1 8 0 dash 16 dash 2 2 0. This came before C&I August 20th for approval.
Approval of this item would approve each school within the district as having a school improvement plan that is data driven promotes a positive impact on school learning.
And includes a continuous improvement process.
Pursuant to WAC 1 80 dash 16 dash 2 20. Chief Jessee.
Good evening Wyatt Jesse chief of schools and continuous improvement.
Yes I'm here for our annual.
Request to approve our.
Continuous improvement plans for our hundred.
Upcoming hundred and four schools.
So this process really does follow tightly.
To.
The state WAC as you're stating.
Director Harris and we've reviewed the list.
We've got all the addresses correct.
They all have been posted as of July 1 have been reviewed multiple times.
And so it's not only this process started actually all the way back in February where schools are working with their their staff their BLT moving through the process of really taking it seriously about where we're at especially under a new strategic plan.
And so we've really honed in this spring About making sure that the schools.
Were nesting their goals and their work underneath the strategic plan.
And for example elementary schools with third grade.
English language arts.
Director Harris.
Mack.
As we just had a robust conversation around the difference between a school and a building.
And last year their request was made by me and I'm really grateful that it's included now that the addresses are in here because we move schools so many times and it gets confusing and having that clarification is really helpful.
I was looking through the list though and noticed that.
21 20 Van Asselt Elementary.
Given our just recent board approval.
Of the name change that would be.
Appropriate to change it to Rising Star at African-American Academy.
Right.
So that would.
That would.
Take fold and then we also have to do that work with OSPI because that has its own process of the recognition of the name.
And so there's some technical things that we would go over with OSPI to recognize the change in how it's listed with OSPI.
So can you help clarify for me then.
Because.
That's the name of the school now as we just board approved it.
But OSPI has a number.
And a name.
And Magnolia and Lincoln don't have their numbers yet.
So.
That's right.
Where where are we at in terms of making those schools OSPI official.
I can give you an update for sure.
It's OSPI.
So.
I think sometimes things take a little bit of time in the form package that we present to them.
Sometimes there's questions coming back on those form packages.
And then they give us then there's some clarity about what exactly.
It is and then they they get back to us and then assign a number.
As you as you.
Are very well educated.
Director Mack around what it is for specifically for the school and it's identified as.
So I can get back and I'll put that in a Friday memo.
Will it be updated by the time we actually approve these schools and or not.
Will it be in this list appropriately because.
What we are approving technically when we approve this board action is the list of schools and their continuous that they have in continuous improvement.
They have CSIPs.
But if the name if there's.
Will there be a number attached to those two schools and will Rising Star at African-American Academy be corrected on this list.
Or.
Correct the name on the list.
How OSPI moves.
I'll have to get back to you I don't Sometimes they don't move so I'm just being really frank with you like OSPI just does not move always really quickly on assigning numbers.
So I'm just trying to make sure that we do list them.
We will present them.
That's one of the big requirements by the state that we recognize those.
I would appreciate for it to be in the BAR language specifically clarifying why they don't have numbers and what's going on with that and the expectation for when they will have their number and.
If that if you don't mind.
Yeah no problem.
Footnotes.
Footnotes footnotes.
Director Burke.
I just want to.
Share for my colleagues.
You know as always.
The continuous school improvement plans create.
Great venue for conversation for directors and staff alike.
One of the topics that came up.
During C&I.
Was the question about.
You know we we recognize that there are changes in leadership that happen.
And when there's a change in leadership at a school.
Is the intent that the new leader would develop a new CSIP.
Or that the new leader would follow the existing one.
Or somewhere in between and kind of how does.
What is.
What should be our expectation.
From a governance point of view.
And the.
The.
First there's an understanding that the CSIP is an iterative and kind of living document but that it also represents the roadmap for the school that was determined by the staff and the BLT and approved.
And so an incoming leader has that as a roadmap.
And so the expectation that that was telegraphed to us was that explicitly stated to us was that new leaders.
Would be working within.
The CSIP that had been developed by the previous staff.
And then.
As they developed their own understanding of the school and other areas for gaps or closure that needed to happen in future versions or future additions there could be changes.
But that was I think it's just an important thing to have out in the public dialogue.
Director Mack.
I appreciate you bringing that point up Director Burke because in the policy I think there's a specific language around like if they're not meeting the goals of the CSIP and it's not being met then there are there are certain corrective actions including replacement of principles and so forth.
So can you explain what the process is for checking in on whether or not the CSIPs are being followed as they've been written and at what point is the.
The leadership of the school the principal assistant principal held accountable in some way for.
Those.
Things.
How what's what is our process to intersect.
So the.
Process to intersect.
If you even look at the WAC.
It does draw out that it's a multi you know there is there's nothing prohibiting schools to use a multi year process just because you.
Nest under and do a certain strategy.
are at schools as Director Burke is kind of leading ourselves down the road of all right somebody comes in new principal or established principal even the work of that has been drawn out there should tie again to the strategic plan.
It should have been a good assessment.
We now have such a robust involvement of a BLT and their staff that it's not just principal dependent and then further Our ability we are now and I know I've explained some of this with some of the board directors is that's why we are structuring ourselves to center the work of central office to support the CSIP.
So it's not just waiting for the school to have their own ability to work in a kind of annualized process and be a compliance.
It is actually now something that one of you mentioned ongoing process for.
Continuous improvement.
