Exceptions - Review Needed | OEI Validation Lab

Step 12 — exception routing

Exceptions - Review Needed

Items enter the queue when sources conflict, cash restrictions are unclear, the entity level is ambiguous, CAP disagrees with the statements, or a metric depends on information not in the package. These are basis or treatment questions, not replication failures: the replication test is whether we can reproduce the published OEI number from source documents.

Signed in as

Allan Bell - Nsites · Nsites

Analysts route items; Donovan CPAs approve accounting treatments; OEI approves methodology positions and unresolved-source items.

Switch role

6 judgment items · 6 pending review · 0 submitted for approval · 0 approved · 0 rejected. No treatment is treated as final until the required reviewer approves it; every action is timestamped in the audit log.

JQ-001 · BELIEVE · Current Ratio

Should the school-only or consolidated column be used for Believe's short-term health metrics?

Pending reviewPermanent mapping rule

Potential treatments: School-only column · Consolidated Believe + Build Believe column
Financial impact: $96,000 of affiliate current liabilities
Metric impact: 1.31 school-only vs 1.20 consolidated
OEI rating impact: None — both Meets Standard
Sources: 26520A.pdf p. 4 · MSCS_Performance_Framework_2025-26.pdf p. 15
Recommended treatment: School-only column — Framework scopes short-term health to the charter holder; affiliate is a facility entity.

Does the recommended treatment cure the difference?

Yes — fully reconciles. Applying the school-only column produces 1.31, which equals the published OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates. figure of 1.31 and the CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation. figure of 1.31. No residual difference remains. The consolidated alternative adds $96,000 of affiliate current liabilities and produces 1.20, re-opening a 0.11 variance. See the side-by-side reconciliation on the metric page.

Reconciliation — Nsites vs OEI

1.31 school-only (as published) vs 1.20 consolidated

Difference: 0.11 · $96,000 of affiliate current liabilities · Likely cause: Entity scope — charter holder vs consolidated organization

Nsites calculation

Nsites calculation — school-only column (matches published)

Current assets (26520A.pdf p. 4): $1,434,653
Current liabilities — charter holder only: $1,095,511
$1,434,653 / $1,095,511: 1.30958

Result

1.31

MS — Meets Standard

OEI assumed methodologyAssumed — reverse-engineered

Alternative — consolidated Believe + Build Believe Properties

Current assets: $1,434,653
Current liabilities — charter holder: $1,095,511
Plus affiliate current liabilities: $96,000
Consolidated current liabilities: $1,191,511
$1,434,653 / $1,191,511: 1.20406

Result

1.20

MS — Meets Standard

Bridge between the two results

Reconciling item	Effect	Why the two calculations differ
Build Believe Properties current liabilities	$96,000 → 0.11 on the ratio	The affiliate is a facility entity. The 2025-26 framework scopes short-term health to the charter holder, so its liabilities are excluded — the treatment that reproduces the published 1.31.

Conclusion: No open variance. Applying the school-only scope reproduces both the published and CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation. figure of 1.31.

Reviewer comments: Matches the published OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates. treatment. Saved to the Believe accounting profile.

Approval workflow · sign-off required from Donovan CPAs

Pending review

No decision recorded yet. This item is unapproved and is counted as an open exception.

You can route this item for review, but only Donovan CPAs can approve or reject it.

JQ-002 · BELIEVE · Days Cash on Hand

OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates./CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation. included the $92,400 trustee-held debt-service reserve in the Days Cash numerator and reported 66 days. Should that reserve have been excluded as restricted cash, which would reduce the result to 61 days?

