Good morning. Welcome to another joint session of the Health and Human Services Committee and Education and Culture Committee. Here with my colleague and co-chair, Council Member Alvinaz and Council Members Sales, Council Member Mink is attending virtually and Council Member Luki. Really appreciate everyone that's here today. We have a couple of items. First, though, I want to, I think I got it right this time that Miss Yao, this is your, this might be, this is going to be your last one with us. So, we're going to talk about the CIP and things related to our childcare and our wellness centers in a whole range of topics and Vivian Yao has been with the council how many years now? 18. 18 years. And has been working on these issues, I think for most of that time, all that time. And certainly the seven years I've been on the council, and I can say, and I'm sure councilman Rauvinos will attest, we wouldn't have been able to do this work and understand it and have the depth of knowledge and care that you bring to the work. And without a doubt, I can say that Montgomery County and our students and our young children and families are better off because you served them. So just want to say thank you and acknowledge your service. And I know you're not, you know, you're not leaving the area or anything, but you're just going to get some time and hopefully spend some time with family and friends, but just want to acknowledge her. So I think it's appropriate to give you a round of applause. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Um, cast you a round of applause. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Rao-Nost. Yeah, so I said my thoughts, which were personal last time. So I'll just, I'll say this, our civil servants across the country are critical and vital to our economy, to our community, to our health. And there is no better example than Vivian here at the local level of somebody who has dedicated their professional career to ensuring the betterment of our entire community and society. And at a time where that work is being demeaned and discredited in ways that are malicious and quite frankly evil and incorrect. Vivian reminds us of how important it is for us to support public servants such as her particularly during this time. So at least we hear Montgomery County need to always uplift and acknowledge that work and continue to support and move it forward. But once again Vivian, thank you for your dedication and commitment and your help to me personally and professionally. You're here. You're here. You don't have to. We just want you to send pictures. Yeah, that's right. Perfect. Send pictures. Let's greet you. So we have Mr. Nandes Rodriguez. The most beautiful thing is that we're going to be in great hands. And previously, under your two lids, left for a little while to go serve in the federal government. And now back with us. So thank you. We're glad. So we have, I'm going to turn it over to you all. We have, we're going to go through the childcare renovation projects, the CIP, and then we're going to talk. There is an update in the packet, which I really appreciate you all providing about the wellness centers and mental health and positive youth development spaces, though there's no amendment before us today. If there are questions about those items, we can certainly take them up. We'll also come back to them in budget, as we always do. So I'll kick it over to our team to miss you out. The aforementioned miss you out. Good morning. We can invite the participants to come up to the table at this point. That includes Mr. Dice. Mr. Dice, Mr. Ascent, OMB, MCPS representative, if you're here, come on up. And anyone from HHS, Dr. Bridgers is here. Mr. Hodge, there we go. Okay, so the joint committee is going to be reviewing projects recommended by the executive for amendment relating to child care renovation. Those three projects are ADA remediation, playgrounds, and childcare facility replacement. Each of these umbrella projects provides for the designing construction of multiple projects that will take place sequentially through the six year CIP period and beyond. There are tables that start on page two of your packet. Two tables for each project that describe the There are tables that start on page two of your packet. Two tables for each project that describe the first one recommended expenditures for each umbrella project by fiscal year. And the second one would be the approved individual project schedules and total costs. So walking through that, the first one is for childcare renovations, ADA remediation. And the recommended project total in the amendment is 8,248,000. The six year total however is 6.8,01 million. That is 112,000 increased to total project costs, but a 1.335 million decrease to the six year total. The recommended funding source is GeoBonds, and the Request Fiscal Year 26 appropriation is actually a negative 941,000. You'll see this trend for all three projects essentially is spreading out the costs going into the beyond six year period with generally increased costs for the project total, but a decreased cost for the six-year period. So the next project is the childcare renovations playgrounds amendment, the recommended total for the project is 9.019 million. The six-year total is 7.106 million. That amounts to a $550,000 increase to the total project costs, but a 2.468 million decrease to the six year period. Again, that's recommended funding sources, Geobonds, and the requested fiscal year 26 appropriation is $126,000. The individual costs are then in the second table following that. And then on page four of your packet, we move on to the childcare facility replacement amendment. The total project cost recommended for that project is 30.121 million. The six year total is 19.815 million. The cost to the cost change to the total project is a 7.35 million. The cost to the, the cost change