of charter schools sponsored by public senior colleges and universities has sparked little interest from higher education. To date, there are no charter schools operating on university campuses. Teacher Quality in Charter Schools Previous studies have identified teacher quality as a major predictor of student achievement (e.g. National Commission on Teaching and Americas Future, 2003). In view of this evidence, teacher quality in charter schools is of utmost importance. The current study provides new information on the characteristics and qualifications of teachers guiding student learning in Texas charter schools and highlights differences associated with school characteristics. Consistent with past studies, recent statistics show that charter school teachers, on average, are less experienced (5.4 years) than teachers in traditional public schools (11.9 years), and they are less likely to have baccalaureate and advanced degrees. Teachers in charter schools are also paid considerably less than those in traditional public schools. In 2001-02, the average teacher salary in charter schools ($29,343) was nearly $9,000 below that for teachers in traditional public schools ($38,278). The lower overall average salary in charters to some extent reflects the relative lack of classroom experience of charter school teachers. According to surveyed teachers, about a third of Texas charter school teachers are either certified in Texas or another state (38 percent), although almost all teachers report working to obtain certification. Of those certified to teach, the primary certification route is through the traditional college undergraduate program. Teachers seeking employment in charter schools report that they do so to be involved in an educational reform effort, to work with like-minded educators, and to work in a school with a positive academic reputation and high standards. Many teachers are also attracted to charter schools by more favorable conditions, such as greater autonomy, small school and class sizes, and the high level of parent involvement. Teacher turnover in charter schoolswith an annual turnover rate more than three times the rate for traditional public schools (53 percent versus 17 percent)is a major barrier to success. Teacher turnover may be partially explained by survey responses. Although charter school teachers have generally favorable impressions of their schools missions and school operations, approximately half believe their charter schools have insufficient financial resources and classrooms lack adequate resources; teachers are also dissatisfied with their salaries. In general, charter schools do appear to have attracted new teachers to public education through opportunities to work without certification. The practice of allowing uncertified teachers in the classroom, however, assumes that highly qualified personnel will enter the teaching field from another profession. Results for this study show that a charter schools ability to attract highly qualified teachers, both certified and non-certified, is associated with the preponderance of at-risk students enrolled in the school and the schools academic success. As noted previously, charter schools enrolling primarily at-risk students have a lower percentage of teachers with advanced degrees (8 percent). In contrast, a larger share of teachers in charter schools serving proportionally fewer at-risk students have advanced degrees (18 percent) and have obtained certification to teach in Texas or another state (42 percent versus 33 percent); about one-fourth of these teachers became certified through a post-baccalaureate program. Teachers in charter schools with less at-risk students are also more likely to have taught in private schools. Teacher quality is also strongly associated with charter school performance. Higher performing charter schools (those rated as Exemplary, Recognized, or Commended) have a smaller share of beginning teachers (11 percent versus 23 percent for lower rated schools), less teachers without a degree (6 percent versus 17 percent), more teachers with advanced degrees (22 percent versus 13 percent), and higher average teacher salaries ($32,217 versus $29,041). These teachers also have fewer students in their classrooms (17:1 versus 19:1). In light of salary and other factors, it is not surprising that teacher turnover in higher performing schools is also lower (40 percent versus 52 percent). Charter School Finance Research both nationally and in Texas reveals that funding and financial issues pose the greatest obstacle to the establishment and success of charter schools. Results of yearly surveys of Texas open-enrollment charter school directors have consistently identified lack of start-up funds, inadequate facilities, and inadequate operating funds as the greatest challenges directors face in opening new charters, and inadequate facilities and operating funds remain key barriers in subsequent operating years (Taebel and Daniel, 2002). Similarly, more than 80 percent of charter school directors responding to the current survey identified inadequate finances and facilities as major barriers to charter school operations. In Texas, charter schools do not have taxing authority to generate revenue; thus, more than three-quarters of funding (77 percent) is derived from state revenue, compared to only 39 percent for public schools statewide. In contrast to the state, charter schools receive proportionally more federal funds (15.1 percent versus 8.5 percent). And, in 2001-02, the total per-pupil funding for charter schools was $6,762, or $1,089 less than the $7,851 for public schools statewide. Charter schools serving primarily at-risk students received about $700 more per pupil ($7,231 versus $6,526) than charters serving less than 70 percent at-risk students. This difference is mainly due to more state ($546 per pupil) and federal ($473 per pupil) monies going to charters serving primarily at-risk populations. Charter schools enrolling largely non-at-risk students receive more than $300 more per pupil from other local funding sources such as grants and donations. This suggests that these schools are more proactive in seeking grant funding, and there is greater local community and family support for these schools. Charter schools primarily spend their money on functions that directly relate to the interaction between teachers and students, such as instruction (51 percent), general administration (13 percent), plant maintenance and operation (13 percent), and school leadership (8 percent). Although traditional public schools spend less for plant maintenance and operation, school leadership, and general administration, these costs may be due to diseconomies of scale associated with small charter school size. Traditional public schools spend considerably more per pupil than charter schools in the areas of facilities construction ($1,167 versus $156) and debt services ($639 versus $29). Average per-pupil expenditures in charter schools increased by $960 between 2001 and 2002, with the largest per-pupil increase for instruction ($759). Surveyed directors recommend adding more state dollars per student to compensate for the inability of charter schools to tax locally and suggest that adjustments should compensate for the diseconomies of scale due to small charter school size. They also recommend that charter schools receive funding for facilities in the same manner that traditional public schools are funded. Charter School Autonomy Several charter school directors believe the autonomy envisioned in the original charter school legislation has been diminished over time by excessive rules and regulations (HB 6, in particular). According to directors, funding inequities between charter and traditional public schools magnify difficulties with unfunded mandates and administrative requirements. Directors believe extensive legislative provisions have made charter schools more like small independent school districts rather than the entrepreneurial organizations originally envisioned. A number of directors express concerns that low-performing charter schools continue to undermine the viability of the charter school concept. Directors, in general, welcome technical assistance from the TEA, ESCs, and other organizations to improve charter schools. In addition, they believe building strong networks among charter schools and collaborations with successful charter schools can help to address weaknesses that undermine the charter school movement. Charter Schools as a Form of School Choice Texas charter schools continue to provide educational choices that accommodate the interests and needs of families and students. Although keenly aware of existing problems, charter school directors express optimism about the potential of charter schools. Foremost, directors believe charter schools have benefited public education by providing school choice for students and parents and have served students who do not fit or have not succeeded in traditional public schools. Parents obviously agree, as the number of students enrolled in charter schools continues to soar. Minority parents, particularly African Americans and Hispanics, are seeking different educational opportunities for their children in charter schools. Evidence indicates that the kinds of informational sources parents use to select charter schools may affect their choices. In Texas, surveyed parents indicate they learn about charter schools primarily from other parents that have children at the charter school. More than half of charter school parents also report that they collect information about the academic performance of students in the charter school and the schools accountability rating, and about half of parents use written brochures or descriptions of the charter school. Only a few parents visit charter school websites. The major factors influencing parents charter school choices are good teachers and the schools education program. Other important factors include the schools academic reputation, the teaching of moral values, the approach to discipline, the ability to serve their childs specific education needs, and the reputation of school staff. As a whole, parents express high levels of satisfaction with charter schools and are more approving of their childs current charter school than the previous school their child attended. Moreover, charter school parents are more satisfied with their childs school than a comparison group of parents whose children attend traditional public schools. In particular, charter school parents are more likely to feel that their child receives sufficient attention, class sizes are small, and the school emphasizes content over test preparation. Conversely, comparison group parents are more likely to be satisfied with enrichment programs, extracurricular activities, and support services in traditional public schools. Parent participation rates are also higher for charter school parents than for comparison sample parents. The largest differences are for volunteering for school activities, visiting classrooms, and attending PTO meetings. Almost certainly, childrens feelings about their schools have a significant impact on parents decisions and vice versa. Thus, it is not surprising that charter school students indicate that the opinions of their parents and teacher quality are the most important factors influencing their decision to attend the charter school. Other influential factors reflect unacceptable conditions at their previous school (most commonly traditional public schools), such as teachers not helping enough, poor grades, and conflicts with students. Surveyed students characterized their educational experiences in charter schools. Nearly 90 percent of students say they work hard at the charter school to earn the grades they receive, and 80 percent or more cite aspects of the teacher-to-student relationship that enhance their overall learning experience. In particular, students report that charter school teachers know them by name, help them understand concepts, and encourage them to think about their future. Students, in open-ended comments, describe charter school teachers as caring, nice, and willing to help. Students also believe the smaller classes provided by charter schools allow more personal attention and one-on-one assistance from the teacher. Approximately three out of four students say that they feel safe at school, learn more at the charter school, and feel that the charter school is a good choice for them. Students are less positive about the adequacy of extracurricular activities. Despite high levels of satisfaction, only about half of charter school students who are eligible to return to the same charter school report that they will return to the school next year (55 percent). Students in schools enrolling primarily at-risk students are less likely to say that they will return (41 percent versus 62 percent). The reasons why students fail to return to charter schools are unknown. In the current evaluation, it became increasingly clear that some students and their parents are choosing charter schools to escape conditions they consider intolerable in traditional public schools. The parents of children attending charter schools serving primarily at-risk students are more likely to cite performance at a previous school and dissatisfaction with a previous school as factors affecting their school choice. Students attending lower performing charter schools are more likely to report that poor grades or getting into trouble at their previous school are influential factors in the choice of a school. Assimilation of Charter Schools into the Public School System Recent efforts at the state and regional levels that have promoted connections between charter schools and public education support systems appear to be working. Charter schools have been invited to state-level meetings and conferences sponsored by the TEA, and the ESCs have provided services for charter schools similar to those provided for other public school districts. Surveyed charter school directors appear increasingly aware that their schools are part of the larger educational community. The majority of directors report extensive reliance on support from ESCs for professional development (82 percent), technical assistance on curricular and instructional issues (78 percent), and technical assistance on PEIMS (73 percent). Moreover, more than 80 percent of directors said charter school educators have had contact with educators in traditional public schools, primarily through networking at conferences, interacting at ESC-sponsored events, or interacting during regional/state-level meetings or training sessions. Although contacts with educators in traditional schools are increasing, charter school educators are more likely to interact with educators in other charter schools in the surrounding area, and interactions with charter colleagues are more likely to occur in collaborative situations, such as meeting to provide information or technical assistance, holding organizational and planning meetings, and partnering on grant initiatives. Although the relationship between charter school and traditional educators remains relatively cooperative, interactions mainly involve the exchange of information rather than the establishment of genuine partnerships. Effects on Traditional Public Schools Some school choice advocates see charter schools as a force for public school reform, with competition spurring traditional schools and districts to higher levels of efficiency and enhanced academic achievement for students. Entrepreneurial opportunities created through charter school legislation, they assume, should promote widespread school improvement. To assess the effects of charter schools on traditional public schools, researchers surveyed 328 superintendents of public school districts within the geographic boundaries of one or more charter schools. Only 134 district officials (54 percent of respondents) were aware of charter schools in or near their districtsthus, many districts in Texas remain unaffected by charter schools. In total, 84 district officials (63 percent) report the loss of students to charter schools. Mid-size districts (3,000-9,999 students) and large districts (10,000 or more students) are more likely than small districts to report students leaving for charters. More than half of respondents also report students returning to their districts from charter schools. These officials express concerns about the students academic preparation, describing them as unprepared and behind other district students. In general, district officials report minimal programmatic effects due to charter schools. Rather than causing changes to educational programs or activities in traditional public schools, charter schools are more likely to prompt the use of student tracking systems or marketing efforts informing parents of district programs. Nearly half of 134 district officials aware of charter schools in their area (46 percent) cite financial effects. District officials most often report that charter schools affect their districts financially through losses in average daily attendance (ADA) funding and federal funding. Districts with decreasing enrollments are significantly more likely to report losses in funding and downsizing in teaching and administrative staff compared to districts with stable or increasing enrollments. On average districts report losing approximately $1.2 million in ADA funding and $108,000 in federal funding due to charter schools. All districts citing lost ADA funding of $1million or more were large districts enrolling more than 10,000 students. These districts typically had more than 10 charter schools in or near district boundaries. Only 19 district officials believe their students are affected by charter schools. Most frequently, district educators, including teachers, counselors, and administrators, are informing at-risk students about alternative learning programs or opportunities in charter schools. Although referrals to charter schools for at-risk students have increased substantially between the current and previous years survey, the vast majority of public school officials continue to raise concerns about the quality of instruction, grading standards (e.g., for assigning grades and course credits), and appropriateness of educational opportunities in charter schools. The increasing tendency to refer at-risk students to charter school, which are regarded by those making the referrals as substandard in educational quality, raises important questionsAre at-risk students in traditional public schools being counseled into charter schools to improve accountability ratings? And if so, what are the implications of such practices for students and charter schools? Accountability for Student Achievement Student achievement in charter schools remains a major problem. Even though charter schools are providing school choices welcomed by students and parents, the worth of options made available through charter schools is a concern. Findings on accountability ratings, passing rates on the state assessment, and the performance of secondary students illustrate the problem. Accountability ratings. Across six school years, Texas traditional public schools have consistently outperformed charter schools on both standard and alternative education accountability ratings. Still, noteworthy findings for the past three school years reveal steady progress by charter schools toward higher performance levels. In 2002, for example, the percentages of charter school campuses rated as Exemplary (standard system) and Commended or Acceptable (alternative system) rose markedly. Even though progress is evident, there is a clear difference between the prevalence of higher and lower achieving charter schools. While about 14 percent of charter schools earn the highest ratings (Exemplary, Recognized, Commended), the vast majority (86 percent) receive one of the lower ratings (Acceptable, Low-Performing, or Needs Peer Review). Furthermore, over the past four school years, an increasing percentage of charter school campuses have applied for ratings under the less academically rigorous alternative accountability system (29, 34, 39, and 54 percent, respectively), while the percentage of traditional public schools included in the alternative system has decreased to 3 percent. Furthermore, only 60 percent of charter school students are included in accountability ratings compared to 85 percent of students statewide. Student mobility and identification errors likely contribute to this variance. Performance on Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS). Even though a smaller and more stable group of charter school students is included in data analyses, students performance on the TAAS in reading (77 percent), mathematics (69 percent), and writing (66 percent) is well below state averages. The TAAS achievement gap between charter schools and the state average, however, is smaller in reading (14 percentage points) than in writing (23 points) or mathematics (24 points). The TAAS passing rate difference between charter schools serving primarily at-risk and non-at-risk students is small (3 to 4 points). Although TAAS passing rates for charter schools remain well below statewide rates, comparisons between 2000 and 2002 show charter schools have closed the achievement gap with traditional public schools. Comparisons between student performance in charter schools and TEA-created peer campuses with similar enrollment, grades served, region, and student demographics, allow more equitable comparisons of student performance. Still, comparisons show that that TAAS passing rates for charter schools are substantially below peer campuses; however, the performance gap between charters and peers narrowed slightly in 2002. Charter schools are especially challenged to prepare students in math. Regardless of the percentages of at-risk students served in charter schools, passing rates for TAAS mathematics are consistently lower than rates for reading. In contrast, subject-area differences are relatively small for students on peer campuses. Consistent with results for TAAS, student dropout and attendance trends favor peer campuses. Performance of secondary students. Enrollment trends reveal that, compared to traditional public schools, charter schools enroll a disproportionately larger share of high school students, particularly those in grades 9 and 10. Thus, it is important to examine outcome measures for secondary students. Compared to charter school students in lower grade levels, TAAS passing rates drop in grade 10. Tenth graders passing rates for reading (80 percent) and mathematics (66 percent) are 15 and 26 percentage points, respectively, below the state averages. Students attending charter schools with a smaller share of at-risk students have somewhat higher passing rates. Like findings for TAAS, end-of-course passing rates also reveal that secondary students in charter schools, regardless of the percentage of at-risk students enrolled, have end-of-course passing rates considerably below statewide averages for Biology, Algebra, Algebra II, English II, and U.S. History. Charter school students in schools serving primarily at-risk students have much lower passing rates than the averages for economically disadvantaged students attending traditional public schools (between 12 and 29 percentage points lower). Surveyed secondary students also reported on the kinds of grades received at their previous school and at their current charter school. Notably, in contrast to assessment outcomes detailed above, students report that their grades have improved considerably at their current charter school. More than half of students report earning Mostly As or Mostly As and Bs in the charter school, which is a nearly 20 a percentage point increase from their previous school. In contrast, the percentage of students indicating they make Cs and Ds or Ds and Fs declined substantially (about 16 percentage points). The most dramatic improvement in grades was for students enrolled in schools serving primarily at-risk students. The percentage of students reporting they earn Mostly As or Mostly As and Bs nearly doubled in the current charter school. Accordingly, students in these schools are less likely to report that they earn Cs, Ds, or Fs. In summary, although some progress is evident, charter school students are still more likely than their traditional public school peers to attend poorly performing schools. Of the 207 low-performing campuses in the state in 2001-02, 77 (37 percent) were charter schools and 34 charter schools retained their low-performing status from 2001 to 2002. The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act establishes a mandate for the improvement of schools, with low-performing schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring. Currently, many charter schools are unlikely to meet standards established under NCLB. Moreover, Texas began implementing a more rigorous statewide assessment during the 2002-03 school year and expectations for lower student passing rates on the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAKS) do not bode well for charter schools, especially considering the fact that a greater proportion of charter school high school students will be tested on the TAKS. Despite ominous prospects for charter schools overall, campus-level results reveal that a small group of charter schools are performing far better than others. And, evidence from case studies conducted as a part of the current evaluation suggests charter school traits that may foster student achievement and offers direction for charter school policies and practices. Characteristics Supporting Achievement in Charter Schools Case studies of higher and lower performing charter schools conducted as a part of the sixth-year evaluation provide insightful information linking conditions and practices in charter schools with student achievement. Even though case studies are based on a limited number of charter schools, analyses of PEIMS and AEIS data for all charter schools generally replicate findings for case studies. Emerging themes provide potential explanations for why students in some charter schools perform better than others. Although the characteristics of students attending higher performing charter schools (successful) and lower performing schools (challenged) differ, it is their different educational approaches that provide the most compelling explanations for student performance. Based on evidence from case studies, attributes associated with student academic achievement in charter schools may include supportive organizational structures, enriched curriculum and instruction, teacher and instructional quality, financial resources supporting student learning, parent commitment to academic support, and strong organizational supports and community connections. Supportive organizational structures. Successful charter schools typically have a grade span supporting a developmental educational continuum, with the foundation for learning laid in early grades leading to targeted outcomes at higher grade levels. Small school size coupled with student contact over multiple years promotes individualization, close student-teacher relationships, a disciplined learning environment, a vertically-aligned curriculum, and enhanced communication and collaboration. Schools often extend the school day, week, or year to reinforce or enrich student learning. Enriched curriculum and instruction. Successful charter schools have high expectations for all students. The states standards-based curriculum is considered a minimum, so schools enrich learning through the core knowledge curriculum, service learning, field trips, foreign language, fine arts, Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate courses, and extracurricular activities. Teacher and instructional quality. Teachers in successful charter schools are more likely to have college degrees and are paid higher salaries. Classrooms in successful charter schools are also more conducive learning environments. Teachers have more available space and instructional resources, and they arrange their classrooms to facilitate student interactions, shared conversations, and collaborative work. These teachers also create more learner-centered environments by combining opportunities for whole-group, independent, and small-group learning. Moreover, they advance student thinking and problem solving through a greater emphasis on higher-order questioning strategies that allow students to verbalize, explain, justify ideas, and reason. Financial resources supporting student learning. Successful charter schools invest more resources in student learning. A greater proportion of expenditures is allocated for instruction, with approximately $1,400 more for instruction per pupil. Additional instructional expenditures include higher salaries for teachers (approximately $8,000 more, on average, than teachers in less successful schools). Parent commitment to academic support. Parents of students attending successful charter schools may or may not be involved in day-to-day school activities due to time and work constraintshowever, they almost invariable lend strong support for their childrens academic achievement through actions such as assisting with homework, checking on progress, visiting the school, communicating regularly with teachers, and supporting disciplinary actions. Strong organizational supports and community connections. Successful charter schools have highly engaged administrative leaders who assume many roles to accomplish school goals. These schools also receive strong support from governing boards that generally include a blend of professionals, community members, and parents. Boards are typically not involved in day-to-day school management but instead provide guidance, financial oversight, and expertise needed by the school. Moreover, fund raising and resource acquisition assistance provided by governing boards of successful schools substantially enhances access to local resources that augment state funds. Additional Research While the current evaluation provides much new information on the general characteristics supporting achievement in charter schools, the study also raises questions about the kinds of educational approaches that are most effective in educating students, particularly those considered at-risk of failure or dropout. Considering findings from this study, we wonder how schools should be configured to appropriately meet the needs of at-risk students? Although investigators have learned a great deal about the way that at-risk students are served in a few charter schools, little is known statewide about the instructional approaches employed in alternative schools affiliated with either charter or traditional public school districts. In particular, it would be of interest to know whether there are differences between the approaches to alternative education in traditional public and charter schools. Furthermore, the increasing number of charter schools rated under the alternative education rating category raises questions about dual standards. More specifically, should at-risk students be held to lower standards than other children? As Texas begins to develop its new accountability system, it is an appropriate time to consider whether it is appropriate to have accountability systems with different standards based on the characteristics of students attending the school. If dual standards are allowed, policymakers should delineate precise criteria for the establishment of alternative schools based on students specific learning needs or situations (special education, adjudicated youth, residential treatment, pregnancy) and avoid using generic terms, such as at-risk, that can be interpreted in myriad ways. References Benner, A.D., Shapley, K.S., Heikes, J.E., Pieper, A.M., Ligon, G.D., & Burt, W.M. (September 2002). Technology integration in education (TIE) initiativeStatewide Survey Report. Austin, TX: Texas Center for Educational Research. Center for Education Reform. (1999). About charter schools. www.edreform.com (retrieved 9/20/99). Center for Education Reform. (2003). About charter schools. www.edreform.com (retrieved 4/8/03). Clark, T. (1997). Education reform in Texas. In Champagne, A., & Harpham, E. J. (Eds.), Texas politics: A reader. NY: W.W. Norton and Company. Cole, R., & Taebel, D. (1987). Texas, politics and public policy. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Dallas Morning News. (1984, June 23). Measure now goes to conference committee, Texas Senate approves school-reform bill. 1A. Dallas Times Herald. (1984, July 18). Big step forward. 1A. Electronic Media Research. (1999). Education reform: Charter schools. EMR Research Corner archives - The Complete K-12 Newsletter. www.ed-market.com (retrieved 11/19/02). Elliott, C., Hofer, K., & Biles, R. (1998). The world of Texas politics. NY: St. Martins Press. Ericson, J., & Silverman, D. (2001). Challenge and opportunity: The impact of charter schools on school districts. A report of the National Study of Charter Schools. RPP International. U.S. Department of Education. Fitzgerald, J., Green, K. Peebles, L., & Kern, D. (2001). The state of charter schools in Colorado 1999-2000: The characteristics, status, and performance record of Colorado charter schools. Denver, CO: Colorado Department of Education. Fuller, B. & Elmore, R.F. (1996). Who chooses? Who loses?Culture, institutions, and the unequal effects of school choice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Fuller, B., Gawlik, M., Gonzales, E., Park, S., & Gibbings, G. (2003). Charter schools and inequality: National disparities in funding, teacher quality, and student support. Berkley, CA: Policy Analysis for California Education. Gill, B.P., Timpan, P.M., Ross, K.E., & Brewer, D.J. (2001). Rhetoric versus reality: What we know and what we need to know about vouchers and charter schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Godwin, K.R., Kemerer, F.R., & Martinez, V.J. (1998). Comparing public choice and voucher programs in San Antonio. In Peterson and Hassel (Eds.), Learning from school choice. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Harrington-Lueker, D. (1994). Charter schools: Another hohum reform, or a genuine reformation thumping on your schoolhouse door? The American School Board Journal, 181(9), 22-26. Horn, J & Miron, G. (1999). Evaluation of the Michigan public school academy initiative. Kalamazoo, MI: The Evaluation Center of Western Michigan University. House Research Organization 1994 Special Legislative Report-Charter schools, vouchers and other school choice options Cuellar, Linebarger et al. 6/28/1994 House Research Organization 1995 bill conference Report Summary Public Education Revisions SB 1 Ratliff (Sadler) 5/29/95 House Research Organization 2001 Bill Analysis Open-enrollment charter school moratorium and regulation HB 6 Dunnam, Smith, Olivo, et al. (CSHB 6 by Oliveira) 4/4/2001 Martinez, V.J., Godwin, K.R., & Kemerer, F.R. (1996). Public school choice in San Antonio: Who chooses and with what effects? In Fuller and Elmore (Eds.), Who chooses? Who loses? Culture, institutions, and the unequal effects of school choice. New York: Teachers College Press. McCotter, S. (1995). Charter schools issue brief: What are charter schools? Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. http://www.ecs.org Nathan, J. (1996). Charter schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office. National Commission on Teaching and Americas Future. (2003). No dream denied: A pledge to Americas childrenSummary report. Washington, D.C. (www.nctaf.org). Shapley, K., Benner, A., & Weiher, G. (2002). Chapter IX: Commentary and policy challenges. In Texas open enrollment charter schools: Fifth year evaluation (pp. 117-125). Austin, TX: Texas Center for Educational Research. Stevens, J. H. (1999). Charter schools in Texas: An analysis of the movement and policy recommendations. Report for the Texas Business and Education Coalition (TBEC), Austin, Texas. U.S. Department of Education. (2000). The state of charter schools, fourth year report, National Study of Charter Schools. www.ed.gov/pubs/charter4rdyear/es.html (retrieved 12/3/02). Vassallo, P. (2000). More than grades: How choice boosts parental involvement and benefits children (Cato Policy Analysis No. 383). Washington, DC: The Cato Institute, Policy Analysis. Vergari, S. (2002). The charter school landscape. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press. Wayne, A.J. & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research, Spring 2003, V. 73, No. 1, pp 89-102. Vanourek, G., Manno, B., Finn, C., & Bierlan, L. (1997). Charter schools as seen by those who know them best: Students, teachers, and parents. Hudson Institute. Charter Schools in Action Project. www.edexcellence.net/chart/chart1.htm. (retrieved 6/12/03). Wohlstetter, P. & Griffin, N.C. (1998). Creating and sustaining learning communities: Early lessons from charter schools. (Research Report OP03). Consortium for Policy Research in Education: University of Pennsylvania. Appendix A Statutory Provisions Governing Texas Open-Enrollment Charter Schools 12.1012  PUBLIC EDUCATION (2) failed to satisfy generally accepted accounting standards of fiscal management; or (3) failed to comply with this subchapter, another law, or a state agency rule. (b) The action the board takes under Subsection (a) shall be based on the best interest of campus or program students, the severity of the violation, and any previous violation the campus or program has committed. LegH. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 1997, 75th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1335, effective September 1, 1997 (renumbered from Sec.12.062) 12.064. Procedure for Placement on Probation or Revocation. (a) Each board of trustees that grants a charter under this subchapter shall adopt a procedure to be used for placing on probation or revoking a charter it grants. (b) The procedure adopted under Subsection (a) must provide an opportunity for a hearing to the campus or program for which a charter is granted under this subchapter and to parents and guardians of students at the campus or in the program. A hearing under this subsection must be held on the campus or on one of the campuses in the case of a cooperative charter program. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 1.997, 75th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1335. effective. September 1, 1997 (renumbered from Sec. 12.063). 12.06. Admission. (a) Eligibility criteria for admission of students to the campus or program for which a charter is granted under this subchapter must give priority on the basis of geographic and residency considerations. After priority is given on those bases, secondary consideration may be given to a student's age, grade level, or academic credentials in general or in a specific area, as necessary for the type of program offered. (b) The campus or program may require an applicant to submit an application not later than a reasonable deadline the campus or program establishes. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 1997, 75th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1335, effective September 1, 1997 (renumbered from Sec. 12.064). SUBCHAPTER D. OPENENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL 12.101. Authorization. (a) In accordance with this subchapter, the State Board of Education may grant a charter on the application of an eligible entity for an openenrollment charter school to operate in a facility of a commercial or nonprofit entity or a school district, including a homerule school district. In this subsection, "eligible entity" means: (1) an institution of higher education as defined under Section 61.003; (2) a private or independent institution of higher education as defined under Section 61.003; (3) an organization that is exempt from taxation under Section 501(c)(3), Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C.S. Section 501(c)(3)); or (4) a governmental entity. (b) The State Board of Education may grant a charter for an openenrollment charter school only to an applicant that meets any financial, governing, and operational standards adopted by the commissioner under this subchapter.. The State Board of Education may not grant a total of more than 215 charters for an openenrollment charter school. (c) If the facility to be used for an openenrollment charter school is a school district facility, the school must be operated in the facility in accordance with the terms established by the board of trustees or other governing body of the district in an agreement governing the relationship between the school and the district. (d) An educator employed by a school district before the effective date of a charter for an openenrollment charter school operated at a school district facility may not be transferred to or employed by the openenrollment charter school over the educator's abjection. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260. effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504. effective September 1, 2001. 12.1011. [Repealed.] Repealed Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September l, 2001. 2001 Note: SECTION 36. (b) A charter for an openenrollment charter school granted under the authority of Section 12.1011 Education Code, as that section existed before repeal by this Act, is considered to have been granted under the authority of Section 12.101. Education Code. Stars. 2001 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1.504. 12.1012. Definitions. In This Subchapter: ( 1) "Charter holder'' means the entity to which a charter is granted under this subchapter. (2) "Governing body of a charter holder" means the board of directors, board of trustees, or other governing body of a charter holder. 45 EDUCATION CODE 12.1012 (3) "Governing body of an openenrollment charter school" means the board of directors, board of trustees, or other governing body of an openenrollment charter school. The term includes the governing body of a charter holder if that body acts as the governing body of the openenrollment charter school. (4) "Management company" means a person, other than a charter holder, who provides management services for an openenrollment charter school: (5) "Management services" means services related to the management or operation of an openenrollment charter school, including: (A) planning, operating, supervising, and evaluating the school's educational programs, services, and facilities; (B) making recommendations to the governing body of the school relating to the selection of school personnel; (C) managing the school's daytoday operations as its administrative manager; (D) preparing and submitting to the governing body of the school a proposed budget; (E) recommending policies to be adopted by the governing body of the school, developing appropriate procedures to implement policies adopted by the governing body of the school, and overseeing the implementation of adopted policies;. and (F) providing leadership for the attainment of student performance at the school based on the indicators adopted under Section 39.051 or by the governing body of the school. (6) "Officer of an openenrollment charter school" means: (A) the principal, director, or other chief operating officer of an openenrollment charter school; (B) an assistant principal or assistant director of an openenrollment charter school; or (C) a person charged with managing the finances of an openenrollment charter school. Leg.H. Stats, 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001: 12.102. Authority Under Charter. An openenrollment charter school: (1) shall provide instruction to students at one or more elementary or secondary grade levels as provided by the charter; (2) is governed under the governing structure described by the charter; (3) retains authority to operate under the charter contingent on satisfactory student performance as provided by the charter in accordance with Section 12.111; and (4) does not have authority to impose taxes. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995. 12.103. General Applicability of Laws, Rules, and Ordinances to OpenEnrollment Charter School. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b) or (c), an openenrollment charter school is subject to federal and state laws and rules governing public schools and to municipal zoning ordinances governing public schools. (b) An openenrollment charter school is subject to this code and rules adopted under this code only to the extent the applicability to an openenrollment charter school of a provision of this code or a rule adopted under this code is specifically provided. (c) Notwithstanding Subsection (a), a campus of an openenrollment charter school located in whole or in part in a municipality with a population of 20,000 or less is not subject to a municipal zoning ordinance governing public schools. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 2001; 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.104. Applicability of Title. (a) An openenrollment charter school has the powers granted to schools under this title. (b) An openenrollment charter school is subject to: (1) a provision of this title establishing a criminal offense; and (2) a prohibition, restriction, or requirement, as applicable, imposed by this title or a rule adopted under this title, relating to: (A) the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) to the extent necessary to monitor compliance with this subchapter as determined by the commissioner; (B) criminal history records under Subchapter C, Chapter 22; (C) reading instruments and accelerated reading instruction programs under Section 28.006; 46 12.1052 PUBLIC EDUCATION (D) satisfactory performance on assessment instruments and to accelerated instruction under Section 28.0211; (E) high school graduation under Section 28.025; (F) special education programs under Subchapter A, Chapter 29; (G) bilingual education under Subchapter B, Chapter 29; (H) prekindergarten programs under Subchapter E, Chapter 29; (I) extracurricular activities under Section 33.081; (J) discipline management practices or behavior management techniques under Section. 3.7.6021; (K) health and safety under Chapter 38; and (L) public school accountability under Subchapters B, C, D; and G, Chapter 39. (c) An openenrollment charter school is entitled to the same level of services provided to school districts by regional education service centers. The commissioner shall adopt rules that provide for the representation of open-enrollment charter schools on the boards of directors of regional education service centers. (d) The commissioner may by rule permit an open-enrollment charter school to voluntarily participate in any state program available to school districts, including a purchasing program, if the school complies with all terms of the program. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 1999, 76th Leg. Sess., Ch. 396, effective September 1, 1999; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg, Sess., Chs. 212, 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12:105. Status. An openenrollment charter school is part of the public school system of this state. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 1999, 76th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1335, effective June 19, 1999; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504. effective September 1, 2001. 12.1051. Applicability of Open Meetings and Public Information Laws. (a) With respect to the operation of an openenrollment charter school, the governing body of a charter holder and the governing body of an openenrollment charter school are considered to be governmental bodies for purposes of Chapters 551 and 552, Government Code. (b) With respect to the operation of an openenrollment charter school, any requirement in Chapter 551 or 552, Government Code that applies to a school district, the board of trustees of a school district, or public school students applies to an openenrollment charter school, the governing body of a charter holder, the governing body of an openenrollment charter school, or students attending an openenrollment charter school. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12:1052. Applicability of Laws Relating to Local Government Records. (a) With respect to the operation of an openenrollment charter school, an openenrollment charter school is considered to be a local government for purposes of Subtitle C, Title 6, Local Government Code, and Subchapter J, Chapter 441, Government Code. (b) Records of an openenrollment charter school and records of a charter holder that relate to an openenrollment charter school are government records for all purposes under state law. (c) Any requirement in Subtitle C, Title 6, Local Government Code, or Subchapter J, Chapter 441, Government Code that applies to a school district, the board of trustees of a school district, or an officer or employee of a school district applies to an openenrollment charter school, the governing body of a charter holder, the governing body of an openenrollment charterschool, or an officer or employee of an openenrollment charter school except that the records of an openenrollment charter school that ceases to operate shall be transferred in the manner prescribed by Subsection (d). (d) The records of an openenrollment charter school that ceases to operate shall be transferred in the manner specified by the commissioner to a custodian designated by the commissioner. The commissioner may designate any appropriate entity to serve as custodian, including the agency, a regional education service center, or a school district. In designating a custodian, the commissioner shall ensure that the transferred records, including student and personnel records, are transferred to a custodian capable of: (1) maintaining the records; (2) making the records readily accessible to students, parents, former school employees, and other persons entitled to access; and (3) complying with applicable state or federal law restricting access to the records. 47 EDUCATION CODE 12:1052 (e) If the charter holder of an openenrollment charter school that ceases to operate or an officer or employee of such a school refuses to transfer school records in the manner specified by the commissioner under Subsection (d), the commissioner may ask the attorney general to petition a court for recovery of the records. If the court grants the petition, the court shall award attorney's fees and court costs to the state. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.1053. Applicability of Laws Relating to Public Purchasing and Contracting (a) This section applies to an openenrollment charter school unless the school's charter otherwise describes procedures for purchasing and contracting and the procedures, are approved by the State Board of Education. (b) An openenrollment charter school is considered to be: (1) a governmental entity for purposes of: (A) Subchapter D, Chapter 2252, Government Code; and (B) Subchapter B, Chapter 271, Local Government Code; (2) a political subdivision for purposes of Subchapter A, Chapter 2254, Government Code; and (3) a local government for purposes of Sections 2256.0092256.016, Government Code. (c) To the extent consistent with this section, a requirement in a law listed in this section that applies to a school district or the board of trustees of a school district applies to an openenrollment charter school, the governing body of a charter holder, or the governing body of an openenrollment charter school. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective. September 1, 2001. 12.1054. Applicability of Laws Relating to Conflict of Interest. (a) A member of the governing body of a charter holder, a member of the governing body of an openenrollment charter school, or an officer of an openenrollment charter school is considered to be a local public official for purposes of Chapter 171, Local Government Code. For purposes of that chapter: (1) a member of the governing body of a charter holder or a member of the Governing body or officer of an openenrollment charter school is considered to have a substantial interest in a business entity if a person related to the member or officer in the third degree by consanguinity or affinity, as determined under Chapter 573, Government Code, has a substantial interest in the business entity under Section 171.002, Local Government Code; (2) notwithstanding any provision of Section 12.1054(1), an employee of an openenrollment charter school rated as academically acceptable or higher under Chapter 39 for at least two of the preceding three school years may serve as a member of the governing body of the charter holder of the governing body of the school if the employees do not constitute a quorum of the governing body or any committee of the governing body; however, all members shall comply with the requirements of Sections 171.003171.007, Local Government Code. (b) To the extent consistent with this section, a requirement in a law listed in this section that applies to a school district or the board of trustees of a school district applies to an openenrollment charter school, the governing body of a charter holder, or the governing body of an openenrollment charter school. Leg.H. Stats. 2001; 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.1055. Applicability of Nepotism Laws. (a) An openenrollment charter school is subject to a prohibition, restriction, or requirement, as applicable, imposed by state law or by a rule adopted under state law, relating to nepotism under Chapter 573, Government Code. (b) Notwithstanding Subsection (a), if an openenrollment charter school is rated academically acceptable or higher under Chapter 39 for at least two of the preceding three school years, then Chapter 573, Government Code, does not apply to that school; however, a member of the governing body of a charter holder or a member of the governing body or officer of an openenrollment charter school shall comply with the requirements of Sections 171.003171.007, Local Government Code, with respect to a personnel matter concerning a person related to the member or officer within the degree specified by Section 573.002, Government Code, as if the personnel matter were a transaction with a business entity subject to those sections, and persons defined under Sections 573.021573.025, Government Code, shall not constitute a quorum of the governing body or any committee of the governing body. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001: 12.1056: Immunity From Liability. In matters related to operation of an openenrollment charter school, an openenrollment charter school is 48 12.107 PUBLIC EDUCATION immune from liability to the same extent as a school district, and its employees and volunteers are immune from liability to the same extent as school district employees and volunteers. A member of the governing body of an openenrollment charter school or of a charter holder is immune from liability to the same extent as a school district trustee. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.1057. Membership in Teacher Retirement System of Texas. (a) An employee of an openenrollment charter school who qualifies for membership in the Teacher Retirement System of Texas shall be covered under the system to the same extent a qualified employee of a school district is covered. (b) For each employee of the school covered under the system, the school is responsible for making any contribution that otherwise would be the legal responsibility of the school district, and the state is responsible for making contributions to the same extent it would be legally responsible if the employee were a school district employee. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.106. State Funding. (a) A charter holder is entitled to receive for the openenrollment charter school funding under Chapter 42 as if the school were a school district without a tier one local share for purposes of Section 42.253 and without any local revenue ("LR") for purposes of Section 42.302. In determining funding for an openenrollment charter school, adjustments under Sections 42.102, 42.103, 42.104, and 42.105 and the district enrichment tax rate ("DTR") under Section 42.302 are based on the average adjustment and average district enrichment tax rate for the state. (b) An openenrollment charter school is entitled to funds that are available to school districts from the agency or the commissioner in the form of grants or other discretionary funding unless the statute authorizing the funding explicitly provides that openenrollment charter schools are not entitled to the funding. (c) The commissioner may adopt rules to provide and account for state funding of openenrollment charter schools under this section. A rule adopted under this section may be similar to a provision of this code that is not similar to Section 12.104(b) if the commissioner determines that the rule is related to financing of openenrollment charter schools and is necessary or prudent to provide or account for state funds. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch: 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1; 2001. 2001 Note: SECTION 40. (a) The change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act, applies beginning with the 20012002 school year, except as provided by this section. (b) An openenrollment charter school operating on September 1. 2001, is funded as follows: (I) for the 20012002 and 20022003 school years, the school receives funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001; (2) for the 20032004 school year, the school receives 90 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 10 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (3) for the 20042005 school year, the school receives 80 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 20 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code as amended by this Act; (4) for the 20052006 school year, the school receives 70 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 30 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (5) for the 20062007 school year, the school receives 60 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 40 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.1.06 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (6) for the 20072008 school year, the school receives 50 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 50 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (7) for the 20082009 school year, the school receives 40 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31 , 2001, and 60 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this act; (8) for the 20092010 school year, the school receives 30 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 70 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this act; (9) for the 20102011 school year, the school receives 20 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 80 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (l0) for the 20112012 school year, the school receives 10 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 90 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections, 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; and (11) for the 20122013 school year and subsequent school years, the school receives 100 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act. (c) The commissioner of education may adopt rules as necessary to implement this section. Slats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 150.1. 12.107. Status and Use of Funds. (a) Funds received under Section 12.106 after September 1, 2001, by a charter holder: 49 12.107 EDUCATION CODE (1) are considered to be public funds for all purposes under state law; (2) are held in trust by the charter holder for the benefit of the students of the openenrollment charter school; (3) may be used only for a purpose for which a school may use local funds under Section 45.105(c); and (4) pending their use, must be deposited into a bank, as defined by Section 45.201, with which the charter holder has entered into a depository contract. (b) A charter holder shall deliver to the agency a copy of the depository contract between the charter holder and any bank into which state funds are deposited. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 2001 Note: SECTION 40. (a) The change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act, applies beginning with the 20012002 school year, except as provided by this section. (b) An openenrollment charter school operating on September 1, 2001, is funded as follows: (1) for the 20012002 and 20022003 school years, the school receives funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001; (2) for the 20032004 school year, the school receives 90 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 10 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (3) for the 20042005 school year, the school receives 80 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 20 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (4) for the 20052006 school year, the school receives 70 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 30 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (5) for the 20062007 school year, the school receives 60 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 40 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended. by this Act; (6) for the 20072008 school year, the school receives 50 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 50 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (7) for the 20082009 school year, the school receives 40 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 60 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act: (8) for the 20092010 school year, the school receives 30 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 70 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (9) for the 20102011 school year, the school receives 20 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 80 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; (10) for the 20112012 school year, the school receives 10 percent of its funding according to the law in effect on August 31, 2001, and 90 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act; and (11) for the 20122013 school year and subsequent school years, the school receives 100 percent of its funding according to the change in law made by Sections 12.106 and 12.107, Education Code, as amended by this Act. (c) The commissioner of education may adopt rules as necessary to implement this section. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504. 12.1071. Effect of Accepting State Funding. (a) A charter holder who accepts state funds under Section 12.106 after the effective date of a provision of this subchapter agrees to be subject to that provision, regardless of the date on which the charter holder's charter was granted. (b) A charter holder who accepts state funds under Section 12.106 after September 1, 2001, agrees to accept all liability under this subchapter for any funds accepted under that section before September 1, 2001. This subsection does not create liability for charter holder conduct occurring before September 1, 2001. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.108. Tuition and Fees Restricted. (a) An openenrollment charter school may not charge tuition to an eligible student who applies under Section 12.117. (h) The governing body of an openenrollment charter school may require a student to pay any fee that the board of trustees of a school district may charge under Section 11.158(a). The governing body may not require a student to pay a fee that the board of trustees of a school district may not charge under Section 11.158(b). Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.109. Transportation. An openenrollment charter school shall provide transportation to each student attending the school to the same extent a school district is required by law to provide transportation to district students. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995. 12.110. Application. (a) The State Board of Education shall adopt: (1) an application form and a procedure that must be used to apply for a charter for an openenrollment charter school; and 50  PUBLIC EDUCATION (2) criteria to use in selecting a program for which to grant a charter. (b) The application form must provide for including the information required under Section 12.111 to be contained in a charter. (c) As part of the application procedure, the board may require a petition supporting a charter for a school signed by a specified number of parents or guardians of schoolage children residing in the area in which a school is proposed or may hold a public hearing to determine parental support for the school. (d) The board may approve or deny an application based on criteria it adopts. The criteria the board adopts must include: (1) criteria relating to improving student performance and encouraging innovative programs; and (2) a statement from any school district whose enrollment is likely to be affected by the openenrollment charter school, including information relating to any financial difficulty that a loss in enrollment may have on the district. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995. 12.1101. Notification of Charter Application. The commissioner by rule shall adopt a procedure for providing notice to the following persons on receipt by the State Board of Education of an application for a charter for an openenrollment charter school under Section 12.110: (1) the board of trustees of each school district from which the proposed openenrollment charter school is likely to draw students, as determined by the commissioner; and (2) each member of the legislature that represents the geographic area to be served by the proposed school, as determined by the commissioner. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504. effective September 1, 2001. 