Source	Funds	Percentage
All Other State Funds	$2,422,054	16%
All Local Funds	$495,137	3%
All Federal Funds	$372,511	2%
Total LCFF Funds	$11,897,151	78%

Source	Funds	Percentage
LCFF S/C Grants	$628,143	4%
All Other LCFF Funds	$11,269,008	74%

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
Inland Leaders Charter	Mike Gordon Executive Director	mgordon@inlandleaders.com 9094461100

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.

Inland Leaders Charter School (ILCS) is a public charter school serving students in Transitional Kindergarten through 8th grade across two campuses in the Inland Empire region of San Bernardino County, California. Both the California Street Campus (CSC) and the Yucaipa Boulevard Campus (YBC) are located in Yucaipa, California. For the 2025–26 school year, ILCS enrolled approximately 10000 students at two sites, with 610 students at CSC, 340 students at YBC, and 50 students with full-time independent study. The student population reflects the diverse community ILCS serves. Approximately 27% of students qualify as socioeconomically disadvantaged, 2.3% are English Learners, 12% are students with disabilities, and 0% are foster youth. ILCS does not currently receive Equity Multiplier funding; therefore, the Equity Multiplier requirements are not applicable to this LCAP.

Inland Leaders Charter Schools is a TK through 8th grade public charter founded in 2007, dedicated to creating leaders for the 21st Century. The vision of Inland Leaders is to sustain a high-quality community charter school founded upon innovative instruction and character education to create 21st Century leaders. ILCS is committed to providing a world-class education for all students that equips them with the critical 21st Century Skills necessary to be successful leaders in life. This is accomplished as ILCS: innovates practices, accelerates achievement, and cultivates leadership in all students. ILCS organizes its strategic plans and LCAP/SPSA into these three broad categories. This Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) serves as the charter school's Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA). Accordingly, it fulfills the planning requirements of the Consolidated Application (ConApp) Federal Addendum for applicable federal programs.

ILCS is committed to the following innovative practices:
Inland Leaders Charter School (ILCS) is deeply committed to improving instructional practices through intentional systems that prioritize continuous growth, reflection, and forward-thinking approaches to teaching and learning. Innovation at ILCS is not treated as a one-time initiative, but as an ongoing process embedded within the school’s culture. Through structured Professional Learning Community (PLC) days, staff regularly examine current practices, challenge existing approaches, and explore new methods to better meet the evolving needs of students.

Teachers at ILCS actively engage in cycles of inquiry where they analyze student data, identify areas for improvement, and research emerging strategies and best practices. This process is rooted in a willingness to experiment, piloting new instructional techniques, reflecting on their effectiveness, and refining approaches based on evidence. Innovation Days further support this work by providing dedicated time and space for teachers to share new ideas, showcase successful strategies, and collaboratively push instructional practices forward.

Grounded in the four essential PLC questions, ILCS ensures that innovation is purposeful and directly tied to student learning. Staff continuously ask what students need to learn, how success will be measured, and how instruction can be adapted when students are not yet meeting expectations, or extended when they are. This cycle drives thoughtful innovation, ensuring that new practices are not only creative, but also impactful.
In addition, ILCS prioritizes professional development as a key lever for innovation. Teachers are encouraged to expand their skill sets, stay informed on current educational research, and bring new ideas back to their teams. By fostering a culture that values curiosity, collaboration, and calculated risk-taking, ILCS remains responsive to changing student needs and educational trends, ensuring that instructional practices are both relevant and effective.

ILCS is committed to the following practices to help accelerate achievement for all students:
Continue to hire highly qualified teachers with CLAD or EL Instruction qualifications by ensuring new hires are credentialed, screened, interviewed, and observed “teaching in action” prior to hire. Teachers receive targeted training to prepare them to work with students with learning loss and those who are behind academically. Teachers engage in ongoing professional development and collaborative learning through PLCs, focusing on strengthening practices for supporting English learners, refining grading approaches, and using rubrics effectively.
ILCS uses Fast ForWord and Read Assist by MySciLearn to support subgroups (EL & SES) of students. Teachers have been trained on the most beneficial effect sizes for student achievement according to Visible Learning by Hattie, Fisher, & Frey. ILCS’s Intervention Specialist (Title 1) and teachers use high quality interventions and curriculum before, during, and after school (including summer and intersession periods) to support student achievement and decrease subgroup achievement gaps. Intervention teachers, tutors, and aides support core instruction teachers in meeting the needs of students below proficiency in math and reading.

ILCS offers the following programs to support students beyond the core curriculum:

Success Academy: All Kindergarten through 6th grade teachers offer Success Academy sessions for students who need additional support in academics. The goal with the academy is to offer sessions that support students in elevating their academic progress. Placement in Success Academy is based upon data and is up to each teacher’s discretion, and when requested, attendance in the program is required.

Title 1 Part A: ILCS also receives federal funding to support students who need additional supports under Title 1. The school administers a targeted Title 1 Part A program with a specific focus on literacy. Students are provided small group instruction with the Title 1 teacher during the regular school day.

ILCS is committed to cultivating a foundation of leadership skills in all students:

Leadership: ILCS is committed to the following practices to cultivate leadership. ILCS works hard to cultivate a safe and structured environment harnessing strong partnerships with parents and community members to ensure all sites have a positive school culture focused on leadership and high standards. ILCS provides mental health support for students in all grade levels through multiple mental health counselors, student leadership coaches, school psychologists, English Learner Liaison and physical health services. All staff have been trained in and implements ROAR (Respect self, others, and property, Own your actions, Act safely, and Rise to Servant Leadership) as the Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS), and the 8 Key Strategies, which support self-regulation and a positive mindset toward a successful future. The staff has been exposed to and all leadership coaches are trained in CharacterStrong.

Electives: The electives program is an optional, after school, program available to all Kindergarten through 8th grade students. The program offers classes in foreign languages, athletics, the arts, culinary skills, martial arts, technology, and more. Electives run throughout the year in 2 separate sessions (Session A and Session B). Many electives offered are free, but others vary in cost. In addition, an extensive sports program is available to middle school students.

Reflections: Annual Performance

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

Overview
Inland Leaders Charter School continues to fulfill its mission of providing high-quality education with a focus on academic excellence, leadership, and equity for all students in Transitional Kindergarten through 8th grade. This section summarizes how our students performed this year and what we are doing to build on our strengths and address areas for growth.

Student Academic Achievement
Our students continue to perform strongly in both English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics on the California School Dashboard — the state's primary tool for evaluating school performance.
In ELA, Inland Leaders students scored 52.6 points above the state standard, placing the school at the highest performance level (Blue). This represents an improvement of 8.5 points from the previous year. In Mathematics, students scored 34.1 points above the standard, earning a Green performance level, with an improvement of 4.2 points over the prior year. These results reflect the hard work of our students and the dedication of our teachers.
However, we recognize that our students with disabilities are not yet experiencing the same level of success. This group currently scores in the Orange (below average) range in both ELA and Math, and their scores declined by 4.1 points in ELA and 4.5 points in Math compared to last year. Closing this gap is a priority, and we have implemented targeted, evidence-based interventions — including multisensory, structured literacy programs — specifically designed to support students with learning disabilities.

Local Assessment Data
In addition to state testing, Inland Leaders uses Renaissance (STAR Reading, STAR Math), a research-based assessment tool, to monitor student progress throughout the year. The most recent results (mid-year 2025–26) showed the following:
General Education Students:

Grades K–6: 68.6% proficient in reading; 56.9% proficient in math
Grades 7–8: 75% proficient in reading; 53% proficient in math

Students Receiving Additional Support:
Students with disabilities (K–6): 35% proficient in reading; 30% proficient in math
Students with disabilities (7–8): 50% proficient in reading; 14.1% proficient in math
English Learners (K–6): 19% proficient in reading; 31% proficient in math
English Learners (7–8): 50% proficient in reading; 50% proficient in math
Socioeconomically disadvantaged students (K–6): 60% proficient in reading; 48% proficient in math
Socioeconomically disadvantaged students (7–8): 78% proficient in reading; 40.8% proficient in math

These results help us identify students who need additional support early and ensure resources are directed where they are needed most.

Chronic Absenteeism and Suspension Rates:
Chronic absenteeism — meaning a student misses 10% or more of the school year — increased slightly to 3% this year, earning a Yellow rating on the Dashboard. While this remains well below state and national averages, any increase in absences concerns us. We have responded by strengthening our attendance support, including one-on-one Student Accountability Meetings, consistent parent outreach, and Independent Study options for families who need flexible arrangements.

Suspension rates rose to 1.3% this year (Orange rating), up 1% from the prior year. We take this seriously. We have expanded our use of Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and restorative practices — approaches that focus on understanding and correcting behavior rather than simply punishing it — to keep our school a safe and welcoming place for all students.

English Learner Progress:
Fifty percent of our English Learner students are making measurable progress toward English language proficiency — an increase of 5.6 percentage points from last year. On the California Dashboard, our English Learners score at the Green level in ELA and the Blue level (highest) in Mathematics. This progress reflects our commitment to intentional English Language Development instruction woven throughout all subject areas. We continue to track and support students through the full reclassification process.

School Climate and Family Engagement
Inland Leaders is proud of the strong sense of community and belonging that defines our school culture. Survey results from this year tell a positive story:
97% of parents reported feeling welcomed and satisfied with the school program
100% of classified staff (instructional aides, office staff, etc.) reported they enjoy working at Inland Leaders
94% of certificated staff (teachers and credentialed personnel) reported the same
88% of students reported feeling safe at school
92% reported feeling cared for by teachers and staff
95% reported feeling respected by adults on campus
While these numbers are encouraging, we also noted that students in grades 6–8 reported lower levels of enjoyment at school compared to younger students. We are actively exploring ways to better connect middle school students to the school experience and ensure they feel engaged, valued, and excited to learn.

Reflections: Actions and Services — What We Did This Year (2025–26)
This section describes the specific programs, resources, and initiatives Inland Leaders Charter School implemented during the 2025–26 school year to support student learning, well-being, and school community. These actions are organized around our three school goals.

Goal 1: Innovate Systems, Programs, and Practices to Provide Greater Access

Action 1.1 — 21st Century Skills in Every Classroom
This year, Inland Leaders focused on building collaboration as a core 21st century skill for our students. Six teachers and one administrator were trained in the Building Thinking Classrooms model — an instructional approach that encourages students to work together, think critically, and communicate their reasoning. This model is now being used in classrooms from 3rd through 8th grade. Rather than passively receiving information, students in these classrooms are actively engaged in problem-solving alongside their peers.

Action 1.2 — Technology for Every Student
Every student at Inland Leaders has access to a personal device — iPads for Kindergartners, and Chromebooks for students in grades 1–8. Students may take their Chromebook home for the full school year to support learning beyond the classroom. Most classrooms are equipped with smart boards, and teachers who need one can request access. To ensure no family is left behind due to limited internet access at home, the school provides portable Wi-Fi hotspots. Additionally, Redcat® speaker and microphone systems are available to help ensure every student can hear instruction clearly.

