Okay. All right. Good evening. Uh, this work session of the ISD279 school board is being held in the forum room of the educational service center on Tuesday, June 10th, 2025. The work session is being audio recorded. The recording will be made available on the district website within two business days after the work session has ended. With regard to the audio recording, our communication staff has asked that we share a friendly reminder that side conversations during the work session are picked up by the recorder and can affect sound quality. Also, conversations during transitions between agenda items are on the recording as well. The intent of the schoolboard work session is to allow for schoolboard discussion on topics. Work sessions do not include an opportunity for audience members to address the board. To acknowledge attendance this evening, I'll ask that all present at the table state their name. Starting with the person to the left, Tanya Prince, school board member. Keith Tate, school board member. Erica Foster, school board member. Jamie Moore, general counsel. Ryan Severson Hall, executive director of community engagement. Brian Bass, assistant superintendent. Assistant superintendent. Valerie Dolson, the district's lobbyist. John Morstead, executive director of finance and operations. Kell, executive director of community relations. Anthony Patternis, executive director of technology. Sarah Mitchell, school board member. Kelsey Dawson, school board member. Uh Kim Hy, superintendent. Where are we? And I, Thomas Brooks, uh schoolboard member and present. The purpose of schoolboard work session is to build trust and teamwork, to exchange information, and when applicable, to provide direction in order to facilitate efficient and effective decision-m at regular board meetings. Dr. Ohio. Will you please share your check-in? All right. Thank you, Vice Chair Brooks. Welcome everyone this evening. We're going to dive right in to with the legislative update and I'll have John Morad introduce well she's not guest our family but go ahead. The person who needs no introduction who uh probably had a little limited sleep from last night here nonetheless to talk about what was approved. So I'll turn it right over to you. Great. Thank you and thank you for having me. Uh well, I'm happy to say the legislature has adjourned not only its regular legislative session, but the special session that was called uh by Governor Walls. Uh they met yesterday morning and the House adjourned around 11 and the Senate adjourned around 2 in the morning. Uh we do have a two-year state budget in place now, so there's no uh no uh threat of any state government shutdown. Uh as a reminder, I did I did include information in your board packet. It's mostly accurate, but I was writing it before the special session began. And so, uh, some of the information might be a little different than what is in the board packet. So, the special session uh, adjourned, I would say, or unfolded with a lot less drama uh, than the way the 2025 legislative session began. I'm not going to necessarily rehash a lot of that, but as you know, there was about six weeks of a lot of spits and starts and a lot of disagreement um due to a tie or not a tie in the House as well as a tie in the Senate. But eventually after all that unfolded, they did start getting down to business of passing a budget. Uh the budget forecast did show significant budget deficits um especially in the out years in the next bian not the next bianium but the bienium after that. And so the legislature and the governor really kind of it it took them a long time to try to figure out how to put forward a two-year state budget with the intent of trying to address the budget deficit in the um out in the tales the 2728 bianium. uh the education finance and policy bill that passed during the special session. Uh they had an overall budget target of zero for the next bianium which is FY26 and 27 but they also had to reduce the education budget by $420 million. Uh we did have some I think a really significant victory in the final agreement. Um the Senate had wanted to kind of put a pause on the inflationary factors that were put into the formula. um the House and the Senate have not agreed to that and so ultimately the inflation automatic inflation factor between two and 3% uh remains in place. Um but there are budget cuts um in the bill but there is some additional funding for school districts. Um most notably there is one-time funding to for a compensatory hold harmless of about it's about $55 million. uh they did not come up with a longer term solution on what to do with compensatory um partly because that just was much too costly. So we did get the one-time funding and then they've established a legis a task force to look at a long-term funding solution um and to figure out what an appropriate compensatory funding formula should be. Uh some some cuts that are in the bill are the special education transportation reimbursement is reduced by $43 million next bianium and another 48 million after that. Uh there is some some thought that the cross subsidy will help address some of those costs but I think that this provision is causing a lot of concerns. Another one that kind of popped up in the leadership negotiations at the end of session, was never introduced as a bill, did not have any public testimony or public hearing, was the establishment of a blue ribbon commission on special education. And its goal is to find $250 million in savings. And if that commission cannot come up with $250 million in savings, then in the FY2829 bianium, special education aid would be cut by a commensurate amount. Yeah. Uh there were some other additional cuts. The student support personnel aid was reduced, school library aid was reduced as well as school lunch meal reimbursement aid. Um and then there was a proposal. This doesn't necessarily uh impact OIO, but uh the allowable uses of long-term facility maintenance revenue was expanded to include uh the um replacement of roofs. Uh there were some policy proposals, and I think this this bill is notable in that the there aren't the significant policy changes that you all faced from the 2023 legislative session. It was a a priority, I would say, especially for the House Republicans, to not add any new mandates. They wanted to repeal some mandates, but because of the tie in the House and the and the the makeup of the Senate and the governor, repealing a lot of mandates wasn't really uh on the cards, but I know House Republicans worked to make sure there were minimal, if any, new mandates. Um some of the policy proposals that did pass were um you can start school on September 1st or later in the 26 and 27 school years. Uh short call substitute um emergency substitute pilot program was made permanent and the there was a mandated $200 daily rate for that um pay of those subs that was removed. Um you will have a little more flexibility with the uses of literacy incentive aid which is now called literacy aid. uh it no longer will spell out all of the uses. You can use literacy aid for whatever you've identified in your literacy plan. Uh and then um there was a working group that was established to look at the use of seclusion as an emergency procedure. Um, one of the new mandates that was added was school districts are going to be required to develop a cardiac arrest intervention plan that districts can use the policy that a model policy that's um determined by the department of education on unrelated um outside of the education bill. There were some other um key areas that passed of interest to schools. One is uh there are some modest changes to earn safe and sick time. I you know I think going into session there was a big hope that there could be more changes to earn safe and sick time and paid leave but alas that did not happen again because of the makeup of the legislature. Excuse me. But uh two changes to earn safe and sick time. Um it would allow an employer to request reasonable documentation of the need to use ESSD after two consecutive scheduled work days um instead of three. And then it would allow an employer to furate earn safe and sick time hours for part-time employees and employees hired midyear. And then the next item I did not include in the update that's in your packet, but there was also regarding paid leave. There was a decrease in the premium rate from 1.1, excuse me, from 1.2% to 1.1%. And these were all part of the jobs and labor bill. And then lastly, there was uh in the labor bill, there was an appropriation of $3.5 million a year to establish a competitive grant program for a teacher apprenticeship uh program. Those are kind of starting in a number of areas across the state. The intermediates have one as well. And so there's some ongoing funding for that. And then I would just note um in the judiciary bill that passed during the regular session, there is a language that would allow um uh you to suspend a data request if someone fails to show up to and inspect the data. And then lastly, uh the elections and state government bill did allow schoolboard meetings be uh schoolboard members to participate in schoolboard meetings um virtually. And then lastly, one of the bills that passed before the end of the regular session was an a leadership agreement to provide $100 million in one-time funds for the unemployment insurance for summerterm employees. Uh the House uh Republicans really wanted to repeal that program. Um but alas again because of the makeup of the legislature the house they didn't have the votes and then the senate but they did agree to one-time funding um for that mandate and my understanding is that would cover about two summer this term summer term and next summer term for that requirement. So uh the legislature did adjourn uh we there is some talk that they might have a special session this fall. Uh it all depends, I think, on what happens at the federal level with the budget bill. There is some concern that there could be some holes in the state budget because of um potential cuts in Medicaid. And so there is some talk that they might come back in a special session to deal with that. Um but if not, the 2026 session begins on February 17th. And then I did just want to add uh you know AIO um has had some really great advocacy and I did note some of the kind of examples of where the platform um what was aligned with the AIO platform had passed and I know that John had come to the capital quite a bit. He testified at least once or twice um representing some issues related to compensatory and unemployment insurance and earned safety. I believe That's it for my update. I'm available for any questions. Thank you, school board members. Any questions? I did have a quick question. I have a couple, but um just clarif $250 million in savings like do they I mean has the like from where? Like do they I'm just curious. Very good question. I don't know that they will find $250 million in savings. I I think they don't understand the complexity of the cost of special education. And it's find the savings or you're losing it anyway, right? Yeah. Well, and keep in mind that's what this this legislature said and as we go, uh, hang on. The committee couldn't find anything. You don't just take $250 million, find something else. You'll just push that into the next legislature to say figure it out. It's it's just a a fancy way to punt and make it look like you cut $250 million in the future, but not have to deal with any of the repercussions of what you actually were saying cut. And so the other question I had was around the seclusion. like um how does that impact like what is that when when they talk about that and like why did it come up and didn't they took it took it away and yeah so uh in 2023 a law was passed that limited seclusion took you could not a district could not use seclusion in uh through up through grade three but you could use seclusion rooms from grades four through 12. Uh there is a senator from the east metro who had a has a student had has a son who went to a level four program and felt very strongly that that that proposal was made an error and that allowing a seclusion room in those younger grades um gives school districts and parents an option if their child needs that. Now, there's very strict laws in statute about how seclusion can be used, when it can be used, who it can be used by, but it was very controversial. And she had a proposal to kind of roll back or her proposal would have allowed seclusion uh would have prohibited seclusion through grade six unless a parent explicitly agreed to it as part of the IEP. Okay. Um but the disability advocacy community was very opposed to that as well as the Department of Education. Ultimately, what ended up in the bill was a working group to look at this um as a is it a measure that school a tool that school districts need um especially primarily in the level three and level four um setting programs. Okay. Then the last question about the um the the aid you were saying what was it for the three and a half million for apprenticeship, right? Is that what it is? Yeah, it's a um to establish a competitive grant for school districts or a group of school districts that would like to set up a teacher apprenticeship program. So, it's it's modeled after what you we know about regarding um like an electrician appren that other trade of trades, electricians, um pipe fitters, plumbers, etc. and uh that intermediates for intermediates have a model in place and where their pair of professionals embedded on the job training and appropriate coursework to move towards um becoming fully licensed. In the intermediate programs, it's ED and autism, but there are other districts around a few other districts around the state that have um um model as well. So, this funding would just go to more districts to try to establish that. So I think our big question will be when we model the financials on what this means for us. So but it's nice to have the uh virtual option. Ellie will present you that. Okay. Sure. Oh, it's already in it's already in. We did an option knowing we were going into this. Okay. Because we we knew the special session they could change it, but I mean honestly they did a good job of of here's our agreement. we're going to stick to it and they did. So, we modeled what we knew just to at least be able to present it to you tonight. So, we'll show you that one. Perfect. I would touch on the food service one that came up too. Um that's first of all not till the 2829 school year and the reduction for us I believe Jeff what you say was like $75 $80,000 about $85,000 goes down from 12.5 cents to 6.25 cents. We get that in Minnesota in addition over the federal reimbursement. Not all states do, but Minnesota is one. So $85,000. So a fairly minimal hit to a $15 million budget. So with the school lunch, so they kept the school lunch, universal lunch. So they didn't nothing got added around like like stopping it at a certain there were proposals to do that but that did not advance. Um and the only question I have is the telecom telecommunications access a do we know how that impacts us? So fortunately for us, we do not get any of that telecommunications aid because in order to get it, you have to be part of a communications cluster, which means you're kind of in a joint powers with multiple districts. Um kind of going through RFP process to jointly get in SER internet services for multiple districts. We do not participate in one of those communication clusters. Um but I've got several colleagues who who will be greatly impacted because it's an addition after comes in. So for some school districts where they don't have as much e-ray dollars coming in, it's a huge impact in reducing their internet costs, but will not impact us. Thank you. All right. Thank you as always. Thank you, Valerie. Okay, we'll keep moving and we'll introduce the 202526 budget. John, you want to introduce your team while you just start out? Yeah, I got you. Okay. All right. [Music] All right. So, good evening again. Tonight, we will be giving the board members the first look at the proposed budget for fiscal year 2026. June represents a culmination of our long-range financial planning process over the past year that includes this presentation and the request for approval that we will bring to the school board on June 24th. The board will have spent parts of nine different work sessions and board meetings receiving information, giving direction, and acting on the 26 fiscal 26 budget to approve the final comprehensive budget. This evening, we'll go through the important elements of the fiscal 26 budget and we'll review the five-year financial forecast tool for our operating funds. Before I turn it over to our team to take you through those items, I want to provide some context for what we'll be reviewing. We'll also highlight some changes in our assumptions as well as updates to how we will present this information. This that part we've done a few times. The the new um financial model just looks a little bit different than it has in the long history, but uh I didn't update my notes. Sorry, because much of the information is new. Um, just follow along, ask questions at the end, please. Um, for