How am I doing.
What's going on with students.
We now have those assessments now have data reporting on it.
So schools are actually right in the middle of adjusting.
I go out in schools.
In this process Director Mack.
And we engage in conversations.
Diane does.
Cashel does.
I mean other other leaders in central office are out in the schools as long as well as the directors of schools.
To coach in with principals and their leadership teams to make adjustments to just those strategies.
Or those systems that they have to correct and to better serve our students especially our students of color furthest from educational justice.
Ultimately.
When there are not a lot of progress that intensifies the support actually of central office.
In working with those particular schools.
Director Pinkham did you have comment question concern sir.
No.
Nothing.
Just.
Glad Director Burke brought up the conversation that we had at the C&I meeting.
And.
Yeah.
Just so I was just getting the programming of the schools and programs and just make sure we clarify that.
What's what.
Because.
As you look at your list that you have.
There's no header to the list.
You just start out with the name.
I'm just taking the first line.
There's 2462 Loyal Heights Elementary School Elementary gives the address.
City of State.
And then in some of those columns for the elementary high school high school you do put programs.
But then Cascade Parent Partnership program is listed as K through 8 should that should be.
You know that getting confusion is that a program or is that a school.
Those are those are identified.
I just want to jump in there is those are identified as programs those specific things because they're not.
And that's actually following our own.
way that we do our quarterly reporting through C&I on programs that are provide unique services.
So I just wonder about that third column should that column indicate if it's a school or program.
Is that what this is intended to do.
Yes.
In the state even though we've made arguments before that we just want to do the schools the state as I was trying to allude to earlier they can get very stubborn.
We don't have seniors.
I mean some of those students at Bridges those are all students from 18 to 21 years old.
It's a different program for special ed services.
OK I'm going to go there.
Ten years ago we had board directors on the dais saying well it's OK it doesn't have to be correct.
We just have to vote on.
We've made a lot of progress for that I am extraordinarily thankful.
We did however this last year hear a great many.
Testimonies from that very podium.
About CSIP's not being followed.
From school communities and being most upset about same and.
There seemed to be.
A disconnect with respect to accountability.
And transparency.
And.
The CSIPs are one of the few places where the board actually has a touch point on some of these issues because we have two employees.
And.
I don't know what the answer is and I appreciate that you're in a new position and that we've reorg and restructured and that we're taking a look at how we address supervision and accountability and transparency.
But I'm extraordinarily.
Distressed that we heard so much testimony this last year.
About.
Washington Middle School.
And the CSIP plan not being followed.
And.
And if this means anything.
Then.
There there has to be another layer of.
Of something.
I don't know what that is.
I certainly will defer to the professionals in the room about.
How that works.
But if we lose trust with folks.
It takes us 10 times longer to earn it back.
And and that's really disturbing.
So all that said I'm still looking through them and you can count on hearing.
Comments questions and concerns before this goes for action.
It's become a hobby for me.
Director Burke.
Just to briefly touch on that concern and what what Director Mack brought up I want to remind all of us but especially those of us that are.
Those of you that are going on for longer.
The work that has started on policy A02 performance management because that is the place where policy governance intersects with the CSIP intersects with accountability intersects with district scorecard.
It is.
The nut that we started working on.
Across exec and C&I.
Spanning two committees and was sort of put on hiatus while the strategic plan built a little bit stronger legs and wings.
And so I guess I'm just going to encourage committee chairs to look at putting that work.
Back on the work plan and elevating it and keeping that focus.
Director Mack.
I appreciate that ping because I think.
The.
I appreciate Mr. Mr. Dessy your your response but it wasn't.
I still don't understand what the actual process is.
I don't understand what the timeline would be or if there's like after six months we do a check in.
There's no.
In my mind there is.
An internal process that happens but there's no formalized process that I point to and say this is when there should be evaluation.
This is how it's done.
So that's what I'm kind of.
looking for would be interested in seeing more of.
So you know to expect that question at action and hopefully we can brief on that issue.
Number two approval of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funding for the Seattle intervention tracking and community partner access grant.
This came before A&F August 19th for consideration.
Approval of this item would authorize the superintendent to accept grant funds totaling six hundred ninety eight thousand four hundred six dollars over two years from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for the development of a community partner and school intervention tracking system.
Take it away Chief Berge.
JoLynn Berge chief financial officer.
This grant proposal outlines funding for an intervention tracking and community partners access grant.
This funding will aid in the development of a community partner and school tracking system to improve our ability to track interventions.
offered by community based organizations and identify gaps in services.
Currently schools are building their own one off spreadsheets and this would give us a central repository which we can put in the interventions and have a way to measure that.
So it will create a system for a flow of information with a central managed system and it will enable our partner school staff and central office staff to input track and monitor interventions provided to each individual student in compliance with our student record policy.
And it does not grant any additional access to any student data other than what the CBO's community based organizations already have.
There were three comments at Audit and Finance.
We have amended the BAR addressing those comments.
Number one we corrected a number to reconcile the amount of the grant in the BAR to the grant award.
Number two we added in the policy implication part of the BAR.
We referred to the student records policy policy 4 2 3 1 and third we were requested in the grant itself to add stronger language about following student privacy rights and access of that personal information and that has been done on page 5 of the grant application.
That concludes my remarks.
Comments questions concerns from my colleague.
Director Mack.
