[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-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],{"_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",6187917,"mediaKeyId","5064226-2c14d29b3aa50011607a026bef57cb99","parentId",5064226,"title","Lakota leaders detail master facilities vision, warn of class‑size and staffing limits without levy","audioSeconds",1841,"startMs",59830,"endMs",1901005,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5064226-2c14d29b3aa50011607a026bef57cb99&start=59&end=1901","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5064226-2c14d29b3aa50011607a026bef57cb99/thumbnail_59830.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6187917/Ohio/Lakota-leaders-detail-master-facilities-vision-warn-of-classsize-and-staffing-limits-without-levy","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6187917-1eb4f409c3dca23bee989a5f545c11cf/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157394&Signature=WkILTBhdQzMaWdsmJmSU2uWorkGw1B5PW2HOfYUd0v1x2-5rHPe~QC4CxxX6lHxCZxjZCcydQs4fp7qKisY-aQr9ZCWwXPMB71UCE6GqHw2BGA4t2ajagikgO~8WU1DorDahAIN0umA~BhpBiCqvJV~BHZj4yR13l6sAg4spQu-~YuLT0OuCAWoasiRtpIITf6h5CXTx4glazOo-RgWtz2IKOkIGmPBnesZuf7hLH3qwbQX2Dh4YfhXwkVxXzmW4IYM4jD~sogk8ldmS6-bLBW~H8qgYciCqOnbQpX2Er6R1B-sFoOqdCAo4MZzJtWVD9tI24w8wCqSr21nWa7gWHA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Lakota Local, OH ","date","2025-06-25T12:52:51.787Z","article","Officials from the Lakota Local district and its architect team presented a working version of the district’s master facilities plan at a June 17 board retreat, showing schematic imagery for expanded athletics, arts and STEM spaces and saying the district has to translate those concepts into a concise package for public outreach.

Architects and district staff said the roughly illustrative designs include a field‑house scale that the district expects could be seeded by roughly $10,000,000 per site if outside partners and townships participate, while noting final size and features will depend on partner contributions and state funding formulas.

District leaders tied the facilities discussion directly to staffing and classroom capacity. Teaching‑and‑learning staff told the board a district target of about 24 students per core K–6 classroom would require roughly 20 additional classroom teachers across the district — roughly 16 of those in the elementary grades — and would also affect how many physical classrooms the district must build or reclaim. Staff made clear the only short‑term source of significant additional classroom capacity would be changes such as shifting all‑day kindergarten back to half‑day (which staff said would free as many as 30 rooms) or adding modular classrooms, both of which carry educational or operational tradeoffs.

Board members and staff discussed site‑level logistics for projected additions, especially at West High School, focusing on parking, traffic flow and stormwater. The architect team recommended early coordination with local police and township officials to plan entrances and circulation to reduce congestion and to explore regional stormwater solutions rather than site‑only detention. Staff also emphasized that many district classrooms are usable for several years and that renovation dollars commonly follow new construction in the latter stages of an OFCC‑assisted project.

Communication and ballot planning were also a focus. Staff and the architect said they are working to condense the program to a one‑ or two‑page outreach package for the public and the board’s levy campaign; they urged the board to be ready to show clear, high‑level images rather than floor‑by‑floor technical drawings so voters can understand what the bond would fund while allowing room to refine details later in design.

What to watch next: district staff and the architect will deliver a public‑facing package in the coming weeks and continue coordination with townships, the Ohio Facilities Construction Commission and local police on traffic/stormwater solutions. The board will consider timing of a formal levy resolution and continued community engagement planning.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Lakota Board of Education Retreat: June 17, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Officials from Lakota Local and its architect team presented schematic designs and cost assumptions for a district master facilities program at a June 17 board retreat, and staff warned that meeting parent expectations on class size and specials would require both new spaces and roughly 20 additional K–6 teachers.","taxTitle","Lakota Local, School Districts, Ohio","taxId",14477,"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},6187903,"Board gets refresher on superintendent and treasurer evaluation process, timelines and common evaluator biases",696,7459340,8156120,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5064226-2c14d29b3aa50011607a026bef57cb99&start=7459&end=8156","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5064226-2c14d29b3aa50011607a026bef57cb99/thumbnail_7459340.jpg","/articles/6187903/Ohio/Board-gets-refresher-on-superintendent-and-treasurer-evaluation-process-timelines-and-common-evaluator-biases","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6187903-9f1aac117c353e81aa3248096465a7ff/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157394&Signature=I9drGxiRwhYNJYGx8OwzQzAIWLxo6IDhu-k7qc-PUck-p9QuIU9miO~-hfMtX8YFMrbRrVb2LXQWsYWJzhElnJvjmNAjohsBLDrr5F0cdQ87ej0RcgPsJbK3uJODce1qn7apbOvz4B6faBFwDip59TJB7p8j6wgtmnMnrSu~8oZy23UvJpsJCD7O1xcOqAwuBL5sTgfnzm3AStm7AYmMrcTlNvralmj3M4T84SsBCwZOJzzzRu2dlj2E8pKnhufFvDGRoXPpBuGxHe0fcly9EoXfE5pU6ovGH4LA2VHygne9PvuYjYvmCnuxg6K~msVgJLYEBaku4z7kavHzPREe8Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Lakota Local board received an evaluation training session at its June 17 retreat that reviewed the distinction between formative feedback and summative performance ratings, recommended a regular cadence of check‑ins and asked the board to align job descriptions and evaluation timelines with contract and legal notice requirements.

