TEA Letter To Prime Prep Academy

TEA
Texas Education Agency
1701 North Congress Avenue Austin, Texas 78701-1494 512463-9734 512463-9838 FAX tea.texas.gov
Michael Williams
Commissioner
January 13, 2015
Mr. Chris Lewis, Board President

Uplift Fort Worth, CDC
4400 Panola Ave.
Fort Worth, TX 76103
Via Certified Mail
Mr. Ron Price, Superintendent

Prime Prep Academy
3102 Maple Ave., Suite 140
Dallas, TX 75201
RE:
Open-Enrollment Charter Held by Uplift Fort Worth, CDC (220-818)
Dear Mr. Lewis and Mr. Price:

The purpose of this letter is to provide official notification regarding my decision to appoint a Board
of Managers for Prime Prep Academy (the charter school). Because of the charter school's statutory
violation and the negative consequences of that violation to current students of the charter school, I
am compelled to appoint this Board of Managers. TEC 12.116(d)(1) specifically allows the
appointment of this Board to a charter school that I have decided to revoke.
Background
In correspondence dated July 15, 2014, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) notified the charter
school of the TEA's intention to revoke the open-enrollment charter. (Consisting of Notice of Findings
and Notice of Intent to Revoke Open-Enrollment Charter and accompanying exhibits, all attached as
Exhibit A). The revocation notice was based on the charter holder'S ineligibility to participate in child
nutrition programs for a period of more than 30 days, which demonstrates a failure to comply with
generally accepted standards of fiscal management. 19 TAC 100.1022(c). On July 30, 2014, the
charter school requested an informal review of this decision. (Consisting of an initial response, three
exhibits, and a supplemental response, all attached as Exhibit B). On August 25, 2014, the TEA
notified the charter school that after an informal review of its response, I had made my final decision
to revoke the open-enrollment charter. (Attached as Exhibit C). The revocation decision is currently
docketed with the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH) for review.
Recently I have learned that the financial situation at the charter school has deteriorated significantly.
I understand that teachers were not timely paid for December 2014 and rental payments were not
timely made for the charter school facility. I understand that the charter school's December 2014

Page 2
allotment from the Foundation School Program was subject to a warrant hold. Given the recent
deterioration of the charter school's financial situation, I am now compelled to exercise my authority
to appoint a Board of Managers to ensure the orderly operation of this charter school while my
revocation decision is pending.
Board of Managers
I am appointing a Board of Managers to the charter school to exercise the powers and duties of the
charter school's board members under the authority of TEC 12.116(d)(1) and 39.112. This
intervention is authorized because I have made my final decision to revoke the open-enrollment
charter school. This Board will exercise all the powers and duties assigned to the charter school's
board by law, rule or regulation. TEC 39.112(a). The powers of the charter holder board are
suspended during the period of the appointment of this Board. TEC 39.112(b). This provision also
requires me to appoint a superintendent. TEC 39.112(b). I will announce my appointments in
upcoming correspondence.
Review Process
Pursuant to 19 TAC 157.1131(2), the charter school may request a formal review of the appointment
of this Board. A request for a formal review must be in writing and received by TEA no later than January
16,2015, and may be addressed as follows:
Division of Enforcement Coordination
1701 North Congress Avenue
Austin, Texas 78701
Fax: (512) 475-3665
EnforcementCoordination@tea.state.tx.us
The rules regarding the request for a formal review are attached as Exhibit D. I may make a final
decision based solely on the written correspondence sent by the charter school.
Compliance and Cooperation

Any questions regarding this correspondence may be addressed to the Division of Enforcement
Coordination at (512) 463-3544 or EnforcementCoordination@tea.state.tx.us.
UI~::I .. I Williams
r."mlmi.:<:inln .. r of Education
MW/cc
Enclosures
Page 3
cc: Dr. Clyde Steelman, Executive Director, Region 11 Education Service Center
Michael Berry, Deputy Commissioner, Policy and Programs, TEA
Sally Partridge, Associate Commissioner for Accreditation and School Improvement, TEA
Lisa Dawn-Fisher, Associate Commissioner, School Finance, TEA
Alice McAfee, Associate Commissioner, Complaints, Investigations, and Enforcement, TEA
Nora Hancock, Associate Commissioner, Grants and Fiscal Compliance, TEA
Criss Cloudt, Associate Commissioner, Assessment and Accountability, TEA
Von Byer, General Counsel, TEA
Christopher Jones, Senior Legal Counsel, TEA
Eric Marin, Legal Counsel, TEA
Ron Rowell, Director of Governance, TEA
Heather Mauze, Director of Charter School Administration, TEA
TR
1701 North Congress Ave Austin,Texas787011494 512463-9734 5124639838FAX www.tea.state.tx.us
220818
20132014
NOTICE OF FINDINGS AND
NOTICE OF INTENT TO REVOKE
OPENENROLLMENT CHARTER
July 15, 2014

4400 Panola Ave.
Certified Mail
and Email

Prime Prep Academy
4400 Panola Ave.
Certified Mail
and Email
RE:
Open-Enrollment Charter Held by Uplift Fort Worth, CDC

This is to notify you that I, as the designee of the Commissioner of Education, intend to
revoke the open-enrollment charter held by Uplift Fort Worth, CDC (hereinafter referred to as
the "charter holder") based on the findings that the charter school (1) failed to satisfy generally
accepted accounting standards of fiscal management; and (2) failed to comply with Texas
Education Code (TEC), Chapter 12, Subchapter D. and its associated rules. TEC 12.115(a);
19 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 100.1021(a).
Exhibit A
____ _ _ _ ... n drrvn'ik.

~
f.~
db
" .......
I.
'=___................
...
~_
___.....'........_ ......_ .....__________-_
The OpenEnroliment Charter
On or about April 19, 2012, Barbara Cargill, Chair for the State Board of Education
(SBOE), and Damien Wallace executed a charter contract creating the openenrollment charter
school that is the subject of this action. ("Contract for Open-Enrollment Charter School" attached
as Exhibit A). The contract provides that the terms of the open-enrollment charter granted by
the SBOE to the charter holder include:
(a) [the charter) contract; (b) applicable law; (c) Request for Application 70110118; (d) any condition, amendment, modification, revision or other change to the
charter adopted or ratified by the [SBOE) or the Commissioner; and (e) all
statements, assurances, commitments and representations made by Charter
Holder in its application for charter, attachments or related documents, to the
extent consistent with the aforementioned (a) through (d).'
II.
Demonstration of Unsatisfactory Financial Perfonmance and

Failure to Comply with Texas Education Code, Chapter 12,
Subchapter 0, and Associated Rules
The commissioner shall revoke the charter of an openenrollment charter school or

reconstitute the governing body of the charter holder if the commissioner determines, among
other determinations, that the charter holder: failed to satisfy generally accepted accounting
standards of fiscal management or failed to comply with TEC Chapter 12, Subchapter D or
another applicable law or rule. TEC 12.115(a). Minimum financial performance is required of
open-enrollment charters, and continuation of a charter is contingent upon the charter holder
satisfying generally accepted accounting standards of fiscal management. 19 TAC
100.1022(c). If the commissioner determines that any unsatisfactory financial performance is
both serious and has not been corrected, the open-enrollment charter school shall be revoked
or nonrenewed. 19 TAC 1 00, 1022(c)(1 )(C). Serious unsatisfactory financial performance
includes a charter holder's loss of eligibility to participate in child nutrition programs for a period
of more than 30 days. 19 TAC 100.1022(c)(2)(B)(viii).
The Texas Department of Agriculture's (TDA) review of the charter holder's Summer
Food Service Program (SFSP) operations in 2012 resulted in TDA sending a Notice of Serious
Deficiency to the charter holder on December 12, 2012. The notice informed the charter holder
that it was seriously deficient in its operation of the SFSP and identified two directors of the
charter who were responsible for the deficiencies in light of their responsibility for management
of the SFSP. TDA required the charter holder to submit a corrective action plan (CAP). TDA
received an acceptable CAP from the charter holder and temporarily deferred the serious
deficiency.
On February 19-20, 2014, TDA conducted an administrative review of the charter
holder's National School Lunch Program (NSLP) operations. The review revealed numerous
violations of NSLP regulations. Many of the findings resulting from the February 2014 review
were the same as those cited in the December 2012 Notice of Serious Deficiency, including
See Exhibit A, Contract for Charter, Paragraph 2.
_____________
__ ____ ,____
~9~.w'~.'~rD~*~_~C$~m~.~~rn~_'~!j~~~11~*~tt~cu~
u_'~~!'~~
__

~
_~MM.M.~w~%'~_"~
__. .
IP. ._ *_ _
~~
_ _ _ _ _ ~"
_ _ _ __
failure to retain records for the required three years and to make the records available to TDA,
and failure to implement a financial system based on generally accepted accounting
procedures.
A default judgment was entered against the charter holder on March 13, 2014 in Smith v.
Sanders, et a/., case number 3: 12-cv-04377, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Texas. The lawsuit alleged violations of the Federal False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. 3729-3733,
arising from the charter holder's participation in the SFSP in 2011 and 2012. As a result of the
default, the charter holder has been adjudicated to have engaged in civil violations of the False
Claims Act.
Based upon the default judgment and the findings arising from TDA's February 2014
review, on April 21, 2014, TDA terminated its Permanent Agreement with the charter holder:
thereby rendering it ineligible for participation in the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) or
any other Child Nutrition Program administered by TDA, including the SFSP.3 Additionally, TDA
placed the charter holder and the two directors identified by TDA as responsible for the serious
deficiencies in the operation of the SFSP program on the Texas Excluded SFSP list (TEXSL).
The charter holder and the two directors will remain on the TEXSL until such time as TDA
determines the serious deficiency has been corrected or for seven years after their exclusion.
On April 21, 2014, TDA sent an additional notice to the charter holder of TDA's intent to reclaim
$45,830.92, as required by federal and state regulations, due to the fact that no documentation
was provided on the review date to support that the claimed reimbursable meals were served
for the months of September, October and November 2013. 4
The charter holder's ineligibility to participate in child nutrition programs for a period of
more than 30 days constitutes serious unsatisfactory financial performance. 19 TAC
100.1022(c)(2)(B)(viii). Open-enrollment charter schools that demonstrate unsatisfactory
financial performance that is both serious and has not been corrected shall be revoked or nonrenewed. 19 TAC 100.1 022(c)(1 )(C). This uncorrected ineligibility constitutes a failure to
demonstrate minimum required financial performance. 19 TAC 100.1022(c). Accordingly, the
charter holder (1) failed to satisfy generally accepted accounting standards of fiscal
management; and (2) failed to comply with TEC, Chapter 12, Subchapter D, and its associated
rules. TEC 12.11S(a); 19TAC 100.1021(a).
III, Flndln9s
The charter holder has been ineligible to partiCipate in child nutrition programs for a period
of more than 30 days.
The charter holder's ineligibility to participate in child nutrition programs constitutes serious
unsatisfactory financial performance.
The charter holder has demonstrated unsatisfactory financial performance that is both
serious and has not been corrected.
, See Exhibit D, TDA correspondence dated April 21, 2014.

