lausd board meeting materials magnolia science academy 6 and 7

��

��

�� !!"#

��$��$�� $�� %��

��&'�� ! �"��

(��)�� #��$��

��$��

��

��

��

�� !��"�� !� ��"��

"�� "��#

��

1

��

��

��

��

��

�� %&�'�� *��(��

��

�� !��" "��#��$�%��!��!��$�� $��!��$��#��!��$��%��$��#�� &�!��!��$��#��'��$��#��&�� &�!��!��$��(��&�!��!��)��!�� (��%�� (��*��*�+�� !��#�� '�� )�� ,��!��-.+�./-0��1��/23'-0&-2�4��!��+��!�� #��)�� !��#��#�� %��+��+�� '��'��*)

��5 ��!��)��,�'��#�� !��" "�#�� !!��)�6 ��'��!��+��#��!�� !��!��!��!��)��#��#��!��!��)�

�� !��5 �� !��-78/2�� !�� 9��:.//'-.&-.�+�# �� (�� -8+�./-0)

��!��

��

4

��

5 ��#�� )

!�� 5 ��!�� !��)

��"�� !��" "�'�9�� #��;�� )�

��

5

ATTACHMENT A RATIFICATION OF CONTRACTS AWARDED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 251 – 13/14 Page 1 of 5 Board of Education March 4, 2014

A. AWARD OF ADVERTISED CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS $1,036,828

The District has engaged in two-tier procurement for its Year 2012 Local Area Network (LAN) Modernization Projects (ITD/E-Rate) partially funded by Federal E-Rate grants. The seven (7) contracts below represent the 2nd tier procurement made pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 20118.2.

CONTRACTOR BID NO./

CONTRACT NO.

SCHOOL / PROJECT AMOUNT

A C D D, Inc. (SBE) 1410070 / 1200206 South Gate MS Board Member: Bennett Kayser

$ 179,500

A C D D, Inc. (SBE) 1410071 / 1200205 West Athens ES

Board Member: Board District 1: Vacant $ 109,580

WNG Construction J V, Inc. (SBE) 1410072/ 1200205 95th Street ES

Board Member: Board District 1: Vacant $153,300

A C D D, Inc. (SBE) 1410073 / 1200203 Van Ness ES

Board Member: Steve Zimmer $102,000

WNG Construction J V, Inc. (SBE) 1410076 / 1200203 Fair ES

Board Member: Mónica Ratliff $120,000

WNG Construction J V, Inc. (SBE) 1410078 / 1200206 Huntington Park SH

Board Member: Bennett Kayser $ 287,448

Construct Alliance, Inc. (SBE) 1410080 / 1200204 Dyer ES

Board Member: Mónica Ratliff $85,000

6



17406 CONTRACTS / AMENDMENTS

CONTRACTOR CONTRACT NO. SCHOOL/PROJECT AMOUNT

None

JOB ORDER CONTRACT AWARDS

CONTRACTOR BID NO. /

CONTRACT NO.

SCHOOL / PROJECT AMOUNT

None

JOB ORDER CONTRACT AMENDMENTS $900,000

CONTRACTOR RFP NO. / CONTRACT NO. (Amendment No.)

SCHOOL / PROJECT

CAPACITY INCREASE

Best Contracting Services 1330009/4400002351

(1330009.01) Roofing Contracting Services Board Member: District-Wide Current contract term: 04/03/13 through 04/02/14 Plus two (2) one-year options

Initial Contract Value: *Amendment No. 1 Aggregate Contract Value:

$350,000 $250,000 $600,000

$250,000*

Fredrick Towers, Inc. (SBE) 1330051/4400002216

(1330051.01) General Contracting Services Board Member: District-Wide Current contract term: 09/13/13 through 09/12/14 Plus two (2) one-year options

Initial Contract Value: *Amendment No. 1 Aggregate Contract Value:

$350,000 $650,000

$1,000,000

$650,000*

B. APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDERS $7,268,552

QUANTITY AMOUNT

Construction contracts that have change orders which do not individually exceed 10 percent for January 2014 (Average Transaction: $65,794)

93 $6,118,884

Repair and modernization contracts that have change orders which do not individually exceed 15 percent for January 2014 (Average Transaction: $8,271)

139

$1,149,668

Repair and modernization contracts that have change orders which individually exceed 15 percent (but do not exceed 25 percent) for January 2014 that require 75 percent approval by the Board.