The presenter emphasized that evaluations serve two distinct purposes: formative development (regular check‑ins, coaching and goal adjustments) and summative conclusions (formal annual ratings that affect contract decisions). The consultant recommended that the summative result should never come as a surprise and that a robust formative system of quarterly or semiannual check‑ins, personal goals and documentation improves both accuracy and fairness.

The session also called attention to evaluator cognitive biases — for example, confirmation bias, halo effect, recency bias and similarity bias — and urged calibration practices so board members see the same objective evidence against agreed standards. The board packet included state model evaluation rubrics for the superintendent and treasurer and a proposed timeline that aligns goal setting, midyear check‑in, a self‑assessment and final evaluation with contract deadlines.

Board members asked staff to update job descriptions and to bring the draft evaluation calendar and evidence templates to the policy committee for refinement. The presenter also suggested the board set a small number of measurable, SMART personal goals for the superintendent and treasurer and to document the thresholds for contract‑year decisions so the board has adequate legal lead time for any non‑renewal or other contract actions.

What to watch next: staff will update the job descriptions, produce the evidence templates and return with a recommended calendar and a short form for the board to use when conveying formative feedback to avoid surprises at the summative stage.","A June 17 retreat session led by human‑resources and a consultant outlined best practices for superintendent and treasurer evaluations, distinguishing formative check‑ins from summative ratings, flagging common cognitive biases and recommending personal goal setting and clearer timelines to align policy, job descriptions and contract deadlines.",{"_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},6187908,"Lakota Board considers therapy‑dog policy, costs and retirement rules after program growth",356,9286256,9642755,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5064226-2c14d29b3aa50011607a026bef57cb99&start=9286&end=9642","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5064226-2c14d29b3aa50011607a026bef57cb99/thumbnail_9286256.jpg","/articles/6187908/Ohio/Lakota-Board-considers-therapydog-policy-costs-and-retirement-rules-after-program-growth","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6187908-b6e2d582f7eabd03989d46970c6a1ab7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157394&Signature=lMMych7qk0NC9QOGdWWcKPVS7to8gPgh9LX867I0kSQ5uSr0aQV0WOWxMMVkgRozWBvRTbx9J27zYzgUxwFrfNbh2GA~XTRglZPzI9L~3~BKUFDkQhzhUjGoJGclb3XuzOwKol3XvnTw~IKyyo8z2SGSKjhhVW9TiikSf9wfe9YnnFEGjqYtWLX-~i8BWbbdzQW0M0kXozPX~MSyQaKRib8VEmUA-6Wx8zgvG1TnEq3sNPUvvnxTf~jNZMXPqYH2ICFSomeKG6PxBxpYWTd868mZTfqFRsbvqPCpz7mRuCkoXdInZ67wVdKHSrZitpwxAkXJeRJiW-hVx-F7mNOnrA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Lakota Local staff used the June 17 retreat to map out the district’s therapy‑dog program and to flag policy and fiscal issues that emerged as the program expanded in recent years.

Staff explained the difference under existing federal guidance between a service animal — which is tied to a specific person’s disability and must be accommodated — and district‑licensed facility or therapy dogs, which the district owns or manages for schoolwide supportive uses. The district’s administrative guidance requires training for hosts and handlers, a written facility agreement and an annual refresh of handler training; staff said handlers must be trained before they handle dogs in school settings and that host families (households where dogs live) must also complete training.

