Coraggio Consulting
Loudoun County School Board, Student Services Committee Meeting, Tuesday, March 19, 2024

Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2024
Place: Loudoun County Public Schools / School Board meeting (see BoardDocs / LCPS-TV)
Length: 1h 17m (video)
Official meeting video (Vimeo / LCPS-TV): https://player.vimeo.com/video/925208231?rel=0
BoardDocs (School Board): https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/loudoun/Board.nsf/Public

Machine transcript (speech-to-text) produced by Coraggio Consulting. Not an official county record. Names and numbers may be misspelled; check the video at the timestamp before quoting.
Speech-to-text: whisper.cpp, model large-v3-turbo. Produced 2026-10-21. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[00:00:03] - Good afternoon, everyone. We'll now call to order the March 19th, 2024 meeting of the Student Services Committee. Thank you all for being here. Item number two on our agenda is public comment.

[00:00:22] One moment, please. - Music is always good. - It's our new intro. - My son, I'm sorry. - Do you need to take it?

[00:00:54] So item number two on our agenda is public comment. Before we begin with our speakers, we will refresh our requirements. Thank you for engaging with the school board through the public comment process. The school board welcomes comments from Loudoun County residents and believes that strong community engagement and outreach are important components of a successful school system.

[00:01:15] Speakers must limit comments to the time allotted. Based on the number of speakers and the agenda this evening, all speakers have been allotted one minute for each public comment. Please be advised that speakers who miss their time slot will not be called at a later time. All audience members shall maintain civility, decorum, and respect for the functioning and dignity of the school board at all times.

[00:01:37] Please remain seated unless arriving, departing, speaking at the table, or during a break. Violations of civility, decorum, and respect include shouting, heckling, jeering, applause, or other noise which disrupts or delays the meeting, obstructing speakers from being able to see the school board and vice versa, interrupting speakers, Attempting to speak when not called to do so by the chair.

[00:02:00] And approaching a speaker or otherwise attempting to intimidate, disparage, or distract a speaker, staff member, or other meeting attendees. Speakers should refrain from vulgarity, obscenities, defamation, profanity, or other like breaches of respect. Nor may speakers target, criticize, or attack individual students and or individual division employees during public comment.

[00:02:21] Speakers should communicate those concerns to their school principal or an appropriate school official. The school board requests that comments on an individual student or employee related matter not be shared at public meetings where the disclosure could violate applicable confidentiality requirements. Speakers should face us, the panel, and direct their comments to the school board.

[00:02:42] Per LCPS policy 2520, members of the school board will not answer questions or respond directly to the public during the public comment period. Violations of decorum or civility by any meeting attendee may result in the chair of the committee directing staff to remove the attendee from the remainder of the meeting.

[00:02:59] Repeated or persistent violations of decorum or civility by the audience may result in, on the decision of the committee chair, public comment being tabled until a later point in the meeting's agenda, limiting the number of attendees in the meeting room during public comment for safety reasons, or the public comment period ending for the day.

[00:03:17] Copies of materials for board members should be given to the public information officer prior to the start of the meeting. Please provide multiple copies. Under no circumstances may a speaker approach the table the school board members. The public is reminded that this meeting is not currently being live streamed or broadcast on television, but is being audio recorded only and will be available to listen to at a later date. We look forward to hearing your comments. Our first speaker today

[00:03:54] will be Michael Rivera, followed by Omer Boot. Good afternoon. I think what may be escaping the new members of the school board and the legacy members of the administration is that policy 8040 It's just bad policy, pure and simple.

[00:04:18] 64 students in LCPS, 0.077% of the student population identify as non-binary. For 64 students, Brenda Sheridan and this administration turned the lives of 82,000 students upside down, diminished the rights of boys and girls to private spaces based on sex, and severely divided the community, creating artificial adversity.

[00:04:41] I urge this committee to put aside its political leanings and personal ideologies to do the right thing and repeal 8040 to start from scratch. You have no idea how well a gesture like that would be received by many of the parents that have been vocally opposed to 8040.

[00:04:57] LCPS has already spent $500,000 to create single-use bathrooms and is currently spending millions more on open-air hall bathrooms. You cannot spend your way out of this problem. Repealing 8040 is not going to create some catastrophic chasm of hardship for kids with gender dysphoria they have bathrooms to use already thank you our next speaker is

[00:05:27] omir boot followed by abby platt that would have um all the board members discussing the policy 8040 i think that's a great suggestion i hope the the board follows through that gives you opportunity

[00:06:05] to discuss what one of one of many uh one of big concerns that we have for our communities in in general, addressing 99.9% of the students. Secondly, in that work group session, I would request if you can discuss having a separate space bathroom for the non-binary students.

[00:06:26] So just like the boys have the boys room, girls have the girls room, non-binary students have their own multi-style bathroom. So this way, when they're going in, they're not being harassed or looked down upon or thinking that they don't have their own privacy.

[00:06:43] They should have their own privacy. Please consider this suggestion. - Thank you. Excuse me, staff. Is there a way to operate these clocks? I've been keeping track of the time myself, but the speakers can't, right, they can't see.

[00:07:10] - Well, there's nobody in the control room. - No one is currently in the booth right now. We can try to have staff members try to find someone from DDI to assist, but we can continue to move forward. We'll continue. Our next speaker is Abby Platt, followed by Suzanne Satterfield.

