Board of Trustees: Andrea Pierpont, President Sarah Mueller, Vice President Daniel Durkin, Clerk 230 Doherty Drive, Larkspur, CA 94939 Sally Relova Jill Sellers
Superintendent: Valerie Pitts, Ed.D.
The mission of the Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Board of Trustees and staff is to develop literacy, critical thinking and an enthusiasm for learning within each student by offering a rich, rigorous, relevant and engaging curriculum and through a collaborative partnership with parents and community.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES Regular Board Meeting of May 23, 2017
6:00 - Open Session 9:00 – Closed Session
Hall Middle School (Conference Room) 200 Doherty Drive, Larkspur, CA 94939
AGENDA
Estimated Time
6:00 p.m. I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER (Board President)
6:01 p.m. II. CONVENE OPEN SESSION
6:01 p.m. A. PERSONS WISHING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
6:02 p.m. B. COMMUNICATIONS/REPORTS AND RECOGNITIONS
1. Board Reports and Recognitions
2. Superintendent’s Reports and Recognitions - LCMEA, CSEA, and SPARK Reports - Principal Reports (including Hall student presentation)
C. STRATEGIC PRIORITIES
6:30 p.m. Priority: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environment….
3. Discussion: Overview of District Health Services and Bi-Annual Review of BP 5030 4. Discussion: Healthy Kids Climate Survey
7:00 p.m. Priority: Inspire academic growth and civic responsibility through a rigorous, inquiry- based curriculum….
5. Discussion: School Site Survey Results and Single Plans for Student Achievement
6. Action: Instructional Minutes and Bell Schedules (Entire board packet on www.lcmschools.org/Board of Trustees/Meetings/2016 - 2017 Meeting Packets)
-1-
7:45 p.m. Priority: Sustain the fiscal integrity and stability of the district.
7. Discussion: Public Hearing on the 2017-18 Local Control and Accountability Plan & Annual Update
8. Discussion: Public Hearing on the General Fund 2017-2018 Budget Draft and District’s Budget Reserve
8:30 p.m. D. GOVERNANCE TEAM ISSUES/PLANNING
9. Discussion: Grand Jury Report Response – Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability
10. Discussion: Policies Review: BP and AR 5141.52 – Suicide Prevention BB 9100 – Organization BB 9110 – Terms of Office BB 9124 – Attorney BB 9130 – Board Committees BB 9140 – Board Representatives BB 9200 – Limits of Board Member Authority BB 9220 – Governing Board Elections BB 9222 – Resignation
8:45 p.m. E. CONSENT CALENDAR (The purpose of the Consent Calendar is to group items which may be approved routinely. A Board Member or member of the audience may request removal of an item for discussion).
A Roll Call Vote should be taken if the Consent Calendar includes Resolutions.
11. Monthly Warrants Reports 2016/17 – 61-69 12. Minutes of the Special Board Meeting of April 18, 2017 13. Minutes of the Regular Board Meeting of April 26, 2017 14. BP and E 6163.4 – Student Use of Technology BP 6176 – Weekend/Saturday Classes BP and AR 7150 – Site Selection and Development BP 7210 – Facilities Financing BP and AR 7211 – Developer Fees BB 9000 – Role of the Board BB 9005 – Governance Standards BB 9010 – Public Statements BB 9011 – Disclosure of Confidential/Privileged Information BB 9012 – Board Member Electronic Communication 15. Revised 2017-18 Board of Trustees Meeting Calendar 16. Resolution 2017/18-15 – Lincoln’s Birthday Observance (2018)
8:50 p.m. F. FUTURE BOARD AGENDA ITEMS
Business and Budget Updates (Standing Item) Policies Review (Standing Item) Local Control Accountability Plan (Public Hearing #2 – June) School Site Safety Reports (June) Temporary Authorization Note (June) 2017-18 Budget Adoption (June) Single Plans for Student Achievement (June - Consent) Educational Protection Act Resolution (June) Consolidated Application (June)
(Entire board packet on www.lcmschools.org/Board of Trustees/Meetings/2016 - 2017 Meeting Packets)
-2- Authorization to Sign on Behalf of Board: Resolution for Geithman and Rigney (June) LEAP Review and Approval (June) Joint Use Agreements with City of Larkspur (June) Climate and Discipline Report (June) Superintendent’s Work Year Calendar (June) Benchmark Assessments Report (August)
8:55 p.m. G. FUTURE BOARD MEETING DATE(S)
June 14 and August 16, 2017
9:00 p.m. III. APPROVAL OF CLOSED SESSION AGENDA
9:01 p.m. IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION AGENDA
9:02 p.m. V. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION TO CONSIDER AND/OR TAKE ACTION UPON ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ITEM(S)
(a) With respect to every item of business to be discussed in Closed Session pursuant to GC Section 54956.8: Real Property Negotiations (b) With respect to every item of business to be discussed in Closed Session pursuant to GC Section 54956.8: Joint Use Agreements with the City of Larkspur (c) With respect to every item of business to be discussed in Closed Session pursuant to GC Section 54957.6: Negotiations – LCMEA and CSEA
9:30 p.m. VI. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION
Announcement of Reportable Action Taken in Closed Session
9:31 p.m. VII. ADJOURNMENT (The Board believes that late night meetings deter public participation, can affect the Board’s decision-making ability, and can be a burden to staff. Regular Board Meetings shall be adjourned at 10:00 p.m. unless extended to a specific time determined by a majority of the Board.
The Board of Trustees welcomes participation by the public. A person wishing to speak on any item on or off the agenda will be granted up to 3 minutes. The Board will limit the public comment period on any single item to 20 minutes. Members of the public are invited to submit comments in writing. An opportunity is provided for the public to address the Board on items not appearing on the agenda. However, in compliance with Board policy and the Brown Act, the Board is not permitted to discuss or take action on non-agenda items. Members of the public addressing the board will conduct themselves with decorum appropriate to the public and
(Entire board packet on www.lcmschools.org/Board of Trustees/Meetings/2016 - 2017 Meeting Packets)
-3- professional nature of the School District elected Board of Trustees. Estimated times are approximate; actual times may vary. Members of the public who are interested in particular agenda items may wish to arrive early. Assistance will be provided to those requiring accommodations for disabilities in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Interested persons must request accommodations at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting by contacting the Superintendent’s Office at 415-927-6960. Any documents related to an agenda item for open session of a regular board meeting and distributed less than 72 hours before the meeting may be inspected at the District Office, 230 Doherty Drive, Larkspur, CA 94939.
(Entire board packet on www.lcmschools.org/Board of Trustees/Meetings/2016 - 2017 Meeting Packets)
-4- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Office of the Superintendent
Date: May 23, 2017 To: Board of Trustees From: Valerie Pitts, Superintendent and Jessica Harper, School Nurse Re: Discussion: Overview of District Health Services and Bi-Annual Review of BP and AR 5030
Background
The Larkspur-Corte Madera School District credentialed school nurse is responsible for overseeing required health services and administering state-mandated screenings. Nurse Harper will provide Trustees with an updated overview of District Health Services.
Analysis
The District’s Health, Wellness, and Safety Committee has met bi-monthly to review policies and procedures. The Committee has also contributed to the Local Control Accountability Plan.
Financial Impact
All costs incurred by the Larkspur-Corte Madera School District are paid as per the teacher salary schedule. Nurse Harper supervises health staff and mandated health activities in the Larkspur-Corte Madera School District.
Recommendation
This item is brought before the board for information and discussion purposes only.
Backup attached: Yes √ No Item No. 3
-5- LCMSD Health Services Overview 2016-17
J e s s ic a Ha rpe r, BSN, RN Credentia led School Nurs e
-6- District Strategic Priority: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of all community members.
Healthy, Safe, and Ready to Learn!
NASN, 2016 -7- SCHOOL HEALTH DEMOGRAPHICS & DATA
COVE HALL NC DISTRICT
Number of students 451 533 584 1568
Number of students with one or more health 99 (21.9%) 126 (23.6%) 135 (23.1 %) 360 (22.9%) condition reported to school
Number of students with asthma 28 (6.2%) 48 (9%) 38 (6.5%) 114 (7.3%)
Number of students with allergies (excluding 24 (5.3%) 41 (7.6%) 52 (8.9%) 117 (7.5%) allergy to medication)
Number of students who require medication at 18 16 32 66 school
Number of daily first-aid/illness/snack visits to 12.7 4 14.2 health office per day (average-mean) -8- CALPADS Enrollment data, 10/2016 National Association of School Nurses recommends:
Daily access to a registered professional school nurse
Nurs e-to-s tudent ra tio: 1 full-time credentialed school nurse per 750 students in the genera l popula tion Ca lifornia School Nurs es Orga niza tion recom m ends :
One full-time credentialed school nurse on every campus
Nurs e-to-s tudent ra tio: 1 full-time credentialed school nurse per 750 students in the genera l popula tion
Avera ge Ra tio of School Nurs e to Student in CA: 1: 2640
Marin County ranks 29 in CA: 1: 2981 NASN, 2009; CSNO, 2010; CSNO, 2015 -9- SCHOOL HEALTH STAFF Credentialed School Nurse 0.5 FTE
● 0.16 FTE per s chool s ite (Cove, Ha ll, Neil Cum m ins )
● 3-4 days per month per school site
School Hea lth Lia is ons
CP R a nd Firs t-a id certified
Assist with first-a id/ illnes s , m edica tion a dm inis tra tion, im m uniza tion compliance, emergency response
School site coverage (42 hours weekly)
-10- COVE (14 hours per week) CURRENT HEALTH SERVICES Primary Prevention HEALTH PROMOTION
Health teaching:
Kindergarten - hand hygiene (selected classes)
Eighth grade comprehensive sexual health and HIV/ AIDS prevention education (in collaboration with School Counselor)
Immunization compliance
Senate Bill 277 - No Personal Beliefs Exemptions -11- PERCENTAGE OF KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS WITH ALL REQUIRED IMMUNIZATIONS
State of CA: 95.6% (2.8% increase from 2015/2016)
Marin County: 93.2% (4.7% increase from 2015/2016)
La rks p ur-Corte Madera:
Cove: 94%
Neil Cum m ins : 96%
California Department of Public Health, 2016-2017 -12- CURRENT HEALTH SERVICES Secondary Prevention
MANDATED HEARING AND VISION SCREENINGS (Grades K, 2, 5, 8)
Vision
● Ed Code Section 49455 - near vision screening
● Number of students screened: 671
● Number of referrals: 26
Hea ring
Number of students screened: 671 -13- N b f f l 7 CURRENT HEALTH SERVICES Tertiary Prevention
CASE M ANAGEM ENT
General Education COVE Hall NC
Number of students with Health Plans: 15 13 31 Special Education
Health assessment and summary
Hearing and Vision screenings
Number of student initial or triennial assessments: 77 -14- Framework for 21st Century School Nursing Practice
NASN, 2016 -15- References
California Department of Public Health, Immunization Branch. (2017). 2016-2017 Kindergarten immunization assessment – Execut ive
summary. Retrieved from: https://archive.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/ 2016-17_CA_KindergartenSummaryReport
California School Nurses Organization. (2015). 2013-2014 ratio of school nurses to K-12 students by county. Retrieved from:
http://www.csno.org/uploads/1/7/2/4/17248852/california_map_of_nurses_ratio_and_rank_2014.pdf
California School Nurses Organization. (2010). School Nurse Assignment. [Position Statement]. Retrieved from:
http://www.csno.org/uploads/1/7/2/4/17248852/school_nurse_assignment-2010.pdf
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2015). Summary health statistics: National health interview survey. Retrieved from:
https://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Health_Statistics/NCHS/NHIS/SHS/2015_SHS_Table_C-2.pdf
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2008). Asthma in California. Retrieved from: https://www.cdc.gov/asthma/stateprofiles/
asthma_in_ca.pdf
National Association of School Nurses. (2016). Framework for 21st century school nursing practice. NASN School Nurse, 31(1), 45-53.
doi:10.1177/1942602X15618644
National Association of School Nurses. (2012). Chronic health conditions managed by school nurses. [Position Statement]. Retrieved from:
https://schoolnursenet.nasn.org/blogs/nasn-profile/2017/03/13/chronic-health-conditions-managed-by-school-nurses -16- Students BP 5030(a)
STUDENT WELLNESS
The Governing Board recognizes the link between student health and learning and desires to provide a comprehensive program promoting healthy eating and physical activity for district students. The Superintendent or designee shall coordinate and align district efforts to support student wellness through health education, physical education and activity, health services, nutrition services, psychological and counseling services, and a safe and healthy school environment. In addition, the Superintendent or designee shall develop strategies for promoting staff wellness and for involving parents/guardians and the community in reinforcing students' understanding and appreciation of the importance of a healthy lifestyle.
School Wellness Council
The Superintendent or designee shall encourage parents/guardians, students, food service employees, physical education teachers, school health professionals, Board members, school administrators, and members of the public to participate in the development, implementation, and periodic review and update of the district's student wellness policy. (42 USC 1758b; 7 CFR 210.30)
To fulfill this requirement, the Superintendent or designee may appoint a school wellness council or other district committee and a wellness council coordinator. The council may include representatives of the groups listed above, as well as health educators, curriculum directors, counselors, before- and after-school program staff, health practitioners, and/or others interested in school health issues.
The Superintendent or designee may make available to the public and school community a list of the names, position titles, and contact information of the wellness council members.
The wellness council shall advise the district on health-related issues, activities, policies, and programs. At the discretion of the Superintendent or designee, the duties of the council may also include the planning, implementation, and evaluation of activities to promote health within the school or community.
Goals for Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Other Wellness Activities
The Board shall adopt specific goals for nutrition promotion and education, physical activity, and other school-based activities that promote student wellness. In developing such goals, the Board shall review and consider evidence-based strategies and techniques. (42 USC 1758b; 7 CFR 210.30)
The district's nutrition education and physical education programs shall be based on research, shall be consistent with the expectations established in the state's curriculum frameworks and content standards, and shall be designed to build the skills and knowledge that all students need to maintain a healthy lifestyle.
The nutrition education program shall include, but is not limited to, information about the benefits of healthy eating for learning, disease prevention, weight management, and oral health. Nutrition education shall be provided as part of the health education program and, as appropriate, shall be integrated into other academic subjects in the regular educational program, before- and after-school programs, summer learning programs, and school garden programs.
-17- STUDENT WELLNESS (cont.) BP 5030(b)
All students shall be provided opportunities to be physically active on a regular basis. Opportunities for moderate to vigorous physical activity shall be provided through physical education and recess and may also be provided through school athletic programs, extracurricular programs, before- and after-school programs, summer learning programs, programs encouraging students to walk or bicycle to and from school, in-class physical activity breaks, and other structured and unstructured activities.
The Board may enter into a joint use agreement or memorandum of understanding to make district facilities or grounds available for recreational or sports activities outside the school day and/or to use community facilities to expand students' access to opportunity for physical activity.
Professional development may be regularly offered to the nutrition program director, managers, and staff, as well as health education teachers, physical education teachers, coaches, activity supervisors, and other staff as appropriate to enhance their knowledge and skills related to student health and wellness.
In order to ensure that students have access to comprehensive health services, the district may provide access to health services at or near district schools and/or may provide referrals to community resources.
The Board recognizes that a safe, positive school environment is also conducive to students' physical and mental health and thus prohibits bullying and harassment of all students, including bullying on the basis of weight or health condition.
The Superintendent or designee shall encourage staff to serve as positive role models for healthy eating and physical fitness. He/she shall promote work-site wellness programs and may provide opportunities for regular physical activity among employees.
Nutrition Guidelines for All Foods Available at School
For all foods and beverages available on each campus during the school day, the district shall adopt nutrition guidelines which are consistent with 42 USC 1758, 1766, 1773, and 1779 and federal regulations and which support the objectives of promoting student health and reducing childhood obesity. (42 USC 1758b)
In order to maximize the district's ability to provide nutritious meals and snacks, all district schools shall participate in available federal school nutrition programs, including the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs and after-school snack programs, to the extent possible. When approved by the California Department of Education, the district may sponsor a summer meal program.
The Superintendent or designee shall provide access to free, potable water in the food service area during meal times in accordance with Education Code 38086 and 42 USC 1758, and shall encourage students' consumption of water by educating them about the health benefits of water and by serving water in an appealing manner.
The Board believes that all foods and beverages sold to students at district schools, including those available outside the district's reimbursable food services program, should support the health curriculum and promote optimal health. Nutrition standards adopted by the district for foods and
-18- STUDENT WELLNESS (cont.) BP 5030(c) beverages provided through student stores, vending machines, or other venues shall meet or exceed state and federal nutrition standards.
The Superintendent or designee shall encourage school organizations to use healthy food items or non-food items for fundraising purposes.
He/she also shall encourage school staff to avoid the use of non-nutritious foods as a reward for students' academic performance, accomplishments, or classroom behavior.
School staff shall encourage parents/guardians or other volunteers to support the district's nutrition education program by considering nutritional quality when selecting any snacks which they may donate for occasional class parties. Class parties or celebrations shall be held after the lunch period when possible.
To reinforce the district's nutrition education program, the Board prohibits the marketing and advertising of foods and beverages that do not meet nutrition standards for the sale of foods and beverages on campus during the school day. (7 CFR 210.30)
Program Implementation and Evaluation
The Superintendent designates the Schools Nurse as being responsible for ensuring that each school site complies with the district's wellness policy. (42 USC 1758b; 7 CFR 210.30) She or he may be contacted through the district office at 415-927-6960.
The Superintendent or designee shall assess the implementation and effectiveness of this policy at least once every three years. (42 USC 1758b; 7 CFR 210.30)
The assessment shall include the extent to which district schools are in compliance with this policy, the extent to which this policy compares to model wellness policies available from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and a description of the progress made in attaining the goals of the wellness policy. (42 USC 1758b)
The Superintendent or designee shall invite feedback on district and school wellness activities from food service personnel, school administrators, the wellness council, parents/guardians, students, teachers, before- and after-school program staff, and/or other appropriate persons.
The Board and the Superintendent or designee shall establish indicators that will be used to measure the implementation and effectiveness of the district activities related to student wellness. Such indicators may include, but are not limited to:
1. An analysis of the nutritional content of school meals and snacks served in all district programs, based on a sample of menus and production records
2. Student participation rates in all school meal and/or snack programs, including the number of students enrolled in the free and reduced-price meals program compared to the number of students eligible for that program
3. Extent to which other foods and beverages that are available on campus during the school day, such as foods and beverages for classroom parties, school celebrations, and rewards/incentives, comply with nutrition standards
-19- STUDENT WELLNESS (cont.) BP 5030(d)
4. Results of the state's physical fitness test at applicable grade levels
5. Number of minutes of physical education offered at each grade span, and the estimated percentage of class time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity
As feasible, the assessment report may include a comparison of results across multiple years, a comparison of district data with county, statewide, or national data, and/or a comparison of wellness data with other student outcomes such as academic indicators or student discipline rates.
In addition, the Superintendent or designee shall prepare and maintain the proper documentation and records needed for the administrative review of the district's wellness policy conducted by the California Department of Education (CDE) every three years.
The assessment results of both the district and state evaluations shall be submitted to the Board for the purposes of evaluating policy and practice, recognizing accomplishments, and making policy adjustments as needed to focus district resources and efforts on actions that are most likely to make a positive impact on student health and achievement.
Notifications
The Superintendent or designee shall inform the public about the content and implementation of the district's wellness policy and shall make the policy, and any updates to the policy, available the public on an annual basis. He/she shall also inform the public of the district's progress towards meeting the goals of the wellness policy, including the availability of the triennial district assessment. (Education Code 49432; 42 USC 1758b; 7 CFR 210.30)
Records
The Superintendent or designee shall retain records that document compliance with 7 CFR 210.30, including, but not limited to, the written student wellness policy, documentation of the triennial assessment of the wellness policy for each school site, and documentation demonstrating compliance with the community involvement requirements, including requirements to make the policy and assessment results available to the public. (7 CFR 210.30)
Policy adopted: May 10, 2006 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy last reviewed: May 28, 2015 Policy reviewed: May 23, 2017
-20- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Office of the Superintendent
Date: May 23, 2017 To: Board of Trustees From: Valerie Pitts, Superintendent Re: Discussion: Healthy Kids Climate Survey
Background
The California School Staff Survey (CSSS), along with its companion student and parent surveys - the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) and the California School Parent Survey (CSPS) - is a service of the California Department of Education (CDE). These three surveys form the California School Climate, Health, and Learning Surveys (Cal-SCHLS) System, the largest, most comprehensive effort in the nation to regularly assess students, staff, and parents at the local level to provide key data on school climate and safety, learning supports and barriers, and stakeholder engagement, as well as youth development, health, and well-being.
These surveys grew out of CDE’s commitment to helping schools promote the successful cognitive, social, and emotional development of all students; create more positive, engaging school environments for students, staff, and parents; and ensure college and career readiness. They provide a wealth of information to guide school improvement and Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) efforts, particularly in regard to the state priorities of enhancing school climate, pupil engagement, and parent involvement.
The CSSS was developed for CDE by WestEd in 2004, to fulfill the requirement in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title IV, that schools conduct an anonymous teacher survey related to student drug use and violence. Recognizing the opportunity this requirement presented, CDE expanded the content to collect other data to guide school improvement efforts and to meet LCAP state priorities. Because the results are anonymous and confidential, the survey provides staff with an opportunity to honestly communicate their perceptions about the school.
The Core and Learning Supports modules of the CCSS were administered to LCMSD staff. Of the 99 staff who took the survey, 65 were from the elementary schools and 34 from the middle school.
Analysis
In addition to the data that the survey provides about the student learning environment, safety, student behavior and discipline, and positive relationships, the survey provides a metric on the district LCAP outcome: 75% of teachers report positive indicators on climate/culture survey. These questions from the survey provide relevant data on this goal.
Backup attached: Yes √ No Item No. 4
-21-
This school is a supportive and inviting place for staff to work. All Elementary Middle Staff School Staff Strongly agree 41% 51% 24% Agree 49% 39% 67% Disagree 10% 10% 9% Strongly disagree 0 0 0
This school promotes trust and collegiality among staff. All Elementary Middle Staff School Staff Strongly agree 42% 50% 27% Agree 44% 35% 61% Disagree 12% 12% 12% Strongly disagree 1% 2% 0 Not applicable 1% 2% 0
This school is a safe place for students. All Elementary Middle Staff School Staff Strongly agree 28% 33% 18% Agree 71% 67% 79% Disagree 0 0 0 Strongly disagree 1% 0 3%
Financial Impact
The cost of the California School Staff Survey is $480.
Legal Consideration
None.
Recommendation
This item is brought before the board for information and discussion purposes only.
-22- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Office of the Superintendent
Date: May 23, 2017 To: Board of Trustees From: Valerie Pitts, Superintendent and Principals Elliot, Walker, and Saibel Re: Discussion: School Site Survey Results and Single Plans for Student Achievement
Background
Each spring, the School Site Councils (SSC’s) conduct an annual parent survey. The survey is used to determine aspects of the total school program that are effective, as well as areas for improvement. The data generated by the School Site Council surveys is reported to the Board of Trustees, shared with parents, and used by the schools to inform their decision-making, action planning, and development of their Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA).
Surveys may be revised to reflect a concern from the prior year’s survey, new programs, and/or when other opportunities for improvement have been identified. All focus on curriculum, instruction, safety, and student services. The SPSA’s will include new goals for the 2017-18 school year.
Analysis
California Education Code (EC) Section 64001 requires that School Site Councils develop the SPSA’s. The SSC’s responsibilities include approving the plan, recommending it to the local Board for approval, monitoring its implementation, and evaluating the effectiveness of the planned activities at least annually.
EC Section 64001 specifies that schools and districts that receive state and federal or other applicable funding through the District’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) are included in the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP). The SPSA is a blueprint to improve the academic performance of all students. SPSA specifics are also included in the Federal Program Monitoring process.
This year, the SPSA’s were developed in tandem with the adoption of the LCAP but in the absence of state assessment data. SSC’s also analyze various local data, such as annual parent, staff, and student surveys to develop measurable goals and objectives for the school that have a positive impact on student achievement. This includes Language Arts and Math benchmark assessments, parent satisfaction surveys, the Healthy Kids/Healthy California Survey, and student/parent satisfaction surveys and focus groups or input generated from stakeholders.
The attached SPSA’s are draft and may be edited further at SSC. They will be on Consent for action at the June 14 board meeting.
Financial Impact
None.
Recommendation
This item is presented to Trustees for discussion purposes only.
Backup attached: Yes √ No Item No. 5
-23- Cove Site Council Parent Survey Results
Spring 2017
-24- Data Summary
• 204 surveys received. • 277 student represented {62% of 450 students) • Hard copies of survey were distributed at Open House & Friday parent coffee and online through Cove Connection
-25- Percentage of people who responded 7-10 on a 10 point scale (Agree or Strongly Agree)
Child known as individual 96
Curriculum Stimulating and Engaging 84
Individual Learning Needs met 80
Child feels part of classroom community 92
Teacher communicates effectively w/ me 85
-26- How satisfied are you with your child’s growth in the following areas?
Percentage of people who responded 7-10 on a 10 point scale (Satisfied or Highly Satisfied)
Academic Growth 83
Social Emotional Growth 90
Creative Thinking Growth 93
-27- • Strong support for Cove overall: Average rating of 8.9 when asked, “If a friend were considering the Cove School, how likely are you to recommend the school?” (1=Not Recommend and 10=Highly Recommend)
• Overall, parents were highly satisfied with their children’s growth, especially in creative thinking and social and emotional skills.
• 89% of parents volunteered
-28- Positive Trends
In the 115 open ended responses, the following themes emerged: • Strong support for teachers (72 comments, 100+ when including comments about staff and administration) • Positive feelings about the community • Support for the progressive approach and curriculum
• Appreciation for the campus and modern facility
-29- Concerns/ Areas for Further Investigation
• Parents desire higher adult/student ratios - more aides, smaller
classes
• Many comments about the need for shade on the playgrounds
• Some concerns about collaborative classes and multiage classes
• Desire for more playground supervision both on K playground and big playground • Questions around rigor, academic challenge, preparation for middle school
-30- Next Steps
• Student Survey • Continue 2 surveys per year
• Further analyze data and comments by grade level • Fall survey on academic achievement, personalized learning, . ngor • Pursue shade for playgrounds • Communicate findings in Cove Connection
• SPSA to reflect actions in areas where we see concerns
-31- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q1 What grade are you in? (This survey is for 3rd, 4th and 5th grade students ONLY)
Answered: 287 Skipped: 2
Third Grade (3rd)
Fourth Grade (4th)
Fifth Grade (5th)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Third Grade (3rd) 39.02% 112
Fourth Grade (4th) 32.06% 92
Fifth Grade (5th) 28.92% 83
Total 287
1 / 30 -32- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q2 Did you go to school at Neil Cummins last year?
Answered: 285 Skipped: 4
Yes, I attended Nei...
No, I did not attend Neil...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes, I attended Neil Cummins last year. 92.63% 264
No, I did not attend Neil Cummins last year. 7.37% 21
Total 285
2 / 30 -33- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q3 I am a:
Answered: 285 Skipped: 4
Boy
Girl
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Boy 54.39% 155
Girl 45.61% 130
Total 285
3 / 30 -34- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q4 I feel like the subjects I am learning at school are:
Answered: 285 Skipped: 4
Too Hard
Too Easy
Just About Right
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Too Hard 2.11% 6
Too Easy 11.23% 32
Just About Right 70.18% 200
Don't Know 16.49% 47
Total 285
4 / 30 -35- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q5 I feel like we use technology (iPads, itouches, computers):
Answered: 283 Skipped: 6
Too Much
Too Little
The Right Amount for Me
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Too Much 7.07% 20
Too Little 19.79% 56
The Right Amount for Me 73.14% 207
Total 283
5 / 30 -36- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q6 Do you like your art class each week in the art room?
Answered: 285 Skipped: 4
It is great.
I like it.
I don't like it.
I strongly dislike it.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
It is great. 30.53% 87
I like it. 44.21% 126
I don't like it. 17.89% 51
I strongly dislike it. 7.37% 21
Total 285
6 / 30 -37- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q7 Do you like your weekly music class in the music room?
Answered: 285 Skipped: 4
It is great.
I like it.
I don't like it.
I strongly dislike it.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
It is great. 48.07% 137
I like it. 41.75% 119
I don't like it. 11.23% 32
I strongly dislike it. 3.51% 10
Total Respondents: 285
7 / 30 -38- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q8 How do you like your weekly P.E. class with your P.E. teacher?
Answered: 285 Skipped: 4
It is great.
I like it.
I don't like it.
I strongly dislike it.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
It is great. 73.68% 210
I like it. 22.81% 65
I don't like it. 5.61% 16
I strongly dislike it. 1.75% 5
Total Respondents: 285
8 / 30 -39- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q9 How do you like your weekly Dance class?
Answered: 285 Skipped: 4
It is great.
I like it.
I don't like it.
I strongly dislike it.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
It is great. 48.77% 139
I like it. 39.65% 113
I don't like it. 9.47% 27
I strongly dislike it. 4.21% 12
Total Respondents: 285
9 / 30 -40- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q10 How do you like your weekly Library class?
Answered: 285 Skipped: 4
It is great.
I like it.
I don't like it.
I strongly dislike it.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
It is great. 51.93% 148
I like it. 40.70% 116
I don't like it. 11.23% 32
I strongly dislike it. 2.46% 7
Total Respondents: 285
10 / 30 -41- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q11 How do you like Science in your classroom?
Answered: 285 Skipped: 4
It is great.
I like it.
I don't like it.
I strongly dislike it.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
It is great. 47.02% 134
I like it. 44.91% 128
I don't like it. 11.93% 34
I strongly dislike it. 3.16% 9
Total Respondents: 285
11 / 30 -42- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q12 How do you like Social Studies/History?
Answered: 284 Skipped: 5
It is great.
I like it.
I don't like it.
I strongly dislike it.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
It is great. 41.90% 119
I like it. 44.01% 125
I don't like it. 14.79% 42
I strongly dislike it. 5.63% 16
Total Respondents: 284
12 / 30 -43- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q13 What are your favorite Language Arts (reading and writing) projects or activities?
Answered: 274 Skipped: 15
13 / 30 -44- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q14 What are your favorite Math projects or activities?
Answered: 277 Skipped: 12
14 / 30 -45- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q15 Do you feel happy most of the time when you are at school?
Answered: 281 Skipped: 8
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 90.39% 254
No 9.61% 27
Total 281
15 / 30 -46- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q16 Do you feel safe on the playground?
Answered: 282 Skipped: 7
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 74.47% 210
No 4.61% 13
Don't Know 20.92% 59
Total 282
16 / 30 -47- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q17 Do you feel safe in the classroom?
Answered: 276 Skipped: 13
Yes
No
Don't Know
OPTIONAL: How can we make ...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 87.68% 242
No 1.09% 3
Don't Know 5.43% 15
OPTIONAL: How can we make the school safer for you? 5.80% 16
Total 276
17 / 30 -48- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q18 Do you feel cared for and able to share your feelings with grown ups at school?
Answered: 278 Skipped: 11
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 54.68% 152
No 13.67% 38
Don't Know 31.65% 88
Total 278
18 / 30 -49- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q19 Do you feel like you have positive relationships with most other students at school?
Answered: 279 Skipped: 10
Yes
No
Don't know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 79.93% 223
No 5.02% 14
Don't know 15.05% 42
Total 279
19 / 30 -50- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q20 Do you like recess time?
Answered: 282 Skipped: 7
Yes, always.
Yes, sometimes.
Not sure.
No, not most of the time.
No, never.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes, always. 50.35% 142
Yes, sometimes. 45.04% 127
Not sure. 4.96% 14
No, not most of the time. 6.38% 18
No, never. 0.35% 1
Total Respondents: 282
20 / 30 -51- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q21 Do you feel like Neil Cummins has a lot of school spirit?
Answered: 279 Skipped: 10
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 72.76% 203
No 7.89% 22
Don't Know 21.86% 61
Total Respondents: 279
21 / 30 -52- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q22 Do you feel included with friends or classmates while eating at lunchtime?
Answered: 274 Skipped: 15
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 86.86% 238
No 5.47% 15
Don't Know 7.66% 21
Total 274
22 / 30 -53- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q23 Do you have enough time to eat your lunch?
Answered: 274 Skipped: 15
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 56.57% 155
No 33.94% 93
Don't Know 9.49% 26
Total 274
23 / 30 -54- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q24 What are the Top 3 Things you enjoy at school?
Answered: 278 Skipped: 11
Classmates & Friends
Dance
Buddies
Projects
Gardening
Inventions
Teachers (current...
Reading
Writing
Math
History/Social Studies
Science
Art
Music
PE
Recess
Assemblies
Mindfulness
Field Trips 24 / 30 -55- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey Field Trips
Class Plays
If there is anything els...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Classmates & Friends 35.25% 98
Dance 12.95% 36
Buddies 16.19% 45
Projects 12.59% 35
Gardening 5.76% 16
Inventions 12.59% 35
Teachers (current teacher or other teachers from past years) 20.50% 57
Reading 25.90% 72
Writing 12.23% 34
Math 23.74% 66
History/Social Studies 15.11% 42
Science 12.59% 35
Art 15.11% 42
Music 14.03% 39
PE 48.56% 135
Recess 39.57% 110
Assemblies 12.23% 34
Mindfulness 6.12% 17
Field Trips 50.00% 139
Class Plays 14.39% 40
If there is anything else you enjoy, please tell us. 21.94% 61
Total Respondents: 278
25 / 30 -56- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q25 Do things like brain breaks, mindfulness, calm.com, and meditation in your classroom help you focus and feel ready to learn?
Answered: 275 Skipped: 14
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 48.36% 133
No 29.09% 80
Don't Know 22.55% 62
Total 275
26 / 30 -57- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q26 Do you like the Friday morning assemblies?
Answered: 275 Skipped: 14
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 59.27% 163
No 14.91% 41
Don't Know 25.82% 71
Total 275
27 / 30 -58- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q27 In order to fit in with others at school, do you sometimes do things that you don't want to (or know you shouldn't) because your friends say you should?
Answered: 276 Skipped: 13
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 19.20% 53
No 60.51% 167
Don't Know 20.29% 56
Total 276
28 / 30 -59- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q28 Is there anything else you want to share about your experience at school?
Answered: 181 Skipped: 108
29 / 30 -60- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Student Survey SurveyMonkey
Q29 Do you have any suggestions for questions we should ask students in the future?
Answered: 164 Skipped: 125
30 / 30 -61- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q1 Please choose:Por favor elija:
Answered: 435 Skipped: 0
English
Espanol
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
English 97.70% 425
Espanol 2.30% 10
Total 435
1 / 92 -62- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q2 I am answering for my child who is in (select one):
Answered: 413 Skipped: 22
PRESCHOOL
K
1
2
3
4
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
PRESCHOOL 0.24% 1
K 17.19% 71
1 16.46% 68
2 15.25% 63
3 22.03% 91
4 13.80% 57
5 15.01% 62
Total 413
2 / 92 -63- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q3 Gender of child:
Answered: 413 Skipped: 22
M
F
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
M 50.61% 209
F 49.39% 204
Total 413
3 / 92 -64- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q4 On the whole, the academic core curriculum (reading, writing, mathematics, science, history/social studies, art, music, physical education) at Neil Cummins is rigorous and engages my child.
Answered: 302 Skipped: 133
(no label)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don't Know Total Weighted Average
(no label) 19.87% 65.23% 10.93% 1.32% 2.65% 60 197 33 4 8 302 3.06
4 / 92 -65- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q5 Rate your understanding of the concept of "Inquiry-based learning."
Answered: 302 Skipped: 133
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 19.87% 60
Good 50.99% 154
Fair 18.54% 56
Poor 11.59% 35
Total Respondents: 302
5 / 92 -66- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q6 Is your child experiencing "Inquiry- based learning" in school?
Answered: 301 Skipped: 134
Yes
No
Do Not Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 51.16% 154
No 2.99% 9
Do Not Know 46.51% 140
Total Respondents: 301
6 / 92 -67- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q7 The Language Arts (reading, writing, listening, speaking) curriculum:
Answered: 300 Skipped: 135
Is the right level of...
Is not challenging...
Is too challenging ...
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Is the right level of challenge for my child. 73.00% 219
Is not challenging enough for my child. 22.67% 68
Is too challenging for my child. 2.00% 6
Don't Know 3.67% 11
Total Respondents: 300
7 / 92 -68- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q8 The Mathematics curriculum:
Answered: 301 Skipped: 134
Is the right level of...
Is not challenging...
Is too challenging ...
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Is the right level of challenge for my child. 65.45% 197
Is not challenging enough for my child. 28.90% 87
Is too challenging for my child. 3.32% 10
Don't Know 3.65% 11
Total Respondents: 301
8 / 92 -69- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q9 The History-Social Studies curriculum:
Answered: 301 Skipped: 134
Is the right level of...
Is not challenging...
Is too challenging ...
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Is the right level of challenge for my child. 69.44% 209
Is not challenging enough for my child. 6.31% 19
Is too challenging for my child. 1.00% 3
Don't Know 24.92% 75
Total Respondents: 301
9 / 92 -70- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q10 The Science curriculum:
Answered: 302 Skipped: 133
Is the right level of...
Is not challenging...
Is too challenging ...
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Is the right level of challenge for my child. 58.28% 176
Is not challenging enough for my child. 16.56% 50
Is too challenging for my child. 0.00% 0
Don't Know 26.16% 79
Total Respondents: 302
10 / 92 -71- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q11 The Writing curriculum:
Answered: 301 Skipped: 134
Is the right level of...
Is not challenging...
Is too challenging ...
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Is the right level of challenge for my child. 80.40% 242
Is not challenging enough for my child. 14.29% 43
Is too challenging for my child. 1.66% 5
Don't Know 5.32% 16
Total Respondents: 301
11 / 92 -72- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q12 Grades K-5: Does your child have differentiated (tailored to his or her individual level) learning opportunities throughout the school day?
Answered: 298 Skipped: 137
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs to Improve
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 13.42% 40
Good 32.21% 96
Fair 11.74% 35
Needs to Improve 13.42% 40
Don't Know 29.19% 87
Total 298
12 / 92 -73- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q13 What do you consider to be your PRIMARY source of information when evaluating whether the academic curriculum is appropriately rigorous and engaging for your child?
Answered: 302 Skipped: 133
Communication with teacher...
Direct experience...
Direct experience...
Conversational feedback fro...
Conversations with other...
Principal communicatio...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Communication with teacher about child’s progress relative to curriculum standards 32.45% 98
Direct experience and/or observation of child’s classroom experience 8.94% 27
Direct experience and/or observation of child’s homework 31.46% 95
Conversational feedback from your child 26.16% 79
Conversations with other parents 0.99% 3
Principal communication or coffee chats 0.00% 0
Total 302
13 / 92 -74- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q14 My child is supported with social emotional learning at Neil Cummins (Mindfulness, Zones of Regulation, Superflex, Social Thinking).
Answered: 300 Skipped: 135
(no label)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Don't Know Total Weighted Average
(no label) 34.33% 54.33% 5.00% 0.67% 5.67% 103 163 15 2 17 300 3.10
14 / 92 -75- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q15 The Music Program is:
Answered: 295 Skipped: 140
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs to Improve
Don't Know
Not Applicable
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 50.17% 148
Good 37.29% 110
Fair 5.08% 15
Needs to Improve 3.73% 11
Don't Know 3.39% 10
Not Applicable 0.34% 1
Total 295
15 / 92 -76- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q16 The Physical Education Program is:
Answered: 295 Skipped: 140
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs to Improve
Don't Know
Not Applicable
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 34.24% 101
Good 38.64% 114
Fair 5.76% 17
Needs to Improve 3.05% 9
Don't Know 18.31% 54
Not Applicable 0.00% 0
Total 295
16 / 92 -77- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q17 The Art Program is:
Answered: 294 Skipped: 141
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs to Improve
Don't Know
Not Applicable
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 30.27% 89
Good 42.86% 126
Fair 10.20% 30
Needs to Improve 6.46% 19
Don't Know 10.20% 30
Not Applicable 0.00% 0
Total 294
17 / 92 -78- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q18 The Library Program is:
Answered: 295 Skipped: 140
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs to Improve
Don't Know
Not Applicable
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 49.49% 146
Good 40.34% 119
Fair 3.73% 11
Needs to Improve 1.02% 3
Don't Know 5.42% 16
Not Applicable 0.00% 0
Total 295
18 / 92 -79- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q19 Technology is successfully integrated in the classroom to support learning.
Answered: 292 Skipped: 143
Strongly agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly agree 21.23% 62
Agree 55.14% 161
Disagree 8.22% 24
Strongly disagree 1.03% 3
Don't Know 14.38% 42
Total 292
19 / 92 -80- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q20 Art (visual art, music, drama, dance) is successfully integrated in the classroom to support learning.
Answered: 292 Skipped: 143
Strongly agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly agree 29.79% 87
Agree 52.40% 153
Disagree 3.77% 11
Strongly disagree 0.00% 0
Don't Know 14.73% 43
Total Respondents: 292
20 / 92 -81- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q21 What is your rating of school spirit, community and cohesiveness this year?
Answered: 293 Skipped: 142
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs Improvement
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 38.91% 114
Good 47.44% 139
Fair 10.24% 30
Needs Improvement 2.39% 7
Don't Know 1.71% 5
Total Respondents: 293
21 / 92 -82- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q22 Grades K-5 reading support provided by Reading Specialist, provided during the day in a separate classroom.
Answered: 291 Skipped: 144
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs to Improve
Don't Know
Does Not Participate
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 14.09% 41
Good 7.22% 21
Fair 1.72% 5
Needs to Improve 0.69% 2
Don't Know 10.31% 30
Does Not Participate 65.98% 192
Total 291
22 / 92 -83- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q23 Special Education Program (academic support, Speech and Language Therapy, and Occupational Therapy provided to students with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs)).
Answered: 289 Skipped: 146
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs to Improve
Don't Know
Does Not Participate
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 7.96% 23
Good 7.27% 21
Fair 1.73% 5
Needs to Improve 0.69% 2
Don't Know 6.57% 19
Does Not Participate 75.78% 219
Total 289
23 / 92 -84- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q24 If your child is learning English as a second language, please rate the effectiveness of instruction provided to develop his or her English language skills.
Answered: 289 Skipped: 146
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs to Improve
Don't Know
Not Applicable to my child
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 2.42% 7
Good 2.08% 6
Fair 0.35% 1
Needs to Improve 0.00% 0
Don't Know 0.69% 2
Not Applicable to my child 94.46% 273
Total 289
24 / 92 -85- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q25 My child's teacher is accessible and responsive.
Answered: 290 Skipped: 145
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 71.03% 206
Agree 26.21% 76
Disagree 2.41% 7
Strongly Disagree 0.34% 1
Don't Know 0.00% 0
Total 290
25 / 92 -86- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q26 My child's teacher provides me with the tools needed to support my child's learning at home.
Answered: 289 Skipped: 146
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 43.94% 127
Agree 43.94% 127
Disagree 8.65% 25
Strongly Disagree 1.04% 3
Don't Know 2.42% 7
Total 289
26 / 92 -87- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q27 The principal provides strong leadership.
Answered: 290 Skipped: 145
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 50.00% 145
Agree 39.66% 115
Disagree 1.72% 5
Strongly Disagree 0.34% 1
Don't Know 8.28% 24
Total 290
27 / 92 -88- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q28 The principal is responsive.
Answered: 290 Skipped: 145
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 56.21% 163
Agree 26.90% 78
Disagree 0.34% 1
Strongly Disagree 0.34% 1
Don't Know 16.21% 47
Total 290
28 / 92 -89- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q29 School information is communicated in a timely and effective manner.
Answered: 286 Skipped: 149
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 51.40% 147
Agree 43.36% 124
Disagree 3.15% 9
Strongly Disagree 0.70% 2
Don't Know 1.40% 4
Total 286
29 / 92 -90- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q30 I regularly receive and read information from the following sources (please check all that apply):
Answered: 284 Skipped: 151
Classroom Coordinator...
Parent Link App
Principal's Coffee Chats...
School website
Social Networking...
Superintendent' s Coffee Cha...
Superintendent' s Perspectiv...
Emails
The Weekly (sent via em...
Blue Pods
Classroom Teacher...
Websites
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Classroom Coordinator emails 55.63% 158
Parent Link App 16.90% 48
Principal's Coffee Chats (in person) 14.79% 42
School website 35.56% 101
7.75% 22 Social Networking Sites (Facebook,Twitter)
Superintendent's Coffee Chat (in person) 2.11% 6
30 / 92 -91- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Superintendent's Perspective emails 24.30% 69
Emails 77.82% 221
The Weekly (sent via email on Sundays and available on Parent Link) 80.28% 228
Blue Pods 56.34% 160
Classroom Teacher Newsletters 81.34% 231
Websites 9.15% 26
Total Respondents: 284
31 / 92 -92- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q31 The best way for me to receive school information is (please check all that apply):
Answered: 286 Skipped: 149
In person
Online
Via email
In printed materials
In a language other than...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
In person 22.73% 65
Online 21.33% 61
Via email 94.76% 271
In printed materials 12.94% 37
In a language other than English 0.00% 0
Total Respondents: 286
32 / 92 -93- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q32 I receive timely information about what my child is learning (e.g., reading, math, science, social studies) and classroom activities (e.g. field trips, plays, class events) from my child’s teacher.
Answered: 286 Skipped: 149
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don’t Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 50.00% 143
Agree 44.41% 127
Disagree 3.15% 9
Strongly Disagree 1.05% 3
Don’t Know 1.40% 4
Total 286
33 / 92 -94- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q33 I receive timely information about what my child is learning in specialists' programs (e.g. music, art, , PE, library).
Answered: 283 Skipped: 152
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 22.26% 63
Agree 56.89% 161
Disagree 14.84% 42
Strongly Disagree 1.41% 4
Don't Know 4.59% 13
Total 283
34 / 92 -95- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q34 My child receives helpful and informative feedback on school work.
Answered: 282 Skipped: 153
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 21.99% 62
Agree 52.13% 147
Disagree 8.16% 23
Strongly Disagree 1.42% 4
Don't Know 16.31% 46
Total 282
35 / 92 -96- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q35 My child receives an appropriate amount of engaging and meaningful homework.
Answered: 281 Skipped: 154
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs to Improve
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excellent 23.13% 65
Good 43.06% 121
Fair 18.15% 51
Needs to Improve 13.52% 38
Don't Know 3.20% 9
Total Respondents: 281
36 / 92 -97- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q36 Does your child generally enjoy coming to school?
Answered: 283 Skipped: 152
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 93.99% 266
No 5.30% 15
Don't Know 0.71% 2
Total 283
37 / 92 -98- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q37 School standards for behavior and discipline are appropriate.
Answered: 280 Skipped: 155
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 33.21% 93
Agree 57.50% 161
Disagree 2.50% 7
Strongly Disagree 1.07% 3
Don't Know 5.71% 16
Total 280
38 / 92 -99- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q38 The playground is well-supervised.
Answered: 281 Skipped: 154
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 17.08% 48
Agree 40.93% 115
Disagree 12.10% 34
Strongly Disagree 2.14% 6
Don't Know 27.76% 78
Total 281
39 / 92 -100- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q39 How do you rate your child's experience on the playground? Please include comments.
Answered: 280 Skipped: 155
Very Satisfied
Satisfied
Dissatisfied
Very Dissatisfied
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Very Satisfied 25.00% 70
Satisfied 59.29% 166
Dissatisfied 6.43% 18
Very Dissatisfied 1.43% 4
Don't Know 7.86% 22
Total 280
40 / 92 -101- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q40 My child finds something engaging to do at recess and lunch recess.
Answered: 282 Skipped: 153
Most of the Time
Some of the Time
Rarely
Never
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Most of the Time 71.63% 202
Some of the Time 18.44% 52
Rarely 1.42% 4
Never 0.71% 2
Don't Know 7.80% 22
Total 282
41 / 92 -102- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q41 Does your child feel welcomed and included in group activities on the playground?
Answered: 277 Skipped: 158
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 81.59% 226
No 5.78% 16
Don't Know 12.64% 35
Total 277
42 / 92 -103- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q42 Has your child reported an ON-GOING experience of bullying behavior such as chronic exclusion, name-calling, teasing, mean behaviors, physical aggression, or similar?
Answered: 282 Skipped: 153
Yes
No
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 13.48% 38
No 82.62% 233
Don't Know 3.90% 11
Total 282
43 / 92 -104- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q43 My child feels safe and secure (emotionally and physically) at school.
Answered: 283 Skipped: 152
Strongly Agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Strongly Agree 46.29% 131
Agree 49.82% 141
Disagree 2.47% 7
Strongly Disagree 0.35% 1
Don't Know 1.06% 3
Total 283
44 / 92 -105- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q44 How satisfied are you with your child's overall school experience?
Answered: 282 Skipped: 153
Very Satisfied
Satisfied
Dissatisfied
Very Dissatisfied
Don't Know
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Very Satisfied 43.26% 122
Satisfied 48.94% 138
Dissatisfied 6.74% 19
Very Dissatisfied 0.00% 0
Don't Know 1.06% 3
Total 282
45 / 92 -106- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q45 Additional Comments/Suggestions
Answered: 63 Skipped: 372
46 / 92 -107- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q46 Suggestions for future surveys:
Answered: 21 Skipped: 414
47 / 92 -108- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q47 Estoy respondiendo a mi hijo que está en (seleccione uno):
Answered: 10 Skipped: 425
Prescolar
K
1
2
3
4
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Prescolar 10.00% 1
K 20.00% 2
1 0.00% 0
2 30.00% 3
3 30.00% 3
4 10.00% 1
5 0.00% 0
Total 10
48 / 92 -109- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q48 Sexo del niño.
Answered: 10 Skipped: 425
M
F
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
M 50.00% 5
F 50.00% 5
Total 10
49 / 92 -110- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q49 En general, el currículo académico (lectura, escritura, matemáticas, ciencia, historia / ciencias sociales, arte, música, educación física) en Neil Cummins es riguroso y involucra a mi hijo.
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
(no label)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Totalmente de acuerdo De acuerdo En desacuerdo Totalmente en desacuerdo No sabe Total Weighted Average
(no label) 71.43% 28.57% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5 2 0 0 0 7 3.71
50 / 92 -111- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q50 Califique su entendimiento del concepto de "aprendizaje basado en investigación".
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelente
Bueno
Justo
Bajo
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelente 71.43% 5
Bueno 28.57% 2
Justo 0.00% 0
Bajo 0.00% 0
Total 7
51 / 92 -112- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q51 Usted cree que su hijo esta participando en "aprendizaje basado en investigación" en la escuela?
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
sí
no
no sé
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
sí 85.71% 6
no 14.29% 1
no sé 0.00% 0
Total 7
52 / 92 -113- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q52 El plan de estudios de lenguaje, escritura, lectura, etc.:
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Es el nivel adecuado de...
No es el nivel adecuado de...
Es muy difícil para mi hijo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Es el nivel adecuado de reto para mi hijo 100.00% 7
No es el nivel adecuado de reto para mi hijo 0.00% 0
Es muy difícil para mi hijo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total Respondents: 7
53 / 92 -114- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q53 El plan de estudios de Matemática:
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Es el nivel adecuado de...
No es el nivel adecuado de...
Es muy difícil para mi hijo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Es el nivel adecuado de reto para mi hijo 85.71% 6
No es el nivel adecuado de reto para mi hijo 0.00% 0
Es muy difícil para mi hijo 14.29% 1
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total Respondents: 7
54 / 92 -115- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q54 El plan de estudios de Estudios Sociales:
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Es el nivel adecuado de...
No es el nivel adecuado de...
Es muy difícil para mi hijo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Es el nivel adecuado de reto para mi hijo 100.00% 7
No es el nivel adecuado de reto para mi hijo 0.00% 0
Es muy difícil para mi hijo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total Respondents: 7
55 / 92 -116- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q55 El plan de estudios de Ciencia:
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Es el nivel adecuado de...
No es el nivel adecuado de...
Es muy difícil para mi hijo
No sabe
No aplica
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Es el nivel adecuado de reto para mi hijo 85.71% 6
No es el nivel adecuado de reto para mi hijo 0.00% 0
Es muy difícil para mi hijo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
No aplica 14.29% 1
Total Respondents: 7
56 / 92 -117- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q56 El plan de estudios de Escritura:
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Es el nivel adecuado de...
No es el nivel adecuado de...
Es muy difícil para mi hijo
No sabe
No aplica
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Es el nivel adecuado de reto para mi hijo 100.00% 7
No es el nivel adecuado de reto para mi hijo 0.00% 0
Es muy difícil para mi hijo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
No aplica 0.00% 0
Total Respondents: 7
57 / 92 -118- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q57 Que considera ser su primer fuente de información cuando evalúa si el currículo académico esta apropiadamente riguroso e interesante para su hijo?
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Comunicación con el profe...
Experiencia directa y/o ...
Experiencia directa y/o ...
Conversación con su hijo.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Comunicación con el profesor del niño sobre los progresos en relación con las normas del curriculum. 100.00% 7
Experiencia directa y/o la observación de la experiencia en la aula. 0.00% 0
Experiencia directa y/o la observación de la tarea del niño. 14.29% 1
Conversación con su hijo. 14.29% 1
Total Respondents: 7
58 / 92 -119- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q58 Música (en la sala de música con un profesor de música)
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelente
Bueno
Razonable
Necesita Mejorar
No sabe
No aplicable
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelente 57.14% 4
Bueno 28.57% 2
Razonable 0.00% 0
Necesita Mejorar 0.00% 0
No sabe 14.29% 1
No aplicable 0.00% 0
Total 7
59 / 92 -120- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q59 Educación Física (En el gimnasio o zona de juegos con el maestro de educación física)
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelente
Bueno
Razonable
Necesita Mejorar
No sabe
No aplicable
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelente 71.43% 5
Bueno 14.29% 1
Razonable 0.00% 0
Necesita Mejorar 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
No aplicable 14.29% 1
Total 7
60 / 92 -121- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q60 Arte (en la sala de arte con el profesor de arte)
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelente
Bueno
Razonable
Necesita Mejorar
No sabe
No aplicable
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelente 71.43% 5
Bueno 14.29% 1
Razonable 0.00% 0
Necesita Mejorar 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
No aplicable 14.29% 1
Total 7
61 / 92 -122- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q61 Biblioteca
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelente
Bueno
Razonable
Necesita Mejorar
No sabe
No aplicable
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelente 85.71% 6
Bueno 14.29% 1
Razonable 0.00% 0
Necesita Mejorar 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
No aplicable 0.00% 0
Total 7
62 / 92 -123- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q62 La tecnología se utiliza con éxito en el aula para apoyar el aprendizaje (integración de la tecnología).
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 57.14% 4
De acuerdo 28.57% 2
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 14.29% 1
Total 7
63 / 92 -124- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q63 Artes (artes visuales, música, teatro, danza) se utilizan con éxito en el aula para apoyar el aprendizaje (integración de las artes).
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 85.71% 6
De acuerdo 14.29% 1
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total Respondents: 7
64 / 92 -125- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q64 ¿Como evalua usted el espíritu y ambiente general de la escuela hasta ahora?
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelente
Bueno
Justo
Bajo
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelente 57.14% 4
Bueno 42.86% 3
Justo 0.00% 0
Bajo 0.00% 0
Total 7
65 / 92 -126- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q65 ¿Se siente un sentido de comunidad y cohesión?
Answered: 6 Skipped: 429
66 / 92 -127- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q66 Grados K-5 Intervención - ayuda adicional de lectura proporcionado por un especialista, fuera del aula (durante el día escolar).
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelente
Bueno
Razonable
Necesita Mejorar
No sabe
Kinder no participa
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelente 42.86% 3
Bueno 42.86% 3
Razonable 0.00% 0
Necesita Mejorar 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Kinder no participa 14.29% 1
Total 7
67 / 92 -128- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q67 Grado K-5 Ayuda Académica(Lectura / Aprendizaje del idioma Inglés a través de especialistas en lectura, siempre durante el día escolar en aulas separadas).
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelente
Bueno
Razonable
Necesita Mejorar
No sabe
No participa
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelente 57.14% 4
Bueno 28.57% 2
Razonable 0.00% 0
Necesita Mejorar 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
No participa 14.29% 1
Total 7
68 / 92 -129- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q68 El Programa de Educación Especial(proporciona ayuda académica, terapia del habla y lenguaje, y terapia ocupacional, a los estudiantes con Planes de Educación Individualizada (IEP)).
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelente
Bueno
Razonable
Necesita Mejorar
No sabe
No participa
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelente 57.14% 4
Bueno 42.86% 3
Razonable 0.00% 0
Necesita Mejorar 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
No participa 0.00% 0
Total 7
69 / 92 -130- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q69 Si su hijo está aprendiendo Inglés como segundo idioma, por favor evalúe la eficacia de la instrucción proporcionada para desarrollar sus habilidades del idioma inglés.
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelente
Bueno
Razonable
Necesita Mejorar
No sabe
No aplica para mi hijo/a
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelente 71.43% 5
Bueno 28.57% 2
Razonable 0.00% 0
Necesita Mejorar 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
No aplica para mi hijo/a 0.00% 0
Total 7
70 / 92 -131- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q70 La maestra de mi hijo es accesible y receptiva.
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 85.71% 6
De acuerdo 14.29% 1
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 7
71 / 92 -132- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q71 La maestra de mi hijo me proporciona las herramientas necessarias para ayudar a mi hijo con su aprendizaje en casa.
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 71.43% 5
De acuerdo 28.57% 2
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 7
72 / 92 -133- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q72 La Directora proporciona un liderazgo fuerte.
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 85.71% 6
De acuerdo 14.29% 1
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 7
73 / 92 -134- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q73 La Directora es sensitiva y receptiva.
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 71.43% 5
De acuerdo 28.57% 2
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 7
74 / 92 -135- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q74 Información de la escuela es comunicada de manera puntual y eficiente.
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 85.71% 6
De acuerdo 14.29% 1
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 7
75 / 92 -136- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q75 Por favor, marque todos los puntos que se apliquen.Recibo y leo regularmente de la información de las siguientes fuentes:
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Correo Electrónico ...
Enlace a la página de...
Coffee Chats de la Directora
Sitio Web de la escuela
Coffee Chats del...
Perspectivas del...
Boletín de los maestros
Paginas Web de los maestros
Boletín semanal de l...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Correo Electrónico del coordinador de clase 100.00% 7
Enlace a la página de internet de padres (applicación informática) 28.57% 2
Coffee Chats de la Directora 0.00% 0
Sitio Web de la escuela 28.57% 2
Coffee Chats del Superintendente 14.29% 1
Perspectivas del Superintendente, correo electronico 28.57% 2
Boletín de los maestros 42.86% 3
Paginas Web de los maestros 14.29% 1
Boletín semanal de la escuela (enviada por correo electrónico los Domingos) 71.43% 5
Total Respondents: 7
76 / 92 -137- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q76 Por favor, marque todos los puntos que se apliquen.Prefiero recibir mi información de la escuela por la siguiente manera:
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
En persona
Por internet
Por correo electrónico
En material impreso
En español
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
En persona 42.86% 3
Por internet 14.29% 1
Por correo electrónico 85.71% 6
En material impreso 28.57% 2
En español 57.14% 4
Total Respondents: 7
77 / 92 -138- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q77 Recibo información oportuna del maestro acerca de lo que mi hijo está aprendiendo regularmente como lectura, matemáticas, ciencias, estudios sociales y actividades como excursiones, obras de teatro y eventos de clase.
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 71.43% 5
De acuerdo 28.57% 2
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 7
78 / 92 -139- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q78 Recibo información oportuna acerca de lo que mi hijo está aprendiendo en los programas de los especialistas (por ejemplo, la música, el arte, la ciencia / tecnología, educación física, biblioteca).
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 85.71% 6
De acuerdo 14.29% 1
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 7
79 / 92 -140- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q79 Mi hijo recibe información útil e informativa sobre su trabajo escolar.
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 71.43% 5
De acuerdo 28.57% 2
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 7
80 / 92 -141- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q80 Mi hijo recibe una cantidad apropiada, interesante y significativa de tareas.
Answered: 7 Skipped: 428
Excelentes
Buenos
Razonable
Necesita Mejorar
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Excelentes 71.43% 5
Buenos 28.57% 2
Razonable 0.00% 0
Necesita Mejorar 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total Respondents: 7
81 / 92 -142- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q81 ¿Por lo general, su hijo disfruta en ir a la escuela?
Answered: 6 Skipped: 429
Sí
No
No Sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Sí 100.00% 6
No 0.00% 0
No Sabe 0.00% 0
Total 6
82 / 92 -143- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q82 Son los estándares de la escuela para el comportamiento y la disciplina adecuadas?
Answered: 6 Skipped: 429
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 83.33% 5
De acuerdo 16.67% 1
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 6
83 / 92 -144- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q83 El área de recreo está bien supervisada.
Answered: 6 Skipped: 429
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 66.67% 4
De acuerdo 16.67% 1
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 16.67% 1
Total 6
84 / 92 -145- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q84 ¿Qué tan satisfecho se siente su hijo en el area de recreo? Por favor incluya comentarios.
Answered: 6 Skipped: 429
Muy satisfecho
satisfecho
insatisfecho
Muy insatisfecho
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Muy satisfecho 50.00% 3
satisfecho 50.00% 3
insatisfecho 0.00% 0
Muy insatisfecho 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 6
85 / 92 -146- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q85 Mi niño encuentra algo que hacer para participar en el recreo:
Answered: 6 Skipped: 429
La mayor parte del tiempo
Parte del tiempo
Rara vez
Nunca
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
La mayor parte del tiempo 100.00% 6
Parte del tiempo 0.00% 0
Rara vez 0.00% 0
Nunca 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 6
86 / 92 -147- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q86 ¿Se siente su hijo bienvenido e incluido en las actividades del grupo en las actividades en el area de juego?
Answered: 6 Skipped: 429
Sí
No
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Sí 100.00% 6
No 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 6
87 / 92 -148- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q87 Se ha quejado su hijo de experiencias continuas con 'bullying' (acoso, intimidación, abuso) como por ejemplo, exclusión crónica, injurias, burlas, comportamiento malicioso, agresión física, o algo similar?
Answered: 6 Skipped: 429
Sí
No
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Sí 16.67% 1
No 83.33% 5
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 6
88 / 92 -149- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q88 Mi hijo se siente seguro y a salvo en la escuela.
Answered: 6 Skipped: 429
Totalmente de acuerdo
De acuerdo
En desacuerdo
Totalmente en desacuerdo
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Totalmente de acuerdo 66.67% 4
De acuerdo 33.33% 2
En desacuerdo 0.00% 0
Totalmente en desacuerdo 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 6
89 / 92 -150- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q89 ¿En general qué tan satisfecho está usted con la experiencia de su hijo en la escuela
Answered: 6 Skipped: 429
Muy satisfecho
insatisfecho
Dissatisfied
Muy insatisfecho
No sabe
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Muy satisfecho 100.00% 6
insatisfecho 0.00% 0
Dissatisfied 0.00% 0
Muy insatisfecho 0.00% 0
No sabe 0.00% 0
Total 6
90 / 92 -151- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q90 Comentarios adicionales / Sugerencias
Answered: 0 Skipped: 435
91 / 92 -152- 2017 Neil Cummins SSC Parent Survey SurveyMonkey
Q91 Sugerencias para futuras encuestas:
Answered: 0 Skipped: 435
92 / 92 -153- 1
2017 Neil Cummins School Site Council Survey Summary of Responses
The Neil Cummins School Site Council is responsible for creating and distributing an annual parent survey and interpreting the results. This survey provides valuable feedback to the school’s administrative staff and to parents regarding how parents feel about their child’s school experience each year. The following is a summary of the responses to the 2017 survey. The summary for each topic area contains this year’s data results, comparisons to the data culled from the 2016 and 2015 surveys, and narratives identifying common themes from parents’ comments.
The number of parents who submitted a completed or partially completed survey between January-March 2017 represents nearly 73% of the total enrollment at Neil Cummins (592 students). Of the 435 parents who began the survey, 302 parents responded to the majority of the survey questions, while 133 did not answer questions 4-50. The survey was offered in English and Spanish. Ten respondents used the Spanish version as compared to eleven responses in Spanish in 2016. (Spanish responses are not aggregated with English responses and should be reviewed by SSC and administration separately.) Response rates were fairly consistent across grade levels K-5 and were representative of 51% boys and 49% girls.
The following tables aggregate survey question and response sets by topic. The sequence below does not mirror the sequence in which the questions appeared on the survey. For ease of reference, the survey question number appears as a parenthetical after each question (e.g., the first question below was question number four on the survey as designated by “(Q4)” following the question text).
I. ACADEMIC PROGRAMS: CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION
Question 2017 Data 2016 Data 2015 Data
1. Academic 85.0 % Strongly agree and 85.0 % Strongly agree and 83.27% Strongly agree and curriculum is rigorous Agree Agree Agree and engages my child. (Q4) (Results the same as 2016.) (1.5% point increase over (5% point increase over 2015.) 2014.)
2. Rate your Excellent 19.8% Excellent 22.8% Excellent 18.2% understanding of the concept of Good 51 % Good 51.5% Good 53.2% “inquiry-based learning.” (Q5) Fair 19% Fair 20.6% Fair 21.2%
Poor 12% Poor 8.5% Poor 8.7%
(These responses are a very (These responses show a (Excellent and Good ratings slight decrease from 2016 steady increase in represent at 4% point responses.) understanding of IBL since increase over 2014.) 2015.)
3. Is your child Yes 51.2% Yes 62.4% Yes 61.6% experiencing “inquiry-based No 3% No 2.3% No 2.2% learning” in school? (Q6) Don’t Know 46.5% Don’t Know 36.2% Do Not Know 37.0%.
4. Language Arts Right level 73% Right level 75% Right level 71.74% (Q7) Not challenging enough Not challenging enough 18% Not challenging enough 22.6% 24.8% Don’t Know 5%
-154- 2
Too challenging: 2% (Right level percentage saw no change over 2014 Don’t Know 3.6% results, but Not Challenging Enough increased 7 percentage points over 2014.)
5. Math (Q8) Right level 65.5% Right level 63% Right level 60.43%
Not challenging enough 29% Not challenging enough 29% Not challenging enough 35.7% Too challenging: 3.3% Don’t know 5% (Right level increased 1.7% Don’t know 3.7% over 2014, and Not Challenging enough saw an 3.5% increase over 2014 results)
6. Science (Q9) Right level 58% Right level 66% Right level 54.6%
Not challenging enough Not challenging enough 19% Not challenging enough 16.5% 21.83% Don’t Know 16% Too challenging: 0% Don’t know 24.45%
Don’t Know 26%
7. Social Studies Right Level 70% Right Level 74% Right level 72.17% (Q10) Not Challenging Enough 6% Not Challenging Enough Not challenging enough 11% 10.9% Too challenging: 1 % Don’t Know 16% Don’t know 16.52% Don’t Know 25% (Compared to 2014 data, Right level increased 11% and Don’t know decreased 12% while Not challenging enough remained unchanged.)
8. Writing (Q11) Right Level 80% Right Level 79% Right Level 76.3%
Not Challenging Enough Not Challenging Enough Not Challenging Enough 14% 13% 16.7%
Too Challenging 1.7% Too Challenging 4% Too Challenging 1.8%
Don’t Know 5.3% Don’t Know 6% Don’t Know 6.1%
9. Grades K-5 Excellent 13.4% Excellent 20% Excellent 14.6% Differentiated Learning (Q12) Good 32% Good 38% Good 33.6%
Fair 11.7% Fair 7% Fair 11.5%
Needs to Improve 13.4% Needs to Improve 9% Needs to Improve 8%
Don’t Know 29% Don’t Know 26% Don’t Know 32.3%
-155- 3
10. What do you Communication with teacher Communication with teacher Communication with teacher consider to be your 32.5% 42% 36.6% PRIMARY source of information when Direct observation of Direct observation of Direct observation of evaluating whether classroom experience 9% classroom experience 11% classroom experience 12.3% the academic curriculum is Direct observation of child’s Direct observation of child’s Direct observation of child’s appropriately rigorous homework 31.5% homework 23% homework 31.3% and engaging for your child? (Q13) Conversational feedback Conversational feedback Conversational feedback from from your child 26% from your child 24% your child: 19.8%
Conversations with other *no one relied on other parents 1% parents or coffee chats
*no one relied on principal communication or coffee chats
11. My child is Strongly Agree 34% Strongly Agree 25% supported with Social Emotional Learning at Agree 54% Agree 56% Neil Cummins. New Question in 2016. Disagree/Strongly Disagree Disagree/Strongly Disagree (Q14) 5% 13%
Don’t Know 5% Don’t Know 11%
Comment Summary: 1. (Q4) “Academic curriculum is rigorous and engages my child.” (69 comments) — The majority of parents (85%) agreed or strongly agreed that the overall academic curriculum is rigorous and engages his or her child. This is consistent with the 2016 and 2015 responses which were significantly better than the 2014 and 2013 responses. The goal set in the SPSA (Single Plan for Student Achievement) is that by June 2017, 90% of parents and students will report the Neil Cummins’ curriculum is rigorous, meaningful, and relevant, addressing student needs was approached but not met.
