This is the second full week of the 2025 General Assembly and all 4 Public Education’s priority education bills are still in play, either being heard on the chamber floor ( HB1954 ), advancing through the committees on the way to the floor, ( SB977 , SB979 , SB1262 ) or still in Committee ( HB 2118 , HB2196 ) so far. Meanwhile work on the budget has begun.  The following are details about 4 Public Education’s six priority education bills in three categories, and the budget that pertains to K-12 public education.  Restorative Practices in Schools Restorative practices in school are known to produce positive outcomes  and it is time for the Commonwealth to make the investments to bring Restorative practices into more of its school systems. Focusing on positive relationships and using evidence-based approaches to guide student behavior are restorative practices that are designed to prioritize students’ safety by helping students to feel welcome and supported. These practices have been shown to lead to fewer disciplinary issues and a safer and more positive school environment.. Restorative practices  emphasize conflict resolution and repairing harm rather than the more traditional and punitive discipline that sometimes pushes students out of the classroom. Restorative practices can help to promote respect, dignity, and mutual concern; repair harm within the school community; create emotionally and physically safe learning environments; give all students a voice, and; empower students and staff to take personal responsibility for the school community. Two of 4 Public Education’s priority bills call for funding a pilot program on Restorative Schools and there are two quick and easy calls to action readers can complete to tell our legislators to pass the bills that support Restorative Schools. They are linked here for the House of Delegates  and Senate . Both bills are important so please answer both calls to action.  New Accountability Framework In 2024 the Virginia Department of Education approved a revised accountability framework scheduled to go into effect in 2025. However there are problems with that revised framework making it essential to conduct a thorough review and make any necessary changes before the revised framework is implemented.  There are two easy and quick calls to action telling our legislators to vote YES on the bills that support delaying implementation of the revised accountability framework until appropriate reviews are conducted. The bills are linked here for the House of Delegate  and Senate . Both bills are important so please answer both calls to action.  Funding for K-12 public schools.  Public education is a cornerstone of our democracy, yet Virginia seriously underfunds its public schools, as was documented by Virginia’s Joint Legislative and Audit Review Commission (JLARC). By way of example, the Commonwealth’s per student funding level is 41st in the United States, between that of Mississippi and Missouri. This problem is made worse by the fact that public schools are primarily funded by localities, largely through property taxes.  This means localities with lower income levels have less funding available for education. School divisions in rural areas, those that have large immigrant populations, or those that are in communities with a high share of poverty, have fewer resources per student to invest in schools, making it harder for their students to obtain a quality education.  The Commonwealth Institute reports  “... over the past few years, community advocates in partnership with education champions in the legislature have made progress — winning historic investments in our P-12 schools, with more of it distributed in an equitable way. And with a system of intentional, equity-focused policies that includes investing in schools and families, we can make high-quality education a reality for every student in every zip code.” But we have a long way to go before schools in rural areas, in low income communities, with large immigrant communities receive the funding they need to support students in their communities the way they need to be supported.  There are currently bills in both the House of Delegates and in the Senate to implement the recommendations of JLARC and improve the funding of Virginia’s public schools. Please take action on both bills. The Education Budget The money committees in the House of Delegates and Senate are currently evaluating the Governor’s budget amendment proposals  for 2025-2026, and those committees will publish their proposed amendments on February 4. That will be followed by a period of negotiation between the Governor and legislature culminating in a revised budget.  As in past years and despite surplus revenues being available recently, the governor’s proposed budget amendments make very few substantive improvements in our public schools . Instead, most of the “improved funding” to education claimed by the Governor is actually an allocation to school construction using funds that were already set aside for that purpose or for public education in general, and some one-time funding for new tests. Most disturbing, in his amended budget the governor proposes that some of the public school funds be diverted to private schools. This is despite research showing mixed to negative outcomes on student achievement when states offer vouchers. Also, it is well known that the private schools receiving the money are not held accountable, are not prevented from discriminating against student applicants or those enrolled, and lack transparency measures. This proposed diversion of funds to private schools is consistent with the Governor’s recent efforts to move toward privatization of public education in Virginia.  The Commonwealth Institute explains :   Diverting public funding to private schools will exacerbate financial challenges for public schools. Using state dollars – whether in the form of tax credits or opportunity scholarships — for private schools leaves fewer resources available for public school students. And research shows that private school vouchers do not improve – and often harm – student outcomes. This $50 million (in the Governor’s proposed budget for private school scholarships) could instead go toward addressing the decades-long underfunding of the public school system. There are bound to be some heated discussions over the budget this year, and 4 Public Education will relay any needs for advocacy. Meanwhile, for more information on Virginia’ budget, including the education component of the budget, readers can attend a webinar on Wednesday, February 5. 2025. Please register at this link .  Recap of the Calls to Action included above - please click to support! SB977 Funding for Public Education (Senate) HB1954 Funding for Public Education (House of Delegates) SB979 Evaluation of Public Schools (Senate) HB2118 Evaluation of Public Schools (House) SB1262 Restorative Schools Project (Senate) HB2196 Restorative Schools Project (House) THANK YOU FOR RAISING YOUR HAND FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION!