2001 Note: SECTION 42. Section 12.1101, Education Code, as added by this Act, applies only to an application for a charter for an openenrollment charter school received by the State Board of Education on or after the effective date of this Act. An application received before the effective date of this Act is governed by the law as it existed immediately before the effective date of this Act, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504. 12.111. Content. Each charter granted under this subchapter must: (1) describe the educational program to be offered, which must include the required curriculum as provided by Section 28.002: (2) specify the period for which the charter or any charter renewal is valid; (3) provide that continuation or renewal of the charter is contingent on acceptable student performance on assessment instruments adopted under Subchapter B, Chapter 39, and on compliance with any accountability provision specified by the charter, by a deadline or at intervals specified by the charter; (4) establish the level of student performance that is considered acceptable for purposes of Subdivision (3); (5) specify any basis, in addition to a basis specified by this subchapter, on which the charter may he placed on probation or revoked or on which renewal of the charter may be denied; (6) prohibit discrimination in admission policy on the basis of sex, national origin, ethnicity, religion, disability, academic, artistic, or athletic ability; or the district the child would otherwise attend in accordance, with this code, although the charter may provide for the exclusion of a student who has a documented history of a criminal offense, a juvenile court adjudication, or discipline problems under Subchapter A, Chapter 37; (7) specify the grade levels to be offered; (8) describe the governing structure of the program, including: (A) the officer positions designated; (B) the manner in which officers are selected and removed from office; (C) the manner in which members of the governing body of the school are selected and removed from office; (D) the manner in which vacancies on that governing body are filled; (E) the term for which members of that governing body serve; and (F) whether the terms were to be staggered: (9) specify the powers or duties of the governing body of the school that the governing body may delegate to an officer; (10) specify the manner in which the school will distribute to parents information related to the qualifications of each professional employee of the program, including any professional or educational degree held by each employee, a statement of any certification under Subchapter B, Chapter 21, held by each employee, and any relevant experience of each employee: 51  EDUCATION CODE (11) describe the process by which the person providing the program will adopt an annual budget; (12) describe the manner in which an annual audit of the financial and programmatic operations of the program is to be conducted, including the manner in which the person providing the program will provide information necessary for the school district in which the program is located to participate, as required by this code or by State Board of Education rule, in the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS); (13) describe the facilities to be used; (14) describe the geographical area served by the program; and (15) specify any type of enrollment criteria to be used. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 1999, 76th Leg. Sess., Ch, 1335, effective June 19, 1999; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 1999 Note: SECTION 10. (a) Each openenrollment charter school for which a charter is granted before September 1, 1999, shall revise its charter as necessary to comply with Section 12.111, Education Code, as amended by this Act, not later than January 1, 2000. (b) The entity to which a charter for an openenrollment charter school is granted before September 1, 1999, shall file a copy of its bylaws or other document as required by Section 11119(a), Education Code, as added by this Act, not later than January 1, 2000. Stats. 1999, 76th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1335. 12.112. Form. A charter for an openenrollment charter school shall be in the form of a written contract signed by the chair of the State Board of Education and the chief operating officer of the school. Leg.H. Stats. 1995; 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995. 12.113. Charter Granted. (a) Each charter the State Board of Education grants for an openenrollment charter school must: (1) satisfy this subchapter; and (2) include the information that is required under Section 12.111 consistent with the information provided in the application and any modification the board requires. (b) The grant of a charter under this subchapter does not create an entitlement to a renewal of a charter on the same terms as it was originally issued. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess.,Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 2001. 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504. effective September 1, 2001. 12.114. Revision. A revision of a charter of an openenrollment charter school may be made only with the approval of the commissioner. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 2001 Note: SECTION 41. (a) The change in law made by Section 12.114, Education Code, as amended by this Act, applies to a revision proposed by an openenrollment charter school that has not been approved by the State Board of Education before September 1, 2001, regardless of the date on which the school proposed the revision. (b) The change in law made by Section 12.127, Education Code, as added by this Act, applies only to a cause of action that accrues on or after September 1, 2001. A cause of action that accrued before September 1, 2001, is governed by the law in effect at the time the cause of action accrued, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504. 12.115. Basis for Modification, Placement on Probation, Revocation, or Denial of Renewal. (a) The commissioner may modify, place on probation, revoke, or deny renewal of the charter of an openenrollment charter school if the commissioner determines that the charter holder: (1) committed a material violation of the charter, including failure to satisfy accountability provisions prescribed by the charter; (2) failed to satisfy generally accepted accounting standards of fiscal management; (3) failed to protect the health, safety, or welfare of the students enrolled at the school; or (4) failed to comply with this subchapter or another applicable law or rule. (b) The action the commissioner takes under Subsection (a) shall be based on the best interest of the school's students, the severity of the violation, and any previous violation the school has committed. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995: Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1501, effective September 1. 12.116. Procedure for Modification, Placement on Probation, Revocation, or Denial of Renewal. (a) The commissioner shall adopt a procedure to be used for modifying, placing on probation, revoking, or denying renewal of the charter of an openenrollment charter school. (b) The procedure adopted under Subsection (a) must provide an opportunity for a hearing to the charter holder 52  PUBLIC EDUCATION and to parents and guardians of students in the school. A hearing under this subsection must be held at the facility at which the program is operated. (c) Chapter 2001, Government Code, does not apply to a hearing that is related to a modification, placement on probation, revocation, or denial of renewal under this subchapter. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.1161. Effect of Revocation, Denial of Renewal, or Surrender of Charter. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), if the commissioner revokes or denies the renewal of a charter of an openenrollment charter school, or if an openenrollment charter school surrenders its charter, the school may not: (1) continue to operate under this subchapter; or (2) receive state funds under this subchapter. (b) An openenrollment charter school may continue to operate and receive state funds under this subchapter for the remainder of a school year if the commissioner denies renewal of the school's charter before the completion of that school year. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.1162. Additional Sanctions. (a) The commissioner shall take any of the actions described by Subsection (b) or by Section 39.131(a), to the extent the commissioner determines necessary, if an openenrollment charter school, as determined by a report issued under Section 39.076(b): (1) commits a material violation of the school's charter; (2) fails to satisfy generally accepted accounting standards of fiscal management; or (3) fails to comply with this subchapter or another applicable rule or law. (b) The commissioner may temporarily withhold funding, suspend the authority of an openenrollment charter school to operate, or take any other reasonable action the commissioner determines necessary to protect the health, safety, or welfare of students enrolled at the school based on evidence that conditions at the school present a danger to the health, safety, or welfare of the students. (c) After the commissioner acts under Subsection (b), the openenrollment charter school may not receive funding and may not resume operating until a determination is made that: (1) despite initial evidence, the conditions at the school do not present a danger or material harm to the health, safety, or welfare of students; or (2) the conditions at the school that presented a danger of material harm to the health, safety, or welfare of students have been corrected. (d) Not later than the third business day after the date the commissioner acts under Subsection (b), the commissioner shall provide the charter holder an opportunity for a hearing. (e) Immediately after a hearing under Subsection (d), the commissioner must cease the action under Subsection (b) or initiate action under Section 12.116. (f) The commissioner shall adopt rules implementing this section. Chapter 2001, Government Code, does not apply to a hearing under this section. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.1163. Audit by Commissioner. (a) To the extent consistent with Subsection (b), the commissioner may audit the records of: (1) an openenrollment charter school; (2) a charter holder; and (3) a management company. (b) An audit under Subsection (a) must be limited to matters directly related to the management or operation of an openenrollment charter school, including any financial and administrative records. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.117. Admission. (a) For admission to an openenrollment charter school, the governing body of the school shall: (1) require the applicant to complete and submit an application not later than a reasonable deadline the school establishes; and (2) on receipt of more acceptable applications for admission under this section than available positions in the school: (A) fill the available positions by lottery; or (B) subject to Subsection (b), fill the available positions in the order in which applications received before the application deadline were received. (b) An openenrollment charter school may fill applications for admission under Subsection (a)(2)(B) only if the 53  EDUCATION CODE school published a notice of the opportunity to apply for admission to the school. A notice published under this subsection must: (1) state the application deadline; and (2) be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the community in which the school is located not later than the seventh day before the application deadline. Leg.H. Stats. 1995, 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260, effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.118. Evaluation of OpenEnrollment Charter Schools. (a) The commissioner shall designate an impartial organization with experience in evaluating school choice programs to conduct an annual evaluation of open-enrollment charter schools. (b) All evaluation under this section trust include consideration of the following items before implementing the charter and after implementing the charter: (1) students' scores on assessment instruments administered under Subchapter B, Chapter 39; (2) student attendance; (3) students' grades; (4) incidents involving student discipline; (5) socioeconomic data on students' families; (6) parents' satisfaction with their children's schools; and (7) students' satisfaction with their schools. (c) The evaluation of openenrollment charter schools must also include an evaluation of: (1) the costs of instruction, administration, and transportation incurred by openenrollment charter schools; (2) the effect of openenrollment charter schools on school districts and on teachers, students, and parents in those districts; and (3) other issues, as determined by the commissioner. Leg.H. Stats. 1995. 74th Leg. Sess., Ch. 260. effective May 30, 1995; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.119. Bylaws; Annual Report. (a) A charter holder shall file with the State Board of Education a copy of its articles of incorporation and bylaws, or comparable documents if the charter holder does not have articles of incorporation or bylaws, within the period and in the manner prescribed by the board. (b) Each year within the period and in a form prescribed by the State Board of Education, each openenrollment charter school shall file with the board the following information: (1) the name, address, and telephone number of each officer and member of the governing body of the openenrollment charter school; and (2) the amount of annual compensation the open enrollment charter school pays to each officer and member of the governing body. (c) On request, the State Board of Education shall provide the information required by this section and Section 12.111(8) to a member of the public. The board may charge a reasonable fee to cover the board's cost in providing the information. Leg.H. Stats. 1999, 76th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1335, effective June 19, 1999; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 1999 Note: SECTION 10. (a) Each openenrollment. charter school for which a charter is granted before September 1, 1999, shall revise its charter as necessary, to comply with Section 12.111, Education Code, as amended by this Act, not later than January 1, 2000. (b) The entity to which a charter for an openenrollment charter school is granted before September 1, 1999, shall file a copy of its bylaws or other document as required by Section 12.119(a), Education Code, as added by this Act, not later than January 1, 2000. Stats. 1999, 76th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1335. 12.120. Restrictions on Serving As Member of Governing Body of Charter Holder or OpenEnrollment Charter School or As Officer or Employee. (a) A person may not serve as a member of the governing body of a charter holder, as a member of the governing body of an openenrollment charter school, or as an officer or employee of an openenrollment charter school if the person: (1) has been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude; (2) has been convicted of an offense listed in Section 37.007(a); (3) has been convicted of an offense listed in Article 62.01(5), Criminal Procedure Code; or (4) has a substantial interest in a management company. (b) For purposes of Subsection (a)(4), a person has a substantial interest in a management company if the person: (1) has a controlling interest in the company; (2) owns more than 10 percent of the voting interest in the company; 54 12.124 PUBLIC EDUCATION (3) owns more than $25,000 of the fair market value of the company; (4) has a direct or indirect participating interest by shares, stock, or otherwise, regardless of whether voting rights are included, in more than 10 percent of the profits, proceeds, or capital gains of the company; (5) is a member of the board of directors or other governing body of the company; (6) serves as an elected officer of the company; or (7) is an employee of the company. Leg.H. Stats. 1999, 76th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1335, effective June 19, 1999; Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.121. Responsibility for OpenEnrollment Charter School. The governing body of an openenrollment charter school is responsible for the management, operation, and accountability of the school, regardless of whether the governing body delegates the governing body's powers and duties to another person. Leg.H. Stats. 2001; 77th Leg: Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.122. Liability of Members of Governing Body of OpenEnrollment Charter School: (a) Notwithstanding the Texas NonProfit Corporation Act (Article 1396101 et seq., Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes) or other law, on request of the commissioner, the attorney general may bring suit against a member of the governing body of an openenrollment charter school for breach of a fiduciary duty by the member, including misapplication of public funds. (b) The attorney general may bring suit under Subsection (a) for: (1) damages; (2) injunctive relief; or (3) any other equitable remedy determined to be appropriate by the court. (c) This section is cumulative of all other remedies. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.123. Training for Members of Governing Body of School and Officers. (a) The commissioner shall adopt rules prescribing training for: (1) members of governing bodies of openenrollment charter schools; and (2) officers of openenrollment charter schools. (b) The rules adopted under Subsection (a) may: (1) specify the minimum amount and frequency of the training; (2) require the training to be provided by: (A) the agency and regional education service centers; (B) entities other than the agency and service centers, subject to approval by the commissioner; or (C) both the agency, service centers, and other entities; and (3) require training to be provided concerning: (A) basic school law, including school finance; (B) health and safety issues; (C) accountability requirements related to the use of public funds; and (D) other requirements relating to accountability to the public, such as open meetings., requirements under Chapter 551, Government Code, and public information requirements under Chapter 552, Government Code. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 2001 Note: SECTION 37. Not later than January 1, 2002, the commissioner of education shall adopt rules relating to training for the members of governing bodies and officers of openenrollment charter schools, as required by Section 12.123, Education Code, as added by this Act. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch.. 1504. 12.124. Loans From Management Company Prohibited: (a) The charter holder or the governing body of an openenrollment charter school may not accept a loan from a management company that has a contract to provide management services to: (1) that charter school; or (2) another charter school that operates under a charter granted to the charter holder. (b) A charter holder or the governing body of an openenrollment charter school that accepts a loan from a management company may not enter into a contract with that management company to provide management services to the school. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess:, Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 55 EDUCATION CODE 12.125 12.125. Contract for Management Services. Any contract, including a contract renewal, between an openenrollment charter school and a management company proposing to provide management services to the school must require the management company to maintain all records related to the management services separately from any other records of the management company. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504; effective September 1, 2001. 12.126. Certain Management Services Contracts Prohibited. The commissioner may prohibit, deny renewal of, suspend, or revoke a contract between an openenrollment charter school and a management company providing management services to the school if the commissioner determines that the management company has: (1) failed to provide educational or related services in compliance with the company's contractual or other legal obligation to any openenrollment charter, school in this state or to any other similar school in another state; (2) failed to protect the health, safety, or welfare of the students enrolled at an openenrollment charter school served by the company; (3) violated this subchapter or a rule adopted under this subchapter; or (4) otherwise failed to comply with any contractual or other legal obligation to provide services to the school. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.127. Liability of Management Company. (a) A management company that provides management services to an openenrollment charter school is liable for damages incurred by the state as a result of the failure of the company to comply with its contractual or other legal obligation to provide services to the school. (b) On request of the commissioner, the attorney general may bring suit on behalf of the state against a management company liable under Subsection (a) for: (1) damages, including any state funding received by the company and any consequential damages suffered by the state; (2) injunctive relief; or (3) any other equitable remedy determined to be appropriate by the court. (c) This section is cumulative of all other remedies and does not affect: (1) the liability of a management company to the charter holder; or (2) the liability of a charter holder, a member of the governing body of a charter holder, or a member of the governing body of an openenrollment charter school to the state. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 2001 Note: SECTION 41. (a) The change in law made by Section 12.114, Education Code, as amended by this Act, applies to a revision proposed by an openenrollment charter school that has not been approved by the State Board of Education before September 1, 2001, regardless of the date on which the school proposed the revision. (b) The change in law made by Section 12.127, Education Code, as added by this Act, applies only to a cause of action that accrues on or after September 1, 2001. A cause of action that accrued before September 1, 2001, is governed by the law in effect at the time the cause of action accrued, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504. 12.128. Property Purchased or Leased with State Funds. (a) Property purchased or leased with funds received by a charter holder under Section 12.106 after September 1, 2001: (1) is considered to be public property for all purposes under state law; (2) is held in trust by the charter holder for the benefit of the students of the openenrollment charter school; and (3) may be used only for a purpose for which a school district may use school district property. (b) if at least 50 percent of the funds used by a charter holder to purchase real property are funds received under Section 12.106 before September 1, 2001, the property is considered to be public property to the extent it was purchased with those funds. (c) The commissioner shall: (1) take possession and assume control of the property described by Subsection (a) of an openenrollment charter school that ceases to operate; and (2) supervise the disposition of the property in accordance with law. (d) The commissioner may adopt rules necessary to administer this section. (e) This section does not affect a security interest in or lien on property established by a creditor in compliance with law if the security interest or lien arose in connection with the sale or lease of the property to the charter holder. Leg.H. Stats. 2001. 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1501. effective September 1, 2001. 56 12.156 PUBLIC EDUCATION 12.129. Minimum Teacher Qualifications. A person employed as a teacher by an openenrollment charter school must hold a high school diploma. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.130. Notice of Teacher Qualifications. Each openenrollment charter school shall provide to the parent or guardian of each student enrolled in the school written notice of the qualifications of each teacher employed by the school. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. SUBCHAPTER E. COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY CHARTER SCHOOL 12.151. Definition. In this subchapter, "public senior college or university" has the meaning assigned by Section 61.003. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.152. Authorization: (a) In accordance with this subchapter and Subchapter D, the State Board of Education may grant a charter on the application of a public senior college or university for an openenrollment charter school to operate on the campus of the public senior college or university or in the same county in which the campus of the public senior college or university is located. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.153. Rules. The commissioner may adopt rules to implement this subchapter. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.154. Content. Notwithstanding Section 12.11.0(d), the State Board of Education may grant a charter under this subchapter only if the following criteria are satisfied in the public senior college's or university's application, as determined by the State Board of Education: (1) the college or university charter school's educational program must include innovative teaching methods; (2) the college or university charter school's educational program must be implemented under the direct supervision of a member of the teaching or research faculty of the public senior college or university; (3) the faculty member supervising the college or university charter school's educational program must have substantial experience and expertise in education research, teacher education, classroom instruction, or educational administration; (4) the college or university charter school's educational program must be designed to meet specific goals described in the charter, including improving student performance, and each aspect of the program must be directed toward the attainment of the goals; (5) the attainment of the college or university charter school's educational program goals must be measured using specific, objective standards set forth in the charter, including assessment methods and a time frame; and (6) the financial operations of the college or university charter school must be supervised by the business office of the public senior college or university. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch.. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.155. School Name. The name of a college or university charter school must include the name of the public senior college or university operating the school. Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess., Ch. 1504, effective September 1, 2001. 12.156. Applicability of Certain Provisions. (a) Except as otherwise provided by this subchapter, Subchapter D applies to a college or university charter school as though the college or university charter school were granted a charter under that subchapter. (b) A charter granted under this subchapter is not considered for purposes of the limit on the number of openenrollment charter schools imposed by Section 12.101(b). Leg.H. Stats. 2001, 77th Leg. Sess,. Ch. 1504. effective September 1, 2001. CHAPTER 13. CREATION, CONSOLIDATION, AND ABOLITION OF A DISTRICT SUBCHAPTER :A. GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 13.001: Definition. 13.002: Permitted Frequency of Proposed Action Appendix B Appendix B1: Charter School Characteristics Appendix B2: Charter School Demographics Appendix B1 Characteristics of At-Risk and Not At-Risk Charter School Campuses Campus LocationYears of Operation Rating Enrollment GradesStudent-Teacher RatioExpenditure Per StudentCharter Schools >=70% At-RiskA W Brown-Fellowship Charter SchoolDallas3Exemplary450PK - 0530.0$4,439Academy of Beaumont Beaumont3Acceptable206PK - 0812.9$6,912Academy of Careers and TechnologiesSan Antonio3Needs Peer Review13609 - 1222.7$4,291Accelerated Intermediate Charter SchoolHouston2Not Rated10406 - 0814.3$9,844Alpha Ii San Antonio4 or moreLow Performing202PK - 0616.7$4,568Amigos Por Vida-Friends For Life CharterHouston3Low Performing366PK - 0624.4$5,634Azleway Charter School Tyler1Not Rated7101 - 1214.2$12,862Benji's Special Education Academy Houston3Low Performing356PK - 1215.3$1,798Big Springs Charter School Leakey2Not Rated1606 - 095.5$33,446Blessed Sacrament Acad Charter H SSan Antonio4 or moreAcceptable19909 - 1221.9$9,322Burnett-Bayland Home Houston4 or moreNot Rated6805 - 1010.9$8,219Burnett-Bayland Reception Center Houston4 or moreAcceptable14505 - 1210.9$8,219Career Plus Learning Academy San Antonio3Low Performing2906 - 0936.2$11,339Cedar Crest 3Not Rated6401 - 1115.3$5,638Cedar Ridge Charter School Lometa4 or moreLow Performing74PK - 128.5$16,595Children First Academy of Houston Houston3Acceptable413PK - 0720.6$4,835Children First of Dallas Dallas3Acceptable330PK - 0718.3$4,707Coastal Bend Youth City Driscoll4 or moreLow Performing5606 - 128.2$12,660Dallas County Juvenile Justice Dallas3Acceptable57806 - 1214.3$4,074Delta 3 Boot Camp Houston4 or moreNot Rated3906 - 1110.9$8,219Dr. M. L. Garza-Gonzalez Charter SchoolCorpus Christi4 or moreAcceptable27506 - 12$2,789Eagle Advantage CharterDallas4 or moreAcceptable172KG - 0817.1$5,757Eagle Project Laredo Lewisville3Acceptable11704 - 1223.4$5,259Eagle Project Waco Lewisville3Acceptable8106 - 1222.5$5,100East Campus 3Low Performing489PK - 120.0East Fort Worth Montessori Fort Worth3Acceptable154PK - 0115.3$5,638El Paso Academy East El Paso2Needs Peer Review34009 - 1223.4$5,357Encino School Encino4 or moreExemplary67PK - 0816.8$6,365Eoac Waco Charter School Waco4 or moreAcceptable173KG - 0519.5$8,966Escuela De Las Americas San Antonio3Exemplary73PK - 0216.0$5,896Notes. indicates data not available in AEIS. Extreme Value indicates implausibly large per pupil expenditures reported by AEIS. Campus LocationYears of Operation Rating Enrollment GradesStudent-Teacher RatioExpenditure Per StudentFort Worth Can Academy Ft Worth3Acceptable21709 - 1217.8$8,304Fruit of Excellence School Elgin3Acceptable8801 1214.3$6,809G C C L R Emergency ShelterCorpus Christi4 or moreNot Rated3202 11$2,789Gabriel Tafolla Charter School Uvalde4 or moreNeeds Peer Review181PK 1210.7$6,443Gateway Academy (Student Alternative)Laredo3Acceptable19309 1229.7$3,919Gateway Charter Academy Dallas2Low Performing110KG 0611.0$12,966George Gervin Charter San Antonio4 or moreAcceptable16209 1219.5$9,334George I. Sanchez Alternative 4 or moreNot Rated1707 1046.6$7,383George I. Sanchez H S Houston4 or moreAcceptable457PK 1246.6$7,383Girls & Boys Prep Academy Houston4 or moreAcceptable9401 0513.4$4,995Guardian Angel Performance AcademySan Antonio3Low Performing5606 0811.1$9,689Gulf Shores Academy Houston3Needs Peer Review3707 121.0Extreme ValueaGulf Shores Charter At Covenant HouseHouston3Needs Peer Review509 091.0Extreme ValueaGulf Shores Charter At SanctusHouston3Acceptable307 081.0Extreme ValueaHarris County Juvenile Detention CenterHouston4 or moreNot Rated18904 1210.9$8,219Harris County Youth Village Seabrook4 or moreAcceptable11107 1010.9$8,219Heights Charter School Houston3Acceptable22608 1214.5$5,131Higgs Carter King Gifted & TalentedSan Antonio4 or moreAcceptable233PK 09$5,600Houston Heights Learning Academy Houston3Needs Peer Review118PK 0423.7$6,121I Am That I Am Academy Dallas3Low Performing12705 1212.6$4,840Idea Academy The Donna2Recognized24704 0819.3$6,902Impact Charter Houston3Acceptable187PK 0616.2$4,449Inspired Vision Mesquite2Low Performing14103 0813.3$6,157Inspired Vision Academy Dallas2Low Performing123PK 0213.3$6,157Jamies House Charter School Houston3Not Rated6106 1210.2$7,269Jesse Jackson Academy Houston3Low Performing23309 1233.3$6,128John H. Wood Charter School San Antonio4 or moreCommended13506 12$13,305Katy-Hockley Boot Camp Katy4 or moreAcceptable13406 1110.9$8,219Kipp Academy Houston4 or moreExemplary33805 0920.2$10,378La Amistad Love & Learning AcademyHouston3Not Rated127PK KG22.6$5,792Marywood Austin4 or moreNot Rated609 128.2$15,955Miracle Farm Austin4 or moreAcceptable2008 128.2$15,955New Frontiers Charter School San Antonio4 or moreNeeds Peer Review641KG 0824.8$6,959Northwest Math, Science, & Lang. Acad.Houston3Low Performing163PK 0516.1$6,167Northwest Preparatory Houston2Not Rated138PK 0611.7$9,710Notes. indicates data not available in AEIS. Extreme Value indicates implausibly large per pupil expenditures reported by AEIS. Campus LocationYears of Operation Rating Enrollment GradesStudent-Teacher RatioExpenditure Per StudentNorthwest Preparatory Campus #2 Houston2Not Rated3702 0811.7$9,710Nova Charter School Dallas4 or moreAcceptable69PK 0217.3$8,347Oak Cliff Academy (Dallas) Dallas3Needs Peer Review674KG 0719.8$0One Stop Multiservice Mcallen4 or moreLow Performing83PK 1227.1Extreme ValueaOne Stop Multiservice Mcallen4 or moreNot Rated43PK 1227.1Extreme ValueaOne Stop Multiservice H S Mcallen4 or moreAcceptable199PK 1227.1Extreme ValueaPanola Carthage2Needs Peer Review7409 1218.8$7,263Pathfinder Camp Austin4 or moreNot Rated2306 108.2$15,955Positive Solutions Charter School San Antonio3Acceptable24709 1231.2$3,409Prepared Table 3Low Performing501PK 100.0Radiance Academy of Learning San Antonio3Needs Peer Review149PK 1011.2$6,971Rapoport Academy Waco4 or moreAcceptable136PK 0410.1$8,581Raul Yzaguirre School For Success Houston4 or moreAcceptable645PK 1217.2$6,064Raven School New Waverly4 or moreAcceptable20109 1211.7$9,103Rise Academy Lubbock3Not Rated100PK 0217.3$4,481Rylie Faith Family Academy Dallas3Low Performing781PK 1215.6$6,633San Antonio Technology Academy San Antonio2Not Rated9209 0916.4$5,527Sentry Technology Prep School Mcallen3Needs Peer Review19109 1242.9$5,170Ser-NinosHouston4 or moreRecognized370PK 0513.9$7,248Settlement Homey Austin4 or moreNot Rated2204 118.2$15,955Southwest Campus 3Not Rated297PK 080.0T-Care Austin4 or moreNot Rated3706 128.2$15,955Technology Education Charter H S Weslaco4 or moreAcceptable11609 1213.0$7,600Tekoa Academy Port Arthur3Low Performing134PK 077.6$7,909Texas Serenity Academy Conroe3Acceptable2607 116.5$10,112Texas Serenity Academy (Bayshore) Houston3Needs Peer Review1208 093.0$14,098The Basic Center San Antonio4 or moreAcceptable2709 1219.5$9,334The Zoe Learning Academy Houston2Not Rated167KG 0616.7$9,379Theresa B Lee Academy Fort Worth3Exemplary24009 1240.0$7,402TOVAS-Tactile Oral Visual Alt SystemTemple3Needs Peer Review161PK 1016.1$6,282Two Dimensions Preparatory AcademyHouston3Acceptable277PK 0513.2$6,428Valley High Harlingen3Low Performing382PK 1216.8Vanguard Academy Pharr1Not Rated48PK 0310.0$11,014Wa-Set Preparatory Academy Houston3Low Performing168PK 0524.0$4,978Wings For Life Austin4 or moreNot Rated710 128.2$15,955Notes. indicates data not available in AEIS. Extreme Value indicates implausibly large per pupil expenditures reported by AEIS. Campus LocationYears of Operation Rating Enrollment GradesStudent-Teacher RatioExpenditure Per StudentCharter Schools <70% At-RiskA+ Academy Lancaster2Low Performing154PK 0825.7$6,814Academy of Accelerated Learning Houston4 or moreNot Rated514PK 0923.6$3,588Academy of Dallas Dallas3Acceptable376PK 0815.0$6,534Academy of Houston Houston4 or moreLow Performing479KG 0814.1$6,013Academy of Skills & Knowledge Tyler4 or moreLow Performing309KG 0812.8$5,084Alief Montessori Community School Houston4 or moreExemplary135PK 0617.0$4,987Alpha Charter School Garland2Needs Peer Review144KG 1211.3$5,442Alphonso Crutchs-Life Support CenterHouston3Needs Peer Review123506 1228.3$4,121American Academy of Excellence CharterHouston3Low Performing37007 1220.6$3,343American Youth Works Charter SchoolAustin4 or moreAcceptable25709 1215.5$6,634Annunciation Maternity Home Austin4 or moreNot Rated310 128.2$15,955Arlington Classics Academy Arlington3Recognized246KG 0613.7$5,201Bay Area Charter Elementary El Lago4 or moreAcceptable146PK 0514.4$4,430Beatrice Mayes Institute Charter SchoolHouston2Exemplary236KG 0814.4$5,464Bexar County Academy San Antonio3Acceptable284PK 0815.0$6,139Brazos River Charter School Nemo2Acceptable8108 1217.4$6,778Brazos School For Inquiry & CreativityCollege Station3Low Performing146PK 129.6$5,704Bright Ideas Charter Wichita Falls3Acceptable81KG 1214.5$10,672Burnham Wood Charter School El Paso4 or moreRecognized156KG 0515.7$5,220Burnham Wood H S El Paso4 or moreCommended3909 1215.7$5,220Calvin Nelms Charter High School Katy3Acceptable15009 1222.4$6,161Cedars International Academy Austin2Not Rated48KG 0616.0$10,655Comquest Academy Tomball3Acceptable6809 1211.9$7,222Crossroad Community Ed Ctr CharterHouston3Low Performing11909 1220.4$6,170Dallas Can! Academy Charter Dallas4 or moreAcceptable37309 1222.3$14,890Dallas Can! Academy Charter Dallas4 or moreAcceptable47609 1222.3$14,890Dallas Community Charter School Dallas4 or moreRecognized126PK 0218.6$4,529Destiny High School Killeen3Acceptable192PK 1215.3$5,638Eagle Advantage Charter El Irving 4 or moreNot Rated2KG 0517.1$5,757Eagle Advantage Charter H S Dallas4 or moreAcceptable17209 1217.1$5,757Eagle Charter School San AntonioSan Antonio3Needs Peer Review11703 1230.4$4,561Eagle Project (Abilene) Lewisville3Acceptable12406 1231.0$4,575Eagle Project (Beaumont) Lewisville3Needs Peer Review18906 1227.0$4,422Notes. indicates data not available in AEIS. Extreme Value indicates implausibly large per pupil expenditures reported by AEIS. Campus LocationYears of Operation Rating Enrollment GradesStudent-Teacher RatioExpenditure Per StudentEagle Project (Brownsville) Lewisville3Needs Peer Review14406 1228.8$19,679Eagle Project (Bryan) Lewisville3Needs Peer Review11807 1223.6$5,228Eagle Project (Dallas) Lewisville3Needs Peer Review6606 1222.0$5,903Eagle Project (Del Rio) Del Rio3Needs Peer Review15004 1250.0$4,703Eagle Project (Ft Worth) Lewisville3Acceptable23106 1225.7$4,257Eagle Project (Lubbock) Lewisville3Needs Peer Review8706 1229.0$5,441Eagle Project (Midland) Lewisville3Needs Peer Review14805 1242.3$7,087Eagle Project (Pharr-Mcallen) Lewisville3Acceptable20605 1241.2$3,863Eagle Project (San Antonio) San Antonio3Needs Peer Review12606 1230.4$4,561Eagle Project (Texarkana) Texarkana3Acceptable5904 1119.7$6,729Eagle Project (Tyler) Lewisville3Needs Peer Review15606 12$3,744East Texas Charter H S Longview3Acceptable14309 1218.7$4,199Ed White Memorial High School League City4 or moreAcceptable9109 1214.4$4,430Eden Park Academy Austin4 or moreNeeds Peer Review162KG 0812.5$6,542Education Center At Little Elm Little Elm2Needs Peer Review6806 1216.8$4,751Education Center At The Colony Little Elm2Needs Peer Review10906 1216.8$4,751Education Center International AcademyGarland1Acceptable5705 1211.6$7,444Ehrhart School Beaumont1Not Rated12701 126.3$6,082El Paso School of Excellence El Paso2Low Performing299PK 0819.8$5,937El Paso School of Excellence MiddleEl Paso2Acceptable9502 0819.8$5,937Erath Excels Academy Inc. Stephenville3Acceptable8309 1210.1$6,813Excel Academy Ft Worth3Acceptable125KG 1215.3$5,638Faith Family Academy of Oak Cliff Dallas3Acceptable844PK 1213.9$6,055Focus Learning Academy Dallas3Commended381KG 0710.7$7,744Fort Worth Academy of Fine Arts Fort Worth2Exemplary12304 1211.9$5,973George I. Sanchez Charter GED 4 or moreLow Performing7712 1246.6$7,383George I. Sanchez Charter H S San Antonio3Needs Peer Review4107 1221.5$16,158Girls & Boys Prep Academy Houston4 or moreAcceptable39501 1213.4$4,995Harmony Science Academy Houston2Acceptable29806 0916.9$6,429Honors Academy Dallas3Needs Peer Review29807 1215.3$5,638Houston Can! Academy Charter SchoolHouston4 or moreAcceptable34409 1224.6$6,441Houston Gateway Academy Houston3Needs Peer Review631KG 0721.8$7,637Jean Massieu Academy Arlington3Recognized143PK 128.3$6,740Jubilee Academic Center San Antonio2Not Rated182PK 1215.0$5,720Notes. indicates data not available in AEIS. Extreme Value indicates implausibly large per pupil expenditures reported by AEIS. Campus LocationYears of Operation Rating Enrollment GradesStudent-Teacher RatioExpenditure Per StudentKatherine Anne Porter School Wimberly3Acceptable11309 127.7Katherine Anne Porter School At BlancoBlanco3Low Performing88PK 0810.6Kenny Dorham School 3Not Rated40PK 088.7Killeen-Richard Milburn Alternative H S Killeen4 or moreAcceptable15709 1225.1$3,494La Hacienda Solutions Austin4 or moreNot Rated309 118.2$15,955Landmark School Palestine3Needs Peer Review9307 1215.3$5,638Legacy High School Kaufman3Needs Peer Review8608 1215.3$5,638Life Charter School Dallas4 or moreAcceptable794KG 1018.9$5,482Mainland Preparatory Academy Texas City4 or moreExemplary284PK 0816.9$9,848Mccullough Academy of Excellence Austin3Low Performing193KG 0410.2$4,677Medical Center Charter School Houston4 or moreLow Performing255PK 0725.5$4,756Meridale-Westwood Austin4 or moreNot Rated73KG 128.2$15,955Metro Charter Academy Arlington2Not Rated298PK 0716.6$5,766Metro School Dallas3Low Performing4703 0615.3$5,638Midland Advantage Charter School Midland3Needs Peer Review549KG 0716.6$6,812Midland-Richard Milburn Alter H S Midland4 or moreAcceptable10709 1232.8$4,279Mid-Valley Academy Mcallen3Acceptable9509 1247.5$5,154Nancy Ney Charter School New Braunfels4 or moreAcceptable4807 1216.8$7,764National Elite Gymnastics Austin4 or moreAcceptable1903 098.2$15,955Nehemiah Institute San Antonio4 or moreNot Rated1907 1116.7$4,568North Hills School Irving4 or moreExemplary79901 1212.2$5,506North Houston H S For Business Houston3Needs Peer Review17009 1224.3$4,376Nova Charter School-Southeast Dallas2Acceptable218PK 0520.2$6,505NYOS Charter School Austin4 or moreExemplary210KG 1012.4$7,104NYOS Charter School Inc. At Gessne Austin4 or moreExemplary52PK 0212.4$7,104Odyssey Academy Inc Galveston3Acceptable20405 0813.7$5,306Paradigm Accelerated School Dublin2Needs Peer Review5609 12$8,254Paso Del Norte Academy El Paso3Acceptable22209 1221.1$4,401Pegasus Charter H S Dallas4 or moreAcceptable15107 1212.4$17,222Pineywoods Community Academy High Lufkin3Acceptable187KG 0913.9$5,892Pinnacle School Ft Worth3Acceptable299KG 1215.3$5,638Radiance Academy of Learning San Antonio3Acceptable131PK 1211.2$6,971Ranch Academy Canton3Not Rated6507 1216.3$7,279Richard Milburn Academy (Amarillo)Amarillo2Acceptable10209 1222.7$6,791Notes. indicates data not available in AEIS. Extreme Value indicates implausibly large per pupil expenditures reported by AEIS. Campus LocationYears of Operation Rating Enrollment GradesStudent-Teacher RatioExpenditure Per StudentRichard Milburn Academy (Beaumont)Beaumont2Low Performing11909 - 1221.6$5,978Richard Milburn Alt. H S (Corpus Christi)Corpus Christi4 or moreAcceptable14309 - 1218.0$4,545Richard Milburn Alt. H S (Lubbock)Lubbock4 or moreNeeds Peer Review14009 - 1220.0$4,238River Oaks Fort Worth3Acceptable13909 - 1217.8$8,304Safeplace Austin4 or moreNot Rated16KG - 098.2$15,955San Antonio Can Academy San Antonio3Not Rated5809 - 1219.3$13,676San Antonio School For Inquiry San Antonio3Low Performing90KG - 1221.3$5,259San Marcos Preparatory School San Marcos2Not Rated87KG - 0511.3School of Excellence In Education San Antonio4 or moreLow Performing873PK - 1116.7$4,568Seashore Learning Center Corpus Christi4 or moreExemplary139KG - 0615.4$5,099Shekinah Hope Universal City3Recognized27PK - 0211.1$7,063Shekinah Radiance Academy San Antonio3Acceptable130PK - 1011.1$7,063Shekinah Schertz San Antonio3Recognized36KG - 0511.1$7,063South Plains Academy Lubbock3Acceptable15509 - 1217.2$5,989Southwest High School Houston3Acceptable44609 - 1214.1$6,369Southwest Preparatory School San Antonio4 or moreAcceptable22009 - 1220.2$8,811Southwest Preparatory Southeast CampusSan Antonio4 or moreAcceptable4009 - 1220.2$8,811St Mary's Academy Charter School Beeville2Not Rated190KG - 0823.8$6,187Star Charter School Austin3Acceptable14201 - 1212.1$5,537Tekoa Academy Marshall 3Low Performing75PK - 127.6$7,909Texas Academy of Excellence Austin4 or moreLow Performing286PK - 0616.5$5,672Texas Empowerment Academy Austin4 or moreLow Performing10505 - 0911.3$8,102Texas Language Charter Dallas3Acceptable119KG - 0517.1$5,148The Echelon 3Needs Peer Review23207 - 1215.3$5,638The Phoenix Charter School Greenville2Not Rated195PK - 079.9$7,128Transformative Charter Academy Killeen4 or moreNeeds Peer Review10609 - 1223.6$3,941Treetops School International Ft Worth4 or moreAcceptable273KG - 1211.9$4,426Univ. of Houston Charter School Houston4 or moreAcceptable129KG - 0518.4$7,877Universal Academy Irving4 or moreAcceptable649PK - 1216.0$6,287Universal Academy - Flower Mound Irving4 or moreAcceptable302KG - 0916.0$6,287University School Irving3Acceptable22707 - 1215.3$5,638Varnett Charter School Houston4 or moreRecognized720PK - 0517.6$5,294Waxahachie Faith Family Academy Waxahachie3Acceptable291PK - 1112.5$6,087West Houston Charter Katy4 or moreExemplary6007 - 1216.6$4,442West Houston Charter Elementary Katy4 or moreAcceptable132KG - 0616.6$4,442Winfree Academy Charter School IrvingIrving2Needs Peer Review40609 - 1224.9$4,446Winfree Academy Char. School LewisvilleLewisville2Acceptable28509 - 1224.9$4,446Winfree Academy Char. Schl. RichardsonRichardson2Needs Peer Review26809 - 1224.9$4,446Y W High School Hurst3Acceptable19608 - 1215.3$5,638YES College Preparatory School Houston2Exemplary42306 - 1214.0$8,886Notes. indicates data not available in AEIS. Extreme Value indicates implausibly large per pupil expenditures reported by AEIS. Appendix B2 Student Demographic Characteristics For At-Risk and Not At-Risk Charter School Campuses (Percent) Campus African American Hispanic WhiteEconomically DisadvantagedCharter Schools >=70% At-RiskA W Brown-Fellowship Charter School96.43.60.088.2Academy of Beaumont93.20.55.388.3Academy of Careers and Technologies10.380.19.671.3Accelerated Intermediate Charter School79.819.20.072.1Alpha Ii9.978.710.971.8Amigos Por Vida-Friends For Life 3.096.40.593.4Azleway Charter School 39.414.146.595.8Benji's Special Education Academy 95.54.50.0100.0Big Springs Charter School 0.025.075.093.8Blessed Sacrament Academy Charter H S0.593.05.577.9Burnett-Bayland Home 42.629.427.9100.0Burnett-Bayland Reception Center 36.639.322.898.6Career Plus Learning Academy 51.741.46.9100.0Cedar Crest 9.417.271.998.4Cedar Ridge Charter School 12.232.455.495.9Children First Academy of Houston 96.92.90.291.3Children First of Dallas 99.40.60.096.1Coastal Bend Youth City 21.453.625.0100.0Dallas County Juvenile Justice 42.738.916.499.8Delta 3 Boot Camp 51.343.65.1100.0Dr. M. L. Garza-Gonzalez Charter School3.390.26.573.5Eagle Advantage Charter 45.350.04.774.4Eagle Project Laredo 0.094.06.090.6Eagle Project Waco 35.851.912.376.5East Campus 90.47.61.6100.0 Campus African American Hispanic WhiteEconomically DisadvantagedEast Fort Worth Montessori 66.920.89.191.6El Paso Academy East 2.990.65.670.9Encino School 0.097.03.094.0Eoac Waco Charter School 49.747.42.994.2Escuela De Las Americas 2.794.50.086.3Fort Worth Can Academy 79.314.75.176.5Fruit of Excellence School 68.225.06.884.1G C C L R Emergency Shelter6.375.018.8100.0Gabriel Tafolla Charter School 0.094.55.581.2Gateway Academy (Student Alternative)0.093.86.271.0Gateway Charter Academy 90.99.10.085.5George Gervin Charter 46.342.610.572.8George I. Sanchez Alternative 5.994.10.094.1George I. Sanchez H S 2.895.21.570.7Girls & Boys Prep Academy 96.83.20.081.9Guardian Angel Performance Academy44.633.919.680.4Gulf Shores Academy 75.721.60.0100.0Gulf Shores Charter School At Covenant House100.00.00.0100.0Gulf Shores Charter School At Sanctus66.70.033.3100.0Harris County Juvenile Detention Center42.334.922.287.8Harris County Youth Village 33.343.223.473.0Heights Charter School 25.765.98.498.2Higgs Carter King Gifted & Talented 12.481.16.496.1Houston Heights Learning Academy 22.073.73.485.6I Am That I Am Academy 88.210.21.698.4Idea Academy 0.093.95.387.9Impact Charter 94.73.21.696.8Inspired Vision 33.352.513.586.5 Campus African American Hispanic WhiteEconomically DisadvantagedInspired Vision Academy 65.030.13.385.4Jamies House Charter School 47.516.436.191.8Jesse Jackson Academy 96.63.40.090.6John H. Wood Charter School 17.844.437.092.6Katy-Hockley Boot Camp 39.647.09.7100.0Kipp Academy 18.677.52.189.6La Amistad Love & Learning Academy68.531.50.098.4Marywood 33.366.70.083.3Miracle Farm 5.00.095.0100.0New Frontiers Charter School 2.091.16.784.2Northwest Math, Science, & Language Academy81.618.40.093.9Northwest Preparatory 99.30.00.794.9Northwest Preparatory Campus #2 51.413.535.1100.0Nova Charter School 40.655.10.092.8Oak Cliff Academy (Dallas) 19.778.60.976.1One Stop Multiservice 0.091.68.496.4One Stop Multiservice 0.097.72.3100.0One Stop Multiservice H S 0.096.04.070.4Panola 13.51.483.871.6Pathfinder Camp 65.213.021.7100.0Positive Solutions Charter School 4.091.54.076.9Prepared Table 90.69.20.2100.0Radiance Academy of Learning 20.157.022.876.5Rapoport Academy 94.12.23.792.6Raul Yzaguirre School For Success 0.697.22.287.0Raven School 31.338.328.9100.0Rise Academy 69.021.010.092.0Rylie Faith Family Academy 16.540.141.073.6 Campus African American Hispanic WhiteEconomically DisadvantagedSan Antonio Technology Academy 7.688.04.3100.0Sentry Technology Prep School 0.095.84.2100.0Ser-Ninos 1.198.10.571.9Settlement Homey 22.718.259.186.4Southwest Campus 45.149.84.7100.0T-Care 45.916.237.889.2Technology Education Charter H S 0.097.42.683.6Tekoa Academy 100.00.00.091.8Texas Serenity Academy 42.350.07.780.8Texas Serenity Academy (Bayshore) 25.066.78.375.0The Basic Center 25.963.07.485.2The Zoe Learning Academy 96.43.00.6100.0Theresa B Lee Academy 92.96.70.497.5TOVAS-Tactile Oral Visual Alt System34.818.644.774.5Two Dimensions Preparatory Academy94.92.92.279.8Valley High 1.090.18.680.4Vanguard Academy 0.091.76.391.7Wa-Set Preparatory Academy 90.57.11.881.5Wings For Life 57.128.614.3100.0Charter Schools <70% At-RiskA+ Academy 22.154.522.753.2Academy of Accelerated Learning 55.342.61.060.3Academy of Dallas 95.23.71.158.8Academy of Houston 85.213.80.067.6Academy of Skills & Knowledge 16.26.176.412.9Alief Montessori Community School 23.733.313.351.1Alpha Charter School 56.34.935.438.2 Campus African American Hispanic WhiteEconomically DisadvantagedAlphonso Crutchs-Life Support Center81.916.41.151.4American Academy of Excellence Charter19.570.39.744.1American Youth Works Charter School16.744.438.159.9Annunciation Maternity Home 66.70.033.30.0Arlington Classics Academy 21.56.565.94.1Bay Area Charter Elementary 2.111.080.115.1Beatrice Mayes Institute Charter School98.71.30.066.1Bexar County Academy 8.588.43.262.0Brazos River Charter School 0.011.188.950.6Brazos School For Inquiry & Creativity8.241.849.367.1Bright Ideas Charter 2.58.684.045.7Burnham Wood Charter School 7.761.526.931.4Burnham Wood H S 7.756.433.328.2Calvin Nelms Charter High School 8.035.355.316.0Cedars International Academy 29.225.039.60.0Comquest Academy 1.522.176.51.5Crossroad Community Ed Center Charter82.413.43.452.1Dallas Can! Academy Charter 58.233.08.665.1Dallas Can! Academy Charter 45.050.84.066.8Dallas Community Charter School 14.356.327.863.5Destiny High School 42.221.434.947.4Eagle Advantage Charter El Irving 50.00.050.050.0Eagle Advantage Charter H S 66.330.22.955.2Eagle Charter School San Antonio48.729.921.441.9Eagle Project (Abilene) 4.030.662.921.8Eagle Project (Beaumont) 86.84.28.535.4Eagle Project (Brownsville) 0.096.53.511.1Eagle Project (Bryan) 31.444.124.68.5 Campus African American Hispanic WhiteEconomically DisadvantagedEagle Project (Dallas) 89.49.11.551.5Eagle Project (Del Rio) 0.078.721.360.0Eagle Project (Ft Worth) 61.920.815.22.2Eagle Project (Lubbock) 9.242.547.158.6Eagle Project (Midland) 2.064.233.10.0Eagle Project (Pharr-Mcallen) 0.096.63.415.5Eagle Project (San Antonio) 1.695.23.27.1Eagle Project (Texarkana) 45.810.244.150.8Eagle Project (Tyler) 28.818.651.99.0East Texas Charter H S 14.77.776.213.3Ed White Memorial High School 3.316.578.00.0Eden Park Academy 10.522.265.44.9Education Center At Little Elm 1.54.492.60.0Education Center At The Colony 3.711.083.50.0Education Center International Academy26.317.550.919.3Ehrhart School 39.43.157.538.6El Paso School of Excellence 2.094.62.758.9El Paso School of Excellence Middle3.291.65.368.4Erath Excels Academy Inc. 0.025.374.762.7Excel Academy 8.820.869.630.4Faith Family Academy of Oak Cliff 94.05.00.866.7Focus Learning Academy 94.82.92.449.9Fort Worth Academy of Fine Arts 13.811.473.20.0George I. Sanchez Charter GED 1.398.70.05.2George I. Sanchez Charter H S San Antonio0.092.77.30.0Girls & Boys Prep Academy 96.51.81.053.2Harmony Science Academy 64.117.414.139.6Honors Academy 84.210.75.036.9 Campus African American Hispanic WhiteEconomically DisadvantagedHouston Can! Academy Charter School64.833.11.735.8Houston Gateway Academy 25.270.24.164.5Jean Massieu Academy 21.021.053.10.0Jubilee Academic Center 9.382.47.165.4Katherine Anne Porter School 0.04.494.715.9Katherine Anne Porter School At Blanco0.017.083.029.5Kenny Dorham School 55.02.542.552.5Killeen-Richard Milburn Alternative H S 45.221.029.949.7La Hacienda Solutions 0.00.0100.00.0Landmark School 15.110.874.226.9Legacy High School 8.15.886.033.7Life Charter School 60.315.922.254.2Mainland Preparatory Academy 90.16.03.246.5Mccullough Academy of Excellence 85.07.37.844.6Medical Center Charter School 72.513.79.035.7Meridale-Westwood 13.78.278.10.0Metro Charter Academy 96.31.32.08.7Metro School 97.92.10.00.0Midland Advantage Charter School 10.447.941.363.9Midland-Richard Milburn Alternative H S 3.744.951.49.3Mid-Valley Academy 1.197.91.137.9Nancy Ney Charter School 2.150.047.958.3National Elite Gymnastics 0.021.168.40.0Nehemiah Institute 0.094.75.352.6North Hills School 9.08.159.71.6North Houston H S For Business 84.113.51.864.7Nova Charter School-Southeast 62.829.86.454.1NYOS Charter School 5.29.082.93.3 Campus African American Hispanic WhiteEconomically DisadvantagedNYOS Charter School Inc. At Gessne 44.226.926.957.7Odyssey Academy Inc. 15.743.133.858.8Paradigm Accelerated School 0.035.762.564.3Paso Del Norte Academy 1.489.29.551.8Pegasus Charter H S 41.744.413.950.3Pineywoods Community Academy High 7.54.881.846.0Pinnacle School 2.35.791.615.4Radiance Academy of Learning 10.751.937.455.7Ranch Academy 4.63.192.30.0Richard Milburn Academy (Amarillo)3.916.777.50.0Richard Milburn Academy (Beaumont)97.50.02.50.0Richard Milburn Alter H S (Corpus Christi)7.772.020.328.0Richard Milburn Alter H S (Lubbock)4.354.340.736.4River Oaks 14.470.514.466.9Safeplace 12.531.356.368.8San Antonio Can Academy 3.496.60.00.0San Antonio School For Inquiry 2.252.241.13.3San Marcos Preparatory School 24.137.937.91.1School of Excellence In Education 11.175.013.156.4Seashore Learning Center 0.017.378.430.2Shekinah Hope 33.344.418.57.4Shekinah Radiance Academy 54.630.014.663.1Shekinah Schertz 8.319.469.40.0South Plains Academy 4.554.238.159.4Southwest High School 25.669.13.423.3Southwest Preparatory School 33.234.530.927.7Southwest Preparatory Southeast Campus37.542.510.062.5St Marys Academy Charter School 3.267.425.353.2 Campus African American Hispanic WhiteEconomically DisadvantagedStar Charter School 1.49.981.70.0Tekoa Academy Marshall 36.06.757.356.0Texas Acad of Excellence 95.53.11.461.9Texas Empowerment Academy 82.912.44.858.1Texas Language Charter 14.381.53.468.1The Echelon 16.865.117.736.2The Phoenix Charter School 9.73.184.622.6Transformative Charter Academy 41.518.933.00.0Treetops School International 4.42.987.21.1Univ of Houston Charter School of Technology28.721.736.417.1Universal Academy 84.39.92.650.2Universal Academy - Flower Mound 10.95.077.80.0University School 12.822.560.417.6Varnett Charter School 98.91.10.041.8Waxahachie Faith Family Academy 8.620.369.148.1West Houston Charter 6.711.775.00.0West Houston Charter Elementary 9.110.678.80.0Winfree Academy Charter School Irving11.144.843.337.2Winfree Academy Charter School Lewisville7.410.979.33.9Winfree Academy Charter School Richardson32.116.447.825.7Y W High School 0.58.787.212.2YES College Preparatory School 7.388.92.654.6 Appendix C Instruments Survey of Charter School Directors Survey of Charter School Teachers Survey of Charter School Students Survey of Charter School Parents Survey of Public School Districts Classroom Observation Form 2002 2002 Evaluation of Open-Enrollment Charter Schools Survey of Charter School Directors The Texas Commissioner of Education has authorized a study of charter schools in accordance with the Texas Education Codes requirements for an annual evaluation. Your assistance is requested. Please complete this survey and return it in the provided postage-page envelope by April 7, 2003. If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Dr. Kelly Shapley at 800-580-8237. Thank you in advance for your assistance.  GENERAL INFORMATION Charter school name:________________________________________________________________ Your job title:______________________________________________________________________ What is your gender? ( Male ( Female What is your race/ethnicity? ( Hispanic ( African American ( White ( Asian or Pacific Islander ( Native American ( Other (specify)___________________ What is your highest education level? (Select only one.) ( Completed high school ( Less than 4 years of college ( Bachelors degree (BA/BS) ( BA/BS and graduate courses ( Masters degree ( Doctorate Do you have TX mid-management certification? ( Yes ( No How many years of experience (including the current school year) have you had in each of these types of schools as an administrator and as a teacher? Years as an ADMINISTRATORPublic SchoolNon-Religious PrivateReligious PrivateCharter School Years as a TEACHERPublic SchoolNon-Religious PrivateReligious PrivateCharter School SCHOOL ORGANIZATION What types of organizational strategies does your school use? For each strategy implemented, please note the extent it is used with your schools students. UsedIf used, strategy implemented with (Select only one):YesNoSome StudentsMost StudentsAll StudentsMulti-age grouping(((((Block scheduling(((((Student and teacher teams(((((Extended day scheduling(((((Extended week scheduling(((((Extended year scheduling(((((Credit through flexible entry/exit courses(((((Other (specify)_________________________((((( SCHOOL OPERATIONS Excluding the state financial allotment and any federal/Title I funds, from what sources have you received support for implementing school operations since your charter school has opened? For each entity, please select all types of support provided. Texas Education AgencyEducation Service CenterCharter Networks/ Assistance CentersManagement CompanyBusiness or Community GroupMonetary support (loans, grants, donations)(((((Technical assistance on legal matters(((((Technical assistance on business operations(((((Technical assistance on PEIMS(((((Technical assistance on curricula and instructional issues(((((In-kind support (donations of material resources)(((((Staff professional development(((((Other (specify)________________________((((( INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT What percent of your schools classrooms have Internet access? ______% What is the average number of classroom computers accessible to teachers and students? ______ Do you have a computer lab? ( Yes ( No Number of lab computers ______ What is your schools average class size? ______ What methods is your school using to assess students performance? For each assessment method used, note whether it is typically used once a year, once a semester, or each marking period. UsedIf yes, how often?YesNoOnce a yearOnce a semesterOnce a Marking PeriodStandardized norm-referenced test (e.g., ITBS)(((((Criterion-referenced test (excluding TAKS)(((((Performance-based tests developed locally(((((Student portfolios(((((Student demonstrations or performances(((((Student projects(((((Student writing samples(((((Tests accompanying adopted textbooks(((((Other (specify)_______________________((((( STUDENT DISCIPLINE AND BEHAVIOR To what extent is each of the following currently a problem at your school? Not a ProblemMinor ProblemModerate ProblemSerious ProblemStudent tardiness((((Student absenteeism((((Physical conflicts among students((((Vandalism of school property((((Student drug or alcohol abuse((((Student possession of weapons on school property((((Other problem (specify) ___________________(((( PARENT INVOLVEMENT Approximately what percentage of the parents in your school have participated in the following activities on a volunteer basis during the 2002-03 school year? 0-25%26-50%51-75%76-100%Not ApplicableFundraising(((((Instructional support(((((Extracurricular activities(((((Presentations at career days or other events(((((Custodial services or building maintenance(((((Professional services (e.g., legal, accounting)(((((Workshops or support groups(((((Student tutoring(((((Student mentoring(((((Other (specify)________________________((((( SCHOOL GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT To what extent are the following individuals involved in these areas of school governance and management? Use the scale that appears below. Not at All 1Small Extent 2Moderate Extent 3Large Extent 4 DirectorCampus Leader or PrincipalTeachersGoverning BoardHiring administrators( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Hiring teachers( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Setting school policies/procedures( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Developing/approving the budget( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Determining training priorities( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Maintaining focus on the schools mission( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Monitoring student performance( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( PEIMS recordkeeping( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Developing curriculum( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Creating the school schedule( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Fundraising( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Developing educational programs( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Conducting teacher appraisal( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (  INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER SCHOOLS Has contact occurred between educators at your school and educators from surrounding schools during the current or previous school year? ( No ( Yes, contact occurred (Select all that apply.) Traditional Public SchoolsOther Charter Schools((Partnered on state/federal grant initiatives((Held organizational/planning meeting(s)((Observed classrooms at other schools((Provided information or technical assistance ((Received information or technical assistance ((Met to discuss student placement((Interacted during regional/state-level meetings or training sessions((Networked with educators at professional conferences((Interacted with educators at ESC-sponsored events((Other (specify)_________________________________________ GENERAL COMMENTS Indicate to what extent each of the following is a barrier to operating your charter school. Not a BarrierSmall BarrierModerate BarrierGreat BarrierInadequate facilities((((Local public school opposition((((Hiring teachers((((Inadequate finances for ongoing operations((((Internal conflicts in the school((((Conflicts with the schools governing board((((Accountability requirements((((Special education requirements((((Too much paperwork/reporting requirements((((Budgeting/accounting requirements((((Other (specify)_________________________ What are the primary benefits of charter schools to Texas public education? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ What recommendations would you offer to policymakers on charter schools? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Thank you for completing this survey. Please return the survey by March 31, 2003. Use the enclosed postage-paid envelope or mail the survey to: TCER P.O. Box 679002, Austin, TX 78767  2002 Evaluation of Open-Enrollment Charter Schools Survey of Charter School Teachers The Texas Commissioner of Education has authorized a study of charter schools in accordance with the Texas Education Codes requirements for an annual evaluation. Your assistance is requested. Please complete this survey and return it in the provided postage-paid envelope by April 7, 2003. If you have any questions about the survey, please contact Dr. Kelly Shapley at 800-580-8237. Thank you in advance for your assistance. GENERAL INFORMATION Charter school name:________________________________________________________________ What is your age? ( 25 or younger ( 46 55 ( 26 35 ( 56 65 ( 36 45 ( 66 or older What is your gender? ( Male ( Female What is your race/ethnicity? ( Hispanic ( African American ( White ( Asian or Pacific Islander ( Native American ( Other (specify)____________________ What is your highest education level? (Select only one.) ( Completed high school ( Fewer than 4 years of college ( Bachelors degree (BA/BS) ( BA/BS and graduate courses ( Masters degree ( Doctorate What is your current teaching certification? (Select all that apply.) ( I am currently certified to teach in Texas ( I am currently certified to teach in another state ( I am working to obtain Texas teaching certification ( I am not certified and not working to obtain certification If you are certified to teach in Texas, what was your certification route? ( College/university undergraduate certification program ( Alternative certification program (ACP) ( College/university post-bachelor certification program What instructional levels do you teach? (Select all that apply.) ( Primary (PK-2) ( Elementary (3-5) ( Middle (6-8) ( High school (9-12) What subject area(s) do you teach? (Select all that apply.) ( Language arts ( Mathematics ( Social studies ( Science ( Reading ( Other __________ Including this school year, how many years have you worked in your current charter school? _____ How many years of experience (including the current school year) have you had in each of these types of schools as a teacher? Years as a TEACHER in aPublic SchoolNon-Religious PrivateReligious PrivateCharter School TEACHER EXPERIENCES How important were the following factors in your decision to seek employment at this school? Not ImportantSomewhat ImportantImportantVery ImportantInterested in being involved in an educational reform effort((((Small school size((((Able to teach without certification((((Less standardized testing pressure((((Academic reputation/high standards of this school((((The high level of parent involvement((((More autonomy at this school((((Difficulty finding another position ((((Opportunity to work with like-minded educators((((Small class sizes at this school((((Opportunity to work with a specific student population((((Opportunity to teach and draw retirement pay((((Other (specify) ____________________________(((( INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT To what extent are the following instructional methods used in your classroom? Not at AllSmall ExtentModerate ExtentLarge ExtentI direct the whole group (lecture, control pace)((((I guide interactive discussion with the whole group((((I make multimedia or PowerPoint presentations((((I provide one-on-one instruction ((((Students work in small groups((((Students complete individual assignments((((Students present oral reports((((Students use computers or the Internet((((Students work with hands-on activities or manipulatives((((Students complete long-term projects((((Other (specify)____________________________(((( What methods are you using to assess students performance in your classroom? For each assessment method used, note whether it is typically used once a year, each semester, or each marking period. UsedIf yes, how often?YesNoOnce a YearOnce a SemesterOnce a Marking PeriodTeacher-made tests(((((Student portfolios(((((Student demonstrations or performances(((((Student projects(((((Student writing samples(((((Other (specify)_______________________((((( Does your classroom have Internet access? ( Yes ( No How many computers do you have in your classroom? ______ What is the average number of students in your class/classes? ______ STUDENT DISCIPLINE AND BEHAVIOR To what extent is each of the following matters currently a problem at your school? Not a ProblemMinor ProblemModerate ProblemSerious ProblemStudent tardiness((((Student absenteeism((((Physical conflicts among students((((Vandalism of school property((((Student drug or alcohol abuse((((Student weapon possession on school property((((Other problem (specify) ___________________(((( PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT What professional development activities have you attended during the 2002-03 school year? YesNoSession sponsored by your school((Session sponsored by an education service center((Session sponsored by a traditional school district((Professional conference((Peer observation and critique((Release time to work with other school educators((Release time for independent training activities((Teaming or shared conference periods((College or university coursework((Other (specify) __________________________(( How many days of professional development have you attended this school year? _____ Does your school have a formal teacher appraisal process? ( Yes (please describe) ______________________________________________________ ( No How often do school administrators observe in your classroom? ( Once a year ( Once a semester ( Once a marking period ( Other __________________________ SCHOOL OPERATIONS To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your school? Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeThis school is meeting students learning needs that were not addressed at other schools((((Class sizes are too large((((I am satisfied with my salary((((The school provides appropriate special education services for students who require it((((This school does not have adequate curriculum guides for the subject(s) I teach((((The school has sufficient financial resources((((This school has strong community support((((I am satisfied with the schools curriculum((((I have insufficient classroom resources ((((This school has effective leadership ((((This school supports teachers autonomy((((This schools buildings need to be improved((((This school has high standards and expectations for students((((Parents are involved in school activities((((Other (specify) __________________(((( GENERAL COMMENTS What have been the primary benefits of teaching at a charter school? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ What have been the primary challenges of teaching at a charter school? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Are you planning on teaching at this charter school next year? ( Yes ( No Why? _________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Thank you for completing this survey. Please return the survey by April 7, 2003. Use the enclosed postage-paid envelope or mail the survey to: TCER P.O. Box 679002 Austin, TX 78767  2002 Evaluation of Open-Enrollment Charter Schools Survey of Charter School Students Marking Instructions: Fill in the check boxes completely using a pencil or pen. If you make a mistake and need to choose another answer, erase or cross out the wrong answer.  GENERAL INFORMATION What is your gender? ( Male ( Female Which of the following best describes you? ( Hispanic ( African American ( White ( Asian or Pacific Islander ( Native American ( Other (describe)___________________ What grade are you in? ( 6th ( 10th ( 7th ( 11th ( 8th ( 12th ( 9th How old are you today? ( 9 ( 15 ( 10 ( 16 ( 11 ( 17 ( 12 ( 18 ( 13 ( 19 ( 14 ( 20 or older What kind of school did you attend before coming to this charter school? ( Public school ( Private school ( Home schooled ( Did not attend school ( Other (describe)___________________ What kinds of grades did you usually get at the school you used to attend? ( Mostly As ( Cs and Ds ( As and Bs ( Mostly Ds ( Mostly Bs ( Ds and Fs ( Bs and Cs ( Mostly Fs ( Mostly Cs What kinds of grades are you getting at your charter school this school year? ( Mostly As ( Cs and Ds ( As and Bs ( Mostly Ds ( Mostly Bs ( Ds and Fs ( Bs and Cs ( Mostly Fs ( Mostly Cs What do you plan to do when you finish high school? ( Get a job ( Go to technical school ( Go to a community college ( Go to a four-year college/university ( Join the military ( Other (describe)___________________ ( Dont know Do you plan on attending this charter school next year? ( Yes ( No ( Not sure Why or why not?____________________ __________________________________ What do you like most about this charter school? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________  What is the biggest problem or the thing you dislike most at this school? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ YOUR CURRENT CHARTER SCHOOL Think about why you and your family chose this school. For each statement, choose how important it was in choosing this school. Choose only one answer for each statement. Not ImportantSomewhat ImportantImportantVery ImportantThis school is close to my home( (((My parents think this school is better for me((((I was not getting good grades at my previous school((((I got into trouble at my previous school((((This school is smaller((((Teachers at my previous school did not help me enough((((There are good teachers at this school((((This school has fewer conflicts between students((((I wanted more challenging classes((((My friends are attending this school((((This school has small classes((((Other (specify) ___________________(((( Think about your current school. For each statement, choose how much you agree or disagree. Choose only one answer for each statement. Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeI work hard to earn the grades I get((((I have more homework at this school than I had at my previous school((((I am learning more here than at my previous school((((Students in this school are interested in learning((((This school has enough extracurricular activities((((I wish there were more courses/subjects I could choose from((((I have a computer available in my classroom when I need one((((I feel safe at this school((((My teachers encourage me to think about my future((((I get a lot of individual attention from my teachers((((My teachers help me understand things we are learning about in class((((Other students at this school help me learn((((Most teachers at this school know me by name((((This school is a good choice for me(((( 2002 Evaluation of Open-Enrollment Charter Schools Survey of Charter School Parents Introduction Hello! My name is (fill in interviewers name). I am calling from the University of Texas Office of Survey Research. May I speak with the parent or guardian of (fill in childs name) or the adult in your household who is most involved in decisions about the education of this child? We are conducting a survey with parents of students who are attending (fill in name of charter school) to obtain parents perceptions of and experiences with the charter school and your childs previous school. We would like to talk with you about (fill in childs name) s experiences at school. Your name has been randomly selected to participate in this survey. All answers will be kept completely confidential. Your participation is voluntary, and if there is a question you dont wish to answer, please let us know and well go on to the next questions. Survey Are you at least 18 years old? Please note gender of respondent Is [childs name] currently enrolled in [CS name]? [If no] Do you have another child attending [CS name]? [If no, end survey] How many years has [childs name] attended this charter school? Do you have any other children enrolled in [CS name]? Yes No [if yes] In what grades are these children enrolled? Think about when you first decided to enroll your child in [CS name]. How important were the following factors in your decision to choose this school? Please respond with not important, somewhat important, important, or very important. Convenient location Academic reputation of this school Small school size The schools discipline approach The educational program of this school The teaching of moral values similar to mine The schools ability to effectively serve my childs specific educational needs (such as special education, dyslexia, dropout recovery) Good teachers My childs poor performance at his/her previous school Dissatisfaction with the educational program and instruction at my childs previous school Reputation of school administrators or staff Recommendations from teachers or staff from my childs previous school Recommendations from a family member or friend When you were considering sending your child to [CS name], what types of information did you use to make the decision? I will read a list of information sources. Please answer yes or no to indicate whether you gathered this information prior to enrolling your child in this school. Written brochures or descriptions of this charter school Information from the charter schools website Academic performance of this schools students The schools accountability rating Information from parents with children at this school To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your childs school? Please respond with strongly disagree, disagree, agree, strongly agree. The charter school meets the needs of my child that were not addressed at his/her previous school. This school has sufficient financial resources. I am satisfied with this schools basic educational program (including reading, language arts, math, science, social studies). I am satisfied with the instruction offered. The rate of staff turnover at this school is acceptable. I am satisfied with this schools enriched educational programs (including music, art, foreign language). This school has high expectations and standards for students. This school has small class sizes. This schools buildings need to be improved. My childs grades have improved since attending [CS name]. This school provides adequate support services (such as counseling, healthcare, social services). Teachers and school leaders are accountable for student achievement. My child receives sufficient individual attention. I am satisfied with the kinds of extracurricular activities offered at this school. This school emphasizes educational content more than test preparation (TAAS/TAKS). This school regularly keeps me informed about how my child is performing academically. My childs TAAS scores have improved since attending [CS name]. Have you participated in any activities at your childs charter school? I will read a list of activities. Please answer yes or no to indicate whether you participated in these activities at [CS name]. Attended PTO meetings Volunteered for school activities Attended a [CS name] school board meeting Served as a member of the schools governing board or a school-related committee Helped make educational program or curricular decisions Helped with fundraising Attended parent-teacher conferences Observed/visited my childs classroom Signed a contract or agreement about participation in my childs education How many students are in your childs class [if elementary]/classes [if middle or high school], on average? What grade levels are offered at [CS name]? Approximately how many students attend [CS name]? What is the name of the principal or director of [CS name]? Thinking about your and your childs experiences at [CS name], if you were to grade the school from an A to an F, what grade would you give it? Is there anything else youd like to share about your childs experiences at [CS name]? Now lets talk about the school your child previously attended. What kind of school did your child/children attend before this charter school? Public school (traditional) Private school Another charter school Home schooled Did not attend school {if did not attend, skip to demographic questions} In what activities did you participate at your childs previous school? I will read a list of activities. Please answer yes or no to indicate whether you participated in these activities at your childs previous school. Attended PTO meetings Volunteered for school activities Attended a school board meeting Served as a member of the school board or a school-related committee Helped make educational program or curricular decisions Helped with fundraising Attended parent-teacher conferences Observed/visited my childs classroom Signed a contract or agreement about participation in my childs education Thinking about your and your childs experiences at that previous school, if you were to grade the school from an A to an F, what grade would you give it? Finally, Id like to finish by asking you a few brief background questions. Are you of Spanish or Hispanic origin? Yes No Dont know Refused What is your race/ethnicity? White African American Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander Native American/American Indian Other Which of the following languages are primarily spoken in your home? English Spanish Chinese Vietnamese Other How much formal education have you had? Did not complete high school Completed high school Less than four years of college College graduate (BA/BS) Graduate courses, no degree Graduate/professional degree Which best describes your household? Two parents or guardians Single parent or guardian Other {describe} What is the estimated annual income of your household/family? Less than $10,000 $10,000 - $14,999 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 or more 2002 Evaluation of Open-Enrollment Charter Schools Survey of Public School Districts The Texas Commissioner of Education commissioned this study of charter school effects on public school districts. By providing the information requested, you will contribute to an improved understanding of the effects of open-enrollment charter schools on public schools in Texas. Please complete this survey (or delegate the task to the appropriate person in your district) and return it in the postage-paid envelope no later than December 6, 2002. If you have any questions about the survey, or if you prefer to answer by telephone or fax, please contact Dr. Kelly Shapley at 800-580-8237. Thank you for your assistance.  GENERAL INFORMATION School district name:________________________________________________________________ Job title:__________________________________________________________________________ District enrollment trend: ( increasing enrollment ( stable enrollment ( decreasing enrollment Are you aware of charter schools that have opened in or near your district? ( Yes (continue to question 1) ( No (skip to question 7) DISTRICT OPERATIONS 1. What changes has your district recently implemented in district operations? Please note whether or not the change was implemented, and for each change implemented, note whether charter schools served as the primary reason, a contributing reason, or were not a factor. Changes to general district operationsOccurredIf yes, charter school served asYesNoPrimary ReasonContributing ReasonNot a FactorTrack students leaving for or returning from charter schools(((((Compare district student achievement with charter school student achievement(((((Increased district marketing to inform parents about district programs(((((Improved responsiveness to district parents needs and concerns(((((Increased communication with parents(((((Promoted parent involvement activities(((((Other________________________________((((( BUDGET AND FINANCIAL OPERATIONS 2. How have charter schools in your area affected your districts budget or financial operations? (select all that apply) ( The district lost approximately $_______________ in ADA funding. ( The district lost approximately $_______________ in federal funding. ( Changing enrollments made it difficult to estimate the budget for personnel, materials, and overhead. ( District had to close school(s). ( District had to downsize teaching staff. ( District had to downsize administrative staff. ( The need to build additional school buildings was reduced. ( Other ___________________________ ________________________________ ( District budget and financial operations were not affected. CHANGES TO EDUCATIONAL APPROACHES AND PRACTICES 3. What changes has your district recently implemented in educational approaches and practices? Please note whether or not the change was implemented, and for each change implemented, note whether charter school(s) served as the primary reason, a contributing reason, or were not a factor. Changes to educational approaches and practicesOccurredIf yes, charter school served asYesNoPrimary ReasonContributing ReasonNot a FactorDeveloped new educational program(s) (e.g., after-school program, at-risk student program)(((((Expanded current district educational program(s)(((((Changed or expanded curricular offerings (e.g., character education, Core Knowledge)(((((Established campus charter school(s)(((((Established an alternative education program(((((Changed school organizational structure (e.g., block scheduling, multiage grouping)(((((Instituted smaller schools or schools-within-schools(((((Decreased class sizes(((((Increased class sizes(((((Adopted one or more practices similar to area charter schools Describe_____________________________(((((Other________________________________((((( Please provide additional comments on changes to district operations, budget/financial operations, or educational approaches/practices. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ DISTRICTCHARTER SCHOOL INTERACTION 4. Did contact occur between district educators and charter school educators during the 2001-02 school year? ( No ( Yes, contact occurred (select all that apply) ( Partnered with charter school(s) on state/federal grant initiatives ( Held organizational/planning meeting(s) with charter school educators ( Observed charter school classrooms ( Provided information or technical assistance to charter school educators ( Met with charter schools to discuss student placement ( Interacted with charter school educators during regional or state-level meetings or training sessions ( Networked with charter school educators at professional conferences ( Interacted with charter school educators at ESC-sponsored events ( Other_______________________________________________________________ 5. In the 2001-02 school year: a. Did students leave schools in your district to attend charter schools? ( Yes ( No ( Not sure b. Did students return or transfer to schools in your district from charter schools? ( Yes ( No ( Not sure c. Did teachers leave schools in your district to teach at charter schools? ( Yes ( No ( Not sure d. Did your district hire teachers from charter schools? ( Yes ( No ( Not sure e. Please provide additional comment on the effects of students and/or teachers leaving for or returning from charter schools. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ EFFECTS ON DISTRICT STUDENTS 6. Have charter schools affected students currently attending district schools? ( No ( Yes (select all that apply) ( Teachers, counselors, or administrators in my district inform students about charter school opportunities. ( Students are informed about special charter school programs or practices (e.g., Montessori, half-day program, flexible scheduling). ( At-risk students are informed about alternative learning programs in charter schools. ( Other_______________________________________________________________ Please provide additional comments on the effects of charter schools on district students. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ EDUCATORS PERCEPTIONS OF CHARTER SCHOOLS 7. Describe your overall perceptions of charter schools. (select all that apply) ( Educators view charter schools as a challenge or competition to the district. ( Educators view charter schools as sources of good ideas and information. ( Educators believe charter schools provide educational opportunities for students who are not currently being appropriately served in district schools. ( Educators believe charter schools have provided alternatives for dissatisfied parents. ( Educators worry that special-needs students in charter schools may not get an appropriate education. ( Educators worry about the fiscal responsibility of charter schools. ( Educators regard increased mobility between the district and charter schools as disruptive to the educational process. ( Educators are concerned about the quality of instruction in charter schools. ( Educators are concerned about the grading standards (i.e., standards for assigning grades and course credits) used in charter schools. ( Educators view charter schools as providing more personalized instruction for students. ( Educators believe charter schools provide better opportunities for parent involvement. ( Other________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ GENERAL COMMENTS 8. Please provide any additional comments about Texas open-enrollment charter schools. _____________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Thank you for completing this survey. Please return the survey by December 6, 2002. Use the enclosed postage-paid envelope or mail the survey to: TCER P.O. Box 679002 Austin, TX 78767  Open-Enrollment Charter School Evaluation Classroom Observation Form 2002 Directions for Observation: (page 1) Complete the descriptive information on page 1. Record as much information as possible before the observation. Note the beginning and ending time for the observation. (page 2) Observe classroom activities for 5 minutes, then record the time under Segment1 and mark information related to the indicators on the form for Segment1 (about one minute). Repeat the process every 10 minutes for Segments 2, 3, 4 throughout the observation. Note the time the observation ends. (page 3) Write descriptive notes during the observation to describe the lesson purpose, teachers role and questioning approach, and student learning experiences. (page 4) Rate the degree to which each item describes the classroom that you observed relative to higher order thinking and subject-specific indicators  RECORD DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION: 1. Observer: ________________________________2. Date of Observation: _____________________3. Teacher: _________________________________4. Start Time: ________ 5. End Time: _________6. School _____________________________ 7. Campus _______________________________8. Grade(s) _______9. Subject: ( Reading ( Language arts ( Social Studies ( Science ( Mathematics ( Other ___________________10a. Total number of students: ___________ b. Female _______ c. Male _________11. Approximate number of students by ethnicity: ____a. Hispanic ____b. African American ____ c. White ____d. Other12. Indicate the teachers gender: ( Female ( Male13. Indicate the teachers ethnicity: ( Hispanic ( African American ( White ( Other14. Technology availability: Classroom computer(s) ______ ( Laptop computer ( Printer(s) ( Scanner ( Projection device ( Graphing calculators ( Other ______________________________________________  15. Rate the adequacy of the physical environment:Sparsely equippedRich in resourcesa. Classroom resources:( 1( 2( 3( 4CrowdedAdequateb. Classroom space:( 1( 2( 3( 4Inhibited interactions among studentsFacilitated interactions among studentsc. Room arrangement:( 1( 2( 3( 4Not at allTo a great extentd. Student work displayed:( 1( 2( 3( 4 RECORD OBSERVATIONS FOR CLASS ACTIVITIES:Record your first observation during the first 5 minutes, then record every 10 minutesSegment12345678910Time16. Class organizationMark all that Apply a. Individual students working alone(((((((((( b. Pairs of students(((((((((( c. Small groups (3+ students)(((((((((( d. Whole class((((((((((17. Teacher isMark One a. Directing whole group (teacher telling, lecturing, questioning, controlling topic and pace)(((((((((( b. Guiding interactive discussion with whole group (primarily students contributing)(((((((((( c. Modeling for whole group (demonstrates a strategy aligned with lesson objective)(((((((((( d. Facilitating/coaching (students work collaboratively on project/problem, teacher assists)(((((((((( e. Monitoring student work(((((((((( f. Providing small-group instruction(((((((((( g. Providing one-on-one instruction (individualized instruction lasting 1 minute or more)(((((((((( h. Giving a test (((((((((( i. Utilizing audio-visual resources(((((((((( j. Facilitating checking/grading of student work(((((((((( k. Managing behavior or materials(((((((((( l. Sitting at desk(((((((((( m. Other (write in)((((((((((18. Students areMark all that Apply a. Making a presentation (one/several student(s) presenting to class for 1+ minutes)(((((((((( b. Listening to a presentation (majority of students)(((((((((( c. Listening to discussion (majority of students)(((((((((( d. Engaged in interactive discussion (majority of students contributing)(((((((((( e. Engaged in focused discussion (QAR, Think-Pair-Share, Reciprocal Teaching, etc.)(((((((((( f. Using graphic organizers/thinking maps (circle, bubble, tree, brace, flow, bridge, etc.)(((((((((( g.)?AKR" "!"""/"0"ƿӯk^OAjhv[UmHnHuhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ^J-jhv[5CJOJQJU^JmHnHuhv[5:CJOJQJ^J hv[CJhv[56CJ\] hv[\ hv[:\hv[:CJ\ hv[CJ\ hv[CJ\hv[CJOJQJ\^Jhv[:CJ4\hv[6CJ4\] jhv[:U\mHnHuhv[:CJH\)?@AKLMNOPQR_vw$a$$a$  6 ] l   4 m ~ , S m y z  #  #  # $a$z ( E o ) A ` ~ 3_ #  # 6F]>Xs3Q]^ #  # $Ju$5ABq2V{!EQ #  # QRtCd#0i~ GH #  # 3^xAXef4Uv*Hfw # w"`a$Mj)V$ e # ^ #  # e *!V!!!!"""" """/"1"####S'T'($a$ # ^` #  # 0"1"##J$Z$ ..66:<<<I=Y= @=G?GmL:O;O?JKWXcdpq}~ӄԄ57»¯ylj hv[5CJ$U\jpB hv[CJUVhv[5CJ$\jhv[5CJ$U\jhv[0JUhv[ hv[\hv[56CJ\] hv[CJH* hv[CJhv[6CJ] hv[5CJ *hv[CJ hv[CJH* hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJH*\(67kdT$$Ifl4r  ;j   20j 64 lalf4p27?BEKO $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $@$If]@a$$IfOPX[^SM@7 $$Ifa$ $@$If]@a$$Ifkd$$Iflr  ;j  0j 64 lal^dhiq=7$Ifkd$$Iflr  ;j  0j 64 lal $$Ifa$ $$If]a$qtw~0kde$$Iflr  ;j  0j 64 lal $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $@$If]@a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $@$If]@a$$IfSM@7 $$Ifa$ $@$If]@a$$IfkdA $$Iflr  ;j  0j 64 lal=7$Ifkd+ $$Iflr  ;j  0j 64 lal $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ńȄτӄԄ0kd $$Iflr  ;j  0j 64 lal $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $@$If]@a$Ԅ5YZӌ ɐ}sqqqmi bn^b`n$a$ckd $$Ifl4j j 0j 64 lalf4 @$If]@ $If] YӌԌ ɐՐ,.*ȘPRTX\`dhlnʡʡʚʚtttʡhv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[67] hv[6] hv[CJ hv[5hv[5CJH* hv[5CJhv[5\aJ hv[7hv[hv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5OJQJ\^J hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[5\-ɐՐ "4Dn$$If^`a$ $$Ifa$$If !x $Ifkd$$Iflr$ d$  2%%%%%04 lalp2%%%%%ȔДؔ2kd$$Iflr$ d$ 04 lal $$If]a$ $.$If].a$ $h$If]ha$ $, $$If]a$ $.$If].a$ $h$If]ha$$If,.LZhvYSF99 $.$If].a$ $h$If]ha$$Ifkd$$Iflr$ d$ 04 lalvLFD@<]kdA$$Iflr$ d$ 04 lal $$If]a$*Ș2P $$Ifa$$IfxPRTX\71(( $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$Ifl4 \T`T444  (04 lalf4p(\`dhln $$If]a$ $$If]a$ $=$If]=a$$IfFf $$Ifa$ ʙЙ3- $=$If]=a$$IfkdS$$Ifl֞Tn T04 lalЙڙ $$If]a$ $$If]a$3- $=$If]=a$$Ifkdf$$Ifl֞Tn T04 lal  $$If]a$ $$If]a$67<>Z[c~˚ԝou"#3HISUVisz»»» hv[CJ] hv[6CJhv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\]hv[5B*CJ\ph hv[5CJ hv[5\hv[5OJQJ\]^J hv[H* hv[6]hv[5CJH*\hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[CJ5"3- $=$If]=a$$Ifkdy$$Ifl֞Tn T04 lal"&).16 $$If]a$ $$If]a$67>B3- $=$If]=a$$Ifkd$$Ifl֞Tn T04 lalBGKPTZ $$If]a$ $$If]a$Z[˚311'  !kd$$Ifl֞Tn T04 lal˚ԝ>X $$Ifa$$Ifx !$Ifkd $$Ifl4 rr$`bbb 204 lalf4p2ʞ֞ & $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$IfFf$ $$Ifa$&( kd&$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lal(.:BNVbjz $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If kd'$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lalƟ֟ޟ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If ޟ kd)$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lal  $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If  kdP*$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lal#'-17;CG $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If GH kd+$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lalHKOSY]cgos $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If st kd,$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 laltw{ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If kd-$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lalȠ̠ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If ̠͠ kd/$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lal͠Р֠ڠ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If kdE0$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lal '+ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If +, kdv1$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lal,/59?DJOW[ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If [\ kd2$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lal\_cgmqw{ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If kd3$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lal $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If kd 5$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lalǡΡԡۡ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If kd:6$$Ifl  rPf!$0$$$$4 lalo#3AIT $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$$If$Ifx ! !] TUV`2, $$If`a$$Ifkdk7$$Ifl4\ <$` M `T`T (0$64 lalf4p(`iqrs $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$ $$If`a$stkd8$$Ifl4r <$  T T T 20$64 lalf4p2t  $If $If $If$IfSMC999 $If $If$Ifkd9$$Iflr <$ TTT0$64 lalçɧΧӧ٧SMC999 $If $If$Ifkd:$$Iflr <$ TTT0$64 lal٧ڧSMC999 $If $If$Ifkdw;$$Iflr <$ TTT0$64 lal "SMC999 $If $If$Ifkd7<$$Iflr <$ TTT0$64 lal"#5;?DISMC999 $If $If$Ifkd<$$Iflr <$ TTT0$64 lalIJekotySMC999 $If $If$Ifkd=$$Iflr <$ TTT0$64 lalyzSE?;95x !h^`hkdw>$$Iflr <$ TTT0$64 lal%&CD^_ !)`z{|}ճ1em͵%Z[лҼԼ)*В½ВВhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\aJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[67] hv[] hv[6] hv[7CJ hv[CJhv[5CJH* hv[5CJhv[ hv[5\hv[5CJOJQJ\^J9.>` $$Ifa$$If$If֭$Ifkd7?$$Iflr 8x!  2%%%%%04 lalp2%%%%%֭ ?9$Ifkdc@$$Iflr 8x! 04 lal $$If]a$ $ $If] a$ %&,?9$IfkdA$$Iflr 8x! 04 lal $$If]a$ $ $If] a$,17=CDJ?9$IfkdA$$Iflr 8x! 04 lal $$If]a$ $ $If] a$JOTY^_z?9$IfkdpB$$Iflr 8x! 04 lal $$If]a$ $ $If] a$z?9$IfkdC$$Iflr 8x! 04 lal $$If]a$ $ $If] a$׮?9$IfkdC$$Iflr 8x! 04 lal $$If]a$ $ $If] a$׮ݮ?9$Ifkd}D$$Iflr 8x! 04 lal $$If]a$ $ $If] a$ !|?9 ] kd,E$$Iflr 8x! 04 lal $$If]a$ $ $If] a$|}ճQF  !$IfkdE$$Ifl40\ !`\   0 !4 lalf4p $$Ifa$$Ifx%01+kdF$$Ifl4\\  ! \ T  (0 !4 lalf4p( $$Ifa$1BHNTU^djGkdG$$Ifl\\  !\ T0 !4 lal $$If]a$ $ $If] a$$Ifjpqw}ZTG $ $If] a$$IfkdH$$Ifl\\  !\ T0 !4 lal $$If]a$gaTGG $$If]a$ $ $If] a$$IfkdII$$Ifl\\  !\ T0 !4 lalǴʹgaTGG $$If]a$ $ $If] a$$IfkdI$$Ifl\\  !\ T0 !4 lalʹδgaTGG $$If]a$ $ $If] a$$IfkdJ$$Ifl\\  !\ T0 !4 lal gaTGG $$If]a$ $ $If] a$$IfkdnK$$Ifl\\  !\ T0 !4 lal048<gaTGG $$If]a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd)L$$Ifl\\  !\ T0 !4 lal<=PW^dgaTGG $$If]a$ $ $If] a$$IfkdL$$Ifl\\  !\ T0 !4 laldeg]  $If] kdM$$Ifl\\  !\ T0 !4 lal͵%Z[lu{~~~~~ $$Ifa$x -DM akdhN$$Ifl4 ! !0 !4 lalf4 $Ifkd O$$Ifl4r D"` 20"4 lalf4p2»ʻлѻٻܻ߻$IfFf?R $$Ifa$ kdT$$Ifl  oD"0"$$$$4 lal  $$Ifa$$If  kdU$$Ifl  oD"0"$$$$4 lal!$'*-03 $$Ifa$$If 34 kdV$$Ifl  oD"0"$$$$4 lal4<?BEHKNQT $$Ifa$$If TU kdW$$Ifl  oD"0"$$$$4 lalU]`cfiloru $$Ifa$$If uv kdX$$Ifl  oD"0"$$$$4 lalv~ $$Ifa$$If kdY$$Ifl  oD"0"$$$$4 lal*+,xBDXyy $$Ifa$x -DM \kdZ$$Ifl4""0"4 lalf4 H$If]H *+,xD Hx|/0 3npq2QR λδήλδή hv[5 hv[57 hv[H*] hv[] hv[6 hv[CJH* hv[CJ hv[5CJhv[56CJ\] hv[5\hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJ hv[7CJhv[6 Hkd)[$$Ifl4Fj#`j`  0    4 lalf4p $$Ifa$$If "4>DFH| $e$If]ea$$IfFf] $$Ifa$F@7* $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd_$$IflֈjH#j88804 lal 193$Ifkdw`$$IflֈjH#j88804 lal $e$If]ea$15=EMU $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$UVz~F@77 $$Ifa$$IfkdJa$$IflֈjH#j88804 lal93$Ifkdb$$IflֈjH#j88804 lal $e$If]ea$ $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$F@7* $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdb$$IflֈjH#j88804 lal93$Ifkdc$$IflֈjH#j88804 lal $e$If]ea$#(-2 $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$23>BHF@7* $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdd$$IflֈjH#j88804 lalHNTZ[p93$Ifkdie$$IflֈjH#j88804 lal $e$If]ea$pty~ $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$F@@@$Ifkdnopq$If $$Ifa$x ! !\kdg$$Ifl4##04 lalf4 (UOFFFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkdg$$Ifl4F ,"`  `6  06    4 lalf4p(.02Zbnz $e$If]ea$$IfFfLj $$Ifa$ E;2% $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$ $If^kdRl$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal8. $If^kd6m$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal $e$If]ea$(4@ $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$@BT\hE;2% $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdn$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lalht82$Ifkdn$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal $e$If]ea$ $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$!E?6) $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdo$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal!%)-.C8. $If^kdp$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal $e$If]ea$CGMSY^ $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$^_vzE;2% $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$ $If^kdq$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal8. $If^kdr$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal $e$If]ea$ $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$E;2% $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$ $If^kdrs$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal8. $If^kdVt$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal $e$If]ea$"',17 $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$78SW]E?6) $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd:u$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal]cino82$Ifkdv$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal $e$If]ea$ $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$E?6) $e$If]ea$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdw$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal82$Ifkdw$$Iflֈ ," **6064 lal $e$If]ea$EFfhpvw$%&NOP3]fgwpfppZppT hv[CJhv[OJQJ^JaJhv[OJQJ^J hv[5\hv[mHnHujhv[UmHnHuhv[5CJOJQJ^Jhv[5:CJOJQJ^J,jhv[5:OJQJU^JmHnHuhv[5:CJOJQJ^J hv[CJhv[hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[7 hv[H*] hv[] hv[6Efghpw$&N}}{ 0^`0 ! !^kdx$$Ifl4,","064 lalf4$IfNP523AB ]g $$Ifa$$xa$$a$&$a$&$a$ !'+RI< $$If]a$ $$Ifa$kd~y$$IflFC!  %%%06    4 lalp%%%$If+01QUYqhW$ $If]a$ $$Ifa$kdqz$$IflFC! 06    4 lal $$If]a$OPYZ,-t5;FRS  l]^w,bf`ai»»»hv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[OJQJ^J hv[CJH* hv[5CJhv[ hv[5\ hv[CJhv[5CJH*\hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\] hv[CJhv[5CJH*\hv[5CJ\9YZ`ej~uhh $$If]a$ $$Ifa$kd{$$IflFC! 06    4 laljksx|~udW $$If]a$$ $If]a$ $$Ifa$kd{$$IflFC! 06    4 lal|}~udW $$If]a$$ $If]a$ $$Ifa$kdW|$$IflFC! 06    4 lal-.st~<~yyyyyyrlcc $$Ifa$$If$xa$$a$kd|$$IflFC! 06    4 lal <Z $$Ifa$$Ifkd}$$IflrPI"P      2064 lalp2KE$Ifkd$$IflrPI"P     064 lal $$If]a$  &4KE$Ifkd$$IflrPI"P064 lal $$If]a$4BPRbpzKE$Ifkdր$$IflrPI"P064 lal $$If]a$KE$Ifkd$$IflrPI"P064 lal $$If]a$5FS XSSNNGGG$a$$a$$a$kd$$IflrPI"P064 lal  l $$Ifa$$If$xa$$a$$a$$a$ $$Ifkdj$$Ifsr 0@t"    4  204 sasp2$+29@A^bfLF$IfkdɄ$$Ifsr 0@t"    4 04 sas $D$If]Da$fjopLF$Ifkd$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas $D$If]Da$YSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkdc$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sasYSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd)$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas#(-2YSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas23MQTX\YSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas\]rvz~YSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd{$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sasYSFFFF $D$If]Da$$IfkdA$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sasYSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas YSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd͋$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas  '.38=YSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas=>bglqvYSFFFF $D$If]Da$$IfkdY$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sasvwYSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sasYSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sasYSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas YSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkdq$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas;?DIPYSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd7$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sasPQlszYSFFFF $D$If]Da$$Ifkd$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas^wYTTMFMT$a$$a$$a$kdÒ$$Ifsr 0@t"404 sas,Z| $$Ifa$$If$xa$$Ifkd$$Iflr pP"       2064 lalp2&4BPRKE$IfkdԔ$$Iflr pP"     064 lal $K$If]Ka$KE$Ifkd$$Iflr pP" 064 lal $K$If]Ka$"KE$IfkdF$$Iflr pP" 064 lal $K$If]Ka$")*DKRY`KE$Ifkd$$Iflr pP" 064 lal $K$If]Ka$`a)*K c #XSSSLEL$a$$a$$a$kd$$Iflr pP" 064 lal)K c #V$$$ %Z'['c'''''''&('(G)W)&+/+0+v+w++++",),y,z,,D///////+0203080X0`0a0g00000000000کhv[6CJ]hv[57\hv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[5CJH*\ hv[CJ hv[5CJhv[5CJ\hv[hv[OJQJ^J hv[5\hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\]<##V$$$$$ % $$Ifa$$If$xa$$a$ %"%b%$Ifkd\$$IfTsr |$d      20$4 sap2Tb%p%~%%%%%%HB$Ifkd$$IfTsr |$d     0$4 saT $=$If]=a$%%%%%&&&HB$Ifkdq$$IfTsr |$d0$4 saT $=$If]=a$&!&&&'&>&C&H&M&HB$Ifkd($$IfTsr |$d0$4 saT $=$If]=a$M&R&S&p&u&z&&&HB$Ifkdߛ$$IfTsr |$d0$4 saT $=$If]=a$&&&&&&&UOBBBB $=$If]=a$$Ifkd$$IfTsr |$d0$4 saT&&&&&&&UOBBBB $=$If]=a$$IfkdM$$IfTsr |$d0$4 saT&&' '''"'UOBBBB $=$If]=a$$Ifkd$$IfTsr |$d0$4 saT"'#'>'E'L'S'Z'UOBBBB $=$If]=a$$Ifkd$$IfTsr |$d0$4 saTZ'['''''(G)W)UPPPIIB$a$$a$$a$kdr$$IfTsr |$d0$4 saTW)&+0+w+++++$If $$Ifa$$xa$$a$$a$++++:1 $ $If]a$ $$Ifa$kd)$$Ifl\   (%%%%064 lalp(%%%%++++++++ZQ $$Ifa$kd4$$Ifl\  064 lal$ $If]a$+++,, ,kbQQQ$ $If]a$ $$Ifa$kdޡ$$Ifl\  064 lal , ,,,,!,kbQQQ$ $If]a$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lal!,",y,z,,D/O///kff_XfQH $$Ifa$$xa$$a$$a$$a$kd2$$Ifl\  064 lal///////$If///05, $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kdܣ$$Ifl\   (%%%%064 lalp(%%%%00 00+0/03080UL??? $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd $$Ifl\  064 lal$ h$If]ha$8090X0]0a0g0f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lalg0h00000f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kdk$$Ifl\  064 lal000000f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lal000000f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lal00011 1 1"1)1*1-1B1K1L1Q1\1e1f1j11111111111112222;2B2C2G2`2g2h2n2222222222222223#33333n6w6x666666 77778hv[6CJ] hv[5\hv[OJQJ^Jhv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[K0011 1 1f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kdi$$Ifl\  064 lal 1 1"1&1*1-1f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lal-1.1B1G1L1Q1f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lalQ1R1\1a1f1j1f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kdg$$Ifl\  064 lalj1k11111f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lal111111f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lal111111f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kde$$Ifl\  064 lal112222f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lal22;2?2C2G2f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lalG2H2`2d2h2m2f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kdc$$Ifl\  064 lalm2n22222f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd $$Ifl\  064 lal222222f]PPP $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lal222222f]PCC $h$If]ha$ $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kda$$Ifl\  064 lal2233f]] $$Ifa$kd $$Ifl\  064 lal3333n6x66666677 7|vvvvvv$If $$Ifa$$xa$$a$$a$$a$]kdñ$$Ifl064 lal 7 77#7*7:1$$ $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd^$$Ifl\   (%%%%064 lalp(%%%%*7/707G7N7U7Z7^U $$Ifa$kd}$$Ifl\  064 lal $h$If]ha$Z7[7n7w777kbUUU $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd5$$Ifl\  064 lal777777kbUUU $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lal777777kbUUU $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl\  064 lal778888:?UAVAkfff____U 0^`0$a$$a$kd]$$Ifl\  064 lal 888888<<UAVA`AaAbAAAEEEEGG=KzK{KL8L:LrLqm^UmUOFFhv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[5CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[jhv[UmHnHuhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ^J-jhv[5CJOJQJU^JmHnHuhv[5:CJOJQJ^J hv[CJ hv[CJhv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[OJQJ^J hv[5\hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\]VA`AbAAAEEEEGGSCSDSJSSSUXYYZlZnZpZtZ~ZZZZZZZ[[H[V[X[[[[[[[\\"\?\F\G\k\s\t\\\\\\\\\\ƿhv[56CJ\] hv[\hv[ hv[CJ hv[5\hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\] hv[5CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[5CJ hv[CJ\>RRRRRRg]PP=$ h$If]ha$ $h$If]ha$ $If^kd"$$Ifl\ :&l FF04 lalRRSgZ Z$Ifkd$$Ifl\ :&l FF04 lalSS"S&S+S0Ss$ h$If]ha$ $h$If]ha$ $If^akd$$Ifl4ll04 lalf40S1S4S9S>SCSg]PP=$ h$If]ha$ $h$If]ha$ $If^kd/$$Ifl\ :&l FF04 lalCSDSSSUUXXXYgddb```d\x$kd$$Ifl\ :&l FF04 lal YY"ZDZlZ$ $Ifa$$ ,$5$7$8$9DH$IflZnZpZtZ2*! $$Ifa$$$Ifkd$$Ifl4\j`PPP (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%tZ~ZZZZZZZZZZpfY $ $If] a$ $If`akd$$Ifl404 lalf4  $If] Ffw$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$ ZZZZZ[$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$[[.[.$ $If^kdU$$Ifl֞r j04 lal.[2[:[>[H[L[V[$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$V[X[|[.$ $If^kd"$$Ifl֞r j04 lal|[[[[[[[$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$[[[," $If^kd$$Ifl:֞r j04 lal[[[[[[[$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$[[\.$ $If^kd$$Ifl֞r j04 lal\\ \ \\\\$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$\\!\.  $If] kdc$$Ifl֞r j04 lal!\"\1\4\8\;\?\B\F\ss$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$ $If`akd"$$Ifl404 lalf4F\G\]\.$ $If^kd$$Ifl֞r j04 lal]\_\c\f\k\n\s\$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$s\t\\.$ $If^kdv$$Ifl֞r j04 lal\\\\\\\$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$\\\.$ $If^kd5$$Ifl֞r j04 lal\\\\\\\$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$\\\.$ $If^kd$$Ifl֞r j04 lal\\\\\\\$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$\\]]^.,,*kd$$Ifl֞r j04 lal\\]]^^_``` bb b-b6bBbeHeVeXeseeeeeeeeeeef(f)fBfQfRfqffffffffffggggoisiwizi~ișșșșșșș hv[H* hv[5CJ hv[CJ\ hv[\hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\ hv[5CJ hv[CJH* hv[CJhv[6CJ]hv[5CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJhv[ hv[6]7^^__```bbee eHeIeXere $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$$IfxreseeeeeeRLCCCC $$Ifa$$Ifkdr$$Ifl4F l   %%%0    4 lalf4p%%%eeeeeeeee$ $If]a$ $ $If] a$$IfFfR$ ,$5$7$8$9DH$Ifa$eeeeeA;.. $ $If] a$$Ifkd_$$Iflֈ |l 8804 laleeeee.kd2$$Iflֈ |l 8804 lal$ $If]a$effff#f(f$ $If]a$ $ $If] a$$If(f)f:f=fBfA;.. $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflֈ |l 8804 lalBfGfLfQfRf.kd$$Iflֈ |l 8804 lal$ $If]a$Rfiflfqfvf{ff$ $If]a$ $ $If] a$$IffffffA;.. $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflֈ |l 8804 lalfffff.kd~$$Iflֈ |l 8804 lal$ $If]a$fffffff$ $If]a$ $ $If] a$$IfffgA1 $If]kdQ$$Iflֈ |l 8804 lalggg~iiiii"j4jDjljyy $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifx !akd2$$Ifl404 lalf4 ~iiij j"j4jnjjjjjjjjjjk k*k2ksssssss&t*t+tStXtYt_tttXxYxlxyyyy{9|D|ùùùóóóóóܤܛܛܒhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[6CJ]hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJhv[56CJ] hv[5CJ hv[\hv[5OJQJ\^J hv[CJ hv[5CJ hv[CJ\ hv[6] hv[H*hv[6mmmm nqqq:rPrrr~hY$ $Ifa$$ ,$5$7$8$9DH$Ifx$akd+$$Ifl4X X 0X 4 lalf4 $If] rr~rrrrr$ $Ifa$rr$s,s2, $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Ifl4\j Jj (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%,s4ssssssGA$Ifkd$$Ifl\j Jj04 lal$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$ssssssgaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\j Jj04 lalsst!t&t*tgaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$IfkdP$$Ifl\j Jj04 lal*t+tItNtStXtgaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\j Jj04 lalXtYtttXxYxlx{{{9|gecce_eee[xkd$$Ifl\j Jj04 lal 9|:|;|E|F|G|S|Z|CkdE$$Ifl4F lt"  %%%0t"    4 lalf4p%%% $$Ifa$$IfD|E|F|R|S|h|i|j|k|v|z||||||||}}}6}D}E}b}p}q}}}}}}}}}}~~~~~~~24STUbKY^»»»»»»»»»hv[6CJ]hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJhv[ hv[H* hv[6] hv[5CJ hv[CJ\ hv[CJhv[56CJ\] hv[5hv[5>*CJH*\hv[5CJ\ hv[5CJhv[5CJH*\4Z|a|j| $$Ifa$j|k|kd$$Ifl4r lt" XXX 2%%%%%0t"4 lalf4p2%%%%%k|v|x|z|||||||||||$ h$If]ha$ $$If]a$ $ $If] a$Ff $$Ifa$$If ||||A;. $ $If] a$$Ifkd($$Iflֈ |lt" XXX0t"4 lal|||||$ h$If]ha$ $$If]a$||||A;. $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflֈ |lt" XXX0t"4 lal|} }}}$ h$If]ha$ $$If]a$}}.}1}A;. $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflֈ |lt" XXX0t"4 lal1}6};}@}D}$ h$If]ha$ $$If]a$D}E}Z}]}A;. $ $If] a$$Ifkdw$$Iflֈ |lt" XXX0t"4 lal]}b}g}k}p}$ h$If]ha$ $$If]a$p}q}}}A;. $ $If] a$$Ifkd<$$Iflֈ |lt" XXX0t"4 lal}}}}}$ h$If]ha$ $$If]a$}}}}A;. $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflֈ |lt" XXX0t"4 lal}}}}}$ h$If]ha$ $$If]a$}}}}A;. $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflֈ |lt" XXX0t"4 lal}}}}}$ h$If]ha$ $$If]a$}}}~A;. $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflֈ |lt" XXX0t"4 lal~~~ ~~$ h$If]ha$ $$If]a$~~2TA;+  $If] $IfkdP$$Iflֈ |lt" XXX0t"4 lalTUVab12()3x$<`akd#$$Ifl4t"t"0t"4 lalf4^lqM[DŽȄ*+1Ѕ݅  )3"$PRƈΈЈ^fh׻ר񣜒 hv[CJ\ hv[CJhv[56CJ] hv[5CJ hv[\ hv[5CJhv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\jhv[Uj0B hv[UVhv[jhv[Ujhv[UmHnHu hv[CJhv[6CJ]4".P\$ $Ifa$$ ,$5$7$8$9DH$If2,# $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$Ifl4\  (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%ƈΈЈOI$Ifkd $$Ifl\ 04 lal$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$NV^fgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$Ifl\ 04 lalfhgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd5 $$Ifl\ 04 lalh  =ABGiv|ύp%27GO\./9Г"&+NRVZ_uy}ۿẵ۬ۧhv[5CJ\ hv[5CJ hv[\hv[5CJ\ hv[] hv[6hv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJhv[ hv[6] hv[5CJ hv[CJ\ hv[CJ; gaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$Ifl\ 04 lal  59=AgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$Ifl\ 04 lalABga$Ifkd*$$Ifl\ 04 lalύЍop./9{$ ,$5$7$8$9DH$Ifxakd$$Ifl4  04 lalf4ϓ$ $Ifa$ϓГkd$$Ifl4r :^J  2%%%%%04 lalf4p2%%%%%Г$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$If"&TNAA.$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflr :^J 04 lal&*+NRVA;.. $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflr :^J 04 lal$  $If] a$VZ^_uyA;. $ $If] a$$Ifkdb$$Iflr :^J 04 lal$  $If] a$y}4.$Ifkd$$Iflr :^J 04 lal$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$۔ߔ *.67Z^gٕ:DJV\ktЖіҖӖ ә  N[ҵjhv[Ujhv[UmHnHuhv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJhv[ hv[6] hv[CJ\ hv[5CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJD4kd$$Iflr :^J 04 lal$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$ה۔ߔ$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$IfTNAA.$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflr :^J 04 lal &*.A;.. $ $If] a$$IfkdV$$Iflr :^J 04 lal$  $If] a$.267VZA;. $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflr :^J 04 lal$  $If] a$Z^bfg}4.$Ifkd$$Iflr :^J 04 lal$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$}4kd$$Iflr :^J 04 lal$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$IfѕՕٕݕTNAA.$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$IfkdJ$$Iflr :^J 04 lalݕA;.. $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflr :^J 04 lal$  $If] a$іA;$Ifkd$$Iflr :^J 04 lal$  $If] a$іҖӖ PRhԣx$ bnx^b`nckd$$Ifl4JJ04 lalf4 %2:GPhңԣ45:;fnrsȤ̤ͤݤ 5=Aҿ۠yyyyyy hv[CJ\hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[56CJ] hv[5CJ hv[\ hv[5CJhv[5CJ\hv[56\] hv[5\hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJjhv[Uj(hv[UjB hv[UVhv[/ԣ  4:$ $Ifa$$ ,$5$7$8$9DH$If:;fj2, $ $If] a$$IfkdN$$$Ifl4\&f! (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%jnrsGA$Ifkd%$$Ifl\&f!04 lal$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$ĤȤ̤gaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd)&$$Ifl\&f!04 lal̤ͤݤgaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd&$$Ifl\&f!04 lal gaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkdw'$$Ifl\&f!04 lal59=AgaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd($$Ifl\&f!04 lalABaeimgaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd($$Ifl\&f!04 lalABimnåǥȥ\vȦԦ 3~" prֹڹ 7CžھսƩթնhv[5CJ\ hv[5 hv[5\hv[5OJQJ\^J hv[5CJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJ hv[\hv[ hv[6] hv[CJ\ hv[CJ hv[5CJ8mngaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkdl)$$Ifl\&f!04 lalåǥgaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd*$$Ifl\&f!04 lalǥȥgaTTA$  $If] a$ $ $If] a$$Ifkd*$$Ifl\&f!04 lalPgWW  $If] kda+$$Ifl\&f!04 lal 345HIJNOP $$Ifa$$Ifxakd,$$Ifl4f!f!04 lalf4PTelmrzêǪ̪  $If $If $If V$If$IfFfo. $$Ifa$̪ͪ$$Ifkd0$$Ifl֞ :^$ *FF  0$4 lalp   $If $If $If V$If $$Ifkd1$$Ifl֞ :^$ *FF  0$4 lalp  $)  $If $If $If V$If)*4$$Ifkd2$$Ifl֞ :^$ *FF  0$4 lalp 49>BFKP  $If $If $If V$IfPQj$$Ifkd4$$Ifl֞ :^$ *FF  0$4 lalp joty~  $If $If $If V$If$$Ifkd85$$Ifl֞ :^$ *FF  0$4 lalp   $If $If $If V$Ifë$$Ifkd\6$$Ifl֞ :^$ *FF  0$4 lalp ëǫ̫Ыիګ߫  $If $If $If V$If߫}$$Ifkd7$$Ifl֞ :^$ *FF  0$4 lalp }~{{{{ $$Ifa$$Ifx$lkd8$$Ifl4$$  0$4 lalf4p "3:;?GU[op"$ylkd=$$Ifl4$$  0$4 lalf4p $IfFfL; $$Ifa$ $V`jt~ $$Ifa$$IfҴ$$Ifkd?>$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp Ҵܴ $$Ifa$>$$Ifkd?$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp >HR\fpz $$Ifa$z|$$Ifkd@$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp ĵεص $$Ifa$$$IfkdA$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp #(- $$Ifa$-.7$$Ifkd?C$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp 7<AFJOT $$Ifa$TUh$$IfkdD$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp hlqv{ $$Ifa$$ $IfkdE$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp Ŷʶ϶ $$Ifa$$IflkdF$$Ifl4$$  0$4 lalf4p ϶ж$$IfkdG$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp   $$Ifa$ %$$IfkdH$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp %*/38<B $$Ifa$BC]$$Ifkd9J$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp ]bgkpuz $$Ifa$z{$$IfkdyK$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp  $$Ifa$$$IfkdL$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp ķȷ̷ѷַ $$Ifa$ַ׷$$IfkdM$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp   $$Ifa$  عڹ$Z^Zkd9O$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _  0$4 lalp ڹ 67Cž $$Ifa$$Ifx$d8$ žƾھܾ޾WQHHHH $$Ifa$$IfkdP$$Ifl4F %%%0    4 lalf4p%%%ھEY 6dc AaM/p0;<FRpx08J5=!'"ݸݱŨݟݟݟݟݟݟݟݟݟݟݘݑݟݟ hv[6CJ hv[CJ]hv[6CJ]hv[5CJ\ hv[5CJhv[5CJOJQJ^Jhv[5CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJhv[ hv[CJ hv[5CJhv[56CJ\]9$IfkdQ$$Ifl4rCmnmn 2%%%%%04 lalf4p2%%%%%  :kdYS$$Ifl4rCmnmn  04 lalf4p $$If]a$ 58=@E $$If]a$$IfEForwzGA444 $$If]a$$IfkdsT$$Ifl4rCmnmn  04 lalf4p z:4$IfkdU$$Ifl4rCmnmn  04 lalf4p $$If]a$:4$IfkdV$$Ifl4rCmnmn  04 lalf4p $$If]a$:4$IfkdW$$Ifl4rCmnmn  04 lalf4p $$If]a$"'(:kdX$$Ifl4rCmnmn  04 lalf4p $$If]a$(ILQTY $$If]a$$IfYZGA444 $$If]a$$IfkdY$$Ifl4rCmnmn  04 lalf4p :4$Ifkd[$$Ifl4rCmnmn  04 lalf4p $$If]a$EF:886kd)\$$Ifl4rCmnmn  04 lalf4p $$If]a$Fl YZk $$Ifa$$Ifx  & F xgd!2f  & F xgd!2fvpc $$If]a$$IfkdQ]$$Ifl0 %%064 lalp%%~ $$If]a$$Ifnkd ^$$Ifl0064 lal:<~ $$If]a$$Ifnkd^$$Ifl0064 lal<={}~ $$If]a$$IfnkdT_$$Ifl0064 lal}~~ $$If]a$$Ifnkd_$$Ifl0064 lal  ~ $$If]a$$Ifnkd`$$Ifl0064 lal    !stK@AaMNYnkd"a$$Ifl0064 lalYcV $@$If]@a$kda$$Ifl0b %%064 lalp%% $$Ifa$$Ifx~ $@$If]@a$$Ifnkdb$$Ifl0b064 lal~ $@$If]@a$$Ifnkd%c$$Ifl0b064 lal ~ $@$If]@a$$Ifnkdc$$Ifl0b064 lal,.~ $@$If]@a$$IfnkdYd$$Ifl0b064 lal./0QRJK45=>nkdd$$Ifl0b064 lalrs"#9:23?@R*+Q$a$"23?@R*+Q      % , A B C "Ǹ~uouououj~uc hv[5CJ hv[\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\ hv[5 hv[5\hv[5OJQJ\^J hv[aJhv[jhv[UmHnHuhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ^J-jhv[5CJOJQJU^JmHnHuhv[5:CJOJQJ^J hv[CJ%Q         L x         $ ,($If](a$Ffg$ ,$Ifa$ ,$Ifx    ?0$ ,$Ifa$ ,$Ifkd*i$$Iflֈ (#444F0(#4 lal    % $ ,($If](a$$ ,$Ifa$% & , / 2 ?9''$ ,$Ifa$$Ifkdj$$Iflֈ (#444F0(#4 lal2 8 < A $ ,$Ifa$$ ,($If](a$A B C ?=;;7xkdj$$Iflֈ (#444F0(#4 lal".^$ $Ifa$$If"$,.RT 6>@LNPZnxz%/45JKOghHk Ǿhv[5OJQJ\^J hv[\ hv[H*\hv[ hv[6] hv[5\hv[5CJH*hv[5CJH*\hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ\ hv[CJ hv[5CJ hv[5CJhv[56CJ]97+ $Ifkdk$$Ifl\ R 666 (%%%%04 lalp(%%%%|i$ D$If]Da$ $E$If]Ea$ $'$If]'a$ $If^_kdl$$Ifl404 lalf4aWJ= $E$If]Ea$ $'$If]'a$ $If^kdm$$Ifl\ R 66602s2 4 lal &.ND7 $'$If]'a$ $If^kdVn$$Ifl\ R 66602s2 4 lal$ D$If]Da$.6>@NA0 Z'$If]'kdo$$Ifl\ R 66602s2 4 lal$ D$If]Da$ $E$If]Ea$NPZdnxtg $D$If]Da$ $E$If]Ea$ $'$If]'a$ !Z$If^_kdo$$Ifl404 lalf4xzeTG:- $D$If]Da$ $E$If]Ea$ $'$If]'a$ Z$If^kdp$$Ifl\ R 66602 4 laleT Z'$If]'kdAq$$Ifl\ R 66602 4 lal|o\$ $If]a$ $E$If]Ea$ $'$If]'a$$ ,Z$If^_kdr$$Ifl404 lalf4aPC6 $E$If]Ea$ $'$If]'a$ Z$If^kdr$$Ifl\ R 66602s2h4 lal%*N</ $'$If]'a$ !Z$If^kd^s$$Ifl\ R 66602s2h4 lal$ $If]a$*/45>A0 Z$If^kdt$$Ifl\ R 66602s2h4 lal$ $If]a$ $E$If]Ea$>BFJK.kdt$$Ifl\ R 66602s2h4 lal$ $If]a$$ E$If]Ea$ $'$If]'a$KghiGHkl  '&_kdu$$Ifl404 lalf4 $If$If '&( @BN|39_e} SY\4!@!"*#"$$$*$,$N$P$X$Z$$$$$$%%%%&& &&Դ hv[CJ\ hv[H*\ hv[CJH* hv[CJ hv[CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ] hv[5CJhv[5CJ\ hv[5CJhv[ hv[\hv[5OJQJ^J>&(< @L$ $Ifa$ $Ifx  LN~2 #d$If]#kd>v$$Ifl4\dP<#dF (%%%%0#4 lalf4p(%%%%~yy  $If  $If] $If`ckdw$$Ifl4##0#4 lalf4 g]OEE  $If  $If] $If`kd_x$$Ifl\dP<#dF0#4 lal ).38g]OEE  $If  $If] $If`kd0y$$Ifl\dP<#dF0#4 lal89UZ_dg]OEE  $If  $If] $If`kdz$$Ifl\dP<#dF0#4 lalde|g]  $Ifkdz$$Ifl\dP<#dF0#4 lal|}  $If $If`ckd{$$Ifl4##0#4 lalf4g]SSS  $If $If`kdJ|$$Ifl\dP<#dF0#4 lal g]SSS  $If $If`kd!}$$Ifl\dP<#dF0#4 lalINSXg]SSS  $If $If`kd}$$Ifl\dP<#dF0#4 lalXYgW  $If] kd~$$Ifl\dP<#dF0#4 lal"""*#0#"$,$N$Z$$$zzzzzz$ $Ifa$ $Ifxakd$$Ifl4##0#4 lalf4 $$$%%5/&& $$Ifa$$IfkdW$$Ifl\D%FF (%%%%0D%64 lalp(%%%%%%%b%l%v%%]W$Ifkd$$Ifl\D%FF0D%64 lal $$Ifa$%%%%&&f`WWW $$Ifa$$Ifkdz$$Ifl\D%FF0D%64 lal&& &&***H++fd`ddd\P $IfxkdT$$Ifl\D%FF0D%64 lal&9(**H++++,, , ,,E,F,j,k,,,,,,,---g.../?@Apuy-26D ៕zhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ]hv[56CJhv[56CJ] hv[5CJj]hv[UjnB hv[UVjhv[Ujhv[U\mHnHuhv[6CJ\] hv[CJ\ hv[5CJhv[5OJQJ\^J hv[6]hv[0OPˉ *LXz$ $Ifa$$ ,$5$7$8$9DH$Ifx *LNz|4<>BFGy}~یߌ CGHx|}ڍލߍ267;du{ڗĽѷhv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJ hv[CJ\hv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[ hv[6] hv[CJ\ hv[CJhv[56CJ] hv[5CJ hv[\A$2( \$Ifkd@$$Ifl4\"F (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%$,4<>F< \$Ifkd$$Ifl\"F04 lal$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ F@$Ifkd=$$Ifl\"F04 lal$ $If]a$ $$If]a$:>BFg]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$Ifkd$$Ifl\"F04 lalFGquy}g]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$Ifkd$$Ifl\"F04 lal}~g]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$Ifkdn$$Ifl\"F04 lalӌ׌یߌg]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$Ifkd)$$Ifl\"F04 lalߌ g]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$Ifkd$$Ifl\"F04 lal;?CGg]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$Ifkd$$Ifl\"F04 lalGHptx|g]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$IfkdZ$$Ifl\"F04 lal|}g]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$Ifkd$$Ifl\"F04 lalҍ֍ڍލg]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$Ifkd$$Ifl\"F04 lalލߍ g]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$Ifkd$$Ifl\"F04 lal*.26g]PP<$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ \$IfkdF$$Ifl\"F04 lal67ڗۗgecceeeeeaekd$$Ifl\"F04 lal ۗțʛϧ)*4opx$a$ HțɛʛStϧ()opdfĬ LM\̾}w}w}w}pi}bXhv[56CJ] hv[5CJ hv[5CJ hv[5CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[5CJ\ hv[5\hv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[6CJ] hv[CJhv[jhv[UmHnHuhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ^J-jhv[5CJOJQJU^JmHnHu"pqr~ԫ6<BNZd$ , $If] a$FfN$ ,$Ifa$ ,$Ifdf?0$ ,$Ifa$ ,$Ifkd_$$Iflֈ l"XXXF0"4 lal$ , $If] a$$ ,$Ifa$ĬʬЬ?9''$ ,$Ifa$$IfkdD$$Iflֈ l"XXXF0"4 lalЬެ$ ,$Ifa$$ , $If] a$ L?=9=2 kd $$Iflֈ l"XXXF0"4 lalLM\j2kd!$$Ifl4Fp ``0 %%%06    4 lalf4p%%%$ $Ifa$$If "$VXвڲ"$FP`xz|ֳسܳ./2FGJ^_egʴ˴  !"#hv[ hv[CJ hv[5\hv[5B*CJph hv[CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\] hv[CJhv[56CJ] hv[5 hv[5CJA"2f$If$ $Ifa$  $Ifkd1"$$Ifl4r@p 000 0 2%%%%%064 lalf4p2%%%%%Ʋвڲm`mQ$ $Ifa$ $$If]a$$ $If]a$ $If^ckd#$$Ifl4  064 lalf4 $IfP@-$ $If]a$ $If^kd6$$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4"$ $Ifa$$ $If]a$ $$If]a$"$<FP@-$ $If]a$ $If^kd$$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4FPZ`$ $Ifa$$ $If]a$ $$If]a$`bzPD $Ifkd%$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4z|$ $If]a$ $If^ckd&$$Ifl4  064 lalf4³̳PF333$ $If]a$ $If^kd '$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4ֳ̳سܳ=3 $If^kd'$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4$ $If]a$=3 $If^kd($$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4$ $If]a$ =3 $If^kdH)$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4$ $If]a$$)./=kd*$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4$ $If]a$/27<AF$ $If]a$ $If^FGJOTYPF333$ $If]a$ $If^kd*$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4Y^_f=0 Z$Ifkdp+$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4$ $If]a$fglqv{xxxx$ $If]a$ Z$If^ckd(,$$Ifl4  064 lalf4P?,,$ $If]a$ Z$If^kd,$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4=0 Z$Ifkdj-$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4$ $If]a$Ŵʴ}jjjj$ $If]a$$ ,Z$5$7$8$9DH$If^ckd".$$Ifl4  064 lalf4ʴ˴ܴP?,,$ $If]a$ Z$If^kd.$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4=, Z$If^kdd/$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4$ $If]a$  =kd0$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4$ $If]a$ !$ $If]a$ Z$If^!"#ɷOjPNJFBJBkd0$$Ifl4r@p 0000064 lalf4ɷOj*,<lx$)*L "+378A%&>?@ABCx»»»»»矗뎅hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\jK7hv[UjsB hv[UVjhv[Uhv[6CJ] hv[CJ\ hv[CJhv[56CJ] hv[5CJ hv[5CJ hv[5CJhv[ hv[CJhv[5CJOJQJ\^J/j*: $$Ifa$$ $Ifa$ $If  :<Xb3- $$If]a$$Ifkd1$$Ifl\ $  (%%%%064 lalp(%%%%blvxF@$Ifkd33$$Ifl\ $ 064 lal$ $If]a$ $$If]a$f`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd3$$Ifl\ $ 064 lal  f`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd4$$Ifl\ $ 064 lal $(f`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd5$$Ifl\ $ 064 lal()*L%BCfd``dZNJ n^`n`kdq6$$Ifl\ $ 064 lalx:\^"*,t$()AIMN_gkl!%&ҿҬҬҬҬҬҬҬҬҬҬҬ hv[CJ hv[CJ\hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ] hv[5CJ hv[\hv[5CJ\hv[hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\]?:\l $$Ifa$$ $Ifa$$ ,$5$7$8$9DH$Ifx$ 2,# $$Ifa$$IfkdmB$$Ifl4\&f! (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%"*,t|OI$IfkdC$$Ifl\&f!04 lal$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$gaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$IfkdHD$$Ifl\&f!04 lal $(gaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$IfkdD$$Ifl\&f!04 lal()AEIMgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$IfkdE$$Ifl\&f!04 lalMN_cgkgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd=F$$Ifl\&f!04 lalklgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$IfkdF$$Ifl\&f!04 lalgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$IfkdG$$Ifl\&f!04 lalgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd2H$$Ifl\&f!04 lalgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$IfkdH$$Ifl\&f!04 lal!%gaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$IfkdI$$Ifl\&f!04 lal%&#g[WURRNH$Ifx$ H]^Hkd'J$$Ifl\&f!04 lal&,O]cu{2345DEFG^_`ahnABEFG (ԾԾԾԸ此hv[6CJ] hv[CJ hv[H* hv[CJhv[56CJ\]hv[5CJH*\hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[ hv[6]=#4:FP`jx $$Ifa$$IfkdJ$$Iflr:$XXXX 2%%%%%0$2 :4 la:p2%%%%%LF$IfkdL$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la: $$Ifa$ LF$IfkdL$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la: $$Ifa$8<@DHUOFFFF $$Ifa$$IfkdsM$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la:HIaeimqUOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkd1N$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la:qrUOFFFF $$Ifa$$IfkdN$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la:UOFFFF $$Ifa$$IfkdO$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la:UOFFFF $$Ifa$$IfkdYP$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la: UOFFFF $$Ifa$$IfkdQ$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la:(,048UOFFFF $$Ifa$$IfkdQ$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la:89W[_cgUOFFFF $$Ifa$$IfkdR$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la:ghFUOIGGGCL]L]kd9S$$Iflr:$XXXX0$2 :4 la:=Z\r@Pr $$If`a$$ $Ifa$$ ,$5$7$8$9DH$Ifx$`=Z\r@Brt  ckopFNRSs{-59:W_cdj󿺳 hv[6] hv[CJ hv[CJ\hv[56CJ] hv[5CJ hv[\hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ \jShv[UjB hv[UVhv[jhv[U:2,# $$Ifa$$Ifkd_$$Ifl4\#TT (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%  *.26OI$Ifkd`$$Ifl\#TT04 lal$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$67cgkogaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkda$$Ifl\#TT04 lalopgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdqb$$Ifl\#TT04 lalgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd4c$$Ifl\#TT04 lalgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdc$$Ifl\#TT04 lal!gaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdd$$Ifl\#TT04 lal!"FJNRgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd}e$$Ifl\#TT04 lalRSsw{gaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd@f$$Ifl\#TT04 lalgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdg$$Ifl\#TT04 lalgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdg$$Ifl\#TT04 lal gaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdh$$Ifl\#TT04 lal  -159gaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$IfkdLi$$Ifl\#TT04 lal9:W[_cgaXXI$ $Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdj$$Ifl\#TT04 lalcd.g_[WUQK$IfxH^Hkdj$$Ifl\#TT04 lal>?OPVWfg}~6<bsy2AUhxUhostxr>afqֿ湰湰hv[6CJ] hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[5hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\ hv[5\hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[6]hv[E.>DOWfo $$Ifa$$Ifkdk$$Iflr2&$FF 2%%%%%0$2 :4 lalp2%%%%%LF$Ifkdl$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lal $$Ifa$ LF$Ifkdm$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lal $$Ifa$159=AUOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkdn$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lalABfjnrvUOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkdo$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lalvwUOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkd|p$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lalUOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkd^q$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lal  UOFFFF $$Ifa$$IfkdFr$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lal26:>BUOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkd.s$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lalBC^bfjnUOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkdt$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lalnoUOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkdt$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lalUOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkdu$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lalUOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkdv$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lal%)-15UOFFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkdw$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lal56 QUOMMKCC & F gd!2fH^Hkdx$$Iflr2&$FF0$2 :4 lal 2qrfg S  x Tn^T`n *C+Oy aw.8:EGQSe#$/~g;ES " $ T V   ` ƾhv[56CJ] hv[5CJ hv[5CJhv[5CJ\jnyhv[UjqB hv[UVjhv[U hv[6]hv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[hv[6CJ] hv[CJ>S Y " 2 T f  $ $Ifa$ $If   0$ $Ifkd$$Ifl4\ `    (%%%%064 lalf4p(%%%%     @ ^ ` r z       $ $If] a$$IfFfu$ $Ifa$`     $ % K L m n      "$TV ht -231VWst06PUv{~.0`bҺhv[6CJ] hv[\hv[56CJ] hv[5CJ hv[5CJhv[hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJ\ hv[CJI   -'$IfkdŅ$$Ifl֞  064 lal        $ $If] a$   -'$Ifkdņ$$Ifl֞  064 lal      $  $ $If] a$$ % - -$ $$Ifa$kdŇ$$Ifl֞  064 lal- 2 7 < A F K  $ $If] a$K L U -'$Ifkd$$Ifl֞  064 lalU Y ] a e i m  $ $If] a$m n v -'$Ifkd$$Ifl֞  064 lalv {       $ $If] a$   -'$Ifkd$$Ifl֞  064 lal        $ $If] a$   -'#kd$$Ifl֞  064 lal"2Tf $$If`a$$ $Ifa$ $If x  3- $$If]a$$Ifkd $$Ifl\ 0  (%%%%064 lalp(%%%% F@$Ifkd$$Ifl\ 0 064 lal$ $If]a$ $$If]a$ T^hrf`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$IfkdT$$Ifl\ 0 064 lalrtf`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd $$Ifl\ 0 064 lalf`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\ 0 064 lal f`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$IfkdƑ$$Ifl\ 0 064 lal  %)-1f`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\ 0 064 lal1231?fcZSJ> $If x   $kdz$$Ifl\ 0 064 lal?^{ $$If`a$$ $Ifa$3- $$If]a$$IfkdT$$Ifl\ 0  (%%%%064 lalp(%%%%F@$Ifkdѕ$$Ifl\ 0 064 lal$ $If]a$ $$If]a$f`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\ 0 064 lal f`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkdi$$Ifl\ 0 064 lal&+05f`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$IfkdC$$Ifl\ 0 064 lal56HLPTf`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\ 0 064 lalTUnrvzf`SS@$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\ 0 064 lalz{~ f[TK? $If x   kdÚ$$Ifl\ 0 064 lal .