Horizon Science Academy sues Ohio for loss of educational grants

01205174v6
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
STATE EX REL.
HORIZON SCIENCE ACADEMY OF
LORAIN, INC. et al.
760 Tower Blvd.
Lorain, Ohio 44052
Relators,
v.
OHIO DEPARTMENT
OF EDUCATION, et al.
25 South Front Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215-4183
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORIGINAL ACTION IN
MANDAMUS
PETITION AND COMPLAINT FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
NICHOLAS J. DERTOUZOS (0071018)
ARTHUR L. CLEMENTS, III (0038159)
Attorneys for Relators
Republic Building, Suite 1400
25 West Prospect Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio 44115-1048
Phone: (216) 621-7227
Email: dertouzos@nicola.com
tclements@nicola.com
Supreme Court of Ohio Clerk of Court - Filed June 15, 2020 - Case No. 2020-0749

01205174v6 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
STATE EX REL.
LORAIN, INC.
760 Tower Blvd.
Lorain, Ohio 44052
and
STATE EX REL.
HORIZON SCIENCE ACADEMY
YOUNGSTOWN, INC.
3403 Southern Blvd.
Youngstown, Ohio 44507
and
STATE EX REL.
CINCINNATI HIGH SCHOOL, INC.
1055 Laidlaw Avenue
Cincinnati, Ohio 45237
and
STATE EX REL.
HORIZON EDUCATIONAL
SERVICES, INC.
6000 S. Marginal Road
Cleveland, Ohio 44103
and
STATE EX REL.
HORIZON SCIENCE ACADEMY -
CLEVELAND MIDDLE SCHOOL
6100 South Marginal Road
Cleveland, Ohio 44103
and
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORIGINAL ACTION IN
MANDAMUS

01205174v6 2
STATE EX REL.
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, INC.
2835 Morse Road
Columbus, Ohio 43229
and
STATE EX REL.
HORIZON SCIENCE ACADEMY, INC.
2350 Morse Road
and
STATE EX REL.
PRIMARY
2899 Morse Road
Columbus Ohio 43231
and
STATE EX REL.
DAYTON
4751 Sue Ann Boulevard
Dayton, Ohio 45415
and
STATE EX REL.
DAYTON HIGH SCHOOL, INC.
250 Shoup Mill Road
Dayton, Ohio 45415
and
STATE EX REL.
SPRINGFIELD
630 S. Reynold Road
Toledo, Ohio 43615
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

01205174v6 3
and
STATE EX REL.
TOLEDO
2600 W. Sylvania Avenue
Toledo, Ohio 43613)
Relators,
v.
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
and
GOVERNOR MIKE DEWINE
77 South High St., 30th
Floor
and
OHIO STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
c/o LAURA KOHLER, PRESIDENT
Mail Stop 103
And
PAOLA DEMARIA, OHIO
SUPERINTENDANT OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTION
and
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

01205174v6 4
KARL J. KOENIG, DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Mail Stop 307
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

01205174v6 5
This Petition and Complaint is brought in the name of the State of Ohio on the relations
of: (i) Horizon Science Academy of Lorain, Inc., (ii) Horizon Science Academy Youngtown,
Inc., (iii) Horizon Science Academy Cincinnati High School, Inc., (iv) Horizon Educational
Services, Inc., (v) Horizon Science Academy - Cleveland Middle School, (vi) Horizon Science
Academy Elementary School, Inc., (vii) Horizon Science Academy, Inc., (viii) Horizon Science
Academy Primary, (ix) Horizon Science Academy - Dayton, (x) Horizon Science Academy
Dayton High School, Inc., (xi) Horizon Science Academy - Springfield, and (xii) Horizon
Science Academy - Toledo (collectively the "HSA Schools"). The facts set forth in this Petition
and Complaint are verified by the attached Affidavits, including from each of the leaders of the
HSA Schools, which are filed contemporaneously herewith and incorporated herein.
I. INTRODUCTION
Unless this Court grants the HSA Schools’ Petition and Complaint for a Writ of
Mandamus, the Relators and the over 4,500 students enrolled there, will suffer the irreparable
consequences of the Ohio Department of Education and the other Respondents’ (collectively
“ODE”) wrongful decision to deny millions of dollars in quality school grant funding intended
for them. Here, ODE retroactively changed certain grant funding application criteria, after
Relators submitted fully eligible applications, to purposefully deny the HSA Schools grants
provided through House Bill 166.
a. HOUSE BILL 166 AND QCS GRANTS
The fiscal years 2020 and 2021 state budget bill, House Bill 166, passed by Ohio’s
General Assembly and signed by Governor Mike DeWine, established a Quality Community
Schools Support Grant (“QCS Grant”) program to be administered through ODE. QCS Grants

01205174v6 6
were intended to provide supplemental funding to certain Ohio community schools that are
designated as a “Community School of Quality”. Under the program, eligible schools must
receive up to $1,750 in each fiscal year for each economically disadvantaged pupil and $1,000
for all other pupils. House Bill 166, Section 265.335, directed ODE to make the QCS Grant
payments to eligible schools at the beginning of the calendar years 2020 and also 2021.
The relator HSA Schools are each organized under Ohio law and operate as public, open-
enrollment, community schools with a mission to provide high-quality education in Ohio
metropolitan areas to families who choose to enroll their children there over traditional public
schools. The majority of the HSA Schools’ students are economically disadvantaged and qualify
to receive free or reduced-price lunches. Despite these obstacles, the HSA Schools have a well-
established record of outperforming comparable traditional school districts in the same Ohio
metropolitan areas. Moreover, the HSA Schools have accomplished this with less per-pupil
funding. Relators are a prime example of quality community schools that the relevant provisions
of House Bill 166 were intended to support with grants.
The HSA Schools are 501(c)(3) tax exempt Ohio public benefit corporations that are each
independently operated by an independent Board of Directors. On behalf of their respective
schools, each independent school board separately contracts with Concept Schools NFP
(“Concept”) for school management services. Non-party Concept is a not-for-profit corporation
organized under the laws of the State of Illinois. Concept is in good standing and successfully
operates numerous charter schools throughout the United States. In Ohio, Concept has been
operating community schools for 20 years, is registered with ODE, has been assigned a unique
IRN code, and has been successfully rated for academic performance. For example, Concept
network schools in Ohio have received numerous awards from ODE and the U.S. Department of

01205174v6 7
Education over the years and have an average 98% graduation rate and a college acceptance rate
of 98%.
Each of the HSA Schools met all the eligibility criteria required by HB 166, Section
265.335(B)(3), to receive a QCS Grant. (See the HSA School Leader Affidavits, attached hereto
as Exhibits 1 through 12.) In addition, Concept met the requirements in Section
265.335(B)(3)(b)(ii) including subpart (III) that requires: “The operator is in good standing in all
states where it operates schools.” (See Concept’s Declaration attached hereto as Exhibit 13.)
Accordingly, when the HSA Schools completed and timely submitted their ODE application
forms in late 2019 for a QCS Grant, they anticipated approval. Following their submission, ODE
corresponded with the HSA Schools with questions to clarify information. The HSA Schools
promptly responded. At no time did ODE raise any question about Relators’ or their contract
operator Concept meeting any criteria set forth in ODE’s application for QCS Grant funding.
Shockingly, through correspondence dated January 10, 2019 [sic], ODE’s Director Karl
Koenig notified the HSA Schools that their applications were denied and vaguely referred to
“business filings in Ohio and other states.” (Exhibit 14.) To justify the denial, ODE retroactively
added one eligibility criterion that was neither a part of House Bill 166 nor ODE’s own
application form. ODE’s invented criterion required Concept to be registered as a foreign
corporation with the Ohio Secretary of State in order for the HSA Schools to be eligible for a
QCS Grant. Perhaps even more shocking is the fact that ODE never properly verified whether
Concept was registered.
ODE’s determination and denial was improper for many reasons. First, none of the
requirements set forth in HB 166 address the necessity that a grant recipient’s operator be
registered as a foreign corporation in Ohio. In an ex post facto manner, ODE applied this after-

01205174v6 8
the-fact requirement, without ever providing the HSA Schools notice or an opportunity to
address it. ODE did this despite wide-open channels of communication to ask follow-up
questions about other information in the HSA Schools’ applications. Second, Concept met all of
the criteria established by ODE to be considered in good standing, as set forth within the
application form that ODE prepared and published. None of the criteria on ODE’s application
form requires registration with the Ohio Secretary of State. Third, ODE exceeded its statutory
and rulemaking authority in making this decision. ODE has no authority under Ohio law,
including HB 166, to make a determination that Concept (or any entity) is required to register
with the Ohio Secretary of State. Fourth, ODE made this unauthorized determination, after the
HSA Schools had already applied for QCS Grant funding, and without obtaining verification of
good standing from the Ohio Secretary of State. In fact, ODE never even bothered to
communicate with the Ohio Secretary of State about Concept’s corporate standing.
At bottom, ODE’s retroactive imposition of an additional criterion to define good
standing, outside of HB 166 and not contained on ODE’s own application form, is arbitrary,
capricious and contrary to law. The decision smacks of a purposeful attempt to deny
economically disadvantaged students funding intended for them by the Ohio Legislature and
Governor when it enacted the Quality Community Schools Support Grant program.
For the reasons set forth herein, a Writ of Mandamus must be issued compelling ODE to
immediately complete the processing of the HSA Schools’ applications and award QCS Grants
to the HSA Schools based upon the criteria set forth in House Bill 166 and ODE’s application
form. ODE’s denial of the HSA Schools’ application is without legal support or excuse.