, In response to the chaner holder's appeal or the tennination from the NSLP and the School Dreakrast Program,
TDA ruled that the tennination from these programs was not subject to appeal. See Exhibit C, "Order Granting
Appellee's Motion to Dismiss" dated May 16,2014.
, See Exhibit 0, TDA correspondence dated April 21, 2014.
- -
'e c
ed-;....
en. rt
re . .
The charter holder (1) failed to satisfy generally accepted accounting standards of fiscal
management; and (2) failed to comply with Texas Education Code (TEG), Chapter 12,
Subchapter D, and ils associated rules.
IV.
Sanction Determination
Uplift Fort Worth. CDC's unsatisfactory financial performance is serious and has not
been corrected and, consequently, requires the commissioner to revoke the charter school's
contract for charter. s
a. Best Interest of the Students.
It is not in the best interest of the students to attend a charter school that is ineligible for
participation in the NSLP or any other Child Nutrition Program administered by TDA, including
the SFSP, as a result of the charter holder's demonstrated serious, unsatisfactory financial
performance.
b. Severity of the Violation.
Approximately sixty-seven percent (67%) of the charter school's enrolled students are
eligible for free or reduced-price food programs. As a result of the charter holder's serious,
unsatisfactory financial performance, a significant percentage of the school's enrolled students
will not be able to partiCipate in the child nutrition programs.
V. Opportunity for an informal Review and Hearing
This is your notice of my intent to revoke the open-enrollment charter held by Uplift Fort
Worth, CDC. You have the right to request an informal review of and hearing regarding the
decision and the findings included in this notice. However, this informal review and hearing shall
be provided only if the charter holder submits a written request for an informal review and
hearing not later than July 30,2014. Failure to submit a request by July 30, 2014 will
constitute a waiver of the right to an informal review or hearing on the revocation of the
open-enrollment charter, and the charter held by Uplift Fort Worth, CDC will be revoked.
If timely requested, the informal review will provide an opportunity for the charter holder
to convince me by way of written arguments and documentation that the findings included in this
notice are inaccurate and/or that revocation of the charter is not warranted. The charter holder
must submit its written arguments and documentation to me at the time the charter holder
requests the informal review. Neither the administrative procedural rules of the Texas
Government Code nor the Rules of Evidence will apply to the informal review process. If, after
, Please note that the amended provisions ofTEC 12.115(0) have superseded the hearing process and eliminated
the commissioner's sanctioning discretion that formed the bases for certain provisions of 19 TAC 100.1021 and 19
TAC 100.1022. Specifically, the sanction options listed under 100.I021(a) arc now limited to revocation and
board reconstitution; the aggmvnting and mitigating faclor provisions in 19 TAC I00.1 022(g) are superseded; and
the procedural provisions of I00.1 021(d-h) are superseded.
.,
the informal review is completed, I do not change my decision to seek revocation of the charter,
this matter will be docketed with the State Office of Administrative Hearings for a hearing
pursuant to TEC 12.116. Any hearing provided shall be limited to the specific findings and
revocation detailed in this correspondence. Under TEC 12.116(c}, the administrative law judge
must uphold my decision unless the administrative law judge finds that the decision is arbitrary
and capricious or clearly erroneous. The decision of the administrative law judge is final and
may not be appealed.
A written request for an informal review and hearing must be addressed to:
Eric Marin, Attorney
Austin, Texas 78701-1494
As set forth in 19 TAC 1 00.1021 (c), the charter holder must post this Notice of Intent in
the time, place and manner required for an open meeting under Texas Government Code
551.043, 551 .051 , and 551 .052.
Any written response or other correspondence pertaining to this Notice must be sent to:
Austin, Texas 78701-1494
Sincerely,
Lizzette Gonzalez Reynolds

Chief Deputy Commissioner of Education
LGRlcc
Enclosures
cc: Dr. Clyde Steelman, Executive Director, Region 11 Education Service Center
Michael Berry, Deputy Commissioner, Policy and Programs, TEA
Sally Partridge, Associate Commissioner for Accreditation and School Improvement, TEA
Lisa Dawn-Fisher, Associate Commissioner, School Finance, TEA
Alice McAfee, Associate Commissioner, Complaints, Investigations, and Enforcement
Nora Hancock, Associate Commissioner, Grants and Fiscal Compliance, TEA
pi.
n'v-ZIJa6
"
"t
Criss Cloudt, Associate Commissioner, Assessment and Accountability, TEA

David Anderson, General Counsel, TEA
Ron Rowell, Director of Governance, TEA
Heather Mauze, Director of Charter School Administration, TEA
Eric Marin, Legal Counsel, TEA
. en._
.. f"
NIiWI'
"""
'
Iii
_'C.,
.....
'tt'
,OF?
EXHIBITS
C'
,-
-r751 .. ';,......
Il'""
,w-
P'
,3'
't
CDN 220RIH
CONTRACT FOR
1011 '1' -: :> .j 1r!l:)O OPEN-ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL

1DW~ ~~ntr\lQt.~6 ~1lI'id between the Tex." State Board of Education (the "Board") and Uplift
J<'iirl W'offli '~bt'('~C!harter lIolder") to operate Prime Prep Academy. a Sixteenth Generation
open-enrollment charter school.
General
I. Dcfinitions. As used in this contrac': .. ( '!1urter'" means the Sixteenth Generation openenrollment charter as pruvided by. Chaplcr 12 Subchapter D, Texas Education Code. and
granted by this c()nlract.
"Charter Holder" me.lns the sponsorirrg emity identified in the charter application and the
entity 10 which a charter is granted by this contmet.
"Charter School'" means the Sixteentl, lic()eration open-enrollment charter school. Charter
School is part of the public school s,'Slem "r Tex(ls and is a "eharter school" within the
meaning 01'20 L:.S .c. 8066.
"Agency" means thc rexas Education \gen..: y.
"Commissi()ner" means the Commissi, lIler..r Education.
2.
TI1C Charter. This contract grants to Churter Holder a Sixteenth Generation open-enrollment
charter under Texas Education Code Chapter 12. Subchapter D. The terms of the chartcr
include: (a) this contract: (b) appliea],l" law: (c) R~quest for Application (RFA) 701-10-118
(d) any condition. anlendment. mudi/kalio/l. revisron u, other change to the charter adopted
or ratitied by the Board or the ""ml1lission~r: and (e) all statements. assurances.
cummitments and representations nll,d~ b\' Charter Holder in its application for charter.
attachments or related documents. t" thc' extent consistent with the aforementioned (a)
through (d).
3. Term of Charter. The charter shall h" in effect fr(lm the date of execution through
July 31. 2017 lin less renewed or terlllinated. The grant of this charter does not create an
entitlement to a r~newal of the charter . The charter may be ren~wed for an additional period
ot' 10 years. It is understuud by all partie; that continued authority to hold the chartcr is
contingent upon the school opening and h"lding classes beginning in the 2012-2013 school
year as stated in RFA 701-10-118 unless thc Charter Hulder submits un amendment request
teo postpon~ the start date that is appr< \ ed hy the cummissiuner of education. However. it is
lirrther understood that the charter ""lSt bcgin operations no later than September 2. 2014.
Failurc to open the school and hold c1a-scs by September 2, 2014 shall render this contract
null and void. and the charter shall (olItlllllaticall) return to the board withuut the need for
/ilrther action.
or4
EXHIBIT A
saN' m )
.,mZ':
fit 'EeLl'
If N
"M'
'.
e-
CON 220811(
4. Revision by Agreement. The terms of the' chaner may be revised with the consent of Charter
Holder by written amendment approve" hy the Commissioner.
Students
5. Open Enrollment. Admission and enn'liment shall be open to any person who resides within
the geographic boundary stated in th~ charter appl ication and who is eligible for admission
based on lawful criteria identified in the charter application. Total enrollment shall not
exceed the maximum number ofstudents sct out in the charter application.
6. Non-religious Instruction and Affiliation. Charter School shall not conduct religious
instruction. Charter Holder and Charter School shall be nonsectarian in their programs,
policies, employment practices. and all other operations.
7. Children with Disabilities. A charter ;choul is a "local educational agency" as defined by
lederal law. CharIer Holder must cO!llply with the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Aet (IDEA), as amended by the Individuals with Oisabilities Education Improvement Act of
2004. 20 U.S.C. 1401. et seq., und implementing regulations; Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1'>73 (Section 5(4). ~9 V.S .C. 794, and implementing regulations:
Title 11 of the Americans with [)isa~ilitie:, Act (ADA). 42 U.S.C. 12131-12165. and
implementing regulations: Chapter 2'1. l'exits Education Code, ond implementing rules: and
court cases applying these laws.
R. Student Performance ond Account,iliJl.i.!J.. Charter Holder shull satisfy Chapter 39.
Subchapters B. C. D. E. G. and J of the l'e,a~ Education Code. and related Agency rules, as
wcll as the sludent performance accoullwbihty criteria staled in its application for charter.
Financial Mllnagcmcnt
9. Financial Manauemcnt and Accoulltabi Iit'. Charier Holder shall salisfy Chapler 12.
Sections 12.104 ond 12.111 of th, Texas Education Code. and related Agenc)' rules
regarding financial management accli II1tahility.
'--____________G;;;.o"'v_e;.:r=nance nnd Operations

10. jndemnifieation. ChLlrter Holder shall hold the Board and Agency harmless from and shall
indemnify the Board and Agency aguillst an) and all claims, demands. and causes of action
uf whatever kind or nature asserted ~~ an) third part)' and occurring or in any way incident
to. arising out nr. or ill connection" ith any acts or Charter Holder, its agents. employees.
and subcontractors in performance oJ this ,"untrac\.
(I( :11
:
.:V "( ~.'!llliJZ