[00:07:30] I am here again as a mother of three children who attend LCPS classes, schools. I'm going to continue to come and to ask you to please protect my children.

[00:07:47] My personal feeling is that we don't need to be at odds, that all children can be protected, that there can be a space for girls, There can be a space for boys, and there should be a space for any child, but I'm begging you not to mix them.

[00:08:05] I would not have such strong feelings if my children had not been personally impacted, if they had not been stripped of their privacy and their ability to safely change and comfortably change, which is what the policy says, that there should be a safe and comfortable place for all.

[00:08:24] And my children are being robbed of that. And I'm asking you, please, to protect all children. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Suzanne Satterfield, followed by Carrie Michonne. It's alarming as mothers that you will sit there and allow a policy to continue that keeps secrets from parents and has children believing they are born in the wrong body while ignoring the fact that girls and boys should never be expected in or out of your own home

[00:09:02] to consent to sharing private spaces with the opposite sex. Due to the current no-questions-asked policy, high school bathrooms have become a free-for-all, which has escalated anxiety levels among students, staff, and parents. It's no myth that students of the opposite sex are hanging out in each other's bathrooms.

[00:09:20] There's no respect or dignity given to students that have an IBS and runs out of the bathroom when seeing the opposite sex in there or girls dealing with their periods. Students should not be subjected to focus groups. They cannot consent. Get bathrooms and locker rooms back to a place where no one has the opposite sex invading their space and you will see a decrease in anxiety levels and an increase in attendance.

[00:09:44] Thank you. Our next speaker is Carrie Michonne, followed by Laura Larson. Hi. Driving here, I was listening to sports radio, yay, go March Madness, and they were talking about that the brain is not fully developed until age 24 or 25. Why are we robbing our children of safe places,

[00:10:15] of putting them in places, in situations where they can make choices and have actions that will adversely affect them for the rest of their lives? You're setting the children up to fail by taking them away and not allowing them to have private spaces for girls, for boys, for female bodies and male bodies, and those who otherwise have a place for them.

[00:10:43] But they should not ever be in the same place. I'm a mother of six, a grandmother of 11. Six of my children, all of them, graduated from LCPS. I can tell you my son who graduated last year can tell you the bathrooms are a joke.

[00:11:00] Thank you. right now. The next speaker is Laura Larson followed by Sarah Plattenberg. Good afternoon.

[00:11:15] I just wanted to speak briefly in support of policy 8040. It has saved lives by helping trans kids feel more comfortable being who they are, allowing them the same rights in LCPS that other kids have, and ensuring that trans kids are treated with the same respect that cisgender students are treated with by policy.

[00:11:38] I hope that as this process is reviewed, LCPS continues to provide the support to one of our most vulnerable groups of students. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Sarah Plattenberg, followed by Shee Van Fleet.

[00:11:57] Hi, my name is Sarah Plattenberg. I am here to speak on behalf of the CX recommendation for policy 6640. I am a mother here in Lomb County Public Schools.

[00:12:17] Two of my children have type 1 diabetes. I'm also an educational advocate and have several clients across state lines who are diabetic. When we took a look at the policy that currently exists in Lomb County, it's significantly outdated and doesn't align with the state recommendations or the state policy, and it's not up to date with current technology.

[00:12:40] And so I just, in knowing that there are many students in Lowndon County that are home today, unable to go to school because the policy doesn't support their needs in school, I'm just here to represent, as a mother, at Lowndon County Public School, update the policy to support students with diabetes.

[00:12:59] Thank you. Our next speaker is Shee Van Fleet, followed by Andrea Weiskopf. Honestly, ask yourself, just say 15 years ago, you would have believed that there's no issue whatsoever that girls should share space with boys.

[00:13:20] Honestly, ask yourself, are you willing to share women's bathroom, locker room, or spa, for example, with men? Are you seriously believe that men can be women, women can be men? But why are you so determined that 80-40 policy is essential for school?

[00:13:39] I tell you why. I have been indoctrinated by Marxist ideology in China. I know what it is, and you so have been indoctrinated by the same ideology. I tell you this because I lived through the Cultural Revolution, and we are living through the same Cultural Revolution right now.

[00:13:59] You are now in position of power. You are now indoctrinating our kids, willingly, knowingly, or unknowingly. And I wrote a book just to tell the story of Cultural Revolution, how it destroyed Chinese. - Thank you.

[00:14:15] Our final speaker will be Andrea Weiskopf.

[00:14:32] - It comes down to this. Do you believe people when they tell you their experiences? I don't understand what it means not to feel at home in my body, but I believe the experiences of others.

[00:14:47] Trans girls are girls. This isn't about what feels right to me or to you. It is about the experiences of others and what is right for them. If a child's mere existence makes you uncomfortable, that is on you, not them.

[00:15:07] What is up to me and you is to believe them and to protect our trans children. Thank you. Black Lives Matter. Thank you.

[00:15:23] Thank you all for coming out today and providing public comment. That will conclude the public comment session for this meeting. The next item on our agenda, item number three, is approval of the February 15th, 2024 minutes.

[00:15:40] I will entertain a motion. Yes, I remember this. How about that? Having reviewed the minutes, I move that we accept them as written.

[00:16:01] Is there a second? Yes, there's a second. The motion has been moved and seconded. And I would like to engage in some discussion related to two points in the draft minutes.

