exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 1 of 98 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO THE 45-DAY COMMENT PERIOD 1 Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment John Affeldt, Managing Attorney and Education Program Director Public Advocates, Inc. John Affeldt, et.al. - Civil Rights Coalition David Sapp, Director of Education Advocacy/ Legal Counsel – ACLU of Southern California Roberta Furger, Director of Public Policy and Research - PICO Shydae Garcia, Edison High School; Citlali Hernandez, Woodrow Wilson High School; Tony Bui, James Lick High School; Naudika Williams, Oakland High School - Student Voice Coalition Taryn Ishida, Executive Director, Californians for Justice – Student Rights Coalition 15495(f): Add a definition of student consultation: Student consultation with respect to the LCAP as meeting at least one of the following actions: (1) An annual survey of students that assesses needs and obtains student input with respect development and implementation of the LCAP and the annual updates and that includes meaningful samples of the LEA’s lowincome, English learner, and foster youth populations; (2) An annual forum with the LEA’s low income, English learner, and foster youth students to assess their needs and obtain student input with respect to development and implementation of the LCAP and the annual updates; (3) Annual focus groups with the LEA’s low income, English learner, and foster youth populations that assess needs and obtain student input with respect to development and implementation of the LCAP and the annual updates; or (4) Use of the “participatory budget” process to get input from the LEAs low income, English Learner, foster care students to assess their needs and obtain student input with respect to development, implementation, and evaluation of the LCAP and the annual updates (including all 8 state priority areas and any local priorities). (5) Representation of students on all high school and middle school site councils, ensuring that that such representation includes low-income students, English learners, or foster youth on each site council where such students attend the school, and preparation of those students so as to support their ability to provide input on the development and implementation of the LCAP and the annual updates at a site-level Agency Response Partially Accept: Proposed section 15495 is edited to include subdivision (a), as follows: “’(a) Consult with pupils,’ as used in Education Code sections 52060, 52066, and 47605.5, means a process for the presentation of the LCAP to pupils for review and comment. This process may include, but is not limited to, surveys of pupils, forums with pupils, or meetings with pupil government bodies or other groups representing pupils.” In addition, the LCAP Template set forth in section 15497 is edited and replaced with a new LCAP Template in proposed section 15498. “Section 1: Stakeholder Engagement” of the revised template is edited to add a guiding question, as follows: “What specific actions were taken to consult with pupils to meet the requirements of Section 15495(a)?” Partially Reject: Suggested definition is too prescriptive for engagement process and would create a new mandate. Statute provides for LEA engagement with students regarding the development of the LCAP at the local level. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 2 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 2 Araceli Simeon-Luna, Project Director – Parent Organization Network Marvin Andrade, Director of Leadership Development - Asian Americans Advancing Justice Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment 15495: Add the following definitions: (i) “Authentic engagement” means providing full information to stakeholders via several media and events; listening to stakeholders’ ideas, priorities and concerns; and addressing the community’s priorities or concerns in the schools’ and districts’ plans and budgets. (j) “Transparency” means being open and honest with the public; establishing ongoing communication with stakeholders; making data and plans available to the public; and making public the processes used and persons involved in producing guidelines, deciding plans and budgets, or selecting representatives to be part of any school committee. (k) “Timely” in the context of the LCAP process means soliciting input from the stakeholders at least three weeks before the plan and budget are developed and presenting the LCAP and budget for public review at least three weeks before it is decided by a board of education, or the body overseeing the LEA. (l) “Stakeholder” refers but is not limited to, parents, community members, pupils, local bargaining units, LEA personnel, county child welfare agencies, county office of education foster youth services programs, court-appointed special advocates, foster youth, foster parents, education rights holders and other foster youth stakeholders, English leaner parents, community organizations, representing English learners, and others as appropriate. Agency Response Reject: Suggested terms are not used in statute or in the proposed regulations. Statute identifies stakeholder groups for consultation and identifies the engagement process for development of the LCAP. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 3 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 3 Eric Premack, Executive Director – Charter Schools Development Center (CSDC) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response 15495: Problem use of the term LEA where it is not applicable to charter schools: Delete the term LEA from the definitions and clearly identify when in a given section of the regulations are and are not applicable to a school district, COE, or charter school. Partially reject: The definition of LEA set forth is consistent with statute and use is appropriate in some contexts. Partially accept: Ensure appropriate use of LEA, school district, charter school, and county office of education throughout regulations. Proposed section 15946 is edited to deleted subsection (c) and is reincorporated into a new proposed section 15497. The proposed section 15497 is also edited to delete “LEA” and substitute “school district,” as follows: “County Superintendent of Schools Oversight Demonstration of Proportionality. In making the determinations required under Education Code section 52070(d)(3), the county superintendent of school shall include review of any descriptions of districtwide services provided pursuant to section 15496(b)(2) or descriptions of schoolwide services provided pursuant to section 15496(b)(4) when determining whether the LEA school district has fully demonstrated that it will increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils under pursuant to subdivision (a) section 15496(a). If a county superintendent of schools does not approve an LCAP because the LEA school district has failed to meet its proportionality requirement to increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils as exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 4 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response specified in this section, it shall provide technical assistance to the LEA school district in meeting that requirement pursuant to Education Code section 52071. 4 CSDC 15495: Education Code 64001 and 20 USC 6312 are not relevant to this section and should be deleted Reject: Citations refer to the authority of referenced plans in statute and proposed regulations. 5 Bill Lucia, President EdVoice 15496: Supplemental grants only for schoolwide and districtwide expenditures: Board should include only supplemental grants in the flexibility allowed for districtwide or schoolwide expenditures Reject: Education Code (EC) section 42238.07 authorizes the board to adopt regulations that govern the expenditure of funds apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated pupils pursuant to EC sections 2574, 2575, 42238.02, and 42238.03, which shall include but not be limited to the two provisions set forth in the statute. Thus, EC Section 42238.07(b) does not preclude the board from adopting regulations to authorize schoolwide and districtwide expenditures for supplemental and concentration grant funds. 6 CSDC 15496(a): Delete 2nd sentence that specifies that funding apportioned “shall be used to increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils as compared to services provided to all pupils.” Statute does not require funding to be used exclusively for unduplicated pupils and language that requires distinguishing the increase relative to other pupils exceeds the scope of the statute. Reject: Statute dictates that expenditure regulations require LEAs to increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils in proportion to the increase in funds apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated pupils. It is consistent with statute to require increase or improvement when compared to all students. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 5 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response 7 CSDC 15496(a)(2): Inclusion of prior year expenditures should be revised to funding apportioned and should not confuse funding with prior-year expenditures. Reject: LEAs have carryover Economic Impact Aid funds and also may have been using other general fund sources to provide services to unduplicated students prior to the adoption of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The use of prior year expenditures allows an LEA to estimate the services actually provided. 8 Civil Rights Coalition ACLU/Public Advocates Arun Ramanathan, Executive Director - EdTrust West Oscar Cruz, President -Families in Schools Debra Brown, Associate Director, Education Policy - Children Now Ellen Wu, Executive Director – California Pan-Ethnic Health Network (CPEHN) Jamila Iris Edwards, Northern California Director - Children’s Defense Fund (CDF) Anne Kelsey Lamb, MPH, Director - Regional Asthma Management and Prevention (RAMP) Asian Americans Advancing Justice PICO 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), (b)(4)(B): To help ensure funds for high-need students are targeted at those student, eight bolded words should be added to the regulations, as follows: Partially accept: Edit proposed regulations sections, as follows: Proposed sections 15496(b)(1)(B), 15496(b)(2)(B), 15496(b)(3) (B), and 15496 (b)(4)(B) are edited to state: Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards serving unduplicated pupils and are effective in meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas. “Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards and are effective in, meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas.” Partially reject: Additional words will not be bolded in the regulations. The phrase “serving unduplicated pupils” is redundant with the rest of the sentence and not included. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 6 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response Form Letter #1 Form Letter #3 Form Letter #4 9 10 Cynthia Rice, Director of Litigation, Advocacy & Training – California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA) Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Executive Director Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, Executive Director California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) 15496(b)(2) A school district that has an enrollment of unduplicated pupils that is at least 40 percent but less than 55 percent of the school site’s total enrollment in the fiscal year for which an LCAP is adopted or in the prior year may expend supplemental grant funds on a districtwide basis 15496(b)(3) (3) A school district that has an enrollment of unduplicated pupils at a school that is in excess of 40 55 percent or more of the school’s total enrollment in the fiscal year for which an LCAP is adopted or in the prior year may expend supplemental and concentration grant funds on a schoolwide basis. 15496(b)(4) A school district that has an enrollment of unduplicated pupils that is less than 40 at least 40 percent but less than 55 percent of the school site’s total enrollment in the fiscal year for which an LCAP is adopted or in the prior year may expend supplemental and concentration grant funds on a schoolwide basis. Reject: Statute does not specify a minimum threshold for districtwide, charterwide, countywide or schoolwide use of funds. Philip Y. Ting, Assemblymember, 19th District and Shirley N. Weber, Ph.D., Assemblymember, 19th District - Assembly Members No specific sections or language suggested Accept: As stated in response to comment #8, language is added to proposed section 15496(b)(1)(B),15496(b)(2)(B),15496(b)(3) (B,15496(b)(4)(B) as follows: A requirement on school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to show how supplemental and concentration funds principally serve high-need students and are effective in meeting the local education agency's goals for these students in state priority areas. A requirement that the Local Control Accountability Plan templates include transparent and standard data and The commenters suggested thresholds would limit LEAs’ ability to locally determine use of supplemental and concentration funds; proposed regulations require additional description of funded services when district or school enrollment of unduplicated pupils is below levels specified in the proposed regulations. “Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards, and effective in, meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas.” exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 7 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment expenditure reporting, strong school site council engagement, and alignment between state priorities, goals, and specific expenditures at the district and school level. Agency Response Partially accept: The proposed spending regulations and the revised LCAP Template, set forth in proposed section 15498, including annual update, provide for transparent and standard data and expenditure reporting. Partially reject: Statute does not require school site council participation. Note, however, that the instructions in Section 2: [Goals, Actions, Expenditures, and Progress Indicators] of the revised LCAP Template state that the “...LCAP should be shared with, and input requested from, school site-level advisory groups, as applicable (e.g., school site councils, etc.) to facilitate alignment between school-site and district level goals and actions.” 11 12 ACLU/Public Advocates CRLA/CABE/ Californians Together 15496(b)(1): If requested amendment to add the eight bolded words to section 15496(b)(1)(B) is not accepted, thus keeping the showing the same for above-threshold districts, then increase the threshold to 65%. Partially accept: The suggested eight bolded words were partially accepted as reflected above in the response to comment # 8. 15496(b)(1): Modify (b)(1) to include those districts that are at 55%: (b)(1) A school district that has an enrollment of unduplicated pupils in excess of 55 percent or more of the district’s enrollment Accept: This change ensures that the regulations are applicable to LEAs with exactly 55 percent enrollment. Partially reject: The amendment to move the threshold to 65 percent was requested as an alternate if the suggested eight bolded words were not accepted. Since a version of the suggested wording was accepted the requested threshold percentage change is not needed. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 8 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment in the fiscal year for which an LCAP is adopted or in the prior year may expend funds on a districtwide basis. 15496(b)(1)(A), (b)(2)(A), (b)(3)(A), (b)(4)(A) (b)(5)(A): (A) Identify in the LCAP those services that are being funded and provided on a districtwide basis. 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), (b)(4)(B) (b)(5)(B): (B) Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas. Agency Response Section 15496(b)(1) is edited as follows: “A school district that has an enrollment of unduplicated pupils in excess of 55 percent or more…” Accept addition of “funded.” Proposed sections 15496(b)(1)(A), 15496(b)(2)(A), 15496(b)(3)(A), 15496(b)(4)(A), and 15496(b) (5)(A), are edited as follows: “Identify in the LCAP those services that are being funded and provided on a districtwide basis.” Addition of “principally” was accepted for addition to sections 15496(b)(1)(B), 15496(b) (2)(B), 15496(b)(3)(B), 15496(b)(4)(B), and 15496(b)(5)(B), as described in comment #8. 13 CRLA/CABE/ Californians Together 15496(b)(1)(C), 15496(b)(2)(C), 15496(b)(3)(C), 15496(b)(4)(C) And countywide 15496(b)(5) – see below: Establish criteria for determining whether a service meets the standards for “most effective use of funds” in all cases, whether a school or district enrollment percentage is above or below the stated thresholds. These criteria should track the requirements of the Title I regulations, as anticipated by the statute, and require that expenditures be based on strategies that specifically address the purpose of the supplemental and concentration grant funding as well as the eight state priorities. Add new section 15496(b)(1)(C) and (b)(3)(C)): “Describe how the services are an effective use of funds that will increase or improve services for English learners, low income Reject: The proposed amendments would impose a similar standard on LEAs with at least 55 percent enrollment of unduplicated pupils as is imposed when such enrollment is less than 55 percent. This standard is not necessary when enrollment of unduplicated pupils is 55 percent or more. Reject: County offices of education serve unique populations of pupils. The needs of those pupils and programs operated by county offices of education to serve those pupils necessarily vary significantly within and across county offices of education. Thus, it is exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 9 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment students and foster youth through identified methods such as research-based programs or allocation of staffing or services that address those students’ needs and are designed to meet the districts’ goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas.” New section 15496(b)(5)(C) “Describe in the LCAP how these services are the most effective use of the funds and will increase or improve services for English learners, low income students and foster youth through identified methods such as research-based programs or allocation of staffing or services that address those students’ needs and are designed to meet the county office of education’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas.” Modify sections 15496(b)(2)(C) and (b)(4)(C): Describe how these services are the most effective use of the funds and will increase or improve services for English learners, low income students and foster youth through identified methods such as research-based programs or allocation of staffing or services that address those students’ needs and are designed to meet the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas. Agency Response not appropriate to prescribe a particular threshold and higher standard of effectiveness for county offices of education. Partially accept: Language was added to more fully state how a district should describe the basis for its determination that services funded by districtwide or schoolwide expenditures of supplemental and concentration funds are the most effective use of such funds to meet the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas where the percentage of unduplicated pupils in the district or school is under the respective threshold specified in the expenditure regulations. Proposed sections 15496(b)(2)(C) and 15496(b)(4)(C) are edited as follows: “Describe how these services are the most effective use of the funds to meet the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas. The description shall include the basis for this determination, including, but not limited to, any alternatives considered and any supporting research, experience, or educational theory.” Partially reject: Proposed additional language is redundant, and “allocation of staffing” is unclear. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 10 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 14 EdVoice Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response 15496 (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), and (b)(5): Modify these sections to add the following language: “(C) Explain in the LCAP how those services will provide a higher level of service to support unduplicated pupils meeting, at a minimum, the pupil achievement goals and specific actions necessary to correct deficiencies, if any, and help unduplicated pupils achieve the goals in the other statewide priorities, as applicable.” Reject: This comment imposes a similar standard on LEAs with at least 55 percent enrollment to the standard for less than 55 percent to provide services districtwide, and a similar standard of at least, or below 40 percent enrollment to provide services schoolwide. This standard is not necessary when enrollment of unduplicated pupils is 55 percent or more districtwide or 40 percent or more schoolwide. 15496(b)(4): Delete 15496(b)(4). Because EC 422380.07 references 20 USC 6314 the flexibility authorized by the Legislature acknowledges the eligibility standard of 40% and 20 USC 6314(b)(1)(A)-(J) is the limit to the restrictions that can be imposed on the use of supplemental grants for schoolwide purposes. 15 CRLA/CABE Californians Together 15496(b)(5): Modify to require countywide only when in excess of 55% of unduplicated pupils. Delete authorization for charterwide: (b)(5) A county office of education expending supplemental and concentration grant funds on a countywide basis or a charter Reject: EC section 42238.07 authorizes the board to adopt regulations that govern the expenditure of funds apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated pupils pursuant to Sections 2574, 2575, 42238.02, and 42238.03, which shall include but not be limited to the two provisions set forth in the statute. Thus, EC section 42238.07(b) does not preclude the board from adopting regulations that authorize schoolwide and districtwide expenditures for supplemental and concentration grant funds. Statute refers to ESEA and provides for spending regulations “no more restrictive” than specified in ESEA statute. Reject: Reject changing the threshold for countywide to 55 percent, for the reasons indicated in above comment # 13. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 11 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response school expending supplemental and concentration grant funds on a charterwide basis may only do so if it has an enrollment of 55% or more unduplicated students and shall do all of the following: 16 17 CRLA/CABE Californians Together CSDC 15496(b)(5)(A)(B)(C): Delete charter schools authorization to use funds on a charterwide basis. Also add same changes to (1)-(2) and add new (3) that were added for districtwide schoolwide. (A) Identify in the LCAP those services that are being funded and provided on a countywide or charterwide basis. (B) Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards meeting the county office of education’s or charter school’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas. Partially accept: Section 15496(b)(5)(A) is edited to add “funded and,” as follows: 15496(b)(5)(B): Delete the verbiage requiring charters “to describe how charter wide expenditures meet the goals in the state priority areas.” This language is unnecessarily restrictive and should be deleted or expanded to include local priorities Partially accept: Addition of local priorities is consistent with statute. “Identify in the LCAP those services that are being funded and provided on a charterwide or countywide basis.” Partially reject: By law, charter schools are authorized to operate with flexibility. The regulations give school districts flexibility and charter school flexibility should not be limited by eliminating authorization for charter schools to spend on a charterwide basis. Section 15496(b)(5)(B) is edited to state as follows: “Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards, and are effective in, meeting the…charter school’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas, as applicable. Partially reject: Retain requirement to describe of expenditures. This requirement implements expenditure of funds on a charterwide basis to increase or improve exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 12 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response services for unduplicated pupils consistent with statutory purpose and requirements. 18 Civil Rights Coalition ACLU/Public Advocates Families in Schools CRLA/CABE/ Californians Together (suggest same language by repealing 15496(c) and add new section 15497) Ed-Trust West 15496(c): Add: new 15496(c): The county superintendent of schools shall, at a properly noticed public hearing, approve a local control and accountability plan only if it satisfies all of the following conditions: (a) The LEA has in good faith addressed all required components of the LCAP (b) The budget for the applicable fiscal year adopted by the governing board of the school district includes expenditures sufficient to implement the specific actions and strategies included in the LCAP adopted by the governing board of the school district, based on the projections of the costs included in the plan; and (c) The LEA has accurately computed the funds and percentage it must expend to increase or improve services on unduplicated pupils pursuant to Section 15496(a) and, where applicable, has met the standards for district or schoolwide use of those funds pursuant to Section 15496(b) Add new subsection (d) to 15496 (d) The determinations required under Education Code Section 52070(d)(3) shall be made by the county superintendent of schools in a public hearing. The county superintendent of schools shall only approve a local control and accountability plan if the local education agency has accurately computed the funds and percentage it must expend to increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils pursuant to Section 15496(a), and where applicable, has met the standards for districtwide or schoolwide use of those funds pursuant to Section 15496(b) Reject: The suggested changes exceed the scope of county superintendent authority in approving an LCAP as specified in EC section 52070. A county superintendent is not authorized or required to conduct a noticed public hearing. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 13 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 19 CRLA/CABE/ Californians Together Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment In addition to the Language above suggested by the coalition, these commenters suggest also adding the following to new separate 15497: (b) The county superintendent shall particularly review any descriptions provided in Section 15496(b) when determining whether the LEA has fully demonstrated that it will increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils under subdivision (a). Partially accept: Proposed section 15496 is edited to delete subdivision (c). A new proposed section 15497 is added. This new section includes most of the language of the previously proposed section 15496(c), with changes indicated as set forth in above comment #3. (c) COES are authorized to review LCAPS and aligned budgets to determine whether federal funds were appropriately used. Partially reject: Do not incorporate the language in the commenters proposed subsection (c). Proposed section 15497 requires county superintendents to review the descriptions in section 15496(b). In addition, the phrase “particularly review” is ambiguous and does not add clarity. (d)If a county superintendent of schools does not approve an LCAP because the LEA has failed to meet its proportionality requirement as specified in the section, it shall provide technical assistance to the LEA in meeting that requirement pursuant to Education Code section 52071. 20 21 EdVoice Civil Rights Coalition ACLU/Public Advocates Agency Response 15496(c): (c) In making the determinations required under Education Code section 52070(d)(3), the county superintendent of schools shall review LCAPs including any descriptions provided under (b) (b) (2)(B) and (b)(2)(C) or subdivisions (b)(4)(B) or (b)(4)(C) when to determineing whether the LEA has fully demonstrated that it will increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils under subdivision (a). If a county superintendent of school does not approve an LCAP because the LEA has failed to meet its proportionality requirement to increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils as specified in this section, it shall provide technical assistance to the LEA in meeting that requirement pursuant to Education Code 52071. Partially accept; proportionality The new proposed section 15497, set forth above at comment #3, includes the clarifying language “…requirement to increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils… .” 15496(c): (c) In making the determinations required under Education Code Reject: The proposed language requiring a county superintendent to “particularly review” Partially reject: Do not include “LCAPs including” language because it is redundant; or (b) (b)(2)(B) and (b)(2)(C) or subdivisions (b)(4)(B) or (b)(4)(C) when would exclude charter schools. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 14 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response section 52070(d)(3), the county superintendent of schools shall particularly review any descriptions provided… is ambiguous and does not provide clarity. 22 Colin Miller, Vice President of Policy – California Charter Schools Association (CCSA) 15496(c): Delete “LEA” and replace with “school district” (c) In making the determinations required under Education Code section 52070(d)(3), the county superintendent of schools shall review any descriptions provided under (b)(2)(B) and (b)(2)(C) or subdivisions (b)(4)(B) and (b)(4)(C) when determining whether the LEA school district has fully demonstrated that it will increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils under subdivision (a). If a county superintendent of schools does not approve an LCAP because the LEA school district has failed to meet its proportionality requirement as specified in this section, it shall provide technical assistance to the LEA school district in meeting that requirement pursuant to Education Code 52071. Accept: The new proposed section 15497, set forth above in comment #3, replaces “LEA” with “school district.” 23 CRLA/CABE/ Californians Together 15496: Add reference to Title III ESEA statute. Reject: ESEA Title III is not a source of rulemaking authority 24 CCSA 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Clarify that compliance with the guiding questions is optional: In 6th paragraph, 1st sentence: For each section of the template, LEAs shall should comply with instructions and In 6th paragraph, 1st sentence: Partially accept: Proposed section 15947 (Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update [“LCAP Template”] is edited; with the addition of a new proposed section 15947 (described above at comment #3), the LCAP template is now set forth in proposed section 15948. The first sentence in the sixth paragraph of the introductory section the sentence is edited as follows: CSDC For each section of the template, LEAs shall should comply with instructions and may use the guiding questions as prompts (but not limits) for completing the information as required by statute. Delete reference to EC 47605 since that reference is to charter petitions not the charter annual update template. “For each section of the template, LEAs should shall comply with instructions and should use the guiding questions as prompts (but not limits) for completing the LCAP… .” exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 15 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response These edits are necessary and appropriate to clarify the sentence to assist LEAs in developing and completing the LCAP. Partially reject: The reference is appropriate because EC section 47605 references requirements to address state priorities identified in EC section 52060(d). 25 CRLA/CABE Californians Together 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: In A, Conditions of Learning, Implementation of State Standards: Add reference to ELD standards since those are part of common core. 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. Partially Accept: The LCAP Template [proposed section 15948] is edited to add: “…and English language development standards…” to State Priorities, Section A. Conditions of Learning: Implementation of State Standards. Partially reject: Proposed section 15948 is not edited to add “disaggregated by unduplicated pupils”. Such a requirement is beyond the scope of statute. In B, Pupil Outcomes, Pupil Achievement, add “disaggregated by unduplicated pupils”, as follows: Pupil achievement: performance on standardized tests, score on Academic Performance Index, share of pupils that are college and career ready, shard of English learners that become English proficient, English learner reclassification rate, share of pupils that pass Advance Placement exams with 3 or higher, share of pupils determined prepared for college by the Early Assessment Program, disaggregated by unduplicated pupils. 26 Janice Gilmore-See (Frost), President -California School Library Association 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: In Section A Conditions of Learning, add a new bullet as follows: Libraries, Literacy and Research: Ensure that all students have access to access to instruction in high quality literacy, information Reject: Section A reflects the state priorities as listed in EC sections 52060 and 52066. This requirement is not listed in statute. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 16 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response content and digital learning skills, a quality school library, online student safety, and professional development for teachers in using 21st Century technology as it allies to learning and teaching. 27 Civil Rights Coalition PICO ACLU/Public Advocates Student Rights Coalition 15497: [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: LCAP Template Section 1, Stakeholder Engagement, Guiding Question 1: Add low-income youth and English learners to the examples. Accept: The LCAP Template [proposed section 15948] is edited to add the suggested language to LCAP Template Section 1, Stakeholder Engagement, as follows: “How have parents, community members, pupils, local bargaining units, and other stakeholders (e.g., LEA personnel, county child welfare agencies, county office of education foster youth services programs, court-appointed special advocates, foster youth, foster parents, education rights holders and other foster youth stakeholders, English learners, English learner parents, community organizations representing English learners, low income youth, and others as appropriate) been engaged and involved in developing, reviewing, and supporting implementation of the LCAP. 28 Civil Rights Coalition PICO ACLU/Public Advocates Melia Franklin, Executive Director - Bay Area Parent Leadership Action Network (PLAN) 15497: [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: LCAP Template, Section 1: Add Guiding Question: 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 pupils identified by Education Code section 42238.01 Accept: The LCAP Template Section 1 Stakeholder Engagement [proposed section 15948] is edited to add a guiding question #6, as follows: LCAP Template, Section 1: Add Guiding Question: In addition, proposed section 15495(a) was “What specific actions were taken to consult with pupils to meet the requirements of Section 15495(a)?” exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 17 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment What specific actions were taken to ensure engagement of pupils meet statutory requirements for stakeholder engagement? Agency Response edited to add a definition of “consult with pupils” as described in comment #1: Reject: EC sections 52062 and 52068 do not reference consulting with students. EC section 47606.5 refers to consulting with students in developing the annual update of the LCAP for charters. EC sections 52060 and 52066 are the sections requiring consulting with students. 29 CRLA/CABE Californians Together Parent Organization Network Asian Americans Advancing Justice Student Rights Coalition 30 CRLA/CABE Californians Together 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: LCAP Section 1 Stakeholder Engagement: Modify Guiding Question #3 to clarify that data must be disaggregated. (3) What information (e.g. quantitative and qualitative data/metrics of pupils disaggregated by unduplicated pupils) was made available to stakeholders related to the state priorities and used by the LEA to inform the LCAP goal setting process? Modify Guiding Question #3 to increase transparency: 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 and where was the information posted? Partially reject: Requirements to provide disaggregated data and the place where information was posted are beyond the scope of statute. 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: LCAP Section 1 Stakeholder Engagement: Modify Guiding Question #4 to clarify which recommendations were rejected and why: Reject: Proposed edits are not necessary. 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 Partially accept: The LCAP Template, Section 1, Stakeholder Engagement [proposed section 15948] is edited to add a sentence to guiding question #3, as follows: “How was the information made available?” The addition of the proposed question may lead to LEAs including unnecessary and lengthy information regarding process that would detract from the transparency of the changes to be implemented through the goals, actions, and expenditures. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 18 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response LEA through any of the LEA’s engagement processes? What recommendations, if any, were rejected and reasons for rejection? 31 Civil Rights Coalition ACLU/Public Advocates Ed-Trust West PICO Student Voice Coalition Student Rights Coalition 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: LCAP Section 1 Stakeholder Engagement: Modify Guiding Question #5 to better articulate student role: (5) What specific actions were taken to meet statutory requirements for stakeholder engagement pursuant to Education Code sections 52062, 52068, and 47606.5, including identifying clearly which committees are being used to meet the minimum requirements and the composition of the committees with a focus on the representation of engagement with representatives of parents and guardians of pupils identified in Education Code section 42238.01? Partially accept: Two separate questions are created one for parent engagement, one for pupil engagement: Edits to Guiding Question #5 [LCAP Template Section 1] are proposed, as follows: “What specific action were taken to meet statutory requirements for stakeholder engagement pursuant to Education Code sections 52062, 52068, and 47606.5, including engagement with representatives of of parents and guardians of pupils identified in Education Code section 42238.01?” Families in Schools A Guiding Question #6 [LCAP Template Section 1] is proposed, as follows: “What specific actions were taken to consult with pupils to meet the requirements of Section 15495(a)?” Edits to section 15495(a) to define “consult with pupils” are proposed as described above in comment #1. Committee composition requirements are addressed by proposed edits as follow: Proposed section 15496, subdivision (b) is edited to state: “‘English learner parent advisory exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 19 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response committee,’ as used in Education Code sections 52063 and 52069 for those school districts or schools and programs operated by county superintendents of schools whose enrollment includes at least 15 percent English learners and at least 50 percent pupils who are English learners, shall be composed of a majority of parents or legal guardians of pupils to whom the definition of Education Code section 42238.01(c) apply. A governing board of a school district or a county superintendent of schools shall not be required to establish a new English learner parent advisory committee if a previously established committee meets these requirements.” Proposed section 15496(e) is edited to state: “’Parent advisory committee,’ as used in Education Code sections 52063 and 52069, shall be composed of a majority of parents or legal guardians of pupils and include parents or legal guardians of pupils to whom one or more of the definitions of Education Code section 42238.01 apply. A governing board of a school district or a county superintendent of schools shall not be required to establish a new parent advisory committee if a previously established committee meets these requirements, including any committee established to exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 20 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response meet the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110) pursuant to Section 1112 of Subpart 1 of Part A of Title I of that act. Partially reject: “…identifying clearly which committees are being used to meet the minimum requirements and the composition of the committees with a focus on the representation of ….” The proposed edits above related to committee composition address this comment. 32 CRLA/CABE Californians Together 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: LCAP Section 1 Stakeholder Engagement: Modify Guiding Question #6 to add reference to unduplicated pupils: 6) In the annual update, describe how stakeholder involvement has been maintained and supported. How has the involvement of these stakeholders supported improved outcomes for pupils, including unduplicated pupils, related to the state priorities? Partially accept: Guiding Question #6 [LCAP Template section 1] is edited to become Guiding Question #7 due to the addition described above (at comment #20). In addition the content was edited to state: “7) In the annual update, hHow has the involvement of these stakeholder involvement been continued and supported?” Also, “How has the involvement of these stakeholders supported improved outcomes for pupils, including unduplicated pupils related to the state priorities?” Partially reject: As presented, “Describe…” is not a question, and reads as instructions. 33 CRLA/CABE Californians Together 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Engagement: LCAP Section 1 Stakeholder Engagement. Add Reject: The suggested addition is not a question. As instructions, the directive is beyond the scope of statute. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 21 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response new Guiding Question #7: 7) Stakeholders should be given information as to current programs and/or services to unduplicated pupils and whether these programs or services were increased or improved or replaced with other programs and services as a result of the stakeholder engagement. 34 Parent Organization Network Asian Americans Advancing Justice 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: LCAP Section 1 Stakeholder Engagement. Add two new Guiding Questions: 7) How were parents or other stakeholders selected to participate in the committee(s) influencing the development or review of the LCAP and budget? How was the selection process publicized? Where the representatives’ names released to the public once they were elected? Partially accept: Definitions of English learner parent advisory committee and parent advisory committee were added to section 15945(b)(3), as described at above comment #31. Partially reject: The information included in the suggested Guiding Question 8 is within proposed Guiding Questions #5 and #7. 8) On average, how many hours of training did parents receive from the district before reviewing proposed school or district plans and budgets? Was the quality of the training evaluated by parents? On average, how much time did parents in committees have to review a school or district plan and budget before providing official recommendations to the district? 35 CPHEN/CDF/RAMP 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: Engagement: LCAP Section 1 Stakeholder Engagement. Add new Guiding Question #7: 7) What information (quantitative and qualitative data/metrics) was considered in the engagement process that seeks to meet the health needs of unduplicated students; e.g., access to physical, social, and emotional health services for students on campus? Reject: Student health needs is not one of the state priorities identified in EC sections 52060 or 52066. It is impractical to list all possible considerations to meet each state priority from the point-of-view of all potential organizations or individual interests. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 22 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response 36 CRLA/CABE Californians Together 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: Introduction/Instruction/Guiding Questions: Amend reference to “subgroup” to “subgroup (unduplicated pupils)”. Somewhere in this document a statement should be made that ”subgroup” includes English learners, economically disadvantaged pupils and foster youth otherwise one may think unduplicated pupils are ignored. Reject: The statute requires goals for each subgroup identified in EC section 52052 which includes, but is not limited to, the unduplicated pupils specified in EC section 42238.01. In addition, EC specifies, and the LCAP instructions reflect, when sections apply to subgroups in EC section 52052 and when they apply only to unduplicated students identified in EC section 42238.01. 37 CCSA 15497: Introduction, First Sentence Clarify that the application of state priorities is different for charter schools: For school districts, Education Code sections 52060 and 52061, for county offices of education, Education Code sections 52066 and 52067, and for charter schools, Education Code 47606.5 require(s) the LCAP to include a description of the annual goals for all pupils and each subgroup of pupils, for each state priority as defined in Section 15495(e), and any local priorities and require the annual update to include a review or progress towards the goals and describe any changes to the goals. Partially accept: The introduction to the LCAP Template states that “For charter schools, the inclusion and description of goals for state 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.” Instructions, 5th sentence: Goals must address each of the state priorities as defined in Section 15495(e) and any additional local priorities; however, one goal may address multiple priorities. Clarify that LEA in this reference does not apply to charter schools: Instructions, 7th sentence: To facilitate alignment between the LCAP and school plans, the school district LCAP shall identify and incorporate school-specific goals related to the state and local priorities from the school plans submitted pursuant to Education Code 64001. “…as defined in Section 15495(i)…” Note: Subdivision (e) of 15495 is edited to become subdivision (i) due to the addition of other definitions Partially reject: should may Some charter schools may have school plans pursuant to EC section 64001 and as such may have a required school site council. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 23 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 38 CSDC Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response LCAP Template, Section 2: Instructions 8th Sentence: Two changes. First, to reflect the concern regarding school district LCAP. Second to clarify whether an action is required (shall) or a best practice (should). Furthermore, the school district LCAP should may be shared with, and input requested from, school site-level advisory groups (e.g., school site councils, English Learner Advisory Councils, pupil advisory groups, etc.) to facilitate alignment between school-site and district-level goals and actions. LCAP Template, Section 2: Instructions edited to clarify that sharing and receipt of input is as applies to a particular type of LEA - “…shared with, and input requested from, school sitelevel advisory groups as applicable 15497: In the Instructions, 3rd sentence: Charter schools may adjust the charter below to align with the terms of the budget. delete Year 2 and 3 budget columns. Partially reject: delete Year 2 and 3 budget columns. EC section 47605 requires charter petitioners proposing to open a new charter school provide financial projections for the first three years of operation. The Section 2 instructions specify that charters schools may adjust the chart to align to the terms of the charter school’s budget. In the Instructions, 8th sentence, clarify process-related requirements not applicable to charter schools e.g., school site councils, English Learner Advisory Councils, etc.) Partially accept: “Furthermore, the LCAP should be shared with, and input requested from, school site-level advisory groups, as applicable …” 39 Civil Rights Coalition ACLU/Public Advocates PICO CRLA/CABE/ Californians Together – in consultation with language only 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: LCAP Section 2: Goals and Progress Indicators: In the Instructions, 10th sentence change as follows: Furthermore, the LCAP should be shared with, and input requested from, developed in consultation with school site-level advisory groups (e.g., school site councils, English Learner Advisory Councils, pupil advisory groups, etc.) and be consistent with and reflective of the school site priorities and plans to Reject: The sentence, LCAP development and consultation is captured in Section 1 of the LCAP “Furthermore, the LCAP should be shared with, and input requested from, school site-level advisory groups (e.g., school site councils, English Learner Advisory Councils, pupil advisory groups, etc.)...” is retained in the revised LCAP without change (proposed section 15498). exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 24 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response facilitate alignment between school-site and district-level goals and actions. 