Avon Grove trustees agree to advance 2025–28 comprehensive plan after public feedback

Avon Grove School District officials on the committee of the whole reviewed the sixth public update of the district—s 2025–28 comprehensive plan and, after noting public feedback and ongoing work, advised staff to put the draft on the legislative meeting agenda for March 27 and to submit the plan to the Pennsylvania Department of Education—s Future Ready comprehensive plan portal by the March 31 deadline.

The presentation, given by Dr. Harvey (district staff), summarized public-inspection activity and how stakeholder teams have addressed comments. "As of March 6, when I compiled this report ... we've had 9 responses so far," Dr. Harvey told the board, and outlined topics raised in those responses.

The board—s action to advance the draft followed an invitation for objections; none were raised. The superintendent-level staff will place the current draft on the March 27 legislative agenda and file the required submission with PDE by March 31 to meet the department—s 28-day public-inspection requirement.

Why it matters: The comprehensive plan guides district priorities and spending for multiple years. Public-inspection periods and a PDE filing are required steps in Pennsylvania—s planning process; community feedback can shape final priorities such as safety, special education support and programming.

District staff said public respondents flagged several issues, and staff described how other district teams are already addressing them. Examples the district summarized include:

- Artificial intelligence and classroom guidance: Commenters said the plan does not explicitly mention AI. Dr. Harvey said an "impact of technology" stakeholder team is working with the district—s stakeholder group to develop any needed guidance or policy on responsible AI use for students and teachers, and that work is separate from the comp‑plan document.

- Extracurriculars: Some respondents noted extracurricular activities were not identified as a priority in the current draft. Dr. Harvey said stakeholder teams did not list extracurriculars as a priority this cycle; however, board members were told that expansion of extracurriculars is addressed elsewhere in budget planning, including proposals for new stipends to expand opportunities in the upcoming budget cycle.

- Supports for students with IEPs and families facing financial burdens: The presentation said subgroup data were examined in the needs assessment and that principals— building-level growth and achievement plans will address subgroup needs; staff pointed the board to those ongoing, school-level plans for actions serving special populations.

- Safety and security scheduling: Commenters asked why a larger safety and security evaluation was placed in Year 3 of the plan. Dr. Harvey said the district has already undertaken “extensive work” in safety and security and that Year 3 would be a further, larger assessment of enhancements already made; the district stressed safety remains an ongoing priority.

- Student connectedness and bullying: A commenter raised concern that the plan—s connected/accepted/valued team indicated 75% of students reported bullying most frequently at school; at least one speaker described updating the code of conduct as one of the earliest planned responses and expressed concern that the code update felt insufficient as a first step. District staff said the point would be reviewed further with relevant teams.

Public comment: Alyssa Norman (resident) urged more reminders for the public-inspection period and suggested clearer presentation materials for non-educators, saying the draft "contains a lot of educational buzzwords" and felt "overwhelming." Norman also asked for clearer communication about career-readiness portfolios for parents.

Next steps: With no objections raised during the committee meeting, staff will place the draft comprehensive plan on the March 27 legislative agenda and proceed to file the plan in PDE—s Future Ready portal by March 31 for final review and any remaining administrative steps.

Questions and follow-up items recorded during the meeting included a request to send another public reminder of the inspection deadline and a direction to share stakeholder feedback (for example, the Zen Den suggestion for staff wellness) with the workforce development action team for consideration.