2014-15 Annual Report and
World’s Best Workforce
Report
Our Mission:
Northeast College Prep will ensure strong academic, social-emotional, and talent
development in every member of its diverse student body, thereby positioning each student
for college graduation, career success, and positive community impact.
Our Vision:
Northeast College Prep students will be empowered with strong academic skills and
knowledge, social and emotional intelligence, deeply-developed personal talents,
commitment to the common good, on-going support from the NECP community, and a deep
love of learning.
Northeast College Prep graduates will thrive in the local, national, and international
community in a wide range of professional fields.
Northeast College Prep’s success will serve as a proof-point that all students, regardless
of background, flourish when a school’s entire staff deeply believes in the potential and fully
commits to the success of each and every one.
Our Core Convictions:
1. All children have the potential for greatness within them.
2. Healthy childhood development requires strong academic, social-emotional, and
personal talent development.
3. Strong academic development must be demonstrable through objective measures.
4. In all areas of childhood development, not everything that matters can be measured
objectively.
5. Diversity enriches our experience and makes us better prepared for an increasingly
complex world.
6. A long-term commitment between staff members to develop and support one
another deepens a school’s positive impact on its students and its community.
7. A child’s education occurs amidst a partnership between the school and the family; a
strong partnership increases the odds of a child’s long-term success.
8. The clearest path to becoming a great school is to learn from great models.
Student Enrollment and Demographics
Student enrollment is the number one challenge for a start-up charter school.
It drives the budget and the future viability of the school. Through our strong
partnership with Global Academy, we were able to get many families referred from
their waiting list to enroll in Northeast College Prep (NECP). In addition, through
our exhaustive, diligent community outreach efforts (Director and Assistant
Director spent 75% of their time September to November of 2013 meeting face-toface with community members) and our ensuing student recruitment efforts, we
were able to attain very strong student enrollment numbers by mid-summer of
2014.
By early August, we had over 160 students enrolled. Unfortunately, our
building was not ready for use until very close to the start of the school year. Due to
this, we lost many families from our enrollment list just before school started. On
our first day of school, only 103 students were in attendance. But from the very first
day, parents expressed strong satisfaction with the quality of the school. They
began to spread the word very quickly about NECP. By the 10th day of school, our
enrollment had risen to 140 and by the 40th day of school, it was at 150.
Our final Average Daily Membership (ADM) was 146. We pulled data on our
students’ primary home languages and found the following: 46% Somali; 27%
English; 10% Arabic; 8% Oromo; 7% Spanish; 1% Soninke; 0.3% Wolof; 0.3% Urdu.
92.4% of our students qualified for free or reduced price lunch.
Student Attrition
From the end of the 2014-15 school year to the start of the 2015-16 school
year we were able to determine the following data on student attrition/retention:
 Students who finished the 2014-15 school year: 146
 Current 2015-16 enrollment: 195
 Students who are new to the school for the 2015-16 school year: 82 (48 in K)
 Students who returned for the 2015-16 school year: 113
 Students who did NOT return for the 2015-16 school year: 33
 Percentage of students who returned: 77.4%
 Reasons for leaving the school:
o Moved outside of transportation zone: 45%
o Lived too far away, too long on the bus, kids had to wake up too early
to get to school: 18%
o Not sure the reason (could not get in touch with family): 15%
o Parents upset that student would be retained in their grade: 12%
o Wanted a school with more arts offerings: 3%
o Got off the waiting list at another school: 3%
o Dad’s work hours changed and needed a school closer to his work: 3%
Governance and Management
The school was in our first year of existence. We will conduct our first board
elections near the end of the 2015-16 school year. The school’s board consists of 4
founding members and two members (one teacher, one parent) who were added
during the 2014-15 school year. The board members bring a wide range of skills
and experiences, including legal, financial, high performing charter school start-up
and management, and previous charter school board experience. This is the board
roster as it is currently configured:
Emily Goff – Board Chair, Community Member
Goff0009@umn.edu
612-877-0930
Founding Board Member: April 2013 to present
Melissa Storbakken – Board Secretary, Community Member and Licensed Teacher
(file # 355940)
Melissa.storbakken@globalacademy.us
763-404-8200
Founding Board Member: April 2013 to present
Courtney Carter – Board Member, Community Member
Courtney.carter@tntp.org
612-644-0743
Founding Board Member: April 2013 to present
Katia Colon-Holmers – Board Member, Community Member
Katia.colon@gmail.com
612-205-1127
Founding Board Member: April 2013 to present
Redouane Elattaoui – Board Member, Parent
elridwan@gmail.com
763-607-4685
Board Member: October 2014 to present
Joanna Schneider – Board Member, Teacher
jschneider@northeastcollegeprep.org
715-212-8406
Board Member: September 2014 to present
Board Member Training
We are currently including some board member training in every monthly
meeting. Topics include charter school finance, new state education legislation and
its impact on charter schools, and charter school law. Our financial services
provider, Beltz, Kes, Darling, and Associates, is a frequent provider of training for
our board. We are also members of the Minnesota Association of Charter Schools
and board members are beginning to take advantage of their training offerings.
