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 | Christina Wong Executive Director, Local, State and Federal Programs |
wongc8@sfusd.edu 415-994-5618 |
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 8,900+ employees administer both the school district and the San Francisco County Office of Education (SFCOE), which makes SFCOE a single district office of education. While this 2026-27 LCAP update is filed under SFCOE, it will cover both the SFCOE and SFUSD. The 2026-27 school year is Year 3 of the 2024-2027 LCAP.
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
Supryia Ray, Commissioner
Lisa Weissman-Ward, Commissioner
- The SFUSD Community -
SFUSD is proud to serve a diverse and inclusive community of students and families. Our capacity to do so is made possible by the parents and caregivers who sit on 11 different advisory committees and councils, with representatives serving on the LCAP Advisory Committee. This plan and our work is not possible without their partnership.
SFUSD is grateful to the City of San Francisco, our Mayor and Board of Supervisors, who work to improve outcomes for public school students, most recently through the Student Success Fund (https://www.sf.gov/student-success-fund). San Francisco Promise is 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).
The broader community of San Francisco and the entire Bay Area supports SFUSD students and educators in a myriad of ways, from professional learning and enrichment with organizations like the California Academy of Sciences and SFMoMA, to providing work-based learning opportunities, including the UCSF partnership with the Mission Bay Hub, to dozens of community based organizations who work tirelessly in service and support of our students, families and community, especially our partners who provide after school services across the district.
SFUSD participates in deep and sustained research-practice-partnerships with Stanford University and UC Berkeley. Since 2009, SFUSD and Stanford have engaged in over 200 joint research projects focusing on areas such as STEM education, socio-emotional 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.
SFUSD benefits from and is grateful for the generosity of our philanthropic partners, including local and national foundations. For example, the Golden State Community Foundation has contributed to the strength and sustainability of programs for focal students. The Salesforce Foundation has come alongside our efforts to improve student outcomes for over a decade, currently investing in improving mathematics in middle schools.
- Students and Schools -
Together, SFUSD and the SFCOE serve approximately 56,000 students from birth through adulthood. SFUSD’s roughly 50,000 students span grades TK-12 in 101 schools and we provide Pre-K at 48 sites. As reported in the 2025-26 enrollment report to the CDE, SFCOE served 289 students across 4 sites.
The SFUSD student body reflects a wide range of cultural, linguistic, and socio-economic backgrounds. San Francisco is and will always be a sanctuary district, committed to serving all children in our community. A snapshot of these demographics from 2025 Data Quest enrollment data for SFUSD (non-charter schools) shows: Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 54.1%; English Learners: 25%; Foster Youth 0.4%; Homeless 6.2%, Students with Disabilities 16.6% African American 5.8%, American Indian .2%, Asian 29.8%, Filipino 3.3%, Latin@ 31.5%, Multi-Racial 7.7%, Pacific Islander .6%, White 12.3%. The SFUSD “Unduplicated Pupil Percentage” (UPP), which is the percentage of focal students who are counted once if they fall in at least one of the LCFF focal student categories (socioeconomically disadvantaged, English Learners, Foster Youth) was 59.4% as of January 2026.
- The SFUSD Vision, Values, Goals and Guardrails -
In October 2022 the SFUSD Board of Education adopted a vision and mission statement, a set of values that anchor our community, 5-year goals for student outcomes, and a set of guardrails, which are the community’s non-negotiables that must be honored when pursuing the goals. Under the leadership of the Board of Education and Superintendent Dr. Maria Su, SFCOE & SFUSD remains committed to implementing these “VVGGs.”
Mission: Every day we provide each and every student the quality instruction and equitable support required to thrive in the 21st century.
Vision: All SFCOE & 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.
Values: We anchor to a common set of 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.
Goals: SFUSD has set goals that reflect key benchmarks in a student’s path toward future success:
VVGG Goal 1- 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).
VVGG Goal 2- 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).
VVGG Goal 3- 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).
Guardrails: The following are community-driven non-negotiables that must be honored while working towards 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 addressing 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).
The SFUSD/SFCOE Board of Public Education approved the above goals and guardrails in 2022, the Superintendent established interim goals and guardrails for the 2025-26 school year. The interim goals and guardrails include initiatives, implementation metrics, and impact metrics for focal students such as Multilingual Learners and students who are African American, Pacific, or Latin@. For more details: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/11A93KXRu6n03Fx-4wJzA0UYgdKYWE9FNZBFn6QoRFUQ/edit?slide=id.g3725a900f48_0_86#slide=id.g3725a900f48_0_86.
The above goals and guardrails established by the school board are intentionally aligned to the LCAP, which in turn is aligned with the CDE priorities:
Priority 1: Basic Services and Conditions of Schools
Priority 2: Implementation of State Academic Standards
Priority 3: Parental Involvement and Family Engagement
Priority 4: Student Achievement
Priority 5: Student Engagement
Priority 6: School Climate
Priority 7: Access to a Broad Course of Study
Priority 8: Outcomes in a Broad Course of Study
Priority 9: Coordination of Services for Expelled Students (County Office of Education)
Priority 10: Coordination of Services for Foster Youth (County Office of Education)
- A Commitment to Continuous Improvement -
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. By way of reflecting back on where we started, and in fulfillment of our requirement to include these in every LCAP update, here are the SFCOE/SFUSD 2023 Dashboard Lowest Indicators: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x2iDZMB78AtGpkzEPvL8AuWQfXlUKkF_JMozoaXhAso/edit#gid=1084394816
SFUSD engages in ongoing, data-driven continuous improvement aligned to LCAP goals and the BOE-adopted Vision, Values, Goals and Guardrails (VVGGs). More about these efforts can be found throughout this update.
Performance on the 2025 CDE Dashboard has informed our focused efforts for continuous improvement.
SFCOE 2025 Dashboard: https://www.caschooldashboard.org/reports/38103890000000/2025
SFUSD 2025 Dashboard: https://www.caschooldashboard.org/reports/38684780000000/2025
- 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 must be used to provide evidence-based services and supports for students at identified sites. The CDE selects schools based on the formula each year. Below are the sites receiving the Equity Multiplier funding for the 2026-2027 school year, their funding allocations and student outcomes focus areas by student group (based on 2025 CA dashboard indicators where specific student groups scored “Red”):
Lee (Edwin and Anita) Newcomer School (located at Lau ES): $51,697
Outcomes Focus: 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.
Redding Elementary School: $325,828
Outcomes Focus:
1) Chronic Absenteeism: All Students, English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Asian, Hispanic or Latin@, White
2) English Language Arts: All Students, English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
3) Mathematics: All Students, English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
4) Science: All Students
Downtown High School: $285,795
Outcomes Focus:
1) Graduation Rate: All Students, English Learners, Long-Term English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Students with Disabilities, Hispanic or Latin@
2) College & Career: All Students, English Learners, Long-Term English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Hispanic or Latin@
Marshall (Thurgood) High School: $624,967
Outcomes Focus:
1) English Learner Progress: All Students, English Learners
2) Suspension Rate: Students with Disabilities
3) Graduation Rate: All Students, English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Hispanic or Latin@
4) English Language Arts: All Students, English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Hispanic or Latin@
5) Mathematics: English Learners, Hispanic or Latin@
6) Science: All Students, English Learners, Hispanic or Latin@
Wells (Ida B.) High School: $319,156
Outcomes Focus:
1) Graduation Rate: All Students, English Learners, Long-Term English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Hispanic or Latin@
2) Science: All Students
3) College & Career: All Students
SFCOE
S.F. County Civic Center Secondary: $209,064
Outcome Focus:
1) Science: All Students
S.F. County Court Woodside Learning Center: $217,960
Outcome Focus:
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) $113,428
Outcome Focus:
1) English Learner Progress: All Students, English Learners
2) Graduation Rate: All Students, English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged, Hispanic or Latin@
3) Science: All Students
The following schools have unused Equity Multiplier funds from the 2025-26 school year. These carryover funds will be used to support the lowest performing students groups at the sites and will continue in Goal 6.
SFUSD
- Lee (Edwin and Anita) Newcomer (newcomer program located at Lau ES)
- Mission Education Center
- Wells (Ida B.) High
- Downtown High
SFCOE
- S.F. County Civic Center Secondary
- S.F. County Court Woodside Learning Center
- S.F. County Opportunity (Hilltop)
The following schools no longer qualify for Equity Multiplier funding for the 2026-2027 school year. 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
- Mission Education Center
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.
The California School Dashboard is a collection of measures that the California Department of Education publishes to indicate district performance. The indicators include student behavioral and engagement data and academic performance and outcome data. The dashboard indicator shows red, orange, yellow, green and blue for all students and for subgroups of students, based on how well the district is doing compared to a standard set by the state.
- Academic Performance -
English Language/Arts - performance on the Smarter Balanced Assessment or California Alternate Assessment for grades 3-8 and 11.
For spring 2025 the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) is in “yellow” which is “standard” status. (technically .2 points below standard for all students. From 2024-2025 SFUSD maintained this standard status, with only a .8 point decline.
Mathematics - performance on the Smarter Balanced Assessment or California Alternate Assessment for grades 3-8 and 11.
For spring 2025 SFUSD maintained “standard” or “yellow” status at 24.4 points below with a 2.7 point increase from 2024.
English learner progress - the percentage of English learners (multilingual learners) who are making progress, as measured by the percentage of current EL students who progressed at least one level on the English Language Proficiency Indicator, maintained a level 4, maintained lower ELPI levels, or decreased at least one ELPI level.
For 2025 SFUSD is in “orange” status with 39.3% making progress and 1.4% staying at a level 4 or higher and 42% maintaining their level of
proficiency. This represents a decline of 3.9 points from 2024.
College and Career Readiness - the percentage of students who graduate from SFUSD not prepared, approaching prepared, or prepared for college and/or career. Indicator is a composite of several measures including : Smarter Balanced assessments, A-G, AP exams, IB exams, Dual Credit (has to be core academic UC course) Seal of Biliteracy, CTE Pathway, Dual Credit, Work-based learning (students with IEPs only), Internships, Leadership/Military science courses.
For 2025 59.7% of SFUSD students were prepared, a small decrease of 2.6 percentage points.
Implementation of academic standards: SFUSD also looks at the implementation of academic standards as a local measure. In 2025 SFUSD met this standard.
Subgroup performance on academic measures: When looking at the performance of individual subgroups across all measures, the data show equity gaps, with some student populations scoring in the blue and green ranges and a large number of student groups scoring in the red and orange ranges. This plan describes efforts to move the needle for our most marginalized students, including, but not limited to Goal 4, Anti-racist culture and equitable supports. As this goal describes, 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.
SFUSD staff reflections for English Language Arts and English Learner Progress are included in the BPE Adopted Goal 1 - 3rd Grade Literacy progress monitoring report https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DSCU3G7A156C/$file/%5BBOE%20Final%20-%2020260319%5D%2020260324%20PMR%20-%20Goal%201.pdf and staff presentation to the board on March 24, 2026 https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DSCU3J7A1734/$file/%5BBOE%20Final%5D%2020260319%20PMR%20Presentation%20-%20Goal%201%20%26%20GR%203.2.pdf.
SFUSD staff reflections for Mathematics are included under BPE Adopted Goal 2 - 8th Grade Math in the progress monitoring report https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DSCU3Q7A1E57/$file/%5BBOE%20Final%20-%2020260319%5D%2020260324%20PMR%20-%20Goal%202.pdf] and presentation to the board on March 24, 2026 https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DSCU3S7A2004/$file/%5BBOE%20Final%5D%2020260319%20PMR%20Presentation%20-%20Goal%202.pdf.
SFUSD staff reflections for College and Career Readiness are included under BPE Adopted Goal 3 - College and Career Readiness in this progress monitoring report https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DRG25S0089EA/$file/%5BBOE%20Final%20-%2020260219%5D%2020260224%20PMR%20-%20Goal%203.pdf and presentation to the board on February 24, 2026 https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DRG25P008780/$file/%5BBOE%20Final%20-%2020260219%5D%2020260224%20PMR%20Presentation%20-%20Goal%203.pdf.
- Academic Engagement -
California measures of academic engagement include:
Chronic absenteeism - the percentage of students in grades TK-8 who were absent 10% or more of the school year.
Overall, 26.6% of students in SFUSD are chronically absent, with a 1.4 percentage point increase in the rate from 2024-25. This compares to 17.1% for the state as a whole. This puts SFUSD in the “red” zone. As with academic performance, equity gaps remain large. However, chronic absenteeism is an issue across all groups as no individual student group scored in the “green” or “blue” status. Among student groups, the largest increase in chronic absenteeism is seen in Latin@ students with a 2 point increase. Among grade level spans, chronic absenteeism is highest for Transitional Kindergarten (TK)/Kindergarten students.
For staff reflections, please see the April 28, 2026 report and presentation made to the Board of Public Education for Guardrail 2 - Serving the Whole Child, which includes this metric. Report: https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DTEVKB81084C/$file/%5BBOE%20Final%5D%2020260428%20PMR%20-%20Guardrail%202.pdf Presentation: https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DTEVKE8112B3/$file/%5BBOE%20Final%5D%2020260428%20PMR%20Presentation%20-%20Guardrail%202.pdf.
Graduation rate - the percentage of students who received a standard school diploma
For all students, SFUSD is in the “green” for graduation, with a graduation rate of 89.4%, representing a move from orange to green.
Access to a broad course of study - SFUSD uses the following tools to measure access to and enrollment in a broad course of study, broken down by grade spans in service of improved outcomes for all students and especially our unduplicated subgroups (English Learners, Foster Youth, Low SES) and focal populations: Locally Selected Measures & Tools (Grade Spans / Equity Groups) 1. Grade 9 Early Warning Indicators (EWI) Exit Rate District tracks the percentage of incoming 9th graders who exit EWI status (e.g. no chronic absenteeism, course failures) by the end of 9th grade . 2. Grade 10 On-Track to Graduation Tracks the percentage of grade-10 students “on-track” for graduation by meeting course requirements and credits by June . 3. Grades 11–12 Course Success in Advanced Pathway Courses Measures the percentage of juniors and seniors (particularly African American, Latinx, NHPI) enrolled in Career Technical Education (CTE) pathway courses, AP courses, or college credit (dual/concurrent enrollment) courses passing with C- or better. 4. Course Access Tools & Master Scheduling Strategies SFUSD’s College and Career Readiness (CCR) office supports site master scheduling that ensures access to CTE electives and summer programming. 5. Mandatory College & Career Readiness Course All high school students must take a semester-long College & Career course that includes personalized planning, exploration of career pathways, CTE, AP and college readiness . These selected measures map directly to LCAP Priorities 2 & 4.
A summary of the differences across school sites and student groups having access to, and are enrolled in, a broad course of study, and may include a description of progress over time in the extent to which all students have access to, and are enrolled in, a broad course of study. San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) continues to ensure all students have access to, and are enrolled in, a broad course of study across grade spans, while identifying and addressing disparities in access and participation across student groups and school sites.
Universal Access Efforts: All SFUSD students in grades 9–12 are expected to complete a semester-long College & Career Readiness (CCR) course designed to introduce CTE pathways, AP options, and college eligibility. Master scheduling support from the College and Career Readiness Office ensures core and elective access, including AVID, dual enrollment, and third semester (summer) programs.
Enrollment Monitoring Tools: Grade 9: District tracks 9th grade Early Warning Indicator (EWI) exit rates to ensure access to a complete schedule and course success. Grade 10: On-track graduation status is used to evaluate course completion aligned with UC/CSU and district diploma requirements.
Grades 11–12: Students enrolled in CTE, AP, or dual enrollment courses are tracked for both participation and success (C- or better). Over the past three years, SFUSD has: (1) Increased 9th grade EWI exit rates, indicating better initial course access. (2) Narrowed gaps in on-track graduation rates across several subgroups. (3) Expanded culturally responsive elective and AP offerings; and (4) Introduced equity-focused supports like AVID-Excel and targeted CTE recruitment efforts for underrepresented students.
- Conditions and Climate -
Measures of district and school conditions and climate are:
Suspension rate: The percentage of students in TK-grade 12 who have been suspended for at least one aggregate day in the school year. Students are counted once regardless of the number of times or days they were suspended.
SFUSD maintained “green” status.
Basics (LCAP State Priority 1)
The percentage of appropriately assigned teachers: Reported annually to the CDE.
Students' access to curriculum-aligned instructional materials
Safe, clean and functional school facilities:
California School Inspections conducted the annual facilities inspection in fall 2025. The evaluator reported that they evaluated 76,515 different items across the fifteen areas across all inspected school sites. They identified 10,642 deficiencies and 191 extreme deficiencies in the 51 school sites visited. This represents an increase from the 2024-2025 school year, where the SFUSD school facilities inspections resulted in 6,921 deficiencies and 157 extreme deficiencies. The increase in deficiencies and extreme deficiencies can partially be attributed to the increase in the number of facilities from 43 to 51 campuses for Williams inspections. The inspectors found that the highest number of extreme deficiencies were in the areas of Fire Safety, Electrical, Interior Surfaces, and Windows and Doors.
SFUSD met the standard for providing the basics of a quality education.
Parent and family engagement: This measure addresses Parent and Family Engagement, including how an LEA builds relationships between school staff and families, builds partnerships for student outcomes and seeks input for decision-making.
SFUSD met the standard for parent and family engagement.
School Climate Survey: Each spring, the San Francisco Unified School District administers a SEL/Culture-Climate survey to students in Grades 4-12.
In 2025-26, the survey results closely tracked the results of the prior year, with a notable exception: a 3-point increase in the favorability score for Sense of Belonging among secondary students. The student response rate climbed nearly three percentage points, to 77%.
Elementary: The survey results for Elementary students were very similar to those in 2024-25. Among the SEL domains, there was no change in the favorability score for Growth Mindset (67%), and 1 point decrease year-over-year for each of the other three domains: Self-Management (65%), Social Awareness (61%), and Self-Efficacy (54%). The Culture-Climate results followed a similar pattern: a 1-point decrease in one domain, Safety, which dropped to 64%, and no change for the other domains, which include Climate of Support for Academic Learning (78%) and Sense of Belonging (73%).
Secondary: As in years past, favorability scores among Secondary students were the same or slightly higher in the SEL domains as compared with Elementary students, and significantly higher in the Culture-Climate domains. Results in the SEL domains were largely flat as compared to last year, though Social Awareness increased by two points, to 65%. Most notably, there was a year-over-year increase for every Culture Climate domain: the score for Climate of Support for Academic Learning increased one point, to 90%, while Safety increased two points, to 74%, and Sense of Belonging increased three points, to 83%.
- Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant (LREBG) Reporting -
Across all SFUSD schools the data show that academic performance and engagement remain critical areas of need for all students and especially focal students in the post-pandemic era. Additionally, community feedback indicates that families see a gap between the promise to implement multitiered systems of support and the reality, with the ongoing recommendation that SFUSD communicate a clear plan for Tier 2 Academic Supports in reading and math to help students reach their full potential. At the same time, teachers have indicated a need for collaboration and professional learning, especially with the adoption of new curriculum in literacy and mathematics (see teacher survey results here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t6TqCMLw6cNsAJUih1HkYXNlUT7yTBOd/view).
To address these needs, Learning Recovery and Emergency Block Grant Funding was allocated to two key investments aimed at accelerating student learning and providing the supports students need to show up at school every day and the supports educators need to deliver rigorous instruction that increases student academic ownership. First, under Goal 1, Action 3 (Teaching & Learning: Standards-aligned assessments) the LREBG paid for $696,329 in substitute costs covered centrally so that teachers could meet with a data analyst from the Research, Planning and Accountability department and receive individualized training and support about the implementation and use of interim assessments, accessing and making sense of the summative assessments, and how to track student response to instructional moves (EC Section 32526(c)(2)(E)). This strategy is key to strengthening multi-tiered systems of support in schools - if educators understand and can access multiple data points about their students, they will be better equipped to coordinate supports for students and conduct instructional planning targeted to their individual students' needs. This investment will continue for 2026-27 in the amount of $1,097,322.
Second, under Goal 1, Action 12 - Systems of Professional Learning- Instructional Leadership Teams, Grade-level/Department Collaboration and Instructional Coaching, LREBG funds in the amount of $10,454,712 was used for instructional coaching (EC Section 32526(c)(2)(B)(vi)). Instructional coaching is SFUSD's core strategy for accelerating academic recovery. Coaching is aligned with the 2023 California Mathematics Framework and the English Language Arts/English Language Development (ELA/ELD) Framework and based on research from TNTP (2024) that shows that even in classrooms where instruction is "standards-aligned," the tasks and activities assigned often lack the rigor and high expectations embedded in the standards. Coaching has a growing evidence base to support its effectiveness (see for example https://www.brookings.edu/articles/instructional-coaching-holds-promise-as-a-method-to-improve-teachers-impact/). In 2026-27 SFUSD will continue to use LREBG funds for instructional coaches district-wide in the amount of $9,713,503.
As applicable, a summary of the work underway as part of technical assistance.
For 2025 differentiated assistance determinations, districts and COEs will become eligible based on:
- Student group performance in two or more Local Control Funding formula (LCFF) state priority areas, or
- Performance on local indicators in two or more priority areas, or
- A combination of student group performance in one state priority area and local indicator performance in one different priority area; or
- Failing to submit CALPADS data on time per Education Code (EC) Section 52071 (a)(2) (only applicable to districts and COEs).
