K12 Inc. Deploys D2L’s Brightspace Across High School, Middle School and Fuel Education

KITCHENER, ON–(Marketwired – August 11, 2016) – D2L, a global learning technology leader, today announced that K12 Inc., one of the largest virtual schools in the U.S., is continuing to expand the use of the Brightspace LMS. Following a successful rollout to thousands of students across the country enrolled in K12’s high school, K12 is now making Brightspace available to thousands more middle school students.

In addition, K12’s Fuel Education will use Brightspace for the distribution of its curriculum. Fuel Education will begin rolling out Brightspace in December with a full rollout scheduled for the first half of 2017.

D2L’s Brightspace platform was embraced by K12 due to a fundamental distinction: Brightspace delivers a personalized learning experience, not the one-size-fits-all model utilized by traditional LMS offerings. Brightspace was designed with modern students in mind and offers a clean, responsive user experience as well as integrated social media, game-based learning, chat and advanced video features. The new Brightspace Daylight experience lets students and teachers use smartphones, tablets or any browser-enabled device, eliminating barriers to learning. Teachers also favor Brightspace because engagement data — offered via real-time learning analytics </strong–< can help them improve student outcomes.

“D2L’s customers such as K12 Inc. care deeply about the educational experience and want a more personalized, engaging learning platform to help each learner learn their own way,” said John Baker, CEO of D2L. “Brightspace is an easy, flexible and smart LMS that was built from the ground up to do exactly that. We are very pleased that K12 and Fuel Education learners will benefit from this personalized approach and learn on their own terms to achieve their academic goals. We look forward to continuing to broaden the scope of our partnership.”

“Our goal in considering a new LMS was to improve student engagement, retention and outcomes while advancing our effort to deliver a more mobile-ready curriculum,” explained Lynda Cloud, Executive Vice President of Products at K12 Inc. “After thorough evaluation, K12 chose D2L to power K12’s next-generation online high school and middle school. The Brightspace platform has enabled us to provide students, learning coaches, and teachers with an innovative, engaging and collaborative learning experience that puts tools and resources right at their fingertips. Parents find that both they and their students have better visibility into what students need to do each day, allowing them to spend more time learning.”

D2L’s track record of innovation has been widely recognized. In March, Fast Company ranked D2L #6 on the Most Innovative Companies of 2016 list in the Data Science Category, amongst Google, IBM, Spotify, Costco, and Blue Cross Blue Shield. eLearning Magazine recently rated D2L as #1 in Adaptive Learning, and Brightspace was recently named the #1 LMS in Higher Ed by Ovum Research.

To learn more about Brightspace, visit http://www.d2l.com/products/learning-environment/.


K12 Inc. (LRN) is driving innovation and advancing the quality of education by delivering state-of-the-art, digital learning platforms and technology to students and school districts across the globe. K12’s award winning curriculum serves over 2,000 schools and school districts and has delivered more than four million courses over the past decade. K12 is a company of educators with the nation’s largest network of K-12 online school teachers, providing instruction, academic services, and learning solutions to public schools and districts, traditional classrooms, blended school programs, and directly to families. The K12 program is offered through K12 partner public schools in approximately two-thirds of the states and the District of Columbia, and through private schools serving students in all 50 states and more than 100 countries. More information can be found at K12.com.


Fuel Education™ partners with school districts to fuel personalized learning and transform the education experience inside and outside the classroom. The company provides innovative solutions for pre-K through 12th grade that empower districts to implement successful online and blended learning programs. Its open, easy-to-use Personalized Learning Platform, PEAK™, enables teachers to customize courses using their own content, FuelEd courses and titles, third-party content, and open educational resources. Fuel Education offers one of the industry’s largest catalogs of K–12 digital curriculum, certified instruction, professional development, and educational services. FuelEd has helped 2,000 school districts to improve student outcomes and better serve diverse student populations. To learn more, visit getfueled.com and Twitter.


D2L’s Brightspace is a digital learning platform that helps schools and institutions deliver personalized learning experiences in a classroom or online to people anywhere in the world. Created for the digital learner, Brightspace is cloud-based, runs on mobile devices, and offers rich multimedia to increase engagement, productivity and knowledge retention. The platform makes it easy to design courses, create content, and grade assignments, giving instructors more time to focus on what’s most important – greater teaching and learning. At the same time, analytics reports track and deliver insights into the performance levels of departments, courses, or individuals.


D2L is the software leader that makes learning experiences better. The company’s cloud-based platform, Brightspace, is easy to use, flexible, and smart. With Brightspace, organizations can personalize the experience for every learner to deliver real results. The company is a world leader in learning analytics: its platform predicts learner performance so that organizations can take action in real-time to keep learners on track. Brightspace is used by learners in higher education, K-12, and the enterprise sector, including the Fortune 1000. D2L has operations in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia, Brazil, and Singapore. www.d2l.com

© 2016 D2L Corporation.

The D2L family of companies includes D2L Corporation, D2L Ltd, D2L Australia Pty Ltd, D2L Europe Ltd, D2L Asia Pte Ltd, and D2L Brasil Soluções de Tecnologia para Educação Ltda.

All D2L marks are trademarks of D2L Corporation. Please visit D2L.com/trademarks for a list of D2L marks.

K12 upgraded to Overweight By First Analysis

August 10, 2016 10:01 am

Writer: Camille Ainsworth

Posted In:

US Broker Ratings

In an analyst rating update on Wednesday shares of K12 (NYSE:LRN) had their rating upgraded by analysts at First Analysis.

The broker said it has now set a ‘Overweight’ rating on shares of K12 with a price target of 14. The price target according to the broker shows a possible increase of 23.35% from the current stock price of 11.35.

Over the last twelve months K12’s share price has decreased from 14.88 to 11.35, changing by -23.72%.

The companies 50 day moving average is 12.68 and its 200 day moving average is 11.16. The 52 week high K12’s shares have peaked at is 15 whilst the 52 week low for the company’s shares is 7.11.

K12 has 37,492,000 shares which are currently outstanding with a price of 11.35 calculating K12’s market capitalisation to 425.53M USD .