Of the 69 individual comments, many support their notion that the challenge level is just right for students and that students are engaged in the curriculum. Some respondents indicated that “challenge” would be a better word than “rigor” to describe the curriculum, and others indicated that student engagement is more important to them than rigor in younger grades.
Twenty-nine parents reported that the curriculum is not rigorous and engaging enough to meet the needs of his/her student. Math and science were specifically mentioned as insufficiently rigorous. No parents indicated that the curriculum is overly rigorous.
2. (Q5) “Rate your understanding of the concept of ‘inquiry-based learning.’” (174 comments) — Themes from the answers to the follow-up question “What do you think ‘inquiry-based learning’ is?” included the following most common responses: ● Learning by asking questions, rather than just presenting facts. ● Exploration of topics and content that enable students to delve deeply based on their curiosity and interest.
-156- 4
3. (Q6) “Is your child experiencing ‘inquiry-based learning’ in school?” (26 comments) — Written responses indicate that most parents understand that this is a focus for the school, but that many are unclear whether or not this is actually happening in their classroom and that they are not sure how to judge whether their child is experiencing inquiry-based learning.
4. (Q7) Language Arts (46 comments) — Note that Language Arts and Writing were asked about in separate questions, but many parents commented on writing program here, so there could be some blending of responses. Twenty-two percent of parents stated that Language Arts is not challenging enough for their child. Themes coming out of the written comments reflect a desire for more differentiation, more rigor and challenge, especially for kids who are behind or ahead of the curve. However, most of the comments can be characterized as positive, and several report specific details about individual students’ experiences in the Language Arts program.
5. (Q8) Math (53 comments) — Twenty-nine percent of parents stated that Math is not challenging enough for their child. This is consistent with parent perceptions from 2016, and both are improvements from 2015 parent perceptions. While the SPSA did not list a specific goal for Math, this is the subject area farthest from the goal that by June 2017, 90% of parents and students will report the Neil Cummins’ curriculum is rigorous, meaningful, and relevant. Thus, this is a fertile area for continued focus and improvement. Many of the parent comments mentioned a common concern that the curriculum is not challenging enough and that his/her student is capable of more difficult work than is being offered. Math development needs to continue to be a goal. SPSA GOAL NOT MET.
6. (Q9) Science (32 comments) — Over 26% expressed that they didn’t know at all whether the science curriculum is engaging and challenging. The vast majority of the 37 comments were along the lines of “Do we even teach science?” There is very little parent visibility into science.
7. (Q10) Social Studies (18 comments) — Sixty-nine percent of parents stated that Social Studies is at the right level of challenge for their child. However, 6% of parents stated that the curriculum is not challenging enough and 25% selected “Don’t know” as their response. Based upon the 18 comments, there appears to be a wide range of experiences in this subject area.
8. (Q11) Writing (29 comments) — Similar to 2016, writing appears to be a gold star winner among academic subjects at Neil Cummins with 80% of parents stating it was the right level, only 14% saying it was too easy and a mere 5% choosing “Don’t know.” The comments were very strong and supportive comments for this subject. People can see the development and seem quite aware of the progress their child is making.
9. (Q12) Differentiated Learning Opportunities (52 comments) — Parent comments varied. Some described not knowing what type of differentiation was taking place, or what evidence would show differentiation. Others complimented specific teachers. Others commented that it is an unrealistic expectation for teachers to differentiate for 25 students. Many commented that the main method for differentiated instruction appears to be through technology, and expressed mixed feelings that, while this may be the only realistic method to provide differentiated learning in this environment, they fear that students may be getting too much screen time during school hours.
10. (Q13) Primary source to evaluate curriculum (No comment box) — Despite the absence of commentary feedback, the results clearly indicate that parents are relying heavily on their communication with teachers, their in-class experiences, and conversations with their own child to inform their impressions of the rigor of the curriculum. No one seem to relying heavily on other sources like the principal or other parents for this information.
11. (Q14) Social emotional learning support (No comment box): There was no comment box here but about 75% of parents strongly agree or agree that this is a fundamental part of Neil Cummins’ curriculum. More thought should be given to adding a comment box for these latter two questions for 2017.
-157- 5
II. ACADEMIC PROGRAMS: SPECIALISTS
Question 2017 Data 2016 Data 2015 Data
1. Music Program Excellent 50% Excellent 52% Excellent/good 89.5% (Q15) (7.8% increase over 2014) Good 37% Good 37% Fair/needs improvement Fair 5% Fair 4% 9.2% (1.6% increase over 2014) Needs Improvement Needs Improvement 3.7% 3% Don’t Know <1% (9.4% decrease over 2014) Don’t Know 3.3% Don’t Know 4%
2. Physical Education Excellent 34% Excellent 13% Excellent/good 57.9% (Q16) Good 38% Good 37% Fair/needs improvement 45.6% Fair 5.7% Fair 18% Don’t Know 7.6% Needs Improvement 3% Needs Improvement 23% Don’t Know 18% Don’t Know 9%
3. Art Program (Q17) Excellent 30% Excellent 34% Excellent/good 74.6% (9.8% increase over 2014) Good 43% Good 45% Fair/needs improvement Fair 10% Fair 8% 16.7% (4.6% increase over 2014) Needs Improvement 6% Needs Improvement 5% Don’t Know 7% Don’t Know 10% (12.4% increase over 2014) Don’t Know 8%
4. Library (Q18) Excellent 49.5% Excellent 61% Excellent/good 95.1% (5.2% increase over 2014) Good 40% Good 34% Fair/needs improvement Fair 3.7% Fair 2% 3.9% (1.1% increase over 2014) Needs Improvement 1% Needs Improvement .5% Don’t Know 5.4% Don’t Know 3%
Comment Summary: 1. (Q15) Music (47 comments) — Parents strongly support the music program. Eighty-seven percent of comments can be characterized as either good or excellent. Comments were very supportive of the teaching in younger grades, but several other reports that kids seem to get more bored with music classes as they get older.
2. (Q16) Physical Education (51 comments) — Seventy-two percent of comments can be characterized as either good or excellent. This is a dramatic improvement from last year in which only 50% of parents rated Physical Education as good/excellent. Most comments describe a general level of enthusiasm for the new teacher.
-158- 6
4. (Q17) Art (47 Comments) — Seventy-three percent of parents rated Art as good/excellent, which is a slight decline from the 79% who reported the program as good/excellent in 2016. Some parents commented that not very much art came home with their children this year, and others express concern that the art instructor could improve in managing the group. Many children complain about stern atmosphere and lack of fun in the class.
5. (Q18) Library (34 comments) — Ninety percent of parents rated Library as good/excellent, which is a slight decline from the remarkable 95% good/excellent rating from 2016. This is another shining star at Neil Cummins. Any negative comments were focused only on missing our librarian who retired last year.
III. PROGRAMS AND INTEGRATION
Question 2017 Data 2016 Data 2015 Data
1. Technology is Strongly Agree 21% Strongly Agree 25% Agree/Strongly Agree 73.7% successfully integrated (16.9% increase over 2014) in the classroom to Agree 55% Agree 50% support learning. (Q19) Disagree 5.8% Disagree 8% Disagree 8% (12.2% decrease over 2014)
Strongly Disagree 1% Strongly Disagree 2% Don’t Know 18.7% (6.4% decrease pver 2014) Don’t Know 14% Don’t Know 14%
2. Art is successfully Strongly Agree 30% Strongly Agree 35% Agree/Strongly Agree 84.9% integrated in the (12.69% increase over 2014) classroom to support Agree 52% Agree 50% learning. (Q20) Disagree 4.89% Disagree 4% Disagree 3% (4.3% decrease over 2014)
Strongly Disagree 0% Strongly Disagree <1% Strongly Disagree 0%
Don’t Know 15% Don’t Know 12% Don’t know 10.7%
3. What is your rating of Excellent 39% Excellent 42% Excellent/Good 84.8% school spirit, community and cohesiveness this Good 47.4% Good 45% Fair/Needs Improvement year? Changed from 2 11.6% questions into this one Fair 10% Fair 9% for 2016. (Q21) Don’t Know 5.36% Needs Improvement Needs Improvement 3% 2.4 % Don’t Know 3% Don’t Know 1.7%
4. If you have a child in Excellent 14% Excellent 14% NEW QUESTION IN 2016 the Special Education program what is your Good 9% Good 9% rating of school spirit, community and Fair 2% Don’t Know 77% cohesiveness? (Q22) Needs to Improve <1%
Don’t Know 10%
Does not participate 66%
-159- 7
Comment Summary: 1. (Q19) Technology Integration (51 comments) — Most comments report that parents are concerned that technology is used too often, resulting in too much screen time for students. A few parents mentioned that technology is used sparingly and that they appreciate the limits.
2. (Q20) Art in the Classroom (18 comments) — Some individual teachers are complimented for their successful integration of art into the classroom. Overall, however, the parent comments indicate either a lack of awareness of arts integration in the classroom or a desire for more.
3. (Q21 and 22) Community/ School Spirit at Neil Cummins (71 comments) — Eighty-six percent of parents rated school spirit as good or excellent. This is similar to 2016 replies. The majority of comments were very positive of the evidence of school spirit seen on campus. Many commented on the leadership of Principal Elliot and her weekly assemblies as being a major factor in the increase of school spirit and pride at Neil Cummins. Several would like to see more community events like Cove in Motion or other ways the school community can come together during school hours.
IV. STUDENT SUPPORT PROGRAMS
Question 2017 Data (adjusted to 2016 Data (adjusted to 2015 Data (adjusted to exclude “does not exclude “does not exclude “does not participate”) participate”) participate”)
1. Grades K-5 (based on 70 responses) (based on 58 responses) (based on 63 responses) Academic Support (Reading/English Excellent 33% Excellent 36% Excellent 30.1% Language Learning support through Good 30% Good 28% Good 44.4% Reading Specialists, provided during the Fair 1% Fair 7% Fair 6.4% school day in separate classrooms). (Q22) Needs to Improve <1% Needs to Improve 2% Needs to Improve 3.2%
Don’t Know 27% Don’t Know 8% Don’t Know 15.9%
2. Special Education (based on 289 responses) (based on 41 responses) (based on 44 responses) Program (provides academic support, Excellent 8% Excellent 37% Excellent 27.7% Speech and Language Therapy, and Good 7 % Good 24% Good 43.2% Occupational Therapy to students with IEPs.) Fair 1.7% Fair 10% Fair 4.6% (Q23). To ensure higher accuracy of Needs to Improve 0.7% Needs to Improve 5% Needs to Improve 4.6% data, the response offering was changed Don’t Know 6.5% Don’t Know 24% Don’t Know 20.5% in 2017 to include an option for “does not Does Not Participate 76% participate”.
3. If your child is (based on 16 responses) (based on 16 responses) (based on 10 responses) learning English as a second language, Excellent 44% Excellent 63% Excellent 40% please rate the effectiveness of Good 38% Good 13% Good 30% instruction provided to Fair 1% Fair 0% Fair 0%
-160- 8
develop his or her English language skills. Needs to Improve 0% Needs/Improve 0% Needs/Improve 0% (Q24) Don’t Know 13% Don’t Know 25% Don’t Know 30%
Comment Summary: 1. (Q22) Grades K-5 Academic Support (14 Comments) — Most parents expressed very high regard for Ms Wilson with a few parents stating they did not really know much about the program at all.
2. (Q23) Special Education Program (4 Comments) — The majority of responses indicate general satisfaction with the Special Education Program. There were very few comments received so no common theme emerged.
3. (Q24) English as a Second Language (0 Comments) — There were no comments and very few responses since most parents of English language learner did not take the English version of this survey. There was a significant decrease in how effective parents found the ESL program between 2016 and this survey; however, the numbers do closely match 2015. Further discussion is warranted.
V. SCHOOL STAFF
Question 2017 Data 2016 Data 2015 Data
1. My child’s teacher Strongly Agree or Agree: Strongly Agree or Agree: Strongly Agree or Agree is accessible and 97% 97% 95% responsive (Q25) Disagree or Strongly Disagree: 3% Disagree 4% Disagree 3%
2. My child's teacher Strongly Agree or Agree Strongly Agree or Agree: Strongly agree or Agree provides me with the 88% 88% 88.1% tools needed to support my child’s Disagree or Strongly Disagree or Strongly learning at home. Disagree 10% disagree 10% Disagree 10% (Q26) Don’t Know 2%
3. The principal Strongly Agree or Agree Strongly Agree or Agree: Strongly agree or Agree provides strong 90% 85% 88% leadership. (Q27) Disagree or Strongly Disagree or Strongly Disagree or Strongly disagree 2% Disagree 7% Disagree 3%
Don’t Know 8% Don’t know 9.4%
4. The principal is Strongly Agree or Agree Strongly Agree or Agree Strongly Agree or Agree responsive. (Q28) 83% 85% 71% (17.1% decrease over Disagree or Strongly Disagree or Strongly 2014) Disagree 1% Disagree 4% Disagree 1.35% Don’t Know 16% Don’t know 22% (26.6% increase over 2014)
-161- 9
Comment Summary: Overall it is generally agreed that both teachers and the principal are accessible and responsive. Numerous teachers were mentioned in very positive terms. In terms of support for work at home the comments (31 in total) are very mixed. Some think it is good, others offer suggestions for improvement. Ms. Elliot continues to receive high ratings and positive comments though several comments discuss discipline and bullying issues on the playground. Parents continue to find Ms Elliot extremely responsive and comments reflect that.
VI. COMMUNICATION BETWEEN SCHOOL & HOME
Question 2017 Data 2016 Data 2015 Data
1. School information Strongly Agree or Agree Strongly agree or Agree 98% Strongly agree or is communicated in a 95% Agree: 97.67% timely and effective Strongly disagree or disagree (4.47% increase over manner. (Q29) Disagree or Strongly 2% 2014) Disagree 4% Don’t know 0% Don’t Know 1% (1% decrease over 2014)
2. I regularly receive Classroom Coordinator Classroom Coordinator 61% HRP: 75.12% (9.38% and read information emails 56% decrease) from the following Principal's’ Coffee Chats 7% sources (please check Principal Coffee Chat 15% Principal's’ Coffee all that apply): (Q30) School website 35% Chats: 20.66% (3.46% School Website 36% increase) Superintendent’s Coffee Chat Superintendent Coffee Chat 2% School website: 33.8% 2% (11.7% decrease) Superintendent’s Perspective Superintendent’s 31% Superintendent’s Perspective 24% Coffee Chat 6.10% Newsletters/email/websites (4% decrease) Emails 78% 94% The Weekly School Superintendent’s Classroom Teacher Newsletter 89% Perspective emails Newsletters 81% 42.25% (7.55% Text messages 10% decrease) Websites 9% Parent link app 15% Teacher The Weekly 80% newsletters/email/web Social networking sites 7% sites 92.02% (new Parent Link App 17% combined option)
Social Networking Sites 8% Teacher websites 28.8% (4.2% Blue Pods (New) 56% decrease)
The Weekly School Newsletter 93.43%
Text messages 18.31% (new option)
Parent link app 37.56% (new option)
Social networking sites 12.68% (new option)
-162- 10
3. The best way for In person 23% In person 25% In person 30.52% me to receive school (11% increase) information is (please Online 21% Online 23% check all that apply): Online 28.64% (Q31) Via email 95% Via email 96% Via email 93.43% In printed materials 13% In printed materials 9.3% In printed materials In another language 0% In Spanish <1% (English 7.51% (3.89% survey only) decrease)
In Spanish 0.0%
Via text message 19.72%
4. I receive timely Strongly Agree or Agree Strongly agree or Agree Strongly agree or information about 94% 94% Agree 89.25% (1.95% what my child is decrease) learning (e.g., Disagree or Strongly Disagree or Strongly reading, math, Disagree 4% Disagree: 6% Don’t Know 0% science, social studies) and Don’t Know 1% classroom activities (e.g. field trips, plays, class events) from my child’s teacher. (Q32)
5. I receive timely Strongly Agree or Agree Strongly agree or Agree Strongly agree or information about 79% 79% Agree 86.32% what my child is (14.52% increase) learning in specialists' Disagree or Strongly Disagree or Strongly Disagree programs (e.g. music, Disagree 16% 17% Don’t know 1.89% art, Don’t know 4% (3.51% decrease) science/technology, Don’t Know 5% motor skills, library). (Q33)
6. My child receives Strongly Agree or Agree Strongly agree or Agree Strongly agree or helpful and 74% 78% Agree 71.96% informative feedback (8.26% increase) on school work.(Q34) Disagree or Strongly Disagree or Strongly Disagree Disagree 10% 10% Don’t know 15.89% (3.81% decrease) Don’t Know 16% Don’t know 12%
7. My child receives Excellent 23% Excellent 25% Excellent or Good an appropriate 64.32% amount of engaging Good 43% Good 52% and meaningful Don’t know 12.21% homework. (Q35) Fair 18% Fair 13% (2.41% increase)
(Changed from “My Needs to Improve 13% Needs to Improve:9% child receives an appropriate amount of Don’t know 14% homework and it is
-163- 11
engaging and meaningful.”)
Comment Summary: 1-3. (Q29 - Q31) Communication from School (Timeliness, Content, Receipt Method) (45 comments) — There was a very slight decrease from the 2016 survey of parents feeling school information is communicated in a timely manner. However, comments seem to indicate that the effectiveness of school communication could be improved if it was more streamlined. Many parents seem to feel that there is too much communication and it is coming from too many sources. The weekly emails and Classroom Teacher Newsletters are the top sources of information for parents. This year’s survey broke out emails, Classroom Teacher Newsletters and websites, which were listed as a single category last year. The vast majority of parents prefer email communication followed by “in person” or online communication.
4. (Q32) Receive Timely Information from my Child’s Teacher (20 comments) — Almost all parents responded that they receive timely information from their child’s teacher; however a theme from the comments seems to questions about how can parents support learning at home with the information given.
5. (Q33) Receive timely info from specialist teachers (29 comments) — Comments vary widely, with some parents reporting that they don’t receive any information and others report only receiving updates from certain specialists. The downward trend from last year stabilized but is still well below 2015 levels.
6-7. (Q34 & Q35) Feedback on Child’s Homework and Homework (79 comments) — Parents appear to like the feedback their child’s teacher provides but are not as enthusiastic about the quality of the homework they are assigned. However, based on the comments provided (20 comments) parents do not see or get feedback on their child’s homework. Regarding homework, the comments (59 comments) were divided between parents who would like more homework, parents who want less and those who want it to be meaningful.
VII. SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT
Question 2017 Data 2016 Data 2015 Data
1. Does your child Yes 94% Yes 93% Yes 95.2% generally enjoy coming to school? No 5% No 7% No 3.38% (Q36) Don’t Know 1% Don’t Know 1.5%
2. School standards Strongly Agree or Agree Strongly agree or Agree: Strongly agree 28.2% for behavior and 91% 89% discipline are Agree 58.7% appropriate. (Q37) Disagree or Strongly Disagree or Strongly Disagree 4% Disagree: 6% Disagree 3.9%
Don’t Know 6% Don’t know: 5% Strongly disagree 2.4%
Don’t know 6.8%
(Almost 6% more answered strongly agree as compared to 2014)
-164- 12
3. The playground is Strongly Agree 17% Strongly agree 17% Strongly agree 13.5% well supervised. (Q38) Agree 41% Agree 45% Agree 47.3%
Disagree 12% Disagree 14% Disagree 11.6%
Strongly Disagree 2% Strongly Disagree 1% Strongly disagree 2.4% Don’t Know 28% Don’t know 23% Don’t know 25.1%
(6.3% more strongly agree/agree responses than in 2014)
4. How do you rate Very Satisfied 25% Very satisfied 23% very satisfied 21.6% your child’s experience on the Satisfied 59% Satisfied 62% Satisfied 61.5% playground? (2015 wording was How Dissatisfied 6% Dissatisfied 7% Dissatisfied 10.5% does your child rate his or her experience Very Dissatisfied 1% Very Dissatisfied 2% Very dissatisfied 1.9% on the playground?) (Q39) Don’t Know 7% Don’t know 4.3%
Q40 (new question) Most of the time 72% New question in 2017 New question in 2017 My child finds survey survey something engaging Some of the time 18% to do at recess and lunch recess. Rarely 1%
Never 1%
Don’t Know 8%
5. Does your child Yes 82% Yes 84% Yes 83.0% feel welcomed and included in group No 6% No 5% No 4.3% activities on the playground? (Q41) Don’t Know 13% Don’t Know 11% Don’t know 12.6%
6. Has your child Yes 13% Yes 12% Yes 7.2% reported ONGOING bullying behavior No 83% No 86% No 90.3% such as exclusion, name calling, teasing Don’t Know 4% Don’t Know 2% Don’t Know 2.4% etc? (Q42)
8. My child feels safe Strongly Agree 46% Strongly agree 43% Strongly agree 49.0% and secure (emotionally and Agree 50% Agree 54% Agree 49.0% physically) at school? (Q43) Disagree 2% Disagree 3% Disagree 0.9%
Strongly Disagree <1% Strongly Disagree <1% Strongly Disagree 0.4% r Don’t Know 1% Don’t know 0% Don’t Know 0.4%
-165- 13
Comment Summary: 1. (Q36) Does your child enjoy coming to school (33 comments) — There were more negative comments than the 94% percent may indicate, but overall most comments were positive. The main reasons given for not liking school range from exclusion/bullying to issues with teachers.
2. (Q37) School Standards for Discipline are appropriate (27 comments) — While the vast majority of responders agree discipline standards are appropriate, many comments tell another story. A common theme relates to students who are chronic classroom disruptions or bullies, and yet nothing changes the behavior — either because teachers don’t have the resources, parents aren’t following up at home, or administration isn’t addressing the behavior strongly enough.
3. (Q38) Playground is well supervised (43 comments) — Comments reflect the fact that parents do not feel there is enough adult supervision at recess. They would prefer more interaction with staff and more supervision from staff and more organized games kids can jump into. Social-emotional training for yard duty staff was an interesting suggestion.
4-6. (Q39-41) How do you rate your child’s playground experience? (48 comments); Child finds something engaging to do at recess? (22 comments); Child Included in activities? (32 comments) — While again parents are generally offering high ratings comments reflect a mixed experience. Specific complaints/comments involve children not playing fair, boys dominating balls and games, nothing to do, desire for more organized games and balls. Other issues include not enough time to eat to disagreement with movies being shown on rainy days.
7. (Q42) Ongoing Bullying Behavior (39 comments) — Parents answering yes have again been higher this year and last than they were in 2015. The vast majority of responses are positive, but it is unsettling to see the response rate stay higher than two years prior. It may be worth reviewing comments individually to discuss as group.
8. (Q43) Child feels safe and secure at school (13 comments): While the overwhelming majority agree, those that don’t cite in their comments bullying or unfriendly behavior or lack of support from teachers.
VIII. OVERALL SATISFACTION
Question 2017 Response 2016 Response 2015 Response
How satisfied are Very Satisfied 43% Very satisfied 51% New question added in you with your child’s 2016 overall school Satisfied 49% Satisfied:42% experience? (Q44) Dissatisfied 7% Dissatisfied 6%
Very Dissatisfied 0% Very Dissatisfied <1%
Don’t Know 1% Don’t Know <1%
Comment Summary: 1. (Q44) Overall Satisfaction with school? Comment Summary (59 comments) — Overall, the majority of parents expressed satisfaction with their child’s school experience and there are a good number of comments that address specifics such as wonderful teachers, positive community and environment and happy children. A significant
-166- 14
number of parents comment that academics could/should be more rigorous. Review of comments as a group might be helpful.
-167- Hall Middle School Site Council Survey Results 2016/17
Hall School Site Council consists of three elected parent officers, three student representatives, two Hall staff members (one teacher, one Classified) and Principal. For the first time we implemented a 1st Trimester survey to assess the success of our efforts over the summer and fall of 2016 to address concerns over school climate and student conduct.
Key highlights from the fall T1 surveys: Rating 7, 8, 9 or 10 out of 10 Question Parent Rating Student Rating (257 responses) (364 responses)
The Top Student Conduct Expectations Document is clear and 87.2% 76.4% effective.
I/My child feel(s) physically safe at Hall. 89.8% 86.8%
I/My child feel(s) emotionally safe at Hall. 84.4% 70.4%
At least one meaningful connection with an adult at school. 72% 70%
School policies and standards of behavior are effectively 70.1% (51.8% in 61.8% (53.8% in enforced. spring 2016) spring 2016)
In administering the spring survey, we sought qualitative feedback on SPSA goals 2 (Engaging curriculum), 3 (Absences due to stress/anxiety), 4 (Student Voice) and 5 (Bullying/safety). Additionally, we sought feedback for LCAP goals pertaining to teachers meeting individual learning needs of students. Highlights from student survey (380 responses: 73% of student body):
Question Percent positive response
My teachers meet my individual learning needs (LCAP goal) 77.5%
I feel safe at school in terms of emergency preparedness: 77%
Teachers and other staff treat me with respect and dignity: 84%
Students at this school respect other students: 52.2%
I know how to get help if I am having social/emotional problems: 83.4%
I feel my voice about issues at Hall is heard: 44% (29% in 15/16)
I have had an ongoing experience of bullying behavior such as: 78% no - 22% yes. chronic exclusion, name-calling, teasing, mean behaviors, physical aggression, cyberbullying, or similar:
● 76.2% never ● 10.6% occasionally for a period ● 7.4% once for a day
-168- I have missed class because I feel anxious, sad, hopeless, angry ● 2.9% 2-5 days or stressed: ● 2.9% more than 5 days
Parent Survey Question Percent positive response
The school policies and standards of behavior are effectively 77% communicated and enforced. (51.8% in 15/16)
I believe my child knows how to get help at school when feeling 63.1% very stressed or anxious:
My child's teachers effectively meet my child's individual learning 74.2% needs (LCAP goal)
Overall, I am satisfied with the academic program at Hall Middle 70.5% School (63.3% in 15/16)
My child has had an ongoing experience of bullying behavior such as: chronic exclusion, name-calling, teasing, mean behaviors, 79.3% no - 20.7% yes physical aggression, cyberbullying, or similar:
● 71% never ● 8.8 % occasionally for My child has missed class due to feeling anxious, sad, hopeless, a period angry or stressed: ● 11.5% once for a day ● 5.5% 2-5 days ● 3.2% more than 5 days
“The curriculum at Hall is stimulating and engaging in:” Department % positive parent response % positive student response
Language Arts 88% 82%
Social Studies 86% 81%
Math 57% 54%
Science 76% 75%
Physical Education 84% 78%
Art/Music/Technology 92% 87%
Spanish 89% 76%
Overall rating 82% 76%
SPSA Goal 2: 75% of parents will indicate that their students participate in a stimulating and engaging curriculum in classes that are conducive to learning. Goal met.
-169-
SPSA Goal 3: 9% of 7th graders on last year’s CHKS indicated they had missed school due to angry, sad, anxious, stressed feelings; our goal was to see that reduce to 7%. We see 7.4% self-report as having missed only one day and 5.8% missing more than two days. Parents report higher numbers. We are encouraged to see under 9% reporting multiple days missed due to stress/anxiety, however we need to do more outreach to understand how to better support parents and students more prone to suffer from cycles of absence. Goal not fully met.
SPSA Goal 4: The percentage of 6-8 grade students reporting that their voice is heard regarding school issues will increase from 29% to 50%. 44% represents a 15% increase from previous year. This falls short of our goal of 50% however it is the second highest percentage over the last five school years. This will continue to be a SPSA goal. Goal not fully met.
Homework While homework did not represent a specific SPSA goal, we have worked very hard to align practices with our new Homework Statement of Purpose to ensure it enhances learning and allows students to live a balanced life. A brief summary of results from the spring survey:
● A strong majority of parents believes their children’s homework enhances their learning. ● A very strong majority of parents believes the amount of homework their children have is “about right” in every discipline (80% in Language Arts, 77% in Social Studies, 67% in Math, 67% in Science). ● A majority of students believes homework enhances their learning in every subject with the exception of PE. ● A strong majority of students believes the amount of homework in every discipline is “about right” with the exception of Math (55% report “too much”).
These results are strong indicators of a staff committed to giving meaningful and appropriate learning tasks beyond the school day. Parent concern about homework has been a significant theme in the work of SSC in recent years, and we see this improving. We are still concerned with questions of equity (not all students have access to the same support at home) and hours spent on school tasks. Grade level teams are working more closely to coordinate projects and assessments, and teachers are more frequently communicating homework tasks for the whole week to allow students opportunities to more effectively time manage. This examination will continue into 2017/18 to ensure equitable practices and a continued focus on student life balance and wellbeing.
Report submitted by Eric Saibel, Principal
-170-
Single Plan for Student Achievement
The Cove School
Larkspur-Corte Madera School District
County-District School (CDS) Code: 21-65367-6024376
-171-
Part II: The Single Plan for Student Achievement
School: The Cove School
District: Larkspur-Corte Madera School District
County-District School (CDS) Code: 21-65367-6024376
Principal: Michelle Walker
Date of this revision: May 15, 2017
The Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is a plan of actions to raise the academic performance of all students. California Education Code sections 41507, 41572, and 64001 and the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) require each school to consolidate all school plans for programs funded through the ConApp and ESEA Program Improvement into the SPSA.
For additional information on school programs and how you may become involved locally, please contact the following person:
Contact Person: Michelle Walker
Position: Principal
Telephone Number: 415-945-9046
Address: 330 Golden Hind Passage, Corte Madera, CA 94925
E-mail Address: [email protected]
The District Governing Board approved this revision of the SPSA on ______.
-172-
Table of Contents
II. Single Plan for Student Achievement
District Vision and Mission
School Vision and Mission
District/School LCAP Coordination
Planned Improvements in Student Performance (Goals #1-6)
Programs Included in This Plan
School Site Council Membership
Recommendations and Assurances
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement iii California Department of Education, February 2014 -173-
Several acronyms are used throughout this document:
LCMSD= Larkspur-Corte Madera School District
LEA= Local Education Agency
LCAP= Local Control Accountability Plan
LCFF= Local Control Funding Formula
CAASPP= California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress
ELA= English Language Arts
EL= English Learners
SED= Socio-Economic Disadvantaged
SPED= Special Education
PBL= Project-Based Learning
SIOP= Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol
PD= Professional Development
NGSS= New Generation Science Standards
CCSS= Common Core State Standards
CIP= Continuous Improvement Process
GF= General Fund
GLAD= Guided Language Acquisition Design
SRI= Scholastic Reading Inventory
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement iii California Department of Education, February 2014 -174-
Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Strategic Plan for 2017-19
District Mission/Vision
The Larkspur-Corte Madera School District is a dynamic learning community committed to educational excellence, equity, and inclusion. We inspire members to think critically, act creatively, work collaboratively, and communicate effectively. We strive to be engaged citizens, contributing positively to our local and global communities
Student Outcomes We believe that in order for our students to be successful in college and careers, all learners must demonstrate the 21st Century skills necessary for this success. Learners will:
· Be Effective Communicators · Be Critical Thinkers and Problem Solvers · Use Curiosity and Imagination · Use Creativity to Express and Explore Learning · Collaborate with Others in Learning and Leading · Be Flexible and Resilient · Demonstrate Initiative and Entrepreneurialism · Innovate
District Strategic Priorities Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of all community members.
Inspire academic growth and civic responsibility through a rigorous, inquiry-based curriculum that is engaging and personalized.
Attract, cultivate, and retain innovative, inspirational educators.
Sustain the fiscal integrity and stability of the district.
Facilitate collaborative partnerships between students, families, schools, and community.
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement iii California Department of Education, February 2014 -175-
District Core Values and Concepts Promoting Visionary & Collaborative Leadership
Our learning leaders model, set direction, and maintain a focus on students and positive learning climates, clear and visible values, and high expectations for all members of our learning community. Our leaders inspire and motivate teams, involve and communicate with our community, and collaborate and form key relationships.
Student-Centered Education In order to ensure that our students meet their highest potential, we provide a comprehensive, inquiry- and standards-based differentiated curriculum, and opportunities for every student to be successful, involved, and engaged in collaborative learning with peers and teachers. We believe ongoing assessment of student learning informs our instructional practices.
Organizational and Personal Learning We promote strategic thinking, innovation, flexibility, and agility in response to changing requirements. We invest in personal learning for all through focused professional development, peer-to-peer learning, and opportunities for reflection across the learning community.
Valuing Faculty, Staff, and Partners Our success depends on valuing the diversity of our faculty, staff, parents, and community members. Their varied backgrounds, skills and knowledge, along with their creativity, dedication, and motivation, contribute to a more enriching educational environment.
Citizenship We model good citizenship, ethical behavior, and sensitivity to others, and promote each individual’s success as members of a local community and global society. We value diversity in our students and believe it enriches our inclusive educational program.
Focus on Process, Progress, and Results We use a variety of measures and data to assess continuous improvement in academic and social/emotional goals, develop short and long term strategic priorities, and manage our resources effectively and efficiently.
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement iii California Department of Education, February 2014 -176-
The Cove School Mission
The Cove School is a community of active learners who inquire, think critically, collaborate, explore and create. By encouraging and supporting individuals to take risks, play and pursue passions, we foster intrinsic motivation to learn and discover the world around us. We learn through a multidisciplinary approach, and utilize facilities and technologies that support this vision. Achievements of all are individually and collectively recognized and celebrated.
The Cove School Guiding Principles
Critical Thinking through Experiential Learning We believe in... · Active, hands-on learning that promotes play, passion and purpose · Relevant, contextualized, integrated curriculum · Generating and exploring questions around real-world challenges · Utilizing a variety of tools in physical and virtual environments · Collaboration among students and adults · Self-directed learning that continues beyond the classroom and school day · Teachers as learning leaders who have ongoing, quality training and ample support
Social and Emotional Development In order to cultivate intrinsic motivation and personal growth, we... · Create safe, inclusive environments that celebrate differences · Embody empathy, kindness and compassion · Are flexible, self-reflective and dynamic · Communicate clearly, respectfully and openly
Creativity As a result of critical thinking, experiential learning and an emotionally safe environment, we… · Experience and embrace the risk taking necessary to build resilience and problem-solving skills · Engage in both conventional and messy paths for learning · Innovate by investigating, integrating and applying learning in order to generate original ideas · Move beyond our first thought by expanding, critiquing and refining ideas to maximize creative efforts · Demonstrate learning and thinking in a variety of ways
Community In order to foster interconnectedness and trust, as a community, we… · Connect locally and globally to enhance our thinking · Grow partnerships between our school and the local community and within our school district · Collectively contribute to decisions and collaboratively uphold our agreements · Nourish lasting relationships that extend beyond the classroom and over time · Support and create lifelong learners
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement iii California Department of Education, February 2014 -177-
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP)
As part of the California funding formula for schools, known as the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), school districts, county offices of education and charter schools are required to develop, adopt, and annually update a three-year Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP). The LCAP is required to identify annual goals, specific actions geared toward implementing those goals, and must measure progress for student subgroups across multiple performance indicators based on eight priorities set by the State. The priorities must be aligned to the district’s spending plan. The LCAP must be approved before the annual district budget can be adopted. Once the budget and LCAP are adopted at the local level, the plan is reviewed by the County superintendent to ensure alignment of projected spending toward goals and services.
A requirement in the development of the LCAP is to solicit input from parents, teachers, students, local bargaining units, staff and other community members in regard to which goals they think will be most effective for implementation in our schools toward reaching state priorities. Toward this end the District has compiled a needs assessment and satisfaction survey. We annually invite our stakeholders to complete this survey as an important part of our plan development process. Once results of the survey are gathered and consolidated, they are used by the District’s LCAP Advisory Committee to update its LCAP each year in June.
As noted above, there are eight state priority areas for which school districts, with parent and community input, must establish goals and actions:
1. Providing all students access to fully credentialed teachers, instructional materials that align with state standards, and safe facilities. 2. Implementation of California’s academic standards, including the Common Core State Standards in English language arts and math, Next Generation Science Standards, English language development, history/social science, visual and performing arts, health education and physical education standards. 3. Parent involvement and participation, so the local community is engaged in the decision- making process and the educational programs of students. 4. Improving student achievement and outcomes along multiple measures, including test scores, English proficiency and college and career preparedness. 5. Supporting student engagement, including whether students attend school or are chronically absent. 6. Highlighting school climate and connectedness through a variety of factors, such as suspension and expulsion rates and other locally identified means. 7. Ensuring all students have access to classes that prepare them for college and careers, regardless of what school they attend or where they live. 8. Measuring other important student outcomes related to required areas of study, including physical education and the arts.
In addition to these eight areas, a district may also identify and incorporate in its plan goals related to its own local priorities. LCMSD has aligned its five strategic priorities with the eight state priorities. For more information please contact the District Office at 415-927-6960 x5 or email [email protected]
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement iii California Department of Education, February 2014 -178-
Form A: Planned Improvements in Student Performance
The School Site Council has analyzed the academic performance of all student groups and has considered the effectiveness of key elements of the instructional program for students failing to meet academic performance index and adequate yearly progress growth targets. As a result, it has adopted the following school goals, related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of students not yet meeting state standards:
LEA GOAL/Strategic Priority: Inspire students to reach their highest potential through an inquiry-based curriculum that adapts continuously to address individual needs, encourage critical thinking and cultivate collaborative, life-long learners. Continuous improvement in student achievement in English Language Arts and Mathematics.
SCHOOL GOAL #1: Math and ELA Proficiency By June of 2018, 83% of all Cove students will reach grade level proficiency in ELA and math according to multiple measures including Common Core state assessments, district benchmark assessments, classroom assessments and digital portfolios.
What data did you use to form this What were the findings from the analysis How will the school evaluate the goal? of this data? progress of this goal? *
State Assessments - CAASP English CAASP Results: School Site Council and teachers will Language Arts and Math (Spring 2017) Gr 3 Math ___% proficient/advanced regularly evaluate data to ensure we are Gr 4 Math ___% proficient/advanced making expected progress toward Gr 5 Math ___% proficient/advanced targeted proficiency levels: · State assessments (annually) Gr 3 ELA ___% proficient/advanced · District benchmark assessments Gr 4 ELA ___% proficient/advanced (each trimester) Gr 5 ELA ___% proficient/advanced · Classroom assessments (ongoing) · Digital Portfolios · Student progress reports in January and June
District Benchmark Assessments Scholastic Reading Inventory- In spring of Scholastic Reading and Front Row Math 2017, ______of the 300 (grade 2-5) (Spring 2016 ) students assessed were proficient or advanced on the ELA SRI.
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 1 California Department of Education, February 2014 -179-
Front Row Math- Writing- In spring of 2017, _____% of all students were proficient or advanced on the end of year benchmark (Lucy Calkins) writing proficiency rubric.
School / Classroom Assesments F and P Reading Assessment- In Spring of Fountas and Pinnell Reading Assessment 2017, ____% of students reached grade Scores (June 2017) level proficiency.
Classroom assessments 2016-17 school year
Student progress reports covering academics, SEL, and learner traits (including creativity)
STRATEGY: Support each child in reaching grade-level proficiency through regular progress monitoring, differentiated support, and increasing rigor in inquiry-oriented activities. Build systems to make student progress data more transparent and usable for all stakeholders. Invest time to continuously develop teachers’ instructional practices.
Person(s) Cost and Funding Source Action/Date Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source) Provide ongoing Professional Development in District TOSA/ Coach Continue to refine and Principal specific signature practices: improve differentiated Lead Team Workshop model instruction, Professional development: instruction and Teachers Guided reading, PTO, PD Funding, SPARK personalized learning Reading Specialist Math- Newly adopted TERC program PD funds Project Based Learning · TERC math training
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 2 California Department of Education, February 2014 -180-
Planning help from integration coaches (TOSA), · Eileen Smith Math Grade level planning days practices PD · Lucy Calkins Writing GLAD training for teachers who have not yet been follow up training trained · NGSS Summer PD
Continue to develop teacher use of (and systems Instructional Technology for selecting, purchasing and monitoring use of) Licenses in various blended learning/technology integration resources programs (Site including: Lexia, Aleks Math, Reading Eggs, Math Discretionary) Seeds, Storia, Reading A-Z, Lexia, and NewsELA
TERC Math training for all teachers (August and September 2017)
Improve in use of Principal multiple ways of Lead Team assessing student Teachers proficiency Reading Specialist Increase use of digital portfolios
Teacher use of rubrics for soft skills progress
tracking (resource Ed Leader 21 resources)
Measurement Complete Principal Continue to refine process for sharing progress .6 FTE Reading specialist; monthly reviews of Classroom Teachers with parents. Progress reports, rubrics/ funding source: Title I/ student progress, Reading Specialist assessment artifacts, digital portfolios and learning General Fund (GF) $69,000 including frequent Ed Specialists management system. progress monitoring of all District students who are below proficient, three
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 3 California Department of Education, February 2014 -181- benchmark assessments Continue to refine system for tracking EL progress per year and offer in- and non-proficient student progress on a regular classroom intervention to basis and intervening. support student growth. Site Council to develop RtI system to $2000 School license for Identify all students who Reading Eggs; funding are not proficient and source Title I continue expanded Teachers collect classroom data and use that data $4000 for NewsELA; GF learning intervention to inform instruction on an ongoing basis. $1,800 for Storia; GF program. Specifically Reading A-Z; GF focus on expanding Administer three benchmark assessments per year Lexia (GF- district) morning math and use common assessment data to inform Aleks (GF- district) intervention program. instructional decision-making.
Procure appropriate grade level licenses for Front $9720 for instructor ($45/hr Row, Reading Eggs, Math Seeds, Storia, Reading for 2 hours/ week x 6 grade A-Z, Lexia, and NewsELA levels x 3 six-week sessions) Determine assessment/rubrics to measure 21st Century skills and PBL (2016-7)
Extended learning opportunities before and after school for students who are not proficient, specifically in math
LEA GOAL/Strategic Priority: Inspire students to reach their highest potential through an inquiry-based curriculum that adapts continuously to address individual needs, encourage critical thinking and cultivate collaborative, life-long learners. Continuous improvement in student achievement in English Language Arts and Mathematics.
SCHOOL GOAL #2: Student Academic Growth By June of 2018, 90% of the Cove students will demonstrate a minimum of one full year of growth in ELA and math as measured by the differential in spring 2017 results and spring of 2018 results. AND
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 4 California Department of Education, February 2014 -182-
90% of parents report that the curriculum and instruction is stimulating, engaging and meets the individual needs of students.
What data did you use to form this What were the findings from the analysis How will the school evaluate the goal? of this data? progress of this goal?
We will use the same measurements as in See all above data sources from Goal #1 See all above data findings from Goal #1 Goal #1, however, we will look at the data differently to determine if students have AND made at least 1 year’s growth.
Parent Survey Data from Spring, 2017 84% of parents responded with a score of 7- 10: The Curriculum is stimulating and engaging. (On a scale of 1-10, please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements (10 is strongest agreement))
80% of parents responded with a score of 7- 10: My child’s individual learning needs are met. (On a scale of 1-10, please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements (10 is strongest agreement))
STRATEGY: Support each child in reaching grade-level proficiency through regular progress monitoring, differentiated support, and increasing rigor in inquiry-oriented activities. Build systems to make student progress data more transparent and usable for all stakeholders. Invest time to continuously develop teachers’ instructional practices.
Cost and Funding Source Person(s) Responsible Task/Date Action/Date (Itemize for Each Source)
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 5 California Department of Education, February 2014 -183-
Same as Goal #1 Same as Goal #1 Same as Goal #1 Same as Goal #1
AND
Ensuring growth for Administration, Clustering, differentiation, Individual learning plans, students who are already teachers tinker time, project based learning meeting proficiency through various strategies
LEA GOAL/Strategic Priority: Inspire students to reach their highest potential through an inquiry-based curriculum that adapts continuously to address individual needs, encourage critical thinking and cultivate collaborative, life-long learners. Continuous improvement in student achievement in English Language Arts and Mathematics.
SCHOOL GOAL #3: English Learners 60% of English learners will demonstrate proficiency according to multiple measures including Common Core state assessments, district benchmark assessments, classroom assessments and digital portfolios. AND 100% of English Learners will demonstrate at least 1 year’s growth in their English language acquisition and in their academic proficiency as measured by the multiple measures listed above.
What data did you use to form this What were the findings from the analysis of this How will the school evaluate the goal? data? progress of this goal?
Same as Goal #1 Same as Goal #1 Same as Goal #1
AND:
Cove ELL data tracking spreadsheet As of May 2017, Cove currently has 35 EL students Comparison of student CELDT scores (Cove had 28 in fall 2016 and 19 students in 2015- from fall 2016 and fall 2017 Measured language acquisition by 16) from a variety of backgrounds and at a variety of ELD standards-based reporting rubric levels of English acquisition. New EL assessment scores (CA will be using a new measure in fall of CELDT assessment data (Fall 2016) There continues to be a large gap between 2017) proficiency of EL students and proficiency of non-EL students.
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 6 California Department of Education, February 2014 -184-
Spring Fountas and Pinnell Reading Assessment scores for students (for Some GLAD strategies are apparent in classrooms, students who are not proficient) and some strategies need to be implemented more visibly (Total Physical Response, Gradual release of SRI scores responsibility, Tier 2 vocabulary instruction, etc).
STRATEGY: Continue to develop classroom teacher skills in teaching English learners as well as evaluate all components of our EL program (support through small group instruction with an EL teacher, after school expanded learning program, English language development curriculum, etc). Implement use of specific measurement tools to ensure measurement of English acquisition in addition to academic proficiency.
Person(s) Cost and Funding Source Action/Date Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source) Increase EL Family Principal Hold ELPs (English Learner Plan meetings) to create Counselor Case Involvement Counselor comprehensive plans for student intervention and Management (.2 FTE) Teachers progress monitoring and to involve families in their $20,000 ELAC learning.
Track family attendance at conferences and reach out to those who do not attend to ensure that they come for a conference.
Ensure that all families have internet access through our outreach program (which provides devices and internet access as needed).
Continue regular ELAC meetings to increase EL family EL Summer Scholarships engagement and student progress (LCFF Supplemental) · Annual San Clemente Family Picnic $6000 · Scholarship Support for Camp and summer academic intervention · Ongoing support from mentor staff members and other partner families who help with translation, school communications, etc.
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 7 California Department of Education, February 2014 -185-
Continue to keep EL All teachers Cluster ELL and provide ELD support in a variety of student progress at the Lead Team ways (via general education teachers, EL support forefront of our work- Reading/EL teacher, after school expanded learning, parent Lead Team and staff Specialist education and partnership) meeting focus topic. Administration TOSA Coach More fully implement Aleks math intervention online curriculum for students who are below grade level in grades 3-5.
Trained staff members share academic conversations and discourse training with other teachers in staff meeting context
Increase GLAD strategies used to deliver rigorous instruction in line with Common Core Standards
Continue to refine and All teachers Analyze progress data to identify EL students needing ELD Curriculum (Lottery/ improve EL interventions Lead Team reading and math intervention. GF) $5000 and supports Reading/EL Specialist Monitor reading intervention program designed to meet Administration individual needs of ELs; Purchase ELD curriculum TOSA Coach
Purchase and implement a tool for EL English acquisition progress tracking.
Track progress data carefully- Counselor to continue case management support
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 8 California Department of Education, February 2014 -186-
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 9 California Department of Education, February 2014 -187-
Form A: Non-Academic Goals
LEA GOAL/Strategic Priority: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments that promote social, emotional, and intellectual growth.
SCHOOL GOAL #4: Social and Emotional Growth Integrate social and emotional development throughout the Cove Curriculum to increase students’ self-regulation, independent work skills, group work skills, risk-taking, ability to persevere on difficult tasks and readiness for college and careers.
What data did you use to form this What were the findings from the How will the school evaluate the progress of this goal? analysis of this data? goal?
Healthy Kids Survey Data 5th graders show strong SEL skills Ongoing tracking of improvements to Healthy Kid (80+ % display each desired skill) Survey results according to statewide survey results
Results from Student Survey, Spring Students, parents and teachers value Student survey results as well as their own self- 2017 SEL skills and the time spent teaching evaluations in qualitative self-reflections as well as them on rubrics measuring SEL skills.
Results from Parent Voices 90% of parents were satisfied with Questionnaires (2017) their child’s social and emotional Ongoing Teacher and counselor observations and growth in the Spring 2017 Parent regular student progress reports Voices Questionnaires
Parents value the SEL component of the Cove Progress Reports
Results from Teacher Survey, Spring Teachers want more support and 2016 professional development in implement certain components of Classroom Observations SEL; All feel confident with implementing parts of SEL in their classroom
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 10 California Department of Education, February 2014 -188-
Need to develop campus support’s confidence in our approach to positive discipline.
STRATEGY: Ensure implementation of practices to promote student social and emotional growth with regard to self-regulation, independent work skills, group work skills, risk-taking and ability to persevere on difficult tasks.
Person(s) Cost and Funding Source Action/Date Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source) Establish TK-5th grade Lead Team Include all skills in guiding principles and digital continuum of SEL tools Counselor citizenship. and skills Principal
Teacher professional Lead Team, Teachers Toolbox program components training in Counselor (GF) $50,000 development in SEL Counselor September 2017 practices Principal SEL Materials and PD Digital Citizenship monthly lessons, parent (SPARK Fund A Need) $7,500 education night, Cove Connection communication TOSA- technology integration to parents, teacher professional development in staff meetings
Mindfulness practices regularly shared at staff meetings
Responsive Classroom components training in staff meetings (Effective Management component is focus for 2017-18 school year) and RC training for teachers
Review of/ continued use of Accountable Communication Technology (ACT) tools for staff climate/ culture
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 11 California Department of Education, February 2014 -189-
Teacher training and campus support training in conflict management protocols
Monitor implementation of Principal Survey teachers regarding current practices practices in classrooms and the school Weekly all-school assemblies to build community and reinforce positive decisions; Include school wide gestures for common vocabulary words we want all students to know and use
Use of rubrics to measure growth in collaboration, reflection, perseverance
Daily mindfulness
Kimochis- implemented K-1 with help of counselor
Toolbox curriculum
Digital Citizenship Curriculum
Promote student Principal Safety Patrol, Helping on kindergarten playground, leadership opportunities Teachers Green Team, No Bully Club, CIM clean up crew, Counselor etc.
Parent Education Counselor Publish an overview of Cove’s SEL approach Principal Teachers Publish article on Digital Citizenship, plan parent PTO ed on digital citizenship
Coffee chats with parents to share details of programs and philosophical approach
Ongoing parent education hosted by PTO
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 12 California Department of Education, February 2014 -190-
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 13 California Department of Education, February 2014 -191-
LEA GOAL/Strategic Priority: Communicate effectively and consistently through open, accessible methods, in order to facilitate collaborative partnerships among classroom, home, school, district and community.
SCHOOL GOAL #5: Community Mobilize the greater Cove Community to support the Cove’s Guiding Principles – Critical Thinking through Experiential Learning, Social and Emotional Development, Creativity and Community- and build partnerships to provide student experiences that blur the lines between school and community.
What data did you use to form this What were the findings from the analysis How will the school evaluate the goal? of this data? progress of this goal?
Results from Parent Voices In April 2017, 86% of surveyed Cove Utilize regular surveys and informal Questionnaires (2015-16) Parents are aware that we have 4 Guiding feedback to understand the perspective & Principles, 14% were unaware. (increase contributions of the Cove Community. Results from Teacher and Student from 81% aware in 2016) - Student Survey 1x/year Surveys, May 2017(TBD) - Teacher Survey 1x/year 70% could explain experiential learning, - Parent Surveys 2x/year 67% could explain Social Emotional Growth - Ongoing informal feedback and 69% could explain Creativity to a friend. Feedback after New Family Orientation Parents value frequent, clear planned for August 2017. communication from administration and classroom teachers.
There is a need for simple, visual tools to promote broader understanding and strengthen collaboration with PTO, SPARK.
Working parents would like to garner a
better understanding of ways they can contribute outside of classroom hours.
There is a high level of volunteerism and a very strong sense of community at the
Cove. 89% of parent respondents said an
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 14 California Department of Education, February 2014 -192-
adult from their family had volunteered this year. (down from 93% in 2016)
WILL ADD June 2017 Teacher and Student Survey data findings when Available. Current data on level of partnerships with Increased number of and depth of local organizations. partnerships (centered around furthering We have established more relationships our Guiding Principles) with local with local organizations (various organizations. organizations helped with our tinkering and making, field studies, and our progress report research).
We still desire a deepened relationship with organizations such that we blur the lines between school and community and students are learning in the field more and more.
STRATEGY: Establish creative, interactive communication channels for key stakeholders (parent, teachers, students, community, administration) to connect, encourage and celebrate the contributions of the greater Cove Community.
Action/Date Person(s) Task/Date Cost and Funding Source Responsible (Itemize for Each Source) Continue to educate Principal Proactively raise parents’ awareness of Guiding about our Guiding Teachers Principles and Signature Practices through Principles School Site Council - Welcome Event (magnets, comments) - New Family Orientation. - Back to School Night (principal presentation & video) - Open House format - New Teacher and staff training - Cove Connection Articles - Website format
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 15 California Department of Education, February 2014 -193-
Proactively reach out to IJ to get their help in publicizing/explaining Cove Guiding Principles in the context of our many events
Broader Community Education for potential partner organizations to better understand the Cove’s Guiding Principles
Form a committee with the purpose of making our Guiding Principles visible through artifacts, messaging and art on campus. Share the campus installations with the community to make our values visible.
Update current Cove School video with current pictures.
Create a new video to capture teacher and student voices around collaborative teaching and to give some visuals to those who are unfamiliar with it.
Communicate: Principal Regular Parent, teacher and student surveys: Continue formal & Teachers Administer, process results and publish synthesis informal 2-way School Site Council of data to inform continued focus areas for goals. communication with key PTO stakeholder groups. Parent Education on Cove Academics and Assessments- including how we track growth in “soft skills.”
Establish Partnerships Principal Create a plan to strategically reach out to those we with local organizations Teachers wish to partner with and present them with a variety of ways this could look. (Develop an and working parents School Site Council PTO integrated piece – whether video, or paper or both- with voices of our community and pictures.)
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 16 California Department of Education, February 2014 -194-
Host annual Tinker/Maker Faire and include/ invite Tinker/ Maker Faire Vendor broader community. and Supplies (SPARK Fund A Need) $7,500
Continue the work we started in 2016-17 to collaborate with existing organizations such as the PTO and SPARK that take a leadership role in the community. Include SPARK, PTO and SSC reps in each of the other organizations (eg SPARK rep on SSC, etc).
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 17 California Department of Education, February 2014 -195-
LEA GOAL/Strategic Priority: Inspire students to reach their highest potential through an inquiry-based curriculum that adapts continuously to address individual needs, encourage critical thinking and cultivate collaborative, life-long learners.
SCHOOL GOAL #6: Innovation Embody a culture of innovation across the organization to drive continued success and improvement through a disciplined use of data, and student, teacher, and parent feedback.
What data did you use What were the findings from the analysis of this How will the school evaluate the progress of to form this goal? data? this goal?
Parent Survey input from “….The Cove is not afraid to try new things; read research; Data (formative and summative, qualitative and 2014-2017 and lead the charge in education reform. It’s awesome!” quantitative) with the intention of continual iteration (Cove Parent) becomes part of school culture.
Frequent 2-way communication among and within Evidence/ artifacts from each key annual initiative stakeholder groups is a prerequisite for success. (eg progress report samples from 2015-16 school year) Culture of Innovation and risk-taking is established at Cove. Maintaining established frameworks while Parent feedback on their understanding of focusing on key annual initiative has been an effective innovative practices that we undertake. approach - 2014-15: Cove Culture Communication about ongoing Cove innovations - 2015-16 : Student Progress Reports through Cove Connection, District Board Meetings - 2016-17 : Systems to make Student Progress and other channels. more transparent and usable. Research: - 2017-18 Continue 2016-17 goal
Growth Mindset (Dweck)
Effective personalization instructional models – Creating comprehensive systems (instructional, need for transparency technology, communication) is a multi-year and accessibility of data undertaking. The systems must address the needs of teachers, parents, students and administrators, work
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 18 California Department of Education, February 2014 -196-
Overcoming the Barriers with the district infrastructure, and meet state and to Educational Innovation federal academic and privacy (FERPA) guidelines. by Kieran Kirkland and Dan Sutch in FutureLab Archive. September 2009
Research & Ideas from Summit is using technology as a powerful tool to Summit Public Schools increase transparency of student goals and progress about utilizing data to for students, teachers and parents. drive positive innovations.
STRATEGY: Follow a Build, Measure, Learn approach. We will rigorously and regularly explore data, identify problems and challenges, develop and implement solutions and then check back with the data, ensuring that we are constantly improving what we do. (from Summit Public Schools)
Person(s) Cost and Funding Source Action/Date Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source) Reinforce Culture of Site Council Professional Development Innovation by regularly Lead Team Provide teacher professional development on Funding: PTO and GF showcasing innovations & Teachers effective, innovative instructional practices. process by which they Administration were achieved. MW to continue membership with Ed Leader 21
Increase use of driving questions in lessons/units to deepen our inquiry-based approach, and improve student perseverance with complex problems Arts Integration Coaching Increase arts integration to deepen understanding (Schools Rule) TBD of the concepts. (1/2015-6/2016)
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 19 California Department of Education, February 2014 -197-
Increase blended learning (an educational Technology Programs innovative practice that allows students to learn at (including NewsELA, Storia, their own individual level and receive immediate Reading Eggs, Math Seeds, feedback) Front Row Ed) for blended learning (See Above in Goal Establish baseline of #1) current technology infrastructure at The Learning Management Cove School as well as System (to be determined) what is provided through the Larkspur-Corte Madera School District.
Set up sustainable infrastructure to facilitate long-term success of Cove Site Council in advancing positive innovation.
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 20 California Department of Education, February 2014 -198-
Programs Included in this Plan
Check the box for each state and federal program in which the school participates. Enter the amounts allocated for each program in which the school participates and, if applicable, check the box indicating that the program’s funds are being consolidated as part of operating a schoolwide program (SWP). The plan must describe the activities to be conducted at the school for each of the state and federal programs in which the school participates. The totals on these pages should match the cost estimates in Form A and the school’s allocation from the ConApp.
Note: For many of the funding sources listed below, school districts may be exercising Categorical Program Provisions options (flexibility), which are described at http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/co/ca12sguiappcatprog.asp.
Of the four following options, please select the one that describes this school site:
This site operates as a targeted assistance school (TAS), not as a schoolwide program (SWP).
This site operates a SWP but does not consolidate its funds as part of operating a SWP.
This site operates a SWP and consolidates only applicable federal funds as part of operating a SWP.
This site operates a SWP and consolidates all applicable funds as part of operating a SWP.
Consolidated State Programs Allocation in the SWP Not Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) – Base Grant allocated to Purpose: To provide flexibility in the use of state and local funds by LEAs and schools individual sites LCFF – Supplemental Grant Not Purpose: To provide a supplemental grant equal to 20 allocated to
percent of the adjusted LCFF base grant for targeted individual disadvantaged students sites Total amount of state categorical funds allocated to this school $0 Consolidated Federal Programs Allocation in the SWP Title I, Part A: Allocation Purpose: To improve basic programs operated by local $ 34,278 educational agencies (LEAs)
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 21 California Department of Education, February 2014 -199-
Title I, Part A: Parental Involvement (if applicable under Section 1118[a][3][c] of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) Purpose: Ensure that parents have information they need to make well-informed choices for their children, more effectively $500 share responsibility with their children’s schools, and help schools develop effective and successful academic programs (this is a reservation from the total Title I, Part A allocation).
For Program Improvement Schools only: Title I, Part A Program Improvement (PI) Professional Development (10 percent N/A minimum reservation from the Title I, Part A reservation for schools in PI Year 1 and 2)
Not Title II, Part A: Improving Teacher Quality allocated to Purpose: Improve and increase the number of highly qualified teachers and principals individual sites Title III, Part A: Language Instruction for Limited- Not Title III funds English-Proficient (LEP) Students allocated to may not be Purpose: Supplement language instruction to help LEP consolidated as students attain English proficiency and meet academic individual part of a SWP1 performance standards sites
Total amount of federal categorical funds allocated to this school $9878
Total amount of state and federal categorical funds allocated to $9878 this school
Note: Other Title I-supported activities that are not shown on this page may be included in the SPSA Action Plan.
1 Title III funds are not a school level allocation even if allocated by the district to a school site. The LEA is responsible for fiscal reporting and monitoring and cannot delegate their authority to a site at which the program is being implemented. If Title III funds are spent at a school site, they must be used for the purposes of Title III and only for those students the LEA has identified for services. For more information please contact the Language Policy and Leadership Office at 916-319-0845.
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 22 California Department of Education, February 2014 -200-
Form D: School Site Council Membership
California Education Code describes the required composition of the School Site Council (SSC). The SSC shall be composed of the principal and representatives of: teachers selected by teachers at the school; other school personnel selected by other school personnel at the school; parents of pupils attending the school selected by such parents; and, in secondary schools, pupils selected by pupils attending the school.2 The current make-up of the SSC is as follows:
Names of Members Staff Student Teacher Member Principal Parent or Classroom Secondary Community Other School
Michelle Walker
Lisa Capobianco
Cathleen Acheritogary
Meredith Mishel
Michelle Hansen, parent
Jennifer Lawson, parent
Ingrid Carbone, parent
Lisa Hielscher
TBD
TBD
Numbers of members in each category 1 1 2 4
Form E: Recommendations and Assurances
2 EC Section 52852
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 23 California Department of Education, February 2014 -201-
The school site council (SSC) recommends this school plan and proposed expenditures to the district governing board for approval and assures the board of the following:
1. The SSC is correctly constituted and was formed in accordance with district governing board policy and state law.
2. The SSC reviewed its responsibilities under state law and district governing board policies, including those board policies relating to material changes in the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) requiring board approval.
3. The SSC sought and considered all recommendations from the following groups or committees before adopting this plan (Check those that apply):
State Compensatory Education Advisory Committee ______Signature
English Learner Advisory Committee ______Signature
Special Education Advisory Committee ______Signature
Gifted and Talented Education Advisory Committee ______Signature
District/School Liaison Team for schools in Program Improvement ______Signature
Compensatory Education Advisory Committee ______Signature
Departmental Advisory Committee (secondary)______Signature
Other committees established by the school or district (list) ______Signature
4. The SSC reviewed the content requirements for school plans of programs included in this SPSA and believes all such content requirements have been met, including those found in district governing board policies and in the local educational agency plan.
5. This SPSA is based on a thorough analysis of student academic performance. The actions proposed herein form a sound, comprehensive, coordinated plan to reach stated school goals to improve student academic performance.
6. This SPSA was adopted by the SSC at a public meeting on: May 18, 2017.
Attested:
Michelle Walker______Typed name of School Principal Signature of School Principal Date
Jennifer Lawson______Typed name of SSC Chairperson Signature of SSC Chairperson Date
Guide to the Single Plan for Student Achievement 24 California Department of Education, February 2014 -202-
Single Plan for Student Achievement
Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Neil Cummins Elementary School Site Council
Prepared by: California Department of Education, February 2014
-203-
Single Plan for Student Achievement
School: Neil Cummins Elementary
District: Larkspur-Corte Madera
County-District School (CDS) Code: 21-65367-6024376
Principal: Patty Elliot
Date of this revision: May 7, 2017
The Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is a plan of actions to raise the academic performance of all students. California Education Code sections 41507, 41572, and 64001 and the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) require each school to consolidate all school plans for programs funded through the ConApp and ESEA Program Improvement into the SPSA.
For additional information on school programs and how you may become involved locally, please contact the following person:
Contact Person: Patty Flynn Elliot
Position: Principal
Telephone Number: 415-927-6965
Address: [email protected]
E-mail Address: [email protected]
The District Governing Board approved this revision of the SPSA October 28, 2015
2
-204-
Single Plan for Student Achievement
District Vision and Mission
School Vision and Mission
District/School LCAP Coordination
Planned Improvements in Student Performance
Academic Goals: Student Achievement & Engagement of All Learners
Non-Academic Goal: Improving Student, Staff, Parent Connectedness
Programs Included in This Plan
School Site Council Membership
Recommendations and Assurances
3
-205-
Several acronyms are used throughout this document:
LCMSD= Larkspur-Corte Madera School District
LEA= Local Education Agency
LCAP= Local Control Accountability Plan
LCFF= Local Control Funding Formula
CAASPP= California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress
ELA= English Language Arts
EL= English Learners
SED= Socio-Economic Disadvantaged
SPED= Special Education
PBL= Project-Based Learning
SIOP= Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol
PD= Professional Development
NGSS= New Generation Science Standards
CCSS= Common Core State Standards
CIP= Continuous Improvement Process
GF= General Fund
GLAD= Guided Language Acquisition Design
SRI= Scholastic Reading Inventory
4
-206-
Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Strategic Plan for 2014-16
District Mission/Vision Larkspur-Corte Madera School District is a dynamic learning community. We are inspired to think critically, collaborate, encourage creativity, and communicate effectively in supportive and inclusive environments. Every individual is empowered to become a productive citizen through relevant, rigorous, and engaging curriculum, active partnerships, and authentic interdisciplinary learning experiences.
Student Outcomes We believe that in order for our students to be successful in college and careers, all learners must demonstrate the 21st Century skills necessary for this success. Learners will: · Be Effective Communicators · Be Critical Thinkers and Problem Solvers · Use Curiosity and Imagination · Use Creativity to Express and Explore Learning · Collaborate with Others in Learning and Leading · Be Flexible and Resilient · Demonstrate Initiative and Entrepreneurialism · Innovate
District Strategic Priorities Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments that promote social, emotional, and intellectual growth.
Inspire students to maximize their potential through an inquiry-based curriculum that adapts continuously in order to address individual needs, encourage critical thinking, and cultivate collaborative, life-long learners.
Attract, develop, and support innovative, inspirational learning leaders who engage and empower students.
Sustain the fiscal integrity and stability of the District.
Communicate effectively and consistently through open, accessible methods, in order to facilitate collaborative partnerships among classroom, home, school, district, and community.
5
-207- District Core Values and Concepts Promoting Visionary & Collaborative Leadership Our learning leaders model, set direction, and maintain a focus on students and positive learning climates, clear and visible values, and high expectations for all members of our learning community. Our leaders inspire and motivate teams, involve and communicate with our community, and collaborate and form key relationships.
Student-Centered Education In order to ensure that our students meet their highest potential, we provide a comprehensive, inquiry- and standards-based differentiated curriculum, and opportunities for every student to be successful, involved, and engaged in collaborative learning with peers and teachers. We believe ongoing assessment of student learning informs our instructional practices.
Organizational and Personal Learning We promote strategic thinking, innovation, flexibility, and agility in response to changing requirements. We invest in personal learning for all through focused professional development, peer-to-peer learning, and opportunities for reflection across the learning community.
Valuing Faculty, Staff, and Partners Our success depends on valuing the diversity of our faculty, staff, parents, and community members. Their varied backgrounds, skills and knowledge, along with their creativity, dedication, and motivation, contribute to a more enriching educational environment.
Citizenship We model good citizenship, ethical behavior, and sensitivity to others, and promote each individual’s success as members of a local community and global society. We value diversity in our students and believe it enriches our inclusive educational program.
Focus on Process, Progress, and Results We use a variety of measures and data to assess continuous improvement in academic and social and emotional goals, develop short and long term strategic priorities, and manage our resources effectively and efficiently.
Neil Cummins Vision Statement
We believe all children are capable of learning, and it is our responsibility to provide a rich, positive, and safe engaging learning environment that fosters their desire to learn and meet the challenges of a changing world.
Neil Cummins Mission Statement
Together our staff, parents, students and community are dedicated to the ongoing education of all young people in the Neil Cummins School.
We work collaboratively to teach, mentor, motivate, challenge, and inspire our students. Our
-208- goal is for our students to become independent, critical thinkers who respond ethically to the challenges facing the world.
We accomplish our mission through a well-rounded curriculum including rigorous academic instruction. We differentiate the curriculum to meet divergent learning styles in a variety of ways including implementing experiential, thematic and project-based learning wherever appropriate. Our focus is on educating the whole child, addressing cognitive, social, emotional, and physical growth. Best practices are enhanced by frequent assessment, regular opportunities for reflection, and innovative, ongoing professional development for our highly qualified, inspirational staff.
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP)
As part of LCFF, school districts, county offices of education and charter schools are required to develop, adopt, and annually update a three-year Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP). The LCAP is required to identify annual goals, specific actions geared toward implementing those goals, and must measure progress for student subgroups across multiple performance indicators based on eight priorities set by the State. The priorities must be aligned to the district’s spending plan. The LCAP must be approved before the annual district budget can be adopted. Once the budget and LCAP are adopted at the local level the plan will be reviewed by the County superintendent and ensure alignment of projected spending toward goals and services.
