Www.smcoe.org LCFF-LCAP Summit 1 2014-15 November 17, 2014 SMCOE LCAP Team

www.smcoe.org

LCFF-LCAP Summit 12014-15

November 17, 2014

SMCOE LCAP Team

www.smcoe.org

AGENDA1.Welcome/Introductions

2.Mindset – LCAP Updates

3.LCAP NEW Template

> MPP

4. 2014-15 LCAP Journey

>Timeline

> Stakeholder Engagement

> LCAP and Other Plans

5. Next Steps - Rubrics

3

Lessons Learned From First LCAP

• One significant thing we accomplished• One important thing we learned• One thing we will repeat or change

this year

With your district team or table group, reflect on your LCAP activities to date. List one idea in each category, then pick one thing to share with the larger group:

www.smcoe.org

SBE Action, November 14, 2014

Update

www.smcoe.org

www.smcoe.org

2014-15 LCFF-LCAP - Mindset

The 2014-15 revision/update of the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) will continue to be rooted in the principles for EQUITY established in the Local Control funding Formula (LCFF) statute:

Improved student outcomes & elimination of subgroup gaps

Subsidiarity

Transparency

Stakeholder Engagement

www.smcoe.org

LCAP Guiding Principles - Mindset

The revision of the LCAP should adhere then to the principles of:

Subsidiarity:

• Local control

• Flexibility based on local needs

• Tells a story about your community’s vision for its students and the path for arriving there

www.smcoe.org


Transparency:

• The LCAP must adequately demonstrate that the District is using LCFF funding to increase and improve services for ALL students, but is also keenly focused on the neediest students

www.smcoe.org


Stakeholder Engagement:

• Stakeholders are meaningfully engaged in the development, continuous improvement and annual update/revision of the LCAP

•The LCAP and the district’s spending plan will be accessible to stakeholders

www.smcoe.org


Ultimately and Most Importantly:

Student-Focused

• The LCAP must be based upon an assessment of student need

• The LCAP goals and actions of the plan must focus on improved outcomes for ALL students and the district’s subgroups

www.smcoe.org

LCAP and Local Accountability

The LCAP is intended to be the document that effectively communicates to all stakeholders:

1. Locally defined LCAP GOALS

2. Actions and Services to achieve LCAP Goals

3. Expenditures associated with the LCAP Goals

www.smcoe.org

Suggested Timeline for 2014-15

July – December 2014

Identify and consult stakeholdersReview LCAP goals, actions and services for needed adjustmentsUpdate progressReview available data for Annual ReportDevelop timeline for data collection and reportingReport demographic information via CALPADSReview alignment of district & site plans with LCAP

January - March 2015

Consult stakeholders

Continue modification of LCAP and updating progress on Annual Report

Review proposed state budget (2015-16) and local implications

Submit 2nd Interim Budget report

April - June 2015Consult stakeholdersReview May revision of proposed State budget (2015-16) and local implications

Invite public comment on draft LCAP

Present draft LCAP to PACsRespond to comments in writingFinalize Annual ReportHold LCAP and budget public hearingReceive local board approvalSubmit to SMCOEReceive LCAPs from charter schools

www.smcoe.org

LCAP Year 1: What was learned?

Findings from PACE Study:

Toward a Grand Vision:

Early Implementation of California’s Local Control Funding Formula

www.smcoe.org

Study overview

•Policy maker Interviews

•Document review: 40 LCAPs, district budgets, school board minutes

•10 Case Study Districts:

•Document review•District, union, school board, parents, County Office in-person interviews (79 interviews)

•14 County Offices of Education telephone interviews (serving 458 districts)

•Conducted July – October 2014

www.smcoe.org

Findings•LCFF Changed school funding from an equal formula to an equity formula

•While LCFF is well supported by stakeholders; its not widely known by the general public

•Needs-based budgeting v. Categorical mindset budgeting is evolving for all

•LCFF is breaking the silos between Fiscal Managers and Curriculum and Instruction Managers

•Adequate metrics to measure success in meeting goals is still a challenge

•Local Control/Ownership/Subsidiarity is work in progress

•Districts generally lacked the necessary skills, strategies, and resources to truly engage citizens, parents, advocacy groups, students, and educators in decision- making around the complex and sometimes contentious issues inherent in LCFF.

www.smcoe.org

www.smcoe.org

The Revised LCAP Template (2015-16)

• Approved Regulations

• Revised LCAP Template

• Things to Consider

www.smcoe.org

Revised LCAP

• SBE-Approved LCAP Regulations and Revised LCAP Template

• Proposed in July 2014

• Approved in September

– Opened additional 15-day public comment period

• Adoption expected in November 2014

• Effective for 2015-16 LCAP

www.smcoe.org

Revised LCAP

• How have the regulations changed?

