BUDGET STUDY COMMITTEE MEETING 

November 20, 2015 3:00 ‐ 4:30 p.m. 

Campbell Conference Room – 3rd Floor, North Building  

AGENDA  1.  Call to Order/Roll Call  Superintendent Gundry   2.  Setting the Agenda  Mark Skvarna, Business Services   3.  Review and Approval of Minutes – May 28, 2015  Mark Skvarna, Business Services   4.  Refinancing Certificates of Participation  Jason List, Isom Advisors       Jeff Baratta, Piper Jaffray  5.  2015‐16 Board Approved Budget Enhancements/Program Augmentation  Laurie Book, Internal Business   6.  Districts’ Consolidation RFP  All   7.  Next Meeting – January 22, 2016  Superintendent Gundry   8.  Adjourn  Superintendent Gundry   MEMBERS Jon R. Gundry, Superintendent/Committee Chair Darcie Green, Board Member Rosemary Kamei, Board Member Grace Mah, Board Member Mary Ann Dewan, Deputy Superintendent Philip Gordillo, Chief Human Resources Officer Del Mallory, SEIU Steve Olmos, Chief Schools Officer Angelica Ramsey, Associate Superintendent Lesbia Reclosado, SEIU Mark Skvarna, Interim Chief Business Officer Earl Thaxton, ACE/CTA Lisa Vieler, ACE/CTA David Wu, Chief Technology Officer  RECORDER Theresa Martinez 

1

1 

 

 BUDGET STUDY COMMITTEE 

UNAPPROVED MINUTES 

MAY 28, 2015 

 

1.  Roll Call and Introductions 

  Superintendent Gundry called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m. 

 

Members Present  Others Present Jon Gundry  Laurie Book Darcie Green  Don Bolce Phil Benfield  Kolvira Chheng Rosemary Kamei  Sandy Fakaosi Maribel Medina  Ted O Micaela Ochoa  Theresa Martinez (recorder) Angelica Ramsey   

 

2.  Setting the Agenda 

  Dr. Ramsey made a motion to accept the agenda as submitted; Board President Green seconded the 

motion.  The motion carried unanimously 

 

3.  Review and Approval of Minutes 

  Board President Green made a motion to approve the April 16, 2015 meeting minutes as submitted; 

Dr. Ramsey seconded the motion.  The motion carried unanimously. 

 

4.  Hearing of Persons Desiring to Address the Committee on Issues Not on the Agenda 

  None 

 

5.  May Revise Update 

  Mr. Chheng reviewed the 2015‐16 Governor’s May Revision.  Points of interest include: 

‐ LCFF Gap funding percentage at 53.08% (up from 32.19%, January budget). 

‐ One‐time discretionary funds of $601 per ADA for 2015‐16. 

 

  Dr. Ramsey asked what the effect will be with Early Childhood.  Mr. Chheng replied if the program is 

under the Prop 98 umbrella, it will come out of discretionary funds or the gap funding will be adjusted.  

Ms. Ochoa shared that with questions rising about $601 per ADA, districts have already held hearings 

and completed LCAP may not include the $601.  Districts are being advised to be transparent about 

additional revenue and to provide updates as necessary. 

 

‐ Lower COLA of 1.02% frees up funds for LCFF (down from 1.58%, January budget). 

‐ Additional $2.1 billion Prop 98 revenues, for a total of $6.1 billion. 

 

  Mr. Bolce asked if LCFF implementation is sustainable.  Mr. Chheng replied that all new money is going 

back to replace what was previously cut and will eventually even out.  Other highlights include: 

 

3

2 

 

‐ K‐12 COLA is 1.02% and applied to the LCFF base grants for each grade span. 

‐ Two grade span adjustments are applied as percentage increases against the adjusted base grant 

and also receive a 1.02% COLA. 

‐ Supplemental and concentration grants are calculated based on  the percentage of a district’s 

enrolled students  (English  learners,  free and reduced‐price meal eligible or foster youth).   Ms. 

Ochoa clarified that Charter Schools are capped at the district they reside in, at that districts level. 