Sex Education in Virginia's K-12 Public Schools The Family Life Education (FLE) curriculum in Virginia is an abstinence-based curriculum taught in grades K-12 with age- and developmentally-appropriate lessons covering Human Growth and Development (HGD) and Social Emotional Health (SEH). which promotes parental involvement, fosters self-care and protective behavior, explains sexual development, and provides mechanisms for coping with peer pressure and stresses. The Virginia Department of Education provides standards and guidelines  for instruction on a “ variety of issues  including family and community relationships, mental health, responsibility and disease prevention.” The lessons are sequential, so that older grade levels build on what is learned earlier, and additional material is added as students mature. Many school districts provide grade-by-grade public overviews of their program (e.g., Fairfax County , Alexandria City , Prince William County , etc.), and they typically provide community review opportunities.  All school districts must provide opt-out opportunities for students to withdraw completely from FLE lessons or to opt-out of specific lessons. Currently, there are efforts in many districts to ensure that FLE can be inclusive of diverse student populations found in Virginia schools. The American Academy of Pediatricians  has found that many “ systematic reviews  of the literature  have indicated  that comprehensive sex education promotes healthy sexual behaviors.” Access to comprehensive sex education has many benefits including building healthy relationships; delayed sexual activity; reduced rates of sexually transmitted diseases, sexual activity, and teen pregnancy; and increased use of contraception and condoms.  Sex education has long been a focus of culture wars, and FLE is no different. One thing that makes it such a flash point is different viewpoints on what should be taught, and when it should be taught. However, great efforts are made in Virginia for parental/guardian involvement and the ability to opt out of the program.  Nevertheless, the FLE curriculum and volunteer committee who provides input on FLE, FLE Curriculum Advisory Committee (FLECAC) , are frequently the target of angry rhetoric  by organized groups who seem to fundamentally disagree with the existence of sex education in public schools, or feel it should exclude LGBTQIA+ students and families. Local groups, parents, guardians, and students have organized  to encourage positive change in FLE programs.  The FLE curriculum is sometimes confused with the School Health Profiles Survey , a national system of surveys implemented by local and state departments of health, which use the data collected in schools to direct resources and programming. See the Fairfax County Youth Survey  to see the kind of data collected and how it is used. In Fairfax County, FCPS values public input; therefore, they publish the FLE meeting dates, notes, members, and more on the FLECAC web page . If you would like to learn more, meetings are held at the Gatehouse cafeteria ( 8115 Gatehouse Road Falls Church, VA 22042) from 7-9pm on the second Tuesday of the month from September-April. The next meetings will be on February 12, March 12, and April 9 in 2025.

When I first heard that President Trump was going to abolish the U.S. Department of Education (USDoE), I was horrified, but now, I may be on the bandwagon. Wait! Hear me out. I would NEVER want to abolish a fully functioning USDoE that supports our public schools, students, educators, and families. But that is not what we have anymore. We have a full blown propaganda machine that makes unprofessional posts, pushes school vouchers, and likely doesn’t know IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) from a hole in the ground. In week 1, President Trump’s USDE went from this to this. Gone is the information that parents/guardians and students would want to know about student loans or education grants, data, and laws. Erased are photos of children with disabilities, including a girl with down syndrome. Instead, they have an ambiguous catchphrase combined with 1984-level Ministry of Truth propaganda about ending “Biden’s book ban hoax,” celebrating sucking money from public schools and eliminating diversity, equity, and inclusion. Oddly enough, they have not yet shut down commentary on their Facebook posts, but the outraged responses to their edu-propaganda are epic. So epic that SPLC-defined extremist groups like Parents Defending Education are directing their propaganda consumers to the USDoE Facebook posts. It would be funny if it weren’t so villainous. However, the responses to the U.S. Department of Edu-Propaganda are inspiring. It is clear that NO ONE is standing down from fighting for public schools, our students, and our staff. Nor will we back down at 4 Public Education. We will be there, side-by-side to push back on the propaganda and fight fiendish takeover of our public schools. Join us. Read our blogs. Sign up for our newsletter. Donate so that we can continue our work. Join local groups that are fighting the privatization of our valuable public schools. If we don't fight for it, we won't have it four years from now. That applies to public schools, civil rights, kindness, ethics, and the rule of law. We must focus on what matters. I hope that public education matters to each and every one of you.

The question of what makes a good school has never been more complicated, and questions like “What are we educating students for?” have never been more relevant. Those are questions Virginia educators have long asked. Unfortunately, the most recently proposed answers from the Governor and Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) are not what kids, grads, or Virginia need. There are four important reasons the Governor’s VDOE School Performance and Support Framework (Framework) should never be implemented. 1. It reduces the time and quality of instruction The Governor’s VDOE Framework hampers and diminishes instructional time and the quality of the instruction that can be delivered in K-12 schools. Already administering the SOLs takes approximately 5 weeks of the instructional year. New growth assessments implemented in the last couple of years add testing windows in fall and spring, and the VALSS which replaces PALS assesses K-3rd reading in each of the early years. The Framework’s 5th grade 8th grade, and new 3E assessments which will include various career and technology evaluations such as the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) will add to the testing load. Assessments can be expected to continue to proliferate as VDOE chooses and will add to the already staggering level of tests and reporting. Any system wide or large scale new programs should be required to enhance instruction and increase class learning time, not decrease it. For 30 years we have relied on multiple choice testing as the primary measure of student achievement and school quality. Sadly that policy has not accomplished any of the stated goals for using it. Even the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) acknowledges that their methodology has not moved the needle on student achievement to a statistically significant degree. Even if we are to accept that their methodology is valid, standardized testing and mass assessment has been particularly ineffective when it comes to the most vulnerable students, particularly around what has been called the “achievement gap.” Yet, the Governor and VDOE adamantly persist in implementing a Framework that creates an entirely new layer of assessments at 3rd, 5th, 8th, and in high school. How much education time will that take away from our students? 