01205174v6 9
II. THE PARTIES
1. Relator Horizon Science Academy of Lorain, Inc. is an Ohio Community School
organized under Ohio Revised Code Section 3314 with its principle place of business located
within Lorain County, Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Lorain attached as Exhibit 1.)
2. Relator Horizon Science Academy Youngstown, Inc. is an Ohio Community
School organized under R.C. 3314 with its principle place of business located within Mahoning
County, Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Youngstown attached as Exhibit 2.)
3. Relator Horizon Science Academy Cincinnati High School, Inc. is an Ohio
Community School organized under R.C. 3314 with its principle place of business located within
Hamilton County, Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Cincinnati attached as Exhibit 3.)
4. Relator Horizon Educational Services, Inc. is an Ohio Community School
organized under R.C. 3314 with its principle place of business located within Cuyahoga County,
Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Cleveland High attached as Exhibit 4.)
5. Relator Horizon Science Academy – Cleveland Middle School is an Ohio
Cuyahoga County, Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Cleveland Middle attached as Exhibit 5.)
6. Relator Horizon Science Academy Elementary School, Inc. is an Ohio
Franklin County, Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Columbus Elementary attached as Exhibit 6.)
7. Relator Horizon Science Academy, Inc. is an Ohio Community School organized
under R.C. 3314 with its principle place of business located within Franklin County, Ohio. (See
Affidavit of HSA Columbus Middle attached as Exhibit 7.)

01205174v6 10
8. Relator Horizon Science Academy Primary School is an Ohio Community School
organized under R.C. 3314 with its principle place of business located within Franklin County,
Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Columbus Primary attached as Exhibit 8.)
9. Relator Horizon Science Academy - Dayton is an Ohio Community School
organized under R.C. 3314 with its principle place of business located within Montgomery
County, Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Dayton Elementary attached as Exhibit 9.)
10. Relator Horizon Science Academy Dayton High School, Inc. is an Ohio
Montgomery County, Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Dayton High attached as Exhibit 10.)
11. Relator Horizon Science Academy – Springfield is an Ohio Community School
organized under R.C. 3314 with its principle place of business located within Lucas County,
Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Springfield attached as Exhibit 11.)
12. Relator Horizon Science Academy – Toledo is an Ohio Community School
organized under R.C. 3314 with its principle place of business located within Lucas County,
Ohio. (See Affidavit of HSA Toledo attached as Exhibit 12.)
13. Each of the Relators bring this action in the name of the State of Ohio on relation
to each of the HSA Schools as verified by the attached Affidavits.
14. Respondent the Ohio Department of Education is the State of Ohio’s Department
responsible for governing and administering the public education system of the State of Ohio
including the HSA Schools and QCS Grant funding under HB 166.
15. Respondent Karl J. Koenig is the Director of the Office of Community Schools
for the Ohio Department of Education and is primarily responsible for governing and

01205174v6 11
administering Ohio Community Schools including the HSA Schools and QCS Grant funding
under HB 166.
16. Respondents the Governor, the Ohio State Board of Education and the Ohio
Superintendent of the Board of Education are each responsible and control the Ohio Department
of Education’s compliance with HB 166 and ultimately the QCS Grant program. Respondents
are collectively referred to herein as “ODE”.
17. Non-party Concept is the operator of the HSA Schools, pursuant to contract, and
is organized as a non-profit under the laws of the State of Illinois. (See Declaration of Concept
attached as Exhibit 13.)
18. This Court has original jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Article IV, Sec.
2(B)(1)(b) of the Ohio Constitution and R.C. 2731.02.
III. THE QUALITY COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SUPPORT GRANT PROGRAM
19. As part of House Bill 166, the State of Ohio budget bill for the fiscal years 2020
and 2021 (“HB 166”), the Ohio Legislature enacted and the Governor signed a Quality
Community Schools Support Grant program to provide additional funding to certain Ohio
Community Schools designated as “Community Schools of Quality” under HB 166.
20. Pursuant to HB 166, Section 265.335, Ohio Community Schools designated as
“Community Schools of Quality” are eligible to receive a grant of up to $1,750 for each student
identified as economically disadvantaged and up to $1,000 for other students enrolled for fiscal
year 2020 and 2021 (the “QCS Grant”).
21. House Bill 166, Section 265.335, directed the Ohio Department of Education to
make the QCS Grant payments to eligible schools at the beginning of each calendar year.

01205174v6 12
22. Each of the HSA Schools met all of the criteria required by HB 166, Section
265.335(B)(3), in order to be eligible to receive the QCS Grant. (See Affidavits attached as
Exhibits 1 through 12.)
23. Relators each had a plain and clear legal right to apply for a QCS Grant and ODE
had a clear legal duty to approve Relators’ applications.
24. Some of these criteria relate to the HSA School’s operator Concept. Specifically,
HB 166, Section 265.335(B)(3)(b)(ii)(III) requires that: “The operator is in good standing is all
states where it operates schools.”
25. HB 166 does not define “good standing” or detail any criteria that must be met in
order to establish good standing.
26. As part of the implementation of the QCS Grant program enacted through HB
166, Section 265.335, ODE was responsible to draft the application forms that must be
completed by Ohio Community Schools to make application for the QCS Grant.
27. Relevant portions of each of the HSA Schools’ completed applications are
attached to each of the HSA Schools’ Affidavits attached hereto as Exhibits 1 through 12.
28. ODE prepared application forms that included requests for information that met
all of the requirements established by the Ohio Legislature in HB 166 in order to receive a QCS
Grant.
29. An Ohio community school operator is not required to register as a foreign
corporation pursuant to HB 166 in order to establish good standing.
30. Accordingly, the forms prepared by ODE did not include any request for
information related to a community school’s operator’s registration as a foreign corporation with
the Ohio Secretary of State.

01205174v6 13
31. Because the HSA Schools and Concept met the criteria for Subpart (B)(3)(b)(ii)
of Section 265.335 of HB 166, the HSA Schools completed the applicable Application Form
entitled “Quality Community Schools Support Request for Information – Criteria 3” (the
“Criteria 3 Application Form”) in order to apply for the QCS Grant.
32. Each of the HSA Schools’ completed Criteria 3 Application Forms are attached to
each of the HSA Schools’ Affidavits attached hereto as Exhibits 1 through 12.
33. The Criteria 3 Application Form drafted by ODE quoted the requirements set
forth in HB 166, Section 265.335(B)(3)(b)(ii), which were comprised of the following 4 criteria:
“(I) One of the operator's schools in another state performed better than the school
district in which the school is located, as determined by the Department.
(II) At least fifty per cent of the total number of students enrolled in all of the
operator's schools are economically disadvantaged, as determined by the
Department.
(III) The operator is in good standing in all states where it operates schools.
(IV) The Department has determined that the operator does not have any financial
viability issues that would prevent it from effectively operating a community school
in Ohio.”
34. Although not defined in HB 166, ODE’s Criteria 3 Application Form provided
criteria in order to meet ODE’s own definition of “good standing”. Specifically, ODE’s Form
stated:
“iii. The operator is in good standing in all states where it operates schools.
For the operator to meet the definition of good standing, the operator must demonstrate
for the most recent school year:
• All schools it currently manages in all states are not on probation;
• All schools it currently manages in all states are not in receipt of notices of intent to
suspend operations from the schools’ current sponsors/authorizers;
• All schools it currently manages in all states have not been required by their
sponsors/authorizers to suspend operations;
• All schools it currently manages are not in receipt of notices of termination from their
current sponsors/authorizers;
• All schools it currently manages do not have unresolved corrective action plans from
the state department of education, current sponsor/authorizer or current operator.

