I'm calling to order this hearing.

This is a public hearing of the committee as a whole of the Council of the District of Columbia.

I'm Phil Mendelssohn, Chair of the Council and Chair of the Committee as a whole.

Today is Monday, July 6, 2026.

The time is 117 in the afternoon.

We are in room 412 of the Johnny Wilson building.

This hearing is being recorded and will be available on the Council's website, which is WW.dccouncil.gov.

The subject of this hearing is Bill 26-403 entitled Education Continuity for Students in the Care of DC Amendment Act of 2025.

The stated purpose of this bill is to require the Office of the State Superintendent of Education to create a course catalog so local education agencies can uniformly evaluate student transcripts to award partial academic credits to students in the care of DC.

The legislation also contemplates the development of processes, plans, and planning teams to support students transitioning into or out of agency placements.

Students care in the students in the care of DC are students in detention commitment, incarceration, or foster care.

Given that these students experience tremendous instability in their education and lives, in 2018, the Council passed Bill 22-950, entitled Students in the Care of DC Coordinating Committee Act of 2018 to identify and recommend solutions to the challenges these students face.

One key challenge described in the committee report for that legislation was, quote, ensuring that students receive credit for work completed, unquote.

While Bill 26-403 attempts to solve some logistical problems with student transition, such as timely sharing of documents, it also addresses the issue of ensuring students receive partial credits for academic progress.

Many students in the care of DC are incarcerated for for two short periods to complete full semester credits, and thus any academic progress is not recognized.

The purpose of today's hearing is to hear public opinion on Bill 26-403 and to evaluate if and how it might solve the long-standing problem of providing schools, students in the care of DC with academic credits for partial semesters and to support their transitions.

Maybe none of that was recorded.

Well, I'm not going to start over.

We have about 14 witnesses before we get to the public, excuse me, to the government witnesses.

For those who are testifying, those who are not testifying, those who are not even aware of the hearing, but become aware of the hearing or have thoughts about the bill.

The record for this bill will close at four at 5 p.m.

on Monday, July 20th.

That's two weeks from today.

That's the record.

That doesn't mean that we won't consider comments to come in after that, but we're required to file a record if we get it before the 20th of July or before 5 p.m.

on the 20th, we'll include it in the record, otherwise it will not be included.

The legislation was introduced by Councilmember Sachary Parker and co-introduced by Councilmembers Robert White, Pro Pinto, Anita Bonds, and Janice Lewis George.

It was introduced last October 6th.

And as I said, it was authored by Councilmember Parker, who is here.

Councilmember, do you have an opening statement?

Yes.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh today I look forward to discussing uh the educational continuity for students in the care of DC Amendment Act of 2025, which I introduced as part of my care for youth plan.

Uh and it highlights uh the systemic improvements uh to school transitions throughout the district that are sorely needed.

As the chair of the Committee on Youth Affairs with oversight of the Child and Family Services Agency and the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services, I have a special interest in protecting these children's education and ensuring they have academic stability, even when other aspects of their life are in flux.

Students in the care of DC are an especially vulnerable part of our population that require tiered support and close hands-off between agencies.

Right now, many students that enter and exit foster care or the juvenile justice system have difficulties successfully transferring academic credit and getting placement in appropriate grade levels due to the lack of coordination and guidance for this student population.

Many are forced to wait weeks upon release or to transfer or resume classroom education.

Some are forced to transition to multiple schools before they find the proper placement.

Many of these students have IEPs and are enrolled in special education services, and major educational disruptions like this are destabilizing and often result in significant learning loss.

Not to mention it puts these young people in a position where they're more likely to end up back in DRURIS in certain instances.

This bill will streamline these transitions and empower every student to continue their academic journey without interruption.

As we continue to face a truancy crisis in the district, it is exceptionally important to focus on measures that can boost school attendance and encourage students to graduate one time.

This bill will bolster support for students in the care of DC and ensure they have the tools they need to succeed.

Recently, the mayor and the deputy mayor for education released a set of recommendations designed by the students in the care of DC coordinating committee.

Multiple advocate groups weighed in on these suggestions, including the School Justice Project and the Children's Law Center.

The majority of the six-part policy framework contained in these recommendations are captured in this legislation, showing broad support for student transition support, cross-agency access to student records, and mandatory acceptance of transfer credits.

While this bill was originally designed to serve students in the care of DC, like those in our foster system and DRS, its benefits will extend to every student in the District of Columbia.

This legislation establishes a uniform course catalog that lists every credit bearing class offered at any secondary school in the district and calls for a uniform transcript procedure.

These will provide greater transparency to the credit allocation process and empower students to choose courses aligned with their interests and future goals.

This bill can therefore plug several existing gaps in our educational framework, helping students and families make informed, equitable decisions within the complex web of the district's schooling options.

I look forward to hearing from both public and government witnesses to learn more about ongoing issues with student transitions and how this bill can be made even stronger.

Every student in our city deserves the support they need to thrive no matter where they live or where they choose to attend school.

This bill provides a structured yet flexible approach to ensuring educational continuity for all students, getting them back in school with the right supports as soon as possible.

And with that, I look forward to today's hearing.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you, Councilmember Parker.

So the way we set up the witness list, we have three witnesses at the beginning who are expert witnesses.

Danielle Robinette, senior policy attorney with Children's Law Center.

Paul Beach, associate partner at Bellweather, who I believe is online, and Dr.

Felicia Hayward, who is Deputy Chief of Secure Programs at Maya Angelou C4 Foundation.

Ms.

Robinette, you are first.

And because we have it set up this way, we're not going to be quite so strict with the clock.

I appreciate it.

It doesn't mean we won't run a clock.

It just means I'm not going to cut you off at the COVID.

Good afternoon, Chairman Mendelson, Councilmember Parker and staff.

My name is Danielle Robinette, and I'm a senior policy attorney with Children's Law Center.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify regarding the 260403, the education continuity for students in the care of DC Amendment Act of 2025.

Children's Law Center attorneys serve as Guardians ad lightum, or GALs, for children in the care and custody of CFSA.

Currently, we represent approximately half of the children involved with CFSA.

Through this work, we too often see students in care fall through the cracks of DC's education system.

Students in care are a highly mobile population.

As a result, it is very common for this group to frequently change schools.

This is particularly true in the district, given that nearly 50% of DC foster youth are placed in Maryland.

While these students are entitled to remain in their DC school of origin, many transfer to a public school closer to their foster placement.

For FY25, CFSA reported 44 students enrolled in PG County schools, 26 in other surrounding counties or states.

Another 37 attended a nonpublic special education school, and 10 were in school in a detention facility.

The education of students in care is governed by a series of MOAs between various agencies.

In practice, we find that these MOAs are not routinely followed and are not enforceable.

Moreover, they fail to anticipate the full array of placement and school changes that students in care regularly experience.

Specifically, the current system lacks intentional planning before school transitions, clear assignment of responsibility for timely enrollment and records transfer, a uniform procedure for credit evaluations, and a requirement that LEAs award partial credits or that they apply transferred credits to graduation requirements.

Students in care have a variety of individuals charged with care their care, including a social worker, a resource parent, a GAL, and a court-appointed education attorney.

Additionally, education decision-making rights are often retained by the birth parent.

However, the MOA governing the education of youth and CFSA's care, which I've included with my testimony, does not clearly assign responsibility for the administrative tasks that come with a school transition.

For example, the MOA outlines the agency's roles while a student is placed in a psychiatric residential treatment facility or a residential treatment center.

However, it fails to assign responsibility for timely and appropriate school enrollment when a student returns to the district.

As a result, students discharged from these settings frequently experience significant delays in accessing appropriate educational services.

The current system also lacks a uniform procedure for transcript evaluations, which leads to arbitrary decisions regarding how coursework is credited.

For example, the MOA for foster youth requires DCPS to construct to conduct transcript evaluations for high school age students who return from RTCs, PRTFs, and non-public day schools.

However, there is no similar obligation for students in care returning from an out-of-state public school.

The MOA requires DCPS to obtain and review records, but only for the subset of students who receive IEP or 504 services.

As a result, students in care returning to a DC public school after attending an out-of-state public school regularly have to fight to get credit for coursework completed in those out-of-state schools.

These are not just bureaucratic headaches.

They are real barriers that prevent these students from completing high school.

Later, my colleague Megan will share some case examples that demonstrate the real world impacts of these gaps in the system.

The Education Continuity for Students in the Care of DC Amendment Act of 2025 seeks to address these gaps by creating a more intentional system of support for the district's most vulnerable students.

Specifically, the bill would establish transition teams to make sure all the relevant parties work together to plan before school changes.

It would ensure students receive credit for coursework completed at previous schools, and it would connect students to the courses they need to progress towards graduation.

The framework established by the bill will meaningfully improve educational engagement for students in care, which we hope in turn will improve long-term outcomes for these students as they enter adulthood and the workforce.

Today's hearing is the culmination of years of work to address address educational barriers faced by DC students involved in the child welfare and or juvenile criminal legal systems.

In November 2020, this committee committee held a joint hearing on a previous iteration of this legislation.

During that hearing, the government witnesses all acknowledged the need to better support students in care.

At that time, DME and DYRS asked the council to leverage the Students in the Care of DC coordinating committee to gather the relevant stakeholders and identify solutions.

Unfortunately, SEDC was unable to meet for years because they could not establish quorum.

During this period of delay, an ad hoc working group met to revise the bill.

However, after sending a draft to the DME for review, no further action was taken.

More than a year of work was shelved indefinitely.

SCDC finally held its inaugural meeting in November 2024.

Over the next year, the group developed several recommendations to improve education for students in care, including an updated version of the legislation.

However, at the last minute, the revised bill was removed from the list of recommendations to be voted on by members.

Instead, the final report transmitted to council late last month proposes a six-part policy framework that largely aligns with the bill before you today.

We strongly urge the council to avoid further delays in advancing the present legislation.

The district cannot continue to kick the can down the road while students in care are forced to navigate a maze of unreliable and unenforceable bureaucratic processes.

The bill provides a framework that can and should adapt to meet the unique needs of students in care.

We look forward to continuing our collaboration with SEDC to address new and outstanding needs.

As the district continues a broader conversation about supporting teens and older youth, the present legislation serves as a crucial tool to bolster school engagement among a population furthest from opportunity.

Thank you, and I welcome any questions.

Paul Beach, who's virtual.

Good morning, Chairman Mendelssohn and members of the committee.

My name is Paul Beach, and I'm an associate partner at Bellweather, a national nonprofit that partners with states, school systems, and nonprofits who strengthened education policy and improve outcomes for students.

I hold a PhD in quantitative research methods and education, and I spent the past 15 years studying education policy, including the educational experiences and outcomes of court-involved students and foster youth.

I'm here because Bellwether led the policy design work in Nebraska that resulted in LB 296, which created a centralized record service for court-involved students.

Over nine months, we conducted more than 150 stakeholder interviews, visited seven facility-based schools, and led a cross-agency working group through a policy design process.

We found when students change placements, education records were often delayed, incomplete or inaccurate, students repeated coursework they had already completed, lost instructional time, and frequently saw credits rejected or counted only as electives rather than towards graduation.

And these barriers disrupted education pathways and reflected long-standing coordination challenges across Nebraska's education, child welfare, and juvenile justice systems.

During our research process, we found few states that had adopted comprehensive approaches to both education data sharing and credit transfer for court-involved students.

Fewer than half of states offered an alternative graduation pathway for students who cannot complete a district specific requirements because of time spent in placement.

The states that do offer this placement pathway, excuse me, often do not make a university available and instead reserve for certain students.

If enacted, Bill 26-403 would place the District of Columbia among the few jurisdictions that have adopted a comprehensive statutory framework to address these long-standing challenges.

And overall, Bill 26-403 establishes a comprehensive framework for improving education continuity for students in the care of DC.

It creates clear timelines in enrollment for enrollment and transition planning, designates school points of contact, establishes uh transcript evaluation process, requires the awarding and transfer of academic credit, including partial credit, strengthens oversight through monitor, monitoring and public reporting.

And these reforms address many of the barriers that contribute to disruptive schooling, lost credit, and delayed graduation for court-involved students.

Based on our experience in Nebraska and elsewhere, I want to highlight five implementation considerations for the council to consider.

First, the bill establishes a strong transition planning process, but its success will depend on clear accountability when transition planning requirements are not met, such as when required meetings are not held or timelines are missed.

The council may want to consider establishing clear accountability for compliance with these requirements.

In Nebraska, we found that effective data sharing often depended on individuals rather than a reliable system.

And when that transition process broke down, students experienced delayed enrollment, uh, incorrect course placement and lost instructional time.

Second, the bill creates a strong framework for record transfer, but again, successful implementation will depend on ensuring records are complete.

In Nebraska, we found that incomplete records, not simply delayed records, were among the most common causes of repeat repeated and lost credit.

And the council may want to consider what happens when an LEA is confronted with a situation where there's a gap or missing information in the student's record, and what do they do before making a final transcript or credit determination?

Third, the bill establishes a strong framework for transcript evaluation and credit transfer, and the council may want to consider providing additional direction to promote consistent uh evaluations and credit determinations so that students with comparable coursework receive comparable credit towards graduation.

In Nebraska, again, we found inconsistent credit determinations often delayed students' progress towards graduation.

Uh fourth, while the bill allows students and families to appeal transcript evaluations, the council may also want to consider allowing them to initiate transcript reviews, credit determinations, or graduation waiver requests.

In Nebraska, students often fell through the cracks when they had no agency over uh initiating these processes.

And finally, the council may want to consider clarifying how disagreements over transcript evaluations, credit determinations, and graduation requirements will be resolved, including which entity has final authority.

Again, in Nebraska, inconsistent transcript evaluations were a major barrier to education continuity and a clear display dispute resolution process will promote greater consistency across uh LEAs.

Um, thank you for the opportunity to testify.

I'm grateful for the committee uh council's commitment to students in the care of DC, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you all have.

Thank you, Mr.

Beach.

Beach.

Dr.

Hayward.

Good afternoon, Chairperson Mendelson, uh Chairperson Parker, members of the committee.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of the education continuity for students in the Care of DC Amendment Act of 2025.

My name is Dr.

Felicia Hayward, and I am speaking on behalf of C Forever Foundation and Maya Angelou Schools, an organization committed to supporting young people experiencing incarceration and helping them successfully transition back into their families, schools, and communities.

And currently the sole education provider for youth experiencing incarceration in Washington, D.C.

For many of our youth, changing placement means losing credits they have already earned, waiting weeks or even months to enroll in school, repeating courses they have already completed, or discovering they are no longer on track to graduate.

These setbacks are discouraging and send a harmful message that their education is secondary to everything else happening in their lives.