Pending review

Potential treatments: Exclude as restricted (Nsites position) · Include as unrestricted (OEI and CAP position)
Financial impact: $92,400
Metric impact: 61 days if the reserve is excluded vs 66 days as OEI/CAP published
OEI rating impact: None — both ≥ 60 days, Meets Standard
Sources: 26520A.pdf p. 12, Note 6 · 9_4_26_CAP Accounting Review Pull.xlsx · Notes
Recommended treatment: Exclude the $92,400 trustee-held reserve as restricted cash (our Nsites position), pending written OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates. confirmation — The reserve is held by the bond trustee and is not available for school operations. We believe OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates.'s 66-day figure can only be reproduced by including this reserve; excluding it is the correct restricted-cash treatment.

Does the recommended treatment cure the difference?

No — variance remains. OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates. and CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation. include the $92,400 in unrestricted cash, giving $1,121,221 / $16,953.43 = 66.14 days (66). Our recommended treatment removes the reserve, giving $1,028,821 / $16,953.43 = 60.69 days (61). The difference is exactly $92,400 / $16,953.43 = 5.45 days. Therefore, following the recommendation does not cure the variance — it makes the difference explicit. Both treatments still produce Meets Standard. To close this item, OEI/Donovan must confirm in writing whether trustee-held reserves are to be treated as unrestricted cash.

Reconciliation — Nsites vs OEI

66 days (as published) vs 61 days under the restricted-cash treatment

Difference: 5 days · $92,400 of trustee-held cash · Likely cause: Definition of unrestricted cash — restricted vs gross balance-sheet cash

Nsites calculation

Nsites calculation — restricted-cash treatment (JQ-002 recommendation)

Cash and cash equivalents (26520A.pdf p. 7): $1,121,221
Less trustee-held debt-service reserve (Note 6, p. 12): ($92,400)
Unrestricted cash used in the formula: $1,028,821
Total expenses (p. 8): $6,411,473
Less depreciation (p. 9): ($223,470)
OEI expense base: $6,188,003
Daily expense = $6,188,003 / 365: $16,953.43
$1,028,821 / $16,953.43: 60.69 days

Result

61 days (60.69)

MS — Meets Standard

OEI published methodology

OEI / CAP calculation — gross cash treatment

Cash and cash equivalents (full balance-sheet line): $1,121,221
Total expenses: $6,411,473
Less depreciation: ($223,470)
OEI expense base: $6,188,003
Daily expense: $16,953.43
$1,121,221 / $16,953.43: 66.14 days

Result

66 days (66.14)

MS — Meets Standard

Bridge between the two results

Reconciling item	Effect	Why the two calculations differ
Trustee-held debt-service reserve	$92,400 → 5.45 days	The only reconciling item. OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates. and CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation. include the reserve in cash; the Nsites restricted-cash reading excludes it. $92,400 / $16,953.43 = 5.45 days, bridging 60.69 to 66.14.

Conclusion: The platform currently publishes 66 days so the replication matches OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates. exactly. The alternative restricted-cash treatment recommended in JQJQ — Judgment Queue itemThe identifier prefix (JQ-001, JQ-002, …) for each accounting-judgment or methodology exception listed on the Exceptions - Review Needed page.-002 would produce 61 days and re-open the difference. Either way the rating is Meets Standard. Resolution requires OEI/Donovan to confirm in writing whether trustee-held reserves count as unrestricted cash.

Reviewer comments: Escalated to OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates./Donovan for a written answer: did OEI intentionally include the trustee-held reserve as unrestricted cash, and should future calculations treat such reserves as unrestricted?

Approval workflow · sign-off required from OEI

Pending review

No decision recorded yet. This item is unapproved and is counted as an open exception.

You can route this item for review, but only OEI can approve or reject it.

JQ-003 · MATCHBOOK · Days Cash on Hand

Should the board-designated operating reserve be excluded from unrestricted cash?

Pending reviewPermanent mapping rule

Potential treatments: Exclude board-designated reserve · Include board-designated reserve (CAP position)
Financial impact: $261,300
Metric impact: FY2024-25: 20.56 days — exact match to Salesforce/CAP
OEI rating impact: None — both Meets Standard
Sources: 34960A.pdf p. 11, Note 3 · OEI-MSCS-Performance-Framework-2026-27.pdf p. 17
Recommended treatment: Exclude — Excluding the reserve reproduces the Salesforce/CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation. FY2024-25 figure of 20.56 days exactly, confirming CAP also excluded it.

