Stafford School Board Work Session 5 13 2025

001to talk to you about the FY26 budget today. Today is budget day. Um just want to talk a little bit through some of the materials you have in front of you and then Mr. Fulmer will lead our presentation to talk through where we are. So in front of you, you do have a copy of the slides. Also included in board docs and in hard copy, we have the budget summary. That's a large piece of paper here in front of you, the budget summary. And then we also included uh the uh just a sample of the proposed FY26 uh teacher scale. So you could take a look at that and what that could potentially look like as we have conversation today. So with that, I'll turn things over to Mr. Fulmer. All right. We'll run through

002um kind of presentation and then we can jump into the documents if you have specific questions. But um a lot of what's in the presentation will mirror what you have um in the budget summary in in front of you. Um so um as we all know the governor um did act on May 2nd and uh as far as K12 education goes, we are remain fully intact with that general assembly budget. That was the budget that was included in your school board's approved budget for state revenue. And that was an increase over last year of just shy of $18.9 million. And that was our best case scenario for the state. Um and then on the county side, uh we um what was in the county administrator's budget was a $5 million increase. Um on April 15th

003when the board of supervisors discussed the budget, they approved that $5 million increase and then additionally um they are having a public hearing on May 20th with the intention of increasing the meals tax um and the intention of providing that funding to the schools to help the school division bring our salaries up to where the um local government had their salary proposal at. So that would be an additional $3.1 million. is it brings our total increase of our local transfer um from last year to this year to 8.1. So to be clear, right now in the county's budget, it is just a $5 million increase, but um everything that's been shared with us and their intent from the meeting on April 15th was that the meals tax and that additional $3.1 million would come to

004the school division. Um and we've heard nothing um kind of to the contrary of that or to think um that we should not proceed forward with that full 18.1 or sorry $8.1 million increase. So are we waiting on questions? Yes. You want to get through everything? Yeah, let's let's question not questions comments. I just wrote mine down. Okay. Okay. So going back to uh this slide that we presented um a few weeks ago um we had four different scenarios kind of our worst case and our best case. Really just highlighting here that we did end up with our best case scenario as far as the state budget and the additional funding that's expected from local government. Um, so there were a couple other small tweaks that I want to point out that are now included

005in our um our local revenue. Uh, we'll talk about this a little bit, but in the county's budget was an additional $265,000 of revenue for our day school transfer. Um, additionally, since the purchase since our last meeting, we also um actually I think finalizing the purchase of Blackjack Road today. So, the county approved that last week at their board meeting. Uh, and that not only saves money on the expenditure side, but it also generates um a rental income for the occupant that's in the back of that building that has about three years left on that lease. So, that was um over $38,000 in additional revenue. So, I wanted to work that into the budget as well. Is that per year? Per year. Yes, ma'am. How does can we take the money or does they have

006to go to the county first and then I mean do we have to do something weird with the money? No. No. It'll be appropriated and and we can spend it like everything else. Okay. Good. I just know that sometimes there approvals. So we look back to your school board adopted budget um or sorry your approved budget was at 484.8 million. Our adjusted revenue now is at a little over 488 million. So that's a $3.4 $4 million increase over what you had in your schoolboard approved budget, but your expenditures in your schoolboard approved budget um were 53 million. So, we still had roughly a $15 million funding gap even with those additional revenues. So, to be clear, we still have a $15 million funding gap. Yes. Okay. Y I just want to make sure that we

007understand what we're shorting the system by not by not being more Whatever. I'm I'm not gonna It's the morning time, so I'll save my words. But to be clear, we are still operating at a $15 million deficit essentially. Yes. Okay. So, how um how do we approach closing that $15 million deficit? Um obviously, a big chunk of our budget um or in the school board's budget was our discretionary spend for compensation. Uh so I this doesn't get into the dollars necessarily, but it does get into the proposal of what we um are are asking the school board to approve for salaries for next year. You'll see really our our theme here is once again is is one staffer. And so we are trying to align with uh what the board of supervisors are offering uh

008their employees and honoring the the $3.1 million additional funds from local government. And and that really was the intent of the board of supervisors that that approved that or set to approve that. Uh the guidance we received really was to try to move up our minimum of 1.5% that we have to do to get the state funding to try to get us up to that 2.7 2.75 that the local government is offering their employees. So public safety will will get 2.75% on their anniversary date. So it's a little different than all their other employees and our employees. So every year that's not new to them. And that's every year they actually move up their steps. They get that percentage um on their anniversary date. All other county employees are getting 2.75% but it is on

009January 1st. Um and they do have um a few hundred,000 um allocated in their budget to correct some uh market pay studies and and a pay. They've had two different studies over the last few years. And so this is kind of closing out those studies that were out there. It's not huge dollar amounts. doesn't appear to be huge percentages across the board for all their employees. It's just a few folks that are out of market from what I've heard is it's predominantly some utility workers. So our our proposal um on our end which is assumes that 1% meals tax increase iss um we started on our license scale that we wanted to do the 2.5% minimum but also realizing we wanted to get closer to that 2.7 2.75 that the board of supervisors has. Now,

010their 2.75 is a mid-year increase. We're proposing a 2.7% and we got there by um a $100 on the base of the teacher scale, which does work its way up the scale and then a two two and a half% on top of that. So, that $100 and that two and a half% brings it up to 2.7% across the board for all of our licensed service skill or licensed employees. On top of that, um there will be the state is fully funding it and that will be a discussion today and then on the board agenda for tonight. Um the state proposed $1,000 bonus for all SOQ funded positions, but as you know, we have more positions than um than just SOQ positions. and the state gave flexibility to the school division so that you can reduce

011below the thousand dollars so that you can still fully fund the bonus and allocate it across all employees. One of the things we'll talk about um in a little while is right now the way that's worded even on the schoolboard agenda is is $700 and 350 for a a 0.5 employee that will be prrated. So if you're a 0 75 or a point 6, we do have varying contacts especially with like our school nutrition or some bus drivers. So we will prorrate that. Um one of the things that um well we'll get into it in a in a minute on how that $700 might vary and so we'll get some feedback from the board there. Um on our service scale, we're doing a 2.7% across the board. Um and then additionally the the 1% bonus.

012So, kind of in summary, all of our employees will have a 2.7% increase from last year to this year or this year going into next year. And uh the proposal for the $700 um onetime bonus, retention bonus or prorated for part-time employees. Questions just on on salaries. I just want to make a note for this slide. if we could uh put some type of a footnote that that um part-time will be prrated because the way this looks, it looks as if 350 is if you're anything less than full-time. So, just so people understand that, I'm glad to hear that it's prrated, but I I think this might be misunderstood. Okay. Thank you. And I think in our board docs item, I think we have that speci specified um out, but um we can adjust it

013here as well. Well, if it's if it's in the you know what's going out to the public, that's fine. Okay. All right. Thanks. Um so now just an overall expenditure summary. So um with that reduction across the board down to a 2.7% it's about $13.5 million in savings over what was in your schoolboard approved budget. We are with the additional public day school money. We do have to add 1.5 FTEES uh as part of thatou. That's a cost of about $150,000. Well, we are proposing um as we've gotten farther along in the year, we were moving uh approximately four FTEEs in from the grants fund into the operating. We can leave one of them in our grants fund for another year. So, we're actually that 128 isn't a reduction of that position, but it's actually

014moving it back into uh title funding for next year. Uh we were awarded and got notice a few weeks ago of the Claude Moore grant that we would fund a point basically point4 roughly half of our Brookoint specialty center leave with that for next year. So that's reducing 52,000 about a half a teacher um FTE over to the Claude Moore grant. Um we are reducing our support position that was in the budget for technology of 104,000. That was one FTE. We are proposing to leave our ESOL coordinator um due to the growth that we've had there. That was really the only two support positions we had included in the budget. Um identified some software reductions of working with the department of 110,000. Um dual enrollment fees of 176,000 reduction. Um fuel is 300,000 uh reduction

015and that is we had already built in $150,000. Um and the superintendent and the school board's approved budget that 300 is in addition to that and actually presented to the FAB C uh just last week I believe and it's on the agenda for tonight in the kind of third quarter year end update as we're projecting through the end of the year of uh we're doing really well with fuel savings this year. Um so this isn't eliminating all of the potential savings there, but I think we can reduce that a little bit more. Um, and as I mentioned, Blackjack Road property, uh, we did are purchasing that. The lease there is 125,000, but even in our kind of cash flow estimates, break even analysis, we said, let's leave $10,000 for maintenance, utilities. So, we have lease

016savings of 125, uh, but only reducing it by 115 at this point. And as we have a full year, maybe we adjust that a little bit. We see a little bit more savings next year. And then additional salary laps of 500. uh and and that is another thing that we'll talk about that we've seen the savings this year already uh as we move forward and I don't think um you know we've had a lot of success the last few years of improving our teacher scale um and and some great success with teacher retention and recruitment. I still think we'll be okay, but I don't know if we'll see the same rates that we had the last few years. Uh so we used to be $3 million a year that we budgeted for salary labs. We

017a couple years ago reduced that to 1.75. So this is bringing it back up to 2.25. So now it's a full $3 million. And that would get us down to an adjusted expenditure total that matches our revenue. I know I already talked about some of these, but this is just a little bit more of a breakdown of what those departmental reductions are. Um uh want to touch on the dual enrollment fees. So that was a um per the state. Now uh Germana in our case uh or the whatever community college at the or college that the division works with will be covering the cost of all of our students dual enrollment fees. Uh so uh right now our students paid but our cost that we were incurring was for our economically disadvantaged students or somebody

018facing a financial hardship, we would help um cover those costs. So now with that being fully covered at the state level, um we don't have to cover any of those costs. So that's about $176,000 in savings that with what we had budgeted and we're incurring in this current year. Um and I think I touched on the rest just quickly on on the software. This is a some of these are kind of like software and resources. Now in one of those instances, it's actually we have a a free partnership now with UMW for some grants, resources, and software. And so working with Dr. Shut's department feel that we can reduce a software resource they had assisted them with grant writing and some pursuing a lot of the grants that we've been able to achieve. So we're

019able to get that resource or a similar resource free now through a MW partnership that we uh looking at those grant positions. had a coordinator of professional learning moving that back into um title four and then also I mentioned about a half an FTE or sorry title two it's up there as title two but I I point4 got me so not title four title two apologize thanks Patrick for your signaling there so it's not a reduction of that position but more of a moving it back into the grants fund now that we are um believe we have that carryover funding and funding for next year I mentioned that specialty center lead uh for our medical pathways there at B point um were awarded that clogmore grant. So that's a total of 180,000 or about 1.4

020FTEES. Um I'm actually uh Patrick if you can just kind of talk us through these couple of slides. So we are making some adjustments to FTEES that um net out to zero uh but just wanted to draw uh some attention to them. Sure. And I'll um I'll do this at a relatively high level since um that we have had some conversation but that got into the deeper detail. I'll note that the com the process that we have gone through uh on this is something that we do every single year um where as we go through the spring we use the additional information that we have to try to target where the uh the needs are for the budgeted positions that we have identify if there are positions that may be greater than what was originally

021needed identify areas where we may need have lesser needs than what was originally part of the superintendent's funding proposal the board's approved budget to ensure that we're putting our resources in uh the place where they're going to have the most impact for students and align with our own staffing standards and the state's um SAQ staffing requirements. Um in this case, because there's been a lot of attention on things this year, we wanted to show our work uh a little bit more to explain some of the things that we looked at. Again, this is not something that's new. Even before the board adopted staffing standards and staffing was handled by different departments, they went through a similar process uh each year on this. Um I was just highlighting uh here that some of the things that

022influenced um how we uh looked at things. So this is looking at actual enrollment as of you know late April uh both in our elementary schools that are part of the class K3 class size reduction program at the state. Looking at our actual student enrollment uh for students requiring level two special education services compared to our February projections. um looking at our actual um English learner uh enrollment uh compared to those February projections. And this year we had an additional factor of getting uh clarity from the state about how they were treating uh English learners. Uh as uh we've said previously, this is the state's first year implementing new standards where the proficiency level of students influence the amount of state funding uh and state expectations of staffing. So uh some grace to the state

023as they are learning what questions they need to answer as well. Um but some of that information only came to us in March. Uh so all of that information was uh uh put together to reassess what amount of staffing we thought was necessary to meet both state requirements as well as the local staffing standards that were um planned to be implemented in this year's budget. And um and the you'll see the the summary here that in that analysis we identified that there were um eight and a half positions originally proposed for um ESOL that we no longer felt uh were necessary to meet the state requirements for uh the local staffing standard um based on again updated state guidance and updated enrollment projection. Um however, we did see uh two areas where there was uh

024additional staffing that would be necessary to honor the same standards that were part of the board's uh approved budget um in level two special education at a couple of schools. And then um in one grade each at three schools that participate in the uh class size reduction program um to proactively uh get ahead of uh compliance in that area. So that in areas where we think we would need a teacher to remain in compliance, we have the opportunity to hire the teacher as opposed to adding that classroom in August when we're not likely to find a teacher. Do you have a summary page that shows us the actual FTEEs that we're adding? So there is a one pager then you have a hard copy around the class size reduction piece. Is that Yes. And Missile

025is that was at your request. We broke down uh what this looked like um for this class. I'm going to ask for it with respect to the title one discussion we're going to have. Correct. Yeah. No, my my question is how many people are we adding for next year like how many parents how many like because you gave us a sheet during budget that showed us who we total FTES. Yeah. And flavor, you know, like are we talking classroom teachers? Are we talking paras? Are we talking bus drivers? How many people are we actually adding to our budget? Uh, sure. Um, so that would that is actually unchanged from the February approved budget. So, as you can see, like all of this nets out. This is just about moving where things are within what was

026in the approved budget. So, I don't have that in front of me, but I'm sure that that's something we do. 125 is what was in there and now we've reduced the technology support position. So, you know, 124 because the other ones were not to we're taking them away from the operating fund. A few of those grant positions are just shifting over to the to the grant. So, as far as FTE count changes from your schoolboard approved budget, but so, so, but to the point of the the flavor of the positions, it would really look the same as it did in the position summary that was in the approved budget that's published uh in the published version online. These are all just teacher adjustments between different uh types of teachers. Right. So, I mean, this makes

027it look like we're doing some cutting, but really we are adding quite a few staff for next year. We're cutting ESL, but we're adding other, right? And and and there are others we're adding besides these, right? These are just this is just the changes changes from the board approved budget. These are the only kind of changes kind of reallocation in terms of where it was. I'll also note that on the summary page, and if you want it broken down, we're happy to to provide that for you, but it does show on the summary page each one how the number of FTEEs. So, for example, you'll see the schoolbased positions for growth. Um, it talks about the existing staffing standards and SO2 compliance. That's at 111.4. So, again, those I think what they were saying, these

028are unchanged from your schoolboard approved budget, but you can see those there. And we're happy to to break that down further if you'd like. Can I go back to ESL? when you finish this and I apologize came up when I was outside. Um Patrick, when you when you finish I have a question. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Um we're using the April data. Do we have data from months prior to that? I'm concerned and we're comparing September to April and if we need fewer in April that means to me that we've either lost students or not lost them but reduced the students or else they've moved up to a different level. Do we evaluate in between? We we do a the reason that April has particular value is because April is the first time where we have

029updated information on proficiency levels for students because March is when the annual WEDA assessment is administered to our students. So, so is this change based on a change in the proficiency or a reduction in the number of students? because I'm concerned that we would not have it both because we have students that are going to phase out of the levels that we don't need to provide the services for them at the level right I mean I'm I'm trying I'm trying to balance this particularly in view of the environment that we're in you know currently in April right so if I uh can the vast majority of uh this uh change is actually attributed to the change in the state guidance of how they treat students, which is particularly related to students that there's lots of

030terms for them, but the state term is former L's. Um, these are students that have reached a proficiency level of at least level five on the WEDA assessment. Um, the board adopted a staffing standard for that addresses those students because there is still work that needs to be done with those students. There's a mandatory four years of monitoring uh under federal law and a requirement for remedial services if necessary for students in that realm. Um the state What federal law is that? I have a feeling that may be changing. Uh it is that is under title three of uh ESA. So that is still the law uh right now and the obligations on school divisions are still the obligations on school division. comment suggesting we not do it but suggesting not un understood but you