01205174v6 14
Please provide a list of all schools managed by the operator, including the following
information in an Excel spreadsheet:
• School’s unique school identifier;
• School’s name;
• Type of school;
• State of location of school.
The operator also must complete the criteria 3(b)(ii) Operator Assurances Supplement
assuring the operator meets the definition of good standing, as defined above. The
Department may request additional documentation from the operator to verify it meets
any or all parts of the definition of good standing.”
(See each of the HSA Schools’ Criteria 3 Application Forms attached to Affidavits 1
through 12.)
35. Non-party Concept met each of the criteria set forth in HB 166,
265.335(B)(3)(b)(ii) and the criteria defined by ODE in the Criteria 3 Application Form. (See
Affidavit of Concept attached as Exhibit 13.)
36. Accordingly, each of the HSA Schools separately completed and timely submitted
an application for the QCS Grant, including the Criteria 3 Application Form, that established that
each school met all of the criteria necessary to be designated as a Community School of Quality
and to be eligible for a QCS Grant.
37. The HSA Schools separately completed Criteria 3 Application Forms were timely
submitted to ODE on or about November 13, 2019.
IV.ODE IMPROPERLY DENIES THE HSA SCHOOLS’ QCS GRANT
38. ODE had a clear legal duty to approve Relators’ applications for QCS Grants.
39. Through correspondence dated January 10, 2019 [sic], however, Defendant
Director Koenig notified the HSA Schools that their application for the QCS Grant was denied.
(Exhibit 14 attached hereto.)

01205174v6 15
40. Defendant Director Koenig vaguely reasoned that, after review of, among other
things, “business filings in Ohio and other states” the HSA Schools applications could not be
approved.
41. None of the requirements set forth in HB 166, Section 265.335, nor ODE’s QCS
Grant application forms reference “Business filings in Ohio”.
42. Nonetheless, Director Koenig’s correspondence stated that ODE had determined
that the HSA Schools did not meet one criterion for the following reason:
“Section 265.335(B)(3)(b)(ii)(III) – Failed to demonstrate the organization is in good
standing in all states where it operates schools. Specifically, Concept Schools NFP is not
registered as a foreign corporation with the Ohio Secretary of State’s office and,
therefore, is not in good standing in Ohio.
As such, the [HSA Schools] will not be designated as Community Schools of Quality and
are ineligible to receive funding from the Quality Community School Support fund this
year.”
43. HB 166, Section 265.335 does not require a Community School of Quality
Operator to be registered as a foreign corporation.
44. ODE imposed this requirement upon the HSA Schools retroactively.
45. In ex post facto fashion, ODE’s inclusion of this requirement imposes a new
obligation in respect to considerations already past and imposes a new burden upon Relators
never contemplated in HB 166.
46. When ODE drafted the QCS Grant program application form, even ODE did not
include a request for information related to foreign corporation registration with the Ohio
Secretary of State from any applicant.
47. Not all entities operating in Ohio are required to register as foreign entities with
the Ohio Secretary of State. For example, Ohio Revised Code Chapter 1703 pertains to foreign

01205174v6 16
entity registration requirements for which there are several exceptions, including without
limitation those stated in R.C. 1703.02 entitled “Corporations Excepted.”
48. ODE is not authorized by HB 166, Revised Code Section 1703 or Ohio law to
determine whether non-party Concept is required to register as a foreign entity (with the Ohio
Secretary of State) under Ohio law or for the purposes of determining good standing under HB
166, Section 265.335 (or any other Ohio law).
49. HB 166, Section 265.335 does not authorize ODE to base the QCS Grant decision
on business filings with the Ohio Secretary of State.
50. HB 166, Section 265.335(B)(3)(b)(ii)(III) does not define “good standing” as
meeting the registration requirements of the Ohio Secretary of State.
51. The Ohio Legislature, in another section of HB 166 did impose a requirement that
certain businesses be in “good standing” with the Ohio Secretary of State “if required” in order
to be eligible for state benefits.
52. Specifically, HB 166, Section 122.86 (A)(1)(a)(ii) relates to a “Small Business
Enterprise” tax credit and specifically includes the requirement that a qualifying enterprise “Is in
good standing with the secretary of state, if the enterprise is required to be registered with the
secretary.”
53. ODE retroactively imposed the foreign entity registration requirement, after the
HSA Schools timely submitted their applications, where the Ohio Legislature decided not to, and
in contravention with Ohio law.
54. The retroactive imposition of an additional criterion or requirement to define good
standing outside of those set forth in HB 166 Section 265.335 is arbitrary, capricious,
discriminatory, unconstitutional, in bad faith and contrary to law.

01205174v6 17
55. Relators have a clear right to QCS Grants having met all of the criteria set forth in
HB 166 and ODE’s own application form.
56. ODE has a clear legal duty to award each of the HSA Schools, pursuant to HB
166, Section 265.335, a grant of up to $1,750 for each student identified as economically
disadvantaged and up to $1,000 for other students enrolled for fiscal year 2020 (and 2021).
57. ODE’s denial is not subject to appeal or other administrative reconsideration and
therefore the HSA Schools have been denied due process.
58. The HSA Schools informally requested that ODE reconsider the denial of the
QCS Grant by letter dated January 19, 2020. The letter explained that Concept “is in good
standing with the State of Ohio in accordance with the parameters determined in the application
developed by ODE [and] is registered with ODE and has received an IRN.” (Exhibit 15.)
59. ODE reiterated its denial, citing ODE’s retroactive and erroneous interpretation of
HB 166 and improper and unauthorized application of R.C. Chapter 1703, by letter dated
February 12, 2020. (Exhibit 16.)
60. The HSA Schools have served 3 requests for public records pertaining to ODE’s
denial of their application for QCS Grants including the good standing requirement. None of
ODE’s responses included any communications nor documents from the Ohio Secretary of State.
61. Upon information and belief, ODE relied upon a simple internet search of the
Ohio Secretary of State’s website to determine whether Concept was registered as a foreign
corporation. The Ohio Secretary of State’s website, however, contains a disclaimer that the
information provided is for “informational purposes only” and “any certification of authenticity
of this information must be provide by the office of the Ohio Secretary of State.” Accordingly, it

01205174v6 18
is not a reliable or appropriate source of information for purposes of making a determination to
award a QCS Grant.
62. ODE’s decision to deny the HSA Schools’ applications based upon unreliable and
uncertified information is arbitrary, capricious, discriminatory in bad faith and contrary to law.
63. ODE’s decision to deny the HSA Schools’ applications was premised upon an
unauthorized interpretation and application of R.C. Chapter 1703 and therefore was arbitrary,
capricious, discriminatory in bad faith and contrary to law.
64. Relators have a clear legal right to a QCS Grant pursuant to HB 166.
65. Respondent ODE has a clear legal duty to approve Relators’ QCS Grant funding.
66. Relators have been presently injured by ODE’s wrongful denial of QCS grant
funding.
67. Relators have no adequate remedy at law and relief cannot otherwise be obtained
except through this Petition and Complaint for Writ of Mandamus.
68. A Writ of Mandamus must issue because the HSA Schools have met all of the
legal requirements of HB 166, Section 265.335(B)(3)(b)(ii)(III) and the criteria and definitions
established by ODE as set forth in the Criteria 3 Application Form to be eligible for a QCS
Grant.
REQUESTED RELIEF
69. For the reasons set forth above, the HSA Schools respectfully request that this
Court:
a. Find in favor of each of the Relator HSA Schools on this Petition and
Complaint for Writ of Mandamus;

01205174v6 19
b. Enter a Writ of Mandamus directing ODE and Respondents to approve
each of Relators’ QCS Grant applications;
c. Order ODE and Respondents to award each of the HSA Schools a grant,
pursuant to HB 166, Section 265.335, in an amount up to $1,750 for each
student identified as economically disadvantaged and up to $1,000 for
other students enrolled for fiscal year 2020;
d. Award to Relators their litigation expenses, including reasonable attorney
fees and costs incurred in bringing this action;
e. For such other relief as this Court finds just and equitable.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Nicholas J. Dertouzos
NICHOLAS J. DERTOUZOS (0071018)
ARTHUR L. CLEMENTS, III (0038159)
Attorney for Plaintiffs
Republic Building, Suite 1400
25 West Prospect Avenue
Cleveland, Ohio 44115-1048
Phone: (216) 621-7227
Email: dertouzos@nicola.com
tclements@nicola.com

AFFIDAVIT OF VERIFICATION
Arthur L.Clements, III, being first duly sworn, states as follows:
I am one of the attorneys for the Relator HSA Schools in the above captioned matter and
competent to provide the following testimony. The information set forth herein is true based
knowledge, except for that information which is compiled from available
documents, including the Affidavits and Declarations attached hereto, for which I am informed
and believe that it is true to the best of my knowledge.
upon my own
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.
%iAARTHUR ELEMENTS, III
<f
^2v7m
PUBLIC
,[
_CKY SCHEIMAN, Attorney
Notary Public, State of Ohio
My Comm
"
! rI W > !I W j
—..... Has No Expiration Date
Section 147.03.R.C.