I really appreciate that those additional things came in after committee and the conversation that we had.
My question or just clarification for transparency on this is.
From my understanding this money is for two years of.
Work to put a system together but it may not and does not include the cost of the system.
So.
It is.
The.
Researching of what exactly.
Should this look like.
But not necessarily act.
This money is not going to pay for the actual system.
That will eventually be.
Needed.
The grant as I understand it will pay for two positions.
We will do systems gather requirements gathering with the schools and the community based organizations to figure out what data and what the system needs to look like.
The grant will also fund the development of the system.
I believe you're talking about the ongoing maintenance costs which we believe those to be very small in the out years.
Not yet defined.
But not so large that we have concerns.
Director Harris.
OK so just for clarification because I had a different understanding from the committee meeting.
This is actually the development of.
Some database system.
They're going to be.
Building it.
But.
So it's not it's not an off the shelf thing it's going to be.
Utilizing some existing software Excel.
Access one of those.
Database systems and.
And it's going to tie into our existing systems and they're going to bring it all together and it's not going to be an additional cost.
Just the maintenance.
In the future.
Correct.
We don't we don't know yet what the system might be.
That's not predetermined.
That's part of what we'll go through in the discovery process whether or not it's something that we currently have that we amend some off the you know customizing off the shelf software or something.
Other questions comments concerns Director Burke.
So what I think I heard and I'm trying to read here two FTE three years.
Two years.
OK there's a three year time frame or three year kind of milestone.
Is that.
What page are you referring.
I'm looking on.
Essentially page.
Of the grant document.
This is the one that's got page three at the bottom.
And this is the topmost box it's basically page 7 of the BAR.
Talks about a three year year 1 year 2 year 3. So does this investment just cover year 1 and year 2 and year 3 is fully.
I think what you're seeing is a difference between their calendar years and our school years.
So this is running for us through 1920 and 2021. So I imagine for the Gates Foundation it's 1920 and 21.
Yeah it talks about year 3 2021 to 2022 full systems in implementation managed and professional development brought in-house by the district.
That implies that that's a no cost.
Yep that's us standing it up and having it operational.
So two FTE two years.
And would those be new staff or funding existing staff.
No at this point we believe there would be new staff.
Okay thank you.
Director Pinkham.
I'm actually kind of flashing back to the other BAR that we just approved about surveys and stuff and what if our CBO's are politically affiliated or and then how that can possibly tie into our data.
Now do we risk having actually information here that identifies students based upon possibly these things if we connect it to our data.
I'm not sure I feel like that may be outside the scope of this grant.
That may be a different question.
Would that be a question for our legal counsel then or.
Because if we were trying to again we're tracking data.
So let's say there's a.
Religious CBO that's providing services and.
Could that possibly.
Share some information about a student if we tie it to our data.
So they follow our current data share policies and they're offering interventions.
So we're tracking student interventions what's being provided to the student and those outcomes.
That's it within the current structure of the policy.
That's all I can say is that we are careful when we are signing MOUs with every community based organization.
Both Ronald and I both review those to make sure that it is following that.
document and that policy there are general terms and conditions in those MOUs that talk about non allowed purposes of the data.
Could you clarify interventions please and give some examples of that to put this conversation in context please.
Sure.
So maybe someone is providing let's say tutoring.
That's a pretty common example.
So they've decided that they have a method they're coming in and they're tutoring a child and reading for 30 minutes every day or maybe they're talking about math or maybe they have another program that talks about maybe how to build a child's self-esteem.
So how that intervention looks in that program what it is and then whether or not they can measure outcomes in their system as well as for us.
Director Harris — you appreciate that.
OK moving on.
Number three.
Approval of grant from Amazon future engineer to support science technology engineering and math STEM education activities.
This came before A&F.
August 19th for approval.
Approval of this item would authorize the superintendent to accept a grant from the Amazon future engineer.
In the amount not to exceed three hundred thousand dollars.
Amazon is supporting up to 30 schools in the district to launch their Amazon future engineer program.
First Washington robotics.
Establishing and running a First Washington Robotics Club during the 2019 20 school year and I want a shout out to our soup and our staff.
When this first came in.
So she went back and got more.
The team went back and got more and I believe that Director Burke will.
Well.
Remember.
at the seafair hydro races a year ago when we were supposed to be making small talk and all that with the really big pooh bahs in the area we ended up at the Washington first robotics tent all day and we convinced them to come show their program in real living color at SLI out at West Seattle High School in the lobby.
Because we couldn't get them on the program it was already set.
This this is the kind of collaboration and leverage that we truly need.
And given Amazon's reach I hope we can exponentiate it in the future.
The floor is yours CAO DeBacker.
Thank you President Harris.
You have teed this up quite well.
It is a result of a conversation that started earlier this spring with Amazon where they wanted to bring the first Washington program into a few schools in Seattle.
We actually declined their offer at that time.
We you as a board had just approved the strategic plan.
We asked Amazon to please look at the strategic plan and see if they could expand it and tie it more to their program to what we had in mind.
And they came back to us with more schools as you could see there are up to 30 schools.
We have 27 schools signed up so far to do this.
We anticipate we'll get the other three very quickly after school starts.
And then what this BAR is for tonight is that there will be a ten thousand dollar.
Stipend or or amount paid to each of those schools participating.
To do things beyond what's happening in the after school programs.
Such as paying for entry fees if they go to competitions.