[00:16:21] First minor point in the list of public comment speakers from the February 15th, 2024 meeting, I believe the last name of one of the speakers is misspelled. Ms. Weiskopf does not have a T at the end of her name, I believe that is a minor, a minor change.

[00:16:44] Any concerns about that? Not mine, just spell or misspell. Yeah, I'm looking for something.

[00:17:07] As someone whose last name is frequently misspelled, I feel bad when it's happening to other people.

[00:17:26] Do you have any concerns about that? That, no. And my second area that I would like to clear up is with regard to agenda item number 5.03 from that meeting in which we were discussing the revisions to policy 8040.

[00:17:56] Ms. Mansfield made a motion. We did do a motion and a second and took a vote. The minutes reflect that there was a motion that passed. However, 80-40 at the last meeting was on for information, not for action, and I don't believe that there was a motion to suspend the rules.

[00:18:18] So I don't know if it is – I would like to inquire with staff whether this is properly considered a motion, if it should be framed in another way, or how we should treat this in the minutes.

[00:18:39] Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm glad to clarify. So as a point of order, this matter was taken up as an information item during that February 15th Student Services Committee. It's my recollection there was discussion and a vote to provide direction for next steps in the committee's consideration of any revisions to Policy 8040.

[00:19:02] So given the outcome of the committee's discussion and direction to staff, If it's your direction to clarify that within the minutes, the staff would be happy to take that back to clarify that.

[00:19:19] Thank you, Mr. Allen. Ms. LaBelle, do you have any thoughts about this clarification? I believe that as it is of public concern, great public concern, we need to be clear about everything that we do with this.

[00:19:43] So that would be my statement. Thank you. Ms. Mansfield. - Thank you, Madam Chair. So with that in mind, and for transparency, I think that we should put that motion in there. Is it not, I don't see it, but-- - Yes, Ms. Mansfield, reading the minutes from the February 15th meeting, it appears that it's a summary of your motion as opposed to the precise language of that motion.

[00:20:19] So staff is happy to incorporate that precise language of your motion for clarity. - Great, thank you. - Those were the only two points of clarification that I wanted to request with regard to these minutes.

[00:20:37] Ms. Mansfield, Ms. LaBelle, did you have any other concerns, Ms. LaBelle? - I want to see a copy of the last motion that was made on this, where we talked, the one where we talked about focus groups, - What the exact verbiage is, is that here anywhere?

[00:21:08] - It is not because, as Mr. Allen said, that it is not reflected in the minutes. The specific verbiage of the discussion is not reflected in the current draft minutes. And what I would propose, as there is a motion to approve these minutes as written on the table, I would propose an amendment to that motion to ask staff to make some edits following up on our questions for clarification to be put on the next meeting agenda

[00:21:47] for approval next month. Is there a second? - I second the motion. - Thank you. So the motion is a motion to amend the motion to approve the minutes as written and instead to ask staff to prepare some additional edits.

[00:22:13] Discussion so then they would just do you need for me to send you the verbiage or do you want me to? Read it or just send it to you. It would be most helpful if you could send it to us Since this is an audio recorded meeting It would be nice for the public to hear what will be added to the February 15th minutes for correction and Mr Alan, if I understood you correctly, we would be amending the February 15th minutes to capture it as a directive and not a motion since there was no vote to suspend the rules.

[00:22:51] I just want to be clear so that we get the minutes correct for next month's meeting. That is correct. Ms. Richardson. Thank you. Ms. Mansfield, would you please read the language from the motion from last month?

[00:23:13] Yes. Directive. Yes, Chair Donohue. I would like to make a motion that the Student Services Committee refer this matter to be studied further and direct the superintendent or designee to get feedback from LCPS students and community members by engaging an outside, non-LCPS organization to facilitate and conduct focus groups consisting of LCPS students and community members to gather such additional input.

[00:23:50] specifically the outside organization conducting such focus groups should be afforded discretion and otherwise forming and conducting such focus groups and should share a synthesis of its collected focus group input with the superintendent or designee in a de-identified manner such information will subsequently be sent to the Student Services Committee for its consideration of the proposed revisions to policy 8040 that was the motion at

[00:24:20] that time. Directive. Directive at that time. Thank you. So the motion is now to amend the minute, to have staff amend the draft minutes with three changes reflecting the correct spelling of one speaker's name, framing this as a, more accurately framing this as a directive than a motion, and including the language that Ms. Mansfield read. We have a motion and a second.

[00:24:56] All those in favor, say aye. Aye. No one opposed? Anyone opposed? No. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, staff. Thank you, Ms. Richardson.

[00:25:12] Thank you, Mr. Allen. We will now move on to Section 4, action items, starting with Item 4.01, New Policy 6640, Emergency First Aid, CPR, and AED Certified Personnel. Ms. Richardson. Thank you, Chair Donahue.

[00:25:29] So this is the second reading of the brand-new policy for LCPS 6640 Emergency First Aid, CPR, and AED-certified personnel. It is taken directly from the Virginia School Board Association Model Policy EBBA as its foundation.

[00:25:50] And this policy was drafted in collaboration with our LCPS Human Resources and Talent Development staff. Again, the impact of this policy provides guidance for school buildings with staffing ratios of 10 or more and fewer than 10, the number of staff required to be trained in emergency first aid, CPR, and AED usage, and the number of staff required to be trained for the administration of insulin and glucagon.