Staffing and Operational Performance
Our staff was the foundation of our success in our first year. Our teachers
brought with them an average of 4.5 years of teaching experience, a strong number
for a start-up school. Most of this experience came in diverse, urban classroom
settings, which was among the most important criteria we looked for when hiring
our teachers. We also had many teachers and staff members who had been part of
start-up or young charter schools, so they brought broad and diverse skill sets wellsuited to getting a school off the ground. In addition, we had native speakers of
Somali, Spanish, and Arabic on staff, which was critical in helping us to connect with
and build strong relationships with our students’ families from the beginning. We
had the following staffing structure during our first year:
 2 kindergarten teachers
 2 1st grade teachers
 1 2nd grade teacher
 2 3rd grade teachers
 1 Physical Education teacher
 1 Arabic teacher
 1 Spanish teacher
 1 Special Education teacher
 1 Special Education paraprofessional
 1 Office Manager
 1 Director
 1 Assistant Director
 1 Office Assistant/Kitchen Worker
Finances/Fiscal Performance
Northeast College Prep finished the 2014-15 school year in very strong
financial health. Our original budget, approved at the June 2014 board meeting, was
built upon an expectation of 150 students. When our building was not ready until
just days before school was to open, causing enrollment early in the school year to
be lower than expected, our board requested that the Director revise the budget to
135 students, which was then passed at the October board meeting.
Due to the many conservative assumptions built into the original 150student budget, as well as some timely fundraising, we were able to revise our
budget to 135 students (a cut of close to $150,000) without cutting staff. This
enabled our school to continue to offer the strong program we had in place and keep
class size low, fulfilling the promises made to parents, students, and staff. We
finished the school year with an average daily membership (ADM) of 146 students,
which was one factor in leading to our annual budget surplus of $212,000 and fund
balance of $277,000, or 14% (according to our June 2015 financials).
Another factor was our robust fundraising efforts. Over the school year, we
brought many funders into the building to tour the school and hear about our
mission, vision, core convictions, and our program. To date, over our start-up year
and the past 2014-15 school year, our fundraising efforts have yielded over
$403,000 from the following sources:
 Smikis Foundation: $150,000
 Prospect Creek Foundation: $100,000
 David Winton Bell Foundation: $30,000
 Sauer Children’s Renew Foundation: $30,000
 Minneapolis Foundation: $25,000
 Graves Family Foundation: $15,000
 Education Transformation Initiative (ETI): $10,000
 Soran Family Foundation: $10,000
 Charter School Partners: $25,000
 Individual donors: $8,000+
Another significant accomplishment in our first year of existence was being
awarded the state School Finance Award for sound fiscal management.
Academic Performance
Given that our student population was overwhelmingly minority and 92.4%
received free or reduced lunch, our student achievement goals aligned with the
goals of the World’s Best Workforce legislation to ensure that all students in third
grade achieve grade-level literacy and all achievement gaps are closed.
Charter contract goals and benchmarks for instruction and student
achievement:
Authorizer contract goals for Year 1:
1.1.2 Comparative Proficiency – District & State (Reading). NECP will
demonstrate higher grade-level and school wide proficiency rates than the
Minneapolis school district in Year 1, for the same grades as offered.
Results: Our only state testing grade in 2014-15 was 3rd grade. The Minneapolis
school district’s proficiency rate in reading in 3rd grade was 41.4% and ours was
28.1%. If you compare the proficiency rate in the Minneapolis Public Schools among
students receiving Free or Reduced Price Lunch, their proficiency rate in reading
was 21.0% while ours was 24.1%. So among low-income students, our students
outperformed the Minneapolis district’s students in reading in our first year.