our assumptions, we regularly review our assumptions for both revenues and expenditures to make sure that the most accurate projections possible. The following assumptions best reflect changes in legislation and our trends going forward. Starting with revenue, revenue assumptions for the general education formula, the base amount the state provides per pupil are now based on the consumer price index or CPI with a minimum of 2% and a cap of no more than 3%. For fiscal year 26, we will receive, as Valerie had mentioned previously, 2.74% is is the CPI amount that was highlighted for the year. And our forecast will follow the CPI projections that are currently out by MDE for fiscals 27 through 30 um going with it through the end of our forecast. The gened formula only affects just over half of our revenue total. Our general formula increase should be more predictable um in following the consumer price index. Expend expenditure assumptions have been a little bit more volatile over the past few years, but if you look at a longer average over 10 years, we're still at approximately 3%. Um so far in the projections we're going to show you, we're still planning to maintain the 3% expense assumption. However, with substantial increases specifically in transportation costs that begin in fiscal year 26 along with contract settlements exceeding the 3% annual threshold, um we may need to make it the decision to revise upward to 3 and a.5% in the future to better reflect actual expenditures. The five-year financial projection model um includes our operating capital and capital projects technology levies that will both be in year three in this particular financial year. As you're aware, operating levy is very near the statutoily imposed cap, meaning we've lost the opportunity to increase revenue in the future unless there's a change in state law. as we update the financial projection model for the new range of years. This year we added fiscal year 2030 to the last year of our projection which in turn increases our deficit spending. This is the fiscal cliff that you will routinely hear um referred to by schools. We'll show you two forecast models this evening. The first shows our forecast based on the current law. And when we did this and got it all prepared for you, that was not yesterday. So, a lot prior to yesterday and since the legislature now has completed their work, the second showing should be a pretty close reflection of what the laws that they just passed yesterday are. Any changes um that we did not include in that will just update in the mid-year budget in February. So getting started, you'll see on the first page some of the key contact points that we have had with the school board during the LRFP process, including the lev the levy preliminary and final approvals, direction in the planning process, and initial budget development, approval of the fiscal 2025 mid-year adjustments and fiscal 26 operating for pair and capital adjustments. And I would now like to turn over to Kelly Bonusa, director of business services. As you know, um, our district has a very robust budget process, and Kelly, along with the assistant director of business services, Mike Huer, and coordinator of business services, Michelle Larson, worked tirelessly to guide their team and everyone involved through that process to get us to today. So, very special thanks to them for all their efforts. And Kelly will walk you through the summary of the general fund budget. And we'll then we'll have Jeff Ansge, director of food uh, and nutrition services. will go through the food and nutrition service financial forecast followed by Brian Severson Hall, executive director of community engagement to present the community education forecast. Kelly will then wrap up with the capital budget forecast. Kelly, it's all yours. Great. So, good evening. Um, I'm not sure which documents you have printed out for which you have electronic access to. Um, there's a smaller packet um that was attached materials that's is going to be up on the screen, but it's going to be kind of small and detailed. So, you might not want to try and strain your eyes on that. So, does everybody have something they can follow along? Great. Um, so in addition to the business services leadership team and compiling the budget, um, I just want to extend a thank you to all of our budget managers across our district um that, uh, for all the assistance that they put together in these data um, and answering questions along the way um, to make sure that the um, information presented tonight is as accurate as possible. Um, so this year has continued to be um, challenging from a financial Um, as you just heard, um, one adoption for this 26 budget is no exception to this year. Um, so we're going to start with either the budget document if you're using that one or else it's the first page in that shorter document this evening. So then budget memo so page one. So again, as John mentioned, the timeline shows fiscal year 26 budget planning process. And this process intentionally provides multiple opportunities for the board to take direction. to provide detail collection. Um the second page of that memo um then gets into the details. So we've provided comparisons for the fiscal year 26 budget in two different ways. The first comparison is of the proposed adopted budget for fiscal year 26 and the revised budget for fiscal year 25. The table shows a planned decrease of $22.7 million fund balance for fiscal year 26. The fund balance is equivalent to over 13 weeks or a little more than three months of operations. There are several adjustments included in the proposed fiscal 26 budget and those adjustments include the board approved February 25th 26 budget adjustments for a net increase of almost 2.9 million. It's comprised of several items through the LRP process. One of which is the delay. We're going to be delaying the repurposing new site this year 27. So, I'll save those $350,000 in 26, but then we'll take it in 27. Um, the enrollment alignment of 2.1 million, the state leaves of absence time off requirements for 20,000, the family medical leave act expansion of payroll tax, and operating capacity for the new elementary 326,000. The board also provided direction on February 11th regarding the 279 online program reconfiguration for 26 resulting in savings of almost 922,000. The board approved on February 25th the 25 midyear budget adjustment one-time savings 236,000 which are now included back into the 26 adopted budget and then as plan this year 25 strategic investments for one year only of the moment was removed and the compensatory maximum whole department estimate of 5.5 million support. So with all of those adjustments, the percentage increase in the expenditure budget is 9.1%. Which is above that 10% target. The projected year-end fund balance is 88.3 million for fiscal year 26 for 25.4% of expenditures. So moving on to page three of the memo, the second comparison is the proposed adopted budget for fiscal year 26 versus the fiscal year 26 5-year function projection model that I shared um with the board on February 25th. The proposed adopted budget shows spending more fund balance than initially projected by 12.4 million. Revenues here are lower by 192,000. So I'm just going to quickly walk through um what those adjustments are. So our operating referendum revenue is decreasing by $2.4 million. It's a combination of students rejected and market value. Our summer unemployment um is increasing by 1.5 million. The TR pension adjustment revenue which has um an offset in expenditures for the rate increasing is an increase of 1.3 million. The interest revenue decrease is $1.2 million. And then our general education aid formula is increasing by 2.74% or $200 on the basic allowance. Um, and we have an adjustment which we projected for February to the actual adopted budget and that's why you're seeing a decrease in dollars. We have a increase for student support personnel aid of $740,000 which is offset by expenditures. We have an increase in third party medical systems building revenue of 396,000 abatement revenue increase of 366,000 an increase in desegregation transportation based on an increase in our 25 cost of 300,000 and then we have a special education decrease which includes that reversal of the prior year old goal of 1.7 million for an increase of 200,000 some Miss. So then if we go to the fourth page of the memo, um we can see that our expenditures are $12.2 million higher than anticipated than that 3% category. And then if we look at our expenditures, we think of them in those four big categories, salaries, benefits, purchase services, and other. And so to walk through each of those sections, um, when we think about the salaries, our biggest adjustment over that 3% is our projected settlements and then our total FTE adjustments. We also take those adjustments in salary and then reigning the benefits at midyear. Um, we are adding back salaries from the 25 mid year for those one time savings 1.3 million additional cost. We have a savings from the 279 online program reconfiguration for 26 of 9921,000 and then we have attrition allocation for staff 200,000. So moving on to benefits, we increase of almost 1.9 million for our medical insurance and our complete plan migration to different plans. And then adding back the 36 open positions from 25, we see an increase in quantities from so now we're seeing the offset of that revenue, the TR pension rate. So it's increasing from 8.75% to 9.5% effective July 1st once. And when you look at our long-term disability insurance, we just have no rates on those um insuranceances and our savings of 63% or almost $569,000. and some other smaller items from the facilities in that area. And we move on to purchase services. We have an increase alone $4.8 million. Again, as John mentioned, the largest increase in that area is our transportation contract, which for next year is increasing 32% or 6.9 million. Then we have savings where we don't automatically increase our expenditures. Um, so those are saving staying in sort of a percent increase for next year. Um, so they don't even get that 3% and that's saving us another 1.4 million. Then we have an adback of purchase services from our adjustment. And so that's a decrease of 183,000. We have an increase in the utility area of electric for 506,000 and then a smaller decrease in tuition. get district 287 that's anticipated of $127,000 and we're moving some supplies um of $100,000 out and putting them into um other services. Um moving on to the last category then our other services those are increasing we're seeing a judgment increase of almost 1.9 million. And then when we look at our curriculum adoption budget capacity, we're increasing that 531,000 for some carryover. And then our other services um are also saving,000. And then we have a federal indirect rate change from the prior year. So it was 1.5% because 25 is moving to 4.1%. And that's going to save us 312,000. And then our other budget capacity which is being moved um from the from the purchase services over into the supplies an increase of 100,000. So now the last page of the memo talks about our next steps. So our next steps are on June 24th we'll bring the adopted budget for this 26 for all the funds in front of the board for their board approval. And then in July, we will start preparation for our fiscal year 25 audit. And then on November 18th, we'll bring the finalized audit in front of the board for acceptance of the 25 results. So next we're going to review the projection models. So starting with the fiscal year 275 year financial projection. So there's three models in the packet for the general fund. We're going to skip the first one. That's a February model. We're going to move on to um the one title general fund. So again, a little bit of history um with our budget process. Once again, it was a strategic priority a number of years ago and we had two goals or outcomes for this strategic priority. The first one was to build a framework and that's the model we refer to and the second one was to design this document that's on your screen financial forecast model. So the projection is a highlevel visual organizer for the financial forecast. It has detailed information supporting the projected projection model and is provided on the following page of each of these documents um for more detail and this allows for multiple opportunities to view this information. So there's three sections to this projection which is the same for all the funds that are being presented tonight. However, the assumption and parameters are differentiated by fund. So this evening again we prepared as John has mentioned two versions of this projection model for the general fund. The first version is based on current law and included the 2.7% increase to the basic formal allowance. Um and then the second version includes revenue and expenditure tactics based on what we knew on June 2nd um for information that was being released from the 25 legislative session. So the top section of this first version shows them the revenue expenditures differences fund balances and then fund balance percentage for a seven-year window that begins with fiscal year 24's action loans. Then you have the revised budget and the adopted budget for fiscal year 26. Those in the blue and then projections for fiscal years 27 f. So you're going to see some operational adjustments totaling 13 million under the chart. This line's used to highlight any needed adjustments. So again, those operational reductions are included in the expenditures listed above. So the assumptions section shows the revenue expenditure assumptions that you use for fiscal years 27 through fiscal years 230. So for the revenue assumptions we have those increasing. So again they're going to fluctuate between 2 and 3% of the general allowance with the most recent estimates from the Minnesota Department of Education being included for fiscal years 27 and fiscal year 2030. Then moving on to the expenditure assess assumptions. Um again those are being projected to increase 3% which is consistent with our prior year tactics and isn't being changed at this time but will be closely mon as John mentioned. So if we exceed that 3% for cost would be outside of those parameters. It would be deficit spending at a greater rate than what's on the projection. And moving on to the middle section shows the budget projection for the revenues in blue and the expenditures in red and those trend lines of the same color show the annual actual budget or projections for each of those items. So as you can see even with that general formula allowance for the revenue being tied to inflation and expenditures are still expected to continue to output our revenues. The final section then looks at the fund balance projection for that same period. So the green bars represent our actual and projected fund balance for each of those years. And then the orange bar shows the minimum required fund balance of 5% as set in board policy. Again those trend lines show the annual projected fund balance related to the minimum. And as you can see operational reductions are needed to maintain that board required minimum fund balance of 5%. So at this time for this model we are planning for operational reduction starting in fiscal year 28300 followed by 4 million and then an additional 6 million for that total 1300. So to provide some context without the operational reductions our fund balance would go negative um in fiscal year 30 by.9%. which would put us then into statuto operating debt for SOD. Districts in SOD are required to identify all finals that have to be approved by the Minnesota Department of Education and how they're going to get out of that. So key factors included in the projection model are um and this is on the detailed page behind this one. um increasing our special education cost subsidy at to 50%. And then additional special education revenue for those increased costs with our contract for the portions of special education transportation and 504 transportation. Um and that revenue is al also received one year after the expense occurs. um recovery of judgment costs from 25 through fiscal year 25 through the property tax levy system and then increased federal government revenue starting in fiscal year 27. So expenditure tactics include adding 1.2 million for the remaining operating capacity for the new elementary school in 27 and then adding the impact of the 10year approved transportation contract for future years. So we are again delaying uh the one year for one year adding the $350,000 for the craft and new site startup cost which were approved to begin in favor 26 and then removing the 5.5 million for the compensatory maximum gold harm assessment for fiscal site. So now we're going to go to the next model for the general fund. So the SE second projection model um contains proposed legislative updates for the general fund. So again, just key differences here include um a slight decrease to our financial health um increasing our operational reductions from a combined 13 million to a combined 14 million for this outline specific 2018. And then additional key factors included in the model are the student