‐ The May Revision proposes an LCFF gap funding percentage of 53.08%. 

‐ LEAs may  use  either  the  gap  percentage  proposed  at  the May  Revision  or  the  gap  funding 

percentage  contained  in  the  enacted  State  Budget  in  establishing  their  class‐size  reduction 

enrollment target for a given year. 

‐ Provides an increase of $2.4 billion in discretionary one‐time Prop 98 funding. 

‐ The Governor proposes to fully extinguish the remaining $992 million in apportionment deferrals 

in 2014‐15. 

‐ COEs receive $40 million one‐time discretionary funds to assist school districts in meeting their 

responsibilities under LCFF. 

‐ COEs at LCFF funding target will receive a 1.02% COLA and workload‐related funding increases in 

2015‐16. 

‐ COEs above LCFF funding target will receive no increase in funding, other than workload‐related 

changes. 

‐ Proposed 1.02% COLA for categorical programs outside of LCFF. 

‐ The CalPERS  employer  contribution  rate  increase  is  less  than  expected,  increasing  to 11.84% 

instead of 12.6% 

‐ The CalSTRS employer contribution rate statutorily increases to 10.73%. 

‐ Prop 30 income tax increase will generate more than $8 billion annually, but funds will no longer 

be available when it expires in 2018. 

‐ No  changes  proposed  for  Prop  2,  district  reserves,  if  certain  conditions  are met:    Prop  98 

maintenance factor must be fully repaid; Prop 98 must be funded based on Test 1; a deposit must 

be made  into  the Prop 98  reserve when  capital  gains  revenues  exceeds 8% of General  Fund 

reserves. 

‐ According to the May Revision, it is projected that the maintenance factor will not be fully repaid 

and Prop 98 will be funded based on Test 3, not Test 1. 

‐ A future recession is not forecast in any of the state’s revenue projections. 

 

  Mr. Chheng reviewed charts showing available reserve percentages for SCC state funded elementary, 

high and unified, and Basic Aid elementary, Basic Aid high and unified.  The charts show what districts 

are reporting and only capture reserves in the general fund.  Mr. Chheng explained the difference in 

percentages could be a result of varying board policies districts have that indicate where they need 

to maintain reserve levels and how they choose to report.  The new cap requirement will help ensure 

consistent reporting. 

 

6.  LAO Report on Ongoing State Aide 

  Ms. Ochoa reported on the Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended modifications to COE funding, 

including: 

‐ Recommend recognizing that many Basic Aid Districts are already funded at their LCFF targets. 

‐ Recommend amending statute to avoid creating new funding disparities among COEs. 

 

There was discussion of the one‐time funds.   

4

3 

 

 

7.  Resolution and Loan for School Districts 

  There was discussion regarding updating Resolution 2114‐2 to continue to provide temporary loans 

to school districts experiencing budget and cash flow  issues.   Ms. Ochoa shared that some district 

CBOs feel this is no longer necessary; others are cautious and still want the option if needed to meet 

their commitments. 

 

  Members identified reasons to continue to budget for loans and the likelihood of districts asking for 

temporary loans. 

 

  Districts would be obligated to repay the SCCOE fully with a prorated daily interest rate equivalent to 

the rate that would be accrued by funds held in the county treasury. 

 

  Ms. Ochoa recommended adopting an updated resolution to keep the amount budgeted for another 

year, and then revisit again next year.  Both Board President Green and Board Member Kamei agreed 

that continuing the resolution is important to support districts.  Superintendent Gundry also felt that 

updating the resolution would be in everybody’s best interest to support the districts’ if needed.  Ms. 

Medina  remarked  that  a positive press  release highlighting  the  resolution  and how  the  SCCOE  is 

continuing to support districts would be good. 

 

  Ms. Ochoa will prepare the transmittal to update the resolution for the June 3, 2015 Board meeting. 

 

8.  Future Agenda Items/Adjournment 

  Board Member Kamei expressed that it would be beneficial to have a running list of what items Board 

Members have requested to understand the priorities going forward. 