K12 Inc. (K12) is a technology-based education company. The Company offers curriculum, software systems and educational services designed to facilitate individualized learning for students in kindergarten through 12th grade (K-12). It provides a range of technology-based educational products and solutions to public school districts, public schools, virtual charter schools, private schools and families. The Company offers a set of products and services primarily to three lines of business, which include public school programs, which consists of managed programs and non-managed programs, Institutional Sales, which includes educational products and services sold to school districts, public schools and other educational institutions that it does not manage and international and private pay schools, which consists of private schools. The Company offers a range of learning applications, which include mobile learning, interactive games, virtual labs, e-book and digital book distribution.

K12 Inc. Announces New Online Private School Scholarship

Company to award five full-tuition scholarships to K12 International Academy for 2016-17

HERNDON, Va., July 19, 2016 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ —K12 Inc. has announced that a new merit-based scholarship is available for students interested in attending its private online school. The K12 Private School Scholarship is designed to support economically disadvantaged high school youth who have demonstrated academic success and seek a more rigorous and individualized educational experience. The Scholarship Committee will award a one year, renewable scholarship to a total of five recipients that will cover the cost of tuition, books and support services at K12 International Academy.

"I am delighted to announce this scholarship, which reflects our mission to put students first," says Stuart Udell, CEO of K12 Inc. "Online learning is uniquely well suited to the motivated student who wants more out of their education. This scholarship will help remove any barriers related to financial means for the recipients."

K12 International Academy is an accredited online private school for full- and part-time students. Operating since 2008, K12 International Academy utilizes the award-winning K12 curriculum and offers students a choice from more than two hundred and forty online courses to suit their interests and goals. K12 teachers customize lesson plans to create an individualized learning experience for their students.

Course offerings include multiple versions of core online high school courses, an extensive array of electives including world languages and even Career Technical Education classes designed to give students a head start on their career goals by earning technical and specialty trade credentials, college credits, and workplace experiences. The school also offers a wide range of clubs, activities and organizations.

The K12 Private School Scholarship is valued at $6,995 a year and is renewable for up to $28,000 over 4 years. Five scholarships will be awarded annually based on a combination of merit and families’ financial circumstances. In addition to the tuition grant, scholarship recipients will be eligible for the following:

  • Laptop computer during enrollment
  • Books and materials
  • An extensive support team of teachers, academic coaches, and counselors.

Scholarship students will also be assigned a mentor who will meet regularly with the student to assist with the transition to online learning and provide additional support.

All students who attend a public, private, or charter school or who are homeschooled are eligible for consideration based upon their completed application to K12 Inc., which must be received no later than August 5, 2016. Students must have a GPA of 3.0, must be a rising 9th grade student and must be a U.S. citizen residing in the United States. Additional documentation demonstrating financial need may be required from applicants.

For more information about the K12 Private School Scholarship, including how to apply, details of the selection process and documentation requirements, visit http://www.icademy.com/k12-international-academy-scholarship

About K12 Inc.K12 Inc. (NYSE:  LRN) is driving innovation and advancing the quality of education by delivering state-of-the-art, digital learning platforms and technology to students and school districts across the globe. With nearly a half-billion dollars invested in developing award winning curriculum, K12 serves over 2,000 schools and school districts and has delivered more than four million courses over the past decade. K12 is a company of educators with the nation’s largest network of K-12 online school teachers, providing instruction, academic services, and learning solutions to public schools and districts, traditional classrooms, blended school programs, and directly to families. More information can be found at www.K12.com or on Facebook.

Logo – http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20110113/PH29436LOGO


Related Links


Charter Groups Want More Regulations for Virtual Charter Schools


By David Safier

on at 4:00 PM

click to enlarge

  • Courtesy of PhotoSpin

Now this is an interesting development. Some prominent charter school organizations have published a report advocating stricter regulations to improve the performance of virtual charter schools, also known as on-line schools. This isn’t an entirely new development. Charter school organizations have been trying to weed out poorly performing schools from the charter ranks, and this is their latest effort. More at the end of the post about the positives and negatives of this push.

Three organizations, National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, National Association of Charter School Organizers and 50CAN, joined together to publish A Call to Action To Improve the Quality of Full-Time Virtual Charter Public Schools. The organizations support virtual charters, but they’ve read the reports about how poorly students at those schools perform compared to students at other public schools and believe the schools should be more carefully regulated.

The facts about the virtual schools in the report look to me to be accurate. A vital bit of information is that 70 percent of the schools are run by for-profit organizations, directly or indirectly, which means the profit motive is going to trump education whenever the two are in conflict. Some other facts: there are 135 full-time virtual schools in the country; 79 percent of their students are in virtual schools with more than a thousand students; virtual school serve more students in poverty and fewer English language learners than traditional public schools.

The report’s recommendations are specific and, if implemented, could doom one of the biggest players, K-12 Inc., a publicly traded corporation (Arizona Virtual Academy, or AZVA, in one of its schools) whose many sins I’ve written about over the years and whose failings are being subjected to increasing scrutiny. The proposal is that enrollment be limited to hundreds, not thousands of students, and if the schools want to grow, they need to meet performance goals. That would be a stake in the heart of K12 Inc. whose profits are based on continual growth and whose stockholders are growing increasingly skittish (its stock is currently trading at about 11, down from a 2011 high of 36). AZVA has over 4,000 students. Another branch, Ohio Virtual Academy, has over 10,000 students. The corporation would crumble if it had to cut its schools’ student populations dramatically.

The report also recommends that virtual schools be funded based on their real costs, another potentialstake in the heart of the for-profit model. Right now, most virtual schools get close to the same per-student state funding as brick-and-mortar schools even though they don’t have physical buildings to pay for and maintain, and their teachers often have twice the student load of teachers in other charters and school districts (A 50-to-1 student-teacher ratio is the standard at K12 Inc. schools). The report estimates that per student costs at virtual schools are 60 percent of the costs at brick-and-mortar schools. Take away their inflated public funding—remember, taxpayers pay for charter schools, just like we pay for school districts—and they lose their profit margins.

