Everyone and the listening audience as well. This is, April. Sorry, it's the April at the SBCSC Administration Building Policy Work Session. There are several people in the audience who are here to hear us deliberate over some of the proposals, for changes in policy. For the most part, my understanding is that the changes that we'll make have been
mandated at the state level. But at this point, I will turn this over to Matt Lawson, general counsel, and he'll walk us through, the changes that we need to be making. So thank you, mister Lawson. Thank you. So before we get into the policies in front of you today to to update, I wanted to provide a brief update on the prior policy cycle that the board has already approved. As outlined in the memo that I provided, the policies adopted on 07/31/2023 have now been fully finalized, reconciled, and aligned with Neola's model policy.
So I've been working, quite a bit with our Neola rep on getting those done. So that included, this was not just a ministerial step. We conducted I conducted a review to ensure that the policies were internally consistent, that they were compliant, and they aligned with the the policies that were presented to the board, and adopted, back in July 2023. And so that also required that, that we go through and actually physically update each policy, in BoardDocs in order to adopt it, in order in order for Neola to
be able to adopt it. So at at this at this point, the policies are completed. They're finalized in BoardDocs and have been submitted for formal production by Neola. And so what I've done is, in the memo that I provided today, just provided a table, a list of all of the policies. I believe that there was 29, 26 maybe, and the the title and just kind of an update on those. So considerable time since the last work session has been spent on getting those finished. Any questions on the prior policies? Is there any questions about procedure, prior policies that Mr.
Lawson just pointed out that we can move forward? Okay. So, the additional policies that are before you today, the superintendent evaluation policy that we've discussed in executive sessions kind of crafting that. And so I figured that we would start with the superintendent evaluation framework, because this is one of the most important governance items that's going to be in front of you today. So the framework is established to provide formal objective and structural processes for evaluating the
superintendent. It moves away from a subjective evaluation and toward measurable performance aligned with student outcomes and board priorities. The framework uses, defined domains, things like instructional leadership, human capital, operations and culture, and it applies a consistent rating scale. It is aligned with the ISBA and IAPSS best practices, and it gives the board a defensible, consistent process moving forward. This is ultimately about accountability, clarity and aligning leadership performance with student results. Included in the packet for the Board is the policy, the rate the matrix and
then also the ISBEA recommendations as well. So if there's any any questions or discussion on the superintendent policy. Well, thank you for all your work on this because I know you I have a quick question. Can you hear me? Yep. Yes. We can hear you. I'm sorry, chair. I have a quick question. So the policy on the superintendent's, measurable evaluation framework, so there was a couple of things that we wanted to see changed in that policy.
Were that was that done? My so my understanding of the policy that's in front of you today, incorporates the most recent round of updates, to the extent that one, you know, was missed or something was not included. I would be happy to make that revision. Well, I can't see what that is, so that's why I'm asking. I don't see the policy that you're speaking of. So I had forwarded, by email a little bit before the meeting, the policies for the package today. Alright. We're not voting on it today, so I'll look at it. And if and if there's something there, I'll I'll just email you. Okay. Thank you, doctor McCullough. I I was gonna mention one of the, areas that we focused on last time
was principle five. And I remember, we cut some of that to eliminate some of the redundancy, but the main thing we kept was that to encourage improved performance and development and establish goals for the future, the board also seeks to ensure that the superintendent's leadership remains focused on improving outcomes, strengthening programs, and responsibly managing the corporation's resources and operations. So, I think that was one important thing to clarify.
We did cut some of that to, again, eliminate some redundancy, but, Doctor. McCullough had actually suggested that we keep responsibly managing the corporation's resources and operations. So I appreciate that. And then in principle seven, all we did was to, and this was my suggestion actually, break up principle seven into two principles. So now it's principle seven and principle eight. Principle eight was the superintendent shall provide regular updates to the board that include relevant
data and reports documenting progress toward established priorities and goals. I think lifting that up, you know, is also a way of creating emphasis for the board and the superintendent to know that this is a specific a particularly important action item, which was different than principle seven, which as you see, the superintendent shall be an active participant with the board in establishing priorities. So those were two things that, ISB ahead combined, and we've broken those apart.
So there's nothing really changed there as much as, we now have principles seven and eight, and then you can see that we simply updated principle nine, ten, 11. And then under performance indicators, doctor McCullough has suggested a few of these, which, I know you can't see these, doctor McCullough, but you might trust that, in fact, we did include those in in your suggestions. Equitable access to programs and opportunities, equitable treatment of students, reduction of disparities in discipline,
maintenance of a balanced budget, school building safety and security, reliability and safety of transportation service. And I'm reading these over mainly because of John's John's here. I wanna be sure he knows. But, of course, the the the listening audience as well in case you're following along. But other than that, I think, we didn't make any changes. And then, importantly, we see here the performance measures, and the, indicators that, mister Lawson
provided for us under, the the different areas that we developed. And, again, for people listening or just watching, we did this collaboratively with the superintendent, which is an important, I think, part of this evaluation, tool that it's not simply developed by the board to give over to the superintendent, but but the superintendent also offers suggestions. So one indicator was stakeholder engagement, another indicator is academic achievement and monitoring, and another
is resource alignment to student outcomes, and, those are the ones that we've agreed on. I know, mister Ellison was also making the suggestion that we focus on community engagement. So, we've tried to incorporate those priorities that are part of our current strategic plan that we can use going forward with the superintendent. And we've discussed with the superintendent, the many the the ways that we feel and
he agrees that we can collect documentation to support all of these both in the form of objective data and test scores as well as the various meetings that the superintendent is having in the community as well as with the staff in the corporation. Is that sufficient? Are we willing to accept, and dare I say, are we willing to live with this document as it is?