Below is a summary of SFUSD’s eligibility for Differentiated Assistance.
The following student group met the A criteria in state priority areas: Pupil Achievement (4, generally red on ELA, Math or ELPI), Pupil Engagement (5, red on graduation rate or chronic absence), and School Climate (6, red on suspension rate): Foster Youth.
The following student groups met the B criteria in state priority areas: Pupil Achievement (4) and Pupil Engagement (5): African American, American Indian, Hispanic, Long Term English Learner, Pacific Islander, and Students with Disabilities.
The following student group met the H criteria in state priority areas: Pupil Achievement (4), Pupil Engagement (5), and Outcomes in a Broad Course of Study (8, red on college/career): Homeless.
Below is a summary of SFCOE’s eligibility for Differentiated Assistance.
The following student groups met the B state criteria in priority areas: Pupil Achievement (4) and Pupil Engagement (5): Hispanic and Students with Disabilities.
SFUSD’s participation in the Networked Improvement Community (NIC) represents a strategic regional partnership focused on addressing persistent educational inequities through disciplined collaboration, data analysis, and continuous improvement. The NIC is part of the Bay Area Geographic Leads Consortium, a cross-county collaboration facilitated by the Santa Clara County Office of Education (https://www.sccoe.org?utm_source=chatgpt.com) and coordinated through the Bay Area Geographic Leads Consortium (https://www.bayareageoleads.org?utm_source=chatgpt.com). This consortium brings together district and county leaders from across the Bay Area to share promising practices, apply improvement science methodologies, and collectively address high-priority challenges affecting historically underserved student populations. During the 2024–2025 school year, SFUSD participated in the Improvement in Action: Reducing Suspensions for African American/Black Students Networked Improvement Community (NIC). This regional initiative focused on reducing disproportionate suspension rates among African American and Black students by examining school-based discipline systems, identifying root causes, and implementing more equitable and restorative approaches to student behavior and school climate. Participating districts engaged in structured cycles of inquiry, data analysis, and collaborative problem-solving to redesign systems that promote belonging, accountability, and academic success.
2024–25 Improvement in Action: Reducing Suspensions for African American/Black Students - (https://www.bayareageoleads.org/improvement-in-action/2024-25-reducing-suspension?utm_source=chatgpt.com).
In the 2025–2026 school year, the consortium expanded its offerings to include the Improvement in Action: African American/Black Student Success Networked Improvement Community (NIC) as well as the Improvement in Action: Leveraging Systems and Pedagogy for Long-Term English Learners Networked Improvement Community (NIC). These initiatives continue to support districts in strengthening instructional systems, student supports, and equitable outcomes for historically marginalized student groups.
Link to 2025–26 African American/Black Student Success NIC - (https://www.bayareageoleads.org/improvement-in-action/2025-26-aablack-student-nic?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
Link to 2025–2026 LTEL NIC Overview -
(https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CjJ3A_j0ytMf1UzYx3Bjl7flc4chPFdZ/view?utm_source=chatgpt.com).
- African American/Black Student Success Networked Improvement Community (NIC)-
SFUSD’s involvement in the African American/Black Student Success NIC aligns directly with Guardrail 2: Serving the Whole Child and complements the district’s Comprehensive Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CCEIS) and Compliance and Improvement Monitoring (CIM) efforts. Through this partnership, SFUSD worked intensively with four secondary schools (Willie Brown Middle School, Marina Middle School, Roosevelt Middle School, and Abraham Lincoln High School) to examine and redesign discipline systems with the goal of reducing exclusionary practices and strengthening restorative responses to student behavior.
At each site, district staff partnered closely with principals, assistant principals, head counselors, and school leadership teams to conduct a comprehensive review of the existing behavior matrix and discipline protocols. This work involved analyzing suspension and referral data, identifying behaviors that escalated too quickly to removal or suspension, examining inconsistencies in implementation, and assessing the extent to which current responses reflected restorative and culturally responsive practices. Using a structured restorative-versus-punitive audit tool, each school identified opportunities to revise behavioral expectations, clarify categories of behavior, and redesign consequences so that they emphasized prevention, skill-building, accountability, and relationship repair rather than exclusion. Following this analysis, SFUSD and site leadership teams developed detailed implementation timelines to guide the redesign and rollout of improved behavior systems. Each timeline included stakeholder engagement, creation of supporting tools and artifacts, staff training, pilot implementation, and ongoing progress monitoring. Key products included revised behavior matrices, student reflection forms, repair agreements, re-entry meeting protocols, family communication templates, and “Other Means of Correction” toolkits. Together, these resources established clearer, more consistent, and more equitable frameworks for responding to student behavior while promoting belonging, trust, and instructional continuity.
The impact of SFUSD’s participation in the NIC extends well beyond the four pilot schools. This work has generated practical models, tools, and implementation strategies that can be adapted across additional sites to reduce suspension rates, improve school climate, and strengthen students’ sense of belonging. By participating in this regional partnership, SFUSD has benefited from shared learning with neighboring districts while advancing its commitment to ensuring that African American and Black students are educated in environments that are fair, culturally responsive, restorative, and designed to support their academic and personal success.
- Leveraging Systems and Pedagogy for Long-Term English Learners” Networked Improvement Community (NIC) -
In addition to focusing on the needs of African American students, SFUSD, with the support of the Santa Clara County Office of Education engaged with the “Leveraging Systems and Pedagogy for Long-Term English Learners” Networked Improvement Community (NIC). Long-Term English Learners in SFUSD are also at the lowest performance levels for two state priority areas: Pupil Achievement (4) and Pupil Engagement (5). LTEL NIC webpage - https://www.bayareageoleads.org/improvement-in-action/2025-26-ltel-student-nic.Teacher leaders from James Denman Middle School and John O’Connell High School participated in 6 sessions during the 2025-26 school year to focus on the particular needs of LTELs at their respective school.
The Denman Middle School team directed their focus on strengthening outcomes for dually identified Long-Term Multilingual Learners and all Multilingual Learners by creating a unified system of support between ELD, Special Education, and the general education program. Their goal was to ensure that every student receives coordinated, language-rich instruction tailored to both their linguistic and learning needs. Some of the challenges included the lack of RSP planning time and burnout and LTEL specific classes such as AVID Excel ELD. Moving forward, teachers will 1) monitor LTEL 7th graders’ progress in 8th grade; 2) create a ML leadership team and develop methods to clearly track departmental accountability; 3) provide regular walkthrough feedback with focus on dually-identified students; 4) Increase student voice opportunities; 5) continue RSP/ELD collaboration; 6) provide practical PD focused on high-impact strategies for dually-identified LTEL (for all staff); and 7) dispel stigma around AVID Excel.
For O'Connell High School, the NIC provided teachers with the opportunity to discuss their challenges and plan a course of action to address the needs of LTELs. The team found that LTEL students are not all scheduled within a single class or cohort, creating challenges around consistent preparation, intervention, and readiness support. During the school year targeted outreach efforts had a meaningful impact on student attendance and family engagement. Direct phone calls home and consistent follow-up supported increased student attendance and helped strengthen family involvement in the testing and reclassification process. Moving forward the team will 1) strengthen a schoolwide culture that supports English Learners and LTEL students; 2) expand access to ELPAC-related resources and supports for students and staff; and 3) increase professional development opportunities focused on Designated ELD and Integrated ELD instructional practices to strengthen classroom support for multilingual learners across content areas.
SFUSD is planning to work with SCCOE to continue participating in both the African American and LTEL NICs and look forward to planning for 2026-27.
- San Francisco County Office of Education Differentiated Assistance -
Below is a summary of SFCOE’s eligibility for Differentiated Assistance.
The following student groups met the B state criteria in priority areas: Pupil Achievement (4) and Pupil Engagement (5): Hispanic and Students with Disabilities. In response to the Differentiated Assistance designation, SFCOE partnered with the California Department of Education for direct technical assistance. In collaboration with the internal team, two initiatives continued:
Literacy Improvement: All Court, Community, and Opportunity Schools continued the reading intervention program piloted two years ago and increased the number of weekly sessions and improved data collection.
Attendance: All Court, Community, and Opportunity Schools continued and built on the attendance procedures created the year before, increasing staff accountability and parent/guardian communication, adding student incentives and closely monitoring interventions.
Two additional major initiatives were initiated:
Math Improvement: The Team has begun researching and piloting two math intervention programs, one aligned with the school district, “Edia,” an online personalized math "tutoring" style program, and “Open Up” an integrated math curriculum.
English Language Learner strategies: Individual sites participated in professional development opportunities that seemed the most relevant and the whole County PD is planned for August 2026.
Plan for 2026–2027
Building on this momentum, SFCOE will prioritize improvements in graduation rate, attendance, as well as math and literacy, particularly for English Learners, Socioeconomically Disadvantaged students, and Students with Disabilities. Key actions include:
1) Hire a new Counselor to support new programming to address chronic absenteeism and ensure that students are making progress towards graduation
2) Continue, and adapt as needed, implementation of new math programming
3) Continue professional development to support English Language Learner-Continue to prioritize student wellness, SEL skill acquisition to ensure that students are able to self-advocate, goal-set, and participate fully in their education.
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.
Below are the list of schools eligible for Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) funds and its focal area of improvement:
- SFUSD -
S.F. International High School - Low Graduation Rate
Downtown High School - Low Graduation Rate
Ida B. Wells High School - Low Graduation Rate
- SFCOE -
S.F. County Opportunity Secondary (Hilltop) - 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 School District (SFUSD) and the San Francisco County Office of Education (SFCOE) have established a coordinated system of evaluation and support, grounded in the district’s Vision, Values, Goals, and Guardrails (VVGG), to ensure that schools identified for Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) effectively meet all requirements under the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). This system includes: conducting comprehensive needs assessments, engaging educational partners, identifying and addressing resource inequities, and implementing and monitoring evidence-based interventions aligned to each school’s School Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) to address the root causes of low graduation rates and improve student outcomes.
A central component of the CSI process is the resource inequities review, which SFUSD and SFCOE define as a structured process to ensure all students have equitable access to high-quality instruction, effective educators, rigorous curriculum, and comprehensive supports. Each CSI school identifies and prioritizes actionable inequities through its needs assessment and outlines aligned strategies within the SPSA.
Based on identified needs, SFUSD and SFCOE allocate CSI funds to implement targeted, evidence-based strategies focused on increasing graduation rates. These include interventions to address chronic absenteeism, low academic achievement in literacy, math, and social-emotional and mental-health needs. Strategies may include targeted literacy supports, credit recovery and academic intervention systems, expanded access to college and career counseling, culturally responsive, trauma-informed practices, and attendance improvement strategies, including family outreach and home visits, and a coordinated care approach through student support teams to address barriers to student engagement and learning.
Ongoing support is provided through collaboration between the Local, State, and Federal Programs department and the Leadership, Equity, Achievement, and Design (LEAD) team. School administrators receive guidance from administrative and data support staff, who assist with data collection, compliance, and ongoing evaluation to support continuous improvement and alignment with CSI goals. Fiscal oversight is also managed through the Grant Management and Reporting Tool (GMART), which helps ensure expenditures are allowable, aligned with approved plans, and support implementation of identified strategies.
We will continue to anchor in the following Theory of Action for SFUSD and SFCOE schools identified for Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) within the ESSA, Title I, Part A:
- IF schools implement a data-informed continuous improvement process, grounded in needs assessment and resource inequity analysis, and aligned to each School Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) with targeted strategies for focal student groups, social-emotional and mental health services, and expanded access to counseling and college and career readiness.
- THEN, schools and communities will build site capacity to implement and refine effective, evidence-based practices, strengthen coordination across student support systems, and increase meaningful engagement with students and families.
- SO THAT, focal student groups will demonstrate accelerated academic growth, increased engagement and credit attainment, and improve high school graduation outcomes.
A description of how the LEA will monitor and evaluate the plan to support student and school improvement.
SFUSD and SFCOE monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of CSI plans through a continuous improvement process aligned to the district’s Vision, Values, Goals, and Guardrails (VVGG). Implementation and progress are tracked through the school’s School Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA), which includes measurable objectives, identified metrics, and defined strategies based on the school’s comprehensive needs assessment. SFUSD and SFCOE utilize multiple data systems, including internal student outcome reports and the California School Dashboard, to monitor progress and evaluate effectiveness. Both quantitative data (e.g., student achievement, attendance, credit completion) and qualitative data (e.g., stakeholder feedback) are used to inform decision-making and improve practices.
At the central level, district teams, in collaboration with the Research Planning and Assessment (RPA), Leadership, Equity, Achievement, and Design (LEAD), Curriculum and Instruction, and Local, State, and Federal Programs partner with school leaders to facilitate data reviews, ongoing fiscal monitoring, and support mid-year and end-of-year SPSA evaluations. These processes help identify areas for improvement and ensure alignment between CSI-funded strategies and efforts to support graduation rates.
At the school level, CSI teams, including School Site Council (SSC) and English Learner Advisory Committee (ELAC), engage in ongoing review of the plan implementation and progress toward identified goals to increase student achievement and graduation rates. Schools regularly monitor the effectiveness of strategies by examining progress on key indicators, including attendance, suspension rates, English Language Arts and mathematics achievement, English learner progress, A-G completion and credit accrual, and school climate data. They do this through site-based structures such as department meetings, instructional leadership teams, and coordinated care teams. These structures support ongoing data analysis, reflection, and adjustment of strategies to improve student outcomes.
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. Budget Updates and Engagement with SFUSD Parent Advisory Committees and Town Halls |
The Superintendent and Budget Team provided budget updates during the fall of 2025 to help prepare the community for the 26-27 budget development process. The Budget Explainer video Superintendent's Virtual Budget Town Hall, and the Budget Town Hall Slide Deck can be found at this link - https://www.sfusd.edu/about-sfusd/budget-and-lcap/latest-budget-updates. In addition to five town halls, the Superintendent and the Budget Team also engaged with the following parent advisory committees: African American Parent Advisory Council (AAPAC), 11/20/2025 Asian PAC, 11/5/2025 Community Advisory Committee for Special Education (CAC), 12/4/2025 District English Learners Advisory Committee (DELAC), 11/19/2025 Foster Youth Services Coordinating Program, 11/20/2025 Indian Education Program, 12/4/2025 Latin@ Community Council and Migrant Education Program, 11/17/2025 Local Control and Accountability Plan Advisory Committee & Public Education Enrichment Fund Community Advisory Council, 11/12/2025 Native Hawaiian & Pacific Islander Matua Advisory Council, 11/4/2025 Queer and Trans Parent Advisory Council (QTPAC), 11/20/2025 |
| 2. LCAP 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 2025–2026 school year. The purpose of this advisory committee is to: deepen our collective understanding of SFUSD’s LCAP goals and priorities; engage in the development of the LCAP; review and give feedback on the goals, actions and services prioritized within the LCAP; convene families, school communities and other educational partners to gather recommendations for the LCAP; and 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. The LCAP Advisory Committee is comprised of the following (23 individuals in total): 10 delegates from the above advisory committees 8 SSC and ELAC representatives from each cohort and grade level across the district 2 student delegates from the Student Advisory Council and Queer Trans Advisory Council 3 representatives from our labor partners, the United Administrators of San Francisco (UASF), United Educators of San Francisco (UESF), and Services Employees International Union (SEIU) This is the current roster for the 2025-26 LCAP Advisory Committee - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1deDLvS6Wjv5ifsj7OFKcQNyf8o88STqFu758S9cj_uo/edit?tab=t.0 LCAP Advisory Committee meetings are held on the 2nd Wednesday of each month, from 5:30-7:30 pm. Meetings are either virtual on Zoom OR hybrid (on Zoom and in person). The in-person location is in the auditorium of Civic Center Secondary School at 727 Golden Gate Ave, San Francisco, CA 94102. Any member of the SFUSD/SFCOE community or member of the public is welcome to attend each LCAP Meeting in adherence to the Greene Act. 2025-26 LCAP Advisory Committee meeting dates and topics: November 12, 2025: The Superintendent and Budget Team provided budget updates to prepare the community for the upcoming budget development process. December 10, 2025: The committee reviewed the 1) LCAP Advisory Committee Overview, Purpose, and Composition; 2) SFUSD Response to LCAP Advisory Committee Recommendations; and 3) Overview of the 2025 California School Dashboard for San Francisco Unified School District. January 14, 2026: The committee reviewed and discussed the 1) 2026 LCAP Mid-Year Report; and 2) Overview of the 2026 LCAP Federal Addendum. February 25, 2026: The committee discussed the 1) 2026 LCAP Advisory Committee Bylaws; and 2) Planning for LCAP Community Engagement. March 11, 2026: The committee continued discussing the 1) 2026 LCAP Advisory Committee Bylaws; and 2) reviewed the draft community survey for families, students and staff. April 8, 2026: The committee approved the 2026 LCAP Advisory Committee Bylaws and reviewed preliminary community survey results. May 13, 2026: The committee 1) started developing the LCAP Recommendations by reviewing and discussing the community survey results and Parent Advisory Committee recommendations. May 27, 2026: The committee developed and took action on the LCAP recommendations to the Board. June 9: The LCAP Advisory Committee representatives present recommendations to the Board for 1st reading of the LCAP June 10: The committee debriefs Board meeting and reviews the 1st reading of the LCAP in preparation for the 2nd reading and final version of the LCAP for action. In addition to the above meetings, LCAP Advisory Committee members participated in smaller working group meetings during the spring of 2026 to help draft the bylaws, community survey and recommendations and share with the full advisory committee. Advisory Committee staff also engaged with their respective parent advisory committee to develop recommendations to the Board that also informed the LCAP Advisory Committee recommendations. Agendas and slide decks are posted on this webpage - https://www.sfusd.edu/advisory-councils-committees/lcap-advisory-committee?search_api_fulltext=lcap%20advisory%20committee |
| 3. School Site Council (SSC) Members and English Learner Advisory Council (ELAC) Members | On January 10, 2026 SFUSD & SFCOE held their school planning summit to launch the development of the School Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) for each school, in alignment and coherence with the district's Vision, Values, Goals, and Guardrails (VVGGs), the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP), and the LCAP Federal Addendum. School site councils had access to the video and presentations for guidance and then held additional meetings to complete the development of their own SPSAs. Here is the link to the school site planning summit webpage which includes presentations and videos - https://www.sfusd.edu/schoolplanningsummit2026?search_api_fulltext=Will%20C.%20Wood%20Middle%20School%202025 |
| 4. Student Advisory Committee (SAC) |
In addition to having a student delegate on the LCAP Advisory Committee, the full SAC membership shared their thoughts and experiences with college and career readiness in May of 2026: - Having the CCR class in 9th grade may be too early; it really is just an overview of the A-G requirements and some career exploration. Students don’t have much agency in course selection in 9th and 10th grade so it would be better if it was closer to when college applications are due. - The CCR class is only 2-3 weeks; I thought it would be a whole semester; the class did not go into the details of the college application process or FAFSA. - The ideal CCR program would include the following at each high school - A college counselor in addition to the current counseling team; Workshops on college options, FAFSA, essay writing, etc.; A college and career readiness room at each high school with resources; and Field trips to colleges, especially for students who would have the opportunity to visit. |
| 5. Queer and Trans Advisory Council (Students) |
In addition to having a student delegate on the LCAP Advisory Committee, students on the QTAC shared their thoughts and experiences in May of 2026: Students conducted a QTAC student survey to gather student experiences of what is going well and what needs improvement. The survey results highlighted the need for gender neutral spaces that are easy to access, i.e., bathrooms, safe changing spaces for sports. Students also conducted 1:1 interviews about the lack of queer affirming history in ethnic studies and the importance of learning from different perspectives. QTAC students also shared the challenge of joining school sports as a trans student. A clear pathway is needed for athletic directors, coaches and student athletes to understand. |
| 6. SFUSD Instructional Cabinet (central office administrators) | Cross Departmental leaders including ELA and Math Content Teams, Professional Growth & Development, LEAD, African American Achievement & Leadership Initiative, and Local, State & Federal Programs, met monthly during the 2025-26 school year to review and reflect on student outcomes data and strategic LCAP actions in preparation for the progress monitoring reports related to VVGG Goal 1 - 3rd Grade Literacy, Goal 2 - 8th Grade Math, and Goal 3 - College and Career Readiness. |
| 7. SFUSD/SFCOE Site-Based Teachers and Leaders |
SFUSD/SFCOE currently administers a survey to site based teachers and leaders twice a year to better understand the impact and efficacy of practices such as anti-racist practices, effective communication, community and belonging, educator collaboration, educator support network, professional learning, student/family engagement, and tools and assessments. Here are the results of the teacher survey - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t6TqCMLw6cNsAJUih1HkYXNlUT7yTBOd/view?usp=sharing |
| 8. Educational Partners/ Community Based Organizations | Representatives from Chinese for Affirmative Action, Coleman Advocates, Mission Graduates, Parents for Public Schools of San Francisco, and 2nd District PTA have attended LCAP Parent Advisory Committee meetings to provide feedback and support during the LCAP development process. |
| 9. Other Engagement: Regional County Office of Education Collaboration |
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. The following includes links to agendas and collaborative work: Bay Area Geographic Leads Consortium : https://www.bayareageoleads.org/ 2025-26 Improvement in Action: African American/Black Student Success Networked Improvement Community (NIC) https://www.bayareageoleads.org/improvement-in-action/2025-26-aablack-student-nic 2025-2026: Improvement in Action: Leveraging Systems and Pedagogy for Long-Term English Learners Network Improvement Community (NIC) https://www.bayareageoleads.org/improvement-in-action/2025-26-ltel-student-nic |
| 10. LCFF Equity Multiplier Funding Engagement for Eligible Schools | As part of the SPSA development process, each eligible school engaged with their SSC and ELAC on how to best use the LCFF Equity Multiplier funds to supplement and not supplant activities to address the needs of student groups. Selected schools were provided guidelines on how to use the funds to support student groups performing at the lowest level on the CA Dashboard - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k_Rb5QJw_gUuGiMGqEOn0uA9K8a-xCBFB0qh6twBkfY/edit?tab=t.0 |
A description of how the adopted LCAP was influenced by the feedback provided by educational partners.
