Sunday, May 31, 2020

The line for policing in the Worcester Public Schools budget

I usually include this in my larger review of the budget, but I was asked about it this weekend, so I thought I'd give it a post on its own.
It's not surprisingly that this has come up, of course, particularly as measures have been filed by members of (at least) the Minneapolis and Denver school boards to remove the budget lines for police in their schools and cancel their memoranda with their departments; if you know of others, I'd be interested.

The first thing to know is that the funding for the Worcester police in the schools is actually in two places: it's first in the line item budget of the Worcester Public Schools, which is voted by the Worcester School Committee. This year, you can find that on page 193; it's part of the Supplemental Program Salaries cost center:
The most important point here is that this account has been level funded since 1993 (FY94) at $120,000.
Since that's a line in our budget, and the School Committee (unlike the City Council) can move money, yes, that money could be transferred.

That isn't, though, most of the funding for the Worcester police who are in the Worcester Public Schools. That's on page 417, where the calculation of how much the City spends on schools is; the entire page looks like this:

If you haven't been through one of these before, what's happening here is this: the City is legally obligated to spend a certain amount on schools each year (it can, of course, spend more; nearly every district does, and most spend MUCH more), and this is figuring out if the City has hit it. It has the past three fiscal years, the current year as budgeted, and the upcoming year (that's FY21).
As a side note, if you look at the bottom line, you'll see we've been dropping since FY18 in how much over the City has been spending on schools.

The City can spend money on the schools two ways: it can hand over actual money, which are the funds that are then allocated by the School Committee (which the city doesn't have any say over), OR they can spend money on the schools directly on things the City does. Worcester, for example, has a municipal water department; the water department doesn't send a bill to the school department, but instead tracks how much the water costs, and that "counts" as school spending. You can see that under line 9 above.

That's where police are, too; they're just above water: 

So for those who have asked how much Worcester spends on police in the schools, the answer for this current year was to be $120,000 + $844,421=$964,421 (I don't know if this was changed by the pandemic; it's on my list to ask) and for next year it's $120,000 + $861,309 = $981,309.
Again as a side note: If you go back across, you might note that this dropped from FY17 to FY18, dropped again for FY19, and then has been climbing again since. I don't know why; I plan to ask that, too.

Now, THIS second set of money, the Worcester School Committee does not vote. It is allocated as part of the City Council's budget process as part of their lines for each of these items (and it isn't separated out). The Council, unlike the School Committee, does NOT have reallocation authority; they cannot move money. If they wish to do something different than what is recommended to them, they have to request the City Manager make a different budget recommendation to them, he has to acquiesce and do so, and then they have to approve that allocation instead. 

If the Worcester School Committee, alone, were to move the $120,000 from our budget to a different line WITHOUT any other action, there is nothing to stop the City from simply spending (overall) the same amount on police in the schools, counting it as school spending, and cutting our actual monetary allocation by a parallel amount.
I'm not saying they would; I am observing they could.

If one wished, as I have seen suggested, to spend the above nearly a million dollars on something ELSE within the schools, the following would need to happen:
  1. The City and the schools would need to agree to end the MOU between the Worcester Police Department and the Worcester Public Schools and no longer have police in the schools. Given what it took to create the MOU, I would think this would take both elected bodies, plus the City Manager, and the Superintendent, plus the Chief.
  2. The Worcester City Council would have to request that the City Manager change his proposed budget to move $861,309 from the police department line to the Worcester schools' allocation. (Note that this would not change overall spending on schools, by the way. It would just change where it is spent.)
  3. The City Manager would have to agree and come back with a different budget proposal, which
  4. ...the City Council would have to vote to approve.
  5. The Worcester School Committee would need to vote to move the $120,000 out of line N of Supplemental Program Salaries and move it...somewhere else, like Educational Support Salaries (where the wraparound coordinators and clinicians are) or Teachers (where the adjustment councilors and psychologists are) PLUS allocate the additional funds from the City similarly.
Now, is all of that impossible? No. 

If this is something you care about, two places to start:
  • the Worcester City Council hears the Worcester Public School allocation (remember: it's a lump sum; they have no say over what is done with it, and nearly all of the funding they're spending they legally have to; the city is literally 0.17% over the mandated minimum) on Tuesday, June 2 at 4 pm.
  • the Worcester School Committee begins its budget hearing on Thursday, June 4 at 4 pm, and we're starting with a public hearing.
Both meetings are public, but remote. 
And if you have questions on any of the above, please let me know. 
OH! And if you're not in Worcester, you should know: it's very common to have the school resource officers be a municipal contribution, not a School Committee allocation, so subbing in whatever your town or city allocation process, your answer may well be similar to the above. 

