Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Superintendent Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
OSBA consultant outlines Bandon SD 54 superintendent evaluation, sets Feb. 3 form deadline and Feb. 9 executive-session review
Summary
Jana Avila Medina of the Oregon School Boards Association reviewed the 2025–26 superintendent evaluation process for Bandon SD 54, detailing five evaluation goals, a 1–4 rating scale, a Feb. 3 deadline for board ratings and an executive-session review under ORS 192.660(2) on Feb. 9.
Jana Avila Medina, a board development specialist with the Oregon School Boards Association, told the Bandon SD 54 board the district’s 2025–26 superintendent evaluation will emphasize accountability, role clarity and improved board–superintendent relationships.
Medina said the board adopted five superintendent goals to form the evaluation criteria: improving academic growth and closing opportunity gaps; promoting safe, welcoming and supportive schools; ensuring responsible fiscal management and operational effectiveness; strengthening leadership systems and accountability; and expanding community partnerships and two-way communication. “It really does, build good board superintendent relationship,” she said, describing evaluation as both collaborative and corrective.
Under the timeline Medina described, the superintendent has already submitted a self-evaluation. Individual board members will complete ratings on each goal using a 1–4 scale and submit comments; Medina said she will compile those individual ratings into a summative evaluation report with a unified rating and consolidated comments. The board will meet in executive session on Feb. 9 to review that summative report and arrive at a unified rating “per statute ORS 192.660(2),” Medina said. The board will then adopt a brief public evaluation summary in open session and the summative evaluation report will be placed in the superintendent’s personnel file.
Medina cautioned that a targeted feedback survey would be late for this evaluation cycle but recommended conducting a separate climate survey after the cycle to gather broader community input. “At this time, based on the timeline as it is, I wouldn’t advise to do a targeted feedback survey,” she said, but added districts commonly use climate surveys to align feedback with board goals.
Medina said she will send the rating form to board members the following day and reminded the board the form is due to the OSBA consultant by Feb. 3. Board members agreed to have OSBA facilitate the executive-session evaluation. Medina closed by noting she will prepare reminders and see the board again on Feb. 9.
The presentation left procedural dates and the five adopted goals as the next clear steps for board members preparing their individual ratings.