2. It narrows student curricula and choices The Framework places restrictions that narrow rather than expand curriculum choices. The VDOE website insists that their 3E’s readiness Framework adds more options for students. However, at this time, students can select individual explorations to sample different fields of interest from music to computers, or from cars to cosmetology or other interests and career possibilities across 17 fields Virginia schools provide. Their elective choices belong to them. By adding the 3E’s, students from middle school onward will be tracked into one of three categories: Enrollment (College or trade school), Enlistment (Military), or Employment (Work). The decision about “what do I want to do with my life,” will effectively be moved earlier for the next generation by at least 5 years--to 12 and 13 year-olds. Forget students deciding for themselves. Their paths for life will be decided by the state and guidance counselors, with the approval of a parent when they are in 7th grade. Their career choices will be streamlined to one goal, in an employment landscape that predicts they will hold multiple jobs, even multiple careers across their work life. 3. It subverts the mission of public education The Framework is destructive to schools’ primary missions of knowledge, skills, and civic understanding. The Framework shifts the entire purpose of K-12 Education towards an education whose primary purpose is to determine a particular career, and create workers. The increased assessments make sure early career choice and lock-in will be the focus. The Framework neglects any subject field that does not provide immediate workforce supply for existing, mostly regional, companies. That approach will reduce study of any fields that uphold and inform immensely important areas of civil, family, and personal lives, including entrepreneurship, small business skills, and creative fields (e.g., theater, visual arts, music). The Framework’s calculations of quality at the school level has very specific requirements and penalties. For instance for student performance to count a full point in VDOE’s readiness ratings students in each category must either complete a CTE credential in a specific field the state selects as high needs, or get an ASVAB score of 65 or higher, or take 3 college credit courses and score B or better in each. Anything less will negatively impact their school on the school’s performance ratings from 1.0 for that student to .75 (or lower) in the calculations. As a result, this structure will create incentive for schools to direct kids into programs that will provide better school ratings rather than better choices for the individual student. The Governor has created an entirely new office in the state government for the sole purpose of collecting data to orient the K to college Virginia Education systems toward an employment-only set of goals. It’s called the Virginia Office of Education Economics, (VOEE). VOEE will choose which careers will be eligible for students to gain credit for their school. Given the proliferation of reports and dashboards the VOEE has been producing, it is likely it will become an embedded and expensive way to measure what our children are not learning by giving them tests that satisfy employers, but students don’t need–unless they are applying for an entry-level minimum wage job at the local mass employer. The Accountability portion of the Framework will be of little or no use to increase learning. The ratings have gone through several naming conventions due to public outcry. They have changed from actual grades to colors (red, yellow, green and blue) to finally Distinguished, On Track, Off Track and Needs Intensive Support. Though the names have changed, the policies and intent behind them have not been altered. The VDOE’s own projections reveal categories that will sort schools into categories that have more to do with socio-economic status of neighborhoods than school quality. An analysis of the VDOE projections reveals that: “Distinguished” labels will apply mostly to schools in more affluent communities. “Schools labeled as Distinguished spend over $1,000 more per student on average in state and local funding than schools labeled as ‘Needs Intensive Support.’” While “Off Track” and “Needs Intensive Support” will become the category for alternative, remedial, working class, and working poor Title 1 schools. “Teacher vacancy rates in Needs Intensive Support schools are five times higher than in Distinguished schools. Nearly 1 in 5 teaching positions in Needs Intensive Support schools are either vacant or filled by provisionally licensed teachers, compared to just 1 in 15 in Distinguished schools.” These categories have been confirmed by the VDOE’s own projections of which schools will receive each rating. That means the VDOE accountability and accreditation Framework will only serve to reinforce the mental health problems and deprivation of less affluent communities, and bolster housing and economic cycles that have led to segregation and housing shortages Analysis reveals that “Nearly 7 in 10 students in Needs Intensive Support schools are students of color. The share of English Learner (EL) students in Needs Intensive Support schools is more than double that of Distinguished schools.” Although there have been recent increases in state school funding, state budgets continue to exist with a status quo between schools that get support and those that don’t, which keeps us below the national average on most funding points. This long standing underfunding of public schools is answered in the Governor’s Framework by a School Improvement grant system in which schools with low ratings must apply for a grant that can only give them up to $500 per student, which will likely provide less than it takes to pay for the bureaucracy of the reports and forms and agreements they must create and monitor. To fund these grants, the VDOE plans to use funds allocated to the school by the federal ESSA program, but the locality will have to apply to the state for the money allocated to them by the federal government. 4. It adds expensive bureaucracy, not instruction What the Framework calls “support” consists predominantly of management consultants. The VDOE’s plan describes “innovation” and exciting new designs, but a deeper look reveals strategies that have been used over the last 30 years to prove schools are underperforming rather than helping schools meet the needs of their students. The bulk of the Governor’s proposed funding will go to specialists and outside managers, not to classroom resources and in-school staff. The resulting “support” does not address the “how” of resolving real instructional needs, achievement gaps or meeting the challenges of the changing work and culture landscape. Instead it tackles how to manage the teachers and students so they deliver the numbers VDOE wants. Notably, this method of “consult and break” has been used for years with dire results in other states as a means to disrupt and shift from local management to privatized school and commercial district managers. It would be detrimental to the state and to our children to implement an infrastructure that does not meet the needs of now nor correct the missteps of the past. The History of Education Mass education in the public schools of the 20th century accomplished great feats for humanity: reducing disease, increasing lifespan, raising economic potential for most countries of the world, and exploding the potential of human creativity in every field by educating all students in our sciences, social sciences, and arts to a level once reserved for only elites. The early 21st century has already almost broken that incredible progress and the schools that created it. Now, if the schools of the near future are to survive and prepare children for their whole lives, not just their 9 to 5 life, we must abandon the stress, break, and punish models of the last 30 years and ask much deeper questions about what is necessary for our children and our human societies to be healthy and thriving, and how to design that success. The Future of Education The currently accelerating speed-of-change is one of the more pressing reasons we cannot opt for an old fashioned, "train them to make buggy whips in 1910" kind of choice. AI, technology, and a changing economic landscape is altering faster than companies can keep up. As Forbes put it, “In 2030 there will be 30 Technology Companies by 2050 there will be 10.” The World Economic Forum estimates that by 2027 44% of workers' core skills will be changed or disrupted and 41% of companies will have reduced their work forces. The 2028 graduates who entered high school in fall of 2024 will already be entering a changed job market. It is not that we shouldn’t equip students to hold jobs, but that we must be more deliberate and cautious and simultaneously more discerning and insightful than Governor Youngkin’s and the VDOE plans allow. Certainly Governor Youngkin’s hastily designed and deliberately destructive Framework, which seeks to prove one more time that the schools which have given us so much are failing, will not give our students and Virginia the thriving future they deserve. There are currently bills in both the House and Senate to call for a review and report on the controversial revision of the school performance accountability system. Take Action Now Please take action on both bills. Tell Delegates in the House of Delegates Education Committee to Vote YES on HB 2118 to require fair and equitable evaluations of public schools and improve student growth and learning outcomes across the Commonwealth. Tell your Legislators to Vote YES on SB979 to require fair and equitable evaluations of public schools. However, between this session and next year, we need to do more than just delay. We need to make a new and better plan that gives the children and youth of Virginia a chance at their dreams.