It’s good to see charter school organizations actively pursuing some of the bad actors in their midst, and I agree with almost everything I read in this report. However, there’s a bit of a caveat I need to add. When they go after poorly performing charters, their targets are almost always schools with students from low income families. It’s true, some of those schools are doing a lousy job, just like some district schools do a bad job with their low income students, but some charters serving those students do terrific work, even though their test scores are at the low end of the spectrum because of socioeconomic factors beyond the schools’ control. If charter organizations work together with state regulators to carve out the genuinely bad schools, that’s a good thing. However, their motives may not be that pure. Every time a charter with low test scores is closed, regardless of the reason, the average test scores for the remaining charter schools rise. Closing charters serving low income students for any reason, good or bad, can give the charter PR people the kind of undeserved bragging rights they love. “Look at our scores! We’re more successful than school districts,” they can say, even though their higher scores may be a result of serving a different population. The poster child for this type of self congratulation is the BASIS chain which has a variety of ways to screen out academically undesirable students, then brags about its students’ academic achievement. The “education reform”/privatization folks would love to be able to say the same kind of thing about charters as a whole, and the easiest way to do that is to close schools serving low income students.

K12 Inc.: Bay Area lawmakers call for audit of California Virtual Academies operator

By Jessica Calefati, jcalefati@bayareanewsgroup.com

05/31/2016 05:08:41 AM PDT

SACRAMENTO — A bipartisan group of lawmakers is calling for a state audit of a profitable but low-performing network of online charter schools following this newspaper’s investigation of K12 Inc., the Virginia company at the heart of the operation.

Published last month, the two-part series revealed that the Wall Street-traded company reaps tens of millions of dollars in state funding while graduating fewer than half of the students enrolled in its high schools. It also found that teachers at K12’s California Virtual Academies have been asked to inflate attendance and enrollment records used to determine how much state funding the schools receive.

California Virtual Academies teacher Julianne Knapp teaches her students during her online class on Nov. 18, 2015, at a public library in San Jose. (Dai Sugano/Bay Area News Group)
Dai Sugano

Assembly members Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, and Catharine Baker, R-San Ramon, say an audit is needed because the Legislature takes allegations of misspent public money seriously — and that any company profiting while students struggle deserves intense scrutiny. Lawmakers say its findings would likely set the stage for legislation aimed at addressing the problems at online schools.

“This reporting raises serious questions that demand a more thorough investigation, which is why I will work with my colleagues to pursue an audit of for-profit charter schools and the mechanisms in place to hold them accountable,” said Ting, who is joining with Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon and other Assembly members to craft the audit request.

Nationally, 70 percent of students enrolled in online charters attend schools managed by for-profit companies such as K12 and its leading competitor, Connections Academy, while 30 percent attend charters that are independent or run by nonprofits.

Sacramento lawmakers aren’t the only ones troubled by K12’s track record. Tom Torlakson, California’s superintendent of public instruction, vowed last week to collaborate with the legislators on possible fixes.

“I am concerned by some issues and practices exposed in this article,” Torlakson said. “I am exploring options to investigate laws and regulations governing these types of charter schools and will work closely with legislators interested in this subject.”

But coming up with solutions to such politically charged problems won’t be easy.

Gov. Jerry Brown is a strong supporter of charter schools and has already vetoed bills that sought to force all charters to comply with conflict-of-interest and transparency rules and ban for-profit companies from operating them. And earlier this year, two bills that would have addressed some of the problems highlighted in this newspaper’s series stalled under pressure from interest groups.

The newspaper’s investigation found that students who spend as little as one minute during a school day logged on to K12’s school software may be counted as “present” in records used to calculate state funding. The investigation also revealed that the districts tasked with overseeing K12’s California schools have a strong financial incentive to turn a blind eye to problems because they receive a cut of California Virtual Academies’ revenue to oversee the schools, which now enroll about 15,000 students.

“Taking the bull by the horns and regulating these irresponsible for-profit companies shouldn’t be a wild idea,” said Bruce Fuller, an education policy professor at UC Berkeley. “If nothing happens and K12 faces no consequences, the company stands to poison the legitimacy of the whole (charter) movement.”

Asked about the possible audit, K12 spokesman Mike Kraft did not comment. But he argued in an email that a student logged onto the company’s software for a minute would not result in additional state funding for K12 without a determination by the student’s teacher that he or she had completed required work.

“In other words, a log on alone — regardless of duration — would not be submitted by CAVA (California Virtual Academies) nor be eligible for funding,” Kraft wrote.

Any bill that creates a new rule for charter schools will require Brown’s support. But a group of Assembly Democrats hope the weight of a Joint Legislative Audit Committee’s findings is what’s needed to draft something the governor finds “palatable,” said John Casey, a spokesman for Rendon, D-Paramount.

Members of the upper and lower house who sit on the committee meet several times a year to consider lawmakers’ audit requests. Once those requests are approved, they’re transferred to California State Auditor Elaine Howle, who is currently working on more than a dozen committee requests. Typically, audits take several months to complete.

“As a parent of school-age children and education advocate, I don’t see any integrity in counting a student who has logged in to an online class for as little as one minute as ‘present’ for instructional purposes or for calculating attendance funding,” said Assemblywoman Baker, the Bay Area’s lone GOP lawmaker.

Drafting legislation that the powerful California Charter Schools Association and California Teachers Association can both support will be another big hurdle to regulating schools run by companies like K12.

In March, Assemblywoman Patty López, D-San Fernando, introduced Assembly Bill 2242, which would have banned for-profit corporations such as K12 from operating charter schools. But the bill also sought to block charters from being part of a network that allows them to share administrators and pool resources to purchase curriculum, banning a structure used today by nearly half the state’s charter schools.

Lopez soon abandoned the bill after charter advocates flooded her district office with letters and calls urging her to drop it.

“After hearing many concerns from families in my district, many of them that I personally know, I have made a decision to not move forward with AB 2242 in the form that it is today,” López said in a statement. “My intent with the bill was not to harm charter schools, but to bring transparency when it comes to public funding.”

The California Charter Schools Association would support legislation that bans for-profit companies like K12 from operating charter schools, but so far no bills have been introduced that deal strictly with that topic, spokeswoman Emily Bertelli said.

Sen. Steve Glazer, D-Walnut Creek, encountered equally passionate opposition to Senate Bill 1434, which sought to impose new restrictions on the school districts that review prospective charter schools’ applications and oversee them once they open their doors.