The LCAP Advisory Committee recommendations to the Board of Education synthesize extensive discussions and recommendations made by each of the 11 advisory councils and committees across 4 broad recommendations, with 56 individual recommendations. The Advisory Committee presented these recommendations to the SFUSD Board of Education on June 9, 2026. SFUSD staff then examined these recommendations for the extent to which they were already included in the LCAP, the feasibility and alignment with state priorities, and then developed cost estimates for each of the recommendations that are not already included. This LCAP update includes 36 of these recommendations, with 15 recommendations needing further consideration based on resource availability, and 5 recommendations deemed not feasible to implement.
The recommendations included in this update include:
Recommendation 1: Staffing Stability, Recruitment and Retention
1.1. Grow our own: rebuild our staffing pipelines: Re-prioritize programs like the Aspiring Teachers program that help paraeducators and other classified staff earn full credentials to become teachers and administrators in order to grow a stable school staff from within our school communities.
1.1.a. Reduce or eliminate the use of staff contracted with SFUSD by outside agencies (e.g., and especially those serving students experiencing disability)
1.1.b. Ensure we have classified educators who have culturally responsive leadership
1.1.c. Ensure we have classified educators who are reflective of the student body, district-wide.
1.1.d. Partner with local universities with credentialing programs.
1.1.Focus on pipelines to address the shortage of Special Education teachers and paras, bilingual teachers for Spanish and Mandarin/Cantonese language programs, and American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN), Black, and Pacific Islander educators.
1.2. Make hiring more inclusive and efficient: Streamline the hiring process and expand support to ensure schools bring in educators who reflect the diversity of SFUSD students and families, with a focus on bilingual, AI/AN, Black, and Pacific Islander staff.
1.2.a. Prioritize hiring and retaining diverse, bilingual, and bicultural educators, including through Grow Our Own, specifically for focal students. Link prospective candidates with resources to support their education and credentialing, such as the Native American Opportunity Plan.
1.2.c. Ensure the payroll system is functioning
1.3. Develop systems to support staff retention:
1.3.a. Maintain and publish (e.g., via dashboard) school-site data showing staff retention and vacancies that can be disaggregated by high-need schools and other groups, such as Special Education and language programs.
Recommendation 2: Sustained Support of Belonging, Mental Health, Wellness and Whole Child Supports
2.5 Communicate clearly with families about supports implemented: Utilize the school’s Coordinated Care Team (CCT) structures to ensure consistent communication with families about behavioral expectations, available student supports through an SST, 504 Plan, or IEP.
2.5.a. Increase transparency around NPS (non-public schools) and residential treatment placements, behavioral incident reports, and school suspension data and practices, and when parents/guardians/caregivers can expect updates from the school.
2.7. Strengthen tiered whole child supports that are culturally responsive and designed based on the individual student experience.
2.8. Support trans students to safely participate in sports: Increase clarity on how trans students can access safe changing spaces and participate in sports without compromising their gender identity.
2.9. Strengthen school culture, sense of belonging, and sanctuary protections for Multilingual Learners.
2.10. Provide transportation support to Foster Youth to increase school stability and improve attendance.
2.11. Support the recruitment of Resource Parents (foster parents) to help keep San Francisco students in San Francisco and strengthen school stability.
2.12. Explore, identify, and communicate creative and sustainable funding opportunities to support critical work with our most marginalized student populations.
2.14 Address chronic absenteeism districtwide. Create a plan with clear metrics and funding in the LCAP that will be incorporated in the district budget to reduce chronic absences.
Recommendation 3: Increased Academic Intervention to Close the Opportunity Gap
3.1 Strengthen academic support systems: Develop and communicate a clear plan for Tier 2 Academic Supports in reading and math to help students reach their full potential.
3.2 Expand in-school math intervention: Specifically investigate and develop options for intervention for students who are below grade level in math to receive intensive instructional support during the school day.
3.3 Use data to drive early and continuous intervention: Continue to implement early warning systems and use data cycles to identify where students are making or not yet making progress, and intervene more quickly and effectively, particularly for focal populations and for students who are not grade level. This will lead to greater success in college and career readiness.
3.4. Support Multilingual Learners in dual language programs: Ensure that immersion and biliteracy students have early exposure to English language and literacy instruction, including consistent designated and/or integrated English Language Development.
3.4.a. Progress monitor in the home language and English, and share with families.
3.4.b. Lessons learned from the implementation of 50/50 model for Spanish Dual Language Immersion (DLI) & Biliteracy programs share with families progress updates, such as English proficiency data of students in DLI and Biliteracy programs.
3.4.c. Provide targeted support to address gaps for Multilingual Learners experiencing disability.
3.5. Develop a comprehensive plan for early literacy assessment and support:
3.6. Fully implement a plan for universal screening for reading difficulties among K-2 students per state requirements in the 2026-2027 school year.
3.7. Develop a plan to serve students identified as having reading difficulties on the screener, with appropriate interventions based on need. Ensure SFUSD is following its own dyslexia guidelines and state law. Implement the Tier 1 curricula enhancements described by the Dyslexia team at the Board’s Curriculum Committee in 2021.
3.9. Create literacy support by nurturing a thriving, positive climate for engaged reading and joyful learning.
3.10. Ensure there is a clear curriculum in place for students with dyslexia - i.e., ensure there are licenses for the Spire program through 8th grade.
3.10.a Ensure effective curriculum implementation: Improve teacher training to implement the adopted literacy curriculum, math curriculum, and social studies curriculum. Establish a system of observation and feedback that fosters a culture of learning and asset-based learning in each school.
3.11. Build and sustain authentic family partnerships: Develop shared learning and opportunities for all students and families, as well as community partnerships, e.g., San Francisco Public Libraries, after-school program providers, and other community-based organizations.
Recommendation 4: Build Staff Capacity Anchored in Cultural Awareness and Inclusivity
4.1 Strengthen staff capacity through community partnerships: Partner with Parent Advisory Committees and community organizations to help staff build cultural awareness and skills to work, teach, and collaborate effectively with diverse communities. This includes using culturally affirming curriculum and teaching methods.
4.2 Align advisory resources for impact while prioritizing EQUITY: Streamline and align resources in district-level advisory bodies in order to provide equitable and meaningful funding for the advisories to collaborate and co-create more effectively with greater impact.
4.6 Prioritize hiring bilingual, bicultural, and community-connected educators and support staff who reflect the diversity of SFUSD students and families.
Recommendations that needed further consideration due to the cost not being included in the 2026-27 budget or the complexity of implementation are:
Recommendation 1: Staffing Stability, Strategic Recruitment and Retention
1.1.d. Expand partnerships with local universities with credentialing programs.
1.1. e. Provide funding to ensure mentorship programs continue and grow, such as TLEE.
1.2.b. Provide funding to have “live” people reaching out to applicants through the recruitment and hiring process. Ensure there is a “live” person to help with the onboarding once hiring is complete, including drop-in hours outside of contract hours for classified staff.
1.3.b. Conduct exit interviews and use that data to improve its retention.
1.4. Incentivize recruitment of permanent SFUSD staff for high-need schools: Recognize and retain teachers serving our most impacted schools by offering incentives like culturally responsive training, time for collaboration, and opportunities to mentor peers.
1.5 Protect the value of having both small and large schools in our district: Smaller schools and class sizes are especially important for meeting the needs of neurodiverse students who benefit from more personalized support.
1.6 Consult school sites before making site-based changes: Before the district makes changes to school site schedules, e.g., the move to the block schedule for middle school, school sites and administrators must be consulted, and school sites should have autonomy in making changes. For example, when a new math curriculum was introduced, students lost health class at some sites. The district should inform school communities by reaching out directly to the SSCs.
Recommendation 2: Sustained Support of Belonging, Mental Health, Wellness, and Whole Child Supports
2.1 Create safe and calming spaces for students: Implement calming spaces in and outside of classrooms so all students have access to wellness center spaces throughout our schools and prioritize student safety, wellness, and high-need supports.
2.2 Ensure that schools have accessible ADA / all-gender restrooms (not locked) stocked with menstrual hygiene products, and safe changing spaces.
2.3 Integrate social-emotional learning and trauma-informed practices throughout the school day: Infuse social-emotional learning opportunities throughout the school day. Work in partnership with local mental health agencies and CBOs to improve care coordination between school services and the broader mental health ecosystem.
2.4 Provide mandatory trauma-informed and culturally sensitive training for all administrators and staff, including increasing awareness of the unique needs and experiences of foster youth and AI/AN students. Move away from PBIS (behavioral-focused training ) and towards trauma-informed training (Ross Greene's Trauma-informed practices and Safe Schools Resolution).
2.6. Ensure full implementation of restorative practices at all schools, including ensuring all staff receive training.
2.13 Scale the Community Schools model to all SFUSD schools.
Recommendation 4: Build Capacity Anchored in Cultural Awareness and Inclusivity
4.4 Create Parent-Staff Learning Communities: Encourage collaborations between teachers and parents/guardians/caregivers on shared best practices, common experiences, what is working and what is not, and how adjustments can be made towards continuous improvement. Create explicit learning communities for parents/guardians/caregivers by inviting teachers and staff to share their proven methods in managing culturally competent classrooms and school spaces. Partner with local and national organizations that support the advancement of our focal populations.
4.5 Require annual professional development focused on culturally responsive teaching, anti-bias practices, immigrant family engagement, and multilingual learner support.
Recommendations that were not feasible to include in this 2026-27 LCAP Update were determined as such due to misalignment with local and state policies or because they are not currently in process and would take substantial resources to implement include:
Recommendation 1: Staffing Stability, Recruitment and Retention
1.3.c. Have an emergency plan for addressing vacancies in key staff positions (e.g., principals) that considers the long-term success and buy-in from the school community, legally mandated services (e.g., for students with IEPs when there are insufficient RSPs/case managers), and is in compliance with contractual agreements.
1.7 Prepare our substitute teachers to provide standards-based, grade-level instruction: Ensure they receive the support and training necessary to deliver grade-level instruction aligned with state standards, so teaching and learning continue every day in every classroom. For substitute teachers who have classes with students with IEPs, the substitute should be provided with the IEP-at-a-glance document.
Recommendation 3: Increased Academic Intervention to Close the Opportunity Gap
3.8 Return to K–2 literacy assessments, where SFUSD teachers receive substitute support to administer 1-1 in-person assessments, as our district did years ago; stop using screen-based assessments for grades K–2; teach Kindergarteners how to read with books and not screens, as so many K–2 students are improperly assessed for their current reading level.
3.12. Ensure that there are clear district-wide pathways for Physical Education Independent Study to ensure that all students can experience physical education in a safe and meaningful way, especially for LGBTQ identified students, who experience elevated rates of verbal and physical harassment
3.13. Provide high-dosage tutoring (1:1 human based) to focal students.
| 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.
LCAP Goal 1 is aligned with the SFUSD/SFCOE Board of Education’s Vision, Values, Goals and Guardrails as follows:
VVGG - Goal 1 - 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 2028.
VVGG- Goal 2 - 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 2028.
VVGG Goal 3 - 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 2028.
VVGG Guardrail 3 - Curriculum & Instruction: The Superintendent will not allow curriculum and instruction that is not rooted in excellence, challenging and engaging, not student-centered, not culturally responsive, or not differentiated to meet the academic needs of all students.
The Vision, Values, Goals and Guardrails adopted by the BOE keep us centered on the most important functions of the district. They form the basis of SFUSD’s progress monitoring process, a regular, cross-office analysis of data about implementation and interim student progress.
LCAP Goal 1 is a broad metric spanning these core functions and outcomes, and points to the importance of a well-rounded education that builds students’ academic skills and their “academic ownership” so that all students can attain 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.
| 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 |
Spring 2025 CAASPP ELA Overall: 0.2 points below standard English Learners: 58.6 below Foster Youth: 134.2 below Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 42.4 below |
Annual 2 point increase |
Decreased 3.7 points English Learners: 9.5 point decrease Foster Youth: 17.4 point decrease Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 6.7 point decrease |
| 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) |
Spring 2025 CAASPP Math Overall: 24.4 points below standard EL: 69.9 below FY: 154.6 below SED: 65.3 below |
Annual 2 point increase |
Decrease 2.5 points EL: 6.8 point decrease FY: 6.7 point decrease SED: 5.4 point decrease |
| 3 | High school readiness rate | 2023: All Students: 58.2% English Learners: 25.5% Foster Youth: 5.9% Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 45.1% |
2023: All Students: 46% English Learners: 28% Foster Youth: 11% Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 41% |
47% (2024-25) EL: 28% FY: 9% SED: 42% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points | 1 percentage point increase EL: same FY: 2pp decrease SED: 1 pp increase |
| 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 |
75.9% (23-24) | 77.7% (24-25) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points |
1.1 percentage point increase |
| 5 | College and Career readiness rate | All Students: 58.2% English Learners: 34.1% Foster Youth: 11.1% Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: 52.3% |
57.8% (Class of 2024) EL: 31.0% FY: 23.5% SED: 50.8% |
59.7% (Class of 2025) EL: 34.4% FY: 26.1% SED: 54.4% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points | 1.5 percentage point increase EL: 0.3 pp increase FY: 15 pp increase SED: 2.1 pp increase |
| 6 | % of Advanced Placement Tests taken with score of 3 or higher | 70% (2022-23) |
73% (2023-24) |
76% (2024-25) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (81%) | 6 percentage point increase |
| 7 | % of SFUSD 12th graders graduating UC/CSU eligible | 60.3% (2022-23) |
59.4% (2023-24) |
56% (2024-25) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points | 4.3 percentage point decrease |
| 8 | Graduation rate | 88.3% |
83% (2024) Decline -5.3% Goal = Annual 2 point increase 90.3% Distance from Standard |
84.9% (2025) |
Annual 2 point increase (94.3%) |
3.4 percentage point decrease |
| 9 | English Learner Progress rate (CA Dashboard measure) |
44.8% |
43.1% (2024) “Maintained” -1.8% |
39.2% (2025) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (54.8%) |
5.6 percentage point decrease |
| 10 | % of SFUSD preschool students ready for kindergarten |
60.3% |
66.2% (2023-24) |
67.9% (2024-25) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (70.3%) |
7.6 percentage point increase |
| 11 | % pass facilities Williams Act inspections (Williams Facilities Inspections only occur at sites that are identified by the CDE; here is the report submitted to the Board in November of 2025 - /https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DNDVG980A425/$file/Williams%20Annual%20Report%2C%20Facilities%20Annual%20Report%20and%20Instructional%20Materials%20Annual%20Report.pdf |
Exemplary: 0 Good: 0 Fair: 36% Poor: 59% |
Exemplary: 0 Good: 0 Fair: 23% Poor: 77% |
Exemplary: 0 Good: 0 Fair: 27.45% Poor: 72.55% |
Exemplary: 0 Good: 0 Fair: 35% Poor: 65% |
Exemplary: 0 Good: 0 Fair: 8.55 percentage point decrease Poor: 13.55 percentage point increase |
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.
-A Description of Overall Implementation-
In 2025-26 SFUSD continued to strengthen core curriculum and instruction in partnership with TNTP, a national organization that works with districts to evaluate the “opportunity gap” in curriculum and instruction. TNTP evaluates instructional materials and conducts observations of classroom practices on the extent to which students have access to rigorous, grade-level content and on the SFUSD Core Instruction Rubric (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b64EoDyzcAAd7XNThmksXgrmp_KBPn0n-6AoFHiIGPs/edit?tab=t.0).
This rubric assesses for the presence of effective classrooms across 4 domains:
(1) Culture of Learning: Are all students engaged in the work of the lesson from start to finish?
(2) Essential Content: Are all students engaged in content aligned to the appropriate standards for their subject and grade?
(3) Academic Ownership: Are all students responsible for doing the thinking in this classroom?
(4) Demonstration of Learning: Do all students demonstrate that they are learning?
In 2025-26 TNTP conducted classroom observations (“learning walks”) in a representative sampling of SFUSD classrooms, which included 120 classroom observations across three walk cycles (September, January and March) in grades K-5, which were then analyzed for patterns and trends (in comparison to 2024-25 data). The operationalization of high-quality instructional materials and the 4 domains of the Core Teaching Rubric has focused on using the results of these observations along with learning walk data collected by administrators to build shared knowledge among central office leaders, school principals and assistant principals, and instructional coaches in service of strengthening instructional leadership. Central office administrators continued the practice of quarterly Instructional Cabinet meetings where staff come together across divisions (Curriculum and Instruction, LEAD school supervisors, and Research, Planning and Accountability) to discuss data and evidence of practice, including implementation successes and challenges.
To support shared knowledge and skill development among site leaders, Instructional Cabinet members designed and convened regular meetings within school cohorts and across the city (“citywide”). These sessions included deep dives into the new curriculum, discussions of student assessment and teacher observation data, and planning how to support grade-level teams and individual teachers based on the evidence.These sessions were essential for building shared knowledge about the importance of consistent implementation of high-quality instructional materials.
Through these structures and processes, we are able to assess differences in planned actions and actions taken as well as challenges and successes with implementation, discussed in greater detail by action below.
Action 1.01 - Teaching & Learning: High-quality and engaging instruction aligned to the Core Rubric
This action focused on strengthening 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. The action of conducting regular and repeated observations was implemented, and school administrators and coaches worked to provide meaningful feedback. However, TNTP observations indicated that across classrooms, focus on essential content, and academic ownership remained lower than desired in English/language arts and mathematics.
For English/language arts the data suggest that some teachers may need more support in designing and delivering lessons using the curriculum. In mathematics, 27% of classrooms had strong academic ownership, and under 40% of classrooms were rated “Yes” or “Mostly” for each of the indicators on this second round of learning walks. Given that this is only Year 1 of the new math curriculum implementation, these ratings offer a strong starting point.
Action 1.02- Teaching & Learning: Implementation of high quality instructional materials
TNTP learning walks in grades K-8 showed an increase in use of high-quality, research-based curricula in both English/language arts and mathematics. In English/language arts, approximately two-thirds of observed classrooms were using the new literacy curriculum by March of 2026, and this implementation increased throughout the spring. SFUSD continued to strengthen implementation with instructional coaches at each elementary school site supporting teachers with the new materials and practices. For K-8 mathematics, 87% of classrooms were observed utilizing the new Amplify Desmos Math materials during classroom instruction, and 80% of classrooms were focused on grade-level content, with a focus on grade-level standards, coherence across standards, and adherence to the appropriate aspects of rigor. Across each time period, we have observed more SFUSD students have access to grade-level content. However, the observations also found differences in how math materials are used in SDC and ML/ELD classrooms, which points to the need for more consistent grade-level collaboration and time for lesson and module internalization. Finally, curriculum pacing remains a challenge. For example, in mathematics, among the approximately 100 math classrooms across sixth through eighth grades, about half were on pace as of the end of January.
For high school, Curriculum and Instruction (C&I) initiated a multiyear curriculum adoption process for the high school math courses Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II. It has been over 10 years since the introduction of the new high school curriculum. Throughout January to June 2026, C&I has worked with TNTP to conduct a comprehensive audit of our high school math written and taught curriculum across grades 9-11. The purpose of this audit is to conduct a root cause analysis of student outcome data along with a review of the provided written curriculum, classroom observations, artifact analysis (collection of classroom tasks and associated student work samples), and surveys and focus groups with site educators and students. The research questions in the diagnostic focus on alignment of instructional materials, assignments, and instructional practices to assess whether all students have equitable access to grade-appropriate materials, instruction, and high expectations from their teachers, and student level of engagement in school and in their math courses.
Action 1.03 - Teaching & Learning: Standards-aligned assessments
We continue to implement Star assessments, which are valid and reliable interim assessments correlated with summative state tests, for progress monitoring (Learn more: https://www.sfusd.edu/district-assessments). Additionally, the Research, Planning and Assessment department provided direct and individualized technical assistance to classroom teachers in the use of summative and interim assessments to support differentiation and learning acceleration.