to the total project is 7, is a 7.35 million increase. The cost change for the six-year period though is a 2.956 million decrease. So the executive has explained that the implementation timelines have just shifted based on recent experience and presumably affordability issues as well. There for the most part the recommended amended costs, pro-project, involve a 10%, less than 10% change in most cases cost reductions, but there are a few that are increases as well. But there are a few to note that don't fall into that category. And council staff has highlighted them on pages four and five years of your packet. The first one is in childcare renovations, ADA remediation. The Up County Regional Services Center project, which has been completed, came out to be $935,440. That's a 77% decrease to what was projected. In childcare renovations playgrounds, the Woodland Elementary School project was completed at $596,000, $11,000. That was an 87% decrease to the projected amount. And the Lone Oak project, which is targeted for completion or work in fiscal year 31, is projected at $820,000, $87,000, which is a 53% decrease. For childcare renovations, childcare facility replacement, the, sorry, woodlands, sorry that there's a typo there. As completed at $2.383 million or 75% decrease, the largest, most significant project though change is related to the MLK Junior Recreation Park Project, which is targeted for fiscal year 27. It's a $7.452 million, sorry, it's projected at $7.452 million, but it's a 295% increase. So the executive explains that this increased results from an expanded scope related to storm water management and electrical work. These kinds of exponential increases are not anticipated for the playgrounds and ADA remediation projects, but because of the scope of replacing facilities, I guess we don't really know necessarily this time, how that's going to impact future projects. Executive says that they will complete a comprehensive re-evaluation of consistments across all projects that will be performed for the full fiscal year 27-32 CIP and that availability of funding will be the main driver of the implementation schedule. So at that, the committee may want a little bit more information about the projects that deviate significantly from the approved project estimates. And if the committee feels that moving forward more expediently with childcare renovation projects in fiscal year 26, like the ADA remediation project is a priority then it may want to seek additional information about what work can happen in 26 and potentially add its subject to available funding at reconciliation. Thank you, Ms. Yao. I think that's a great place to start. So I don't know who wants to start as far as just explaining some of the deviations in the pushback one or two years and the why there and Mr. Dice maybe maybe start with that. I'll give it a shot. David Dice Director Montgomery County Department of General Services. Again the cost that you see projected out over in these lengthy tables are exactly that projections over the course of many years. And I can't tell you what the costs are gonna be two years from now, much less, 10 years from now. So these are a lump sum distributed proportionally over a large chart. So there is going to be deviation. The ADA and the playground projects, as Missy Owl pointed out, pretty straightforward stuff, and we can knock those out without much difficulty. And that's why we, and that's what we have been doing. The rec, or the facility replacements are significantly different. and just as we've done with libraries and are about to do with recreation centers, as you know, we go in, we prefer to go in and do a forensic analysis of the structures so that we have an idea of what exactly going to run into so that I can provide you with a realistic cost estimate. We have some amounts of money that one project alone could suck up the majority of if we, depending on what we run into. So some of those deviations, for instance, the case of up county regional services center, the work was very straightforward. It was playground to do. There was an original estimate as part of that distribution across the table of large projects. We went into the work and it came in considerably less expensive. Woodland Elementary School facility, that work was completed. was a wonderful facility. I don't know if you've seen it or not. You should visit it. It's an amazing facility. The playground is representative of the work that we're doing at all the playgrounds around the area. And that job went swimmingly well. representative of a project that's relatively new construction and little to run into that required major work. Some of the other projects MLK will be more challenging because of the nature of that facility. We know that facility. We've been in that facility with other projects. And so we would expect that to be more expensive. So each one of the childcare facility replacements is going to be highly individualized and unpredictable, particularly as we get into each individual site. Once again, pretty confident about the playgrounds and the ADA work. It's pretty common through facilities that we do all across the county's portfolio, But the renovations to child care facilities are a vast unknown. I'd love to be more specific, but that's a challenge. Dr. Briggies? Good morning. E.C. Chair, Juwondo, HHS Chair, Albinosa, and Joint Committee members. I want to back up thank Ms. Jowell for all the support that she gave and continues to give to HHS during these council sessions. There are three points that I want to just emphasize and that OMB and DGS really looked into with HHS's input and collaboration was the revaluation of the cost estimate. So therefore you have the increases and the decreases, the equitable response for all to make these spaces ADA compliance. And then lastly, knowing that their lean budget times ahead to look at the cost affordability. And so when we look at the CIP over time, these are some of the challenges and input that HHS provided to DGS and OMB, and I just wanted to go on the record to thank them for their assessment. I appreciate that. Do you have any questions on this? Any council member sales? Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Dr. Bridgers and Mr. Dice. Who made the original cost estimates for some of these projects, specifically the MLK project? Just wanting to understand the cost increase. Sure, specifically for MLK is Mr. Good morning, Greg Austin, Department of General Services, as Director Dice is indicated. All of these childcare renovation projects started out as an umbrella project. They were subsequently broken out into these three categories, the ADA renovations, the playgrounds, and then the facility replacements. MLK falls into that facility replacement. So that original umbrella project, level of effort project was nearly $40 million in projected cost. And then that was subsequently broken into three CIPs, which are then three separate umbrellas. So there's really about 22 or 24 different sub-projects within that original LOE. And a lot of those costs were carried forward and as Director Dice has mentioned, we were allowed at nearly 40 million. It was spread over all three of those CIPs and then further spread over the individual projects. So the original allotment that was projected for MLK was only a few million dollars. As it turns out, the project in that MLK to differentiate that from Woodland, for example, Woodland was a, you know, elementary school being rebuilt, incorporated a small addition to that building for about $3 million plus the playground. And that was that project, MCPS delivered that in concert with the elementary school construction. MLK on the other hand is on a parks department campus. We need to, for continuity of operations, we need to allow the existing facility to continue to operate while we build a new facility next door. It's on a parcel of land that is constrained both from environmental and current infrastructure issues. And then of course, as Director Dice has mentioned, the storm water management and the infrastructure utility infrastructure necessary to all that went into what is now a $7 to $8 million project tear down rebuild. And that is what's gotten infinitely more complicated than we originally anticipated nearly 10 years ago when we started developing this entire program. So that's the real differentiator there. Let me just add to that. Thank you, Mr. Austin. This is going to happen again. You're going to see numbers vary on this again as we come back and give you updated reports on these projects. I'm just going to promise you the MLK is a great example. It wasn't a renovation became new construction. That takes on a whole different town because it's building something is supposed to renovating something that's existing. These numbers, they seem precise. I realize you look at this table and I see $3,840,321, not $22, $21. These are all distributed numbers using square footage or other ratios. They will change as we go. You've got a large amount of money, and we're just giving you representative examples of how this will work, but the cards on the deck are going to shuffle as we go ahead. And once we know more, we'll update you and let you know how we're going. But it's a larger amount of money as Greg pointed out. It's overall, it's a level of effort project project which gives me a lump sum to spend and I spend it as I go and as I just mentioned in my previous comments one project can skew the course but we'll know that in advance and we'll keep you updated. And so is the project more expensive because it was delayed or just because of normal wear and tear? Well, no, it was the nature of this particular project is the fact that a new facility needed to be constructed on that site, but not the existing facility was inadequate for the use. So, but whenever you get into sight work, things are gonna get considerably more expensive. So, each one of these sites has its different nuances to them. Again, summer new, we've looked at putting in prefab structures as well, of them, we're just too difficult to lift in over other things to set. So new construction, as in this case, was the best option. So we look at each one of these as we encounter them. We generally know what to expect, but won't know until we get to that level of detail. Okay, thank you. We just talked about the childcare renovation. It was raised by Miss Yao, just what this will do to the timeline of potential the renovation. So for example, we're moving the 25 money previously. It was approved. Okay. Three, five, and now it's, you're moving that down and pushing a lot of it out out of the six year. Could you just give us a sense of, or maybe the H.H.H. Chalky, whoever, what's that going to mean for when those get completed. Your question is how delays will affect cost estimates? Yeah. Well, I'll say that this is the biennial year. So we were planning to do a comprehensive reassessment in the full CIP. How the cost estimates are scheduled is trying to keep things intact with the projects that are scheduled in the upcoming year. So mitigating some of those impacts that we're likely to see nearer in time and then we'll reevaluate the further we get down the road. Like Director, I said, the cost estimates could vary. It's a six year period, but each project has its own nuances that could also affect cost estimates. So these are very much just projections of this time. Right. And making the numbers work, which keeping the projects that are the closest to being worked on worked on. OK. Yep, look. I can add one more thing. I've been asked a lot over the last few days about what tariffs are going to do. No one knows the engineering news record just issued an article earlier today, I