: , ,:~ J ;; J
. ~ ;.IJ : ...
~! ~J~
" H~
,' .
~
=0
mumm"
CDN 220RIK
!2H~~ : :f~.. :
r l ' . -,
I
'
L ....7!1:.cI1+1-1r~r.,,;~~;~!'_;;:i',!il-I.!:'!~..,;3MOJ-___---.:T:.::his
I IE
Agreement
i
A
me lldhis contracl. including all referenced attachments und terms
lhC'o oraTed by"lererence, contaim thl' entire agreement of the parties. All prior
representations. understandings. and d,.clIssiuns are superseded by this contracl.
12. Severabilitv. If any provision of thi~ c.lntmet is determined by a court or other tribunal to Ill!
unenforceable or invalid for any rcas.. " . the rcmainder of the contract sball remain in full
rorce and efTect. so as to give effec' t,l thc intent or the parties to the extent valid and
cnforceable.
13. Conditions of Contract. Execution 01 this contract by the Board is conditioned on full and
timdy compliance by Chartcr Holder with: ta} the terms, required assurances. and
conditions of RI'/\ 701-10-118; (h) applicable law; and (C) all commitments and
representations madc in Charter Holdds application and any supporting documents (to the
extent such commitments and reprcsentations are consistent with the terms of this contract).
By executing thi, contract, thc Charter Iioider represents tbat it understands that the Charter
Holder, including any and all governance. at whatever level whether appointed or elected.
employees, a~ents, and voluntcer~ ~h ,, 11 full) cooperate with every Texas Education Agency
investigation and/or sanction deemed lIece,sary by the commissioner based on authority and
re~ponsibility given to the commissil1l1er in statc or federal law. 111is means that the Texas
Education Agency stafr may conduct .;nntidential interviews of charter school personnel and
contractors outside the prcsence of TCpresentatives orthe charter school's administration and
ward. and that ti,ilure to timdy repl~ with reasonable requests for acce:;s to site. personnel.
documents. or <llher materials and/or Items is a m"tcrial violation of the contract for chaner.
14. No Waiver of Breach. No a~scl1l. express IIr implied. to any breach of any of the covennnts
or agrecmenL~ hcrein shall waive any 'lIcce~ding or other breach.
15. Vcnue. Any suit arising under this cll"tract shall bc brought in Travis County. Texus.
16. Governing Law. In uny suit arising ," der this contract. Texas law shall apply.
17. Laws and Rules Applicable. By exe< uting this contract, the ul1llersigned representatives or
Charter Holder represent that they ha"l' read and understand the rules adopted by the Board
and the Commissinner pursuant tll Texas ~.dueution Code Chapter 12, Subchaptcr D and that
they have had filII opportunity tn con,ult with their own legal counsel concerning said rules
pnor to executing this agreement. TllC u,".krsigned representatives further understand and
agree that: (a) this contract is conti l1~~JIl upon legislative authorization and the contract and
the funding under it may Ill! mnditkJ or even terminated by filture legislative act; (b) the
terms of this contrdct. and of the Si.\tc-cnth Generation opencnrollment charter created by
this contraCt. include all applicable ,tatc and lederal laws and all applicable rules and
regulations: (e) state and federal IIms, rules. and regulations may be adopted, amended or
repealed from time to time: (d) al' such changes to state and federal laws. rule~. and
,,1'4
- fp
-==
-+ ...
ilWZ r:m:zmz
He
c)
ret
i"S
CON 220818
regulations aprlicubl~ to Chart~r Holu~r llr l(1 iL' charter school(s) may modify this contrncl.
as of the eff~ctiv" uate provided in the law. rule, ur regulation; and (e) a contract term that
contlicts with any state or federal law. ruk. ur regulation is superseded by the law. rule. or
regulation to the cxtent that the law. ruk. or regulution conflicL~ with the contract term.
18. Eligjbjlity and Authority. By executing thb contract, Charter Holder represents that it is all
"cligible entity" within the meaning l'j' Section 12.101 (u). Texas Education Code. and it is
understood by all parties thut if the Charter Holder loses its 501 (c)(3) taX exempt status ror
any period ofti",. through action of tit" Internal Revellue Service or any other action which
renders the Charter Holder no longer all "eligible entity" within the meaning of TEe
12.1 01 (a). the charter contract shall be rendered void. and it shall automatically return to
the Slate Board or Education without .111)' other action having to be taken by the SBOE or by
thc commissioner.
Thc Chartcr Holder shall immediateh noti]).' the Commissioner of any legal cbange in its
status. which would disqualify it from h"lding the charter, of any violation of the terms and
conditions of this cuntract. or of an~ change in the chief operating officer of the Charter
Holder. Charter Holder rurther repr"scltts Ihat the person signing this contract has been
properly delegated authurity to do so.
entered into this
day of
---
.211
3-.2'f--t...!
Date
J:1II=.1 "Io';.~
"r .. ';
.. ,v,
. ".!J ~il,JI
Ot : It
.j oj' 4
'.111
'If
r C.- 'J,r
" "1 Z'I02
:m't
175'
'Iii
tV' n-1
'"
QC
It.
It
= 5:,.
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

TODD STAPLES
COMMISSIONER
April 21, 2014

Certified Mail Number 91 7199 9991 70302631 5157
and First-Class Mail
3102 Maple Avenue
Dallas, Texas 7520 I
RE:
Notice of Termination of Permanent Agreement and Exclusion of Damien Wallace and

Chuma Jones, as responsible principals (CE ID #01712)
Dear Mr. Price:

Effective April 21, 2014, the Texas Department of Agriculture (TDA) is terminating its
Permanent Agreement with Uplift Fort Worth, CDC (Uplift). As a result, Uplift is no longer
eligible for participation in the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) or any other Child
Nutrition Program administered by TDA, including the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP).
This action is being taken pursuant to 1 CFR 210.25 and Article VIII.S.2 of the Permanent
Agreement.
A detauitjudgment (Defilult) was entered against Uplift on March 13,2014, in Smith v. Sanders.
et al., case number 3:12-cv-04377, in the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Dallas.
The lawsuit was brought by Lawrence Smith, as relator, alleging violations of the Federal False
Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. 3129 - 3733 (False Claims Act) arising out of Uplift's participation in
the SFSP in 2011 and 2012. As a result or the Default, Uplift has been adjudicated to have
engaged in civil violations of the False Claims Act.
.
Uplift operated the SFSP for program years 2011 and 2012. TDA reviewed Uplift's SFSP
operations in 2012, and as a result, sent Uplift a Notice of Serious Deficiency (Notice) on
December 12, 2012. The Notice informed Uplift that it was seriously deficient in its operation of
the SFSP and that Damien Wallace and Chazma Jones were the individuals responSible for the
serious deficiencies in light of their responsibility for management oflbe SFSP. TDA required
Uplift to submit a corrective action plan (CAP) by January 12,2013. TDA received an
acceptable CAP and temporarily deferred the serious deficiency.
RO. Box 12847
/\wei TClOIS 78711
(512)463-7476
Fax: (888) 223-8861
www.T=rAgriculture.gov
EXHIBIT B
'e
,.

April 21, 2014
Poge 2 af2
r
On February 19 - 20, 2014, TDA conducted an Administrative Review of Uplift's NSLP

operations and found numerous violations ofNSLP regulations. Many ofthe findings resulting
from the February 19 - 20, 2014 review were the same as those cited in the December 12,2012
Notice, specifically, failure to implement a financial system based on generally acceptable
accounting Pl"!lcedures, and failure to retain records for the required three years and to make
those records available to IDA.
Uplift's corrective action plan submitted in response to the serious deficiencies identified in
Uplift's 2011 and 2012 SFSP operations did not permanently and fully correct the organization's
financial non-compliances that affect all Child Nutrition Programs administered by Uplift.
As a result of the Default and the findings arising out of the February 19 - 20, 2014 review, TDA
is hereby:
Terminating Uplift's Food and Nutrition Division Permanent Agreement (Permanent
Agreement) effective April 21, 2014.
Excluding Uplift, Damien Wallace (Executive Director, DOB 1111911971) and Chazrna
Jones (Director of Administration, DOB 12119/1980) from future SFSP participation
effective April 21, 2014.
Uplift, Damien Wallace and Chazmn Jones will be placed on the Texas Excluded SFSP List
(TEXSL) and State List. While on the TEXSL, Uplift will not be able to participate in the SFSP as
a contracting entity or site. Damien Wallace and Chazrna Jones will not be able to perform any
SFSP function or serve as a principal in any organization or site in the SFSP. They will remain on
the TEXSL until such time as TDA determines thnt the serious deficiency has been corrected or for
seven years after their exclusion.
.
If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact Angela Olige, Chief
Administrator at (512) 463-8583 or email Angela.Olige@TexasArnculture.aov.
Sincerely yours,
~a..C(J~ck..
Tracy Mueck
Administrator
Food and Nutrition
TMlJUai
ec:
Mr. Damien Wallace

Ms. Chazma Jones
United States Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service
t:
1M'
a,
tt t
sem"
'Ili;-;, r
mAC'
tr
=me
TDA DOCKET :"0. 69-1-I-NLSrISnr

UPLIFT FORT WORTH, CDC,
Appellant
nEFORE THE ADl\II:"iISTRA TlVE
VS.
DEPARnIEl"T OF
AGRICULTURE
TEXAS DEPAln;\lENT
OF AGRICULTURE,
Appellee
STATE OFTEXAS
ORDER GRA:'ITI;\'G APPELLEE'S :\IOTION TO DISMISS