A Tough Week for Transgender Students and Families After years of attacks on rights of transgender students, this past week has seen an onslaught of anti-transgender media, court cases, and federal and state activity. For parents of transgender students, transgender students, and the transgender community, it is just too much. They are exhausted, so all allies need to continue to step up to fight alongside them against such attacks. “Children's well-being now, ability to live life without scarred spirits, and their very lives a re at stake.”   - Robert Rigby Since last Wednesday, we have seen almost  nonstop attacks on the rights of transgender students to exist. Here is a timeline:  December 4: Opening arguments began in the US v. Skrmetti  Supreme Court case where the state of Tennessee is trying to eliminate gender affirming care for transgender children, despite parental consent and doctor’s approval. December 6: A Fairfax Circuit Court hearing on Jane Doe v. FCSB  where America First Legal argued a religious objection on behalf of the children of a West Springfield parent, Stephanie Lundquist-Arora, against pronoun and bathroom policies in Fairfax County. December 9: Yet another Federalist opinion piece was published attacking transgender civil rights and transgender allies by Stephanie Lundquist-Arora, Independent Women’s Network (IWN) Fairfax Chapter Lead. December 10: Trump nominated known transphobic election denier Harmeet Dillon as the Assistant Attorney General (AG) in charge of the civil rights division in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). December 11: A vote was passed in the House on a Republican-amended military budget bill that will ban gender affirming care for military family children. December 11:  Chesterfield County School Board undermined the safety of transgender students through a controversial policy revision. Below, I will cover these attacks on the rights of transgender students to exist in life and public school; however, before doing so, I would like to remind everyone of some successes in the past week. Although we will need to continue the fight for LGBTQIA+ civil rights and the right of transgender people to exist, we also need to celebrate our successes: Prattville Pride  won an injunction to permit them to participate in the Prattville annual Christmas parade, Montana Supreme Court blocked a ban  on healthcare for transgender youth, the U.S. Supreme Court turned away a Wisconsin case  against transgender students, and local group, Transgender Education Association  won an award for their advocacy. Click on the arrows below to read more about about this rough week of attacks on transgender civil rights.  1. Gender Affirming Care under Fire at the Supreme Court ( L.W. v. Skrmetti ) On December 4th, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) began hearing oral arguments in the case of L.W. v. Skrmetti , to determine whether Tennessee Senate Bill 1 prohibiting gender-affirming care for minors violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Tennessee, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP brought the lawsuit on behalf of a 16-year-old transgender girl, her parents, two other plaintiff families, and a Memphis-based physician.  Glorious but cold day for Supreme Court rally Lambda Legal  described the case as whether “transgender minors in Tennessee can access the same medical care that is commonly provided to non transgender minors and whether their families can make healthcare decisions in consultation with their doctors without the interference of politicians.” The lawyers argued that the Tennessee law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution because it “unfairly discriminates against transgender youth by denying them the same care that is available to other youth, such as hormone therapy or puberty blockers.” Lambda Legal noted two historic firsts  associated with this case: the Solicitor General of the United States, Elizabeth Prelogar, also represented the interests of the transgender community, and this is the first case at the Supreme Court where parties are represented by an openly transgender lawyer, Chase Strangio, co-counsel from the ACLU. I and other FCPS Pride board members attended the rally in support of the civil rights of transgender youth and their families. As you can see from the photos below, the Freedom to Be Ourselves rally  was a glorious affair with music, rainbows, and people from all over the country who showed up in the extreme cold to support civil rights for transgender people. Straight, gay, trans, non-binary, and cis people of all races and religions rallied against the dark disinformation campaign from the sad, small affair with paid agitators and angry operatives screaming negativity and hate against parents and their children in our rally. The outcome of this case will have far reaching consequences. Over half of the states have banned hormone therapies for transgender youth, and far-right groups are targeting trans youth with coordinated disinformation campaigns and legal cases (see below). In Virginia, a negative SCOTUS decision would make school district defense of supportive transgender student policies more critical, but also more difficult. Sign made by parents at the Free to Be Ourselves rally 2. Religious Objection to Using Pronouns and Bathroom Access ( Jane Doe v. FCSB ) On December 6th, Judge Kassabian heard a demurrer request by the FCSB in the Fairfax Circuit Court after America First Legal added new plaintiffs to its lawsuit. Fundamentally, the lawsuit asserts that religious freedom supersedes other freedoms, and therefore permits violation of FCPS anti-bullying policies and infringement of the rights of transgender students to their pronouns, names, and right to use the bathroom of their gender.  In August, America First Legal added three additional plaintiffs, the minor sons of Stephanie Lundquist-Arora, after the claims of the graduated high school senior, Jane Doe, were rendered moot because Doe had graduated. Lundquist Arora is known as the IWN Fairfax Chair , a “concerned parent” on Fox and Newsmax, and a columnist (for various far right media outlets) whose opinion pieces regularly attack FCPS policies and personnel, and LGBTQIA rights. News reports indicate that Lundquist-Arora dropped out of the 2023  school board election after video surfaced of her mocking an autistic student . Last Friday, the FCSB lawyer, Noah Sullivan of Gentry Lock, argued to dismiss the case based on standing questioning “What real  conflict is there between [the plaintiffs] religious practices and what the School Board’s policies require?” Sullivan declared that the plaintiffs admit that there is no conflict, rather raise “erroneous procedural arguments.”  There was a mildly humorous point during the trial when Ian Prior started to say “LCPS” instead of “FCPS” during his argument. This was funny, as Prior, the America First Legal counsel, is the founder of Fight for Schools , and has been deeply involved  in the culture wars  in Loudoun County  Public Schools (LCPS).  Ultimately, the judge ruled that four counts will continue because they cover constitutional issues, while three were dismissed with leave for the plaintiffs to amend their complaint. Prior has trumpeted the decision as a “major win;” however, in truth, this hearing merely determined that the four “pronoun” counts will go to trial, but the three “bathroom” counts were dismissed. At trial, the plaintiff’s will have to prove their case of “compelled speech” which may be difficult as no one is forcing speech. The students are fully within their rights to avoid using pronouns, like the teacher in the Vlaming case . There was quite a bit of conservative media in the audience, including Luke Rosiak of the Daily Wire and Nick Minock of WJLA, both of whom reported on the case. Unfortunately, Rosiak’s reporting mostly recycled Prior’s talking points, referred to cisgender girls as “normal girls,” and included several irrelevant, inflammatory points to rile up his conservative readers. Similarly, Minock reported Prior’s inaccurate statements about FCPS policy as if they were true; however, he did reach out to others for comment. Interestingly, neither reporter mentioned the petitioner’s name, despite Lundquist-Arora being familiar to both of them. One should know that there are deep connections among Rosiak, Prior, and Lundquist-Arora, all of whom do work with (or for?) Independent Women’s Forum (IWF), a Project 2025 signatory, and IWF’s affiliated groups like IWN. However, for the most complete and correct coverage of the case, one should review Angela Woolsey’s reporting in Fairfax Now . At this time, there is no court hearing set. If you would like to learn more about the case, please check out 4 Public Education’s previous blogs: A Complex (and Expensive!) Legal Showdown about Student Rights Continues  (August 10, 2024) A Controversial Legal Attack on Students and Schools  (July 19, 2024) 3. Nomination of Harmeet Dhillon to a Civil Rights Appointment On October 9th, Trump chose Harmeet K. Dhillon, a known Trump loyalist and activist. As the Washington post  noted, “If confirmed by the Senate, Dhillon would oversee hundreds of civil rights attorneys charged with anti discrimination and voting rights cases, though she is expected to preside over a broad shift in enforcement priorities from the Biden administration.” Besides her activism against COVID protections; voting rights; and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, she is a 2020 election denier who has been active against transgender rights and protections. She will likely pursue changes to transgender students’ rights in sports, schools, and health care. Of course, her activism extends to  the rights of all LGBTQIA people , as well. This means that the civil rights of the entire LGBTQIA community may be abridged under Dhillon’s leadership; however, it is likely that she will continue to focus most of her attention on restricting the rights of the transgender community, which will have devastating consequences. 