believe it was or late yesterday, that things like lumber prices could go up 25%. I it would, I don't know what it's gonna do to cost it, will raise costs. My biggest concern in addition to costs is material availability and delay. So what we were just starting to recover from COVID and the effects of that is gonna be a resurgence. So I'm not gonna be able to peg a number. People are always, can you tell us, is it 17.3% or 25.2? I don't know. It's out of my control, but we need to be prepared for the fact that these numbers are going to go up. So just wanted to go on record with that right now. So no one's surprised. Yep, one of the many unfortunate things we're dealing with. I think Councillor Romain has a question. Thanks. Yeah, I just wanted to circle back to MLK for a moment. Apologies if this was already made clear to others. So it shifted from renovation to new construction because of stormwater management issues or it's if you could just explain how that why that shift happened. certainly again Greg Asselberg, Department of General Services. The original level of effort project contemplated renovations of all of these spaces. In the case of the portfolio that is now referred to as facility replacement, effectively, either a tear down rebuild or rebuild in place. Those were facilities that we were unable to renovate and still meet the required state regulations as it relates to childcare.. So when we looked at MLK for example, we determined after lengthy analysis and investigation in the actual facility that would be impossible or infeasible to renovate the facility and still meet the requirements under the state regulations for child care and what that facility needed to be. So the less expensive, I realize that's a bit of a misnomer, but the less expensive option or the better option was to simply replace it in kind on that site. And so as director Dice has noted, that turns a renovation into new construction and that with it opens up the door to things like stormwater management, utility, other infrastructure that you typically wouldn't deal with in a simple renovation. So that's really the base. And of course we have a lot more detail if we could follow up if needed. Thank you. All right. Yes, Mr. Sey. Yes, Mr. Sey. Just had a quick question about the ADA remediation. How many of those projects are going to be delayed? I'm just thinking about I know you mentioned the up county project was completed pretty easily. It looks like it was even less than the original estimates. I'm just wondering what the foot traffic is at any of the delayed sites. In these, thank you. That's a great question. These projects are pretty straightforward. We don't anticipate any delays. The only impact could be on affordability and generally in the CIP. But we don't anticipate any delays either here or with the playgrounds. No perfect. That's all I hear. Just a quick comment. I know that things I look at the numbers and I always go. The numbers for the later years aren't necessarily so real, right? I am a realist and so I look at them as they're just there but they're going to shift and that's okay and we need to all be mindful and expect that. Thank you for forecasting the, I know you don't have a magic eight ball that's going to give you all the answers that everyone wants to know right now as we're all struggling with analyzing and ever changing landscape but I appreciate you know the the detail and I appreciate the the choices that you all have to make in terms of feasibility functionality cost and all of that has to go into one so you know it's it's great to be able to see we had cost savings in certain places. I appreciate why we had extra expenses with MLK. And so, you know, we know we're going to have to do this dance for the foreseeable future. So thank you and we'll be back. Time will tell. All right, so Michelle. Without objection, we'll accept the amendments. So moving on to project updates. At the February 24th Joint Committee meeting on school based wellness and health services Committee members requesting an update on the capital expenditures for developing comprehensive high school wellness centers, as well as the delineation of which high schools have comprehensive wellness centers, which schools have bridged wellness programs, et cetera. So on page five of your packet, we set out responses to that request. High school wellness centers and expanded wellness services CIP project provides for the design and construction of two types of high school facilities. One is the comprehensive high school wellness center that provides health, mental health, social services, and family support youth development services. And the other type is the bridge to wellness mental health and youth development services space. The comprehensive high school wellness centers can be built as either standalone projects or in conjunction with major school construction. And centers built in conjunction with major projects are typically bit as add on projects and realize savings from being associated with those larger school projects. The joint committee has prioritized expansion of full high school wellness centers based on need consistent with racial equity and social justice principles rather than the timing of major school construction projects. Dedicated bridge to wellness, mental health and youth development spaces are as a matter of course planned and constructed for high schools, they're undergoing major school construction and are not prioritized for high school wellness centers with somatic health services. So on page six, there are bullets that kind of describe where we are in terms of the status of which high schools have what and what is being planned in the CIP project. There are currently six high schools that have full wellness centers, Gathersburg, Kennedy, Northwood, Seneca Valley, Watkins Mill, and Weedon High Schools. Every other