[00:26:18] Feedback, the policy was posted as usual and customary for two weeks, and feedback was received from NSAC, LEAF, and SEAC, as well as a member of the Equity Committee. Staff have reviewed this feedback, and the red line version that you have in front of you incorporates the changes from community feedback. First and foremost, the title of the policy. Staff took and reviewed the feedback from the community and have now added and diabetes management trained

[00:26:53] into the title of this policy, and that should be noted on your red line version, for the policy title to now read Emergency First Aid, CPR, AED, and Diabetes Management Trained and Certified Personnel. In lines two through four, we removed and, and added Diabetes Management to reflect knew the new title of the policy. Line four, we removed the word certification because not all

[00:27:29] trainings conducted result in certification. Some trainings simply just mean that staff have been trained. In line six, we added designated by the principal as these staff members may vary from school to school. Additionally, in lines 9, 12, and 14, the numeric values changed to a minimum of three staff members changed in the administration of insulin and glucagon, and a minimum of three

[00:28:07] staff members who have current certification or training in emergency first aid, CPR, and use of AED no matter the size of the school staff. Please note that this is a standard higher than what is stated by Virginia Code. Code requires two. Here in LCPS, it is best practice, so we have set the standard at three. This also reflects our kind consideration of the feedback based from the equity committee, MSAC, as well as SEAC, because there are students in our population that are not

[00:28:45] deemed to be independent with their management of diabetes care and so the requirement of two trained staff members we felt that it would be most appropriate across our division to have three trained staff members per school location. Additionally on line 16 we changed present to available given that the registered nurse in a school may be physically present in the school building, but may not be available to administer insulin or glucagon if he or she is responding

[00:29:24] to another student's needs. At that time, if there's any questions or discussion on the proposed revisions before the committee on Policy 6640.

[00:29:41] Thank you, Ms. Richardson. I don't have any questions. I am very appreciative of your and your staff's diligence in incorporating the feedback that received and it certainly eases my mind that we have adjusted the the numbers of required personnel to to a little bit higher I did have one question if if you had any communication with HRTD or any other departments if you anticipate that this might create any difficulties in staffing this number of certified

[00:30:19] personnel at the facilities? No, not at this time. We did not receive any other feedback from any LCPS departments with concerns with regards to staffing. I am also joined this afternoon by Mrs. Jeannie Kloman, our supervisor of student health services, and so she can also weigh in on our training practices and how we support our schools. Thank you. Thank you for joining us.

[00:30:43] You're welcome. It is our current practice to have at least three people. So the school nurse, our HCS and two more in addition to that health office staff member trained excellent thank you welcome other questions Ms. Mansfield thank you for incorporating some of that feedback um I was also I mean this is one of those um times when you don't know what you don't know and one of those things is about diabetes and and and how far that we've come with technology and

[00:31:19] all the rest of that and I was looking at CX recommendations their recommendation for five and six and I was wondering what the thought process was not incorporating those things because they are in the video e guidance that they

[00:31:37] also sent to us yes ma'am are you asking me about the training are you referencing

[00:32:25] the training and number five yes I'm so I'm asking about the so we're talking diabetes management trained personnel and so I'm wondering why we couldn't incorporate recommendation four or five and six into this policy because I mean it did look to me that they had taken it directly from the video we guidance document that big huge book on that they sent with us that they sent along with their uh i see where you are now so recommendation four in at line nine is that what you're referring

[00:33:03] to ma'am yes ma'am so those two employees are level three trained those additional into the nurse to the nurse that's what we consider to be diabetes management trained and then five so are they allowed to monitor the glucose monitoring at the schools or is it something the parents have to do? So our staff follows the DMMP, which is the diabetes medical management

[00:33:38] plan, and it follows, monitors the diabetic students' blood sugars according to the doctor's orders and responds to all alarms on CGMs. So I guess if we don't have certain levels at the schools, which it looks like there's a level one, a level two, a level three, if we don't have like certain levels at the schools, then they wouldn't be able to do some of that. So we have, like I said the staff that are trained to manage diabetes that means when i say manage i mean treat a high

[00:34:12] blood sugar a low blood sugar administer insulin be able to administer emergency drugs like glucagon for a student whose blood sugar is very very low those staff are trained to do that those three staff so then you wouldn't see a problem putting four five and six in there well in my the way I see it it is because the manage the people who are trained to manage diabetes have

[00:34:52] that level of training do they have the actual apps I mean all I can say is I had a girl scout um who had like talking about two different things maybe that's the confusion you're talking about cgms and we're talking about trained to manage diabetes so that's two different things so if I draw our attention back to line nine, which is recommendation four from SEAC. Line nine, I'll go back up to line eight to read the entire sentence. If one or more students diagnosed as having

[00:35:31] diabetes attend such school, there shall be at least, the original policy said two, we have said three employees who have training in the administration of insulin and glucagon. The recommendation for the listening public and those present here, since it's not on the screen from SEAC, is line nine. Their suggested language is, shall be at least two employees who have level three diabetes training. As defined by the American Diabetes Association and the Virginia

[00:36:07] Department of Education, Mrs. Kloman has confirmed that those trained staff in our buildings currently are level three trained in blood glucose monitoring including reading and responding to continuous glucose monitor alarms and trends the administration of insulin including the use and insertion and reinsertion of insulin pumps or any of its parts and then they stated virginia

[00:36:37] code 22.1-274.01 colon 1 section b glucagon administration ketone testing such as urine and blood and carbohydrate counting school personnel who have responsibility for the student with diabetes throughout the school day and school sponsored activities to include but not limited to teachers, bus drivers, playground monitors, cafeteria managers will receive level 2 diabetes training.

