The instructions for completing the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) follow the template.
| Local Educational Agency (LEA) Name | Contact Name and Title | Email and Phone |
| San Francisco County Office of Education | Tim Burke LCAP Director |
burket@sfusd.edu 415-802-7262 |
A description of the LEA, its schools, and its students in grades transitional kindergarten–12, as applicable to the LEA. LEAs may also provide information about their strategic plan, vision, etc.
The San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) is the seventh-largest public school district in California, serving approximately 50,000 preschool through grade 12 students across 122 schools, including 6 county and court schools through the San Francisco County Office of Education. San Francisco is both a city and a county; therefore, SFUSD’s 8,929 employees administer both the school district and the San Francisco County Office of Education (SFCOE), which makes SFCOE a single district office of Education. SFUSD and SFCOE are governed by an elected seven member Board of Education:
Phil Kim, President
Jaime Huling Vice President
Matt Alexander, Commissioner
Alida Fisher, Commissioner
Parag Gupta, Commissioner
Supriya Ray, Commissioner
Lisa Weissman-Ward, Commissioner
Under the leadership of the Board of Education and Superintendent Dr. Maria Su, SFUSD remains committed to implementing our Mission and Vision:
MISSION: Every day we provide each and every student the quality instruction and equitable support required to thrive in the 21st century
VISION: All SFUSD students will graduate as independent thinkers with a sense of agency who have attained academic and creative skills to lead productive lives and contribute to our community.
We anchor to the Values: Student-Centered, Fearless, United, Social Justice and Diversity-Driven.
Student-Centered: We put students' needs first.
Fearless: We persist through challenges.
United: We celebrate and build on each other's strengths.
Social Justice: We stand with those most vulnerable in our community.
Diversity-Driven: We respect and seek to understand each person.
SFUSD works to provide each and every student the quality instruction and equitable support required to thrive in the 21st century. Our students and families represent a wide range of cultural, linguistic, and socio-economic backgrounds, and we feel tremendous pride in being able to serve such a diverse and inclusive community. Below is an overview of some of these demographics:
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 53.9%, English Learners 25.6%, Foster Youth 0.5%, Homeless 2.7%, Students with Disabilities 14%
African American 6%, American Indian .2%, Asian 31.8%, Filipino 3.7%, Latine/x 32.1%, Multi-Racial 7.7%, Pacific Islander .7%, White 13.6%.
As with many school districts throughout the Bay Area, SFUSD has experienced shifts in enrollment over the past few years. Between 2017 and 2024, the school district experienced notable shifts in student enrollment and demographics:
-Total enrollment dropped from 53,033 to 48,736 students, a decline of 8.1%.
-Asian students decreased from 35.8% to 31.8%.
-Multilingual (Hispanic) students increased from 27.0% to 32.1%, showing the largest growth among racial/ethnic groups.
-White students slightly declined from 14.4% to 13.6%.
-African American students fell from 7.4% to 6.0%.
-Filipino students declined from 4.8% to 3.7%.
-Students identifying as Two or More Races grew, from 4.3% to 7.7%.
-English Learners dropped from 28.5% to 25.6%.
-Students with Disabilities rose from 11.4% to 14.0%.
-The percentage of Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students remained relatively stable, around 56.4% in 2017 and 53.9% in 2024.
-The Homeless student rate was not recorded in 2017 but reached 2.7% in 2024, peaking in 2023.
-Foster Youth representation remained steady, ranging from 0.4% to 0.6%.
Overall, the data shows declining enrollment while specific increases of Hispanic and multiracial students,Students with Disabilities and Students experiencing Homelessness.
In the fall of 2022, the San Francisco Board of Education established their Vision, Values, Goals, and Guardrails to serve as the district’s compass for the next five years. There are three GOALS for what SFUSD students will know and be able to do by June 2027 (Note: these goals align with state priorities as indicated):
3rd-grade Literacy: The percentage of ALL third-grade students reading at grade level as measured by state tests (SBAC ELA) will increase from 52% proficiency rate in October 2022 to 70% proficiency by October 2027 (LCFF Priority 2: State Standards, Priority 4: Student Achievement).
8th-grade Math: The percentage of ALL eighth-grade students performing math at grade level as measured by the state tests (SBAC Math) will increase from 42% proficiency rate in October 2022 to 65% proficiency by October 2027 (LCFF Priority 2: State Standards, Priority 4: Student Achievement).
College & Career Readiness: The percentage of all high school 12th graders who are “college/career ready“ as defined by the California Department of Education will increase from 57.5% in June 2020 to 70% by June 2027 (Priority 4: Student Achievement, Priority 7: Course Access).
Our work is further informed by GUARDRAILS, which are defined as the community’s specific non-negotiables that must be honored while implementing the goals.
Guardrail 1 Effective Decision-Making: The superintendent will not make major decisions without utilizing a process–that which includes meaningful consultation with the parents/guardians, students, and staff who will be impacted by those decisions–at the inception, adoption, and review (LCFF Priority 3: Parent Engagement, LCFF Priority 5: Student Engagement).
Guardrail 2 Serving The Whole Child: The Superintendent will not take approaches that neglect the cognitive and academic development, social and emotional development, identity development, physical and mental well-being, or ethical and moral development of students (LCFF Priority 5: Student Engagement, LCFF Priority 7: Course Access).
Guardrail 3 Curriculum and Instruction: The Superintendent will not permit curriculum and instruction which is not rooted in excellence, not challenging and engaging, not student-centered, not culturally responsive, or not differentiated to meet the academic needs of all students (LCFF Priority 1: Basic Services, LCFF Priority 2: State Standards, LCFF Priority 8: Pupil Outcomes, LCFF Priority 7: Course Access).
Guardrail 4 Resource Allocation: The Superintendent will not allow resources to be allocated without transparently communicating how the allocations are baseline sufficient to operate all schools while ensuring inequitable inputs and creating more equity and excellence in student outcomes ((LCFF Priority 1: Basic Services).
Guardrail 5 Strategic Partnerships: The Superintendent will not impede collaboration with the City of San Francisco, state and federal agencies, community-based organizations, philanthropic organizations, and the business community to advance the District’s goals and values (LCFF Priority 3: Parent Engagement, LCFF Priority 4: Student Achievement).
SFUSD is committed to Building Strong Schools for a Bright Future, one where every student has access to excellent, inclusive, and creative schools. We aim for all students to develop strong academic knowledge and skills, as well as a host of dispositions and behaviors, that increase their curiosity and engagement, activate their full potential for learning, and prepare them for life, work, and study beyond their secondary school years. While the pace and the path toward achieving these outcomes will vary among students and unfold along a set of learning progressions, the goal is for every SFUSD student to possess these capacities by the time they graduate. SFCOE and SFUSD schools have many bright spots to celebrate, learn from and scale throughout our district and county. At the same time, there are many opportunities for improvement as evidenced by the 2023 CA Dashboard results which informed the development of the 2024-2027 LCAP Goals and Actions:
SFCOE/SFUSD 2023 Dashboard Lowest Indicators:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x2iDZMB78AtGpkzEPvL8AuWQfXlUKkF_JMozoaXhAso/edit#gid=1084394816
These indicators have informed our focused efforts for continuous improvement. Essential to that effort is our partnership with students, staff, administrators, parents, community partners, community based organizations including higher education partners and local philanthropic partners. Examples of such partnerships include collaborations with research institutions like UC Berkeley and Stanford University, organizations like the California Academy of Sciences and SFMoMA, amongst the dozens of local community based organizations in service and support of our students, families and community. Since 2009, SFUSD and Stanford have engaged in over 200 joint research projects focusing on areas such as STEM education, socioemotional learning, and college affordability. For over two decades, SFUSD and UC Berkeley have collaborated on topics including science assessment, high school trajectories, nutrition services, and Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR) to empower youth to lead and participate in all stages of a research project, from identifying problems to implementing solutions, with the goal of addressing issues they care about. Another example is the San Francisco Promise, a partnership among San Francisco State University, San Francisco Unified School District, and the Mayor’s Office of the City of San Francisco to create educational opportunities for families in the City and County of San Francisco so that historically under-resourced students are prepared for and attend college directly from high school (https://future.sfsu.edu/sf-promise). Further, for over a decade, SFUSD has partnered with Salesforce to provide significant support to SFUSD students, helping improve student outcomes and opportunities in addition to building capacity by investing in teacher training programs and teacher residency programs, enabling SFUSD to recruit and deploy hundreds of qualified teachers into the classroom. SFUSD is grateful for the ongoing partnership with the City of San Francisco, working together to improve outcomes for public school students, most recently through the Student Success Fund (https://www.sf.gov/student-success-fund). SFUSD is grateful for our collaboration with the multitude of community partners, much of which will be highlighted below in the Engaging Educational Partners section.
LCFF Equity Multiplier Funding:
The Local Control Funding Formula Equity Multiplier provides additional funding to districts for allocation to school sites with prior year non-stability rates greater than 25 percent and prior year socioeconomically disadvantaged pupil rates greater than 70 percent. Equity Multiplier funding is required to be used to provide evidence-based services and supports for students at these school sites. Here are the schools sites receiving Equity Multiplier funding for the the 2025-2026 school year, their funding allocations and student outcomes focus areas (based on 2023 CA dashboard indicators where specific student groups scored “Red”- see spreadsheet: bit.ly/SFUSDSFCOE2023CADashboardResults
SFUSD
Wells (Ida B.) High: $281,716;
African American: Suspension
Hispanic: Graduation rate, College & Career Indicators (CCI)
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: Graduation Rate, Suspension, CCI; Students with Disabilities: Suspension
Downtown High: $210,348
African American: Suspension
Hispanic: Graduation rate, CCI
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: Graduation Rate, Suspension, CCI
Lee (Edwin and Anita) Newcomer: $50,535
No specific student groups based on CA Dashboard “Red” status but the focus of the school is in service of Newcomer students who are English Language Learners.
Mission Education Center: $183,010
English Learners: Mathematics
SFCOE
S.F. County Court Woodside Learning Center: $245,093
No specific student groups based on CA Dashboard “Red” status but the school has identified English Learners and Students with IEPs as their key focal students
S.F. County Opportunity (Hilltop) $102,357
All students: CCI
English Learners: English Learner Progress Indicators
S.F. County Civic Center Secondary: $166,212
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: Graduation Rate
The following schools have unused Equity Multiplier funds from the 2024/25 school year. These carryover funds will be used to support the lowest performing students groups at the sites and will continue in Goal 6.
S.F. County Court Woodside Learning Center
S.F. County Opportunity (Hilltop)
S.F. County Civic Center Secondary
Wells (Ida B.)
Downtown High
Muir (John) Elementary
Visitacion Valley Middle School
The following schools no longer qualify for Equity Multiplier funding for school year 2025-2026. Any unused funds (carryover) at these particular sites will continue in Goal 6 to support these specific schools and the needs identified for low-performing student groups:
Muir (John) Elementary
Visitacion Valley Middle School
Note: The stability rate is a measure to identify the number and percent of students who receive a “full year” of learning in the same school. The measure is intended to serve as a tool to help better understand the complex needs of students and schools. The California Department of Education makes this calculation. Please visit: https://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/ad/sr.asp for more information about stability rates.
A reflection on annual performance based on a review of the California School Dashboard (Dashboard) and local data.
Successes:
San Francisco Unified demonstrated targeted improvements in key performance areas from 2023 to 2024, particularly in efforts to reduce exclusionary discipline and improve student engagement. The overall suspension rate improved from Yellow to Green, suggesting progress in creating safer and more inclusive environments. This shift likely reflects districtwide efforts to implement restorative practices and social-emotional learning, with preliminary impacts observed among African American students and students with disabilities—groups historically overrepresented in suspension data.
Chronic absenteeism, while still rated Yellow, declined notably from 26.1% to approximately 20.2%. This improvement appears to benefit socioeconomically disadvantaged students and foster youth, as school-level data show increasing attendance supports and transportation interventions targeting these populations. The district’s ongoing attendance campaigns and partnerships with families contributed to stronger re-engagement efforts for students at risk of chronic absence.
College and career readiness remained a district strength. With 57.8% of students meeting preparedness benchmarks in 2024, San Francisco Unified retained a Green rating in this area. Participation in Advanced Placement courses, dual enrollment, and Career Technical Education programs remained strong, particularly for low-income students and English learners. While this represents a slight dip from 58.2% in 2023, the district’s strong positioning in this metric indicates effective programming aligned to postsecondary goals. One example of this strength in action can be found at Mission High School whose students, many of them who are economically disadvantaged or come from marginalized communities, had a higher acceptance rate for UC Berkeley than any other public or private high school in the city. Of the 78 Mission High students who applied to UC Berkeley this year, 29 were admitted, amounting to a 37% acceptance rate. Further, from 2022 to 2024, it had a higher percentage of students admitted to UC Berkeley than another high school in California with more than 100 applicants. This is testimony to the dedicated teachers, administrators, parents/caregivers, community partners and SFUSD central office leaders who work tirelessly to ensure students have choice and access to a multitude of college and career pathways after they graduate from SFUSD.
Socio-emotional Learning (Guardrail 2, Serving the Whole Child)
In 2024–25, San Francisco Unified School District made meaningful strides in supporting the social-emotional development of both elementary and secondary students, with notable improvements in student-reported outcomes across several key SEL domains.
Elementary Students:
Elementary SEL results showed a broadly favorable climate for academic learning, with 78% of students reporting supportive classroom environments. Growth Mindset (67%), Self-Management (66%), and Sense of Belonging (73%) also reflected modest gains from the prior year. However, areas such as Self-Efficacy (55%) and Social Awareness (62%) remained challenges, particularly when benchmarked against other CORE districts, where performance hovered between the 40th and 59th percentiles.
Secondary Students:
Secondary students exhibited stronger overall SEL outcomes, with particularly high scores in Climate of Support for Academic Learning (89%, up 19 points) and Sense of Belonging (80%, up 25 points). These results suggest effective SEL strategies and a supportive school culture at the secondary level. Safety (72%), Self-Management (71%), and Growth Mindset (68%) also improved. Yet, consistent with elementary findings, Self-Efficacy (54%) and Social Awareness (63%) remained among the lower-scoring areas, indicating a continued need to focus on students’ confidence and empathetic understanding.
Focal Student Populations:
While the survey results provide school-wide averages, areas such as Sense of Belonging and Self-Efficacy remain disproportionately low for certain focal groups, including English learners, foster youth, and low-income students. Additional targeted supports are needed to close these gaps and ensure equitable access to SEL development opportunities. Many focal student groups experienced steady gains across multiple indicators:
African American students showed a notable 4-point increase in sense of belonging (60% ? 64%) and a 2-point gain in social awareness, suggesting improved efforts in culturally responsive engagement and inclusion. Self-efficacy rose slightly from 42% to 43%.
Pacific Islander students also improved in all domains: self-efficacy (+1), belonging (+2), and social awareness (+2). While still below district averages, this movement signals a positive trajectory.
Students with IEPs experienced a 2-point increase in both self-efficacy (40% ? 42%) and social awareness (54% ? 56%), reflecting the impact of differentiated SEL and behavior supports.
Multilingual learners and long-term English learners improved by 2 points across all domains, with self-efficacy reaching 51% and 49%, respectively, and belonging rising to 67% and 66%.
Foster youth and students experiencing homelessness also demonstrated a 2-point increase across all three core domains, suggesting greater access to caring adults and school supports.
Overall, SFUSD has achieved measurable progress in fostering supportive learning environments and student self-regulation skills. The high Sense of Belonging favorability scores for Spring 2025 -- 73% among elementary students and 80% among secondary students -- is cause for celebration. It is important to note that “Neutral’ response items (e.g., “Neither Disagree nor Agree”) were removed from 11 questions on the 2025 SEL/Culture Climate survey instruments, including all Sense of Belonging questions on the secondary survey. These changes impacted the Sense of Belonging results for secondary students (grades 6-12): there was a very large increase year-over-year, from 55% to 80% (25 percentage points). Sense of Belonging response items on the elementary survey (grades 4-5) were unchanged from past versions, and there was a small year-over-year increase in the favorability score among these younger students (1 percentage point). While some portion of the large favorability score increase among secondary students can be attributed to the response item changes, a 3-year trend analysis confirms that the increase in the “Strongly Agree” and “Agree” response items is significantly larger than the increase seen in the “Strongly Disagree” and “Disagree” items. However, please note that the neutral response did exist in the prior years, and how it was divided is unknown.
These metrics indicate that while some progress has been made, especially in secondary students' sense of belonging, focal groups such as English learners, foster youth, and low-income students continue to require targeted SEL supports, particularly in the areas of self-efficacy and social awareness.
Challenges:
Several challenges emerged or persisted, particularly in academic achievement for historically underserved subgroups. Mathematics performance dropped significantly, shifting from Green to Orange, with scores declining by 5.2 points to 27.1 points below standard. This decline disproportionately impacted English learners, Students with Disabilities, and Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students.
English Language Arts (ELA) also declined by 2.8 points, with African American students and English learners continuing to perform below state standards.
Additionally, another data point to emphasize is around English Learner Progress, which declined from 44.8% to 43.1% of students making progress toward English proficiency. This metric dropped from Yellow to Orange, with Long-Term English Learners (LTELs) showing the least progress.
The graduation rate, while still relatively strong, slightly declined from 88.3% in 2023 to 87.3% in 2024. Persistent gaps remain for foster youth and English learners, signaling a need for ongoing investments in credit recovery, academic counseling, and re-engagement services.
While the socio-emotional (SEL) data reflect important gains, persistent equity gaps remain. Focal student groups continue to report lower outcomes compared to the district average in all areas. In 2025:
Self-efficacy remained below 45% for African American students and students with IEPs, compared to 55% districtwide.
Sense of belonging for Pacific Islander (60%) and foster youth/homeless students (61%) lagged behind the overall average (73%).
Social awareness scores for most subgroups remained 5–10 points below the district average, with only gradual improvement year over year.
In summary, SFUSD made important gains in climate and engagement, particularly for students disproportionately affected by discipline and absenteeism. At the same time, academic disparities persist and in some cases have widened, especially in math and language development for English learners, students with disabilities, and low-income students.
For more detailed analysis, reference the 2024 San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) California School Dashboard Executive Summary developed for the LCAP Mid Year to the Board of Education in February 2025: https://bit.ly/24CADashboardSummary
Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant (LREBG) Reporting:
SFUSD has prioritized investments in professional learning to accelerate academic recovery and support teacher development aligned with the 2023 California Mathematics Framework and the English Language Arts/English Language Development (ELA/ELD) Framework. This strategic focus—reflected in Actions 1.11 and 1.12—was informed by research-supported practices shown to strengthen instructional quality and student outcomes. Unexpended LREBG funds will be rolled over to the 2026-2027 school year in order to sustain these crucial actions while at the same time spend the remaining funding within the expiring Arts & Materials Block Grant. Remaining LREBG funds will be spend in support of providing professional development and coaching:
Action 1.11 Systems of Professional Learning: Professional Development
Build educator capacity by providing regular, high-quality professional learning opportunities to strengthen language and literacy instruction and math instruction at every SFUSD school.
This effort aligns with evidence-based principles articulated in research based practice guides (What Works Clearinghouse), which emphasize the impact of content-focused, collaborative, and sustained PD. SFUSD’s districtwide PD structures were designed with these principles in mind—targeting key instructional shifts, embedding reflection and feedback, and connecting learning directly to classroom application.
Action 1.11 will be monitored through by:
-% of teachers participating in PD aligned to math or ELA/ELD frameworks
-% of teachers reporting increased confidence in implementing targeted strategies that were modeled in PD
-ELA/Math benchmark assessment scores (disaggregated by unduplicated pupil group)
-Student growth on CAASPP for ELA and Math in grades 3–8 and 11
-Teacher evaluation results related to instructional practices targeted in PD
Action 1.12 Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade-level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching.
Multiple rigorous studies—including a meta-analysis of 60 causal studies—have confirmed that instructional coaching significantly improves teacher practice (effect size = +0.49 SD) and student achievement (effect size = +0.18 SD), particularly in literacy instruction.¹ Similarly, professional learning communities (PLCs) are known to enhance teacher collaboration, reduce instructional isolation, and promote shared responsibility for outcomes. SFUSD’s model promotes cross-role collaboration through ILTs and Grade/Department Level Collaboration as well as data driven coaching cycles supported by SFUSD instructional coaches.
Action 1.12 will be monitored through by:
-# of ILT/PLC meetings held per semester
-% of ILT/PLC teams using formative data to adjust instruction
-% of teachers receiving instructional coaching (disaggregated by school)
-Teacher self-assessments of practice
-Instructional walkthrough calibration data (e.g., % of classrooms demonstrating framework-aligned practices)
-Retention rate of teachers at high-need schools (coaching often supports retention)
-Student engagement or classroom culture scores (based on SEL or culture/climate surveys)
These two actions represent a systems-level approach to continuous improvement. They address identified disparities in student performance and instructional consistency—particularly among unduplicated pupils—and are designed to meet LREBG requirements under EC Section 32526(c)(2) and (d). Implementation fidelity and effectiveness will continue to be monitored using both state and local indicators, including educator feedback, classroom observations, and student outcome data. The specific funding amounts we plan to use for each action will be determined through the 25-26 school year budget development process.
As applicable, a summary of the work underway as part of technical assistance.
Below is a summary of SFUSD Differentiated Assistance Indicators based on 2023 and 2024 CA Dashboard results.
2023 Indicator & 2023 Student Group(s)
ELA/Math: Hispanic, American Indian & Alaskan Native, Students with Disabilities
Graduation: African American,
Suspension: Foster Youth, African American
2024 Indicator & 2024 Student Group(s)
ELA / Math: Foster Youth, Hispanic, Homeless, LTEL, Students with Disabilities
Graduation: Foster Youth, Hispanic, Homeless, LTEL, Students with Disabilities
Explanation of Differentiated Assistance: https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/leaproposedcrit.asp
Advancing Equity Through Guardrail 2.3 and Restorative Practices
During the 2024–25 school year, technical assistance efforts significantly advanced SFUSD’s work to disrupt exclusionary practices affecting African-American students. A key development was the district-wide identification and adoption of Guardrail 2.3, which focuses explicitly on reducing suspension rates for African-American students. This guardrail provided a clear, actionable anchor for aligning school site plans and leadership capacity-building efforts.
The Santa Clara County Office of Education, our geographic lead agency, has contracted with CORE Districts to provide Differentiated Assistance to SFUSD focused on African American student Suspension Rates and African American student Graduation Rates. CORE Districts partners with SFUSD in service of achieving Holistic Coherence, in order to increase the district’s likelihood of achieving its goals to improve student outcomes. In alignment with the State Priorities, emphasis is placed on accelerating the improvement of outcomes for specific student populations least well-served, and in particular, those student groups identified for Differentiated Assistance. Holistic Coherence represents an approach that is an antidote to “one size fits all” strategies and/or approaches that address symptoms alone, while ignoring individual, interpersonal or institutional root causes. The approach is rooted in inquiry, which is fundamental to continuous improvement in education for several reasons: it fosters a culture of curiosity and reflection; it informs data-driven decision making; it encourages collaborative problem-solving; it identifies and addresses inequities; and it supports accountability and transparency through ongoing progress monitoring and feedback loops. CORE is providing technical assistance in service of building the capability of the district to learn through our improvement efforts to ensure student outcomes and experiences are reliably successful throughout our district for each and every student.
Started in school year 2023-2024, SFUSD leaders in partnership with leaders from CORE District embarked on an effort to better understand the underlying root causes of the issue of disproportionate African American student Suspension Rates, and to learn their way into improving the District's African American Suspension Rate - and ultimately the educational experiences of African American Students. The Schools Division Leadership Team engaged in a study of African American Suspensions Assistant Superintendents asked a series of questions to approximately 40 principals to gather information and begin to identify trends and patterns throughout our district. They anchored in inquiry and sought honest answers in order to learn together as opposed to placing blame or expecting a right or wrong answer. Part of the process includes the practice of maintaining an open mind, open heart, and open will as they listen and learn to better understand the problem and the complex systems that produce it. The ultimate goal is to develop a set of change actions that can be tested in order to achieve more reliable improvement. The Assistant Superintendents invited principals to consider the perspectives of teachers and other educational partners within their schools regarding the overall conditions necessary for reducing AA suspensions. The team ran Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles of inquiry, making predictions, gathering data through their interviews, studying the results compared to their predictions and deciding where to act next. A few of the many factors identified as being essential to reducing AA suspensions were: Mindsets towards Alternatives to Suspensions, Systemic Supports: Wellness programs, Social Worker, Counseling, Collaboration within the Team on What is a Suspension and Strong Relationships with Families.
At the start of the 2024-2025 school year and in collaboration with the LEAD department, Student and Family Services Division (SFSD), Special Education Department (SPED), the Superintendent’s Office and the African American Achievement Leadership Initiative (AAALI), SFUSD leaders engaged in a year-long series of monthly professional development sessions facilitated in partnership CORE Districts and the Santa Clara County Office of Education, our CDE appointed Geographic Lead agency to oversee SFUSD Differentiated Assistance. These sessions supported leaders in developing a shared language and strategy around critical equity levers, including: data-informed planning, adult mindset transformation, collective accountability, and the proactive use of Restorative Practices (RP). This unified technical assistance approach helped create coherence across departments and began building district-wide capacity to implement and sustain change.
Looking ahead, this technical assistance work is set to deepen and scale. Beginning in Fall 2025, every school will implement a goal aligned with Guardrail 2.3 in their required Coordinated Care Team (CCT) plan. To ensure effective implementation, all site administrators will participate in a mandatory All Admin training session prior to goal development. These plans will also incorporate efforts in support of Serving the Whole Child (Guardrail 2) with explicit focus on sense of belonging and chronic absenteeism, ensuring a comprehensive approach to equity and overall school climate improvement.
Restorative Practices (RP) emerged as a cornerstone of this year’s technical assistance strategy. Identified by central office leaders as a key intervention, RP is helping schools shift from punitive to restorative cultures. RP not only provides an effective response when harm occurs but also fosters a proactive, inclusive community mindset. This year, 24 school sites trained dedicated teams (3–4 members per site) to become RP trainers, with representation across elementary, middle, and high schools. These site teams are now positioned to model and lead RP implementation. Plans are in place to train at least 24 additional sites in the coming year, continuing the momentum and extending the reach of this transformative work.