1.2.2 Comparative Proficiency – District & State (Math). NECP will
demonstrate higher grade-level and school wide proficiency rates than the
Minneapolis school district in Year 1, for the same grades as offered.
Results: Our only state testing grade in 2014-15 was 3rd grade. The Minneapolis
school district’s proficiency rate in math in 3rd grade was 52.5% and ours was
46.9%. If you compare the proficiency rate in the Minneapolis Public Schools among
students receiving Free or Reduced Price Lunch, their proficiency rate in math was
34.7% while ours was 41.4%. So among low-income students, our students
outperformed the Minneapolis district’s students in math in our first year.
NWEA MAP. In Math and Reading, students scoring in the lowest quartile (1-25%)
on the fall NWEA MAP who are continuously enrolled for one year will on average
increase their percentile ranking by at least 30 percentage points by
spring. Students scoring in the next quartile (26% to 50%) will on average increase
their percentile ranking by at least 20 percentage points from fall to spring.
Students scoring in the next quartile (51-75%) will on average increase their
percentile ranking by at least 10 percentile points from fall to spring. Students in
the top quartile (76-100%) will on average increase their percentile ranking by at
least 5 percentile points from fall to spring.
Results:
Math: Avg.
Math: Avg.
Reading: Avg. Reading: Avg.
Growth (by
Growth (by
Growth (by
Growth (by
percentile
percentile
percentile
percentile
points): Goal
points):
points): Goal
points):
Actual
Actual
st
1 Quartile (1+30
+14.6
+30
+11.4
25% in fall)
2nd Quartile
+20
+3
+20
-0.7
(26-50% in
fall)
3rd Quartile
+10
+3.9
+10
-0.1
(51-75% in
fall)
4th Quartile
+5
-2
+5
0
(76-99 % in
fall)
It should be noted that these goals were highly ambitious and have since been
revised with our authorizer to be achieved over a 4-year period, rather than in a
single year. Though we did not meet the goals in any of the quartiles, it is evident
that our students on average made significant progress, particularly the students
who came to the school in the lowest quartile. This school-wide progress is further
evidenced by the fact that school-wide students made 116% of their RIT goals for
the school year in math and 127% of their RIT goals for the school year in reading.
In other words, if we add up the RIT goals for the year for each student in the school
and then add up their final results, school-wide we exceeded the overall RIT goals by
16% in math and 27% in reading. This is another way of showing that our students,
on average, made 16% over a year’s growth in math and 27% over a year’s growth in
reading. We also doubled the number of students on grade level in reading from 28 in
fall 2014 to 56 in spring 2015 and increased by 62% the number of students on grade
level in math from 37 in fall 2014 to 60 in spring 2015.
Assessment System:
Internal assessments:
Our internal assessments were the NWEA MAP test, given twice per year in
fall and spring, as well as locally-developed interim assessments aligned to state
standards and our reading and math curriculum programs (Reading Street and
Investigations).
NWEA:
Growth was to be measured over the course of the school year by giving the
NWEA MAP in the fall and spring.
Internal Interim Assessments:
Our authorizer, Student Achievement Minnesota, provided a highly skilled
assessment expert named Lori Magstedt to work with us to create quarterly interim
assessments that were aligned to state standards. These assessments also followed
the trajectory of our reading (Reading Street) and math programs (Investigations)
so that as teachers use the curriculum, the content they were teaching was what
appeared on the interim assessments and student progress could be measured.
Process for assessing and evaluating each student’s progress toward meeting
state and local academic standards and identifying strengths and weaknesses
of instruction:
Curriculum mapping:
Our entire curriculum was mapped out and was reflected in our quarterly
assessments. Each quarterly assessment assessed the state standards that were
taught during that quarter, as well as assessing an appropriate amount of standards
from the previous quarters so that students retained what was learned throughout
the year. By the end of the year, all state standards were assessed on the quarterly
interim assessments.
Formative assessment for improving instruction:
The results of the quarterly interim assessments were used to zero in on
specific standards that individual students needed more help with. But the
quarterly interims were not the only time teachers were assessing their students.