4. The Federalist Jumps the Shark with Transphobic Content In this most recent The Federalist opinion piece classified under the subject “Trans Insanity,” Lundquist-Arora continued her verbal attack on the transgender community. To date she has written dozens of pieces in the Washington Times, Washington Examiner, and The Federalist expounding on untruths about LGBTQIA youth and adults, their families, and their allies. In this opinion piece, Lundquist-Arora claimed that through the smog and traffic jam in Delhi, India, she saw “trans-identifying adults” mobbing a car next to her. Of course, it is entirely possible that men are merely dressing up as women, but she claimed that they were “trans-identifying” without talking to them. Additionally, Lundquist-Arora ignored the critical context that unhomed people of all ages and identities  interfere with traffic in Delhi, and the tragic regularity of sexual assaults by cisgender men . If one takes her at her word that this scenario actually happened and she saw it through the smog, it is a bizarre scenario to use in order to misrepresent transgender people in India, much less in the United States. However, Lundquist-Arora went one step further to tarnish the reputations of those who fight for transgender civil rights when she claimed they belong to a “trans cult.” Once you portray your opponents as belonging in a cult, without any evidence, then you really have lost the argument.  In that piece, Lundquist-Arora made a series of dubious, easily disprovable, and mean-spirited statements about transgender people, parents of transgender students, and allies: A “transgender mob” existed, and it was trying to “weaponize [the] kindness” of Americans. Transgender student rights run counter to women’s rights, parental rights, and religious freedom. ( Note: this is pure far right disinformation.) Those parents and grandparents supporting transgender civil rights are a “tyrannical minority.” “The trans cult [is] made up of mostly bored white women.” Trans activists are “narcissistic.”  Based on my own experience, most advocates for transgender civil rights are transgender and/or parents and relatives of transgender children or adults. Typically, transgender allies include individuals/groups who support civil rights for all Americans, no matter their gender identity, race, immigration status, religion, sexuality, or disability.  In fact, there is a strong kinship among different racial civil rights groups, disability advocates, religious groups, and LGBTQIA advocates. To deny this cooperation is to deny the truth of those of us on the ground, standing up every day for the rights of students, educators, and community members. As seen at the rally at the Supreme Court, the audience and speakers represented the full spectrum of our country, including women, men, and children who were white, Black, Hispanic, Christian, Jewish, and (even) Republicans.  There is no need to misrepresent parents of transgender children as beggars, narcissists, cultists, and “alphabet mafia.” The Federalist should be ashamed of itself for repeatedly publishing such lies and hate. Most civil rights activists know that transgender rights run hand-in-hand with women’s rights, parental rights, and religious rights. Unfortunately, to fully explain this would require an entirely different blog. 5. Restricting the Military Families’ Insurance Coverage At the last minute, Republican congressman, Mike Johnson (R-LA) added language to the 2025 National Defense Authorization Act  (NDAA), that bans insurance company Tricare from providing gender-affirming care for minors under the age of 18.The House voted on the NDAA  with the ban in place on Wednesday, December 11th. It was hoped that it would fail, as have previous efforts  to add similar legislation into the NDAA; however, the House passed the NDAA  with the amended language. The votes were tallied by the Washington Post . This news has been feared by military families across the country. Its passage means that children receiving life-saving medical care–with parental consent under the supervision of their doctor–will be ripped from their ongoing care and will either suffer without treatment, pay out of pocket, or find other less accessible or safe ways to ensure continued care. Military families demand and deserve health care for ALL of their kids. Anyone who requires medical care for a chronic condition, whether it be asthma or diabetes should be sympathetic to the need to have continued access to life-saving medicines and care. Gender-affirming care is most common  for cisgender people whose birth gender matches their gender identity. Such care for cisgender people can include hormone replacement therapy (common among perimenopausal women), birth control pills, breast reconstruction following mastectomies, gynecomastia treatments  for men, and testosterone treatments. Many such treatments are used on cisgender minors, as well. I would hope that cisgender women and men who receive gender-affirming care  would be sympathetic to ensuring gender-affirming health care for others, including transgender people. Similarly, if cisgender patients’ gender-affirming health care is covered by insurance, so should gender-affirming health care for transgender patients be covered by insurance.  "Lawmakers are playing politics with the military families' health care: “This is a betrayal of our service members and a threat to national security." - Rachel Branaman , executive director of the Modern Military Association of America The amendment to the NDAA  is a direct attack on military members and their families. You can find more information, including action items, at this link .   “The inclusion of this harmful provision puts the lives of children at risk and may force thousands of service members to make the choice of continuing their military service or leaving to ensure their child can get the health care they need.” - Representative Adam Smith  (D-WA), top Democrat on the House Committee on Armed Services 6. Chesterfield School Board Chooses Anti-Trans Policies In an astonishing move on December 11th, a large school district outside of Richmond voted to impose anti-trans policies in their schools despite the overwhelming outcry of parents and school staff. It is said that these policies go beyond Youngkin’s anti-trans model policies  and LGBTQIA advocates express safety concerns about these sweeping anti-trans changes. Despite more than 130 speakers on Tuesday, most of whom opposed these changes, Chesterfield County Public Schools School Board (CCPSSB) voted to reverse their policies, which many say will endanger transgender students. Claiming they were acting according to “parents rights,” the CCPSSB enacted policies against the Superintendent's wishes which permit deadnaming of transgender children, forced bathroom use according to sex on the birth certificate, compel actions by staff, and restrict access to sports. Amendments to the previous policy can be found here .  All in all, they removed the word “transgender” nearly a dozen times from their policy; however, they continue to reference Governor Northam’s 2021 Transgender Policies in their new policy. Does that mean that they are in violation of their own policies? Or, does it mean they require another vote to amend the policy? Answer: Unknown, but this ironic misstep clarifies that their effort is more about exclusion of transgender students and not about policy. Despite the desperate pleas and scientific justifications made by hundreds of people, the CCPSSB chose to enact policies that will most likely cause immense harm to the transgender and nonbinary communities of students and their families, while offering no perceivable benefit. In the words of Roberty Rigby of FCPS Pride: “the criminal indifference to the safety of children is stunning.”  