Seattle Public Schools Board of Directors Amended and Final Investigation Report August 9, 2021MFR Seattle Public Schools Board of Directors Amended and Final Investigation Report August 9, 2021 Table of Contents |. Introduction... ce me ni A WL Investigation ProceSs nnn 2 AA. Initiation of Investigation after the Pause.. 12 B. Interviews and Documents... has C. Applicable Policies 3 1, Policy 1005: Responsibilities and Authority of Board ... mY 2, Policy 1310: Policy Adoption & Suspension; Creation of Manuals & Superintendent Procedures... iB 3. Policy No. 0030: Ensuring Educational and Racial Equity. A 4, Policy 5010: Nondiscrimination & Affirmative Action 4 5. Policy and Procedure 5207: Prohibition of Harassment, Intimidation and Bullying......5, IIL, Complaints... 6 A. In-Scope Claims... 6 B. Out-of-Scope Claims. 6 4. Retaliation Complaint... 6 2, Inappropriate Use of Positional Authority... 8 IV. Summary Findings... 8 Po.8 10 + Wil Creek: WA 98082 + (425) 424-1232 awa‘Soattie Public Schools - Board of Directors Amended and Final investigation Report ‘August 8, 2021 Page i A. V. Background information... A VI. Chronology. A B, c. amo VILAnalysis and Findings... . September 16, 2020 Executive Committee Meeting... Did Dirs. DeWolf or Hampson Violate SPS Policies 5010 and 5207 by Engaging in Discriminatory, Harassing, intimidating, Bullying, or Retaliatory Conduct Based on Race and/or Gender? 1. Dir, DeWolf 2. Dir. Hampson.. Did Dirs. DeWoif or Hampson Violate SPS Policy 5207 by Engaging in Harassing, Intimidating, or Bullying Conduct?...... : . SPS... 1, SPS Board of Directors... 2. Educational Leadership of SPS . 3. SPS Demographics and Strategic Plan... 4, Seattle Counell PTSA wo... ab swe Complainants and Respondents... 1. Complainant Or. ai... 2. Complainant Ms. aaa meee ipititatiagcasft 3, Respondent Dir. HAMPSON. sn see 4. Respondent Dir. DeWolf.... Introduction of Policy 0040 ~ August 2019 ... Fall 2019 - Beginning Community Engagement on Policy 0040... dune 2020... July 2020 eee ‘August 1 through August 26, 2020. ‘August 28 Telephone Call. PLO, Box 15980 + Mil Givek, WA GRoRE + qazsyaza-r23: .Seattle Public Schools - Board of Directors Amendad and Final investigation Report ‘August 9, 2021 Page ti A. Did Dirs. DeWolf or Hampson Violate SPS Policies 5010 and 5207 by Engaging in Discriminatory, Harassing, Intimidating Bullying, or Retaliatory Conduct Based on Race and/or Gender”... 3. Findings... B. Did Dirs, DeWoff or Hampson Violate SPS Policy 5207 by Engaging in Harassing, Intimidating, or Bullying Conduct? 1. Complaints ..... eee 2. Response 3. Findings... VIII. Conclusion BTaence > prewlmitahegtoup.cothSeattle Public Schools Board of Directors Amended and Final Investigation Report August 9, 2021 1. Introduction ‘Qn November 2, 2020, Marcella Fleming Reed, JD, SPHR, SHRM-SCP, Pl of MFR Law Group PLLC ("MFR") was retained by Seattle Public Schools’ (SPS, or the “District") Chief Legal Counsel, Gregory C. Narver, to conduct @ non-privileged investigation of claims of anti-Black discrimination, intersectional racism (race and gender)' and harassment, intimidation, and bullying made by Chief of Equity, Partnerships and Engagement (EPE) Dr. URES Director ("Dir") of Racial Equity Advancement GEIEMEREM) (‘Complainants’) against SPS. District 3 Board Dir, Chandra Hampson and SPS District 5 Board Dir. and President Zachary DeWot (‘Respondents’),> Complainants raised these complaints in a letter to the SPS School Board (the “Board") dated September 18, 2020. Deputy Chief Legal Counsel John Cerqui and Dir. of Employee & Association Relations, Labor & Employee Relations Misa Garmoe. The law fitm of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP has acted as legal counsel for the District in this matter. and ' Intersectionality is a term used to reflect when individuals experience harm based on mambership in multiple oppressed groups, MFR understands Dr. lil 2nd Ms ih to be claiming diserimination based on their combined class as Black women. * Effective January 9, 2021, moved to the position of Chief Academic Officer. James Bush, who hag been the SPS Executive Director of School and Community Partnerships, was named Chief of EPE 3 On December 2, 2020, Dir. Hampson was elected Board President and began serving immediately. Respondents both identify as Native,‘Seatle Public Schools - Board of Directors Amended and Final Investigation Report ‘August 9, 2021 Page 20f 40 (On March 9, 2021, a pause was taken in this investigation for the parties to attempt mediation of their disputes. On July 2, 2021, SPS was officially notified that the mediation had concluded unsuccessfully, and this investigation officially resumed on that date. During the investigation’s pause, there have been significant leadership changes at SPS. This report reflects the organizational