Source	Funds	Percentage
All Other State Funds	$455,878	28%
All Local Funds	$99,947	6%
All Federal Funds	$266,676	16%
Total LCFF Funds	$808,342	50%

Source	Funds	Percentage
LCFF S/C Grants	$218,044	13%
All Other LCFF Funds	$590,298	36%

Local Control and Accountability Plan

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
Alternatives in Action	Nidia Burgos-Garcia Executive Director	nburgos@alternativesinaction.org 5107484314

Plan Summary 2026-27

General Information

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.

Alternatives in Action (AIA) is a public charter school located in the Seminary neighborhood of East Oakland. The school was originally founded as the Bay Area School of Enterprise in February 2001, when a group of ten youth, working in partnership with adult experts, designed, wrote, and submitted the first youth-initiated charter school petition in the country. Alternatives in Action prepares youth, the majority of whom have been unsuccessful in previous school settings, for college and career success, and the ability to make meaningful contributions to the community. Many students arrive at AIA below grade level and AIA teachers provide additional instructional support to bring students closer to grade level standards. The school's approach to working with high-risk youth is unique among non-traditional schools. AIA provides an environment where students take ownership of their learning and partner with caring adults to transform their lives as they learn how to positively impact their local community. Rather than using the continuation high school approach, which typically emphasizes rapid credit recovery merely to meet the minimum state established graduation requirements, AIA strives to prepare students for ambitious post-high school goals, including enrollment in community colleges, four-year universities, and certificate programs that prepare them for immediate employment in the skilled workforce.
Alternatives in Action serves 86 students in grades 9-12. The student population of AIA is 88.4% Hispanic/Latino, 9.3% African American, and 100% are socioeconomically disadvantaged. In addition, 54.7% are designated English Learners (EL) and 34.9% qualify for special education services. Many AIA English Learners are long-term ELs (LTEL). In 2025-26, 28.8% of English Learners were LTELs. AIA is a single-site charter school with approximately 100% "unduplicated pupil" count of high risk youth (2025-26 DataQuest).
The purpose of this Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) is to address the School Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) for Alternatives in Action which is the Schoolwide Program; herein referred to as the LCAP. The Charter School's plan is to effectively meet the ESSA Requirements in alignment with the LCAP and other federal, state and local programs. The plans included in the LCAP address these requirements compliant to include focusing on three goals: 1) AIA Graduates are prepared to be successful in college and careers and to be contributing members and leaders in their community; Goal 2) Develop student leadership and engagement to improve student learning; Goal 3) Build capacity for families and the community to partner with AIA to strengthen support for student success. Alternatives in Action completed a comprehensive needs assessment of the entire school which included an analysis of verifiable state data as well as local performance data used to measure student outcomes as evidenced in the annual update portion of the LCAP. The needs assessment process included meeting parents, classified staff, teachers and administrators to identify areas of opportunity for the students and groups of students who are not achieving standard mastery and to identify strategies which will be implemented in the LCAP to address those areas of opportunity.
The identification of the process for evaluating and monitoring the implementation of the LCAP and the progress toward accomplishing the established goals will include discussing the actions and services with the use of supplemental funds at the school level through the Parent Advisory Council which will include parents of English Learners. The Parent Advisory Council will meet four times per year to inform the process. Parents, classified staff, certificated staff and an administrator will make up the council. The number of parents will exceed or be equal to the number of total staff members. The council will discuss academic performance, supplemental services and areas to make improvements with Title funds as part of the School Plan included in the LCAP conversations at the meeting in the fall and at the meeting in the spring. The teachers, staff, and parents also participate in an annual survey which provides feedback on the goals and services. The teachers, staff, and administrators actively participate in the decision making process throughout the year and during LCAP workshops and Feedback meetings. The decisions will take into account the needs of Alternatives in Action based on student achievement data to include SBAC, ELPAC, and local assessment data and student demographic data will be used as a basis for making decision about the use of supplemental federal funds and the development of policies on basic core services.
Each goals includes actions and services that address the needs of all students and significant subgroups which include evidence-based strategies that provide opportunities for all children, methods, and instructional strategies, and particular focus on students at risk of not meeting the State academic standards.
Alternatives in Action is receiving Equity Multiplier funding.

Reflections: Annual Performance

A reflection on annual performance based on a review of the California School Dashboard (Dashboard) and local data.

2025 Dashboard Performance
Academic Performance in English Language Arts (ELA): English Language Arts results declined in 2025, with the Distance from Standard (DFS) decreasing from -107.6 points below standard in 2024 to -162.5 points below standard in 2025. Similar declines were observed among English Learners (-193.4 DFS), socioeconomically disadvantaged students (-162.5 DFS) and Hispanic students (-164.6 DFS). Due to fewer than 30 students participating in statewide testing, the school did not receive a Dashboard performance level for ELA in 2025. While performance remains below standard across student groups, the school will continue to focus on strengthening literacy instruction, expanding intervention supports, and utilizing targeted instructional strategies to address persistent achievement gaps and accelerate academic growth.
Academic Performance in Math: Mathematics results showed modest improvement in 2025, with the Distance from Standard (DFS) improving from -183.1 points below standard in 2024 to -172.7 points below standard in 2025. English Learners improved from -202.0 DFS to -197.1 DFS, socioeconomically disadvantaged students improved from -186.2 DFS to -172.7 DFS, and Hispanic students improved from -181.0 DFS to -176.3 DFS. Due to fewer than 30 students participating in statewide testing, the school did not receive a Dashboard performance level for Mathematics in 2025. Although students continue to perform below standard, the improvement suggests that instructional supports and intervention efforts are contributing to gradual academic growth. The school will continue to focus on strengthening foundational mathematics skills, targeted intervention, and data-informed instruction to improve student outcomes.
English Learner Progress Indicator (ELPI): English Learner performance improved substantially in 2025. The percentage of English learners making progress toward English language proficiency increased from 11.5% in 2024 to 45.2% in 2025, moving from a Red performance level to a Green performance level. This significant increase reflects the effectiveness of targeted English language development supports and interventions designed to accelerate language acquisition. The school will continue refining and expanding these supports to sustain positive outcomes for English learners.
Graduation Rate: The graduation rate improved for all students, increasing from 68.4% in 2024 to 72.7% in 2025 while maintaining a Yellow performance level. English Learners increased from 62.5% to 67.9%, socioeconomically disadvantaged students increased from 66.7% to 72.7%, and Hispanic students improved from 70.3% to 75.0%. These gains suggest that student support systems, credit recovery opportunities, and graduation monitoring efforts are helping more students successfully complete high school.
College and Career Indicator (CCI): College and Career Indicator results improved considerably in 2025. The percentage of students meeting CCI Prepared criteria increased from 10.8% to 27.3% for all students. English Learners increased from 8.7% to 17.9%, socioeconomically disadvantaged students increased from 11.4% to 27.3%, and Hispanic students increased from 11.1% to 25.0%. While the performance level remained Yellow, the substantial increase demonstrates progress in expanding access to college and career readiness opportunities and improving student completion of pathways that contribute to postsecondary success.
Suspension Rate: Suspension outcomes improved significantly in 2025. The overall suspension rate decreased from 13.5% to 4.0%, moving from Red performance level to a Green performance level. English Learners improved from 15.4% to 4.8%, socioeconomically disadvantaged students improved from 10.9% to 4.4%, and Hispanic students improved from 13.8% to 3.9%, all achieving Green performance levels. These substantial reductions indicate that behavioral supports, restorative practices, student interventions and proactive approaches to addressing student needs have been effective in reducing suspensions and improving school climate.
Local Indicators: All state-mandated local indicators requirements were met.
Lowest Performing Student Groups
The LCAP includes required actions to address the need for improvement related to Graduation Rate, ELA, and Math on the 2023 Dashboard:
Graduation Rate: All Students and Hispanic students(see Action 2.3 Student Engagement: School Enrichment and Community Building Opportunities). AIA received a Yellow performance on the 2024 Dashboard for all students, including Hispanic students.
English Language Arts: All students, socioeconomically disadvantaged (SED) students and Hispanic students(see Action 1.2 Instructional Model and 1.3 Data Driven MTSS: Tier 2 and 3 Academic Supports). AIA students demonstrated significant growth in ELA and moved from a Red performance level to an Orange performance level for all students, SED students and Hispanic students.
Mathematics: All students, socioeconomically disadvantaged and Hispanic students(see Action 1.2 Instructional Model and 1.3 Data Driven MTSS: Tier 2 and 3 Academic Supports). AIA students demonstrated significant growth in Math and moved from a Red performance level to an Orange performance level for all students, SED students and Hispanic students.
Learning Recovery and Emergency Block Grant: Alternatives in Action does not have any unexpended LREBG funding.

Reflections: Technical Assistance

As applicable, a summary of the work underway as part of technical assistance.

Not applicable

Comprehensive Support and Improvement

An LEA with a school or schools eligible for comprehensive support and improvement must respond to the following prompts.

Schools Identified

A list of the schools in the LEA that are eligible for comprehensive support and improvement.

Alternatives in Action is a single school LEA that is not eligible for comprehensive support and improvement.

Support for Identified Schools

A description of how the LEA has or will support its eligible schools in developing comprehensive support and improvement plans.

Not applicable

Monitoring and Evaluating Effectiveness

A description of how the LEA will monitor and evaluate the plan to support student and school improvement.

Not applicable

Engaging Educational Partners

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. Parent	Relationships between teachers and parents are critical to our work. Parents can provide direct feedback to teachers and staff through in-person meetings or informal communications. The school engages in open lines of 2-way communication (via phone calls, texts, emails) with families. The relationship with the bilingual parent coordinator and families has been critical in building trust and rapport with families to provide input into school decisions. Family Education and Engagement events also provide an opportunity for families and staff to communicate and provide input into school decisions. In addition, a parent representative(s) is elected to the School Board and parents are involved in the Parent Advisory Committee. Parents have provided feedback during these regular school meetings. The school also administers a survey in May to solicit feedback from families geared towards LCAP Goals, Actions and measures. This survey is administered in several ways to ensure families have support in completing the survey, as well as having an opportunity to provide positive or constructive feedback into the LCAP. For example, families can complete a paper or electronic version depending on what works best for them. In addition, parents provided feedback and input into the LCAP during the ELAC meetings and the Parent Advisory Committee.
2. Teachers, administrators, and other school personnel	Teachers/Staff/Administrators provided feedback during regular staff meetings and during individual meetings with administrators throughout the year. The draft 2026-27 LCAP was shared at a staff meeting for feedback and input. During these meetings, discussions, feedback and suggestions were shared in terms of where the school was making progress and what areas for improvement were needed. This feedback was incorporated into the LCAP.
3. Students	Student feedback is collected via our annual student survey administration in January and May.
4. Board	AIA provides opportunities for its BOD and the public to comment and provide input and feedback into the LCAP. The Board provided input/feedback during the Mid Year presentation on 01/29/2026. The Public Hearing for the LCAP will be on 06/11/2026.

A description of how the adopted LCAP was influenced by the feedback provided by educational partners.

Educational partner input gathered through staff meetings, leadership team discussions, Families in Action workshops, student engagement activities, and ongoing family communication identified several priorities for continuous improvement. Educational partners emphasized the need to strengthen supports for students with disabilities and English learners, expand instructional coaching and professional learning opportunities for staff, and continue building systems to address students' increasing academic, behavioral, and social-emotional needs. Families, students, and staff, and continue building systems to address students' increasing academic, behavioral, and social-emotional needs. Families, students and staff also highlighted the importance of expanding college and career readiness opportunities, including A-G awareness, dual enrollment, internships, and postsecondary planning supports, while continuing to strengthen family partnerships and communication regarding student progress and school programs.
Students and staff emphasized the importance of expanding meaningful leadership opportunities, increasing student voice in school decision-making, and strengthening schoolwide systems that promote belonging and connectedness. Educational partners also highlighted the need to maintain robust mental health, restorative justice and coordinated support services to address students' academic, behavioral, and social-emotional needs. Additional feedback supported continued investment in student wellness, campus safety, community-building activities, and consistent onboarding practices to ensure all students feel connected and supported as members of the school community.
Educational partners identified the need to strengthen family participation in school engagement opportunities, increase representation in advisory groups, and leadership activities, continue building relationships with families through personalized outreach, and expand family education opportunities related to student achievement, college and career readiness, and school decision-making processes.

Goals and Actions

Goal

Goal #	Description	Type of Goal
Goal 1	Increase student achievement for ALL students to have the skills necessary to be prepared for college and career.	Broad

State Priorities addressed by this goal.

Priority 1: Basic Services, Priority 2: Implementation of State Standards, Priority 4: Student Achievement, Priority 7: Course Access, Priority 8: Pupil Outcomes

An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.

Alternatives in Action envisions generations of young adults inspired and prepared to take meaningful action that positively transforms their lives and their communities. AIA recognizes the leadership potential in its youth, the majority of whom have been unsuccessful in traditional school settings, and strives to prepare these youth for college, career, and community. Alternatives in Action (AIA) operates a Title I Schoolwide Program (SWP), designed to improve academic achievement throughout the school so all students, particularly the lowest-achieving students, demonstrate proficiency on the state's academic standards.