031know that is that is an act of congress and the law itself is what sets the requirement for school divisions to set the those reporting. Okay. So so so our students really the student count hasn't changed. That's right. So it's not that you know are there some do does the blend of students look a little different in April than it did in January? Sure. Because there are students that have gained proficiency in that time. We've had new students who've enrolled that back bill. We've had students that have left. That's natural over a multi-month period. Right. But we would expect the new students enrolling next year probably will not be at a higher level of proficiency. Correct. That the students may be in April. I just want to make sure that we're not back here in

032August or September. Correct. Saying, "Oh my gosh, we got all these students and now we need to increase correct what we decreased to budget to balance everything out." The good news is that when we did the historical check to see which of these projection approaches would be more accurate, using the April data as a proxy for what the following September would look like was the most stable and accurate model. Um, and it actually tends to be slightly higher than what the actual September enrollment looks like, which is good because there are students that enroll after September. September is the count that tells us what the state's going to give us money for. So, that's important for budget purposes, but we continue to have students enroll. In fact, one of the things that I've um that

033I've learned in this process as we're trying to get better with this, um we actually have a decent increase in enrollment for English learners uh at the semester break, at the winter break. And that's be in part because of the fact that our school calendar runs on a summer to summer uh model whereas in uh Latin America uh the school calendar runs on a January to December school calendar. So it's often so it's often the case that there are students that are leaving at the end of their school year but it comes in in the middle of their summer because they're winter. Exactly. That's right. In the southern hemisphere but but that's true that that's true in Central America as well for the school calendar. So um so that we've we have learned a lot

034about how to make our projections more accurate uh in this area. Um so um the concern the concern you raised Miley is absolutely one that we took very seriously because we do not want to be in a situation of having to come back to the board uh in the fall to ask for something that we could have predicted. So I just also want to clarify that the eight and a half that you have up here aren't people that we have not hired yet. Correct. This is not a reduction individual of the 30. Right. Well, there's still 20 there's still 28 and a half positions left. 28. So, how I'm just curious what our fill rate is on those positions at this point. Are they all filled? Yeah. I just would like to figure out for

035next year, huh? They're not even funded till next year. Well, I know. Well, yeah, but they have been off of contracts all the way through. No, the No, no, they're we funded ESOL teachers at this point, right? I'm just wondering if we have a full capacity at this point or what are we still going to be looking to fill? Right. So this year there were 113.5 um ESOL positions included in the board's budget. Um all but one of which was filled and one that was vacant was actually covered through the assignment of extra blocks uh to teachers. So these 28 were on top of that 113. Correct. Original was 38 36.5. We're dropping that by 8.5. Okay. To only needing an additional 28 you saw teachers. I can get an answer to you about where

036we are with the hiring. Yeah. I just want to know how close we are to filling this. I I would like to share that information with the um the supervisors just because during the whole budget thing they they raised questions about that. So I mean I'm sure we'll give them a general summary but but just so they know that you know we with this reevaluation because there was a lot of questions. I know we had questions they have questions. Why do we need all of a sudden 36 I think everybody had that question. My concern is more related to our ability to fill the position and people starting to nag us about the fact that these are unfilled open positions with money on the side of those. Yeah. Well, so I don't know. But again,

037there the public doesn't necessarily know that. Correct. So I'd like for them to have a full understanding of how these positions are hired, why we do this this way in particular. But I think it's important for them to know to your point level scrutiny. Yeah. Ironically, you know, we lose teams to the ESOL positions because they want to, you know, to to have that experience or to to do that different type of work. So, it sounds like we've done a great job with filling them. Do you anticipate any um issues filling? And to be honest, I'm probably going to ask that question about all of our hard to stuff. What I think are great are hard to acquisitions. Like, where are we at in terms of building back? I would echo I think I I

038think I answered this question at some earlier point for the board note and I apologize if my memory is failing me on that but as these positions go Esau is not a subject area I worry about for exactly the reason that you decided that often times classroom teachers like to navigate into this territory. Okay. Um and so that the challenge then becomes hiring the classroom teachers behind them. But we have to do this is not a either or. We have to do both of these things. So, it's not like uh this is a oh no, we're hamstringing ourselves in uh one area. It's we have to do both. So, um but I'm happy to get the status for you. Please, it would be nice just to see across the board if you I mean if

039it's not that hard. When is our next threeon three supposed to be theoretically August 2028 mightation calendar to Miss Healey's point maybe that's an opportunity to explain to them our more efficient or better metric and counts and how we reconciled this math um to make sure that partly clarification from BOE. Yeah, 100%. But I think like we talked about making sure the supervisors are aware and that might be the best avenue to do that because I don't think it's like something that translates easily in a memo. Um well then you have to assume that they're going to actually read the memo from us. Yeah. That's why I'm more concerned about the public understanding how it works than anything else because I think it was a shock to me to hear that we needed so many

040in one year for the same students that we've had. It's not like we were expecting an influx of students to to meet this. It was just to to meet our current student needs. We needed over 30 what is the 36 or I will say with that though there was new staffing standards that are implemented by the state. So we were meeting the year before, but we had to implement it this year was the deadline. But but then I found out that we were actually funded for these positions the year before, but apparently the money was allocated to other positions and and that's why it was part of this shock that we had to all of a sudden do and you had nothing to do with you because you weren't here. But um you know we

041had to fund all these positions but this has to be shown in context and and the reason I'm suggesting is that that we save this but then we in our reevaluation we identified you know all this special education positions and these other positions we need because if I were looking at this from a you know allocation of funding I would say well you know you have a half million dollars that you you know didn't need. So, it's just just in terms of, you know, transparency and and keeping those communications open. I I' I'd rather explain it in a memo. Even if it's the memo is not read, at least we can say, you know, there was a memo there that that this is what we came out. I mean, it's all it's all public information.

042So, it's not like we're and we're always adjusting staffing requirements based on actual needs because we always base our budget on projected needs, right? But it's not usually a half a million dollars in one category after after we went out and and really made the case we have no choice. This is mandatory. This is a state requirement, you know, and everything else. I just it's it's my observation. It's something I you know I think it would be prudent for us to to share that information and also at the same time you know while we were evaluating that we evaluated the others and these are additional costs. So, it's not like we, you know, came up with, you know, we asked for a half million more than we actually needed. Can I go back to a

043question um Dr. Chase was uh referring to um in the growth positions and I I thank you um Dr. Smith for pointing out to find this number, but it says 111.4 for FTEES and it's it's easy to count out like the ones that you just pointed out in the position adjustments and it's easy to see um the L coordinator, the bus attendance, um the growth for the new schools, but what isn't super clear is what are those 111.4 FPS is that what you were also getting to Sarah? Yeah, for Dr. Chase. Um, so is there any way that we can see a breakout of those 111.4? Yeah, and we've attached them to I didn't attach them today because it wasn't a change, but we've had them as attachments for previous work. We're trying to go

044through things. I think that would just be helpful for us to know um who where are they? Yeah. And we can even attach them. We we to your point, we've done that where it's been like high school, we need this for this many broken out that we have. teachers, paras, and now that we're just like having to do our due diligence in the cutting and or either adding or approving whatever. Um, if we could just have that. Am I get hitting that, right? Yeah. No, I tried this morning to dig that paper out and I couldn't find it. So, right. You know, I know I've seen it, but I just I see this and then I'm like, okay, so, and what else? What else? Right. Okay. Yeah, that's easy enough. Okay. Yeah, because the other

04512 and a half are counted for. Yeah. Yeah, I can see those. But I also think it's important to note that we need for us right now if that would that be helpful. We need to also make it clear though that you know when we're putting out these numbers, they are projected numbers based on a variable that can change. It's not a fixed variable. It is a variable for that very reason. And so whereas we are giving you one number, it's literally like based on this information that we have now and what the state is telling us now. And because the state can change on a dime, our allocations can change on a dime. And so I think it's really important to make sure that we keep hitting like driving that home to people that

046like we're not just throwing numbers around to throw numbers around. we are like the environment changes all of the time and I think it's important for folks to know that we do have to go through this process like this level of granularity look into where we can pick and pull from and how we can pick and pull from it while we're still meeting the mandatory state minimums or whatever it might be. It's it's a point for me that can't be spoken enough. You're exactly right, Miss Alstead. We work with with human resources and our school leadership to look at it very frequently to look at where are projections, where are our kids at, what are our student needs and we make adjustments throughout the year. And so you're right, you're very much it is it

047is um it's projections and the real total number which hasn't changed, right? Well, yeah. I mean, and the thing is that we we have to project for what may or may not be coming based on history, not on what we think the future might look like. That's the problem, right? And I get that the future could be very different, but absolutely it's frustrating. Go ahead. So maybe you continue in the presentation. Thank you. Yeah. And almost almost done actually. So um with with those adjustments to departments and and the FTE which net out this year with with the one reduction on the grant positions and the and the salary adjustments. Um, it does align our proposed adopted budgeted expenditures with our adopted revenue and which means we have a balanced budget. Question. Yes, ma'am. Uh,

048on this page here, the BCBA, y'all forget that we're not all experts in education terminology. Board certified behavior analyst. Okay. Well, tell me next time. Also sometimes known as an applied behavior analyst or ABA therapist. Um so also just touching on a few of the the one-time up um capital items uh and and some of the carryover funds. We'll talk about this a little bit later, but just pointing out that one of the things that was originally proposed in departments was the Chromebook replacement, cyclic replacement. We pulled that out in the in the superintendent's budget and proposed using onetime funds for that. We'll talk about that later. Also, we're using onetime funds for the Blackjack Road property. Uh just letting you know um as as we already discussed, it was approved by the board of

049supervisors, but um we are closing on that like literally today. Uh and then um so do we also have in this larger budget Chromebook purchases? Uh there are some that are purchased them on this page. So it's um not like an increase in the budget. The only increase was with the onetime cap. Gotcha. So it's not an increase, but we have some amount that Yes. Some that are operating, some that are grant funded with like BPSA technology funds is is our bulk of how we fund those Chromebooks. Um so the board of supervisors has um already um appropriated those carryover funds and then we'll get guidance today from the school board on exactly how we want to allocate those. Um digging into a little bit deeper on our the state bonus payment as I mentioned

050it was $1,000 proposed by the state but it was only funding SOQ positions but they gave us the flexibility to reduce that so there was no local match required. Um, and for us, um, based on the number of employees we have now, and so let me back up for just a minute. Our proposal is to do that more of a retention bonus. And how that would work is on June 15th is kind of the I want to say a due date for contracts, but it is a um, it is somewhat of a state deadline. And so we want to say um for any of our employees that return their contracts, sign those contracts by June 15th, that they do intend to return for next year, they would be eligible for a $700 bonus um to

051be paid out on July 1st. Uh so a little bit of an incentive not only to return their contracts quickly, but um just to return generally speaking. Are you talking about full-time? For full-time employees. Yes, ma'am. And as I mentioned, it would be um prrated. Uh and for our part-time employees, I do um want to point out one of the things that uh Carter and I uh were working on late last week and over the weekend is um we're getting a flat dollar amount from the state of 3.3. We don't know exactly how many employees are going to sign and return their contracts. The estimate of $700 is based on we've already reduced by the people that have um have identified or um to us that they are retiring or resigning for whatever various reasons.

052So that is an updated number based on people that we think are are going to return next year. That number could come down a little bit. And so, uh, when we get to the board meeting tonight, uh, we might amend that language to give us some flexibility of if that number does drop lower, uh, than what we current anticipated, we could actually increase. Now, we're not talking $100 or $200. It would take it from 750, 725, 750, but we want to expend all of those dollars. We don't want to return it back to the state. So, so question, one of the things that we want to, this is sort of a minimum of 700 and then everybody's parttime would be prrated based on that. Yes. And so it could come up a little bit and

053then same thing we prorrate. So Okay. I like that. Okay. So the three point that $3.3 million has been I'm assuming we have to go across the street and get that um appropriated to us as well. Yes. So would we be seeing any delays from them because we know that happened last year. Yep. It's happened twice. So I would like for our folks not to get let down by that because that money is ours coming from the state, not the county. And but we still have to jump. We're being transferred to our employees. It's so that's what I'm saying. Like so just to be clear though, this is this layer that we have to walk through that is like gasoline. We're walking through with a lit match and someone has the G has already spread

054the gasoline. So I just want to make sure we're clear that our hope is July one because that money is ours. Well, we're not for the flames yet. There's been no reason. I just want to make sure because No, there is because we have a history here. We're planning on taking it and we've been able to make sure because last year it they it hit hard. We have we have had conversation with the county administrator about it. They understand there's no local match required. This is really just pass through funds and so they were very supportive of it and so be very clear. So we are looking at that June 3rd date to take it to the supervisors. Okay. And that I believe is it. Um oh just timeline. So, I've kind of had a

055lot of these dates throughout the presentation. Some of these are also recapping some of our prior dates. Uh, but um tonight uh we want to adopt the budget and then assuming we don't have any changes to to salaries, we're prepared uh to have contracts ready and released to employees on Friday. Right, Patrick? We're still in line there. So, uh, Miss Fitch has been working with HR staff very closely to get that all ramped up, ready to go. Um, and if there's a lot of proofing there, we got we got to want to get those contracts as correct as possible. And so, if we make any changes, it just starts a a cycle again. Can I ask um two questions about blackjack? Sure. What is the age of the group and the age of the HVAC?

056I asked it sort of last time, but um I can get the answer to you, but I think the building is only 10 it might be less than 10 years old. And they gave us some um credit on closing for minor things to like to recote the roof. They credit it back so we can re leaking already like minor like but actually the overall condition of the building and the roof was okay. There was just some some stuff. It's to give it to make sure that we negotiated with the seller to on us getting it that they've given us some funding back on closing towards that to make sure all and then everything's sealed up. So the age of the building you say is less than 10. So that means the HBA will come. I'm

057sorry. Thank you. I'm trying to get um so just if I could with this timeline um I I don't anticipate that the meal tax hearing isn't going to happen the way we expect, but if it does, what happens? We have to take $3 million out of our If we don't get that $3 million, what's the plan? We would have to come back and and reconcile again for the 3.1 billion and and cancel those contracts. You tell people I think the contract says like pending appropriation. Okay. And then we would just have to re like reappropriate in a reconciliation and then we would have to reissue and we've had several again several conversations with uh the county administrator about this. I've sent a letter over to them. I he shared there was no concerns with us

058proceeding. Yeah, I get to I get the caution. What happens with staff if I'm a person I want people to hear that if this happens this is what would happen that the 16th is still whatever you get on the 16th is contingent on the vote on the 20th and what can they do on the 21st if they've signed on the 16th or 17th on the 21st something on the 20th something crazy happens what can a staff person can they say I know I already signed my contract turned it in because I wanted the bonus but how I I don't want to be a employee anymore. They don't they're allowed to do that, right? That's like a window. If they wanted to resign. Yeah. Because of the you know because the amendment we've changed. We have

059to offer a new contract. No, he just said we don't have to do new contracts. We would have to we're going to have to do reconcile because we're reducing the which gives them the out. Yes. They're not. This is a right to work state. Okay. And part of the sorry I was gonna say I was gonna point out and actually have Patrick explain why we picked June 15th as our as our cut off for correct under state law licensed employees have the opportunity until June 15th uh to leave their current position inform us they do not plan to return um and we release them from even if they have signed a contract um we are the expectation of state law is to release them to whatever they plan on doing afterwards including taking a position

060with another school division after June 15th. Um, under state law, there is no requirement that you have to grant the release of a contract. Um, and so the standard practice, not just in Stafford, but in all school divisions, um, is that unless there is a reason to affirmatively grant release right away, the standard practice is, um, that we release pending hire of suitable replacement uh, for the position. So being able to reach a resolution before June 15th um gives us the opportunity to reach that termination uh taking that cut off date into consideration. But when are you when are you sending them out on the 13th? We'd like to get them out Friday. Oh, the contracts are coming out this Friday. Which is the date? 16th. May 16th. But that was June. He's talking about

061we're in May. I thought he said May 15. June 15th. June 15th is the statuto deadline. Okay. Okay. So, they'll have time back up. Well, hypothetically, they could go out after the 20th. Hypothetically, and then there would be no contingency or anything like that. I'm just They could. But it makes it really difficult when folks have have uh not suggesting that they do that, but if I were an employee, I would feel more secure in signing a contract that did not have a little asterisk that said, "Well, if we don't get the money, then this this No, but this is even more significant though because we've we've got an approved level from the supervisor advisors even with their 5% withholding. This is a you know a a wish and a hope you know that it

062goes through and and I but they don't have to sign until after the Yeah. But I would I would probably wait till the 21st. Probably most of them would I Yeah. I think we're also but they don't have to sign. Yeah. And as you know we're also competing against other school divisions that are getting their contracts out. So that's the other reason that we we felt good about where it was. We've had good conversations and so that's where the No, we can feel good, but that doesn't make it. I just think it's a matter of like we we've touched that burner one two and been burned one too many times that now there's sort of an over precaution on all of our cards for that because it's just not been as I mean I get

063it's changing now and that is good to see like I think the open dialogue that you have with Mr. action is very hopeful and very encouraging to all of us. But who doesn't vote? But about to get to that. Oh, sorry. I got you. But but for us then I think it becomes very important because we are the ones then and we can take all the abuse and all the hitting and all the whatever that we get from everybody. But the fact of the matter is is we walk this walk every year and then somehow or another it's like it's like running 90 miles an hour into a brick wall. So this year we're just hoping it's a wall of balloons and we're going to run right through it and everyone will get what they

064were promised. I know just my analogies I it all gets out of me like I love the rainy I love the rain brings out imagery. question. I mean, hypothetically, we could publish our pre proposed list of of salaries and people could look up, you know, what theirs would be and and that would be pending the approval of the meals tax and then send them out on the, you know, the even that that night. Do they do that in their afternoon session or the evening session or or whatever? I don't know. No, I mean, we've had this discussion and I know you want them out there, but I just am not really comfortable sending something out saying this is what we we we we think we're going to get when we haven't gotten it yet. Right.