>`p$If$ $Ifa$3-$$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Ifl\P 6P (%%%%064 lalp(%%%%SMDD $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Ifl\P 6P064 lal$ $If]a$v~!!%%%%%%+&6&:&E&(!+,+-+.+O+P+Q+Z+\+g+m+s+++4̽~wnhnhnhnh hv[CJhv[6CJ] hv[5aJjhv[5UaJhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ^J-jhv[5CJOJQJU^JmHnHuhv[5:CJOJQJ^J hv[\ hv[\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[ hv[6] hv[CJ hv[CJ\& f`WWD$ $If]a$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Ifl\P 6P064 lalv~"=%&s)f`ZVVVVVV` ]` kd̞$$Ifl\P 6P064 lal s) +!+"+,+.+O+Q+C.]0624*4<47:>?9CDCoC~CC $$Ifa$$Ifx$a$  4<4T478868:;;C;>>?9C:CoC~CCCCCDDDDD.D0DLDND^DJEREVFvFXLpLmNNNNNOOO OPPPP.P0P:PRHSISJUTUUUUUVWWWWXXXXZZZZ0Z2ZZhZjZtZ2\&_F_B`p`t``crdddddddddeeeee e`fafgܿܶܶܭܿܶܶܭ hv[CJH*hv[56CJhv[5CJ\hv[6CJ]hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[5CJ hv[5\ hv[CJ hv[7CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[5CJ<\P^PxP!$Ifkd$$Ifs4{ry eQ=!    (%%%04 salf4p(%%%xPzPPPPPPx $$If]a$ $h$If]ha$ $If^_kdP$$Ifs4!!04 salf4PPPPPQWI<<< $h$If]ha$ $If^kdۨ$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 salQQQ4Q>QFQJ<// $h$If]ha$ $If^kd$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 sal $$If]a$FQPQZQ\QQQ=/ $If^kd]$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 sal $$If]a$ $h$If]ha$QQQQQQ=/ $If^kd$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 sal $$If]a$ $h$If]ha$QQQQQQ=kd߫$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 sal $$If]a$ $h$If]ha$Q RRRRR $$If]a$ $h$If]ha$ $If^R R>RWQ$Ifkd$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 sal>R?RURZR_RdRiRx $$If]a$ $h$If]ha$ $If^_kda$$Ifs4!!04 salf4iRjRRRRRWI<<< $h$If]ha$ $If^kd$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 salRRRRRRJ<// $h$If]ha$ $If^kd$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 sal $$If]a$RRRRRR=/ $If^kdn$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 sal $$If]a$ $h$If]ha$RRRRRS=/ $If^kd/$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 sal $$If]a$ $h$If]ha$S SSSSS=kd$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 sal $$If]a$ $h$If]ha$S7S;S?SCSGS $$If]a$ $h$If]ha$ $If^GSHSISJUTUUUWUQOKE$Ifxkd$$Ifsry eQ=! 04 salUUUUUUUJD$Ifkdr$$Ifs Fy i0 %%%0    4 salp%%% $$Ifa$UUUUU}wnn $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfsFy i00    4 salUUUUU}wnn $$Ifa$$Ifkd6$$IfsFy i00    4 salUUUUU}wnn $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfsFy i00    4 salUUUVVWXXXX}{{{ww{sd$7$8$H$Ifxkd$$IfsFy i00    4 sal XZ>ZvZ$$7$8$H$Ifa$vZxZZ+$7$8$H$IfkdI$$Ifs4{\//ttt (%%%%02 s2 4 sasf4p(%%%%ZZZZZ [[J;$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$[ [*[,[t[~[[J;$7$8$H$Ifkdb$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$[[[[[[[J;$7$8$H$Ifkd7$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$[["\'\,\1\\M;;;$$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$Ifkd $$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf41\2\&_F_G_ccrd\VTTPTLxkd$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4rddddddJ<3 $$Ifa$ H$If]kdĻ$$Ifs4{0/`/\ %%02 s2 4 sasf4p%% $ H$Ifa$ H$If]dddee e $$Ifa$ $ H$Ifa$ e"e>e+$7$8$H$Ifkd׼$$Ifs4{\/ /ttt (%%%02 s2 4 sasf4p(%%%>eHeRe\e^eeeJ;$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$eeeeeeeJ;$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$eeeffffJ;$7$8$H$Ifkdο$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$ff2f7fs@ss7($7$8$H$Ifkd4$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$ssssss7kd-$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$ssstt t$$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$If tt3t8t=tI:(($$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$Ifkd&$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4=tBtGtHtdt7($7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$dtitntstxtyt7kd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$ytttttt$$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$IfttttI:($$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4ttttt7kd $$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$tttuuu$$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$Ifu u)u.u3uI:(($$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf43u8u=u>uZu7($7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$Zu_uduiulumu7kd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$muuuuuu$$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$IfuuuuuI:(($$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4uuuuu7($7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$uvv vvv7kd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$v4v9v>vCvHv$$7$8$H$Ifa$$$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$IfHvIv^vcvhvI:(($$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4hvmvpvqvv7($7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$vvvvvv7kd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$Ifa$vvvvvv$$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$Ifvvw]z}}}IGA=GGkd$$Ifs4{r,^$,0$2 s2 4 sasf4}~`l~̀ $$Ifa$$Ifx ̀΀Ҁ܀:4' $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\ wc (%%%%04 lalp(%%%%܀ QK> $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\ wc04 lal $If] $$If]a$$.8lfYL> $If] $$If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\ wc04 lal8:>FPZlfYL> $If] $$If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Ifl\ wc04 lalZ\`jt~lfYL> $If] $$If]a$ $$If]a$$IfkdB$$Ifl\ wc04 lal~CDKRYljfd`ZQQQ $$Ifa$$Ifxkd$$Ifl\ wc04 lal Y` $$Ifa$`ag$Ifkd$$Ifl4(rH A 2%%%%%04 lalf4p2%%%%%gow $$Ifa$qG΅υBCGH=>BC HZ/0ÊĊ΋&ɿɿɿɿɿɿɿɿɶɯߔߏ~ hv[CJ hv[57hv[ hv[H*hv[6CJ\hv[5CJH*hv[5CJ\ hv[5\hv[7CJ\hv[6CJ\] hv[CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJhv[56CJ]hv[56CJ hv[5CJ/$Ifkd$$Ifl4rH A 2%%%%%04 lalf4p2%%%%%ƒÃ8kd$$Ifl4rH A04 lalf4$ K$If]Ka$ $K$If]Ka$ÃŃʃσԃك$ K$If]Ka$ $K$If]Ka$$Ifكڃ܃VPCCC $K$If]Ka$$Ifkd$$Ifl4rH A04 lalf4E?22 $K$If]Ka$$Ifkd$$Ifl4rH A04 lalf4$ K$If]Ka$ 82$Ifkd$$Ifl4rH A04 lalf4$ K$If]Ka$ $K$If]Ka$G82kd*$$Ifl4rH A04 lalf4$ K$If]Ka$ $K$If]Ka$G >kd3$$Ifl4F#`` %%%0#    4 lalf4p%%% $$Ifa$$Ifx"4BD $$Ifa$$IfDFH$IfkdG$$Ifl4r# ' tt t 2%%%%%0#4 lalf4p2%%%%%HZj|ĈΈ؈ $ $If]a$ $$If]a$$IfFfF $$Ifa$ $If`  $Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ M#:::::0#    4 lalf4$.8BLV$ $If]a$ $$If]a$VX\$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ M#:::::0#    4 lalf4\fnx$ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ M#:::::0#    4 lalf4ĉΉ։މ$ $If]a$ $$If]a$މ$Ifkd|$$Ifl4ִ M#:::::0#    4 lalf4  $ $If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkde$$Ifl4ִ M#:::::0#    4 lalf4"&*.$ $If]a$ $$If]a$./Ê]kdN$$Ifl4ִ M#:::::0#    4 lalf4ÊĊx>` $ H$Ifa$ H$If]x >‘đؑڑ  ƓǓޖԗ֗ #$)9IW՟ݟװذ׶ާǞǺhv[5:CJOJQJ^Jhv[7CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[ hv[CJ hv[7CJ hv[CJ\hv[56CJ hv[5CJ hv[CJhv[56CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\1‘đ֑I;2% $ H$Ifa$ $$Ifa$ H$If]kd7$$Ifs4{F/$`/\`u %%%0$    2 s2 4 sasf4p%%%  $ H$Ifa$ $$Ifa$kdu$$Ifs4{r/$ /ttt u (%%%0$2 s2 4 sasf4p(%%%&+05:$$7$8$H$If]a$$7$8$H$If:;_diI:$$$$7$8$H$If]a$$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r/$/tttu0$2 s2 4 sasf4inst3$$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r/$/tttu0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$$$7$8$H$Ifa$$$7$8$H$If]a$ÒȒ͒I:$$$$7$8$H$If]a$$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r/$/tttu0$2 s2 4 sasf4͒Ғגؒ3$$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{r/$/tttu0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$3kdw$$Ifs4{r/$/tttu0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$#(-2$$7$8$H$If]a$$7$8$H$If23QV[I:$$$$7$8$H$If]a$$7$8$H$Ifkdb$$Ifs4{r/$/tttu0$2 s2 4 sasf4[`ef3$$7$8$H$IfkdM$$Ifs4{r/$/tttu0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$3kd8$$Ifs4{r/$/tttu0$2 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$œ$$7$8$H$If]a$$7$8$H$IfœƓǓޖIGCG?xkd# $$Ifs4{r/$/tttu0$2 s2 4 sasf4֗*$$7$8$H$Ifa$$7$8$H$If*+O+$7$8$H$Ifkd $$Ifs4{\//ttt (%%%%02 s2 4 sasf4p(%%%%OTY^_qvF7$7$8$H$Ifkd` $$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$v{F7$7$8$H$Ifkd5 $$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$0kd $$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$$$7$8$H$If]a$ĘɘΘϘ7kd $$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$$7$8$H$If#F7$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$#(-.LQVF7$7$8$H$Ifkd$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$V[\sw|F7$7$8$H$Ifkd^$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4$$7$8$H$If]a$\M777$$7$8$H$If]a$$7$8$H$Ifkd3$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf49BI\ZVZRLC $$Ifa$$Ifxkd$$Ifs4{\//ttt02 s2 4 sasf4IPWXY*$$Ifkd$$Ifs4\` @ $``  (%%%%0$2 s2 4 sasf4p(%%%% $IfYagou}Þ$IfFf $$Ifa$ÞĞמ*$$Ifkd$$Ifs֞` P@0  $` 0$2 s2 4 sasמܞ $$Ifa$ *$$Ifkd$$Ifs֞` P@0  $` 0$2 s2 4 sas !&+ $$Ifa$+,@*$$Ifkd$$Ifs֞` P@0  $` 0$2 s2 4 sas@EJOTY^ $$Ifa$^_{*$$Ifkd$$Ifs֞` P@0  $` 0$2 s2 4 sas{ $$Ifa$*$$Ifkd`$$Ifs֞` P@0  $` 0$2 s2 4 sasşʟϟԟ $$Ifa$ԟ՟ݟ*$ kd:$$Ifs֞` P@0  $` 0$2 s2 4 sasiװذ >;G,:ghl~ 0^`0ذٰJO(;G\],:h59˾xndxxx[xhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\]hv[56CJ\ hv[6CJ hv[CJ hv[5\hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[6 hv[6] hv[]hv[jhv[UmHnHuhv[5CJOJQJ^Jhv[5:CJOJQJ^Jhv[5:CJOJQJ^J,jhv[5:OJQJU^JmHnHu#l~LefgR_`aty(CDE .48?@fjKgmB»»ӻӻ»ӻ»ײ hv[CJhv[5CJH* hv[5CJhv[5CJH*\hv[5CJ\hv[6CJ]hv[5CJ\ hv[6]hv[56\] hv[5\hv[hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[]hv[5\] hv[6CJ hv[CJ2~LR( mx $$Ifa$$Ifx(Up~93333$Ifkd$$If\2dRt" " (%%%%0B"2:4 alp(%%%%BFjn -1gk68jl^bT\]a>@PR\cEN! hv[CJH*hv[56CJ hv[5CJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[6CJ] hv[CJ hv[H*hv[ hv[6] hv[CJhv[6CJ]A~jdddd$Ifkd$$If\2dRt" "0B"2:4 al3Ajdddd$Ifkd$$If\2dRt" "0B"2:4 alABQzjdddd$Ifkdx $$If\2dRt" "0B"2:4 al6j$Tjddddd`^ZxV^Vkdk!$$If\2dRt" "0B"2:4 al TU\]o $$Ifa$$If<666$Ifkdl"$$Ifl\ d !   (%%%%04 lalp(%%%%WQQQ$Ifkd#$$Ifl\ d !  04 lal $If^  !$If1@R[lfff\ $If^$Ifkd$$$Ifl\ d !  04 lal[\lfff$Ifkd%$$Ifl\ d !  04 lalgq  $$Ifa$$Ifx%\kd&$$Ifl4!!04 lalf4 !"#gq?ac'()CDEFG,59ƿƿƺ堖{qjqjc\ hv[5CJ hv[CJ\ hv[5\hv[56\] hv[6]hv[hv[5CJ\ hv[>*CJj5;hv[CJUjB hv[UVjhv[CJU hv[] hv[6 hv[6CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\ hv[5CJ hv[CJhv[6CJ]hv[56CJ\]$   !&+WNNNNNNN $$Ifa$kdX'$$Ifs4F!`+  %%%0    4 salf4p%%%+056?@HKNQTrh^ h$If $If h$If] ($If](\kdu-$$Ifs4!!04 salf4$IfFf* $$Ifa$ TWZ]`ailorux~FfQ2 2$If 2$If $If h$If] ($If]($IfFf7/ $If $If $$Ifa$ h$IfwmccZ $$Ifa$ h$If $If h$If] $If$If\kd94$$Ifs4!!04 salf4 h$If '(G$a$]FfM9 $$Ifa$ h$If $If h$If] $If$IfFf6 $If $IfG9 $$Ifa$ $If^$Ifx ^` 9:;@EJOTMG>>>>> $$Ifa$$Ifkd@$$If4F@ "`@   %%%0"    2 s2 4 asf4p%%%9:;cdlmopHIJTVrs#&'(0]e=?ƿƺ hv[>*CJjfhv[CJUjn|||||v hv[aJhv[6CJ] hv[CJhv[6CJ] hv[CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\]hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\ hv[6]hv[ hv[5\hv[56\] hv[7hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\+3 4   M T h v  $$Ifa$$Ifx n^`nv w x }      WNNNNNNN $$Ifa$kd $$IfH4FV#  0#    4 HaHf4p              $$If]a$$IfFf $$Ifa$   kd$$IfH ^ VN #         0#$$$$4 HaH         $$If]a$$If   kd$$IfH ^ VN #0#$$$$4 HaH $(-27; $$If]a$$If ;< kdm$$IfH ^ VN #0#$$$$4 HaH<HMRW\afko $$If]a$$If op kdE$$IfH ^ VN #0#$$$$4 HaHp"D`n $$Ifa$$Ifx !% np$Ifkd$$Ifs4r d # 20#4 sasf4p2npbd+,-$($:ST^b Hh  &!(!4!!!S"""## $ $ζΡhv[6CJ] hv[CJhv[56CJ\] hv[6]hv[hv[56\] hv[5\hv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[6CJ] hv[CJ hv[7CJ hv[CJ] hv[6CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[5CJ2*Nbdt~ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$IfFf $$Ifa$ kdb$$Ifs  dP  !#0#$$$$4 sas  $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$If  kd$$Ifs  dP  !#0#$$$$4 sas,-ST^ $$Ifa$$If&x&$a$ ! ULLLLL $$Ifa$kdȑ$$Ifl4F` T#``  @   06    4 lalf4pkd$$Ifl4r` T# ` 8R 2064 lalf4p2  #x$ $If] a$^kd$$Ifl4##064 lalf4 $IfFf $$Ifa$ #(-16;$ $If] a$ $$Ifa$$$If]a$;<:2( $Ifkd$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lal:@JTZdn $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$np2( $IfkdԚ$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lal $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$2( $Ifkd$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lal.6@JR\fuhuh $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$ $If^kdb$$Ifl4##064 lalf4fh2( $Ifkd$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lal $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$2( $IfkdH$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lal",2<F $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$FHh2( $Ifkd$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lalhjuhuh $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$ $If^kd֡$$Ifl4##064 lalf42( $Ifkdn$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lal $.8 $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$8:t2( $Ifkd$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 laltz $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$2( $Ifkd$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lal    uhuh $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$ $If^kdJ$$Ifl4##064 lalf4  V 2( $Ifkd$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lalV \ d l r z   $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$   2( $Ifkd0$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lal        $$Ifa$$$If]a$$ $If] a$  (!S"T"20.)$a$%kdp$$Ifl֞` >T#` 8064 lal $$$%%''z*****}--.......!0U0]0u0y0|0}0~0000C1D13377788l88 96989üðü՘՘՘՘Փ̍́Ázsz hv[CJ] hv[6CJ hv[5CJ hv[5 hv[CJ hv[7 hv[6 hv[CJhv[56CJH*\]hv[56CJ\] hv[CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[6]hv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[56\] hv[5\-T"%e'(z**}----"...T.v... $$Ifa$$Ifx$a$...$Ifkd$$Ifl4r@   !`@ T`8T` 2%%%%%04 lalf4p2%%%%%.........../ /// $h$If]ha$ $$If]a$ $$If]a$$IfFf֭ $$Ifa$//F/L/3-$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Ifl֞@ j  !@ **8**04 lalL/V/`/f/p/z/ $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ $$If]a$z/|///3-$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Ifl֞@ j  !@ **8**04 lal////// $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ $$If]a$//0 03-$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Ifl֞@ j  !@ **8**04 lal 00000 0 $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ $$If]a$ 0!0:0=03-$ $$Ifa$$Ifkdв$$Ifl֞@ j  !@ **8**04 lal=0B0G0J0O0T0 $h$If]ha$ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ $$If]a$T0U0u0C1D131+% !*]*kd$$Ifl֞@ j  !@ **8**04 lalD13777778@8\8j8 $ !$Ifa$  !$Ifx ! j8l88  !$Ifkd$$Iflr lT!  204 lalp28888888G<  !$Ifkd$$Iflr lT! 04 lal$ !$If]a$88888889GA !kd߶$$Iflr lT! 04 lal$ !$If]a$89:9n9P;{;v@@DEEEE&HoLzLLLLL $$Ifa$$Ifx bn^b`n$a$ !89:9n9P;{;v@@@BBNCRCDDDDEEEEEmEqEEEE&HHHGI]InLoLLDMNNNNNO#Oøå߁߁ypj hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[57\hv[56\]hv[5CJ\ hv[7hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\jhv[CJUjxqB hv[UV hv[CJjhv[CJU hv[6 hv[6] hv[5\hv[hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[57)LLLLMM!MLF==== $$Ifa$$Ifkd=$$Ifl4Fgw"`g!  06    2 s2 4 lasf4p!M2MCMDMFMLMPMSMWM[M_M R$If ]$If $If $If U$If$IfFf) $$Ifa$ _M`MbM)#$Ifkd}$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 lasbMhMlMoMsMwM{M R$If ]$If $If $If U$If{M|M~M)#$Ifkd$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 las~MMMMMMM R$If ]$If $If $If U$IfMMM)#$Ifkd$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 lasMMMMMMM R$If ]$If $If $If U$IfMMM)#$Ifkd$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 lasMMMMMMM R$If ]$If $If $If U$IfMMM)#$Ifkd$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 lasMMMMMMM R$If ]$If $If $If U$IfMMM)#$Ifkd$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 lasMMMMMNN R$If ]$If $If $If U$IfNN N)#$Ifkd$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 las NNNNNN#N R$If ]$If $If $If U$If#N$N&N)#$Ifkd3$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 las&N,N1N5N:N>NCN R$If` ]$If $If $If U$IfCNDNGN)#$IfkdM$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 lasGNMNRNVN[N_NcN R$If ]$If $If $If U$IfcNdNgN)#$Ifkdg$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 lasgNmNqNuNyN}NN R$If ]$If $If $If U$IfNNN)#$Ifkd$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 lasNNNNNNN R$If ]$If $If $If U$IfNNNN)'%kd$$Ifl֞g w"g5062 s2 4 lasNOPPYSZSfSSS:TtT $$Ifa$$Ifx  !d ! #O'OPPPPP5Q9QZSfSjSSxT|TTTTUU'V(V)V/VoVsVVVVVXXYYYvZxZZZ2[6[B[[[ѾߌxxѾnhv[57CJ\ hv[6] hv[]hv[5\]hv[56\] hv[6CJ hv[CJhv[6CJ] hv[CJhv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\hv[5CJ\ hv[6hv[ hv[5\hv[56\ hv[CJ hv[6CJ+tTvTxT|TTTTTRIIII>I $$$Ifa$ $$Ifa$kd$$Ifl4FTJ`T{ { %%%0    4 lalf4p%%%TTTTTTTTTTUUU$U&U>UJUTU^UfUrU|UUUUFf0FfK$IfFf $$$Ifa$ $$Ifa$U)VVVxZZ2[4[6[B[`[|[[[[[ $$$Ifa$$If $$Ifa$x !  !d !@H]@^H  !H^H[[kd$$Ifl4r l`8 2%%%%%04 lalf4p2%%%%%[[\\ \\\\!\"\*\+\-\1\6\<\A\\kd}$$Ifl404 lalf4$IfFf $$Ifa$[[\\ \\\!\"\*\+\Q\R\x\y\\\\\\\]]<]=]I]J]p]q]]]]]]] ^ ^3^4^[^\^d^^^^^^+_[`_`aaýhv[5CJ\ hv[6 hv[5\hv[56\hv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[ hv[CJhv[CJaJhv[6CJ] hv[CJ hv[7CJhv[57CJ\hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\3A\G\L\Q\ $$Ifa$Q\R\T\$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4T\X\]\c\h\n\s\x\ $$Ifa$x\y\{\$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4{\\\\\\\\ $$Ifa$\\\$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4\\\\\\\\ $$Ifa$\\\$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4\\\\\\\\ $$Ifa$\\\$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4\\\\] ]]] $$Ifa$]]]$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4]]!]'],]2]7]<] $$Ifa$<]=]I]$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4I]J]L]P]U][]`]f]k]p] $$Ifa$$If\kd$$Ifl404 lalf4 p]q]s]$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4s]w]|]]]]]] $$Ifa$]]]$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4]]]]]]]] $$Ifa$]]]$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4]]]]]]]] $$Ifa$]]] $Ifkd$$Iflִ 4l880    4 lal]]]]]^^ ^ $$Ifa$ ^ ^^$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4^^^^#^)^.^3^ $$Ifa$3^4^7^$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf47^;^@^F^K^Q^V^[^ $$Ifa$[^\^kd$$Ifl4ִ 4l880    4 lalf4\^^^^^aSacala|aa|||| $$Ifa$x !\kd$$Ifl404 lalf4  !$If aaSaa2c>cdddddeeeeMfqgughhvizi;jjjkkkkkllllllllmnnFoGobofoooop씍~hv[56CJ\ hv[7 hv[6CJ hv[CJ hv[6]hv[6\] hv[\ hv[6hv[hv[5CJ] hv[CJ] hv[6CJ hv[CJhv[6CJ] hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\0aaaaaa90000 $$Ifa$kdH$$If\ a#    (0p#2 V4 ap(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa $$If]a$\kd$$Ifa#p#0p#2 s4 a$IfFf $$Ifa$aaa $$If]a$aa kd<$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 aab bbbb"b'b+b/b $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ /b0b kd$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 a0b8b?bFbLbQbVb[b_bcb $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ cbdb kd$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 adbkbrbzbbbbbbb $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ bb kd$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 abbbbbbbbbb $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ bb kdd$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 abbbbbbbbbc $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ cc kd.$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 acccccc$c)c-c1c $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ 1c2c kd$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 a2c>c?cGcOcWc]cbcgclcqcuc $$If]a$ $$Ifa$\kd$$Ifa#p#0p#2 s4 a$If ucvc kdL$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 avc~ccccccccc $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ cc kd$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 acccccccccc $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ cc kd$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 acccccdd ddd $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ dd kd$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 add#d+d/d4d9d>dCdHd $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ HdId kdt$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 aIdPdXd_dcdhdmdrdvd{d $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ {d|d kd>$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 a|dddddddddd $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ dd kd$$If  qa#0p#$$$$2 s4 addeCf_h;jkFoGoRooooo $$Ifa$x ! ! oooooooppWNNNNNNN $$Ifa$kd$$Ifs4F  `  0    4 sasf4ppp"p#p+p3p;p?pDpIpNpwwwjjjj $$If]a$ $$Ifa$akd$$Ifs402 4 sasf4 ,$5$7$8$9DH$If`FfO p"pIqUqzrrrrrrrssOtStiumuwww{,|[~_~`d^b*7;osԇ؇DH 59!"luɺ຦hv[6CJ] hv[CJ] hv[6CJ hv[CJhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[56\] hv[5\hv[ hv[6] hv[CJ hv[\aJ>NpOpWp_pfp/&&& $$Ifa$kd0$$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasfpjpoptpyp $$If]a$ypzpppp/&&& $$Ifa$kd$$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasppppp $$If]a$ppppp/&&& $$Ifa$kd$$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasppppp $$If]a$ppppp/&&& $$Ifa$kdy$$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasppppp $$If]a$pppq q/&&& $$Ifa$kd< $$Ifs֞ 02 4 sas qqqqq $$If]a$q q'q.q5q/&&& $$Ifa$kd $$Ifs֞ 02 4 sas5q9q>qCqHq $$If]a$HqIqUq/ ,$5$7$8$9DH$If`kd $$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasUqVq^qfqnqrqwq|qq $$If]a$ $$Ifa$akd $$Ifs402 4 sasf4qqqqq/&&& $$Ifa$kd $$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasqqqqq $$If]a$qqqqq/&&& $$Ifa$kd $$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasqqqqq $$If]a$qqqqq/&&& $$Ifa$kd $$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasqqqqq $$If]a$qrrrr/&&& $$Ifa$kdg$$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasrrr$r)r $$If]a$)r*r1r9r@r/&&& $$Ifa$kd*$$Ifs֞ 02 4 sas@rCrHrMrQr $$If]a$QrRrYr`rgr/&&& $$Ifa$kd$$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasgrkrpruryr $$If]a$yrzrrrr/--+kd$$Ifs֞ 02 4 sasruww{,|!i"l6.UVWacZ[^_$a$uy7;6}Wabc@FGM_kl~Uw#tu˴xqfb\ hv[CJ hv[hv[5CJOJQJ hv[5CJ hv[CJ\hv[5CJ\jhv[UmHnHuhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5:CJOJQJ^J,jhv[5:OJQJU^JmHnHuhv[5:CJOJQJ^Jhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[6CJ] hv[CJ hv[6CJ#_kl~tuɩөߩ $$Ifa$$Ifd8_efstuέϭOPrsƮӮԮۮSѰҰ YZ!$%&?ACEGIKTϹܹع j-hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\] hv[6]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[CJ hv[CJ\ *hv[5CJ hv[CJ hv[5CJ? $Ifkds$$IflrY ? zsss 2%%%%%04 lalp2%%%%%  !*5kd$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If*9<?DEN5kd$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$IfNWZ\_`i5kdm$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$Ifiqtw|}5kd*$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If5kd$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If5kd$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$IfȪ˪ΪӪԪݪ5kdo$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$Ifݪ5kdV$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If 3kd=$$IflArY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If!,/2785kd6$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If8BLORWX5kd$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$IfXbgjmrs5kd$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$Ifs}5kd$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If5kdb$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$Ifëūɫʫ5kd-$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$Ifʫԫݫ߫5kd$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If5kd$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If !5kdd $$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If!+357<=5kd!!$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If=GSVY^_5kd!$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal $If V$If $If$If_efjns $If V$If $If $$Ifa$$Ifstuέϭ٭YTRMKKKd8dLkd"$$IflrY ? zsss04 lal ,<O $$Ifa$$IfOPgj93) *$If$Ifkd#$$Ifl4\ L  (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%jmrsVPF *$If$Ifkd$$$Ifl4\ L 04 lalf4 $$Ifa$ `$Iflf\RI $$Ifa$ `$If *$If$Ifkd%$$Ifl\ L 04 lalƮʮήӮlf\RI $$Ifa$ `$If *$If$Ifkdh&$$Ifl\ L 04 lalӮԮlf$Ifkd9'$$Ifl\ L 04 lalRS] $$Ifa$$If\kd ($$Ifl404 lalf4smdd $$Ifa$$Ifkd($$Ifl40V`z  %%064 lalf4p%%Ȱ̰ѰUOE< $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd)$$Ifl4FV == %%06    4 lalf4p%%ѰҰٰܰ{ukb $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd*$$Ifl4FV==06    4 lalf4{ukb $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd+$$Ifl4FV==06    4 lalf4{ukb $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkdo,$$Ifl4FV==06    4 lalf4Y{u$IfkdA-$$Ifl4FV==06    4 lalf4YZ[" $$Ifa$$If^kd!.$$Ifl4VV064 lalf4 "#$(-:?qkbbbb $$Ifa$$Ifkd.$$Ifl40` %%064 lalf4p%%?@kd/$$Ifl4rV  SIe 2%%%%%064 lalf4p2%%%%%@ACEGIKMTUaejmruy} $If $If $IfFfr3 $$Ifa$$If}~$Ifkd5$$Iflִ- V *)0;*06    4 lal $If $If $$Ifa$ $If̴$Ifkd87$$Iflִ- V *)0;*06    4 lalT̴ѴҴӴ>Nտڿ)*vwHIijo/013569:=>jk¹¹hv[56CJ\] hv[5CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[6CJ]hv[5CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJhv[ hv[6] hv[CJA̴=>NCDckd{8$$Ifl4064 lalf4$Ifbkd!9$$Ifl40`  %%04 lalf4p%% $$Ifa$$If 93) $If$Ifkd:$$Ifl4\2 VVV (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%$)*ilqvb\R $If$Ifkd?;$$Ifl\2VVV04 lal $Ifvwlf\RR $If $If$Ifkd;$$Ifl\2VVV04 lallf\RR $If $If$Ifkd<$$Ifl\2VVV04 lal lf\RR $If $If$Ifkd:=$$Ifl\2VVV04 lal>@DHlf\RR $If $If$Ifkd=$$Ifl\2VVV04 lalHI\_dilf\RR $If $If$Ifkd>$$Ifl\2VVV04 lalijlf$Ifkd/?$$Ifl\2VVV04 lal $$Ifa$$If\kd?$$Ifl404 lalf4 #&/uofff $$Ifa$$Ifkd@$$Ifl40 ` h %%04 lalf4p%%/013593** $$Ifa$$IfkdA$$Ifl4\ ,4   T (%%%04 lalf4p(%%%579;=>UX]_cej V$If $If$IfFfD $$Ifa$ jk3-$$ $$Ifa$$IfkdF$$Ifl֞ & ,4^ **04 lal $$Ifa$ V$If $If3-$$ $$Ifa$$IfkdH$$Ifl֞ & ,4^ **04 lal $$Ifa$ V$If $If3-$$ $$Ifa$$IfkdI$$Ifl֞ & ,4^ **04 lalV/012569:=>jk45#$%^_`pqrsvwz{~  )*/01qrtuhv[56CJ\] hv[CJ hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[6] hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJI $$Ifa$ V$If $IfU3-$IfkdUX]_cej V$If $If$IfFfO $$Ifa$ jk0*! $$Ifa$$Ifkd6R$$Ifl4֞ .<J 04 lalf4 V$If $If $$Ifa$3-$$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd3S$$Ifl֞ .<J 04 lal $$Ifa$ V$If $If3-$$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd8T$$Ifl֞ .<J 04 lal $$Ifa$ V$If $If33-$Ifkd=U$$Ifl֞ .<J 04 lal345$%3^ $$Ifa$$If\kdPV$$Ifl4JJ04 lalf4 ^_`dgpuofff $$Ifa$$IfkdV$$Ifl40 .`  %%04 lalf4p%%pqrtv93** $$Ifa$$IfkdX$$Ifl4\ z.  ZZZ (%%%04 lalf4p(%%%vxz|~ $If \$If V$If $If 2$If h$If$IfFfZ $$Ifa$ 0* h$If$Ifkd)]$$Ifl4֞ M z. ------04 lalf4 $If \$If V$If $If 2$If3-# h$If$Ifkd&^$$Ifl֞ M z. ------04 lal  $If \$If V$If $If 2$If  3-# h$If$Ifkd+_$$Ifl֞ M z. ------04 lal!$) $If \$If V$If $If 2$If)*p3-$Ifkd0`$$Ifl֞ M z. ------04 lalpqrtu)*HXk $$Ifa$$If\kdCa$$Ifl4..04 lalf4 u)*iklmoqsv  yz :|}OT"#$&)aƽƪƪƽƪƽhv[5CJ \ hv[\hv[6\] hv[H*hv[ hv[6] hv[CJ\hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJH* hv[5CJ hv[CJ hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJOJQJ\^J4klmoqsuWQHHHH $$Ifa$$Ifkda$$Ifl4Fr? !`r %%%0    4 lalf4p%%%uv$Ifkd c$$Ifl4rrX?% ! r 2%%%%%04 lalf4p2%%%%%2kdd$$IflrrX?% !r04 lal $$If]a$ $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$  $$If]a$ $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$$IfJMRUYSF9F $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$$Ifkd[e$$IflrrX?% !r04 lalUZ[LF9 $$If]a$$Ifkd4f$$IflrrX?% !r04 lal $$If]a$2kd g$$IflrrX?% !r04 lal $$If]a$ $$If]a$ $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$ $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$$IfYSF9F $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$$Ifkdg$$IflrrX?% !r04 lal  JD7 $$If]a$$Ifkdh$$IflrrX?% !r04 lal $$If]a$2kdi$$IflrrX?% !r04 lal $$If]a$ $$If]a$ $H$If]Ha$ ;<H|} $$Ifa$$If\kdj$$Ifl4 ! !04 lalf4 $If] uoff $$Ifa$$IfkdPk$$Ifl40l`~  %%04 lalf4p%%WQHHH $$Ifa$$IfkdIl$$Ifl4FBl T* %%%0    4 lalf4p%%%93& $$If]a$$Ifkdm$$Ifl4\Bl *** (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%_YL $$If]a$$Ifkdo$$Ifl\Bl***04 lal $$If]a$HKPUlfYLL $$If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkdo$$Ifl\Bl***04 lalUV~lfYLL $$If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkdp$$Ifl\Bl***04 laljdWJJ $$If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkdq$$Ifl\Bl***04 lallfYLL $$If]a$ $$If]a$$IfkdUr$$Ifl\Bl***04 lal!#'+lfYLL $$If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkd&s$$Ifl\Bl***04 lal+,DFJNlfYLL $$If]a$ $$If]a$$Ifkds$$Ifl\Bl***04 lalNOlf$Ifkdt$$Ifl\Bl***04 lal" $$Ifa$$If\kdu$$Ifl4ll04 lalf4 "#$&(uoff $$Ifa$$IfkdJv$$Ifl40\ `\ T %%04 lalf4p%%():=BWQG> $$Ifa$ $If$IfkdCw$$Ifl4F\  \ ** %%%0    4 lalf4p%%%BCX[`yof $$Ifa$ $If$IfkdTx$$IflF\ \ **0    4 lal`awy~yof $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkdy$$IflF\ \ **0    4 lal~yof $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkdy$$IflF\ \ **0    4 laly\kd${$$Ifl404 lalf4$Ifkdiz$$IflF\ \ **0    4 lalaabcegilQRW"#@89PQ^`ez|=>͈z hv[H*\ hv[CJH*hv[5CJ \hv[6CJ]hv[ hv[6]hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[5CJ hv[CJ hv[5CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJ hv[\hv[6\] hv[CJ\0?Oa $$Ifa$$If abcegikWQHHHH $$Ifa$$Ifkd{$$Ifl4F^` %%%0    4 lalf4p%%%kl$Ifkd|$$Ifl4rw^  2%%%%%04 lalf4p2%%%%%2kdc~$$Iflrw^04 lal $If $$Ifa$ @$If V$If $If $$Ifa$ @$If V$If$IfYSI?6 $$Ifa$ @$If V$If$Ifkd<$$Iflrw^04 lal!$)OI?5 @$If V$If$Ifkd#$$Iflrw^04 lal $If)+/0UXD>4 V$If$Ifkd$$Iflrw^04 lal $If $$Ifa$X]_cdz:4$Ifkd$$Iflrw^04 lal $If $$Ifa$ @$Ifz}0kd҂$$Iflrw^04 lal $If $$Ifa$ @$If V$If $If $$Ifa$ @$If V$If$IfYSI?6 $$Ifa$ @$If V$If$Ifkd$$Iflrw^04 lalOI?5 @$If V$If$Ifkd$$Iflrw^04 lal $IfEGF@6 V$If$Ifkdo$$Iflrw^04 lal $If $$Ifa$GKMQR:4$IfkdH$$Iflrw^04 lal $If $$Ifa$ @$If"#@89@P $$Ifa$$If\kd3$$Ifl4^^04 lalf4 PQRW\uoff $$Ifa$$Ifkdև$$Ifl40z`  %%04 lalf4p%%\]^`bdUOFFF $$Ifa$$Ifkdψ$$Ifl4Fz  %%%0    4 lalf4p%%%de71' $If$Ifkd$$Ifl4\rz  (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%$',1c]S $If$Ifkdi$$Ifl\rz04 lal $$Ifa$12|~lf\SS $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd2$$Ifl\rz04 lallf\SS $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd$$Ifl\rz04 lal=lff$Ifkdč$$Ifl\rz04 lal=>? - . 9 I  $$Ifa$$If\kd$$Ifl4zz04 lalf4- . I J W ] ^    8 ` f =i/0Y12C5K/11ȿȬޖȬȬޑފ hv[>*CJ hv[>*hv[6CJ] hv[\hv[6\] hv[CJ\hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[5CJhv[5CJ \ hv[CJhv[hv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5CJ\0I J K P U rlcc $$Ifa$$IfkdL$$Ifl40V`V  %%04 lalf4p%%U V W Y [ ] PJAAA $$Ifa$$Ifkd@$$Ifl4FV V %%%0    4 lalf4p%%%] ^   2," $If$Ifkd[$$Ifl4\V4 V (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%        ^XN $If$Ifkd$$Ifl\V4V04 lal $$Ifa$  L P U Z gaWNN $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkdk$$Ifl\V4V04 lalZ [     gaWNN $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd4$$Ifl\V4V04 lal     % gaWNN $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd$$Ifl\V4V04 lal% & V Y ^ c gaWNN $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkdƕ$$Ifl\V4V04 lalc d     gaWNN $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd$$Ifl\V4V04 lal  ' * . 2 gaWNN $$Ifa$ $If$IfkdX$$Ifl\V4V04 lal2 3 a c g k gaWNN $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd!$$Ifl\V4V04 lalk l     gaWNN $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd$$Ifl\V4V04 lal      gaWNN $$Ifa$ $If$Ifkd$$Ifl\V4V04 lal  7 ga$Ifkd|$$Ifl\V4V04 lal7 8 9  $$Ifa$$If7$8$H$_kda$$Ifl404 lalf4 "%smc N$If$Ifkd$$Ifl40xdx %%04 lalf4p%%%&9< N$If$Iflkd$$Ifl0xdx04 lal<=fi N$If$Iflkd$$Ifl0xdx04 lalij{~ N$If$Iflkd1$$Ifl0xdx04 lal~ N$If$IflkdΞ$$Ifl0xdx04 lal N$If$Iflkdk$$Ifl0xdx04 lal/--\kd$$Ifl4dd04 lalf4$Iflkd$$Ifl0xdx04 lal/01245!!c%d%**--P/Q/1111 $0^`0a$7$8$H$122%2'25767;;*<+<7<8<>&>8CCCcCdCuCCCCC $$Ifa$$Ifx$a$1222%2&2'2*<+<7<>&>8CcCCCCCCCCCDDD>D@DADkDmDnDDDDD;zqeq_q_Xq_Xq_Xq_Xq_Xq_ hv[CJH* hv[CJhv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[5\ hv[CJhv[jhv[UmHnHuhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ^J-jhv[5CJOJQJU^JmHnHuhv[5:CJOJQJ^J"CCCCCC^XKXA $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifkdd$$Ifl\` >N` F (%%%%N4 lalp(%%%%CCCCCC{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkd$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalCCCDDD{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkd$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalDD)D,D5D@D{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkd$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lal@DADZD\DbDmD{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkd$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalmDnD~DDDD{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkd$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalDDDDDD{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkdw$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalDDDDDDDEEE1E3E4ETEVEWEEEEEEEEEEFFFFLFNFFFGGHGII%J/J3J=JJJJJtKKKLLLL]M^MMTDTETŢ̴̹̹̞̾̾hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[5OJQJ\^J hv[] hv[6 hv[6] hv[5\hv[ hv[CJ hv[CJH*hv[56CJ\] hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJH*:DDDDDD{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkdi$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalDDEEEE{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkd[$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalEEE!E'E3E{q $If^ $ $If] a$$IfpkdM$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lal3E4EBEDEJEVE{q $If^ $ $If] a$$IfpkdE$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalVEWEnEqEwEE{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkd7$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalEEEEEE{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkd)$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalEEEEEE{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkd$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalEEEEFF{q $If^ $ $If] a$$Ifpkd $$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lalFFLFFGGHGIGJ]MSQMQ5kd$$IflNNN4 lal$Ifpkd$$Ifl\` >N` FN4 lal]M^MMTT!TDTETFTGT\TgToTsT~TTTTTT $$Ifa$$IfddTTT4* $IfkdH$$Ifl4\,r,FF (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%TTTTTTwi $If] d$If] d"$If]" $If^akdd$$Ifl404 lalf4TTTTTTT3UQUUUWW+W5WWWXXXXXz[[?^V^;agWg'h*hvjjmmmqqtuwwwYzvz8}9}I}J}QRd+,ľľľľľľľľľľľľįĦ hv[5\hv[5CJ\hv[6CJ] hv[aJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[] hv[6]hv[hv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[5CJ\ *hv[CJ hv[CJ>TTTTTUdZL>0 $If] d$If] d"$If]" $If^kd$$Ifl4\,r,FF04 lalf4UUUUUUdZL>0 $If] d$If] d"$If]" $If^kd$$Ifl4\,r,FF04 lalf4U U)U,U/U2UdZL>0 $If] d$If] d"$If]" $If^kda$$Ifl4\,r,FF04 lalf42U3UQUdV $If]kd$$Ifl4\,r,FF04 lalf4QURUoUvU}UU{q $If d$If] d$If $If^akd׵$$Ifl404 lalf4UUUUUUdZPB8 $If d$If] d$If $If^kd^$$Ifl4\,r,FF04 lalf4UUUUUUdZPB8 $If d$If] d$If $If^kd$$Ifl4\,r,FF04 lalf4UUUXXXXXy[z[d^\ZZ\VTTkdԷ$$Ifl4\,r,FF04 lalf4 z[?^@^;agujvjmmmqqttwwXzYz8}9}QRdLG[$\$cdo܂'+ $$Ifa$$IfxdL +,;XRRR$Ifkd$$IflFZF%j| %%%0h%6    4 lap%%%,9:ȇ=Eab=>  ϋЋCD( dhԔBC[\hilmnҕӕ89cd¹󹭹hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\ hv[6]hv[hv[5OJQJ\^J hv[>*CJ hv[5\ hv[CJDE~xxx$Ifkd$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 la9~xxx$Ifkd$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 la9:;u~xxx$Ifkd`$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 la ~xxx$Ifkd:$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 la~xxx$Ifkd$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 la=a~xxxxx$Ifkd$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 laabmʉ=~xxx$Ifkd$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 la=>W ~xxx$Ifkdx$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 la  }ϋ~xxx$IfkdD$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 laϋЋ C~xxx$Ifkd$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 laCDS~xxx$Ifkd$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 la(ԔՔ֔~zxsoxsmicc$IfPdLkd$$IflFZF%j|0h%6    4 la ֔ !).okd$$Ifl4F, H$`, H %%%H$    4 lalf4p%%% $$Ifa$$If .489BCDIPSUWXYZ[\mn5kd>$$Ifl4H$H$H$4 lalf4Ff$IfFf $$Ifa$ $ $If] a$  $If $$If]a$ $Z$If]Za$$Z$If]Z^a$ $$If]a$ $Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4•ŕȕ˕ΕЕҕ $ $If] a$  $If $$If]a$ $Z$If]Za$$Z$If]Z^a$ $$If]a$ ҕӕ$Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4 $ $If] a$  $If $$If]a$ $Z$If]Za$$Z$If]Z^a$ $$If]a$ $Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4"'),.1468 $ $If] a$  $If $$If]a$ $Z$If]Za$$Z$If]Z^a$ $$If]a$ 89I$Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4IMQTVY[^`c $ $If] a$  $If $$If]a$ $Z$If]Za$$Z$If]Z^a$ $$If]a$ cd}$Ifkdf$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4} $ $If] a$  $If $$If]a$ $Z$If]Za$$Z$If]Z^a$ $$If]a$ d͖Ζ֖89cdȗɗ23;XYmØĘȘ()!89?Tf}'ӮDEH°ʰĻѴѮ hv[CJhv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\ hv[aJ hv[6]hv[5CJ\hv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[hv[6CJ]hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\ hv[5\ hv[CJ:$Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4Ėǖʖ͖ $ $If] a$  $If $$If]a$ $Z$If]Za$$Z$If]Z^a$ $$If]a$ ͖Ζ֖$IfkdB$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4֖ږݖ $ $If] a$  $If $$If]a$ $Z$If]Za$ $$If^a$ $$If]a$ $Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4!&(+.0358r $ $If] a$  D$If  $If $$Ifa$ $V$If]Va$ $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$$If5kd$$Ifl4H$H$H$4 lalf4 89G$Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4GKPSUX[^`c $ $If] a$  D$If  $If $$Ifa$ $V$If]Va$ $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$ cd{$Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4{ $ $If] a$  D$If  $If $$Ifa$ $V$If]Va$ $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$ $Ifkdj$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4ŗȗ $ $If] a$  D$If  $If $$Ifa$ $V$If]Va$ $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$ ȗɗ$Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4 $ $If] a$  D$If  $If $$Ifa$ $V$If]Va$ $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$ $IfkdF$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4 #&*.2 $ $If] a$ $$Ifa$  $If $$Ifa$ $V$If]Va$ $H$If]Ha$ $$If]a$ 23;$Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4;?BEHKNQUX $ $If] a$  D$If  $If $$Ifa$ $V$If]Va$ $$If`a$ $$If]a$ XYm$Ifkd"$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4mqtwz} $ $If] a$  D$If  $If $$Ifa$ $V$If]Va$ $$If^a$ $$If]a$ $Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4Ø $ $If] a$  D$If  $If $$Ifa$ $V$If]Va$ $$If^a$ $$If]a$ ØĘ($Ifkd$$Ifl4 , |@j H$, P*H$((((4 lalf4() !912?@T'ӮԮ $$Ifa$$IfxG[$\$5kdl$$Ifl4H$H$H$4 lalf4  %+078IFf$IfFf $$Ifa$IJ]`cgkpt|xndnZ  $If  F$If  $If $If]  $If  $If$If_kd$$Ifl4##0#4 lalf4 |}$Ifkd.$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4  $If  F$If  $If $If]  $If  $If̯$Ifkdf$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4̯ϯү֯گ߯  $If  F$If  $If $If]  $If  $If$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4 #  $If  F$If  $If $If]  $If  $If#$4$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf447:>BGKS  $If  F$If  $If $If]  $If  $IfSTm$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4mpsw{  $If  F$If  $If $If]  $If  $If$IfkdT$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4  $If $$Ifa$  $If $If]  $If  $If°ʰ$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4ʰͰа԰ذݰ  $If  F$If  $If $If]  $If  $Ifkd$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4ABwx4<\pͲղ(ɸ$01:;<Kû9IμQU׼ן hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[6]hv[5>*\ hv[5 hv[5CJ hv[5\hv[5OJQJ\^Jhv[ hv[CJhv[6CJ] hv[CJH* hv[CJhv[5CJ\8"'+~tf\R\  F$If  $If $$If]$  $If  $If$Ifakd4$$Ifl4##0#4 lalf4 F$If +3  $If34kd$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf44BEHLPUX`  $If  F$If  $If $$If]$  $If  $If$If`akd($$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4ax{~  $If  F$If  $If $$If]$  $If  $If$Ifkde$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4ȱ  $If  F$If  $If $$If]$  $If  $If$Ifȱɱkd$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4ɱ  $If  F$If  $If $$If]$  $If  $If$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4"'+3  $If  F$If  $If $$If]$  $If  $If$If34kd*$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf44<>BFJOS[  $If  F$If  $If $$If]$  $If  $If$If[\kdu$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4\psw{  $If  F$If  $If $$If]$  $If $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4IJ̲  $If  F$If  $If $$If]$  $If $$Ifa$$If̲Ͳkd'$$Ifl4ִR t NN#R "RfHy0#    4 lalf4Ͳ($| d$If$Ifxakdr$$Ifl4##0#4 lalf4$If $)01246JD;; $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Ifl4FXh(#`X` %%%0(#    4 lalf4p%%% H$If68:;<hitx}viiii $$If]a$ $If^_kd+ $$Ifl4(#(#0(#4 lalf4($IfFf  H$If $$Ifa$ * $If^kd $$Ifl4ֈ;CK(#;0(#4 lalf4H$$ U$If]a$ U$If] $$If]a$A3 U$If]kd$$Ifl4ֈ;CK(#;0(#4 lalf4 rH$$ U$If]a$ $$If]a$ $If^_kd$$Ifl4(#(#0(#4 lalf4"',A7** $$If]a$ $If^kd$$Ifl4ֈ;CK(#;0(#4 lalf4,0489&kd$$Ifl4ֈ;CK(#;0(#4 lalf4 U$If] $$If]a$9{{{{dH$$ U$If]a$ $$If]a$ $If^_kd$$Ifl4(#(#0(#4 lalf4 U$If]A7** $$If]a$ $If^kd$$Ifl4ֈ;CK(#;0(#4 lalf4ļɼͼμ&kd$$Ifl4ֈ;CK(#;0(#4 lalf4 U$If] $$If]a$μ   %)-{{{{ $$If]a$ $If^_kd$$Ifl4(#(#0(#4 lalf4 U$If]-.9>CA7** $$If]a$ $If^kds$$Ifl4ֈ;CK(#;0(#4 lalf4CHLPQ&kd$$Ifl4ֈ;CK(#;0(#4 lalf4 U$If] $$If]a$Q $$Ifa$x_kd$$Ifl4(#(#0(#4 lalf4$If?jkmy;@9>ch;@[\~,1@JƿƤƤƤhv[6]aJhv[5\aJhv[6CJ] hv[5\ hv[aJhv[5CJ\hv[ hv[6]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\]@)4?IC:::: $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfTl4F?% @ @  %%%0$[    44 laf4p%%%T?@ kd$$IfTl4r_?%  2%%%%%0$[44 laf4p2%%%%%T@LQV[` '$If '+$If]+ $If h$If`aI?5' '+$If]+ $If h$Ifkd$$IfTl4r_?% 0$[44 laf4T8. h$Ifkdr$$IfTlr_?% 0$[44 laT '$If $If*kd_$$IfTlr_?% 0$[44 laT '$If $If '+$If]+ '$If '+$If]+ $If h$IfLF$IfkdL$$IfTlr_?% 0$[44 laTjkmy{x$If$IfG[$\$$a$ekd9 $$IfTl4$)$0$4 laf4T  $$Ifa$$Ifdkd $$IfTl:7(%0 &+4 laTIC:::: $$Ifa$$Ifkd!$$IfTl4FL07(-   %%%0 &     44 laf4p%%%T kd"$$IfTl4rL0#@(I$ 2%%%%%0 &44 laf4p2%%%%%T/49>C}seTT$  $If] a$ 2$If] $If h$Ifjkd$$$IfTl47(%0 &+44 laf4T  $If] CD\afLB8* 2$If] $If h$Ifkd%$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laTfkpq;1 h$Ifkd)&$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$$  $If] a$ 2$If] $IfLB8* 2$If] $If h$Ifkd;'$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT;1 h$IfkdM($$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$$$  $If] a$ 2$If] $If$%;@ELB8* 2$If] $If h$Ifkd_)$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laTEJOP];1 h$Ifkdq*$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$]aejo$  $If] a$ 2$If] $IfopLB8* 2$If] $If h$Ifkd+$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT;1 h$Ifkd,$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$$  $If] a$ 2$If] $IfLB8* 2$If] $If h$Ifkd-$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT;+ 2$If]kd.$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$49>CHykZZ$  $If] a$ 2$If] $If hh$If^h`jkd/$$IfTl47(%0 &+44 laf4THIchL:0 $If hh$If^h`kdM0$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laThmrwx-kd_1$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$ 2$If]x$  $If] a$ 2$If] $If hh$If^h`L:0 $If hh$If^h`kdq2$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT-kd3$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$ 2$If]#(-$  $If] a$ 2$If] $If hh$If^h`-.;@L:0 $If hh$If^h`kd4$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT@DIMN-kd5$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$ 2$If]Nv{$  $If] a$ 2$If] $If hh$If^h`L:0 $If hh$If^h`kd6$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT-kd7$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$ 2$If]$  $If] a$ 2$If] $If hh$If^h`L:0 $If hh$If^h`kd8$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT -kd9$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$ 2$If],049>$  $If] a$ 2$If] $If h$If>?MQL:0 $If hh$If^h`kd;$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laTQUZ_`-kd<$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$ 2$If]`~$  $If] a$ 2$If] $If hh$If^h`L:0 $If hh$If^h`kd%=$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT-kd7>$$IfTlr7 #(A 0 &+44 laT$  $If] a$ 2$If]Z[\ ',{qqqq H$IfGx[$\$G[$\$jkd?$$IfTl47(%0 &+44 laf4T$If JW '(,]aEItx'0<pq|_x   JKu} MN08bvԲئǟǟئǟǟǟǟ hv[CJH*hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[6]hv[hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\ hv[5\ hv[aJhv[6]aJ>,-]aeWQE< $$Ifa$ H$$If$Ifkd@$$Ifl4F` F%`F %%%0F%    4 lalf4p%%%ef|vmm $$Ifa$$Ifkd1A$$Ifl4F` F%`F0F%    4 lalf4 |vja $$Ifa$ H$$If$IfkdA$$Ifl4F` F%`F0F%    4 lalf4  EIM|vja $$Ifa$ H$$If$IfkdB$$Ifl4F` F%`F0F%    4 lalf4MNtx||vja $$Ifa$ H$$If$IfkdJC$$Ifl4F` F%`F0F%    4 lalf4|}|vmm $$Ifa$$IfkdC$$Ifl4F` F%`F0F%    4 lalf4o|v$IfkdD$$Ifl4F` F%`F0F%    4 lalf4opq|^_x   $Ifx\kdcE$$Ifl4F%F%0F%4 lalf4 456GO[HkdF$$Ifl4F J&`  %%%0J&    4 lalf4p%%% $$Ifa$$If[j $$Ifa$jkl$IfkdG$$Ifl4r -J&  T; 2%%%%%0J&4 lalf4p2%%%%%lrx| $If h$If $IfFfN$IfFfJ $$Ifa$ #).45LOFfT $If h$If $If$IfFfQ $If^ $If )$If $If $IfORT[bhmstFf3[ $If$IfFfX $If^ $If )$If $If $If $If h$If   &-FfX^ $If^ $If )$If $If $If $If h$If $If$If-34KMPRZagntu}Ffd $If )$If $If $If $If h$If $If$IfFf}a $If^Ff$k $If $If $If h$If $If$IfFfg $If^ $If )$If#)067NPFfnq $If h$If $If$IfFfIn $If^ $If )$If $If $IfPSV]djqwxFfw $If$IfFft $If^ $If )$If $If $If $If h$If ")Ffz $If^ $If )$If $If $If $If h$If $If$If)/08:=@GNT[abvx{~FfQ $If )$If $If $If $If h$If $If$IfFf~ $If^Ff $If $If $If h$If $If$IfFf $If^ $If )$IfvW&; Sb/33V { |  Tejzcdghxy6jüǼõüǼüõüüüüüõõõõõõõõìhv[5CJH*\hv[5CJ\ hv[6] hv[5\hv[hv[5OJQJ\^J hv[CJH* hv[CJ] hv[CJhv[6CJ]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ= &; RSb23G[$\$G[$\${ |  456Bjklmw $$Ifa$$IfxG[$\$G[$\$gi!;<FGQSop  !=>ST\*+wxx {  úúҳɺúhv[5:CJOJQJ^J hv[6]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[ hv[H* hv[CJhv[6CJ]hv[5CJH*\hv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\]993* $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Ifl4\ `  `8` (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%% $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$$IfkdЊ$$Ifl4r t  no 8  2%%%%%04 lalf4p2%%%%%;kd;$$Iflr t no804 lal $If $If R$If!"38=BGwmm $If $If R$If $If^\kd$$Ifl404 lalf4 R$IfGHQV[`YOE;1 $If $If R$If $If^kd$$Iflr t no804 lal`eflqvOE;1 $If R$If $If^kdt$$Iflr t no804 lal $Ifv{OI?5 $If R$If$IfkdM$$Iflr t no804 lal $IfOI?5 $If R$If$Ifkd&$$Iflr t no804 lal $IfOI?5 $If R$If$Ifkd$$Iflr t no804 lal $If OI?5 $If R$If$Ifkdؑ$$Iflr t no804 lal $IfgOII$Ifkd$$Iflr t no804 lal $If !"8FLS[ $$Ifa$$Ifx\kd$$Ifl404 lalf4 [\]ot93** $$Ifa$$Ifkd;$$Ifl4\ ` 2 `8` (%%%%04 lalf4p(%%%%t $$Ifa$$Ifkdz$$Ifl4r    8  2%%%%%04 lalf4p2%%%%%LF$Ifkdі$$Iflr  804 lal $ $If] a$LF$Ifkd$$Iflr  804 lal $ $If] a$  $ $If] a$ $If^\kdg$$Ifl404 lalf405:?DYOBBBB $ $If] a$ $If^kd$$Iflr  804 lalDEZ^bfkYOBBBB $ $If] a$ $If^kd$$Iflr  804 lalklYSFFFF $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflr  804 lalYSFFFF $ $If] a$$IfkdO$$Iflr  804 lalYSFFFF $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflr  804 lal'/YSJJJJ $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Iflr  804 lal/0INSX]YSFFFF $ $If] a$$Ifkd$$Iflr  804 lal]^ty~YSFFFF $ $If] a$$Ifkd{$$Iflr  804 lalYSS$IfkdF$$Iflr  804 lal!) $$Ifa$$Ifx\kd$$Ifl404 lalf4 )*+=B93** $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$Ifl4\^"`> `8`8 (%%%%0:#4 laf4p(%%%%BSYZ[ $$Ifa$[\k$Ifkd$$Ifl4r^" >FF 8 8 2%%%%%0:#4 laf4p2%%%%%klrvy| $$Ifa$ $If^\kd2$$Ifl4":#0:#4 laf4WMDDDD $$Ifa$ $If^kd$$Iflr^">FF880:#4 laYOFFFF $$Ifa$ $If^kdp$$Iflr^">FF880:#4 laYS$Ifkd($$Iflr^">FF880:#4 la $$Ifa$ $If^\kd$$Ifl4":#0:#4 laf4#YOFFFF $$Ifa$ $If^kdb$$Iflr^">FF880:#4 la#$HNTZ`YOFFFF $$Ifa$ $If^kd$$Iflr^">FF880:#4 la`ayYOFFFF $$Ifa$ $If^kdҧ$$Iflr^">FF880:#4 laYOFFFF $$Ifa$ $If^kd$$Iflr^">FF880:#4 la*wYSSS$IfkdB$$Iflr^">FF880:#4 lax y z {     %%4%5%((/h$a$\kd$$Ifl4":#0:#4 laf4      %4%*;*Q4t405o5556666;; A&ArDDG HIIPPSSVVZZs[w[\"\%\8\waakk&r̾|hv[5CJOJQJ\hv[5CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[6CJ]hv[OJQJ^J hv[CJhv[jhv[UmHnHuhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ^J-jhv[5CJOJQJU^JmHnHu0//P4Q4t4u4/505o5;> ArDGIMPSSVVZZ]waafcehjj*mso&r=rudy| ~8~bc56a78ֈ׈de6&r=r ~8~6ae67] ~ BCDƲ˲9>z:?7;z%)}?KNY/:=O*+f;^˿˶hv[ hv[5\hv[6CJ]hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[CJOJQJhv[5CJOJQJ\^J hv[CJhv[5CJOJQJ\B67]EFȦɦ }~ <yz1+,f;G & F x[$\$gd!2fx^`DkA>Enq|.':Zb0}Wxz}NдддЭЭЭЭ hv[CJ] hv[6CJhv[B*CJphhv[5CJ\hv[6CJ] hv[CJhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5CJ\ hv[5\hv[ hv[6]@D:;opq|}de)*&' 0^`0$a$G & F [$\$gd!2fG & F x[$\$gd!2f'XY?@()@A 0^`0%&s,-89:; 0^`0Nl5]s+A]c)Hmnpz{|   FGƸ򱩥 hv[CJ hv[5 hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[jhv[U hv[5\hv[5CJ\mH nH uhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ]hv[B*CJphhv[6CJ] hv[CJ hv[>*CJ3()Hnopz|6 )$^`a$ (  ^ l*,=A&#$+DM./( -%&#$+D-./]- 0^`0($  K./^Ka$ $0^`0a$6    pFG)$ a$ )$^`a$)$a$)$`a$Gy6CD67vw)`+$`a$)$a$)$`a$ *$^`a$ )$^`a$GDI67@vw  V W \       *+~=X78ͤȝȝ hv[5CJhv[CJOJQJhv[OJQJhv[5CJOJQJ\ hv[\ hv[5hv[CJOJQJhv[5CJ\ hv[5\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[>h[   l Z  B   )$h^h`a$ )$^`a$,<^<, -&#$+D-./]-0  )^`  V W       gS*+.$`a$-$a$*$a$ *$^`a$ )$^`a$*)$a$ )$h^h`a$~1t78<=G/ -#&#$+D-./]- ) V:^: )$h^h`a$ )$^`a$*$`a$*$a$)$a$)$`a$GXYZ8pBn)$a$)$`a$ )$h^h`a$ *$h^h`a$ ) h^h` ) h^h` / ^@Bhj,-2AB23;< J K   %%E%F%%%'',(-(e)f)k)t)))))**ɻիɝ hv[5CJ hv[6CJ hv[CJ]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ\ hv[CJ\ hv[5 hv[5\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[CJOJQJhv[hv[OJQJ>,-ABMJ K   !J"$&&C'')$<]<^`a$ *$^`a$ 0$O^`Oa$)$`a$ )$t^t`a$)$a$)$`a$'''''''''e)f)))***+*$`a$)$`a$ )$t^t`a$)$a$ *$<]<`a$*  *$ - &#$+D./]-a$ * #I ^I` +C+x++ ,_,----1.2.`/133s4t4442$`a$ )$t^t`a$)$a$)$`a$ )$^`a$ 1$^`a$ )$h^h`a$ )^`*b+c+++++++L,N,-------.1.2.0011T1U133s4t4y444444445555 5555566W6X666667777789888K9L9Q999߾hv[OJQJ hv[6 hv[] hv[CJ] hv[CJ\ hv[5 hv[5\ hv[6CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[OJQJhv[D4445K9L99999(:):,:-:6:G:H:I:;;4$a$ / T ^ / -&!A&#$+D-./]-*I^I* F)$a$3$a$2$`a$)$`a$0$a$999(:):-:G:H:I:;;;;;3<4<r>s>x>>>>>KBnCCCC}D~DD8GXHHHHH!I8IQIlKKLLMPQ(Q)QQQSSTTTллЮееееееее hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\ hv[5CJ hv[CJ hv[5\ hv[CJ\ hv[5CJ hv[CJ\ hv[\hv[OJQJhv[5CJOJQJ\ hv[CJ hv[5hv[7;;;3<4<=r>s>>>>> AKBCC}D~DDDNEE+F6$`a$5$a$4 714$`a$ 1$}^`}a$4$a$+F8GDHQI_JlKzLMNOPQQ(Q)QQQQQQQQ,  7 VX^X`7$`a$16$`a$+`+`+$`a$+$`a$QQQQ[RR\SSSTTTYUU6VCWPX]YkZx[\]6$`a$6$a$:$a$9$a$1$`a$ 8$^`a$ 1$^`a$ , 6K^KTT[[]]A]B]E]F]J]K]a$^`a$ 1$^`a$!B $%&'>oOP  1$)^)`a$11$a$1$`a$1$`a$ 1$^`a$ 7$^`a$ˆBw\]DEcdeijl%&#$+D!./,  1$)^)`a$1$a$1$`a$ 1$^`a$ 1^` 7$^`a$l}~ȍɍTUܐݐ)*KLI )$^`a$ *^`)$`a$ )$t^t`a$)$`a$)$a$ ,  ^  -67NRTUܐݐ)*KLdejҘԘ՘TU[OPa@Az{/0QRڪ۪Sӽ׫hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\jhv[5CJU\hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[CJ hv[5\ hv[6CJ hv[CJ] hv[CJ hv[6CJ@ْ%`8ӗdeԘ՘2YsTU *^`)$a$)$`a$)$`a$ )$^`a$A؜IJKNOQabc  *$^`a$)$a$, b&#$+D!./ ) wI^I )$h^h`a$ *$h^h`a$ )$^`a$)$`a$@Az{3Р,D[!{n @$^`a$ *$^`a$ *^` )$^`a$)$`a$ )$O^`Oa$)$a$ )$^`a$/0QRfЦ!ڪ۪hi )$)^)`a$)$x`xa$A$a$ )$^`a$ *$^`a$)$`a$)$`a$)$a$S]^hgIJOװذ  XYNO_`e!"67<ҽӽbc>? ST] WYսսո hv[6CJ hv[6hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[ hv[5\hv[56\hv[5\]FiTBz`abefgpǮ )$^`a$ , @ ^ B -$AF&#$+Di./]-$a$ *$^`a$)$`a$&IJװذ  XYZg˴* )$^`a$)$`a$C$`a$)$`a$ )$^`a$)$a$*$`a$ *$^`a$NOڵ"S$Ʒ&E_ *$h^h`a$ *^` )$h^h`a$* *$^`a$ )$^`a$)$`a$ )$^`a$)$a$_`!"ۻO67$a$ )$^`a$ *$^`a$ )$8^8`a$6$x`xa$6$a$)$a$)$`a$ҽӽbc ?T *$^`a$ )$^`a$ D$)^)`a$)$a$)$`a$D , % K^K,$ - &#$+D-./]-a$T>?Qd~VSTk3$`a$ : ^3$a$*$`a$ *$^`a$)$`a$D$a$)$a$ )$^`a$ YZ 2"#opqtu , I^I`3$a$` )$^`a$)$`a$ D$^`a$E$`a$YZ"#(ou!"'no\]c[\a45:!"5656MN%&UV abhv[5CJ\ hv[CJjhv[U hv[5\hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[ hv[CJKu~!"no\][ )$ {^a$)$a$)$`a$) , O ^ F  -$8&#$+DU./]-[\45!"569xikH )$^`a$ *$^`a$)$a$)$`a$56MN%&UV+ Eab) _7$ S a$)$ a$)  )$a$)$`a$789: $$Ifa$$Ifx $0^`0a$ 0^`0) 7:,1'@MNOw"#$ivwx)     6";""1#//)0*0004676~6u<x<<BBCG/GHHHOO hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJH* hv[CJhv[ hv[6] hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\J=DFPT\ahyl $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$$If\kd$$Ifs412024 saf4x$IfFf hi $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd&$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$  4 $Ifkd7$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa4<>HLTY` $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$`ak $IfkdH$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sakw $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdY$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdj$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa#%/2:?G $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$GHk $Ifkd{$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 saksu $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa(,49@ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$@AY $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 saYakux $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa!$,19 $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$9:G $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 saGIKUX`el $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$lm $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$- $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa-46AEMRY $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$YZu $Ifkd%$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sau~ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd6$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdG$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa#-08=D $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$DEm $IfkdX$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sam| $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdi$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$  $Ifkdz$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa #'/4; $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$;<R $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 saR]_jmuz $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa"$6:BGN $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$NO` $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa`gq{~ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa $+ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$+, kd$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG02    4 sa&'@IKVZbgn $ $If] a$ $$If]a$Ff $$Ifa$$Ifno $IfkdR$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdc$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$  * $Ifkdt$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa*1;MQY^e $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ef $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa*4?CKPW $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$WXy $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 say{ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa#.19>E $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$EFi $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 saiuw $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd $$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa 24<@O $$If]a$ $$Ifa$OPo $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 saowy $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd/$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd@ $$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa&0;?GLS $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$STm $IfkdQ $$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 samuw $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdb $$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkds $$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa "48@EL $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$LMf $Ifkd $$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 safmo~ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$( $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa(13BFNSZ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$Z[v $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sav} $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$  $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa #'/4; $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$;<Y $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 saYeoy} $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd $$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ C $Ifkd.$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 saCKMW[cho $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$opz $Ifkd?$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 saz $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdP$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$  $Ifkda$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa #59AFM $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$MNu $Ifkdr$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sau} $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$st kd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG0b2    4 satuw  (-4 $ $If] a$ $$If]a$Ffo! $$Ifa$$If45L $Ifkd#$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 saLS]hksx $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd&$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$$%= $Ifkd'$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa=EOY\dix $$If]a$ $$Ifa$xy $Ifkd(($$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd9)$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$! $IfkdJ*$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa!(2<?GKS $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$STw $Ifkd[+$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 saw $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdl,$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd}-$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa  #+07 $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$78L $Ifkd.$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 saLQ[fjrw~ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$~ $Ifkd/$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd0$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ . $Ifkd1$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa.68BFNSZ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$Z[w $Ifkd2$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 saw~ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd3$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd4$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa!37?DK $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$KLV $Ifkd6$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 saV^hsw $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd7$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd'8$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd89$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa!+.6:B $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$BCe $IfkdI:$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 saemw $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdZ;$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdk<$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa% $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$%&I $Ifkd|=$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 saIQSehpt| $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$|} $Ifkd>$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd?$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$* $Ifkd@$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa*57AEMRY $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$YZ $IfkdA$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdB$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdC$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa,08=? $$If]a$ $$Ifa$?@T $IfkdD$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 saTZ\fiqv~ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$~ $IfkdF$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdG$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ kd&H$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG0{1    4 sa  )*8\kdvM$$Ifs41c20c24 saf4  x$If] FfK $$Ifa$$If8BDSW_dk $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$kl $IfkdN$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdO$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd#P$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa!+:>FKR $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$RSr $Ifkd4Q$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sarx $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdER$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdVS$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa"$6:BGN $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$NOu $IfkdgT$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sau} $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdxU$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$( $IfkdV$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa(/9DHPU\ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$\]{ $IfkdW$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa{ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdX$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdY$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa)48@EL $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$LMu $IfkdZ$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sau} $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd[$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$  $Ifkd\$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa ',3 $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$34[ $Ifkd^$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa[km| $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd_$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd"`$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa',3 $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$34H $Ifkd3a$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 saHPZdgot{ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa${| $IfkdDb$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdUc$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$( $Ifkdfd$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa(02=@HMT $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$TUx $Ifkdwe$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sax $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdf$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$  $Ifkdg$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa # - 8 < D I Q  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$Q R t  $Ifkdh$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sat {        $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$    $Ifkdi$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa         $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$    $Ifkdj$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa   ' ) 1 6 =  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$= > \  $Ifkdk$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa\ c m x |     $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$    $Ifkdl$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa         $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$    $Ifkdm$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa    $ , 1 8  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$8 9 T  $Ifkdo$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 saT _ a s w     $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$     kd!p$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG0c2    4 sa    ) < D P X n            $ $If] a$ $$If]a$Ffr $$Ifa$$If    $Ifkdqu$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa     ! & -  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$- . G  $Ifkdv$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 saG R T f i q v }  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$} ~   $Ifkdw$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa         $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$    $Ifkdx$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa     $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$5 $Ifkdy$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa5@BTW_dk $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$kl $Ifkdz$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd{$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$, $Ifkd|$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa,8:LPX]d $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$de $Ifkd}$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd $$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa!,08=D $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$DEd $Ifkd,$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sadpz $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd=$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdN$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa-08=D $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$DEe $Ifkd_$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 saepr $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdp$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa  "&- $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$-.M $Ifkd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 saMUWfjrw~ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$~ $Ifkd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$/ $IfkdŊ$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa/8:EIQV] $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$]^ $Ifkd֋$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa ",08=D $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$DEf $Ifkd $$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 safhr $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$  $Ifkd+$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa *.6;B $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$BC^ $Ifkd<$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa^fhsw $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdM$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd^$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa$+ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$+,G $Ifkdo$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 saGOQcgot{ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa${| $Ifkd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$  kd$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG0{1    4 sa (13>BJNP $$If]a$Ff} $$Ifa$$IfPQx $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sax $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa "*/6 $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$67O $Ifkd%$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 saOV`jltx $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd6$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdG$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$( $IfkdX$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa(/9DHPU\ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$\]| $Ifkdi$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa| $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdz$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$& $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa&.8GKSX_ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$_`u $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sau| $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa %, $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$,-O $Ifkdϫ$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 saOWYkow| $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$: $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa:HR]`hmt $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$tu $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$' $Ifkd5$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa'.8BFNSZ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$Z[{ $IfkdF$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa{ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $IfkdW$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkdh$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa$.2:?F $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$FGk $Ifkdy$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sakr| $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$  $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa    ! ) + 2  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$2 3 L  $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 saL T V a e m r y  $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$y z   $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa         $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$    $Ifkdλ$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa    ! !!! $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$!!