SFUSD will continue addressing African American student suspensions, attendance, and sense of belonging through several strategies:
Coordinated Care Approach:
-Professional Development and Support through the PITCH Initiative
-Restorative Practices
-Ongoing Partnerships for Data Analysis (example: Leaders within the Student and Family Services Division (SFSD) have partnered with UC Berkeley to analyze data from Coordinated Care Teams (CCT) Attendance Plans to identify common practices, challenges, and promising practices that emerge from these plans for continuous improvement)
These initiatives represent a multi-faceted approach to addressing the complex issue of suspensions, attendance, and the sense of belonging among African American students, aiming to create a more supportive and inclusive school environment.
There has also been intentional work in the Student and Family Services Division to analyze and mitigate student expulsions from SFUSD schools. A review of local disciplinary data identified a significant reduction in expulsion cases from the 2023–2024 to the 2024–2025 school year across multiple student subgroups. Total expulsions dropped from 58 cases in 2023–2024 to 26 in 2024–2025, representing a 55% decline. This downward trend was evident among key student groups:
-African American students experienced a 50% reduction in expulsions, from 16 to 8 cases.
-Latinx students saw a decrease from 16 to 12 expulsions.
-Students with IEP/504 plans (including those identified through child find) had their expulsions reduced from 12 to 4.
-Students identified as Two or More races declined from 5 to 2 expulsions.
Additionally, expulsions were completely eliminated for White and Arab students in 2024–2025, compared to 1 and 2 cases respectively the previous year. The district also observed a continued effort to utilize alternatives to expulsion, with 70% of referred cases in 2024–2025 being withdrawn, up from 56% the prior year.
Because of the intentional efforts of the SFSD team by supporting the implementation of restorative practices, early intervention strategies, and educator training on culturally responsive discipline, SFUSD is making marked strides towards better implementation equitable disciplinary practices and taking one step closer towards fostering an Antiracist Organizational Culture.
Through coordinated technical assistance, SFUSD has laid a strong foundation for addressing discipline disparities and advancing racial equity, a core component of our Social Justice Value and Antiracist Organizational Culture work. These efforts are creating systemic conditions where African-American students experience more just, restorative, and inclusive learning environments. SFUSD looks forward to continued engagement with school leaders as part of the Bay Area Geographic Lead Consortium in a networked improvement community aimed at improving outcomes and experiences for African American/Black students- Frequently Asked Questions - AA/Black Student Success Network Improvement Community (NIC) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z0F14wlw_I40lzn3oZRLnDHiuCUjsWSE/view
San Francisco County Office of Education Differentiated Assistance
2023 Indicator & 2023 Student Group(s)
Graduation: African American
Suspension: African American
2024 Indicator & 2024 Student Group(s)
ELA / Math: Foster Youth, Hispanic, Homeless, LTEL, Students with Disabilities
Graduation: Foster Youth, Hispanic, Homeless, LTEL, Students with Disabilities
Explanation of Differentiated Assistance: https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/leaproposedcrit.asp
In response to the Differentiated Assistance designation, SFCOE partnered with the California Department of Education for direct technical assistance. Two major initiatives were implemented:
Literacy Improvement: All Court, Community, and Opportunity Schools fully adopted the Reading with Relevance curriculum, a culturally responsive program emphasizing academic and social-emotional learning. We also introduced the Corrective Reading program to provide intensive support for students significantly below grade level. Additionally, there is a notable improvement in students' academic confidence and classroom participation.
CALPADS Data Corrections: SFCOE collaborated with SFUSD to realign CALPADS reporting, ensuring accurate student data attribution. These changes, approved by the shared Board of Education, helped improve the validity within CALPADS and ensure we can use the CA Dashboard results to learn what is working and what can be improved within our County schools. The impact of this alignment allows SFCOE to more clearly see where improvement is needed in service of student outcomes and experiences, as indicated by multiple student groups (Foster Youth, Hispanic, Homeless, Long-Term English Learners (LTELs) and Students with Disabilities identified as “Red” on the 2024 CA Dashboard result.
Plan for 2025–2026
Building on this momentum, SFCOE will prioritize improvements in College and Career Indicators, particularly for English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students, and Students with Disabilities. Key actions include:
-Hiring three new Career Technical Education (CTE) instructors for our court school and one county community school to expand access to industry-aligned pathways.
-Developing an implementation plan for integrated academic and career guidance.
-Continuing professional development for teachers on culturally responsive instruction and college readiness skills.
An LEA with a school or schools eligible for comprehensive support and improvement must respond to the following prompts.
A list of the schools in the LEA that are eligible for comprehensive support and improvement.
S.F. International High School-Low Graduation Rate
Downtown High School- Low Graduation Rate
Ida B. Wells High School-Low Graduation Rate
S.F. County Opportunity Secondary (Hilltop)-Low Graduation Rate
S.F. County Civic Center Secondary-Low Graduation Rate
A description of how the LEA has or will support its eligible schools in developing comprehensive support and improvement plans.
San Francisco Unified and San Francisco County have established a system of support such that CSI schools can effectively complete all the requirements related to the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) designation, including conducting a needs assessment, engaging stakeholders in planning, selecting/implementing evidence-based interventions, and identifying resource inequities. In addition, San Francisco Unified has aligned additional resources to provide supplemental support to CSI schools to close the achievement gap. Progress monitoring is ongoing and measurable through the district’s Vision, Values, Goals, and Guardrails (VVGG).
We will continue to anchor in the following Theory of Action for SFUSD and SFCOE schools that qualify for the CSI designation within the ESSA, Title I, Part A.
IF we put into action a data-informed, continuous improvement process as articulated in the all-site School Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) for identified focal student groups to increase the high school graduation rate.
THEN schools and communities will meaningfully build site capacity and success through the implementation of effective practices, adapting and adopting as they learn and endure systems for continuing this work.
SO THAT, each and every focal student will demonstrate, accelerate, and maintain their growth in learning and graduate.
The State and Federal Programs department works with the Leadership, Equity, Achievement, Design (LEAD) department, which includes the Assistant Superintendent and Executive Directors who directly supervise schools, and informs CSI sites of their designation. District leadership works alongside LEAD and site administrators to develop and continuously revise their SPSAs. Schools have been supported and trained to use a continuous improvement framework to understand the challenges facing their schools related to the low graduation rate.
Resource Inequities Review:
SFUSD and SFCOE define the goal of a Resource Inequities Review as follows: To ensure that all students have equitable support and access to various resources such as programs, rigorous curriculum, interventions, and effective teachers, so all students can achieve at high levels and graduate. To achieve the focus of VVGG and support schools in identifying inequities, actions, and strategies to address them. In turn, each SPSA includes a description of the actionable inequities identified, the inequities that will be prioritized at the school site, and the strategies to address these inequities. Lastly, school teams are included and encouraged to participate in the reflection of the district’s VVGG.
Ongoing Support and Guidance for Principals and District Staff
All CSI administrators were notified of the status of the ESSA designation and identification. SFUSD met with each administrator to provide information about CSI once CDE identified schools. One-on-one support was provided for administrators to address the criteria of CSI identification, CSI requirements, and the resources and support to implement planning. Each principal was provided a toolkit (from CDE and the district’s State and Federal Programs and LEAD High School administration) to provide background information, communication tools to support efforts to inform and engage education partners, and resources to support schools in completing the SPSA with CSI components. The discussions provided contact information for support and guidance for ongoing planning and engaging in the continuous cycle of improvement.
A description of how the LEA will monitor and evaluate the plan to support student and school improvement.
District staff will monitor and support the implementation of CSI plans. The SPSA includes a prompt that allows sites to describe how they will provide additional support and monitoring of the school designation.
CSI school teams, including SSC and ELAC committee members, will evaluate school plans alongside district support staff on an ongoing basis throughout the year. School teams will review whether they have met the measurable objectives stated within the plan and the reflection implementation.
CSI schools will review the progress of their plan implementation in conjunction with various stakeholders, such as parents, community members, ELAC, SSC, etc..
Internal data systems and reports, as well as the California Dashboard, will serve as a valuable tool for SFUSD in order to evaluate the progress of CSI schools. The district collects a robust set of data that aligns with the California Dashboard to support the district and staff in monitoring and evaluation implementation, including, but not limited to:
Attendance
Suspensions
English Language Arts
Math
English Learner Progress
A-G Progress
At Risk Reports
School Climate Survey
Progress monitoring will occur at multiple checkpoints throughout the year to assess progress toward our Vision, Values, Goals, and Guardrails. These data are reviewed across multiple settings centrally and at school sites.
School Facilitated data review:
Grade/Department level meetings
Instructional Leadership Team review
SAP/CARE/CC Team
Central Office Facilitated:
Data conferences with the Research, Planning, and Assessment (RPA), LEAD, State and Federal Programs, and school site administrators to review and reflect on outcomes, strengths, and areas of opportunity to inform a school’s continuous improvement planning.
Instructional Rounds
Beginning of the year/Mid-year and End of year reviews of SPSAs and PDSA cycles
Critical and targeted SPSA support to address robust planning
CSI plans are reviewed and evaluated by site and district leaders. Plans are evaluated by examining the level of action effectiveness in alignment with the correlating site metrics, which are differentiated in each SPSA based on the site needs assessment. The commitment is to define clear, measurable goals for improvement in student achievement, growth, graduation rates, and low-performing sites.
Specific metrics are developed, and benchmarks provide a method to track progress toward the district’s VVGG. Coaching is provided in areas of need, including, but not limited to, additional data monitoring to ensure sites have the data and resources needed to implement actions. For monitoring of graduation rate, schools can track student performance as aligned to college and career readiness by monitoring individual student credit completion. Moreover, the district analyzes data to ensure all underperforming groups are making adequate progress and closing the achievement gap. Data points are presented in various settings to ensure collaboration and feedback from various stakeholders, such as SSC and ELAC meetings in an effort to include parent/guardian groups within the district. Parents/guardians are an integral component of monitoring progress and evaluating effectiveness.
Data analysis is an integral part of the process, and sites will continuously collect and analyze multiple sources of data, including student achievement data, attendance rates, discipline incidents, and stakeholder feedback. Utilizing both quantitative and qualitative data to gain a comprehensive understanding of school performance and areas of improvement. Regular progress monitoring will occur as the CSI program administrator will schedule regular progress monitoring to track the impact of interventions and support initiatives. By using formative assessments, interim assessments, and other tools to assess student learning and growth toward SFUSD’s VVGG.
The quality of implementation will be evaluated with fidelity and quality of implementation of intervention strategies and support programs. Conducting observations, walkthroughs, and program evaluations to assess how effectively interventions are implemented in classrooms throughout the school. The VVGG accountability measures will hold schools accountable for meeting improvement targets and goals as established in the school plan. Accountability measures and providing support resources based on the results of monitoring and evaluation efforts.
A summary of the process used to engage educational partners in the development of the LCAP.
School districts and county offices of education must, at a minimum, consult with teachers, principals, administrators, other school personnel, local bargaining units, parents, and students in the development of the LCAP.
Charter schools must, at a minimum, consult with teachers, principals, administrators, other school personnel, parents, and students in the development of the LCAP.
An LEA receiving Equity Multiplier funds must also consult with educational partners at schools generating Equity Multiplier funds in the development of the LCAP, specifically, in the development of the required focus goal for each applicable school.
| Educational Partner(s) | Process for Engagement |
| 1. Engagement with SFUSD Parent Advisory Committees and SFUSD Budget Stabilization Community Town Halls |
Superintendent Dr. Maria Su engaged SFUSD Parent Advisory Committees soon after assuming the role of Superintendent in October 2024. The primary focus of these engagements was to communicate three priorities: -Balance SFUSD’s budget to maintain local control -Rebuild trust with our community -Tackle operational hurdles that will allow our schools to provide the best possible learning environments for the 49,000 students in our care Superintendent Su began by connecting with and listening directly to parents and community leaders. Below is a summary of our efforts. AAPAC -AAPAC General Meeting: Celebrating Kwanzaa, December 19, Ruth Asawa -AAPAC General Meeting: Accountability in the New Year, Jan 16,, Leola M. Havard Asian PAC -Asian PAC: Monthly Meeting, Nov 6, Ulloa Elementary School -Asian PAC: Monthly Meeting, Dec 4, Virtual Community Advisory Committee for Special Education (CAC- SPED) -CAC Meeting with Superintendent Su, Nov 18, Supt Conf Room -CAC Follow-Up Meeting, Feb 21, Supt Conf Room District English Learner Advisory Committee: -DELAC General Meeting, Nov 20, Everett Middle School Queer Trans Parent Advisory Council (QTPAC) -QTPAC 1st Meeting, Nov 21, iLab Local Control & Accountability Plan Advisory Committee (LCAP): -LCAP Meeting 3, Nov 13, Civic Center Auditorium -LCAP Meeting 6, February 12, Civic Center Auditorium -LCAP Meeting 7, March 12, Civic Center Auditorium Student Advisory Council (SAC): -Student Advisory Council Meeting, Nov 4, SFUSD Board Room Foster Youth Coordinating Services Program (FYCSP) -Foster Youth Services Coordinating Program (FYSCP) - Executive Leadership Team, Nov 19, Virtual Latinx Community Council: -Latinx Community Council, March 14, 3:30pm, Supt Conf Room/Virtual Matua Advisory Council (MAC) -MAC Meeting, April 9, Pacific Islander Resource Hut, 150 Executive Park Blvd. District Budget & Stabilization Town Halls https://www.sfusd.edu/about-sfusd/budget-and-lcap/district-budget-stabilization-town-halls-homepage The Superintendent launched a series of engagement sessions to be in community, build relationships and collect input to inform decisions moving forward. Participation in Town Hall and Advisory Meetings was intended to create an experience for both the community to hear how the district is stabilizing SFUSD’s budget and for the Superintendent to listen to community members and understand their school experiences and priorities. Advisory and town hall sessions were facilitated intentionally to hear a variety of perspectives in a short amount of time and to ensure equity of voice for all those that attended. Event Summary: Virtual Town Hall: 1 Webinar: 770 live stream, 2,734 views overall In Person Town Hall, 6 In Person, 235 Participants Dates of Engagement: Wednesday March 26 - Lawton 6:00 - 7:00 pm Wednesday, April 16 Balboa HS 6:00 - 7:00 pm Thursday, April 17 Presidio MS 7:00 -8:00pm Saturday, April 19 Jean Parker 11:00 - 12:00pm Saturday, April 19 Carver 1:00 - 2:00 pm Wednesday, April 23 Mission High School 6:00 - 7:00pm Overview of Sessions: Sessions began with an introduction to the Superintendent and key content (budget history and projections, Superintendent priorities, progress thus far & call to radically reimagine the future). Participants were asked to reflect on key content and share their input individually and with colleagues. (I like, I worry, some ideas I have). The sessions ended with open Q&A between the Superintendent and participants. Summary of Key Themes based on Community Feedback: Deep Concern Classroom Conditions & Reductions Community input: Families and staff are extremely concerned about overcrowded classrooms, combo classes, para-educator layoffs, and counselor cuts. This is especially worrisome for students with IEPs or in language programs. Recommended Actions: -Prioritize resource allocation for para-educators, counselors, and SPED staff to meet compliance and equity standards. -Re-assess combo class default practices, especially in immersion and early grades. -Publish transparent class size targets by grade and program. Demand for Better Student Support Systems Community input: Learning loss, SEL support, and access to academic interventions are critical, especially post-pandemic. Summary of Recommended Actions: -Ensure SEL and mental health supports remain accessible at every school. -Invest in reading and math intervention staff over a one-size-fits-all curriculum. -Monitor and publish student learning recovery metrics and update regularly. Fiscal Health Enrollment Loss is Both a Symptom and a Cause Community input: Declining enrollment stems from a lack of trust in quality, stability, and program offerings. Summary of Recommended Actions: -Create a district-wide marketing and enrollment recovery plan. -Invest in family-facing supports, like better lottery experiences and site tours. -Track and report enrollment trends monthly with reasons for exit. Concerns about Future School Closure & Process Community input: People worry that closures are inevitable but fear lack of transparency or equity in that process. Summary of Recommended Actions: Share clear criteria and timelines for any future closures or consolidations. Begin community engagement now in under-enrolled areas to build proactive solutions. Prioritize walkability, program continuity, and community integrity in closure decisions. Rebuilding Trust Calls for Revenue Generation & Partnering Community input: Many want to explore non-cut solutions: selling surplus properties, partnerships, local fundraising, and better leveraging of philanthropic dollars. Summary of Recommended Actions: -Launch a revenue generation task force with community, PTA, and business leaders. -Explore leasing underutilized properties or installing solar to reduce costs. -Develop a philanthropy and grants strategy aligned to district priorities. Widespread Appreciation for Transparency Community input: They appreciate the superintendent’s transparency, presence at town halls, and the commitment to not laying off teachers. Summary of Recommended Actions: -Continue regular town halls and transparent budget updates. -Clarify which roles (if not teachers) are being reduced and how that supports students. -Share positive district stories and school successes more widely to reinforce trust |
| 2. LCAP Parent Advisory Committee |
The San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) continued its commitment to inclusive and transparent planning through the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) Advisory Committee for the 2024–2025 school year. The purpose of this advisory committee is to: -To deepen our collective understanding of SFUSD’s LCAP goals and priorities -To engage in the development of the LCAP -To review and give feedback on the goals, actions and services prioritized within the LCAP -To convene families, school communities and other educational partners to gather recommendations for our Local Control & Accountability plan -To monitor the implementation of the LCAP by reviewing data, reviewing budget allocations and working to ensure alignment between the plan and how it is carried out This committee, comprising parent delegates, staff liaisons from various district advisories, and student representatives, plays a pivotal role in shaping the district's educational strategies. Specifically, the LCAP Advisory Committee comprises parent delegates and staff liaisons from each of the twelve advisories within the district, including the African American Parent Advisory Committee (AAPAC), Matua Parent Advisory Committee (MAC), District English Learner Advisory Committee (DELAC), Community Advisory Committee for Special Education (SPED-CAC), Indian Education, Migrant Education, and the Foster Youth Services Coordinating Program (FYSCP). Additionally, SFUSD launched the three new advisories in the 2024-2025 school year: Latinx Community Council (LCC), Asian American Parent Advisory Committee, and the Queer Trans Parent Advisory Committee (QTPAC). In addition to delegates from our parent advisory committees, the LCAP Advisory Committee includes School Site Council parent representatives across our Elementary, PK- 8, Middle and High Schools throughout the district. The LCAP Advisory Committee also includes two student delegates, one from the District English Learner Advisory Committee (DELAC) and another Queer Trans Advisory Council (QTAC). Representatives from the United Administrators of San Francisco (UASF) and United Educators of San Francisco (UESF) also engage in the committee work each month. Regular meetings are held on the second Wednesday of each month from 5:30 to 7:30 PM at Civic Center Secondary School, located at 727 Golden Gate Ave, San Francisco, CA 94102. These sessions are open to the public, fostering community engagement in the decision-making process. 12 meetings were held between September 2024 to June 2025 (October was cancelled due to conflict with announcements regarding the Resource Alignment Initiative). Below is a summary of the LCAP Advisory Committee meetings for the 2024–2025 school year, including dates and summaries based on the linked agendas: Meeting 1: September 11, 2024 Summary: The committee convened to establish goals for the 2024–2025 LCAP, focusing on aligning district priorities with community needs. Meeting 2: October 9, 2024 Note: Meeting Cancelled due to conflict with announcements regarding the Resource Alignment Initiative. Meeting 3: November 13, 2024 Summary: Discussions centered on reviewing student performance data and identifying areas for improvement in the upcoming LCAP. Meeting 4: December 11, 2024 Summary: The committee analyzed budget allocations and their alignment with LCAP goals, ensuring fiscal responsibility. Meeting 5: January 8, 2025 Summary: Members evaluated the effectiveness of previous LCAP actions and proposed adjustments for the new cycle. Meeting 6: February 12, 2025 Summary: The focus was on community engagement strategies to gather broader input for the LCAP development. Meeting 7: March 12, 2025 Summary: The committee reviewed feedback from community sessions and integrated suggestions into the LCAP draft. Meeting 8: April 9, 2025 Summary: Discussions included finalizing LCAP goals and preparing for the presentation to the Board of Education. Meeting 9: May 14, 2025 Summary: The committee conducted a review of community inputs and began to draft priority recommendations to present to the Board of Education at the LCAP 1st Reading. Meeting 10: May 28, 2025 Summary: The committee finalized priority recommendations to present to the Board of Education at the LCAP 1st Reading. Meeting 11: June 11, 2025 Summary: Final preparations were made for the LCAP presentation, with emphasis on clear communication of goals and actions. Committee members will review a draft meeting Scope & Sequence for the 2025-2026 school year and develop a strategy for both retaining current committee members as well as bringing new parents into the committee. These meetings are integral to the development and monitoring of SFUSD's LCAP, ensuring that the district's goals and actions align with community needs and state priorities. The LCAP Advisory Committee also developed and administered a community survey for parents and educational partners to share their feedback around implementation of the Goals and Guardrails. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1rpWFsNKuVn6lzyWKNcrIZZ3h8lV92Ebamc6_XrSiIZM/preview For additional details on SFUSD's LCAP and related resources, please visit the SFUSD LCAP Advisory Committee webpage: https://www.sfusd.edu/advisory-councils-committees/lcap-advisory-committee |
| 3. SFUSD Parent Advisory Committee Alignment Meetings (SFUSD Staff) | This school year, the Advisory Alignment Committee, consisting of staff who support SFUSD’s thirteen parent and student advisory committees, met monthly to align and share best practices to improve district, school, community and parent/caregiver partnership. Anchoring our shared values of anti-racism, social justice, and student-centered decision-making, we worked collaboratively to ensure transparent communication and cohesion in a system where siloing in a system of this size can naturally occur. Throughout the school year, the Advisory Liaison committee shared highlights of their work, collaborated on various events and workshops, lifted up parent voices and identified common areas for improvement in service of strengthening and deepening district and parent community partnership. Through structured reflection activities and cross-committee dialogue, the committee advanced inclusive practices, strengthened feedback loops, and shaped more responsive districtwide planning. |
| 4. LCAP Engagement at Parent Advisory Committee Meetings |
District staff members engaged with the district parent advisory groups during their monthly meetings. Parents from across the district entered each listening session and shared their unique perspectives on district decisions and suggested recommendations for improvements for overall district improvement. African American PAC:11/16/24 (SSC Fall Summit Engagement), 1/18/25, 2/28/2025, 4/19/2025 Asian PAC: 2/28/2025, 4/16/2025, 5/6/2025 Community Advisory Committee- Special Education (CAC-SPED): 2/27/205, 2/28/2025 District English Learner Advisory Committee (DELAC): 1/15/2025, 2/19/2025, 2/28/2025, 4/16/2025, 6/4/2025 Foster Youth Coordinating Services Program (FYSCP): 4/23/2025 Indian ED PAC: 4/11/2025 Migrant Ed PAC: 2/28/2025, 4/21/2025 Matua Advisory Committee (MAC): 2/5/2025, 2/28/2025 Latinx Community Council (LCC): 9/7/2024, 2/28/2025, 3/6/2025, 5/8/2025 Queer Trans PAC (QTPAC): 4/17/2025 Link to 2025 Parent Advisory Recommendations: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G4XnHTYtf2XeqM_ukj-zg4r7cRAzyP7XUSLorNlMsw0/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.7tr04ng7vm66 |
| 5. School Site Council (SSC) members and English Learner Advisory Council (ELAC) members |
School Site Council Fall Summit- 11/16/2024: Agenda: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ibYx_8bBc3fjh58TdfsL4rPtnMNxRDKXzBZaUq4FChQ/edit?tab=t.0 SFUSD convened school site council members, parent advisory group parents and community leaders to share best practices for effective school community partnership and how the community can engage in and support effective governance to improve student outcomes. Participants attended district/parent led workshops based on their preferred interest: Engaging Multilingual Learner Families in School Planning Special Education & Inclusion SFUSD’s Approach to African American and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Achievement School Site Councils 101 Data for Equity Understanding CA School Funding & Local Control & Accountability Planning How to Support a Welcoming Environment for All School Planning Summit- 3/8/2025 Webpage: https://www.sfusd.edu/connect/get-involved/school-planning-summit SFUSD convened school site council members, parent advisory group parents and community leaders to share the School Staffing and Budget Plan guidelines that SFUSD will use to determine how staff is allocated to schools for the 2024-2025 school year. We reviewed key priorities in order to achieve our Vision, Values, Goals and Guardrails and help develop school priorities, plans and resource allocations for next year to best serve our students as captured in the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSAs). Targeted English Learner Advisory Committee Listening Sessions (Spring 2025): SFUSD held focused listening sessions with a number of school site ELACs to ensure their voices are lifted up in our district and school site planning. The Multilingual Pathways department team also created a survey for school site leaders to reflect on how their ELAC informs their school priorities and what more can be done collectively as a district to strengthen each English Learner Advisory Committee. In alignment with the English Learner Roadmap, Principle 4, Alignment and Articulation, SFUSD and DELAC strive for meaningful collaboration and communication across systems and educational partners to ensure consistent support for English Learners from early childhood through higher education.Guided by the vision of this grounding policy, SFUSD DELAC leaders (parent volunteers at that) work tirelessly to ensure that school sites and the district overall incorporate ELAC and DELAC feedback to implement researched-based strategies that are proven to improve outcomes and experiences for our Multilingual Learners. SFUSD developed an ELAC Toolkit in service of supporting: ELAC roles and responsibilities and guidance on how parents/caregivers can become more involved in their child’s school as an ELAC member Family Literacy workshop designed to support students’ growth at home Attendance Awareness workshop focused on building good attendance habits Engaging ELAC members and multilingual families in the school planning process, SPSA and site budget. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_nsiyT8i2-dAfbVC3JkG3ZYB4ufOSkwf9q4vpKKjtfI/edit Participating School Sites: Bryant ES, Moscone ES, Flynn ES, Sanchez ES, Ulloa ES, Cleveland ES, Tenderloin Community ES, Longfellow ES, James Lick MS, Everett MS, MLK MS, Hoover MS, Willie Brown MS Summary of Themes & Recommendations from ELAC Listening Sessions: 1. Stronger Support for Multilingual Learners (MLs): ELs face challenges with motivation, confidence, grammar, pronunciation, and limited opportunities for speaking practice. Students requested more after-school tutoring, mentoring programs, and inclusive classroom strategies. There's a call for expanding support to underrepresented language groups (e.g., Russian speakers). 2. Improve College & Career Readiness for ELs: EL students need more help navigating college applications due to language barriers. Suggestions include bilingual college counselors, translated materials, workshops, and fairs on FAFSA and applications. 3. Strengthen Family Communication & Engagement: Parents want clearer, two-way communication with schools in their home languages. Proposals include: family-friendly progress reports, newsletters, and expanded use of interpreters. 4. Professional Development for Educators: Mandatory training for teachers on EL strategies and use of tools to support English acquisition. Address teacher bias and increase culturally responsive practices. 5. Equity in Resource Allocation: Calls for expanded ELD teacher staffing, competitive salaries, and literacy support, especially in underserved schools. More translated materials, comic books, and homework adaptation were requested to support learning at home. https://docs.google.com/document/d/15PfAs-4HGt51EJDJMhL9D05QXm4c19u3xoxEAkUPpjE/edit?tab=t.0 |