personnel aid reduction in 26 followed by an additional increase in fiscal year 28. And then we have the school library aid um reduction of 36,000 for 26 followed by an additional reduction in 28. It's even smaller. Um then we have our special education aid which contains then the transportation reimbursement reduction. So currently we're reimbured with 100% for our transportation cost and in fiscal year 26 it would go to 95% followed by um a reduction of an additional 5%. will be funded at 90% starting in fiscal year 27. So then our expenditure tactics include adjustments for that student personnel aid in the school library aid and then also adjustments for um the compensatory which would include reducing it to what we now know is 158,000 rather than 5.5 million. So all of that details in your packets. Typically for the revenues and expenditure tactics, we maybe have one or two items. We have many many more which just goes to the complexity of what we deal with right now. Um and with that I'll turn it over to Jeff to go through the nutrition financial project. Thank you. Um so food and nutrition services we're uh fund too. We're selfunded. We don't rely on the general fund for our revenue. off of reimbursement from breakfast, lunch, snack, any alle cart sales that we have. Um, and the the projection is set up the same as Kelly went over for the for the general fund. Um, on the top here, just to recap where we're at with 2024. So in 2024 um we had a revenue of just under 18 million um and expenditures of slightly over 17 million. So we were able to increase our fund balance by 949,000. Um now our fund balance we have a target of 12% that we want to maintain. Um and looking at in 2024 last year ended we were at 33.9. uh for 2025 on that top section um after midyear we reviewed and we're projecting a increase of 218,000 to a fund balance um for this current year. And then looking at the 5-year projection of 2026 through 2030 um we don't uh show any operational adjust adjustments necessary to maintain that 12%. uh at the end of 2030 we're seeing it at 18% without operational adjustments. Um the assumptions for revenue uh is a 2.75 annual increase and assumptions for expenditures over the years are 3% annually. So we see from 2026 to 2030 um similar to the general fund we see expenditures outpacing revenue slightly. Um and then at the bottom with the fund balance projection uh you see our fund balance um heading down from 32.9 as of last year to 18.3 um percent. So, we'll still maintain that 12% um above that 12% fund balance. This didn't take into account uh the reduction of 6.25%. As John mentioned before, it's about $85,000. That'll have an effect as well. And yeah, other than that, I think that we're we're pretty healthy. When I when we budget from a food cost perspective, we're very conservative. For example, midy year this past year, we were at a 42% we generally I generally budget two percentage points cushioning my food cost. Um so these um reductions in fund balance I feel are going to be slightly less and less portrayed on this year. So that's all I have for food service, right? All right. Well, good evening everyone. I'm going to cover the community service fund and I just have mainly four key talking points. And the first one, as you can see across the revenue line, uh we continue to see steady participation growth in our community education programs, uh which is great, which for us results in more revenue obviously. And just a reminder, approximately 75 to 80% of our revenue is participation fees. So anytime you see an increase in revenue, what you're really seeing is an increase in participation. So when you're thinking about budget to to students, youth and adults who are participating. Um also on here you can see uh purposeful fund balance spend down. You can see at the end of uh 2024 it was all the way up to 38% fund balance, which is way higher than the range that I'd like to keep it at. Some folks, uh, some of you in here have heard me share this before, but I'm a big fan of prices, right? So, like the range game, you know, the range game, you remember that game? I try to keep our fund balance in the range of 7 to 15%. Um, I don't like it to go below 7% because if we have an off year on participation, we we're just like Jeff shared with um, food nutrition services, we're a self funded department, so we need to have money there in case we have a down year. And then I don't like to see it go above 15%. Because for me that feels like we're just charging participants too much money and we're not a for profit that's looking to, you know, give money to our shareholders, right? So that's kind of why when I talk about the 7 to 15% range, that's what I'm talking about. So the good news, you can see um by the time we hit 2027 2028, we're back in the range, right? We're back in our what our our goal tends to be. And we did get a little high. Um, part of the reason we got so high is because our our participation came back more quickly than we could recover our staff that we had to lay off during the pandemic. So, that's why you saw a little bit more of that gap happening, but that has fortunately leveled off. We were, I think, I've shared with this team, we were fully staffed last summer. We were fully staffed this school year and we're fully staffed for summer programs that start on Friday, right? So, we're we're in a good spot where the budget trend should be a little little more stable, I would say. And then the only other my last comment would be this school year uh did end up being excellent for us and we were a little we were close to a million better on our fund balance than we thought we might be in November. And how that plays out for us is any of our operational reductions that had previously been scheduled in 2027 have been pushed out all the way to 2028 and they've been reduced by over $700,000. So we're hoping that that trend keeps going and and that changes, but that's a very positive trend for us. And uh I would say maybe one added comment would be after hearing Val's report I would say the legislative session was pretty neutral for us in the community education field. So we didn't have any increase to our funding but we also didn't have anything that significantly impacted us in a negative way either. So there were some proposals at the very beginning of legislation that could have been negative for community ed but they they were pulled. So overall, um, this is a good budget for us to report on. Excited that we're kind of getting back to our more level revenue and expenditures and in in the right range for our fund balance. So those would be the main talking points for this particular budget. So the last fund that we're going to look at tonight then is the capital fund. So up on the screen, you can see it. Um, we have some operational adjustments under that first chart. Um, and the assumptions for this fund include our revenues and expenditures staying in zero% for 27 through fiscal year 2030. Um, that middle section again shows our budget projection for revenues in blue and expenditures in red. And as planned, our expenditures are projected to outpace our revenues beginning fiscal year 27. And then that last section looks at the fund balance projection for that same time period. And the green bars represent our actual and projected fund balances for each of those years. And then the orange bar shows a minimum required fund balance of 10%. And the lines show the annual projected fund balances related to that. Um at this time we're planning for operational increases of 1.9 million which are spread over the next four years to maintain again that 10% uh funds target and the detail is um about finding the visual organizer for um this fund. And then the last item is just talking about the big budget document that we put out on the um once the board approves the budget on June 24th and it contains five sections. So the first section is the introductory section with that executive summary which provides just another review of the 26 budgets. Um and then the organizational section which includes district level information and the financial se section then that includes those key policies and visual displays of our budget data. And then the fourth section is the information section which we've just taken some of the data out of um as well as projections and staffing allocations. And then the last section is the benchmark comparison for data points with our benchmark districts. And John the time for any questions. Thank you. Members, questions. Um, thank you. Um, I do have a question for Ann around community ed and I think I've kind of asked it before and um, I'm really passionate. I do think that community ed has a an opportunity to be a really powerful kind of equalizer. Um, and it's expensive. I mean, I know it's not a money maker necessarily, but I mean, I always look at my own family of four and my kids just can't be in, you know, things like that. Other, you know, we just don't have the resources to do that. And I imagine that's, you know, reflective of many in our community. And so I'm just curious around, you know, do we have data talking about showing who's participating in our district? Um maybe who isn't or who we're not maybe reaching. And then I guess I'm curious like do we have any programming that's um on a like like sliding scales? Are we partnering with are we exploring partnerships with foundations or different organizations? Because what I've noticed is um in our district we have opportunities around academics, you know, but I also think kids need beyond, right? Like it can't just be always that's not fun all the time for kids. Like I mean Camp Rocks is great, but like it's not like baseball and it's not art and theater. And I'm just very very very very very passionate about ensuring that our young people have like a full educational experience because I think that's what when you do you know you think about your future it's like how kids stay more engaged and how kids get excited and I remember during co you know it wasn't so much the academics kids were missing it was that social connectedness and I remember Brooklyn Bridge bridge alliance also did a survey amongst their youth and that is the one thing during co that was missing was like being part of something kind of greater than yourself and those opportunities. And so, um, I'm very very very very passionate about it. And so, um, again, I I love all your I think all your programming is great, but I'm just kind of I'm just more out of curiosity kind of looking at what's your vision, um, around that piece. Yeah. So, why share your passion for that? You covered a lot of ground. So, I would say a couple things. So there's a wide range on our programs on you know like kids for example is 100% fee based pretty much right and then you have programs that are completely free like targeted services right the entire EC and FE program is on a sliding fee scale so yes we do um I can either figure out a way to do that in a written presentation for you all I'm trying I'm doing it in my brain right now Um well and I could ask I know you would ask us for work session topics and maybe that would be we could do that I'd be happy to do that work session ECF is interesting um the majority of our folks who participate in ECF ECF either come in at the low end of the sliding scale or the high end. So we we we tend to have families who uh pay very little fees or people who pay 100%. We don't have as many in the middle which is interesting right because they track that very closely. Um certainly like AB um we get state and federal funding for AB right so that's one program where we do get funding but I'd be happy to because we do track that track well I know like for example I always bring personal example you know this week there you have this like basketball camp at AIO and there's like a morning and night and it's I've had friends and it's like phenomenal like everybody's having a great experience but you know if you can't afford to go you know and you just you know so I'm just more curious of like how and I I'll put this in our Google doc, Tanya. But um but you know, I think it would be really cool to start to explore like what are some like other um whether it's foundations or different government entities like kind of what's out there for um even like scholarship funds or something, but that we can go kind of beyond to make those um connections I think would be really great because I see like City of Brooklyn Park does a lot of that like with their park on the go, work on the go, you know, they'll just show up places. And I think Brian, I know we could also pull out the last time you presented. Maybe it's been a few years. I know we have those historical documents and it might be a is that still the same or what's changed, but I know you've mentioned before you do a lot of conversations with the city so that there's not overlap or duplication. So having some scope, but maybe where is something uncovered or if we want to intentionally have duplication for some benefit where we're capturing um kids that would not otherwise be captured. I I think that might be part of that discussion. No, I'd be more than happy to do a work session. Yeah. And there and we you know this year we expanded after school enrichment programs to three of our schools on the east side that we didn't have it before. uh and you know we we offered all the classes at a 75% discount and so therefore I just you know I spent $20,000 plus dollars of my fund balance to offer those programs right so there's we we have a lot of examples and we there certainly could be city of Brooklyn Park's a great example um you know they've chosen to write into their city budget to fund after school programs for youth right you know so those are choices that school districts and and cities can make, right? There's nothing to say that the school board can't allocate money for these programs, right? Even though we're self-funded out of fund one, right? So there I think those are awesome topics to have and and we look at that, you know, we our our number one goal is that participation in in community education programs reflects our community, right? So that's our standard, right? So we know where we're meeting that standard and we know where we're not. Some of our programs were exceeding that standard, others we're not, right? You know, so those are I'm happy to I'm always happy to report on where I think we're knocking it out the park and I'm happy to I'm not happy to report out, but I'm always honest about reporting out where I think we're not meeting that standard. Right? So that that's one thing you can count on. But I'd be I would love to do a deeper dive because we think about it all the time. Um and summer is probably yes there are some programs well they have they have caught who are expected to meet our expenses but that we also offer a ton of programs that are free little fee to no fee uh as well. So yeah, thanks Kelsey for asking that. It's it's at the heart of what we do. Yeah. Well, you have such a strong foundation in what you do within community ed. So I think even like leveraging what you already are you doing with the different relationships and kind of exploring that that would be great and there's I think also an opportunity to see the full landscape and maybe amplify where there's non-district non city opportunities and we're going to talk actually in policy about how do we um uh have uh how do how do other programs um have access to sharing the information in the district about those programs. So again, we can have more kids going to things that already exist and maybe aren't fully utilized. That' be awesome. Thank you. Any others? Uh, no. I guess I just point out, you know, how much we're absorbing into the fund balance. And um a lot of these are expenses are things that we've known were likely to come to fruition. So it's not a surprise even though it's a change. Um it's not a surprising change since we've been discussing it all along. Um and the fact that we have the ability to absorb it is very significant in comparison to other districts across the state that are making the reductions and the cuts um with very short notice and that's quite shocking and impactful. So, um, as always, thank you for the great work and the proactive nature and, um, all of the iterations that go into this and, um, it pays off and this, it pays off and that we don't have cuts that are impacting our students. So, thank you. I I do have one quick question. Um, so the, uh, I'm trying to remember, this might have been in something in the past, but the with the redistricting, was that net neutral as far as the number of kids that required busing? Uh it is close to there. I think we're anticipating there could be a couple additional routes needed. Okay. Um but some of that is, you know, with with a new school we know we're adding right there, right? So um I want to say there might be one or two more based on the movement, but it's it's a lot better than some of the options presented. The one that ultimately the board approved was the most cost effective of the choices. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We'll move on to our next speakers. Uh review and monitoring reports DNE and we'll get a little time for letting your staff set up here after this. May have a little tea on you. It smells really good. Lost sight of my you sitting for an hour if you need to. No power through. Okay. Thank you. All right. So, we'll go ahead and get started on monitoring report B and Dr. Bass, I'll let you introduce who else is with you this evening, please. All right. Thank you, Dr. Hy. Good evening, Chair Prince, Vice Chair Brooks, and members of the board. It is with a sustained spirit of excitement that we bring tonight's vision cards update for strategic directions B&E. Uh before we jump in, I want to thank our data and assessment team led by director of learning achievement, Dr. Joe K. I also want to thank the partnership with our other directors that are here this evening uh Sunonny Burkin Student Services and Dr. Michael Walker from Department of Educational Equity for your partnership in tonight's reimagining vision cards. Thank you all for your persistence and brilliance in attempting to integrate all the feedback shared along the way. Tonight's presentation outcome outcomes include the following. So we'll learn about and discuss the data measures for the high priority initiatives for for strategic direction B. We'll learn about the reframing of strategic direction E as the continuous improvement magnifier. For those of you who listen to the podcast, you already have a sneak peek at that one. And then number three, explore the enhanced alignment between strategic priority system strategies and the measures that show implementation fidelity impact. That's that system strategy snapshot piece that we were introduced to in May. So, as a reminder, vision cards track the district's progress toward strategic goals by aligning data with the strategic roadmap that the board has set created by administrators um with board guidance, vision cards, measure performance, identify growth for gaps, and support continuous improvement through clear, measurable goals tied to the district's overall vision. So our definition statement continuous improvement as a normed practice strives to fundamentally reimagine how to perform procedures and tasks to ensure transparency in reporting proper resources that meet current needs and anticipate future expectations and desired outcomes. So tonight, uh, strategic directions B and E. Um, and in conversations that we've had about the, uh, strategic directions, uh, in December of 2021 when the strategic directions were, uh, debated and discussed by the board at that time, there was language um, that I think we were striving for that we wanted those directions to reflect. Um and so in pursuit of language um we also um introduced um some tension around how do we measure all those things that are in those descriptors. So you'll see um for strategic direction B the overarching theme is a culture of achievement right a culture of achievement and we look at it in terms of contentri rigorous and pathways and so that's what you're going to see data this evening when we get into B is in those three big areas of how we're impacting that then for strategic direction E as we're looking at this continuous improvement magnifier how are we addressing acknowledge and reducing these deep systemic uh disparities, barriers, and inequities. Um and then that other big chunk here is continuous improvement. So um so we we think we've done uh I think we tried to do it justice um in terms of strategic direction E being reframed as a continuous improvement magnifier and seeing that magnifier across all of the other strategic directions with an emphasis on continuous improvement. So um and we want your feedback. We want you like keep us honest on that please. And then um this slide as we had uh back in May um introduces this overarching question of you know are all of our initiatives aligned to the strategic priorities and we believe that we're we're demonstrating uh more visibility of that. Um and so you'll see that throughout tonight's uh presentation. Good evening. As you may recall, we partner with national nonprofit educational resource resource strategies, which works with districts across the nation to develop systems to assess the impact of their strategies and to drive positive outcomes for students and they call the process system strategy ROI. We've changed it to system strategies snapshot and uh the snapshot on the screen represents strategic direction B. It lists the priorities, the expected outcomes, strategies, process or implementation measures, outcome measures, and then it gets into the funding for some of the strategies, not all of the strategies. Yet, that's still the work of the vision card steering committee. This system strategy snapshot represents strategic direction E. And just as a refresher, so we all have that shared vocabulary, the priority from each strategic directions listed on our strategic plan. It's what's the most important for each strategic directions. Uh then we have an expected outcome, what we hope will happen if we focus on this priority. There's a list of strategies, process measures, implementation, how we're monitoring this along the way, and then lastly, outcome or impact measures. And as we move through tonight's presentation, we'll walk through a couple of these. So first we have strategic direction B build and nurture a culture of achievement by providing contentrich rigorous and equitable and individualized pathways and as Dr. Bass mentioned we really focused on achievement rigorous and pathways. So this is that highle overview of the highest priority in strategic direction B and that's ensure and confirm each scholar has access to highquality core instruction and interventions across the system. So the expected outcome for this is that more than greater than 67% of students in grades 2 through 10 will achieve typical growth which is at the 50th percentile or higher as measured by fast bridge a reading and growth by start score and we'll talk about that in a little bit uh as an indicator of high quality core instruction. So a couple of our strategies are professional learning teams. Those are our teacher collaborative teams that meet to talk about student data at curriculum assessment. Uh and then also high quality core instruction. We've spent a lot of time working with our learning leaders and our teachers about the four components of high quality core instruction and monitoring those. One of the process measures that we've introduced are learning walks. Uh and then lastly, our outcome reser would be uh the A reading screens data. Again, this breaks it down a little bit further that some of the with some additional strategies. So, the first box with PLTS, standardsbased instruction and grading are ongoing data digs and the equity transformation cycle are really strategies that get at that first part of the priority highquality core instruction. This is what all students in the system receive. The second box are Minnesota multi-tered systems of support site leadership teams. The high leverage moves or the the practices that they use in their meetings and then our interventions get at the second part of the priority. It's interventions across the system. So those are the strategies that we're monitoring along the way. And then we have our process measures. So learning walks and progress monitoring on classroom based measures are in Indigo. So those are measures that we have not yet introduced as process measures. They're measures we've kept track of. This year was our first year at learning walks. So right so 2425 we did learning walks. We're really looking at tonight at 23 24 data. So I think that's you know we had to keep reminding ourselves of that as we went through the process uh that we had these great learning walks this year and I can't wait to talk about them and share all the cool things that we've seen and learned as a result of that. Um and we also continue to monitor participation in professional learning. We believe that professional learning for teachers is one of the highest levers uh to move and change teacher practice in student outcomes. Our outcome measures uh we have typical growth for fastbridge. That's the type of growth we want to see from core instruction and then aggressive growth. We want to see aggressive growth for students who are receiving intervention services. Uh and then also our culture of achievement scale from our family stakeholder survey. So just a little bit about typical growth uh is the amount of progress we would expect a student to make in a year based on how students across the country usually grow. It's like staying on track with the average student. Half of students grow more than this and half grow less than this. And we'll talk a little bit more. Dr. Watkins will talk about that in a couple minutes. First I want to make sure that we all have um a common language and what we're looking at. A reading is our universal screener. It's given to students three times a year in grades this year 2 through 10 or 23 24 2 through 10 25 to 26 2 through 12 will take this test. Um and it produces uh two different types of data. One of the types of data it produces is risk levels. So each student uh has four different is assigned based off of their score a risk level. Low risk, very low risk, some risk and high risk. Those risk levels correlate to proficiency on the MCA and they have a really strong correlation. Uh the other thing that these results are used for is it's a data point that intervention teachers use and TAG teachers use to advocate more services for students. We're not going to look at risk levels today and we're not going to look at MCAs today. MCAs are the proficiency on state standardized tests. We're going to focus on growth measures and it monitors how student learning changes between two points in time. So in this case, we're going to be looking at fall to spring data. And so Dr. Watkins, he's a coordinator in the data and assessment department, will talk us through our 2324 data. Thank you. Good evening, everybody. Um, so the metric that we're going to look at here first is the A reading typical growth and uh so we'll be looking at percentage of students making typical growth from fall to spring. And um so when we talk about growth by start score, we're looking at the growth that students make relative to other students who started at the same point. Um so during the 23 24 school year, 33% of students achieve typical growth by start score. And this was a 2% decrease from the 22 23 school year. So that's what we're seeing on that that slide there. This one uh the line graph shows the last three years of the A reading growth by star score with the same cut point of typical growth. So 50th percentile or better. And the chart shows that during the 2122 school year all grades saw the highest rate of making typical growth. Each grade has trended downward since then. Um and 23 24 was the first year all of grade 10 was assessed which is why 21 22 and 22 23 are blind for grade 10. So you just see that yellow bar there. This slide continues to show typical growth by start score disagregated by race and ethnicity and it shows the trends from the past three years. Results from the 2324 school year showed multi-racial students making typical growth at the highest rates 37% which was also 1% higher than the school's percentage of the previous year. There's been a decrease between years among all other student groups. Second metric used within this indicator is the percentage of students making aggressive growth as measured by fall to spring growth by start score. So for aggressive growth we're now talking about 75th percentile. So nationally that'd be only 25% of students that would achieve that. During the 2324 school year 12% of AIO students made aggressive growth group. The next chart shows the variation by race and ethnicity over the three years. In 2324, multi-racial students made the highest rate of aggressive growth at 15% followed by white students at 13%. Multi-racial students rate of aggressive growth um increased from the 2223 school year while most of the other groups remain stable. And here we're going to transition to a different indicator. Now, we're going to look at the family stakeholder survey and specifically the culture of achievement scale. This survey was conducted in the spring of 2324. A scientific sample of families with children enrolled in the district was used and 1,339 families responded. The scale is based on the following six questions. Staff effectively communicate with my scholar. Staff know my scholar's interests. staff address the needs that is behavior, special education, language, social, emotional of my scholar. My scholars been able to use their strengths. Staff believe my scholar can succeed and staff provide an appropriate level of challenge for my scholar. The the survey items with the highest rate of positive responses where staff believe my scholar can succeed at 89% and staff effectively communicate with my scholar at 85%. This slide shows the rates of positive responses across race and ethnicity groups for the past two administrations. Families of black and multi-racial students had the highest rates of positive responses at 83% and 81% respectively in the most recent survey administration. And across survey years, multi-racial families ratings increased by 10% and black families positive ratings increased by 5%. And this slide shows the percent positive for families of scholars who receive free or reduced price meals or FRL on the this chart, English learner or multilingual services or EL on this chart and special education services or sped on this chart of the families with the scholars receiving services. Those receiving EL services had the highest rate at 86% which increased from 84% in the previous survey admin. The next slide shows the rates of most positive responses on the same survey by grade range and families of early childhood or EC scholars had the highest rates of positive responses at 92% in the most recent survey year. This was followed by families of elementary school scholars at 87% and I will pass it to Dr. Walker. Thank you Dr. Watkins. As you heard uh we're going to step into strategic direction E and as Dr. Bass stated earlier we have done a reframing of strategic direction E. Uh the reason why we reframe is to operate as a continuous improvement magnifier. You may be asking yourself why is that? Well, the reason why is because to truly create uh equitable systems, we must first interrogate and eliminate ineffective procedures and that reinforce inequities. This is why we will center the two priorities, the highest priorities of eliminating ineffective procedures and focus priority of exploring the cycles and processes for continuous improvement and then identifying improve ineffective procedures. So therefore when we think about this uh magnifier right um it makes me think about these uh two critical questions because in order for us to have this continuous improvement um we have to be honest with ourselves right we have to be honest with ourselves and these questions that comes up for me are um are our systems truly meeting the needs of each of our scholars and then the second question is are we willing to change when they are not it's very important right that we have to be willing to do and so I ask myself as director of educational equity I often ask myself um questions as you will get to know me I'm asking all these questions and so they just show up in my mind and so um I'm wondering do our cycle center those in our system who are the farthest from justice and then who have also been the most marginalized and minoritized in our systems um I asked this question because if we're not doing that what does that say about our commitment to our mission and vision which is really centered around uh equity and so this magnifier is not just like a metaphor but it's really a call to action to make what is invisible visible, right? We have to make what's invisible visible. Um, and it's really important to understand that these are not really like technical questions that we're asking ourselves, but really moral questions that we're asking ourselves. What's the more moral imperative here that we are faced with when we're thinking about our scholars that we're trying to impact uh positively? So, as we think about that, I'm going to pass over to uh Sunny to give us a real life example of how we are doing this in action. Yeah, thank you Dr. Walker. Um, I'm excited to share with you some information about how the student services department um is connected to our strategic direction E. Uh, as Dr. Walker so eloquently stated, we must interrogate and eliminate ineffective procedures that reinforce inequities. In the area of special education, um we are focused on eliminating ineffective staff procedures that negatively impact the ability for staff to provide direct instruction, supports, and services to our students. Um in the summer of 2023, uh the Center for Applied Research um and Educational Improvement, Kerry, out of the University of Minnesota completed a program audit. uh and one of their recommendations um was that we address the due