[00:37:11] So Mrs. Mansfield, just for clarity, are you asking why did staff not consider the entire recommendation or is there a particular part that you wanted us to focus on? So I guess I'm looking at the, well, the entire, I mean, of course we would want more employees, right?

[00:37:32] Level 3 trained. But I guess it doesn't really say much about teachers, bus drivers, playground monitors, and those kinds of things. Again, I don't know what I don't know about diabetes, but I want to make sure that everybody is safe.

[00:37:48] And one thing that I know about SEAC is that they do their due diligence when it comes to looking at policies. So I'm wondering, and I don't know if we can ask why they put this in there, is that something that we can do?

[00:38:06] We would be happy to take any of your questions back to SEAC to seek more clarity. Okay. Certainly. Should that be the will of the committee?

[00:38:33] Is it possible to request that you do that while also sending this to the full board so that we can have that additional information when the full board considers this as an information item? Should that be the will of the committee, we can certainly do that.

[00:39:00] Happy to follow up with SEAC to get more clarity. Should all aside to move it forward as an information item. Thank you. Mr. Richardson. Ms. LaBelle. I I was Wondering miss Mansfield mentioned that sometimes these Problems occur on buses or on playgrounds

[00:39:30] How are we going to make sure that this is being monitored in places where students might be away from one-on-one? I guess that's the word I want to look at that becomes a concern also if they're out on the playground The teacher might be in another area of the playground or if they're on the bus and the bus driver in the bus attendant Because I know sped buses do have attendance are Not quite as aware of what's going on. How do we monitor that is that covered anywhere?

[00:40:07] There's diabetes awareness training diabetes aware am I not on am I on still okay? Sorry, I'm not used to this button. I apologize. We have diabetes awareness training, which is one of the levels of training. So staff that may not be giving injections but can respond and be aware of signs and symptoms of a high or low blood sugar can support a student until additional help is available.

[00:40:39] And we teach everyone the most important piece is if we don't have the CGM to look at the number but the student is symptomatic, the safest thing and best practice is to treat symptoms as a low. And then once we're able to check a blood sugar, determine the next course of action.

[00:41:01] Because the low blood sugar is most dangerous for a student if not treated. Yes, thank you. You're welcome. Thank you, Madam Chair.

[00:41:18] I guess I just don't feel comfortable yet bringing this to the full board until I know a little bit more about this. And, you know, it's on board docs and everything, but I still have a little bit more questions and would like to know their thinking behind it, adding the rest.

[00:41:39] Because I did read it in some of the guidance, and so I see where they're coming from. I just want to know a little bit more. So I don't know that I'm comfortable quite yet doing that. Ms. LaBelle.

[00:41:56] If there is no more discussion, I move that... We table this issue until we get more feedback from SEAC to see how they are and why they are making these recommendations.

[00:42:18] There is a motion. Is there a second? I second. There is a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Trying to follow the rules.

[00:42:35] Okay. So, all those in favor of collecting additional information from SEAC and having this item return to us in a future meeting with an update for action?

[00:42:55] Say aye. Aye.

[00:43:09] Opposed? None. Abstain? I think I will abstain. So that motion passes, two, in support. Okay, so moving on then to, on our agenda, to item 4.02, new policy 6650, personnel training viral infections, Ms. Richardson.

[00:43:36] Thank you, Chair Donahue. As you recall, personnel training for viral infections policy 6650, again, very similar to 6640, is a brand new policy for LCPS. Its foundation comes from the Virginia School Board Association model policy EBBB.

[00:43:52] This policy as well was drafted in collaboration with LCPS Human Resources and Talent Development. The impact at the time is guidance to personnel having direct contact with students, required training in the causes, prevention, transmission, and effects of blood-borne pathogens.

[00:44:19] Policy 6650 was presented as an information item in February. Again, the new policy mirrors the VSBA model policy. There was no feedback received at this time from LEAF, MSAC, and SEAC or the equity committee on 6650 so it is the recommendation of staff that this move forward to the full school board as an information item thank you Ms. Richardson I didn't notice that while equity did not have any specific

[00:44:55] suggestions they did include a question about what type of training would be involved currently there's the video that's available for staff to view thank you chair how often do they have to take it like every year every other year as you're a new person and i mean because i looked in the in the reg the virginia code it didn't really say

[00:45:28] how many times or so i would recommend checking with human resources to be sure but i'm required to take it annually and i believe that that's the requirement for all staff i guess i'm just wondering if that's code or if that's just best practiced or if we even know just because i mean we're always looking at training and maybe this is not the hill to die on per se but we got to start somewhere with training with all the training that they have to do

[00:45:59] um i believe i don't staff are happy to take this back and vet this with hrtd to ask what is the current practice and requirement in lcps and follow up with the committee whether it's annually whether it's once every so often but we can certainly get that information for you thank Thank you, Ms. Richardson.

[00:46:31] Any other questions, Ms. Bensfield? I think that's also something that we can do with the full board as well, if you're amenable. Any other questions or concerns about the revisions? Ms. Labelle, any questions or concerns about the revisions, or not revisions because it's a new policy, about the draft new policy?