0 $0

QUANTITY

C. COMPLETION OF CONTRACTS – January 2014 32

D. AWARD OF INFORMAL CONTRACTS (Not Exceeding $84,100 effective 01/01/14) $330,958

QUANTITY AMOUNT A & B Letters for January 2014 (Avg. Trans. $11,032) 30 $330,958

7



E. REJECTION OF BIDS

BID NO. SCHOOL/PROJECT REASON

1410068

Germain ES Year 2012 Local Area Network Modernization Board Member: Tamar Galatzan

All bids were rejected due to excessive cost. The project scope and duration will be revised and the project re-advertised with an anticipated construction start date of April 2014

1410067

Westwood ES Year 2012 Local Area Network Modernization Board Member: Steve Zimmer

All bids were rejected due to excessive cost. The project scope and duration will be revised and the project re-advertised with an anticipated construction start date of April 2014

F. AWARD OF ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING CONTRACTS $2,589,607

CONTRACTOR BID NO./ CONTRACT NO.

SCHOOL/PROJECT

NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT

CSDA Design Group 1420026 / 4400002565

Olive Vista MS Site analysis and design services for seismic modernization of the new Physical Education and Multi-Purpose/Lunch Pavilion/ Student Store. Board Member: Mónica Ratliff

$2,298,184

HMC Architects, Inc. 1420027 / 4400002594

Foshay Learning Cener Site analysis for seismic modernization of the North Classroom Building and Lunch Pavilion/ Student Store. Board Member: Board District 1: Vacant

$141,114

Osborn Architecture (SBE) 1420028 / 4400002612

Crenshaw HS Site analysis for seismic modernization of Lunch Pavilion/ Multi-Purpose/ Student Store and Campus Energy Management System & HVAC Equipment Replacement. Board Member: Board District 1: Vacant

$150,309

ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING CONTRACT AMENDMENTS $4,035,000

CONTRACTOR BID NO./

CONTRACT NO. (Amendment No.)

SCHOOL/PROJECT

NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT

HMC Architects, Inc. 1220005.03 / 4400000888

Task order contract to provide architectural support services. Current Contract Term including all prior amendments: 9/27/11 through 9/30/14 Plus one (1) renewal option.

Initial Contract Value: Amendments No. 1 Amendment No. 2 *Amendment No. 3 Aggregate Contract Value:

$170,000 $75,000 +

Option Years 1 $115,000

$35,000 $395,000

$35,000*

8



ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING CONTRACT AMENDMENTS (CONT.D)

Request to approve an increase in the aggregate not-to-exceed capacity and to exercise the final option amendment for thirteen (13) capacity contracts for geotechnical engineering services listed below, by $4 Million. This proposal will increase the total capacity to $30.5 million. Current 13 Contracts’ Term: 04/01/10 through 03/31/15 Including four (4) one-year renewal options. CONTRACTOR BID NO./

CONTRACT NO. (Amendment No.)

The Converse Professional Group, dba Converse Consultants 1090014.05 / 4400001410 Geocon West, Inc. 1090015.07 / 4400001411 Geotechnical Professionals, Inc. (SBE) 1090016.05 / 4400001412 Geotechnologies, Inc. (SBE) 1090017.05 / 4400001413 Gorian and Associates, Inc. (SBE) 1090018.05 / 4400001414 Group Delta Consultants, Inc. (SBE) 1090019.07 / 4400001415 Koury Geotechnical Services, Inc. 1090022.06 / 4400001691 Leighton Consulting, Inc. 1090023.05 / 4400001417 AMEC Environment & Infrastructure Inc. 1090024.05 / 4400001692 Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical 1090025.05 / 4400001418 NMG Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants (SBE) 1090026.05 / 4400001419 R M A Group (SBE) 1090027.05 / 4400001420 URS Corporation 1090028.08 / 4400001421

9



G. SOLE-SOURCE TASK ORDER CONTRACT $10,000

CONTRACTOR BID NO./ CONTRACT NO.

SCHOOL/PROJECT/SERVICES NOT TO EXCEED CAPACITY

B. E. B. & Associates, Inc. (SBE) 1420012 / 4400002559

Capacity contract to provide mechanical engineering services initiated under Architect-Engineer Agreement No. 0620079 Board Member: District-wide

$10,000

H. AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL / TECHNICAL SERVICES CONTRACT $15,000

CONTRACTOR BID NO./ CONTRACT NO. (Amendment No.)