 

  Board President Green made a motion to adjourn; Dr. Ramsey seconded the motion.   The meeting 

adjourned at 4:30 p.m. 

 

5

3111 N. Tustin St, Ste. 120 - Orange, CA 92865

Certificates of Participation –Refunding Analysis

by

Isom Advisors,a Division of Urban Futures, Inc.&Piper Jaffray & Co.

November 20, 2015

Overview of Firms

3

Meeting your financial challenges and saving you money

Company Overview

Isom Advisors is a full service planning, campaign, and financial advisory firm that serves California school districts

The leading financial advisor to school districts for 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015

We are independent with no conflicts of interest

Our staff has over 50 years experience providing honest advice and the highest level of service

Strong references from our clients

County school district experience includes: Campaigns

Strong References

#1 K-12 Financial Advisor

Independence

50 Years Experience

“Isom Advisors brought to me an innovative plan that would upgrade and renovate our facilities as well as improve the general fund. They implemented the plan to perfection and we won handily.”

Tim Baird, Superintendent Encinitas Union School District

“Isom Advisors brought to me an innovative plan that would upgrade and renovate our facilities as well as improve the general fund. They implemented the plan to perfection and we won handily.”

Tim Baird, Superintendent Encinitas Union School District

Campbell HSD Franklin-McKinley ESD

Gilroy USD Morgan Hill USD

4

More K-12 bonds sold since 2011 than any FA firm

A Leader in the Industry

Isom Advisors has been the leading Financial Advisor to California school districts in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015

Isom Advisors is in the market managing bond sales more frequently than any other F.A. firm; this frequency provides our clients unparalleled experience in assessing bond structures and determining appropriate interest rates

Source: California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission and Thompson Reuters* Does not include TRANs or CFDs

2012 Ranking of Top 7 K-12 CA Financial Advisors# of District Bond Sales

Financial Advisor DistrictsIsom Advisors, Urban Futures Inc. 31Keygent 30Kelling Northcross Nobriga 27Caldwell Flores Winters 18Dale Scott & Co. 18Government Financial Strategies 14Dolinka Group 13

Total 151

2013 Ranking of Top 7 K-12 CA Financial Advisors# of District Bond Sales

Financial Advisor Districts

Isom Advisors, Urban Futures Inc. 55Keygent 41Dale Scott & Co. 29Fieldman Rolapp 29Caldwell Flores Winters 28Kelling Northcross Nobriga 25Dolinka Group 25

Total 232

2011 Ranking of Top 7 K-12 CA Financial Advisors# of District Bond Sales

Financial Advisor DistrictsIsom Advisors, Urban Futures Inc. 37Dale Scott & Co. 35Kelling Northcross Nobriga 28Caldwell Flores Winters 25Keygent 14Government Financial Strategies 14Dolinka Group 12

Total 165

2014 Ranking of Top 7 K-12 CA Financial Advisors # of District Bond Sales

Financial Advisor DistrictsIsom Advisors, Urban Futures Inc. 48Keygent 37Dale Scott & Co. 17Caldwell Flores Winters 15Fieldman Rolapp 11Government Financial Strategies 11Dolinka Group 10

Total 149

2015 Ranking of Top 7 K-12 CA Financial Advisors# of District Bond Sales to date 8/25/15

Financial Advisor DistrictsIsom Advisors, Urban Futures Inc. 61Dale Scott & Co. 23Government Financial Strategies 18Caldwell Flores Winters 16Keygent 16Kelling Northcross Nobriga 15Fieldman Rolapp 15

Total 164

5

Leading California Education Underwriter

Overview of Piper Jaffray

Piper Jaffray is a full-service middle market investment bank with a leading Public Finance practice

Piper Jaffray has some of the most experienced bankers in the industry having focused exclusively on the financing needs of California education issuers for over 21 years

Our senior bankers have a history of dedicated board service with education groups such as Coalition for Adequate School Housing (CASH), California Association of School Business Officials (CASBO), Californians for School Facilities (CSF), among others