[00:46:52] I'm sitting here looking at the LIS from the Virginia government, and it's true. They do not tell us how often it is, just that it has to be done. you I I would propose then or I my preference for how to proceed then would be that we go ahead and send this matter to the full board as an information item and during that time in between now and the next full board meeting ask

[00:47:28] student services to confer with HRTD about the current requirements and perhaps write something into the policy that says the training shall be annual or whatever whatever staff recommends to align with our current practice and I would entertain such a motion I'd make such a motion thank you miss labell there a second second thank you any further discussion the motion has

[00:48:07] been properly moved and seconded all those in favor say aye aye no opposed no abstentions as the motion passes unanimously to send this proposed policy to the full board for information thank you and now we will move on to item 5.01 for discussion point of clarification related to the discussion and directive from last month's meeting the focus groups to review policy 8040 Ms.

[00:48:44] Richardson thank you chair Donahue first and foremost thank you to the committee for allowing staff to put this item as a discussion point so that we have clarity moving through this process again as we previously discussed we will make sure that the minutes from the February 15th meeting accurately denote and reflect the direction that was given given the nature of that directive staff felt it important to share with the committee because this would be be student services, this student services committee's first time moving through a process

[00:49:20] where we have been directed to seek information and support from a third party provider. So I wanted to give a high level overview of our procurement process and be able to ask some guiding questions so that we know how to move forward with this direction.

[00:49:38] So as you can see, here's an overview of our procurement process and we do have some staff members here should you have some questions that go way beyond my understanding. So I do thank Mrs. Casali and Hind for being here with us this afternoon.

[00:49:54] But the first stage of the procurement process is to put out the request for quotes. So we as a school division identify a need. The need in this case was a direction given by the Student Services Committee during the February 15th meeting to contract, partner with a third-party vendor to facilitate focus groups in the review of policy 8040. Then the next stage of the procurement process is to create that request for quotes. So a lot of my questions this evening are going to come from what should that process feel like, look like, sound like, that creation of that quote. And so it's important for

[00:50:34] you to know that as we move through that process, here's sort of the structure for the request for quotes. So it's a collaborative process with our procurement office. We have to define the purpose and scope of the work that we expect our third-party vendors that are drafting these proposals to be able to provide to LCPS. We have to establish the background, so I'll ask you some clarifying questions about what you see as relevant aspects of the background of this process.

[00:51:03] The general requirements that we're looking for as a school division through this process. Contractor performance, we have the opportunity, since we're asking for this service to provide some guidance and some parameters, some must-haves, right, that we would like to see as end outcomes of this process.

[00:51:26] We also have our insurance requirements and indemnifications. I always mess up that word, so please forgive me. We also make sure that all of our procurement and requests for quotes are in compliance with the State Corporation Commission, the SCC.

[00:51:47] We also get to define the period that the quote is posted out for vendors to be able to get that feedback, right? So giving them enough time to read over what we have drafted, the scope of work that we're looking into, and giving them enough time to respond to our request.

[00:52:07] Then we have our requirements on how these documents and proposals are to be submitted to LCPS. We define the method in which they are to be submitted for our review. Then of course we define what our rights are as the requester of this procurement process.

[00:52:27] Then there's the award process. We also make sure that our vendors are knowledgeable on the front end of what the evaluation criteria are going to be in. B, so that they can structure these proposals for our review as a school division in accordance with our expectations. And then certainly, if applicable, we have a pricing schedule that we expect the proposals to come within. And then we have terms and conditions. So, after that process, there's a review to request for quotes. Then the procurement

[00:53:05] Office will actually issue and post the request for quotes. We will talk about the timeframe that we want that posted so that vendors can respond and submit their proposals. Then we will form a committee to evaluate the proposals that come in.

[00:53:24] Procurement takes the lead on the negotiation of the contract, working with the vendors to actually award the request for quotes. And then procurement works to maintain all of the record keepings behind that award. Okay.

[00:53:39] So I just wanted you to have an idea of what that process feels like and then I'll sort of walk you through some of the points of clarification that staff needed. So knowing that we're looking at focus groups and this could range from zero cost depending on the vendor that submits a proposal.

[00:54:00] But it could have a price tag associated, has there been thoughts of the committee as to what's the price range that we would like to stay in for this scope of work.

[00:54:18] What is the typical, since if you guys have done focus groups in the past, what kind of use of zero, but then has there also been a cost, and where could that fund come from? Our procurement office did a preliminary sort of review of a similar scope of work.

[00:54:39] And it could be zero cost up to around $50,000 would be sort of what we would be. That would be the range. Zero to $50,000 is best estimate at this time. And the money, since this was a non-budgeted request, would have to come from our operating funds.

[00:55:06] Richardson, could you, are you able to expand at all on what that means if it comes from the operating funds? So operating funds are the, so it wouldn't be federal funds, it would be local funds that sit within the general operating budget.

[00:55:24] And so we would have to work with business and financial services once the quotes come in for the scope of service to see, you know, if they are falling within what we have defined as expected. So maybe not to exceed $50,000 for this type of work, we would then have to look at year-end funds that may be available due to attrition and vacancies, and that's where we would find the monies.

[00:55:52] So if this were to cost some amount of money up to $50,000, would that money be having to take away from any other projects, planned activities?