(! $Ifkd߼$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa(!1!3!>!B!J!O!V! $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$V!W!v! $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sav!!!!!!!! $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$!!! $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa!!!!!!!! $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$!!" $Ifkd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa""""!")"."5" $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$5"6""" kd#$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG02    4 sa"""""""""##0#1#T#]#_#n#r#z### $ $If] a$ $$If]a$Ff $$Ifa$$If### $Ifkds$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa######## $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$##$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa$$#$5$9$A$F$M$ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$M$N$\$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa\$g$i$t$x$$$$ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$$$$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa$$$$$$$$ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$$$$ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa$$$$% %%% $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$%%7% $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa7%C%E%T%W%_%d%k% $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$k%l%% $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa%%%%%%%% $$If]a$ $$Ifa$%%% $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa%%%%& &&& $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$&&0& $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa0&?&I&S&W&_&d&k& $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$k&l&}& $Ifkd $$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa}&&&&&&&& $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$&&& $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa&&&&&&&& $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$&&' $Ifkd.$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa''!','/'7'<'C' $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$C'D'\' $Ifkd?$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa\'d'f'q'u'}''' $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$''' $IfkdP$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa'''''''' $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$''' $Ifkda$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa''((((!((( $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$(()(P( $Ifkdr$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 saP(\(f(q(t(|((( $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$((( $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa(((((((( $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$((( $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa((())))) $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$))6) $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa6)8):)I)L)T)X)_) $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$_)`)~) $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa~)))))))) $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$))) $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa))))))* * $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$ * *%* $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa%*,*.*9*=*E*J*Q* $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$Q*R*_* $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa_*`*b*t*x**** $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$*** $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa******** $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$*** $Ifkd $$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa*+ ++ +(+-+4+ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$4+5+T+ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 saT+]+g+r+v+~+++ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$+++ $Ifkd-$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa++++++++ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$+++ $Ifkd>$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa++,,,,$,+, $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$+,,,N, $IfkdO$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 saN,U,_,j,n,v,{,, $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$,,, $Ifkd`$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa,,,,,,,, $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$,,, $Ifkdq$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa,,,,,- -- $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$--6- $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa6-A-C-N-R-Z-_-f- $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$f-g-- $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa-------- $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$--- $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa-------. $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$..+. $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa+.2.4.F.J.R.W.^. $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$^._.. $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa........ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$... $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa..../ /// $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$//(/ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa(/./0/;/?/G/L/S/ $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$S/T/t/ $Ifkd$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sat/|/~////// $ $If] a$ $$If]a$ $$Ifa$//(0)0 kd $$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG0k2    4 sa)0*0000000 $$Ifa$$Ifx000x$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42  2%%%%%064 lap2%%%%%00"1'1+1/141 $$If]a$$If^kd?$$Ifl4422064 laf44151I1N1R1V1[1XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la[1\111111XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdq$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la1111111XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la1111111XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la112222!2XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdx$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la!2"2E2J2O2T2Y2XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd%$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laY2Z2}22222XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la2222222XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la2222223XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd,$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la33$3)3.33393XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la93:3]3b3g3l3q3XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laq3r333333XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd3$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la3333333XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la334 4444XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la44<4A4E4I4N4XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd:$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laN4O4r4w4{444XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la4444444XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la4444444XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdA$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la4455#5'5-5XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la-5.5V5Z5_5c5h5XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lah5i555555XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdH$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la5555555XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la5555555XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la55 6%6)6-636XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdO$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la36465676?6Q6[6b6}6XVVPGGGG $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la}6~66$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42  2%%%%%064 lap2%%%%%66666666KE$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$66666777KE$Ifkdz$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$77 7!7D7I7N7R7KE$Ifkd'$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$R7W7X7{77777KE$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$7777777XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la7777777XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd.$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la7788!8&8,8XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la,8-8P8T8Y8]8b8XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd $$Iflrt"T*42 064 lab8c888888XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd5 $$Iflrt"T*42 064 la8888888XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd $$Iflrt"T*42 064 la888889 9XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd $$Iflrt"T*42 064 la 9 9.92979;9@9XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd< $$Iflrt"T*42 064 la@9A9e9i9n9r9w9XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd $$Iflrt"T*42 064 law9x999999XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd $$Iflrt"T*42 064 la9999999XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdC$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la99:: :::XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la::C:I:M:Q:W:XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laW:X:~:::::XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdJ$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la:::::::XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la:::::;;XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la;;+;0;5;9;>;XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdQ$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la>;?;e;j;o;s;x;XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lax;y;;;;;;XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la;;;;;;;XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdX$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la;;;;;<<XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la<<*</<3<7<<<XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la<<=<`<e<j<o<t<XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd_$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lat<u<v<x<<<<<<XVVPGGGG $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$Iflrt"T*42 064 la<<<$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42  2%%%%%064 lap2%%%%%<<<<<<==KE$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$=#=(=-=.=Q=V=Z=KE$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$Z=^=c=d=====KE$Ifkd7$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$========KE$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$====>> >XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la > >/>4>9>=>B>XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd>$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laB>C>f>k>p>t>y>XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lay>z>>>>>>XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la>>>>>>>XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdE$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la>>???!?&?XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la&?'?J?O?S?W?\?XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la\?]??????XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdL $$Iflrt"T*42 064 la???????XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd $$Iflrt"T*42 064 la??????@XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd!$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la@@'@+@0@4@9@XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdS"$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la9@:@]@a@f@j@p@XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd#$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lap@q@@@@@@XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd#$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la@@@@@@@XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdZ$$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la@@@@@AAXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd%$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laAA+A/A4A8A=AXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd%$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la=A>AaAfAjAnAtAXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkda&$$Iflrt"T*42 064 latAuAAAAAAXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd'$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laAAAAAAAXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd'$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laAABB BBBXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdh($$Iflrt"T*42 064 laBB7BCaCeCKE$Ifkd,$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$eCjCnCtCuCCCCKE$Ifkd-$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$CCCCCCCCKE$IfkdG.$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$CCCCDD DDKE$Ifkd.$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$DD4D9D>DCDHDXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd/$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laHDIDlDpDuDyD~DXREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdN0$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la~DDDDDDDXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd0$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laDDDDDDDXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd1$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laDDEEEE#EXREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdU2$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la#E$EGELEQEUEZEXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd3$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laZE[E~EEEEEXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd3$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laEEEEEEEXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd\4$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laEEEEEEFXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd 5$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laFF%F*F.F2F7FXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd5$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la7F8F[F_FdFhFmFXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdc6$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lamFnFFFFFFXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd7$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laFFFFFFFXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd7$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laFFFGG GGXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdj8$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laGG0GXPx$Ifkd9$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la0G1GTGYG^GcGhG $$If]a$$If^kd9$$Ifl4422064 laf4hGiGGGGGGXREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdI:$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laGGGGGGGXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd:$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laGGGGHH HXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd;$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la H H.H3H7H$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laHH!I$Ifkd?$$Iflrt"T*42  2%%%%%064 lap2%%%%%!I&I+I/I4I5I\IaIKE$Ifkd(@$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$aIfIjIoIpIIIIKE$Ifkd@$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$IIIIIIIIKE$IfkdA$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$IIIJJ JJJKE$Ifkd/B$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$JJ8J[B[G[XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd-y$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laG[H[k[o[s[x[|[XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdy$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la|[}[~[[[[[[[XVVPGGGG $$Ifa$$Ifkdz$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la[[[$Ifkd4{$$Iflrt"T*42  2%%%%%064 lap2%%%%%[[[[[\$\)\KE$IfkdX|$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$)\.\3\8\9\\\`\e\KE$Ifkd}$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$e\j\o\p\\\\\KE$Ifkd}$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$\\\\\\\\KE$Ifkd_~$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$\\]] ]]]XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd $$Iflrt"T*42 064 la]]7];]?]D]I]XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laI]J]m]r]w]|]]XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdf$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la]]]]]]]XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la]]]]]]]XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la]]^^^^!^XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdm$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la!^"^M^Q^V^[^`^XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la`^a^^^^^^XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdǃ$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la^^^^^^^XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdt$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la^^^^^__XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd!$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la_ _,_0_5_9_=_XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd΅$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la=_>_^_b_g_l_p_XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd{$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lap_q______XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd($$Iflrt"T*42 064 la_______XREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdՇ$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la__` ````XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la``=`B`G`L`P`XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd/$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laP`Q`t`y`~```XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd܉$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la```````XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la```````XREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd6$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la``aa#a'a,aXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la,a-aPaUaZa_adaXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 ladaeaaaaaaXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd=$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laaaaaaaaXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laaaaaaaab!bXVVPGGGG $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la!b"bEb$IfkdD$$Iflrt"T*42  2%%%%%064 lap2%%%%%EbIbMbRbVbWbzbbKE$Ifkdh$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$bbbbbbbbKE$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$bbbbbbbbKE$Ifkd‘$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$bbbc#c(c,c1cKE$Ifkdo$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la $$If]a$1c2cUcZc_cdcicXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laicjccccccXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdɓ$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lacccccccXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdv$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laccccdd dXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd#$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la d d9d>dCdHdMdXREEEE $$If]a$$IfkdЕ$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laMdNdqdvdzd~ddXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd}$$Iflrt"T*42 064 ladddddddXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd*$$Iflrt"T*42 064 ladddddddXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdח$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laddeee"e'eXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la'e(eKeOeTeYe^eXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd1$$Iflrt"T*42 064 la^e_eeeeeeXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkdޙ$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laeeeeeeeXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laeeeeeffXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd8$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laff0f4f9f>fBfXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 laBfCfmfrfwf|ffXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lafffffffXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd?$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lafffffffXREEEE $$If]a$$Ifkd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lafffffffffXVIIIIII $0^`0a$kd$$Iflrt"T*42 064 lafg g/gQgsggggggggggh2h3h5hhhii$If Z$If$a$ $0^`0a$iiiiiiOjPjjjOHkdɟ$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If_kdF$$IfTl$h%064 laT jjjjjjjjjjkk4kGklkmkkkkkkl+l7l8l9l  h`h h`hh`hkkkkkkkkkkkll+l,l7l9l:lgliljlqlrlxlmm)m*m~mmmmmmmmnnnnnnn o oo o!o"o#o$o%o&o'o(o)o:o;oo?o@oAoBoCo뺰˦hv[56\]hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[5\hv[ hv[CJ hv[CJ jqhv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\A9l:lglilqlwlxlmm)m*m8m9mGmOmPmbm^kd>$$Ifl4.064 laf4 $$Ifa$h`hbmcmrmsmtm&kdȠ$$Ifl4֞.8$ >[064 laf4 $$Ifa$tmumvmwmxmymzm{m|m}m~mmmmmmm^kd$$Ifl4.~064 laf4Ff $$Ifa$mmmmmmm $$Ifa$mmmmm/&&& $$Ifa$kdo$$Ifl4֞.8* ::064 laf4mmmmmmmmmmmmmnnn HkdF$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If Ff $$Ifa$nnnnnnnnnn o~~~~~ $$Ifa$$If_kd$$IfTl4F:&$`    4 laf4T$$&dIfPa$ o oo!o#o%o'o)of`WWWWW $$Ifa$$IfkdE$$IfTl4ֈ:& $ vv4 laf4T)o*o;o#$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:& $vv <&&&&&&4 lap<&&&&&&T;o=o?oAoCoEoFo`obodofo`Z$Ifkd'$$IfTlֈ:& $vv4 laT $$Ifa$ CoDoEo`oaobocodoeofogohoiojoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooopppppppp p p p6p7p8p9p:p;pp?p@pApBpCpDpVpWpRqSqqr hv[5\hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[CJ hv[CJhv[ jqhv[CJNfohojo $$Ifa$jokoo#$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:& $vv <&&&&&&4 lap<&&&&&&Tooooooooooo`Z$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:& $vv4 laT $$Ifa$ ooo $$Ifa$ooo#$Ifkdy$$IfTlֈ:& $vv <&&&&&&4 lap<&&&&&&Tooooooopppp`Z$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:& $vv4 laT $$Ifa$ p p p $$Ifa$ p p6p#$Ifkd4$$IfTlֈ:& $vv <&&&&&&4 lap<&&&&&&T6p8p:pp@pApBpDpVp`^^X$IfkdX$$IfTlֈ:& $vv4 laT $$Ifa$ VpWpXpRqSqTqkqqqqqqq$If]q^q$IfHkd$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap qqrr r r=7... $$Ifa$$Ifkdd$$IfTl4FֈSm"&**n-l0$4 laf4Trrrr r r r r rrr6r7r8r9r:r;rr?r@rmrnrorprqrrrsrtrurvrwrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrsssssss s!s"s#sCsDsEsFsGsHsIsJsKsLsMsvswsxsyszs{s|s}s~sssss hv[CJhv[ hv[CJ jqhv[CJY r rrr6r8r:rr@r$IfFf1 $$Ifa$ @rArmrorqrsrB<333 $$Ifa$$Ifkd6$$IfTlֈSm"&**n-l0$4 laTsrurwrxrrrrrrr$IfFfѻ $$Ifa$ rrrrrrB<333 $$Ifa$$Ifkdֽ$$IfTlֈSm"&**n-l0$4 laTrrrrssss!s#s$IfFfq $$Ifa$ #s$sCsEsGsIsB<333 $$Ifa$$Ifkdv$$IfTlֈSm"&**n-l0$4 laTIsKsMsNsvsxszs|s~ss$IfFf $$Ifa$ ssssB82$If ^`kd$$IfTlֈSm"&**n-l0$4 laTssssssftgtstttuuvvvvvvvvvvvEvFvGvHvJvKvLvMvNvOvPv{v|v}v~vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvѿѿѸѿѿѿѿѿѿѿhv[ hv[5\ jqhv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJOJQJ\hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\phGsssssFtGtttttuuuu$$&dIfPa$$If ^` ^`Hkd$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap uuuuuuuuE?$Ifkd$$IfTl4\F{+`K 0O%4 laf4T$$&dIfPa$ $$Ifa$uuuu $$Ifa$uuv'!$Ifkd$$IfTl4֞F{"&+ Ktv70O%4 laf4TvvvvvvvvEvGvIvJvLvNvPv$IfFf $$Ifa$PvQv{v*$$Ifkd$$IfTl֞>k{"&u+Ctv70O%4 laT{v}vvvvvvvvvvvvvv$IfFf $$Ifa$vvv*$$Ifkd$$IfTl֞>k{"&u+Ctv70O%4 laTvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv$IfFf $$Ifa$vvvvvvvwwwwwwwwwww?w@wAwBwDwEwFwGwHwIwJwrwswtwuwwwxwywzw{w|w}w~wwwwww0xBxCxDxExFxGxHxIxJx_x`xaxbxcxdxexfxgxxxxxxxxxxxx hv[5\hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[ jqhv[CJKvvw*$$IfkdC$$IfTl֞>k{"&u+Ctv70O%4 laTwwwwwwww?wAwCwDwFwHwJw$IfFf  $$Ifa$JwKwrw*$$Ifkdk$$IfTl֞>k{"&u+Ctv70O%4 laTrwtwvwwwyw{w}w~wwwwwwwwwxxHkd$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If ^`FfH $$Ifa$xx/x0xBxDxFxHxJxOI$Ifkd$$IflrF}#77770#64 la $$Ifa$JxKx_x$Ifkd$$IflrF}#7777 2&&&&&0#64 lap2&&&&&_xaxcxexgxhxxxxOI$Ifkd!$$IflrF}#77770#64 la $$Ifa$xxx $$Ifa$xxx$Ifkd$$IflrF}#7777 2&&&&&0#64 lap2&&&&&xxxxxxxxxOI$Ifkd$$$IflrF}#77770#64 la $$Ifa$xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxyyyyyyyyyFyGyHyIyJyKyLyMyNyOyPycydyeyyyzz2z>z?z@zAzBzCzDzEzFzGzHz_z`zazbzczdzezfzgzhzizzzz緰 hv[5\ hv[CJ hv[6CJ] hv[CJhv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[CJ hv[CJ jqhv[CJhv[Exxx $$Ifa$xxy$Ifkd$$IflrF}#7777 2&&&&&0#64 lap2&&&&&yyyyyyFyHyJyOI$Ifkd'$$IflrF}#77770#64 la $$Ifa$JyLyNy $$Ifa$NyOyPykd$$IflrF}#7777 2&&&&&0#64 lap2&&&&&Pycydyeyzzz zzz"z1z $$Ifa$Hkd*$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If 1z2z>z@zBzDzFzE?6666 $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IflֈW2 $<s0$64 laFzHzIz_zazczezgziz$IfFfT $$Ifa$izjzzzzzzE?6666 $$Ifa$$IfkdT$$IflֈW2 $<s0$64 lazzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.{/{0{1{2{3{4{5{6{7{8{U{V{W{X{Y{Z{[{\{]{^{_{q{r{s{t{u{v{w{x{y{z{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[CJhv[ jqhv[CJWzzzzzzzzz$IfFf $$Ifa$zzzzzzzE?6666 $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IflֈW2 $<s0$64 lazzz.{0{2{4{6{8{$IfFf $$Ifa$8{9{U{W{Y{[{]{E?6666 $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IflֈW2 $<s0$64 la]{_{`{q{s{u{w{y{{{$IfFf' $$Ifa${{|{{{{{{E?6666 $$Ifa$$Ifkd'$$IflֈW2 $<s0$64 la{{{{{{{{{$IfFf $$Ifa${{{{EC=$Ifkd$$IflֈW2 $<s0$64 la{{{}|~|||||||| $$Ifa$Hkd$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap {{{}|~|||||}}}}}}}}}}}!}"}$}%}'}(})}*}+}-}.}0}1}3}4}5}6}7}9}:}<}=}?}@}A}S}T}V}W}Y}Z}\}]}^}_}`}b}c}e}f}h}i}j}k}l}n}o}q}r}t}u}ȺȳȺȳȺȳȺȳȺȳȺȳȺȳ jhv[ jhv[ jhv[hv[ jhv[ hv[5\hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[B*CJphF||||||||ki````` $$Ifa$kd;$$Ifl\* T064 la||}}*}6}B}XRIIII $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Iflr J$ Ph0D%64 laB}C}S}$Ifkd$$Iflr J$ Ph 2&&&&&0D%64 lap2&&&&&S}_}k}w}}}}}}OI$Ifkdf$$Iflr J$ Ph0D%64 la $$Ifa$u}v}w}x}z}{}}}~}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~"~#~%~&~'~I~J~L~M~ jhv[ jhv[ jhv[ jhv[ hv[CJhv[V}}} $$Ifa$}}}$IfkdV $$Iflr J$ Ph 2&&&&&0D%64 lap2&&&&&}~~~(~)~I~U~a~OI$Ifkd $$Iflr J$ Ph0D%64 la $$Ifa$M~O~P~R~S~T~U~V~X~Y~[~\~^~_~`~a~b~d~e~g~h~j~k~l~m~n~p~q~s~t~v~w~x~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    jhv[ jhv[ hv[CJ jhv[ jhv[hv[Va~m~y~ $$Ifa$y~z~~$Ifkd $$Iflr J$ Ph 2&&&&&0D%64 lap2&&&&&~~~~~~~ OI$Ifkd $$Iflr J$ Ph0D%64 la $$Ifa$   !"#9:<=?@BCDEFHIKLNOPQRTUWXZ[\]^`acdfgh jhv[ jhv[ jhv[hv[ jhv[ hv[CJV $ $$Ifa$$%9$Ifkd$$Iflr J$ Ph 2&&&&&0D%64 lap2&&&&&9EQ]ijOI$Ifkdk$$Iflr J$ Ph0D%64 la $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$   !"#$&')*,-./0235689:\]_`bcefgh jhv[ jhv[ hv[CJ jhv[hv[ jhv[V$Ifkd[$$Iflr J$ Ph 2&&&&&0D%64 lap2&&&&& #OI$Ifkd$$Iflr J$ Ph0D%64 la $$Ifa$#/; $$Ifa$;<\$Ifkd$$Iflr J$ Ph 2&&&&&0D%64 lap2&&&&&\ht€OI$Ifkd$$Iflr J$ Ph0D%64 la $$Ifa$hiklnoqrstuwxz{}~€ÀŀƀȀɀˀ̀̀΀πрҀԀՀ׀؀ـۀހù hv[CJ hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[CJ hv[CJ jhv[ jhv[ jhv[hv[ jhv[D€΀ڀ $$Ifa$ڀۀ܀kd $$Iflr J$ Ph 2&&&&&0D%64 lap2&&&&&܀݀ހǁȁ $$Ifa$`Hkdp$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If āǁȁ-./01Z[\]^Z[\]^˃̃̓΃σ zܬhv[CJOJQJhv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\phhv[ hv[5\ hv[CJ hv[6CJ] jqhv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ@,~uuo$If $$Ifa$kd$$IflF k%Z0!6    4 laJ,-/1YXOOI$If $$Ifa$kd$$IflF k%Z &&&0!6    4 laJp&&&YZ\^~uuo$If $$Ifa$kd$$IflF k%Z0!6    4 laJXOOI$If $$Ifa$kd$$IflF k%Z &&&0!6    4 laJp&&&~uuo$If $$Ifa$kd$$IflF k%Z0!6    4 laJXOOI$If $$Ifa$kdk$$IflF k%Z &&&0!6    4 laJp&&&Y~uuo$If $$Ifa$kdz$$IflF k%Z0!6    4 laJYZ\^XOOI$If $$Ifa$kd>$$IflF k%Z &&&0!6    4 laJp&&&ʃ~uuo$If $$Ifa$kdM$$IflF k%Z0!6    4 laJʃ˃̓σXOOI$If $$Ifa$kd$$IflF k%Z &&&0!6    4 laJp&&&  ~xr)Hkd $$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If`kd $$IflF k%Z0!6    4 laJz{| $$Ifa$$If$z{|΄τЄф҄ӄԄՄքCDEFGHIJKmnopqrstuDžȅɅʅ˅̅ͅ΅υ"#$%&'()*MN jqhv[CJ hv[CJ hv[5\hv[hv[CJ OJQJ^JV΄Є҄ԄքXRIIII $$Ifa$$IfkdY!$$Iflr?$064 lalքׄ$Ifkd]"$$Iflr?$ 2&&&&&064 lalp2&&&&&OI$Ifkd#$$Iflr?$064 lal $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$C$Ifkd$$$Iflr?$ 2&&&&&064 lalp2&&&&&CEGIKLmoqOI$Ifkd&$$Iflr?$064 lal $$Ifa$qsu $$Ifa$uv$Ifkd '$$Iflr?$ 2&&&&&064 lalp2&&&&&DžɅ˅OI$Ifkdr($$Iflr?$064 lal $$Ifa$˅ͅυ $$Ifa$υЅ$Ifkdb)$$Iflr?$ 2&&&&&064 lalp2&&&&&"$&OI$Ifkd*$$Iflr?$064 lal $$Ifa$&(* $$Ifa$*+M$Ifkd+$$Iflr?$ 2&&&&&064 lalp2&&&&&MOQSUVOI$Ifkd -$$Iflr?$064 lal $$Ifa$NOPQRSTUц؈وڈۈ+kl./:;EFOPZ[k眒hv[5CJOJQJ\hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[5\ hv[CJ hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ jqhv[CJhv[4 $$Ifa$kd.$$Iflr?$ 2&&&&&064 lalp2&&&&&цوڈۈklq| $0^`0a$_kdw/$$IfTl      X [0      64 laiT $$Ifa$  ʉ_kd/$$IfTl$h%064 laT$If Z$If$a$    :Ojk ^ ` ` Hkd0$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap kӌԌ݌ތ  gjmnoȍɍ;>LNO|}rstُڏCGTUVhi}~АӐ()7 hv[5\hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ jqhv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJRӌ݌ 24mnȍLN|$% ^` `  h`h%&'rsُTUh};< $ ` $ ` ` ` v^v`67EFT\]op^kd0$$Ifl4.L064 laf4 $$Ifa$ /&&& $$Ifa$kd1$$Ifl4֞.NV.6  L 6064 laf4$If  h`hFf#4 $$Ifa$7Dɓʓ˓͓̓ΓϓГѓ012345678^_`abcdefü jqhv[CJ hv[5\ hv[CJ hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[F *4C $$Ifa$$IfHkdX6$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap CDVPGGGG $$Ifa$$Ifkd6$$Ifl4rwn $V{|{|0D%4 laf4$Ifkd7$$Iflrwn $V{|{| 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&ɓ˓͓PJ$Ifkd@9$$Iflrwn $V{|{|0D%4 la $$Ifa$͓ϓѓ $$Ifa$ѓғ$Ifkd-:$$Iflrwn $V{|{| 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&024PJ$Ifkd;$$Iflrwn $V{|{|0D%4 la $$Ifa$468 $$Ifa$89^$Ifkd<$$Iflrwn $V{|{| 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&^`bdfgPJ$Ifkd=$$Iflrwn $V{|{|0D%4 la $$Ifa$TUVWXYZ[\•ÕĕŕƕǕȕɕʕ67n̿ hv[5\ hv[CJ hv[5CJOJQJ\hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[CJ hv[CJ jqhv[CJhv[F $$Ifa$$Ifkd>$$Iflrwn $V{|{| 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&PJ$Ifkd7@$$Iflrwn $V{|{|0D%4 la $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd$A$$Iflrwn $V{|{| 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&TVXPJ$IfkdB$$Iflrwn $V{|{|0D%4 la $$Ifa$XZ\ $$Ifa$\]$IfkduC$$Iflrwn $V{|{| 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&•ĕPJ$IfkdD$$Iflrwn $V{|{|0D%4 la $$Ifa$ĕƕȕ $$Ifa$ȕɕʕkdE$$Iflrwn $V{|{| 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&ʕ678CP`m $$Ifa$ ^`Hkd*G$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If mnXRIIII $$Ifa$$IfkdG$$Iflrsy $J064 laܖݖޖߖ>?@ABCDEFefghijklm—×ėŗƗ/01234567]^_`abcde hv[CJhv[ jqhv[CJ^ܖ$IfkdsH$$Iflrsy $J 2&&&&&064 lap2&&&&&ܖޖOI$IfkdI$$Iflrsy $J064 la $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$>$IfkdvJ$$Iflrsy $J 2&&&&&064 lap2&&&&&>@BDFGegiOI$IfkdK$$Iflrsy $J064 la $$Ifa$ikm $$Ifa$mn$IfkdyL$$Iflrsy $J 2&&&&&064 lap2&&&&&—LF$IfkdM$$Iflrsy $J064 la $$Ifa$—ėƗ $$Ifa$ƗǗ$IfkdrN$$Iflrsy $J 2&&&&&064 lap2&&&&&/13LF$IfkdO$$Iflrsy $J064 la $$Ifa$357 $$Ifa$78kdkP$$Iflrsy $J 2&&&&&064 lap2&&&&&8]_acefDkdQ$$Iflrsy $J064 la $$Ifa$$If $$Ifa$`ab̙͙Ιϙљҙәԙՙ֙י !#$%&'();<=>@ABCDEF_`abdefghij͚̚ךؚ]}!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[5\ hv[CJ hv[6CJ] hv[CJhv[ jqhv[CJNkdnR$$Iflrsy $J 2&&&&&064 lap2&&&&&abchi|}>kdS$$Ifl4\@A-#`F 0#4 laf4 $$Ifa$$$&dIfPa$ $$Ifa$}~ $$Ifa$$If̙Ι+% $$Ifa$$IfkdT$$Ifl4֞@A-# ]^FNOO0#4 laf4ΙЙљәՙיؙ$IfFfW $$Ifa$  .( $$Ifa$$IfkdY$$Ifl4֞@A-#]^FNOO0#4 laf4 "#%')*;=?@BDF$IfFf\ $$Ifa$ FG_a.( $$Ifa$$Ifkd^$$Ifl4֞@A-#]^FNOO0#4 laf4acdfhjk$IfFfya $$Ifa$ ܚ.,,kdc$$Ifl4֞@A-#]^FNOO0#4 laf4ܚݚ\]}~ԛ՛֛ $$Ifa$Hkdd$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If ^`}~ԛ՛&'()*+,-.CDEFGHIJKnopqrstuvœÜ&'()*+,-.0IJѝhv[5CJ\!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\phhv[ jqhv[CJ hv[5\ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[B*CJphJ&(*,.XRIIII $$Ifa$$Ifkd9e$$IflrG~K#7770#64 la./C$Ifkd#f$$IflrG~K#777 2%%%%%0#64 lap2%%%%%CEGIKLnprOI$Ifkdg$$IflrG~K#7770#64 la $$Ifa$rtv $$Ifa$vw$Ifkdlh$$IflrG~K#777 2%%%%%0#64 lap2%%%%%OI$Ifkdi$$IflrG~K#7770#64 la $$Ifa$Ü $$Ifa$ÜĜ$Ifkdj$$IflrG~K#777 2%%%%%0#64 lap2%%%%%&(*OI$Ifkdl$$IflrG~K#7770#64 la $$Ifa$*,. $$Ifa$./0kdl$$IflrG~K#777 2%%%%%0#64 lap2%%%%%0IJK $$Ifa$Hkd;n$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $Ifѝӝ՝~xoo $$Ifa$$Ifkdn$$IflFG~7:06    4 laѝҝӝԝ՝   ?@ABC\]^_`;<=>?klmnoRSӠԠ  efghv[5CJ\hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[ jqhv[CJH՝֝  XRII $$Ifa$$Ifkd|o$$IflFG~7: &&&06    4 lap&&&  ?AC~xoo $$Ifa$$Ifkdp$$IflFG~7:06    4 laCD\^`VPGG $$Ifa$$Ifkd]q$$IflFG~7: &&&06    4 lap&&&`a~xoo $$Ifa$$Ifkdpr$$IflFG~7:06    4 laXRII $$Ifa$$Ifkd4s$$IflFG~7: &&&06    4 lap&&&~xoo $$Ifa$$IfkdCt$$IflFG~7:06    4 laXRII $$Ifa$$Ifkdu$$IflFG~7: &&&06    4 lap&&&;=?~xoo $$Ifa$$Ifkdv$$IflFG~7:06    4 la?@kmoXRII $$Ifa$$Ifkdv$$IflFG~7: &&&06    4 lap&&&opqşƟQWX~|||||vv|||vv hkdw$$IflFG~7:06    4 la Ҡ   efgy $$Ifa$Hkdx$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If h g;<=>?@ABC+,-./0123]^_`abcdeģţƣǣȣɣ jhv[ jhv[ jhv[hv[ jhv[ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[5\PXRIIII $$Ifa$$Ifkd"y$$Iflr!L  0"64 la$Ifkdz$$Iflr!L   2&&&&&0"64 lap2&&&&&;=?MG$Ifkdy{$$Iflr!L  0"64 la $$Ifa$?AC $$Ifa$CD$Ifkd_|$$Iflr!L   2&&&&&0"64 lap2&&&&&OI$Ifkd}$$Iflr!L  0"64 la $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$+$Ifkd~$$Iflr!L   2&&&&&0"64 lap2&&&&&+-/134]_aOI$Ifkd$$Iflr!L  0"64 la $$Ifa$ace $$Ifa$ef$IfkdՀ$$Iflr!L   2&&&&&0"64 lap2&&&&&ģƣȣOI$Ifkd.$$Iflr!L  0"64 la $$Ifa$ȣʣ̣ $$Ifa$ɣʣˣ̣$%&'()*+,YZ[\]^_`aҤӤԤդ֤פؤ٤ڤ`@Aijɿﹳﹳ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\ph jhv[ jhv[ jhv[ hv[CJ jhv[hv[C̣ͣ$Ifkd$$Iflr!L   2&&&&&0"64 lap2&&&&&$&(OI$Ifkdi$$Iflr!L  0"64 la $$Ifa$(*, $$Ifa$,-Y$IfkdK$$Iflr!L   2&&&&&0"64 lap2&&&&&Y[]_abOI$Ifkd$$Iflr!L  0"64 la $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$Ҥ$Ifkd$$Iflr!L   2&&&&&0"64 lap2&&&&&ҤԤ֤ؤڤۤOI$Ifkd߈$$Iflr!L  0"64 la $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$kd$$Iflr!L   2&&&&&0"64 lap2&&&&&`@ABijkW ^ Hkd$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If23Z[\]ʩcdg|}ӪԪժ01VWnopuv~ǾǠhv[5CJOJQJ\hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\phhv[5CJ\hv[hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ jqhv[CJ6ɨ238HZ[\]$a$ $0^`0a$_kd$$IfTl      FX 0      64 laT $$Ifa$cdefgh|_kd$$IfTl0("0"64 laT$If Z$If |}~ӪԪ0V hvh`h hh`h hh`h hHkd$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap VWno~ëͫ׫LN` ph`h p p h hp h hh`h h h~ëīȫɫͫΫҫӫث٫ݫޫLNO`aqr  )*78DEQR_`mnz{ĭԭ֭׭ح)*78DEhv[6CJ] hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ jqhv[CJW`q  )D_z֭׭)DQR ph`h p p ph`hEʮˮ+,qryzԯկ߰()*vEHde³ijųƳdzȳɳʳ jhv[ jhv[ jhv[hv[ jhv[ hv[5\hv[5CJ\hv[B*CJph!hv[5B*CJOJQJ\phjhv[UmHnHu hv[CJ hv[CJ jqhv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ4ʮ+89qyүӯԯկ)+,v ph^h p ph`h ph`hPdeft $$Ifa$Hkd$$Ifl$h% $ 4 l` ap $If pijƳȳʳVPGGGG $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$Ifl4rV  $eeee0D%4 laf4ʳ˳$Ifkd`$$Ifl4rV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 laf4p2&&&&&ʳ6789:;<=>hijklmnopǴȴɴʴ˴̴ʹδϴ123456789\]^_`abcd jhv[ jhv[ jhv[hv[ jhv[ hv[CJV68:MG$Ifkd$$Ifl4rV  $eeee0D%4 laf4 $$Ifa$:<> $$Ifa$>?h$Ifkdw$$Ifl4rV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 laf4p2&&&&&hjlnpqMG$Ifkd$$Ifl4rV  $eeee0D%4 laf4 $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$Ǵ$Ifkd$$Ifl4rV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 laf4p2&&&&&Ǵɴ˴ʹϴдMG$Ifkdē$$Ifl4rV  $eeee0D%4 laf4 $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$1$Ifkd$$Ifl4rV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 laf4p2&&&&&13579:\^`MG$Ifkd͕$$Ifl4rV  $eeee0D%4 laf4 $$Ifa$`bd $$Ifa$de$Ifkd$$Ifl4rV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 laf4p2&&&&&MG$Ifkd֗$$Ifl4rV  $eeee0D%4 laf4 $$Ifa$޵ߵQTpqȶɶʶ˶̶Ͷζ϶жRSTUVWXYZɷʷ˷̷ͷηϷзѷSTUVW hv[5\ hv[CJ hv[5CJ\ jhv[ jhv[ hv[CJ jhv[hv[ jhv[M $$Ifa$޵$Ifkd$$Ifl4rV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 laf4p2&&&&&޵pMKKKkdߙ$$Ifl4rV  $eeee0D%4 laf4 $$Ifa$pqrȶNH$Ifkd$$IflrV  $eeee0D%4 la $$Ifa$ȶʶ̶ζж $$Ifa$жѶ$Ifkdy$$IflrV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&RTVPJ$Ifkd$$IflrV  $eeee0D%4 la $$Ifa$VXZ $$Ifa$Z[$Ifkd$$IflrV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&ɷ˷ͷPJ$Ifkdž$$IflrV  $eeee0D%4 la $$Ifa$ͷϷѷ $$Ifa$ѷҷ$Ifkd$$IflrV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&SUWPJ$Ifkd$$IflrV  $eeee0D%4 la $$Ifa$WXYZ[wxyz{|}~>?@ABCDEFstuvwxyz{ֹ׹عٹڹ۹ܹݹ޹߹56CD» hv[>*CJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ jhv[ jhv[ hv[CJ jhv[hv[ jhv[JWY[ $$Ifa$[\w$Ifkd$$IflrV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&wy{}PJ$Ifkd$$IflrV  $eeee0D%4 la $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IflrV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&>@BPJ$Ifkd$$IflrV  $eeee0D%4 la $$Ifa$BDF $$Ifa$FGs$Ifkd|$$IflrV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&suwy{|PJ$Ifkd$$IflrV  $eeee0D%4 la $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$ֹ$Ifkdy$$IflrV  $eeee 2&&&&&0D%4 lap2&&&&&ֹعڹܹ޹߹PNA $0^`0a$kd$$IflrV  $eeee0D%4 la $$Ifa$56CD`a45ܽݽ\ & F ^`gd!2f & F gd!2f$a$Da4P\]^{|%EFLNOUknotµզզµhv[5CJ\hv[6CJ] jqhv[CJ hv[CJhv[5CJOJQJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[6CJ]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[8Ҿ׾۾3EfBPV & F ^`gd!2f & F x^`gd!2f & F xgd!2f & F ^`gd!2f v vx & F gd!2f :]=O|]J & F ^`gd!2f & F x^`gd!2f & F xgd!2fi0fg34p & F gd!2f & F ^`gd!2f & F xgd!2f & F x^`gd!2fpqYZ,:dz9Qu & F x^`gd!2fz^zzx^zx & F xgd!2f & F gd!2f 6=OYt v & F xgd!2f & F gd!2f & F ^`gd!2f ;Yp 'BTU $0^`0a$ & F xgd!2f v9[\^{|_kdv$$IfTl$h%064 laT$If Z$If$a$ EFLN|` `qkd$$Ifl$h%  %064 l` %ap %xxo $$Ifa$ ^`qkd$$Ifl$h%  %064 l` %ap %$If9:wxyz{|}~!"#$%&'()*+lmnopqrstuv     hv[CJhv[ jqhv[CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[5>*CJ\S ,9 $$Ifa$$If_kdU$$IfTl4F:&$`    4 laf4T9:wy{}f`WWWWW $$Ifa$$Ifkd߫$$IfTl4ֈ:&lf!$ vvF4 laf4T#$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:&lf!$vvF <%%%%%%4 lap<%%%%%%T!#%'`Z$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:&lf!$vvF4 laT $$Ifa$ ')+ $$Ifa$+,l#$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:&lf!$vvF <%%%%%%4 lap<%%%%%%Tlnprtvw`Z$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:&lf!$vvF4 laT $$Ifa$  $$Ifa$#$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:&lf!$vvF <%%%%%%4 lap<%%%%%%T`Z$Ifkd߱$$IfTlֈ:&lf!$vvF4 laT $$Ifa$   $$Ifa$   #!!kd$$IfTlֈ:&lf!$vvF <%%%%%%4 lap<%%%%%%T ./03r:;-.kl%&`HIy89:;<=>?@ABtuvwxyz{|}~ۭңhv[hv[5>*CJ\ hv[CJ hv[5CJOJQJ\ jqhv[CJhv[6CJ]hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[5CJOJQJ\ hv[CJ>./0:-zzzzzt^ ^` ^`ikdҳ$$Ifl$h%   04 lap $If -k$%&HIy|qkd{$$Ifl$h%  %064 l` %ap %$If ^`oi$Ifkd&$$IfTl4F:$`"0    4 laf4T $$Ifa$8:<>?9000 $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$IfTl4ֈ:lf!$ v*04 laf4T>@BCtvxz|~$IfFfӸ $$Ifa$ ~B<333 $$Ifa$$Ifkdغ$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v*04 laT~     <=>?@ABCDEF !"#$%&'hv[ jqhv[CJ hv[CJ^  $IfFfi $$Ifa$ <>@BB<333 $$Ifa$$Ifkdn$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v*04 laTBDFG$IfFf $$Ifa$ B<333 $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v*04 laT$IfFf $$Ifa$ !#B<333 $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v*04 laT#%'(f$IfFf+ $$Ifa$ B<333 $$Ifa$$Ifkd0$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v*04 laTR[\]+-./uv01ij^_ '(34  PQRZhv[6CJ] hv[CJhv[5CJOJQJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ jqhv[CJhv[IR\xn ^`qkd$$Ifl$h%   064 l` ap $IfFf $$Ifa$ -.u0i^34  ^`^ \ ^` \ ^`PQnofqkdq$$Ifl$h%   064 l` ap $If ^`^ ^`` Z[bcno*;>?GHOdfgh\]Y2345^_PQDEmnGHhv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[6CJ]hv[5CJ\hv[5CJOJQJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJ jqhv[CJF=Gfg\24^$If^ \ ^ ^`` ^_`PDm~~~~~~x` L]L^`qkd$$Ifl$h%   064 l` ap  mG&Ivp^qkd$$Ifl$h%   064 l` ap $If` ` I)W $$Ifa$^EU   2 FIJknv!28[ & _  jmhv[hv[ hv[5\hv[OJQJ^Jhv[CJOJQJ^Jhv[5CJ\ hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\A   () FG{ $If<$If$If _kdr$$IfTl      FX 0      64 laT GHIJk x$If x [kd$$Ifl")(0(64 laz./SCC Px$IfNkd$$IfTl0)m34 laGT x$IfNkd~$$IfTl0)m34 laGT 4 [ ]H tp .(#x$If>kd5$$IfTl4)(34 laGf4T p .(#x$IfNkd$$IfTl0 !) 34 laGT   <   5Qkd!$$IfTl40H):34 laGf4T$ tx$If^ p .(#x$IfQkd$$IfTl40H):34 laGf4T       : < = O P j k x y                 P S                        w x { |                       hv[CJhv[5CJ\ hv[CJ jmhv[hv[ jmhv[5\ hv[5\R M N O   !x$If>kd$$IfTl4)(34 laGf4T p .(#x$If tp .(#x$If       $$Ifa$$Ifekd $$IfTl4 ) (0& 4 laGf4T       PJAAAA $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfTlrlX$' ~  044 laGT  kd$$IfTlrlX$' ~   2044 laGp2T       Akd$$IfTlrlX$' ~  044 laGT $$Ifa$$If      $$Ifa$$If  kd$$IfTlrlX$' ~   2044 laGp2T  ' 6 7 8 Q a $$Ifa$$Ifa b w {    PJAAAA $$Ifa$$Ifkd{$$IfTlrlX$' ~  044 laGT  kd$$IfTlrlX$' ~   2044 laGp2T       Akd`$$IfTlrlX$' ~  044 laGT $$Ifa$$If      $$Ifa$$If  kd$$IfTlrlX$' ~   2044 laGp2T               $$Ifa$$If_kdE$$Ifl4*04 laf4x$If     h i j k l m n o p q r s { }        $ h$Ifa$Ff $If`Ff $$Ifa$  h                             ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k { | } ~        hv[CJ jmhv[CJ hv[PJ hv[5\ hv[CJhv[V                  hv$IfFf $ h$Ifa$Ff $$Ifa$              vvvvvvvvvvqFf $$Ifa$ hv$Iftkd$$Ifl410* 04 laf4   " $ & ( * , . 0 2 4 5 U W Y [ ] _ a c e g i j { } FfFf< $$Ifa$ hv$If}              hvh$If^h`Ffb $$Ifa$                                      ! " % | } ~                                            ` a b hv[PJ hv[5\hv[ hv[CJ jmhv[CJX            ! " vvvvvvvvvvqFf $$Ifa$ hv$Iftkd $$Ifl4 0* 04 laf4 " | ~                       ` b Ff Ff $$Ifa$ hv$Ifb c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u x                                             & B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Z hv[6] hv[PJhv[ hv[CJ jmhv[CJXb d f h j l n p r t u                $IfFf hv$IfFf  $$Ifa$          B D F H J L N P R T V W k m o q Ff~$ $$Ifa$ hv$IfFf $IfZ k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~                                             ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > A T U V hv[PJ hv[CJ jmhv[CJhv[[q s u w y { }                    Fft- $If hv$IfFf( $$Ifa$       ) + - / 1 3 5 7 9 ; = > T V X Z \ ^ Ffj6 $$Ifa$ hv$IfFf1 $IfV W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h ~                ! " # $ % _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u hv[PJ hv[5\hv[ hv[CJ jmhv[CJX^ ` b d f h i ~  hvh$If^h`Ffj? hv$IfFf: $$Ifa$        " $ & wqqqqqqqqqq$If hvh$If^h`tkdB $$Ifl4U0* 04 laf4 & ' _ a c e g i k m o q s t FfJ $$Ifa$ hvh$If^h`FfE                   t u v w x y z { | } ~  hv[PJhv[ jmhv[CJ hv[CJZ           t v x z | ~ Ff S $$Ifa$ hvh$If^h`FfN  U`W`Y`[`]`_`a`c`e`g`i`Ff\ $$Ifa$ hvh$If^h`FfW  Taking notes (two-column, main idea, process, hypothesis-proof, problem- solution)(((((((((( h. Writing communication related to lesson (reflection, composition, notebook, journal)(((((((((( i. Engaged in problem solving/investigation (manipulatives, experiment, game, exploration)(((((((((( j. Engaged in individual reading/reflection(((((((((( k. Oral/choral reading(((((((((( l. Using technology ________________________________________________(((((((((( m. Using /audio-visual resources ______________________________________(((((((((( n. Completing worksheets/short-answer activities(((((((((( o. Taking a test(((((((((( p. Checking/grading student work(((((((((( q. Non-academic activity/off task _____________________________________(((((((((( Other __________________________________________________________(((((((((( Comments: RECORD DESCRIPTIVE NOTES DURING OBSERVATION: Describe the intended purpose/learning objectives for the lesson or activity:Describe the teachers activities and questioning strategies: (Lower order questions = l and higher order questions = +) QQDescribe the students learning experience: (What did students learn from the lesson?) COMPLETE RATING SCALES AFTER THE OBSERVATION Higher Order Thinking Indicators 19. The teacherNot at AllSmall ExtentModerate ExtentLarge Extenta. Asks open-ended questions with multiple answers((((b. Asks questions that require reasoning (if/then, what if, or suppose that)((((c. Asks students to justify ideas and explain their thoughts (Why do you think so?)((((d. Asks students to explain key concepts, definitions, and attributes in their own words((((e. Has students think about and relate examples from their own experience((((f. Relates subject matter to other contexts or to everyday life(((( Appendix D Student Performance for Charter School Campuses Appendix D Student Performance for Charter School Campuses Campus Enrollment GradesAnnual Dropout Rate Attendance RateTAAS Reading % PassingTAAS Math % PassingCharter Schools >=70% At-RiskA. W. Brown-Fellowship Charter School450PK - 0596.797.097.1Academy of Beaumont206PK - 080.094.362.060.0Academy of Careers and Technologies13609 - 128.579.871.447.1Accelerated Intermediate Charter School10406 - 0884.173.8Alpha Ii202PK - 0695.085.354.9Amigos Por Vida-Friends For Life 366PK - 0696.467.971.9Azleway Charter School7101 - 1261.161.5Benji's Special Education Academy356PK - 125.695.472.958.6Big Springs Charter School1606 - 09100.0Blessed Sacrament Academy Charter H S19909 - 127.078.276.057.1Burnett-Bayland Home6805 - 100.0100.053.364.7Burnett-Bayland Reception Center14505 - 120.099.566.767.6Career Plus Learning Academy2906 - 090.094.192.976.9Cedar Crest6401 - 111.298.792.380.0Cedar Ridge Charter School74PK - 120.094.642.938.5Children First Academy of Houston413PK - 070.096.584.195.2Children First of Dallas330PK - 070.094.873.261.6Coastal Bend Youth City5606 - 120.097.964.737.5Dallas County Juvenile Justice57806 - 120.093.770.747.3Delta 3 Boot Camp3906 - 110.098.180.060.0Dr. M. L. Garza-Gonzalez Charter School27506 - 122.487.363.167.6Eagle Advantage Charter 172KG - 0863.069.8 Campus Enrollment GradesAnnual Dropout Rate Attendance RateTAAS Reading % PassingTAAS Math % PassingEagle Project (Laredo)11704 - 1215.181.254.836.7Eagle Project (Waco)8106 - 120.481.277.877.8East Campus489PK - 120.097.748.947.3East Fort Worth Montessori154PK - 01El Paso Academy East34009 - 127.194.372.063.5Encino School67PK - 080.097.390.687.5Eoac Waco Charter School173KG - 0596.375.566.7Escuela De Las Americas73PK - 0295.1Fort Worth Can Academy21709 - 124.876.353.645.1Fruit of Excellence School8801 - 120.088.394.773.7G C C L R Emergency Shelter3202 - 110.0100.0100.0100.0Gabriel Tafolla Charter School181PK - 122.291.163.858.1Gateway Academy (Student Alternative)19309 - 126.579.860.044.1Gateway Charter Academy110KG - 0680.071.1George Gervin Charter16209 - 128.781.275.055.6George I. Sanchez - Alternative1707 - 106.196.750.050.0George I. Sanchez H S457PK - 123.985.792.575.4Girls & Boys Prep Academy 9401 - 0585.767.9Guardian Angel Performance Academy5606 - 080.082.280.676.5Gulf Shores Academy3707 - 120.089.8100.0100.0Gulf Shores Charter School At Covenant House509 - 09Gulf Shores Charter School At Sanctus307 - 08Harris County Juvenile Detention Center18904 - 120.097.675.867.7Harris County Youth Village11107 - 100.099.984.660.0Heights Charter School22608 - 121.788.777.064.8 Campus Enrollment GradesAnnual Dropout Rate Attendance RateTAAS Reading % PassingTAAS Math % PassingHiggs Carter King Gifted & Talented233PK 090.094.053.854.1Houston Heights Learning Academy 118PK 0494.762.558.3I Am That I Am Academy12705 120.093.667.551.2Idea Academy 24704 080.097.589.196.1Impact Charter187PK 0695.171.987.1Inspired Vision14103 0894.446.656.7Inspired Vision Academy123PK 0294.9Jamies House Charter School6106 125.197.750.020.0Jesse Jackson Academy23309 1212.679.580.048.0John H. Wood Charter School13506 120.496.673.366.7Katy-Hockley Boot Camp13406 110.096.083.361.3Kipp Academy33805 090.099.199.4100.0La Amistad Love & Learning Academy127PK KG100.0100.0Marywood609 125.690.1Miracle Farm2008 120.097.5100.0100.0New Frontiers Charter School641KG 080.092.464.573.5Northwest Math, Science, & Language Academy163PK 0594.882.673.1Northwest Preparatory138PK 0657.947.4Northwest Preparatory Campus #23702 0833.337.5Nova Charter School69PK 0296.3Oak Cliff Academy (Dallas)674KG 0797.163.269.0One Stop Multiservice83PK 1260.054.5One Stop Multiservice43PK 12100.050.0One Stop Multiservice H S199PK 120.881.969.051.6Panola 7409 120.087.183.373.3 Campus Enrollment GradesAnnual Dropout Rate Attendance RateTAAS Reading % PassingTAAS Math % PassingPathfinder Camp2306 100.099.466.737.5Positive Solutions Charter School24709 126.970.260.648.9Prepared Table501PK 100.094.954.938.7Radiance Academy of Learning - 149PK 106.193.173.863.9Rapoport Academy136PK 0497.490.981.8Raul Yzaguirre School For Success645PK 120.696.477.581.2Raven School20109 120.0100.080.071.4Rise Academy100PK 0294.3Rylie Faith Family Academy781PK 121.994.471.269.4San Antonio Technology Academy9209 09100.00.0Sentry Technology Prep School19109 120.883.564.448.9Ser-Ninos Charter 370PK 0596.390.798.1Settlement Homey2204 110.092.683.375.0Southwest Campus297PK 080.097.164.354.8T-Care3706 121.099.8100.033.3Technology Education Charter H S11609 124.871.187.566.7Tekoa Academy134PK 0793.846.935.8Texas Serenity Academy2607 110.099.4100.0100.0Texas Serenity Academy (Bayshore)1208 090.096.375.066.7The Basic Center2709 120.0100.0The Zoe Learning Academy167KG 0652.151.4Theresa B Lee Academy24009 120.095.097.187.2TOVAS-Tactile Oral Visual Alternative System161PK 100.094.077.353.1Two Dimensions Preparatory Academy277PK 0596.7100.096.0Valley High382PK 1213.781.675.070.8 Campus Enrollment GradesAnnual Dropout Rate Attendance RateTAAS Reading % PassingTAAS Math % PassingVanguard Academy48PK 0333.3100.0Wa-Set Preparatory Academy168PK 0595.165.765.9Wings For Life710 120.095.1Charter Schools <70% At-RiskA+ Academy154PK 0893.145.647.0Academy of Accelerated Learning514PK 090.698.7Academy of Dallas376PK 080.095.769.278.3Academy of Houston479KG 080.095.064.061.9Academy of Skills & Knowledge309KG 080.095.875.368.9Alief Montessori Community School135PK 0695.992.692.6Alpha Charter School144KG 123.387.683.060.9Alphonso Crutchs-Life Support Center123506 120.585.567.758.5American Academy of Excellence Charter37007 121.850.272.952.8American Youth Works Charter School25709 122.085.578.763.8Annunciation Maternity Home310 12Arlington Classics Academy246KG 060.096.191.787.2Bay Area Charter Elementary146PK 0595.897.378.9Beatrice Mayes Institute Charter School236KG 080.097.295.192.3Bexar County Academy284PK 080.092.870.773.2Brazos River Charter School8108 120.089.7100.085.0Brazos School For Inquiry & Creativity146PK 121.995.282.671.7Bright Ideas Charter81KG 120.092.889.581.6Burnham Wood Charter School156KG 050.099.992.292.6Burnham Wood H S3909 1291.792.3Calvin Nelms Charter High School15009 128.489.287.583.3 Campus Enrollment GradesAnnual Dropout Rate Attendance RateTAAS Reading % PassingTAAS Math % PassingCedars International Academy48KG 0686.486.4Comquest Academy6809 121.196.881.372.2Crossroad Community Ed Center Charter11909 129.292.543.845.0Dallas Can! Academy Charter37309 127.281.063.950.8Dallas Can! Academy Charter47609 1211.178.571.944.9Dallas Community Charter School126PK 0294.5Destiny High School192PK 1210.581.460.052.1Eagle Advantage Charter El Irving2KG 05Eagle Advantage Charter H S17209 1213.084.056.037.5Eagle Charter School San Antonio11703 1261.854.5Eagle Project (Abilene)12406 1220.975.896.262.5Eagle Project (Beaumont)18906 126.484.775.044.2Eagle Project (Brownsville)14406 125.170.279.358.6Eagle Project (Bryan)11807 121.072.955.033.3Eagle Project (Dallas)6606 1211.261.352.655.0Eagle Project (Del Rio)15004 125.581.848.740.0Eagle Project (Ft Worth)23106 127.379.057.740.0Eagle Project (Lubbock)8706 126.686.589.766.7Eagle Project (Midland)14805 127.689.171.457.1Eagle Project (Pharr-Mcallen)20605 12.081.662.874.0Eagle Project (San Antonio)12606 124.783.633.325.0Eagle Project (Texarkana)5904 1119.972.050.042.9Eagle Project (Tyler)15606 125.868.664.754.3East Texas Charter H S14309 127.884.896.680.6Ed White Memorial High School9109 122.487.971.475.0 Campus Enrollment GradesAnnual Dropout Rate Attendance RateTAAS Reading % PassingTAAS Math % PassingEden Park Academy162KG 080.094.785.960.7Education Center At Little Elm 6806 1292.392.0Education Center At The Colony 10906 1292.983.3Education Center International Academy5705 1273.393.5Ehrhart School The12701 1271.867.6El Paso School of Excellence299PK 0895.160.741.7El Paso School of Excellence Middle9502 0882.775.7Erath Excels Academy Inc.8309 1211.983.789.582.6Excel Academy125KG 120.292.081.867.6Faith Family Academy of Oak Cliff844PK 120.095.660.859.6Focus Learning Academy381KG 0796.771.869.1Fort Worth Academy of Fine Arts12304 120.096.197.696.6George I. Sanchez Charter GED7712 1246.876.0George I. Sanchez Charter H S San Antonio4107 124.078.766.780.0Girls & Boys Prep Academy39501 120.098.079.170.8Harmony Science Academy29806 093.193.190.090.7Honors Academy29807 121.379.781.065.3Houston Can! Academy Charter School34409 125.977.772.466.0Houston Gateway Academy631KG 0794.571.580.3Jean Massieu Academy143PK 120.095.684.475.0Jubilee Academic Center182PK 1271.673.2Katherine Anne Porter School11309 122.088.3100.076.9Katherine Anne Porter School At Blanco88PK 0854.550.0Kenny Dorham School 40PK 0898.233.350.0Killeen-Richard Milburn Alternative H S15709 1210.679.778.852.3 Campus Enrollment GradesAnnual Dropout Rate Attendance RateTAAS Reading % PassingTAAS Math % PassingLa Hacienda Solutions309 110.0Landmark School9307 120.985.068.665.8Legacy High School8608 123.684.090.080.0Life Charter School794KG 100.096.689.384.7Mainland Preparatory Academy284PK 080.097.794.795.3Mccullough Academy of Excellence193KG 0496.575.676.1Medical Center Charter School 255PK 0796.379.774.3Meridale-Westwood73KG 120.599.770.077.8Metro Charter Academy298PK 0764.761.9Metro School4703 060.089.037.244.2Mid-Valley Academy9509 120.080.475.055.0Midland-Richard Milburn Alter H S10709 125.378.282.452.9Midland Advantage Charter School549KG 0794.276.278.8Nancy Ney Charter School4807 121.793.458.850.0National Elite Gymnastics1903 090.093.8100.094.4Nehemiah Institute1907 110.086.480.040.0North Hills School79901 120.096.698.798.3North Houston H S For Business17009 1210.492.888.964.3Nova Charter School-Southeast218PK 0596.567.262.5NYOS Charter School210KG 100.095.996.396.2NYOS Charter School Inc. At Gessne52PK 02Odyssey Academy Inc.20405 080.095.986.488.9Paradigm Accelerated School5609 125.390.778.685.7Paso Del Norte Academy22209 123.985.866.758.3Pegasus Charter H S15107 120.092.185.473.0 Campus Enrollment GradesAnnual Dropout Rate Attendance RateTAAS Reading % PassingTAAS Math % PassingPineywoods Community Academy High187KG 090.095.389.283.5Pinnacle School299KG 120.098.489.484.8Radiance Academy of Learning131PK 123.486.678.360.4Ranch Academy6507 120.999.966.783.3Richard Milburn Academy (Amarillo)10209 120.076.072.442.9Richard Milburn Academy (Beaumont)11909 128.578.566.748.4Richard Milburn Alter H S-Corpus C14309 122.483.792.657.9Richard Milburn Alter H S-Lubbock14009 124.985.675.060.0River Oaks13909 1258.846.5Safeplace16KG 09100.075.0San Antonio Can Academy5809 1275.016.7San Antonio School For Inquiry 90KG 120.091.873.164.7San Marcos Preparatory School87KG 0574.271.9School of Excellence In Education873PK 110.094.675.873.8Seashore Learning Center139KG 0696.495.290.3Shekinah Hope27PK 02Shekinah Radiance Academy130PK 100.094.384.063.3Shekinah Schertz36KG 0580.088.9South Plains Academy15509 124.091.273.350.0Southwest High School44609 120.087.977.970.8Southwest Preparatory School22009 126.085.171.346.6Southwest Preparatory Southeast Campus4009 1275.066.7St Marys Academy Charter School190KG 0884.669.9Star Charter School14201 120.094.187.690.5Tekoa Academy Marshall75PK 1272.072.0 Campus Enrollment GradesAnnual Dropout Rate Attendance RateTAAS Reading % PassingTAAS Math % PassingTexas Academy of Excellence286PK - 0696.260.566.7Texas Empowerment Academy10505 - 090.091.981.978.1Texas Language Charter119KG - 0596.564.962.2The Echelon23207 - 123.175.581.852.4The Phoenix Charter School195PK - 0779.773.5Transformative Charter Academy10609 - 125.783.070.464.0Treetops School International273KG - 120.094.476.869.4Univ. of Houston Charter School of Technology129KG - 0596.793.097.7Universal Academy - Flower Mound302KG - 0993.994.8Universal Academy649PK - 120.095.888.287.8University School22707 - 120.190.683.376.7Varnett Charter School720PK - 0597.792.893.4Waxahachie Faith Family Academy291PK - 110.092.884.270.7West Houston Charter6007 - 120.094.396.392.6West Houston Charter Elementary132KG - 0695.997.192.8Winfree Academy Charter School Irving40609 - 121.684.886.866.0Winfree Academy Charter School Lewisville28509 - 122.979.287.178.9Winfree Academy Charter School Richardson26809 - 121.284.659.069.4Y W High School19608 - 120.077.475.861.0YES College Preparatory School42306 - 120.097.998.6100.0Note. indicates data not available in AEIS.  The Center for Education Reform does not explain how they arrived at their school counts (i.e., number of open-enrollment charters, campus charters, etc.)  In 1997, legislative modifications allowed for an unlimited number of 75 Percent Rule charter schools that were required to maintain an enrollment of 75 percent or more at-risk students [TEC, 12.101(a)(2)]. Subsequent changes in the education code eliminated this designation.      PAGE 12  PAGE 11  PAGE 180  PAGE 181  PAGE 182  PAGE 200  PAGE 199  PAGE 208  PAGE 225  PAGE 212  PAGE 238  PAGE 237 87 45 46 91 41 40 12 27 51 64 65 68 81 82 84 86 34 55 67 74 83 85 85 85 87 90 91 66 96 94 93 91 81 81 50 99 99 77 15 18 40 48 77 82 19 30 47 52 61 61 65 73 80 83 85 87 45 74 OVER 57 `U`V`W`X`Y`Z`[`\`]`^`_```a`b`c`d`e`f`g`h`i`j`m````````````````````````8a9a:a;aa?a@aAaBaCaDaEaFaGaHaIaJaKaLaMaPa{a|a}a~aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa hv[PJ hv[CJ jmhv[CJhv[UZi`j`````````````8a:aa@aBaDaFaHaJaLaFfe $$Ifa$ hvh$If^h`Ff` LaMa{a}aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaFfm $$Ifa$ hvh$If^h`Ffi aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaabbb b b b b bbbbbbbbbbbbbbebfbgbhbibjbkblbmbnbobpbqbrbsbtbubvbwbxbybbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb jmhv[CJhv[ hv[CJ^aabb b bbbbbbbbbebgbibkbmbobqbsbubwbybFfv $$Ifa$ hvh$If^h`Ff}r ybzbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbFf $$Ifa$ hvh$If^h`Ffy{ bbbbbbbbbbbbbcccccccccccccccc c!c"c#c$cpcqcrcsctcucvcwcxcyczc{c|c}c~ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccdhdzddddce hv[6] hv[5\ hv[PJhv[ hv[CJ jmhv[CJVbbcccccccc c"c$c%cpcrctcvcxczc|c~ccccFf $$Ifa$ hvh$If^h`Ffu cccccccccccccccccddgd$If !Ff $$Ifa$ hvx$IfFfq gdhdidjdkd4[kd $$Ifl:*04 la$Ifikd" $$Ifl*   04 lap kdldmdndodA[kdٕ $$Ifl:*04 la$If[kdK $$Ifl:*04 laodpdqdrdsdA[kd $$Ifl:*04 la$If[kdg $$Ifl:*04 lasdtdudvdwdA[kd $$Ifl:*04 la$If[kd $$Ifl:*04 lawdxdydzddA7 P+$If[kd- $$Ifl:*04 la$If[kd $$Ifl:*04 laddddd d$Ifikd $$Ifl*   04 lap ddeeezqqq d$IfkdV $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4eeeeezqqq d$Ifkd $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4eee e ezqqq d$Ifkd֛ $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4 e e e eezqqq d$Ifkd $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4eeeeezqqq d$IfkdV $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4eeeeezqqq d$Ifkd $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4eeeeezqqq d$Ifkd֞ $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4eeeeezqqq d$Ifkd $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4ee e!e"ezqqq d$IfkdV $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4"e#e$e%e&ezqqq d$Ifkd $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4&e'e(e)e*ezqqq d$Ifkd֡ $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4*e+e,e-e.ezqqq d$Ifkd $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4.e/e0e1e2ezqqq d$IfkdV $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf42e3e4e5e6ezqqq d$Ifkd $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf46e7eezt$Ifkd֤ $$Ifl4F$(_)*i0    4 laf4ceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeefff|f}f~fffffffffffffffffg/g0g1g2g3g4g5g6g7ggggggggggggggggggg-h.h/h0h1h hv[6] hv[CJ jmhv[CJ hv[5\hv[Xeeeee3Ykd1 $$Ifl*04 la d$Ifikd $$Ifl*   04 lap eeeeeBYkd) $$Ifl*04 la d$IfYkd $$Ifl*04 laeeeeeBYkd! $$Ifl*04 la d$IfYkd $$Ifl*04 laeeeeeBYkd $$Ifl*04 la d$IfYkd $$Ifl*04 laeeeeeBYkd $$Ifl*04 la d$IfYkd $$Ifl*04 laeeeeeBYkd $$Ifl*04 la d$IfYkd $$Ifl*04 laeeeeeBYkd $$Ifl*04 la d$IfYkd $$Ifl*04 laeeeeeBYkd $$Ifl*04 la d$IfYkd} $$Ifl*04 laeeeeeef$IfYkdu $$Ifl*04 lafffff+f;fHf $$Ifa$$Ifpkd $$IfTl4Z(n(   04 laf4p THfIf|f~ffffRLCCCC $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$IfTl4rZlif!D%(04 laf4Tffkdv $$IfTl4rZlif!D%( 204 laf4p2Tfffffff/gCkdȰ $$IfTl4rZlif!D%(04 laf4T $$Ifa$$If/g1g3g5g7g $$Ifa$7g8gkd $$IfTl4rZlif!D%( 204 laf4p2T8ggggggg;kd $$IfTl4rZlif!D%(04 laf4T $$Ifa$($If^`(gggggg $$Ifa$$Ifggkdг $$IfTl4rZlif!D%( 204 laf4p2Tg-h/h1h3h5h6hCkd" $$IfTl4rZlif!D%(04 laf4T $$Ifa$$If1h2h3h4h5h6h7h@hLh|h~hhhhhiii+i,iIiJiKipiqitiui|i}i~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijjƼưưƪƼhv[CJaJ hv[CJhv[56CJ\]hv[CJPJaJhv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\hv[5CJ\ hv[CJ hv[CJhv[ hv[CJ jmhv[CJ@6h7h8h9h:h;hh?h@hKhLh|h}h~hhhhhhhi+i,iFfx $$Ifa$ H$If^Hx $0^`0a$ !,iJiKiqiui}iiiiizqqzzz $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ H$If^Hekdù $$If43'3032  24af4x$If iii* H$If^Hkdc $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24aiiiiiii $$Ifa$ $$If]a$iii* H$If^HkdA $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aiiiiijj $$Ifa$ $$If]a$jjjj.j/j2j3j:j;j?jCjDjHjIjJjRjSjVjWj^j_jajejfjjjkjojpjqjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjkkkkkkkkkkkk"k#k$k>k?kAkBkIkJkPkUkVkWk|k}kkkkkkkkkkk hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJ\jj/j* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a/j3j;j=j?jDjIj $$Ifa$ $$If]a$IjJjSj* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24aSjWj_jajfjkjpj $$Ifa$ $$If]a$pjqjj* H$If^HkdϽ $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24ajjjjjjj $$Ifa$ $$If]a$jjj* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24ajjjjjjj $$Ifa$ $$If]a$jjk* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24akkkkkk#k $$Ifa$ $$If]a$#k$k?k* H$If^Hkdi $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a?kBkJkLkNkPkVk $$Ifa$ $$If]a$VkWk}k* H$If^HkdA $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&&'032  24a}kkkkkkk $$Ifa$ $$If]a$kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkllll l llll/l0l2l3l:l;l>l?lClDlHlIlMlNlOlZl[l]l^lelfliljlnlolsltlxlylzllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJ\kkk* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24akkkkkkk $$Ifa$ $$If]a$kkk* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24akkkll ll $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ll0l* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a0l3l;l?lDlIlNl $$Ifa$ $$If]a$NlOl[l* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a[l^lfljloltlyl $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ylzll* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24alllllll $$Ifa$ $$If]a$lll* H$If^HkdW $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24alllllll $$Ifa$ $$If]a$llm* H$If^Hkd/ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24allmmmmmmmm#m$m(m)m-m.m/mFmGmImJmQmRmUmVmZm[m_m`mdmemfmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmnn n n nnnnnnnnn6n7n:n;nBnCnGnKnLnPnQnRnUnhv[hv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJ hv[CJYmmmm$m)m.m $$Ifa$ $$If]a$.m/mGm* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aGmJmRmVm[m`mem $$Ifa$ $$If]a$emfmm* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24ammmmmmm $$Ifa$ $$If]a$mmm* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24ammmmmmm $$Ifa$ $$If]a$mmm* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24amn nnnnn $$Ifa$ $$If]a$nn7n* H$If^Hkdg $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a7n;nCnEnGnLnQn $$Ifa$ $$If]a$QnRnSnUn*((kd? $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24aUn]n^nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnooooo o#o$o(o)o-o.o2o3o4o@oCoDoKoLoOoPoToUoYoZo^o_o`o{o~oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooohv[CJaJ hv[CJhv[56CJ\]hv[CJPJaJhv[5CJ\SUn^nkntnnnnnnnnnnnnn $$If]a$Ff $$Ifa$ H$If^Hnoo* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aoo o$o)o.o3o $$Ifa$ $$If]a$3o4o@o* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a@oDoLoPoUoZo_o $$Ifa$ $$If]a$_o`o{o* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a{ooooooo $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ooo* H$If^Hkdk $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&&&032  24aooooooo $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ooo* H$If^HkdC $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aooooooo $$Ifa$ $$If]a$oo p* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aoo pppppppp"p#p'p(p)pApCpDpKpLpNpRpSpXpoprpspzp{p~pppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppqqqq&q)q*q1q2q5q6q:q;q?q@qDqEqFqlqoqpqwqxq{q|qqqqqqqhv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJ hv[CJ\ ppppp#p(p $$Ifa$ $$If]a$(p)pAp* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24aApDpLpNpSpUpWp $$Ifa$ $$If]a$WpXpop* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'&&032  24aopsp{ppppp $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ppp* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24appppppp $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ppp* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24apppppqq $$Ifa$ $$If]a$qq&q* H$If^Hkd_ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a&q*q2q6q;q@qEq $$Ifa$ $$If]a$EqFqlq* H$If^Hkd7 $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24alqpqxq|qqqq $$Ifa$ $$If]a$qqq* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqrrrr r#r$r(r)r-r.r2r3r4rJrMrNrUrVrYrZr^r_rcrdrhrirjrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrssss sshv[hv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJ hv[CJZqqqqqqq $$Ifa$ $$If]a$qqq* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24aqqqqqqq $$Ifa$ $$If]a$qqr* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24arr r$r)r.r3r $$Ifa$ $$If]a$3r4rJr* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aJrNrVrZr_rdrir $$Ifa$ $$If]a$irjrr* H$If^Hkdu $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24arrrrrrr $$Ifa$ $$If]a$rrr* H$If^HkdM $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24arrrrrrr $$Ifa$ $$If]a$rrr* H$If^Hkd+ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24arrss sss $$Ifa$ $$If]a$sssssCsDsEsLsMsNsOsPsQsRsSsTsUsVs|s}s~ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssstttt t tttt*t-t.t5t6t9t:t>t?tCtDtHtItJtMtUtVtttttthv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[CJhv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJRssCs* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aCsEsMsOsQsSsUs $$Ifa$ $$If]a$UsVs|s* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&&&032  24a|s~ssssss $$Ifa$ $$If]a$sss* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&&&032  24asssssss $$Ifa$ $$If]a$sss* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24assstt tt $$Ifa$ $$If]a$tt*t* H$If^Hkdc $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a*t.t6t:t?tDtIt $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ItJtKtMt*((kd; $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aMtVtctlttttttttttttu $$If]a$Ff $$Ifa$ H$If^Htttttttttttttuuu&u)u*u1u2u3u4u8u9u=u>uBuCuDu[u^u_ufugujukuouputuuuyuzu{uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuvvvvv v'v(vhv[hv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJ hv[CJZuu&u* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a&u*u2u4u9u>uCu $$Ifa$ $$If]a$CuDu[u* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a[u_ugukupuuuzu $$Ifa$ $$If]a$zu{uu* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24auuuuuuu $$Ifa$ $$If]a$uuu* H$If^Hkdg $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24auuuuuuu $$Ifa$ $$If]a$uuu* H$If^Hkd? $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24auuuuuuv $$Ifa$ $$If]a$vvv* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24av v(v*v/v1v3v $$Ifa$ $$If]a$(v)v*v.v/v0v1v2v3v4vQvSvTv[v\v_v`vdvevivjvnvovpvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvww w wwwwwwww'w*w+w2w3w6w7w;w{?