Action 1.3 — A Rich and Relevant Curriculum
Inland Leaders provides a strong foundation in core subjects — reading, writing, mathematics, history, and science — while connecting lessons to real-world skills students will use in their lives and careers. Students also have access to a wide range of elective courses, including Music, Robotics, Esports, Film and Media Arts, and a Broadway performance elective. These courses allow students to explore their interests and develop talents beyond the core academic program.
This year, middle school students also participated in a seminar led by community speaker Dino Ambrosi, who spoke about healthy technology habits, screen time awareness, and making intentional choices about digital use.

Goal 2: Accelerate Student Proficiency Through High-Quality Staff and Instruction

Action 2.1 — Hiring and Supporting Qualified Teachers
Inland Leaders is committed to hiring fully credentialed, highly qualified teachers. This year, two teachers are working under intern credentials and one under a Short-Term Staff Permit (STSP) — both are supervised and supported pathways toward full licensure. The school recognized that bringing on newly credentialed teachers this year created a greater need for administrative coaching and mentorship, and responded by increasing direct support to those staff members.

Action 2.2 — Ongoing Professional Development
Inland Leaders invests significantly in teacher learning and collaboration. Our teachers participate in Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) — structured weekly meetings where teams analyze student data, share instructional strategies, and plan together. This year, ten additional teachers attended the nationally recognized PLC at Work conference, meaning the majority of our staff have now participated in this training.
New teachers who hold preliminary credentials receive two-year induction support through a partnership with the Riverside County Office of Education (RCOE), including an assigned mentor teacher throughout the process.
To strengthen student mental health support, school administrators and our mental health team attended the Student Mental Wellness Conference in September 2025. Our associate clinical social worker also received specialized training in Bounce Back, a cognitive behavioral program designed to help children who have experienced trauma or adverse childhood experiences.

Action 2.3 — Updated Curriculum and Assessment Tools
This year, Inland Leaders introduced a new history curriculum, implemented the DIBELS reading assessment. -DIBELS Screening. The DIBELS assessment was introduced as an early screening tool to help identify students at risk for dyslexia and other reading difficulties, allowing teachers to intervene earlier and more effectively. Journify was also piloted, an AI-assisted tool that helps our special education team write and monitor Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and identify potential interventions for students with disabilities.

Action 2.4 — Intervention Programs for Struggling Learners
Students who need additional academic support have access to several intervention options:
-Success Academy provides two extra hours of instruction per week, delivered by homeroom teachers for students in grades K–6.
-Reading Intervention Specialists work with small groups of students who qualify for Title I support, using Science of Reading-aligned approaches. This support is available to English Learners across all grade levels through 8th grade.
-Structured Literacy Intervention was added this year specifically for students with learning disabilities, using multisensory, explicit, and evidence-based techniques.
The school also piloted data analysis tools to help identify struggling students earlier and design short-term, targeted interventions more efficiently.

Goal 3: Cultivate a Safe, Healthy, and Orderly Environment

Action 3.1 — Student Initiatives and Well-Being
Inland Leaders took several steps this year to support students' physical safety, mental health, and personal development:
-Project Reboot: Community speaker Dino Ambrosi returned in spring 2026 to present to students and families about his Project Reboot initiative, helping young people build healthier relationships with technology and social media.
-Student Council: Our middle school student council program continues to give students meaningful leadership experience through student government, community service, and event planning.
-Campus Safety Improvements: At both our California Street and Yucaipa Boulevard campuses, field restoration projects addressed uneven ground and holes that posed injury risks to students during outdoor play. An oak tree that had grown through a retaining wall and broken through blacktop was also safely removed.
-Mental Health Services: Students continue to receive mental health support as a Tier II service. The school is also actively working with the state on implementation of the California Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative (CYBHI).
-Early Literacy Support: Inland Leaders hosted a Literacy Night at the Yucaipa Boulevard Campus, giving families practical strategies to support reading development at home. Intervention tutors were also hired to deliver Tier II and III literacy support in grades K–2, and additional aides were brought on in Transitional Kindergarten, reducing the adult-to-student ratio to approximately 1 adult for every 8 students.

Action 3.2 — Staff Well-Being and Professional Growth
Inland Leaders believes that supporting staff well-being directly benefits students. This year:
-All teachers attended staff training with Dino Ambrosi about the impact of screen addiction on students' motivation and learning, inspiring staff to model balanced technology habits.
-Building Thinking Classrooms training was made available to all teachers, deepening our schoolwide commitment to critical thinking and collaboration.
-The school's Wellness Committee launched a staff Running Club, encouraging colleagues to set personal health goals together. The effort culminated with several staff members completing a half-marathon.

Action 3.3: Parent/Community Partnerships:
This year, Inland Leaders deepened its connections with families and the broader community through a range of meaningful partnerships and events. We partnered with LoveOurCities to engage students and families in local service. Through the Inland Leaders Foundation and our EXL program, students connected with local businesses — including Riley's Farm and Big Time Design — gaining real-world learning experiences beyond the classroom. Families were invited to a Project Reboot Parent Workshop to learn strategies for supporting healthy technology habits at home, and a Literacy Night gave parents practical tools to strengthen early reading development. The school also subscribed to Cyber Safety Cop resources to support ongoing digital citizenship education for students and families.

Action 3.4: Safe and Clean Schools
Inland Leaders made significant investments in the physical environment at both the California Street and Yucaipa Boulevard campuses. Field restoration work eliminated uneven ground and holes that posed injury risks, and the Gaga Pit — a popular student activity area — was fully restored. Worn carpet in several classrooms was replaced to improve the learning environment. A contracted crew safely removed a large oak tree that had been breaking through a retaining wall and asphalt in a student play area. Both campuses also increased the frequency of emergency safety drills and added a second major disaster drill to the school calendar, reinforcing our commitment to student and staff safety.

As required by the LCAP template instructions, Inland Leaders Charter School has reviewed the California School Dashboard to identify any school, student group, or student group within a school that received the lowest performance level (Red) on one or more state indicators.

Based on this review, the following findings are identified for the Dashboard:
No school within ILCS, no student group within ILCS, and no student group within any school within ILCS received the lowest performance level (Red) on any state indicator on the 2024 California School Dashboard. ILCS will continue to monitor all indicators, with particular attention to students with disabilities, whose performance in ELA and Mathematics remains at the Orange level and whose scores declined in the 2024–25 Dashboard cycle. Targeted actions to address this trend are embedded in Goal 2, Actions 2.1, 2.3, and 2.4.

In summary, the Dashboard and local data confirm that Inland Leaders continues to be a high-performing charter school with a strong academic foundation and positive school culture. As ILCS moves forward, it remains committed to closing achievement gaps, supporting the whole child, and using data to drive strategic decision-making.

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.

Not applicable

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.

As a TK–8th grade charter school, the Local Education Agency (LEA) is committed to a continuous cycle of improvement grounded in data analysis, stakeholder engagement, and accountability. To effectively monitor and evaluate the implementation of the LCAP goals, the following multi-tiered systems are in place:

Data-Driven Decision Making:
The leadership team regularly analyzes student performance data from local and state assessments (e.g., CAASPP, DIBELS, Early Literacy/STAR Reading & Math Assessments, ESGI for TK/K grades, PARSEC, & the State Dashboard) to evaluate progress toward academic goals. Data is disaggregated to identify gaps and inform targeted interventions.

Progress Monitoring Tools:
Each goal within the LCAP includes specific, measurable metrics. These metrics are reviewed at least three times per year to assess growth and determine if mid-year course corrections are needed. This includes monitoring attendance, behavior, academic performance, and stakeholder survey data through periodic student pulse survey work and annual LCAP surveys, including parent, student, and staff. Each grade level utilizes data sheets with comprehensive student achievement data to drive on-going interventions and support.

Educational Partner Engagement and Feedback:
Feedback is integrated into the process through regular input opportunities for teachers, classified staff, students, families, and community members. This includes staff meetings, parent surveys, student reflections, and School Site Council discussions. Educational partners' input is used to refine actions and services.

Leadership Oversight and Implementation Checks:
The administrative team meets regularly to review LCAP goal progress and implementation of related programs and services. Action items are tracked through agendas, walkthroughs, classroom observations, surveys, human resources, and budget data to ensure alignment with the plan.

Annual Review and Reporting:
At the end of each year, the LEA conducts a comprehensive review of LCAP outcomes. Results are shared with education partners through the LCAP Annual Update, School Accountability Report Card (SARC), and other schoolwide communication channels.

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. Students	In January, Inland Leaders distributed a comprehensive LCAP-specific survey to all students in 1st through 8th grade. This survey was designed to go beyond routine check-ins, gathering in-depth student perspectives on school strengths, areas for improvement, and what matters most to them. The results gave us a meaningful, student-centered view of the school experience across grade levels. Following the survey, Inland Leaders held its annual all-staff meeting — bringing together both teachers and classified support staff, organized by grade level — to collaboratively review and discuss what students shared. Together, staff analyzed the results, identified patterns, and prioritized areas of need to inform planning for the year ahead. Importantly, teachers then brought those findings back to their own classrooms, sharing the LCAP data directly with students. This step reinforced to students that their voices matter, that their feedback was taken seriously, and that they are genuine partners in shaping the direction of their school.
2. Parents/Families	In January, Inland Leaders distributed a comprehensive LCAP-specific survey to all parents and guardians. Like the student survey, this was designed to gather substantive feedback — not just general satisfaction scores — with a focus on school strengths, areas for growth, and the priorities that matter most to our families. Survey results were brought into the annual all-staff meeting, where teachers, classified support staff, and parents came together by grade level to review the findings collaboratively. This joint analysis allowed staff and families to identify shared areas of need and align on priorities for the year ahead — a process that reflects our belief that school improvement is a partnership. In addition, Inland Leaders hosted "Coffee with the Principal" events open to all families. These informal gatherings provided a welcoming space for parents to hear a summary of survey findings, ask questions, and share additional input directly with school leadership. Together, these efforts ensure that parent perspectives are not just collected — they are heard, discussed, and used to shape decisions.
3. Classified Staff	In January, a comprehensive LCAP-specific survey was sent to all staff members, both teachers and classified support staff. The survey was designed to gather honest, in-depth feedback on school strengths, areas for improvement, and the priorities staff feel are most important for moving the school forward. Survey results were then brought into the annual all-staff meeting, organized by grade level and inclusive of both certificated and classified staff. Together, teams reviewed the findings, identified patterns, and collectively determined areas of need to guide planning for the year ahead. This collaborative process ensures that the people closest to students every day have a meaningful voice in shaping school direction. Classified staff — including instructional aides, office personnel, and other support staff — were also engaged earlier in the year through a dedicated "Culture Orientation" meeting held at the start of the school year. This gathering gave classified staff a focused opportunity to review the LCAP goals, share their perspectives, and help plan how classified team members would be meaningfully engaged in LCAP implementation throughout the year. This reflects Inland Leaders' commitment to ensuring that every staff member — regardless of role — is an informed and valued partner in our school's continuous improvement process.
4. Certificated Staff	Ongoing Staff Engagement Throughout the Year Beyond the January survey and all-staff meeting, certificated staff engaged in a variety of structured opportunities throughout the year that kept LCAP goals at the center of their professional work. Teachers participated in weekly Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) — collaborative team meetings focused on analyzing student data, refining instructional practices, and problem-solving together. These sessions provided a regular, built-in forum for teachers to reflect on progress toward LCAP goals and adjust their approach based on what the data was showing. Certificated staff also completed targeted surveys specific to their roles as classroom instructors, providing focused feedback on instructional supports, professional development needs, and the effectiveness of current programs and services. In addition, teachers participated in Innovation Days — dedicated time set aside for creative thinking, collaboration, and exploring new approaches to teaching and learning. Staff also engaged during orientation days at the start of the school year, which included time to review LCAP goals and set the tone for the year ahead. Across all of these touchpoints, certificated staff had ongoing opportunities to provide meaningful input on our LCAP goals and actions — ensuring that the plan reflects the real experiences of the teachers who implement it every day.
5. Administration	Throughout the 2025–26 school year, the Inland Leaders administrative team engaged in continuous review and reflection to ensure that daily decisions, programs, and resource allocations remained aligned with our LCAP goals and commitments. This was not a once-a-year review — school leadership consistently monitored implementation, revisited goal progress, and made adjustments as needed to stay on track. Equally important, administrators did not work in isolation. Throughout the year, the administrative team collaborated directly with all educational partners — students, families, teachers, and classified staff — participating alongside them in the various meetings, surveys, and feedback sessions described above. This included the joint analysis of survey data gathered from across the school community, ensuring that leadership decisions were informed by the voices of the people our school serves. This approach reflects a core belief at Inland Leaders: that strong leadership means listening as much as directing, and that the best path forward is one built together with our entire school community.
6. Governing Board	The Inland Leaders Board of Directors plays an active role in overseeing the implementation and development of the LCAP. Throughout the school year, the Board receives regular updates on progress toward LCAP goals and actions as a standing part of board meetings — ensuring that school governance remains closely connected to the outcomes that matter most for students. Each spring, the Board reviews the draft LCAP at the May board meeting, providing an opportunity for trustees to examine the plan in detail before it is finalized. At this same meeting, a public hearing is held, giving parents, community members, and other stakeholders an open forum to review the draft plan and share their feedback directly with the Board. This step reflects Inland Leaders' commitment to transparency and community voice in its most formal governance setting. The Board then takes action to finalize and officially approve the LCAP at the June board meeting, ensuring the plan is adopted in a timely manner and in full accordance with state requirements.