structure as it existed in the fall of 2020 and winter of 2021 fl. Investigation Process A ini tion of Investigation after the Pause MFR was notified of the need to complete this investigation on July 12, 2021, and immediately sent the following note to the parties: It is my understanding that your mediation has process has concluded unsuccessfully. ‘As a result, | will be finalizing and issuing my report. Prior to finalizing the report, | will consider any relevant documentary information provided by the parties by close of business Friday, July 16. We can provide access to a ShareFile folder if you do not want to send your documentation by email. Please copy Anissa Uscocovich (anissa@mfrlawgroup.com) on your emails to me. Dir. Hampson expressed concerns that MFR’s investigation could not be complete because she had not provided certain documentation and that not all relevant witnesses had been interviewed. * MFR sent a subsequent email on July 14, inviting parties to make available any additional documentation or the names of any additional witnesses they felt were relevant to this investigation by close of business on Monday, July 19, 2021. Only Dir. Hampson provided additional documentation and requested additional witnesses prior to the deadline. Dir. Hampson’s documents were reviewed and the witnesses she identified were interviewed. © ‘Aithough MFR understands Dir. Hampson's perspective, MFR has been able to develop an understanding of the issues from other witnesses, and the review of documentary evidence, video/audio recordings, and transcripts of Board and committee meetings. With regard to the documents, in December 2019, MFR set Lup a ShareFife folder for Dir. Hampson to share documents with us she had promised to provide during her interviews. Although MFR reminded Dir. Hampson a few times, she did not provide the documentation. A final reminder from Director of Employee & Association Relations Misa Garmoe was sent to Director Hampson on January 12, 2021, requesting documents by January 15, 2024 5 On July 20, 2021, afer the deadiine for submitting additional documents or requests had passed, Dir. DeWolf asked if MFR had interviewed three witnesses, two of whom had been identified by Dir. Hampson. Although MFR did not directly answer Dir. DeWolf's question, MFR did presume his question was an endorsement of Dir. Hampson’s request that two particular witnesses be interviewed. The third witness Dir. DeWolf inquired about had already been interviewed‘Seattle Public Schools - Board of Directors Amended and Final Investigation Report August 8, 2021 Page Sof 40 B, Interviews and Documents MFR interviewed 20 witnesses, including the complainants, respondents, the SPS superintendent and many of her direct reports, and several Board directors. A listing of the individuals interviewed and the dates of those interviews is attached to this report as Exhibit A, along with copies of interview summaries from which excerpts are cited in this report MER also reviewed approximately 5,633 pages of documentation, including emails, SPS policies and procedures, Board agendas, minutes, transcripts and audio files, and documents provided by witnesses.* Documents cited in this report are aggregated in alphanumeric order and included with this report as Exhibit B. C. Applicable Polici 1, Policy 1005: Responsibilities and Authority of Board Pursuant to SPS Policy 1005, “It is the duty and responsibility of the Board to set policy for, and provide governance and oversight of, the Seattle School District.” (MFR SPS-BOD 3E-001 to 3E- 002 al 3E-001.) Policy 1005 explains: “The Board shall develop and approve policies, set academic performance goals, set expects 1s for staff and students, and nurture a climate conducive to continuous improvement" (Id.) The Board employs the superintendent to manage the operations of SPS. All staff report directly to the superintendent or someone in her chain of command. The Board is accountable to the ‘community for success of the district. (fd.) 2. Policy 1310: Policy Adoption & Suspension; Creation of Manuals & ‘Superintendent Procedures Policy 1910: Policy Adoption & Suspension; Creation of Manuals & Superintendent Procedures. provides, “The superintendent shall develop administrative procedures {called "Superintendent Procedures’] to facilitate the implementation of Board policies." (MFR SPS-BOD 3F-001 to 3F- 002 at 3F-002.) Superintendent Procedures do not have to be approved by the Board, but the Board ‘may revise them when it appears that they are not consistent with the Board's intentions as expressed in its policies.” (/d.) ® During her interview, Ms. agreed to provide a chronology and other documentation related to the ‘community engagement work EPE had done related to Policy 0040; she did not provide this documentation.