| 6. Student Advisory Committee (SAC) |
Student Advisory Committee Survey 2024-25 The 2024–2025 Student Advisory Committee (SAC) High School Survey gathered input from over 3,000 students (3,030 students total) across 19 SFUSD high schools, providing valuable insights into student perspectives on academics, extracurricular activities, safety, and district support. Overall, students reported positive experiences, especially praising the variety and accessibility of extracurricular activities, responsiveness of teachers and staff, and preparation for life after high school. Most students also reported feeling safe at school and believe the wellness centers are instrumental to supporting their needs. Below are some of the questions asked in the survey: Do you have any ideas about what would improve your learning experience at school? If so, please share them here. Sample student responses: “I am incredibly grateful for Balboa’s Law Academy and believe that all schools should offer a similar curriculum surrounding politics and economics to their students.” “More classes or ones involving real world skills like managing finances or job readiness classes, dmv classes or mechanical classes.” Do you have any ideas about how to improve your school's wellness center so that you feel your needs are met? If so, please share them here. Sample student responses: “It’s the only place in the school where people can feel genuinely safe (revise for typo).” “I didn’t know about our school’s wellness center until the end of fall semester, so I think it would have been more helpful to me if I knew about it earlier.” Some areas for improvement expressed in the survey highlight a dissatisfaction with district-level responsiveness and the relevance and lack of promotion for summer programs. Many called for clearer communication with administrators, more timely support from counselors, and greater student voice in decision-making. Recommendations include improving district-student communication channels, diversifying summer offerings, expanding college and career readiness resources, and maintaining a strong focus on school safety. Here are some additional quotes highlighting student perspectives and experiences: “Please consider giving high school freshmen more access to the counseling department, counselors are not as available as students who are looking for course selection and academic advice would hope for.” “My school could teach people more about the day in the life of an adult, and how they pay and manage finances, and state or national laws that U.S citizens need to abide by. I also think that our school doesn't emphasize important medical information enough, because many people are struggling in school, and need a way to keep their physical and mental health in check.” SAC Student Survey 2024-25 Results: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xwDgZCxtHnIvKIv89hSAsAEpM0rcboXD/view Youth Summit on April 11, 2025- Agenda & Flyer https://drive.google.com/file/d/13Q2M4jSoI_kJqWgxOvInRkKxBOjzWQlx/view |
| 7. SFUSD/SFCOE Teachers/ Administrators Other School Personnel/ Other Educational Partners |
SFUSD whole-heartedly recognizes that teachers and administrators are the most essential employees to the success of our students and the district as a whole in service of accomplishing our Goals and Guardrails. Their voices and experiences are critical to our efforts to continuously improve our systems and structures, anchored in our values, to best prepare students for college and careers beyond their years in SFUSD schools. In multiple focus group listening sessions, site and central office leaders shared feedback on coherence, supports, and systemic challenges within SFUSD. Participants highlighted progress around instructional alignment, specifically the alignment around the CORE Rubric and cross-departmental collaboration to support focal student group improvement. However, they voiced significant concerns about central office dysfunction, hiring delays, unclear reorganization plans, and the loss of critical supports—particularly from LEAD, HR, and C&I—which are perceived as essential to the daily success of site leaders and school operations. A leader from the United Administrators of San Francisco (UASF) has consistently participated in monthly LCAP Advisory Committee meetings. SFUSD also administers the Quality Teacher and Education Act (QTEA) survey to gather critical feedback from teachers and administrators. This long-standing tool provides valuable longitudinal data on staff wellbeing, satisfaction, and professional experiences. In 2024, the survey was updated to assess how SFUSD is progressing toward the Superintendent’s Vision, Values, Goals, and Guardrails, while also examining key drivers of employee retention. Administered twice annually to educators and school leaders, the survey gathers input on topics including: Anti-Racist Practices, Community & Belonging, Cultural Humility, Deeper Learning, Educator Collaboration, Support Networks, Reflective Practices, and Student/Family Engagement. Feedback from the Spring 2024 survey is highlighted below. Conducted annually, SFUSD administered the QTEA survey to gather feedback from teachers and administrators about their experiences, needs, and perceptions of the district. Results from the Spring 2024 data clearly reflect both teachers and administrators deep commitment to students and a deep desire for overall systemic improvement. However, responses from both groups of participants revealed shared concerns about leadership, compensation, and workload—as well as some role-specific perspectives. Teachers expressed significant frustration with district leadership, citing poor communication, top-down decision-making, and a lack of responsiveness to classroom realities. Many feel unsupported in managing post-pandemic student behavior, navigating rigid curriculum mandates, and balancing overwhelming administrative responsibilities. Burnout is a pervasive theme, driven by large class sizes, inadequate compensation, and emotional strain. Teachers also voiced that DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) efforts often feel superficial and narrowly focused, calling for broader cultural representation and more meaningful engagement. Mental health and wellness emerged as top priorities, with strong calls for enhanced support, smaller class sizes, and policies that promote a healthy work-life balance. While some teachers acknowledged the potential for rewarding experiences in SFUSD, nearly a quarter reported they plan to stay only 1–5 more years, indicating growing retention challenges. Administrators echoed several of the same concerns, particularly around compensation not keeping pace with San Francisco’s cost of living and the emotional toll of the job. Many described a disconnect between district leadership and site-based realities, highlighting the need for more empathetic and grounded leadership practices. Administrators also expressed concern that DEI initiatives are inconsistently applied and often feel performative rather than transformative. They emphasized the need for more inclusive benefits, better communication about policies, and expanded mental health support. Administrators also emphasized the importance of professional development that is practical, collaborative, and responsive to evolving school needs. Across both groups, there is a clear call for SFUSD to act with greater transparency, to prioritize employee well-being, and to foster a culture where educators and leaders feel heard, supported, and equipped to succeed. These insights provide a strong foundation for targeted improvement strategies that can enhance retention, rebuild trust, and ensure the district’s long-term success. Feedback from the 2025 survey is currently being gathered and analyzed to inform district professional learning and improvement. |
| 8. Educational Partners/ Community Based Organizations |
LCAP Advisory Committee members and district staff engaged with Educational Partners and Community-based organizations throughout the 2024-2025 school year, including meeting and collaborating with staff from the Mission Economic Development Agency (MEDA), Mission Graduates, Latino Task Force, Chinese for Affirmative Action, Coleman Advocates for Children and Youth, Support for Families of Children with Disabilities, Parents for Public Schools-SF, SF Parents, 2nd District PTA amongst other educational partner organizations. One example of how local community based organizations develop parent awareness and understanding of our complex system is a workshop by SF Parents on SFUSD Funding, explaining the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) and the overall SFUSD Budget deficit https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d6l7CScLH4M8S6BmADyC7zWwe7bRrVep/view?ts=68317b6e. Another community organization, Parents for Public Schools SF, conducted a survey for families to gather input around how SFUSD can better implement and improve its goals as outlined in the LCAP. While the final survey results are being finalized, the overall feedback survey reveals that families recognize some progress by SFUSD in areas like relationship-building, student advocacy, and instructional responsiveness. Yet, overall satisfaction remains moderate, with most ratings around “2.5” out of 4. Suggested areas for improvement include continuing to build trust with families, enhance communication, and refine/improve differentiated academic supports—specifically for students with disabilities and English Learners. |
| 9. Collaboration with the Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) administrator(s) |
Ongoing collaboration with the SELPA administrator and consultation and review in May of 2025. |
| 10. Other Engagement: Regional County Office of Education collaboration |
SFUSD staff attended monthly Accountability Network meetings led by the Alameda County Office of Education to learn about updates on state legislation, state and federal programs and other measures of accountability. SFUSD/SFCOE staff has collaborated with other Bay Area County Office of Education leaders as part of the Bay Area Geographic Leads Consortium, facilitated by our Geographic Lead agency, the Santa Clara County Office of Education. Our work has been to create structures and processes that allow for sharing and collaboration amongst all geographic leads and support one another to address district priorities and needs. BAY AREA GEOGRAPHIC LEADS CONSORTIUM: https://www.bayareageoleads.org/ 2024-2025: Improvement in Action: Reducing Suspensions for African American/Black Students Network Improvement Community (NIC) https://www.bayareageoleads.org/improvement-in-action/2024-25-improvement-in-action-session-materials 2025-2026: Improvement in Action: Leveraging Systems and Pedagogy for Long-Term English Learners Network Improvement Community (NIC) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CjJ3A_j0ytMf1UzYx3Bjl7flc4chPFdZ/view |
| 11. Equity Multiplier Funding Engagement for Eligible Schools |
Wells (Ida B.) High School- CA Dashboard Focal Groups and Indicators: African American: Suspension Hispanic: Graduation rate, College & Career Indicators (CCI) Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: Graduation Rate, Suspension, CCI; Students with Disabilities: Suspension Spring 2025: Staff Engagement (Instructional Leadership Team Meetings) Spring 2025: Parent Engagement Spring 2025: Student Engagement Topics Discussed: Funding, low-performing student groups/indicators as identified on the CA School Dashboard, and actions in alignment with the goals to support students Downtown High- CA Dashboard Focal Groups and Indicators: African American: Suspension Hispanic: Graduation rate, CCI Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: Graduation Rate, Suspension, CCI Spring 2025: Staff Engagement (Instructional Leadership Team Meetings) Spring 2025: Parent Engagement Spring 2025: Student Engagement Topics Discussed: Funding, low-performing student groups/indicators as identified on the CA School Dashboard, and actions in alignment with the goals to support students Lee (Edwin and Anita) Newcomer - CA Dashboard Focal Groups and Indicators: Mission Education Center: English Learners: Mathematics Spring 2025: Staff Engagement (Instructional Leadership Team Meetings) Spring 2025: Parent Engagement Spring 2025: Student Engagement Topics Discussed: Funding, low-performing student groups/indicators as identified on the CA School Dashboard, and actions in alignment with the goals to support students S.F. County Court Woodside Learning Center- CA Dashboard Focal Groups and Indicators: No specific student groups based on CA Dashboard “Red” status but the school has identified English Learners and Students with IEPs as their key focal students Spring 2025: Staff Engagement (Instructional Leadership Team Meetings) Spring 2025: Parent Engagement Spring 2025: Student Engagement Topics Discussed: Funding, low-performing student groups/indicators as identified on the CA School Dashboard, and actions in alignment with the goals to support students S.F. County Opportunity (Hilltop)- CA Dashboard Focal Groups and Indicators: All students: CCI English Learners: English Learner Progress Indicators Spring 2025: Staff Engagement (Instructional Leadership Team Meetings) Spring 2025: Parent Engagement Spring 2025: Student Engagement Topics Discussed: Funding, low-performing student groups/indicators as identified on the CA School Dashboard, and actions in alignment with the goals to support students S.F. County Civic Center Secondary- CA Dashboard Focal Groups and Indicators: Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: Graduation Rate Spring 2025: Staff Engagement (Instructional Leadership Team Meetings) Spring 2025: Parent Engagement Spring 2025: Student Engagement Topics Discussed: Funding, low-performing student groups/indicators as identified on the CA School Dashboard, and actions in alignment with the goals to support students |
A description of how the adopted LCAP was influenced by the feedback provided by educational partners.
SFUSD gathered feedback from educational partners from across the district as listed above. This feedback was read, organized, and reviewed carefully and considered in the revision of LCAP goals, actions, metrics and investments.
The 2024-2025 school year was a difficult one for the SFUSD community. In October 2024, Dr. Maria Su joined the district as Superintendent, ending the Resource Alignment Initiative at the direction of the Board of Education, ensuring there would be no school closures or mergers in the 2025-26 school year. Dr. Su has focused on three priorities aimed at addressing the district's financial challenges and ensuring it can effectively serve its students:
Maintain local control through budget stabilization: This involves implementing a plan to ensure a balanced budget, including effective staffing of schools and delivery of essential educational services and programs for student success.
Restore trust and public confidence: This entails improving communication, engaging with the community and schools, and building strategic partnerships.
Restore, remediate, and develop healthy operations systems: This focus includes improving oversight and accountability in the district's operational systems.
SFUSD is experiencing a significant budget deficit due to declining enrollment trends, reduced state funding, and rising expenditures. The district must implement $113 million in reductions for 2025-26 to balance its budget. SFUSD has taken a number of steps to get closer to balancing the budget, including:
Reducing central office staff
Eliminating hundreds of vacant positions
Reducing rentals, leases, repairs, and non-capital expenditures
Reducing costs for materials and supplies, contractors, and conferences
The district has also made an effort to reduce the number of possible layoffs by including offering an early retirement plan for eligible employees. These events have shaped how SFUSD updated its LCAP for the 2025–26 school year. The district increased its efforts to include families, students, staff and community in dialogue regarding SFUSD’s budget and stabilization efforts in order to come together as a community to discuss what’s important to our families, staff, students, and community supporters. Despite these cuts SFUSD remains steadfast in service of accomplishing the Board of Education’s Vision, Values, Goals and Guardrails: https://www.sfusd.edu/about-sfusd/our-mission-and-vision.
Our work, together as a community, must be anchored in building strong schools where every student has access to excellent, inclusive, and creative schools.
SFUSD is committed to Building Strong Schools for a Bright Future, one where every student has access to excellent,
inclusive, and creative schools. The fundamental responsibility of our schools is to prepare students for life and to
create the next generation of leaders. To do this, we must elevate academic achievement, invest in early learning, and
prepare students for college, careers, and the world. That starts with delivering on the basic promises of education and
holding ourselves accountable to doing so.
Our schools are the place where our students learn, our educators change lives, and the next generation of leaders are shaped. We must deliver the resources, staffing, support, and programs to make every school a first-choice school. Our students, no matter their circumstances, should be engaged, healthy, and learning in every SFUSD school throughout the City.
Our school district must be a strong, efficient, and trusted organization that serves students and staff well, builds a connection with the community SFUSD serves, and where every decision is based on improving student outcomes.
We have to embrace financial stability and good governance as core values in all of our decision-making, with a commitment to doing things well.
See this link for District Response to LCAP Advisory Committee recommendations and suggested actions: https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DHTVGW80BCAC/$file/SFUSD%20District%20Response%20to%20LCAP%20Advisory%20Committee%20Recommendations%20to%20BoE%202025.pdf
| Goal # | Description | Type of Goal |
| Goal 1 |
Goal 1: Student Achievement: Literacy, Math, College & Career Readiness Increase students' literacy, math, and college & career readiness skills so that they will graduate as independent thinkers who have gained academic and creative skills to lead productive lives and contribute to our community. |
Broad |
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Priority 1: Basic (Conditions of Learning) Priority 2: State Standards (Conditions of Learning) Priority 4: Pupil Achievement (Pupil Outcomes) Priority 7: Course Access (Conditions of Learning) Priority 8: Other Pupil Outcomes (Pupil Outcomes)
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
Goal 1 and the corresponding actions keep us focused on the main thing- to improve student outcomes so that each and every San Francisco Unified student and each and every in our County schools has the best chance to succeed both in our schools and in their lives beyond. This is OUR COLLECTIVE CHARGE- to ensure that every student will receive high quality instruction rooted in the practices of Deeper Learning so that on any given day, in every single classroom, each student is:
-engaged in the lesson from start to finish
-demonstrating a sense of belonging
-learning content appropriate for their grade level and subject area
-doing the thinking in this classroom
-demonstrating that they are learning
We aspire to empower students, to support their acquisition of strong academic knowledge and skills, to support their socio-emotional development and disposition in order for them to lead a choice-filled life beyond their secondary school years. We believe that, by creating effective conditions for learning in our schools and classrooms, students will be situated to achieve at the highest level and to reach their academic potential.
SFUSD is committed to ensure that every student experiences instruction grounded in the pedagogy and practices of Deeper Learning so that on any given day, in every single classroom, each student is (as evidenced by the SFUSD Core Instruction Rubric). This commitment to deeper learning will empower students to develop strong academic knowledge and skills, as well as a host of dispositions and behaviors, that will prepare them for life, work, and study beyond their secondary school years. Our goal is that every SFUSD student possesses the six capacities in our graduate profile by the time they graduate high school in order to compete and thrive in the 21st century world: content knowledge, creativity, career & life skills, global, local & digital identity, leadership, empathy & collaboration, sense of purpose & sense of self.
The quality of teachers’ professional learning matters and our central office supports play a role in our ability to strengthen the instructional core for each and every student. By focusing on teaching and learning and supporting its teachers in the area of instruction and pedagogy, students are bound to increase their levels of academic achievement through consistency in the quality and practices of instruction across all schools and classrooms in SFUSD.ch and every student the quality instruction and equitable support necessary to thrive in the 21st century. With an increased focus districtwide on improving student outcomes, SFUSD as a whole will ??need to harness the UNIFIED efforts of all educators and staff to achieve our goals for each and every student in SFUSD.
| Metric # | Metric | Baseline | Year 1 Outcome | Year 2 Outcome | Target for Year 3 Outcome | Current Difference from Baseline |
| 1 | SBAC Performance & Growth* (Grades 3-8 and 11) ELA proficiency rate |
Spring 2024 CAASPP ELA Overall: TBD Spring 2023 CAASPP ELA Overall: +3.5 Average Distance from Standard (see link for Distance from Standard Explained: https: //www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/ documents/academicindicator.pdf) English Learners: 49.1 points below standard Foster Youth: 116.8 points below standard Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 35.5 points below standard |
Spring 2024 CAASPP ELA Overall: .7 points above standard -Outcome: 53.7% -”Maintained” -2.8 points -Goal: Annual 2 point increase, +5.5 Distance from Standard |
Annual 2 point increase |
||
| 2 | SBAC Performance & Growth* (Grades 3-8 and 11) Math proficiency rate | Spring 2024 CAASPP Math Overall: TBD Spring 2023 CAASPP Math Overall: -21.9 Distance from Standard (Distance from Standard explained: https ://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/ documents/academicindicator.pdf) English Learners: 63.1 points below standard Foster Youth: 147.9 points below standard Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 59.9 points below standard |
Spring 2024 CAASPP Math Overall: 27.1 points below standard -Outcome: 45.6% -Declined 5.2 points -Goal: Annual 2 point increase (-19.8 Distance from Standard) |
Annual 2 point increase |
||
| 3 | High school readiness rate | 2023: All Students: 58.2% English Learners: 25.5% Foster Youth: 5.9% Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 45.1% |
41.8% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points | ||
| 4 | % of HS students on-track | All students: 76.6% English Learners: not currently available Foster Youth: not currently available Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: not currently available |
73% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points |
||
| 5 | College and Career readiness rate | All Students: 58.2% English Learners: 34.1% Foster Youth: 11.1% Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 52.3% |
57.8% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points | ||
| 6 | % of Advanced Placement Tests taken with score of 3 or higher | 71% |
73.5% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (81%) | ||
| 7 | % of SFUSD 12th graders graduating UC/CSU eligible | 63.6% |
71.9% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points | ||
| 8 | Graduation rate | 88.3% |
83% Decline -5.3% Goal = Annual 2 point increase 90.3% Distance from Standard |
Annual 2 point increase (94.3%) |
||
| 9 | English Learner Progress rate (CA Dashboard measure) |
44.8% |
43.1% “Maintained” -1.8% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (54.8%) |
||
| 10 | % of SFUSD preschool students ready for kindergarten |
60.3% |
70% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (70.3%) |
||
| 11 | Increase the number of SFUSD high school students participating in internships at any point during a school year by 20% |
1,211 in Summer 2022 |
Metric deprioritized due to budget reductions | 2,091 by Summer 2027 |
||
| 12 | % pass facilities Williams Act inspections |
100% |
100% | 100% |
An analysis of how this goal was carried out in the previous year.
A description of any substantive differences in planned actions and actual implementation of these actions.
During the 2024-2025 school year, SFUSD successfully implemented several actions in Goal 1 Student Achievement: Literacy, Math, College & Career Readiness in order to Increase students' literacy, math, and college & career readiness skills so that they will graduate as independent thinkers who have gained academic and creative skills to lead productive lives and contribute to our community. Despite these efforts, persistent achievement gaps remain, particularly for African American, Foster Youth, Latine/x (Hispanic), Students Experiencing Homelessness, English Learners, Long-Term English Learners (LTELs) and Students with Disabilities. While progress was made in some areas, further focused and targeted implementation is needed to continue addressing these systemic inequities and the barriers that prevent our most marginalized students from achieving the academic outcomes and socio-emotional learning experiences as captured in the Vision, Values, Goals and Guardrails. Actions 1.01, Teaching & Learning: High-quality and engaging instruction aligned to the Core Rubric and Action 1.02 Teaching & Learning: High-quality, research-based curricula were fully implemented in support of SFUSD Board of Education Goal 1- Literacy and Guardrail 3.1, High Quality Instruction. These actions were monitored monthly by the SFUSD Instructional Cabinet, anchoring in the following four goals:
Center Multilingual Learners*, African American and Pacific Islander students
*See Roadmap for Multilingual Learner Achievement and Success: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KSflIGYNB5S8IpviVPhxHEmBt6W7X6FE/view
Align on strong literacy Essential Content practices and where those surface in the Into Reading materials
Calibrate on how these practices are aligned to the SFUSD Core Rubric
Ground feedback in low-inference evidence, constructing actionable, bite-sized next steps anchored in the curriculum and strong literacy instruction for all
Action 1.03 Teaching & Learning: Standards-aligned Assessments and 1.04 Teaching & Learning: Use of Data were also fully implemented. SFUSD began using Star assessments in the 2023-24 school year as the district-wide interim measure of student outcomes across grades K-8 to align with our SFUSD Goals and Interim Goals. In the 2024-25 school year, grades 9-10 also began to take the Star assessments as their district-wide interim assessment, which builds our district's K-HS vertical articulation in using the same interim assessments. This inclusion of HS leveraged evidence of learning to monitor students' progress in their learning. The Star assessments are heavily researched, valid, reliable, and highly correlated to summative state assessments, making them ideal interim measures to monitor progress toward interim district goals in the 2025-26 school year. Learn more: https://www.sfusd.edu/district-assessments
In alignment with VVGG Guardrail 3.2, Use of Data for Instructional Improvement, SFUSD has explicitly built capacity within our system for teachers, administrators, parent leaders and educational partners to learn from and respond to what our quantitative and qualitative data can teach us about what is working and where improvement is needed.
SFUSD fully implemented Actions 1.08 Teaching & Learning: Kindergarten Readiness, 1.10 Build and sustain robust programs- Arts, Athletics, Language Programs, Libraries, and Physical Education, 1.11 Systems of Professional Learning: Professional Development and 1.12 Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade-level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching, 1.13 SF County Office of Education: Literacy and 1.14 SF County Office of Education: Academic Counseling & Career Technical Education Programming.
SFUSD partially implemented the following LCAP actions in school year 2024-2025.:
1.05 Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multi-language learners
While many components of this action were fully implemented in 2024-2025 such as the implementation of STAR summative assessments, English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC), English Language Progress Indicators (ELPI) Enrollment Center LOTE assessments, Seal of Biliteracy etc., further refinement of ELD resources and differentiation of instructional supports for multilingual learners is needed in Year 2 literacy curriculum implementation.
1.06 Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations
In Year 1 of the Literacy curriculum implementation, teachers focused on direct, explicit instruction where instruction is systematic, direct, engaging, and success oriented as a purposeful way of teaching students. As teachers, coaches and leaders engaged in professional learning and reflection, the need to differentiate instruction was identified in order to meet the specific needs of individual students at the level they are at and accelerate in order to achieve our goals for literacy.
1.07 Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness
Reductions to staff has limited the district’s ability to fully implement this action, as exemplified by reductions to High School Credit Recovery and Paid High School Internships.
1.09 Teaching & Learning: Augmenting Core Instruction with Access to Technology
SFUSD has invested in a suite of digital learning tools to complement high quality Tier 1 instruction and personalize intervention to accelerate grade level proficiency for target students at Title 1 schools. Implementation of the various digital learning tools varied across school sites throughout the district. There is work to be done to transform a mental model that digital learning tools are supplemental and peripheral to instruction to a model where digital learning tools are integral to everyday teaching and learning. Successful implementation often requires a staff point person and champion. SFUSD will narrow the number of digital tools available for sites to choose from and ensure the tools available are directly aligned to district curriculum.
An explanation of material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures and/or Planned Percentages of Improved Services and Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services.
SFUSD has revised Action 1.10 to include Science as a program to build and sustain as a District priority and has incorporated Science teachers into the Budgeted Expenditures for this Action. This change results in an increase of approximately $45 million in the 2025-26 LCAP.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
During the 2024–25 school year, SFUSD implemented a wide range of actions to support student achievement in literacy, math, and college and career readiness. Several actions—particularly those focused on core instruction, assessment alignment, and instructional leadership—were implemented with fidelity and showed promising early results. However, persistent achievement gaps and inconsistent progress across key metrics highlight the need for targeted refinement in priority actions connected to the overall Student Achievement goals.
Effective Actions Based on Evidence:
Actions 1.01 & 1.02 (Instruction aligned to Core Rubric and Research-Based Curricula):
These actions were implemented districtwide and monitored monthly by the SFUSD Instructional Cabinet. According to TNTP walkthroughs, 73% of classrooms used HMH curriculum and 93% demonstrated a strong culture of learning. Interim Goal 1.2 (Grade 1 Star Reading) data was at 56.3% in 23-24 while at 63.4% at the end of 24-25.
Actions 1.03 & 1.04 (Standards-Aligned Assessments and Data Use):
STAR assessments were adopted K–10, promoting alignment and coherence in progress monitoring. Instructional coaches reported using assessment data in 48% of their planning activities. LEAD teams used real-time data to support site leaders, contributing to incremental growth in literacy outcomes, especially in early grades.