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

During the 2025–26 school year, Inland Leaders Charter School made authentic engagement with all educational partners and the Governing Board a central priority in both the development and ongoing monitoring of our LCAP.

We hosted our annual stakeholder meeting, bringing together certificated and classified staff to collaboratively review survey findings, identify areas of need, and align on priorities for the year ahead. Families were engaged through our "Coffee with the Principal" events, open to all parents and guardians, where survey results were shared openly and families had the opportunity to ask questions and provide direct input to school leadership.
Comprehensive LCAP-specific surveys were distributed to all parents, staff, and students, gathering in-depth perspectives on school strengths, areas for growth, and the priorities that matter most to each group. These surveys went beyond routine feedback — they were designed to generate meaningful data that directly informed our planning and decision-making.

Throughout the year, the administrative team engaged in continuous review and reflection, ensuring that programs, staffing, and resources remained aligned with LCAP goals and requirements. Leadership did not work in isolation — administrators collaborated actively with all educational partners across meetings, events, and feedback sessions, ensuring that decisions were grounded in the real experiences of the students and families we serve.
These intentional efforts reflect Inland Leaders' commitment to shared leadership and ongoing collaboration — because we believe the best outcomes for students are achieved when the entire school community is informed, engaged, and working together.

The feedback gathered from all educational partners during the 2025–26 school year directly shaped the goals, actions, metrics, and resource decisions reflected in this LCAP for 2026–27. The following are specific examples of how that feedback was translated into plan decisions:
Student survey feedback revealed that middle school students reported lower levels of enjoyment and connectedness compared to elementary students, with 78% of students reporting they "like coming to school" — a figure the school identified as needing improvement. In direct response, ILCS added a dedicated Leadership class for Student Council students to Action 1.3, designed to increase middle school engagement, voice, and sense of belonging. The student survey also drove the addition of a critical thinking dimension to the LCAP Student Survey instrument for 2026–27, ensuring student input on this domain is captured more precisely going forward.

Parent survey feedback consistently identified school safety, communication, and student mental health as top priorities. Parents reported 99% satisfaction with school safety and 100% confidence that concerns are addressed, affirming that current investments in Action 3.1 (Student Initiative) and Action 3.4 (Safe and Clean Schools) are valued and should be continued. Parent input also reinforced the importance of family literacy events, leading to the continuation and expansion of Literacy Night and Title I parent workshops within Action 3.3.

Certificated staff feedback, gathered through PLCs, Innovation Days, and the annual LCAP survey, identified the need for more structured professional development evaluation. Teachers reported that while PD opportunities were valuable, there was no formal mechanism to measure their impact on classroom practice. This directly led to the addition of formal professional development effectiveness surveys as a component of Action 2.2 for 2026–27, addressing a gap identified in the Goal 2 analysis.

Classified staff feedback, gathered through the Culture Orientation and annual survey, reflected strong satisfaction (100% favorability for "I like working at ILCS") but highlighted that health plan options needed broader communication. This feedback is reflected in the continued investment in competitive health plan offerings within Action 3.2 and informed the addition of clearer employee wellness communication protocols.

Administrative review of implementation data and Dashboard results identified students with disabilities as the student group with the greatest performance gap and declining trend. This analysis, conducted in collaboration with special education staff and shared with the Board, led to the addition of a self-contained classroom model for neurodivergent learners requiring extended personalized instruction as a planned enhancement to Action 2.4 for 2026–27.

Governing Board feedback during the May 2026 public hearing affirmed the three-goal structure and requested that ILCS increase specificity in how AI tools are being used by staff and students. This feedback is reflected in the expanded description of AI-related professional development within Action 2.2 and the planned development of an AI use policy referenced in the Goal 1 analysis.

Collectively, these efforts reflect ILCS's commitment to a planning process that is genuinely responsive — not just procedurally compliant — ensuring that the voices of students, families, staff, and the Board are intentionally connected to the decisions in this plan.

Goals and Actions

Goal

Goal #	Description	Type of Goal
Goal 1	Innovate systems, programs and practices to provide greater access and options to improve 21st century student learner outcomes.	Broad

State Priorities addressed by this goal.

7,8

An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.

The vision of Inland Leaders is to sustain a high-quality community charter school founded upon innovative instruction and character education to create 21st Century Leaders. ILCS's mission states, "committed to providing a world-class education for students that will equip them with the critical 21st Century Skills necessary to be successful leaders in life." The need for a 21st century skills goal in the LCAP plan must integrate preparing students for a rapidly changing world which includes:

Evolving Workplace: Jobs are demanding different skillsets than ever before. Critical thinking, problem-solving, collaboration, and communication are key for success in today's knowledge economy.

Information Overload: Students need to be able to navigate the vast amount of information available online. This means developing information literacy, media literacy, and digital literacy skills to analyze and evaluate what they find.

Globalized World: Collaboration and communication across cultures is increasingly important. 21st Century skills help students develop the ability to work effectively with people from diverse backgrounds.

Adaptability and Lifelong Learning: The pace of change is accelerating, so the ability to learn new things and adapt to new situations is crucial. 21st Century skills equip students with the tools they need to be lifelong learners.

By incorporating a 21st Century skills goal into the LCAP plan, ILCS is demonstrating our commitment to preparing students for the future.

Educational partner surveys and dicussions have resulted in the need to continue to prepare the students with the 21st Century skills needed to be successful in college or career.

Measuring and Reporting Results

Metric #	Metric	Baseline	Year 1 Outcome	Year 2 Outcome	Target for Year 3 Outcome	Current Difference from Baseline
1	Survey/Inventory of Student and Teacher 21st Century Skills	Annual survey questions to determine 21st Century implementation and effectiveness. Current baseline demonstrates 21st Century effectives at below 80%.	Student Survey - My Teacher uses creative ways to engage me in learning 91% (Student LCAP Student Survey). Student Survey - Overall Dimension for school culture indicates a favorability of 81% (Student LCAP Survey). Student Survey - 2025 - 2026 School year - A critical thinking dimension/questions to be added to the LCAP Student Survey. Teacher Survey: Across the overall dimensions of 21st Century Skills—Critical Thinking, Creativity, and Character—teachers reported an average favorability rating of 87%. When asked, "How confident are you in teaching Critical Thinking, Creativity, and Character?", responses reflected an 86% favorability rating. In response to the question, "How often are you intentional in teaching the 3 C’s (Critical Thinking, Creativity, Character)?", an even higher 89% favorability rating was reported.	Survey results indicate strong levels of student engagement and a continued focus on innovation and 21st century learning skills at ILCS. On the student survey, 91% of students responded favorably to the statement: “My teacher uses creative ways to engage me in learning.” This reflects students’ positive perceptions of classroom instruction and engaging learning experiences. In addition, the Student LCAP Survey for the School Culture Dimension showed an overall 82% favorability, representing an increase of 1% from the previous year. Certificated teachers also reported strong results in the area of innovation and 21st century skills, with an average 84% favorability in the Innovation – 21st Century Skills Dimension. On the teacher survey related to 21st century learning skills, staff reported a 92% favorability on questions connected to: Collaboration Creativity Character Critical Thinking Across the overall survey dimensions, teachers reported 91% favorability in feeling confident in their ability to deliver instruction that promotes creativity, character development, and critical thinking skills. Additionally, in response to the question: “How often are you intentional in teaching the 3 C’s (Collaboration, Critical Thinking, and Creativity)?” teachers reported an average 97% favorability. These results reflect ILCS’s continued commitment to preparing students with the academic, social, and critical thinking skills necessary for success in college, career, and life.	90% of students and teachers demonstrate proficiency with the 5Cs of the 21st Century skills.	2025-2026 The difference between the current baseline and year 1 outcome is over a 10% increase. The baseline date indicated 80% and the current year outcome average is 92%.
2	Inventory of Technology Devices	Current inventory of technology devices indicates sufficient inventory other than replacement of old items and the need for Promethian Boards in requested classrooms.	The following technology devices were purchased: Promethians Boards - 9 Total 4 Staff Computers Charging stations for classroom computers 55 replacement Chromebooks Network up and operating at 99% of time scheduled.	During the school year, ILCS continued to invest in technology to support student learning, campus safety, instructional programs, and student services. The following technology purchases were made: 5 iPads were purchased to support Special Education services, the Nurse’s Office for blood sugar tracking, and the front office Meghan’s Law visitor check-in system. 20 iPads were purchased for Kindergarten classroom instructional use. 5 Promethean Boards were purchased to enhance classroom instruction and student engagement. 111 Chromebooks were purchased for the YBC campus. 40 Chromebooks were purchased to support the Independent Study program. In addition, the school’s technology infrastructure remained reliable throughout the year, with the network operational approximately 95% of scheduled instructional and operational time, experiencing only minor downtime interruptions. These technology upgrades support ILCS’s ongoing commitment to providing students and staff with access to modern instructional tools, student support resources, and safe, efficient campus operations.	Increase and replacement in technology devices in order that all classrooms are equipped with a set of updated Chromebooks or Ipads, Interactive Whiteboard (as requested), document camera, Redcat sound system (as requested), and computer projector. Staff survey to determine if this action is accomplished by year 3. In addition, network operating at full bandwidth speeds 99% of the scheduled time.	2025-2026 The baseline indicated that the current inventory of technology devices showed sufficient inventory other than replacement of old items and the need for Promethian Boards in requested classrooms. Year 1 outcome indicates that Promethian Boards were purchased along with the need to replace 55 student Chromebooks along with charging stations, and 4 staff computers. There is a need to replace a large number of outdated computers in the 2025-2026 school year. Network "up" time decreased to 95% from 99%.
3	Access to and Enrollment in a Broad Course of Study	Student Information System (Aeries) course records demonstrate limited 21st Century elective course offerings at 1 for middle school. Elective participation in at least one 21st century course is below 80%.	Outcome Met - ILCS Middle School Media Arts course taken by the majority of students - embedded in the day. MS has a Robotics Team. All middle school mandated courses: history, English, math, science, PE. Embedded intervention for ELA, and Spanish as well as Leadership. It's a well-rounded and broad offering. ILCS also offers Int Math 1, which is a 9th grade course, and Honors English.	Our middle school program is designed to provide students with a strong academic foundation while also creating opportunities for enrichment, intervention, and leadership development. Students in grades 7 and 8 are offered the following core classes: English 7 & 8 Math 7 & 8 Science 7 & 8 Physical Education (PE) 7 & 8 World History (Grade 7) U.S. History (Grade 8) In addition to our core academic program, students have access to advanced coursework opportunities. These include: Integrated Math, an advanced mathematics course aligned to 9th grade standards ELA 8 Honors, designed for students seeking additional academic rigor in English Language Arts To support student success, middle school students also receive embedded intervention and enrichment opportunities during the school day through our: Skills Center for English Language Arts (ELA) support Spanish instruction This year, we expanded opportunities for student creativity and engagement by adding a Media Arts class for middle school students as part of the regular school day. This course allows students to explore digital media, communication, and creative expression through hands-on learning experiences. Looking ahead to next year, we are excited to introduce a dedicated Leadership class for Student Council students. This course will help students strengthen leadership skills, collaboration, school involvement, and student voice.	90% of students are enrolled into a 21st Century course or elective.	2025-2026 Student Information System (Aeries) course records demonstrate only one 21st Century elective course offerings for middle school students and elective participation in an after school program is also below 80%. Current year 1 outcome indicates that the Middle School Media Arts course is taken by the majority of students - embedded in the day. Middle school has a Robotics Team that was expanded to the elementary grade levels. All middle school core courses were offered: history, English, math, science, PE. Also offered were intervention for ELA, Spanish and Leadership. It's a well-rounded and broad offering. Middle school also offers Integrated Math 1, which is a 9th grade course, and Honors English.