Paying for transportation.
So the ten thousand dollars per school.
Will be.
Decided on its use by the school but it will also be coordinated through our career and tech ed program because we want that amount that money to go.
To enhancing the programs that will be there through the first Washington program.
Director Pinkham comments questions concerns sir.
Yeah just looking through this.
Did we ask to list those three additional schools or not in this.
Because those three additional schools are known.
No no.
At this time we know 27. There are three openings.
But I thought we knew which three schools were being.
There are 27 schools that we know right now.
Amazon is funding up to 30. So we have three spots still available.
But I thought we discussed which those three schools were correct.
Am I. No.
Not to my recollection.
Let me check my notes because I thought.
Why you look at your notes director Mack.
I just also want to if we could be really clear about what this.
What this specific grant is covering and that there's a whole bunch of money that's going.
Around the backside and not coming through our coffers that's funding this program.
Correct.
So.
This three hundred thousand dollars is specifically to support.
The students that access the program.
At those schools to have additional materials however they need to.
Spend it so that they can run the program but the actual.
Funding of.
The first robotics after school.
Program.
The staff etc.
That's all covered.
And not.
That doesn't come through Seattle Public Schools and that's paid directly by First.
Washington.
I'm not sure if it's through grant.
I don't remember what was stated but just for clarification this is just.
About the materials at.
These 30 schools.
Correct.
And additional funding but that the program is actually potentially running it.
Way more schools than that that are being funded through.
Parents at the school or other.
No.
No.
The the after school robotics program is being sponsored.
Via Amazon via First Washington.
So that the after school program is coordinated in that manner.
This ten thousand dollars going to each of the participating schools.
Is coming through.
Us.
They are connected though and so I they're.
They are connected.
Director Harris.
OK and the meeting that we had discussed this.
It was shared with me that those three schools were Aki Rainer View and World Schools.
So for you to say now say no.
I got a concern here.
What's.
What's the message.
I will double check on that.
They are not listed in the bar.
The 27 schools listed in the bar on pages 2 and 3. I was not aware that we had a commitment from those three schools at this time.
Yeah I think that's what I was asking at the one meeting and those were the three that were shared with me.
And it was an open meeting so I'm not violating anything here.
So I just want to.
See if that can get clarified.
We will have that clarified for you by the time this comes for action.
Director Mack.
I think I also remember requesting.
That it would be helpful to.
Clarify how many students access these programs at each of the schools.
Yes that is in the BAR.
OK great.
It is it is outlined there as to how many.
How many students are.
Depending on the grade level.
OK moving on.
Number four.
On our list of 11 intro items and our time check is. 7 35. 741 excuse me.
OK.
Number four discovery research K-12 D R K-12 grant from the National Science Foundation.
This came before A&F August 19th.
For approval.
Approval of this item would authorize the superintendent to accept the discovery research K-12 D R K-12 in parens grant from the National Science Foundation which was awarded on July 1. 2019 in the amount of five hundred thousand dollars per year for three years for a total of one point five million dollars for the three year grant period.
Are you also presenting on that.
Yes I am presenting on this.
Thank you.
Take it away.
I'm very proud to announce that we the Seattle Public Schools recipient of a partnership grant with the University of Washington.
A grant that is through the National Science Foundation.
This is a grant that will help us in preparing our teachers specifically our K through 5 teachers.
On.
On science and on pedagogy.
And also having a.
Partnership with the university in order to strengthen.
The use of the next generation science standards.
This is a grant that has been sought after by the University of Washington for four years now.
This is the third time that they've applied for it.
We finally were they were finally successful in getting that.
So it's a long time coming.
You were first notified of the grant I believe in a memo a Friday memo in July.
And with us today if you have questions specifically about the grant and what will happen with it we have Dr. Jessica Thompson from the University of Washington.
She has graciously attended in case you have questions specifically about what will be happening.
But it's a it's a perfect timing for us as you know with the science standards and the science curriculum being approved later or earlier this spring.
This allows us to strengthen the PD that those K through 5 teachers will get.
Comments questions concerns from my colleagues Director Burke then Director Mack.
I would like to learn a little bit about the activities around this grant and what we see as measures of efficacy from this work in past or related areas.
I say that because.
Being candid.
The.
Some of their there's history around NSF funded programs.
That have.
Potentially not improved student outcomes.
And specifically the work around mathematics.
Dismantled a lot of mathematics for a lot of students.
And so I'm looking to see that this is.
Something that we have.
That we're not buying onto the front side of a treadmill that's going to.
Create disadvantages for our students when we're trying to.
Improve their access to sophisticated science and math and technology.
With your permission President Harris Dr. Jessica Thompson from the University of Washington.
So addressing your question about what activities will be involved.
These are primarily activities that support.
The teachers in professional learning.
Our team has been studying teacher learning for several years and we are looking so we're supporting the professional development for the teachers.
As you know before we can really look at student outcomes we also have to look at teacher outcomes.
And that's one of the things actually that the grant will help us do is understand the process measures.
So not just the outcome but the process measures along the way so that we can understand how teachers are learning.
and answer those questions about under what conditions and for whom.
How are these how are the teachers learning.
And we'll actually be doing some classroom observations and working with teachers to see how they're working on pedagogy in the classroom and it'll actually give us a better lever so we can actually.
Understand any relationships to the student outcomes as well.
