Share |

UP Education Network (Unlocking Potential Inc)

 90 Canal Street, Suite 600
 Boston, MA 02114
[P] (617) 307-5980
[F] (617) 765-0446
www.upeducationnetwork.org
info@upeducationnetwork.org
Kimberly Wong
Facebook Twitter
INCORPORATED: 2010
 Printable Profile (Summary / Full)
EIN 27-2194956

LAST UPDATED: 08/03/2015
Organization DBA UP Education Network
Former Names Unlocking Potential Inc (2014)
Organization received a competitive grant from the Boston Foundation in the past five years Yes

Summary

--

Mission StatementMORE »

UP Education Network (formerly Unlocking Potential Inc.) is one of the few school management organizations in the country successfully tackling the challenges of in-district school turnaround. Our mission is to rapidly transform chronically underperforming district schools into extraordinary schools that sustain high achievement over time. Our work is helping students from Massachusetts’s historically underserved communities acquire the knowledge, skills, and strength of character necessary to succeed on the path to college.

Mission Statement

UP Education Network (formerly Unlocking Potential Inc.) is one of the few school management organizations in the country successfully tackling the challenges of in-district school turnaround. Our mission is to rapidly transform chronically underperforming district schools into extraordinary schools that sustain high achievement over time. Our work is helping students from Massachusetts’s historically underserved communities acquire the knowledge, skills, and strength of character necessary to succeed on the path to college.


FinancialsMORE »

Fiscal Year July 01, 2015 to June 30, 2016
Projected Income $7,457,462.00
Projected Expense $7,549,993.00

ProgramsMORE »

  • (1) School Restart
  • (2) School Management & Support

Revenue vs. Expense ($000s)

Expense Breakdown 2014 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2013 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2012 (%)

For more details regarding the organization's financial information, select the financial tab and review available comments.


Overview

Mission Statement

UP Education Network (formerly Unlocking Potential Inc.) is one of the few school management organizations in the country successfully tackling the challenges of in-district school turnaround. Our mission is to rapidly transform chronically underperforming district schools into extraordinary schools that sustain high achievement over time. Our work is helping students from Massachusetts’s historically underserved communities acquire the knowledge, skills, and strength of character necessary to succeed on the path to college.


Background Statement

UP Education Network was founded by Scott Given and Yutaka Tamura in 2010, and the organization’s launch had roots in their experience spearheading the transformation of Excel Academy Charter School in East Boston, MA. From 2005-2008, under their leadership, Excel Academy was transformed from an underperforming school into the highest-performing public middle school in the state. The motivating challenge of UP Education Network is to replicate and scale the success found at high-performing charter schools while operating within a district context.


Impact Statement

UP Academies are creating life-enhancing opportunities for the 2,600 students that we serve across our five district elementary and middle schools in Boston and Lawrence, Massachusetts. We are excited to launch a new UP Academy in Springfield in summer 2016. Beyond the scope of this direct impact, we seek to drive a broader discussion on the challenging but necessary work of school turnaround. Our instructional practices borrow elements from high performing charter schools, and student growth at our existing UP Academies demonstrate the transferability of these practices to district settings. In bridging together the charter and district ecosystems, we are helping ensure that innovations in one sector are not isolated. As we rapidly grow our network, we seek to serve as school restart “proof points” that the same level of success our existing UP Academies have achieved can be replicated on a larger scale. Further, in addressing the turnaround of clusters of low-performing schools, we believe that our organization can contribute to tangible short-term and long-term social and economic improvements in the neighborhoods and communities that we serve.


Needs Statement

We leverage and need philanthropic resources for two purposes. First, these resources are used to restart additional schools. The launch of a new UP Academy requires a one-time investment of approximately $1,000,000 during the 12 months prior to the school's opening, and the vast majority of these dollars are covered by philanthropy. (After beginning operations, every UP school is designed to self-sustain its core operating functions without ongoing private funding.) Second, we utilize philanthropy, in combination with a fee paid by each of our schools out of their public dollar allocation, to cover the network office expense of managing and supporting our operating schools. The network office supports the talent, academic, facilities, financial, technological, and other operational needs of our schools.  As we scale, the share of school support costs covered by management fees from our schools will increase and thus our need for philanthropy to cover school support expenses will decrease.

Based on the significant gains our scholars have made, we are encouraged and eager to bring the UP Academy model to additional schools and communities in the state. We intend to continue penetrating the Massachusetts market, aiming to impact nearly 10,000 students by 2020. 