[00:56:11] More than likely, no, because it would come from a lapse in turnover. As you all know, as board members, we do, even in March, we still have vacancies in staffing, but those monies are already encumbered funds, so we would have to work with business and finance, as well as the superintendent, to repurpose some of those funds.

[00:56:32] Thank you. Ms. Richardson, can you give us an estimate of how long this entire process from beginning to end would take? Weeks? Months?

[00:56:48] Ms. LaBelle, that's a fabulous question because that was my next point of clarification for you all as a committee. Certainly, we know that the procurement process, we need to afford folks time to see the posting.

[00:57:07] Staff, first of all, need to draft the request for quotes, which we can probably get done later this week once you all give us the appropriate feedback. And then how long would we anticipate this work to take? So that lends itself to the time it would take to create the focus groups.

[00:57:29] The evaluation process in procurement itself takes some time. We have to read over the proposals. We have to go through the scope of services. Procurement works with the vendors that submit these quotes. We negotiate certain terms to make sure that we're going to get the outcomes that we expect from this process and from this request that goes forth? So we would be looking at weeks. And so my question to you all as a committee is, can you give us some sort of guiding thoughts on no longer

[00:58:01] than, by such a date, so that we know how to draft the scope of services, so that we can make sure that the requests that come in, that the vendors are going to be able to meet our expectations with regards to time. So just knowing the time that it takes to draft the request for quotes, it has to be posted for a minimum of 10 days, and then getting those quotes back, taking the time to read them, and then procurement working with the individual vendors, and then actually granting the

[00:58:35] award to the selected vendor. So that process puts us solidly into April, right? And so we could say we expect the scope of work to start about maybe may all right so then as a committee sort of what are your thoughts what are your feelings what's your guidance that you'd like to give on a time frame so that we have the opportunity for the vendor to assess our population our community to look at all of the supporting documents surrounding policy 8040 that lends itself

[00:59:13] to another question. They'll have to go back through the scope of work and look at model policies 2021. They'll have to read and become familiar with policy 8040. And then the vendor will also have to become familiar with model policies 2023, as well as learn our demographics, right, in order to form and facilitate the focus groups. So, I'm asking for your guidance.

[00:59:38] That's a point of clarification for staff. What is the anticipated timeline? Ms. LaBelle. If I may. So we are talking about at least May before we get response from focus groups.

[01:00:02] Once we get that, procurement, well, that whole process. So once we get that information and get the information back from the focus groups and then put it through our committee again, Am I correct in thinking that it'll be June before we can get all the way through this process?

[01:00:29] I would say that's a really ambitious timeline, with a vendor being secured possibly by the end of April, with the onboarding needed for the vendor for them to become familiar with what our request is, right? And then the human factor, right, of having to look at our population, our demographics, and determine how they're going to comprise these focus groups.

[01:00:59] Also, how many focus groups would we like? That's also a point of clarification for the committee to provide additional guidance to staff. I would say that we're looking at the better part of the summer for the facilitation, so the identification, the facilitation of those groups.

[01:01:23] We would have to see what vendors are recommending with regards to how many times they would want the focus groups to meet, for how long. So you're talking about that human factor of working with other people to form these focus groups and what would be the expectations for meetings and how would these meetings be structured to give us the feedback that we're seeking.

[01:01:46] So I think June is a little ambitious. I think we need a little bit more time since it is March 19th. Thank you, Ms. Richardson. So in your answer to your first question, up to $50,000, I think that's what I would be comfortable with that.

[01:02:13] I don't know. I can't speak for other people. But that's something I would be comfortable with. For me, also, knowing this is going to be a process and getting focus groups, and I don't want to bias anything.

[01:02:36] So I would like to have, of course, a lot of us want sooner rather than later, but maybe we also want to do this right because it's been hanging over our heads for so long. and there's litigation pending two different kinds of things we also have to make sure that the kids are in or students and teachers are not coming to school in summer is that appropriate to have them come in for the summer for those focus groups or is that something that we have to wait

[01:03:14] until august september i would think as we move through this process that being a part so should someone in our community be identified as a part of a focus group that would be your choice to participate certainly we would work with vendors to sort of define and outline what's expected for each focus group meeting and can you make this commitment to be able to participate in what we consider our summer months for those of us that are 12-monthers there is there is no time off so you know make making sure that people have the flexibility and the understanding that this is

[01:03:54] voluntary you know so no one's forcing you to participate but you've been identified as someone who you know might be able to participate and can you make this commitment here's what this you know we're anticipating five meetings here's a general overview of what the meetings are going to be and yes there's three meetings one in june one in july one in august is that something that you can

[01:04:17] commit to if i could ask a question ms richardson you mentioned comparing um similar focus groups that LCPS has engaged previously, or similar scope, would you be able to tell us the purpose or topic of any somewhat similar scope focus groups that LCPS has organized previously?