– Revised / new definitions– Expanded requirements related to use

of supplemental and concentration funds

– Clarified role of COEs in determining compliance with proportionality requirements

20

Revisions to the State Priorities

21

Revised State Priorities

• Implementation of State Standards: implementation of academic content and performance standards and English language development standards adopted by the state board for all pupils, including English learners. (Priority2)

• Parental involvement: efforts to seek parent input in decision making at the district and each school site, promotion of parent participation for programs for unduplicated pupils and special need subgroups. (Priority 3)

www.smcoe.org

Revised / New Definitions

22

• Pupil Consultation– Clarified requirement for districts to include

unduplicated and other numerically-significant pupil subgroups in the LCAP development process

• Parents– Expanded definition to include anyone holding

rights to make educational decisions for pupils• Parent Advisory Committees

– Technical clarifications regardingrequirements to form groups

www.smcoe.org

Use of Targeted Funds

23

• No change to definitions for:– Services– Increase– Improve

• Requirement to increase or improve services to unduplicated pupils remains

• Additional requirements for district-wideor school-wide use of targeted funds

www.smcoe.org

Principally Directed

24

• Supplemental and Concentration Funds to be “principally directed toward” unduplicated students– Must identify students to understand where services

are required:• District-wide• Site-specific

• Family Educational and Privacy Act (FERPA)Responsibilities– Protect personally identifiable information (PII)– Cannot implement programs which effectively identify

students in subgroups

• District must be cognizant of potentially sensitive designations:– Low-income– Foster youth– English learner– Special Education

www.smcoe.org

Principally Directed (continued)

25

• Districts have discretion in determining how funds/services are “principally directed” toward pupil subgroups

• Identify services which benefit all students but provide a greater benefit for pupil subgroups

• “Pull-out” services may inadvertently reveal personally identifiable information

• Alternative may be “pull-in” services, where specialized services are provided to an entire class– Part of service which provides greater benefit

to pupil subgroups

www.smcoe.org

Expanded COE Oversight

26

• 2014-15 COE LCAP Approval Criteria– Use of SBE Template– Complied with expenditure requirements

(budgeted expenditures sufficient to implement plan)

– Compliance with expenditure regulations(minimum proportionality)

• Revised regulations expand oversight responsibilities related to demonstration of minimum proportionality

www.smcoe.org

COE Oversight - Proportionality

27

• Section 15497– …county superintendent of schools SHALL

review any descriptions of districtwide or schoolwide services…when determining whether the school district has FULLY DEMONSTRATED that it will increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils… (emphasis added)

• COE to provide technical assistance to district if LCAP not approved as a result

COE Oversight of Proportionality COE to review descriptions of districtwide or

schoolwide services

If LCAP not approved due to not meeting proportionalityrequirements, then COE to provide technical

assistance

Code changes Renumbered from 5 CCR 15496(c) to 15497 Changed “LEA” to “school district” Expanded “review any descriptions” to “include

review of descriptions of districtwide services…or schoolwide services…”

Clarified “proportionality requirement” to “requirement to increaseor improve services for unduplicated pupils

COE Oversight of ProportionalityExpanded Requirement for COEs

15497. County superintendent shall include review of any descriptions of districtwide and schoolwide services provided when determining whether the school district has fully demonstrated that it will increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils pursuant to section 15496(a)

Review of additional “basis for determination” required in the description of how selected services provided are the most effective use of funds to meet the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils Basis shall include, but not limited to, the following:

Alternatives considered Supporting research Experience Educational theory

www.smcoe.org

Revised LCAP Template• SBE-Approved Revised LCAP

Template• Major Format Changes• Goal Consolidation• Annual Update• Guiding Questions

www.smcoe.org

Guiding Questions

31

• New/modified questions for revised LCAPTemplate:

– Stakeholder Engagement (Section 1)• How was information made available?• What specific actions were taken to

consult with pupils…?• How has stakeholder involvement been

continued and supported?

www.smcoe.org

LCAP Format Changes• Section 1

– Added row for annual update

32

www.smcoe.org

Goal Consolidation

20

• New LCAP Format may require districts toconsider consolidating goals and services

• Each goal will require 2 pages at a minimum

• District LCAPS around the State have 3 to30 goals

• Greater number of goals may increase length of LCAP and reduce usability for local stakeholders

www.smcoe.org

LCAP Format Changes• Revised Section 2– Combines Sections 2, 3A, and 3B from

previoustemplate

– Goal-driven (2 pages per goal minimum)

LCAP Year 1: xxxx-xx

LCAP Year 2: xxxx-xx

34

www.smcoe.org

Section 2 Tables (2015-16)GOAL:

Related State and/or Local Priorities:1__ 2__ 3__ 4__ 5__ 6__ 7__ 8__

COE only: 9__ 10__Local : Specify _____________________

Identified Need :

Goal Applies to:

Schools:

Applicable Pupil Subgroups:

LCAP Year 1: xxxx-xxExpected Annual

Measurable Outcomes:

Actions/ServicesScope of Service

Pupils to be served within identified scope of service BudgetedExpenditures

__ALL

OR:__Low Income pupils __English Learners__Foster Youth __Redesignated fluent English proficient __Other Subgroups:(Specify)________________________

35

www.smcoe.org36

– Goals, Actions, Expenditures, andProgress Indicators (Section 2)

• What actions/services will be provided to all pupils, to subgroups of pupils identified…, to specific school sites, to English learners, to low-income pupils, and/or to foster youth?

• How do these actions/services link to identified goals and expected measurable outcomes?

www.smcoe.org

LCAP Format Changes• New Annual Update Section– Budgeted vs. Estimated

Expenditures– Goal-driven (1 page per goal minimum)

37

www.smcoe.org

Annual Update Section - 1

38

• How have actions/services addressed needs of all pupils and were desired outcomes achieved?

– For pupil subgroups?– For sites?

• What information was used to evaluate progress toward goals?

• What progress has been made, how effectivewere actions/services?

