Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the After School Programming topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City and CPS discuss after‑school pilot at Hughes, weighing costs and mobile options
Summary
CPS leaders and the city's recreation director discussed a potential after‑school pilot modeled on Recognite at Hughes High School. Director Betts presented tiered packages (2–4 days/week) and a 4‑day option cost estimate of roughly $500,000; board members urged smaller pilots, use of existing Schedule E staff, or mobile recreation to reduce cost.
Assistant Superintendent Amy Randolph and CRC Director Betts presented possible after‑school pilot options designed to bring Recognite‑style programming into the school year, focusing initially on Hughes High School because transit‑tap data showed students congregating downtown after dismissal.
‘‘We started conversations with the community…and developed a mind map,’’ Director Betts said, describing community focus groups with CPS principals and youth that informed five pillars for Act4Cincy and the Rec model. Betts described three tiered packages for a school pilot — gold, silver and bronze — and said cost modeling put a four‑day‑a‑week option at a little over $500,000, driven largely by staffing and food costs.
Why it matters: School and city leaders said the pilot aims to give students safe, engaging places to be after school, reduce disruptions in nearby business districts and improve attendance by offering activities that motivate students to attend. Board members pressed for cost‑effective models that rely on CPS personnel and Schedule E supplemental pay where possible.
District leaders described steps already taken: CPS staff reviewed existing programs across high schools, surveyed students not participating in after‑school activities, and asked resource coordinators for site‑specific information. Superintendent Murphy suggested varsity athletic events and other high‑attendance gatherings as practical venues for outreach to parents about secure‑storage training and other safety programs.
Board members raised operational questions: Dr. Kareem Moffett and others urged stronger use of existing school staff (Schedule E) and asked whether a single‑school pilot would create a demand bottleneck attracting students from other schools. Director Betts and other presenters proposed mobile recreation as an alternative way to reach multiple neighborhoods without hosting a four‑day expensive program at one site.
Funding and next steps: City and CPS officials acknowledged constrained budgets — the city cited a $29 million budget gap — and suggested fundraising, foundation grants, and sponsorships as likely sources. The district’s foundation, transitioning to the Cincinnati Public School Foundation (KidFuture), was listed as a potential fundraising partner for after‑school pillars. Directors and board members agreed to further planning and to complete student surveys and site‑specific funding assessments before committing to a model.
Next step: Staff will refine cost estimates, share survey results and explore funding partners; the topic will return for deeper discussion at a future joint meeting.