Action 1.07 (College and Career Readiness):
The College/Career readiness rate remained steady at 57.8% (CA State average is 45%) and the graduation rate slightly declined from 88.3% to 83%, indicating that further investment is needed to meet desired outcomes.
SFUSD is making progress in helping more 9th graders get back on track academically, with 30% of early-warning students improving their grades and attendance—exceeding the 25% target.
Action 1.12 (Instructional Leadership Teams and Coaching):
Instructional coaching and ILT support were pivotal in improving professional learning structures. Schools with strong principal-coach collaboration demonstrated consistent use of curriculum, effective planning routines, and improved student literacy outcomes.
Actions with Partial or Limited Effectiveness:
Action 1.05 (Supports for Multilingual Learners):
While foundational systems (ELPAC, STAR, Seal of Biliteracy) were implemented, the English Learner Progress Indicator declined to 43.1%, missing the target of 54.8%. Refinement in instructional differentiation and more robust ELD integration are needed.
Action 1.06 (Targeted Supports for Focal Students):
Despite progress in lesson planning and literacy scaffolding, interim goals for focal subgroups such as African American students and students with disabilities were not met. The need for differentiated support emerged as a consistent theme in educator feedback and coaching logs.
Action 1.07 (College and Career Readiness):
The College/Career readiness rate remained steady at 57.8% (CA State average is 45%) and the graduation rate slightly declined from 88.3% to 83%, indicating that further investment is needed to meet desired outcomes. Other areas of College and Career Readiness indicate the need for improvement- only 45% of focal students in CTE, AP, or college credit courses earned passing grades, and just 65% of 10th graders were on-track to graduate, showing that key readiness actions need more support, especially as budget cuts impact program availability.
Action 1.09 (Access to Technology):
Although digital tools were made available districtwide, site-level implementation was inconsistent. Many educators continued to view digital tools as supplemental, rather than integral to instruction. SFUSD has committed to narrowing the toolset and strengthening alignment with curriculum for Year 2.
A description of any changes made to the planned goal, metrics, desired outcomes, or actions for the coming year that resulted from reflections on prior practice.
1.05 Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multi-language learners
Improve supports to improve cross-lingual transfer based on teacher input. Review and revise materials to offer more support for teachers in order to develop educator expertise in language and literacy practices that support high-quality curriculum implementation.
1.06 Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations
Continue to build capacity of district and school site leadership teams, specifically Instructional Leadership Teams and Coordinated Care Teams to analyze data for continuous improvement for all students and especially our most marginalized student focal groups.
1.07 Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness: Revised metrics
Due to the impending budget deficit, SFUSD will deprioritize the metric in interim Guardrail 5.3 to Increase the number of SFUSD high school students participating in internships at any point during a school year by 20%. SFUSD will present revised Guardrails at the start of the 2025-2026 school year to the community and Board of Education.
Action 1.09 Teaching & Learning: Augmenting Core Instruction with Access to Technology
The digital tools as described within this action will shift on overall usage and feedback from teachers and leaders based on 2024-2025 implementation. Wyzant Learning will be deprioritized in favor of IXL Learning. In service of best supporting Students with Disabilities, we have updated and expanded our instructional and support resources across all service settings for students with disabilities, including RSP, Mild/Moderate SDC, Extensive Support Needs SDC, and Pre-K/TK Integrated Inclusion classrooms.
The updates to this action were informed by educational partner feedback (teachers and administrators) and student performance data. In early grades (Pre-K/TK), SFUSD will support foundational learning using tools such as the Desired Results Developmental Profile (DRDP), Creative Curriculum, and TeachTown, with added emphasis on inclusive practices through MetaPlay and Basics.For grades K–2, 3–5, and middle school, consistent access to multi-sensory reading programs was prioritized. Enhancements include broader use of iSPIRE, Fundations, Wilson, and Sounds Sensible, in both print and digital formats, as well as expanded integration of IXL across core content areas. These decisions were driven by local assessments showing gains in foundational reading skills where these programs were used. Additionally, TeachTown Encore was added across all grade bands through high school to provide accessible instruction in ELA, Math, Science, and Social Studies. Middle and high school programs also added targeted tools like Reading Accelerator, Read 180/CODE, and Basics for social-emotional and transition support. We also broadened the focus on social skills instruction, particularly for students with extensive support needs, by embedding structured social development curricula across grade levels. These enhancements aim to support student growth in both academic and behavioral domains.
1.10: Build and sustain robust programs- Arts, Athletics, Language Programs, Libraries, and Physical Education.
Revise action to include Science. Science was included on the 2024 Dashboard for informational purposes only. The State Board has not decided “HOW” Science will be included in the Accountability System. SFUSD is and has been committed to a district-wide implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) through a core curriculum that positively impacts science learning for all students. ?The NGSS consist of 3 dimensions (Science and Engineering Practices (SEP), Disciplinary Core Ideas (DCI) and Crosscutting Concepts (CC)).
The SEPs are behaviors that scientists engage in as they investigate and build models and theories about the natural world and the key set of engineering practices that engineers use as they design and build models and systems.
The DCIs are key organizing concepts, problem solving tools, or underlying principles of a discipline.
The CCs are underlying themes that have value in all disciplines of science.
When teachers integrate all three dimensions of the CA NGSS, their classrooms look different. These shifts occur because the CA NGSS instruction has the following characteristics:
Three dimensional: Students engage in scientific inquiry of phenomena using all three dimensions of the CA NGSS.
Coherent across the curriculum: Learning builds upon itself from year to year and science integrates with other parts of the curriculum.
Relevant to local communities and student interests: Content and skills build students’ existing experience to learn about and solve real-world problemsThe NGSS call for a shift in the way that science is taught, with an increased focus on the doing of science and engineering through making sense of rich phenomena and solving real-world problems. SFUSD has addressed these shifts by developing a Science Core Curriculum in partnership with SFUSD teachers and experts in the science education field. Specifically, the curriculum engages students in taking on real-life tasks that use San Francisco as the classroom. Students are led to build mastery and personalize their learning in their approaches to the real-life tasks. As the State Board determines how Science will be included in the statewide Accountability System, SFUSD will ensure that students are prepared to demonstrate their learning of and love for all things Science.
Action 1.07 (College and Career Readiness):
Budget reductions led to partial implementation, notably in High School Credit Recovery and Paid Internship Programs.
A report of the Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for last year’s actions may be found in the Annual Update Table. A report of the Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services for last year’s actions may be found in the Contributing Actions Annual Update Table.
| Action # | Title | Description | Total Funds | Contributing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Action #1 | Teaching & Learning: High-quality and engaging instruction aligned to the Core Rubric | Strengthen the district’s execution of the “Academic Ownership” and “Essential Content” domains of the Core instructional rubric through regular and repeated observations using the rubric and providing meaningful feedback. | $4,080,842.00 |
No |
| Action #2 | Teaching & Learning: High-quality, research-based curricula | Every educator is equipped with research-based, high-quality curricula to effectively implement the new PK-through-Grade 8 Language Arts—English Language Arts, Spanish Language Arts, and Designated English Language Development—curricula. Select middle schools will participate in a Math curriculum pilot and teach Algebra 1 in 8th grade. |
$12,001,178.00 |
No |
| Action #3 | Teaching & Learning: Standards-aligned Assessments | Ensure that teachers and administrators have standards-aligned formative and summative assessments to progress monitoring student learning. |
$734,998.00 |
Yes |
| Action #4 | Teaching & Learning: Use of Data | In conjunction with adopting the new district assessment in SY23-24, build teachers’ and site leaders’ capacity to use data—access and understand data reports regularly, and continuously improve instruction based on the data in support of Guardrail 3. |
$687,910.00 |
No |
| Action #5 | Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multi-language learners | Monitor progress and provide integrated and designated English Language Development implementation in all schools. Sites will schedule designated ELD for all Multilingual English Learners. Classroom teachers will implement instructional practices that include integrated ELD in all content areas to teach students how English works so they can access all content subjects and complex text to build knowledge and extend their vocabulary. TK-5 Classroom teachers will provide designated ELD using the newly adopted ELD curriculum and provide cross-linguistic transfer of literacy skills in Dual Language Immersion and biliteracy programs. Schools will monitor progress of MLs using STAR summative assessments, English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC), and English Language Progress Indicators (ELPI). District will identify and award biliteracy program participation in 5th and 8th grades and improve systems and LOTE assessments to award the Seal of Biliteracy to graduating seniors.SFUSD will monitor progress for Long Term English Learners (LTELs). |
$32,846,781.00 |
Yes |
| Action #6 | Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations | Provide differentiated and targeted support for our focal student populations as determined by school sites in alignment with district goals, as supported by data conferences, the instructional leadership team network and the grade level collaboration coordinated care team (CCT) interventions and other supports based on student needs as determined by needs assessment and captured in the School Plan for Student Achievement. (Focal pop = American Indian students, African American/Black students, Foster Youth, Homeless Youth, English Language Learners, Latinx students, Low socioeconomic status students, Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander students, Students w/ IEPs) |
$29,312,230.00 |
Yes |
| Action #7 | Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness | Improve college/career readiness by improving and increasing support around High School Credit Recovery, College Credit Courses (formerly Dual Enrollment), Secondary Support Programs such as Freshman on Track, and Paid Internship Opportunities. |
$17,269,009.00 |
Yes |
| Action #8 | Teaching & Learning: Kindergarten Readiness | Implement Universal Preschool and Transitional Kindergarten to support kindergarten readiness; through developing Kinder Transition plans and supports, adopt a new Preschool and Transitional Kindergarten curriculum and pilot Individual Growth and Development Indicators( IGDIs)/ STAR assessments for early grades. |
$16,321,809.00 |
No |
| Action #9 | Teaching & Learning: Augmenting Core Instruction with Access to Technology | Ensure all students have access to technology (devices) and digital learning platforms that support differentiated instruction in and out of the classroom. |
$1,335,000.00 |
No |
| Action #10 | Build and sustain robust programs- Arts, Athletics, Language Pathways, Libraries, and Physical Education. | Provide robust programming so every student can access Science, Arts, Athletics, Language Programs, Libraries, and Physical Education. |
$93,449,831.00 |
No |
| Action #11 | Systems of Professional Learning: Professional Development | Build educator capacity by providing regular, high-quality professional learning opportunities to strengthen language and literacy instruction and math instruction at every SFUSD school. |
$2,926,665.00 |
No |
| Action #12 | Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade-level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching | Every school PK-12 has an Instructional Leadership Team that facilitates shared learning about academic rigor; instructional coaches to support implementing high-quality, standards-based curricula; prepared and collaborative staff; and regular time for teachers to plan together. |
$22,966,656.00 |
Yes |
| Action #13 | SF County Office of Education: Literacy | Every educator is equipped with evidence-based, high-quality curricula specifically intended to augment student learning for those who are significantly below grade level. |
$90,425.00 |
No |
| Action #14 | SF County Office of Education: Academic Counseling & Career Technical Education Programming | Grow CTE programming in the court school to provide all youth additional workforce support, particularly long-term students; increase Counseling support to ensure access to college and career options. |
$1,629,458.00 |
Yes |
| Goal # | Description | Type of Goal |
| Goal 2 |
Goal 2: Serving the Whole Child: Support all aspects of student growth, including cognitive (brain) and academic, social and emotional, identity, physical and mental well-being, and ethical and moral development |
Broad |
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Priority 1: Basic (Conditions of Learning) Priority 5: Student Engagement Priority 6: School Climate Priority 7: Course Access Priority 8: Pupil Outcomes Priority 9: Coordination of Instruction of Expelled Pupils (County Office of Education) Priority 10. Coordination of Services for Foster Youth (County Office of Education)
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
This goal of Serving the Whole Child is essential in fulfilling our commitment to Equity and Excellence. We envision that every school is a place where students form meaningful connections and feel like they belong, a place that fosters strong relationships among families, teachers, and students and a place that offers comprehensive services in support of child development. SFUSD believes that quality schools offer engaging and challenging programs, caring and committed staff, strong and visible leaders and instruction differentiated to meet each students’ needs. By ensuring those supports at every San Francisco school, students will feel a sense of belonging and develop the academic and social skills to thrive in their communities.
| Metric # | Metric | Baseline | Year 1 Outcome | Year 2 Outcome | Target for Year 3 Outcome | Current Difference from Baseline |
| 1 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Growth Mindset (Elementary students) |
67% |
66% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (77%) | ||
| 2 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Efficacy (Elementary students) | 53% | 54% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (63%) |
||
| 3 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Management (Elementary students) |
66% |
65% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (76%) |
||
| 4 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Social Awareness (Elementary students) |
53% |
61% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (63%) |
||
| 5 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Growth Mindset (MS students) |
66% |
65% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (76%) |
||
| 6 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Efficacy (MS students) |
55% |
54% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (65%) |
||
| 7 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Management (MS students) |
68% |
67% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (78%) |
||
| 8 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Social Awareness (MS students) |
59% |
58% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (69%) |
||
| 9 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Growth Mindset (HS students) |
68% |
68% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (78%) |
||
| 10 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Efficacy (HS students) |
50% |
51% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (60%) |
||
| 11 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Management (HS students) |
69% |
70% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (79%) |
||
| 12 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Social Awareness (HS students) |
63% |
63% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (73%) |
||
| 13 | Chronic Absenteeism rate: Elementary School (ES) |
27.6% |
21.1% | Decrease by 10 percentage points | ||
| 14 | Chronic Absenteeism rate: Middle School (MS) |
Middle School: 21.51% |
18.4% | Decrease by 10 percentage points |
||
| 15 | Chronic Absenteeism rate: High School (HS) |
All High School 26.38% |
27.5% | Decrease by 10 percentage points |
||
| 16 | Suspension Rate |
All Students: 2.2% |
1.9% |
All Students: 1% |
||
| 17 | # of Suspensions for AA |
9.6% |
8.5% | 5.6% |
||
| 18 | # of suspensions for HL |
3.1% |
2.4% | 2% |
||
| 19 | % of schools that have a Coordinated Care Team and Attendance plan |
100% |
100% | 100% |
An analysis of how this goal was carried out in the previous year.
A description of any substantive differences in planned actions and actual implementation of these actions.
In the 2024–25 school year, SFUSD continued implementing Goal 2: Serving the Whole Child—a comprehensive and equity-driven effort to support students’ cognitive, social-emotional, physical, and ethical development. All actions within Goal 2 were fully implemented in the 2024-2025 school year. The implementation was aligned with our commitment to cultivating school environments where every student feels a sense of belonging and where instruction is differentiated to meet individual needs.
Emphasis was placed on professional development (Action 2.01) and strengthening site-based Coordinated Care Teams (Action 2.03). 100% of schools active CCT bringing together counselors, social workers, and educators to monitor student well-being and respond to needs quickly. CCTs used a team-based approach to ensure no student slipped through the cracks, especially those facing mental health challenges, homelessness, or trauma.
Actions promoting data-informed practices (Action 2.06) and improving attendance (Action 2.04) were particularly central to implementation success. All school sites maintained fully operational Coordinated Care Teams and attendance plans, demonstrating districtwide structural consistency.
An explanation of material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures and/or Planned Percentages of Improved Services and Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services.
San Francisco does not anticipated significant material discrepancies between budgeted expenditures and estimated actual expenditures. In some cases, ongoing vacancies, changes in the level of contracted service provided, or other factors may result in a discrepancy between the original budget and projected final expenditure.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
Effective Actions:
Among the most successful efforts was Action 2.02: Safe & Supportive Schools: Safety and well-being, which ensured every school had access to social workers and wellness centers. This contributed to a districtwide drop in elementary and middle school chronic absenteeism by over 6 percentage points—signaling that wraparound mental health supports likely contributed to stronger student engagement.
Similarly, Action 2.04: Improve Attendance produced encouraging gains, with elementary school absenteeism dropping from 27.6% to 21.1%, and middle school rates declining as well. These results suggest effective coordination among attendance improvement staff, site-level CCTs, and community outreach efforts.
Opportunities for Improvement:
Despite attention, students of color—especially Black students—are still suspended and expelled at much higher rates than their peers, often for subjective behaviors like “defiance” or “disrespect.” A growing body of evidence shows these disparities are not about students misbehaving more, but about how educators interpret and respond to behaviors—often shaped by racial and cultural differences that go unacknowledged in schools.
Despite positive momentum, some SEL survey metrics showed flat or even slightly negative change. For instance, Self-Management and Self-Efficacy scores at both the elementary and middle school levels remained stagnant or declined marginally. This indicates that Action 2.01 (Professional Development on school climate) and Action 2.05 (Increase Sense of Belonging) may not yet be fully effective in shifting school culture or staff-student relational dynamics. The plateau in high school SEL measures suggests that additional student voice or youth-led initiatives may be needed to enhance belonging and empowerment at the secondary level.
High school chronic absenteeism was another concern—rising slightly from 26.38% to 27.5%. This underscores the need for more targeted supports for older students, including possibly refining data practices (Action 2.06) or expanding mentorship and student connection initiatives.
The overall implementation of Goal 2 reflects a strong foundation and meaningful progress, especially in attendance and wellness support. However, the stagnation in SEL indicators—particularly for Self Efficacy and Growth Mindset—calls for a refined focus on relationship-building and culturally responsive practices within the classroom. Continuous feedback loops using SEL data and student focus groups will be critical to improving these areas.
A description of any changes made to the planned goal, metrics, desired outcomes, or actions for the coming year that resulted from reflections on prior practice.
Due to the budget deficit and the need to cut staff and reduce central support, Action 2.01 Professional Development for various staff roles will be reduced, thus potentially impacting our staff capacity to implement whole child supports in service of student learning and belonging. This may weaken wraparound services and undermine chronic absenteeism and SEL metric improvements. It will require intentional coordination for site-level teams to implement the key actions in service of our Serving the Whole Child goal.
A report of the Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for last year’s actions may be found in the Annual Update Table. A report of the Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services for last year’s actions may be found in the Contributing Actions Annual Update Table.
| Action # | Title | Description | Total Funds | Contributing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Action #1 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Professional Development | Build staff capacity to ensure every school fosters strong relationships among families, teachers, and students to create and sustain a positive, nurturing school climate |
$11,607,426.00 |
No |
| Action #2 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Safety and well-being | Ensure schools are safe and supportive of student's mental health and well-being by providing social workers at every school site, wellness centers, and other supports to provide wraparound services to students as needed. |
$9,121,389.00 |
Yes |
| Action #3 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Coordinated Care Team | Strengthen and institutionalize CCTs to provide coordinated experience at school sites to students and families, specifically with an asset-based and anti-racist lens. |
$16,333,036.00 |
No |
| Action #4 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Improve Attendance | Intentionally coordinate and support attendance improvement endeavors throughout the district so that every student attends school more frequently. |
$2,794,879.00 |
Yes |
| Action #5 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Increase Sense of Belonging | Build the capacity of all SFUSD staff to ensure every school is a place where students form meaningful connections and feel like they belong. |
$11,159,942.00 |
No |
| Action #6 | Systems of Support: Improved Use of Data | Build teachers’ and site leaders’ capacity to regularly use data to reach site-level and district-wide target reports, such as mental health referral data, suspensions, and expulsions; Coordinated Care Team attendance plans to understand data reports and continuously improve based on the data. |
$5,647,292.00 |
Yes |
| Action #7 | SF County Office of Education: Transition support | Continue the role of Transition Specialist who supports youth as they transition between court schools and other placements, youth returning from expulsion, and youth placed in neglected shelters, in addition to additional mental health support for students who enter county schools and then exit county schools back to SFUSD schools. |
$328,993.00 |
Yes |
| Action #8 | SF County Office of Education: Individual Learning Plans | Continue to implement and improve the system for Individual Learning Plans by being more specific as to the intervention needed as well as the measures and cadence for monitoring and communication progress to all educational partners. |
$1,482,488.00 |
Yes |
| Goal # | Description | Type of Goal |
| Goal 3 |
Goal 3: Strategic Partnerships: Engage parents/caregivers as partners and collaborate with the City of San Francisco, state and federal agencies, community-based organizations, philanthropic organizations, and the business community to advance the District’s goals and values. |
Broad |
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
State Priority 3: Parental Involvement and Family Engagement
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
At the 1st Reading of our LCAP on June 6th, 2023, parent representatives across our parent advisory committees named the importance of partnering with parents and caregivers, community members and community based organizations in service of improving the outcomes and experiences of our students. They asked us to actively involve parents and families in the educational process through improved communication and partnerships with the community to support students' academic and social-emotional development. They asked us to develop comprehensive parent engagement programs that involve parents in decision-making processes, such as our School Site Councils (SSCs), English Learner Advisory Committees (ELACs) and parent advisory committees and other parent partnership opportunities. Jane D. Hull writes, “At the end of the day, the most overwhelming key to a child's success is the positive involvement of parents.” SFUSD is committed to working in partnership with our families, our community, and our city government, and we develop the systems and structures needed to build trust, listen deeply, craft shared goals and collaborate to attain them.
| Metric # | Metric | Baseline | Year 1 Outcome | Year 2 Outcome | Target for Year 3 Outcome | Current Difference from Baseline |
| 1 | Percentage of parents who express satisfaction with their opportunities to participate in school decision-making processes and programs. (responded favorably in answering “I feel welcome to participate at this school”) (Panorama Survey) |
96% | 97% | 100% | ||
| 2 | Percentage of favorable responses from parents in the School Culture and Climate Survey (Climate for Academic Learning) (Panorama Survey) |
92% | 95% | 100% | ||
| 3 | Percentage of favorable responses from parents in Sense of Belonging (School Connectedness) (Panorama Survey) |
95% | 96% | 100% | ||
| 4 | Percentage of favorable responses from parents Safety (School Connectedness)(Panorama Survey) |
93% | 96% | 100% | ||
| 5 | Increase collaboration between SFUSD and its partners to assess student needs,program effectiveness, as measured by the number of schools using assessment tools in the SFUSD Community Schools toolkit |
9 schools in Fall of 2022 | Metric to be revised to align with CDE Annual Performance Review for California Community Schools Partnership Program (CCSPP) (Updated metric forthcoming in August 2025) | All Community schools | ||
| 6 | Using at least four modes of engagement (interviews, focus groups, town halls, and surveys), increase the number of participants in the previously used modes from 2,217 in January, 2022 to 3,325 as of June 30, 2024 (a 50% increase). |
3,325 | Metric paused to determine update to VVGG Guardrail 1 (Update forthcoming in August 2025) | Increase by 10% each year | ||
| 7 | Increase the participation rate in surveys for the combined percentage of underrepresented groups (AI, AA, Latino/a, NHPI) from 13.6% in January, 2022 to 18.6% as of June 30, 2024. |
18.6% | Metric paused to determine update to VVGG Guardrail 1 (Update forthcoming in August 2025) |
33.6% | ||
| 8 | Percentage of participants on working committees related to the decision agreed that input given was included in the recommendations will increase from baseline |
70% |
Metric paused to determine update to VVGG Guardrail 1 (Update forthcoming in August 2025) |
90% |
An analysis of how this goal was carried out in the previous year.
A description of any substantive differences in planned actions and actual implementation of these actions.
In 2024–25, San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) continued its efforts to strengthen partnerships with families and the broader San Francisco community under Goal 3. This goal focused on parent/caregiver engagement and cross-sector collaboration to support student learning, safety, and well-being. The district prioritized inclusive engagement and capacity-building strategies to foster authentic, trusting relationships with families, educators, and civic partners.
The district implemented a multi-pronged strategy that included public communications improvements (Action 3.02), the expansion of advisory structures (Action 3.03), and differentiated capacity-building for parents and caregivers (Action 3.04). Parallel investments were made to scale community schools (Action 3.05) and align crisis response protocols through a sustained interagency partnership (Action 3.06). Engagement was also a major area of focus with a structured framework (Action 3.01) guiding input-gathering on major district decisions.
An explanation of material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures and/or Planned Percentages of Improved Services and Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services.
San Francisco does not anticipated significant material discrepancies between budgeted expenditures and estimated actual expenditures. In some cases, ongoing vacancies, changes in the level of contracted service provided, or other factors may result in a discrepancy between the original budget and projected final expenditure.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
Effective Actions:
The outcomes reported on the Panorama Survey show broad success: parent satisfaction with participation opportunities rose from 96% to 97%, favorable responses on school climate and connectedness metrics (including safety and belonging) also rose to 95–96%. These high levels of parent positivity suggest that SFUSD’s advisory structures (Action 3.03) and communication improvements (Action 3.02) are resonating with families.
Action 3.04, which built capacity among SSC and ELAC participants and extended outreach to historically underserved families, contributed to increased participation from underrepresented groups—from 13.6% to 18.6% in just two years. This milestone illustrates effective collaboration with community-based organizations and successful deployment of multilingual outreach strategies.
Opportunities for Improvement:
Although many engagement metrics showed gains, several were paused for recalibration under Vision, Values, Goals, and Guardrails (VVGG), indicating a need to better align measurement tools with stakeholder expectations. For example, metrics tied to deeper feedback loops and perceived inclusion of input in decision-making (e.g., “input included in recommendations”) require clearer implementation fidelity under Action 3.01.
Additionally, the community schools model (Action 3.05) showed only partial progress. While professional learning communities were launched for school coordinators, the number of schools utilizing SFUSD’s Community Schools toolkit remained uneven, suggesting varied capacity or resource constraints across sites.
A description of any changes made to the planned goal, metrics, desired outcomes, or actions for the coming year that resulted from reflections on prior practice.
While the VVGG Guardrail 2, Serving the Whole Child, work will remain focused on increasing student attendance and their sense of belonging, the Board of Education, Superintendent and Execute Cabinet will revise the interim guardrail focus areas and progress monitoring measures at the start of the 2025-2026 school year. This work will be communicated publicly at the Board of Education monthly meetings and socialized throughout the district, including staff, parent advisory committees and other education partners.