Can we accept it as it is? Do people feel strongly that we can accept this as it is? Are we voting on the policies today? No. No. Okay. Because I need to look I need to look at them one more time before we do that. Okay. That that would be great. Don't forget there are three readings, and we're just saying we're gonna move ahead, doctor McCullough, with this version subject to your I'm gonna turn around and look at you, subject to your, your concern. Does that seem fair? That seems fair. Okay.
Very good. So I think, mister Lawson, we can move on. Okay. And just to clarify before I I'm gonna interrupt you. I'm sorry. So doctor McCullough's question is appropriate. Is this considered a first reading? No. So we're still just reviewing. You're just reviewing, and you could do a first reading and still make amendments along the way. Yes. Yes. However the board wants to proceed. Yeah. So procedurally This is not this is not a first reading. So procedurally, we're reviewing, and then there'll be a first reading at which we will make another set of comments.
So doctor McCullough and board, you will have plenty of opportunities to look over these documents and make changes. And the publics will provide input as well. Very good. Okay. So when we're done, I have a couple questions and a concern. So when we're done, just let me know when you're done. Okay. We will. Okay. So, so moving on to the, the new policies or, revised policies that are in front of you. There's also a memo that are that outlines the, the list of policies that are being presented for, for the work session today.
And unless you prefer otherwise, I'll just go through kind of a policy by policy, presentation and a brief overview of, like, the changes that were made. Please. And all that is laid out in the memo along with, whether it was a a legal change or an operational, change or something else required. So the first one is, policy fifteen twenty, employment of administrators. The policy updates the administrator contracts to align with current state law, particularly around compensation limits tied to referendums. The goal here is consistency on legal compliance and how we structure the administrator agreements,
and also to ensure, alignment with the positions that we, currently have across the district today. Policy twenty two sixty two, latch key programs. The updates on this policy added flexibility for latch key programming, particularly in non or emergency or nontraditional situations. It ensures that we can continue services without being locked into rigid structures. Policy twenty three seventy point o three, the Indiana Course Access Program. Updates on this policy aligns our policy with the updated state requirements for course for
course access. It clarifies timelines, enrollment procedures, and reporting obligations. Ultimately, it expands student access while ensuring compliance. Policy twenty six zero three, is a new policy that's actually required by state law. Can we pause there for a second? Sure. I just wanna make sure everybody is is with us. So the policies that, mister Lawson's reading to us, come after the superintendent evaluation. So there's the superintendent evaluation following the legal memorandum, and so it's about the middle
of the packet. There's also, like, a summary list in the front. Right. Just one one, one minute. So we're up to twenty two sixty two? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, mister Lawson. Mhmm. So the school performance dashboard, I think, is where I left off. 2603. 2603. Sorry. So, as I mentioned, this is a a new policy that's required by state law. It requires schools to publish performance data online. It's fundamentally about transparency and public accountability. Policies there's, policy thirty two fourteen and forty two fourteen, relating to staff gifts.
These policies update the restriction on gap on staff gifts and vendor relationships. It strengthens the ethic standards and reduces risk around conflicts of interest, and it aligns language across certified and noncertified staff. Could you could you name those two policies again, please? Thirty two fourteen and forty two fourteen. Thank you. The, next policy is, fifth five one one three zero two, school transfer options. This is, strictly a federal compliance update, aligning our policy language with ESSA requirements.
There's no operational change. This is about staying current legally. Policy fifty five forty, schools and governmental agencies. This clarifies how we interact with DCS and law enforcement. It it addresses access to students and extended, circumstances, and it is both a legal compliance and student protection policy. At the last work session, I believe that we had a decent amount of discussion about this particular policy and the need to, coordinate with our, with our, partners around from DCS and and law enforcement. And I did talk with, some of those individuals and get their input on kind
of what are that structure should look like. And so, the policy that's before you now, aligns with the feedback that I had received. Okay. Policy sixty one zero five, this is a a clarifies statutory authority for electronic signatures. Practically speaking, it supports how we already operate, especially with digital contracting and and other things. And it's also worth noting too that, as part of our ongoing compliance efforts to, one, maintain and, two, to streamline the way that we handle contracts across the district,
one of the ways that we are able to do that is through the use of Adobe Sign. And so, one thing that has been historically an issue in the district has, you know, finding sign agreements, getting them uploaded. And so from a legal standpoint, the legal department is is maintaining all contracts electronically. We are requiring that they go through a legal review by myself prior to being placed on the board agenda. They also have to be reviewed or being sorry. They have also to be signed by the vendor or the the other party, before
being placed. So that way, as soon as the board approves a contract, then, the legal department handles it. From there, we take those agreements, send them to superintendent Yeed for his signature electronically. And then that allows us then to immediately upload those into the, the the database that we were using to store contracts in order to maintain compliance. I think this is the the the best, most practical way of doing things, as opposed to printing agreements out, having, you know, the board sign some things and have you know, having them sign some inconsistently, Eid signing some inconsistently.
And it just maintains that, you know, for, the majority of contracts, there are some that the board has to, has to sign. But for the majority of contracts, Eid superintendent Eid has the authority to sign electronically following the board's approval. Six policy sixty two twenty, the budget pre preparation. This is, more of a substantive operational update. It modernizes the budget structure and adds internal control language. It formalizes the CFO involvement and reporting expectations, and it directly aligns with, SBO eight
expectations and strengthens fiscal oversight. Policy eighty three zero five, information security. This strengthens our cybersecurity posture. It defines threats, requires tracking, and formalizes response expectations. Given, you know, the the current risk and the, the climate around cybersecurity, things getting breached, things in in the nature, this is an important, an important update in my opinion. Policy twenty four thirty one, interscholistic athlete or athletics. This updates athletic program oversight and compliance requirements and ensures alignment with state law and
IHSAA expectations. Policy twenty four thirty two, grievance procedures. This is another new policy that is required by state law. This it establishes a formal grievance process related to athletics participation requirements And as the updates here, the, you know, implementing this policy is about legal compliance and risk mitigation. But, again, this is another policy that's required by state law. So, yeah, overall, the policies that you have in front of you is more of a targeted set, compliance driven update cycle.
We have additional policies that we are continuing to maintain or continuing to update. There are additional policies, I think, as part of this particular set that, would be presented at at another work session once we finalize these policies. As I'd mentioned earlier, the bulk of, work over the last, you know, couple months since the last work session was surrounding getting, you know, the policies that were already adopted by the board actually updated in the system. So that way, those can be taken off of the list. And then moving forward, then the list that I provided today, was done so, at
the in coordination with and through recommendation of our Neola rep. So that was that was kind of how we decided or how I decided which policies I would present today and, the process and how we did so. If I anybody has any questions, I'd be happy to to answer those. I just have one question. I remember at the last policy meeting, I I asked that we can, at some point, take a look at our bullying policy so that we can strengthen that And
also, the cell phone policy, that the cell phone, bill that was passed by the state legislators, and we need to see if we have a policy in place. I think we do, but we know if it's strengthened. We need to strengthen that policy Okay. According to the guidelines the state set forward. No. I believe the the bullying policy may have been may be included naturally in an update that, is planned for a little bit later, but I will pull that one specifically and and see about updating that right away. We we did we did update that, though, guys.
Was the cell phone law passed? Mhmm. Yes. Downstate? Yes. Yes. And we have to align our policy along with the guidelines that they were, they were talking about. Because I do know that in that in that law, that cell phone, law, that, students there's certain students with medical needs can have their phone. But we have to make sure we have guidelines in place that will identify specifically those kinds of, folks that needs to carry those types of their phones.
So So that everybody can't say that I'm sick. I need my phone. Those kinds of things. We need to have something in place for that. So if I go visit these schools, I'm gonna walk into them, and I won't be able to see the cell phone. Right? This doesn't really take effect, I think, until July? Yes. In theory. Yes. For the next school year? Yeah. Have you Yeah. Yes. That's that's correct. We're working on the, code of conduct. Do I have that? Right now, the policy says personal communication devices are not allowed.
They have to be locked or secured in a locker. The state gave guidance as to they should be turned off, out of sight, either in a locker or somewhere from Bell in the morning to Bell in the afternoon. They should not be used whatsoever. And No. Of course. What are the consequences? Well, we don't know yet. I downloaded the ISBA one, and we are looking at those to add to the,
depends who you talk to. You know? Some some people think that there should be a slap on the hand or on the wrist. Others think you should get the death penalty. So Okay. Can we just can we make this a racial issue? So from what doctor McCullough is indicating, it seems fair, and I hope it's there that, for students who have an IEP, that it's actually written into the IEP, so
that if they need access to a phone, if there's some extenuating circumstances, which I think is part of the debate overall is there are some kids who need to be in touch with their parents and the parents want to know if they can reach out to their children. Yes. And especially these days with the higher number of diabetic students with those monitors here that send signals to their phones if they need insulin or something. So we have to look at all cases.
Right. Now we visited one school in Fort Wayne, I think. I think our securities had been quite expensive. It can't be that expensive if it fails problems. It's, we inquired about that. It's $13 per pouch. And as the students come in, they insert their phone in the pouch and the pouch locks and they cannot access.
So but their cell phones are with them though. They in the pouch. On their way out, it's a magnetic key. They pass it by the magnetic key and it unlocks the pouch and they get their phone out and They don't seem like a very big expense considering what they could avoid and misbehavior misuse. $13 multiplied by a thousand students that 13,000 and you multiply that.
So it's almost a quarter of 1,000,000 if you wanna buy one for every student. Wait. It's a permanent thing. It's not like you're buying them every day, I think. True. So we'll so we'll come back to this then when the state comes up with some consistent guidelines. In the meantime, I think we should continue, with this. So now you've given us the overview. Do you wanna go into the the actual text of each one?