Glazer’s bill, which was sponsored by the California Charter Schools Association, would have required all school districts that authorize charter schools to annually submit financial statements to the charters, showing how they spent the oversight fees collected. Once the California Teachers Association voiced numerous concerns with the sweeping proposal, which the union detailed in a lengthy April letter addressed to Glazer, the measure stalled before being heard by the Senate Education Committee.

K12’s critics such as Diane Ravitch — a New York University education historian and former U.S. Department of Education assistant secretary — say the company’s track record in California is so worrisome that there should be no excuse for lawmakers dragging their feet.

“The California Legislature should feel obligated to do something about it,” Ravitch said. “It’s incomprehensible that no one seems to care.”

Contact Jessica Calefati at 916-441-2101. Follow her at Twitter.com/Calefati.

Pa. warns Agora Cyber: Provide accurate data – or else

Updated:May 19, 2016 — 1:08 AM EDT

by Martha Woodall, Staff Writer

The Pennsylvania Department of Education has delivered a stark warning to Agora Cyber Charter School, the state’s second-largest online charter, which has had troubles throughout this academic year.

A top department official told the school it must provide accurate data on student testing and attendance by May 27, or the department “will take appropriate actions against the school.”

Agora, based in King of Prussia, with 8,500 students statewide, has been trying to obtain a five-year renewal of its operating agreement from the department since October 2014.

According to a letter obtained by the Inquirer, David Volkman, the department’s executive deputy secretary, notified Agora’s CEO on Monday of “very serious data quality issues.”

The data problems, Volkman wrote, “have far-reaching implications and appear to be another symptom of Agora’s ongoing operational issues.”

Nicole Reigleman, a spokeswoman for the department, confirmed Wednesday afternoon that the department had sent the letter to Agora “outlining issues with the accuracy and integrity of its data.”

She said the department “will consider many factors when determining the status of Agora’s charter renewal.”

Joann Gigliotti, an Agora spokeswoman, said Wednesday that the school had received an electronic copy of the letter Monday.

“We are currently working on the data requested,” she said in an email. “We feel confident that we will be able to deliver what [the department] is requesting by their deadline.”

Gigliotti noted that Agora’s application for a new charter was submitted 17 months ago. “We do not believe [the department’s] request is related to the renewal,” she said.

She also blamed the data problems on incomplete demographic information that was not in the format the department needed.

“As such, we are gathering additional information from our families, who have been very responsive to our requests,” Gigliotti said.

In his letter, Volkman said his department had been troubled by continuing problems at Agora since a meeting with the school’s officials in late February.

Volkman said the data issues affect Agora’s ability to meet state and federal reporting requirements, which could jeopardize the school’s federal funding. He said problems with Agora’s data also interfere with the department’s ability to meet its obligations.

Volkman said the problems with recording attendance raise concerns about whether Agora is submitting accurate bills to school districts and is billing for students who are no longer enrolled, and whether students are receiving the education to which they are entitled.

He said the department was aware that Agora had contracted with the Montgomery County Intermediate Unit for help in resolving attendance and billing discrepancies. “The data issues, however, are deep, pervasive, and entrenched in the school’s operations,” Volkman said.

He ordered the school to provide results of state testing and 11th-grade academic data, and to review prior data it had sent to the department for “accuracy and integrity.”

The cyber school has been beset with controversy this academic year.

Since last August, Agora has been led by a series of top administrators and has experienced turnover on its board.

In early February, Agora laid off scores of staffers, blaming its financial problems on the lack of a state budget at that time.

Agora’s board initially refused to say how many staffers lost their jobs. But in a Feb. 29 letter to parents and staff, Agora said 136 jobs were eliminated for a savings of $4.5 million.

Last week, Agora’s teachers voted, 312-46, to be represented by a new local affiliate of the Pennsylvania State Education Association.

martha.woodall@phillynews.com 215-854-2789 @marwooda

More Coverage

Published: May 18, 2016 — 5:00 PM EDT
| Updated:May 19, 2016 — 1:08 AM EDT

The Philadelphia Inquirer

We encourage respectful comments but reserve the right to delete anything that doesn’t contribute to an engaging dialogue

Help us moderate this thread by flagging comments that violate our guidelines



Idaho School District Wins 2016 Fuel Education™ Transformation Award

Bonneville Joint School District recognized for innovative use of online learning to address students’ individual needs

08:30 ET
from Fuel Education

HERNDON, Va., May 11, 2016 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Not all students excel in a traditional brick-and-mortar school. Whether a student is home or hospital-bound because of a chronic illness, has behavioral or learning challenges, or has other unique needs, they still need access to high-quality education. The Bonneville Online School, in Idaho’s Bonneville Joint School District, uses the power of online learning to address the needs of its students outside of the traditional education environment.

Personalized learning solutions provider Fuel Education™ (FuelEd™) has named Bonneville Online School (BOS) its 2016 Transformation Award winner. Schools and districts using FuelEd solutions were encouraged to submit success stories to demonstrate how they have used innovative online or blended learning programs to transform education for their students. Bonneville was selected from dozens of entries for providing K–8 students with a flexible school structure that enables them to have a successful academic experience from home.

Continue reading

getfueled.com (PRNewsFoto/Fuel Education)

“We are very pleased to honor Bonneville Online School as an outstanding example of how school districts can use online and blended learning to help students overcome education barriers,” said Gregg Levin, General Manager of Fuel Education. “Fuel Educations primary goal is to help our school and district partners to personalize learning for each student—regardless of their personal circumstance—so they can achieve their academic goals.”

When 9-year-old Gabe enrolled at BOS in fall 2015, he had been diagnosed with ADHD and dyslexia, and had been exhibiting behavioral issues with his principal and teacher at his previous brick-and-mortar school. Gabe started working on his FuelEd courses at grade level, but his learning coach—his mother—immediately realized his skill levels were well below grade level. With the support of his teacher, a modifiable curriculum, and his learning coach, Gabe is now a dramatically different student. He is confident and enthusiastic about school and puts in the extra effort needed to stay on track, even working on some Saturday mornings and school vacation days. Gabe has pride in his accomplishments and sees himself as an online, at-home learner until he graduates.

