Board members in attendance:
Caitlin Wright, Alicia Gallegos-Fambrini, Joyce Montgomery, Nora Crivello, JP Anderson, John Glover (web conference)

Staff in attendance (CEO, Directors, and Principals):
Kevin Sved (CEO), Benjamin Moeller, Kirsten Carr, Melissa Alatorre Alnas, James Dent, Sharon Waller, Heather Parsons

Translators: Alex Mijares (GPS), Rita Castaneda (HPS)

Caitrin explained that the reason for the closed session was to discuss the following topic(s): public employment, CEO evaluation.

There were no public comments for the closed session.

The closed session convened at 5:33 pm.

The open session reconvened at 6:11. No actions were taken during the closed session.

Students received awards in a public ceremony.

Joyce moved that the school policies be removed from the consent agenda (the meeting minutes to remain).

There were no public comments concerning the regular agenda.

Nora praised the results and inquired as to the success of the Navi model as applied to partner-school RO Hardin (Hollister USD). John affirmed Nora’s praise. He expressed interest in information related to the progress of ELs and EL reclassification. He also asked about student enrollment in middle school.

Caitrin was impressed by the success of the model in middle school. She expressed interest in the achievement levels of new students vs. returning students. She offered a suggestion that demographic background be presented, and she would like information about SWD students in the analysis.

Kevin focused on Distance From Three (DF3) data. He also mentioned state dashboard performance and colors (growth and achievement status) which were exceptionally strong in many areas at both schools.

On a different subject, Kevin updated the board on CA High-Speed Rail, which is related to our facilities planning for GPS. The key year is now 2020 for this project in our region. Caitrin mentioned the importance of a facilities committee to be prepared for the future. John mentioned the importance of a detailed timeline as part of the plan.

Joyce mentioned the culture survey, specifically comparing and contrasting HPS and GPS. The principals addressed the topic. John suggested referencing the TNTP Survey. Joyce suggested that a survey question related to resources might be revised to improve clarity/accuracy.  Alicia inquired as to Kevin’s interpretation of the survey responses. Kevin reported high teacher retention rates at both schools. John observed that the scores are very high (positive) and have improved over the years. John shared that, contextually, these are good and solid scores. Caitrin also noticed the marked improvements and appreciated the hard work applied in this area. She also appreciated the inclusion of reports from all directors in the packet.

Bryan Adams, financial consultant, provided an update on the financial narrative, including net income numbers, budgets, and projections.

Caitrin reviewed the last governance committee meeting, a key point being development (growth) of the board, preferably by the end of the school year. She also mentioned the importance of connecting with parents at all sites.

Kevin summarized his memo on the topic. Melissa read the new, proposed mission statement. She reviewed the staff survey connected to the mission, which indicated strong buy-in by the staff. Alicia mentioned her interest in including a more explicit identification of targeted student groups. Kevin responded and explained how the green-lighting process reinforces our goal of serving FRL and EL students. John suggested alternative methods of preserving the intention (of the vision and mission). Alicia reiterated the importance of defining target student populations. Caitrin suggested that the values and beliefs might be listed to reinforce the definition of who Navigator Schools serve. Joyce is comfortable with a more general reference. Nora stated that she was in favor of the proposed mission and commended the work to create it. JP agreed. Alicia mentioned her expectations that we address the targeted population explicitly.

Kirsten summarized the charter development process. She highlighted the admission preference plan and solicited the board’s feedback. John mentioned the complexity of determining student eligibility during the application phase. John suggested reaching out to KIPP Bay Area and Joyce suggested reaching out to ACE. John considered the importance of staff diversity, sibling enrollment, and children-of-staff enrollment. Caitrin explained how attendance-area stipulations can promote diversity. Caitrin asked a clarifying question regarding TK, and Kevin explained the inclusion of TK language in the proposed charter. Joyce expanded upon the explanation. John offered further thoughts on TK and charter development. Caitrin suggested clarifying language relating to number of terms.

Kevin reviewed the strategic plan and its development.

Kirsten presented a review of the green-lighting tool. Caitrin solicited feedback from staff concerning the tool. John asked a question about key personnel and transitions during the process. Caitrin expressed interest in learning more about the definition of the phrase viable fundraising strategy (as featured in a slide during the presentation). Kirsten expanded upon key objectives and the evidence associated with them. Kevin reviewed key criteria, priorities, potential risks, and essential value of expansion with the aim of serving the needs of high-need students in new communities.

Nora and Alicia posed questions concerning the NS model in a district identified for expansion. Nora focused on implications of seasonal/migrant attendance. James and Sharon spoke of their experiences in the region and the development and success of the NS model. Caitrin reiterated the importance of community organizing. John explained the value of preparing a plan for state-level approval.

John listed three main concerns/priorities: a well-informed community via powerful communication strategies (existing school community); addition of a CBO; and substantial fund-raising commitments, especially during Year 0 or Year 0-1. Caitrin expanded upon the balance of needs between existing and expansion schools. Caitrin recognized and praised the progress and increased rigor of the green-lighting process, as did John.

This item was deferred to a later date by unanimous consent.

Caitrin summarized the process heretofore regarding the contract and compensation. She explained that this would be a retroactive raise. The CEO salary will be raised by 4.7% retroactive to July 1, 2017.

Caitrin mentioned amendments of dates and salary figures for an at-will employment contract.