Measuring and Reporting Results

Metric #	Metric	Baseline	Year 1 Outcome	Year 2 Outcome	Target for Year 3 Outcome	Current Difference from Baseline
1	CAASPP Distance from Standard for ELA Data Source: CA Dashboard	ELA DFS All Students: -191.8 EL: -212.2 SED: -188.9 Hispanic: -191.3 Data Year: 2022-23	ELA DFS All Students: -107.6 EL: -143.5 LTEL: -148.1 SED: -111.2 Hispanic: -107.6 Data Year: 2023-24	ELA DFS All Students: -162.5 EL: -193.4 LTEL: -203.4 SED: -162.5 Hispanic: -164.6 Data Year: 2024-25	ELA DFS All Students: -161.8 EL: -182.2 SED: -158.9 Hispanic: -161.3	ELA DFS All Students: +29.3 EL: +18.8 SED: +26.4 Hispanic: +26.7
2	CAASPP Distance from Standard for Math Data Source: CA Dashboard	Math DFS All Students: -250.5 EL: -258.8 SED: -254.1 Hispanic: -248.3 Data Year: 2022-23	Math DFS All Students: -183.1 EL: -202.0 LTEL: -195.7 SED: -186.2 Hispanic: -181.0 Data Year: 2023-24	Math DFS All Students: -172.7 EL: -197.1 LTEL: -207.1 SED: -172.7 Hispanic: -176.3 Data Year: 2024-25	Math DFS All Students: -220.5 EL: -228.8 SED: -224.1 Hispanic: -218.3	Math DFS All Students: +77.8 EL: +61.7 SED: +81.4 Hispanic: +72.0
3	CAST Science Indicator Data Source: CA Dashboard Science indicator methodology shifted to Science Points on 2025 Dashboard	Science DFS All: -40.2 Hispanic: -38.3 SED: -40 Data Year: 2022-23	Science DFS 2024 All: -35.0 Hispanic: -35.0 SED: -35.1 EL: -39.8 LTEL: -38.2 Data Year: 2023-24	Science Points (SP) 2025 All: 36 SP Hispanic: 35.9 SP SED: 36.2 SP EL: 36.6 SP LTEL: 37.8 SP Data Year: 2024-25	All: 40 SP Hispanic: 40 SP SED: 40 SP EL: 40 SP LTEL: 40 SP Year 3 targets updated to reflect Science Points methodology	A numeric comparison is not calculated because the baseline year and current year outcomes use different California School Dashboard methodologies (Distance from Standard vs Science Points). Progress is reported based on performance trends within the current Science Points metric.
4	NWEA/MAP Reading Conditional Growth Index target met Data Source: Local Data NWEA	-0.4 Data Year: 2024-25 New metric; baseline established in 2024-25	-0.4 Data Year: 2024-25	-0.5 Data Year: 2025-26	Greater than 0	-0.1
5	NWEA/MAP Language Conditional Growth Index target met Data Source: Local Data NWEA	-0.2 Data Year: 2023-24	-0.22 Data Year: 2024-25	-1.1 Data Year: 2025-26	Greater than 0	-0.9
6	NWEA/MAP Math Conditional Growth Index target met Data Source: Local Data NWEA	-0.31 Data Year: 2023-24	0.53 Data Year: 2024-25	-1.1 Data Year: 2025-26	Greater than 0	-0.8
7	ELPI: % of English Learners making progress on ELPAC Data Source: CA School Dashboard	30.8% Very Low Data Year: 2022-23	EL: 11.5% LTEL: 14.3% Data Year: 2023-24	EL: 45.2% LTEL: 59.4% Data Year: 2024-25	45%	Increased by 14.4%
8	% of LTELs scoring level 3 and 4 on ELPAC Data Source: ELPAC Results	39.13% Data Year: 2022-23	12.5% Data Year: 2023-24	40.0% Data Year: 2024-25	50% or higher	Increased by 0.87%
9	EL Reclassification Rate Data Source: Calpads (Data Source updated in 2024-25)	4% Data Year: 2022-23	0% Data Year: 2023-24	8% Data Year: 2023-24	8%	Increase by 4%
10	CCI% of students demonstrating college readiness for all students and all significant subgroups Data Source: CA School Dashboard	All students: 0.0% English Learners: 0.0% SED: 0.0% Hispanic/Latinx: 0.0% Data Year: 2022-23	All students: 10.8% English Learners: 8.7% LTEL: 13.3% SED: 11.4% Hispanic: 11.1% Data Year: 2023-24	All students: 27.3% English Learners: 17.9% LTEL: 18.5% SED: 27.3% Hispanic: 25% Data Year: 2024-25	5% or higher	All Students: +27.3% English Learners: +17.9% LTEL: +18.5% SED: +27.3% Hispanic: +25.4%
11	A-G Course Completion Rate: % of students who successfully completed a-g requirements Data Source: Dashboard - Met UC/CSU Requirements and CTE Pathway Completion Report	All Students 26.2% EL 23.8% SED 26.7% Hispanic 24.6% Data Year: 2022-23	All Students 44.7% EL 29.2% LTEL 43.8% SED 44.4% Hispanic 45.9% Data Year: 2023-24	All Students: 50% English Learners: 42.9% LTEL: 44.4% SED: 50% Hispanic: 50% Data Year: 2024-25	50% or higher	All Students: +23.8% EL: 19.1% LTEL: n/a SED: +23.3% Hispanic: +25.4%
12	Dual Enrollment: % of students in Dual Enrollment Courses Data Source: Local	8% New metric Baseline established in 2024-25	8% 2024-25 Baseline Year	10% 2025-26	Increase by 5%	2%
13	Career Pathway: % of students enrolled in career pathways Data Source: Local Data	28.7% 33 students Data Year: 2023-24	51.0% 50 students Data Year: 2024-25	50% Data Year: 2025-26	45%	21.3%
14	Career Pathway Completion Rate: % of students who completed a CTE Pathway Data Source: Dashboard - Met UC/CSU Requirements and CTE Pathway Completion Report	All Students 1.6% EL 2.4% SED 1.7% Hispanic 1.8% Data Year: 2022-23	All Students 13.2% EL 12.5% LTEL 18.8% SED 13.9% Hispanic 13.5% Data Year: 2023-24	All Students 18.2% EL 10.7% LTEL 11.1% SED 18.2% Hispanic 16.7% Data Year: 2024-25	15%	All Students: +16.6% EL: +8.3% LTEL:n/a SED: +16.5% Hispanic: +14.9%
15	College Application: % of students eligible who apply to a 4-year college Data Source: Local Data	51.7% (15/29) Data Year: 2023-24	88% (21/24) Data Year: 2024-25	83.3% Data Year: 2025-26	60% or higher	31.6%
16	College Acceptance: % of students accepted to a 4-year college Data Source: Local Data	53.3% (8/15) Data Year: 2023-24	100% (21/21) Data Year: 2024-25	37.5% Data Year: 2025-26	60% or higher	-15.8%
17	Financial Aid: % of students who apply for the FAFSA/Dream Act Data Source: Local Data	84.6% 22 out of 26 Data Year: 2023-24	91% 31 out of 34 Data Year: 2024-25	41.7% Data Year: 2025-26	80% or higher	-42.9%
18	% of teachers, including EL teachers, credentialed and properly assigned Data Source: SARC	48.5% of teachers fully credentialed Data Year: 2021-2022	72.1% of teachers fully credentialed Data Year: 2022-23	94.2% of teachers fully credentialed Data Year: 2023-24	100%	Increase of 45.7%
19	% of students with access to enroll in courses required for high school Data Source: Local Data - Master Schedule in SIS	100% Data Year: 2023-24	100% Data Year: 2024-25	100% Data Year: 2025-26	100%	Maintained
20	% of students with access to their own copies of standards aligned instructional materials for use at school and at home Data Source: SARC	100% Data Year: 2023-24	100% Data Year: 2024-25	100% Data Year: 2025-26	100%	Maintained
21	Implementation of standards for all students and enable ELs access to CCSS and ELD Standards Data Source: Local Indicator: CA School Dashboard Priority 2 Self Reflection Tool	Met Data Year: 2023-24	Met Data Year: 2024-25	Met Data Year: 2025-26	Met	Maintained

Goal Analysis for 2026-27

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.

Alternatives in Action made significant progress in implementing planned actions while adapting to emerging needs and challenges throughout the year. The school substantially implemented the actions associated with Goal 1, with most actions identified as fully implemented and several partially implemented due primarily to staffing challenges. Key actions included professional development and instructional coaching (Action 1.1), the instructional model with daily intervention and English Learner supports (Action 1.2), MTSS interventions and NWEA assessment administration (Action 1.3), English Language Development supports (Action 1.4), curriculum and instructional material improvements (Action 1.7), and college and career readiness programming (Actions 1.8 and 1.9). Successes included consistent instructional coaching, implementation of ELLevation for English Learner progress monitoring, expansion of AP and dual enrollment opportunities, targeted instructional aide support, improved college and career readiness systems, and increased alignment of instructional practices through professional learning. Substantive differences from planned implementation included the hiring of a Special Education Coordinator (Action 1.5), ongoing recruitment efforts for specialized staff, and modifications to college and career pathway programming to better serve all students rather than grade-level cohorts. Challenges included serving a growing population of students with significant academic, social-emotional, English Learner, and special education needs, recruiting qualified specialized staff, and maintaining comprehensive supports within a small school setting. Overall, the school successfully implemented the majority of planned actions and continued refining systems and supports to improve 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 explanation for the differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actuals are as follows:

Action 1.1 Professional Development and Coaching: Budgeted $114,365; Actual $45,131; Difference was due to staffing. The school was unable to fill the Assistant Director position.

Action 1.2 Instructional Model: Budgeted $715,609; Actual $549,560; Difference was due to staffing. The school was unable to fill the Assistant Director position.

Action 1.3 Data Driven MTSS: Tier 2 and 3 Academic Supports: Budgeted $273,284; Actual $204,750; Difference was due to staffing. The school was unable to fill the Academic Lead position.

Action 1.4 English Language Development: Budgeted $50,000; Actual $62,000; The school invested in more staff training for ELD.

Action 1.6 Curriculum and Instruction: Budgeted $64,159; Actual $91,374; The school made significant curriculum investments for students.

An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.

The actions implemented under Goal 1 demonstrated mixed but generally positive effectiveness in making progress toward the goal. Notable gains were observed in English Learner outcomes, with the English Learner Progress Indicator increasing from 30.8% to 45.2% (Metric 1.7), Long-Term English Learners scoring Level 3 or 4 on ELPAC increasing from 39.1% to 40.0% (Metric 1.8), and the reclassification rate increasing from 4% to 8% (Metric 1.9). College and career readiness outcomes improved substantially, including College/Career Indicator performance increasing from 0% to 27.3% for all students (Metric 1.10), A-G completion increasing from 26.2% to 50.0% (Metric 1.11), career pathway enrollment increasing from 28.7% to 50.0% (Metric 1.13), career pathway completion increasing from 1.6% to 18.2% (Metric 1.14), and college application rates increasing from 51.7% to 83.3% (Metric 1.15). Teacher credentialing also improved significantly from 48.5% to 94.2% (Metric 1.18).

Academic achievement outcomes were mixed. While ELA and Math performance remain below desired levels, CAASPP results show improvement compared to baseline performance, particularly for English Learners, socioeconomically disadvantaged students, and students with disabilities (Metrics 1.1 and 1.2). NWEA MAP growth measures in Reading, Language, and Math (Metrics 1.4-1.6) declined from prior performance and indicate a continued need to strengthen academic interventions and instructional supports. Financial aid completion and college acceptance rates also declined during the current year (Metrics 1.16 and 1.17), highlighting an area for continued focus. Overall, the implemented actions appear to have been effective in improving English Learner outcomes, college and career readiness, access to coursework, and staffing capacity, while continued efforts are needed to accelerate academic growth and postsecondary transition outcomes.

A description of any changes made to the planned goal, metrics, desired outcomes, or actions for the coming year that resulted from reflections on prior practice.

There are no changes planned to the goal, metrics, target outcomes, or actions.

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.

