Jana Wilcox Lavin (Opportunity 180) oral history interview conducted by Kelliann Beavers: transcript

An Interview with Jana Wilcox-Lavin
Perspectives from the COVID-19 Pandemic: Leadership and Learning in Nevada
Produced by:
The University of Nevada Las Vegas
The Lincy Institute
2024
Principal Researchers:
Magdalena Martinez, Ph.D. and Kelliann Beavers, Ph.D.
1
The following interview was a part of the “Perspectives from the COVID-19 Pandemic:
Leadership and Learning in Nevada” research project. The recorded interview and transcript
were made possible through the generosity of The Lincy Institute at the University of Nevada,
Las Vegas. The goal of the project was to understand and document how Nevada organizations
and leaders responded to the myriad challenges that the pandemic engendered. The interviewees
thank The Lincy Institute and their supporters for the opportunity to reflect on their roles
throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The researchers also acknowledge the following
individuals who contributed to the conceptualization, data collection, and analysis of the project:
Dr. John Hudak, Dr. Makada Henry-Nickie, Elia Del Carmen Solano-Patricio, Taylor Cummings,
Peter Grema, Kristian Thymianos, Saha Salahi, Madison Frazee, and Katie Lim.
Each interviewee had the opportunity to review their transcript. All measures have been taken to
preserve the style and language of the interviewee. This interview features Jana Wilcox-Lavin,
CEO of Opportunity 180, and was conducted on 5/16/22 by Kelliann Beavers and Kristian
Thymianos. This interview covers topics including reflections on leadership, organizational
challenges, and opportunities for collaboration.
2
Interview with Jana Wilcox Lavin
Date: 5-16-2022
SPEAKERS: Kelliann Beavers, Jana Wilcox Lavin, Kristian Thymianos
Kelliann [00:05]
All right. And just to start, to confirm that you have read the consent form and you’re consenting
us to recording the interview and your name, so long as you've reviewed the transcript ahead of
time.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [00:15]
Yes.
Kelliann [00:17]
Okay, great. Thanks so much. So the first question is pretty basic. If you could just describe your
role in your organization.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [00:24]
Sure. I am the CEO of Opportunity 180. We are a nonprofit that focuses on ensuring every kid
can graduate from high school, college, and career-ready. And the choice is up to them on how
they live their life. We do that through five key levers. But essentially, we're an investor and a
partner, and we focus on good governance, good data, engaged community, and great ideas, all
leading towards more great schools for kids.
Kelliann [00:57]
Great. Thank you so much for that. And then the next question is, how you saw your
organization's role during the pandemic?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [01:06]
Yeah. Well, I am humbled by a lot of the ways that our colleagues adjusted their approach, to sort
of respond in real-time to needs during the pandemic, which I think was absolutely necessary and
critical. We as an organization stayed the course on our mission and vision in particular because
we already are an organization that's taking the long view and looking at the horizon.
And so we felt like it was really important to stay the course because eventually, we would come
out of this shutdown/lockdown situation and that we needed to keep marching forward in the
best interest of kids. And so we actually – our role was to stay the course and to be available as a
resource to our partners as needed. But also, to keep marching forward towards every kid being
able to live their full potential.
Kelliann [02:05]
Thank you for that. The next question is, which groups do you believe were hardest hit by the
COVID recession in the pandemic? This doesn't necessarily have to be specifically groups you
work with. It can be broadly, or you can talk about it in the context of your role.
3
Jana Wilcox Lavin [02:28]
I mean I would say, everyone was – I think the pandemic had a universal impact in lots of
different ways. And I would say, those who had the least access to resources that they needed to
navigate this new sort of unforeseen full-time lifestyle were those the most impacted. So those
who led service jobs that were not paused, those who didn't have access to critical resources,
funds, access to food, access to time, and space for childcare. In general, those communities who
we had already left behind were left further behind.
Kelliann [03:20]
Thanks. That's a good way to put it. How, if at all, did your organization's goals change to
accommodate the hardest hit groups?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [03:33]
We have always been squarely focused on providing opportunity and providing conditions for
great schools to thrive, for those that have had the least access to opportunity and the least access
to quality schools in their proximity. I would say, one way we are responding now is, we are
getting more bullish on the specific policy conditions, and the specific conditions we think are
necessary for the system and the environment to respond to what we learned. And recognizing –
we are coming out of this without being able to deny the inequities in a way that I think some
were able to in the past.