IN THE OHIO SUPREME COURT
STATE EX REL.
LORAIN, INC. ET AL.
)
)
)
)
Relators )
)vs.
) AFFIDAVIT OF DANIEL
SUMER IN SUPPORT OF
PETITION FOR WRIT OF
MANDAMUS
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION )
ET AL. )
Respondents. )
SS.)
)COUNTY OF
Daniel Sumer, being first duly sworn, states as follows:
The information set forth in this Affidavit is based upon my own personal1.
knowledge and I am competent to provide sworn testimony as to all matters herein.
I am the Principal for Horizon Science Academy of Lorain, Inc. (“I-ISA”) and
authorized to provide this sworn testimony on behalf of IiSA as HSA’s designated
2.
representative. HSA is sometimes referred to as Florizon Science Academy Lorain.
FISA is open-enrollment, public community school and has been assigned IRN3.
011533 by the Ohio Department of Education (“ODE”).
FISA is located in the City of Lorain in Lorain County, Ohio.4.
01208191vl
EXHIBIT
isS3
S3
3

HSA is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt Ohio public benefit corporation.5. HSA is
independently operated by the Board of Directors.
HSA contracts with Concept Schools NFP (“Concept”) for school management6.
services.
I was involved in completing and approved HSA’s application for a Quality7.
Community School Support Grant (“QCS Grant”) pursuant to Ohio House Bill 166, the fiscal
years 2020 and 2021 State budget bill.
8. The ODE provided HSA with an application form that set forth the specific
eligibility criteria that were required to be met in order to qualify for a QCS Grant. Attached as
Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the portions of that application which relate to the
captioned Petition for Writ of Mandamus that are maintained in the ordinary course of HSA’s
business as a school.
HSA met all of the eligibility criteria required by House Bill 166 and ODE’s9.
application form in order to receive a QCS Grant.
10. In addition, it is my understanding based upon my familiarity with the underlying
facts, and after reviewing the Criteria 3 Application Form provided by ODE, that Concept met
the requirements in House Bill 166 and ODE’s criteria to be considered an operator in good
standing.
11. Accordingly, when HSA completed and timely submitted our ODE application
form for a QCS Grant, HSA believed we had a clear legal right to a QCS Grant and anticipated
approval.
2

12. While the application was being processed, ODE did not raise any concern to
HSA about meeting any criteria set forth in ODE’s application form.
Through correspondence dated January 10, 2019 [sic], ODE’s Director Karl13.
Koenig notified HSA that our application was denied. ODE’s denial was apparently based upon
a new eligibility criterion that was not contained on ODE’s own application form. ODE never
communicated that new criterion to HSA prior to Director Koenig’s correspondence.
ODE’s retroactive imposition of this additional criterion as grounds to deny14.
HSA’s application after the application was submitted is arbitrary, capricious and contrary to my
understanding of the intent of the Quality Community Schools Support Grant program passed by
the Ohio legislature.
ODE’s denial is a purposefully wrongful attempt to deny HSA’s economically15.
disadvantaged students funding intended for them by the Ohio legislature and Governor when it
enacted the House Bill 166 and Quality Community Schools Support Grant program.
16. ODE has a clear legal duty to approve HSA’s application and provide HSA QCS
Grant funding.
17. HSA has been presently injured and will continue to be harmed by ODE’s
wrongful denial of QCS Grant funding that is required to be provided to HSA as a matter of law.
18. HSA has no adequate remedy at law and relief cannot otherwise be obtained
except through a Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
3

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.
7'»*
DANIEL SUMER
*1 day ofJune, 2020.SWORN TO BEFORE ME and subscribed in my presence this
A
NOTARY PUBUIC
s Brenda J. Stenger
} Notary Public, Stateof Ohio
/ My CommissionExpires
November 23, 2024
4

r.'rrr *£**??'
#EachChildOurFuture
r
Quality Community Schools Support
Request for Information - Criteria 3
House Bill 166 (the FY20-FY21 state budget bill) established a quality community schools support grant to
provide additional funding to community schools designated as a Community School of Quality. Qualified
community schools under the program are eligible to receive up to $1,750 in each fiscal year for each pupil
identified as economically disadvantaged and up to $1,000 in each fiscal year for all others. Payments for the
current fiscal year are calculated using the final adjusted full-time equivalent number of students enrolled in the
community school for the prior fiscal year, except if the school is in its first year of operation. For schools in the
first year of operation, the payment is calculated using the adjusted full-time equivalent number of students
enrolled in the school for the current fiscal year as of the date the payment is made, as reported by the school
pursuant to section 3314.08 of the Ohio Revised Code. By Jan. 31 of each fiscal year, the Ohio Department of
Education will make payments to each community school designated as a Community School of Quality.
Community schools must satisfy at least one of the following criteria to receive funding.
Criteria 1:
The community school meets all of the following criteria:
(a) The school’s sponsor was rated “Exemplary” or “Effective” on the sponsor’s most recent evaluation
conducted under section 3314.06 of the Revised Code.
(b) The school received a higher Performance Index score than the school district in which the school is
located on the two most recent Ohio School Report Cards issued for the school under section 3302.03
of the Revised Code.
(c) The school received an overall grade of "A" or "B" for the Value-Added progress dimension on the most
recent report card issued for the school under section 3302.03 of the Revised Code or is a school
described under division (A)(4) of section 3314.35 of the Revised Code and did not receive a grade for
the Value-Added progress dimension on the most recent report card.
(d) At least 50 percent of the students enrolled in the school are economically disadvantaged, as
determined by the Ohio Department of Education.
Criteria 2:
(a) The school’s sponsor was rated "Exemplary" or "Effective" on the sponsor's most recent evaluation
(b) The school is in its first year of operation or the school opened as a kindergarten school and has added
one grade per year and has been in operation for fewer than four school years.
(c) The school is replicating an operational and instructional model used by a communi
in division (B)(1) of this section. EXHIBIT
Criteria 3:
(a) The school's sponsor was rated "Exemplary" or "Effective" on the sponsor's most recent evaluation
JL
Department
of Education
PAGE 1 | Quality Community School Request for Information Criteria 3 | October 2019

TZrwmm
#EachChildOurFuture
r ; i
(b) The school contracts with an operator that operates schools in other states and meets at least one of
the following criteria:
(i) Has operated a school that received a grant funded through the federal Charter Schools
Program established under 20 U.S.C. 7221 or received funding from the Charter School
Growth Fund; or
(ii) Meets all of the following criteria:
(I) One of the operator’s schools in another state performed better than the school district in which
the school is located, as determined by the Department.
(II) At least 50 percent of the total number of students enrolled in all of the operator’s schools are
economically disadvantaged, as determined by the Department.
(Ill) The operator is in good standing in all states where it operates schools.
(IV) The Department has determined the operator does not have any financial viability issues that
would prevent it from effectively operating a community school in Ohio.
A school that is designated as a Community School of Quality under division (B) shall maintain that designation
for the two fiscal years following the fiscal year in which the school was initially designated as a Community
School of Quality.
For the Department to make a designation of a quality community school under Criteria 3, information must be
provided to the Department from the operator of a community school. The information below outlines the
necessary information for the Department to make the determination and the process for submission.
JL
Department
of Education
i. A:,',,.