Piper Jaffray is a perennial leader in both General Obligation and Certificate of Participation issuances for Education issuers

San FranciscoUnderwriting

Desk/Sales & Public Finance Office

SacramentoPublic Finance Office

Orange CountyPublic Finance Office

El Segundo(Los Angeles Area)Public Finance Office

6

Piper Jaffray’s Municipal Sales Force

Piper Jaffray’s Underwriting Expertise

Piper Jaffray’s San Francisco-based trading desk provides real-time feedback regarding investor preferences and sentiment for California education credits

Our continuous commitment to California Education provides a high level of communication between our underwriting desk and the investors interested in purchasing the County Office of Education’s Certificates

Our experienced municipal sales force provides the County Office of Education with a wide array of investors to maximize the demand for the Certificates and provide the County Office of Education with the lowest borrowing rates

Piper also has a dedicated Bank Qualified underwriting and sales force bringing another layer of expertise to the transaction

100 200 300 400 500 600

Morgan Stanley

George K Baum

RBC Capital Markets

Piper Jaffray & Co

Stifel Nicolaus

# of Issues

California EducationGeneral Obligation Issuances

2010-2015 (YTD)

10 20 30 40 50 60

George K Baum

Southwest Securities

RBC Capital Markets

Piper Jaffray & Co

Stifel Nicolaus

# of Issues

California EducationCertificate of Participation Issuances

2010-2015 (YTD)

Refunding Analysis

8

2016 Refunding OverviewExecutive summary

In April of 1995, the County Office of Education issued a $16,165,000 Certificate of Participation (“1995 COPs”) for the purposes of acquiring the land and improving/constructing the COE

The term of the 1995 COP was 30 years with payments through 2025

In June of 2002, the County Office of Education refunded the 1995 COPs by issuing a $15,895,000 Certificate of Participation (“2002 Refunding COPs) to reduce debt service

The financing was an advance refunding as it was completed a year prior to the first redemption date

The term of the 2002 Refunding COP is the same as it’s original until 2025 Total debt service savings equaled $764,947

Opportunity to refund the 2002 Refunding COPs, to lower the debt service (principal and interest) payments, and save the COE additional dollars

Potential savings of approximately $1.26 million

9

Interest Rate EnvironmentLow Interest Rate Environment

3.00%

3.50%

4.00%

4.50%

5.00%

5.50%

6.00%

1/1/

014/

1/01

7/1/

0110

/1/0

11/

1/02

4/1/

027/

1/02

10/1

/02

1/1/

034/

1/03

7/1/

0310

/1/0

31/

1/04

4/1/

047/

1/04

10/1

/04

1/1/

054/

1/05

7/1/

0510

/1/0

51/

1/06

4/1/

067/

1/06

10/1

/06

1/1/

074/

1/07

7/1/

0710

/1/0

71/

1/08

4/1/

087/

1/08

10/1

/08

1/1/

094/

1/09

7/1/

0910

/1/0

91/

1/10

4/1/

107/

1/10

10/1

/10

1/1/

114/

1/11

7/1/

1110

/1/1

11/

1/12

4/1/

127/

1/12

10/1

/12

1/1/

134/

1/13

7/1/

1310

/1/1

31/

1/14

4/1/

147/

1/14

10/1

/14

1/1/

154/

1/15

7/1/

1510

/1/1

5

Bond Buyer 20 Bond Index(January 1, 2001 to present)

High: 6.01% (10/16/08)Low: 3.27% (12/6/12)

Average: 4.47%Current: 3.74% (11/12/15)

10

Yields on the 2002 Refunding COPs range between 4.60% to 5.15%

Yields on the 2015 refunding COPs are estimated to range between 0.45% to 2.77%

This spread in interest rates is what generates the savings to the District

Yield Comparison

0.40%0.90%1.40%1.90%2.40%2.90%3.40%3.90%4.40%4.90%5.40%

Current Interest Rates Old Interest Rates

Comparing Interest RatesCurrent rates are lower than 2002 rates

11

Tax Rate Savings New Tax Rate Old Tax Rate

Tax Rate Savings New Tax Rate Old Tax Rate

Tax Rate Savings New Tax Rate Old Tax Rate

Deferred savings shortens the maturity of thebonds so that debt service savings are realizedin the final years. Interest cost is the lowest ofthe three options, but the savings are notrealized until later years.