Action 1.04 - Teaching & Learning: Use of Data
Use of data for instructional improvement is SFUSD BPE Adopted Interim Guardrail 3.2. Making connections between the activities and the actions of adults on the one hand and the learning outcomes of students in the classroom is a critical skill for all educators in the district to develop. To build these muscles, for the third year in a row, Research Planning and Accountability (RPA), in collaboration with the Executive Directors of school supervision (LEAD), has been implementing a series of “Use of Data” professional development activities for site leaders and instructional coaches. These sessions are designed to coincide with the availability of the results from Star assessments and seek to develop instructional leaders’ competence in 1) identifying and collecting appropriate implementation data and 2) connecting the collected implemented data with student outcome data to assess the impact of the schools’/teachers’ strategies. More specifically, the sessions have focused on elementary schools and English/Language Arts (BPE Adopted Goal 1).
The theory of change underlying this initiative is that as site leaders and coaches enhance their analytical skills through these PDs and use their learnings with their instructional leadership team (ILT) at their respective site, teachers will strengthen their proficiency in using data for instructional improvement. One part of the initiative is an assignment for site leaders and coaches to engage in a data review activity with their ILT and to submit a survey and an artifact from the activity. Evidence shows clear growth in this area: The share of elementary cohort sites successfully completing this requirement has steadily increased over three years, from 41% to 53%. Additionally, in a biannual staff survey there was a 10 point increase in the percentage of teachers who responded that they independently reviewed data and monitored progress for continued improvement of instruction (67% in December of 2025 compared to 57% in June of 2025). The December value already exceeded the target of 62% set for the end of the year.
Action 1.05 - Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multi-language learners
This year focused on revising English Language Development observation tools and implementing curriculum revisions - Based on feedback from the Multilingual Pathways Department (MPD), Houghton-Mifflin Harcourt (publisher) revised the Designated English Language Development (D-ELD) curriculum, including updated lesson slides, new teacher guides, and student workbooks. Instructional coaches worked to integrate these into every classroom.
Finally, MPD continued to monitor English Learner compliance and student rostering to ensure that all multilingual learners are appropriately identified and receive daily Designated ELD instruction aligned with our core curriculum.
To ensure a successful implementation of these initiatives, MPD has invested in ongoing systems of support for schools and educators. These investments include monthly Multilingual Learner Coordinator meetings; the acquisition of 7550 student workbooks and 876 teacher guides to support D-ELD instruction; professional learning opportunities for K-5 teachers and school staff; and Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) designed to support collaboration, reflection, and continuous improvement in Designated ELD instruction.
Action 1.06 - Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations
For students needing additional intervention and support, administrators and instructional coaches support educators in using the Star Instructional Planning Reports to guide instruction for “Each and Every” identified students (see Goal 4 for more detail about the Each and Every initiative). These reports summarize: 1) skills students have already mastered; and 2) focal skills that need to be bolstered. To move this work forward, we are strengthening staff data literacy through consistent, systemwide routines for analyzing and acting on student data. Educators are supported to interpret Star Instructional Planning Reports, identify trends across students, and translate those insights into targeted instructional plans. This includes ongoing progress monitoring to assess the effectiveness of instructional adjustments and ensure students are accelerating toward grade-level proficiency. This approach reinforces a shift from data collection to data-driven action, ensuring that student plans are responsive, aligned, and continuously updated based on evidence of learning.
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. SFUSD focused on supporting effective implementation of the built-in reading tutoring program Amira, especially in the early grades (K-2). In mathematics, the Curriculum and Instruction division piloted an intervention for middle school called Edia. This tool will be available for all middle schools in 2026-27.
Ongoing progress monitoring by district leaders revealed that Amira implementation was not as widespread as hoped by winter 2026. A survey revealed that lack of devices including headphones were a key barrier. Additional funds will be applied in 2026-27 to ensure every classroom has at least three dedicated Amira device packages for grades K-3.
Action 1.07 - Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness
Progress in the actions towards college and career readiness continued to be affected by reductions to key staff, which has limited the district’s ability to fully implement actions related to internships and credit recovery, as exemplified by reductions to High School Credit Recovery and Paid High School Internships.
However, efforts to ensure students are on track to graduate had strong implementation, including the Setting Up for Success initiative, a proactive, schoolwide system of support for incoming 9th grade students, starting before the school year begins. As part of this initiative high school sites improved their case management and progress monitoring competencies through the focus on both the 9th grade Early Warning Indicator (EWI) students and the 10th grade off-track students. By January of 2026, 79% of high schools had facilitated a formalized 9th grade EWI meeting where schools worked on their 9th grade staff to build awareness about EWI and to introduce the list of 9th grade students with the EWI flag. The work now engages broader groups of stakeholders—teachers and families—beyond counselors and Coordinated Care Teams (CCTs). With the AI tutoring platform and instructional walkthroughs focusing on math, high school teams are strengthening students’ math achievement on Star Math.
The Mission Bay Hub (MBH) campus opened in spring 2026. The Mission Bay Hub (MBH) began in 2023 as a supportive, relationship-centered learning environment for students in SFUSD who are underrepresented in STEM fields, addressing systemic inequity and opportunity gaps. The MBH currently has partnerships with 5 high schools, allowing students in those schools to spend a semester in deep learning through interdisciplinary projects and work-based learning experiences in Biotechnology and Life Sciences, and Medicine and Patient Care, benefitting from a collaboration with industry professionals at UCSF.
Finally, SFUSD continues to implement 49 Career and Technical Education programs at 16 high schools, preparing students for jobs in industries ranging from Biotech to Culinary to Engineering. Across the City, students are developing their technical skills, while cultivating soft skills like critical thinking, initiative, flexibility, public speaking, and leadership.
Action 1.08- Teaching & Learning: Kindergarten Readiness
This year we continued to implement Universal Preschool and Transitional Kindergarten to support kindergarten readiness. This included 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.
Action 1.09- Teaching & Learning: Augmenting Core Instruction with Access to Technology
Access to technology continued to be a barrier for implementing technology-based components of the English/language arts curriculum in early grades. With respect to implementation of Amira (AI-enabled early literacy screening and tutoring), SFUSD staff conducted a survey to better understand barriers to use. Teachers reported a need for devices and headphones. We continued to inventory and fill needs to ensure every classroom has the technology needed.
Action 1.10- Teaching & Learning: Build and sustain robust programs- Arts, Athletics, Language Pathways, Libraries, and Physical Education
This action has been fully implemented during the 2024-27 LCAP cycle with the use of local Public Education Enrichment Fund (PEEF). The PEEF Community Advisory Committee has recommended that central office and clerical roles for Sports, Libraries, Arts, and Music (SLAM) be restored, allowing these departments to manage their own staffing structures and site allocations.The final PEEF expenditure will be presented to the school board on June 9, 2026.
Action 1.11- Systems of Professional Learning: Professional Development
Professional development remains essential for full implementation of new curricula. In 2025-26 the Curriculum Instruction Division was able to braid local, state, and federal resources as well as philanthropic funds from local foundations to host a PK-8 Language, Literacy, and Math Institute. Saturday Institutes are a voluntary (and paid) professional development opportunity focused on honing knowledge and skills in the core curriculum. In January 281 educators attended, which was a strong showing given that educators were prepared to strike in the following two weeks.
Additionally, SFUSD was able to implement its plan of offering spring sessions for 6-8 math educators around target indicators in Academic Ownership. On March 11th, 91 teachers participated in a full-day learning session that included direct opportunities for teachers to plan for expanded classroom structures and strategies. These changes would enable all students to justify their thinking beyond stating answers and to discuss and ask questions about each other’s thinking to improve their own mathematical understanding.
Action 1.12- Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade-level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching
SFUSD continued funding for instructional coaches at each site, as well as dedicated grade-level collaboration time. These supports are essential for curriculum implementation, use of data to inform instruction, and for sharing knowledge about practice within and between schools.
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.
The material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures can be attributed to significant salary savings due to a high vacancy rate across the district, and improved estimated benefit costs throughout the fiscal year.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
SFUSD’s efforts to improve curriculum and instruction is based on research about what works in improving teaching and learning and college and career readiness, and are carefully planned and assessed throughout the school year.
Instructional Leadership Teams, Instructional coaching, and Grade Level Collaborations (GLCs) continued to be pivotal for improving instruction. Schools with strong principal-coach collaboration demonstrated consistent use of curriculum, effective planning routines, and improved student literacy outcomes. Improved student performance on Star interim assessments was seen at sites where instructional coaches consistently implemented professional learning modules, where coaches maintained focused engagement with a core group of teachers over time, and where there were the highest number of weekly coaching sessions.
For college and career readiness, there was a slight increase in the overall rate (59.7%) and the graduation rate slightly increased to 84.9% (though still down from the baseline of 88%). Students scoring 3 or higher on AP tests increased notably by 6 points. However, there was a 4.3 point decrease in the percentage of 12th grade student graduates eligible for admission to a UC or CSU campus (56%). Because the indicator is based on the entirety of students’ high school career, it is not highly responsive to concerted efforts in the short-run. At the same time, the systematic and multi-prong strategy focused on case management and progress monitoring is gaining traction. High school sites are bolstering their case management and progress monitoring competencies through the focus on both the 9th grade EWI students (the Setting Up for Success initiative) and the 10th grade off-track students. The work now engages broader groups of stakeholders—teachers and families—beyond counselors and Coordinated Care Teams (CCTs). The EWI exit rate always fluctuates throughout the year before the end-of-year rate is reached, and the on-track rate will meaningfully improve even more after various credit recovery opportunities over the summer.. Accordingly, we anticipate the metrics will increase further next year. Moreover, the new focus on 9th and 10th grade math success will not only strengthen student learning and outcomes in math and other academic courses but also contribute to students’ achievement on the SBAC assessment in their 11th grade year. As these initiatives take hold, students will be more likely to qualify for one of the myriad pathways to the College/Career preparedness that CDE’s indicator lays out.
Please see the progress monitoring reports linked in the data analysis section for more reflections about the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of SFUSD’s initiatives and actions related to this goal.
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.
SFUSD is engaged in continuous improvement through progress monitoring, and the following reflections show how we are strengthening actions over time.
Actions 1.01 - 1.04 - Teaching and Learning
For strengthening instruction: Instructional Walkthrough / Learning Walks Instructional walkthroughs and learning walks are key to the strategy of improving instructional leadership. They will continue to serve as a key lever for improvement, not simply a compliance structure. In 2026-27 we will continue to use walkthrough evidence to identify districtwide trends, calibrate expectations for high quality literacy instruction, and provide leaders and coaches with actionable next steps. Moving forward, walkthroughs should increasingly focus on evidence of student practice, discourse, academic ownership, and implementation of structured literacy routines. In addition, schools should have opportunities to engage in cross site learning walks to surface bright spots, build coherence, and deepen collective understanding of effective instruction across the district.
For academic interventions: We are expanding the presence of MTSS, and working to ensure coherence across Tier I/II/III. In literacy we are expanding guidance and professional development for teachers on providing Tier II literacy intervention during small group reading instruction across grades K-5, and will continue to follow the Tier 3 Literacy Intervention Dyslexia Guidelines. We are expanding the number of Tier II math intervention course sections across grades 6-8 in SY 26.27. For middle school math we will be utilizing Boost powered by mClass within the Amplify Desmos Math platform to support intervention and provide professional development to teachers. In high school all students will have access to a supplemental resource called Edia, following a successful pilot.
Action 1.04 - Use of Data: SFUSD will continue to implement its comprehensive plan for early literacy assessment and support in accordance with CDE Ed Code. and continue to check in with our partners to ensure accountability. We continue to strengthen staff data literacy through consistent, systemwide routines for analyzing and acting on student data. Educators are supported to interpret Star Instructional Planning Reports, identify trends across students, and translate those insights into targeted instructional plans. This includes ongoing progress monitoring to assess the effectiveness of instructional adjustments and ensure students are accelerating toward grade-level proficiency. This approach reinforces a shift from data collection to data-driven action, ensuring that student plans are responsive, aligned, and continuously updated based on evidence of learning.
Action 1.05 - ELD and Supports for Multilingual Learners: We will emphasize the importance of early exposure to English language and literacy instruction for ML students in immersion and biliteracy programs, including consistent designated and/or integrated ELD. We will emphasize support for multilingual learners by focusing the ELD initiative on professional learning targeting the grade levels where ML proficiency levels drop off. We will also emphasize support for multilingual learners in dual language programs by ensuring that immersion and biliteracy students have early exposure to English language and literacy instruction, including consistent designated and/or integrated English Language Development.
To support successful implementation of the newly aligned ELD curriculum for K-5 literacy, MPD will offer a full-day institute on August 6th, 2026. Designated ELD: Implementing Revised Materials Through Differentiation and Collaborative Planning, where teachers will explore the revised materials, deepen their understanding of lesson design, and engage in collaborative planning and internalization of the curriculum. Schools will have the opportunity to review their Multilingual Learner Monitoring Reports with support from MPD. These sessions will help schools identify and address the individual needs of multilingual learners based on their ELPI levels and ELPAC domain performance, ensuring students receive targeted language development support. Additionally, we will ensure that the LCAP Advisory Committee recommendation to monitor progress in the home language and English, and share with families is fully implemented.
We will also make sure that lessons learned from the implementation of the 50/50 model for Spanish Dual Language Immersion (DLI) & Biliteracy programs are shared with families along with progress updates, such as English proficiency data of students in DLI and Biliteracy programs.
Finally, there is an ongoing collaboration between the ML Roadmap Team, the ELPAC, and the Special Education Department to address the special needs of Multilingual Learners with IEPs. We provide professional development to case managers to ensure there are appropriate accommodations and supports during the IEP assessment process, and that the IEP also includes linguistically appropriate goals. We also provide professional development on using the differentiation strategies and scaffolding available with our adopted general education curriculum.
Actions 1.11 and 1.12 - Strengthening Systems of Professional Learning:
With the trends across implementation of high-quality instructional materials in language arts and math, professional learning, instructional leadership, and progress monitoring in mind, SFUSD commits to the following implementation strategy adjustments:
1. Aligning expectations for LEAD’s supervision and support of school administrators in order to improve overall application of coach and administrator professional learning at school sites: This work will establish and/or refine shared expectations, codify how the school supervisors implement and operationalize those expectations for shared ownership through clear roles and responsibilities, and identify non-negotiables for how staff across the vertical spine of implementation are held accountable to those expectations. In this way, SFUSD aims to deepen investment and clarity around grade-level collaboration, unit and lesson internalization, and tools used for progress monitoring implementation across the system.
2. Expanding partnerships across LEAD, instructional coaches, and RPA to support curriculum-based coaching. To do this, coaches will join coherence meetings with district partners and TNTP and plan for:
a. Conducting focus groups of school administrators to develop a deeper understanding of leader perceptions of their role in implementation, instructional leadership in general, and the quality of coaching partnerships at their school sites
b. Using focus group insights to codify coaching guidance that clearly establishes priorities for teacher collaboration, goal-setting, and cycles of continuous improvement, including GLCs and internalization
c. Utilizing content-specific tools and shared language to more effectively monitor teaching and learning progress in language arts and mathematics instruction using curriculum-based criteria
3. Establishing partnerships across special education and language programs leads to surface best practices and bright spots in use of instructional materials for Tier 1 instruction. Using progress monitoring data from TNTP and school administrator learning walks as well as Instructional Leader Journals, the district will seek to surface and showcase effective use of language arts and mathematics high-quality instructional materials (HQIM) across a variety of learning spaces including SDC and ELD classrooms. Department leads will leverage this data to interview special education and multilingual language educators, understand the conditions that enabled their effective use of materials during Tier 1 instruction, and highlight those findings across a variety of communication channels as a means to shifting mindsets and perceptions about the appropriateness of language arts and mathematics HQIM for all students.
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. Develop and communicate a clear plan for Tier 2 Academic Supports in reading and math to help students reach their full potential. |
$3,270,533.00 |
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. |
$15,243,699.00 |
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. This action includes providing release time for teachers to meet with central office data experts from the Research, Planning and Accountability department to review classroom and school-level assessment data (summative and interim) and plan for using assessment data to develop tiered supports. This action is partially funded by LREBG funds in the amount of $1,097,332 because it is an essential component of progress monitoring and using benchmark assessments to ensure aligned instruction and that students receive additional supports and interventions as indicated by the data. This action is provided district-wide because every classroom has focal student populations who were impacted by learning loss as a result of the pandemic. Research suggests that using student achievement to support instructional decision making is fundamental to improvement (see for example, https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/WWC/Docs/PracticeGuide/dddm_pg_092909.pdf) and that interim assessments benefit students who are not yet meeting standard (Konstantopoulos et al., 2015). The metric aligned with this action is 1 and 2 - SBAC performance and growth for ELA and math. Additionally, we are tracking student growth on interim assessments (STAR). |
$1,572,238.00 |
No |
| 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. |
$687,912.00 |
No |
| Action #5 | Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multilingual 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). SFUSD 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). We will also make sure that lessons learned from the implementation of the 50/50 model for Spanish Dual Language Immersion (DLI) & Biliteracy programs are shared with families along with progress updates, such as English proficiency data of students in DLI and Biliteracy programs. |
$37,662,689.00 |
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, Latin@ students, Low socioeconomic status students, Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander students, Students w/ IEPs) |
$22,059,620.00 |
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. |
$14,438,356.00 |
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. |
$20,739,398.00 |
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. |
$3,490,450.00 |
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. |
$102,752,306.00 |
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. |
$4,083,386.00 |
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. The instructional coaches are partially funded through the Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant (in the amount of $9,713,503) because our needs assessment showed that post-pandemic, teachers needed support in ensuring learning loss did not exacerbate an already-existing opportunity gap around standards-aligned, rigorous instruction. Research from TNTP (2024) that shows that even in classrooms where instruction is "standards-aligned," the tasks and activities assigned often lack the rigor and high expectations embedded in the standards. Coaching has a growing evidence base to support its effectiveness (see for example https://www.brookings.edu/articles/instructional-coaching-holds-promise-as-a-method-to-improve-teachers-impact/). The coaches play an essential role in building teachers' capacity to implement the 2023 Mathematics Framework and the English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework, including increasing practices that improve student academic ownership in the classroom and structured talk to support multilingual learners, as well as building instructional leadership capacity across the school community through learning walks, grade-level and department collaboration. The LCAP metrics tied to this action are 1 and 2 (SBAC Performance and Growth on ELA and math) and 9, English Learner Progress rate. Additionally, within the central office we are collecting data on the number and frequency of learning walks, grade-level/department collaboration meetings, and evidence of instructional improvement to monitor the implementation of this action. |
$15,615,961.00 |
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. |
$16,572.00 |
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. |
$3,115,102.00 |
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.
LCAP Goal 2 is aligned to SFUSD/SFCOE’s 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.
Guardrail 2 supports the development of the whole child in SFUSD, supplementing the academic foci of the three goals under Vision, Values, Goals, and Guardrails (VVGGs). Reducing chronic absenteeism (Interim Guardrail 2.1)—a nationwide problem in the post-pandemic era—is an important aim.
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% | 67% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (77%) | No change |
| 2 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Efficacy (Elementary students) | 53% | 54% | 55% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (63%) |
2 percentage point increase |
| 3 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Management (Elementary students) |
66% |
65% | 66% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (76%) |
No change |
| 4 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Social Awareness (Elementary students) |
53% |
61% | 62% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (63%) |
9 percentage point increase |
| 5 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Growth Mindset (MS students) |
66% |
65% | 67% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (76%) |
1 percentage point increase |
| 6 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Efficacy (MS students) |
55% |
54% | 56% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (65%) |
1 percentage point increase |
| 7 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Management (MS students) |
68% |
67% | 69% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (78%) |
1 percentage point increase |
| 8 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Social Awareness (MS students) |
59% |
58% | 60% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (69%) |
1 percentage point increase |
| 9 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Growth Mindset (HS students) |
68% |
68% | 69% | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (78%) |
1 percentage point increase |
| 10 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Efficacy (HS students) |
50% |
51% | 52% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (60%) |
2 percentage point increase |
| 11 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Self Management (HS students) |
69% |
70% | 72% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (79%) |
3 percentage point increase |
| 12 | SEL Survey: positive response rate for Social Awareness (HS students) |
63% |
63% | 65% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (73%) |
2 percentage point increase |
| 13 | Chronic Absenteeism rate: Elementary School (ES) |
27.6% |
21.1% | 22.5% |
Decrease by 10 percentage points | 5.1 percentage point decrease |
| 14 | Chronic Absenteeism rate: Middle School (MS) |
Middle School: 21.51% |
18.4% | 19.6% | Decrease by 10 percentage points |
1.9 percentage point decrease |
| 15 | Chronic Absenteeism rate: High School (HS) |
All High School 26.38% |
27.5% | 28.3% |
Decrease by 10 percentage points |
1.9 percentage point increase |
| 16 | Suspension Rate |
All Students: 2.2% |
1.9% |
2.1% |
All Students: 1% |
0.1 percentage point decrease |
| 17 | # of Suspensions for AA |
9.6% |
8.5% | 5.6% |
||
| 18 | # of suspensions for HL |
3.1% |
2.4% | 2.9% |
2% |
0.2 percentage point decrease |
| 19 | % of schools that have a Coordinated Care Team and Attendance plan |
100% |
100% | 100% | 100% |
No change |
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.