On this duy, ha\ing
eons t "er~d
the t\ppcllec's :Vlotinn to Dismiss and the documents on
tile in this case, the Auministrat;\e Review Ofticial (A({O) Iinos lhal Appellant's
tennination from the National School Lunch ProgrJm (t-:SLP) and the School Breakfast
Program (SOP) is not subject to appeal. The ARO. therdtlre, grants Appellee's Motion
for the folll)\ving rcu:.;ons;
There arc no provisions in the Code of Federal RegulJtillns (CFR) or the Texas
Administrative Code (TAC) that provide Illr an appeal upon temlination Irom the
NLSI' or SBp. l'cithcr 7 C:FR f!IO.25. \\hkh penains to the tennination Irom the
NSLP. nor 7 eFR
~~~().19.
which pertains to the termination liOIIl the SBP. pro\'ides
Illr an appeal Ill' the termination of Appellant from the NLSp or SAP.
neither -I T AC
1.1 02 I. (penaining to the i': LSp). nor -I TAC
Likewise.
*1.1 OJ I, (penaining to
the SBP). provides Il,r an appeal uponlcnnina!ion from the NLSPISBP.

Appeals. which pertain Iu Ihe NLSP anu SBP under Ihe pn)\isions Ihe Code uf Fed"r,,1
th~
Regulati,'ns (CI'R) and
lise;}l aelillns. (See 7 CFR

pertJining the :\ LS 1'. \1
Texas ,\dmini str"ti'" CoOe (TAC). arc limiwd only to

*~iO.IS(j)
and ('I): ano
TAC
~l.iO~l(a)
Ii"
app~als
<" 'e~ 7 ( FR ~ ~~Il . I.' ( f){: I ;lIld 4 r. \C ~ 1.1 ()} I (.1 ) li'r aPJl~ , t1,
pert aining the SUP).

;\p[1cllant" ...;
~
~tlntt:l1tit.ln
1.1(J II j ... \\ illwlit
th:u It I'" I.'milled In.tIl .!ppl.'JI unliL'r
I11l.'l'It hl.'C~lI:'!1.'
.\prellant in it>
R~pl~
Food Se[\icc;
I'ro~ralll
,,,.:., ( , 1111111;': ' nILI \! II III
" )' i J.
:.1 ~"
.,
'I'"
".111'
thL'
Phl\ bi "Il" HI" ~
th~
r \C
pw\bions of ~ T .\ (
~ 1.1111
1. .t:- ..:itcd h:
III ,\I'pellee, \1I,ti ,'n tll DI,llll". pCl1:lins onl:- tLl the SUllltller
I)
(Sr<;pl.
\Qll lc I h~ I'r!l\i'lllllS " f -I T. \C ~1.1 1l11 gh c
I;
"
.,
EXHIBIT C
,. r :
tt r
.,!
t...
,. .,$
, 1 0'1
Appdlant the light to appeal its temlination rrllm Ihe SFSP.
th~se
1:0"
provisions uo not
apply to Appellant's tennilwtion trom Ihe :\LSP und SBP. which is the subject of the
abo\ ctitled action.
Based lin Iinding that Appellant's tcnninatioll Ii'om the NSLP and SBP is not subject to
appeal, the issues that Appellant raised in its Repl}
(0
Appellee's ;Vlotion to Dismiss
regarding the merits ofthe tennination arc .:onsidcreu moot. and therel(m:. arc not
addressed in this Order.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the abovetitkd action BE DIS~"SSED WITH
PRE.JUDICE to the rights of the Parties to request reconsideration or this matter or any
part of it.
SIGNED VII the 10'" day of :">Iay 20('+.

.~
Jim I'oll an.l"'~ ~
;\ulllinislrall\C R~w Ofl\-.:cr

r I.!'~"S Dl.!'partiilCrir \)1' Agn(,11 I! lin.:
1'.0. R" , 12,.ji
.\uslin. T\O!'\:lS 7S711 -.:!1'~7
Phone: (:, I:::!) ~ 7 ~ ~5~S
I'dccllpier: (SOU) 91)1)8520

JlIl1:pn ll.mlJ'L t,,=":'\jJ ~ \gricuh UI ",-'gLl}
\I'klt,
, . \". 11..... '1 .1 , 1)
10\!l " . "" " I." 1"'1 Ii'
,,
",-
''3
,-.
'
S ' . : $ 5 1 _ ' :fI
__
:.
e:o
'"
CERTIFIC-\ TE OF SERVICE
I hereby ccnify th," a copy of the Order Grunting Appcllec'~ Motion to Dismiss was sent
by c~niticd mail. r~tum receipt requested. f:lcsimile. Dr by email to eJch addressee lis t~d
helow on May 16. 2014.
Uplift Fon Wortll. CDC
c /o Mr. Edwin S. Florcs
Chalker Flores. L.l.r.
14951 ;O-;orth Dallas P'lrkway. Suite 400
Dallas, Texas 75254
CI-.'1RRR 91 7199 <Jl)Q 1 7031 945496 U.
E-mailed
Stephen P. Di lion
lead Deputy Gencral C<lllllsd
Texas Depanmcnt of Agri..:ulturc
P.O. Box 12S47
Allstin. Te,as 78711
E-mailed
I,
I'
I, "c., . \.
I~
1.111.
'.;
'.1
.." .
.. l' I
I''' II :
I } ,.
j' ..:
~ . ~ :
Iff
PI' 1
.J I " -
urr , .. ,,.eo

TODD STAPLES
COMMISSIONER
April 21, 2014
CERTIFIED MAIL
9171999991703026315140
CE 1D 01712
Region Xl

Uplift Fort Worth
3102 Maple Avenue
Dallas, Texas 7520 I
Dear Mr. Price:

An Administrative Review of the School Nutrition Programs for your Contracting Entity (CE)
was conducted on December 19, 2013. The review indicated there were Performance Standard
(PS) findings resulting from lack of documentation to support that reimbursable meals were
served.
As no documentation could be provided on the day of review to support the September,

October and November claims filed by your CE, TDA 15 taking the appropriate fiscal
utlon to reclaim S45,830.92, ., required by federal and state regulations. Unless your CE
obtains relief on appeal, thlt debt must be repaid no later than May 12, 2014.
You may appeal this action pursuant to USDA regulations and Title 4, Texas Administrative
Code, Part I, Chapter I, SubchapterP, Division 3, 1.1021 (National School Lunch Program)
and Division 4, 1.1 031 (School Breakfast Program). The following fiscal actions are subjcct to
an administrative review: (I) denial of all or a part ora claim for reimbursement, which includes
the recovery of overpayment through direct assessment or offset of future claims, disallowance
of overclaims as reflected in unpaid claims for reimbursement, submission of a revised claim for
reimbursement, and correction of records to ensure thaI unfilcd claims for reimbursement arc
corrected when filed; and (2) withholding of payment based on the results of a comprehensive
on-site evaluation or follow-up activity. Your request for an appeal must be submitted in writing
and postmarked by S p.m. central time not later than fifteen (I S) days after the receipt, or deemcd
receipt, of this letter. The request for appeal must also clearly identify the action being appealed
and include a photocopy of this letter.
p.o. Box 12847
Aunjn. Teow 78711
(512) 463-7476
Fax: (888) 223-8861
www.Tc:n.sAgriculrure.gov
EXHIBIT 0
m" .
tr
....
'')
April 21,2014
Page 2 of2
With respect to notice provided by certified mail, relum receipt requested, in the absence of an
official receipt, in any fonn, from the United States Postal Service reflecting the date of actual or
attempted delivery, the notice will be deemed to be received by the school food authority five (5)
days after being sent to the school food authority's last known mailing address.
Your appeal should be sent to:
Food and NutrItion Appeals
Texas Department of Agriculture
Legal Division
Attn: Docket Clerk
POBox 1Z847
Austin, Texas 78711

Fax (800) 9098530
Please note that appeal hearing procedures for the Food and Nutrition Programs are located in
Title 4, Tcxas Administrative Code, Part I, Chapter I, Subchapter P.
If you have any questions concerning the review, please contact me at 512-4638008 or at
Sharon.Welbom@TexasAgriculture.gov.
Sincerely yours,
~~~~
Sharon Welborn
Director for School Operations
Food and Nutrition Division
SWffMlal
cc: School Nutrition Director
Region Xl
USDA - ms, SWRO
Rocelved :
Jul . 30. 2014 2:50PM
O'
Jul 30 2014
on, McCollom, Demeralh
&
O/HANLON, MCCOLLOM
0 .'
201Q
808 WEST AVENUE

AUSTIN, 'l'IUCAs 7870 I
.Jut 30 PH 2: 53
rms EDUCATION AGENCY

LEGAL SERVICES DIVISION
'l'EL.EPHCNE: (512) 4948114.
FACSIMILE: (612) ""4-9918
=)
P. 1
RECEIVED
DEMERATH
ATIOIINEYSAND COUNSEI.OfISAT LAw
DATE: July 30. 2014
No. 0477
NUMBER OF.,AGES:
13
TO: Eric Marin

Tex. Edue. Assoc.
FAX NO.:
512-475-3662
CC: David Anderson
FAX NO.:
512-475-3662
FAX NO.:
512-475-3662
(Includes Cover Sheet)
Tex.Educ.~ociauon
CC: VonBuyer
Tex. Educ. Association
FROM: Darren G. Gibson

RE: Response of Uplift Fort Worth to Notice oflntent to Revoke Open-Enrollment
Charter and Request for Informal Review and Hearing
COMMENTS:
Please see the attached letter retlecting the response of Uplift Fort Worth to the TEA's Notice of
Intent to Revoke Open-Enrollment Charter and Uplift's request for informal review and hearing.
D8Iten G. Gibson
O'HANLON. MCCOLLOM & DEMERATH
808 West Ave
Austin, IX 78701
512-354-7208 direct
512-494-9949
512-494-9919 fax
dgibson@808wcst.com
'OOlillJlUnication and as
and confidential. If the reader
, il)tCl)ded r~cipient. yo~ iW~~i1Wnotifiild that any disclosure; ~.~.pYiDt
taking cif
. iIly"lIOIion in rcliBn~
of this infonnation is strictly'pi'ohiblte.d. J.{ you !i,.~c received
transmission
li'n(:~I~!~~~~:~
n
!iI.!!~ I~Orify liS by ielephi!~e t~ .~~ for the retum of the
..doclllllents at our el '\1 .,
"
Exhibit B
Recel.ed :
Jul. 30. 2014 2:50PM
O'
Jul 30 2014
No. 0477
lon, McCollom, Demerath
O'HANLON, MCCOLLOM
&
P. 2
DEMERATH
ATTORNEYS AND COOI'ISELORS AT LAW

1108 WE.,. -,VI'IIUE
AUSTIN. TEX'AS 7870 f

TEU:Pl1oNE: (!l12) 4.4 ..984'
FACGIf4IL: (5t2) 4 .....8 8
...,
...,
<
...,
:;u
KE"tN O'HAI'lLON
CIEIfnPICD. CrwL~
cDli1,.,o. CML Y...",,-
(")
LEIUE MCCOLLOM
CarmrllD. CMLAPPCu.AE
Ca.mnm. U.Ofll ANa a..~LO"t'IotDIT
TEXAS BCWIIOCWI' UoaL. ~11ON
JUsnN OblEAA"ni
July 30, 2014
V(a!acslmi/e (512-475-3662) &, certified mall, returlll'eceipt requested

Tex:as Education Association
Austin, Texas 78701
Re:
Response to Notice of Intent to Revoke Open-Enrollment Charter and Request for

Informal Review and Hearing
Dear Mr. Marin:

Our finn, O'Hanlon, McCollom & Demerath, has been retained by Uplift Forth Worth,
CDC ("Uplift") regarding the Notice of Findings and Notice of Intent to RevoJce the OpenEnrollment Charter sent by Chief Deputy Commissioner Lizette Gonzalez Reynolds on July IS,
2014. By this letter, we hereby request an iniol1nalrevicw of and hearing regarding the decision
and findings in the revocation notice.
1. Guiding Principle: The Best Interest of Prime Prep Studenl5
First and foremost it should be stated that the top priority of Uplift and its Board has
always been to work in the best interests ofPlime Prep Academy stUdents, parents, and educatoxs.
As yon are no doubt aware, the majority of the srudents at Prime Prep Academy COme from
challenging socio-economic baclcgrounds and, pliol' to their enrollment at Prime Prep Academy,
these students have been underserved by traditional public education. Since its inception, Prime
Prep Academy has been designed to provide an alternative education environment where students
have an opportunity 10 reach their full potential and succeed both academically and in life. To
achieve this mission, it has always been clear that vision, leadership, operational discipline, and a
strong financial commitment fi'om SUPpOltel'S are necessary, and the Uplift Board and Prime Prep
supporters are committed to providing each of these elements for success.
Already in its shOII history, Pl1me PIep Academy is showing positive results. Prime Prep
Academy graduates have been awanled 15 academic and athletic scholarships, and the school
boasts a 95% attendance rate at the high school campus, a 100% graduation rate, and a 0%
dropout rate. Prime Prep students are not only attending summer school classes at local
Rece
Jul. 30. 2014 2:50PM
on, McCollom, Demerath
Jul 30 20t4
O . No. 0477
P. 3
RespoDSe Letter to TEA

July 30,2014
Page 2 ofS
community colleges, but arc passing college courses with A's and B's. At a school considered by
some to be focused on athletics, 85% of Prime Prep students arc focused solely on academics and
do not participate in sports. These statistics exemplify the positive impact that Prime Prep
Academy is having everyday on the lives of its students.
At this juncrurc. Uplift's primary goal is only to cnsUll: that these students continue to
have access to the unique educational opportunities provided by Prime Prep Academy fur years to
come. With that as its mission. Uplift does not believe that revocation of the ch811cr and closing
the school is in the best interest of the students. The law governing the revocation decision
expressly directs thal the CoJDmissioner's declsiOll sha11 be based on the best interest nf the
charter school's students. TEx. EDuc. COOl! i2.11S(b). Revocation of the charter would only
SClve to punish the students and the community served by Prime Prep Academy, rather than the
prior administrators responsible for the problems that led to the rcvocatiOll notice.
To be ciear, Uplift docs not dispute that the actions of the school's prior administration
ultimately led to the ineligibility action by the Texas Department of Agriculture and this
revocation action by the TEA. These same administrators were responsible for additional
management oversighls identified by the TEA.I Furthennore, the Uplift Board accepts full
responsibility for ovel'Sigbt of these past administrators. To that end, over the last seveLlIl months
the Board has made numerous changes to the administration and management of Prime Prep
Academy, including removing the I'csponsible p81ties.l Furthermore, there has been a complete
overhaul of the child nutrition program and staff; including the completion of a thorough and
detailed corrective action plan submitted to the IDA.] The Uplift Board is dedicated to providing
100% of the student population with nutritious meals, nlgardless of whether the school is
participating in federally-funded school lunch programs.
The Uplift Board has also instituted significant reforms to improve financial lranspanlncy
and oversight to eDSUl'e the long-tcnn viability of Prime Prep Academy. First, the Board brought
in an outside auditing film to conduct a thorough audit of the schools' financcs. Second, overhead
costs have heen significantly reduced by reducing support positions and associated pa}'!'Oll
expenses, and the Uplift Board is willing to elCplore additional struC!Ul'al changes to further reduce
operating COstS and increase effectiveness. Third, back-office fmancial and business support
I Far example, fimner Sliperintendcnt Rachel Kiag-SlDden siegcd complia...e COtmJ in April and Novelnber 2013
cerrifyio, thal,U Prime Prep blcl:ground checla had be... cooduct<d.
, DL. WaUace and his wife, Cbazma Jone., ar> no longer connected 10 Uplift or Primo Prep Academy in any \Yay.
Mr. WaU.ce was removed as Executive Director in NOVember 20t3. In December 20ll, both Snperintendent R.chcI
SlIIciers alld Director of Administralion Chaw.1011e, were ttnnlnated. In 1111U11)1 2014, the Board hired ROil Prlec
(Conner Olnn ISO Baud Trusteo) IS the lnItrhn SUpcrlntellllcnl, and Mr. Price brought in new m,no&emetlt "am.
) Yolanda Bania WIIS hired as tbe Direclor of Food and NutrilioMI Ser1licos in March 2014. Ms. Banks ovors... tb.
nulrili0ll31 pro!lfllDS Cor Ibe sebooJ. In addition, Jennifer Young W~S hired 1$ tho Food S.rvice M...."" co monit..
the food production records, IIlCIlUs, lIIId student participation. Prime Prep ACldemy has also implemenled point-ofsal. record lceepillg syslem to better track daily p~rticipirion in the scho<lliunch program. Prime Pnip Audomy ,Iso
is in \he process of soliciting IU'Ps for i~ food service veodor and mug addillo.al chlllge, 10 lis cbltd nutrition
program to better meel tho nutrilionat lItetls of its Srod.AU.
Received:
Jul. 30. 2014 2:50PM
O'
Jul 3020H
No. 0417
P. 4
Response Letter to TEA

July 30,2014
Page 3 ofS
functions have been outsoUl'Ced to JR3 Education Associates, which has resulted in significant
cost savings and improved operations. Finally, the Uplift Board has received fiDancial
commitments from Uplifr supporters to cover the cost of students' meals and other operating
expense! for the coming school year to ensure that the needs of Prime Pl'CP students are met
In light of these reforms, Uplift believes that both the action of the TCA in excluding
Uplift from future participation in the national child null'ition programs and the resulting
revocation decision by the lEA are unjustified. In fact, the IDA made its decision without even
considCJ:ing the corrective action plan submitted by Uplift, which was over 1,000 pagC! long and
submitted only two busineS! days before the IDA's eligibility decision. IDA staff had not even
complcted its l'eview of that documentation before its decision was made.~ Furthermore, the TDA
based its decision on false infolmation rep'ding a purported default judgment that never existed. S
GivCll these factors, Uplift could, if it so chose, potentially engage in a prOll'acted legal
battle regarding the TDA's decision and the resulting revocation notice D.'Om the TEA. However,
we do not believe that such litigation against the State would be in the best interests of the
students.' Therefore Uplift would like to respectfully ll:quest that the informa111!iview and hearing
process be used to explore options other than chartCl rcvocation to ensure the continued operation
of Prime Prep Academy. We are co.mdent that following the recent changes made by the Uplift
Board. Prime Prep Academy is now in a strong position to continue its mission, and the
revocation of the charter and shutting down the school would only hann the students and prevent
then!. from receiving the quality education they deserve.
011 Thunday, April 11,2014, Uplift sabmitted its ColtOctive Action Document (CAD) to TOA, and cho CAD
colUtltllting over 1,000 pages of doculDOIIu requested by TOA. On Monday, April 21. 2014, !h. TOA mid. ilS
decision to tOlmlttate Uplift's Pennanent A&Rement and 10 render Uplift Ineligible 10 participate ill w child DUtrirloll
programs ldmlnUtmd by the IDA. (Exhibit I, 04/21/14 TDA Lener.) Thil decisio.. wlSlllacio only two bllS!nClIs
days after Uplift submitted 115 responso to the TOA, and the IDA did aot ev... wOtlllIt! owa stiff of the d.c:lslM
On April 22, 2014, Ms. Strodlb k infonncd Uplift that !he IDA had "$lilted" Ibe review of Ibe CAD. (Exhibit 2,
04122114 l!mail.) As is .Ietr from this email, !he decision by IDA odatlttisttatiOil was IIOt bosed on any ~vlcw of
Uplill's CAD response roprdinc Ihe alleged Yiolacion.!, .ince lhal response and supponlttg documentallon had not
evOll yet been reviewed by IDA ,/If[
f An enlly of defal~t i. very different than I defaul! jadgmCIIL The CllI1Y of cIofau1r Is a docker entry by the clerlr. or
the court that men:ly pennits lb. pllintiff to move rOi enuy of cIofault Judl.nCDt under FRCP SS(b), whorm a
defaultjad,m""t is afinal adjUdication of liability by cho coun: $" u.s. ". 111.0800 1ft U.s. ClifFeii<;)', 3S6FJd IS1.
163 (Lst Cle. 2004); New York Lifo Ins. V. B,oIVn, 84 F.3d 131, 141 (SIb Cir. 1996); Ackta Dinet Mlttl. Corp. 1\
FluleI'hut Corp., 861'.3d 852, ISS n.3 (81b Cit. 1996).ln the 1awSlllr~ned on by the TOA and cited In the Notice, the
court .laIi: (nat Jadge Lyan) ""r...d I "Clerk's Enlly otOefaalt" on March 13,2014, at the request oflbe plainliff
atm Uplift failed ro respond 10 the complaint (Exhibit 3.) JUdg. Lynn IIlOver tutored a cIofault judgmllll ICftinst
Uplif\, and UpUft WIt never adjudicated to have vlolaled lhe False Claims At!. Rather, tile clerk simply entered an
enIJY of defaalt, which Iw no adjudlcltoty eect and Is merely I procedunl step Itt the process of obtaining a d.fault
judgmenl. The IDA's slatelllenl5 to the conlmlY aro simply Wlon,.
Upiift reservos all legal righlS rogardiDg 'he decisions of the TOA and TEA, including the rlghls to proceed with
future litigalion, should ic bee..ne ncCCUftty or prudent. Nothing in this leiter .hould be considered IS a waIver of any
sach rigllls.
.luI 30 2014 ~
R.e.lv.d:
Jul. 30. 2014 2:51PM
O'
\:f1I
No. 0477
P. 5
Response Letter to TEA

July 30, 2014
Page 4 of5
2. Reconstitution Rather Than Revoeation

The TEA's revocation notice cites to TExAS EDUCATION COOl! 12.115(a)(2) as the legal
basis for revocation of the charter. Section 12.115(a)(2) states that "the commissioner shall
revoke the charter of an open-enrollment charter school Dr reconntlllTe the go\'ernlng body of the
charTer holdtr if the commission detenaines that the ch81ter holde!' .. , failed to satisfy geDCl'ld
accepted accounting standards of fiscal management. .. (emphasis added) Thus, reconstitution of
the governing body of the charter holder and continued OPCl'ation of the school is expressly
contemplated by tbe stahlte. However, the TEA's revocation notice only discusses revocation and
does not even contemplate reconstihltion as a possible option.
Uplift hereby l'!:quCS1S that the infonnal review and hearing process be used to explore
reconstitution of the goveroing body of the cbarter holder. Such a reconstitution would allow
Prime Prep Academy to remain open and to continue educating its srudents with the least amount
of disruption to those students, their parents, and the Prime Prep educators and slaff. Indeed, the
Uplift Board would like to wade with the Commissioner to facilitate local input from community
and parents in the l'l:Constitution process, as required by the statute. !Ex. EDUC. CODE 12.l1S(d).
The Uplift Board can offer additional assistance in helping the TEA identify qualified community
membCl's for service on the reconstituted governing body and curtent Board members should be
consider for service on that goveming body, as provided for by law. Id Finally, Uplift would be
willing to work with the TEA in the creation of a new 501(c)(3) organization to hold the charter,
as cDntemplated by Section 12.115(e). In light of the recent changes in the Prime Prep nutrition
program and siaff desclibcd below, this new organization should qualify for participation in the
national child nub'ition programs, which would address the pUlported basis for revocation.
3. Transfer Operations To Another Charter As R Last Resort
Should the C01!lll1issioner reject reconstitution and prDceed with revocation, Uplift
requests that tbe Commissioner utilize the procedures outlined in TExAs EDUCATION COOl!
12.1l6(d) regarding management and assignment of operations of Prime Prep Academy to a
different ch81ter holder. Although Uplift believes that reconstitution process is preferable, the
transfer process provided in Section ~2.116(d) would allow for the continued operation Df the
schools and the continued education of the Pl'ime Prep students as a last resort. In light of the
recent changes at Prime Prep Academy, Uplift believes that the management and operation of
Prime Prep Academy can be successfully transferred, so long as an appl'Dpriate chalter holder can
be identified. Any subsequent clwtcr holder should be able to not only manage the operations of
the school, but that can also continue to provide the unique educational environment offeted by
Prime Prep Academy and maintain continuity of key staff, educators, and SUppOlt services to
students.
Again, simply revoking the charter and shutting down Prime Prep Academy would only
harm the students lind the community served by the school. We look forw81d to working with the
TEA to flJld the most effective way to continue the operations of Prime Prep Academy and the
education of its students.
Received:
Jul. 30. 2014 2:51PM
Jul
O' flIIIII! on, McCollo m, Oe melath
au
~U14 ~.
No. 0477
R.c:1pODSC Letter to TEA

July 30, 2014
PageS of 5
Sincerely.
Dan'en O. Gibson
Enclosures
cc:
T. Chris Lewis, Board President, Uplift Fort Worth, CDC (by email)
David Anderson, Gencra1 Counsel, TEA (by email and fax, 512-475-3662)
VOIlByer. Deputy General Counsel, TEA (by emai\and fax, 512-475-3662)
P. 6
Jul. 30. 2014 2:51PM
on, McCollom, Demeralh
JuI 30 2014
ttlon.
v,y
EXHIBIT 1
No.0477
P. 7
Received: .
Ju1.30. 2014 2:51PM

~ a.x
Server
O'
lon, McCollom, Demerath
~/~a/~Ul~ l:O~:U~ ~M
Jul 30 2014
~~uE
4/005
FaK
No. 0477
P. 8
QCJ.vt:r
.'
:.
.. ... ., ...