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.

No substantive differences noted in planned actions and implementation. All actions for Goal #1 were accomplished and fully implemented.

Successes included the Robotics team expansion to more grade levels, extra interactive whiteboards ordered when requested by teachers, the addition of a CTE course in media arts in the middles school grades, student film festival event, TK-2nd new Chromebooks, and Kinder IPADs. There were no relevant challenges to implementing this goal.

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.

A material difference of greater than 15% (ILCS standard difference percentage) was noted for action 1.1 in which most of the costs were absorbed by staff who provided the service and actions within their regularly scheduled work hours. In addition, Action 1.3 had a 17% difference with less expenses than budgeted due to staff not taking health insurance. Therefore, fewer expenses were incurred for this action.

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

This year brought several notable accomplishments in support of our technology and 21st century learning goals. Additional Promethean interactive boards were provided to teachers upon request, expanding access to dynamic, engaging instructional tools across classrooms. Our Robotics program grew significantly, extending participation to elementary-age students and giving younger learners hands-on experience with coding, engineering, and collaborative problem-solving. Our Media Arts program achieved full CTE (Career Technical Education) credentialing, a meaningful milestone that strengthens the academic legitimacy of the program and the value it provides to students — culminating in a Film Festival that celebrated student creativity and storytelling. Additionally, new Chromebooks and iPads were purchased for students in Transitional Kindergarten through 2nd grade, ensuring that our youngest learners have access to the technology tools they need to thrive in today's learning environment.

No significant challenges were identified for this goal during the 2025–26 school year, reflecting strong implementation and continued momentum across our technology and innovation initiatives.

Overall, Goal #1 has proven effective in driving targeted actions that support system innovation, expand educational opportunities, and enhance student outcomes through the integration of 21st-century learning practices.

Action 1.1 – 21st Century Skills: Creativity Implementation (2025-2026)
Progress Status: Fully Implemented
The administration launched a schoolwide initiative focused on Collaboration, a core 21st-century skill, to promote innovative teaching and learning across all classrooms. During the 25-26 school year, Inland Leaders targeted collaboration as the next “C” in 21st Century skill development and implementation. Inland Leaders trained 6 teachers and 1 administrator in the Building Thinking Classroom model of instruction in order to foster greater levels of collaboration, communication, and critical thinking. This initiative has been supported by several key implementation strategies. Staff video messages from the school director consistently emphasize the importance of fostering Collaboration in instruction. Instructional walkthroughs are conducted by the administrative team with a focus on identifying and supporting creative instructional practices. Implementation is occurring across grade levels spanning 3 to 8.
Weekly staff bulletins provide strategies and instructional ideas to build capacity and encourage innovation among educators. Additionally, all teachers participated in a Creativity-focused workshop facilitated by the Creative Education Foundation, strengthening their instructional toolkit. Several teachers also attended the CUE Conference in March, gaining practical tools to more effectively integrate creativity into their classrooms.

Action 1.2 – Expanding Access to Technology Devices
Progress Status: Fully Implemented
Significant strides have been made to improve access to instructional technology for both students and staff, aligning with the vision of creating a 21st Century Classroom. To enhance classroom engagement, nine new Promethean Boards were purchased and installed. A number of new computers were also acquired to support digital learning and ensure equitable access to online resources.

To increase efficiency, charging stations were purchased. In addition, the school continues to invest in strengthening its network infrastructure to provide stable and reliable internet connectivity. A recent needs assessment revealed a requirement for additional computers to fully meet the instructional and access needs of all students and staff.

For the 2025-2026 school year, ILCS continued to offer 1-1 devices for all students in grades K-8, emphasizing iPads® in Kindergarten, and Chromebooks in 1st-8th. The majority of teachers use smart boards, with access offered to each teacher requesting one. Portable hotspots are offered to families without reliable internet, and microphones/speakers from Redcat® are offered as needed to amplify auditory delivery of instruction. All students also have access to keeping a Chromebook at home for the duration of the school year.

Action 1.3 – Implementation of 21st Century Courses
Progress Status: Fully Implemented
ILCS provides a strong foundation in core academic subjects, including reading, writing, mathematics, history, and science, while intentionally connecting learning to real-world application in the 21st century. In addition, ILCS offers a variety of engaging elective courses, including Music, Esports, Robotics, Film and Media Arts, and a Broadway elective, giving students opportunities to explore their interests and develop new skills.
Additionally, middle school students participated in a seminar led by Dino Ambrosi, which focused on promoting student well-being by raising awareness around healthy use of devices, screen time, and digital habits

Action 2 was a contributing action for UPP students, and this group was provided with the ability to check out technology for their use at home, including hot-spots for internet access.

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.

Planned changes inlcude a focus on the next "C" in our 5 Cs of 21st Century skills for 2026-2027 as Communication to challenge students to develop high level communication skills in their interactions with different audiences.

Action 5 was added in order to split out the UPP student technoloy device supports and expenses for contributing actions. Now Action 2 only represents the devices for the non-UPP students.

Other changes included the additional action to determine Artificial Intelligence and its safe ana appropriate use in the classroom by students and staff.

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	1.1 21st Century Skills Implementation In All Classrooms	Administration and instructional staff will develop curriculum and implement lessons that integrate Character, Communication, Collaboration, Creativity and Critical Thinking (5 Cs). Budget Expenses include substitutes to release teachers for training and collaboration. Expenses related to stipends for staff that support 21st Century programs such as robotics. Consultants to train staff. Online website fees for resources.	$3,500.00	No
Action #2	1.2 Technology Devices	Provide one to one technology devices and technology support for students and teachers. Purchase of updated iPads, Chromebooks, document cameras, smartboards, and other classroom devices to handle higher-level learning processes. This action also includes purchasing internet hotspots and computer devices for unduplicated students in need of reliable internet access at home. Network devices and subscriptions associated with reliable internet access.	$163,735.00	No
Action #3	1.3 21st Century Courses	Sites will provide access to innovative 21st Century courses such as the arts, music, esports, robotics, coding, entreupreneurship, media arts, performing arts among others.	$82,000.00	No
Action #4	1.4 Artificial Intelligence	The research and development of an Artificial Intelligence Policy and Implementation Plan.	$1,500.00	No
Action #5	1.5 Technology Devices UPP	Provide technology devices for UPP students to support learning.	$19,600.00	Yes

Goal

Goal #	Description	Type of Goal
Goal 2	Accelerate 90% of all students to proficiency in content areas on standardized assessments to close the achievement gap.	Broad

State Priorities addressed by this goal.

1,2,4,5,7

An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.

Closing the Achievement Gap: The current proficiency percentage rate indicates an achievement gap that needs to be addressed. By aiming for 90% proficiency, the schools strive to ensure all students, regardless of background, are equipped with the necessary skills and knowledge. Low SES and EL students demonstrate markedly lower achievement rates in math and ELA on state assessments and require targeted curriculum, instruction and teacher training to increase their achievement.

College and Career Readiness: A proficiency rate of 90% will put students on a strong foundation for success in college or directly entering the workforce. 21st Century careers demand a high level of competency in the core subjects, and this goal reflects the charter's commitment to preparing them for that future.

Unlocking Potential: ILCS students possess tremendous potential, and a 90% proficiency target reflects our belief in their ability to achieve academic excellence. This goal will motivate both students and educators to push boundaries and reach new heights.

Sustainable Growth: While the charter acknowledges the current achievement level, a 90% proficiency goal represents a significant yet achievable jump. It demonstrates a commitment to continuous improvement and sets a clear target for sustained academic growth over time.

Educational Partners indicated a major desire and commitment to students achieving at the highest levels, which in turn, led the school to develop the "Accelerate" Goal.