Of course, this policy change will disrupt the schools, including foreseeable issues associated with children using names other than those on their birth certificates, all of which should fall under the new policy. If Susanna goes by “Sue” or Michael goes by “Mike” will the rules apply equally to them as applied to the families of transgender children who will be required to submit written authorization of their approval of naming convention in the school? Much of these changes were pushed by the far-right evangelical lobbying organization Family Foundation located in Richmond which has a large budget and motivated activists who have been bussed around the state for protests. They can be identified by their tragically ironic mass-produced posters held by grandparents that say “Protect Every Kid” which obviously exclude the kids that they find distasteful like LGBTQIA+ students. Family Foundation descended on 10/7/21 FCSB meeting RVA Magazine of Richmond  notes that they are on the opposite side of the majority of Virginians on nearly every subject from same-sex marriage to legalization of cannabis. The Family Foundation is against reproductive rights, LGBTQIA+ rights, parental rights, and sex education. In opposition to respected medical organizations, the Family Foundation of Virginia supports “ conversion therapy ,” which has more in common with torture than therapeutic psychological support. Family Foundation of Virginia is on the SPLC-defined list of anti-LGBTQIA hate groups , as well.  Can the Chesterfield school district defend the expense, confusion, harm, and inequality caused by these changes? How do these changes improve education outcomes? Answer: they can’t defend these changes, and excluding and scaring students does not improve outcomes. Anticipating 2025 and More Civil Rights Attacks If the last couple of years of vicious attacks against transgender student rights have seemed rough, this will only intensify under the next presidential administration. With pressure, policy changes, and key appointments at the federal level, it will make it harder for school districts to hold their ground. Additionally, it is known that changes at the federal level will create chaos which will make it harder for school administration and staff to know how vigorously to defend and support queer students and staff out of confusion and fear of retaliation. Robert Rigby, longtime LGBTQIA activist and leader of FCPS Pride, anticipates that in the next year: “Queer kids and staff are entering an automatically more hostile environment in any school. The burden will fall upon teachers and staff to stand by kids.” He suggested that we continue with our advocacy for civil rights for our LGBTQIA+ students, families, staff, and community. We shouldn’t stop reminding our local school boards and superintendents via emails and conversations how important it is to support our vulnerable children during these challenging times.

When the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) rolled out its proposed Accreditation and Accountability Framework in June of 2024, they projected 70% of Virginia’s highly ranked K-12 schools would be categorized as Off Track or Needing Intensive Support based on their data modeling. However, the mechanics of that modeling was not released to either the Virginia legislature or the public.  By July 25th, after outcries of disinformation and non-transparency, the  estimate was dropped to 61%,  again without revealing source data. When that was run up the flagpole but did not fly well, the percentage was dropped yet again.  To requests and FOIAs for more transparency and the data on which the modeling was based, VDOE failed to respond, but did say most recent modeling shows lower failure projections.  On August 29, 2024, the Virginia Board of Education voted to confirm the final rules regarding the Framework without having released the actual data modeling. In September, eight Northern  Virginia superintendents requested delays in implementing the changes which will take effect in January of 2025. Similarly, legislators have requested delay. Finally on November 8, 2024 , Governor Youngkin and Superintendent Coons released some data, while complaining about the Virginia Education Associations’ press conference during which once again called for data release. As of November 8th, Youngkin’s projected estimate of Off Track schools stands at 35% of Virginia K-12 schools expected to be Off Track or In Need of Intensive Support. The modeling dataset released  is complex, convoluted, and difficult to decipher, but at least it’s something. The spreadsheet does not answer the question of why the numbers keep changing or why the Governor and his VDOE are so determined to create embedded “gotcha’s” in their Framework. How did the Department’s projections change from 60.1% on the day it was approved in August, to 35% on November 8th? Why did the department’s projections go from 70 to 61, to 40s, to 35 percent? See Governor Youngkin’s Magic Math Part 2 for a deeper analysis. No explanation has been provided by Youngkin’s VDOE as to why the numbers keep changing. Particularly, we don’t know what in the Framework was changed to alter the outcome projections between August when the Framework was approved and November when the data was released.  We are still left to wonder why schools that were rated best in the country a few months ago and highly rated for years, now are expected to have 1 in 3 schools Off Track. Governor Youngkin never retracted the criticism of Virginia’s public schools he shared after the first release of 70% estimates.  Current review of the actual “Support Framework” (though there is little evidence of “support” for either students or schools in the Framework) does show small changes to adjust the initial Mastery and Growth ratios and some allowance for English Learner growth assessments. However, it does not show substantive changes that would account for the initial projected failure rates, the downward trend, or the continued excessive projections that one in three Virginia schools be Off Track. One explanation may be that some components of the Accreditation and Accountability Support Framework, such as the 3E Readiness requirements, have never been implemented before. There is no data from which to extrapolate what the success rates will be on the statewide 5th grade and 8th grade portfolios, or on the high school courses required in middle school and college requirements in high school which have never been required before.  In fact, we don’t know what the success rates will be for large scale changes in high school Career and Technology Education (CTE) implementation which will require new staff positions and new private sector-school partnerships. Nor do we know whether counselors’ work load requirements for implementing the prescribed 3E plans for all middle and high schoolers will be successful. Although there are small added accommodations for English Learner growth, it is not clear whether those adjustments will ameliorate the effects of newly enrolled English learners being counted in testing reports and how they will affect school accountability scores. We have no crosswalk with current English Learner SOL scores to see how those school scores will change. All those questions remain unanswered even after the current data and modeling results were released.  In other words, the Youngkin VDOE is relying on Magic Math to convince Virginians that they have it right this time and that one third of schools are Off Track and in Need of Intensive Support. (Note: “Support” in the Framework context is actually intrusive intervention requirements such as contractual MOUs and supervision).  Instead of this opaque and constantly changing VDOE Framework, 4 Public Education recommends Virginia use solutions we already know will work rather than implementing the VDOE’s plan. For example:  Declare ALL public schools in Virginia in need of the state funding support that would provide the resources and flexibility localities required to supply their children with the Constitutionally required quality education.  Provide the support recommended in the 2023 JLARC Report and provide funding for teachers, English Learners, and Special Education students that would meet or exceed the national average.  Once real solutions have been implemented, then VDOE and the Governor can try again to run the numbers, because Virginians are done with their magic sleight of hand with our public education dollars and students.  See  Thane Glenn’s Fantasy Stories of Educational Horror for Part II in this series or click below.