‘Seattle Public Schools - Board of Directors Amended and Final Investigation Report ‘August 9, 2021 Page 4 of 40 3. Policy No. 0030: Ensuring Educational and Racial Equity Policy 0030: Ensuring Educational and Racial Equity, adopted in August 2012 and revised on November 4, 2020, is an aspirational policy committing SPS to educational equity through the utilization of metrics, reasonable allocation of resources, and professional development. (MFR ‘SPS-BOD 3C-001 to 3C-003.) Policy 0030 specifically addresses the following: Equitable Access to resources even when this means differentiating resources allocation. Racial Equity Analysis of existing policies, programs, procedures, and professional development opportunities. ‘+ Workforce Equity by actively working to have the teacher and administrator workforce "be balanced and reflect the diversity of the student body.” ‘+ Professional Development focused on skill building retated to eliminating opportunity gaps and other disparities in achievement. ‘+ Welcoming School Environments that are inclusive and support the diversity of the student population, families, and communities. + Partnerships with others who have demonstrated culturally specific expertise, + Multiple Pathways to Success to meet the diverse student body. * Recognizing Diversity by providing materials and assessments that reflect diversity of students and staff. (MFR SPS-BOD 3C-001 to 30-003 at 3C-002.) Policy 0030 requires the superintendent to develop procedures for implementation, an action plan, and clear accountability and metries. (Id., at 3C-003.) 4. Policy 5010: Nondiscrimination & Affirmative Action Policy 5010 states succinctly: “The District is committed to non-discrimination in all its education ‘and employment activities.” (MFR SPS-BOD 3G-001 to 3G-003 at 36-001.) The policy then identifies a variety of groups, including gender and race, as protected classes under the policy. Superintendent Procedure (“Procedure”) 5010SP, dated January 9, 2018, details how Policy 5010, is to be implemented. (MFR SPS-BOD 3G-004 to 36-009.) Under Procedure 5010SP, complaints can be informal or formal. Formal complaints of discrimination will be investigated by Human Resources (HR) or its designee and a written report provided to the superintendent. (id, at 36-004 and 36-005.) Procedure 5010SP also protects individuals reporting discrimination, serving as a witness or otherwise providing information about an act of discrimination from acts of ‘reprisal or retaliation.” (MFR SPS-BOD 3G-004 to 36-009 at 36-008.) The standard of review for investigations is preponderance of the evidence.‘Seatile Public Schools - Board of Directors Amended and Final Investigation Report ‘August 9, 2021 Page Sof 40, 5. Policy and Procedure 5207: Prohibition of Harassment, intimidation and Bullying Policy 5207: Prohibition of Harassment, Intimidation and Bullying, commits the District to providing a"...safe, civil, equitable work environment for all employees and volunteers." (MFR SPS-80D_ 3H-001 to 3H-002,) It also states: “The District desires work environment that is free from harassment, intimidation, and bullying (‘HIB')."(Id.) Policy 5207 then specifically defines HIB: HIB in the workplace refers to repeated and/or unreasonable actions of an individual (or group) directed towards an employee or volunteer (or @ group of ‘employees or volunteers) that is intended to intimidate, bully, degrade, or humiliate, This inchides written messages or images (including those that are electronically transmitted), verbal comments, or physical acts. To be considered as HIB, the messages, images, comments, or acts must; ‘+ Physically harm an employee or voluntaer or damage the employee's or volunteer's property; or * Have the effect of substantially interfering with an employee's or volunteer's work environment; or * Be so severe, persistent, or pervasive that it creates an intimidating or threatening work environment; or * Have the effect of substantially disrupting the orderly operation of the work place. (Ud, at 3H-001,) HIB complaints alleging conduct based on protected class stalus, such as race or gender, are Investigated under the provisions of Procedure 5010SP by HR or its designee. (MFR SPS-BOD. 3H-003 to 3H-007 at 3H-003 to 31-004.) The procedures for investigating HIB complaints not based on protected class are set forth by Procedure 5207SP. These complaints are also investigated by HR or its designee, (MFR SPS-BOD 3H-003 to 3H-007 at 3H-005.) Procedure 5207SP protects individuals reporting harassment, intimidation, or bullying from “reprisal or retaliation.” (MFR SPS-BOD 3H-003 to 3H-007 at 3H-006.) According to Chief of HR| J Policy 5207 has been interpreted consistent not only with the letter of the policy, but also with the spirit of the policy. The goal has been to create a work environment