Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews integrated-program spending: student-investment, early-intervention and early-literacy grants
Summary
District staff reported on integrated-program revenue streams and described how student-investment, early-intervention and early-literacy funds were used for academic and social-emotional staffing, curriculum purchases and targeted tutoring.
Get email alerts on the Education Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tanya presented the district's integrated-program report, explaining that the presentation covered the student-investment account, the early-intervention indicator system and a newly added early-literacy grant. She said the district had met with campus teams to draft continuous improvement plans and had disaggregated survey data to identify focal groups and trends.
Tanya told the board the district has prioritized purchasing personnel to support students: two academic counselors (Catherine Allred and Misty Snively) and one social-emotional counselor paid from the high-school-success stream; partial funding for an ag teacher and cosmetology salary; targeted tutors at the Lincoln School of Early Learning; and stipends for the tech team from the early-intervention fund. For early literacy, she said the district purchased the Frog Street curriculum for pre-K and daycare-age children; phonic interventions included Gardner's New Alphabet and Secret Stories.
Tanya noted the district conducted empathy interviews and school surveys to understand attendance barriers, and that the ESD provided free UFLI materials at no cost. "We continue to focus on improving academic achievement in English, math and science, especially students performing below grade level," she said. Board members asked clarifying questions about allocations and timing; Tanya and staff said the purchases and staffing described were from last year's spending and are being reported now as required by state and federal grant rules.
No new funding decisions were taken at the meeting; the presentation was an informational report required to document prior allocations and compliance with reporting obligations.