Level Savings

Deferred Savings

Upfront Savings

Debt service savings are approximately level ineach year. Most common refunding structure.

Upfront savings provides near term debtservice savings by deferring principalamortization. Interest cost is the highest of thethree options, but the savings are immediate.

Tax Rate ($)

Years

Tax Rate ($)

Tax Rate ($)

Years

Years

The options below illustrate the three most commonrefunding structures:

1

2

3

Refunding structuring options

2016 Refunding

12

Series 2016 Refunding Savings

2016 Refunding Savings

Based on current interest rates, COE savings would equal approximately $1.26 million in total savings by refunding the 2002 Refunding COPs

Annual savings to the COE would be approximately $154,500 through 2024.

The industry accepted threshold for present value savings is a minimum of 3.00%. Based on current interest rates, the refunding would generate present value savings of nearly 12.78%

*Assumes The 2002 Refunding COP Reserve fund will be used to fully defease the 2025 maturity, and a portion of the 2024 maturity.

Date Prior Debt Service Prior Receipts Flow Refunding Debt Service Savings

4/1/2016 $945,488 $0 $945,488 $918,982 $26,5054/1/2017 1,168,350 - 1,168,350 1,011,350 157,000 4/1/2018 1,163,200 - 1,163,200 1,009,600 153,600 4/1/2019 1,165,675 - 1,165,675 1,012,250 153,425 4/1/2020 1,171,250 - 1,171,250 1,016,450 154,800 4/1/2021 1,167,500 - 1,167,500 1,014,250 153,250 4/1/2022 1,166,750 - 1,166,750 1,012,500 154,250 4/1/2023 1,163,750 - 1,163,750 1,008,750 155,000

*4/1/2024 1,168,500 5,815 1,162,685 1,008,000 154,685 *4/1/2025 1,165,500 1,165,500 - - -

Total $11,445,963 $1,171,315 $10,274,647 $9,012,132 $1,262,515

13

TimelineRefunding Schedule

Task Responsible Party Date

Initial discussion of refunding opportunity COE/FA/Underwriter September

Special Counsel delivers draft of legal documents for review Special Counsel October

Request State approval of financing Special Counsel October

Receive State approval Special Counsel November

Rating agency meeting COE/FA/Underwriter November 5

Budget Committee meeting to discuss financing FA/Underwriter November 20

Receive rating from S&P FA December 2

COE Board approves resolution authorizing refunding and supporting legal documents for the 2016 COP Refunding COE December 9

Price Certificates COE/Finance Team January 14

Closing of 2016 COP Refunding COE/Finance Team January 27

Budget Study Committee MeetingInternal Business ServicesBusiness Services Branch

November 20,2015

2015‐16 State Budget Act

On June 25th, 2015 Governor Jerry Brown signed the 2015‐16 State Budget Act.  At this time we received confirmation for approval of pending funding for $5.1 M in state aid. 

Branch Chiefs and program managers submitted requests with justifications to use a portion of this funding for program enhancements and augmentations to existing programs.

All program additions and augmentations support the goals of the SCCOE by providing services to:

1. Improve student equity and reduce access discrepancies to high quality education

2. Provide support to districts, communities, schools and students

3. Be a premier employer

4. Improve organizational effectiveness and efficiency

2

7

SCCOE Program Enhancements

• On June 17th, 2015,  the SCCBOE approved $3.2 M for new programs and augmentations to existing programs

• The slides to follow are categorized by branch, program name and the amount of funding requested

• Corresponding numbers , 1 through 4, are notated in red at the end of each program name to identify the corresponding SCCOE goals