that is safe for everyone. In situations where an individual has only engaged in offensive conduct once or twice, SPS has sometimes looked to interactions with others to address pattems of behavior. The standard of review for investigations is preponderance of the evidence,Soatle Public Schoots - Board of Directors Amended and Final Investigation Report August 9, 2021 Page 6 of 40 MM. Comptaints A. In-Scope Claims, ‘On September 18, 2020, Dr. jail in 2 memorandum entitled Bullying, intimidation, and Anti- Black Racism, addressed to the Board and copied to Superintendent Denise Juneau and Executive Dir. of the Washington State School Directors’ Association Tim Garchow, alleged on behalf of herself and Ms. i anti-Black and intersectional racism by Dirs, Hampson and DeWolf in response to thelr work related to draft SPS Policy 0040. (MFR SPS-BOD 14-001 to 1A- 013.) Dr. lll and Ms. RHR alleged that on September 16, 2020, while presenting the most current updates on community engagement regarding Policy 0040, the conduct of Dirs. DeWolf ‘and Hampson brought into public view what Dr. ill and Ms. RI had been enduring privately for months, an orchestrated campaign of bullying, escelating intimidation, gaslighting, and retaliation. Specifically identified in the memorandum were four examples of experiences: 1, Director Hampson began bullying Chief jill and altempted to discredited ores all in response to what she perceived as a loss of control or “ownership” over Policy 0040 2, Director Hampson orchestrated with external stakeholders the overt silencing of Director} board report, testimony and undermining the credibility of her policy work, and Director |. under false pretenses, so that they could continue to 3 Directors Hampson and DeWolf scheduled a meeting with Chief jill berate and I it Director 4, Directors DeWolf and Hampson modeled overt silencing and chastisement of Black women in leadership, displaying the often public consequences Black women face for addressing the racism which Hampson and DeWolt, regularly claim a commitment to ending. (10,, at 1-003 to 14-004; grammatical errors have not been corrected.) B. —Qut-of-Scope Claims 4. Retaliation Complaint During the initial interview of Dr. ila she explained that she and Ms. jig) had submitted their September 18, 2020 letter? to name the offensive conduct they had been subjected to and to offer paints of reconciliation for moving forward collaboratively. (/d., at 1-005.) Dr. iii and " Dr. REY references this document as a ltr, but i is writ in a memorandum format.Seattle Public Schools - Board of Directors Amended and Final investigation Report August 9, 2021 Page 7of 40 Ms. RH do not believe 2 HIB investigation into their concems is appropriate because (i) the HIB system is not designed to address anti-racist work or concerns; (i) the HIB complaint process Is designed to deal with acts of overt discrimination and harassment; and (ii) there are no stated criteria for HIB conduct based on implicit bias. Consequently, Dr. iil) sees “...the formalization of the complaint and being named a complainant(s] as a diffusing and watering down tactic for the Board, as well as an attempt to disassociate the system from the issue.” Interview of Dr. (RR) «November 23, 2020, at page 2. Further, Dr. jill strongly believes, and Ms. | agrees, SPS's insistence on conducting this investigation is an act of retaliation. Dr. imal is concerned that the investigation has the potential to damage both her and Ms. i careers. Ms. agreed with Dr, EI explaining DeWolf, the person whom allegations are against, is the person requiting and pushing for a HIB investigation wants it noted that she and} did not move forward with 2 HIB complaint because these types of investigations can be ‘traumatizing. What ‘and are trying to prove is anti-Blackness, which is very dificult to prove. 's going to expect the best and be positive about this investigation but knows that DeWolf is familiar with the law and the level of ‘scrutiny that is raquired around a racial claim. DeWoif is fipping accountability and putting the burden on staff, but the complaints must be investigated to prove ‘whether staff did experience something. This institutional tactic is taken by DeWalt to clear his name on his last year as a Board member. Board members understand that| and| ‘are well respected and would not go around using serious ‘and harmful racial matters as a weapon against them a have established reputations in the community and believe JeWalt is Tying to find a different way to discredit their named experiences. ‘The choice to move forward with an investigation is the most institutionally racist way you can do it. This behavior is always done to Black folks and holds up anti- Blackness. If you feel you are being discriminated against, you need to prove it with