I think the other thing I would say is, the activation of parents across the socioeconomic
spectrum and across the geographic spectrum. We are raising specific funds to continue to
activate families to be really, the third leg of the stool in student success, in a much more direct
way than maybe we were before. So I would say, amplify, double down --didn't necessarily shift.
Kristian Thymianos [04:50]
Could you elaborate a little more on the geographic – sorry? What was the other spectrum that
you mentioned over there?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [04:56]
Socioeconomic.
Kristian Thymianos [04:57]
Yeah. Could you elaborate – talk a little bit more about what those spectrums are, and maybe
how you were focusing on them?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [05:05]
So I would say that pre-pandemic, there was an assumption that families with resources and
families with access to seats at the table had more voice in education policy, had more voice in
what was happening, and had more voice in their school. I think what we actually learned
through the lockdown is that actually, nobody had a seat at the table in a really meaningful way.
And resources in that instance maybe gave you a leg up, in terms of what you were able to do to
support your students. But they didn't necessarily change the level of voice you had in what
happened and the decisions that were being made.
4
And because that was a normalizing factor, we are now saying, we want to see all parents
activated. We definitely want to activate those families that have previously been left out of the
conversation. And we want to bring together families that really organized during this time, and
really want to see meaningful, impactful change for their kids. We think there's a real opportunity
to amplify those voices together in a way that didn't feel quite as clear before. Because this was
an environment where your access to quality learning during this time was resource and
family-driven and not school-driven. And so that normalization was quite different than a
day-to-day in-person learning environment in a really broad socioeconomic swing of a county.
Kristian Thymianos [06:45]
Thank you. Much appreciated.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [06:46]
Sure.
Kelliann [06:51]
Can you discuss if there were collaborative efforts across non-government organizations?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [06:58]
Yeah, I think there were. I think there was definitely collaboration. And now, I'm going to get on
a soapbox. I'm sorry. So yes, I think there was a clear collaboration among nonprofits and sort of
grassroots leaders in non-governmental agencies to support acute needs that were identified and
exacerbated, and just sort of like, you couldn't hide from, right? Tech being one of them.
Laptops, access to the internet, right?
I think what we also noticed though is families were still not at the table for those discussions
and those opportunities - it still lived in the grasstops space and the policy level discussion. And
so for example, when our parent leadership team that we've organized came forward to give
some feedback on the approach to technology gap closure– and we have a report on our website,
if you want to look it up, that they put together. They surveyed 100 families to find out "what do
you still need?" I think this was in the summer, so March-April-May-June. We had four months
of implementation, and then they did this survey. And they found that what was being offered
still wasn't enough for people to live their daily life. So, if you had four kids, and you were
working from home, and you were all on the free internet at the same time, no one could actually
do anything successfully.
But nobody asked that question pre–putting the strategy in place. We asked that post. And that's
not a blame or a criticism. It's just an example, I think, of how there were just – we continued on
this pathway of not bringing families to the table to help design the solutions and were really
designing the solutions based on this identified problem and made an assumption that design was
going to meet the need. And then when it didn't, and all of this effort had been put into it, it
became very uncomfortable. All right. I'll get off my soapbox.
Kelliann [09:06]
Thanks for explaining that. But you said something that I'm wondering – I know a bit about this
5
–but if you could just give your perspective on helping those who might not understand the
difference between grassroots and grasstops.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [09:22]
Yeah, sure. So, I'm a grasstops leader. I have access. I have resources. I am committed to social
justice and social impact and social investing. But I am also a privileged white woman who does
not experience the day-to-day inequities of the families that I hope to partner with to solve
problems for kids. And so, to me, the grassroots are those who are truly both trying to solve the
problem and living through the problem simultaneously. And I as a grasstops leader, only fit one
of those categories.
Kelliann [10:03]
Thanks for sharing that and helping us understand it. The next question is, what do you wish, if
anything, that different levels of government would have done or could have done differently in
response to the pandemic and the recession? And if you'd like to talk about specific policies, you
can, or you can speak more broadly.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [10:26]
So first I will say, I think we have to just remember that we all had to survive, and want to couch
all of my critiques in the context of nobody had ever done this before, at least in our modern – in
our world, in this space, in the way that it was done and designed. And so, it's hard to critique
without also naming that to be the truth of the context. It was hard for everyone, and mostly, we
were trying to survive.