Plans only work if they're funded

Okay, look: I appreciate--truly!--having the thoughtful opinions of health professionals, especially epidemiologists about what we should be doing about schools, so I read the above linked piece in today's Washington Post with interest. Daniel Halpern, who wrote the piece, is an epidemiologist and teaches UNC on global health. And he urges that schools be reopened in the fall, concluding with this:
Although some covid-19 cases regrettably may result from reopening schools, the existing evidence does not warrant inflicting potentially long-term academic, social and vocational disadvantages on millions of children.
Here's the problem: the sentence before, which is the ONLY sentence in which he comments on this, reads:
Adequate testing and evidence-based safety precautions are essential for protecting teachers and other staff.
THERE IS NO PLAN FOR THAT AND THERE IS NO ONE PUTTING FUNDING TOGETHER FOR THAT!

I'm not particularly going after Halpern for that; he's opining from his place of expertise, as he should. To put into operation what he recommends, however, requires that those of us with expertise on the other end note that as yet, what he recommends isn't being organized or funded. I tweeted this out last week:
I'm not saying this frivolously: let's just run Worcester numbers for a minute:
25,000 students plus
4500 staff
times two (masks work for four hours)
is 59,000 masks a day. Plus, these are kids, so some are going to get torn or tossed or otherwise ruined.
A DAY. For ONE school system.

And no one is paying for this, as yet, which is what is being noted by two of the superintendents of larger districts in California this week:

"Operating our schools will not be as easy as separating desks or placing pieces of tape on the floor," Beutner and Marten said in their statement. "A robust system of COVID-19 testing and contact tracing will need to be in place before we can consider reopening schools. Local health authorities, not school districts, have to lead the way on testing, contact tracing, and a clear set of protocols on how to respond to any occurrence of the virus."
The CEO of California School Boards Association has called California's state budget plan "not realistic."

Schools start their 2020-21 school year the first week of August. We need better from leaders then giving us a list, a cut budget, and sending us on our way.

And (Massachusetts note) everything I am seeing coming out of state planning on this--which also note, is only DESE--has been "all systems go! We're going to give you a plan and we'll be set!" WITHOUT ANY PLAN ON HOW TO MAKE THE FUNDING WORK.

We need not to do that. It's irresponsible.

Saturday, May 30, 2020

Lest my silence be complicit

some of this overlaps with what I posted yesterday on Facebook

I don't want my wanting to say just the right thing here turn instead into silence.
I also don't want to take up more space when my words are not those that most need to be heard.

I don't think it should escape any of us that the same week that brought us Amy Cooper weaponizing white womanhood in Central Park also brought us the death of George Floyd by the hand she was trying to invoke.
White supremacy is enforced thousands of little ways, and most are not at the point of a gun.

And just as it doesn't take a gun, it doesn't take laws, either. As Clint Smith tweeted yesterday:
We make and enforce policies in schools, among other places. It's also one of the places in America were the disparities in race between who enforces polices and who is expected to follow them is particularly large.
What we have in student handbooks and district policies, what we spend time on in professional development and curriculum, and what we don't say is what matters here.

Policies are also what we spend money on in our budgets.

Friday, May 29, 2020

May Board of Elementary and Secondary Education meeting: later blog

Due to my own schedule and the Board going for a highly unusual afternoon meeting, I missed this week's Board of Ed. Thanks to the wonders of video, however, here is my blog of the meeting, a bit late.

Craven: values are to be as transparent as possible with the members of the public as we move forward, through this remote learning, working to improve the lives of the almost million children whose lives have been displaced 
appreciate the work of all at the Department and stakeholders working diligently towards this summer and fall with keeping kids safe
Will be letting districts know what plans are as soon as they are developed

Wednesday, May 27, 2020

Creating the least bad option

The follow-up to last night's post
Let me preface this (again) by noting that I have next to no say over any of this, in any of my capacities.

And let me add (again) that I am speaking only for myself.