Measuring and Reporting Results

Metric #	Metric	Baseline	Year 1 Outcome	Year 2 Outcome	Target for Year 3 Outcome	Current Difference from Baseline
1	Fully Credentialed and Appropriately Assigned Teachers: Human Resources Data System to track highly qualified staff and CALSAAS reports	95% of instructional staff are highly qualified.	95% of instructional staff are highly qualified.	96% of instructional staff are highly qualified with 4% on an intern credential.	100% of all instructional staff are credentialed with CLAD	2025-2026 Difference from Baseline There is a slight difference between the baseline and year 2 outcome. 96% of instructional staff are highly qualified, but if you include intern credentials, 100% are qualified.
2	Participation levels of staff in professional development to address student acceleration/intervention. Professional development survey questions to determine overall effectiveness of PD activities.	Survey to be provided to staff in 2024-2025 school year to determine baseline.	TK–2nd Grade Teachers received training in the administration and use of benchmark assessments, including Renaissance Phonics and Curriculum-Based Measures, to better identify and support struggling students. TK–8th Grade Teachers participated in two specialized half-day workshops: one focused on Creativity in the Classroom led by Creative Education during Innovation Day, and the other on Trauma-Informed Practices designed to support students’ social-emotional needs. In addition, a team of teachers attended key conferences and institutes to deepen expertise and bring innovative practices back to the site, including: Professional Learning Communities (PLC) at Work Institute Computer Using Educators (CUE) Conference California Association for Science Teachers (CAST) California Assessment Conference (CAC) Crisis Prevention Institute (CPI) Orton-Gillingham Training AI in Education Conference Survey Results and Impact Following the training, a professional development survey was administered using a five-point scale (5 = most favorable). Survey responses demonstrated a significant gain in knowledge and confidence: Pre-training knowledge averaged 2.9 Post-training knowledge increased to 4.1, reflecting a +1.2 point gain Likelihood to apply training averaged 3.9 Overall training satisfaction was rated at 3.8	Survey not administered but the following data was captured: ILCS is committed to providing meaningful professional development opportunities that support student achievement, staff growth, and overall school improvement. Throughout the school year, teachers and staff participated in a variety of trainings and conferences designed to strengthen instructional practices, student support systems, and school culture. Staff attended a Project Reboot presentation focused on mental wellness and healthy digital habits. The training provided strategies to help students and adults better manage screen time and address the impact of social media use. A representative team of teachers from each grade level attended the PLC at Work Conference in Pasadena. This conference provided staff with tools and strategies to strengthen Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), improve collaboration, and support high-quality teaching and learning practices. In addition, a staff member attended the Building Thinking Classrooms conference and later provided an in-house professional development session for all staff to share strategies and best practices learned from the training. Teachers also participated in Innovation Day, which included professional development sessions on a variety of instructional and educational topics, including: Brisk instructional tools Classroom Management Data Reflection within PLCs AI Assessments & IEPs PLC 15-Day Challenge Building Thinking Classrooms Guiding Coalition Special Education staff members attended additional conferences and trainings to support student learning and wellness, including: Wellness Together Conference Artificial Intelligence in Education Assessing High Support Needs DBT Skills for Adolescents and Families Training Staff also completed the Conscious Discipline E-Course, a brain-based, adult-first approach designed to help educators create emotionally safe and well-regulated environments for both adults and children. Additional professional development opportunities included: DIBELS Training to support literacy assessment and intervention practices Leading the Math Change workshop focused on strengthening mathematics instruction Attendance at the California Association of Directors of Activities (CADA) Conference by two staff members to strengthen and improve the Student Council program Participation in the Science Fair Conference by the middle school science teacher to network, collaborate, and learn best practices for science education and student engagement These professional development opportunities reflect ILCS’s ongoing commitment to continuous improvement, innovation, and providing students with high-quality educational experiences.	100% of instructional staff attend PD addressing acceleration and interventions for students. 90% of instructional staff indicate PD was effective in this topic.	The baseline indicated that surveys would be provided to staff in 2024-2025 school year to determine baseline. Surveys were provided which included participating in professional development and the effectiveness of the professional development training. Data indicated a score of 3.9 out of a 5 point scale for post training knowledge, likelihood to apply training, and overall training satisfaction. 2025-2026 Difference from Baseline Surveys were not administered but data collected is provided in the Year 2 outcome section.
3	Local Benchmarks: Renaissance STAR Reading and Renaissance STAR Math	School STAR reading % proficient (Taken from Grade Level Data Sheets from Renaissance Reports) - Does not include IS 1st Grade - 87% 2nd Grade - 76% 3rd Grade - 68% 4th Grade - 63% 5th Grade - 65% 6th Grade - 68% 7th Grade - 47% 8th Grade - 56% Overall % Proficient - 66.% 1st - 8th (3rd-8th - 61%) School STAR math % proficient (TBD)	End of Year Scores - Renaissance (Whole School - Seat Based & IS - STAR Summary Report - Students at expected GE / Total Number of Students. ELA 1st Grade - 84%. - 2nd Grade - 81%. 3rd Grade - 67%. 4th Grade - 76%. 5th Grade - 71%. 6th Grade - 77%. 7th Grade - 82%. 8th Grade - 77%. Overall % Proficient - 76.% 1st - 8th (3rd-8th - 75%) Math 1st Grade - 72% 2nd Grade - 81%. 3rd Grade - 68%. 4th Grade - 81% 5th Grade - 77%. 6th Grade - 79%. 7th Grade - 68%. 8th Grade - 67%. Overal % Proficient - 74%. -1st - 8th (3rd-8th 74%)	According to the Renaissance Learning Growth Proficiency Chart Report, students demonstrated strong levels of academic proficiency across grade levels in both English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics. ELA proficiency rates by grade level were as follows: 1st Grade: 84% 2nd Grade: 83% 3rd Grade: 83% 4th Grade: 81% 5th Grade: 82% 6th Grade: 80% 7th Grade: 80% 8th Grade: 82% The overall average proficiency rate in ELA was 82%. Mathematics proficiency rates by grade level were as follows: 1st Grade: 62% 2nd Grade: 79% 3rd Grade: 73% 4th Grade: 84% 5th Grade: 79% 6th Grade: 76% 7th Grade: 87% 8th Grade: 81% The overall average proficiency rate in Mathematics was 78%. These results reflect continued student achievement and growth across grade levels, while also helping the school identify areas for ongoing instructional support and academic improvement.	Overall school reading proficient at 81% Overall school math proficient at 74%	STAR Reading Current Difference from Baseline Baseline 2023 - 2024 - Overall % Proficient - 63% Year 2 Outcome - 2025 - 2026 - Overall % Proficient - 82%. From 2023/2024 to 2025/2026 - 19% gain STAR Math Current Difference from Baseline Baseline 2023 - 2024 - Overall % Proficient - 74% (year1) Year 2 Outcome - 2025 - 2026 - Overall % Proficient - 78%. From 2023/2024 to 2025/2026 - 4% gain
4	State Dashboard	Preliminary CAASPP scores (2023-2024) indicate 72% proficient in Reading and 64% proficient in math 3% growth goals on ELA and math EL: ELA - 8% - Math - 38% (2022-2023) Low SES: - ELA - 65% - Math 58% (2022-2023) EL Reclassification rate 59.4% (RFEP) -DataQuest	Preliminary CAASPP scores (2024-2025) indicate 74% proficient in Reading and 64% proficient in math 3% growth goals on ELA and math EL: ELA - 38% - Math - 38% (2023-2024) Low SES: -69 ELA - % - Math 58% (2023-2024) EL Reclassification rate 60.7% (RFEP) -DataQuest	Preliminary CAASPP scores (2025-2026) indicate 75.6% proficient in ELA and 65% proficient in math. (2025-2026) EL: ELA - 33.3% - Math - 41.7% (2024-2025) Low SES: ELA 65.68% - Math - 54.76% (2025-2026 not available at the time of the LCAP) EL Reclassification rate 55.8% (RFEP) -DataQuest For students in Grades 5 and 8, the California Science Test (CAST) results showed an overall proficiency rate of 62%. Among English Learner (EL) students, 53% (8 of 15 students) met proficiency in ELA, earning a performance level of 3 or 4. In Mathematics, 47% (7 of 15 students) met proficiency, also achieving a performance level of 3 or 4.	CAASPP growth goal: 81% proficient in ELA and 74% in math EL: ELA - 17% - Math - 47% Low SES: ELA 74% - Math - 67% EL Reclassification rate-64%	Difference Between Baseline and Current Outcomes: ELA (Reading): 3.6% proficient growth. Math: 1% proficient growth Summary of Change: ELA proficiency increased by 3 percentage points, showing continued progress toward literacy goals. Math proficiency remained steady at 65%, indicating the need to maintain or adjust instructional strategies in this content area. Difference Between Baseline and Current Outcomes – Subgroup Analysis English Learners (EL): 2025-2026 ELA: 9% proficient growth. Math: 9% proficient growth Low Socioeconomic Status (Low SES): 2024–2025 (Most Current): ELA: 9% proficient growth Math: -4% proficient growth (negative) EL Reclassification: Difference = - 3.6%

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.

One substantive difference was identified this year related to Goal 2, Metric 2. While professional development opportunities were provided consistently throughout the year, formal staff surveys to measure the effectiveness of those experiences were not systematically collected. As a result, we do not yet have the structured data needed to fully evaluate whether our professional development efforts are achieving their intended impact on instructional practice.
We recognize this as an important gap. Gathering meaningful feedback from staff on the quality and relevance of their professional learning is essential to ensuring we are investing in the right growth opportunities. To address this, formal staff surveys focused specifically on professional development effectiveness will be developed and implemented beginning in the 2026–27 school year.

Material difference was noted for Action 2.2 in which professional development expenses were increased due to the hiring of 8 new teachers who required an increase for induction supports. Also, action 2.2 included an unplanned professional development training for staff in the area of healthy technology use for students.

Also, Action 2.4 was recalculated and budgeted to include more intervention supports for students as well as new staffing approved by the Board to support UPP students and direct services. This resulted in a large increase to Action 2.4 expenses.

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

Overall, Goal #2 demonstrated effectiveness in advancing targeted actions to accelerate 90% of all students to proficiency in core content areas on standardized assessments, thereby helping to close the achievement gap.

Action 2.1 – Hire and Retain High-Quality Staff
Progress Toward Outcomes: Fully Implemented
Inland Leaders is committed to hiring fully credentialed, highly qualified teachers. This year, two teachers are working under intern credentials and one under a Short-Term Staff Permit (STSP) — both are supervised and supported pathways toward full licensure. The school recognized that bringing on newly credentialed teachers this year created a greater need for administrative coaching and mentorship, and responded by increasing direct support to those staff members.

Action 2.2 — Professional Development
Progress Toward Outcomes: Partially Implemented
Inland Leaders invests significantly in teacher learning and collaboration. Our teachers participate in Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) — structured weekly meetings where teams analyze student data, share instructional strategies, and plan together. This year, ten additional teachers attended the nationally recognized PLC at Work conference, meaning the majority of our staff have now participated in this training.
New teachers who hold preliminary credentials receive two-year induction support through a partnership with the Riverside County Office of Education (RCOE), including an assigned mentor teacher throughout the process.
To strengthen student mental health support, school administrators and our mental health team attended the Student Mental Wellness Conference in September 2025. Our associate clinical social worker also received specialized training in Bounce Back, a cognitive behavioral program designed to help children who have experienced trauma or adverse childhood experiences. Although extensive Professional Development was provided, formal surveys were not conducted to determine effectiveness which is the reason for a "partially implemented" designation for this action.

