Bill reported a smooth start to the school year, noting high staff retention. He highlighted the new Alumni Support and Rising Leaders program. The Board acknowledged Middle School Academic Dean Megan Graul, whose op-ed was recently published stressing the importance of math education. Bill announced a $15,000 Department of Education grant to provide tutoring for about 30 K–3 students through the Springboard program. Trustees also recognized the work of the Succession Committee, chaired by Anne with Sarah, Sherriff, and Amy, for guiding the transition planning process.

It was decided that the the October 2 meeting will be held remotely, with discussion to include MCAS data and the Executive Director’s evaluation. An additional in-person meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, October 28 at 5:45 PM to review stakeholder input from the succession process. The November 6 meeting will remain on the calendar as a placeholder, to be used if further board action is needed.

The Board reviewed and approved the updated DESE Accountability Plan, which is required as part of the charter renewal cycle. Bill explained that while the plan’s key design elements remain the same, measures were refined to better reflect current practice, including the use of mCLASS for early literacy, updated ANet reporting, and alignment with the new teacher evaluation system. 

The Board reviewed annual updates to the Employee Guidelines and Student & Family Handbook, along with several related policies. Patrick explained that most revisions were administrative in nature and highlighted updates to comply with new state guidance on medication administration, noting that Springfield Prep’s operations were already aligned with the requirements. Trustees also discussed the ratification of the school’s annual standing medication order.   In addition, updates to Title IX and nondiscrimination policies were presented, including designating the Executive Director as the appeal officer in line with counsel’s advice.

Anne Malone reported on the Executive Director transition process. She reminded the Board that it decided to pursue a solo Executive Director model, and that stakeholder listening sessions would be held in September and October to gather input from staff, families, and community members. Trustees will be asked to attend at least one session. Garth noted that the timeline is ambitious and emphasized the importance of pivoting if the process develops in ways not originally anticipated.

Feedback from the listening sessions will inform refinements to the job description and the overall selection process, which is planned for October through January, with the goal of a final decision early 2026. The spring months will then focus on supporting the incoming Executive Director. Trustees underscored the importance of a transparent process and agreed that the first step is to listen to stakeholders before making further determinations.

During discussion, Sally asked whether a search firm would be used. Anne explained that the committee does not plan to engage a search firm at this stage but that it will consider stakeholder input before considering next steps in the search process. Mary Kate asked how families view the Executive Director’s role and how this perception has evolved. Bill responded that long-standing families know him well, while newer families have had less direct contact as principals have assumed greater leadership visibility.

Trustees also discussed whether the Board should vote on the draft Executive Director job description before it goes through the community input process. Bill noted that there is no specific requirement to approve a job description at this stage. He suggested the Board could wait until after stakeholder sessions and consider approving a final version then. Trustees agreed it was not necessary to vote at this stage and that the committee would bring back a revised job description, if needed, following community input.

Bill left the meeting.  Sarah then outlined the timeline for the annual Executive Director evaluation. Bill completed his self-evaluation in advance of the meeting, and trustees were asked to submit their evaluations by September 15. The Governance Committee will review the compiled results at its September 22 meeting and share a report with the Board at the October meeting. The process is expected to conclude in November with Board approval of the evaluation, Executive Director goals, and compensation. Trustees agreed on the importance of completing the process on time this year.

Sarah reviewed the evaluation timeline, noting that Board members should submit evaluations by September 15 so that the Governance Committee can synthesize results in time for discussion at the October 28 meeting.