CEO Statement

In 2009, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan gave a rousing call to action for “everyone who cares about public education to take on the toughest assignment of all and get in the business of turning around our lowest–performing schools.” To date, the vast majority of high quality school management organizations have shied away from district- and state-level opportunities to transform chronically underperforming schools. UP Education Network fills this urgent need as a unique partner to the school districts and cities, restarting district-identified underperforming schools under UP management but with local school district oversight.


Board Chair Statement

--

Geographic Area Served

In a specific U.S. city, cities, state(s) and/or region.
GREATER BOSTON REGION, MA
NORTHEAST REGION, MA
PIONEER VALLEY REGION, MA
UP Education Network currently manages five schools in Boston and Lawrence, Massachusetts, serving 2,600 students in grades K-8. We are excited to open a new UP Academy in Springfield in summer 2016.

Organization Categories

  1. Education - Elementary & Secondary Schools
  2. -
  3. -

Independent research has been conducted on this organization's theory of change or on the effectiveness of this organization's program(s)

Yes

Programs

(1) School Restart

To support the launch of a new restart school, we:

(1) design extraordinary, financially sustainable schools;

(2) prepare our schools’ future leaders;

(3) attract and hire world class talent;

(4) ensure the operational readiness of our schools; and

(5) build strong relations with respective districts and other stakeholders.

Through successful execution of these five pre-launch activities, and with a one-time investment of approximately $1,000,000, we are able to transform chronically underperforming schools into extraordinary schools that will sustain their operations on public funds.

 

Budget  $1,700,000.00
Category  Education, General/Other Elementary & Secondary Education
Population Served Children and Youth (0 - 19 years)
Program Short-Term Success 

In fall 2013, the John P. Holland was one of four Massachusetts schools to be placed into Level 5, the most serious category in Massachusetts' accountability system. As a result, the Commonwealth appointed UP Education Network to become the receiver of the Holland. In August 2014, we restarted the Holland as UP Academy Holland, opening our doors to approximately 720 K1-5 students in the Bowdoin-Geneva neighborhood of Boston. 

Program Long-Term Success 

By transforming chronically underperforming district schools into extraordinary schools, UP Education Network will ensure that some of the hardest-to-serve students in Massachusetts will acquire the knowledge, skills and strength of character necessary to succeed on the path to college and to achieve their full potential.  Over time, by transforming multiple schools within respective urban districts, we will set a new bar for excellence within the district context and demonstrate best educational practices, leading toward the eventual elimination of struggling schools in the communities we serve. 

Program Success Monitored By 

Prior to UP’s management, the schools we are invited to restart typically have student proficiency rates of less than 25% in math and English Language Arts (ELA), often times even in the low double-digits. Each UP school has established a series of quantitative goals following their respective launches: after one year of our management at a given restart school, we aim for 45% of students to be proficient in math and 45% of students to be proficient in ELA. After four years of our management, we aim for 75% of our students to be proficient in math and 75% of our students to be proficient in ELA.

Examples of Program Success 



(2) School Management & Support

Upon school launch, we undertake five separate support activities:

(1) stimulate innovation and share best practices;

(2) support school leaders and manage school quality;

(3) strengthen, develop, and retain talent;

(4) deliver high-quality academic and operational home office services; and

(5) manage district, governance, and other external relations.

Budget  $2,400,000.00
Category  Education, General/Other Elementary & Secondary Education
Population Served Children and Youth (0 - 19 years)
Program Short-Term Success 


Program Long-Term Success 


Program Success Monitored By 


Examples of Program Success 



CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

--

Management


CEO/Executive Director Mr. Scott Given
CEO Term Start July 2010
CEO Email sgiven@upeducationnetwork.org
CEO Experience

A former strategy consultant and investment banker, Given has worked in education reform for more than a decade. After teaching for two years at Boston Collegiate Charter School, Given became Principal of Excel Academy Charter School in East Boston, MA, where from 2005-2008 he spearheaded one of the few successful public school turnarounds in recent U.S. educational history. He graduated summa cum laude from Dartmouth College and holds an MBA from Harvard Business School. Given has worked as an independent consultant for charter and district schools in 10 states; as an Entrepreneur in Residence at the Newark Charter School Fund; an Entrepreneur in Residence at NewSchools Venture Fund; and currently as a Broad Academy participant.