Actions

Action #	Title	Description	Total Funds	Contributing
Action #1	Professional Development and Coaching (Title II)	- Maintain an Instructional Coach or designee to provide staff coaching and professional learning focused on English Language Arts, Mathematics, English Language Development, data analysis (CAASPP, ELPAC, NWEA), effective instructional practices, formative assessment, classroom management, and positive student supports. - Strengthen standards-aligned instruction through the use of power standards, common planning, data analysis, and aligned benchmark assessments. - Conduct formal observations and ongoing inquiry-based coaching cycles to support continuous improvement in instructional practice and professional growth. - Provide professional development opportunities for staff, including: - Achievement Network literacy support and data analysis - Community Schools Statewide Initiative and Alameda County Office of Education coaching and technical assistance - Leadership coaching for instructional and operational leaders - PowerSchool training focused on student information systems and data management - Restorative Justice professional development and coaching - Literacy and Justice for All professional development - Humanity at Work staff culture development training - ELLevation professional development and support for English Learner instruction - Other conferences, trainings, and partnership opportunities aligned to school priorities - Provide summer professional development and staff retreat opportunities to strengthen instructional practices, school culture, and strategic planning. - Provide onboarding and support for new staff, including training on instructional systems, school procedures, culture, and student supports.	$46,033.00	No
Action #2	Instructional Model LREBG	- Maintain a daily bell schedule that includes one hour of academic intervention daily in Math and ELA, other core subject areas, and additional time for SEL activities. - Maintain teaching staff to meet A-G and career pathways offerings, including after school intervention, and ELD Newcomer Cohort - Academic Lead or designee will teach a universal approach to math lesson planning, coaching 1-on-1 with math instructors - Academic Lead or their designee will provide support to ELA teachers in implementing effective English Language Development (ELD) strategies.	$728,540.00	No
Action #3	Data Driven MTSS: Tier 2 and 3 Academic Supports* (Title I/IV)	- Utilize instructional leadership staff to analyze assessment data and support teachers in implementing data-informed instructional practices. - Support collaboration among instructional leaders, testing coordinators, and teachers to identify and address student learning needs in English Language Arts and Mathematics. - Administer NWEA/MAP Reading, Language, and Mathematics assessments three times annually to identify student strengths, needs, and growth. - Provide targeted individual and small-group academic interventions based on assessment results and student needs. - Maintain academic intervention opportunities during and after the school day. - Strategically place instructional aides and support staff to provide targeted assistance for English Learners, students with disabilities, and other students requiring additional support.	$108,082.00	Yes
Action #4	English Language Development	- Provide ELD Professional Development instructions on the following: - SDAIE strategies - ELPAC data analysis - ELD Standards - Integrated ELD - Bilingual staff, planning support from Academic Lead, intentionally chosen curriculum based on data from ELPAC and NWEA/MAP assessments - Designated ELD - Newcomer cohort, designated blocks for ELD and Humanities, targeted intervention after school - Progress Monitoring: Track progress of all English Learners and follow reclassification procedures including monitoring after reclassification to ensure continued academic progress - Long Term English Learner Support- Identification of LTELs at the beginning of the year; supports will include an additional class focused on EL support during academic intervention hour - Academic Lead or designee focused on EL supports directly in EL class - School will seek consulting and professional development for additional EL support	$0.00	Yes
Action #5	Special Education	- Maintain Special Education staffing to provide services and supports for students with disabilities and ensure compliance with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs). - Utilize instructional aides to support implementation of accommodations, modifications, and IEP service minutes. - Maintain collaboration among Special Education staff, instructional aides, general education teachers, related service providers, and school leadership. - Provide ongoing professional development and training related to special education compliance, instructional strategies, and inclusive practices. - Utilize partnerships with service providers and staffing agencies to support assessments, related services, and specialized student supports. - Maintain counseling, mental health, and related support services to address students' academic, behavioral, and social-emotional needs.	$202,878.00	No
Action #6	Hiring and Retention	- Conduct rigorous hiring process to ensure new instructors are appropriately credentialed with appropriate English learner authorization as defined by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing and current staff are credentialed/appropriately assigned - Maintain partnership with the Reach Institute for School Leadership to support credentialing and Induction for instructors - Provide support for staff to become credentialed in career technical education	$5,848.00	No
Action #7	Curriculum and Instruction	- Update instructional materials and curriculum as needed, including reviewing and updating a-g courses - Identify and purchase novels, textbooks and software to support curriculum implementation - ELA - Supplement novel sets for Humanities - NWEA to support Reading and Language Arts - Adopt new literacy development curriculum - Math - Implement mathematics curriculum and intervention resources aligned to grade-level standards and student learning needs, including supports for newcomer students. - Continue utilizing online History Alive (TCI) curriculum, Kahoot and Newsela, - Utilize UC Scout - Social Studies - Maintain current technology and purchase computer replacements, software, other tech materials as needed - Maintain AP Spanish and AP Seminar course offerings. - Provide dual enrollment opportunities through local community colleges (one Dual Enrollment course tied to CTE; others are HS credit courses) - Utilize supplemental instructional resources to support differentiated instruction and student engagement.	$73,223.00	No
Action #8	Academic Readiness and Counseling*	- Maintain a College and Career Coordinator position to provide college and career exploration, transcript reviews, A-G monitoring, financial aid support, college visits, career readiness activities, parent workshops, and internship opportunities. - Provide individualized counseling and planning meetings to support students in developing and monitoring postsecondary goals. - Utilize student information systems and college/career readiness data to monitor progress toward graduation, A-G completion, and College/Career Indicator readiness. - Provide workshops and activities related to college admissions, financial aid, career pathways, and postsecondary planning for students and families. - Partner with Families in Action and other community organizations to increase student awareness of A-G requirements and postsecondary opportunities.	$117,956.00	Yes
Action #9	Post-High School Pathways*	- Provide students with individualized college and career planning and support in developing and monitoring postsecondary goals. - Support students and families in completing FAFSA, California Dream Act, scholarship, and financial aid applications. - Provide opportunities for students to participate in college visits, including local community colleges, universities, vocational schools, and other postsecondary institutions. - Expand student access to dual enrollment opportunities through local colleges and university partnerships. - Provide career exploration opportunities through guest speakers, career awareness activities, internships, workplace learning experiences, and community partnerships. - Maintain and expand career pathway opportunities, including multimedia and other career-focused programs. - Provide A-G awareness workshops and postsecondary planning opportunities for students and families through partnerships such as Families in Action. - Develop targeted supports for newcomer students and other student groups to increase access to college and career pathways.	$185,922.00	Yes

Goal

Goal #	Description	Type of Goal
Goal 2	Develop student leadership and engagement to improve student learning.	Broad

State Priorities addressed by this goal.

Priority 1: Basic, Priority 5: Student Engagement, Priority 6: School Climate

An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.

At AIA youth are empowered to make choices about their educational experiences and influence most decisions about how their school functions on a day-to-day basis. The youth we serve thrive on the relationships they build with teachers and staff at AIA as well as the bonds they form with their peers. Most of our students have not experienced this support and care at previous schools and we know that this has contributed to their lack of social emotional awareness and well-being, general mistrust in educational institutions, and overall sense of themselves and their own capacity for learning. Developing student self-esteem, self-confidence, and empathy has a direct impact on their learning and academic achievement. We have seen the effect that participation in leadership development has on students' ability to identify goals, focus on successes, and transfer skills across subjects and into community building. Most importantly, leadership and engagement in school governance, culture, and climate supports students' capacity in the classroom as well as communication and self-advocacy connected to their academic learning.

Measuring and Reporting Results

Metric #	Metric	Baseline	Year 1 Outcome	Year 2 Outcome	Target for Year 3 Outcome	Current Difference from Baseline
1	Attendance Rate Data Source: CALPADS P-2	88.09% Data Year: 2023-24	94.06% Data Year: 2024-25	88.8% Data Year: 2025-26	90% or higher	Increase by 0.7%
2	Chronic Absence Rate for all students and all significant subgroups Data Source: DataQuest	All Students: 28.0% EL: 29.6% Homeless: 0.0% SWD: 36.0% SED: 27.3% Black/African American: 0.0% Hispanic: 28.2% Data Year: 2022-23	All Students: 38.4% EL: 42.1% SWD: 38.5% SED: 36.5% African American: 36.4% Hispanic: 38.6% Data Year: 2023-24	All Students: 17.2% EL: 15.3% SWD: 16.7% SED: 17.0% African American: n/a Hispanic: 14.6% Data Year: 2024-25	30% or lower for all students and student groups	All Students: -10.8% EL: -14.3% SWD: -19.3% SED: -10.3% African American: n/a Hispanic: -13.6%
3	Suspension rate for all students and all significant subgroups Data Source: CA School Dashboard	All Students: 4.2% English Learners: 2.0% SED: 3.9% SWD: 7.1% Hispanic/Latinx: 4.0% Data Year: 2022-23	All Students: 13.5% English Learners: 15.4% LTEL: 15.5% SED: 10.9% SWD: 7.7% Hispanic/Latinx: 13.8% Data Year: 2023-24	All Students: 4% English Learners: 4.8% LTEL: 7.1% SED: 4.4% SWD: 11.1% Hispanic/Latinx: 3.9% Data Year: 2024-25	All students: 2.5% English Learners: 1.0% SED: 2.5% SWD: 5.0% Hispanic/Latinx: 2.5%	All Students: -0.2% English Learners: +2.8% LTEL: +3.9% SED: +0.5% SWD: +4.0% Hispanic/Latinx: -0.1% Data Year: 2023-24
4	Expulsion Rate for all students and all significant subgroups Data Source: DataQuest	0% schoolwide and for all student groups Data Year: 2022-23	All Students: 2.1% Hispanic: 2.3% Data Year: 2023-24	All Students: 0% Hispanic: 0% Data Year: 2024-25	0%	All Students: Maintain Hispanic: Maintain
5	4-/5- Year Cohort Graduation Rate for all students and all significant subgroups Data Source: CA Dashboard	All: 67.2% EL: 61.9% Hispanic: 66.7% SED: 68.3% Data Year: 2022-23	All: 68.4% EL: 62.5% LTEL: 81.3% Hispanic: 70.3% SED: 66.7% Data Year: 2023-24	All: 72.7% EL: 67.9% LTEL: 66.7% Hispanic: 75% SED: 72.7% Data Year: 2024-25	80% or higher for all students and student groups	All: +5.5% EL: +6.0% LTEL: N/A Hispanic: +8.3% SED: +4.4%
6	High School DropOut Rate Data Source: DataQuest	All Students: 30.8% EL: 32.4% SED: 31.4% Hispanic: 31.3% Data Year: 2022-23	All Students: 27.8% EL: 34.8% SED: 29.4% Hispanic: 25.7% Data Year: 2023-24	All Students: 4.5% EL: 3.6% SED: 4.5% Hispanic: 2.8% Data Year: 2024-25	25% or lower for all students and student groups	All: -26.3% EL: -28.8% Hispanic: -28.5% SED: -26.9%
7	Facility in “good repair”? Data Source: SARC	Met Data Year: 2023-24	Met Data Year: 2024-25	Met Data Year: 2025-26	Met	Maintain
8	Student Survey: % of students who report: - Feeling safe on campus - Having one adult that they can talk to when they have a problem - Feeling that they have leadership opportunities Data Source: Local Survey Data	- Feeling safe on campus: 94.2% - Having one adult that they can talk to when they have a problem: 93.0% - Feeling that they have leadership opportunities: 91.9% Data Year: 2023-24	- Feeling safe on campus: 92.7% - Having one adult that they can talk to when they have a problem: 86.8% - Feeling that they have leadership opportunities: 91.2% Data Year: 2024-25	- Feeling safe on campus: 90.3% - Having one adult that they can talk to when they have a problem: 87% - Feeling that they have leadership opportunities: N/A Data Year: 2025-26	90% or higher	- Feeling safe on campus: -3.9% - Having one adult that they can talk to when they have a problem: -6% - Feeling that they have leadership opportunities: N/A
9	Parent Survey: % of parents who report: - Feeling that the school is safe - Feeling that their student is supported Data Source: Local Survey Data	- Feeling that the school is safe: 78% - Feeling that their student is supported: 80% Data Year: 2023-24	- Feeling that the school is safe: 91% - Feeling that their student is supported: 91% Data Year: 2024-25	- Feeling that the school is safe: 93.3% - Feeling that their student is supported: 93.3% Data Year: 2025-26	90% or higher	- Feeling that the school is safe: +15.3% - Feeling that their student is supported: +13.3%

Goal Analysis for 2026-27

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, the school substantially implemented the actions associated with Goal 2, with several actions fully implemented and others partially implemented as the school continued refining systems and expanding supports. Key actions included Restorative Justice and PBIS implementation (Action 2.1), youth leadership development opportunities (Action 2.2), student engagement and enrichment activities (Action 2.3), coordination of services for high-need students through the COST process and counseling supports (Action 2.4), wellness initiatives (Action 2.5), and maintaining a safe and well-maintained campus (Action 2.6).
Successes included strengthening restorative justice systems through two full-time and one part-time RJ Coordinators, expanding student leadership opportunities through the E-Team, increasing student participation in athletics and enrichment activities, strengthening community partnerships, expanding counseling and mental health services, improving attendance monitoring systems, and increasing campus safety through additional cameras and visitor management systems.
Substantive differences from planned implementation included replacing the planned Health and Wellness Coordinator and part-time counselor model with two clinical counselors, modifying leadership structures to emphasize student-led opportunities, and adjusting student engagement programming to better align with student interests and needs.

Challenges included onboarding increasing numbers of transfer students, maintaining consistent communication and implementation of support systems among staff, recruiting specialized personnel, and continuing to build a culture of leadership opportunities that extends beyond a small group of student leaders.