SCHOOL/PROJECT

NOT-TO-EXCEED CAPACITY INCREASE

Excel Door & Gate Company, Inc. (SBE)

1480012 / 4400002522 Capacity contract to provide repair and preventative maintenance of roll-up/down-rolling steel doors at Beaudry Headquarters..

Current Contract Term: 01/03/14 through 11/30/14 Plus four (4) one-year renewal options.

$15,000* General Funded

AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL / TECHNICAL SERVICES CONTRACT AMENDMENTS $120,000

CONTRACTOR BID NO./ CONTRACT NO. (Amendment No.)

SCHOOL/PROJECT

NOT-TO-EXCEED CAPACITY INCREASE

EMSL Analytical, Inc. dba LA Testing

1190132.06 / 4400000611 Capacity contract to provide environmental laboratory services, asbestos and mold testing District-wide.

Current Contract Term: 12/23/10 through 11/30/14 Plus one (1) one-year renewal option.

Initial Contract Value: Amendment No. 1 Amendment No. 2 Amendment No. 3 Amendment No. 4 Amendment No. 5 *Amendment No. 6 Aggregate Contract Value:

$240,000 -$190,000

Option Year 1 $50,000

Option Year 2 Option Year 3

$120,000 $220,000

$120,000* General Funded

EXTRA SERVICES /AMENDMENTS $505,710

Contract Nos.: 0320166/4400001541, 0520026/4400000132, 0520120/4400001659, 0620156/4400000286, 0820037/4400000430, 0820040/4400000433, 1020002/4400000115, 1220027/4400000985, 1220030/4400001015, 1320006/4400000608, 1320007/4400000610, 1420013/4400002054, and 1420146/4400000119

10

INFORMATIV

E

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'�� *�� )��

��

�� "�"�� 1��!��!�� 1�� 1��"��#��"� ��$��!��$%��&�� 1�� !��!�� #� �� "�'"� ��!"��#�� (�� )�� '��$��#��%�� )�� ;�� '� ��&#��" �� '�� "�"�� '��< �� '�� '�� "�"��

��

11

��

�� '��'��%�'��" �� #��=��>�$>?�� >@��>?'� #�"��%��" �� '�#�� "�"��

�� 1��

��!��!�� "�� 1�� 1��#��"� ��$��"��!��$%��&�� 1��

�#�)�� "�"��

�� !��!�� #� ��

��#��'��" �� '��" ��! �� "��1�� !�� '��(%��)�� "�"��#��;�� "�"��#�)�� ;�� %��

��

12

ATTACHMENT A

APPROVAL OF PROCUREMENT CONTRACTS: RATIFICATION OF DELEGATED AUTHORITY

Bd. of Ed Rpt. No. 254−13/14 Page 1 of 7 Board of Education March 4, 2014

A. PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS ALREADY AWARDED

NEW CONTRACTS NOT EXCEEDING $250,000 $504,300

CONTRACTOR IDENTIFI- CATION NO.

DESCRIPTION SOURCE OF FUNDS

AMOUNT

Cambium Education Inc., dba Voyager Learning and Sopris Learning

4400002558 Single-source contract to provide four (4) days of professional development and 38 days of support on Language!® 4th Edition Tier 3 reading intervention program to support students in 4th – 9th grade with significantly less than proficient reading skills. Contract Term: 01/27/14 through 06/30/14 Contract Value: $86,000 Requester: Susan Tandberg, Director Office of Curriculum, Instruction and School Support

Coordinated Early

Intervening Services (100%)

$86,000

Cambium Education Inc., dba Voyager Learning and Sopris Learning

4400002578 Single-source contract to provide nineteen (19) days of professional development and support to implement Read Well® Tier 3 reading intervention program at six (6) schools (Western ES, 68th Street ES, 74th Street ES, Valerio ES, Politi ES, and Loreto ES). Contract Term: 01/27/14 through 06/30/14 Contract Value: $38,000 Requester: Susan Tandberg, Director Office of Curriculum, Instruction and School Support

Target Pilot Program Grant

(100%)

$38,000

Sanjal dba 3Pro 4400002576 Informally competed contract to provide project management services in support of the District’s Common Core Technology Project (CCTP). Contract Term: 01/06/14 through 12/31/14 Contract Value: $249,600 Requester: Ronald S. Chandler Chief Information Officer Information Technology Division

Bond (100%)

$249,600

13

ATTACHMENT A




NEW CONTRACTS NOT EXCEEDING $250,000 (CONT.)