TODD STAPLES
COMMISSIONEA
Apri12l,20l4
Celtilled MAil Nunlbel' 91 71999991 7030263] 5157
~nd First-Class Mnll
Mr. Ron Price, SuperinIctulent

Uplift Fort Worth. CDC
3102 Maple Avenue
DlIl1as, TcxIllI7S201
RE:
Nutlee oCTerminatiun ofPetmanent AgreelUCDt Bnd Exclusion of Damiea Wnllllce and

Cbavna Jones, as re9poPSibie principll!.l tCE 10 itOI712)
Dear Mr.l'rice:
Effeotive April 21, 2014,ihe Texas Deportment of Agriculture ('IDA) is [ermwlIlng ilS
Permanent Agreement ,,1th UpliflForl Worth, CDC (Uplift). As n resuh. Uplift I~ no (onger
eligible fa\' participation in the National School Lunch Progran\ (NSLP) or UIly uther Child
Nutrition Program administered by IDA, including Ille Summer .'ood Servico Program (SFSP).
TIIis action is be;ng talcen pmsuant La 7 CPR 210.25 and Article Vllr.S.2 of the Pennanenl
Agreement.
A dd'aulljudgmel\t (Default) was entered against UpUft on March 13,2014, in Smith v. Saw!qs.
el aI., cast number 3:12-cv-04377, in Ihe U. S. Districl Coul1 fonhc Northern District oeDalias.
The Inwsuit ~ brought by Lawrence Smith, as relator, aUeging violations of the (lederal False
Claims Ac!. 31 U.S.C. 3729 - 3733 (F'alse Claims ACI) arising out of Uplift's pallieipatiOD in
the SFSP In 2011 and 2012. As 8 result oflhc Default. Uplift has been adj\ldicated 10 have
engaged in civil violations of the !1alse Claims Act.
Uplift opel1lted lIle SFSP for program yealS 2011 aDd 2012. IDA reviewed Uplift's SFSP
oper8[io[\.~ in 2012, and as a result, sent Uplift a Notice ofScrious Deficiency (Notice) on
D~eelllbel'12, 2012. The Notice infomled Uplift tbal il was seriously deficient in its operation of
tbe SFSP and Ibat Damien Wallace and ChBzma Jones ~re the individuals responsible for the
serious de~jencies in ligbt oflhelr responsibility for management ot the SFSP. IDA required
Uplift 10 submit a c:omcti\'D acUon plan (CAP) by Innuar}" 12, 2013. IDA receh'ed an
accepl:lblc CAP nnd [empOT1lo1y deferred the serious deficiency.
r.O.llox 12847
;\unin.li:.... 7871 I
(511) 46307416
",*,.T.:xuA!:riLulcun:.p
1',.: C8RRj 2'38861
,,'
:,
::
':
"
Received : A
Ju1. 30. 2014 2:51PM

I'ax ::server
oql~~I~Ulq
!1WI on, McCollom, Demeralh
1:0~;U~ y~ YA~E
Jul 30 2G14
5/005
No. 0477
Fax:>erver
P. 9
Mr. Ita. "ric,," Sup_rlllienden,

April 1 i. 2D I,.
P",c2011
On February 19 - 20, 20 I", TDA conducted III Admillistrative Review of Uplift' $ NSLP
oper~ciolls and found numel'OUS violations ofNSLP I'CguJnlions. Man!, of Ihe findings resulting
from the l"cb[U1Il)' 19 - 20, 2014 review
lhe sanie as tbose cited ill the December 12, 2012
Now.'C, specifically, failure to implement a financial system based on generally acctplablc
acCOunti.ll~ Pl'!lcCdllrts, and failure to relllin t1!cunis for the 1'1!Iluired three ye8\'S and to maJc.c
Ihose records IMitable 10 TDA.
w=
Uplift's corrective action lllan submitted inrcsponse to Ihe setiou., dt:ficiencles idcnlilied in
Uplift's 2011 and 2012 SFSP opClations did 1\01 pemulrumtly IIIICI fuUy comet the organizlltioll'$
finaru:ifllnon-colnplianees lbnt alleet all Child Nutrition Pro~ram' administeTed by Uplift.
As a result of the Default and Ih~ flnding.~ arising out of the Februa/l' 19 - 20, 2014 ICvie\\', IDA
is hereby:
Terminalillg UpUft'! Food and Nutrition Division PermllnCn1 Agteement (Permanent
.A\ll'Cclllenl) effective April 21. 2014.
Excluding Uplift, Dllmien Walla~ (Executive Director, DOB 11/19/1971) Md Chll'l.lllll
Jones (Oircclllr of AdrninislCalion, DOB 12119/1980) from [ullin: SFSI' participation
e11i:clive April::!1, 2014.
Uplift, Damien Wallacel\nd Cba1ma Jones will be pll1cad on tbe Texas Excluded SFSP List
(fEXSL) an" Slate List While on tbe mxsL. Uplift \\IiU not be able \0 p.rticipate in lbe SJlSP 83
a contracting entily 01' site. Dlmien Wallace and Chmna Jones will nul be ..ble to perConn any
SFSP nlnelioll or seLve as ~ principal in any ol'gaoiZlLlion ouite in the SFSP. ThC)' will remain on
the TEXSL unlil such time as TDA detenuincs that !lIe serious dclicicncy has heen corrected or for
seven years after their c.~cILl5ion.
If yuu l\lIve any que~tions "egurding tbi~ COrrCSpoLldcnce. p\a_ contact Angela Olige, Chief
Adminislnllor 8t (512) 463-8583 01' email Ani!da.OIigc@Tex!lsAllrieullu\'C,go\.
Siacel-e1y yours,
jtGl~~Ck..
Tr.ley Mw:ek
AdDlhllstralOl'
Food and Norrilion
TM/Jlhl
cc:
Mr. Damico Wallace

Ms. Chams Jones
United Sillies Depm"uncn! of Agriculture }o'ood and Nutrition StTVice
Jul.30. 2014 2:51PM
Jul 30 2014
EXHIBIT 2
No.0477
P. 10
Recolved :.
Jul. 30. 2014 2:51PM
O'h.nlon, McCollom, Demerath
Jul 30 2014 .~
No. 0477
SubJett: Fwd: CAD - Dietary Guidelines Findln,

Date: Monday, May 12, 2014 otl:49:41 PM Central Daylight Time
frohl:
To,
Yolanda Banks
Edwin Flores
Begin forwarded message:
From: YOLANDA SANKS <l/Qlandiban!g;CA!mac.coln>

Subject: Re: CAD - Dietary Guldellns8 Anding
Oate: April 22. 2014 3:34:50 PM COT
To: Anne 5lrodlbeck <Mne.Shodlbeck@T!Il(Hl\gricu!ture.qov>
Hi Anns,
NeUhar myself nor Doona are listed as "&UppOrt" SO I couldn't fde the claim last week and 1
don't have access to meal pallsm compliance unUilhe FND 1011. updated. Hopefuly they w~1
updale thai sooner rather Ihan laler.
Yolanda Banks
On Apr 22, 2014, al 3:22 PM. Anne Slrodlbeck <Anne,Slrodlbeck@TexasAgricullure,gov>
wrote:
Good afternoon,
We have stilted Ihe review of your 1" CAD. The finding wllh Ihe Dietary
GuldeHnes which Is appllotion for the 6 cenl meal certifiation Is required to be
completed In lXUNPS Meal Certification Dashboard. I know""e reopened Ihe
lindlng In March to allow addtlionaltnfotmation to be submitted.
I will need to deny this findlns based on current document.tion. Were you aware
Hneeded to be put Into TXUNPS as ,tated In the finding or did you not receive the
Information Meded?
Thank you much,
Anne
Anne Slredrbedr, R.D., L.D.
Coordinator for School Operotions
Food & N~trltion
Te~.s Department of A.riculture
542S Polk Street, Suite G20
Houslon, Texas 77023
Mobile: 713-3987850
Office: 7139218114
Office Fax: 713-921-8205
Austin Phone: 1.8n.TEltMEAl
Email address: annul,odlbeck@lte!(jsa"lculturuov
P. 11
Received:
Jul. 30. 2014 2:51PM
O'
Jul 30 2014
No. 0477
P. 13
Case 3:12-cv-04317-M Document 29 Flied 03/13/14 Page 1 of 1 PagelD 286
UNrrED STATES DunlUCTCOURT

FOR THE NORTHERNDISTRlCT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
Lawrence M Smilil
Plaintiff
v.
Deion L Sanders et al
Defendant
Civil Action No. 3:12-cv-04377-M
CLERK'S ENTRY OF DEFAULT

The record reflects that service of liIe complaint has been made upon tile Defendant
named below:
Uplift Fort Worth CDC

It appears fi'Om tile record that service of the complaint has been made, Ihat the Defeodant
has failed to answer or othClWise defi:nd as directed within the time allowed, and tbat the Plaintiff
has shown (hat failure through affidavit or otherwise.
Therefore, upon Plaintiffs rcqucs~ DEFAULT is entered against the Defeodant

named above.
KAREN S. MITCHELL, CLERK

U.S. DISTRICT COURT
siS. Todd
By: Deputy
JuIJlJ
Ju1.30. 2014 4:08PM
No.
P.....
I/5
........
e.=
c>""
1~5...
,,>
O/HANLON, MCCOLLOM & DEMERATH
..'"
",,,,
",0
,.,c:
<<">
-,..
<"> ....
... -
E:
- ....
",0
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAw
OCt:>
808 WEST AVEtlUIt