065But how much how much more language is in that contract that they have to review? Is it how big is the contract that they're signing? The the language of the contract would be the same no matter what because we always have a provision that states is contingent upon the appropriation of uh necessary funds by the school board. Yeah. So, and I also think people want something in their hands sooner rather than later because there is other stuff that they read or review or whatever. The appropriation of this 3.1 is is in my view an entirely different ball field than the appropriation of the rest of the money which they've already approved. That's that's all. Can I ask um you gave us the list of the K3 class size reduction? Um, where are those three? What

066elementary schools are those three are we CSRs going? Is that part of a future agenda item or is that related to this one or Well, it was part of their budget presentation, so I just didn't know where it was where they're going. Uh, I can't. Um, farm and white water. Okay. Jason found your numbers. I think the additional it's not a guarantee. Oh, it's is we're projecting that based on the numbers. It's not they're not just giving them a position. But is it ask are you asking is it for 25 because we are adding we're adding three positions for growth. So I just didn't know where those I see the breakout of what we currently have. I'm curious where those positions will go. Right. So, um, again, I I think the way that I would

067point this out is especially when we take CSR into account, but really with everything, um, this, you know, we we use the phrase growth, and that is at a grand division level, we're looking at number of positions this year versus a but in terms of site allocations. It's really a zerobased approach. Okay, regardless of what we needed this year, what do we see next year? What does that trigger in terms of staffing need? Um and that's where we uh rely on Mr. White's projections which uh as we this board has discussed many times have a tremendous high rate of accuracy um both for industry and just overall um and that is what we rely on for uh those staffing allocations. um even with tremendously accurate projections which is is are that are based on multiple

068years of historical data you can sometimes find small little quirks uh that arise and I would say that these three fall into that category where the historical trend I I'll I'll use Ferry Farm as an example the historical trend cohort progression etc would suggest an enrollment of uh 93 students in first grade at Ferry Farm next year but they currently have 102 kindergarteners this year right now Now, because they're a class size reduction school, that's a difference of a classroom that would be required to stay in the class size reduction. What is the number? Um, is it 20? Uh, for kindergarten, uh, it is 20. Oh, it's 24 for 20. So, so um that that's an anomaly that there would be that kind of discrepancy. Um, but at the same time, we want to acknowledge

069that there may be those discrepancies and to plan ahead for that. We do regular enrollment monitoring throughout the summer to see what amount of staffing is necessary to remain in compliance with class size reduction uh requirements. And so, uh, there are, you know, ongoing adjustments that may be necessary. Okay. Um, up and down. Uh, the last couple of years it has typically been we have been able to pull some on net. we have ended up being able to pull back more positions than we needed to add. Um, in these three situations because of that quirk uh that where the immediate year data tells a slightly different story than what the historic data uh tells um this is just a way of getting ahead of it. So, can I ask a question about the proposed FY26

070teacher scale? Yes. So basically with the and maybe I'm wrong, I'm just trying to process this. So basically we are changing our scale from a 3% step to a 2.7% step. No, no. So it's still a 3% differential from I'll say 1 to 15. Um and so that's where you'll see in the the column closer to the middle it'll say step differential. And that's actually what it is between each step. Um the proposed projected increase is because we didn't across the board on those steps. So that's where that's showing the actual salary increase of those employees that are on those steps. We'll see the projected increase. The only change that we're doing is at the very bottom because we increased that base scale $100. It kind of compresses from zero to one. Hello. So I'm

071still So all right. So if we give 2.7 to up at the above 17 that one and a half still stays one and 1.5 between the the steps. Yes. Okay. And I do I don't know if I pointed it out earlier, but we are doing even if for our offscale employees. So we go up to 30 on this scale, but we have folks that go up well above 30 and have been grandfathered in um kind of so they'll get a 2.7% across the board as well. But they're but are people actually getting their step? So we've kind of adjusted the scales. They're not getting what was in last year's full step. We want them to maintain on the proper step. So if they're on 15 this year, they're going to be on 16 next year.

072But we had to adjust the scale to make it represent the salaries that are proposed for next year. So how is it still at 3% difference? I'm confused. So So if last year I got I'm just going to start with a relatively let me see if there's one. Okay. So last year I got 16,300 and so now I'm supposed to get a 3% step. You're not getting the full step. I'm not getting it. So it is changing. So last year step six was 60,300. This year step six is 60,126. So it's actually less if you look at across the board, but every employee moves up a step. So that's level six, year six employee this year is going to be year seven next year. So that's a 2.7% increase, right? So it's not a 3%

073step. No, it is not. Okay. That's what I was trying to get at. We are not giving people a 3% step. Yeah. And so I'm concerned that we publish it as a 3% when they aren't actually getting a 3%. Yes. And so we we don't intend to to p we there is 3% between each steps. They are not getting a step. they're getting a 2.7% increase across the board. Okay, so that's my question because this whole thing has always caused the confusion. We have a scale, steps, and phases and no one has ever been able to appropriately articulate for the community what that actually means and how that translates onto paper. So in this particular case, we are not we do not have the funding to do any steps or phases whatever we had proposed

074in our in our original five-year budget. Yes. But we are adjusting the scale up by 2.7%. So that to me is the only way I can. Right. So to me it's like the step became 2.7 rather than three. So this and it's not both. Well to me you say step right. You're the the actual step of them moving up like a step is a verb, right? Like yeah they're only moving up 2.7% of where they're at this year. We look at it as if you're looking at the scale and they're going to move up a full step, that would have been 3%. But we adjusted what that was this year by adjusting the whole scale. But our scale for next year still has those 3% differentials. No, the county, but we need to the county

075the way they explain it in their proposal is like it's a mess. And I might have the numbers reversed or slightly off, but they advertised it as like one and a half% step and 1.25 for like race. So like their math scale adjustment. So we talk about it differently than they do. So even like I just want to put out there that their their math is about the same. It's not like they've pulled a fast one on us. They are talking about a one and a half step approximately and a 1.25 increase approximately that will come out to 275. I still don't. I just what what I've seen in the past is people are expecting when they see a 3% step like this, they are expecting 3%. And when they don't get 3%, then the

076following year, they're expecting us to make that up plus give them their step for the next year. And I don't want that confusion to be there. The fact is we have changed our scale from 3% to 2.7%. So maybe that's what we should put down rather than acting like there is going to be a three still coming. Right. Right. Well, we because even though this we're I know Dr. Chase is not saying that we are doing this on purpose, but our way of communicating it to people like there are some teachers who might think like me and I can do a little bit of math on a calculator and see what 3% is from what I have now and what I'll get later and know that that's not it. And then and then we look

077disingenuous and we look like we're trying to pull one over and we know we're not because we don't have control of our money and everyone knows that. So then just make it plain. We we want to give you guys a 3% step increase but that's not what we're doing this year and we may not do it next year. Like we just need to make it plain and honest or we lose trust and credibility. And when Dr. Chase points it out here, it does make it look like we're not being as forthcoming as we're supposed to. And then I feel like, well, what the heck am I fighting for if I don't even understand it? So, well, and even if you look at steps six or years 16 up, their step differential is one and a

078half% and that this year they're getting a 2.7. So, they're getting, you know, teachers or educators above 16, right, are getting more are getting 2.7 versus one and a half versus one and a half. Right. So, so this scale versus like 25, it's like the bottom half of the scale is slightly worse than what is currently in place and the top half is like slightly better so that they they could all get the same percent because our scale typically isn't built for them to all get a flat percent. So, it's slightly compressed at the bottom, but the differentials are the same except at the bottom. compressing it slightly to make it work and altering it from this year. So, it is a little bit confusing. I think I would take that column out, the stuff

079differential, because we're no longer we no longer Yeah. And we normally don't I actually put that on there for y'all. That's not something we usually publish in our in our budget book or we send out to our proposal is now out the window. I I did it for for this meeting for transparency because I wanted you to see we are compressing at the at the bottom of the scale by introducing right we are still compressing at the bottom part of our when we published the fiveyear budget just to go back because perhaps I've been thinking this wrong for the last three and a half years. Yeah. Um, but we've been talking about implementing phase one, phase two, phase three, and that was all tied to our five-year budget, which we identified the steps we were

080going to take to make this to to even this salary situation out. Correct. But now we have to abandon our phased implementation because the five-year budget was not met. Phase four, phase four of the fiveear budget was not met. Right. So, so it's really it's going to be very confusing because even when we came out with the 503 million, we spoke very strongly about wanting to implement phases and but that wasn't even a full phase four, but that's how we spoke at that point in time. So, what the public heard say was we wanted phase four of the teacher scale and to bring our support staff up to phase three. Yeah, that was all tied to our five-year budget which was thrown out the window year one. Well, sorry. Yeah, pretty much. But but now

081it's going to get more confusing because because that phase was related to steps which is really just right now overall we're just adjusting a scale. Yeah. And so just two points on that is yes. Normally we wouldn't show the step differential. We wanted to show you because there is still that 3% between each step, right? So that the integrity of that scale from steps one to 15 remains in terms of your work to try to get 3% between each step. It does show that now in step zero it is two and a half%. In terms of what is the actual amount between step to step. You're exactly right. We didn't give everybody a step. It's what we're what I'm recommending is two and a half 2.7% across the board because I didn't think we could

082get to 3%. The countyy's at 2.75. I didn't think we could get to three. Um, and then I also if you we got to three for some, then we'd be at one and a half for others if we gave a step and considering inflation at 2.9. Really wanted to to try to address that as well. So that's part of the rationale for recommending the 2.7% across the board. Again, we want to be clear, want to be transparent. I appreciate the the questions and conversation and we'll we will based on what you approve, we will and it's an emotional discussion. That's the problem. It's that it's not something even if you're a rational thinker that you can look at and really kind of bring the information down rationally. It's an emotional discussion and it's very confusing.

083Well, people in this 17 to 30 years, they were always getting this delayed gratification. They were still only at one and a half%. Right. So, so to a certain extent they're getting better. We've kind of levelized the playing field a little bit. But I think what we really need to do is next year's year five. We need to really have a serious discussion about what the salary scale looks like next year. Are are we are we maybe we can't keep maybe we can't do three% make it sustainable and and next year is when this all fiveyear budget comes to an end. We are going to have to make a decision about what that looks like. So does that be I feel like our fivey year budget came to an end the minute we couldn't that's

084probably a good idea the minute we were $14 million short our budget and next year is not going to be better right I mean so it's frustrating because so so we can't I don't want to promise to have something we can't deliver I agree no I agree and I'm more comfortable giving everybody 2.7% than to continue to delay the the the raises the scale for the people who are 17 to 30 years. Yeah. No. So, I totally agree with you that the two is the right way to go. But, but there is an emotionality around this conversation that occurs pay scale and then it's it's like a boomerang back on us, right? Not too, but for a retreat in particular as something to consider adding to their agenda and get to fix one year because

085right now we've got 3% from two to 16. Yeah. But year one is two and a half. So that's that's you know something it's an aberration. And and my other question is how in the world are we going to expect to attract new teachers when we only raise our starting salary by $100? I mean I mean serious when everybody else is getting teachers that correct someone has to convince someone outside of this room that that's important. Well, no, it's we're the one allocating this in our hands, but we're only allocating the pennies that we're being given. Do you know what I mean? We got millions here, Elisa. I mean, but look how many people we need to hide. I think that's the question. You can fix it there. You can give them more there, but

086then who else are you going to basically? My point is though, we can't be crying. We can't attract teachers if we're not doing anything on this face scale. $100 between last year and this year. We all know it cost more than that for gas the price. But then but then where where do you suggest we get the money from though? That's where I'm how where do we get the money from? Should we because for me then it's then it comes from the side allocations. We have to pull all that money back because that's money we can utilize for teachers and and build the bulk up. And then what do our individual schools do? Rely put the pressure on the parents to have the money to to do all that stuff? Like where do you get

087the money from? I I would like I would like Fab to look at this because I I see a serious problem in recruiting. What are our our surrounding jurisdictions doing in terms of the the difference between their 25 and 26 starting teacher salaries percentage doing 7% across the board. Yeah. But but our our competitive ones of Spotsy and Spots we catch up to Spotsy and that's part of how we get some more experienced teachers because at some point our lines cross and um because we have bigger steps in but I I agree with you but I think we need to look at the whole scale and say how do we make this work so that we can sustain this because I don't like making promises to people that we can't keep and and the 3%

088differential it it it's not working and that's why we suppress that we suppress that's why we've we've not raised the the entry level pay scale for two years so it's it's yeah it's it's not a good position to be in so I think but is it a retreat discussion or is it a fab discussion or both or both I think both yeah I would agree with that I think the 3% has been very challenging and it has prevented us from trying to address the very bottom of the scale. And so I I do think a conversation around the the step scale, the pay scale, what's what's an appropriate amount between we did look at Prince William and Spsylvania in terms of what is what's in between some of their scales and there's a range of

089two I feel like it was 2.15 to two and a half. We can provide that to you, but we looked at some of that. They're they're not at 3%. Um, and so I I just think we need to take a closer look at that so you can we can appropriate that money to some of the bottom of the scale in the future. Well, good luck hiring people when we offer a $100 difference between last year and this year. But you could also say good luck retaining people when you're not like I I agree with you 100%. But the money it's all the same. We got 3%. If but if you if you up this here, you're going to make it smaller here. So then that does become a retention conversation. So you can't criticize saying

090we're not we're not bringing new people in without acknowledging that we're trying to keep the ones we have here. At the same time, it's one pot of money to pay these individuals who deserve money across the board. Remember that we have not just been hiring first year teachers. We've done better at hiring teachers with more experience because of our scale. Right. So that does that first year. It's not year zero with Stafford. It's year zero in teaching overall. It's like we are bringing more experienced teachers because we've been able to do a little better than not all surrounding counties but some surrounding counties in middle we have tuition uh the re reimbursement program for student loans. But typically so we do have we have better health insurance. So somebody new is a better understanding. I

091do have a I have a question, Mr. So, I've asked these two people on the other side of me. Um, because I think we're all having a collective senior moment. We absolutely understand what pot of money is which except for local, right? What that $6 million where is that coming from? We were thinking is that the lunch fund and the blackjack revenue and what is that? So, it's things like um blackjack revenue, but other rebates um or is it grants? No, our grants typically are in our grants fund if if they're tied directly to an expenditure. Um these would be um student fees that are charged and then submitted up to central office. If we have rental fees that are charged, if somebody does a field rental or a school building rental and it's sent

092up to central office, okay, we just I couldn't understand that line does include our day school. So, I know Jason wants to answer the question before so he can do some other stuff. So Jason, did you want to answer that question? Sure. So the facility was built in 2012. It's about 15 years old. Okay. HVAC systems of that type. 15 to 20 years. So you know worse we'll probably replace it somewhere in five, six, seven year range. But these aren't your multi-million dollar systems. These are 1020,000 type of systems. Much really. But how many are there? I believe there's four total units. Okay. Um, so it's like 100,000. It's like our school mechanical project that we have to That's nice. Nothing that complication. Uh, the roof. Um, there was a piece that as Chris mentioned,

093we had a leak recently. Um, they did make repairs to that. They allowed us another $10,000 um in the final closing to do some more work. We have a quote for I believe it's about 7,000 to do a little bit more work there. So we should be mind to cover that. Okay. Thank you. So I just want to say one thing just since we were talking about SAS and stuff like that. I think in this discussion this is really weird coming from the most anti-technology person probably on the board. Next slide please. But um I I feel very frustrated. I know why we're pulling back the technology position. But I also feel like every year for our poor technology folks, we add more and more and more to their plate and and we manage to

094reduce software. I guess that's fine, but we don't our physical assets are still there for them and we never give them another person to help with that workload. So, I would just like it known that it feels like the right thing to do. And I know we have a new person coming on board and their vision maybe, but I I don't I'd like to know that we could support that person with people if their vision is whatever. So, it's really confounding for me to see that kind of I guess we look at it as like I I think it's easy for people to blow it off and be like, "Oh, spend that much money on a person, but I don't think you understand the fleet that that person's respons that that team is responsible for."