A report of the Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for last year’s actions may be found in the Annual Update Table. A report of the Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services for last year’s actions may be found in the Contributing Actions Annual Update Table.
| Action # | Title | Description | Total Funds | Contributing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Action #1 | Community Engagement for Effective Decision Making | In alignment with VVGG Guardrail 1, implement the engagement process in major decisions. Ensure three levels of educational partner groups are convened for each decision (Core Committee, Focus Group, General Populous). Intentionally plan and facilitate multiple opportunities for engagement for each major decision. |
$497,967.00 |
No |
| Action #2 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Improve communication channels. | Differentiated outreach for focal populations to ensure participation. Improve districtwide public information and family communications channels (e.g OASIS, The Family Bulletin, Parent newsletters, bulletins, website, ParentVue) |
$1,880,000.00 |
Yes |
| Action #3 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Parent & Student Advisory Committees and Councils | Develop and support nine parent advisory committees + 2 Student Advisory Councils to improve communication, engagement, partnership, and participation in district and school decision-making and progress monitoring. 1)AAPAC= African American PAC, 2)AsAmPAC= Asian American PAC (working name), 3)CAC-SPED= Community Advisory Committee for Special Education 4)DELAC= District English Learner Advisory Council 5)Indian Ed PAC 6)Latinx Community Council 7)MAC= Matua Advisory Council, 8)MigrantEd PAC, 9) QTPAC = Queer Trans PAC 10)SAC= Student Advisory Council (students) 11)QTAC= Queer Trans Advisory Council (students 12) Early Education Parent Advisory Committee (PAC) in addition to the Foster Youth Coordinating Services Program (FYCSP). |
$650,412.00 |
No |
| Action #4 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Build the capacity of parents and caregivers. | Develop and support parents who serve on School Site Councils (SSCs) and English Learner Advisory Committees (ELACs) to improve communication, engagement, partnership, and participation in district and school decision-making and progress monitoring. Develop and sustain partnerships with community-based organizations to ensure we are connecting with members of our most marginalized parents/caregivers and communities. | $4,172,019.00 |
Yes |
| Action #5 | Community Schools: Build the capacity of staff to develop, implement, and sustain the community school model | Engage community school coordinators, family liaisons, and other support staff in networked learning communities to share best practices and implement the community schools approach. | $9,580,624.00 |
No |
| Action #6 | Safe & Supportive Schools: School Crisis Support Initiative | Sustain a partnership between SFUSD, the Department of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF), and the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (NICJR) to support ongoing relationship development locally at the school and community level to monitor incidences and align on the crisis response to mitigate violence and restore harm. | $160,000.00 |
Yes |
| Goal # | Description | Type of Goal |
| Goal 4 |
Goal 4: Anti-Racist Culture & Equitable Supports: SFUSD aims to build and sustain an Anti-Racist organizational culture where we work to eliminate oppression and biases to ensure equally high outcomes for all students and community members by creating and implementing multicultural, multilingual, multiethnic, gender equitable, multiracial, and inclusive best practices. We aim to remove the predictability of success or failure that currently correlates with any social or cultural factor and will implement targeted and differentiated supports in order to improve outcomes and experiences for our most marginalized student groups. |
Focus |
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Priority 2: Implementation of State Standards Priority 3: Parental Involvement and Family Engagement Priority 4: Student Achievement Priority 5: Student Engagement Priority 6: School Climate Priority 7: Course Access Priority 8: Pupil Outcomes Priority 9: Coordination of Instruction of Expelled Pupils Priority 10. Coordination of Services for Foster Youth
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
In order to achieve our Vision, Values, Goals and Guardrails we must anchor in our core value of being UNITED as ONE TEAM. We must create and foster a sense of belonging and trust at every level within our organization so that we can do the same for students and families. We need to improve the outcomes and experiences for our most marginalized students and that requires us to ground in a strong foundation of collectivism and shared accountability, committed to implementing anti-racist practices as a constant process throughout our change journey in the school year ahead. We must focus on centering leadership at all levels throughout the district and foster the strong leadership skills that will be needed during a season of significant changes. We must strive towards our anti-ractist vision to eliminate oppression and biases to ensure equally high outcomes for all students and community members by creating and implementing multicultural, multilingual, multiethnic, gender equitable, multiracial, and inclusive best practices. When we sustain this work, we will see improvement for our underserved students and communities.
| Metric # | Metric | Baseline | Year 1 Outcome | Year 2 Outcome | Target for Year 3 Outcome | Current Difference from Baseline |
| 1 | The percentage of African American and Pacific Islander Kindergarten students meeting grade level proficiency as measured by district interim tests (Star Early Literacy) will increase by 5% each year | 52% in May 2024 |
52.8% (Spring 2025) | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (62%) |
||
| 2 | Grade 3 English Learner students meeting grade level proficiency as measured by district interim tests (Star Reading) will increase by 5% each year | 15% in March 2024 | 13.6% (Spring 2025) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (25%) |
||
| 3 | Grade 3 African American students at proficient as measured by district interim tests (Star Math) will increase by 5% each year | 16% in March 2024 | 15.2% (Spring 2025) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (26%) |
||
| 4 | Grade 7 Latino students at proficient as measured by district interim tests (Star Math) will increase by 5% each year | 11% in March 2024 | 13.5% (Spring 2025) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (21%) |
||
| 5 | Percentage of entering 9th grade students who exit EWI status by the end of the 9th grade will increase by 5% each year | 23% (Aug 2023) |
58% June 2024 |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (33% or better) |
||
| 6 | Improve attendance for Students with Disabilities | 40% of Students with IEPs are Chronically Absent | 31.4% of Students with IEPs are Chronically Absent | Decrease by double digit improvement (10% or better) | ||
| 7 | Improve College & Career Readiness for Students with Disabilities | Spring 2023: 38% of students w/ IEPs met UC/CSU requirements | Spring 2024: 43.39% of students w/ IEPs met UC/CSU requirements | 48% | ||
| 8 | Reduce disproportionate risk ratios (as calculated by CDE) of African American/Black students in Emotional Disturbance (ED) and Other Health Impairment (OHI) categories |
Spring 2023 Emotional Disturbance (ED) 3.95 Other Health Impairment (OHI) 2.36 |
Spring 2024 Emotional Disturbance (ED): 3.01 SFUSD will however be implementing the 2025 plan which is required because it was DISPRO 3 years in a row. Emotional Disturbance: SFUSD is not currently disproportionate for ED for 2026 Other Health Impairment: SFUSD is not currently disproportionate for OHI for 2024-2025. |
Below 2.0 in each category | ||
| 9 | % of students making progress on English Learner Progress Indicators (ELPI) | 44.8% of MLs making progress on ELPI based on 2023 CA Dashboard results |
43.1% of MLs making progress on ELPI based on 2024 CA Dashboard results | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (55% or better) |
||
| 10 | Reduce the % of Multi Language Learners who are Long Term English Language Learners | 13.32% | 14.6% | 7% of all MLs are LTELs | ||
| 11 | Reduce the overall % of LTELs who are Latino | Latino/Hispanic students make up 71% of all LTELs while they are 64% of total ML population. | Latino/Hispanic students make up 72.9% of all LTELs while they are 65% of total ML population | Latino LTELS are equal to the overall % of total ML population | ||
| 12 | Reduce suspensions for Foster Youth | 9.2% | 8.5% | 3.2% | ||
| 13 | Increase graduation rate for Foster Youth | 70.2% | 72.22% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (80.2%) |
An analysis of how this goal was carried out in the previous year.
A description of any substantive differences in planned actions and actual implementation of these actions.
SFUSD implemented the majority of the Actions within Goal 4 throughout the 2024-2025 school year. The actions within this goal are of utmost importance and urgency to improve outcomes and experiences for our most marginalized student communities.
Action 4.01: Targeted supports: Students with IEPs
The San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) began taking proactive steps to strengthen its systems and structures for serving students who receive Special Education services. An independent assessment of SFUSD’s Special Education Department affirms these ongoing efforts. SFUSD requested the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) conduct a review of its special education services in spring 2024. FCMAT is an expert in educational programs and financial services of school districts in California. The review took place in fall 2024 and included extensive interviews with key SFUSD staff and evaluation of SFUSD’s SpEd procedures, data and processes. SFUSD is implementing multiple action items that directly align with the report’s recommendations, including but not limited to:
-Strengthening the continuum of Special Education services
-Improving data systems
-Increasing accountability and oversight
-Hiring and retaining Special Education staff
-Deepening authentic partnerships
While SFUSD has experienced trends of declining enrollment in the past five years, Special Education enrollment has increased. In 2023-24, nearly 14% of SFUSD’s 49,000 students in TK-12th grades were identified as requiring Special Education services, which represents a 2-percentage point increase since 2019-20. SFUSD employs nearly 500 teachers and over 1,300 para educators who work directly with students receiving Special Education services.
Action Items Already in Progress That Align With Report Recommendations
Special Education services are bound by state and federal mandates to ensure students eligible for special education have meaningful access to general education in the least restrictive environment to meet their unique needs. SFUSD is both a school district and county office of education, both of which contribute to Special Education programs. SFUSD is making progress on key areas outlined in the FCMAT report.
Strengthening the Continuum of Special Education Services
Through cross-departmental efforts, SFUSD is working to address the significant disproportionality of African American students referred for Special Education services. By examining the continuum of services provided, SFUSD highlighted the need to strengthen site- level tiers of support, Student Success Team structures and interventions that are already in place across schools within general education.
Improving Data Systems
Additionally, SFUSD is focused on improving data systems to better inform decision-making and planning. As a result of this process, the team is beginning to organize more accurate, robust, usable data sets related to programming, staffing, caseloads, class sizes, and other data sets that were previously challenging to access.
Increasing Accountability and Oversight
SFUSD will be working to further define the distinction between district and county programming, with a specific emphasis on strengthening strategies and programming for students who have more extensive support needs, such as those in Special Day Classes (SDC) or county-level services. SFUSD’s goal is to better address these students' needs within our schools and transition students back from Non-Public Schools (NPS) whenever possible.
Hiring and Retaining Special Education Staff
The Special Education Services Department meets weekly with the Human Resources Department to address issues related to staffing and to strategize about ongoing recruitment and retention efforts. For the first time in recent memory, SFUSD is preparing to post positions for occupational and physical therapists, aiming to hire directly for roles that have primarily been filled through contracted services. Additionally, SFUSD is organizing hiring fairs, recruitment events and pursuing a supplemental grant for the Urban Teacher Residency Program, with a specific focus on Special Education teacher credentials.
Deepening Authentic Partnerships
SFUSD recognizes that a key part of this work is strengthening and deepening partnerships with families, the Special Education Community Advisory Council (CAC), and the community-based organizations (CBOs) that serve SFUSD students and families.
4.03- Targeted supports: Comprehensive Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CCEIS)
San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) is not currently identified as disproportionate (DISPRO) in the categories of Emotional Disturbance (ED) or Other Health Impairment (OHI) per the February 2025 data reported by CDE. However, due to three consecutive years of disproportionality in ED (2021–22, 2022–23, and 2023–24), SFUSD is required to implement its 2025 Coordinated Intervening Methods (CIM) plan. Additionally, SFUSD will need to develop a Significant Disproportionality (SIG DISP) plan for discipline, as it has met the threshold for three years in both “Any Discipline” and “Less than 10 Days Out-of-School Suspension.”
4.02- Each and Every By Name and 4.04 African American Achievement & Leadership Initiative (AAALI)
The African American Achievement and Leadership Initiative (AAALI) and the Fa’asamoa and Samoan Initiative (FASI) stood as pillars in SFUSD’s commitment to African American and Pacific Islander students. These weren’t just programs—they were people-powered movements rooted in historical resolutions and cultural truth-telling. Whether through the Mastering Cultural Identity courses, Black Star Rising, or the Vasega Amata Samoan Dual Language Pathway, these initiatives ensured students not only saw themselves in curriculum but also in leadership, celebration, and community.
Nowhere was this more powerfully demonstrated than through the Each and Every By Name initiative, SFUSD’s bold strategy to double the percentage of Black and Pacific Islander kindergarten students reading at grade level. This work exemplified equity in motion. By developing coordinated care teams, personalized literacy data reports, and high-dosage tutoring (like the AI-enabled Amira tool), the district moved from one-size-fits-all support to student-specific success planning.
What’s more, community was the constant. AAPAC and MAC did more than advise—they activated. Through family book clubs, literacy nights, and Pacific Islander-authored read-alouds, the district didn’t just deliver services—it rebuilt trust and re-centered families as essential partners in academic progress.
And it paid off. Over 20% growth in Star Early Literacy proficiency among kindergarten AA/PI students. Ten schools where 100% of focal students met or exceeded standards. Nineteen where over two-thirds hit the mark. These numbers weren’t anomalies—they were outcomes of intentional design.The actions within Goal 4 in service of our most marginalized students were planned for and implemented yet with variable fidelity and thus variable impact.
4.05- Targeted supports: Students and Families Experiencing Homelessness (SAFEH)
In the Fall of 2024, the grant funded SAFEH manager transitioned into a different role outside of the district. The position, although initially approved by the state appointed fiscal advisory, was not approved after the manager transitioned and remains the case. This work was divided amongst SFSD leadership who we able to implement the actions herein with fidelity in addition to the other workstreams of their primary roles.
4.06- LGBTQ Student Supports
Full y implemented in addition to launching a Queer Trans Parent Advisory Council in support of ensuring the district takes intentional steps to create and foster welcoming and inclusive learning environments.
An explanation of material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures and/or Planned Percentages of Improved Services and Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services.
San Francisco does not anticipated significant material discrepancies between budgeted expenditures and estimated actual expenditures. In some cases, ongoing vacancies, changes in the level of contracted service provided, or other factors may result in a discrepancy between the original budget and projected final expenditure.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
Actions show modest but uneven progress across the district. Focal student populations in SFUSD remain a priority for all staff, parents and educational partners to collectively solve for in order to achieve our mission and vision.
A description of any changes made to the planned goal, metrics, desired outcomes, or actions for the coming year that resulted from reflections on prior practice.
No changes planned at this time.
A report of the Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for last year’s actions may be found in the Annual Update Table. A report of the Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services for last year’s actions may be found in the Contributing Actions Annual Update Table.
| Action # | Title | Description | Total Funds | Contributing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Action #1 | Targeted supports: Students with IEPs | Implement curriculum (SPIRE, TeachTown) to support whole district implementation and instructional coherence. Provide ongoing Special Education training and support for teachers, paraprofessionals, administrators, and related service providers on Curriculum, Behavior, SEIS, and Legal topics. Training for teachers to understand learning with disability (in alignment with Culturally Responsive Teaching and Learning PD) Example of school staff taking Inclusion checklist Quiz at the beginning of the year and tailoring staff development and capacity building accordingly. Support & promote SpEd case manager usage of Goalbook. School staff implement Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions accordingly and as guided by school leadership teams (ITLs, CCTs, SSTs, etc). Ongoing parent and caregiver capacity building via workshops, connection to community based resources. |
$2,227,650.00 |
No |
| Action #2 | Targeted supports: Each & Every By Name | Adopt a case management approach, serving the whole child, to help raise the literacy proficiency of Black and Pacific Islander kindergarteners. |
$448,250.00 |
No |
| Action #3 | Targeted supports: Comprehensive Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CCEIS) | Develop and implement “Rising Scholar Plans” for every identified student, actively engage families through family conferences and educational partner meetings, collaborate directly with school sites to provide case management, and support the full implementation of student-specific strategies. |
$195,749.00 |
No |
| Action #4 | Targeted supports: African American Achievement & Leadership Initiative (AAALI) | Increase the success of African American students and families by implementing targeted support for academic and social-emotional learning (Shoestrings in (PK,TK and K), Mastering Cultural Identity course in Middle School, Black Star Rising in High School, elevating effective practices and strategies, and cultivating leaders engaged in dismantling systemic barriers to African American achievement (PITCH, AA Community of Practice). | $1,935,085.00 |
No |
| Action #5 | Targeted supports: Students and Families Experiencing Homelessness (SAFEH) | Increase the capacity of all schools to identify and support students eligible under the federal McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, specifically around Enrollment, Attendance, and Success in school. Administer CDE’s annual homelessness questionnaire (AB27) to identify our district's students and families experiencing homelessness. The SAFEH Enrollment form collects information about any identified family's housing status and immediate support needs. Provide information to families on the city's support for eviction assistance, relocation assistance, rapid rehousing eligibility, and other long-term housing supports. |
$354,770.00 |
No |
| Action #6 | LGBTQ Student Supports | Develop and implement supportive policies and procedures that explicitly protect the rights of LGBTQ students and address issues such as gender identity and expression, preferred name and pronoun use, bathroom use, and participation in school activities like sports and clubs. | $245,008.00 |
No |
| Action #7 | Targeted supports: Foster Youth | Ensure staff are aware of who their students in foster care are and can access transition plans in collaboration with the Foster Youth Services Coordination Program; ensure staff are trained and in compliance with AB740 Notification Requirements that require schools to send written notification to the County Social Worker, a Minor’s attorney, the Ed Rights Holder (ERH), the FYSCP District Liaison and the Tribal Social Worker (if applicable) when a student in the foster care system is being faced with: Suspension (including in-school suspensions), Expulsion, IEP Meeting when a Manifestation Determination takes place, Involuntary Transfer to a continuation school; Enhance transportation services to ensure school stability and maintain foster youth in their school of origin when it is in their best interest; Develop truancy policies that take account of the unique needs of and legal requirements for Foster Youth. |
$347,518.00 |
Yes |
| Action #8 | Targeted Support: Newcomer students | Implement the curriculum (LOOK, National Geographic) to ensure all elementary newcomer students are equipped with the basic communication structures of English regardless of their age or grade level. Provide guidance for schools to create structures to welcome newcomer students into their school communities. Implement the Summer Academy for Integrated Language Learning (SAILL) to provide training for teaching of instructional approaches to improve language and literacy for newcomer MLs and to provide additional language development and credit recovery for recently arrived high school newcomer MLs who may be credit deficient. Support of newcomer pathway teachers and principals around instructional strategies that support accessing grade-level text and tasks and systems of social-emotional support that improve student attendance and retention. Provide resources and counseling to newly arrived students and families at the Enrollment Center (EC); train EC and site-based counselors on foreign transcript translation and evaluation. | $1,015,000.00 |
Yes |
| Action #9 | Targeted Supports: Potential and Long Term English Language Learners | Teachers and administrators monitor students' progress and set goals for potential and long-term English Language learners. Develop and implement a professional development toolkit for sites to implement professional learning around designated and integrated ELD; Collaborate with content teams to ensure training in Integrated ELD focused on scaffolds for academic reading and writing and academic discourse. |
$1,578,790.00 |
Yes |
| Goal # | Description | Type of Goal |
| Goal 5 |
Goal 5: Operational Coherence: Effectively align and coordinate the processes and activities across our five organizational divisions (Business Services, Education Services, Human Resources, Operations, and Schools) and respective departments to improve staff Responsiveness, establish Clear and accessible Processes, develop Knowledgeable Staff, and build Relationship-focused support. |
Broad |
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Priority 1: Basic Priority 9: Coordination of Instruction of Expelled Pupils (County Office of Education) Priority 10. Coordination of Services for Foster Youth (County Office of Education)
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
In order to achieve our goals, our systems and supports for our staff must be of highest quality, consistent and predictable. We must develop critical tools & systems, build a resilient infrastructure so that every student in every school is future ready for college and career success in the 21st century. Our tools & systems have been everything but over the past few years and we aspire to improve our core functions of human resources, payroll, and business services including our budget management enterprise systems and Learning Management Systems (LMSs), Student Information System, application and enrollment systems, student and family portals, email, collaboration, and communication systems.
| Metric # | Metric | Baseline | Year 1 Outcome | Year 2 Outcome | Target for Year 3 Outcome | Current Difference from Baseline |
| 1 | The percentage of teachers who reported receiving meaningful feedback (3+ times) from a colleague or principal, as measured by the QTEA survey | Spring 2024: Colleague- 36% Principal- 24% |
Spring 2025: Colleague- 38% Principal- 24% QTEA survey renamed to Site Based Educator survey; Metric to be revised as Survey is on pause due to budget cuts |
|||
| 2 | Teachers and Staff Sense of Belonging |
Spring 2024: 77% (Panorama) |
Spring 2025: 80% (Panorama) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (87%) | ||
| 3 | % Favorable response to Question: The school’s strategic plan will achieve its goals and objectives | Spring 2024: 60% (Panorama) |
Spring 2025: 64% (Panorama) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (70%) | ||
| 4 | Reduce deficit spending in the Unrestricted General Fund |
2024: $59.8M |
2025: $90M |
$0 |
2026: $47M Projected | |
| 5 | Improve response time to address HVAC work order request (fix heating and cooling concerns) | 2024: Average of 56 days to complete work order | 2025: 7 days (despite increase in number of requests) | 5 days on average | ||
| 6 | % of teachers who are highly credentialed in their subject area | 81% | 93.58% (3717 out of 3972) as of 9/3/24 92.08% (4162 out of 4520) as of 6/4/25 *Note: The low headcount at the start of the year was a result of CDE delays in position availability; the end of year head count better reflects a fully-staffed District. |
100% |
An analysis of how this goal was carried out in the previous year.
A description of any substantive differences in planned actions and actual implementation of these actions.
San Francisco Unified School District made steady progress in implementing Goal 5: Operational Coherence, with notable successes in staff belonging and strategic alignment, but ongoing challenges in staffing, credentialing, and fiscal stability.
Effective Implementation:
SFUSD saw improvements in key culture metrics, with staff sense of belonging rising from 77% to 80% and belief in the district’s strategic direction increasing from 60% to 64%, according to Panorama survey data. These gains reflect improved internal alignment across the district’s five organizational divisions and greater confidence in leadership. Programs such as the SF Urban Teacher Residency and Para to Teacher pathway have helped sustain educator pipelines, especially in hard-to-staff subject areas. However, hiring highly qualified credentialed educators remains a challenge locally and statewide, let alone nationally. There has also been progress transitioning from the EMPowerSF system to a new ERP/HCM platform, with a rollout planned as scheduled by July 2025.
Action 5.04- Resource Management- Improve Facilities:
In response to school community feedback and inspection findings, SFUSD Facilities identified two key priorities for investment: 1) Classroom Climate – Improving heating and air quality and 2) Adequate Restroom Facilities – Ensuring clean, operational, and stocked restrooms
Classroom Climate
Maintaining comfortable classroom temperatures is essential for teaching and learning. SFUSD continues to prioritize indoor air quality through routine custodial work, including dusting horizontal surfaces, vacuuming carpets, and cleaning air ducts to reduce allergens and airborne particles. In 2023, the District transitioned to dilution-based green cleaning chemicals, which provide the same efficacy as traditional bleach-based products without harmful impacts to human health or the environment.
To increase our capacity to address heating and cooling concerns, SFUSD has implemented a coordinated response model. Contracted engineers and Buildings & Grounds (B&G) staff now work together, with assignments based on system type and repair complexity. This approach enables us to respond to heat-related work orders at dozens of sites simultaneously, increasing efficiency and reducing delays. The District allocates $1 million annually to support this maintenance and repair work.
This coordinated effort has yielded significant improvements in response times. In September 2024, the average time to complete an HVAC work order was 56 days. By May 2025, that average had dropped to just 7 days—despite an overall increase in the number of requests. This improvement is the result of strategic changes in how work is assigned, streamlined work order processing, and targeted investments in HVAC system redundancy.
Adequate Restroom Facilities
Access to clean, operational, and well-stocked restrooms is essential to supporting student health, dignity, and academic success. In response to both internal inspections and community feedback, SFUSD has made targeted investments in improving restroom conditions across school sites. Staff used data from the Facilities Inspection Tool (FIT), which identified 1,979 restroom deficiencies, along with 196 restroom-related work orders and six Williams Complaints, to scope and prioritize the necessary work.
To enhance the restroom experience, the District completed the installation of feminine hygiene product dispensers in all elementary school female and gender-neutral restrooms, as well as at least one male restroom serving students in grade 3 and above. This initiative aligns with our broader equity and health efforts.
Additionally, the Custodial team piloted an epoxy sealant on restroom floors over Fall Break 2024 to improve cleanliness, odor control, and overall appearance. Following the success of the pilot, districtwide rollout is planned for Summer 2025.
Maintaining these facilities also requires substantial ongoing investment in custodial supplies and infrastructure support. These efforts are supported by multiple funding sources, including general fund, ELOP, and permit revenue, and reflect our continued commitment to providing dignified restroom conditions for all students.
SFUSD's Facilities Inspection Tool identified several recurring deficiencies across school sites. The most widespread issue was the lack of readily available menstrual products, reported in 972 instances. Additionally, 413 restrooms had incomplete menstrual product notices posted, while 113 lacked the required notice altogether. The inspections also found that 29 single-user restrooms were not properly labeled as all-gender, and 25 restrooms had loose toilet seats, indicating ongoing maintenance needs in restroom facilities.
Next Steps
Build redundancy in HVAC systems at 21 school sites
Continue to improve response times to heat-related work orders through strategic vendor partnerships
Enhance student experience by refinishing and sealing restroom floors and improving lighting. Scoping underway with work expected to start Summer 2025
Complete PAC and building filter replacements across sites in summer 2025
Areas for Improvement:
Despite these advances, SFUSD continues to face persistent challenges. The teacher retention rate and the percentage of fully staffed classrooms have yet to meet ambitious targets. The percentage of highly credentialed teachers slightly declined (from 93.58% to 92.08%), and the QTEA/Site-Based Educator survey—used to measure meaningful feedback—has been paused due to budget constraints.
Facing a projected $114 million shortfall for the 2025–26 school year, San Francisco Unified School District implemented a series of budget reductions aimed at averting state intervention. The district significantly reduced central office expenditures—cutting over 200 administrative positions and trimming its central budget share from 25% to 16%. Notably, SFUSD avoided laying off classroom teachers by offering early retirement incentives, resulting in over 300 educator departures.Despite this, school sites are experiencing critical staffing gaps. SFUSD is in the prcoess of reorganizing its systems and support structures to ensure schools are prepared for a strong start to the 2025-206 school year.
An explanation of material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures and/or Planned Percentages of Improved Services and Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services.
San Francisco does not anticipated significant material discrepancies between budgeted expenditures and estimated actual expenditures. In some cases, ongoing vacancies, changes in the level of contracted service provided, or other factors may result in a discrepancy between the original budget and projected final expenditure.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
San Francisco Unified School District made steady progress in implementing Goal 5: Operational Coherence, with clear gains in staff belonging (+3%) and strategic alignment (+4%), and infrastructure upgrades that significantly reduced HVAC repair times from 56 to 7 days.
Upon taking the helm of leadership in October 2024, Superintendent Su has been laser focused in service of three stabilization priorities:
-Maintain local control through budget stabilization: implementing a plan to ensure a balanced budget, which is essential for retaining local control and avoiding potential state intervention.
-Restore trust and public confidence: promoting open and accessible communication with the community, engaging in outreach efforts and building strong partnerships.
-Restore, remediate, and develop healthy operational systems: improving oversight and accountability within all SFUSD operations, addressing past and/or ongoing issues such as the EMPower SF payroll system.