Gabe is just one of the more than 100 students enrolled in BOS. BOS was founded in 2010 at the request of a group of local parents who wanted an in-district online school that offered a curriculum approved by the superintendent. Students have the flexibility to complete FuelEd courses at their own pace with guidance from a learning coach and one of BOS’ three teachers. BOS takes an innovative approach to the mastery of content. If students score between 70-79 percent on an end-of-lesson test, students review missed questions with their learning coach to prove they know the material instead of retaking the test. For instructional support, teachers and students connect via phone, email, text, Class Connects and Google Hangouts for one-to-one or group instruction. Every Thursday, students can attend an optional face-to-face session with their teachers and peers.

BOS measures student success based on their participation in Thursday sessions, the level of direct communication with teachers, and growth and proficiency assessments. Nearly 60 percent of students attend the optional Thursday sessions. Students and their learning coaches are in almost constant communication with teachers.

The 2016 FuelEd Transformation Award submissions represented districts with diverse demographic, economic, and geographic backgrounds and identified specific challenges such as increasing graduation rates, providing flexible scheduling, and differentiating instruction for at-risk students. Despite their different backgrounds and goals, each district was able to use FuelEd’s digital curriculum to effectively address these challenges.

To read more about BOS and their program, as well as past FuelEd Transformation Award winners, visit www.getfueled.com/resources-results/transformation-awards.

About Fuel Education
Fuel Education™ partners with school districts to fuel personalized learning and transform the education experience inside and outside the classroom. The company provides innovative solutions for pre-K through 12th grade that empower districts to implement successful online and blended learning programs. Its open, easy-to-use Personalized Learning Platform, PEAK™, enables teachers to customize courses using their own content, FuelEd courses and titles, third-party content, and open educational resources. Fuel Education offers the industry’s largest catalog of K–12 digital curriculum, certified instruction, professional development, and educational services. FuelEd has helped 2,000 school districts to improve student outcomes and better serve diverse student populations. To learn more, visitgetfueled.com and Twitter.

©2016 Fuel Education LLC. All rights reserved. Fuel Education and FuelEd are trademarks of Fuel Education LLC or its affiliates. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

Logo – http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20140821/138483

SOURCE Fuel Education

Related Links


K12 Inc. Reports Third Quarter Fiscal 2016 with Revenue of $221.3 Million

April 27, 2016 07:00 ET

| Source: K12 Inc.

HERNDON, Va., April 27, 2016 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — K12 Inc. (NYSE:LRN), a technology-based education company and leading provider of proprietary curriculum and online school programs for students in pre-K through high school, today announced its results for the third fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2016.

Financial Highlights for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2016 (Third Quarter Fiscal Year 2016)

  • Revenues of $221.3 million, compared to $244.6 million in the third quarter of FY 2015.
  • EBITDA, a non-GAAP measure (see reconciliation below), of $36.7 million, compared to $45.2 million in the third quarter of FY 2015.
  • Operating income of $19.1 million, compared to $27.4 million in the third quarter of FY 2015.
  • Net income attributable to common stockholders of $14.3 million, compared to $17.0 million in the third quarter of FY 2015. 
  • Diluted net income attributable to common stockholders per share of $0.37, compared to $0.45 in the third quarter of FY 2015. 

Financial Highlights for the Nine Months Ended March 31, 2016

  • Revenues of $651.4 million, compared to $712.6 million for the first nine months of FY 2015.
  • EBITDA, a non-GAAP measure (see reconciliation below), of $64.0 million, compared to $87.0 million for the first nine months of FY 2015.
  • Operating income of $13.4 million compared to $34.7 million for the first nine months of FY 2015.
  • Net income attributable to common stockholders of $10.0 million, compared to $22.6 million for the first nine months of FY 2015.
  • Diluted net income attributable to common stockholders per share of $0.26, compared to $0.60 for the first nine months of FY 2015.

Changes to the year-over-year financial results, for the three and nine months ended March 31, 2016, are primarily due to the transition of the Agora Cyber Charter School contract from a managed to a non-managed program.

Comments from Management                         

“We continue to achieve financial results in line with the guidance we provided for the year,” said Stuart Udell, Chief Executive Officer. “I am also extremely proud of this year’s academic accomplishments and the extraordinary efforts of our dedicated teachers and school teams.  While we have made great strides in the last few years, we will continue to work with our partners to further improve the academic outcomes for all the students we serve,” added Udell.

Cash, Capital Expenditures and Capital Leases

As of March 31, 2016, the Company had cash and cash equivalents of $199.5 million, an increase of $3.6 million compared to the $195.9 million reported at June 30, 2015. This increase is largely the result of normal seasonal trends.

Capital expenditures for the nine months ended March 31, 2016 were $41.0 million, a decrease of $4.3 million from the prior year’s first nine months, and was comprised of:

  • $2.5 million for property and equipment,
  • $26.3 million for capitalized software development, and
  • $12.2 million for capitalized curriculum.

Capital leases financed additional purchases of $6.9 million during the nine months ended March 31, 2016, primarily for student computers.  This compares to capital leases financed during the nine months ended March 31, 2015 of $12.1 million.


The following table sets forth the Company’s revenues — Managed Public School Programs (curriculum and services sold to managed public schools), Institutional (curriculum, technology and services provided to school districts, public schools and other educational institutions that the Company does not manage), and Private Pay Schools and Other (private schools for which the Company charges student tuition and makes direct consumer sales) – for the periods indicated.

Beginning in fiscal 2016, the Company has presented revenue from Non-managed Programs as part of the Institutional line of business, along with the Institutional Software and Services, which together constitute total Institutional revenue.  In the prior year these revenues were presented as part of the Public School Programs line of business, which included both Managed and Non-managed Public School Programs. We believe this revised presentation clarifies and better aligns the disclosure of Non-Managed Program revenues with the Company’s operational and sales structure.