095and how small that team actually is. Now, these are my new like um fluffy shades because I'm on the technology advisory committee now, so I can do all this. But um but anyway, there's a reason for that. I would rather see I would rather see who's on the ground than another head in charge. So I Yeah. So I just want to make sure that we understand like we we really do need to consider filling those gaps in the future. Do we have that list of the 111 or is that coming? Oh, you have it. That's right. We have what was in the approved budget. So it doesn't take into account the positions that we shifted around because we haven't updated it for that yet. We do that as part of the we did it on

096the presentation. But we have just this is the 111 that we were Well, that was in your budget, right? Is that okay? Right. Great right. Yeah. For right now. We can get and we can you can tell us and we'll just write different. Right. It's just going to change. We're just killing another tree. Yeah. Does this equal? It's warm in here. Turn it over. Can I put this one back? Okay. I was like something happened. This equals 111. Okay. CSR and CSR. Yeah. And it was special. Yeah. five and a half just these these figures reflect still what was in the approved correct so that's why you total up you saw it you'll still see 36.5 so that hasn't been adjusted but yeah and the adjustments are in the presentation we just got to confirm

097well so then the other question I have is on the back of this we used to have the unfunded needs that the school system has do we still have that list um so we have it but it needs updated too based on all the changes from yeah I'd like to update that and have it attached because I do think it's important for people to see like what we're actually giving up and sacrificing as a system. I get it. We can't be perfect. We can't have a perfect world, whatever that means. But if we could let's say not giving up, let's say working towards, right? But but I think that it's it's important for the public to remember that there is still a list of things that we're not even looking at at this point. Thanks.

098Thanks. as a 21st century school system. We're happy to update it. Just might not be That's an encore. No, no, no, no. That's fine. That's a special I'm just Yeah, I'm just confused because this adds up to 106.4, but we have 111.4. So, where are the other five positions that have been added? Is that No, there was six. Yeah, there was a separate document that had that broke out the other ones. This is 106. Yeah, but this includes the extra eel that we're not going to move them over to. So what I'm saying is this is 106.4, but what's here is 11.4. So there's five something else. These are not accurate then because we've taken he said that. Yeah. So why do we have one that's why are we getting something that's not accurate? He

099said updated because they haven't updated it up because we just we just asked him to do it. Okay. I'm just It's hard for me to to to add and subtract when the I don't have it all in front of them. The total numbers have changed because even though we dropped down eight and a half ESOL positions, we increased special. But if you go back to that chart, I think there was a there there was extra at the at the bottom. I don't think I don't think they technology. It did. It It equaled it just a technology with the with the numbers. Oh, it has a deficit. I thought it was one. Great. Okay. It's a principal for the new schools. Yes. And the office manager, but that's already a separate line on here. I thought

100or six and a half staff staffing for planning area of new schools. Six and a half. See that's a separate line on this whole thing. This is not right. One second. I'm trying that's a line. Yeah, it doesn't equal. Right. So then this is actually going to be 105.4 then because it's also a deficit of one other position. So this is 105.4 and we're at 111.4 to approve. So the ESOL coordinator is not listed on here. The So the support position, those two support positions are on a separate line item. So there was a separate attachment. This was just for the growth positions and they're just trying to double check the high school. No, that's a teacher Esau. That's right. Okay. I just want I just want to know if we're approving 111.4 4 FTEES.

101We see 105.4 in what you gave us, but there's a deficit now of seven 766. Yeah. Yeah. We can we'll get the answer. Okay. If we can update this. I mean, I I get it. It's 105, but it's not this 105. Correct. Yeah. And that's what I explained before I Somebody else asked for it. I'm the one that wants the This was what they had. This was what school board's approved budget. So I was just comparing what was already provided. So we're going to get something in response to Dr. Chase's original question that shows 111. Yes, we were going to update that, but we were just going through the changes and that was in the presentation. So all the attachments haven't been updated for the budget bullet. Okay. and and I it would be interesting

102to me to know the difference with those ESOL where they came out whether because we've got Esau and Eli when I have an updated chart then I can review it. Sure. Thank you. Thank you. And I I still just um you know ages ago Mrs. Healey brought up the question of more paras and I still continue to question a little bit. You know, we added so many paras with grant funding and now it's operating funding and I'm just and it's still going up. Yeah. And it's still going up. Yeah. I'd love to see like we've talked about it too um that you know back when I started they talked about some of them falling off due to attrition. Yes. Um, but I know we've grown and then I know that Virginia Literacy Act provided funding

103for some. So, I'd like to see like kind of the addition and subtraction like we eliminated these positions but then these were funded by growth and then we eliminated these positions but then these were added back by V Virginia Literacy or you know were needed for sped or like whatever that looks like. so that we can see that even though it does appear that we're growing, we're actually growing efficiently and taking into account where we have been able to make efficiencies with those positions. And I see three are the three that are listed under high school have been reduced. Yeah, there's like there's Yeah, we could we could put together maybe a historical brief for you this year. Obviously, that was a level two, not like super urgent, but something that's almost like a writing

104document moving forward. Um so that every year when we look at these numbers again we can see how that's changing and how we're they add it then and if any of those are con being converted from like gened paras to sped paras or like you know but we're adding 15 level two paras in middle school which I'm not questioning that I'm assuming we're needing them but we're saying in high school we're actually reding Is that reducing from from what we have currently? These are growth positions. So we we 15 in middle school are not some of those middle school students at level two going on to high school and there's going to be a need for that. I don't I don't know. I don't have the numbers and we did take the three from we

105took away the growth positions at level two in high school. Is that correct? There's no growth positions for level two Paris at high school. So actually that would be one of the numbers that we would update on this chart as part of the summary that was provided here. This described shifts this this described a shift in how we the teacher uh position allocation would look. Um we can update what it would look like uh in terms of the grade level split for a pair of professionals adjustments. So are SOQ they're not SO paras are part of the local staffing standard. They are not uh there there is an SOQ regarding special education pair of professionals but our local standard it seems I mean if I look at a document I'm I'm only going to be

106able to look at it in the text of other documents that I have and looking at this it appears that we are not only not projecting a need for growth positions of terrorists and high school we're reducing the the high school but yet we projecting a need of 15 you 17 in elementary, which is covers what? Six six grades, and then 15 in middle, which to me is a lot for three grades. That means we have a high number of students with that need, but yet a reduction in high school. So that's all I Does it any of it relate to not having a day school program at middle school where we're trying to better accommodate them in a general in a you know least restrictive environment more you know normal 68 environment rather than

107day school. I mean it's based on some student needs right in terms it's other it's also based on the staffing standards that you approved in terms of how we we've gotten to these numbers based on our student numbers based on the staffing standards that we put together. So that's something that we're happy to update this and well I really think that's something this hasn't been provided in February for our schoolboard approved work session. So see we had the outcome. I think that's a good conversation. You want to say that out loud so that can put on an agenda. Missy, can you or Moren and Maya, can you guys put on an agenda item for a work session a review of the staffing standards so that we can get a better idea of this? Honestly, because

108we've had she brought up a great point. We've had them going for a while. It's good to be evaluate is this a thumbs up a thumbs down or what's the input from the principles too? We do that every fall and go through the plan. So I know Mr. Bernett and the time the HR team did a did a review. They did bring it to FAB C I feel like a few months ago, right? Either January or February, we did a presentation of the status of staffing standard implementation. And then I also know his team has been working with principles to give feedback on our current staffing standards so we can working, what's not, what's a new five-year plan like conversations about what that might look like and what might inform those decisions for the next

109fiveyear plan. Um, Well, especially since next year's the last year, we kind of need to know where the strategic plan and the budget. I think the strategic plan is the year after. Are we in a good place right now for budget? We'll take a like a quick break or I don't know and then we'll do conversation. I know. I'm trying to I know a rainy day like this. That's right. Okay. been digging into this kind of taking a deeper dive into Chromebooks including replacement in terms of summer summer collection um all of that and so I know you uh you are scheduled to take action on that those one-time funds uh that will allow us to have that replacement cycle u also with us we're looking at that cliff that's coming down the road too

110with because of the the large purchase with Chromebooks several years ago during during COVID. And so, um, Dr. Stimple is coming, uh, as as chief of schools. He's been helping with the technology department. H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H Hunter Mat is here as well as we talk through um these items so we can answer some questions and just talk with you about the plan in terms of Chromebook replacement here. So here is Dr. Stemple. He's gonna kick us off. Good afternoon or morning still, I guess. Um so what presented to you is uh deploying our our Chromebook fleet across the

111division. U some planning talk topics that we went through this uh document is um high school summer collection. This is a new process. We're going to collect all high school Chromebooks for the first time. A lot of times they would go home in the summer uh that type of thing. So we are going to collect them all this summer. uh which presents its own challenges but feel feel like it's the best checkin of our technology and I'm going to talk a little bit about that later. Uh we have to do a better job of checking in on our technology. I think we do a better job checking on old textbooks probably. So that's one of the processes that we'll talk about shortly. Um middle school options and then the elementary school K through five. Oops.

112Um, so, uh, Chromebook storage and student access, annual device checkouts and collection, and then our sustainability and survivability are managing, uh, our Chromebook program. We'll start with elementary schools. Uh, what we're looking at is Chromebooks kept in classroom specific charts, uh, cards. Yeah, cards, charts, cards. Uh, one card per two classrooms. K1, we're practical. I say we're practical. We do have a few elementary schools where perhaps K1 and K1 and K and one are not on the same sides of the building. So it may not be as easy, but we're practical. That is our plan. Uh each student has a designated device checked out to them two through five, but they're kept in the cart. Uh there may be an occasion as the students get a little older where they may go home overnight for

113specific reasons, but it would not be a general thing where they're checked out and um just sent home on a regular basis or given to them. And there's some advantages to that. In elementary school, we can control our screen time more and then breakage from transport obviously is minimized somewhat. people on the wrong button. Uh middle schools, uh middle schools, um we are looking at checking out Chromebooks to the individual students for the year. Uh they be responsible for them daily fully charged and they're responsible for returning damage devices for repair and then they're collected at the end of each year just like the high schools. We are preparing for students for high school. uh we don't want to have barriers for take-home availability as uh they are used extensively. Do students have the option

114of meeting them at school if they don't want to take them home? Um we do not have enough cards for that. Uh so we wouldn't have an opportunity to place them in a in a charging cart or something where it wouldn't have that. And keep in mind that middle school students often leave from a classroom that they don't go back to the next morning if they're because they're moving around the building. Oh, for X and Y or or they may end in PE, for example, and not have and or wherever. So, do we provide any type of cover for them if they want to take them home? You know, like Nope. No. So, they just take it if they drop it at snow. Yeah. Okay. high schools. Uh, same thing. We check them out individual

115students for the year. They're responsible for bringing devices daily fully charged. They're responsible for returning. Uh, same thing. We continue with the same thing we've done at high school. Uh, no difference, no proposed changes there. Do we track how much we spend on repairs annually? We do. So, we have about 187,000 a year in parks. And I can bring up the like hours of labor and transport. Yeah, because I was going to say the labor. If we could just maybe get that in the bulletin, I think that might be interesting. I mean, I think it's just that people don't realize that it's not just purchasing the equipment, it's maintaining the equipment. There are long-term expenditures. And we're only thinking Chromebooks when in actuality they teachers have their own laptops, their um uh portable devices. They

116have classroom devices, screens on the walls, projectors. All of those things are all still part of the consideration. And what's our replacement cycle on some of that too? We don't have one. We some of them when it breaks, we replace it. And we're going to talk through some of that stuff at the end. Yeah, we're going to talk through some some strategies and some things we want to do moving forward. Um some of the benefits annual device collection is we're inventory verification. U that's something I think we need to do better job of verifying the instead of giving a kid a Chromebook at the beginning of nth grade and not verifying its existence yearly or by yearly uh uh semester check-in if you would. uh we're giving them some expensive equipment and we need to

117I know that's a lot to ask of a principal but as former principal I think it should be something we should want to do. Uh helps keep a track of that inventory. It also allows for cleaning updates, repairs u and I think it does help prevent the damage and the loss over summer break. And if we got sick and students don't come back then we have to chase them down. A student moves a student who just makes sense. And I know some of the principles are doing it for the first time this year. Uh and we're going to see how that goes. But uh if student A gives me a Chromebook, student A gets that Chromebook back. Again, ownership. So uh we're going to see how that goes. At some of our schools, we're not

118um you're not turning in a nice Chromebook that you've taken care of and getting something else back. So, we're hoping that ownership that goes well and we can produce some ownership, you know, establish some ownership for the Chromebook they are getting, especially uh in the middle school. Why will we not do that in all our um schools this year? Uh a lot of it's just been staff. It's first time we collect them all in the high schools and I don't think they're all ready for that. So, Dr. Robertson was going to talk to middle schools are going to be collecting all of theirs. Elementary schools collecting all of theirs. Okay. But elementary school students don't take their phones. Correct. Mr. My understanding we've done that in elementary and middle. We've always collected them. We haven't

119in high school and that's what we're doing this year. So how many high schools are going to collect them? All of them. All of them are collect. You said they weren't going to do it this year. No, I was just about assuming you're getting the same one back that you That's unfortunate, right? This Dr. Robertson was speaking to the principles tomorrow. He said like you could end up with winning the unlucky lottery and getting a Chromebook that was not well maintained. Well, like if you're So, in other words, if you're an incoming ninth grader, you could be getting an outgoing 12th graders. Well, that would be the case no matter what. Right. But that's what I'm saying is that you won't just because you took care of yours, you're now as a ninth grader, you're

120going to be at school of we're not transferring from the middle school to high school. But as a sophomore, well, they are they will or they won't get their same Chromebook back when they're a junior. At some of the schools, they will. Not all the schools. For example, North Stafford has to take all of theirs off site this year because North Stafford is kind of Yeah, because they're shutting down for repairs. So, to expect to take 2,000 offsite with names attached and bring 2,000 back and get them to the same kids may be nearly impossible. But Wow. Dr. I think Hunter had something to add in the back. I was going to mention ninth graders will always get a new one. That's what I a new one. Last four years we've done new devices. Okay.