A requirement in the development of the LCAP is to solicit input from parents, teachers, students, local bargaining units, staff and other community members in regard to what they think which goals would be most effective for implementation in our schools toward reaching state priorities. Toward this end the district has compiled a survey. We invite you to please complete this survey as an important part of our needs assessment process. Once all results of the survey are gathered and consolidated, results will be used by the LCAP committee to update our annual LCAP.
As noted above, there are eight state priority areas for which school districts, with parent and community input, must establish goals and actions:
1. Providing all students’ access to fully credentialed teachers, instructional materials that align with state standards, and safe facilities. 2. Implementation of California’s academic standards, including the Common Core State Standards in English language arts and math, Next Generation Science Standards, English language development, history social science, visual and performing arts, health education and physical education standards. 3. Parent involvement and participation, so the local community is engaged in the decision- making process and the educational programs of students. 4. Improving student achievement and outcomes along multiple measures, including test scores, English proficiency and college and career preparedness. 5. Supporting student engagement, including whether students attend school or are chronically absent.
7
-209-
6. Highlighting school climate and connectedness through a variety of factors, such as suspension and expulsion rates and other locally identified means. 7. Ensuring all students have access to classes that prepare them for college and careers, regardless of what school they attend or where they live. 8. Measuring other important student outcomes related to required areas of study, including physical education and the arts.
In addition to these eight areas, a district may also identify and incorporate in its plan goals related to its own local priorities. LCMSD has incorporated our five Strategic priorities with the eight state priorities.
8
-210-
Academic Goal: Planned Improvements in Student Performance
LEA Strategic Priority: Inspire students to reach their highest potential through an inquiry-based curriculum that adapts continuously to address individual needs, encourage critical thinking and cultivate collaborative, life-long learners. Continuous improvement in student achievement in English Language Arts and Mathematics.
SCHOOL GOAL 1: By June 2018, 80% of all students will meet or exceed standards on state annual and treimester district bench mark assessments in ELA and 70% in Math. By June 2018, 100% EL students will make sufficient annual progress in English as measured by California English Language Development Test (CELDT) through equal access to CCSS. By June 2018, 85% of parents and students will report the Neil Cummins curriculum is rigorous, meaningful and relevant, addressing student needs and 85% of parents will report student needs are met. By June 2018, 100% of students will have equal access to standards-aligned curriculum, including the Arts as evidenced by posted outcomes, examples of student work, observations and lesson plans By June 2018, 100% of teachers will implement 2-3 interdisciplinary (cross subject/integrated) PBL projects. By June 2018, 100% of students have access to technology/internet at home and school.
What data did you use to form this goal? What were the How will the school evaluate the progress findings from the of this goal? analysis of this data?
CAASPP State Testing data Spring 2016 80% of students met or CAASPP Testing data from May 2017 (grades 3-5) exceeded standards in CAASPP ELA assessments
74% of students met or exceeded standards in CAASPP Math assessments
9
-211-
Benchmark Assessments given 3 times a See Appendix 1 Benchmark Assessment data from Trimester year for reading, math and writing attached for 2016-17 1, 2 and 3 in the 2017-18 school year Benchmark Assessment Data
Student Report Cards Trimester Student Report Cards in the 2017- Revising and updating CCSS aligned report 18 school year cards
SSC Parent Perception Survey SSC Parent Survey SSC Parent Survey results in Spring 2018 May 2017 reported 83.27 % Strongly agree or Agree the curriculum is rigorous and engaging
SSC Student Survey SSC Student Survey SSC Student Survey results in Spring 2018 May 2017 reported 70% curriculum and instruction is “just about right”, 11% reported “too easy”
10
-212-
STRATEGIES: Enhance English Language Arts, Social Studies, Science, Math and Cultural Literacy for All Students, Continuous improvement in student achievement across all core subjects, Arts, Phys Ed and Essential 21st Century Skills
Person(s) Cost and Funding Source Action/Date Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source)
August 2017-June 2018 Teachers · Teacher planning and Certificated subs Revise curriculum mapping Principal meeting time $2,000 NC Discretionary/PTO of CA Common Core and · Tuesday staff meetings NGSS (Science) Standards · Wednesday grade level team meetings · Release time for planning August 2017-June 2018 Teachers time Implement NGSS and K-5 Principal · Professional Development Science 2x week MCOE Consortium throughout 2017-18 school year · Science/Math Consortium MCOE
August 2017-June 2018 Teachers Provide teacher coaching in Principal Prof. Development differentiation/PBL/small $3,000 NC Discretionary/PTO group instruction/technology/ responsive classrooms and GLAD/ELL strategies/inclusion strategies
11
-213-
August 2017-June 2018 Principal · Responsive Classroom Prof. Development Adopt math and language Director of Educ. training $3,000 NC Discretionary/PTO arts CCSS curriculum Services · Summer/Fall PBL training MCOE · Coaching with LCMSD TOSA (Teacher on Special Assignment) August 2017-June 2018 Provide afterschool and Principal Intervention Specialist summer programs for ELL Intervention $122,000 Title I and General and students who are not Specialist Fund meeting standard
August 2017-June 2018 Principal · ELAC Meetings 3 x year Counselor Implement integrated and Counselor · Extended Learning $107,000 General Fund discrete Arts programs K-5 Intervention Spec. Opportunities · Monitoring student progress closely (Counselor with Teachers) · Ensuring access to technology devices and internet in homes August 2017-June 2018 Provide support and Principal options for ongoing training Teachers and PD in Counselor differentiation/PBL/small Dir. of Educ. Serv. group instruction/responsive classrooms
12
-214-
Principal EL Curriculum/Support August 2017-June 2018 Teachers $5,000 General Fund/Lottery Intervention Specialist Dir.of Educ. Serv. working with individuals and small groups of students for reading, EL and math support and monitoring of student progress Principal Teachers August 2017-June 2018 Counselor Provide case management for EL students Principal Teachers August 2017-June 2018 Implement K-5 CCSS aligned report cards and explore narrative reporting and communication re. student progress Principal Teachers August 2017-June 2018 Counselor Local (3 times a year) benchmark assessments in Reading, Writing and Math, reporting results to the Board of Education and parents Principal Teachers August 2017-June 2018 Counselor Classroom-based systematic intervention and
13
-215-
EL support for target students, monitor progress, develop system of mulit- tiered approach Principal Teachers August 2017-June 2018 Counselor Implement Student Support TEAM (SST) meetings for students not meeting standard Principal August 2017-June 2018 Teachers VAPA standars and Site Dir. Educ. Serv. Arts Team (SAT) plans will be integrated into inquiry- based common core curriculum. Develop Arts Integration rubric. Certificated Subs and PD Principal $2,000 SPARK Science August 2017-June 2018 Teachers Develop Dir. Educ. Serv. assessments/rubrics for CCSS and NGSS to measure 21st Century Skills Principal Certificated subs Teachers $2,000 NC Discretionary/PTO August 2017-June 2018 Dir. Educ. Serv. Lucy Calkins Writer’s Prof. Development Workshop Program $5,000 General Fund/Lottery implemented in K-5 classrooms
14
-216-
Principal Teachers August 2017-June 2018 Counselor Cluster EL students and advanced learners when creating class groups Principal Teachers August 2017-June 2018 Dir. Educ. Serv. Develop and implement assessments/rubrics to measure 21st Century skills and PBL (Project Based Learning)
15
-217-
Non-Academic Goal
LEA Strategic Priority: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments that promote social, emotional, and intellectual growth.
SCHOOL GOAL 2: By June 2018, students and staff will report an increase of satisfaction with school culture, improved school climate, connectedness and respect as measured by positive responses to relative questions on staff, student and parent SSC Surveys. Reduction of behavior referrals to the office. Increase in attendance to average 98%.
What data did you use to form this What were the findings How will the school evaluate the progress of goal? from the analysis of this this goal? data?
April 2017 Student Survey in grades 3-5 April student survey May 2018 Student Survey in grades 3-5 grades 3-5 81.8% students reported that they agree “my teacher cares about me”
January 2016 school survey with students in grades 3-5 78.8% students reported that they agree “I have good friends at school”
SSC student survey April 2017 SSC Student Survey (grades 3-5) in April 2017 April 2017 SSC Student Survey showed 79% students “have positive
16
-218-
relationships with most students”
SSC student survey (grades 3-5) in April 2017 showed 90% students “feel safe in the classroom”, while 74% students reported “I feel safe on the playground”
March 2017 SSC Parent Survey March 2018 SSC Parent Survey In 2017 SSC parent survey 94% parents reported that their child generally enjoys coming to school
In 2017 SSC parent survey 84% parents reported that their child feels welcomed and included in group activities on the playground
Student behavior related office referrals 2017-18 Student behavior related office referrals 34% Strongly Agree 54% Agree their child is supported with Social Emotional Learning at Neil Cummins.
17
-219-
Student attendance incentives monthly and annually ADA reports throughout 2017-18 school year Graph weekly attendance patterns; August 2017-June 2018 streamline attendance protocols for teachers
Counselor provides ELP/ILP Case Management and SEL activities
80% teachers implement cyber-safety and digital citizenship (Common Sense Media) in their classrooms
Foster a shared vision among stakeholders and promote meaningful stakeholder participation that fosters a sense of contribution, ownership and empowerment (student/staff/parents)
STRATEGY: 1) School-wide attendance incentives and classroom based attendance incentives 2) School-wide SEL (Social Emotional Learning) Curriculum implemented and classroom based SEL Mindfulness practices. 3) Develop/implement school-wide and classroom based positive behavior support plan and strategies to reduce behavioral disruptions.
18
-220-
Person(s) Cost and Funding Source Action/Date Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source)
August 2016-June 2017 Principal August 2017-June 2018 Approx. $5000 (SPARK Fund a Need) Mindfulness training/coaching and Counselor schedule Mindfulness classroom implementation Teachers coach teachers and lead students in mindfulness practices throughout the school year
August 2016-June 2017 Principal Approx. $8000 (SPARK Fund a Need) SEL program in Kinder and 1st grade Counselor August 2016 schedule classrooms with Musical Teachers Kimochis coach teachers Moments/Kimochis and lead students in Kimochis/SEL practices throughout the school year
August 2016-June 2017 Principal Fall 2017 and Spring $1,000 PTO (Parent Education) Parent education/training in Counselor 2018- schedule parent Mindfulness curriculum and PTO training with Mindfulness implementation Coach who works with teachers and students in classrooms
Fall 2017 and Spring 2018- schedule parent training with Kimochis coach (Kimochis/SEL program in K/1 August 2016-June 2017 Principal classrooms) 19
-221-
Maintain Safe Routes to School Counselor Program, Recycle Champions/Eco PTO Hawks, Green Tips Teachers
August 2016-June 2017 Principal $2,000 NC Discretionary/Gen. Fund Implement inclusive education for PD Counselor for all staff, students and parents PTO Teachers
Programs Included in this Plan
Check the box for each state and federal program in which the school participates. Enter the amounts allocated for each program in which the school participates and, if applicable, check the box indicating that the program’s funds are being consolidated as part of operating a school wide program (SWP). The plan must describe the activities to be conducted at the school for each of the state and federal programs in which the school participates. The totals on these pages should match the cost estimates in Form A and the school’s allocation from the Consolidated Application.
Note: For many of the funding sources listed below, school districts may be exercising Categorical Program Provisions options (flexibility), which are described at http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/co/ca12sguiappcatprog.asp.
20
-222-
This site operates as a Targeted Assistance School (TAS), not as a school wide program (SWP).
State Programs Allocation Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) – Base Grant Not allocated to ▢ Purpose: To provide flexibility in the use of state and local individual sites funds by LEAs and schools LCFF – Supplemental Grant Purpose: To provide a supplemental grant equal to 20 percent Not allocated to ▢ of the adjusted LCFF base grant for targeted disadvantaged individual sites students ▢ Economic Impact Aid/Limited English Proficient (EIA-LEP) Purpose: Develop fluency in English and academic proficiency of English Learners. Federal Programs Allocation Title I, Part A: Allocation X Purpose: To improve basic programs operated by local $37,307 educational agencies (LEAs)
Title I, Part A: Parental Involvement (if applicable under Section 1118[a][3][c] of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) Purpose: Ensure that parents have information they need to ▢ make well-informed choices for their children, more effectively share responsibility with their children’s schools, and help schools develop effective and successful academic programs (this is a reservation from the total Title I, Part A allocation).
21
-223-
Not allocated to Title II, Part A: Improving Teacher Quality individual sites ▢ Purpose: Improve and increase the number of highly qualified District wide teachers and principals Program
Title III, Part A: Language Instruction for Limited-English- Not allocated to Proficient (LEP) Students individual sites ▢ Purpose: Supplement language instruction to help LEP District wide students attain English proficiency and meet academic Program performance standards
Total amount of federal categorical funds allocated to this school Total amount of state and federal categorical funds allocated to this school
School Site Council Membership California Education Code describes the required composition of the School Site Council (SSC). The SSC shall be composed of the principal and representatives of: teachers selected by teachers at the school; other school personnel selected by other school personnel at the school; parents of pupils attending the school selected by such parents; and, in secondary schools, pupils selected by pupils attending the school.1 The current make-up of the SSC is as follows:
1 EC Section 52852 22
-224-
Names of Classroom Other Parent or Principal Members Teacher School Community Staff Member
Mandy Downing ▢ ▢ ▢ ý Erica Fortescue ▢ ▢ ▢ ý
Shelly Levin ▢ ▢ ▢ ý
Laura O’Shea ▢ ▢ ▢ ý
Colleen Beery ▢ ý ☐ ▢
Malia McLaughlin ▢ ý ☐ ▢
Patty Elliot ý ▢ ▢ ▢ Eve Osborn ▢ ▢ ý ▢ Carla Caldera Total 1 2 1 4 Recommendations and Assurances
The school site council (SSC) recommends this school plan and proposed expenditures to the district governing board for approval and assures the board of the following:
1. The SSC is correctly constituted and was formed in accordance with district governing board policy and state law. 2. The SSC reviewed its responsibilities under state law and district governing board policies, including those board policies relating to material changes in the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) requiring board approval.
23
-225-
3. The SSC sought and considered all recommendations from the following groups or committees before adopting this plan (Check those that apply):
▢ State Compensatory Education Advisory Committee Signature
▢ English Learner Advisory Committee Signature
▢ Special Education Advisory Committee Signature
▢ Gifted and Talented Education Advisory Committee Signature
▢ District/School Liaison Team for schools in Program Improvement Signature
▢ Compensatory Education Advisory Committee Signature
▢ Departmental Advisory Committee (secondary) Signature
▢ Other committees established by the school or district (list) Signature
4. The SSC reviewed the content requirements for school plans of programs included in this SPSA and believes all such content requirements have been met, including those found in district governing board policies and in the local educational agency plan. 5. This SPSA is based on a thorough analysis of student academic performance. The actions proposed herein form a sound, comprehensive, coordinated plan to reach stated school goals to improve student academic performance. 6. This SPSA was adopted by the SSC at a public meeting on: June 11, 2017.
Attested:
___Patty Flynn Elliot______May 11, 2017 Typed name of School Principal Signature of School Principal Date
___Laura O’Shea May 11, 2017 Typed name of SSC Chairperson Signature of SSC Chairperson Date
24
-226-
Appendix 1 2016-17 Benchmark Assessment Data
Reading The reading assessment is administered to 1st-5th grade students through the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI). First grade students take the Foundation Reading Assessment until they score high enough to take the full reading assessment. SRI is an online, adaptive benchmark assessment aligned to Common Core Standards. The assessment provides students with a Lexile reading score based on an end-of-year grade level proficiency standard.
Reading Proficiency - All students Fall Mid-Year End of Year Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic
Reading Proficiency Growth - All students with two or more scores First Score Last Score End of Year Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic
Reading Proficiency – All English Learners Fall Score Mid-Year Score End of Year Advanced Proficient Basic 22% Below Basic 57%
Reading Proficiency Growth – All English Learners with two or more scores Fall Score Mid-Year Score End of Year Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic
25
-227-
Larkspur-
Corte Madera School District 2016-2017 Mid Year Benchmark Assessment Report
Reading Reading Assessments rd-8th
All LCMSD 3 grade students take the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) assessment three times a year. SRI is an online adaptive assessment-of- that measures student reading level and reports it as a Lexile score. Scholastic establishes end of the year Lexile proficiency levels for each grade. SRI generates a Lexile reading score that measures reading proficiency measured Tableagainst R1 an - end Proficiencyyear standard. Growth – Students with two or more scores (980 students) End-of-Year Proficiency Level Fall District Performance Mid Year District Performance Change Advanced 45% 54% +4% Proficient 31% 26% Basic 13% 12% -5% 12% 8%
Table R2 - BelowPrior YearBasic Comparison Fall Fall Mid Year Mid Year 2015-2016 2016-2017 2015-2016 2016-2017 70% 76% 77% 80%
Table Advanced R3 - Growth& Proficient Summary Report – Students with two or more scores (980 students) Fall Test Score Average Mid Year Test Score Average Average Lexile Growth Cove 812 897 85 764 836 72 Hall 1113 1135 22 Neil Cummins
Reading Analysis 26
-228-
-to- -to- · The mid year SRI data indicates positive growth in reading proficiency when comparing year year and fall mid year. Overall proficiency increased from the fall assessments to the mid year assessment as seen in Table R1. This chart reports fall and mid year SRI scores for all students with two or more scores, allowing for a comparison of cohort data · within the school year. This data indicates a reduction in the percentage of Basic and Below Basic students with a · commensurate increase in the percentage of Advanced and Proficient students. Overall proficiency in both the fall and mid year assessments are higher than last year’s scores as indicated in Table R2. Students demonstrated growth in Lexile reading levels at all three schools with the greatest growth occurring at the elementary schools as seen in Table R3. Writing Writing Assessments - Kindergarten - - -of- The kindergarten benchmark writing assessment is an on demand writing task at the end of a genre unit that is scored using theWriting Units Assessments of Study Rubric. - 1 stStudents Grade earn a score of 1 4 in the Overall area. A score of 3 represents end year proficiency. st - - The 1 grade benchmark writing assessment is an on demand writing task at the end of a genre unit that is scored using the Units of Study Rubric. Students earn-of a- score of 1 4 in each of nine areas (Overall, Lead, Transitions, Ending, Organization, Elaboration, Craft, Spelling and Punctuation). The Elaboration and Craft scores are doubled. There are 44 points possible. A Writingscore of 28Assessments is considered - 2 tond-5 beth Gradeend year proficient. nd-5th - –
The 2 grade benchmark writing assessment consists of two on demand writing tasks one at the start of the writing- unit and one at the end. This allows teachers to measure student growth and learning as a result of the unit of instruction. Each writing task is scored using the Units of Study Rubric to measure individual student growth. Students earn a -scoreof- of 1 4 in eachproficient. of nine areas (Overall, Lead, Transitions, Ending, Organization, Elaboration, Craft, Spelling and Punctuation). The Elaboration and Craft scores are doubled. There are 44 points possible. A score of 28 is considered to be end year Writing Assessments - 6th-8th Grade - - The middle school benchmark writing assessment is an on demand writing task at the end of a genre unit that is scored using the Units of Study Rubric. Students earn a score of 1 4 in each of nine areas (Overall, Lead, Transitions, Ending, Organization, 27
-229-
-of- Elaboration, Craft, Spelling and Punctuation). The Elaboration and Craft scores are doubled. There are 44 points possible. A Tablescore of W1 28 – is Kindergarten considered to Writingbe end Scoresyear proficient. Fall Mid Year Score Percent of Students Percent of Students 14% 19% 3% -- Rubric 4 36% 52% Rubric 3.5 42% 27% Rubric 3 5% 3% Rubric 2 TableRubric W2 1 – 1st Grade Writing 1st Grade Writing Data Fall Benchmark Mid Year Benchmark 24 26 25% 52% Average Score Table % W3EOY – Proficient 2nd – 5th Grade Writing Fall Benchmark Mid Year Benchmark Grade Pre-Unit Post-Unit Ave % EOY Pre-Unit Post-Unit Ave % EOY Level Ave Ave Growth Prof Ave Ave Growth Prof 2 19 26 7 41% 18 26 8 43% 3 18 24 6 32% 20 26 6 39% 4 16 23 7 21% 22 28 6 64% 5 18 25 7 39% 20 25 5 38%
Table W4 – Middle School Writing Grade Fall Average Fall % EOY Proficient Mid Year Average Mid Year % EOY Proficient 6 23 27% 27 44% 7 22 14% 28 59% 8 27 52% 26 45%
28
-230-
Writing Analysis
- The mid year benchmark writing assessment data demonstrates strong growth in student writing. When compared to fall writing· scores, mid year post unit writing scores reflect higher average scores and percentage of ststudents meetingth end of year proficiency. Thisth demonstrates overallth growth in student writing and achievement of grade level standards. · Exceptionally strong gains in- end of- year proficiency are evident in kindergarten (18%), 1 grade (27%), 4 grade (43%), 6 grade (17%) and 7 grade (45%).- Growth in writingiency. from pre to post unit indicates consistent and positive growth in writing, as seen in Table W3. This, · coupled with a trend towards higher pre unit writing scores compared to the fall writing assessment indicate a positive trend in profic This is the first year that the middle school is using the Units of Study rubric and therefore fluctuations in scores are to be expected as teachers adjust their scoring of student work. The eighth grade team identified that they were more Mathematicslenient during the scoring of the narrative writing samples in the fall than they were with the mid year writing task. Elementary Math Assessments -
Front Row is an onlinend classroom-5th based math resource that provides assessments, activities, differentiated assignments and - concept instruction. Many classroom teachers use Front Row as a regular class activity to differentiate instruction and-of monit- or student progress. All 2 grade students take the Front Row benchmark assessment three times a year. It is a fixed test of 30 36 questions that assesses end of year expectations for grade level concepts. Front Row reports accuracy on the end year expectations for math proficiency. Teachers can see individual student performance on specific content standards as an accumulation of their work on assessments and Front Row activities. On the district level Front Row only reports and overall Tableaccuracy M1 score – Ele formentary each student. Front Row It does Accuracy not break Scores those by scores Grade down Level by standard or skill area. Grade Level Fall Average Mid Year Average Growth 59% 60% 1% 42% 54% 12% Second Grade 54% 56% 2% Third Grade 50% 54% 4% Fourth Grade TableFifth M2 Grade – Elementary Front Row Accuracy Scores by Year Grade Level 2016 Mid Year 2017 Mid Year
29
-231-
51% 60% 56% 54% Second Grade 55% 56% Third Grade 44% 54% Fourth Grade Fifth Grade Elementary Math Analysis
The data indicates growth at each grade level, but that growth is small at most grade levels. Third grade exhibited significant growth in accuracy while other grade levels reported accuracynd levelsth only slightly higher than the fall assessment. Because Front Row does not breakrd downth the standards, it is unknown if these scores represent growth in content areas that have already been covered. Compared to last year, this year’s 2 and 5 grade scores are considerably higher (9% and 12% respectively), while 3 and 4 grade scores are relatively consistent with last year.
30
-232-
Single Plan for Student Achievement
-233-
Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Hall Middle School Site Council
Part II: The Single Plan for Student Achievement
School: Hall Middle School
District: Larkspur-Corte Madera
County-District School (CDS) Code: 21-65367-6024376
Principal: Eric Saibel
Date of this revision: 5/10/17
The Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is a plan of actions to raise the academic performance of all students. California Education Code sections 41507, 41572, and 64001 and the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) require each school to consolidate all school plans for programs funded through the ConApp and ESEA Program Improvement into the SPSA.
For additional information on school programs and how you may become involved locally, please contact the following person:
Contact Person: Eric Saibel
Position: Principal
-234-
Telephone Number: 415-927-6978
Address: 200 Doherty Drive, Larkspur, CA 94939
E-mail Address: [email protected]
The District Governing Board approved this revision of the SPSA on ______.
Table of Contents
II. Single Plan for Student Achievement
Form A: Planned Improvements in Student Performance 1
Form A 2
Form A (Non-Academic Goal) 4
Form B: Centralized Services for Planned Improvements in Student 5 Performance
Form C: Programs Included in This Plan 6
-235-
Form D: School Site Council Membership 9
Form E: Recommendations and Assurances 10
-236-
Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Strategic Plan for 2017-18
District Mission/Vision The Larkspur-Corte Madera School District is a dynamic learning community committed to educational excellence, equity, and inclusion. We inspire members to think critically, act creatively, work collaboratively, and communicate effectively. We strive to be engaged citizens, contributing positively to our local and global communities.
Student Outcomes We believe that in order for our students to be successful in college and careers, all learners must demonstrate the 21st Century skills necessary for this success. Learners will: ● Be Effective Communicators ● Be Critical Thinkers and Problem Solvers ● Use Curiosity and Imagination ● Use Creativity to Express and Explore Learning ● Collaborate with Others in Learning and Leading ● Be Flexible and Resilient ● Demonstrate Initiative and Entrepreneurialism ● Innovate
District Strategic Priorities ● Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of all community members. ● Inspire academic growth and civic responsibility through a rigorous, inquiry-based curriculum that is engaging and personalized. ● Attract, cultivate, and retain innovative, inspirational educators. ● Sustain the fiscal integrity and stability of the district. ● Facilitate collaborative partnerships between students, families, schools, and community.
-237-
District Core Values and Concepts Promoting Visionary & Collaborative Leadership Our learning leaders model, set direction, and maintain a focus on students and positive learning climates, clear and visible values, and high expectations for all members of our learning community. Our leaders inspire and motivate teams, involve and communicate with our community, and collaborate and form key relationships.
Student-Centered Education In order to ensure that our students meet their highest potential, we provide a comprehensive, inquiry- and standards-based differentiated curriculum, and opportunities for every student to be successful, involved, and engaged in collaborative learning with peers and teachers. We believe ongoing assessment of student learning informs our instructional practices.
Organizational and Personal Learning We promote strategic thinking, innovation, flexibility, and agility in response to changing requirements. We invest in personal learning for all through focused professional development, peer-to-peer learning, and opportunities for reflection across the learning community.
Valuing Faculty, Staff, and Partners Our success depends on valuing the diversity of our faculty, staff, parents, and community members. Their varied backgrounds, skills and knowledge, along with their creativity, dedication, and motivation, contribute to a more enriching educational environment.
Citizenship We model good citizenship, ethical behavior, and sensitivity to others, and promote each individual’s success as members of a local community and global society. We value diversity in our students and believe it enriches our inclusive educational program.
Focus on Process, Progress, and Results We use a variety of measures and data to assess continuous improvement in academic and social/emotional goals, develop short and long term strategic priorities, and manage our resources effectively and efficiently.
-238-
Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) As part of LCFF, school districts, county offices of education and charter schools are required to develop, adopt, and annually update a three-year Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP). The LCAP is required to identify annual goals, specific actions geared toward implementing those goals, and must measure progress for student subgroups across multiple performance indicators based on eight priorities set by the State. The priorities must be aligned to the district’s spending plan. The LCAP must be approved before the annual district budget can be adopted. Once the budget and LCAP are adopted at the local level the plan will be reviewed by the County superintendent and ensure alignment of projected spending toward goals and services.
A requirement in the development of the LCAP is to solicit input from parents, teachers, students, local bargaining units, staff and other community members in regard to what they think which goals would be most effective for implementation in our schools toward reaching state priorities. Toward this end the district has compiled a survey. We invite you to please complete this survey as an important part of our needs assessment process. Once all results of the survey are gathered and consolidated, results will be used by the LCAP committee to update our LCAP by June 2015.
As noted above, there are eight state priority areas for which school districts, with parent and community input, must establish goals and actions: 1. Providing all students access to fully credentialed teachers, instructional materials that align with state standards, and safe facilities. 2. Implementation of California’s academic standards, including the Common Core State Standards in English language arts and math, Next Generation Science Standards, English language development, history social science, visual and performing arts, health education and physical education standards. 3. Parent involvement and participation, so the local community is engaged in the decision-making process and the educational programs of students. 4. Improving student achievement and outcomes along multiple measures, including test scores, English proficiency and college and career preparedness. 5. Supporting student engagement, including whether students attend school or are chronically absent. 6. Highlighting school climate and connectedness through a variety of factors, such as suspension and expulsion rates and other locally identified means.
-239-
7. Ensuring all students have access to classes that prepare them for college and careers, regardless of what school they attend or where they live. 8. Measuring other important student outcomes related to required areas of study, including physical education and the arts. In addition to these eight areas, a district may also identify and incorporate in its plan goals related to its own local priorities. LCMSD has incorporated our five Strategic priorities with the eight state priorities.
Form A: Planned Improvements in Student Performance
The School Site Council has analyzed the academic performance of all student groups and has considered the effectiveness of key elements of the instructional program for students failing to meet academic performance index and adequate yearly progress growth targets. As a result, it has adopted the following school goals, related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of students not yet meeting state standards:
LEA GOAL/Strategic Priority: Inspire academic growth and civic responsibility through a rigorous, inquiry-based curriculum that is engaging and personalized.
SCHOOL GOAL: _1__ Student Academic Proficiency. For the 2017-18 school year, at least 80% of students will demonstrate proficiency on CAASPP ELA, 80 % or more reading at or above grade level on the SRI tests, and at 80% scoring at least a 28 on benchmark writing assessments. 70% of students will demonstrate proficiency on CAASPP Math and the new local benchmark assessments MDTP and CAASPP Interim assessments. Ensure that each and every student learns while enhancing English Language Arts and Mathematics instruction for all students.
What data did you use to form What were the findings from the analysis How will the school evaluate the progress of this this goal? of this data? goal?
ELA (SRI) and Math Interim, 49% of students scored end-of-year proficient MDTP and on the February 2017 ELA Writing CAASPP assessments classroom benchmark Assessment (Benchmark), and 81% scored Trimester benchmark assessments assessments proficient or above on the 2017 ELA reading assessment. 57% met or exceeded the
-240-
standard on the February 2017 Math SBAC Interim Comprehensive Assessment. CAASPP assessments In 2015/16, 76% of students were proficient in ELA CAASPP and 59% in Math CAASPP summative assessments.
STRATEGY: Implement instructional strategies that that addresses the literacy and math needs of students performing below the proficient range, as measured by trimester benchmarks, classroom assessments and CASSPP data.
Person(s) Cost and Funding Source Action/Date Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source) Implement, review and Grade 6-8 general Collect and analyze benchmark data and EIA/LEP evaluate district approved education information from teacher produced tests and intervention programs and teachers educational technology programs to identify Title III benchmark assessments students from each grade level for ELA and math (trimester) intervention. Title II Counselor, Administration Identify and schedule students for math and ELA Title I support classes and before/after school. Intervention sessions, based on previous multiple measures and initial classroom assessments. Fund after school/Saturday School intervention Progress monitoring of all students who are below proficient at weekly department meetings and (Scholastic Reading monthly grade level work. Offer interventions Inventory (SRI) & within classrooms. Scholastic Math Inventory (SMI) for English Language Review and evaluate intervention programs and Arts (ELA)
benchmark assessments.
-241-
Reading Assessments Science and math teachers Teachers, Teachers participate in peer class observations acquire and implement Paraprofessionals and feedback on literacy strategies and math CCSS funding effective literacy strategies. practices modeled by trained in-house teachers.
Scheduling students, monitoring progress and Cluster ELL students and modifying schedules as needed. provide ELD support Administration ELL paraprofessional assigned to clustered classes. EL pull-out support class offered.
Continue to research professional development Math teachers implement Teachers opportunities for effective math instruction, CCSS aligned curriculum supplementary programs and CCSS aligned curriculum. Teachers attend CPM training when available. Implement CPM curricular materials.
Provide targeted reinforcement Re-commit to Advisory period as opportunity for of curricular topics during Teachers staff to monitor student progress and communicate Advisory Period as appropriate. concerns to colleagues and parents. (ongoing)
Provide targeted instruction in Identify students by reviewing IEPs, classroom a smaller, self contained Teachers performance and multiple measures of classroom setting for identified assessments. (ongoing) students with special needs. Schedule students for given classes in a Learning Center setting based on individual student needs.
Monitor student progress. (ongoing)
Review student performance data to date (grades, Conduct parent conferences for other assessments. (Sept. – Oct.) students who are performing
-242-
below expectations in English, Administration Identify priority students. (Sept. – Oct.) math and/or other subjects, Schedule conferences. (Oct.) and all EL students. Implement follow up strategies as needed. (Nov. – June)
Complete curriculum mapping Review and revise current curriculum maps in for CCSS and NGSS, with grade level team meetings, identify common focus on inquiry, PBL, tech Administration, expectations for documentation, create/revise as integration and differentiation. TOSAs, teachers needed.
Provide support and options for Plan and implement monthly sessions and ongoing training and PD in Administration, group/individual coaching during collaboration differentiation, PBL, small TOSAs, teachers periods. group instruction, technology, blended learning, Arts integration.
LEA GOAL: Inspire academic growth and civic responsibility through a rigorous, inquiry-based curriculum that is engaging and personalized.
SCHOOL GOAL: 2 100% of students will have multiple opportunities a year to participate in cross-curricular projects and inquiry-based learning experiences that facilitate real world connections.
-243-
What data did you What were the findings from the analysis of this data? How will the school use to form this evaluate the progress goal? of this goal?
SSC Student Survey 2017 SSC Parent Survey: Spring 2018 SSC Parent and Focus Groups In 2016/17, we exceeded our goal of 75% parents reporting stimulating and and Student Survey 2016/17 engaging curriculum with an 81% positive rating across the curriculum. In 15/16, results 68.3% of parents indicated that the curriculum was stimulating and engaging in all/most classes, a drop of 5.7% from 74% the previous year. We are seeing Student products and increased student and parent interest in relevant learning experiences that help number of public students connect their work at school to real world scenarios. exhibitions of student work
Faculty professional presentations in local/national educational forums
STRATEGY: Expand innovative programs and instructional practices, within the general education setting, to implement and introduce and ongoing enrichment programs. Provide differentiated curriculum, PBL and instruction to challenge students; personalizing to needs.
Cost and Funding
Action/Date Person(s) Source Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source)
-244-
Increase use of driving Teachers Reinforce practice with all teachers (ongoing). Fall General Fund (GF) questions in lessons/units 2017 PD centered on grade level teams establishing Instructional staff salaries to create an inquiry-based shared driving questions. approach Support for teachers for Tech, PBL, VAPA Increase integrated,collaborative TOSA, Teachers Provide differentiated curriculum, PBL and instruction CCSS and GF including units between subjects to challenge students, personalizing needs release time Continue professional development on PBL and differentiation with site TOSA (ongoing). PTA Increase PBL in SPARK classrooms TOSA, Teachers Continue with Site Arts Team meetings. Sharing activities and strategies during faculty meetings
Continue with Arts Teachers participate in professional development Integration in all subjects. Administration sessions on NGSS (ongoing). Teachers participate in Teachers collaboration with science teachers in neighboring districts. (Ongoing)
Develop proficiency rubric Administration, Continue exploring similar documents from local to define successful Habits Lead Team, middle schools. Begin exploring/implementing of Learning Teachers grading and reporting practices that more accurately report on specific student proficiencies.
Implement NGSS Administration, Conduct SSTs and ILPs as needed (ongoing). standards and supporting teachers, curricular materials in all Parents science classes.
-245-
Begin new Curriculum adoption process for NGSS Administration, Offer an Odyssey of the Mind and Speech & Debate Conduct parents, teachers, programs, coached by parent volunteers and/or parent/student/teacher community staffed by a teacher with a stipend. meetings to identify student partners needs and implement appropriate strategies to keep them appropriately challenged and engaged.
Increase partnerships with local/national community organizations/agencies to facilitate real-world connections for students Support after school classes from outside Provide after school organizations that expand opportunities in PTA enrichment opportunities, technology, language acquisition, the arts, etc. scholarships for students who are not participating in after school activities BTSN, Open House, Parent Chats, Parent Ed, Staff Increased opportunities for Meetings, Grade Level assemblies, all-school students to share/perform assemblies, Board meetings, community/civic forums work in front of authentic become opportunities for student presentations. audiences.
Form A Non-Academic Goal
-246-
LEA GOAL: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of all community members.
SCHOOL GOAL: 3 80% of students will report and experience a culture of inclusion and mutual respect amongst peers.
What data did you use to form this What were the findings from the analysis How will the school evaluate the goal? of this data? progress of this goal?
16/17 Site Council survey data showed Only half of the student body feel/report that The Hall Middle School Site Council, 52.2% of students reporting that students students respect other student here at Hall. Administration and Counseling at Hall respect other students. Department will evaluate school climate via the results on an annual basis as part of the SPSA evaluation process and SSC Student Survey data.
STRATEGIES: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of all community members. Hall Middle School expand mindfulness strategies and revise the character education curriculum. Continue to implement the Social Vision Statement: “We Are One.”
Person(s) Cost and Funding Source Action/Date Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source) Integration of Character Administration, Grade level meetings (September), Leadership class Counts curriculum in teachers assembly (Fall, 2016) and activities (ongoing). grades 6-8, delivered during Advisory periods monthly. Funding of school counselor. Curricular program. Increase the number of School counselor will co-facilitate social & emotional faculty using strategies for Character Counts curriculum into guidance lessons and collaborating with classroom teachers.
-247-
implementing Mindfulness practices for students. School budget Implement mindfulness activities in bi-weekly faculty meetings to help teachers gain awareness and Continue parent education strategies. sessions on mindfulness and student socio- Train faculty volunteers in mindfulness strategies for emotional health both adults and students. Admin, Teachers, PTA funding and scheduling Increased Grade Level Counselor for Parent Education assemblies, gatherings and field trips to build community. Hold monthly parent chats during the school day, and schedule evening sessions, for Hall parents and in Admin/Counselor conjunction with neighboring schools. Video messages from school to community highlighting successes and addressing Solicit referrals from teachers, track and follow up on challenges. referrals. Notify parents of students receiving referrals. Administration (Ongoing). Continue “Positive Student Classroom Referral” program to Teachers recognize positive student behavior. Implement CHKS, conduct family meetings and collect other pertinent data to assess reasons behind Administration, students missing school. Continue to monitor Counselor student absences as they School SIte Council Survey Fall and Spring. pertain to anxiety/stress Administration, Counselor,
-248-
Continue assessing Teachers, Site student connectedness to Council school and faculty
LEA GOAL: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of all community members.
SCHOOL GOAL: 4 The percentage of 6-8 grade students reporting that their voice is heard regarding school issues will increase from 44% to 55%
What data did you use to form this What were the findings from the analysis How will the school evaluate the goal? of this data? progress of this goal?
SSC Student surveys, 2013 - 2017. Students reporting that their voice is heard The Hall Middle School Site Council, regarding school issues in grades 6-8: Administration and Counseling Department will evaluate school climate 2013 – 38% via the results on an annual basis as part 2014 – 40% of the SPSA evaluation process and SSC 2015 – 47% Student Survey data.
2016 – 29.4% 2017 -- 44%
STRATEGIES: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of all community members. Hall Middle School will expand the Leadership class and implement new activities to increase student involvement and choice in school matters.
Person(s) Cost and Funding Source Action/Date Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source)
-249-
Increase Leadership class Administration, Administration and teacher will collaborate on refining Funding of teacher, .4 FTE. from 1 section to 2. teacher and enhancing the curriculum for the Leadership class Continue developing the Leadership (ongoing). Leadership class students. curriculum and activities. Planning and implementing student run assemblies Ongoing. (each trimester)
Leadership students will participate in activities and Contine to implement a Administration, lessons on presentation skills, motivation, process to faciliate Counselor mindfulness, from a hired consultant. (Periodically) students reporting concerns. Leadership students will continue a faculty supervised Instagram account (Ongoing). Continue to survey student Administration PTA about their experiences at Leadership Students open school parent & community hall. Including follow up events: Back to school night, graduation. focus groups at each grade level. Leadership students report and take input at monthly faculty meetings, report at PTA meetings (trimesters), LCMSD Board meetings (annually) and all SSC meetings. Continue inviting students Administration, to present at faculty Teachers meetings.
Administration Continue Principals for a Day program identifying students to experience leadership on campus.
-250-
LEA GOAL: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of all community members.
SCHOOL GOAL: 5 Reduce incidents of student conduct: ● Bullying by 30% ● Disciplinary detentions issued by administration by 30% ● Suspensions by 40%
What data did you use to form this What were the findings from the analysis How will the school evaluate the goal? of this data? progress of this goal?
SSC surveys, 2016 - 2017. We had a 30% decrease of suspensions The Hall Middle School Site Council, from 15/16 to 16/17. Administration and Counseling CHKS 2015 Department will evaluate school climate via the results on an annual basis as part of the SPSA evaluation process and SSC Student Survey data.
STRATEGIES: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of all community members. Hall Middle School will provide staff development on school climate and student conduct and implement strategies to reduce student incidents of misconduct.
Person(s) Cost and Funding Source Action/Date Task/Date Responsible (Itemize for Each Source)
-251-
Revise, develop and Administration, Administrators visit classes first week to review clear implement strategies to teachers rules (August, 2017). clearly and consistently convey behavioral Communicate to parents about incidents that occur standards and after school and what should be reported to school expectations. (Fall, 2016) (ongoing).
Publicize who to call for specific purposes: teacher, counselor, principal, and how students can access counselor (ongoing).
Conduct staff professional development in to strategize and implement practices, and Nuts and bolts training on behavioral expectations for all new staff. (August, 2016).
Hold grade level sessions to review expectations for students (August, 2017).
Conduct periodic (e.g., trimester) PTA sponsored parent/teacher “Listening sessions” to surface and
address parent issues on a proactive basis.
Begin the school year with a positive culture building assembly or series of activities.
Continue increasing clubs and activities at lunch, and include ideas from students and parent volunteers to Revise, develop and help run them. (Fall, 2017) implement positive strategies for students. Expand mindfulness practices beyond 6th grade Core (Fall, 2016) classes. (Fall, 2017)
More robust student information system
-252-
documentation on interventions. (Fall, 2017)
Continue implementing options such as community service (lunch clean-up), Saturday School, school counseling sessions, restorative circles, Solution Integrate the Hall “Cougar Teams, SART, etc. (Fall, 2017) Code” into the daily culture of the school through Provide additional training for identified teachers with announcements and higher incidents of student behavioral incidents in activities. class. (Ongoing) (Ongoing) Investigate 80/20 proactive/reactive approach to behavior management.
Reinforce and Structure grade level meetings to include solution communicate identified oriented discussions on student behavioral school wide policies interventions with the counselor and admin. (Fall, regarding cell phones and 2017) campus boundaries. (Fall, 2017) Investigate ways to utilize parent volunteers for small group instruction, campus/classroom support and/or supervision. (Fall, 2016) Increase support for teachers in creating and maintaining effective learning environments. (Ongoing)
Form B: Centralized Services for Planned Improvements in Student Performance
-253-
The following actions and related expenditures support this site program goal and will be performed as a centralized service. Note: the total amount for each categorical program in Form B must be aligned with the Consolidated Application.
School Goal #:
Actions to be Taken to Reach Funding This Goal1 Start Date2 Source Consider all appropriate Proposed Estimated (itemize dimensions (e.g., Teaching Completion Expenditures Cost for each and Learning, Staffing, and Date source) Professional Development)
Counselor Leadership Teacher TOSAs Extended Learning Instructor ELA para SRI/SMI Professional Development SPARK PTA
1 See Appendix A: Chart of Legal Specifics for the Single Plan for Student Achievement for content required by each program or funding source supporting this goal. 2 List the date an action will be taken, or will begin, and the date it will be completed.
-254-
Note: Centralized services may include the following direct services:
● Research-based instructional strategies, curriculum development, school climate, and data disaggregation for instructional staff
● District-wide staff providing specific services to schools, e.g., English Language Development Coordinator, Teachers on Special Assignment, Instructional Coaches
● After–School and Summer School programs funded by categorical programs
● Data analysis services, software, and training for assessment of student progress
Centralized services do not include administrative costs.
Please duplicate this form as necessary.
Form C: Programs Included in this Plan
Check the box for each state and federal program in which the school participates. Enter the amounts allocated for each program in which the school participates and, if applicable, check the box indicating that the program’s funds are being consolidated as part of operating a schoolwide program (SWP). The plan must describe the activities to be conducted at the school for each of the state and federal programs in which the school participates. The totals on these pages should match the cost estimates in Form A and the school’s allocation from the ConApp.
Note: For many of the funding sources listed below, school districts may be exercising Categorical Program Provisions options (flexibility), which are described at http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/co/ca12sguiappcatprog.asp.
Of the four following options, please select the one that describes this school site:
☐ This site operates as a targeted assistance school (TAS), not as a schoolwide program (SWP).
☐ This site operates a SWP but does not consolidate its funds as part of operating a SWP.
-255-
☐ This site operates a SWP and consolidates only applicable federal funds as part of operating a SWP.
☐ This site operates a SWP and consolidates all applicable funds as part of operating a SWP.
Consolidated State Programs Allocation in the SWP Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) – Base Not Grant allocated to ☒ ☐ Purpose: To provide flexibility in the use of state and individual local funds by LEAs and schools sites LCFF – Supplemental Grant Not Purpose: To provide a supplemental grant equal to 20 allocated to ☒ ☐ percent of the adjusted LCFF base grant for targeted individual disadvantaged students sites LCFF – Concentration Grant Purpose: To provide an additional concentration grant ☐ equal to 50 percent of the adjusted LCFF base grant $ ☐ for targeted students exceeding 55 percent of an LEA’s enrollment California School Age Families Education (Carryover only) ☐ $ ☐ Purpose: Assist expectant and parenting students to succeed in school Economic Impact Aid/State Compensatory Education (EIA-SCE) (Carryover only) ☐ $ ☐ Purpose: Help educationally disadvantaged students succeed in the regular program Economic Impact Aid/Limited English Proficient (EIA-LEP) (Carryover only) ☐ $ ☐ Purpose: Develop fluency in English and academic proficiency of English learners
-256-
Peer Assistance and Review (Carryover only) ☐ Purpose: Assist teachers through coaching and $ ☐ mentoring Professional Development Block Grant (Carryover only) ☐ Purpose: Attract, train, and retain classroom $ ☐ personnel to improve student performance in core curriculum areas Pupil Retention Block Grant (Carryover only) ☐ Purpose: Prevent students from dropping out of $ ☐ school Quality Education Investment Act (QEIA) Purpose: Funds are available for use in performing ☐ $ ☐ various specified measures to improve academic instruction and pupil academic achievement School and Library Improvement Program Block ☐ Grant (Carryover only) $ ☐ Purpose: Improve library and other school programs School Safety and Violence Prevention Act ☐ (Carryover only) $ ☐ Purpose: Increase school safety Tobacco-Use Prevention Education ☐ $ ☐ Purpose: Eliminate tobacco use among students List and Describe Other State or Local Funds ☐ $ ☐ (e.g., Career and Technical Education [CTE], etc.) Total amount of state categorical funds allocated to this $0 school Consolidated Federal Programs Allocation in the SWP Title I, Part A: Allocation ☐ Purpose: To improve basic programs operated by $ ☐ local educational agencies (LEAs)
-257-
Title I, Part A: Parental Involvement (if applicable under Section 1118[a][3][c] of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) Purpose: Ensure that parents have information they need to make well- ☐ $ ☐ informed choices for their children, more effectively share responsibility with their children’s schools, and help schools develop effective and successful academic programs (this is a reservation from the total Title I, Part A allocation). For Program Improvement Schools only: Title I, Part A Program Improvement (PI) Professional ☐ ☐ Development (10 percent minimum $ reservation from the Title I, Part A reservation for schools in PI Year 1 and 2) Title II, Part A: Improving Teacher Quality $3500 ☒ Purpose: Improve and increase the number of highly ☐
qualified teachers and principals Title III, Part A: Language Instruction for Limited- Title III funds Not English-Proficient (LEP) Students may not be allocated to ☒ Purpose: Supplement language instruction to help consolidated individual LEP students attain English proficiency and meet as part of a sites academic performance standards SWP3
3 Title III funds are not a school level allocation even if allocated by the district to a school site. The LEA is responsible for fiscal reporting and monitoring and cannot delegate their authority to a site at which the program is being implemented. If Title III funds are spent at a school site, they must be used for the purposes of Title III and only for those students the LEA has identified for services. For more information please contact the Language Policy and Leadership Office at 916-319-0845.
-258-
Title VI, Part B: Rural Education Achievement Program ☐ $ ☐ Purpose: Provide flexibility in the use of ESEA funds to eligible LEAs For School Improvement Schools only: School Improvement Grant (SIG) ☐ Purpose: to address the needs of schools in $ ☐ improvement, corrective action, and restructuring to improve student achievement ☐ Other federal funds (list and describe) $ ☐ ☐ Other federal funds (list and describe) $ ☐ ☐ Other federal funds (list and describe) $ ☐ Total amount of federal categorical funds allocated to this
school Total amount of state and federal categorical funds allocated to this school
Note: Other Title I-supported activities that are not shown on this page may be included in the SPSA Action Plan.
Form D: School Site Council Membership
California Education Code describes the required composition of the School Site Council (SSC). The SSC shall be composed of the principal and representatives of: teachers selected by teachers at the school; other school personnel selected by other school personnel at the school; parents of pupils attending the school selected by such parents; and, in secondary schools, pupils selected by pupils attending the school.4 The current make-up of the SSC is as follows:
4 EC Section 52852
-259-
Other Parent or Classroom Secondary Names of Members Principal School Community Teacher Student Staff Member
Eric Saibel x☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Rebecca Merrill ☐ ☐ x☐ ☐
Natasha Griffin ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ ☐
Sharon Tilley ☐ ☐ ☐x ☐
Mark Bello ☐ ☐ ☐ x☐
Jessica Edelen ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐x
Dalya Byrnes ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐x
Grace Mathews ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ x☐
Jack Watson ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐x
☐ ☐ ☐ ☐
Numbers of members in each category 1 1 1 3 3
Form E: Recommendations and Assurances
-260-
The school site council (SSC) recommends this school plan and proposed expenditures to the district governing board for approval and assures the board of the following:
1. The SSC is correctly constituted and was formed in accordance with district governing board policy and state law.
2. The SSC reviewed its responsibilities under state law and district governing board policies, including those board policies relating to material changes in the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) requiring board approval.
3. The SSC sought and considered all recommendations from the following groups or committees before adopting this plan (Check those that apply):
☐ State Compensatory Education Advisory Committee Signature
☐ English Learner Advisory Committee Signature
☐ Special Education Advisory Committee Signature
☐ Gifted and Talented Education Advisory Committee Signature
☐ District/School Liaison Team for schools in Program Improvement Signature
☐ Compensatory Education Advisory Committee Signature
☐ Departmental Advisory Committee (secondary) Signature
☐ Other committees established by the school or district (list) Signature
4. The SSC reviewed the content requirements for school plans of programs included in this SPSA and believes all such content requirements have been met, including those found in district governing board policies and in the local educational agency plan.
5. This SPSA is based on a thorough analysis of student academic performance. The actions proposed herein form a sound, comprehensive, coordinated plan to reach stated school goals to improve student academic performance.
-261-
6. This SPSA was adopted by the SSC at a public meeting on: ______.
Attested:
___Eric Saibel______6/17/17 Typed name of School Principal Signature of School Principal Date
______6/17/17 Typed name of SSC Chairperson Signature of SSC Chairperson Date
-262- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Office of the Superintendent
Date: May 23, 2017 To: Board of Trustees From: Valerie Pitts, Superintendent and Paula Rigney, Chief Business Official Re: Action: Instructional Minutes and Bell Schedules 2017-18
Background
According to Board Policy 6112, the Board of Trustees shall assign the length of the school day subject to the provisions of the law. Education Codes 46111-46117 prescribe the minimum instructional minutes as follows:
TK & Kindergarten 180 minutes/day; 36,000/year (EC 46115) (240 max., EC 46111) Grades 1-3 230 minutes/day; 50,400/year (EC 46112) (240 max., EC 46111) Grades 4-8 240 minutes/day; 54,000/year (EC 46113) (240 max., EC 46111)
Analysis
The attached chart indicates the instructional minute calculation for The Cove, Neil Cummins, and Hall. Neil Cummins and Hall proposes the same beginning and ending time as 2017-18.
Legal Consideration
The proposed minutes for The Cove School, Neil Cummins Elementary, and Hall Middle School will meet and/or exceed the legal requirements. Students receiving free and reduced lunch must receive lunches daily.
Recommendation
The Superintendent recommends Trustees approve the 2017-18 bell schedules and instructional minutes.
Backup attached: Yes √ No Item No. 6
-263- Larkspur Corte Madera School District
INSTRUCTIONAL MINUTES BELL SCHEDULE
School Year 2017-2018
School: Cove
Start 8:14 AM 8:14AM 8:14 AM End 12:00 PM 2:10 PM 3:00 PM Number of Hours 3:46 5:56 6:46
Number of Minutes 226 356 406 Less: Recess 0 0 -15 Less: Lunch 0 -45 -45
Actual Dail Instructional Minutes 226 311 346 Number of Regular Days 138 138 138
Actual Minutes - Regular Da s 31,188 42,918 47,748 ,Mm1ffi1ffilfiL,
Start 8:14AM 8:14AM 8:14AM End 12:00 PM 12:30 PM 12:30 PM Number of Hours 3:46 4:16 4:16
Number of Minutes 226 256 256 Less: Recess 0 0 0 Less: Lunch 0 0 0
Actual Daily Instructional Minutes 226 256 256 Number of Minimum Days 1 1 1
Actual Minutes - Minimum Days 226 256 256
Wednesday Schedule Start 8:14AM 8:14AM 8:14AM End 12:00 PM 1:15 PM 1:15 PM Number of Hours 3:46 5:01 5:01
Number of Minutes 226 301 301 Less: Recess 0 0 -15 Less: Lunch 0 -45 -45
Actual Daily Instructional Minutes 226 256 241 Number Wed. Days 41 41 41
Actual Minutes - Wed. Days 9,266 10,496 9,881
!Total No. of Instructional Days 1801 1801 1801
Annual Instructional Minutes Total Annual Instructional Minutes 40,6801 53,6701 57,8851 Required Number of Minutes 36,0001 50,4001 50,4001
-264- Larkspur Corte Madera School District
INSTRUCTIONAL MINUTES BELL SCHEDULE
School Year 2017-2018
School: Neil Cummins
8:10 AM 8:10AM End 2:00 PM 2:50 PM Number of Hours 5:50 6:40
Number of Minutes 350 400 Less: Recess -15 -15 Less: Lunch -45 -45
Actual Dail Instructional Minutes 290 340 131 139
Actual Minutes - Regular Days . 37,990 47,260 fllj'.wfflfllDJJD
Start 8:10AM 8:10AM End 12:10 PM 2:50 PM Number of Hours 4:00 6:40
Number of Minutes 240 400 Less: Recess -15 -15 Less: Lunch 0 -40
Actual Dail Instructional Minutes 225 345 Nuinber of Minimum Da s 10 0
Actual Minutes - Minimum Da s 2,250 0
Wednesday Schedule Start 8:10AM 8:10AM End 1:30 PM 1:30 PM Number of Hours 5:20 5:20
Number of Minutes 320 320 Less: Recess -15 -15 Less: Lunch -45 -45
Actual Daily Instructional Minutes 260 260 Number Wed. Days 39 41
Actual Minutes - Wed. Days 10,140 10,660
!Total No. of Instructional Days 180! 180!
Annual Instructional Minutes Total Annual Instructional Minutes 50,3801 57,9201 Required Number of Minutes 36,0001 50,4001
-265- Larkspur Corte Madera School District
INSTRUCTIONAL MINUTES BELL SCHEDULE
School Year 2017-2018 ·
School: Hall
Grades 6th -8th
Start 8:15AM End 3:12 PM Number of Hours 6:57
Number of Minutes 417 Less: Recess -15 Less: Lunch -40
Actual Daily Instructional Minutes 362 Number of Regular Days 140
Actual Minutes - Regular Days 50,680 ,...... ru,.g
Start 8:15 AM End 11:40 AM Number of Hours 3:25
Number of Minutes 205 Less: Recess -15 Less: Lunch 0
Actual Daily Instructional Minutes 190 Number of Minimum Days 1
Actual Minutes - Minimum Days 190
Wednesday Schedule Start 8:15AM End 2:12 PM Number of Hours 5:57
Number of Minutes 357 Less: Recess -15 Less: Lunch -40
Actual Daily Instructional Minutes 302 Number Wed. Days 39
Actual Minutes -Wed. Days 11,778
Total No. of Instructional Days 180
Annual Instructional Minutes Total Annual Instructional Minutes 62,648 Required Number of Minutes 54,000
-266- Larkspur- Corte Madera School District Cove Instructional Minutes 2017-18 TK Kinder Grades Grades Grade Grade Grade Morning 1 2 3 4 5 Regular Days Start 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 End 12:00 2:10 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:00 3:00 Number of Daily Minutes 226 356 406 406 406 406 406 Less Recess -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 Less Lunch -45 -45 -45 -45 -45 -45 Actual Daily Instructional Min 211 296 346 346 346 346 346 Number of Regular Days 180 131 138 138 138 138 138 Annual Minutes - Regular Days 37980 38776 47748 47748 47748 47748 47748
Minimum Days Start 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 8:14 End 12:30 12:30 12:30 12:30 12:30 12:30 Number of Daily Minutes 256 256 256 256 256 256 Less Recess -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 Less Lunch Actual Daily Instructional Min 241 241 241 241 241 241 Number of A Minimum Days 40 42 42 42 42 42 Start 8:14 End 12:10 Number of Daily Minutes 236 Less Recess -15 Less Lunch Actual Daily Instructional Min 221 Number of B Minimum Days 9 Annual Minutes - Minimum Days 11629 10122 10122 10122 10122 10122
Total Instructional Days 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 Total Annual Minutes 37980 50405 57870 57870 57870 57870 57870 Required Number of Minutes 36000 36000 50400 50400 50400 54000 54000
(Under) Over 1980 14405 7470 7470 7470 3870 3870
Completed By: Michelle Walker Date: 15-May-17
-267- Neil Cummins 2017-18 Instructional Minutes
Kinder Grades Grades Grade Grade Grade 1 2 3 4 5 Regular Days Start 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10 End 2:00 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 2:50 # Daily Min 350 400 400 400 400 400
Less Recess -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 Less Lunch -45 -45 -45 -45 -45 -45
Actual Daily Instructional Min 290 340 340 340 340 340 Number of Regular Days 131 138 138 138 138 138 Annual Minutes - Regular Days 37990 46920 46920 46920 46920 46920
Minimum Days Start 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10 8:10 End 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 # Daily Min 320 320 320 320 320 320 Less Recess -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 Less Lunch -45 -45 -45 -45 -45 -45 Actual Daily Instructional Min 260 260 260 260 260 260 Number of "A" Minimum Days 40 42 42 42 42 42 Annual Minutes - "A" Minimum Days 10,400 10,920 10,920 10,920 10,920 10,920 Start 8:10 End 12:10 # Daily Min 230 Less Recess -15 Less Lunch Actual Daily Instructional Min 215 0 0 0 0 0 Number of "B" Minimum Day 9 0 0 0 0 0 Annual Minutes - "B" Minimum Days 1935 0 0 0 0 0
Total Instructional Days 180 180 180 180 180 180 Total Annual Minutes 50,325 57,840 57,840 57,840 57,840 57,840 Required # Min 36000 50400 50400 50400 54000 54000
(Under) Over 14325 7440 7440 7440 3840 3840
-268- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Hall Middle School Instructional Minutes Worksheet Grades 6-8 2017-2018
Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, Friday Wednesday Start 8:15 Start 8:15 End 3:12 End 2:12 Number of Minutes 417 Number of Minutes 357
Less Recess -15 Less Recess -15 Less Lunch -40 Less Lunch -40
Actual Daily Instructional Min. 362 Actual Daily Instructional Min. 302 Number of Days 140 Number of Days 34
Annual Minutes 50,680 Annual Minutes 10,268
Conference Days Last Day of School Start 8:15 Start 8:15 End 2:12 End 11:40 Number of Minutes 357 Number of Minutes 205
Less Recess -15 Less Recess -15 Less Lunch -40 Less Lunch
Actual Daily Instructional Min. 302 Actual Daily Instructional Min. 190 Number of Days 5 Number of Days 1
Annual Minutes 1,510.00 Annual Minutes 190
Totals Number Minutes Total Mon., Tues., Thurs., Fri. 140 362 50,680 Wednesday 34 302 10,268 Conference Days 5 302 1,510 Last Day 1 190 190 Total Instructional Minutes 62,648 Statutory Required Minimum 54,000 Over (Under) 8,648
-269- LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT THE COVE SCHOOL
School Hours 2017-18
Transitional Kindergarten: 8:14am – 12:00pm (MTWThF)
Kindergarten: 8:14am - 2:10pm (MTThF) 8:14am – 1:15pm (W) Lunch: 12:30-1:15pm *August 22-September 1 dismissal at 12:20pm for assessments
Grades 1-5: 8:14am - 3:00pm (MTThF) 8:14am – 1:15pm (W) Recess: 10:35am - 10:50am Lunch: 12:30-1:15pm
Important Dates: ● First Day of School – August 22 ● Back to School Night –August 31 ● Parent Teacher Conferences – October 16-20 o 1:15pm Dismissal for conference week ● Open House Night – April 5 ● Last Day of School - June 7 o 12:30pm Dismissal for last day of school Supervised Lunch (Optional): 12:30-1:15pm
Office Hours: 8:00am – 4:00pm (MTThF) 8:00am – 3:30pm (W) Closed during school holidays
-270- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Neil Cummins School 2017-2018 DRAFT Bell Schedule
Kindergarten: Instruction 8:10 – 2:00 Snack Time/Recess (2 Classes) 9:45 – 10:00 Snack Time/Recess (2 Classes) 10:00 - 10:15 Lunch/Recess #1 (2 Classes) 11:35 – 12:20 Lunch Recess #2 (2 Classes) 12:30 - 1:15 Dismissal 2:00 Early Dismissal on Wed. 1:30
Grades 1 & 2: M, T, Th, F Instruction 8:10 – 9:45 Snack Time/Recess 9:45 – 10:00 Instruction 10:00 – 11:45 Lunch/Recess 11:45 – 12:30 Instruction 12:30 – 2:50 Dismissal 2:50 Early Dismissal on Wed. 1:30
Grades 3-5: M, T, Th, F Instruction 8:10 – 10:00 Snack Time/Recess 10:00 - 10:15 Instruction 10:15 – 12:30 Lunch/Recess 12:30 – 1:15 Instruction 1:15 – 2:50 Dismissal 2:50 Early Dismissal on Wed. 1:30
Minimum Days: Early Release (@1:30) All Wednesdays Teacher Instructional Planning
October 16, 17, 19, 20 2017 Conference Week 1:30 Dismissal * please note: no school on Sept. 21, 2017
June 7, 2017 Last Day of School
********************************************************************************************** School Hours: School starts at 8:10 (K-5) on Tuesday, August 22nd
Back to School Night - August 31st, 2017 Open House - April 5th, 2018
Kindergarten Schedule August 22 through September 1 Kindergarten dismissal 12:10pm Beginning on September 5th (Tuesday after Labor Day) Kindergarten dismissal at 2:00pm
Grades 1-5 August 22, 2017: Students begin their regular schedule (see above)
Revised 5/14/17
-271- Hall Middle School Bell Schedule 2017/18
Time Monday Tuesday Thursday Friday Minutes
8:15 - 9:16 (HR) 1 7 4 2 61
9:20 - 10:16 2 1 5 3 56
10:16-10:31 Recess Recess Recess Recess 15
10:35 - 11:31 3 2 6 4 56
11:35 - 12:31 4 3 7 5 56
12:31 - 1:11 Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch 40
1:16 - 2:12 5 4 1 6 56
2:16 - 3:12 6 5 Advisory 7 56
Time Wednesday Minutes
8:15 - 9:16 (HR) 6 61
9:20 - 10:16 7 56
10:16 - 10:31 Recess 15
10:35 - 11:31 1 56
11:35 - 12:31 2 56
12:31 - 1:11 Lunch 40
1:16 - 2:12 3 56
-272- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Office of the Superintendent
Date: May 23, 2017 To: Board of Trustees From: Valerie Pitts, Superintendent Re: Discussion: Public Hearing on the 2017-18 Local Control and Accountability Plan & Annual Update
Background
Assembly Bill 97 (Chapter 47, Statues of 2013) signed by Governor Brown on July 1, 2013 specifies implementation requirements for the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) that includes the development of a Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP).
Local Education Agencies (LEAs) must adopt three-year LCAPs annually. Plans must be aligned to the LEA budget and describe annual goals and actions for all pupils and any additional local priorities identified by the local governing board. The key goal areas for the LCAP are as follows: 1) Basic services such as appropriately assigned teachers and instructional materials, and adequate school facilities, 2) Implementation of Common Core Curriculum Standards, especially for English Language Learners, 3) Parental involvement, including outreach to parents of disadvantaged students, 4) Student achievement, including test scores, college readiness and language proficiency, 5) Student engagement, including attendance, dropout and graduation rates, 6) School climate including suspensions and expulsions, safety and campus connections, 7) Course access, including core classes and special programs for needy students, and 8) Other student outcomes demonstrating a broad course of study.
Analysis
This year the LCAP has been reviewed and revised with broad stakeholder input including the District’s LCAP Advisory Committee. Staff, parents, principals, English Learner Parent Advisory Committee (ELAC), and other constituent groups have consulted and contributed to the development of the plan.
An updated LCAP draft will be posted on the District website on June 10 for the public hearing. The Superintendent will review changes and revisions.
Financial Impact
The District will receive $11,455,839 through the Local Control Funding Formula in 2017-18 that is funded by local property taxes and state aid. This total includes supplemental funds of approximately $215,774, based on enrollment of subgroup populations (socio-economically disadvantaged, English Language Learners, and foster students). The LCAP describes how these funds will be spent in achieving educational goals and priorities for 2017-18, 18-19 and 19-20.
Legal Implications
The LCAP must be adopted each year in tandem with the budget. Public input is required.
Recommendation
This information is provided to Trustees for information and discussion purposes only.
Backup attached: Yes √ No Item No. 7
-273- Page 1 of 69
LCAP Year 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20
Addendum: General instructions & regulatory requirements. Local Control Appendix A: Priorities 5 and 6 Rate Calculations Accountability Plan Appendix B: Guiding Questions: Use as prompts (not limits) LCFF Evaluation Rubrics [Note: this text will be hyperlinked to the LCFF Evaluation Rubric web page when it becomes available.]: and Annual Update Essential data to support completion of this LCAP. Please analyze the LEA’s full data set; specific links to the rubrics are also provided within (LCAP) Template the template.
LEA Name Larkspur-Corte Madera School District
Contact------Name and Valerie Pitts Email and [email protected] Title Superintendent Phone 415.927.6960 x5
2017-20 Plan Summary
THE STORY Briefly describe the students and community and how the LEA serves them. The Larkspur-Corte Madera School District is a high performing K-8 school district, approximately eight miles north of the Golden Gate Bridge in Marin County, California, serving families and students in the cities of Corte Madera and Larkspur. The residents of the Twin Cities community are very supportive of public education. With our learning community, our recent focus has been on full implementation of the Common Core State Standards and emphasis on mathematics, rigorous project-based learning and interdisciplinary curriculum and VAPA emphasis.
The average per pupil spending is approximately $11,500, $3500 of which is from local revenues. These local revenues from business leases, a parcel tax and SPARK, the Larkspur-Corte Madera Schools Foundation allow the district to provide ample enrichment programs at its schools, including visual and performing arts, robust technology, a focus on project-based learning and social emotional well-being, and a variety of other curricular activities, after school tutoring and homework clubs and world language to its students.
The district's Student Achievement Profile places it in the top 10% of public schools in California. The staff is collaborative and compassionate. Together with an active parent community, they serve as catalysts for growth who inspire and promote well-rounded, lifelong learners and future citizens of the world through challenging, innovative, rigorous curriculum. Class size averages are 24(K-3), 26(4/5) and 27(6-8) students per class. Our district provides an extraordinary education through its commitment to meeting the needs of each student with safe and healthy environments, innovative staff, and an engaging and inspiring curriculum, while at the same time maintaining fiscal stability, and promoting strong community involvement. • Elementary Schools: Neil Cummins Elementary, The Cove School • Middle School: Henry C. Hall Middle School • 1,548 Students, K-8 • 100+ Certificated teachers, librarians, administrators • 50+ Classified Staff • Marin County population: 260,750 • Larkspur population: 12,325 • Corte Madera population: 9,916
-274- Page 2 of 69
LCAP HIGHLIGHTS Identify and briefly summarize the key features of this year’s LCAP. This year’s LCAP continues to feature our programmatic emphasis on CCSS, Project-Based Learning and Visual and Performing Arts. Our curricular area of focus districtwide is Mathematics, as we seek to both extend and nurture the transition to Common Core and support of Mathematical practices. Our supplemental LCAP funds are directed, along with other state and federal funds, at providing support to students who are struggling to meet standards in our ongoing commitment to closing the achievement gap. The LCAP also features continued work in ensuring our schools are welcoming, safe and engaging places for students. We have strong safety, discipline and attendance patterns and seek to continue to improve climate and school connectedness indicators. We are in excellent fiscal health and maintain consistency in program with a conservative and watchful eye on revenues and expenditures – ensuring students come first.
REVIEW OF PERFORMANCE
Based on a review of performance on the state indicators and local performance indicators included in the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, progress toward LCAP goals, local self-assessment tools, stakeholder input, or other information, what progress is the LEA most proud of and how does the LEA plan to maintain or build upon that success? This may include identifying any specific examples of how past increases or improvements in services for low-income students, English learners, and foster youth have led to improved performance for these students. Our safety and school climate indicators are strong; student attendance and graduation rates steady and high. Students have state of the art facilities and technology; all sites have been modernized and one new school constructed; a 1:1 student to device ratio is available in all grades.
We are most proud of our academic achievement and excellence across state indicators. We have made GREATEST good progress with helping our English learners become proficient in English, although more intervention is PROGRESS needed with newcomers, and students with special needs. We have undertaken a significant amount of work in our Math Curriculum and articulation K-8 resulting in the adoption of a new K-5 Math Curriculum: TERC Investigations.
Referring to the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, identify any state indicator or local performance indicator for which overall performance was in the “Red” or “Orange” performance category or where the LEA received a “Not Met” or “Not Met for Two or More Years” rating. Additionally, identify any areas that the LEA has determined need significant improvement based on review of local performance indicators or other local indicators. What steps is the LEA planning to take to address these areas with the greatest need for improvement? English Learner Progress performance is in the "orange" performance category indicating that the district continues to struggle with helping English Learners acquire and achieve at standard. We continue to need to focus on systematic intervention for our special groups including collecting and monitoring student progress data.
The district has also identified Math Student Performance as an area of need; related to the transition, articulation and full implementation of Math CCSS K-8. Districtwide Student Performance is in the 'yellow" category (caution) while specific schools and grade levels are meeting standard (green).
GREATEST LCMSD has worked this year to implement significant professional development for teachers K-8 in Math CCSS. Additionally, grades K-5 have adopted TERC Investigations Math Curriculum.The 17-18 LCAP NEEDS identifies the following actions to improve math performance: 1) Implementation of new TERC curriculum K-5 2) continued peer coaching and professional development 3) districtwide articulation 4) differentiated math grouping within classrooms 5) math intervention groups and/or extended learning 6) specific benchmark assessments used to inform instruction
-275- Page 3 of 69
Referring to the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, identify any state indicator for which performance for any student group was two or more performance levels below the “all student” performance. What steps is the LEA planning to take to address these performance gaps? ELA Achievement: All Student performance is "blue" indicating a high level of student performance (meeting or exceeding standards). However, English Learners, Students with Disabilities and Hispanic student groups are two performance levels below, i.e., "yellow." Socioeconomically Disadvantaged student group is three performance levels below All Students, i.e., "orange."
Math Achievement: All student performance is "yellow." Socioeconomically Disadvantaged and Hispanic student groups are "red," two levels below. PERFORMANCE GAPS Suspension Rate: All Student performance is "blue" but Hispanic is "yellow." An area of need is to focus all professional efforts on systematic interventions for the groups not meeting standard. This district commits to the provision of specific ELD curriculum, ongoing case management, articulated curriculum, skill-building software, and extended learning opportunities for students not meeting standard.
INCREASED OR IMPROVED SERVICES If not previously addressed, identify the two to three most significant ways that the LEA will increase or improve services for low-income students, English learners, and foster youth. We will be providing all newcomer EL students with ipads and English Learning apps. Counselors and intervention specialists will case manage and ensure students are ELD specific instruction and monitoring progress through disaggregated local benchmark assessment data and grade level PLC's. The district will improve its delivery of case management, intervention and extended learning services and internet access for SED students. Special education students will receive specialized services in Reading and Math that systematically address IEP objectives and monitor growth. Lexia and Sonday System (Orton Gillingham) are specific examples of skill-building curriculum that staff has received recent training in. Full implementation will occur 2017-18. Students who need math remediation will receive support classes (6-8) or intervention services from an intervention specialist (k-5).
BUDGET SUMMARY Complete the table below. LEAs may include additional information or more detail, including graphics.
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
Total General Fund Budget Expenditures for LCAP Year $14,003,916
Total------Funds Budgeted for Planned Actions/Services to $16,802,000.00 Meet the Goals in the LCAP for LCAP Year
The LCAP is intended to be a comprehensive planning tool but may not describe all General Fund Budget Expenditures. Briefly describe any of the General Fund Budget Expenditures specified above for the LCAP year not included in the LCAP.
-276- Page 4 of 69
$11,354,681 Total Projected LCFF Revenues for LCAP Year
-277- Page 5 of 69
Annual Update LCAP Year Reviewed: 2016-17
Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals from the prior year LCAP. Duplicate the table as needed. District Strategic Priority: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual Goal growth of all community members. Goal 1: Improve student engagement, health, well-being and connectedness to school. 1 ------State and/or Local Priorities Addressed by this goal: STATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COE 9 10 LOCAL
ANNUAL MEASURABLE OUTCOMES
EXPECTED ACTUAL
1.1 Increase ADA to 97% 1.1 ADA 96.5
1.2 Reduce chronic absenteeism (truancy) to fewer than 5 students 1.2 The Cove: 14 students (3%)were chronically absent ( absent 10% or more of the per site as measured by mandatory SART meetings. school year) NC: 16 students (2.7%)were chronically absent 1.3 Maintain 0% expulsion and drop-out rate; reduce suspension rate Hall: 35 students (6.6%)had three or more unexcused absences to <10 days of suspensions District rate: 4% (Saturday School makeups not calculated)
1.4 80% students feel connected to school on HKS measures 1.3 0% expulsion rate (one student expelled) Suspension rate = 15 students suspended 1.5 >85% of students and parents report curriculum is stimulating and engaging 1.4 99% of 5th graders report medium or high connectedness to school and 89% of 7th graders students 1.6 District scores proficient in Student Digital Citizenship in Bright reported medium or high connectedness to school on HKS student survey Bytes survey 1.5 >80% (across 3 sitesstudents and parents report curriculum is stimulating and 1.7 >75% teachers, parents, students report positive indicators on engaging on School Site Council HKS and district climate/culture survey (3 x per year) surveys.
1.8 5th and 8th grade students maintain Healthy Fitness Levels on 1.6 District students score Emerging in Student Digital Citizenship Phys Ed Assessment 1.7 > 75% teachers, parents and students report positive indicators on HKS and local climate/culture surveys
-278- Page 6 of 69
1.8 5th and 7th grade students maintained Healthy Fitness Levels on Phys Ed Assessments
ACTIONS / SERVICES
Duplicate the Actions/Services from the prior year LCAP and complete a copy of the following table for each. Duplicate the table as needed. startcollapse Action 1 PLANNED ACTUAL Actions/Services 1.1 Principals will plan staff activities and teambuilding that 1.1 Several activities were conducted throughout the year focus on with staff in fostering growth mindset and positive school professional culture among staff, growth mindset, and develop culture guiding principles or cultural agreements 1.2 Culture work was done in collaboration with LCMEA; four 1.2 Operate Culture Committee in LCAP Advisory and k-8 math workshops were conducted; two teambuilding and establish climate activities were held monitoring system 1.3 Positive Behavior Support plan implemented at HMS with 1.3 Develop/implement schoolwide positive behavior support revised student discipline systems and behavioral plan expectations, training in No Bully, Restorative Circles, Restorative Justice , No Bully and IUnderstand programs Mindfulness and Classroom Management occurred for all HMS; Responsive Classroom, Kimochi and Mindfulness Elem staff.Several student led faculty presentations were completed. 1.4 Revise student handbook, behavioral expectations and interventions matrix at middle school 1.4 Hall Middle School made significant positive and clear revisions to their student handbook 1.5 Provide classroom management training and coaching for HMS teachers 1.5 Training in classroom management and No Bully completed in August 2016 1.6 Maintain Safe Routes to School data on Green Trips 1.6 Safe Routes to Schools committees active at all schools and green trips rates were maintained
The Cove and Neil Cummins Elementary schools used SPARK dollars for social emotional learning and wellness activities for students and staff. Responsive Classroom trainings were attended by elem teacher reps .
-279- Page 7 of 69
BUDGETED ESTIMATED ACTUAL Expenditures Contracted Services $5,000 Staff Development/Extra Duty Contracted Services 5000-5999: Services And Other Operating Expenditures Locally Defined $8,599
Action 2 PLANNED ACTUAL Actions/Services 1.7 Provide Counselors at all schools 1.7 .60-1.0 counselors at all schools
1.8 Develop a variety of student leadership activities 1.8 Student leadership activities prevalent at all schools
1.9 ELP/ILP Case Management by counselors 1.9 Counselors provide case management for EL students and families 1.10 Implement attendance incentive strategies, intervene with chronic 1.10 Attendance campaigns at all schools. Saturday School offenders and communicate data on attendance goals implemented at HMS
1.11 Implement SART meetings at site for truant students 1.11 SART meetings at schools for excessive absences
1.12 Teachers Implement cyber-safety (Common Sense 1.12 Teachers have access to Common Sense Media Media) lessons and implement as appropriate training (5-8 grade tech and 7th QUEST classes), and Responsive Classrooms and PBIS 1.13 Wellness Policy in full implementation
1.13 Implement Wellness Policy with fidelity at all campuses 1.14 Quarterly Parent Education programs at all sites including Parent/Coffee bi-monthly chats at HMS 1.14 PTA/PTOs ensure adult modeling, collaborate with other districts 1.15 PD on Inclusive Education still needs work and ongoing in parent education PD
1.15 Implement inclusive education PD for all staff, students/parents
BUDGETED ESTIMATED ACTUAL Expenditures 3000-3999: Employee Benefits $296,000 2.8 FTE Counselor Salary Costs 1000-1999: Certificated Personnel Salaries $212,978 2.8 FTE Counselor Statutory Benefit Costs 3000-3999: Employee Benefits $61,055
-280- Page 8 of 69
ANALYSIS Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals from the prior year LCAP. Duplicate the table as needed.
Use actual annual measurable outcome data, including performance data from the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable.
Describe the overall implementation of the The district placed great emphasis this year on positive school climate and culture. Lead Teams discussed actions/services to achieve the articulated goal. and implemented a variety of strategies at sites according to local needs. The overall result on the HKS staff climate survey was positive and we met our goal of 75% of teachers reporting positive indicators. Continued emphasis and increasing expectations for greater percentages of posiitve responding on HKS survey is prioritized for 17-18. No difference in ADA due to campaigns or Saturday School. Recommend continued communication from school sites as to the importance of attendance and specific communication to parents. Truancy definitions should be communicated clearly at the beginning of the school year. Suspension and Expulsion rates should trend downward ( although currently low) with new and consistent behavioral expectations at the middle school.
Describe------the overall effectiveness of the actions/services The impact of stating a goal and creating plans for improvement was effective. This stated goal relating to to achieve the articulated goal as measured by the LEA. cultural improvement should be maintained for several years. Changes in school leadership at HMS were positive. No difference in ADA due to campaigns or Saturday School. Recommend continued communication from school sites as to the importance of attendance and specific communication to parents. Suspension and Expulsion rates should trend downward ( although currently low) with new and consistent behavioral expectations at the middle school
Explain------material differences between Budgeted Actual costs of contracted services. Actual personnel placement on salary schedule and district statuary Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures. benefits.
Describe------any changes made to this goal, expected Revised metrics for positive indicators for staff to correspond with same for students re: school climate and outcomes, metrics, or actions and services to achieve this culture (see revised expected AMO's on 17-18 LCAP). Survey indicators primarily measure safety as a goal as a result of this analysis and analysis of the LCFF social emotional feeling (free from bullying, physical harm and negative peer pressure) Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable. Identify where those Truancy definitions should be communicated clearly at the beginning of the school year. changes can be found in the LCAP.
-281- Page 9 of 69
Annual Update LCAP Year Reviewed: 2016-17
Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals from the prior year LCAP. Duplicate the table as needed. District Strategic Priority: Inspire academic growth and civic responsibility through a rigorous, inquiry-based curriculum that is engaging and Goal personalized. Goal: Enhance progress and ensure continuous improvement and access to English, Math, Science, Social Science, Arts and Digital Literacy for all students. 2 Ensure equitable and inclusive practices for students with special needs.
------State and/or Local Priorities Addressed by this goal: STATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COE 9 10 LOCAL
ANNUAL MEASURABLE OUTCOMES
EXPECTED ACTUAL
2.1 >75% of students meet or exceed standards on state annual and 2.1 77% of students grades 3-8 met or exceeded ELA standards on State trimester district benchmark assessments in ELA and 65% in Math. assessments; 80%___ met or exceeded standards on local reading benchmarks. ___ 3-8 met or exceeded standards on local writing rubrics 2.2 > 65% of students will meet or exceed standards in Science, Arts, 64% of students grades 3-8 met or exceeded Math standards on State assessments. Social Studies ___ of students 3-8 met or exceeded standards on local math benchmark Students in target groups make gains to 60%. assessments
2.3 100% of English Learners will make sufficient annual progress in 2.2 >80% of students met standards in Science, Arts and Social Studies as English as measured by the California English Language measured by grades and progress Development Test (CELDT) (AMAO 1) through equal access to CCSS reports
2.4 Teachers will implement 2-3 interdisciplinary (cross subject/dept) 2.3 61% of English Learners made sufficient progress in English as measured by projects per year at HMS CELDT
2.5 85% of parents report curriculum is rigorous; 85% of parents will 2.4 Teachers averaged 2 interdisciplinary units grade 3-8 report student needs are met 2.5 >80% of parents report curriculum is rigorous; >75% of parents report student 2.6 75% of parents of students with IEP’s will report satisfaction with needs are met Special Ed program. 2.6 89.7% of parents of students with IEP’s will report satisfaction with Special Ed 2.7 100% of students have equal access to standards-aligned program. curriculum, including the Arts. 2.7 100% of students have equal access to standards-aligned curriculum, including the Arts.
-282- Page 10 of 69
2.8 100% of students have access to technology/internet at home and school. 2.8 100% of students have access to technology/internet at home and school.
2.9 Decrease student/computer ratio to 1:1 in two more grade levels 2.9 Student computer ratio was decreased to 1:1 in 6 grade levels ( added 2 and 3)
2.10 Increase Classroom, Access, Skills, Environment (CASE) score 2.10 Bright Bytes CASE score = 1072 (proficient) on BrightBytes Survey to 1100
ACTIONS / SERVICES
Duplicate the Actions/Services from the prior year LCAP and complete a copy of the following table for each. Duplicate the table as needed. startcollapse Action 1 PLANNED ACTUAL Actions/Services 2.1 Revise curriculum mapping of CA Common Core and 2.1 Curriculum maps exist for 3-8 CCSS ELA and Math and NGSS NGSS Standards • Implement integrated and discrete Arts programs K-8; Art is integrated and provided by VAPA teachers in discrete • Implement K-8 CCSS aligned report cards and explore programs narrative reporting and communication re: student progress Elementary report cards are standards based. The Cove has • Write, align formats, rubrics and implement IBL/VAPA units a narrative report. HMS has not transitioned to CCSS aligned per report cards. grade IBL/VAPA units are in progress • Implement NGSS and K-5 Science 2x week K-5 science is implemented 2x per week Maker class at HMS, Tinker time weekly at The Cove • Implement Science-Maker activities K-8 2.2 PBL planning in process 2.2 Develop district/system plan for PBL http://bie.org/blog/pbl_system_planning_at_a_district_level 2.3 Coaching by TOSA in PBL and technology and ELL strategies 2.3 Provide coaching in differentiation/PBL/small group instruction/technology responsive classrooms/PBS and 2.4 Adopted K-5 Math curriculum; ELA in process and on GLAD/ELL strategies/Inclusion strategies target for 17-18 2.4 Adopt math and language arts CCSS curriculum 2.5 Hotspots available and deployed to students without internet at home
-283- Page 11 of 69
2.5 Purchase standards-aligned digital instructional materials 2.6 Reading Specialists at Elementary Schools. EL support and books, mobile devices and hotspots for check out to before and after school HW and push in support teacher at students. HMS
2.6 Provide Reading Specialists K-5, TOSA’s tech/pbl/LA K-8 2.7 Reading volunteers in 3rd grade at elementary schools.
2.7 Use of reading volunteers to allow 1:1 for EL in 3rd grade 2.8 Summer school offered to 22 EL students
2.8 Provide afterschool and summer programs for ELL and 2.9 Counselors case manage EL Students and families and students who are not meeting standard conduct ELP's as necessary
2.9 Counselors to provide case management for target 2.10 Benchmarks are implemented 3x per year across ELA populations as and Math needed (ELL, Advanced Learners); conduct ILPs/ELPs as needed 2.11 Intervention Response systems are in pilot and will continue progress in 17-18. Written EL program guidelines in 2.10 Implement local (3x/yr) benchmark assessments in place Reading, Writing and Math K-8 according to a calendar and present results to Board, report results to parents 2.12 EL students are clustered
2.11 Implement classroom-based systematic intervention and 2.13 Gifted Students are clustered in appropriate classes multi-tiered response system and ELD curriculum for target students; monitor 2.14 Written guidelines are fully implemented
2.12 Provide sheltered classes for ELL (cluster students in 2.15 Student Support Teams meeting as needed but need to gen ed increase frequency classes) and para support when appropriate; write ELP’s 2.16 Arts Teams have waned this year 2.13 Cluster Advanced students in classes for differentiation, small group, personalization, outreach to parents through 2.17 Student-led conferences occur frequently in grades 4/5 ILPs, ELPs. and somwhat in grades 6-8
2.14 Implement written guidelines for ELL programs 2.18 Articulated math progressions with Elementary Feeder districts to TUHSD - TUHSD has parent document 2.15 Implement Student Support Team Meetings for students with IEP’s (communicate progress regularly) 2.19 Ed Leader 21 and BIE rubrics are used somewhat by teachers - inconsistent 2.16 VAPA standards and Site Arts Team (SAT) plans will be integrated into the inquiry- based common core curriculum. 2.20 Lexia, Sonday System and ALEK's intervention Develop Arts integration rubric programs were purchased
-284- Page 12 of 69
2.17 Implement student-led conferences, student goal setting and progress monitoring 4-8
2.18 Align pre-algebra/algebra/geometry standards, curriculum, coursework progression with TALK-12 districts – develop document for use with parents
2.19 Develop assessments/rubrics for CCSS and NGSS and to measure 21st Century skills ( Ed Leader 21)
2.20 Purchase and implement specific curriculum for students with dyslexia and other reading disabilities
BUDGETED ESTIMATED ACTUAL Expenditures 3000-3999: Employee Benefits $11,639,000 Summer School Programs and After School Programs (Parks and Rec & Boys and Girls Club) 5000-5999: Services And Other Operating Expenditures Concentration $9,728 Annual licensing fees for intervention programs 5000-5999: Services And Other Operating Expenditures Concentration $4,973 Certificated Teachers Salaries 1000-1999: Certificated Personnel Salaries LCFF $9,298,152 Certificated Teachers Benefits 3000-3999: Employee Benefits LCFF $1,707,581 Instructional Aides/Classified Support 2000-2999: Classified Personnel Salaries LCFF $961,475
ANALYSIS Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals from the prior year LCAP. Duplicate the table as needed.
Use actual annual measurable outcome data, including performance data from the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable.
Describe the overall implementation of the Implementation of identified activities are highly dependent on Leadership Teams and focus at the sites. actions/services to achieve the articulated goal. Continuous improvement is occurring but varies between and within schools. Teachers are much more comfortable with CCSS and NGSS but still learning how to provide rigorous and engaging curriculum with CCSS/NGSS integrated.
------
-285- Page 13 of 69
Describe the overall effectiveness of the actions/services Clustering is an effective strategy to supporting EL and Gifted students. PLCs, department and grade level to achieve the articulated goal as measured by the LEA. teams need to implement monitoring strategies that hold teams accountable to student progress. Site administrators need to provide teachers with direct and specific feedback on the effectiveness of observable, targeted instructional practices. Use of Inquiry as a strategy and underscoring student led projects, questioning and critical thinking strategies provide increased rigor and engagement. Technology integration and interdisciplinary unit development have been focus areas for TOSA
Explain------material differences between Budgeted Summer school and after school scholarships were slightly higher than anticipated. Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures.
Describe------any changes made to this goal, expected Continue to increase and measure student engagement and rigor in curriculum. Middle School students outcomes, metrics, or actions and services to achieve this want to be involved more in choosing their approaches to projects; more emphasis on student reflection goal as a result of this analysis and analysis of the LCFF and participation in goal setting; use of rubrics to assess student communication, creativity, agency, Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable. Identify where those problem solving. changes can be found in the LCAP.
-286- Page 14 of 69
Annual Update LCAP Year Reviewed: 2016-17
Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals from the prior year LCAP. Duplicate the table as needed. Goal Strategic Priority: Attract, cultivate, and retain innovative, inspirational educators • All teachers will demonstrate improvement in professional standards. 3 • All staff will participate in ongoing professional learning in Project-Based Learning, Arts, Sciences, Technology, ELD/GLAD and differentiation strategies, classroom management • District will recruit and retain excellent teachers/learning leaders to fill vacancies
------State and/or Local Priorities Addressed by this goal: STATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COE 9 10 LOCAL
ANNUAL MEASURABLE OUTCOMES
EXPECTED ACTUAL
3.1 75% of teachers will apply (meet or exceed standards) on CSTP’s 3.1 Met and show progress in areas of need (make progress on PBL rubric) 3.2 Met - all teachers are using CCSS and NGSS 3.2 100% of teachers will implement CCSS and NGSS 3.3 ISTE Standards not met by 100% 3.3 5/5 Proficient on aggregate ISTE standards on BrightBytes survey 3.4 Salary at median, benefits are not 3.4 Maintain competitive salaries and benefits at/or above median of Marin districts 3.5 100% of teachers are appropriately credentialed
3.5 100% of teachers will be appropriately credentialed 3.6 100% of teachers included PD in CIP
3.6 100% of teachers will embed professional learning in CIP goals 3.7 80% of teachers reported job satisfaction on HKS Climate Survey and Other school surveys 3.7 75% of teachers will report average or above job satisfaction on climate surveys 3.8 Offering signing bonus in Math and participating in housing options study
3.8 Develop hiring and longevity strategies
ACTIONS / SERVICES
-287- Page 15 of 69
Duplicate the Actions/Services from the prior year LCAP and complete a copy of the following table for each. Duplicate the table as needed. startcollapse Action 1 PLANNED ACTUAL Actions/Services 3.1 Develop three-year Professional Development Plan (IBL, 3.1 All PD this year has fully aligned with LCAP goals. Tech, LCMSD was first to provide inclusion overview to SEAC VAPA, GLAD strategies, Inclusion, Common Core parents; an inclusion PLC with other districts has been implementation) in support of LCAP formed. • Execute PD Plan consistent with LCAP and SPSA Not many teachers take advantage of online PD offerings. • Support new teachers with mentoring/coaching/TOSA’s Most teachers attend training and workshops and • Develop structures for professional learning including conferences participation in webinars, MOOCs, and other online learning opportunities to apply to credit on salary schedule 3.2 This activity has been put on hold due to budget constraints and negotiations 3.2 Establish a clear stipend schedule with incentives for Some stipends for coordinating PD have been applied teacher TOSA position effective growth and leadership • Identify leadership opportunities for staff to build capacity, 3.3 ELA and Math departments strong at Hall including coaching and mentoring, design ladder system for learning leaders 3.4 HR processes under constant PDSA cycle
3.3 Build and strengthen department teams at Hall and across 3.5 New negotiations team has been positive district for vertical articulation 3.6 Continue this focus; not established
3.4 Develop and revise HR processes to streamline HR 3.7 Completed and consistent use support to all staff and ensure fidelity in hiring, retention and evaluation 3.8 Implemented processes 3.9 Implemented 3.5 Negotiate contracts with collaborative interest approaches 3.10 AIP's and PAR coaches successful 3.6 Identify signature and inspirational teaching practices, conduct more observations and give feedback, instructional rounds, use PBL Gold Standards Rubric and SIOP
-288- Page 16 of 69
3.7 Admin will complete new Continuous Improvement process with all on-cycle teachers, reflect on process with admin partner, and make recommendations for revisions to process
3.8 Reduce meetings/other commitments during school day to increase Principal presence in classrooms
3.9 Support teacher-teacher peer observations and TOSA coaching
3.10 Use Arts Integration Planners and PAR coaches as needed
BUDGETED ESTIMATED ACTUAL Expenditures 3000-3999: Employee Benefits $227,000 Salary associated 1000-1999: Certificated Personnel Salaries LCFF $194,540 Benefits associated 3000-3999: Employee Benefits LCFF $37,000
ANALYSIS Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals from the prior year LCAP. Duplicate the table as needed.
Use actual annual measurable outcome data, including performance data from the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable.
Describe the overall implementation of the Overall implementation of actions and services for all Goals 3/Strategic Priority have been effective. actions/services to achieve the articulated goal. 100% of teachers on evaluation use the CSTP's and district CIP process. Professional development in Math, ELA and NGSS implemented.
LCAP Self-Reflection Tool completed and demonstrates initial to full implementation of standards All current year hiring completed with 100% appropriately credentialed teachers
Describe------the overall effectiveness of the actions/services Effective CIP (Continual Improvement Process) to achieve the articulated goal as measured by the LEA. Need ongoing multiple forms of professional development ( more use of personalized learning options for PD) Hiring strategies are effective Activities to improve school climate are effective
------
-289- Page 17 of 69
Explain material differences between Budgeted Actual placement and salary increases due to negotiation settlement. Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures.
Describe------any changes made to this goal, expected Focus on Math and Math intervention in the current and 17-18 school year outcomes, metrics, or actions and services to achieve this Offer signing bonus for math teachers for 17-18 goal as a result of this analysis and analysis of the LCFF Implemented HKS Climate survey Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable. Identify where those changes can be found in the LCAP.
-290- Page 18 of 69
Annual Update LCAP Year Reviewed: 2016-17
Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals from the prior year LCAP. Duplicate the table as needed. Goal Strategic Priority: Sustain the fiscal integrity and stability of the district Maintain AAA rating and strong FCMAT health rating. Leverage and align district resources with student improvement and LCAP goals 4 Maintain outstanding facilities, leveraging new facilities for innovative learning
------State and/or Local Priorities Addressed by this goal: STATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COE 9 10 LOCAL
ANNUAL MEASURABLE OUTCOMES
EXPECTED ACTUAL
4.1 FCMAT positive health risk indicator <2 4.1 MET FCMAT tool has been revised - low risk is now 5-6 indicators present and the district scored 4 or less. 4.2 Maintain zero Williams Act complaints 4.2 MET 0 Williams Complaints; 4.3 Three year plan for reducing class size averages to under 24 K-3, 26 4-5, and 27 6-8 Core 4.3 MET Class size averages as stated;
4.4 First and Second Interim Budget Positive Certifications 4.4 MET positive budget certifications;
4.5 > 60% of teachers at modernized sites will use learning suites to 4.5 MET >60% use of collaborative learning suites. collaborate daily (open doors) with partner teachers
ACTIONS / SERVICES
Duplicate the Actions/Services from the prior year LCAP and complete a copy of the following table for each. Duplicate the table as needed.
startcollapse Action 1 PLANNED ACTUAL Actions/Services
-291- Page 19 of 69
4.1 Tag all major expenditures/object codes to strategic 4.1 in process - PO tagging and digital PO's priorities and LCAP 4.2 MET FAP active • Add “Strategic Priority” line to be completed on all POs/ expense claims 4.3 Position control complete June 2017
4.2 Facilitate Finance/Fiscal Alliance Partnership. Utilize for 4.4 Lease agreements under revision and to be completed MYP by July 1, 201 planning 4.5 Processes are electronic but not all are using e- 4.3 Fully implement all aspects of position control in QSS signatures
4.4 Renew all leases and prioritize next facilities needs 4.6 Attendance % shows daily and weekly in new SIS/ALMA - very transparent 4.5 Develop online purchase order and expense claim process 4.7 Sharing a housing study project • Streamline processes using e-forms and signatures 4.8 Arts programs and staff are fully funded 4.6 Graph weekly attendance patterns; streamline attendance protocols for teachers 4.9 SPARK has agreed to increase their commitment earlier for MYP purposes 4.7 Participate in shared services contracts with other districts
4.8 Ensure current staffing of programs including arts
4.9 Build SPARK investment plan and MYP strategies
Action 2 PLANNED ACTUAL Actions/Services 4.10 Provide infrastructure support: custodial/grounds, 4.10 services in place and modifications being planned for maintenance, secretaries, nurse, 17-18 to align with needs campus support 4.11 Admin in curriculum/assessment, sped, tech, business, 4.11 Provide District Administration to support schools – facilities curriculum, technology, business, facilities, special education
BUDGETED ESTIMATED ACTUAL Expenditures Contracted Services, and Supplies 3000-3999: Employee Benefits Salaries for admin; curriculum/sped/tech/business/facilities $3,932,000
-292- Page 20 of 69
Salaries for facilities custodial/grounds/maintenance/secretaries/nurse/campus support NOTE: costs are for 1xxx-2xxx 1000-1999: Certificated Personnel Salaries LCFF $3,099,039 Stat Benefits for admin; curriculum/sped/tech/business/facilities Stat Benefits for facilities custodial/grounds/maintenance/secretaries/nurse/campus support
3000-3999: Employee Benefits LCFF $537,669 Supplies/Materials 4000-4999: Books And Supplies LCFF $63,000 Constracts/Operational/etc 5000-5999: Services And Other Operating Expenditures LCFF $307,801
ANALYSIS Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals from the prior year LCAP. Duplicate the table as needed.
Use actual annual measurable outcome data, including performance data from the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable.
Describe the overall implementation of the Sustain the fiscal integrity and stability of the district: actions/services to achieve the articulated goal. Business office has an action plan for guiding annual improvements; increases in some FTE (payroll) were necessary to finish position control; SPED services resulted in several agreements that exceeded planned expenditures. Legal fees increased as per renewing lease agreements and other special ed agreements.
.20 temporary increase in payroll position to accomplish position control data input
Describe------the overall effectiveness of the actions/services Will be effective if articulated objectives are met. to achieve the articulated goal as measured by the LEA.
Explain------material differences between Budgeted Salaries/Benefits based on actual placement and negotiations settlement Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures. 4xxx-5xxx slight increase due to unexpected facilities needs
------
-293- Page 21 of 69
Describe any changes made to this goal, expected Focused time by business, payroll, HR to implement position control. outcomes, metrics, or actions and services to achieve this goal as a result of this analysis and analysis of the LCFF Additional effort analyzing LCFF, Property Taxes and Basic Aid status and projections for MYP Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable. Identify where those changes can be found in the LCAP. Increase in SPED administration by .20 17-18 planned; see LCAP Goal 2/Strategic Priority for Student Achievement - additional out of home placement exceeded planned costs
-294- Page 22 of 69
Annual Update LCAP Year Reviewed: 2016-17
Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals from the prior year LCAP. Duplicate the table as needed. Goal Strategic Priority: Facilitate collaborative partnerships between students, families, schools, and community Develop and improve communication, participation, and articulation among and schools, district, parents, community 5 ------State and/or Local Priorities Addressed by this goal: STATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COE 9 10 LOCAL
ANNUAL MEASURABLE OUTCOMES
EXPECTED ACTUAL
5.1 95% of staff will consistently implement communication protocols 5.1 Met - 95% of staff have internet presence re: class and curriculum including maintaining websites 5.2 Met - > of families completed surveys 5.2 >40% of families will complete parent input surveys (LCAP, SSC, Bright Bytes) 5.3 Not Met - ELAC groups successful at sites but representation on parent groups nill 5.3 Parent group membership (LCAP, PTA/O, SSC, SPARK) will represent District demographics, including parents of Latino students 5.4 Met - Middle school has clearly communicated behavioral expectations and parents signed off. More parents volunteering in classrooms 5.4 Increase parent volunteers at the middle school; clearly communicate behavioral expectations
ACTIONS / SERVICES
Duplicate the Actions/Services from the prior year LCAP and complete a copy of the following table for each. Duplicate the table as needed.
startcollapse Action 1 PLANNED ACTUAL Actions/Services 5.1 Staff have been trained in ALMA
-295- Page 23 of 69
5.1 Provide staff support and training in technology and new Staff provide information to parents re: curriculum LMS plans/highlights • Teachers provide curriculum maps for parents on websites at 5.2 Social media use excellent for district/site activities start of school year 5.3 Schools have equitable resources and communicated as 5.2 Continue use and expansion of social media for district such highlights 5.4 Partnerships with ADL, Beyond Differences, No Bully, 5.3 Ensure equity among three schools is communicated Safe Routes
5.4 Continued partnership with community-based 5.5 Protocols in place, Roundtable has begun serving in organizations and Communication role agencies 5.6 Spanish options on all voicemail 5.5 Develop communication protocols including staff websites (weekly 5.7 Parent Link is still viable -may be replaced by ALMA or teacher, site, district formats/agreements); communication Schoolwires are those are fully upgraded. committee 5.8 Clear communication on math adoption, No Bully, Equity 5.6 Make Spanish an option on voicemail and Behavioral Expectations
5.7 Implement and evaluate the effectiveness of Parent Link 5.9 No measurable goals for paperless systems
5.8 Communicate curriculum changes, No Bully, Behavior 5.10 Staff have Adobe Updates policies 5.11 Many communication forums in place for parent input 5.9 Set measurable goals for paperless systems and participation.
5.10 Train site staff on fillable forms and processes 5.12 Alliance meetings held quarterly
5.11 Continue communication forums with 5.13 SPARK and PTO/PTA's effectively plan parents/community: LCAP, SSC, Chats, PTA/PTO, PTA/PTOs/SPARK Alliance Meetings 5.14 Parent conferences are all held with appropriate translation services; 5.12 Joint Board Meeting/SPARK/PTA/PTO meeting communication at HMS has improved
5.13 Develop efficient coordinated fundraising plan 5.15 Full implementation
-296- Page 24 of 69
5.14 Parent Conferences K-8 (with translation available); improve communication with SPED parents re progress at HMS
5.15 Implement Parent Compact
BUDGETED ESTIMATED ACTUAL Expenditures Contracted Services $72,000 Contracted Services 5800: Professional/Consulting Services And Operating Expenditures LCFF $77,200
ANALYSIS Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals from the prior year LCAP. Duplicate the table as needed.
Use actual annual measurable outcome data, including performance data from the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable.
Describe the overall implementation of the Goal: Develop and improve communication, participation, and articulation among and schools, district, actions/services to achieve the articulated goal. parents, community
LCMSD has excellent communication actions and strategies.
Describe------the overall effectiveness of the actions/services Social Media and website and SIS upgrades effective as measured by % use to achieve the articulated goal as measured by the LEA.
Explain------material differences between Budgeted Slight increase due to additional support for new student information systems Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures.
Describe------any changes made to this goal, expected The quantity and avenues of communication at times is duplicated and superfluous. Needs to be more outcomes, metrics, or actions and services to achieve this focused and targeted. Explore uses of Blu Pod application in 17-18 LCAP actions under Goal 5. Upgraded goal as a result of this analysis and analysis of the LCFF Schoolwires website mid year to comply with new ADA regulations. Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable. Identify where those changes can be found in the LCAP.
-297- Page 25 of 69 Stakeholder Engagement ------LCAP Year 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20 ------INVOLVEMENT PROCESS FOR LCAP AND ANNUAL UPDATE
How, when, and with whom did the LEA consult as part of the planning process for this LCAP/Annual Review and Analysis?
LCAP and Strategic Planning
The district’s strategic planning process is aligned with the LCAP development process. The objective of strategic planning as well as LCAP planning is to 1) ensure that our vision is future-oriented, supports innovation, and reflects what we believe; 2) align our strategic priorities with the vision; 3) develop measurable goals and supporting action plans; and 4) engage our stakeholders in our continuous improvement process. A concise and action-oriented plan drives decision-making and resource allocations. It becomes the blueprint for providing each child with an extraordinary education. It is our path to excellence.
The district engages many stakeholders in the strategic planning and LCAP cycle, which includes an annual LCAP survey and various focus groups for listening and learning as well as highly involved Parent Teacher groups, staff lead teams and School Site Councils. The district convenes a District LCAP Advisory Committee and an LCAP process that solicits input from our local community and city agencies, district parent leadership, staff and union leadership, and trustees and other community leaders, including senior citizens. A stakeholder survey on the website is posted early spring for input from staff, parents, and the community. Trustees review progress on LCAP development through the Budget and LCAP development calendar.
School Site Single Plan for Student Achievement and LCAP
An annual process is used by school sites to review the district Strategic Priorities and revise and align the Single Plans for Student Achievement. The SPSAs are used as site progress monitoring tools and action plans in support of the district strategic plan. Each site also conducts a parent survey (as well as a student survey at the middle school) each Spring. This year, these results were also used as part of the LCAP needs assessment gathering and information. This year more than 50% of parents have responded to these surveys. All students at the middle school complete an annual survey on educational programs, staff, and climate at the middle school.
LCAP Stakeholder Involvement and Development Process
In February 2017, an open survey on the LCAP was placed on the district website as part of the revision and input process. This survey was open to staff, parents, and the general community. Several pages of input were generated from those who completed the survey and represented the stakeholder groups.
An LCAP Advisory Committee consisting of parents, staff, students, and community members review the development of the LCAP and provide input to drafts. This committee has met four times in 2016-17: October, Dec, Feb, April and May. The committee has provided input on the LCAP draft.
Each of the parent/staff committees in the district has reviewed the LCAP process and given input on the action plans during Winter and Spring of 2016-17. These groups include the School Site Councils, PTA/PTOs, Foundation Board, English Learner Advisory Group, Special Education Parent Advisory, site leadership teams, and the District Fiscal Alliance Partnership. The Administrative Leadership Team (ALT), , Technology Committee, and Roundtable also reviewed and provided input to the LCAP. Meetings of these groups are held monthly and input is always a function/purpose of each meeting. Principals reported input from site groups via ALT.
The Draft LCAP was posted on the district website on May 4, 2017 with a link for online public comments/input. It was presented to the Board of Trustees as a first read on May 23 and as a second read on June14. Revisions in response to public comment have been made. On June 14 the Board of Trustees approved the 16-19 LCAP and supporting 2017-18 budget.
Communication The LCAP survey is on the district website. Additionally, Board presentations, the board meeting summary publication, It Happened Wednesday, and the bi-weekly Superintendent’s Perspective keep the public aware of the LCAP development process, input mechanisms, and stakeholder survey. An LCFF/LCAP webpage was created on the
-298- Page 26 of 69
LCMSD website to keep the broader community informed of the draft LCAP. In addition to the website, district social media sites (e.g., Facebook and Twitter) provide links to the draft.
The LCAP Advisory Committee met quarterly to review the LCAP goals, actions and services. This group reflects the following stakeholders:
Parents from each school site council, Principals, teachers, and classified staff representatives and a student representative from the middle school. While it was difficult finding a parent to serve that represented our English Learners, a classified staff member who was also a parent served in that capacity.
LCAP Advisory, SSCs and Lead Teams, Roundtable, and Trustees reviewed student achievement data from CCSS aligned benchmark assessments in reading, writing and math. At least ___ of students met standard in reading/writing. ____ of students met standard in math on the end of year benchmark assessments
INVOLVEMENT PROCESS FOR LCAP AND ANNUAL UPDATE IMPACT ON LCAP AND ANNUAL UPDATE
How did these consultations impact the LCAP for the upcoming year?
Several priority areas arise from site and district input and parent/community participation. The LCAP goals are aligned with the strategic priorities of the district. Included within the district’s five strategic priorities are the eight state priorities.
Each of these strategic priorities has a goal and action plan in the LCAP. Various groups in the district have reviewed and provided input on these plans.
The SPSAs allow staff and School Site Councils the opportunity to identify actions that improve the LCAP goal areas and strategic priorities of the district at the site level. These plans emphasize the review of state and local measures of student performance and progress and how each teacher will utilize data to assure continuous improvement in student achievement. Staff continues to prioritize small class sizes, small group instruction, paraprofessional assistance, professional development, and, most importantly, increased time for planning in order to meet the individual and personalized needs of students through differentiation. Staff also supports cost of living salary increases, and stipends for additional responsibilities for case management, specialized ELL and GATE assessments, and after-school enrichment activities facilitation. Staff supports the addition of extended learning and summer opportunities for students who need additional academic support as well as the targeted focus of a case manager, mentor or parent liaison for ELL students. Credentialed teachers or qualified paraprofessionals in licensed after school programs provide extended learning after school and in summer school. Summer school scholarships are provided to EL and low SES students through supplemental district funds and community partnerships.
Survey results from the LCAP and SSC surveys are sorted and analyzed and reveal the following recommendations: Keep class sizes small.
Continue to provide a comprehensive curriculum including Phys Ed and The Arts.
Maintain the high-performing status of the district in the top 10% of the state.
Provide more rigor, depth, and critical thinking and subject integration in the curriculum.
Improve the actual implementation of differentiation and project-based learning (PBL).
Support the continued improvement and growth of teachers.
Assure the academic support necessary for all students (in particular EL's) to grow and advance their learning.
Provide increased resources to teachers and students to accomplish the above recommendations including time for teachers to collaborate.
-299- Page 27 of 69
Provide strong site leadership.
Provide additional academic learning opportunities for students after school.
Parents would like efficient and effective communication about student progress and assessments; make communication two-way.
Parents would like information about school and district programs to be relevant, timely, concise and free of jargon.
Parents would like to retain strong teachers and support all teachers to implement Common Core State Standards.
Parents would like equitable access to activities and learning opportunities, for EL and advanced learners Parents would like homework to be relevant and time-efficient.
Parents of English Language Learners (ELL) would like their children to learn English and make progress in academic areas.
Parents of EL students would prefer access to school communications in Spanish.
Parents of students who have Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) were very specific in their LCAP input as well:
Ensure strong, qualified staff; provide ongoing, regular communication; communicate with general education teachers; implement all modifications and accommodations with consistency and fidelity; provide systematic instruction for academic goals and objectives; frequently monitor progress with data; keep student-to-staff ratios low for case managers and other related services.
The input from all surveys, focus groups, ,and community participation and the LCAP Advisory Committee have been incorporated as much as possible into the LCAP.
Impact on LCAP
Parents were the largest group to give input. Staff had opportunities as well. Overall there is great satisfaction with educational programs in the district and the LCAP goals are appropriate but need to be streamlined and targeted to driving questions.
-300- Page 28 of 69 Goals, Actions, & Services
Strategic Planning Details and Accountability
Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals. Duplicate the table as needed. ------New Modified Unchanged ------Strategic Priority: Foster healthy, inclusive, respectful, and safe learning environments. Promote the social, emotional, and intellectual growth of all community members. Goal 1 Goal 1: Improve student engagement, health, well-being and connectedness to school.
------State and/or Local Priorities Addressed by this goal: STATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COE 9 10 LOCAL ------Identified Need • Build a culture that supports socially responsible citizenship in students and adults including mindfulness and growth mindset • Maintain low rates of expulsion/suspension and discipline for bullying/harassment • Maintain or increase ADA (2017 = 96.5%) • Maintain physical education and strong assessment patterns for students K-8 * Increase school connectedness reported by students
------EXPECTED ANNUAL MEASURABLE OUTCOMES
Metrics/Indicators Baseline 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 1.1 P2 ADA 1.1 ADA 96.5 1.1 Increase ADA to 97% 1.1 Maintain ADA at 97%
1.2 Attendance records 1.2 The Cove: 14 students 1.2 Reduce chronic 1.2 Reduce chronic (3%)were absenteeism (truancy) to fewer absenteeism (truancy) to fewer 1.3 #'s of chronically absent than 5 students per site than 5 students per site suspensions/expulsions NC: 16 students (2.7% Hall: 35 students (6.6%) 1.3 Maintain 0% expulsion and 1.3 Maintain 0% expulsion and 1.4 HKS student and staff District rate: 4% drop-out rate; reduce drop-out rate; reduce survey suspension rate to < 15 students suspension rate to < 15 students 1.3 0% expulsion rate (one suspended suspended 1.5 SSC surveys student expelled) Suspension rate = 15 students 1.4 Maintain student 1.4 Maintain student suspended connectedness connectedness rates on HKSs
-301- Page 29 of 69
1.6 CA Phys Ed Assessments rates on HKS gr 5 and 7 1.4 99% of 5th graders report 1.5 >90% of students and medium or 1.5 >85% of students and parents report curriculum is high connectedness to school parents report curriculum is stimulating and engaging and 89% of 7th graders students stimulating and engaging reported medium or high >85% of students and parents connectedness to school on >85% teachers report positive report curriculum is stimulating HKS indicators on climate/culture and engaging student survey survey >85% teachers report positive 1.5 >80% (across 3 sites 1.6 5th and 8th grade students indicators on climate/culture students and maintain Healthy Fitness Levels survey parents report curriculum is on Phys Ed Assessment stimulating 1.6 >80% 5th and 8th grade and engaging on School Site students maintain Healthy Council Fitness Levels on Phys Ed surveys. Assessment > 75% teachers, parents and student report positive indicators on HKS and local climate/culture surveys
1.6 5th and 7th grade students maintained Healthy Fitness Levels on Phys Ed Assessments
PLANNED ACTIONS / SERVICES Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s Actions/Services. Duplicate the table, including Budgeted Expenditures, as needed.
Action 1
For Actions/Services not included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement:
Students to be Served All Students with Disabilities
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
OR
For Actions/Services included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement: Students to be Served English Learners Foster Youth Low Income
-302- Page 30 of 69
Scope of Services LEA-wide Schoolwide OR Limited to Unduplicated Student Group(s)
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
ACTIONS/SERVICES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged
1.1 Create a shared vision among stakeholders and 1.1 Refine and sustain a shared vision among promote meaningful stakeholder participation stakeholders and promote meaningful stakeholder opportunities that fosters a sense of contribution, participation opportunities that fosters a sense of ownership and empowerment (students/staff/parents) contribution, ownership and empowerment (students/staff/parents)
1.2 Utilize a Multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) such 1.2 Improve the Multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) as Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports to such as Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports to improve school climate, address school safety, improve school climate, address school safety, attendance and overall student wellness. Ensure that the attendance, and overall student wellness. Ensure that the strategies used are evidence-based, trauma-sensitive, strategies used are evidence-based, trauma-sensitive, restorative in nature, and address student mental health restorative in nature, and address student mental health
1.3 Implement No Bully districtwide (add elementary 1.3 Maintain No Bully districtwide (add elementary training); continue Restorative Justice practices at HMS; training); continue Restorative Justice practices at HMS; Articulate responsive classrooms and Mindfulness K-8 Articulate responsive classrooms and Mindfulness K-8
1.4 Implement Saturday School consistently 1.4 Implement Saturday School
BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Amount $5,000 Amount $5,000 Amount $5,000
Source Locally$5,000 Defined Source Locally Defined Source Locally Defined
Budget 5000-5999:$5,000 Services And Other Budget 5000-5999: Services And Other Operating Budget 5000-5999: Services And Other Reference Operating Expenditures Reference Expenditures Reference Operating Expenditures Contracted Services Contracted Services Contracted Services
-303- Page 31 of 69
Action 2
For Actions/Services not included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement:
Students to be Served All Students with Disabilities
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
OR
For Actions/Services included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement: Students to be Served English Learners Foster Youth Low Income
Scope of Services LEA-wide Schoolwide OR Limited to Unduplicated Student Group(s)
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
ACTIONS/SERVICES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged
1.5 Provide Counselors for ELP/ILP Case Management 1.5 Provide Counselors for ELP/ILP Case Management and SEL activities and SEL activitie
1.7 70% Teachers Implement cyber-safety (Common 1.7 80% Teachers Implement cyber-safety (Common Sense Media) Sense Media) training (K-5) (6-8 grade tech and 7th QUEST classes) training K-5 (6-8 grade tech and 7th QUEST classes)
1.9 PTA/PTOs ensure adult modeling, collaborate with 1.9 PTA/PTOs ensure adult modeling, collaborate with other districts other districts in parent education in parent education
1.10 Implement inclusive education PD for all staff, 1.10 Implement inclusive education PD for all staff, students/parents students/parents
-304- Page 32 of 69
BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Amount $305,000 Amount $315,000 Amount $330,000
Source LCFF$305,000 Source LCFF Source LCFF
Budget 3000-3999:$305,000 Employee Benefits Budget 3000-3999: Employee Benefits Budget 3000-3999: Employee Benefits Reference Total for salaries and benefits Reference Total for salaries and benefits Reference Total for salaries and benefits
-305- Page 33 of 69 Goals, Actions, & Services
Strategic Planning Details and Accountability
Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals. Duplicate the table as needed. ------New Modified Unchanged ------Strategic Priority: Inspire academic growth and civic responsibility through a rigorous, inquiry-based curriculum that is engaging and personalized.
Goal 2 Ensure continuous improvement, achievement and equitable and inclusive access to standards-aligned English, Math, Science, Social Science, Arts, Physical Education and Digital Literacy for all students.
------State and/or Local Priorities Addressed by this goal: STATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COE 9 10 LOCAL ------Identified Need • Students must be prepared for citizenship, college and careers in the 21st Century • Inquiry based education that differentiates and personalizes and challenges in CCSS, NGSS, technology, arts, and world language, health and PE • Involve students in their own learning (student-directed and student-centered personalized learning) • Ensure each and every student makes annual progress • < 80% students meeting standard on ELA and < 65% meeting standard on Math State assessments, spring 2016 • Continue to work with EL's to gain English proficiency • Build instructional practices that support EL's, and students with learning differences within gen ed classes • CCSS based report cards in place K-4, need 5-8 report card revisions • Maintain 1:1 student tech device ratio • Implement CCSS aligned instructional materials and PD in ELA/Math curriculum/NGSS • Maintain discrete and integrated VAPA programs K-8
------EXPECTED ANNUAL MEASURABLE OUTCOMES
Metrics/Indicators Baseline 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2.1 State Assessments, Local 2.1 2.1 2.1 ELA/Math Benchmark • 77% of students grades 3-8 • >80% of students grades 3- • >80% of students grades 3- Assessments, Grades/report met or exceeded ELA 8 meet or exceed ELA 8 meet or exceed ELA card marks
-306- Page 34 of 69
standards on State standards on State standards on State 2.2 CELDT assessments; assessments assessments • 80% met or exceeded • 80% meet or exceed • 80% meet or exceed 2.3 Teacher/Principal standards on local reading standards on local reading standards on local reading Observations benchmarks. and writing benchmarks. and writing benchmarks. 2.4 SSC Surveys • ___ met or exceeded • 70% of students grades 3-8 • 70% of students grades 3-8 standards on local writing meet or exceed Math meet or exceed Math 2.5 Student Schedules rubrics standards on State standards on State • 64% of students grades 3-8 assessments. assessments. 2.6 Technology records met or exceeded Math • 70% of students 3-8 meet or • 70% of students 3-8 meet or standards on State exceeded standards on exceeded standards on 2.7 LCAP Reflection Tool assessments. local math benchmark local math benchmark • ___ of students 3-8 met or assessments assessments exceeded standards on • 65% of students will meet or • 65% of students will meet or local math benchmark exceed standards in exceed standards in assessments Science, Arts, Social Science, Arts, Social • 65% of students met or Studies. Studies. exceeded standards in Science, Arts, Social 60% of students in target groups 64% of students in target groups Studies. will meet or exceed standards will meet or exceed standards
2.2 61% of English Learners 2.2 80% of English Learners will 2.2 80% of English Learners will made sufficient progress in improve one proficiency level as make sufficient annual progress English as measured by CELDT measured by the California in English as measured by the English Language Development California English Language 2.3 Teachers averaged two Test (CELDT) overall student Development Test (CELDT) interdisciplinary units in grade 3- performance level. (AMAO 1) overall student performance 8 through equal access to CCSS level. (AMAO 1) through equal access to CCSS 2.4 80% of parents report 2.3 Teachers will implement 2-3 curriculum is rigorous; 75% of interdisciplinary (cross 2.3 Teachers will implement 2-3 parents report student needs are subject/dept) projects per year interdisciplinary (cross me subject/dept) projects per year 2.4 85% of parents report 89.7% of parents of students curriculum is rigorous; 2.4 85% of parents report with IEP’s will report satisfaction 75% of parents will report curriculum is rigorous; with Special Ed program. student needs are met 85% of parents will report Maintain 90% of parents of student needs are met 2.5 100% of students have students with IEP’s will report Maintain 90% of parents of equal access to standards- satisfaction with Special Ed students with IEP’s will report aligned curriculum, including the program satisfaction with Special Ed Arts. program 2.5 100% of students have 2.6 100% of students have equal access to standards- 2.5 100% of students have access to technology/internet at aligned curriculum, including the equal access to standards- home and school. Arts and Physical Education, aligned curriculum, including the Student computer ratio was Health Ed and World Language Arts, PE, Health Ed and World decreased to 1:1 in 2 grade (WL) Lang. levels ( 2nd/3rd)
-307- Page 35 of 69
2.7 Initial Implementation on 2.6 100% of students have 2.6 100% of students have Self-Reflection Tool (3) access to technology/internet at access to technology/internet at home and school. home and school. Maintain student/computer ratio Maintain student/computer ratio to 1:1 to 1:1
2.7 Full Implementation on Self- 2.7 Full Implementation on Self- Reflection Tool for Standards Reflection Tool for Standards and Curriculum (4) and Curriculum (4)
PLANNED ACTIONS / SERVICES Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s Actions/Services. Duplicate the table, including Budgeted Expenditures, as needed.
Action 1
For Actions/Services not included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement:
Students to be Served All Students with Disabilities
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
OR
For Actions/Services included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement: Students to be Served English Learners Foster Youth Low Income
Scope of Services LEA-wide Schoolwide OR Limited to Unduplicated Student Group(s)
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
ACTIONS/SERVICES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged
2.1 Provide differentiated professional learning 2.1 Provide differentiated professional learning opportunities that focus on curriculum and pedagogy that opportunities that focus on curriculum and pedagogy that
-308- Page 36 of 69 is firmly rooted in research, practice, and informed by is firmly rooted in research, practice, and informed by collaboration among higher education faculty and collaboration among higher education faculty and practitioners from local districts. practitioners from local districts.
2.2 Revise curriculum mapping of CA Common Core and 2.2 Revise curriculum mapping of CA Common Core NGSS, ISTE and NGSS Standards/full implementation Standards • Implement integrated and discrete Arts • Implement integrated and discrete Arts programs K- programs K-8; 8; • Implement K-8 CCSS aligned report • Implement K-8 CCSS aligned report cards and explore cards and explore narrative reporting and communication re: student narrative reporting and communication re: student progress progress • Write, align formats, rubrics and implement • Write, align formats, rubrics and IBL/VAPA units per implement IBL/VAPA units per grade grade • Implement NGSS and K-5 Science 2x week • Implement NGSS and K-5 Science 2x • Implement Science-Maker activities K-8 week 2.3 Purchase standards-aligned digital instructional • Implement Science-Maker activities K- materials and books, mobile devices and hotspots for 8. check out to students.
2.3 Adopt Language Arts CCSS curriculum 2.4 Provide Reading and Math Intervention
2.4 Purchase standards-aligned digital instructional 2.5 Counselors to provide case management for target materials and books, mobile devices and hotspots for populations as check out to students. needed (ELL, Advanced Learners); conduct ILPs/ELPs as needed 2.5 Provide Reading and Math Intervention 2.6 Use local assessment data to establish instructional 2.6 Counselors to provide case management for target priorities, inform classroom instruction, appropriately populations as place and exit students from intervention and support needed (ELL, Advanced Learners); conduct ILPs/ELPs programs, and monitor student progress and as needed achievement
2.7 Actively implement and monitor a PLC process that 2.7 Cluster Advanced students in classes for uses local assessment data to establish instructional differentiation, small priorities, inform classroom instruction, appropriately group, personalization, outreach to parents through ILPs place and exit students from intervention and support programs, and monitor student progress and 2.8 Implement Student Support Team Meetings for achievement. students with IEP’s (communicate progress regularly)
2.8 Cluster Advanced students in classes for 2.9 Develop Site Arts Team (SAT) plans and integration differentiation, small rubrics group, personalization, outreach to parents through ILPs 2.10 Implement student-led conferences, student goal 2.9 Implement Student Support Team Meetings for setting and students with IEP’s (communicate progress regularly) progress monitoring 4-8
-309- Page 37 of 69
2.10 Develop Site Arts Team (SAT) plans and integration 2.11 Develop assessments/rubrics for CCSS and NGSS rubrics and to measure 21st Century skills 2.11 Implement student-led conferences, student goal setting and progress monitoring 4-8
2.12 Develop assessments/rubrics for CCSS and NGSS and to measure 21st Century skills
2.13 Revise and review Homework Policies at all schools
BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Amount $12,103,000 Amount $12,573,000 Amount $13,038,201
Source LCFF$12,103,000 Source LCFF Source LCFF
Budget 3000-3999:$12,103,000 Employee Benefits Budget 3000-3999: Employee Benefits Budget 3000-3999: Employee Benefits Reference Salaries and benefits Reference Salaries and benefits Reference Salaries and benefits
Action 2
For Actions/Services not included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement:
Students to be Served All Students with Disabilities
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
OR
For Actions/Services included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement: Students to be Served English Learners Foster Youth Low Income
Scope of Services LEA-wide Schoolwide OR Limited to Unduplicated Student Group(s)
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
-310- Page 38 of 69
ACTIONS/SERVICES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged
2.14 Provide after school and summer programs for ELL 2.12 Provide after school and summer programs for ELL students who are not meeting standard students who are not meeting standard
2.15 Implement classroom-based systematic intervention 2.13 Implement classroom-based systematic and multi-tiered response system and intensive ELD intervention and multi-tiered response system and curriculum for newcomers intensive ELD curriculum newcomers
2.16 Provide sheltered classes for ELL (cluster students 2.14 Provide sheltered classes for ELL (cluster students in gen ed in gen ed classes) and para support when appropriate; classes) and para support when appropriate; write ELP’s write ELP’s
2.17 Provide iPads to EL students in need for translation 2.15 Provide iPads to EL students in need for translation and other educational uses and other educational uses
BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
-311- Page 39 of 69 Goals, Actions, & Services
Strategic Planning Details and Accountability
Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals. Duplicate the table as needed. ------New Modified Unchanged ------Goal 3 Strategic Priority: Attract, cultivate, and retain innovative, inspirational educators • All teachers will demonstrate improvement in professional standards and participate in effective Professional Development and Learning opportunities
• District will recruit and retain excellent teachers/learning leaders to fill vacancies
------State and/or Local Priorities Addressed by this goal: STATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COE 9 10 LOCAL ------Identified Need • Recruit and retain talented teachers; more science and math training • Ensure and commit to a climate of continuous improvement for self • Inspire learning leaders and support excellence in teaching • Deepen and model collaborative teaching and learning communities’ strategies, including time for reflection and implementation • Maintain median starting salary; increase benefits to median for teachers • Provide differentiated PD in Math, IBL, VAPA, Technology, Language Arts adoption • Provide instructional coaching for teachers and training for paraprofessionals and other classified staff (maintain TOSA FTE 1.6)
------EXPECTED ANNUAL MEASURABLE OUTCOMES
Metrics/Indicators Baseline 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 3.1 Continuous Improvement 3.1 75% of teachers apply or 3.1 80% of teachers will apply 3.1 85% of teachers will apply Process (CIP, the District meet/exceed standards on (meet or exceed standards) on (meet or exceed standards) on evaluation process) documents. CSTP's and PBL rubrics. CSTP's and PBL Rubric. 100% CSTP’s and PBL rubric. 100% of 100% teachers embed PD in of teachers will embed teachers will embed professional 3.2 LCAP Self-Reflection Tools CIP goals professional learning in CIP learning in CIP goals goals
-312- Page 40 of 69
3.3 International Society for 3.2 Initial Implementation for 3.2 Full Implementation for 3.2 Full Implementation for Technology in Education (ISTE) Standards and Curriculum and Standards and Curriculum and Standards and Curriculum and Standards rubric Support for Teachers and Support for Teachers and Support for Teachers and Administrators on Reflection Administrators on Reflection Administrators on Reflection 3.4 Credentials data Tool Tool Tool
3.5 Salary Schedules/Benefits 3.3 60% Proficient on ISTE 3.3 Improve to 4/5 Proficient on 3.3 Maintain 5/5 Proficient ISTE data Rubric ISTE Rubric Rubric
3.4 All teachers appropriately 3.4 100% of teachers will be 3.4 100% of teachers will be certified appropriately credentialed appropriately credentialed
3.5 Entry and mid salary at 3.5 Boost salary and benefits as 3.5 Maintain competitive Median in county possible salaries and benefits at or above Benefits second from bottom in Implement hiring and longevity median; county strategies No signing bonus or incentives applied yet
PLANNED ACTIONS / SERVICES Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s Actions/Services. Duplicate the table, including Budgeted Expenditures, as needed.
Action 1
For Actions/Services not included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement:
Students to be Served All Students with Disabilities
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
OR
For Actions/Services included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement: Students to be Served English Learners Foster Youth Low Income
Scope of Services LEA-wide Schoolwide OR Limited to Unduplicated Student Group(s)
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
-313- Page 41 of 69
ACTIONS/SERVICES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged
3.1 Establish professional communities of practice, 3.1 Establish professional communities of practice, aligned to the Quality Professional Learning Standards, aligned to the Quality Professional Learning Standards, to support mutually agreed-upon student learning goals to support mutually agreed-upon student learning goals and outcomes, LCAP and SPSA. and outcomes, LCAP and SPSA.
3.2 Provide differentiated professional learning 3.2 Provide differentiated professional learning opportunities that focus on curriculum and pedagogy that opportunities that focus on curriculum and pedagogy that is firmly rooted in research, practice, and informed by is firmly rooted in research, practice, and informed by collaboration among higher education faculty and collaboration among higher education faculty and practitioners from local districts practitioners from local districts
3.3 Establish a clear stipend schedule with incentives for 3.3 Establish a clear stipend schedule with incentives for teacher teacher growth and leadership growth and leadership • Identify leadership opportunities for • Identify leadership opportunities for staff to build staff to build capacity, capacity, including coaching and mentoring, explore ladder system including coaching and mentoring, implement ladder for system for learning leaders learning leaders
3.4 Build and strengthen vertical articulation 3.4 Build and strengthen vertical articulation
3.5 Support counselors in new job 3.5 Full implementation case management by duties/responsibilities/case counselors management 3.6 Develop and revise HR processes to streamline HR 3.6 Develop and revise HR processes to streamline HR support to all support to all staff and ensure fidelity in hiring, and evaluation staff and ensure fidelity in hiring, and evaluation processes processes 3.7 Implement new benefit structure 3.7 Negotiate tiered rate structure and inlieu grandfathering as 3.8 PDSA CIP necessary to support lower insurance rates 3.9 Reduce meetings/other commitments during school 3.8 PDSA CIP day to increase Principal presence in classrooms 3.9 Reduce meetings/other commitments during school day to 3.10 Support educators in making practice more increase Principal presence in classrooms transparent, through calibrated peer observation, common planning, and experimentation with feedback; 3.10 Support educators in making practice more and open doors transparent, through calibrated peer observation,
-314- Page 42 of 69 common planning, and experimentation with feedback; 3.11 Use Arts Integration Planners, TOSA's and PAR and open doors coaches as needed.
3.11 Use Arts Integration Planners, TOSA's and PAR coaches as needed
BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Amount $235,000 Amount $244,000 Amount $253,760
Source LCFF$235,000 Source LCFF Source LCFF
Budget 3000-3999:$235,000 Employee Benefits Budget 3000-3999: Employee Benefits Budget 3000-3999: Employee Benefits Reference Salaries/Benefits/Contracts Reference Salaries/Benefits/Contracts Reference Salaries/Benefits/Contracts
-315- Page 43 of 69 Goals, Actions, & Services
Strategic Planning Details and Accountability
Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals. Duplicate the table as needed. ------New Modified Unchanged ------Strategic Priority: Sustain the fiscal integrity and stability of the district
Goal 4 Leverage and align district resources with student improvement and LCAP goals Maintain equitable class size distribution Maintain outstanding facilities, leveraging new facilities for innovative learning
------State and/or Local Priorities Addressed by this goal: STATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COE 9 10 LOCAL ------Identified Need • Align resources to support our strategic priorities/LCAP • Draft new Facilities and Capital Asset Master Plan; leverage modern facilities for innovative learning • Reduce class size as possible with funding • Support SPARK and PTA/PTOs in leveraging donations • Reduce deficit budgeting • Fully implement position control • Maintain low FCMAT Health Risk Indicator rating • Monitor utilities for sustainability; work onsolar buyout plan
------EXPECTED ANNUAL MEASURABLE OUTCOMES
Metrics/Indicators Baseline 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 4.1 FCMAT Health Risks 4.1 =4 risk indicators on 4.1 Realize a low FCMAT risk 4.1 Maintain a low FCMAT risk Indicators FCMAT=low analysis 4.2 Maintain zero Williams Act 4.2 Williams Complaints - Board 4.2 0 Williams Complaints; 4.2 Maintain zero Williams Act complaints Minutes complaints 4.3 Class size averages 24 K- 4.3 Implement plan for reducing 4.3 Class Size Actuals 3, 26 4-5, and 27 6-8 Core; class 4.3 Monitor funding to plan for class size averages under 24 K- size range 18- 30 at HMS reducing class size averages 3, 26 4-5, and 27 6-8 Core
-316- Page 44 of 69
4.4 Budget Reports/Budget 4.4 Positive budget certification under 24 K-3, 26 4-5, and 27 6-8 4.4 First and Second Interim Certification Letters letters Core Budget Positive Certifications; <100K deficit budgeting 4.5 Position Control & PO 4.5 Beginning implementation of 4.4 First and Second Interim process Position Budget Positive Certifications; 4.5 Full Implementation Position Control and electronic PO's reduce deficit budgeting at first Control and PO process 4.6 Observations by Admin interim 4.6 >60% use of collaborative 4.6 > 70% of teachers at 4.7 Salaries/Benefits actuals learning suites 4.5 Full implementation of modernized sites will use Position learning suites to collaborate 4.7 Benefits rates increasing Control; site staff use PO's daily (open doors) with partner teachers 4.6 > than 65% of teachers at modernized sites will use 4.7 Implement tiered rate benefit learning suites to collaborate structure; adjust or eliminate daily (open doors) with partner inlieu teachers
4.7 Increase benefits per fund availability; adjust inlieu
PLANNED ACTIONS / SERVICES Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s Actions/Services. Duplicate the table, including Budgeted Expenditures, as needed.
Action 1
For Actions/Services not included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement:
Students to be Served All Students with Disabilities
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
OR
For Actions/Services included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement: Students to be Served English Learners Foster Youth Low Income
Scope of Services LEA-wide Schoolwide OR Limited to Unduplicated Student Group(s)
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
-317- Page 45 of 69
ACTIONS/SERVICES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged
4.1 Tag all major expenditures/object codes to strategic 4.1 Tag all major expenditures/object codes to strategic priorities and priorities and LCAP LCAP
4.2 Facilitate Finance/Fiscal Alliance Partnership. Utilize 4.2 Facilitate Finance/Fiscal Alliance Partnership. Utilize for MYP planning ; plan for reduced GF contribution to for MYP SpEd through forecasting needs planning; reduce Special Education costs
4.4 Prioritize remaining facilities needs, related staffing 4.4 Develop new Facilities Master Plan and plan for solar buyout 4.5 Streamline purchase order and expense claim 4.5 Develop online purchase order and expense claim processes, process e-forms and signatures • Streamline processes using e-forms 4.6 Graph weekly attendance patterns; streamline and signatures attendance protocols for teachers 4.6 Graph weekly attendance patterns; streamline attendance 4.7 Participate in shared services contracts with other protocols for teachers districts
4.7 Increase participation in shared services contracts 4.8 Ensure current staffing of programs including arts with other districts 4.9 Sustain and improve SPARK investment plan and 4.8 Ensure current staffing of programs including arts MYP strategies
4.9 Build SPARK investment plan and MYP strategies 5.0 Implement elimination of in lieu 5.0 Build in non inlieu expenses into MYP
BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
Action 2
For Actions/Services not included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement:
Students to be Served All Students with Disabilities
-318- Page 46 of 69
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
OR
For Actions/Services included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement: Students to be Served English Learners Foster Youth Low Income
Scope of Services LEA-wide Schoolwide OR Limited to Unduplicated Student Group(s)
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
ACTIONS/SERVICES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged
4.10 Provide infrastructure support: custodial/grounds, 4.10 Provide infrastructure support: custodial/grounds, maintenance, secretaries, nurse, maintenance, secretaries, nurse, campus support campus support
4.11 Provide District Administration to support schools – 4.11 Provide District Administration to support schools – curriculum, curriculum, technology, business, facilities, special education technology, business, facilities, special education
BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Amount $4,082,000 Amount $4,094,000 Amount $4,134,940
Source LCFF$4,082,000 Source LCFF Source LCFF
Budget 3000-3999:$4,082,000 Employee Benefits Budget 3000-3999: Employee Benefits Budget 3000-3999: Employee Benefits Reference Salaries/Benefits/Contracted Services, Reference Salaries/Benefits/Contracted Services, Reference Salaries/Benefits/Contracted Services, and Supplies and Supplies and Supplies
-319- Page 47 of 69 Goals, Actions, & Services
Strategic Planning Details and Accountability
Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s goals. Duplicate the table as needed. ------New Modified Unchanged ------Strategic Priority: Facilitate collaborative partnerships between students, families, schools, and community.