process or paperwork concerns of our staff and that that should have a direct correlation on the outcomes for our special education students and that obviously aligns very naturally with our strategic direction E um so we went to work on that we developed a due process task force um to come up with uh strategies that we're going to be discussing in the next few slides Um specifically we honed in on uh production of special education evaluations um which I will elaborate on in the upcoming slides. Uh our measures for strategic direction E include a staff survey as a process measure and progress reports and evaluation um bypass procedures as outcome measures. The staff survey is actually a a future metric. We intend to gather data that measures the connection between workload reduction and student outcomes or the ratings that they receive on their progress reports. So, how can we ensure that um those two things are connected that we're getting the data that we're um hoping to collect? Um but first, we're going to take a closer look at the evaluation bypass procedures. Uh, and as we get into that, I'll just share a little bit of information with you about what evaluation is in special education. Um, so when a student is first evaluated for services, that's called an initial evaluation. All subsequent evaluations are referred to as re-evaluations. Up until the fall of 2022, Minnesota required that students be re-evaluated every three years to determine if they still had a need and still needed special education services. In the fall of 2022, Minnesota changed that rule and gave districts the opportunity to make individualized choices for each student as to whether or not they needed another evaluation. Um and so this opened the doors and gave us an opportunity to really address how we were evaluating students and why. Um and we have since um reduced the amount of special education evaluation re-evaluations that we do in this district through a bypass process. So, we have criteria that our school psychologists use to determine uh when an evaluate a re-evaluation may be unnecessary um and then talk that through with families and other team members um to determine next steps. Um I do want to note that this isn't just about paperwork reduction. Um special education reevaluations when we do them and they're not necessary um are not great for kids and families. So, we're pulling kiddos that are already um oftentimes behind out of class to complete assessments to give us data that we don't need because we already have it. Um and we're requiring families to come in two extra times during the year for meetings um and provide us information through phone interviews, through um rating scales, checklists. So, it's cumbersome. Um so, first and foremost, it is about the the students and the families. Uh and the additional benefit is the workload reduction. Um last or during the 2024 school year, we bypassed 196 evaluations. Um that was about 5.85% of our total special education count. Um and we're looking to be in that vision range of around 9 to 10%. Um and I know we just reported on last year, but I I already know what we did this year. So we're we're moving in a good direction. Um, we also want to cap at about that 10%. Um, because there are a number of re-evaluations that are good for us to do because we need new data because the student has um regressed or made growth. So, we're not trying to get to 100%. Um, we're trying to hit that sweet spot. Um, okay. So I had mentioned on a previous slide that um the staff's we're going to be using a staff survey as a process measure. If you think of that in relation to evaluation reduction um what I envision is that we're asking staff um based on the number of evaluations that um you didn't do this year because of this process. How many time how much time were you able to give back to students? Um how much additional time were you able to spend with students? Were you able to make your group sizes smaller? um were able to do more observations and so collecting some of that anecdotal information through uh staff survey. Another metric on this slide you'll see is progress reporting. Um on the next few slides we'll be reviewing progress reporting data, but I'd like to give you again some contextual information about progress reports. Um they're required for students on IEPs. were required to provide written progress as many times per year as students uh receive report cards. So in this district it's about three times per year depending on the school. Um and students can obtain um rankings between one and five on every goal on their IEP. So some students just have one goal that they're working on, others have up to eight and anywhere in between. Um one and two are thumbs up, you're making great progress. Um, three and five are um I don't want to say thumbs down. That doesn't sound nice, but um are we need to be working harder. We're not quite getting there. And uh four just means that hasn't been addressed yet because we have a full year um to assist a student in making progress. So sometimes um services come up in one trimester but not another. And so when we review this data, we see that 88% of our students um at the end of try 2 of last year um had progress marks of one or two. Um so they were or 88% of our goals, excuse me, um were this one and two mark and we're looking to move in the direction hopefully in that 95% range. Um on the next few slides I have additional data um disagregated by um a variety of factors. The one unique thing about this data set is it's not based by student but essentially based by goal since students each have multiple or many have multiple goals and they each have different rankings or ratings um and the numbers don't necessarily go in a chron or a logical order. So it's about the number of goals, not the number of students. Um so the first slide has progress reports um based on the students um language status and multilingual learners are in yellow and um our non-ELL students are in blue. So um this was a a data set that isn't typical of other data sets that we we see for our EL learners. And so that's wonderful to see um our ELERS kind of setting the bar and making progress on those goals. Um the next data set shows um broken out by gender and we have um our female students or goals for our female students slightly higher progress than for male students. And uh finally broken out by um race. And you can see that goals for our American Indian, Native Hawaiian students, Asian students, Hispanic students, white students are all above baseline average, while goals for our black and multi-racial students that are below that baseline um number of 88%. So in summary, if you recall, strategic direction E has us eliminating ineffective procedures to reduce inequities. Um, and in the case of special education, those inequities exist when our staff are so overworked that they can't provide highquality services to our students. So we're working to um reduce that workload to have positive outcomes on our uh progress reports. Thank you. So like our uh session in May um we uh brought back the pause and process slide um so that we're not just going to keep dumping data and and more information at you so we can kind of digest and talk through and look for that alignment um for these uh for the first half or the first part of our presentation this evening. And then we also are curious about the continuous improvement magnifier. Do you feel like this is um that this this has continued to reflect the purpose of of strategic direction E and if we've lost anything, what do you feel like we've lost or if we've gained something, what do you feel like we've gained? Um so we're really looking forward to your feedback on that as well. So um like we like a like we um phased this out last time, we gave you some individual think time. Um so there's some post-it notes that are um at your stations or at your uh seats. So, if you want to take those um and jot down your thoughts or ideas either related to the questions or other feedback that you want to provide, provide us and then we'll uh split up into those same groups of three that we did last time so that you all can have that discussion time um that that really helps you make even more meaning and sense out of the data um and and maybe some of the questions that you have before they come out to us. So, um I can I can tee us up with a timer here for three to five initial minutes for staffing time or do you should we ask if there's any clarifying questions before we discuss a lot of information this way? Sure. I just have a question. Is is are you reading the same as Fastbridge or those two? Fast is the company if you will that has that. Okay. Okay. The brand name I should say. Good job. Okay. on the Oh, go ahead. Um, on the goal setting, I had a question on how are those goals set? Like, are they intended to be sort of like that stretch but achievable? So, the intention is that the students can achieve them or are they some type of other objective measure where there might um it might not be as individualized specific to the special education? Yeah. to the to the um special education goal setting. Yeah. So for the um evaluation bypass, I I used um information that I got from our regional directors um and created a baseline out of that data to where we fall. And for the progress reporting, just our current where we're at as our middle metric. Yeah. So my question is for the progress reporting you said they set goals um and then you're measuring how many goals they achieve. So like the goals themselves are they like goals that are you know uh kind of the smart goal or like that stretch but achievable so that that we would expect students to be able to achieve them or are they arbitrary? They're all written to be achieved within one calendar year's time. Okay. For that student that is achievable by that student. Okay. And they are smart goals. Yes. Okay. and it is for the end of the year. And so if they're making this pro or that's progress toward the goal after trimester 2. Yes. We're not we're not we're not taking the um the measure at the end of the year. We're taking it after trimester 2. Yes. Thank you. I So I had the same question. I was questioning the subjectivity of that measurement and so like if they are smart goals then I think that sort of answers the question but I think there's also the pending question of can two different staff members have two different measurements for that same goal and to me if that's the case then I I question that measurement but I can do they in revital Yeah. So I mean we really we focus on database you know collecting specific data for the goals and if you're right within the IEP how and what type of data is going to be collected to measure that goal. Um and then there's a certain kind of formula in Minnesota where um that needs to everything that needs to be included in a goal. So the conditions baseline outcome data um and there's then the objectives and benchmarks as well. Okay. Um, so in a system this big, you know, I can't promise that everyone's exactly on par with everything that they're inputting, but we try to have systems in place. So between the protocols that um are there to ensure um the same type of elements are embedded in every goal that's being set, that's our best chance at reducing variability across sites. But as you said, as a district as large as ours, um there to to say there's no variability couldn't be truthful. Yeah. I'm just curious at all and I know it's the board but uh do you also take in attendance because if not you're comparing you're not comparing you could be comparing saying these many kids made um babies made progress but there was someone that was at school less than 50% of the time you know that impacts what happens too. So I'm just curious. I think that's a great consideration on all of our metrics around achievement like the underpinning of attendance and how that's going to impact every measure. Right. So I think I feel like that's just almost an underlying data point that we need to understand results through. And then for a reading uh going back to Sarah Sarah start uh what's the goal on that one? was can you clarify that for me growth the goal for typical growth so that that'd be 50% um so it' be making the same amount of growth that that that is typical nationally for students that are at the same starting point okay does that make sense y so I actually have a question about this cuz and this is a personal question I guess but I'm curious how it impacts our scores across the board if we have higher learners that score high in the fall and then don't have growth at all in the spring. How does that impact how we how we monitor that growth or how does that impact? No, I think it's a great question. It is a great question and it is something that we've been I'd say monitoring um not just with uh FastBridge with a reading and a math but also as we think about the MCA, you know, the goals that we set for that as well. Um so I think that's something that we're exploring. I I we've done a lot of like checking the norming studies to see what it means to have a goal for, you know, by starting score versus a growth by all. That's another option is to just say everybody should make this same rate that is set for the whole grade level. You know what I mean? So there's pros and cons of those two things, but it's not always the case that the kids who start out lower make more growth nationally. You know, it maybe used to be the case, but it is no longer that case um in all cases. So there are these balances that come into it and it does become kind of a technical conversation pretty quickly, but it's a great question and and so yeah, if we wanted to explore that further, we certainly could. Yeah. And I think it's more and it falls under the rigor of like are we measuring those higher scoring students and tracking how they're doing as well. We're seeing movement just understanding their trends as well. I still think that these goals that we have for typical growth and for aggressive growth at least from my perspective um they're still pretty rigorous for us right now. Okay. we're a ways, you know, from hitting that for all students, you know, just because we're at 33%, right? Or 32%. Um, and nationally it'd be 50%. You know, so that that's a that tells us we have some more kids, you know, right? But for your students that I'm just brainstorming, just don't see the superintendent grow, but um but students that like uh what director Foster is saying that's already coming in quite high, then they will never have aggressive growth. Correct. So we're really looking at aggressive growth for our students who are receiving intervention services. Okay, thank you. Yeah, we're looking so one of the other things we do is we al also look at growth and proficiency and how those are combined. So do we have a student who is not growing but is proficient and what does that look like or a student who is really high has really high growth but isn't proficient. So we have those are the conversations that our professional learning teams are having at sites about that. Yeah. And when we think about core instruction, what every child has has access to, what we're trying to grow is the percentage of students in that in their in their core classroom teacher in their third grade teachers classroom that they that that um the majority of those students have received typical growth, right? And if those students are far away from meeting proficiency, we want to see aggressive growth. We want to make sure that they're accessing intervention and making aggressive growth. So it's not a perfect measure, right? But it allows us to see right what how are we doing with typical growth. Yeah. Go ahead. I'm sorry. It's it's it's director's foster fault. But but if there's if if if you do have uh our babies at the top level, are we literally looking at those kids and saying if they're growing, if they're stuck, if they're lowering, are we literally just looking at that group, not anybody else, but that group to see if we're having growth. The idea with growth or decline? Yeah. The idea with growth by starting score is you could make high growth or low growth at anywhere. Yeah, I think that might be more my question is are we analyzing those kids at the top? They count for this. Our tag teachers are absolutely looking at that. Thank you. Absolutely. So they count separate from intervention and middle or we just group together or so they would see a teach. So if I'm a teacher, right, I would see my whole class and I would see each student's score and then I wouldn't see any growth in the fall, right? Because that's our baseline. I would look at it in the winter and say, "Oh, Jill Kind has 67% growth. Dr. Walker has 98% growth." Um, Dr. Bass has 75% growth. And we would say, "Okay, Dr. Walker, let's take let's have our tag teachers look at how did he do last year? Is this a new thing for Dr. Walker or is this a consistent performance?" Jill kind Oh, this is Jill Kai needs to be an intervention. We need to make sure that she's uh making going to make that aggressive growth because she needs to do so we look at every individual. Absolutely. So