Overall Implementation
Serving the Whole Child is a comprehensive and equity-driven effort to support students’ cognitive, social-emotional, physical, and ethical development. SFUSD remains committed to this goal and its related actions.
Reducing chronic absenteeism from 24% in June of 2025 to 20% in June of 2026 is SFUSD/SFCOE BPE Adopted Interim Guardrail 2.1. While SFUSD made important gains on this front two years ago, a reduction in resources led to a reversal of progress last year, a trend that has continued into this year. By contrast, the district has made notable strides in growing students’ sense of belonging (Interim Guardrail 2.2). By achieving 80% favorability on the measure, SFUSD met this year's target. This reflects years of efforts by school sites and central leaders to rebuild school community and culture after the pandemic. Lastly, SFUSD has made small but steady improvements in reducing disproportionate discipline of African American students (Interim Guardrail 2.3). Continuing to bolster Restorative Practices (RP), which appears promising, may accelerate the district's pursuit of systemic improvement.
Successes and challenges for each action are reported below:
Action 2.01 - Safe and supportive schools - Professional development
Throughout the district schools continued to work on ensuring strong relationships among families, teachers, and students to create and sustain a positive, nurturing school climate. Positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS) is a well established practice in all schools, and schools have also maintained and strengthened use of restorative practices to support relational trust and school culture as well as behavior and disciplinary issues. However, reduced central office capacity to implement training along with a necessary focus on core instruction has limited the implementation of professional development related to school culture and climate as a districtwide activity.
Action 2.02 - Safe and Supportive Schools - Safety and Wellbeing
This action was fully implemented in 2025-26. All schools continue to have school social workers and the wellness centers in every middle school were also sustained. The Community Schools grant has been essential for continuing progress in this area.
Action 2.03 - Coordinated Care Teams (CCTs) at school sites continued to operate in 2025-26. The CCTs began as a result of a Board of Education (BOE) resolution in April 2020 during the pandemic. The Student & Family Services Division (SFSD) then began a year-long process, in collaboration with LEAD, EED, SPED, CBO partners, students, and families, to develop the coordinated care process. The Coordinated Care Framework focuses on family partnership, student engagement, school/community input, and high-quality Tier 1 (universal) programming for all students. As a key component of the framework, all sites are required to draft a standardized CCT plan focused on Tier 1 practices in alignment with their Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA). In 2025-26 all school plans included the goal of reducing suspensions overall and of African American students in particular.
Action 2.04 - Safe and Supportive Schools - Improve Attendance
SFUSD remains concerned about chronic absenteeism, which has not fully recovered since the pandemic. A key initiative for reducing chronic absenteeism was asking all sites to include an attendance goal in their CCT plan. In Fall 2025, 106 sites (91% of all sites) submitted a CCT plan. Plan submission was strongest among early education sites (100% submitted plans), followed by elementary schools (92%), high schools (91%) and K-8/middle schools (86%).
Beyond documenting a goal and related strategies, decreasing students’ chronic absenteeism requires systematic implementation of those plans. However, the district’s capacity to gather implementation data across all sites is limited, so central staff relies on self-reported survey responses from sites. According to the Guardrail 2 Status Survey administered by SFSD:
- 64% (52 out of 81 responses) reported that their attendance strategies were in place
- 36% (29 out of 81 responses) reported that their attendance strategies were partially in place
Supporting sites in implementing these plans requires close collaboration among multiple central office departments. As of April, 2026 SFUSD was in its third year of monthly meetings among SFSD, LEAD, SPED, and AAALI, which functions as a space to support this work.
Budget reductions affecting the Student and Family Services division affected the extent to which central office staff could provide direct services to schools regarding their attendance plans. As described further below, capacity is being rebuilt for 2026-27 so that school leaders have a point of contact for support and accountability in strengthening attendance and belonging. actions.
Action 2.05 - Safe and Supportive Schools - Increase Sense of Belonging
This year, nearly all schools that submitted a plan documented that sense-of-belonging work focused on everyday relationship-building practices—teachers greeting students at the door each morning and implementing specific “proactive classroom management” strategies, such as clear visual schedules to help students feel oriented and safe.
A number of schools, particularly middle and high schools, connected the sense-of-belonging work to how staff address conflicts. These plans describe using restorative conversations in place of punitive responses to repair relationships and signal that all students are important members of the school community, even when they experience challenges. Across plans, many schools used disaggregated data to monitor whether overall improvements masked discrepancies for students of color, multilingual learners, and students receiving special education services.
Action 2.06 - Systems of Support - Improved Use of Data
This action was focused on building teachers’ and site leaders’ capacity to use data about student attendance and well-being. Coordinated Care Teams used their plans and available data to monitor progress. Efforts to build capacity from the central office were limited due to resource constraints, specifically in not having a data system that enables a coordinated school- and district-wide tracking of student attendance and behaviors in real time that enables an effective response based on individual student needs and responses to intervention.
Action 2.07 - SF County Office of Education Transition Support
SFCOE continued to utilize Transition Specialists to support 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 schools. In 2025-26 SFUSD had 4 Transition Specialists supporting youth who have been arrested, expelled, have significant school refusal and other special circumstances. The Transition Specialists provide focused case management as students transition from one setting to another. Some examples of transitions that the specialists support are re-entry back into school after not attending for one to five years, or from juvenile hall to a comprehensive school, or when students transition in and out of a County school due to their eligibility as foster youth, experiencing homelessness, expulsion or probation involvement. Transition Specialists are expected to have six points of contact in the first two weeks of a shift from one school to another, and provide intensive case management going forward based on the data (student grades, attendance, connection to new adults at the new school, behavior, etc.).
Action 2.08 - SF County Office of Education Individual Learning Plans
The work to implement and improve the system for Individual Learning Plans, including being more specific about the intervention needed and the measures and cadence for monitoring continued in 2025-2026.
In response to the LCAP Advisory Committee recommendations please note that Special Education Services tracks non-public school and residential treatment placements and reports them as part of the SELPA Local plan, and overall District reporting. Behavior reports and suspension data can be found in Synergy. Parents need to be informed by the school before a student is suspended.
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.
The material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures can be attributed to significant salary savings due to a high vacancy rate across the district, and improved estimated benefit costs throughout the fiscal year.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
SFUSD’s chronic absenteeism rate increased from 2023-24 to 2024-25 increased from 23% to 24%, missing the 20% target. The loss of progress followed a significant drop in the preceding year, from 26% to 23%. This change likely resulted from a substantial reduction in staff and resources devoted to improving attendance. High school chronic absenteeism remains a critical concern, rising for the second consecutive year from 27.5% in 2024-25 to 28.3% in 2025-26. 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 in the 2026-27 school year. Across all grade levels, the central office role focused solely on attendance improvement is likely needed to meaningfully decrease chronic absenteeism.
Racial disparities in discipline also remain a significant challenge. Students of color—especially Black students—are still suspended at much higher rates than their peers. The overall suspension rate for all students slightly increased from 1.9% to 2.1%, and the rate for African American students increased from 8.5% to 9.1% in 2025-26, demonstrating a persistent challenge that requires a more refined focus on culturally responsive and anti-racist practices. The growing body of evidence continues to show these disparities are rooted in how educators interpret and respond to subjective behaviors like "defiance" or "disrespect." Still, the percentages reflect an improvement from baseline, suggesting that continuing to support the implementation of Restorative Practices (RP), may accelerate the district's pursuit of systemic improvement. The resource allocations necessary to improve disproportionate discipline and get Interim Guardrail 2.3 on track are minimal, requiring continuation of the work on Restorative Practices already in progress.
The Student and Family Services Division and the Research, Planning and Accountability department have been studying the district's efforts related to serving the Whole Child. It is clear that attendance, sense of belonging, and disproportionate discipline are interconnected. Sites with relational, student-centered plans show stronger attendance outcomes than those relying primarily on procedural or escalation-based approaches. Schools that did not submit a plan show the least favorable attendance patterns. This research continues to inform how the district supports schools in strengthening their plans and implementation, each shaped by the quality of students’ daily relationships and school experiences and how well a school’s Tier 1 systems are functioning.
Evidence suggests that the intentional focus on safety, wellbeing and belonging is paying off for students attending school regularly. Social and emotional learning metrics for Goal 2 show meaningful progress at the elementary level, with a 9 point increase in students’ sense of social awareness. There was a notable 3-point increase in the favorability score for Sense of Belonging among secondary students. These results reflect years of efforts by school sites and central leaders to rebuild school community and culture after the pandemic.
Additional evidence of effectiveness includes school investments in community-building routines such as morning meetings, restorative circles, and schoolwide events celebrating student achievements. For example, Downtown High School incorporated schoolwide celebration assemblies, and Feinstein Elementary used student recognition certificates to celebrate students for being safe, respectful, and responsible in morning circles. They also developed programming for Inclusive Schools Week to engage students receiving special education services and their families. Both sites have levels of sense of belonging that are above the district average.
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 work on Guardrail 2, Serving the Whole Child will remain focused on increasing student attendance and their sense of belonging, the Board of Education, Superintendent and Executive Cabinet will revise the interim guardrail focus areas and progress monitoring measures at the start of the 2026-2027 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.
Action 2.04 - Improving Attendance and Reducing Chronic Absenteeism (BPE Adopted Interim Guardrail 2.1): SFUSD is strengthening its supports for attendance to reduce chronic absenteeism in 2026-2027 and will do so through the following actions:
- Hiring a Supervisor of Attendance and Belonging who will monitor attendance patterns and trends across the district and increase support and accountability for the implementation of school-based CCT plans with respect to attendance-related strategies and outcomes.
- Standardize the relational approach in CCT Plans: Tier 1 attendance plans should prioritize relational and individualized strategies, moving away from procedural, one-size-fits-all processes (e.g., by expanding successful practices such as Presidio MS’s positive phone call campaign and empathy interviews). This includes
- Ensure 100% CCT Plan submission and quality: Implement a process to support the 7% of sites that did not submit a CCT plan, as these sites show the highest chronic absenteeism rates (27%). SFSD and LEAD supports will focus on ensuring every site has a substantive, data-grounded plan.
- Provide targeted support for partial Implementers: Prioritize coaching and resources for the 36% of sites that self-reported only "Partially in place" implementation of CCT attendance strategies to move them to "In place" status.
Action 2.05 - Strengthening Students’ Sense of Belonging
We will also continue and deepen actions to strengthen students’ sense of belonging (BPE Adopted Interim Guardrail 2.2). Research highlights that belonging is accelerated when teachers build strong relationships and design learning experiences connected to students' lives and identities. Specific actions include:
- Provide culturally responsive resources for teachers to embed learning experiences that connect to students’ lives and identities, especially for historically underserved groups who are more likely to feel they do not belong.
- Systematically verify and act on the noted connection between student access to Wellness/Community Health Outreach Workers (CHOWs) access and a sense of belonging, and leverage the roles of Community Schools, AAALI, and Athletics in improving belonging metrics.
- Continue to support Restorative Practices training. To date, 44 sites have been trained in the trainer model for RP. Community School Coordinators from 12 CCEIS schools will be trained this summer. An additional 22 sites will be trained in 2026-27. Schools who complete the train-the-trainer are expected to take that back and train school site staff.
Action 2.06- Systems of support and improved use of data: the Student and Family Services Division will be hiring a Supervisor of Attendance and Belonging and additional staff who will support use of data and implementation of multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS), as aligned to Guardrail 2.
In response to the LCAP Advisory Committee recommendations, please note that Schools are required to communicate with families about student supports including SSTs, 504 Plans, and IEPs. The Coordinated Care Team structure is a central way for communication to occur, and we continue to build the capacity of these teams to ensure consistency.
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 |
$3,864,115.00 |
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. |
$10,389,435.00 |
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. |
$10,917,919.00 |
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. |
$5,413,986.00 |
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. |
$10,008,661.00 |
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. |
$6,790,948.00 |
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. |
$356,559.00 |
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. |
$1,459,650.00 |
No |
| 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.
LCAP Goal 3 is aligned to the following SFUSD/SFCOE BPE Adopted Guardrails:
Guardrail 1: Effective Decision-Making - The superintendent will not make major decisions without utilizing a process–that includes meaningful consultation with the parents/guardians, students, and staff who will be impacted by those decisions–at the inception, adoption, and review.
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.
Parent involvement and family engagement is critical to student success and to the district’s ability to meet the needs of our diverse communities. SFUSD Board Policy 6020 on Parent Involvement establishes the foundational principle that parents and guardians serve as children's primary educators, and that their ongoing involvement is essential to student achievement and a healthy school environment. The policy directs the Superintendent to actively consult with families when creating meaningful opportunities for participation — spanning school activities, advisory and decision-making roles, and home-based learning support.
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.
This commitment is reinforced by the District's Guardrail 1 on Effective Decision-Making, which requires that any major decision involve genuine consultation with the parents, students, and staff affected — not as an afterthought, but at every stage: from the initial conception of an idea through its adoption and periodic review.
At the strategic level, family engagement is not treated as a peripheral concern. SFUSD has designated the implementation of its Family Engagement Standards as one of six core priorities for supporting student success. These standards are built on three pillars: ensuring families feel welcomed in schools, equipping them with the information needed to be true partners in their children's education, and guaranteeing their meaningful inclusion in school-level decision-making.
| 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% | 97% | 100% | 1 percentage point increase |
| 2 | Percentage of favorable responses from parents in the School Culture and Climate Survey (Climate for Academic Learning) (Panorama Survey) |
92% | 95% | 94% | 100% | 2 percentage point increase |
| 3 | Percentage of favorable responses from parents in Sense of Belonging (School Connectedness) (Panorama Survey) |
95% | 96% | 96% |
100% | 1 percentage point increase |
| 4 | Percentage of favorable responses from parents Safety (School Connectedness)(Panorama Survey) |
93% | 96% | 97% | 100% | 3 percentage point increase |
| 5 | Increase collaboration between SFUSD and its partners to assess student needs, program effectiveness, as measured by the “Strategic Partnership Capacity Building Area” on the California Community School Partnership Program Annual Progress Report |
In SY 23-24, out of 38 schools reporting on the California Community Schools Partnership Program Annual Progress Report template: 42.1% of schools reported in the “Visioning” phase 42.1% of schools reported in the “Engaging” phase 15.8% of schools reported in the “Transforming” phase |
In SY 24-25, out of 42 schools reporting on the California Community Schools Partnership Program Annual Progress Report template: 33.3% of schools reported in the “Visioning” phase 52.4% of schools reported in the “Engaging” phase 14.3% of schools reported in the “Transforming” phase |
TBD: SY 25-26 Annual Progress Reports are due to the SFUSD Central Office by June 12, 2026. Official Annual Progress Reporting is due to the California Department of Education on June 30, 2026. |
Target for Year 3 Outcome in SY 26-27, out of 63 schools reporting on the Annual Progress Report: 23.3% of schools reported in the “Visioning” phase 52.4% of schools reported in the “Engaging” phase 24.3% of schools reported in the “Transforming” phase |
Increase of 10% from SY 24-25 Annual Progress Reporting in each self assessment rating leve |
| 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 [inactive] | [inactive] | Increase by 10% each year |
[inactive] |
| 7 | Increase the participation rate in surveys for the combined percentage of underrepresented groups (AI, AA, Latin@, 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 [inactive] |
[inactive] | 33.6% |
[inactive] |
| 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 [inactive] |
[inactive] | 90% | [inactive] |
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.
Overall Implementation:
In 2025–26, San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) continued its efforts to strengthen partnerships with families and the broader San Francisco community under Goal 3.This past school year the Board of Public Education held four meetings on public engagement to learn more about effective strategies from parents/guardians/caregivers. The goal is to implement strategies designed to improve the Board’s approach to routine engagement with the public and to develop a two-way engagement process for major decisions.
Action 3.01- Community Engagement for Effective Decision Making: In 2025-26 significant efforts went to strengthening the 11 parent advisory committees and 2 student advisory councils that work to improve communication, engagement, partnership, and participation in district and school decision-making and progress monitoring.
Action 3.02- Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Improve communication channels.Family engagement has remained a central component of the "Each and Every by Name" strategy, with a focus on equipping families with literacy tools, strengthening home-school partnerships, and increasing access to culturally affirming resources.
Action 3.03 - Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Parent & Student Advisory Committees and Councils: Numerous formal and informal events occurred throughout the year at the district and site levels to support community engagement for effective decision making including School Planning Summit, regular LCAP stakeholder engagement meetings, and School Site Council (SSC) and English Learners Advisory Committee (ELAC) meetings at schools. These meetings were designed to engage the parents and community in additional opportunities to receive updates on district and school priorities and performance, and to solicit input and ideas from parents and stakeholders.
Action 3.04- To ensure appropriate and meaningful engagement and participation, the district’s Translation and Interpretation staff assist by providing language interpretation support for community meetings.
In partnership with CBOs and SFUSD parent advisory groups, the District English Learner Advisory Committee hosted Literacy, Math, & Science Fairs featuring hands-on activities, family workshops, and at-home learning resources. This included an event on December 6, 2025 at Cesar Chavez Elementary School, where 263 students and families participated and May 9th, 2026 at Gordon J. Lau Elementary School with 400 students and family participants.
Action 3.05- Community Schools: School year 2025-26 Annual Progress Reports are due to the SFUSD Central Office by June 12, 2026 and the Official Annual Progress Reporting is due to the California Department of Education on June 30, 2026.
SFUSD ExCEL programs operate in all elementary, middle and K8 schools through partnerships with community based organizations who lead after school, summer expanded learning programs. These partner organizations meet monthly with central SFUSD teams to ensure alignment with VVGGs through professional development and leadership / operational / fiscal guidance. The alignment emphasizes family partnership work, including a continuous improvement cycle and data review of family feedback received in district-wide surveys.
Finally, SFUSD continued to engage with philanthropic organizations, and the business community to support our goals. In 2025-26 SFUSD continued to benefit from philanthropic partners including local and national foundations and individual donors. Philanthropic support strengthens key initiatives including the literacy curriculum implementation, AAALI, Each and Every by Name, the Mission Bay Hub and Rainbow Clubs. The SFUSD foundation Spark raised $12 million to support SFUSD priority initiatives, programs, teachers, schools and students. Priority initiatives include support for SFUSD's literacy, math and college and career goals as well as guardrails supporting the African American Achievement and Leadership's Each and Every Child by Name initiative, sense of belonging and chronic absenteeism.
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.
The material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures can be attributed to significant salary savings due to a high vacancy rate across the district, and improved estimated benefit costs throughout the fiscal year.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
The outcomes reported on the Panorama Survey show broad and steady parent satisfaction, including opportunities to participate in decisions (held steady at 97%), and satisfaction with school culture and climate also remained high at 94%. 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.
As described above, data about the effectiveness of the Community Schools strategy is pending final reporting, though qualitative evidence from community school coordinators and LCAP members suggest that it is a promising strategy. The LCAP Advisory Committee members have noted that the Community Schools model is comprehensive with respect to the goals and actions in the LCAP and that the district should expand this model to all 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.
Action 3.01 - Pending full board approval, the Board of Public Education will be focused on prioritizing and implementing recommendations from its Ad-hoc Committee on Public Engagement, including:
1. Student outcomes focused governance training: The Board conducts a community training session on its Student Outcomes Focused Governance framework. This would include an overview of the governance framework, the Board’s process of developing the Vision, Values, Goals, and Guardrails (VVGGs), how Goals and Guardrails are monitored, and the role of the Board vs. the Superintendent.
2. School site engagement - Once per semester, commissioners will sit down with a school community (e.g., PTA, SSC, organized school community systems, etc.) at a school site to understand what is happening in the school community experientially and understand school data as it relates to student outcomes reported at a District level. Commissioners would conduct this engagement at different school sites,so over the course of the year there would be 14 sites engaged.
3. Board shadow days: Once per semester, the Board will observe schools for the day. This includes connecting with parents during morning arrival, doing classroom walkthroughs with school administrators, talking with students over lunch, etc. One to three commissioners will attend each Board Shadow Day.
4. Commissioner attendance at Advisory Councils and Committees: Commissioners attend the monthly/quarterly advisory council and committee meetings. Each council and committee should have attendance by a commissioner at least twice during the school year and by at least two different commissioners.
5. Engagement with Community-based Organizations (CBOs): The Board holds three general listening sessions with CBOs that work with the district. How these sessions will be organized, such as by type of CBO or a general session, and to what objective, will be determined with the CBO community. Each session would be attended by no more than three commissioners.
Action 3.02 - 3.05: In order to better align the work of the parent advisory committees to the district’s VVGGs, student outcomes data for each focal population will be provided to the public. Based on the data collected and student experiences, each advisory committee will develop recommendations and track staff responses and implementation.
SFUSD will also provide English language proficiency data and gather input from the Spanish Dual Language Immersion and Biliteracy programs, and share with the DELAC and LCAP Advisory Committee.
We have also added additional language from the LCAP Advisory Committee to include:
- Elevate parent/guardian/caregiver leadership and share what works: Build a coalition of parents/guardians/caregivers to lead and model best practices at their school sites that help staff create welcoming, inclusive school environments, especially for our focal populations. Document and share these effective strategies across the district.
