[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6249660,"mediaKeyId","3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe","parentId",3204960,"title","CPS foundation seeks larger initial budget as board presses for guardrails and oversight","audioSeconds",225,"startMs",3603000,"endMs",3828000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe&start=3603&end=3828","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe/thumbnail_3603000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6249660/Ohio/CPS-foundation-seeks-larger-initial-budget-as-board-presses-for-guardrails-and-oversight","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6249660-2ade69a0df4565584b289651afae95e8/orig.mp4?Expires=1770716558&Signature=QRgp9klQmoLHq1QyICbs8heD5oAqRwjaV5XdUmwH44zEEq~jwijBdOLof-1AVaCuK-QHbxOUtVw8y-FULxIIeUPByzMlSh4JtNpB~PuJmVDApr41N4OIaEPyoe4xxumXjZ0LYr5NZNDeKPKhbi-o~qCdVTno66l~ACtCpRqXK0m87sXZOSb~ElrZPR3Qh4ldenBMLNNrGhPGzs6jSHQLqMsrdTzyy~SrNskbe0PcsXxm9jkZ969L8Zl3LOH-6q~7D2oHWhR7jv7RHybb5O87B5cIlsl5E-GgwJIuCnLrrYzWr96nqt6sxycF8DcjzkxZPMZaxtIszmXqNH7y0IKPeg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Cincinnati Public Schools","date","2025-05-07T00:55:49.697Z","article","Board members received an update May 5 on the community fundraising arm that is converting from an alumni/ABC group into the Cincinnati Public Schools Foundation and asked for more detail before approving a larger funding request for next fiscal year.

The foundation’s leadership presented a first‑year fundraising goal of $2,000,000 and a five‑year target of $20,000,000. The foundation’s draft operating budget for fiscal 2026 totaled $1,341,587, higher than the value set in the memorandum of understanding (MOU) the board previously approved, $1,124,963. Assistant Treasurer Mike Guston told the board the higher figure reflects planned staff and operating costs, including rent and a modest moving allowance if the foundation relocates office space in 2026.

Board members asked for specific guardrails on how foundation dollars would align with district priorities and for a comparative benchmark of fundraising overhead. Board member Lindy urged benchmarking the foundation’s fundraising costs against other school foundations’ 990 filings. Board member Craig said the superintendent should lead on district priorities and warned individual board members’ project pitches could skew the foundation’s agenda. Vice President Bolton emphasized consistent vocabulary and messaging to avoid confusion with levy and public funding discussions.

Superintendent Murphy and Guston said the MOU language allows the parties to agree on a different annual contribution but that, if the parties do not agree, the MOU number would default to $1,124,963. Guston said the foundation’s current budget assumes it will continue renting outside district facilities through March 2026 and that a move into district space, if approved, would likely occur in July 2026.

Board members directed the administration to gather additional information: clearer line‑item justification for the proposed $1,341,587 budget, details on rent and in‑kind support options, a plan for evaluating fundraising overhead, and a timeline for when the foundation will report fundraising priorities back to the board. The board did not take a final vote on the revised amount at the meeting; administration said the foundation budget line will be part of the district’s overall fiscal 2026 budget request the board will vote on in June.

Why this matters: The foundation will solicit private funds for programs the district otherwise would not be able to sustain with general revenue. Board members said they want transparency on costs, donor restrictions and how private fundraising will interact with public budget priorities before committing to a higher contribution.