Sure. The let's see. So we're gonna look together at, say, fifteen twenty and then move on from there? Sure. So in the in the the packet that you have, with the memorandums, the policies are in order by the number, as they are in numerical order and then as they are listed in that table. Okay. And then, I will ensure that, I work with Gabby to get these up all uploaded to, the website, first thing tomorrow. So did you wanna start with the superintendent evaluation? We kinda talked about that. The red there are a couple red line changes on that that I think align
with the most recent round of feedback that I've had received, and those surround and you talked about it earlier, principle adding principle eight and then, you had the language surrounding that. So I didn't know if you wanted to specifically talk about that one anymore or moving on. I think we can move on, when I asked if there's you know, can we live with it? Mhmm. Everyone seemed to feel we could live with it and move on. And then doctor McCullough is gonna weigh in as well with any comments there.
So let me what is the language in 1520? I let me see what the language is. I'm not quite sure if if if what's what's what was changed in that? Wait. We're on the We're we're still talking about the superintendent. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. That's okay. We're gonna go to 1620. Right? Right away. 1520. 1520. Sorry. 1520. Yes. So we're gonna move there right away? Okay. So Is that yeah. Sure. Yeah. I mean, looking at, fifteen twenty, and I don't know if it's apparent from the
copies of the black and white copies that you have, but the one of the first things that, were updated or the primary things were updated is that, the individuals employed in the following positions are considered administrators. So it's that list, the executive director role, director, coordinator, principal, and assistant principal. So this list has been updated, one, to align with the prior the policy as it currently stands, but then also, as you'll see throughout, removing the references to assistant superintendent. And so only the those five roles, are listed as the the basic categories for
being considered as administrators. Okay. Because we did we we did remove the deputy superintendent and assistant superintendent. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yep. And, yeah. No. Those should be, those are redlined out, on the versions that was that is before the board today. Okay. And then there were some, a couple of the provisions that were removed at the, recommendation of Neola. And those are the ones that I read. The the board will not employ children, siblings, and so on? Yeah. Correct. And some and some and the way that the updates are, are structured is that
sometimes Nola will give you an option. And so, you know, sometimes, you know, that was one of the options. And then so the second, the paragraph right below it was the option that was essentially chosen for the update. So yeah. Okay. So so one other thing on in this policy that that I I kinda, I'm looking at is administrators who are employed in noncertified, positions shall be at will employees. Should we take a look at that? Okay. What letter is that?
I believe it's I I and then one. Is that what you're referring to, doctor McCullough? I'm sorry. To what? Are you I believe are you referring to the paragraph about at will employees? Yes. I am. Okay. And so the that particular paragraph, the I mean, the primary update was one, removing the assistant superintendent designation. And then, the titling of at will employees is basically being noncertificated administrators, as being
employees at will that are employed by a specific contract. And the noncertificated, terminology was specifically recommended by our Neola rep. Okay. So if you look seven lines down in the in that number one at will and employees, seven lines down to the far right, we probably should have strike assistance agreement 10 Yeah. That one was missed. And also under h on the first line. Yeah. Yeah. I don't think we got rid of this.
I I will get those updated. I I I guess I wanna ask a question. I I know we got rid of deputy superintendent for sure, but I don't know that we superintendent for sure, but I don't know that we eliminated assistant superintendent. Oh, I mean, I just try to be consistent. I don't know. I I know. I just was mentioning that because do we not have some assistant superintendents or not? I think that we I I think that we had we had that conversation that we should eliminate that and just go with executive directors and directors. Oh, okay. I know we I know we definitely took out deputy superintendent. That was the the the term that was removed last year.
But I don't remember us removing assistant superintendent. So can we strike that out in this one? Because they had that has been abused, that title. You you can. It's the board's policies. I'm just I'm asking the board. I'm at who said I'm asking the board? Yeah. Well, the first question, do we have any assistant superintendents? We don't have any at this time, but I remember the board inquiring about moving somebody into that role. We did have late. And at the time when the inquiry was done, that role had not been eliminated.
The deputy had been eliminated, but not the assistant. Is there Go ahead. Sorry. Is there a difference between assistant and superintendent and executive director in terms of job duties or pay scale or anything like that? Nope. It's just a title. So we do have executive directors. Yeah. So we do have executive directors. We do not have any assistant superintendents. So I'm not sure that we have had a very robust conversation about what these
various job titles were. I think the the prior superintendent had decided we needed a deputy superintendent, but that's not something that was decided on by the board. So is this a policy we need to go back to and decide whether we want such distinctions, missus Lee? Personal opinion. It's not so much about the title as it's about the job description. So you can make these titles anything. I mean, I've been in roles where at the whim of whoever the CEO was,
we went from managers to directors and back again, and I was like, whatever. Same job description. They just changed the title. So, and then we have the list on the, you know, in the beginning of which roles report to the superintendent. So as long as things match and we use the right titles on job descriptions, which brings me to the point that CFO is not on that list and should c f I mean, right, the CFO reports to the superintendent. So do we need to add that title?