I fear that in the entirely legitimate concerns over what kids are losing by not being in school--food, mental health support, physical activity, along with education--we may have lost sight of the overarching concern of the time:
we are in a pandemic



As of today, more than 100,000 American people--that would be, for example, more than half the population of Worcester--have died of this disease, most of them in the past two months. That is almost certainly an undercount. And we are early in this outbreak in the U.S..

Internationally, more than 350,000 people have died. That's as if we lost all of Anaheim.
The highest risk category for coronavirus includes one-third of American teachers, as well as significant numbers of school staff.

Risks are also particularly high if you are Latinx, or Black, or Native American, or poor
Some people who don't die get very sick.
That includes children.
It also includes particular high risk categories, which also includes children.

Antibody testing, as yet, is unreliable, and we don't know yet if you can get it again.
To create herd immunity, 70-90% of a population needs to have immunity; we don't know for sure yet, but most estimates have us in the U.S. at below 10% exposure at this point.
And herd immunity alone isn't a solution

In short, we are putting the actual lives of children and school staff up against their education.
People who gather together share this disease, and then people die of this disease.
We need to not do that.

What then, are we do to?
I've heard several times lately that there is no good option: there are only bad options, and we should choose or create the least bad option possible.

To start: we need to stop and make an actual plan this time. We went flying out of schools in mid-March as if the buildings were on fire. We needed to do that, and some districts and schools managed better than others, but now we have a chance to take a breath.

We're also going to need resources, and thus, if you're reading this, here's your one ask from me: send an email to Congress and tell them we need funds for public education. Only the federal government has the resources to pull off what is needed here.

I've seen lots of citing of "Maslow before Bloom" over the course of the time we've been out: in essence, that people's basic needs of things like physical safety and enough to eat must be met before their learning needs are. It is what was recognized when the first order of business for schools was to feed kids.

And so, first: we feed kids. Right now, we're missing thousands of kids across the state: Multiply that across the country, and we have millions of kids who are missing meals.
First order of business then is do what it takes to make sure kids are fed. There are lots of models out there: deliveries are happening in some districts, some have added adult meals (without reimbursement), and the P-EBT benefit is also designed to help with that. Nationally, food insecurity is growing during the pandemic. The numbers we had for free and reduced lunch qualification in mid-March are bound to be wrong right now; we should update those numbers, as we can.
But above all: Get food to kids who need food, whoever they are, wherever they are, whatever their need.

Then, we make sure they're connected, so we can make sure they're well.
We need internet connections to every kid, no matter where they are. This is now a necessity. This isn't only about schools: it's about medicine, jobs, food...you need connection to do it. Some have made the parallel with rural electrification, in it being a matter of public interest and equity to get such access. Obviously, a federal effort on that would be ideal. Lacking that, state efforts, local efforts need to be organized such that families aren't without or dependent on making a cell phone data payment for access.
I would argue that if schools require it, districts should pay for it, but if it is used beyond that, then that could be broader.
This means, by the way, that we also need to have conversations around things like bandwidth, because some families, but also some communities, are maxed out.
Likewise, no more essays on cell phones or sharing devices. We're not sharing slates or spellers in colonial times: every student has a laptop or something of its ilk to do their work on.
We also need to recognize: kids are going to socialize on these, too. That's also part of school.
We find every kid, though, and we connect every kid.

That, of course, doesn't get us too much farther forward than we are now, save fixing some of what's broken. Next we try being actively constructive.
This takes first noting that the pandemic has hit kids inequitably. There are students right now who need more support than others. This is where our taking a breath comes in: What do those students need? How do we meet those needs?

Most of our students are going to need to feel connected. It's going to be hard to have that connection, starting off a new year with new teachers and classmates. Some have suggested looping classes, having students stay with the same teacher and classmates for another year; this gives the added benefit of perhaps having the teacher coming in with an idea of where students are at as the year begins. That won't work for everyone, though, but each student should have an adult (at least one!) who is their link to the school. Some schools have homeroom teachers for this; some have mentoring groups; with buildings closed, it is possible that this could extend beyond teachers. Students need a home base, though, from which to start. This means taking stock of each student before school starts to base the year off those connections.  For the adults: those are their kids. For the kids, this is their link to the school and district.