Overall, the school successfully maintained a comprehensive system of academic, behavioral, social-emotional, and wellness supports while continuing to refine services based on student needs and feedback.

The explanation for the differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actuals are as follows:
Action 2.1 Restorative Justice: Budgeted $139,510; Actual $166,037; Difference due to an increase in Social Emotional Learning (SEL) supports.
Action 2.3 Student Engagement: School Enrichment and Community Building Opportunities: Budgeted $57,384; Actual $66,381; Difference due to an increase in college field trips tied to student engagement.
Action 2.4 Coordination of Supports for Highest Need Youth: Budgeted $103,272; Actual $148,154; Difference due to increased supports for highest need youth.

An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.

The actions implemented under Goal 2 were effective in improving student engagement, attendance, school climate, and student outcomes. Attendance improved from 88.1% to 88.8% (Metric 2.1), while chronic absenteeism decreased significantly from 28.0% to 17.2% overall, with notable reductions for English Learners, students with disabilities, socioeconomically disadvantaged students, and Hispanic students (Metric 2.2). Suspension rates declined substantially from the prior year and returned to levels comparable to or lower than baseline for most student groups (Metric 2.3), while expulsion rates returned to and remained at 0% (Metric 2.4). Graduation rates increased across all reported student groups, including English Learners and Hispanic students (Metric 2.5), and dropout rates decreased dramatically from 30.8% to 4.5% overall (Metric 2.6).

The effectiveness of the school's restorative justice, counseling, attendance intervention, and student support systems is also reflected in strong climate and engagement indicators. Parent survey results improved significantly, with 93.3% of parents reporting that the school is safe and that their student is supported (Metric 2.9). Student survey results remained strong, with 90.3% of students reporting feeling safe on campus and 87.0% reporting having at least one trusted adult at school (Metric 2.8), although these measures declined slightly from baseline and will continue to be monitored. The school also maintained facilities in good repair (Metric 2.7). Overall, the implementation of Restorative Justice (Action 2.1), Youth Leadership Development (Action 2.2), Student Engagement and Community Building Opportunities (Action 2.3), Coordination of Supports for Highest-Need Youth (Action 2.4), Fitness and Wellness initiatives (Action 2.5), and Safe, Clean, and Maintained Campus efforts (Action 2.6) contributed to improvements in attendance, graduation, school climate, and student engagement while reducing chronic absenteeism, suspensions, expulsions, and dropout rates.

A description of any changes made to the planned goal, metrics, desired outcomes, or actions for the coming year that resulted from reflections on prior practice.

There are no changes planned to the goal, metrics, target outcomes, or actions.

Actions

Action #	Title	Description	Total Funds	Contributing
Action #1	Restorative Justice	Restorative Justice (RJ) Coordinator and staff supports the school by providing direct support services and professional development on RJ practices: - Orient students and families to school expectations and disciplinary procedures within new student orientation interviews, parent orientation interviews, and student retreat; Hold 2 orientation sessions to differentiate new families vs. returning families to ensure adequate understanding of school norms and expectations - Assess and revise restorative justice school-wide strategies; Revisit structures to support implementation of schoolwide RJ practices in the classroom and schoolwide; Create classroom toolkits for teachers to use - Train all adults working with AIA on principles of restorative justice, restorative justice strategies and implementation procedures at AIA; Reinforce systems and tools for classroom management; Ground all staff on RJ strategies and provide consistent coaching towards building positive classroom culture; Revise classroom observation tool to include coaching of positive classroom culture strategies with an RJ lens - Continue to implement school wide PBIS and increase supports for Tier 2 and 3 - Maintain RJ Coordinator and provide year-long Unconditional Education coaching and support - On-going training for RJ staff (professional development), including Restorative Justice for Oakland Youth (RJOY) and RJ team shadowing/best practices with local community high school	$117,138.00	Yes
Action #2	Youth Leadership Development	- Train staff on youth development principles with an emphasis on student voice, physical and emotional safety, leadership development, and project-based learning. - Maintain youth leadership structures through the E-Team and other student leadership opportunities that support student participation in school planning, decision-making, and community engagement activities. - Provide leadership development opportunities that allow students to create goals, plan events, and engage in service-learning and community partnerships. - Maintain partnerships with community organizations and schools, including Greenleaf Elementary School and Alameda County Safe Routes to School, to expand authentic leadership experiences for students. - Ensure student representation and participation on advisory and governance structures, including advisory roles connected to the Alternatives in Action Board of Directors. - Provide opportunities for students to participate in interview panels, school improvement discussions, family engagement activities, and presentations to visitors and community partners.	$0.00	No
Action #3	Student Engagement: School Enrichment and Community Building Opportunities LREBG	Provide opportunities that promote student engagement, belonging, and school connectedness, including: - Maintain regular Advisory (Home) and Social-Emotional Learning classes and continue communitywide meetings that support relationship-building, team development, and cultural celebrations. - Recognition ceremonies and celebrations for student achievement, attendance, growth, and engagement. - Student-led cultural events, assemblies, and community-building activities developed through student and community partnerships. - New student orientation activities, retreats, and onboarding supports designed to increase student connectedness and successful school transitions. - Schoolwide activities including Winter Showcase, Spirit Week, Portfolio Night, music and SEL activities, senior events, and other student engagement opportunities. - Academic, cultural, historical, and college field trips designed to expand student learning and postsecondary awareness. - Maintain partnerships that provide mentoring, leadership, arts, athletics, and enrichment opportunities for students. - Continue partnerships with local schools and organizations to expand opportunities for athletics, college awareness, restorative practices, and student leadership. - Utilize school communication platforms and media tools to highlight student accomplishments and engagement opportunities.	$66,072.00	No
Action #4	Coordination of Supports for highest need youth	- Maintain a Coordination of Services Team (COST) structure to identify students in need of additional support, manage referrals, coordinate services, and monitor interventions. - Utilize COST to connect students and families with mental health, health, legal, social service, and basic needs resources. - Maintain instructional aide support and specialized services to increase access to accommodations and interventions for students with disabilities and other high-needs students. - Maintain Health and Wellness staffing to support restorative practices, wellness initiatives, student interventions, and coordination of services. - Maintain school-based counseling services and partnerships with community agencies to provide individual counseling, case management, crisis response, and mental health supports. - Strengthen systems for communication, coordination, and monitoring of student supports across school staff and service providers	$59,046.00	No
Action #5	Fitness and Wellness	- Health and Wellness Coordinator supports health and wellness opportunities for students including bringing in community resources and running the Health and Wellness Fair - Maintain opportunities for students to participate in sports activities and nutrition program - Continue to develop athletic offerings based on student input and interest - Maintain healthy breakfast, snack and lunch program	$65,364.00	No
Action #6	Safe, Clean and Maintained Campus	- Maintain appropriate custodial supports - Train all staff and youth on facility expectations and safety protocols - Ensure all staff are CPR/First Aid certified and all staff have completed child abuse mandated reporting training - Facility Improvements: - Provide appropriate facilities - Increase safety with cameras and updating campus with new carpeting and windows - Maintain Urban Garden and develop Student created mural project	$309,019.00	No

Goal

Goal #	Description	Type of Goal
Goal 3	To build capacity for families and the community to partner with Alternatives in Action to strenghten support for student success	Broad

State Priorities addressed by this goal.

Priority 3: Parental Involvement and Family Engagement

An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.

Supporting high needs youth necessitates providing support for the entire family and establishing a positive relationship with parents/guardians. AIA youth and families form strong bonds with AIA teachers and personnel because we work very intentionally to cultivate and nurture those relationships. We believe in forming an educational partnership and empowering parents/caring adults to be active participants in youth development and achievement.

Measuring and Reporting Results

Metric #	Metric	Baseline	Year 1 Outcome	Year 2 Outcome	Target for Year 3 Outcome	Current Difference from Baseline
1	Engagement: % of parents/family members who attend at least 1 educational event Data Source: Local Data	80% Data Year: 2023-24	86% Data Year: 2024-25	92.2% Data Year: 2025-26	85% or higher	Increase 12.2%
2	Engagement: % of parents who respond to parent survey and report: - Satisfaction with communication - Satisfaction with family engagement program - Satisfaction with parent involvement in governance Data Source: Local Survey Data	- Satisfaction with communication: 90% - Satisfaction with family engagement program: 88% - Satisfaction with parent involvement in governance: 100% Data Year: 2024-25 Baseline re-established in 2024-25; data not collected in 2023-24	N/A Baseline established in 2024-25	- Satisfaction with communication: 85% - Satisfaction with family engagement program: 80% - Satisfaction with parent involvement in governance: 100% Data Year: 2025-26	90% or higher	- Satisfaction with communication: -15% - Satisfaction with family engagement program: -8% - Satisfaction with parent involvement in governance: maintained
3	Education: % of parents who report: - Satisfaction with academic program - Satisfaction with college and career readiness Data Source: Local Survey Data	- Satisfaction with academic program: 90% - Satisfaction with college and career readiness: 60% Data Year: 2023-24	- Satisfaction with academic program: 95% - Satisfaction with college and career readiness: 95% Data Year: 2024-25	- Satisfaction with academic program: 93.5% - Satisfaction with college and career readiness: 90.3% Not Yet Available Data Year: 2025-26	90% or higher	- Satisfaction with academic program: +3.5% - Satisfaction with college and career readiness: +30.3%
4	Seek parent input & promote parental participation in programs for unduplicated students and students with exceptional needs Data Source: Local Indicator Priority 3	Full Implementation Data Year: 2023-24	Full Implementation Data Year: 2023-24	Full Implementation Data Year: 2024-25	Full Implementation and Sustainability	Maintained

Goal Analysis for 2026-27

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.

The school substantially implemented the actions associated with Goal 3 and continued to expand opportunities for family outreach, communication, engagement, and participation in school decision-making. Through Action 3.1, the school maintained regular communication with families through phone calls, emails, social media, family conferences, surveys, Cafecitos, volunteer opportunities, and bilingual outreach. The school also continued efforts to strengthen family engagement through a Family Liaison position and increased parent participation. Through Action 3.2, the school maintained parent leadership structures including the Parent Advisory Committee, ELAC, and parent representation on the Board Advisory structure while providing workshops and engagement opportunities related to college and career readiness, financial aid, A-G requirements, student achievement, and wellness. Community partnerships with Families in Action, La Clínica, and other community resource providers supported additional opportunities for family engagement and education.

Successes included increased parent participation in school events and volunteer opportunities, expanded family engagement through athletic events and community partnerships, increased parent survey participation, and continued implementation of governance and advisory opportunities. Challenges included a transition to a new Family Liaison position, limited participation in some parent workshops despite extensive outreach efforts, and the need to continue strengthening family engagement beyond school events. Overall, the school maintained multiple opportunities for families to engage with the school, provide input, and support student success while continuing to refine outreach strategies to increase participation across all family groups.

The explanation for the differences between Budgeted Expenditures and Estimated Actuals are as follows:

Action 3.1: Family Outreach and Communication: Budgeted $243,741; Actual $304,740. Difference due to an increase in staffing.

An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.

The actions implemented under Goal 3 were generally effective in increasing family engagement and maintaining strong family partnerships with the school. Participation in educational events increased from 80.0% to 92.2% of families (Metric 3.1), exceeding the Year 3 target of 90% and demonstrating increased family engagement in school activities. Parent satisfaction with the school's academic program increased from 90.0% to 93.5%, while satisfaction with college and career readiness increased substantially from 60.0% to 90.3% (Metric 3.3). The school also maintained full implementation of Priority 3 requirements related to seeking parent input and promoting participation for parents of unduplicated pupils and students with exceptional needs (Metric 3.4).

Parent survey results related to communication and family engagement declined from the prior-year baseline, with satisfaction with communication decreasing from 90% to 85% and satisfaction with the family engagement program decreasing from 88% to 80% (Metric 3.2). However, satisfaction with parent involvement in governance remained at 100%. The decline in communication and engagement satisfaction may be attributable in part to the transition to a new Family Liaison and ongoing efforts to rebuild participation in workshops and engagement opportunities. Despite these challenges, family participation rates continued to increase, and overall parent perceptions of school safety, academic support, and college and career readiness remained strong. The implementation of Family Outreach and Communication (Action 3.1) and Family Education and Engagement (Action 3.2) contributed to increased family participation, sustained opportunities for leadership and governance, and strong parent satisfaction with key aspects of the school's educational program.

A description of any changes made to the planned goal, metrics, desired outcomes, or actions for the coming year that resulted from reflections on prior practice.

There are no changes planned to the goal, metrics, target outcomes, or actions.