Goal 5 Develop and improve communication, participation, and articulation among and schools, district, parents, community.
------State and/or Local Priorities Addressed by this goal: STATE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 COE 9 10 LOCAL ------Identified Need • Develop and improve communication, transparency, and involvement between staff, students and parents • Consistent use of websites, apps, blogs, Twitter, Google Docs • PTA/PTOs/SPARK/SSC Alliance Meetings • Develop communication protocols and plan • Parenting Education programs need to include a variety of venues and topics including school reform issues • Need better representation of EL /Sped parents on Site Councils, PTA/PTOs or SPARK boards • Need improved meeting translation and message/communication available in Spanish
------EXPECTED ANNUAL MEASURABLE OUTCOMES
Metrics/Indicators Baseline 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 5.1 Self-reporting by 5.1 95% of staff have internet 5.1 95% of staff will consistently 5.1 95% of staff will consistently staff/principals presence re: class and implement communication implement communication curriculum protocols including maintaining protocols including maintaining 5.2 Survey completion rates websites websites 5.2 > 50% of families completed 5.3 Membership Rosters surveys 5.2 >60% of parents will 5.2 >65% of parents will complete parent input surveys complete parent input surveys 5.4 Attendance logs for parent 5.3 ELAC groups successful at (LCAP, SSC, other local) (LCAP, SSC, other local) conferences/meetings. sites, but representation on site and district parent groups 5.3 Parent group membership 5.3 Parent group membership needed. (LCAP, PTA/O, SSC, SPARK) (LCAP, PTA/O, SSC, SPARK)
-320- Page 48 of 69
5.5 Volunteer sign-ins self 5.4 More parents volunteering will include EL and SpEd will include EL and SpEd reporting and SSC survey in classrooms parents parents responses. 5.5 Website ADA compliant, Blu 5.4 >60% of parents will report 5.4 More than 65% of parents 5.6 Website, Social Media data Pods beginning implementation, volunteering; involvement in will report ALMA fully implemented. conferences, satisfaction with volunteering,involvement in progress reports, Spanish conferences, satisfaction with translation progress reports, Spanish translation 5.5.100% use of ALMA by parents to update student 5.5 Maintain high completion information; 100% return of rates of required forms and contracts parent response to ALMA, Blu thru BluPods; increase parent Pods, Twitter, FB participation in Twitter and FB
PLANNED ACTIONS / SERVICES Complete a copy of the following table for each of the LEA’s Actions/Services. Duplicate the table, including Budgeted Expenditures, as needed.
Action 1
For Actions/Services not included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement:
Students to be Served All Students with Disabilities
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
OR
For Actions/Services included as contributing to meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement: Students to be Served English Learners Foster Youth Low Income
Scope of Services LEA-wide Schoolwide OR Limited to Unduplicated Student Group(s)
Location(s) All Schools Specific Schools: Specific Grade spans:
ACTIONS/SERVICES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
-321- Page 49 of 69
New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged New Modified Unchanged
5.1 Foster meaningful two-way communication between 5.1 Foster meaningful two-way communication between educators and families across cultures and languages, educators and families across cultures and languages, using multiple communication methods and including using multiple communication methods and including two-way communication about student interests, needs, two-way communication about student interests, needs, academic progress, attendance, risk factors, strategies academic progress, attendance, risk factors, strategies for improvement, and college and career pathways for improvement, and college and career pathways
5.2 Provide professional learning that builds the 5.2 Provide professional learning that builds the knowledge, understanding, skills and confidence of knowledge, understanding, skills and confidence of parents/guardians to contribute to the design and parents/guardians to contribute to the design and implementation of plans to improve student outcomes implementation of plans to improve student outcomes and engage in decision-making. and engage in decision-making.
5.3 Continue use and expansion of social media, apps 5.3 Continue use and expansion of social media, apps and website for district highlights; consider FB and website for district highlights; provide staff support Livestream for Board Meetings, provide staff support and and training training 5.4 Continued partnership with community-based 5.4 Continued partnership with community-based organizations and organizations and agencies agencies
5.5 Develop communication protocols including staff 5.5 Implement communication protocols including staff websites (weekly websites teacher, site, district formats/agreements); weekly teacher, site, district formats/agreements); communication communication committee, formats for progress reports and report cards committee, formats for progress reports and report cards
5.6 Make Spanish an option on voicemail 5.6 Explore Portuguese as an option on voicemail
5.7 Investigate and implement new and enhanced 5.7 Investigate and implement new and enhanced means to provide translation services to families. means to provide translation services to families.
5.8 Parent Conferences K-8 (with translation available); 5.8 Parent Conferences K-8 (with translation available); improve communication with SPED parents re student improve progress communication with SPED parents re student progress
5.9 Implement Parent Compact 5.9 Implement Parent Compact
5.10 Conduct Alliance meetings to coordinate parent 5.10 Conduct Alliance meetings to coordinate parent groups: PTA/PTO, SPARK and SSC. groups: PTA/PTO, SPARK and SSC.
BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Amount $72,000 Amount $75,000 Amount $77,000
$72,000
-322- Page 50 of 69
Source LCFF Source LCFF Source LCFF
Budget 5000-5999:$72,000 Services And Other Budget 5000-5999: Services And Other Operating Budget 5000-5999: Services And Other Reference Operating Expenditures Reference Expenditures Reference Operating Expenditures Contracted Services Contracted Services Contracted Services
-323- Page 51 of 69
Demonstration of Increased or Improved Services for Unduplicated Pupils
LCAP Year 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20 ------Estimated Supplemental and Concentration Grant Funds: $219,598 Percentage to Increase or Improve Services: 2% ------Describe how services provided for unduplicated pupils are increased or improved by at least the percentage identified above, either qualitatively or quantitatively, as compared to services provided for all students in the LCAP year.
Identify each action/service being funded and provided on a schoolwide or LEA-wide basis. Include the required descriptions supporting each schoolwide or LEA- wide use of funds (see instructions). ------During fiscal year 2017-18 LCMSD will receive approximately $220K supplemental funding from LCFF based on the following number counts/percentage of unduplicated pupils: 9.7%. These funds will be specifically dedicated and directed toward students who are learning English and students who are from disadvantaged socioeconomic circumstances. In 17-18 we will add a middle support class and provide ipads for students who arrive from other countries and need English Language software support for English acquistion.
LCMSD will offer a variety of programs and supports specifically for English learners and students from low-income families. These programs have come about from action research conducted by school grade level PLC’s and the evidence provided in the field through research studies and instructional strategies experts. First and foremost students from low income families need supportive relationships with adults at school who can also link them to other services in the community including health and social services agencies (Jensen, 2013. How Poverty Effects Classroom Engagement, ASCD). Similarly, English Language Learners benefit from adult role models and relationships with counselors who case manage and ensure the provision of services. ELL students also benefit from second-tier, small-group interventions including the use of evidence-based direct instruction in reading that explicitly targets skills such as phonological/phonemic awareness, letter-sound recognition, alphabetic decoding, fluency building and comprehension skills (Kamp, et. al. 2007). The supplemental funds received by the district are directed towards counselors a intervention specialists, EL Support teachers and para professionals who provide case management, academic support tutorials, small group targeted instruction in the classroom and reading specialist support. Additionally we will provide extended learning and summer program scholarships, and access to WiFi mobile hot-spots for families without internet. Hall Middle School will offer an English support class based on numbers of EL students who require more intensive English language instruction to access core curriculum.
These services are aligned with LCAP goals that support all students in reaching their highest potential but are focused on students with the most need. Counselors K-8 provide for case management to facilitate learning plans, small group and mental health counseling, positive behavior support and restorative practices and some extended learning. Reading specialists provide academic support K-5; advisory and support classes at the middle school support Multi-tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) School-wide implementation of MTSS and other academic support practices will not only have an impact on the learning environment and the climate of the school as a whole but will also have a positive impact on the students needing EL and academic support. The district recognizes that while supplemental funds are generated in order to serve the focus students, some services may, should the need arise, be utilized for students outside the focus groups. By providing the services identified without limitations, LCMSD will best serve all students, especially focus students.
Supplemental funds are specifically expended on programs to improve student achievement and learning English. The funds will support ongoing Reading Specialist and counselor programs that serve predominantly Title 1, ELL and Special Education students. The programs and services will be provided at each school (district-wide) to increase and improve services to unduplicated pupils in the 17-18 school year as follows:
-324- Page 52 of 69
1) All students will be assessed three times a year given local measures/benchmark assessments in reading/language arts and math. These assessments will be disaggregated by ELL, SED, and Special Education populations. Specific services will be given to students who are not proficient. These services will be monitored by the principal, case manager or coordinator.
2) Students who are not academically proficient will receive first tier interventions in classrooms. Second tier interventions including intervention specialist support and or before and/or after-school tutorials provided 2·3 times per week during the second and third trimesters of the school year. Students with IEP's receive designated support and services implemented with fidelity..
3) Students who are not proficient in English will receive SDAIE and ELD in Gen Ed classes rather than in pullout settings. Students may be clustered for sheltered instruction in English as needed within the general classroom or support classes at the middle school.
Student progress will be monitored through the implementation of individualized learning plans (ILP’s) and English Learner plans (ELP’s) and IEP's.
The unduplicated pupil count upon which the supplemental is based on 9.2% of our total student ADA. Currently, the district employs 93 FTE credentialed teachers/counselors/other. 1.6 FTE are dedicated Reading/Intervention Specialists, .20 are Academic Support teachers and there are 2.8 FTE Counselors. These are 4% of our total certificated FTE. Additionally, there are 1.25 FTE Paraprofessionals K-5 that provide support to reading and ELD programs. This represents a minimum additional amount designated support for EL and SED students. Monies from supplemental funding are also spent on Extended Learning services, case management/coordination services, ELD curriculum, and ELD professional development. These expenditures meet LCFF minimum proportionality requirement LCMSD provides a significant additional level of services compared to the supplemental funding services. These far exceed the proportion of funding and student ADA------
-325- Revised Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template Instructions
Addendum The Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) and Annual Update Template documents and communicates local educational agencies’ (LEAs) actions and expenditures to support student outcomes and overall performance. For school districts and county offices of education, the LCAP is a three-year plan which is reviewed and updated in the second and third years of the plan. Charter schools may complete the LCAP to align with the term of the charter school’s budget, typically one year, which is submitted to the school’s authorizer. The LCAP and Annual Update Template must be completed by all LEAs each year.
For school districts, the LCAP must describe, for the school district and each school within the district, goals and specific actions to achieve those goals for all students and each student group identified by the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) (ethnic, socioeconomically disadvantaged, English learners, foster youth, pupils with disabilities, and homeless youth), for each of the state priorities and any locally identified priorities.
For county offices of education, the LCAP must describe, for each county office of education-operated school and program, goals and specific actions to achieve those goals for all students and each LCFF student group funded through the county office of education (students attending juvenile court schools, on probation or parole, or expelled under certain conditions) for each of the state priorities and any locally identified priorities. School districts and county offices of education may additionally coordinate and describe in their LCAPs services funded by a school district that are provided to students attending county-operated schools and programs, including special education programs.
If a county superintendent of schools has jurisdiction over a single school district, the county board of education and the governing board of the school district may adopt and file for review and approval a single LCAP consistent with the requirements in Education Code (EC) sections 52060, 52062, 52066, 52068, and 52070. The LCAP must clearly articulate to which entity’s budget (school district or county superintendent of schools) all budgeted and actual expenditures are aligned.
Charter schools must describe goals and specific actions to achieve those goals for all students and each LCFF subgroup of students including students with disabilities and homeless youth, for each of the state priorities that apply for the grade levels served or the nature of the program operated by the charter school, and any locally identified priorities. For charter schools, the inclusion and description of goals for state priorities in the LCAP may be modified to meet the grade levels served and the nature of the programs provided, including modifications to reflect only the statutory requirements explicitly applicable to charter schools in the Education Code. Changes in LCAP goals and actions/services for charter schools that result from the annual update process do not necessarily constitute a material revision to the school’s charter petition.
-326- For questions related to specific sections of the template, please see instructions below: Instructions: Linked Table of Contents
Plan Summary Annual Update Stakeholder Engagement Goals, Actions, and Services Planned Actions/Services Demonstration of Increased or Improved Services for Unduplicated Students
For additional questions or technical assistance related to completion of the LCAP template, please contact the local county office of education, or the CDE’s Local Agency Systems Support Office at: 916-319-0809 or by email at: [email protected].
Plan Summary The LCAP is intended to reflect an LEA’s annual goals, actions, services and expenditures within a fixed three- year planning cycle. LEAs must include a plan summary for the LCAP each year. When developing the LCAP, mark the appropriate LCAP year, and address the prompts provided in these sections. When developing the LCAP in year 2 or year 3, mark the appropriate LCAP year and replace the previous summary information with information relevant to the current year LCAP. In this section, briefly address the prompts provided. These prompts are not limits. LEAs may include information regarding local program(s), community demographics, and the overall vision of the LEA. LEAs may also attach documents (e.g., the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics data reports) if desired and/or include charts illustrating goals, planned outcomes, actual outcomes, or related planned and actual expenditures. An LEA may use an alternative format for the plan summary as long as it includes the information specified in each prompt and the budget summary table. The reference to LCFF Evaluation Rubrics means the evaluation rubrics adopted by the State Board of Education under EC Section 52064.5. Budget Summary The LEA must complete the LCAP Budget Summary table as follows: Total LEA General Fund Budget Expenditures for the LCAP Year: This amount is the LEA’s total budgeted General Fund expenditures for the LCAP year. The LCAP year means the fiscal year for which an LCAP is adopted or updated by July 1. The General Fund is the main operating fund of the LEA and accounts for all activities not accounted for in another fund. All activities are reported in the General Fund unless there is a compelling reason to account for an activity in another fund. For further information please refer to the California School Accounting Manual (http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/ac/sa/). (Note: For some charter schools that follow governmental fund accounting, this amount is the total budgeted expenditures in the Charter Schools Special Revenue Fund. For charter schools that follow the not-for-profit accounting model, this amount is total budgeted expenses, such as those budgeted in the Charter Schools Enterprise Fund.) Total Funds Budgeted for Planned Actions/Services to Meet the Goals in the LCAP for the LCAP Year: This amount is the total of the budgeted expenditures associated with the actions/services included for the LCAP year from all sources of funds, as reflected in the LCAP. To the extent actions/services and/or expenditures are listed in the LCAP under more than one goal, the expenditures should be counted only once.
Description of any use(s) of the General Fund Budget Expenditures specified above for the LCAP year not included in the LCAP: Briefly describe expenditures included in total General Fund Expenditures that are not included in the total funds budgeted for planned actions/services for
-327- the LCAP year. (Note: The total funds budgeted for planned actions/services may include funds other than general fund expenditures.)
Total Projected LCFF Revenues for LCAP Year: This amount is the total amount of LCFF funding the LEA estimates it will receive pursuant to EC sections 42238.02 (for school districts and charter schools) and 2574 (for county offices of education), as implemented by EC sections 42238.03 and 2575 for the LCAP year respectively.
Annual Update The planned goals, expected outcomes, actions/services, and budgeted expenditures must be copied verbatim from the previous year’s* approved LCAP. Minor typographical errors may be corrected. * For example, for LCAP year 2017/18 of the 2017/18 – 2019/20 LCAP, review the goals in the 2016/17 LCAP. Moving forward, review the goals from the most recent LCAP year. For example, LCAP year 2020/21 will review goals from the 2019/20 LCAP year, which is the last year of the 2017/18 – 2019/20 LCAP. Annual Measurable Outcomes For each goal in the prior year, identify and review the actual measurable outcomes as compared to the expected annual measurable outcomes identified in the prior year for the goal. Actions/Services Identify the planned Actions/Services and the budgeted expenditures to implement these actions toward achieving the described goal. Identify the actual actions/services implemented to meet the described goal and the estimated actual annual expenditures to implement the actions/services. As applicable, identify any changes to the students or student groups served, or to the planned location of the actions/services provided. Analysis Using actual annual measurable outcome data, including data from the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, analyze whether the planned actions/services were effective in achieving the goal. Respond to the prompts as instructed. Describe the overall implementation of the actions/services to achieve the articulated goal. Include a discussion of relevant challenges and successes experienced with the implementation process. Describe the overall effectiveness of the actions/services to achieve the articulated goal as measured by the LEA. Explain material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures. Minor variances in expenditures or a dollar-for-dollar accounting is not required. Describe any changes made to this goal, expected outcomes, metrics, or actions and services to achieve this goal as a result of this analysis and analysis of the data provided in the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable. Identify where those changes can be found in the LCAP. Stakeholder Engagement Meaningful engagement of parents, students, and other stakeholders, including those representing the student groups identified by LCFF, is critical to the development of the LCAP and the budget process. Education Code identifies the minimum consultation requirements for school districts and county offices of education as consulting with teachers, principals, administrators, other school personnel, local bargaining units of the school district, parents, and pupils in developing the LCAP. Education Code requires charter schools to consult with teachers, principals, administrators, other school personnel, parents, and pupils in developing the LCAP. In addition, Education Code Section 48985 specifies the requirements for the translation of notices, reports, statements, or records sent to a parent or guardian.
-328- The LCAP should be shared with, and LEAs should request input from, school site-level advisory groups, as applicable (e.g., school site councils, English Learner Advisory Councils, student advisory groups, etc.), to facilitate alignment between school-site and district-level goals and actions. An LEA may incorporate or reference actions described in other plans that are being undertaken to meet specific goals. Instructions: The stakeholder engagement process is an ongoing, annual process. The requirements for this section are the same for each year of a three-year LCAP. When developing the LCAP, mark the appropriate LCAP year, and describe the stakeholder engagement process used to develop the LCAP and Annual Update. When developing the LCAP in year 2 or year 3, mark the appropriate LCAP year and replace the previous stakeholder narrative(s) and describe the stakeholder engagement process used to develop the current year LCAP and Annual Update. School districts and county offices of education: Describe the process used to consult with the Parent Advisory Committee, the English Learner Parent Advisory Committee, parents, students, school personnel, the LEA’s local bargaining units, and the community to inform the development of the LCAP and the annual review and analysis for the indicated LCAP year. Charter schools: Describe the process used to consult with teachers, principals, administrators, other school personnel, parents, and students to inform the development of the LCAP and the annual review and analysis for the indicated LCAP year. Describe how the consultation process impacted the development of the LCAP and annual update for the indicated LCAP year, including the goals, actions, services, and expenditures.
Goals, Actions, and Services LEAs must include a description of the annual goals, for all students and each LCFF identified group of students, to be achieved for each state priority as applicable to type of LEA. An LEA may also include additional local priorities. This section shall also include a description of the specific planned actions an LEA will take to meet the identified goals, and a description of the expenditures required to implement the specific actions. School districts and county offices of education: The LCAP is a three-year plan, which is reviewed and updated annually, as required. Charter schools: The number of years addressed in the LCAP may align with the term of the charter schools budget, typically one year, which is submitted to the school’s authorizer. If year 2 and/or year 3 is not applicable, charter schools must specify as such. New, Modified, Unchanged As part of the LCAP development process, which includes the annual update and stakeholder engagement, indicate if the goal, identified need, related state and/or local priorities, and/or expected annual measurable outcomes for the current LCAP year or future LCAP years are modified or unchanged from the previous year’s LCAP; or, specify if the goal is new. Goal State the goal. LEAs may number the goals using the “Goal #” box for ease of reference. A goal is a broad statement that describes the desired result to which all actions/services are directed. A goal answers the question: What is the LEA seeking to achieve? Related State and/or Local Priorities Identify the state and/or local priorities addressed by the goal by placing a check mark next to the applicable priority or priorities. The LCAP must include goals that address each of the state priorities, as applicable to the type of LEA, and any additional local priorities; however, one goal may address multiple priorities. (Link to State Priorities) Identified Need
-329- Describe the needs that led to establishing the goal. The identified needs may be based on quantitative or qualitative information, including, but not limited to, results of the annual update process or performance data from the LCFF Evaluation Rubrics, as applicable. Expected Annual Measurable Outcomes For each LCAP year, identify the metric(s) or indicator(s) that the LEA will use to track progress toward the expected outcomes. LEAs may identify metrics for specific student groups. Include in the baseline column the most recent data associated with this metric or indicator available at the time of adoption of the LCAP for the first year of the three-year plan. The most recent data associated with a metric or indicator includes data as reported in the annual update of the LCAP year immediately preceding the three-year plan, as applicable. The baseline data shall remain unchanged throughout the three-year LCAP. In the subsequent year columns, identify the progress to be made in each year of the three-year cycle of the LCAP. Consider how expected outcomes in any given year are related to the expected outcomes for subsequent years. The metrics may be quantitative or qualitative, but at minimum an LEA must use the applicable required metrics for the related state priorities, in each LCAP year as applicable to the type of LEA. For the student engagement priority metrics, as applicable, LEAs must calculate the rates as described in the LCAP Template Appendix, sections (a) through (d). Planned Actions/Services
For each action/service, the LEA must complete either the section “For Actions/Services not contributing to meeting Increased or Improved Services Requirement” or the section “For Actions/Services Contributing to Meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement.” The LEA shall not complete both sections for a single action.
For Actions/Services Not Contributing to Meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement Students to be Served The “Students to be Served” box is to be completed for all actions/services except for those which are included by the LEA as contributing to meeting the requirement to increase or improve services for unduplicated students. Indicate in this box which students will benefit from the actions/services by checking “All”, “Students with Disabilities”, or “Specific Student Group(s)”. If “Specific Student Group(s)” is checked, identify the specific student group(s) as appropriate. Location(s) Identify the location where the action/services will be provided. If the services are provided to all schools within the LEA, the LEA must indicate “All Schools”. If the services are provided to specific schools within the LEA or specific grade spans only, the LEA must mark “Specific Schools” or “Specific Grade Spans”. Identify the individual school or a subset of schools or grade spans (e.g., all high schools or grades K-5), as appropriate. Charter schools operating more than one site, authorized within the same charter petition, may choose to distinguish between sites by selecting “Specific Schools” and identify the site(s) where the actions/services will be provided. For charter schools operating only one site, “All Schools” and “Specific Schools” may be synonymous and, therefore, either would be appropriate. Charter schools may use either term provided they are used in a consistent manner through the LCAP.
For Actions/Services Contributing to Meeting the Increased or Improved Services Requirement: Students to be Served For any action/service contributing to the LEA’s overall demonstration that it has increased or improved services for unduplicated students above what is provided to all students (see Demonstration of Increased or Improved Services for Unduplicated Students section, below), the LEA must identify the unduplicated student group(s) being served. Scope of Service
-330- For each action/service contributing to meeting the increased or improved services requirement, identify scope of service by indicating “LEA-wide”, “Schoolwide”, or “Limited to Unduplicated Student Group(s)”. The LEA must select one of the following three options: If the action/service is being funded and provided to upgrade the entire educational program of the LEA, place a check mark next to “LEA-wide.” If the action/service is being funded and provided to upgrade the entire educational program of a particular school or schools, place a check mark next to “schoolwide”. If the action/service being funded and provided is limited to the unduplicated students identified in “Students to be Served”, place a check mark next to “Limited to Student Groups”. For charter schools and single-school school districts, “LEA-wide” and “Schoolwide” may be synonymous and, therefore, either would be appropriate. For charter schools operating multiple schools (determined by a unique CDS code) under a single charter, use “LEA-wide” to refer to all schools under the charter and use “Schoolwide” to refer to a single school authorized within the same charter petition. Charter schools operating a single school may use “LEA-wide” or “Schoolwide” provided these terms are used in a consistent manner through the LCAP. Location(s) Identify the location where the action/services will be provided. If the services are provided to all schools within the LEA, the LEA must indicate “All Schools”. If the services are provided to specific schools within the LEA or specific grade spans only, the LEA must mark “Specific Schools” or “Specific Grade Spans”. Identify the individual school or a subset of schools or grade spans (e.g., all high schools or grades K-5), as appropriate. Charter schools operating more than one site, authorized within the same charter petition, may choose to distinguish between sites by selecting “Specific Schools” and identify the site(s) where the actions/services will be provided. For charter schools operating only one site, “All Schools” and “Specific Schools” may be synonymous and, therefore, either would be appropriate. Charter schools may use either term provided they are used in a consistent manner through the LCAP. Actions/Services For each LCAP year, identify the actions to be performed and services provided to meet the described goal. Actions and services that are implemented to achieve the identified goal may be grouped together. LEAs may number the action/service using the “Action #” box for ease of reference.
New/Modified/Unchanged: Check “New” if the action/service is being added in any of the three years of the LCAP to meet the articulated goal. Check “Modified” if the action/service was included to meet an articulated goal and has been changed or modified in any way from the prior year description. Check “Unchanged” if the action/service was included to meet an articulated goal and has not been changed or modified in any way from the prior year description. o If a planned action/service is anticipated to remain unchanged for the duration of the plan, an LEA may check “Unchanged” and leave the subsequent year columns blank rather than having to copy/paste the action/service into the subsequent year columns. Budgeted expenditures may be treated in the same way as applicable. Note: The goal from the prior year may or may not be included in the current three-year LCAP. For example, when developing year 1 of the LCAP, the goals articulated in year 3 of the preceding three-year LCAP will be from the prior year. Charter schools may complete the LCAP to align with the term of the charter school’s budget that is submitted to the school’s authorizer. Accordingly, a charter school submitting a one-year budget to its authorizer may choose not to complete the year 2 and year 3 portions of the Goals, Actions, and
-331- Services section of the template. If year 2 and/or year 3 is not applicable, charter schools must specify as such. Budgeted Expenditures For each action/service, list and describe budgeted expenditures for each school year to implement these actions, including where those expenditures can be found in the LEA’s budget. The LEA must reference all fund sources for each proposed expenditure. Expenditures must be classified using the California School Accounting Manual as required by Education Code sections 52061, 52067, and 47606.5. Expenditures that are included more than once in an LCAP must be indicated as a duplicated expenditure and include a reference to the goal and action/service where the expenditure first appears in the LCAP. If a county superintendent of schools has jurisdiction over a single school district, and chooses to complete a single LCAP, the LCAP must clearly articulate to which entity’s budget (school district or county superintendent of schools) all budgeted expenditures are aligned.
Demonstration of Increased or Improved Services for Unduplicated Students This section must be completed for each LCAP year. When developing the LCAP in year 2 or year 3, copy the Demonstration of Increased or Improved Services for Unduplicated Students table and mark the appropriate LCAP year. Using the copy of the table, complete the table as required for the current year LCAP. Retain all prior year tables for this section for each of the three years within the LCAP. Estimated Supplemental and Concentration Grant Funds Identify the amount of funds in the LCAP year calculated on the basis of the number and concentration of low income, foster youth, and English learner students as determined pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a)(5). Percentage to Increase or Improve Services Identify the percentage by which services for unduplicated pupils must be increased or improved as compared to the services provided to all students in the LCAP year as calculated pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a)(7). Consistent with the requirements of 5 CCR 15496, describe how services provided for unduplicated pupils are increased or improved by at least the percentage calculated as compared to services provided for all students in the LCAP year. To improve services means to grow services in quality and to increase services means to grow services in quantity. This description must address how the action(s)/service(s) limited for one or more unduplicated student group(s), and any schoolwide or districtwide action(s)/service(s) supported by the appropriate description, taken together, result in the required proportional increase or improvement in services for unduplicated pupils. If the overall increased or improved services include any actions/services being funded and provided on a schoolwide or districtwide basis, identify each action/service and include the required descriptions supporting each action/service as follows. For those services being provided on an LEA-wide basis: For school districts with an unduplicated pupil percentage of 55% or more, and for charter schools and county offices of education: Describe how these services are principally directed to and effective in meeting its goals for unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priorities. For school districts with an unduplicated pupil percentage of less than 55%: Describe how these services are principally directed to and effective in meeting its goals for unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priorities. Also describe how the services are the most effective use of the funds to meet these goals for its unduplicated pupils. Provide the basis for this determination, including any alternatives considered, supporting research, experience or educational theory.
-332- For school districts only, identify in the description those services being funded and provided on a schoolwide basis, and include the required description supporting the use of the funds on a schoolwide basis:
For schools with 40% or more enrollment of unduplicated pupils: Describe how these services are principally directed to and effective in meeting its goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priorities.
For school districts expending funds on a schoolwide basis at a school with less than 40% enrollment of unduplicated pupils: Describe how these services are principally directed to and how the services are the most effective use of the funds to meet its goals for English learners, low income students and foster youth, in the state and any local priorities.
State Priorities Priority 1: Basic Services addresses the degree to which: A. Teachers in the LEA are appropriately assigned and fully credentialed in the subject area and for the pupils they are teaching; B. Pupils in the school district have sufficient access to the standards-aligned instructional materials; and C. School facilities are maintained in good repair. Priority 2: Implementation of State Standards addresses: A. The implementation of state board adopted academic content and performance standards for all students, which are: a. English Language Arts – Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts b. Mathematics – Common Core State Standards for Mathematics c. English Language Development d. Career Technical Education e. Health Education Content Standards f. History-Social Science g. Model School Library Standards h. Physical Education Model Content Standards i. Next Generation Science Standards j. Visual and Performing Arts k. World Language; and B. How the programs and services will enable English learners to access the CCSS and the ELD standards for purposes of gaining academic content knowledge and English language proficiency. Priority 3: Parental Involvement addresses: A. The efforts the school district makes to seek parent input in making decisions for the school district and each individual school site; B. How the school district will promote parental participation in programs for unduplicated pupils; and C. How the school district will promote parental participation in programs for individuals with exceptional needs. Priority 4: Pupil Achievement as measured by all of the following, as applicable: A. Statewide assessments; B. The Academic Performance Index; C. The percentage of pupils who have successfully completed courses that satisfy UC or CSU entrance requirements, or programs of study that align with state board approved career technical educational standards and framework; D. The percentage of English learner pupils who make progress toward English proficiency as measured by the CELDT; E. The English learner reclassification rate; F. The percentage of pupils who have passed an advanced placement examination with a score of 3 or higher; and G. The percentage of pupils who participate in, and demonstrate college preparedness pursuant to, the Early Assessment Program, or any subsequent assessment of college preparedness. Priority 5: Pupil Engagement as measured by all of the following, as applicable: A. School attendance rates; B. Chronic absenteeism rates;
-333- C. Middle school dropout rates; D. High school dropout rates; and E. High school graduation rates; Priority 6: School Climate as measured by all of the following, as applicable: A. Pupil suspension rates; B. Pupil expulsion rates; and C. Other local measures, including surveys of pupils, parents, and teachers on the sense of safety and school connectedness. Priority 7: Course Access addresses the extent to which pupils have access to and are enrolled in: A. S broad course of study including courses described under Sections 51210 and 51220(a)-(i), as applicable; B. Programs and services developed and provided to unduplicated pupils; and C. Programs and services developed and provided to individuals with exceptional needs. Priority 8: Pupil Outcomes addresses pupil outcomes, if available, for courses described under Sections 51210 and 51220(a)-(i), as applicable. Priority 9: Coordination of Instruction of Expelled Pupils (COE Only) addresses how the county superintendent of schools will coordinate instruction of expelled pupils Priority 10. Coordination of Services for Foster Youth (COE Only) addresses how the county superintendent of schools will coordinate services for foster children, including: A. Working with the county child welfare agency to minimize changes in school placement B. Providing education-related information to the county child welfare agency to assist in the delivery of services to foster children, including educational status and progress information that is required to be included in court reports; C. Responding to requests from the juvenile court for information and working with the juvenile court to ensure the delivery and coordination of necessary educational services; and D. Establishing a mechanism for the efficient expeditious transfer of health and education records and the health and education passport. Local Priorities address: A. Local priority goals; and B. Methods for measuring progress toward local goals.
-334- APPENDIX A: PRIORITIES 5 AND 6 RATE CALCULATION INSTRUCTIONS
For the purposes of completing the LCAP in reference to the state priorities under Education Code sections 52060 and 52066, as applicable to type of LEA, the following shall apply:
(a) “Chronic absenteeism rate” shall be calculated as follows:
(1) The number of pupils with a primary, secondary, or short-term enrollment during the academic year (July 1 – June 30) who are chronically absent where “chronic absentee” means a pupil who is absent 10 percent or more of the schooldays in the school year when the total number of days a pupil is absent is divided by the total number of days the pupil is enrolled and school was actually taught in the total number of days the pupil is enrolled and school was actually taught in the regular day schools of the district, exclusive of Saturdays and Sundays.
(2) The unduplicated count of pupils with a primary, secondary, or short-term enrollment during the academic year (July 1 – June 30).
(3) Divide (1) by (2).
(b) “Middle School dropout rate” shall be calculated as set forth in California Code of Regulations, title 5, Section 1039.1.
(c) “High school dropout rate” shall be calculated as follows:
(1) The number of cohort members who dropout by the end of year 4 in the cohort where “cohort” is defined as the number of first-time grade 9 pupils in year 1 (starting cohort) plus pupils who transfer in, minus pupils who transfer out, emigrate, or die during school years 1, 2, 3, and 4.
(2) The total number of cohort members.
(3) Divide (1) by (2).
(d) “High school graduation rate” shall be calculated as follows:
(1) The number of cohort members who earned a regular high school diploma [or earned an adult education high school diploma or passed the California High School Proficiency Exam] by the end of year 4 in the cohort where “cohort” is defined as the number of first-time grade 9 pupils in year 1 (starting cohort) plus pupils who transfer in, minus pupils who transfer out, emigrate, or die during school years 1, 2, 3, and 4.
(2) The total number of cohort members.
(3) Divide (1) by (2).
(e) “Suspension rate” shall be calculated as follows:
(1) The unduplicated count of pupils involved in one or more incidents for which the pupil was suspended during the academic year (July 1 – June 30).
(2) The unduplicated count of pupils with a primary, secondary, or short-term enrollment during the academic year (July 1 – June 30).
(3) Divide (1) by (2).
-335- (f) “Expulsion rate” shall be calculated as follows:
(1) The unduplicated count of pupils involved in one or more incidents for which the pupil was expelled during the academic year (July 1 – June 30).
(2) The unduplicated count of pupils with a primary, secondary, or short-term enrollment during the academic year (July 1 – June 30).
(3) Divide (1) by (2).
NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 42238.07 and 52064, Education Code. Reference: Sections 2574, 2575, 42238.01, 42238.02, 42238.03, 42238.07, 47605, 47605.6, 47606.5, 48926, 52052, 52060, 52061, 52062, 52063, 52064, 52066, 52067, 52068, 52069, 52070, 52070.5, and 64001,; 20 U.S.C. Sections 6312 and 6314.
-336- APPENDIX B: GUIDING QUESTIONS Guiding Questions: Annual Review and Analysis
1) How have the actions/services addressed the needs of all pupils and did the provisions of those services result in the desired outcomes? 2) How have the actions/services addressed the needs of all subgroups of pupils identified pursuant to Education Code Section 52052, including, but not limited to, English learners, low-income pupils, and foster youth; and did the provision of those actions/services result in the desired outcomes? 3) How have the actions/services addressed the identified needs and goals of specific school sites and were these actions/services effective in achieving the desired outcomes? 4) What information (e.g., quantitative and qualitative data/metrics) was examined to review progress toward goals in the annual update? 5) What progress has been achieved toward the goal and expected measurable outcome(s)? How effective were the actions and services in making progress toward the goal? What changes to goals, actions, services, and expenditures are being made in the LCAP as a result of the review of progress and assessment of the effectiveness of the actions and services? 6) What differences are there between budgeted expenditures and estimated actual annual expenditures? What were the reasons for any differences?
Guiding Questions: Stakeholder Engagement 1) How have applicable stakeholders (e.g., parents and pupils, including parents of unduplicated pupils and unduplicated pupils identified in Education Code Section 42238.01; community members; local bargaining units; LEA personnel; county child welfare agencies; county office of education foster youth services programs, court-appointed special advocates, and other foster youth stakeholders; community organizations representing English learners; and others as appropriate) been engaged and involved in developing, reviewing, and supporting implementation of the LCAP? 2) How have stakeholders been included in the LEA’s process in a timely manner to allow for engagement in the development of the LCAP? 3) What information (e.g., quantitative and qualitative data/metrics) was made available to stakeholders related to the state priorities and used by the LEA to inform the LCAP goal setting process? How was the information made available? 4) What changes, if any, were made in the LCAP prior to adoption as a result of written comments or other feedback received by the LEA through any of the LEA’s engagement processes? 5) What specific actions were taken to meet statutory requirements for stakeholder engagement pursuant to Education Code sections 52062, 52068, or 47606.5, as applicable, including engagement with representatives of parents and guardians of pupils identified in Education Code Section 42238.01? 6) What specific actions were taken to consult with pupils to meet the requirements 5 CCR 15495(a)? 7) How has stakeholder involvement been continued and supported? How has the involvement of these stakeholders supported improved outcomes for pupils, including unduplicated pupils, related to the state priorities?
-337- Guiding Questions: Goals, Actions, and Services
1) What are the LEA’s goal(s) to address state priorities related to “Conditions of Learning”: Basic Services (Priority 1), the Implementation of State Standards (Priority 2), and Course Access (Priority 7)? 2) What are the LEA’s goal(s) to address state priorities related to “Pupil Outcomes”: Pupil Achievement (Priority 4), Pupil Outcomes (Priority 8), Coordination of Instruction of Expelled Pupils (Priority 9 – COE Only), and Coordination of Services for Foster Youth (Priority 10 – COE Only)? 3) What are the LEA’s goal(s) to address state priorities related to parent and pupil “Engagement”: Parental Involvement (Priority 3), Pupil Engagement (Priority 5), and School Climate (Priority 6)? 4) What are the LEA’s goal(s) to address any locally-identified priorities? 5) How have the unique needs of individual school sites been evaluated to inform the development of meaningful district and/or individual school site goals (e.g., input from site level advisory groups, staff, parents, community, pupils; review of school level plans; in-depth school level data analysis, etc.)? 6) What are the unique goals for unduplicated pupils as defined in Education Code sections 42238.01 and bgroups as defined in section 52052 that are different from the LEA’s goals for all pupils? 7) What are the specific expected measurable outcomes associated with each of the goals annually and over the term of the LCAP? 8) What information (e.g., quantitative and qualitative data/metrics) was considered/reviewed to develop goals to address each state or local priority? 9) What information was considered/reviewed for individual school sites? 10) What information was considered/reviewed for subgroups identified in Education Code Section 52052? 11) What actions/services will be provided to all pupils, to subgroups of pupils identified pursuant to Education Code Section 52052, to specific school sites, to English learners, to low-income pupils, and/or to foster youth to achieve goals identified in the LCAP? 12) How do these actions/services link to identified goals and expected measurable outcomes? 13) What expenditures support changes to actions/services as a result of the goal identified? Where can these expenditures be found in the LEA’s budget?
Prepared by the California Department of Education, October 2016
-338- LCAP Expenditure Summary
Total Expenditures by Funding Source 2017-18 2016-17 2016-17 through Funding Source Annual Update Annual Update 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2019-20 Budgeted Actual Total All Funding Sources 16,171,000.00 16,580,790.00 16,802,000.00 17,306,000.00 17,838,901.00 51,946,901.00 16,171,000.00 274,033.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Concentration 0.00 14,701.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 LCFF 0.00 16,283,457.00 16,797,000.00 17,301,000.00 17,833,901.00 51,931,901.00 Locally Defined 0.00 8,599.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 15,000.00
* Totals based on expenditure amounts in goal and annual update sections.
-339- Total Expenditures by Object Type 2017-18 2016-17 2016-17 through Object Type Annual Update Annual Update 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2019-20 Budgeted Actual Total All Expenditure Types 16,171,000.00 16,580,790.00 16,802,000.00 17,306,000.00 17,838,901.00 51,946,901.00 77,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1000-1999: Certificated Personnel Salaries 0.00 12,804,709.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000-2999: Classified Personnel Salaries 0.00 961,475.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3000-3999: Employee Benefits 16,094,000.00 2,343,305.00 16,725,000.00 17,226,000.00 17,756,901.00 51,707,901.00 4000-4999: Books And Supplies 0.00 63,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5000-5999: Services And Other Operating 0.00 331,101.00 77,000.00 80,000.00 82,000.00 239,000.00 Expenditures 5800: Professional/Consulting Services And 0.00 77,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Operating Expenditures
* Totals based on expenditure amounts in goal and annual update sections.
-340- Total Expenditures by Object Type and Funding Source 2016-17 2016-17 2017-18 Annual Annual through Object Type Funding Source 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Update Update 2019-20 Budgeted Actual Total All Expenditure Types All Funding Sources 16,171,000.00 16,580,790.00 16,802,000.00 17,306,000.00 17,838,901.00 51,946,901.00 77,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1000-1999: Certificated 0.00 212,978.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Personnel Salaries 1000-1999: Certificated LCFF 0.00 12,591,731.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Personnel Salaries 2000-2999: Classified LCFF 0.00 961,475.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Personnel Salaries 3000-3999: Employee 16,094,000.00 61,055.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Benefits 3000-3999: Employee LCFF 0.00 2,282,250.00 16,725,000.00 17,226,000.00 17,756,901.00 51,707,901.00 Benefits 4000-4999: Books And LCFF 0.00 63,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Supplies 5000-5999: Services And Concentration 0.00 14,701.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other Operating Expenditures 5000-5999: Services And LCFF 0.00 307,801.00 72,000.00 75,000.00 77,000.00 224,000.00 Other Operating Expenditures 5000-5999: Services And Locally Defined 0.00 8,599.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 15,000.00 Other Operating Expenditures 5800: Professional/Consulting LCFF 0.00 77,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Services And Operating Expenditures
* Totals based on expenditure amounts in goal and annual update sections.
-341- Total Expenditures by Goal 2017-18 through Goal 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2019-20 Total Goal 1 310,000.00 320,000.00 335,000.00 965,000.00 Goal 2 12,103,000.00 12,573,000.00 13,038,201.00 37,714,201.00 Goal 3 235,000.00 244,000.00 253,760.00 732,760.00 Goal 4 4,082,000.00 4,094,000.00 4,134,940.00 12,310,940.00 Goal 5 72,000.00 75,000.00 77,000.00 224,000.00
* Totals based on expenditure amounts in goal and annual update sections.
-342- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Office of the Superintendent
Date: May 23, 2017 To: Board of Trustees From: Valerie Pitts, Superintendent and Paula Rigney, Chief Business Official Re: Discussion: Public Hearing on the General Fund 2017-18 Budget
Background
State law requires the Board to adopt its annual budget before July 1 and in alignment with the LCAP, since the District is on a “single adoption” cycle. By the time the Board considers this item, it will have conducted the required public hearing. The budget public hearing must occur at the same meeting as the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) public hearing and at a separate meeting from the formal adoption of the budget and LCAP.
Analysis
The attached General Fund, Cafeteria, Deferred Maintenance, Bond, and Developer Fee budgets are in the State approved SACS (Standardized Account Code Structure) alternative format. A copy of the budget in the SACS download format that is required by the State Department of Education for final adoption will be provided at the June 14th Board meeting.
The Multi-Year Projection (MYP) reflects adjusted certificated and classified salary and benefit calculations based on staff hired to date. It includes salary increases based upon step and column for the two subsequent years. The Key Budget Assumptions included in this report provide more detailed descriptions of the assumptions used in calculating the estimated budgets for 2017-18 through 2019-20.
The District must also include disclosure of the District’s fund balance reserves and provide a statement of reasons if assigned, unassigned and/or unappropriated balances exceed the state required minimum reserve.
On June 20, 2014, the Governor signed into law SB 858 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 32, Statutes of 2014), the education budget trailer bill. The bill requires that District’s document and report the substantiation need for reserves greater than the state required minimum serve for economic uncertainty.
School district reserve levels, as well as their fund balances, are determined by the Board of Trustees to meet local priorities and allow districts to save for potential future expected and unexpected expenditures and for eventual economic downturns. The statutory minimum for school district reserves for economic uncertainties ranges from one (1) to five (5)%, depending on district enrollment, and covers between one to five weeks of payroll. Fiscal advisors in California recommend reserving greater percentages, particularly in districts that are community funded (Basic Aide). Prudent budgeting raises expectations for school districts to establish and maintain reserves above the statutory minimum. Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Board policy requires a six (6)% reserve. In practice, the Board of Trustees of the Larkspur-Corte Madera School District currently maintains a reserve of approximately 9.75% for purposes of rising special education costs, continued funding of ongoing operational costs, curriculum adoption, deferred maintenance/HVAC/electrical needs, and payroll during the next economic downturn. This also prepares for when the revenues from Proposition 30 begin to sunset.
-343-
Fiscal Impact
Approval of this item will result in projected revenue of $18,648,909 and projected expenditures of $18,846,001 from the General Fund resulting in excess of expenses over revenues of $294,086 in 2017-18. This budget reflects that the District remains fiscally solvent for the budget year and two subsequent years as required to obtain a positive certification.
Legal Consideration
The Board is required to adopt a budget before June 30, 2017.
Recommendation
This item is for discussion and public input purposes only.
Backup attached: Yes √ No Item No. 8
-344- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District
Intra-District Memorandum
To: Dr. Valerie Pitts, Superintendent
From: Paula Rigney, Chief Business Official
Date: May 23, 2017
Re: 2017-18 Proposed Budget - All Funds
BUDGET NEWS The Governor's May Revise was announced on May 15, 2017. The revised state budget, as it impacts education, was similar in nature to his January proposal, with a small conservative raised revenue forecast. But the Proposition 98 guarantee increased slightly in the 2017-2018 budget year. The proposal also included a higher spending plan toward education, which we greatly appreciated, it does carry more risk. School Services of California is nervous about the sustainability of the economy and governor's plan.
GENERAL FUND The Key Budget Assumptions are attached to this narrative and describe detailed descriptions of assumptions used to prepare the 2017-18 budget as well as factors to consider for the two subsequent years. They also include all of the expenditures supporting the District's Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP).
LCFF Revenues The State continues its seven year process to implement the LCFF. The LCFF eliminated "revenue limits", the deficit factor, and collapsed almost all State categorical revenue into the formula. The District has used the Fiscal Crisis Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) LCFF calculator, with the assumptions detailed in the attached budget assumptions to calculate revenue estimates for 2017-18 through 2019-20. The District is projected to receive $11,455,840, in LCFF revenue for 2017-18, an increase of $288,469 over the 2016-17 projected funding level due to the cost of living adjustment (COLA) and "Gap" funding.
Districts are now known as "LCFF funded" or "basic aid." As the District is growing and barely into basic aid status before the implementation ofLCFF, our projections indicate that the District will be LCFF funded for 2017-18 through 2019-20.
Federal Funding Federal funding is made up of Special Education Funding of $310,122 and Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) funding (Title I, II, and III) of $67,557. These funding levels have decreased from 2017-18 levels by $-34,033.
-345- State Funding The implementation of the LCFF has reduced the number and total funding of State categorical programs outside of the LCFF. The District's remaining State funding is limited to Lottery funding of $282,290 restricted Proposition 39 energy efficiency funding of $102,330, Mandated Cost Block grant of $41,664, and State mental health funding of $44,672.
Another change in state funding comes in the form of an accounting change. The State is now requiring school district's to record as an expense, as well as equal state revenue, the STRS payments that the State makes "on-behalf' of the school district's employees. There is not net impact of this change in accounting (a $733,000 increase to both State Revenue and STRS expense) with the exception of a slightly increased reserve for economic uncertainties, which is calculated based upon total expenditures.
Local Funding Parcel tax revenue of $2,963,020 has been budgeted based upon preliminary estimates of the recently approved Measure A of $714.74 per parcel.
SPARK has updated their contribution to the General Fund to $1,000,000, based upon current budget development meetings.
Lease revenue of $544,513, is included based upon current leases, comprised primarily of the long-term lease to Marin Primary and Middle School.
General Fund Expenditures The bulk of the District's expenditures, 86%, are employee salaries and benefits. The remaining 14% of the budget funds are contracted services, supplies and materials, capital outlay, and other expenses. Elementary school districts are required by law to spend at least 60% of total expenditures on classroom related expenses including teachers and paraprofessionals. The District maintains a percentage well over 60%.
Salary and benefit projections include current salary agreements and step and column, as well as proposed and implemented increases to STRS, PERS, and Worker's Compensation rates. Any new hire positions not filled at the time of adoption are budgeted at the highest allowed per bargaining unit contracts.
OTHER FUNDS The CAFETERIA FUND was budgeted based on historical operations using current reimbursement rates, indirect cost rate, and anticipated food services contract rates for 2017-18. The District is in the process of completing its request for proposal (RFP) process for the 2017-18 school year, with the bid opening on June 2°d. Total General Fund contribution to the program is $16,994, which is partially offset by the indirect cost transfer of $5,000.
The DEFERRED MAINTENANCE FUND contribution is maintained to address modernization and repair needs at the District's three sites. The current Deferred Maintenance Plan helps direct the funds to the scheduled projects. The District transfers $80,000 from the general fund to support the Deferred Maintenance Plan.
The BOND FUND budget (Fund 21 ). The three main 2014 Measure D projects were substantially complete for the beginning of school in September of 2015. The funds remaining are for minor work that will be completed this summer as well as a contingency of $663,000 that is available for additional future work (including the District's portion of the Hall athletic field replacement). There are no expenditures included in the proposed budget due to all remaining funds being currently budgeted. When the accounting records are closed for 2016-17, all remaining budget balances from the projects will be "rolled over" to the 2017-18 budget.
-346- The DEVELOPER FEE FUND is funded by Level I Developer Impact Fees. The rates for these fees are set by the State Allocation Board and enacted by the District after performing a justification study. The District's current rates of $3 .3 6 per sq. ft. for residential and $0 .54 per sq. ft. for commercial were approved in April of 2014. Developer fee revenue is projected to decrease from the 2012-13 through 2016-17 levels, as no signification development projects have been approved/begun.
Attachments
1) Key Budget Assumptions - All significant budget assumptions used to create the budget and multi year projections (MYP).
2) 2016-17 Estimated Actuals and 2017-18 Proposed Budget for the General Fund-An updated budget for 2016-17, which projects how the District will close out the year and the summary of the General Fund budget for 2017-18. This form is presented in the SACS alternative form.
3) 2016-17 through 2019-20 MYP - As required by AB 1200, the MYP is a projection 2017-18 and the subsequent two year. This projection supports the assumption that the District can meet its financial obligations for the budget year, as well as the two subsequent years.
4) Reserve Disclosure-A summary of the District current and projected reserves for 2017-18 through 2019-20 and the statement ofreasons for the reserve need. This disclosure was new for 2015-16 and is the transparency portion of the reserve cap legislation that was approved in the eleventh hour in the 2015-16 State budget.
-347- LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT 2017-18 General Fund Budget
KEY BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS Draft - 2017-18 Budget Adoption May 23, 2017 . The following Budget Assumptions are based on the Governor's May Revise 2017-2018 Proposed Budget Workshop by Services of California (SSC), Education Coalition (California School Boards Association, Association of California School Administrators, California Association of School Business Officials), Legislative Analysts Office, State Department of Finance, and Marin County Office of Education Common Message.
2017-18 General Fund
REVENUES • Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) revenue of $11,455,840 is based upon the Governor's Budget Adoption LCFF calculator with the following assumptions. The gap funding percentage is the percentage of the "gap" between the current funding level and the proposed full implementation funding level under LCFF:
ADA ADA% Gap Funding COLA Unduplicated %
1488 96.0% 43.9% 1.56% 9.93%
• Parcel Tax based upon the initial projections of the approved Measure A of $2,963,020 • Federal Revenue decrease from 2016-17 to $363,226 (-34,033) • SPARK Revenue of $1,000,000 based upon ongoing budget development • Other State Revenue of $1,204,057 • Lease revenue based upon current leases of $544,513 • Other Local Revenues $1,118,253 including the current Special Education Marin SELPA allocation
EXPENDITURES Salaries & Benefits
• Projected salaries (steps and columns) based upon actual staffing and placement/hiring as of May, 2017, • Health and Welfare (H&W) increase to $9,000 cap based upon settled agreement with LCMEA and CSEA • STRS rate increased to 14.43% based upon STRS adopted rate (from 12.58% in 2016-17) • STRS On-Behalf Rate is 8.58%, although this expense has no net impact as it is paid directly by the State • PERS rate increased to 15.53% based upon PERS adopted rate (from 13.888% in 2016-17) • Workers' Compensation rate decreases to 1.104% based upon Marin Schools Insurance Authority (MSIA) approved rates • OASDI/Social Security (6.2%), Medicare (1.45%), and Unemployment Insurance (0.05%) are based upon actual rates
-348- Non-Salary accounts
• Includes costs for Technology Device Succession Plan and investments to move towards 1: 1 technology • Decrease in 4000 and 5000 object categories to account for the math adoption purchased in 2016-2017 but account for expenditures in future curriculum adoptions ( Language Arts) and professional development as well as ongoing cost increases such as utilities, insurance, special education contracted services and NPS fees, audit fees, network and technology contracts, and site discretionary spending
RESERVES
• State and Board designated reserve for economic uncertainties at 6%, based upon Board policy • Assignment of $704,738 for remaining one-time State unrestricted revenue, Special Education Unanticipated Cost (NPS/residential)
2018-19 General Fund
REVENUES • Local Control Funding Formula revenue of $11,840,380 is based upon the Governor's 2018-19 Proposed Budget LCFF calculator with the following assumptions (conservatively, no enrollment growth has been included):
ADA ADA% Gap Funding COLA Unduplicated %
1488 96.0% 39.03% 2.15% 9.92%
• Parcel Tax base per parcel increased 5% to $3,111,171 • Federal Revenue decrease from 2017-18 to $309,312 • Local revenues - SPARK base reset to level of $875,000 pending ongoing budget development discussions • Other State Revenue of $1,202,999 • Lease revenue based upon current leases of $551,319 • Other Local Revenues $1,103,351 including current Special Education SELPA allocation
EXPENDITURES Salaries & Benefits
• Projected Step and Column increases included in salary projections • Benefits updated to include effects of step and column increases and staffing changes from prior year • STRS rate increase to 16.28% based upon STRS adopted rate • PERS rate increased to 18. 7% based upon PERS projected rate
Non-Salary accounts
• Includes costs for Device Succession Plan and investments to move towards 1 :1 technology • Slight decrease in 4000 and 5000 object categories to account for anticipated curriculum adoptions (Math, Language Arts) and professional development as well as ongoing cost increases such as utilities, insurance, special education contracted services and NPS, audit fees, network and technology contracts, and site discretionary spending
-349- RESERVES
• State and Board designated reserve for economic uncertainties at 6%, based upon Board policy • Assignment of $481,722 for remaining one-time State unrestricted revenue, Solar Buy Out, Special Education Unanticipated Cost (NPS/residential)
2019-20 General Fund
REVENUES • Local Control Funding Formula revenue of $12,013,917 is based upon the Governor's May Revise LCFF calculator with the following assumptions (conservatively, no enrollment growth has been included):
ADA ADA% Gap Funding COLA Unduplicated %
1488 96.0% 41.51% 2.35% 9.91%
• Parcel Tax base per parcel increased 5% to $3,266,730 • Federal Revenue of $302,388 • Local revenues - SPARK base reset to level of $875,000 pending ongoing budget development meetings • Other State Revenue of $1,100,669 • Lease revenue based upon current leases of $558,211 • Other Local Revenues $1,359, 113 including current Marin SELPA allocation
EXPENDITURES Salaries & Benefits
• Projected Step and Column increases included in salary projections • Benefits updated to include effects of step and column increases and staffing changes from prior year • STRS rate increase to 18.13% based upon STRS adopted rate • PERS rate increased to 21.6% based upon PERS projected rate
Non-Salary accounts
• Includes costs for Device Succession Plan and investments to move towards 1: 1 technology • Slight decrease in 4000 and 5000 object categories to account for anticipated curriculum adoptions (Math, Language Arts) and professional development as well as ongoing cost increases such as utilities, insurance, special education contracted services and NPS, audit fees, network and technology contracts, and site discretionary spending RESERVES
• State and Board designated reserve for economic uncertainties at 6%, based upon Board policy • Assignment of $481,722 for remaining one-time State unrestricted revenue, Solar Buy Out, Special Education Unanticipated Cost (NPS/residential)
-350- LCFF Calculator Universal Assum tlons Larks ur-Corte Madera 65367 -2017-18 Ma Revise LCFF Estimates Pre ared b MCOE
Summary of Funding 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 Target $ 10,763,508 11,181,017 $ 11,514,076 11,546,078 11,747,143 $ 11,998,543 $ 12,201,232 12,436,518 12,437,003 Floor 8,484 222 9 004 545 9 846,657 10,765,167 11,227 236 11,455 839 11,774 305 12 016 440 12,436,518 Applied Fonnula: Target or Floor FLOOR FLOOR FLOOR FLOOR FLOOR FLOOR FLOOR FLOOR TARGET Remaining Need after Gap rnrormationaJ only} 2,005,733 1,520,045 791,063 351,176 291,304 154,508 113,093 Current Year Gap Funding 273,553 656,427 876,356 429,735 228,603 388,196 313,834 420,078 Miscellaneous Adjustments Economic Recovery Target Additional State Aid Total Phase-In Entitlement $ 8,757,775 $ 9,660,972 $ 10,723,013 11,194,902 $ 11,455,839 $ 11,844,035 12,088,139 $ 12,436,518 $ 12,437,003
Components of LCFF By Object Code 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 8011 - State Aid 979,619 979,619 2,825,576 $ 2,333,982 $ 2,151,536 2,155,408 1,025,408 $ 1,025,408 $ 1,025,408 8011 - Fair Share 8311 & 8590 - Categoricals 979,619 EPA (for LCFF Calculation purposes) 272,194 Local Revenue Sources: 8021 to 8089 - Property Taxes 7,805,262 8,526,847 7,599,307 8,561,495 9,003,925 9,388,249 10,988,509 11,404,194 11,836,506 8096 - In-Lieu of Pro art Taxes Pro ert Taxes net of in-lieu 7,137,704 7805,262 8,526,847 7,599,307 8,561,495 9,003,925 9,388,249 10,988 509 11,404,194 11,836,506 TOTAL FUNDING $ 8,350,189 9,069,261 9,799,868 10,723,013 11,194,902 $ 11,455,839 11,844,035 12,312,359 $ 12,726,110 13,158,422
Basid Aid Status Basic Aid Non-Basic Aid Non-Basic Aid Non-Basic Aid Non-Basic Aid Non-Basic Aid Non-Basic Aid Non-Basic Aid Basic Aid $ $ 27,106 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 424,911 $ 226,875 $ 284,380 $ 138,896 $ $ $ $ $ 224,220 $ 289,592 $ 296,508 $ 8 757775 $ 9660972 $ 10 723013 $ 11194 902 $ 11455 839 $ 11844 035 $ 12 088139 $ 12 436 518 $ 12437003 ece,p s (for budget & cashflow) $ 271,700 $ 284,856 $ 293,360 $ 307,222 $ 290,394 $ 300,378 $ 300,378 $ 298,442 $ 296,508 $ 296,508
Summary of Student Population 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 Undupllcated Pupll Population Agency Unduplicated Pupil Count 173.00 163.00 154.00 153.00 153.00 153.00 153.00 153.00 153.00 COE Undu licated Pu ii Count 1.00 Total Unduplicated pupil Count 173.00 164.00 154.00 153.00 153.00 153.00 153.00 153.00 153.00 Rolling %, Supplemental Grant 11.8000% 11.3300% 10.8500% 10.2700% 9.9300% 9.9200% 9.9100% 9.9500% 9.9700% Rolling %, Concentration Grant 11.8000% 11.3300% 10.8500% 10.2700% 9.9300% 9.9200% 9.9100% 9.9500% 9.9700%
FUNDED ADA Adjusted Base Grant ADA Current Year Current Year Current Year Current Year Current Year Prior Year Prior Year Cun-ent Year Cu"ent Year GradesTK-3 658.47 667.39 679.93 671.47 659.65 659.65 661.58 659.65 659.65 Grades 4-6 468.08 491.04 496.59 498.18 502.03 502.03 505.89 493.32 493.32 Grades 7-8 295.35 308.58 314.13 327.48 340.21 340.21 324.74 329.57 329.57 Grades 9-12 Total Adjusted Base Grant ADA 1,421.90 1,467.01 1,490.65 1,497.13 1,501.89 1,501.89 1,492.21 1,482.54 1,482.54
Total Funded ADA 1421.90 1467.01 1490.65 1497.13 1501.89 1501.89 1492.21 1482.54 1482.54
ACTUAL ADA (Current Yoar Only/ GradesTK-3 658.47 667.39 679.93 671.47 659.65 661.58 659.65 659.65 659.65 Grades 4-6 468.08 491.04 496.59 498.18 502.03 505.89 493.32 493.32 493.32 Grades 7-8 295.35 308.58 314.13 327.48 340.21 324.74 329.57 329.57 329.57 Grades 9-12 Total Actual ADA 1,421.90 1,467.01 1,490.65 1,497,13 1,501.89 1,492.21 1,482,54 1,482.54 1,482.54 Funded Difference (Funded ADA loss Actual ADA} 9.68 9.67
M.lnlmum Proportlonallty Percentage (MPP) 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
Current year estimated supplemental and concentration grant funding In the LCAP year 105,763 178,055 207,307 215,774 228,028 233,054 241,522 $ 237,489 Current year Minimum Proportionality Percentage (MPP) 1.11% 1.70% 1.90% 1.93% 1.97% 1.98% 1.99% 1.96%
LCFF Calculator v18.1 a 5/19/20179:08 AM Summary released May 14, 2017 -351- Larkspur-Corte Madera Property Tax History and Projections Dist ID#! 65367! 2017-18 Mav Revise LCFF Estimates Prepared bv MCOE Pl J-29B DOF 4/28/17 Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected DOFEST I 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2017-18 I Diff I 8021 Home Owners Exemption 47,747 47,435 48,560 49,118 49,045 48,174 48,174 48,174 48,174 48,174 8041 Secured 6,931,174 7,273,696 7,852,769 8,592,814 9,167,055 9,608,094 9,992,417 10,392,114 10,807,799 11,240,111 9,641,857 I (33,763)1 Secured % Increase from PY 4.94% 7.96% 9.42% 6.68% 4.81% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 99.65%1 8042 Unsecured 151,872 154,995 171,866. 176,318 185,987 188,251 188,251 188,251 188,251 188,251 8043 Prior Year 6,910 28,486 37,158 13,689 19,262 19,262 19,262 19,262 19,262 19,262 8044 Supplemental - 300,650 416,494 413,941 340,708 340,708 340,708 340,708 340,708 340,708 8045 ERAF - -- (1,646,573) (1,200,563) (1,200,563) (1,200,563) -- 8047 Communitv Redevelopment ------Total Taxes $ 7,137,704 $ 7,805,262 $ 8,526,847 $ 7,599,307 $ 8,561,495 $ 9,003,925 $ 9,388,249 $ 10,988,509 $ 11,404,194 $ 11,836,506 Total Tax % Increase from PY 9.35% 9.24% -10.88% 12.66% 5.17% 4.27% 17.05% 3.78% 3.79%
District estimates Total taxes:!,. ..:,ia;3Sf;9SS'.!;;' : fo,03;i;ss1r t · ·;:,.10;41s,1611!'.;; • ,,10;213;075.1,·.; ?i/s,s21,21s; 11;: ., ··d -9.7% 20.1% 3.8% 3.8% -8.2% -100.0% Difference: $ 209,540 $ (1,028,626) $ (1,026,912) $ 175,433 $ 1,476,915 $ 11,836,506
Difference Less ERAF $ 1,410,103 $ 171,937 $ 173,651 $ 175,433 $ 1,476,915 $ 11,836,506
ANALYSIS OF FUNDING STATUS Entitlement 8,757,775 9,660,972 10,723,013 11,194,902 11,455,839 11,844,035 12,088,139 12,436,518 12,437,003 Less Categoricals 979,619 979,619 1,025,408 1,025,408 1,025,408 1,025,408 1,025,408 1,025,408 1,025,408 Subtotal subject to tax offset 7,778,156 8,681,353 9,697,605 10,169,494 10,430,431 10,818,627 11,062,731 11,411,110 11,411,595 Property taxes pre-ERAF 7,805,262 8,526,847 9,245,880 9,762,058 10,204,488 10,588,812 10,988,509 11,404,194 11,836,506 Excess Taxes 27,106 424,911 Preliminary ERAF capacity 154,506 451,725 407,437 225,943 229,815 74,222 6,916 Constitutional minimum ($120/ADA) 170,628 176,041 178,878 179,656 180,227 180,227 179,065 177,905 177,905 ERAF capacity 272,847 227,781 45,716 49,588 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 no longer subject to ERAF Basic Aid 2017-18 Estimate Unitary tax 63,288 DOF 17-18 estimate 9,641,857 Total at 100% 9,705,145 Estimate at 99% 9,608,094
LCFF Calculator v18.1a 5/19/20179:08 AM Local 2 released May 14, 2017 -352- 5-53 SSC School District and Charter School Financial Projection Dartboard 2017-18 May Revision This version of SSC's Financial Projection Dartboard is based on the 2017-18 May Revision. We have updated the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) factors. We have also updated the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), Consumer Price Index (CPI), and ten-year T-bill planning factors per the latest economic forecasts. We rely on various state agencies and outside sources in developing these factors, but we assume responsibility for them with the understanding that they are general guidelines. LCFF ENTITLEMENT FACTORS Entitlement Factors per ADA K-3 4-6 7-8 9-12 2016-1 7 Base Grants $7,083 $7,189 $7,403 $8,578 COLA at 1.56% $110 $112 $115 $134 2017-18 Base Grants $7,193 $7,301 $7,518 $8,712
Entitlement Factors per ADA K-3 4-6 7-8 9-12 2017-18 Base Grants $7,193 $7,301 $7,518 $8,712 Grade Span Adjustment Factors 10.4% - - 2.6% Grade Span Adjustment Amounts $748 - - $227 2017-18 Adjusted Base Grants $7,941 $7,301 $7,518 $8,939 Supplemental Grants (%Adj.Base) 20% 20% 20% 20% Concentration Grants 50% 50% 50% 50% Concentration Grant Threshold 55% 55% 55% 55%
LCFF DARTBOARD FACTORS Factor 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 LCFF Planning Factors SSC Simulator SSC Simulator SSC Simulator2 SSC Simulator2 SSC Simulator2 SSC Gap Funding Percentage· 55.03% 43.97% 39.03% 41.51% 44.07% Department of Finance Gap Funding 55.03% 43.97% 71.53% 73.51% 100.00% Percentage Gap Funding Percentage• 54.84% 43.97% - - (May Revise) - PLANNING FACTORS Factor 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 Statutory COLA 0.00% 1.56% 2.15% 2.35% 2.57% COLA on state and local share only.of Special Education, Child Nutrition, Foster Youth, Preschool, 0.00% 1.56% 2.15% 2.35% 2.57% American Indian Education Centers/American Indian Early Childhood Education California CPI 2.50% 3.11% 3.19% 2.86% 2.97% Interest Rate for Ten-Year Treasuries 2.20% 2.67% 2.90% 3.05% 3.00% Unrestricted per ADA $144 $144 $144 $144 $144 California Lottery Restricted per ADA $45 $45 $45 $45 $45 Mandate Block Grades K-8 per ADA $28.42 $28.42 $28.42 $28.42 $28.42 Grant (District) Grades 9-12 per ADA $56 $56 $56 $56 $56 Mandate Block Grades K-8 per ADA $14.21 $14.21 $14.21 $14.21 $14.21 Grant (Charter) Grades 9-12 per ADA $42 $42 $42 $42 $42 One-Time Discretionary Funds per ADA $214 $1703 -- - CalPERS Employer Rate (projected) 13.888% 15.531% 18.1% 20.8% 23.8% Ca!STRS Employer Rate (statutory) 12.58% 14.43% 16.28% 18.13% 19.10%
RESERVES State Reserve Requirement District ADA Range Reserve Plan The greater of 5% or $66,000 0 to 300 The greater of 4% or $66,000 301 to 1,000 SSC recommends one year's increment 3% 1,001 to 30,000 of planned revenue growth 2% 30,001 to 400,000 1% 400,001 and higher
1 Either this percentage or the final State Budget gap percentage can be used for calculating movement toward class sizes of 24: 1 at grades transitional L' kindergarten-3. · 2 For the forecast years, the total dollar amount needed to fund the statutory COLA is applied to the SSC LCFF Simulator. 3 Amount is not eligible for receipt until May 2019, and LEAs should exclude from their budget and multiyear projection.