121So going forward, and I won't I won't ask I won't speak for the new technology person. Going forward, the recognition is that ninth grader would keep that Chromebook. So when they turn in at the end of the summer, they're going to get the same one back in 10th grade. Gotcha. Thank you. Can I just say like logistically this has been a big push for our high schools to to take all these in, store them, check on them. We would like to give the same one back. I think we're just now at the point we can't commit 100% to that for this year. We would like to. I think they're going to look at that. Dr. Robertson's going to look work with principles to see if we can make that happen. But just where we are

122right now, just full transparency, I don't think we're for children who are in credit recovery or new credit, will they essentially check theirs in and then get it right back for lack of better language rather than checking it in for the summer and then answer that question for you. Hunter, you said yes. most likely. So, I'd say it's like a quick check because they're going to need it. I think honestly summer classes start technically before spring classes end. Um, so to be without a device for any period of time would be a struggle for those students, particularly the ones that are relying on credit recovery. And it's similar to our assisted technology users. Okay. There really isn't a good break, right? Can we just talk about how we track um breakage in terms of like

123if I've got the same kid coming to me and he's gotten three Chromebooks because he keeps breaking it. What's our like what do we do? Do we track like hey Johnny's this is your fourth Chromebook this year, Johnny. We certainly can't give you another one. So are we tracking that? I don't have a good answer because that would be at the school level. Yeah. So I think we need to find that out because we need to find out. I mean, it's one thing if you break it one time, I get it. Oops. Excuse me, I tripped. But I can't keep giving you new Chromebooks every nine weeks without without The question is, is there a policy and a regulation? Keep keep in mind maybe and I and and a repayment at some point we're going

124to have to hold you financially responsible for this problem. Keep in mind that you're using the term breakage breakage which covers a lot of things. They're not all coming back broke broke. Some of them are right or they're older technologies that we're trying to keep together, older platforms and Hunter can speak to that better than I can as far as uh the software is working properly. It has nothing to do with the kid. Yeah. No, no. I'm talking about break and missed. I can when I've talked with principles about this, if they can show the kid did it intentionally, they're charging them. Okay. Sometimes there's a there's a they're trying to work through it. Was it was it techn you know was it intentional that you dropped it? Was it intentional you know did you

125throw it? Did you drop it? Did you what happened? If we can show that the kid did it intentionally we are charging them for that device and there's a little bit right. But if but if it's the same kid and he keeps saying I'm sorry I dropped it again and you hand them four textbooks. Yeah. Well, I'll also say a bit of a of a um a sense of pride because a lot of times the loners are like the little kid Chromebooks and not the big kid Chromebooks. So, everybody knows like your Chromebook is broken and now you're on this like elementary school smaller less less cool Chromebook. As you should put like heart stickers on them and paint them. Oh, they put a lot of stickers on their own. I'm all for that. I

126mean, it should definitely be embarrassing. It it is very evident that you do not have the proper Chromebook and people, you know, I'm surprised at how much they care. That sounds like Chromebook shame. I was just going to say life is filled with all kinds of struggles. I'm sure that it won't be long before we're told we can. Hey, if it makes them pay for them, then uh they're going to have to pay for stuff and for us to not to do that. So, here's just a quick uh uh analysis you guys have. About one in three student devices are submitted for repair annually. Oh wow. And this does put a heavy strain on the technical staff. You've asked about that and like I said Hunter does have the hours but it broke it but

127it would have them now. There you go. So it is this year up to about a week and a half ago 11,772 hours for just the central IT technicians. It doesn't count the individuals in the buildings and that's included and that is in addition to that 1,116 hours of transport time back and forth from the schools to where we can do the centralized repairs. Hunter, does that include the I know we have some student students that come down in there and work. Does that include all of those too? Yeah, that so that's six full-time and three part-time people. So, and the the bulk of say the bulk, but there's a lot of intern work over the summer because so much of this we don't discover until we get them all back. And well, I know

128in the past, you know, since we have not been collecting all of them, but they still have been doing a lot of work over the summer, what's that going to look like now that we're taking them all in for internships and, you know, costs of repairs and what have you? What what kind of team is that going to take versus what we've been doing in the past? Or do you get the same team just for like the crunch during the summer? I mean, really, it's as many student interns as we can. That's how we bolster the numbers. So, otherwise, it's the same, but it's the same district technicians that are working on things like the collections, deploying new devices, whether desktops or Chromebooks. So, it's it's a crunch. Do you see less repairs in elementary

129school since they don't take them home? Dramatically. So, and the looking at data of schools that have gone from no cards to carts, it's at least cut in half and usually it's a little bit more than that. So, I was under the impression at the beginning of the year that that's what we were aiming for in middle school. And I feel like that's where we started. And then obviously with certain types of class, we might have the exception of a child saying, "I need to take mine home, otherwise I can't keep up." And that would be the exception to the rule. But now I have two middle schoolers with Chromebooks all the time. And I don't I don't have a sense of when that changed. It just all of a sudden went from I need

130it for this project to I have it all the time. Um, and I don't know why we moved away from where we were and keeping them in middle school, especially because our rate of damage at middle school was higher per capita compared to other levels. I think middle school was the best example because that we have like a full year of they didn't use cards. This year they did use cards and that's when we talk about less than half. So can I think Stacy's back there, right? Yeah, Miss Johnson's here. So, we did have two middle schools try, excuse me, try out the carts um and look at that and we got feedback from those schools and Miss Johnson can speak to it. I think uh there was a lot of concerns that came out

131from the principles, the teachers and the staff there about just the instructional um impact that it had. And so, you know, I think where we are now is we are we don't think that the carts at the middle school are the best uh best way to move forward instructionally. I think that if there it does present some opportunities if they don't need to take it home every night, but at the same time when we're looking at what our teachers needs and our staff needs. I mean, they were talking about the needs that kids have to access materials online if they're studying at home or they have hard copy stuff as well, but just some of the materials are not accessible to kids when they when they leave and they've seen a struggle with that. And

132so Stacy, I don't know if you want to add to that. No, no. I mean, the summary of the survey results clearly indicate that staff feel like our students who weren't permitted to take devices home each evening were at a disadvantage. Is there any way that we can instead of doing an all or nothing approach that we can do like a step approach? Sixth grades keep them at school, seventh grades check them out, eighth grades take them home. That was an option that we did discuss. Okay. The first um Plan a overwhelmingly is that each student have a device that they can take home. Um if the if that's not the plan that we are able to go with then we talked about a tiered system. something I mean for me it's a question of

133it is a question of money and and res like human resources really at this point in time and so I think that if difficult decisions have to be made they have to be made and whereas I if I I hate to take that out we might have to ask our teachers to find a way to make sure that anything that's internet based gets done during the school day and everything else goes home as homework because at the end of the day we are looking at addressing the critical budget shortfalls and how do we do that and so every dollar allocated at each part of our system is important. And and I hate I don't want to say this being like I don't mean to sound crass saying it, but sometimes it's not about it can't

134be about convenience, right? Or what may or may not be easier. Like we may need you to think on the fly because this is not a cheap price tag and we already we already know what the problem is in middle school, right? And it's not their fault because it's who they are. So nobody's blaming that, right? But then it is up to the adults to say we can't afford to keep appeasing middle school students. We have to find a way around that. Well, I think one of the things that I'm concerned about too is that I would really like to know how the technology is used instructionally, right? And I think we don't have a very good grasp on that because I it's clearly an expense we have not just in purchasing but maintaining and

135following up and the staff required and I just would like to get a better grasp of what our instructional use is and where it's really necessary so that maybe we can address some of these other questions. Yeah. And I would be okay with like selecting the right technology for the student based on the class that they're taking because even at the high school level, don't we have um some kids in some of like the CAD type classes where they're not even on Chromebooks or they get in addition to Chromebooks a different laptop who's like I don't know the there's a lab and they work on it in the lab. So yeah, but I think that those students I I they sometimes do because I don't know what math or science or art class my kid

136was in at Brook Point, but the Chromebook could not be used at home for the any of their homework. They had to get a Mac. I believe it was a Mac. I could be wrong, but they got a Mac. My recy was a Mac as well. But it took it took many many months of the teacher requesting or you know going through the hoops doing the right thing and my kid was like I still can't do the work because of having only the Chromebook and then finally they got the other computer that was better for the software or whatever. So, there's a lot of moving parts to this and it's not one sizefits-all, unfortunately, which makes it really, really hard for all of us. But, and I'm so glad that we're instituting something different because

137how we track what these students do because when that kid graduated, she did not turn in her Chromebook or her other thing. I turned it in when I found it after they were in college many, many months later. And I never gotounded. But when they had textbooks that were due, I gotounded for those textbooks. I got sent that bill. My kid got shamed. You ain't doing this. You're not going to prom without this textbook from two years ago. And we were able to maintain that. But now all of a sudden with Chromebooks that cost a lot more per than a textbook, we can't do that. That to me, I don't see I don't understand the disconnect. It doesn't make sense. I I do not one device. It's not four. Yeah. But but you get what

138I'm saying? The one device cost a heck of a lot more than what we were paying for one book. But I got letters home for that library book or whatever and I didn't get anything that my kid basically stole these these things that I did find in the closet and I did turn them in. But it's an account it is an accountability piece and to speak to the to the the high school kids we get are a little bit higher as they get into those more specialized classes. And so I'd rather know that we're saving money and we're being more fiscally responsible at the middle school level to support being able to move that around. again to speaking to the personnel issue like 11,000 hours just from central office that I'm going to put it

139at 12,000 because I'm going to round up for you because the number was so ridiculous anyway but in repair time and repair cost on a staff that's how big the size of my like the number of people and three seriously so so that to me it feels like elves in the toy shop like you better totally it totally is but the thing is is that again we're asking And and I I feel like it's easier to put the onus on the adults in the room, which is the teachers, to say we need to focus on ways that we can be that if we're giving homework, it's not Chromebook reliant. I don't know how hard that is, but I know we did it for a thousand years. We figured out how to give homework out. And

140I and I just think for the middle school, we have to figure that that question out. I don't know if we need to run the numbers. I'm sorry, Susan. on the cost savings that that actually is. But if we're reducing 50% of our repairs just by leaving them on a cart, nobody in this room can deny. Nobody in this room can overlook that. Well, I will say we have several strategies we'd like to present as part of the presentation that we can share that includes. Can I just ask one other thing though is that we put on here major advantages in elementary school time and I know all of us have spoken about screen time and it's not put on here for anything else. Now, I feel like having them over the summer is helping

141with potentially could be helping with screen time because we don't we don't provide the accessibility. But I feel like having middle schoolers, again, they're probably your uh ones most on social media because it's brand new for them or, you know, a couple years old for them. But I feel like holding Chromebooks is also part of screen time. If you allow us to go through this, I'll talk about screen time. He wants us to stay on track with the allow us to go through the pres. We'll talk to we've got a strategy there too. Staying on track today. So there's some managing for the Chromebook that we probably you know that we still need to talk about. First of all, we do nothing and respect the tech program. There's no um we do very little as

142far as we're giving you a device and then it's just that's it. That's it. We don't do anything about contract when they get the device like these are your responsibilities with the with the device. That's what he's saying. Yeah. We need to do more about the respect the program. We're giving you, you know, a Chromebook that you need to take care of. What's that involve? Um, and then we if we man, you know, should minimize travel in and out of the building, minimize travel within the building. These are things we could possibly do. We do need to talk about fees, discussions, consequences when devices are lost or damaged. Back to her to to Alyssa's comment, Miss Hallstead's comments about if the same kid has multiple, do you lose your your Chromebook privilege? and everything you

143gets passed out a piece of paper. We have to outlook at consequences and monitoring our failure points. Again, they're not always uh broken devices. As these get older, the the um the systems don't work and then we have a lot of that instilling some ownership. And then of course in what we're purchasing, make sure we're purchasing. Sometimes you get what you pay for when you go with cheaper models. And let's be honest, and we try to spend our stretch our money as far as we can, but you can get more for cheaper, but sometimes you need to think about the durability of it. Um, well, and the capability of it, too. Right. These are things that we are looking at. You're hiring a new chief technology officer soon. The screen time usage. We're looking at

144rolling out parent lights light speed access for this coming school year. That is the access for parents to know exactly the screen time of their children on that device on the device they have correct because they have other devices. Well, well that's I mean they're if they're given a cell phone that's their problem but it's not our as far as accountability. Correct. And um Dr. Smith's familiar with this as a parent and his previous uh stops uh so he can speak to light speed access. We are looking at rolling that out for our parents um this coming school year. And it does so it allows parents to sign up. Parents can see get weekly daily reports. What sites are my kids on? How many times they go to that site? It's got a lot of

145different features that we we're working through now because like that's the type of thing that we can look at if we look at our child's device. It's a feature the device is not home all the time. This allows us to check that even when the device isn't and the parent would have. So we have some features to set up. I don't want to speak too much about the settings all with it yet because we're working through all that. Sure. But, you know, usually the way I did, I could turn my child's Chromebook off when they're out of school if I wanted to and not allow them to they couldn't have access to it. Um, I could get a weekly report. I could I believe you get a daily I get a weekly report. I I

146think you get a daily report, too. So, it's a feature that we have and we are looking forward to rolling that out. We we'll do a lot of communication with parents about it because they would have to go in and sign up and they can have access to some of that back to school night sign up. Yeah. So we'll we're going to communicate over the summer and so they're ready to roll out. We want to work with principles about it and our in our CT so they they understand them so everybody's our tech folks ready to support parents with that at all levels. That's for because that first parent teacher conference is the way to confirm elementary parents are on it and then get them to value that feedback early. We won't need to work

147so hard to get them to stay enrolled moving forward. They just did. It's been five years and I feel like in a lot of ways kids have become more casual about having Chromebooks and they're not taking as good a care of them as they did when we initially got them. And so I think to go back to Dr. Stimple's point, we do need to do more work around respecting the tech and putting some of those structures in place. I think it also gets to his next point just around how teachers utilize these materials. You know, we rolled these out in the midst of COVID. There wasn't training on and professional development on how do you choose what resources are best? How do you make some of those selections? And so, I've talked with Mr. bowling

148about it and and also with our professional learning department, but how do we provide some of that support for teachers and make not just what's easiest right on on a Chromebook or technology, but what's going to be most effective and how do we how do we make some of those distinctions and some of those um but to go back to the parent light speed and tying it in with that or whatever. So the parents will be able to see like what platforms the teachers are utilizing in the classroom, right? Yeah. They'll be to see what sites they go to. So I so like for my child I could see you know did they um did they go to the learning m did they go to canvas and you know how many times they go to

149that did they go to Google or there was different sites so but they can also see if the kid is trying to get around our systems go to YouTube and watch creating right so we're anticipating there might be oh I see this on how do my child get around to this and so we would be able to find say hey no we see that's happening and so there'll be some there will also be some access with our tech folks on the back end to kind of take a look at some of that too and will there be a bumper between the parent the teacher if the parent comes in like why is my kid constantly on the Chromebook in your classroom? I'm just curious too, right? Like there has to be a kind of a

150buffer to what we do. So the teacher's not Yeah. The teacher's not constantly feeling feeling the heat. Yes. Yes. Like justifying what Thank you. That's the word I was just going to say having to justify con. Make sure there's a little buffer in there too for them. Are there any expectations with learning management system use at the middle school and high school level? There is. And Mr. Bowling, I don't know if you can speak to or It looks like Dr. Robertson's back there as well in terms of expectations for for Canvas at the middle school and high school level. I don't know that we have um any specific expectations as it pertains to Canvas. I think generally we want teachers to engage in it and utilize it as a resource. Um I'm not sure prior

151to my arrival if we provided like a shell of a course for teachers to use to build off of in each content area. So So it's extensively used in the high school. First of all, um we have created over 35 different course shells for courses for teachers that are new and they come in and they can make a copy of it and add and subtract what they want to to cater the course to the needs of their kids uh and to their curriculum. Um, at the middle school level, I would say that it's highly implemented and highly used, uh, pretty frequently and consistently. Um, maybe not quite at the level of high schools. Um, and we have some but few users in the elementary level. I mean I just you know it's frustrating if you