the highest level of scrutiny. believed that she and were genuinely writing a note and putting iin front of the Board seeking a change in behavior and accountability. Board members have been extremely degrading to and A which has been disheartening, The forcing of an investigation upon them is disappointing, but she is wiling to participate and work her way through the process. Interview of Ms. il) December 21, 2020, at pages 3 and 4. Prior to the initiation of MFR's investigation, this concem had been raised and explored with outside legal counsel, Chief Legal Counsel Narver, Superintendent Juneau, and Chief of HR iil It was determined that, pursuant to SPS Procedures 5210SP and 5207SP, unless‘Seattle Public Schoois - Board of Direciors Amended and Final Investigation Report ‘August 9, 2021 Page 8 of 40, Complainants were able to successfully mediate their dispute, an investigation would need to be conducted. Dr. ll determined she was not interested in mediation with the Respondents because she felt it would have the effect of reducing what she saw as a systemic problem into an interpersonal confict. While Dr. jag] ond Ms. ga cid not want the complaints investigated under Policy 5010 or addressed informally through a conflict resolution process with Dirs. DeWolf and Hampson, Dirs, DeWolf and Hampson expressed frustration at the substantial allegations made against them and the lack of substantive action being taken. Both Board directors felt it was important to move forward with an investigation so that it was clear they were not being held to a different standard or process than other SPS staff. Dr. SH 2nd Ms. RRs retaliation concern is outside the scope of MFR estigation, 2. Inappropriate Use of Positional Authority During a follow-up interview on January 25, 2021, Dr. jill complained Dir. Hampson is using her authority as prasident of the Board to (i) make it appear as if the Seattle Council Parent Teacher Student Association (SCPTSA) is working collaboratively with staff on a combined draft of Policy 0040; and (ii) to ensure that Poticy 0040 does not directly addresses the type of conduct Dir. Hamoson has engaged in to the detriment of Or. ai and Ms. (REE Further, despite the “urgency” to move this policy forward that led to the offensive August 28 call, delays continue In moving Policy 0040 forward because Dir. Hampson is waiting for this investigation to be ‘completed before bringing Policy 0040 before the Board, Dr. REREEY complaint is outside the scope of MFR's investigation bacause i (is not temporally related fo the major events at issue in this investigation; and (ii) daes not clearly state a claim under the District's anti-discrimination or HIB policies. IV. Summary Findings A. _ Did Dirs. DeWolf or Hampson Violate SPS Policies 5010 and §207 by Engaging in Discriminatory, Harassing, Intimidating, Bullying, or Retallatory Conduct Based on Race and/or Gender? 4. Dir. DeWolt After a thorugh review of the evidence, MFR finds:Seattle Public Schools - Board of Directors Amended and Final Investigation Report August 8, 2021 Page 9 of 0 * Dir. DeWolf did not discriminate against, harass, intimidate, or bully Dr. jill) and Ms. (iB based solely on race (Black). + There is insufficient evidence for MFR to conclude Dir. DeWolf discriminated against, harassed, intimidated, or bullied Dr. iil or Ms. RHEE based on intersectionality. ‘+ The evidence of intentional gender discrimination js mixed and inconclusive, + Dir. DeWolf violated Policy 5207 by repeatedly engaging in HIB conduct that, being persistent over time, had the effect of substantially interfering with the work environment. 2, Dir. Hampson After a thorough review of the evidence, MFR finds Dir. Hampson did not discriminate against Dr, ial or Ms. iil on the basis of race, gender, or intersectionality, B. Did Dirs. DeWolf or Hampson Violate SPS Policy 5207 by Engaging in Harassing, Intimidating, or Bullying Conduct? After a thorough review of the evidence, MFR finds Dirs. DeWolf and Hampson used their positions and authority to the detriment of Dr. [iil end Ms. RR in violation of Policy 5207. V. Background Information A SPS 1. SPS Board of Directors SPS is governed by an elected body of seven citizens who serve four-year terms. Each director Fepresents a geographic district. The work of the Board includes hiring and evaluating the Superintendent; establishing policies for governing SPS; adopting a balancad budget each year; having legal and fiduciary authority for SPS; adopting instructional materials; and serving as ‘community representatives to the District and on behalf of the District. Directors do not have dedicated staff to assist with their work. They are assisted by SPS staff members on an as-needed basis. Dir. of Policy and Board Relations Gi day work is focused on managing the logistics