$<:hool © 2017 School Services of California, Inc. -353- ~~~~aINC. JUIY I t;)UU!,jl::~ Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Unrestricted and Restricted Form01 Expenditures by Object 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017-18 Budaet ·Total Fund Total Fund %Diff Object Unrestricted Restricted col.A+B Unrestricted Restricted col. D+E Column Description Resource Codes Codes (Al (Bl (Cl (DI (El (Fl C&F
A.REVENUES 1) LCFF Sources oo,_, ____ 1<'-l-~~""-• ~,.~,.~,...,e_-11,,~SC.,I ______,J -"'~""-" __ .1,1, 2) Federal Revenue 8100-8299 _ _Q,QQ_j___ 397,259 oo 397,259.oo o.oo L 363.226.00 I 363,226.oo -8.6% 3) Other State Revenue 8300-8599 ______.§79.~@ I ___~5ic910.00 ____1.524.1_01.00_ 256,742.00 L 947,315.oo I 1.204.057.oo ~ 4) Other Local Revenue 8600-8799 4,607,074.131 731,404.00 5,338,478.~~~2,077.001 __ 1,733,709.aj 5,625,786 00 5.4% 5) TOTAL, REVENUES 16 410 103.131 2.013 573.oo i 18,484,276.13 15,604,659.oo I 3,044,250.00 I 18.648.909.oo o.9% B. EXPENDITURES 1) Certificated Salaries ,=,_ 1--- •. ,~ ..,.... '·™·~· .. L_ ·-~'-"'·" --'·"'·"' J ... ., .. ~J .. ~, .. ~... -,,. 2) Classified Salaries 2000-2999 ~ -- 1,781,332.00 ---- 693,751 00 ~-- 2,475,083 00 >- -- _ 1,886,822 00 ~- 716,899.00 t- 2,603,721.00 f---_?.1~ 3) Employee Benefits 3000-3999 f __ 2,562,204.00 --- 1,224,271 00 J.. .. _ 3,786,475.00 ·-· _2,760,242.0-0t __ 1,500,757.00t-- 4,260,999.00 ~- 1.?~~% 4) Books and Supplies 4000-4999 I __ 483,093.13 ~ _____ 292,575.oo 1 ____775,668.13 ~ 298,747.oo __ 122,512.00 t-·-- 421,419.oo --~~ 5) Services and Other Operating Expenditures 5000-5999 t= 1.036.477.00 ___ 1.063.272.0;;-r _ 2.099.749.00 _____ 867.383.00 ____1.069,712.00 ____ 1.937.095.,QQ_ __ :7J'I~ 6) Capital Outlay :~::::: f------0.00 ______o.oof o.oo ______ooo ___ .. ___ o.oo [ _____ o.oo ___ Q"Q.'l:'• 7) Other Outgo (excluding Transfers of Indirect 1 Costs) 1400-1499 28,200.00 188,815 oo __£11,Q.!~-- 28.200.00 r 241.802 oo 216,002 oo _ _11.?'l:'£ 8) Other Outgo - Transfers of Indirect Costs 7300-7399 (6,200 00 1,200 00 _ (5,00Q,Q.Q.) (7,478.0011 2,478.00 (5,000.00) 0.0%
91 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 14,027 582.13 4,562 243 00 18 589,825.13 13,310,502.00 5,535,499.00 18,846 001.00 1.4%
C. EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES BEFORE OTHER FINANCING SOURCES AND USES (AS - 89) I 2.383.121.00 I (2.488.670.0J (105.549.00) 2.294.157.00 I (2.491.249.00) (197.092.00) 86.7%
D. OTHER FINANCING SOURCES/USES I ! I
1) lnterfund Transfers a) Transfers In 8900-8929 -··-··-----·· o.oo ___ ._____ ··-·-··0.001,._ ·-····-··· ... _.o.oo.. _. --·· ·--- o.oo -·-·-··-·-··o.oo -·----····-·o.oo ··-····Q.,Q.'l:'o_ b) Transfers Out 1500-1529 16,994.00 00,000.00 I 96,994.oo 16,994.00 00,000.00 96,994.oo 0.0%
2) Other Sources/Uses a) Sources b) Uses ;:::;::: ~=-~ :::: ==- :::;~=- ::: ----- ::d=- :::: ·--· :::: =:: 3) Contributions 8980-8999 t_(~~l ---~~Q.9 -~----····Jl.,Cl_()_ __{?,§!1..?49.0;t··· 2,§71,?49c00 ------·- 0.00. ______-0.,Q.'l:'o 4) TOTAL, OTHER FINANCING SOURCES/USES I r2.410.218.001 2.321.284.oo (96.994.001 r2.s88.243;; 2.491 249.oo (96,994.001 0.0%
California Dept of EducaUon SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017.1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 04/10/2017) Page 1 Printed:-354- 5/18/2017 2:53 PM Ju1y 1 csuaget Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Mann County Unrestricted and Restricted Fenn 01 Expenditures by Object 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017-18 Budaet
Total Fund Total Fund %0iff Object Unrestricted Restricted col.A+B Unrestricied Restricted col. D + E Column Oescriotion Resource Codes Codes {A) {Bl (Cl IDl IEl (Fl C&F E. NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE IC + D4l 135,157.00 1167 366.00 1202,543.00 1294,086.00 0.00 1294,086.00\ 45.2% F. FUND BALANCE, RESERVES
1) Beginning Fund Balance a) As of July 1 - Unaudited 9791 _ ,.,n.=~ l- m.~J .'·"'- ,~.~ -· '·'"·=·~ ___ ... n•.~ I___ ,. ,oo.~,.~ --""" b) Audit Adjustments 9793 =1 =I = = =I = = c) As of July 1 -Audited (F1a + F1b) [ _ 2.176.5~.620 53 L _2.392.142.83 _ 2.141.~: ____ 48.234.531 2.189.599.83 _-a 5% d) Other Restatements 9795 0,.12_~[=----== 0 00 -· 0.00 0.00 0 00 ~ 0.00 0.0% e) Adjusted Beginning Balance (F1c + F1d) -- 2,176,522.301 ____ 215,620 53 - - 2,392.~ -~~ I_ ___ - 48,234.53 __ 2,189,599.83 --- -8.~ 2) Ending Balance, June 30 (E + F1e) __ 2.141.365 30-r 48.234.53 2.189.599.83 1.847.279.30_1 48.234.53 1.895.513.83 -13 4%
Components of Ending Fund Balance a) Nonspendable Revolving Cash 9711 ,..... ___1_0•0_00.00 0.00 ·--- 1,000.00" ____o~_o_o_,______o~.o~o_,__ 0.00 -100.0%
Stores 9712 _ -----· 0.00_ ---·-·-- 0.00 ______0.00 --- 0.00 1--- _ ~ _____(),.QCJ_~ Prepaid Expenditures 9713 ---- 12,134.60 --· 0.00 12,134.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 -100.0% All Others 9719 1-----~o~.o=o'-+------~o.QCJ_ --· . o.oo o.oo ____ -· __ . o.oo I______o.oo __ ~ b) Restricted 9740 ,______o~.oo-'-< ____4=8=.2=34~.5~3-+- ___ 48,234.53 o.oo . 48,234.531 48,234.53 0.0% c) Committed Stabilization Arrangements 9750 ______o=·=oo=+-----o=.o=oc.+--- ______o=.o=o~,...-----=o,.~o=o+------=o.=oo=+------o=·o=o __ 0.0%
Other Commitments 9760 ---·-----·------· o.oo +-----=o=.o=o'-1·---·--·-·-----·------.... o.oQ. __ ---·------·-· o.oo 1------~o~.oo=-i-·----·----·--·o.oo _____ 0.0% d) Assigned
Other Assignments 9780 ------·----·---- o.oo_+-_____o~.o_o ...... ___ 0.00 ~ ______o_.~o_oc.+------0=·~00-+--·------0.00 ~ ~' e) Unassigned/unappropriated
Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 ------~0~.0=0.,______0=·=00=-t-·------~O.~O=O-t------·-0=.=00 0__ +-----~O=.O=O+------0.00. --·-0.0% Unassioned/Unappropnated Amount 9790 2,128,230.70 0.00 2 128 230.70 1 847 279.30 0.00 1,847 279.30 -13.2%
California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017.1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 04/10/2017) Page2 Printed:-355- 5/18/2017 2:53 PM Ju1y I cuage1 Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Unrestricted and Restricted Form01 Expenditures by Object 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017-18 Budaet Total Fund Total Fund %Diff Unrestricted Restricted col. A+ B Unrestricted Restricted col.D+E Column Descriotio"n Resource Codes IA) 18) ICl (D) (El /Fl C&F G.ASSETS I i I I I I 1}Cash I I I a) in County Treasury 9110 f-··-··-· 6,159, 106.32·!---___(!,889,354.5~t--- 4,269,751.75 1) Fair Value Adjustment to Cash in County Treasury 9111 L 0.00 i 0.00 I 0.00__ b) in Banks 9120 0.00 I 0.00 O.OQ.. c) in Revolving Fund 9130 ,000.00 0.00 - ---- _-1,.Q.QQ,QQ_
d) with Fiscal Agent 9135 o.oo.l _____ o.ooJ ______o.oo e) collections awaiting deposit 9140 o.oo 0.00 r 0.00 2) Investments 9150 I 0.00 0.00 I Q.00 3) Accounts Receivable 9200 [ 1,712.82 ---· 299,867.6±3=-~;,;;~~ 4) Due from Granter Government 9290 L __ o.oo o.oo_ ___ o.oo 5) Due from Other Funds 9310 I 15.6~____ 0.00 _ 15,678.98
6) Stores 9320 0.00 jl 0.00 0.00 ·--12,134.60·--·- . 0.00 - -12,~ 7) Prepaid Expenditures 9330 t 8) Other Current Assets 9340 -----·· o.oo . ..AOQ______o.oo 9) TOTAL. ASSETS I 6. 109,632.12 11,5a9,4a6.941 4,600,145.10
H. DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES I 1) Deferred Outflows of Resources 9490 ______o.oo __ o.oo I o.oo 21 TOTAL, DEFERRED OUTFLOWS o.oo o.oo I o.oo I. LIABILITIES 1) Accounts Payable 9500 I____ 307.979.24 l___ (12.419.70)l ______295,559.54 2) Due to Granter Governments 9590 I ----·- 0.00_ ----·- ~1- ______Q,_QQ_ 3) Due to Other Funds 9610 ______o.oo__ ao,000.00 ___ ao,000.00
4) Current Loans 9640 ~ 0.00 0.00 0.00
5) Unearned Revenue 9650 ______y.Q_Q.. --·-·- _Q.oQ_ ----- 0.00 6) TOTAL, LIABILITIES 307,979.24 67,580.30 375,559.54 J. DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES 1) Deferred Inflows of Resources 9690 _ ----- 0.00 _ ---- 0.00 t_____ 0.00 2) TOTAL, DEFERRED INFLOWS 0.00 0.00 0.00 K. FUND EQUITY
Ending Fund Balance, June 30 CG9 + H2l - (16 + J2l I 5 881.653.481 (1.657.067.24 4.224.586.24
California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software -2017.1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 04/10/2017) Page3 -356-Printed: 5/18/2017 2:53 PM Ju1y 1 ~uage1 Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Unrestricted and Restricted Form 01 Expenditures by Object 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017-18 Budaet
Total Fund Total Fund %Diff Object Unrestricted Restricted col.A+B Unrestricted Restricted col.D+E Column Description Resource Codes Codes (A) (Bl (C) (Dl (El IF) C&F
LCFF SOURCES
Principal Apportionment State Aid - Current Year 8011 -----· 2.3§0,874__ .o_o_,- _____o_._o_o•-· .. ·- 2,360.874.0Q. _ -·-· 2.151,536oc.,=o.o=·+------'o'".oo=-t·---- 2, 151,536.0Q. _ ...:.~.~ Education Protection Account State Aid - Current Year 8012 300,928.00 0.00 300,928.00 -· 300,378.00 0.00 300,378.00 -0.2%
State Aid - Prior Years 8019 _ ...... -·-----=o~.o_.,o_+------o~·-=o=-o+--... - .. _-- o.oo _ ··-.. ------~o~.o=-oc+------'o"'.o"o+-·------·~o._.,o~o ___.Q.0% Tax Relief Subventions Homeowners' Exemptions 8021 ... 47,692.00 ·t-----~o~.oo- ...... 47,692.00 ...... 48, 174.0"'0~--1------'0'".00=..1-- ______.. 48, 174.00. ·- ,, __1_.Q,!~ Timber Yield Tax 8022 -·.. ··-·--...... o.c.oo.=-o ··1-----"'o."'oo=-+ ...... 0.00 ...... _ ...... _0.00 ... 1------=0cc.oc,o,+..... -.-·--·.. 0.00 _____ .. 0.0% Other Subventions/In-Lieu Taxes 8029 --·---·-- 0.00·+-----"'o"'.oo=.,1--·--·-····- o.oo _ ._ .. ____ o.o"o+------=o"'.oo""+______o~.o:_o,_ __..Q~ County & District Taxes Secured Roll Taxes 8041 ,____ 9-, 1_84~,_28_6_._o_o_,______o~.o~o..., __~9~.286.oo 9,608,094.oo o.oo 9,608,094.00 4.6%
Unsecured Roll Taxes 8042 ...... - 178,838.oo 1-----o"'.o"'o=-i _____ 178,838.00. __ 1-=-88=•·2=.,5,.,1"'.o"'o+------=o"'.oo=-i---~1.8"8~.,2"5-'1.=oo ___5~ Prior Years' Taxes 8043 17,027.00 0.00 17,027.00 19,262.00 0.00 19,262.00 13.1% Supplemental Taxes 8044 434,421.00 0.00 434,421.00 ---~34~0,,,7~0~8:·:o~o-+------=O~.O-=O+----- 340,708.00. __:21.6% Education Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) 8045 __ (1.299,628.001 ...... ____o_.oo...... P ,299,628.ooJ ...... _ J1.200.se3.0011-----""o'"'.oo==-i .. ..<1,200,563.00) ,, __ -7.6% Community Redevelopment Funds (SB 617/699/1992) 8047 --~o~.o~o~------=o~.o_.,o+-_____ .. ___oc9.o ______o~·-=o-=o+-----~o~.o~o- ______~o=.oo ---~ Penalties and Interest from Delinquent Truces 8048 ...... _o.oo 1------'o"'.o"'o=-i 0.00 ______o.o,.=o+ ______o,c•cccoo=-i ·-·--··---·--·-· 0.00 ...... _ .. 0.0% Miscellaneous Funds (EC 41604) Royalties and Bonuses 8081 ·-.. ---·---o~.o~o-+-_____o".-=oo-_____ o.oo _ - .. ·--·.. ·--· o.oo+------o~.o_o-+--·----o~.o-o+---o~.o~'*""' Other In-Lieu Truces 8082 ___.. __o~.o_o_ ..... _____o~·~oo-+--·--- o.oo ______o_~·_o_o ...... _____o~.o_o-+-·-----0_.o_o_+- ___o_.0_%_, Less: Non-LCFF (50%) Adjustment 8089 ______o.oo+------o~·-=oo=-+·------·· o.oo_ ...... 0.00 .. 1------=o~.o~o+-
Subtotal, LCFF Sources .. ------·----·--·--+---'1-"1,ec2=.24_,.,,.c_43"'8"'.0"'0'-l------'O"'.OO=i-.. -1'-'1'"'2,.,2'-'4,~38.Q.Q.>---· 11,455,840.00 0.00 11,455,840.00 __ 2.1%
LCFF Transfers
Unrestricted LCFF Transfers - Current Year 0000 8091 0.00 0.00 - .. ···-·------~00.,00 0,, ..,t------+--·------·- o.oo.. ~.0.0% All Other LCFF Transfers - Current Year All Other 8091 0.00 0.00 _0.00 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 9~ Transfers to Charter Schools in Lieu of Property Taxes 8096 0.00 0.00 .. -·-0.00. _ .. ---···-.. - 0.00_ 0.00 0.00 0.0%
Property Taxes Transfers 8097 ______oo._oooo - .. --- oo._oooo ~ ____.. _ oo._0000. ---.. -··--· oo._0000.L ·----~oo~·_oo_oo-+------~-+--~~0.00 0.0% LCFF/Revenue Limit Transfers - Prior Years 8099 I- 0.00 0.0% _TOTAL, LCFF SOURCES ______...... - ...... _·----·-·--- - 11,224,438.00 _ ____ AQO_ 11,224,438.00 11,455,840J0 ____.._QJJ.Q_ 11,455,840.00 2.1% FEDERAL REVENUE
Maintenance and Operations 8110 o.oo o.oo.~·-·-·-··--· o.oo o.oo . o.oo 1-- ...... ___ o.oo __ .. __ 0.0% Special Education Entitlement 8181 0.00 ..... _ 202,354.00 _ ...... _ 202,354.00 0.00 ______.. 207,073.00 ...... 207,073.00_ ...... _2.3% Special Education Discretionary Grants 8182 1------=o~.0~04-...... _ 128,346.00 ·····-·-·-·"· 128,346.oo 1------=o~.o~o_,______.. 103,049.00 _____ 103,049.0Q. ·-- -19.7% Child Nutrition Programs 8220 t-----~o~.oo-•---·-·---~o~.o~o ~-"--""____ o~.o_o_,______o~·~oo-'-+-·--- .. --.--2-.Q.Q.~ -"·---.. - o.oo -~ Donated Food Commodities 8221 ,______o.oo o.oo ...... __ o.oo.1-____..,o"'.o"o+··-----"o".oc=o-1-- ·--··--· o.oo ____Q.0%
Forest Reserve Funds 8260 ______.. __ ..,00•• o"'o+------"o"'.oc=o-1-----·----·- o.oo ---·-" ___o=··,0~0 0.• ·t-----_.o,....o=o'-! ______MQ. _ 0.0% Flood Control Funds 8270 ...... -...... ___ ,.. ___ o.00~1------0=·~00=-+··-...... o.oo ·--.. -·-·-··---· o.oo'-1-_____o=·ccoo'--t·"""-·"""""'"'"' o.oo .. _ ...... 0.0%
Wildlife Reserve Funds 8280 .. _ .. ___ o.oo_ o.oo .... --o.oo .. --.. ----·---~o=.o~o+------o=·~oo"-+-.. ·---.. -· o.oo. __ ~
FEMA 8281 e-·---·- o.oo ---·--- o..Q.Q. _ .. ______o.oo ______.. __ o.oo+·--·-·---· o.oo ~ __.. ______o__ .o_o-+---0~.0_%_ 1 lnteragency Contracts Between LEAs 8285 0.00 .. _, __ .. _0.00 .... _ ..... o.oo_~ -·-- o.oo ·-·-.. -.. ----.. - o.oo ... o.oo. -·-· 0.0% Pass-Through Revenues from Federal Sources 8287 1------=o~.oo=-i·------·---·=o,Q.Q.. -----~o-=o~o+--_____o".ccoo"-'·------___ AQ.Q..~ _____q,o_Q. ·---~ TIiie I, Part A, Basic 3010 8290 43 946.00 43,946.00 34 278,00 34278.00 -22.0% Title I, Part D, Local Delinquent Programs 3025 8290 1------+------·---- o.oo ------~o... o-=o·+------+·--·--·---.Q..Q.Q. ______o.oo -~ Title II, Part A, Educator Quality 4035 8290 >------·----·-··-17,214.00 ~ ······-·-·-17~14.00. -·-····-·-·-· 13,427c!J.Q.,.... ·---· 13,427.00 ___ -22.0% Title Ill, Part A, Immigrant Education ...J:r9.gram ------·-·------·----- 4201 ----·- 829L_ ~-----=o~.o~o ·------o.oo ~------o.oo ______o=·=oo~~---o=·~oo/c='
California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017.1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 04/10/2017) Page4 -357-Printed: 5/18/2017 2:53 PM JUlY I CU\Jyt:n Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin Coun_ty Unrestricted and Restricted Form 01 Expenditures by Object 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017-18 Budaet
Total Fund Total Fund %Dlff Object Unrestricted Restricted col.A+B Unrestricted Restricted col.D+E Column Description Resource Codes Codes IAl 1Bl ICl IOI IEl IFl C&F I Totle Ill, Part A, English Leamer I Program 4203 8290 5399.00 5,399.00 5399.oo I 5,399.00 0.0%
Totle V, Part B, Public Charter Schools Grant Program (PCSGP) (NCLB) 4610 8290 0.00 0.00 0,00 I 0.00 0.0% 3012-3020, 3030- 3199, 4036-4126, ,, ______,, 0.00_ ___ JL~ Other NCLB / Every Student Succeeds Act 5510 8290 ·-·-··""' 0.00 .I Career and Technical Education 3500-3599 8290 •.. 0.00 ,______,,,, 0.00 --:f-:: __Q,Q!! All Other Federal Revenue All Other 8290 ____Qi).Q______... ~o_ 0.00 o.oo o.oo ~----.Q,Q.9 rI ..M!! ___ :MI
Other State Apportionments
ROC/P Entitlement Prior Years 6360 6319 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.0%
Special Education Master Plan Current Year 6500 6311 0.00 0.00 0.0Q I 0.00 0.0% Prior Years 6500 6319 0.00 0.00 0.00 ' 0.00 0.0% All Other Stale Apportionments· Current Year 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 __ o.o~ All Other 8311 f---·-----· All Other State Apportionments· Prior Years All Other 8319 0.00 0.00 ---- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% 0.00 0.00 0.00 ______o.oo ___ __Q,Q_~ Child Nutrillon Programs 8520 0.00 0.00 -····------Mandated Costs Reimbursements 8550 361,631.00 0.00 361,631.00 41,664.00 0.00 41,664J1Q. ___-88,5%
Lottery - Unrestricted and lnstrucllonal Materials 8560 217,560.00 71~~. 291,756.00 215,078.00 __llil_g_QQ__ 282,290.00 -3.2% Tax Relief Subventions Restricted Levies ~ Other
Homeowners' Exemptions 6575 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -~ --9,_0'!! Other Subventions/In-Lieu Taxes 6576 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0%
Pass-Through Revenues from State Sources 8587 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.0% After School Education and Safety (ASES) 6010 8590 __Q.,QQ_ r-----· 0.00 ----· 0.00 0.00 _o,.~ Charter School Facility Grant 6030 8590 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 ___Q,.Q!! Drug/Alcohol/Tobacco Funds 6650, 6690 8590 __Q,QQ_ ,---·-- 0.00 0.00 t-- 0.00 0.0% California Clean Energy Jobs Act 6230 8590 102,330,!).Q. -· 102,330.00_ ___1~_,330,00 -- 102,330.00 ,___ 0.0% Career Technical Education Incentive ______jl.00 ____ ,,, 0.0~ Grant Program 6387 8590 ····-·.. ----·"· 0.00 ------...... 0.00_ -·- ...... - ...... 0.00 American Indian Ea~y Childhood Education 7210 8590 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.0% Specialized Secondary 7370 6590 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.0% Quality Education Investment Act 7400 8590 0.00 -· 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.0% Common Core State Standards Implementation 7405 8590 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% All Other State Revenue All Other 8590 0.00 768384.00 768,384.00 0.00 mn3.oo m,773.oo 1.2%
TOTAL, OTHEf!§J:e.TE RE,YENUE 579,191.00 944,910.00 _ 1,524,101.00 256,742.00 947,315.00 1,204,057.00 -21.0% ------.__. - .
California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software· 2017.1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 0411012017) Page 5 -358-Printed: 5/1812017 2:53 PM JUl:f I CUIJYt:L Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Unrestricted and Restricted Fonn01 Expenditures by Object 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017-18 Budget
Total Fund Diff 1 Total Fund % ObJ·ect f Unrestricted Restricted col.A+ B Unrestricted Restricted col. D+ E Column Oesi:::riotion Resource Codes Codes {Al {Bl {Cl {Dl fEl {Fl C&F OTHER LOCAL REVENUE
Other Local Revenue County and District Taxes
Other Restricted Levies Secured Roll 8615 0.00 o.oo I ·-·· ___o._o_o_,______o~._oo-<- ______o~._oo_,__I --·--- o.oo ~ 0.0% Unsecured Roll 8616 0.00 a.oo I o.oo o.oo a.oo L----·-· a.oo ~ Prior Years' Taxes 8617 0.00 ---~~i 0.00 0.00 ~ 0 00 0 0% Supplemental Taxes 8618 i'"":_____ o~.o=o'-+-··------o.oo !---·--·-· 0.09 o.oo . ___ Jl~ ___ .__ ·__ a:oo ·----;; Non-Ad Valorem Taxes 1 Parcel Taxes 8621 ... 2,821,924.00 ·-- ·--··-····-·-··-· o.oo.L ..... _2.s21,924.oo. _2,963,020.00. ····-· o.oo l-·--··-·2,963,020.00. ·-······ 5.0% Other 8622 1------..,0~.o"o+----·-···-o.oo I ·-··-----··-··---o.o~o~f------~o~.0"0-1------·-··-·-=-o.~o~o -····----·- .o.oo _ 0.0% Community Redevelopment Funds Not Subject to LCFF Deduction 8625 0.00 o.oo I o.oo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Penalties and Interest from Delinquent Non-LCFF Taxes 8629 0.00 OJ ·--·--Q,_1?.Q-+-----~O.~O~O+·--·-----·· 0.00_ -·-··--·-0.00 _ 0.0% Sales Sale of Equipment/Supplies 8631 Sale of Publications 8632 Food Service Sales 8634 All Other Sales 8639
Leases and Rentals 8650 531,690.00 0.00 531,690 00 544,513.00 ---·-·--·-----·0.00 --·-- 544,513.00. __ J4'.!!, Interest 8660 __ _ _ 2,300.00 _ ___ _ o.ooj--- ____ 2,300.00 _ ___ 2,300.00 ·····-··-·-·o.oo. --··-·--·-·2,300.00. -··· ... 0.0% Net Increase (Decrease) in the Fair Value of Investments 8662 o oo o.oo .. o.oo ______o_.o_o-+- _____o_._o_o, ___. ______o._.QQ. --·- o.Q'.!!> Fees and Contracts Adult Education Fees 8671 -····-··-- ··--··-·-· 0.00.1---____..,o~.o..,o_,__ . o.oo. -·- o.o,_o,._1-----~o~.o..,o-t_····--·-·-···---· o.oo
Non-Resident Students 8672 -·---·-·__ o,_.o __ o~,-----~o~.oo~, 1_____ 0~.o_o_ .. 1,----·---~o".o,~o.t------~o~.o~o..,____ . ___ o.oo ___ 0.0%
Transportation Fees From Individuals 8675 ---·-·----··- O.QO_ -··--·---·-··--··-0.00 .. ··-·-··-··-·-···-· o.oo ______..... _o.oo _ ·-- 0.00. -··---·---· 0.00 -·---- 0.0% lnteragency Services 8677 ···-··-··---·-·0.00 ···---·------··-··-0.00 -···-··-··--·-·-MO_------0.00_ ·- ··--·-··---0.00 --··----·-···0.00_ ···--- 0.0% Mitigation/Developer Fees 8681 ·------0.00 __ 0.00 -··-·------·· 0.00_ ·--- 0.00 -··-···-·-----0.00 _ ····-··-·-- o.oo. ____ _Q,.Q'./!>
All Other Fees and Contracts 8689 .. ···-·--·········-···· 0.00.1_____ ~0~.o~o+····-··-·--··--······ o.oo_ ----··--·--·-o.o_o,_+-______o~._o_o+--··-··-····-·-·-·· o.oo_ ...... 0.0% Other Local Revenue Plus: Misc Funds Non-LCFF (50%) Adjustment 8691 0.00 o.oo -·-·-· o.oo.t--_____o~.o_o-+-----~o~.o-o_+-··---··--···- o.oo __ 0.0% Pass-Through Revenues From Local Sources 8697 1-----~o~.o~o-+------~o.oo I o_~.o-'o_,______o~·=-oo-"-' ___.___ o=.-'oo.c.+-----~o~.o~o+.--o~.=-o=% 1 All Other Local Revenue 8699 1.251.160.13 ·----OJJ±="l,251, 1_60~._13_ .... ___3~8=2,?44.00 1,000,000.00 1,382,244.00 -- 10.5% Tuition 8710 1------'o"'.o,.,o+----·--=o,,.o,o"" .. ___occ·=-oo=+-----'o".o"'o"+-----~o".o"o+-----o"'."'o=-o+---'o"'.o"'*=i' All Other Transfers In 8781-8783 1------'0"'.0"0+--··----..9.J)_Q. _____o~.-'oo.~t------'O".O"'O"+-· ---~-Occ·cccOO=+-----~O~.O"Oc1---0~.=-0%=i' Transfers of Apportionments Special Education SELPA Transfers From Districts or Charter Schools 6500 8791 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0% From County Offices 6500 8792 1------+ ---~7=-31c,,4~0~4.~.o"o+---~7_3,=-1~,.4~04,_=·oco,+------t----~73~3~,.7~0"9·~·0~0 ~-7:~]09.00__ ...Q,~'.!!, FromJPAs 6500 8793 o.oo L______.__ 0~·~00~1------+-----~o~.o_o"+-----·-- o.oo _ 0.0% ROC/P Transfers From Districts or Charter Schools 6360 8791 1------+···-··-·-··-··--- 0.00 I ·---..9.~-1------1,-·-·-·-····-·--··- 0.00 -·-··- ··--·-···-0.00__ ...... __ 0.0% From County Offices 6360 8792 1------+-···---·---o.oo. ____o~·=-oo~t------+···---·-·-·--· o~·=-00=-..------'o~.o~o .. +--=-o~.0~%"
From JPAs 6360 8793 ·····-···· 0.00 _ ··.---··-···--·-0.00 ·1------1·-- .... o.oo -·------··-- .. _.o.oo. ·····- 0.0% Other Transfers of Apportionments From Districts or Charter Schools All Other 8791 ,______o_.o_o_,. __ .______QQQ_ ___.__QQQ_ ----·-J)J).Q_~-·--·---..9.c.QQ..f-.--___M.Q. .___ .Q,.Q'.!!>
From County Offices All Other 8792 ,______Q,_QQ. ______Q,QQ ,______o_.=oo ..... ______o=.oQ..,____ ..__ o~.~oo~ ...-----0~.o~o ...... ___o~.0~% .... FromJPAs All Other 8793 -·-- o.oo ____.__ o.oo o.oo o.oo o.oo o.oo 0.0% All Other Transfers In from All Others 8799 0.00 0.00 0.00 _.....Q,QQ_ 0.00 0.00 0.0% . TOTAL,JYIHER LOCAL REVENUE ___··------·------·- ___ 4Jl..Q1QZ4.13 ---· 73t,4.Q4,QQ_ ~~478.13 -· 3,892,077.00 __ 1,WJ09.00 ,._ ...§,625 786.00 ___ J4!!
TOTA~ REVENUES·-·-······-···--··-···-····-·-·······-···········---···-··---······--···-······-·······_J--··- 16,410,703.13. -··-····2,073,573.00 ...... _ 18,484~76.13 -····-15,604,659.00 ..... _...... 3,044,250.00 --·- 18,648,909.00...... ~
California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017.1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 04/10/2017) Page6 -359-Printed: 5/18/2017 2:53 PM Ju1y I ouuyta Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Unrestricted and Restricted Form01 Expenditures by Object 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017 -18 Budget Total Fund Total Fund %Diff Object Unrestricted Restricted col.A+B Unrestricted Restricted col. D +E Column Description Resource Codes Codes IA) 18) IC) /Dl IEl IF) C&F CERTIFICATED SALARIES
Certificated Teachers· Salaries 1100 -~644,945.00 _ 868.657.f).Q _____ 7,513,602.00 -· 6.069,401.00 I 1,617,649.00,I 7,687,050.00 2.3% Certificated Pupil Support Salaries 1200 343,747.00 149,542.00 493,289.00 346,460.00 r 151,350 00 I 497,810.00 0.9% Certificated Supervisors' and Administrators' Salaries 1300 .. 1.153,784.00 ____ 80,)SQJJ.Q. ___ 1,233,944.00 --· 1,060,725.00 I __ 106,100.04-__ 1,166,825.0Q_ ~ Other Certificated Salaries 1900 _. 0 00 0.00 ___ 0.00 ~--- O.OQJ _____Q,_QQ__ __ 0.0~
. TOTAL, CERTIFICATED SALARIES ------·-··---·-··-·- -~' ~_1!.476 00 1,098,359.00 Ii 9,240,835 00 7,476,586.00 Ill .!,~75,.Q.~ ..Q.ll~ Jl,351,685.QQ_ ~ __ J_,2% CLASSIFIED SALARIES
°'"'"""""""'~' ~,oo, ''°" m.,~.oo _ ,,,~.oo j.. .,,,00.00 ,,,_ m.ooJ- ... m.~.oo .... ~-~-00. __ "·~ ~~~~~~::=~--~=~--- § ~,;~~~~ ~= '.~~~r~~t~--,:~r-~~~r~ -~~ '~~~ ~~t~ EMPLOYEE BENEFITS I
STRS 3101-3102 ___ 1,010,687.00 857,516.00 1,868,203.00 1,077,504.00 1,010,213.00 ,_. 2,087,717.00 11.8%
PERS 3201-3202 --··- 243,461.00 _ 87,093.00 ··--··-- 330,554.00 ---~259.ooJ____ 1_~ 423 960.00 28.~ OASDI/Medicare/Altemative 3301-3302 ~ 249.355.00 61,283.00 310,638.00 260,261.00 I 81,240.00 341,501.00 ~~ Health and Welfare Benefits 3401-3402 ~ ____ 833,816.00 _ 183,329.00 _ 1,017,145.00 ____ . 776,423.00 I 255,208.00 1,031,631.00 1.4% Unemployment Insurance 3501-3502 ____ 5,815.00 _ 879.00 ______6,694.00 _____ 5,169.00 L___ 1,546.00 e-· 6,715.00 0.3% Workers' Compensation 3601-3602 166,848.00 29,050.00 1_95,898.00 184,136.00 40,932.00 225,068.00 14.9%
OPES, Allocated 3701-3702 -~3=2~,0~0~0~.o.oC+------0~.~ooc_ ·--··--- 32,009cOQ._~2.ooo.oo ------~QQ_ -----~3~2~,0~00~·~00"-+_~o~.O~*.c.i' OPEB, Active Employees 3751-3752 >------o~_o_o-+-----~o~.o~o-+------o_.o_o-+--·---~o~.o~o-+-- -·-----~o~.o_o-+------o~._oo-_~o~.o~r.-'<,
Other Employee Benefits 3901-3902 ---·--· 20,222.00 5,121.00_ ~ __2§,343.00_>---110.490.00 ~------'1,,,9'-'1'-'7.,.,.0~0+----'1'-'1"-2'-'4-"07,.,.-"00=+--'34=3,.,.5=%
,..I..OTAL, EMPLOYEE BENEFIT§______-·------·-+--~62,204.00 ,____.1,224,211.00 .,- ··-· 3,786.475.oo >- 2,760,242.00 _L ___ ..c1,",5,~o"'o~,7~5~7.~o-~o+--~4,~2~6o~·~99~9,~.o~oc+-~1,,_2.~5~%1 BOOKS AND SUPPLIES
Approved Textbooks and Core Curricula Materials 4100 ------· 40,000.00 _ _ 74,196.00 ______114,196.00_____ 30,000.0.Q._33,~0 ____ 63,606.00 -~~
Books and Other Reference Materials 4200 ...... 25.116.13 --····-··-· 171,775.00+- ______196,891.13 . ..______17,074.00_ --·····-····-· 35!686.00 -----·--· 52,760.00. ·-· -73.2% Materials and Supplies 4300 _ 173,388.00 -·------46,604.00_ ···-····--··219,992.00 ______71,673.00 ----- 53,380.00 ~)25,053.00 _-0.2% Noncapitalized Equipment 4400 Food 4700
Operations and Housekeeping
Services 5500 ,____ 1~6~2~,3~5~5~.0~0-+------"0~.0~0,_,_ ___1~6-2~,3-5_5~.0-0-+-----1~9_ 2,,"2~5~0.,0~Q_,_0 _____o~._00-+----~19~2=,2~5~0~.0~0-+--~18~.~4''-' Transfers of Direct Costs 5710 .... 0.00 _ ·-·--·--··-0.00 ---····----·····- 0.00_ ········--·-··-··-···- 0.00_ ..... o.oo -··----·····--· 0.00 ···-·- 0.0% Transfers of Direct Costs~ lnterfund 5750 ____o __ .o_o __ ,______o._o_o_,.. ______o.oo ,_ ____ o.oo_~ ___ o.QQ..______o.oo_~ Professional/Consulting Services and Operating Expenditures 5800 f---~54~5,~,6~1-~~----9~8~9~,8~5~8-~00-'-l--~1=5~35~.4~7~3~.o~o-t---~37~1cc•5~1~3~.o~o+--~1,~00~7~,7~8~3~.o~o+---1~·~37~9~,2~96~-~o~o .. __·~1~0.=2~% Communications 5900 -·---~50J1.Q.~-- ...;_Q,QQ_ 49J~----~Q,O.Q. ___ o.oo _____ 49....Q.OO,.~o~o, __·1~.5~%'-'< TOTAL, SERVICES AND OTHER OPERATING EXPENDITURES_···············---·-···--···--···-····-·-··-·-···--······-··-· ______1,036.477.0-0_ ···-····· 1Rtlac272.00 --······ 2,099,749.00 ·-·····-·--867,383.00 ~ .. _ 1,069J12.QQ.. _____ J,937,095.00. ··--- -7.7% Calllomla Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software· 2017. 1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 04/10/2017) Page? -360-Printed: 5/18/2017 2:53 PM Ju1y I ouuyta Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Unrestricted and Restricted Form 01 Expenditures by Object 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017-18 Budget Total Fund Total Fund %Diff Object I Unrestricted Restricted col.A+ B Unrestricted Restricted col. D+ E Column Descriotion Resource Codes Codes 1 {Al {Bl CCl CDl CEl {Fl C&F CAPITAL OUTLAY Land 6100 __ ,ool. ,,J~ ooo ___ oooL _,J __ o.oo>-- 00% Land Improvements 6170 _____ 0.00 I 0.00 i ___ 0.00 ___ 0.001---__ 0.00 ___ 0.00 0.0% ~~~;~~;~::~...... -········· ...... ~. ==--~~ l;~-l~f .·] ~-=~~l ~ -~l~~=-- ~~ -~~ OTHER OUTGO (excluding Transfers of Indirect Costs) I I Tuition Tuition for Instruction Under lnterdistrict Attendance Agreements 7110 0 State Special Schools 7130 0.00 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.0% Tuition, Excess Costs, and/or Deficit Payments Payments to Districts or Charter Schools Payments to County Offices ::: ····~· ;:L ...... ,::::! ~:::;·-- ·:: ~ ,::-:=:-,::: ~:: Payments to JPAs 7143 L .. .. . •'" , __ "·"" i . . . ..,. -· _. . ·"""" ,.... .""' Transfers of Pass-Through Revenues ...... ,= ·- .• .. To Districts or Charter Schools 7211 To County Offices 7212 1-----·!!1-_____:i ------;;~ ----:·:i ----:·::------:·:: ~! ToJPAs 7213 = =I = = = ~ = Special Education SELPA Transfers of Apportionments -·--1 To Districts or Charter Schools 6500 7221 ___ 9a0.Q.J_ _o~.o_o_+------+ ...... o.oo --·-·--·-·-- ··-·· 0.00_ -··--·· 0.0% To County Offices 6500 7222 ' ------t--·-···__··-_··_--_·_- __-=·--o:·:o:o: t' ______o:·:o:o:-t------+-···-··-·-·--··---·-o.oo ______o.oo ---·- o.o% ToJPAs 6500 7223 , ----- _ ---- . ----·--·- 0.00 _ ··-··--·--·-· o.oo.r-- 0.0% ROC/P Transfers of Apportionments To Districts or Charter Schools 6360 7221 0.00 0.00 0.0% To County Offices 6360 7222 O_,QQ_ --·- 0.00 ______Q,QQ______QJ!Q_>--_0.0% ToJPAs 6360 7223 f------t·-·-·------QJJ.Q.. .. 0.00 ______..Q,_Qll.. ____Q,QQ_ __..Q,__Q_~ OtherTransfersofApportionments AIIOther 7221-7223 r ______OftO_~------Q,QQ_____ 0.00~ ___ o.oo1l ______o.ooF ooo 00% All Other Transfers 7281-7283 ~ _ 0.00 ~ _____ 0.00 ______0.00 f---~00 ______000 _ 000 ~ All Other Transfers Out to All Others 7299 . ______O 00 r· _ ---- _ O.Oi-- _ _ __ O 00 ______O 00 [ ______0.00 _ ___ O 00 • _ O 0% 1 I =-Debt Service~ Interest 7438 0.00 _____ O.O_Qj ______p.<}Q_f-- 0.00 ______Q_,QQ______0.00~ Other Debt Service - Principal 7439 _____-_- ::::::::: ------· ,_ _ _~:::_:: ____- __-_· -_:_::;:::_::_ -· ·-···. . ~::: -_·--_ :_:_:_::~:_:__ : _____ ; __:~ __ :_: _ _TOTAL, OTHER OUTGO(excluding Transfers of Indirect Costs).______188 81_:·.:t_-_- _ __..2 ·---·- -·-· ______247 88 2 _ OTHER OUTGO - TRANSFERS OF INDIRECT COSTS Transfers of Indirect Costs 7310 ______{1.200 OQ) ______1,200 00 _ __ _ 0.00 _____ @,478.-0.Ql ·--··-··--·- 2,478.00 --·--··-··--··- 0.00. .. ..Q,-0_~ Transfers of Indirect Costs - lnterfund 7350 ____ (5,000.00)~- 0.00 {5,000.00) _____(§,.QQ.Q,-OQ) __ 0.00 {5 000.00\ 0.0% ,_!QTAL, OTHER 9UTGO - TRANSFERS OF_ INDIRECT COSTS -l----"(60 ,,2"'0"'0"'.0"'0\4------'-'1'"'20,.,0"-'.000.,_ ____J~,OOO.OQ)f-·-(7,478.00) 2,478.00 15,000.00\ O.Q~ TOTAL, EXPENDITURES-·--·-··--····-···-··-·····-··---·----·-········--·---·----·-··-- ___ 14,027,582.13 ~-- 4,562,243.00 ...... 18,589,825.13 ··-·- 13,310,502.00 -··--- 5,535,4W.W _____ 18,846,001.00 ··-·-·-1.4% California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017.1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 04/10/2017) Pages -361-Printed: 5/18/2017 2:53 PM Ju1y I ouoge1 Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Unrestricted and Restricted Form01 Expenditures by Object 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017-18 Budget Total Fund Total Fund o/oOiff Object Unrestricted Restricted col.A+ B Unrestricted Restricted col. D + E Column Description Resource Codes Codes (Al (Bl CCl (Dl /El /Fl C&F INTERFUND TRANSFERS INTERFUND TRANSFERS IN I From: Special Reserve Fund 8912 ~------o_oo 0.00 ____ 0.00 ____ 0.00 o.oo ,_____ o_.0_0_ 1___ 0~.0~%--1 From: Bond Interest and ~ Redemption Fund 8914 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 __ 0.00 _____ 0.0% Other Authorized lnterfund Transfers In 8919 , - ---- ·--;;-;;;; ______O 00 j _____ --~~~ ---~~: 0.00 _____ o_oo ______0.00 ____ 0.0% j&!Q_TAL, INTERFUNDTRANSFERS IN ______------0.00 0 ___ 0_00 ___ ------0.00 ------0.00 ______0.00 ~------__ 0.00 _ 0.0% ':=:~:~::.:ITT "" ...... ~000 I . . o.:l . . 000 ...... 000 I ...... 000 ...... ooo ~.00% To: Special Reserve Fund 7612 ______0.00 J--- ___ 0.00 ~ _ _ 0.00 e- _____ 0 00 : ____ 0.00 __ ___ 0.00 ____(),~ To: State School Building Fund/ 1 I I County School Facilities Fund 7613 ~-___ 0.00 0.00 ___ O 00 1--- 0.00 I 0.00 0.00 0.0% To: Cafeteria Fund 7616 ~, 16,994.00 L O 00 16,994.00 16~~1- 0.00 _____ 16,994.00 __QQ'Y<, Other Authorized lnterfund Transfers Out 7619 ______0.00 80,000.00 80,000:;;;;- ~ 80,000 ~--- 80,000.00 ---~ ~) TOTAL, INTERFUND TRANSFERS OUT ------~994.0o_l 80,000.00 96,994.00 ~- 16,994 00 80,000 00 96,994.0Q__ __o~ OTHER SOURCES/USES SOURCES State Apportionments Emergency Apportionments 8931 ______occ'_oco~+-----1-0~.oo~ ..... ------0.00 o.oo__,______0~-~00"+------· 0.00 ,_ 0.0% - Proceeds ------, Proceeds from Sale/Lease Purchase or Land/Buildings 8953 -~Q.. ______o.oo ______o.oo ______o .. oo ~----- o.oo LI_ o .. oo,_,_o .. o~.· Other Sources 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 Transfers from Funds of Lapsed/Reorganized LEAs 8965 ______(l,Q(l__ ___ 0.00 ______0.00 I ,. Long-Term Debt Proceeds Proceeds from Certificates of Participation 8971 Proceeds from Capital Leases 8972 : ... :: ..... : ::: ~.•·•:••·~:: ==:::f ~=.·:::: I=.:=:: ~=;;; Proceeds from Lease Revenue Bonds 8973 0.00 0.00 0.00::t000 _ 0.00 _ -- _ -- 0.00 _ ---- 0.0% All Other Financing Sources 8979 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 ---0.00 ------0.00_ ------0.0% ~tc) TOTAL, SOURCES ______------______o:oo ______o:oo______o:oo ______o:oo __ o.oo 0.00_~___ 0.0% USES Transfers of Funds from Lapsed/Reorganized LEAs 7651 ______0.00 _ ------0.00 ------0.00 ------0.00_ --·-·-·--·------·--!!F0.00I ______o,oo__ Y,Q!o All Other Financing Uses 7699 ------o.oo ______o.oo_ -~Oc-,o~o+------=o,.coQ__ ----- 0.00 ----- 0.00 _ 0.0% ___ o.oo______o.oo ______o.oo ______o.oo _____ 0.0% __ _(d) TOTAL, USES __ ------0.00 _ ------0.00 _ CONTRIBUTIONS Contributions from Unrestricted Revenues 8980 _(£.401,284.00) 2,401,284.00 ______o,oo _(2,571,249.00}+-__2_s,5_7_1,~2_49~.o_o..-,... _____o~.o_o--t- __o~.0~'* ....• Contributions from Restricted Revenues 8990 _ ' , • o .. oomL______o.oo !______o.oo __ o.oo o.oo o.oo 0.0% 2 401 284 0 (el TOTAL, CONTRIBUTIONS ,, J 2,401,284.00 0.00 (2,571,24~,QO, --- 2,571,249.00 f------~0~.0~0-t--~0~.0~'*,• TOTAL, OTHER FINANCING SOURCES/USES (a - b + c - d + el (2,418 278.00 2 321284.00 (96,994.00 12,588,243.00 2,491,249.00 196,994.00 0.0% California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017.1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 04110/2017) Page 9 -362-Printed: 511812017 2:53 PM _,UIJ I LH.IU!:IC~ Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Unrestricted and Restricted Fonn01 Expenditures by Function 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017-18 Budaet Total Fund Total Fund %Diff Object Unrestricted Restricted col.A+B Unrestricted Restricted col. D + E Column Oescriotion Function Codes Codes /Al /Bl /Cl /Dl /El /Fl C&F A. REVENUES I I 1) LCFF Sources 8010-80991... 11,224.438.ooL... _ .. ______o.oo I __ 11.224.438.00 ..... _ .... 11,455,840.oo 1...... - ..... o.oo 1...... 11,455,840.00 ______2.1% 2) Federal Revenue 8100-8299 !.. ·-···-··--·o.oo f...... -... -.. 397,259.ooJ___ .. 397,259.oo >-··-··-.. --o.oo I .. _... ___ 363,225.0tl ____ 363,226 ..QQ. ___:8.6% 3) Other State Revenue 8300-8599 ~ .... _ ...... 579,191.00.: ... - ...... 944,910.00.I ._.... _ 1,s24,101.oo ...... 256,742.00.( ...... 947,315.00 i_ ...... 1,204,057.oo ...... -21.0% 4) Other Local Revenue 8600-8799 t.. --- 4,607,074.13 L_ 731,404.00 I 5,338,478.13 ·-······· 3,892,077.00 I _ 1,733.709.00 I _5,625,786.00__ 5.4% 5) TOTAL REVENUES I 16 410,703.131 2 073,573.00 18 484 276.13 15,604,659.00 I 3,044,250.00 i 18.648 909.00 0.9% B. EXPENDITURES (Objects 1000-7999) Ii I I .i 1) Instruction 1000-1999 L..... -• 9,097.208.00 I 3,488,241.00 I 12.585,449.00 ____ 8,374,251.00 t-- 4.291,615.00 I ~866.00.~ 2) Instruction - Related Services 2000-2999 ~1,085.131 -- 102.746.00 I -- 1.903,831.13 - 1,841,405.00 I 134,563.00 I 1,975,968.00 3.8% 3) Pupil Services 3000-3999 ~ 47~ 215,S.~ -- 691,223.0Q.. --- 488,454.00 ~---.. 239,310.001-····-- 727,764.00. - 5.3% 4) Ancillary Services 4000-4999 ~ 0.00 20,921.00 20,921.00 0.00 :--~..1QQ.j.....- 20,951.00 0.1% 5) Community Services 5000-5999 : ··--·-...... o.ool ------0.00 r---- 0.00" ·----·-.. ·- o.oo.: . 0.00: 0.00 0.0% 6) Enterprise 6000-6999 I ...------0.04 0.00 , 0.00 c ··-···.. -- 0.00 : ·--·- 0.00 i ·-· 0.00 ~ 7) General Administration 7000-7999 ~-'· 1,554,435.00 \ 46,200.001 ___1,§Q_Q,635,00 1,482,278.00 ! 47,478.00 t~.756.0Q.. _ -4.4% 8) Plant Services 8000-8999 1.070.960.00 499,791.00 I 1.570,751.00 1.095,914.oo I 553,700.00 I 1.649,614.oo 5.0% 9) Other Outgo 9000-9999 76~~~~~9 [...... 28,200.00 L_ ...... _188:~;;::r ___ .. ___ 217,015.oo _28.200.00.l ...... 247,882.ool ...... 275,082.00. .... 202% 10l TOTAL. EXPENDITURES I 14,027,582.131 4 562 243.00 I 18 589,825.13 13,310 502.00 I 5,535,499.00 I 18,846,001.00 1.4% C. EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES BEFORE OTHER FINANCING SOURCES AND USES /AS· 8101 I 2,383,121.00 I 12,488,670.0J 1105,549.00l 2,294157.00: 12,491,249.00il 1197,092.00l 86.7% D. OTHER FINANCING SOURCES/USES ! J I , i 1) lnterfund Transfers a) Transfers In 8900-89291 o.oo o.oo I o.oo . o.ooL______o.oo I ----· o.oo 0.0% b) Transfers Out 7600-7629 L __ ~~~ 00 ~ 80,000.00 I 96,994.00 16 994 00 I 80 000 00 I 96 994 00 0.0% 2) Other Sources/Uses a) Sources b) Uses ::::f .... ::~11 _ - ____ ::::rl~~·~:~ .....•.. ~.• ·•••. •=: .. ::!==:=~~:: 3) Contributions 8980-8999 • .. ..<2,401,284.00).. . 2,401,284.00 ...... __...... 0.00. ____ (2,571,249.q:f ______2,571,249.00 , ·--···.... 0.00 __ _Qi)~ 41 TOTAL, OTHER FINANCING SOURCES/USES I 12 418,278.oml 2.321.284.oo 196 994.om 12 588 243.oml 2,491,249.00 ! /96,994.om 0.0% Callfomla Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software· 2017.1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 04/02/2015) Page 1 -363-Printed: 5/18/2017 2:53 PM "Ul::J I UU\.l!;j 2016-17 Estimated Actuals 2017-18 Budaet Total Fund Total Fund %0iff Object Unrestricted Restricted col.A+B Unrestricted Restricted col.D+E Column Description Function Codes Codes {Al {Bl {Cl {Dl {El {Fl C&F I E. NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND i I BALANCE IC + D41 135, 151.0ml 1167,386.oml (202,543.00' 1294,086.00\I 0.00 I 1294,086.00\ 45.2% F. FUND BALANCE, RESERVES I ' I I 1) Beginning Fund Balance I a) As of July 1 - Unaudited 9791 \··- _ ~·:~~~52:::: \--- 21~:~:::::-=~--2,392,142.83 _ -- 2.141,36530 :______48,23:!1-- 2,189,59:·:: ~~:_-:::: b) Audit Adjustments 9793 1· --- 2,176,522.30 215.620.53 1 ····---··-O.OO -··-·-·--· O.OO !···-- _48,234 .. 531 ____ 2,189,599 .. 83 c) As of July 1 - Audited (F1a + F1b) C .••.• 2,392,142.83 ··-····- 2,141,365.30 -:-·-···-·-·- •..•• _-8.5% d) Other Restatements 9795 '1 --·····-·······---· 0.00 l_ ----····--·.... 0.00 / ...... ---··········--·····--- -- OJJ.Cl___ _ ·------···0.00 'i ______0.00 L______I 0.00 -·-·-0.0% I i I I e) Adjusted Beginning Balance (F1c + F1d) L...... 2. 116,522.3or·····-·-·I 215,620.53 , ...... 2,392. 142.83 _ ·-······-· 2.141,365.30_, ______.... 48,234.53. ...• 2, 189,599.83 ______-8.5% 2) Ending Balance, June 30 (E + F1e) 1·· J.,,,.,.,, ___ ,,,,rnf .'·"'""·'L --'·"''·'"'·~ I '"~·" ,,oo,,m .., _,,,,., Components of Ending Fund Balance a) Nonspendable Revolving Cash 9711 , 1,00000 ~-- ______1,000.00 ___ Q,OO_ o.oo ··-····-··------·o.oo___ -100.0% Stores 9712 Prepaid Expenditures 9713 1 1 All Others 9719 i--·,::~:i-- .·~-·. :: :•••..•..•.. "'~=-=-:: i ===~= ·-~_:: :: b) Restricted 9740 0.00 I 48,234.53 I ·---·-· 48,234.53_ 0.00 48,234.53 48.234,~- ____0.0% c) Committed Stabilization Arrangements 9750 1-- o.oo+-Ii -----"o"'.oo"'-1·---··-·--·--··-·-o.oo ______o.00~1------.=co·cc.oo"-t--- 0.00 ----- 0.0% Other Commitments (by Resource/Object) 9760 1 o.oo+l____ ~o~.o~o+------~o~.o~o'+-·-----~o,~.o~o+------=-o.cco~o+-·-··--·---·- o.oo _ 0.0% d) Assigned I 0.00 0.00 0.00 I Other Assignments (by Resource/Object) 9780 l-- --·----;: 0.00 0.00 0.0% e) Unassigned/unappropriated Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 o.o_o.,.l _____o~·~oo'-+-·-··-·------·- o.oo ______o~.o_o-+------~o.~o_o_,__. ______.QRQ.~.o.o~ Unassianed/Unaooropriated Amount 9790 2.128.230.10 I o.oo i 2,128,230.70 1.847 219.30 o.oo I 1,847,279.30 -13.2% California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Soflware-2017.1.0 File: fund-a (Rev 04102/2015) Page2 -364-Printed: 511812017 2:53 PM Ju1y 1 i:suaget Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Multiyear Projections Form MYP Unrestricted 2017-18 % % Budget Change 2018-19 Change 2019-20 Object (Form 01) (Cols. C-NA) Projection (Cols. E-C/C) Descri tion Codes A B C D (Enter projections for subsequent years I and 2 in Columns C and E; current year - Column A - is extracted) A. REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES I. LCFF/Revenue Limit Sources 8010-8099 11,455,840.00 3.36% 11,840,380.00 3.97% 12,310,639.00 2. Federal Revenues 8100-8299 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 3. Other State Revenues 8300-8599 256,742.00 -0.31% 255,936.00 0.00% 255,936.00 4. Other Local Revenues 8600-8799 3,892,077.00 2.71% 3,997,703.00 2.59% 4,101,154.00 5. Other Financing Sources a. Transfers In 8900-8929 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 b. Other Sources 8930-8979 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 c. Contributions 8980-8999 4.71% (2,692,398.00) 2.48% (2,759,069.00 6. Total Sum lines Al thrn A5c 13 401 621.00 13 908 660.00 B. EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES I. Certificated Salaries a. Base Salaries 7,476,586.00 7,483,822.00 b. Step & Column Adjustment 0.00 c. Cost-of-Living Adjustment 0.00 0.00 d. Other Adjustments 7,236.00 121,589.00 e. Total Certificated Salaries (Sum lines Bia thru Bid) 1000-1999 7,483,822.00 7,605,411.00 2. Classified Salaries a. Base Salaries 1,886,822.00 1,907,735.00 b. Step & Column Adjustment c. Cost-of-Living Adjustment d. Other Adjustments 20,913.00 36,830.00 e. Total Classified Salaries (Sum lines B2a thru B2d) 2000-2999 1,886,822.00 1.11% 1,907,735.00 1.93% 1,944,565.00 3. Employee Benefits 3000-3999 2,760,242.00 1.97% 2,814,617.00 8.21% 3,045,682.00 4. Books and Supplies 4000-4999 298,747.00 5.25% 314,420.00 0.19% 315,006.00 5. Services and Other Operating Expenditures 5000-5999 867,383.00 -3.34% 838,416.00 1.08% 847,451.00 6. Capital Outlay 6000-6999 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 7. Other Outgo (excluding Transfers oflndirect Costs) 7100-7299, 7400-749 28,200.00 0.00% 28,200.00 0.00% 28,200.00 8. Other Outgo - Transfers of Indirect Costs 7300-7399 (7,478.00) 0.00% (7,478.00 0.00% 7,478.00) 9. Other Financing Uses a. Transfers Out 7600-7629 16,994.00 0.00% 16,994.00 0.00% 16,994.00 b. Other Uses 7630-7699 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 10. Other Adjustments (Explain in Section F below) 0.00 11. Total Sum lines Bl thru BIO 13 795 831.00 C. NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE Line A6 minus line B 11 112 829.00 D. FUND BALANCE I. Net Beginning Fund Balance (Form 01, line Fie) 1,852,174.30 2. Ending Fund Balance (Sum lines C and DI) 1,965,003.30 3. Components of Ending Fund Balance a. Nonspendable 9710-9719 b. Restricted 9740 c. Committed I . Stabilization Arrangements 9750 0.00 2. Other Commitments 9760 0.00 d. Assigned 9780 0.00 e. Unassigned/Unappropriated I. Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 0.00 2. Unassigned/Unappropriated 9790 1,965,003.30 f. Total Components of Ending Fund Balance Line D3fmust a ee with line D2 I 965 003.30 California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017.1.0 File: myp (Rev 03/30/2015) Page 1 Printed: 5/18/2017 -365- 4:53 PM July 1 Budget Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Multiyear Projections Form MYP Unrestricted 2017-18 % % Budget Change 2018-19 Change 2019-20 Object (Fonn 01) (Cols. C-NA) Projection (Cols. E-C/C) Descri lion Codes A B C D E. AVAILABLE RESERVES I. General Fund a. Stabilization Arrangements 9750 0.00 b. Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 0.00 c. Unassigned/Unappropriated 9790 1,965,003.30 (Enter reserve projections for subsequent years I and 2 in Columns C and E; current year - Column A- is extracted.) 2. Special Reserve Fund - Noncapital Outlay (Fund 17) a. Stabilization Arrangements 9750 b. Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 c. Unassigned/Unappropriated 9790 3. Total Available Reserves Sum lines Ela thru E2c I 965 003.30 F. ASSUMPTIONS Please provide below or on a separate attachment, the assumptions used to detennine the projections for the first and second subsequent fiscal years. Further, please include an explanation for any significant expenditure adjustments projected in lines BI d, 82d, and BI 0. For additional infonnation, please refer to the Budget Assumptions section of the SACS Financial Reporting Software User Guide. 18-19 Slight decrease in certificated administration salaries and benefits California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017.1.0 File: myp (Rev 03/30/2015) Page 2 Printed: 5/18/2017 -366- 4:53 PM July 1 t:luaget Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Multiyear Projections Form MYP Restricted 2017-18 % % Budget Change 2018-19 Change 2019-20 Object (FonnOI) (Cols. C-NA) Projection (Cols. E-C/C) Descri tion Codes A B C D (Enter projections for subsequent years I and 2 in Columns C and E; current year - Column A - is extracted) A. REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES I. LCFF /Revenue Limit Sources 8010-8099 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 2. Federal Revenues 8100-8299 363,226.00 -14.84% 309,312.00 -2.24% 302,388.00 3. Other State Revenues 8300-8599 947,315.00 -0.03% 947,063.00 -10.80% 844,733.00 4. Other Local Revenues 8600-8799 1,733,709.00 -5.22% 1,643,137.00 I.IO% 1,661,178.00 5. Other Financing Sources a. Transfers In 8900-8929 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 b. Other Sources 8930-8979 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 c. Contributions 8980-8999 2,571,249.00 4.71% 2,692,399.00 2.48% 2,759,069.00 6. Total Sum lines AI thru A5c 5 591 911.00 5 567 368.00 B. EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES I. Certificated Salaries a. Base Salaries 1,875,099.00 1,908,403.00 b. Step & Column Adjustment c. Cost-of-Living Adjustment d. Other Adjustments 33,304.00 34,015.00 e. Total Certificated Salaries (Sum lines Bia thru Bid) . 1000-1999 1,908,403.00 1,942,418.00 2. Classified Salaries a. Base Salaries 716,899.00 730,967.00 b. Step & Column Adjustment c. Cost-of-Living Adjustment d. Other Adjustments 14,068.00 14,349.00 e. Total Classified Salaries (Sum lines B2a thru B2d) 2000-2999 716,899.00 1.96% 730,967.00 1.96% 745,316.00 3. Employee Benefits 3000-3999 1,500,757.00 4.30% 1,565,248.00 4.36% 1,633,436.00 4. Books and Supplies 4000-4999 122,672.00 -6.58% 114,604.53 0.00% I 14,605.00 5. Services and Other Operating Expenditures 5000-5999 1,069,712.00 -5.10% 1,015,155.00 -18.65% 825,825.00 6. Capital Outlay 6000-6999 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 7. Other Outgo (excluding Transfers of Indirect Costs) 7100-7299, 7400-749 247,882.00 -9.92% 223,290.00 0.00% 223,290.00 8. Other Outgo - Transfers of Indirect Costs 7300-7399 2,478.00 0.00% 2,478.00 0.00% . 2,478.00 9. Other Financing Uses a. Transfers Out 7600-7629 0.00% 0.00% 80,000.00 b. Other Uses 7630-7699 0.00 IO. Other Adjustments (Explain in Section F below) II. Total Sum lines Bl thruBIO 5,567 368.00 C. NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE Line A6 minus line B 11 0.00 D. FUND BALANCE I. Net Beginning Fund Balance (Fann 01, line Fie) 0.00 2. Ending Fund Balance (Sum lines C and DI) 0.00 3. Components of Ending Fund Balance a. Nonspendable 9710-9719 0.00 b. Restricted 9740 c.Committed I. Stabilization Arrangements 9750 2. Other Commitments 9760 d. Assigned 9780 e. Unassigned/Unappropriated I. Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 2. Unassigned/Unappropriated 9790 f. Total Components of Ending Fund Balance Line D3fmust a ee with line D2 California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017. 1.0 File: myp (Rev 03/30/2015) Page 1 Printed: 5/18/2017 -367- 4:53 PM July 1 Budget Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Multiyear Projections Form MYP Restricted 2017-18 % % Budget Change 2018-19 Change 2019-20 Object (FonnOI) (Cols. C-A/A) (Cols. E-C/C) Descri tion Codes A B D E. AVAILABLE RESERVES I. General Fund a. Stabilization Arrangements 9750 b. Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 c. Unassigned/Unappropriated 9790 (Enter reserve projections for subsequent years I and 2 in Columns C and E; current year - Column A- is extracted.) 2. Special Reserve Fund - Noncapital Outlay (Fund 17) a. Stabilization Arrangements 9750 b. Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 c. Unassigned/Unappropriated 9790 3. Total Available Reserves Sum lines Ela thru E2c F. ASSUMPTIONS Please provide below or on a separate attachment, the assumptions used to determine the projections for the first and second subsequent fiscal years. Further, please include an explanation for any significant expenditure adjustments projected in lines B Id, B2d, and BIO. For additional infonnation, please refer to the Budget Assumptions section of the SACS Financial Reporting Software User Guide. 18-19 and 19-18 significate decreases in operational costs due to NPS placement graduating up to high school California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software- 2017.1.0 File: myp (Rev 03/30/2015) Page 2 Printed: 5/18/2017 -368- 4:53 PM July 1 1:1uage1 Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Multiyear Projections Form MYP Unrestricted/Restricted 2017-18 % % Budget Change 2018-19 Change 2019-20 Object (Form OJ) (Cols. C-NA) (Cols. E-C/C) Descri tion Codes A B D (Enter projections for subsequent years I and 2 in Columns C and E; cUITent year - Column A - is extracted) A. REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES I. LCFF/Revenue Limit Sources 8010-8099 11,455,840.00 3.36% 11,840,380.00 3.97% 12,310,639.00 2. Federal Revenues 8100-8299 363,226.00 -14.84% 309,312.00 -2.24% 302,388.00 3. Other State Revenues 8300-8599 1,204,057.00 -0.09% 1,202,999.00 -8.51% 1,100,669.00 4. Other Local Revenues 8600-8799 5,625,786.00 0.27% 5,640,840.00 2.15% 5,762,332.00 5. Other Financing Sources a. Transfers In 8900-8929 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 b. Other Sources 8930-8979 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 c. Contributions 8980-8999 0.00 0.00% 1.00 -100.00% 0.00 6. Total Sum lines Al thru A5c 18 993 532.00 19 476 028.00 B. EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES I. Certificated Salaries a. Base Salaries 9,351,685.00 9,392,225.00 b. Step & Column Adjustment 0.00 0.00 c. Cost-of-Living Adjustment 0.00 0.00 d. Other Ac(justments 40,540.00 155,604.00 e. Total Certificated Salaries (Sum lines Bia thru Bid) 1000-1999 9,392,225.00 9,547,829.00 2. Classified Salaries a. Base Salaries 2,603,721.00 2,638,702.00 b. Step & Column Adjustment 0.00 0.00 c. Cost-of-Living Adjustment 0.00 0.00 d. Other Adjustments 34,981.00 51,179.00 e. Total Classified Salaries (Sum lines B2a thru B2d) 2000-2999 2,603,721.00 1.34% 2,638,702.00 1.94% 2,689,881.00 3. Employee Benefits 3000-3999 4,260,999.00 2.79% 4,379,865.00 6.83% 4,679,118.00 4. Books and Supplies 4000-4999 421,419.00 1.80% 429,024.53 0.14% 429,611.00 5. Services and Other Operating Expenditures 5000-5999 1,937,095.00 -4.31% 1,853,571.00 -9.73% 1,673,276.00 6. Capital Outlay 6000-6999 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 7. Otl1er Outgo (excluding Transfers of Indirect Costs) 7100-7299, 7400-7499 276,082.00 -8.91% 251,490.00 0.00% 251,490.00 8. Other Outgo - Transfers oflndirect Costs 7300-7399 5,000.00 0.00% (5,000.00 0.00% 5,000.00 9. Other Financing Uses a. Transfers Out 7600-7629 96,994.00 0.00% 96,994.00 0.00% 96,994.00 b. Other Uses 7630-7699 0.00 0.00% 0.00 10. Other Adjustments 0.00 0.00 II. Total Sum lines Bl thruBJO 19 036 871.53 19 363 199.00 C. NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE Line A6 minus line B 11 43 339.53 112,829.00 D. FUND BALANCE I. Net Beginning Fund Balance (Form OJ, line Fie) 1,895,513.83 1,852,174.30 2. Ending Fund Balance (Sum lines C and DI) 1,852,174.30 1,965,003.30 3. Components of Ending Fund Balance a. Nonspendable 9710-9719 0.00 0.00 b. Restricted 9740 0.00 0.00 c.Committed I. Stabilization Arrangements 9750 0.00 0.00 2. Other Commitments 9760 0.00 0.00 d. Assigned 9780 0.00 0.00 e. Unassigned/Unappropriated I. Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 0.00 0.00 2. Unassigned/Unappropriated 9790 1,852,174.30 1,965,003.30 f Total Components of Ending Fund Balance Line D3fmust a ee with line D2 I 852 174.30 I 965 003.30 California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017.1.0 File: myp (Rev 03/09/2016) Page 1 Printed: 5/18/2017 -369- 4:53 PM July 1 Budget Larkspur-Corte Madera General Fund 21 65367 0000000 Marin County Multiyear Projections Form MYP Unrestricted/Restricted 2017-18 % % Budget Change 2018-19 Change 2019-20 Object (Form 01) (Cols. C-A/A) (Cols. E-C/C) Descri tion Codes A B D E. AVAILABLE RESERVES I. General Fund a. Stabilization Arrangements 9750 0.00 b. Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 0.00 c. Unassigned/Unappropriated 9790 1,965,003.30 d. Negative Restricted Ending Balances (Negative resources 2000-9999) 9792 0.00 2. Special Reserve Fund - Noncapital Outlay (Fund 17) a. Stabilization Arrangements 9750 0.00 b. Reserve for Economic Uncertainties 9789 0.00 c. Unassigned/Unappropriated 9790 0.00 3. Total Available Reserves - by Amount (Sum lines Ela thru E2c) 4. Total Available Reserves - b Percent Line E3 divided b Line F3c F. RECOMMENDED RESERVES I. Special Education Pass-through Exclusions For districts that serve as the administrative unit (AU) of a special education local plan area (SELPA): a. Do you choose to exclude from the reserve calculation the pass-through funds distributed to SELPA members? No b. If you are the SELPA AU and are excluding special education pass-through funds: I. Enter the name(s) of the SELPA(s): 2. Special education pass-through funds (Column A: Fund I 0, resources 3300-3499 and 6500-6540, objects 7211-7213 and 7221-7223; enter projections for subsequent years I and 2 in Columns C and E) 0.00 2. District ADA Used to determine the reserve standard percentage level on line F3d (Col. A: Form A, Estimated P-2 ADA column, Lines A4 and C4; enter projections) 1,487.96 3. Calculating the Reserves a. Expenditures and Other Financing Uses (Line B 11) 19,363,199.00 b. Plus: Special Education Pass-through Funds (Line Flb2, if Line Fla is No) 0.00 c. Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses (Line F3a plus line F3b) 19,363,199.00 d. Reserve Standard Percentage Level (Refer to Form OICS, Criterion IO for calculation details) 3% e. Reserve Standard - By Percent (Line F3c times F3d) 580,895.97 f. Reserve Standard - By Amount (Refer to Form OI CS, Criterion IO for calculation details) 0.00 g. Reserve Standard (Greater of Line F3e or F3f) 580,895.97 h. Available Reserves Line E3 Meet Reserve Standard Line F3 YES California Dept of Education SACS Financial Reporting Software - 2017 .1.0 File: myp (Rev 03/09/2016) Page2 Printed: 5/18/2017 -370- 4:53 PM LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT MULTI-YEAR PROJECTIONS 2016-17 thru 2019-20 2016-17 to 2019-20 Budget A~option - DRAFT 2016117 2017118 2018119 2019-20 May23,2017 % Second Interim ·% Budget Adoption % Budget Adoption % Budget Adoption Change Unrntrlctt-d Rntrktttl Combinftl Change Unn-strictnl Rrstrlcled ComblnW Change Unrestricted Rtstrlcled Comblnfll Change Unrestricted Restricted Combined Description LCFF LCFF LCFF LCFF A. REVENUES & OTHER FrNANCINO SOURCES I. LCFF Entillcmcnt Sources LCFF LCFF LCFf LCFF n. Stale Aid (including PY categorical programs) 1479.56ADA 2,360,874 2,360,874 1488ADA 2,151,539 2,151,539 148BADA 2,155,408 2,155,408 148BADA 1,025,408 1,025,408 b.EPA 300,928 300,928 300,375 300,375 296,722 296,722 296,722 296,722 c.PropcrtyTnxcs [email protected]% 8,562,636 8,562,636 [email protected]% 9,003,926 9,003,926 tax@4% 9,388,250 9,388,250 tax@4% 10,988,509 10,986,509 d. Total LCFF Entitlement Sources 11,224,438 11,224.438 X 11,455,840 11,455,840 X 11,840,380. 11,840,380 X 12,310,639 12,310,639 2. Fcdcrnl Revenues 397,259 397,259 363,226 363,226 309,312 309,312 302,388 302,388 3. Other Stale Revenues 579,191 944,910 1,524,101 X 256,742 947,315 1,204,057 X 255,936 947,063 1,202,999 X 255,936 844,733 1,100,669 4. Other Local Revenues 3,512,880 731,404 4,244,284 X 3,892,077 1,733,709 5,625,786 X 3,997,703 1,643,137 5,640,841 X 4,101,153 1,681,178 5,782,331 5. Other Fino.ncing Sources (cncronchmcnl) (2,401,284) 2,401,284 X (2,571,249) 2,571,249 (2,692,398) 2,692,398 (2,759,069) 2,759,069 6. Foundation Revenues 1,093,420 1,093.420 X X X TOT AL PROJECTED REVENUE (Atd thru A6) 14,008,845 4,474,857 18,483,502 13,033,410 5,615,499 18,648,909 13,401,621 5,591911 18,993,532 13,908,660 5,567,368 19,476 028 B. EXPEN011URES AND OTHER FINANClNO USES I. Ccrtifica.tcdS11l11rics a. Base S1darics/Stcp & Columns Adjustments 7,940,510 1,075,576 9,016,088 7,307,586 1,856,316 9,163,902 7,314,822 1,889,730 9,204,551 7,436,411 1,923,745 9,360,155 b, Step & Column Adjustment (Included in bnsc for current year) c:. Coil-of•Living Adjustment b, Other Adjustments (Stipends, Subs, Extra Duty) 198,850 22,783 221,633 169,000 18,783 187,783 169,000 18,673 187,673 169,000 18,673 187,673 c. 01her Adjustments (Additions/Reductions) d. Total CertlficalW S1larin ISwn lints Oh-Bib\ 8139 360 1098359 9 237719 7 476 586 1875099 9,351 685 7 483 822 1908403 9 392 225 7 605 411 1842.418 9 547 829 2.ClassifiedSalaries a.BllSCSalaries 1,702,362 680,251 2,382,813 1,818,922 703,399 2,522,321 1,841,936 717.467 2,559,403 1,878,n5 731,816 2,610,591 b. Other Adjustments {Stipends, Subs, Extra Duty) 82,084 13,500 95,584 67,900 13,500 81,400 65,800 13,500 79,300 65,800 13,500 79,300 c. Other Adjus1menls (Additions/Reductions) c. Total CJassJOW Salarln ISwn lints Bla-Blbl 1,784,448 693,751 2,478197 1,886,822 716,899 2,603 721 1,907738 730,987 2,638,703 1,944,575 745,316 2,689 891 3. Employee Benefits 2,562,064 1,224,261 3,786,325 2,760,242 1,500,757 4,260,999 2,814,617 1,565,248 4,379.865 3,045,682 1,633,436 4,679,118 4. Books a.nd Supplies 469,130 292,575 761,705 298,747 122,672 421.419 314,420 114,603 429,023 315,006 114,603 429,609 S. Services, Other Operating Expenses 1,037,554 1,063,272 2,100,826 867,393 1,069,712 1,937,105 838,416 1,015,155 1,853,571 847.451 825,825 1,673,276 6, CapilAI 01.ulay 7.0lherOulgo 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 60,000 8. Direct Support/Jndircct Costs (6,200) 1,200 (5,000) (7,478) (7,478) (7,478) (7,478) (7,478) (7,478) 9. 01hcr Financing Uses {Def. Mo.intJCaf'eleria) 45,194 268,817 314,011 45,184 250,362 295,546 45,193 225.no 270,963 45,184 225,nO 270,954 10. Net Estimated Adjustments to EFB at close 11. TOTAL PROJECTED EXPENDITURES (81-89\ 14,031,548 4,642,234 18,673,782 13,327,496 5,615,500 18,942,998 13,396,728 5,640,146 19,036,871 13,795,831 5,567,368 19,363,198 C. NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE 122,9031 1167,376 1190,279 1294,086\ 0 1294,086\ 4,895 148,2351 f43,338 112,829 10 112831 D. FUND BALANCE I. Est. BegiMing Fund Balance (form OIi. iine Fie)• 2,178,522 215,621 2 392,143 2,141,365 48.235 2,189,600 9.70% 1,847,279 48,235 1,895,514 9.57% 1,852,174 0 1,852,175 2. EndinR. Fund B11l11ncc(Sum lincsC a.nd DI) 2,153,619 48,245 2,201,864 1,847.279 48.235 1,895,514 1,852,174 0 1,852.176 1,965,003 0 1,965,005 £AVAILABLE RESERVES I. General Fund (Unnslriclcd) a.Revolving Cash 1.000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 b. DtslgnalW ror Economic Un«rtalntits (6'1•) 6.00% 1,120,427 1120427 6,001/. 1,136,580 1,138,580 -, e.oo•;. 1,142 212 1142.212 6.001/, 1181792 1,181,792 c.RtstrlctW d. One.time M1nda1W (16,17). S~dal Ed (17-20),EPA (17-20) 548,414 546,414 396,722 398,722 - 481,722 481,722 481,722 481,722 r. Undtsl,:natrd/UndlstrlbutW Amount 485,778 48,245 534,023 312,977 48,235 361,212 . 227,240 0 227,241 320,489 0 320,491 -371- 2017-18 Budget Adoption Reserves LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT: 21-65367 Substantiation of need for reserves greater than the state required mini'mum reserve for economic uncertainty The governing board of a school district that proposes to adopt a budget that includes a combined assigned and unassigned ending fund balance in excess of the minimum recommended reserve for economic uncertainties, shall, at the Budget Adoption public hearing, provide: The minimum recommended reserve for economic uncertainties; The combined assigned and unassigned ending fund balances that are in excess of the minimum recommended reserve for economic uncertainties for each fiscal year identified in the budget; and A statement of reasons to substantiate the need for reserves that are higher than the minimum recommended reserve. 2017-18 Total General Fund Expenditures & Other Uses $ 18,846,001 Minimum Reserve requirement 3% $ SGS,380 General Fund Combined Ending Fund Balance $ 1,895,513 Special Reserve Fund Ending Fund Balance $ Components of ending balance: Nonspendable (revolving, prepaid, etc.) $ 1,000 Restricted $ 48,235 Committed $ Assigned $ 568,290 Reserve for economic uncertainties $ 704,738 Unassigned and Unappropriated $ Subtotal Assigned, Unassigned & Unappropriated $ 1,273,028 Total Components of ending balance $ 1,322,263 Assigned & Unassigned balances above the minimum reserve requirement $ 707,648 Statement of Reasons The District's Fund Balance includes assigned, unassigned and unappropriated components, that in total are greater than the Minimum Recommended Reserve for Economic Uncertainties because: - Protection aaainst future economic downturn/meetina cashflow needs included in payroll Curriculum adoption,enrollment qrowth Expiration of Proposition 30/55 Revenues Maintaining a AAA credit rating/maintaining sound financial oolicies High cost special education students/residential and NPS placement Page 1 Printed 5/18/2017 5:33 PM -372- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Office of the Superintendent Date: May 23, 2017 To: Board of Trustees From: Valerie Pitts, Superintendent Re: Discussion: Grand Jury Response to Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Background (Grand Jury Report Summary) Marin is an expensive place to live, not only for low-income residents, but also the average wage earner. The Grand Jury Report, Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability, offers solutions to improve housing affordability for all households. The residents of Marin experience the results of the high cost of housing in many ways, including the fact that our roadways are congested with the cars of commuters, the financial strain that high housing costs put on low and moderate income households, problems caused by homeless living on the streets, and the likelihood that our children will have to leave the county to find someplace where they can afford a home. The Grand Jury researched how communities (both inside and outside of Marin County) have addressed key problems of housing affordability that could be applied throughout Marin. Several barriers to affordable housing were identified. In response to each barrier, the Grand Jury remarks on potential solutions and makes specific recommendations. Below are the items related to school districts and teacher housing: Barrier: Too Expensive to Build Solution: School Districts’ Teacher Housing. California Senator Mark Leno authored the Teacher Housing Act of 2016 (Senate Bill 1413) that was signed into law by Governor Brown on September 27, 2016. This Bill provides that “a school district may establish and implement programs that address the housing needs of teachers and school district employees who face challenges in securing affordable housing. To the extent feasible, the school district may establish and implement programs that, among other things, do the following: (a) Leverage federal, state, and local public, private, and nonprofit programs and fiscal resources available to housing developers, (b) Promote public and private partnerships, and (c) Foster innovative financing opportunities.” Before this bill was passed, taxpayer funds could not be used for restricted (school staff only) housing. Grand Jury Recommendation: R4. Each school district should investigate building teacher and staff workforce housing on their land. The Grand Jury requests a response from LCMSD on R4. Below is the response from LCMSD. Backup attached: Yes √ No Item No. 9 -373- Analysis/Response to Grand Jury The recommendation has been implemented as a collaborative effort of all school districts in Marin. The Efficiency and Effectiveness Collaborative has prioritized the topic of affordable housing this year and is researching this issue through a variety of methods including: · Developing an inventory of currently available property · Surveying staff to determine the level of interest/need · Reviewing unique financing options available • Reviewing successful efforts elsewhere in the state The Collaborative recently hired a consulting firm to develop a realistic cost estimate for providing workforce housing, including the alternatives of building on currently owned school land or purchasing an existing multi-unit facility. Such possibilities exist under Senate Bill 1413 signed in 2016. In addition, as part of long-range facility master planning, Larkspur-Corte Madera School District recently completed a Land and Facilities Use Analysis (DCG Study) to analyze District sites to determine the feasibility of using them more effectively and efficiently in pursuit of both fiscal sustainability and the realization of key District initiatives, including retaining quality teachers and creating possible options for teacher housing. Our findings showed potential for developing housing options, although acreage is limited for multiuse dwellings. Barriers to this development exist, including those identified in the Grand Jury Report. LCMSD will continue to participate in County efforts and collaboration among school districts and other partner agencies and community-based organizations to identify appropriate sites for housing. The District will also work to engage the community in plans for action in the next five years. Financial Impact The cost of the Land and Facilities Use Analysis was $20,000. This report will take the District well into the next decade of Facilities and Land Use Master Planning. Legal Implications There is recent legislation allowing school districts to use surplus property for supporting teacher housing. The District must abide by surplus requirements and other legal parameters. Recommendation This information is provided to Trustees for information and discussion. -374- 2016–2017 MARIN COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Report Date: April 6, 2017 Public Release Date: April 12, 2017 -375- Marin County Civil Grand Jury Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability SUMMARY Marin is an expensive place to live, not only for low-income residents but also the average wage earner. This report offers solutions to improve housing affordability for all households. The residents of Marin experience the results of the high cost of housing in many ways, including the fact that our roadways are congested with the cars of commuters, the financial strain that high housing costs put on low and moderate income households, problems caused by homeless living on the streets, and the likelihood that our children will have to leave the county to find someplace where they can afford a home. The Grand Jury researched how communities (both inside and outside of Marin County) have addressed key problems of housing affordability that could be applied throughout Marin: ■ Community resistance forms a barrier to virtually any new development in Marin. Vocal opposition serves to constrain the actions of civic leadership. Attempts to satisfy the needs of the developer and the needs of the community simultaneously are often ineffective. We highlight several examples where proactive involvement of the community with planners and developers has been successful in creating projects that are win-wins. We suggest that efforts to create early discussions between these parties will help to overcome this barrier. ■ It is expensive to build in Marin. The high cost of land and construction form a formidable barrier to affordability, particularly in the case of low-income affordable housing. No one solution will completely overcome this barrier, but a creative approach to address some construction fees will make Marin more attractive for development. ■ Developers cite the planning process in Marin as a clear barrier to progress. Regulatory delay becomes burdensome when developing low-income affordable housing. We suggest that models exist where successful early cooperation between developers, and planners, and neighborhoods has made the planning process more efficient. These models could easily be adopted across Marin’s communities. ■ While housing affordability is a countywide problem, each of the 11 towns and cities of Marin and the County have their own approach to the problem. Municipalities should coordinate available resources to develop low-income affordable housing that would benefit all of the citizens of Marin. This effort would be best coordinated through a central Housing Coordinator. A problem as complicated as housing affordability is not easily solved and it will not be solved overnight. However, our research suggests that it should be possible to make incremental changes that will overcome some of the barriers to affordability. These changes form the recommendations made in this report. -376- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability BACKGROUND Scarcely a week goes by without housing prices being featured in local news. According to the California Association of Realtors, only 20% of households in Marin County could purchase a median-priced home in the fourth quarter of 2016. The chart below indicates that Marin is one of the least affordable counties even in the extremely expensive Bay Area. From: “Housing Affordability in CA: by County.” California Association of Realtors. Accessed on 8 Mar. 2017. In this report, housing affordability refers to the measure of whether a typical household can afford to purchase or rent a typical home. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidelines suggest that housing is affordable if it requires less than 30% of household income. The latest HUD estimate for median household income in Marin County is $107,720.1 This is a distinctly different concept from affordable housing. Affordable housing is subsidized by the government and available for occupancy by households that meet income thresholds specified by HUD, which defines “low income” as earning less than 50% of median household income. Why is affordability a problem? Housing is too expensive for middle-income and lower-income households that include many of our public employees, retail employees and maintenance workers.2 Spending too much of a household’s monthly budget on housing impacts a family’s ability to buy other basic needs: food, clothing, transportation, insurance, utilities, etc. The U.S. Census Bureau’s Center for Economic Studies3 reports that as of 2014, over 61,000 workers commuted into Marin each day, adding to the traffic problems that we see on our roads. The high cost of housing also increases the number of homeless on our streets, creates difficulties for senior citizens on fixed incomes keeping up with increasing rents, and challenges the most 1 “FY 2017 Income Limits Documentation System.” Economic and Market Analysis Division, HUD. Accessed March 2017. 2 “County Of Marin: Workforce Housing.” [video] The County of Marin. 14 May 2014. 3 “On The Map.” The United States Census Bureau. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 2 of 31 -377- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability vulnerable segments of our population. Housing is unavailable as well for our next generation, resulting in an increasingly older population. There are many benefits of creating a more affordable housing infrastructure. Environmental benefits will accrue if commutes can be shortened. Social benefits from increased diversity in our population will enrich our lives. Economic benefits will include an increased property tax base from new housing, as well as an increase in sales taxes if workers live here and shop here, rather than taking their dollars elsewhere. The Grand Jury wrote this report in an effort to document the genesis of the Marin housing problem, understand the barriers, and offer some solutions that have worked elsewhere. We are under no illusion that there are quick or simple fixes. A problem that has taken decades to develop will not disappear overnight. However, we do suggest that it is time to address this problem in new ways. METHODOLOGY The Grand Jury recognized that the investigation of the barriers to housing affordability would require a broad approach. Accordingly, the Grand Jury pursued the following: ■ Conducted research into the physical and economic demographics of Marin County, including: population and economic/financial data, land use policies/constraints, housing supply/demand/cost characteristics and transportation infrastructure. ■ Interviewed County department managers and staff associated with planning and approval of housing projects in Marin. ■ Distributed a questionnaire to planning staff of the County and the 11 cities and towns of Marin seeking information regarding their low-income affordable housing policies, processes and fees. ■ Reviewed Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs) of the County, cities and towns with a focus on expenditures for low-income affordable housing development. ■ Interviewed people in various capacities who are involved in developing market rate and low-income affordable housing within and outside the County. ■ Conducted research into Federal, California, County and municipal laws and regulations applicable to real estate development and low-income affordable housing (including housing elements and Plan Bay Area4). 4 “Plan Bay Area 2040.” Plan Bay Area. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 3 of 31 -378- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability ■ Researched issues and interviewed people from advocacy groups in support of developing low-income affordable housing throughout the county. ■ Issued questionnaires to advocacy groups in opposition to the development of high- density housing and low-income affordable housing. ■ Researched published papers and books by the advocacy groups cited above. ■ Conducted research into conflict resolution strategies, programs and best practices. ■ Researched successful approaches to reconciling the positions of housing developers and opponents of developments. ■ Reviewed the history of recent low-income affordable housing projects with attention to the processes, costs, development time frames and community acceptance. ■ Obtained local utility district connection fee estimates. DISCUSSION California’s Legislative Analyst Office 2015 report California’s High Housing Costs: Causes and Consequences5 lists significant factors why coastal areas (like Marin) have not built enough housing, including community resistance to such new housing, environmental reviews that can be used to stop or limit housing development, and limited vacant developable land. The goal of this Marin County Civil Grand Jury report is to showcase proven solutions to affordability barriers. These solutions could be implemented separately. However, since many of the barriers are interconnected we believe that by integrating them together into civic practices, our citizens will see long-term improvements in housing affordability. In this report, the Grand Jury focused on these specific barriers: ■ Community Resistance ■ Too Expensive to Build ■ Planning Process ■ Low-Income Affordable Housing Faces Unique Challenges ■ Myths & Perceptions 5 “California’s High Housing Costs: Causes and Consequences.” California Legislative Analyst’s Office. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 4 of 31 -379- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Barrier: Community Resistance If you show up at a planning hearing to complain about a proposed project in your neighborhood, your single voice is unlikely to matter. Therefore, you decide to form a coalition with your neighbors. The coalition would hold meetings, write letters, make phone calls, post signs, and demand the local officials do something. This is democracy in action. What if a proposed project is upsetting: a high-density housing project (that will add to traffic), a homeless shelter (that will bring in undesirable people), a flood detention basin (that might cause local flooding), or a low-income housing development (that will decrease property values)? The coalition might agree that the project is for the “greater good,” but is not appropriate for the neighborhood. To protect yourselves from the “big guys,” you might hire the services of a lawyer to find a way to stop or slow down this project (“level the playing field”). In Marin County, these reactions are common for civic projects.6 Solution: Regular Developer Meetings. Before developers formally file plans for housing developments, they should meet with the local planning staff to anticipate likely challenges. Planning departments advise developers on regulatory issues, but often what frustrates planning approval are “the neighbors.” Planners can advise the developer on “hot button” issues they are likely to face before they set the formal public planning process in motion. Example: Since 2012, the City of Petaluma has conducted weekly Development Review Committee meetings to brainstorm with developers. In attendance are a number of city departments including fire, building, planning, public works, water resources and conservation, code enforcement, economic development, and housing. City staff advise developers of what potential issues could be controversial and suggest ways to adjust the project scope to minimize issues. These might include proactive meetings with neighborhoods or increasing the scope of formal planning notices. Developers appreciate this streamlined approach that saves both time and money. The City staff benefit from an improved collaborative environment. Solution: Community Outreach. The issue of where to place a civic project has been well studied for over 40 years and is referred to as “Facility Siting” (see Appendix A: Facility Siting). Nimbyism (“Not In My Backyard”) is the understandable reaction of a community to a poor public planning process and lack of trust in government. By proactively reaching out to the entire community, using “plain speak,” and with no hidden agenda, facilitators can help all the parties talk out the issues at outreach meetings with the goal that people will arrive at an agreeable understanding. Example: In 2007, Homeward Bound of Marin was getting ready to design The Next Key Center (32 affordable studio apartments and room to grow their culinary program) on a parcel of the decommissioned Hamilton base in Novato. Before they started the formal planning process, they did a major outreach effort to their surrounding neighbors. Rather than holding large meetings, they chose to meet one-on-one with the neighbors. They shared their plans (“We’re thinking of…”), asked the neighbors about their concerns (“What do you think?”), and tried to address these concerns in their plan. Their goal was to ensure that everyone had a chance to be heard so that their public planning hearings would be well supported. Their new facility opened in November 2008. 