Action 2.3 — Updated Curriculum and Assessment Tools
Progress Toward Outcomes: Fully Implemented
School year 2025-2026, Inland Leaders introduced a new history curriculum, implemented the DIBELS reading assessment (described further below), and piloted Journify — an AI-assisted tool that helps our special education team write and monitor Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and identify potential interventions for students with disabilities.
Instructional programs at ILCS are aligned with state standards and designed to meet the diverse needs of all learners. The school has made strategic investments in core curriculum materials and annual subscriptions to support instruction. Supplemental resources, including leveled books, online programs, and educational magazines, enhance core instruction across subject areas.

Action 2.4 — High-Quality Interventions
Progress Toward Outcomes: Fully Implemented
Students who need additional academic support have access to several intervention options:
-Success Academy provides two extra hours of instruction per week, delivered by homeroom teachers for students in grades K–6.
-Reading Intervention Specialists work with small groups of students who qualify for Title I support, using Science of Reading-aligned approaches. This support is available to English Learners across all grade levels through 8th grade.
-Structured Literacy Intervention was added this year specifically for students with learning disabilities, using multisensory, explicit, and evidence-based techniques.

The school also piloted data analysis tools to help identify struggling students earlier and design short-term, targeted interventions more efficiently.

ILCS has significantly expanded and refined its intervention programs to close learning gaps and provide targeted support for unduplicated and special education students. These interventions are delivered through both onsite and online tiered support systems. Certified core teachers and intervention support staff implement a combination of pull-out and push-in services across campuses for UPP.

Targeted Title I services are provided for students in grades 3–8, with additional weekly small group math instruction at CSC. Research-based intervention programs—such as UFLI, Lalilo, Freckle, and Heggerty—are used to reinforce foundational skills. The Success Academy has been restructured and expanded to operate before, during, and after school, with instruction led by core teachers and support staff. This program is currently in progress and aims to maximize student progress through consistent, data-driven support.

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

Action 2.1 was removed from contributing actions and interventions supports for UPP students was transferred to Action 2.4 to more clearly and accurately capture intervention expenses for UPP student groups.

Other planned changes include the use of formal professional development surveys to determine effectiveness. Also, English Language student services were more clearly provided in Action 2.4. LREBG funding was added to Action 2.5 to purchase progress monitoring tools.

During the LCAP process, administration noted the need to support neuro-divergent learners who need increased support with a self-contained classroom for longer periods of the school day for more personalized instruction targeting IEP goals. This change was made for Action 2.4.

Actions

Action #	Title	Description	Total Funds	Contributing
Action #1	2.1 Hire & Retain High Quality Staff:	ILCS is committed to hiring high-quality credentialed/licensed staff as a primary initiative that leads to the success of students. Continue to hire highly qualified teachers with CLAD or EL instruction qualifications by ensuring new hires are credentialed, screened, interviewed, and observed “teaching in action” prior to hire. Retain veteran teachers, train new teachers, & maintain classroom aide support to increase proficiency rates for English Learners and students with disabilities. Intervention staff to support at-risk students using Title 1 Part A funding in Goal 2 Action 4 (interventions)	$3,716,000.00	No
Action #2	2.2 Professional Development	Targeted training and support in the areas of: English Language Learners Student engagement strategies Teacher Efficacy Science of Reading Administrator training and conferences to address student achievement. Revisit: The implementation of Thinking Maps in all classrooms and train all new teachers in Thinking Maps and Write From the Beginning. Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) Master teachers to coach new teachers, including Induction	$87,450.00	No
Action #3	2.3 Curriculum & Assessment	The following will be purchased/developed/implemented: Instructional materials and curriculum to address the state standards Supplemental books and materials Intervention materials to address students who are below proficiency and unduplicated students. New assessments to align with the Science of Reading program Develop middle school benchmark assessments to determine student growth in History, Science, and Spanish	$252,500.00	No
Action #4	2.4 High Quality Interventions	Provide high-quality interventions (onsite and online) and curriculum/assessments that align through the grade levels to decrease subgroup achievement gaps with the support of intervention staff. Involves the use of supplemental materials, curriculum/assessments, equipment, and software to improve learning for unduplicated students and students with disabilities. Action includes restructuring the Success Academy (before/during/after school) program to create greater results for students through the use of core teachers and support staff. Also includes Title 1 Part A services for identified students from Low SES, EL and foster groups. These services include specialized literacy support during the regular school day for EL students. Teachers serving EL students implement Integrated ELD strategies within core content instruction. Implementation is monitored through walkthroughs and coaching cycles at least twice per semester. A proportional share of LCFF Supplemental funds is allocated within this action to support the EL-specific services described above. These expenditures represent increased and improved services targeted to English Learner students beyond the base program and are consistent with the school's unduplicated pupil concentration of 2.3%. Included in this action is the additional periods in the day for our severe disability students to work on their IEP goals in a sheltered classroom with personalized curriculum and instructional supports. Summer school expenses are also included as 15 days of instruction is provided to students with an intentional focus on UPP groups.	$1,214,656.00	Yes
Action #5	2.5 Progress Monitoring Tools	Purchase and implement progress monitoring tools such as PARSEC to quickly assess and determine instructional supports for UPP students with real-time updates for instructional decision makers. Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grants to fund this action. Learning Recovery (LREBG) funding is being used to support the implementation of a 3-year progress monitoring system for student assessments. LREBG also to fund Renaissance, ESGI and Dibels assessments. A complete needs assessment was completed for LREBG funds and presented to the ILCS Board of Directors. LREGB actions will be evaluated with the CA state dashboard student achievement growth for EL and Low SES subgroups in math and reading. Research demonstrates that progress monitoring tools greatly enhance the ability of instrucitonal decision makers to implement new interventions and strategies in a quicker and more productive manner than without such systems in place. Students whose teachers regularly monitor learning and adjust instruction outperform comparable students in traditional classrooms. The gains are considered educationally meaningful, particularly because progress monitoring is relatively inexpensive to implement. (Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2001). What Is Scientifically-Based Research on Progress Monitoring?)	$67,000.00	Yes

Goal

Goal #	Description	Type of Goal
Goal 3	Cultivate a safe, healthy, and orderly environment harnessing strong relationships with educational partners to ensure all sites have a positive school culture focused on leadership and high standards.	Broad

State Priorities addressed by this goal.

1,3,5,6

An explanation of why the LEA has developed this goal.

Educational Partners continue to stress the importance of alignment with the state priority of safe and healthy school environments. Education Partners agree that:

-A safe, healthy, and orderly environment is the bedrock for effective learning. When students feel physically and emotionally secure, they can focus on absorbing information and engaging with the curriculum.

-Fostering a positive school culture with strong leadership and high standards promotes respect, inclusivity, and a sense of belonging. This motivates students to participate, take academic risks, and strive for excellence.

-Research shows a clear correlation between positive school climate and student achievement. Reduced disruptions, a focus on learning, and a culture of high expectations all contribute to better academic performance and student outcomes.

Measuring and Reporting Results

Metric #	Metric	Baseline	Year 1 Outcome	Year 2 Outcome	Target for Year 3 Outcome	Current Difference from Baseline
1	Suspension/Expulsion Rate-Dashboard	Current State Dashboard Suspension rate: 0.4% Blue designation Expulsion rate: 0 students	Current State Dashboard (Date pulled April-May) Suspension rate: 0.3% Blue designation - Decline by .1%. (State is at 3.2% and is the green designation). Expulsion rate: 0 students.	According to the current 2025 California Dashboard, the school’s suspension indicator is identified as Orange, with 1.3% of students suspended at least one day during the school year. This reflects an increase of 1% from the previous year. For comparison, the statewide suspension rate is 2.9% of students suspended at least one day. Statewide data reflects a decline of 0.4% from the previous year, and the statewide suspension indicator is identified as Green. While the suspension rate increased, it is important to note that the school maintained a 0% expulsion rate. In comparison, the surrounding district reported a 0.2% expulsion rate, while both the county and the state reported 0.1% expulsion rates.	Maintain Current State Dashboard-Blue designation	2025-2026 Difference from Baseline Baseline Dashboard Suspension rate: 0.4% Blue designation Expulsion rate: 0 students Current State Dashboard (Date pulled April-May) Suspension rate: Difference: +1% Expulsion rate: 0%
2	Educational Partner Survey to determine student/parent/staff perception of school safety and connectedness.	Current data reveals Overall Parent Satisfaction with school program: 98.5% (feel welcomed and like attending ILCS) Overall Staff Satisfaction with employment 86% (like going to work, feel appreciated) Overall Student Satisfaction with school program 78% (feel welcomed and like coming to school)	Overall Parent Satisfaction with school program: 99% (feel welcomed and like attending ILCS)Overall Staff Satisfaction with employment 96% (like going to work, feel appreciated) Overall Student Satisfaction with school program 78% (feel welcomed and like coming to school)	Results from the LCAP educational partners surveys reflect strong levels of satisfaction and positive school climate among parents, staff, and students. Parents reported an average overall favorability rating of 98% regarding school programs and services. Parent responses also reflected strong confidence in the school’s communication and support systems, including: 100% favorability for the statement: “Any concerns with my child/ren at ILCS are addressed.” 97% favorability for: “My family feels welcomed at ILCS.” 98% favorability for: “I am happy that my student(s) attend ILCS.” In the area of school safety, parents reported very positive perceptions, including: 99% favorability for: “My child’s school is a safe place to learn.” 100% favorability for: “Any concerns with my child/ren at ILCS are addressed.” Staff survey results also reflected a positive school culture and work environment. Staff reported: 97% favorability for: “I like working at ILCS.” 87% favorability for: “I feel valued by my team and by site administration.” 100% favorability for: “I feel safe at work.” Student survey responses indicated generally positive perceptions of school climate and safety. Students reported: 78% favorability for: “I feel welcomed at ILCS.” 78% favorability for: “I like coming to school.” 88% favorability for: “I feel safe at school.” These survey results demonstrate strong stakeholder confidence in the school’s learning environment, school safety, and overall school community.	Overall Parent Satisfaction with school program: 99% Overall Staff Satisfaction with employment 95% Overall Student Satisfaction with school program 87%	2025-2026 Difference from Baseline: Overall Parent Satisfaction with school program: -.2% Overall Staff Satisfaction with employment : +9% Overall Student Satisfaction with school program: +3%
3	Staff Survey Events Calendar	Staff survey: Satisfaction with ILCS - 95% Valued by Administration - 86% Events calendar to be determined	Staff survey: Satisfaction with ILCS - 100% Valued by Administration - 93% Provided celebrations and recognition events for classified and certificated employees "Cultivate days" for staff Staff Appreciation Week (Foundation funded) Cultivate Committee Lion’s ROAR/ Creative Cats Potluck days Provide a competitive health plan to cover employees medical and health needs. Pulse survey checks on employee and their mental health Staff survey - check in (fires) Staff survey - Data Celebration	Results from the LCAP staff survey reflect a strong sense of staff satisfaction and positive workplace culture at ILCS. Staff reported: 100% favorability for the statement: “I like working at ILCS.” 88% favorability for: “I feel valued by site administration.” ILCS continues to prioritize staff recognition, collaboration, and appreciation through a variety of activities and celebrations throughout the school year. Staff are regularly recognized through initiatives such as the weekly “Lions Roar” Bulletin, which highlights accomplishments, celebrations, and positive contributions across the school community. Additional staff appreciation and culture-building opportunities included: Cultivate Days, which featured staff potlucks and opportunities for collaboration and connection Staff Appreciation Week, generously supported through donations from the Inland Leaders Foundation Collaborative Cats Recognition, where teachers are recognized during Board meetings for innovation and excellence in the classroom The school also held six “Huddles” during the school year. These collaborative gatherings provided teaching staff opportunities to celebrate colleagues, strengthen relationships, and engage in discussions focused on Professional Learning Community (PLC) systems and continuous improvement efforts. LCS provides a competitive health benefits program designed to support employees’ medical and healthcare needs. Employees are offered a variety of healthcare plan options, including PPO and HMO plans, to help meet the diverse needs of staff and their families. As part of the employee survey process, staff were asked: “Were you satisfied with the various health care plan options that were available to select (i.e., PPO vs. HMO)?” Survey responses indicated: 53% responded Yes 18% responded No The remaining responses selected other options or were neutral	Staff Survey Satisfaction with ILCS: +5% Valued by Site Administration: +2% 3 Cultivate Events per year	2025-2026 Difference from Baseline Staff survey: Satisfaction with ILCS - Valued by Administration - 86% - Year 1 Outcome 93% - 7% increase. More than 3 Cultivate events provided
4	Attendance/Chronic Absenteeism Rate: Dashboard	State Dashboard: 3.6% Green Designation	State Dashboard: 2.0% - Blue Designation - Improved by 3.3%	According to the current California Dashboard, the school received a Yellow designation for Chronic Absenteeism, with 3% of students identified as chronically absent. This reflects an increase of 1% from the previous year. For comparison, the state also received a Yellow designation, with 17.1% of students identified as chronically absent statewide. Statewide data reflects a decline of 1.5% from the previous year.	2.6% Blue designation	2025-2026 Difference from Baseline: Chronic Absenteeism: + 1%
5	Middle School Dropout Rate	Current drop out rate is 0	Current drop out rate is 0	Current drop out rate is 0	Maintain a dropout rate of 0	2025-2026 Difference from Baseline There is no change from the baseline to Year 2 Outcome. There is a 0 drop out rate.
6	Facilities in Good Repair (FIT)	Local Indicator 1- FIT inspection at 0 instances of deficiencies	2024-2025 Local Indicator 1- FIT inspection at 0 instances of deficiencies	The 2025–2026 Facilities Inspection Tool (FIT) Report indicated an overall rating of “Good.” All inspected systems and areas were rated as “Good” with the exception of Fire Safety, which received a rating of “Poor” due to a fire system that was not functioning properly at the time of the inspection. Since the inspection, the fire system issue has been repaired and is now functioning properly.	Local Indicator 1- FIT inspection to maintain 0 deficiencies	2025-2026 Difference from Baseline There is no change from the baseline data to Year 1 Outcome Data. There are 0 current deficiencies.