- Strengthen staff capacity through community partnerships: Partner with Parent Advisory Committees and community organizations to help staff build cultural awareness and skills to work, teach, and collaborate effectively with diverse communities. This includes using culturally affirming curriculum and teaching methods.
- Build and sustain authentic family partnerships: Develop shared learning and opportunities for all students and families, as well as community partnerships, e.g., San Francisco Public Libraries, after-school program providers, and other community-based organizations.
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. |
$1,074,877.00 |
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 |
No |
| Action #3 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Parent & Student Advisory Committees and Councils | Develop and support 11 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) AsPAC = Asian PAC, 3) CAC-SPED = Community Advisory Committee for Special Education, 4) DELAC = District English Learner Advisory Council, 5) FYCSP = Foster Youth Coordinating Services Program, 6) Indian Ed PAC, 7) Latin@ Community Council, 8) MAC = Matua Advisory Council, 9) Migrant Ed PAC, 10) QTPAC = Queer Trans Parent Advisory Council, 11) LCAP Advisory Council, 12) SAC = Student Advisory Council (students) 13) QTAC= Queer Trans Advisory Council (students) Partner with Parent Advisory Committees and community organizations to help staff build cultural awareness and skills to work, teach, and collaborate effectively with diverse communities. This includes using culturally affirming curriculum and teaching methods. |
$1,265,923.00 |
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. Develop shared learning and opportunities for all students and families, as well as community partnerships, e.g., San Francisco Public Libraries, after-school program providers, and other community-based organizations. |
$1,631,785.00 |
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. | $11,918,163.00 |
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. | $29,200.00 |
No |
| 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.
LCAP Goal 4 is integral to fulfilling all of SFUSD/SFCOE’s Goals and ensuring that we collectively adhere to all of the Guardrails. SFUSD is a diverse community of learners and together we work to foster trust and belonging for all communities. Our anti-racist vision acknowledges that the disparities we see in student outcomes are rooted in historical marginalization of specific groups and that achieving our goals means eliminating oppression and bias to ensure equally high outcomes for all students. We do this 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 | 51.7% in May 2024 |
52.8% (Spring 2025) |
53.8% (Spring 2026) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (62%) |
2.1 percentage point increase |
| 2 | Grade 3 English Learner students meeting grade level proficiency as measured by district interim tests (Star Reading) will increase by 5% each year | 14.7% in March 2024 | 13.6% (Spring 2025) |
12.4% (March 2026) | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (25%) |
2.3 percentage point decrease |
| 3 | Grade 3 African American students at proficient as measured by district interim tests (Star Math) will increase by 5% each year | 15.5% in March 2024 (For the new metric) 3.0% (March 2024) |
15.2% (Spring 2025) |
5.7% (March 2026) | Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (26%) |
2.7 percentage point increase |
| 4 | Grade 7 Latino students at proficient as measured by district interim tests (Star Math) will increase by 5% each year | 10.6% in March 2024 (For the new metric) 11.5% (March 2024) |
13.5% (March 2025) 12.8% (March 2025) |
15.0% (March 2026) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (21%) |
3.5 percentage point increase |
| 5 | Percentage of entering 9th grade students who exit EWI status by the end of the 9th grade will increase by 5% each year | 20% (Aug 2023) | 19% (June 2024) |
25% (June 2025) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (33% or better) |
5 percentage point increase |
| 6 | Improve attendance for Students with Disabilities | 40% of Students with IEPs are Chronically Absent | 34% of Students with IEPs are Chronically Absent (2023-24) | 36% of Students with IEPs are Chronically Absent (2024-25) | Decrease by double digit improvement (10% or better) | 4 percentage point decrease |
| 7 | Improve College & Career Readiness for Students with Disabilities | Spring 2023: 38% of students w/ IEPs met UC/CSU requirements | Spring 2024: 39% of students w/ IEPs met UC/CSU requirements (Class of 2023) | 43% of students w/ IEPs met UC/CSU requirements (Class of 2024) | 48% | 5 percentage point increase |
| 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 AA suspension rate: 10.2 (2023) |
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. AA suspension rate: 9.63 (2024) |
9.13 (Spring 2025) |
Below 2.0 in each category | 1.07 decrease |
| 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 | 39.2% of MLs making progress on ELPI based on 2025 CA Dashboard results |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (55% or better) |
5.6 percentage point decrease |
| 10 | Reduce the % of Multi Language Learners who are Long Term English Language Learners | 13.32% | 14.6% | 14.32% | 7% of all MLs are LTELs | 1 percentage point increase |
| 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 | Latin@/Hispanic students make up 71.1% of all LTELs while they are 63% of total ML population (8.1 pp gap) | Latino LTELS are equal to the overall % of total ML population | The gap between the proportions has increased by 1.1 percentage point |
| 12 | Reduce suspensions for Foster Youth | 12% (2022-23) |
8% (2023-24) |
10% (2024-25) |
3.2% | 2 percentage point decrease |
| 13 | Increase graduation rate for Foster Youth | 68.6% (2022-23) |
60.8% (2023-24) |
76.1% (2024-25) |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (80.2%) | 5.9 percentage point increase |
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.
Overall Implementation
SFUSD implemented the majority of the Actions within Goal 4 throughout the 2025-2026 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 for Students with IEPs
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
While SFUSD has experienced trends of declining enrollment in the past five years, Special Education enrollment has increased. In 2024-25, 16.6% of SFUSD’s 50,000 students in TK-12th grades were identified as requiring Special Education services, which represents a 4-percentage point increase since 2019-20. SFUSD employs over 500 teachers and 1,100 para educators who work directly with students receiving Special Education services.
SFUSD is 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 Identification for Special Education - In the 2025-2026 school year the Special Education Department has come up with an action plan to address the over-identification of African American students in Special Education and Discipline which result in disproportionality. In partnership with the Student and Family Services the Special Education department will continue implementation of the CIM for CCEIS Action Plan. As part of that work there will be an expansion of the Shoestrings Program for the 2026-27 school year. In addition, best practices from Special Education will be used to inform implementation of a standardized MTSS framework throughout SFUSD. In order to ensure this is rolled out with fidelity, there will be an expectation that all schools use a common CCT process, and monitor, support, & require its consistent use.
- Expanding & Strengthening the Continuum of Service - This work included opening a new County Program at Edwin & Anita Lee School. Work has been underway throughout the 2025-2026 school year to build this school for students with Extensive Support Needs. The focal eligibility for students in the program will be Autism, Intellectual Disability and Emotional Disability. For school year 2026-2027 there will be two classes, 1-class for grades 5-8 and 1-class for grades 9-12. In school year 2027-2028: the goal will be to have 4 classes (grade 5-6, 7-8, 9-10, 11-12).
- Increasing Special Education Participation in Special Education- Throughout the 2025-2026 school year the special education department has been working to monitor and increase participation. We are reviewing the special education course offerings in Middle School, especially the impact of the new math pilot and the impact of study skills on student outcomes. In addition, the special education department will focus on the training of case managers, administrators and general educators in partnership with Supporting Innovative Practices (SIP).
- Building Capacity for Inclusive and Effective Special Education Practices - this is happening by strengthening the scope and sequence of professional development for teachers and administrators. The department is working to ensure there is clear guidance to ensure broader understanding of IEP requirements. Through partnership with Supporting Innovative Practices there is renewed focus on Inclusive practices to ensure the Rightful Presence of all students. Instructional guidance is also provided to staff to ensure the fidelity of specialized academic instruction.
Action 4.02 - Targeted Supports: Each and Every by Name
The African American Achievement and Leadership Initiative (AAALI) and the Fa’a Samoa Initiative (FASI) continued to support SFUSD’s efforts to improve outcomes for African American and Pacific Islander students through culturally affirming, equity-centered, and community-rooted strategies, including Each and Every by Name. Each and Every by Name is SFUSD’s targeted strategy connected to Interim Goal 1.1 and the district’s broader Goal 1 literacy efforts. For Each and Every by Name, implementation efforts during the year included the following: family literacy workshops, book clubs, and literacy nights in partnership with AAPAC, the Fa’a Samoa Initiative, and the San Francisco Public Library; -distribution of culturally affirming books and decodable readers to students and families; coordinated care and data review processes across departments and school sites; targeted literacy intervention supports, including implementation of the Amira literacy platform; professional learning and coaching connected to foundational literacy instruction; expanded collaboration across Curriculum & Instruction, Community Schools, Expanded Learning, and school-based teams; and progress monitoring.
SFUSD also continued efforts to strengthen implementation of literacy interventions and instructional supports connected to Each and Every By Name. Teacher feedback and instructional walkthrough data identified ongoing challenges related to technology access, implementation consistency, opportunities for student practice, instructional coherence, and foundational literacy routines across classrooms. At the same time, emerging data demonstrated that students who consistently engaged with literacy intervention supports experienced stronger literacy growth and achievement outcomes.
Action 4.03 - Targeted Supports: Comprehensive Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CCEIS)
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 Compliance and Improvement Monitoring (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.” SFUSD’s 2025 CIM Plan was approved by the CDE on January 16th, 2026. Within the plan, the Prioritized Problem Areas include disproportionate identification of African American students under the eligibility category of Emotional Disability (‘21-22, ‘22-23, and ‘23-24), as well as two years of consecutively disproportionate application of exclusionary discipline practices to African American students with IEPs (‘23-24, ‘24-25). This plan approached addressing the root causes by applying layers of applicable data to first locate these root causes within our system, and then align supports and strategies to address the specific challenging factors in the spaces where they consistently present. This represented a strategic pivot to frame reducing Significant Disproportionality as a symptom of our system’s health, rather than a more deficit-based framing of SigDis as a result of student-level needs.
In February 2026 the CDE shifted its monitoring of SFUSD, and district leaders began partnering closely with CDE to align to their new approach. The 2025 Plan was streamlined and adjusted, and a new CIM team was launched in partnership with the CDE on May 8, 2026. Key components of the new plan include a targeted pre-referral pilot, the standardization of a district wide MTSS plan and an expansion of the Shoestrings program, an intensive assessment and intervention program aimed at reducing the disproportionate referral of Black children to special education services,
Action 4.04 - Targeted supports: African American Achievement and leadership Initiative (AAALI)
Core programming under AAALI continued in 2025-26. This included the Shoestrings program, Mastering Cultural Identity courses which weave historical and contemporary African and African American cultural content into curriculum focused on emotional intelligence, self-awareness and academic persistence, and Black Star Rising, a STEM-focused enrichment and academic support program for student groups that are underrepresented in the STEM fields. Students in the program attended school on Saturdays throughout the academic year and participated in STEM enrichment workshops and field trips, received individualized mentoring and tutoring, and bolstered their college awareness through visits to colleges and universities within California.
Action 4.05 - Targeted supports: Students and Families Experiencing Homelessness (SAFEH)
The Students and Families Experiencing Homelessness (SAFEH) program provided professional development and consultations to school site and central staff to increase identification and support for students experiencing homelessness, as defined under the federal McKinney-Vento Act. Additionally, the SAFEH program connected families to city housing resources and other immediate needs, as well as collaborated with internal and external partners to reduce barriers to enrollment, attendance and student success. The McKinney-Vento liaison works to ensure the educational rights of students experiencing housing instability are upheld and the district is meeting its obligations to effectively identify and serve students experiencing homelessness. These actions included systemizing the distribution and collection of the annual Housing Survey, posting SAFEH flyers and MKV Rights posters in common areas, expanding supplemental academic resources and providing guidance on graduation and post-secondary plans in alignment with the policies specifically pertaining to students experiencing homelessness.
Action 4.06 - LGBTQ Student Supports
SFUSD continued to 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. SFUSD also launched a Queer Trans Parent Advisory Council and Queer Trans Advisory Council (students) in support of ensuring the district takes intentional steps to create and foster welcoming and inclusive learning environments.
Action 4.07 - Targeted supports: Foster Youth
SFUSD continued to 1) 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; 2) 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.
The district will also strengthen transportation services to ensure school stability and maintain foster youth in their school of origin when it is in their best interest.
Action 4.08 - Targeted Supports: Newcomer Students
The Multilingual Pathways Department (MPD) provided 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. MPD teachers of special assignment also provided guidance for schools to create structures to welcome newcomer students into their school communities. During the summer the district implemented Summer Academy for Integrated Language Learning (SAILL) to provide training for teaching of instructional approaches to improve language and literacy for newcomer Multilingual Learners (MLs) and to provide additional language development and credit recovery for recently arrived high school newcomer MLs who may be credit deficient. Newcomer pathway teachers and principals received support around instructional strategies that support accessing grade-level text and tasks and systems of social-emotional support that improve student attendance and retention. MPD staff also provides resources for counseling support of newly arrived students and families at the Enrollment Center (EC), including ; training site-based counselors on foreign transcript translation and evaluation.
Action 4.09 - Targeted Supports: Potential and Long Term English Language Learners
Teachers and administrators monitored students' progress and set goals for potential and long-term English Language learners. MPD developed and implements a professional development toolkit for sites to implement professional learning around designated and integrated ELD. The MPD staff also collaborates with content teams to ensure training in Integrated ELD is focused on scaffolds for academic reading and writing and academic discourse.
In 2025-26 the Instructional Coach Network continued to focus on ensuring designated English Language Development (ELD) as well as integrated ELD during English Language Arts and Mathematics. Through this work the Curriculum and Instruction division identified a lack of full alignment between the core literacy program and ELD content and worked with the publisher to make improvements.
TOSAs also developed, updated, and improved access to high quality supplemental ELD resources, including ensuring materials are aligned with state standards and the seven ELD practices highlighted above. Meanwhile, materials were updated and integrated with technology to increase access for students and staff, which involved the development of leveled texts and online platforms to practice language. Resources that are designed to enhance instructional differentiation and access for EL subtypes included “LOOK” for elementary Newcomer students, “English 3D” for Long Term ELs and “Systematic ELD” for Newcomers at the secondary levels.
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.
The material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures can be attributed to significant salary savings due to a high vacancy rate across the district, and improved estimated benefit costs throughout the fiscal year.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
The metrics show modest but stable improvements in key areas. The percentage of African American and Pacific Islander kindergarten students meeting proficiency in English/Language arts continues to gradually improve (53.8% in Spring 2025 compared to 51.7% in 2023). Literacy proficiency rates among focal students have increased from the initiative’s original baseline, demonstrating promising progress toward improving early literacy outcomes through intentional investment, targeted intervention, family partnership, and coordinated systems of support. While the district has experienced promising growth in early literacy outcomes for focal students, continued systemwide implementation and alignment across classrooms, schools, and central office teams remain necessary to achieve long-term literacy goals and strengthen equitable outcomes for African American and Pacific Islander students.
At the high school level there were notable improvements in the percentage of students exiting early warning indicator status by the end of 9th grade, and measures of attendance and college and career readiness improved for students with IEPs. And suspension rates for African American students also moved in the right direction.
For new metric 3 (started in 2024-2025), there was a small increase in the percentage of African American sixth grade students scoring at or above proficiency on district interim tests (Star Math) from baseline, but a small decrease from the year prior. We will continue to track this metric as it relates to the implementation of the new math curriculum and the included supplemental interventions.
Although there was a 5.6 point decrease in the percentage of students making progress on English Learner Progress Indicators (ELPI), there are significant efforts underway to align instructional coaching to support multilingual learners. In 2025-26 TOSAs worked with school sites to select areas of focus through the provision of on-site coaching and facilitation of professional learning communities (PLCs). PLCs targeted areas of improvement tied to learning goals and outcomes for multilingual learners. In addition, TOSAs provided whole staff professional development workshops on integrated and designated ELD strategies and support school site teams with PD plans, scheduling designated ELD, course access, and focal tutoring for ELs. These activities will continue in 2026-27 as they show continued promise.
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.
Three metrics for this goal—#3, #4, and #8—have been updated, as the district’s corresponding Vision, Values, Goals and Guardrails (VVGGs) metrics were updated. For metric #3, the focal grade shifted from Grade 3 to Grade 6. For metric #4, the focal grade shifted from Grade 7 to Grade 8. For metric #8, the metric has completely changed from previously focusing on African American students’ referral to special education to disproportionate suspensions of African American students.
Planned actions for 2026-27 are incorporated into the above descriptions of overall implementation, with some exceptions:
Action 4.01: Strengthen the identification process for special education to address increases in the number of students referred to special education via a targeted Pre-referral Pilot for initial IEPs, focused on sites with highest rates of referral to address overrepresentation. In partnership with SFSD, inform implementation of district wide standardized MTSS framework to ensure students are receiving needed support in the general education setting. Set an expectation that all schools use a common CCT process and monitor support & require its consistent use. Expand & Strengthen the Continuum of Services by monitoring the percent of time students with IEPs are participating in general education to ensure the Rightful Presence of all students in partnership with Supporting Innovative Practices (SIP). Strengthen the scope and sequence of professional development for teachers and administrators to ensure broader understanding of IEP requirements, provide instructional guidance on specialized academic instruction and mentorship for new teachers.
There is an ongoing collaboration between the ML Roadmap Team, the ELPAC, and the Special Education Department to address the special needs of Multilingual Learners with IEPs. We provide professional development to case managers to ensure there are appropriate accommodations and supports during the IEP assessment process, and that the IEP also includes linguistically appropriate goals. We also provide professional development on using the differentiation strategies and scaffolding available with our adopted general education curriculum.
Action 4.02: As SFUSD moves into the next phase of implementation, the district will continue focusing on: strengthening Tier 1 literacy instruction; increasing opportunities for students to engage in foundational literacy practice and academic ownership; improving MTSS alignment and intervention coherence; deepening family partnership efforts; strengthening instructional coaching and professional learning; and improving cross-departmental coordination and accountability structures in support of African American and Pacific Islander student achievement.
Action 4.07- Targeted supports for foster youth: Strengthen transportation services to promote school stability and ensure foster youth are able to remain in their school of origin when it is determined to be in their best interest. Conduct Best Interest Determination meetings with placement districts, Ed RIghts Holders and Protective Service Workers (HSA social workers) to determine the best school for enrollment. Provide individualized one-on-one tutoring services to support academic achievement and growth for foster youth students.
In response to the LCAP Advisory Committee recommendations, SFUSD will also communicate how to become a Resource (foster) Parent through existing communication channels. SFUSD could provide this information through flyers printed in multiple languages, and SFUSD Family Liaisons will be asked to provide these resources to share at Principal Coffee chats, back to school nights and other school related events. SFUSD FYSCP Staff can connect with SFUSD Community School leaders to include the San Francisco Human Services Agency (SFHSA) during the jobalike professional learning space during the course of the year.
Strengthening school culture, sense of belonging, and sanctuary protections for newcomer students:
The Refugee and Immigrant Solidarity in Education (RISE-SF) program of SFSD staffs a District Coordinator (RISE-SF DC) who offers professional developments and consultation to all SFUSD programs and school site staff to ensure practices are inclusive and equitable to newcomer immigrant families, and works closely with community-based organizations (CBOs) to provide school-based services for this population. Additionally, the District Coordinator trains and supervises school-based staff to act as RISE-SF Liaisons, charged with promoting positive school culture through partnerships with other SFUSD programs to offer ongoing student meetings and school-wide events.
RISE-SF's Newcomer Services Coordinator (RISE-SF NSC), in collaboration with school site and central program staff, conducts outreach, assessment, and linkages for immigrant and refugee students and families, with a focus of those in asylum proceedings as well as unaccompanied minors, around basic needs, legal immigration needs, and educational resources. Other services include implementation of family workshops, accompaniment to appointments, and school advocacy.
Sanctuary City and District (SCD) Joint Information Center (J.I.C.): RISE-SF continued spearheading efforts to coordinate and streamline sanctuary education district-wide. Due to shifts in central leadership staffing, SCD team was reorganized and previous efforts were limited. The cross-departmental team now consists of RISE-SF District Coordinator, Afterschool Program Manager, School Safety Services Director, and Policy Communications Coordinator, focusing on as needed "rapid response" to possible enforcement activities as well as coordinating community and staff outreach and education efforts. This reporting period, team monitored central leadership JIC communication pathway for rapid response needs (eg, immigration enforcement rumors, caregiver or student detention/deportation, etc.) met weekly to debrief incidences and update materials, resources, and policies, with an emphasis on ensuring compliance with new California legislation -AB 49 (Safe Haven Schools Act), SB 98 (SAFE Act), AB 495 (Family Preparedness Act), and AB 419 (Student Rights):
NEW - SFUSD Multilingual Caregiver Authorization Affidavits - Announced on all SFUSD bulletins
NEW - Multilingual SFUSD Sanctuary School Response Protocol Infographic for staff and community
NEW - RISE-SF Staff Learnings + Resources Padlet
NEW - "We Are Sanctuary" campaign in response to California Department of Education (CDE) Our Schools: Resources for Including Immigrant Families efforts
SFUSD Immigrant Policy and Resources website, Admin_Sanctuary City & District Resources & Support, All Staff_Sanctuary City & District Resources & Support, Copy of SFUSD School Notice to Law Enforcement building signage, and multilingual RISE-SF Sanctuary Resources for Families.
