Latest from the DC Nurses Association to those who signed their petition below. The fight continues to make nursing coverage 40 hours/week for all schools a permanent thing. The emergency legislation only keeps current nursing coverage for the rest of this school year:

Thank you for your support for 40-hour nursing coverage in every school in the District. The emergency legislation introduced by Education Chair Grosso passed unanimously. The legislation would keep the current nursing coverage in place for the 2016-2017 school year. This would ensure that no changes will occur in January 2017. This is a victory for us.

However, this is a temporary fix. Dr. LaQuandra Nesbitt is still the Director of Department of Health and can still implement her plan that will strip full-time coverage from the DC schools in the 2017-2018 school year. We cannot allow her to continue this. Please see the video below of Dr. Nesbitt reminding us why nurses are not required in the schools during an emergency. Her plan is not in the interest of the children of the District of Columbia.

The videos is at this link https://youtu.be/IhyJgmsMM2M

On Monday, November 14th, DCNA will be lobbying the Council member to support a bill that will change the minimum requirement of nursing coverage in every school from 20 to 40 hours permanently. We will begin on 10am. Can you join us? Please let us know. Thanks

DC Nurses Association

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw yesterday on Twitter that this has been delayed - won't be implemented in 2016-17 school year.

Has anyone seen something more official?

I've looked at the legislation and I don't think it will really be effective. It doesn't explicitly delay the new program. It says that current nursing levels should be maintained, but nursing levels have already been cut. So be ready for no major impact unless Muriel Bowser decided to join on the bandwagon.

No, it doesn't delay the new program, but no one had issues with the new program except for the provision that would potentially reduce nursing hours. Maintaining the current nursing levels (at least for this year) is a huge win. Nursing levels have not yet been cut, but some schools did not have nurses full time or no nurse at all to begin with. For those schools, unfortunately, they will not get an increase in nursing hours. But for the schools that currently have some or full-time nursing coverage, they will be able to retain them at their current levels for the remainder of the year.

Please sign the petition,


http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/every-child-deserves.fb48?source=s.icn.fb&r_by=16575014?

The DCNA is continuing to advocate for full-time nursing coverage for all schools, and once you sign the petition, they will keep you updated on progress.

My school is operating with less coverage than what was initially allocated, so I'm concerned the new legislation just locks it in.

But would you rather have even less coverage because that's what you may get without the emergency measure.

Clearly not. I'm thankful for the legislation, but not satisfied.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw yesterday on Twitter that this has been delayed - won't be implemented in 2016-17 school year.

Has anyone seen something more official?

I've looked at the legislation and I don't think it will really be effective. It doesn't explicitly delay the new program. It says that current nursing levels should be maintained, but nursing levels have already been cut. So be ready for no major impact unless Muriel Bowser decided to join on the bandwagon.

No, it doesn't delay the new program, but no one had issues with the new program except for the provision that would potentially reduce nursing hours. Maintaining the current nursing levels (at least for this year) is a huge win. Nursing levels have not yet been cut, but some schools did not have nurses full time or no nurse at all to begin with. For those schools, unfortunately, they will not get an increase in nursing hours. But for the schools that currently have some or full-time nursing coverage, they will be able to retain them at their current levels for the remainder of the year.

Please sign the petition,


http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/every-child-deserves.fb48?source=s.icn.fb&r_by=16575014?

The DCNA is continuing to advocate for full-time nursing coverage for all schools, and once you sign the petition, they will keep you updated on progress.

My school is operating with less coverage than what was initially allocated, so I'm concerned the new legislation just locks it in.

But would you rather have even less coverage because that's what you may get without the emergency measure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw yesterday on Twitter that this has been delayed - won't be implemented in 2016-17 school year.

Has anyone seen something more official?

I've looked at the legislation and I don't think it will really be effective. It doesn't explicitly delay the new program. It says that current nursing levels should be maintained, but nursing levels have already been cut. So be ready for no major impact unless Muriel Bowser decided to join on the bandwagon.

No, it doesn't delay the new program, but no one had issues with the new program except for the provision that would potentially reduce nursing hours. Maintaining the current nursing levels (at least for this year) is a huge win. Nursing levels have not yet been cut, but some schools did not have nurses full time or no nurse at all to begin with. For those schools, unfortunately, they will not get an increase in nursing hours. But for the schools that currently have some or full-time nursing coverage, they will be able to retain them at their current levels for the remainder of the year.

Please sign the petition,


http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/every-child-deserves.fb48?source=s.icn.fb&r_by=16575014?

The DCNA is continuing to advocate for full-time nursing coverage for all schools, and once you sign the petition, they will keep you updated on progress.

My school is operating with less coverage than what was initially allocated, so I'm concerned the new legislation just locks it in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Saw yesterday on Twitter that this has been delayed - won't be implemented in 2016-17 school year.

Has anyone seen something more official?

I've looked at the legislation and I don't think it will really be effective. It doesn't explicitly delay the new program. It says that current nursing levels should be maintained, but nursing levels have already been cut. So be ready for no major impact unless Muriel Bowser decided to join on the bandwagon.

No, it doesn't delay the new program, but no one had issues with the new program except for the provision that would potentially reduce nursing hours. Maintaining the current nursing levels (at least for this year) is a huge win. Nursing levels have not yet been cut, but some schools did not have nurses full time or no nurse at all to begin with. For those schools, unfortunately, they will not get an increase in nursing hours. But for the schools that currently have some or full-time nursing coverage, they will be able to retain them at their current levels for the remainder of the year.

Please sign the petition,


http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/every-child-deserves.fb48?source=s.icn.fb&r_by=16575014?

The DCNA is continuing to advocate for full-time nursing coverage for all schools, and once you sign the petition, they will keep you updated on progress.

Anonymous wrote:Saw yesterday on Twitter that this has been delayed - won't be implemented in 2016-17 school year.

Has anyone seen something more official?

I've looked at the legislation and I don't think it will really be effective. It doesn't explicitly delay the new program. It says that current nursing levels should be maintained, but nursing levels have already been cut. So be ready for no major impact unless Muriel Bowser decided to join on the bandwagon.

Saw yesterday on Twitter that this has been delayed - won't be implemented in 2016-17 school year.

Has anyone seen something more official?

Did DOH the Attorney General's office or other Administration lawyers before making this change?

Given the presence of very severe nut allergies and other medical issues faced by DC schoolchildren, is DC government ready to take on massive liability if a child has a seizure or major allergic reaction and there is no nurse available to provide timely treatment?

I want able to watch all of it, by it looks like Gross favors a compromise to keep current school nurse levels at least through the end of the year, but Dr. Nesbitt said she's not asking for it. WTF?

Anonymous wrote:FWIW - the the Department of Health is pushing this, most schools are completely opposed and feel the same way. Some coordinated parent advocacy would be incredibly helpful

Parent advocacy is the answer. This also points to the need for an elected Board of Education.

The Council roundtable is happening now. Dr. Nesbitt is on and is not directly answering Grosso's questions.