40 41 ACLU/Public Advocates Laura Faer, Statewide Education Rights Director - Public Counsel Carl Pinkston, Secretary -Black Parallel School Board 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: LCAP Section 2: Goals and Progress Indicators: Change Guiding Question #3 as follows: 3) What are the LEA’s goal(s) to address state priorities related to “Engagement” (e.g., pupil and parent, school climate, attendance and dropout rates)? Partially reject: Edits do not include attendance and dropout rates because these are included with “pupil engagement” as stated in EC sections 52060(d)(5) and 52066(d)(5). CRLA/CABE/ Californians Together 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update: LCAP Section 2: Goals and Progress Indicators: Partially reject: Reject the parenthetical. Suggested language limits the goals to only goals for unduplicated pupils. However, statute requires the district to include unique goals for all subgroups; subgroups are defined by EC section 52052 which is broader than just the three subgroups for unduplicated pupils, defined by EC section 42238.01. Change Guiding Question #6 as follows: 6) What are the unique goals for subgroups (unduplicated pupils) as defined in Education Code sections 42238.01 and 52052 that are different from the LEA’s goals for all pupils? Describe the improved or increased services for each unduplicated pupil Partially accept: Guiding Question #3 [Section 2] is edited as follows, “What are the LEA’s goal(s) to address state priorities related to parent and pupil “Engagement” (e.g., parent involvement, pupil engagement, and school climate)?” Partially accept: Proposed section 15495, is edited to add subdivision (j) to provide a definition of subgroup, as follows: 42 CPEHN/CDF/RAMP 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual “(j) “Subgroup” means the numerically significant pupil subgroups identified pursuant to Education Code section 52052.” Reject: Student health needs is not one of the exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 25 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Update]: LCAP Section 2: Goals and Progress Indicators: Add a new Guiding Question #12: 12) What information (quantitative/qualitative data/metrics) was considered/reviewed to develop health-specific goals to address each state or local priority; e.g., access to physical, social, and emotional health services, improved school facilities and infrastructure, improved access to healthy meals, and equitable access to quality academic instruction? 43 Civil Rights Coalition ACLU/Public Advocates Public Counsel 15497: 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: LCAP Section 2: Goals and Progress Indicators: Carolyn Laub, Executive Director – Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) Network In the Section 2, Table in the last column, “Related State and Local Priorities,” change the first sentence in the parenthetical as follows: (Identify specific state priority and, as applicable, statutorilyrequired element.” Brian Lee, State Director Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California In the Section 2 Table, add new 1st column to identify each state priority area and each of the 23 statutorily-defined measures within each priority area. Black Parallel School Board CCSA Clarify applicability of state priorities to charter schools. In the Table, last column, entitled “Related State and Local Priorities,” parenthetical: (Identify specific state priority. For districts and COEs, all priorities, as defined in Section 15496(e), in statute must be included and identified; each goal may be linked to more than one priority, if appropriate. Agency Response state priorities identified in EC 52060 or 52066. It is impractical to list all possible considerations to meet each state priority from the point-of-view of all potential organizations or individual interests. Partially accept: The LCAP Template set forth in section 15497 is edited and replaced with a proposed LCAP Template in section 15498. The prior Section 2 Table is replaced with a revised table, in Section 2, titled as follows: “Section 2. Goals, Actions, Expenditures, and Progress Indicators” The edited Section 2 Table includes columns, as follows: “GOAL: Expected Annual Outcomes (In each year, must include all metrics as applicable, pursuant to Education Code sections 52060 and 52066): LCAP Year 1: xxxx-xx Year 2:” xxxx-xx Year 3:xxxx-xx The Instructions for completing the edited Section 2 Table are set forth in section 15498. Section 15495 was edited to add subdivision exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 26 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response (g), which adds a definition as follows: “”Required metric” means all of the specified measures and standards for each state priority as set forth in Education Code section 52060(d) and 52066(d), as applicable” 44 CRLA/CABE Californians Together 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: Section 3: Actions, Services, and Expenditures. In order to ensure the appropriate uses of the LCFF funds and federal funds, this section requires language in the instructions section clearly stating supplemental or concentration funds used for districtwide, schoolwide, or countywide purposes must not supplant Title I or Title III funds. Reject: Supplanting of Federal funds is addressed from the perspective of, and requirements specific to, federal programs. The proposed addition is beyond the scope of the LCFF statute 45 CSDC 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: Section 3: Actions, Services, and Expenditures. Guiding Question #3 and #5 Where can these expenditures be found in the LEA budget? Subgroup data in question 5. Not required in statutes and are too complex 46 CPEHN/CDF/RAMP 15497: [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Reject: As described above, the LCAP Template previously set forth in section 15947 has been edited and is now section 15498. Guiding Question #3 in former section 15497, Section 2, is now Guiding Question #13 in Section 2 of 15498, without change; Guiding Question #5 in former section 159497, Section 2, is now Guiding Questions #2 in the Annual Update Instructions, section 2. The guiding questions are consistent with statute that requires the LCAP to include a listing and description of expenditures. As specified in the Introduction to the LCAP Template. Guiding questions are prompts (but not limits), and not requirements. Reject: Guiding questions are prompts not exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 27 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response Update]: Section 3: Actions, Services, and Expenditures. Guiding Questions: Add new Guiding Question #8: 8) What health specific actions/services will be provided to all pupils, to subgroups of pupils identified pursuant to Education Code section 52052, to achieve the goals identified in the LCAP? limits and each LEA may add Guiding Questions as deemed appropriate for community circumstances. It is impractical to list all possible considerations to meet each state priority from the point-of-view of all potential organizations or individual interests. 47 Dale Shimasaki, Ph.D.,AAP CA Advocate - Association of American Publishers, Inc. 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: Section 3: Actions, Services, and Expenditures: Require districts to list the title, subject and date of publication of those instructional materials used to implement the academic standards (priority 2), including the common core math and the common core reading adoption. Reject: This is beyond the scope of the LCAP. This information is already included in the School Accountability and Report Card and there is legislative intent to minimize duplication of reporting requirements. Adding this requirement would be counter to that intent. 48 Civil Rights Coalition 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: Section 3: Actions, Services, and Expenditures.: Reject: Calculation results and process is captured in Section 3: Use of Supplemental and Concentration Grant funds and Proportionality, of the LCAP Template [Section 15498]. Review process required by EC sections 52070(d)(3), 52070.5(d)(3), and Section 15497 will verify the expenditure requirements for meeting the proportionality requirements, including the accuracy of calculations. ACLU/Public Advocates Ed-Trust West Transparency on Prior Year Expenditures: Add a space in the LCAP to describe how the LEA calculated the prior year expenditures in Step 2 (15496(a)(2)) Create a space in the LCAP template where LEAs must identify the dollar amount and methodology used to estimate “the amount of LCFF funds expended by the LEA on services for unduplicated pupils in the prior year that is in addition to what was expended on services provided for all pupils” as described in steps 2 of the 7 step “proportionality” calculation outlined in CCR Section 15496(a) 49 CSDC 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: No requirement in statute for charter schools to provide the Reject: One template has been developed for use by all LEAs; the proposed regulations were purposefully developed to capture the exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 28 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response detailed description of and/or justification for the use of funds. Instead have charter-specific template to as charter of identify the percentage increase in funding generated by unduplicated low income, foster youth, and English learner students. description and/or justification of use of funds and are consistent with statute. 50 CRLA/CABE/ Californians Together 15497: [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: Revise the instruction to delete reference to districts and schools below specified thresholds. Guiding Questions: #7C This instruction refers to districts and schools below specified thresholds. Districts and schools should not be able to expend their supplemental and concentration funds for districtwide or schoolwide purposes when this is not the intent of the LCFF statute. See response to comment #9 above. 51 Civil Rights Coalition New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Direct CDE to create and districts to use distinct SACS codes so that districts differentially track LCFF base funding and LCFF supplemental and concentration funding. Reject: Use of distinct SACS codes to track funding as described by commenters will not typically provide the desired outcome suggested in comment because SACS codes track to an LEA general ledger. ACLU/Public Advocates EdVoice Children Now Assembly Members Utilize SACS structure to track the use of supplemental and concentration funding separate from base funding to ensure a district’s expenditures align with its LCAP. Include transparent and standard data and expenditure reporting. Asian Americans Advancing Justice 52 PICO New Regulation/No specific language suggested: The proposed spending regulations and the revised LCAP Template set forth in proposed section 15498, including the annual update, provide for transparent and standard data and expenditure reporting. Partially accept: Proposed section 15495 is exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 29 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Student Voice Coalition Student Rights Coalition Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Issue a regulation mandating a formal process for districts to consult students such as creating a student advisory council which includes representation of unduplicated students and ensuring selection criteria and composition is reflected in Section 1 of the LCAP. PLAN Dean Vogel, President – California Teachers Association (CTA) Asian Americans Advancing Justice Form Letter #1 Form Letter #3 Form Letter #6 Children Now Asian Americans Advancing Justice Agency Response edited to include subdivision (a), as set forth in comment #1. Partially Reject: Specific training requirements exceed the scope of the statute and are not included. Require districts to employ at least one of the following strategies to satisfy the requirement for student consultation for the purposes of the LCAP: annual survey, quarterly focus groups, semi-annual town hall or forum, participatory budget process, and/or representation of county s students on school site councils. Strengthen requirements for seeking student input in developing, reviewing, and updating the LCAP. Adhere to the statute by requiring that districts seek meaningful student input in developing, reviewing and updating the LCAP Students are the primary stakeholders in education and their input should matter to the Local Control Accountability process. Update the regulations to include a process for capturing what students think; create a Student Advisory Committee; and ask districts what specific actions were taken to engage with students. Provide adequate training to students serving in committees. 53 Parent Leadership Action Network Asian Americans Advancing Justice New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Clarify that parent engagement requires access to information on strategies according to state priorities that serve high needs students currently being used in the district, the effectiveness of those strategies, and the costs of services provided to accomplish each strategy. Partially accept: Definitions of English learner parent advisory committee and parent advisory committee were added to section 15945(b)(3), as described at above comment #31. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 30 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Improving transparency and standardization around parent selection process and data and expenditure reporting. Agency Response Partially reject: Comments regarding setting an accountability process do not suggest any specific language or edits. Setting an accountability process that rewards districts and schools for engaging stakeholders authentically; collaborating with them throughout the LCAP process, and for being responsive to their community’s priorities in education by integrating stakeholders’ input in the LCAP and the budget. 54 55 Civil Rights Coalition ACLU/Public Advocates Children Now GSA Network Public Counsel Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California Black Parallel School Board Andrea Ball, J.D., Legislative Advocate – California School Boards Association (CSBA) PICO Children Now New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Provide an electronic needs-assessment connected to the LCAP, with certain fields pre-populated with data that is already submitted to CDE. ACLU/Public Advocates New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Add requirement that the SBE conduct an annual review of the template each fall and a standing board meeting whether to commence rulemaking to modify the LCAP template in response to the past year’s implementation experiences. The LCAP template format should be modified so that the metrics and goals are aligned, in a single section, with the specific action and expenditure information. Establish common definitions of indicators that are consistent with state law, such as chronic absenteeism Create electronic template and provide access to electronic links to state data sets that can be used to define and measure progress in the state priorities. Partially accept: The LCAP template, Section 2 and Section 3 tables have been combined so that the goals and actions, services, and expenditures related to that goal are on a single page. This should help ensure greater alignment between goals and expenditures. An Appendix has been added that includes definitions for indicators that have a statutory definition, including chronic absenteeism. Partially reject: Comments regarding the electronic template do not suggest any specific language or edits. However, the CDE has developed a timeline for an electronic template as outlined in the SBE’s May 2014 agenda item. Reject: Statute does not require modification of the LCAP template on a particular or prescribed schedule. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 31 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 56 Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment CTA For the next few years, SBE conduct an annual substantive review of the LCAP template, with an eye toward January adoption of a revised template as appropriate. Zoe Rawson Labor/Community Strategy Center’s Community Rights Campaign New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Template should require districts to account for the impact of police presence in schools, report data on the use of law enforcement in handling student behaviors, and encourage the use of alternatives to school police. Agency Response Reject: No specific language or comment is suggested. Each LEA has the discretion to report data or to develop alternative programs based on the discussion in the community and the goals, actions, services and expenditures developed by the LEA. Template should ensure that LCFF funds are directed to school sites with the highest rates of criminalization and school pushout, as evidenced by discipline and law enforcement data and discriminatory outcomes. Template should make explicit that LCFF funds are not to be used for school police. 57 Parent Leadership Action Network Form Letter #3 New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Improve assurances that districts are strengthening site council engagement in school level site plan development that is aligned to LCAP development by requiring greater transparency and reporting from the districts around how the specific expenditures in district and site plans align with state priorities and goals. Partially accept: The Section 2 and Section 3 tables have been combined so that the goals and actions, services, and expenditures related to that goal are on a single page. This should help ensure greater alignments between goals and expenditures. Assembly Members Asian Americans Advancing Justice Improve assurances that districts are creating the conditions necessary for authentic partnership in development of the LCAP through improving transparency and standardization around dollars and data, strengthening site council engagement, and requiring greater alignment between state priorities, goals and specific expenditures at the district and school level Ensure consultation with school site councils and alignment between LCAPS and school site plans and priorities. Partially reject: The comment is unclear and no specific edit to the proposed regulations is included. For site councils, please see response to exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 32 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response comments #10. Ensure strong site council engagement. Strengthening parent engagement at the local level (i.e., DELAC, Parent Advisory Committees) by clarifying the purpose and rules for any advisory committee, providing recommendations on LCFF; by providing training for school staff and parents on laws, data analysis, budgeting, goal and timeline setting, and about effective program and strategies to support English learners, lowincome students; and students in foster care; and by encouraging LEA’s to partner or hire organizations that specialize in parent engagement to increase school staff capacity to work with parents. 58 PLAN Education Trust-West Children Now 59 Parent Leadership Action Network Specific training requirements are beyond the scope of the statute. New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Parent Advisory Councils: Require greater transparency in the form of annual reporting from the districts on what processes are being utilized to ensure that Parent Advisory Councils are engaging the parents of high needs students. Modify the LCAP guidance around parent advisory committees to add transparency to the parent advisory committee selection process. Partially accept: Partially accept as to parent advisory committee selection process. A definition has been added in section 15495(e) clarifying that the parent advisory committee shall be composed of a majority of parents. Please see response to comment #31. New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Access to Interpretation and Translation: Require districts to report annually on how they are providing legally mandated access to interpretation and translation of all information provided to parents in their primary native language, especially if the information translated was the same provided in English on student data, proposed district level strategies and funds principally intended to serve unduplicated pupils. Reject: Translation requirements are set forth in EC section 48985 and requiring an annual report is beyond the scope of the statute. Partially reject: Partially reject as to annual reporting. The statute does not require annual reporting and such language would create a mandate. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 33 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 60 Asian Americans Advancing Justice Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Ensure alignment between state priorities, goals, and specific expenditures. Form letter #1 Require greater alignment between state priorities, goals and specific expenditures at the district and school level, including clarifying the role of the district and local school site councils in this process. Modify the LCAP template to ensure greater alignment between state priorities, goals and specific expenditures at the district and school level, so that parents, students and the public can understand the district’s plan. Agency Response Partially accept: The Section 2 and Section 3 tables have been combined so that the goals and actions, services, and expenditures related to that goal are on a single page. This should help ensure greater alignments between goals and expenditures. Partially reject: The comment is unclear and no specific edit to the proposed regulations is included. 61 California School Library Association New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Reference requirement in the regulations to provide school library services pursuant to Education Code section 18100. Reject: School library services are not one of the state priorities identified in EC sections 52060 or 52066. 62 Serge Bonte - Mountain View, CA New Regulation/No specific language suggested: CMOs charging management/ facilities/business fees will result in supplemental funds moving away from target students for noneducation purposes. COEs and districts charge business fees also: Regulations to exclude LCFF supplemental funds from such management/facilities or business fees. Concerned that the proposed regulations will not be applied equally between charter and public schools. Reject: Edits to the proposed regulations are not required. The proposed regulations require all LEAs to identify goals, actions, services, and expenditures being provided to all students. New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Provide guidance for COE oversight in the area of COE review of district use of schoolwide and districtwide flexibility and the calculations made to determine a district’s supplemental and concentration grant amounts. Reject: No specific edit to the proposed regulations is included. 63 Children Now Asian Americans Advancing Justice Form Letter #3 The proposed regulations are consistent with statutory requirements for all LEAs, including charter schools. Please see response to comments #18 and #19 exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 34 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Form Letter #1 Form Letter #2 Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response Ensure that COEs have meaningful oversight over all districts for purposes of reviewing and approving LCAP and budgetary compliance with the LCFF statute and the State Board’s regulations. Ensure that COEs have COEs have meaningful oversight over all districts to ensure compliance with the LCFF statute and the state board’s regulations. Provide explicit guidance to COEs to review districtwide and schoolwide plans to ensure that they increase or improve services in proportion to supplemental grants in a manner that will increase academic achievement 64 Asian Americans Advancing Justice New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Clarifying the process to report violations, including irregularities in fund allocations and expenditures. Reject: No specific edit to the proposed regulations is included. EC section 52075 sets forth a procedure for submitting complaints. 