Co-CEO --
Co-CEO Term Start --
Co-CEO Email --
Co-CEO Experience --

Former CEOs and Terms

Name Start End
-- -- --

Senior Staff

Name Title Experience/Biography
Ms. Victoria Criado Chief Public Affairs Officer --
Ms. Nicole Dorn Chief Operating Officer Nicole worked as a consultant with the Boston Consulting Group, where her work primarily focused on improving productivity in the financial services sector and developing education reform strategies for non-profit and public sector clients. Prior to joining BCG, Nicole worked for the U.S. Department of Education as Deputy Director of the Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. There, she was responsible for developing recommendations to Congress on how to simplify the financial aid application process in order to improve access to college for low- and moderate-income students. She is an alumnus of Teach For America and taught for three years in the Baltimore City Public Schools. Nicole received her BA from Harvard University, her MA in Teaching from Johns Hopkins University, and her MBA from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University.
Ms. Sheri Leo Chief Talent Officer --
Ms. Kristen Linnenbank Director of School Operations --
Mr. Jamie Morrison Chief Academic Officer --
Mr. Tim Nicolette President

Tim has worked in a variety of roles in strategy consulting, school district leadership, city government, and nonprofit management. Most recently, he served as Chief of Staff to the Superintendent of Boston Public Schools. Prior to that, he served as the Deputy Chief Financial Officer of the district and as an Advisor to Boston Mayor Tom Menino. Tim has worked as a strategy consultant with L.E.K. Consulting and led Inspire, a nonprofit consulting firm focused on serving education and youth development nonprofits. Tim received his B.A. from Columbia University and earned his M.B.A. from Harvard Business School.

Ms. Erin Walsh-Hagan Director of School Leadership --

Awards

Award Awarding Organization Year
U.S. Education Reform Organization of the Year NewSchools Venture Fund 2013

Affiliations

Affiliation Year
-- --
Member of state association of nonprofits? No
Name of state association --

External Assessments and Accreditations

External Assessment or Accreditation Year
-- --

Collaborations

We partner with the Boston Public Schools, the Lawrence Public Schools, and the Springfield Public Schools as we continue to manage and launch restart schools within the districts. In addition, we have developed strong partnerships with:

  • Teach For America - Massachusetts
  • The Match Teacher Residency
  • Sposato Graduate School of Education
  • The Lewis D. Brown Peace Institute
  • College Bound Dorchester
  • Imajine That!
  • Playworks
  • The Family Nurturing Center

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

--

Foundation Comments

--

Staff Information

Number of Full Time Staff 36
Number of Part Time Staff 1
Number of Volunteers 0
Number of Contract Staff 0
Staff Retention Rate % --

Staff Demographics

Ethnicity African American/Black: 3
Asian American/Pacific Islander: 4
Caucasian: 22
Hispanic/Latino: 6
Native American/American Indian: 0
Other: 1
Other (if specified): --
Gender Female: 25
Male: 11
Not Specified 0

Plans & Policies

Organization has Fundraising Plan? Under Development
Organization has Strategic Plan? Under Development
Years Strategic Plan Considers --
Management Succession Plan No
Business Continuity of Operations Plan --
Organization Policies And Procedures Yes
Nondiscrimination Policy Yes
Whistle Blower Policy Yes
Document Destruction Policy Yes
Directors and Officers Insurance Policy --
State Charitable Solicitations Permit --
State Registration --

Risk Management Provisions

--

Reporting and Evaluations

Management Reports to Board? Yes
CEO Formal Evaluation and Frequency Yes Annually
Senior Management Formal Evaluation and Frequency Yes Annually
Non Management Formal Evaluation and Frequency Yes Annually

Governance


Board Chair Mr Farhad Nanji
Board Chair Company Affiliation Managing Director, Highfields Capital
Board Chair Term Feb 2013 -
Board Co-Chair --
Board Co-Chair Company Affiliation --
Board Co-Chair Term -

Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
Dr. Karla Brooks Baehr District Management Council Voting
Mr. James Berylson Managing Partner, Berylson Capital Partners Director, Richard and Susan Smith Family Foundation Voting
Mr. Scott Given Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer, UP Education Network Voting
Ms. Joanna Jacobson Strategic Grant Partners Voting
Ms. Rebecca Ledley Former Director of K-12 education programs, The Philanthropy Roundtable Voting
Mr. Martin Mannion Summit Partners Voting
Mr. Jordan Meranus CEO & Founder, Ellevation Education Voting
Mr. Farhad Nanji Managing Director, Highfields Capital Voting
Mr. Yutaka Tamura Founder, Excel Academy Charter Schools Voting

