Kim Cook v. Gary Chartrand, 792 F.3d 1294

Florida enacted the Student Success Act (2011), requiring at least 50% of teacher evaluations be based on student learning growth from statewide assessments and directing the Commissioner to approve a formula (FCAT VAM) to measure growth.
FCAT VAM was designed to evaluate teachers of tested subjects/grades (Type A teachers) by comparing students’ current and prior FCAT scores; it yields a teacher component and a common school component.
Many teachers (Type B and Type C) do not teach tested subjects or their students lack the required prior FCAT scores; districts lacking alternative models used FCAT VAM-derived measures anyway (using students’ FCAT scores even when teachers did not teach those subjects or using school-wide scores).
Plaintiffs (seven teachers and three teacher associations) sued state and district officials alleging due process and equal protection violations as-applied, claiming the evaluation scheme irrationally used unrelated FCAT scores to evaluate non-FCAT teachers.
The district court dismissed plaintiffs’ facial challenge but allowed as-applied claims; later it granted summary judgment for defendants, finding the evaluation policies survived rational basis review. Plaintiffs appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standing	Plaintiffs alleged concrete risk of future reduced pay and employment harm from irrational evaluations	Policies at issue changed; plaintiffs lack standing to challenge past evaluations	Plaintiffs had standing at filing; alleged injury was concrete, traceable, and redressable
Mootness	Post-filing statutory changes moot case because districts are revising policies	Changes do not make recurrence impossible; government unlikely to resume illegal acts but presumption rebuttable	Case not moot; changes could permit similar evaluations and salary links remain
Substantive Due Process	Using FCAT scores unrelated to teachers’ subjects is arbitrary and not rationally related to improving student achievement	Legislature’s purpose was improving student achievement; FCAT VAM could rationally be thought to measure school-wide or spillover effects and to incentivize improvement	Rational basis review applies; policy rationally related to legitimate state interest; claim fails
Equal Protection	Distinctions between teacher types are irrationally arbitrary	Classification rationally furthers state interest in student performance improvement	Rational basis applies; classification is rationally related to legitimate interest; claim fails

Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (standing requires concrete, particularized injury)
FCC v. Beach Communications, 508 U.S. 307 (rational basis standard and scope of conceivable justifications)
Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (rational basis review can uphold seemingly unwise legislation)
Vance v. Bradley, 440 U.S. 93 (deference to political branches absent evidence of antipathy)
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, 473 U.S. 432 (rational basis standard for equal protection classifications)
Arcia v. Florida Secretary of State, 772 F.3d 1335 (standing/mootness principles applied in Eleventh Circuit)
Elend v. Basham, 471 F.3d 1199 (requirement of real and immediate threat for prospective relief)
Deen v. Egleston, 597 F.3d 1223 (burden on challenger to negate conceivable rational bases)
Debra P. v. Turlington, 644 F.2d 397 (invalidated test covering untaught material)
Armstead v. Starkville Mun. Separate Sch. Dist., 461 F.2d 276 (invalidated GRE as irrational teacher qualification)