#EachChildOurFuture
r i
Criteria 3{b)(i) Specific Requirements
Operators with community schools that meet the criteria in section 3(b)(i) must complete this form.
Criteria 3(b)(i) Requirements:
Not
Criteria Yes No
Applicable
The school’s sponsor was rated “Exemplary” or “Effective” on the sponsor’s
most recent evaluation conducted under section 3314.06 of the Revised
Code.
The school contracts with an operator that operates schools in other states
AND has operated a school that received a grant funded through the federal
Charter Schools Program established under 20 U.S.C. 7221 or received
funding from the Charter School Growth Fund.
Criteria 3(b)(i) Required Narrative:
If the community school believes they meet the criteria in section 3(b)(i) to qualify as a Community School of
Quality, indicate the name of the operator and the school the operator has operated that received a grant
funded through the federal Charter Schools Program established under 20 U.S.C. 7221 or received funding
from the Charter School Growth Fund. Please specify the exact name of the grant and the year the school
received the grant.
Operator Affirmations:
I attest the application requesting quality community schools support grant funds meets all eligibility
requirements for the criteria indicated above.
Position:Name:
Signature: Date:
JL
Department
of Education

#EachChildOurFuture
1
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Specific Requirements
Operators of community schools that believe they meet the criteria in section 3(b)(ii) must complete the criteria
3(b)(ii) Required Narrative and provide supporting documentation.
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Requirements:
Not
NoCriteria Yes
Applicable
Code.
AND meets all of the following criteria:
(I) One of the operator’s schools in another state performed better
than the school district in which the school is located, as
determined by the Department.
At least 50 percent of the total number of students enrolled in all of
the operator’s schools are economically disadvantaged, as
(II)
The operator is in good standing in all states where it operates
schools.
(Ill)
The Department has determined the operator does not have any
financial viability issues that would prevent it from effectively
operating a community school in Ohio.
(IV)
. Sedat Duman . President&CEOPosition:Name:
Digitally signed by Sedat Duman
Date: 2019.11.13 12:58:52
-06'00'
Sedat Duman . 11/13/2019Date:Signature:
JL
Department
of Education

#EachChildOurFuture
r
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Required Narrative and Supporting Documentation
If the community school believes that it meets the criteria in section 3(b)(ii) to qualify as a Community School of
Quality, the operator of the community school must demonstrate the following qualities by providing the
following information to the Department.
i. One of the operator’s schools in another state must have performed better than the school district in
which the school is located, as defined below.
For the operator to meet this requirement, the operator must demonstrate one of the schools it operates
in another state achieved proficiency level in all reported grades for all students in English language
arts, math and science for grades 3 through 8 and/or reported high school equivalency [for proficiency]
is higher than the district the operator’s school is located based on the most recent available data
submitted by each state for federal accountability.
Please provide the name and address of the school, the public district the school is located in, NCES
number and a link to the state’s accountability system that explains how the ratings for the school were
calculated in an Excel spreadsheet.
ii. At least 50 percent of the total number of students enrolled in all of the operator’s schools are
economically disadvantaged, as defined by the U.S. Department of Education’s EdFacts reporting.
Please provide a list of all schools managed by the operator and include the following information for
each school in an Excel spreadsheet;
• Type of school;
The Department will verify the information provided by the operator for all of its schools against the
data collected via the U.S. Department of Education’s EdFacts reporting.
iii. The operator is in good standing in all states where it operates schools.
For the operator to meet the definition of good standing, the operator must demonstrate for the most
recent school year:
• All schools it currently manages in all states are not in receipt of notices of intent to suspend
operations from the schools’ current sponsors/authorizers;
• All schools it currently manages are not in receipt of notices of termination from their current
sponsors/authorizers;
• All schools it currently manages do not have unresolved corrective action plans from the state
department of education, current sponsor/authorizer or current operator.
Please provide a list of all schools managed by the operator, including the following information in an
Excel spreadsheet:
• Type of school;
JL
Department
of Education
ft’»: .'
A -:.t ;'.‘T -

i - v
-/.
#EachChildOurFuture
r
The operator also must complete the criteria 3(b)(ii) Operator Assurances Supplement assuring the
operator meets the definition of good standing, as defined above. The Department may request
additional documentation from the operator to verify it meets any or all parts of the definition of good
standing.
iv. The Department has determined the operator does not have any financial viability issues that would
prevent it from effectively operating a community school in Ohio.
For the operator to meet this definition, the operator must demonstrate:
• All schools it manages have not been determined to be unauditable by the auditor of state in
each state the operator has managed schools;
• All schools it manages have not had unresolved findings for recovery in each state the operator
has managed schools;
• All schools it manages have not received opinions other than unqualified opinions from the most
recently released annual fiscal audits from each state the operator has managed schools;
• All schools it manages have not had other significant issues related to fiscal condition, such as
ongoing concern comments in multiple audit reports, material misstatements in financial
statements, and/or findings for financial matters related to internal controls or oversight of federal
funds from each state the operator has managed schools.
Please provide copies of the requested documentation listed in Appendix A - Quality Community
Schools Support - Financial Viability Checklist. The operator also must complete the criteria (3)(b)(ii)
Operator Assurances Supplement assuring the operator does not have any financial viability issues
that would prevent it from effectively operating a community school in Ohio.
L J
Department
of Education

#EachChildOurFuture
r Criteria 3(b)(ii) Operator Assurances Supplement
Operators of community schools who believe they meet criteria 3(b)(ii) to be designated as a Community
School of Quality must provide the following assurances to the Department.
Good Standing Assurances:
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states are not on probation.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states are not in receipt of notices of intent to suspend
operations from the schools’ current sponsors/authorizers.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states have not been required by their
sponsors/authorizers to suspend operations.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states are not in receipt of notices of termination from their
current sponsors/authorizers.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states do not have unresolved corrective action plans from
the state department, current sponsor/authorizer or current operator.
I agree
L J
Department
of Education

#EachChildOurFuture
r i
Financial Viability Assurances:
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states have not been determined to be unauditable by the
auditor of state in each state the operator has managed schools.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states have not had unresolved findings for recovery in
each state the operator has managed schools.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states have not received opinions other than unqualified
opinions from the most recently released annual fiscal audits from each state in which the operator has
managed schools.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states have not had other significant issues related to fiscal
condition, such as ongoing concern comments in multiple audit reports for the same school, material
misstatements in financial statements, and/or findings for financial matters related to internal controls or
oversight of federal funds from each state in which the operator has managed schools.
^
I agree
JL
Department
of Education
«i. .-. •.•
... UX :ij

#EachChildOurFuture
r
Operator Attestation of Assurances
By signing, I attest that I have reviewed the above information and it is true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge.
Sedat Duman President&CEOName: Position:
Date: 2019.11.13 12:59:32
-06'00'
Sedat Duman 11/13/2019Signature: Date:
This form can be signed by hand or electronically by clicking "Fill & Sign" in the toolbar. Once clicked, options
will appear. Click "Place Signature" and a new box will appear. You can create a new electronic signature or
add an existing password-protected signature.
The assurances must be submitted with all other required narratives and supporting documentation requested
by the Department as part of the application for consideration.
NOTE: The Department may request additional documentation from the operator at any point of the application
review process to verify the operator meets any or all parts of the definition of good standing and the operator
does not have any financial viability issues that would prevent it from effectively operating a community school
in Ohio. If the Department discovers any of the information provided by the operator above is inaccurate at any
point in the review process or the operator fails to fully respond to a request from the Department for more
information, all community schools indicated as meeting criteria 3(b)(ii) by the operator may be ineligible
to receive further consideration from the Department for the quality community schools support grant.
L. j
Department
of Education

