Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Foster Care Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rushford-Peterson packet includes foster-care transportation agreement with Fillmore County
Summary
District materials included a Purchase of Service Agreement with Fillmore County Community Services to share costs and procedures for transporting students in foster care for FY 2026; the packet describes placement decision responsibilities, billing terms, and a dispute-resolution process.
The Rushford-Peterson School District’s meeting materials included a proposed Purchase of Service Agreement with Fillmore County Community Services (FCCS) governing transportation of students in foster care for the term July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026.
The agreement frames FCCS as responsible for education-placement determinations, with a presumption that students remain in their school of origin unless a best-interests determination recommends transfer. It lists best-interest factors — including student age, sibling school placement, commute distance, safety, and course availability — and requires documentation of placement decisions in FCCS case files.
Transportation responsibilities are tiered: when feasible students will ride on existing bus routes, with the district covering those costs; specialized transportation for students with IEPs who attend district schools is the district’s responsibility; and van service or other arrangements for students for whom a route is not feasible will be invoiced to FCCS. The agreement sets a standard that FCCS will assume financial responsibility for non-routable transport and will reimburse the district; the district will invoice FCCS quarterly and FCCS is to pay within 35 days of invoice.
The document includes a dispute-resolution process requiring written explanation within 24 hours, review by the district and FCCS director with a decision within three business days, and a provision that the child remains enrolled in the school of origin while disputes are resolved. The term, indemnification, data-practices compliance (Minnesota Government Data Practices Act) and a 30‑day termination clause are included in the packet.
The meeting materials present the agreement for board consideration; the packet did not include a recorded vote or execution date in the segments provided.