AMOUNT

College Summit Inc.

4400002620 Single-source contract to provide comprehensive college access program to approximately 677 students utilizing a structured on-line curriculum, college resource center, and career exploration portal, as well as train 50 seniors as peer leaders. Additionally, senior advisory teachers and counselors/administrators will be trained to teach and oversee the program. Contract Term: 02/03/14 through 06/30/14 Contract Value: $32,700 Requester: Sandra Gephart Fontana, Principal Arleta High School

General (100%)

$32,700

14

ATTACHMENT A







AMOUNT

Sentient Research 4400002591 Named in grant mandated provider contract to evaluate and analyze the Merck Childhood Asthma Network Phase II grant data. Contractor will evaluate which care model improves asthma outcomes and identify specific strategies that are most effective in utilizing School Nurses as asthma educators and the “Yes We Can” model of care. Contract Term: 01/17/14 through 06/30/14 Contract Value: $35,000 Requester: Dee Apodaca, Director District Nursing Services

Merck Childhood

Asthma Network Grant

(100%)

$35,000

Partnership for Los Angeles Schools

4400002553 Named in grant mandated provider contract to co-conduct a current state assessment, collaboratively develop a vision and implementation roadmap for personalized learning, and co-present the application proposal to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for the Next-Gen Systems grant. Contract Term: 01/13/14 through 01/30/14 Contract Value: $30,000 Requester: Donna Muncey, Ph.D. Chief of Intensive Support and Intervention

Gates Next-Gen

Systems Grant (100%)

$30,000

15

ATTACHMENT A







AMOUNT

Wolfone Productions

4400002508 Single-source contract to provide students with training in safety precautions and mental discipline. The contractor will provide training by using several different exercise techniques and disciplines that will aid in helping the students increase their focus in the classroom, self-esteem, confidence, conflict-resolution, and communication skills. Contract Term: 12/10/13 through 05/24/14 Contract Value: $33,000 Requester: Luz Cotto, Principal George Washington Carver Middle School

ARRA Title 1

SIG Year 2 (62%)

NCLB

Cohort 1 ARRA Title 1

SIG Year 3 (38%)

$33,000

Union Bank N.A. 4400002159 &

4400002560

Single-source contracts by which Union Bank will establish, as a pilot, bank branches in existing improvements on the campuses of Lincoln Senior High (Board District 2, ESC-East) and Crenshaw High School (Board District 1, ESC-ISIC). The Board authorized the negotiation and execution of these agreements on October 1, 2013 (Board Report No. 039-13/14). Contract Term: 12/20/13 through 12/19/18 includes two (2) one-year renewal options Aggregate Not-to-Exceed Value: No cash outlay for the District Requesters: Roberto Martinez Instructional Area Superintendent Educational Service Center – East Tommy Chang Instructional Area Superintendent Intensive Support and Innovation Center

No Funds Required

$0.00

16

ATTACHMENT A




INCOME CONTRACT AMENDMENT NOT EXCEEDING $250,000 <$27,000>

CONTRACTOR IDENTIFI-CATION & AMEND-

MENT NO.


AMOUNT

People For Parks 4400002640-2 Amendment to increase contract capacity to provide funding to the District for the operation of Community-School Parks program at Trinity and Vine Elementary Schools during the weekends and summer vacation periods. Current Contract Term: 11/01/11 through 01/31/14 New end date: 12/31/14 Initial Contract Value: $200,800 Amendment No.1: $0 *Amendment No. 2: $27,000 Aggregate Contract Value: $227,800 Requester: Alvaro Cortes Executive Director Beyond the Bell Branch

Revenue <$27,000*>

B. AFTER THE FACT NEW CONTRACTS NOT EXCEEDING $250,000 ALREADY AWARDED $0

The contract actions represented below are unauthorized commitments initiated by the sponsoring school or division without a formal contract in place. This action requires the Board to ratify the contract after the fact to allow the vendor to be paid. The District did request and has received the benefit of the services. Informative memorandum included. CONTRACTOR IDENTIFI-

