Judy Rose, presenting a program evaluation to the Provo City School Board on Sept. 19, said data from 2020–2024 show invited students accepted CAST/CAS at an average rate of 39 percent and that students attending CAS do not exhibit higher RISE math growth than students who declined the program. Rose told trustees the program historically moved from school‑based options in the 1980s to magnet sites (Grandview, Provo Peaks and Sunset View) and is now primarily focused on accelerated math.

Rose summarized a parent survey of fourth‑through sixth‑grade families (72 fourth‑grade responses, 74 fifth‑grade, 74 sixth‑grade). Of respondents, 29 percent had declined a CAS invitation, 41 percent were never invited and 30 percent were currently participating. Asked about the district’s future approach to acceleration, 23 percent preferred the current model, 67 percent preferred in‑school (neighborhood) opportunities and 10 percent had no opinion. Top reasons families declined CAS included a desire to remain with peers, stay in neighborhood schools and remain in dual language immersion; transportation also appeared as a barrier.

Board members pressed Rose and business administrator Devin Dailey on resource implications. District staff presented high‑level cost estimates: additional teacher staffing for CAST/CAS is driven by enrollment and projection methods and can add roughly 1.5 FTE in current site configurations; a district GT specialist was estimated at 0.5 FTE for the CAST site model and 1.0 FTE for a neighborhood rollout; a school‑based GT leader stipend was proposed at about $1,500. Transportation costs were estimated at roughly $100,000 per year for two CAST sites or $50,000 for a single site. Curriculum and enrichment supplements were estimated at about $7,000 per school. Administrators also provided per‑student illustrative math: a two‑site CAST model at 180 students was quoted at roughly $18.69 per student, a single site at $15.52, and a broad neighborhood rollout at $8.38 if substantially more students were served.

Trustees focused discussion on two central tradeoffs: program intensity and measurable student growth versus equitable access and reduced family burden. Rose recommended a balanced approach: maintain CAST for students who need a full‑day accelerated environment while expanding district supports and professional development so neighborhood schools can better serve advanced learners. She stressed the need for an explicit curriculum scope and sequence and for district‑level coordination so that acceleration is consistent rather than site‑by‑site.

Next steps: the board directed staff to refine hybrid model details, including updated cost and FTE calculations, prospective locations if a single CAST site were chosen, and outreach to parents and principals. Rose and district staff were asked to return with clearer cost‑per‑student modeling and with proposals for parent focus groups to test community preferences.

The board took no formal vote on program redesign during the study session; members signaled interest in additional analysis and community engagement ahead of future decisions.