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 | Strengthen the identification process for special education to address increases in the number of students referred to special education via a targeted Pre-referral Pilot for initial IEPs, focused on sites with highest rates of referral to address overrepresentation. In partnership with SFSD, inform implementation of district wide standardized MTSS framework to ensure students are receiving needed support in the general education setting. Set an expectation that all schools use a common CCT process and monitor support & require its consistent use. Expand & Strengthen the Continuum of Services by monitoring the percent of time students with IEPs are participating in general education to ensure the Rightful Presence of all students in partnership with Supporting Innovative Practices (SIP). Strengthen the scope and sequence of professional development for teachers and administrators to ensure broader understanding of IEP requirements, provide instructional guidance on specialized academic instruction and mentorship for new teachers. Provide targeted support to Multilingual learners experiencing disability through collaboration between the ML Roadmap Team, the ELPAC and SpEd to improve services to students, including through professional development. |
$1,930,078.00 |
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. |
$461,400.00 |
No |
| Action #3 | Targeted supports: Comprehensive Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CCEIS) | A new CIM team was launched in partnership with the CDE on May 8, 2026. Key components of the plan include a targeted Pre-referral pilot, the standardization of a district wide MTSS plan and an expansion of the Shoestrings program. |
$162,626.00 |
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). | $2,116,070.00 |
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. Provide professional development and consultations to school site and central staff to increase identification and support for students experiencing homelessness, as defined under the federal McKinney-Vento Act. |
$368,928.00 |
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. | $204,924.00 |
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, or Involuntary Transfer to a continuation school. Strengthen transportation services to ensure school stability and maintain foster youth in their school of origin when it is determined to be in their best interest. Develop truancy policies that take account of the unique needs of and legal requirements for Foster Youth. Provide ongoing professional development, consultation, and technical assistance to school staff, central office personnel, and county partners on effective implementation and best practices for supporting foster youth. Assign Central FYSCP Educational Liaisons to oversee compliance with foster youth educational rights and district policies, while providing guidance and technical assistance to schools and partner agencies. |
$433,718.00 |
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. | $380,521.00 |
No |
| 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. |
$1,649,792.00 |
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.
LCAP Goal 5 is aligned to SFUSD/SFCOE’s 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 addressing inequitable inputs and creating more equity and excellence in student outcomes.
In order to achieve our goals, our systems must be of highest quality, consistent and predictable. We must develop and sustain 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. We continue to aspire to improve our core functions of human resources, payroll, and business services including our budget management enterprise systems, 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 Site-Based Teacher/Leader Survey (formerly 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 |
Spring 2026 (pending) Fall 2025: Colleague: 40% Principal: 23% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points | Colleague: 4 percentage point increase Principal: 1 percentage point decrease |
| 2 | Teachers and Staff Sense of Belonging |
Spring 2024: 77% (Annual Culture/Climate Survey) |
Spring 2025: 80% (Annual Culture/Climate Survey) |
Spring 2026: 81% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (87%) | 4 percentage point increase |
| 3 | % Favorable response to Question: The school’s strategic plan will achieve its goals and objectives | Spring 2024: 60% (Annual Culture/Climate Survey) |
Spring 2025: 64% (Annual Culture/Climate Survey) |
Spring 2026: 65% |
Double digit increase by 10 percentage points (70%) | 5 percentage point increase |
| 4 | Reduce deficit spending in the Unrestricted General Fund |
2024: $59.8M shortfall |
2025: $90M shortfall |
2026: $22M shortfall |
$1.3m shortfall |
From $59.8M deficit to $22M deficit |
| 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) This interim guardrail (formerly 4.3) was discontinued starting in 24-25. |
[inactive] | 5 days on average | [inactive] |
| 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.
Overall Implementation
In 2025-26 SFUSD completed a major change in our enterprise resource program (Action 5.05) with the full installation of Frontline. Technical assistance was provided to sites to support use of Frontline for budget management and tracking, thereby supporting clear and accessible processes to ensure reliable and predictable resources (Action 5.01).
Action 5.01 - Improve Operations: Establish clear & accessible processes As part of the district budget stabilization and planning work, SFUSD held five town hall meetings and joined 11 parent and community advisory groups to engage the community in budget development for the 2026-27 school year. In January, schools were provided with staffing allocations based on the staffing model to support effective planning. Work to ensure efficient staffing also included instituting a position control system that enables a more accurate projection of staffing needs relative to student enrollment.
Action 5.02 - Staff recruitment and retention
SFUSD has developed a robust system for teacher recruitment and retention, but resource constraints have affected our ability to fully implement this system every year. On the recruitment side, the Aspiring Teachers Program was designed for classified employees who want to earn their teacher certification. Aspiring Teachers were guided through university admissions, balancing working part or full time in SFUSD while pursuing their teaching credential, and securing a position to be teacher of record once they either qualified for an intern credential, or graduated with their preliminary teaching credential. This program was paused to new candidates in 2025-26 due to lack of resources, but this spring there were 7 new graduates from the program.
The SFUSD Student Teacher Program is another important part of the teacher pipeline. It serves 150–175 student teachers annually across 21 university partners. The program provides comprehensive support including onboarding, placement assistance, data management, and cross-departmental coordination with HR and the Department of Teaching. A key function is maintaining and updating MOUs with university partners to ensure program alignment and accountability. The program promotes professional growth through structured placement support and data management systems that track student teacher progress and outcomes, enabling SFUSD to measure improvement across cohorts.
To support and retain new teachers, SFUSD continued to offer the New Teacher Orientation and the SFUSD Induction Program. The induction program provides two years of mentoring grounded in instructional standards, core curriculum, and use of data. Mentors work with teachers to create individualized learning plans and provide ongoing feedback during weekly meetings. To support and retain new school and central office administrators, SFUSD and SFCOE offer the Transformative Leadership for Equity and Excellence (TLEE) program for new administrators. All new leaders in SFUSD & SFCOE are required to participate in TLEE. TLEE provides bi-weekly leadership coaching from a trained leadership coach for two years (40 hours annually) and monthly professional development oriented around the 11 Essential Leadership Priorities (60-80 hours annually).
To support retention in a high-cost city, SFUSD opened Shirley Chisholm Village, a 135-unit affordable housing project for teachers and staff. We are also exploring other housing options for educators in San Francisco, as directed by the Board of Education.
Action 5.03 - The School Staffing Model
SFUSD continued to use the school staffing model to determine staffing allocations at each school. The model is based on enrollment projections, best practices, and community input, as well as unique programming at some schools. This includes:
- Using Funds for Students Who Need Them Most: Sites are allocated funds based on their percentage of unduplicated students and must use these to support student needs.
- Staffing Based on Student Needs – Schools get teachers and support staff based on how many students need extra help, including English learners, low-income students, and students receiving special education services.
- Improving Special Education – SFUSD commissioned a review of its special education services last year and is implementing recommended reforms from that review: strengthening service continuity, improving systems, increasing accountability, and prioritizing hiring to serve students with disabilities.
- Supporting Underserved Schools – When planning staffing and school space, SFUSD works to reduce negative effects on schools in historically under-resourced communities.
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. 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.
The Facilities Team invested $3.66 Million in FY2026 to repair and replace heating and ventilation systems at eleven schools. Additionally, our Buildings and Grounds department significantly improved service delivery to schools by reducing resolution time. While initial response times (time to first technician visit) remained consistent in both years, between 0 and 2 days of a request, the time required to reach "Complete" status improved by 70% between FY25 and FY26. In FY25, an urgent heat-related work order took 40-80 days to complete. Similar issues reported in FY2026 were resolved within 7-15 days. The improvement was driven by more efficient triage and part-stocking:
- Part Availability: Parts like motors, capacitors, and fuses were stocked in advance of the winter season and could be installed within days of the initial request.
- Proactive Boiler Resets: Maintenance teams in FY26 strategically grouped “boiler resets” more effectively, often clearing multiple building-wide outages in a single morning to prevent the multi-day “no heat” scenarios.
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. SFUSD Facilities and Bond teams launched restroom renovation projects at John Muir Elementary, George Washington High School and Lincoln High School following an analysis of the 2025 FIT results and outstanding work orders. Work was additionally scheduled with Buildings and Grounds and Custodial to address lighting, graffiti, cleanliness and dispenser issues. Next Steps include 3 major restroom renovation projects scheduled for Summer 2026 and the next round of boiler replacement projects at 11 sites.
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.
The material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures can be attributed to significant salary savings due to a high vacancy rate across the district, and improved estimated benefit costs throughout the fiscal year.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
SFUSD made steady progress in implementing Goal 5: Operational Coherence, with consistent rates in staff belonging and strategic alignment, and infrastructure upgrades that significantly improved our fiscal systems and facilities. We have successfully moved from a negative fiscal certification to a qualified certification and to a fully balanced budget that (1) includes a clear plan to address deficit spending; (2) allows the district to meet its financial obligations; and (3) protects Student Outcome Goals. In the district’s 3rd Interim Report, SFUSD’s recommended certification was positive. Here is the presentation to the board - https://go.boarddocs.com/ca/sfusd/Board.nsf/files/DTVLFE5367A3/$file/FY25-26%203rd%20Interim%20Report%20Presentation.pdf
In terms of staff recruitment, the percentage of teachers who are highly credentialed in their subject area increased from 92.08% (4162 out of 4520) as of 6/4/25 to 94.7% (3717 out of 3924) as of 5/27/26, the district is still aiming to attain 100% target for all teachers. It should be noted that we are already seeing a 54% decrease in Emergency credentialed teachers with the use of this hierarchy in the 2025-26 SY. SFUSD is continuing to prioritize the Aspiring Teacher Program supported by the CTC classified grant for tuition reimbursement and program incidentals, and case management to support working as a para while enrolled in a program. Cultivate internal partnerships with HR and AALI to focus on African American males and external partnership with CCSF. The SF Urban Teacher Residency continues to recruit candidates in highly focused areas. Special Education is actively reducing reliance on Non-Public agencies for staffing by converting NPA staff to a District FTE. This is included in the SELPA plan and will be referenced in the LCAP.
With respect to staff retention and sense of belonging, there was a small improvement in key culture metrics, with staff sense of belonging rising slightly from 80% to 81%. Notably, staff belief that their school’s strategic plan will achieve its goals and objectives increased by 5 percentage points, according to Panorama survey data. These gains reflect steady internal alignment across the district’s five organizational divisions and greater confidence in leadership.
The SFUSD Induction Program has been found to be one of the most effective ways to retain talented teachers in SFUSD. The Induction Program touches every school (112+) and SIP is in communication with the school leaders to partner in developing their new teachers. Similarly, staff evaluations show the Transformative Leadership for Equity and Excellence (TLEE) program continues to be essential for onboarding and supporting new leaders in the SFUSD VVGGs and the current districtwide actions to improve teaching and learning.
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.
Staff will be strengthening the actions, particularly in the area of staff recruitment and retention. As we continue to stabilize the budget, we need to ensure that we establish sustainable recruitment opportunities and educator pipelines, especially for special education and bilingual teachers.
Action 5.02 - Staff recruitment and retention: We will re-prioritize programs that help paraeducators and other classified staff earn full credentials to become teachers and administrators in order to grow a stable school staff from within our school communities. We will Continue the Aspiring Teacher Program supported by the CTC classified grant for tuition reimbursement and program incidentals, and case management to support working as a para while enrolled in a program. Cultivate internal partnerships with HR and AALI to focus on African American males and external partnership with CCSF.
SFUSD continues its university partnerships and internal partnership with the Department of Special Education to address the shortage of special education teachers and recruit into the SF Urban Teacher Residency program and student teacher program. We also recruit teachers into the newly created pathway for bilingual educators (BILA) with existing university partners at Stanford & SFSU, and have a renewed partnership with USF. As funds become available SFUSD may also reinstate the J1 Visiting Teacher program which brings in bilingual educators and educators with special education expertise.
As part of our efforts to sustain and grow leadership we will also provide monthly professional development and 1:1 coaching for 75 new Assistant Principals and Principals in SFUSD, focused on cultivating their Instructional, Social Justice, Inclusive Facilitative, and Operational/Managerial leadership.
We will continue to provide opportunities for all staff to learn and grow their cultural competencies.
In response to community feedback we are developing a Vacancy Dashboard showing staffing data and vacancies.
We have not been able to sustain the staff exit survey due to budget cuts but will consider bringing it back as resources become available.
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. |
$5,249,610.00 |
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. |
$5,433,359.00 |
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. |
$1,945,851.00 |
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. |
$1,429,387.00 |
No |
| Action #5 | Resource Management: Enterprise Resource Program | Fully transition and sustain a new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system called Frontline and a Human Capital Management Suite (HCM) called Red Rover. |
$7,244,365.00 |
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. |
$293,683.00 |
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: 5.8% SED: 5.9% Wells Hispanic: 5.5% SED: 5.3% Downtown Hispanic: 2.9% SED: 3.2% |
2026 (available Nov 2026) Civic Center SED: Hilltop Hispanic: SED: Downtown EL: Hispanic: LTEL: SED: Wells Hispanic: SED: |
Hilltop EL: 10% Hispanic: 10% SED: 9.5% Wells Hispanic: 10% SED: 10% Downtown Hispanic: 9.6% SED: 9.8% |
Hilltop EL: No performance color (n too small) Hispanic: Increase of 3 percentage points SED: Increase of 3.4 percentage points. Wells Hispanic: 2.5 percentage point increase SED: 3.5 percentage point increase Downtown Hispanic: Increased by .3 points (maintained) SED: Increased by .4 points (maintained) |
| 2 | Increase student sense of belonging at school as measured by end of year Panorama student survey data (Downtown High School, Lee Newcomer School) |
Woodside: 53% Hilltop: 84% Civic Center: 85% Wells: 61% Downtown: 58% Vis Valley MS: 52% Muir: 75% Lee: 64% |
Woodside: no data for 2025 Hilltop: 96% Civic Center: no data for 2025 Wells: 86% Downtown: 83% Vis Valley MS: 70% Muir: 76% Lee: 75% |
Woodside: no data for 2026 Hilltop: 90% Civic Center: 88% Wells: 87% Downtown: 89% Vis Valley MS: 75% Muir: 67% Lee: No data |
Increase by double digit growth (10 percentage points) |
Woodside: No change/no data Hilltop: Increase of 6 percentage points Civic Center: Increase of 3 percentage points Wells: Increase of 26 percentage points Downtown: Increase of 31 percentage points Vis Valley: Increase of 23 percentage points Muir: Decrease of 8 percentage points Lee: N/A |
| 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 |
Vis Valley MS: EL: 38% chronically absent SED: 45.4% chronically absent Hispanic: 46.6% chronically absent |
EL: 41% chronically absent SED: 41.7% chronically absent Hispanic: 46.3% chronically absent |
EL: 13 percentage point decrease (year 3 target met) SED: 9.3 percentage point decrease (year 3 target met) Hispanic: 9.7 percentage point decrease |
| 4 | 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% |
2026 (available Nov 2026) |
Civic SED: 60% Wells Hispanic: 51.4% Downtown Hispanic: 60% SED: 62.4% |
(available Nov 2026) |
| 5 | 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% |
Wells: SED: 3% AA: 3.5% SWD: 2.9% Downtown: AA: 6% Vis Valley MS: AA: 32.1% SWD: 10.3% |
Woodside: 0% Hilltop: 0% Civic: 0% Wells: SED:2% AA:7% SWD:8% Downtown: AA: 4.6% Vis Valley MS: AA: 15% SWD: 8% |
Woodside: 0 Hilltop: 0 Civic: 0 Wells: SED: Decrease of 5.7 points (met target) AA: Decrease of 10.2 points (met target) SWD: Decrease of 11.2 points (met target) Downtown AA: Decrease of 3.8 percentage points Vis Valley MS AA: 11 percentage point increase SWDL 3.7 percentage point decrease |
| 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 |
Observations showed movement to "developing" on the structured talk portion of the ELD Observation Tool and maintaining emerging status for academic conversations. |
The Observation Tool went through significant revision and is no longer producing a developmental status report that allows us to compare data. The new tool is: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1js_xQj_SDDuxhu605AHYkZQxl5YIdK-fmPqTJ-Uiybc/edit?tab=t.22gyvfikudl2 |
Sustain at "Developing" or Higher on SFUSD ELD Observation Tool |
Moved up 1 level from emerging to developing in structured talk. No change in Emerging. |
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.
At the site level, there has been a shift away from funding and implementing mindfulness strategies. At the district level, there is an increased focus on "learning walks" to observe instruction, document the status of key strategies, and support instructional practice improvement and therefore student outcomes.
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.
The material differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actual Expenditures can be attributed to significant salary savings due to a high vacancy rate across the district, and improved estimated benefit costs throughout the fiscal year.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
For Action 1 - Each site paired a counselor or counselor-equivalent role with a structured credit-tracking tool (transcript audits, hex trackers, Student Academic Tracker) reviewed on a regular cadence (weekly/monthly/hex), uses ILPs as the core individualized planning document, and added CTE/dual-enrollment/work-based learning opportunities to support college-and-career-readiness. Every teacher serves as an advisor monitoring ILP progress and "Student Passport" completion; goal is 100% of 12th graders (or likely graduates) complete an ILP within one month of enrollment, with 80% completing a concrete postsecondary action (FAFSA/CADAA, applications, documented transition plan).
For belonging and attendance at Visitacion Valley: 70% of students reported felt a sense of belonging or connection to the school in the spring of 2025, which was an 18% increase from spring of 2024. This Spring, 75% of students at Vis reported a sense of belonging, a 5% uptick, demonstrating progress toward the goal. It is expected that this will also be reflected in the 2025-26 suspension data which is not yet published.
Coordinated Care Teams continue to improve their functions and operations, leading to more tiered intervention support for students needing it.
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.
Schools no longer receiving Equity Multiplier funding no longer have the resources to contract with outside providers.
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. | $667,793.00 |
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). |
$1,266,799.00 |
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. | $198,789.00 |
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). |
$0.00 |
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). |
$60,945.00 |
No |
| Goal # | Description | Type of Goal |
| Goal 7 | Equity Multiplier Goal - Improve student achievement in English/Language Arts, especially for multi-lingual learners and socioeconomically disadvantaged students. | Focus |
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Priority 4: Student Achievement
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
Redding Elementary School was newly identified for Equity Multiplier funding in 2024-2025. Redding has analyzed its data and gathered community input to form this goal.
| Metric # | Metric | Baseline | Year 1 Outcome | Year 2 Outcome | Target for Year 3 Outcome | Current Difference from Baseline |
| 1 | English Language Arts - Smarter Balanced Summative | 2025 CA Dashboard: English Learners: -125.2 Average Distance from Standard Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: -107.2 Average Distance from Standard |
N/a - new school in 2026-27 | N/a - new school in 2026-27 | English Learners: -88.1 Average Distance from Standard (2024 status) Socioeconomically Disadvantaged: -68 Average Distance from Standard (2024 status) |
No change (2026-27 is year 1 for this school). |
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.
N/A - Redding Elementary School is newly identified for equity multiplier funding in 2026-27.
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.
N/A - Redding Elementary School is newly identified for equity multiplier funding in 2026-27.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
N/A - Redding Elementary School is newly identified for equity multiplier funding in 2026-27.
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.
N/A - Redding Elementary School is newly identified for equity multiplier funding in 2026-27.
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 | Increase academic intervention support | Hire an academic response to intervention teacher and an instructional aide to provide targeted literacy intervention and supplemental academic support for students performing significantly below grade level, particularly English Learners, socioeconomically disadvantaged students, and students receiving special education services identified in the SPSA. | $292,318.00 |
No |
| Action #2 | Increase social and emotional and attendance supports | Hire an Americorps intern to provide supplemental social-emotional, attendance, and student engagement supports aligned to the SPSA goals related to chronic absenteeism, sense of belonging, and whole child development. | $33,510.00 |
No |
| Goal # | Description | Type of Goal |
| Goal 8 | Equity Multiplier Goal - Student achievement and engagement Marshall High School | Focus |
State Priorities addressed by this goal.
Priority 4: Student Achievement Priority 5: Student Engagement
An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.
Marshall High School was newly identified for equity multiplier funding for the 2026-27 school year. This goal reflects the school's analysis of data and community priorities based on their School Plan for Student Achievement.
| Metric # | Metric | Baseline | Year 1 Outcome | Year 2 Outcome | Target for Year 3 Outcome | Current Difference from Baseline |
| 1 | Improve graduation rate | 2025 EL: 61.3% Hispanic: 57.3% SED: 67.8% |
n/a (new school in 2026-27) | n/a (new school in 2026-27) |
EL: 70% Hispanic: 70% SED: 70% |
No change (2026-27 is year 1 for this school). |
| 2 | Increase in English Learner Progress Indicator (ELPI) - Summative ELPAC | ELs who progressed at least one ELPI level: 22.4% | n/a (new school in 2026-27) |
n/a (new school in 2026-27) | ELs who progressed at least one ELPI level: increase 10 percentage points each year |
No change (2026-27 is year 1 for this school). |
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.
N/A = Marshall High School is newly identified for equity multiplier funding in 2026-27.
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.
N/A = Marshall High School is newly identified for equity multiplier funding in 2026-27.
An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.
N/A = Marshall High School is newly identified for equity multiplier funding in 2026-27.
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.
N/A = Marshall High School is newly identified for equity multiplier funding in 2026-27.