• The program summary descriptions are included on the excel handouts provided

3

Educational Services Branch

4

$1,246,276  

Categorical and Special Projects “ Trainings for ELAC, SSC, DAL, LCAP/LCFF to districts”;  1, 2

53,363

Project Working on Refining our Destiny (WORD);  1, 2

49,750

Greene Scholars Program (GSP);   1, 2 2,300

Summer Institute @ TeenForce & Bullis;  1, 2 136,000

African American Student Day;   1, 2 5,000

Brother and Sister Roundtables;   1, 2 36,900

Beyond Mentoring Day;   1, 2 40,000

Parent University;   2 42,000

Teacher on Special Assignment (TOSA) / Instructional Coaches Institute;  1, 2

11,275

Aspiring Administrator Institute;   2 22,500

8

Educational Services Branch Cont’d

5

Central Office Institute;  2, 4 8,000

School Climate;  2, 4 183,909

College Day;   1, 2 5,000

Santa Clara County Asian PacificIslander Educators and Administrators;   1, 2

20,000

Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics (STEAM) Symposium;  2

29,400

San Jose/Silicon Valley (SJSV2020) Symposium;  1, 2 13,000

San Jose/Silicon Valley (SJSV2020) Symposium;   1, 2 29,049

Superintendent’s Speakers;   2, 4 47,680

Sobrato Early Academic Language (SEAL) Project;   1, 2

165,400

Educational Services Branch Cont’d

6

The Jose Valdes Math Institute – Professional Development for Teachers;   1, 2 49,750

History/Social Sciences/Civics – Professional Consultants for CCSS;   1, 2 50,000

Ed Leader 21 – Professional Development for District Leaders;   2 96,000

Hispanic Foundation of Silicon Valley’s Family College Success Center;  1, 2 100,000

San Jose / Silicon Valley (SJSV2020) Educational Support‐Teacher Pipeline Study;  2 50,000

9

Human Resources

7

$122,000

Extra Coverage for SCCOE Events (i.e. Teacher Recruitment, Classified Recruitment);  2, 3, 4

8,000

Addition to HR2 as requested by School Districts;  2, 3, 4 15,000

Support to Wellness Program;  3 75,000

Online Software for Performance Evaluation Management;  3, 4

12,000

Software for Monitoring and Maintaining Data Relevant to the Affordable Care Act;  3

12,000

Office of the Superintendent

8

$224,021

Internal Audit Budget for 2015‐16 unplanned of unexpected projects;   4

51,000

Strong Start Director I Position;   4 173,021

10

Student Services Branch

9

$1,318,344

Meetings with Stakeholders to cover Travel, Food, Materials and Guest Speakers;   2

10,000

Professional Services to Conduct Program Review for Sp. Ed and Guest Speaker;   2, 4

95,000

Peer Assistance Review Teachers and Panel Members;  2

33,622

Reduction of Indirect for Migrant Ed to 8%;  2, 4 112,000

Reduction of Indirect for Headstart to 8.5%;  2, 4 358,000

Technology Support for Migrant Ed;   2 89,722

Inclusion Collaborative – Manager to Director;   4 20,000

Online High School Project Planning & Start‐Up;  1, 2 350,000

Student Services Branch Cont’d

10

Additional, TBD Special Education FacilitiesUpgrades;   1, 2 150,000

Special Education Facilities Analysis (consultant or staff and materials);    3, 4

100,000

11

Technology Services Branch

11

$340,783

Funding for Educational Technology ServicesAcademic Technology Specialist and Operational Expenses;  4

210,783

Database Administrator to support Migrant Education;   2

130,000

Additional SCCOE Program Enhancements

• Throughout the fiscal year, Program Addition Forms are submitted to the Superintendent with justification for additional funding from unrestricted reserves

• These forms are signed by the requestor, Branch Chief, Chief Business Officer and approved by the Superintendent

• The slides to follow are categorized by branch, program name and the amount of funding requested

• Corresponding numbers , 1 through 4, are notated in red at the end of each program name to identify the corresponding SCCOE goals