Actions

Action #	Title	Description	Total Funds	Contributing
Action #1	Family Outreach and Communication	- Provide regular outreach for family engagement opportunities including use of robocalls, letters, personal phone calls, emails, social media, flyers, and home visits - School will attend training for ParentSquare to better interact with families - Ensure monthly instructor communication to parents regarding student progress as well as weekly family communications - Continue hosting "Cafecitos" as an informal gathering where families can connect with the Executive Director and staff in a welcoming environment. - Ensure all communication to families is in primary language(s); several bilingual staff in Spanish to support communications with families - Hold family orientation, parent/student conferences and other activities to support family engagement in student learning - Administer surveys to parents, students, and staff annually to assess satisfaction with program and get feedback on program improvements - Conduct family focus groups to gather feedback and input into programs and occurrences at school - Provide activities and workshops to parents based on identified needs	$279,587.00	No
Action #2	Family Education and Engagement	AIA provides multiple opportunities for families to provide input in decision-making and for family engagement with the school and surrounding community. These opportunities include: - Parent Leadership Groups: Opportunities for parents to engage in decision making - Maintain parent representative(s) as Advisory Members to the Alternatives in Action High School BOD. - Maintain the Parent Advisory Committee meeting structure monthly during the academic year. - Maintain ELAC schedule, meeting regularly and ensuring compliance with all requirements. - Provide training & development for parents to function effectively in governance roles. - Meetings with families to review assessment goals and results, student progress and their support roles in academic achievement of their student. - Provide training for parents on web-based learning management system (Schoology), web-based student performance system (PowerSchool), discipline procedures and other school systems, and parent communication system (Parent Square). - Provide workshops and activities on A-G requirements, college application process, financial aid and scholarship opportunities, and other topics identified by the Parent Advisory Committee. - College Counselor supporting with family engagement especially in terms of college application process, financial; well attended workshops; - Community Partnerships include: - Families in Action - partnership heavily led by students and parents from local high schools - empowering families with understanding what A-G is, focus on raising A-G completion for all students and student group, and focus on raising CAASPP scores - La Clinica Partnership - Offer mental health series to provide mental health support for families - Community Closet - clothing and toy donations for AIA families and surrounding community. -Additional family engagement opportunities include: Student Portfolio Night, Student Presentations of Learning, Health and Wellness Fair (participants and volunteers), BASE Day (end-of-year celebration): participants and volunteers, SmugMug site, Instagram site engagement	$1,020.00	Yes

Goal

Goal #	Description	Type of Goal
Goal 4	The school will improve academic achievement and college and career readiness outcomes for English Learners (EL) and Students with Disabilities (SWD) by expanding targeted instructional supports and increasing access to rigorous coursework and interventions in English Language Arts and Mathematics. Through additional staffing, differentiated instruction, and increased monitoring of student progress and postsecondary readiness, the school will improve student performance on the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) in ELA and Mathematics and increase College/Career Indicator (CCI) readiness, including A–G course completion.	Equity Multiplier Focus Group

State Priorities addressed by this goal.

Priority 4: Student Achievement

An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.

The school developed this Equity Multiplier Focus Goal based on an analysis of student outcome data and educational partner input that identified persistent achievement gaps and barriers to college and career readiness for English Learners (EL) and Students with Disabilities (SWD). School data indicate that these student groups continue to experience lower levels of academic achievement in English Language Arts and Mathematics and require additional supports to access rigorous coursework and successfully prepare for postsecondary opportunities. Educational partners, including staff, students, and families, emphasized the need for increased targeted academic interventions, differentiated instruction, expanded access to grade-level content, and additional support in meeting college and career readiness milestones. The school also identified a need to strengthen systems for monitoring student progress, providing timely interventions, and ensuring EL and SWD students have equitable access to A–G coursework and other opportunities that contribute to College/Career Indicator (CCI) readiness.

Measuring and Reporting Results

Metric #	Metric	Baseline	Year 1 Outcome	Year 2 Outcome	Target for Year 3 Outcome	Current Difference from Baseline
1	CAASPP Distance from Standard for ELA Data Source: CA Dashboard	ELA DFS All Students: -162.5 EL: -193.4 LTEL: -203.4 SED: -162.5 Hispanic: -164.6 Data Year: 2024-25 (Baseline Year)	N/A	N/A	ELA DFS All Students: -161.8 EL: -182.2 SED: -158.9 Hispanic: -161.3	N/A-New Goal
2	CAASPP Distance from Standard for Math Data Source: CA Dashboard	Math DFS All Students: -172.7 EL: -197.1 LTEL: -207.1 SED: -172.7 Hispanic: -176.3 Data Year: 2024-25 (Baseline Year)	N/A	N/A	Math DFS All Students: -220.5 EL: -228.8 SED: -224.1 Hispanic: -218.3	N/A-New Goal
3	CCI% of Students Demonstrating College Readiness for All Students and All Significant Subgroups Data Source: CA School Dashboard	All students: 27.3% English Learners: 17.9% LTEL: 18.5% SED: 27.3% Hispanic: 25% Data Year: 2024-25 (Baseline Year)	N/A	N/A	+3% or higher	N/A -New Goal

Goal Analysis for 2026-27

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.

Not Applicable. This goal was added as a new Equity Multiplier Focus Goal in the 2026-27 LCAP.

An explanation of how effective the specific actions were in making progress toward the goal.

Not Applicable. This goal was added as a new Equity Multiplier Focus Goal in the 2026-27 LCAP.

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.

Not Applicable. This goal was added as a new Equity Multiplier Focus Goal in the 2026-27 LCAP.

Actions

Action #	Title	Description	Total Funds	Contributing
Action #1	Targeted Academic & College Readiness Supports	The school will provide additional staffing and targeted instructional supports to improve outcomes in ELA, Mathematics, and college and career readiness for English Learners and Students with Disabilities. Additional staffing may include intervention teachers, instructional aides, academic support personnel, and expanded teacher collaboration time to deliver small-group instruction, progress monitoring, co-teaching, differentiated instruction, and intervention during the school day. Supports will prioritize literacy and mathematics acceleration through targeted intervention and scaffolded access to grade-level curriculum. The school will also strengthen A–G and CCI readiness by providing increased academic advising, course monitoring, intervention planning, and student progress reviews to ensure EL and SWD students successfully complete rigorous coursework and are supported toward postsecondary readiness outcomes. These supports will be informed by student assessment data and adjusted throughout implementation to address identified opportunity gaps.	$0.00	No

Increased or Improved Services for Foster Youth, English Learners, and Low-Income Students for 2026-27

Total Projected LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants	Projected Additional 15 percent LCFF Concentration Grant
$218,044.00	$2,394.00

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
36.90%	0.00%	$0.00	36.90%

The Budgeted Expenditures for Actions identified as Contributing may be found in the Contributing Actions Table.

Required Descriptions

LEA-wide and Schoolwide Actions

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 3	CAASPP Distance from Standard (DFS) in ELA and Math indicate the need for continued growth in ELA and Math for socioeconomically disadvantaged (SED) students and English Learners.	The school will provide all students, including socioeconomically disadvantaged students and English Learners, targeted Tier 2 and Tier 3 academic supports. Analyzing local assessment data from NWEA will support identifying the needs in ELA and Math for students and providing instructional best practices in those areas. Individual and small group instruction will be utilized to support students with ELA and Math areas of need. In addition, the academic intervention hour four days a week will provide additional time and support for students.	1.1, 1.2 Distance from Standard (DFS) in ELA and Math 1.4, 1.5, 1.6 NWEA CGI
Goal 1 Action 8	Although Alternatives in Action has increased the percentage of students who are "prepared" on the College/Career Indicator, the school will continue to focus on post-high school strategies for EL, Hispanic, and SED students.	Continuing efforts to increase the CCI remain a priority for the 2026-27 school year. The College & Career Coordinator (CCC) will provide a variety of academic readiness strategies and counseling in order for AIA graduates to be ready for college or career post-high school. The school will utilize the CCI spreadsheet to identify and monitor progress towards meeting CCI measures. The school is ensuring that students have opportunities for Dual Enrollment (college credit courses), completing a-g course requirements, offering an AP Spanish course and providing an entire Multimedia pathway sequence for students to earn completion of a CTE Pathway.	1.10 CCI 1.11 A-G Course Completion Rate 1.12 Dual Enrollment 1.13 Career Pathway Enrollment 1.14 CTE Completion
Goal 2 Action 1	AIA continues to focus on decreasing Suspension and Expulsion Rates for SED, Hispanic and EL students.	Restorative justice practices will help reduce suspension rates by clearly communicating behavior expectations through student and parent orientations and by supporting staff with ongoing training and coaching on restorative strategies. The RJ Coordinator will lead these efforts to promote relationship-building, accountability, and a positive school climate, reducing the need for exclusionary discipline. By integrating culturally responsive practices and increasing Tier 2 and 3 supports through PBIS, the school will be able to support the needs of socioeconomically disadvantaged, Hispanic, and EL students.	2.3 Suspension Rate 2.4 Expulsion Rate
Goal 3 Action 2	Supporting high needs youth necessitates providing support for the entire family and establishing a positive relationship with parents/guardians. Family engagement of English Learners and SED students is important to strengthen support for student success.	The school will provide a variety of opportunities for families to participate in school decision-making and community engagement. Parents are involved through leadership groups such as the Parent Advisory Committee and ELAC, with training provided to support their governance roles. The school hosts regular meetings and workshops on academic progress and college readiness, with strong support from the college counselor and community partners like Families in Action and La Clinica. Families also engage through events like Student Portfolio Night, Presentations of Learning, and the annual BASE Day celebration.	3.1 Engagement: % of parents/family members attending at least 1 educational event. 3.4 Seek parent input and promote parental participation in programs.
Goal 1 Action 9	Although Alternatives in Action has increased the percentage of students who are "prepared" on the College/Career Indicator, the school will continue to focus on post-high school strategies for EL, Hispanic, and SED students also received a Very Low Level	The school will utilize the CCI spreadsheet to identify and monitor progress towards meeting college ready measures. The school is ensuring that students have opportunities for Dual Enrollment (college credit courses), completing a-g course requirements, and offering an AP Spanish course. Many AIA students are the first in their families to attend college. Supports are in place to ensure students, including SED and English Learners complete the FAFSA and a college application. Data is monitored on post-high school enrollment for 2-year and 4-year colleges.	1.15 College Application 1.16 College Acceptance 1.17 Financial Aid

Limited Actions

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
Goal 1 Action 4	Alternatives in Action has seen an increase from the previous year of English Learners making progress towards English language proficiency. The school will continue to focus on increasing its English Learner Progress Indicator.	ELD professional development is required of all instructional staff. Because the school has a large number of English learners at different proficiency levels (newcomers to long-term ELs), the school will track the progress of all ELs to identify supports needed towards proficiency and reclassification. The school will also have an instructional aide primarily focused on ELs.	1.7 ELPI 1.8 LTEL Performance Level 3 and 4 1.9 EL Reclassification

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

Additional Concentration Grant Funding

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.

Alternatives in Action is a single school LWA with a greater than 55% unduplicated pupil population that will use additional concentration grant add-on funding to increase the staff providing direct services to students through the following action(s): Action 1.3 Data Driven MTSS: Tier 2 and 3 Academic Supports

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	N/A	N/A
Staff-to-student ratio of certificated staff providing direct services to students	N/A	N/A

2026-27 Total Planned Expenditures Table

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	$590,298.00	$218,044.00	36.94%	0.00%	36.94%

Totals	LCFF Funds	Other State Funds	Local Funds	Federal Funds	Total Funds	Total Personnel	Total Non-Personnel
Totals	$1,992,873.00	$355,827.00	$0.00	$17,028.00	$2,365,728.00	$1,615,702.00	$750,026.00

Goal #	Action #	Action Title	Student Group(s)	Contributing to Increased or Improved Services?	Scope	Unduplicated Student Group(s)	Location	Time Span
1	1	Professional Development and Coaching (Title II)	All	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All Schools	Ongoing
1	2	Instructional Model LREBG	All	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All Schools	Ongoing
1	3	Data Driven MTSS: Tier 2 and 3 Academic Supports* (Title I/IV)	All	Yes	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	Ongoing
1	4	English Language Development	English Learners	Yes	Limited	English Learners	All Schools	Ongoing
1	5	Special Education	All	No	Limited	N/A	All Schools	Ongoing
1	6	Hiring and Retention	All	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All Schools	Ongoing
1	7	Curriculum and Instruction	All	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All Schools	Ongoing
1	8	Academic Readiness and Counseling*	All	Yes	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	Ongoing
1	9	Post-High School Pathways*	All	Yes	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	Ongoing
2	1	Restorative Justice	All	Yes	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	Ongoing
2	2	Youth Leadership Development	All	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All Schools	Ongoing
2	3	Student Engagement: School Enrichment and Community Building Opportunities LREBG	All	No	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	Ongoing
2	4	Coordination of Supports for highest need youth	All	No	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	Ongoing
2	5	Fitness and Wellness	All	No	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	Ongoing
2	6	Safe, Clean and Maintained Campus	All	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All Schools	Ongoing
3	1	Family Outreach and Communication	All	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All Schools	Ongoing
3	2	Family Education and Engagement	All	Yes	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	Ongoing
4	1	Targeted Academic & College Readiness Supports	EL, SED, SWD	No	LEA-Wide	English Learners and Low-income	All Schools	Ongoing

