Context
Gran Via currently operates under ER BOCES authorization, which funds 13 students regardless of actual enrollment. With 30 students in the classroom, 17 generate no per-pupil revenue. That structural gap costs between $194K and $217K per year in lost PPR, and no realistic combination of staffing cuts or schedule changes closes it.
An alternative authorization route exists through APS-CSI, where every enrolled student would be funded. This path requires an operating agreement with an existing CSI school within APS boundaries, such as Montessori del Mundo or Wildflower. Neither path is solely within the board's control; each depends on external approvals and the willingness of partner organizations.
The analysis below shows the financial reality of each route so the board can weigh trade-offs, express a preferred direction, and understand what conditions must be met before either path becomes operational.
Two authorization routes
Path A
Continue with ER BOCES
Existing authorization structure. Funding remains limited to 13 FPC regardless of enrollment. The board could direct administration to reduce programming days to lower costs, but fundraising remains essential.
Requires
CDE or APS approval to operate within APS boundaries under current structure.
Scenario 1
2-day HSE · 5 FTE
-$117K
Scenario 2
1-day split · 3 FTE
-$69K
Path B
APS-CSI partnership
New authorization route through a CSI-authorized school within APS. All 30 enrolled students would be funded at a higher PPR. Two potential partners under consideration.
Requires
CSI school agreeing to operate as Gran Via's LEP.
Scenario 3
MdM partnership · 2-day · 5 FTE
+$29K
Scenario 4
Wildflower · 2-day · 5 FTE
+$24K
Key assumptions by route
Path A · ER BOCES
| Funded students (FPC) | 13 |
| Enrolled students | 30 |
| Per pupil revenue | $11,380 |
| Staff (S1 / S2) | 5 FTE / 3 FTE |
| Unfunded students | 17 |
| Lost PPR revenue | $194K–$217K |
Path B · APS-CSI
| Funded students (FPC) | 30 |
| Enrolled students | 30 |
| PPR (MdM / Wildflower) | $12,789 / $12,442 |
| Staff | 5 FTE |
| Unfunded students | 0 |
| Additional state revenue | $61K |
Financial outcomes & core metrics
S1 · BOCES 2-day
−$117K
net loss
S2 · BOCES 1-day
−$69K
net loss
S3 · MdM
+$29K
net income
S4 · Wildflower
+$24K
net income
Revenue vs. expenditures
The revenue gap between routes drives the financial difference — not cost structure
Path A revenue
Path B revenue
Expenditures
Days cash on hand
30 days is the minimum threshold for operational stability
Below threshold
Above threshold
Ending fund balance at 6/30
All scenarios begin with the same $48,723 fund balance
Fundraising & gap analysis
What does it take to reach 30 days cash on hand?
Path A requires fundraising just to reach the floor. Path B generates surplus without it.
Fundraising needed
Surplus (no fundraising required)
Path A trade-off
Scenario 2 cuts the fundraising need from $87K to $36K by dropping to 3 FTE and a 1-day split model. But even with that fundraising fully realized, both BOCES scenarios top out at exactly 30 days cash on hand — the absolute floor, with no margin for the unexpected.
Path B trade-off
Neither APS-CSI scenario requires fundraising to achieve operational stability. Philanthropy could be directed toward growth and programming rather than covering basic operations. The trade-off is the effort and uncertainty of securing the partnership itself.
What needs to be true for each route
If we continue with ER BOCES
Gran Via must secure $36K–$87K in annual fundraising as a structural operating cost. Scenario 2 (1-day split) is the leaner option, but eliminates Lead Guide positions and operates at the floor of financial viability. The organization also needs CDE or APS approval to operate within APS boundaries under the existing arrangement.
If we pursue CSI
A CSI school must agree to an operating agreement, and that agreement needs to hold through the authorization process. If secured, every enrolled student is funded, producing $24K–$29K in annual surplus and 100+ days cash on hand without philanthropic support. This hasn't been agreed to yet.
What stays the same either way
30 enrolled students. The same instructional model. The same mission. The difference is whether the revenue architecture can support the work without annual fundraising as a lifeline — and whether the external conditions for each path can be met.
Possible next steps
1Board votes on a preferred authorization direction based on these financial realities, or delegates the decision to the Executive Director
2Administration reports on feasibility: status of conversations with MdM and/or Wildflower, and any risks to current ER BOCES authorization, or any additional pathways should they become available
3Board reviews updated scenarios once partnership terms (or ER BOCES constraints) are confirmed
4Formal authorization decision when a viable path has been validated by all parties