• The program summary descriptions are included on the excel handouts provided

12

12

Educational Services Branch

13

$267,177

White House Initiative on Asian American & Pacific Islanders;   1, 2

18,228

Learning Multimedia Center / Book Academy;   2 2,500

Associate Superintendent Travel;    2 25,000

Learning Multimedia Center / Silicon Valley Reads;    2 23,000

Additional Ed Leader 21   (SJSV2020)‐reimbursement to Districts;     2, 4

3,000

American Leadership Forum (ALF) Board Training;    4 12,500

Sobrato Early Academic Language (SEAL) Project;  1, 2 86,600

USC Urban Superintendent Academy;   4 30,000

C&I Multilingual Education Services (2015‐16)  11 FTE – Coordinator – 2 years only (2016‐17 ‐ $88,465)

66,349

Office of the Superintendent

14

$91,408

Media & Communications – Contract with Communication Resources to Schools (Thomas DeLapp) – Walden West Matters;    2, 4

58,908

Media & Communications (Contract extension with Communication Resources for WW Matters and Superintendent Projects;    2, 4

32,500

13

Student Services Branch

15

$1,086,379

Improvements at Walden West (Deferred Maintenance Fund Balance);    2, 4

870,000

Online Registration System for Teachers ‐ EducationPreparation for Inclusion Classroom/Local Education Agency Planning (EPIC/LEAP);  2, 4  

61,200

Foster Youth Services‐Funding for Emerging Scholars, Summer School Credit Recovery, Facilitation Services, Dental Mobile Van; 1, 2

155,179

Programs Supported by the SCCBOE for Ongoing or Multi‐Year Additional Funding

• Alternative Education to include the new Opportunity Youth Academy‐OYA,Contributions as of 10/31/15: 

– Community Schools                                                                                          $1,183,372

– Opportunity Youth Academy $1,075,466

– Juvenile Court Schools $   547,950

– The contributions fluctuate based on changes in ADA estimates                                  during the year with the final actual ADA calculated on P‐annual 

• ROP transition funding 2015‐16 through 2017‐18 $5,560,792

• Educare of SV, 2015‐16 and 2016‐17, for salaries and benefits for staff                                     to augment Early Learning/Head Start services  ($750k per year) $1,500,000 

• 1% of CSSF expenditures (for calculation) to our Facilities Fund after 4% reserve requirement is met and funding is available (assigned) $2,286,312

• Reduction of Indirect for Walden West from 10.47% to 5%  (1 X) $   142,195

16

14

Technology Services Branch (TSB) Funding History For Contributions for Internal Services

• Prior to 2008‐09, object code 5710‐19 was used to transfer direct costs (expenditures) to programs, and a corresponding credit was booked to reduce expenditures in TSB

• TSB was reimbursed using this object code for services provided to programs such as:

– Maintain/Upgrade Installation for all computers, printers, laptops, servers, lab PC’s,phone, SCCOE maintenance and Internet data communication 

– Processing services for accounting, payroll, human Resources and DBAS

– Site support for AED, Headstart, Special Ed, State Preschool, Walden West and a Database Administrator for Migrant Education

• This process of charging individual programs for uniform services provided was extremely tedious and time consuming. Since the majority of the services provided benefited all programs, it was viewed as overhead, therefore covered by indirect

• It was also agreed that due to the indirect rate for the student services programs  increasing by 1% each year (not to exceed the SCCOE standard rate of 10.47%), this would generate additional income to Fund 800, so a kickback to TSB for the site support noted above was provided 

17

Technology Services Branch (TSB) Funding History For Contributions for Internal Services

18

• Therefore, in 2008‐09, a decision was made to eliminate the use of the 5710‐19 direct charge process and contribute from reserves an amount based on an itemized revenue estimate for the items noted on the prior slide (contribution object code 8980‐89)

• The only time 5710‐19 object code is used is for program specific requests that do not benefit all SCCOE programs

• 2009‐10, Technology Services (at that time known as Regional Technology Center‐RTC), reorganized and became the Technology Services Branch. Previously RTC was part of the Business Services Branch, the name change actually occurred in 2010‐11