  Three Months Ended   Change   Nine Months Ended   Change
  March 31,   2016 / 2015   March 31,   2016 / 2015
($ in thousands)   2016     2015       $   %     2016     2015       $   %
Managed Public School Programs (1) $ 185,832   $ 213,230     $ (27,398 )   -12.8 %   $ 533,633   $ 612,344     $ (78,711 )   -12.9 %
Non-managed Public School Programs (1)   13,145     9,324       3,821     41.0 %     44,441     31,009       13,432     43.3 %
Institutional Software & Services   10,645     10,954       (309 )   -2.8 %     36,134     35,670       464     1.3 %
Total Institutional   23,790     20,278       3,512     17.3 %     80,575     66,679       13,896     20.8 %
Private Pay Schools and Other   11,718     11,115       603     5.4 %     37,173     33,617       3,556     10.6 %
Total $ 221,340   $ 244,623     $ (23,283 )   -9.5 %   $ 651,381   $ 712,640     $ (61,259 )   -8.6 %
(1) Managed Programs include schools where K12 provides substantially all of the management, technology and academic support services in addition to curriculum, learning systems and instructional services. Non-managed Programs include schools where K12 provides curriculum and technology, and the school can also contract for instruction or other educational services.  Non-managed programs, however, do not offer primary administrative oversight.

Enrollment Data

The following table sets forth enrollment data for students in Managed Public School Programs and our Non-managed Public School Programs for the periods indicated.  These figures exclude enrollments from classroom pilot programs and consumer programs.

  Three Months EndedMarch 31,   2016 / 2015   Nine Months EndedMarch 31,   2016 / 2015
  2016   2015   Change    Change %   2016   2015   Change    Change %
Managed Public School Programs (1,2) 104,640   115,330     (10,690 )     -9.3 %   104,229   116,198     (11,969 )     -10.3 %
Non-managed Public School Programs (1) 26,816   20,165     6,651       33.0 %   27,326   20,341     6,985       34.3 %
(1) If a school changes from a Managed to a Non-managed program, the corresponding enrollment classification would change in the period in which the contract arrangement changed.
(2) Managed Public School Programs include enrollments for which K12 receives no public funding or revenue.

Revenue per Enrollment Data

The following table sets forth revenue per average enrollment data for students in Public School Programs for the periods indicated.

  Three Months Ended   Change   Nine Months Ended   Change
  March 31,   2016 / 2015   March 31,   2016 / 2015
    2016     2015     $ %     2016     2015     $ %
Managed Public School Programs $ 1,776     $ 1,849     $ (73 )     -3.9 %   $ 5,120     $ 5,270     $ (150 )     -2.8 %
Non-managed Public School Programs   490       462       28       6.0 %     1,626       1,524       102       6.7 %

Fourth Quarter Outlook

The Company is forecasting the following for the fourth quarter of FY 2016:

  • Revenue in the range of $205 million to $215 million.
  • Operating income in the range of $5 million to $9 million.
  • Capital expenditures, which includes curriculum and software development, computers and infrastructure, of $22 million to $27 million.

Special Note on Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We have tried, whenever possible, to identify these forward-looking statements using words such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “continues,” “likely,” “may,” “opportunity,” “potential,” “projects,” “will,” “expects,” “plans,” “intends” and similar expressions to identify forward looking statements, whether in the negative or the affirmative. These statements reflect our current beliefs and are based upon information currently available to us. Accordingly, such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which could cause our actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, such statements. These risks, uncertainties, factors and contingencies include, but are not limited to: reduction of per pupil funding amounts at the schools we serve; inability to achieve sufficient levels of new enrollments to sustain or to grow our business model; failure of the schools we serve to comply with regulations resulting in a loss of funding or an obligation to repay funds previously received; declines or variations in academic performance outcomes as curriculum and testing standards evolve; harm to our reputation resulting from poor performance or misconduct by operators or us in any school in our industry and in any school in which we operate; legal and regulatory challenges from opponents of virtual public education, public charter schools or for-profit education companies; discrepancies in interpretation of legislation by regulatory agencies that may lead to payment or funding disputes; termination of our contracts with schools due to a loss of authorizing charter; failure to enter into new school contracts or renew existing contracts, in part or in their entirety; unsuccessful integration of mergers, acquisitions and joint ventures; failure to further develop, maintain and enhance our technology, products, services and brands; inadequate recruiting, training and retention of effective teachers and employees; infringement  of our intellectual property; non-compliance with laws and regulations related to operating schools in a foreign jurisdiction; entry of new competitors with superior competitive technologies and lower prices; and other risks and uncertainties associated with our business described in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Although the Company believes the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions, it can give no assurance that the expectations will be attained or that any deviation will not be material. All information in this release is as of April 27, 2016, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to conform the statement to actual results or changes in the Company’s expectations.

Conference Call

The Company will discuss its third quarter fiscal year 2016 financial results during a conference call scheduled for Wednesday, April 27, 2016 at 8:30 a.m. eastern time (ET).

The conference call will be webcast and available at http://public.viavid.com/index.php?id=119013.  Please access the web site at least 15 minutes prior to the start of the call.

To participate in the live call, investors and analysts should dial (877) 407-4019 (domestic) or (201) 689-8337 (international) at 8:15 a.m. (ET). No passcode is required. 

A replay of the call will be available starting on April 27, 2016 at 11:00 a.m. ET through May 27, 2016 at 11:00 a.m. ET, at (877) 660-6853 (domestic) or (201) 612-7415 (international) using conference ID 13634573. A webcast replay of the call will be available at http://public.viavid.com/index.php?id=119013 for 30 days.

Financial Statements

The financial statements set forth below are not the complete set of K12 Inc.’s financial statements for the three months and nine months ended March 31, 2016, and are presented below without footnotes. Readers are encouraged to obtain and carefully review K12 Inc.’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2016, including all financial statements contained therein and the footnotes thereto, filed with the SEC. The Form 10-Q may be retrieved from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov or from K12 Inc.’s website at www.k12.com.