CFO is a standard title amongst all the, Indiana districts. Right. So I'm saying do we but we just do we need to add it to this list? I think it's a fine title. Like, this I think they should be on hold. I I believe CFO is in a in a class by themselves. They could be assistant superintendent in charge of finance or CFO. You're out. That's the same thing. So that's what But there's no reference. There's no reference. Okay. Where it says, in addition to the superintendent, individuals employed in the following positions shall
be considered administrators. So if the CFO is considered administrator, I think we just need to add that to the list. I mean, if that's okay. Yeah. If it if it's not there and if it's not mentioned in another policy, it I think that's a Yeah. That's that's an excellent point. That's intended to be, like, the the list, and then everything else should kind of align with that. So I'll add the CFO to that and ensure that there's alignment in the rest of the policy. Yeah. Anybody who reports to the superintendent should be on this. Any role that might.
Right? Anybody who might be considered an administrator, not necessarily reports to the superintendent. Seems like a very fine line right now as I'm thinking of the superintendent's discretion and a board policy, I think what we saw earlier is that, you know, there's almost an something ad hoc. This that the superintendent could decide the CFO could be, when we look at what director of finance. Thank you.
So where how do we is there something to reconcile here if I feel like it's our board shouldn't be in operations, but the board has a policy. So so so so I don't know the direct policy right now. I haven't looked it up. But when the board president is comes on, an elected board president every year, they get to select the recommendations of the board of CFO, finance person. That's already and a pop that's already there.
The superintendent does not get to select the CFO. It's the treasurer. The treasurer. It's the treasurer. The treasurer. Right. Yeah. So we have the CFO serving as a treasurer. The board picks the treasurer. Right. The CFO okay. If it's a position that exists and it it okay. If if the superintendent's gonna create a new position, he's gotta come to the board to do that. Okay. So that's your check valve there on that. Now, he he came up with financial executive financial director. Why did you do that?
I think chief financial officer is the better title. Yep. I do as well. Yeah. I I think I think adding that to the list here I mean, it should be added to this list. And then I I think if there's some other position that the superintendent wants that's not on this list that doesn't exist, the superintendent's gotta come to the board to create that. Okay. Does it state so that should be stated here? I don't think it's stated explicitly in this. I I think it's in other policies about having to come to the Okay.
To to create the position. And as the fiscal body, that's part of your statutory responsibility as well is to, fund the positions and identify the positions that are being funded. So Okay. So what we decide about assistant superintendent? Okay. Did we I just was I know that we, like I said, definitely got rid of deputy superintendent position. I don't know that there was real discussion, one way or the other on getting
rid of the assistant superintendent position. Right. But right now, we don't have any. And I'd be good to leave it. We just had to add it to the list if we have it in the text, I think. Yeah. Right? So. I think I think the effort was made to eliminate it in the text. Assistant superintendent is the one that we found in a couple of places. Yeah. But it's been eliminated in other places. So Yeah. If you wanna Probably easier to eliminate it because Yes. I'll I'll I'll I'll make sure it's eliminated. Okay. Yeah. Right. And it still leaves room for the superintendent to propose it to the board, which then we'll deliberate. Okay.
Yeah. Yeah. If there are no other questions about 1520, I'm going to move on to 20 two, the latchkey programs. So one of the, one made one change on that particular policy, which may not be as clear on the copies that you have, is the the section heading titles, adding some clarity to the program and kind of how that is supposed to operate and, the additional language surrounding emergency operations.
So So under the under the program delivery model where it talks about the the latch key program shall be provided under our provisions. And they're talking about, it being provided when schools via remote or e learning due to a declared emergency. And yeah. Any questions on on that?
I mean, I think a lot of that a lot of the update was around kind of organize organization of that policy because it really just kinda ran together in the beforehand. And so some of the YOLO recommended changes, included adding those specific, title headings. No. We can I think we can move on? Yeah. Okay. So, twenty three seventy point o three Indiana Course Access Program. The updates on this one so, under the ICAP participation requirements, really, the main update
was where it says eligible students may not enroll in more than, two ICAP courses per semester. That was that was really the primary change, to update that timeline. And then you'll see, down a little bit further, you know, there were some new other recommended provisions that were removed. And just as a as a general matter, if, if a provision has been removed, almost always, it's because it was Neola recommended. So provisions that were in our our old policies, if they're not or if they're struck out in the new revised version, most likely, that was because Neola recommended it
either from a legal standpoint or an organizational standpoint. Any questions on that one? No. Okay. Moving on the school performance Internet dashboard twenty six zero three. This is a totally new policy, as I mentioned, recommended, or required by law. That requires the posting of school performance data, and the list the following list. This list was crafted, and and, totally com composed by Neola and the the recommendation to be consistent with the stat with the statutory requirements of 2031 a dash 5.5.
I don't have a question, but I do have a comment because I was going to, at the end of your, at the end of this meeting, bring that up because, I was gonna ask if we have a dashboard, a policy where we do an annual performance report to show, you know, how our student tracking our data and students, achievement, because there are several schools that actually do that, and so, bringing this
policy forward and actually putting something in place, is is what I was gonna be asking about and looking for. So I'm I'm glad that we we're starting that process. Okay. Well, Neola has given that over to us because I for years, it was actually the state that would provide all this data. Yeah. I've seen a couple of of annual performance reports, this morning when I had my Zoom meeting, from several other schools, and, they were I mean, they're really, on on target, and it's really something to see.
They provide that information to, their the the community, and there's there's there's, schools, their teachers, their their their principals. Everyone gets a copy of that annual, performance report. And I thought it was very interesting because it show it had a lot of information that that shows with how this district was doing, how the students were doing, and I think it was very important to show that. So I I I think we're we're on a good track. Could you share those links to those that you saw, the best practices?