Does the recommended treatment cure the difference?

Yes — fully reconciles. Against Salesforce/CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation. FY2024-25: CAP reported 20.56 days. Excluding the $261,300 board-designated reserve, we reproduce 20.56 days exactly — fully reconciled, confirming CAP also excluded the reserve. No FY2024-25 published OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates. CQ2CQ2 — Core Question 2 — Financial HealthThe financial-health section of the OEI performance framework. CQ2 covers near-term measures (current ratio, days cash, enrollment variance, default) and sustainability measures (total margin, debt-to-asset, debt service coverage ratio, cash flow). report was provided for Matchbook, so CAP is the comparison target for this year. The only published OEI figure on file is the 80-day figure from the FY2023-24 CQ2 report — a different fiscal year whose audited statements are not in the data room — so it is not a like-for-like target for FY2024-25. See the side-by-side reconciliation on the metric page.

Reconciliation — Nsites vs OEI

21 days Nsites (FY2024-25) vs 80 days published (FY2023-24 report)

Difference: Different fiscal years — not a calculation difference · Likely cause: Comparing different reporting periods

Nsites calculation

Nsites calculation — FY2024-25 audited

Cash (34960A.pdf p. 5): $754,842
Audited total expenses: $16,452,973
Less IPS in-kind contributed services: ($2,683,118)
Less depreciation: ($369,832)
OEI expense base: $13,400,023
Daily expense: $36,712.39
$754,842 / $36,712.39: 20.56 days

Result

21 days

DNMS — below the 30-day covenant floor

OEI published methodology

Published OEI CQ2 — FY2023-24 report

Published Days Cash on Hand: 80 days
Reporting period: FY2023-24
Underlying FY2023-24 inputs: Not traceable

Result

80 days

MS — Meets Standard

Bridge between the two results

Reconciling item	Effect	Why the two calculations differ
Period mismatch	Full 59-day gap	The two figures cover different fiscal years, so no reconciling accounting item exists. Matchbook's cash position deteriorated between the two years; Note 6 of 34960A.pdf confirms the FY2024-25 Days Cash covenant was breached.
Comparable FY2024-25 target	Unavailable	A like-for-like comparison requires the FY2024-25 published CQ2CQ2 — Core Question 2 — Financial HealthThe financial-health section of the OEI performance framework. CQ2 covers near-term measures (current ratio, days cash, enrollment variance, default) and sustainability measures (total margin, debt-to-asset, debt service coverage ratio, cash flow). report, which is logged as a data-room gap.

Conclusion: This is presented as a period mismatch, not a replication failure. The FY2024-25 Nsites result reconciles exactly to the Salesforce/CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation. FY25 pull (20.56 days).

Reviewer comments: Recorded as a recurring Matchbook mapping rule.

Approval workflow · sign-off required from Donovan CPAs

Pending review

No decision recorded yet. This item is unapproved and is counted as an open exception.

You can route this item for review, but only Donovan CPAs can approve or reject it.

JQ-004 · MATCHBOOK · Debt Default

Why this is flagged: Matchbook's audit (34960A.pdf p. 14, Note 7) discloses a debt covenant violation that the lender cured with a waiver. The published report treated this as no default. Nothing is wrong with the numbers — this item exists as a point of future reference: how should a waived covenant violation be described if the same situation recurs in a future year?

Pending review

Potential treatments: No default (published treatment) · Covenant violation with waiver — disclose
Financial impact: None
Metric impact: Narrative only
OEI rating impact: None — Meets Standard either way
Sources: 34960A.pdf p. 14, Note 7
Recommended treatment: Report as covenant violation with waiver — Purely a disclosure-standard question, not a calculation question. The framework requires disclosure of waived violations even where the rating is unaffected, so the recommendation is about narrative accuracy for future cycles — it changes no figure and no rating.