#EachChildOurFuture
r 1
Appendix - A Quality Community School Support- Financial Viability Checklist
QUALITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL FUNDING
COMMUNITY SCHOOL OPERATOR - FINANCIAL VIABILITY CHECKLIST
REQUEST PERIOD - FISCAL YEAR 2020
Section I: Operators with Audited Financial Statements with opinion and footnotes - Please provide
the following:
Most recent Audit Report (includes audited financial statements released with footnotes) - Must have
been released within the last 24 months. Please note, compilation reports do not qualify as audited
financial statements. If your audit was released more than 24 months ago, please follow the checklist
for unaudited statements in Section II.
Listing of any loan receivables (including those associated with community schools) that are not
reported in the financial statements submitted with this checklist.
Listing of any loans made to community schools that have been forgiven by the operator and currently
are listed within the financial statements provided, along with the reason(s) the loan(s) were forgiven,
amount forgiven and date approved by operator.
Listing of community schools that have had FTE adjustments (for example, claw back, final adjustments
#1, #2) and a description of how the “true-up” from the operator took place for all FTE adjustments for
each school affected during the audit report period. If not included in the audited statements provided,
identify the amount of the “true up” accounts payable to the school that has been or will be repaid.
Please identify all FTE adjustments that are under appeal.
Section II - Operators with no current audit report (audited financial statements released with opinion
and footnotes), please provide the following required financial documents for the most
recent fiscal year ending. (Note, the below list is a preliminary set of necessary documentation.
Additional documentation may be requested as the financial viability assessment is completed.)
Balance Sheet: Accrual basis is required. The balance sheet “as of date” should be the same as the
— “final date” of the period covered by the Statement of Activities.
Statement of Activities: Accrual basis is required (income statement/profit and loss statement). The final
day of the income statement’s reporting period should align with the “as of date” on the balance
— sheet.
General Ledger: Provide a detailed report by account for all figures reported on both the Balance Sheet
— and Statement of Activities.
—I
|_ Listing of any loans made to community schools that have been forgiven by the operator and currently
— amount forgiven and date approved by operator.
Please return all required documents and checklist noting that all documents have been provided following the
submission instructions below.
JL
Department
of Education
• iiv v
-<C i/X;> ••
/•
miiii.

#EaciiChildOurFuture
Timeline for Submission
1
Applicant should note the timelines listed below:
Nov. 22, 2019: The applicant must complete the Request for Information in its entirety and submit all
required narratives and attachments by 11:59 p.m. on the due date to receive consideration. Only
complete submissions will be considered. The Department will not review any late or incomplete
submissions after the deadline.
Jan.15, 2020: The applicant will receive a decision from the Department on the status of the
submission.
Jan. 31, 2020: The Department will make payments to each eligible community school of quality.
All applicants must complete the Request for Information in its entirety and provide the criteria-specific
narrative and supporting documentation to receive consideration from the Department. The Department will not
score any late or incomplete submissions. If you have questions about the Request for Information, please
email communitv.schools@education.ohio.gov.
Directions for Submission
The Department will collect documentation from operators seeking to complete the Request for Information
utilizing SharePoint. To request access, please email Marv.Cotton@education.ohio.gov to request access to
the SharePoint site. The email request should include:
• Name of the operator;
• Name and email addresses of all persons seeking access to the SharePoint site;
• A phone number to contact if there are additional follow up questions.
The deadline to request access to the SharePoint site is Wednesday, Nov. 13. The deadline for submission of
the Request for Information is Friday, Nov. 22, 2019.
L J
Department
of Education

#EachChildOurFuture
r
Request for Information - Criteria 3 Rubric
Submission Date: ^^^5/2019
Horizon Science Academy Lorain . 011533School Name:
Sponsor Name' Buckeye Community Hope Foundation
If applicable:
Operator Name: Concept Schools
School IRN:
. 000862Sponsor IRN:
. 014979Operator IRN:
Each application will be rated using the criteria included in the appropriate application rubric. Applications will
be evaluated as Met or not Met for each of the condition requirements identified in the criteria the community
school qualifies. A committee will review all documentation submitted for the specific criteria and determine
whether to grant approval for the quality community schools support grant funds. Community schools that meet
the requirements outlined in the criteria will be approved for the quality community schools support grant funds.
All community schools designated as a Community School of Quality will receive payments from the
Department by Jan. 31 of each fiscal year.
Which criteria does the community school meet to qualify as a Community School of Quality as defined under
section 265.335 of House Bill 166?
Criteria 3(b)(ii)
Criteria 3(b)(i) Rubric
Not
Criteria 3(b)(i) Requirements Met Met
The school’s sponsor was rated “Exemplary” or “Effective” on the sponsor’s most recent
evaluation conducted under section 3314.06 of the Revised Code.
The school contracts with an operator that operates schools in other states AND has
operated a school that received a grant funded through the federal Charter Schools
Growth Fund.
Department Staff Review Yes No
Did the community school satisfy all the conditions under criteria 3(a) to qualify as a
Community School of Quality defined under Section 265.335 of House Bill 166?
Did the community school include all required narrative and supporting documentation
requirements outlined in criteria 3(b), Narrative and Supporting Documentation
Requirements, of the application?
Comments:
J
Department
of Education
, . . BMP

#EachChildOurFuture
r
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Rubric
Not
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Requirements Met Met
The school contracts with an operator that operates schools in other states AND meets
all of the following criteria:
(I) One of the operator's schools in another state performed better than the
school district in which the school is located, as determined by the
Department.
(II) At least 50 percent of the total number of students enrolled in all of the
operator’s schools are economically disadvantaged, as determined by the
Department.
(IV) The Department has determined the operator does not have any
financial viability issues that would prevent it from effectively operating a
community school in Ohio.
Did the community school satisfy all of the conditions under criteria 3(b) to qualify as a
Comments:
Recommendation: Approved Not Approved
L A
Department
of Education

)STATE EX REL.
HORTZON SCIENCE ACADEMY OF
LORAIN, INC. ET AL.
)
)
)
Relators )
)vs.
AFFIDAVIT OF DEBRA
DAVIES IN SUPPORT OF
MANDAMUS
)
OH10 DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION )
ET AL. )
Respondents. )
&MLLM)
SS.
COUNTY OF
Debra Davies, being first duly sworn, states as follows:
The information set forth in this Affidavit is based upon my own personal
I am the President of the Board of Directors for Horizon Science Academy2.
Youngstown, Inc. (“FISA”) and authorized to provide this sworn testimony on behalf of FISA as
FISA’s designated representative. FISA is sometimes referred to as Horizon Science Academy
Youngstown.
HSA is open-enrollment, public community school and has been assigned IRN3.
HSA is located in the City of Youngstown in Mahoning County, Ohio.4.
EXHIBIT
D12055«v2 £
a2
3

HSA is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt Ohio public benefit corporation,
independently operated by the Board of Directors.
5. HSA is
6. HSA contracts with Concept Schools NFP (“Concept”) for school management
services.
7. I was involved in completing and approved HSA’s application for a Quality
Community School Support Grant (“QCS Grant”) pursuant to Ohio House Bill 166, the fiscal years
2020 and 2021 State budget bill.
The ODE provided HSA with an application form that set forth the specific8.
Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the portions of that application which relate to the captioned
Petition for Writ of Mandamus that are maintained in the ordinary course of HSA’s business as a
school.
10. In addition, it is my understanding based upon my familiarity with the underlying
facts, and after reviewing the Criteria 3 Application Form provided by ODE, that Concept met the
requirements in House Bill 166 and ODE’s criteria to be considered an operator in good standing.
11. Accordingly, when HSA completed and timely submitted our ODE application form
for a QCS Grant, HSA believed we had a clear legal right to a QCS Grant and anticipated approval.
12. While the application was being processed, ODE did not raise any concern to HSA
about meeting any criteria set forth in ODE’s application form.
13. Through correspondence dated January 10, 2019 [sic], ODE’s Director Karl Koenig
notified HSA that our application was denied. ODE’s denial was apparently based upon a new
2

eligibility criterion that was not contained on ODE’s own application form. ODE never
ODE’s retroactive imposition of this additional criterion as grounds to deny USA’s14.
application after the application was submitted is arbitrary, capricious and contrary to my
ODE’s denial is a purposefully wrongful attempt to deny HSA’s economically15.
disadvantaged students funding intended for them by the Ohio legislature and Governor when it
ODE has a clear legal duty to approve HSA’s application and provide HSA QCS16.
Grant funding.
HSA has been presently injured and will continue to be harmed by ODE’s wrongful17.
denial of QCS Grant funding that is required to be provided to HSA as a matter of law.
HSA has no18.
/
through a Petition for Writ of Mandamus. i
uFURTHER AFFIANT SAYETFI NAUGHT.

