PUBLIC HEARING2016-17
LCAP & BUDGET
BOARD OF EDUCATIONPITTSBURG UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
J U N E 1 5 , 2 0 1 61
Presented by:Enrique E PalaciosDeputy Superintendent,Anthony MolinaExecutive Director & Eileen Chen Director
About LCFF and LCAP• How the Local Control Funding Formula Works• Local Control & Accountability Plans• LCAP Timeline
The Big Picture • Overview of our District• Our District’s Student Achievement • Our District’s Plans for Success
Budget Development• District Fiscal Trends – General Fund Revenue• New Revenue• Increase in District Financial Commitments• New Investments Being Considered• Proposed Supplemental & Concentration
Reflections & Feedback
OV E RV I E W O F P R E S E N TAT I O N
2
ABOUT LCFF AND LCAP
3
In 2013, California dramatically reformed the way it funds our public schools. LCFF established a funding system that provides school districts with base funding and additional funds based on how many low-income students, English learners, and foster youth they serve.
H O W T H E L O C A L C O N T R O L F U N D I N G F O R M U L A ( L C F F ) W O R K S
B A S EG R A N T S
Every student generates a base grant, which funds basic educational costs, such as teacher salaries, retirement costs, instructional materials, etc.
S U P P L E M E N TA L G R A N T S
Every student who is low-income, learning English, or in foster care generates 20% more funding above the base grant.
These funds must be spent on increasing and improving services for these high-need student groups in order to improve their achievement.
C O N C E N T R AT I O N G R A N T S
In districts where at least 55% of students are high-need, those high-need students above the 55% enrollment threshold generate an extra 50% of the base grant.
These funds must also be spent to increase or improve services for high-need students in order to improve their achievement.
4
All school districts must adopt a Local Control & Accountability Plan (LCAP), a 3-year plan for how districts will use state funds to serve all students.
T H E L O C A L C O N T R O L & A C C O U N TA B I L I T Y P L A N ( L C A P S )
Each district’s LCAP must include the following:
Goals
Actions
Related expenditures
LCAPs must include services that target each major student subgroup, including:
Racial/ethnic subgroups
Low-income students
English learners
Students with disabilities
Foster youth
Homeless youth
LCAPs must address the 8 State Priorities*:
1. Basic Services
2. Implementation of standards
3. Parental engagement
4. Student achievement
5. Student engagement
6. School climate
7. Access to courses
8. Other student outcomes
5* For county offices of education there are 2 additional priorities: (9) Instruction for Expelled Youth and (10) Foster Youth Services
T H E T I M E F R A M E T O D E V E L O P T H E L C A P
District engaged the community to solicit input on the LCAP.District and community assessed student needs.
District presented main new activities to the Board and Community at Board Workshop in May.
District presented main new activities to parent groups and student groups.
School board adopts plan by July 1st in a public hearing.
Required by Statute
County office of education must approve district LCAPs by October 8th.
Required by Statute
Winter 2016 Spring 2016 Spring 2016 July 1, 2016 October 8, 2016
6
THE BIG PICTURE
7
Elementary: 8
Junior: 3
High School: 1
Alternative: 1
Pre-school: 8
Adult Education
OV E RV I E W O F O U R D I S T R I C T
TK-5: 5,010
6-8: 2,533
9-12: 3,110
Pre-school: 479
Support Staff: 353
Teachers: 565
Administrators:79
Latino: 7,413 (63.61%)
African America: 1,973 (16.93%)
Asian: 953 (8.18%)
White: 639 (5.34%)
Other: 676 (5.79%)
Low-Income: 8,423English Learners: 3,642Foster Youth: 53Homeless Youth:71% Students with Disabilities 9.8%