• Reasons for difference between budgeted and estimated actual expenditures?

www.smcoe.org

Annual Update Section - 2

39

• Components• Concerns

– Breakdown of expenditures by pupil subgroups

– Differences between Budgeted and Actual

• Recommendation for estimates:– Use budget information that is

available• Budgeted Expenditures• 1st Interim Budget

• Use to explain what was planned vs. what actually took place and why

www.smcoe.org

Annual Update Tables (2014-15)Original GOAL from prior year

LCAP:

Related State and/or Local Priorities:1__ 2__ 3__ 4__ 5__ 6__ 7__ 8__

COE only: 9__ 10__

Local : Specify _____________________

Goal Applies to:Schools: Applicable Pupil Subgroups:

Expected Annual Measurable Outcomes:

Actual AnnualMeasurable Outcomes:

LCAP Year: xxxx-xxPlanned Actions/Services Actual Actions/Services

Budgeted

Expenditures

Estimated Actual Annual Expenditures

Scope of service:

Scope of service:

__ALL __ALL

OR:__Low Income pupils __English Learners__Foster Youth __Redesignated fluent English proficient __Other Subgroups:(Specify)___________

OR:__Low Income pupils __English Learners__Foster Youth __Redesignated fluent English proficient __Other Subgroups:(Specify)_____________

What changes in actions, services, and expenditures will be made as a

result of reviewing past progress and/or changes to goals?

40

www.smcoe.org

Section 3A and 3B – Use of Supplemental and Concentration Grant Funds and Proportionality

Total amount of Supplemental and Concentration grant funds calculated: $_____________________________

Instructions for 3A: In the box below, 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 pupils as determined pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a)(5). Describe how the LEA is expending these funds in the LCAP year. Include a description of, and justification for, the use of any funds in a districtwide, schoolwide, countywide, or charterwide manner as specified in 5 CCR 15496. For school districts with below 55 percent of enrollment of unduplicated pupils in the district or below 40 percent of enrollment of unduplicated pupils at a school site in the LCAP year, when using supplemental and concentration funds in a districtwide or schoolwide manner, the school district must additionally describe how the services provided are the most effective use of funds to meet the district’s goals for unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas. (See 5 CCR 15496(b) for guidance.)

41

www.smcoe.org

Section 3A and 3B – Use of Supplemental and Concentration Grant Funds and Proportionality

Instructions for 3B: In the box below, identify the percentage by which services for unduplicated pupils must be increased or improved as compared to the services provided to all pupils in the LCAP year as calculated pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a).

Consistent with the requirements of 5 CCR 15496, demonstrate how the services provided in the LCAP year for low income pupils, foster youth, and English learners provide for increased or improved services for these pupils in proportion to the increase in funding provided for such pupils in that year as calculated pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a)(7). An LEA shall describe how the proportionality percentage is met using a quantitative and/or qualitative description of the increased and/or improved services for unduplicated pupils as compared to the services provided to all pupils.

%

LCAP Section 3

LCAP Section 3 Changes LCFF overview Purpose of MPP &

Supplemental/Concentration Grants

MPP Calculations

What to enter - where and how

LCAP Format Changes• Section 3A and 3B

– Previously Sections 3C and 3D– Minor changes – boxes for Supplemental and

Concentration Funding Total ($) and Minimum Proportionality Percentage (MPP) (%)

*Unduplicated Pupil Percentage (UPP) must be above 55%

Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF)

Target Entitlement

NecessarySma

llSchool

Grade Span AdjustmentK-3 9-12

Base Grant(by grade span)

Supplemental Grant

Concentration Grant*

Targeted Instructional Improvement Block Grant

Home-to-School Transportation

Adjusted

Base Grant

Add- ons

12-13 Award Level

Unduplicated CountEnglish

Learners Low Income FosterYouth

ADA

LCFF – Economic Recovery Target (ERT)Additional funding for LEAs that would have received more funding under the old funding system, undeficited, when compared to the new LCFF, as projected for fiscal year 2020-21

Revenue Limit & Categoricals

LCFF

2020-21

Calculated one-time as part of 2013-14 calculation and funded over 8 years, additional 1/8 each year.

Calculation was completed by CDE in 2013-14P-2 certification (June 2014).

Is a component of the transition calculation and permanent add-on once Target is reached.

Minimum Proportionality PercentageLCFF provides additional

funding based on the unduplicated count of low-income, English learner, and foster youth

Supplemental & Concentration grants (S & C)

LEAs must increase or improve services to these pupils in proportion to the increase in funds

Base program services

Increased or improved services

Minimum Proportionality Percentage MPP is the lowest level of increased or improved services forunduplicated students A minimum, not a maximum Services funded with LCFF

Not federal or other restricted

Services are above those provided for all students (base program) Not above services in prior year Not a maintenance of effort calculation

In the LCAP year Not the current year Can calculate additional years for transition planning

Minimum Proportionality Percentage

At full LCFF implementationThe MPP calculation is:

*Less TIIG and Transportation (add-ons)

Supplemental&

Concentration

Grants

All

Othe

r

LCFFFunding*

%

MPP

ExampleAt full LCFF implementation

$ 1,000,00

0--------------

8,100,000

=12.35%

MPP

S&C

Total LCFF

$ 9,600,000

-500,00

0-

1,000,000

--------------$ 8,100,000

- TIIG/Transp.