K12 INC.
March 31,   June 30,
  2016       2015  
  (In thousands, except share and per share data)
Current assets      
Cash and cash equivalents $ 199,508     $ 195,852  
Accounts receivable, net of allowance of $9,949 and $9,657 at March 31, 2016 and June 30, 2015, respectively   222,884       188,246  
Inventories, net   16,146       29,571  
Deferred tax asset   8,406       8,989  
Prepaid expenses   16,837       11,428  
Other current assets   24,797       24,877  
Total current assets   488,578       458,963  
Property and equipment, net   26,717       34,407  
Capitalized software, net   67,710       62,683  
Capitalized curriculum development costs, net   58,345       58,696  
Intangible assets, net   19,347       21,195  
Goodwill   66,160       66,160  
Deposits and other assets   7,049       6,495  
Total assets $ 733,906     $ 708,599  
Current liabilities      
Current portion of capital lease obligations $ 13,453     $ 16,635  
Accounts payable   15,745       29,819  
Accrued liabilities   14,209       12,486  
Accrued compensation and benefits   26,898       26,790  
Deferred revenue   50,898       24,927  
Total current liabilities   121,203       110,657  
Capital lease obligations, net of current portion   9,660       13,022  
Deferred rent, net of current portion   6,958       7,692  
Deferred tax liability   27,654       22,456  
Other long-term liabilities   6,475       8,233  
Total liabilities   171,950       162,060  
Commitments and contingencies          
Redeemable noncontrolling interest   9,801       9,601  
Stockholders’ equity              
Common stock, par value $0.0001; 100,000,000 shares authorized; 42,593,095 and 41,837,894 shares issued and 39,090,497 and 38,335,296 shares outstanding at March 31, 2016 and June 30, 2015, respectively   4       4  
Additional paid-in capital   668,238       663,461  
Accumulated other comprehensive loss   (643 )     (1,065 )
Accumulated deficit   (40,444 )     (50,462 )
Treasury stock of 3,502,598 shares at cost at March 31, 2016 and June 30, 2015   (75,000 )     (75,000 )
Total stockholders’ equity   552,155       536,938  
Total liabilities, redeemable noncontrolling interest and equity $ 733,906     $ 708,599  
K12 INC.
Three Months Ended   Nine Months Ended
  March 31,   March 31,
  2016       2015       2016       2015  
  (In thousands, except share and per share data)
Revenues $ 221,340     $ 244,623     $ 651,381     $ 712,640  
Cost and expenses                              
Instructional costs and services   134,755       148,985       403,374       440,857  
Selling, administrative, and other operating expenses   64,888       64,871       225,598       226,972  
Product development expenses   2,563       3,337       9,004       10,065  
Total costs and expenses   202,206       217,193       637,976       677,894  
Income from operations   19,134       27,430       13,405       34,746  
Interest expense, net   (101 )     (315 )     (596 )     (134 )
Income before income tax expense and noncontrolling interest   19,033       27,115       12,809       34,612  
Income tax expense   (5,368 )     (10,586 )     (3,924 )     (12,711 )
Net income   13,665       16,529       8,885       21,901  
Adjust net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest   608       484       1,133       667  
Net income attributable to common stockholders $ 14,273     $ 17,013     $ 10,018     $ 22,568  
Net income attributable to common stockholders per share                              
Basic $ 0.38     $ 0.46     $ 0.27     $ 0.60  
Diluted $ 0.37     $ 0.45     $ 0.26     $ 0.60  
Weighted average shares used in computing per share amounts:                              
Basic   37,692,826       37,211,634       37,562,106       37,334,598  
Diluted   38,999,871       37,408,911       38,559,204       37,574,665  
K12 INC.
Nine Months Ended March 31,
    2016       2015  
  (In thousands)
Cash flows from operating activities      
Net income $ 8,885     $ 21,901  
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities              
Depreciation and amortization expense   50,622       52,273  
Stock-based compensation expense   13,759       13,471  
Excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation   (6 )     (8 )
Deferred income taxes   (552 )     4,128  
Provision for doubtful accounts   2,895       1,442  
Provision for excess and obsolete inventory   543       541  
Benefit for student computer shrinkage and obsolescence   (422 )     (262 )
Expensed leased computer peripherals   2,532        
Changes in assets and liabilities:              
Accounts receivable   (37,521 )     (81,421 )
Inventories   12,882       15,532  
Prepaid expenses   (5,409 )     (4,226 )
Other current assets   79       (3,719 )
Deposits and other assets   (159 )     (425 )
Accounts payable   (14,074 )     (10,979 )
Accrued liabilities   3,483       (1,974 )
Accrued compensation and benefits   110       4,619  
Deferred revenue   25,971       32,336  
Deferred rent and other liabilities   (2,496 )     2,510  
Net cash provided by operating activities   61,122       45,739  
Cash flows from investing activities              
Purchase of property and equipment   (2,458 )     (7,656 )
Capitalized software development costs   (26,321 )     (25,430 )
Capitalized curriculum development costs   (12,206 )     (12,194 )
Investment in LearnBop, Inc.         (6,512 )
Net cash used in investing activities   (40,985 )     (51,792 )
Cash flows from financing activities              
Repayments on capital lease obligations   (13,428 )     (16,743 )
Purchase of treasury stock         (26,452 )
Proceeds from exercise of stock options   14       513  
Excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation   6       8  
Retirement of restricted stock for income tax withholding   (3,056 )     (2,388 )
Net cash used in financing activities   (16,464 )     (45,062 )
Effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents   (17 )     (2,144 )
Net change in cash and cash equivalents   3,656       (53,259 )
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period   195,852       196,109  
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period $ 199,508     $ 142,850  

Non-GAAP Financial Measures


EBITDA consists of net income plus net interest expense, plus income tax expense, minus income tax benefit, plus depreciation and amortization and non-controlling interest. Interest expense primarily consists of interest expense for capital leases. We use EBITDA in addition to income from operations and net income as a measure of operating performance. However, EBITDA is not a recognized measurement under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, and when analyzing our operating performance, investors should use EBITDA in addition to, and not as an alternative for, net income as determined in accordance with GAAP. Not all companies use identical calculations for EBITDA, therefore our presentation of EBITDA may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. Furthermore, EBITDA is not intended to be a measure of free cash flow for our management’s discretionary use, as it does not consider certain cash requirements such as capital expenditures, tax payments, interest payments, or other working capital.

We believe EBITDA is useful to an investor in evaluating our operating performance because it is widely used to measure a company’s operating performance without regard to items such as depreciation and amortization, which can vary depending upon accounting methods and the book value of assets, and to present a meaningful measure of corporate performance exclusive of our capital structure and the method by which assets were acquired. Our management uses EBITDA:

  • as an additional measurement of operating performance because it assists us in comparing our performance on a consistent basis; and
  • in presentations to the members of our Board of Directors to enable our Board to have the same measurement basis of operating performance as is used by management to compare our current operating results with corresponding prior periods and with the results of other companies in our industry.