Some students need mental health supports. Much like everything else, this is harder to even figure out when we aren't seeing students in person. Persistence in who have we heard from and who haven't we heard from is one way, particularly through their connection with the school. Some of this can be over video, but sometimes the connection may be written. Some may be over the phone. In some cases--and this isn't the only time I am going to suggest this--maybe we are finding a way to get students someone in person, but through a glass door.
This is probably going to take more staff than we have now, too, and it's not the last time I am going to make that observation, either. Student mental health needs are higher than ever during the pandemic, and if we're going to get students through this as healthy as possible, then we need to meet that need.
As a note to this: we also know that some kids aren't safe where they are, making those connections with other adults crucial. 

The pandemic has been particularly difficult for students with special needs and their families. This has been a really hard one for schools, and there is no easy answer at all. It is another one, though, where the level of staffing, and the level of connection with families, makes a huge difference. Some of this can be done via video. Some students, though, don't respond to that. How do we get students their connections with staff members? And how to we actually PARTNER with families--who, after all, are doing much of the lifting on this--to meet student needs? Can we send people to porches and windows? I know of examples of aides moving in with families (and thus becoming part of their 'pandemic pod'). Can we somehow directly support families that are most strained by this? 

We have large numbers of students whose first language isn't English and whose families may not speak English at all. First, we've got to stop sending work home to these children in English; that makes no sense! Translation programs, with all due respect to Google, aren't that strong. Here's another staffing issue: we need more people who work for districts who speak the languages that students do at home, and that can connect with families where they're at. It is difficult to do that well if we don't have people working with them and for us who can speak and listen directly.

Not everything can be done on a computer, and families need to not be trying to scramble to get students what they need for school during a pandemic. Students need school supplies: they need paper and pencils and crayons and art supplies and science kits. If students are learning at home, they need those supplies at home. For little kids in particular, learning means hands-on materials. We need to not assume that families have blocks or markers or whatever else is needed for school. 
Note that for gym class and art class and music class, that may mean something different. Nerves would probably be strained unduly if we gave every student a recorder, but music and art should be made as well as studied (it's in the standards!) and keeping students active is essential. Worcester Hearts Connected has made a start on that last, if you're looking for examples.
That last means a renewed emphasis from the state, incidentally, that outdoor time and recess time and gym time are part of school time. School time doesn't mean you've spent hours in front of a Chromebook, home or no.

One of the disparities for students is a quiet space to work. Here is the one place that I would open buildings, but with strict scheduling for those who live together and limited access and lots of cleaning. Giving students and their families, if needed, space that is quiet to work through their math or read, if that isn't possible with limited space at home is part of attempting to make up for equity gaps. 

Little kids in particular struggle to learn remotely, and for them, we should bring our student/adult ratio WAY down, and flood early elementary with people. Unemployment is up; we have everything from students talking about taking gap years to college graduates looking for work to people sidelined by the economic downturn. CORI them all, get them some training, and create a teaching assistant corps.
Note here: assistant corps. I'm under absolutely no illusions about what it takes to teach elementary school, and that can't be replicated short term (regardless of what particular national programs may have done). But what would be stations in elementary school are not something one can replicate well online. Teachers teach; assistants ensure that students are connected to the learning by getting it to them.

For all students, we always start by finding out where we are. The level of online reaction (to put it mildly) to the not-revolutionary notion that we assess kids as they come back has been...something. Teachers have always need to figure out what kids know and can do before they move forward with teaching them. That is significantly more true than it ever was before this year, as some students will have continued moving forward (and may even have leapt well ahead of what would otherwise have been intended for them), and some have slid during their time away.
I have seen some suggestions, relatedly, that moving to a mastery based system, as Cleveland is considering doing, would be a timely switch. This means each student fully learns the skill or material before moving on. As students are coming in next year in radically different places from one another--always true, but more true now!--they need to start different places. They'll take different amounts of time to get to where they need to be--also always true!--so maybe it is time to make that how this works.

And speaking of teachers and of staff: first, let's get them a break, for sure, as this spring has been exhausting. Then, let's look at their needs, too. Some of them are working from home with their own kids; how do we as districts and as schools effectively work to help teachers and staff balance their home lives while teaching? What does that look like around time and scheduling and planning? If we are going to do this for an extended period of time, we need to actively be seeking solutions to that issue.
Next, what do staff need to be able to do this work well? I've seen a BIG push on tech training, which is understandable, and in many cases, was needed. But we are also talking about a societal trauma on a scale not seen in decades. We're trying to teach students in a way that hasn't been done on this scale ever. We're watching inequities grow vastly right in front of us. We are having to reach students in their homes with their families. What does that mean both for professional development and for staff support? What do staff and teachers need to connect with students, to keep and get students engaged, to actively work to overcome inequities, and to not burn out themselves? That's work that needs to start this summer and continue through the year.
This means that cultural competency has never been more important: knowing and appreciating the strengths of families is crucial to connection.