Education should be the one constant that follows a young person, not something that starts over with every transition.

Every day we have the privilege of walking alongside young people who are working incredibly hard to rewrite their stories.

These are young people who have made mistakes, experienced trauma, survived violence, or simply grown up in circumstances beyond their control.

Yet, despite everything they have faced, they continue to tell us the same thing.

I just want a chance to graduate.

Yet far too often, their greatest obstacle is not a lack of motivation.

It is a system that unintentionally creates barriers every time they move between placements, schools, or agencies.

Unfortunately, the system does not always give them that chance.

Imagine being halfway through Algebra One, finally passing after years of struggling, only to be transferred to another placement where your credits disappear and you're told to start over.

Imagine earning enough credits to graduate only to discover that your new school will not accept them.

Imagine being released from a juvenile facility, excited to return to school, only to sit home for weeks waiting for enrollment while your classmates continue to move forward without you.

These are not hypothetical situations.

They are the lived experiences of too many young people in the district.

Every interruption sends the same message that their education can wait, but education cannot wait.

This bill recognizes a simple but powerful truth.

A young person's future should never depend on how many times they move through systems they cannot control.

This legislation takes meaningful steps to change that.

By requiring enrollment within two days of a placement change, students will be will spend next time less time disconnected from learning.

By requiring comprehensive transition planning before placement changes, schools and agencies can better prepare students for success instead of reacting after disruptions occur.

The bill also addresses some of the most common frustrations we hear from young people.

Why don't my credits count?

The work I do here doesn't matter.

The requirements for uniform transcript evaluations, acceptance of partial credits, recognition of coursework completed in other schools, and flexible graduation pathways acknowledge the realities of students whose education has been interrupted through no fault of their own.

Importantly, this legislation recognizes that educational continuity is a shared responsibility.

By establishing school points of contact, improving communication between agencies, ensuring timely transfer of records, and increasing oversight and accountability.

The bill creates a coordinated system that keeps students, not bureaucracy, at the center of decision making.

When students stay connected to school, they are more likely to graduate, obtain employment, and avoid future involvement with the justice system.

Educational success is one of the strongest protective factors against recidivism.

Investing in educational continuity is not only the right thing to do for our young people, but also a smart investment in safer communities and a stronger district.

Our youth have already experienced significant disruption.

They should not have to overcome unnecessary, unnecessary educational barriers simply because they entered the juvenile justice system.

They deserve every opportunity to continue learning, earn meaningful credits, graduate on time, and pursue the futures they envision for themselves.

On behalf of C Forever Foundation and Maya Angelou Schools, the young people we serve and their families, I respectfully urge the council to pass the education continuity for students in the Care of DC Amendment Act of 2025.

Thank you for your time, your leadership, and your commitment to ensuring that every young person in the district has a fair opportunity to succeed.

I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Dr.

Hayward.

I don't have a copy of your statement.

If you could provide that, please, that would be helpful.

My first couple of questions are going to go to uh Mr.

Beach.

In the Bellweather report on Nebraska it noted that let me see what I have here.

Um the previous efforts by Nebraska's Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Education Courts, and Probation Division to improve cross-agency data sharing were well-intentioned but largely unsuccessful.

Why were they unsuccessful?

Thank you for that question, uh Chairman.

Um just to be uh frank, we didn't dive into diagnosing why past efforts weren't successful uh comprehensively at least, but I can offer a few examples of why this current effort was successful.

Uh previous efforts, I think relied on some homegrown data platforms that really ended up creating more work for some of the folks working in placements in the 200-plus school districts across the state and in numerous schools.

Uh this current approach, the what we relied on was convening a cross-agency leadership team within the state that included representatives from the Nebraska Department of Education, Department of Health and Human Services, uh courts, and probation.

And that process, you know, took about three or four months to really develop a shared understanding of the problem itself and to co-design a solution for fixing it.

And I think that was really at the crux of what made this successful.

We were there facilitating the process, but we weren't uh imposing uh a policy design or set of recommendations on that group.

It was really on them to come up with the idea that really fit their system uh the best.

And that ended up being a centralized record service within the state.

Uh previously, the state had to rely on a really diffuse system that was people powered.

If a student transferred from uh a cross placements, whether they're going from a school to a secure facility and back to a school, that process really relied on an individual uh course counselor, school counselor calling, emailing, faxing, sending hard copies of course transcripts to individual schools and districts, a system that just clearly wasn't working for students and resulted in significant delays, incorrect course placement, and led to a lot of frustration for students.

So I think to answer your question, the previous efforts really um didn't rely on a co-developed solution with all the different agencies involved, and I think that was at the crux of success here.

In the course of implementing these reforms, um, were there some lessons learned uh as I'm assuming there had to be probably some course correction as you were as you were um proceeding.

Yeah, I would direct you to uh Lane Carr from the Nebraska Department of Education's testimony.

He gets into some of the early lessons learned.

They're very early in implementation in Nebraska.

Um we spoke with them uh a few weeks back.

And what I can share is um yes, there are significant challenges when you move to a system like this, a lot of upfront costs.

I want to highlight some some real advantages though of sort of that upfront work.

I think what they are running into, and you can read in Lane's testimony is issues with uh sealed cases presenting challenges and identifying students that are uh eligible for the centralized record service uh out of state placements and partial credits, things we've heard about today already.

Um I think the important part to remember though is uh prior to this implementation of this new system, which again is is just occurring now, basically, uh they weren't there wasn't an avenue for even asking these questions.

There wasn't uh a space for which the state could really interrogate a student's record, a court involved student's record.

And they have sort of shifted the mindset that we are now in the process of solving this problem.

We have opened up the box, and now we can really go in and try to fix a lot of these little issues that will ensure that the system runs a bit smoother.

Um so that I think is um the big advantage of the system.

Another advantage is that uh once this process is underway and transcripts are reviewed and you do it for one student.

We what we know is that students change placements frequently.

Uh it's not often just one placement, it's it's many placements.

And once a student goes through this process in the district, that transcript will be sort of a living document that doesn't require the next course counselor or next LEA to really recreate the whole transcript uh in its entirety.

And that's gonna have huge advantages for students that are uh transferring across placements multiple times throughout their uh educational journey.

Uh thank you.

Um I have a couple more questions, and I'll turn to Mr.

Parker.

Uh do we have a sense of what states have implemented any of these uh proposals like uh universal credit transfer system or partial credit policy?

Partial credit policy um some states have.

I don't have it right in front of me, certain policies.

I know of very few states that have proposed a comprehensive data sharing and credit transfer system like the District of Columbia is doing here.

Nebraska is probably the closest peer state in that effort.

Um we in our research efforts in Nebraska, we spent uh a lot of time at the outset uh scholaring other states' statutes, uh talking with folks uh in those states, uh serving experts to better understand you know who's doing this well across the country.

And it turns out very few places, if any are doing it really well.

Uh so I just applaud this committee's effort for pursuing this really comprehensive framework because I think it's something that other states can can learn a great deal from in terms of improving continuity for court-involved students.

Uh one last question for you.

Do you have a sense of what the cost was for the state of Nebraska?

Uh I do not have uh we didn't delve into the the cost of this the system.

We developed reports and the policy recommendations, and then the legislature took up that report and ended up uh passing LB 296.

But Lane Car from the Nebraska of Education, I know will be able to answer that question uh in more detail than I can.

Okay.

And last question, which is for either Mr.

Abnette or Dr.

Hayward, do you have a sense of the uh breadth of the problem here?

Like how many students were talking about?

Um, yeah, uh Children's Law Center, I um my answers are gonna focus on students in foster care because that's kind of our area of expertise.

Um I would say almost every client that is in high school or in credit bearing courses loses credits at some point along the way.

Um we I'm trying to do some quick math.

You figure there are about 500 kids in care.

Some of those aren't school age, but every single one that comes through has some sort of either we're putting together old transcripts, um, our investigator teams are gathering everything and putting it together and working with schools to get credits, or a student is sent to uh PRTF or similar such facility, and then the coursework they do there doesn't count when they return.

So they you know had that placement, and and maybe for their behavioral health needs, that placement was appropriate.

Um but because there's no planning ahead of time, they go off and they do whatever schooling that the facility has and then come back and later someone decides whether or not they get credit for it.

I know that's not a great answer to your numbers question, but well, except that it sounded like it's pretty much 100% of everyone who's foster youth in a mostly in high school, because that's where you're getting credit bearing courses.

Dr.

Hayward, can you add to that?

Yes, so I think for um young people, again, not entirely sure of uh complete numbers, but high school aged students who are not entering high school initially, like not going from eighth to ninth grade, but if you've been in high school, I would say that the majority of young people have will have an impact or have been impacted by credits not being counted when they have transitioned out of facilities into schools that don't accept partial credits.

Let me turn to my colleague, Councilmember Parker.

Thank you.

Um, I wanted to come to you first.

You spoke about the lack of enforcement of past MOAs between uh OSC DURS and others and them not being enforced.

We also heard uh Mr.

Beach talk about the importance of enforcement.

Can you explain some of the impacts that the lack of enforcement have had in your experience and with the young people that you're working with?

Yeah, absolutely.

Thank you for that question.

Um what happens with the MOAs is that they are agreements between the agencies, so the students are actually not party to those agreements.

So when something doesn't happen, um a transcript of isn't evaluated or credits aren't considered, or someone misses a deadline for enrollment or whatever step they are in, um there's no way for us as attorneys on behalf of the young person to pursue it.

We can keep asking for help.

We can keep asking DCPS, like please reconsider the transcript audit that you did.

But they don't have to, because there's no way for us to enforce it legally because the student is not a party to those agreements.

If CFSA and DCPS disagree about something, there are mechanisms in the MOA for them to figure sort it out amongst themselves, but the students aren't actually party to those agreements.

Got it.

And um, Mr.

Beach, I wanted to come to you.

It was really helpful for you to name some of the lessons learned, enforcement complete records, consistent credit determinations, the young people having agency and credit determinations and determining which agency has the authority to make the final decision.

I think that one would be tricky in a DC context.

Uh the glaring answer for me would be Aussie, but you know.

Um can you speak more about enforcement and what I'm hearing now is that there's different levels to it, as well as there is different players, the young person, advocates, lawyers, agencies.

Can you just in terms of your experience of what's worked well, go a little further on what we should be seeing in terms of enforcing any type of uniform course catalog or credit transfer?

Yeah, I'll start by saying again that you know, in our survey of states, we haven't seen this done particularly well uh anywhere.

Um, but what the issue was in Nebraska that consistently came up as students would complete a full course or partial credit, then transfer either placement to uh a new district.

And again, the context is much different here.

There are 244 districts in Nebraska, but um the point is that often instead of uh accepting a core English credit from a student, a district would instead note it as an elective, and students would just pile up partial credits and elective credits and make no progress towards graduation.

And when so when they returned, you know they might have accumulated a lot of credits, but they would get to their home district and be far behind uh in terms of their graduation pathway, and we heard from student students constantly that that was just so discouraging.

And they often, you know, directly from students to say we just sort of give up when we get to this point.

And so I think from an enforcement perspective, I think the the bill sets up a great framework for uh evaluating appeal processes and so forth.

I think the crux is going to be uh the LEAs and whether or not they are going to accept those credits or not as core uh graduation requirements.

So I think that's I think the mechanism that I notice the most when reviewing the bill.

Understood.

Thank you.

Uh and then Dr.

Hayward, uh, can you uh uh share a little bit more on average how long it's taking Maya to receive transcripts, IEPs, educational records day to day.

Sure.

So I think it it moves a little bit quicker, obviously at New Beginnings, because they're typically coming from YSE.

Um I think when at YSC it can take a little while, not for IEPs.

IEPs, if they're in DC comes from special programs, right?

So everything transfers in relatively quickly.

And if and and if we can't get them, then we reach out to Aussie.

Um but gathering records when students have been at multiple facilities could take weeks, right?

Um it could take two weeks to figure out all of the different places that they've been, trying to gather everything from them, from family, from reaching out to the schools, from doing records requests.

Um, and that's just again in DC.

Um, when we get into students who are coming from other states, it can also take a while as well.

Um areas have better systems um where you can just make a request and hope you get it, but it really relies on the relationships that our guidance counselors make with other school districts and other LEAs to can have an impact on how quickly we get records.

Understood.

Thank you.

Uh I do have more questions.

I was trying to honor the clock.

Um Dr.

Hayward, while I'm with you, um, can you elaborate on the communications between Maya and uh in a school?

And let's talk about it uh in the context of a young person that's leaving DRS or leaving detention and enrolling in set school.

And for those watching, you may hear phrases like YSC or New Beginning, those are secure detention facilities within D R S just for context.

Um so the communication, it depends on which facility we're talking about, but generally the So let's say a young person was detained in New Beginnings, their time and new beginnings is coming to a close, and now they're set, they are set to enroll in school X.

What is the communication like between Maya, the education server at DRS and those schools so that the credit transfer process happens?

Sure.

So the communication uh primarily lands with our student advocates who are the staff members who are who are responsible for transitioning young people back into the community upon release at New Beginnings.

Um and then there's other communications that can happen between the special education coordinator and uh wherever it is that they're going, if it's there's a student with an IEP, guidance counselor.

Um, but generally that student advocate gathers everything to make sure that the students can complete the enrollment process in whatever school it is that they're going to.

Um and that involves um it's it's a little bit less involved when they leave at a time that aligns with the school calendar.

So, for example, if they leave at the end of a quarter, there's a lot less conversation that has to happen because everything is you receive that credit or that point two five.

We we issue 0.25 credit for a quarter.

Um, but when they leave in the middle of a quarter or it at a different time that doesn't align with the school calendar, that's when there's more conversation because that's when we need to figure out um if this credit is going to transfer.

And oftentimes, if it's not a half a year, which is 0.5 for a half a year credit, or one credit for a full year credit, it may not transfer depending on whether the receiving LEA determines that whether they'll accept that credit or not.

Understood.

Understood.

And just to put a fine point on it, I'm assuming those coordinators are having to learn and have context for any number of curriculum offerings across DC.

Whereas if there was a more uniform system, they would know how those credits would transfer or apply from school to school.

Yes.

So again, our guidance counselors spend a lot of time really trying to understand um the different LEAs that our young people typically go to.

Um a lot of times they do end up at similar LEAs, right?

So it's like we can reach out to this person and say, hey, this person is leaving, this kid is leaving, this is what we have or what they've earned.

Um but when it's a new LEA or when it's an LEA or when there's been transition at that end, the receiving LEA and they don't have a relationship just yet, it can take a little bit of time.

But a lot of it is really the relationship building and what our guidance counselors do and our school staff do to reach out to those other LEAs.

Absolutely.

Okay, Mr.

Chairman, I have two more questions and then I'm done.