{C{D{E{V{Y{Z{a{b{c{d{h{i{m{n{r{s{t{{{{{{{{hv[hv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJ hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[56CJ\]Rzzz* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24azzzzzzz $$Ifa$ $$If]a$zzz* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24azzzzzz{ $$Ifa$ $$If]a${{%{* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a%{){1{5{:{?{D{ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$D{E{V{* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aV{Z{b{d{i{n{s{ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$s{t{{* H$If^Hkd_ $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a{{{{{{{ $$Ifa$ $$If]a${{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{|||||| |$|'|(|/|0|3|4|8|9|=|>|B|C|D|c|e|f|m|n|o|p|q|r|w|x|{|||}||||||||||||||||||||||||||||hv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJZ{{{* H$If^Hkd= $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a{{{{{{{ $$Ifa$ $$If]a${{{* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a{{{{||| $$Ifa$ $$If]a$| |$|* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'&&032  24a$|(|0|4|9|>|C| $$Ifa$ $$If]a$C|D|c|* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24ac|f|n|p|r|x||| $$Ifa$ $$If]a$||}||* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a||||||| $$Ifa$ $$If]a$|||* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a||||||| $$Ifa$ $$If]a$|||* H$If^HkdY $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a||||}}} } }}}}}}}}-}0}1}8}9}<}=}A}B}F}G}K}L}M}T}V}W}^}_}b}c}g}h}m}n}r}s}t}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~;~=~>~E~F~hv[hv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJ hv[CJZ|}} }}}} $$Ifa$ $$If]a$}}-}* H$If^Hkd7 $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a-}1}9}=}B}G}L} $$Ifa$ $$If]a$L}M}T}* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aT}W}_}c}h}n}s} $$Ifa$ $$If]a$s}t}}* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a}}}}}}} $$Ifa$ $$If]a$}}}* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a}}}}}}} $$Ifa$ $$If]a$}}}* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a}}~~ ~~~ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$~~;~* H$If^Hkdu $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a;~>~F~J~O~T~Y~ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$F~I~J~N~O~S~T~X~Y~Z~k~m~n~u~v~w~x~y~z~}~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ '(+,0156:;<_bcjklmqrwx|}~hv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJZY~Z~k~* H$If^HkdM $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24ak~n~v~x~z~~~~ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$~~~* H$If^Hkd% $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a~~~~~~~ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$~~~* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a~~~~~~~ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$~~* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a (,16; $$Ifa$ $$If]a$;<_* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a_ckmrx} $$Ifa$ $$If]a$}~* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$  !245<=>?@AEFKLMhklstuvz{ɀʀˀրـڀ #$()*+hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJR*((kdo $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a  !25=?AFL $$If]a$Ff $$Ifa$ H$If^HLMh* H$If^Hkd  $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24ahltv{ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ʀ*"x$Ifkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''&&032  24aʀˀրڀyy $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ H$If^Hekd $$If43'3032  24af4* H$If^HkdA $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a $)+- $$Ifa$ $$If]a$+,-.@CDKLOPTUYZ^_`svw~ŁƁʁˁρЁс  &)*1256:;?@DEFlpqxy|}hv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJhv[ hv[CJZ-.@* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''&&032  24a@DLPUZ_ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$_`s* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24asw $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd! $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aƁˁЁ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$Ёс* H$If^Hkd" $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a  $$Ifa$ $$If]a$&* H$If^Hkd# $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a&*26;@E $$Ifa$ $$If]a$EFl* H$If^Hkd]$ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24alqy} $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd5% $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aĂɂ΂ӂ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ÂĂȂɂ͂΂҂ӂԂ  456=>?@ABCDEFGbefmnqrvw{|$%()-.hv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJZӂԂ* H$If^Hkd & $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a  $$Ifa$ $$If]a$4* H$If^Hkd& $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a46>@BDF $$Ifa$ $$If]a$FGb* H$If^Hkd' $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&&&032  24abfnrw| $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd( $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkdm) $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^HkdK* $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a%).38 $$Ifa$ $$If]a$.23789UWX_`cdhinostuфӄԄۄ܄߄  !%&*+,=?@GHIJKLPQUVWx{|hv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJZ89U* H$If^Hkd#+ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aUX`diot $$Ifa$ $$If]a$tu* H$If^Hkd+ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ф* H$If^Hkd, $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aфԄ܄ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ * H$If^Hkd- $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a !&+ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$+,=* H$If^Hkd. $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a=@HJLQV $$Ifa$ $$If]a$VWx* H$If^Hkd[/ $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24ax| $$Ifa$ $$If]a$*((kd90 $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a +-.56789:>?CDEVXY`adeijnostu׆چۆ#$()-.234TWX_hv[hv[CJaJ hv[CJhv[56CJ\]hv[CJPJaJhv[5CJ\Rυ +.68:?D $$If]a$Ff2 $$Ifa$ H$If^HDEV* H$If^Hkd4 $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24aVYaejot $$Ifa$ $$If]a$tu* H$If^Hkd5 $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$׆* H$If^Hkd6 $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a׆ۆ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkde7 $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a$).3 $$Ifa$ $$If]a$34T* H$If^Hkd=8 $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aTX`bgik $$Ifa$ $$If]a$_`abfghijklÇćŇ͇̇·χЇч҇ӇԇՇև  69:ABCDEFJKOPQilmtuyz~hv[CJaJhv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJZkl* H$If^Hkd9 $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'&&032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$Ç* H$If^Hkd9 $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aÇŇ͇χчӇՇ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$Շև* H$If^Hkd: $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&&&032  24a  $$Ifa$ $$If]a$6* H$If^Hkd; $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a6:BDFKP $$Ifa$ $$If]a$PQi* H$If^Hkd{< $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24aimuz $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^HkdY= $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aˆ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ˆÈ߈ !$%)*./345LNOVW[\`aefjklȉɉ͉̉щ҉։׉ۉ܉݉  ,/07 hv[CJhv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJ\ˆÈ߈* H$If^Hkd1> $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a߈ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd ? $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a!%*/4 $$Ifa$ $$If]a$45L* H$If^Hkd? $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aLOW\afk $$Ifa$ $$If]a$kl* H$If^Hkd@ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^HkdA $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aɉ͉҉׉܉ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$܉݉* H$If^HkdiB $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a  $$Ifa$ $$If]a$,* H$If^HkdAC $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a,08<AFK $$Ifa$ $$If]a$78;<@AEFJKLjmnuvxy}~ÊĊŊߊ !$%)*./345LOPWX[\`aefjkl hv[CJhv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJ\KLj* H$If^HkdD $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24ajnvy~ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^HkdD $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aĊ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ĊŊߊ* H$If^HkdE $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aߊ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^HkdF $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a!%*/4 $$Ifa$ $$If]a$45L* H$If^HkdyG $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aLPX\afk $$Ifa$ $$If]a$kl* H$If^HkdQH $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$  145<=@AEFJKOPQqst{|}~ČŌƌ%&'()*./345hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJR*((kd)I $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a‹ˋ 15=AFKP $$If]a$Ff|K $$Ifa$ H$If^HPQq* H$If^HkdM $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aqt|~ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^HkdN $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24aŌ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$Ōƌ* H$If^Hkd}O $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd[P $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a&(*/4 $$Ifa$ $$If]a$45R* H$If^Hkd9Q $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a5RUV]^_`deijnopȍʍˍҍӍ׍؍܍ݍ  8;<CDGHLMQRVWXorsz{|}hv[ hv[CJhv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJZRV^`ejo $$Ifa$ $$If]a$op* H$If^HkdR $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ȍ* H$If^HkdR $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24aȍˍӍ؍ݍ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^HkdS $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a  $$Ifa$ $$If]a$8* H$If^HkdT $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a8<DHMRW $$Ifa$ $$If]a$WXo* H$If^HkdU $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aos{} $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd[V $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24aŽǎ̎ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ŽƎǎˎ͎̎134;<?@DEIJNOPjmnuvyz~яԏՏ܏ݏ !$%)*./3hv[ hv[CJhv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJZ͎̎* H$If^Hkd9W $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$1* H$If^HkdX $$If֞f"F(-3'''''&&032  24a14<@EJO $$Ifa$ $$If]a$OPj* H$If^HkdX $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24ajnvz $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^HkdY $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$я* H$If^HkdZ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aяՏݏ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkdq[ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a!%*/4 $$Ifa$ $$If]a$345MPQXYZ[_`deijkĐŐƐǐȐɐ͐ΐҐӐԐ  9;<CDEFGHLMQRShjkrstuyz~hv[hv[CJaJ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJZ45M* H$If^HkdI\ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aMQY[`ej $$Ifa$ $$If]a$jk* H$If^Hkd!] $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd] $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aŐǐɐΐӐ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ӐԐ* H$If^Hkd^ $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a  $$Ifa$ $$If]a$9* H$If^Hkd_ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a9<DFHMR $$Ifa$ $$If]a$RSh* H$If^Hkd` $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24ahksuz $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkdka $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24aÑȑ͑ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$‘ÑǑȑ̑͑Αёّڑ.2CDZ[\cdghijklmnoĒŒɒʒΒϒВ!$%,-01hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[CJhv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJR͑Αϑё*((kdIb $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aёڑ.CDZ\dhjln $$If]a$Ffd $$Ifa$ H$If^Hno* H$If^Hkdf $$If֞f"F(-3''''&&&032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkdg $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aŒʒϒ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ϒВ* H$If^Hkdh $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$!* H$If^Hkdoi $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a!%-16;@ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$156:;?@Abefmnoptuyz~ϓѓғٓړݓޓ,./67:;?@DEIJK^`ahilmqrvw{|hv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJZ@Ab* H$If^HkdGj $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24abfnpuz $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkdk $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ϓ* H$If^Hkdk $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24aϓғړޓ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkdl $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$,* H$If^Hkdm $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a,/7;@EJ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$JK^* H$If^Hkdn $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a^aimrw| $$Ifa$ $$If]a$|}* H$If^Hkdio $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a|}!"%&*+/0456PRSZ[^_cdijnopĕŕɕʕΕϕӕԕՕhv[hv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJ hv[CJZ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^HkdAp $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkdq $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a"&+05 $$Ifa$ $$If]a$56P* H$If^Hkdq $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aPS[_djo $$Ifa$ $$If]a$op* H$If^Hkdr $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkds $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aŕʕϕԕ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ԕՕ* H$If^Hkdt $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a  $$Ifa$ $$If]a$  367>?@AEFJKOPQehipqtuyz~іԖՖܖݖ  !%&*+,CFGNORSWX\]hv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJZ3* H$If^HkdWu $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a37?AFKP $$Ifa$ $$If]a$PQe* H$If^Hkd/v $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24aeiquz $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd w $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$і* H$If^Hkdw $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&&&032  24aіՖݖ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ * H$If^Hkdx $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a !&+ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$+,C* H$If^Hkdy $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aCGOSX]b $$Ifa$ $$If]a$]abcwz{ߗ  /23:;>?CDHIMNO_bcjknostxy}~ʘ̘͘Ԙ՘ؘ٘ݘޘhv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJRbcw* H$If^Hkdmz $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aw{ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$*((kdE{ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aΗߗ  /3;?DIN $$If]a$Ff} $$Ifa$ H$If^HNO_* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a_ckoty~ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$~* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ʘ* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aʘ͘՘٘ޘ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ * H$If^Hkdk $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a  !%&*+,ORSZ[^_cdhimnoԙיؙߙ    $&'./012389=>?WYZabchv[ hv[CJhv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJZ !&+ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$+,O* H$If^HkdC $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aOS[_din $$Ifa$ $$If]a$no* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ԙ* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aԙؙ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd˅ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a   $$Ifa$ $$If]a$$* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a$'/139> $$Ifa$ $$If]a$>?W* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24aWZbdfkp $$Ifa$ $$If]a$cdefjkopqΚКњؚٚښۚܚݚ  #$()*CFGNOPQUVZ[_`aoqryz{|}~hv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJ hv[CJhv[Zpq* H$If^Hkd_ $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$Κ* H$If^Hkd= $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aΚњٚۚݚ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ * H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a $) $$Ifa$ $$If]a$)*C* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aCGOQV[` $$Ifa$ $$If]a$`ao* H$If^Hkdˋ $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24aorz|~ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&&&032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ΛЛћ؛ٛڛۛܛݛ   367>?BCGHLMQRSpst{|œÜĜŜƜʜ˜ϜМќ   !$%,hv[hv[CJaJ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJZΛ* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aΛћٛۛݛ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^HkdY $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a   $$Ifa$ $$If]a$3* H$If^Hkd7 $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a37?CHMR $$Ifa$ $$If]a$RSp* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24apt| $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aœĜƜ˜М $$Ifa$ $$If]a$Мќ* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a  $$Ifa$ $$If]a$  !* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a!%-16;@ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$,-0156:;?@AXZ[bcdefgklpqru}~ҝ֝ !"<?@GHKLPQUVZ[\svw~hv[56CJ\]hv[5CJ\hv[ hv[CJhv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJR@AX* H$If^Hkd{ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aX[ceglq $$Ifa$ $$If]a$qrsu*((kdS $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24au~ҝ! $$If]a$Ff $$Ifa$ H$If^H!"<* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a<@HLQV[ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$[\s* H$If^Hkdՙ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24asw $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$؞۞ܞ!"&'+,012PST[\_`deijnopݟ  #$()hv[ hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJZ؞* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a؞ܞ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkdc $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a"',1 $$Ifa$ $$If]a$12P* H$If^HkdA $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aPT\`ejo $$Ifa$ $$If]a$op* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ݟ* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24aݟ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$ * H$If^Hkdϟ $$If֞f"F(-3'''&&''032  24a $) $$Ifa$ $$If]a$)*<* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a)*<?@GHKLPQUVZ[\svw~ŠƠʠˠϠРѠ%()012378<=ABCilmtuxy}~hv[hv[CJaJhv[CJPJaJ hv[CJZ<@HLQV[ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$[\s* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24asw $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkd] $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24aƠˠР $$Ifa$ $$If]a$РѠ* H$If^Hkd; $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a $$Ifa$ $$If]a$%* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a%)138=B $$Ifa$ $$If]a$BCi* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''&'''032  24aimuy~ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$* H$If^Hkdɥ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24aáȡ͡ҡ $$Ifa$ $$If]a$¡áǡȡ̡͡ѡҡӡ   -0189<=ABFGKLMlopwx{|\]tuvxy{|~ɻ hv[CJjh!2fUh!2fjhv[0JU hv[CJhv[ hv[6] hv[CJhv[CJPJaJhv[CJaJFҡӡ* H$If^Hkd $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a   $$Ifa$ $$If]a$-* H$If^Hkdy $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a-19=BGL $$Ifa$ $$If]a$LMl* H$If^HkdQ $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24alpx| $$Ifa$ $$If]a$*((kd) $$If֞f"F(-3'''''''032  24a\tuwxz{}~ƤǤȤɤ$a$ $0^`0a$ĤŤƤǤȤɤʤФѤԤդ֤פؤޤߤ  hv[0JCJmHnHuhv[ hv[CJhb0JCJmHnHuhv[0JCJjhv[0JCJUNɤ֤פ,-.12569:=>ABE$a$ &'*+,-.12569:=>ABEFIJMNQRUVYZ]^abefijmnqruvyz}~鲨hv[CJOJQJhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jhv[5CJOJQJ\^Jh!2fhv[0JCJmHnHuhv[0JCJhv[ hv[CJjhv[0JCJUBEFIJMNQRUVYZ]^abefijmnqruvyz}~~¥ťƥɥʥͥΥѥҥե֥٥ڥݥޥ   "# hv[CJhv[5CJ\hv[hv[5CJOJQJ\^JA¥ťƥɥʥͥΥѥҥե֥٥ڥݥޥ    !"# $0^`0a$90P&P/ =!"#$ % Dp90P&P/ =!"#$% Dp90P&P/ =!"#$% Dp(/ =!"#$% (/ =!"#$% (/ =!"#$% 90P-/R / =!"#$% Dp-90P?/R / =!"#$% Dp?90PO/R / =!"#$% DpO90P]/R / =!"#$% Dp]90Ps/R / =!"#$% Dps90P/R / =!"#$% Dp,/R / =!"#$% ,/R / =!"#$% 90P/R / =!"#$% Dp90P/R / =!"#$% DpA 0/ =!F"#8$8% P0 <HH+ 0/ =!", #8$8% (/ =!"#$8% A 0/ =!"#$F% P0 + 0/ =!"#$8% (/ =!"x#$8% A 0/ =!"#&$% P0 u + 0/ =!"x#$8% (/ =!"#8$8% A 0/ =!"#$% P0 &&+ 0/ =!E"#r$8% (/ =!"#$8% A 0/ =!"#&$T% P0 HV+ 0/ =!"#&$8% (/ =!0"D#$8% A 0/ =!F"#$8% P0 7Hj+ 0/ =!0"D#$8% (/ =!U"#$8% A 0/ =!U"#$8% P0 H+ 0/ =!U"#$8% (/ =!F"Z#F$8% A 0/ =!F"8#$8% P0 HV+ 0/ =!"Z#$8% (/ =!"#$8% A 0/ =!"F#$8% P0 + 0/ =!"#$8% (/ =!"#$8% A 0/ =!"#$% P0 ]= 0/ =!"#$%0 $](/ =!F"$#$8% A 0/ =!"#$8% P0 V+ 0/ =!"#r$8% (/ =!"#$8% A 0/ =!"#r$8% P0 WH+ 0/ =!"#r$8% (/ =!"#*$8% A 0/ =!"#$% P0 90P/R / =!"#$% Dp<0P&P0= /!"#$% Dp/&P0= /!"#$% /0/R = /!"#$% ,/R / =!"#$% =0P&P/R / =!"#$% DpE 0&P/ =!"J#$% P0 / 0&P/ =!"#$% ,&P/ =!"#$% < 0&P/ =!"#$%0 E 0&P/ =!"#$% P0 2 0&P/ =!"#$%0 9&P/ =!"#$%0 < 0&P/ =!"#$%0 2 0&P/ =!"#$%0 < 0&P/ =!"#$%0 E 0&P/ =!"#$% P0 2 0&P/ =!"#$%0 ,&P/ =!"#$% ,&P/ =!"#$% ,&P/ =!"#$% 3 0&P/ =!"#$% P / 0&P/ =!"#$% 3 0&P/ =!"#$% P / 0&P/ =!"#$% ,&P/ =!"#$% < 00P&P/ =!"#$% Dp<0P&P0= /!"#$% DpTDd J  C A? "2llMJ)D`!llMJ)5eXA)XxXMh\U>μ_Zl_4jm'$ʛ6yԅm) մZ(unT(صH@NPąTLcd gw9;;!z0 .9fZZlq2f8Ru0Z*Hk mq'42\^J]*!5(j+Rdx1m5Х1R_;"eՎ'-taorL9P"3!.AHla^-ޢqv,nEg ƙzbM?5+&{Y,%~ұXoSQrۭ8w>%eʼn]Ivd:PPS ,))|,)O.R\+eB!.>!wsKR2gR\,ec~})U{e˄ى^L{j绡AdXCa-eI7V.-k'M)O{(t[: v5y4$[#la Š kש]߉~{~guš5 lW`%a nvM6 뜛?o?]^g\Zv|˄nS~l%~$D"\G.vG:U"r5]QhM*!?߃wMxWa|bzF00xx8Sr0( u)l: dNȁ|'$s659X{ Lךq9Ɖ='c/I?"~)?w[|5 @ ^7jBt7Nf/c>n9 IoѩzA-FѩyA3Z'|?FrΗF?Ntͷ{g,bG2{jGQ9;?RP߽gίPbd}^O]O7FoeoU2SWϯ-_;saayyJ4ͱoNe:̦s-}&`v;Ov{=ҧW$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v#v#v:V l4 20j 65 55554alf4p2$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v#v#v:V l0j 65 55554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v#v#v:V l0j 65 55554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v#v#v:V l0j 65 55554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v#v#v:V l0j 65 5555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v#v#v:V l0j 65 5555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v#v#v:V l0j 65 5555/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5j #vj :V l40j 65j / / 4alf4Dd  J  C A? "2XkTYƸ4 `!,kTYƸlN(S*xYkU?gfw3|M1iuw&; ~Dバ?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~                           ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~                            ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~                            ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~                            ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~                            ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~        !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"$%&'()*QaXtUVWXYZ[\]^_`ucdefghijklmnopqrsxyz{|}~Root Entry FLVSlData # WordDocumentD$ObjectPoolKVLV_11208908173!FKVKVOle PRINTT^CompObjb  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMPSTUWXYZ]`abdefgjmnoqrstwz{|~ !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8Excel.Chart.89qOh+'0@H`t  Laura Danielx Dana BeebelMicrosoft Excel@?n@saeU. +     ''   Arialw@K bwbw0--- Arialw@L bwbw0--- Arialw@F bwbw0--- Arialw@J bwbw0----------------------- "System 0-'-  --   !!---'---  -  $ kk----'-- - o 9  9    ---'-- -  -    k k---'-- -   !!---'-- -  k ---'-- -  k - -   $kk$OkOkO$IIkkI$ggkk$,k,k,$vkvkv$ E E k k ---'-- - k ---'-- -  -   k-kk99kk -kk7k7kkk^ k^  k ---'-- -   ------'-- -  i  2 ~17------'-- -   -----'-- -  ]X  2 rd19------'-- -   -----'-- -  uR  2 g146-------'-- -   -----'-- -    2 +160-------'-- -   -----'-- -    2 89------'-- -   -----'-- -  R w   2 185-------'-- -   -----'-- -    b  2 n180-------'-- -   ----'-- -     2 ?@09* 2 50** 2 100*** 2 150*** 2 u200***---'-- -   ----'-- -    2 1996-97%%%%%%2 1997-98%%%%%%2 b1998-99%%%%%%2 1999-00%%%%%%2 2000-01%%%%%%2 ?2001-02%%%%%%2  2002-03%%%%%%---'-- -   ------'-- -    2 Year8//----'-- -   ------'-- -  Sd  Arialw@N bwbw0-2 HtNumber of Schools-----'-- -   ---'-- -   - - '   '  'ObjInfo Workbookb"SummaryInformation( DocumentSummaryInformation8, '@\p Dana Beebe Ba= =p<X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)                + ) , *  `Chart1Sheet1 Sheet2!Sheet3`iZR3  @@  a 1996-971997-981998-991999-002000-012001-022002-03Year # Schoolsh Y  '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?d,,Letter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 62xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"d,,??3` 0 ` 0 ` t ` t ` ` 003S f3d23 M NM4 3Q:  # SchoolsQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D $% M 3O& Q4$% M 3O& Q4FA'" % 3O1 3 b#M& 43*I@#M&! 74% 1 FM3O&Q  Year'4% jLMZ3Oa&Q &Number of Schools'4523  NM43" 3_ M NM  MM< 444% M <3OQ'4% ~'Mz3O& Q'4%  'Mz3O& Q'4%  'Mz3O& Q  180'4% Mp3O& Q'44e1996-971997-981998-991999-002000-012001-022002-03e1@3@@V@@b@d@f@ g@e>  '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U   ~ 1@ ~ 3@ ~ @V@ ~ @b@ ~ d@ ~ f@ ~  g@(  p  6NMM?t M]`Z  '@"??3` t` t` 0` 0` t <`3d23 M NM4 3Q:  # SchoolsQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4D $% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FA  f 3O 3 b#M&43*#M&! M4% 8 M3O%& Q  Year'4% ]>"MZ3O& Q &Number of Schools'4523  O43" 3_ M NM  MM< 444% M <3OQ'4% Mp3O&Q'44e1996-971997-981998-991999-002000-012001-022002-03e1@3@@V@@b@d@f@ g@e >@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??hU>@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??hU>@7 ՜.+,0 PXd lt| 1 Sheet1Sheet2Sheet3Chart1  WorksheetsCharts FMicrosoft Graph 2000GBiff5MSGraph.Chart.89q_1120890896;FKVKVOle  PRINT wCompObjd  8  *   B ''  "Arialw@Y +bwbw0---"Arialw@5 [bwbw0--------- "System 0-'- B -'- B -- $ ----'---   u   DD  ---'--- B  u-    ---'--- B ---'--- " ---'---  ---'---  -- $=`=`=$W55WW5$$ %n%n  %$ddd$! ! -$`==``=$555$ww$nnn$D*D*D$!   ! ! ---'---  ---'--- B - -DD   ggtt  ---'--- B ------'--- .^  2  17%%----'--- B -----'--- &X  2 c19%%----'--- B -----'--- .a  2 l17%%----'--- B -----'--- &  2 19%%----'--- B -----'--- u_  2 r 99%%----'--- B -----'--- ']  2 :h174%%%----'--- B -----'--- 5;  2 200%%%----'--- B -----'---     2 # 241%%%----'--- B -----'---  )  2 <180%%%----'--- B -----'--- x  2 89%%----'--- B -----'--- a0  2 t;160%%%----'--- B -----'--- b  2 146%%%----'--- B ----'--- C   2 XP09* 2 100*** 2 200*** 2 x300***---'--- B ---'--- C  2 1996-97******2 01997-98******2 1998-99******2 1999-00******2 =2000-01******2 2001-02******---'--- B -----'--- s "Arialw@r 2bwbw0- 2 Number-----'--- B -  u---'---  y---'---  y-- .2 Charter Schools6***2&***&.---'---  y---'---  y- - _1.*2 pCharter School Campuses6***2&***6*?**&*&.---'---   y---'---  B -- ' B  '  'ObjInfoWorkbook"_1121595415!FpIKVpIKVOle N Z$@B""$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial=lL,##0.00_ Z$@` J ` J ` 0b` 7j` w 883ffff̙̙3f3fff3f3f33333f33333\R3& STU1996-971997-981998-991999-002000-012001-02Charter Schools1@3@@V@@b@d@f@ Charter School Campuses1@3@X@e@i@ n@WY(#= 8 h>X4@@3d' 3Q "Charter SchoolsQQQ3_ O   MMd 4E4 3Q 2Charter School CampusesQQQ3_ O    MMd 4E4 3Q NorthQQQ3_4E4D$% M063O&Q4$% M063O&Q4FA0 3O 4 3 b#M& 43*Y@#M&! 74% XpMZ3O*&Q Number'4523 M NM43" p!3Op^8% M3O&Q423 M NM443_ M NM  MMd 444%  M:3O&Q'4% [M:3O&Q'4% l:M:3O&Q'4% M:3O&Q'4% M03O&Q'4% M03O&Q'44  !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8`2aU'1'SQyxq඾PYxmuؑ e )KH[ǜ֩d^H)!e7l;#RvDKy)+6\SX_vUUO&z~A ?^ "J[A*VuNo+%{zz "a)8S+ËyG x1ç8`?{O3T@c00 ?)юAO:1coo}/d:g_>σoط z1”i{u}x'I;=K j[{;d?{3qa?}=,CD;Ckit0 !Tɷ )ߚCu'FiMZ}`0::8:}I+󓣓MZn:V2ɓI*J{\ptTJgkr-d=RVzwcV>V$z_",&DXx H~{5H]ȯx4tPUoĿ:"/}UXW;B# *ܕݸ|saZGs\|GNLCB7*6 ae̐\Z쫳,^9!*Dcu_Sq MJ6]nLFczQW"%ƩeG w *$$Ifl!vh5$ 5555#v$ #v:V l 2%%%%%0,5$ 54alp2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5$ 5555#v$ #v:V l05$ 54al$$Ifl!vh5$ 5555#v$ #v:V l05$ 5/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5$ 5555#v$ #v:V l05$ 5/ / 4alE$$Ifl!vh5T545454#vT#v4:V l4   (0+,5T54/  / / 4alf4p($$Ifl!vh5T555555#vT#v:V l4  F0+5T5/ / / / / / 4alf4pF=kdS$$Ifl4֞Tn  T  F04 lalf4pF$$Ifl!vh5T555555#vT#v:V l05T5/ / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5T555555#vT#v:V l05T5/ / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5T555555#vT#v:V l05T5/ / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5T555555#vT#v:V l05T5/ / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5T555555#vT#v:V l05T5/ / / / / / 4alG$$Ifl!vh55b5b5b5#v#vb#v:V l4  20+,55b54alf4p2 $$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l4  Z0+555555555 4alf4pZkd!$$Ifl4  rPf!$   Z0$$$$4 lalf4pZ/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al/$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V l0555555555 4al8$$Ifl!vh5 5M 5T5T#v #vM #vT:V l4 (0$6+++,,5 5M 5T4alf4p(P$$Ifl!vh5 55T5T5T#v #v#vT:V l4 20$6+++,5 55T4alf4p2$$Ifl!vh5 55T5T5T#v #v#vT:V l0$65 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5 55T5T5T#v #v#vT:V l0$65 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5 55T5T5T#v #v#vT:V l0$65 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5 55T5T5T#v #v#vT:V l0$65 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5 55T5T5T#v #v#vT:V l0$65 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5 55T5T5T#v #v#vT:V l0$65 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5 55T5T5T#v #v#vT:V l0$65 55T4al*$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 2%%%%%0,5 54alp2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l05 54al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l05 54al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l05 54al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l05 54al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l05 54al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l05 54al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l05 54al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l05 54al$$Ifl!vh5\ 5#v\ #v:V l4  0 !+,5\ 54alf4p%$$Ifl!vh5\ 555T#v\ #v#vT:V l4  (0 !+,5\ 55T4alf4p($$Ifl!vh5\ 555T#v\ #v#vT:V l0 !5\ 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 555T#v\ #v#vT:V l0 !5\ 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 555T#v\ #v#vT:V l0 !5\ 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 555T#v\ #v#vT:V l0 !5\ 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 555T#v\ #v#vT:V l0 !,5\ 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 555T#v\ #v#vT:V l0 !,5\ 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 555T#v\ #v#vT:V l0 !,5\ 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 555T#v\ #v#vT:V l0 !,5\ 55T4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 555T#v\ #v#vT:V l0 !,5\ 55T/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5 !#v !:V l40 !5 !/ / 4alf4m$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v:V l4 20"+,555/ /  / 4alf4p2$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v :V l4  Z0"+55 / /  4alf4pZkdzP$$Ifl4  oD"   Z0"$$$$4 lalf4pZ$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v :V l0"55 / /  4al$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v :V l0"55 / /  4al$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v :V l0"55 / /  4al$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v :V l0"55 / /  4al$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v :V l0"55 / /  4al$$Ifl!v h555555555 #v#v :V l0"55 / /  / 4al$$Ifl!vh5"#v":V l40"5"/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5j55#vj#v#v:V l4  0++5j554alf4pn$$Ifl!vh5j55858585#vj#v#v8#v:V l4 <0++5j55854alf4p<kd1\$$Ifl4ֈjH# j888  <04 lalf4p<$$Ifl!vh5j55858585#vj#v#v8#v:V l05j55854al$$Ifl!vh5j55858585#vj#v#v8#v:V l05j55854al$$Ifl!vh5j55858585#vj#v#v8#v:V l05j55854al$$Ifl!vh5j55858585#vj#v#v8#v:V l05j55854al$$Ifl!vh5j55858585#vj#v#v8#v:V l05j55854al$$Ifl!vh5j55858585#vj#v#v8#v:V l05j55854al$$Ifl!vh5j55858585#vj#v#v8#v:V l05j55854al$$Ifl!vh5j55858585#vj#v#v8#v:V l05j55854al$$Ifl!vh5j55858585#vj#v#v8#v:V l05j5585/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l405#/ / 4alf4 $$Ifl!vh5 5 56#v #v #v6:V l4  06++5 5 564alf4p$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l4 <06++5 555*564alf4p<kdh$$Ifl4ֈ ,"  ** 6 <064 lalf4p<$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*564al$$Ifl!vh5 555*5*56#v #v#v#v*#v6:V l065 555*56/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5,"#v,":V l4065,"/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh55|5|#v#v|:V l %%%06,5 54alp%%%$$Ifl!vh55|5|#v#v|:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh55|5|#v#v|:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh55|5|#v#v|:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh55|5|#v#v|:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh55|5|#v#v|:V l065 54als$$Ifl!vh5P5555#vP#v#v#v#v:V l 206,5P5555/ /  4alp2$$Ifl!vh5P5555#vP#v#v#v#v:V l065P5555/  4al$g.   / !"#$%&'()*+,-0ed23456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abchijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~$Ifl!vh5P5555#vP#v#v#v#v:V l065P55554al$$Ifl!vh5P5555#vP#v#v#v#v:V l065P55554al$$Ifl!vh5P5555#vP#v#v#v#v:V l065P55554al$$Ifl!vh5P5555#vP#v#v#v#v:V l065P55554al]$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s 20,5554/ /  44 sasp2$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s05554/  44 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sas$$Ifs!vh555554#v#v#v4:V s0555444 sasI$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 206,5 5/ /  4alp2$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 5/  4al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54alN$$If!vh5d5555#vd#v:V s 20$,5d5/ /  44 sp2T$$If!vh5d5555#vd#v:V s0$5d5/  44 sT$$If!vh5d5555#vd#v:V s0$5d544 sT$$If!vh5d5555#vd#v:V s0$5d544 sT$$If!vh5d5555#vd#v:V s0$5d544 sT$$If!vh5d5555#vd#v:V s0$5d544 sT$$If!vh5d5555#vd#v:V s0$5d544 sT$$If!vh5d5555#vd#v:V s0$5d544 sT$$If!vh5d5555#vd#v:V s0$5d544 sT$$If!vh5d5555#vd#v:V s0$5d544 sT $$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l (%%%%06554alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06554al+$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l (%%%%06,5 5/ / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 5/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 54al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l065 5/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l065/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v#v:V l (%%%%06,5 554alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v#v:V l065 554al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v#v:V l065 554al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v#v:V l065 554al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v#v:V l065 554al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v#v:V l065 554al.$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l4 (%%%%0,55/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l055/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l055/ 4alN$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l4 (%%%%0,5 5F55F/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5l#vl:V l405l4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5l#vl:V l405l4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5l#vl:V l405l4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5l#vl:V l405l4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al$$Ifl!vh5 5F55F#v #vF#v#vF:V l05 5F55F4al7$$Ifl!vh55P5P5P#v#vP:V l4 (%%%%0+,55P/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l4 F%%%%%%%0+55/ / 4alf4pF%%%%%%%Gkd$$Ifl4֞r j  F%%%%%%%04 lalf4pF%%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l055/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l:0554al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l0554al:$$Ifl!vh5 55 #v #v#v :V l4 %%%0,5 55 / / / / 4alf4p%%%$$Ifl!vh5 5555858#v #v#v#v8:V l4 <%%%%%%0,5 5558/ / / / 4alf4p<%%%%%% kd$$Ifl4ֈ |l 88 <%%%%%%04 lalf4p<%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 5555858#v #v#v#v8:V l05 55584al$$Ifl!vh5 5555858#v #v#v#v8:V l05 55584al$$Ifl!vh5 5555858#v #v#v#v8:V l05 55584al$$Ifl!vh5 5555858#v #v#v#v8:V l05 55584al$$Ifl!vh5 5555858#v #v#v#v8:V l05 55584al$$Ifl!vh5 5555858#v #v#v#v8:V l05 55584al$$Ifl!vh5 5555858#v #v#v#v8:V l05 5558/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 5b55b#v #vb#v#vb:V l4 (%%%%0X ,5 5b55b/ / / /  / / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v#v#v#v#v:V l4 F%%%%%%%0X ,5 55555/ / / / /  / / 4alf4pF%%%%%%%GkdY$$Ifl4֞ .rX   F%%%%%%%0X 4 lalf4pF%%%%%%%3$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v#v#v#v#v:V l40X 5 55555/  / / / 4alf43$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v#v#v#v#v:V l40X 5 55555/  / / / 4alf43$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v#v#v#v#v:V l40X 5 55555/  / / / 4alf43$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v#v#v#v#v:V l40X 5 55555/  / / / 4alf43$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v#v#v#v#v:V l40X 5 55555/  / / / 4alf43$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v#v#v#v#v:V l40X 5 55555/  / / / 4alf4A$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v#v#v#v#v:V l40X 5 55555/  / / /  / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5X #vX :V l40X 5X / / 4alf42$$Ifl!vh5j555#vj#v:V l4 (%%%%0,5j5/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5j555#vj#v:V l05j54al$$Ifl!vh5j555#vj#v:V l05j54al$$Ifl!vh5j555#vj#v:V l05j54al$$Ifl!vh5j555#vj#v:V l05j54al$$Ifl!vh5j555#vj#v:V l05j54alV$$Ifl!vh5 55#v #v#v:V l4 %%%0t",5 55/  / / /  / / 4alf4p%%%$$Ifl!vh5 55X5X5X#v #v#vX:V l4 2%%%%%0t",5 55X/ / / /  / / / / 4alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555X5X5X#v #v#vX:V l4 <%%%%%%0t",5 55X/ / / / / / / / 4alf4p<%%%%%% kdM$$Ifl4ֈ |lt" XXX <%%%%%%0t"4 lalf4p<%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555X5X5X#v #v#vX:V l0t"5 55X4al$$Ifl!vh5 555X5X5X#v #v#vX:V l0t"5 55X4al$$Ifl!vh5 555X5X5X#v #v#vX:V l0t"5 55X4al$$Ifl!vh5 555X5X5X#v #v#vX:V l0t"5 55X4al$$Ifl!vh5 555X5X5X#v #v#vX:V l0t"5 55X4al$$Ifl!vh5 555X5X5X#v #v#vX:V l0t"5 55X4al$$Ifl!vh5 555X5PRINT (#CompObjObObjInfoQWorkbook 8p!  '   Z ''  Times New Romanbwbw0- Arialw@ bwbw0---- Arialw@ Xbwbw0---Times New Romanbwbw0----------- "System 0-'- Z -'- Z  ,-'- Z -'- 9 !!-'-  `T-'-  PT--  $T11TT1$TI;I;TTI$T`Z`ZTT`$TwBwBTTw$TTT$TTT- $;I*I*;;I$Z``ZZ`$BwwBBw$  $ - $*IZIZ**I$ y y   $   ---'---  `T---'--- Z - T   -TT33    `TT-=T=T=T=T1=1TI=IT`=`T---'---  Z ------'---   g  2 3q4&----'---  Z -----'---  7  2 J31&&----'---  Z -----'---  O'  2 b143&&----'---  Z -----'---  {f  2 y%42&&----'---  Z -----'---  }K  2 U46&&----'---  Z -----'---  K  2 U46&&----'---  Z -----'---  u    2  35&&----'---  Z -----'---  _7%  2 J/25&----'---  Z -----'---  6 }   2  85&----'---  Z -----'---   0   2 : 10&&----'---  Z -----'---  _U  2 r_40&----'---  Z -----'---  ] }  2  33&&----'---  Z -----'---  OU  2 b_23&----'---  Z -----'---  7  2 J10&&----'---  Z -----'---   }  2 300&----'---  Z ----'---  Z   2 ?00* 2  20** 2 40** 2 60** 2  80** 2 q 100***---'---  Z ----'---  Z  '2 3kPossession of weapons+&!&&&5!!&&&'2 JDrug or alcohol abuse6&%&!!&&&!&&!"2 a Physical conflicts+&$!!!&&!2 y Vandalism7!&&!92  Absenteeism5&!&!!92  Tardiness-!&&!---'---  Z ------'---   2 Percent-%"%%----'---  Z --   ,---'---   ----'---   -- -   @\ 2 JR Minor problemC&&&&&!9---'-- -  ----'-- -  ---   \ 2 J&Moderate problemC&&!!!&&&!9---'---  ----'---  -- -  K \  2 J] Serious problemm*!&&&&&!9---'---   ----'---  Z ---'---  Z -- ' Z  '  'Excel.Chart.89qOh+'0@H`t  Laura Danielx Dana BeebelMicrosoft Excel@|MG"@$[՜.+,0 PXd lt| '@\p Dana Beebe Ba=,7=<X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1dArial1dArial1.Times New Roman1.Times New Roman1Arial1Arial1.Times New Roman"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)                + ) , *  `Chart1Sheet1Sheet2Sheet3`i Tardiness AbsenteeismPhysical conflicts VandalismDrug or alcohol abusePossession of weapons Minor problemModerate problemSerious problem \  '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?d,,Letter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 62xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"d,,??3` 4#` 4#` `  ` ` ` `  &X3d 3Q:  Minor problemQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4 3Q: $Moderate problemQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4 3Q: "Serious problemQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D$% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FA*{ A 3OL  3 b#M&43*4@#M& 4%  FM3O%& Q Percent'43" 2f 3O4g% M3O&Q423 M NM4444% Mp3O& Q'4% _Mz3O & Q'4%  Mp3O& Q'4% _Mp3O & Q'4% {Mp3O& Q'4% Mp3OQ'4% Mp3O& Q'4% IX _Mz3O & Q'4% Mp3OQ'4% Mp3OQ'4% Mp3O& Q'44e3Possession of weapons3Possession of weapons3Possession of weapons3Drug or alcohol abuse3Drug or alcohol abuse3Drug or alcohol abuse-Physical conflicts-Physical conflicts-Physical conflicts Vandalism Vandalism Vandalism Absenteeism Absenteeism Absenteeism Tardiness Tardiness Tardinesse@?@$@@E@@E@@G@@@ @G@A@$@e>  '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U} }  } }     @ ?@$@@ E@@ E@@ G@@@ @ G@A@$@x4*****>@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U>@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U>@7 SummaryInformation(RDocumentSummaryInformation8V,_1117434097C[!FpIKVpIKVOle [1 Sheet1Sheet2Sheet3Chart1  WorksheetsCharts !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8Excel.Chart.89qOh+'0@PRINT13CompObj\bObjInfo ^WorkbookK18,  9    k ''  Times New Romanbwbw0- Arialw@s bwbw0---Times New Romanbwbw0----- "System 0-'-  k --  h K !!---'---  k - $_ _ \\_X  E__ \ \_---'---  k ---'--- f J !!---'--- \ _---'--- \ O--   $$RR$3 3 3$ggg$$^^  $TT$555$hhh$BB-  $ 33  3$g g g$F F $^  ^ ^$  TT$555$h h h$B))BB-  $$RR$ g g   g$F   F F $ : :   $ . . T T $5V 5V 5$ h h   h$) ))---'-- - \ _---'-- -  k -\  \ -s\sj\js\s \ s. \. s \ _\\\**]]++__---'-- -  k ------'-- - 5i   2 10&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - i  2 25&&----'-- -  k -----'-- -    2 /28&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - rP  2 c36&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - g  2 35&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - 7I  2 32&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - j  2 23&&----'-- -  k -----'-- -   2 122&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - Q  2 d27&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - [  2 e18&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - 1  2 /24&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - Pi  2 cs23&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - @  2 J21&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - 7J  2 T28&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - jE  2 36&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - u  2 127&&----'-- -  k -----'-- -  Q  2 d49&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - e  2 24&&----'-- -  k -----'-- -  P   2 c 64&----'-- -  k -----'-- -  z   2  84&----'-- -  k -----'-- - 7    2  84&----'-- -  k -----'-- - j (   2 2 21&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - 7    2 1 33&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - J Q   2 d 83&----'-- -  k -----'-- - "   2 45&&----'-- -  k -----'-- - 5  2 25&----'-- -  k -----'-- - o  2 25&----'-- -  k ----'-- -  k   2 05& 2 D20&& 2 40&& 2 q 60&& 2  80&& 2  100Z&&&---'-- -  k ---'-- -  k  -2 Governing board conflicts5&%!&&%&&!&!&&!"2 Internal conflicts&!&!!&&!+2 0Public school opposition+&&!!&&&&&&&&&*2 cSpecial ed requirementsn*&!!!!&!&&!9!&02 EAccountability requirements5!!&&&!&$!&&!9!&92 j!Budgeting/accounting requirements2&&%!&%!!!&&&&%!&&!9!&'2 >Inadequate facilities&!&!&&!!!!!$2 1.Paperwork/reportinge+!&!5&%!&&&%2 eHiring teachers6&%!!!&!$2 FInadequate financese&!&!&&!!&!&!!---'-- -  k ------'-- -  Y  ? 2 JPercent2*&**----'-- -  k --   Y  E---'--- W  F---'--- W  F- -  (  x 2  Small barrier*9!&!!---'---  W  F---'---  W  F- -   (   2 Moderate barrierC&&!!!&!!---'-- - W  F---'-- - W  F--   ( ` 2  2 r Great barrier5!!&!!---'--- W  F---'---  k ---'---  k - -'  k  '  ' '@\p Dana Beebe Ba=k=T<X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1.Times New Roman1.Times New Roman1.Times New Roman1.Times New Roman1Arial1.Times New Roman1.Times New Roman1.Times New Roman"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)                + ) , *  `Chart1 !Sheet1Z*Sheet2M+Sheet3`i9 Inadequate facilitiesPublic school oppositionHiring teachersInadequate financesInternal conflictsGoverning board conflictsAccountability requirementsSpecial ed requirementsPaperwork/reporting Small barrierModerate barrier Great barrier!Budgeting/accounting requirements<   '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?d,,Letter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6j2xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"d,,??3` %` %` w`` w` ` w` `  `  3(fC3d23 M NM4  3Q:  Small barrierQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4  3Q: $Moderate barrierQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4  3Q:  Great barrierQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D$% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FA`[A 3OK_6 3 bM&43*4@#M& 4%  ]M3O)& Q Percent'4523 M  43" #3O% M3O&Q423 M NM443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O& Q'4% Mp3OQ'4% Mp3OQ'4% Mp3O& Q'4% & _Mz3O & Q'4% Mp3OQ'4% zn _Mz3O & Q'4% Mp3O& Q'44 e;Governing board conflicts;Governing board conflicts;Governing board conflicts-Internal conflicts-Internal conflicts-Internal conflicts9Public school opposition9Public school opposition9Public school opposition7Special ed requirements7Special ed requirements7Special ed requirements?Accountability requirements?Accountability requirements?Accountability requirementsK!Budgeting/accounting requirementsK!Budgeting/accounting requirementsK!Budgeting/accounting requirements3Inadequate facilities3Inadequate facilities3Inadequate facilities/Paperwork/reporting/Paperwork/reporting/Paperwork/reporting'Hiring teachers'Hiring teachers'Hiring teachers/ Inadequate finances/ Inadequate finances/ Inadequate financese$@@9@@<@8@B@7@@A@5@ @@@<@ @7@B@5@6@;@@@;@H@ @ 2@ 8@ F@e>  '@  dMbP?_*+%MLocal HP LaserJet 2200S odXXLetterPRIV0''''\KhC({ "dXX??U} }  } }   (Column E)        $@@#(@ %o 9@@#;@  %o <@8@#J@ %o B@7@@#@P@ %o A@5@ @#P@ %o  @@<@ @#Q@ %o 7@B@5@#T@ %o 6@;@@@#T@ %o  ;@H@ @# U@ % o  2@8@F@# U@  % oD>QQQQQQQQQ>@  7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U>@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U>@7 4% Mp3OQ'4% Mp3O& Q'44 ee   e >@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??oU>@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??oU>@7 SummaryInformation(!_DocumentSummaryInformation8c,_1116758758$!F`KV`KVOle hH`t  Laura Danielx Dana BeebelMicrosoft Excel@w#@G5՜.+,0 PXd lt| 1 Sheet1Sheet2Sheet3Chart1  WorksheetsChartsBCX5X#v #v#vX:V l0t"5 55X4al$$Ifl!vh5 555X5X5X#v #v#vX:V l0t"5 55X4al$$Ifl!vh5 555X5X5X#v #v#vX:V l0t"5 55X/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5t"#vt":V l40t"5t"/ / 4alf4Dd J  C A? "2OATxZmd=+ `!#ATxZmd=!O.xZ_h[U&7f]שT(5ݟ;W&HrknG \Pp{!/Y^1"/ba"bkϳ~6oez W){rG%Y_ Lc0jw +m?$Z+m-p~AȕBy v!Qi!Wvr=QI!M۠x]A"nu{VЂdF4/&YQ/0JNx%E$CTԦmP-ݪOn#J $@0#!ՑR]V$żx<==[ ;iaUZ[Ө^:Ǟ , -fS9xPzGcC 9@Ot1:ɑ;n۾Eu#-ulo\zf)T̹}.en.KnMQ_7z}^dnh'⟛b䑱#ޔ')@Tn9[5ugda4]x}NmZ)Fu8/Ş14BjDLp~7f/@$wG+_;:]0/3!GG?܉;0cA#ۉ4#bF@"Hվz'{WHОYG\$ i-ρ ُ#ifb*k4 0`wճqsOCi@ 10y}N}&;q5_W?Ľ gx߁ 9+X^oa"WChlzV}Li;aQZw- emR|w"qіvހTUm>΍x^-c񒓚t ^v<C_ koOwT.wsT画u"bDpo+j[)^63nX.l3Tsm!KAOy;UH^*n>si)L9tx"ʃߧOah8-pv|Wga:7Dq*<#wRj-m8͐M3)օSfkrGeͶ7jxOSg33'[TK)ʃ_g&n:&KE9783Wàߌ}34Ulel[<0&w(ܝp)Gþ_}mg웱oƾRۦstoW}/+L(bOpS̺'= }>v=y{e+ל#gZSl+U4D2B 2$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l4 (%%%%0,55/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l055/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5 #v :V l405 / / 4alf4d$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l4 2%%%%%0,,5 55/ / 4alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V l05 554al$$Ifl!vh5J#vJ:V l405J/ / 4alf4& Dd 4 DJ  C A? "2F ,(ǔ¿dl`!\F ,(ǔ¿2O>*x[][>g$~6ډƫڡN뵳8䧦L1D+$Zi{q[X-!)(>`v_ҷ &PC˖!tCpsgޫ^]\]c͜sfo9FiX~@RBPZ-.q t1Y ql5zj9zMgϠ'Ri,|!༨dYe.ۈ,ט 6`\P]Y 6Ag.ۈ k\˨M u , %66ni*#'#H1O7<?<-{8"~ y鲇#9wҪXM(O[֙kӅ*v֙8|3Kj!OX§PB{^3Fw&M [1;n?ݜ]F]FhG&jcty;ot%+ݤMznÔ׻ (Įg kj|޵6$7|]M܈s=wѴ}{cs/Rrrzܠwv쌿;8;Eql21(] ?c(o+<&0C!(_EuAu?#a\S0Gagcu?E0#060}ь?v4ś |^39fco&; *4xO'z߂Lৡ[}Q.Lg/ Kru/…L}ʄ8/3w S.f1CQ?L`*4(E:}.*OHH =Zw߄eMDuh(Yp+`",DrA*r}bN?Oq &{OC#gNp &~_]@Z}k]@-,~b?;TN:anhݢG|?Ow#Q'/!m']~2I1?[KtdՐ봷DK%ÿ^N#Q9V J~ae_, V٪^'cV}t}ܺݬލ/t3s8-n?{.Օ^ P؍q82{B*vٲ $#wcgo~0Oyl;q(9_|Tq#$KJM}C[| ?wc?{׷nAy1#A=B{FŽxO8Oi z͂βo߅_5Ÿ2$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l4 (%%%%0,55/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l055/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5f!#vf!:V l405f!/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 55*555F5F#v #v#v*#v#vF:V l F%%%%%%%0$5 55*55F/ /  / 4alpF%%%%%%%7kd,$$Ifl֞ :^$ *FF F%%%%%%%0$4 lalpF%%%%%%%"$$Ifl!vh5 55*555F5F#v #v#v*#v#vF:V l  0$5 55*55F/ / 4alp "$$Ifl!vh5 55*555F5F#v #v#v*#v#vF:V l  0$5 55*55F/ / 4alp "$$Ifl!vh5 55*555F5F#v #v#v*#v#vF:V l  0$5 55*55F/ / 4alp "$$Ifl!vh5 55*555F5F#v #v#v*#v#vF:V l  0$5 55*55F/ / 4alp "$$Ifl!vh5 55*555F5F#v #v#v*#v#vF:V l  0$5 55*55F/ / 4alp "$$Ifl!vh5 55*555F5F#v #v#v*#v#vF:V l  0$5 55*55F/ / 4alp 0$$Ifl!vh5 55*555F5F#v #v#v*#v#vF:V l  0$5 55*55F/ /  / 4alp $$Ifl!vh5$#v$:V l4  0$5$/ / 4alf4p $$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l F%%%%%%%0$,50 5 5555_5/ /  / 4alpF%%%%%%%7kdt9$$Ifl֞0 ;-3J$0  _ F%%%%%%%0$4 lalpF%%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5$#v$:V l4  0$,5$/  4alf4p >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp $$Ifl!vh5$#v$:V l4  0$,5$/  4alf4p >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp >$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ / 4alp L$$Ifl!vh50 5 5555_5#v0 #v #v#v#v#v_#v:V l  0$50 5 5555_5/ /  / 4alp 4$$Ifl!vh555#v#v:V l4 %%%055/ / /  / / 4alf4p%%%$$Ifl!vh55m5n5m5n#v#vm#vn#vm#vn:V l4 2%%%%%055m5n5m5n/ / / / / 4alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh55m5n5m5n#v#vm#vn#vm#vn:V l4  055m5n5m5n/ / 4alf4p $$Ifl!vh55m5n5m5n#v#vm#vn#vm#vn:V l4  055m5n5m5n/ / 4alf4p $$Ifl!vh55m5n5m5n#v#vm#vn#vm#vn:V l4  055m5n5m5n/ / 4alf4p $$Ifl!vh55m5n5m5n#v#vm#vn#vm#vn:V l4  055m5n5m5n/ / 4alf4p $$Ifl!vh55m5n5m5n#v#vm#vn#vm#vn:V l4  055m5n5m5n/ / 4alf4p $$Ifl!vh55m5n5m5n#v#vm#vn#vm#vn:V l4  055m5n5m5n/ / 4alf4p $$Ifl!vh55m5n5m5n#v#vm#vn#vm#vn:V l4  055m5n5m5n/ / 4alf4p $$Ifl!vh55m5n5m5n#v#vm#vn#vm#vn:V l4  055m5n5m5n/ / 4alf4p &$$Ifl!vh55m5n5m5n#v#vm#vn#vm#vn:V l4  055m5n5m5n/ /  / 4alf4p $$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l %%06554alp%%$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l %%06554alp%%$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l06554al$$Ifl!vh554545455F#v#v4#v#vF:V l4> <%%%%%%0(#,55455F/ / 4alf4p<%%%%%%kde$$Ifl4>ֈ (#444F <%%%%%%0(#4 lalf4p<%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh554545455F#v#v4#v#vF:V l0(#55455F/ 4al$$Ifl!vh554545455F#v#v4#v#vF:V l0(#55455F4al$$Ifl!vh554545455F#v#v4#v#vF:V l0(#55455F/ 4al'$$Ifl!vh5 565656#v #v6:V l (%%%%0,5 56/ / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 565656#v #v6:V l0,5 56/ 2s2 4al$$Ifl!vh5 565656#v #v6:V l0,5 562s2 4al$$Ifl!vh5 565656#v #v6:V l0,5 56/ 2s2 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l40,5/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 565656#v #v6:V l0,5 56/ 2 4al$$Ifl!vh5 565656#v #v6:V l0,5 56/ 2 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l40,5/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 565656#v #v6:V l0,5 56/ 2s2h4al$$Ifl!vh5 565656#v #v6:V l0,5 562s2h4al$$Ifl!vh5 565656#v #v6:V l0,5 562s2h4al$$Ifl!vh5 565656#v #v6:V l0,5 56/ 2s2h4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l40,5/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5d555F#vd#v#vF:V l4 (%%%%0#,5d55F/ / / / /  / / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l40#5#/  4alf4$$Ifl!vh5d555F#vd#v#vF:V l0#5d55F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5d555F#vd#v#vF:V l0#5d55F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5d555F#vd#v#vF:V l0#5d55F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5d555F#vd#v#vF:V l0#5d55F/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l40#5#/  4alf4$$Ifl!vh5d555F#vd#v#vF:V l0#,5d55F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5d555F#vd#v#vF:V l0#,5d55F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5d555F#vd#v#vF:V l0#,5d55F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5d555F#vd#v#vF:V l0#,5d55F/ /  / 4al$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l40 !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8Excel.Chart.89qOh+'0@H`t Kelly Shapleyx Dana BeebeeMicrosoft Excel@]y+!@>/PRINT#&D=CompObjibObjInfo%(kWorkbook+B)  <    ''   Arialw@h bwbw0- Arialw@z 2bwbw0--- Arialw@v bwbw0--- "System 0-'-  -'-   Z  6-'-  -'-  !!-'- [ a-'- j Q--  $lBlBl$  $-:-:nn-$$DD//$NNN$QQ$PP$ppp$pp$1313qq1$  - $BllBBl$HH  $:--n:n:-$bb$D/D/D$N& N& N$QQQ$  PP$p p p$ppp$31 1 q3q31$   - $lll$H  H H$- - nn-$b  bb$s s //$& N N & & N$; ; $ D D P P $ pQ pQ   p$f f $ 1 1 q q 1$ ---'--- [ a---'---  -  Z -p p   Z Z a<<^^@@aa---'---  ------'--- P{  2 b16%%----'---  -----'--- )   2 24%%----'---  -----'--- w  2 #16%%----'---  -----'--- r  2 20%%----'---  -----'--- J|  2 16%%----'---  -----'--- 2  2 D22%%----'---  -----'---    2 17%%----'---  -----'--- k  2 21%%----'---  -----'--- T  2 f21%%----'---  -----'--- ,  2 19%%----'---  -----'--- s  2 '}16%%----'---  -----'--- u`  2 j13%%----'---  -----'--- )]  2 g20%%----'---  -----'--- G  2 #24%%----'---  -----'--- rH  2 R25%%----'---  -----'--- J>  2 H32%%----'---  -----'--- 2  2 D34%%----'---  -----'---  _  2 i34%%----'---  -----'--- k   2 35%%----'---  -----'--- UT  2 f42%%----'---  -----'--- ,v  2 33%%----'---  -----'--- t  2 '~40%%----'---  -----'--- u1  2 ;37%%----'---  -----'--- oP6  2 b@77%----'---  -----'--- )~  2 11%%----'---  -----'---    2 #26%%----'---  -----'--- a r   2  22%%----'---  -----'--- J U   2 _ 26%%----'---  -----'--- N 2   2 D 27%%----'---  -----'---  2    2  34%%----'---  -----'--- ka    2  29%%----'---  -----'---  TQ   2 f[ 22%%----'---  -----'--- ,O    2  35%%----'---  -----'---  !   2 '+ 34%%----'---  -----'--- _ u   2 41%%----'---  -----'--- P|  2 b11%%----'---  ----'---    2 01* 2 ]20** 2 40** 2 F 60** 2  80** 2  100***---'---  ---'---   <2 `#Difficulty finding another position6&*%***********&**-2 Less standardized testing**&&&*****%***&**02 !qTeach without certificationn-**&*5***&*&***32 Teach and draw retirement pay-**&******5**?****%32 Work with specific populationK*&5*&**&&*******32 BLevel of parental involvement**%********%*%*?**2 Small class size2?*&*&&&%*!2 Small school size2?*&&***&%*2 d More autonomy=*******?%'2 High school standards6**&&***&*****&62 $Work with like-minded educatorsK*&5*&*?*******&**&92 l!Involvement in educational reform*%*%*?******&******?---'---  ------'--- 4 9 2 CPercent-%"%%----'---  --   Z  6---'---  Y  7---'---  Y  7--  h ~: P "2 ( Somewhat important2*?*5**?****---'---  Y  7---'---  Y  7--  h : j 2 (  Important?****---'---  Y  7---'---  Y  7--  h > :   2 ( O Very important2*%?****---'---  Y  7---'---  ---'---  --'   '  ' '@\p Dana Beebe Ba=@=<X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)                + ) , *    `Chart1^!Sheet1`iSomewhat important ImportantVery importantTeach and draw retirement payWork with specific populationSmall class sizeWork with like-minded educators#Difficulty finding another position More autonomyHigh school standardsLevel of parental involvementLess standardized testingTeach without certificationSmall school size!Involvement in educational reformd 1  '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 62xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"dXX??3` .` .` ` .` 0% -3d  3Q: (Somewhat importantQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 43_ O   MM< 4E4  3Q:  ImportantQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4  3Q:  Very importantQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D$% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FA&m2C 3OAi] Q 3 b#M& 43*4@#M& 4% 8 M3O%&Q Percent'43" 3O % M3O& Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&Q'4%  eMp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44 eO#Difficulty finding another positionO#Difficulty finding another positionO#Difficulty finding another position;Less standardized testing;Less standardized testing;Less standardized testing?Teach without certification?Teach without certification?Teach without certificationCTeach and draw retirement payCTeach and draw retirement payCTeach and draw retirement payCWork with specific populationCWork with specific populationCWork with specific populationCLevel of parental involvementCLevel of parental involvementCLevel of parental involvement)Small class size)Small class size)Small class size+Small school size+Small school size+Small school size# More autonomy# More autonomy# More autonomy3 High school standards3 High school standards3 High school standardsG Work with like-minded educatorsG Work with like-minded educatorsG Work with like-minded educatorsK !Involvement in educational reformK !Involvement in educational reformK !Involvement in educational reformeL0@&@@8@4@%@/@7@:@L4@3333339@L6@ffffff0@fffff?@9@ffffff6@@@33333:@1@A@@@fffff4@ffffffA@ffffff=@3333335@E@ffffff6@ 2@ @@ 33333sA@ /@ C@ A@ *@ @B@ ffffffD@e> ffff '@  dMbP?_*+%M~HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - EnhancedDX).X)"dXX??U} q}   (Column E)         x@@@(fffff&A@DDD  8@h@@(K@DDD  ؘ@@d@(43333sP@DDD @@l@(33333P@DDD @@@(yR@DDD  @@@ܤ@(̬T@DDD @A@@@(fffff&U@ DDD  T@0@@(fffffFU@DDD  @|@@( 33333sU@D D D    `@@D@( U@D D D   /@C@A@( @V@ D D D   @@B@@( ̬V@ D D D J>VVVVVVVVVVV>@7 (fffff&U@ DDD  T@0@@(fffffFU@DDD  @|@@( 33333sU@D D D    `@@D@( U@D D D   /@C@A@( @V@ D D D   @@B@@( ̬V@ D D D J>VVVVVVVVVVV>@ SummaryInformation(')lDocumentSummaryInformation8p_1116761933.!F`KV`KVOle u՜.+,0 PXh px TASBCh Sheet1Chart1  WorksheetsCharts !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8Excel.Chart.89qPRINT+-H5EPRINT$CompObj,0vbObjInfoxB)  4    ''   Arialw@ bwbw0- Arialw@ Wbwbw0--- "System 0-'-  -'-    R-'-  -'-  !!-'- [ a-'- j Q--  $VVV$$##$dd$XXX$$&&$ff$ZZZ$- $VnVnV$$##$dd$XFXFX$$&&$wwff$ZZZ$55- $nVVnnV$  $  ##$  dd$FXq Xq FFX$  $  &&$w  fwfw$Z Z Z$5  55---'--- [ a---'---  -  Z -55~~    Z Z a\\__  aa---'---   Arialw@D bwbw0------'--- @b  2 Rl29%%----'---  -----'--- *  2 422%%----'---  -----'--- 9n  2 x31%%----'---  -----'--- y   2 38%%----'---  -----'--- ~B   2 T*21%%----'---  -----'--- !  2 +21%%----'---  -----'--- ;F  2 14%%----'---  -----'--- |o  2 19%%----'---  -----'--- TD  2 V16%%----'---  -----'---   2 76%----'---  -----'--- &@  2 R15%%----'---  -----'---   2 24%%----'---  -----'--- 9k  2 u31%%----'---  -----'--- y&  2 27%%----'---  -----'--- PB  2 T36%%----'---  -----'--- &  2 30%%----'---  -----'--- ;  2 39%%----'---  -----'--- |Y  2 40%%----'---  -----'--- D  2 V32%%----'---  -----'--- U  2 33%%----'---  -----'--- @  2 R63%----'---  -----'--- f  2 p31%%----'---  -----'--- 9h    2  19%%----'---  -----'--- y *   2 4 16%%----'---  -----'---  B,   2 T6 34%%----'---  -----'--- x    2 $ 42%%----'---  -----'--- ; 2   2 < 41%%----'---  -----'--- | {   2  37%%----'---  -----'---  D-   2 V7 51%%----'---  -----'--- L   2 59%%----'---  ----'---    2 09* 2 20** 2  40** 2 T60** 2  80** 2  100 *** 2  120 ***---'---  ---'---   +2 O"Multimedia presentations=*?*****&*****&-2 Computer-based activities6*?*****&***&%*&"2 Long-term projects*****?***&&%2 Student oral reports2*********&'2 RDirecting whole group6*&**5*******$2 Hands-on activitiesu6***&***&%*&42 lGuided interactive discussions:*******&%**&&*&&**&2  Small groups2?*****&(2 TiOne-on-one instruction:********&*&**(2 lIndividual assignments**%****&&**?**&---'---  ------'---  2  Percent-%"%%----'---  --    R---'---   S---'---   S--  g 9 l 2 '  Small extent2?**$**---'---   S---'---   S--  g 9 q 2 ' Moderate extent=******$**---'---   S---'---   S--  g $ 9  2 ' 5 Large extent*****$**---'---   S---'---  ---'---  --'   '  '      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@AYZEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVW }m\]^_`abcdefghijkl~opqrstuvwxyz{|lj[w D A( EMF$U"F, EMF+@XXF\PEMF+"@ @ $@ !@ 0@?@     !" !" !  RpArial*0&,xw(,<((,0'\  pArial\J &@wTwO #\\'@I0O #dv% RpArial*0&,xw(,@),0x)\ pArial\J &@wTw< \\x)@I0< dv% Rp Arial*0&,xw(,< ),0(\ pArial\J &@wTw D\\(@I0 Ddv% % % % % % " !%    % " !%    % %   V0&`@ &`@ `@ &&`&% % % % " !% % %   "`D ; D `  6`63`63 `6  `6 @ `6@ % % % " !% % %    ; D &% ( &`  6@ `6@ 6&6&`% % % " !% % %    % % % " !% % %   !!rq % % % " !% % %   &`A % % % " !% % %   &PP &% (   !FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@&"J!b K$$==^t$0T ( p8% % Ld&"kXBrP!??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ " % V0& q&""l&l&"% !FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@&hJ!b K$$==^t$0T ( p8% % Ld&hXBxf)!??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ " % V0&c&hh&&h% !FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@&J!b K$$==^t$0T ( p8% % Ld&4XBZ !??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ " % V0&:&55&&% !FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@&J!b K$$==^t$0T ( p8% % Ld&=XB8O!??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ " % V0&C&>&>&% !FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@&:kJ!b K$$==^t$0T ( p8% % Ld&:XBC!??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ " % V0&5&::&&:% !FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@&LJ!b K$$==^t$0T ( p8% % Ld&qXB7!??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ " % V0&{w&rr&&% !FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@&J!b K$$==^t$0T ( p8% % Ld&XBX,p!??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ " % V0&"&&&% !FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@& nJ!b K$$==^t$0T ( p8% % Ld& UXB !??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ " % V0&[&  V&V& % !FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@&RJ!b K$$==^t$0T ( p8% % Ld&R:XBP!??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ " % V0&M@&R;R;&&R% !FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@&{J!b K$$==^t$0T ( p8% % Ld&XBx !??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ " % V0&&&&% '% V0q""ll"V0chhhV00Y5TT55V0FCAA>>V05:::V0m{1r,,rrV0V0[  VV V06Ml;RgRg;;RV0'% ( V0q""ll"V0c h h hV0O T  TTV0<Z CAU U >A>AV05D :? :? :V0'{ ,  ,,V0   V0x [ s s VV V0bM gR R ggRV0  % % % " !% % %   &`A % % % " !% % %    &% ( &  6@ % &6&66363 6  6 @ 6@ &`6&6&6&06&0v6&v6&6&H6&H6&6&6&`6&`% % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   O  TLDqUU@@LErLTXDiUU@@LP29%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   CT  TLMcUU@@LMcLTXMeUU@@MeLP38%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   \   TLQUU@@LRLTXQUU@@LP31%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   S  TL CUU@@L DLTX ;UU@@LP22%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   &   TL5UU@@L5LTX7UU@@7LP21%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   l  TL{UU@@L{LTX}UU@@}LP19%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   r%  TL|UU@@L|LTX| UU@@|LP14%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %    k  TL[UU@@L\LTX SUU@@ LP21%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   >  TLMUU@@LMLTXOUU@@OLP16%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   G  TLQuUU@@LQvLTTQuUU@@QLP7%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   E&% ( '% (   +T2|Z TXiUU@@LP15%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   RT&% ( '% (   +ax TXeUU@@eLP27%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %    &% ( '% (   +( TX9UU@@9LP31%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %    S&% ( '% (   +/W, TXh;UU@@hLP24%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   q&&% ( '% (   +Jr TX7UU@@7LP36%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   |l"&% ( '% (   + TX} UU@@}LP40%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   %&% ( '% (   +,T TXe UU@@eLP39%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   Fk&% ( '% (   +U}D TX SUU@@ LP30%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   >&% ( '% (   + b5 TXFOUU@@FOLP32%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   j&% ( '% (   +y TXUU@@LP33%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   /h  TT9]iUU@@9LP6%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   TH   TXe= UU@@eLP16%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   '   TX UU@@LP19%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   zS  TX&o;UU@@&LP31%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   &J   TX7? UU@@7LP34%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   ? l   TXI } UU@@I }LP37%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   P %  TXE UU@@LP41%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   7 k  TX , SUU@@ LP42%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %   >K   TXO@ UU@@OLP51%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % " !% % %      TXUU@@LP59%%% % % % % " !% % %    % % % " !% % %      TT8'UU@@LP0%TX['UU@@[LP20%%TX'UU@@LP40%%TXW'UU@@LP60%%TXh  'UU@@h LP80%%T`  'UU@@ LT100%%%T` w 'UU@@ LT120%%%% % % " !% % %    % % % " !% % %      T iUU@@ L|Multimedia presentations7%9%%%%%"%%%%%"TeUU@@eLtStudent oral reports-%%%%%%%%%"TUU@@LpLong-term projects%%%%%9%%%""T;UU@@LComputer-based activities0%9%%%%%"%%%"!%"To7UU@@o7LxDirecting whole group0%"%%/%%%%%%%Tl}UU@@l} LdSmall groups-9%%%%%"Tj UU@@jLGuided interactive discussions4%%%%%%%"!%%""%""%%"T SUU@@ LtHands-on activities0%%%"%%%"!%"TLOUU@@LOLxOne-on-one instruction4%%%%%%%%"%"%%TMUU@@MLxIndividual assignments%%!%%%%""%%9%%"% % % " !% % %    % % % % % % % % " !% % %   ?  TxPUU@@PL\Percent-%"%%% % % % % " !% % %    % &% ( '% (   +; D % % % " !% % %   < C % % % " !% % %   < C &% ( FpdEMF+*@$??@  @@T++!b K$$>>^t$0T ( p8% % LdT~ *GXX!??% % $$AA( " FEMF+@ %   +T! %  T4 UU@@ LdSmall extent/;''"''% % % " !% % %   < C % % % " !% % %   < C &% ( '% (   +<g!  Tyu 4 UU@@yLlModerate extent;''''''"''% % % " !% % %   < C % % % " !% % %   < C &% ( '% (   +  !  T ` 4 UU@@  LdLarge extent'''''"''% % % " !% % %   < C % % % " !% % %    % % % " !% % %    % ( % ( % "  !  " !  ( ( ( " F4(EMF+*@$??!b Ld& &)??" FEMF+@  Oh+'0@H`t Kelly Shapleyx Dana BeebeeMicrosoft Excel@]y+!@6R/՜.+,0 PXh px TASBCh Workbook/1D&SummaryInformation(2yDocumentSummaryInformation8}_11205516595!F`uKV`uKV '@\p Dana Beebe Ba==<X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)                + ) , *    ! `Chart1jSheet1`i+ Small extentModerate extent Large extentMultimedia presentationsStudent oral reportsLong-term projectsComputer-based activitiesDirecting whole group Small groupsGuided interactive discussionsHands-on activitiesOne-on-one instructionIndividual assignments| '  '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 62xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"dXX??3` .` .` ` .` 0% -3d  3Q:  Small extentQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4  3Q: "Moderate extentQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4  3Q:  Large extentQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D$% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAmC 3OAi] P 3 b#M& 43*4@#M& 4%  M3O%&Q Percent'43" :v3O<% M3O& Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44 e9Multimedia presentations9Multimedia presentations9Multimedia presentations;Computer-based activities;Computer-based activities;Computer-based activities-Long-term projects-Long-term projects-Long-term projects1Student oral reports1Student oral reports1Student oral reports3Directing whole group3Directing whole group3Directing whole group/Hands-on activities/Hands-on activities/Hands-on activitiesEGuided interactive discussionsEGuided interactive discussionsEGuided interactive discussions! Small groups! Small groups! Small groups5One-on-one instruction5One-on-one instruction5One-on-one instruction5 Individual assignments5 Individual assignments5 Individual assignmentse=@-@@3333336@7@>@>@ffffff?@3@333333C@:@3333330@5@A@@@3333335@333333>@33333D@,@C@LD@3333333@333333D@fffffB@0@@@LI@ ffffff@ 33333s@@ fffffM@e> ffff '@  dMbP?_*+%MHP LaserJet 6P4C odXXLetterDINU"46^ "dXX??U} q}   (Column E)       =@-@`@#H@ %/ X@@@#333333S@ %/ >@@3@#9T@ %/ @@P@#YT@ %/ 5@Ы@T@#43333V@ %/  @@^@#33333SW@ %/  X@@@#fffffW@ %/ @@$@#9X@ %/   0@(@ij@# 43333X@ % /   0@@*@# 33333X@  % /D>QQQQQQQQQ>@7   0@(@ij@# 43333X@ % /   0@@*@# 33333X@  % /D>QQQQQQQQQ>@ Sheet1Chart1  WorksheetsCharts !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8Excel.Chart.89qOh+'0@H`t Ole PRINT47[#CompObjbObjInfo69c. '    ''   Arialw@ 'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"dXX??3` .` .` ` l`  `  `P@f3d 3Q:  Minor problemQi ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4 3Q: $Moderate problemQi ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4 3Q: "Serious problemQi ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D$% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FA\ 3OX 3 b#M&43*4@#M& 43" | .3O|% M3O& Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44e3Possession of weapons3Possession of weapons3Possession of weapons-Physical conflicts-Physical conflicts-Physical conflicts3Drug or alcohol abuse3Drug or alcohol abuse3Drug or alcohol abuse Vandalism Vandalism Vandalism Absenteeism Absenteeism Absenteeism Tardiness Tardiness Tardinesse*@@@'@ @fffff4@333333(@333333@fffff&A@#@ffffff@ @@33333<@/@ffffffA@>@0@e>  '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U (Column E)    *@@#.@ %/ @'@v@#1@ %/ T@@І@#fffff&D@ %/ ̪@@w@#G@ %/ @l@ؘ@#,S@ %/ 0@>@0@#33333ST@ %/x>UQQQQ>@7 %/ @'@v@#1@ %/ T@@І@#fffff&D@ %/ ̪@@w@#G@ %/ @l@ؘ@#,S@ %/ 0@>@0@#33333ST@ %/x>UQQQQ>@ Kelly Shapleyx Dana BeebeeMicrosoft Excel@]y+!@ R՜.+,0 PXh px TASBCh Sheet1Chart1  WorksheetsChartsOle PRINT<?#CompObjbObjInfo>A&F(p8  "   U ''   Arialw@C Ⱦbwbw0------------------ "System 0-'- U -'- U --  $ ----'---  S ZY  Y    ---'--- U S Z-    ---'--- U ---'--- l4 !!---'---  ---'---  -- $aaa$GNGNG$***$  $ ;{ ;{   ;- $YrYrY$NNN$;;$     ${   { { - $rrr$^^$;;;$ 0' 0'   0$     ---'---  ---'--- U -  YY ``))    ---'--- U -----'--- 7*  2 5*----'--- U -----'--- [9  2 mD11**----'--- U -----'---  =  2 O29**----'--- U -----'--- +l    2  38**----'--- U -----'--- Ib  2 20**----'--- U -----'--- K]  2 ]h12**----'--- U -----'---   &   2 1 40**----'--- U -----'---  /   2 A 46**----'--- U -----'--- O  2 "48**----'--- U -----'--- xJ  2 U17**----'--- U -----'--- } Q   2 c 60**----'--- U -----'--- Kp  2 ]{14**----'--- U -----'--- i+  2 15**----'--- U -----'--- ;   2 71**----'--- U -----'--- Q  2 c13**----'--- U ---'--- U   2 j03* 2 -n20** 2 n40** 2 n60** 2 un80**---'--- U ---'--- U  "2  Physical conflicts2*%&&*&**&&2 Drug or alcohol6****&***2 3+abuse***&*2 G Vandalism2****&?2  Absenteeism2*&****&?2  Tardiness-****&&---'--- U -  T Z---'--- R [---'--- R [--  1t 2  Elementary2*?***%---'--- R [---'--- R [--  1X 2 Middle=***---'--- R [---'--- R [--  1 2  High School6**2&***---'--- R [---'--- U ---'--- U --' U  '  ' !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8Excel.Chart.89qOh+'0@H`t Kelly Shapleyx Dana BeebeeMicrosoft Excel@]y+!@F U՜.+,0 PWorkbookSummaryInformation(@BDocumentSummaryInformation8_1116761845"SE!F`uKV`uKV '@\p Dana Beebe Ba= =<X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)0.0                + ) , *    `Chart1Sheet18 Tardiness AbsenteeismPhysical conflicts VandalismDrug or alcohol abuse ElementaryMiddle High School p  '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 62xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"dXX??3` .` .` l` l` Pp ` ` 3d 3Q:  ElementaryQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4 3Q: MiddleQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4 3Q:  High SchoolQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D $% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAa 3OHH 3 b#M& 43*4@#M& ! 74523  NM43" #W 3O#W% M3O&Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% pMz3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'4% &pMz3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'4% l IpMz3O&Q'4% pMz3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44e-Physical conflicts-Physical conflicts-Physical conflicts3Drug or alcohol abuse3Drug or alcohol abuse3Drug or alcohol abuse Vandalism Vandalism Vandalism Absenteeism Absenteeism Absenteeism Tardiness Tardiness Tardinesse,@4@*@@(@H@&@.@1@=@D@Q@C@G@N@e>  '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U}  (Column E)    ,@4@*@ @(@H@ &@.@1@ =@D@Q@ C@G@N@d>4444>@7 Xh px TASBCh Sheet1Chart1  WorksheetsCharts !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8Excel.Chart.89q#5#/ / 4alf4G$$Ifl!vh555F5F#v#v#vF:V l (%%%%0D%6,555F/ /  / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh555F5F#v#v#vF:V l0D%6,555F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh555F5F#v#v#vF:V l0D%6,555F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh555F5F#v#v#vF:V l0D%6,555F/ / / 4alO$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l4 (%%%%0!+,5 5/ /  / / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l4 F%%%%%%%0!+,5 5/ / 4alf4pF%%%%%%%Gkd$$Ifl4֞ ,4<!   F%%%%%%%0!4 lalf4pF%%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l0!,5 5/ / 2s24al$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l0!,,5 5/ / 2s24al$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l0!,5 5/ / 2s24al$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l0!,5 5/ / 2s24al$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l0!,5 5/ / 2s24al$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l0!,5 5/ / / 2s24alL Dd %J  C A? "2 Xm"fyJ o`! Xm"fyJt<']X|:P x[olo̝ϸ8H"\1#7M62MiRYHW{lcC*F8T8mTUU mD#U "U(4R>[D*Dٽcoμ{3{3f}P ڱ SER-t ܜ, viB!*0݄ss5FZSbOz!Y~ 3/XC"T'qB4?$VQ?]ȑ#F)ϟgHU؅,pXևO"K,}n|YzHj[KZͤgYj;%Fz[D*Ⱥ&2MiYw~rʧdi{v!$'ei ~*u!@^*ʺӶ,-Tnu W5f@16fe)I6fJJu \mkRbCf])3 \m9) \m;RNI/p]1WLJ/p]1oI/u_+uAJ׵8< lpO1weGRz$S.ޙOlܿ9_%Xbܿ9,3w]3 i9Â#eRr;sSܿ9`_pΜKH'(Zy<5xM+] _zf}{z}؎eQutE@㢙J_sʏbJ.HX̹3hgv? GDS%=otFmZJθ-$~t.gt9{06k3k0uA.%{^5)2n5vk7F3FΞ 1(=Z̎sS(I5hM7 k/^<+^-/xV;4|_{} @Sܣ+w:tJk `G)-`LxBНVnw΄3 f*X )̈́s P&̈́%mA ^LG).f£~J𳾙Q?2)L'{ 0+J""V5>$@)ïP&|,~^›ϭۢ6/ D/uHnK Ķ,kG`ێpL df y:d CV.>' ljG #EuTu2o{ PiDf HNX/Pˢ.K [=Ee4Qh^+?K#x+$ adP[6nw Zc%9Yi+S'݃s@X^*_kzؽBl[1<8NڌP8L5X@e5jAz$Rdf4xqEMa e]0sgaT?`cm7I7a7e)ϻqk Mvp=≑B6M.R-iUTz,|s$ޣ.~ܱ$pJiQ[#\ӣ!*]趸rV\-q|H;!l.]kqDXezUVQŮz5R:F0޷_yf.+W⯑myVUK/G b_ѲS!¶dBc!Z2v>CKOV3#aVd@t'g{=^TlW\C{ikl(A9=RTٳ5skỚci^qb+Gr9_!_l9/hTىoT+Ɲb~x?9&lѷܸ晸8G^.暳ؙBkyhђsS~vz/2$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l4 (%%%%0,55F/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al$$Ifl!vh55F5F5F#v#vF:V l055F4al`$$Ifl!vh55$ 5$ 5#v#v$ #v:V l4 (%%%%0t"6+,55$ 5/ /  / / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh55v555585#v#vv#v#v#v8#v:V l4 F%%%%%%%0t"6+,55v55585/ / 4alf4pF%%%%%%%Jkd$$Ifl4֞ :^t" v8 F%%%%%%%0t"64 lalf4pF%%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh55v555585#v#vv#v#v#v8#v:V l0t"655v55585/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh55v555585#v#vv#v#v#v8#v:V l0t"655v55585/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh55v555585#v#vv#v#v#v8#v:V l0t"655v55585/ / 4al"$$Ifl!vh55v555585#v#vv#v#v#v8#v:V l0t"655v55585/ / / 4alR$$Ifl!vh55p5p5p#v#vp:V l4 (%%%%06+,55p/ /  / / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5585858585858#v#v8:V l4 F%%%%%%%06+,558/ / 4alf4pF%%%%%%%Jkd$$Ifl4֞ :r" 888888 F%%%%%%%064 lalf4pF%%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5585858585858#v#v8:V l06558/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5585858585858#v#v8:V l06558/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5585858585858#v#v8:V l06558/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5585858585858#v#v8:V l06558/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5585858585858#v#v8:V l06558/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5585858585858#v#v8:V l06558/ / / 4alF Dd %J  C A? "24~P9M`!|4~P9M4']X|:Jx[olEwGW*MQ'b Z Ԅ  5$堽k4BL#hb$~"!!T%ƀQAX@x73w-=S 77~veX)ceO2lbA+d L&Kn(1 44^3].,Mcn=2]Uƽ <ۧ'N+J*ף\OߡU; X]#~/lrixk&~ZW; „'NXh3\ˁ.30@'[cj׀qS6q2<dXuKVdCXu#VdXu>, {aymu.YjbWΖ7X٤l#wrklR]Gp6.ۈœM6bq0g겍XmIuF,6٤l#qlR]lR]1nuMK&)Lj:&}w{s{MwWqw#nsk5G9,,3eKi]eW%'WQѻ^ZrV'KW\/&NvgV.|xgM\P5R$#a5 1Q",+n*š5aܱ `[EaKDa V]&LbgvFavPa WX֢fSb.@дk{H|zdϥ2'YNnGb7:Y./hS|f?;;g  W=!yNj|i9/ ܐ?0Ntb ā g>G74681*hj;1xqS::AV {/膆&'ƿMM,c|2X3?%쾘f'~2R5ߕkv^a3*MY!c{{VC#luF1Nی:p_cV|]Ŀog)ԁNyMVu`W:1F96Wz P P[a57-puA[EtBu෶:"=8_PՁ?@q~.lP_&%ǂbFW/*,Lw]p4NDX*c2b gË~LrV ]T$Q1Ttk4$S\1YM. ,:js79ҞJʻ=r5N60?֦a 4O:Hw;43%St;%xS|y>K_%sca$*y at.פKsKͮ@M\'0N;%y>G6ޒBPp>ܙ*D§@׮$ڑe\ TǗSY+=jjWMg o؍3ԻX>{-O-`3]<^`S>EZ#wyrz̴[c6"r|O~&{XcݺyPB[3o a9AoY2/3ݥQ%:${`fk!|Yeޜ:cޏ7z c@$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l4 (%%%%0,55F5/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l055F54al$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l055F54al$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l055F54al$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l055F54al$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l055F54al$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l055F54al$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l055F54al$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l055F54al$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l055F54al$$Ifl!vh55F55#v#vF#v:V l055F54al9$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l (%%%%0f!6,55/ /  / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0f!655/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0f!655/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0f!655/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5f!#vf!:V l40f!6,5f!/  4alf4$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0f!655/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0f!655/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0f!655/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0f!655/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0f!655/ / / 4al9$$Ifl!vh5x555#vx#v:V l (%%%%0f!6,5x5/ /  / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5x555#vx#v:V l0f!6,5x5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5x555#vx#v:V l0f!6,5x5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5x555#vx#v:V l0f!6,5x5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5x555#vx#v:V l0f!6,5x5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5x555#vx#v:V l0f!6,5x5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5x555#vx#v:V l0f!6,5x5/ / / 4al($$Ifl!vh55b5#v#vb#v:V l4 %%%0$++,55b5/ / 4alf4p%%%$$Ifl!vh55b555#v#vb#v#v:V l4 2%%%%%0$+++++55b55/ / 4alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh555555#v#v#v#v:V l4 <%%%%%%0$++++,5555/ / / 4alf4p<%%%%%% kd>$$Ifl4ֈl$     <%%%%%%0$4 lalf4p<%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh555555#v#v#v#v:V l0$,,,5555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh555555#v#v#v#v:V l0$,,,55554al$$Ifl!vh555555#v#v#v#v:V l0$,,,55554al$$Ifl!vh555555#v#v#v#v:V l0$,,,55554al$$Ifl!vh555555#v#v#v#v:V l0$,,,55554al$$Ifl!vh555555#v#v#v#v:V l0$,,,55554al=$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l* (%%%%06,5H5F/ /  / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l06,5H5F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l06,5H5F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l06,5H5F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l06,5H5F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l06,5H5F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l06,5H5F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l06,5H5F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l06,5H5F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l06,5H5F/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5H5F5F5F#vH#vF:V l06,5H5F/ / / 4al9$$Ifl!vh5x5F5F5F#vx#vF:V l (%%%%06,5x5F/ /  / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5x5F5F5F#vx#vF:V l065x5F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5J#vJ:V l406,5J/  4alf4$$Ifl!vh5x5F5F5F#vx#vF:V l06,5x5F/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5x5F5F5F#vx#vF:V l06,5x5F/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5x5F5F5F#vx#vF:V l106,5x5F/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5x5F5F5F#vx#vF:V l06,5x5F/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5x5F5F5F#vx#vF:V l06,5x5F/ / / / 4alDd L\J  C A? "2DL =/C_JW"+= `!L =/C_JW"+=f#1]8;A(xZ]h\Usn&MldEii6Ql~ ؂тT+)!)IvaM(}K RD 4][w0sg}| - 3t$&Üi ^ypNbAeiVkh2ƤLPo-9KvΒ-Y%KVv zp_}Nv&HKvŒ]d,٘%d-AKhT~nŽ_W)rLZcIj(R~+ F@;6}US{)P:UEy]ު} -q]Gݠ0{5w` pqGDvr(-e~7{Q& UD]G}f/wW"<:TmT;~7~ȃYt_O9haa7 rO1>D0-g_%@̫M#C˯_ yk;Ǻ卣uo^uG?=V i~& J0|k5Cz]Þk%߻K尉}6>Ⱦ > }8%$YKHIVkt:!@r.W܌~7 x:rt*>:fҩQ@akKaj;}6&BԩD|t< Km>YVVĻt6MOD.w[VOwX$mAf0&9:xƬ,\;\,5L͐!'ٱxV]mw\UgFѓbde,T3W]|ɶW%S']y(GE^c該R/ux.gD,Lc;6u2Θxj9X;6-xm/|lգclt<&.+ߪb[=nKѯ۪jpGJ7}Gl<=O֐}jU9&꼪O TOx=R3-@Dd J  C A? "2&%ʄQUYdޏ`!%ʄQUYdޏ!(jO-xZoh[U?&i_S6(StY;)Y-RlMZ( s8PZ~p}. PYL26Zxyݗ_B5~x_rw~{n*<ہ6x8*Bd-RƐ#l?eު/߃'fU6Cni\ǾiF9NF`yGrZL}<+!SL@ nClri!):xTm[gXl)%z;"7iV [qE٪󦘱bZ-S֣d=JP2 Y1\Z\chq1(z|yO,rfWY-C[7Y9oo>?T:~j(YOe]o6 w,q,X+AAVšZ7W` ኵ l!\pܿegnE-S[/,A^‚[`7Ǻ6:vny; jAYelV ˤb1K>A1’[ BݢoptLl (}s,ƫAg][_s=̽\ˊP=[ms+N X9$fWC_qmpM{^7^UMٴM+Y(Y@JfNyY2/)%%ۃh y%;dRתkd8w99Ek86_Fvor<`9P|d* s9wq%_6ZJzpOo! 5ËpO3 X~oA3 p#@~_ 72u7lr#|~(߀kC$ti8J?Fa+~O+Mx=-n x@?.ݼ/?F7`-tߍ=AO_ +W]N_഑ӟnүFUؑulޓPKʚdJف.5'x36xPysx@w/} _xH&uRe[ϦO'SD2L@%&g#u6ZۊȦpp:F5}C F‰xz m]r Vttp(b éH|0NlRG驲rBn<9وZNgNx {V;)XO̧Zق Q=9;vRomOpj/ ,9'b;\9Nv;E6}މQ|>7<]z8b<ID+Uy]ȻwN3U@9 G}Ole PRINTDG4CompObjbObjInfoFIf=& A @    ''   Arialw@D bwbw0-- "System 0-'-  --  a!!---'---  - $c c c qcc  c---'---  ---'--- `!!---'---  c---'---  S--  $((\\($zz$##WW#$$SS$Z Z $m m NN$$. . JJ$o o $Z Z EE$( ( $ d d AA $\ \ - $(>(>\\($z$$zz$#` #` WW#$  $  SS$Z   Z Z $m   Nm Nm $  $.   J. J. $o   o o $Z 3 3 EZ EZ $( n n ( ( $d   Ad Ad $\ \ \ ---'---  c---'---  -   UU$$    d d 3 3     c~~zzuuqqllhhcc---'---   Arialw@B bwbw0------'--- ~#  2 -15%%----'---  -----'--- h  2 r22%%----'---  -----'--- yb  2 37%%----'---  -----'--- t  2  39%%----'---  -----'--- uK  2 35%%----'---  -----'--- zX  2 b45%%----'---  -----'--- pb  2 l46%%----'---  -----'--- ^v  2  36%%----'---  -----'--- k   2 55%%----'---  -----'--- qc  2 m46%%----'---  -----'--- g6  2 57%%----'---  -----'--- m  2 55%%----'---  -----'--- b]  2 g45%%----'---  -----'--- hY  2 zc45%%----'---  -----'--- ~3  2 45%----'---  -----'---   2 85%----'---  -----'--- y&   2 85%----'---  -----'--- I    2  85%----'---  -----'--- u`    2  17%%----'---  -----'--- . z   2  16%%----'---  -----'--- p;    2  15%%----'---  -----'---  v   2  29%%----'---  -----'--- k    2  18%%----'---  -----'---  qe   2 o 28%%----'---  -----'--- gu    2 ! 23%%----'---  -----'--- z m   2 & 28%%----'---  -----'--- b2   2 40%%----'---  -----'--- @ h   2 z 42%%----'---  ----'---    2 02* 2 [10** 2 +20** 2 30** 2 40** 2  50** 2 j 60** 2 : 70** 2  80** 2  90** 2  100***---'---  ---'---   '2 Class sizes too large6*&&&%*&*****12 Inadequate curriculum guides********&*&**?****&42 Sufficient Financial resources2*&**.***&**&**&*&$2 Salary satisfactoryg2**%&*&*&*%72 C Insufficient classroom resources*&*&**&*&&**?*&**&*&?2 %Parents involved in school activitiesm2***&*%*%***&&****&%*&+2 Strong Community Support2***6*??**%2****.2 Building needs improvement2********&?**%*?**72 R Satisfied with School curriculum2*&**5*2&***&*&**?%2 Effective Leadership2*&%******&**02 Supports teachers autonomys2****&**&**&*****?%@2 }n&Appropriate special education services2******&**&****&***&*%&*&72 Meeting Students Learning Needs=****2****&******6***&02 xHigh standards for studentss6**&*****&*&****&---'---  -   q---'---  r---'---  r--  > 2 OAgree2***---'---  r---'---  r--  n @  2  Strongly Agree2***%2***---'---  r---'---  ---'---  --'   '  'WorkbookHSummaryInformation(HJDocumentSummaryInformation8,_1116921971cM!F`uKV`uKV      !"#$%'M*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~ '@\p Dana Beebe Ba=@=<X@"1" Tw Cen MT1" Tw Cen MT1" Tw Cen MT1" Tw Cen MT1.Times New Roman1.Times New Roman1.Times New Roman1" Tw Cen MT1" Tw Cen MT1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)"Yes";"Yes";"No""True";"True";"False""On";"On";"Off"                + ) , *  (x@ @ D@ *x @ D@  x` @ D@  8 8` 8 8` 8 8` 8``   8@ 8 8 8@@ 8@ 8` `(Chart3h#Sheet14Sheet25Sheet3`i  Hb@μK1WHnμK1WHPNG  IHDRh6sRGB pHYsttfxIDAT8OR0Ù2FȦwAH 7QbQAc]y> " 8Dր{whm.smm CLnJ2(W>f^4&2̫z M+?0OC&%ktF=_T}CIENDB`3  @@  7Decision FactorStrongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly AgreeMean Meeting Student s Learning NeedsCS e" 70%CS < 70%Class sizes too largeSalary satisfactoryInadequate curriculum guidesSufficient Financial resourcesStrong Community Support Satisfied with School curriculum Insufficient classroom resourcesEffective LeadershipSupports teachers autonomyBuildings need improvement(High standards/expectations for students%Parents Involved in School Activities&Appropriate special education servicesBuilding needs improvementHigh standards for students%Parents involved in school activities"1    '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?dXLetter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 62xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"dX??3` < ` < ` " ` 0"@ ` 0"@` 0"@3d23 M NM4 3Q: AgreeQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4 3Q:  Strongly AgreeQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D $% M 3O& Q4$% M 3O& Q4FAIj 3OBj 3 b#M& 43*#M& 4523 M  43" 3O% M3O&Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44e3Class sizes too large3Class sizes too largeAInadequate curriculum guidesAInadequate curriculum guidesESufficient Financial resourcesESufficient Financial resources/Salary satisfactory/Salary satisfactoryI Insufficient classroom resourcesI Insufficient classroom resourcesS%Parents involved in school activitiesS%Parents involved in school activities9Strong Community Support9Strong Community Support=Building needs improvement=Building needs improvementI Satisfied with School curriculumI Satisfied with School curriculum1 Effective Leadership1 Effective Leadership? Supports teachers autonomy? Supports teachers autonomyU &Appropriate special education servicesU &Appropriate special education servicesI Meeting Student s Learning NeedsI  Meeting Student s Learning Needs? High standards for students? High standards for studentse333333.@ffffff@5@ffffff @ffffffB@ @@C@ @LA@333330@33333sF@/@fffffF@.@333333B@ffffff=@̌K@2@ 33333F@ 333333<@ L@ 6@ ffffffK@ <@ 33333F@ 33333C@ F@  E@e> ̠ '@  dMbP?_*+%M~HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - EnhancedD).X)"d??U.    4 (@   @   @   @   (@   (@   (@   (@   (@   @           $% $~@Б@F@@t@"3333330@ DD"33333T@ DD $@P@@@t@  ! # $l@ @x@@g@  $<@@@q@g@  !  # $ @H@\@@l@  $ @?@,@І@l@  ! ####& $ @@@̵@@`s@  $`@&@h@<@@  ! # $@D@@@@j@ $L@ @|@P@@j@ ! # $+@@D@@@p@ $3@l@ب@@k@ ! # $@@@@q@ $@@F@p@@p@ !# $@P@"@@ r@ $@@@̵@(@q@ !# $`@@@@n@ $%@̪@B@@@p@ !# $"@@^@\@ r@ $ @ؘ@@@ r@D lz(F(FF(FF(FF(66"66"66"66"66"6! (@" # $ (@% & ' <@( ) * (@+ ,  -  !!!# "$"`@@@С@ r@ #$#@@@@@ $!$# %$%/@H@?@4@@p@ &$&І@P@@@@@ '!'" ($(y@Ћ@@X@t@ )$)v@@4@@t@ *!*" +$+@4@T@@p@ ,$,(@ģ@G@H@@p@-R"66"66"66"66(  v  <A@AA?]& >"@***r  ''**!!$$7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U>@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%M~HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - EnhancedD).X)"d??U}  (Column D)       O ZClass sizes too large @ w@" fffff2@ DDO ZInadequate curriculum guides @ @" >@ DDPOZ!Sufficient Financial resources @ @@" F@ DDOZ Salary satisfactory @C@ @@" 33333sG@ DDO Z# Insufficient classroom resources @ @" fffffI@ DD  @ ؘ@" ffffffN@ DDOZStrong Community Support @ @" ̌N@ DD  p@ @" 33333sP@  DD 0OZ# Satisfied with School curriculum  @ H@"  LR@ D D  tOZEffective Leadership  @ @"  fffffR@  D D  O Z!9Supports teachers autonomy  X@ С@"  T@  D D  OZ )&Appropriate special education services  h@ <@"  33333T@  D D  (O ZC Meeting Student s Learning Needs  @ ,@"  33333SU@  D D   F@ r@" fffffU@ DD"0zxJ}Jy (  p  6NMM?i :]``  '@"`??3` `  o3d23 M NM4 3Q: AgreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4 3Q:  Strongly AgreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4D $% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O& Q4FA 3OI ) 3 b#M43*#M! M4523  O43" G*3OG% M3OQ443_ M NM  MM< 4444ee          e >@7 Oh+'0@H`t Keven Vicknair Dana BeebeaMicrosoft Excel@Dա'@Lω/՜.+,0 PXd lt| 3 Sheet1Sheet2Sheet3Chart3  WorksheetsCharts !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8Excel.Chart.89qOh+'0@H\p  Amy Pieper Dan SheehanMicrosoft Excel@ iOle PRINTLO)zFCompObjbObjInfoNQ8' 9# C   X h ''   Arialw@ Sw\w0--- Arialw@ OSw\w0---"System 0-'- X h --  9 H !!---'--- X h  A ---'--- X h ---'--- 7 G !!---'---  X---'---  H--  $$00$WWW$$#:#:aa#$$''--$UUU$$  ^^ $- $$00$W.W.W$$:##a:a:#$$'-'-'$UyUyU$$   ^^ $  - $$5 5 00$.WH WH ..W$  $# # aa#$  $P P --$yUP UP yyU$  $   ^ ^ $   ---'---  X---'--- X h -   -   yy    j j    Xu^u^u)u)uu[u[u'u'uuXuX---'--- X h ------'--- to  2  20%%----'--- X h -----'--- MN  2 16%%----'--- X h -----'--- j:   2 L19%%----'--- X h -----'--- t  2 ~30%%----'--- X h -----'--- ~2  2 <23%%----'--- X h -----'--- }l  2 ~)21%%----'--- X h -----'--- J)  2 322%%----'--- X h -----'--- N8  2 J16%%----'--- X h -----'--- j   2 19%%----'--- X h -----'--- {}  2 )21%%----'--- X h -----'--- ji   2 {19%%----'--- X h -----'--- oL  2 V13%%----'--- X h -----'--- M{  2 '16%%----'--- X h -----'--- :_  2 Li17%%----'--- X h -----'--- ~  2 19%%----'--- X h -----'--- l  2 ~20%%----'--- X h -----'--- J.  2 23%%----'--- X h -----'--- 8h  2 Jr24%%----'--- X h -----'---   2 23%%----'--- X h -----'--- {y  2 %33%%----'--- X h -----'--- .i  2 {29%%----'--- X h -----'--- go.  2 899%----'--- X h -----'--- M]  2 g18%%----'--- X h -----'--- :  2 L15%%----'--- X h -----'--- e ,   2 6 85%----'--- X h -----'--- ~Q   2 14%%----'--- X h -----'--- Q l  2 ~16%%----'--- X h -----'--- J d   2 n 20%%----'--- X h -----'---  85   2 J? 25%%----'--- X h -----'---  d   2 n 26%%----'--- X h -----'--- { Y   2 c 28%%----'--- X h -----'--- ~ i   2 {* 34%%----'--- X h -----'--- .  2 817%%----'--- X h ----'--- X h   2 1w07% 2 120%% 2 1T40%% 2 1 60%% 2 1E 80%% 2 1 100'%%%---'--- X h ---'--- X h  .2 ZFriends attend this school)%%%"%%%%%"""%%%.2 FTrouble at previous school)%%%%%%%!%%"""%%%!2 OZSchool is smaller-"%%%""9%%*2 School is close to homes-"%%%""%"%%%%9%+2 gMore challenging classes7%%"%%%%%%%"%""%"2 wSmall class size-9%"%"""!%*2 Fewer student conflictss)%/%"%%%%"%%""42 LPoor grades at previous school-%%%%%%"%%%!%%"""%%%C2 p(Previous teachers did not help me enough-%!%%"%%"%%"%%%%%%%9%%%%%%%<2 |#Parents think this school is better-%%%"%%"%"""%%%"%%%12 }Good teachers at this school4%%%%%"%%"%%"""%%%---'--- X h -----'---   2 Percent-%"%%----'--- X h -   A ---'---  @ ---'---  @ --   "2 +Somewhat important-%9%/%%9%%%%---'---  @ ---'---  @ --   2  Important9%%%%---'---  @ ---'---  @ --  \ 3  2 l Very important-%!9%%%%---'---  @ ---'--- X h ---'--- X h -- -4--< u ---- - -) } --  2 82%%' X h ----mL ---- - -d9  --  2  82%%' X h ----.  ---- - -%  --  2  68%%' X h ---- -[ ---- - - 5m --  2 F 67%%' X h ----R [ ---- - -I m -Arialw@ Sw\w0- -- -  2  65%%' X h ----C [ ---- - -----\ q ---- - -I y --  2  57%%' X h ----|C  ---- - -s0  --  2  56%%' X h ----'\  ---- - -I  --  2  55%%' X h ---- Ac ---- - - Iu --  2 O 51%%' X h ----R L ---- - -I ^ --  2 r 50%%' X h ----K b---- - -8 j--  2 {42%%' X h -- -' X h  '   'WorkbookOzSummaryInformation(PRDocumentSummaryInformation8`_1116845806*KU!FPKVPKV '@\p Dan Sheehan Ba= * =&9X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1JArial1JArial1Arial1Arial1Arial1@Arial1Arial1"Arial1"Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1'Arial1'Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)                + ) , *    `Chart1#j2reasons for choosing school!Qopinions about current CS_opinions format2`iP/   3  @@  . Poor grades at previous schoolTrouble at previous schoolGood teachers at this schoolFewer student conflictsMore challenging classesFriends attend this schoolSmall class sizeSomewhat important ImportantVery importantSchool is smallerMore homework at this school!Enough extracurricular activities+Other students at this school help me learn2Students in this school are interested in learning-I wish there were more courses to choose from!I am learning more at this schoolI feel safe at this school#This school is a good choice for me1My teachers encourage me to think about my futureMost teachers know me by nameStrongly disagree or disagreeStrongly agree or agree&My teachers help me understand things #I get a lot of individual attention"Computer available in my classroom(Previous teachers did not help me enoughSchool is close to home#Parents think this school is better$I work hard to earn the grades I getAgreeStrongly Agree"    '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy PCL.ALL.TASB?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5e2xUA00_شqmp<Ҫ Ànloڒ۾'}qM8x 5 jR FP]f;'bߧ2Biodze?GJH:CNG'7T/*]UJ;dELfOnsy4zM'Y+غ-З0Te->{?"ET4Mvbм%x+- ysa?/WwHVP;+cb<:?~*fҞ b"_DCJ0jIwRQ\WEaEەX1|[eE(e3d?ta"dXX??3` 8 ` 8 ` $` $J` #0` #0 ` #0!` #0"` #0#` $$ (  ~  < @A? bh]x $<82<#JXa@  B @AA? tt:] $<82<#JX?0  B  @AA?Z  ]  $<68<#JX  Bp @AA?'  k]p $<67<#JX(B  B @AA?' k |]  $<65 <$JXV  B @AA?v  p]  $  B` @AA?x ' ]`  $<57<#JX  B @AA?[  |]  $<56<#JXD   B @AA?x ' ]   $<55<#JX   BP @AA?  ] P $<51<#JXhF   B @AA? ] x $<50<#JX   B @AA?4 ] p $<42<#JXGGڛ3d23 M NM4  3Q: (Somewhat importantQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4  3Q:  ImportantQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4  3Q:  Very importantQ ; Q ; Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D$% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAm][ 3OR^#o 3 b#M& 43*Y@4@#M& 4% 3 &M3O0&Q Percent'43" 3O% M3O&!Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&"Q'4% Mp3O&"Q'4%  sMp3O&"Q'4% Mp3O&"Q'44 e=Friends attend this school=Friends attend this school=Friends attend this school=Trouble at previous school=Trouble at previous school=Trouble at previous school+School is smaller+School is smaller+School is smaller7School is close to home7School is close to home7School is close to home9More challenging classes9More challenging classes9More challenging classes)Small class size)Small class size)Small class size7Fewer student conflicts7Fewer student conflicts7Fewer student conflictsEPoor grades at previous schoolEPoor grades at previous schoolEPoor grades at previous schoolY(Previous teachers did not help me enoughY(Previous teachers did not help me enoughY(Previous teachers did not help me enoughO #Parents think this school is betterO #Parents think this school is betterO #Parents think this school is betterA Good teachers at this schoolA Good teachers at this schoolA Good teachers at this schoole4@*@"@0@0@2@3@1@.@>@1@ @7@3@,@5@4@0@6@7@4@0@8@9@3@7@:@ 5@ @@ <@ 3@ =@ A@e>  '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U} } $} I          4@*@"@E@ 0@0@2@I@  3@1@.@I@ >@1@ @K@ 7@3@,@L@ 5@4@0@L@ 6@7@4@@P@ 0@8@9@@P@  3@7@:@Q@  5@@@<@T@  3@=@A@T@>>0000000000 (  v  <NMM? *]   '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 62xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"dXX??3` $` 8 ` 8 ` $` $ ` $ ` $J ` $ 0 (  ~  <0 @A? j 5]0 $<82< a@  B1 @AA?{  m]1, $<82< ?0  B`1 @AA?  ]`1 $<68<   B1 @AA?x  ]1 $<67< (B  B2 @AA?* M ]2  $<65 <  #  BP2 @AA?*  ]P2 $<65<   B2 @AA? * ]2 $<57<   B2 @AA?} ]2 $<56< D   B@3 @AA?}  ] @3 $<55<    B3 @AA?-  ] 3 $<51< hF   B3 @AA?0  7 ] 3 $<50<    B04 @AA?7 = ] 04 $<42< G@J3d23 M NM4  3Q: (Somewhat importantQ ; Q ; Q3_4E4  3Q:  ImportantQ ; Q ; Q3_4E4  3Q:  Very importantQ ; Q ; Q3_4E4D$% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAT 3OLR13 b#M&43*Y@4@#M&! M43"  t3O % M3O& Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O& Q'4% yFMp3O & Q'4% Mp3O& Q'4% Mp3O& Q'44 ee      e >@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??nU} I          Q@>@  N@C@  G@J@ F@L@ D@N@ B@P@ >@Q@ =@Q@  ;@@R@  7@@S@  4@T@  4@T@  3@@T@ &@@V@"J&$$$$$$$$$$$$$@ (   v  <NMM?+ '] $   '@"$ ??3` 8 ` 8 ` L ` d` L ` L ` L #3d23 M NM4 3Q: >Strongly disagree or disagreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4 3Q: 2Strongly agree or agreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4D $% M 3O& Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAjas 3OIj 3 b#M&43*Y@4@#M&! M43" &T 3O&% M3O&Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44ee          e   >@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??eU} $'         .@.@  >@"@  D@&@ G@"@ C@5@ C@9@ G@7@ E@=@  I@6@  C@C@  F@A@  I@=@  E@C@ J@B@"J&$$$$$$$$$$$$$P(  v  <NMM?  )] 0+  '@"0+??3` ` 8 ` 8 ` ` ` ` `(    BHW @AA? nY]HW@. $<89<  BW @AA?l 0]W. $<81<  BW @AA?  ]W/ $<80<  B8X @AA?  ]8X0 $<80<  BX @AA? | ]Xx1 $<77<  BX @AA? r \]Xp2 $<73<  B(Y @AA? \l G](Yh3 $<71<  BxY @AA?j $ ]xY`4 $<69<   BY @AA?  ] YX5 $<64<   BZ @AA?*  ] ZP6 $<60<к   BhZ @AA?/ u ] hZH7 $<56<   BZ @AA? T ? ] Z@8 $<52<   B[ @AA?3? * ] [89 $<39<*  BX[ @AA? } ]X[0: $<30<(!3d23 M NM4 3Q: AgreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4 3Q:  Strongly AgreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4D $% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAjx 3OGj 3 b#M&43*4@#M&! M4% 0" GM3O.&Q Percent'43" *3O% M3O&Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44ee          e >@7 &@80՜.+,00 PXh px TASBCh reasons for choosing schoolopinions about current CSopinions format2Chart1  WorksheetsChartsOle PRINTTWDCompObjbObjInfoVYC+  " H   [ ''   Arialw@ Sw\w0- Arialw@v !Sw\w0-------"System 0-'- [ --  < !!---'--- [  ]---'--- [ ---'--- : !!---'--- ^\---'--- mL--  $$-4 -4 ff-$, , $  JJ$  $  //$h h h$B B $L L L$  $1 1 ii1$  $B B NN$: : - $4 4 $4 - - f4 f4 -$, $ $ , , $ ~ ~ J J $     $ 2 2 / / $ h h   h$B   B B $ L L   L$ W W   $ 1 1 i i 1$     $B   NB NB $: ee: : ---'--- ^\---'--- [ -  ]66SS6  6  6  6]]\-yyytytyYyYy=y=y!y!yyxyxy\y\---'--- [  Arialw@u {Sw\w0------'--- j  2 15''----'--- [ -----'---    2 30''----'--- [ -----'--- ~-  2 741''----'--- [ -----'--- lp  2 z47''----'--- [ -----'--- xc  2 u 39''----'--- [ -----'--- Px  2  39''----'--- [ -----'--- Ge  2 Yo46''----'--- [ -----'--- 48  2 B42''----'--- [ -----'--- +  2 =51''----'--- [ -----'--- x  2  39''----'--- [ -----'--- Z  2 "d45''----'--- [ -----'---   2 51''----'--- [ -----'--- o8  2 B42''----'--- [ -----'---  f  2 x53''----'--- [ -----'--- Z  2 d15''----'--- [ -----'---  |   2  95'----'--- [ -----'---  ~w   2  11''----'--- [ -----'--- l6    2  91'----'--- [ -----'---  c   2 u 21''----'--- [ -----'--- PI    2  25''----'--- [ -----'---  Gn   2 Yx 23''----'--- [ -----'--- 4 X   2 b 29''----'--- [ -----'--- 6 +   2 = 22''----'--- [ -----'---  z   2  38''----'--- [ -----'--- A    2 " 35''----'--- [ -----'---  "   2 , 29''----'--- [ -----'--- o*   2  39''----'--- [ -----'---  f   2 x 36''----'--- [ ----'--- [   2 bz06, 2 b'20,, 2 b 40,, 2 b 60,, 2 bn 80,, 2 b100,,,---'--- [ ----'--- [  12 nMore homework at this school=****?*5*&**&&&***92 *!Enough extracurricular activities2******$*&*&***&%*&H2 +Other students at this school help me learn:**&****&**&&&******?****<2 #Students are interested in learning2****&*****&********:2 t"Computer available in my classroom6*?****%*****?%&*&&**?62 +I wish there were more courses 5&****5**?**&**&*&<2 XE#I get a lot of individual attention*******%********02 I learn more at this schooll***?****&&&***.2 <@I feel safe at this school**&****&&&***<2 #This school is a good choice for me-*&&&***&*****&**&**?*H2 h+Teachers encourage thinking about my future-**&**&**&*******&******?%***<2 x#Teachers help me understand things -**&**&***?*****&******&32 Most teachers know me by name=*&**&**&&**5?**%**?*32 wnI work hard to earn my grades5*&*******?%****&---'--- [ ------'--- X c  2 n Percent5,(,,----'--- [ --    ]---'-- -  ^---'-- -  ^--      2 Agree2***---'---  ^---'---  ^- -   Z ,  2 k Strongly Agree2***%2***---'---   ^---'---  [ ---'---  [ --  -4- -db----  - -Qj--  2 89''' [ --- - ----  - -{ --  2 !81''' [ --- -$ ----  - -y --  2  80''' [ --- -  ----  - -w --  2 - 80''' [ --- -/nn ----  - -&[ --  2  77''' [ --- -  ----  - -  --  2 9H 73''' [ --- -S  ----  - -J  --  2 & 71''' [ --- - ; ----  - -} C --  2 ^ 69''' [ --- -\B H ----  - -S/ Z --  2  64''' [ --- - Y ----  - - a --  2 }, 60''' [ --- -{u w ----  - -rb  --  2  56''' [ --- -, d+ ----  - - l= --  2  52''' [ --- -  ----  - - " --  2 #g 39''' [ --- -%> ? ----  - -+ Q --  2  30''' [ -- -' [  '  ' !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8Excel.Chart.89qOh+'0@H\p  Amy Pieper Dan SheehanMicrosoft Excel@ i&@6TM0՜.+,00 PWorkbook7{SummaryInformation(XZDocumentSummaryInformation8`_1120891152 q]!FPKVPKV '@\p Dan Sheehan Ba= ) =Z-<X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1JArial1JArial1Arial1Arial1Arial1@Arial1Arial1"Arial1"Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1'Arial1'Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1TArial1TArial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)                + ) , *    `0Chart2#2reasons for choosing school!Ropinions about current CS,`opinions format2`ip4 1   3  @@  .&Poor grades at previous schoolTrouble at previous schoolGood teachers at this schoolFewer student conflictsMore challenging classesFriends attend this schoolSmall class sizeSomewhat important ImportantVery importantSchool is smallerMore homework at this school!Enough extracurricular activities+Other students at this school help me learn2Students in this school are interested in learning-I wish there were more courses to choose from!I am learning more at this schoolI feel safe at this school#This school is a good choice for me1My teachers encourage me to think about my futureMost teachers know me by nameStrongly disagree or disagreeStrongly agree or agree&My teachers help me understand things #I get a lot of individual attention"Computer available in my classroom(Previous teachers did not help me enoughSchool is close to home#Parents think this school is better$I work hard to earn the grades I getAgreeStrongly AgreeI work hard to earn my grades#Teachers help me understand things +Teachers encourage thinking about my futureI learn more at this schoolI wish there were more courses #Students are interested in learning*2  . $  '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy PCL.ALL.TASB?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 5e2xUA00_شqmp<Ҫ Ànloڒ۾'}qM8x 5 jR FP]f;'bߧ2Biodze?GJH:CNG'7T/*]UJ;dELfOnsy4zM'Y+غ-З0Te->{?"ET4Mvbм%x+- ysa?/WwHVP;+cb<:?~*fҞ b"_DCJ0jIwRQ\WEaEەX1|[eE(e3d?ta"dXX??3` 8 ` 8 ` $` $` $ ` %?! (     B @AA?CeZ]P $<89< N[  B @AA? /$] $<81< N[  Bh @AA?J $E]h $<80< N[  B @AA?J C] $<80< N[  B @AA?+ (]  $<77< N[  BX @AA?  ]X  $<73< N[  B @AA?  }]x  $<71< N[  B @AA?W XL M]p  $<69< N[  BH @AA? " ] Hh  $<64< N[  B @AA?  ] ` $<60< N[к  B @AA?9 4 ] X $<56< N[  B8 @AA? ] 8P $<52< N[  B @AA? ] H $<39< N[*  B @AA? o  f ]@ $<30< N[(y>3d23 M NM4 3Q: AgreeQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4 3Q:  Strongly AgreeQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D$% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FA{\ 3O;[' 3 b#M&!43*4@#M&4% 5 r %M3O9&Q Percent'43" %03O'% M3O&Q423 M NM443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44eAMore homework at this schoolAMore homework at this schoolK!Enough extracurricular activitiesK!Enough extracurricular activities_+Other students at this school help me learn_+Other students at this school help me learnO#Students are interested in learningO#Students are interested in learningM"Computer available in my classroomM"Computer available in my classroomGI wish there were more courses GI wish there were more courses O#I get a lot of individual attentionO#I get a lot of individual attention?I learn more at this school?I learn more at this school=I feel safe at this school=I feel safe at this schoolO #This school is a good choice for meO #This school is a good choice for me_ +Teachers encourage thinking about my future_ +Teachers encourage thinking about my futureO #Teachers help me understand things O #Teachers help me understand things C Most teachers know me by nameC Most teachers know me by nameC I work hard to earn my gradesC I work hard to earn my gradese.@.@>@"@D@&@G@"@C@5@C@9@G@7@E@=@I@6@ C@ C@ F@ A@ I@ =@ E@ C@ J@ B@e>  '@  dMbP?_*+%"??U} } $} I          4@*@"@E@ 0@0@2@I@  3@1@.@I@ >@1@ @K@ 7@3@,@L@ 5@4@0@L@ 6@7@4@@P@ 0@8@9@@P@  3@7@:@Q@  5@@@<@T@  3@=@A@T@>>0000000000 (  v  <NMM? *]   '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 62xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"dXX??3` $` 8 ` 8 ` $` $ ` $ ` $J ` $ 0 (  ~  <0 @A? j 5]0 $<82< a@  Bh0 @AA?{  m]h0 $<82< ?0  B0 @AA?  ]0 $<68<   B1 @AA?x  ]1 $<67< (B  BX1 @AA?* M ]X1 $<65 <  #  B1 @AA?*  ]1 $<65<   B1 @AA? * ]1 $<57<   BH2 @AA?} ]H2 $<56< D   B2 @AA?}  ] 2 $<55<    B2 @AA?-  ] 2 $<51< hF   B83 @AA?0  7 ] 83  $<50<    B3 @AA?7 = ] 3! $<42< G@J3d23 M NM4  3Q: (Somewhat importantQ ; Q ; Q3_4E4  3Q:  ImportantQ ; Q ; Q3_4E4  3Q:  Very importantQ ; Q ; Q3_4E4D$% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAT 3OLR13 b#M&43*Y@4@#M&! M43"  t3O % M3O& Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O& Q'4% yFMp3O & Q'4% Mp3O& Q'4% Mp3O& Q'44 ee      e >@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??nU} I          Q@>@  N@C@  G@J@ F@L@ D@N@ B@P@ >@Q@ =@Q@  ;@@R@  7@@S@  4@T@  4@T@  3@@T@ &@@V@"J&$$$$$$$$$$$$$@ (   v  <NMM?+ '] !  '@"!??3` 8 ` 8 ` L ` d` L ` L ` L #3d23 M NM4 3Q: >Strongly disagree or disagreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4 3Q: 2Strongly agree or agreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4D $% M 3O& Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAjas 3OIj 3 b#M&43*Y@4@#M&! M43" &T 3O&% M3O&Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44ee          e   >@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??eU} $'         .@.@  >@"@  D@&@ %G@"@ C@5@ $C@9@ G@7@ #E@=@  I@6@  C@C@ " F@A@ ! I@=@  E@C@  J@B@"J&$$$$$$$$$$$$$P(  v  <NMM?  )] -  '@"-??3` ` 8 ` 8 ` ` ` ` `(    BV @AA? nY]V0 $<89<  BV @AA?l 0]V`0 $<81<  BLW @AA?  ]LWX1 $<80<  BW @AA?  ]WP2 $<80<  BW @AA? | ]WH3 $<77<  B@7 Xh px TASBCh reasons for choosing schoolopinions about current CSopinions format2Chart2  WorksheetsCharts !FMicrosoft Excel ChartBiff8Excel.Chart.89qOle PRINT\_"CompObjbObjInfo^aD     !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~;( l (    ''   Arialw@ bwbw0- Arialw@ Cbwbw0--- Arialw@ 6bwbw0--- "System 0-'-  --  } !!---'---  - $ ,,----'--- 0  ca    88   ---'---   ca-    , ,---'---   ---'---  { !!---'---  , ---'---  , - -   $,,$LL,,$,,$4,4,4$@c @c ,,@$   , , $K   ,K ,K -   $,,$L,L,L$2z2z,,2$h-h-,,h$c   ,c ,c $   , , $ C C , , ---'-- - , ---'-- -  -   ,-,,88,, B,Bs,sB%,%B,B,B< ,< B , B , ---'-- -   ------'-- -  |=  2 H8)----'-- -   -----'-- -  BM  2 a25))----'-- -   -----'-- -  %  2 911))----'-- -   -----'-- -  +>  2 ?I26))----'-- -   -----'-- -      2  12))----'-- -   -----'-- -   %U   2 9` 11))----'-- -   -----'-- -     2 12))----'-- -   -----'-- -  1V  2 Ea41))----'-- -   -----'-- -  "p  2 15))----'-- -   -----'-- -  X#  2 21))----'-- -   -----'-- -      2 % 41)----'-- -   -----'-- -  s 4   2 %? 41)----'-- -   -----'-- -  % 3   2 G 31)----'-- -   -----'-- -  RE    2  71)----'-- -   ----'-- -     2 a01) 2 810)) 2 ^820)) 2 830)) 2 840)) 2 j850))---'-- -   ---'-- -    2 jMostly A=)%#12 jA and BA1)))12 jsMostly B=)%#12 j-B and CB1)))52 jMostly C=)%#52 j C and DC5)))52 jE D and FC5)))----'-- -   ------'-- -  n-T  Arialw@ #bwbw0- 2 cPercent-----'-- -   --    ca---'---   db---'---   db-  -    2 yPrevious school1)%))%%%)))---'-- -   db---'-- -   db- -    ` (2 yCurrent charter school5)))%)))%%)))---'-- -  db---'-- -  ---'-- -  -  -'   '  'Oh+'0@H\p  Amy Pieper Dana BeebeMicrosoft Excel@ i&@9!U՜.+,0< PXh px TASBCh Workbook tSummaryInformation(`bDocumentSummaryInformation8l_1116915879eFP0KVP0KV '@\p Dana Beebe Ba= |/  =<X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1JArial1JArial1Arial1Arial1Arial1JArial1Arial1"Arial1"Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1'Arial1'Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1'Arial1'Arial1Arial1'Arial1Arial1'Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)"Yes";"Yes";"No""True";"True";"False""On";"On";"Off"                + ) , *    *8 `Chart3# reasons for choosing school!v?opinions about current CSMopinions format2hgrades`iX( $   3  @@  H7/Poor grades at previous schoolTrouble at previous schoolGood teachers at this schoolFewer student conflictsMore challenging classesFriends attend this schoolSmall class sizeSomewhat important ImportantVery importantSchool is smallerMore homework at this school!Enough extracurricular activities+Other students at this school help me learn2Students in this school are interested in learning-I wish there were more courses to choose from!I am learning more at this schoolI feel safe at this school#This school is a good choice for me1My teachers encourage me to think about my futureMost teachers know me by nameStrongly disagree or disagreeStrongly agree or agree&My teachers help me understand things #I get a lot of individual attention"Computer available in my classroom(Previous teachers did not help me enoughSchool is close to home#Parents think this school is better$I work hard to earn the grades I getAgreeStrongly AgreeI work hard to earn my grades#Teachers help me understand things +Teachers encourage thinking about my futureI learn more at this schoolI wish there were more courses #Students are interested in learningMostly AA and BMostly BB and CMostly CC and DD and FPrevious schoolCurrent charter school21   -#  '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 62xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"dXX??3` 8 !` ("` 8 #` ($` u%3'3d23 M NM4 3Q: "Previous schoolQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4 3Q: 0Current charter schoolQ ;Q ;Q3_ O   MM< 4E4D$% M 3O&!Q4$% M 3O&#Q4FA  3O2\0 3 b#M&"43*$@#M&"! 74% OMZ3O)&%Q Percent'4523 M NM43"  )3O % M3O&&Q423 M NM443_ M NM  MM< 444%  [Mz3O &$Q'4% Mp3O&$Q'4% Mp3O&$Q'44eMostly AMostly AA and BA and BMostly BMostly BB and CB and CMostly CMostly CC and DC and DD and FD and Fe @(@9@D@&@.@:@5@@@(@@&@@e>  '@  dMbP?_*+%"w??@ U} } } 8          4@*@"@E@ 0@0@2@I@  3@1@.@I@ >@1@ @K@ 7@3@,@L@ 5@4@0@L@ 6@7@4@@P@ 0@8@9@@P@  3@7@:@Q@  5@@@<@T@  3@=@A@T@>>0000000000(  v  <NMM?  *] w  '@M\\TASBINC\W2_Wendy.ALL.TASB?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 62xUA0d0_شqmp2Ҫnnoڲ-mvaaj{\;-x 2 (Fk@ R;&b:O+-L;Gx=uWcD\BVZNfHwʭN?r>'g)TUCV4l:b@lN!}ZgĮ}C+*\V2ü#Ґ^$&LE-!Ō-ׂ[ T/nYX38> )3V*Z#ǯ?QM: qPQN CCqu'a~xZQveElBU`/kY;=#N@tf"dXX??3` $` 8 ` 8 ` $` $ ` $ ` $J ` $   (  ~  <|] @A? g 4]|](w $<82< a@  B] @AA?  q]]xw $<82< ?0  B^ @AA?  ]^h w $<68<   Bl^ @AA?{  ]l^` w $<67< (B  B^ @AA?, Q ]^X w $<65 <  #  B _ @AA?, $ ] _P w $<65<   B\_ @AA? , ]\_H w $<57<   B_ @AA?~   ]_@w $<56< D   B3 @AA?~ # ] 38w $<55<    B3 @AA?K  * ] 30w $<51< hF   B(4 @AA?O  Y ] (4(w $<50<    B_ @AA?Y c ] _ w $<42< G`V3d23 M NM4  3Q: (Somewhat importantQ ; Q ; Q3_4E4  3Q:  ImportantQ ; Q ; Q3_4E4  3Q:  Very importantQ ; Q ; Q3_4E4D$% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAO( 3OKO1#3 b#M&43*Y@4@#M&! M43" @ 3OB% M3O& Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O& Q'4% u=Mp3O & Q'4% Mp3O& Q'4% Mp3O& Q'44 ee      e >@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??nU} 8          Q@>@  N@C@  G@J@ F@L@ D@N@ B@P@ >@Q@ =@Q@  ;@@R@  7@@S@  4@T@  4@T@  3@@T@ &@@V@"J&$$$$$$$$$$$$$0 (   v  <NMM?) '] pw  '@"p??3` 8 ` 8 ` L ` d` L ` L ` L ̥Xf.3d23 M NM4 3Q: >Strongly disagree or disagreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4 3Q: 2Strongly agree or agreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4D $% M 3O& Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAZ~ 3O@Z  3 b#M&43*Y@4@#M&! M43" m3Om% M3O&Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44ee          e   >@7 '@  dMbP?_*+%"??eU} '         .@.@  >@"@  D@&@ %G@"@ C@5@ $C@9@ G@7@ #E@=@  I@6@  C@C@ " F@A@ ! I@=@  E@C@  J@B@"J&$$$$$$$$$$$$$@(  v  <NMM?& )] |w  '@"|??3` ` 8 ` 8 ` ` ` ` P(    B  @AA? a$V]  w $<89<  Bp @AA?v + ]p w $<81<  B @AA?  ]!w $<80<  B @AA?  ]"w $<80<  B` @AA?  ]`#w $<77<  B @AA?  ]$w $<73<  B @AA? v z]%w $<71<  BP @AA?q U J]P&w $<69<   B @AA?  ] 'w $<64<   B @AA?+  ] (w $<60<к   B@ @AA?5 ] @)w $<56<   B @AA?  ] *w $<52<   B @AA?.  ] +w $<39<*  B0 @AA?i ya ]0|,w $<30<(@f+3d23 M NM4 3Q: AgreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4 3Q:  Strongly AgreeQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4D $% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FA[ 3O?[" 3 b#M&43*4@#M&! M4% 9o :M3O7&Q Percent'43" 3O% M3O&Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O&Q'4% Mp3O&Q'44ee          e >@* ** 7 '@  dMbP?_*+%" ??eU   - . & @(@ '9@D@ (&@.@ ):@5@ *@@ +(@@ ,&@@   &$$$$$$$`$(  $v $ <NMM?   #] ,w  '@",??3` (` (` 8 ` 8 ` ( x03d23 M NM4 3Q: "Previous schoolQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4 3Q: 0Current charter schoolQ ;Q ;Q3_4E4D $% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FAx> 3O?Y# 3 b#M&43*$@#M&! M4% y 9M3O7&Q Percent'43" 3O% M3O&Q443_ M NM  MM< 444% Mp3O& Q'4% Mp3O& Q'44eee $$>@7 reasons for choosing schoolopinions about current CSopinions format2gradesChart3  WorksheetsChartsL;*! FMicrosoft Graph 2000GBiff5MSGraph.Chart.89q!c{dX,ɫ_ {T@vN\'clK"%Q?*@2$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l4 (%%%%0,55/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0554al Dd "J   C A ? "2E MI^G#! `! MI^G#3dVL6x[al~on/wFvr(]UВ`pH ąW Qym8ٻwbUhPT BFQWVI~`"HZ#D3ovggmLl{{3ChH@|\!#Fc<|% N U+ɚ6e;;]mRXGܿU^EϊoZ>^a)6@}5VDe_ve_ŒY5CAmoe]" Yl)&d(S;?CqO3")& v5vKeM3fMKVnϝp~ lxD] "$>A2ʣ'I S$8.dV׉ฐNn-'Bju%Yq!VW!,2 gԝs$~A݋ 9STp{Bs8:V1!.]*uB T6;$]\rP܄rQc6oCĪH2J1{B$>SZDDb/E1;K#UZD„RfxXL /&"/r`<΄]%b5BRDٯ K1eN&b/gV(/fYQ³Z팓 Z*5v]cW礕!sc0{Hn&C\6#^;Mp֭a +lRa Rؔ®*²LT V؈F6IM7P6a֣)MaZaǮ]K 3 ;6 {Ha)l6h2ך^Eƾ;V!QxLɹp\7j#O/_erw|j^E0~-a۟kG^.34o~~Vza…Ⳟ!#F<{;ȿ`_,K[ȿK _O{D*Ŀ#Q|3\aTG0E2c43_M<GcG2Gbl71%r_0|O~+<PIxbywqa(ĐN|_`߁ӱe߆{7#gزomw В> +r9@F?^7 -rpkyXǢv%Or,jLs?=,jU7XlaQ;o8pkĿ=6Y?EWKTjϥ=Omr%Оc;)ߙ>:} ߭&f%.a[ ~Cg77 4DNo~Z@1ﺦk[Y)b`%$@Z [ I7z;R+Y:]C@\JZ, &VmPoW(@o.Vbvۥ|`狦cS܌˄_ h[^ӊGQ;OI3|vJx'il0Q<=.g;Pcݷ^=l};״K- EsGmg␢RX^ $vk*N4`>Pʘ[.;sҨ _f4^㭥۸jlndY}аS8Okzv%ǭC;u^ uȮ UAf4o$T2Swxc̵-|qLhTjX$vdn( !k 3_K17`ZJљj~iVmNvl1aW-pwyFYΨsAcR1o}Jx~Q\mYJ+<Kdkp&<ț;AӭK}ygX%jL<14/k\w3]sBFOO{?M5}wuϗ~IרS>,}v5rW2np, Y™q3^^^rFOGu}{ۿ a9Lr>$hV9xF/:1IFXYN@$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l4 (%%%%0,555F/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh5555F#v#v#vF:V l0,555F4al$$Ifl!vh55X5X5X55F#v#vX#v#vF:V l4> <%%%%%%0",,55X55F/ / 4alf4p<%%%%%%kd$$Ifl4>ֈ l"XXXF <%%%%%%0"4 lalf4p<%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh55X5X5X55F#v#vX#v#vF:V l0"55X55F/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55X5X5X55F#v#vX#v#vF:V l0"55X55F4al$$Ifl!vh55X5X5X55F#v#vX#v#vF:V l0"55X55F/ 4al/$$Ifl!vh5550#v#v#v0:V l4 %%%06++,5550/ / 4alf4p%%%k$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4 2%%%%%06++,550/ / / 4alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 #v :V l4065 / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l406550/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l406550/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l406550/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 #v :V l4065 / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh5 #v :V l4065 4alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh5 #v :V l4065 4alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l4065504alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l406550/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh550505050#v#v0:V l406550/ / 4alf4{$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l (%%%%06,,5 5/ / / / /  / / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ /  / 4al" Dd - mJ   C A ? " 2 /Z?]#3m` 7`!X /Z?]#3mҲE%0O7& x\}lo>;`qWRM إHIEE%W[K4*TviQ$"U)?) UjZUiԉG:ܥZ=f~!;~Bj4Z>RtjVi}Db>Qװ5ڔx;ZgՒB.h @?tG]Gй-+=T 79rԏN=+ED0~8Jۍ:sS){8K w6Cس}獏ȈJ4S*N-8g 9Ԣ$8 $贽uHrI/qi; _@IWa5S\wڎb$9&ǸyHrPriHGpi&Hםb$um苤U[ՋsHtQֹ?3% mk;K=Kux]rFn`d~nb~n,ǘ_m6/6u;8A'K3/NKVycљ_NLLjjm,o[u7%w[!Iw[QS.n,ǘn(Aw[0w[0KtqKv%^ϲ2%^ϲ/KYj})ܹWRyw]ʞYB(UU-ZE~^Z9`/LkAwv#;<#nz$NHשtJ=t+Jw[~t1)`[wZN+Jҍ+ݸS}J7tCJY6+[t nT:őp5m]ٜ1HZ+Rx={}YbS'4ivLU;[]x v&P8keI:˚c|į? /8 >`+$ (pAo"xj8p g÷E2L<u(E{ZĿ,MzkH6p_"= HWV,~'̝ /ᝰ;a=pܙpȄoƠLxN`ȄbP&$"poǠLp Lcp0(\\ O{aL!] LULpE]d+1(lWCLkN@$VmH EdY 5c;VY^~i'o[dZ8AZ Gk<XO\6 ܵ'غMkg ke KW775=Jڪ~l.e5x?4LHf\Ns7U'S5*ih)d_Ϙ; a[;SmU]f{>zQvt`U)Iklk|>3`f =g1oG ##۷>'JCR>a+5I [LY\=&+ ̢BiJϦv U-YʘRs1ldlnG=fTO.spx9n-VrG 2]F׻Un'|p72Y7ի͜o 郆n}t[؉yڥ&Y0*h]A]&Gz{PtbdT?nd=Qt.Onk7^u2ihWgE_܃ ߌf؇t##qr3'ӓ>Ow߸Ҙc{a'~=nߟp){~8Y{!)<_'~~1RCf&ו%irNitmN*E9}D_>% b @?[B &˱ϳ~oY~w<8ߡIFJJU&T T7QUUTUμٝ;_jm={ݼ{! 86'%1jCǐ)8~x gpl'UAI}N3r_P2. %(_\S,|Ϟ1>g6@٘va\W]BD7+} gp3&kɚG-d׊}ͷMGPq700ͨ1\BN >L5V{IrX%%B*mc7uz!7mރA}r/RFrP$xoy}.nKH?oS H5E>:4v#Y;jޮsK6C0\%YG=lKp5H8kKpkQ_K$X| FHg6W\$m| ʘ3k6WScq_y_LH?q6hKp gl| 1!뉳6WLH#qvƗઍ &D,v]m«JordFk-vmLr܄5D, Og޷|@mJg6 eQ*V;tGnDFn3u%tnJ,]t9c +UކAJ骔.tS7 nX醕nH醔ҝPCJwH)>K(]B6(kQQT:xFQ p"ޟ齢WnD)c8C(/B F fN1*?e/[Vz[p߿Wޫ/oƅtUk CxRhu'N q5>!k vSp#o#+.oS ?ށ6e70+?I< \ Oo# Y#C:tF_xp^_v`<3(}y*±/tz=8 z\B/#VkBί+mUnex[+JYH7?U ^Ե|U_G#[^ʅpN_?pW?wOd~ϫ_VC/!«?V$~ƫ?VU*^Z*p'? qJ6@kU  Gwx*xUQF>`Ivwp*j"'6 tkHT[D^\I).IjkG69wz'f'oMskZlw,mO ZoOƲL:5x{7t:c04l-P[h}l&е>WDXeoŴtSD\׺,2N7a ^=1X.pvbˮ|.ѻ.k[fc`j#cnT'bNZXwVcg|Ė V&{"O~匚w}~-)i-QmgV.³Pl= GdkݙX5rɋw+vCb6}wqp..<ⱏ8R.1Mwyh艞$Gq-ZI1-|:ev<:gŝ<ƋίxJhtMwFm;Br'^.e~g/[7ѓn };t=I9̸[,xzɜd45X7sErMLzހgh gg؅Q5 G,cc"Vdc舕 [ ̌'h3?E4'YcSF3SRe1EfVJLxJ֘ꕊR>9U"4$[c_OXYŰVbȾx}fw6bbk\h@ i~ -&RPT&e#-&i ,+BUBbe.;#O&|ki0[dB !sssy0W69[EVW̮ep >n[0lb[`a WXBa E&<~?.+_FϊZB3J~gffrb( Zns2iGsx #ukפ+M/{^׫h +M+JS#HS?14mL^/]һ߳ go{$Ρ?A瑐W>Z멱蘑ٸzW.7ۺiMݿ5sg7٤sqwA bEоRxXl !̸͞eGxI959FONNX)ȵuT|򑦘ΟR; ȸyU\it| X'T2ɯD2=4 jF1QK+C4seQrܕoEiG'`[Ole PIC dgLMETA HMPRINTfiV(;*8 &    @ ``iݜ*o?H6A^BbzbO/(fvEE>j(9jJ2 """)))000___UUUMMMBBB999 ```( +9%I;/]E:IS+!!lYQGj2ga1aS {Cg..&YQFh.IRj#SjJu3lJA7e ,N, QdoV YC6r3w_GqC-}zn#&s[ Rp$L 6n{DuqVJ4H2Aph6B"}3%6Z\H"BMXR ӕ$sVo<gX .YLg:}ߚ=VCq8SeFMjLZc"LeN?Pppiiiwwwfxю7Tvpxd?2}Dx#$_`,19م>w؁V!0ȳypQit|45'  "ArialI-"ArialK----"Small Fonts-"System-'- @-'- @-'- <-'- U-'- T --  $@@OO@$)G)G88)$!!$  $$$$33$ppp$XXhhX$AAPPA$**99*$""---'--- U---'--- @- S S-SQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQSQS"Q"S3Q3SCQCSTQTSeQeSvQvSQSQSQSQSQSQVPVPVPVPVPV2P2VTPTVvPvVPVPVPS-SS<<%%llTT==&&---'---  @---   =b&H---'--- ;a&H  2 )Q56---'--- @ &---'--- $  2 13---'--- @ ---'---    2 13---'--- @  ---'---    2 31---'--- @ 9---'--- 8  2 (44---'--- @ ---'---   2 0---'--- @ 9---'--- 8  2 (44---'--- @ N4---'--- M4  2 =50---'--- @ 9m---'--- 8m  2 p(44---'--- @ mV---'--- kV  2 Y6---'--- @ U>---'--- S>  2 A6---'--- @ >'---'--- <'  2 *73---'--- @ '---'--- %  2 9---'--- @----'--- H----'--- @---'--- 1---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- t---'--- @---'--- x]---'--- @---'--- aF---'--- @---'--- I.---'--- @---'--- 2---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- H----'--- @---'--- 1---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- t---'--- @---'--- x]---'--- @---'--- aF---'--- @---'--- I.---'--- @---'--- 2---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- H----'--- @---'--- 1---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- t---'--- @---'--- x]---'--- @---'--- aF---'--- @---'--- I.---'--- @---'--- 2---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- H----'--- @---'--- 1---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @---'--- t---'--- @---'--- x]---'--- @---'--- aF---'--- @---'--- I.---'--- @---'--- 2---'--- @---'--- ---'--- @- T =---'--- R =  2 @29---'--- @----'--- A  2 \0 2 \10 2 \20 2 \30 2 \ 40 2 \,50 2 \N60 2 \p70 2 \80 2 \90 2 \100---'--- @----'--- A 2 @D All Centers2 )FThompson 2 LSequoyah 2 kRice2 YRhoads2 RMartinez 2 ]James 2 [Earhart2 [Dunbar2 pVColonial2 Y]Carver2 B^Brown 2 +]Edison2 KAnderson---'--- @----'--- C  2 Centers---'--- @----'--- Ni 2 oPercent2 ~3---'--- @- -' @ '  'C0 ' .   x ''  "Arialw@4 bwbw0-"Arialw@ Kbwbw0--- "System 0-'- x -'- x  { a-'- x -'- X  -'- + _y-'- * Oy--  $z   z z$z  z z$z1 1 zz$zP P zz$zv v zz$z  "z"z$zP P (z(z$z> > .z.z$zee4z4z- $zU U zzU$z[ [ zz[$za a zza$zg g zzg$zn n zzn$zt t zzt$zz z zzz$zzz$z  zz---'--- + _y---'--- x -) z  ) -) z z)  ) 5 5)  )  ) M M)  )  ) e e)  )  ) } })  ) 8  8 )  )  ) P  P )  )  ) i  i )  @ z) z@ 5) 5@ ) @ ) @ e) e@ ) @ ) @ ) @ P ) P @ ) @ ) `z) z) c) z/c/z5c5z;c;zAcAzHcHzNcNzTcTzZcZz`c`z---'--- x "Arialw@ bwbw0------'---     2  83%%----'--- x -----'---      2  84%%----'--- x -----'--- & @   2 K 92%%----'--- x -----'--- , _   2 j 80%%----'--- x -----'--- 2    2  82%%----'--- x -----'--- 9B    2  87%%----'--- x -----'--- ? _   2 j 80%%----'--- x -----'--- E M   2 X 79%%----'--- x -----'--- Kt  2 40%%----'--- x -----'---  >   2 Q 85%%----'--- x -----'--- B D   2 W 87%%----'--- x -----'---  J   2 ] 97%%----'--- x -----'--- B P   2 c 87%%----'--- x -----'--- z V   2 i% 90%%----'--- x -----'---  ]   2 p 97%%----'--- x -----'--- z c   2 v% 90%%----'--- x -----'--- \ i  2 | 61%%----'--- x -----'---  o'   2 2 77%%----'--- x ----'--- y   2 i e07* 2 i 10** 2 i 20** 2 i 30** 2 i ;40** 2 i 50** 2 i 60** 2 i l 70** 2 i & 80** 2 i 90** 2 i 100***---'--- x ---'--- y  2 Q! Reputation of6*******%2 administrators/staff**?*&**&&*2 WAServe specific2*%*&**&&2 education needs***&*******&2 R Good teachers:*****&**&$2 Discipline approachf6&&********&*2 iAcademic2&***?&2  reputation******!2 Education programe2**&*******?!2 vTeaching of morale-**&****?**2 values%***&2 | Convenient6**%****2 location*&***!2 Small school sizee2?*&&***&%*---'--- x ------'---    2 Percentn-%%%)2 > !----'--- x --  { a---'---   e---'---   e--    { ..2 Traditional School Parents-*****2&***2***&.---'---   e---'---   e--    W .(2 Charter School Parents6***2&***2***&.---'---   e---'--- x --' x  '  'CompObjdObjInfohjWorkbook _1120898703mF@zKV@zKV FMicrosoft Graph 2000GBiff5MSGraph.Chart.89q Z$@B""$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_ Z$@B""$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial=X ,##0.00_ Z$@88 ``iݜ*o?H6A^BbzbO/(fvEE>j(9jJ2BBB\R3&$m'$I $S TU#Traditional School ParentsCharter School Parents+"Reputation of administrators/staffT@@U@'Serve specific education needsU@U@ Good teachersW@@X@Discipline approachT@U@Academic reputationT@V@Education programU@@X@!Teaching of moral valuesT@V@Convenient locationS@N@ Small school size D@ @S@WY8%= xd>X 4`^`3d  3Q 8Traditional School ParentsQQQ3_ O    d 4E4  3Q 0Charter School ParentsQQQ3_ O   d 4E4  3Q 8Traditional School ParentsQQQ3_   f- % i@zag\Oy Ek( DD60% d 4E4  3QQQQ3_    d 4E4  3QQQQ3_    d 4E4  3QQQQ3_4EC4  3Q Q QQ3_4E4D$% M063O&Q4$% M063O&Q4FA1T_6 3O~X[ - 3 boM&43*Y@$@@#M&4% R @M3O(&Q Percent '43d" 7m*3O8m% M3O&Q443_  NM  d 4444       X2O"#$%&'(3*+,-./01;456789:<NP>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMQRSTUVYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~ݪP}Q@a$$Ifl!vh55 5 5 #v#v :V l4 (%%%%06+,55 / / / / /  / / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l4 F%%%%%%%06+,55/ / / / / / / 4alf4pF%%%%%%%Nkd$$Ifl4֞   F%%%%%%%064 lalf4pF%%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l06,55/ / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l06,55/ / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l06,55/ / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l06,55/ / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l06,55/ / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l06,55/ / / / / / 4al $$Ifl!vh5555555#v#v:V l06,55/ / / /  / 4al{$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l (%%%%06,,5 5/ / / / /  / / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ /  / 4al{$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l (%%%%06,,5 5/ / / / /  / / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l06,5 5/ /  / 4al{$$Ifl!vh5P555#vP#v#v:V l (%%%%06,5P5/ / / / /  / / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5P555#vP#v#v:V l06,5P5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5P555#vP#v#v:V l06,5P5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5P555#vP#v#v:V l06,5P5/ /  / 4al,$$Ifl!vh5,5P5#v,#vP#v:V l4/ %%%0++,5,5P5/ / 4alf4p%%%v$$Ifl!vh5,5J555#v,#vJ#v#v#v:V l4 2%%%%%0++,55J555/ 4alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5,5J555#v,#vJ#v#v#v:V l05,5J555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5,5J555#v,#vJ#v#v#v:V l05,5J5554al$$Ifl!vh5,5J555#v,#vJ#v#v#v:V l05,5J5554al$$Ifl!vh5,5J555#v,#vJ#v#v#v:V l05,5J5554al*$$Ifl!vh5 55#v #v#v:V s4{ %%%0++5 55/ / 44 salf4p%%%^$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s4{ (%%%0++5 55/ / / 44 salf4p(%%%$$Ifl!vh5!#v!:V s405!44 salf4$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5!#v!:V s405!44 salf4$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v:V s05 5544 sal$$Ifl!vh5505#v#v0#v:V s  %%%05505/ 44 salp%%%$$Ifl!vh5505#v#v0#v:V s0550544 sal$$Ifl!vh5505#v#v0#v:V s0550544 sal$$Ifl!vh5505#v#v0#v:V s0550544 sal$$Ifl!vh5505#v#v0#v:V s0550544 salB$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{ (%%%%05/5t/ / 2 s2 44 sasf4p(%%%%$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ / 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5\#v/#v\:V s4{ %%0+,5/5\/ / 2 s2 44 sasf4p%%?$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{ (%%%0+,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4p(%%%$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{0,5/5t/ / 2 s2 44 sasf4NDd d&P   S A ? " 2 g+"JQ`!~ g+"JQ4(3K:_@DLxݚ_lE]򧤞TJ1E5-\λkc"j5"oBH}S i& zM@ԇA 6fwmK[)$滝|3}0Pq] 㣣2aYY^QD V1SпȝOjٸ| 8/o:Li ?ddwdOH}FGs [#tPz12-{0fnlY)x8J%FQYYquGƙpN羷o Ϙ z yZDeg3RŢ^nvbB6LlX3Bbb+$VKX#Fb1b%v b'] vb׈]#6DlbEdz Y9rbUĪ'^e(FiQ⑦xdi}&?gȧii$vbCĆ>H2do͐miۖfib%%m&lb dg%MX:bТ 0fU{Ҏ_& t;ᅯ 2^e!$Z;ܱk#<D{.e;֋#|b?kC.&k{iuh 9.`zCh,R7dZ~anu.*^m<;!țaP) J8&5%oj~-s9>r^V˻w4=b=ۭrJ_;ub/INAm<v qyo\ ,%u0>bg'ߠ;'7٠u;T7#)z7Hΰ>MkMRm%m~&k 45_K$-6[5pR"- GHTDL}VR[S&hKXm#|*׽V"k݆r&(.^<*~ \#_aKpUhpTntFcXBB~K #[ޅ   2 0J 37*----'--- j -----'--- :w  2 M47**----'--- j -----'--- J^  2 j61**----'--- j -----'--- I%  2 171**----'--- j -----'---     2 '! 53**----'--- j -----'--- vE   2 X39**----'--- j -----'--- P  2 34**----'--- j -----'--- 3E  2 29**----'--- j ---'--- k   2 @09* 2 50** 2 ~100*** 2 u150***---'--- j ---'--- k  2  Charter 19996*******2  Charter 20006*******2  Charter 20016*******2  Charter 20026*******2 ] State 20022******---'--- j -----'--- c "Arialw@ Dbwbw0- 2 tPercent-----'--- j - *V l---'--- %R p---'--- %R p-- .2 Standard2*****.---'--- %R p---'--- %R p-- M.'2 ^Alternative Education2***%*2**&***.---'--- %R p---'--- j --' j  '  'Workbook_1120898876}sF@KV@KVOle PRINTru)     "#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_befghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial=!*,##0.00_ Z$@` J ` J ` `p ` `p 883ffff̙̙3f3fff3f3f33333f33333\R3&$ $$ STU Charter 1999 Charter 2000 Charter 2001 Charter 2002 State 2002StandardQ@P@N@G@@X@Alternative Education=@A@C@J@@WY(#= ) >X4 =M3E2d 3Q StandardQQQ3_ O   MMd 4E4 3Q .Alternative EducationQQQ3_ O    MMd 4E4 3Q NorthQQQ3_4E4D $% M063O&Q4$% M063O&Q4FAS 4 3OK& 3 b#M&43*I@#M&! 74% W_MZ3O?&Q Percent'4523 M NM43" { P3O{ % M3O&Q423 M NM443_ M NM  MMd 444%  'M:3O&Q'4% M:3O&Q'4% M:3O&Q'4% M03O&Q'4% n M:3O&Q'4% CM:3O&Q'4% 9M:3O!&Q'4% M:3O*&Q'4% M03O&Q'44  FMicrosoft Graph 2000GBiff5MSGraph.Chart.89q4 R    j ''  "Arialw@ #bwbw0----------------------"System 0-'- j -'- j -- $y  \y\y----'--- } xy   y y ---'--- j -y   \ \yy---'--- Jb ---'--- ^! x---'--- ]0 x-- $EjVjV\E\Ej$\\$\\$B _R _R \B \B _---'--- ^! x---'--- j -y \y\b\ybybyby\y\ sy\ys#\#s\sv \v s \ ---'--- j -----'--- iA  2 |M46**----'--- j -----'--- d    2  40**----'--- j -----'--- V   2 351**----'--- j -----'--- t  2 19**----'--- j ---'--- k   2 009* 2 25** 2 50** 2 u75**---'--- j ---'--- k   2 z1999**** 2 #2000**** 2 2001**** 2 v 2002****---'--- j -----'---  c "Arialw@ Dbwbw0- 2 tPercente-----'--- j --' j  '  'CompObjdObjInfotv Workbook!_1120891230yF@KV@KV Z$@B""$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial=!*,##0.00_ Z$@` J ` J ` `p ` fm 883ffff̙̙3f3fff3f3f33333f33333\R3&$ $$ STU<@@@D@H@3@G@I@D@WY(#= 7o + >X4 =M3E2d 3Q Column 1QQQ3_ O   MMd 4E4 3Q Column 2QQQ3_ M  f- % i@za߿ߝXo( UUUU30% MMd 4E4 3Q NorthQQQ3_4E4D $% M063O&Q4$% M063O&Q4FA / 3OK 3 b#M&43*9@#M&! 74% Wu_MZ3O?&Q Percent'4523 M NM43" 3_ M NM  MMd 444% M:3O&Q'4% Y >M:3O&Q'4%  M:3O&Q'4% (gM:3O&Q'4% M03O&Q'4%  -M:3O &Q'4%  -M:3O &Q'4%  P -M:3O &Q'4%  -M:3O &Q'4% M03O&Q'44 Ole `PRINTx{= CompObjadObjInfoz|c FMicrosoft Graph 2000GBiff5MSGraph.Chart.89q Z$@B""$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,K: T     ''  "Arialw@ +bwbw0------------------ "System 0-'-  -- r !!---'---  -- $b b ----'--- c P M  b b b b ---'---  P M-  b b ---'---  ---'--- q ---'--- d ---'--- s -- $yyy$RBBRRB$***$     -$$$n n $ ^F ^F   ^-$__$77$n   n n $F   F F ---'--- d ---'---  - b   b b ---'---  -----'--- j  2 }54**----'---  -----'--- 3m  2 y74**----'---  -----'--- E  2 "Q64**----'---  -----'--- s    2 * 67**----'---  -----'--- 46  2 GB60**----'---  -----'--- sS   2 67**----'---  -----'--- O+    2  71**----'---  -----'--- DQ  2 d85**----'---  -----'---   2 -91**----'---  -----'---  ,   2 ? 89**----'---  -----'--- #z  2 78**----'---  -----'---  a   2 ,m 93**----'---  ---'---    2 03* 2 s30** 2 s60** 2 s90** 2 uI120(***---'---  ---'---   2 " All Tests2-*&&2 "Reading6*****2 "WritingK** 2 " Math=**---'---  -------'--- T?/c "Arialw@ )bwbw0- 2 CtPercent-"Arialw@ *bwbw0- 2 HPassing-----'---  - Q M---'--- L Q---'--- L Q--  g.2 #CS >=70%62,,**C.---'--- L Q---'--- L Q--  h:.2 #yCS < 70%62,**C.---'--- L Q---'--- L Q--  $ .2 #5 State2**.---'--- L Q---'---  --'   '  'Workbookd_1120891256wkF@KV@KVOle PRINT~##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial=\P ,##0.00_ Z$@` J ` J ` p ` p ` -883ffff̙̙3f3fff3f3f33333f33333\R3& STU All TestsReadingWriting MathCS >=70%K@R@P@P@CS < 70%N@S@P@Q@State@U@V@@V@@W@WY t($= 4>X43d23 M NM4 3Q CS >=70%QQQ3_ O   MMd 4E4 3Q CS < 70%QQQ3_ O    MMd 4E4 3Q StateQQQ3_ O   MMd 4E4D $% M063O&Q4$% M063O&Q4FA#:7 3OK 3 b#M&43*>@#M&! 74% EMZ3O!+&Q "Percent Passing'4523 M NM43"  $d:3O $% M3O&Q423 M NM443_ M NM  MMd 444% M03O&Q'4% {KM:3O&Q'4% M03O&Q'4% .d{KM:3O&Q'4% M03O&Q'44 \5u/ / 2 s2 44 sasf4p%%%T$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t5u#v/#vt#vu:V s4{ (%%%0$++5/5t5u/ 2 s2 44 sasf4p(%%%$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t5u#v/#vt#vu:V s4{0$5/5t5u/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t5u#v/#vt#vu:V s4{0$5/5t5u/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t5u#v/#vt#vu:V s4{0$5/5t5u/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t5u#v/#vt#vu:V s4{0$5/5t5u/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t5u#v/#vt#vu:V s4{0$5/5t5u/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t5u#v/#vt#vu:V s4{0$5/5t5u/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t5u#v/#vt#vu:V s4{0$5/5t5u/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t5u#v/#vt#vu:V s4{0$5/5t5u/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t5u#v/#vt#vu:V s4{0$5/5t5u/ / 2 s2 44 sasf4B$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{ (%%%%05/5t/ / 2 s2 44 sasf4p(%%%%$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ 2 s2 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5/5t5t5t#v/#vt:V s4{05/5t/ / 2 s2 44 sasf42$$Ifs!vh5` 555#v` #v:V s4 (%%%%0$+,5` 52 s2 44 sasf4p(%%%%$$Ifs!vh5` 555555#v` #v:V s4 F%%%%%%%0$+5` 52 s2 44 sasf4pF%%%%%%%Okd$$Ifs4֞` P@0  $ `  F%%%%%%%0$2 s2 4 sasf4pF%%%%%%%$$Ifs!vh5` 555555#v` #v:V s0$5` 52 s2 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5` 555555#v` #v:V s0$5` 52 s2 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5` 555555#v` #v:V s0$5` 52 s2 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5` 555555#v` #v:V s0$5` 52 s2 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5` 555555#v` #v:V s0$5` 52 s2 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5` 555555#v` #v:V s0$5` 52 s2 44 sasn$$If2!vh55 55"#v#v #v#v":V (%%%%0B",55 55"/ /  / / 2:44 alp(%%%%$$If2!vh55 55"#v#v #v#v":V 0B",55 55"/ / / 2:44 al$$If2!vh55 55"#v#v #v#v":V 0B",55 55"/ / 2:44 al$$If2!vh55 55"#v#v #v#v":V 0B",55 55"/ / 2:44 al$$If2!vh55 55"#v#v #v#v":V 0B",55 55"/ /  / 2:44 alZ$$Ifl!vh5 5 55#v #v #v#v:V l (%%%%05 5 55/ /  / / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 5 55#v #v #v#v:V l0,5 5 55/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 5 55#v #v #v#v:V l0,5 5 55/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 5 55#v #v #v#v:V l0,5 5 55/ / /  / 4al$$Ifl!vh5!