The above doesn't, of course, solve anywhere near anything. 
It won't, of course, make up for what we're missing by not having school in person. 
As best as I can tell, though, the real push to have school in person is coming less from educators, and more from those who see schools as a way of "restarting" the economy. I'd suggest we need to consider the health and well-being of people ahead of that. 

While the above doesn't fix education, it might, though, keep schools from killing people. 

ASBO roundtable on reopening schools

ASBO (that's the national version of MASBO, thus the international organization for school business officials) roundtable on reopening schools with Mary Filardo of 21st Century Schools as staff to the National Council on School Facilities, and David Sturtz, Executive Director-Assessment Services, Cooperative Strategies
I'm just making notes on the presentation itself

Filardo: reopening plans that are safe, operational, equitable, and affordable
uniform and precise guidance for planning, operation, and maintenance for building, transportation, and school assignments
Complexity 
changing nature of planning
cost as compared to benefit
"the social distancing pieces are really complicated"
Some pieces require long planning period: need for engagement with the community, and procurement may take time

Sturtz: Schools are "intense social environments"
  • main tools of social distancing are space and time
  • improve building hygiene: air quality, cleaning & disinfecting, bathroom improvements
  • personal hygiene
planning staff, community "have to be engaged" in how these issues will play out
community trust and community confidence is "absolutely critical" to how this will play out in the 2020-21 year

capacity for buildings "in an abnormal circumstance" right now; that needs to be determined "quite quickly" to then be able to plan from there; "what would be a reasonable capacity in the room"
ten or less, for example, creates a significant reduction in capacity for face time
Feasibility of staffing at that ratio: what then are the budgetary impacts of that?
Community worries, interests, needs: "making it a dialogue" with the community, further building trust
Capital planning to meet capacity needs
Scheduling for that capacity
Redistricting of students "save that for last"
All of this assumes significant learning loss due to remote learning
the most thoughtful capacity to support safety to allow for face time
"most of them take your capacity and whack by about 60%"
need actual space (not what's on the drawings)
what's the personal space allowance? What are your fixtures? 
how much space does each student need in square footage? (44 to 100 square feet)
what if we spread out further (gyms, cafeterias, libraries) if bumping staff
What about time from 100% online to full in school? 
what are the implications of each? fewer days but longer days?
segmenting groups from groups; mitigating risk between groups fewest number of kids have to quarantine if  exposed
Bein: Facilities driven decisions alongside and interacting with community dialogue


Filardo: 
economic impact of the pandemic; states on average 45% of school funding
capital costs for reopening: HVAC systems, window repairs, portable classrooms, sensors in bathrooms, add humidity to air
When buildings reopen, let everything run (water sitting makes people ill, too!)
signage "is actually a really big deal"
outdoor environments are safer
deep clean when there are times of illness
communication is "essential"
nurse for every school on site
before and after care? and cleaning in between and added social distancing
mental health services and counseling to students
added custodial staffing and scheduling across district to allow for coverage
continued support to community feeding programs
Sturtz: important to advocate on the Hill: reopening schools "is not free"

Note: the National Council on School Facilities has been having weekly roundtables to discuss school reopening; you can find them online here.

Tuesday, May 26, 2020

The pit in my stomach

Let me, first of all, note that I do not, in any of my capacities, have any authority over any of this.
And I am, as always here, speaking only for myself.

Let me, second, note that every time I hear from those who are making decisions, I can feel my stomach drop with the fear that they're simply going to send us back without the massive investment it would take to make that anything approaching safe.

Please make no mistake: having our kids out of school is absolutely catastrophic to their education, and, in many cases, to their physical and mental health. In some cases, this has been exponentially increased by the lack of timely response, or mismanagement, or other leadership lacks.
I'm not under any illusions on how destructive this time is to many.