that's the the professional learning teams, our instructional coaches, our staff development assessment specialists and our MNT or Minnesota uh MTSS team site leadership teams are looking at that. That's sort of one of their charges is to make sure that each student somebody has eyes on that. Thank you. Well, and if if if at one point like an intervention isn't working, there's no progress, then what? Yep. So each site has a student assistance team, a student intervention team, a problem solving team. They have lots of different names where that student would come and the team would talk about. So the on the team would be an interventionist, a counselor, a social worker, the site principal or assistant principal, and they'd say, "Okay, what's the intervention done with fidelity would be the first question, right? So liken it to a doctor. Are we following the treatment plan?" Um, okay. Yes, we are. So then, do we need to increase the dosage? do they need to do it more or is it the actual intervention that needs to be changed? So, they're going to go through a whole process to figure out sort of like that root cause analysis of why isn't it working? What's the next best step for this student? Okay. So, one more question about that. So, then when when a decision like that's made, whatever level, if it's Yep. high achieve, you know, kids that do really well, kids that are in like how do who talks to parents about this? Like is it the teacher? Is it like how do parents know how to even support? Yeah, great question. Any of this? So, that's one of the things that we are working on to systematize is so that it is the there's a point person at each school that we can say uh it is the counselor at every site who runs the sit team who's going to do the communicating or it's the principal or whoever. Uh so, right now it varies between sites. So, it might be the intervention teacher, it might be a title one teacher, could be the interventionist. So, we're working on improving that. So if it's a K5 is not the classroom teacher that shares it at conferences or anything. They might share it at conferences. If it's a tier one, but if it's a tier 2 intervention, it could be our intervention teacher who's sharing it. Great question. So I think this is a really good discussion that kind of comes full circle to the this is under continuous improvement. So that's not to say that we're not measuring and making sure all students are continuing to achieve growth, but but for this measure, we're focusing on the intervention. and this is the metric for growth for this specific segment because it's continuous improvement. Y I think that's where like sometimes like as we're interpreting this I think that's what we got to kind of keep our eye on is what's the specific um strategy and the measure for that strategy it does not mean that we're not doing other things correct if this is curious if this is the straightest alignment right to that priority strategy and measure is that good Yeah. Are we still going in the breakout room? What do you want him to do, Dr. B? I mean, I think it's your call. We can save it for the end if you're feeling like you got your initial Well, maybe we just have large group conversation. That's kind of going well right now. So, I would just say to answer where the question is, they're up here. They're on the monitors. Yep. Um, so I love this page. Maybe that's helpful. Like I feel like this is the best page for us to look at to answer the question because it's got the priority, the expected out from the strategy, and then the measures. So this is what we're reflecting on, right? What page is it? What page is that? It doesn't have page number on it. system strategy snapshot. It looks like this. It's in the beginning of the package. At the beginning of the slide packet, there one of the questions that I had on measures um is the family stakeholder survey. Um, so I think there's been data that shows the highest engagement uh from families at the elementary level. Um, and we notice um some of the percentages decrease um as years go on. And so one of the questions that I'm wondering is one are we measuring family burnout? Um, and if that is the case, that families are getting burned out as as their kids are progressing through um our our schools, is that a reliable measurement um for some of these vision cards um particularly for middle school and high school. Tom, in our scientific sample, do we make sure that we have a proportionate representation of middle school families, high school families? Yes. Do you want to say more about that? I'm wondering if the burnout that you're thinking of is like over surveying like they they've received too many surveys or is it that they're uh they're reaching a point where it's Yeah, I guess I just am trying to understand exactly what you're after. like is do you think there would be a solution in terms of addressing that burnout like is it so I look at a question because we have family stakeholder questions I think on a lot of the vision cards um like one of the questions being staff know my scholars interests um if families are less engaged as students are getting older how can you accurately answer that question um so like it's those types of questions that I'm I'm wondering about yeah so are they appropriate for that grade, which is that's kind of what we're Yeah. And so this will kind of speak back to like as we continue to refine processes, is the family stakeholder survey still measuring what we want it to measure and should it be different by grade level considering that they have different needs at different grade level. Okay. Well, and different levels of independence. That's what came to mind for me. Um I and for the stakeholder survey, that was one of the comments I had as well. I think the staff provide an appropriate level of challenge for my scholar and what was the other one addressing the needs. Those were the two most relevant questions in my mind and then the others kind of fell far below in answering the question of what we're asking and so just even highlighting prioritizing some of those questions and um can you just list the oh sorry staff provide an appropriate level of challenge for my scholar and staff address the needs of my scholar. Okay, thank you. Just the most directly relevant it seemed. And if you have more insight behind why the other questions were relevant, I'd totally be open to hearing that too. The the the So there's like dual things we're looking for, right? So what's the So if the treatment is about what it what the educator moves are, right? Then what should be the impact of those educator moves, right? Um and so there's the performance we'd like to see from our scholars, right? typical growth, aggressive growth. And then there's the what are the things that are harder to measure, which is how much confidence, courage, and confidence are they feeling, right? In terms of agency and efficacy, that also, right, is is a really critical variable for our scholars is how confident, how much agency, and how strong do they feel advocating for themselves? Do they know what their strengths are? Do they like So, so I think as we look at to your to your point um chair Prince about the the validity and reliability of all of the items for the relatability of or the relevance of all of them. I think we we have room for for refinement and we are looking at AVID's uh student agency survey. They have one in elementary, middle and high school and we are and we are excited to to review that and see which of those items or which of those scales might be import um like really good for us to bring over to our our stakeholder survey. Yeah. So, yeah. I also wonder do is it more important to measure students response than parents response as they get older? Like when they're young, they they're maybe less reliable how they self-report versus high school. Yeah. Okay. And like my kid, my middle schooler would be able to respond to staff believe my scholar can succeed and I probably wouldn't be able to gauge that exactly as a parent. But this is exactly the right conversation to have at tying it all together. Any feedback on the the reframing of strategic direction is a continuous improvement magnifier. You like that? Is it I like it for me because it gives something tangible to something that has felt intangible. Like when we're talking about equity and disparities, it's always felt like language that's out here. And this like the way that it was described at the beginning from um Dr. Walker like made it really clear like what are we looking for and what are we trying to measure with that? And I also think that like when we think about equity and disparities that should underpin everything and not necessarily be just in one strategy but but to me like the continuous improvement really said I think does get at that because of the way that it was described like it actually gives us a place to say what's working and what do we need to change for the outcome that we're trying to achieve. other thoughts. Um, I love that it started with data and it ended with data and I thought you guys did a fabulous job framing that. Um, and just the focus of continuous improvement. I mean, I feel like that's one of the key indicators of success is how we can in integrate that into everything we do just as humans. So, um, that was really exciting to hear both of you present. So, thank you for that. And I just have a question back to the the decrease in the the A reading typical growth. Um have we identified like how are we analyzing what specifics might have you know decrease? So I just keep that process or just kind of an overview. I have to keep reframing it in my mind because this is 23 24. We had a lot happening there. We had a pilot happening with some of our our ele all of our elementary teachers were either piloting or teaching old curriculum in the science of reading. we were learning about it and so letters training letters well letters training we had all half of our elementary staff going through letters training so there was a lot happening in 23 24 uh that um led to these disappointing results I think we're not happy with that and I think one of the things that we've seen this year is 2425 uh we have more teachers engaging in letters training or another uh training called OLA or core and And what we're hearing from them is after this year of implementing and doing this training, they're they're having these light bulb moments that are really exciting. So, we're having those conversations with leaders and with teachers about, okay, now that you have this learning, what does this look like in the classroom? So, how do we get our staff development assessment specialists into the classroom and say, let me show you how to do this. So, we're saying, yep, this is our data. And now we're moving forward because we've changed curriculum since 23 24. I mean, we've adopted two year one. Again, this is year one of two new curriculums that were very intentionally focused on the areas that we knew we were weak in earlier, explicit instruction and phonics instruction. So, I think that is some of the things. So, yes, and it's some of that continuous improvement. Is this where Dr. Kai you're going to talk about learning walks or is that still coming? So learning walks are 2425 and we did those uh specifically focused on explicit instruction in elementary and every elementary teacher had two learning walks this year. Can you explain what that looks like? A learning walk. Yep. So we go in uh there's a form that's a checklist and it's in duplicate and so as a nerdy teacher I love duplicate interpolate forms. Um but so we would look for uh there are 16 elements of explicit instruction and we would spend seven minutes in the classroom. Not five, not four, uh seven minutes and we would look for each of these elements and we saw it. It was a checkbox. If we didn't see it, it was blank. Uh we would tear the top sheet off, leave it with the teacher so they knew what we saw. And then we would take the bottom sheet back and enter it into our fabulous data system. And then teachers had the opportunity to say, you know what, I think you actually missed this. It also gave us an opportunity to see, oh, Jill K's not doing this. That's not okay, right? We have a policy. So the expectation that teachers use our guaranteed viable district curriculum. So that was an opportunity to have conversations with leaders about, hey, you should go check on Joe Kind and see what's going on. Uh what we know is that there were very few teachers who weren't using the curriculum. What we also observed in the spring was the the growth in confidence of the classroom teacher in using the routines and structures of the curriculum. And that's always the hardest right because your muscle memory wants to when it's uncomfortable wants to default back to the way you've always done it. And our teachers weren't defaulting back. They were embracing the challenges and getting into that. Um so every elementary teacher had two of those this year. We want to do two more next year. uh and just keep really growing helping teachers grow that memory and provide feedback, right? Because that in the- moment feedback of, oh, I think you did see this. Maybe I don't understand what this looks like. So, how do we use this data to inform our professional learning at the system level and with principles at sites? Because we do share the data with the principal. So, if I could um in some of the conversations that we've had, um the first one going in to verify that the over $1 million in curriculum materials that we just invested in that they're being used. So, we verified the use of the materials. And then secondly, making sure that the explicit instruction, those 16 moves that we want to be able to see going in and providing teachers feedback on that because first is are you using the materials? And then secondly, are you also centering the pedigogy and the instruction that we want you to to be using in the classroom with the scholars with the materials? So, um these are these are these are outstanding and we're able to collect that for year one and then build on that for next year. And the whole point of the learning walks as well was to support the staff and see if there's a need that they need or more training in something and focus our ongoing professional learning. Absolutely. And we changed our January system monthly at elementary because of the what we were seeing in learning walks. who felt that there needed to be a conversation uh vertically about what happens. Here's how I use this vocabulary routine in kindergarten. How does that grow in first grade and second grade? And teachers gave us really positive feedback after the team. Um well, thank you for that. I mean, I I agree with what everyone's been saying. I mean, I think for me, like when I think about like kind of these interventions or just like the math or reading, um there's this component that I feel like another like kind of close the loop and that's like family and caregiver engagement because I know like my son for example had interventions, but like what I would get is a letter and I would be like, you know, I work full-time, you know, I have all the I have other kids and so I'm like trying to just read the letter and like have 0% training, you know, in any of it and I don't I you know I think sometimes our families like I mean I think our schools we can only do so much you know and I think that families are kind of thirsty to know like what else can I do to be supportive like do I need to go to Huntington do I go or do I just need to know a little bit more about the intervention or the you know whatever is being taught right now because I think that um that's just like a such a like other kind of huge component that um I know there's varying degrees of who you know but I do think families and caregivers would like to know a little bit more and just as much as teachers get like trainings and stuff. Um I think that would be really helpful. I actually had a conversation today with Vanessa Giller, our coordinator of family and community engagement about exactly that. And so trying to find a time this summer where we could get together to say, okay, what is our plan for particularly around literacy? Because there's more requirements with the read act, the remedy about communication with families, but it's all like you said, uh very education targeted and so how do we make it an active uh sort of process and not this you get this letter or this phone call or this message? So that's on our to be done list. Um, so having had kids on IEP before and then kind of thinking about Kelsey's comment there is in addition to school, I know a lot of like we were in the position to do all kinds of stuff after school too. So is there some kind of understanding of how much on top of school that the kids are getting versus kids that aren't able to get that additional question. Okay. So, how do you make that visible in the results? Yeah, because if there's because we're going to have Yeah. We're going to have parents that have the facilities to do whatever it takes, right? Above and beyond what the schools have to offer and then the