It was in a Zoom meeting. I did I I I'll see if I can get a hold of that link, and I'll show you a copy of it. K. Thank you. Yeah. I thought it was very important, so that'd be something we can probably build off of. Any other questions or comments on 2603? So moving on to 32144214 are are both relating to staff gifts. You'll see the revision of removing the word Christmas, and, the newola recommended term was some special holidays.
And the version the text that is listed, as you you'll see, there was, at the very end of thirty two thirty two fourteen, there's you'll see in brackets where it says end of option two. And so that was, obviously, that would indicate there was a first option. So the language that is above that, starting with the professional staff members, those were all included in option two. And just as a a drafting note, the way that it works is that the policies are updated in the, in board docs directly in there.
And if you see, like, brackets with, like, an x indicating, you know, we select that one or, for instance, the end of option two, how that's still included on that policy, what happens is that once the board has approved and adopted a policy, we then submit a disposition sheet to Neola. And then what Neola does is they take that disposition sheet, and then they format and revise the policies. And they disposition sheet, and then they format and revise the policies. And they will remove, you know, for instance, the end of option two in the brackets. Sometimes you'll see maybe drafting notes that are still included right there. Those are also removed as part of the Neola production process.
And, so just that's just an a a drafting note for the board's, awareness. Any questions on thirty two fourteen or forty two fourteen? The changes the changes made for those, are they're the same changes for both. Moving on to fifty one thirteen o two at the school transfer school transfer options. You'll see that, the NEOLA recommended, revisions to that included, basically striking out the first
paragraph of that, and yeah. I mean, just streamlining that policy and removing the the first paragraph. And in doing so, just updated and also updated the federal references, to align with ESSA. So this is more of a, of a legal compliance update than a a substantive one. Any questions on that? No. It says specific that language is specifically no trial behind. Yeah. So the, moving on to fifty five forty, the schools and governmental agencies.
K. So this what this does, clarifies the DCS and law enforcement access procedures. And, also, the the impact of it is basically to protect student rights and ensures compliance with DCS. And because, you know, obviously, we wanna be as cooperative as we can with law enforcement, with DCS. But at the same time, you know, we have to ensure that we are following our legal obligations and, not providing or doing more than we than we have to in order to ensure compliance. And so you'll see the provisions that were struck out.
Those were, options that there there could have been. So, you know, for instance, when an agency such as DCS requests permission to interrogate a student at the school, the principal or designee should request that the agency inform a parent unless the parent is the target of the investigation. So, like, that was one. The options on that was either the school take that responsibility to try to inform or, ask the agency itself to inform the parent. And, based on feedback that I had received from our partners and then also my
understanding of discussions at the the prior work session on this topic, was that law enforcement or the I'm sorry, DCS, we should ask them to notify or, inform a parent unless unless otherwise it was needed. Any questions on on that? No. I think the only other thing that was ambiguous, perhaps for me alone, was the in this third paragraph, the principal or designee, and depends on the kind of exigent
circumstances, who gets to be that designee. And does the parent have a right to identify who that designee should be? So I like, the next sentence or next line down, I I struck that, but I need to I need to strike that principal or designee and just put principal Okay. On that to correct that. So if that if that were to just say principal Yeah. Would that would that fix your the ambiguity that you're referencing? Yeah. That's the ambiguity. Well, I except, I I mean, there there could be circumstances where the principal's not
present. Right. And he has designated someone to, you know, the assistant principal typically. So I I would be okay leaving that in there because if you don't have that in there and the principal is not available, is there a violation of policy because someone else did it? That's a good point. Yeah. So I I I think you're better off to leave the designee in there. Yeah. I don't know. A percentage of incidents like this occur where I think as a parent, I wanna
know who the designee is. What about But if it's not the principal principal. Well, someone is going to identify contact the parents. I'm contacting you because principal so and so is not available. Yeah. And and it's part of my responsibilities to fill in that position. And then I I think when I added to that thank you, mister Augustine. I think when I the other complicating factor is, the time sometimes it takes to reach a parent who's at work or simply unavailable.
Mhmm. And so given that lag time, you know, does the principal have a designee? Because if we're under a certain time limit, we can't reach the parent. Yeah. That's the that part was what I what's what's the time limit? I mean, as a parent, I wanna know, what's going on and not come to school to pick up my child and find out, oh, this happened. I don't know how I mean, I understand perfectly what you're saying. Yeah.
But did you wanna include a time frame, like, as soon as practicable as Yeah. At least that, I think. So legally, when you say as soon as practical practicable, that means that the very first opportunity you have, that's slightly different than as soon as possible, which may impose an impossible, obligation on you. But, under the as soon as practicable means under the circumstances that you do it
as quickly as you could. So Mr. Reed, you've been in this position as a principal. What? Am I complicating this? Is it my I mean, I agree with Mr. Agostino in the sense that as soon as it's bad because you don't know the circumstances, you don't know how you know, how much access you will have while you're dealing with something. And then you will need to wait until it's practicable Right.
