LANL Foundation – Report on Community Conversations for PED – Martinez-Yazzie Action Plan Preparation – 09.26.2025
Summary
AI-generated summaryThe LANL Foundation’s September 26, 2025 report describes community engagement intended to inform New Mexico’s Martinez/Yazzie Action Plan. It recounts the lawsuit and court proceedings as background and describes the Foundation’s role in organizing engagement.
Page 1 · source excerpt
Report on Community Conversations for the New Mexico Public Education Department: Martinez/Yazzie Consolidated Action Plan PreparationOpen page 1
Page 2 · source excerpt
In April 2025, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, granting their motion in part. The court agreed an Action Plan was necessary, but issued the responsibility to the New Mexico Public Education DepartmentOpen page 2
The report describes regional meetings, targeted sessions, and a statewide survey, alongside efforts to provide access supports such as interpretation, meals, and childcare. It reports more than 1,400 participants at community engagements and more than 1,200 survey responses.
Page 9 · source excerpt
This included consideration for venues and ensuring every meeting included meals, child care, translation services, and adequate materials.Open page 9
Page 10 · source excerpt
over 55 hours leading in-person and virtual stakeholder engagements in 13 communities with more than 1,400 total participants.Open page 10
The Foundation says it did not analyze the engagement data or develop the Action Plan. It identifies WestEd, PED, and LESC as responsible for reviewing and compiling the input and producing the plan.
Page 12 · source excerpt
The LANL Foundation did not document or analyze any data that was collected, or contribute to the development of the Action Plan. Instead, this role went to WestEd who then worked with PED and LESC to review, compile,and ultimately, produce an Action Plan.Open page 12
Key points
The report says the engagement was organized around three themes: funding and accountability; culturally responsive educators; and programs, resources, supports, and instruction.
Page 7 · source excerpt
Funding and Accountability — How should funds be allocated and tracked to guarantee equity and efficacy?
Open page 7Page 7 · source excerpt
High-Quality, Culturally Responsive Educators — What strategies should be used to recruit, train, and retain educators who reflect and honor local communities?
Open page 7Page 7 · source excerpt
Resources, Programs, Supports, and Instruction — What day-to-day supports, programs, and instructional strategies do students need?
Open page 7The report describes several ways for people to contribute, including meetings, a survey, an online submission portal, the Listening Tool, and written notes. It says WestEd collected sticky notes from sessions for use in drafting the Action Plan.
Page 7 · source excerpt
Additional contributions were gathered through complementary channels: the Listening Tool (available online, on paper, and via audio), an online submission portal, and note taker discussion notes.
Open page 7Page 7 · source excerpt
WestEd partners collected all sticky notes from each session for incorporation into the drafting of the Action Plan.
Open page 7The report says more than 1,200 survey responses were submitted to WestEd to inform the Action Plan, and that respondents could also submit existing documents, plans, and frameworks.
Page 11 · source excerpt
This data was submitted to WestEd, who used it to inform the Action Plan.
Open page 11Page 11 · source excerpt
More than 350 unique actions were collected through this process.
Open page 11The report’s timeline says LANL Foundation was excluded from compiling and analyzing stakeholder input, which it lists as work by WestEd, PED, and LESC.
Page 6 · source excerpt
Compile & Analyze Stakeholder Input 8/1/2025 9/8/2025 LANLF was excluded from this step.
Open page 6
Questions to follow
- Was the engagement data later made public, and in what form?
- How did PED, WestEd, and LESC describe the way community input informed the Action Plan?
- What further opportunities, if any, were provided for communities to review or respond to the draft plan?
Generated Oct 21, 2026 · Citations refer to the saved original.
Original source: New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty
Help keep this archive accurate
Found an error or missing context? Send a private report to the review inbox. Reports do not automatically change or remove public content.
Commentary
AI-generated analysisThe report’s description of multiple participation formats and access supports suggests the process was designed to offer different ways to contribute. The report does not, in these passages, establish how fully those options reached or represented different communities.
Page 7 · source excerpt
Open page 7Page 9 · source excerpt
Open page 9Because the report says the Foundation did not analyze the collected data, it cannot itself show how particular submissions were weighed or incorporated into the plan. The report says the Foundation hoped the data would be made public, leaving that question open in this document.
Page 12 · source excerpt
Open page 12Page 12 · source excerpt
Open page 12