AUSTIN, TEXAs 78701
nUPHONIt! (.'2) 4.4..0849
"'cn
z ....
~
W
C>
-0
"'fl'"
N
0-
FAcslMILEl (8 I Z) ",84... 8 t"
DATE: July 30, 2014
NUMBER OF PAGES:
FAX NO.:
512-4153662
CC: David Anderson

rex. Educ. Association
FAX NO.:
512-4153662
CC: VonBycr
Tex. Educ. Association
FAX NO.:
512-4153662
--7TO: Eric Marin
(Includes Cover Sheet)
Tex. Educ. Assoc.
FROM: Dmen O. Gibson
RE: Supplemental Response of Uplift Fort Worth to Notice oflntent to Revoke OpenEmollmcnt Charter and Request for IDfolDlai Review and Hearing
COMMENTS:
Please see the attached letter supplementing the response ofUpJift Fort Worth to the TEA's
Notice of Intent to Revoke Open-Enrollment Cbarter and Uplift's request for infOlDlal tevicw and
hearing.
Darren O. Gibson
O'HANLON, MCCOLLOM & DEMERATIr
808 West Ave
Austin, IX 18101
512354-7208 direct
512-494-9949
512-494-9919 fax
dgibson(ii}808west.com
this ftcsjmjle trwmi.siQU is int~nkd PAIy fgr the persowI and

confideotial use of the designated JeciJJjclIIlsl above. This mesSage may be an attomey-cUeut
cOlDIDllDicatlon and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of 1his lIlC99agc is ACt the
intended recipient, you arc hereby notified that any discl<lsure, copying. distribution or the taking o.f
any action in reliance em the contcots of this inf01JDatiou is strictly prohibited. If yo.\1 Jiao received
this trAllSJ:llission in Clror, please immediately notify us by telcpbnne tc arrange for the rctum o.f the
dOCUlllcnts at our expense. Ibanlcyou. .
Tbe infonpatioo Contained in
:Q
1""1
C')
-<
1""1
1""1
JuJ 30 201
Jul. 30. 20 14 4:09PM
. 4Po
No. 1915
o 'HANLON,
P. 2/5
MCCOLLOM & DEMERATH
. ATIDRNE'fS ArlO COUNSELORS AT LAw
eoe
W.!ST AyS:NUIE
AU"'.". 'rnAS 7870.

TE1.I!'PHON: (1112) ......11
FAC.SIMlLI (Ilt2) ....... ,
ICEvlHO.............
r-_
"'
,.,
c.
en
...
en ,.,
~. CfIoLma..a...ac
C~.Ow.T. . .
LEsuE McCoLLOM
,.,0
'<n
" <:
C'DIIY5D, L...doR.-HD u.t.ar,Rf(J
T~ Bo,MDCIIl.aAL. Grec'" nr'TIOH
n ....
...,",0
JucnN OEMliRATH
2>
C-aw._
->
::
July 30, 2014
<""
-,.,
~=
=-<
On
nafacs;mll. (511-475-3661) & cerljfieci mail. Ttl/1m receiPt reguutcd
'-'
=
:=
~
W
0
:a:
..."
-!?
p..)
0-
1701 Nodh CoogJ'C$S Avenue

Austin, Texas 78101
Supplement to Uplift Fort Worth IWpoDSII
Dear Mr. Marin:

1 WIiIe 10 provide a very brief, but impoJ1ant supplement 10 the Iespoose submitted earlier
today by Uplift Forth Worth, CDC ("UpJift") to the TEA's Notice of Fiadings aud Notice of
Intent to Rcvo1te the Open-EnroUmcnt Charter, daled luly IS, 2014. Please be advised Ibar less
Iban ten minutes after sendiag the initial response, I was Inti1lII1Cd tbat the tourt in the pending
False Claims Act lawsuit, Smith I'. Sanden, Clv. A. No. 3:12-ov-4377-M, entered an Older
granting Uplift's mOlioa to set ssidc the cnby of default. The Court's order is attached to this
letter. This order further CODfirms that no default judgment was ever entered aud that Uplift bas
:never been adjudicated to lurve engaged in civil violations oftbc Paise Claim Act.
Thauk you for your CQllSideralioD.
Sincerely,
Danen G. Gibson
Enclosures
cc!
T. Cluis Lewis, Board President, Uplift Fort Worth, CDC (byemall)

navid Anderson, Ckneral Co\lllSeI, TEA (by email BDd fax, 512-475-3662)
Von Byu, Deputy General Counsel, TU. (by email and &x, 512-475-3662)
/T1
-<
Eric Manu, Attomey

'fcxas Education Associa1iOQ
Re:
/T1
/T1
Jul 30
Ju1.30. 2014 4:09PM
No. 1915
Case 3:12-cv-04377-M Document 60 Filed 07/30/14
Page 1 of 3 PagelD 620
TJNII'ED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel

LAWRENCE M. SMITH,
Plaintiff,
v.
Civil Action No. 3:12-Gv-4317-M
DElON L. SANDERS, et 01.,

Dcfendaats.
P. 3/5
.......
..........
51
....
'"
.... .....
0
l=i
c::o . .
.... '"
..,=
... n
>
n_
..., -
W
0
",0
:;::
2>
... C'>
-~==.....
On
z<
-!?
r-.>
0-
ORDER
Before the Court is the Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant Uplift Fort
Worth, CDC (UUplift") [Doclcct Entty #37], filed by Relator Lawrence M. Smith, and the Motion
to Set Aside EoIry ofDefault and Briefin SUPPOlt (Doclcet Entty I#SI], filed by Uplift. ~1ator'$
Motion is DENIED, and Uplift's Motlon is GRANTED.

Relator alleges that on Janu8l}' 29, 2014, Uplift was served by personal service' on
Abigail Sanlos, lID uaidenlified person at Prime Prep Academy allegedly represeoled to be the
appropriale person to receive service on bebalf of Upli1ll Uplift did not answer or otherwise
respond within twentY-one days ofservice on Ms. Santos. Accordingly, onMarcb 12, 2014,
Relator requested that the Clerk make an cntty of defaul~ which the Clerk did on Match 13,
2014. 00 April 9, 2014, Relator filed. Motion faT Default Judgment. On AprU 23, 2014, Uplift
I The puti.. disqru as to ~ mdbod of setViu WOO usal. While R.olllOr 1110801 !hit Uplift WII .....ed duoUlh
pmolll!!eM'" 04 Ms. SlIltos, Uplift mainlaiaslhll ML SIIIIOI ICccptcd service by cadtied moil. HowC1Icr,1IIis
discrtponcy is moa~ bettusol'lOpl'dless oflb II1C!Ihod oCscrvi<l:. Ms. SInIos _ ocithu III olli"" DOT a rccisltral
or 1I1InI&iIII1IIent o!Uplift. Dot's MGt. App. u 3.
'DiaaI Mill!, who pulJlO!\l:dly served \VIs. SoDIDs. aIIoacs thot wh .. she Irri~ed 01 Uplift's olliw, she """ potted
by I ''tall s1codcr lady wilb JOd hair" who <bled !bat she could not Iccept Jentlcc hcrsd~ but woul4 c:alldlo proper
pason. PI:s \I.osp., App. all (Milll Dec!.). MilhmoiDmins!hlltbls womllllntrod.ud Ms. SlumS OS tbepropcr
p<nOIIlO receive setVi... and slated thot Ms. San.... \IllS. member ofthe ollieo staIr!or Uplift, at "bicb. paint Ms.
~mb banded Ibe summons 10 Ms. SoDIDS.ld.
::0
fTI
(")
fTI
<
I'T1
o
Recel.ode
Jul 30
Jul. 30. 20 14 4:09PM
No. 1915
Case 3:12-cv04377-M Document 60 Filed 07/30114
P. 4/5
Page 2 of 3 pagelD 621
purponedly obtAined knowledge ofthc Clerk's eatry of deliw1t when alettcr from the Texas
Dcpa.rtment of Agriculture was filxcd to Uplift., stating that Uplift's contm:t for the NatiDDa!
School LWlCh Program. and School BrcalcCast Prognm was being terminated as Ii result of1he
cnlly of default. Do May 16, 2014, Uplift respoDded to Relator's Motion for Deliwlt Judgment.
and moved Ihe CoIIrt to set aside the entry Df default Uplift asserts that it was not properly
served, because Ms. Santos is neither an officer nor a registc:rcd or managing agent of Uplift, but
rather was a janitor working for a contractDr that provided custodial services to Uplift. Def.'s
Mot., App. at 3.
Rule 55 oflhe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes coutts to set aside an entry of
default "for good cause." Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c). In determining what c~ good c.ause,
courts should consider, among other things, (J) whether the default was willful or the result of
excusable neglect, (2) wbethcr a meritorious defense is presented, and (3) whether setting aside
the default would prejudice the advemry. Mattcro/Diench1ce, 975 F.2d 181, 183 (5th Cir.
1992). "These factors are Dot 'talismanic,' and the COIlrt need not consider aU of these factolS,
and may consider others ...." CJC Holdillgs,lllc. v. Wright d: LDlo, Inc., 979 F.2d 60, 64 '(5th
Cir. 1992). "The decision to set aside a default dcciee lies within the sound discretion oflbe
district court."
Ullit~d Stalen.
Dna Porcel o/Reol Prop., 763 Fold 181, 183 (5th Cir. 1985).1n
exercising their discretion, courts are to recall that our judicial system ''universally evar[s] trial
on the merits." Diench1ce, 975 F.2d at 183 (citations omitted). ~[W)hilc courts apply essentially
the same standard to motions to set aside a default and a judgment by default, the former is more
readily granted than a motion to set aside a default judgment" Id at 184.
Uplift asserts that its failure ro answer or otherwise respond was DOt willful and was the
result of excusable neglect beceusc it was not properly served. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
2
Recel
Jul 30
Jul. 30. 2014 4: 10PM
No. 1915
Case 3:12-cv043n-M Document 60 FUed 07/30/14
P. 5/5
Page 3 of 3 PagelD 622
4(h)(1)(B) provides that a COrpOllltiOD may be served ''by delivering a copy oCthe SIDDDlOns and
of the complaint to aD officer, a IJWIIIging Or geueraJ agent, or any olhct agent authorized by
appointmenr or by law to receive set1Iicc of plOCCSS n Uplift maintains that Ms. Santos is DOt
an officer or agent of Uplift. Ronald Price, tbe SUperintendeDt for Prime Prep Academy, filed lID
affidavit stating that Ms. Santos was an anployee ortbe jlDilorial service colllractcd by I!pJift TO
provide custodial services to Prime Prep AcadCDlY, aod thai Ms. SlDlos was not an employee,
officer, or a member ofmllJ\llgemem of Prime Prep Academy al tbe time of service. De. 's MOL,
App.at3.
AccordiDgly, the Court fmds !bar Uplift bas demonstnlted that il WIS not properly served,
because Ms. Santos was DOt ID individuaJ. authorized to acccplservicc 00 behalf of Uplift Uplift,
therefore, had no obligation 10 answer, and CallDot be defaulted for 1iilling to do so. Therefore,
the Court SETS ASIDE tbe Clerk's Enll}' of Default against Uplift and DENIES Relator's
MOtiOD :fur Default ludgment as
to Uplift. Relator JDUSt properly serve UpJift within thirty dlLYs
ofthe dale of this Order, or its claims against Uplift will be dismissed.
SO ORDERED.
July 30,2014.
'1
"
11$
'
' ....
TEXAS EOUCAnON AGENCY