MI'
DEBRA DAVIES
, 2020.SWORN TO BEFORE ME and subscribed in
©beryl Breuitte
Notary Public
State of Ohio
My Commission Expires
October 20,2022
0
NOTARY PUBLIQJ
3

#EachChildOurFuture
r 1
Criteria 1:
Criteria 2:
(c) The school is replicating an operational and instructional model used by a community
|
Criteria 3:
$
(a) The school’s sponsor was rated "Exemplary" or "Effective" on the sponsor's most recent evaluation
AL
Department
of Education

#EachChildOurFutuire
Growth Fund; or
School of Quality.
L J
Department
of Education
>V' A

#EachChildOurFuture
r
Criteria 3(b)(i) Specific Requirements
Operators with community schools that meet the criteria in section 3(b)(i) must complete this form.
Criteria 3{b)(i) Requirements:
Not
Yes NoCriteria
Applicable
Code.
AND has operated a school that received a grant funded through the federal
Charter Schools Program established under 20 U.S.C. 7221 or received
funding from the Charter School Growth Fund.
Criteria 3(b)(i) Required Narrative:
If the community school believes they meet the criteria in section 3(b)(i) to qualify as a Community School of
Quality, indicate the name of the operator and the school the operator has operated that received a grant
funded through the federal Charter Schools Program established under 20 U.S.C. 7221 or received funding
from the Charter School Growth Fund. Please specify the exact name of the grant and the year the school
received the grant.
Position:Name:
Signature: Date:
JL
Department
of Education
iV'.OTH

#EachChildOurFuture
r
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Specific Requirements
Operators of community schools that believe they meet the criteria in section 3(b)(ii) must complete the criteria
3(b)(ii) Required Narrative and provide supporting documentation.
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Requirements:
Not
Criteria Yes No
Applicable
Code.
AND meets all of the following criteria:
(I) One of the operator’s schools in another state performed better
than the school district in which the school is located, as
At least 50 percent of the total number of students enrolled in all of
the operator’s schools are economically disadvantaged, as
(II)
The operator is in good standing in all states where it operates
schools.
(IN)
The Department has determined the operator does not have any
financial viability issues that would prevent it from effectively
operating a community school in Ohio.
(IV)
. Sedat Duman . President&CEOPosition:Name:
Date: 2019.11.13 13:03:40
-06'00'
Sedat Duman . 11/13/2019Signature: Date:
L J
Department
of EducationPAGE 41Quality Community School Request for Information Criteria 3 | October 2019

[rrr.Trrvrp'rr ~"Trr
#EachChildOurFuture
r 1
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Required Narrative and Supporting Documentation
If the community school believes that it meets the criteria in section 3(b)(ii) to qualify as a Community School of
Quality, the operator of the community school must demonstrate the following qualities by providing the
following information to the Department.
i. One of the operator’s schools in another state must have performed better than the school district in
which the school is located, as defined below.
For the operator to meet this requirement, the operator must demonstrate one of the schools it operates
in another state achieved proficiency level in all reported grades for all students in English language
arts, math and science for grades 3 through 8 and/or reported high school equivalency [for proficiency]
is higher than the district the operator’s school is located based on the most recent available data
submitted by each state for federal accountability.
Please provide the name and address of the school, the public district the school is located in, NCES
number and a link to the state’s accountability system that explains how the ratings for the school were
calculated in an Excel spreadsheet.
ii. At least 50 percent of the total number of students enrolled in all of the operator’s schools are
economically disadvantaged, as defined by the U.S. Department of Education’s EdFacts reporting.
Please provide a list of all schools managed by the operator and include the following information for
each school in an Excel spreadsheet;
• Type of school;
The Department will verify the information provided by the operator for all of its schools against the
data collected via the U.S. Department of Education’s EdFacts reporting.
iii. The operator is in good standing in all states where it operates schools.
For the operator to meet the definition of good standing, the operator must demonstrate for the most
recent school year:
• All schools it currently manages in all states are not in receipt of notices of intent to suspend
operations from the schools’ current sponsors/authorizers;
• All schools it currently manages are not in receipt of notices of termination from their current
sponsors/authorizers;
• All schools it currently manages do not have unresolved corrective action plans from the state
department of education, current sponsor/authorizer or current operator.
Please provide a list of all schools managed by the operator, including the following information in an
Excel spreadsheet:
• Type of school;
JL.
Department
of Education
ii-jf.ii'.'Ai BOB

#EachChUdOurFuture
1
The operator also must complete the criteria 3(b)(ii) Operator Assurances Supplement assuring the
operator meets the definition of good standing, as defined above. The Department may request
additional documentation from the operator to verify it meets any or all parts of the definition of good
standing.
iv. The Department has determined the operator does not have any financial viability issues that would
prevent it from effectively operating a community school in Ohio.
For the operator to meet this definition, the operator must demonstrate:
• All schools it manages have not been determined to be unauditable by the auditor of state in
each state the operator has managed schools;
• All schools it manages have not had unresolved findings for recovery in each state the operator
has managed schools;
• All schools it manages have not received opinions other than unqualified opinions from the most
recently released annual fiscal audits from each state the operator has managed schools;
• All schools it manages have not had other significant issues related to fiscal condition, such as
ongoing concern comments in multiple audit reports, material misstatements in financial
statements, and/or findings for financial matters related to internal controls or oversight of federal
funds from each state the operator has managed schools.
Please provide copies of the requested documentation listed in Appendix A - Quality Community
Schools Support -Financial Viability Checklist. The operator also must complete the criteria (3)(b)(ii)
Operator Assurances Supplement assuring the operator does not have any financial viability issues
that would prevent it from effectively operating a community school in Ohio.
JL
Department
of Education
;:>.v -.i

r*T~r-r,
----
#EachChildOurFuture
r 1
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Operator Assurances Supplement
Operators of community schools who believe they meet criteria 3(b)(ii) to be designated as a Community
School of Quality must provide the following assurances to the Department.
Good Standing Assurances:
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states are not on probation.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states are not in receipt of notices of intent to suspend
operations from the schools’ current sponsors/authorizers.
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states have not been required by their
sponsors/authorizers to suspend operations.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states are not in receipt of notices of termination from their
current sponsors/authorizers.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states do not have unresolved corrective action plans from
the state department, current sponsor/authorizer or current operator.
I agree
JL
Department
of Education
;.v,u-,'V. .

tr'vrz 0*>'•
*•
- 'C£
~
>."
#EachChildOurFuture
r 1
Financial Viability Assurances:
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states have not been determined to be unauditable by the
auditor of state in each state the operator has managed schools.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states have not had unresolved findings for recovery in
each state the operator has managed schools.
^
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states have not received opinions other than unqualified
opinions from the most recently released annual fiscal audits from each state in which the operator has
managed schools.
I agree
All schools currently managed by the operator in all states have not had other significant issues related to fiscal
condition, such as ongoing concern comments in multiple audit reports for the same school, material
misstatements in financial statements, and/or findings for financial matters related to internal controls or
oversight of federal funds from each state in which the operator has managed schools.
^
I agree
L J
Department
of Education
..’.V

#EachChildOurFuture
r 1
Operator Attestation of Assurances
By signing, I attest that I have reviewed the above information and it is true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge.
President&CEOSedat DumanName: Position:
Date: 2019.11.13 13:04:21
-06W
Sedat Duman 11/13/2019Signature: Date:
This form can be signed by hand or electronically by clicking "Fill & Sign" in the toolbar. Once clicked, options
will appear. Click "Place Signature" and a new box will appear. You can create a new electronic signature or
add an existing password-protected signature.
The assurances must be submitted with all other required narratives and supporting documentation requested
by the Department as part of the application for consideration.
NOTE: The Department may request additional documentation from the operator at any point of the application
review process to verify the operator meets any or all parts of the definition of good standing and the operator
does not have any financial viability issues that would prevent it from effectively operating a community school
in Ohio. If the Department discovers any of the information provided by the operator above is inaccurate at any
point in the review process or the operator fails to fully respond to a request from the Department for more
information, all community schools indicated as meeting criteria 3(b)(ii) by the operator may be ineligible
to receive further consideration from the Department for the quality community schools support grant.
AL
Department
of Education
. . Ml

