Credit: Al Seib/Los Angeles Times/Polaris
This story was updated on April 5 to include details of teacher, school staff ratification vote in favor of the reopening plan.

Underscoring the patchwork of reopening plans emerging even among adjoining districts, West Contra Costa Unified students will be able to return to the classroom April 19 under a plan that involved weeks of intense labor negotiations with its five employee unions.

All five of the district’s employee unions voted last week to ratify the agreement, West Contra Costa Unified spokesman Robert Jordan confirmed Monday. The teachers union, United Teachers of Richmond, announced Friday that 78% of teachers voted in favor of the plan.

The memorandum of understanding approved by teachers states clearly that “distance learning shall remain the primary mode of instruction” for the remainder of the school year, even for those students participating in the in-person program. However, teachers can volunteer to teach in person to the students who participate.

The plan does not come close to offering full-time in-person instruction. Instead, it will offer what the district is calling two-hour “interventions” daily for high-need students, as well as longer in-person “hubs” on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday for students from all grades.

For a brief guide to West Contra Costa’s plan, check out our FAQ at the end of this report.

West Contra Costa Unified enrolls about 30,000 students in the East Bay Area serving the communities of Richmond, El Cerrito, San Pablo, Pinole, Hercules and El Sobrante.

Some students in nearby Oakland Unified returned to campus on Tuesday for the first time in over a year, albeit for a limited number of hours and for only two days a week.  San Francisco Unified will start bringing back students on April 12.

“I do believe that this is the best plan that we can pass, today, for this spring, and I believe that I have an obligation to do what I can to help the most children in the moment,” West Contra Costa’s school board president Mister Phillips said at a school board meeting last week.

Phillips added that although he believes the plan could have had more in-person offerings, he wanted to act fast to address the needs of students who are struggling the most while not being in school, as well as those who haven’t participated in distance learning.

In the “hubs” program, the district will invite students back on to campuses from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. for K-8 grades and 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. for middle school and high school students Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday.

Teachers and other school staff won’t be required to staff the hubs but may volunteer to attend, and will be offered a bonus of up to $3,250 for the rest of the school year for doing so.

If teachers volunteer to come into the classroom, they will teach to students who are in the classroom and “Zoom out” the lessons simultaneously to the students who are learning from home. The teacher will be partnered with an instructional aide who will help with a variety of Zoom tasks so that the teacher can focus on actual instruction.

When a teacher isn’t available, the district will offer what it calls “supervised distance learning,” where students come into the classroom under staff supervision to do distance learning while the teacher provides instruction remotely from his or her home.

The “interventions” for high needs students from all grades will be held from either 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. or 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. five days a week to offer additional academic tutoring. They will also offer programs and counseling for social-emotional learning, which are designed to help students develop emotional skills like self-awareness and navigating healthy relationships vital to success in school and life.

The district has targeted 1,400 students — about 5% of its enrollment — as having the highest need and will invite them first for the two-hour “interventions.”

If staffing allows, more students will be invited to participate in the “intervention” sessions, Superintendent Matthew Duffy said.

Student cohorts for the intervention programs will be no more than 10 students, and no more than 15 for the hub programs; mask-wearing, social distancing, and other safety protocols will also have to be in place.

School board member Jamela Smith-Folds, who cast the only vote against the plan last Friday, doubted the district will be prepared to open safely on April 19. She asked detailed questions about the district’s safety and staffing protocols during the past two school board meetings. She said she didn’t think her questions were properly answered and felt that what she perceives as the district’s lack of preparedness would result in the staff being overworked.

West Contra Costa Unified’s spring plan will go beyond that of nearby Oakland Unified in that it is offering an in-person option for all students in all grades.

Oakland Unified, in contrast, is guaranteeing an in-person option for pre-K through elementary students and will bring back at least one grade in middle or high school. Oakland Unified’s in-person program began this week for only pre-K through second grade and will start April 19 for the other students. So far, Oakland students will only be in class for 2 1/2 hours in the afternoon two days each week.

San Francisco Unified, which like West Contra Costa Unified has not yet opened its doors to students on campus, will begin offering in-person classes for its youngest students as well as its highest-needs students on April 12. The district will offer in-person classes to more students starting April 19.

West Contra Costa Unified’s plan replaces a previous tentative agreement between the district and the unions. That plan only called for the two-hour “interventions” for high-needs students, and not the “hubs” for all students.

But after criticism from parent group West Contra Costa Safe Open Schools that the plan didn’t go far enough to get students back into schools, and a legal threat from the group, the district added the plan to offer in school instruction for more students.

The parent group, which includes parents who are attorneys, sent a letter to district officials and school board members last week, claiming the previous plan would go against the district’s duty to offer in-person instruction “to the greatest extent possible” as required by the state education code. Members of the group told EdSource last week they were considering suing the school district and were searching for a law firm to represent them.

Kelly Hardy, one of the leaders of West Contra Costa Safe Open Schools, said the group is pleased with the current plan and hopes it can serve as a practice run for the fall. District officials stated last week that they are planning a full return in the fall with five days a week of in-person instruction.

“We’re eager to have some of this practice in the spring, so we can work out any kinks there may be, and we can practice going to school,” Hardy said. “I know my kid will be happy to be back in the classroom.”

Hardy said the group would still consider suing the district, though, if not enough teachers and staff volunteer in order to accommodate the number of students who sign up.

District officials at Friday’s meeting said they were confident that they will get enough volunteers to meet the need, and will be reaching out to parents in the coming weeks to get a “commitment” whether their children will participate.

“There’s an excitement to get back and working with kids,” said Associate Superintendent of Business Services Tony Wold. “We’re going to allow that natural excitement and that connection to get back.”

Wold added that the district will continue talks with the labor unions to facilitate bringing more staff back in person if not enough volunteer to meet the need and to qualify for funds from the state’s $2 billion financial incentive program approved by the state Legislature in March.

To get more reports like this one, click here to sign up for EdSource’s no-cost daily email on latest developments in education.

Share Article

Comments (5)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * *

Comments Policy

We welcome your comments. All comments are moderated for civility, relevance and other considerations. Click here for EdSource's Comments Policy.

  1. Jim 6 months ago6 months ago

    More evidence on why parents who care about education don’t send their kids to crappy districts. It will be interesting to see what the long term effects of the reputational damage to certain districts will be.

  2. Carrie 6 months ago6 months ago

    There are 2 points in this article that are unclear. Your article sounds like the hubs will last 4-5 hrs from 10am to 2 or 3pm. However, what I'm hearing from our schools is that the hubs will only last 2-3 hrs sometime within that range. Also, which students are allowed to attend the social emotional Thursday and Friday activities? Your article makes it sound like it is for the hubs … Read More

    There are 2 points in this article that are unclear. Your article sounds like the hubs will last 4-5 hrs from 10am to 2 or 3pm. However, what I’m hearing from our schools is that the hubs will only last 2-3 hrs sometime within that range. Also, which students are allowed to attend the social emotional Thursday and Friday activities? Your article makes it sound like it is for the hubs students, but the MOU lists it as part of the interventions. Please clarify!

  3. Patrick 6 months ago6 months ago

    As a parent with a child in this district, the opacity of all of this has been frustrating. I don't understand why a school two miles away from my house in Albany is open five days a week for in-person instruction when my kid's school may or may not reopen this school year. All of the negotiations around reopening have felt needlessly antagonistic, pitting parents against teachers and unions against the district, and I really … Read More

    As a parent with a child in this district, the opacity of all of this has been frustrating. I don’t understand why a school two miles away from my house in Albany is open five days a week for in-person instruction when my kid’s school may or may not reopen this school year. All of the negotiations around reopening have felt needlessly antagonistic, pitting parents against teachers and unions against the district, and I really wish I had a better understanding of what was preventing us from going back.

    Is it a lack of PPE? Challenges with keeping social distance in the classroom? Inadequate ventilation? Also, if we’ve been in quarantine for a year, why are they just now scrambling to figure out what reentry might look like? The lack of urgency, adaptability, and transparency by the school district when it comes to reopening has been frustrating to watch.

    Replies

    • marco 6 months ago6 months ago

      Well, what happened was that a group of loud parents got organized (for the first time in recent memory) and got in the way of the district’s standard operating procedure, which is to strike a balance between what’s desired by the adults in the unions and what’s convenient for the adult district administrators, with zero consideration for what’s in the best interest of students.

      • SASHA 6 months ago6 months ago

        Thank goodness for those loud parents. The kids are so much happier in school than in front of a screens at home. They are much safer and healthier too, mentally and physically. I was so surprised to learn how much power and resistance the union had through this process. It is quite a battle and the small town is awkwardly divided.