Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Climate topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Mateo-Foster City trustees hear school‑climate update focused on restorative practices, attendance and anonymous alerts
Summary
District student‑services leaders told the board the district is three years into restorative-practices work, has seen overall attendance gains and is using an anonymous alert system and community partners such as Samaritan House to strengthen student supports. Trustees requested site‑level data and next steps to expand student leadership.
The San Mateo‑Foster City School District Board of Trustees received a broad update on school climate and student supports at a meeting where district staff highlighted progress on restorative practices, attendance and anonymous reporting.
"My name is Dr. Cristiano Agawa, assistant superintendent of student services," said Dr. Agawa as he opened the presentation describing four department goals: culture, student voice, increasing attendance and deepening restorative practices. He said those goals guide nine district strategies tied to the district strategic plan.
Dr. Maguera Herrera, introduced by Dr. Agawa as the district's executive director of student services, described a multilayered wellness team that includes social workers, clinicians, counselors, community‑school specialists and restorative‑justice TOSAs. "This is year three of the restorative work," she said, noting the district expects full cultural adoption to take five to seven years and that the approach aims to move away from punitive discipline toward intentional interventions that keep students connected to school.
Presenters said overall attendance improved year over year and that English learners and students with disabilities showed notable gains, while some small subgroup shifts (for example a modest uptick in the district’s White and Asian percentages) will be monitored. Staff provided discipline and attendance data, described monthly site reports and said principals receive school‑level dashboards to inform local interventions.
The board heard how the district uses a progressive‑discipline matrix and a rubric for "school culture walkthroughs" to calibrate responses across sites. Staff cautioned that changes in state reporting and local coding practices can alter year‑to‑year comparisons: some descriptors used in past reports ("horseplay," "play fighting") have been relabeled under updated reporting rules.
On curriculum, staff previewed Wayfinder lessons used at middle schools for financial literacy, digital citizenship and social‑emotional learning during advisory periods. "If we wanted to expand it beyond comprehensive middles, we have implementers and role models who could support the case," Dr. Agawa said.
The presentation also reviewed the district’s anonymous alert (AA) system. Staff said AAs provide a way for students to report concerns without immediately identifying themselves; reporters select tags that reflect how they interpret a situation. "Those tags are claims — they are not confirmations," a presenter said, adding that the system is site‑based in most cases and that the district responds to the sender even when anonymity is requested.
Trustees pressed staff for more school‑level detail and examples of how anonymous reports are handled. Trustee Ho asked whether the board could see how many forms were completed and the breakdown by site and student subgroup; staff said they can produce site cross‑tabs, student‑level repeat‑offender reports and response‑rate figures on request.
The presentation included a district example from 2021 in which student comments raised serious concern; staff said the case illustrated the value of a reporting funnel that lets worried students or parents provide information without identifying themselves up front.
Staff also described partnerships with Samaritan House and other local providers to expand wraparound services; they said Samaritan House hosted professional development days for district mental‑health staff (58 attendees were cited), provided referral pathways and invited staff volunteers to support families.
Trustees asked about plans to expand student leadership in restorative work. Staff said pilots at specific schools—where students serve as peer mediators and lead restorative circles—are underway and that the next step is intentional student training. The district also scheduled staff training on gender support plans for January 16.
The board checked for public comment (none were submitted online or in person) and adjourned later in the meeting.
What happens next: trustees asked staff to provide site‑level breakdowns of discipline and anonymous‑alert data and examples of AA cases and responses. The district said it will add those cross‑tabs to follow‑up materials for the board.