Um I will just say uh as a follow-up.

I remember visiting DRS and talking to the young people, and it was a heartbreaking story of a young man who had uh recalled being in detention several times at DRS.

He leaves, is set to enroll, can enroll, um, and the school, I'm not gonna name the school, drops out, ends up back in DRS.

And so what may seem like trivial windows of time could be a very precarious situation for young people that need stability and support.

Um and that's again why this is so important.

And even though we're talking about DRS, I was just handed this article.

I haven't fully read it, but about a young person years ago that thought they graduated, enrolled in a university only to be told, actually you didn't graduate.

Um again, just kind of underscoring why is this an issue and why is this important?

It's not just for DRS young people, although that is important enough.

Uh it is an issue.

Two more questions than I'm done.

Mr.

Beach, I wanted to come back to you.

In your September 2023 report on shared strategies and examination of bellweather school cohort program, your team noted that as school systems become more complex, there is a distinct need for improvement and strategic planning, which can serve as a North Star for school leaders.

Does this bill's emphasis on pre-transition planning and transition teams capture the benefits of this type of improvement planning recommended uh by your organization?

Uh yeah, yes, I would say um that the transition planning process is comprehensive in terms of the committee, the the members of that transition planning team, um, the school contact and the process that um has to be undertaken to ensure there is continuity for students uh in the care of DC.

I think you know that report I'm actually not as familiar with, but another report that we have written that is very similar to that.

One of the two things that we often recommend is a continuity of people and a continuity information are just key for this population of students that are ultimately in sometimes you know a handful to dozens of different placements throughout their educational career.

And every time they move from placement to placement, as we've heard from Dr.

Hayward and Danielle, that information is lost, there's delays, and those delays just keep compounding and adding up and adding up to a point where a student gets in high school, they're so far behind often that they have just sort of given up.

Um another piece that I think that continuity information and people is just so important is that we know that many students in this population often have gaps in their academic history.

And what I was alluding to in my earlier testimony is that we found in Nebraska a school counselor might be presented with the situation where they don't have the past two years of educational history, and they're not quite sure what to do in that situation.

And I think this process that the District of Columbia has set up will help alleviate that for students, create a process for investigating where a student was, you know, what courses were they in previous uh to their current placement, and will just help accelerate their transition into their new school or new placement.

Awesome.

Thank you.

And then last question.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um I'm gonna ask a different variation, um, Danielle, about the delays that you're encountering.

The chairman asked, and you said roughly every young person in CFSA's care encounters these delays at some point.

Can you just speak more on the extent of the delays?

Are we talking days, weeks, what and what is the impact there?

And thank you for that question.

I think it depends a little on the type of school transition.

Um, so if they're transitioning back to a traditional public school or a charter school, um the delays tend to be a little bit shorter, maybe a handful a week or so.

Um, where we see some of the really long delays are when the student needs to transition to a non-public day school for special education reasons, or um they need a PRTF or RTC because those are private facilities, they are under no obligation to take these students.

Um of them are very highly specialized, and so you have to find the right one that meets that student's needs, and we can see students wait weeks, months with no placement.

And and to a point you were making before about how long those delays are, I think much has been made of how much school students are missing, um, chronic absenteeism and truancy.

And and when we're talking about these days, if if at 10 days we're ready to start prosecuting parents, we should also be making sure that the government agencies responsible for some of these decisions are also being held accountable to those same timelines.

Because in in many of these cases, anyway, it's not the student or their parent or their resource parent.

It's it's waiting on agencies to do something, and they're sitting at home with no education in the meantime.

I'm gonna leave it there, but thank you all for your testimony.

Really insightful.

Uh thank you, Councilmember Parker.

I have no further questions for you.

Thank you, the three of you.

Uh gonna turn to um the next set of witnesses.

Noah Doherty, Director of School Talent and Academic Strategy to DC Charter School Alliance.

Caterina Semanova, special counsel on legislation and policy at the public defender service for the District of Columbia.

Claire Liebert.

Who's just listed as a public witness?

Why are you hesitating?

Oh.

Tell Bell, Deputy Director of School Justice Process Project.

Not sure what questions I have, but sure.

Then I will stop there.

Noah Doherty.

Good afternoon, Chairman Mendelson and members of the committee.

My name is Noah Doherty.

I'm award two resident and the director of school talent and academic strategy at the DC Charter School Alliance.

We want to thank you, Chairman Mendelssohn, for holding this hearing, Councilmember Parker for introducing the bill, and council members Robert White, Pinto Bonds, and Lewis George for co-introducing it.

The broad support from the council for this bill reflects our own shared belief about the importance of addressing this issue.

We wholeheartedly support the purpose of this bill and the creation of systems that ensure educational continuity, credit transfer, timely enrollment, and flexible graduation pathways for students in the care of DC agencies and others who experience school disruptions.

We've been in conversation about this bill with advocates, including the Children's Law Center, because we understand how important this legislation is.

Every day, educators of public charter schools, along with our friends at DCPS, serve students in the care of DC.

And while many of our public charter leaders cannot attend today's hearing, please know they care deeply about ensuring all students, particularly those at risk, have the same opportunities, support, and access to success as their less vulnerable peers.

Because schools and LEAs will bear the primary responsibility of implementation.

Their perspectives are critical to ensuring that the district's most vulnerable students receive the consistent support and opportunities they deserve, and we urge policymakers to engage directly with schools as you further refine this legislation.

These school perspectives inform the three recommendations we have for this legislation.

First, it's critically important this legislation provide as much explicit clarity as possible.

For example, there are actions where the owner is clear, such as the outlined responsibilities of the LEA point of contact.

And there are other actions without this clarity, including which entity is responsible for convening transition meetings and distributing transition plans.

Furthermore, this legislation creates local definitions for federally defined terms such as FAPE and new terms such as awaiting placement.

The lack clarity.

We want schools and agencies to effectively implement this legislation and precise definitions and timelines are critical to that goal.

Second, we believe a transition team is critical to ensuring educational continuity for our students, and we don't want scheduling challenges to impede that work.

We know from our experience with IEP teams that the more participants you involve, the more challenges you face convening them, especially on short notice.

We would encourage more flexibility so the teams can make important decisions quickly and aren't delayed by scheduling challenges.

And finally, we believe we believe a strong data infrastructure is key to achieving the outcomes of this legislation, and that Aussie should have the resources necessary to ensure smooth data sharing between agencies and LEAs.

A strong data sharing system will ensure students are placed in appropriate courses.

Transition meetings are smooth and supportive for students, and the partial credit can be awarded to help students graduate on time.

Thank you for your time and I welcome your questions.

Good afternoon.

I'm Caterina Semyonova, special counsel to the Director on Policy and Legislation at the Public Defender Service.

With me today and available for questions is PDS attorney Nikisha Winston, who has represented youth in special education matters for more than two decades.

PDS strongly supports the goals of this legislation.

The bill requires the district to engage in timely transition planning for youth who are returning to district schools.

This would be a clear improvement over the current reality.

Youth who leave YSC or new beginnings often have to wait weeks before getting enrolled in school.

They don't know which school they can attend or which school can meet their special education needs.

They leave DYRS custody without documents showing the work they completed while detained.

Without these documents, community schools aren't able to place them in the classes that they need to graduate.

Another helpful provision requires each LEA to provide a point of contact for students who are transitioning from an agency placement.

However, rather than focusing on the LEA, the legislation should require a point of contact at each school so that families have the most direct access to support in the building where their child attends school.

The legislation also tackles the problem of students spending years in school without ever graduating by creating course equivalencies and stackable credits.

Many students who transition between a charter school, YSC, residential, and a DP DCPS school may be in ninth grade, despite spending years in high school.

This is because the district has 67 LEAs, each with its own courses and requirements, and credits do not typically transfer between institutions, leaving students stuck in a credit deficit.

With justification, students feel like they have been set up for failure and without a way to graduate, they are more likely to drop out or become chronically truant, leading to worse outcomes for employment and increasing the likelihood of future legal system involvement.

One important solution to problems regarding credits and transition planning, which is not included in this legislation, but should be, is a requirement that charter schools and out-of-boundary DCPS schools re-enroll youth who return from detention or other placements or not unenroll them from the community school in the first place.

Under the current system, a student is withdrawn from their community school after five days at YSC.

The original school then has the discretion to allow reenrollment.

Youth who have missed just a couple weeks of school while detained and have been cleared of all charges may have to reenroll in a boundary school that they expressly avoided through the lottery.

Being forced to attend a new school, typically after the school year has already started, adds stress and another barrier to education.

It may also increase family burden by separating siblings.

Further, when youth are in a non-public school placement because a public school cannot meet their special education needs, they have to restart that entire placement process.

It can take months and extensive litigation for the child to return to the non public placement that the school person that school personnel agreed the child needed because the public school was not able to meet their needs.

This is also a problem for summer school.

Youth who leave YSC after the school year ends cannot enroll in a community school until the fall and therefore cannot go to public summer school.

Another complication of withdrawing the child from their community placement is that the prior school loses access to the child's records and loses the ability to continue working on reports related to the student special education needs.

Thank you for advancing this important legislation.

We look forward to the opportunity to work with the committee as this legislation moves forward.

Thank you.

Claire Liebert is not here.

Taylor Bill.

Good afternoon.

Thank you, Chairman Mendelson, for holding this hearing.

First, I just want to actually start off with answering a couple of the questions you posed earlier to my fellow colleagues.

One, how much did the Nebraska Nebraska system cost?

It was about $300,000.

And so my understanding in talking with folks from Nebraska, some of our colleagues that work in similar spaces there, is that it is kind of the initial startup costs that might not be a complete calculation of how much the program will cost over the years.

For a sense of numbers, Nebraska has about 2200 adjudicated youth according to one of their 2024 reports, which is like one of the more recent ones that I could find online.

We have about 9600 young people in the care of DC, which also includes CFSA young people.

So Nebraska system does not.

So and that's based on the SEDC report that was just released at the end of June.

You know, I think that that is something to take into consideration as we think about, you know, what the real cost of this might be, which I understand it's a tough fiscal year.

Um yes, there's an initial startup cost, but as many of my colleagues have already spoken to today, SEDC has written about in its report, and I'm sure a lot of the government witnesses will testify to as well.

DC has done a lot of work in this space over the last several years.

We've been moving towards this moment for several years now.

So much of the framework has already started to kind of galvanize into place, and many of the players who are involved with these young people, like uh Ms.

Hayward who just testified, are are already kind of seeing some of the strengths that this bill could um lead to for young people in the district.

Um I just want to why do we have four times what Nebraska has?

So one Nebraska doesn't count youth in foster placement and is part of that calculation, so that's just the adjudicated young people.

That's not the petitions as well.

So I think that our number is a bit more inclusive of various folks in in different settings.

We also count folks in other um placements.

So I think that our number might be SED, which I'm a part of, um, kind of struggled to think about some of these numbers at the beginning, but I think that the goal was to be as comprehensive as possible when trying to calculate the number of students in the care of DC.

Um I didn't introduce myself.

My name is Tao Bell.

I'm uh the deputy director at School Justice Project and I am also a DCPS parent and award four resident.

Um every one of our clients at SJP since we opened our doors in 2013 has had this problem.

Um I'm gonna skip through much of my testimony.

I provided written testimony, but for the sake of uh today's my 15 seconds remaining, I just want to say that at the time that we had this hearing last time to address a very similar bill, the then SCDC executive director said, period, we need more time.

Well, six years later, we're at the same point.

I think that more time has been given.

Um the only other point I want to point out to you today, Chairman Mendelssohn, is that the SEDC report highlights a six-part policy framework.

And in relying on that framework, the SEDC report notes a number of state statutes that have been codified into law across the United States that work at bits and pieces of this solution, just like um the gentleman from Bellwether noted.

However, why is it that in those states those students are entitled to a law that codifies those rights for them?

Whereas we are suggesting just a policy frameworks, which we have found as in the advocacy community, like my colleagues have testified to, the memorandums of agreement just aren't working, unfortunately.

So even though we've tried, we just haven't gotten there yet, and I think part of that is because it has not actually nothing like this has been passed into law just yet.

Thank you.

Was there I I interrupted you with questions.

So do you need a little bit more time?

That's okay.

I uh submitted written testimony, um, but I'd be happy to talk with you or your office about this as long as you would allow me.

Uh well, no, I I invite uh I should say this with a little hesitation.

But yes, please uh folks work with my staff on this.

Why is it that the MOAs are not working?

I I think we all probably have different um reasons for that.

Um, you know, as you I I think that there have been very good intentions behind the MOAs.

Many of the right people needed to be at the table were there, I will say the advocacy and community weren't a part of those discussions, but that's to be understood.

Um I think part of it is that the agencies, um, the actual agency staff, one, in my experience, are not trained on the MOA.

They don't really understand exactly what their obligations are.

And two, I think that sometimes, you know, uh unfortunately, unless something is kind of written into law, um it's not understood that those are also obligations that the agency staff must undertake.

Um if if the MOAs would have been complied with, I think that um many of the situations that we've seen, certainly at School Justice Project over the years, um, could have been avoided.

So why does that give me optimism that uh our adopting legislation will have a better outcome?

Because the MOAs, um, while they are goal-oriented, I I don't know that they are actually prescriptive enough.

So one of the intents of this legislation was to provide a a lot of specificity to ensure that um any questions that you know could be raised about this population were answered in the legislation to ensure that the folks who are on the ground had uh real-time access to you know, take a look at the legislation, see what the process was, what does a transition team look like?

Who needs to be a part of that conversation?

Who uh needs to be a part of um what what does the course catalog look like and how how can the agencies ensure or also make sure that the agencies understand that across like the 65 LEAs that we have in the district?

Um you know, I I think that everyone who works with these young people is incredibly well intentioned, but also busy.

And so I think creating some type of structure that is in place that the agencies and the LEAs um can make sure that there is some type of framework that's adopted so that a policy within that LEA can be adopted and that school staff are trained on, that will actually ensure that this bill uh performs as it's supposed to, and that young people actually um are able to reap the benefits of it.

See, I asked a question because I think that an issue with implementation, whether it's a law or an MOA, is agency commitment.

The MOA is actually negotiated by the agency, right?

So you would think that they would have commitment.

A law that we pass isn't necessarily bought into by an agency, so it seems like commitment might be a little bit more tenuous.

Well, I mean, I think part of the challenge here is that uh I think there's a bias against kids who are in this care of DC.

And so the agency's got to have a commitment to it.

I'm not saying an MOA is the right way and that a bill is not.

We have the bill before us, and I certainly want to uh work on this.

But legislating is uh more distant from an agency's commitment than an MOA, I would think.

And you don't have to be the only one to answer if anybody else wants to jump in.

But sorry.