Hindsight always gives us a beautiful perspective on how we could have done things differently.
I just want to name that because I'm also generally, usually, a pretty harsh critic.
So I will say two major themes that I wish were true. One, consistency. And, coupled with
consistency, regular proactive, meaningful communications so people knew what to expect. I’d
say managed consistency plus managed expectations, I think was missing in hindsight,
particularly in the school system but I would say mostly, at all levels. We stayed in a reactive
mode for 18 months. I understand being in a reactive mode for the first 90 days. I have to believe
there's a point at which we can start to do some analysis and prediction and move into a
proactive space, where we're saying, "This is what we think is going to happen, and these are the
criteria we're going to use, and this is how we're going to decide."
And instead, all the way up until January of this year, we had an unannounced school pause for
five days that nobody knew was coming. I just don't believe we didn't have the information in
advance to figure that out or predict it. I think consistency and managed expectations, which to
me is just a demonstration of respect to the community at large.
The second thing I would say is, I think we had a massive, missed opportunity to actually put our
rethinking into action. I believe that from all of that time, sitting at home, talking about how
everything was going to be different when we came out of this - nobody actually did anything
different when we left.
6
What I feel was a missed opportunity was a collective, coordinated, clear response to what
problems have been exacerbated for us through this situation, and how are we going to use these
four billion dollars that we just got from the federal government to tackle these problems in a
collective, coordinated, clear way, so the community knows what outcomes to expect and that we
are not duplicating funds, and use the funds in different ways? And I think that was a missed
opportunity at the level of comprehensiveness that could have existed.
Kelliann [13:34]
Thank you for that. I'm going to ask, I think, just one or two more questions. And then I'll pass it
over to Kristian Thymianos. The next question is – and you've talked a little bit about this – but
if anything else comes to mind; were there groups in the community that you successfully
engaged with during the pandemic?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [13:52]
We supported PEF’s work, and we worked with all of our schools in a pretty meaningful way. All
of our school portfolio schools, all of our talent partners that we bring in, we pivoted everything
to remote. I would say we had some pretty regular working relationships with the key education
players in the community and then mostly, our schools.
Kelliann [14:31]
Great. Thank you for that. And then, if you'd like to speak to two to three changes, that your
organization completed or experienced, that worked well during the pandemic.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [14:46]
Like how we operate, or how we do what we do?
Kelliann [14:52]
I think either.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [14:53]
Okay. In terms of how we operate, we've gone full to a hybrid schedule, so we've changed our
schedule to be three days in, two days out, permanently, going forward, with flexible summer
schedules, so that people can spend time with their families and have space to take care of
themselves.
Kelliann [15:09]
Oh, wow.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [15:13]
We tried to take all of the learnings from the pandemic, in terms of what worked for people in
their life and implement them into the way we operate. So we are now three days in and two days
out, and we have Fridays off in the summer. And tried to make some adjustments that met the
needs of our team, recognizing that somehow we've managed to do it for as long as we did we
can keep doing it.
7
In terms of what we do, I think I mentioned we got tighter in terms of raising money for
activating parent power. And I think that's it. I think mostly, we stayed the course and tried to
change the way we operate, rather than what we're trying to accomplish.
Kelliann [16:01]
That's great, yeah. And those accomplishments are pretty huge, so I can see that that would have
been a lot of ducks that had to be in a row to make those things happen. So okay, great. Kristian
Thymianos's going to ask a few more questions, and thanks again for everything you’re sharing
with us.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [16:18]
Sure.
Kristian Thymianos [16:19]
Hi there. Thank you so far. Your response is very insightful. These next couple of questions are a
little bit about the school environment that you were witnessing. I do want to ask a first filter
kind of question before I get into this one. Reading about your organization, I see that there is
quite a bit of research/work and resources for charter schools. I want to get that right: that you all
are involved with the charter school policy area within Nevada.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [16:56]
Not exclusively.