% Unduplicated or High Need: 83.29%
# of Schools # of Students # of StaffFTE’s
# of Students by Race/Ethnicity
# of Students by group
8
Data LessonsOur students have made consistent growth in graduation completion & college-readiness indicators
Our students have made consistent growth in increasing time in-class (reductions in truancy, suspensions)
Most of our students are close or at the achievement level in comparison to like-student groups in the State and County
Our Opportunity Gap Areas: Overall Literacy and Math
Opportunity Gap Targeted Student Groups* English language learners * African American students* Students with disabilities
9
2015 PUSD CAASPP ELA by Student GroupExceeded or Met Standards
Comparison with County and State
30
%
28
%
44
%
29
%
55
%
24
%
36
%
33
%
52
%
31%
78
%
41%
65
%
25
%
68
%
62
%
44
%
32
%
72
%
38
%
35
%
28
%
61%
59
%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
All Students Latino Asian Pacific Islander Filipino African American White Two +
PUSD
County
State
All Students Latino AsianPacific
IslanderFilipino
African American
White Two +
PUSD 5,699 3,631 173 96 316 1,051 272 132
County 90,787 30,942 11,174 626 4,041 8,953 30,349 4,048
State 3,204,421 1,719,666 287,182 16,381 85,869 188,871 784,055 86,912
2015 PUSD CAASPP ELA by ProgramExceeded or Met Standards
Comparison with County and State
30
%
12%
4%
27
%
52
%
11%
16%
27
%
44
%
11%
12%
31%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
All Students English Learners Special Education Socio-Economic
PUSD
County
State
All Students English Learners Special Education Socio-Economic
PUSD 5,848 1,830 461 4,787
County 94,772 14,437 9,126 38,538
State 3,336,270 617,537 321,477 1,925,129
2015 PUSD CAASPP Math by Student GroupExceeded or Met Standards
Comparison with County and State
22
%
20
%
43
%
20
%
44
%
14%
23
%
25
%
43
%
21%
73
%
28
%
53
%
15%
57
%
53
%
33
%
21%
69
%
27
%
52
%
16%
49
%
49
%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
All Students Latino Asian Pacific Islander Filipino African American White Two +
PUSD
County
State
All Students Latino AsianPacific
IslanderFilipino
African American
White Two +
PUSD 5,702 3,631 175 96 314 1,053 274 134
County 90,867 31,005 11,246 623 4,043 8,915 30,330 4,049
State 3,209,994 1,722,846 289,980 16,392 86,384 188,308 783,703 86,844
2015 PUSD CAASPP Math by ProgramExceeded or Met Standards
Comparison with County and State
22
%
13%
4%
20
%
43
%
11%
12%
18%
33
%
11%
9%
21%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
All Students English Learners Special Education Socio-Economic
PUSD
County
State
All Students English Learners Special Education Socio-Economic
PUSD 5,848 1,835 468 4,788
County 94,772 14,617 9,106 38,562
State 3,336,270 625,489 320,276 1,928,365
2015 PUSD Cohort Grad Rates Comparison with County and State
89
.3
84
.7
95
.9
88
.2 96
.2
77
.7
93
.3
90
.6
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
AllStudents
Latino Asian PacificIslander
Filipino AfricanAmerican
White Two +
PUSD
County
State
PUSD Cohort Grad Rate 4-year trends by Race/Ethnicity
70
.2 70
81.
5
79 8
4.9
64
.5 69
.6
66
.771.
3
73
.1 75 8
1.8 85
.7
66
64
.4
62
.5
74
.5
74
.5
86
.2
66
.7
82
.9
69
.9
76
75
88.4 89 88.5 86.491.7
85.388.7 87.5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Allstudents
Latino Asian PacificIslander
Fiipino AfricanAmerican
White Two +
2012
2013
2014
2015
PUSD Cohort Grad Rate 4-year trends by Program
70.2
58.5
41.7
69.471.3
61.9 60.2
70.274.5
60
49.4
73.6
88.483.9
65.6
87.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
All Students EnglishLearners
SpecialEducation
Socio-Economic
2012
2013
2014
2015
PUSD 4-year trend UC/CSU Eligibility by Race/Ethnicity
17
17.2
26
.1
12.5
33
.3
11.3
15.9
0
26
.2
24
48
44
.4
50
18.5
31.