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	$0.00	$46,033.00	$41,475.00	$0.00	$0.00	$4,558.00	$46,033.00	0.00%
1	2	$728,540.00	$0.00	$728,540.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$728,540.00	0.00%
1	3	$90,679.00	$17,403.00	$56,955.00	$51,127.00	$0.00	$0.00	$108,082.00	0.00%
1	4	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	0.00%
1	5	$0.00	$202,878.00	$61,460.00	$128,948.00	$0.00	$12,470.00	$202,878.00	0.00%
1	6	$0.00	$5,848.00	$5,848.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$5,848.00	0.00%
1	7	$20,000.00	$53,223.00	$73,223.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$73,223.00	0.00%
1	8	$87,956.00	$30,000.00	$117,956.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$117,956.00	0.00%
1	9	$185,922.00	$0.00	$79,104.00	$106,818.00	$0.00	$0.00	$185,922.00	0.00%
2	1	$117,138.00	$0.00	$117,138.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$117,138.00	0.00%
2	2	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	0.00%
2	3	$0.00	$66,072.00	$66,072.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$66,072.00	0.00%
2	4	$29,046.00	$30,000.00	$0.00	$59,046.00	$0.00	$0.00	$59,046.00	0.00%
2	5	$55,364.00	$10,000.00	$65,364.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$65,364.00	0.00%
2	6	$47,432.00	$261,587.00	$309,019.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$309,019.00	0.00%
3	1	$253,625.00	$25,962.00	$269,699.00	$9,888.00	$0.00	$0.00	$279,587.00	0.00%
3	2	$0.00	$1,020.00	$1,020.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$1,020.00	0.00%
4	1	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	0.00%

2026-27 Contributing Actions Table

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)
$590,298.00	$218,044.00	36.94%	0.00%	36.94%	$372,173.00	0.00%	63.05%

Totals by Type	Total LCFF Funds
Total:	$372,173.00
LEA-wide Total:	$1,931,413.00
Limited Total:	$61,460.00
Schoolwide Total:	$0.00

Goal #	Action #	Action Title	Contributing to Increased or Improved Services?	Scope	Unduplicated Student Group(s)	Location	Planned Expenditures for Contributing Actions (LCFF Funds)	Planned Percentage of Improved Services (%)
1	3	Data Driven MTSS: Tier 2 and 3 Academic Supports* (Title I/IV)	Yes	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	$56,955.00	0.00%
1	4	English Language Development	Yes	Limited	English Learners	All Schools	$0.00	0.00%
1	8	Academic Readiness and Counseling*	Yes	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	$117,956.00	0.00%
1	9	Post-High School Pathways*	Yes	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	$79,104.00	0.00%
2	1	Restorative Justice	Yes	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	$117,138.00	0.00%
3	2	Family Education and Engagement	Yes	LEA-Wide	All	All Schools	$1,020.00	0.00%

2025-26 Annual Update Table

Totals	Last Year's Total Planned Expenditures (Total Funds)	Total Estimated Actual Expenditures (Total Funds)
Totals	$2,351,084.00	$1,708,832.00

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	Professional Development and Coaching (Title II)	No	$114,365.00	$45,131.00
1	2	Instructional Model	No	$715,609.00	$549,560.00
1	3	Data Driven MTSS: Tier 2 and 3 Academic Supports* (Title I/VI)	Yes	$143,074.00	$0.00
1	4	English Language Development	Yes	$50,000.00	$0.00
1	5	Special Education	No	$198,900.00	$198,900.00
1	6	Hiring and Retention	No	$32,013.00	$45,831.00
1	7	Curriculum & Instruction	No	$64,159.00	$91,374.00
1	8	Academic Readiness & Counseling	Yes	$137,956.00	$0.00
1	9	Post -High School Pathways	Yes	$106,500.00	$0.00
2	1	Restorative Justice	Yes	$135,134.00	$0.00
2	2	Youth Leadership Development	No	$0.00	$0.00
2	3	Student Engagement: School Enrichment and Community Building Opportunities (LREBG)	No	$57,384.00	$66,381.00
2	4	Coordination of Supports for Highest Need Youth	No	$103,272.00	$148,154.00
2	5	Fitness & Wellness	No	$53,762.00	$55,164.00
2	6	Safe, Clean, and Maintained Campus	No	$193,134.00	$203,597.00
3	1	Family Outreach and Communication	No	$243,741.00	$304,740.00
3	2	Family Education and Engagement Events	Yes	$2,081.00	$0.00

2025-26 Contributing Actions Annual Update Table

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	$368,332.00	$574,745.00	$474,064.00	$100,681.00	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	3	Data Driven MTSS: Tier 2 and 3 Academic Supports* (Title I/VI)	Yes	$143,074.00	$66,479.00	0.00%	0.00%
1	4	English Language Development	Yes	$50,000.00	$14,724.00	0.00%	0.00%
1	8	Academic Readiness & Counseling	Yes	$137,956.00	$148,705.00	0.00%	0.00%
1	9	Post -High School Pathways	Yes	$106,500.00	$96,000.00	0.00%	0.00%
2	1	Restorative Justice	Yes	$135,134.00	$148,156.00	0.00%	0.00%
3	2	Family Education and Engagement Events	Yes	$2,081.00	$0.00	0.00%	0.00%

2025-26 LCFF Carryover Table

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)
$991,953.00	$368,332.00	0.00%	37.13%	$474,064.00	0.00%	47.79%	$0.00 - No Carryover	0.00% - No Carryover

Local Control and Accountability Plan Instructions

Plan Summary

Engaging Educational Partners

Goals and Actions

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.

Introduction and Instructions

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:

Comprehensive Strategic Planning: The process of developing and annually updating the LCAP supports comprehensive strategic planning, particularly to address and reduce disparities in opportunities and outcomes between student groups indicated by the California School Dashboard (California Education Code [EC] Section 52064[e][1]). 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.
Meaningful Engagement of Educational Partners: The LCAP development process should result in an LCAP that reflects decisions made through meaningful engagement (EC Section 52064[e][1]). Local educational partners possess valuable perspectives and insights about an LEA's programs and services. Effective strategic planning will incorporate these perspectives and insights in order to identify potential goals and actions to be included in the LCAP.
Accountability and Compliance: The LCAP serves an important accountability function because the nature of some LCAP template sections require LEAs to show that they have complied with various requirements specified in the LCFF statutes and regulations, most notably:
- Demonstrating that LEAs are increasing or improving services for foster youth, English learners, including long-term English learners, and low-income students in proportion to the amount of additional funding those students generate under LCFF (EC Section 52064[b][4-6]).
- Establishing goals, supported by actions and related expenditures, that address the statutory priority areas and statutory metrics (EC sections 52064[b][1] and [2]).
  - NOTE: As specified in EC Section 62064(b)(1), the LCAP must provide a description of the annual goals, for all pupils and each subgroup of pupils identified pursuant to EC Section 52052, to be achieved for each of the state priorities. Beginning in 2023–24, EC Section 52052 identifies long-term English learners as a separate and distinct pupil subgroup with a numerical significance at 15 students.
- Annually reviewing and updating the LCAP to reflect progress toward the goals (EC Section 52064[b][7]).
- Ensuring that all increases attributable to supplemental and concentration grant calculations, including concentration grant add-on funding and/or LCFF carryover, are reflected in the LCAP (EC sections 52064[b][6], [8], and [11]).

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.

Plan Summary

Purpose

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.

Requirements and Instructions

General Information

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.

For example, information about an LEA in terms of geography, enrollment, employment, the number and size of specific schools, recent community challenges, and other such information the LEA may wish to include can enable a reader to more fully understand the LEA’s LCAP.
As part of this response, identify all schools within the LEA receiving Equity Multiplier funding.

Reflections: Annual Performance

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:

Any school within the LEA that received the lowest performance level on one or more state indicators on the 2023 Dashboard;
Any student group within the LEA that received the lowest performance level on one or more state indicators on the 2023 Dashboard; and/or
Any student group within a school within the LEA that received the lowest performance level on one or more state indicators on the 2023 Dashboard.

Reflections: Technical Assistance

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.

If the LEA is not eligible for or receiving technical assistance, the LEA may respond to this prompt as “Not Applicable.”

Comprehensive Support and Improvement

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:

Schools Identified

A list of the schools in the LEA that are eligible for comprehensive support and improvement.

Identify the schools within the LEA that have been identified for CSI.

Support for Identified Schools

A description of how the LEA has or will support its eligible schools in developing comprehensive support and improvement plans.

Describe how the LEA has or will support the identified schools in developing CSI plans that included a school-level needs assessment, evidence-based interventions, and the identification of any resource inequities to be addressed through the implementation of the CSI plan.

Monitoring and Evaluating Effectiveness

A description of how the LEA will monitor and evaluate the plan to support student and school improvement.

Describe how the LEA will monitor and evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the CSI plan to support student and school improvement.

Engaging Educational Partners

Purpose

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.

Requirements

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:

Teachers,
Principals,
Administrators,
Other school personnel,
Local bargaining units of the LEA,
Parents, and
Students

A school district or COE 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.

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:

Teachers,
Principals,
Administrators,
Other school personnel,
Parents, and
Students

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:

For school districts, see Education Code Section 52062 (California Legislative Information);
- Note: Charter schools using the LCAP as the School Plan for Student Achievement must meet the requirements of EC Section 52062(a).
For COEs, see Education Code Section 52068 (California Legislative Information); and
For charter schools, see Education Code Section 47606.5 (California Legislative Information).
NOTE: As a reminder, the superintendent of a school district or COE must respond, in writing, to comments received by the applicable committees identified in the Education Code sections listed above. This includes the parent advisory committee and may include the English learner parent advisory committee and, as of July 1, 2024, the student advisory committee, as applicable.

Instructions

Respond to the prompts as follows:

A summary of the process used to engage educational partners 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.

Complete the table as follows:

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 sufficient response to this prompt must include general information about the timeline of the process and meetings or other engagement strategies with educational partners. A response may also include information about an LEA’s philosophical approach to engaging its educational partners.
An LEA receiving Equity Multiplier funds must also include a summary of how it consulted 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.

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.

A sufficient response to this prompt will provide educational partners and the public with clear, specific information about how the engagement process influenced the development of the LCAP. This may include a description of how the LEA prioritized requests of educational partners within the context of the budgetary resources available or otherwise prioritized areas of focus within the LCAP.
An LEA receiving Equity Multiplier funds must include a description of how the consultation with educational partners at schools generating Equity Multiplier funds influenced the development of the adopted LCAP.
For the purposes of this prompt, this may also include, but is not necessarily limited to:

Inclusion of a goal or decision to pursue a Focus Goal (as described below)
Inclusion of metrics other than the statutorily required metrics
Determination of the target outcome on one or more metrics
Inclusion of performance by one or more student groups in the Measuring and Reporting Results subsection
Inclusion of action(s) or a group of actions
Elimination of action(s) or group of actions
Changes to the level of proposed expenditures for one or more actions
Inclusion of action(s) as contributing to increased or improved services for unduplicated students
Analysis of effectiveness of the specific actions to achieve the goal
Analysis of material differences in expenditures
Analysis of changes made to a goal for the ensuing LCAP year based on the annual update process
Analysis of challenges or successes in the implementation of actions

Goals and Actions

Purpose

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.

Requirements and Instructions

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:

Focus Goal: A Focus Goal is relatively more concentrated in scope and may focus on a fewer number of metrics to measure improvement. A Focus Goal statement will be time bound and make clear how the goal is to be measured.
- All Equity Multiplier goals must be developed as focus goals. For additional information, see Required Focus Goal(s) for LEAs Receiving Equity Multiplier Funding below.
Broad Goal: A Broad Goal is relatively less concentrated in its scope and may focus on improving performance across a wide range of metrics.
Maintenance of Progress Goal: A Maintenance of Progress Goal includes actions that may be ongoing without significant changes and allows an LEA to track performance on any metrics not addressed in the other goals of the LCAP.

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:

Focus Goal(s)

Description

The description provided for a Focus Goal must be specific, measurable, and time bound.

An LEA develops a Focus Goal to address areas of need that may require or benefit from a more specific and data intensive approach.
The Focus Goal can explicitly reference the metric(s) by which achievement of the goal will be measured and the time frame according to which the LEA expects to achieve the goal.

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.

An explanation must be based on Dashboard data or other locally collected data.
LEAs must describe how the LEA identified this goal for focused attention, including relevant consultation with educational partners.
LEAs are encouraged to promote transparency and understanding around the decision to pursue a focus goal.

Required Focus Goal(s) for LEAs Receiving Equity Multiplier Funding

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:

All student groups that have the lowest performance level on one or more state indicators on the Dashboard, and
Any underlying issues in the credentialing, subject matter preparation, and retention of the school’s educators, if applicable.

Focus Goals for each and every Equity Multiplier schoolsite must identify specific metrics for each identified student group, as applicable.
An LEA may create a single goal for multiple Equity Multiplier schoolsites if those schoolsites have the same student group(s) performing at the lowest performance level on one or more state indicators on the Dashboard or, experience similar issues in the credentialing, subject matter preparation, and retention of the school’s educators.
- When creating a single goal for multiple Equity Multiplier schoolsites, the goal must identify the student groups and the performance levels on the Dashboard that the Focus Goal is addressing; or,
- The common issues the schoolsites are experiencing in credentialing, subject matter preparation, and retention of the school’s educators, if applicable.