Does the recommended treatment cure the difference?

Not a variance. Both treatments yield Meets Standard and the same numeric result; the recommendation changes narrative disclosure only. Nothing to reconcile — adopting it does not move any figure.

Reviewer comments: Requires OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates. confirmation of narrative standard.

Approval workflow · sign-off required from Donovan CPAs

Pending review

No decision recorded yet. This item is unapproved and is counted as an open exception.

You can route this item for review, but only Donovan CPAs can approve or reject it.

JQ-005 · GPA · Financial Reporting Requirements

Why this is flagged: Financial Reporting Requirements is scored from OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates.'s own submission log (did the school file each required report on time). That log is an OEI internal record — it is not in any document the schools provided, so there is no source data to calculate from. The question being posed: without the log, do we honestly mark the metric Unable to Validate, or do we copy OEI's published rating? This item resolves nothing numerically — its purpose is to protect the integrity of the replication scores.

Pending reviewPermanent mapping rule

Potential treatments: Mark Unable to Validate · Adopt the published rating
Financial impact: None
Metric impact: Metric not calculable
OEI rating impact: Excluded from replication denominators
Sources: MSCS_Performance_Framework_2025-26.pdf p. 24
Recommended treatment: Mark Unable to Validate — Adopting the published rating would breach the no-cheating principle — a validation target can never be used as an input. The potential hindrance of the honest treatment: the metric sits out of the accuracy denominators, slightly lowering coverage until OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates. supplies the log. That is the intended trade-off — better a visible gap than a score propped up by the answer key.

Does the recommended treatment cure the difference?

Not a variance. The metric has no source to calculate from, so there is no Nsites number to reconcile. Marking Unable to Validate keeps it out of the accuracy denominators; it can only be cured by OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates. supplying the submission log.

Reviewer comments: Applied to all three schools. Request submission logs from OEIOEI — Office of Education InnovationThe City of Indianapolis Mayor's Office division that authorizes and oversees mayor-sponsored charter schools. OEI publishes the performance framework and the annual accountability reports this platform independently replicates..

Approval workflow · sign-off required from Donovan CPAs

Pending review

No decision recorded yet. This item is unapproved and is counted as an open exception.

You can route this item for review, but only Donovan CPAs can approve or reject it.

JQ-006 · BELIEVE · Debt Service Coverage Ratio

Why this is flagged: the DSCRDSCR — Debt Service Coverage RatioNet income plus depreciation and interest expense, divided by annual principal and interest payments. It measures whether operations generate enough cash to cover debt payments. OEI's Meets Standard threshold is 1.10 or greater. formula changed between framework versions. The 2025-26 framework (p. 21) includes amortization of debt issuance costs in the numerator; the 2023-24 framework — and CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation.'s historical practice — excluded it. The question exists because the choice is year-dependent, not a matter of preference: applying the wrong year's rule to a historical period manufactures a variance that isn't real.

Pending reviewPermanent mapping rule

Potential treatments: Include (2025-26 framework) · Exclude (CAP practice / 2023-24 framework)
Financial impact: $6,652 of amortized debt issuance costs
Metric impact: 2.91 vs 2.88
OEI rating impact: None
Sources: MSCS_Performance_Framework_2025-26.pdf p. 21 · 26520A.pdf p. 7
Recommended treatment: Include for FY2024-25; exclude for FY2023-24 periods — This is a version-control question, not an accounting dispute. Each period must be calculated under the framework in force for that year: FY2024-25 includes the $6,652 of amortization (reproducing the published 2.91); FY2023-24 and earlier exclude it (matching CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation. practice). Using one rule across all years would create an artificial 0.03 gap on one side or the other.

Does the recommended treatment cure the difference?