#v!:V l40,5!/ / 4alf4P$$Ifl!vh555+ #v#v#v+ :V s4 %%%0+555+ /  / / / / 44 salf4p%%%$$Ifl!v h55`5`5`5`5`5`5`5 `#v#v `:V s4 Z%%%%%%%%%0+55 `/ / / / / /  /  44 salf4pZ%%%%%%%%%kd($$Ifs4  y 9Y! ```````` Z%%%%%%%%%0$$$$4 salf4pZ%%%%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5!#v!:V s405!/ 44 salf4"$$Ifl!v h55`5`5`5`5`5`5`5 `#v#v `:V s4055 `/ / / / / 44 salf4kd.$$Ifs4  y 9Y!````````0$$$$4 salf40$$Ifl!v h55`5`5`5`5`5`5`5 `#v#v `:V s4055 `/ / / / / /  44 salf4kd1$$Ifs4  y 9Y!````````0$$$$4 salf4$$Ifl!vh5!#v!:V s405!/ 44 salf4>$$Ifl!v h55`5`5`5`5`5`5`5 `#v#v `:V s4055 `/ / / / / /  / 44 salf4kd4$$Ifs4  y 9Y!````````0$$$$4 salf4L$$Ifl!v h55`5`5`5`5`5`5`5 `#v#v `:V s4055 `/ / / / / / / /  44 salf4kd7$$Ifs4  y 9Y!````````0$$$$4 salf4Dd  J  C A? " 2+\py;`!+\pxjJPD xYkUlv65H[ Kn$}iY(EJ ltwu6/VAE(`iK}C/${{gfls{ιds!A8fTU,̐V6M=j5(Y[Țtи[sG>\ϝ½C\>{ ˜ )cэv)>Pla>;|AHpg<`YHհvX"Z^/GJ΀F Az3I$9wHv8#XZ"]`T>+1X&Hnc~YF[I?]c9Kj@{<"qU< GHz y& xӧo1'S]4eKf9 vѽ=);$g?M,9wHVL6"&+LFgq!-}9䷐ճv#D-dmy"ɾ C~ qrn7q[9SH;*KWкe.uIKM"Xz >wKZukZ*uKZ篅W;\'Rh&p\դl6q\apǟe(?A?$ E} %vS ?Hfol56MG4 ߋ&"pA_ǻ(;] OcD<58N. "ONb"A,~+Z)׍@ɩV^SVRb wxPgOʕ|yg:$$fSjT*ފ+xլb\=>RU4ߦ963oad:sxov/ƺw-lxC{/拕b}NXvWuswF~U\x=#:|ާ\a;+л.vxP88wq\eL~YΕTLmhܥ K#L.|[:;2C=ma>ygGD $$If!vh5@ 5 5 #v@ #v #v :V 4 %%%0"+5@ 5 5 2 s2 44 asf4p%%% $$If!v h5@ 555*55555 #v@ #v#v#v*#v#v#v#v :V 4 Z%%%%%%%%%0"+5@ 555*5555 2 s2 44 asf4pZ%%%%%%%%%kdA$$If4 @ zJ" @ * Z%%%%%%%%%0"$$$$2 s2 4 asf4pZ%%%%%%%%%$$If!vh5@ 5#v@ #v:V 40"5@ 52 s44 asf4'$$If!v h5@ 555155555 #v@ #v#v1#v#v#v#v :V 0", 5@ 5515555 2 s2 44 askdGG$$If @ zJ"@ 10"$$$$2 s2 4 as'$$If!v h5@ 555155555 #v@ #v#v1#v#v#v#v :V 0", 5@ 5515555 2 s2 44 askdeJ$$If @ zJ"@ 10"$$$$2 s2 4 as'$$If!v h5@ 555155555 #v@ #v#v1#v#v#v#v :V 0", 5@ 5515555 2 s2 44 askdM$$If @ zJ"@ 10"$$$$2 s2 4 as'$$If!v h5@ 555155555 #v@ #v#v1#v#v#v#v :V 0", 5@ 5515555 2 s2 44 askdP$$If @ zJ"@ 10"$$$$2 s2 4 as'$$If!v h5@ 555155555 #v@ #v#v1#v#v#v#v :V 0", 5@ 5515555 2 s2 44 askdS$$If @ zJ"@ 10"$$$$2 s2 4 as'$$If!v h5@ 555155555 #v@ #v#v1#v#v#v#v :V 0", 5@ 5515555 2 s2 44 askdV$$If @ zJ"@ 10"$$$$2 s2 4 as$$If!vh5@ 5#v@ #v:V 40",5@ 52 s44 asf4$$If!v h5@ 555*55555 #v@ #v#v*#v :V 0", 5@ 55*5 2 s2 44 askdZ$$If @  zJ"@ *0"$$$$2 s2 4 as$$If!v h5@ 555*55555 #v@ #v#v*#v :V 0", 5@ 55*5 2 s2 44 askd]$$If @  zJ"@ *0"$$$$2 s2 4 as$$If!v h5@ 555*55555 #v@ #v#v*#v :V 0", 5@ 55*5 2 s2 2 44 askd`$$If @  zJ"@ *0"$$$$2 s2 2 4 as$$If!v h5@ 555*55555 #v@ #v#v*#v :V 0", 5@ 55*5 2 s2 44 askdc$$If @  zJ"@ *0"$$$$2 s2 4 asDd  J  C A? "2d'C˶Ȳ!v@f`!8'C˶Ȳ!vxjJPD xWkAf1mj$"T&4`EЃx$ 'DAmmAμqM &d $N5A Iњ}$j3PBGw2ߏjrT ySxԧG/4=3գwX+S07.qX(Kx!EwyDžG+RKCD(Oa5.r=\_j,ClIDD^!ځDed쑮LOOk?P,Mڜ_bqRFXׯed$_}5kb CS<=ý(c#,R5X|Ī4ƲbU7 ,*8zRvNLLHXC}yBH7|oNa6/HYg$$Ifl!vh555555#v#v:V s <%%%%%%0 %55/ / 44 salp<%%%%%%kdj$$Ifsֈ  Y% <%%%%%%0 %4 salp<%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh555555#v#v:V s0 %55/ 44 sal$$Ifl!vh555555#v#v:V s0 %55/ / 44 sal$$Ifl!vh5 %#v %:V s40 %5 %/ / 44 salf4D$$Ifl!vh5 55F5#v #v#vF#v:V l  (0,5 55F5/ / 4alp($$Ifl!vh5#v:V l40,5/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 55F5#v #v#vF#v:V l05 55F5/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5 55F5#v #v#vF#v:V l05 55F54al$$Ifl!vh5 55F5#v #v#vF#v:V l05 55F54al$$Ifl!vh5 55F5#v #v#vF#v:V l05 55F5/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5 55F5#v #v#vF#v:V l05 55F5/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 55F5#v #v#vF#v:V l05 55F5/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5 55F5#v #v#vF#v:V l05 55F54al$$Ifl!vh5 55F5#v #v#vF#v:V l05 55F54al$$Ifl!vh5 55F5#v #v#vF#v:V l05 55F54al4Dd !J  C A? "2>?L}Hrz`!j>?L}H PxQ@'8xZMl[Ef?'$! B$mg)DH 4$MSBhREPHVrDK$T$T #8 P-fwq@4~f3̎wMV6k=ԫBRD#lG! gI’zT5k|NmGSeL]C#{ծ7$ifG_G|e L*UwUҀ@֋|"E,,i{H^ْp?)X/ ͥza9`^!_}+xZu}ZR;z QlUM(%`Rzggg M'h*30]] C{T)=,Q&܌#W#G./nxqk0\E'p=o`LőOU?Y\C뿣Mb e:sn; =7OK#h?YE"ݿ_-*~o> ,|C]pxmy^yWn޻_q\c8##T:%,]ƃnRZ_J6|uTCwW&2ᴒ*)]Zf#_/ ߨv,7++S_s'"s"{"@jDĒWѼx"y*Q퀬J,'xR[JT^ lls<]k +k׮P=J>ÞjHȵ= 70%62,,**C2 " CS < 70%62,**C$2 "; All Charter Schools26***2&***&---'---  -----'--- S/c "Arialw@ ξbwbw0- 2 GtNumber-----'---  - Q ---'--- L ---'--- L --  .2 #"Students2****&.---'--- L ---'--- L --  t.2 # TAAS Scores-2222&**&.---'--- L ---'---  --'   '  'CompObjdObjInfoWorkbook1TableQ Z$@B""$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial=\P ,##0.00_ Z$@` J ` J ` p ` n '` p 883ffff̙̙3f3fff3f3f33333f33333\R3& STU CS >= 70%CS < 70%All Charter SchoolsStudents@+@ @@ TAAS Scoresش@@)@WY t($= 8 >X43d 3Q StudentsQQQ3_ O   MMd 4E4 3Q  TAAS ScoresQQQ3_ O    MMd 4E4 3Q StateQQQ3_ M  f- % i@za3x!tV$d( 10% MMd 4E4D $% M063O&Q4$% M063O&Q4FA+:0 3O{ 3 b#M&43*j@@@#M&! 74% E*MZ3O*&Q Number'4523 M NM43" $N:3O$% M3O&Q423 M NM443_ M NM  MMd 444%  KM:3O$&Q'4% M03O&Q'4% ~ KM:3O&Q'4% O KM:3O$&Q'4% M03O&Q'4% M03O&Q'4% CM:3O&Q'44   /ځ$$IfH!vh555#v#v:V H4  0#+,55/ / 44 HaHf4p$$IfH!v h555555555 #v#v :V H4  Z0#+55 / /  44 HaHf4pZkd*$$IfH4 ^ VN #            Z0#$$$$4 HaHf4pZ$$IfH!v h555555555 #v#v :V H0#55 /  44 HaH$$IfH!v h555555555 #v#v :V H0#55 44 HaH$$IfH!v h555555555 #v#v :V H0#55 44 HaH$$IfH!v h555555555 #v#v :V H0#55 44 HaHi$$Ifs!vh55555#v#v:V s4 20#,,55/ / / 44 sasf4p2!$$Ifs!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V s4  Z0#, 55555555 / /  44 sasf4pZkd$$Ifs4  dP  !#  Z0#$$$$4 sasf4pZ8$$Ifs!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V s0#55555555 / 44 sas*$$Ifs!v h555555555 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v#v :V s0#55555555 44 sasP$$Ifl!vh5` 5 5@ #v` #v #v@ :V l4  06+,5` 5 5@ /  / / / / 4alf4p$$Ifl!vh5` 5585R5#v` #v#v8#vR#v:V l4 206+5` 5585R5/ / / / / 4alf4p2$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l4  F06+5` 558555/ / / / / 4alf4pF@kd$$Ifl4֞` >T# ` 8  F064 lalf4pF$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l4065#/ 4alf4L$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / / 4al>$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / 4alL$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l4065#/ 4alf4L$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / / 4al>$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / 4alL$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l4065#/ 4alf4L$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / / 4al>$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / 4alL$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l4065#/ 4alf4L$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / / 4al>$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / 4alL$$Ifl!vh5` 5558555#v` #v#v8#v#v#v:V l065` 558555/ / / / / / 4ali$$Ifl!vh5@ 5T585T5#v@ #vT#v8#vT#v:V l4 2%%%%%0+++,5@ 5T585T54alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5@ 5*5*585*5*5#v@ #v*#v8#v*#v:V l4 F%%%%%%%0+++,,5@ 5*585*54alf4pF%%%%%%%=kd)$$Ifl4֞@ j  !@ ** 8**  F%%%%%%%04 lalf4pF%%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5@ 5*5*585*5*5#v@ #v*#v8#v*#v:V l05@ 5*585*54al$$Ifl!vh5@ 5*5*585*5*5#v@ #v*#v8#v*#v:V l05@ 5*585*54al$$Ifl!vh5@ 5*5*585*5*5#v@ #v*#v8#v*#v:V l05@ 5*585*54al$$Ifl!vh5@ 5*5*585*5*5#v@ #v*#v8#v*#v:V l05@ 5*585*54al$$Ifl!vh5@ 5*5*585*5*5#v@ #v*#v8#v*#v:V l05@ 5*585*54alb$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v#v:V l 20,5 555/ / 4alp2$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v#v:V l05 555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5 5555#v #v#v#v:V l05 5554alDd !J  C A? "29Q2 v+}zSv `;nn t΍?,3Qf<"ua0 *N>^9<)Rjo[ֆg,D_,[j#fրW`XIJU)F7N0'4.!IŤ 綉5-,eh椬Ƥx9kw̱}݈wmo&vԩتV d% 6o0X`9K_['Ln "kț&漉/k˛X&79յa΢;c0ݭg}^co?u|^*%|xMCp†jkvsqoSPu.& .d7k `^rpドVϳv\tq&܁V7/)^\` 3%qbU^"N_^ =*sq˳~6<'JRTJ?PES}+BLN893>v8swSYSn0vڪOYd~trřB's4 GoQ,\k(:XMRi*o9o,yGt>n^_?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnoprstuvwxyz{|}~ $$If!v h555555555 #v :V 0p#5 2 s44  $$Ifs!vh5 55 #v #v#v :V s4  0+5 55 44 sasf4po$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s4  F0+52 44 sasf4pFFkd$$Ifs4֞    F02 4 sasf4pF$$Ifs!vh5#v:V s4052 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5#v:V s4052 44 sasf4$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sas$$Ifs!vh5555555#v:V s052 44 sasp$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l 2%%%%%0,55z5s/ / / / 4alp2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V lA055z5s/ / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55z5s5s5s#v#vz#vs:V l055z5s/ / 4al<$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l4 (%%%%0,5 5/ /  / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l405 5/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l05 5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l05 5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l05 5/ /  / 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh55z #v#vz :V l4 %%06+,55z / / /  / 4alf4p%%$$Ifl!vh55=5=#v#v=:V l4 %%06+55=/ / 4alf4p%%$$Ifl!vh55=5=#v#v=:V l40655=/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh55=5=#v#v=:V l40655=/ / / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh55=5=#v#v=:V l40655=/ / / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh55=5=#v#v=:V l40655=/ / /  / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5V#vV:V l4065V/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh55#v#v:V l4 %%06+,55/  / / 4alf4p%%$$Ifl!vh55S5I5e5#v#vS#vI#ve#v:V l4 2%%%%%06+55S5I5e5/  / / / / 4alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh55*5)5055;5*5#v#v*#v)#v0#v#v;#v*#v:V l4 P%%%%%%%%06+55*5)5055;5*5/ / / 4alf4pP%%%%%%%%kdk1$$Ifl4ִ- V  *)0;* P%%%%%%%%06    4 lalf4pP%%%%%%%%A$$Ifl!vh55*5)5055;5*5#v#v*#v)#v0#v#v;#v*#v:V l0655*5)5055;5*5/ / / 4alA$$Ifl!vh55*5)5055;5*5#v#v*#v)#v0#v#v;#v*#v:V l0655*5)5055;5*5/ /  / 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l4065/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh55 #v#v :V l4 %%0+,55 / / 4alf4p%%$$Ifl!vh55V5V5V#v#vV:V l4 (%%%%0+55V/ 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh55V5V5V#v#vV:V l055V4al$$Ifl!vh55V5V5V#v#vV:V l0,55V4al$$Ifl!vh55V5V5V#v#vV:V l055V4al$$Ifl!vh55V5V5V#v#vV:V l055V4al$$Ifl!vh55V5V5V#v#vV:V l055V4al$$Ifl!vh55V5V5V#v#vV:V l055V4al$$Ifl!vh55V5V5V#v#vV:V l055V/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 5h#v #vh:V l4 %%0+,5 5h/ / /  / 4alf4p%%W$$Ifl!vh5 5 55T#v #v #v#vT:V l4 (%%%0+5 5 55T/ / / 4alf4p(%%%$$Ifl!vh5 55555*5*#v #v#v#v*:V l4 F%%%%%%0+5 555*/ / / / 4alf4pF%%%%%%=kdB$$Ifl4֞ & ,4^  ** F%%%%%%04 lalf4pF%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 55555*5*#v #v#v#v*:V l05 555*/ / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 55555*5*#v #v#v#v*:V l05 555*/ / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 55555*5*#v #v#v#v*:V l05 555*/ / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 55555*5*#v #v#v#v*:V l05 555*/ / / /  / 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 5*#v #v*:V l4 %%0+,5 5*/ / /  / 4alf4p%%;$$Ifl!vh5 555#v #v:V l4 (%%%0+5 5/ / / 4alf4p(%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l4 F%%%%%%0+5 5/ / / / 4alf4pF%%%%%%=kdRN$$Ifl4֞ .<J   F%%%%%%04 lalf4pF%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l405 5/ / / / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l05 5/ / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l05 5/ / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 555555#v #v:V l05 5/ / / / /  / 4al$$Ifl!vh5J#vJ:V l405J/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 5#v #v:V l4 %%0+,5 5/ / /  / 4alf4p%%;$$Ifl!vh5 5Z5Z5Z#v #vZ:V l4 (%%%0+5 5Z/ / / 4alf4p(%%%$$Ifl!vh5 5-5-5-5-5-5-#v #v-:V l4 F%%%%%%0+5 5-/ / / / 4alf4pF%%%%%%=kdEY$$Ifl4֞ M z.  ------ F%%%%%%04 lalf4pF%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 5-5-5-5-5-5-#v #v-:V l405 5-/ / / / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 5-5-5-5-5-5-#v #v-:V l05 5-/ / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 5-5-5-5-5-5-#v #v-:V l05 5-/ / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 5-5-5-5-5-5-#v #v-:V l05 5-/ / / / /  / 4al$$Ifl!vh5.#v.:V l405./ / 4alf4#$$Ifl!vh5r55#vr#v:V l4 %%%0+,5r5/ / / 4alf4p%%%u$$Ifl!vh5r5555#vr#v#v#v#v:V l4 2%%%%%0+5r5555/ / 4alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5r5555#vr#v#v#v#v:V l05r55554al$$Ifl!vh5r5555#vr#v#v#v#v:V l05r55554al$$Ifl!vh5r5555#vr#v#v#v#v:V l05r55554al$$Ifl!vh5r5555#vr#v#v#v#v:V l05r55554al$$Ifl!vh5r5555#vr#v#v#v#v:V l05r5555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5r5555#vr#v#v#v#v:V l05r5555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5r5555#vr#v#v#v#v:V l05r5555/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5 !#v !:V l405 !/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh55~ #v#v~ :V l4 %%0+,55~ / / 4alf4p%%G$$Ifl!vh55T5*#v#vT#v*:V l4 %%%0+55T5*/ / / / / 4alf4p%%%s$$Ifl!vh55*5*5*#v#v*:V l4 (%%%%0+55*/ / / / / / / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh55*5*5*#v#v*:V l055*/ / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh55*5*5*#v#v*:V l055*/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh55*5*5*#v#v*:V l0,55*/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh55*5*5*#v#v*:V l055*/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh55*5*5*#v#v*:V l055*/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh55*5*5*#v#v*:V l055*/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh55*5*5*#v#v*:V l055*/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh55*5*5*#v#v*:V l055*/ / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5l#vl:V l405l/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5\ 5T#v\ #vT:V l4 %%0+,5\ 5T/ / 4alf4p%%$$Ifl!vh5\ 5*5*#v\ #v*:V l4 %%%0+5\ 5*/ / 4alf4p%%%$$Ifl!vh5\ 5*5*#v\ #v*:V l05\ 5*/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 5*5*#v\ #v*:V l05\ 5*/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 5*5*#v\ #v*:V l05\ 5*/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5\ 5*5*#v\ #v*:V l05\ 5*/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ / 4alf4#$$Ifl!vh555#v#v:V l4 %%%0+,55/ / / 4alf4p%%%u$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l4 2%%%%%0+55555/ / 4alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l0555554al$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l055555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l0555554al$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l055555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l055555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l055555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l0555554al$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l0555554al$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l0555554al$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l055555/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5^#v^:V l405^/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh55 #v#v :V l4 %%0+,55 / / 4alf4p%%5$$Ifl!vh555#v#v#v:V l4 %%%0+,555/ / / 4alf4p%%%a$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l4 (%%%%0+,55/ / / / / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0,55/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0,55/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0,55/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5555#v#v:V l0,55/ / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5z#vz:V l405z/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5V5 #vV#v :V l4 %%0+,5V5 / / 4alf4p%%$$Ifl!vh5V55#vV#v#v:V l4 %%%0+,5V55/ 4alf4p%%%7$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l4 (%%%%0+,5V5/ / 4alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5V555#vV#v:V l0,5V5/ / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5x5#vx#v:V l4 %%0,5x5/ / 4alf4p%%$$Ifl!vh5x5#vx#v:V l0,5x54al$$Ifl!vh5x5#vx#v:V l0,5x54al$$Ifl!vh5x5#vx#v:V l0,5x54al$$Ifl!vh5x5#vx#v:V l0,5x54al$$Ifl!vh5x5#vx#v:V l0,5x54al$$Ifl!vh5x5#vx#v:V l0,5x5/ / 4al$$Ifl!vh5d#vd:V l405d/ / 4alf4Q$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V l (%%%%N5` 55F5/ / / / /  / / 4alp(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN,5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ /  / / / /  / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN,5` 55F5/ / / / /  / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ / / / / / / 4al$$Ifl!vh5` 55F5#v` #v#vF#v:V lN5` 55F5/ /  / / / /  / 4alU$$Ifl!vh5N#vN:V lN5N/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5,5F5F5#v,#vF#v:V l4 (%%%%05,5F54alf4p(%%%%$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l4054alf4$$Ifl!vh5,5F5F5#v,#vF#v:V l405,5F54alf4$$Ifl!vh5,5F5F5#v,#vF#v:V l405,5F54alf4$$Ifl!vh5,5F5F5#v,#vF#v:V l405,5F54alf4$$Ifl!vh5,5F5F5#v,#vF#v:V l405,5F54alf4$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l4054alf4$$Ifl!vh5,5F5F5#v,#vF#v:V l405,5F54alf4$$Ifl!vh5,5F5F5#v,#vF#v:V l405,5F54alf4$$Ifl!vh5,5F5F5#v,#vF#v:V l405,5F54alf4)$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l %%%0h%6,55j5|/ /  / 4ap%%%$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ / 4a$$If!vh55j5|#v#vj#v|:V l0h%655j5|/ /  / 4a"$$Ifl!vh5, 55H#v, #v#vH:V l4 %%%H$+5, 55H/ / / /  / / 4alf4p%%%X$$Ifl!vh5, 5P55555*5#v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v*#v:V l4 P%%%%%%%%H$+++++5, 5P55555*5/ / / / / / / / / / / 4alf4pP%%%%%%%%+kd$$Ifl4ִ, |@j H$ , P```*` P%%%%%%%%H$    4 lalf4pP%%%%%%%%j$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4 d%%%%%%%%%%H$+++++ 5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4pd%%%%%%%%%%kd-$$Ifl4 , |@j H$ , P   *  d%%%%%%%%%%H$((((4 lalf4pd%%%%%%%%%%n$$Ifl!vh5H$#vH$:V l4H$5H$/ /  4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4n$$Ifl!vh5H$#vH$:V l4H$5H$/  / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / /  4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / / 4alf4l$$Ifl!v h5, 5P5555555 *5 #v, #vP#v#v#v#v#v#v *#v :V l4H$5, 5P555555 *5 / /  / / / / /  4alf4`$$Ifl!vh5H$#vH$:V l4H$5H$/ 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5R 5"555H5y5#vR #v"#v#v#vH#vy#v:V l4 F%%%%%%%0#+5R 5"555H5y5/ / /  / / 4alf4pF%%%%%%%Bkd$$Ifl4֞R t NN#`R "Hy F%%%%%%%0#4 lalf4pF%%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l4 P%%%%%%%%0#+5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / / / 4alf4pP%%%%%%%%~kd$$Ifl4ִR t NN# R "RfHy P%%%%%%%%0#    4 lalf4pP%%%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l40#,5#/  4alf46$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / 4alf46$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / 4alf46$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / 4alf46$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / 4alf4D$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / / 4alf4D$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / / 4alf4D$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / / 4alf4R$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / /  / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l40#,5#/  / 4alf4I$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / / 4alf4;$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / 4alf4;$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / 4alf4;$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / 4alf4I$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / / 4alf4I$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / / 4alf4W$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / /  / 4alf4W$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ / /  / 4alf4I$$Ifl!vh5R 5"55R5f5H5y5#vR #v"#v#vR#vf#vH#vy#v:V l40#5R 5"55R5f5H5y5/ /  / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5##v#:V l40#5#/ / 4alf4W$$Ifl!vh5X55#vX#v#v:V l4 %%%0(#++,5X55/ / /  / / 4alf4p%%%$$Ifl!vh5X55555#vX#v#v:V l4J <%%%%%%0(#++5X55/ / / / / 4alf4p<%%%%%% kdn $$Ifl4JֈX`h(# X  <%%%%%%0(#4 lalf4p<%%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5(##v(#:V l40(#5(#/  / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5;55555#v;#v#v:V l40(#5;55/ / / / / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5;55555#v;#v#v:V l40(#5;55/ / / / / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5(##v(#:V l40(#,5(#/  / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5;55555#v;#v#v:V l40(#,5;55/ / / / / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5;55555#v;#v#v:V l40(#,5;55/ / / / / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5(##v(#:V l40(#,5(#/  / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5;55555#v;#v#v:V l40(#,5;55/ / / / / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5;55555#v;#v#v:V l40(#,5;55/ / / / / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5(##v(#:V l40(#5(#/ /  4alf4D$$Ifl!vh5;55555#v;#v#v:V l40(#,5;55/  / / / / / / / 4alf4D$$Ifl!vh5;55555#v;#v#v:V l40(#,5;55/  / / / / / /  / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5(##v(#:V l40(#5(#/ / 4alf4E$$IfU!vh5 5@ 5@ #v #v@ :V l4 %%%0$[+,,5 5@ /  / / / / af4p%%%T$$IfU!vh5 5555#v #v:V l4 2%%%%%0$[+,,5 5/ / / / / / af4p2%%%%%T$$IfU!vh5 5555#v #v:V l40$[,5 5/ / / / af4T$$IfU!vh5 5555#v #v:V l0$[,5 5/ / / / aT$$IfU!vh5 5555#v #v:V l0$[,5 5/ / / / aT$$IfU!vh5 5555#v #v:V l0$[,5 5/ / / / aT$$If!vh5)$#v)$:V l40$5)$/ / 4af4T$$If!vh5%#v%:V l:0 &+5%/  / 4aTS$$If!vh55- 5 #v#v- #v :V l4 %%%0 & +,,55- 5 /  / / / / af4p%%%T$$If!vh555I55$#v#v#vI#v#v$:V l4 2%%%%%0 &+,,555I55$/ / / / / / af4p2%%%%%T$$If!vh5%#v%:V l40 &+5%af4T$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh5%#v%:V l40 &+5%af4T$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aT$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / aTH$$If!vh555A55 #v#v#vA#v#v :V l0 &+,555A55 / / / / / / / / aT$$If!vh5%#v%:V l40 &+5%/ / af4T$$Ifl!vh5`55F#v`#v#vF:V l4 %%%0F%,5`55F/ 4alf4p%%%$$Ifl!vh5`55F#v`#v#vF:V l40F%5`55F4alf4$$Ifl!vh5`55F#v`#v#vF:V l40F%5`55F4alf4$$Ifl!vh5`55F#v`#v#vF:V l40F%5`55F4alf4$$Ifl!vh5`55F#v`#v#vF:V l40F%5`55F4alf4$$Ifl!vh5`55F#v`#v#vF:V l40F%5`55F4alf4$$Ifl!vh5`55F#v`#v#vF:V l40F%5`55F4alf4$$Ifl!vh5F%#vF%:V l40F%5F%/ / 4alf4$$Ifl!vh5 55#v #v#v:V l4 %%%0J&+,5 554alf4p%%%{$$Ifl!vh5 55T5;5#v #v#vT#v;#v:V l4 2%%%%%0J&+,5 55T5;5/ / 4alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l4 Z%%%%%%%%%0J&+, 5 5T5*5v5T55H55 */ 4alf4pZ%%%%%%%%%kdH$$Ifl4 (- #J&  T*vTH* Z%%%%%%%%%0J&$$$$4 lalf4pZ%%%%%%%%%;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kdbM$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kdP$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kdS$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kdV$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kdY$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kd]$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kd@`$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4I$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 */ 4alf4kdec$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4W$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 */ / 4alf4kdf$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4I$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 */ 4alf4kdi$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kd m$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kd1p$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kdVs$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kd{v$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kdy$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4I$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 */ 4alf4kd|$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4W$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 */ / 4alf4kd$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4I$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 */ 4alf4kd9$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4;$$Ifl!v h5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *#v #vT#v*#vv#vT#v#vH#v#v *:V l40J&,5 5T5*5v5T55H55 *4alf4kdl$$Ifl4 (- #J& T*vTH*0J&$$$$4 lalf4=$$Ifl!vh5 5 585#v #v #v8#v:V l4 (%%%%0+++,5 5 5854alf4p(%%%%i$$Ifl!vh5 5n5o585#v #vn#vo#v8#v:V l4 2%%%%%0+++,5 5n5o5854alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 5n5o585#v #vn#vo#v8#v:V l05 5n5o5854al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l4054alf4$$Ifl!vh5 5n5o585#v #vn#vo#v8#v:V l05 5n5o5854al$$Ifl!vh5 5n5o585#v #vn#vo#v8#v:V l05 5n5o5854al$$Ifl!vh5 5n5o585#v #vn#vo#v8#v:V l05 5n5o5854al$$Ifl!vh5 5n5o585#v #vn#vo#v8#v:V l05 5n5o5854al$$Ifl!vh5 5n5o585#v #vn#vo#v8#v:V l05 5n5o5854al$$Ifl!vh5 5n5o585#v #vn#vo#v8#v:V l05 5n5o5854al$$Ifl!vh5 5n5o585#v #vn#vo#v8#v:V l05 5n5o585/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ / 4alf4=$$Ifl!vh5 52 585#v #v2 #v8#v:V l4 (%%%%0+++,5 52 5854alf4p(%%%%U$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l4 2%%%%%0+++5 55854alf4p2%%%%%$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 55854al$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 55854al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l4054alf4$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 55854al$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 55854al$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 55854al$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 55854al$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 55854al$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 55854al$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 55854al$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 55854al$$Ifl!vh5 55585#v #v#v8#v:V l05 5585/ 4al$$Ifl!vh5#v:V l405/ / 4alf4*$$If!vh5>5 5858#v>#v #v8:V l4 (%%%%0:#+++,5>5 584f4p(%%%%B$$If!vh5>5F5F5858#v>#vF#v8:V l4 2%%%%%0:#+++5>5F584f4p2%%%%%$$If!vh5:##v:#:V l40:#5:#4f4$$If!vh5>5F5F5858#v>#vF#v8:V l0:#5>5F584$$If!vh5>5F5F5858#v>#vF#v8:V l0:#5>5F584$$If!vh5>5F5F5858#v>#vF#v8:V l0:#5>5F584$$If!vh5:##v:#:V l40:#5:#4f4$$If!vh5>5F5F5858#v>#vF#v8:V l0:#5>5F584$$If!vh5>5F5F5858#v>#vF#v8:V l0:#5>5F584$$If!vh5>5F5F5858#v>#vF#v8:V l0:#5>5F584$$If!vh5>5F5F5858#v>#vF#v8:V l0:#5>5F584$$If!vh5>5F5F5858#v>#vF#v8:V l0:#5>5F58/ 4$$If!vh5:##v:#:V l40:#5:#/ / 4f49DdaH\  c 8Aex5E_Pic7r*s,ZLdk^ez]*s,ZLdk^($.$.BB 0"bJ:b ^d̏)*YSEsֲ@ 0RL sA4m*TgPD!@ @R0q;^ A(նR8t$d #@]@Dd< ^  c :Aex5E_Pic24r1)3'DZ+}#z1)3'DZ+}(<$.$.0 @8@?xg????~~p~x?x8>x>1<x`x8?<?@ 8y>?? ??>8Dd< ^  c :Aex5E_Pic29r;_B7w,¶z;_B7w,(<$.$.?<<>> o^>??~???o?'|? ?p<??????~?0??~x?~~<?~@~x~?x~|><<<> @ Dd< ^  c :Aex5E_Pic33r`ƣE%Jaz`ƣE%J(<p$.$.?x<>$>?<p~?>~?>??`pp? 8?x<>xx?x8?x_<?8~|x|A?|~p?p~x<8x|<p Dd< ^  c :Aex5E_Pic36r\PLT떺z\PLT떺(<$.$.<=`^1 6`??? ?p`~xpp~xx8<?x?<>x>><<<@~@0 1??|0? > $$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s P%%%%%%%%0252 5`5A55`55G44 spP%%%%%%%%skdK$$Ifsִ `"#'W,12 `A`GG P%%%%%%%%02    4 sapP%%%%%%%%$$If!vh52#v2:V s4025244 sf4$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh52 5`5A55`55G5G#v2 #v`#vA#v#v`#v#vG:V s0252 5`5A55`55G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s P%%%%%%%%0b25 5`5A5555G44 spP%%%%%%%%skd$$Ifsִv #a',1 `AGG P%%%%%%%%0b2    4 sapP%%%%%%%%$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrtuvwxyz{|}~v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5`5A5555G5G#v #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0b25 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s P%%%%%%%%0{15 5-5A5555G44 spP%%%%%%%%skd$$Ifsִ DG"z&+1 -AGG P%%%%%%%%0{1    4 sapP%%%%%%%%$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5-5A5555G5G#v #v-#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 5-5A5555G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s P%%%%%%%%0c253 55A55X55G44 spP%%%%%%%%skd7I$$Ifsִ [^#b',13 AXGG P%%%%%%%%0c2    4 sapP%%%%%%%%$$If!vh5c2#vc2:V s40c25c244 sf4$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh53 55A55X55G5G#v3 #v#vA#v#vX#v#vG:V s0c253 55A55X55G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s P%%%%%%%%0{15 55A5555G44 spP%%%%%%%%skd2q$$IfsִW !b$"z&+1 AGG P%%%%%%%%0{1    4 sapP%%%%%%%%$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 55A5555G5G#v #v#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0{15 55A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s P%%%%%%%%025 5}5A5555G44 spP%%%%%%%%skd$$Ifsִ R#',2 }AGG P%%%%%%%%02    4 sapP%%%%%%%%$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5 5}5A5555G5G#v #v}#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s025 5}5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s P%%%%%%%%0k25j 5`5A5555G44 spP%%%%%%%%skd4$$Ifsִ WZ#j',1j `AGG P%%%%%%%%0k2    4 sapP%%%%%%%%$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s$$If!vh5j 5`5A5555G5G#vj #v`#vA#v#v#v#vG:V s0k25j 5`5A5555G44 s"$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 2%%%%%065 54p2%%%%%$$If!vh52#v2:V l406524f4$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54"$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 2%%%%%065 54p2%%%%%$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54"$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 2%%%%%065 54p2%%%%%$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54"$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 2%%%%%065 54p2%%%%%$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh52#v2:V l406524f4$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54"$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 2%%%%%065 54p2%%%%%$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54"$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 2%%%%%065 54p2%%%%%$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54"$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 2%%%%%065 54p2%%%%%$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54"$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 2%%%%%065 54p2%%%%%$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54"$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l 2%%%%%065 54p2%%%%%$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5 5555#v #v:V l065 54$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l065h%4Ts$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh5#v:V l40654af4<$$If!vh5 5555556#v #v#v#v#v#v#v6:V l406,5>555555[/ / / 4af4$$If!v h555555555 5 5 #v#v#v#v#v#v#v #v :V l06,5555555 5 5 / / / / / /  / 4a3kd$$Ifl .8$ W06,,,,4 la$$If!vh5#v:V l4065~4af4<$$If!vh5 5555552#v #v#v#v#v#v#v2:V l406,5:555555:/ / / 4af4b$$If!v h555555555 5 5 #v#v#v#v#v#v #v :V l06555555 5 / / / /  4a3kd$$Ifl .8* Y06,,,,4 las$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh555#v#v#v:V l4+,5554f4T$$If!vh55v5v555#v#vv#v:V l4+,55v5/ 4f4T0$$If!vh55v5v555#v#vv#v:V l <&&&&&&,55v5/ 4p<&&&&&&T$$If!vh55v5v555#v#vv#v:V l,55v54T"$$If!vh55v5v555#v#vv#v:V l <&&&&&&,55v54p<&&&&&&T$$If!vh55v5v555#v#vv#v:V l,55v54T"$$If!vh55v5v555#v#vv#v:V l <&&&&&&,55v54p<&&&&&&T$$If!vh55v5v555#v#vv#v:V l,55v54T"$$If!vh55v5v555#v#vv#v:V l <&&&&&&,55v54p<&&&&&&T$$If!vh55v5v555#v#vv#v:V l,55v54Ts$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p )$$If!vh55*5n5-5l5#v#v*#vn#v-#vl#v:V l4F0$)v,,55*5n5-5l5/ / 4af4T$$If!vh55*5n5-5l5#v#v*#vn#v-#vl#v:V l <&&&&&&0$,55*5n5-5l5/ / 4ap<&&&&&&Tkd$$IfTlֈSm"&**n-l <&&&&&&0$4 lap<&&&&&&T$$If!vh55*5n5-5l5#v#v*#vn#v-#vl#v:V l0$,55*5n5-5l5/ 4aT$$If!vh55*5n5-5l5#v#v*#vn#v-#vl#v:V l <&&&&&&0$,55*5n5-5l5/ 4ap<&&&&&&Tkd=$$IfTlֈSm"&**n-l <&&&&&&0$4 lap<&&&&&&T$$If!vh55*5n5-5l5#v#v*#vn#v-#vl#v:V l0$,55*5n5-5l5/ 4aT$$If!vh55*5n5-5l5#v#v*#vn#v-#vl#v:V l <&&&&&&0$,55*5n5-5l5/ 4ap<&&&&&&Tkdݾ$$IfTlֈSm"&**n-l <&&&&&&0$4 lap<&&&&&&T$$If!vh55*5n5-5l5#v#v*#vn#v-#vl#v:V l0$,55*5n5-5l5/ 4aT$$If!vh55*5n5-5l5#v#v*#vn#v-#vl#v:V l <&&&&&&0$,55*5n5-5l5/ 4ap<&&&&&&Tkd}$$IfTlֈSm"&**n-l <&&&&&&0$4 lap<&&&&&&T$$If!vh55*5n5-5l5#v#v*#vn#v-#vl#v:V l0$,55*5n5-5l5/ 4aTs$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh5K555 #vK#v#v#v :V l40O%+,5K555 / / / 4af4TM$$If!vh5K5t5v55755#vK#vt#vv#v#v7#v#v:V l40O%+,,5K5t5v55755/ / / 4af4T$$If!vh5C5t5v55755#vC#vt#vv#v#v7#v#v:V l F&&&&&&&0O%,5C5t5v55755/ 4apF&&&&&&&TIkd$$IfTl֞>k{"&u+Ctv7 F&&&&&&&0O%4 lapF&&&&&&&T$$If!vh5C5t5v55755#vC#vt#vv#v#v7#v#v:V l0O%,5C5t5v55755/ 4aT$$If!vh5C5t5v55755#vC#vt#vv#v#v7#v#v:V l F&&&&&&&0O%,5C5t5v55755/ 4apF&&&&&&&TIkd$$IfTl֞>k{"&u+Ctv7 F&&&&&&&0O%4 lapF&&&&&&&T$$If!vh5C5t5v55755#vC#vt#vv#v#v7#v#v:V l0O%,5C5t5v55755/ 4aT$$If!vh5C5t5v55755#vC#vt#vv#v#v7#v#v:V l F&&&&&&&0O%,5C5t5v55755/ 4apF&&&&&&&TIkd8$$IfTl֞>k{"&u+Ctv7 F&&&&&&&0O%4 lapF&&&&&&&T$$If!vh5C5t5v55755#vC#vt#vv#v#v7#v#v:V l0O%,5C5t5v55755/ 4aT$$If!vh5C5t5v55755#vC#vt#vv#v#v7#v#v:V l F&&&&&&&0O%,5C5t5v55755/ 4apF&&&&&&&TIkd`$$IfTl֞>k{"&u+Ctv7 F&&&&&&&0O%4 lapF&&&&&&&T$$If!vh5C5t5v55755#vC#vt#vv#v#v7#v#v:V l0O%,5C5t5v55755/ 4aT$$If!vh5C5t5v55755#vC#vt#vv#v#v7#v#v:V l F&&&&&&&0O%,5C5t5v55755/ 4apF&&&&&&&TIkd$$IfTl֞>k{"&u+Ctv7 F&&&&&&&0O%4 lapF&&&&&&&Ts$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh557575757#v#v7:V l0#6557/  / 4aI$$If!vh557575757#v#v7:V l 2&&&&&0#6,557/ / 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh557575757#v#v7:V l0#6,557/ 4a;$$If!vh557575757#v#v7:V l 2&&&&&0#6,557/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh557575757#v#v7:V l0#6,557/ 4a;$$If!vh557575757#v#v7:V l 2&&&&&0#6,557/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh557575757#v#v7:V l0#6,557/ 4a;$$If!vh557575757#v#v7:V l 2&&&&&0#6,557/ 4ap2&&&&&s$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l0$6,5<55555s/  / 4a$$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l <&&&&&&0$6,5<55555s/ / 4ap<&&&&&&kd$$IflֈW2 $<s <&&&&&&0$64 lap<&&&&&&$$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l0$6,5<55555s/ 4a$$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l <&&&&&&0$6,5<55555s/ 4ap<&&&&&&kdZ$$IflֈW2 $<s <&&&&&&0$64 lap<&&&&&&$$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l0$6,5<55555s/ 4a$$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l <&&&&&&0$6,5<55555s/ 4ap<&&&&&&kd$$IflֈW2 $<s <&&&&&&0$64 lap<&&&&&&$$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l0$6,5<55555s/ 4a$$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l <&&&&&&0$6,5<55555s/ 4ap<&&&&&&kd$$IflֈW2 $<s <&&&&&&0$64 lap<&&&&&&$$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l0$6,5<555      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstvwxyz{|}~55s/ 4a$$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l <&&&&&&0$6,5<55555s/ 4ap<&&&&&&kd-$$IflֈW2 $<s <&&&&&&0$64 lap<&&&&&&$$If!vh5<55555s#v<#v#v#v#v#vs:V l0$6,5<55555s/ 4as$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh5555T#v#v#vT:V l06555T4a$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l0D%6,5 55P5h5/  / 4as$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l 2&&&&&0D%6,5 55P5h5/ / 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ae$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l 2&&&&&0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ae$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l 2&&&&&0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ae$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l 2&&&&&0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ae$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l 2&&&&&0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ae$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l 2&&&&&0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ae$$If!vh5 55P5h5#v #v#vP#vh#v:V l 2&&&&&0D%6,5 55P5h5/ 4ap2&&&&&s$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l0!6,555Z/  / 4aJ$$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l &&&0!6,555Z/ / 4aJp&&&$$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l0!6,555Z/ 4aJ $$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l &&&0!6,555Z/ 4aJp&&&$$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l0!6,555Z/ 4aJ $$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l &&&0!6,555Z/ 4aJp&&&$$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l0!6,555Z/ 4aJ $$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l &&&0!6,555Z/ 4aJp&&&$$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l0!6,555Z/ 4aJ $$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l &&&0!6,555Z/ 4aJp&&&$$IfJ!vh555Z#v#v#vZ:V l0!6,555Z/ 4aJs$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l06,,55555/  / 4ale$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l 2&&&&&06,55555/ 4alp2&&&&&$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l06,55555/ 4ale$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l 2&&&&&06,55555/ 4alp2&&&&&$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l06,55555/ 4ale$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l 2&&&&&06,55555/ 4alp2&&&&&$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l06,55555/ 4ale$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l 2&&&&&06,55555/ 4alp2&&&&&$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l06,55555/ 4ale$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l 2&&&&&06,55555/ 4alp2&&&&&$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l06,55555/ 4ale$$Ifl!vh55555#v#v#v#v#v:V l 2&&&&&06,55555/ 4alp2&&&&&$$Ifi!vh5[#v[:V l0      65[4aiT$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l065h%4Ts$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh5#v:V l40654af4<$$If!vh5 5555556#v #v#v#v#v#v#v6:V l406,5 5555556/ / / 4af4b$$If!v h555555555 5 5 #v#v#v#v#v#v #v :V l06555555 5 / / / /  4a3kd2$$Ifl .NVB.6 "  L06,,,,4 las$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l40D%,5V5{5|5{5|/  / 4af4p$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l 2&&&&&0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ / 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4af$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l 2&&&&&0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ab$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l 2&&&&&0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ab$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l 2&&&&&0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ab$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l 2&&&&&0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ab$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l 2&&&&&0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ab$$If!vh5V5{5|5{5|#vV#v{#v|#v{#v|:V l 2&&&&&0D%,5V5{5|5{5|/ 4ap2&&&&&s$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l06,5J5/  / 4a;$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l 2&&&&&06,5J5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l06,5J5/ 4a;$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l 2&&&&&06,5J5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l06,5J5/ 4a6$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l 2&&&&&06,5J5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l06,5J5/ 4a6$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l 2&&&&&06,5J5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l06,5J5/ 4a;$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l 2&&&&&06,5J5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l06,5J5/ 4a;$$If!vh5J5555#vJ#v:V l 2&&&&&06,5J5/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh555F5 #v#v#vF#v :V l40#+,555F5 / / / 4f41$$If!vh55]5^5F5N5O5O#v#v]#v^#vF#vN#vO:V l40#+,,55]5^5F5N5O/ / / 4f4$$If!vh55]5^5F5N5O5O#v#v]#v^#vF#vN#vO:V l4 F&&&&&&&0#,55]5^5F5N5O/ / 4f4pF&&&&&&&BkdU$$Ifl4֞@A-#]^FNOO F&&&&&&&0#4 laf4pF&&&&&&&$$If!vh55]5^5F5N5O5O#v#v]#v^#vF#vN#vO:V l40#,55]5^5F5N5O/ 4f4$$If!vh55]5^5F5N5O5O#v#v]#v^#vF#vN#vO:V l4 F&&&&&&&0#,55]5^5F5N5O/ 4f4pF&&&&&&&BkdZ$$Ifl4֞@A-#]^FNOO F&&&&&&&0#4 laf4pF&&&&&&&$$If!vh55]5^5F5N5O5O#v#v]#v^#vF#vN#vO:V l40#,55]5^5F5N5O/ 4f4$$If!vh55]5^5F5N5O5O#v#v]#v^#vF#vN#vO:V l4 F&&&&&&&0#,55]5^5F5N5O/ 4f4pF&&&&&&&Bkd_$$Ifl4֞@A-#]^FNOO F&&&&&&&0#4 laf4pF&&&&&&&$$If!vh55]5^5F5N5O5O#v#v]#v^#vF#vN#vO:V l40#,55]5^5F5N5O/ 4f4s$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh55755757#v#v7#v#v7:V l0#6557557/  / 4ae$$If!vh55755757#v#v7#v#v7:V l 2%%%%%0#6,557557/ / 4ap2%%%%%$$If!vh55755757#v#v7#v#v7:V l0#6,557557/ 4aW$$If!vh55755757#v#v7#v#v7:V l 2%%%%%0#6,557557/ 4ap2%%%%%$$If!vh55755757#v#v7#v#v7:V l0#6,557557/ 4aW$$If!vh55755757#v#v7#v#v7:V l 2%%%%%0#6,557557/ 4ap2%%%%%$$If!vh55755757#v#v7#v#v7:V l0#6,557557/ 4aW$$If!vh55755757#v#v7#v#v7:V l 2%%%%%0#6,557557/ 4ap2%%%%%s$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l065575:/  / 4a$$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l &&&06,5575:/ / 4ap&&&$$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l06,5575:/ 4a$$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l &&&06,5575:/ 4ap&&&$$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l06,5575:/ 4a $$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l &&&06,5575:/ 4ap&&&$$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l06,5575:/ 4a $$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l &&&06,5575:/ 4ap&&&$$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l06,5575:/ 4a $$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l &&&06,5575:/ 4ap&&&$$If!vh5575:#v#v7#v::V l06,5575:/ 4as$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l0"6,5L5 55/  / 4ae$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l 2&&&&&0"6,5L5 55/ / 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l0"6,5L5 55/ 4aW$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l 2&&&&&0"6,5L5 55/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l0"6,5L5 55/ 4aW$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l 2&&&&&0"6,5L5 55/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l0"6,5L5 55/ 4aW$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l 2&&&&&0"6,5L5 55/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l0"6,5L5 55/ 4aW$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l 2&&&&&0"6,5L5 55/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l0"6,5L5 55/ 4aW$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l 2&&&&&0"6,5L5 55/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l0"6,5L5 55/ 4aW$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l 2&&&&&0"6,5L5 55/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l0"6,5L5 55/ 4aW$$If!vh5L5 5 55#vL#v #v#v:V l 2&&&&&0"6,5L5 55/ 4ap2&&&&&s$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh5#v:V l0      654aT$$If!vh5"#v":V l0"65"4aTs$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p s$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l $ 5h%4` p $$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l40D%,55e/  / 4af4L$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l4 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ / 4af4p2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l40D%,55e/ 4af4B$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l4 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4af4p2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l40D%,55e/ 4af4>$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l4 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4af4p2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l40D%,55e/ 4af4>$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l4 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4af4p2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l40D%,55e/ 4af4>$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l4 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4af4p2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l40D%,55e/ 4af4>$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l4 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4af4p2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l40D%,55e/ 4af4$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l0D%,55e/  / 4aF$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ / 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l0D%,55e/ 4a<$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l0D%,55e/ 4a8$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l0D%,55e/ 4a8$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l0D%,55e/ 4a8$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l0D%,55e/ 4a8$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l0D%,55e/ 4a8$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l 2&&&&&0D%,55e/ 4ap2&&&&&$$If!vh55e5e5e5e#v#ve:V l0D%,55e/ 4a$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l065h%4T$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l  %065h%4` %p %$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l  %06,5h%4` %p %$$If!vh555#v#v#v:V l4+,5554f4T$$If!vh55v5v5F55#v#vv#vF#v#v:V l4+,55v5F55/ 4f4TL$$If!vh55v5v5F55#v#vv#vF#v#v:V l <%%%%%%,55v5F55/ 4p<%%%%%%T$$If!vh55v5v5F55#v#vv#vF#v#v:V l,55v5F554T>$$If!vh55v5v5F55#v#vv#vF#v#v:V l <%%%%%%,55v5F554p<%%%%%%T$$If!vh55v5v5F55#v#vv#vF#v#v:V l,55v5F554T>$$If!vh55v5v5F55#v#vv#vF#v#v:V l <%%%%%%,55v5F554p<%%%%%%T$$If!vh55v5v5F55#v#vv#vF#v#v:V l,55v5F554T>$$If!vh55v5v5F55#v#vv#vF#v#v:V l <%%%%%%,55v5F554p<%%%%%%T$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l   05h%/ 4p $$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l  %065h%4` %p %$$If!vh555"#v#v#v":V l40+,555"/ / / 4f4T'$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l40+,55v5*555/ / / 4f4T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l <0,55v5*555/ / 4p<Tkd6$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v* <04 lap<T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l0,55v5*555/ 4T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l <0,55v5*555/ 4p<Tkdڻ$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v* <04 lap<T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l0,55v5*555/ 4T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l <0,55v5*555/ 4p<Tkdp$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v* <04 lap<T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l0,55v5*555/ 4T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l <0,55v5*555/ 4p<Tkd$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v* <04 lap<T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l0,55v5*555/ 4T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l <0,55v5*555/ 4p<Tkd$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v* <04 lap<T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l0,55v5*555/ 4T$$If!vh55v5*555#v#vv#v*#v#v#v:V l <0,55v5*555/ 4p<Tkd2$$IfTlֈ:lf!$v* <04 lap<T$$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l   065h%4` p $$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l   065h%4` p $$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l   065h%4` p $$If!vh5h%#vh%:V l   065h%4` p $$If!vh5#v:V l0      654aT$$Ifz!vh5(#v(:V l0(65(4az$$Ifz!vh55m#v#vm:V l355m/ / /  4aGT$$Ifz!vh55m#v#vm:V l355m/ / 4aGT$$Ifz!vh55 #v#v :V l355 / / /  4aGTi$$Ifz!vh5(#v(:V l435(/ 4aGf4T$$Ifz!vh5:5#v:#v:V l435:5/ 4aGf4T$$Ifz!vh5:5#v:#v:V l435:5/ 4aGf4Ti$$Ifz!vh5(#v(:V l435(/ 4aGf4T$$Ifm!vh5 (#v (:V l40& ,5 (/ 4aGf4T5$$IfG!vh5' 5~ 555 #v' #v~ #v#v :V l04,5' 5~ 55 / / / / / / / 4aGT$$IfG!vh5' 5~ 555 #v' #v~ #v#v :V l 204,5' 5~ 55 / /  / / / /  / 4aGp2T5$$IfG!vh5' 5~ 555 #v' #v~ #v#v :V l04,5' 5~ 55 / / / / / / / 4aGT$$IfG!vh5' 5~ 555 #v' #v~ #v#v :V l 204,5' 5~ 55 / /  / / / /  / 4aGp2T5$$IfG!vh5' 5~ 555 #v' #v~ #v#v :V l04,5' 5~ 55 / / / / / / / 4aGT$$IfG!vh5' 5~ 555 #v' #v~ #v#v :V l 204,5' 5~ 55 / /  / / / /  / 4aGp2T5$$IfG!vh5' 5~ 555 #v' #v~ #v#v :V l04,5' 5~ 55 / / / / /  / / 4aGT$$IfG!vh5' 5~ 555 #v' #v~ #v#v :V l 204,5' 5~ 55 / /  / / / /  / 4aGp2T$$If!vh5+#v+:V l40,5/ 4f4@$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / 41kd$$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laN$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kdP$$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 la@$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / 41kd$$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 la8$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0,, 5 555555 5 41kdH$$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 la$$If!vh55 #v#v :V l410,5 5/ / 4f4I$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kds$$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kd$$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kdo$$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%x$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / / / / 41kd $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 la$$If!vh55 #v#v :V l4 0,5 5/ 4f4I$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kdE $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kd $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kdA $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kd $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd= $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%H$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l05 555555 5 / / 41kd $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd3" $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kd' $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laC$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%05 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd/+ $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%H$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l05 555555 5 / / 41kd0 $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd4 $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kd9 $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laM$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%0kd= $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%$$If!vh55 #v#v :V l4U0,5 5/ 4f4C$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%05 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kdLC $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kdH $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kdBL $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kdQ $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd>U $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kdZ $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd:^ $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kdc $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd6g $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kdl $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd2p $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kdu $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd.y $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kd~ $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd* $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kd $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 laI$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l n%%%%%%%%%%%0, 5 555555 5 / / 4pn%%%%%%%%%%%,kd& $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(*  n%%%%%%%%%%%0,,,,4 lapn%%%%%%%%%%%N$$If!v h55y5y5y5{55y5{5 y5 y5 #v#vy#v{#v#vy#v{#v y#v :V l0, 5 555555 5 / / 41kd $$Ifl  v!"n$%b'(* 0,,,,4 la$$If!vh5+#v+:V l   054p $$If!vh5+#v+:V l:05/ 4$$If!vh5+#v+:V l:05/ 4$$If!vh5+#v+:V l:05/ 4$$If!vh5+#v+:V l:05/ 4$$If!vh5+#v+:V l:05/ 4$$If!vh5+#v+:V l:05/ 4$$If!vh5+#v+:V l:05/ 4$$If!vh5+#v+:V l:05/ 4$$If!vh5+#v+:V l:05/ 4$$If!vh5+#v+:V l   054p $$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5(5;5=#v(#v;#v=:V l405i55/ 4f4$$If!vh5+#v+:V l   054p z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054z$$If!vh5+#v+:V l054$$If!vh5n(#vn(:V l4   05n(4af4p T$$If!vh55555#v#v#v#v:V l40,55554af4TP$$If!vh55555#v#v#v#v:V l4 20,55554af4p2T$$If!vh55555#v#v#v#v:V l40,55554af4TP$$If!vh55555#v#v#v#v:V l4 20,55554af4p2T$$If!vh55555#v#v#v#v:V l40,55554af4TP$$If!vh55555#v#v#v#v:V l4 20,55554af4p2T$$If!vh55555#v#v#v#v:V l40,55554af4Ty$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V  F%%%%%%%03,5592  24 pF%%%%%%%Ikd $$If֞f"F(-3'&&&&&& F%%%%%%%032  24apF%%%%%%%$$If!vh53#v3:V 403,5392  24 f4$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 y$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V  F%%%%%%%03,5592  24 pF%%%%%%%Ikd $$If֞f"F(-3'&&&&&& F%%%%%%%032  24apF%%%%%%%$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 y$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V  F%%%%%%%03,5592  24 pF%%%%%%%Ikd $$If֞f"F(-3'&&&&&& F%%%%%%%032  24apF%%%%%%%$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 y$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V  F%%%%%%%0      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLNOPkRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijMlmnoqrstuvwxyz{|}~3,5592  24 pF%%%%%%%Ikd9 $$If֞f"F(-3'&&&&&& F%%%%%%%032  24apF%%%%%%%$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 y$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V  F%%%%%%%03,5592  24 pF%%%%%%%IkdG $$If֞f"F(-3'&&&&&& F%%%%%%%032  24apF%%%%%%%$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh53#v3:V 403,5392  24 f4$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 y$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V  F%%%%%%%03,5592  24 pF%%%%%%%Ikd1 $$If֞f"F(-3'&&&&&& F%%%%%%%032  24apF%%%%%%%$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 y$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V  F%%%%%%%03,5592  24 pF%%%%%%%IkdJ $$If֞f"F(-3'&&&&&& F%%%%%%%032  24apF%%%%%%%$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 y$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V  F%%%%%%%03,5592  24 pF%%%%%%%Ikd!c $$If֞f"F(-3'&&&&&& F%%%%%%%032  24apF%%%%%%%$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 y$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V  F%%%%%%%03,5592  24 pF%%%%%%%Ikd| $$If֞f"F(-3'&&&&&& F%%%%%%%032  24apF%%%%%%%$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 y$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V  F%%%%%%%03,5592  24 pF%%%%%%%Ikd1 $$If֞f"F(-3'&&&&&& F%%%%%%%032  24apF%%%%%%%$$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 $$If!vh5555555#v#v:V 03,5592  24 ((((((((((((((((((((((((6666666666666DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDRTTTTTbpppppppppppppppppprrrrr0"c*08rLR\~ilD|^hAھ"" &o0#:HbO_Vckv x&` 4NPg@rqذB!9n $89#O[apuTu^I 666666666vvvvvvvvv66666686666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666hH6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666662 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~_HmH nH sH tH 8`8 Normal_HmH sH tH `@` Heading 1,2nd Level Heading$@&5CJH@H  Heading 2$0@&^`0CJd@d Heading 3,3rd Level Heading$@&`CJL@L  Heading 4$$d@&a$ >*CJaJL@L  Heading 5$5$7$8$9D@&H$5CJ8@8  Heading 6$@&CJ@@@  Heading 7$@& 5B*ph^@^  Heading 8)$ ,5$7$8$9D@&H$5CJF @F  Heading 9 $$@&a$ 5CJaJDA`D Default Paragraph FontVi@V  Table Normal :V 44 la (k`(No List 8@8 Header  !CJ6@6  Footnote Text@&@@ Footnote ReferenceH*VR@"V Body Text Indent 2d`CJaJ2B@22 Body TextCJ6UA6 Hyperlink >*B*phZC@RZ Body Text Indent0d^`0CJaJ8 @b8 Footer  !CJ.)@q. Page Number@P@@ Body Text 2 B*CJphBQ@B Body Text 35B*CJph^>@^ Title,1st Level Heading$a$5CJ\aJB'B Comment ReferenceCJaJ4@4  Comment TextVOV Bullet Par Indented^`CJVOV Bullet Par Indented Twice ^ROR Appendix Title $a$5KHOJQJ^O^ Normal w/ 1st line indented `CJ:@: Quote!8]^8CJ,O", Spacer"CJ bO2b Par w/ bullet,#,or letter#^`CJ@OB@ A BLOCK PARA$ CJOJQJ:"@: Caption%6B*CJph:J@b: Subtitle&5CJ\aJFVqF FollowedHyperlink >*B* phNON OmniPage #1(5$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuNON OmniPage #2)5$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuNON OmniPage #3*5$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuNON OmniPage #4+5$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuNON OmniPage #6,5$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuNON OmniPage #7-5$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuNON OmniPage #8.5$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuNON OmniPage #9/5$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuNON OmniPage #505$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuPOP OmniPage #1015$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuPO"P OmniPage #1125$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuPO2P OmniPage #1235$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuPOBP OmniPage #1345$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuPORP OmniPage #1555$7$8$9DH$ mHnHuPObP OmniPage #1665$7$8$9DH$ mHnHu4Or4 OmniPage #1874O4 OmniPage #1984O4 OmniPage #2094O4 OmniPage #14:XOX OmniPage #21;5$7$8$9DH$OJQJmHnHu4O4 OmniPage #22<4O4 OmniPage #23=4O4 OmniPage #24>4O4 OmniPage #25?4O4 OmniPage #26@4O4 OmniPage #27A4O"4 OmniPage #29B4O24 OmniPage #28C4OB4 OmniPage #30D4OR4 OmniPage #31E4Ob4 OmniPage #32FJ^@rJ Normal (Web)Gdd[$\$CJaJNON Table TitleH$$(Pa$ 5CJ\PK![Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢Iw},-j4 wP-t#bΙ{UTU^hd}㨫)*1P' ^W0)T9<l#$yi};~@(Hu* Dנz/0ǰ $ X3aZ,D0j~3߶b~i>3\`?/[G\!-Rk.sԻ..a濭?PK!֧6 _rels/.relsj0 }Q%v/C/}(h"O = C?hv=Ʌ%[xp{۵_Pѣ<1H0ORBdJE4b$q_6LR7`0̞O,En7Lib/SeеPK!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xml M @}w7c(EbˮCAǠҟ7՛K Y, e.|,H,lxɴIsQ}#Ր ֵ+!,^$j=GW)E+& 8PK!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlYOo6w toc'vuر-MniP@I}úama[إ4:lЯGRX^6؊>$ !)O^rC$y@/yH*񄴽)޵߻UDb`}"qۋJחX^)I`nEp)liV[]1M<OP6r=zgbIguSebORD۫qu gZo~ٺlAplxpT0+[}`jzAV2Fi@qv֬5\|ʜ̭NleXdsjcs7f W+Ն7`g ȘJj|h(KD- dXiJ؇(x$( :;˹! I_TS 1?E??ZBΪmU/?~xY'y5g&΋/ɋ>GMGeD3Vq%'#q$8K)fw9:ĵ x}rxwr:\TZaG*y8IjbRc|XŻǿI u3KGnD1NIBs RuK>V.EL+M2#'fi ~V vl{u8zH *:(W☕ ~JTe\O*tHGHY}KNP*ݾ˦TѼ9/#A7qZ$*c?qUnwN%Oi4 =3ڗP 1Pm \\9Mؓ2aD];Yt\[x]}Wr|]g- eW )6-rCSj id DЇAΜIqbJ#x꺃 6k#ASh&ʌt(Q%p%m&]caSl=X\P1Mh9MVdDAaVB[݈fJíP|8 քAV^f Hn- "d>znNJ ة>b&2vKyϼD:,AGm\nziÙ.uχYC6OMf3or$5NHT[XF64T,ќM0E)`#5XY`פ;%1U٥m;R>QD DcpU'&LE/pm%]8firS4d 7y\`JnίI R3U~7+׸#m qBiDi*L69mY&iHE=(K&N!V.KeLDĕ{D vEꦚdeNƟe(MN9ߜR6&3(a/DUz<{ˊYȳV)9Z[4^n5!J?Q3eBoCM m<.vpIYfZY_p[=al-Y}Nc͙ŋ4vfavl'SA8|*u{-ߟ0%M07%<ҍPK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-![Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 +_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!Ptheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ' theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK] &}    $(,048<@DHLPTX\`dhlptx|   +*('&$%#"! )./01235,-4;:9876IGFDECBA?>=<H@O`;  $(,048<@DHLPTX\`dhlptx|  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<t-ekBk?KcYXwqv %B1hn***L=R=g=2N7NKNJ_O_k_nnsnnX]y":<<zCEZZN[P[f[`bjۑ~!f  4$;4$v4$4$4$5$/5$j5$5$5$6$V6$6$6$6$(7$c7$7$7$7$@8$m8$8$8$9$19$t9$9$9$:$;:$e:$:$:$:$B;$o;$;$;$ <$3<$v<$<$<$=$O=$y=$=$=$>$V>$>$>$>$+?$i?$?$?$?$8@$@$@$@$A$cA$A$A$B$DB$B$B$B$+C$YC$C$C$C$"D$SD$D$D$ (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((a1DT,dJv &r^G*9TpSYOkCorsvxz{u}M~ hzNk7}ѝgɣ~EʳWD ~Z   b Z V abce1hjklUnoqst(vwx7z{|F~+._7531|]c,)#-2Zs "Vrz #%6>Yao~-Eops~  @ ] _   + E o      ! # ' , 1 6 > C (3?HR]gqvz~$&+9GU_ls| *7DSan{ &5BN\ix z Qwe (;O]bt|67O^qԄɐ,vP\Й"6BZ˚&(ޟGHst̠͠+,[\T`st٧"Iy֭ ,Jz׮|1jʹ<d34TUuv 1U2Hp(@h!C^7]N+Yj|<4 $f2\ =vP"`# %b%%&M&&&&"'Z'W)+++ ,!,//080g0000 1-1Q1j11112G2m22223 7*7Z7777VAK"L\LLOPQ0Q^Q~QQQR4RMRuRRRRRS0SCSYlZtZZ[.[V[|[[[[\\!\F\]\s\\\\\\\^reeeee(fBfRfffffgljjDkzkkk ll7lOljlllllmrrr,sss*tXt9|Z|j|k|||||}1}D}]}p}}}}}}}~~Tf AϓГ&Vy.Z}ݕіԣ:j̤AmǥP̪ )4Pjë߫}$Ҵ>z-7Th϶ %B]zַ ڹž Ez(YF<} Y.Q  % 2 A .Nx*>K&L~ 8d|X$%%&++,E,R,j,,,,,,,--f.89x99:#:S:n::::;M;-A"F+FzFFFFFFFHJ JZJmJJJJJJJJJKN.T\TTTTUTUwUUUUZ*[\[[.\Q\f\{\\\\_``&aaab$bddddeRiRRRRSSGSUUUUUXvZZ[[[1\rdd e>eeefAfqffff,gPgggm q rbrdrr*sss t=tdtyttttu3uZumuuuuvHvhvvvv}̀܀8Z~Y`gÃكGDH V\މ.Ê:i͒2[œ*Ov#VIYÞמ +@^{ԟ~~AT[ +TG9TY6Sl 8v      ;<opn #;:nfFh8t V    T"../L/z/// 0 0=0T0D1j88889L!M_MbM{M~MMMMMMMMMN N#N&NCNGNcNgNNNNNtTTU[[A\Q\T\x\{\\\\\\\]]<]I]p]s]]]]]]] ^^3^7^[^\^aaaaa/b0bcbdbbbbbcc1c2cucvcccccddHdId{d|dddopNpfpyppppppp qq5qHqUqqqqqqqqr)r@rQrgryrr_ *Niݪ8Xsʫ!=_sOjӮѰY"?@}̴vHi/5jU/5j3^pv )pkuUU+N"(B`~ak)XzGP\d1=I U ]   Z  % c  2 k   7 %<i~1CCCD@DmDDDDE3EVEEEEF]MTTTUU2UQUUUUz[+9a= ϋC֔.ҕ8Ic}͖֖8Gc{ȗ2;XmØ(I|̯#4Smʰ+34`aȱɱ34[\̲Ͳ$6,9μ-CQ?@`Cf$E]oHhx-@N>Q`,e M|o [jlO-P)G`v[tDk/])B[k#`/j6'6G G'+4;+FQ]Wgkuy!li_Tu[h 4`kGk@Y9Gl-YuDm ;RN`+n *eWyEiOoSmLf(Zv ;YCoz Mut4L$=x!Sw7L~.ZwKVBe%I|*Y?T~8kRrNu(\{Lu 3[3H{(Tx Q t     = \     8 T     - G }    5k,dDdDe-M~/]Df B^+G{ Px6O(\|&_u,O:t'Z{Fk 2 L y    !(!V!v!!!!"5""###$M$\$$$$$%7%k%%%%&0&k&}&&&&'C'\'''''((P((((()6)_)~))) *%*Q*_*****4+T++++++,N,,,,,-6-f----.+.^..../(/S/t//)00041[1111!2Y222393q3334N4444-5h555536}6667R7777,8b888 9@9w999:W:::;>;x;;;<<<t<<<=Z=== >B>y>>>&?\???@9@p@@@A=AtAAABLBBBC*CeCCCDHD~DDD#EZEEEF7FmFFFG0GhGGG HAHyHHH!IaIIIJKJJJJ.KdKKK L@LvLLLMVMMMM4NkNNNOXO|OOO.PiPPP Q@QwQQQRIRRRRSNSSSS(T^TTTU?UUUU%V_VVVVim—Ɨ378}Ι Faܚ.CrvÜ*.0՝ C`?o?C+aeȣ̣(,YҤ|V`ʳ:>hǴ1`d޵pȶжVZͷѷW[wBFsֹp9'+l ->~B#^mIG         a          }  " b  q  ^ & i`Laaybbcgdkdodsdwdddee eeeeee"e&e*e.e2e6eeeeeeeeeefHfff/g7g8gggg6h,iiiiij/jIjSjpjjjjjk#k?kVk}kkkkkl0lNl[lylllllm.mGmemmmmmmn7nQnUnno3o@o_o{oooooo p(pApWpopppppq&qEqlqqqqqqr3rJrirrrrrrsCsUs|ssssst*tItMtu&uCu[uzuuuuuuvv3vQvovvvvvvw'wGwkwwwwwwwx@x]xtxxxxxxy,yCy\ysyyyyyyyzzzz{%{D{V{s{{{{{{|$|C|c||||||||}-}L}T}s}}}}}}~;~Y~k~~~~~~;_}Lhʀ-@_sЁ&Elӂ4Fb8Utф +=VxDVt׆3TkÇՇ6Piˆ߈4Lk܉,KjĊߊ4LkPqŌ4Roȍ8Wo̎1Ojя4MjӐ9Rh͑ёnϒ!@bϓ,J^|5Poԕ3Peі +CbwN_~ʘ +Onԙ$>WpΚ )C`oΛ3RpМ !@Xqu!<[s؞1Poݟ )<[sР%Biҡ-LlɤE~#      !"#$%&'()*+,./013456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXY[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrtuvwxyz{|}~     !#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqstuvwxy{|}~     !"$&'()*+,-./012345789:;<=?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXZ[\]^_`bcdefghijklmnpqrstuvwxyz{|}      !"#$%&'()*+,./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnqrtuvwxyz{|}                         ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ^ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~                          ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @ A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~                       " $ % & ( ) * + - . / 0 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 : ; < = ? @ A B D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~                            ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~                            ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] ^ _ ` a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~        !"#$%&')*+,-./012456789:;<=>@ABCDEFGIJKLMNOPQSTUVWXYZ[\^_`abcdefhijklmnoprstuwxy{|}      !"#%'()*,-./012345678:;<=>?@ABCDEFHIJKLMNOPQRSTVWXYZ[\]^`abcdefghijkmnopqrtuvwxyz{}~     !"#$%&'()+,-./012345689:;<=>?@ABCEFGHIJKLMNOPQRTUVWXYZ[\]^_`bcdefghijklmopqrstuvwxyz|}~     !"#$%'()*+,-./012346789:;<=>?@ACDEFGHIJKLMOPQRSTUVWXYZ[]^_`abcdefghjklmnopqrstuvwyz{|}~    ;GTGVGkkk؂ڂ   "&;&=&2HKHMHLMMST T?XZ46,,, $&%@B  :::::::::::::::::"%(/36=ADKOT[_bimry}!!!!!!!!!!!!`a/X$2$/>T4v^@V,V`+(  \B  S D"?\B  S DjJ"?\B  S D"?\B   S DjJ"?\B   S D"?\B   S DjJ"?h   S  "?  \B   S D"?\B  S DjJ"?b  C "?  b  C "?  b  C "?  b  C "?  b  C "? b  C "? b  C "? b  C "? b  C  "?  b  C  "?  b  C  "?  b  C  "?  b  C  "?  b  C "? b  C "? \B  S D"?\B  S DjJ"?   c R .``TY`TY"?%  ! c R!.``TY`TY"?$  " c R".``TY`TY"?#  # c R#.``TY`TY"?"  $ c R$.``TY`TY"?   % c R%.``TY`TY"?!  & c R&.``TY`TY"?  ' c R'.``TY`TY"?  ( c R(.``TY`TY"?  ) c R).``TY`TY"?&  * c R*.``TY`TY"?  + c R+.``TY`TY"?  , S L$.`]]`TW`TW]"?. $ - S L%.`]]`TW`TW]"?/ % . S L.`]]`TW`TW]"?'  / S L.`]]`TW`TW]"?(  0 S L.`]]`TW`TW]"?)  1 S L .`]]`TW`TW]"?*   2 S L!.`]]`TW`TW]"?+ ! 3 S L".`]]`TW`TW]"?, " 4 S L&.`]]`TW`TW]"?0 & 5 S L#.`]]`TW`TW]"?- # 6 S L,.`]]`TW`TW]"?6 , 7 S L+.`]]`TW`TW]"?5 + 8 S L*.`]]`TW`TW]"?4 * 9 S L).`]]`TW`TW]"?3 ) : S L(.`]]`TW`TW]"?2 ( ; S L'.`]]`TW`TW]"?1 ' < S L8.`]]`TW`TW]"?B 8 = S L7.`]]`TW`TW]"?A 7 > S L6.`]]`TW`TW]"?@ 6 ? S L5.`]]`TW`TW]"?? 5 @ S L:.`]]`TW`TW]"?D : A S L4.`]]`TW`TW]"?> 4 B S L3.`]]`TW`TW]"?= 3 C S L2.`]]`TW`TW]"?< 2 D S L0.`]]`TW`TW]"?: 0 E S L1.`]]`TW`TW]"?; 1 F S L/.`]]`TW`TW]"?9 / G S L..`]]`TW`TW]"?8 . H S L9.`]]`TW`TW]"?C 9 I S L-.`]]`TW`TW]"?7 -\B L S D"?G\B M S DjJ"?H` ]!85+e< _C"?R N # zn ` G>-H?@G>CG>`TI@`TS-U-_S%I@G>]!85+e<Z O 3 ;Oy#9)W; ;\B P S D"?I\B Q S DjJ"?J\B R S D"?E\B S S DjJ"?F\B T S D"?K\B U S DjJ"?L\B V S DjJ"?\B [ S D"?M\B \ S DjJ"?N\B ] S D"?O\B ^ S DjJ"?PV ` # ="?Q =B S  ? /tt--jjjjkk"            &&&&&&&& &!&,H-H.H/H0H1HSSSSSSSSSSSSSSokkBkbkIKK nb  Vm%T4$44$4D%4 D%4 D%4 D%4 4$44$4 T t-I8 tit } t?t% ( A t \<t1hMt<nXt  t  tHd' tVt6Rgtxt0$t4$44$4+`5t*@t( 5ht' M t& h t$hE t%Uht#Ext"Mht!t  ext)t.Ut/St0 t1s E t23  t3{t5  t,u t-U;t4 eKt;% } t:' t9]'t8]Gt7Ugt6 wtIp=tGPEtF XtD-  tEU  tCUH  tB5h tAHt?X] t>}0 t=M!ht<M!tH ept@tR4$44S$4L4$44M$4PJ$J4QK$K4T$4U$4[4$44\$4]4$44^$4``T_]!T& _1112610926 _1112673725revenue_sources _1116256908 _1116338777 _1115203931 _1115579348 _1115579527 _1115580032 _1115580116 _1115580141 _1115660313 _1115660339 _1115707977 _1116254841 _1116255138 _1116257389 _1116257430 _1116257592 _1115612199 _1115886596 _1115971884 _1115971934 _1116260399 _1116263704 _1116264662 _1115963113 _1115963151 _1115966476 _1115967085 _Hlt43261285 _Hlt43261286 _Hlk43261323 _Hlk43261324 _Hlt43261239 _Hlt43261240 _Hlt43261354 _Hlt43261355TGTGk؂           ;&;&;&KHKHKHKHKHMMTTTTjj  @@@@@@@@ @ @ @ @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @!@"@#@@@$@%@TGTGk؂           ;&;&;&KHKHKHKHKHMMTTTT  ^u% _u%6 `u% au% bu%, cu%qdu%̂ eu%$ fu%L gu%L hu%Lu iu%ju% ku%́ lu%$Xmu% nu%lou%  pu%V qu%| ru%w su% tu%WEE       ##JJ$$    9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState ȵ SZMSs{4:GN#.RW07ޓ18}qw{əЙО֞06ģȣX`̧ӧ %,Y_} (luCH8=&.gi7?kpTWÿipHPKQu~T\ GN BI*1  @G$+3mrafgl*/)1gnnu7 A        9Aqy?D|+2ijýĽ`cpx-5aj!57.6FK-5IPY`AG)3 IQks).DK+2qx] _ ` b c e f h i    SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation84CompObjyAprile Benner Normal.dotmlworley2Microsoft Office Word@@;U@d=V@d=VWӧ՜.+,0 hp  TASBT Chapter I: Introduction Title  F'Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q}%%d,m,..=A?A E EQQZ[__4i:iGjJjnnnnOuSu%{-{5}6}һӻDH?G{[\ g  3333333333333333333333333333333333qqtu()FGceuv !^_"#KLhi&(SU #adfg&)+,RUWX} % %;GWGkkLM7IHLHoHrHhokoЙߚ "I  24_a '||%C 0x4QR33 44__U`V`~rrrrrrrrttuuBvHvccŕƕҕӕA(q[[wx    ""XXaabbdd۴޴ll\]KK!!ԥ\t~11bb] _ k v w x                                      h] k v x                        8 7pu 1 `U) W~bT PqtXv(^Wt^_ebx]wZ Y$x L yަ>M hh^h`OJQJo(h^`CJOJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh pp^p`OJ QJ o(h @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh ^`OJ QJ o(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh PP^P`OJ QJ o( hh^h`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh pp^p`OJ QJ o(h @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh ^`OJ QJ o(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh PP^P`OJ QJ o(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh pp^p`OJ QJ o(h @ @ ^@ `OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh ^`OJ QJ o(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh PP^P`OJ QJ o(h 88^8`OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh   ^ `OJ QJ o(h   ^ `OJQJo(h xx^x`OJ QJ o(oh HH^H`OJ QJ o(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh ^`OJ QJ o(h 88^8`OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh   ^ `OJ QJ o(h   ^ `OJQJo(h xx^x`OJ QJ o(oh HH^H`OJ QJ o(h ^`OJQJo(h ^`OJ QJ o(oh ^`OJ QJ o(hh^h`.^`.$ $ ^$ `.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L. hh^h`OJQJo(hh^h`B*OJQJo( `U)1 Y$xu8L y^Wt^_eW~bTx]w7qtX |.                                                     (A!2fbv[_AMO_XmlVersionسEmpty@ ssssss ssI8I9I;I<fCfD;R;S;Y;ZmnĆćĉĊ444444MMMMMMMMM M!M)M*M0M19596=>DEOPZ[{|ZZZZZZZZP P \\\\\%\&j1j2j>j?jEjFjLjMjQjROO__..    @,@4@@@\@@@ @$@8@$L@L@P@Z@j@r@@H@P@l@t@ @$@<@$L@*X@8t@D@H@R@Z@`@j@r@~@@\@h@@@@ @$@4@D@P@Z@d@r@@@$@0@(@ D@.`@8t@T@Z@>@Unknown G* Times New Roman5Symbol3. * ArialY CG TimesTimes New Roman9GaramondK,Bookman Old StyleEMonotype SortsI. ??Arial Unicode MSABook Antiqua?= * Courier New;WingdingsA BCambria Math#ph:D&:D&w&WӧTWӧTY4d 3QHX? b2 ! xxChapter I: Introduction Aprile Bennerlworley<