Kristian Thymianos [16:58]
Yeah.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [17:00]
We are about student outcomes and not public school-type. We are invested in public schools,
charters, and district schools and we are about student outcomes.
Kristian Thymianos [17:09]
Yeah, cool. All right, thank you. So can you talk about the role of charter schools during the
pandemic? For example, how did their experience or operations change during the pandemic to
kind of meet this new need, when parents, schools, and the community were experiencing flux in
their normal lives?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [17:33]
Yeah. I think our schools became community centers and community hubs. They became places
to distribute food. They became places where kids could get access to certain things that they
needed. I would actually say most of our schools worked incredibly hard to keep kids learning, to
offer optional spaces for kids to be allowed within the guardrails of what was legal and
allowable. But I would say, our schools, in particular, our portfolio schools, our portfolio charter
schools that serve exclusively, communities that have previously had the least access to the
high-quality schools in the valley, involved their parents in decision making, surveyed their
parents weekly, and provided food onsite for families. They partnered together to provide food –
8
if you had kids who generally commuted a long way, and there was another school that was
closer, they collaborated to make sure those families were covered.
And I think they responded, reacted, and found some ways to become the hub for what families
needed to get what they could and to stay in close touch with families and staff. So most of them
surveyed families and staff every week on "What do you need? What's missing? What's
working? What can we accomplish?" We started cross-team professional development and a sort
of Dropbox channel, that they could drop resources that they were leveraging and resources that
we could provide them, to continue to meet their needs.
Kristian Thymianos [19:05]
Fascinating to hear. Glad to hear that they're helping with the community in that sense. This is
building off that-
Jana Wilcox Lavin [19:11]
Why they exist, right?
Kristian Thymianos [19:12]
Yeah. No, for real. This is basically the same kind of question. So what have been the most
innovative ways that schools have dealt with the challenges of the pandemic and the recession?
If you can think of anything else, other than what you just said, that might be useful and/or
interesting?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [19:32]
Useful or interesting in terms of what schools did?
Kristian Thymianos [19:36]
Yes. Just in general, you know. Public, not just charter.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [19:41]
I think the best micro example that we didn't scale is, how often, how frequently, and what you
were talking to families about. And I think what's been interesting is to watch – even our schools
now, now when they're thinking about making big changes or going into a pause, they're calling
families first and saying, "Who supports this? Who doesn't support this? Who would be
negatively impacted if we made this choice? And what can we do to support you in that
instance?"
And I think the schools that were able to put that in place and to proactively consider the user
before making the choice, were the ones who maintained the deepest community connection
coming out of the pandemic and the deepest sense of meaningful ongoing partnership.
Kristian Thymianos [20:38]
Thank you. I really appreciate that. Also, other good stuff. I like to hear the kind of community
input over there. Again, I feel like you're doing a great job answering questions so far, kind of
9
touching on everything else here. In light of the experience, is there anything that you think
could be done policy-wise to improve access and quality of education since the pandemic?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [21:04]
Goodness, yes.
Kristian Thymianos [21:05]
Maybe like two or three big things, then.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [21:07]
Three big things. We did a survey of Nevada residents that tells us that 76% of families believe
that they are not considered when making education policy cross-demo, cross-party affiliation
across the board. The biggest policy thing is, how are you considering the user in the policy
before it is developed? And I think we often tend to think of the user as the "system," and we're
not thinking of the user as the end user. And I think that is a massive, missed opportunity in
education policy, period. So I'll go ahead and name that one as my first one, is consider the end
user, not just the intermediary users.
The second thing I would say is that neighborhood-zoned assignments are an antiquated system
for how kids are accessing a particular school. While I have always been a believer in open
enrollment, I think there has never been a stronger case for letting students and families select
the school that's right for them. We hear consistently that some students thrived in online
learning and some students didn't. Some students really were successful at the hybrid approach
and some students weren't. Instead of forcing every school to do everything the same way, why
don't we let – we have 400 schools in our valley. Why don't we let them become what the
community needs for them, and then let families choose where they want to go? So
fundamentally, I would think massively rethinking student assignments, and not through a forced
system. That eliminates redlining as the key-way in which students are organized in schools –
which I think is just continuing to perpetuate many of the challenges that we know exist – would
be a huge opportunity in this next policy landscape.