associated with Board committess and public meetings. At the time of this investigation, Ms. QR) had regular weekly meetings with the Board President. Ms. SERBRREREM) is a direct report to Chief of Staff jiiAmaaaiy‘Seattie Public Schools - Board of Directors Amended and Final investigation Report August 9, 202 Page 10 of 40 2, Educational Leadership of SPS SPS is led by Superintendent Juneau, who joined the organization on July 1, 2018. ‘Superintendent Juneau is the first Native superintendent. On December 8, 2020, Ms. Juneau announced she would be resigning her position as superintendent effective June 30, 2021, Dr. Brent Jones, the former chief of EPE, has been nominated to serve as interim superintendent beginning July 1, 2021. Reporting to Superintendent Juneau is a group of leaders referred to as her “small cabinet.” This includes leaders of the 10 major divisions and the chief of staff. (MFR SPS-BOD 28-001 and 2B- 002.) These leaders regularly interface with the Board on issues of policy and procedure. Certain committees are staffed by SPS leaders, For example, the Audit and Finance Committee is staffed by the chief financial officer. 3. SPS Demographics and Strategic Plan ‘SPS is the largest school district in Washington State with 104 schools and a published enrollment of 53,627 in October 2019. More than 53% of SPS's students are ethnically diverse. Black or ‘African Americans are the largest ethnic group at nearly 14%, while Asian, Latinx, and multiracial categories each make up approximately 13%. Native Hawaiian/Paeific Islander and Native American/American Indian both make up 0.4% and 0.45%, respectively. SPS has adopted Seattle Excellence, a five-year strategic plan “...guided by four priorities and is laser focused on supporting Students of Color who are furthest away from educational justice, he commitment of Seattle Excellence is for beginning with African American boys and teens.” SPS to become an anti-racist educational system, and the belief is that by doing this, educational outcomes for all students will improve. 4. Seattle Council PTSA ‘The SCPTSA represents over 80 parent teacher and parent teacher school associations serving Parents and students in the District. According to their website, SCPTSA is "Centering the voices of those furthest from educational justice, we support, inform, and advocate for and with school communities all over Seattle.” ® The composition of the small cabinet changed in January 2021; organizational charts for 2020 and 2021 are included. (MFR SPS-BOD 28-001 and 28-002.)Seattle Public Schools - Board of Directors Amended and Final Investigation Report August 9, 2021 Page 11 oF 40 Historically, SCPTSA had a reputation for not being reflective of the communities it represented. In the last few years, SCPTSA has worked hard to change that reputation and to be more representative of its communities. The last three presidents for the SCPTSA have been women of color. The current president of SCPTSA, Ms. jill is Latino. B, Complainants and Respondents 4. Complainant Dr. ial Or. ill (Black) has been an educator with SPS for 22 years. She is the chief academic officer and was appointed to fill this position effective January 9, 2021. Prior to accepting this position, Dr. ji) Served 2s the chief of EPE beginning June 1, 2019. Dr. jill a'so served as the executive director of organizational development for equity, strategy and partnership; the HR. director for professional growth and educator support; a principal leadership coach; a principal; and an assistant principal. Dr. RH is committed to anti-racism work and wants the District to be an anti-racist institution. During her interview, Dr. ll Peraphrased a quote from the New York Times bestselling author of, So you want to talk about race, leoma Olvo: "You don't have to pretend to be free of racism to be anti-racist. We commit acts of racism, and challenge them wherever you find them, including yoursel. Itis the only way to move forward.” 2. Complainant Ms. aaa Ms. (RH (Black) joined SPS on October 7, 2020, as the director of racial equily advancement. Prior to joining SPS, Ms. was working as a special advisor to the mayor to support alignment of the City of Seattle's Race and Social Justice Initiative across city divisions. (Ms. HRB Is @ graduate of the University of Washington with a B.A in Sociology and a B.S. Health Informatics and Management. After graduating from the University of Washington, Ms. took 2 position as a Teach for America Educator in Atlanta, Georgia. While there, Ms. received her master’s in education from Georgia State University. Ms. jamal graduated from Seattle University Law School in 2016. Ms. RRB] immigrated to the United States as a child, altended SPS, and has always been tied to Seattle's local Black communities and the larger Seattle community.