Duluth committee gives first reading to Title I parent-involvement policy

Duluth Public School District Policy Committee · January 14, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
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

The Duluth Public School District policy committee gave a first reading to Policy 612.1, a new Title I parent-involvement policy that aligns with MSBA guidance and cites the U.S. Department of Education’s January 2025 parent and family engagement guidance; one local naming change was requested.

The Duluth Public School District policy committee on Jan. 13 gave a first reading to Policy 612.1, a new policy to develop parent-involvement practices for Title I programs that would replace Policy 10-67.

The chair introduced the draft as a Title I–focused policy intended to "encourage and facilitate involvement by parents of students participating in Title I in the educational programs and experiences of students." Brenda Spartz, the district’s director of elementary schools, said the draft draws heavily from the Minnesota School Boards Association model and was reviewed by the Title I advisory group prior to the meeting. "This policy basically comes directly from MSBA," Spartz said.

Why it matters: the draft codifies longstanding Title I practices into a district policy, including requirements for an annual family meeting, a written compact that describes shared commitments, and involvement opportunities for families of students served by Title I whether they attend public or private schools within district boundaries. Committee members noted the draft cites the U.S. Department of Education parent and family engagement guidance (January 2025) as a resource and reported no subsequent federal changes.

A single, explicit local change was requested by district staff to align committee language with local practice: the advisory body should be named the "federal program advisory council" to match how the district currently identifies participants, rather than the more generic "parent advisory council." Committee members said about 15 people attended the December advisory meeting where the draft was discussed.

The item was introduced as a first reading; no final action was taken. Staff said the policy will return for further consideration after additional review and coordination with related family and community engagement work that district staff said is underway.