152know there's certain basic information that should just be available on the learning management system from every teacher and so I'm just curious do we have something like like there is a syllabus or your due dates are there or we do um extensively especially for the high enrollment courses there are some so for instance a course like um AP calculus that the curriculum of that course is really determined by the college board and so we really just u copy and paste those into our shell you know uh so but yes across the board almost every course has uh some guidance the other and I don't want to lease versus purchase that uh Chris Palmer's team's been looking procurement's been looking into this option uh it's kind of something that's I would say in the exploratory stages

153uh because do we find any pros or cons one way or the other? Um what we're doing working we need to change it. Yeah. So right now we're reaching out to other school divisions. We already have have been for several weeks that are currently leasing and trying to determine like all right what analysis did you do when you went to leasing versus buying? What we're finding out is there wasn't a whole lot of analysis done and like I want to see a cost analysis of of purchasing versus buying. So, that's what my team is is working on. Um, and so they're gathering the contracts. What are the costs of leasing um like that we're paying out, but then um all right, so we save some bucks, but then what happens is that a threeyear, fouryear

154contract. Right now, we're we have our Chromebooks for longer than that, but then on our Chromebooks, we have maybe more repair costs because we're keeping them longer. So, there's a lot that goes into that, a lot of pros and cons. And so, we're trying to pull all that information together. It's just not a quick house. And some of that is when we've looked at the repair costs. If we leased them, they would repair them and get them back, right? So, we wouldn't have all that stuff down. But, but again, yeah. So, how long does that lease last? So, it's it is a lot to take into the turnaround time, right? assuming that if we have to send a Chromebook in to be repaired, they're giving us a loan or Chromebook as well within that lease

155agreement, but also comparing is it comparing like if we're comparing our school system to spots or one of the others in county that and I'm only using them because they're next door, but the smaller ones, it's a big difference because we have a gajillion students, right? So, I don't know if that would make our plan better or worse, right? Like the more you have, the more students you have, the better your deal, like a whatever program. I think we heard from a variety of one. I know like some of the larger ones we've definitely heard from and well my other question would be like what is the ratio between staff to manage the Chromebooks and the number of Chromebooks like Spotsy might be smaller than us but if they still have six full-time three part-time

156then they're able to repair how does it impact our hours like or how many office hour like how many of these 11,000 12,000 hours are we saving if we do a lease twice? Well, so to your point earlier about the technology project manager, that's another reason we put it on hold. Let's wait to see like we went with the leasing option, you know, if that like maybe that frees up some staff to do some other things. And so really just wanted to look at the whole picture and you know, we are looking forward to a new chief technology officer coming in with with that perspective that has done some of this work that can really help us to and background is more the instructional side. Correct. Yes. And um a question I would also have

157too is well no but I think that's been part of the problem. I guess I would worry in the leasing and maybe it's nothing to worry about but in the leasing uh when we have high stress test time making sure that we have everything we need for the students to like if we've sent a bunch out and we are coming up on our testing season it's like oh are we good? Uh we'll continue to look at the internships, the student engagement and then again the new chief of technology working with uh our communications team kind of that culture shift to one of ownership instead of this is just a piece of paper or treating like a textbook kind of you know you get it back and we don't well there was I was surprised there

158wasn't like a contract like this is your computer you're signing for it your parents are signing for it and you're responsible because they think it's a right? Not a privilege to have that Chromebook. So that's the problem that we've created and that's the culture shift. But we created that with Chromebook, right? If we require it for for academics, then we're going to have to provide it. Keep in mind how we originally have But we don't have to require it for testing. That's a separate discussion. But like you say though, shifting part of the respect for the tech if we have you signed a contract. It also helps us in the discipline when you know a kid does something it's like hey you signed a contract your parent signed it this is what's going to happen

159if people zero consequence uh well then their parent will agree unless they're emancipated right and we created this a little bit because the way we originally rolled this out we had no plan prior to co people drove by and we basically hand them a device through a window and and they drove on and we uh it was not hope to see you again. Yeah, I mean we crash course teachers on how to use and teach via technology in a two-eek period. Um and they all had to learn Canvas quickly and so there there is some I don't know if we recover from that as educators to be honest. I know. But I I think there's also been gaps in and helping teachers learn how to use the technology effectively because I think it it was

160it's always been reactive since we've gotten. So this time next year we should be in a good position to make some evaluations or hopefully earlier than this time next year when and I think also what Dr. Warner talked about like the instructional piece to come back with some things. Absolutely. Well, the question is allocated to I think around the use of the technology. So teachers are using it more effectively then they don't go back and forth as much. So the money that's allocated I think she's getting ready to ask the the the oldest Chromebooks are all in the middle schools and they all need to be replaced. Um and that would be $2.2 2 million and uh they're all all the oldest ones are in the middle school and Hunter can speak to that a

161little bit. And then we have some older ones in the elementary school uh to replace those oldest ones and then we have some still old classroom desktop computers and that's another replacement issue there. So there's your reallocated money if that's what you're asking So, what I was going to ask is it I think it's ironic that it's $3.1 million and it's there's not even a single high school kid accounted for up here. That's which is the group that we are asking to most heavily rely on. We use BPSA funds for those. Okay. But then my question is if we allocate this money out and replace all these things now, what's the point of release versus purchase because you're good for the next five years, right? I'm I'm asking that could be that's part of the

162that I mean so so how many computers did we buy for the high school with the other funds what percentage did we replace for the high school high schools so it's one grade level per year oh so we buy one grade level per year okay so the freshman the newest so it's a recurring tech a little less than 900 what is the value to us of the middle school ones once we replace them can we use them for parts or or oh my god, we're going to black market computer have an eBay store. But I think especially with this kind of purchase for the middle school is a great time to implement a stronger respect the tech policy because they're getting new computers and Sandra's team's on board. We're trying to come up with kind

163of a little bit of a messaging a messaging, you know, something that's well I I agree some type of a a contract with the parents before we particularly in the middle school. We could start this out as a pilot with the middle school going to be if if in fact we're able to do this and we're handing out brand new computers to every middle school parent. Yeah. the ninth graders when the ninth graders come in get their car bags for the books that people could purchase sometime maybe but not I don't I don't know any I've never seen them do it that might be a good help but I also think you need to understand like the first year my kid was given a Chromebook or like after we got back into schools I was

164like here you can have it back I don't want them to have it um and then I'm told well you have like so you need something for that parent who's going to argue it I much rather supply my own laptop for my kid. Let y'all put your little giggy gaggy stuff on there to keep it a boring laptop and then I don't have to pay anything when it breaks cuz I it's it's already mine. I've got my own geek squad or whatever. Like what is going to be your response to people like that who don't or someone who doesn't want it? Um current Yeah. So currently we do not allow folks to bring their own technology. That's what you think. But I'm telling you what I did because I wasn't well it's already when we

165did the cell phones. So I I do think again with our chief technology officer looking at that and see I mean is there opportunity to do that part of the piece is honestly and we can talk about just the filtering behind it and you know does our filter apply to your device and what are some other things I mean on an Apple device they can text right things we need to have those answers for the parents are difficult so right now we don't allow bring your own technology and um in terms of if you don't take a device you know there are things that our teachers work through in terms of alternative assignments it doesn't if I'm not going to sign. I'm was wondering like there's going to be someone that's like I'm not signing

166that. So then do you still give the child the laptop? No. Or does the teacher then have to do extra to Okay. So the teacher things there's lots of stuff I didn't sign and nobody ever asked me about because nobody ever looks at it. I didn't sign a lot of stuff too but then again my kids don't take SOS so I'm just not a normal person and there's always got to be a response for the abnormal people. I'm just saying for a principal to have to have staff responsible for looking at the 2,00 signed various forms, the five different forms, 2,000 having somebody check them doesn't happen. So, but supposed to conduct most of it is done. They will probably run because that's how they do it for like family life, right? We have a

167method to do it that makes it very low tech on staff. So we do we do agree that now is a great time for us to implement some of the stuff with middle schools. I know Miss Johnson can work with principles graders as um Dr. come back too in terms of looking at that and we started to put some structures in place for this summer if if in fact we're going to hand out brand new computers to every middle school I would like to have something acknowledgement by the the parent that accepts it that this is a new you know we're going to still prefer the tiered method versus straight every sixth grader take it home I still prefer the the tiered method it's a lot to metriculate into a middle Yeah, I prefer to

168just let them stay all they all need to stay until we can find out. I don't disagree, but I I wouldn't have a problem with because you are what is our next step as a board like is it do we need to create a policy to do to direct you to make a like what's that next step? So, well the first step is to because respect so we can buy them. So, we are waiting to purchase these. We do need them for next year and so that's we're getting late. So, we would purchase them tomorrow probably. I think we're ready to push go, right, Hunter? Pretty much. Um, and so that and then I think for me it's it's working with our chief technology officer that comes in to really look at look at where

169we are working with our middle school and high school principles. You know, we've mentioned a lot of things that are in the works that we are working on now. We're collecting them all. So, really for us to really firm that up. Um, I think that there are pieces within our code of condant that we have already, but we can review that to make sure that that still gives us the backing that we need. um there to support. I like the idea of an acknowledgement I don't want to call contract an acknowledgement around that I have this and for us to make sure like Dr. Temple said to make sure with the fees that we are applying those consistently and saying hey you know you messed this up this is we're gonna we're going to apply

170this fee and we're going to do this fine. So I think all of that are things that are in the works that we are working on and we're happy to come back and give you an update as we this is something that the board like we really need to pay close attention to because it has a price tag right like if this was a whatever some of them other things I think it could very clearly go right be like okay just let us know how it's going but if this requires the board to actually put down words on paper in a policy because again it has a price tag so whatever validates it makes it so I wonder if we come back at the beginning of the school year like let's get the school year

171underway and we can give you an update on how this y'all not seeing Miss Guy's hand up. Gosh darn y'all make me say a word. My hand is up, ladies. Come on now. What I would like to see is and whenever y'all are ready because we don't understand how it's integrated into the classroom. Maybe some teachers aren't sure how they're supposed to do it, but obviously parents don't understand either. I would like a presentation at one of the meetings that explains all that so that the public has that information, the parents have an understanding of what's going on in the classrooms and there's a level of expectation that is either going to be met or not met. Um, but then that's how exactly. So all that information should be wrapped up in a pretty bow

172that the public can understand as well. That's what I would like. Missing, what were you saying? Yeah. I I don't actually I was saying if we get this report at the beginning of the school year, it's going to be too late. If I I think we need to start with the ninth graders when they get their new computer, there needs to be some respect the tech plan in place for those students. But also the middle school, if we're going to spend $2 million, I want something I want to go to middle school. at least that the parents acknowledge that they're getting a brand new, you know, Chromebook and that the parents are responsible for it. Now, and also I'd like to follow up on Alyssa's, you know, statement about the privilege versus the right because

173if if in fact that's the way we're going to look at it, which I don't have a problem with. If they abuse the privilege, we have the right to take it back. And that can be in that acknowledgement as well. And then that follows up with um you know with Maya's point about you know what's happening in the classroom and you know how are the teachers on board with this. It sounds like something that you know as we move along not for the beginning of the year but that some of your advisory committees you know the teacher advisory committee the parent advisory committee you know PTO's whatever that they may be able to help us with this. So, it's it's more of a long-term, you know, working this out, but short term, I would I

174think we have to have something before we hand out close to $3 million worth of new computers. I agree, Dr. And thank you for your work because what it shows is that, you know, we we've kind of muddled along since we started this out, but we have never really had a review. I've never seen anything until now. So, it's it's a good start. Never organized actually done it. It's been an hour going into we've identified some things that we can we haven't gotten an update on it. So, um I just want to publicly state that I'm really not comfortable with designated devices for two, second, and fifth grade. I'm just not really comfortable with a lot of screen time in elementary school in general and you know research on reading and concentration and all of

175that. like we are creating a whole bunch of little ABD people here who are clicking on links and going down rabbit holes and and losing that ability to concentrate. So, I'm just going to say not a fan. I think it was I think that that intent was that that within the cart you have number two you have number three you have number four matches your cubby number so that when it's time for you to pull you would always have number two as what designated amount on it as a instructional tool that would be similar to what Liza was saying about understanding what the teacher right role is in the designated device will be you always if we're really, you know, we say helping with uh screen time in elementary school, but I think it's our

176diligent due diligence to go middle school on up because I mean we what we are requiring is part of an issue. I know it's how we in instructionally reach and teach, but at the same time, I still think that we need to be doing our due diligence. I she's not on a I also think that there is a difference. So when we're teaching children to read, there is a difference between holding a book and reading a book and looking at a screen. And I'm just concerned if we are too reliant on the screen time that we're impeding their ability to become good readers. So I So I had a two things. one when we talk about respect the tech I understand from your concern as a budget standpoint but also from a responsibility standpoint um

177can kind of like to when your kid is getting a driver's license right like you are telling them operating this improperly or without the proper care is going to create lasting damage either to property or people right and it's the same thing when we let kids online and you know I have a sixth grader this year and an eighth grader this year and one was real excited to get a Chromebook because didn't have one in elementary school and one is very much like I'm so done with this thing. Um, but to get from that mindset, it does take a lot of effort from the adults in that kid's lives. And so I would hope that respect the tech and I love that the idea of this software that you said that parents like you know

178I think it's important not just to see um what your kids are using but like the balance like if your kids are on a on a computer 100% of the time how much of this actually doing academic stuff and how much of it is looking at you know or googling you know how lightsabers work right like are we using the tool for its intended purpose even if it's not nefarious ious. If you are being distracted down rabbit holes of cool stuff to look up when you're supposed to be in math, that's also something that we as parents need to kind of almost be trained to look for in addition to um you know the actual instructional time. And when you're talking about Sandra being on top of um creating something cool and awesome to roll

179out, I'm really hoping that that means it's going to be incorporated into our transition day, which I think is the most logical place to talk to sixth graders and nth graders. graders. Yeah. Um, so this middle school number is for every middle schooler to get new technology. Yes. Yeah. So that means four grades in a row getting new technology. Correct. So, so there is two different issues here though, right? Because it's the physical Chromebook itself and having to replace them. But then it's also the actual educational impact of utilizing the Chromebook. And as a personal frustration of mine, we keep telling me, and by we, it's not necessarily all you in this room, but anybody in this room, that kids need this or they're not going to be successful later on in life. And I

180just don't think in second grade, that's a fair argument to make. So, I really would request that we are also really looking at the necessity like if we're going to be doing data on so many different things and we really need to really focus on what is the importance of a second grader doing math on a Chromebook versus doing math by hand. Now, I get it for science and everything else and fun experiments and those kinds of things, but for me at that age group, there's no reason why the teacher can't show the YouTube video from her platform and utilize technology in that way and have the kids actually being up here and not down here in their Chromebook. So, I think what you're saying makes a lot of sense, but I also know like

181my mother worked in Arlington for 30 years. They had iPads like 20 30 years like from the time they came out. They also had that thing that we're going to institute this year. They had something like that too that helps parents track. They also had training. They also have a lot of other stuff that we just didn't have. And so when we did just give it to our money. Yeah. Yes. I'm saying when we gave we didn't do any of those training. We didn't have any of that stuff and our like no one was ready for it. We were already and we still are 20 to 25 years behind many other counties in the state of Virginia. And those students are performing at a higher rate than we are for many other reasons. But some

182of it is because they have integrated how to use their their electronics in a I would say a healthier way than what we are. And so we're starting now after letting it out like letting the cat out the bag. Now we're backing up and starting what we should have done before we even should have done it because we did it in a reactive way during co because we were five years behind and I would and I would also say and you know in terms of from from teachers being able to meet a wide variety of needs it can be a good resource. So if I'm have a small group that I'm working with on certain reading skills without technology and I have another one that might be working on a technology program that's computer adaptive

183that meets that rises to their level and so it is where as a teacher I can't be with them at that particular time. So there are I think there are some appropriate times and places for that. Um but I think the instructional piece the the point is well taken. We would love to come back and talk to you about instructional technology the the needs the screen time the role of the teacher all of that. I think that would be I think I mean hopefully the benefit is that you find out better ways to help the teachers utilize the technology instead of being and again we I don't think we've done that training as much it has been like it was co here you go and now and the role of the parent because a lot