What’s next: Board members asked the foundation to return with its prioritized fundraising categories in June and requested the administration provide a written breakdown linking the foundation’s proposed expenses to district budget categories.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","CPS Board Business Meeting May 5, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Board members received an update May 5 on the community fundraising arm that is converting from an alumni/ABC group into the Cincinnati Public Schools Foundation and asked for more detail before approving a larger funding request for next fiscal year.","taxTitle","Cincinnati Public Schools, School Districts, Ohio","taxId",13483,"location","Ohio","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6249640,"Board committee advances draft mental‑health and wellness policy, aims for vote next month",935,9971000,10906000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe&start=9971&end=10906","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe/thumbnail_9971000.jpg","/articles/6249640/Ohio/Board-committee-advances-draft-mentalhealth-and-wellness-policy-aims-for-vote-next-month","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6249640-7fd6fa1950cbd2e8a684478f141c472e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770716558&Signature=h6kFDNQLwcdp4eA-L3g4Uxovu-nTV3EZsYFPDMp2i9nS-ER3zVFJ3SFaqsVRNNvsn4Lsnpu1Dxx~X-sGyyhXl0WAF9x~qHk6uc4X8zrHM0m2vGDqM41vG3uV58GIBTWn5hTyvrHdU0nnlibZOj3TyRZxH4xxLgIxPoi2TMJPtnnXuVILsD-aP1TsQfales7ZOZlV~efeSHw-fmxxYmSRZHKOiY-TjSkMyUCcsLM05dAjaOFplGOixL80UwSDUj1efrVzwL-4fubXQx3560zHCMZhTs0DUyMFUX69GU276RNRlFtbzfmt9jO1v8n-wqa~3JkU7rjDxEfVK4Fvr3vfgg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Board’s policy committee presented a comprehensive draft mental‑health and wellness policy May 5 that would set district expectations for school‑based mental‑health staff, social‑emotional instruction, employee wellness and crisis response.

Board member Mapp, who chaired the policy committee, summarized goal areas that include ensuring each school has access to licensed mental‑health staff and counselors, designating calming spaces and sensory supports in classrooms, adopting a district‑level social‑emotional learning curriculum after a pilot and creating a structured approach to critical‑incident response. The draft also calls for expanded access to employee assistance programs and regular data review of student and staff wellness outcomes.

Policy team members present included Assistant General Counsel Stephanie Scott, Positive School Culture Director Manisha House, lead school counselor (named in the meeting), lead school psychologist and lead school social worker; community partners from MindPeace were also consulted. Mapp said the policy’s language was intended to align with the district’s guardrails and strategic plan and to protect students while supporting staff.

Board members asked about cost implications and rollout timing. Superintendent Murphy and policy staff said much of the policy formalizes work already under way in the district and that the policy does not necessarily require immediate new hires; some functions may be supplied through existing co‑located partners or through telehealth and school‑based health centers. The committee asked administration to present pilot curriculum results at the upcoming Committee‑of‑the‑Whole/CAL meeting and to return the policy to the full board for a vote at the next business meeting.

Why this matters: The policy would set district expectations around supports for student mental health and the well‑being of employees and would help formalize the district’s response to traumatic incidents.

What’s next: The committee will incorporate feedback and present the pilot curriculum results at the CAL; the full board expects a vote on the policy at the May business meeting.","The Board’s policy committee on May 5 advanced a draft mental‑health and wellness policy that would require school‑level access to licensed mental‑health professionals, a district social‑emotional learning curriculum and a structured critical‑incident response.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6249645,"Dater Montessori parents urge board to restore ELL coordinator position slated for elimination",1043,7693000,8736000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe&start=7693&end=8736","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe/thumbnail_7693000.jpg","/articles/6249645/Ohio/Dater-Montessori-parents-urge-board-to-restore-ELL-coordinator-position-slated-for-elimination","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6249645-c21aba92befb523ca04310e21da4ea53/orig.mp4?Expires=1770716558&Signature=nSO0Ml6cn97F6Scr~zzIFyQGNW1qaGsx5R0MgfUVVkA9Nsz0SolEa~8fLy~zIprZaPQqjsRd4QuujNKDGGMIrhEPNbI2jdVUdCVoMKpngzGbs5KQvq74Sl2N4tpNZ5Hhk3zTHah57eUWhc5~hNBVb~hqOWjg53DltU3a1IZKjUfzffE1wyKpEj00cNQe39cZfJ1lWccSIyUb7MEPRjDjUFd6vI~l1lhGUmbc5IzCd5i1EYzamL7~DJm28I6SNqWGZYu3aLHO96d0uXPSb69lOyYxMoIGY2~fqffxN6RnxN73uGJ~9b7QqrUB8KZIMoLkpOu2np9dERKqkT7SrW7YMQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Dozens of parents, students and community members used the May 5 public comment period to urge Cincinnati Public Schools to retain an English‑language learner (ELL) coordinator position at Dater Montessori that school leaders plan to remove as part of school‑level Title funding allocations.

