PRESENTATION GUIDE Dear School District Administrator, This PowerPoint presentation is intended to help initiate and facilitate community engagement in budget planning during the Local Control and Accountability Plan development process. The information included in this presentation is an example of what would be helpful to share with stakeholders. Feel free to add or omit information to tailor this presentation to the specific context of your district. We provide further guiding information throughout the presentation indicated by this symbol: This presentation is a companion to the Best Practices for Engaging Stakeholders in the Budget document. Sincerely,

DISTRICT’S NAME BUDGET OVERVIEW District’s Logo Date SUPPORTING OUR STUDENTS & FAMILIES DISTRICT’S NAME BUDGET OVERVIEW District’s Logo Date

OVERVIEW OF PRESENTATION 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

ABOUT LCFF AND LCAP

HOW THE LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA (LCFF) WORKS 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 extra dollars based on how many low-income students, English learners, and foster youth they serve. BASE GRANTS SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS CONCENTRATION GRANTS Every student generates a base grant, which funds basic educational costs, such as teacher salaries, retirement costs, instructional materials, etc. Every student who is low-income, learning English, or in foster care generates 20% more funding above the base grant. 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.

SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION FUNDS – USED TO “INCREASE AND IMPROVE” SERVICES Districts Must Meet Specific Requirements in How They Use Supplemental and Concentration (S & C) Funding Increases S & C funds must be used to “increase and improve” services for high-need students (low income, English learner, and foster youth) S & C funds can be used for schoolwide and districtwide services that benefit non-high-need students, but must demonstrate the spending is “principally directed” and “effective” at improving outcomes for unduplicated pupils. The burden of demonstration depends on the concentration of high-need students. Districts must show that spending is the “most effective use” if (1) districtwide concentration of high-need students is below 55% or (2) schoolwide concentration of high-need students is below 40%. Otherwise districts only have to demonstrate the spending is an effective use of funds.

THE LOCAL CONTROL & ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN (LCAPS) 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. Each district’s LCAP must include the following: Plan summary Goals and measurable outcomes Actions Related expenditures LCAPs must include goals for each priority and 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*: Basic Services Implementation of standards Parental engagement Student achievement Student engagement School climate Access to courses Other student outcomes * For county offices of education there are 2 additional priorities: (9) Instruction for Expelled Youth and (10) Foster Youth Services

THE TIMEFRAME TO DEVELOP THE LCAP Summer-Fall 20XX October 8, 20XX Winter 20XX Spring 20XX Spring 20XX June 20XX July 1, 20XX District engages the community to solicit input on the LCAP. District and community assess student needs. Suggested District creates first draft of plan, incorporating community input. Suggested District presents proposed plan to parent advisory committees for feedback and input. Suggested District responds in writing to feedback from parent advisory committees and incorporates feedback into plan. Suggested District hold at least 1 public hearing on the plan before board adopts it. Required by Statute 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

THE BIG PICTURE

OVERVIEW OF OUR DISTRICT # of Schools # of Students # of Staff % of Students by Race/Ethnicity % of Students by group Elementary: Middle: High School: Alternative: Charter: TK-5: 6-8: 9-12: Total: Support Staff: Teachers: Administrators: Latino: African American/ Black: Asian: White: Other: Low-Income: English Learners: Foster Youth: Homeless Youth: % Unduplicated or High Need:

OUR DISTRICT’S STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

OUR DISTRICT’S STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

OUR DISTRICT’S SCHOOL CLIMATE

OUR DISTRICT’S PLANS FOR SUCCESS 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? Which actions “increase an improve” services for targeted students, and if districtwide or schoolwide how is this an (the most) effective use of funds?

BUDGET DEVELOPMENT

MONEY COMING INTO THE DISTRICT OVER THE YEARS – GENERAL FUND REVENUE Total General Fund Revenue, 2014-2018 in Millions 2017-18 General Fund Revenue in Millions Increase in Revenue from 2016-17 to 2017-18 = $16.8 million Natalie

Expenditures in Millions WHERE WILL THE DISTRICT SPEND ITS MONEY? 2017-2018 Expenditures in Millions

Revenue Sources in Millions WHAT ARE THE DISTRICT’S SOURCES FOR NEW MONEY? $16.8 MILLION Revenue Sources in Millions

