Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Indian Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Indian Education program asks SFUSD for permanent Mission District home
Summary
Title 7 Indian Education Program leaders and families told the board the program lacks a permanent, welcoming space and urged the district to identify a Mission District location, improve 506 form distribution and run Synergy reports to capture American Indian students.
Parent leaders and program staff presented the San Francisco Unified School District’s Title 7 Indian Education Program to the board and asked for a permanent, centrally located space so they can build a library, host family nights and expand outreach.
Rachel Treba, parent advisory chair, and student representative Eike Lille described program services and participation: weekly tutoring, a two-week summer program, monthly family nights and cultural events such as a Dancing Feathers Pow Wow. Treba said the program currently identifies 465 students as American Indian districtwide but only about 150 are enrolled in the program — a gap she attributed to inconsistent distribution and return of the federal 506 form used to document American Indian status.
Multiple public speakers — Mary Travis Allen, Georgia Williams Bratt, Gloria Molt and others — urged the board to place the program in a permanent Mission District location near other Native-serving agencies and to provide staff and clerical support so outreach can reach families who list American Indian as a primary or secondary identity. "We need the stability of having a location, ideally in the Mission, where people have access to it," one parent testified.
District staff and commissioners acknowledged the request and discussed immediate steps: running reports from the new Synergy student information system to find students who identified American Indian as a secondary ethnicity, improving distribution of the 506 forms, and retrieving stored program materials currently inaccessible because of moves and construction. The board directed staff to work with the program and explore sites, including non-school locations such as City College facilities and other centrally located options, and to report back with potential locations and a plan for access to program resources.
Board members praised the program’s cultural and academic supports and asked staff to prioritize follow-up so families see progress quickly. The board noted the program’s potential to support culturally relevant curriculum and to inform updates to core instruction.