1701 North Congress Ave . Austin, Texas 78701-1494 512463-9734 512463-9838 FAX www.tea.state.tx.us
Midlael Williams
Ccnlmisslon;r
August 25, 2014
Via Certified Mall

4400 Panola Ave.
Prime Prep Academy
4400 Panola Ave.
RE:
Opan-Enrollmant Charter Held by Uplift Fort Worth, CDC (220-818)

I, as the designee of the Commissioner of Education, have received your response to the
Texas Education Agency's (TEA) Juiy 15, 2014, notice of findings and notice of intent to revoke the
open enrollment charter for Uplift Forth Worth, CDC d/b/a Prime Prep Academy (Uplift). I have
conducted an informai review of your response and detemined that 1) the findings listed in the letter
of Juiy 15, 2014 will remain unchanged and are now final and 2) the TEA will proceed with the
revocation of the charter heid by Uplift. Your appeal will be forwarded to the State Office of
Administrative Hearings (SOAH) for a hearing pursuant to 12.116(c) of the Texas EdUcation Code.
The agency will be in further contact with you regarding the scheduling of the SOAH hearing.
Shouid you have any questions regarding the scheduling of the hearing, you may contact Eric Marin
in the Division of Legal Services at (512) 463-9720.
L'
e Gonzalez Reynolds
Chief Deputy Commissioner of Education
LGRlcc
Exhibit C
."
It
...
Is
51
Uplift Fort Worth. CDC

Page 2
cc: Dr. Clyde Steelman. Executive Director. Region 11 Education Service Center
Michael Beny, Deputy Commissioner, Policy and Programs. TEA
Sally Partridge. Associate Commissioner for Accreditation and Schoollmprovemenl, TEA
Lisa Dawn-Fisher. Associate Commissioner, School Finance. TEA
ADce McAfee, Associate Commissioner. Complaints, Investigations. and Enforcement. TEA
Nora Hancock. Associate Commissioner. Grants and Fiscal Compliance. TEA
Criss Cloudt, Associate Commissioner, Assessment and Accountability. TEA
Von Byer. General Counsel. TEA
Michael Rigby, Associate Deputy Counsel. TEA
Eric Marin. Legal Counsel. TEA
Ron Rowell, Director of Govemance. TEA
Heather Mauze. Director of Charter School Administration. TEA
W'
Division 2. Formal Review
Statutory Authority: The provisions of this Division 2 issued under the Texas Educlltion
Code, 39.102 and 39.1II4, unless othem'isc noted.
157.1131. Applicability.
This division applies only to a commissioner of education decision to:
(I) assign an accreditation status of Accredited-Warned or Accredited-Probation to a
school district or an open-enrollment charter school; and
(2) assign a board of managers to a school district under the Texas Education Code,
Chapter 39.
SOllree: The provisions q(this I57.I 131 adopted to be effective September 18.2014,39 TexReg
7334.
157.1132. Notice.
The commissioner of education shall provide a school district or an open-enrollment charter
school with written notice of an action subject to this division. The notice shall include an
explanation of the factual and legal basis for the decision, documentation supporting the
decision, and a description of the procedures to seek a review of the decision.
SOllree: The provisions o/this 157. I 132 adopted to be effective September 18. 20J.l. 39 TexReg
7334.
157.1133. Request.
The superintendent of the school district or chief executive officer of the open-enrollment charter
school may request, in writing, a formal review under this division.
(I) The request must be properly addressed to the Texas Education Agency (TEA)
representative identitied in the notice issued under 157.1132 of this title (relating to
Notice) and must be received by the TEA representative on or before the deadline
specitied in the notice.
Exhibit 0
(2) The request must include a summary of all arguments and documentation supporting
the position of the school district or open-enrollment charter school.
(3) The summary of arguments must not exceed 20 single-spaced pages and must contain
citations to specific pages in the supporting documentation. The summary must concisely
state. in numbered paragraphs:
(A) if alleging the decision was made in violation of a statutory provision, the
statutory provision violated and the specific facts supporting a conclusion that the
statute was violated by the decision;
(B) if alleging the decision was made in excess of the TEA's statutory authority,
the TEA's statutory authority and the specific facts supporting a conclusion that
the decision was made in excess of this authority;
(e) if alleging the decision was made through unlawful procedure, the lawful
procedure and the specific facts supporting a conclusion that the decision was
made through unlawful procedure:
(D) if alleging the decision was affected by other error of law, the law violated
and the specific facts supporting a conclusion that the decision violated that law;
(E) if alleging the decision was not reasonably supported by substantial evidence
considering the reliable and probative evidence as a whole, each finding,
inference, conclusion, or decision that was unsupported by substantial evidence;
(F) if alleging the decision was arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse
of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion, each finding,
inference, conclusion, or decision affected and the specific facts supporting a
conclusion that each was so affected;
(0) tor each violation, error, or detect alleged under subparagraphs (A)-(F) of this
paragraph, the substantial rights of the school district or open-enrollment charter

school that were prejudiced by such violation, error, or defect;
(H) a concise statement of the relief sought by the requestor; and
(I) the name, mailing address, telephone number, and facsimile number of the
requestor's representative.
(4) Supporting documentation must be "bates stamped" numbered consecutively on each
page.
(5) If no formal review is requested by the deadline specified in the notice, a final order
may be issued without formal review.
SOllrc'e: The provisions o.fthis 15 7.1133 adopted to be effective September 18, 20J.l, 39 TexReg
733./.
157.1I34. Procedures.
(a) The Texas Education Agency (TEA) representative may require the school district or openenrollment charter school to meet at the TEA headquarters in Austin, Texas, or by telephone to
discuss the findings andlor provide additional information for review.
(b) The county district or campus identification number of the affected entity must be included in
all written correspondence on the formal review, as well as the date the notice was issued under
157.1132 of this title (relating to Notice).
(c) All deadlines under this division shall be calculated from the date of actual receipt. No
mailbox rule applies.
SOllrce: The provisions o/this .1"157.1134 adopted to be effective September 18. 201./, 39 TexReg
733./.
157.1135. Formal Review.

(a) The Texas Education Agency (TEA) shall review the notice issued under 157.1132 of this
title (relating to Notice) and supporting documents; the request for review, summary of
arguments, and supporting documents; and other relevant items and information.
(b) Formal review is an executive function conducted by the TEA staff. Formal review is not a
contested case hearing, and rules prohibiting ex parte communications do not apply. The rules of
civil procedure and evidence do not apply.
(c) The TEA shall consider the matters set forth in the notice and shall not consider items or
information that are irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious.
(d) The TEA may take official notice of generally recognized information within the TEA's area
of specialized knowledge.
(e) The special skills and knowledge of the TEA staff shall be used in evaluating all information
presented during the formal review.
(t) The TEA may present, incorporate, or request additional brieting, findings, and
documentation regarding relevant issues and may set limitations on and deadlines to respond to
such requests at any time before the linal order is issued.
Source: The provisions of this .1"157. 1135 adopted to be effective September 18. 20N. 39 TexReg
733./.
157.1136. Fimll Order and Appeal.

Following the formal review, a final order will be issued. The final order may include changes or
additions to the proposed order and such moditications are not subject to another formal review
procedure. A final order issued following a formal review is final and may not be appealed.
Source: The provisions (!{this 15 7. 1136 adopted /0 be effective September 18. 201-1. 39 TexReg
733./.
157.1137. Other Law.

The Texas Govemment Code. Chapter 2001, and the Texas Education Code, 7.057, do not
apply to a fomlal review under this division.
Source: The provisions ofthis 157.113 7 adopted to be effective September 18, 201-1. 39 TexReg
733./.

TEA Letter To Prime Prep Academy

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

TEA Letter To Prime Prep Academy

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

TEA

Texas Education Agency

January 13, 2015

Mr. Chris Lewis, Board President

Via Certified Mail

Mr. Ron Price, Superintendent

Open-Enrollment Charter Held by Uplift Fort Worth, CDC (220-818)

Dear Mr. Lewis and Mr. Price:

Uplift Fort Worth, CDC

Compliance and Cooperation

Uplift Fort Worth, CDC

July 15, 2014

Mr. Ron Price, Superintendent

Open-Enrollment Charter Held by Uplift Fort Worth, CDC

Dear Mr. Lewis and Mr. Price:

____ _ _ _ ... n drrvn'ik.

___.....'........_ ......_ .....__________-_

The OpenEnroliment Charter

Demonstration of Unsatisfactory Financial Perfonmance and

The commissioner shall revoke the charter of an openenrollment charter school or

See Exhibit A, Contract for Charter, Paragraph 2.

, See Exhibit D, TDA correspondence dated April 21, 2014.

V. Opportunity for an informal Review and Hearing

Lizzette Gonzalez Reynolds

Criss Cloudt, Associate Commissioner, Assessment and Accountability, TEA

1011 '1' -: :> .j 1r!l:)O OPEN-ENROLLMENT CHARTER SCHOOL

'--____________G;;;.o"'v_e;.:r=nance nnd Operations

.:V "( ~.'!llliJZ

entered into this

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

April 21, 2014

Notice of Termination of Permanent Agreement and Exclusion of Damien Wallace and

Dear Mr. Price:

RO. Box 12847

/\wei TClOIS 78711

Fax: (888) 223-8861

Mr. Ron Price, Superintendent

On February 19 - 20, 2014, TDA conducted an Administrative Review of Uplift's NSLP

Mr. Damien Wallace

TDA DOCKET :"0. 69-1-I-NLSrISnr

nEFORE THE ADl\II:"iISTRA TlVE

ORDER GRA:'ITI;\'G APPELLEE'S :\IOTION TO DISMISS

the t\ppcllec's :Vlotinn to Dismiss and the documents on

which pertains to the termination liOIIl the SBP. pro\'ides

1.1 02 I. (penaining to the i': LSp). nor -I TAC

the SBP). provides Il,r an appeal uponlcnnina!ion from the NLSPISBP.

Regulati,'ns (CI'R) and

lise;}l aelillns. (See 7 CFR

Texas ,\dmini str"ti'" CoOe (TAC). arc limiwd only to

and ('I): ano

pert aining the SUP).

1.1(J II j ... \\ illwlit

th:u It I'" I.'milled In.tIl .!ppl.'JI unliL'r

,,,.:., ( , 1111111;': ' nILI \! II III

Phl\ bi "Il" HI" ~

\Qll lc I h~ I'r!l\i'lllllS " f -I T. \C ~1.1 1l11 gh c

Appdlant the light to appeal its temlination rrllm Ihe SFSP.

Appellee's ;Vlotion to Dismiss

SIGNED VII the 10'" day of :">Iay 20('+.

Jim I'oll an.l"'~ ~

;\ulllinislrall\C R~w Ofl\-.:cr

I'dccllpier: (SOU) 91)1)8520

S ' . : $ 5 1 _ ' :fI