Yes — fully reconciles. Using the version-correct rule (include amortization for FY2024-25) gives a numerator of $734,028 and 2.9063, matching the published 2.91. Applying the older CAPCAP — Charter Accountability Portal / Corrective Action data setThe intermediate financial data set maintained in Salesforce that OEI and its accountants use when producing published ratings. In this platform CAP values are a validation target for comparison only — they are never used as inputs to a Nsites calculation. practice removes $6,652 of amortization, giving $727,376 / $252,561 = 2.88 and a 0.03 variance. The side-by-side reconciliation shows both calculations.

Reconciliation — Nsites vs OEI

2.91 under the 2025-26 framework vs 2.88 under the older CAP practice

Difference: 0.03 · treatment of amortization of debt issuance costs · Likely cause: Framework version difference

Nsites calculation

Nsites calculation — 2025-26 framework (matches published)

Change in net assets: $337,028
Plus depreciation: $223,470
Plus interest expense: $173,530
Numerator: $734,028
Current maturities of long-term debt: $79,031
Plus interest expense: $173,530
Denominator: $252,561
$734,028 / $252,561: 2.9063

Result

2.91

MS — Meets Standard

Salesforce / CAP methodologyAssumed — reverse-engineered

Older CAP practice — amortization of issuance costs excluded

Numerator before amortization treatment: $734,028
Less amortization of debt issuance costs held in interest: ($6,652)
Adjusted numerator: $727,376
Denominator: $252,561
$727,376 / $252,561: 2.8800

Result

2.88

MS — Meets Standard

Bridge between the two results

Reconciling item	Effect	Why the two calculations differ
Amortization of debt issuance costs	0.03 on the ratio	The 2025-26 framework includes amortization in the numerator; the 2023-24 practice excluded it. Applying the version-correct rule for each year removes the difference entirely.

Conclusion: No open variance for FY2024-25. The bridge documents why historical periods must be recalculated with the framework version in force for that year.

Reviewer comments: Version-aware rule stored in the rules library.

Approval workflow · sign-off required from Donovan CPAs

Pending review

No decision recorded yet. This item is unapproved and is counted as an open exception.

You can route this item for review, but only Donovan CPAs can approve or reject it.

Approved recurring treatments

School accounting profiles

When an analyst approves a recurring school-specific treatment it is saved here and applied automatically in future periods.

BELIEVE Circle City High School / Build Believe Properties, LLC

Auditor: Donovan CPAs

Recurring account mappings: Short-term metrics → school-only column · Leverage & DSCR → consolidated column
Restricted cash treatment: Trustee-held debt-service reserve excluded (pending OEI confirmation).
Board-designated cash: None reported.
Affiliate treatment: Build Believe Properties, LLC consolidated for long-term health only.
Debt treatment: Facility note held at affiliate; principal read from the affiliate debt schedule.
Known reporting peculiarities: Two-column presentation invites wrong-column extraction; column is pinned in the mapping profile.
Last validated / reviewer: FY2024-25 · Allan Bell - Nsites

Global Preparatory Academy, Inc.

Auditor: Donovan CPAs

Recurring account mappings: All metrics → single school entity
Restricted cash treatment: Donor-restricted grant cash excluded per Note 9.
Board-designated cash: None reported.
Affiliate treatment: None.
Debt treatment: Single note payable; principal and interest in cash flow statement.
Known reporting peculiarities: Enrollment schedules live in the supplemental file (34450S.pdf), not the audit file.
Last validated / reviewer: FY2024-25 · Allan Bell - Nsites

Matchbook Learning Schools of Indiana, Inc.

Auditor: Donovan CPAs

Recurring account mappings: All metrics → combined network entity · School-level splits retained for reference
Restricted cash treatment: None.
Board-designated cash: Operating reserve excluded from unrestricted cash.
Affiliate treatment: None.
Debt treatment: Facility loan plus line of credit; waived days-cash covenant in FY2023-24.
Known reporting peculiarities: Combined statements present K-8 and The Match HS together; do not read the first school column as the total.
Last validated / reviewer: FY2023-24 · Allan Bell - Nsites