Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Student Support topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

District 99 presents relationship-mapping data and new engagement steps as administrators push supports for ninth graders and students with few trusted adults

Community High School District 99 Board of Education · May 19, 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

Administrators told the board that staff- and student-reported relationship mapping shows ninth graders report far fewer trusted adults than seniors; the district plans targeted supports, expanded activities and counselor follow-up for students identified with zero to one trusted adult.

Courtney and Arwin presented year-two relationship-mapping results to the Community High School District 99 Board, showing staff and students largely agreed on patterns of trusted adult relationships across grades and subgroups. Courtney said staff-identified relationships increase across high school and that “our seniors obviously have way more relationships identified than our ninth graders.”

Arwin said the district expanded the exercise this year to ask students directly which adults they trust, using a names-and-photos interface; he estimated the student response rate at about 75 percent and said students clicked actual names rather than providing numeric counts. "If my memory serves, I think it was around 75 percent of our students who completed it," he said.

The presentations showed ninth graders reported roughly 4.5 trusted relationships on average and the number nearly doubled for seniors. District staff flagged students who appear on a 0-to-1 list so counselors and social workers (the CTriplS team) can follow up. Courtney said the lists are used internally to guide outreach, not as punitive measures: the team tries to connect students authentically rather than label them publicly.

Administrators and board members discussed how the 0-to-1 list should inform supports. Courtney and Arwin noted the measure is not always a clear indicator of underperformance; in some cases high-achieving students who are active in community groups reported few staff relationships. Board members asked whether the 0-to-1 metric correlates with GPA and attendance; Arwin said the district did not find a consistent correlation across both buildings and will continue disaggregating the data.

Ryan, who led the district’s activities and athletics outreach, said participation is strongly linked with attendance and lower failure rates: among the 3,245 students who answered the participation survey, 81.5 percent reported involvement in at least one activity and 57.5 percent of those were involved in two or more. He added that students who participate were far less likely to earn F grades (less than 1 percent for participants vs. 7 percent districtwide) and described steps to connect willing students to teams and clubs.

The board requested follow-up detail on the precise response rate and suggested exploring more frequent surveys or targeted checks for ninth graders. Administrators said they would refine the process next year and continue using the data to create support groups (for example, a "Men of DGN" group) and to coordinate outreach by coaches and counselors.

The board did not take formal action on the presentation itself. The administration encouraged continued monitoring and plans to incorporate the findings into next year’s engagement work.