communities that are not going to be able to do that. So, thank you. Are we good to continue the second half of the presentation? Good. Thank you. Yes. Thank you. All right. So the second the focus priority in strategic direction B is to improve pathways for college and career readiness to unleash student agency. The expected outcome is that tag participation accelerated course enrollment and 12 x 12 enrollment mirror our district demographics. Uh so we have two strategies that's avid via individual determination and advisory. uh process measure is the to be developed student agency survey and our outcome measure is the achievement index. So again here are some more details on our strategies. Uh we have a middle school math acceleration that we we'll look at and then our advisory program improvement process. We're spending a lot of time looking at advisory 612 that each and every student has access to during their uh career here and how does that align with AVID? How do we make sure that it is the guaranteed and viable learning that we want for each and every one of our scholars? Uh our process measure student agency survey scale to be developed. It's an indigo. And then our outcome measures are the achievement index or 12 by 12 and graduation and continuation rates. So the achievement index metric consists of four measures. Students earning at least one semester or trimester of credit in the following courses. Post-secondary enrollments where students go to the college. Concurrent enrollments where students take the college course with our teachers on our campuses. Uh articulated courses where students take the course with our teachers but have to go to the college to get the credit. Uh AP courses, IB courses and or HP high performance courses. Students earning professional certificates in either CPR, first aid, ENT or EMR. Completing an internship, apprenticeship, or related experience. and students earning a Minnesota bilingual seal. In this metric, each student was counted one time regardless of how many of these four items they achieved. A total of 63% of all students enrolled in our high schools during the 23 24 year have achieved at least one of these three these four measures of the index, an increase of 1% since 2223. This metric continues to be in the baseline range but is trending positively. These particular measures were chosen as they are inclusive of a variety of pathways for students to show college and career readiness. This slide shows the achievement index data broken down by race and ethnicity. The data showed that the groups with the highest rate of achievement in the 2324 school year were students identifying as white at 71% um and students identifying as Asian, so that was 69%. The largest increase between years was among American Indian and Hawaiian Pacific Islander students at 10% followed by Asian students who achieved a 4% increase. In this chart, the achievement index data were disagregated by service groups. And among students receiving services, those receiving free reduced price meals had the highest rate of achievement at 59%. When looking at rates by gender, students identifying as female uh were at 69% and that was 10% higher than for male students. The 12 by 12 metric shows the percent of students who are on track to or have earned 12 credits that could lead to college credit by the time they graduate. Courses that could lead to student earning college credit include PSO, concurrent enrollment, articulated, AP, and IB courses. To be considered on track in this method, students in grades nine must have earned three or more credits. Students in grade 10, six or more credits, grade 11, nine or more, and grade 12 earned 12 or more credits, and any of the aforementioned courses. A total of 12% of students were either on track to have earned 12 credits by the end of their 12th grade year, which is approximately 2 and a half% increase from the 22 23 school year. This metric moved to base the baseline range. This graph shows the 12 x 12 metric disagregated by race and ethnicity. The student groups that had the highest rates of being on track for or meeting the requirements of this metric were students who identify as white 18% and multi-racial 15%. Followed closely by Asian students at 14%. The largest increase between years was seen among white students with an increase of 7% and multi-racial students with an increase of 5%. This metric was also disagreed by service group and gender. Students who identify as female achieved the 12 x 12 at a rate higher than the overall average of 14%. Students receiving free or reduced price meals have the highest rate of achievement of 12 x 12 of all service groups at 8%. And Dr. Watkins is going to talk about our graduation continuation rates. Our graduation and continuation rates are the percentage of students in each class who either graduated in four years or continued on for a fifth year with multilingual or special education support. Results for all of the groups using this indicator in the monitor. Here we're only seeing results for state racial groups and most have achieved the 80% benchmark in most of these years. By 2024, each of our racial groups was either above 90% or has improved since 2021. However, graduation continuation rates for our American Indian and Hispanic students have been below the benchmark for most of the past four years. Back to Dr. Walker. Thank you, Dr. Watkins. Again, here's a magnifier. And again, a city to keep us honest in our in our commitment to continuous improvement. And the two questions obviously are are really important and viable. The way that I look at these questions is it's the conscience of the district. It's something to slow down to really ask oursel these important questions so we can have a positive impact on our students and our scholars and families, right? So, how do we make sure that we're asking those question being very intentional so that we can get to some of these different outcomes that we want to see, right? And so when we look at the next slide, this kind of is our priority E, right? Apply evidence from multiple data sources to drive rigorous system improvements. And then the strategy that we're uh utilizing is equity transformation cycle, professional learning team, program improvement process. But right now, we're going to dig into uh the equity transformation cycle a little bit. Um but before we go there, I want to stop and talk about data for a second. So you know since the inception of our good vision cards we have shown this graphic to explain the different levels of achievement data that we present in the updates to the board right and so what I want to briefly go through this is talking about the three different levels of data there's satellite data there's map data and then there's street data um and so when we think about that the view this satellite view gives us the data from like a big picture look at the full district right trends and patterns that's what the satellite data does for us then there's the map view which zooms down or zooms in into the school level or even into like a grade level across the the system, right? And so that's what that level of data is working with. And then we have what we call the street level data which you all are kind of been addressing a little bit in the earlier conversation that you're having talking about. What are the parents saying? What are the students getting that right? That's getting those voices of our students and families right at the entrance of how are you experiencing our system, right? And this is where the equity work lives, right? this equity workplace where we can get day-to-day impact from our students and families based on conversations and how we approach them in that in that work. And so that's what we want to make sure that we're doing in this work, right? So we want to impact our scholars in a positive way and these questions that we are asking can get to meaningful change. And so when we think about this, right, in 2023 before I was uh with the with the system, um there was an introduction of street data and the work uh that uh Shane Sapphir and Jamila Dugen had done. And so we made sure that all of our district leaders had a really good understanding and concept of what uh the knowledge around street data were. And then this year in 2425 we dug into the equity transformation cycle. Um however we wanted to make sure that we were very intentional and we slowed down about what is this equity transformation cycle is about so that we can really interrupt these ineffective ways that we use and view data. Right? uh interrupting the mindsets and replacing it with curiosity uh for how we can establish the conditions for our equity teams. And so each school uh based on their data digs uh crafted an equity challenge which is the first step in starting the process of uh equity transformation cycle. And so we'll just kind of go through equity transformation cycle. As you see here there's the listen, uncover, reimagine, and move. And so I'm going to share just a little bit about how I have experienced this in my in my um past work and past experiences. And so when we think about the the segment of listening and and you heard me talk about like changing our mindsets and beliefs, right? But we have to be prepared to listen. Um and what I mean by that is when we go out and ask families to share with us their true experiences, we may not always hear what we want to hear, right? We may not always hear what we want to hear. And we got to prepare ourselves to be able to receive that information because any sense of body language that we show, any facial expressions that we give off can change the dynamic and what we hear from those families, right? And what we want to what we don't want to do is like influence their responses. We need to hear the uncut raw truth so that we can really make some changes, right? And that's where we get to the next thing about uncovering. And so if we are really wanting to uncover that, we have to do a good job of that listening process. And so we want to slow our educators down, our leaders down and saying, "Hey, let's make sure we're prepared to really do some listening because when these students start giving us feedback, you may not like that. You may not want to hear what they have to say, especially if they're going to say in their authentic voice, right? It could be a little raspy. I'll just use that term. It be a little raspy, right? Um, and so as we start to uncover that, then we say, "Oh, look at what we learned. Look at what we found out." Right? Now the question is what do we do with that information that we found out that's the uncovering part right then we got to reimagine the reimagine part is now I got to do something different because as as as the philosopher says is that if we keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results that is the definition of insanity right so when we hear this information we got to be willing to reimagine what we're going to do we have to be willing to do that now the question becomes Is the system ready and prepared for that reimagining? Right? And that's where we have to really start to think about our mind frames, our mindsets, our beliefs, how we're showing up. And that's why these questions that we are entering in this uh strategic direction E is really instrumental because it helps us slow down. It helps us pause. It helps us really think through of where we're at, where we want to go, how do we get there, how are we listening to these real voices. And then at the end, we got to move, right? And sometimes the movement is where the rubber meets the road, right? Is where the rubber meets the road. And so as we think about this work, I just want to before I pass over to Dr. Basing process and what I want us to be really mindful of is that this work is not about perfection. It's about progress over perfection, right? How are we getting better every single day? How are we doing the work every single minute with the students that we are coming in contact with, with the families that we're coming in contact with? If we can do those things, when we start to think about these equity transformation cycles that we're having our leaders go through, we can replicate this multiple times with multiple groups, with multiple marginalized and minoritized communities and populations to get some of these different um changes that we want in our data. But again, got us first start off with being prepared to listen. Thank you. Thank you. The energy and passion. Thank you, Dr. Walker. Um, and thank you all. So, I think we um in the conversation that we've had, I don't I'm not sure um if we can stay in a large group. uh again if you you all are comfortable with that um to to provide us uh again with some more feedback on we think about uh how we're capturing these two big overarching questions for continuous improvement magnifier. I'm still feeling like this is a strong reflection of of honoring that direction. And then as we look at unleashing uh student agency um those measures around uh the achievement index, the 12x 12, those pieces and then the student agency surveys coming, right? That's that's what we're going to pilot next year um and get feedback from students on next year and be able to populate that. That kind of answers the question that we had earlier about it might be interesting to see that 6 through 12 we focus more on student responses and K5 we focus more on uh family responses. So open it up to the to you all. Yeah. Um Dr. Walker, every time you speak I feel like I need to say amen. [Laughter] I always appreciate it. I don't know if that was a counseling session or I know I was like [Laughter] um um so I'm curious of the questions that other school board members have. Um, as I'm looking at this vision card, um, and some of the data that was presented today, with the exception of like the graduation continuation rates and then the four-year dropout rates, which actually that's its specific to special education, it feels like there's a huge chunk of our student population that's missing from this data. Um the front page seems like it sort of hits at one large set of students which is focused on you know uh measuring typical and aggressive growth. Um and then we're looking at higher achievement on the second side which is um all of the sort of post-secary PSO concurrent AP HP courses etc. Um it it seems like there's a lot of a lot of students missing and I don't know if we can capture that through survey data like you mentioned is coming. Um but yeah, I kind of wanted a response to that. Um and then the second part is when I look at the achievement index seems like we're lumping a bunch of things into one that don't necessarily go together. like CPR first aid doesn't equal EMT EMR certification to me. Um yeah. So yeah, just kind of wanted some thoughts on those two things. I think so. I think there's a a couple of things. One of the things about our professional certifications is right now we have the health science magnet at ASO senior and the automotive magnet with building a better future. we are expanding our certifications that are going to be offered across the system. So really looking at that. So those numbers will include other other uh programs at different sites. So I think that's one thing that we need to think about as well. CPR and first aid can actually uh students can take that to a job and use that to get it a to get a salary advancement that so that's why that's included in that measurement. Yeah, it's a great clarification. And I think the other piece is there are large chunk of students missing in that uh achieve in the 12 x 12. Uh so really now focusing on how do we look at elementary tag participation? How do we look at that middle school math acceleration? How do we look at all of those opportunities that uh give students access to more rigorous coursework? And I had one more thought and it just escaped my mind. Well, I mean, again, it's hard to like separate like my own experience with some of this with what we're talking about, but I mean, my um I my question was going to be like with the achievement index with the 12 x 12 like I think some of it is is like how are we ensuring people know to do that because like I my daughter who's now going to junior year college like I I've made her I didn't give her an option like I'm like you're taking this AP course and HP that's just not an option you know and like but I've noticed even like with my other kids who's going into or she's going into high or high school I mean I just don't know how much parents if you're not engaged engaged in things like then you don't really know like yeah you should take an HP's course or it's not as hard as you think it is or it's it's actually more conversational you know and it's actually like really getting you to think critically versus that so I think that is also um when you look at the number. Um I'm just I guess my question is like how are we kind of amplifying it throughout the district? Um beyond even TAG, right? Like I mean it's like it's kind of all throughout elementary and kind to show that like and and to show all of our kids that like or students that yes, you can you can