65 GSA Network Public Counsel New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Template should incorporate into one easy-to-read chart descriptions of (a) identified needs (b) goals (c) actions and (d) expenditures for each priority area and each measure. Partially accept: As described above, the LCAP Template is edited as set forth in the new section 15498. Section 2: Goals, Actions, Expenditures and Progress Indicators includes a revised chart that includes a description of the goals, need(s) identified, expected annual outcomes, related state and/or local priorities, actions/services and related expenditures. Reject: The comment is unclear and no specific edit to the proposed regulations is included. The LCAP Template introduction also states “For charter schools, the inclusions and description of goals for state Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California Black Parallel School Board 66 CSDC New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Many of the requirements in the template (e.g., state priorities do not apply to charter schools and the reference to state priorities that are not applicable) is confusing. Therefore, separate charter template. If not separate template, then better call out the exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 35 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment differences for charters – EC 44258.9, 48296, 51210, 51220 not applicable to charter schools. Agency Response priorities in the LCAP may be modified to meet the grade levels served and the nature of the program provided, including modifications to reflect only the statutory requirements explicitly applicable to charter schools in the Education Code Development of an electronic template is under consideration, and it may be better customized to each LEA type. 67 Public Counsel GSA Network 68 69 Steven Ward, Legislative Analyst and Government Relations California School Finance Reform Coalition CSBA New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Current guiding questions should incorporate several examples, so as to avoid confusion regarding the priority area requirements Reject: The comment is unclear and no specific edit to the proposed regulations is included. State priority areas are set forth in EC sections 52060(d) and 52066(d) as identified in the proposed regulations. Planned goals, actions, services and expenditures are locally determined. New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Support Letter This commenter does not suggest any changes to the proposed regulations; therefore no response is necessary New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Support This commenter does not suggest any changes to the proposed regulations; therefore no response is necessary. Provide additional clarification or FAQs how LEAs may attribute prior year districtwide or schoolwide expenditures in making the proportionality calculation Support Template exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 36 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS 70 Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment David Kopperud, Chairperson - State School Attendance Review Board 15495: New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Provide specific uniform definitions for attendance rates and chronic absenteeism. Attendance rate be calculated as the ADA divided by the average daily enrollment for a given period of school days Chronic absenteeism rate use the definition in EC 60901(c)(1) Attendance rate and chronic absentee rates be calculated for pupil subgroups. Template include space for goals in reducing the chronic absenteeism rates for different subgroups as well as space for specifying interventions and expenditures at both the district and school levels Provide specific definitions for LCAP measures of school climate. In-school and out-of-school suspension rates should be calculated separately and should be reported by the subpopulations identified in the LCFF/LCAP legislation. Match LCAP priorities to LEA budget reviews Regulations be drafted that enable county superintendents and the SSPI to review prevention/invention efforts (including staffing) to determine if adequate resources are being provided and funded to achieve progress, especially in the area of pupil engagement and school climate. The LCAP template should include provisions for the LCAPs to clearly state how additional funding will be used to meet the special needs of these subpopulations, especially in the priority Agency Response Partially Accept/Partially Reject: The revised LCAP Template includes an Appendix with definitions that are identified in the School Accountability and Report Card. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 37 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response areas for pupil engagement and school climate. 71 Form Letter #2 New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Provide a standard by which districts must, at a minimum, explicitly demonstrate that the districtwide or schoolwide services will actually improve the academic achievement of low income students, English learners, and foster youth or close persistent achievement gaps. Partially Accept: See response to comment #74 below. 72 Form Letter #2 New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Eliminate the allowance for flexibility on the use of “concentration” grant funds for districtwide, schoolwide, or countywide purposes, as it is not authorized by law. Reject: Use of supplemental and concentration funds on a schoolwide, districtwide, or countywide is authorized by statute. EC section 42238.07 authorizes the board to adopt regulations that govern the expenditure of funds apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated pupils pursuant to EC sections 2574, 2575, 42238.02, and 42238.03, which shall include but not be limited to two provisions set forth in statute. Thus, EC 42238.07(b) does not preclude the board from adopting regulations that authorize schoolwide and districtwide expenditures for supplemental and concentration grant funds. 73 Form Letter #5 New Regulation/No specific language suggested: County offices of education must review and approve Local Control and Accountability Plans (LCAP). Please see response to comments #18 and #19. Given this important responsibility, we must strengthen and clarify this oversight role. Oversight should be done in a public hearing. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 38 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response 74 CRLA/CABE/Californians Together New Regulation/No specific language suggested: Establish stronger provisions stating that supplemental and concentration funds can be used for district-wide and school-wide services only if the service demonstrably provides a differential benefit to unduplicated pupils by showing an actual increase or improvement of services to unduplicated pupils that promotes priority goals for those subgroups, also benefiting the general student population. This is necessary to ensure use of the funds in a manner that addresses unduplicated pupil achievement, goals and priorities as required by EC Sections 52052, 52060, and 52066. Partially Accept: Edit proposed regulations sections, as follows: 15496(b)(1)(B), 15496(b) (2)(B), 15496(b)(3)(B),15496 (b)(4)(B), and 15496(5)(B) to state: “Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards, and are effective in, meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas.” 75 Children Now 15497 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update]: Section 3: Actions, Services, and Expenditures. Require the LCAP template to include information specific to foster youth. The draft LCAP template can be improved by dividing the “goal chart” in section 2 into two goal charts, one containing goals for all students, the other containing goals for at-risk subgroups, similar to the structure of the charts in section 3. Reject: The LCAP Template is designed for all LEAs. An LEA can identify specific goals and actions for specific subgroups, including foster youth. The edited LCAP Template, Section 2: Goals Actions, Expenditures, and Progress Indicators [section 15498] instructions and chart require an LEA to identify the applicable pupil subgroup for a goal, and any actions, services and related expenditures applicable to a subgroup. 6-26-14 [California Department of Education] exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 39 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO THE 15-DAY COMMENT PERIOD (JULY 12-28, 2014) Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response 1 Leslie DeRose, Board Member, Pajaro Valley Unified School District Niccole Childs, Board President, Hesperia Unified School District Sherri Reusche, Board Member, Calaveras Unified School District Annie Fox, PICO California Cindy Marten, Superintendent, San Diego Unified 15495(a) - No specific language recommended: Amend language to ensure pupils are consulted as the LCAP is being developed, rather than sharing the LCAP once it is completed. Accept: As stated in response to comment #3, the language of proposed section 15495(a) is revised to ensure pupils are involved in the development of the LCAP. 2 Wesley Smith, Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) 15495(a) - No specific language recommended: Carefully consider if definition of “consult with pupils” is necessary and if so, clarify what is meant by “consulting”. Reject. The language of proposed section 15495(a), revised as described in response #3, provides a definition for “consult with pupils” to clarify that the consultation process is to enable review and comment on development of the LCAP. Inclusion of a definition for consultation with pupils is necessary to assist local education agencies (LEAs) to implement LCFF’s new statutory process for consultation with pupils. It also provides a list of permissive examples for how to complete this engagement. The revised definition provides needed flexibility for an LEA to design a process that meets the needs of its pupils, grade levels served, and type of program. As clarified, the proposed The proposed definition is overly broad and unnecessary and may have implications in the Uniform Complaint Process as this process may be used when LEAs fail to comply to complete the required consultations. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 40 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response definition sufficiently informs LEAs and potential UCP complainants regarding the purpose and process for “consultation” required by the statute. 3 4 California School Finance Reform Coalition 15495(a): (a) “Consult with pupils”, as used in Education Code sections 52060, 52066, and 47605.5, means a process for the presentation of the LCAP to pupils for to review and comment in developing a local control and accountability plan. This process may include, but is not limited to, surveys of pupils, forums with pupils, or meetings with pupil government bodies or other groups representing pupils. Andrea Ball, Teri Burns, Josh Daniels, California School Boards Association (CSBA) (a) “Consult with pupils”, as used in Education Code sections 52060, 52066, and 47605.5, means a process for the presentation of the LCAP to pupils for to review and comment on the development of the local control and accountability plan. This process may include, but is not limited to, surveys of pupils, forums with pupils, or meetings with pupil government bodies or other groups representing pupils. David Gordon and Judith McConnell, California Task Force on K-12 Civic Learning 15495(a): Add the following to increase the role of students in the planning process: “Consult with pupils”, as used in Education Code sections 52060, 52066, and 47605.5, means a process for the presentation of the LCAP to pupils for review and comment. Students are the ultimate stakeholders and they bring an important Accept: The language of proposed section 15495(a) was revised to ensure pupils are involved in the development of the LCAP as follows: 15495 (a): “(a) “Consult with pupils,” as used in Education Code sections 52060, 52066, and 47605.5 47606.5, means a process to enable for the presentation of the LCAP to pupils, including unduplicated pupils and other numerically significant pupil subgroups, to for review and comment on the development of the LCAP. This process may include, but is not limited to, surveys of pupils, forums with pupils, pupil advisory committees, or meetings with pupil government bodies or other groups representing pupils.” Reject: The suggested additional language does not clarify the definition of “consult with pupils” and the District Advisory Committee is not required to be used as the parent advisory committee with which the LEA must consult on the LCAP. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 41 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response perspective to the table, especially at the high school level. This process may include, but is not limited to, surveys of pupils, forums with pupils, or meetings with pupil government bodies or other groups representing pupils, or student representation on the District Advisory Committee. 5 Cecelia Mansfield, California State PTA 15495(a): Add the following to increase the role of students in the planning process: “Consult with pupils”, as used in Education Code sections 52060, 52066, and 47605.5, means a process for the presentation of the LCAP to pupils for review and comment. This process may include, but is not limited to, student representation on the District Advisory Committee, surveys of pupils, forums with pupils, or meetings with pupil government bodies or other groups representing pupils. 6 Oscar Cruz, President and CEO, Families in Schools Civil Rights Coalition Student Voice Coalition Bill Lucia, EdVoice 15495(a): Add the following to increase the role of students in the planning process: “Consult with pupils”, as used in Education Code sections 52060, 52066, and 47605.5, means establishing a process or processes for the inclusion of pupils in the development of the LCAP and for the presentation of the LCAP to pupils for review and comment. This process may include, but is not limited to, formation of a student advisory committee similar in function to parent committees in subparagraphs (b) and (e) of this section, surveys of pupils, forums with pupils, or meetings with pupil government bodies or other groups representing pupils. The process or processes that an LEA adopts should ensure the inclusion of unduplicated pupils and other numerically significant pupil subgroups. Reject: The District Advisory Committee is not required to be used as the parent advisory committee with which the LEA must consult on the LCAP. Partially Accept: The language of proposed section 15495(a) was revised as set forth in response #3 to ensure pupils, including unduplicated pupils and other numerically significant pupil subgroups, are involved in the development of the LCAP. Partially Reject: Addition of the suggested language regarding formation of a student advisory commit is not necessary as LEAs have discretion to form such a committee for consultation. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 42 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response Accept: The language of proposed section 15495(a) was revised as set forth in response to comment #3. The revisions include replacing the reference to section 47605.5 with 47606.5. 7 Colin Miller, California Charter Schools Association (CCSA) 15495(a): This section contains an incorrect cross reference, on page 2, line 1, replace 47605.5 with 47606.5. 8 Oscar Cruz, President and CEO of Families in Schools 15495(b) and (e): Amend section 15495(b) and (e) to state: (b) “English learner parent advisory committee,” as used in Education Code sections 52063 and 52069 for those school districts or schools and programs operated by county superintendents of schools whose enrollment includes at least 15 percent English learners and at least 50 pupils who are English learners, shall be composed of parents or legal guardians, of which at least a majority of are parents or legal guardians of pupils to whom the definition of Education Code section 42238.01(c) apply or an equivalent percentage as the number of pupils to whom to the definition of Education Code section 42238.01(c) apply, whichever is greater. A governing board of a school district or a county superintendent of schools shall not be required to establish a new English learner parent advisory committee if a previously established committee meets these requirements. (e) “Parent advisory committee,” as used in Education Code sections 52063 and 52069, shall be composed of parents or legal guardians, of which at least a majority of are parents or legal guardians of pupils and include parents or legal guardians of pupils to whom one or more of the definitions of Education Code section 42238.01 apply or an equivalent percentage as the number of pupils to whom to the definition of Education Code section 42238.01(c) apply, whichever is greater. A governing board of a school district or a county Reject: The suggested revisions to the proposed regulation section 15495(b) and (e) would create an additional and potentially insurmountable burden for LEAs to ensure they meet the specified percentage requirements for committee composition. Regulation section 15495(e) is renumbered to be 15495(f) due to the addition of a new subdivision (e), which adds a definition of “parents”. In addition, the wording of the renumbered 15495(f) is revised, as is the wording of 15495(b), as a result of the addition of new subdivision (e). See revised language set forth in response to comment #11. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 43 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response superintendent of schools shall not be required to establish a new parent advisory committee if a previously established committee meets these requirements, including any committee established to meet the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110) pursuant to Section 1112 of Subpart 1 of Part A of Title I of that act. 9 Civil Rights Coalition Section 15495(e): Ensure parents of unduplicated pupils are represented on the parent advisory committees in proportion to the composition of unduplicated pupils in the district. Maria Raouf Annie Fox, PICO California Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) Amend Section 15495(e) to state: (e) “Parent advisory committee,” as used in Education Code sections 52063 and 52069, shall be composed of a majority of parents or legal guardians of pupils and include parents or legal guardians of pupils to whom one or more of the definitions of Education Code section 42238.01 apply. A governing board of a school district or a county superintendent of schools shall not be required to establish a new parent advisory committee if a previously established committee meets these requirements, including any committee established to meet the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110) pursuant to Section 1112 of Subpart 1 of Part A of Title I of that act. The overall representation on the committee of parents or legal guardians of pupils to whom one or more of the definitions of Education Code section 42238.01 apply should, at a minimum, be proportional to the overall representation of such pupils among the LEA’s total enrollment.” Reject: The suggested revisions to the proposed regulations may create an additional and potentially insurmountable burden for LEAs to ensure they meet the specified percentage requirements for committee representation. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 44 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS 10 11 Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Leslie DeRose, Board Member, Pajaro Valley Unified School District Niccole Childs, Board President, Hesperia Unified School District Sherri Reusche, Board Member, Calaveras Unified School District Andrea Ball, Teri Burns, Josh Daniels, California School Boards Association (CSBA) 15495(e) - No specific language change recommended: Support the clarification that the Parent Advisory Committee must be comprised of a majority of parents/guardians of pupils in general and is not limited to the categories of unduplicated pupils. Jackie Thu-Huong Wong, Director Foster Ed, National Center for Youth Law Debra Brown, Associate Director, Children Now Alliance for Children’s Rights 15495(e) Amend this section to ensure representation of foster youth on the parent advisory committee as follows: “(e) “Parent advisory committee,” as used in Education Code sections 52063 and 52069,shall be composed of a majority of parents, or legal guardians, or educational rights holders of pupils and include parents, or legal guardians, or educational rights holders of pupils to whom one or more of the definitions of Education Code section 42238.01 apply. The committee shall include representation from each of the three subgroups of pupils defined in Education Code section 42238.01 and served by the district. A governing board of a school district or a county superintendent of schools shall not be required to establish a new parent advisory committee if a previously established committee meets these requirements, including any committee established to meet the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110) pursuant to Section 1112 of Subpart 1 of Part A of Title I of that act.” Agency Response Reject: The suggested revision is not necessary. The proposed section 15495(f) requires an LEA parent advisory committee to be composed of a majority of parents of pupils, and requires inclusion of parents of pupils to whom one or more of the definitions of unduplicated pupils applies. Partially Accept: The language of proposed section 15495 was revised to add a proposed subdivision (e) to add a definition of “parents.” The proposed definition of “parents” includes “parent, legal guardian, and educational rights holder,” as follows: “(e) “Parents” means the natural or adoptive parents, legal guardians, or other persons holding the right to make educational decisions for the pupil pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 361 or 727 or Education Code sections 56028 or 56055, including foster parents who hold rights to make educational decisions.” In addition, proposed section 15495, subdivisions (b) and (f), are revised to make reference to “parent,” as follows: exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 45 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response “(b) “English learner parent advisory committee,” as used in Education Code sections 52063 and 52069 for those school districts or schools and programs operated by county superintendents of schools whose enrollment includes at least 15 percent English learners and at least 50 pupils who are English learners, shall be composed of a majority of parents, as defined in subdivision (e), or legal guardians of pupils to whom the definition of in Education Code section 42238.01(c) applyies. A governing board of a school district or a county superintendent of schools shall not be required to establish a new English learner parent advisory committee if a previously established committee meets these requirements.” “(f)(e) “Parent advisory committee,” as used in Education Code sections 52063 and 52069, shall be composed of a majority of parents, as defined in subdivision (e), or legal guardians of pupils and include parents or legal guardians of pupils to whom one or more of the definitions of in Education Code section 42238.01 apply. A governing board of a school district or a county superintendent of schools shall not be required to establish a new parent advisory exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 46 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response committee if a previously established committee meets these requirements, including any committee established to meet the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110) pursuant to Section 1112 of Subpart 1 of Part A of Title I of that act.” Partially Reject: The suggested language requiring representation from each of the three groups identified as unduplicated pupils may be burdensome for LEAs, particularly in those that have lower enrollment of unduplicated students. 12 California School Finance Reform Coalition 15495(g): Amend language to focus on specified measures in statute and not the quantity of identified measurements as follows: (g) “Required metric” means all of the specified measures and standards for each state priority as set forth in Education Code sections 52060(d) and 52066(d), as applicable. Cindy Marten, Superintendent, San Diego Unified Andrea Ball, Teri Burns, Josh Daniels, California School Boards Association (CSBA) As written, this definition can be interpreted to suggest that LEAs will be required to use all metrics included in the statutory provisions in the Education Code related to each state priority. This may be a requirement that may not be appropriate in all circumstances, and LEAs may also choose to establish locally defined metrics. Clarify this definition be clarified to require that “only those metrics that are applicable for each state priority are Reject: Pursuant to EC sections 52060 and 52066, LEAs must include every metric and objective set forth in statute for each state priority with the exception of metrics that are not applicable to the particular LEA (for example an elementary school district would not report graduation rates). The definition of “required metric” is now in the LCAP template to provide additional clarity in the instructions for the goal table. The commenters’ suggested language would give an LEA an option to choose only the metrics it would like to include in its LCAP to measure progress on state priorities. LEAs are authorized to identify and report locally identified metrics in addition to the required metrics. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 47 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response required.” 13 14 Peter Birdsall, California County Superintendents Educational Services Association 15495(g) No specific language requested: Support the addition of the proposed section 15495(g) that defines “Required Metric.” This addition will help provide clarity for the LEAs when they are determining the different metrics for each of their goals as aligned to the state priorities. This addition will also enhance the review of the LCAPs by the county offices of education, as the “required metric” will be a key component of each LEA’s plan. Leslie L. DeRose, Board Member, Pajaro Valley Unified School District Wendy Benkert Ed.D. Associate Superintendent of Business Services, Orange County Department of Education. Jeff Frost Niccole Childs, Board President, Hesperia Unified School District Sherri Reusche, Board Member, Calaveras Unified School District Wesley Smith, Association of California School 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), and (b)(4)(B): Delete the word “principally” from the referenced sections. Use of this term makes the result less transparent, may limit use of funds to best serve students and distracts from the goal to improve pupil outcomes and close gaps in achievement. Delete the words “principally…and are effective in” and This commenter supports the definition of “Required Metric” which is now included in the proposed revised LCAP template. See response to comment #12. Reject: The term “principally” applies to the description of services that must be provided when funds apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated pupils are used for services on a districtwide or schoolwide basis. It provides additional clarity and does not limit the use of funds beyond the current expenditure regulations set forth in section 15496(b). Inclusion of the term “principally” is consistent with EC 42238.07 and existing language of proposed sections 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), and (b)(4)(B), that such services are intended to benefit unduplicated pupils, though they may be provided on a districtwide or schoolwide basis as specified in the proposed sections. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 48 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Administrators (ACSA) Cindy Marten, Superintendent, San Diego Unified Eric Premack, Charter Schools Development Center 15 Oscar Cruz President and CEO of Families in Schools Jackie Thu-Huong Wong, Director Foster Ed, National Center for Youth Law Civil Rights Coalition Debra Brown, Associate Director, Children Now Annie Fox, PICO California Ron Rapp, California Federation of Teachers Steven Nelson, Trustee, Mountain View Whisman School District Valerie Cuevas Interim Executive Director Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response maintaining the sentence as it was written in the emergency regulations, so that the sentence would read, “Describe in the LCAP how such services are directed towards meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas.” No specific language is recommended, comment expresses general concern over the addition of the words “principally…and are effective in”. The terms are vague and impractical. 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), and (b)(4)(B): Retain the 5 words, “principally” and “and are effective in” in the above-referenced sections. This amendment to the regulations will still enable districts to be innovative while fostering robust conversations at the local level on how to best serve high need pupils. These commenters support the language of proposed sections 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), and (b)(4)(B). Therefore, no response is necessary. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 49 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response The Education Trust– West Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) Kristine Andarmani Hillary Martinez Sheedy Dedashti Kim Miles Bill Lucia, EdVoice 16 17 Angela Sims California School Finance Reform Coalition 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), and (b)(4)(B): Keep 8 words (reference to comments proposed in 45 day public comment period). Retain the term “principally” and “and are effective in” in the referenced sections, add “serving unduplicated pupils”. This amendment to the regulations will still enable districts to be innovative while fostering robust conversations at the local level on how to best serve high need pupils. Reject: Addition of the suggested phrase “serving unduplicated pupils” is unnecessary because it is redundant. 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), (b)(4)(B), and (b)(5)(B): Support the use of the term “principally” as proposed in the regulations, add specific language to include local priority areas and additional detail on the description required as follows: Partially Accept: The language of proposed sections 15496(b)(1)(B), (b) (2)(B), (b)(3)(B) and (b)(4)(B) was revised to include local priority areas, as follows: (1)(B), (2)(B), (3)(B) and (4)(B): Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards, and are effective in, meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas. The description may include alternatives considered, research, experience, or educational theory that informs the choice of services. “Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards, and are effective in, meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas.” exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 50 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment (5)(B): Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards, and are effective in, meeting the county office of education’s or charter schools goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas, as applicable. The description may include alternatives considered, research, experience, or educational theory that informs the choice of services. Agency Response In addition, proposed sections 15496(b)(2)(C) and (b)(4)(C), were revised to include local priority areas, as follows: “Describe how these services are the most effective use of the funds to meet the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas. Partially Reject: Addition of suggested language to proposed regulations sections 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), (b)(4)(B) and (b)(5)(B) to permit descriptions of how a choice of services is made is unnecessary when enrollment of unduplicated pupils meets or exceeds the thresholds specified in the proposed regulations and in the case of county offices of education, which serve unique populations and pupils and whose programs to serve those pupils vary significantly. 18 Andrea Ball, Teri Burns, Josh Daniels, California School Boards Association (CSBA) 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), (b)(4)(B): (1)(B), (2)(B), (3)(B) and (4)(B): Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards, and are effective in, meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas. The description may include supporting research, experience, or educational theory. Partially Accept: The language of proposed sections 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), (b)(4)(B) was revised to include “ and any local priority” as described in response to comment #17. Partially Reject: The suggestion to delete the term “principally” is rejected for the reasons set forth in response to comment #14. Addition of the suggested language regarding description of supporting research, exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 51 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response experience, or educational theory is rejected for the reasons set forth in response to comment #17. 19 20 Cheryl Ingham, Humboldt County LCAP Lead Garry T. Eagles, Supt., Humboldt Co. Ofc. Of Ed. 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), (b)(4)(B) and (b)(5)(B), no specific language requested: The term “principally” allows for local interpretation, COEs should be instructed to accept LCAPs that indicate how funds will be used “principally” for an identified group if LEA stakeholders and the governing board have approved the descriptions. California School Finance Reform Coalition 15496(b)(2)(C) and (b)(4)(C): Amend language to add flexibility as follows: (b)(2)(C) and (4)(C): Describe how these services are the most effective use of funds to meet the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas. The description shall include provide the basis for this determination, including, but not limited to, any alternatives considered and any supporting research, experience, or educational theory which may include a description of alternatives considered, research, experience, or educational theory that informs the choice of services. Andrea Ball, Teri Burns, Josh Daniels, California School Boards Association (CSBA) (b)(2)(C) and (4)(C): Describe how these services are the most effective use of funds to meet the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas. The description shall include the basis for this determination, including, but not limited to, which may include any alternatives considered, and Reject: Directing County Offices of Education to accept or reject LCAPs as described by the commenter is beyond the scope of regulations. Partially Accept: Proposed regulation sections 15496(b)(2)(C) and (b)(4)(C) are revised to substitute “provide” in place of “include,” as follows: Describe how these services are the most effective use of the funds to meet the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas. The description shall include provide the basis for this determination, including, but not limited to, any alternatives considered and any supporting research, experience, or educational theory.” Partially Reject: The commenters’ suggestion to remove “including, but not limited to” and add “which may include” would eliminate the proposed regulation’s requirement that an LEA select at least one option from the list exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 52 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment any research, experience, or educational theory. 21 Eric Premack, Charter Schools Development Center 15496(b)(2)(C) and (b)(4)(C) No specific language recommended: The addition of “include the basis for this determination including, but not limited to, any alternatives considered and any supporting research, experience, or educational theory” adds considerably to the length and complexity of the LCAP, likely making it less comprehensible. It is not required by statute and is burdensome. 22 Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) 15496 (b)(2): Replace existing 15496(b)(2) with the following to ensure that the same requirements apply to county offices and school districts. This would also limit the use of supplemental and concentration funds for districtwide or schoolwide purposes to LEAs, including county offices of education, over the 55% districtwide threshold or 40% schoolwide threshold for unduplicated student enrollment. Finally this would apply the standard formerly required only of those LEAs below the threshold to describe how this is the “most effective” use of funds to LEAs above the thresholds. “(b)(2): A school district or county office of education that has an enrollment of unduplicated pupils of more than 55 percent of the district’s, county office of education’s total enrollment, or a district or county office of education that has an enrollment of Agency Response and would instead allow the LEA to use any description they so choose. The proposed change would weaken the requirement that LEAs add this description when they provide services on a districtwide or schoolwide basis and are under the enrollment thresholds specified in the regulations. Reject: This referenced language of proposed regulation sections 15496(b)(2)(C) and (b)(4)(C) further defines the description required to demonstrate that selected services are the “most effective” use of funds to meet goals for unduplicated student when an LEA under the enrollment threshold specified in regulations provides services districtwide or schoolwide pursuant to the regulations. Reject: Statute does not specify a minimum threshold for districtwide, charterwide, countywide, or schoolwide use of funds. The commenters’ suggested thresholds would limit LEAs’ ability to locally determine use of supplemental and concentration funds; proposed regulations require additional description of funded services when district or school enrollment of unduplicated pupils is below levels specified in the proposed regulations. County offices of education serve unique populations of pupils. The needs of those pupils and the programs operated by county exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 53 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response unduplicated pupils of more than 40% school site with more than 40 percent of the school sits total enrollment in the fiscal year for which an LCAP is adopted or in the prior year may expend supplemental and concentration grant funds on a district wide basis shall do all of the following: (a)Identify in the LCAP those services that are being funded and provided on a district wide basis. (b) Describe in the LCAP how such services are principally directed towards, and are effective in, meeting the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state eight priority areas. (c) Describe how these services are the most effective use of the funds to meet the district’s goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas. The description shall include the basis for this determination, including, but not limited to, any alternatives considered and any supporting research, experience or educational theory. offices of education to serve those pupils necessarily vary significantly within and across county offices of education. Thus, it is not appropriate to prescribe a particular threshold and higher standard of effectiveness for county offices of education. 15496(b)(3), (b)(4) and (b)(5): Delete these sections, LEAs under the 55% districtwide threshold or 40% schoolwide threshold for unduplicated student enrollment should not have the option of using supplemental and concentration funds for districtwide or schoolwide purposes. 15496 No specific language requested: Establish criteria for determining whether a service meets the standards for “most effective use of funds”. These criteria should track the requirements of the Title I and Title III regulations, as anticipated by the statute, and require that expenditures be based on strategies that specifically address the purpose of the supplemental and concentration grant funding as well as the eight state priorities. Establish stronger provisions stating that supplemental and concentration funds can be used for district wide and school wide Reject: Commenters’ suggestion to establish criteria for “most effective use of funds” that track Title I and Title III criteria would add restrictive criteria which are inconsistent with the statute’s intended flexibility for LEAs to implement locally-determined strategies and services to improve outcomes for unduplicated pupils in the state priority areas. The proposed regulations at sections 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(B), (b)(3)(B), (b)(4)(B) exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 54 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment services only if the service demonstrably provides a differential benefit to unduplicated pupils by showing an actual increase or improvement of services to unduplicated pupils that promotes priority goals for those subgroups, also benefiting the general student population. This is necessary to ensure use of the funds in a manner that addresses unduplicated pupil achievement, goals and priorities as required by Sections 52052, 52060, and 52066. 15496(b): Insert after “funded” the words “from all sources, including federal funding”, in (b)(1)(A) [pg 5, line 16], (b) (2)(A) [pg 5, line 26]; (b)(3)(A) [pg 6, line 11]; (b)(4)(A)[pg 6, line 21] and (b)(5) (A) [pg 7, line 4]. Delete “such” on line 3, pg 4 and replace with “from all sources of funds, including federal funds, and description of services provided pursuant to this section.” 23 24 Annie Fox, PICO California 15497 No specific language requested: The COE oversight section is narrowed to one aspect of the review and is confusing to the field. Civil Rights Coalition 15497: “In making the determinations required under Education Code section 52070(d)(3), the county superintendent of schools shall include review of any descriptions of districtwide services provided pursuant to section 15496(b)(1) or section 15496(b)(2) or descriptions of schoolwide services provided pursuant to section 15496(b)(3) or section 15496(b)(4) when determining Agency Response and (b)(5)(B) require LEAs to describe how services are principally directed towards, and effective in, meeting the district’s goals for unduplicated pupils in the state priorities and in local priorities. In addition, the proposed regulations at sections 15496(b)(1)(B), (b)(2) (C) and (b)(4)(C) require school districts to describe how these services are the most effective use of funds, and to provide the basis for that determination, as specified. Reject: Education Code section 42238.07 provides the SBE with the authority to adopt regulations governing expenditure of LCFF funds. Federal funds are governed by federal law and regulations. Insertion of language related to all fund sources goes beyond the scope of the LCFF statute and these regulations. Accept: See response to comment #24. Accept: Proposed regulations section 15497 is revised to clarify that the COE oversight extends to all LEAs providing districtwide or schoolwide services, as follows: “In making the determinations required exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 55 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment whether the school district has fully demonstrated that it will increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils pursuant to section 15496(a).” Alternatively, delete this sentence. 25 Valerie Cuevas Interim Executive Director The Education Trust– West 15497: Add section (b) to ensure COEs monitor compliance with prior year expenditures in the proportionality calculation: “(b) The expenditures included in the estimate of the amount of LCFF funds expended by the LEA on services for unduplicated pupils in the prior year that is in addition to what was expended on services provided for all pupils pursuant to section 15496 (a) (2). If a county superintendent of schools does not approve an LCAP because the school district has failed to meet the requirement to appropriately calculate the percentage by which services for unduplicated pupils must be increased or improved above services provided to all pupils in the fiscal year, it shall provide technical assistance to the school district in meeting that requirement pursuant to Education Code section 52071.“ Bill Lucia, EdVoice To ensure clarity about the expected scope of review provided by the County Office of Education, Section 15497 should be amended with a preamble, “In addition to reviewing LCAPs for consistency with the template adopted by the Board and the Agency Response under Education Code section 52070(d)(3), the county superintendent of schools shall include review of any descriptions of districtwide or schoolwide services provided pursuant to sections 15496(b)(1) through (b)(4) 15496(b)(2) or descriptions of schoolwide services provided pursuant to section 15496(b)(4) when determining whether the school district has fully demonstrated that it will increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils pursuant to section 15496(a).” Reject: The suggested additions are not necessary. EC 52070 requires a county office of education to ensure a school district adheres to the LCAP template adopted by the SBE, adopts a budget that includes expenditures sufficient to implement the actions and strategies in the LCAP, and adopts an LCAP that adheres to the LCFF expenditure regulations adopted by the SBE. This process would include a review of the accuracy of the LEA’s calculations of proportionality, with the understanding that best estimates available at the time of LCAP adoption are utilized. Statute also requires the county office of education to provide technical assistance to school districts when it disapproves an LCAP. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 56 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response applicable district budget to be consistent with the LCAP as required by paragraph (2) of Section 52070…” 26 27 Cheryl Ingham, Humboldt County LCAP Lead Garry T. Eagles, Superintendent, Humboldt County Office of Education 15497 No specific language requested: Resist any changes to COE oversight, COEs can check technical aspects of the LCAP but should not weigh in on appropriateness of actions, this responsibility lies with the LEA and local stakeholders. Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) 15497 No specific language requested: Clarify and strengthen COEs authority to review LCAPs & aligned budgets for the purposes of determining whether federal funds were appropriately used. 28 California School Finance Reform Coalition Other/No specific language requested: These regulations should also make clear that CDE has responsibility to monitor the COE’s, Districts and Charter schools both as to the LCFF compliance with respect to their obligations to subgrantees as specified in Sections 3113-3116, 3121-3022 and 3302 of the ESEA: EDGAR 34 CFR 80.40. The current regulations do not address this important oversight requirement and should be revised to add a new section doing so. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: No specific language requested: Recommend that SBE reject changes to the LCAP template made at the July SBE meeting and retain the emergency regulations version of the LCAP template and convene a stakeholder working Accept: See response to comment #24. Reject. The suggested changes are beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Statute (EC 52070) states the requirements for county office of education review of LCAPs. In addition, EC section 42238.07 provides the SBE authority to adopt regulations governing expenditure of LCFF funds. Compliance with requirements related to federal funds is governed by federal law and regulations and is outside the scope of these regulations. Reject: The LCAP template in proposed section 15497.5 is revised to improve clarity. See responses to comments #49 and #53. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 57 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response group to inform changes to a template at a later date. Valerie Pitts, Ed.D., Superintendent, Larkspur-Corte Madera School District 29 Vincent Matthews, San Jose Superintendent of Schools Recommend that SBE reject changes to the LCAP template made at the July SBE meeting and retain the emergency regulations version of the LCAP template and make changes after the first round of state student performance data is available. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: No specific language requested: Reduce the legal language in the main LCAP template, using an appendix for references (remove Education Code references and language shall/pupils) to increase readability and understanding for stakeholders. 30 Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: No specific language requested: The following sentence from the LCAP Introduction should include a reference to the ESEA Title III, Part A, 3102, this would be consistent with the explicit reference to Title I already contained in the language: “The information contained in the LCAP, or annual update, may be supplemented by information contained in other plans (including the LEA plan pursuant to Section 1112 of Subpart 1 of Part A of Title I of Public Law 107-110) that are incorporated or referenced as relevant in this document.” In the State Priorities section of the LCAP, the description of Pupil Outcomes should include a sentence stating: Reject: Statute requires LEAs to adhere to the template to obtain approval of an LCAP, so some legal language is necessary. In addition, the LCAP template (proposed regulation section 15497.5) is revised to make it more readable and understandable to stakeholders. See responses to comments #49 and #53. Reject: Not necessary because the instructions for the Goal Table in the revised LCAP template, Section 2, “Expected Annual Measurable Outcomes” require identification and description of specific expected outcomes for all pupils and, where applicable, for specific subgroups. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 58 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response “Pupils outcomes and other pupil outcomes shall be disaggregated by unduplicated pupil for the purpose of showing performance or progress by these pupils”. 31 32 Peter Birdsall, California County Superintendents Educational Services Association California School Finance Reform Coalition Eric Premack, Charter Schools Development Center No specific language requested: Recommend that the terminology and verbiage used in proposed section 15497.5 (LCAP Template) be aligned to the Proposed Regulations for LCFF. Currently there is incoherence between the two that will lead to confusion in the field. An example of this can be found on page seven of the LCAP Template in which question 12 outlines “performance indicators” as opposed to the “required metric” description outlined in the regulations. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: If the recommendation to return to the LCAP template adopted through emergency regulations is not adopted, then recommend deleting from the Introduction, as follows: “However, the narrative response and goals and actions should demonstrate each guiding question was considered during the development of the plan.” Accept: The proposed guiding question #12 in Section 2 of the proposed LCAP template in section 15497.5 is revised as follows: “12) How do these actions/services link to identified goals and expected measurable outcomes performance indicators?” Reject: The commenters note that this language contradicts the previous sentence which states that no narrative response is required for a guiding question. However, this language does not impose a new requirement, but instead recommends guiding questions be considered and answers reflected as the LEA deems appropriate. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 59 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 33 Jessica Sawko, California Science Teachers Association (CSTA) Dr. Laura Henriques, CSTA Form Letter #1 Form Letter #2 Form Letter #3 Debra Brown, Associate Director, Children Now Valerie Cuevas Interim Executive Director The Education Trust– West Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Address all fields and standards in the LCAP, in particular the Next Generation Science standards. Amend language as follows: implementation of all academic content and performance standards and English language development standards adopted by the state board, including common core state standards (CCSS), next generation science standards (NGSS), English language development standards (ELD), career technical education standards (CTE), history-social science, visual and performing arts, health education, world language, model school library, and physical education standards, for all pupils, including English learners. (Priority 2) Suggested variations on the above language: Chris Roe, California STEM Learning Network Specifically state CCSS, ELA, mathematics, ELD, and NGSS. Specifically state CCSS, ELA, ELD, and NGSS. Specifically state CCSS, ELD, and NGSS. Additional variation: Include History Social Science Standards and a reference to civic learning: David Gordon and Judith McConnell, California Implementation of State Standards: implementation of academic content and performance standards and English language development standards adopted by the state board for all subjects, including the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), English Language Development (ELD) standards, Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), and California History- Agency Response Reject: EC sections 52060 and 52066 do not list all specific state board adopted standards. Instead, the statutes generally reference adopted standards. Accordingly, it includes all the adopted standards. The language of proposed regulation section 15497.5 reflects statute. However, this is an area SBE and CDE staff will continue to work on clarifying through communications on the CDE and SBE websites. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 60 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS 34 35 Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Task Force on K-12 Civic Learning Cecelia Mansfield California State PTA Social Science Standards, to prepare all pupils, including English learners, for college, career and civic life. (Priority 2) Annie Fox, PICO California Civil Rights Coalition Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template] No specific language requested. Support clarification of English Language Development Standards as part of the state standards. Agency Response Also received comments on general support for science education and language that identifies NGSS specifically but no specific suggested language. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template] No specific language requested. The first paragraph of Section 1 should include references to Education Code sections 52060(g) and 52066(g) to ensure the public knows the ways the LCFF authorizes parents and students to participate. Letter of support; no response is necessary. Accept: The first paragraph of the instructions for Section 1 is revised as follows: Meaningful engagement of parents, pupils, and other stakeholders, including those representing the subgroups identified in Education Code section 52052, is critical to the LCAP and budget process. Education Code sections 52060(g), 52062 and 52063 specify the exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 61 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response minimum requirements for school districts; Education Code sections 52066(g), 52068 and 52069 specify the minimum requirements for county offices of education, and Education Code section 47606.5 specifies the minimum requirements for charter schools. In addition, Education Code section 48985 specifies the requirements for translation of documents. 36 37 38 Oscar Cruz, President and CEO, Families in Schools Oscar Cruz, President and CEO, Families in Schools Civil Rights Coalition Student Voice Coalition Colin Miller, California Charter Schools 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Amend the instructions section to ensure that the broad use of parents is not limited to the parent advisory committee, as follows: Instructions: Describe the process used to consult with parents, parent advisory committees, pupils, school personnel, school site councils, local bargaining units and the community and how this engagement contributed to development of the LCAP or annual update. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Amend guiding question #6 in section 1 as follows: 6) What specific actions were taken to consult with pupils, including unduplicated pupils, to meet the requirements 5 CCR 15495(a)? 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Reject: The proposed changes are not necessary. The instructions for the proposed LCAP template accurately reflect the statute regarding consultation with parents. Reject: The suggested change is not necessary. The phrase “consult with pupils” is defined in proposed regulation section 15496(a), which is revised to reference “unduplicated pupils” as set forth in response to comment #3. Partially Accept: The instructions in the proposed LCAP template, Section 1, are exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 62 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Association (CCSA) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response Amend the instructions section to more accurately reflect statute as follows: revised as follows: “Describe the process used to consult with parents, pupils, school personnel, local bargaining units as applicable, and the community and how this engagement consultation contributed to development of the LCAP or annual update.” “Describe the process used to consult with parents, pupils, school personnel, local bargaining units and the community applicable stakeholders as referenced above and how this engagement contributed to development of the LCAP or annual update.” Amend guiding question 1 as follows: 1) How have parents, community members, pupils, local bargaining units, and other applicable stakeholders (e.g., parents, community members, pupils, local bargaining units, and other stakeholders, LEA personnel, county child welfare agencies, county office of education foster youth services programs, court-appointed special advocates, foster youth, foster parents, education rights holders and other foster youth stakeholders, English learners, English learner parents, community organizations representing English learners, low income youth, and others as appropriate) been engaged and involved in developing, reviewing, and supporting implementation of the LCAP? Amend Section 1, guiding question #1 as follows: “How have parents, community members, pupils, local bargaining units, and other 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, courtappointed special advocates, foster youth, foster parents, education rights holders and other foster youth stakeholders; English learners, English learner parents, community organizations representing English learners; low income youth, and others as appropriate) been engaged and involved in developing, reviewing, and supporting implementation of the LCAP? “ Partially Reject: Removing the list of those with whom to consult and replacing it with the exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 63 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response suggested reference reduces clarity. However, the note that bargaining units are not included in the groups with which charter schools are required to consult is addressed in the revised language. 39 40 Valerie Chrisman, Associate Superintendent of Educational Services, Ventura County Office of Education 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Section 1 Instructions, line 2, to be consistent with the change made from “engage” to “consult” amend as follows: Cheryl Ingham, Humboldt County LCAP Lead Garry T. Eagles, Supt., Humboldt Co. Ofc. Of Ed. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Add specific sections to LCAP Section 1 – Engagement: Accept: The proposed LCAP instructions are revised as set forth in response to comment #38. Instructions: Describe the process used to consult with parents, pupils, school personnel, local bargaining units and the community and how this engagement consultation contributed to development of the LCAP or annual update. Add new subheadings to the chart in Section 1 of the template:  Dates of Meetings  Audience (or, Group(s) attending)  Summary of progress - from prior year that was provided to attendees  Recommendations collected from group Under Impact column add:  Changes made to LCAP based on input from meeting, such as: o Goals revised o Targets for progress adjusted o New actions Reject: Addition of the suggested specific sections in the proposed LCAP template, Section 1, are not necessary. They may inhibit an LEA’s narrative and require unnecessary and burdensome reporting. In addition, LEAs’ compliance with statutory requirements for the LCAP process is currently included in the audit guide and will be reviewed as part of annual audits. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 64 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment o 41 Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) Agency Response Deletions 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Add specific requirements to LCAP Section 1 – Engagement: Include districts listing what recommendations offered by the parent advisory committees, specifically the DELAC committees, were included in the LCAP and which were rejected by the local governing body and by the superintendent. Additionally, the LCFF statute requires that the school superintendent respond in writing to the DELAC members regarding their LCAP recommendations. Include verification that this occurred and a summary of the superintendent response. Reject: The suggested edits are not necessary. The addition of the proposed additional requirements may lead to LEAs including unnecessary and lengthy information regarding process that would detract from the transparency of the changes to be implemented through the goals, actions, and expenditures. Add a sentence in the instructions referencing Education Code section 52062(a)(2) and the requirement that the school district superintendent present the LCAP to the English learner parent advisory committee and to respond to their comments in writing to ensure districts understand this is a requirement and COEs review this. In addition a guiding question should be added reflecting this requirement. Amend Guiding Question #4 (this is possibly a reference to #3) as follows: “3) What information (e.g., quantitative and qualitative data/metrics on pupils, including duplicated pupils 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 Reject: The question is purposefully broad in scope to consider all students and, as applicable, specific subgroups. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 65 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response information made available? 42 Cheryl Ingham, Humboldt County LCAP Lead Garry T. Eagles, Supt., Humboldt Co. Ofc. Of Ed. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Remove instructions, guiding questions, and “appendix” from the LCAP template. Include them in a separate, companion document. Reject: Instructions and guiding questions are provided before each table to ensure LEAs fill out the tables with the appropriate instructions and context in mind. However, this area may be further explored in the future in connection with creation of an electronic template. 43 Cheryl Ingham, Humboldt County LCAP Lead Garry T. Eagles, Supt., Humboldt Co. Ofc. Of Ed. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Number required metrics to correspond to State Priorities, i.e. Priority 1, metrics 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc. and use these in section tables to identify which metrics are addressed by which goal. Reject: The LCAP template is intended to allow an LEA to comply with statute and regulations and provide a transparent, narrative document to share with all stakeholders. Additional coding that requires stakeholders to search for appendices to understand how a goal is measured or addressed would take away from this purpose. 44 Debra Brown, Associate Director Children Now 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Require the reporting of baseline data for all standardized metrics for which baseline data is available. See the proposed template to collect and summarize this information in a transparent format from Children Now, includes: a list of all required LCAP metrics with columns indicating LEA wide, school or subgroup and anticipated outcome for each year of the next 4 year period. Brian Lee, State Director Fight Crime, Invest in The LCAP template should require the reporting of baseline data for all metrics for which baseline data is available. This would Reject: Optional reporting, collection, and display of this data may be explored in the future in connection with creation of an electronic template. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 66 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Kids California 45 Civil Rights Coalition Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment ensure transparency around the starting point that progress towards goals is measured against. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Amend Table 2 instructions to read: “Furthermore, the LCAP should be developed in consultation with school site level advisory groups (e.g., school site councils, English Learner Advisory Councils, pupil advisory groups, etc.) and be consistent with and reflective of the school site priorities and plans to facilitate alignment between school-site and district-level goals and actions.” 46 Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) Civil Rights Coalition Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) Bill Lucia, EdVoice Agency Response Reject: The suggested changes are not necessary. The regulations as proposed provide for appropriate consultation consistent with statute. In addition to the above language, CRLA, Californians Together and CABE recommend that the language commencing with “Furthermore, the LCAP should be developed in consultation with” should include district level committees including the English learner parent advisory committee. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Add the following language to Table 2 instructions: “Because the state priorities broadly cover an LEA’s work to support its students and achieve outcomes, almost all LEA expenditures should be listed and described as a consequence of being tied to the actions that support an LEA’s goals for each of the state priorities. In crafting goals, specific actions, and expenditures, LEAs should carefully consider how to reflect the services and related expenses for their basic instructional Partially Accept: The fifth paragraph of the introduction to the proposed LCAP template is revised to include: Accordingly, in developing goals, specific actions, and expenditures, LEAs should carefully consider how to reflect exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 67 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response program in relationship to the state priorities. The LCAP should reflect how all LCFF funds are being spent.” the services and related expenses for their basic instructional program in relationship to the state priorities. Add guiding question #14: Reject: The suggested guiding question #14 is unclear; the term “almost all” may create confusion. “14) Do the LEA’s goals, services, and related expenses reflect almost all of the LEA’s expenditures, including all LCFF funding?” Modify the Instructions for Section 2 of the LCAP under “Actions/Services and Related Expenditures” to read: “Left Column: Identify all annual actions to be performed and services provided. . . ” and “Right Column: Identify all annual actions to be performed and services provided. . . .” 47 48 Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) Eric Premack, Charter Schools Development Center 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: In order to ensure the appropriate uses of the LCFF funds and federal funds, the Instructions section should clearly state supplemental or concentration funds used for district wide, schools wide or county wide purposes, must not supplant Title I or Title III funds. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: The instructions and revised goals table in section 2 state that it “must include all metrics as applicable,” which is vague and/or incorrect. This should be revised to clearly note that charter schools need not include all metrics if they are not applicable to the charter school’s program, grades served, and/or if the metric relates to a law that is not explicitly applicable to charter schools. The same should be done with respect to the annual update table. Reject: Supplanting of federal funds is addressed from the perspective of, and pursuant to requirements specific to, federal programs. Reject: The instructions for the goal table in the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, as revised, reflect statute by requiring that all metrics be addressed, as applicable to an LEA (e.g., an elementary school district, or a charter serving only elementary school students would not provide a graduation rate). As specified in EC sections 47605 and exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 68 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response 47605.6, a charter school need only address the state priorities specified in EC section 52060 that apply for the grade levels served, or the nature of the program operated, by the charter school. 49 Valerie Chrisman, Associate Superintendent of Educational Services, Ventura County Office of Education 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: The instructions for section 2 should have directions for all parts of the section 2 table, having some but not all is confusing. Does the new template accommodate including an overarching goal, with multiple outcomes with different actions and services. In section 2, guiding question number 12, the term performance indicators should be clarified, does this mean metrics? In the table, expected annual outcomes line is unclear, do the metrics connected to the goal go in that box or do you list the metrics in the second row and the expected changes in the third row? Clarification is needed in chart or instructions. Reviewers need to find the metrics easily. Correct this by including a description of lines 2 and 3 of the table that tell the writers to include the metrics. As it now stands line 2 looks like a general caution that all metrics must be included and it’s not clear where. In section 2, guiding question number 13 asks where Partially accept: The instructions, tables, and guiding questions in the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, are revised to provide greater clarity and transparency regarding the presentation of related goals, expected measurable outcomes, and actions/services and expenditures, as well as the scope of services and pupils, including pupil subgroups, served. The information in the Section 2 goal table is revised to reflect a vertical alignment by LCAP year. The revised instructions include headings and instructions for each part of the goal table. The instructions with the heading “Expected Measurable Outcomes” clarify where and how expected annual measurable outcomes should be identified. In addition, the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, guiding question #12 in 15497.5 is revised to read, as follows: “12) How do these actions/services link to identified goals and performance indicators expected measurable outcomes performance indicators?” exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 69 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment “expenditures can be found in the LEA’s budget”, but in the table it asks for budgeted expenditures, the guiding question should refer to both. In the section 2 table line 4 is very awkward- “Describe the need(s) identified, including a description of the supporting data, to develop the goal”? Here are some choices- not sure they are better but it gives an idea of the change that is needed. “Describe the specific data used and the needs that data surfaced which resulted in the identification this goal. “ “Describe how this goal was identified using the data, and the identified need the data illuminated.” Agency Response Reject: The instructions for the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, under the heading “Budgeted Expenditures,” specify that both the budgeted expenditures and where they can be located must be identified. Partially accept: The proposed LCAP template, Table 2, goal table instructions under the heading “Identified Need” are revised as follows: “Describe the need(s) identified by the LEA that this goal addresses, including a description of the supporting data, used to identify the need(s) develop each goal. “Detail the data and subsequent needs that led to the identification of this goal.” Section 3A is much better than the old 3C and will be easier for the districts to understand. 50 Colin Miller, California Charter Schools Association (CCSA) 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Make the following amendments to the Instruction on page 23 to only require an LEA to complete an LCAP in a non-annual update year: “All LEAs must complete the LCAP and or Annual Update Template each year. “ Make the following amendment to sentence 2 to specify this is not The commenter supports the revisions to the LCAP template, section 3A; thus no response required. Reject: An LEA must complete the entire LCAP and annual update template each year. The instructions in the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, require the LEA to complete the LCAP prospectively for the next 3 years in each year to align with the budget process. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 70 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment specific to a charter school: “ For a school district, Tthe LCAP is a three-year plan for the upcoming school year and the two years that follow. Eric Premack, Charter Schools Development Center 51 52 California School Finance Reform Coalition Andrea Ball, Teri Burns, Josh Daniels, California School Boards Association (CSBA) Agency Response The paragraph following the one cited by the commenter in the revised instructions for the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, further defines the flexibility allowable to a charter schools to align with the term of its budget. Clarify that charters do not have to comply with the following “The LCAP is a three-year plan for the upcoming school year and the two years that follow.” Specify that it is a one year plan for a charter school. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: If the recommendation to return to the LCAP template adopted through emergency regulations is not adopted, then recommend amending language on identified need in the LCAP Table 2 Instructions as follows to reduce unnecessary amount of text added to the LCAP: “Identified Need: Describe the need(s) identified, including a description of the supporting data, to develop each goal.” 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Recommend amending language on identified need in the LCAP Table 2 Instructions as follows to reduce unnecessary amount of text added to the LCAP: “Identified Need: Describe the need(s) identified, which may include including a description of the supporting data used to develop each goal.” Reject: The instructions language which the commenter suggests be deleted is necessary to ensure an LEA provides transparency regarding a need identified by the LEA. However, the LCAP template, Section 2, and instructions regarding “Identified Need” were revised to improve clarity as set forth in response to comment #49 above. Reject: The language which the commenter suggests amending is necessary for the reasons specified in response to comment #51. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 71 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 53 Cindy Marten, Superintendent, San Diego Unified Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template] No specific language required: The description of actions, services, and outcomes should be the focus of the LCAP, not expenditures as the new template seems to suggest. The layout of the revised LCAP template suggests the columns for the actions and services provided to all students (first column for LCAP Year 1 subgroups, schools or level of services) should be aligned with the actions and services provided to the unduplicated students (second column for LCAP Year 1 schools or level of service) since the lines read across. This current structure does not seem to acknowledge the reality of districtwide approaches. The layout of the revised LCAP template suggests that school districts are able to differentiate the expenditures associated with the three different unduplicated pupil subgroups (English learners, low-income and foster youth), this may not be the case for many districtwide expenditures The inclusion of new requirements calling for more information on expenditures fails to recognize that LEAs are allowed to use supplemental and concentration grant funds to “improve or increase services,” since the focus on expenditures is more relevant if a school district increased services. By requiring more detailed expenditures, the LCAP template, in effect, will result in the reporting of dollar amounts, but does not consider the inclusion of qualitative descriptions if the delivery of Agency Response Partially accept: The instructions, tables, and guiding questions in the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, are revised to provide greater clarity and transparency as set forth in response to comment #49. Partially reject: The goal template does not require reporting of more detailed expenditure information. The annual update table does require an LEA to provide information related to whether or not an LEA implemented the plan for actions and expenditures laid out in the prior year LCAP. Changes were made to clarify the language in the annual update table consistent with the changes to the goal table. The LEA may still include descriptions of qualitative changes in reporting on actions to achieve a goal. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 72 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response services is in fact being improved. 