Kristian Thymianos [23:14]
Those are the right two, yeah.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [23:16]
Yeah. How do we consider anywhere, anytime learning? I think we think of learning as in the
four walls of a school. And I think what we know is that learning happens everywhere. And so,
while I know the Department of Education is leaning in the direction of competency-based
education, I think we also get very focused on holistic versus modular learning. I guess, think
about competency-based learning in terms of micro-credentials, rather than a full three-credit
hour if that makes sense.
The last piece I would say with that is, I think in terms of teaching, the same thing. How do we
modularize teaching credentials so that you can stack many micro credentials towards a
meaningful teacher credential, that allows you to teach, coming from a vast array of experiences
from before? So, if you've been in the military, and then you worked in logistics, and then you
10
went on to take another role, what could you potentially test out of, or opt-out of, based on what
your competencies demonstrate your abilities are? And then just actually get micro-credentials
and other skills that are necessary to move into the teaching profession. Instead, we've sort of
forced this very linear, four-year degree, must look this way. And then we constantly complain
that we can't get people into a system that is lacking portability. I think we haven't widened the
opportunity for people to engage in teaching by offering different ways to enter the pathway,
based on wherever it is that you come from.
Look at the Great Recession. Lots of people are changing jobs. Two people that I know that had
massive suburban homes now live in the city. Five people I know that used to do certain jobs quit
and are doing all sorts of different things. How did the teaching profession miss out on that
opportunity to think about how can we activate all of these people leaving their worlds, trying to
have an impact, to get them into teaching, without forcing them to have a four-year degree that
says that I learned Pedagogy 101?
Kristian Thymianos [25:36]
Thank you. That actually kind of filters a little bit into these next couple of questions geared
more towards workforce development things. You said earlier on that you were concerned about
high school graduates and college graduates, kind of getting students to that point, right?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [25:58]
Say that again.
Kristian Thymianos [25:59]
You said that you all were kind of concerned with the graduation of students, and kind of like
their-
Jana Wilcox Lavin [26:04]
-college and career preparation.
Kristian Thymianos [26:05]
Yes, that's what it was. Okay. So I was just wondering, have you observed any changes in the
retention or graduation of existing students?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [26:21]
I mean retention for sure. We've seen massive numbers of students not return to school. I'm not
sure we know all of the reasons why yet. I don’t know if we know enough yet on the graduation
piece. I will say, and I assume you guys know this as people who study education policy in our
space. But our graduation standards are quite low. I mean, they're non-existent essentially. And a
standard diploma is a "seat time" diploma, and it doesn't actually give you all the credits you
need to transition into a 100-level course in college.
Given that, and given that we are not seeing students complete seat time requirements, I would
actually ask, did we come out of the pandemic making the changes we know that needed to be
made? This would be another example to me of like, did we really think about the most modular,
flexible ways to get the skills they need to graduate college and career-ready? Or did we just say,
11
"You have to come back and provide this seat time by logging into your computer at this time,"
right?
And so I would argue if the goal is for kids to leave college and career-ready, and kids didn't
show up to school because they were working, why didn't we give them credit for work time?
And how can we translate those competencies into meaningful skills that we could access, in a
modular way, that help them gain the credits they need to transition? Did we get creative in
figuring out how kids in that position were successfully translating and transitioning through the
system? Or did we sort of stay hard and rigid and say, "These were the seat-time requirements.
You log in at this time, and do this thing, and stay off video, and then you get to graduate." And I
feel like there was a meaningful shift in the way we think about learning acquisition and training
acquisition that didn't codify. It was right in front of us, and we just like didn't catch the ball – as
a system. I know that there are examples, but it wasn't systemic.
Kristian Thymianos [28:35]
I just want to pause real quick. It's around 4:30. I wanted to check if you needed to hop off right
now, or-
Jana Wilcox Lavin [28:41]
I'm going to move to the phone in just a second. But yeah.
Kristian Thymianos [28:43]
Okay. All right. No problem. Just let us know when you have to go do it, and we can do that.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [28:46]
Sure.