Part II of Governor Youngkin’s Magical Thinking series Once upon a time, in a land we all love, there was a Governor (or Thane if you are in Shakespearean Scotland).... From day one of his term, Governor Glenn Youngkin knew that his future depended on his record in Virginia. And his record in Virginia depended on his plan to convince the people of Virginia that their schools were terrible. He set out with a series of stories and policies that would divide and defeat Virginians. His first fantastic tale that Virginia schools were terrible would be launched with Executive Order One and depend on a Tattle Line where students and parents across the Commonwealth could report how awful their teachers were. The  Tattle Line was a failure,  and only released, after lawsuits, but Youngkin and his Secretary Guiderra continued to publicize their base, fallacious tale that public school teachers and schools in Virginia were lying to and failing their communities. There have been variations on the “Our schools are Terrible Tales,” from Hillsdale History  changes that insisted to Black, Brown, and Girl children that their ancestors did not contribute to Virginia’s story, to the attorney general’s never-ending investigations and advocacy against student access to education opportunities.  With each story the projections grew more fantastical. All reiterated the imagined failure of Virginia’s public schools: that they were inferior, teaching false and destructive information, and preferring marginal students over those “worthy of merit.” The stories would be carried by both his staff and in the MAGA journalism and litigation movements.  Many of the tales were  outlandish , and  ruthlessly cruel , targeting the most vulnerable students  and telling lies that teachers were unduly influencing students about things like their gender, their rights, their ethnicities, their class, and their right to a high quality education.  Some of the stories just lied about what was offered already. The Lab Schools plans proposed dual enrollment and career programs which already existed in public schools, but the new plans would require more administrative management, and provide a more limited number of seats. Each tale attacking the education system and regaling the positive motives of privatizers was phrased as what was “good for”  students, and what was “better for Virginia,”  and what “must be done,” but each tale was merely a thinly veiled attempt to make Virginians believe that schools, students, teachers, and school boards deserved punishment.  Each was matched with a policy that directly confirmed the Governor and his allies' commitment to privilege and profit for some, and punishment or loss of services for the rest. Though he achieved a few items on his list, Youngkin’s governo rship so far has remained a series of minor skirmishes and larger battles foiled thanks mainly to a courageous group of legislators who have pushed back. The School Performance and Support Framework (Framework) is Mr. Youngkin’s most recent attempt to savage Virginia’s schools. His couriers promised that this time they would prove  almost three quarters of the schools in Virginia were failing.  Then CNBC reported  Virginia’s schools as the best in the nation, which exposed his tale as horror-fantasy.  He and his aides are still determined to implement the Framework, though it has received substantial resistance  from school boards, superintendents, and grassroots feedback around the state.  The Framework promises to create more disruption and chaos in children’s education than any policy so far because it will affect every year of a student’s education, and will affect every subject and every school in Virginia. No child will be safe from the spectre of tests designed for arbitrary, deliberate failure and no school will be safe from the ogre of failure labeling.   His last set of Education Horror Stories in 2025 will determine Glenn Youngkin’s future. He knows it, and as a result will do and say whatever it takes to convince Virginia and the nation his macabre tales are true.  See  Governor Youngkin’s Magic Math for Part I, or click below.

Because this is an odd year, as opposed to an even year, the Virginia General Assembly session will be short, lasting only 30 days. For this reason, the rush to get bills through each legislative chamber will be even more hectic than last year, and advocates for Public Education will be challenged to keep up with the calls to action before votes are made.  The General Assembly convened in Richmond on January 8, 2025 and January 17th is the last day legislators may introduce bills and resolutions. At this time, bills are moving quickly through subcommittees and committees as legislators decide which bills should advance to floor votes. February 4th is Crossover, the last day for each chamber to act on its own legislation (except Budget Bills) before surviving bills crossover to the other Chamber for consideration. February 20th is the last day either chamber can act on any remaining bills and appoint conferees. Links to Education Bills Information on the: Education bills in the House of Delegates can be found at this link K-12 Public Education bills in the Senate can be found at this link . List and status of each of the six priority 4 Public Education bills for the 2025 session can be found at this link . As calls-to-action are developed for priority education bills they will be shared on 4 Public Education’s webpage under the “act” tab ”.