Several speakers — including Magdalena Netzel, Wasagmi Sanogo and Mario Daoshi — testified in multiple languages through translation that the coordinator provided daily translation, enrollment assistance and a trusted link between families and the school. Parents described the coordinator as essential when families do not speak English fluently and said the role boosted enrollment, attendance and family engagement. One speaker said a child refused to enter school in earlier years until he saw the coordinator at the door.

Assistant Principal and PTN leaders and several teachers also described the coordinator’s role as central to community‑building activities such as a Unity Fair and to routine communications before conferences and events. A parent‑volunteer noted the coordinator handled translation during meetings and helped families navigate school procedures.

Superintendent Murphy said the staffing change at that school originated with the school’s ILT (instructional leadership team). School leaders told the ILT they would allocate Title funding to a reading specialist and a math specialist rather than the ELL coordinator. Murphy said the district is investigating the matter and will provide more detail about which positions at the school are school‑funded versus federally restricted in order to clarify options.

Why this matters: Title III and other federal funds target language access and supplemental services for English learners. Removing an on‑site coordinator can reduce multilingual families’ access to school information and to services that support student attendance and achievement.

What’s next: Parents asked trustees to intervene and asked administration to seek ways to preserve the coordinator role at Dater. Superintendent Murphy and school leaders said they would provide clarifying detail on funding sources and the ILT’s decision and report back to the board.","Dozens of parents and staff told the May 5 board meeting that an English‑language learner coordinator at Dater Montessori is vital and should not be eliminated as the school reallocates Title funds.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6249650,"CPS faces $35.5M gap in draft FY2026 budget; administration outlines cuts, task force work",283,10171000,10454000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe&start=10171&end=10454","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe/thumbnail_10171000.jpg","/articles/6249650/Ohio/CPS-faces-355M-gap-in-draft-FY2026-budget-administration-outlines-cuts-task-force-work","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6249650-e0f9e52020acfbfc4e39e50e3d1f027c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770716558&Signature=duuXRvKBX6zhRwqFMg17JVbRz9IIXrxjv5OEKeFUk-V6m4RwKrYZabVSN8o~jzJgdnCODE5wm5uC4epkGrfHpn3woEvv6BAxrx6Jez2XFOgzQkLl4QZM1eh3yjvlw0VKIjQiZ2fc-LvgzwsQU~7bCtIOfyPEh2I34XuY2e-LDJZM4n4mkOqItdK-Q2or~GZ3y~bdOU7-f4WuM1dlN7mrOEgUW9lr-OZp5jydETIzyT-7T1WrchFrnxUoEp8g9n9UpR0N51tY4uwLdiXTZMVL4AYYiOlXSOG~WEEmotBx80xvNUdCuPxTC2UMMhtwzzPqliM4aWB6Fktuyt0wvOd4vg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Cincinnati Public Schools officials told trustees May 5 they are narrowing a multi‑million‑dollar fiscal 2026 shortfall but that additional reductions remain necessary before the board adopts a balanced budget.

The district’s baseline target for the general fund is about $624 million. Administration said it has identified $10 million in “known underspends,” realized about $13.7 million from initial budget‑reduction work and is analyzing roughly $51.5 million in additional potential savings from a brainstormed “list of 100” ideas. After reconciling those items, Guston and Superintendent Murphy said the draft gap currently stands at roughly $35.5 million; that figure will be updated as the board and administration complete further reductions and confirm final state funding figures.

To tackle the gap the district has convened a budget task force that is reviewing central‑office reorganizations, potential retire‑rehire approaches, school staffing allocations, Title funding uses and vendor contracts. Murphy said the administration is aiming for deeper contract reductions (about 20% in many smaller vendor lines) and is revisiting whether consolidated or shared administrative roles could reduce long‑term costs.

Board members pressed for numbers and timelines. Several trustees urged the administration to bring a concrete budget proposal to the board well before the June vote so members could review line items rather than rely on a 90‑day appropriation. Board member Craig warned against overloading central office by continuing to shift savings expectations there; Lindy and others asked for the administration to identify which core instructional and compliance items must be preserved.

A separate personnel disagreement arose during the consent agenda when trustees debated whether to approve two administrative promotions scheduled to begin in August. Some trustees said promotions should be paused until the budget is finalized; administrators said the changes consolidate multiple roles and would produce net savings versus the current four separate allocations. The board approved the consent agenda with recorded abstentions and reserved additional scrutiny for specific personnel items.