6 Spotswood, Dick. “It’s hard to get anything done in our county.” Marin IJ. 27 Sep. 2016. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 5 of 31 -380- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Example: In 2003, the Citizens Advisory Committee released to Mill Valley City Council the Miller Avenue Precise Plan,7 which detailed the “year-long process to examine the future of Miller Avenue in terms of land use and street character, traffic and circulation, market and economics, and implementation and sustainability.”8 In May 2007, City Planners conducted two community workshops to get feedback on possible improvements. Soon after, a nine-person steering committee founded the Friends of Mill Valley as a reaction when “...the committee's outline became, in effect, a draft plan because of a need to get the plan moving ahead.”9 City Council was “baffled by the growing opposition.”10 Friends of Mill Valley held a series of town meetings to discuss long-term policy changes (affecting land use and residential properties) that were proceeding without sufficient public input. After four years of planning, the project was now at a standstill. In response to community pressure, a Design Advisory Committee (with liaisons from City Council, Planning Commission, and five citizen experts) was formed by the City of Mill Valley in 2009, and during the next two years resulted in numerous workshops, focus groups, and extensive committee meetings. In 2011, the Miller Avenue Streetscape Plan was adopted by City Council11 and groundbreaking on the project began on June 13, 2016.12 Solution: Specific Plans. In Marin County it is not uncommon to have a developer purchase a parcel, create a development plan, file the plan with the planning department, and because of community resistance, have their project slowed down, scaled back, or simply die. Such delays and uncertainty are expensive for the developers. The result is that developers choose to build in less “risky” counties. Municipalities are then planned piecemeal, on an individual parcel basis. If a community adopted a Specific Plan, many of these problems would disappear. A Specific Plan is a comprehensive planning and zoning document for a defined geographic region.13 The upfront work of creating the plan allows citizens to work together to define a specific community vision and have the municipality establish the detailed land use and design regulations. Developers wishing to build on a parcel in the Specific Plan would be able to move forward secure in the knowledge that extensive work to create building plans and construction documents would not be wasted. Example: In 2011, Redwood City adopted the Downtown Precise Plan,14 designed to rejuvenate the city’s downtown area. It provided a blueprint for development of the city’s downtown through 2030, and as amended includes: plans for retail uses, building placement (including building heights and sizes), and housing development (including low-income affordable housing). To date over 2,336 new housing units have been approved or constructed (213 of which are affordable).15 The most frequent criticism of new projects in Marin is additional traffic congestion. With traffic on major roads at or nearly-at capacity during commute hours, even having a few additional cars on the road could make a bad situation intolerable. Traffic is a real problem, and in many locations congestion serves as an insurmountable barrier to new construction. While the subject 7 “Historical Information - Streetscape Plan Meetings and Documents (2003-2011).” City of Mill Valley. 8 “Miller Avenue Precise Plan.” City of Mill Valley, 3 Feb. 2003 9 Speich, Don. “Citizen brigade, Mill Valley council clash on vision for city.” Marin IJ, 28 May 2007 10 Ibid. 11 “Miller Avenue Streetscape Plan (adopted 2011).” City of Mill Valley. 12 “Miller Avenue Streetscape Plan: History & Background.” City of Mill Valley. 13 “The Planner’s Guide to Specific Plans.” Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 14 “Downtown Precise Plan.” Redwood City. 15 Silverfarb, Bill. “Redwood City allows for more affordable housing.” The Daily Journal. 2016 May 2016. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 6 of 31 -381- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability of transportation infrastructure is sufficiently complex to warrant its own Grand Jury report, we believe that careful study of traffic, and a creative approach to local conditions can serve as a starting point towards mitigating the effects of new construction. Solution: Reduce School-Related Commute Hours Traffic. School-related traffic is a significant component of commute traffic. Displacing cars with school buses will reduce traffic congestion during school transit hours. Example: Coordinated Countywide Student Transportation Study. To address congestion caused by parents ferrying their children to and from schools the Marin Transportation Authority and the Marin County Office of Education cooperated in a study of widespread adoption of school busing in the county in 2015.16 The study concluded that while the geographic features of Marin make large scale busing difficult in some residential areas, the majority of county schools would benefit from extended bus service. While the funding of a comprehensive school bus program is significant, costs are substantially less than those required by increasing road capacity. The recent adoption of a subsidized school bus program in Tiburon is an excellent example of the benefits. An article in the Marin Independent Journal17 noted a 40% reduction in commute-hour traffic after the implementation of a voluntary bus program by the Reed Union School District. Solution: Concentrate on Local Traffic Congestion Issues. Not all congestion issues are a result of California Highway 101 commute traffic. Investigating local road congestion could also have significant benefits. Changing local traffic flow is less expensive than costly new road construction. Example: Mill Valley Traffic and Congestion Reduction Advisory Task Force. In 2015, the City of Mill Valley studied traffic capacity18 with a goal of restoring transit times in the city’s two main arteries – Blithedale Avenue and the Almonte Boulevard/Shoreline Highway – to that of 2012-2013. The study noted a number of projects that contributed to reductions in traffic, including a pilot school bus program (as noted above), staggering of school hours, and retiming of traffic lights at critical intersections. Mill Valley, County and state agencies met, shared traffic data, and quickly resolved jurisdictional issues. 16 “Coordinated Countywide Student Transportation Study.” Marin Transit. Nov. 2015. 17 Krawitt, Carl. “Marin Voice: Tiburon Peninsula school buses are worth the investment.” Marin IJ. 18 Jul. 2016. 18 “Traffic Task Force Subcommittee Meeting - City Concludes Traffic Task Force, Sends Detailed Report to Council.” City of Mill Valley. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 7 of 31 -382- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Barrier: Too Expensive to Build Long heralded for its strong environmental stewardship, Marin County has designated 80% of its land for either open space or agricultural use.19 Because residents did not want to compromise Marin’s natural beauty and small-town character, municipalities have enacted low-density zoning laws. The limited amount of suitable vacant land for housing has caused parcel prices to dramatically increase. Zoning regulations hamper developers, who would normally build more units on such expensive land to maximize their return on investment. While these constraints are particularly severe in the case of developers wishing to build housing that is affordable to low- and moderate-income families, they are significant for any housing construction. Solution: Stimulate Public-Private Partnerships. In 1945, the California Legislature gave local governments the power to form a redevelopment agency (RDA) to revitalize a deteriorated area. While most of this initial funding came from the Federal government, it allowed local governments to issue bonds and attract private investment. In 1952, Proposition 18 established a new financing structure, which allowed local governments to redistribute property tax revenue for the project area. However, it was not until legislation was passed in the late 1970s (Senate Bill 90 and Proposition 13) that RDAs became widespread because of loosened definitions of “deteriorated” and increased funding choices; this in turn caused public-sponsored construction to grow dramatically (which required that 15 percent of all new housing in an RDA be affordable to low- and moderate-income residents). RDAs grew so much in number (and size) that by 2008, they received 12 percent of state property tax revenue, and were putting other government programs in jeopardy.20 By 2012, the RDAs were dissolved, and the successor agencies (usually local governments) were assigned the responsibility of paying off the RDAs’ debt. During their existence, RDAs built over 100,000 units of housing.21 The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) currently gives local governments the ability to issue tax credits to private investors for “the acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction of rental housing targeted to lower-income households.”22 Since 1995, over 107,000 units of low- income housing were created. Example: In 2011, the Dublin (California) Housing Authority, Housing Authority of the County of Alameda (HACA), affordable housing developer Eden Housing, and for-profit homebuilder KB Home were able to revitalize 150 units of old public housing and convert them into a vibrant, mixed-use, mixed-income community (130 affordable family rentals, 50 affordable seniors’ rentals, 184 market-rate homes, and 14 below-market-rate homes). The Urban Land Institute awarded this project the 2014 winner of the “Jack Kemp Excellence in Affordable & Workforce Housing Awards.”23 Example: In 2013, ROEM Development Corporation, the City of Mountain View, Google, and Citi Community Capital built Franklin Street Family Apartments with 51 units for households earning up to 50% of the area’s median income.24 19 “Marin At a Glance 2015 Annual Report.” County of Marin. 20 “Redevelopment Agencies in California: History, Benefits, Excesses, and Closure.” U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development/Office of Policy Development and Research. 21 “Spotlight on Redevelopment.” Seifel Consulting, Inc. 22 “Low-Income Housing Tax Credits.” Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R) U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 15 May 2016. 23 Johnson, Alison. “2014 Jack Kemp Award Winners and Finalists.” Urban Land Institute. 23 Oct. 2014. 24 “Public-Private Partnership Funds Affordable Housing near Transit.” Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R) Edge Magazine. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 8 of 31 -383- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Solution: Junior Accessory Dwelling Units. Effective January 2017, Assembly Bill 229925 and Senate Bill 106926 amended state law to make it easier for homeowners to create legal accessory dwelling unit (ADU) rentals on their property: reducing minimum lot sizes, reducing utility connection fees, and reducing parking requirements. Furthermore, Assembly Bill 240627 established a new type of second unit called a “junior accessory dwelling unit” – created by adding an “efficiency kitchen” (no gas or 220 volt appliance) to an existing underutilized bedroom (maximum 500 square feet). Example: In 2014, Novato City Council adopted Ordinance 1595 amending its zoning code to allow for junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) and reduced their development fee. Based on Novato’s request, local sanitary and water districts eliminated their connection fees for JADUs, and the Novato Fire Marshall waived sprinkler and fire separation requirements. The result saves homeowners wishing to create a JADU over $40,000 in fees.28 In 2016, Novato received applications for and approved two junior accessory dwelling units. In 2017, the Marin Community Foundation awarded Lilypad a $200,000 grant to help homeowners turn spare bedrooms or other spaces into accessory dwelling units.29 Solution: School Districts’ Teacher Housing. California Senator Mark Leno authored the Teacher Housing Act of 2016 (Senate Bill 1413) that was signed into law by Governor Brown on September 27, 2016. This bill provides that “a school district may establish and implement programs that address the housing needs of teachers and school district employees who face challenges in securing affordable housing. To the extent feasible, the school district may establish and implement programs that, among other things, do the following: (a) Leverage federal, state, and local public, private, and nonprofit programs and fiscal resources available to housing developers, (b) Promote public and private partnerships, (c) Foster innovative financing opportunities.”30 Before this bill was passed, taxpayer funds could not be used for restricted (school staff only) housing. The nonprofit and nonpartisan Learning Policy Institute’s report Solving the Teacher Shortage31 agreed that “lack of affordable housing is one reason teachers leave the profession or leave districts with high costs of living.” Because of teacher turnover, school districts have to continually invest in recruitment, since new teachers cannot afford to live in Marin County. Providing subsidized housing for teachers will give school district administration another tool to attract top-quality staff. Example: In 2002, the Santa Clara Unified School District built Casa Del Maestro (“House of the Teacher”) on land it owned (and is now operated and managed by the nonprofit Santa Clara Teacher Housing Foundation) using no taxpayer funds. With a typical monthly rent of $1,500 for a two bedroom unit in the complex (compared to an average market rent of $3,13432), the school district has seen teacher turnover drop to below average.33 25 “AB-2299 Land use: housing: 2nd units. (2015-2016).” California Legislative Information. 26 “SB-1069 Land use: zoning. (2015-2016).” California Legislative Information. 27 “AB-2406 Housing: junior accessory dwelling units. (2015-2016).” California Legislative Information. 28 “Junior Accessory Dwelling Units.” League of California Cities. 29 Mara, Janis. “Lilypad gets grant to help Marin homeowners create in-law units.” Marin IJ. 7 Feb. 2017. 30 “Teacher Housing Act of 2016 [53570 - 53574].” California Legislative Information. 31 “Solving the Teacher Shortage.” Learning Policy Institute. 32 “Rent trend data in Santa Clara, California.” Rent Jungle, Accessed Jan 11, 2017 33 “How one Bay Area school district is making sure teachers aren’t priced out.” KALW Public Radio. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 9 of 31 -384- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Example: Beginning in 2005, the San Mateo Community College District created two housing developments for faculty and staff. “The District is able to build first class, market rate housing and offer below-market rents because 1) it owns the land (land costs do not need to be included in the cost of ownership or operations); 2) it financed the project with a tax-exempt issue; 3) the property is property-tax exempt; and 4) the District does not have a profit motive. Rents from the project are set at a level that is sufficient to pay back all costs of construction, financing, maintenance and operations and fund a long-term capital reserve.”34 Solution: Identify Underutilized Parcels. “Marin County has an abundance of many things: hiking trails, water views and great farm-to-table food. But try buying a vacant lot here and you’ll discover what we lack most. Simply put: We have no lots.”35 California State Law “mandates that local governments adequately plan to meet the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community.”36 This plan is referred to as a Housing Element. Contained in the housing element is a land inventory that includes both vacant and underutilized parcels that may be considered development opportunities. Before a housing element is finalized, the public is invited to comment.37 In Marin, because of fears of showcasing growth opportunities, citizens often request that many vacant and underutilized parcels be removed from the Housing Element’s land inventory. Rather than depend upon a highly politicized process, it would be more transparent for the County to prepare a publicly available and easily obtainable map of all incorporated and unincorporated vacant and underutilized parcels in Marin. Example: As part of the development of the 2012-2035 Portland Plan, the City of Portland, Oregon’s Bureau of Planning & Sustainability released the Development Capacity Analysis geographic information systems (GIS) model.38 The model was used to create the Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI),39 which was used to provide data to address their “big” questions.40 As a result, “permitting continues to exceed production levels, offering an indicator that the city may continue to see growth in the number of new housing units added to the city stock in 2016 and 2017.”41 34 “Staff Housing Development.” San Mateo Community College District. 35 Hilgers, Laura. “Not a Lot of Lots.” Marin Magazine. April 2014. 36 “Housing Elements and Regional Housing Need Allocation.” California Department of Housing and Community Development. 37 “Marin County - List of sites to be evaluated in the SEIR for the 2007-2014 and 2014-2022 Housing Element planning periods.” County of Marin. 38 “Development Capacity Analysis GIS model.” City of Portland. 39 “Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI).” City of Portland. 40 “The Portland Plan.” City of Portland, Oregon. 41 “State of Housing Report in Portland.” Portland Housing Bureau. December 2016. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 10 of 31 -385- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Barrier: Planning Process The planning process in Marin cities and towns is unpredictable and time-consuming. A developer faces different regulations in every municipality. In addition, developers in every city, town, and the unincorporated County face the costs of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that may require extensive environmental reviews as well as time consuming public comment. As stated in a report issued by the McKinsey Global Institute entitled A Tool Kit to Close California’s Housing Gap,42 “the statute has come under scrutiny for enabling any opponent to a project ... to delay or block the project by threatening a lawsuit under CEQA. Generally speaking, if a project opponent files a CEQA lawsuit, the project cannot commence until the litigation is resolved in favor of the government and the project sponsor. This can delay projects by months or years, and adds substantial risk to the entitlement process.” Approvals for new housing can take anywhere from six months to over three years depending upon the complexity of the project and public opposition. Long delays in the approval process can lead to lost opportunities and high costs for land holding, architectural planning, and legal expenses. McKinsey’s report estimates that such costs can account for 30% of the total cost of a housing unit. Solution: Regular Developer Meetings. As mentioned previously in “Barrier: Community Resistance,” arranging regularly scheduled meetings with developers, city or county planning officials, advocacy groups and the general public would better allow all interested parties to offer their input during each stage of the process. Solution: Improved Noticing. Planning departments comply with legal noticing requirements for development projects. However, these notices are often filled with confusing legal terms that the average resident might not understand and instead choose to ignore. Later, when the project has moved to an advanced stage, a resident might hear rumors about the project and become angry that they were not adequately informed. Using plain speak and increasing noticing to a wider radius (than the minimum requirements) would lead to a more informed community much earlier in the process and fewer delays by opposition later. Example: A few examples of municipal planning notices are showcased in Appendix B: Municipal Planning Notices. The Tiburon and Marin County notices are printed with small single-spaced type and filled with legal jargon. From Tiburon’s: “The Planning Division is recommending a Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted for the project pursuant to section 21080 of...” If a resident makes it through the first three paragraphs of the letter without his eyes glazing over, he might discover that written comments on the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study will be accepted until 5:30pm. This type of language makes little sense to ordinary residents outside of planning commission circles. A better example might be the card circulated by Mill Valley that has the meeting date, location, and project contact in bold typeface at the top of the card, followed by a brief description of the project. It concludes with instructions for interested parties on submitting comments, relevant meeting dates and sources for further information. All relevant details are presented in very clear, precise and simple language. Solution: Community Outreach. As previously discussed, developers should reach out to neighbors and other interested parties from the very beginning of the planning process, address concerns and incorporate suggestions whenever possible. By involving the public from the 42 “A Tool Kit To Close California’s Housing Gap: 3.5 Million Homes By 2025.” McKinsey Global Institute. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 11 of 31 -386- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability outset, many objections can be resolved in open dialogue. Meetings should be held as often as necessary until everyone's opinions have been heard. It is difficult to find examples of good community outreach for Marin projects. The same public concerns, however, exist in other Bay Area locations. In Napa, objections are often seen to the construction of new wineries. An example of how to reach out to the community in a positive way is seen in the following: Example: Constructing a new winery in Napa County evokes strong neighborhood reactions. “Questions from neighboring residents, growers and vintners about impacts on groundwater, traffic and rural character in the form of opposing public-hearing comments and letters as well as appeals of approvals have led the county Board of Supervisors over the past several months to call for better analysis of current conditions and community input.”43 In 2016, Beau Vigne Winery did an extensive outreach before its hearing, resulting in “a show of support that the Planning Commission seldom sees in often- contentious winery times.”44 43 Quackenbush, Jeff. “Counties grapple with winery outreach directly to consumers.” North Bay Business Journal. 12 May 2015. 44 Eberling, Barry. “New Napa winery wins planner praise for neighborhood outreach.” Napa Valley Register. 8 Sep. 2016. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 12 of 31 -387- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Barrier: Low-Income Affordable Housing Faces Unique Challenges The current approach to planning low-cost affordable housing in Marin County is fragmented and lacks coordination. Each municipality has its own community development agency (CDA) that is focused on specific goals and priorities identified within its own boundaries. In addition, Marin County has a CDA that serves only the unincorporated areas of Marin. No single agency is tasked with the coordination and facilitation of solutions to housing-related issues that affect the entire region. For example, affordable housing that addresses the needs of the most vulnerable portion of Marin’s population is administered by a combination of the Marin Housing Authority, Marin County Health and Human Services and a wide range of non-profit operators in locations scattered among the County, cities and towns. Section 8 housing vouchers provide federal funding to supplement housing costs for low-income families. The long waiting list for these vouchers is a clear indicator of unmet demand for additional subsidized affordable housing. Individually, each of the municipalities and the County has its own plan to address low-income affordable housing, but these plans have been ineffective at solving the problem. Economic barriers add to the difficulty of constructing new housing and protecting existing low- income housing stock. The cost of buildable property is a major consideration, but in addition, developers face high costs for permits, energy and water hookups, and legal expenses. Complex requirements for environmental review and transportation infrastructure limitations are also complicating factors. Developers are economically motivated to look to areas with fewer restrictions and less uncertainty than in Marin County. Solution: In-Lieu Housing Fee Pooling. Many communities require that developers of multi- unit housing set aside a percentage of units as affordable housing. Of the 12 jurisdictions in Marin (11 incorporated municipalities plus the unincorporated county) 7 allow the payment of housing fees in-lieu of building affordable housing units. These funds are then deposited in an account to be spent to increase the supply of housing (generally to be affordable to low and moderate-income residents). Outside of the City of Novato very little of this money has been expended for affordable housing, and for most of the jurisdictions, the account balances are too low to be useful (for a fund overview, see Appendix C: Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fees). Pooling these funds, with central administration at the County level, would best leverage the power of this money to stimulate the construction of affordable housing. Solution: In-Lieu Housing Fee Recalculation. “The Board of Supervisors concur that the in- lieu fees fail to generate sufficient revenue to support the amount of affordable housing needed in Marin County.”45 The City of San Rafael reported, “our experience shows that accepting fees in lieu of providing units in developments under construction does not result in an increase in the number of affordable units.”46 If the goal of in-lieu housing fees is to stabilize and increase the amount of low-income affordable housing in the County, then there are insufficient in-lieu fund account balances to achieve this. Therefore, either local governments need to either not allow the payment of in-lieu housing fees (so low-income affordable housing is created) or in-lieu fees need to reflect the true cost of developing such housing. Example: In 2016, the City of Pasadena commissioned the Affordable Housing In Lieu Fee Analysis study47 in support of an inclusionary housing ordinance.48 By analyzing the 45 Marin County Board of Supervisors response to 2002-03 “Financing Affordable Housing” Grand Jury report. 16 Sep. 2003. 46 City of San Rafael response to 2002-03 “Financing Affordable Housing” Grand Jury report. 30 Jun. 2003, 47 “Pasadena Affordable Housing In Lieu Fee Analysis.” David Paul Rosen & Associates. 48 “Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.” City of Pasadena. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 13 of 31 -388- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability rental housing affordability gap and predicting likely numbers of new construction, they were able to calculate a truer value for an in-lieu housing fee. Solution: Fast-track Low-income Affordable Housing Applications. Low-income affordable housing developers face many obstacles that add costs to their projects. Giving priority to the processing of their applications through the various planning departments would be an easy way to shorten the timeline to construction and thus reduce cost. Several of Marin’s communities have procedures in place for fast-tracking. The County of Marin proposes to implement fast- tracking for unincorporated areas in 2017. Tiburon gives “highest processing priority” to affordable housing projects, and San Rafael reports that it has some policies in place “that encourage streamlined approaches of projects that qualify as affordable housing.” San Anselmo offers expedited processing for secondary units but not multifamily construction. Other Marin towns and cities do not have such provisions in place. Each of the towns and cities of Marin should implement fast-tracking of affordable housing projects, bringing these projects to the top of the planning review queue. Example: Below-market-rate projects are fast-tracked through the City of Petaluma’s approval process. All processing time limits required by state law are adhered to.49 Solution: Community Outreach. Often community fears of the local impact of low-income affordable housing turn into vocal demonstrations. Contributing to these fears are perceptions of the impact of affordable housing on neighborhoods, for example the belief that affordable housing developments will drive down property values and attract undesirable residents. As noted in our section on planning process above, an aggressive program of involvement of nearby stakeholders should alleviate unsupported fears, and will allow developers and homeowners to work together to ensure that development works to benefit the community. Example: Oma Village. Homeward Bound of Marin has recently opened Oma Village, a development of 14 units in Novato intended for residence by families that are leaving homelessness. Before entering into the planning review process, Homeward Bound contacted nearby residents individually to explain what they hoped to do. By carefully explaining the criteria for approval of applicants, and by making some changes to their architectural drawings to meet neighborhood concerns, they were able to smoothly move through planning review and begin construction of the Village. Solution: Reduce Costs Of Utility Connections. Sewer, water, electricity, and gas connections add significantly to the cost of any new development (see Appendix D: Utility Connection Fee Estimates). Developers of market-rate housing are able to recoup these fees upon successful completion of a profitable project. These fees burden developers that follow a mission to provide low-cost affordable housing. Waiving or reducing connection fees would provide a major incentive to the developers of low-cost affordable housing. Example: The City of Santa Cruz’s (California) municipal code allows for waivers of many development fees if they will assist in providing residential units that are affordable to low and very-low income households.50 The fees eligible for waivers include: sewer and water connection fees, planning application and plan-check fees, building permit and plan-check fees, park land and open space dedication in-lieu fees, and fire fees. 49 “Housing Element 2015-2023.” City of Petaluma. 50 “Chapter 24.16 Affordable Housing Provisions.” Santa Cruz Municipal Code. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 14 of 31 -389- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Barrier: Myths & Perceptions “The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth – persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the clichés of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” – John F. Kennedy Perhaps the most challenging barrier to tackle is that of altering long held misperceptions of a community. These beliefs are deeply entrenched and in many cases are based on myths. We collected a sampling of oft-repeated refrains from community meetings and the media and analyzed them for accuracy. We researched these issues to see if they had any merit (see Appendix E: Marin Housing Perceptions). Solution: Education. Myths that continue to circulate in the community eventually become embedded in the belief system when they are continually repeated as if they were facts. Psychologists understand that to overcome misinformation, three psychological effects need to be considered: familiarity effect (emphasize the facts, not the myth), overkill backfire effect (simplify the message), and the worldview backfire effect (don’t argue, reframe the message).51 Leadership must take a stance in public support of facts, using properly considered psychology, rather than reacting solely to community-wide fears. Example: As a counterpoint to active NIMBY groups, YIMBY (yes in my backyard) activism and education has been spreading worldwide. YIMBYs are “generally younger than their opponents, mainly renters, many of them employed in the tech industry, they were driven to activism after they found themselves unable even to rent in San Francisco or Berkeley or Oakland, let alone buy.”52 Solution: Deliberative Polling® was created in 1988 by Professor James Fishkin of Stanford University. “Citizens are often uninformed about key public issues. Conventional polls represent the public's surface impressions of sound bites and headlines. The public, subject to what social scientists have called "rational ignorance," has little reason to confront tradeoffs or invest time and effort in acquiring information or coming to a considered judgment.”53 The Deliberative Polling® process involves bringing together a sample of an affected population, sharing balanced briefing materials, and then having a dialogue with competing experts and political leaders. Housing affordability has been a “hot topic” in Marin County for years. Former Supervisor Susan Adams “faced an unsuccessful recall effort in part due to her support for developing affordable housing at Marinwood”54 and was voted out of office in 2014. From October 2015 to February 2016, the Board of Supervisors convened a series of Preserving Housing Affordability public workshops.55 The Marin IJ wrote: “All but conceding that the drive to provide adequate affordable housing in Marin has been a failure, county officials are shifting gears, hoping that an aggressive strategy aimed at saving the housing that does exist while considering initiatives to slow soaring rents will bear fruit.”56 As former Supervisor Steve Kinsey stated, “We’re becoming a rich, white, old community, and yet California is becoming a much more 51 Cook, John and Lewandowsky, Stephan. “The Debunking Handbook.” Skeptical Science. 23 Jan. 2012. 52 Lucas, Scott. “The YIMBYs Next Door.” San Francisco Magazine. 30 Nov. 2016. 53 “What is Deliberative Polling®?” Center for Deliberative Democracy, Stanford University. 54 Halstead, Richard. “Bill to ease pressure on Marin to build more housing moves forward.” Marin IJ. 20 May 2014. 55 “Affordable Housing.” Marin County Community Development Agency. 56 Johnson, Nels. “Marin County officials: Rent control among strategies to preserve affordable housing.” Marin IJ. 11 Oct. 2015. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 15 of 31 -390- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability demographically diverse community, so there is a conflict there that has to be addressed.”57 While protecting the affordable housing status quo is a good goal, it is not enough. Example: In March 2008, 238 scientifically randomly selected San Mateo County residents gathered for a weekend at Threshold 2008’s Countywide Assembly on Housing Choices. Commonly held housing beliefs changed as a result of this process:58 Agree Agree Housing Poll Question Before After There is a need for more housing in the County 38% 68% Any new housing should be located in already developed areas 61% 72% New housing developments would be good for the environment 33% 44% The County’s vital services like education, fire, police and health would 46% 68% suffer if there continues to be a shortage of affordable housing 57 Halstead, Richard. “Marin Supervisor Kinsey reflects on 20-year career.” Marin IJ. 1 Jan. 2017. 58 Greenway, Greg and Fishkin, James. “Results of the San Mateo Countywide Assembly on Housing Choices.” Center for Deliberative Democracy, Stanford University. March 2008. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 16 of 31 -391- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability Introducing: The Regional Housing Coordinator The Grand Jury believes that a number of the previous solutions (community outreach, in-lieu housing fee pooling, in-lieu fees to stimulation public-private partnerships, education, and case studies) could best be served through the creation of a County Regional Housing Coordinator. The coordinator would: ■ Commission a study to quantify the demand for new housing units. ■ Work with funding sources and developers ■ Work with cities, towns and the County to develop Specific Plans ■ Identify underutilized parcels ■ Explore opportunities for public-private partnerships ■ Create a County-wide Civic mediation program for all civic project community dialogues ■ Conduct Deliberative Polling® to build the public voice on housing choices ■ Coordinate and analyze in-lieu housing fee usage While each municipality would maintain local planning control, the Regional Housing Coordinator would ensure that County-wide issues such as subsidized housing, civic development, and funding would be a shared resource. Regional housing coordinators are found in other states, including: ■ Nevada (Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority) ■ North Carolina (The Arc of North Carolina) ■ Pennsylvania (Self-Determination Housing Project of Pennsylvania, Inc.) Ironically, the June 2003 Marin County Grand Jury report (Financing Affordable Housing: Local In-Lieu Fees And Set-Aside Funds) recommendations included: ■ The Board of Supervisors and the cities and towns should establish an appropriate mechanism for the coordination of all affordable housing activities in the County. ■ The Board of Supervisors should support and cooperate with the various nonprofit housing agencies and developers within the County by including them in the implementation of the countywide housing programs. In their September 16, 2003 response to the June 2003 Report, the Marin County Board of Supervisors wrote: “Marin County, the Marin Community Foundation and the Major Employers of Marin are working collaboratively to develop a countywide housing trust fund. Each entity will be contributing cash and in-kind services to match funds established by the state for housing trusts. The goal is to generate six million dollars over the next five years to be used for affordable housing. All the cities and towns will be invited to participate in the Marin Workforce Housing Trust Fund. Their contribution will be matched dollar for dollar, which is a substantial incentive. The Community Development Agency will begin to engage the Countywide Planning Agency that represents all the cities, towns and the County, to develop an effective strategic approach to address the housing needs of Marin County.” April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 17 of 31 -392- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability The Marin Workforce Housing Trust (MWHT) was established in 2003 as a “public-private collaboration between various local businesses, the Marin Community Foundation and the County of Marin to support and encourage the development of affordable workforce housing throughout Marin County.”59 Over the years, the MWHT issued a pre-development loan of $283,210 to Eden Housing (for the construction of Warner Creek Senior Housing in Novato) and $231,593 to EAH Housing (for the construction of Shelter Hill in Mill Valley). Because of difficulties finding other loan recipients, in 2010 the business community pulled out. By 2014, the Marin Community Foundation also stopped participating. In 2016, the Marin Workforce Housing Trust decided to cease operations (“The purpose of the Trust was to use funds raised for loans to support workforce housing. While this is a worthy and important endeavor, there is not enough affordable housing development in Marin County for a standalone organization to be 60 feasible” ), and transfer its funds into Marin County's Affordable Housing Trust Fund. While the Grand Jury applauds the establishment of the Marin Workforce Housing Trust, it is clear that simply offering affordable housing funds to low-income affordable housing developers will not improve the situation. During our investigation, we heard repeatedly from both nonprofits and funding sources that the challenge to building low-income and middle-income affordable housing isn’t identifying funding sources, it is overcoming local political and community resistance. That is why we suggest that the role of the regional housing coordinator must be financial (work with funding sources and coordinate in-lieu housing fee usage), research (identify underutilized parcels), and political (civic mediation and public polling). Unlike the June 2003 Report recommendations, the housing coordinator would not only focus on low-income affordable housing, but housing that is affordable for people who currently live and work in Marin. 59 “Transfer of Marin Workforce Housing Trust Assets to the County's Affordable Housing Trust.” County of Marin. 15 Nov. 2016. 60 Ibid. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 18 of 31 -393- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability CONCLUSION The Marin County Civil Grand Jury believes, based on success in the Bay Area and nationwide, that many of the barriers that challenge housing affordability can be overcome using solutions detailed in our Discussion: ■ Community Outreach ■ Concentrate on Local Traffic Congestion Issues ■ Deliberative Polling® ■ Education ■ Fast-track Low-income Affordable Housing Applications ■ Identify Underutilized Parcels ■ Improved Noticing ■ In-Lieu Housing Fee Recalculation ■ In-Lieu Housing Fees Pooling ■ Junior Accessory Dwelling Units ■ Reduce Commute Hours Traffic ■ Reduce Costs Of Utility Connections ■ Regular Developer Meetings ■ School Districts’ Teacher Housing ■ Specific Plans ■ Stimulate Public-Private Partnerships The Grand Jury is under no illusion that implementing these solutions will magically transform our housing affordability situation overnight. Some of these solutions may not work well in Marin. Some of these solutions require a combination of new policies and new skills. Nevertheless, we suggest that it is time to establish agreed-upon baseline metrics for housing affordability, perform tests of these solutions, re-measure these efforts against the baseline, and fine-tune the solutions to optimize results. Implementing these solutions require public agencies and officials to change “business as usual.” Approaching tough issues (such as housing) with the question “What do we want our County to become?” (rather than “What don’t we want?”), we believe our leaders will be able to guide our citizens more comprehensively and efficiently. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 19 of 31 -394- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability FINDINGS F1. Political will for the construction of new housing is constrained by County-wide vocal citizen opposition. F2. The costs of land and development make it too expensive to build low-income affordable housing in Marin. F3. Developers routinely respond that they do not try to build housing in Marin because of the difficulties imposed by the local regulatory requirements and citizen complaints. F4. Responsibility for housing in Marin is fragmented with little overall coordination among different agencies in the County as well as the Cities and Towns. F5. Active planning for the creation of low-income affordable housing does not occur within our cities, towns, and the County. F6. Over 60,000 people commute each day to jobs in Marin, many living outside the County. F7. Proposals to build low-income affordable housing create immediate neighbor opposition. Efforts to mediate with neighborhood groups are often too late in the process and have been ineffective. RECOMMENDATIONS R1. Each planning department should begin regularly scheduled meetings at which developers can speak, early in the process, with all relevant members of staff to discuss impacts of proposed development and potential solutions to problems. R2. Each planning department should develop a proactive community outreach strategy for any project that might be considered potentially controversial (including going beyond legal noticing minimums and initiating outreach efforts as early as possible in the development cycle). R3. Each planning department should use succinct “plain-speak” to convey issues in their outreach. R4. Each school district should investigate building teacher and staff workforce housing on their land. R5. Each utility district should adopt waivers for hook-up fees for low-income housing projects and accessory dwelling units. R6. Each jurisdiction should adopt procedures so that low-income housing projects are fast- tracked through the planning and permitting process. R7. The County should create and fund the position of Regional Housing Coordinator. The Coordinator's responsibilities should include: working with funding sources and developers, identifying underutilized properties, working with jurisdictions to create specific plans, and creating a County-wide Civic mediation program for all civic project community dialogues. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 20 of 31 -395- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability REQUEST FOR RESPONSES Pursuant to Penal Code section 933.05, the grand jury requests responses as follows: From the following governing bodies: ■ Almonte Sanitary District (R5) ■ Alto Sanitary District (R5) ■ Bolinas Community Public Utility District (R5) ■ Bolinas-Stinson Union School District (R4) ■ City of Belvedere (R1, R2, R3, R6) ■ City of Larkspur (R1, R2, R3, R6) ■ City of Mill Valley (R1, R2, R3, R5, R6) ■ City of Novato (R1, R2, R3, R6) ■ City of San Rafael (R1, R2, R3, R6) ■ City of Sausalito (R1, R2, R3, R6) ■ Corte Madera Sanitary District No 2 (R5) ■ County of Marin (R1, R2, R3, R6, R7) ■ Dixie School District (R4) ■ Homestead Valley Sanitary District (R5) ■ Inverness Public Utility District (R5) ■ Kentfield School District (R4) ■ Laguna Joint School District (R4) ■ Lagunitas School District (R4) ■ Larkspur-Corte Madera School District (R4) ■ Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District (R5) ■ Lincoln School District (R4) ■ Marin Community College District (R4) ■ Marin County Office of Education (R4) ■ Marin Municipal Water District (R5) ■ Mill Valley School District (R4) ■ Nicasio School District (R4) ■ North Marin Water District (R5) ■ Novato Sanitary District (R5) ■ Novato Unified School District (R4) ■ Reed Union School District (R4) ■ Richardson Bay Sanitary District (R5) ■ Ross School District (R4) ■ Ross Valley School District (R4) ■ San Quentin Village Sewer Maintenance District (R5) ■ San Rafael City Schools (R4) ■ San Rafael Sanitation District (R5) ■ Sausalito - Marin City Sanitary District (R5) ■ Sausalito Marin City School District (R4) ■ Shoreline Unified School District (R4) ■ Sewerage Agency of Southern Marin (R5) ■ Stinson Beach County Water District (R5) ■ Tamalpais Community Service District (R5) ■ Tamalpais Union High School District (R4) ■ Tiburon Sanitary District #5 (R5) April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 21 of 31 -396- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability ■ Tomales Village Community Services District (R5) ■ Town of Corte Madera (R1, R2, R3, R6) ■ Town of Fairfax (R1, R2, R3, R6) ■ Town of Ross (R1, R2, R3, R6) ■ Town of San Anselmo (R1, R2, R3, R6) ■ Town of Tiburon (R1, R2, R3) ■ Union Joint School District (R4) The governing bodies indicated above should be aware that the comment or response of the governing body must be conducted in accordance with Penal Code section 933 (c) and subject to the notice, agenda and open meeting requirements of the Brown Act. Note: At the time this report was prepared information was available at the websites listed. Reports issued by the Civil Grand Jury do not identify individuals interviewed. Penal Code Section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Civil Grand Jury. The California State Legislature has stated that it intends the provisions of Penal Code Section 929 prohibiting disclosure of witness identities to encourage full candor in testimony in Grand Jury investigations by protecting the privacy and confidentiality of those who participate in any Civil Grand Jury investigation. This report was issued by the Grand Jury with the exception of a juror who was a former elected official in a named municipality. This grand juror was excluded from all parts of the investigation, including interviews, deliberations, and the writing and approval of this report. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 22 of 31 -397- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability GLOSSARY ADU: Accessory Dwelling Unit – A new dwelling unit added entirely within an existing building or an existing authorized auxiliary structure in areas where residential use is allowed. Affordable Housing: Housing subsidized by the government and available for occupancy by households that meet income thresholds specified by HUD. CDA: Community Development Agency – coordinates planning, building, and environmental health departments within unincorporated areas in Marin County. CEQA: California Environmental Quality Act – A statute that requires state and local agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions and to avoid or mitigate those impacts, if feasible. Enacted 1970. Fast-tracking: Prioritizing and expediting the review process by a Planning Commission. Housing Affordability: The measure of whether a typical household can afford to purchase or rent a typical home. Housing Element: A law enacted in 1969 requiring local governments to create comprehensive long-term plans to address projected future housing needs in a community. HUD: U.S. Department of Housing and Development In Lieu Housing Fees: A fee paid by developers to local government in lieu of incorporating mandated affordable housing into a project. These funds are intended to be used by the government agency to support other low-income housing projects. JADU: Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit MHA: Marin Housing Authority – A public-private agency overseen by a governing board including private tenants and members of the Board of Supervisors to promote affordable housing in Marin. NIMBY: “Not in my backyard” PDA: Priority Development Area Plain Speak: Using simple, direct language in place of confusing legal jargon. Plan Bay Area: Contains strategies for meeting the anticipated demand for transportation, housing, and land use in local Priority Development Areas (PDAs) through 2040. RDA: Redevelopment Agency – Program created in 1945 by the California Legislature to allow local governments to revitalize deteriorated areas. Over 100,000 housing units were created by RDAs before the end of the program in 2012. Specific Plan: A comprehensive planning and zoning document for a defined geographic region. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 23 of 31 -398- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability APPENDIX A: Facility Siting The issue of where to place a civic project has been well-studied for over 40 years and referred to as “Facility Siting.” The process for siting a project can be: regulatory, market, or voluntary.61 A regulatory process imposes a project on a community through legal actions (such as eminent domain). With a market process, incentives to the community are offered as conditions of project approval. A voluntary process involves significant community dialogue, collaboration, and negotiation. The MIT-Harvard Public Disputes Program has found that the voluntary process of “mediation, when used properly, produces fairer outcomes, more efficient results, and more stable political commitments, as well as wiser use of the best scientific and technical information available.”62 The well-tested Facility Siting Credo63 details the various objectives that should be considered in a voluntary process: ■ Institute a broad participatory process ■ Achieve agreement that the status quo unacceptable ■ Seek consensus ■ Work to develop trust ■ Choose the solution that best addresses the problem ■ Guarantee that stringent safety measures will be met ■ Fully address all negative aspects of the facility ■ Make the host community better off ■ Use contingent agreements ■ Seek acceptable sites through a volunteer process ■ Consider a competitive siting process ■ Work for geographic fairness ■ Set realistic timetables ■ Keep multiple options open at all times As elected officials understand, it is important to be “people-focused” (actively listening to all constituent needs) – or else they won’t be re-elected. Contractors or municipality staff members, who are responsible for achieving their milestones, tend to be much more “problem-focused.” The Facility Siting Credo balances both “problem-focused” and “people-focused” needs to arrive at solutions that are “win-win” instead of “win-lose.” 61 Lesbirel, S. Hayden and Shaw, Daigee. “Facility Siting: Issues and Perspectives.” Columbia Earthscape. 62 MIT-Harvard Public Disputes Program. 63 Susskind , Lawrence. "The Facility Siting Credo.” Negotiation Journal, Volume VI, Issue 4, October 1990, pp. 309-314 April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 24 of 31 -399- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability APPENDIX B: Municipal Planning Notices The following are recent examples of planning committee hearing notices that have been sent to nearby homeowners and business owners: April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 25 of 31 -400- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability APPENDIX B: Municipal Planning Notices (cont’d) April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 26 of 31 -401- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability APPENDIX B: Municipal Planning Notices (cont’d) The following is an example of a “plain speak” formal notice: April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 27 of 31 -402- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability APPENDIX C: Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fees Many communities require developers of multi-unit housing to set aside a percentage of new units as affordable housing. Instead of building affordable housing units, some of these municipalities allow the payment of fees in-lieu. Has In-Lieu In-Lieu Fund Account In-Lieu Fund Municipality Fees? Balance (FY2016) 5-Year Expenditures Belvedere NO N/A N/A Corte Madera YES $165,391 None Fairfax NO N/A N/A Larkspur YES $34,380 Marin Housing Authority for administering 39 deed-restricted units Mill Valley YES $123,895 None Novato YES Cash: $497,232 $400,000 loan to Homeward Bound Assets: $2,397,232 for Oma Village transitional housing (14 extremely-low-income family units) Ross NO N/A N/A Sausalito NO N/A N/A San Anselmo NO N/A N/A San Rafael YES $1,107,422 $40,000 to Marin Housing Authority for BMR Rental Project Contract Payment; some loans to the MHA Tiburon YES $1,224,780 Homeward Bound: $5,000 MHA: $76,327 Legal Aide: $47,531 Community Homeless Pgm (REST): $12,425 County YES $5,774,727 Staff time: $879,123 Of Contracts: $94,922 Marin Loans: $983,000 Grants: $375,000 April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 28 of 31 -403- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability APPENDIX D: Utility Connection Fee Estimates To better understand costs that developers incur, the Grand Jury surveyed agencies to get an estimate of what it would cost for a service connection for: a new multi-family home (6 units) – both market rate and affordable (low-income subsidized), an accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and a junior accessory dwelling unit (JADU). 6 6 1 1 Jr. Agency Market Affordable Accessory Accessory Rate Units Rate Units Dwell Unit Dwell Unit Almonte Sanitary District $24,000 $24,000 $1,600 $0 Alto Sanitary District $25,672 $25,672 $4,450 $0 Bolinas Community Public Utility District (BCPUD) N/A64 N/A $0 $0 Central Marin Sanitation Agency (CMSA) $33,992 Member %65 $354 $0 City of Mill Valley $30,000 $30,000 $0 $0 Corte Madera Sanitary District No 2 $46,610 $46,610 $7,768 $0 Homestead Valley Sanitary District $7,800 $7,800 $1,600 $0 Inverness Public Utility District $5,800 $5,800 $5,800 $0 Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District $34,566 $34,566 $5,184 $0 Marin Municipal Water District $56,000 $32,200 $13,532 $0 North Marin Water District $67,200 $67,200 $10,000 $0 Novato Sanitary District $65,160 $65,160 $10,860 $0 Richardson Bay Sanitary District $9,769 $9,769 $1,242 $0 Ross Valley Sanitary District (RVSD) $68,557 $066 $11,426 $0 San Quentin Village Sewer Maintenance District $38,988 $38,988 $6,498 $0 San Rafael Sanitation District $20,566 $20,566 $1,424 $0 Sausalito - Marin City Sanitary District $36,780 $36,780 $6,130 $0 Sewer $7,000 Sewer $7,000 Sewer $0 Stinson Beach County Water District Negotiated Water $17,500 Water $17,500 Water $0 Tamalpais Community Service District $27,081 $27,081 $4,581 $0 Belvedere $99,684 $99,684 $16,614 $0 Tiburon Sanitary District #5 Paradise Cove $33,072 $33,072 $5,512 $0 Tiburon $71,916 $71,916 $11,986 $0 Tomales Village Community Services District $4,600 $4,600 $4,600 $0 64 BCPUD has moratoria in place on any new service connections to both their water system and sewer system. 65 CMSA Ordinance 2013-2: “Those residential construction projects which a Member Agency designates and determines are qualified for reduced local sewer connection fees shall also automatically qualify for a reduced regional capacity charge. However, the Agency's regional capacity charge shall be reduced only by the same proportionate amount as the Member Agency's fee.” 66 RVSD Ordinance 64, Section 29: “On adoption of a resolution by the Board, the District may make an exemption of Connection Fees for low and moderate income or senior citizen housing that is available to the general public operated by a non- profit corporation or by a government agency.” April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 29 of 31 -404- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability APPENDIX E: Marin Housing Perceptions Increased housing issues are being forced upon Marin County FACT: All housing issues are under local government control. Established in 2008, the Sustainable Communities Act’s (Senate Bill 375) goal was to target greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from passenger vehicles. To achieve that, each of California’s regional planning agencies must develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy that “contains land use, housing, and transportation strategies that, if implemented, would allow the region to meet its GHG emission reduction targets.”67 In 2013, our local regional planning agencies, Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), jointly approved Plan Bay Area68 to satisfy the Sustainable Communities Act. Plan Bay Area contains strategies for meeting the anticipated demand for transportation, housing, and land use in local Priority Development Areas (PDAs). Municipalities that approve PDAs are awarded with transportation grant funds and cannot be legally forced to approve the housing allocations for the PDAs. Marin County has insufficient resources for an increased population FACTS: ✓ Fire - With improved technology and improved fire agency cooperation, fire staffing has decreased in recent years while still providing excess capacity. With more people, the 9-1-1 demands for EMS and fire will likely increase, and response times may suffer (without additional staffing). ✓ Hospitals - The long term national trend is a decreased inpatient hospital demand.69 If the increased population were mostly younger and agile, then demand for inpatient services would be considerably less than an increased older population with pre-existing conditions. Both (the new) Marin General Hospital and Novato Community Hospital have excess capacity to adapt to at least a 20% increase in population. ✓ Open Space - Marin County open spaces and parks receive approximately 6 million total visitors per year. The County’s active land management goals are to encourage visitation and recreation while balancing the physical infrastructure, programing and communications to ensure that both facilities and recreation have minimal impacts on ecosystems, neighbors and visitor experience. ✓ Police - Given the level of crime in Marin, adding 10-15% to the population would not likely have a major impact on the ability of the police force to suppress or investigate criminal behavior. Additional population would likely necessitate a change in staffing levels. ✓ Schools - Many Marin County public schools have demographic study updates in which consultants attempt to project future district size to plan accordingly for the future. For 2016- 2017 school year, Marin County public schools have an enrollment of 38,941. Kentfield School District has a capacity of 1,560 students and a current enrollment of 1,246 (utilization factor of 79.9%). By 2020 the projected utilization factor will be 89.6%. As of 2013, Larkspur-Corte Madera School had enrollment of 1,462 students and project by 2023 an enrollment of 1,593. As of 2016, Dixie School District had 2,005 students enrolled and projected to grow to 2,089 by 2025. 67 “Sustainable Communities.” California Environmental Protection Agency. 68 “Plan Bay Area.” Plan Bay Area 2040. 69 Evans, Melanie, “Inpatient services fall at hospitals as ACA expands insurance.” Modern Healthcare. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 30 of 31 -405- Overcoming Barriers to Housing Affordability APPENDIX E: Marin Housing Perceptions (cont’d) Marin County has insufficient resources for an increased population (cont’d) ✓ Sewers - Central Marin Sanitation Agency (CMSA) (serving 120,000 customers in Corte Madera, Larkspur, Ross Valley, and San Rafael) has capacity to treat over 125 MGD (million gallons of water/day). Normal use is 7-12 MGD, and during storms, peak rainwater incursion temporarily has increased to 116 MGD. Additional population (with better sewer laterals) would not overflow the system. On a smaller scale for example, Sewerage Agency of Southern Marin (SASM) normally processes 2.3MGD, with peak storm processing of 30-32 MGD. SASM’s total processing of 32.7MGD (with an additional 3.2MG equalization basins) would likewise not cause system overflow problems with increased population in the SASM service area. ✓ Water - Water Districts are state mandated to produce a Urban Water Management Plan every five years to confirm that water supply will be available to meet projected water demand considering the population and jobs projections of local or regional land use planning agencies. Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) has capacity to handle over 210,000 customers (currently 189,000 customers) with an assumption of three consecutive dry years. North Marin Water District (NMWD) has 20,535 customers and has capacity to handle over 67,482 customers. Both MMWD and NMWD have plans in place for customer outreach and water conservation projects that can be expanded in an effort to extend the time when the water district may need to increase capacity or importation. April 6, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 31 of 31 -406- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Office of the Superintendent Date: May 23, 2017 To: Board of Trustees From: Valerie Pitts, Superintendent Re: Discussion: Policies Review: BP and AR 5141.52 – Suicide Prevention BB 9100 – Organization BB 9110 – Terms of Office BB 9124 – Attorney BB 9130 – Board Committees BB 9140 – Board Representatives BB 9200 – Limits of Board Member Authority BB 9220 – Governing Board Elections BB 9222 – Resignation Background Trustees review selected policies monthly or bimonthly. In addition, as the California School Boards Association (CSBA) and/or other agencies recommend new policies or changes to existing ones, they are referred to the Trustees for review, discussion, and approval. Financial Impact None. Recommendation The Superintendent recommends Trustees review the above Board Policies and Administrative Regulations for approval on the Consent Calendar at the next regular board meeting. Backup attached: Yes √ No Item No. 10 -407- Students BP 5141.52 SUICIDE PREVENTION The Board of Trustees recognizes that suicide is a leading cause of death among youth and that school personnel who regularly interact with students are often in a position to recognize the warning signs of suicide and to offer appropriate referral and/or assistance. To attempt to reduce suicidal behavior and its impact on students and families, the Superintendent or designee shall develop measures and strategies for suicide prevention, intervention, and postvention. In developing measures and strategies for use by the district, the Superintendent or designee may consult with school health professionals, school counselors, school psychologists, school social workers, administrators, other staff, parents/guardians, students, local health agencies, mental health professionals, and community organizations. Such measures and strategies shall include, but are not limited to: 1. Staff development on suicide awareness and prevention for teachers, school counselors, and other district employees who interact with students in the secondary grades 2. Instruction to students in grades 7 or 8 in problem-solving and coping skills to promote students' mental, emotional, and social health and well-being, as well as instruction in recognizing and appropriately responding to warning signs of suicidal intent in others 3. Methods for promoting a positive school climate that enhances students' feelings of connectedness with the school and that is characterized by caring staff and harmonious interrelationships among students 4. The provision of information to parents/guardians regarding risk factors and warning signs of suicide, the severity of the youth suicide problem, the district's suicide prevention curriculum, basic steps for helping suicidal youth, and/or school and community resources that can help youth in crisis 5. Encouragement for students to notify appropriate school personnel or other adults when they are experiencing thoughts of suicide or when they suspect or have knowledge of another student's suicidal intentions 6. Crisis intervention procedures for addressing suicide threats or attempts 7. Counseling and other postvention strategies for helping students, staff, and others cope in the aftermath of a student's suicide As appropriate, these measures and strategies shall specifically address the needs of students who are at high risk of suicide, including, but not limited to, students who are bereaved by suicide; students with disabilities, mental illness, or substance use disorders; students who are experiencing homelessness or who are in out-of-home settings such as foster care; and students who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or questioning youth. (Education Code 215) Policy adopted: LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Larkspur, California -408- Students AR 5141.52(a) SUICIDE PREVENTION Staff Development Suicide prevention training shall be provided to teachers, counselors, and other district employees who interact with students at the secondary level. The training shall be offered under the direction of a district counselor/psychologist and/or in cooperation with one or more community mental health agencies. Materials for training shall include how to identify appropriate mental health services at the school site and within the community, and when and how to refer youth and their families to those services. Materials also may include programs that can be completed through self-review of suitable suicide prevention materials. (Education Code 215) Staff development shall include research and information related to the following topics: 1. The higher risk of suicide among certain groups, including, but not limited to, students who are bereaved by suicide; students with disabilities, mental illness, or substance use disorders; students who are experiencing homelessness or who are in out-of-home settings such as foster care; and students who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or questioning youth 2. Individual risk factors such as previous suicide attempt(s) or self-harm, history of depression or mental illness, family history of suicide or violence, feelings of isolation, interpersonal conflicts, a recent severe stressor or loss, family instability, impulsivity, and other factors 3. Warning signs that may indicate depression, emotional distress, or suicidal intentions, such as changes in students' personality or behavior and verbalizations of hopelessness or suicidal intent 4. Protective factors that may help to decrease a person's suicide risk, such as resiliency, problem-solving ability, access to mental health care, and positive connections to family, peers, school, and community 5. Instructional strategies for teaching the suicide prevention curriculum and promoting mental and emotional health 6. School and community resources and services, including resources and services that meet the specific needs of high-risk groups 7. District procedures for intervening when a student attempts, threatens, or discloses the desire to die by suicide Instruction The district's comprehensive health education program shall promote the healthy mental, emotional, and social development of students and shall be aligned with the state content standards and curriculum framework. Suicide prevention instruction shall be incorporated into the health education curriculum at appropriate secondary grades and shall be designed to help students: -409- SUICIDE PREVENTION AR 5141.52(b) 1. Identify and analyze signs of depression and self-destructive behaviors and understand how feelings of depression, loss, isolation, inadequacy, and anxiety can lead to thoughts of suicide 2. Develop coping and resiliency skills and self-esteem 3. Learn to listen, be honest, share feelings, and get help when communicating with friends who show signs of suicidal intent 4. Identify trusted adults, school resources, and/or community crisis intervention resources where youth can get help and recognize that there is no stigma associated with seeking services for mental health, substance abuse, and/or suicide prevention Intervention Students shall be encouraged to notify a teacher, principal, counselor, or other adult when they are experiencing thoughts of suicide or when they suspect or have knowledge of another student's suicidal intentions. Every statement regarding suicidal intent shall be taken seriously. Whenever a staff member suspects or has knowledge of a student's suicidal intentions based on the student's verbalizations or act of self-harm, he/she shall promptly notify the principal or school counselor. Although any personal information that a student discloses to a school counselor shall generally not be revealed, released, referenced, or discussed with third parties, the counselor may report to the principal or student's parents/guardians when he/she has reasonable cause to believe that disclosure is necessary to avert a clear and present danger to the health, safety, or welfare of the student. In addition, the counselor may disclose information of a personal nature to psychotherapists, other health care providers, or the school nurse for the sole purpose of referring the student for treatment. (Education Code 49602) A school employee shall act only within the authorization and scope of his/her credential or license. An employee is not authorized to diagnose or treat mental illness unless he/she is specifically licensed and employed to do so. (Education Code 215) Whenever schools establish a peer counseling system to provide support for students, peer counselors shall receive training that includes identification of the warning signs of suicidal behavior and referral of a suicidal student to appropriate adults. When a suicide attempt or threat is reported, the principal or designee shall ensure student safety by taking the following actions: 1. Immediately securing medical treatment and/or mental health services as necessary 2. Notifying law enforcement and/or other emergency assistance if a suicidal act is being actively threatened 3. Keeping the student under continuous adult supervision until the parent/guardian and/or appropriate support agent or agency can be contacted and has the opportunity to intervene -410- SUICIDE PREVENTION AR 5141.52(c) 4. Removing other students from the immediate area as soon as possible The principal or designee shall document the incident in writing, including the steps that the school took in response to the suicide attempt or threat. The Superintendent or designee shall follow up with the parent/guardian and student in a timely manner to provide referrals to appropriate services as needed. If the parent/guardian does not access treatment for the student, the Superintendent or designee may meet with the parent/guardian to identify barriers to treatment and assist the family in providing follow-up care for the student. If follow-up care is still not provided, the Superintendent or designee shall consider whether he/she is required, pursuant to laws for mandated reporters of child neglect, to refer the matter to the local child protective services agency. For any student returning to school after a mental health crisis, the principal or designee and/or school counselor may meet with the parents/guardians and, if appropriate, with the student to discuss re-entry and appropriate next steps to ensure the student's readiness for return to school. Postvention In the event that a student dies by suicide, the Superintendent or designee shall communicate with the student's parents/guardians to offer condolences, assistance, and resources. In accordance with the laws governing confidentiality of student record information, the Superintendent or designee shall consult with the parents/guardians regarding facts that may be divulged to other students, parents/guardians, and staff. The Superintendent or designee shall implement procedures to address students' and staff's grief and to minimize the risk of imitative suicide or suicide contagion. He/she shall provide students, parents/guardians, and staff with information, counseling, and/or referrals to community agencies as needed. School staff may receive assistance from school counselors or other mental health professionals in determining how best to discuss the suicide or attempted suicide with students. Any response to media inquiries shall be handled by the district-designated spokesperson who shall not divulge confidential information. The district's response shall not sensationalize suicide and shall focus on the district's postvention plan and available resources. After any suicide or attempted suicide by a student, the Superintendent or designee shall provide an opportunity for all staff who responded to the incident to debrief, evaluate the effectiveness of the strategies used, and make recommendations for future actions. Regulation adopted: LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Larkspur, California -411- Board Bylaw BB 9100 ORGANIZATION Each year, the Board of Trustees shall hold an annual organizational meeting. In any year in which a regular election of district Board members is conducted, the organizational meeting shall be held within a 15-day period beginning from the date upon which a Board member elected at that election takes office. During non-election years, the meeting shall be held within the same 15-day period on the calendar. (Education Code 35143) The day and time of the annual meeting shall be selected by the Board at its