- S & C---------------All other LCFF

Components AmountBase Grant / NSS $

8,000,000Supplemental & Concentration

1,000,000

TIIG & Transportation

500,000

ERT 100,000

Total LCFF $ 9,600,000

Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF)

Transition Entitlement

RL/NSS

Categoricals

Base/NSS

Supp. & Conc.

TIIG & Transp.

TIIG & Transp.

PY Gap

Floor

CY Funded Gap

ERT

Add.St.Aid for Min.St.Aid

CY Total Gap

How much counts as S

& C for MPP?

TARGET

FLOOR

TRANSITION

Minimum Proportionality Percentage

During LCFF Transition Part of the LCFF Transition total is attributed to Supplemental and Concentration for purposes of the MPP calculation

Compare prior year spending for increased or improved services to unduplicated pupils to the Target S & C amount If spending more than Target S & C

= Target S & C If spending less than Target S & C

= PY spending + difference between PY spending and Target

S & C multiplied by Gap %

Do the math during transition, even when Floor is above Target

Increased or improved services

Minimum Proportionality PercentageDuring LCFF

TransitionFirst, calculate the amount of LCFF Transition funding to attribute to Supplemental and Concentration:

Attributed S&C Dollars

All

Othe

r

LCFFFunding*

MPP

Prior year spending for increased / improved services

+ Difference between PY spending and Target S & C multiplied by Gap %

= Amount attributed to S & C

Then, same calculation.

%

Only duringTransition

*less TIIG & Transportation

Example – During LCFF Transition

1. Target S & C2. Est. PY

expenditures forunduplicated pupils

3. Balance to target(step 1 – step 2)

4. Portion of balance(step 3 x Gap %)

5. Est. S & C(step 2 + step 4)6. All other LCFF

(LCFF transition total* – step 5)*less TIIG & transportation

7. MPP (step 5 ÷ step 6)

800,000300,000------------ 500,000

x 20.00%100,000-------------400,000

÷8,000,0005.00%

•Estimate

Prior year spending

•Balance x Gap %

Plus portion of balance

to Target S&C

S&C

MPP

Use LCFF Calculator to Help

Enter PY spending estimates

Step 5 is S & C

Step 7 is MPP

Minimum Proportionality Percentage (MPP): Summary Supplemental & Concentration Grant

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16** 2016-17**1. LCFF Target Supplemental & Concentration

Grant Fundingfrom Calculator tab

810,869 785,040 767,827

2. Prior Year (estimated) Expenditures for Unduplicated Pupils above what was spent on services for all pupils

150,000 300,000 450,000

Prior Year EIA expenditures 103,681

2014-15 py exp (2013-14 exp) must >= 2012-13 EIA exp TRUE

3. Difference [1] less [2] 660,869 485,040 317,827

4. Estimated Additional Supplemental & Concentration Grant Funding[3] * GAP funding rate

195,353 100,306 80,982

GAP funding rate 29.56% 20.68% 25.48%

5. Estimated Supplemental and Concentration Grant Funding [2] plus [4] (unless [3]<0 then [1]) LCAP Section 3, Part C

345,353 400,306 530,982

6. Base FundingLCFF Phase-In Entitlement less [5],excludes Targeted Instructional Improvement & Transportation

7,923,642 7,831,342 7,787,624

LCFF Phase-In Entitlement 8,841,665 8,804,318 8,891,276

7/8. Minimum Proportionality Percentage*[5] / [6]LCAP Section 3, Part D

4.36% 5.11% 6.82%

Use LCFF Calculator to Help

Results also shown on Summary tab S & C amount MPP

LCFF Calculator available at fcmat.org

Minimum Proportionality Percentage (MPP): Summary Supplemental & Concentration

Grant

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Current year estimated supplemental and concentration grant funding in the LCAP yea

$ 345,353 $ 400,306 $ 530,982

Current year Minimum Proportionality Percentage (MPP) 4.36% 5.11% 6.82%

Where to enter the results

S & C amount (step 5) goes to part 3A (old 3C) Enter in single line (NEW) at the top of

the box

• MPP (step 7) goes to part 3B (old 3D)• Enter in the separate % box (NEW) at the top

of the box

Step 7 MPP

Total amount of Supplemental and Concentration grant funds calculated: $_ Step 5 S & C

Section 3A – Use of Supplemental and Concentration Grant Funds

Total amount of Supplemental and Concentration grant funds calculated: $_____________________________

Instructions for 3A: In the box below, 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 pupils as determined pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a)(5). Describe how the LEA is expending these funds in the LCAP year. Include a description of, and justification for, the use of any funds in a districtwide, schoolwide, countywide, or charterwide manner as specified in 5 CCR 15496. For school districts with below 55 percent of enrollment of unduplicated pupils in the district or below 40 percent of enrollment of unduplicated pupils at a school site in the LCAP year, when using supplemental and concentration funds in a districtwide or schoolwide manner, the school district must additionally describe how the services provided are the most effective use of funds to meet the district’s goals for unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas. (See 5 CCR 15496(b) for guidance.)