CATION NO. DESCRIPTION SOURCE OF

FUNDS AMOUNT

None

17

ATTACHMENT A



C. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT ALREADY AWARDED

$0 The contract action(s) represented below is (are) part of the Common Core Technology Project Plan and ITD-SEP previously adopted by the Board on February 12, 2013, under Board Report No. 157-12/13. CONTRACTOR IDENTIFI-


FUNDS AMOUNT

None

GOODS AND GENERAL SERVICES CONRACTS ALREADY AWARDED

$0 The contract action(s) represented below is (are) part of the Common Core Technology Project Plan and ITD-SEP previously adopted by the Board on February 12, 2013, under Board Report No. 157-12/13. The total amount is only an estimate since the expenditures made against contracts are based upon purchases and/or approved invoices.

CONTRACTOR IDENTIFI-


FUNDS NOT TO-EXCEED

AMOUNT None

18

ATTACHMENT A



PROCUREMENT AGREEMENTS NOT EXCEEDING $250,000 $11,841,554 The contract actions represented below are those actions put in place within each sponsoring school’s or division’s approved budget. These delegated procurement methods represent streamline ordering tools that assist schools and offices in meeting immediate mission essential needs for goods or services.

QTY. OF POs/ TRANSACTIONS

Purchase Orders – January 2014 (Avg. Trans.- $68,027) 56 $3,809,524

Low Value – Decentralized Purchase Orders (Avg. Trans. - $1,425) 2,038 $2,904,215

DISTRICT CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS- (Avg. Trans. $457) 5,836 $2,669,088

Rental Facilities 8 $18,520

Travel/Conference Attendance (Avg. Trans. $511) 384 $196,297

GENERAL STORES DISTRIBUTION CENTER - (Avg. Trans. $5,821) Informative memo included

277 $1,612,281

BOOK/INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIAL PURCHASE ORDERS (BPO) - (Avg. Trans. $2,807)

225 $631,629

Detailed information is provided on the Procurement Services website.

D. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES NOT EXCEEDING $250,000 $892,367

The contract actions represented below are those actions put in place within each sponsoring school’s or division’s approved budget. These delegated procurement methods represent streamline ordering tools that assist schools and offices in meeting immediate mission essential needs for professional services.

QTY. OF POs Low Value – Decentralized Purchase Orders January 2014 (Avg. Trans. $5,949)

150 $892,367

19

ATTACHMENT B

REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PROCUREMENT CONTRACTS NOT UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY


A. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS

NEW CONTRACTS EXCEEDING $250,000 $3,800,500

CONTRACTOR IDENTIFI-CATION NO.


AMOUNT

American Institutes for Research

4400002621 (RFP 2000000093)

Provide formative and summative evaluation of the Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) using mixed approach including quantitative and qualitative analyses. Contract Term: 03/05/14 through 03/04/19 includes four (4) one-year option renewals Aggregate Five-Year Contract Value: $2,445,500 Requester: Cynthia Lim, Executive Director Office of Data and Accountability

General (Restricted – Common Core State Standard Funding) (100%)

$2,445,500

Frasco, Inc. FU-GEN, Inc. G4S Compliance & Investigations Tactical Solutions International

4400002635 (RFQ 2000000090)

4400002636

(RFQ 2000000090)

4400002637 (RFQ 2000000090)

4400002638 (RFQ 2000000090)

Approve execution of four (4) bench contracts for professional services to provide on-call investigation services for alleged employee sexual and non-sexual misconduct. Contractors shall provide services on an as-needed basis. Contract Term: 03/14/14 through 03/13/19 includes two (2) one-year option renewals Aggregate Five-Year Contract Value For Four Contracts: $500,000 Requester: Vivian Ekchian Chief Human Resources Officer

General (100%)

$500,000

Epi-Use America, Inc.