Also address his concerns about past National Science Foundation grants.
Yes.
I don't know the mathematics NSF funded grants that you're referring to.
But I I think that what is important is to understand.
I think these process measures are really important to understand so that we because we could just go ahead and do professional development and then hope We're the best outcome.
But if we can understand how teachers are learning along the way then we can fine tune and improve the professional development so that we can get those better outcomes.
So it really is has the built in.
It actually is modeled off of the Carnegie networked improvement communities which looks at process quick process measures so we can do rapid cycles of looking at data and analyzing how teachers are learning so we can respond very quickly.
to the improvements of the professional learning that we're providing.
Director Mack.
I had a question in committee.
Ms. DeBacker and about.
When and where we were notified of this.
Grant that this had been applied for well over a year ago and went through and then the entire science adoption and all of that.
Going on and I did not remember hearing about this and so I was wondering if.
That research had been done had been identified where we were notified and when.
We.
As far as our own science community here.
From Mary Margaret and our science team we are aware that the University of Washington has applied for this two other times because when they write a partner into that grant that partner has to sign off on it.
So we were aware that the grant was in process.
Your application was due.
Last November.
So.
So.
So the application was due last November but we didn't the board wasn't notified.
that this grant was being applied for.
I'm.
I cannot answer that since I was not here at that time.
Because I asked a question during the committee hoping that someone would that it came out in a Friday memo or it actually was stated in a meeting and.
Because I think we were.
I have recollection of asking specific questions around grants and.
Not hearing about this so.
It sounds like.
We were not notified of this previously.
You were notified that the grant was received.
in early July as whether or not you were notified back in November.
I am not privy to that information.
Superintendent Juneau and then Director Pinkham.
So yeah I think the process like we there are applications for grants in process a lot.
And so.
We don't receive several and we just we don't.
Bring.
Grants we are applying for.
Until we actually receive them.
To the board.
Or that we're a part of or.
Members of or signing on.
Director Pinkham.
Thank you.
And Director Pinkham then Director Burke.
Thank you for this.
And I do see that there was a correction but still maybe with the press from the University of Washington here.
It used to say University of Washington Department of Education but now we are saying University of Washington School of Education.
I believe the correct name is College of Education so we may again.
I know we corrected.
At least got Department of Education changed but now it says school.
I ask that it say College of Education in the BAR and the purpose so if we can again make that change College of Education.
It's the School of Medicine.
But this is the College of Education we're doing a.
Grant with.
I will.
I guess I will look to.
To Diane and your team around.
Accountability measures just to restate.
This board approved five million dollars for professional development.
For a K-5 science adoption.
This is an additional one point five million.
There was some additional money in the middle school and the high school.
This is the single largest investment.
By subject area that I have ever seen in the history of this district.
I believe it's larger than it's certainly larger than what the board has approved.
For our strategic goal.
Of.
African-American males reading by third grade.
So I just want to.
Really put forth the gravity of this situation and the investment.
And there needs to be incremental accountability.
And I'll follow that up and close the subject out.
This board.
Was buffeted.
For months.
On our new science curriculum.
We passed it.
That was then this is now.
But we did amend it from the dais that we would have a four year look at.
And it would seem to me that.
This PD.
And paying off of Director Burke's.
Point.
Five million dollars.
Does that mean that.
We can find other uses for the five million dollars and have this grant supplant.
I guess is one of my questions if this money is new found money if you will.
And I think the point that.
Director Mack was.
Making and I will.
Elucidate that.
For months.
We were involved in quite controversial.
Science adoption.
Procedures.
And it could not have been unknown.
That this grant was was out there and.
I for one as a board director would have appreciated knowing about it.
It's a question of trust and transparency.
And I get that we.
Apply for grants every week here.
But that's a different case.
The amplify was.
Quite controversial.
Lots of information came to us.
But the fact that this didn't.
Is disturbing.
Moving on.
And thank you for coming.
By the way.
Much appreciate your help.
And look forward to being asked.
Really good.
Tough questions in the future.
Number five offices superintendent public instruction OSPI beginning educator support team.
Best.
Grant approval came before A&F August 19th for approval.
Approval of this item authorizes the superintendent to accept the 2019 20 best grant in the amount of three hundred thousand dollars and to implement the provisions of said grant.
Dr. Codd Chief of Human Resources.
Thank you.
Good evening.
So the best grant is awarded by OSPI to all school districts.
It is not competitive grant.
It's actually based on the number of novice teachers that you have in your district.
The best grant funding we have received every year for the past five years it's it flows through legislative action and comes to the school districts.
But it is above the two hundred and fifty thousand dollars threshold.
We do need to bring it.
Before you for approval.
This.
Grant supports our PAR program.
And allows us to hire additional consulting teachers who you may know as STAR consulting teachers.
Under our new PAR program we not only support our first year teachers we also support our second and third year teachers who have not yet met the performance standards.
We.
This grant allows us to hire two additional additional consulting teachers which allows us to lower the caseload overall.
For all of the teachers.
The funding also supports the implementation of our foundational coursework which is the professional development series that first and second year teachers.
will receive to increase their instructional skills and their cultural responsive teaching practices.
Our goal really through PAR and thanks to this grant that that helps us is to make sure that all of our third year teachers moving into the continuing status or tenure as some people call it fully meet our performance expectations and have the tools necessary to meet the needs of our students.
So I'll open it up with questions.