LCAP 3A-Describe ExpendituresKey Changes – 5 CCR 15496 Funded – Added to 15496 the requirement to identify

those services that are being funded in addition to identifying services being provided on a districtwide and schoolwide basis

Principally – Added to section 15496 related to describing how districtwide and schoolwide services are principally directed towards meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils

And are effective in – Added to 15496 related to describing how districtwide and schoolwide services are effective in meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils

Provide basis for this determination – Added to 15496 the requirement that the description provided for districtwide and schoolwide services provide the basis for this determination, including, but not limited to, any alternatives considered and any supporting research, experience, or educational theory

LCAP 3A – Describe Expenditures

Describe how LEA is expending S&C funds in the LCAP Year

•LOW-INCOME PUPILS

• ENGLISH LEARNERS

• FOSTER YOUTH

If DISTRICTWIDE,

SCHOOLWIDE,

COUNTYWIDE, or

CHARTERWIDE

• REDESIGNATED FLUENT ENGLISH PROFICIENT•OTHER SUBGROUPS

• FOSTER YOUTH

LCAP 3A – Describe Expenditures Clearly defining base to determine services above

and beyond what is provided to all students What do you provide to all students if no S&C

funds received? Starting point for determining services above

and beyond what is provided to all students Will look different for most districts

55% + Unduplicated Students*• Identify services funded and

provided• Describe how services are:

– Principally directed toward(local discretion)

– Effective in meeting goals forunduplicated students

Less than 55%**• Identify services funded and




• Describe how services are most effective:– Include basis for determination– Any alternatives considered– Supporting research,

experience,or educational theory

District-wide Use of Funds

*Note: Current or prior year **Note: Current year only

40% + Unduplicated Students*• Identify services funded and




Less than 40%**• Identify services funded and




• Describe how services are most effective:– Include basis for determination– Any alternatives considered– Supporting research,

experience,or educational theory

School-wide Use of Funds

**Note: Current year enrollment only*Note: Enrollment in current or prior year

Section 3B – Minimum Proportionality Percentage

Instructions for 3B: In the box below, identify the percentage by which services for unduplicated pupils must be increased or improved as compared to the services provided to all pupils in the LCAP year as calculated pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a).

Consistent with the requirements of 5 CCR 15496, demonstrate how the services provided in the LCAP year for low income pupils, foster youth, and English learners provide for increased or improved services for these pupils in proportion to the increase in funding provided for such pupils in that year as calculated pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a)(7). An LEA shall describe how the proportionality percentage is met using a quantitative and/or qualitative description of the increased and/or improved services for unduplicated pupils as compared to the services provided to all pupils.

%

LCAP Section 3B - Minimum Proportionality Percentage

Demonstrate how the services planned for are proportionally more than those provided for all students by at least the calculated MPP.

LCAP 3B – Demonstrate Proportionality

Describe how the proportionality percentage is met

Description may be quantitative and/or qualitative.

Describe the increased and/or improved services for unduplicated pupils as compared to services for all pupils.

LCAP 3B – Demonstrate Proportionality Examples

Additional counselors* Instructional assistants* Provision of summer reading

materials* Reading intervention program* After school family resource center* Tutoring program* Increase targeted interventions* Fund literacy coaches*

*Both qualitative and/or quantitative measures

www.smcoe.org

2014-15 SMCOE-LCAP Support LCAP and Accountability Support Sessions (10:30AM-12:00PM):Sept. 26, 2014 – Audience: District Accountability and Business StaffDec. 11, 2014 – Audience: District Accountability and Business StaffJan. 23, 2015– Audience: District Accountability and Business StaffMarch 27, 2015– Audience: District Accountability and Business StaffJune 5, 2015– Audience: District Accountability and Business Staff LCAP Summits (9AM-12PM):

Nov. 17, 2014 - Audience: District LCAP Leadership TeamsRegistration for LCAP Summit #1 link: http://sanmateo.k12oms.org/event_register.php?id=91243Mar. 2, 2015 - Audience: District LCAP Leadership TeamsApril 8, 2015 - Audience: District LCAP Leadership Teams

http://sanmateo.k12oms.org/event_register.php?id=91243

http://sanmateo.k12oms.org/event_register.php?id=91243

www.smcoe.org

One-on-One District Technical Assistance Sessions: (Two-hour windows, twice daily) December 8-19, 2014 – Audience: District LCAP Leadership Teams March 2-13, 2015 - Audience: District LCAP Leadership Teams April 1-17, 2015 - Audience: District LCAP Leadership Teams

Register at:

http://www.signupgenius.com/go/20f0f4facac23a6fb6-lcap

http://www.signupgenius.com/go/20f0f4facac23a6fb6-lcap

www.smcoe.org

Suggested Local Accountability Calendar - 1

• Goals/Metrics Refinement

• District Plan(s) Alignment• SMCOE Feedback

Integration

LCAP Refinement Nov./Dec. 2014

• Site plan-LCAP alignment• Document/report on

federal funds• Identify LCAP implications

SPSA Alignment and Revision

Dec. 2014-Feb. 2015 • LCAP refinement based on Site Plan input

• LCAP/2nd Interim submitted to local board for approval

LCAP & 2nd Interim Budget Reporting

March15, 2014

www.smcoe.org

Suggested Local Accountability Calendar - 2

• SPSA data update to stakeholders @ sites

• Site-based LCAP input/feedback garnered

SPSA Monitoring & Reporting

March/April 2015

• Aggregated data report• Site input/feedback

integration• LCAP refinment (as needed) &

District-wide committee engagements

LCAP Refinment April./May 2015

• LCAP/Final Budget submitted to board for approval

LCAP/Final BudgetJune 30, 2015

72

Ongoing Stakeholder Engagement

73

Revised LCAP

SECTION 2: GOALS, ACTIONS, EXPENDITURES, AND PROGRESS INDICATORS

SECTION 1: STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

SECTION 3: USE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION GRANT FUNDS AND PROPORTIONALITY

ANNUAL UPDATE

74

Revised Section 1: Stakeholder Engagement Description

• Education Code 52060 (g) A governing board of a school district shall consult with teachers, principals, administrators, and other school personnel, local bargaining units of the school district, parents, and pupils developing a local control and accountability plan.