—
#EachChildOurFuture
r Appendix - A Quality Community School Support- Financial Viability Checklist
QUALITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL FUNDING
COMMUNITY SCHOOL OPERATOR - FINANCIAL VIABILITY CHECKLIST
REQUEST PERIOD - FISCAL YEAR 2020
Section I: Operators with Audited Financial Statements with opinion and footnotes - Please provide
the following:
Most recent Audit Report (includes audited financial statements released with footnotes) - Must have
been released within the last 24 months. Please note, compilation reports do not qualify as audited
financial statements. If your audit was released more than 24 months ago, please follow the checklist
for unaudited statements in Section II.
Section II - Operators with no current audit report (audited financial statements released with opinion
and footnotes), please provide the following required financial documents for the most
recent fiscal year ending. (Note, the below list is a preliminary set of necessary documentation.
Additional documentation may be requested as the financial viability assessment is completed.)
Balance Sheet: Accrual basis is required. The balance sheet “as of date” should be the same as the
“final date” of the period covered by the Statement of Activities.
Statement of Activities: Accrual basis is required (income statement/profit and loss statement). The final
day of the income statement’s reporting period should align with the “as of date” on the balance
sheet.
General Ledger: Provide a detailed report by account for all figures reported on both the Balance Sheet
and Statement of Activities.
Please return all required documents and checklist noting that all documents have been provided following the
submission instructions below.
L. J
Department
of Education

#EachChildOurFuture
Timeline for Submission
1
Applicant should note the timelines listed below:
Nov. 22, 2019: The applicant must complete the Request for Information in its entirety and submit all
required narratives and attachments by 11:59 p.m. on the due date to receive consideration. Only
complete submissions will be considered. The Department will not review any late or incomplete
submissions after the deadline.
Jan. 15, 2020: The applicant will receive a decision from the Department on the status of the
submission.
Jan. 31, 2020: The Department will make payments to each eligible community school of quality.
All applicants must complete the Request for Information in its entirety and provide the criteria-specific
narrative and supporting documentation to receive consideration from the Department. The Department will not
score any late or incomplete submissions. If you have questions about the Request for Information, please
email communitv.schools@education.ohio.gov.
Directions for Submission
The Department will collect documentation from operators seeking to complete the Request for Information
utilizing SharePoint. To request access, please email Mary.Cotton@education.Ohio.gov to request access to
the SharePoint site. The email request should include:
• Name of the operator;
• Name and email addresses of all persons seeking access to the SharePoint site;
• A phone number to contact if there are additional follow up questions.
The deadline to request access to the SharePoint site is Wednesday, Nov. 13. The deadline for submission of
the Request for Information is Friday, Nov. 22, 2019.
L J
Department
of Education

#Each.CMldOurFu.ture
r
Request for Information - Criteria 3 Rubric
Submission Date: 11/15/2019
Horizon Science Academy Youngstown School IRN: 011986School Name:
Sponsor Name:Buckeye Community Hope Foundation . 000862Sponsor IRN:
If applicable:
Operator Name: Concept Schools . 014979Operator IRN:
Each application will be rated using the criteria included in the appropriate application rubric. Applications will
be evaluated as Met or not Met for each of the condition requirements identified in the criteria the community
school qualifies. A committee will review all documentation submitted for the specific criteria and determine
whether to grant approval for the quality community schools support grant funds. Community schools that meet
the requirements outlined in the criteria will be approved for the quality community schools support grant funds.
All community schools designated as a Community School of Quality will receive payments from the
Department by Jan. 31 of each fiscal year.
Which criteria does the community school meet to qualify as a Community School of Quality as defined under
section 265.335 of House Bill 166?
Criteria 3(b)(ii)
Criteria 3(b)(i) Rubric
Not
Criteria 3(b)(i) Requirements Met Met
The school contracts with an operator that operates schools in other states AND has
operated a school that received a grant funded through the federal Charter Schools
Growth Fund.
Did the community school satisfy all the conditions under criteria 3(a) to qualify as a
Comments:
J
Department
of Education
PAGE 12 | Quality Community School Request for Information Criteria 3 [ October 2019

#EachChildOurFuture
r
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Rubric
Not
Criteria 3(b)(ii) Requirements Met Met
The school contracts with an operator that operates schools in other states AND meets
all of the following criteria:
(I) One of the operator's schools in another state performed better than the
school district in which the school is located, as determined by the
Department.
(II) At least 50 percent of the total number of students enrolled in all of the
operator’s schools are economically disadvantaged, as determined by the
Department.
(IV) The Department has determined the operator does not have any
financial viability issues that would prevent it from effectively operating a
community school in Ohio.
Did the community school satisfy all of the conditions under criteria 3(b) to qualify as a
Comments:
Recommendation: Approved Not Approved
L A
Department
of Education
"
. MB

)STATE EX REL.
LORAIN, INC.ET AL.
)
)
)
) •Relators
)vs.
AFFIDAVIT OF DR. HOLLY
CARTWRIGHT IN SUPPORT OF
MANDAMUS
) •
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION )
ETAL. )
Respondents. )
-WA-IPC ss.)
COUNTY OF
Dr.Holly Cartwright, PhD, being first duly sworn, states as follows:
The information set forth in this Affidavit is based upon my own personal1.
I am the Principal of Horizon Science Academy Cincinnati High School, Inc.
(“HSA”) and authorized to provide this sworn testimony on behalf of HSA as HSA’s designated
representative. HSA is sometimes referred to as Horizon Science Academy Cincinnati.
HSA is open-enrollment, public community school and has been assigned IRN
2.
3.
HSA is located in the City of Cincinnati in Hamilton County,Ohio.
HSA is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt Ohio public benefit corporation,
independently operated by a Board of Directors to whom I directly report.
4.
HSA is. 5.
EXHIBIT
O
01205488vl
3

HSA contracts with Concept Schools NFP (“Concept”) for school management6.
services.
I was involved in completing, and approved HSA’s application for a Quality
Community School Support Grant (“QCS Grant”) pursuant to Ohio House Bill 166,the fiscal years
2020 and 2021 State budget bill.
The ODE provided HSA with an application form that set forth the specific
Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the portions of that application which relate to the captioned
Petition for Writ of Mandamus that are maintained in the ordinary course of HSA’s business as a
7.
8.
school.
In addition, it is my understanding based upon my familiarity with the underlying10.
facts, and after reviewing the Criteria 3 Application Form provided by ODE, that Concept met the
requirements in House Bill 166 and ODE’scriteria to be considered an operator in good standing.
• 11. . Accordingly, when HSA completed and timely submitted our ODE application form
for a QCS Grant,HSA believed we had a clear legal right to a QCS Grant and anticipated approval.
/
12. While the application was being processed, ODE did not raise any concern to HSA
about meeting any criteria set forth in ODE’sapplication form.
13. Through correspondence dated January 10, 2019 [sic], ODE’s Director Karl Koenig
notified HSA that our application was denied. ODE’s denial was apparently based upon a new
eligibility criterion that was not contained on ODE’s own application form. ODE never .
2

14. . ODE’s retroactive imposition of this additional criterion as grounds to deny HSA’s
• •
application after the application was submitted is arbitrary, capricious and contrary to my
i
ODE’s denial is a purposefully wrongful attempt to deny HSA’s economically
disadvantaged students funding intended for them by the-Ohio legislature and Governor when it
15.
16. ODE has a clear legal duty to approve HSA’s application and provide HSA QCS
Grant funding.
17. HSA has been presently injured and will continue to be harmed by ODE’s wrongful
denial of QCS Grant funding that is required to be provided to HSA as a matter of law.
18. HSA has no adequate remedy at lay/ and relief cannot otherwise be obtained except
through a Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
FURTHER AFFIANTSAYETH NAUGHT.
.0DR.HOLLY
^RTWRMHT/PhD
I
SWORN TO BEFORE ME and subscribed in my presence this day of June,2020.
filNOTARY PUBLIC
(
SHANNONM.O'CONNELL
Notary Public, State of Ohio
sags;/ I My Commission Expires
M&.l / September 25,2021
3

#EachChildOurFuture
r
Criteria 1:
Criteria 2:
(c) The school is replicating an operational and instructional model used by a communit
3
2
Criteria 3:
8
AL.
Department
of Education

?rr~.
#EachChildOurFuture
Growth Fund; or
School of Quality.
JL
Department
of Education

Horizon Science Academy sues Ohio for loss of educational grants

Horizon Science Academy sues Ohio for loss of educational grants

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Horizon Science Academy sues Ohio for loss of educational grants

Similar to Horizon Science Academy sues Ohio for loss of educational grants (20)

More from Gulen Cemaat

More from Gulen Cemaat (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Horizon Science Academy sues Ohio for loss of educational grants