Constituent Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
-- -- --

Youth Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
-- -- --

Advisory Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
-- -- --

Board Demographics

Ethnicity African American/Black: 0
Asian American/Pacific Islander: 2
Caucasian: 7
Hispanic/Latino: 0
Native American/American Indian: 0
Other: 0
Other (if specified): 0
Gender Female: 3
Male: 6
Not Specified 0

Board Information

Board Term Lengths 1
Board Term Limits --
Board Meeting Attendance % --
Written Board Selection Criteria Yes
Written Conflict Of Interest Policy Yes
Percentage of Monetary Contributions 100%
Percentage of In-Kind Contributions 100%
Constituency Includes Client Representation No

Standing Committees

  • Audit
  • Development / Fund Development / Fund Raising / Grant Writing / Major Gifts
  • Finance

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

--

Foundation Comments

--

Financials


Revenue vs. Expense ($000s)

Expense Breakdown 2014 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2013 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2012 (%)

Fiscal Year July 01, 2015 to June 30, 2016
Projected Income $7,457,462.00
Projected Expense $7,549,993.00
Form 990s

2013 Form 990

2012 Form 990

2011 Form 990

2010 Form 990

Audit Documents

2014 Audited Financials

2013 Audited Financials

2012 Audited Financials

2011 Audited Financials

IRS Letter of Exemption

IRS Letter of Determination

Prior Three Years Total Revenue and Expense Totals

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Total Revenue $5,902,751 $3,600,519 $1,377,968
Total Expenses $4,219,550 $3,155,136 $1,328,837

Prior Three Years Revenue Sources

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Foundation and
Corporation Contributions
-- -- --
Government Contributions $0 $0 $0
    Federal -- -- --
    State -- -- --
    Local -- -- --
    Unspecified -- -- --
Individual Contributions $4,186,471 $2,988,534 $858,418
Indirect Public Support -- -- --
Earned Revenue $1,716,280 $611,985 $519,550
Investment Income, Net of Losses -- -- --
Membership Dues -- -- --
Special Events -- -- --
Revenue In-Kind -- -- --
Other -- -- --

Prior Three Years Expense Allocations

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Program Expense $2,841,463 $2,372,651 $1,096,885
Administration Expense $1,238,009 $721,122 $207,593
Fundraising Expense $140,078 $61,363 $24,359
Payments to Affiliates -- -- --
Total Revenue/Total Expenses 1.40 1.14 1.04
Program Expense/Total Expenses 67% 75% 83%
Fundraising Expense/Contributed Revenue 3% 2% 3%

Prior Three Years Assets and Liabilities

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Total Assets $3,040,939 $1,275,844 $552,455
Current Assets $2,882,583 $1,094,174 $482,235
Long-Term Liabilities $0 $0 $0
Current Liabilities $492,577 $410,683 $132,677
Total Net Assets $2,548,362 $865,161 $419,778

Prior Three Years Top Three Funding Sources

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
1st (Source and Amount) -- --
-- --
-- --
2nd (Source and Amount) -- --
-- --
-- --
3rd (Source and Amount) -- --
-- --
-- --

Financial Planning

Endowment Value --
Spending Policy N/A
Percentage(If selected) --
Credit Line Yes
Reserve Fund Yes
How many months does reserve cover? --

Capital Campaign

Are you currently in a Capital Campaign? No
Capital Campaign Purpose --
Campaign Goal --
Capital Campaign Dates -
Capital Campaign Raised-to-Date Amount --
Capital Campaign Anticipated in Next 5 Years? --

Short Term Solvency

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Current Ratio: Current Assets/Current Liabilities 5.85 2.66 3.63

Long Term Solvency

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Long-term Liabilities/Total Assets 0% 0% 0%

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

--

Foundation Comments

Financial summary data in the charts and graphs above are per the organization's audited financials. Contributions from foundations and corporations are listed under individuals when the breakout was not available.

Documents


Other Documents

No Other Documents currently available.

Impact

The Impact tab is a section on the Giving Common added in October 2013; as such the majority of nonprofits have not yet had the chance to complete this voluntary section. The purpose of the Impact section is to ask five deceptively simple questions that require reflection and promote communication about what really matters – results. The goal is to encourage strategic thinking about how a nonprofit will achieve its goals. The following Impact questions are being completed by nonprofits slowly, thoughtfully and at the right time for their respective organizations to ensure the most accurate information possible.


1. What is your organization aiming to accomplish?



2. What are your strategies for making this happen?


3. What are your organization’s capabilities for doing this?

--

4. How will your organization know if you are making progress?



5. What have and haven’t you accomplished so far?

--