• Education Code 52066 (g) has the same requirements for county offices of education

75

Revised Section 1: Stakeholder Engagement Instructions

• Previously, the verb was “engage” and now it is “consult” which matches Education Code 52060.

• Added to the list of people who are to be consulted with are “school personnel” and “local bargaining units as applicable,” also in Education Code 52060..

• The remaining changes are related to capturing in the revised Section 2 what was previously in Sections 2 and 3A and 3B.

76

1. How have applicable stakeholders (e.g., including parents and pupils of unduplicated pupils and unduplicated pupils identified in Education Code 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 in developing, reviewing, and support 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 ofthe LCAP?

Revised Section 1: Guiding Questions on Stakeholder Engagement

77

Revised Section 1: Guiding Questions on Stakeholder Engagement (continued)

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 this 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, and 47606.5, including engagement with representative parents of pupils identified in Education Code section 42238.01?

78

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

Revised Section 1: Guiding Questions on Stakeholder Engagement (continued)

79

Revised Section 1:LCAP Template

Involvement Process Impact on LCAP

Annual Update: Annual Update:

80

Classification of Students for LCFFEnglish

Learners(EL)

Low Income(LI)

Foster Youth(FY)

• Based on Home Language Survey and California English Language Development Test (CELDT)

• No time limit for funding• Reclassified students

(Fluent English Proficient) will no longer generate additional funding

• Qualify based on free and reduced price meals eligibility.

• Foster youth are students who have been placed into an institution, group home, or private home of a state-certified caregiver or under the placement and care of the county welfare department, county probation department or tribal organization.

• All foster youth qualify as Low Income students.

81

Subgroups are considered numerically significant if there are 30 or more students with the exception of Foster Youth where 15 students are considered numerically significant.

• English Learners• Low Income• Students with Disabilities• Foster Youth

Other SubgroupsRacial/Ethnic Subgroups

• Black or African American• American Indian or

Alaska Native• Asian• Filipino• Hispanic or Latino• Native Hawaiian or

Pacific Islander• White• Two or more races

82

Required Representation fromParent Groups

Parent Advisory Group

Low Income rep

Foster Youth rep

English Learner rep

EL Parent Advisory Group (if district

enrollment includes):

15% ELs

At least 50 EL pupils

If st

uden

ts a

re p

art o

f one

or m

ore

of

thes

e su

bgro

ups,

par

ents

or f

amilie

s m

ust b

e in

clude

d in

the

Pare

nt A

dviso

ry

Gro

up. Members of pre-existing committees

(ELAC/DELAC) can be included in the LCAP EL Parent Advisory Committee.

83

Definition of “consult”

The determination of curriculum content, the selection of instructional materials, and the use of instructional technology are subject to the duty to "consult" under Government Code Section 3543.2(a).

"Consultation" (also known as "meet and confer") involves the free exchange of information, opinions, informal proposals, and recommendations according to orderly procedures in a conscientious effort to incorporate such recommendations into the resulting policy or plan.

The Fiscal Report (2013)School Services of California, Inc.

84

Obligation to “negotiate”

While LEAs have an obligation to "consult," they do not have an obligation to "meet and negotiate" implementation decisions. "Establishing educational policies, goals and objectives," "determining curriculum," and "establishing budgetary priorities and allocations" are all fundamental management prerogatives not within the mandatory scope of bargaining…


85

Obligation to “negotiate”(continued)

However, if such decisions would have a foreseeable impact on negotiable "terms and conditions of employment" for bargaining unit members, a school district or COE is required to negotiate the "effects" or "impacts" of these decisions on negotiable subjects, including for example, hours of employment and compensation for professional development.


86

Team Discussion

• What is your process this year for continuing to work with stakeholder groups to monitor goal implementation and student outcomes?

• Given the new information, how do you intend to consult with groups not previously part of the development process?

5 minutes

87

Stakeholder Considerations

• Identify Stakeholders: Review recent regulations and template to ensure all required groups are represented in the LCAP stakeholder process

• Develop a Schedule for Stakeholder Activities: Plan year-round activities to engage stakeholders

• Engage Stakeholders in Meaningful WaysBuild capacity and seek informed input

88

Stakeholder ConsiderationsIdentify StakeholdersHave you included all required stakeholders in your engagement plans for 2014-15?

Students: Unduplicated pupils and other numerically significant pupil subgroups

Parent advisory committee (including required representation) English learner parent advisory committee School personnel Local bargaining units Schoolsite-level advisory groups Community members Local governing board

Has your district identified all of the stakeholders who

should be involved in the LCAP process

this year?