The following tables provide a reconciliation of net income to EBITDA:

  Three Months Ended March 31,   Nine Months Ended December 31,
    2016     2015       2016     2015  
    (In thousands)   (In thousands)
Net income — K12 Inc.    $   14,273   $   17,013     $   10,018   $   22,568  
Interest expense (income), net        101       315         596       134  
Income tax expense       5,368       10,586         3,924       12,711  
Depreciation and amortization        17,586       17,764         50,622       52,273  
Noncontrolling interest        (608 )     (484 )       (1,133 )     (667 )
EBITDA    $   36,720   $   45,194     $   64,027   $   87,019  

About K12 Inc.

K12 Inc. (NYSE:LRN) is driving innovation and advancing the quality of education by delivering state-of-the-art, digital learning platforms and technology to students and school districts across the globe. K12’s award winning curriculum serves over 2,000 schools and school districts and has delivered more than four million courses over the past decade. K12 is a company of educators with the nation’s largest network of K-12 online school teachers, providing instruction, academic services, and learning solutions to public schools and districts, traditional classrooms, blended school programs, and directly to families. The K12 program is offered through K12 partner public schools in 33 states and the District of Columbia, and through school districts and public and private schools serving students in all 50 states and more than 100 countries.  More information can be found at K12.com.

K12 Inc.
Investor Contact:
Mike Kraft, 571-353-7778
VP Finance & Corporate Treasurer

Teachers present cyber school options at Lackawanna Trail School Board meeting April 11

First Posted: 7:29 pm – April 12th, 2016

By Ben Freda – For Abington Journal

Story Tools:

Social Media:




FACTORYVILLE — Technology teacher Boyd Semken, librarian Kelly Hopkins, and social studies teacher Katie Lane proposed the Lackawanna Trail School District should pursue its own cyber school during a school board meeting April 11.

Hopkins said that if a Trail student enters a cyber charter school in kindergarten and continues to the highest level of cyber school at $26,000 per year, that student over 13 years will cost the district $338,000. School districts pay for students to attend cyber school.

She mentioned that in addition to the financial issues, a student in cyber charter school can have a lack of success.

“A study by the Stanford University Center for Research on Education in October 2015 stated that if a students who goes to an online cyber school is likely to lose 72 days of learning in reading and 180 days of learning in math,” she said.

Hopkins said students in a district-run cyber program can come back to the schools they left. Students can also get involved in Trail’s organizations and activities, as well as receive a Lackawanna Trail diploma through such a program.

“Based on 50 percent return of our students next year if we can get this off the ground, we’re looking at a $201,000 savings,” she said.

Hopkins said that with these savings, Trail would be able to increase advanced placement course offerings. She then listed school districts that use in-house cyber programs include Old Forge, Carbondale and Pittsburgh. She mentioned that Pittsburgh’s school district was able to bring back 126 students and save $1.1 million.

Semken said the district has three choices: Virtual Learning Network (VLN), K12, and Edison Learning. Semken said that VLN provides students everything including new computer, textbooks, tech support for full-time students, and on-site training for staff. It costs $3,875 per student.

He said that the difference between VLN and K12 is that K12 doesn’t provide computers or training support. He said Edison Learning also doesn’t provide computers or tech support but costs less than the VLN Platform.

Semken asked the board members for a room in the high school building where students might do a blended program.

“A blended program would be where they (students) would actually come to our building (high school),” he said. “They would do cyber school in a room and then possibly come to special classes.”

Lane listed reasons why students would leave Lackawanna Trail to attend a cyber charting school, such as family life struggles, anxiety, or social issues.

“We feel that if we have a cyber-blended option with a student retention team, in what we are calling a ‘safe haven classroom,’ we might be able to address some of those needs of those students and keep them within the brick and mortar first,” she said.

Lane then mentioned that if they can work through some conflict resolution for two weeks, that will have a safe haven classroom.

High school principal Mark Murphy wondered whether the curriculum of the cyber classes are aligned with Trail’s classes.

“If the student chooses to go away (to a cyber charting school) for two months (and decided to come back to Lackawanna Trail), there might be large gaps,” he said. “There’s no crosswalk to the curriculum.”

Hopkins said the three cyber school options mentioned above are currently piloting a program that allows teachers to author their own classes.

In other business, the board voted to approve:

• The academic calendar of 2016-17 school year.

• Nutrition Group, Inc. as the Food Service Management Company for the 2016-17 school year based on competitive bids submitted publicly on March 7, 2016.

• The retirement of Donald Rupp, high school science teacher, effective June 30, 2016.

• The retirement of Debra Reynolds, elementary assistant cafeteria manager, effective June 30, 2016.

Reach the Abington Journal newsroom at 570-587-1148 or by email at news@theabingtonjournal.com.


All user comments are subject to our Terms of Service. Users may flag inappropriate comments.

Other Stories:

Dietrich Theater Open Mic to feature old time radio plays Abington Heights routs Honesdale in Lackawanna League softball opener

Note: K12, inc operates Insight of Ohio, and Ohio Virtual Academy…

William Phillis of the Ohio Coalition for Equity and Adequacy, has been tracking the movement by school districts to bill the state for money lost to charters. Ohio has many charters rated D or F by the state that divert funding from public schools.  Be sure to read the linked letter.

He writes in his latest post:

“Morgan Local School Board invoices the state for $1,138,235 in local funds deducted for charter schools


“School districts continue to invoice the state. The Morgan invoice is for local levy funding only. Superintendent Lori Snyder-Lowe’s thoughtful letter to the state emphasizes the education abuse suffered by charter students residing in the Morgan Local School District. The dismal performance of charters should be of grave concern to all local district officials and educators. Is it not a fiduciary responsibility of local school officials to ensure their students the most efficacious educational opportunity possible?


“State officials have the constitutional responsibility to secure a thorough and efficient system of common schools. The Ohio system was declared unconstitutional four times by the Ohio Supreme Court. Since those declarations, $7 billion has been deducted from school districts for the parasitical charter industry.”

William Phillis