Thank you.
Comments questions concerns.
I have a question about STAR mentor teachers.
When they become STAR mentor teachers are they STAR mentor teachers as long as they wish to be or do we have a five year limit and then return them to the teaching force and bring up other folks.
I'm trying to figure out what the pipeline looks like here.
Yes.
So we call them STAR mentor consulting teachers now because we also have the evaluation support consulting teachers under one umbrella.
And they are five year terms and they have to commit to going back into the classroom.
So there is a rotation and we are trying to think about making sure people are coming from the classroom close to the classroom helping other classroom teachers in improve their instructional skill and then getting them back into the classroom.
Other questions comments concerns.
Seeing none.
Thank you Dr. Codd.
I also have the next item.
Well then you're not dismissed.
Number six approval of the draft project agreement quote teacher diversity contract end quote between the city of Seattle Department of Education early learning DEEL and the Seattle Public Schools to diversify the educator workforce.
This came before A&F August 19th for approval.
Approval of this item would authorize the superintendent to execute the draft teacher diversity contract with the Department of Education and early learning.
And accept the funds in the amount of five hundred fifty thousand dollars for the purposes of advancing diversity among the educator workforce.
Take it away.
Sure.
So as you are fully aware our voters in the city of Seattle voted to approve the levy in November of 2018 and then on March 12th of 2019 the school board you all approved the families and education preschool and promise levy partnership agreement the overall partnership agreement.
Accepting grant funds totaling twenty five million six hundred seventy three thousand two hundred and twenty one dollars.
At the time of that the city of Seattle Department of Education and Early Learning and our HR department.
We were still discussing our overall approach and strategy to the teacher diversity.
Portion of the families in Ed Levy.
So it was not in what you originally approved on March 12th.
I just want to make sure you understand.
This grant is for five hundred and fifty thousand dollars.
This is in addition to the really big big number you read out.
This is in addition to the big number of twenty five million something something.
So this grant award is five hundred and fifty thousand dollars.
It's for the 2019-20 school year.
We are available to apply and engage in this partnership in future years but this is just a one year grant at this point in time with.
Of course we need to meet deliverables so that we can renew but it is anticipated that we will be able to renew.
For at least the next five years.
So.
This grant directly supports our strategic plan goal to have a culturally responsive workforce.
The work plan in that strategic plan and the work plan outlined in this draft.
Project agreement are the same.
The grant supports our efforts aimed at recruiting.
Supporting and mentoring.
And.
Removing barriers.
For educators of color so that they can become teachers in our system.
There are essentially four programmatic strategies that are outlined in the attached project agreement.
Or teacher diversity contract.
Number one Academy for Rising Educators you heard Superintendent Juneau talk.
About that program in her comments and show pictures of that first inaugural cohort.
That is for graduating seniors or adult learners in our own paraprofessional ranks or even in the community who do not yet have an AA degree.
So it's a pathway for those adult learners who think they might want to be on the pathway to teaching but they have no they have not completed a college degree yet.
And so we have a new pathway for them.
We have the classified to cert program which this grant also supports.
Those are our current classified employees here in Seattle Public Schools who already have AA degrees or perhaps a BA degree and then we help them on a pathway so that they can get their finish out their BA if they need to and get their teaching credential.
This grant also supports Seattle teacher residency which you are fully aware of that program which I know you're all in support of.
And that helps our adult learners that who already have a BA degree earn a master's degree.
And then a new pathway My Brother's Teacher which is in partnership with the University of Washington and DEEL to encourage males of color to become teachers in the early learning spaces.
We're focused on not just recruiting and enrolling our adult learners into these different pathways and programs.
But we are interested in making sure that they persist like our lights keep going that they complete all their programming.
So there's a mentorship and advising aspect and then eventually yes get them hired into Seattle Public Schools and keep them in Seattle Public Schools.
So we've got about one hundred and forty thousand dollars dedicated to direct tuition support.
We've got one hundred and ten thousand dollars dedicated to a program coordinator who will oversee this entire project and also helps us with our recruitment of educators of color in general and then one hundred and fifty thousand dollars to the Seattle teacher residency and one hundred thousand dollars for my brother's teacher which is a new pathway.
And then of course we've got the indirect costs at the 9.8 percent indirect rate.
So with that I'll just open it up for questions.
So what's this.
Is this a new hire that you're talking about.
Yes it has not.
They have not been hired yet.
OK.
Sustainability concerns obviously.
And then is this the same 25 percent hold back from DEEL that they do for Seattle preschool partnership.
There is no 25 percent hold back that we've been talking about in our discussions.
So there's nothing in our if you look in the attachment there's nothing about a 25 percent hold back.
I'm not actually aware of what the aware of what the 25 percent hold back is because it's not in my area and I haven't been paying attention to that.
They call it performance pay.
We call it being their banker.
OK.
Questions comments concerns.
Director Pinkham.
Thank you for this and also to.
City of Seattle on providing this grant opportunity and contract for us.
And I'd ask like the at the meeting did they see the culturally responsive professional development preparation and also the note of that pathway 5 bilingual certification program.
If maybe in the future as we look at this to also include some other diversity certifications or endorsements that schools may offer if we can add that kind of support if.
That can be possible because as I noted the University of Washington has a Native American kind of a tribal certification endorsement that is a summer program for students or teachers to go to and I know it costs and some people say well who's going to cover that cost.