Um so what I will say on my part is I do actually I I work with the agency staff just about every day.

I will say I do think that it's a tremendously committed group of folks.

I do also think that there are um areas where the agency staff probably need to devote more resources in this area to this these particular student populations in order to make sure that they can effectuate the aims of this bill.

Um however, I do think that that is one of the kind of positive outcomes of um of actually codifying law.

I will also say that the fact that SEDC has been able to come so this far, um, though stopping short of you know fully supporting a codified piece of legislation really shows that the folks that are at that table, which is basically every agency that interacts with these um young people are committed and are willing to you know engage in that conversation but really are looking to the council, I think, for more um instruction on how specifically to do that and what is most important for council um in order for when they have to prioritize what they are and are not able to do.

Ms.

Winston?

Yes, I I think the answer boiled down to there being a lack of enforcement.

Um the MOAs were great frameworks for what should happen, but when it didn't happen, there is no way to make it happen.

And so that's I think Mr.

Beech was correct in his prior testimony about that is one thing that's missing from this bill is actually an enforcement mechanism.

If we had some sort of dispute resolution portion of it that allowed us to actually enforce making sure that transcripts actually happen, making sure that meetings that um new schools were actually designated.

There's no way for us to do that.

We can just point to the MOA and say, well, the MOA says you're supposed to do this, but there's nothing to force them to do it.

And that's lacking from the bill.

So what would what would you suggest?

Some sort of dispute resolution um either through the Office of Dispute Resolution, like for instance, with the home and hospital program, we have we can appeal that and we can actually have a hearing on that if it's not actually being implemented.

So I think if there was some sort of dispute resolution where we could resolve that, you know, if something's not happening, I think that would be helpful to make ensuring that these things happen if the agencies aren't following.

So let me just note that as you were saying that I'm thinking to myself, fiscal impact.

The more this bill costs, the more difficult difficult it will be, or less likely it will be that it's funded.

Just I mean that's a reality.

This council passes a lot of legislation that's subject to appropriation and every year with the budget, we have a list of bills that we're repealing because they never got funded.

I'm not interested in pushing a bill that has a cost.

So where am I going with that?

Just that um if it's dispute resolution process, it has to be as minimally costly as possible.

And that's why I pointed to the home and hospital appeal process, because there's very little that goes into that.

Um we it's it's you have a minor here.

It's not even a full hearing.

Essentially, we have we have a um we can have a um mercy why I'm forgetting the word for it.

Um we talk about uh what we're gonna do before we actually have a hand.

Yes, sorry.

Mediation.

We'll have our mediation sessions.

Um and usually they're resolved there.

So there isn't a whole lot that happens in terms of uh um having these hearings, but I think that um if there was something where we could actually say, hey, we we didn't get invited to a meeting, there was nothing in place in terms of us of a um school placement, it would allow us to be able to um enforce these things so that they could actually happen for students.

Uh one other question.

So there's some criticism that the bill is too prescriptive.

Any response I can respond to that.

Um so the last time around when we did this, we heard the opposite critique actually, that the bill wasn't prescriptive enough.

And so um and that it lacked a lot of detail.

And even today with the bill that Councilmember Parker introduced, um, his team did a fabulous job ensuring that there was a level of detail that was not previous before.

But I think even today you've heard through the testimony that's been presented that there are still areas that probably need to be um accounted for and markup.

However, I think that prescription is the way to go here because um without that, I think the agency staff and school staff on the ground kind of you know are left in a position of um wondering what else they were supposed to do in order to be compliant.

Um having a level of prescriptive prescription like this is kind of akin to something like um, you know, the the IDEA, where you have not just a lofty set of goals, but also a compli uh a set of procedural safeguards to ensure that everyone along the way knows exactly what they're supposed to do and when, so that no questions can be um, you know, left to the school staff who are again just trying their best to you know work with as many students as they can.

Any other comments, yes, Mr.

Dhorty?

I would only add that I think we very much agree that I think any kind of the level prescriptiveness that ensures that LEAs aren't trying to interpret the law, right?

And make sure that they're doing things correctly, we would support one area where we think that their uh more flexibility would help to better meet the intended outcomes of the bill is around the transition team.

Um there are a lot of folks who are are on that team, and we know that when we need to pull together a lot of people very, very quickly, that scheduling becomes a real challenge.

And so if the goal is to make sure that we're meeting um the work the students are in school, they're in the right classes as quickly as possible, we would um suggest that more flexibility in either the makeup or quorum of that of that team um would would help to advance the the intended purpose of the goal of the bill.

Any other questions?

Uh I don't have any other questions for you at this time.

Thank you all very much.

Um Rachel Russo is also with the School Justice Project.

Believe she's online.

Megan Conway, senior attorney at Children's Law Center.

Maria Boyer, director of programs and outreach of the advocates for justice and education.

T D Davis.

Ronan Ravenscroft.

Ronan Ravenscroft.

Jessica Giles, Executive Director of Center for Strong Public Schools Action Fund.

Rachel Russo, who's virtual.

Good afternoon, Chairman Mendelson and Councilmember Parker.

My name is Rachel Russo, and I'm a special education attorney and the director of operations at School Justice Project.

At SJP, we represent older court-involved students with disabilities during incarceration and throughout re-entry.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in support of Bill 26403.

One of the most frustrating conversations I've had in my career was one of my first meetings with a client I'll call Kevin.

At the time, 18-year-old Kevin was committed to DYRS.

When we met, he was excited.

He told me that someone had looked at his transcript and said that he had 25 credits, more than the 24 required to graduate.

He thought he was finished with high school.5 credits, but those credits told a very different story than that of a student about to graduate.

He had earned twice the music credits he needed, three times the art credits, and an astonishing 11 elective credits, even though only three and a half counted towards graduation.

Meanwhile, he'd never been enrolled in 11th or 12th grade English, was missing three science credits, and lacked several other required courses.

His records also showed that he had partial credits from out of state placements that had never transferred to his DC transcript.

That work simply disappeared.

Having to tell an 18-year-old that the graduation he thought he had earned was actually still at least a year away was devastating.

Kevin had done exactly what we asked young people to do.

He showed up to school, completed the classes he was assigned, and kept working despite repeated placement changes.

Yet the adults and systems responsible for coordinating his education had failed him.

Unfortunately, Kevin's story is not unique.

SJP regularly represents students who lose credits when they change schools, repeat classes they've already completed, or spend months taking courses that don't move them any closer to graduation.

Kevin's story is exactly why this legislation matters.

If Bill 26403 had been in place, Kevin's outcome likely would have been very different.

Those requirements may sound technical, but for students like Kevin, they're life-changing.

They are the difference between believing you've graduated and learning you still have at least another year of school.

They're the difference between months of hard work disappearing and that work counting.

Students in the district's care should not have to rely on luck or an attorney catching a transcript error after the damage has already been done.

Bill 26403 creates the structure and accountability needed to keep those students on track to graduation.

Kevin's story should not happen again.

When a young person in the district's care does the work, the district must ensure that work counts.

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify, and I welcome any questions.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding Bill 260403, the education continuity for students in the Care of DC Amendment Act of 2025.

Maria's been committed to CFSA for years.

After escalating mental health and community safety concerns and a stay at YSC, CFSA ultimately secured DBH approval to send Maria to a psychiatric residential treatment facility, a PRTF out of state.

This PRTF did not have a school.

The PRTF contracted with a remote off-site school monitor and an online school platform.

Maria did really well in the school program while at the PRTF.

She liked that it showed her progress in a very clear and visual way, and she also admitted that while on the PRTF, there was nothing else interesting to do.

She had successfully completed more than any of the other patients in the program and was very motivated to complete as much as she could to expedite graduating from high school upon her return to the district.

Throughout this time, my investigator and I spent hours in research, emails, phone calls with the school platform, with DCPS, probably with many in this room, trying to confirm that Maria would indeed get credit towards graduation for the hard work over the many months she was at this PRTF.

After the assigned DCPS monitor, Stepp stopped responding to us.

It turned out he had ceased employment with DCPS.

His supervisor took over, tried to secure approval for academic credit for Maria outside of the scope of her normal job, but she ultimately could not.

When it became clear that Maria would not get any academic credit for her hard work or a commitment from DCPS to enroll her in courses analogous to the ones she was working on, so she could at least continue the courses and pass.

She understandably completely disengaged.

I believe that not having a productive and future-oriented activity to engage in for most of each day negatively impacted not only her academic trajectory, but also her treatment and her return to the community.

The transition team envisioned by the bill before the council would be would have been required to convene before a school change took place.

If this transition team had existed and discovered that Maria would be going to a PRTF without a school and with only a digital platform from which DCPS does not accept credits, DCPS would have been obligated to plan for this.

And perhaps by setting Maria up with a platform that DCPS does accept and ensuring that she was enrolled only in courses that would further her progress toward graduation.

The transition team would be planning for her discharge as well, identifying the next school, managing her schedule, utilizing the uniform transcript evaluation process, and accepting partial credits where necessary.

We have another client, Tasha, who CFSA moved abruptly to a Florida residential treatment center in RTC two weeks before the end of the DC school year without consulting the education attorney in advance.

As such, Tasha was unable to complete the courses in which she was enrolled and did not obtain any academic credit for that term.

Florida's school year had already ended when the client arrived.

DCPS had not coordinated with the RTC to try to help ensure the youth could take classes for credits.

Because the RTC was not an Aussie approved program, the RTC did not have automatic access to any of her prior educational records, and DCPS did not access have access to the RTC's records, which DCPS did not figure out how to exchange the records, nor did anyone from BCPS attend more than a handful of meetings to monitor her education.

The youth was then discharged from the RTC just prior to the end of the term.

Florida requires an end-of-course exam to be completed to award credit, and Tasha was again moved without any plans or accommodation to take the exam to earn the credits she had almost completed.

Tasha left the RTC with no school placement, no school applications completed, or interviews conducted, no updates to her IEP or transition plans, and no academic credit having been achieved.

Even as her GAL and education attorney continued to fight for weeks after her return, they were ultimately unsuccessful in changing the outcome of this lack of coordination, accommodation, and planning.

I see that I am well over.

I have one final relevant client story to share if you would like to hear it.

I should say no, but I won't.

Appreciate that.

When one of my colleagues' clients came into care, CFSA noted that she was severely undercredited for a 17-year-old.

She had been enrolled in a DCPS high school since the fall, but was classified as a ninth grader because of her credit status.

The newly appointed education attorney and GAL requested transcripts from three different out-of-state high schools that the youth attended prior to moving to DC, even though she had been enrolled in the DCPS high school for months.

They sent these transcripts to the DCPS school, who did award credits accordingly, which put her as a 10th grade status with the possibility of taking summer school credit recovery to enroll as an 11th grader this fall.

This would mean she's only one year behind her same-age peers as a pro as opposed to three years behind, which is a big deal to a kid.

This new bill places the responsibility of communicating with a student in care's last school attended to obtain the records relevant to their credit status squarely with the point of contact for students in the care of DC.

Managing educational transitions for students in the care of DC is complex and involves staff at many different agencies.

Since I became aware of this credit bill six years ago, I've not seen any increase in consistency with outcomes for these particular district residents, and thus I believe the legislation is critical for uh helping our district residents as soon as possible.

Thank you very much.

Welcome any questions.

Thank you.

Maria Boyer.

And did I pronounce your last name correctly?

You did.

Thank you.

I I really appreciate it.

Um thank you very much again today, um, Chairman Mendelssohn for having me here.

My name is Maria Bloyer, and I am director of programs and outreach at Advocates for Justice and Education.

I very much appreciate the opportunity to talk about this legislation, and I appreciate Councilmember Parker and all of your co-introductees for this tremendous work.

This is important legislation, and it's important not just for the children we've been talking about today.

Um, you know, our court involved kids and our system connected kids.

This legislation creates really important infrastructure at the state level that will support the educ better educational outcomes for all DC children.

And I think it's really important to remember the fact that right now in DC, there's not a common core catalog, and there's no common definition of what certain classes are, and there's not LEAs aren't required to have a protocol for when they're reviewing transcripts from other students.

I thought Dr.

Hayworth's testimony was excellent when she talked about Algebra One as an example of a place where LEAs disagree sometimes on what Algebra One is.

Um I I'm excited about this legislation, not only for the court involved students and the system involved students that it supports, but also what it means for all students in the district.

We need that uniform course catalog.

We also really need you know some continuity and flexibility regarding um transcript reviews.

LEAs need to have a policy.

This legislation requires that they create a policy, and then it requires that they implement that policy.

Um that's important.

Um the other thing that I think is incredibly important here is to realize the impact that this has on students.

And I know I shared an article with you all regarding a young person I worked with some years ago, and I want to I want to spend some time talking about that.

Because I I have a reoccurring anxiety dream, like I think a lot of attorneys do.

Um every time I fill out a bar application, I have to go through my educational history and everything.

And um I have this dream that I find out that I didn't graduate from high school, actually.

It was like 30 years ago.

Um this family I worked with called and they said we just got a call from our school that said our kid didn't graduate.

I was like, that's crazy.

That didn't happen.

Um, except for it did.

I made several phone calls.

I talked with the LEA closed, unfortunately, right after the student graduated.

I talked to the PCSV, I talked to about four different LEAs, and because there wasn't a common definition of what a biology lab class looked like, this kid didn't get to graduate.

She delayed going to college, right?

And then, even more frustratingly, because then her new her old LEA closed, she didn't really get it together over the summer to go to this new unexpected.

I thought I was done with high school and now I have to go to high school class.

And I just want you to visualize what that must feel like, right?

You think you're done.

You have walked.

There is a picture of you being done with high school, and now you're not.

Um all of a sudden she had to meet a whole new LEA's graduation requirements.

So then instead of going from being like one lab credit behind, she was now two credits behind.

And then she wound up getting her high school diploma at the end of the next year after earning two new credits, but she wound up getting that diploma from a different LEA than she thought she would got her original diploma from.

That is so messy and unnecessary.

And that is so derailing for a student.

And this is the kind of thing that parents and youth deal with all the time in DC.

It's not just our kids who are court involved.

It's parents who may change LEAs because they moved, or may just transition LEAs because they think this would be a better fit for their child, or because their student is homeless.

Um, you asked a lot of great questions earlier.

I'm happy to answer them.

I am cognizant of the fact that I am over time.

Um, but you also have my testimony about this.

Um, but I do appreciate the chance to talk about this, and I think it's incredibly important for all of our kids in DC.

Thank you.

Uh thank you.

Kyla Woods.

I skipped DD Davis.

Oh, yeah.

Good afternoon.

Uh my name is Dee Dee Davis, and I'm a Ward Four resident of D.C.

and I appreciate the opportunity to testify here today about this bill.