7
16.7
24
.6
24
32
.1
16.7
42
.9
19.7
25
25
34
.3
32
.2
45
.5
42
.1
64
.9
29
.5
34
.7
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
All Latino Asian PacificIslander
Filipino AA White Two +
2012
2013
2014
2015
PUSD 4-year trend UC/CSU Eligibility by Program
17
10.7
3.6
15.4
26.2
7.8
3.3
25.424.6
1.2 3.8
22.9
34.3
4.8
0
32.6
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
All English Learners Special Education Socio-Eco
2012
2013
2014
2015
PUSD Writing Benchmark% of Student Groups in Mastery Band Levels
Latino AsianAfrican
AmericanFilipino
PacificIslander
WhiteTwo ormoreRaces
All Grp
Elementary 26% 32% 21% 40% 28% 25% 25% 23%
Junior 32% 70% 27% 60% 27% 30% 24% 33%
Senior 30% 23% 27% 48% 44% 41% 34% 32%
All Lvl 29% 42% 25% 49% 33% 32% 28% 29%
26
%
32
%
21%
40
%
28
%
25
%
25
%
23
%
32
%
70
%
27
%
60
%
27
% 30
%
24
%
33
%
30
%
23
%
27
%
48
%
44
%
41%
34
%
32
%
29
%
42
%
25
%
49
%
33
%
32
%
28
% 29
%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
No. in Mastery/Total Tested
1822/7732
645/1910
372/1396
2839/11038
PUSD Writing Benchmark% of Student Groups in Mastery Band Levels
English Learner Special Education Socio-Economic
Elementary 17% 7% 18%
Junior 11% 7% 28%
Senior 19% 12% 28%
All Lvl 16% 9% 25%
17%
7%
18%
11%
7%
28
%
19%
12%
28
%
16%
9%
25
%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
No. in Mastery/Total Tested
1822/7732
645/1910
372/1396
2839/11038
Answer the following questions for your stakeholders:
• Which LCAP goals are the district prioritizing to improve student achievement?
• How will our LCFF investments support meeting our district’s goals for improved student achievement?
• How does the LCAP reflect the district’s commitment to closing opportunity and achievement gaps?
OUR DISTRICT’S PLANS FOR SUCCESS
21
2014-2015
• Class size reduction
• Professional Development Time for Teachers
• Full time College & Career Technician
• Technology & data support-
• Extended learning- evening school, K-8th summer school, online learning
• Restorative Practices
• Vision 2027
2015-2016
• Kept Main Actions from 2014-15
• Early Literacy
• Increased Extended learning
• Increased Restorative Practices
• Added Black Diamond to Vision 2027
• Expanded CTE, LMC class
• Identified Counselor Support for students who are English language learners
• Fulltime Assistant Principals at Elementary Schools
• Implemented Garden Program
• Ed Tech Cadre
• 8th grade College and Career awareness
22
UPDATEGoal 1: Full implementation of the Pittsburg Learning Model
Keep Main Activities from 2015-2016
• Expand Early Literacy coaches to 1.0 FTE at elementary
• Continue Expanded Learning- increase participation, focus on ELLs
• Determine plan of ELD & Dual Immersion
• Expand CTE classes/pathways, AP classes, LMC classes
• Expand Ed Tech opportunities, including Coding, Mentor Teacher
• Focus on targeted student groups• Newcomer students & Foster Students & African American Male
• Relevant Learning: Financial Literacy; Pittsburg Historical Society (3rd Grade); College Visit (Jr Highs)
• Comprehensive Counseling Plan; EAOP support
• Secondary Teaching and Learning support
• Initial work increasing access to Athletics and Arts
LCAP UPDATES & REVISIONS 2016 - 17Goal 1: Full implementation of the Pittsburg Learning Model
23
2014-2015
• Instructional Coaches- 12 FTE
• Full release BTSA Coaches
• Extensive PD for certificated and classified staff
• Release time for PD (2 days)
• Student assessment systems
• Administrator mentoring
•
2015-2016
Kept Main Activities from 2014-15• District wide Professional Development;
in partnership with PEA/CTA: Focus on Opportunity Gap
• 2 days of PD for our classified staff• Professional Development for Project
Based Learning & Tech Integration: Vision 2027
• Identified mentor teachers to support intern and temp teachers
• Developed a marketing plan for the District
• Reviewed our services to students with disabilities
• Revised of Reclassification Criteria for ELLs
• Marketing materials and social media, website updates
24
UPDATE Goal 2: High quality professional development and coaching
Keep Main Activities from 2015-2016
• Expand Professional Development for Teachers
• Special Education Services (Stetson) and Compliance Issues
• Expand opportunities for DI teachers
• Advanced Placement & AVID for teachers