And if we can direct some funds there that'd be fantastic.
Sure.
And I think it's important for you all in the public to know that this this strategy is iterative.
We're constantly learning we're engaging with our partners.
They're giving us feedback.
We have a new office of.
African-American male achievement.
Keisha Scarlett is relatively new in her role and so there's a lot of really good thinking that this this opportunity this grant is really kind of bringing people together and helping us think about what the future of this could look like and how we could expand just in our strategies and our mentorship and our professional development.
I'm really excited.
There is an opportunity for this to be for the next five years.
This just happens to be.
You know for one year five hundred fifty thousand for one year but we fully anticipate that this is an ongoing grant to the human resources department.
Any other questions comments concerns seeing none.
Seven amendments to Superintendent Denise Juneau's employment agreement to address performance compensation amounts for 2019 20 and 2021 and base salary for 2019 20 to exhibit a performance evaluation compensation criteria.
to the superintendent's employment agreement to change the bonus payment date from June 30th to September 30th and define previously undefined terms and authorization for future salary discussions with the superintendent.
This came before exec August 21st for approval.
Approval of this item would increase the superintendent's base salary set performance compensation amounts for the 2019 school year.
and the 2021 contract year approve an amended Exhibit A to the superintendent's employment agreement authorize the board president and board vice president to have salary discussions with the superintendent connected to her salary and bonus increases starting with the 2020 21 school year and authorize the board president to execute Amendment 2 to the superintendent's employment agreement and to execute amended Exhibit A to the superintendent's employment agreement.
Assistant Chief Counsel John Cerqui take it away.
Good evening John Cerqui and I was asked by President Harris to assist in drafting of this BAR involving the superintendent's compensation and items that are related to that.
So the summary went through kind of the four items that this board action report proposes.
One is to change the base salary.
There is some discussion still I wanted to put that on the record as to what other non-represented employees in the district will receive.
The BAR is written with an exact amount but at action it could be changed to say I move the board approve increase in the superintendent's base salary by the amount given to other non-represented represented management staff.
So that's an option for you to consider between now and an action.
The other items to set the performance compensation the bonus amount it was listed in our original employment agreement at 15000 per year.
It was left open as to whether you wanted to change that amount.
The executive committee has put forward 15000 for the bonus amount so that's going to set that in the contract for the next two years.
Part of that discussion precipitated whether there should be ongoing salary discussions and retention discussions with the superintendent which gets into the fourth prong about delegating salary discussions to the president and vice president which is board authorizes those discussions to happen with those three individuals.
Obviously any final decision would come back to the board for action.
And then it also amends Exhibit A. So Exhibit A was what we set staff and the board and the superintendent worked on the goals as to what would be the performance criterion for the next two years.
And when this was approved by the board we included percentages and percentage points and consistently so we are correcting that it's five percentage points.
So that is in the document.
It's also moving the date as to when this bonus will be paid.
We.
Heard from Dr. Anderson that the vetted and valid data from.
Director Harris.
Anderson who is a director of research and evaluation correct.
Thank you.
Yes.
You betcha.
That this data would be available and stronger data if it was what we had on September 1 so that now the bonus will be paid.
On September 30th if it is earned versus the June 30th date that was previously included we will not have good data to use by June 30th to determine whether the bonus has been earned.
And then we wanted to define what students are furthest from educational justice.
So there is a definition of that in the amended Exhibit A to include African African-American Latinx Native American Pacific Islander and Southeast Asian students.
And those are the four items that are contained in this BAR if I can answer any questions.
Comments questions concerns seeing none.
Thank you very much Mr. Cerqui.
Number eight BEX IV resolution 2019 20 dash 5 acceptance of the building commissioning report for the Loyal Heights elementary school modernization and addition project.
This came before Ops August 15th for consideration.
Approval of this item would adopt resolution 2019 20 dash 5 accepting the building commissioning report for the Loyal Heights Elementary School project.
Chief Podesta take it away.
It's our practice at the closing of capital projects to hire a commissioning agent who is a quality assurance expert who inspects and determines to our satisfaction the mechanical systems and.
Building systems are working appropriately in this case for Loyal Heights the commissioning agent.
Tracked one hundred and seventy one issues relating to building systems HVAC mechanical and plumbing and has since signed off on every one of them.
At committee there was one that was unresolved related to a gas meter that has since been resolved.
And this is part of closing out a project.
It's part of our OSPI process and releasing retainage payments to the contractors.
So this means a project is done and somebody else has certified it.
Completely then close it out.
Done done and done.
Done done for these elements.
There may be other contractual pieces that I'm not aware of but for for this it's close.
Comments questions concerns seeing none.
You're staying there.
9 BEX IV BTA IV approval of construction change order number 20 for the Lincoln High School modernization and addition project.
This came before Ops August 15th for approval approval of this item would authorize superintendent to execute the construction change order number 20 for the Lincoln High School modernization and addition project in the amount of seven hundred ninety eight thousand five hundred forty two dollars and twenty two cents plus Washington State sales tax with any minor additions deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent to take action to implement the change order.
Take it away Chief Podesta please.
This authorizes payment for roughly 120 work items ranging from things from a few hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars that come up along the way with a ninety three million dollar construction project.
In a historic building in a historic building which those of you have seen it is gorgeous.
I invite everybody to the ribbon cutting on September 3rd.
Are we still on budget on this one.