I am a solo practitioner panel attorney at the DC Superior Court.

So I represent youth in the foster care system as a GAL.

I'm a defense attorney for youth in the juvenile justice system, and I'm a special education attorney for youth in both systems.

I usually spend my time in the courtroom or in school meetings.

I don't usually get involved in policy.

I usually just you know send my grievances and problems to these great people in this room.

But this bill was so important and is so relevant to all of my clients that I thought it was important to be here in person here today.

I've uh have about 20 years of experience just in this field with DC youth, and I've represented over a thousand clients.

And I would say, I know we've asked questions about numbers.

For my high school youth, it's close to 100% of them have the issues that this bill addresses.

Across the board, it's almost never a problem, never not a problem for our kids.

So I thought it was important to share a perspective of youth who don't have the support of SJP, PDS, CLC, all the organizations here, because that's only about half the youth in the system.

Most of them have me or an attorney that doesn't specialize in both systems or education.

There's actually a panel at the DC Superior Court of specialized education attorneys because there's such a need for educational issues to be addressed for our youth that the court pays attorneys to essentially sue or go against our public school systems because it's such a problem.

In fact, there's a wait list for youth to get those attorneys.

There's a wait list because there's too many kids that have those issues.

So I thought that was important to share today.

Um as we've already heard from several panel or uh members here testifying that the requirements in the legislation already exist in several places, whether that's guidance or memorandum of understanding.

Um the practice is that only a few agency staff actually know about those agreements.

So we've kind of talked about why they're may not be applied or enforced.

It's not that the intent isn't shared.

I work with a lot of the different organizations and government agencies that are apply to this bill, and the staff care.

They want to do what's right.

We've heard some of the testimony.

It's like it's not the ground level staff that know about the MOAs or what the requirements are, and those are the ones at the meetings.

I'm regularly at meetings where I am the only person that knows about the MOAs of the MOU.

And so I have to share that information.

So it's really hard for things to be implemented when they're not well known.

Um I wanted to share two provisions in the bill that I thought were especially impactful.

One is the interim educational services when the appropriate school placement cannot be identified.

We heard testimony about kids waiting days, weeks, months without services.

And so while the timelines are very reasonable for reenrollment, I believe it's two days for um most kids.

But some of the youth have significant or complex need that require those highly specialized placements, and they just cannot be arranged that quickly.

Most of them can, but there are a few that can't.

So those youth, what I'm concerned about is that they're gonna sit at detention centers while those placements are identified if there's a two-day requirement, or they'll stay at treatment facilities when the treatment's no longer needed because we need to identify those programs.

Instead, they should be able to return home and get those interim educational services.

So I think that's a very important provision in the bill.

And the second one I wanted to highlight is the dual enrollment provisions.

We all know that when the kids go to YSC, they're detained for more than five days, they're unenrolled from their LEA.

So if they were able to maintain that enrollment, we would eliminate most of the issues in this bill for half of the kids.

Short-term placement, if they can stay off dual enrollment, we don't have these issues.

Save a ton of money, time, and a headache for those kids.

And it would be similarly with the kids that are being discharged from long-term placements.

If they could overlap their reenrollment and be enrolled in the LEA that they're going to, records could be shared, placements could be identified.

Right now, kids, the L receiving LEA does not have any responsibility for kids until they're enrolled.

So when they're at New Beginnings and they're going to a certain charter school or DCPS, those LEAs have no responsibility legally for the kids until they're enrolled.

That's not a lot of incentive for them to participate in that pre-discharge planning to identify the staff that are needed, much less kids that are going to Maryland.

That's a different issue.

But if there was dual enrollment, when the kid is enrolled in your school, you're required to do things for that youth.

And that would help a lot.

So I wanted to highlight those two provisions.

And I think that the strengthening the out-of-state placements provisions by requiring the education plan before a child is placed, kind of as Megan highlighted, would be great.

Not just discharge planning on the back end on the front end before youth goes, having a plan for education, because I do want to acknowledge that there are kids that need specialized placements.

So I am concerned about having the provision that the kids can only be placed in facilities with accredited schools.

For the vast majority of kids, we do want accredited schools.

That's very important.

But some kids have very specialized needs, mental health, substance use, kids that have been exposed to CSEC.

You know, sometimes that is the priority, but there needs to be an education plan for those youth in advance before they go there to help eliminate the issues on the back end.

Finally, I just wanted to point out that the youth that we're working with for the most part, they're not falling behind because they can't do the work where they're not doing the work.

They're falling behind because the work they've done is not being recognized.

The work they've done is not being acknowledged or transferred back to their schools, and that's failing our youth.

We all know that the value of the high school diploma and the recidivism rates, the employment rates for those youth, and by us not having a mechanism for our youth to continue on their path to graduation, or for further perpetuating those statistics.

I actually was very disheartened to read the Aussie testimony about the data and the numbers for our youth in the juvenile justice and the neglect system.

And so I think that this bill would go a long way to helping those numbers increase into helping our youth graduate.

Happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you.

And I don't have a copy of your statement.

I can submit it.

If you would, please.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chairman Mendelson and members of the committee of the whole.

My name is Kyla Woods.

I am the associate director of policy and outreach at Open City Advocates.

Today, our CEO, Penelope Spain is inside a federal prison today working with a client.

She asked me to deliver this testimony on her behalf.

Open City Advocates provides legal representation and holistic mentoring to youth committed in DC's Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services.

We begin working with clients after they have been removed from their homes and placed in secure facilities.

And we stay with them through re-entry.

Open City Advocates strongly supports this bill, and we thank Council Member Parker for introducing it.

The council has heard this from us before.

In November of 2020, Open City Advocates testified in support of this bill's predecessor.

Six school years have passed.

The ninth graders of that fall have finished school or given up on it, waiting for a fixed.

The problem has not moved.

For more than two decades, we have watched what education does for our clients.

It leads to jobs, cuts the risk of rearrest, and reconnects young people to their communities.

One of our clients completed his GED after years of disillusionment with school and multiple DYRS placement disruptions disruptions.

With that credential, he found the confidence to work three jobs and set a new goal, college.

Credits matter exactly for this reason.

Wendy Calvadish's study of committed youth found that more the more credits a young person earns while confined, the more likely they are to return to school and earn a diploma after release.

Here is what we see instead.

Nearly every DYRS placement change means a school change in every nearly, I'm sorry, and nearly every school change costs credits.

As you've heard, our clients are told to repeat courses they have already passed.

They, their families, their advocates spend weeks chasing transcripts, school records, and IEP updates.

And when young people learn that their hours in a facility classroom do not count towards graduation, they reasonably stop trying.

Three provisions matter most to us.

A transition team, an IEP-style team for credit transfer, so that assists a student has an education plan upon placement changes.

Something that others have said as well that it's extremely important is a uniform course catalog.

Aussie's catalog and equivalency table means that DCPS, public charter schools, and non-public chart public schools can finally speak one language about the courses our students earn towards graduation.

Enrollment within two days, as has been mentioned before.

Our hope is that no student sits at home losing momentum.

One more provision that matters to us is stackable of partial credits.

They mean that the work a student does in any classroom counts somewhere and keeps counting until the course is complete.

Chairman Mendelssohn, we know you want evidence that this bill is universally applicable.

It is.

This is why we work alongside education advocates year after year.

These problems come up for our clients again and again.

A system that can move credits for a young person leaving a secure facility can move credits for anyone.

We understand many details will be worked out at markup.

The core of the bill must survive it.

Transition planning, one course catalog, and fast enrollment.

Our clients have waited six years.

We urge the committee to move it.

Thank you for your consideration.

And we are available for to answer questions via email in uh Ms.

Spain's absence.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I have a just a couple of questions.

Ums Davis, you spoke about dual enrollment.

What do you mean by that?

Sorry.

When our youth are detained at YSC for the five days, whatever LEA they came from, it's with they're withdrawn and then they're re-enrolled at MyAngelo.

So they're they end one enrollment and start a new one, and then they have to transfer back.

So I want the dual enrollment that the bill would allow is to maintain enrollment at your prior LEA and the current LEA.

So therefore both can access your records.

So we don't have to then, when you leave YSC five days later, your charges are dropped or decided that you can be in the community.

You don't then have to go re-enroll somewhere else because some charter schools don't have to allow you to come back.

Or your out-of-boundary school doesn't have to allow you to come back.

So if you're going back to your neighborhood school, you then have to re-enroll and then your records from your first LEA and from my Angelo then have to transfer to that school.

If you can be enrolled in both places, it's seamless.

Got it.

And let me see, Ms.

Conway.

You described uh, let me see.

Uh one of the individuals, Maria, you said that DC, let me see.

Um we would be going to a PRTF without a school and with only a digital platform from which DCPS does not accept credits, DCPS would have been obligated to plan for this.

Isn't that a fiscal doesn't that create a fiscal impact?

A fiscal cost to DCPS.

So what I'll have to in my experience on this case, one of the things that we learned was that DCPS does accept certain other online platforms and just that they did not accept the particular one that that PRTF used.

So if we had planned for, I don't think that would create, I'm not sure how much money that would create to enroll one extra student or paying for an extra profile in the platform that DCPS already uses somewhere.

Um I don't see how that would create a significant fiscal impact.

Does that make sense?

Uh it makes sense.

I still wanted to ask the question.

Okay.

Um I mean again, I want to be mindful of um where there could be a cost.

Right, right.

Um, you know, presumably if DCPS accepts credit from those, that means some other DCPS schools, correct me if I'm wrong.

Um, or maybe in their Digital Pioneers Academy.

Let me just stop there and let you ask that question to someone who knows more about what DCPS offers.

But for my from where I sit, it shouldn't cost more than adding a student um profile on and planning for them to be enrolled in the proper program.

Ms.

Boyer, you were being pointed to.

Do you know more about this?

Well, I think it's really important to recognize that right now DC is paying a lot of money for classes that don't count.

So there is a built-in savings with this legislation because you know the young man who's got seven art classes.

You know, we just wasted the cost of one, two, three, four, five art classes because you only need one art class to graduate.

So there is a built-in savings to having a more rational credit um obtainment process.

Um and I don't want that to be disregarded in this conversation.

It's saving children's time, but it's also saving the district's time and money.

Now you said there were some questions you did I asked earlier.

Do you want to answer?

Well, I I just want to flag that I think the reenrollment issue that both DD and PDS raised is really important.

Um, because we also waste a lot of time and money when kids are coming out of facility, not being able to re-enter their school.

So I think that's an that's a place where there's money that can be saved.

And I also just think it's really important to realize this is a universal problem.

This is not a problem just for our most involved um students.

I think um my colleague from Open City Advocates said it really well.

It shows up really clearly with our court-involved kids, but it's a problem for all of our kids who have any kind of movement between LEAs or who come in and out of the system.

I think you're right, it's a problem for military families as well.

Yeah.

I just added one thing for the PRTFs.

If the student has an IEP, the district is paying for that education at that PRTF that doesn't count.

So it wouldn't be an additional cost, it would just be getting your money's worth for credits that will actually transfer back.

So when it when a youth is placed by DYRS or CFSA and they have a special IEP, that cost is being funded by the district.

So ensuring that they're actually earning credits that can count for district diplomas is is actually cost savings that they're not going to have to repeat when then they get then come back to the district.

Thank you.

Councilmember Parker.

I don't have many questions.

I thought this was a really insightful panel.

I did note, DD Davis.

Uh thank you for your testimony, the interim school services and the dual enrollment.

Um this is less a question for you, but just thinking out loud when you said the dual enrollment part.

My immediate thought was how would we do a school count?

Or would we have students on uh LEA's role that is in detention and how do you accommodate if now those students are being recorded in multiple areas?

Uh that's something I'm sure we can figure out, but it's just one of the many challenges uh that that would uh cause.

Uh but you make a very compelling reason why we should explore it because it would cut down on that transfer time and window uh as students are moving in between LEAs.

But it seems like you wanted to jump in there.

Yes, so they would be enrolled at one LEA as a non-attending student.

They wouldn't be only intending one, and a similar way we do that now is with students who attend non-public schools.

So they maintain their spot in the LEA who place them at the non-public school, but they're in fact enrolled at the non-public school.

So they are in two systems, but they're only attending one.

So they're they're still in the on the roles at their local LEA, but they're not going to that school daily, they're attending a different school.

Okay.

And I thank you.

Um again, uh really compelling testimony from all of you.

Thank you.

I uh you give us a lot to think about, uh, but by and large, it seems as though you're uh lifting up the need for this type of legislation, which I really appreciate.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

Uh we're going to turn to the government witnesses.

Aisha Brathwaite Flicker, General Counsel, Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services, and Kylan Boardman Scheuer, Assistant Superintendent, Postsecondary, and Career Education Officer, the State Superintendent of Education.

Um Ms.

Flicker, you want to start.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chairman Mildelson and Councilmember Parker and the members of the committee of the whole.

I'm Aisha Braithwaite Fluker, the general counsel at the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on the education continuity for the students in the care of DC Amendment Act of 2025.

DYRS strongly supports the goal of ensuring educational continuity for youth in the district's care.

We share the committee's commitment to reducing educational disruptions and improving coordination among agencies that serve vulnerable youth.

Having access to critical education records, creating a uniform transcript, evaluation procedure, dual enrollment, allowing course waivers, and granting community service exemptions are impactful amendments that help ensure young people in the care of DYRS are on the best possible path to graduation.

While we support these vital additions, there are specific aspects of the bill that DYRS recommends modifying to improve implementation.

The bill creates a series of significant new mandates related to enrollment timelines, transition planning, and education record access and service provision to securely detained and sheltered youth that would require substantial new staffing and operational infrastructure that do not currently exist within the agency.

Currently, DYRS has a small education team that includes one supervisor and two educational specialists.

The team provides education transition services and helps to build a supportive network for our committed and post-committed youth.

Under the proposed legislation, DYRS would be responsible for educational planning for youth served by the court social services division.

Currently, CSSD collaborates with guardians and families of securely detained youth released by the court to ensure school attendance.

Additional staffing would be required to support the implementation of this legislation.

DYRS estimates that we will need at least seven additional full-time employees dedicated to education transition planning, enrollment coordination, and ongoing operational support.

Beyond the fiscal impact, several provisions present operational concerns.

I will provide three examples.

One, the bill's mandated timelines in some instances are not achievable given the realities of placement changes.

Currently, under procedures established by DYRS, the Office of the State Superintendent of Education, and the District of Columbia Public Schools, youth must be enrolled within five days.

This time frame is not arbitrary, but is aligned with DC Code 162312G, which requires detained youth to appear before the court within five days.

At the court hearing, various substantive issues are discussed, often including a change of placement to the community.

Having a transition meeting seven days prior to court is not possible if a youth is only in our care for five or fewer days.

Failure to account for these challenges would create requirements that DYRS cannot possibly meet.

Example two.

Provisions allowing educationally noncompliant facilities to be removed from placement eligibility are also concerning.

While accountability is important, limiting available placement options without ensuring sufficient alternatives could significantly reduce placement capacity for youth with specialized treatment needs.

Such reductions could limit the agency's ability to place to make placements based on the individualized needs of youth.

And then my last example is that the bill's mandates, the bill mandates that the receiving LEA shall provide the student with interim education services that allow the student to make academic progress towards graduation if not placed in an educational placement within two days.

Doing so would be an impossible feat if the young person is not enrolled in an educational program.

The bill should consider defining interim education services with specificity around the education services would be how they would be implemented and who would be providing those services, especially given that the youth is not currently enrolled in school.

For these reasons, DYRS respectfully recommends that the committee not advance the legislation in its current form.

Instead, we encourage a collaborative process involving DYRS, Aussie, the Child and Family Services Agency, the Department of Corrections, local education agencies, and other stakeholders to develop a phased implementation plan with clearly identified funding, realistic timelines, and shared accountability measures.

DYRS remains committed to working with the council and our partner agencies to improve educational outcomes for youth in the district's care.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on this important legislation.

I'm available for any questions you may have.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Flucher.

Mr.

Boidman Boardman Troyer.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chairman Mendelson, Councilmember Parker, and Council Staff.

My name is Kylan Boardman-Shoyer.

I am the assistant superintendent for post-secondary and career education for the Office of the State Superintendent of Education.

In this role, I help oversee programs that support students in high school and beyond.

I'm joined by Victoria Glick, Aussie's Director of Special Education who can answer questions about Aussie's role in supporting students with disabilities who are in the care of DC.

I appreciate the opportunity to offer testimony on Bill 26403, the Education Continuity for Students in the Care of DC Amendment Act of 2025.

First, I want to thank you for holding a hearing on this important topic and for shining a spotlight on students in the care of DC.

Increasing pathways to timely graduation and improving postsecondary outcomes is central to ASE's mission and our recently launched five-year strategic plan.

We share the Council's goal of ensuring that students in care, who often experience significant periods of mobility, receive consistent, high quality educational opportunities.

ASI agrees that the district should improve practices and structures to better serve this high need population.

We also recognize that the bill text would benefit from further refinement and that the proposed solutions carry significant costs.

ASI looks forward to working with the council and our sister agencies to refine the bill to achieve our shared goals with an effective framework and the necessary resources.

This bill touches upon the responsibilities and practices of many government agencies and partners.

In my testimony today, I will provide some context for the legislation by describing our agency's role in supporting students in the care of DC, as well as the existing needs of this population.

This background should add clarity regarding agency roles and existing practices and underscore the need for improvement.

Then I will provide recommendations for the legislation and how to move forward.

Ultimately, our hope is that we will have the opportunity to continue to dialogue with the council and all the relevant agencies, including local education agencies, the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services, the Child and Family Services Agency, the Department of Corrections, and the Family Court Social Services Division to work towards the best possible legislative approach.

To ground our conversation, I will share some education data about students in care.

DC serves one nearly 100,000 students in district LEAs and state public agencies.

Of these students, approximately 500 individuals were enrolled in DYRS or DOC during the 25-26 school year, and 400 were placed in the care of CFSA with overlap between these populations.

Our preliminary data show that approximately half of students enrolled in DYRS or DOC in the 25-26 school year did not re-enroll in a DC public or public charter school.

10% re enrolled in District of Columbia Public Schools, DCPS, 5% re enrolled in a public charter school, and 35% remain enrolled in DYRS or DOC.

In the 24-25 school year, the district achieved a record high four-year graduation rate of 79%.

In contrast, students who enrolled in DOC or DYRS during high school had four and five-year graduation rates of 10 and 15%, and students in the care of CFSA had four and five-year graduation rates of 24 and 31%.

These alarming data demonstrate the urgent need to strengthen supports for this high-need population.

Students in care may attend a variety of schools depending on the outcome of justice or child welfare systems involvement.

ASI is one of many DC government agencies that play a role in ensuring educational continuity for students transitioning across the justice and child welfare systems.

As a state education agency, Aussie plays a limited though important role in monitoring educational services for a subset of students in care.

Specifically, under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA, ASI ensures that students with individual education programs receive the services they are entitled to across our complex ecosystem of students in care.

We do so through memorandums of agreement that establish the roles of each agency, expectations for cross-agency coordination, data sharing, practice alignment, and the procedures each agency will take to support a seamless transition for students across systems based upon existing resources.

ASI regularly convenes with sister agencies to refine our agreements and revise agency practices to reflect the needs of students in care.

For example, the MOAs identify agency responsibilities and set timelines for enrolling students in school, transferring transcripts and special education records, and reviewing transcripts to identify appropriate class placements.

Cross agency coordination includes the leadership and work of our sister agencies.

CFSA is responsible for the welfare of students in their care.

The fostering connections to success and increasing adoptions act of 2008 requires CFSA to maintain a student's enrollment in their LEA whenever possible.

Like the transition meeting described in the proposed bill, CFSA meets this federal mandate by convening a cross-agency meeting for each student to address educational continuity.

At this meeting, all district agencies involved in a student's care are engaged in a discussion about the best interest of the student with a focus on educational continuity and the steps each agency must take to seamlessly transition the student's home and educational life to the next phase.

Under local and federal law, DYRS, DOC, DCPS, and charter schools have specific responsibilities for providing education to students in their facilities or enrolled in their schools.

For students transitioning between DYRS and LEAs, agencies engage in data sharing, transcript analysis, joint planning for enrollment to align with housing transitions and other cross-coordination activities to plan for student success.

The district has made significant progress over time in developing and growing systems to support students in care, but we must continue to improve our systems and supports to ensure smooth transitions and educational continuity.

Now that I've walked you through some important background information, I will speak to the bill before us.

As previously mentioned, the council's focus on this population of students and the complexity of their unique situations is warranted, and we support both the intent and the conceptual framework that is outlined in the bill.

That being said, there are multiple provisions that we recommend revising to ensure the language is detailed enough to support the required coordination among the relevant agencies, but not so prescriptive that today's proposed solutions become tomorrow's self-imposed hurdles.

This is a complex bill with 19 definitions and 87 different requirements, approximately half of which touch upon Aussie's work.

It assigns new responsibilities across multiple agencies, creates new operational processes, and introduces new definitions and requirements that interact with federal law, local regulations, MOAs, and LEA level practices.

ASI has a number of recommended edits and clarifying questions.

For the sake of time, I will not list them here now, but I have provided a few examples in the appendix of my written testimony.

Because of the scale and complexity of the bill, ASI strongly recommends a collaborative approach.

We would welcome the opportunity to work with the Council, the Deputy Mayor for Education, LEAs, SPAs, CFSA, and other relevant stakeholders to identify immediate next steps and determine which provisions should be prioritized for near-term implementation and which require longer-term solutions and associated funding.

For example, rather than establishing highly prescriptive one-size-fits-all requirements for transcript evaluation or credit transfer, we believe it would be more effective to create a framework that will bring SPAs and LEAs together to improve existing practices and develop consensus-based solutions.

This approach aligns with how we have successfully improved policy and practice in other areas through clear guidance and data-informed capacity building support for LEAs.

Simultaneously, there are provisions that would benefit from greater specificity.

For example, the bill requires Aussie to develop training and guidance to respond to the specific needs of students in the care of DC.

This broad language makes it difficult for ASI to know what actions to take or to develop a fiscal impact statement.

In sum, Aussie supports the council's goal of strengthening educational continuity and improving outcomes for students in care.

We agree that this population deserves focused policy attention, strong collaboration among agencies, and streamlined systems that reflect the experience of multi-systems involved youth.

However, significant revisions are needed before the first reading.

We look forward to working with the council, LEAs, and our sister agencies to develop clear, cost-effective solutions that will help students in the care of DC succeed.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

So the way I heard ASI's testimony is that there needs to be some work before first reading, that there's some over prescriptiveness in some areas, under prescriptiveness, or I'll say vagueness in other areas.

But working with us the way I read QIRS's testimony is the committee not advanced the legislation.

And instead a collaborative process.

We encourage the collaborative process.

I'm struck by the testimony that says that there was a hearing six years ago at which the outcome was there needs to be some collaborative work, and nothing's happened in six years.

So why would I have any confidence about a collaborative process at this point?

Who wants to take first shot?

Ms.

Flucker.

I would defer to ASI on that question.

Thank you.

Chairman.

Yes, except your testimony was a little bit more strident on this point.

Like don't move the bill.

We want a collaborative process.

I mean, what I can say is that I think that there are new players at the table right now who have I work well with ASI and DYRS works well with all of the stakeholders that we mentioned in our testimony, and we do think that there can be some creative work that can happen to ensure that the bill is written in a way that accounts for some of the challenges that we raise.

And so I don't know if Aussie has anything additional to add on that.

I think all I would add is first I would say that while it is very clear, and the data that's included in my testimony make very clear that we have not done enough to support this population of students.

I do think that there has been some progress over the last six years.

I think that there's been an evolution and refinement of the MOAs, and Director Glick can speak to some of those practices.

I also do think that some of the transparency that the bill is trying to create around course data and how certain courses should be eligible for course equivalency when looking at transferring students between SPAs and LEAs.

That work has been largely not completed, but but the foundation has been built through our course data collection that has happened over the last several years and thanks to the council, we'll continue to be able to move forward.

And a lot of the work that we've done there will build significant foundation to support some of the course equivalency and the transfer elements that are that are envisioned within this proposed bill.

So you mentioned MOAs, uh but we heard testimony that the MOAs are not very effective.

So why even bother with the MOAs?

It was a little harsh on my part, but there was testimony, I think early on that the uh MOAs aren't enforceable or aren't enforced, or are I looking for variation on not enforceable and not enforced.

Well, I think that there's um there's been some good work on establishing what we want to happen through the MOAs, and I'm going to defer to Director Glick to speak around how we try to work to implement those MOAs with fidelity.

Thanks, Chairman.

Um, and thank you for the question.

Um a note on enforceability, and then I'll talk a little bit about the MOAs themselves and um the progress we've made with those MOAs.

Um so uh the MOAs uh are a network of foundational concepts and agreements and that the agencies have come together um through those structures to um establish a shared agreement and procedures for how the district will coordinate um across a number of areas data sharing um who's responsible um by agency for particular actions when the student transitions um and a variety of other operational aspects.

To your point earlier to the panel, that those MOAs are the basis of our shared agreement as agencies about what we do as individual agencies in this very complex ecosystem to move students back and forth through these systems.

These MOAs are predominantly applicable to students with disabilities.

The enforceability of the education for students with disabilities lies in the federal law, not inside these MOAs.

And so I I think you and I have discussed at length during the special education hearings about the enforceability of those rights.

And so the MOAs are effectively enforceable in the context of the IDEA.

They are not designed to establish entitlements beyond what already exists under the federal special education law.

A note on the legislation, while the legislation establishes quite a bit of accountability, it does not establish a remedy.

And so the enforceability our review of the legislation in terms of enforceability doesn't necessarily achieve the end goal that we share, which is that students have a remedy if if they in fact are not receiving the education they're entitled to.

Another note on the MOAs, just briefly, is that the MOAs are capture education and the responsibilities across different agencies based on the different circumstances and agencies involved in a particular scenario.

So it is a network of MOAs.

And that while the legislation seeks to address the full scope of circumstances for all students in the care of DC, the MOAs only really speak to students with disabilities.

And so when looking at the MOAs against the entire group that this legislation I understand is intended to address, it's a bit of an apples oranges comparison.

So you're making some comments with regard to the bill, and I'm still stuck on my question about the MOAs.

And I'm looking at this testimony.

Specifically, the current system lacks intentional planning before school transitions, clear assignment of responsibilities for timely enrollment and records transfer, uniform procedure for credit evaluations, and a requirement that LEAs award partial credits or that they apply transferred credits to graduation requirements.

Not sure all that's supposed to be in an MOA, but I am kind of stuck on the are not routinely followed or not enforceable.

But rather than spend more time on MOAs.

So Ms.

Flucker, maybe I just need to confess that I'm still a bit damaged from the legislation on the Road Act, which was all about planning, which DYRS resisted at the time, resisted when it was going through the council on first and second reading, and as far as I can tell, continues to resist.

Why is it that DYRS doesn't believe in planning?

Your answer is going to be, well, you do, but then you say you need at least seven additional full-time employees, which says to me either that DRS is looking to uh torpedo this bill with a cost, or the DYRS is uh under resourced.

I suspect it's more the latter, although I will bet Councilmember Parker can contradict me if I'm wrong that the director of DR DYRS testified at his budget hearing that the budget for DYRS was adequate and met all the needs.

So which is it?

Um about planning, which seems to not exist in this space with regard to students in the care of DC, or um under resourced and not wanting to admit it.

So why not microphone?

Yes, we do support planning.

Um we we know that planning is the cornerstone to rehabilitation in ensuring that we work with the parents of our youth, the at the legal advocates that represent our youth, and the youth themselves to ensure that they get the supportive services that they need.

I think sometimes there is a push and pull between whether something needs to be codified in the law if it's already occurring at the agency.

Well, if it's already occurring, then there should not be a need for seven additional full-time employees dedicated to an educational transition planning.

You mean like educational planning?

Right.

So we do have an education team currently.

Two people.

Yeah, and a supervisor.

So then it's adequate what's being provided?

Because I've just listened to a couple hours of testimony about how these kids are falling through the cracks.

I I think we've all all heard the data that we we want to make sure that our young people are graduating at a higher rate than what what we heard today.

What I'm saying is that the bill requires additional work that's not currently being done through DYRS, and that they it's being done either through Aussie or through DCPS or through court social services division.

DYRS's main goal is to ensure that we work with our committed youth and ensure that they transition uh out to um better education programs.

But when we're talking about working with securely detained youth, that population is so transient.

They might be at YSC for two days, three days, 10 days.

Um it just depends.

And so once they leave our facility, they have no um there's no legal reason for them to engage with DYRS further.

This bill is indicating that we would need to make sure we have transition planning, prepare for um court hearings in advance, seven days in advance.

Those are the additional things that we would need additional support for.

Also, as it relates to accessing new technologies through DCPS or Aussie, we currently have some um information, but we're not currently have access to Aspen, which is another system that the district uses to enroll enroll and disenroll students.

So those are different investments that would be needed.

Um we right now we transition kids within five days.

This bill is saying within two days.

And so anytime you're in saying you want to do something faster, oftentimes you need additional support to get that done.

I may come back to this, Councilmember Parker.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um I am struck by this testimony.

I I I don't know what I anticipated, but I thought it was going to be a the gist of let's work together and uh support our most vulnerable students.

And what I'm hearing from DYRS and ASI, I'm taking away is yes, we have a problem, but let's not address it in this way.

Um maybe I'm interpreting it the wrong way, but uh I'm struck and I'm being generous there.

I want to start with DRS.

And so well, before I go there, we acknowledge that there is a problem with credit transfers, the lack of transitional support and services between LEAs and for young people in the detention of DRS and in our foster care system.

It seems like everybody acknowledges that that is a problem.

I think the stat that was given is that we have a 10 to 15 percent four-year graduation rate for young people leaving VRS.

That's a problem.

It's also worth noting, and it was alluded to earlier that uh education services are linked to recidivism.

I think the last reports we had on recidivism had it above 50 percent, meaning everything we're doing at D R S is a revolving door in the young people are coming right back to the agency, which is aligned with what I heard from the young man that I referenced earlier.

And then there's this subtext, and I'm getting to my questions that what is the role of ASI?

Now, I may be on the island by myself, and I know I've talked about this many times, but it almost seemed as though in your testimony, uh, the representative from ASI, you're suggesting many agencies have the responsibility for these young people, not us.

That's what I'm taking away from the testimony.

So I'm gonna clarify that because I see it as ASI's responsibility ultimately, regardless if the young person is in the care of DRS, CFSA or any LEA.

Uh for DRS.

One of the challenges, and the chairman just spoke about this, you raise staffing challenges.

Are you prepared to talk about which provisions you believe are achievable today with the three FTEs you currently have versus the seven you would need to implement this bill?

Sorry.

The dual enrollment, a course uh catalog, those types of things we believe would be very helpful in ensuring young people transition as quickly as possible from either YSC Youth Services Center or New Beginnings.

Um those would not require new investments on on behalf of DYRS, and we think that those would be great additions to assisting young people to move forward in their educational program.

Okay.

Uh let me ask this.

Do you are you satisfied with the transitional services at D R S today?

I think that we're doing the best job that we can.

Um I know that I routinely make sure that I am available to all uh panels, most uh and when I say panels, I'm talking about the legal advocates that represent our young people.

They know if there is an issue with any type of any issue, but obviously an educational transition issue, that they can raise it to my office, the Office of General Counsel at DYRS, and we will work closely with them to try to resolve that issue.

And on average, in a given, let's say a period of time, a month, how many of those complaints or issues does your office field?

So in the last I've been with DYRS for approximately four years, and while there are due process complaints that have been raised through my Angelo Academy that they will resolve, there's only been one that was provided to where I have.

Okay.

I can assure you that there have been more than one instances where young people are running into these barriers.

Maybe they're not running it up the chain, and only one has reached your office, but I routinely hear that this is a barrier.

We heard from Maya earlier today, the provider at D R S that they're saying, yes, this is a routine issue for us.

Uh so I just would hope that this would be something the agency would look at and potentially work with uh my team on.

I want to keep going though.

Another area you highlighted was expanded responsibilities.

Yes, the bill expands responsibilities for both Aussie and the agency in recognition that we're not doing a good job as a district right now.

We should be clear-eyed about that.

It does expand responsibility.

No, I I agree with you, yes.

Okay, so you indicated that the bill would require D R S to assume educational planning responsibilities for youth served by court social services, and you talked about that.

Um you have a proposal by how you would divide responsibilities between DRS and court social services.

I took from that comment that uh you would recommend a bifurcated approach where you all deal with young people in your care, we deal with young people in our care.

Is that what you're getting at?

No, DYRS has always been in support of a unified system.

Um we know that there are challenges with making that happen, but we have been working closely with the new CSSD director, and there is collaboration happening.

I think that the issue is that when a young person is no longer under our supervision and they're under the supervision of court social services division, that parent that's involved, that young person that's involved in those cases, they have that there's no hook for them to still engage with DYRS.

So we could make a transition plan or or be responsible for scheduling a transition plan, but they they don't have to attend.

Um there's no reason, it's almost like an inmate who gets released from DOC because maybe you know their case got dismissed or you know and then DOC is still reaching out to them to say, hey, I want to do education planning with you.

If D R S is making a transition plan and is sharing it with court social services who is working with that young people person to make sure they're going to school, going to work, what have you, while they're under their supervision, why would not why would court social services not adhere to the plan that presumably you would have worked with them on create it for the young person in question?

No, I I think that all of our stakeholders are we want to ensure that young people receive education, and I think that they would be in support of that.

And if there is a meeting that happens with all of us at the table, I think all of us would ensure that it's followed.

Okay.

And then you had issues with timelines.

I heard the one area where you said it's two days, and so I'm hearing you would recommend it remain at five days.

Yes, I would recommend that it remain at five days, yes.

Okay.

Uh are there alternative benchmarks that DURS uh believes would still achieve timely educational transition um services outside of that five-day window?

Yes.

I mean, the five days would be the limit.

Most young people who transition from YSC and to go to new beginnings, it's a s a seamless transition.

Um those young people are already getting um education services through my angelo at YSC and they transition to new beginnings without any disruption.

I think the areas that are more challenging are young people who have to go to out-of-state placements.

And that is a population that I think is a more difficult to manage and plan for because those young people have individual individualized needs.

And I think you heard from a prior um person, Ms.

Davis, who spoke about the substance abuse.

Some of our kids need intensive substance abuse.

And they might be in an intensive program, a detox program.

And education services may not be available there, but the goal is for them to get clean first.

We want to make sure young people get clean and stabilize.

Um and obviously education is always at the forefront as well, but we do have young people who have specialized needs.

And to say that a young person, if they are placed at a placement that's providing them with treatment and the education is not in alignment with what ASI thinks is appropriate, they get removed.

We think that that would be a challenge and wouldn't be appropriate.

That is a wouldn't serve the young person.

I just would encourage you to review that with the agency.

I don't think DRS should publicly make that statement that if our state education agency says this is not worthwhile education, we should still send young people to that program.

What what I'm saying is that we want to make sure that we have the appropriate treatment facilities available.

And treatment is important.

And stabilization we want to make sure that our young people get stabilized.

And education should be provided there, but there is, I'm sorry, there is a missing link between the education that they're receiving at these specialized placements and what Aussie is willing to accept.

And so that's why we are in support of a catalog so that and so that when a young person leaves a placement, they are able to get the services and support.

I mean, get the credits that they're looking for.

Okay.

I have many more questions, Mr.

Chairman.

I just would say education is a rehabilitation services service, in my opinion.

Mine too.

And it should not be seen as secondary that if you get this treatment or if we can place you here, uh we'll get to the education after the fact.

And so again, I I take your feedback with the positive intention I believe you're uh making it, but I think the sentiment, how I'm receiving it is yeah, there is a problem, but other things trump the education that our young people would receive.

And I think we can do both things.

We can get them the care they deserve while also giving them the education that is quality and that will put them on the right path.

I agree with you, Council.

Okay.

So I hope we can work together on that.

Yes.

Awesome.

Accept that in your testimony, you say provisions allowing educationally noncompliant facilities.

I'll repeat educationally noncompliant facilities to be removed from placement eligibility are also concerning.

Well, accountability is important, limiting available placement options without ensuring sufficient alternatives could significantly reduce placement capacity for youth with specialized treatment needs.

I mean, you have it right there in writing.

What is the point of sending a or providing a youth who is in DYRS's care with educationally noncompliant services that are just a waste of that person's just a waste of that person's uh I don't know what I want to say, time?

Expectations.

How can that be justified in any way?

I think that um the conversation that I was having with Councilman Parker, I want to just reiterate that we understand the importance of education.

And we want to work with Aussie and DCPS to ensure that our young people's credits that they're receiving at these placements, that they will transfer.

Um but we do at times have young people who are severely having severe mental health breakdowns, also who are you know on substances and need sort substance abuse substance abuse support.

Um, and even CSEC issues, trafficking issues where they need those individualized services, and sometimes there is a need to get them those services immediately.

We do not want young people at YSC awaiting placement.

And so I think one this kind of brings up another issue that we often cost me here.

So you place somebody, and then you're not placing them at a school.

You're placing them well, either at new beginnings or at uh um I forget exactly the term, but um out-of-state placement.

And out-of-state placement.

That's one thing.

The educational uh services that are provided is the second thing.

And you're saying don't uh the the bill um you know, don't remove uh the these noncompliant educational um services to be disallowed.

That has nothing to do with like what you were just saying a minute ago with somebody there there's an emergency of crisis and you need to place them in a facility.

I I don't I don't think they are getting educational services while they're in crisis.

Well, what is required is when they are in crisis at those facilities, we do still need to ensure that education is being provided.

Um so it's okay for a noncompliant.

What would they do?

No, it's not it's not okay for noncompliant.

The bill specifically says that the young person would be removed immediately.

And so I think that's removed from the placement.

From the placement where they're getting treatment.

It says allowing educationally noncompliant facilities to be removed from placement eligibility.

Yes, Chairman.

Did you uh in the bill it specifically states here?

Okay, so I've just listened to a couple hours of testimony.

It sounds like this educational noncompliance is more the norm than the exception.

Or was the testimony wrong?

I wouldn't say that is more the norm.

I think that the issue that that I heard was that young people are getting education, it's the credits that they are receiving.

And so some of them may have the the credits don't go towards graduation or they may have too many of one type of credit, like the arts example that was was mentioned.

So young people are getting education.

It's the is the transition when they transition back, the issues with whether those credits are going to be credit bearing and where they are able to move towards graduation.

So there was the instance of the uh youth who had seven arts credits and needs only one, and the other six are a waste.

That's one issue.

That's what you're speaking to.

But then there was the issue of youth who get uh, let's say algebra, and then that's not accepted by DCPS or by a charter school.

That's a different issue.

You're not speaking to that.

I am, because that would speak to the noncompliant facilities.

I'm just not understanding how DYRS can justify, and you did this with the Road Act as well, are justifying that it's okay not to plan this stuff appropriately for youth.

Chairman Mendelson, I don't want that to be the takeaway from this this hearing.

What I I believe this bill will help to support is this course catalog, which we'll share with everyone, everyone will be clear when a young person gets placed at any placement, what credits would be covered and what which ones would not.

And it would be important for us to know that in advance.

We we do support that.

Um I looked at the bill quickly.

I don't remember that anybody is responsible for court social services.

Are you saying that the way this bill is written, DYRS would be responsible for youth who are under the supervision of court social services?

Well, the bill speaks about youth in the care of DC.

When those young people are placed securely detained, they're not committed to us yet.

When they are securely detained at DYRS, that they would be in the care of DC.

I'm sorry.

When they're placed at DYRS.

Through the courts.

So through a court order, they're securely detained.

This is before they the court decides whether they have been involved in any type of criminal activity.

They sometimes are detained before their trial.

Sure.

And so because they're in our physical custody, that would qualify as a young person who is in the care of DC.

If most are you and if I'm understanding it correctly, a juvenile is arrested.

Technically, they're under court social services, but they're being held at a DYRS facility.

Is that what you're saying?

That's correct.

They are under the supervision of the court.

And what do you do with that juvenile?

We we follow whatever court orders we receive.

When we receive a court order saying that this young person should be released, we release them home to their parents.

When we get receive a court order saying that they should go to a youth shelter house who we contract with, we send them there.

If they are securely detained at YSC, we ensure that they are enrolled within five days with MyAngelou Academy, and we ensure that they get education.

But in terms of education, you do nothing other than just placing them at Maya Angelou if they are in at New Beginnings.

Maya Angelo, we we contract with Maya Angelo and they are at both facilities.

That's correct.

And we have a smooth transition for young people who are at YSC who are receiving educational services through Maya, who then transition to new beginnings, they receive those supports as well.

But I do think that some of the issues that we're talking about speaks about the placement array that we have in the district.

Specifically as it relates to residential treatment facilities and other placement options that we have for young people.

Currently we have 191 youth committed to the DYRS.

New Beginnings is a 60-bed facility.

So we have to rely on out-of-state placements to ensure that young people get rehabilitation.

And so there is a but you're not doing an out-of-state placement unless the in the youth is has been committed to DYRS.

That's that is correct.

Okay.

And so then you certainly can't be saying that you shouldn't have any responsibility at that point.

No, for committed kids, we do have that responsibility.

How many juveniles are under DYRS?

I guess I'll say committed to DYRS, whether that's uh community placement or a community facility placement or at a secure placement or an out of state placement.

How many juveniles?

Um for committed kids, how many committed kids do we have right now?

We have 191 committed kids right now.

That's the entire universe.

That for committed kids, we do also have that awaiting, not a waiting placement.

We have the securely detained group that we I indicated is under the supervision of the court.

I think we have about I don't want to give you the wrong number, but I think we might have about 61.

So roughly a third of those who are committed.

No, the committed No.

So those would be additional to the committee population.

Yeah.

I think you said 191 committed.

Sixty who are under court social services.

So that's a third the number.

191, a third of 191 is roughly 60.

I think you're not understanding me.

I'm sorry.

191 and then a third more who are court social services.

Do you have any others?

Oh, and then we have our Title 16 youth.

Those are at the jail.

They are housed at DYRS and they are under 18 years old, but they're being charged as adults.

How many?

I do want to get I will get back to you with the specific numbers for each one of those populations.

How many I mean approximately maybe 20 to 30 young people.

Okay.

So if you take 30 plus 60, that's 90, that's roughly half.

Okay.

So you have three people doing education for 191.

But you need seven more people?

Well, I'd be to do the other 90.

I think here.

It depends it depends on the population.

I mean, so it depends on how you count that population.

You know, if we have a young person who's an overnighter, would we still be required to do a transition plan for that?

And what I mean by an overnighter, I mean that they were in our care for that one night, they go to court the next day and get released.

That that number we haven't discussed that.

I mean I'm just thinking.

Really?

Well, I know, but the bill doesn't address it.

So those are the types of things that we think the bill would need to be.

Sure.

Except I think your testimony was that we should just not move the bill instead of addressing it.

Um but you also said that you'll need seven additional full employees at least.

I left out that word.

At least seven additional full-time employees.

And that's an estimate.

Depending on when once the bill is passed.

Currently, right now, we're not doing the transition meetings with the number of folks that are required within the bill, the coordination of those meetings and things of that nature.

And you mean for the ones who are actually committed to you?

No, I'm saying for the population that we're the larger population that we we are discussing.

I feel like we're going around circles.

Councilmember Parker, do you have more questions?

Yes.

Um I think it's important for us to come back to the why and why this bill is important.

It's because so many of our young people are finding it difficult to transition between LEAs full stop.

And it's uniquely a challenge for young people in the care of D R S.

But I think it's important for us to zoom out that even for young people outside of DRS, this is a challenge, and that is why we should be dealing with this.