Board members and staff discussed several operational and fiscal points: some early dogs were funded or supported under different arrangements, and higher market demand and supply issues caused purchase prices to range from roughly $1,500 in early cohorts up to several thousand dollars in later years (one recent purchase was cited at about $10,000). Staff said the district is considering a program‑wide cap or threshold for future purchases and exploring partnerships with local veterinarians to create consistent, district‑wide routine medical coverage for all host families. Staff also asked the board whether retired therapy dogs should be quietly decommissioned or publicly recognized; administrators recommended a quiet approach and asked the board to authorize clearer written procedures on retirement, custody and any prorated purchase options for host families.

Other discussion items included how the district will respond to student allergies, data collection for program outcomes, and building assignments for dogs given some animals’ temperament and age. Staff said the program fits best where building administration and staff are committed to incorporating the dog into structured interventions rather than treating the animal as a general comfort amenity.

What to watch next: district staff said they will draft revisions to the administrative guidance that define purchase thresholds, medical‑cost partnerships, handler training timelines and retirement procedures for therapy dogs, then return those recommendations to the board for review.","The board reviewed the district’s facility/therapy‑dog program at its June 17 retreat, discussing the difference between service animals and therapy dogs, host/handler expectations, training requirements, medical/maintenance cost responsibilities, and whether the district should set an upper price threshold for purchasing dogs going forward.",{"_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},6187912,"Board questions whether Lakota Central serves credit recovery or mental‑health needs after attendance review",495,3495349,3990480,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5064226-2c14d29b3aa50011607a026bef57cb99&start=3495&end=3990","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5064226-2c14d29b3aa50011607a026bef57cb99/thumbnail_3495349.jpg","/articles/6187912/Ohio/Board-questions-whether-Lakota-Central-serves-credit-recovery-or-mentalhealth-needs-after-attendance-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6187912-423e7153ec88503b16cf284c6240a9c3/orig.mp4?Expires=1771157394&Signature=SKCFtf6kZ0tknmrvv3hiYSFjCb-Q5fm917UAXBS9hB~t9UY0wwFxnqxR4E1Nx0KiRWmP5Rx4AWVx0MQfxn7AymAzcYSBZVAuosQSuVX5T~oM7d-QZcz2WQm4Z8TI46rJsA-fbUfXlAv8bWypPCCu~c1rAH-nK~JHhkv~1NnY7lLGCHnmAczdncnNIiwelmncw8BX29IY1KKZvB6HKs27KRyBND79BbqXyRoWQPHQr0WfjlUpuA1okLEORyX9t2hbk6Dl~gtBhZst4ENhX9tCOOSm0mwOYTB~cJEinSR4Tp6u9I~rUvuhaq6SeIAFqIyu0t0EcB70bL6Z01cBl5OWjg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","District administrators and board members spent significant time reviewing Lakota Central during the June 17 retreat, focusing on how the program is used and how attendance is recorded.

Staff told the board that Central’s attendance is not logged like a typical building’s day‑by‑day present/absent calendar but is instead captured as manually entered “minutes worked,” a method that produced a year‑to‑date average attendance figure of 78.4% for the program’s approximately 258 enrolled students. Administrators acknowledged they need a clearer crosswalk between minutes‑worked entries, in‑person time and assignment completion, and asked for a Cognos report and spot checks to understand how minutes‑worked correlates with student grades and progress.

Board members and staff also contrasted Central’s original purpose with its current use. Staff said curriculum leaders expected Central to target students needing credit recovery, but current data show a larger share of students there are referred for mental‑health reasons or self‑refer, rather than solely for credit deficiency. The MTSS (multi‑tiered system of supports) process screens referrals but staff acknowledged inconsistencies in how interventions are documented before a Central placement and questioned whether better in‑school interventions could reduce placements.

The district agreed to several follow‑ups: clarify the “minutes worked” definition and data collection method; perform targeted crosswalks between attendance percentages and academic outcomes; and ask the curriculum and counseling teams to return to the board with recommended options for Central’s future operations — whether that means retooling the current Central model, integrating some services into home high schools, or establishing clearer return‑to‑home‑building pathways for students who improve.

What to watch next: administrators said they will bring the Cognos attendance analysis and proposed criteria for Central placement back to the board, with options on whether to redesign the program or strengthen home‑school interventions and supports.","Board discussion at the June 17 retreat centered on Lakota Central’s attendance accounting and purpose: district staff reported a year‑to‑date ‘minutes worked’ average attendance of 78.4% for Central students and said most students placed there appear to be seeking alternative supports related to mental health rather than formal credit recovery.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Lakota leaders detail master facilities vision, warn of class‑size and staffing limits without levy

Board gets refresher on superintendent and treasurer evaluation process, timelines and common evaluator biases

Lakota Board considers therapy‑dog policy, costs and retirement rules after program growth

Board questions whether Lakota Central serves credit recovery or mental‑health needs after attendance review