Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Summer Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RCS proposes smaller, targeted summer program for tiered interventions as full Discovery Camp costs loom
Summary
Staff proposed a smaller summer program focused on tier 2/3 academic remediation and credit recovery rather than the full Discovery Camp model because of budget constraints. The targeted program would serve about 100–120 students in a shorter day; full Discovery Camp last year cost about $215,000, and transportation was a major driver of expense.
District staff proposed a scaled summer program that narrows enrollment to students identified for tier‑2 and tier‑3 interventions and credit recovery, citing budget constraints and the desire for measurable academic impact.
Jean (staff member) described the elementary summer proposal as a four‑hour day focused on targeted skill work for kindergarten through grade 5 students who qualify for intervention. "So we would be looking at about a hundred to a 20 students," Jean said, adding that the program would prioritize instructional gains measured by pre‑ and post‑assessments rather than an open enrollment lottery used in past Discovery Camp offerings.
Why it matters: Board members who supported the broader Discovery Camp noted its engagement and community experiences; staff said the targeted model seeks to reduce the ‘‘summer slide’’ for students most at risk while being mindful of the district’s limited budget and long‑term levy impacts.
Budget and program details - Intended enrollment and day length: Approximately 100–120 elementary students, four‑hour day to align with extended‑school‑year services for students with disabilities; middle‑school offerings would be shorter and focused on prerequisite literacy/math skills; high‑school programming would center on credit recovery and regents preparation. - Cost context: Staff said full Discovery Camp last year cost about $215,000, and that transportation was a significant portion of that figure. Jean said the scaled proposal would be materially less than that and emphasized staff aimed to manage costs using existing resources where possible. - Eligibility: Slots would be filled by teacher recommendation for students who need tier‑2/tier‑3 supports; the program would not be a parent lottery as Discovery Camp had sometimes been. - Partnerships and funding: Staff said town partners had provided staffing support in prior years (town employees teamed with district staff) and that grant writers are applying for outside funding; Linda Bruno (Town Councilperson) was referenced as a municipal contact who had supported prior collaboration.
Board questions and priorities - Several trustees asked whether a full Discovery Camp could be restored if additional grants or municipal funding became available; staff said it could if external funding materialized, but the district must be mindful of long‑term levy effects. Staff noted a rule of thumb offered in the discussion: adding roughly $275,000 to the budget could translate to about a 1% increase on the local tax levy. - Trustees recommended prioritizing eighth‑grade remediation and credit recovery because there is less time to address deficits before high school.
Ending: Staff will continue to pursue grant and municipal partnerships and will return with more detailed cost estimates and student selection criteria; trustees asked district leaders to preserve pathways to scale up if funding is secured.