Yes we are.
Director Mack.
Yeah and for clarification just so the public knows this has been reviewed and the change orders are reviewed also by Director Geary separately and the there's a metrics that we look at which is 5 10 or 15 percent over.
And that this is well under.
Yeah.
What I can't remember you.
I don't have the dollar figure we have still ample room in our contingency and yes direct.
We.
Go over these in detail.
The project team does with the.
Board director.
Director Geary is fulfilling that role right now.
And then they're also obviously talked about in ops committee as well.
Director Pinkham.
On one of the change orders a delete fire shutter.
So it looks like it's saving us almost six thousand dollars.
Was it not needed or what.
Yes.
What is the fire shutter analysis.
I believe it's part of the separation system that's involved in the fire code.
I don't know exactly what a fire shutter is but it's you know since there was enough remodeling inside the school was probably an extra component that was taken out of the system.
And if you come to the Lincoln.
Ribbon cutting you can ask.
Richard Best because I think Richard Best knows everything about every school in this district.
I think he needed a fire shutter over there.
And I'll pay money to watch.
Thank you.
I want to ping off of what.
Both Chief Podesta and Chair Mack said.
Jill Geary who is not with us tonight our director Took it upon herself to read every change order.
On all of our capital projects as a volunteer basis and with her legal background and her sharp eye.
Props.
Props props and props.
And.
And.
This is not a lazy board people.
As you see Director Pinkham often catches the errors etc.
And.
And I'm proud to be a part of it.
Moving on.
Number 10 BEX 5 and distressed school grant approval of four actions related to the West Woodland modernization and addition project.
Came before Ops August 15th for approval.
Approval of this item would authorize the superintendent to enter into an architectural and engineering A.E.
contract with McGranahan Architects in the amount of one million six hundred thirty eight thousand two hundred twenty eight dollars plus reimbursable expenses not to exceed twenty five thousand dollars.
Authorize the superintendent to accept and obligate 2017 distress school grant DSG funds in the amount of six million dollars.
Allow transfer of two point five million dollars from the K-3 class size reduction grant to West Woodland Elementary School renovation and addition project and allow transfers of two point six million dollars from BEX V program contingency to the West Woodland Elementary School renovation and addition project.
Take it away.
Again this is to set up the initial architectural contract to begin work on the West Woodland modernization.
That's a project that's going to go into construction June of 2020 and will be have construction costs of roughly 13 million dollars.
The other financial aspects are assembling the budget for the project.
So this is this is taking off a piece of work and hiring the architect to help us design the changes that we're going to make to the building.
Questions comments concerns Director Mack.
No just a big thank you to again the capital team and folks for finding ways to fix issues in our buildings with limited funding and cobbling these different funds together for this one in specific because it wasn't on.
X5 and is still something that's incredibly needed.
So.
And don't thanks also go out to the legislature for the distress Schools grants.
Thanks go to the legislature.
Thanks go to our team that.
Put those grant applications together.
And.
Yes we get we have broad interests as.
We've gotten from voters here and from.
The state.
OK and.
Making this fit.
Allowing transfer from two point five million dollars from the class.
The K-3 class size reduction.
Help me out with that because anytime I see.
Money going away from K3.
Class size reduction.
I.
My initial.
Cynical mind goes to bristle.
Well.
And I. Would have to do a little bit further research and we can when we bring this back for action into where those savings came from.
But we.
With.
Help from the operations committee you know jealously.
Guard our reserves and try to make savings along the way.
So we need to with whether it's a grant or levy funds we always need to deliver the original scope.
And but once there are savings when that's done we move money around to see if we can add value elsewhere.
Can.
Can you update us.
Sure.
We can make.
We can get bring you detail when we come back for action on what that is.
Director Pinkham please.
Thank you.
For this modernization and addition project for Westwood what was what's the anticipated budget for this.
Because to me this is just moving almost 12 billion dollars over there.
But what was the budget for this project.
Anticipated construction budget is 13 million dollars.
Yeah because.
One thing I guess just kind of quash under the purpose at least maybe if you can add the total there because I had to scroll down a while.
How much does that add up to.
Eventually down on the fiscal impact it shows us the total amount.
We put that total amount also up in the purpose.
Absolutely.
Just to be clear this action does the financial shifting in the background but it's really only authorizing us to spend the one point six for the architect.
I appreciate that but it looks like there's four or five different.
And there are a lot of moving parts in this BAR.
I understand it.
So we want to be as transparent as we possibly can be.
OK.
Last item number 11 BEX IV resolution 2019 20 dash 3 final acceptance of contract P 5 1 1 6 with Rhine demolition LLC for the Wing Luke Elementary School replacement phase 1 project.
This came before Ops August 15th for approval.
Approval of this item would adopt resolution 2019 20 dash 3. As attached to the board action report and accept the work performed under contract P 5 1 1 6 with Ryan demolition LLC for the Wing Luke elementary replacement phase 1 project as final.
Take it away.
Chief Podesta.
This this is finalizing a piece of work.
We had a demolition contract.
To.
Demolish the.
Former Wing Luke building so we can build a new one and that work is complete and.
is complete to our satisfaction.
So this allows us to close the contract and make the final payments to the contractor.
Director Harris.
Comments questions concerns seeing none.
We are adjourned at 8 18 p.m.
Thank you all.
Thank you.
And happy start of schools next week.