Our guest blogger, Phyllis Payne, MPH, is the Co-Founder of SLEEP (Start Later for Excellence in Education Proposal) & Implementation Director at the national nonprofit, Start School Later . Are you hoping for later middle school start times for your own or other children in Fairfax?  If yes, we need your help now. Please sign this petition  to urge the school board and Superintendent Reid to prioritize this change to benefit the health, well-being, safety, and performance of our children.   The planned timeline has hit a wall. A year ago, I thought this board would be voting on a change to middle school start times for Fairfax this month (January 2025) for implementation in the fall of 2025. That’s what the FCPS timeline calls for.  Not only has the Board not had a public discussion of which of the 5 options presented on December 3rd is best for Fairfax, it is stuck on the question of whether to implement new bell schedules concurrently with boundary changes. We know from prior experience that FCPS has announced bell time changes as late as May, but best practice usually means that decisions must be made by March for smooth implementation, so it feels to me as if the decision to wait 8 weeks for further input from staff is a decision to delay yet another year at least. The Request for Proposal issued in January 2023 called for implementation in the 2024-2025 school year, but FCPS didn’t contract with any vendors until August 2023 — a delay that already cost students a year of healthier schedules. To do nothing is to continue to do harm.  I would like to hear this board and Dr. Reid reiterate FCPS’ commitment to changing middle school start times while keeping healthy scheduling for all of our students with a definitive plan and timeline for implementation in fall of 2025.  Here’s the testimony that I gave to the school board on January 9th . What I would have liked to say, if I had more than 2 minutes:   SLEEP in Fairfax has been advocating for healthy school schedules for Fairfax County children since 2004. FCPS has struggled to meet the biologically-driven scheduling needs of our children and today, you have several options, including 2 that start middle and high schools after 8:30 a.m. as recommended by the nation’s pediatricians. You have an opportunity to fulfill the dreams of parents, students, and staff in our school district . Stick with your original plans to implement next fall. It’s harmful to interrupt a child’s sleep cycle in the early morning hours – depriving them of the rest they need to grow and thrive. To delay is to continue to do harm. You’ve had the options since December 3rd and, yet, instead of discussing which of the options might be our Goldilocks Solution, we’re waiting to compare how the operationalization will differ if we change bells before or concurrently with boundary changes. It will be 8 weeks of delay to consider that question, which may mean a whole additional year or another decade, and, every day, some students and families are suffering with a schedule that literally cuts off their sleep and dreaming before it’s appropriate for them to wake. Sleep is foundational to almost everything we are doing as a school district. At Start School Later’s National Conference this year, Dr. Mark Bedell, Anne Arundel’s superintendent bragged about attendance rates increasing.  He noted, the big push back was concern about high schoolers not being available to pick up elementary siblings from school. There was a burden that parents put on the high schools. Superintendent Bedell shared the good news, “Guess what? Everybody. We don’t have any problems. … Our attendance rates over the last two years have increased. …When we have a system designed in the best interests of adults first rather than doing what’s right by children, then, we do a lot of harm, and our school board made a conscious decision that we weren’t going to make decisions to satisfy an adult-centered agenda.” He added, “Two years of data has shown significant promise that this was a good move, both on Federal and State level accountability measures—almost every single one of them is a net plus.”  His biggest smile came as he shared that he’s won more state championship titles  in the two years since the change than in all six years in his previous position. I’ve heard from more than one school leader that c hanging start times one of the best things they’ve done! Students feel better and are more awake and alert for school. FCPS shifted high schools from 7:20-8:10. The evidence base now includes positive outcomes from our students including significant improvements in mood and safe driving. More of our high schoolers eat breakfast. We left middle schoolers behind with a promise of improvements, which have been delayed long enough.  In the words of one of our students, “ Please do it by next year, I feel like a walking carcass .” The data bears her out and reminds us of the urgency of making this change. A recent review article on middle school start times and young adolescent sleep concluded that "... after an increase in opportunity for sleep due to a later SST shift, all students improved in negative affect, which included less fear, hostility, guilt, and sadness." and ,   "Late SSTs improved mood-related concerns, including self-reported depression and anxiety. Kim et al  found that students who experienced a delay in SST reported lower depressive symptoms and perceived stress, and students reported less engagement in behavioral and verbal aggressive actions at the 12-month follow-up." Further, if we want our children to be awake and ready to learn, the authors note, "Improvements in sleep and alertness may be a mechanism to promote engagement in school, such that students may be less likely to nap at school or doze off during instruction." (Barlan, et.al , 2022) If you know any families with children who suffer from depression and suicidality, you know, there is NOTHING more important to a parent than providing an environment in which our teens actually want to LIVE. Providing a later morning school schedule can have just that impact. I continue to be motivated by the student who wrote, “I work from 9 to midnight cleaning office buildings with my father and pray for later start times every day.” Please lead us to success on this transformational change--align bell times with adolescent body clocks to help our teens thrive. The outcomes are overwhelmingly positive. Delay harms too many. You have the power to prevent suffering. Families, teachers, and parents are counting on you. Thank you!  Other comments from Fairfax students include: “Almost everyone I know tells me they are tired on a daily basis.” We don’t ask our children to fast during the week and binge eat on the weekend. We need to stop expecting them to sleep that way. " “I have been struggling every day since the first day of school, even though I have been going to bed at 8:00. I have been forgetting things and not being able to focus." “Every day, I feel like a mess waking up … My mind is so much more clouded compared to elementary school…if the school board decides not to do anything about it, then teachers shouldn’t tell students not to fall asleep in class…” “Many of my friends don’t want to take after school clubs because they are tired.” Data from the Fairfax County Youth Survey (2023) : In Fairfax, about  1 in 4 eighth graders reported feeling so sad or hopeless almost every day for two weeks or more in a row that they stopped doing some usual activities .  More than 3 in 20 eighth graders reported that they felt stressed defined as "a situation in which a person feels tense, restless, nervous, anxious, or is unable to sleep at night because their mind is troubled" (within the last 30 days) either "most of the time" or "all of the time." Only about 1 in 3 answered "none of the time." Please take action now! Sign, and share the petition - on social media, in your neighborhood groups, with your PTA - everywhere you can to get the word out that Middle School Start Times are being derailed. Find more research and take more actions with our advocacy toolkit here. Photo credit: Marisa Ross

In today’s divided world, it was a pleasure to see agreement in a school board meeting, as the Fairfax County School Board (FCSB) unanimously agreed to extend  Dr. Michelle Reid’s contract for another year. Recently, Dr. Reid was ranked the second most powerful Virginian after Governor Youngkin. Thankfully, she has worked to use this power for good as she, the Fairfax County School Board (FCSB), and FCPS work towards quality, equitable education for Fairfax County students and higher pay and protections for staff. Some have loudly questioned her compensation package; however, her negotiated contract is well in line with compensation for other Superintendents of the largest school districts in Fairfax County. Additionally, she took on the job in the midst of coordinated attacks on FCPS by well-funded radical groups wishing to upend public education through repeated lawsuits and disinformation. Few professionals would be willing to walk into a job with that level of work, scrutiny, and impact no matter the compensation package, particularly when the job seems to run 24-7. Finally, Dr. Reid seems to be everywhere all at once. Whether she is visiting schools, supporting communities, or working with Virginians Organized for Interfaith Community Engagement (VOICE)  to improve mental health , she is working to ensure that our schools offer quality education and opportunities, in a safe and restorative environment for students and staff. Thank you Dr. Reid and FCSB for this partnership.