54 Valerie Cuevas, Interim Executive Director The Education Trust– West 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: See attached suggested Goal Table and Annual Update template from Ed Trust West. The suggested template includes: Changing the orientation of table 2 so that actions, services, and expenditures for unduplicated students are listed separately from and below those for all students, similar to the 2014-15 template. Changing the orientation of table 2 to maintain left to right descriptions of year over year actions and expenditures to avoid repetitiveness. 55 Wesley Smith , Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) Coalition of LEAs and statewide organizations Partially accept: The instructions, tables, and guiding questions in the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, are revised to provide greater clarity and transparency as specified in the responses to comments #49 and #53. The instructions for the proposed LCAP, Section 2, goal table clearly state that goals for all pupil subgroups and school sites must be included, including goals for specific subgroups and school sites as applicable. Clarify that all applicable subgroups and affected schools must be addressed separately as necessary. Add language in the template boxes to ensure this. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Make the following changes to guiding questions for table 2: 2) What are the LEA’s goal(s) to address state priorities related to “Pupil Outcomes, “including improving deficiencies in positive outcomes for numerically significant pupil subgroups, redesignated fluent English proficient students, and unduplicated pupils (i.e., English learners, low-income, and foster youth)? Reject: The phrase “improving deficiencies in positive outcomes” is unclear. 6) What are the unique goals for unduplicated pupils as defined in Education Code sections 42238.01 and numerically significant Reject: Addition of the term “numerically significant,” because the term is already exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 73 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response subgroups as defined in section 52052 that are different from the LEA’s goals for all pupils? included under the reference to EC section 52052 and in proposed section 15495(j). 7) What are the specific expected outcomes, metrics, and measurable changes associated with each of the goals annually and over the term of the LCAP? Partially accept: The proposed LCAP, Section 2, guiding question #7, is revised, as follows: “7) What are the specific predicted expected measurable outcomes/metrics/noticeable changes associated with each of the goals annually and over the term of the LCAP?” 10) What information was considered/reviewed for numerically significant subgroups identified in Education Code section 52052? Reject: Addition of the term “numerically significant,” because the term is already included under the reference to EC section 52052 and in proposed section 15495(j). 11) What actions/services will be provided to all pupils, to numerically significant subgroups of pupils identified pursuant to Education Code section 52052, to specific school sites, to unduplicated students (English learners, to low-income pupils, and/or to foster youth) to achieve goals identified in the LCAP? Reject: Addition of “unduplicated students” is unnecessary because the question identifies and includes “unduplicated students” by referencing English learners, low-income pupils, and foster youth. Table 2 emphasizes the amount of funding expended on each pupil subgroup rather than the amount expended on the action/service aligned to the goal. By proposing to tie expenditures to pupil subgroups, the template creates an impossible accounting challenge that cannot be reconciled. For example, an LEA receives supplemental or concentration grant funding based on whether the pupil is either an English learner (EL), low-income (LI), or a foster youth. The LEA receives only Partially accept: The proposed LCAP template, Section 2, goal table is revised as described in response to comments #49 and #53. The revised goal table and “Budgeted Expenditures” instructions make clear that the reporting of expenditures is linked to the described action/service and not separately to each of the subgroups. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 74 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response one allocation regardless if the pupil is both an EL and LI, hence the term unduplicated. The proposed template indicates expenditures are to be detailed by subgroup and for an unduplicated pupil a dollar may be counted twice, which does not accurately reflect expenditures. See attached suggested goal table from the Association for California School Administrators and the Coalition of statewide organizations and administrators. The proposed table 2 includes the following changes: Amending the 2nd heading to read “Expected Annual Measurable Outcomes” Adding the term “numerically significant” to references to subgroups pursuant to Education Code section 52052. Remove the separate right hand column that details actions and expenditures for unduplicated pupils and instead allow an LEA to check a box indicating which pupil group an action or expenditure applies to. 56 Valerie Chrisman, Associate Superintendent of Educational Services, Ventura County Office of Education 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: The detailing of budgeted vs. actual expenditures in the update section is of tremendous concern to districts and reviewers. How are County Offices of Education going to monitor without having to review two budgets now? Change “actual expenditures” to Accept: The revised LCAP template, Section 2, goal table and annual update table include the term “measurable” as suggested. Reject: The term “numerically significant” is unnecessary as Education Code section 52052 and the definition of “subgroup” in proposed section 15495(j) already describes subgroups as numerically significant. Partially accept: The instructions, tables, and guiding questions in the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, are revised to provide greater clarity and transparency as specified in the responses to comments #49 and #53. Partially reject: See revisions to the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, annual update table, described in response to comment #64 below. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 75 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response “expenditures”. Guiding questions under number 5 are currently in the wrong order. First, one needs to look at what changes/progress is made and how they compare to what was predicted. Then they would detail the changes which will be made after that review. On guiding question 5: make the following amendments: “5) What changes in actions, services, and expenditures will be have been made as a result of reviewing past progress and/or changes to goals? What changes/progress have been realized and how do these compare to changes/progress predicted? What modifications are being made to the LCAP as a result of this comparison?” Partially accept: The LCAP template, Section 2, Annual Update Guiding questions are revised as follows: Question #5 is revised, and guiding question #6 is added: 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? What changes in actions, services, and expenditures will be made as a result of reviewing past progress and/or changes to goals? What changes/progress have been realized and how do these compare to changes/progress predicted? What modifications are being made to the LCAP as a result of this comparison? 6. What differences are there between budgeted expenditures and estimated actual annual expenditures? What were the reasons for any differences? exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 76 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 57 Colin Miller, California Charter Schools Association (CCSA) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Add clarity to the annual update table instructions for charter schools on page 27 as follows: “Annual Update Instructions: For each goal in the prior year LCAP, review the progress toward the expected annual outcome(s) based on, at a minimum, the required metrics pursuant to Education Code sections 52060 and 52066 and 47606.5 as applicable.” 58 Oscar Cruz, President and CEO, Families in Schools 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: See attached suggested Goal Table and Annual Update template from Families in Schools. The proposed template includes: Amending table 2 and the annual update table to show three years of expenditures horizontally rather than the proposed vertical alignment. Also add a prior year column to table 2 that shows the expenditures made in the prior year. 59 60 Annie Fox, PICO California Civil Rights Coalition Bill Lucia, EdVoice 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template] No specific language requested. Support annual update table Cheryl Ingham, Humboldt County LCAP Lead Garry T. Eagles, Supt., Humboldt Co. Ofc. Of Ed. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: See attached suggested Annual Update template from the Humboldt County Office of Education. The HCOE draft would be duplicated for each goal. Sections (3a, Agency Response Reject: The education code references apply to the required metrics, not the annual update requirement, and the required metrics are not directly referenced in section 47606.5, but are applicable to charter schools by reference to section 52060 in sections 47605 and 47605.6. Partially accept: The instructions, tables, and guiding questions in the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, are revised to provide greater clarity and transparency as specified in the responses to comments #49 and #53. Partially reject: The proposed LCAP template, Section 2, is revised to provide greater clarity and transparency. Vertical alignment of Goals, Actions and Services, and expenditures would diminish transparency, and readability of the plan. Letter of support; no response necessary. Partially Accept: The instructions, tables, and guiding questions in the LCAP template, Section 2, are revised to provide greater clarity and transparency as described in exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 77 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment 3B) relating to increases and improvements in services for the required groups (unduplicated count students) would be added after the goals, per suggestions below. This model is for Annual update but could also be adapted to show three year LCAP scope. Agency Response response to comments #49 and #53. The additional structure and coding proposed in this template would take away from this purpose and be more difficult for a reader, such as a parent, to understand. The proposed template includes: 61 62 Leslie DeRose, Board Member, Pajaro Valley Unified School District Niccole Childs, Board President, Hesperia Unified School District Sherri Reusche, Board Member, Calaveras Unified School District Andrea Ball, Teri Burns, Josh Daniels, California School Boards Association (CSBA) Andrea Ball, Teri Burns, Josh Daniels, California School Boards Association (CSBA) A column and coding structure for an LEA to select and identify codes for each element that a goal applies to. It also includes the identification of object codes for expenditures, notes and coding on whether a goal is maintained, revised, or new, and coded metrics. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: The subheading on the right side of the annual update table asks for "Actual Action/Services and Related Expenditures." At the time of year in which LEAs will begin their LCAP update review and analysis, they will not have the year-end actuals. Partially Accept: The proposed LCAP template, Section 2, annual update table and instructions were revised to provide for reporting of “Estimated Actual Annual Expenditures.” Recommend the following change to the subheading to avoid confusion: “Projected Year-End Action/Services and Related Budgeted Expenditures”. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Add the word budgeted to the chart subheading: “Actions/services and Related Budgeted Expenditures” Partially accept: See response to comment #64. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 78 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 63 64 Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Wendy Benkert Ed.D. Associate Superintendent of Business Services, Orange County Department of Education. Jeff Frost 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Modify the annual update section to focus exclusively on actions and outcomes. LEAs will not have “actual expenditures” at this time, the table represents a shift from outcomes to expenditures, and many metrics will not be available until after this table is completed. California School Finance Reform Coalition 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: If the recommendation to return to the LCAP template adopted through emergency regulations is not adopted, then recommend the following changes to the annual update section: Agency Response Partially Accept: See response to comment #61. . Partially accept: See response to comment #61. Amend language in LCAP instructions to note that the report of annual expenditures must be based on the estimates prepared at the time the proportionality calculation is competed as required by section 15496(a)(2). The subheading for the right-hand column of the LCAP annual update template be changed to read: “Projected Year-End Action/Services and Related Estimated Expenditures,” and that the column heading that now reads, “Actual Expenditures” be changed to read, “Estimated Year-end Expenditures.” 65 Colin Miller, California Charter Schools Association (CCSA) 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: The subheading on the right side of the annual update table asks for "Actual Action/Services and Related Expenditures." At the time of year in which LEAs will begin their LCAP update review and analysis, they will not have the year-end actuals. Amend subheadings as follows: Partially Accept: See response to comment #61. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 79 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response Change “actual expenditures” to “estimated actual expenditures.” 66 Wesley Smith, Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) Coalition of Statewide Organizations and LEAs 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Make the following changes to the guiding questions: “5) What changes in actions, services, and expenditures will be made as a result of reviewing past progress and/or changes to goals? What changes/progress have been realized and how do these compare to changes/progress predicted? What modifications are being made to the LCAP as a result of this comparison? “ See attached suggested annual update table from the Association of California School Administrators and Coalition of Statewide organizations and LEAs. The proposed table includes: Partially accept: The LCAP template, Section 2, guiding questions are revised as follows: Question #5 is revised, and question #6 is added as set forth above in response to comment #56. Partially accept: See changes to the term “actual” in response to comment #61. Changing the headings for the annual update table to read ““Budgeted Expenditures for Action/Services.” Add the term “measurable” to headings for outcomes. Accept: Amend headings to read “Expected Annual Measurable Outcomes”, and “Actual Annual Measurable Outcomes” Remove the separate boxes that details actions and expenditures for unduplicated pupils and instead allow an LEA to check a box indicating which pupil group an action or expenditure applies to. Partially Accept: The instructions, tables, and guiding questions in the LCAP template, Section 2, are revised to provide greater clarity and transparency as described in response to comments #49 and #53. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 80 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 67 68 69 Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Cindy Marten, Superintendent, San Diego Unified Andrea Ball, Teri Burns, Josh Daniels, California School Boards Association (CSBA) 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template] no specific language requested: Provide more clarity on the following part of guiding question 5, since it is redundant to the annual update table or remove if unnecessary: Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template] no specific language requested: Annual Update Guiding Question 5: This question needs to be clear that districts are to describe the changes in actions, services, and expenditures at the district and school site level, with attention given to unduplicated pupils that will be made in the LCAP and budget. The phrase “district and school site level and unduplicated pupils” needs to be inserted in order to prompt the reporting of this specified information. Joshua Schultz, Deputy Superintendent, Napa County Office of Education Peter Birdsall, California County Superintendents Educational Services Association Cindy Marten, Superintendent, San 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Remove “Actual Expenditures” column from the annual update table to shift the focus to outcomes achieved for students and avoid the creation of a financial tracking system similar to categoricals. Agency Response Partially accept: See response to comment #56. “5) What changes in actions, services, and expenditures will be made as a result of reviewing past progress and/or changes to goals? What changes/progress have been realized and how do these compare to changes/progress predicted? What modifications are being made to the LCAP as a result of this comparison? “ Partially Accept: See response to comment #56. Reject: The “Actual Expenditures” column was added to the template to ensure that LEAs are transparent about whether they provided the planned service and expended the funds identified. See also changes made to the term “actual” in response to comment #61. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 81 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response Diego Unified 70 71 72 73 Andrea Ball, Teri Burns, Josh Daniels, California School Boards Association (CSBA) 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Recommend putting the annual update table before the goals table to align the order in the template with the order in practice. Brian Lee, State Director Fight Crime, Invest in Kids California 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: The LCAP template should explicitly require an explanation of how all LCFF funds, not just Supplemental and Concentration funds, are used, and should also reflect how other district expenditures are used. Cheryl Ingham, Humboldt County LCAP Lead Garry T. Eagles, Supt., Humboldt Co. Ofc. Of Ed. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Amend instructions to require statement of dollar amount of Supplemental/Concentration funds only. Delete description of expenditures. Information is available in Action/Budget section (Section 2) and is repetitive in this part. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: The LCAP template should require reporting of how the level of Supplemental and Concentration funding is calculated to ensure that calculation is correct and transparent. Brian Lee, State Director Fight Crime, Invest in Kids California The LCAP template should require districts to account for all Supplemental and Concentration funds by reporting which expenditures will be funded using Supplemental and Concentration funds, and which expenditures are districtwide or schoolwide. Reject: The primary focus of the LCAP is goal development and planning; thus the goal table is first. Reject: See response to comment #46. Reject: This suggested amendment would reduce transparency on the use of supplemental and concentration funds. Reject: The COE review process must ensure that the LEA has completed the LCAP according to the template and will assess whether this amount is accurately reported. Including the calculation which is based on LEA input would not ensure accuracy or transparency for stakeholders. The instructions for the LCAP template, Section 3A, include directions for the LEA to list and describe the use of supplemental and concentration grant funding and include the exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 82 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response required justification for using funds for districtwide or schoolwide services. 74 75 Vincent Matthews San Jose Superintendent of Schools 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Require a standard table in the LCAP that provides information on calculating the base, supplemental, and concentration grant amounts. Jackie Thu-Huong Wong, Director, Foster Ed, National Center for Youth Law Annie Fox, PICO California 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Require the LEA to include each step of the calculation required by 5 CCR § 15496(a), including specifically identifying all expenditures that are included in the estimate specified in § 15496(a)(2), which of those expenditures will be continued into the current year, and at what level. Reject: See response to comment #73. Reject: See response to comment #73. No specific language requested: Modify the format of Section 3a to make it easier for LEAs to follow the instructions to further promote accessibility of information for stakeholders and transparency around use of supplemental and concentration funding. 76 Debra Brown, Associate Director, Children Now Civil Rights Coalition Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Further modify Section 3.A of the LCAP template to assist LEAs and promote accessibility and transparency by providing discrete prompts in which LEAs would report all of the information required Partially Accept: Instructions for Sections 3A and 3B were reorganized to clarify each of the required elements for each section. A separate box in table 3A was added for an LEA to enter the total supplemental and concentration grant funds calculated. A separate box in table 3B was added for an LEA to enter the minimum proportionality percentage. Partially Accept: See response to comment #75. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 83 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response in the instructions: (a) the total supplemental and concentration amount; (b) a description of how supplemental and concentration funding will used, (c) space to specifically identify each use of funds for districtwide and schoolwide purposes with space for the appropriate justification (with each required component of the justification). See attached suggested sections 3a and 3b from Children Now and the Civil Rights Coalition: Proposed 3a sections includes: A calculation table for the supplemental and concentration grants and minimum proportionality percentage that includes boxes to be completed for each of the steps in Section 15496(a). An additional table that requires the top 10 actions/expenditures for the prior year. Amending Section 3A instructions as follows: A. 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, and the year-to-year increase in these funds, as determined pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a)(5). Complete Attachment 1 to reflect the basis for this calculation. Describe how the LEA is expending these funds in the LCAP year, focusing on new or expanded uses of these funds. Include a description of, and justification for, the For any use of any these funds in a districtwide, schoolwide, countywide, or charterwide manner, include a Partially Accept: See response to comment #75 . exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 84 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response description of each such use, and justification for how such use is principally directed towards and effective in meeting the LEA’s goals for unduplicated pupils, as specified in 5 CCR 15496. Add additional rows to the table as necessary. 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 priority areas. (See 5 CCR 15496(b) for guidance.) Including tables with specific boxes that require separate detail of new services as compared to the prior year, and justification of schoolwide/districtwide expenditures. Amend Section 3B instructions to require the completion of the calculation table. 77 Debra Brown, Associate Director, Children Now Civil Rights Coalition Valerie Cuevas Interim Executive Director The Education Trust– West Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Specifically, the LCAP template should be further modified to ensure that LEAs: (1) set forth their 7-step calculation of the LEA’s supplemental and concentration funding and proportionality percentage pursuant to 5 CCR § 15496(a) in an appendix (delineating in Step 2 the basis for its prior year unduplicated expenditures, including a listing of included programs and their dollar amounts); and (2) identify which continued prior year actions or services and which newly added actions or services are Reject: See response to comment #73. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 85 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 78 79 80 Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) specifically funded by supplemental and concentration funds, and at what level (with actual dollar amounts). Cheryl Ingham, Humboldt County LCAP Lead Garry T. Eagles, Supt., Humboldt Co. Ofc. Of Ed. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Change prompt. Ask for minimum proportionality percentage (MPP) only for numerical “increases.” For “improvements,” request LEA provide a description of programs and services it will be strategically implementing to improve outcomes for each identified group; SED, EL, FY, RFEP. This section could be the go-to section to review district plans for “unduplicated count students” by also adding, reasons for choosing the approaches LEA selects and information on how impact will be tracked. This would keep the focus on evidence LEA is providing support to students who generated Supplemental/Concentration funds, not a contrived percent. Cheryl Ingham, Humboldt County LCAP Lead Garry T. Eagles, Supt., Humboldt Co. Ofc. Of Ed. Debra Brown, Associate Director, Children Now 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]/ No specific language requested: Need examples from CDE/SBE on what is an acceptable qualitative description of meeting the proportionality description. Agency Response See attached proposed appendix from Children Now and the Civil Rights coalition. The appendix includes boxes for each of the steps of the calculation required in regulations. Reject: LCFF statute specifically requires that an LEA: “increase or improve services in proportion to the increase in funds”. The minimum proportionality percentage must be applied to both quantitative and qualitative descriptions of the provision of services. Reject: Providing these examples is outside of the scope of regulations. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]/ No specific language requested: Amend the definition to ensure clarity as follows: (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 Reject: Proposed change in language is unnecessary. The current definition does not prohibit an LEA from calculating a chronic absenteeism rate for any subgroup. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 86 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response 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 all pupils (in the group or subgroup being measured) with a primary, secondary, or short-term enrollment “in the group or subgroup being measured” during the academic year (July 1 – June 30). (3) Divide (1) by (2). 81 82 Eric Premack, Charter Schools Development Center 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]/ No specific language requested: The new definitions for chronic absenteeism and especially dropout rates are unnecessarily restrictive and may yield misleading results. The definition of absenteeism calls for basing the calculation on the number of days school is taught in the district, which could be problematic for county and/or charter schools. It also calls for excluding Saturdays and Sundays which may also be misleading for schools that teach on these days. The high school dropout rate methodology is unnecessarily narrow by excluding students who pursue nontraditional options (e.g., GED and is successor), who require more than four years to graduate due to child-rearing or other responsibilities, etc. Maria Raouf Annie Fox, PICO California New Regulation/ No specific language requested: Ensure meaningful engagement of the SSCs and ELACS in the development and alignment of LCAPS and site level plans and budgets. Reject: LEAs may include additional locallyidentified metrics to further explain and detail their LCAP narrative. An LEA may include narrative that provides a basis for the results of the metrics, and this may be especially helpful for those LEAs with unique programs or student populations. Reject: Statute does not specify that ELACs are the designated English learner parent advisory committee, although they may be used as such. The LCAP instructions already require that “To facilitate alignment between the LCAP and school plans, the LCAP shall exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 87 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response identify and incorporate school-specific goals related to the state and local priorities from the school plans submitted pursuant to Education Code section 64001. Furthermore, the LCAP should be shared with, and input requested from, school site-level advisory groups, as applicable (e.g., school site councils, English Learner Advisory Councils, pupil advisory groups, etc.) to facilitate alignment between school-site and districtlevel goals and actions.” 83 Ron Rapp, California Federation of Teachers New Regulation/ No specific language requested: School personnel and local bargaining units must be involved throughout the planning, development and annual review of these plans. 84 John Lorona New Regulation/ No specific language requested: Continue to improve the LCFF regulations in order to ensure that all stakeholders and the public can understand how all supplemental and concentration funds are being used, and provide greater transparency around how districts are calculating funds intended to improve or increase services for high-need students. 85 Vincent Matthews San Jose Superintendent of Schools New Regulation/ No specific language requested: Provide translated versions of the LCAP template in the top 10 most prevalent languages in California. Reject: This commenter does not provide specific language recommendations. However, the instructions for completing an LCAP in statute and reflected in the proposed LCAP template require consultation of school personnel and local bargaining units. This commenter makes no specific language recommendations. However, in response to the general comment, the proposed LCAP template is revised to provide greater transparency. Reject: Translation of the regulations is not in the scope of regulations. The 2014-15 LCAP template is provided translated into Spanish on the WestEd website exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 88 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response 86 Vincent Matthews San Jose Superintendent of Schools New Regulation/ No specific language requested: Include a summary at the beginning of the LCAP to share LEA information, data, and context for the LCAP. Reject: LEAs have the option to provide summaries of their adopted LCAP as they determine are appropriate to their local circumstances and needs. 87 Vincent Matthews San Jose Superintendent of Schools New Regulation/ No specific language requested: Use an excel document template for LCAP tables to allow for ease of inputting information. Reject: CDE continues to work on the development of an electronic template that will provide additional flexibility in format of the LCAP and greater ease of use. 88 Vincent Matthews San Jose Superintendent of Schools New Regulation No specific language requested: Provide examples of well-constructed LCAPs and sections of LCAPs. Reject: The proposed LCAP template was revised as set forth in response to comments #49 and #53. Providing these examples is outside the scope of regulations. 89 Cindy Marten, Superintendent, San Diego Unified New Regulation No specific language requested: See attached user friendly LCAP from San Diego Unified to inform amendments to the LCAP. Kent Kern, Superintendent San Juan Unified New Regulation/ No specific language requested: General support for the new template format. General concern over addition of any language that reduces local control or restricts use of funds. Emphasis in LCAP template should be changed to be more on achievement of student outcomes and less on dollars spent. Cindy Marten, Superintendent, San Diego Unified New Regulation/ No specific language requested: Accelerate the development of the evaluation rubric to during the 2014-15 year. Cynthia Rice, CRLA Shelly Spiegel Coleman, New Regulation/ No specific language requested: In the “guidance” that will be sent to school districts and COEs 90 91 92 Reject: Proposed LCAP template is revised as described in response to comments #49 and #53. General letter of support. See response to comments #49 and #53. Reject: Beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Reject: Beyond the scope of the statute. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 89 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 93 Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Californians Together Jan Gustafson Corea, California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) on the regulations by CDE/SBE, a statement should be included that school districts and COEs are encouraged to maintain their school site EL parent advisory committees. Senator Wyland New Regulation/ No specific language requested: In the absence of reliable Smarter Balance test results, standardized testing should be defined more specifically to include other well-known diagnostic standardized tests. Agency Response No specific language requested. LEAs may determine usage of standardized tests, including diagnostic assessments, as appropriate to locally determined pupil needs and outcomes. LATE COMMENTS RECEIVED 94 95 96 97 Taryn Ishida,  Letters from Student Voice Coalition  Student Voice Support  Steven Bradford, Assemblymember  Holly Mitchell, Senator Molly Dunn, Alliance for Children’s Rights Additional steps need to be taken to ensure districts seek meaningful student input. No response required. Received after the closed comment period. Ensure Foster Youth representation on Parent Advisory Committee. No response required. Received after the closed comment period. Bruce Braciszewski, Classroom of the Future Foundation Jackie Wong, National Center for Youth Law Please give very serious consideration to including Science content as a focus within LCAP. No response required. Received after the closed comment period. Retain “Principally”; Ensure Foster Youth representation on Parent Advisory Committee.; Ensure Transparency for Calculation of No response required. Received after the closed comment period. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 90 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Prior Year Expenditures and Current Year Supplemental/Concentration Funding. 98 Carol Fry Bohlin Include Science content as a focus within LCAP. 9-05-14 [California Department of Education] No response required. Received after the closed comment period. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 91 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS OMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO THE SECOND 15-DAY COMMENT PERIOD (SEPTEMBER 6-22, 2014) 1 2 Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Leigh Shampain, Superintendent, Sonora School District 15495(a) - No specific language recommended: Does a K-6 student have enough knowledge and experience to provide valid input? I feel my Stakeholder Group, which helps to draft the LCAP goals and activities would be wasting their time going the process of getting input from the student group. Student input should only come from high school students, who have the intelligence and experiences to provide well thought out feedback. California Rural Legal Assistance, Inc., Californians Together, and California Association for Bilingual Education (Joint Letter) No specific language recommended: Amend Section 15496 and LCAP template to require LEAs to identify and describe in the LCAP the base level services and programs that are provided to ELs, or were provided to ELs in the prior year, so that a meaningful comparison can be made to determine where services will be increased or improved and to ensure that supplemental and concentration grant funds are not used to provide base services. Agency Response Reject: Statute permits all students to consult on the LCAP and a limitation restricting consultation to high school students would be contrary to statute. The revised definition provides needed flexibility for an LEA to design a process that meets the needs of its pupils, grade levels served, and type of program. Comment does not address 2nd 15-day amendments: No response required. Section 15496(a): Require LEAs [to] provide their completed calculation pursuant to Section 15496(a) in Section 3 of LCAP template. Comment does not address 2nd 15-day amendments: No response required. Section 15496(b)(4): Strike section 15496(b)(4) in its entirety Comment does not address 2nd 15-day amendments: No response required. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Section 1 – Add the following Guiding Questions: 1 – Describe the process used to inform the PAC and DELAC Comment does not address 2nd 15-day amendments: No response required. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 92 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response about the superintendent’s requirement to respond in writing to any comment form the PAC or DELAC? Did the superintendent receive any comment from the PAC or DELAC? 2 – When was the LCAP presented to the DELAC and PAC? Was a formal meeting held? How were members of the DELAC and PAC invited or informed of the meeting? If and ELAC continues to service as a school site EL parent advisory committee, were they part of the process? 3 – When was the public hearing held? When was the vote on the LCAP held? 3 Toni Beal, Administrator, Educational Support Services, Sonoma County Office of Education Section 2: In Section 2’s column entitled “Budgeted Expenditures” insert (including all finding sources (e.g. federal, state & other)) Comment does not address 2nd 15-day amendments: No response required. Insert column similar to that in the emergency template: What will be different/improved for students (based on identified metric) Comment does not address 2nd 15-day amendments: No response required. Appendix: Include an annual update appendix that provides definitions related to EL issues Comment does not address 2nd 15-day amendments: No response required. 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: As part of the state's requirement that districts address all of the required metrics for the 8 state priority areas, it would be helpful if there were a way to check the box near the "Expected Outcomes" to ensure that each district addressed each of the required metrics. Otherwise it is very difficult to keep track of what metrics a district has "missed" and still needs to address per education code. Reject: This revision is not necessary. The goal table in the proposed LCAP template, Section 2, includes a place to identify the state priority or priorities addressed by each goal. The instructions for the Expected Annual Measurable Outcomes section of the goal table direct LEAs to identify and describe specific expected measurable outcomes using, at minimum, "the applicable required metrics for the related state priorities." The instructions then state that the "required metrics are the exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 93 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response specified measures and objectives for each state priority as set forth in Education Code sections 52060(d) and 52066(d)." 4 5 6 Coalition of local education agencies (LEAs) and Education Management Groups (ACSA, CASBO, CALSSD, CSBA) representing school administrators, school board members, county superintendents and school business officials No specific language recommended: “…we are requesting the State Board of Education (SBE), at its November 2014 meeting, adopt the proposed LCAP Template, as presented at the September 2014 meeting.” Christina Goennier Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent of Instructional Services Beaumont Unified School District 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template] No specific language recommended: Please be sure to include more than just AP classes as a measure. We also need to include Dual Enrollment and Articulated courses with our local colleges. Bill Lucia, President, EdVoice 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Modify the goal table and the Introduction to the template in order to ensure LEAs comply with the LCFF statute and the template instructions with respect to each of the required metrics in the list of State Priorities. Valerie Cuevas, Interim Executive Director, Education Trust-West Coalition of civil rights, advocacy, community, Letter of support: No response required. Comment does not address 2nd 15-day amendments: No response required. Reject: The suggested additions are not necessary. The instructions for the Expected Annual Measurable Outcomes section of the goal table direct LEAs to identify and describe specific expected measurable outcomes using, at minimum, "the applicable required metrics for the exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 94 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment parent, student and other organizations Judy D. White, Ed.D., President, California Association of AfricanAmerican Superintendents and Administrators [Modifications highlighted] State Priorities The state priorities and required metrics listed in Education Code sections 52060 and 52066 can be categorized as specified below for planning purposes, however, school districts and county offices of education must address each of the state priorities and required metrics in their LCAP. B. Pupil Outcomes: … Required Metrics: Performance on state or local standardized tests, Academic Performance Index, A‐G completion rates, progress of English learners towards proficiency, English learner reclassification rates, advanced placement passage rate, Early Assessment Program participation and college preparedness rates. B. Pupil Outcomes: Pupil achievement: performance on standardized tests, score on Academic Performance Index, share of pupils that are college and career ready, share of English learners that become English proficient, English learner reclassification rate, share of pupils that pass Advanced Placement exams with 3 or higher, share of pupils determined prepared for college by the Early Assessment Program. (Priority 4) Required Metrics: Performance on state or local standardized tests, Academic Performance Index, A‐G completion rates, Agency Response related state priorities." The instructions then state that the "required metrics are the specified measures and objectives for each state priority as set forth in Education Code sections 52060(d) and 52066(d)." exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 95 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response progress of English learners towards proficiency, English learner reclassification rates, advanced placement passage rate, Early Assessment Program participation and college preparedness rates. C. Engagement: Parental involvement: efforts to seek parent input in decision making at the district and each school site, promotion of parent participation in programs for unduplicated pupils and special need subgroups.(Priority 3) Pupil engagement: school attendance rates, chronic absenteeism rates, middle school dropout rates, high school dropout rates, high school graduations rates. (Priority 5) Required Metrics: Student attendance rates, chronic absenteeism rates, middle school dropout rates, high school dropout rates, high school graduation rates. School climate: pupil suspension rates, pupil expulsion rates, other local measures including surveys of pupils, parents and teachers on the sense of safety and school connectedness. (Priority 6) Required Metrics: Pupil suspension rates, pupil expulsion rates, other local measures including pupil, parent, and teacher surveys on school safety and connectedness. 7 Valerie Cuevas, Interim Executive Director, Education Trust-West 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Make changes to the LCAP template to incorporate the proportionality calculation: Section 3A, add the label “Step 5” to the box prompting LEAs to Reject: The suggested additions are not necessary. The directions to the table in Section 3A already direct the LEA to identify exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 96 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment report the dollar amount of supplemental and concentration funds. Section 3B, add the label “Step 7,” indicating that the minimum proportionality is this step in the calculation. Add to the table boxes for Steps 1 through 4 and 6 for each step of the calculation. Coalition of Foster Youth Advocates Agency Response the amount of funds in the LCAP year calculated pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a)(5), which is “Step 5.” Similarly, the directions to the table in Section 3B direct the LEA to identify the minimum proportionality percentage calculated pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a)(7), which is “Step 7.” Add the following emphasized text to the instruction for Section 3B: In the box below, identify “each step of the proportionality calculation in the corresponding boxes pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a)(1)-(4) and (6), including” 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 pursuant to 5 CCR 15496(a). . Add the language, emphasized below, to the instructions entitled “Action/Services” in Section 2 of the LCAP template. This added language requires LEAs to consider how actions and services apply to the specific needs of different student subgroups: Reject: All of the suggested additions are not necessary. Consistent with Education Code sections 47605, 52060, and 52066, the LCAP template requires LEAs to describe goals and specific actions to achieve those goals for all pupils and each subgroup of pupils. For each LCAP year, Iidentify all annual actions to be performed and services provided to all pupils or any subgroups other than low-income, English learner, foster youth pupils, and pupils redesignated English proficient to “all pupils and to each unduplicated pupil subgroup to” meet the described goal. Actions may describe a group of services that are implemented to achieve the identified goal. “If an action/service applies to all pupils or to multiple unduplicated pupils, describe if and how the LEA will tailor that action or service for any applicable pupil subgroup.” Change the language, emphasized below, to the instructions exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 97 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment entitled “Pupils to be served within identified scope of service” in Section 2 of the LCAP template. This addition specifies that LEAs are expected to plan differentiated services to address the specific needs of each unduplicated student subgroup: For each action/service, identify the pupils to be served within the identified scope of service. “ If the action to be performed or the service to be provided is for all pupils, place a check mark next to “ALL.”” “For each action and/or service to be provided above what is being provided for all pupils, place a check mark next to the applicable unduplicated pupil subgroup(s) and/or other pupil subgroup(s) that will benefit from the additional action, and/or will receive the additional service” Identify, as applicable, additional actions and services for unduplicated pupil subgroup(s) as defined in Education Code section 42238.01, pupils redesignated fluent English proficient, and/or pupils subgroup(s) as defined in Education Code section 52052. ”Actions and services for unduplicated pupil subgroups must be differentiated to address the specific needs of each subgroup.” In the table in Section 2, separate out the Actions/Services sections for all students and for each of the unduplicated subgroups and other subgroups of students. This will prompt LEAs to plan actions and services tailored to each group. Agency Response exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 98 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) 8 Laura Henriques, President, California Science Teachers Association Chris Roe, President and CEO, California STEM Learning Network Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment No specific language recommended: In order to facilitate a better understanding of State Priority #2’s intention…strongly supports the board’s recommendation that clarifying guidance be provided to the field. This guidance should include one or more of the following: a list of all SBE adopted standards, a link to the SBE website where the list of standards can be accessed, and information that makes it clear to all stakeholders that this priority is more encompassing than Common Core. This information can be provided in the form of a Agency Response General letter of support; no response required. exec-nov14item02 Attachment 4 Page 99 of 99 TITLE 5 LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AND TEMPLATE REGULATIONS Name/Agency (Commenter) Title 5 Regulation Section and Public Comment Agency Response Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document or introductory information provided with the revised LCAP template. Additionally, this information could be a part of the Evaluation Rubrics currently under development. 9 Coalition of civil rights, advocacy, community, parent, student and other organizations Judy D. White, Ed.D., President, California Association of AfricanAmerican Superintendents and Administrators 15497.5 [Local Control and Accountability Plan and Annual Update Template]: Add the following Guiding Questions to Section 1 to further clarify for LEAs how they should describe their stakeholder engagement: a. “What percentage of parents on your Parent Advisory Committee represent unduplicated students?” b. “How have Site Councils been included in the LCAP development process and how have their recommendations for the LCAP been incorporated into the plan?” c. “How have DELAC recommendations for the LCAP been included in the plan?” Comment does not address 2nd 15-day amendments: No response required. At the end of the paragraph in the LCAP template instructions addressing “Budgeted Expenditures” for Section 2 (at p. 26 of 36 of the proposed revised regulations) add the following sentences: “Where the identical actions/services and associated expenditures have been previously identified in the LCAP, reference where that occurred. Do not repeat the source and expenditure information.” 10-16-14 [California Department of Education] Reject: Mandating that LEAs refrain from repeating information in their LCAPs will impede LEA’s flexibility to complete LCAPs appropriate to local objectives and needs.