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.

An explanation must be based on Dashboard data or other locally collected data.
LEAs must describe how the LEA identified this goal for focused attention, including relevant consultation with educational partners.
LEAs are encouraged to promote transparency and understanding around the decision to pursue a focus goal.
In addition to this information, the LEA must also identify:
- The school or schools to which the goal applies

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.

Equity Multiplier funds must be used to supplement, not supplant, funding provided to Equity Multiplier schoolsites for purposes of the LCFF, the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELO-P), the Literacy Coaches and Reading Specialists (LCRS) Grant Program, and/or the California Community Schools Partnership Program (CCSPP).
This means that Equity Multiplier funds must not be used to replace funding that an Equity Multiplier schoolsite would otherwise receive to implement LEA-wide actions identified in the LCAP or that an Equity Multiplier schoolsite would otherwise receive to implement provisions of the ELO-P, the LCRS, and/or the CCSPP.

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.

Broad Goal

Description

Describe what the LEA plans to achieve through the actions included in the goal.

The description of a broad goal will be clearly aligned with the expected measurable outcomes included for the goal.
The goal description organizes the actions and expected outcomes in a cohesive and consistent manner.
A goal description is specific enough to be measurable in either quantitative or qualitative terms. A broad goal is not as specific as a focus goal. While it is specific enough to be measurable, there are many different metrics for measuring progress toward 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.

Maintenance of Progress 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.

Use this type of goal to address the state priorities and applicable metrics not addressed within the other goals in the LCAP.
The state priorities and metrics to be addressed in this section are those for which the LEA, in consultation with educational partners, has determined to maintain actions and monitor progress while focusing implementation efforts on the actions covered by 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.

Measuring and Reporting Results:

For each LCAP year, identify the metric(s) that the LEA will use to track progress toward the expected outcomes.

LEAs must identify metrics for specific student groups, as appropriate, including expected outcomes that address and reduce disparities in outcomes between student groups.
The metrics may be quantitative or qualitative; but at minimum, an LEA’s LCAP must include goals that are measured using all of the applicable metrics for the related state priorities, in each LCAP year, as applicable to the type of LEA.

To the extent a state priority does not specify one or more metrics (e.g., implementation of state academic content and performance standards), the LEA must identify a metric to use within the LCAP. For these state priorities, LEAs are encouraged to use metrics based on or reported through the relevant local indicator self-reflection tools within the Dashboard.

Required metrics for LEA-wide actions: For each action identified as 1) contributing towards the requirement to increase or improve services for foster youth, English learners, including long-term English learners, and low-income students and 2) being provided on an LEA-wide basis, the LEA must identify one or more metrics to monitor the effectiveness of the action and its budgeted expenditures.
- These required metrics may be identified within the action description or the first prompt in the increased or improved services section, however the description must clearly identify the metric(s) being used to monitor the effectiveness of the action and the action(s) that the metric(s) apply to.
Required metrics for Equity Multiplier goals: For each Equity Multiplier goal, the LEA must identify:
- The specific metrics for each identified student group at each specific schoolsite, as applicable, to measure the progress toward the goal, and/or
- The specific metrics used to measure progress in meeting the goal related to credentialing, subject matter preparation, or educator retention at each specific schoolsite.

Complete the table as follows:

Metric #

Enter the metric number.

Metric

Identify the standard of measure being used to determine progress towards the goal and/or to measure the effectiveness of one or more actions associated with the goal.

Baseline

Enter the baseline when completing the LCAP for 2024–25.

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

When completing the LCAP for 2025–26, enter the most recent data available. Indicate the school year to which the data applies.
- Note for Charter Schools: Charter schools developing a one-year LCAP may provide the Year 1 Outcome when completing the LCAP for both 2025–26 and 2026–27 or may provide the Year 1 Outcome for 2025–26 and provide the Year 2 Outcome for 2026–27.

Year 2 Outcome

When completing the LCAP for 2026–27, enter the most recent data available. Indicate the school year to which the data applies.
- Note for Charter Schools: Charter schools developing a one-year LCAP may identify the Year 2 Outcome as not applicable when completing the LCAP for 2026–27 or may provide the Year 2 Outcome for 2026–27.

Target for Year 3 Outcome

When completing the first year of the LCAP, enter the target outcome for the relevant metric the LEA expects to achieve by the end of the three-year LCAP cycle.
- Note for Charter Schools: Charter schools developing a one- or two-year LCAP may identify a Target for Year 1 or Target for Year 2, as applicable.

Current Difference from Baseline

When completing the LCAP for 2025–26 and 2026–27, enter the current difference between the baseline and the yearly outcome, as applicable.
- Note for Charter Schools: Charter schools developing a one- or two-year LCAP will identify the current difference between the baseline and the yearly outcome for Year 1 and/or the current difference between the baseline and the yearly outcome for Year 2, as applicable.

Timeline for school districts and COEs for completing the “Measuring and Reporting Results” part of the Goal.

Metric	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.

Goal Analysis:

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.

● 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.

Actions:

Complete the table as follows. Add additional rows as necessary.

Action #

Enter the action number.

Title

Provide a short title for the action. This title will also appear in the action tables.

Description

Provide a brief description of the action.
- For actions that contribute to meeting the increased or improved services requirement, the LEA may include an explanation of how each action is principally directed towards and effective in meeting the LEA's goals for unduplicated students, as described in the instructions for the Increased or Improved Services for Foster Youth, English Learners, and Low-Income Students section.
- As previously noted, for each action identified as 1) contributing towards the requirement to increase or improve services for foster youth, English learners, including long-term English learners, and low-income students and 2) being provided on an LEA-wide basis, the LEA must identify one or more metrics to monitor the effectiveness of the action and its budgeted expenditures.
- These required metrics may be identified within the action description or the first prompt in the increased or improved services section; however, the description must clearly identify the metric(s) being used to monitor the effectiveness of the action and the action(s) that the metric(s) apply to.

Total Funds

Enter the total amount of expenditures associated with this action. Budgeted expenditures from specific fund sources will be provided in the action tables.

Contributing

Indicate whether the action contributes to meeting the increased or improved services requirement as described in the Increased or Improved Services section using a “Y” for Yes or an “N” for No.
- Note: for each such contributing action, the LEA will need to provide additional information in the Increased or Improved Services section to address the requirements in California Code of Regulations, Title 5 [5 CCR] Section 15496 in the Increased or Improved Services section of the LCAP.

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.

Required Actions

LEAs with 30 or more English learners and/or 15 or more long-term English learners must include specific actions in the LCAP related to, at a minimum:
- Language acquisition programs, as defined in EC Section 306, provided to students, and
- Professional development for teachers.
- If an LEA has both 30 or more English learners and 15 or more long-term English learners, the LEA must include actions for both English learners and long-term English learners.
LEAs eligible for technical assistance pursuant to EC sections 47607.3, 52071, 52071.5, 52072, or 52072.5, must include specific actions within the LCAP related to its implementation of the work underway as part of technical assistance. The most common form of this technical assistance is frequently referred to as Differentiated Assistance.
LEAs that have Red Dashboard indicators for (1) a school within the LEA, (2) a student group within the LEA, and/or (3) a student group within any school within the LEA must include one or more specific actions within the LCAP:
- The specific action(s) must be directed towards the identified student group(s) and/or school(s) and must address the identified state indicator(s) for which the student group or school received the lowest performance level on the 2023 Dashboard. Each student group and/or school that receives the lowest performance level on the 2023 Dashboard must be addressed by one or more actions.
- These required actions will be effective for the three-year LCAP cycle.

Increased or Improved Services for Foster Youth, English Learners, and Low-Income Students

Purpose

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.

Statutory Requirements

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:

How the action is increasing or improving services for the unduplicated student group(s) (Identified Needs and Action Design), and
How the action meets the LEA's goals for its unduplicated pupils in the state and any local priority areas (Measurement of Effectiveness).

LEA-wide and Schoolwide Actions

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.

Conclusory statements that a service will help achieve an expected outcome for the goal, without an explicit connection or further explanation as to how, are not sufficient.
Further, simply stating that an LEA has a high enrollment percentage of a specific student group or groups does not meet the increased or improved services standard because enrolling students is not the same as serving students.

For School Districts Only

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.

Requirements and Instructions

Complete the tables as follows:

Total Projected LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants

Specify the amount of LCFF supplemental and concentration grant funds the LEA estimates it will receive in the coming year based on the number and concentration of foster youth, English learner, and low-income students. This amount includes the Additional 15 percent LCFF Concentration Grant.

Projected Additional 15 percent LCFF Concentration Grant

Specify the amount of additional LCFF concentration grant add-on funding, as described in EC Section 42238.02, that the LEA estimates it will receive in the coming year.

Projected Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year

Specify the estimated percentage by which services for unduplicated pupils must be increased or improved as compared to the services provided to all students in the LCAP year as calculated pursuant to 5 CCR Section 15496(a)(7).

LCFF Carryover — Percentage

Specify the LCFF Carryover — Percentage identified in the LCFF Carryover Table. If a carryover percentage is not identified in the LCFF Carryover Table, specify a percentage of zero (0.00%).

LCFF Carryover — Dollar

Specify the LCFF Carryover — Dollar amount identified in the LCFF Carryover Table. If a carryover amount is not identified in the LCFF Carryover Table, specify an amount of zero ($0).

Total Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year

Add the Projected Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year and the Proportional LCFF Required Carryover Percentage and specify the percentage. This is the LEA’s percentage by which services for unduplicated pupils must be increased or improved as compared to the services provided to all students in the LCAP year, as calculated pursuant to 5 CCR Section 15496(a)(7).

Required Descriptions:

LEA-wide and Schoolwide Actions

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.

As stated above, conclusory statements that a service will help achieve an expected outcome for the goal, without an explicit connection or further explanation as to how, are not sufficient.
Further, simply stating that an LEA has a high enrollment percentage of a specific student group or groups does not meet the increased or improved services standard because enrolling students is not the same as serving students.

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.

Limited Actions

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 each action with an identified Planned Percentage of Improved Services, identify the goal and action number and describe the methodology that was used.
When identifying a Planned Percentage of Improved Services, the LEA must describe the methodology that it used to determine the contribution of the action towards the proportional percentage. The percentage of improved services for an action corresponds to the amount of LCFF funding that the LEA estimates it would expend to implement the action if it were funded.
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 Total Planned Expenditures Table and then convert the quotient to a percentage. This percentage is the Planned Percentage of Improved Services for the action.

Additional Concentration Grant Funding

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:

An LEA that does not receive a concentration grant or the concentration grant add-on must indicate that a response to this prompt is not applicable.
Identify the goal and action numbers of the actions in the LCAP that the LEA is implementing to meet the requirement 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.
An LEA that does not have comparison schools from which to describe how it is using the concentration grant add-on funds, such as a single-school LEA or an LEA that only has schools with an enrollment of unduplicated students that is greater than 55 percent, must describe how it is using the funds to increase the number of credentialed staff, classified staff, or both, including custodial staff, who provide direct services to students at selected schools and the criteria used to determine which schools require additional staffing support.
In the event that an additional concentration grant add-on is not sufficient to increase staff providing direct services to students at a school with an enrollment of unduplicated students that is greater than 55 percent, the LEA must describe how it is using the funds to retain staff providing direct services to students at a school with an enrollment of unduplicated students that is greater than 55 percent.

Complete the table as follows:

Provide the staff-to-student ratio of classified staff providing direct services to students with a concentration of unduplicated students that is 55 percent or less and the staff-to-student ratio of classified staff providing direct services to students at schools with a concentration of unduplicated students that is greater than 55 percent, as applicable to the LEA.
- The LEA may group its schools by grade span (Elementary, Middle/Junior High, and High Schools), as applicable to the LEA.
- The staff-to-student ratio must be based on the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) staff and the number of enrolled students as counted on the first Wednesday in October of each year.
Provide the staff-to-student ratio of certificated staff providing direct services to students at schools with a concentration of unduplicated students that is 55 percent or less and the staff-to-student ratio of certificated staff providing direct services to students at schools with a concentration of unduplicated students that is greater than 55 percent, as applicable to the LEA.
- The LEA may group its schools by grade span (Elementary, Middle/Junior High, and High Schools), as applicable to the LEA.
- The staff-to-student ratio must be based on the number of FTE staff and the number of enrolled students as counted on the first Wednesday in October of each year.

Action Tables

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:

Table 1: Total Planned Expenditures Table (for the coming LCAP Year)
Table 2: Contributing Actions Table (for the coming LCAP Year)
Table 3: Annual Update Table (for the current LCAP Year)
Table 4: Contributing Actions Annual Update Table (for the current LCAP Year)
Table 5: LCFF Carryover Table (for the current LCAP Year)

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.