WHAT IS THE DISTRICT COMMITTED TO SPENDING IN 2017-18? COMMITMENT COST (In Millions) Increase in Revenue $ 16.8 Salary Increases (required step-and-column) $ 0.5 Salary Increases (negotiated raises) $ 2.0 Increase in Health Care Benefits $ 1.0 Increase in Pensions (burden shifted from the state to the district) $ 1.5 K-3 Class Size Reduction (required under LCFF) Total Financial Commitments $ 6.0 Revenue Increase Remaining $ 10.8 Natalie

2017-18 NEW INVESTMENTS BEING CONSIDERED Remaining New Revenue for 2017-18 = $10.8 Million Priority Goal LCFF-Base (In Millions) LCFF-Suppl. & Conc. (In Millions) Expanding summer school to 3 additional school sites (add names of school sites) Improving Math and English Language Arts achievement $ 1.1 New tutoring program at 4 school sites (add names of school sites) $ 0.2 Expanding restorative justice to 5 more schools (name schools) Decreasing suspensions Natalie Use the “Goal” column in this and the following tables to show how district investments will address the needs identified by the data displayed earlier in the presentation. CONTINUED

2017-18 NEW INVESTMENTS BEING CONSIDERED Remaining New Revenue for 2017-18 = $10.8 Million Priority Goal LCFF-Base (In Millions) LCFF-Suppl. & Conc. (In Millions) Expanding dual-language learners program; adding 8 new positions Improving English learner academic achievement $ 0.8 Additional need-based school-site allocations Increasing support for high-need students $ 0.7 10 additional counselors Increasing access to college-prep coursework $ 1.0 Districtwide teacher professional development Improving academic achievement $ 6.8 Total $ 7.8 $ 3.0 Natalie

OTHER POTENTIAL NEW INVESTMENTS Potential Investments Goal Cost (In Millions) Career technical course pathways Preparation for career $ 4.0 3-5 New social workers Socio-emotional supports $ 0.3-0.5 Transportation for extracurricular activities Student engagement/ graduation rates $ 0.2 Professional development in culturally-relevant pedagogy Student engagement/school climate $ 2.0 4 new parent liaisons Parent engagement $ 0.4

2017-18 PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL & CONCENTRATION SPENDING (IN MILLIONS) ACTION OR SERVICE GOAL EVALULATED AND PROVEN EFFECTIVE? CHANGE TO ACTION OR SERVICE IN 2017-18 CONTINUED INVESTMENT FROM 2016-17 PROPOSED NEW INVESTMENT 2017-18 DISTRICTWIDE/SCHOOLWIDE/ TARGETED 2 foster youth liaisons Ensuring continuity of educational support for foster youth Yes Continued $ 0.2 Targeted Professional development for all teachers on the new ELD Standards Improving English learner academic achievement $ 5.0 Districtwide 4 Restorative justice trainers to train 80 teachers at 10 school sites (name schools) Decreasing suspensions 2 additional trainers to serve 5 more school sites (name schools) $ 0.2 Schoolwide CONTINUED

2017-18 PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL & CONCENTRATION SPENDING (IN MILLIONS) ACTION OR SERVICE GOAL EVALULATED AND PROVEN EFFECTIVE? CHANGE TO ACTION OR SERVICE IN 2016-17 CONTINUED INVESTMENT FROM 2015-16 PROPOSED NEW INVESTMENT 2016-17 DISTRICTWIDE/SCHOOLWIDE/ TARGETED Dual-language learners program Improving English learner academic achievement Yes Adding 8 new positions to program $ 10.4 $ 0.8 Targeted Allocations to highest-need school sites Increasing support for high-need students Increased site funding $ 44.5 $ 0.7 Schoolwide Summer school for credit recovery/ academically at-risk students at 5 school sites (name schools) Improving graduation rates 3 additional school sites (name schools) $ 1.1 CONTINUED

2017-18 PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL & CONCENTRATION SPENDING (IN MILLIONS) ACTION OR SERVICE GOAL EVALULATED AND PROVEN EFFECTIVE? CHANGE TO ACTION OR SERVICE IN 2016-17 CONTINUED INVESTMENT FROM 2015-16 PROPOSED NEW INVESTMENT 2016-17 DISTRICTWIDE/ SCHOOLWIDE/ TARGETED Tutoring services at 4 school sites Improving Math and English Language Arts achievement Yes Launching program at 4 school sites (name schools) $ 0.2 Schoolwide TOTALS $ 61.0 $ 3.0 GRAND TOTAL $64 MILLION

REFLECTIONS & FEEDBACK

REFLECTIONS & FEEDBACK 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? Do you think the targeted actions/services will effectively increase/improve outcomes for targeted students? What alternative actions/services do you think might be more effective?

THANK YOU!