Update on the Amherst Public Schools’ New Bullying Reporting Platform

Report on the Meeting of the Regional School Committee,  September 24, 2024

The Regional School Committee (RSC) met in the Amherst High School library on September 24. The meeting was live-streamed and recorded by Amherst Media. The recording can be viewed here. 

After the meeting was called to order, the first agenda item was a presentation of the district’s new bullying reporting software, BRIM. Jerry Champagne, Director of Information Systems for Amherst-Pelham Regional Schools, demonstrated how the BRIM system works. After noting that the previous platform was not easy to use, Superintendent Xiomara Herman (Dr. Xi) stated that it was important that the new system be end-user friendly. Champagne went through the full process of filing a “test” report to show the RSC how the BRIM platform would be experienced, both for the person filing the report, and then also showed the back-end of the software that administrators and investigators would see once reports had been submitted. 

One notable difference from the old bullying reporting platform is that bullying reports in BRIM cannot be deleted (Champagne demonstrated that they can be “canceled,” but there is still a record of the report being filed). Using a laptop, Champagne showed how the reporting system could be accessed from a link at the top of the school district home page (where a drop-down menu prompted the user to choose which school they were reporting from), and also from links on each of the school’s separate web pages. The software automatically notifies a team of administrators, including Dr. Xi, immediately in real time when a report is submitted, and follows up with prompts throughout the investigation process to ensure a timely resolution. 

Users filling out the BRIM report begin with an option to describe the details of the bullying or harassment incident, with separate fields to report a more specific location (i.e. the cafeteria) and the date of the incident. There is a drop down menu to select who is filling out the report (friend, classmate, parent, teacher, other school personnel, community member, or the person being bullied). Once these fields are completed, the user can click a button to “report” the incident. This one page report is all that’s needed to start an investigation.

After the initial report is submitted, the user gets a confirmation message on the next screen, and there are options to include more detail: if the reporting individual wants to give their name, and whether they are willing to be contacted. They can upload images or videos, report how long the behavior has been going on, and describe what type of behavior took place. This section has been customized by the district to include categories that aren’t in the generic BRIM package, including “transphobic.” The names of the perpetrators can be reported on this page, whether there were witnesses, and whether anyone was notified about the incident. There is another drop down menu to report the specific time of day the incident occurred. After Champagne went through each of these steps and filed the “test” report to demonstrate, Dr. Xi showed Sarahbess Kenney, who was sitting next to her, her cell phone, where a report popped up immediately: “Bullying report filed…, 6:42pm.” 

There is a team for each school that is notified when a report is submitted. Members of the team can log into their BRIM dashboard and view the reports. Champagne noted that some of the failures of the old system occurred because there wasn’t a systematic follow-up practice: the BRIM platform has built-in prompts that each team member receives throughout the 10-day investigation process to ensure that reports cannot “slip through the cracks.” There are places for the investigating team to enter additional data as it is gathered: for example, what intervention was needed (meeting with student, parents notified, counselor notified, in-school suspension, out of school suspension, police notified, etc.). There is an option for more files to be uploaded if necessary (screenshots of text messages, photos, videos, etc). One notable feature is that the final comments field cannot be left blank: the investigator has to include notes on what was done. 

Champagne said that one takeaway from the first few weeks of school is that they need to work on getting more detailed comments into the reports from the investigators (who they’ve interviewed, who the instigators were, etc.) to help build the data in BRIM. The back end of BRIM has reporting capabilities where users can see different charts of types of bullying that have taken place, percentages of white students vs. BIPOC students who have been targeted, incidents broken down by grade, etc. 

Sarah Marshall  worried that some of the fields might not be student friendly and was wondering if they could be customized. Champagne and Dr. Xi both responded saying that the priority was making the initial form end-user (the person filing the report)  friendly and not cumbersome, and that it was better to keep an open “description” field where people could write notes, rather than add more fields. Anna Heard asked if there was an option for investigators to indicate that multiple types of incidents had taken place (for example: physical and verbal bullying), and the answer was yes. Heard also asked how investigators distinguished between cases that didn’t meet the legal definition of “bullying,” and an incident that was “not confirmable, or determined to be untrue, since the final result for each of those would be the “Closed, not founded” option. Champagne responded that the details field in the report would be the place for investigators to explain that. Dr. Xi added that it was important for investigators to be detailed in their reporting, because there could likely be incidents of harassment that don’t rise to meet the legal definition of bullying, but that still require an intervention by the school, and it is important to track those incidents as well, and also consider interventions such as providing counseling or contacting the caregiver. 