Kristian Thymianos [28:51]
Moving on a little bit, in terms of how students were preparing during this whole ordeal. I
wanted to know a little bit about if you've been seeing how housing issues may have been
affecting students during this point in time. You were talking a little bit about job insecurity
when it comes to adults. But kind of going back to the beginning for these people – or these
students.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [29:21]
Yeah. Again, I guess my big headline coming out of the pandemic is, we had so many missed
cues. For example, we know housing insecurity is a big thing. One of the best examples I've ever
seen of students of a school addressing housing insecurity for students is in a school in
Indianapolis. Where they created what they call "the apartment." And in the apartment, every
student who's homeless, who identifies as homeless, has a locker that has a key that only the
student and the principal have access to. It has a washer and dryer, and it has a place where they
can keep their belongings. When leave school at night, and they're going to live in their cars, stay
on the neighbor's couch, or be in a shelter, they know all of their things are safe, and that they
always have access to clean clothes. And they can always gain access to what they need, and
everything that they own is protected. What a simple, simple low-cost solution to create security
12
for housing insecure students. And what a tiny, little change that needs to happen, where you just
find one room in a building.
I guess that's my point. We know housing insecurity is a problem. We know we are losing kids
because of it. What are the simple solutions that don't necessarily even require a policy? That just
requires thoughtful human engagement to make, to put the needs of the kids first. I think that the
headline is, we still haven't shifted to a student-centered policy approach. We are still focused on
a system in adult-centered policy approach, even in the midst of this massive disaster.
Kristian Thymianos [31:07]
I want to extend that to food insecurity. I mean, we know that they opened up food distribution
centers. Was that enough? Could anything else have been done differently? What about that?
Jana Wilcox Lavin [31:20]
Yeah. I mean I guess that goes back to the question you asked around non-governmental
coordination, right? So again, I think everyone did the best they could, like in the first three
months. Everybody was just trying to – nobody knew what was happening. So I think people did
a lot that they could.
I think in terms of food insecurity, you saw some great stuff coming out of Three Square, United
Way and other places, to serve multiple vulnerable families, and I think you saw lots of
microcosms of solutions. And again, I just don't think they were particularly systemic. If CCSD,
for example, has its own food service – well, not if, they have a massive food service operation,
right? How is that food service operation, and coordinating with Three Square – coordinating
with the greatest access points for families? And did we create strong enough distribution
channels? And I know we used buses to send internet out into the world. Were those buses
packed with food? I guess I just wonder if we pulled the threads all the way through each of
those pieces. [If] there were some opportunities that we could have considered, and that we still
can consider, right, as we think about what comes next.
Kelliann [32:55]
Yeah. Thank you so much for all of that. It's really compassionate and great to hear about your
ideas and your perspective.
I think we have gone through most of what we wanted to discuss, so I'm going to spare you the
switching to your phone. But I will email you, if it's okay, to check in about anyone else you
might think it's good for us to reach out to interview – not necessarily at your organization, but
anywhere, really, that you think there is someone whose perspective that might be meaningful for
our research. And thank you again so much for everything that you shared, and all the work that
you do in the community. It's so important.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [33:32]
Yeah, thanks. So can I just ask, really quickly, what's the end product of all of this?
Kelliann [33:36]
Sure. So we're working on a series of reports. And ultimately, our hope is to make some policy
13
recommendations based on what we have learned from leaders throughout the state in a range of
areas. So it's not all education or nonprofit focus, but that is a part of what we're looking at. And
so, whether we'll publish some smaller, more focused briefs about certain sectors that we've
spoken with, I guess remains to be seen, based on what comes up from the content. But yeah.
We're partnering with a couple of scholars that work at Brookings in D.C., and then we have a
professor here at Brookings Mountain West who is leading us, and then our team there at UNLV
Brookings Mountain West.
So we've conducted, I think, close to 20 interviews, and we'll keep doing more for the next few
months. And then, what comes out of it, will sort of be based on what people have shared.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [34:31]
Cool. Great. Thanks.
Kelliann [34:33]
And we'll definitely be in touch with you about it. And like I said, share the material with you as
soon as we have your content transcribed.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [34:43]
Yeah, great. Thank you, guys.
Kelliann [34:44]
Sure. Thank you.
Jana Wilcox Lavin [34:45]
I appreciate it. Bye.
Kelliann [34:46]
Have a good one.
Kristian Thymianos [34:47]
Thank you. Have a nice day.
End of Audio 34:52
14