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 | Provide instructional coaching | A literacy coach will provide job-embedded PD and coaching on reading, writing, academic language, and content-area literacy, specifically targeted at instructional strategies that support multilingual learners. | $103,781.00 |
No |
| Total Projected LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants | Projected Additional 15 percent LCFF Concentration Grant |
| $81,289,424.00 | $16,420,009.00 |
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 |
| 14.79% | 0.00% | $0.00 | 14.79% |
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 | LEA-wide 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). | 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. | Schools will monitor progress of MLs using SBAC, STAR summative assessments, English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC), and English Language Progress Indicators (ELPI). The 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. Metrics 1, 3, 9 |
| Goal 1 Action 6 | 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). | 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. | 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. Metrics 1, 3,9 |
| Goal 1 Action 7 | 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, Latin@ students,,Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander students, Students w/ IEP) are performing below average on statewide College and Career indicators. | 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. | 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". Metrics 4,5,7,8 |
| Goal 1 Action 12 | 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 utilize. | 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. | Focal student empathy interviews, instructional walkthroughs focused on how unduplicated students are engaging with content and demonstrating academic ownership. Additionally, Site-Based Teacher/Leader Survey (formerly 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. Metrics 1, 2 |
| Goal 1 Action 14 | 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). | 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. | College & Career indicators Metrics 5,8 |
| Goal 2 Action 2 | 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. | 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. | Suspension rate, attendance rates, SEL indicators Metrics 1-18 |
| Goal 2 Action 4 | 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 | Intentionally coordinate and support attendance improvement endeavors throughout the district so that every student attends school more frequently. This includes hiring a Supervisor of Attendance and Belonging. 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. | Attendance, Chronic Absentee metrics, local data collected and discussed in Coordinated Care teams Metrics 13-15 |
| Goal 2 Action 6 | 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. | Staff within the Research, Planning and Assessment (RPA) team are highly trained district office staff who generate reports and analyses on our unduplicated student groups, among other groups, to share with district and site administrators, teachers and classified staff. The insights and findings are 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 (SSC) meetings, Instructional Leadership Team (ILT) meetings, English Learner advisory committee (DELAC) meetings, staff meetings, and student support team (SST) meetings. | Number of data conferences with RPA, share of PK-12 teachers reviewing data and progress monitoring for continuous improvement of instruction Metrics 13-18 |
| Goal 2 Action 7 | 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. | 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 a COE-wide basis. | Student reporting of feeling supported during transition meetings. Metrics 15, 16 |
| Goal 2 Action 8 | 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). | 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 a COE-wide basis. | Individual Learning Plan monitoring Metrics 15-18 |
| Goal 3 Action 2 | 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. | 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. | Participation in district and school events, district advisory committee participation (DELAC, LCAP Advisory Committee, Foster Youth Coordinating Services Program), parent response on SEL survey. Metrics 1-4 |
| Goal 3 Action 4 | LEA-wide 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. | 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. | Participation in district and school events, district advisory committee participation (DELAC, LCAP Advisory Committee, Foster Youth Coordinating Services Program, parent response on SEL survey. Metrics 1-4 |
| Goal 3 Action 6 | 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. | 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. | Reduced number of incidents Goal 2, metrics 16-18 |
| Goal 4 Action 7 | 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). | 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 AB 740 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. Ensure school district staff have the tools and training necessary to support foster youth, including the ability to identify foster youth students and understand their educational rights, available resources, and support systems. Establish and implement districtwide policies and procedures that align with the educational rights of foster youth. Provide ongoing professional development, consultation, and technical assistance to school staff, central office personnel, and county partners on effective implementation and best practices for supporting foster youth. Assign Central FYSCP Educational Liaisons to oversee compliance with foster youth educational rights and district policies, while providing guidance and technical assistance to schools and partner agencies. Strengthen transportation services to promote school stability and ensure foster youth are able to remain in their school of origin when it is determined to be in their best interest. Provide individualized one-on-one tutoring services to support academic achievement and growth for foster youth students. | Formative and summative assessment benchmarks, CA dashboard outcomes Goal 1, metrics 1-2 |
| Goal 4 Action 8 | 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). | 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. | Formative and summative assessment benchmarks, CA dashboard outcomes Goal 1 metrics 1, 2,9 |
| Goal 4 Action 9 | 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 | 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. | Formative and summative assessment benchmarks, CA dashboard outcomes Goal 1 metrics 1,2,9 Goal 4 metrics 2,10,11 |
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 |
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.
not 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.
SFUSD uses a School Staffing Model 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. Schools receive a per pupil budget allocation of $300 times their unduplicated per pupil percentage from concentration grant funding. This ensures that schools with a high concentration (above 55 percent) of foster youth, English learners, and low-income students receive concentration funding to increase the capacity for staff and other impactful services to close the opportunity gap for focal students enrolled at their school. 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 includes providing FTE allocations of Assistant Principals, Counselors, and Supplemental Teachers funded by concentration grant funding. 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 designated allocations of concentration grant funding in addition to other differentiated staffing and budget support.
| 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 %) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-27 | $549,448,203.00 | $81,289,424.00 | 14.79% | 0.00% | 14.79% |
| Totals | LCFF Funds | Other State Funds | Local Funds | Federal Funds | Total Funds | Total Personnel | Total Non-Personnel |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Totals | $174,951,966.00 | $51,088,171.00 | $93,920,137.00 | $23,717,416.00 | $343,677,690.00 | $285,324,963.00 | $58,352,727.00 |
| 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 | All | 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 | No | 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 Multilingual 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 | No | 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 | No | 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 | No | 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 | No | 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 | No | Schoolwide | All | SFCOE | 2026-2027 |
| 6 | 2 | Implement targeted strategies to increase students’ sense of belonging | All students | No | Schoolwide | All | SFCOE | 2024-2026 |
| 6 | 3 | Improve Attendance (Reduce Chronic Absenteeism) | All students | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFCOE/SFUSD | 2024-2027 |
| 6 | 4 | Reduce Suspensions | African American/Black students; Students with Disability | No | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2026-2027 |
| 6 | 5 | Accelerate Language Development | Multi-language learners | No | LEA-Wide | Multilingual Learners | SFUSD/SFCOE | 2024-2027 |
| 7 | 1 | Increase academic intervention support | Multilingual Learners; Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students; Students with Disabilities | No | Schoolwide | Multilingual Learners; Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students; | Redding Elementary School | 2026-2027 |
| 7 | 2 | Increase social and emotional and attendance supports | Multilingual Learners; Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students | No | Schoolwide | Multilingual Learners; Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Students | Redding Elementary School | 2026-2027 |
| 8 | 1 | Provide instructional coaching | Multilingual Learners | No | Schoolwide | Multilingual Learners | Marshall (Thurgood) High School | 2026-2027 |
| 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 | $3,270,533.00 | $0.00 | $3,270,533.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $3,270,533.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 2 | $9,030,553.00 | $6,213,146.00 | $11,530,857.00 | $3,712,842.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $15,243,699.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 3 | $1,572,238.00 | $0.00 | $548,661.00 | $960,434.00 | $63,143.00 | $0.00 | $1,572,238.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 4 | $687,912.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $687,912.00 | $0.00 | $687,912.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 5 | $37,144,051.00 | $518,638.00 | $34,578,210.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $3,084,479.00 | $37,662,689.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 6 | $21,473,867.00 | $585,753.00 | $19,798,593.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $2,261,027.00 | $22,059,620.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 7 | $12,675,037.00 | $1,763,319.00 | $7,876,425.00 | $3,155,579.00 | $3,353,112.00 | $53,240.00 | $14,438,356.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 8 | $19,483,097.00 | $1,256,301.00 | $20,739,398.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $20,739,398.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 9 | $2,299,935.00 | $1,190,515.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $3,490,450.00 | $0.00 | $3,490,450.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 10 | $81,689,179.00 | $21,063,127.00 | $33,954,740.00 | $9,625,730.00 | $59,171,836.00 | $0.00 | $102,752,306.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 11 | $3,395,474.00 | $687,912.00 | $3,395,474.00 | $0.00 | $687,912.00 | $0.00 | $4,083,386.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 12 | $15,615,961.00 | $0.00 | $3,395,474.00 | $12,220,487.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $15,615,961.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 13 | $0.00 | $16,572.00 | $16,572.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $16,572.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 14 | $2,309,564.00 | $805,538.00 | $1,482,098.00 | $1,073,059.00 | $0.00 | $559,945.00 | $3,115,102.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 1 | $3,864,115.00 | $0.00 | $3,864,115.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $3,864,115.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 2 | $10,389,435.00 | $0.00 | $3,864,115.00 | $0.00 | $2,900,208.00 | $3,625,112.00 | $10,389,435.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 3 | $10,917,919.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $4,426,772.00 | $6,491,147.00 | $10,917,919.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 4 | $5,413,986.00 | $0.00 | $5,413,986.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5,413,986.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 5 | $10,008,661.00 | $0.00 | $981,051.00 | $2,408,415.00 | $5,260,021.00 | $1,359,174.00 | $10,008,661.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 6 | $6,790,948.00 | $0.00 | $6,790,948.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $6,790,948.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 7 | $356,559.00 | $0.00 | $356,559.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $356,559.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 8 | $894,165.00 | $565,485.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,459,650.00 | $1,459,650.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 1 | $1,074,877.00 | $0.00 | $1,074,877.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,074,877.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 2 | $0.00 | $1,880,000.00 | $0.00 | $1,880,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,880,000.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 3 | $1,265,923.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $162,000.00 | $848,923.00 | $255,000.00 | $1,265,923.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 4 | $1,631,785.00 | $0.00 | $142,457.00 | $636,961.00 | $472,133.00 | $380,234.00 | $1,631,785.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 5 | $7,799,369.00 | $4,118,794.00 | $0.00 | $11,918,163.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $11,918,163.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 6 | $0.00 | $29,200.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $29,200.00 | $0.00 | $29,200.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 1 | $1,930,078.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,930,078.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,930,078.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 2 | $12,000.00 | $449,400.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $461,400.00 | $0.00 | $461,400.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 3 | $50,443.00 | $112,183.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $162,626.00 | $162,626.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 4 | $849,628.00 | $1,266,442.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $2,116,070.00 | $0.00 | $2,116,070.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 5 | $349,263.00 | $19,665.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $368,928.00 | $0.00 | $368,928.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 6 | $170,924.00 | $34,000.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $204,924.00 | $0.00 | $204,924.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 7 | $280,656.00 | $153,062.00 | $179,426.00 | $254,292.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $433,718.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 8 | $78,836.00 | $301,685.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $380,521.00 | $380,521.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 9 | $862,272.00 | $787,520.00 | $99,766.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,550,026.00 | $1,649,792.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 1 | $1,487,090.00 | $3,762,520.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5,249,610.00 | $0.00 | $5,249,610.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 2 | $3,261,495.00 | $2,171,864.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $3,338,124.00 | $2,095,235.00 | $5,433,359.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 3 | $1,945,851.00 | $0.00 | $1,844,304.00 | $0.00 | $101,547.00 | $0.00 | $1,945,851.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 4 | $0.00 | $1,429,387.00 | $1,429,387.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $1,429,387.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 5 | $195,556.00 | $7,048,809.00 | $7,244,365.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $7,244,365.00 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 6 | $293,683.00 | $0.00 | $293,683.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $293,683.00 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 1 | $667,793.00 | $0.00 | $209,064.00 | $458,729.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $667,793.00 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 2 | $1,205,854.00 | $60,945.00 | $251,000.00 | $327,887.00 | $687,912.00 | $0.00 | $1,266,799.00 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 3 | $198,789.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $198,789.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $198,789.00 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 4 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | 0.00% |
| 6 | 5 | $0.00 | $60,945.00 | $0.00 | $60,945.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $60,945.00 | 0.00% |
| 7 | 1 | $292,318.00 | $0.00 | $292,318.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $292,318.00 | 0.00% |
| 7 | 2 | $33,510.00 | $0.00 | $33,510.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $33,510.00 | 0.00% |
| 8 | 1 | $103,781.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $103,781.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $103,781.00 | 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $549,448,203.00 | $81,289,424.00 | 14.79% | 0.00% | 14.79% | $83,978,057.00 | 0.00% | 15.28% |
| Totals by Type | Total LCFF Funds |
|---|---|
| Total: | $83,978,057.00 |
| LEA-wide Total: | $174,166,074.00 |
| Limited Total: | $0.00 |
| Schoolwide Total: | $785,892.00 |
| 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 | 5 | Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multilingual Learners | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $34,578,210.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 6 | Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $19,798,593.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 7 | Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $7,876,425.00 | 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 | $3,395,474.00 | 0.00% |
| 1 | 14 | SF County Office of Education: Academic Counseling & Career Technical Education Programming | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $1,482,098.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 2 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Safety and well-being | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $3,864,115.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 4 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Improve Attendance | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $5,413,986.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 6 | Systems of Support: Improved Use of Data | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $6,790,948.00 | 0.00% |
| 2 | 7 | SF County Office of Education: Transition support | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $356,559.00 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 4 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Build the capacity of parents and caregivers. | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $142,457.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 7 | Targeted supports: Foster Youth | Yes | LEA-Wide | All | SFUSD/SFCOE | $179,426.00 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 9 | Targeted Supports: Potential and Long Term English Language Learners | Yes | LEA-Wide | English Learners | SFUSD/SFCOE | $99,766.00 | 0.00% |
| Totals | Last Year's Total Planned Expenditures (Total Funds) | Total Estimated Actual Expenditures (Total Funds) |
|---|---|---|
| Totals | $342,506,978.00 | $262,055,636.00 |
| 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 | $4,080,842.00 | $3,107,791.00 |
| 1 | 2 | Teaching & Learning: High-quality, research-based curricula | No | $12,001,178.00 | $12,881,101.00 |
| 1 | 3 | Teaching & Learning: Standards-aligned Assessments | No | $734,998.00 | $696,329.00 |
| 1 | 4 | Teaching & Learning: Use of Data | No | $687,910.00 | $450,646.00 |
| 1 | 5 | Teaching & Learning: English Language Development and supports for Multilingual learners | Yes | $32,892,981.00 | $31,786,818.00 |
| 1 | 6 | Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations | Yes | $29,312,230.00 | $25,388,420.00 |
| 1 | 7 | Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness | Yes | $17,269,009.00 | $18,502,711.00 |
| 1 | 8 | Teaching & Learning: Kindergarten Readiness | No | $16,321,809.00 | $12,382,364.00 |
| 1 | 9 | Teaching & Learning: Augmenting Core Instruction with Access to Technology | No | $1,335,000.00 | $1,569,509.00 |
| 1 | 10 | Build and sustain robust programs- Arts, Athletics, Language Pathways, Libraries, and Physical Education. | No | $93,449,831.00 | $60,125,876.00 |
| 1 | 11 | Systems of Professional Learning: Professional Development | No | $2,926,665.00 | $3,205,246.00 |
| 1 | 12 | Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade-level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching | Yes | $22,966,656.00 | $15,485,921.00 |
| 1 | 13 | SF County Office of Education: Literacy | No | $90,425.00 | $17,320.00 |
| 1 | 14 | SF County Office of Education: Academic Counseling & Career Technical Education Programming | Yes | $1,629,458.00 | $2,235,436.00 |
| 2 | 1 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Professional Development | No | $11,607,426.00 | $6,880,354.00 |
| 2 | 2 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Safety and well-being | Yes | $9,121,389.00 | $6,135,696.00 |
| 2 | 3 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Coordinated Care Team | No | $16,333,036.00 | $6,099,171.00 |
| 2 | 4 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Improve Attendance | Yes | $2,794,879.00 | $4,616,171.00 |
| 2 | 5 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Increase Sense of Belonging | No | $11,159,942.00 | $8,842,658.00 |
| 2 | 6 | Systems of Support: Improved Use of Data | Yes | $5,647,292.00 | $405,241.00 |
| 2 | 7 | SF County Office of Education: Transition support | Yes | $328,993.00 | $340,013.00 |
| 2 | 8 | SF County Office of Education: Individual Learning Plans | Yes | $1,482,488.00 | $1,149,403.00 |
| 3 | 1 | Community Engagement for Effective Decision Making | No | $497,967.00 | $790,944.00 |
| 3 | 2 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Improve communication channels. | Yes | $1,880,000.00 | $1,876,200.00 |
| 3 | 3 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Parent & Student Advisory Committees and Councils | No | $650,412.00 | $196,728.00 |
| 3 | 4 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Build the capacity of parents and caregivers. | Yes | $4,172,019.00 | $3,692,051.00 |
| 3 | 5 | Community Schools: Build the capacity of staff to develop, implement, and sustain the community school model | No | $9,580,624.00 | $8,575,222.00 |
| 3 | 6 | Safe & Supportive Schools: School Crisis Support Initiative | Yes | $160,000.00 | $167,501.00 |
| 4 | 1 | Targeted supports: Students with IEPs | No | $2,227,650.00 | $718,027.00 |
| 4 | 2 | Targeted supports: Each & Every By Name | No | $448,250.00 | $269,365.00 |
| 4 | 3 | Targeted supports: Comprehensive Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CCEIS) | No | $195,749.00 | $47,898.00 |
| 4 | 4 | Targeted supports: African American Achievement & Leadership Initiative (AAALI) | No | $1,935,085.00 | $1,287,599.00 |
| 4 | 5 | Targeted supports: Students and Families Experiencing Homelessness (SAFEH) | No | $354,770.00 | $219,080.00 |
| 4 | 6 | LGBTQ Student Supports | No | $245,008.00 | $63,641.00 |
| 4 | 7 | Targeted supports: Foster Youth | Yes | $347,518.00 | $249,252.00 |
| 4 | 8 | Targeted Support: Newcomer students | Yes | $1,015,000.00 | $852,646.00 |
| 4 | 9 | Targeted Supports: Potential and Long Term English Language Learners | Yes | $1,578,790.00 | $1,123,672.00 |
| 5 | 1 | Improve Operations: Establish clear & accessible processes | No | $5,180,834.00 | $3,913,007.00 |
| 5 | 2 | Staff recruitment and retention | No | $5,814,964.00 | $4,151,054.00 |
| 5 | 3 | Resource Allocation: School Staffing Model | No | $297,685.00 | $291,000.00 |
| 5 | 4 | Resource Management: Improve facilities | No | $253,353.00 | $73,936.00 |
| 5 | 5 | Resource Management: Enterprise Resource Program | No | $10,000,000.00 | $10,230,387.00 |
| 5 | 6 | SF County Office of Education Operations | No | $135,951.00 | $68,411.00 |
| 6 | 1 | SFCOE College & Career Counseling support | No | $373,643.00 | $312,888.00 |
| 6 | 2 | Implement targeted strategies to increase students’ sense of belonging | No | $482,600.00 | $327,887.00 |
| 6 | 3 | Improve Attendance (Reduce Chronic Absenteeism) | No | $189,000.00 | $202,252.00 |
| 6 | 4 | Reduce Suspensions | No | $45,646.00 | $6,000.00 |
| 6 | 5 | Accelerate Language Development | No | $270,023.00 | $44,793.00 |
| 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 | $79,402,929.00 | $85,607,106.00 | $82,417,756.00 | $3,189,350.00 | 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 Multilingual learners | Yes | $26,879,051.00 | $28,405,389.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 1 | 6 | Teaching & Learning: Targeted instructional supports, especially for focal student populations | Yes | $27,506,385.00 | $25,388,420.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 1 | 7 | Teaching & Learning: College & Career Readiness | Yes | $4,679,453.00 | $9,683,479.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 1 | 12 | Systems of Professional Learning: Instructional Leadership Teams (ILT), Grade-level/ Department Collaboration, and Instructional Coaching | Yes | $10,746,026.00 | $3,869,111.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 1 | 14 | SF County Office of Education: Academic Counseling & Career Technical Education Programming | Yes | $1,124,067.00 | $730,400.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 2 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Safety and well-being | Yes | $1,592,569.00 | $6,135,696.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 4 | Safe & Supportive Schools: Improve Attendance | Yes | $2,794,879.00 | $4,616,171.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 6 | Systems of Support: Improved Use of Data | Yes | $5,647,292.00 | $405,241.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 7 | SF County Office of Education: Transition support | Yes | $328,993.00 | $340,013.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 8 | SF County Office of Education: Individual Learning Plans | Yes | $458,480.00 | $0.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 3 | 2 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Improve communication channels. | Yes | $1,880,000.00 | $1,876,200.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 3 | 4 | Strengthen Partnership with Parents/ Caregivers: Build the capacity of parents and caregivers. | Yes | $822,354.00 | $111,437.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 3 | 6 | Safe & Supportive Schools: School Crisis Support Initiative | Yes | $160,000.00 | $167,501.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 4 | 7 | Targeted supports: Foster Youth | Yes | $72,250.00 | $0.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 4 | 8 | Targeted Support: Newcomer students | Yes | $815,000.00 | $688,698.00 | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 4 | 9 | Targeted Supports: Potential and Long Term English Language Learners | Yes | $100,307.00 | $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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| $526,791,268.00 | $79,402,929.00 | 0.01% | 15.08% | $82,417,756.00 | 0.00% | 15.65% | $0.00 - No Carryover | 0.00% - No Carryover |
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.