Citizen Portal
Sign In

Board questions use and reporting of Achievement Gap Reduction funds; administrators describe sustainment strategy

3796730 · June 12, 2025
Article hero
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Board members pressed administrators about how AGR funds were spent, whether additional dollars provided new services, and asked for clearer, disaggregated reporting showing gap reductions; administrators said funds sustain literacy instructional positions and that about $960,000 is expected to go to Menominee.

Board members on June 11 pressed district administrators for clearer evidence that Achievement Gap Reduction (AGR) funds produced additional services and measurable reductions in student achievement gaps.

Dr. Coleman, presenting the AGR update, described how the district is using AGR funds at Roosevelt, Jefferson and Menominee elementary schools. He said Roosevelt and Jefferson are operating with an 18‑to‑1 staffing model and Menominee will use a 2‑to‑24 co‑teaching model during CKLA literacy blocks to provide targeted practice time and intervention. Coleman said literacy coaches and interventionists will teach during critical literacy blocks to create smaller adult‑to‑student ratios where needed.

Questions from board members focused on the size of the AGR award, how the district had notified the board of an increase, and whether the additional money led to net new services. One board member said the district anticipated roughly $1 million but learned in November that the award would be about $1.5 million; she asked whether the extra $500,000 resulted in new programming. Administrators said AGR funds are being used primarily to sustain current IST (instructional support teacher)/intervention positions that otherwise would not be affordable in the base budget. Dr. Coleman said, “The AGR funds allows us to sustain those positions and use them...we wouldn't be able to without these funds,” language he used to clarify that the funds maintain staffing rather than always adding FTE.

On reporting and evaluation, board members asked for disaggregated evidence of gap reduction (by economic status, race and special populations). District staff said they will provide more detailed iReady and other assessment reports disaggregated by subgroup and cohort and will consider revisions to the AGR report template to better show gap reductions. Dr. Coleman said the district will work with DPI programs (the early reading initiative was cited as a partner for professional development in selected sites) and with principals to align coaching and in‑classroom support.

A board member asked the administration to share facilities and finance committee briefings showing how the additional AGR dollars were allocated; administrators agreed to bring more detailed budgets and service-level documentation to the facilities and finance committee and to the education committee before the next school year.

Ending: Administrators committed to more detailed, disaggregated reporting on AGR outcomes and to showing how AGR funds supplement (not supplant) base staffing and services; the board directed follow-up at committee level before fall implementation.