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.

There were no substantive differences in planned actions and actual implementation of these actions.

No material difference was noted greater than the school standard of 15%, although Action 4 was close with 14% more expenditures than the budgeted amount. This was due to the need to custodial staffing shortages that resulted in higher costs with the use of independent contracting companies. In addition, facility repair costs were higher than anticipated as well.

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

Goal #3 was successfully implemented through a variety of targeted actions, resulting in a safe, healthy, and orderly environment. These efforts were strengthened by strong partnerships with students, staff, and families, contributing to a school culture rooted in leadership, well-being, and high standards.

Action 3.1 – Student-Focused Initiatives
Progress toward outcomes: Fully Implemented
During the spring of 2026, ILCS invited Dino Ambrosi to speak with students and parents regarding his Project Reboot initiative. His presentations focused on helping students develop healthy habits related to technology, screen time, and social media use. The school continues to maintain a robust Associated Student Body (ASB) program in which middle school students develop valuable leadership skills and gain opportunities to participate in student government and public service experiences. At both the California Street and Yucaipa Boulevard Campuses, a field restoration project took place that eliminated holes and uneven mounds that could pose safety risks and lead to injuries. Inland Leaders also continues to provide mental health services to students as a Tier II support, while implementation efforts related to the California Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative (CYBHI) are currently in progress with the state. Additional student support initiatives included hosting Literacy Night at YBC, where families were provided with strategies to support early literacy development at home. Intervention tutors were hired to support literacy instruction in grades K–2 through targeted Tier II and Tier III interventions. Additional aides were also hired in Transitional Kindergarten, lowering the adult-to-student ratio to approximately 1:8. Furthermore, the DIBELS assessment system was purchased and implemented as an early screening tool to identify dyslexia risk factors and other reading difficulties.

In support of student enrichment, the Extended Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP) is fully operational, offering engaging programs for unduplicated students. Mental health services are accessible to all students, with annual suicide awareness presentations provided for middle schoolers. Health support includes LVN nurses stationed at both YBC and CSC campuses, with oversight from a credentialed RN consultant.
To enhance student engagement, the school hosts regular field trips, rallies, award assemblies, and board recognitions. Leadership-specific field trips are also aligned with regional engagement goals. Nutritional needs are met through fully implemented universal breakfast and lunch programs.
Leadership development is emphasized through dedicated instruction in grades 1–8 by three leadership coaches, with additional staff, student, and parent training. One LEADCON convention was successfully hosted this year. Student life and culture are enriched through dances, house/roar rallies, movie nights, and family literacy events. Resilience and coping courses, facilitated by Building a Generation, are provided to students in grades 6–8. Facility improvements include the installation of new basketball rims and backboards. For data monitoring, the Kelvin platform and PARSEC systems are used to analyze student behavior and attendance trends, while PULSE surveys monitor morale and school climate.

Action 3.2 – Staff-Focused Initiatives
Progress toward outcomes: Fully Implemented
Dino Ambrosi of Project Reboot shared a message with all teachers about student screen addiction, inspiring staff to be leaders that balance technology & learning, & to understand the habits of students that can negatively impact their desire to learn. Training in Building Thinking Classrooms was offered to all teachers, which is in line with our goal to build 21st century learners who collaborate & think critically. The Wellness Committee launched a Running Club to invite & encourage staff to practice healthy habits & goal-setting, culminating in participation in a half-marathon. Staff wellness and recognition are supported through initiatives like “Cultivate Days” and Staff Appreciation Week, funded by the ILCS Foundation. Programs such as Lion’s ROAR and Colaborative Cats highlight staff achievements, while potlucks foster a collegial work environment. Competitive health plans are provided for all employees, contributing to overall well-being.
To further support staff, PULSE mental health check-ins are conducted regularly. Surveys gather feedback on wellness, data celebration, and internal communication, promoting a culture of transparency and support.

Action 3.3 – Parent, Community, and Educational Partner Engagement
Progress toward outcomes: Fully Implemented
This year, Inland Leaders deepened its connections with families and the broader community through a range of meaningful partnerships and events. We partnered with LoveOurCities to engage students and families in local service. Through the Inland Leaders Foundation and our EXL program, students connected with local businesses — including Riley's Farm and Big Time Design — gaining real-world learning experiences beyond the classroom. Families were invited to a Project Reboot Parent Workshop to learn strategies for supporting healthy technology habits at home, and a Literacy Night gave parents practical tools to strengthen early reading development. The school also subscribed to Cyber Safety Cop resources to support ongoing digital citizenship education for students and families. UPP families were also provided with a targeted Literacy Night where they engaged with our intervention staff on supporting their students at home in reading and writing.

Opportunities for parent involvement include participation as grade-level representatives and room parents, as well as engagement through events like Coffee with the Principal, finance meetings, and LCAP sessions. Parent-teacher conferences and student support meetings (SCAT) further strengthen collaboration.
The school fosters strong community ties through an activities coordinator who oversees outreach and partnerships with businesses such as Chipotle, Panda Express, and Element. Signature events like Love Our Cities and the Veterans Day Celebration. Whole-school communication is maintained via weekly ParentSquare updates. Additional outreach includes presentations and workshops such as the Title I Literacy Event. Parent feedback is gathered through a school culture and program effectiveness survey conducted annually in January.

Action 3.4 – Safe and Clean School Environments
Progress toward outcomes: Fully Implemented
At the both the California Street and Yucaipa Boulevard Campuses, a field restoration project took place that eliminated holes and uneven mounds that could pose safety risks and lead to injuries. We recarpeted several classrooms with worn carpet. Also the Gaga Pit play area was restored among other facility projects, Both campuses increased the frequency of safety drills and added second major disaster drill (CSC) to the school year. Armed security guard was provided for the sites through Covered6.

Security infrastructure has been strengthened through the installation of security cameras, upgraded intercoms at CSC, network firewalls, and advanced cybersecurity systems. The Raptor visitor screening system is fully operational, and campuses have been equipped with safety fencing, barriers, and green screens, especially at YBC.
Custodial services are robust, with two full-time custodians assigned to CSC and one full-time custodian at YBC who was promoted to support facility project management. Maintenance and cleanliness are prioritized through ongoing repairs and daily cleaning protocols that maintain a sanitary and well-kept learning environment.

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.

Goal 3 remains as a strength at ILCS with high parent, students and staff ratings. Educational partners expressed a strong desire for the school to maintain its current course with Goal 3 initiatives with no notable changes. A notable change is that Action 2 is now changed to "100%" personnel costs since this action is the cost of medical, dental and other personnel health benefits that are provided for full-time staff. Action 3 was revised to removed the Contributing Action costs.

Additionally, Action 5 was added to split out student health services from Action 1 where it resided previously. This allows for better tracking and allows for Supplemental LCFF funds to be directed toward these specific services.

Actions

Action #	Title	Description	Total Funds	Contributing
Action #1	3.1 Student Engagement Initiative	The Student Initiative will implement/offer/provide the following: The Extended Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP) to offer enrichment for unduplicated students to include an extended school day and school year. Improve Attendance monitoring, field trips, student celebrations. Food service providing universal breakfast/lunch Use of surveys to monitor student culture and morale Training to staff, students, and parents regarding the leadership programs Leadership field trips to engage students in our region and support the area's needs Leadership coach(es) with support from school staff to support the leadership initiative and teach leadership classes to all students in 1st - 8th grades. Use of Data system to analyze behavior and attendance. Leadership Conventions (LEADCON) Student Activities such as dances, assemblies, and family events to encourage family/student engagement in the school community.	$832,000.00	No
Action #2	3.2 Staff Initiative	The following actions will be offered/provided: Celebrations and recognition events for classified and certificated employees Cultivate days" for staff Competitive health plan to cover employee medical and health needs. Pulse survey checks on employee and their mental health	$684,581.00	No
Action #3	3.3 Parent/Community Partnerships	The following opportunities will be offered/provided: Parent involvement with participating in school events and decision-making processes. Parent involvement to include support with student achievement Activities Coordinator to create opportunities/events for community outreach Whole school communication to educational partners on a weekly basis Focused Title 1 parent workshops to support student achievement Surveys of parents regarding culture and program effectiveness	$58,000.00	No
Action #4	3.4 Safe and Clean Schools	The following will be provided: Security systems to include security cameras, network equipment, firewalls, cybersecurity Building/Site repair and maintenance Cleaning and sanitation of school facilities Custodial support and services	$428,000.00	No
Action #5	3.5 Student Health Services	This action provides counseling and nurse services at the two school sites throughout the school day. Expenses include LVNs and counselors and related supply costs.	$122,000.00	Yes