Because of these concentrated efforts, SFUSD has avoided teacher layoffs, reduced central office costs from 25% to 16%, and advanced a districtwide transition to a new ERP system. Ongoing staffing and credentialing challenges underscore the importance of continued fiscal discipline and cross-divisional coordination, implementation and progress monitoring.
A description of any changes made to the planned goal, metrics, desired outcomes, or actions for the coming year that resulted from reflections on prior practice.
The QTEA Survey as described in metric 1 was renamed the site based educator survey. Because of the overall budget deficit, analysis of this survey data will need to be redistributed across departments and therefore implementation of this survey is currently on pause until further determined.
Metric 7 revised from Improve heating systems to reduce work orders submitted to Improve response time to address HVAC work order request (fix heating and cooling concerns).
A report of the Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for last year’s actions may be found in the Annual Update Table. A report of the Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services for last year’s actions may be found in the Contributing Actions Annual Update Table.
| Action # | Title | Description | Total Funds | Contributing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Action #1 | Improve Operations: Establish clear & accessible processes | Establish clear & accessible processes to ensure every school has reliable and predictable resources inclusive of consistent, dedicated operational budgets & processes. |
$5,180,834.00 |
No |
| Action #2 | Staff recruitment and retention | Ensure that we accomplish our goal of having 100% of classrooms fully staffed at the beginning of the school year so that every student is taught by a qualified teacher. Continue to refine the hiring process centrally by expanding the contractual hiring timelines for specific high-demand credential areas. Continue the Aspiring Teachers Program for any classified employee who wants to become a teacher, the CCSF Partnership—Pre Apprenticeship Program to provide targeted support for paraeducators, with an initial focus on African American males, and the SF Urban Teacher Residency to support candidates under the leadership of highly qualified veteran teachers in high-needs subject areas such as Math and Science. Develop a more efficient application process, provide professional development and targeted support for hiring managers, and administer exit surveys for employees leaving the district to learn about and refine our recruitment efforts. Continue implementing the Quality Teacher and Education Act (QTEA) survey and learn from its findings. |
$5,814,964.00 |
No |
| Action #3 | Resource Allocation: School Staffing Model | Every school will be optimally positioned to balance education quality and financial responsibility by implementing a school staffing model to ensure we accomplish our commitment to Equity and Excellence. |
$297,685.00 |
No |
| Action #4 | Resource Management: Improve facilities | Ensure facilities are in good condition, specifically school heating systems and middle and high school women's bathrooms. |
$253,353.00 |
No |
| Action #5 | Resource Management: Enterprise Resource Program | Transition from our current payroll, finance, and human resources systems—including EMPowerSF—to a new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system called Frontline and a Human Capital Management Suite (HCM) called Red Rover for full implementation by July 2025. |
$10,000,000.00 |
No |
| Action #6 | SF County Office of Education Operations | Establish clear delineation between the SF Unified School District business and operational services and the County Office of Education business and operational services. |
$135,951.00 |
No |
| Goal # | Description | Type of Goal |
| Goal 6 |
Equity Multiplier Goals & Actions Three San Francisco County Office of Education schools and five San Francisco Unified schools have qualified for Equity Multiplier funding due to their non-stability rates greater than 25 percent and socioeconomically disadvantaged pupil rates greater than 70 percent per the California Department of Education's (CDE) Stability Rate Report for 2022-2023. S.F. County Court Woodside Learning Center, S.F. County Opportunity (Hilltop), S.F. County Civic Center Secondary, Wells (Ida B.) High, Downtown High, Muir (John) Elementary, Visitacion Valley Middle, Lee (Edwin and Anita) Newcomer By June of 2027, each of these schools will improve outcomes for the specific student groups that have been identified as being of the highest need on the 2023 CA School Dashboard and will implement targeted actions to Serve the Whole Child in alignment with LCFF Priority 4: Student Achievement, Priority 5: Student Engagement, Priority 6: School Climate, Priority 7: Course Access and Priority 8: Pupil Outcomes. |
Equity Multiplier Focus Goal |
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Priority 4: Student Achievement Priority 5: Student Engagement Priority 6: School Climate Priority 7: Course Access Priority 8: Pupil Outcomes
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
Improving outcomes for our most marginalized students is our commitment to Equity and Excellence in action. The 2023 CA School Dashboard revealed that low performance on the College and Career indicators impacted the highest number of student groups. Yet in order to improve student outcomes for college and career, students first must feel that school is a place where they belong. As such, school leaders,
parents/caregivers, teachers, staff and other educational partners believe that increasing supports to Serve the Whole Child will both drive success in College and Career indicators while reducing Chronic Absenteeism and Suspensions.
Each school leader and their respective leadership teams and SSCs determined a multi-pronged approach to improving the outcomes and experiences of their focal student populations.
S.F. County Court Woodside Learning Center: English Learners, Students with IEPs
S.F. County Opportunity (Hilltop): English Learners, Hispanic, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
S.F. County Civic Center Secondary: Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
Wells (Ida B.): African American, Hispanic, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Students With Disabilities
Downtown High: African American, Hispanic, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
Muir (John) Elementary: While no specific focal groups were “RED” on 2023 CA Dashboard, Muir has identified African American students, English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged and Hispanic students are their focal student populations.
Visitacion Valley Middle: African American, English Learners, Hispanic, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Students With Disabilities
Lee (Edwin and Anita) Newcomer: Newcomer students, English Learners
| Metric # | Metric | Baseline | Year 1 Outcome | Year 2 Outcome | Target for Year 3 Outcome | Current Difference from Baseline |
| 1 | Improve College and Career Indicators | Hilltop EL: 2.9% Hispanic: 2.8% SED:2.5% Wells Hispanic:3% SED: 3.2% Downtown Hispanic: 2.6% SED:2.8% |
Hilltop EL: No Performance color Hispanic: 0% SED:0 % Wells Hispanic:.4% (Decrease of 2.6%) SED: No Performance color Downtown Hispanic: No Performance color SED: No Performance color |
Hilltop EL: 10% Hispanic: 10% SED: 9.5% Wells Hispanic: 10% SED: 10% Downtown Hispanic: 9.6% SED: 9.8% |
||
| 2 | Increase their sense of belonging at school from as measured by end of year Panorama student survey data | Woodside: 53% Hilltop: 84% Civic: no data for 2024 Wells: 61% Downtown: 58% Vis Valley MS: 52% Muir: 75% Lee: 64% |
Woodside: no data for 2025 Hilltop: 96% Civic: no data for 2025 Wells: 86% Downtown: 83% Vis Valley MS: 70% Muir: 76% Lee: 75% |
Increase by double digit growth (10 percentage points) | ||
| 3 | Improve attendance (Reduce Chronic Absenteeism) | Vis Valley MS: EL: 51% chronically absent SED: 51.7% chronically absent Hispanic: 56.3% chronically absent |
Vis Valley MS: EL: 41% chronically absent SED: 45.3% chronically absent Hispanic: 45.6% chronically absent |
EL: 41% chronically absent SED: 41.7% chronically absent Hispanic: 46.3% chronically absent |
||
| 4 | Reduce suspensions | Woodside: 0% Hilltop: 0% Civic: 0% Wells: SED:8.7% AA:13.8% SWD:14.1% Downtown: AA: 10.6% Vis Valley MS: AA: 21.1% SWD: 14% |
Woodside: 0% Hilltop: 0.9% Civic: 9.6% Wells: SED: 3.8% AA: 3.1% SWD: 6.2% Downtown: AA: 9.8% Vis Valley MS: AA: No performance color SWD: 17.9% |
Woodside: 0% Hilltop: 0% Civic: 0% Wells: SED:2% AA:7% SWD:8% Downtown: AA: 4.6% Vis Valley MS: AA: 15% SWD: 8% |
||
| 5 | Improve Graduation rate |
Civic SED: 60% Wells Hispanic: 41.4% Downtown Hispanic: 50% SED: 52.4% |
Civic SED: 71.4% Wells Hispanic: 37.7% Downtown Hispanic: 37.14% SED: 40.40% |
Civic SED: 60% Wells Hispanic: 51.4% Downtown Hispanic: 60% SED: 62.4% |
||
| 6 | Accelerate Language Development See link for Emerging on SFUSD Observation Tool of Effective Practices for ELD: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_MHNzG6o7hv_Pzx_6xizJp7BBLeLf8uZ83DhbCHJTdI/edit |
Local Indicator: "Emerging" SFUSD ELD Observation Tool | Update pending | Sustain at "Developing" or Higher on SFUSD ELD Observation Tool |
An analysis of how this goal was carried out in the previous year.
A description of any substantive differences in planned actions and actual implementation of these actions.
Equity Multiplier schools, including S.F. County Court Woodside Learning Center, S.F. County Opportunity (Hilltop), S.F. County Civic Center Secondary, Wells (Ida B.) High, Downtown High, Muir (John) Elementary, Visitacion Valley Middle, Lee (Edwin and Anita) Newcomer implemented tiered academic, socio-emotional and wellness strategies as planned to serve their students, many of whom the state has identified as having the highest need in our system.Schools aligned actions to SFUSD VVGG and CA LCFF priorities—especially Student Achievement, Engagement, and School Climate—through targeted academic supports, culturally responsive practices and community engagement. Improvements in chronic absenteeism and school climate.
An explanation of material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures and/or Planned Percentages of Improved Services and Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services.
San Francisco does not anticipated significant material discrepancies between budgeted expenditures and estimated actual expenditures. In some cases, ongoing vacancies, changes in the level of contracted service provided, or other factors may result in a discrepancy between the original budget and projected final expenditure.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
Actions taken at both schools have shown early indicators of effectiveness. At John Muir, targeted ELA and math interventions alongside community school strategies supported improvements in student attendance and assessment outcomes. Visitacion Valley Middle demonstrated measurable gains in students’ sense of belonging and staff-aligned instructional strategies, though gaps remain for focal subgroups in literacy and math. Continuous use of Panorama data, STAR assessments, and site-based surveys helped sites refine practices throughout the year.
A description of any changes made to the planned goal, metrics, desired outcomes, or actions for the coming year that resulted from reflections on prior practice.
There were no major substantive changes to the planned goal, metrics or actions. Based on 2024–25 reflections, schools will deepen family engagement, increase Tier 2/3 academic interventions, and expand SEL strategies. However, at John Muir, there was a noted need for increased mental health services after the loss of a Seneca therapist, which led to strengthened partnerships with Behavioral Health Access Center. John Muir plans to reinvest in mental health staffing and broaden community partnerships. Visitacion Valley Middle expanded its implementation of school-wide literacy and student agency efforts with additional coaching and planning time, responding to staff and student input gathered during their School Planning Summit. The VVMS team is planning to implement professional development for culturally relevant instruction and structured student reflection practices. These refinements are intended to accelerate growth toward the 2027 LCAP targets for all identified student groups.
A report of the Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for last year’s actions may be found in the Annual Update Table. A report of the Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services for last year’s actions may be found in the Contributing Actions Annual Update Table.
| Action # | Title | Description | Total Funds | Contributing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Action #1 | SFCOE College & Career Counseling support | SF County Office of Education schools (S.F. County Court Woodside Learning Center, S.F. County Opportunity (Hilltop) S.F. County Civic Center Secondary) will provide increased academic counseling and support monitoring student progress towards course completion, college and career readiness. Resources to support this action will be provided over multiple school years in order to reach our 3 year targeted outcome. | $145,786.00 |
No |
| Action #2 | Implement targeted strategies to increase students’ sense of belonging | Partner with the Niroga Institute to support focal students' sense of belonging which we believe will decrease suspension rates and improve progress towards graduation and college readiness. Support all staff to develop Tier 1 Mindfulness practices across the school, by the end of the year students and staff will use Mindfulness strategies as part of their daily preparedness to learn practice. (Visitacion Valley Middle School, Wells and Downtown). Increase experiential learning offerings for our students to increase all students' sense of belonging through CBO partnerships and extended hours for both teacher professional development and project improvement (Downtown) Hold at least 4 AAPAC and 4 ELAC meetings per year as well as at least 5 whole school community events. In addition, our community schools coordinator will ensure that each event brings at a minimum (2) community partners to the events to connect with and provide education and resources to families. We will gather feedback at the end of each meeting to determine if these meetings are: 1) helping ensure parent-school partnership communications are meeting parents' needs; 2) teach parents how they can support their children at home 3) increase parents' sense of belonging as measured by end of year Panorama survey data Partner with Playworks to build a “culture of play that enables kids to feel a real sense of belonging and have the opportunity to contribute on the playground, in the classroom, and into their communities.” We will hold 5 empathy interviews 3 times throughout the school year to get student input around their sense of belonging at school and ways in which we can foster a deeper sense of belonging for our students. Playworks will lead a Junior Coach student leadership team as the school will create a student council and at least two other student leadership in order to solicit feedback and input from students as we design and revise systems and structures at our school (Muir) Provide weekend enrichment classes to newcomer students to provide more hands-on learning, field trips, outdoor exploration to deepen their understanding of academic concepts (Lee Newcomer). |
$251,000.00 |
No |
| Action #3 | Improve Attendance (Reduce Chronic Absenteeism) | The Coordinated Care Team at each site will work with the teachers and staff at each school site to implement PBIS TIER 1, 2 and 3 student wellness and attendance support systems. |
$189,000.00 |
No |
| Action #4 | Reduce Suspensions | Sites will work with each school's head counselor and Coordinated Care Teams to increase Restorative Practices implementation. By the end of the year, students and adults will have learned to use Mindfulness practices to de-escalate students when needed (Visitacion Valley MS, Downtown, Wells). | $335,000.00 |
No |
| Action #5 | Accelerate Language Development | Set up one-on-one language tutors for students to accelerate their language and vocabulary development. Language tutors will meet with students 2-3x per week. (Lee Newcomer) Contract with EL Education to for coach support curriculum implementation, differentiation and PBL. Support teachers in differentiating the curriculum to ensure rigorous implementation and access for MLLs (Visitacion Valley MS). |
$155,000.00 |
No |
| Total Projected LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants | Projected Additional 15 percent LCFF Concentration Grant |
| $82,602,860.00 | $2,900,752.00 |
Required Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the LCAP Year
| Projected Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year | LCFF Carryover — Percentage | LCFF Carryover — Dollar | Total Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year |
| 15.73% | 0.46% | $2,438,196.00 | 16.19% |
The Budgeted Expenditures for Actions identified as Contributing may be found in the Contributing Actions Table.
For each action being provided to an entire LEA or school, provide an explanation of (1) the unique identified need(s) of the unduplicated student group(s) for whom the action is principally directed, (2) how the action is designed to address the identified need(s) and why it is being provided on an LEA or schoolwide basis, and (3) the metric(s) used to measure the effectiveness of the action in improving outcomes for the unduplicated student group(s).
| Goal and Action #(s) | Identified Need(s) | How the Action(s) Address Need(s) and Why it is Provided on an LEA-wide or Schoolwide Basis | Metric(s) to Monitor Effectiveness |
| Goal 1 Action 5,Goal 1 Action 6,Goal 1 Action 7,Goal 1 Action 12,Goal 1 Action 14,Goal 2 Action 2,Goal 2 Action 4,Goal 2 Action 6,Goal 2 Action 7,Goal 2 Action 8,Goal 3 Action 2,Goal 3 Action 4,Goal 3 Action 6,Goal 4 Action 7,Goal 4 Action 8,Goal 4 Action 9 | Action 1.05: Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multi-language learners Need: English learner students are disproportionately represented among students scoring below standard on both statewide assessments and district formative and summative assessments (Star Reading and Star Math). They require additional support in order to accelerate their progress toward meeting standard(s). Scope: LEA-wide Action 1.06: Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations Need: English learner, foster youth and low income students are disproportionately represented among students below standard on statewide and district summative/ formative assessments(SBAC, Star Reading, Star Math). They require additional support in order to accelerate their progress toward meeting standard(s). Scope: LEA-wide Action 1.07: Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness Need: Unduplicated students (Foster Youth, ELs and low socioeconomic status students) and additional focal student groups (American Indian students, African American/Black students, Homeless Youth, Latinx students,,Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander students, Students w/ IEP) are performing below average on statewide College and Career indicators. Scope: LEA-wide Action 1.12: Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching Need: Build teachers and administrator capacity to ground in and learn from how a coherent system for professional learning supports student learning, particularly the learning of unduplicated and focal students.Awareness of both academic and social emotional student data, especially for our focal student populations, is critical to build awareness around the need for additional tiered academic, social emotional, and behavioral supports. This data throughout our systems for professional learning requires the use of district level databases and platforms, and a level of expertise to utilized. Scope: LEA-wide Action 1.14: SF County Office of Education: Academic Counseling & Career Technical Education Programming Need: English learner, foster youth and low income students are disproportionately represented among students below standard on statewide and district summative/formative assessments and require additional support in order to accelerate their progress toward meeting standard(s). Scope: LEA-wide Action 2.02 Safe & Supportive Schools: Safety and wellbeing Need: Unduplicated students have a range of support needs as demonstrated higher levels of suspension, particularly for AA/Black students and lower sense of belonging along with other SEL indicators. Scope: LEA-wide Action 2.04: Safe & Supportive Schools: Improve Attendance Need: Unduplicated students have a range of support needs as demonstrated higher levels of absenteeism Scope: LEA-wide Action 2.06:Systems of Support: Improved Use of Data Need: Unduplicated students have a range of support needs as demonstrated by their lower achievement levels on academic metrics. Higher percentages of unduplicated students are achieving two or more years below grade level and are in need of additional targeted support in literacy and mathematics.Moreover, higher percentages of unduplicated students are chronically absent and may have received a suspension.School sites develop a range of support strategies for these students, which are funded by targeted allocations from the district office, in addition to other funding sources. Scope: LEA-wide Action 2.07: SF County Office of Education: Transition support Need: English learner, foster youth and low income students are disproportionately represented among students transitioning between SF Unified Schools and SF County Schools. Scope: LEA-wide Action 2:08: SF County Office of Education: Individual Learning Plans Need: English learner, foster youth and low income students are disproportionately represented among students below standard on statewide and district summative/formative assessments as well as student engagement measures. They require additional support in order to accelerate their progress toward meeting standard(s). Scope: LEA-wide Action 3.02: Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Improve communication channels. Need: Parents of unduplicated students have named the priority of improving and deepening communication channels so that they can better partner with SFUSD/SFCOE to provide supports for their children and additionally communicate what is working and not working so that our district and county schools can implement the requested and necessary supports. Action 3.04: Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Build the capacity of parents and caregivers. Need: Parents of unduplicated students have named the priority of improving and deepening communication channels so that they can better partner with SFUSD/SFCOE to provide supports for their children and additionally communicate what is working and not working so that our district and county schools can implement the requested and necessary supports. Scope: LEA-wide Action 3.06: Safe & Supportive Schools: School Crisis Support Initiative Need: Unduplicated students are disproportionately represented among students for suspensions and over-representation in Special Education for Emotional Disturbance. Scope: LEA-wide Action 4.07: Targeted supports: Foster Youth Need: English learner, foster youth and low income students are disproportionately represented among students below standard on statewide performance dashboard indicators and district assessments and require additional support in order to accelerate their progress toward meeting standard(s). Scope: LEA-wide Action 4.08: Targeted Support: Newcomer students Need: English learner, foster youth and low income students are disproportionately represented among students below standard on statewide performance dashboard indicators and district assessments and require additional support in order to accelerate their progress toward meeting standard(s). Scope: LEA-wide Action 4.09: Targeted Supports: Potential and Long Term English Language Learners Need: English learner, foster youth and low income students are disproportionately represented among students below standard on statewide performance dashboard indicators and district assessments and require additional support in order to accelerate their progress toward meeting standard(s). Scope: LEA-wide | Action 1.05: Site and Central Office staff will monitor progress and provide specific literacy and language supports to ensure unduplicated students can access the content in classrooms and demonstrate academic ownership of their learning using appropriate scaffolds and supports. Classroom teachers will implement instructional practices that help students develop their listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills so that they can access all content subjects and complex text to build knowledge and extend their vocabulary. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide basis. Action 1.06: SFUSD/SFCOE will provide differentiated and targeted interventions for our focal student populations as determined by school sites in alignment with district goals, as supported by data conferences, the instructional leadership team network and the grade level collaboration coordinated care team (CCT) interventions and other supports based on student needs as determined by needs assessment and captured in the School Plan for Student Achievement. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide basis. Action 1.07: SFUSD/SFCOE will improve college/career readiness by improving and increasing support for unduplicated and focal students around High School Credit Recovery,College Credit Courses (formerly Dual Enrollment), Secondary Support Programs such as Freshman on Track, and Paid Internship Opportunities. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide basis. Action 1.12: Every school PK-12 has an Instructional Leadership Team that facilitates shared learning about academic rigor and whether or not it is improving student outcomes, particularly those for our unduplicated and focal students. Instructional coaches will support teachers to implement high quality, standards-based curricula and differentiate instruction for unduplicated students who have been performing below standard. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide basis. Action 1.14: SFUSD/SFCOE will grow CTE programming in the court school to provide all youth additional workforce support, particularly long-term students; increase counseling support to ensure access to college and career options. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an COE-wide basis. Action 2.02: Ensure schools are safe and supportive of student's mental health and well-being by providing social workers at every school site, wellness centers, and other supports to provide wraparound services to students as needed. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide basis. Action 2.04: Intentionally coordinate and support attendance improvement endeavors throughout the district so that every student attends school more frequently. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide basis. Action 2.06: Staff within the Research, Planning and Assessment (RPA) team are highly trained district office staff who generate reports on our unduplicated student groups, among other groups, to share with district and site administrators, teachers and classified staff.This data is used by staff to inform decisions around additional support and intervention, as well as reclassification determinations and placement of unduplicated pupils within supplemental programming. Analyses conducted by the RPA team and communicated to site leaders will support the ongoing monitoring of student performance in key academic and social emotional areas at the district department, committee and meeting level; as well as at school site council meetings, instructional leadership team meetings, English Learner advisory committee meetings, staff meetings, and student support team meetings. Action 2.07: Continue the role of Transition Specialist who supports unduplicated youth as they transition between court schools and other placements, youth returning from expulsion, and youth placed in neglected shelters, in addition to additional mental health support for students who enter county schools and then exit county schools back to SFUSD schools. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an COE-wide basis. Action 2.08: Continue to implement and improve the system for Individual Learning Plans for unduplicated students by being more specific as to the intervention needed as well as the measures and cadence for monitoring and communication progress to all educational partners. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an COE-wide basis. Action 3.02: Differentiated outreach for focal populations to ensure participation of parents of unduplicated students. Improve districtwide public information and family communications channels (e.g OASIS, The Family Bulletin, Parent newsletters, bulletins, website, ParentVue). While primarily focused on serving the needs of parents/caregivers of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students, parents and caregivers and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide basis. Action 3.04: In addition to improving communication as outlined about in Action 3.02, this action is intended to strengthen parent capacity to engage in local decision making, for example in School Site Councils or English Language Advisory Councils as well as in district level decision making, for example on one of SFUSD's twelve parent and student advisory councils/committees. While primarily focused on serving the needs of parents/caregivers of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students, parents and caregivers and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide basis. Action 3.06: By sustaining a partnership between SFUSD, the Department of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF), and the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (NICJR)to support ongoing relationship development locally at the school and community level to monitor incidences of unduplicated student incidents and align on the crisis response to mitigate violence and restore harm. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide basis. Action 4.07: Ensure staff are aware of who their students in foster care are and can access transition plans in collaboration with the Foster Youth Services Coordination Program; ensure staff are trained and in compliance with AB740Notification Requirements that require schools to send written notification to the County Social Worker, a Minor’s attorney, the Ed Rights Holder (ERH), the FYSCP District Liaison and the Tribal Social Worker(if applicable) when a student in the foster care system is being faced with: Suspension(including in-school suspensions), Expulsion,IEP Meeting when a Manifestation Determination takes place, Involuntary Transfer to a continuation school; Enhance transportation services to ensure school stability and maintain foster youth in their school of origin when it is in their best interest; Develop truancy policies that take account of the unique needs of and legal requirements for Foster Youth. Implement the curriculum (LOOK, National Geographic)to ensure all elementary newcomer students are equipped with the basic communication structures of English regardless of their age or grade level. Provide guidance for schools to create structures to welcome newcomer students into their school communities.Implement the Summer Academy for Integrated Language Learning (SAILL) to provide training for teaching of instructional approaches to improve language and literacy for newcomer MLs and to provide additional language development and credit recovery for recently arrived high school newcomer MLs who may be credit deficient.Support of newcomer pathway teachers and principals around instructional strategies that support accessing grade-level text and tasks and systems of social-emotional support that improve student attendance and retention.Provide resources and counseling to newly arrived students and families at the Enrollment Center (EC); train EC and site-based counselors on foreign transcript translation and evaluation. Teachers and administrators monitor students' progress and set goals for potential and long-term English Language learners. Develop and implement a professional development toolkit for sites to implement professional learning around designated and integrated ELD; Collaborate with content teams to ensure training in Integrated ELD focused on scaffolds for academic reading and writing and academic discourse. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide and COE-wide basis. Action 4.08: Ensure staff are aware of who their students i foster care are and can access transition plans in collaboration with the Foster Youth Services Coordination Program; ensure staff are trained and in compliance with AB740Notification Requirements that require schools to send written notification to the County Social Worker, a Minor’s attorney, the Ed Rights Holder (ERH), the FYSCP District Liaison and the Tribal Social Worker(if applicable) when a student in the foster care system is being faced with: Suspension(including in-school suspensions), Expulsion,IEP Meeting when a Manifestation Determination takes place, Involuntary Transfer to a continuation school; Enhance transportation services to ensure school stability and maintain foster youth in their school of origin when it is in their best interest; Develop truancy policies that take account of the unique needs of and legal requirements for Foster Youth. Implement the curriculum (LOOK, National Geographic)to ensure all elementary newcomer students are equipped with the basic communication structures of English regardless of their age or grade level. Provide guidance for schools to create structures to welcome newcomer students into their school communities.Implement the Summer Academy for Integrated Language Learning (SAILL) to provide training for teaching of instructional approaches to improve language and literacy for newcomer MLs and to provide additional language development and credit recovery for recently arrived high school newcomer MLs who may be credit deficient.Support of newcomer pathway teachers and principals around instructional strategies that support accessing grade-level text and tasks and systems of social-emotional support that improve student attendance and retention.Provide resources and counseling to newly arrived students and families at the Enrollment Center (EC); train EC and site-based counselors on foreign transcript translation and evaluation. Teachers and administrators monitor students' progress and set goals for potential and long-term English Language learners. Develop and implement a professional development toolkit for sites to implement professional learning around designated and integrated ELD; Collaborate with content teams to ensure training in Integrated ELD focused on scaffolds for academic reading and writing and academic discourse. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide and COE-wide basis. Action 4.9: Ensure staff are aware of who their students in foster care are and can access transition plans in collaboration with the Foster Youth Services Coordination Program; ensure staff are trained and in compliance with AB740Notification Requirements that require schools to send written notification to the County Social Worker, a Minor’s attorney, the Ed Rights Holder (ERH), the FYSCP District Liaison and the Tribal Social Worker(if applicable) when a student in the foster care system is being faced with: Suspension(including in-school suspensions), Expulsion,IEP Meeting when a Manifestation Determination takes place, Involuntary Transfer to a continuation school; Enhance transportation services to ensure school stability and maintain foster youth in their school of origin when it is in their best interest; Develop truancy policies that take account of the unique needs of and legal requirements for Foster Youth. Implement the curriculum (LOOK, National Geographic)to ensure all elementary newcomer students are equipped with the basic communication structures of English regardless of their age or grade level. Provide guidance for schools to create structures to welcome newcomer students into their school communities.Implement the Summer Academy for Integrated Language Learning (SAILL) to provide training for teaching of instructional approaches to improve language and literacy for newcomer MLs and to provide additional language development and credit recovery for recently arrived high school newcomer MLs who may be credit deficient.Support of newcomer pathway teachers and principals around instructional strategies that support accessing grade-level text and tasks and systems of social-emotional support that improve student attendance and retention. Provide resources and counseling to newly arrived students and families at the Enrollment Center (EC); train EC and site-based counselors on foreign transcript translation and evaluation. Teachers and administrators monitor students' progress and set goals for potential and long-term English Language learners. Develop and implement a professional development toolkit for sites to implement professional learning around designated and integrated ELD; Collaborate with content teams to ensure training in Integrated ELD focused on scaffolds for academic reading and writing and academic discourse. While primarily focused on serving the needs of English learners, Foster Youth and students from low socioeconomic status, this action will have a positive impact on all students and is therefore being provided on an LEA-wide and COE-wide basis. | Action 1.05: Schools will monitor progress of MLs using STAR summative assessments, English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC), and English Language Progress Indicators (ELPI). District will identify and award bi-literacy program participation in 5th and 8th grades and improve systems and LOTE assessments to award the Seal of Biliteracy to graduating seniors. Action 1.06: Percent of unduplicated students that are showing growth on state and local assessments (SBAC, Star Reading, Star Math) amongst other metrics to indicate academic growth. Action 1.07: Graduation rate, percent of students completing high school credit recovery, percent of students enrolled in college credit courses (Dual Enrollment), percent of 9th grade "Freshman on track". Action 1.12: Focal student empathy interviews, instructional walkthroughs focused on how unduplicated students are engaging with content and demonstrating academic ownership. Additionally, QTEA teacher feedback, percent of staff attending professional development, percent of staff feeling supported and impacted by instructional coaching, number of classroom visits, percent of staff receiving effective feedback, amongst others. Action 1.14: College & Career indicators Action 2.02: Suspension rate, attendance rates, SEL indicators Action 2.04: Attendance, Chronic Absentee metrics, local data collected and discussed in Coordinated Care teams Action 2.06: Number of data conferences with RPA, staff responding feeling supported to engage in student performance data and adjust instruction based on that data. Action 2.07: Student reporting of feeling supported during transition meetings Action 2.08: Individual Learning Plan monitoring Action 3.02: Participation in district and school events, district advisory committee participation(DELAC, LCAP Advisory Committee, Foster Youth Coordinating Services Program, parent response on SEL survey. Action 3.04: Participation in district and school events, district advisory committee participation(DELAC, LCAP Advisory Committee, Foster Youth Coordinating Services Program, parent response on SEL survey. Action 3.06: Reduced number of incidents Action 4.7: Formative and summative assessment benchmarks, CA dashboard outcomes Action 4.8: Formative and summative assessment benchmarks, CA dashboard outcomes Action 4.9: Formative and summative assessment benchmarks, CA dashboard outcomes |
For each action being solely provided to one or more unduplicated student group(s), provide an explanation of (1) the unique identified need(s) of the unduplicated student group(s) being served, (2) how the action is designed to address the identified need(s), and (3) how the effectiveness of the action in improving outcomes for the unduplicated student group(s) will be measured.