89

Stakeholder ConsiderationsDevelop a Schedule for Stakeholder Activities Plan year-round activities to engage stakeholders

July - October 2014 November 2014 - January 2015• Expand/identify stakeholder groups and members

• Develop annual schedule of events & publicize timelines

• Involve & consult with stakeholders: LCAP cycle overview Current demographics Data review & analyses Needs assessments Surveys Other local plans Introduce new LCAP template

• Report to local board

• Involve & consult with stakeholders:• Prior topics, as appropriate Final regulations for LCAP template &

Annual Report Discuss local implications of proposed

2016-17 State budget Review progress on metrics for LCAP

Annual Report Revisit goals, actions & services Seek and respond to feedback


90

February - March 2015 April – June 2015

• Involve & consult with stakeholders:• Prior topics, as appropriate

Review progress on metrics for LCAP Annual Report

Update goals, actions & services & Annual Report

Share draft LCAP Evaluation Rubric, when available

Present draft LCAP & Annual Report to PACs Respond to and incorporate feedback


• Involve & consult with stakeholders:• Prior topics, as appropriate

Discuss local implications of revised State budget proposal (FY 2016-17), calculate funding

Update progress on metrics for LCAP Annual Report

Invite written comments from public Respond to feedback Present draft LCAP & Annual Report to PACs Use feedback to update goals, actions &

services and Annual Report Respond in writing to PAC comments and

incorporate feedback Present final draft LCAP & Annual Report to

PACs• Hold public hearing for LCAP/budget• Local board approval of LCAP/budget

Stakeholder ConsiderationsDevelop a Schedule for Stakeholder Activities

91

Stakeholder ConsiderationsEngage Stakeholders in Meaningful Ways

Build capacity and seek informed inputTips for consulting with stakeholders:• Schedule events that are tailored to your district’s geographic area, size and

population • Hold Public/Community meetings and forums• Share information at Back-To-School Night and at schoolsite meetings• Publish fact sheets and other accessible materials (translated)• Host listening sessions & focus groups• Conduct interviews• Convene expert panels • Organize leadership teams• Seek input through opinion polls and on-line and face-to-face surveys• Present information and ask questions in user-friendly terms

92

Examples of Stakeholder Questions

• Priority 1: Basic Services – Think of a time you/your child/your students had a great learning/teaching experience: Describe the kinds of facilities and instructional materials that are in place.

• Priority 2: Implementation of CCSS – How do you best learn/teach new skills and information? What helps you the most in learning/teaching new information?

93

• Priority 3: Parent Involvement and Input – Think of a time when you’ve/your parent population has really been connected and involved in the education of your child/your students. What conditions were in place?

• Priority 4: Student Achievement – When you/your child/your student has really been able to show they understand something, what was in place that got them there? How do you know best that your child/you/your student really understands something?


94

• Priority 5: Student Engagement – What do you hear from your friends/yourself/your child/your student that tells you that they really are connected to/engaged in learning at school? Why do you think you/your friends/your child was connected at that particular time?

• Priority 6: School Climate – Describe a school in which you/your child/your student feel totally safe, wanted, connected, and that you/your child/your student would feel like you’d really miss out if you didn’t attend every day?


95

• Priority 7: Course Access – How do you/your child/your students make decisions on what level/types of classes to take? Do you/your child/your students take the classes that you think prepare you/your child/your students for your/their future?

• Priority 8: Other Student Outcomes – What do you/your child/your student need to be able to do to be successful in a job and/or college upon leaving school/moving to the next level of school (for K-8)?


96

Resources for Stakeholder Engagement

http://www.cde.ca.gov/qs/

97

Resources for Stakeholder Engagement

http://www.capta.org/sections/programs/lcff-lcap.cfm

Selected Resources:

California School Parent Survey (CSPS) California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) California School Climate Survey (CSCS) http://csps.wested.org/

The Handbook on Family and Community Engagement http://www.schoolcommunitynetwork.org/downloads/FACEHandbook.pdf

Harvard School of Education: K-12 Parent Survey Template:http://www.hfrp.org/family-involvement

SEDL National Center for Family and Community Connections with Schoolshttp://www.sedl.org/connections/toolkit/contents.html

Seeing is Believing: Promising Practices for How School Districts Promote Family Engagementhttp://www.hfrp.org/family-involvement/publications-resources/seeing-is-believing-promising-practices-for-how-school-districts-promote-family-engagement

http://www.sedl.org/connections/toolkit/contents.html

http://www.sedl.org/connections/toolkit/contents.html

98

Team Discussion

• Does your district have a plan for stakeholder engagement throughout the year? How might it be modified to address the current issues?

• How will the stakeholder involvement processes and be different this year?

5 minutes

99

REMINDER – Complaints Process (UCP)

• EC 52075 requires that complaints regarding the LCFF/LCAP processes be covered under the Uniform Complaint Procedures (UCP):• Make sure to maintain updated BPs and ARs. Make sure to

include the LCFF/LCAP provisionsBP 1312.3 – AR 1312.3BP 0460 – AR 0460

• Respond to complaints in a timely manner as per your UCP

• Disseminate to ALL stakeholders annually the required updated UCP information

100

Rubric Design and Development Process

101

LCFF Rubric Design

Spending Regulations LCAP Template Evaluation Rubrics

DefineClarify key terms and conditions to support local implementation that achieves LCFF implementation objectives

Organize and CommunicateDemonstrate through the development and sharing of the LCAP that local implementation supports LCFF implementation objectives and regulations

Assess and Indicate AssistanceProvide a process for assessing performance and identifying assistance based on review of the LCAP that meets specific areas of need related to LCFF implementation objectives and regulations

102

LCFF Rubric Design

Connecting Elements/Guiding Principles• Performance-focused – relationship between plans,

funding use, and outcomes for students• Simplicity and transparency• Student-focused – local identification of needs, provides

equitable opportunity• State priorities – define metrics, but rely on local

determination of measurement• Stakeholder Engagement – parents, community,

educators

103

LCFF Evaluation Rubric Legislation

The specific requirements of the evaluation rubrics are set forth in EC Section 52064.5:(a) On or before October 1, 2015, the state board shall adopt evaluation

rubrics for all of the following purposes:(1) To assist a school district, county office of education, or charter school

in evaluating strengths, weaknesses, and areas that require improvement.

