Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Project Focus Access topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Parents urge Catalina Foothills to revisit Project Focus partnership; board hears calls for review

Catalina Foothills Unified School District Governing Board · March 17, 2026
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

Multiple parents and advocates told the board that Catalina Foothills Unified School District declined to renew or sign an intergovernmental agreement enabling student participation in Project Focus, a University of Arizona postsecondary program for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and asked the district to formally review the decision and incorporate family input.

Several families and disability‑support advocates used the public comment period to urge the Catalina Foothills Unified School District to review a decision not to participate in Project Focus, a postsecondary inclusion program run in partnership with the University of Arizona.

Bley Crawford, a junior at the high school, said they want access to Project Focus course offerings. “I want to take classes at the U of A,” the student said during the public comment period.

David Crawford, who identified himself as Bentley’s father and a physician who works with young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities, told the board he and other families have been unable to secure district support for Project Focus and asked the administration to formally review the decision with meaningful family input. “Project Focus is something that matters a lot,” he said, urging a district review and more post‑secondary options for students who would benefit.

Parent advocates requested three steps: (1) a formal administrative review of the decision not to renew an intergovernmental agreement with Project Focus with meaningful family input; (2) assurance that students with disabilities have access to the same range of postsecondary options as non‑disabled peers; and (3) individual consideration for students ready to participate.

Board leaders noted that the item was raised during public comment and that the board could not respond with action in that moment, but they said the remarks would be recorded and can be considered through appropriate agenda processes. The board did not take immediate action during the meeting; parents asked for follow-up from administration and for the item to be considered on a future agenda.