high school in the county has a bridge to wellness program currently. The approved fiscal year 25 to 30 CIP includes funding for three additional comprehensive wellness center facilities. Springbrook as a standalone project, which is program for for fiscal year 26 paint branch which is program beginning in fiscal year 28 and woodward to accommodate the northwood students that are going to be there is program beginning in fiscal year 26. The approved fiscal year 25 to 30 CIP includes funding for the mental health PYD space for Blake High School, which is program beginning in fiscal year 28, regroup or high school, beginning in fiscal year 29, and then Crown High School, beginning in fiscal year 25. The Joint Committee will have the opportunity to reassess the priority need of full high school on the center projects next spring in the full fiscal year 27 to 32 CIP cycle. Thank you, miss. Yeah, for that overview. Do anything to add on from HHS or DGS? You don't have. So just to say that the projects that we have in the CIP are all moving forward. We have Springbrook, which starts in FY26. We'll have to do, we're working with MCPS. We'll have to do feasibility studies and start looking at what that looks like. As a standalone project, it's not with any other school construction. It's happening in spring books, so this will end up being all by itself. Just to fix an issue in the CIP, I think the Woodward is already open and the Wellness Center is already running, the students are already there this year. So it will continue in FY26 because Northwood, Northwood High School is being built. Wellness center will be built again as part of the construction, but MCPS is giving that to us for free because it was already existing in the original building. Crown, we had already gotten pretty far down the road on Crown for a wellness center. We are switching that now to just to make things a little more complicated, a connections to wellness program. So connections is kind of the enhanced bridge to wellness. So it has the PYD component that the bridge to wellness does not have. So like I said, we're trying to make things a little more complicated for you in trying to figure out which programs are all. But as our HHS programs, we are now working with MCPS to alter the footprint a little bit to remove the somatic pieces of that construction, which is happening right now, and just making sure that we have the PID and mental health services that are going to be in that school when it opens. So connections, oh, good, Dr. Bridges. This is definitely one space where we have taken strong consideration from the Health and Human Services standpoint to strengthen that connection as Mr. Hodge talked about looking at the racial equity and social justice space looking at the delineation of where these CIP plan expansions are and looking at not only the somatic care but the mental care as well and positive development. So this is an area that we really held close to look at how we can strengthen this area and also want to think out MCPS partners who are in the audience this morning but also who may be listening. This is where HHS and MCPS continues to build a strong partnership. I appreciate that. I'll turn to Councillor Aron as first. I just have one quick question. Then I'll turn to him and then Councillor Lutti. Thanks. I had a question just to two comments. One, expressing my appreciation. I know this squirt required a lot of creative thoughts and creative strategies because, you existing footprints within schools and there's not a lot of extra space available for anything, let alone something as important as this. So I really want to express my appreciation to MCPS's team both at the school as well as the administrative and capital level because I'm happy to hear that we're making a great deal of progress. I guess just one thought, and this is, again, categorize this with this and a million other things that we're having to process and deal with over the next few years. But in terms of the semantic care, we had done an assessment and evaluation of what was available to students last year and the year before. That's all going to change. And we have to acknowledge that, and that's why it's even more important for us to have potential spaces available. If and when we have to adjust programming to meet the perspective needs of students moving forward, the mental health needs are there, they're significant, they're across the board. But as the Medicaid reimbursements begin to diminish, I know we're all having the same conversations with our primary care coalition and our clinics that are on the ground who are already struggling to meet demand as it is, that's not going to get better. So we just have to continue to think creatively through all of this. And as I always try to do, I know Council Chair Chawondo does, Council Vice President Chawondo does as well as Channel or Appreciation of Council Member Noverro, who of course was spearheaded this effort several years ago. And I think she'd be happy to actually schedule to connect with her soon. She'll be happy to hear about this progress. So thank you. Absolutely, I was thinking about her as we were talking. Council member Luki. Thank you. I know we were all here last week and had a conversation and Dr. Connelly Chester and I had previously worked on some things at the state and had been a long standing challenge to get billing for Medicaid for therapeutic services that are provided at schools and so I'm happy to hear that Maryland is making that progress. That's certainly benefits the use of these spaces and to councilmember Alarnos' point, you know, adaptability that we need to have in place moving forward for what we may be able to recoup versus what we may not in terms of the operational side of these spaces. But I also appreciate that the update that these are all still moving ahead on schedule, especially