I also spend a good bit of time in and around schools, and schools of different types. I know what it's like in a suburban high school at lunchtime, and what it's like at an urban elementary school at recess. I've been in the closets that pass for offices for speech therapists and myriad of other support staff, the auto bays and shops of a vocational school at work, the flood of students running for buses at the end of the day.
I've also been in a lot of bathrooms.
I don't of course know it all, but know what a lot of that looks like in schools in Massachusetts right now.

I don't know how we do it without kids touching each other and breathing on each other and their teachers. I mean that, genuinely. I have tried and tried to figure out how you'd do it.
  • How do you get the kids on and off the buses? Ok, once they're on, they sit single seat, every other seat. That's going to take...probably three times the buses, I'm guessing? We already had a bus drivers shortage, so where are those drivers coming from? And it takes months to build school buses, so where are we getting those?
    But you also need the kids to not pass each other in aisle, right? So the first ones to get on have to sit all the way in the back, and they have to be the last ones off. And when you load for the ride home, the first ones to get on, who go all the way to the back, have to be the last ones off. If you're familiar with kids, you know that this is going to be both unpopular--kids wait to be the ones for those back seats!--and hard to enforce. So do we need to staff the buses with monitors?
    And still, every single student has to go past the driver, both in and out.
    And loading and unloading in that sequence, with kids having to wait to be six feet apart, is going to take forever.

  • So then they get to school, and we get them off the bus, and they go...where? Little kids usually head to the playground, but they can't share balls or jump ropes; they can't use the playground equipment; they can't even stand together and talk to each other, right?
    And if not, usually they get sent to a gym or something, where they sit as classes. If you take the entire population of the elementary school and make them all sit six feet apart...where is that space?
    Older kids sometimes are allowed to go straight to their lockers. They can't be at their lockers when the people on either side are at their lockers, though, right? And we can't have kids passing along two lines of kids at open lockers, either. So is it sequenced? Have we arranged for every other one to go to their lockers in an order that keeps them from passing each other?

  • Somehow, we have now made it to a classroom. We've seen the photos of the kids sitting every other desk in other countries. How many kids can we have in a classroom to do that? And if it's only them, where are their classmates? Are we switching off days in and out? How did we decide who was in and out? And how does it work if some of the point is for parents to be able to go back to work with students on a 50% schedule? And what about the vocational schools that already had a half and half schedule?
    Those students who are sitting there, though, have brought us back to having students sit in rows...which we were trying not to do anymore. I taught high school English, for example, and I had students move into a circle to discuss, and move into groups to work together, and pair up to exchange ideas, and...we can't do any of that.
    No circle time on the rug, no tables in the elementary classrooms, no lab partners in science class...
    How do we do special education pull asides? Or how does an IA work with an individual student? Can we do anything other than listen in music? Where will we find space enough for art class?

  • And if you've taught or have kids, you know the reminders are going to have to be constant: 
    • Leave your mask on.
    • Don't touch him.
    • Stay in your desk.
    • Don't talk to her.
    • Back up.
    • Six feet apart.
    • ...and on and on
    • ...which just sounds absolutely miserable.
    Add to that the fact that this is enforcing policies and procedures, and our institutions, schools very much included, do so very inequitably. Which kids are going to get in the most trouble for not wearing their mask/staying six feet apart/etc? The same kids who always do: kids of color, kids who are disabled, and so forth.
    Also, how are we doing this for kids who don't speak English?

  • Bathrooms. I imagine we send kids in one at a time? Will there be warm water in every sink? Soap and paper towels (bad time for the hand dryers to spread germs)? Are we going to give each kid enough time to wash their hands as often as they should? Are we going to allow that much bathroom access?

  • How are we keeping all of this clean? Do we have sufficient custodial staff? Supplies? Are they basically constantly cleaning?

  • How are we feeding the kids lunch? I've heard that kids are eating in their classrooms to prevent overcrowding in the lunchrooms. They go get their food, I imagine? Six feet apart and then they bring it back six feet apart with no one dropping anything and then they eat that way? And then they can't pass anyone to throw anything away, so someone brings the trash around but stays far away?

And again and again and again: where is the money coming from for the buses and the drivers, for the masks and the soap and the newly repaired sinks and the cleaning supplies and the additional custodial staff and the improved ventilation systems and the signs and arrows on floors and walls and all the paper towels? Ones that work, please.

I mean this absolutely honestly: I do not see how this can work.
Second post tomorrow: Not that anyone asked me, but...