Community Meeting: L ocal C ontrol A ccountability P lan Whittier Union High School District

Welcome to WUHSD Parent/Community Meeting Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP)

WUHSD Parent/Community Meetings WUHSD Board Room 6:00 - 7:00 PM Purpose of Meetings: –To Inform –To Seek Input Meeting Dates: –January 23 –February 13 –March 20 –April 9

5 Elements of the new Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) 1.Local Control 2.Equity 3.Accountability 4.Transparency 5.Inclusiveness and Collaboration

Inclusiveness and Collaboration Network of Collaboration at each school and at district with Certificated and Classified Staff, Students, and Parents and with five elementary partner districts –Parent Networks –PTSA, English Learner Advisory Committee, School Site Council, Boosters and other parent organizations –District Student Advisory Committee –Citizens Oversight Committee for Measure W –WSEA (Whittier Secondary Educators Association) and CSEA (Classified School Employees Association) Leaders

Development Process for the LCAP October 1 LCAP Task Force Nov/Dec Educational Services at Sites (Visit 1) Jan/Feb Educational Services at Sites (Visit 2) January 23 1 st LCAP Parent/Community Meeting February 13 2 nd LCAP Parent/Community Meeting February 27 LCAP Task Force March 20 3 rd LCAP Parent/Community Meeting April 9 4 th LCAP Parent/Community Meeting May 13 LCAP presented to the Board of Trustees for approval

Communication and Transparency District Newsletters E-Newsletters School and District Websites LCFF/LCAP Video Clips Materials Distributed at LCAP Meetings will be Posted and Published

L ocal C ontrol F unding F ormula: A New Funding Model for our schools

50 year Old Funding Model Revenue Limit Funding model had been in effect since early 1970’s Funding was a fixed amount per student Over 50 state categorical programs were added. Each had specific programmatic and fiscal compliance requirements

Local Control Funding Formula Local Control funding Formula (LCFF) implemented on July 1, 2013 New funding model increases local control, reduces inequities, reflects needs of targeted students and is more transparent

Why Propose Change ? Old Funding Model as Characterized by Governor Brown Overly complex State driven – Top down Insufficient “Treating unequal's equally is not justice” Governor Brown, January 2013

Key Elements of LCFF Local Control, Local Decision Making Equity Accountability Transparency Inclusive

A New Funding Approach New Funding Model = New Emphasis, Policies and Governance 1.Targeted Funding for Targeted Student Groups 2.Local Decision Making with Stakeholder Input about how to address Student Needs and Close Achievement Gaps with Budget Accountability

LCFF – What and How Equal BASE GRANT amounts per pupil for four grade spans – the same for all students at all school districts K $6952$7056$7266$8419* Additional Funding is added based on fixed percentages of Targeted Populations Supplemental Grant at 20% Concentration Grant at 50% * Base amounts projected at full implementation over eight years

Targeted Student Populations Supplemental and Concentration grants are increased based on the percentage of total enrollment accounted for by: English Learners Free and Reduced priced meal program Foster children LCFF = Base Grant + Supplemental Grant (20%) + Concentration Grant (50%)

Local Control Accountability Plan Accountability Under LCFF To ensure that the district budget is aligned with the priorities of the State a plan called the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) is required LCAP must be adopted annually by the Board of Trustees prior to the adoption of the district budget LCAP must include SPECIFIC ACTIONS with a DESCRIPTION OF EXPENDITURES

Steps to LCAP Adoption Alignment to Eight State Priorities Consultation with: Teachers, Bargaining Units, Parents, Stakeholders, Principals, Students, other School Personnel Review and comment by: Parent Advisory Committees, EL Parent Advisory groups, other school groups Input from the public through: Public Hearing process, community reports Adoption by Board prior to budget adoption

State Priorities Student Achievement Student Engagement Other Student Outcomes (performance on tests or other required areas of student performance) School Climate Parental Involvement Implementation of Common Core State Standards Course Access Basic Services (teacher assignments and care of facilities) The following eight areas must be addressed in LCAP

Changes in the Past 12 Years in Students We Serve 13% English Learners 23% R-FEP 3% Other 22% White 73% Hispanic 31% Soc Econ Dis Then 4% Other 10% English Learners Now 10% White 86% Hispanic 70% Soc Econ Dis 20% R-FEP

Students Receiving Free or Reduced Meals

WUHSD District Measurable Targets Academic Performance Index (API) Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) CAHSEE: Pass and Proficient 4-Year Graduation Rate Grade Level Credits Towards Graduation: On-Target Rate College Eligibility: a-g Course Completion Advanced Placement: Exams & Enrollment Student Attendance Rate

Comprehensive Strategy to Increase Performance on Measurable Targets Professional Learning Communities We are committed to doing WHATEVER IT TAKES

Pyramid of Prevention & Interventions RESULTS

District API Growth

800 Narrowing the Achievement Gap: Gaining on the Goal of 800

AP Tests Taken & Percent of 10 th – 12 th Enrollment

College Eligibility: A-G Course Completion Rate

WUHSD On-Target Rates 03/0404/0505/0606/0707/0808/0909/1010/1111/1212/13 9 th 77.9%76.3%76.8%79.8%83.4%86.4%86.1%86.3%85.4%89.5% 10 th 75.4%76.9%75.3%79.5%84.3%84.7%86.9%87.1%86.6%89.3% 11 th 87.6%86.3%87.7%89.0%92.6%94.0%93.1%95.0%95.7%96.4%

CAHSEE Senior Pass Rates ELA Math %99.5% %99.8% %99.8% %100% %99.94% %99.94%

WUHSD 10 th Grade ELA CAHSEE Pass Rate

WUHSD 10 th Grade Math CAHSEE Pass Rate

Attendance Rates

4-Year Cohort Dropout Rate WUHSD6.6%5.8% LA County18.9%16.5%15.1% CA State16.6%14.7%23.8%

Staying the Course: Growth over the Past 8 Years If we add up the API Growth Points from each of the past seven years, how have we done? WUHSD = 172 growth points State of California = 65 growth points How do our High Schools compare to the 973 Comprehensive High Schools in CA?

School Growth Points Percentile in CA (973 HS) Cal 17097% LS 15294% PHS 17597% SF 18999% WHS 15895% Staying the Course: Growth over the Past Eight Years

Key Questions Addressed by PLCs 1.What do we want students to know? 2.How do we know when they learn it? 3.How do we respond when they do not learn it? 4.How do we enrich and extend the learning for those students who have demonstrated mastery?

#3 How do we respond when they do not learn it? Building a Systematic Response

Whatever it Takes Guiding Principles Intervention rather than remediation Intervention that is systematic Intervention that is provided in a timely manner Intervention that is directed rather than invited Prevention is the best Intervention

Focus on Freshman Parent Partnership Campus Watch Link Crew Freshman First Day Summer Bridge Program ELA and Math Placement

Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes Rigor Relevance Relationships Intensity Coherence Focus Whatever it Takes