with respect to McGreeter High School, which is in my district, and then of course, our Northeast Consortium Schools Springbroke, Paint Branch, and Blake, all of which serve my district and councilmember Minks district. And I'm very appreciative that they are closing time to one another in terms of coming online, because I think it's important since that cluster of schools serves the same community that they are able to be able to be brought online contemporaneous with one another to the greatest extent possible. So thank you for that. Really great point. Council member Mink. Thank you also. Glad to see that these projects are still moving forward. I know it's not easy to keep everything going and I appreciate it. We had talked some last year, I don't know what a Bible call all the details at this moment, but we talked last year some about what Chair Alpernos was referencing, I believe, in terms of access to care, especially for those who are uninsured and other resources that students have and families have to receive somatic care. And I just wanted to circle back to that again as something to to follow up on maybe at another session in in more detail. I think that that's a really really important point. And you know like I noted last year you know just because there is maybe a you know a clinic that is nearby that could provide care doesn't necessarily mean that those same students or families are going to go there. Right. There's a huge benefit to having these options available in the schools. Our populations are also changing dramatically even from year to year and that's going to be, we're going to see, I'm sure, all kinds of changes in the next year to and and on down the line given the dynamics at play here. You know I'm thinking about a Blake High School for example where we have a huge immigrant population as well a huge new comer population. Things are just changing there to a dramatic degree month by month it seems like and that's causing a lot of dynamics on the ground, obviously, in terms of, if you don't, mental health and social interactions with the students, but also we can infer in terms of somatic needs also. And so, you know, I am, of course, aware that we don't have an unlimited budget, right? We're struggling to keep these projects moving forward as they are, and I know that's why, you know, we are not currently planning to do full wellness centers at all high schools because we want to make sure these kids have something at the same time I just want to make sure that there's that we have a thorough understanding of what like the strategy is and you know if there's ways that we can think about short-term service versus versus long-term and what we really want those long-term goals to be. And you know, if what we are doing is kind of relying on access outside the schools, then it would be great to dive in more deeply maybe on the operating side in terms of what we're doing to help make sure those connections are able to be made and are being made. Is there are there thoughts from anyone on the panel in terms of some of those details there that you could speak to? So, again, Mark Hodg, Chief Operating Officer, if you recall, when we were talking about this last year, you mentioned one of the options we have is to open up the wellness centers and the school-based health centers and elementary schools that we currently have, the 16 sites, to students from other schools who may need access to care. You're absolutely right. Opening up to them and having them actually show up are two different things. It is certainly an option we have. We'd also discussed the possibility of telehealth. Again, not necessarily the best way to provide care, but without other options, it is an option. Yes, and the landscape is changing. And so the conversation we had last year versus the conversation we may have at a future work session could potentially change everything. Because if students are not able to access or be eligible for medical assistance, that means they're uninsured. And where are they gonna get care? Are they gonna be eligible for care for kids, which would require them to go to another primary doctor that we contract with? Or do we provide that in the schools? And so we did make, and this is just off the cuff. So I'm not going to promise this, but it is an option that we were able to install bridge to wellness programs in every high school just using a classroom. It is possible for us to be able to do that from a somatic, you mentioned short term versus long term. From a short term perspective, if we could get access to a space, we could provide that care in the meantime while we wait for a new administration at the federal level to reverse some of these things that would provide other access. So absolutely happy to work with the schoolhouse services team about how to provide more options for somatic care in our schools. I appreciate that and hopefully we can follow up with plenty of time before we do the full CIP to kind of go through this strategy and how you all are approaching that also. Given that facilities wise, obviously, like you said, we need a lot less for a bridge program. I just want to make sure then if we're doing like, when we do large new construction projects or large scale renovations that we're not eliminating the possibility to include semantic care and include a full wellness center on down the road. You know, though we can institute some of these programs and think about whether we do want to program in even if it's a, you know, a while out, but to make sure that our projects are keeping the possibility open to whatever extent is possible. And then additionally, there's two components here. One is the analysis on the CIP side in terms of here are the factors, here's where there's access, elementary schools, etc., etc. And the other piece that has to be paired with that conversation