Total Planned Expenditures Table

In the Total Planned Expenditures Table, input the following information for each action in the LCAP for that applicable LCAP year:

LCAP Year: Identify the applicable LCAP Year.
1. Projected LCFF Base Grant: Provide the total amount estimated LCFF entitlement for the coming school year, excluding the supplemental and concentration grants and the add-ons for the Targeted Instructional Improvement Block Grant program, the former Home-to-School Transportation program, and the Small School District Transportation program, pursuant to 5 CCR Section 15496(a)(8). Note that the LCFF Base Grant for purposes of the LCAP also includes the Necessary Small Schools and Economic Recovery Target allowances for school districts, and County Operations Grant for COEs.

See EC sections 2574 (for COEs) and 42238.02 (for school districts and charter schools), as applicable, for LCFF entitlement calculations.

2. Projected LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants: Provide the total amount of LCFF supplemental and concentration grants estimated on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated students for the coming school year.
3. Projected Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year: This percentage will not be entered; it is calculated based on the Projected LCFF Base Grant and the Projected LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants, pursuant to 5 CCR Section 15496(a)(8). This is the percentage by which services for unduplicated pupils must be increased or improved as compared to the services provided to all students in the coming LCAP year.
LCFF Carryover — Percentage: Specify the LCFF Carryover — Percentage identified in the LCFF Carryover Table from the prior LCAP year. If a carryover percentage is not identified in the LCFF Carryover Table, specify a percentage of zero (0.00%).
Total Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year: This percentage will not be entered; it is calculated based on the Projected Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Coming School Year and the LCFF Carryover — Percentage. This is the percentage by which the LEA must increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils as compared to the services provided to all students in the coming LCAP year.
Goal #: Enter the LCAP Goal number for the action.
Action #: Enter the action’s number as indicated in the LCAP Goal.
Action Title: Provide a title of the action.
Student Group(s): Indicate the student group or groups who will be the primary beneficiary of the action by entering “All,” or by entering a specific student group or groups.
Contributing to Increased or Improved Services?: Type “Yes” if the action is included as contributing to meeting the increased or improved services requirement; OR, type “No” if the action is not included as contributing to meeting the increased or improved services requirement.
If “Yes” is entered into the Contributing column, then complete the following columns:
- Scope: The scope of an action may be LEA-wide (i.e., districtwide, countywide, or charterwide), schoolwide, or limited. An action that is LEA-wide in scope upgrades the entire educational program of the LEA. An action that is schoolwide in scope upgrades the entire educational program of a single school. An action that is limited in its scope is an action that serves only one or more unduplicated student groups.
- Unduplicated Student Group(s): Regardless of scope, contributing actions serve one or more unduplicated student groups. Indicate one or more unduplicated student groups for whom services are being increased or improved as compared to what all students receive.
- Location: Identify the location where the action will be provided. If the action is provided to all schools within the LEA, the LEA must indicate “All Schools.” If the action is provided to specific schools within the LEA or specific grade spans only, the LEA must enter “Specific Schools” or “Specific Grade Spans.” Identify the individual school or a subset of schools or grade spans (e.g., all high schools or grades transitional kindergarten through grade five), as appropriate.
Time Span: Enter “ongoing” if the action will be implemented for an indeterminate period of time. Otherwise, indicate the span of time for which the action will be implemented. For example, an LEA might enter “1 Year,” or “2 Years,” or “6 Months.”
Total Personnel: Enter the total amount of personnel expenditures utilized to implement this action.
Total Non-Personnel: This amount will be automatically calculated based on information provided in the Total Personnel column and the Total Funds column.
LCFF Funds: Enter the total amount of LCFF funds utilized to implement this action, if any. LCFF funds include all funds that make up an LEA’s total LCFF target (i.e., base grant, grade span adjustment, supplemental grant, concentration grant, Targeted Instructional Improvement Block Grant, and Home-To-School Transportation).
- Note: For an action to contribute towards meeting the increased or improved services requirement, it must include some measure of LCFF funding. The action may also include funding from other sources, however the extent to which an action contributes to meeting the increased or improved services requirement is based on the LCFF funding being used to implement the action.
Other State Funds: Enter the total amount of Other State Funds utilized to implement this action, if any.
- Note: Equity Multiplier funds must be included in the “Other State Funds” category, not in the “LCFF Funds” category. As a reminder, Equity Multiplier funds must be used to supplement, not supplant, funding provided to Equity Multiplier schoolsites for purposes of the LCFF, the ELO-P, the LCRS, and/or the CCSPP. This means that Equity Multiplier funds must not be used to replace funding that an Equity Multiplier schoolsite would otherwise receive to implement LEA-wide actions identified in the LEA’s LCAP or that an Equity Multiplier schoolsite would otherwise receive to implement provisions of the ELO-P, the LCRS, and/or the CCSPP.
Local Funds: Enter the total amount of Local Funds utilized to implement this action, if any.
Federal Funds: Enter the total amount of Federal Funds utilized to implement this action, if any.
Total Funds: This amount is automatically calculated based on amounts entered in the previous four columns.
Planned Percentage of Improved Services: For any action identified as contributing, being provided on a Limited basis to unduplicated students, and that does not have funding associated with the action, enter the planned quality improvement anticipated for the action as a percentage rounded to the nearest hundredth (0.00%). A limited action is an action that only serves foster youth, English learners, and/or low-income students.
- As noted in the instructions for the Increased or Improved Services section, when identifying a Planned Percentage of Improved Services, the LEA must describe the methodology that it used to determine the contribution of the action towards the proportional percentage. The percentage of improved services for an action corresponds to the amount of LCFF funding that the LEA estimates it would expend to implement the action if it were funded.

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.

Contributing Actions Table

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.

Annual Update Table

In the Annual Update Table, provide the following information for each action in the LCAP for the relevant LCAP year:

Estimated Actual Expenditures: Enter the total estimated actual expenditures to implement this action, if any.

Contributing Actions Annual Update Table

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:

6. Estimated Actual LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants: Provide the total amount of LCFF supplemental and concentration grants estimated based on the number and concentration of unduplicated students in the current school year.
Estimated Actual Expenditures for Contributing Actions: Enter the total estimated actual expenditure of LCFF funds used to implement this action, if any.
Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services: For any action identified as contributing, being provided on a Limited basis only to unduplicated students, and that does not have funding associated with the action, enter the total estimated actual quality improvement anticipated for the action as a percentage rounded to the nearest hundredth (0.00%).
- Building on the example provided above for calculating the Planned Percentage of Improved Services, the LEA in the example implements the action. As part of the annual update process, the LEA reviews implementation and student outcome data and determines that the action was implemented with fidelity and that outcomes for foster youth students improved. The LEA reviews the original estimated cost for the action and determines that had it hired additional staff to collect and analyze data and to coordinate supports for students that estimated actual cost would have been $169,500 due to a cost of living adjustment. The LEA would divide the estimated actual cost of $169,500 by the amount of LCFF Funding identified in the Data Entry Table and then convert the quotient to a percentage. This percentage is the Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services for the action.

LCFF Carryover Table

9. Estimated Actual LCFF Base Grant: Provide the total amount of estimated LCFF Target Entitlement for the current school year, excluding the supplemental and concentration grants and the add-ons for the Targeted Instructional Improvement Block Grant program, the former Home-to-School Transportation program, and the Small School District Transportation program, pursuant to 5 CCR Section 15496(a)(8). Note that the LCFF Base Grant for purposes of the LCAP also includes the Necessary Small Schools and Economic Recovery Target allowances for school districts, and County Operations Grant for COEs. See EC sections 2574 (for COEs) and 42238.02 (for school districts and charter schools), as applicable, for LCFF entitlement calculations.
10. Total Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Current School Year: This percentage will not be entered. The percentage is calculated based on the amounts of the Estimated Actual LCFF Base Grant (9) and the Estimated Actual LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants (6), pursuant to 5 CCR Section 15496(a)(8), plus the LCFF Carryover – Percentage from the prior year. This is the percentage by which services for unduplicated pupils must be increased or improved as compared to the services provided to all students in the current LCAP year.

Calculations in the Action Tables

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.

Contributing Actions Table

4. Total Planned Contributing Expenditures (LCFF Funds)
- This amount is the total of the Planned Expenditures for Contributing Actions (LCFF Funds) column.
5. Total Planned Percentage of Improved Services
- This percentage is the total of the Planned Percentage of Improved Services column.
Planned Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the coming school year (4 divided by 1, plus 5)
- This percentage is calculated by dividing the Total Planned Contributing Expenditures (4) by the Projected LCFF Base Grant (1), converting the quotient to a percentage, and adding it to the Total Planned Percentage of Improved Services (5).

Contributing Actions Annual Update Table

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.”

6. Estimated Actual LCFF Supplemental and Concentration Grants
- This is the total amount of LCFF supplemental and concentration grants the LEA estimates it will actually receive based on of the number and concentration of unduplicated students in the current school year.
4. Total Planned Contributing Expenditures (LCFF Funds)
- This amount is the total of the Last Year's Planned Expenditures for Contributing Actions (LCFF Funds).
7. Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for Contributing Actions
- This amount is the total of the Estimated Actual Expenditures for Contributing Actions (LCFF Funds).
Difference Between Planned and Estimated Actual Expenditures for Contributing Actions (Subtract 7 from 4)
- This amount is the Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for Contributing Actions (7) subtracted from the Total Planned Contributing Expenditures (4).

5. Total Planned Percentage of Improved Services (%)
- This amount is the total of the Planned Percentage of Improved Services column.
8. Total Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services (%)
- This amount is the total of the Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services column.
Difference Between Planned and Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services (Subtract 5 from 8)
- This amount is the Total Planned Percentage of Improved Services (5) subtracted from the Total Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services (8).

LCFF Carryover Table

10. Total Percentage to Increase or Improve Services for the Current School Year (6 divided by 9 plus Carryover %)
- This percentage is the Estimated Actual LCFF Supplemental and/or Concentration Grants (6) divided by the Estimated Actual LCFF Base Grant (9) plus the LCFF Carryover – Percentage from the prior year.
11. Estimated Actual Percentage of Increased or Improved Services (7 divided by 9, plus 8)
- This percentage is the Total Estimated Actual Expenditures for Contributing Actions (7) divided by the LCFF Funding (9), then converting the quotient to a percentage and adding the Total Estimated Actual Percentage of Improved Services (8).
12. LCFF Carryover — Dollar Amount LCFF Carryover (Subtract 11 from 10 and multiply by 9)
- If the Estimated Actual Percentage of Increased or Improved Services (11) is less than the Estimated Actual Percentage to Increase or Improve Services (10), the LEA is required to carry over LCFF funds.

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.

13. LCFF Carryover — Percentage (12 divided by 9)
- This percentage is the unmet portion of the Percentage to Increase or Improve Services that the LEA must carry over into the coming LCAP year. The percentage is calculated by dividing the LCFF Carryover (12) by the LCFF Funding (9).

LCFF Budget Overview for Parents

Budget Overview for the 2026-27 School Year

Projected Revenue by Fund Source

Breakdown of Total LCFF Funds

Budgeted Expenditures in the LCAP

Increased or Improved Services for High Needs Students in the LCAP for the 2026-27 School Year

Update on Increased or Improved Services for High Needs Students in 2025-26

Prior Year Expenditures: Increased or Improved Services for High Needs Students

Local Control and Accountability Plan

Plan Summary 2026-27

General Information

Reflections: Annual Performance

Reflections: Technical Assistance

Comprehensive Support and Improvement

Schools Identified

Support for Identified Schools

Monitoring and Evaluating Effectiveness

Engaging Educational Partners

Goals and Actions

Goal

Measuring and Reporting Results

Goal Analysis for 2026-27

Actions

Goal

Measuring and Reporting Results

Goal Analysis for 2026-27

Actions

Goal

Measuring and Reporting Results

Goal Analysis for 2026-27

Actions

Goal

Measuring and Reporting Results

Goal Analysis for 2026-27

Actions

Increased or Improved Services for Foster Youth, English Learners, and Low-Income Students for 2026-27

Required Descriptions

LEA-wide and Schoolwide Actions

Limited Actions

Additional Concentration Grant Funding

2026-27 Total Planned Expenditures Table

2026-27 Contributing Actions Table

2025-26 Annual Update Table

2025-26 Contributing Actions Annual Update Table

2025-26 LCFF Carryover Table

Plan Summary

Purpose

Requirements and Instructions

General Information

Reflections: Annual Performance

Reflections: Technical Assistance

Comprehensive Support and Improvement

Schools Identified

Support for Identified Schools

Monitoring and Evaluating Effectiveness

Engaging Educational Partners

Purpose

Requirements

Instructions

Respond to the prompts as follows:

Complete the table as follows:

Goals and Actions

Purpose

Requirements and Instructions

Focus Goal(s)

Broad Goal

Maintenance of Progress Goal

Measuring and Reporting Results:

Goal Analysis:

Actions:

Required Actions

Purpose

Statutory Requirements

For School Districts Only

Requirements and Instructions

Required Descriptions:

Additional Concentration Grant Funding

Action Tables

Contributing Actions Table

Annual Update Table