Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Petition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Da Vinci RISE presents petition to board, emphasizes re‑engagement for foster and homeless youth
Summary
Da Vinci RISE petitioners presented to the Acton‑Agua Dulce board on April 23, describing the program's alternative model for foster, homeless and justice‑involved youth, improved outcomes (dropout rate from 55% to 25%; graduation 72.7%; attendance increases) and reasons for seeking authorization from the district instead of LACOE.
Erin Whalen, lead petitioner for Da Vinci RISE and assistant superintendent of student services for Da Vinci Schools, presented the RISE model and petition to the board during a public hearing. She described RISE as an alternative school focused on reengaging highly vulnerable youth and said the program’s outcomes have improved following system redesigns: she reported the dropout rate decreased from 55% in 2020–21 to 25%, graduation rose to 72.7%, and chronic absenteeism declined from 95% to 58%.
Whalen and other Da Vinci staff explained that RISE serves a high proportion of students in foster care (over 19% reported) and that the school uses competency‑based pathways, integrated wraparound supports and strong community partnerships. They said the school currently has approximately 166 students across two co‑located sites (Hawthorne and South LA) and emphasized that the shift from LACOE to Acton‑Agua Dulce is about fit and a smaller, more nimble authorizer that can support the school’s model. Supportive testimony from a RISE special educator and Da Vinci leaders described inclusive practices and the school’s role in countywide reengagement strategies.
Board members questioned enrollment, facilities, fiscal arrangements and how the school’s co‑location model operates. Petitioners said their oversight and back‑office functions are managed by a central Da Vinci business office and that some administrative costs are shared across network schools; petitioners offered to meet further with trustees and district staff for follow‑up information. The public hearing was closed at 9:48 p.m.; no final authorization decision was made that night.
