You are here: Home / Community Assets Search / SAFE program is now being cut for 2016. What is taking its place? June 17 RPS meeting notes.

SAFE program is now being cut for 2016. What is taking its place? June 17 RPS meeting notes.

 Impact Lvl 1: Diversity and Inclusion ; Education
Public Report on RPS Student and Family Engagement (SAFE) Program led by Rochester Public Schools
Last modified: June 17, 2016

Contents

Highlights

SAFE program is now being cut for 2016. What is taking its place? Notes from June 17 RPS meeting.

Contents

 

Community questions regarding the elimination of SAFE

I had collected the following questions before the June 17 RPS meeting:

  • Given the emphasis to be in compliance with OCR, what programs will replace SAFE?
  • Will these programs connect underserved students with teachers?
  • All research shows that strengthening this relationship has the greatest impact.
  • How will students be encouraged and supported in taking rigorous coursework?
  • Who are the community partners and how will they work with the equity specialists? What relationships and agreements are in place? SAFE is part of a community network focused on similar goals. Is it in the best interest of the district and the community to disrupt this network in favor of an unknown?
  • Has anyone asked the students, teachers, and principals what they think about the SAFE Program being cut?
  • Are there any potential inequities in this new plan to replace SAFE with an unknown? Does this help or harm the 110 students who were receiving quality programming?
  • How will the district measure success?
  • How will progress be reported to ensure that the students in most need are getting support?
  • How will the 110 students served by SAFE this year continue to receive both the opportunities and supports they have come to expect in SAFE? Please ask for details.
  • How will students achieve if they go from the SAFE Program with its focus on skill development and career preparation to talking circles?

 

 

Q/A at Superintendent Meeting Notes and Impression

 

Q/A List

 

These are my notes and impressions from the RPS June 17 Listening Meeting

  • Question: Given the emphasis to be in compliance with OCR, what programs will replace SAFE?
  • RPS Response: "SAFE" content would remain just that its delivery is changing.
  • My impression: Not really clear who really owns this new SAFE content.

 

  • Question: Will these programs connect underserved students with teachers?
  • RPS Response: Confident they will be. For example, Mayo HS's social worker, Juan, will continue to connect with students and teachers. SAFE as a program with dedicated admin did not make it into the new budget. The newly appointed Equity Specialists will also pay a role.
  • My impression: Not really clear who really owns this new SAFE content. Is there too much faith that no coodination is needed?

 

  • Question: All research shows that strengthening this relationship has the greatest impact. How will students be encouraged and supported in taking rigorous coursework?
  • RPS Response: They have confidence the newly formed "team" will continue with the SAFE mission if not its prior structure.
  • My impression: Not clear. But they feel they can.

 

  • Question: Who are the community partners and how will they work with the equity specialists? What relationships and agreements are in place? SAFE is part of a community network focused on similar goals. Is it in the best interest of the district and the community to disrupt this network in favor of an unknown?
  • RPS Response: Same partners should remain from the connections previously made and will continue to be used. Equity Specialists will play a role.

 

  • Question: Has anyone asked the students, teachers, and principals what they think about the SAFE Program being cut? (Question was not asked)
  • RPS Response:
  • My assessment: Based on lack of official communication to Commission I would conclude that a better communication protocol should have been exercised.

 

  • Are there any potential inequities in this new plan to replace SAFE with an unknown? Does this help or harm the 110 students who were receiving quality programming?
  • RPS Response: The current students will continue to receive equivalent quality programming via the new structure.
  • My impression: A distributed model in theory could be made to work. But as one of the attendees said, having been a teacher, she was so glad to finally see a SAFE coordination structure to ensure sharing of best practices, strategies and connection. Before SAFE, it was left to each school's own device. It was not optimal and confusing.

 

  • How will the district measure success?
  • RPS Response: Not very clear. United Way had received reporting before. Same data would be collected presumably. Juan (Mayo social worker) cited anecdotal stories (and very compelling).
  • My impression: RPS does not seem to have accountability data readily available stakeholders. They do have anecdotal evidence which they don't seem to share with the public or the volunteers (at least via the web). I expressed my concern the lack of visible accountability will only get worse.

 

  • How will progress be reported to ensure that the students in most need are getting support?
  • RPS Response: same as above.