Teachers were conducting formative assessments throughout each week. These
assessments took many forms, including informal assessments made throughout
individual lessons. There were also many assessments built into the reading and
math programs that we used. This gave us a seamless system of state standard
assessments: informal on-going formative assessments > frequent curriculum-based
assessments tied to the math and reading programs and aligned to state standards >
quarterly interim assessments aligned to state standards and the reading and math
programs > MCAs at the end of the school year.
Periodic reviews of curriculum and instruction:
Every quarter, following the students’ quarterly assessments, teachers sat
down in grade level teams with our Assistant Director and Lori Magstedt from our
authorizer (SAM) and analyzed the assessment results. They went through classwide data to look for trends and patterns in what students knew and didn’t know,
and they also went through student-by-student data to determine where gaps were
in individual students’ level of understanding of concepts. This data was then used
to make instructional plans for the following weeks.
Professional Development
Abundant, on-going, job-embedded professional development was a major
area of focus in our first year and will continue to be into the future. Beginning July
30th, we had a total of 25 full days of professional development over the course of
the school year, as well as 2 hours every Friday afternoon (students are dismissed
two hours early on Fridays). This added up to well over 200 hours of professional
development over the course of our first school year. Professional development
topics included the following areas of particular focus:
 Responsive Classroom strategies, procedures, and techniques
 International Baccalaureate curriculum development
 Educational Non-verbal Yardsticks (ENVoY) techniques
 Culturally responsive teaching strategies
 Effective guided reading strategies
 SIOP strategies for English Learners
 Welcoming Schools community building and anti-bullying strategies
 Inquiry-based teaching and learning
We also invested a large amount of time and resources in teacher coaching.
Each teacher got on average 2-3 15+ minute observations and one 30-minute
feedback session per week with our Assistant Director. Over the school year, this
added up to approximately 25 hours of observation and 20 hours of feedback
sessions for each teacher over the course of the school year. This was truly a
dramatic difference from the more typical experience of teachers where 3
observations per year are more likely. In addition to this, our teachers had one full,
uninterrupted hour each day to plan with their grade level partner, as well as
another 35 minutes of planning time. We found that thanks to these structures and
the large amount of professional development days, the amount of time it took
teachers to address challenges in their teaching was much quicker than one would
typically find in most schools.
Teacher Evaluation System:
The purpose of all of our school structures and processes is to maximize
student achievement. Our teacher evaluation system is another example of this. It
is designed to strengthen each teacher’s instruction over time. Here are its
components:
A. Individual Professional Growth and Development Plan
All licensed teachers at Northeast College Prep will set an individual
professional growth goal by October 1st of each school year that will be
reviewed by their grade level administrator. The teacher must explain how
the goal will result in improved student learning at Northeast College Prep.
Each teacher will review the progress made in meeting the goal in a spring
meeting with their grade level administrator.
B. Peer Review Process
Teachers at Northeast College Prep will participate in instructional rounds
and/or peer observations at least twice each academic school year.
C. Professional Learning Community
Teachers at Northeast College Prep will participate in a professional learning
community through collaborative staff planning workshop days and grade
level meetings.
D. Student Engagement
Longitudinal data regarding student engagement will be collected for each
teacher through the following means: student surveys, peer observations,
administrative observations.
E. Test Data
Teachers will collect data from valid and reliable assessments aligned to
state and local academic standards. Student success will be measured by the
percentage of students who meet NWEA growth targets in reading and math.
Specific benchmarks for acceptable scores will be determined annually by
the administration and communicated to the teaching staff.
F. Staff Development Activities
The administration will survey staff regarding potential staff development
activities that will be coordinated with this evaluation process and teacher
outcomes.
G. Summative Evaluation
1. The director will prepare a summative evaluation of every teacher on a
three-year cycle.
2. The summative evaluation will consider the following components:
a. A review of at least 6 formal teaching observations conducted by
the school’s director over the three year cycle;
b. The teacher’s self-reflection based on professional standards
established in rule (8710.2000 Standards of Effective Practice for
Teachers);
c. Completion of all other components required in this process.
d. Teachers may prepare a portfolio for administrative
consideration in the summative review process (optional).
H. Overall Evaluation
1. The administration will keep a record of all components of a
teacher’s evaluation process.
2. The overall evaluation for each three year cycle will be based on the
following:
65% Summative administrative review
35% Student test data
3. Specific benchmarks for overall acceptable job performance will be
communicated to the teachers each fall.
4. The final overall evaluation will be placed in the employee’s official
performance review file.
5. Teachers with unacceptable job performance will be subject to
Northeast College Prep Policy 403: Discipline, Suspension, and
Dismissal of School District Employees.
Parent Satisfaction
Parent satisfaction with the school is a top priority for Northeast College
Prep. Early in the school year, before our first parent/guardian-teacher conferences
in November, our teachers conducted home visits. This was highly effective in
establishing a foundation of trust and understanding between our families and our
staff. It is something we plan to do every year. We also held monthly family evening
events at the school, including Open House, parent-teacher conferences in
November and March, Festival of Nations in January, and a Community Resources
event in May. In order to measure parent satisfaction, we sent out a parent survey
in December of 2014. We received 50 responses, which was a return rate of over
40%, considering some of our families have multiple children in the school. We
were very pleased with the results, which were as follows:
1. How happy is your child at Northeast College Prep?
 Very happy – 88%
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
 Somewhat happy – 10%
 Somewhat unhappy – 2%
 Very unhappy
 Does not apply to me or no opinion
How much is your child learning at Northeast College Prep?
 My child is learning a lot at Northeast College Prep. – 94%
 My child is sometimes learning at Northeast College Prep. – 6%
 My child is seldom learning at Northeast College Prep.
 My child is not learning at Northeast College Prep.
 Does not apply to me or no response
How safe is your child at Northeast College Prep?
 Northeast College Prep is a very safe school. – 94%
 Northeast College Prep is sometimes a safe school. – 6%
 Northeast College Prep is sometimes not a safe school.
 Northeast College Prep is not a safe school.
 Does not apply to me or no opinion
How welcome do you feel at Northeast College Prep?
 I always feel welcome when I come to Northeast College Prep. – 98%
 I sometimes feel welcome when I come to Northeast College Prep. – 2%
 I sometimes feel unwelcome at Northeast College Prep.
 I feel unwelcome at Northeast College Prep.
 Does not apply to me or no opinion
How satisfied are you with the school’s lunch program?
 I am very satisfied with the school’s lunch program. – 84%
 I am somewhat satisfied with the school’s lunch program? – 10%
 I am somewhat unsatisfied with the school’s lunch program. – 4%
 I am very unsatisfied with the school’s lunch program. – 2%
 Does not apply to me or no opinion
How satisfied are you with the school’s bus service?
 I am very satisfied with the school’s bus service. – 70%
 I am somewhat satisfied with the school’s bus service. – 20%
 I am somewhat unsatisfied with the school’s bus service. – 4%
 I am very unsatisfied with the school’s bus service. – 2%
 Does not apply to me or no opinion – 4%
How satisfied are you with the communication that you receive from the school?
 I am very satisfied with the communication I receive from the school. – 94%
 I am somewhat satisfied with the communication I receive from the school. – 4%
 I am somewhat unsatisfied with the communication I receive from the school. – 2%
 I am very unsatisfied with the communication I receive from the school..
 Does not apply to me or no opinion
Overall, how satisfied are you with Northeast College Prep?
 I am very satisfied with Northeast College Prep. – 94%
 I am somewhat satisfied with Northeast College Prep. – 6%
 I am somewhat unsatisfied with Northeast College Prep.
 I am very unsatisfied with Northeast College Prep.
 Does not apply to me or no opinion
9. Would you recommend Northeast College Prep to your family or friends?
 I would (or have) recommended NECP to my family or friends. – 98%
 I would recommend NECP with some reservations to my family or friends.
 I would not recommend Northeast College Prep to my family or friends.
 Does not apply to me or no opinion – 2%
External School Review
In January of 2015, we had an external school review done by Charter School
Partners to assess our progress in our first half-year as a school. Here are some of
the comments shared in their final report:
“Lesson planning and academic planning in general are areas of strength for the
school. All teachers report regular submission of lesson plans and unit plans and rely
on positive and collaborative processes of unit creation with their partner teachers.
The structure of the school's PD and school day offers time for teachers to carry out
this planning, and the expectation that they use it productively appears to be met in all
cases.”
“Teachers universally report the frequency and caliber of teacher coaching as a
strength of the school. Informal coaching and regular feedback are well appreciated
and acknowledged as sources of professional growth and development. Going forward,
the strength of the professional relationships created through this coaching holds the
school in good stead as more formal evaluation and professional growth schemas
necessarily emerge.”