[01:04:50] I'm sorry if my statement was misleading. When LCPS procurement reviewed similar work, they did not specify that it was LCPS-created focus groups. Our procurement department can see all of the awards across the state. And so looking at work that is similar to what we are seeking is where they got an approximation of what we might be looking at as far as a price tag. So I'm sorry if I was not

[01:05:20] initially clear. I think that was my mistake, not yours. Thank you, Ms. Richardson. Ms. LaBelle. Are there other sources, sole sources of providing for a focus group? That I am not aware that there's a sole source vendor out there that specializes in the creation of focus groups I think there's

[01:05:56] lots of consulting firms that might be interested in such a request when when we put this out through the procurement process but knowledge of a particular vendor that specializes in this our procurement department in their initial review of similar work there was nobody that specialized in focus groups thank you thank you Madam Chair I am so I'm thinking it would be

[01:06:36] more reasonable for September October with that's that's kind of what I'm thinking is that's a more reasonable request thinking about the procurement process and then having them come up you know agreeing with the proposal and then identifying or have them you know them having them identify potential participants and having them agree to do this so and I can see that this could be a two-step process with you know homogeneous groups and heterogeneous groups

[01:07:15] depending uh on what their proposal is so that would be my thought I'm off slightly off topic but I I see that we are almost at 4 15 um and this is already over the time that we had allotted for this meeting. Ms. Mansfield, Ms. LaBelle, are either of you able to stay for a few more

[01:07:45] minutes? Ms. Richardson, I don't know how many more questions you have, and I am, I guess, looking to whether it makes more sense for you to put your questions out so that we can think about them, or if we should continue to try to work through them and address them one at a time thank you chair donahue it was just really a few more questions so we've heard some feedback looking at a september october time frame we're looking at about a six to seven

[01:08:24] month process from beginning to end should we begin the procurement process this month if we can get the request drafted and out this week which is ambitious but we will do our best The other outcome was staff are seeking a little bit of clarity with regards to what the committee is thinking with regards to the reporting out from the focus groups.

[01:08:53] Are you looking just for oral reports? Are you looking for written reports? What type of expectations should we set forth in this request for quotes for vendors so that they have clarity? That's my final question.

[01:09:15] So I think that presenting their findings to us and to the superintendent, I think that at the same time, I think that that's something that we could do for transparency and to avoid them doing for one and then the other.

[01:09:36] Let's see, what else did you ask? Written. Oh, written or oral. I think we kind of have to leave that up to them because sometimes I think that people are like, I think we have to leave it up to their proposal, what they think would be best.

[01:09:54] Because we want this to be done in a de-identified manner as much as possible. We want to keep privacy and student privacy as much as we can. And I think that one way to do that is to allow these people, and non-biased, so that we can allow these people to do what we've asked them to do.

[01:10:20] Ms. LeBeau. I am concerned about the amount of time this will take. I had hoped that we could get this off the agenda, get it solved before next school year.

[01:10:36] That, I think, is a very important point. I think that we need to look at possibly other ways of getting information that will help us make decisions, because this process of procurement, finding the right focus, the people to conduct the focus group, it's taking such a long time.

[01:11:00] And I know the community, both sides of the community, are looking for answers sooner than that. so I think we need to think about this a bit more so this has been going on for what three years now um and while I would and I think there's a reason why it's been going on three years is because

[01:11:33] people really haven't been able to dive down into it and so then it just keeps on hanging on and I don't want to bring up the bring this up all the time continually year after year um so I think that just because we say September, say September, that doesn't mean things can't go sooner. That

[01:12:09] would be great. But I think we have to give people time to come up with these proposals and things like that. But I also don't know of another completely objective way to get these things answered in a discussion without focus groups. Chair, Ms. Mansfield, to answer your question,

[01:12:43] policy 8040 was adopted by the school board August 11th, 2021. So it will be three years in August of 2024. And I think part of the reason why we want these focus groups is what is going on in the schools right now? And what, you know, from the, how, what, what is the impact for the kids and for the staff and teachers? So, and the school community, we hear a lot from other people,

[01:13:10] but we don't really hear that much from inside. Those are just my thoughts. With regard to your

[01:13:24] Last question, Ms. Richardson, I would hope that we would be able to see some kind of written summary or analysis of the information collected by the vendor, assuming that we go forward with the focus groups, as long as it can be done in an anonymous way for people who wish to remain anonymous, who would wish to participate in the focus group, but want to remain anonymous by doing so.

[01:13:59] So related to that, I have had a question of why we feel, or do we feel confident, and if so, why we feel confident that people will be willing to participate in focus groups.

[01:14:27] Mrs. Donahue, great question. I don't know that I can speak to the will of most people. Certainly, as you all have acknowledged as a committee, this has been a topic of interest for our community in particular. would have to say even in the most public of forums people have been comfortable speaking out and so I think that if we secure a vendor that is able to create safe spaces for those that haven't voiced their truths that maybe

[01:15:01] they would be inclined again I can't speak for the will of most people but this seems to be a community in which we care deeply and so we typically communicate about what we care about and so I would think that if afforded the opportunity and structured correctly and facilitated by the third party provider that people would participate that's my thought just from being here a mere 19 months thank you miss Richardson have did you have other

[01:15:40] specific questions or points of clarification for us no I think the committee again for affording staff this opportunity thank you for engaging in discussion. Thank you for providing us the feedback necessary so that the Student Services Committee staff members are able to take this information back to the superintendent and begin to work with procurement. Thank you. Thank you, Ms.

[01:16:09] Richardson. Any other questions or comments? Okay, item six on the agenda is new business. Is there any new business? New business?

[01:16:31] I think that maybe it's time we have a lot to think about already. How's that? No new business? No new business. Okay. In that case, the March 19th, 2024 meeting of the Student Services Committee is adjourned.

[01:16:49] Thank you all for your attendance and support. Our next meeting will be April 18th, 2024. Have a good evening. Drive home safely.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coraggio Consulting · aguyonx.com