 

  • How will the 110 students served by SAFE this year continue to receive both the opportunities and supports they have come to expect in SAFE?
  • RPS Response: same as above.

 

 

My General Impression

 

Community members expressed concern:

1. Lack of formal communication:

Folks heard the elimination through the grapevine. Not a proper way to interlock with concerned community partners and citiizens and volunteers.

Let alone the 100 plus students.

Caught many of the stakeholders by surprise. Concerned the lack of communication will cast doubts to students as to RPS commitment.

2. Why there is no "name" for the "new program"?

Why not just keep the SAFE name? If supposedly the same support is available just via a different delivery method.

3. Lack of accountability and explanation of SAFE program from RPS.

Not visible at least to volunteers and community members.

Would the future be the same?

4. Didn't the passing of the referendum suppose to ensure no RPS support cuts?

 

 

 

PB Editorial: Save the SAFE Program

 

LINK to PB article

 

 

.

 

 

 

  

 

Related Reports

 

 

Pinned Rochester Public Schools organization and project reports

. Project Report of Rochester Public Schools Strategic Plan : November 11, 2024 : Rochester Public Schools Referendum Nov 2024
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Commitment, Diversity and Inclusion, Education, Governance/Public Policy
Impact Lvl2: C2C: 3rd Grade Reading, C2C: 8th Grade Math, C2C: HS Graduation, C2C: Post-Secondary, C2C: Workforce Participation, Higher-Education

RPS Superintendent Video and Presentation Slides

Referendum to support: Strong Communities; Strong Schools; Strong Young People

PB Reporting on Referendum Efforts and Results


Project Report of Family and Community Engagement (RPS) : October 21, 2024 : RPS Family Engagement Reports
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2: C2C: 3rd Grade Reading

Oct 2024 Reports

Reading Literacy Updates


Project Report of Rochester Public Schools Strategic Plan : September 29, 2023 : Technology Referendum for the Rochester schools
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Commitment, Education, Governance/Public Policy, STEM, Technology Enablement
Impact Lvl2: C2C: Post-Secondary, C2C: Workforce Participation

1. Post Bulletin: Rochester 10 Year, $ 10M+ school funding referendum Op ED PB: Kent Pekel: "Why I recommended a technology referendum for the Rochester schools"; 2. School Board Study Session; 3. Official YouTube Presentation


Project Report of Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights) : September 15, 2023 : RPS Board Consider Updating District Equity Policy
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2: C2C: 3rd Grade Reading, C2C: 8th Grade Math, C2C: Post-Secondary, C2C: Workforce Participation

RPS Board Study Session video recording; Proposed Equity Policy; PB Reporting


Project Report of Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights) : July 26, 2023 : 2022-2023 RPS Disipline Data
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2: C2C: 3rd Grade Reading, C2C: 8th Grade Math, C2C: Post-Secondary, C2C: Workforce Participation, Higher-Education

According to the district’s data, suspensions increased from 1,224 in 2021-22 to 1,523 in 2022-23, representing a jump of 24.4%."


Project Report of Rochester Public Schools Strategic Plan : April 25, 2023 : Rochester Public Schools Strategic Plan 2022
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education, Governance/Public Policy
Impact Lvl2: C2C: 3rd Grade Reading, C2C: 8th Grade Math, C2C: Post-Secondary, C2C: Workforce Participation, Higher-Education

1. 2022 Strategic Plan and extracted sections. 2. RPS Strategic Plan Building Blocks 


Project Report of RPS American Indian Education : October 06, 2022 : American Indian Education at RPS
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education, Food
Impact Lvl2:

 October 10, 2022 Indigenous Peoples' Day


Project Report of Rochester Public Schools Strategic Plan : August 09, 2022 : Plans to Strengthen Belonging and Behavior During the 2022-2023 School Year
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Commitment, Diversity and Inclusion, Education, Governance/Public Policy
Impact Lvl2: C2C: Prenatal-K Development, C2C: Kindergarten Readiness, C2C: 3rd Grade Reading, C2C: 8th Grade Math, C2C: Post-Secondary, C2C: Workforce Participation, Human Resource


Project Report of Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights) : July 20, 2022 : Outcome and Discipline Data 2021-2022
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2:

RPS 2021-2022 Monitoring Reports


Organization Report: March 29, 2022 : Rochester Public Schools Board Self-Evaluation
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2:

2022 RPS School Board Self Evaluation Framework; Video Recording


Project Report of Rochester Public Schools Strategic Plan : March 28, 2022 : RPS School Board Meeting - 3/22/22
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2: C2C: Prenatal-K Development, C2C: Kindergarten Readiness, C2C: 3rd Grade Reading, C2C: 8th Grade Math, C2C: HS Graduation, C2C: Post-Secondary, C2C: Workforce Participation

Strategic Action Plan - Focus Group and Survey Results


Project Report of Family and Community Engagement (RPS) : January 12, 2022 : Family and Community Engagement (RPS) Report
Impact Lvl1: Caring Relationship, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2: C2C: Prenatal-K Development, C2C: Kindergarten Readiness, C2C: 3rd Grade Reading, C2C: 8th Grade Math, C2C: HS Graduation, C2C: Post-Secondary, C2C: Workforce Participation

January Family Engagement Video Recordings


Project Report of Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights) : July 21, 2020 : Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights) 2019 -2020
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2:

2019 and 2020 RPS Data: July 14, 2020 School Board Meeting, 2019-2020 First Semester, Achievement and Integration Plan Updates 2020

 


Project Report of Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights) : September 23, 2019 : Analysis of RPS referal data
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2:

Phil Wheeler analysis of RPS referral data.


Project Report of Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights) : July 17, 2019 : Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights)
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2: C2C: 8th Grade Math, C2C: Post-Secondary, C2C: Workforce Participation, Higher-Education

2018-2019 Report presented to RPS school board and comparison with 2018 reporting. 


Project Report of Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights) : August 24, 2017 : August 2017 Update of June 27 RPS Board Study of 2016-2017 discipline data
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2:

August updating the 2017-06-27 RPS Board Study of discipline data with school breakdown. 


Project Report of Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights) : March 09, 2016 : Consultant interim identification on barriers
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education
Impact Lvl2:

Great Lakes Equity Center has identified 6 barriers for equity progress.


Project Report of Closing referral disparities (resolution agreement with Office of Civil Rights) : January 05, 2016 : An openBEAM 5+1 proposal to address school disciplinary dispairty
Impact Lvl1: Children & Youth, Diversity and Inclusion, Education, Governance/Public Policy
Impact Lvl2:

 The Rochester Public School District is taking the first steps to address a disproportionate disciplinary rate for black and Hispanic students. A community engagement session to get input and solicit involvement from community members will be held at 5:30 p.m. Jan. 7 at Riverside Elementary School. I believe that conversation is necessary but not sufficient. We need to follow up with actions. Here is a 5+1 action plan.

 


Back To Top

 

Site Information
Project Phase Definitions
The following defines the various project phases:
  1. Available - a product, program or service is in production
  2. Develop - program or application is being developed
  3. Plan - idea is solid, stakeholders are identified, and there is strong commitment to go forward from all parties.
  4. Concept Phase - idea scoped out with enough details to give an early sizing and/or to build a proof of concept
    demonstration
  5. Pre-concept Phase - an early idea or a requirement.
About Beam

Community Beam (dmcbeam.org) is a registry of private and public resources (organizations, projects, initiatives, programs) that underpin economic and social developments of greater Rochester:

  • For the commercial sector, we tend to register startup activities (new companies and new commercial projects) that bring diversification and high-impact opportunities to the area.
  • For the non-profit sector, we wish to shine light on all the organizations and services that otherwise labor under relative obscurity.
  • Our hope is that dmcbeam.org will encourage cross-sector collaborations and creative solutions.

While there are a number of registries in the community, dmcbeam.org's  distinct value is to pilot a database with a data structure and categorizations that answer the questions such as: What organizations or projects/programs in our community that have purported relevance with some of the over-arching focuses put forward by initiatives such as DMC, J2G and Health Improvements?

This database could be used as one of the ways to explore the capacities of the community. If you are someone on an exploratory journey to learn about the greater Rochester community. dmcbeam.org could be an interesting first step.

Links to Beam sub-sites 
Sample of Beam sub-sites: