1. FCPS’s failure to follow their process for policy management defined in FCPS policy 114 – Policy Development ad Review, has left 69% of policies not reviewed on schedule, with 28% of policies not reviewed for more than ten years.
2. The failure of FCPS to conduct a comprehensive review of existing policies when a new policy is put in place. This has the risk of creating redundancy and confusion, including potential conflict when executing the policy’s intent.

Both of these are explained below.

FCPS’s failure to follow the defined policy review process

Overall there are 95 policies that dictate how the school system should handle a variety of topics. Supporting these policies are the specific instructions for carrying out these policies, known as “Regulations.” FCPS has over 180 regulations.

FCPS Policy 114 states that all policies will be reviewed and updated on a rotating basis by number every three years policies (100-level policies, then, 200, 300, and 400). The assumed intention of the review cycle is to ensure that policies are up-to-date and effective. If there is some cause to change a policy between the 3-year scheduled reviews (such as a law that has changed), FCPS will make changes as needed.

Here’s the issue. Of FCPS’s 95 policies, 66, or 69%, have not been reviewed per the schedule defined in 114. Of the 66 showing as past their scheduled review date, 28 or 42% are listed as not being reviewed in over 14 years. (Note: some policies indicate a last review date while others indicate the last amendment date, but we assume both terms indicate a last review.)

Policy 443 (and its related regulation 400-36), which we have asked the BOE to review and replace with a new policy* (proposed to the BOE on February 8), hasn’t been reviewed since its inception four years ago; policy 437, a related policy, hasn’t been reviewed in 6 years. (Oddly, regulation 400-48, which defines how 437 is to be carried out, was reviewed and updated seven months ago, apparently without reviewing the policy it supports, 437).

We will be requesting that the BOE and Policy Committee produce a schedule of policy reviews for 2023, which we will ask them to publish on the FCPS website. We also ask that, as part of this process the BOE also indicate what parts of the policy have been amended/updated. We will also publish it on our site as well to ensure effective transparency.

It is a daunting task to catch up. The 2023 schedule will have to include the review of 66 policies already past three years plus the 11 that will exceed three years between March and the end of 2023.

New Policies are not always connected to existing policies that may already address or partially address the intent of the new policy.

When a new policy is proposed, one of the steps that should be in place is to review the existing policies to determine if the intent of the new policy can be accomplished by clarifying or modifying an existing policy or if the new policy proposal should replace the existing policy. The experience of the last year indicates that this review does not seem to be consistently done by FCPS.

As an example, when we developed our new gender identity policy last week* we created it within the context of the current discussions and policies, covering gender expression and the creation and maintenance of a safe environment for those expressing an alternative gender identity. We found that gender expression and identity are covered today in at least 3 policies – 309, 343, and 437 – which should all be reviewed together for potential consolidation or amendments/addendums to 309 and 347. We believe 443 needs to be replaced as its language needs to be updated for the substantial amount of data accumulated by the medical community since its development and adoption four years ago.

As an example, Policy 309 defines what is considered a protected class and includes gender identity (as is necessary by law under Title XII). In several ways Policy 309 seems to cover the intent of policy 443 as it makes a clear case for the creation of a welcoming environment that supports gender identity choices (and we assume transgender identity as well) and that any type of harassment or intimidation of students or staff in this protected category will not be tolerated.

Policy 443, as written, is also redundant and unnecessary when you consider 437 already covers the issue of a welcoming environment that promotes inclusiveness. Regulation 400-48, which defines how to administer policy 437, specifically mentions gender identity as a class that will be protected from bullying and harassment and calls for action to be taken if a child expressing an alternative gender identity is the subject of bullying, harassment, discrimination, physical attacks and/or intimidation. It also contains the following relative to notification of an occurrence of bullying/harassment.

Providing Notice of an Act of Bullying, Harassment, or Intimidation The school should take prompt action to provide notice to parents.

a. A parent or guardian of the alleged targeted student will be notified within three business days after the date the act is reported. 

b. A parent or guardian of the respondent student will be notified within five business days after the date the act is reported.

This certainly raises questions about a child that may be teased, harassed or bullied for expressing their gender identity and how the school handles the notification to the child’s parent or guardian. It seems to conflict with policy 443 and its restrictions on informing parents of their child’s gender choices and transgender identity. Does the school notify the parent/guardian about the incident but not explain why it occurred?

We don’t want to leave the impression that the point made here is limited to gender expression policies. This failure to review existing policies was also evident in 2022 during the discussion on the proposed anti-racism policy. We pointed out that while the intent of the new policy was proper, several key components of the new policy were already covered in existing policies. As we stated, that could create confusion on how to administer the policy, and some of the comments in the new policy could actually weaken the effort to identify and deal with racist behavior. Many modifications to the policy were made throughout 2022, and while we still disagree with the use of the term anti-racism since it is so closely tied to the advocates of CRT, the new policy is a step forward, even f it does not yet identify how to determine the root causes of the racist behavior.**

The new policy proposal can be found here.