is what is being done on the ground to ensure that those families and students are able to access that, know about it, and then how are we going to track whether people are actually using it, whether that is successful. And so, you know, it's all well and good to say that those resources are there, but if we're not making sure that families are able to take advantage of that and that they're actually doing it, you know, then it's talk without action. So I just want to make sure that we are able to bring both of those conversations together also. Appreciate that, Councilor Remake. I will just mention as we're forecasting the full CIP, we discussed last week and have discussed before the transition years, like sixth and ninth grade, and in the access for middle school students and kind of building on what you said just now, Mr. Hodg, like if you had to and you could use a space in a classroom or something to deliver services. We know that there are needs at our middle school level, particularly as kids are coming in and all throughout. So I think one of the things I'd like, you can say a little bit now, but I would like to just charge you to come when we talk about the full CIP next year with MCPS, I think we talked about it on the side of the student being well-missed teams in the conversation last year around mental health and some of the services that are being provided in middle schools. But for example, sixth grade was underutilized and we know that's a key transition year. So I would love us to be thinking on the CIP side about what we might be able to do. Or maybe it's not a space issue, it could be just a programmatic issue that we could talk about during budget in the middle school arena. So I don't know if you have any thoughts but just wanted to raise that. So one of the things in space is MCPS. So leave the answer to them. But one of the things, and we'd wanted to move into middle schools with our school-based health and wellness centers. When we started the program 20 years ago, more than 20 years ago now, it was all elementary schools. When we expanded to high schools, starting with Northwood, and now we have six sites. When Councilmember Nivoro started talking about a wellness center in every high school, and then which led to our conversation last year, where we provided updates on the priority list for high schools. We had middle schools included in that, but because the conversation was only about high schools, we didn't include the middle schools. There are examples of school-based health centers and elementary schools where students have access to care, then they go to middle school and they don't have access, and then they go to high school and they have access again. And so having that conversation is really important, I think, to all of us because middle school is an important time to have that access to care as well. I will add one thing to my idea about finding a space in this site. It doesn't have to be all day every day. I mean, if we had, if we picked three middle schools and we were there one day, two days, and it moved to the next school, that they could get the care that they need at a lower price, and we wouldn't be utilizing a space full time. So I think we have a lot of options. I think we can be creative in this, in talking with MCPS, in with school host services and HHS, to figure out how we might be able to work this at a still cost money to hire nurse practitioners, or to contract nurse practitioners, but I think we can do some things in the short term to address some of these concerns for sure. Great, well I look forward to following up with that. Anything else, Collin? Okay. Anything else from that? Just to mention that there are updates on the school-based health and linkage-assolaring centers on the last page of your packet. I mean, I'm sorry, I'm page seven or fewer packet. We appreciate that. You have anything to say? You've been up here. It'll give you an opportunity. I don't want you to feel left out. I appreciate that. DJ Conley MCPS Capital Budget Manager. No, we just look forward to continue our work with HHS and all the critical services that they provide our schools, our families. And we are up to the challenge of being creative and fluid program changes. So we look forward to continuing the work. Sounds good. We appreciate the team. Dr. Bridget. Council vice president. Let me just add this in addition to what Mr. Hodge stated. We're having those conversations and the conversations are needed in HHS and along with his partners look forward to having the conversation with the council or joint committee sessions. Conversation need to be had now at the elementary school level as well. So while we talk about middle school HHS across all service areas, I have in those conversation regarding what it looks like at all three levels because data definitely indicate that these conversations need to be head. need need to have parental, parental empowerment sessions in addition to the conversations. So just wanted to share that with you in addition to what we're doing. CIPs are good, but we have to have the program planning and implementation to support and complement those CIP improvement plans. Absolutely. Got to be based on where the need is. I know, I know there have been some conversations since last week. The idea of like a cluster model had come up of, you know, if you didn't have one at a high school, you know, obviously we can't. It takes time to bring those online, but if there's need right now, could you do it at a middle school that needs it? And you could, like you said, it still might be challenging to get people to come to that from a high school to the middle school for example but I think that all needs to be on the table as we're trying to provide services across 211 schools so look forward to continuing the conversation. All right with that I think we adjourned.