| Goal and Action #(s) | Identified Need(s) | How the Action(s) are Designed to Address Need(s) | Metric(s) to Monitor Effectiveness |
| N/A | N/A | N/A |
For any limited action contributing to meeting the increased or improved services requirement that is associated with a Planned Percentage of Improved Services in the Contributing Summary Table rather than an expenditure of LCFF funds, describe the methodology that was used to determine the contribution of the action towards the proportional percentage, as applicable.
N/A
A description of the plan for how the additional concentration grant add-on funding identified above will be used to increase the number of staff providing direct services to students at schools that have a high concentration (above 55 percent) of foster youth, English learners, and low-income students, as applicable.
SFUSD has adopted a new School Staffing and Resource Plan to provide consistency, predictability, and clarity with respect to staffing and funding allocations for school. This plan will ensure that each school receives the instructional, administrative, and support staff needed to design the educational experience for their students as well as the necessary support for our students who have been historically underserved by SFUSD. The staffing allocations for individual sites are based upon enrollment projections and informed by best practices to support student learning, the needs of our student population, our bargaining agreements, and community input. SFUSD is targeting investments in high quality instruction and a community schools approach. This looks like providing resources for coaching, instructional leadership teams, coordinated care teams, and student supports. Additionally, our staffing plan reflects our commitment to improving the outcomes for our focal students who have been historically underserved by the district. We will continue to provide increased resources to our students with the greatest need. Schools with a high concentration of foster youth, multilingual learners, and low-income students receive a designated allocation of concentration grant funding in addition to other differentiated staffing and budget support. This concentration funding ensures that these sites have increased capacity for staff and other impactful services to close the opportunity gap for focal students enrolled at their school.
| Staff-to-student ratios by type of school and concentration of unduplicated students | Schools with a student concentration of 55 percent or less | Schools with a student concentration of greater than 55 percent |
| Staff-to-student ratio of classified staff providing direct services to students | 156.5 students per 1 staff | 106.2 students per 1 staff |
| Staff-to-student ratio of certificated staff providing direct services to students | 18.5 students per 1 staff | 16.2 students per 1 staff |
| LCAP Year | 1. Projected LCFF Base Grant | 2. Projected LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants | 3. Projected Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year (2 divided by 1) | LCFF Carryover — Percentage (Input Percentage from Prior Year) | Total Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year (3 + Carryover %) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | $525,014,552.00 | $82,602,860.00 | 15.73% | 0.00% | 16.19% |
| Totals | LCFF Funds | Other State Funds | Local Funds | Federal Funds | Total Funds | Total Personnel | Total Non-Personnel |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Totals | $186,001,056.00 | $45,812,203.00 | $90,329,884.00 | $20,032,509.00 | $342,175,652.00 | $284,275,324.00 | $57,900,328.00 |
| Goal # | Action # | Action Title | Student Group(s) | Contributing to Increased or Improved Services? | Scope | Unduplicated Student Group(s) | Location | Time Span |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | Teaching & Learning: High-quality and engaging instruction aligned to the Core Rubric | All students | No | LEA-Wide | No | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 2 | Teaching & Learning: High-quality, research-based curricula | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 3 | Teaching & Learning: Standards-aligned Assessments | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 4 | Teaching & Learning: Use of Data | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 5 | Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multi-language learners | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 6 | Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations | American Indian students, African American/Black students, Foster Youth, Homeless Youth, English Language Learners, Latinx students, Low socioeconomic status students, Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander students, Students w/ IEPs) | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 7 | Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 8 | Teaching & Learning: Kindergarten Readiness | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 9 | Teaching & Learning: Augmenting Core Instruction with Access to Technology | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 10 | Build and sustain robust programs- Arts, Athletics, Language Pathways, Libraries, and Physical Education. | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 11 | Systems of Professional Learning: Professional Development | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 12 | Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade-level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 13 | SF County Office of Education: Literacy | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 1 | 14 | SF County Office of Education: Academic Counseling & Career Technical Education Programming | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 2 | 1 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Professional Development | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 2 | 2 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Safety and well-being | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 2 | 3 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Coordinated Care Team | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 2 | 4 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Improve Attendance | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 2 | 5 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Increase Sense of Belonging | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 2 | 6 | Systems of Support: Improved Use of Data | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 2 | 7 | SF County Office of Education: Transition support | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 2 | 8 | SF County Office of Education: Individual Learning Plans | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 3 | 1 | Community Engagement for Effective Decision Making | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 3 | 2 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Improve communication channels. | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 3 | 3 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Parent & Student Advisory Committees and Councils | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 3 | 4 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Build the capacity of parents and caregivers. | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 3 | 5 | Community Schools: Build the capacity of staff to develop, implement, and sustain the community school model | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 3 | 6 | Safe & Supportive Schools: School Crisis Support Initiative | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 4 | 1 | Targeted supports: Students with IEPs | Students with IEPs | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 4 | 2 | Targeted supports: Each & Every By Name | AA/Black and Pacific Islander students | No | LEA-Wide | Low SES, Foster Youth | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 4 | 3 | Targeted supports: Comprehensive Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CCEIS) | African American/Black students | No | LEA-Wide | Low SES | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 4 | 4 | Targeted supports: African American Achievement & Leadership Initiative (AAALI) | African American/Black students | No | LEA-Wide | Low SES | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 4 | 5 | Targeted supports: Students and Families Experiencing Homelessness (SAFEH) | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 4 | 6 | LGBTQ Student Supports | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 4 | 7 | Targeted supports: Foster Youth | All students | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 4 | 8 | Targeted Support: Newcomer students | Multi-language learners | Yes | LEA-Wide | English Learners | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 4 | 9 | Targeted Supports: Potential and Long Term English Language Learners | Multi-language learners | Yes | LEA-Wide | English Learners | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 5 | 1 | Improve Operations: Establish clear & accessible processes | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 5 | 2 | Staff recruitment and retention | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 5 | 3 | Resource Allocation: School Staffing Model | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 5 | 4 | Resource Management: Improve facilities | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 5 | 5 | Resource Management: Enterprise Resource Program | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 5 | 6 | SF County Office of Education Operations | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 6 | 1 | SFCOE College & Career Counseling support | All students, English Learners, Hispanic, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Students With Disabilities | No | LEA-Wide | English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 6 | 2 | Implement targeted strategies to increase students’ sense of belonging | All students, African American students, English Learners, Hispanic students , Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students, Students With Disabilities | No | LEA-Wide | English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged | Visitacion Valley MS, Downtown, Wells, Muir, Lee Newcomer | 2024-2027 |
| 6 | 3 | Improve Attendance (Reduce Chronic Absenteeism) | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 6 | 4 | Reduce Suspensions | All students, African American students, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students, Students With Disabilities | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 6 | 5 | Accelerate Language Development | English Learners | No | LEA-Wide | English Learners | SFUSD | 2024-2027 |
| Goal # | Action # | Total Personnel | Total Non-personnel | LCFF Funds | Other State Funds | Local Funds | Federal Funds | Total Funds | Planned Percentage of Improved Services |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | $4,080,842.00 | $0.00 | $4,080,842.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $4,080,842.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 2 | $8,408,178.00 | $3,593,000.00 | $8,408,178.00 | $3,593,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $12,001,178.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 3 | $734,998.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $734,998.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $734,998.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 4 | $687,910.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $687,910.00 | $0.00 | $687,910.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 5 | $29,844,132.00 | $3,002,649.00 | $26,832,851.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $6,013,930.00 | $32,846,781.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 6 | $24,869,700.00 | $4,442,530.00 | $27,506,385.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,805,845.00 | $29,312,230.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 7 | $14,106,304.00 | $3,162,705.00 | $4,679,453.00 | $8,926,989.00 | $3,662,567.00 | $0.00 | $17,269,009.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 8 | $15,431,383.00 | $890,426.00 | $16,321,809.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $16,321,809.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 9 | $191,470.00 | $1,143,530.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,335,000.00 | $0.00 | $1,335,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 10 | $84,770,880.00 | $8,678,951.00 | $45,261,247.00 | $0.00 | $48,188,584.00 | $0.00 | $93,449,831.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 11 | $2,926,666.00 | ($1.00) | $2,238,755.00 | $0.00 | $687,910.00 | $0.00 | $2,926,665.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 12 | $22,966,656.00 | $0.00 | $10,746,026.00 | $12,220,630.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $22,966,656.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 13 | $0.00 | $90,425.00 | $0.00 | $90,425.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $90,425.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 14 | $1,152,913.00 | $476,545.00 | $1,124,067.00 | $505,391.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,629,458.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 1 | $11,607,426.00 | $0.00 | $11,607,426.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $11,607,426.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 2 | $4,867,418.00 | $4,253,971.00 | $1,592,569.00 | $0.00 | $7,528,820.00 | $0.00 | $9,121,389.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 3 | $16,333,036.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $16,333,036.00 | $0.00 | $16,333,036.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 4 | $2,794,879.00 | $0.00 | $2,794,879.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $2,794,879.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 5 | $11,159,942.00 | $0.00 | $1,180,471.00 | $3,950,023.00 | $4,566,751.00 | $1,462,697.00 | $11,159,942.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 6 | $5,113,856.00 | $533,436.00 | $5,647,292.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5,647,292.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 7 | $328,993.00 | $0.00 | $328,993.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $328,993.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 8 | $553,399.00 | $929,089.00 | $458,480.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,024,008.00 | $1,482,488.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 1 | $0.00 | $497,967.00 | $497,967.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $497,967.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 2 | $0.00 | $1,880,000.00 | $1,880,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,880,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 3 | $650,411.00 | $1.00 | $243,830.00 | $225,000.00 | $0.00 | $181,582.00 | $650,412.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 4 | $4,172,019.00 | $0.00 | $822,354.00 | $864,235.00 | $968,215.00 | $1,517,215.00 | $4,172,019.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 5 | $5,637,039.00 | $3,943,585.00 | $0.00 | $9,580,624.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $9,580,624.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 6 | $0.00 | $160,000.00 | $160,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $160,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 1 | $1,786,674.00 | $440,976.00 | $0.00 | $2,227,650.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $2,227,650.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 2 | $62,937.00 | $385,313.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $448,250.00 | $0.00 | $448,250.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 3 | $182,622.00 | $13,127.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $195,749.00 | $195,749.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 4 | $1,348,664.00 | $586,421.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,935,085.00 | $0.00 | $1,935,085.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 5 | $329,661.00 | $25,109.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $354,770.00 | $0.00 | $354,770.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 6 | $156,356.00 | $88,652.00 | $61,252.00 | $0.00 | $183,756.00 | $0.00 | $245,008.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 7 | $288,138.00 | $59,380.00 | $72,250.00 | $275,268.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $347,518.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 8 | $0.00 | $1,015,000.00 | $815,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $200,000.00 | $1,015,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 9 | $820,483.00 | $758,307.00 | $100,307.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,478,483.00 | $1,578,790.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 1 | $1,188,507.00 | $3,992,327.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5,180,834.00 | $5,180,834.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 2 | $4,138,580.00 | $1,676,384.00 | $0.00 | $1,542,184.00 | $3,300,614.00 | $972,166.00 | $5,814,964.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 3 | $297,685.00 | $0.00 | $297,685.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $297,685.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 4 | $148,616.00 | $104,737.00 | $104,737.00 | $0.00 | $148,616.00 | $0.00 | $253,353.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 5 | $0.00 | $10,000,000.00 | $10,000,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $10,000,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 6 | $135,951.00 | $0.00 | $135,951.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $135,951.00 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 1 | $0.00 | $145,786.00 | $0.00 | $145,786.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $145,786.00 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 2 | $0.00 | $251,000.00 | $0.00 | $251,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $251,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 3 | $0.00 | $189,000.00 | $0.00 | $189,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $189,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 4 | $0.00 | $335,000.00 | $0.00 | $335,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $335,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 5 | $0.00 | $155,000.00 | $0.00 | $155,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $155,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 1. Projected LCFF Base Grant | 2. Projected LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants | 3. Projected Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year (2 divided by 1) | LCFF Carryover - Percentage (Percentage from Prior Year) | Total Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year (3 + Carryover %) | 4. Total Planned Contributing Expenditures (LCFF Funds) | 5. Total Planned Percentage of Improved Services (%) | Planned Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year (4 divided by 1 plus 5) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $525,014,552.00 | $82,602,860.00 | 15.73% | 0.00% | 16.19% | $85,560,906.00 | 0.00% | 16.30% |
| Totals by Type | Total LCFF Funds |
|---|---|
| Total: | $85,560,906.00 |
| LEA-wide Total: | $186,001,056.00 |
| Limited Total: | $0.00 |
| Schoolwide Total: | $0.00 |
| Goal # | Action # | Action Title | Contributing to Increased or Improved Services? | Scope | Unduplicated Student Group(s) | Location | Planned Expenditures for Contributing Actions (LCFF Funds) | Planned Percentage of Improved Services (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3 | Teaching & Learning: Standards-aligned Assessments | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $0.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 5 | Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multi-language learners | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $26,832,851.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 6 | Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $27,506,385.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 7 | Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $4,679,453.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 12 | Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade-level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $10,746,026.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 14 | SF County Office of Education: Academic Counseling & Career Technical Education Programming | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $1,124,067.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 2 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Safety and well-being | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $1,592,569.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 4 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Improve Attendance | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $2,794,879.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 6 | Systems of Support: Improved Use of Data | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $5,647,292.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 7 | SF County Office of Education: Transition support | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $328,993.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 8 | SF County Office of Education: Individual Learning Plans | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $458,480.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 2 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Improve communication channels. | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $1,880,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 4 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Build the capacity of parents and caregivers. | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $822,354.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 6 | Safe & Supportive Schools: School Crisis Support Initiative | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $160,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 7 | Targeted supports: Foster Youth | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $72,250.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 8 | Targeted Support: Newcomer students | Yes | LEA-Wide | English Learners | SFUSD/SFCOE | $815,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 9 | Targeted Supports: Potential and Long Term English Language Learners | Yes | LEA-Wide | English Learners | SFUSD/SFCOE | $100,307.00 | 0.00% |
| Totals | Last Year's Total Planned Expenditures (Total Funds) | Total Estimated Actual Expenditures (Total Funds) |
|---|---|---|
| Totals | $281,755,925.00 | $269,680,377.00 |
| Last Year's Goal # | Last Year's Action # | Action Title | Contributed to Increased or Improved Services? | Last Year's Total Planned Expenditures (Total Funds) | Estimated Actual Expenditures (Input Total Funds) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | Teaching & Learning: High-quality and engaging instruction aligned to the Core Rubric | No | $5,765,686.00 | $5,374,499.00 |
| 1 | 2 | Teaching & Learning: High-quality, research-based curricula | No | $11,713,284.00 | $11,334,012.00 |
| 1 | 3 | Teaching & Learning: Standards-aligned Assessments | No | $674,194.00 | $486,014.00 |
| 1 | 4 | Teaching & Learning: Use of Data | No | $621,547.00 | $611,419.00 |
| 1 | 5 | Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multi-language learners | Yes | $31,868,515.00 | $30,446,659.00 |
| 1 | 6 | Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations | Yes | $26,135,818.00 | $21,346,655.00 |
| 1 | 7 | Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness | Yes | $16,270,131.00 | $13,740,896.00 |
| 1 | 8 | Teaching & Learning: Kindergarten Readiness | No | $12,307,267.00 | $9,635,215.00 |
| 1 | 9 | Teaching & Learning: Augmenting Core Instruction with Access to Technology | No | $1,758,549.00 | $1,822,721.00 |
| 1 | 10 | Build and sustain robust programs- Arts, Athletics, Language Pathways, Libraries, and Physical Education. | No | $47,149,998.00 | $42,078,876.00 |
| 1 | 11 | Systems of Professional Learning: Professional Development | No | $3,860,725.00 | $2,805,653.00 |
| 1 | 12 | Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade-level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching | Yes | $23,642,773.00 | $23,121,840.00 |
| 1 | 13 | SF County Office of Education: Literacy | No | $118,783.00 | $67,774.00 |
| 1 | 14 | SF County Office of Education: Academic Counseling & Career Technical Education Programming | Yes | $2,126,589.00 | $2,257,550.00 |
| 2 | 1 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Professional Development | No | $12,181,668.00 | $11,389,450.00 |
| 2 | 2 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Safety and well-being | Yes | $7,955,734.00 | $14,439,975.00 |
| 2 | 3 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Coordinated Care Team | No | $17,247,260.00 | $12,350,180.00 |
| 2 | 4 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Improve Attendance | Yes | $2,353,133.00 | $3,402,079.00 |
| 2 | 5 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Increase Sense of Belonging | No | $11,593,380.00 | $10,990,986.00 |
| 2 | 6 | Systems of Support: Improved Use of Data | Yes | $6,187,849.00 | $5,882,382.00 |
| 2 | 7 | SF County Office of Education: Transition support | Yes | $361,187.00 | $263,763.00 |
| 2 | 8 | SF County Office of Education: Individual Learning Plans | Yes | $642,693.00 | $825,170.00 |
| 3 | 1 | Community Engagement for Effective Decision Making | No | $776,433.00 | $502,990.00 |
| 3 | 2 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Improve communication channels. | Yes | $2,103,646.00 | $2,548,163.00 |
| 3 | 3 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Parent & Student Advisory Committees and Councils | No | $835,756.00 | $822,652.00 |
| 3 | 4 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Build the capacity of parents and caregivers. | Yes | $4,172,182.00 | $3,302,717.00 |
| 3 | 5 | Community Schools: Build the capacity of staff to develop, implement, and sustain the community school model | No | $1,354,124.00 | $2,731,823.00 |
| 3 | 6 | Safe & Supportive Schools: School Crisis Support Initiative | Yes | $222,609.00 | $198,039.00 |
| 4 | 1 | Targeted supports: Students with IEPs | No | $908,734.00 | $1,510,447.00 |
| 4 | 2 | Targeted supports: Each & Every By Name | No | $479,399.00 | $150,836.00 |
| 4 | 3 | Targeted supports: Comprehensive Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CCEIS) | No | $193,627.00 | $162,162.00 |
| 4 | 4 | Targeted supports: African American Achievement & Leadership Initiative (AAALI) | No | $1,589,984.00 | $1,353,221.00 |
| 4 | 5 | Targeted supports: Students and Families Experiencing Homelessness (SAFEH) | No | $349,459.00 | $294,105.00 |
| 4 | 6 | LGBTQ Student Supports | No | $231,370.00 | $120,210.00 |
| 4 | 7 | Targeted supports: Foster Youth | Yes | $252,386.00 | $217,857.00 |
| 4 | 8 | Targeted Support: Newcomer students | Yes | $1,274,970.00 | $1,093,070.00 |
| 4 | 9 | Targeted Supports: Potential and Long Term English Language Learners | Yes | $1,704,424.00 | $1,057,850.00 |
| 5 | 1 | Improve Operations: Establish clear & accessible processes | No | $9,849,653.00 | $7,483,883.00 |
| 5 | 2 | Staff recruitment and retention | No | $5,826,882.00 | $4,852,673.00 |
| 5 | 3 | Resource Allocation: School Staffing Model | No | $297,685.00 | $229,326.00 |
| 5 | 4 | Resource Management: Improve facilities | No | $307,583.00 | $572,813.00 |
| 5 | 5 | Resource Management: Enterprise Resource Program | No | $5,288,839.00 | $15,221,484.00 |
| 5 | 6 | SF County Office of Education Operations | No | $123,631.00 | $122,990.00 |
| 6 | 1 | SFCOE College & Career Counseling support | No | $145,786.00 | $103,713.00 |
| 6 | 2 | Implement targeted strategies to increase students’ sense of belonging | No | $251,000.00 | $305,428.00 |
| 6 | 3 | Improve Attendance (Reduce Chronic Absenteeism) | No | $189,000.00 | $48,157.00 |
| 6 | 4 | Reduce Suspensions | No | $335,000.00 | $0.00 |
| 6 | 5 | Accelerate Language Development | No | $155,000.00 | $0.00 |
| Totals | 6. Estimated Actual LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants (Input Dollar Amount) | 4. Total Planned Contributing Expenditures (LCFF Funds) | 7. Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for Contributing Actions (LCFF Funds) | Difference Between Planned and Estimated Actual Expenditures for Contributing Actions (Subtract 7 from 4) | 5. Total Planned Percentage of Improved Services (%) | 8. Total Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services (%) | Difference Between Planned and Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services (Subtract 5 from 8) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Totals | $78,513,964.00 | $78,225,538.00 | $75,787,342.00 | $2,438,196.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Last Year's Goal # | Last Year's Action # | Action Title | Contributed to Increased or Improved Services? | Last Year's Total Planned Expenditures for Contributing Actions(LCFF Funds) | Estimated Actual Expenditures for Contributing Actions (Input LCFF Funds) | Planned Percentage of Improved Services (%) | Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services (Input Percentage) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5 | Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multi-language learners | Yes | $26,879,051.00 | $26,548,623.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 1 | 6 | Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations | Yes | $24,329,973.00 | $21,103,895.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 1 | 7 | Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness | Yes | $146,660.00 | $84,418.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 1 | 12 | Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade-level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching | Yes | $12,573,787.00 | $11,949,792.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 1 | 14 | SF County Office of Education: Academic Counseling & Career Technical Education Programming | Yes | $1,611,814.00 | $1,329,530.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 2 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Safety and well-being | Yes | $1,592,569.00 | $1,372,242.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 4 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Improve Attendance | Yes | $230,654.00 | $2,457,165.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 6 | Systems of Support: Improved Use of Data | Yes | $6,187,849.00 | $5,882,382.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 7 | SF County Office of Education: Transition support | Yes | $361,187.00 | $263,763.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 8 | SF County Office of Education: Individual Learning Plans | Yes | $0.00 | $0.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 3 | 2 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Improve communication channels. | Yes | $2,103,646.00 | $2,548,163.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 3 | 4 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Build the capacity of parents and caregivers. | Yes | $926,739.00 | $990,330.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 3 | 6 | Safe & Supportive Schools: School Crisis Support Initiative | Yes | $222,609.00 | $198,039.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 4 | 7 | Targeted supports: Foster Youth | Yes | $0.00 | $0.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 4 | 8 | Targeted Support: Newcomer students | Yes | $1,059,000.00 | $1,059,000.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 4 | 9 | Targeted Supports: Potential and Long Term English Language Learners | Yes | $0.00 | $0.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 9. Estimated Actual LCFF Base Grant (Input Dollar Amount) | 6. Estimated Actual LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants | LCFF Carryover - Percentage (Input Percentage from Prior Year) | 10. Total Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Current School Year (6 divided by 9 plus Carryover %) | 7. Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for Contributing Actions (LCFF Funds) | 8. Total Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services (%) | 11. Estimated Actual Percentage of Increased or Improved Services (7 divided by 9, plus 8) | 12. LCFF Carryover — Dollar Amount (Subtract 11 from 10 and multiply by 9) | 13. LCFF Carryover — Percentage (12 divided by 9) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $524,790,883.00 | $78,513,964.00 | 0.00% | 14.96% | $75,787,342.00 | 0.00% | 14.44% | $272,662,200.00 | 0.52% |
Increased or Improved Services for Foster Youth, English Learners, and Low-Income Students
For additional questions or technical assistance related to the completion of the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) template, please contact the local county office of education (COE), or the California Department of Education’s (CDE’s) Local Agency Systems Support Office, by phone at 916-319-0809 or by email at LCFF@cde.ca.gov.
