Creating workable accountability systems for charter schools is one of the most important projects underway in public school reform. These systems are vital to the success of charter schools as a reform strategy. Not only do well-functioning accountability systems give authorizers the tools they need to close ineffective schools, they also create incentives and provide information that can help all charter schools improve continuously. Though people often speak of accountability systems in terms of the consequences they impose on poor performers, the broader value of accountability should not be forgotten. Viable results-based accountability also makes it less likely that charter authorizers will fall back to conventional, less productive patterns of school oversight that focus on compliance with regulations instead of student achievement.

Insights Gained
The work of authorizers holds significance beyond the realm of charter schools. Observers often refer to charter schools as "labs" for reform. The accountability systems being developed by charter-granting agencies are also laboratories, and they are yielding insights that can inform broader efforts to hold public schools accountable. This is especially true as interest grows in decentralizing our districts.32 If districts move to such a model, having an accountability policy that can monitor the performance of a wide range of educational models will be important. The work of charter authorizers could lead the way in redefining how public schools should be governed. Insights include:

The imperative of setting the terms of accountability early
Though several authorizers have extended term-setting into the first year of a charter's life to allow the accountability plan to reflect the school's student population, all of the leading charter authorizers stress the importance of early agreement on the terms of accountability.

Professional judgment a necessity
Though the accountability process must be clear, focused on meaningful data, and have explicit guidelines for making decisions, the ultimate decision process must allow the authorizer flexibility to consider the case of each school. An overly rigid process will not be able to capture the school's progress or use the full range of information available about the school.

The value of requiring schools to use multiple measures to assess progress
In contrast to many statewide accountability systems which peg school ratings to a small number of standardized test scores, some charter authorizers have developed accountability agreements that include multiple measures. These may include absolute scores and gains over time; a school's success relative to its goals and compared to outcomes of similar schools; a school's performance considering academic and non-academic indicators; and a school's results on different assessments, including standardized and performance assessments.

The value of aligning external systems with each school's own mission
In an attempt to align external accountability systems with schools' own internal aims, several authorizers enter into agreements with schools that include performance targets unique to each school. In combination with targets that are common to all schools, these benchmarks create an accountability system that both respects schools' individual missions and provides the authorizer with some meaningful comparative information.

The power of self-reviews & site visits
While standard reporting requirements yield a core of data, many authorizers have also begun asking schools to engage in detailed self-reviews and conducting their own site visits to schools. These practices serve a developmental purpose, providing a wealth of information schools can use to improve performance, at the same time as they generate information authorizers can use in decision-making.

The value of developing a range of responses to poor performance
A range of responses to poor performance possibly could include technical assistance, probationary status, and other efforts to prevent school failure. Though authorizers differ in the amount of assistance they provide, many leading authorizers try to design systems that have developmental value for the schools.

The benefits of a transparent system
By opening up data and processes to scrutiny by a range of actors - from school officials and policymakers to parents and the general public - authorizers serve a number of purposes. They ensure that school leaders understand the terms of their accountability, making it less likely they will be blindsided by the process. They mitigate the effects of political influence and they empower parents and other community members to play a role in the process by providing them with information about how schools are doing.

Charter Accountability: A Work In Progress
Though these developments are compelling, it is clear that charter school accountability systems are still a work in progress. Charter-granting agencies face a number of challenges in creating workable approaches. They often lack the capacity and resources to do the work of setting the terms, gathering information, and using the data to make good decisions; this is of particular concern for authorizers who have already chartered large numbers of schools without having an effective accountability system in place. The work is further complicated by the technical challenges of setting appropriate targets for performance and measuring progress. Finally, the political environment provides an unpredictable backdrop for authorizers. Some of these challenges are fixed and eternal. Others can be remedied if policymakers see the value of the work authorizers are performing.

Charter-granting agencies around the country have responded to these challenges with great creativity and promising innovation. Their situation is unique: they have the opportunity to rethink how public schools should be governed. By exchanging ideas with each other and their counterparts, by making the case to policymakers that they need adequate resources to do their jobs well, and by continuing to explore the issues raised in this document, authorizers can show more leadership in fulfilling the promise of public school accountability.