Too. Yeah. How many times you cannot you cannot just get on the phone and That's right. Share the information with other people in the room. You know? We'll we'll we'll wordsmith that in there. Okay. Okay. And then you can look and see how it reads. And Yep. But I think that's the way to go on that one. So then do we need to leave principal or designee in that next paragraph where it was replaced with principal? I would. Okay. Okay. Just just throughout the principal or destiny? Yeah. Because someone I mean, you're gonna have situations where the principal is not there.
Okay. Well, that makes sense. Any any other comments or feedback? I don't think so. K. So moving on to sixty one zero five. So this is, the policy relating to electronic signatures and records. This adds you'll see it added statutory citations. It also clarified electronic signature authority. One thing, the second paragraph I'd specifically bring your attention to, which is kind of what I referred to earlier in terms of our process in order to ensure compliance.
But it says that the superintendent is expressly authorized to execute and affix his or her manual or electronic signature to all contracts, agreements, and instruments that have been duly approved by the board, and such execution shall constitute the official act of the school corporation. And so, you know, with the exception of, I believe there's a list like the disposition of property or anything like that, you know, the board would sign those types of agreements. But just the, you know, the ongoing, agreements that the board is approving, you know,
the superintendent as part of our ongoing, compliance, process would then sign those electronically. Any any questions on that? I the only question I have on that is, like, I think we gotta reconcile this. The one state law that I showed you were contracts that have to be signed by off by the president and secretary. Yeah. Well, I think that adding that the that it's expressly, approved by the board. Yeah. I think that it's my understanding of what would allow for that. Yeah. I think Yeah.
Because the You gotta look at that. Yeah. The board would expressly approve it. And then I know that there are there's a couple, like I said, disposition of properties. This is, like, your major stuff. Yeah. So, so we'll, Pete Augustino and I will review that just to ensure that it it aligns with, the provisions of Indian law that he's referring to. I believe it does, but he and I will align on that and present any additional changes that are needed. But my understanding is that it aligns by, the board giving specific authority to the
superintendent to, again, sign the contracts that are already approved by the only those that are approved by the board. Any questions on on that? No. That's good. So 6220, budget preparation. So that specifically, it adds some of the internal control requirements, but also, specifically includes the the CFO coordination and reporting expectations. So, specifically, the board directs the superintendent in collaboration with the chief financial officer, to
present the budget to the board. And, it yeah. Then it also lays out, like, when presented, the proposed budget shall include as appropriate, and those are all, items that were included, or recommended by Neola or, already present in this in the policy that we have already in place today. And then the bottom, the bottom sentence was was added as well, where it says no funds shall be expended nor any obligation incurred except in accordance with appropriations approved by the board and in compliance with applicable law.
That, is just, again, intended to strengthen the fiscal oversight and alignment with, SPO a alignment. So I I think this is important for the public to understand that we don't look at the operations. We're not developing the budget. By state statute, we approve the budget. And the paragraph three from the from the bottom, the board may amend the budget and approve transfers between appropriations in accordance with applicable law as all such amendments or
transfers shall be presented to the board for approval. Then then that there are two things with that one. It seems circular. Right? The board may amend, and it's presenting it to the board. Yeah. So I don't know how that I I can give you an example of this. It just happened not too long ago when enough came up here and said ask the board to approve a transfer of money from one account to the other. That's a budget amendment, and the board approved it. No money can be moved within the budget from one account to another without the
direct approval of the board. Got it. And, yes, the chief financial officer has come to us on occasion to move education funds to operations. So So yeah. I I think that, you have the power to amend the budget on how that occurs as the CFO or the the superintendent comes to you. And maybe the wording here is a little could be tightened up a little bit better. I think just even the way you explained it, you both have explained it might be Yeah. Might be good. Because I think there's a misunderstanding about the board's role in this.
You don't sue a sponte. We don't what? You don't sue a sponte to amend the budget. Right. So I think fiscal oversight and accountability. Yeah. Is that okay with everybody? If you have a if you have a recommendation for a swap on that, let me know. Yeah. It might be switching the order of the clauses. Okay. So I'll, yes. So I'll I'll update that to make that a little bit more clear. Alright. Either either changing the language or maybe as Pete suggested, maybe, swapping clauses.
Other than the that other than that paragraph, were there any other questions or comments? No. So moving on to eighty three zero five, information security. For this. This just adds cybersecurity protections and incident tracking requirements. There are some, couple provisions that were removed, as recommended by Neola. And, for instance, like the, the bottom one talking about the administrative guidelines, references coming back to the established administrative guidelines.
The superintendent will determine a method for maintaining the repository. So it just it continues to strengthen and enhance, the security in our risk management abilities. So much of much of the language that is already included in that policy is in our current policy, and so there are just a a few different changes, the deletion of the one pair one few sentences and then addition of the other language. Excuse me. Matt, can I have you go back, please? Because I I I didn't quite get what did we change on 6220?
So, going back to 6220, the budget preparation, so that added some the language, basically, collab ensuring that the superintendent, in collaboration with the chief financial officer, is maintaining and reporting the, required data to the, to the board. Okay. Okay. So I I I think on the third from the last paragraph, I think if we insert the clause upon request of the superintendent slash CFO, I think that'll Upon the request of the superintendent and CFO, we do what?
