The Half Million Dollar Health Survey
by Sue Greenwald M.D.
The State Board of Education meeting for October was held in Grand Island, Nebraska. It was a pleasure to visit the “Raising Nebraska” building at Fonner Park, a lovely and interesting facility. It was a quick and sparsely attending meeting, after which I was able to visit with Commissioner Maher about the Nebraska Literacy Project that he and his staff have been working on (more details to come), and have lunch with board member Sherry Jones in her sun-filled car.
During the meeting, the State Board voted to accept a federal grant of over $560,000 to conduct health surveys on students. The Youth Risk Behavioral Surveillance System (YRBSS) grant covers a 5 year period, or $112,475 per year. These surveys are intended for both public and private schools.
Although federal grants might be seen as “free money,” Nebraska taxpayers will be on the hook for the costs of implementation. Those costs were not estimated for the board.
“The Office of Student Support Services,” at the Nebraska Dept. of Education (NDE), “will lead this initiative, working closely with schools across Nebraska. The program will involve collaboration with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and other public health entities to ensure that the data collected is utilized effectively to benefit Nebraska's youth.”
According to Methodology of the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, onsite “Survey Coordinators” receive training from the CDC (Center for Disease Control) on how to do “sampling, questionnaire modification, or follow-up” along with learning to use the proprietary software. (page 8)
Therefore, the work product of state employees of two agencies, DHHS and NDE, as well as local school administrators will be required to implement the survey.
The second survey system included in the grant is called School Health Profiles (SHP). The government does love their acronyms. The YRBSS survey alternates school years with the SHP as each are biennial. They use the same state and local personnel and similar data-collection software.
School Health Profiles (Methodology document page 18)
Another CDC surveillance system that uses many of the features of YRBSS is School Health Profiles, which provides biennial data on school health policies and practices in secondary schools in states, territories, large urban school districts, and tribal governments. Profiles uses two standard computer-scannable questionnaire booklets to collect data, one for school principals and one for lead health education teachers.
Who is helped by all this work done by Nebraskans? It isn’t the students or the administrators. According to the CDC, it’s the CDC.
Future Directions (Methodology document page 18)
“YRBSS is evolving constantly to meet the needs of CDC and other users of the data.”
Who are the “other users of the data?” According to the CDC it’s the World Health Organization and the United Nations. (still page 18)
Global Youth Risk Behavior Survey CDC has applied many of the features of YRBSS successfully to the Global Youth Risk Behavior Survey (G-YRBS), also known as the Global School-Based Student Health Survey. G-YRBS was developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) and CDC in collaboration with UNICEF, UNESCO, and UNAIDS. Since 2003, G-YRBS has provided data on health behaviors and protective factors among students in 84 developing countries.
As CDC does for YRBSS sites, WHO and CDC provide ongoing capacity building and technical support to countries conducting a G-YRBS.
These surveys are not new, they started in the early 90’s. Many reading this have probably taken them. The CDC does report back to the state, giving them statistics on teen smoking, drinking, drug use, reported bullying, physical or sexual abuse, and suicidal ideation.
In recent years, parents have objected to their teens being asked about their gender and pronouns, and their sexual experiences. Those concerns have been addressed, and a draft questionnaire for 2025 does not include those questions.
While the collated YRBSS results don’t directly help students, the CDC, which is captured politically and financially by pharmaceutical companies, does use the data to harm students.
In recent years, statistics gathered on those questionnaires have led to the correlation of suicide and transgenderism. Rather than postulating that both of those conditions correlate strongly with mental illness, the leap was made that schools need to enthusiastically support “gender-affirming care” to prevent suicide. Led by federal government agencies and championed at teacher and counselor training sessions, this philosophy resulted in the unprecedented phenomenon of kids trained up to be “trans,” and started on puberty blocking drugs, thereby causing grave physical and emotional harm to many minors.
Bad research has bad consequences, especially when the point of the research is to benefit Pharma.
A case in point is the recent disclosure that results of a $6 million, tax funded NIH study on puberty blockers was hidden from the public for 9 years for political reasons.
Another use of the survey data is to identify a “school climate” of anxiety and depression. The theory is: if any students are in need of mental health care, all students must receive it. Because Equity.
An entire cottage industry in “mental health” has been developed for the education cartel. Federal money flowing from the Biden administration is the catalyst. Nebraska is a late adopter of the mental health scam, but it is catching up quickly. Big Pharma couldn’t be happier. Read this previously linked article:
Every School Board Everywhere Needs to See this Study
“Many see schools as an ideal setting for implementing preventative measures. People just assume more attention to kids’ mental health during the school day with things like social emotional learning curricula and regular check-ins with a school counselor will benefit them, despite the data that indicates otherwise.”
Are the questionnaires even legal?
There is a 1970’s era law called the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA) that protects students from being asked invasive questions at school. It is described in depth HERE. The law applies to any entity taking money from the Federal Dept of Education, therefore the Nebraska Dept. of Ed would theoretically have to comply.
The PPRA requires that families of students must OPT IN to questions about subjects that are considered private. These subjects are well defined in the law, and include politics, religion, sex, mental health, professional associations and family relationships. According to PPRA, parents must be fully informed and sign permission. That isn’t generally what happens. Most school districts provide an OPT OUT form. If the permission form doesn’t reach the parent and isn’t returned, the school has implied consent.
The NDE partners with DHHS (Nebraska Dept of Health and Human Services) on the survey. Apparently, they can skirt the privacy law because DHHS is involved, providing legal cover for NDE. It would be interesting to have lawyers weigh in on this.
One has to ask why the CDC would use the carrot of a half million dollars to gather student data from local classrooms. Hopefully, we have answered that question. Anything that benefits the pharmaceutical companies benefits the CDC.
Forward Nebraska recommends that you take an OPT OUT form to your school, one for each child, at the beginning of every year, and insist that your students are not surveyed. You can find an opt out form HERE. (Click on SEL Surveys)
At the October State Board meeting, the survey grant was passed by a 4 to 2 vote. There was no discussion during the public meeting. I was informed the discussion had taken place during the board’s private meeting the day before.
When asked to explain their vote, board President Elizabeth Tegtmeier of North Platte stated succinctly: “I know my constituents don’t like surveys.”
Board member Sherry Jones of Grand Island wrote out her objections:
“Why I voted no on Action Item 7.2.C. - Accepting the Improving Adolescent Health and Well-Being Through School-Based Surveillance Grant
I am leery when it comes to schools and other agencies giving surveys to our children. Who will receive this information and what will be done with it?
This survey is an opt-out; not an opt-in. I believe student surveys should be opt-in which requires parents give permission for their child to participate in surveys.
There are five questions on the survey which pertain to the subject of suicide. I believe asking these questions, within a survey format, is reckless, unethical and uncaring. What if a student answers one or more of those questions in the affirmative, that they are or have considered suicide and/or have a plan about how they would attempt suicide? Since this survey is anonymous, no adult in a position to respond will know of this student’s thoughts and/or plans. It’s as if the student’s cry for help has entered the ears of a piece of paper. Who is going to respond to this student who is considering suicide. Again, this is reckless, unethical and uncaring.
In the rationale/background information section of the agenda item it stated “Nebraska has addressed concerns from schools by removing specific questions that previously caused unease.” I do not know what those questions were but I do not trust a company that initially had such questions on a survey.
I believe there is danger in planting unhealthy and harmful ideas in children’s minds which they may not typically even think about. Many of the questions on this survey do just that.”
Here is what she is referring to:
Thank you Ms. Jones, we agree. Government grants deserve more scrutiny than they usually receive.