184of people like we don't know what to do with these things I know we don't want them we don't want our kids coming home with them we don't want them addicted to it but they all are so um I know it's not our job necessarily to educate parents but we definitely can put some links and some resources and give them some some more information when when we have that type of uh conversation because it's not good what we're seeing with and I'm talking about middle schoolers on down. Those kids are not built the same as the older kids and they are not functioning at the same level and some of that is because we just threw screens in front of them and walked away. So, a lot of work is taking place. We're looking forward

185to moving this for you. As Miss Healey said, we haven't taken this kind of deep dive before and we've identified some areas that we need to continue to work on and we need to improve and and we'll do that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank your staff. Title one title one now. I don't think I think picking up lunch, but I don't think she's back yet. I just had Michael already. He said, All right. So, going to roll right in. And when Missy says, "Let's set up the creek and then I'm sorry. Are we doing it right now?" Yeah, we're going to do it. No, wait. No. Oh, I thought you said we're doing it. Okay. I'm go ahead. I'm sorry. Title's recommendations. Title one. Let's keep moving. All right. So, we do have

186Mr. Bowling here with us as we talk about Title One. Um, every year, you know, you approve the annual great grant for Title One. And so, we want to dig into this a little bit deeper uh this year and just talk a little bit about the percentages. I know we've had conversations around all right, how do the decisions we make this year impact next year? And then when we open three new schools in 2026, so we want to have a part of that conversation. There's also uh I know we've had conversations around middle schools and the impact of middle schools and so uh I want to talk talk that about that with you today um before you get ready to take any action on the title one annual grant. Mr. Bowling. Okay, Chris is pulling

187up the presentations. So good. I guess it's afternoon now. So good afternoon. Um, we've previously spoken with you about the title one school identification. We've talked about different scenarios and informed you about different uh, perspectives as you go into redistricting and how there may be impacts. um what we were waiting on is our March 30th numbers to come in through the nutrition services and the nutrition services determines those those numbers that we use the free and reduced lunch percentages um and we identify schools based on that. So, we had to get that first. But, so just a couple reminders as we go in that each school division is allocated a certain an amount of money for title one uh school support. Should we decide to change the schools based on the the threshold we set,

188we may have to divide the pie smaller or give each person a larger share depending on if we identify more schools or fewer schools. Okay. So, historically, we have only identified elementary schools for title one funding. And we do have the ability to say we're just funding elementary. We're f or we could add in Thank you. Here's our the presentation coming um and for at least five years that I can track back the threshold for support has remained at 40%. Um, and just as a reminder, it does not have to be in 5% increments. Uh, however, uh, many people do make these thresholds in 5% in uh, increments. The next slide, Chris, talks a little bit about our economically disadvantaged student population, which title one serves. And um it look you you can see here

189that over the past four years we've had a steady increase in the number of um students who are identified as economically disadvantaged and I do anticipate that um you know with federal layoffs we will see some increase in those numbers as well that when when is that data collected though that's not till April again this is current as of just a few days ago. Okay. So, everything we do now is could change. Oh, sorry. This was from the fall membership table. So, that is probably from 30 uh September 30th numbers. Sorry, I apologize. So, these numbers, our student count has gone up by approximately 1,500 students, but our economically disadvantaged went up by over 5,000. Is am I reading that correct? You are. That's amazing. Yes. um significant impacts of the pandemic. Um so that's

190not just the new students. That's Nope. So um just to to remind you of what these uh fund what this funding can support it number one it has to be all supplemental support. So it cannot supplant meaning take the place of anything we plan to provide for a school already. So, for instance, if if a school gets a reading specialist, we can't just say, "We'll pay for that reading specialist out of Title One money." We would have to provide additional resources on top of what the school division provides with local funding. And but what types of staff they hire and what their jobs are really can change based on the needs of the school. So up here you'll see a list of different kinds of um of of expenditures that that could be included uh

191through title one funding. This is almost like that school-based allowance that we've always said we wanted to do but can't. So in effect, if we identify title one school, we're giving them extra money to use as they see as they need it for their community to enhance what they but unfortunately we only get one lump sum of money and we can't divide it out, right? But but it's it's still doing something for that community. It's special and it's on top and it's on top of whatever we already provide for all schools, right? And this is on top of the class size reduction too, correct? in addition to that's why I asked for those numbers to see because they're already getting class size reduction money and now we this is you know extra okay so I

192mean you can see that it's really wide in the scope of things that it can provide and we work our staff works with each school individually to identify how much is that going to cost and and to help them with their budgeting um and their expenditures as well and Chris's team does too. Uh so we have a really nice partnership. Um the considerations that that we um well the things that we considered when coming to you with a recommendation are we looked at potential redistricting scenarios of course. We looked at our growing population of economically disadvantaged students. We looked at the financial implications of identifying additional schools. Meaning if you have to slice the pie thinner, how much does it really hurt? Because at some point if you slice too thin, you reduce the efficacy

193of the money, right? So we we look very closely at that. Um, we looked at funding balances, uh, and at an anticipated carryover, meaning if a school had been, um, had a certain amount of money this year that was identified through title one funding, uh, what we're looking at is how much can they carry over to the next year to offset any losses that they might get. And so, uh, we we those were all in the consideration. um federal accountability. We thought about that as the new accountability changes come through and what the impacts would be there. We looked at qualifying middle school achievement data. So we were considering you're going to see this recommendation includes providing support to two middle schools. Um and so we looked at their achievement data that is linked in

194the presentation. Um and you've seen that data in uh previously. So, we looked at the current budget forecast um and also at additional school needs uh in particular those of uh Drew Inheim. So, I'm hold on, but go ahead. Okay, so um our recommendation um on slide uh seven, we explored a couple of different options. Go ahead. One more slide, Chris. Um so we looked at different kinds of thresholds. So we looked at 40% which we had done in the past. We looked at 45% and we looked at 50%. Uh then we looked at uh identification of the of elementary schools only as we've done in the past or at the possibility of identifying middle schools. And um this is not a new process just so you know. This is we're bringing it to you

195more formally for the first time uh in many years. Usually it comes through on consent um uh and because of a change but also all the redistricting uh uh discussions that have have occurred. All right. So Chris, next slide. So on the next slide you will see and before we jump too deeply in um the percentage free and reduced lunch which is in the fourth column uh from the left it's indicated as FRL uh that percentage is a rounded number that you'll see there. So the actual computations are based on hundreds the hundreds place but we don't have those uh listed in here. So there may be some rounding. If you do straight numbers off of this the calculations then then you might see a little bit of a difference. Um so what this indicates

196is these are the free and reduced lunch numbers uh as indicated by our nutrition services. That's the FRL column. The next column is for schools that are identified as C meaning every student in the school receives free and reduced lunch automatically. there is a multiplier that is used and that is a 1.6 multiplier and what that does is compensates for the students who are not required to fill out the application because it's already identified as a C school meaning they don't have to fill out the paperwork anymore but we know that there's addition there are additional students in that school that 1.6 6 multiplier is set by the um secretary of agriculture at the USDA level. So can I just for clarity? So for example, Anthony Burns is listed at 39%. But because it's C

197school, you know that more than 39% of the students would qualify for free and reduced lunch, but many of them don't fill out the paper. We don't know anything. Right. Right. Right. Well, we assume, right? we are required to use the multiplier and and use the percentage of C with the C multiplier that you see in column five um as we are setting our threshold. So you have to use column five and you move down and you set your threshold and then for Shirleyheim you see we switch over to 56%. And and that would be the number we used for Shirley. So the C how did how could you refresh my memory on how they are identified? I thought we identified them. So and for the public can you say for the record what C?

198Yes. Yes. Um so it's uh so we'll start with where the money So title one funding is federal funding. It is passed through the state to individual school divisions. The state sets the total amount that we receive based on our economically disadvantaged population. So, we'll start there. The multiplier is set by the US Department of Agriculture. And I'm getting there. Okay. And there is a range from 1.3 to 1.6 that they can set that at. It has been set for us and it's been the same since 2014. And it's set at 1.6. Um, and so I'm sorry now qualify for community. That's the it's called a community eligibility provision, right? And um Chris, do you want to uh Is Brian in here? Brian, do you want to speak to how the C number uh identification

199is how schools are identified as CP? Sure. So um every year on April the 1st uh we have to uh validate the numbers. So C the community eligibility provision is based off the number or the percentage of students in a school that are approved for meal benefits based upon we call direct certification. That means they're approved for SNAP tanniff um Medicaid free those uh foster foster homeless. So based upon that number alone if that percentage is at a certain number and we deem that it's um worthwhile for the district to do so that it makes sense in the school uh then we'll determine whether the school is paying. So is that the percentage of free and reduced lunch F1 here? Is that different from what you're talking about? Yes, it is because the percentage of

200free and reduced lunch in a nonC school includes students and families who apply by income application whereas C schools families we are not required to apply. In fact, we cannot accept that. No, I I get that. What I'm keep going back to. I'm trying to to in my mind see the difference between a school that we automatically multiply by 1.6. And I get it. We have to do that. And I understand it's because family's like, I don't have to fill out that form. They're going to get a free lunch anyway. But the other schools that have free and reduced lunch. Is there a factor and that's based on the income. Is there a factor that we would consider to to determine whether they should be a C school that is different? You you mentioned some

201other things here. How do we get that information? Because I'm looking at these for example Conway has 48%. That's on your other handout free and reduced weather, right? They have 48% yet they're not a C school whereas Burns is 39% free and reduced lunch but they are a C school. But you're talking about the likelihood they would fill out the application for the FRL. So we would make the determination. I'm just saying how do we those two numbers are two different numbers. They're measuring two different things. Okay. So uh the the percentage of friend reduced at Conway measures um students who are approved through um social service benefits SNAP as in addition to income applications the student the percentage um at Anthony Burns is only the students who are directly certified that are receiving social

202service benefits in that school. That's why can't compare the two numbers. That's where the multiplier would come. So why would we not want our schools with the higher percentages of free reduced lunch to be C schools? C is based not on the percent of free and reduced but the percent of families who are receiving social service benefits which we don't have that knowledge until we're or do we have that knowledge? It's more based on community demographics not on school demographics not necessarily who shows up in our schools. saying that they wouldn't they wouldn't apply. I mean, if we if we're young, but we only say they won't apply after they've already been identified as receiving SNAP or being because we have free I mean, we have families that qualify as low income in probably every

203neighborhood in Stafford County, but some neighborhoods and some areas are going to have higher propensity of that because of their, you know, space to cost ratios. like you can get a house of a certain size to accommodate a family of a certain size that's on an income of a certain size. Um some of that you know we have some of it is not all based on income either. We have enlisted military vet, you know, people who are on an enlisted salary, which is not super high, right? But they might have a lot of dependents and they can afford to live in neighborhoods because they're getting base housing allowance, but they're at the end of the day, their salary still doesn't provide enough to cover the needs of the family just because the government is paying,

204you know, through their military service for them to live in a house that can accommodate the size of their family. Yeah. Um, so there's a lot of different ways that families come in and can qualify and that's part of the community eligibility provision is it looks like the entire community that feeds into that school and it's meant to support the community versus like a free and reduced lunch application that is meant to be an application for a specific family based on that one household or one roof needs under that roof versus the community demographics as a whole. So how often do we review these C schools? every April 1. So every year and then does that come to us after April 1 to determine whether we're going to continue, whether we're going to, you know,

205add anybody on? I assume we never take them off unless we have to. I I don't know, but that would be if if it's a free lunch for everybody, then that helps their student meal day. Typically, we um the program is set up typically where um once a school reaches that C status, um it tends to stay on. There are circumstances which would may require um changes and that like redist anything that would would grossly impact the attendance area for that as as an example. It is it is likely that Anthony Burns will drop to an estimated 23% uh free reduced lunch rate which would I we would probably remove them from C and from but we will be removing them from title one status it appears. Okay. Can you explain the red numbers the

206reduction? Is that because you've taken those numbers to put towards the middle school? So yeah absolutely. So pie changes to get to get to get to here. What you see in front of you is is an with a threshold set at 50%. Now I know the first thing you'll say is well Conway and Ferry Farm are on there. Well, it's because last year they were identified and so they were a title one school. We need to provide transition funding to them for one year after. Okay. So the line really is just below Shirley, but we this is an indicator of not only the threshold, but also the funding that we'll be providing to schools. So this shows you in uh column six then is the 2425 funding level for each school. You'll notice that Drew

207Middle and Shirley Heim are indicated as a zero. That's because they were not identified last year. And we're proposing uh with this threshold that new funding levels and it does divide the pie uh it slices a little bit thinner. Have we talked about this before? Because I feel like I thought Drew was getting some benefit either from title one or from it is a school already. Okay. And the one thing that the the one um interesting fact there is once there's a school is identified as C and if it's not identified as title one and it and with the C multiplier if it reaches 75% or over 75% so that means 75.1 or greater then it's automatically identified as a C school. So Drew is already as a I'm sorry as a title one school.

208So Drew is already inching closer and closer to this. So then can I kind of back up a minute and wonder where where is Shirley Heim been? Like did they just have a big jump or did we like why was Shirley Heheim not identified as a C school right because they're free and reduced like even because they're free and reduced lunch is not higher or is higher than really any other school. It was never even brought to the table with hey Shirley Heim is up here but here's why they don't qualify or here's what we can do for them because they don't qualify because it's evident that the needs are there for this community but I don't recall and maybe I'm just have a mental block but like that we haven't really had a conversation

209about that. I'm going to jump in really quick for for Brian. Him and I had a lot of conversations about this but Brian you can jump in as well. So, um, CP, the threshold to actually to qualify as CP is is pretty low. Um, but when you qualify for C, you're taking a reduced amount for every meal that you serve for federal reimbursement. So, we evaluate on April 1st. Um, and that number is 25%. So, you just have to be 25% free and reduced based on the community eligibility provision, which not to confuse it, but as you know, that's different than application based. Um, and so a lot of our schools would qualify, but we have to then do an analysis. Um, and and we did that already with Shirley this year. And if we

210converted Shirley to a C school, we would lose money each month. That I remember because we have a high participation of free and reduced students already that are taking lunch. And so for all of those students, we get the full um federal reimbursement rate for those students. But as soon as you go to C school, you take a reduced amount. higher propensity of rule followers at Shirley like that will fill out the paperwork and qualify whereas the other places where so those free students are submitting an application and they're still getting that free meal but we would actually take a fraction of that and then being applying it to all students and that would ultimately mean that the reduction um I think it depends but what's the reduction amount Brian is it vary is for

211middle school it it varies depending upon what the school's identified student percentage is um So roughly 70% though ballpark maybe 70% 75 75% reduction no sorry so we're getting 25% you get 75% reduction yeah so everyone 100 students that eat um at a c school I'm just using this as an example every 100 then if if the claiming percentage is 75% then we only get full reimbursement on 75 of those students be curious to look our debt um student debt ratio and see what percentage that is and we take that into account. It's one of the things I've been working with Mr. Williams on the last two years is when we're doing that analysis of C schools, we take that into account because if we're not collecting then it's not really income to us. What

212we don't want to do is convert a school to C and then we have to increase lunch prices at all the other schools to cover the shortfalls at that school. And why isn't a high school like North Stafford a C school? same probably the same analysis that I explained for Shirley Han followers even though the uh federal government the USDA reduced the the minimum threshold for being eligible for C at 25%. they didn't increase additional funding. So the lower that 20 so so example for example if a school was 25% and you made them uh c 25% times 1.6 Six. Was that Chris's do that quickly? Chris also exhibited some English skills today. I just want you to know that smaller sentence. Yeah. So, we're just getting a paid uh reimburse on a very small

213percentage of the number of students in in that building. So, it would be worthwhile then um then any loss would then have to come out of the district's operating fund. So therefore, we want to be very careful that we're not taking on any um you know thing that would cost the district money. Okay. So this slide, slide number eight is basically telling us that there are two schools that need it and we need to split the pie a little bit thinner so that we can give it to these two schools. Period. That's what this is all about based on current numbers, not the redistricting. Well, look at Stafford Middlewood. So then what does redistricting do to us? taking Anthony Burns off C. Is that star for that or the star for that one? Sorry, the

