Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Superintendent Evaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brookings-Harbor board reviews superintendent's 2025–26 goals and evaluation timeline
Summary
Superintendent Helena Chirinian presented two proposed goals—capacity-building in special programs and a 2026–2029 strategic plan update—and introduced a draft evaluation timeline with an optional Targeted Feedback Survey; the board was asked to review the draft before further discussion.
At a July 16, 2025 work session, the Brookings-Harbor School District 17C Board of Directors heard Superintendent Helena Chirinian present two proposed goals for the 2025–2026 school year and a draft evaluation timeline. The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Trish Walker at 6:02 p.m.
Chirinian presented Goal 1 as “Superintendent Capacity-Building in Special Programs,” describing an effort to build her expertise in Special Programs and Special Education through a personal professional learning plan, participation in specialized training, mentorship, and strategic leadership actions to enhance program oversight and support across the district. She framed this as an internal capacity and oversight goal for the superintendent’s office.
Chirinian also proposed Goal 2: “Strategic Plan Update and Extension,” saying she will lead a collaborative and inclusive process to update and extend the district’s strategic plan for the 2026–2029 cycle. The draft timeline sets a milestone for a board presentation of a new draft by May 15, 2026, and specifies the update will include measurable goals and stakeholder input.
In addition to the goal statements, Chirinian introduced a draft Superintendent Evaluation Timeline and Process for 2025–2026 that outlines key milestones for setting goals, ongoing progress updates, and formal evaluations. The timeline includes an optional Targeted Feedback Survey (TFS) to be administered in fall or winter as part of gathering stakeholder input. Board members were encouraged to review the proposed structure for discussion at future sessions; no vote or formal action was taken at the work session.
The presentation primarily focused on internal planning and timing rather than on specific budget or staffing changes. The board did not adopt goals or set final evaluation criteria during the public session; members were asked to review the materials ahead of a future meeting where the district anticipates further discussion or formal action.