Why this matters: The district must balance state and local revenue with contractual obligations, staffing and federally‑restricted program funding. Trustees and staff are working against the May/June timetable for the five‑year forecast and the fiscal 2026 appropriation.

What’s next: Administration will present updated revenue figures and a revised budget proposal at meetings in May and will return with a recommended balanced spending plan before the board’s June budget vote.","Cincinnati Public Schools officials told trustees May 5 they are narrowing a multi‑million‑dollar fiscal 2026 shortfall but still face additional reductions estimated at about $35.5 million.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6249655,"Board leans toward 10‑year renewal of $48M levy; substitute levy and income tax options discussed",230,5289000,5519000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe&start=5289&end=5519","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3204960-def26e2abf47ee31e985c2562de45dfe/thumbnail_5289000.jpg","/articles/6249655/Ohio/Board-leans-toward-10year-renewal-of-48M-levy-substitute-levy-and-income-tax-options-discussed","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6249655-af0d25be43624af68cc41777435457fc/orig.mp4?Expires=1770716558&Signature=VGgcMsSXMqX9-Q4UGEy7G4dLnL-iDBISZoztkbejdP7bAt61UogbL6hoAyB2-X3TU46geXsRvZgpT0QWZAGsRsdeRrqPuSJwSv-FIy-sseNFzZ06sAJzm1Z2Xi8FFVUto5dpf7qKv8V2MTt17mqJTdDTAhjZVnExpeFh8lEIYSyNSdD3Tb6Wq74Jss0HzwEr7uoLInqW0uFRve2v8AhG55nATuPUAzUwbUNagBkkyQDZgEKarKB7vz4TncMWvfsOptxURYbrTlXAoBJ66MdoQ3QAPgYz4xr7wqtz-OOnhzxTj7BjmUPa3rjVqAG9ffVgMIHRPhDHm99nN8uNbDINog__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Cincinnati Public Schools Board on May 5 moved closer to placing a renewal levy on the November ballot and spent an hour discussing alternatives that could affect the district’s long‑term revenue.

Assistant Treasurer Mike Guston presented levy options and an analysis showing a 10‑year renewal of $48 million was the simplest approach to “preserve existing revenue” while avoiding ballot‑language complexity that could reduce voter support. Guston and consultant data showed a substitute levy — a fixed‑sum question that captures future new property values — could produce modest additional revenue (an estimated maximum of about $300,000 in its early years) but yields diminishing returns each year as new values become part of the base.

Board members raised legal and communications considerations. Board member Lindy argued for a 10‑year renewal to avoid frequent ask cycles and protect ongoing programs. Vice President Bolton and others warned that substitute‑levy ballot language is longer and potentially confusing to voters. Board member Craig urged an earlier decision so a comprehensive voter education and marketing campaign could begin. The board also received a briefing on school district income tax options — a resident tax not tied to property values and in use in roughly one‑third of Ohio districts — including discussion of earned‑income versus traditional income bases.

The board did not adopt a resolution during the meeting but President Moffett instructed staff to prepare a resolution for the next business meeting. Multiple trustees told staff they expected to see a draft resolution recommending the renewal, 10 years, $48,000,000 on the November ballot.

Why this matters: The levy funds are a significant portion of district operating revenue; a renewal preserves current funding levels, while substitute or new levies carry different tax and outreach implications. Trustees said they want to avoid “levy fatigue” among voters while ensuring ongoing services and programs are not cut.

What’s next: Administration will prepare a resolution and ballot language for the board’s next business meeting and provide further financial modeling and outreach timetables.","Trustees signaled support for a 10‑year renewal levy at $48 million for the November ballot and discussed substitute levies and a school district income tax as alternative revenue tools. The board asked administration to prepare a resolution for the next business meeting and to provide voter‑facing language for public outreach.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

CPS foundation seeks larger initial budget as board presses for guardrails and oversight

Board committee advances draft mental‑health and wellness policy, aims for vote next month

Dater Montessori parents urge board to restore ELL coordinator position slated for elimination

CPS faces $35.5M gap in draft FY2026 budget; administration outlines cuts, task force work

Board leans toward 10‑year renewal of $48M levy; substitute levy and income tax options discussed