4400002617 (RFP 2000000081

Contract to upgrade the District’s E-Recruiting System. The vendor will upgrade the District current SAP E-Recruiting Version 3.0, to SAP E-Recruiting, Version 6.0. Contract Term: 03/05/14 through 03/04/17 includes one (1) one-year renewal option Aggregate Three-Year Contract Value: $855,000 Requester: Ronald S. Chandler Chief Information Officer Information Technology Division

General (87%)

COPs (13%)

$855,000

20

ATTACHMENT B



A. APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS

AMENDMENTS EXCEEDING $250,000 $0



AMOUNT

None

B. APPROVAL OF GOODS AND GENERAL SERVICES CONTRACTS

Authority to award contracts for furnishing equipment, supplies and general services. The total amount is only an estimate since the expenditures made against contracts are based upon purchases and/or approved invoices. NEW CONTRACTS EXCEEDING $250,000 $27,492,868



NOT TO EXCEED

AMOUNT AT&T Corporation

4400002605 (RFP 2000000031)

Capacity contract to provide District-wide access to high-speed, high-bandwidth dedicated internet services to all schools and offices. Contract Term: 03/05/14 through 02/28/19 includes two (2) one-year renewal options Aggregate Five-Year Not-To-Exceed Value: $4,200,000 Based on estimated E-Rate and California Teleconnect discounts, the total net cost to the District is estimated to be less than $399,000. Requester: Ronald S. Chandler Chief Information Officer Information Technology Division

General (100%)

$4,200,000

AAA Solar Electric, Inc.

4400002625 (IFB 2000000121

Package 1)

4400002626 (IFB 2000000121

Package 2)

Capacity contracts to provide network equipment to modernize school local area networks (LANs) and to add new wireless network for 118 schools. Contract Term: 03/05/14 through 03/14/18 includes two (2) one-year renewal options Aggregate Four-Year Contract Value For Two Contracts: $23,292,868 Based on estimated E-Rate discounts, the total net cost to the District is estimated to be less than $3,040,667. Requester: Ronald S. Chandler Chief Information Officer Information Technology Division

Bond 100% $23,292,868

21

ATTACHMENT B




Authority to award contracts for furnishing equipment, supplies and general services. The total amount is only an estimate since the expenditures made against contracts are based upon purchases and/or approved invoices.

AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT NOT EXCEEDING $250,000 $0



NOT TO EXCEED

AMOUNT Able Microsystems Corp., dba KIS Computer Center

4400001368-4 (1050120-4)

No-cost time extension of capacity contract to provide various types of multimedia projectors, document cameras, carts, supplies and related services for schools and offices. Non Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) related requests. Current Contract Term including all prior amendments: 04/01/10 through 03/31/14 New End Date: 03/31/15 Initial Contract Value: $15,302,416 Amendment No. 1 & 2: $3,000,000 Amendment No. 3: $4,000,000 *Amendment No. 4: $0 Aggregate Contract Value: $22,302,416 Requester: George Silva Chief Procurement Officer Procurement Services Division Ronald S. Chandler Chief Information Officer Information Technology Division

Various per requesting school or

office

$0*

UTILIZATION OF PIGGYBACK CONTRACT IN EFFECT EXCEEDING $250,000 $0

Authorize the utilization of piggyback contracts in effect. The proposed action complies with the Public Contract Code Sections 10299 and 20118, which allows school districts to utilize other governmental agencies’ established contracts and does not change District policy. CONTRACTOR IDENTIFI-

CATION NO.


NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT

None

22

ATTACHMENT B




Authority to award contracts for furnishing equipment, supplies and general services. The total amount is only an estimate since the expenditures made against contracts are based upon purchases and/or approved invoices.

. INCOME CONTRACTS <$24,500>



NOT TO EXCEED

AMOUNT Textbook Agency

4500046853 (IFB 2000000111)

Contract to provide revenue to the District from the salvage sale of obsolete and damaged textbooks identified through the textbook inventory and barcoding program. Contract Term: 03/05/14 through 03/26/14 Total Revenue Value: $24,500 Requester: Donna Muncey, Ph.D. Chief of Intensive Support and Intervention

Revenue <$24,500>

23

INFORMATIV

E24

� � ��

Board of Education Report No. 254-13/14 For 03/04/14

INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE

Los Angeles Unified School District Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Instruction

INFORMATIVE TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: February 9, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent FROM: Susan Tandberg, Ed.D. Director, K-12 Instruction SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR RATIFICATION OF CONTRACTS WITH CAMBIUM EDUCATION INC., DBA VOYAGER LEARNING AND SOPRIS LEARNING CONTRACT NO.: 4400002558 AND 400002578 CONTRACT AMOUNT: $86,000 AND 38,000 The purpose of this informative is to provide additional information as to the above mentioned contracts with Cambium Education dba Voyager Learning and Sopris Learning. 440002558 Single-source contract to provide four (4) days of professional development and