• The reorganization continued in 2010‐11 and several of the technology related programs in Fund 800 were moved to TSB with the agreement Fund 800 would contribute the amount of the original expenditure cost for these programs using object code 8980‐90

• TSB also receives revenues from external resources for services to districts

• The revenue and expenditures for internal and external services are tracked separately to maintain a record of fund balance generated from both resources

15

Technology Services Branch Funding From Contributions for Internal Services

• Technology Services; Internal Revenue

– Direct costs for Transfers of Service (8980‐89) $ 3,436,967

– Reorganization Contribution (8980‐90) 775,846

– 901 School Districts  (8980‐06) 58,443

Total Internal Revenue Contribution $ 4,271,256                       

19

16

17

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Santa Clara County Office of Ed

ucation

Internal Business Services

2015‐16 $1.4 M

 Additional Program

 Enhan

cements from Reserves

As of October 31, 2015

Program

 Impact Justification

Requested By

Branch

Amount 

Requested 

Budgeted

White House initiative on Asian

 American

 and Pacific Islanders provides support 

for Asian

 Americans and Pacific Islander studen

ts and educators‐COE to offer 

workshops

Yee Wan

Educational 

Services Branch

$18,228

Learning Multim

edia Cen

ter‐Book Academ

yBeth 

Olshew

sky

Educational 

Services Branch

$2,500

ESB Support Services‐travel expen

ses for Associate Superintenden

t due to 

increased duties

Angelica 

Ram

sey, Ed.D.

Educational 

Services Branch

$25,000

Learning Multim

edia Cen

ter‐Silicon Valley Reads financial support

Beth 

Olshew

sky

Educational 

Services Branch

$23,000

Additional Ed Leader21‐reimbursem

ent to Districts for even

t in Dallas

Angelica 

Ram

sey, Ed.D.

Educational 

Services Branch

$3,000

ALF (American

 Leadership Forum) Board Training‐support for Luther Burbank SD

Angelica 

Ram

sey, Ed.D.

Educational 

Services Branch

$12,500

SEAL (Sobrato Early Academ

ic Language) M

odel‐coverage for subs for SEAL 

training, and m

aterials

Angelica 

Ram

sey, Ed.D.

Educational 

Services Branch

$86,600

USC

 Urban

 Superintenden

t Academ

y‐reim

burse 5 peo

ple for travel costs accepted 

to program

Angelica 

Ram

sey, Ed.D.

Educational 

Services Branch

$30,000

C&I M

ultilingual Education Services (2015‐16)                                                                    

1 FTE ‐ Coordinator ‐ 2 years only (2016‐17 ‐ $88,465)

Angelica 

Ram

sey, Ed.D.

Educational 

Services Branch

$66,349

Educational Service Branch Total

$267,177 Page 1 of 2

29

Santa Clara County Office of Ed

ucation

Internal Business Services

2015‐16 $1.4 M

 Additional Program

 Enhan

cements from Reserves

As of October 31, 2015

Program

 Impact Justification

Requested By

Branch

Amount 

Requested 

Budgeted

One Time addition of $67,500 for contract with Communication Resources of 

Schools to assist with communications assistance related

 to W

alden

 West matter.

Ken

 Blackstone

Office of the 

Superintenden

t$58,908

Contract extension with communication resources for schools to continue with 

assistance and advertisem

ent related to the Walden

 West matter and other 

projects designated

 by the Superintenden

t

Ken

 Blackstone

Office of the 

Superintenden

t$32,500

Office of the Superintendent To

tal

$91,408

Improvemen

ts at Walden

 West

Mary Ann 

Dew

anStuden

t Services

$870,000

EPIC (Educ Prep for Incl Classroom) / LEAP (Leaders in Educational Administration 

Program

)Janice Battaglia

Studen

t Services

$61,200

Foster Youth Services

Sonja House

Studen

t Services

$155,179

Student Services Branch Total

$1,086,379

Grand Total for One‐tim

e Costs

$1,444,964

Page 2 of 2

30