Jennifer Shiao expressed gratitude to Champagne, Dr. Xi, and everyone involved in the process of implementing the new system, saying she thought it would be a huge improvement. She pointed out that the link to the reporting form on the ARPS homepage only shows up on desktop devices, and is not visible on mobile devices (pointing out that since many people, especially students, would be using their phones to report, this was a problem, and suggested finding a way to make the process more obvious on mobile devices). She also wondered whether the word choice of “victim” on the reporting form might be intimidating or off-putting to some students, and asked whether there was another way for students to identify themselves. She also suggested that the field “Do you want to be contacted?” be changed to “Are you open to being contacted?” 

Dr. Xi explained the distinction between the incident status once a case has been closed: when the status is listed as “closed,” that means that a case of bullying (behavior that met the legal definition of bullying) has been closed. A case listed as “closed unfounded,” could mean that although a behavior wasn’t technically found to be bullying, it could have been an incident of harassment where a behavioral intervention was implemented; that is, “closed unfounded” doesn’t mean that nothing was done.

William Sherr suggested possibly updating the status options so there was something to explicitly indicate an issue of harassment was addressed, pointing out that the word “unfounded” has potential to be harmful to a victim of harassment (their case was “unfounded”), saying “If there is harassment involved, I feel that ‘unfounded’  is not appropriate.” Sherr pointed out that the form is titled “Bullying and Harassment Reporting” and the data are  only tracking bullying. Dr. Xi told the committee that before any fields were adjusted in the form, it would need to be discussed and be a team decision, saying “I do see where everyone is coming from, but I also would like to make sure that from a team and collaborative effort, the team is very aware and clearly able to define it, and  investigators understand where it’s going to be before we fully implement it.” 

The most recent bullying prevention plan hasn’t been officially presented to the full RSC body: it is available online. Sarah Marshall suggested putting a link somewhere other than the school and district websites, such as on PowerSchool or somewhere it would be easy for students to access. Dr. Xi and her team are working on branding and posters with QR codes for students to access the form. Several members of the RSC expressed gratitude for the improvement over the old system. 

Bridget Hynes said, “Eighteen months ago everything erupted…I was in this library and I felt deeply moved to try and do something. And now, as a community, we’ve hired a new superintendent, got this new form up, we have a bullying plan, we have a bullying policy, we have the website up and running, and it’s just a big sense of relief, so I just wanted to say I feel…like we can all be proud of where we’re going…I’m really happy.” 

Sherr added, “I just wanted to say, thank you again, it also really looks like not only do we have a new system, but it looks like you, Dr. Xi, are redirecting the investigators to do investigations differently, and I really appreciate that, and just wanted to tell the community that you’re doing a good job.” 

An update on the Track and Field project followed, which will be covered in a separate article. The Four Towns meeting will take place Saturday, September 28, and Dr. Xi presented the committee with preliminary FY26 budget information to review in advance of the meeting. There were no Chair updates; Policy subcommittee updates were that the subcommittee was going to meet on the 4th Monday of each month, and will start with reviewing the personnel and student section of the policies. Finance subcommittee updates were that the subcommittee would be seeking data from the central office, and would be meeting the third Monday of each month. Superintendent updates included Hispanic Heritage Month, district highlights, and an entry plan update.

Tilman Wolf noted that the meeting had extended its 2.5 hour limit, and Heard moved to extend the meeting by 30 minutes. Six  members (Kenney, Shiao, Leonard, Marshall, Heard, and Sherr were in favor and three (Wolf, Hynes and Irv Rhodes) opposed, and the meeting was extended. The minutes from the April 9 meeting were reviewed, revised, and approved.Future agenda items proposed included MCAS, high school block scheduling, annual superintendent reports on class size and guidelines, and vocational/non-college track programs.