“The overall atmosphere was extremely calm and orderly for both students and adults.
Expectations were clear and routines were well established. In general, time and
attention were focused on teaching and learning and not on managing behavior.”
“The atmosphere in classrooms was calm, but still joyful, with students taking
observable pride and comfort in their demonstrated understanding of behavioral and
academic expectations.”
“The culture of high expectations based in a deep respect for the individual worth and
unique value of every child is well-established at the school.”
“Adults were always engaging with and in close proximity to students. In most cases,
adults proactively set and modeled expectations in ways that set students up to
successfully meet them. It was clear that students had internalized several procedures
and expectations such that explicit directions from adults were no longer required.”
“One of the most impressive aspects of NECP is that students meet the high
expectations set for them - especially in common spaces - but there doesn't seem to be
a tension of adults battling to ensure students meet those expectations. Rather,
students seem to be invested and accustomed to the expectation to be calm and
quiet/silent in common spaces and to take some pride in doing so.”
“Roles and expectations were clear to students and adults and, as a result, did not
require any verbal directions. Procedures were executed smoothly, calmly, and
efficiently. Adults and students consistently respected the silent nature of the
arrival/breakfast and lunch routines.”
“Great practices are in place regarding state reporting. MARSS reports are reviewed
whenever a new student starts or a student leaves the school. Corrections are made to
the SIS, and print-outs are maintained in a binder.”
“The school maintains a calm feeling throughout the day that was observed by the
team and articulated by staff members. Arrival, dismissal and lunch systems were
strong.”
“In general, instruction and student work appeared appropriately rigorous and
engaging to students. Work in upper grade levels was particularly noteworthy in the
first year of the school's existence and given that students' past educational
experiences and academic skills likely vary considerably.”
“Classroom instruction was well planned and executed in every observation. Students
were engaged in purposeful work in both independent and full group instruction.”
Innovative Practices and Implementation
We believe that our combination of programs (International Baccalaureate,
Responsive Classroom, ENVoY, Talent Development) and our mix of modeling
several of our foundational structures after our partner school, Global Academy,
while also maintaining our own distinguishing characteristics, is quite innovative.
Our large number of school hours, professional development hours and abundant
teacher coaching is also innovative and aligned to what research suggests is most
important for schools serving a high percentage of students who qualify for free or
reduced price lunch.
Future Plans
By the end of our first year, we were already facing a problem that is created
by our success with enrollment: the need for more space. Our current facility is not
large enough to house us for much longer. We are in the midst of a serious search
for a larger facility that can hopefully house us for many years into the future,
including meeting our needs once we are fully enrolled with kindergarten through
8th grade. We hope to move into a new facility by the 2016-17 or 2017-18 school
year (at the latest).
Our priorities for the 2015-16 school year are to increase the number and
quality of supports for our learners who are below grade level. This was a top
priority when we made staffing decisions for the 2015-16 school year. We have
secured a grant from the Prospect Creek Foundation for academic interventions and
we have also brought in the Minnesota Reading Corps to do one-on-one reading
interventions with students who are below grade level. We are very hopeful that
these supports will help these learners catch up and get on a path to academic
success for many years into the future.
Another area of priority for this school year and into the future is our Talent
Development program. One of our school’s core convictions is: “Healthy childhood
development requires strong academic, social-emotional, and personal talent
development.” The importance of individual talent development is also embedded
in our mission: “Northeast College Prep will ensure strong academic, socialemotional, and talent development in every member of its diverse student body,
thereby positioning each student for college graduation, career success, and positive
community impact.” Ultimately, our long-term vision is to have a full-time staff
member who is the point person for student talent development, working with
families and teachers to identify talents emerging in each child and find avenues for
them to explore and develop those talents deeply in the community. As a step in
that direction, we are very excited that this year, our physical education teacher,
Jane Ojile, will receive a stipend to be our first Talent Development Coordinator.
She will be developing a database of talent development opportunities in the
community, a log of students and their individual interests and talents, and will
begin the process of connecting students and families to opportunities in the
community based on their individual talents.
Authorizer Contact Information
If you would like to contact Northeast College Prep’s authorizer directly, you may
contact Liz Wynne at:
Student Achievement Minnesota
P.O. Box 581639
Minneapolis, MN 55458-1639
http://www.samnllc.org/contact-us