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
$628,143.00	$0.00

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
5.70%	0.00%	$0.00	5.70%

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 5	Educatiohal partners (staff and administration) indicate that unduplicated students have far less resources and access to technology than their peers,. Therefore, ILCS has determined to provide unduplicated students with Chromebooks or IPADs (depending on grade level) and internet hot-spots to overcome this barrier to learning.	The action address the need for all students to have equitable access to technology.	Metric used is the inventory of student technology devices in comparison to student enrollment to ensure all students are provided with the appropriate device. Hot-spot inventory is evaluated every trimester as to whether additional devices are required.
Goal 2 Action 4	Research and evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that the greatest variable in closing the student achievement gap is the instructional staff that the student works with from day to day. Therefore, ILCS has determined to hire and retain the highest quality staff available. In addition, research also demonstrates that interventions are most effective when the student is placed into classes with their core teachers providing the interventions. As a result, ILCS has developed a system to provide interventions during, before, and after school using the core instructional staff rather than outside vendors or contractors. Timely interventions are critical to closing the achievement gap for at-risk pupils that this action is targeting. Educational partners rank the retention of high-performing teachers as the greatest need on surveys.	Action 2.4 encompasses the entire LEA as all students who are struggling to achieve standard have access to the interventions. The population of students that demonstrate the greatest need for intervention or our success academy are our Low SES and EL students and they have the greatest participation rate in our success academy programs. But, any student in need of intervention is provided with the necessary supports that meet their need.	To monitor the effectiveness of using our core teachers as the intervention teachers, ILCS utilizes local benchmarks for the primary grades (K-2) that include STAR early literacy, Dibels, STAR Math, and ESGI assessments. Students in grades 3-8 are assessed with CAASPP, STAR Math and Star Reading three times a year. These metrics provided the data needed to determine if students are demonstrating consistent and normed growth while attending interventions.
Goal 2 Action 4, Goal 2 Action 5	Unduplicated students demonstrate achievement gaps compared to other students as identified by school staff on surveys and in meetings.	Action 2.4 addresses the need for specific interventions to improve the academic performance of unduplicated students. These interventions are offered schoolwide for any student who requires extra support as to provide all students equitable access. In action 2.5 Instructors require progress monitoring tools to make "on the go" instructional decisions for students who are specifically demonstrating academic struggles. Educational partners recognized the need for progress monitoring tools and requested implementation of the tools for better instructional decisions in a timely manner. A targeted-only approach was considered but determined to be less effective. LEA-wide delivery ensures that all struggling students, including the disproportionate share who are Low SES and EL, receive consistent access regardless of identification status	Metrics include the California Dashboard academic progress indicators for EL, low-ses and foster students including local benchmark assessment results disagregated by unduplicated student groups. to determine if interventions are effectively moving students closer to proficiency.
Goal 3 Action 1	Low SES and EL student engagement in school has demonstrated a decrease since 2020. Therefore engagement strategies are necessary to get them to school on a consistent basis and inspire their learning while attending. Educational partners note that student engagement is a foundational piece of student learning and must be in place before learning may begin.	The action is provided LEA-wide in order to engage all students throughout the day with the strategies indicated in the action 3.1 description, but the goal was developed with UPP populations as the target for improvement since data demonstrated the larger truancy rates and gaps in achievement from these groups.	Refer to Goal 3 Metrics that measure student engagement.
Goal 3 Action 3	Parents are an essential component of student success. Therefore, parents and families need to be engaged and supported in their child's education. The target population of the Parent Partnerships are Low SES and EL students. These student group parents' need additional support and events to engage them in the learning process for students.	Although, most of this action is targeted for Low SES and EL students, the events and activities are open to all parents to attend.	Parent survey results defined in Goal 3: Metric 2.

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

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.

Not Applicable

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	1 staff to every 26.32 students	NA
Staff-to-student ratio of certificated staff providing direct services to students	1 staff to every 17.1 students	NA

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	$11,012,328.00	$628,143.00	5.70%	0.00%	5.70%

Totals	LCFF Funds	Other State Funds	Local Funds	Federal Funds	Total Funds	Total Personnel	Total Non-Personnel
Totals	$5,852,941.00	$1,243,427.00	$233,500.00	$402,654.00	$7,732,522.00	$6,313,336.00	$1,419,186.00

Goal #	Action #	Action Title	Student Group(s)	Contributing to Increased or Improved Services?	Scope	Unduplicated Student Group(s)	Location	Time Span
1	1	1.1 21st Century Skills Implementation In All Classrooms	All students	No	LEA-Wide	All groups	All sites	Multi-year
1	2	1.2 Technology Devices	All students	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All sites	on-going
1	3	1.3 21st Century Courses	All students	No	LEA-Wide	All groups	All sites	on-going
1	4	1.4 Artificial Intelligence	N/A	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All sites	2026-2027
1	5	1.5 Technology Devices UPP	Low SES; EL; Foster	Yes	LEA-Wide	Low SES; EL; Foster	All sites	on-going
2	1	2.1 Hire & Retain High Quality Staff:	All	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All sites	on-going
2	2	2.2 Professional Development	All	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All sites	on-going
2	3	2.3 Curriculum & Assessment	All	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All sites	on-going
2	4	2.4 High Quality Interventions	Low SES; EL; Foster	Yes	LEA-Wide	Low SES; EL; Foster	All sites	on-going
2	5	2.5 Progress Monitoring Tools	All	Yes	LEA-Wide	Low SES; EL; Foster	All sites	2025-2028
3	1	3.1 Student Engagement Initiative	All students	No	LEA-Wide	Low SES	All sites	on-going
3	2	3.2 Staff Initiative	All students	No	LEA-Wide	All groups	All sites	on-going
3	3	3.3 Parent/Community Partnerships	All Students	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All sites	ongoing
3	4	3.4 Safe and Clean Schools	All students	No	LEA-Wide	N/A	All sites	On Going
3	5	3.5 Student Health Services	All students	Yes	LEA-Wide	Low SES; EL; Foster	All sites	on-going

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	$500.00	$3,000.00	$3,500.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$3,500.00	0.00%
1	2	$0.00	$163,735.00	$153,735.00	$0.00	$0.00	$10,000.00	$163,735.00	0.00%
1	3	$72,000.00	$10,000.00	$12,000.00	$70,000.00	$0.00	$0.00	$82,000.00	0.00%
1	4	$0.00	$1,500.00	$0.00	$1,500.00	$0.00	$0.00	$1,500.00	0.00%
1	5	$0.00	$19,600.00	$19,600.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$19,600.00	0.00%
2	1	$3,696,000.00	$20,000.00	$3,449,000.00	$199,000.00	$0.00	$68,000.00	$3,716,000.00	0.00%
2	2	$5,500.00	$81,950.00	$30,450.00	$55,500.00	$0.00	$1,500.00	$87,450.00	0.00%
2	3	$0.00	$252,500.00	$177,000.00	$75,500.00	$0.00	$0.00	$252,500.00	0.00%
2	4	$1,180,555.00	$34,101.00	$561,656.00	$345,000.00	$0.00	$308,000.00	$1,214,656.00	0.00%
2	5	$0.00	$67,000.00	$44,000.00	$23,000.00	$0.00	$0.00	$67,000.00	0.00%
3	1	$365,000.00	$467,000.00	$208,000.00	$392,000.00	$232,000.00	$0.00	$832,000.00	0.00%
3	2	$684,581.00	$0.00	$589,000.00	$81,927.00	$0.00	$13,654.00	$684,581.00	0.00%
3	3	$42,200.00	$15,800.00	$55,000.00	$0.00	$1,500.00	$1,500.00	$58,000.00	0.00%
3	4	$152,000.00	$276,000.00	$428,000.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$428,000.00	0.00%
3	5	$115,000.00	$7,000.00	$122,000.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$122,000.00	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)
$11,012,328.00	$628,143.00	5.70%	0.00%	5.70%	$747,256.00	0.00%	6.79%

Totals by Type	Total LCFF Funds
Total:	$747,256.00
LEA-wide Total:	$5,852,941.00
Limited Total:	$0.00
Schoolwide Total:	$0.00

Goal #	Action #	Action Title	Contributing to Increased or Improved Services?	Scope	Unduplicated Student Group(s)	Location	Planned Expenditures for Contributing Actions (LCFF Funds)	Planned Percentage of Improved Services (%)
1	5	1.5 Technology Devices UPP	Yes	LEA-Wide	Low SES; EL; Foster	All sites	$19,600.00	0.00%
2	4	2.4 High Quality Interventions	Yes	LEA-Wide	Low SES; EL; Foster	All sites	$561,656.00	0.00%
2	5	2.5 Progress Monitoring Tools	Yes	LEA-Wide	Low SES; EL; Foster	All sites	$44,000.00	0.00%
3	5	3.5 Student Health Services	Yes	LEA-Wide	Low SES; EL; Foster	All sites	$122,000.00	0.00%

2025-26 Annual Update Table

Totals	Last Year's Total Planned Expenditures (Total Funds)	Total Estimated Actual Expenditures (Total Funds)
Totals	$6,579,950.00	$7,121,518.21

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	1.1- 21st Century Skills Implementation In All Classrooms	No	$7,500.00	$2,394.00
1	2	1.2-Technology Devices	Yes	$81,000.00	$89,105.19
1	3	1.3- 21st Century Courses	No	$97,000.00	$80,444.22
2	1	2.1 Hire & Retain High Quality Staff:	Yes	$3,376,250.00	$3,596,509.00
2	2	2.2 Professional Development	No	$53,500.00	$89,937.22
2	3	2.3 Curriculum & Assessment	Yes	$213,500.00	$202,109.74
2	4	2.4 High Quality Interventions	Yes	$481,000.00	$950,580.26
3	1	3.1 Student Initiative	Yes	$1,003,000.00	$942,969.53
3	2	3.2 Staff Initiative	No	$602,000.00	$635,689.89
3	3	3.3 Parent/Community Partnerships	Yes	$51,200.00	$50,071.92
3	4	3.4 Safe and Clean Schools	No	$614,000.00	$481,707.24

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	$618,696.00	$4,089,750.00	$752,719.27	$3,337,030.73	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	2	1.2-Technology Devices	Yes	$78,000.00	$20,183.47	0.00%	0.00%
2	1	2.1 Hire & Retain High Quality Staff:	Yes	$3,376,250.00	$287,720.72	0.00%	0.00%
2	3	2.3 Curriculum & Assessment	Yes	$91,500.00	$46,262.00	0.00%	0.00%
2	4	2.4 High Quality Interventions	Yes	$92,000.00	$321,243.08	0.00%	0.00%
3	1	3.1 Student Initiative	Yes	$402,000.00	$40,252.00	0.00%	0.00%
3	3	3.3 Parent/Community Partnerships	Yes	$50,000.00	$37,058.00	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)
$11,501,309.00	$618,696.00	0.00%	5.38%	$752,719.27	0.00%	6.54%	$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

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

Contributing Actions Annual Update Table

LCFF Carryover Table

Calculations in the Action Tables

Contributing Actions Table