214star for Anthony Burns, is it going to stay on as C? That's transition year funding. That means that it won't be on the funding next year. Okay. But are they staying C as well? Uh that is not determined by our office. So it has to be re-evaluated next year. next year for 2026 August 2026 school year it'll be reevaluated so these are going for next year defined it to be no changes next year to see so it'll be re-evaluated in April 1st next year okay got yeah we are recommending the the 50% threshold so that that and that's what you would have in front of you in terms of how the pie would be further split it would allow us to bring on two middle schools who really need some additional support but it does

215decrease some support from the other schools we have had conversations ations with with all of those principles and and about what that would mean and how that would look and um to make sure we're still providing the the right amount of support. So, does how does this help us? Oh, maybe it's coming. Sorry. For um 18 and 19 because we both we all know that that's a go down to slide 10, Chris. Well, I had can I run through this rationale real quick just to make sure you know our thinking. Okay. No, that's for C. I'll talk title one is our discretion. I understand C and I understand your math and thank you for looking out for us and not having us lose money but staffer middle being at 49% 300 reduced that is so

216close to the 50 and especially given the fact that Drew is at 41 and I don't know if the 1.5 is accurate but that's the fact we have to deal with but if we're approving a 41% over 49 N we can't we can't not pick it because we have to go down the line. I I think I think middle is so close we ought to consider. But title one funding is different than the free and reduced lunch funding and and and because title one is a restricted grant. We only get one lump sum. We have to make sure that the other needs are there before we have to set our whole criteria we're saying for title one is the percentage of free and reduced lunch. Yes. Well, that's adding on this major percentage of Wait,

217hold on. Time out. Because he's got a rationale. So maybe that helps us figure out why Drew and Shirley were or not. The rational is it's 50%. Well, but also this is And you said we didn't we didn't consider percent, but I can tell you that maybe back in the old days, we actually looked at these schools and we looked at the needs and we and and if it was, you know, we might have said, well, we like 40, but if one was at 39 or 38, we would consider that. It was not this arbitrary cut off of that. So I'm I'm saying that I would consider adding in Shirley Heim at 49%. Sorry, Stafford Middle because then how much are you taking away from Shirley? Well, well, you have you're dividing it by three

218the middle. [Music] It's based on the population of students talking about adding staffer middle. So I know Mr. Bullying has some rationale to share. I will share that you know we it is a balancing act, right? there's only so much money to go around and and we do look at kind of where's where do we recommend the right threshold to be and it it is a balance we've talked with some of the we've talked with all of these principles around what that means there's additional federal accountability measures there's other things that they have to do and so it's it's not just I don't want to say just free money right there's other requirements that they have to engage with and so we have talked with um like I said Shirleyheim and Drew about this because

219we felt like that's the right balance so that you don't further dilute the money so much that it doesn't have as much of an impact. And so that's been our approach. And I know Mr. Bowling has some other rationale to share about how we got here. Schools have a higher threshold of accountability than the elementary schools are different. In in this recommendation, we've set it as the same. We do know and so how they use the money. So is it different for the middle school? Is it the rules are the same? Um I mean they can provide the same type of We also cut off Conway here. I mean Conway is at 48 and by adding the middle schools we're we're definitely cutting out Conway and we did as as Dr. Chase would say we

220made a commitment for the population when we moved them to Conway that we would give additional resources and they will give additional resources was this was the title one funding. So, I'm I'm not opposed to adding the middle schools, but there is a cost. And the cost is Conway is paying the cost of adding the middle schools. And if we're adding the middle schools, I feel that staff and middle is so close to that line that you drew. You know, if if the tie came in, that line could could be 1%. That's all. It's it's Yes, it is a limited amount of money. And and and is it is it enough to make a difference? anything's going to help but but I still come back to this 41% before the 1.6. You have a rationale

221and then I have a question maybe based after you I mean if you were waiting and I wanted to throw one other thing in which you know in terms of thinking about middle school or not thinking about middle school is at least there has been um loan forgiveness for people who work in title one schools. So, you know, one of the things I have heard often from Dr. Warner is concern about staffing Shirley Heim. Shirley Heim is title one, then it may be more attractive to some teachers because they get loan forgiveness. And that's if they work there for five years, it's 15 thou up to $15,000 forgiveness. For how long? Yeah. Yeah. I I agree. I mean, I I don't know. Yeah. I mean, I'm okay with adding them in, but I'm saying if

222you're going to add them in, you that 1% for Stafford Middle that that if if that if you do Stafford Middle, then you have to do North Staff and High School. And you already said it to slice it to middle. You're not talking about high schools at all. So, you're just saying just adding a change. Did you have something to move us forward? Can I finish? Is the discussion the discussion is not the discussion do we expand the title one schools from elementary to middle that is the discussion and if so but we need to hear the rationale before we talk about how the same but we might be able to pull some with the redistricting profile there's no change in middle schools next let's hear the rationale and then discuss based on what the

223rale is rather than what we think the rale is. Okay. Rale so I could have put as the first bullet. Unfortunately, you have to put a threshold somewhere. You have to draw a line and and that is a very tough decision and what we looked at was the uh impact on schools that were already identified and trying to reduce the impact on each school and looking at the overall big picture. um a it is tough. It is is really hard to to lay a line somewhere, but once you start splitting the pie thinner and thinner, your efficacy goes down because you can't afford a full position maybe or you can't so you can only hire part-time people and so that becomes uh a little difficult. Um we so we were looking at how to maximize

224that funding to support the schools in greatest need. Shirleyheim has been one of those schools that has uh consistently expressed uh additional needs and and staffing concerns that we have not heard as much from uh I mean we we know that no school is perfect with staffing and you know um but we've heard a greater need coming out of uh Shirleyheim than we have Stafford. Um and so again we have to make a tough decision at some point. Um maybe some just don't as loud. We did consider well we we we spoke with them as well. Um we did consider all the redistricting scenarios and the predicted uh you know those projected percentages of free and reduced price lunch as well as the CP uh multiplier. Uh and then we uh look to minimize that

225impact of on the allocation of the supplemental title one funding. So uh having said that uh as we Chris can you go to the next slide as we look to 26 27. So should we go with this recommendation the number of potentially identified schools would be nine. The total new schools would be two um in 26 27 with ES18 and 19 also being identified. And if we stayed with the same threshold um and then uh there would be three schools that would transition away from title one funding over the years. What what is that? CES confrey reduced lunch is just one factor in multiple factors in evaluating a school for title one funding and we've tried to put potentially in there several times because I mean some of this is based on your redistricting decisions

226and I know this is ahead of that but you've asked for this. We wanted to bring this back to you so you could see what that could look like because as I think Mr. Bowling tried to explain is if we remove title one from a school, they do get a transition year. And so next year, so planning ahead would be that transition year. So when they have the students they're going to have in 2026, we're set up. So we're thinking two years ahead on this and trying to plan ahead on this because some of your scenarios do have, for example, Anthony Burns dropping both down to 23%. Right, in both l green lime and purple same way. So it would not be title one or CP6. would because it be a transition year the transition

227year is next year because our we would be out because of the okay with redistricting the way the scenarios are looking right now Anthony Burns runs down to close to 23 in two of the top uh runners uh and we've asked for if there is any flexibility on that transition year with such a precipitous drop in the the identified population and we were told that we can make the transition year this year based on the projected numbers and the redistricting. Okay. But that that transition number from Perry from Anthony Burns is that 27,900 down in the transition year. Is that am I reading that correctly? So next year Conway is minus 118,500 which percentage wise is is a much more significant that is because of the 1.6 multiplier. Um so you're allowed to you're allowed

228to do what you want on on that. You just we do have you have to qualify the school. Do you have to give it the same amount of funding? Uh it's all computed the same way. Um I I'm not sure what okay for um we mentioned carryover beforehand. So we can apply for a waiver and carry over as much funding as the schools have this year. So for example, Conway is going to be pretty much in par with what they have this year because they're keeping all of their carryover. How much carryover can can we just get a separate report on how much carryover the schools have had say over the past three years? No, I just I just want I'm not asking for now. Just want to get that report so I can look

229at it because they're carrying it over tells me they may not be using it all. So while Conway is is projected on this recommendation to lose 118,500, they have $105,000 in anticipated carryover for next year. So that can offset some of that that loss for the one-year transition. Okay. I just want to see I just want to see the numbers, please. No, you understand the only reason why they're having a larger amount of carryover this year. Usually, we're only allowed 15% of the whole grant amount to be carried over. We applied for a waiver knowing that we were going to be moving into um redistricting the year the next year and the transition. So, we applied for a carryover waiver. So, we're allowed to carry more than 15% and we told the principles and with

230losing staffing and things that they moved and stuff like that, we told them to please stop spending until we had an answer. Then when I see it for the past three years, this year it'll be different from the other years. That's good. That's why I asked for three pause and then we can revisit this. But Chick-fil-A is here. So, please make a play. when I look at Shirley as opposed to receiving some benefit those those population and we're talking Widewater Monure or um would feed into Shirley Heheim. Now Burns does go to Stafford Middle, but the other schools that feed into Stafford Middle aren't I guess as many on this list or the balance of like percentages of feeder schools? Like do we factor in kids that are essentially used to receiving a benefit going

231from a school that has it to a school that doesn't? We don't really have pure of any sort like feeder patterns. So it's very difficult to do to attract that because I think Stafford Middle there's some that come up but it's Stafford Burns and Wre Stanford has a really high school population it's just too hard to and I think that's something that we continue to look had and we have a lot of conversation around what's going to what's going to have the most impact and how far does do you you go down do you kind of take away and you know really continue to slice that pie and dwindle that money in terms of looking at your impact and so that's you know like Michael said earlier you got to draw a line somewhere and

232that's as we've really been looking at that talking with principles talking with staff around what's going to make the most impact that's how we've routed this but we look at other factors besides just Yes. Well, you're basically taking Conway away to help make room for the middle schools. Well, not Fairy Farms. Fairy farm. Well, Fairy Farm. Fairy Farm, Burns, and Conway. No, I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the one. Well, no, we're also trying to plan ahead in terms of Yes. trying to think about what redistricting decisions you're going to make and what that looks for 18 and 19 because it does look like 18 and 19 will come on both. So that's we're trying to plan two years ahead with this, right? In terms of thinking about that, which is another reason

233to to really think about do you really want and I'm not advocating one way or the other, but do you really want to add the middle schools this year when you know next year you're going to have two new time you're going to have two two coming on, two coming on, but three coming on. They don't come off right away though. They next year will be their last year. That's why we built their transition. That's what the transition That's the kind of the point of having a conversation with things early. Yeah. But we've also added the middle schools with the principles who you you've spoken with all the principles that are on the on the sheet, right? They're aware. They're aware, but are you like were they was there any push back? Were they arguing

234or upset? So, for example, so and I don't want to so I have talked so I'll talk about mon. I did have a conversation with Mr. Mackey just around what that means because I did look at that. All right, 99,000 like that's a a big jump. And so him and I had that conversation around what he felt comfortable with, where he was, was he still able to be able to meet the needs of the school. And he him and I talked about some ideas and and he was comfortable with that. He understood the need to be able to reach a couple of our middle schools that really needed some support. Um, and so we had that conversation in terms of where he was because I wanted to make sure, especially given that was one of

235the But why is he taking the biggest bite or loss? Because he has the most money. Well, actually Conway is well, but Conway is coming off. But I'm just curious, but they're next year. The fact that they're coming off. Yeah. So, there is a calculation to me is so what? Next year they have the same need that they have this year, right? So, the fact that they're coming off the year after that doesn't affect for me the decision about what they're going to get for next year. Gotcha. They wouldn't You're right. They would also follow. So, yeah, it is a calculation. Now, Burns, I keep going back to Burns. Where's Mr. Sigman? When I look at that that free and reduced number and I see you know what it was it 30 39 39 I

236have a little less sympathy there because they're on that list because of the multiplier and Burns is projected to be 23% free and reduced lunch in all three of your your existing redistricting plans. So that is one that we think we right but the 39% free and reduced lunch isn't a true measure of how many free and reduced lunch kids are in that school right because it's only the ones who filled out the form but the C stuff is looking at the community community as a whole so the 39 the the free and reduced lunch number for C schools is meaningless but do we know what the C numbers are on all schools? That would be interesting. I would have asked for that if I had known we had those numbers. Do we have the

237C numbers for every school? If if we do, I'd like to see that because the only way you can compare it is to have it for every school, which is why, you know, I appreciate you sending that list because that makes it helpful for me. But do we have the C? We we do have that number. Can Can we get that for all the schools? Yes. Okay. You can just send it back. When you're But when you're identifying for title one, you cannot use a C number for a nonp I'm talking about itformational for me to to have in my background. Just clarify. Why would you have a C score if you're not a C school? Well, because you have to calculate it to figure out whether you're going to make that school a C

238school. And as we that determines how much federal reimbursement you get, right? And as we've discussed, there are C schools where because the free and reduced lunch numbers are so high, you would lose money making them a C school, right? That was what we were hearing about Shirley Hind that um which is a shame because they're the ones that probably needed, you know, it I hate I really I mean I I know we're we're not a business, right? But it it it makes me sad that we're we're not identifying schools as C because it we're not going to make as much money. Well, no, it's not going to cover the cost. I mean, because the meal is only reimbursed in part percentage. Well, don't get on the cost with me because our nutrition pays for

239a lot of things that they don't have to pay for because they they cover a lot of costs. when we need hoods on the, you know, dishwashers, dishwashers, things like that. Our school nutrition fund funds things that the school system should be paying for. At least it has traditionally. I don't know. I haven't seen any reports lately. So, this is only for title one. Are we going to bring these schools on for title one? Then why do we constantly keep talking about the C? Because the C has an impact. when you have a C multiplier, then we consider the C multiplier as well when we look at the title one application. So there's no title there's no C schools that are not on this list, right? By by having that 1.6 multiplier, they're almost guaranteed

240to be on these are all of our C schools, right? So by definition, the only one in the past that was not on our identified title one list was Drew Middle. Okay. All right. Is there anything else? No. So, we are planning on bringing this to we need action on it in June at the board meeting for uh so we can submit the application and so we can we'll get that information. I have the two requests that I have is uh carryover funds for the past year and Cul three years and T calculation for schools for all the schools for all schools because I want to see where where it is and and maybe we could also get the cost If if if we have any general costs to make a school a C for

241example Stafford Middle at 49% being reduced or how or Shirley home how much would it cost us to make them C schools cost right and that's you talking about you'd actually be selling more lunches so how much do we make on a breakfast or lunch and that's the factor that we go inspector's announcement on what do we think our overall participation will increase. Is it going to cover that 25 or 30% reduction, right? You're going to take what would be the cost to us because I I mean I I would like to have more of our schools be C if we can because two reasons. One, it makes sure the kids get two meals and two it means we're not going to have any student meal debt for those schools. Yeah. Okay. I'm just going

242to sit with it because we have to think on it. We will bring this back. You weren't doing it. But this is all factored into So, can we adjourn? Yes. Okay, let's Yeah. Wait, one last piece though. Oh, wait. In order for us to prepare the application for June, we have to know the identification of schools in the threshold. So, we can't decide that to attribute to the red district though, right? Or do we just you just want us to set the threshold? In in the past, we've always the board has gone with the with staff's recommendation and we put it into the title one application and bring it to you. I I would I would I would say go with the recommendation because I think that you know that 50% seems reasonable. Are we

243pulling Susan staff recommendation different? Would you feel any differently if Shirley were at 49 versus 50? I'm just curious. I I It's not just the free and reduced lunch though. I think there's other factors that go into play in the title one and I think 50% is what's the other factor? Why would you not and obviously it's not in my district but I feel I feel like we're shortch changing staff. It's what is the other factor? It's the number of ELLL students. It's the number of STEM students. see that up there. It's the number of Yeah, but those data but she knows that because it's in her district. But it's also the fact that they are having a hard time staffing and it's just a school with different issues. Like I talked to principals that

244have different staffing issues all over the county. I'm on staff recommendation. Thank you. Susan, his new staff recommendation. I'm only going down the road with Susan. It's going to get approved. Don't worry about it. A little few to one. I don't know. You got it. Where are you dismissed? We're dismissed. We'll write it as recommended. Thank you. What am I supposed to Harbor minutes on the phone.