Um Mr.

Boardman Schroyer, I wanted to come to you.

Um why does ASI not currently publish a comprehensive uniform course catalog for all secondary classes across the district?

Thank you so much for the question.

And actually, if if you wouldn't mind, I would just take a point of privilege to just clarify some of the your interpretation earlier.

I just wanted to make sure that it's clear.

We are not saying that we don't support the bill.

We actually very much do support the bill.

We do believe that there are areas where we need to tweak the language so that we can actually move forward with implementation in a successful way.

Um but that is that is Aussie's official position on the legislation is that we are absolutely interested in working with you and and the committee in general to figure out how do we tweak the language in a way so that what is intended can be implemented in the way it's intended.

So I really appreciate that.

That wasn't my interpretation, so uh thanks for the clarification.

Very good.

Um in terms of your question on the course catalog, I think what I alluded to earlier is the course data collection that Aussie has been undergoing for I would say probably the last two to three years actually is getting us much closer to what you're asking for than I think we have publicly communicated.

So if you look at the fact that our course collection, the publicly available data in the course collection, you can look at all the different um, for instance, we actually just did this in in the prep for this hearing.

We were looking at all the different ways LEAs report algebra one, and you can map all of the different ways, and there was uh roughly 180 different ways that you know courses were like named, and that included duplication.

So it was closer to like 50 different ways that LEAs have basically named Algebra One, but you can map all of that through the course collection that we have in a way that gets very close to, maybe not exactly what the bill speaks to, but very close to us being able to say, yes, these courses across all of these different educational entities are connected to the same graduation requirement and the same course level standards associated with that graduation requirement.

And so if we were able to better leverage that and communicate with stakeholders about how to use that, we think we would get close to, maybe not exactly where the bill is going, but very close to where the intent of that component that that subtitle of the bill is is moving in the direction of.

And what is the intended timeline on that work stream that you're referencing?

So I believe I'm gonna look back.

I believe that is available as of today.

That is um how how we've communicated about it is maybe not in in that exact way, but it is available as of today.

It's publicly available and publicly happy to show you.

So if I were to uh be a counselor at a said high school, I should be able to look at this LEA across town to see which of their courses align with mine.

And where does one find that this open source comparison tool you're talking about?

It's on the report card website.

Got it.

Okay.

And I would say that you know one of the things that is envisioned in the legislation is uh Aussie doing different trainings.

We think again, this might be an area where we could better communicate that this information is readily available and how schools and LEAs should be leveraging it.

I was struck by that one.

I think you testified that it was broad for us to say ASI should do training.

Yes, that's correct.

We we believe we're again not arguing that we shouldn't do training, but it would be useful for us to understand specifically what areas the council is identifying as the key deficiencies, and how do we make sure that we are building our training to address that?

So I uh I was struck by something Mr.

Beech referenced earlier, which a key takeaway is the lack of enforcement.

And so let's use this uh scenario you're talking about.

There's this tool ASI has put out.

If there is a discrepancy, who is the arbiter to decide what is what?

Can people come to ASI and say make a determination whether or not these courses are aligned, or is it right now more so reference between LEAs for them to is it a FY or are you all in a position to make a determination about course distinctions?

Yeah.

Right now it is um all of those decisions are fully LEA decisions.

So we are providing this and other, you know, we've we've released other guidance on course equivalency.

All of that information that we've released is meant to be guidance so that um LEAs can leverage those tools, but as of right now, it is fully under an LEA autonomy decision.

And one of the things this bill would do would, in my opinion, put ASEAN in a driver's seat to help make those decisions in instances where it's not as clear or it's it's ambiguous.

Because ultimately someone has to make the determination if let's say DCPS and said charter school doesn't agree that this course is equivalent.

It seems like you're gonna jump in there.

Yeah, councilmember Parker, I appreciate your interest in enforcement and accountability, and I think Aussie shares that interest um wholeheartedly.

I love that.

One of the um enforcement officer from the beginning over here.

Um but uh um one of the um areas where more prescriptive language might be or more specificity um would help guide ASI's work um in this space is to specify what you intend Aussie to enforce through the bill.

Um the language in that provision is very broad, much like the training provision.

It says Aussie will enforce.

Not clear entirely what Aussie would be enforcing and what remedy would be available.

Um much of our responsibility in this landscape currently as um the state education agency is with regard to our authorities in special education that are afforded to us through federal laws.

Um and it's very clear what the enforcement actions are and what the remedies available are.

This bill seeks to extend some of those entitlements to students without disabilities and that framework or those procedural safeguards that our partners in the advocacy space um mentioned in their testimony are seeking, don't exist for students without disabilities.

And so being clear about what that framework for remedy is.

Of course they do.

We would create a law to say they exist.

And we would need to be clear on what those enforcement mechanisms are and what those remedies are.

I will name my bias.

I've said it a million one times.

I think ASI needs to lean into being the state education agency and not merely a collaborator with LEAs.

I don't mean that as a form of disrespect.

Uh but this would require ASI to say LEAs.

This is our determination about course credits, but I hear you loud and clear, that is an area where we can tighten up and be more uh prescriptive in language to denote what we are hoping ASI uh to do in that instance.

Uh I see my time ticking, and the chairman is peering down the so I want to uh go to this question here.

This um the bill introduces a strict deadline.

Students must be enrolled in their new school within two days of entering or exercise exiting the care of DC.

So just quick aside, the overnight scenario wouldn't fit because again, the bill says two days.

Uh this short timeline was created to ensure that students did not experience learning loss or truancy as a result of administrative failures.

I think we've already made that point.

This is the same deadline as our neighboring jurisdiction of Virginia.

Uh, how will ASI or how could ASI manage this timeline?

Um and maybe that is part of this prescriptive language that we would need to iron out, but ideally ASI would be working with us.

And what kind of systems will need to be in place to ensure these efficient transitions actually happen between LEAs.

Yeah, I appreciate the question here.

Um I think the operations component of this really speak back to the necessity of clarity around the definition of the population that we are intending to address collectively through this legislation.

The definition that's adopted is the same definition of student universe or a resident universe that is adopted by the act that um makes SCDC operational.

Um that definition is um one that is very broad.

It encompasses folks all the way up to age 25 who are in varying levels of um engagement across CFSA, Federal Bureau of Prinsons, Department of Correction, C SOSA, like need more clarity on which population you are speaking to in order to understand which timelines would apply.

It would be children in the care of DC, namely from D R S or CFSA.

A recurring trend is LEA's telling D R S or Maya, the provider, we won't accept set credit from Maya Angelou because this kid was in DRS.

That is an instance where I would imagine Aussie will step in to say, actually, you will accept this credit, or actually you do have to transition this young person within two days for the continuity of their education services.

Um I'm over time, but I'm just using that as a concrete example of why this would be important because right now there is no recourse for that LEA telling that young person or the family or D R S they won't take the credit.

Did you want a reaction to that?

Uh sure.

Because I have two more questions and then we're done.

Oh, uh what's your reaction to what Councilmember Parker just said?

I did have two more questions myself, but my reaction to that, Councilmember Parker, is that with a narrowing of the student universe or the population and as clarified, we could better understand how to operationalize the activities that are expected by the agencies.

And I totally recognize this will be new for ASI.

New muscles, new systems uh will need to be developed, but there is a glaring gap right now.

Um could um I would just only add that going back to the earlier question around um who becomes the arbiter of maybe those differences.

I think one thing that I would just reiterate, uh maybe frustratingly so, is that if we do a better job getting these um this information out around the course collection so that they better understand how to utilize those tools.

And one of the other things that the bill speaks to, which I think we've not really spent a lot of time talking about, but I think is also an essential component here, is making sure that whether it be an LEA or an SPA, they have access to the data that they need, those transcripts that they need early enough.

And I think once they have that, yes, you might be right that there might still be an area where we need dispute resolution or something like that.

But at the end of the day, if they were better equipped, then they would likely be able to make far better decisions.

And as many of the advocates testified to, there's no one in this space who is intentionally trying to keep students from being able to access credits.

But we have not necessarily gotten them access to the data, gotten them access to the guidance that they need so that they could better connect those students to the credit that they've earned or the credit that they need to earn before graduating.

And we think that by doing so with both the course collection component, and I think one of the things that we'd love to talk to the council and the this committee about is what is the best mechanism for getting that information, that important data to those decision makers early enough.

We think that it would actually be better to put some time and money into creating a digital backpack, which would really allow for that educational data to move real time with the students.

So we'd love to engage in that conversation as we move forward.

Two questions?

Yes, very quickly.

ASI, I'm jumping around.

On June 26th, the mayor and uh wait a minute, wait a minute.

Yes.

Uh uh published bridging the gap, a strategic plan for students in the care of DC.

It made multiple suggestions to improve the academic futures of children like those in D R S and CFSA.

Uh one of uh the suggestions for ASI was to create a statewide information system or SIS uh that will hold all student records and transcripts, which I believe you're referencing when you talk about the digital backpack.

Um just very quickly, what what needs to happen for that to happen be reality?

Is it a funding issue?

Is it a time?

Infrastructure.

So again, I would I would acknowledge that um a statewide SIS and a digital backpack aren't exactly the same thing, but I do think that the digital backpack is the more feasible solution to the same problem that a statewide SIS would be looking to solve.

And I think really at the end of the day, um the biggest hurdle right now would be funding supporting the creation of that digital backpack.

And let's say funding was not an issue.

Is that something you can do in a year's time?

Is that a multi-year effort?

Like how realistic are we talking if funding was taken off the table?

It would be a multi-year effort.

Got it.

And it would necessarily need to incorporate the voice of our local education agencies and our state public agencies that are responsible for education, but not necessarily constituted for that purpose.

And so we would need to do a fair amount of public engagement with our stakeholders to move that work forward.

We could of course stage it so that maybe some of the most crucial elements could be identified and addressed first while we phase in some of the more complicated components.

Okay.

I'll leave it there for the sake of time.

I do know we have another hearing.

Uh, but I look forward to working with the committee and your respective teams.

So what's the difference between a digital backpack and SIS?

Yikes.

So it so a digital broad it up phone and a friend.

So it uh I'll I'll speak a little bit, but then go ahead and care.

This is my favorite topic, so I just couldn't resist the chance.

Hi everyone, my name is Kelly Scholl, assistant superintendent of data assessment and research at Aussie.

Each LEA right now has a student information system.

So you hear the name Power School Aspen.

This is the system that this LEA owns.

The state that has a state education agency on a nightly basis gets data from those student information systems uh push to Aussie, which is how we own data, uh, how we how we access data across all 69 LEAs, and with that we build our state law institutional educational data, so SLED, which is um independent of the individual student information systems that folks procure.

A few states do have a statewide SIS where they say you will use X.

That's not our model, LEAs make that decision.

Then on the back end, we normalize across the data and can view that as if it all came from the same place in our sled system.

And a digital backpack.

It's like a fancy sled uh student, it would be um an enhancement of our state longitudinal data system where right now you can go in and you can see assessment scores, you can see enrollment history.

I think of it as like adding a folder, which is wow, you do a multi-year stage, you could add a folder that has the transcript.

You could add in a folder that has case notes.

So SLED is sort of like the shell, the backpack, and then as we hear more requests for more data and we're able to get access to it and have the time and resources, we sort of add folders to this digital backpack so that it becomes a very robust picture of the student's educational experience.

Are there alternative approaches that would be less costly or more efficient than the centralized system?

We right now we do have what we call early access apps.

So uh for immunizations and IEP information, once students are stage three enrolled, so registered at a school over the summer, schools can access that information.

Uh I think if we wanted to narrow down to like one thing we want to build, uh we've talked about it for attendance.

You could do an early access to attendance application and click.

I think the challenge there is that it that's not a super efficient way to do it.

And so that hasn't been scalable for all of the different data sets.

Uh, but if there was one thing we wanted to do faster, we're only trying to accomplish one thing, that is an alternative.

So um this hearing has been mostly about uh I'm gonna say data transfer.

Um that is it um well, data transfer.

So what are the primary barriers to timely data transfer?

Say it again.

What are the barrier primary barriers to timely data transfer?

So I think the the primary challenges to data transfer are that um as as Aussie indicated, Aussie plays one role in a very complex ecosystem here.

Um but not all of the data associated with students who are engaged with CFSA, with DYRS, with CSOSO, with DOC.

Um so when you are talking about data transfer, Aussie holds our we hold a special education data system.

As you heard in testimony from Dr.

Hayward, IEPs are transferred um fairly easily through that data system because Aussie owns that data system.

There are other components of data that are held by different agencies that are need require transferring.

Um so we have in in our MOA net framework established data sharing agreements to transfer that data.

Um, but there aren't necessarily holistic data systems that this district has invested in to transfer all of the components of data, and that's why we come back again with this um concept around the digital backpack, because what it can offer is a holistic um data transfer process with all of the different components from all the different agencies.

But um at this time, Aussie has invested its resources in the transfer of data that Aussie owns and has authoritative access to the data that ASI owns.

How about data that ASI doesn't own that you should own?

What is that?

Okay, yep, go ahead.

I want to be clear that Aussie doesn't own any of this data.

The students and families own the data.

Aussie's able to access it and we take that responsibility seriously.

Um right now we do hear through the grapevine challenges of the this transfer, somebody is waiting a few days to get a transcript from another LEA.

Right now, that process is all happening LEA to LEA.

Aussie does collect course data, so we could through a module in SLED or digital backpack, whatever you want to call it, have a sort of preliminary draft transcript to skip that call of one school having to call another school to see what courses they took.

Um I don't I can't think of off the top of my head any data that Aussie should have access to, that it doesn't.

Um I do think right now this is a process that is happening without Aussie, which is important to know LEAs are communicating with other LEAs.

So we don't have a lot of visibility into the timelines there.

All right, that's helpful.

Uh is there any um statutory impediment or any statutory facilitation that we should know?

A statutory impediment to Aussie participating in that process.

Or developing your digital backpack, or I'm I've always thought of that as being a resource issue as in money.

I would agree with that.

We actually are already collecting all of the course data that we would need for those sorts of transcripts with the help of the council.

That's the project that's been um sustained over the past few years.

So it is now about the resources to actually develop the tool to transmit this back to LEAs in that way.

I I also think we'd want to talk to our general counsel to make sure um around the statutory components.

Uh it's a good question, but one that I want to reserve the right to get back to you on.

Oh, good.

So there's follow-up.

So you'll have to get back to us.

All right.

I'm gonna leave it there.

Uh we have another hearing that's gonna start in a few minutes.

Um actually probably 10 minutes.

Uh so this has been a hearing on bill twenty-six-403 education continuity for students from the care of DC Amendment Act 2025.

And this hearing is adjourned.