be part of this and you can you know achieve this even if you know what I mean. I think when we were Oh, sorry. I'll let you respond but I was gonna maybe I can tag on to that. Um, so, uh, one of the things I think that we had intended when we were first setting out some of these metrics was how do we have the multiple pathways so that it's not only on like the AP or the um, like the other kind of the credit side. So, I 100% agree like the how do people know and then how do we treat the different pathways in a way that that's indivi individualized achievement also. Yeah, I was just going to reference the the equity transformation cycle, right? And the equity um challenge that we're that I I kind of just shared is that as you have this data and we ask those questions, so who do we not see in the data? So that's a question that the schools can ask themselves, they start ask our indigenous males are not showing up in our um 12x 12 snapshot, right? So now as that can be part of their equity challenge that they do and now they do a deep dive saying so why is this happening? So now they go through this equity cycle they go and try to maybe listen to some of the young men who are experiencing this see what are some of the barriers now they uncover that now they got to reimagine. So how do we be intentional about getting these students access to these courses, right? And so now that becomes part of the process and then they have to reimagine whatever it is that they have been doing and saying we got to change it and now we got to move and do something different. So that can be the way that they can address some of these things that you're referencing is through that equity transformation cycle which is why it's so important that they get the understanding of that so they can replicate that for many different situations. Doesn't have to just be one at a time. they can do 15 of these throughout the school year because there can be smaller groups who are addressing different data points that we have within our system. Does that make sense for everybody? What would you say is the goal for the this achievement index measures because not everybody is going to want to do an AP class. Not everybody is going to want to do PSO. For some people, it's getting a C and passing. Um that's their goal when they leave. So, and how that's an individualized pathway, correct? So, how do we and maybe that's the question we're all mulling is success looks different for each kid. Can I can I share an observation? Um, so when I when I've heard the conversations around this and look at this, it's I look at it as career and college pathway. So, when you look at that first row, that's really a have I participated in something that's getting on the college pathway. The remaining three buckets are all about am I participating in something that's going to lead me towards a future career whether that's apprenticeship related experience getting the bilingual seal uh participating in a certification process as Jill mentioned with our pathway programs is going to expand all of the high schools once everything gets implemented. So it's I think beyond just that first totally did I participate in those AP and and honor but it's not going to be 100% because it won't not everybody will be covered by these areas. Yeah. I would like we should just call it college and career something index because to me like there has to be other ways to measure achievement for students that this doesn't this doesn't fit. But I I think this is under the college and career. So it's the right measures. It's just it's not achievement. It's the college and career. But I do think we should challenge ourselves to say because if we want every single student to participate in college and career, then what we're measuring number one, the opportunities have to be that everyone should be able to be in this number. And then to the point like who's missing in the data and what do we need to do about that then? Well, I mean, you look at the data in 12 by 12 and there's clear disparities of who's I mean my I can tell you my daughter is like the only black student in her class in a lot of her HP classes and I don't necessarily think that's reflective because all other black students only want to have a C, you know, like that's not, you know, that I I would very much challenge that. And I think that um so I like what you were saying, Dr. Walker, around that on that transformation piece. I think that's really critical. Yeah. And I wasn't commenting on a racial issue at all. I think like my sister was didn't want to go anywhere after high school. So um so I think it's more just what's reality of where our students are at and if this is so if that's a career and college readiness index then yes that totally matches it and it makes sense. Yes, I'm tracking with that portion of it. But I think it's what's my question is what's the goal for that percentage? What do we want our schools to be at? So right 100% girl. Um so I would want each and every one of our students to try uh a rigorous course AP IB concurrent enrollment or to be in a CTE pathway or strand. So I think that could be a measurement that we add. Are they taking a strand course to explore that career opportunity as opposed to maybe being in an official internship or taking a test to get this certification. So uh I want it to be 100%. I agree. I I just go ahead. I'm sorry Dr. K. I got to jump in here. I think we're, you know, um, just in pro, I'm dressing in processing. I'm going as a superintendent. I think, you know, some of this is would a, could a, shoulda, and then how do we create consistency in the school that we either say every child will take an IB class or every child will take an AP course or, you know what I mean? or even if we want them to volunteer to do that. Um are we do we in our district do we have a process set where there's a counselor or somebody sitting down with that child? You know, there's been many a child that go, I didn't know we had PSM. Yep. Right. And that's going to show in these numbers right here. Right. So, what is our process and procedures that I've been saying down the road? I'm just with you. But when we look at the strategies though, that advisory program improvement process that is a place that we know that every middle schooler is in every day and we can start that conversation. Uh we actually start that conversation in elementary. So, right, we're having these strands at the high schools. How do we back that all the way down to kindergarten? Right? Uh our CTE program uh person talks about how when you're in kindergarten, everyone wants to be an astronaut or, you know, they want the big career, but there's all these little careers along the way. So, how do we start exposing students to that sort of continuum of where they what they could do uh all the way down as our as our little kindergarters, right? So that program improvement process to make sure that we're consistent and coherent across the system is really critical. So that's some upcoming that's work that's on the to be done list for 2526. I want I want to jump in on piece. So um so this this this is really critical the expected outcome that that first row of blue. Um, so what we're talking about is does the enrollment and participation in those pathways mirror the demographics of our district. Right? So that's one way of looking at it. And then I'm hearing us also engage in and we want 95% of our scholars before they graduate participate in at least one of I like how you frame that uh Anthony in either a college or a career pathway experience. Right. What kind of career though? So we got our babies because they're social media people and they're entrepreneurs and they want to open their own business. That's not up there, right? So we we're still kind of I'm just brainstorming. We're so we're still kind of doing 2000s when our kids are like over here, right? So it's just something to think about. And was the data outdated as well? Because I know park centers had a lot of innovative initiatives this year that might not be reflected. 23 24 data. So the 2425 data is not Yes, that is correct. Is a reason why I pointed that out is um if if there's um a recommendation for us to expand this expected outcome to go beyond mirroring our district demographic data, but to say we want over 95% or we want whatever percent of our students to have taken at least one. Um we can certainly move in that direction. Um and then obviously as a system then we have to right roll that out call it the gel kind no goal 100% I think it comes back to I think it comes back to what is the one right so of the list that's there that that just hits a certain little bitty pocket of our kids, right? Um when we studied I'm sorry. Oh, go ahead. Go ahead. When when I was uh in my first principal ship at Brooklyn Center, we studied Mountains View School District at that time. They were they were being nationally recognized for starting an early college program and so they required all students to take at least one um college level course in a in an area of interest that they had. they had such a broad and comprehensive set of offerings um that that students found themselves represented in one of those different um post-secondary opportunities. So I mean that that that that that districts are doing doing that. So I think the other piece Yeah. I think the other piece is that right now every student has a personal learning plan in grades 9 through 12 and it's housed in schooly our learning management system. So we can't easily mine the data to find out like what are those plans, who doesn't have a plan. So one of the things that we're tomorrow uh looking at with our counselors 612 and some other friends uh is uh a platform that would allow us to do that to go in students take interest surveys in there and we can see what they're interested in. So we can then create courses that they're interested in and really I can see us uh evolving this metric to include some of those pieces talking about. Yep. Yeah. So it reflects what their career interests are for the future as opposed to what they were in 20 2010 five. [Laughter] Okay. Yeah. I mean, I think I I mean, I'm I really like how you how you frame this and I I do think um it allows us to have these conversations to say like kind of dig deeper and like I think Kanye reference is like very tangible um and so we can look at it and and look where we want to go. I mean, and I I just believe that I just want all of our students have have be exposed, you know, and not limit themselves. And that does not mean an AP. I understand that. But it does mean like opportunity, opportunity, right? And like how do we how do we open that door? I mean, that's my passion. I mean, Brian, I am not opposed to saying we should say yes. Let's all we want all our kids to take a college or career class. I think that is a realistic goal for a district that wants to be the stretch and achieve. I mean, I'd love to obviously it be a conversation. Um, but I think there's areas where we can really reach for some of those goals and I think it'd be an interesting premise to look at. I think I'd leave it in your guys's hand to take the feedback and say should it be that exactly that or should be something different given the emerging kind of things that are in play. I'm more saying you'd have my support in terms of the the reach and stretch. Yes. Yeah. Do you want to go to the uh next steps? So um similar to May um we'll continue uh to collect input and develop the new process. So we've got that stakeholder um survey. Uh what we didn't talk about um is that um when we deliver the staff stakeholder survey, what we're trying to uh integrated is some skip logic where it populates, for example, our special ed teachers items that are specific to um what Sunny spoke to earlier. So everybody wouldn't get those items, but those who are licensed special ed staff would get those items. Um and so if you're teaching literacy, then you would maybe have a skip logic um where you're getting specific items that are loaded for literacy instruction. So that is something that um we're also looking at for those surveys next year. The second uh one is identify the remaining major strategies. So um Tanya, the one that you you um highlighted earlier, that's a really good way of seeing the system strategy snapshot laid all the way out. We're going to continue populating more and more of the strategies across the system, giving greater visibility on all the things that we're trying to do to reach all students. Um, and then that last one, um, is to continue to integrate your feedback, um, which was so valuable tonight, um, always, but especially tonight. This is the questions that we're asking tonight aren't questions that we typically are asking at Vision Cards Update, and this is this is this is fantastic. So, we're continuing to your feedback. So, thank you. So Brian, at the start you kind of um had some circles around like our strategies are written um with a lot of additional words that we're kind of really trying to get our values and things. Is there a need to refine them or like so that they can be a little bit more honed in so that it flows all the way through or if you all are accepting our interpretation then I think we're good. Okay. Um if if if if you want to put if we want to push and and and narrow it further, we certainly can. Um you you can see the complexity when when you look at um uh address, acknowledge and reduce. There's three, right? Systemic disparities, barriers, and inequity. There's three more. And then you have lead, develop, and align. There's three more. There's nine, right? Um our district towards continuous improvement. So it it so your focus right your focus is uh is is distributed right more broadly but if if there were an opportunity for us to narrow I think that's what we've attempted to do in our in our thinking and interpretation. It almost seemed like I wasn't here but we were trying to make a pretty sentence. Yeah we yeah we we were trying to make sure everybody's voice was reflected in it. Um but my the reason why I wonder is because you know the board turns over a lot and then we each hone in on with so much in there and I don't I don't want there to be a lot of like this as board changes occur over time like I want you to feel like you've got really the right things after all this learning we've done with with the the new model and the alignment just a thought yeah I if you're asking me my honest opinion would be vulnerable in the moment yes it would be helpful to have it be more narrow yes well yeah and maybe I'll hone it with your chest Which one? Which one? Each of those things. Yeah. That that creates a sell it, son. Sell it. I love the honesty. When we talk about these at work, we want to make them like almost like a battlecry, right? That not a legal document, I guess. You know, a poll. Thank you. Thank you all. Good job you all. Thank you. Yeah, I don't have any deal. Oh, just 9200. Um, so yeah. So before we adjourn, um, We did want to give you an update about policy committee. Um so we are starting to review the so today we we reviewed 900 and 200 series policies. Um so we're hoping that you all can start to take a look at those and offer any feedback. What are they? So 200's the board um bylaws and stuff. So we didn't want to necessarily make changes in policy committee. We we're gonna advance them to the next to the first reading, but we want the board to review them in members of the board with the 200 series and kind of what we discussed and it's just to give you time to review it before the August meeting. So you'll get two emails, one about those policies that we talked about today and then you'll get another one about the 500 series which we are working on next year um which is a lot of student focused policies including policy 508 um which does not have procedures um so um at some point we'll also need you all to start taking a look at those as well before we get into policy committee. Um we did have some conversations today about getting those policies in front of um students like our schoolboard reps um to get their feedback um but we anticipate a lot of discussion with some of those policies and the scholars would come to a work session so they you can really talk talk not yeah two emails from me you just keep cranking audio if I could just mention I put the Google doc out there. It's a spreadsheet for you to add work session items. You do need your um apps email. So, if you don't know what that is, um let me quick um describe that to you. So, when you go to click into it, it'll ask you to like enter your email. And so, it's your last name, your first initial apps.279.org. And that's where actually all of our documents come through, which is probably why sometimes like where is it? What are you talking about? So if you need help, Anony's right there. It's It's in Google Drive, right? Google Drive. Yeah. So if you go to portal.dist279.org, log in with your regular credentials, you'll see the Google icon. Click on it and you'll be right in. Okay. See, you know the answer. All right. Um I think those are the only updates we have. So meeting adjourned at 8:31. That's