The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to engage their local educational partners in an annual planning process to evaluate their progress within eight state priority areas encompassing all statutory metrics (COEs have 10 state priorities). LEAs document the results of this planning process in the LCAP using the template adopted by the State Board of Education.
The LCAP development process serves three distinct, but related functions:
The LCAP template, like each LEA’s final adopted LCAP, is a document, not a process. LEAs must use the template to memorialize the outcome of their LCAP development process, which must: (a) reflect comprehensive strategic planning, particularly to address and reduce disparities in opportunities and outcomes between student groups indicated by the California School Dashboard (Dashboard), (b) through meaningful engagement with educational partners that (c) meets legal requirements, as reflected in the final adopted LCAP. The sections included within the LCAP template do not and cannot reflect the full development process, just as the LCAP template itself is not intended as a tool for engaging educational partners.
If a county superintendent of schools has jurisdiction over a single school district, the county board of education and the governing board of the school district may adopt and file for review and approval a single LCAP consistent with the requirements in EC sections 52060, 52062, 52066, 52068, and 52070. The LCAP must clearly articulate to which entity’s budget (school district or county superintendent of schools) all budgeted and actual expenditures are aligned.
The revised LCAP template for the 2024–25, 2025–26, and 2026–27 school years reflects statutory changes made through Senate Bill 114 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review), Chapter 48, Statutes of 2023.
At its most basic, the adopted LCAP should attempt to distill not just what the LEA is doing for students in transitional kindergarten through grade twelve (TK–12), but also allow educational partners to understand why, and whether those strategies are leading to improved opportunities and outcomes for students. LEAs are strongly encouraged to use language and a level of detail in their adopted LCAPs intended to be meaningful and accessible for the LEA’s diverse educational partners and the broader public.
In developing and finalizing the LCAP for adoption, LEAs are encouraged to keep the following overarching frame at the forefront of the strategic planning and educational partner engagement functions:
Given present performance across the state priorities and on indicators in the Dashboard, how is the LEA using its budgetary resources to respond to TK–12 student and community needs, and address any performance gaps, including by meeting its obligation to increase or improve services for foster youth, English learners, and low-income students?
LEAs are encouraged to focus on a set of metrics and actions which, based on research, experience, and input gathered from educational partners, the LEA believes will have the biggest impact on behalf of its TK–12 students.
These instructions address the requirements for each section of the LCAP, but may include information about effective practices when developing the LCAP and completing the LCAP document. Additionally, the beginning of each template section includes information emphasizing the purpose that section serves.
A well-developed Plan Summary section provides a meaningful context for the LCAP. This section provides information about an LEA’s community as well as relevant information about student needs and performance. In order to present a meaningful context for the rest of the LCAP, the content of this section should be clearly and meaningfully related to the content included throughout each subsequent section of the LCAP.
A description of the LEA, its schools, and its students in grades transitional kindergarten–12, as applicable to the LEA. LEAs may also provide information about their strategic plan, vision, etc.
Briefly describe the LEA, its schools, and its students in grades TK–12, as applicable to the LEA.
A reflection on annual performance based on a review of the California School Dashboard (Dashboard) and local data.
Reflect on the LEA’s annual performance on the Dashboard and local data. This may include both successes and challenges identified by the LEA during the development process.
LEAs are encouraged to highlight how they are addressing the identified needs of student groups, and/or schools within the LCAP as part of this response.
As part of this response, the LEA must identify the following, which will remain unchanged during the three-year LCAP cycle:
As applicable, a summary of the work underway as part of technical assistance.
Annually identify the reason(s) the LEA is eligible for or has requested technical assistance consistent with EC sections 47607.3, 52071, 52071.5, 52072, or 52072.5, and provide a summary of the work underway as part of receiving technical assistance. The most common form of this technical assistance is frequently referred to as Differentiated Assistance, however this also includes LEAs that have requested technical assistance from their COE.
An LEA with a school or schools identified for comprehensive support and improvement (CSI) under the Every Student Succeeds Act must respond to the following prompts:
A list of the schools in the LEA that are eligible for comprehensive support and improvement.
A description of how the LEA has or will support its eligible schools in developing comprehensive support and improvement plans.
A description of how the LEA will monitor and evaluate the plan to support student and school improvement.
Significant and purposeful engagement of parents, students, educators, and other educational partners, including those representing the student groups identified by LCFF, is critical to the development of the LCAP and the budget process. Consistent with statute, such engagement should support comprehensive strategic planning, particularly to address and reduce disparities in opportunities and outcomes between student groups indicated by the Dashboard, accountability, and improvement across the state priorities and locally identified priorities (EC Section 52064[e][1]). Engagement of educational partners is an ongoing, annual process.
This section is designed to reflect how the engagement of educational partners influenced the decisions reflected in the adopted LCAP. The goal is to allow educational partners that participated in the LCAP development process and the broader public to understand how the LEA engaged educational partners and the impact of that engagement. LEAs are encouraged to keep this goal in the forefront when completing this section.
School districts and COEs: EC sections 52060(g) (California Legislative Information) and 52066(g) (California Legislative Information) specify the educational partners that must be consulted when developing the LCAP:
Before adopting the LCAP, school districts and COEs must share it with the applicable committees, as identified below under Requirements and Instructions. The superintendent is required by statute to respond in writing to the comments received from these committees. School districts and COEs must also consult with the special education local plan area administrator(s) when developing the LCAP.
Charter schools: EC Section 47606.5(d) (California Legislative Information) requires that the following educational partners be consulted with when developing the LCAP:
A charter school receiving Equity Multiplier funds must also consult with educational partners at the school generating Equity Multiplier funds in the development of the LCAP, specifically, in the development of the required focus goal for the school.
The LCAP should also be shared with, and LEAs should request input from, schoolsite-level advisory groups, as applicable (e.g., schoolsite councils, English Learner Advisory Councils, student advisory groups, etc.), to facilitate alignment between schoolsite and district-level goals. Information and resources that support effective engagement, define student consultation, and provide the requirements for advisory group composition, can be found under Resources on the CDE’s LCAP webpage.
Before the governing board/body of an LEA considers the adoption of the LCAP, the LEA must meet the following legal requirements:
A summary of the process used to engage educational partners in the development of the LCAP.
School districts and county offices of education must, at a minimum, consult with teachers, principals, administrators, other school personnel, local bargaining units, parents, and students in the development of the LCAP.
Charter schools must, at a minimum, consult with teachers, principals, administrators, other school personnel, parents, and students in the development of the LCAP.
An LEA receiving Equity Multiplier funds must also consult with educational partners at schools generating Equity Multiplier funds in the development of the LCAP, specifically, in the development of the required focus goal for each applicable school.
Educational Partners
Identify the applicable educational partner(s) or group(s) that were engaged in the development of the LCAP.
Process for Engagement
Describe the engagement process used by the LEA to involve the identified educational partner(s) in the development of the LCAP. At a minimum, the LEA must describe how it met its obligation to consult with all statutorily required educational partners, as applicable to the type of LEA.
A description of how the adopted LCAP was influenced by the feedback provided by educational partners.
Describe any goals, metrics, actions, or budgeted expenditures in the LCAP that were influenced by or developed in response to the educational partner feedback.
Well-developed goals will clearly communicate to educational partners what the LEA plans to accomplish, what the LEA plans to do in order to accomplish the goal, and how the LEA will know when it has accomplished the goal. A goal statement, associated metrics and expected outcomes, and the actions included in the goal must be in alignment. The explanation for why the LEA included a goal is an opportunity for LEAs to clearly communicate to educational partners and the public why, among the various strengths and areas for improvement highlighted by performance data and strategies and actions that could be pursued, the LEA decided to pursue this goal, and the related metrics, expected outcomes, actions, and expenditures.
A well-developed goal can be focused on the performance relative to a metric or metrics for all students, a specific student group(s), narrowing performance gaps, or implementing programs or strategies expected to impact outcomes. LEAs should assess the performance of their student groups when developing goals and the related actions to achieve such goals.
LEAs should prioritize the goals, specific actions, and related expenditures included within the LCAP within one or more state priorities. LEAs must consider performance on the state and local indicators, including their locally collected and reported data for the local indicators that are included in the Dashboard, in determining whether and how to prioritize its goals within the LCAP. As previously stated, strategic planning that is comprehensive connects budgetary decisions to teaching and learning performance data. LEAs should continually evaluate the hard choices they make about the use of limited resources to meet student and community needs to ensure opportunities and outcomes are improved for all students, and to address and reduce disparities in opportunities and outcomes between student groups indicated by the Dashboard.
In order to support prioritization of goals, the LCAP template provides LEAs with the option of developing three different kinds of goals:
Requirement to Address the LCFF State Priorities
At a minimum, the LCAP must address all LCFF priorities and associated metrics articulated in EC sections 52060(d) and 52066(d), as applicable to the LEA. The LCFF State Priorities Summary provides a summary of EC sections 52060(d) and 52066(d) to aid in the development of the LCAP.
Respond to the following prompts, as applicable:
Description
The description provided for a Focus Goal must be specific, measurable, and time bound.
Type of Goal
Identify the type of goal being implemented as a Focus Goal.
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Identify each of the state priorities that this goal is intended to address.
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
Explain why the LEA has chosen to prioritize this goal.
Description
LEAs receiving Equity Multiplier funding must include one or more focus goals for each school generating Equity Multiplier funding. In addition to addressing the focus goal requirements described above, LEAs must adhere to the following requirements.
Focus goals for Equity Multiplier schoolsites must address the following:
Type of Goal
Identify the type of goal being implemented as an Equity Multiplier Focus Goal.
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Identify each of the state priorities that this goal is intended to address.
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
Explain why the LEA has chosen to prioritize this goal.
LEAs are encouraged to approach an Equity Multiplier goal from a wholistic standpoint, considering how the goal might maximize student outcomes through the use of LCFF and other funding in addition to Equity Multiplier funds.
Note: EC Section 42238.024(b)(1) (California Legislative Information) requires that Equity Multiplier funds be used for the provision of evidence-based services and supports for students. Evidence-based services and supports are based on objective evidence that has informed the design of the service or support and/or guides the modification of those services and supports. Evidence-based supports and strategies are most commonly based on educational research and/or metrics of LEA, school, and/or student performance.
Description
Describe what the LEA plans to achieve through the actions included in the goal.
Type of Goal
Identify the type of goal being implemented as a Broad Goal.
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Identify each of the state priorities that this goal is intended to address.
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
Explain why the LEA developed this goal and how the actions and metrics grouped together will help achieve the goal.
Description
Describe how the LEA intends to maintain the progress made in the LCFF State Priorities not addressed by the other goals in the LCAP.
Type of Goal
Identify the type of goal being implemented as a Maintenance of Progress Goal.
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Identify each of the state priorities that this goal is intended to address.
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
Explain how the actions will sustain the progress exemplified by the related metrics.
For each LCAP year, identify the metric(s) that the LEA will use to track progress toward the expected outcomes.
Complete the table as follows:
Metric #
Metric
Baseline
o Use the most recent data associated with the metric available at the time of adoption of the LCAP for the first year of the three-year plan. LEAs may use data as reported on the 2023 Dashboard for the baseline of a metric only if that data represents the most recent available data (e.g., high school graduation rate).
o Using the most recent data available may involve reviewing data the LEA is preparing for submission to the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) or data that the LEA has recently submitted to CALPADS.
o Indicate the school year to which the baseline data applies.
o The baseline data must remain unchanged throughout the three-year LCAP.
▪ This requirement is not intended to prevent LEAs from revising the baseline data if it is necessary to do so. For example, if an LEA identifies that its data collection practices for a particular metric are leading to inaccurate data and revises its practice to obtain accurate data, it would also be appropriate for the LEA to revise the baseline data to align with the more accurate data process and report its results using the accurate data.
▪ If an LEA chooses to revise its baseline data, then, at a minimum, it must clearly identify the change as part of its response to the description of changes prompt in the Goal Analysis for the goal. LEAs are also strongly encouraged to involve their educational partners in the decision of whether or not to revise a baseline and to communicate the proposed change to their educational partners.
o Note for Charter Schools: Charter schools developing a one- or two-year LCAP may identify a new baseline each year, as applicable.
Year 1 Outcome
Year 2 Outcome
Target for Year 3 Outcome
Current Difference from Baseline
Timeline for school districts and COEs for completing the “Measuring and Reporting Results” part of the Goal.
|
Baseline |
Year 1 Outcome |
Year 2 Outcome |
Target for Year 3 Outcome |
Current Difference from Baseline |
|
|
Enter information in this box when completing the LCAP for 2024–25 or when adding a new metric. |
Enter information in this box when completing the LCAP for 2024–25 or when adding a new metric. |
Enter information in this box when completing the LCAP for 2025–26. Leave blank until then. |
Enter information in this box when completing the LCAP for 2026–27. Leave blank until then. |
Enter information in this box when completing the LCAP for 2024–25 or when adding a new metric. |
Enter information in this box when completing the LCAP for 2025–26 and 2026–27. Leave blank until then. |
Enter the LCAP Year.
Using actual annual measurable outcome data, including data from the Dashboard, analyze whether the planned actions were effective towards achieving the goal. “Effective” means the degree to which the planned actions were successful in producing the target result. Respond to the prompts as instructed.
Note: When completing the 2024–25 LCAP, use the 2023–24 Local Control and Accountability Plan Annual Update template to complete the Goal Analysis and identify the Goal Analysis prompts in the 2024–25 LCAP as “Not Applicable.”
A description of overall implementation, including any substantive differences in planned actions and actual implementation of these actions, and any relevant challenges and successes experienced with implementation.
● Describe the overall implementation of the actions to achieve the articulated goal, including relevant challenges and successes experienced with implementation.
o Include a discussion of relevant challenges and successes experienced with the implementation process.
o This discussion must include any instance where the LEA did not implement a planned action or implemented a planned action in a manner that differs substantively from how it was described in the adopted LCAP.
An explanation of material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures and/or Planned Percentages of Improved Services and Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services.
● Explain material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures and between the Planned Percentages of Improved Services and Estimated Actual Percentages of Improved Services, as applicable. Minor variances in expenditures or percentages do not need to be addressed, and a dollar-for-dollar accounting is not required.
A description of the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the specific actions to date in making progress toward the goal.
● Describe the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the specific actions to date in making progress toward the goal. “Effectiveness” means the degree to which the actions were successful in producing the target result and “ineffectiveness” means that the actions did not produce any significant or targeted result.
o In some cases, not all actions in a goal will be intended to improve performance on all of the metrics associated with the goal.
o When responding to this prompt, LEAs may assess the effectiveness of a single action or group of actions within the goal in the context of performance on a single metric or group of specific metrics within the goal that are applicable to the action(s). Grouping actions with metrics will allow for more robust analysis of whether the strategy the LEA is using to impact a specified set of metrics is working and increase transparency for educational partners. LEAs are encouraged to use such an approach when goals include multiple actions and metrics that are not closely associated.
o Beginning with the development of the 2024–25 LCAP, the LEA must change actions that have not proven effective over a three-year period.
A description of any changes made to the planned goal, metrics, target outcomes, or actions for the coming year that resulted from reflections on prior practice.
● Describe any changes made to this goal, expected outcomes, metrics, or actions to achieve this goal as a result of this analysis and analysis of the data provided in the Dashboard or other local data, as applicable.
o As noted above, beginning with the development of the 2024–25 LCAP, the LEA must change actions that have not proven effective over a three-year period. For actions that have been identified as ineffective, the LEA must identify the ineffective action and must include a description of the following:
▪ The reasons for the ineffectiveness, and
▪ How changes to the action will result in a new or strengthened approach.
Complete the table as follows. Add additional rows as necessary.
Title
Description
Total Funds
Contributing
Actions for Foster Youth: School districts, COEs, and charter schools that have a numerically significant foster youth student subgroup are encouraged to include specific actions in the LCAP designed to meet needs specific to foster youth students.
A well-written Increased or Improved Services section provides educational partners with a comprehensive description, within a single dedicated section, of how an LEA plans to increase or improve services for its unduplicated students as defined in EC Section 42238.02 in grades TK–12 as compared to all students in grades TK–12, as applicable, and how LEA-wide or schoolwide actions identified for this purpose meet regulatory requirements. Descriptions provided should include sufficient detail yet be sufficiently succinct to promote a broader understanding of educational partners to facilitate their ability to provide input. An LEA’s description in this section must align with the actions included in the Goals and Actions section as contributing.
Please Note: For the purpose of meeting the Increased or Improved Services requirement and consistent with EC Section 42238.02, long-term English learners are included in the English learner student group.
An LEA is required to demonstrate in its LCAP how it is increasing or improving services for its students who are foster youth, English learners, and/or low-income, collectively referred to as unduplicated students, as compared to the services provided to all students in proportion to the increase in funding it receives based on the number and concentration of unduplicated students in the LEA (EC Section 42238.07[a][1], EC Section 52064[b][8][B]; 5 CCR Section 15496[a]). This proportionality percentage is also known as the “minimum proportionality percentage” or “MPP.” The manner in which an LEA demonstrates it is meeting its MPP is two-fold: (1) through the expenditure of LCFF funds or through the identification of a Planned Percentage of Improved Services as documented in the Contributing Actions Table, and (2) through the explanations provided in the Increased or Improved Services for Foster Youth, English Learners, and Low-Income Students section.
To improve services means to grow services in quality and to increase services means to grow services in quantity. Services are increased or improved by those actions in the LCAP that are identified in the Goals and Actions section as contributing to the increased or improved services requirement, whether they are provided across the entire LEA (LEA-wide action), provided to an entire school (Schoolwide action), or solely provided to one or more unduplicated student group(s) (Limited action).
Therefore, for any action contributing to meet the increased or improved services requirement, the LEA must include an explanation of:
In addition to the above required explanations, LEAs must provide a justification for why an LEA-wide or Schoolwide action is being provided to all students and how the action is intended to improve outcomes for unduplicated student group(s) as compared to all students.
Actions provided on an LEA-wide basis at school districts with an unduplicated pupil percentage of less than 55 percent must also include a description of how the actions 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 must provide the basis for this determination, including any alternatives considered, supporting research, experience, or educational theory.
Actions provided on a Schoolwide basis for schools with less than 40 percent enrollment of unduplicated pupils must also include a description of how these actions 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 must provide the basis for this determination, including any alternatives considered, supporting research, experience, or educational theory.
Complete the tables as follows:
Total Projected LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants
Projected Additional 15 percent LCFF Concentration Grant
Projected Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year
LCFF Carryover — Dollar
Total Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year
For each action being provided to an entire LEA or school, provide an explanation of (1) the unique identified need(s) of the unduplicated student group(s) for whom the action is principally directed, (2) how the action is designed to address the identified need(s) and why it is being provided on an LEA or schoolwide basis, and (3) the metric(s) used to measure the effectiveness of the action in improving outcomes for the unduplicated student group(s).
If the LEA has provided this required description in the Action Descriptions, state as such within the table.
Complete the table as follows:
Identified Need(s)
Provide an explanation of the unique identified need(s) of the LEA’s unduplicated student group(s) for whom the action is principally directed.
An LEA demonstrates how an action is principally directed towards an unduplicated student group(s) when the LEA explains the need(s), condition(s), or circumstance(s) of the unduplicated student group(s) identified through a needs assessment and how the action addresses them. A meaningful needs assessment includes, at a minimum, analysis of applicable student achievement data and educational partner feedback.
How the Action(s) are Designed to Address Need(s) and Why it is Provided on an LEA-wide or Schoolwide Basis
Provide an explanation of how the action as designed will address the unique identified need(s) of the LEA’s unduplicated student group(s) for whom the action is principally directed and the rationale for why the action is being provided on an LEA-wide or schoolwide basis.
Metric(s) to Monitor Effectiveness
Identify the metric(s) being used to measure the progress and effectiveness of the action(s).
Note for COEs and Charter Schools: In the case of COEs and charter schools, schoolwide and LEA-wide are considered to be synonymous.
For each action being solely provided to one or more unduplicated student group(s), provide an explanation of (1) the unique identified need(s) of the unduplicated student group(s) being served, (2) how the action is designed to address the identified need(s), and (3) how the effectiveness of the action in improving outcomes for the unduplicated student group(s) will be measured.
If the LEA has provided the required descriptions in the Action Descriptions, state as such.
Complete the table as follows:
Identified Need(s)
Provide an explanation of the unique need(s) of the unduplicated student group(s) being served identified through the LEA’s needs assessment. A meaningful needs assessment includes, at a minimum, analysis of applicable student achievement data and educational partner feedback.
How the Action(s) are Designed to Address Need(s)
Provide an explanation of how the action is designed to address the unique identified need(s) of the unduplicated student group(s) being served.
Metric(s) to Monitor Effectiveness
Identify the metric(s) being used to measure the progress and effectiveness of the action(s).
For any limited action contributing to meeting the increased or improved services requirement that is associated with a Planned Percentage of Improved Services in the Contributing Summary Table rather than an expenditure of LCFF funds, describe the methodology that was used to determine the contribution of the action towards the proportional percentage, as applicable.
A description of the plan for how the additional concentration grant add-on funding identified above will be used to increase the number of staff providing direct services to students at schools that have a high concentration (above 55 percent) of foster youth, English learners, and low-income students, as applicable.
An LEA that receives the additional concentration grant add-on described in EC Section 42238.02 is required to demonstrate how it is using these funds to increase the number of staff who provide direct services to students at schools with an enrollment of unduplicated students that is greater than 55 percent as compared to the number of staff who provide direct services to students at schools with an enrollment of unduplicated students that is equal to or less than 55 percent. The staff who provide direct services to students must be certificated staff and/or classified staff employed by the LEA; classified staff includes custodial staff.
Provide the following descriptions, as applicable to the LEA:
Complete the table as follows:
Complete the Total Planned Expenditures Table for each action in the LCAP. The information entered into this table will automatically populate the other Action Tables. Information is only entered into the Total Planned Expenditures Table, the Annual Update Table, the Contributing Actions Annual Update Table, and the LCFF Carryover Table. The word “input” has been added to column headers to aid in identifying the column(s) where information will be entered. Information is not entered on the remaining Action tables.
The following tables are required to be included as part of the LCAP adopted by the local governing board or governing body:
Note: The coming LCAP Year is the year that is being planned for, while the current LCAP year is the current year of implementation. For example, when developing the 2024–25 LCAP, 2024–25 will be the coming LCAP Year and 2023–24 will be the current LCAP Year.
In the Total Planned Expenditures Table, input the following information for each action in the LCAP for that applicable LCAP year:
See EC sections 2574 (for COEs) and 42238.02 (for school districts and charter schools), as applicable, for LCFF entitlement calculations.
For example, an LEA determines that there is a need to analyze data to ensure that instructional aides and expanded learning providers know what targeted supports to provide to students who are foster youth. The LEA could implement this action by hiring additional staff to collect and analyze data and to coordinate supports for students, which, based on the LEA’s current pay scale, the LEA estimates would cost $165,000. Instead, the LEA chooses to utilize a portion of existing staff time to analyze data relating to students who are foster youth. This analysis will then be shared with site principals who will use the data to coordinate services provided by instructional assistants and expanded learning providers to target support to students. In this example, the LEA would divide the estimated cost of $165,000 by the amount of LCFF Funding identified in the Data Entry Table and then convert the quotient to a percentage. This percentage is the Planned Percentage of Improved Services for the action.
As noted above, information will not be entered in the Contributing Actions Table; however, the ‘Contributing to Increased or Improved Services?’ column will need to be checked to ensure that only actions with a “Yes” are displaying. If actions with a “No” are displayed or if actions that are contributing are not displaying in the column, use the drop-down menu in the column header to filter only the “Yes” responses.
In the Annual Update Table, provide the following information for each action in the LCAP for the relevant LCAP year:
In the Contributing Actions Annual Update Table, check the ‘Contributing to Increased or Improved Services?’ column to ensure that only actions with a “Yes” are displaying. If actions with a “No” are displayed or if actions that are contributing are not displaying in the column, use the drop-down menu in the column header to filter only the “Yes” responses. Provide the following information for each contributing action in the LCAP for the relevant LCAP year:
To reduce the duplication of effort of LEAs, the Action Tables include functionality such as pre-population of fields and cells based on the information provided in the Data Entry Table, the Annual Update Summary Table, and the Contributing Actions Table. For transparency, the functionality and calculations used are provided below.
Pursuant to EC Section 42238.07(c)(2), if the Total Planned Contributing Expenditures (4) is less than the Estimated Actual LCFF Supplemental and Concentration Grants (6), the LEA is required to calculate the difference between the Total Planned Percentage of Improved Services (5) and the Total Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services (7). If the Total Planned Contributing Expenditures (4) is equal to or greater than the Estimated Actual LCFF Supplemental and Concentration Grants (6), the Difference Between Planned and Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services will display “Not Required.”
The amount of LCFF funds is calculated by subtracting the Estimated Actual Percentage to Increase or Improve Services (11) from the Estimated Actual Percentage of Increased or Improved Services (10) and then multiplying by the Estimated Actual LCFF Base Grant (9). This amount is the amount of LCFF funds that is required to be carried over to the coming year.