The board may amend the budget and approve transfers between appropriations. I think if we put that clause at the beginning of that, we should be okay. No. I think the transfer of funds that's the amending of budget seems to give us more latitude than I think we actually have. But we can Well, is that true or not? No. You have, you are the fiscal body, so you do have that statutory power to amend it. So that's there's other there's a lot that goes on in this clause that says
in accordance with applicable law because, are we doing an additional appropriation, which requires notice of publication and, or so what is the actual amendment? And then, and it's always easier to amend to reduce the budget if you amend to increase. You almost have to start the whole process over again on budget on the budget process. But it's covered in the clause in accordance with applicable law.
Any other questions? So any, any questions on, eighty three zero five information security? Moving on. So to twenty four thirty one, Interscholastic Athletics. So you'll see, as I referenced earlier, so the there are three options there that were that have x's in between those parentheses. That that was what I was referring to earlier is, like, those were selected. And so when Neola goes to, do the final production after the board is adopted, those will be removed. That was and same thing for the end of option at the end.
So, what this does this this policy, updates program oversight and compliance requirements, specifically those three, provisions that are added to it. And then, at the end, you'll see the there's a grievances. It starts with grievances report regarding the alleged violation of Indiana code twenty thirty three thirteen. It references then the new policy that will follow this one, for 2432.
So it's, connected. There any questions on twenty four thirty one? So twenty four thirty two, are the grievance procedures for violation of the state law limiting participation of transgender girls in athletics. This was a, a formal this establishes formal grievance procedures that are required by state law, by the, the statutory citation I just said. And it ensures compliance and reduces legal risk. The language that is included in this policy, pretty much in its entirety are what
was recommended by, by DiOLA. So the legislature has revised this law on transgender athletes. Is that correct? Yeah. There is a grievance. If you deny somebody the the ability to compete, then there is a grievance process. In some states, the laws are excluding transgender athletes. That's what I thought too. Not in Indiana? I guess not. If the Not in Indiana. I mean, I could see agreements, but the law may preclude that.
I'm not agreeing with that at all just so you all know that. I mean, state law will it will proceed 35. Policy. The state law would proceed with It will proceed. Thank you. Yeah. I know that word, but I couldn't say it. It will proceed. So we have to Twenty thirty three thirty. Maybe we need to see what that law says. We're gonna pull it up right now. So the silence for everyone is that we're looking to see what the law said. And I think the intent here is to allow a grievance by someone who feels
that, someone has been allowed to participate in violation of the law prohibiting or limiting transgender participation. So yeah. That's a little that's a little bit different than Mhmm. Participation. Yeah. If it if it'd be helpful, I could just read the verbatim text of the statute. So it says here under under twenty thirty three dash Thirteen four.
Dash four. Yeah. Do you wanna read it? Yeah. I can I can read it? So Go ahead. The title of it but that provision is athletic team or sport designation, participation on athletic team or sport prohibited. And it says, a school corporation, public school, non public school, or association that organizes, sanctions, or sponsors an athletic team or sport described in section one of this chapter shall expressly designate the athletic team or sport as one of the following. One, a male, men's, or boys' team or sport. Two, a female, women's, or girls' team or sport.
Three, a coeducational or mixed team or sport. And then, letter b of that statute is a male based on a student's biological sex at birth in accordance with the student's genetics and reproductive biology may not participate on an athletic team or sport designated under this section as being a female, women's, or girls' athletic team or sport. So, the as Pete had mentioned, the submission of the grievance, the grievance procedures are
for, you know, if we have, an alleged violation of that of that provision. Okay. Do we need to clarify that anywhere to avoid the kind of misreadings I gave it? Let's see here. So may maybe that first paragraph, it says saying limiting the participation of maybe prohibiting the participation of? I mean, it is a prohibition, not a limit. Yes. I think that that might clarify to change the word limiting to pro prohibiting. So the state law prohibiting the participation. Not participation.
So this was a I'm sorry to ask this at this point, but so is Indiana an early adopter of that? In, '22. Yes. Let's see. 2022. Oh, go ahead. I'm good. I was just gonna ask if there are any other questions or comments on that. Well, there's probably are. But So yeah. Yeah. I mean, the one thing I just wanted to make clear is that, like, you know, our our board policy relating to transgender athletes specifically is aligned with and directed by state law. I under I understand.
So just to be clear about that. I got it. And and so if there are no other questions or comments, I would recommend that the board set, another, session for a first reading of the policies that were proposed. And then at that time, they can also I'll take a look at the the bullying policy and the updates that were made to that, previously as Pew had said. And, maybe that could be presented for as part of the work session, before the reading. Do you, would think sooner than later than May?
Yeah. I mean, the so the there are only, I mean, a a handful of revisions that were identified today. So, I mean, I will probably try to do those tomorrow and then resend those out. So as soon as the board wants to set that, I think this is probably, will be okay. We don't have to decide right now. I I would think. Yeah, late April, early May. Yeah. And you and you could pick this back up on agenda planning too Yeah. As far as Why don't we do that? Listing first reading on a board agenda. Oh, yeah. Okay. Sounds very good. Well, I appreciate all the work you've put into this, and I appreciate the board
coming tonight. And to everyone who is listening and to our two participants, in the audience. Thank you for being here. I'll now adjourn this meeting. Thank you. Okay. There is no mister Ed, clause. Like, I don't know if it's one-sided in that statute. Yeah. Oh,