• New Teachers Support
• Math adoption and ELA/ELD pilot
• Coding lessons – Code.org
• Science – expansion of Stanford partnership
• Mentor Teacher
• Administrator PD: Equity Focused groups, expand to Assistant Principals
• Professional Development for Classified: including math, students with disabilities
LCAP UPDATES & REVISIONS 2016 - 17Goal 2: High quality professional development and coaching
25
2014-2015
• Parent Volunteer Coordinators (at some schools)
• Parent education and ESL class
• Training for parents, site and district staff on Restorative Justice
• Additional translator
• Additional School Welfare & Attendance worker
• Full Service Community Schools Coordinator
• Additional counselor support at all levels
2015-2016Kept Main Activities from 2014-2015
• Parent and Community Engagement• Parent & Family Coordinator
(District)• Parent & Family Liaisons at each
school site• Parent Workshops: Early
Literacy, Restorative Justice, Truancy, CAASPP
• Restorative Practices in Junior High and High School
• Expanded mental health services to serve all students• Increased Lincoln Center on-site
support• Increased Nursing services for schools• Community Schools (Hillview)
26
UPDATE onGoal 3: Supportive environments conducive to learning
Keep Main Activities from 2015-2016
• Increase Parent & Family classes; family engagement plans
• Expand Community Schools (Highlands)
• Expand Restorative Practices: Elementary
• Expand translation services
• Establish Parent Advisory Group for Students with Disabilities (CAC)
• Dual Immersion Community Advisory Group
• Coordination of Mental Health and Behavior Support
• 27
LCAP UPDATES & REVISIONS 2016 - 17Goal 3: Supportive environments conducive to learning
BUDGET DEVELOPMENT
28
D I S T R I C T F I S C A L T R E N D S – G E N E R A L F U N D R E V E N U E
Total General Fund Revenue, 2013-20172016-17 General Fund Revenue
29
$13,710,842
$16,239,287
$4,688,033
$2,189,089 $2,304,702
-
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,000
16,000,000
18,000,000
82,422,39421,828,706
10,974,350
5,548,875 3,966,468
BASE GRANTS
SUPPLEMENTAL & CONCENTRATION
OTHER STATE
FEDERAL
LOCAL MISCELLANEOUS
BREAKDOWN OF SOURCES
Revenue Sources in %
30
66.07%
17.50%
8.80%
4.45%3.18%
BASE GRANTS SUPPLEMENTAL & CONCENTRATION OTHER STATE FEDERAL LOCAL MISCELLANEOUS
L C F F 2 0 1 3 - 2 0 1 9
31
$0
$74,932,318$79,194,920
$82,422,394$84,774,700 $86,410,483
0
10,000,000
20,000,000
30,000,000
40,000,000
50,000,000
60,000,000
70,000,000
80,000,000
90,000,000
100,000,000
2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
BASE GRANTS
L C F F 2 0 1 3 - 2 0 1 9
32
$0
$7,763,749
$17,948,372
$21,828,706
$24,339,425 $25,008,344
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
SUPPLEMENTAL & CONCENTRATION
L C F F 2 0 1 3 - 2 0 1 9
33
86.54%
84.27%
83.29%
81.62%81.41% 81.41%
78.00%
79.00%
80.00%
81.00%
82.00%
83.00%
84.00%
85.00%
86.00%
87.00%
2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
UNDUPLICATED COUNT
L C F F 2 0 1 3 - 2 0 1 9
34
0.00%
10.36%
22.66%
26.48%
28.71% 28.94%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
PROPORTIONALITY
L C F F F LO O R & TA R G E T
35
$-
$20,000,000
$40,000,000
$60,000,000
$80,000,000
$100,000,000
$120,000,000
$140,000,000
2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
FLOOR TARGET Linear (FLOOR) Linear (TARGET)
FLOOR TARGET
2013-2014 $ 66,842,771 $ 106,874,364
2014-2015 $ 72,491,409 $ 107,992,666
2015-2016 $ 84,175,949 $ 109,980,398
2016-2017 $ 98,418,518 $ 109,970,598
2017-2018 $ 104,930,184 $ 111,266,744
2018-2019 $ 110,105,319 $ 114,511,159
36
Year 1: 2013-14 Year 2: 2014-15 Year 3: 2015-16 Year 4: 2016-17
Year 5: 2017-18 Year 6: 2018-19 Year 7: 2019-20 Year 8: 2020-21
Floor Gap Remaining Need after Gap
PUSD Progress Towards Full LCFF Implementation
REFLECTIONS & FEEDBACK
37
Questions for discussion:
• What questions do you have about the information we presented? Is there anything we need to clarify?
• In what ways do these spending priorities resonate with you? In what ways do they not resonate with you?
• Which investments might we increase or add, and why? Which investments might we decrease or eliminate, and why?
• In what ways is this spending plan helping to close opportunity and achievement gaps within our district?
R E F L E C T I O N S & F E E D B A C K
38
THANK YOU!
39