regular meeting held immediately prior to the first day of the 15-day period. On behalf of the Board, the Superintendent shall notify the County Superintendent of Schools of the day and time selected. Within 15 days prior to the date of the annual meeting, the clerk of the Board, with the assistance of the Superintendent, shall notify in writing all Board members and members-elect of the date and time selected for the meeting. (Education Code 35143) At this meeting the Board shall: 1. Elect a president and a clerk and/or vice president from its members 2. Authorize signatures 3. Designate Board representatives to serve on committees or commissions of the district, other public agencies, or organizations with which the district partners or collaborates Election of Officers The Board shall each year elect its entire slate of officers. The election of Board officers shall be conducted during an open session of the annual organizational meeting. Policy adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy reviewed: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -412- Board Bylaw BB 9110 TERMS OF OFFICE The Board of Trustees shall consist of five (5) members whose terms shall be staggered so that as nearly as practicable, one half of the members shall be elected in each even-numbered year. The term of office for members elected in regular elections shall be four years, commencing on the first Friday in December next succeeding their election. (Education Code 5017) Board member terms expire four years after their initial election on the first Friday in December following the election of new members. (Education Code 5000) A member whose term has expired shall continue to discharge the duties of the office until his/her successor has qualified by taking the oath of office. (Government Code 1302, 1360; Education Code 5017) Policy adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy reviewed: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -413- Board Bylaw BB 9124 ATTORNEY The Board of Trustees recognizes the complex legal environment in which districts operate and desires reliable, high-quality legal advice at reasonable rates. In order to meet the district's legal needs, the Board may contract with county counsel, attorneys in private practice, or appoint legal counsel as a district employee or independent contractor. The Board also supports pursuing collaborative legal efforts with other agencies and districts as appropriate. Duties of Legal Counsel The district's legal counsel may: (Education Code 35041.5) 1. Render legal advice to the Board and the Superintendent or designee 2. Serve the Board and the Superintendent or designee in the preparation and conduct of district litigation and administrative proceedings 3. Render advice on school bond and tax increase measures and prepare the necessary forms for the voting of these measures 4. Perform other administrative duties as assigned by the Board and Superintendent or designee Retaining Legal Counsel At his/her discretion, the Board president or Superintendent may confer with district legal counsel subject to any limits or parameters established by the Board. In addition, the Superintendent or Board president may contact district legal counsel to provide the Board with legal information or advice when so directed by a majority of the Board. Individual Board members other than the Board president may not seek advice from district legal counsel on matters of district business unless so authorized by a majority of the Board. Policy adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy reviewed: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -414- Board Bylaw BB 9130(a) BOARD COMMITTEES The Board of Trustees may establish a committee whenever it determines that such a committee would benefit the district by providing diverse viewpoints, specialized knowledge or expertise, or increased efficiency. Such committees may be subcommittees of the Board or committees that include members of the community, staff, or other stakeholder groups. Upon establishing a committee, the Board shall clearly define the committee's purpose, any timeline for completion of assigned responsibilities, any stakeholder groups or individuals to be represented on the committee, length of time that committee members are expected to serve, and expectations for reporting to the Board and/or the Superintendent or designee. Unless specifically authorized by the Board to act on its behalf, the committee shall act in an advisory capacity. Except for subcommittees of the Board, committee members shall, as appropriate, be recommended by the Superintendent or designee and appointed by the Board president, subject to Board approval. The Superintendent or designee shall provide committee members with information and assistance necessary for the fulfillment of the committee's charges, and may serve as a non-voting advisor to the committee at the discretion of the Board. Whenever so charged, committees may actively seek input and participation by parents/guardians, staff, community, and students and may consult with local public boards and agencies. Any committee not required by law may be dissolved when its duties or term has been completed or whenever the Board deems necessary. Committee Meetings Unless otherwise exempted by law, Board-created committees shall provide public notice of their meetings and conduct meetings in accordance with Government Code 54950-54963 (the Brown Act). However, Board subcommittees composed solely of less than a quorum of the members of the Board are not subject to open meeting laws unless they are standing committees. Standing committees of the Board, irrespective of membership, are those that have a continuing subject matter jurisdiction or a meeting schedule established by action of the Board. (Government Code 54952) Standing committees with a continuing subject matter jurisdiction include, but are not limited to, those responsible for providing advice on budgets, audits, Board policy, contracts, and personnel matters at the Board's request. When a majority of the members of the Board attend an open and noticed meeting of a standing committee, the Board members who are not members of the standing committee shall attend only as observers. (Government Code 54952.2) Whenever any advisory or standing committee, including a committee not otherwise subject to the Brown Act, posts a meeting agenda at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting, that meeting shall be considered as a regular meeting of the Board for purposes of the Brown Act and therefore must be held within district boundaries unless otherwise authorized by law. (Government Code 54954) -415- BOARD COMMITTEES (cont.) BB 9130(b) Committees may meet in a closed session during a regular or special meeting only for those purposes specifically authorized by law for closed sessions held by the Board. Policy adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy reviewed: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -416- Board Bylaw BB 9140 BOARD REPRESENTATIVES The Board of Trustees recognizes that effective performance of its community leadership responsibilities may require its participation in district or community committees on matters of concern to the district and its students. As needed, the Board may appoint any of its members to serve as its representative on a district committee or on a committee of another public agency or organization of which the Board or district is a member or to which the Board is invited to participate. When making such appointments, the Board shall clearly specify the authority and responsibilities of the representative(s), including, but not limited to, reporting back to the Board regarding committee activities and/or actions. Board representatives shall not exercise the authority of the Board without prior Board approval. If a committee discusses a topic on which the Board has taken a position, the Board member shall express the position of the Board. When contributing his/her own ideas or opinions, the representative shall clearly indicate that he/she is expressing his/her individual idea or opinion. Board Representative to Elect Members of County Committee on School District Organization At its annual organizational meeting, the Board shall designate one Board member as its representative to elect members to the county committee on school district organization. (Education Code 35023) Policy adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy reviewed: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -417- Board Bylaw BB 9200 LIMITS OF BOARD MEMBER AUTHORITY The Board of Trustees recognizes that the Board is the unit of authority over the district and that a Board member has no individual authority. Board members shall hold the education of students above any partisan principle, group interest, or personal interest. Unless agreed to by the Board as a whole, individual members of the Board shall not exercise any administrative responsibility with respect to the schools or command the services of any school employee. Individual Board members shall submit requests for information to the Superintendent. Board members shall refer Board-related correspondence to the Superintendent for forwarding to the Board or for placement on the Board's agenda, as appropriate. Individual Board members do not have the authority to resolve complaints. Any Board member approached directly by a person with a complaint should refer the complainant to the Superintendent or designee so that the problem may receive proper consideration and be handled through the appropriate district process. A Board member whose child is attending a district school should be aware of his/her role as a Board member when interacting with district employees about his/her child. Because his/her position as a Board member may inhibit the performance of school personnel, the Board member should inform the Superintendent or designee before volunteering in his/her child's classroom. The Superintendent or designee shall provide a copy of the state's open meeting laws (Brown Act) to each Board member and to anyone who is elected to the Board but has not yet assumed office. Board members and persons elected to the Board who have not yet assumed office are responsible for complying with the requirements of the Brown Act. (Government Code 54952.1) Policy adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy reviewed: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -418- Board Bylaw BB 9220(a) GOVERNING BOARD ELECTIONS Any person is eligible to be a member of the Board of Trustees, without further qualifications, if he/she is 18 years of age or older, a citizen of California, a resident of the school district, a registered voter, and not legally disqualified from holding civil office. Any person who has been convicted of a felony involving the giving, accepting, or offering of a bribe, embezzlement or theft of public funds, extortion, perjury, or conspiracy to commit any such crime, under California law or the law of another state, the United States of America, or another country, is not eligible to be a candidate for office or be a Board member except when he/she has been granted a pardon in accordance with law. (Education Code 35107; Elections Code 20) A district employee elected to the Board shall resign his/her employment before being sworn in or shall have his/her employment automatically terminated upon being sworn into office. (Education Code 35107) To reduce costs associated with conducting elections, the Board may consolidate Board elections with the local municipal or statewide primary or general election. Board election procedures shall be conducted in accordance with state and federal law. Electing Board Members Board members may reside anywhere within the district's boundaries and shall be elected by all voters in the district. Campaign Conduct In order to help protect the public's trust in the electoral process as well as the public's confidence in the Board and district, the Board encourages all candidates to sign and adhere to the principles in the Code of Fair Campaign Practices pursuant to Elections Code 20440. Statement of Qualifications In order to help defray the costs of campaigning for the Board, the district shall pay the cost of printing, handling, translating, and mailing candidate statements filed pursuant to Elections Code 13307. On the 125th day prior to the day fixed for the general district election, the Board secretary or his/her designee shall deliver a notice, bearing the secretary's signature and district seal, to the county elections official describing both of the following: (Elections Code 10509) 1. The elective offices of the district to be filled at the general election and which offices, if any, are for the balance of an unexpired term 2. Whether the district or the candidate is to pay for the publication of a statement of qualifications pursuant to Elections Code 13307 Candidate statements shall be limited to no more than 200 words. (Elections Code 13307) -419- GOVERNING BOARD ELECTIONS (cont.) BB 9220(b) Tie Votes in Board Member Elections After an election for which the Board has decided to resolve a tie by lot, the Board shall immediately notify the candidates who received the tie votes of the time and place where the candidates or their representatives should appear before the Board. The Board at that time shall determine the winner by lot. (Education Code 5016) After an election for which the Board has decided to resolve a tie with a runoff election, the Board shall schedule the runoff election in accordance with law. (Education Code 5016) Whenever a tie makes it impossible to determine which of two or more candidates has been elected to the Board, the Board shall immediately notify the candidates who received the tie votes of the time and place where the candidates or their representatives should appear before the Board. The Board at that time shall determine the winner by lot. (Education Code 5016) Policy adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy reviewed: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -420- Board Bylaw BB 9222 RESIGNATION A member of the Governing Board who wishes to resign from the Board shall file a written resignation with the County Superintendent of Schools. (Education Code 5090) The resigning Board member shall also notify the Board and give a copy of his/her written resignation to the Board secretary. The resignation shall become effective when filed with the County Superintendent, except when a deferred effective date is specified in the resignation. A Board member may not defer the effective date of his/her resignation for more than 60 days after he/she files the resignation with the County Superintendent. (Education Code 5090, 5091) Once filed, a written resignation, whether specifying a deferred effective date or otherwise, shall be irrevocable. (Education Code 5090) A Board member who tenders his/her resignation with a deferred effective date shall, until the effective date of the resignation, continue to exercise all the powers of the office, except that he/she shall not have the right to vote for his/her successor in an action taken by the Board to make a provisional appointment. (Education Code 5091, 35178) A Board member who resigns shall file, within 30 days of leaving office, a revised Statement of Economic Interest/Form 700 covering the period of time between the closing date of the last statement required to be filed and the date he/she leaves office. (Government Code 87302, 87500) Policy adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy reviewed: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -421- Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Office of the Superintendent Date: May 23, 2017 To: Board of Trustees From: Valerie Pitts, Superintendent Re: Consent: Monthly Warrant Reports 2016/2017 Batches 61 - 69 Background Prior to each meeting, the Board is given a listing of commercial warrant expenditures made in the District’s general fund and other funds. The commercial warrants paid to vendors of services and products to the District accompany the list and are provided to Trustees for their review. Financial Impact $ 448,319.67 in budgeted expenditures in 2016-2017. Legal Consideration None. Recommendation It is recommended that Trustees accept and approve the commercial warrant listing batches 2016/2017 - Batches 61 - 69. Backup previously provided to Board Members Item No. 11 -422- LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES (held in the Hall Middle School Conference Room) April 18, 2017 I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER (Board President) The special meeting of the Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Board of Trustees was called to order by President Andrea Pierpont at 8:03 p.m. Trustees Present: Dan Durkin, Sarah Mueller, Andrea Pierpont, Sally Relova, Jill Sellers Trustees Absent: None II. APPROVAL OF CLOSED SESSION AGENDA There were no changes to the agenda. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION AGENDA There were no public comments. IV. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION TO CONSIDER AND/OR TAKE ACTION UPN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS (a) With respect to every item of business to be discussed in Closed Session pursuant to GC Section 54957: Discussion of Superintendent’s Employment Contract V. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION Announcement of Reportable Action Taken in Closed Session Trustees reconvened to Open Session at 9:55 p.m. Trustee Pierpont announced the Board had discussed the item listed on the agenda and took no action. A. FUTURE BOARD MEETING DATE(S) April 26 and May 23, 2017 VI. ADJOURNMENT M/s/c (Pierpont-Mueller) to adjourn the meeting at 9:56 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Mary Anne O’Keeffe Executive Assistant to the Superintendent 4/18/17 -1- Agenda Item 12 -423- LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES (held in the Hall Middle School Library) April 26, 2017 I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER (Board President) The regular meeting of the Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Board of Trustees was called to order by President Andrea Pierpont at 4:00 p.m. Trustees Present: Dan Durkin, Sarah Mueller, Andrea Pierpont, Sally Relova, Jill Sellers Trustees Absent: None Management Present: Valerie Pitts, Daniel Norbutas, Paula Rigney, Patty Elliot. Michelle Walker, Eric Saibel, Tenisha Tate, Wolf Gutscher II. APPROVAL OF CLOSED SESSION AGENDA There were no changes to the Closed Session Agenda. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION AGENDA None. IV. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION TO CONSIDER AND/OR TAKE ACTION UPON ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ITEM(S) (a) With respect to every item of business to be discussed in Closed Session pursuant to EC Section 48918(c): Consideration of Student Expulsion Case 2016/17-02 (b) With respect to every item of business to be discussed in Closed Session pursuant to GC Section 54957.6: Conference with Labor Negotiator: Agency Designated Representatives: Board President and Vice President; Unrepresented Employee: Superintendent (c) With respect to every item of business to be discussed in Closed Session pursuant to GC Section 54957: Discipline/Dismissal/Release – Certificated and Classified Employees (d) With respect to every item of business to be discussed in Closed Session pursuant to GC Section 54957.6: Negotiations – Certificated and Classified Employees (e) With respect to every item of business to be discussed in Closed Session pursuant to GC Section 54957: Public Employees – Leave Requests V. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION Trustees convened Open Session at 6:04 p.m. Trustee Pierpont report that one leave request was approved by unanimous vote. A. PERSONS WISHING TO ADDRESS ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Mary Jane Burke, County Superintendent of Schools, Mary Jane Burke, surprised Dr. Valerie Pitts with the Marin County Educator of The Year Award! This is a very distinguished award, whose recipient is determined by the Golden Bell Committee, and is well-deserved. Dr. Pitts has dedicated the last 35 years to her educational career and many of her accolades were read to the audience. Dr. Pitts is an inspirational, creative, courageous, committed, accomplished educator. The award will officially be presented at the Golden Bell Award Ceremony on May 25, 2017. Dr. Pitts was truly honored and thanked everyone in the District and at the County Office of Education for their many years of support. 4/26/17 -1- Agenda Item 13 -424- Jeff Pearson, Boardwalk One resident, provided history of the Boardwalk and demographics of 71 current residents. A counter-offer to the District’s proposed increase in parking fees will be forthcoming. Steve Clark, Boardwalk One resident, has been on the parking lease negotiations committee. He questioned some of the tactics implemented by the District’s consults, Dutra, and he felt there were errors in the comparables presented. Kathryn Washburn, Boardwalk One resident, felt the increased parking fees will be a hardship for many. She asked for reconsideration of what is proposed. B. COMMUNICATIONS/REPORTS AND RECOGNITIONS 1. Board Reports and Correspondence · Hall’s Open House · Neil Cummins’ PTO Meeting · Joel Montero’s Financial Presentation at MCOE · Cove PTO Meeting · Recognition of Executive Assistant to the Superintendent, Mary Anne O’Keeffe, for her work for the District and assistance provided to Trustees in the recent Superintendent search Superintendent Reports and Recognitions Superintendent Pitts honored teachers and classified staff nominated by their peers at their sites for the Golden Bell awards as follows: Cove School – Alice Franco and Jackie Shapiro; Neil Cummins – Colleen Beery and Mike Kozak; Hall Middle – Shaughnessy Gavin and Karmela Cleary. Thanks and congratulations was expressed to all awardees. Superintendent Pitts reported there had been no Williams Complaints during the quarter ending March 31, 2017. 2. Announcement of Finalist for District Superintendent Board President Andrea Pierpont explained the process the Trustees had undertaken in order to be at the point of announcing the District’s hiring of a new Superintendent beginning July 1, 2017. Dr. Brett Geithman was introduced as the finalist from a highly-qualified field of candidates. Dr. Geithman expressed appreciation and eager anticipation of joining the LCMSD learning community. He will spend several days over the next two months transitioning with Dr. Pitts. He was welcomed by all. C. PUBLIC HEARING – SUNSHINE OF INITIAL PR0OSALS 3. Discussion: Sunshining CSEA and LCMSD Initial Contract Proposals for Negotiations Board President Andrea Pierpont noted the Classified Union (CSEA) had just submitted their proposals. There was no public input. D. STRATEGIC PRIORITIES Priority: Sustain the fiscal integrity and stability of the district. 4. Action: Reject All Bid(s) for Hall Middle School Synthetic Field Turf Resurfacing 4/26/17 -2- Agenda Item 13 -425- M/s/c (Relova-Sellers) to reject all bid(s) for Hall Middle School Synthetic Field Turf Resurfacing. AYES: Relova, Sellers, Durkin, Mueller, Pierpont NOES: None 5. Action: Award CMAS Agreement for Hall Middle School Synthetic Field Turf Resurfacing M/s/c (Mueller-Durkin) to award CMAS Agreement for Hall Middle School Synthetic Field Turf Resurfacing. AYES: Mueller, Durkin, Pierpont, Relova, Sellers NOES: None 6. Action: Award Bid Proposal for Hall Middle School HVAC Replacement Project M/s/c (Mueller-Sellers) to award bid proposal for Hall Middle School Replacement Project. AYES: Mueller, Sellers, Durkin, Pierpont, Relova NOES: None 7. Action: Award Bid Proposal for Prop 39 Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency Services: Lighting Retrofits Project M/s/c (Durkin-Sellers) to award bid proposal for Prop 39 Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency Services: Lighting Retrofits Project. AYES: Durkin, Sellers, Mueller, Pierpont, Relova NOES: None Priority: Inspire academic growth and civic responsibility through a rigorous, inquiry-based curriculum…. 8. Discussion: Benchmark Assessments Reports Daniel Norbutas, Senior Director of Educational Services and Technology, presented mid-year benchmark assessment data. He shared student end-of-year proficiency data in reading, writing and math that demonstrated student growth since the fall benchmark assessments and provided comparison data from last year. 9. Discussion: Hall Middle School Homework Update Principal Saibel shared the process in which staff at Hall continues to engage in ensuring its homework philosophy and policies are consistent, relevant, and in the best interest of students. The report included responses from a student and parent survey administered through School Site Council. The results indicated, in most subject areas, parents either agree or strongly agree that homework enhances their child’s learning. Additionally, the majority of parents responded that the amount of homework their child receives is just right/appropriate. The typical Hall student is spending between 1-2 hours on homework nightly according to their parents. Hall staff continues to evaluate if students have a meaningful and appropriate homework experience. There are many factors to consider when assessing progress toward this end. Priority: Sustain the fiscal integrity and stability of the district. 10. Discussion: Transportation Report Superintendent Pitts reviewed an invitation from Yellow Bus Challenge (YBC) in Tiburon for them to provide bus services for students to and from The Cove School in the morning and the afternoon. This would replace the current service provided by Marin Transit. More information will be forthcoming as the agreement is finalized between the District and YBC. Principal Walker will reach out to parents of children who currently use the bus. Marin Transit will continue the service 4/26/17 -3- Agenda Item 13 -426- for the middle school, but is recommending elementary students be served using a yellow bus model. 11. Discussion: Local Control Accountability Plan Draft Superintendent Pitts reviewed the LCAP draft, which is in a new/improved format with condensed actions and goals, and which will also be reviewed at the upcoming LCAP Advisory Committee meeting. The draft will be reviewed again at the next board meeting during a public hearing. Goals and objectives include continued focus on math instruction, Common Core State Standards, and closing the achievement gap that exists between groups of students. She asked that Trustees submit suggested changes or comments to her. 12. Discussion: First Draft – 2017-18 General Fund Budget Chief Business Official, Paula Rigney, presented the first draft of the 2017-18 budget. It included local revenues from parcel tax, estimated property taxes, and estimated LCFF calculations. Expenses projected staffing levels, actual hiring and placement through April 15, updated retirements rates (PERS/STRS), current worker’s compensation rates, updated special education costs, supplies, and estimated services contracts. Ms. Rigney advised the Trustees that there may be changes coming in the June proposed budget due to several unknowns including LCFF revenues projected in the Governor’s May Revise, updated SPARK contributions, inclusion of a tentative collective bargaining agreement with certificated and classified staff, updated hiring and placement, and final alignment with all actions in the proposed LCAP. E. GOVERNANCE TEAM ISSUES/PLANNING 13. Discussion/Action: Superintendent Employment Agreement Trustee Pierpont read into the record a summary of the contract of Dr. Brett Geither as Superintendent beginning July 1, 2017. M/s/c (Sellers, Durkin) to the Superintendent’s Employment Agreement. AYES: Sellers, Durkin, Mueller, Pierpont, Relova NOES: None 14. Discussion: Policies Review Regarding AR 7150, the final sentence of the regulation was deleted. The revised AR, along with all other policies, will return for approval on Consent at the May 23, 2017 meeting. F. CONSENT CALENDAR M/s/c (Relova, Sellers) to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. AYES: Relova, Sellers, Durkin, Pierpont NOES: None G. FUTURE BOARD AGENDA ITEMS There were no suggested changes to the upcoming board agenda items. H. FUTURE BOARD MEETING DATE(S) May 23 and June 14, 2017. The June 21, 2017 board meeting was cancelled. 4/26/17 -4- Agenda Item 13 -427- VI. ADJOURNMENT M/s/c (Pierpont-Mueller) to adjourn the meeting at 9:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Valerie Pitts, Ed.D. Secretary to the Board of Trustees Mary Anne O’Keeffe Executive Assistant to the Superintendent 4/26/17 -5- Agenda Item 13 -428- Instruction BP 6163.4(a) STUDENT USE OF TECHNOLOGY The Board of Trustees intends that technological resources provided by the district be used in a safe and responsible manner in support of the instructional program and for the advancement of student learning. All students using these resources shall receive instruction in their proper and appropriate use. Teachers, administrators, and/or library media specialists are expected to review the technological resources and online sites that will be used in the classroom or assigned to students in order to ensure that they are appropriate for the intended purpose and the age of the students. The Superintendent or designee shall notify students and parents/guardians about authorized uses of district technology, user obligations and responsibilities, and consequences for unauthorized use and/or unlawful activities in accordance with this Board policy and the district's Acceptable Use Agreement. District technology includes, but is not limited to, computers, the district's computer network including servers and wireless computer networking technology (wi-fi), the Internet, email, USB drives, wireless access points (routers), tablet computers, smartphones and smart devices, telephones, cellular telephones, personal digital assistants, pagers, MP3 players, wearable technology, any wireless communication device including emergency radios, and/or future technological innovations, whether accessed on or off site or through district-owned or personally owned equipment or devices. Before a student is authorized to use district technology, the student and his/her parent/guardian shall sign and return the Acceptable Use Agreement. In that agreement, the parent/guardian shall agree not to hold the district or any district staff responsible for the failure of any technology protection measures or user mistakes or negligence and shall agree to indemnify and hold harmless the district and district staff for any damages or costs incurred. The district reserves the right to monitor student use of technology within the jurisdiction of the district without advance notice or consent. Students shall be informed that their use of district technology, including, but not limited to, computer files, email, text messages, instant messaging, and other electronic communications, is not private and may be accessed by the district for the purpose of ensuring proper use. Students have no reasonable expectation of privacy in use of the district technology. Students' personally owned devices shall not be searched except in cases where there is a reasonable suspicion, based on specific and objective facts, that the search will uncover evidence of a violation of law, district policy, or school rules. The Superintendent or designee may gather and maintain information pertaining directly to school safety or student safety from the social media activity of any district student in accordance with Education Code 49073.6 and BP/AR 5125 - Student Records. Whenever a student is found to have violated Board policy or the district's Acceptable Use Agreement, the principal or designee may cancel or limit a student's user privileges or increase supervision of the student's use of the district's equipment and other technological resources, as appropriate. Inappropriate use also may result in disciplinary action and/or legal action in accordance with law and Board policy. The Superintendent or designee, with input from students and appropriate staff, shall regularly review and update procedures to enhance the safety and security of students using district technology and to help ensure that the district adapts to changing technologies and circumstances. -429- STUDENT USE OF TECHNOLOGY (cont.) BP 6163.4(b) Internet Safety The Superintendent or designee shall ensure that all district computers with Internet access have a technology protection measure that protects against access to visual depictions that are obscene, child pornography, or harmful to minors and that the operation of such measures is enforced. (20 USC 6777; 47 USC 254; 47 CFR 54.520) To reinforce these measures, the Superintendent or designee shall implement rules and procedures designed to restrict students' access to harmful or inappropriate matter on the Internet and to ensure that students do not engage in unauthorized or unlawful online activities. Harmful matter includes matter, taken as a whole, which to the average person, applying contemporary statewide standards, appeals to the prurient interest and is matter which depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct and which lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors. (Penal Code 313) The district's Acceptable Use Agreement shall establish expectations for appropriate student conduct when using the Internet or other forms of electronic communication, including, but not limited to, prohibitions against: 1. Accessing, posting, submitting, publishing, or displaying harmful or inappropriate matter that is threatening, obscene, disruptive, or sexually explicit, or that could be construed as harassment or disparagement of others based on their race/ethnicity, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, or political beliefs 2. Intentionally uploading, downloading, or creating computer viruses and/or maliciously attempting to harm or destroy district equipment or materials or manipulate the data of any other user, including so-called "hacking" 3. Distributing personal identification information, including the name, address, telephone number, Social Security number, or other personally identifiable information, of another student, staff member, or other person with the intent to threaten, intimidate, harass, or ridicule that person The Superintendent or designee shall provide age-appropriate instruction regarding safe and appropriate behavior on social networking sites, chat rooms, and other Internet services. Such instruction shall include, but not be limited to, the dangers of posting one's own personal identification information online, misrepresentation by online predators, how to report inappropriate or offensive content or threats, behaviors that constitute cyberbullying, and how to respond when subjected to cyberbullying. Policy adopted: November 3, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy last revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -430- Instruction E 6163.4(a) STUDENT USE OF TECHNOLGY ACCEPTABLE USE AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF DISTRICT FROM LIABILITY (STUDENTS) The Larkspur-Corte Madera School District authorizes students to use technology owned or otherwise provided by the district as necessary for instructional purposes. The use of district technology is a privilege permitted at the district's discretion and is subject to the conditions and restrictions set forth in applicable Board policies, administrative regulations, and this Acceptable Use Agreement. The district reserves the right to suspend access at any time, without notice, for any reason. The district expects all students to use technology responsibly in order to avoid potential problems and liability. The district may place reasonable restrictions on the sites, material, and/or information that students may access through the system. Each student who is authorized to use district technology and his/her parent/guardian shall sign this Acceptable Use Agreement as an indication that they have read and understand the agreement. Definitions District technology includes, but is not limited to, computers, the district's computer network including servers and wireless computer networking technology (wi-fi), the Internet, email, USB drives, wireless access points (routers), tablet computers, smartphones and smart devices, telephones, cellular telephones, personal digital assistants, pagers, MP3 players, wearable technology, any wireless communication device including emergency radios, and/or future technological innovations, whether accessed on or off site or through district-owned or personally owned equipment or devices. Student Obligations and Responsibilities Students are expected to use district technology safely, responsibly, and for educational purposes only. The student in whose name district technology is issued is responsible for its proper use at all times. Students shall not share their assigned online services account information, passwords, or other information used for identification and authorization purposes, and shall use the system only under the account to which they have been assigned. Students are prohibited from using district technology for improper purposes, including, but not limited to, use of district technology to: 1. Access, post, display, or otherwise use material that is discriminatory, libelous, defamatory, obscene, sexually explicit, or disruptive 2. Bully, harass, intimidate, or threaten other students, staff, or other individuals ("cyberbullying") 3. Disclose, use, or disseminate personal identification information (such as name, address, telephone number, Social Security number, or other personal information) of another student, staff member, or other person with the intent to threaten, intimidate, harass, or ridicule that person -431- STUDENT USE OF TECHNOLGY (cont.) E 6163.4(b) 4. Infringe on copyright, license, trademark, patent, or other intellectual property rights 5. Intentionally disrupt or harm district technology or other district operations (such as destroying district equipment, placing a virus on district computers, adding or removing a computer program without permission from a teacher or other district personnel, changing settings on shared computers) 6. Install unauthorized software 7. "Hack" into the system to manipulate data of the district or other users 8. Engage in or promote any practice that is unethical or violates any law or Board policy, administrative regulation, or district practice Privacy Since the use of district technology is intended for educational purposes, students shall not have any expectation of privacy in any use of district technology. The district reserves the right to monitor and record all use of district technology, including, but not limited to, access to the Internet or social media, communications sent or received from district technology, or other uses. Such monitoring/recording may occur at any time without prior notice for any legal purposes including, but not limited to, record retention and distribution and/or investigation of improper, illegal, or prohibited activity. Students should be aware that, in most instances, their use of district technology (such as web searches and emails) cannot be erased or deleted. All passwords created for or used on any district technology are the sole property of the district. The creation or use of a password by a student on district technology does not create a reasonable expectation of privacy. Personally Owned Devices If a student uses a personally owned device to access district technology, he/she shall abide by all applicable Board policies, administrative regulations, and this Acceptable Use Agreement. Any such use of a personally owned device may subject the contents of the device and any communications sent or received on the device to disclosure pursuant to a lawful subpoena or public records request. Reporting If a student becomes aware of any security problem (such as any compromise of the confidentiality of any login or account information) or misuse of district technology, he/she shall immediately report such information to the teacher or other district personnel. Consequences for Violation Violations of the law, Board policy, or this agreement may result in revocation of a student's access to district technology and/or discipline, up to and including suspension or expulsion. In addition, violations of the law, Board policy, or this agreement may be reported to law enforcement agencies as appropriate. -432- STUDENT USE OF TECHNOLGY (cont.) E 6163.4(c) Student Acknowledgment I have received, read, understand, and agree to abide by this Acceptable Use Agreement and other applicable laws and district policies and regulations governing the use of district technology. I understand that there is no expectation of privacy when using district technology. I further understand that any violation may result in loss of user privileges, disciplinary action, and/or appropriate legal action. Name: ______Grade: ______ (Please print) School: ______ Signature: ______Date: ______ Parent or Legal Guardian Acknowledgment If the student is under 18 years of age, a parent/guardian must also read and sign the agreement. As the parent/guardian of the above-named student, I have read, understand, and agree that my child shall comply with the terms of the Acceptable Use Agreement. By signing this Agreement, I give permission for my child to use district technology and/or to access the school's computer network and the Internet. I understand that, despite the district's best efforts, it is impossible for the school to restrict access to all offensive and controversial materials. I agree to release from liability, indemnify, and hold harmless the school, district, and district personnel against all claims, damages, and costs that may result from my child's use of district technology or the failure of any technology protection measures used by the district. Further, I accept full responsibility for supervision of my child's use of his/her access account if and when such access is not in the school setting. Name: ______Date: ______ (Please print) Signature: ______ Regulation adopted: November 3, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Regulation last revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -433- Instruction BP 6176 WEEKEND/SATURDAY CLASSES The Board of Trustees desires to increase educational opportunities outside the regular school week in order to meet student needs and promote academic achievement. When staffing, facilities, and other resources are available, the Board may approve the provision of classes on Saturday and/or Sunday that support and are integrated with other learning opportunities. Weekend classes may include, but are not limited to: 1. Makeup classes for absences occurring during the week (Education Code 37223) 2. Supplemental instruction for students who need additional assistance to meet academic standards or requirements Attendance at weekend classes offered pursuant to Education Code 37223 shall be voluntary, except that truants, as defined in Education Code 48260, may be required to attend classes on one day of a weekend in order to make up lost instructional time. (Education Code 37223) A student shall be excused from a weekend class if the student's parent/guardian notifies the school in writing that such attendance would be in conflict with his/her religious beliefs. Such students shall be given priority for enrollment in any other available supplemental instruction offered at a time other than during the weekend. A teacher shall not be assigned to work on a Saturday or Sunday if he/she objects in writing that the assignment would conflict with his/her religious beliefs or practices. In addition, a full-time teacher employed by the district prior to the implementation of weekend classes shall not be required, without his/her consent, to teach for more than 180 full days during a school year or for more than the number of full days that district schools were maintained during the year preceding implementation of weekend classes, whichever is greater. (Education Code 44824) Unless the requirement is waived by the California Department of Education, the district shall provide at least one nutritionally adequate meal during the weekend session in accordance with Education Code 49550. Policy adopted: May 23, 2017 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Larkspur, California -434- Facilities BP 7150 SITE SELECTION AND DEVELOPMENT The Board of Trustees believes that a school site should serve the district's educational needs in accordance with the district's master plan as well as show potential for contributing to other community needs. The Board recognizes the importance of community input in the site selection process. To this end, the Board will solicit community input whenever a school site is to be selected or proposed for alternative use and shall provide public notice and hold public hearings in accordance with law. The Superintendent or designee shall establish a site selection process which complies with law and ensures that the best possible sites are acquired and developed in a cost-effective manner. Before acquiring property for a new school or an addition to an existing school site, the Board shall evaluate the property at a public hearing using state site selection standards. (Education Code 17211) Environmental Impact Investigation for the Site Selection Process The Superintendent or designee shall determine whether any proposed development project is subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and shall ensure compliance with this Act whenever so required. When evaluating district projects, the CEQA guidelines shall be used. Policy adopted: September 8, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -435- Facilities AR 7150(a) SITE SELECTION AND DEVELOPMENT As part of the district's site selection process, the Superintendent or designee shall: 1. Meet with appropriate local government recreation and park authorities to review all possible methods of coordinating the planning, design, and construction of new school facilities, other general facilities or projects, and school sites or major additions to existing school facilities and recreation and park facilities in the community. (Education Code 35275) 2. Notify the appropriate local planning agency in writing and request its report and recommendations regarding the proposed site or proposed addition's conformity with the adopted general plan. (Government Code 65402; Public Resources Code 21151.2) 3. Have the site investigated by competent personnel with regard to population trends, transportation, water supply, waste disposal facilities, utilities, traffic hazards, surface drainage conditions, and other factors affecting initial and operating costs. This investigation shall include geological and soil engineering studies to preclude locating the facility on terrain that has the potential for earthquake or other geologic hazard damage as specified in Government Code 65302. (Education Code 17212-17212.5) 4. As necessary, request information necessary or useful to assess and determine the safety of a proposed school site, other project or an addition to an existing school site, from a person, corporation, public utility, locally publicly owned utility, or governmental agency regarding pipelines, electric transmission and distribution lines, railroads, and storage tanks in accordance with law. (Education Code 17212.2, 17251) 5. Ensure that the site meets state standards for its proposed use or school site selection as specified in 5 CCR 14010-14012. 6. Ensure compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as required by law. (Public Resources Code 21000-21177) 7. If the proposed site is within two miles of the air line of an airport runway or proposed runway, before acquiring title to or leasing the site, notify the California Department of Education in writing. (Education Code 17215) 8. If the proposed site is within 500 feet of the edge of the closest traffic lane of a freeway or other busy traffic corridor, conduct an air quality analysis pursuant to Health and Safety Code 44360 and Education Code 17213 and determine that the air quality at the proposed site is such that neither short-term nor long-term exposure poses significant health risks to students. (Education Code 17213) In the selection and development of projects funded pursuant to the School Facilities Program of 1998 (Proposition 1A) as contained in Education Code 17070.10-17077.10, the Superintendent or designee shall: 1. Determine whether the proposed site is free of toxic contamination by ensuring that a Phase I environmental assessment and/or preliminary endangerment assessment is conducted as required by law (Education Code 17213.1) -436- SITE SELECTION AND DEVELOPMENT (cont.) AR 7150(b) The Superintendent or designee shall ensure that the preliminary endangerment assessment is made available for public review and comment in accordance with Education Code 17213.1. 2. Annually submit a summary report of expenditures to the State Allocation Board in accordance with law (Education Code 17076.10) 3. Include in the plans a hard-wired connection to a public switched telephone network or utilization of wireless technology (Education Code 17077.10) Regulation adopted: September 8, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Regulation revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -437- Facilities BP 7210 FACILITIES FINANCING When it is determined that school facilities must be built or expanded to accommodate increased or projected increased enrollment, the Board of Trustees shall consider appropriate methods of financing for the purchase of school sites and the construction of buildings. In addition, financing may be needed when safety considerations and educational program improvements require the replacement, reconstruction or modernization of existing facilities. The Superintendent or designee shall research funding alternatives and recommend to the Board the method that would best serve district needs as identified in the district's master plan for school facilities. These funding alternatives may include, but not be limited to: 1. Levying developer fees pursuant to Education Code 17620 and Government Code 65995- 65998 2. Forming a community facilities district pursuant to Government Code 53311-53368.3, the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act 3. Forming a school facilities improvement district pursuant to Education Code 15300-15425 4. Issuing voter-approved general obligation bonds 5. Imposing a qualified parcel tax pursuant to Government Code 50079 6. Using lease revenues for capital outlay purposes from surplus school property Policy adopted: September 8, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -438- Facilities BP 7211 DEVELOPER FEES In order to finance the construction or reconstruction of school facilities needed to accommodate students coming from new development, the Board of Trustees may establish, levy and collect developer fees on residential, commercial and industrial construction within the district, subject to restrictions specified by law and administrative regulation. Appeals Process for Protests by Developers The Superintendent or designee shall establish an appeals process for the handling of protests by developers. (Education Code 17621) Policy adopted: September 8, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -439- Facilities AR 7211(a) DEVELOPER FEES Level 1 Funding: Residential, Commercial and Industrial Construction Before taking action to establish, increase or impose developer fees, the Board of Trustees shall conduct a fee justification study which: (Government Code 66001) 1. Identifies the purpose of the fee and the use to which the fee will be put 2. Determines a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of development project for which the fee is imposed 3. Determines a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility and the type of development project for which the fee is imposed 4. Determines a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributed to the development for which the fee is imposed Level 1 Funding: Notice and Hearing Requirements Before levying developer fees or prior to increasing an existing fee, the Board shall schedule a public hearing. The Superintendent or designee shall mail notice of the time and place of the meeting, including a general explanation of the matter to be considered and a statement that the required data are available, at least 14 days prior to the meeting to any interested party who has requested such information. Any written request for mailed notices shall be valid for one year from the date on which it is filed unless a renewal request is filed. Renewal requests for mailed notices shall be filed on or before April 1 of each year. The district may charge a fee reasonably related to the cost of providing these materials. (Government Code 66016) Information on the anticipated amount of fees, other available funds and funding sources, and the estimated cost of planning, land acquisition and school construction shall be made available to the public at least 10 days before the hearing. (Government Code 66016) At the hearing, the Board shall adopt a resolution for the levying of the developer fees. (Government Code 66016) The resolution shall set forth: 1. The purpose of the fee and the public improvement(s) that the fee will be used to finance (Government Code 66006) 2. The Board's findings of reasonable relationship which justify the fees pursuant to Government Code 66001 3. The district's determination of the following condition which allows collection of the fees at the time when building permits are issued: (Government Code 66007) That the fees shall be collected for public improvements or facilities for which an account has been established, funds have been appropriated and the district has adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan -440- DEVELOPER FEES (cont.) AR 7211(b) Level 2 Funding: Residential Construction In order to impose residential construction fees within the limits of Government Code 65995.5, the Board shall: (Government Code 65995.5) 1. Make a timely application to the State Allocation Board for new construction funding for which it is eligible 2. Conduct and adopt a school facility needs analysis pursuant to Government Code 65995.6 3. Satisfy at least two of the requirements set forth in Government Code 65995.5(b)(3)(A-D) (Government Code 65995.5) Level 2 Funding: Notice and Hearing Requirements At least 45 days prior to completion of the school facility needs analysis, the Board shall notify and provide copies of the analysis to the planning commission or agency of the city or county with land use jurisdiction within the district. Upon request of either party, the Board and city or county shall meet within 15 days following notification. (Government Code 65352.2) The Board shall adopt the school facility needs analysis by resolution at a public hearing. (Government Code 65995.6) This analysis may not be adopted until the analysis, in its final form, has been made available to the public for a period of not less than 30 days. Prior to its adoption, the public shall have the opportunity to review and comment on the analysis and the Board shall respond to written comments it receives regarding the analysis. (Government Code 65995.6) During the period of public review, the analysis shall be provided to the local agency responsible for land use planning for its review and comment. (Government Code 65995.6) No less than 30 days prior to the hearing, notice of the time and place of the hearing, including the location and procedure for viewing or requesting a copy of the proposed analysis, shall be published in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdiction of the district. If there is no paper of general circulation, the notice shall be posted in at least three conspicuous places within the district's jurisdiction not less than 30 days prior to the hearing. (Government Code 65995.6) In addition, the Superintendent or designee shall mail a copy of the needs analysis not less than 30 days prior to the hearing to any person who has made a written request if the written request was made 45 days prior to the hearing. The district may charge a fee reasonably related to the cost of providing these materials. (Government Code 65995.6) The school facility needs analysis may be revised at any time. The revision is subject to the same conditions and requirements applicable to the adoption of the analysis. The existing school building capacity shall be recalculated as part of any revision to the needs analysis. (Government Code 65995.6) The fees authorized by Government Code 65995.6 and Government Code 65995.7 shall be adopted by resolution as part of the adoption or revision of the school facilities needs analysis. The fees shall -441- DEVELOPER FEES (cont.) AR 7211(c) take effect immediately upon adoption of the resolution and may not be effective for more than one year. (Government Code 65995.6) Level 3 Funding: Residential Construction When Level 3 fees are authorized by law and the district qualifies for Level 2 funding pursuant to Government Code 65995.5, the Board may assess a fee on residential construction pursuant to the requirements of Government Code 65995.7. Level 3 Funding: Notice and Hearing Requirements Pursuant to Government Code 65995.7, the notice and hearing requirements, resolution requirement, and term of effectiveness for Level 3 funding shall be the same as the requirements for Level 2 funding as specified above. All Developer Funding Fees: Additional Requirements The district shall send a copy of any resolution adopting or increasing developer fees to the city and county, accompanied by all relevant supporting documentation and a map indicating the boundaries of the area subject to the fee. (Education Code 17621) In cooperation with local governmental agencies issuing building permits, the Superintendent or designee shall establish a means by which all of the following shall be accomplished: 1. The project applicant shall receive a written statement of the amount of the fees and notification that the 90-day approval period during which the applicant may protest has begun. (Government Code 66020) 2. The Superintendent or designee shall receive and retain acknowledgment that the above notification was received. 3. Before a permit is issued and upon the payment of the applicable fee or requirement, the Board shall immediately certify that the fee has been paid or that the district has determined that the fee does not apply to the development project. (Education Code 17620) Developer fees shall be deposited, invested, accounted for and expended pursuant to Government Code 66006. Developer fees shall be deposited in a separate capital facilities account, except for temporary investments allowed by law, and shall be used only for the purpose for which they were collected. Interest income earned by the capital facilities account shall also be deposited in that account and used only for the purpose for which the fee was originally collected. (Government Code 66006) For each separate account so established, the Superintendent or designee shall, within 180 days after the last day of each fiscal year, make available to the public the following information for the fiscal year: (Government Code 66006) 1. A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund 2. The amount of the fee -442- DEVELOPER FEES (cont.) AR 7211(d) 3. The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund 4. The amount of the fees collected and the interest earned 5. An identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees 6. An identification of an approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the district determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement 7. A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement on which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and, in the case of an interfund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid, and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan 8. The amount of refunds made pursuant to Government Code 66001(e) and any allocations made pursuant to Government Code 66001(f) The Board shall review the above information at the first regularly scheduled public Board meeting which occurs 15 days after the information is made available to the public. Fifteen-day prior notice of this meeting shall be mailed to any parties filing a written request pursuant to Government Code 66006. (Government Code 66006) In addition to discharging its public disclosure duties regarding the levying of developer fees, the Board shall, for the fifth fiscal year after the first deposit into the account or fund and every five years thereafter, make all of the following findings with respect to the portion of the account or fund that remains unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted: (Government Code 66001) 1. Identify the purpose to which the fee is to be put 2. Demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged 3. Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing in incomplete improvements originally identified 4. Designate the approximate dates on which the funding referred to in item #3 is expected to be deposited into the appropriate account or fund When sufficient funds have been collected to complete the financing of public improvements but such improvements remain incomplete, the district shall, within 180 days of the date that a determination of sufficient funding was made, either identify an approximate date by which construction will begin or refund the unexpended revenues in accordance with Government Code 66001. (Government Code 66001) -443- DEVELOPER FEES (cont.) AR 7211(e) Appeals Process for Protests by Developers Developers of residential, commercial and industrial projects who claim that the developer fee has been inappropriately levied shall use the following procedures: (Government Code 66020) 1. The developer shall tender any required payment in full or provide satisfactory evidence of arrangements to pay the fee when due or ensure performance of the conditions necessary to meet the requirements of the imposition. 2. The developer shall serve written notice to the Board. This notice shall include: a. A statement that the required payment is tendered or will be tendered when due, or that any conditions which have been imposed are provided for or satisfied, under protest b. A statement informing the Board of the factual elements of the dispute and the legal theory forming the basis for the protest 3. The protest shall be filed at the time of approval or conditional approval of the development or within 90 days after the date of the imposition of the fees. At the time of the imposition of the fee, the Superintendent or designee shall provide each project applicant written notice that the 90-day period in which the applicant may initiate a protest has begun. The developer may file an action to attack, review, set aside, void or annul the imposition of the fees imposed on the development project within 180 days of delivery of the notice. (Government Code 66020) Policy adopted: September 8, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Policy revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -444- Bylaws of the Board BB 9000(a) ROLE OF THE BOARD The Board of Trustees has been elected by the community to provide leadership and citizen oversight of the district. The Board shall ensure that the district is responsive to the values, beliefs, and priorities of the community. The Board shall work with the Superintendent to fulfill its major responsibilities, which include: 1. Setting the direction for the district through a process that involves the community, parents/guardians, students, and staff and is focused on student learning and achievement 2. Establishing an effective and efficient organizational structure for the district by: a. Employing the Superintendent and setting policy for hiring of other personnel b. Overseeing the development and adoption of policies c. Establishing academic expectations and adopting the curriculum and instructional materials d. Establishing budget priorities and adopting the budget e. Providing safe, adequate facilities that support the district's instructional program f. Setting parameters for negotiations with employee organizations and ratifying collective bargaining agreements 3. Providing support to the Superintendent and staff as they carry out the Board's direction by: a. Establishing and adhering to standards of responsible governance b. Making decisions and providing resources that support district priorities and goals c. Upholding Board policies d. Being knowledgeable about district programs and efforts in order to serve as effective spokespersons 4. Ensuring accountability to the public for the performance of the district's schools by: a. Evaluating the Superintendent and setting policy for the evaluation of other personnel b. Monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of policies -445- ROLE OF THE BOARD (cont.) BB 9000(b) c. Serving as a judicial (hearing) and appeals body in accordance with law, Board policies, and negotiated agreements d. Monitoring student achievement and program effectiveness and requiring program changes as necessary e. Monitoring and adjusting district finances f. Monitoring the collective bargaining process 5. Providing community leadership and advocacy on behalf of students, the district's educational program, and public education in order to build support within the local community and at the state and national levels The Board is authorized to establish and finance any program or activity that is not in conflict with, inconsistent with, or preempted by law. (Education Code 35160) Bylaw adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Bylaw last revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -446- Bylaws of the Board BB 9005 GOVERNANCE STANDARDS The Board of Trustees believes that its primary responsibility is to act in the best interests of every student in the district. The Board also has major commitments to parents/guardians, all members of the community, employees, the state of California, laws pertaining to public education, and established policies of the district. To maximize Board effectiveness and public confidence in district governance, Board members are expected to govern responsibly and hold themselves to the highest standards of ethical conduct. The Board expects its members to work with each other and the Superintendent to ensure that a high- quality education is provided to each student. Each individual Board member shall: 1. Keep learning and achievement for all students as the primary focus 2. Value, support and advocate for public education 3. Recognize and respect differences of perspective and style on the Board and among staff, students, parents and the community 4. Act with dignity, and understand the implications of demeanor and behavior 5. Keep confidential matters confidential 6. Participate in professional development and commit the time and energy necessary to be an informed and effective leader 7. Understand the distinctions between Board and staff roles, and refrain from performing management functions that are the responsibility of the Superintendent and staff 8. Understand that authority rests with the Board as a whole and not with individuals. Board members also shall assume collective responsibility for building unity and creating a positive organizational culture. To operate effectively, the Board shall have a unity of purpose and: 1. Keep the district focused on learning and achievement for all students 2. Communicate a common vision 3. Operate openly, with trust and integrity 4. Govern in a dignified and professional manner, treating everyone with civility and respect 5. Govern within Board-adopted policies and procedures BB 9005(b) 6. Take collective responsibility for the Board's performance 7. Periodically evaluate its own effectiveness 8. Ensure opportunities for the diverse range of views in the community to inform Board deliberations Bylaw adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Bylaw revised: May 23, 217 Larkspur, California -447- Bylaws of the Board BB 9010 PUBLIC STATEMENTS The Board of Trustees recognizes the responsibility of Board Members in their role as community leaders to participate in public discourse on matters of civic or community interest, including those involving the district, and their right to freely express their personal views. However, to ensure communication of a consistent, unified message regarding district issues, Board Members are expected to respect the authority of the Board to choose its representatives to communicate its positions and to abide by established protocols. All public statements authorized to be made on behalf of the Board shall be made by the Board President or, if appropriate, by the Superintendent or other designated representative. When speaking for the district, the Board encourages its spokespersons to exercise restraint and tact and to communicate the message in a manner that promotes public confidence in the Board’s leadership. Board spokespersons shall not disclose confidential information or information received in closed session except when authorized by a majority of the Board. (Government Code 54963). When speaking to community groups, members of the public, or the media, individual Board Members should recognize that their statements may be perceived as reflecting the views and positions of the Board. Board Members have a responsibility to identify personal viewpoints as such and not as the viewpoint of the Board. In addition, the Board encourages members who participate on social networking sites, blogs, or other discussion or informational sites to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous, and professional manner and to model good behavior for district students and the community. Such electronic communications are subject to the same standards and protocols established for other forms of communication, and the disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act may likewise apply to them. Bylaw adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Bylaw last revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -448- Bylaws of the Board BB 9011 DISCLOSURE OF CONFIDENTIAL/PRIVILEGED INFORMATION The Board of Trustees recognizes the importance of maintaining the confidentiality of information acquired as part of a Board member's official duties. Confidential/privileged information shall be released only to the extent authorized by law. Disclosure of Closed Session Information A Board member shall not disclose confidential information acquired during a closed session to a person not entitled to receive such information, unless a majority of the Board has authorized its disclosure. (Government Code 54963) Confidential information means a communication made in a closed session that is specifically related to the basis for the Board to meet lawfully in closed session. (Government Code 54963) The Board shall not take any action against any person for disclosing confidential information, nor shall the disclosure be considered a violation of the law or Board policy, when the person is: (Government Code 54963) 1. Making a confidential inquiry or complaint to a district attorney or grand jury concerning a perceived violation of law, including disclosing facts necessary to establish the illegality or potential illegality of a Board action that has been the subject of deliberation during a closed session 2. Expressing an opinion concerning the propriety or legality of Board action in closed session, including disclosure of the nature and extent of the illegal or potentially illegal action 3. Disclosing information that is not confidential Other Disclosures A Board member shall not disclose, for pecuniary gain, confidential information acquired in the course of his/her official duties. Confidential information includes information that is not a public record subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act, information that by law may not be disclosed, or information that may have a material financial effect on the Board member. (Government Code 1098) Disclosures excepted from this prohibition are those made to law enforcement officials or to the joint legislative audit committee when reporting on improper governmental activities. (Government Code 1098) Bylaw adopted: August 25, 2004 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Bylaw revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -449- Bylaws of the Board BB 9012 BOARD MEMBER ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION The Board of Trustees recognizes that electronic communication among Board members and between Board members, district administration, and members of the public is an efficient and convenient way to communicate and expedite the exchange of information and to help keep the community informed about the goals, programs, and achievements of the district and its schools. Board members shall exercise caution so as to ensure that electronic communications are not used as a means for the Board to deliberate outside of an agendized Board meeting. A majority of the Board shall not, outside of an authorized meeting, use a series of electronic communications of any kind, directly or through intermediaries, to discuss, deliberate, or take action on any item that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board. (Government Code 54952.2) Examples of permissible electronic communications concerning district business include, but are not limited to, dissemination of Board meeting agendas and agenda packets, reports of activities from the Superintendent, and reminders regarding meeting times, dates, and places. Board members shall make every effort to ensure that their electronic communications conform to the same standards and protocols established for other forms of communication. A Board member may respond, as appropriate, to an electronic communication received from a member of the community and should make clear that his/her response does not necessarily reflect the views of the Board as a whole. Any complaint or request for information should be forwarded to the Superintendent in accordance with Board bylaws and protocols so that the issue may receive proper consideration and be handled through the appropriate district process. As appropriate, communication received from the press shall be forwarded to the designated district spokesperson. In order to minimize the risk of improper disclosure, Board members shall avoid reference to confidential information and information acquired during closed session. Board members may use electronic communications to discuss matters other than district business with each other, regardless of the number of members participating in the discussion. Like other writings concerning district business, a Board member's electronic communication are subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act. Bylaw adopted: March 12, 2014 LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Bylaw revised: May 23, 2017 Larkspur, California -450- LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING CALENDAR 2017-18 Usually the Third or Fourth Wednesday of the Month Closed Session: 5:00 p.m. Open Session: 6:00 p.m. DATE NOTES August 16 (formerly set for 8/2 and 8/30) September 13 October 25 November 15 December 13 January 17 February 7 March 7 April 18 May 23 June 13 June 20 Board Approved: March 8, 2017 Board Revised: May 23, 2017 -451- LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT Larkspur, California Resolution 2016/17-15 Revision of Date Upon Which the Schools of the District Close in Observance of Lincoln’s Birthday WHEREAS, Education Code sections 37220 (school holidays) and 45205 (classified employee holidays) authorize school districts to designate other days during the school year as the holidays to which students and classified employees are entitled in lieu of certain holidays designated as regular holidays by Section 45205; and WHEREAS, such designation must provide at least a three-day weekend for classified employees; and WHEREAS, a classified employee who would be entitled to a regular paid holiday but would not be in a paid status during any portion of the working day immediately preceding or succeeding the day so designated in lieu of the regular holiday shall be entitled to the regular holiday and shall be paid double time and a half if required to work on the regular holiday. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, February 12, known as Lincoln’s Birthday, shall be observed on February 23, 2018, the Friday after Presidents’ Day. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Board of Trustees at a meeting held on May 23, 2017 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Andrea Pierpont, President Daniel Durkin, Clerk Board of Trustees Board of Trustees I, Valerie Pitts, Secretary to the Board of Trustees, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the Resolution adopted by the Board of Trustees of the LARKSPUR-CORTE MADERA SCHOOL DISTRICT at their regular meeting of May 23, 2017 which Resolution is on file in the office of said Board. Date Valerie Pitts, Superintendent Secretary to the Board of Trustees -452-