(2) To assist a county superintendent of schools in identifying school districts and charter schools in need of technical assistance pursuant to Section 52071 or 47607.3 as applicable, and the specific priorities upon which the technical assistance should be focused.

(3) To assist the Superintendent in identifying school districts for which intervention pursuant to Section 52072 is warranted.

104

LCFF Evaluation Rubric Legislation

(b) The evaluation rubrics shall reflect a holistic, multidimensional assessment of school district and individual school site performance and shall include all of the state priorities described in subdivision (d) of Section 52060.

(c) As part of the evaluation rubrics, the state board shall adopt standards for school district and individual school site performance and expectation for improvement in regard to each of the state priorities in subdivision (d) of Section 52060.

105

Rubric Development Process

The SBE has requested a process for developing rubrics that takes into account the following:• Stakeholder input that reflects knowledge and experience from

practitioners, researchers, students, and parents• Relevant application to the diverse range of LEAs that will use

the rubrics, including factors such as regional differences, types of LEAs, sizes of LEAs, student demographics, and baseline outcomes

• Fidelity to the LCFF design principles as identified in the legislation (i.e., performance, equity, engagement, outcomes, and local flexibility)

106

Rubric Development Process

Rubric Design Group

Practitioner and Community

Advisory Group

Research Advisory Group

Policy Advisory Group

CDE-SBE-WestEd

Recommendation to the SBE for Rubric Approval

107

Rubric Design Timeline

• Summer/Fall 2014 – Initial meetings of RDG to plan timeline for future meetings and deliverables established; organize and facilitate sessions with various working groups for preliminary input

• Spring 2015 – First draft of evaluation rubrics completed by RDG

• Spring/Summer 2015 – Organize and facilitate follow-up sessions with various working groups regarding draft evaluation rubrics

108

Rubric Design Timeline

• September 2015 – Evaluation rubrics adopted by the SBE

• October 1, 2015 – Statutory deadline for adoption of the evaluation rubrics

109

Ties to Other Documents

110

© 2014 School Services of California, Inc.

How Are Other Plans Affected by the LCAP?

The LCAP must be consistent with the strategies included in the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA)

What is the SPSA? Who writes it? How do we use it? Is it REQUIRED?

In accordance with E.C. 52052, specific actions included in the LCAP, or the annual update of the LCAP, must be consistent with the strategies included in the SPSAs developed pursuant to E.C. 64001

The updated template for SPSA includes sections for the use of LCFF base, supplemental, and concentration funds

Districts should align the SPSA planning timeline with the LCAP to ensure actions and strategies are consistent

110

111


Federal Funds – “Supplement” Not “Supplant”


The LCFF does not recognize supplemental and concentration grants as restricted dollars

As LEAs create expenditure plans, it will be important to follow the Federal guidelines and ensure LEAs can clearly demonstrate that Title I and Title III funds are used to provide services and support that meet the following criteria:

Are above and beyond the “core” program

Were not previously funded with a state or local resource

112


Federal Funds – “Supplement” Not “Supplant”


There’s uncertainty on the approach the federal government will take as it relates to the uses of supplemental and concentration funds as well as ways to demonstrate supplemental services to their satisfaction

LEAs with varying student demographics amongst school sites should consider the way staff and other expenditures are funded across the LEA so they do not risk penalties

ADVICE: Establish and document the “core” program and add supplements to the “core” program

LEAP continues to be a REQUIREMENT:

PI, SES, Comparability, Title II, Title III provisions

113


Supplemental and Concentration Grant Expenditures

E.C. 15496 details the requirements for LEAs to demonstrate increased or improved services for unduplicated pupils in proportion to the increase in the funds apportioned for supplemental and concentration grants

To increase services means to grow services in quantity

To improve services means to grow services in quality

The Education Code now gives the local governing board broad authority as to what services to offer

But the student population to be served with targeted funds is still well defined 113

114

Team Discussion

• How are you aligning the goals of various plans?

• How are you ensuring that the SPSAs are aligned with the LCAP?

• What timeline have you established for the alignment of plans?

5 minutes

www.smcoe.org

www.smcoe.org

Accountability and Closing the AchievementGap

• Compliance/Assessment/Accountability/Oversight

• Where are we today?

• Next steps—the next two years

• After three years—the county office role

• After five years—CCEE plus the other players

• Impact on AB 1200—the budget, the plan, the board

www.smcoe.org

Nine Very Important Things to Remember

• There is no new money

• Do not forget about cash and solvency

• The oversight process will evolve, become more complex and the role of theplayers will change

• Engagement is not an afterthought and expectations will likely exceed theresources to implement

www.smcoe.org

Nine Very Important Things to Remember

• There is a need to continue to build a standard review protocol

• Coordination between business and program is of critical importance

• In the end, it is still all about relationships

• The COE role—What must you do… What should you do… What can you do…

• Eye on the prize—Closing the Achievement Gap and SERVING ALL CHILDREN

www.smcoe.org

Questions?