38 days of support on Language! 4th Edition Tier 3 reading intervention program to support students in 4th and above with significantly less than proficient reading skills. Language! 4th Edition has been used for multiple years in the District as a Tier 3 replacement program for students in grades 4-9 who are performing significantly below grade level in reading. The District currently has 70 schools that are using the program for intervention. Schools choose to use the program and are provided professional development and coaching support and data analysis in collaboration with the company. Schools included are identified on Attachment A. Contract Term: 01/27/14 through 06/30/14 Contract Value: $86,000 Funding Source: Coordinated Early Intervention Services Requester: Susan Tandberg, Director Office of Curriculum, Instruction & Support

25

� � ��

Members, Board of Education Dr. John e. Deasy, Superintendent - 2 - February 10, 2014 4400002578� Single-source contract to provide nineteen (19) days of professional development

and support to implement Read Well Tier 3 reading intervention program at six (6) schools (Western ES, 68th Street ES, 74th Street ES, Valerio ES, Politi ES, and Loreto ES). Each school is providing Tier 3 supports for 90 minutes per day to students who have a history of underperforming in reading. This program is for students K-3 intensive intervention and is only available at the six schools funded through the Target Grant. � The six schools are part of the Target Grant and were selected because they received a Target Library makeover. Professional development and embedded school support will be provided to Total 10 teachers, 5 coaches, and 6 principals. Contract Term: 01/27/14 through 06/30/14 Contract Value: $38,000 Funding source: Target Grant Requester: Susan Tandberg, Director Office of Curriculum, Instruction and School Support �

c: Michelle King David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t Jefferson Crain Gerardo Loera George Silva

26

� � ��

��

��

School ESC Board District 118th Street Elementary South 7 92nd Street Elementary South 7 96th Street Elementary South 7 9th Street Elementary East 2 Anatola Elementary North 6 Augustus Hawkins HS ISIC 1 Blythe Street Elementary North 3 Broad Avenue Elementary South 7 Budlong Avenue Elementary West 1 Canoga Park Elementary North 3 Capistrano Avenue Elementary North 3 Carthay Center Elementary West 1 Chester Nimitz Middle School ISIC 5 Cohasset Street Elementary North 6 Denker Elementary South 7 Dominguez Elementary South 7 El Dorado Avenue Elementary North 6 Fairfax High School* West 4 Frank Del Olmo Elementary East 2 George K Porter Middle School North 3 Halldale Elementary South 7 Harmony Elementary East 5 Hawaiian Elmentary South 7 Haynes Elementary North 3 Henry T Gage Middle School East 5 Hollenbeck Middle School ISIC 2 Hooper Avenue Elementary East 5 Huntington Drive Elementary East 2 James Madison Middle School North 3 John Burroughs Middle School* West 1 Knox Elementary South 7 Legacy HS VAPA South 7 Leland Street Elementary South 7 Lockwood Elementary East 5 Mack Elementary West 1 Maclay Middle School ISIC 6 Maywood Academy High School South 5 Manchester Elementary* South 1 Meyler Street Elementary South 7

Attachment A 27

� � ��

��

��

Miramonte Elementary South 7 Montara Avenue Elementary South 5 Moore M-S-T Academy South 7 MUIR MAT/SCI MAG* ISIC 1 Napa Street Elementary North 3 Noble Avenue Elementary North 6 Normont Elementary South 7 Nueva Vista Elementary South 5 Pacoima Middle School North 6 Panorama City Elementary North 6 Pio Pico Middle School West 1 Plasencia Elementary Est 2 Ramona Opportunity Senior High West 5 Richard E Byrd Middle School North 6 ROOSEVELT HS ESP ISIC 2 Roscoe Elementary North 6 San Miguel Elementary South 5 Sharp Avenue Elementary North 6 Sheridan Street Elementary East 2 South Park Elementary South 7 State Elementary South 5 Stephen M White Middle School South 7 Summy Brae Elementary School North 3 Theodore Roosevelt Sr. High School ISIC 2 Thomas A Edison Middle School South 7 Vanalden Elemenatry North 3 Vista Middle School North 6 Wadsworth Avenue Elementary East 5 Walnut Park Elementary South 5 Western Elemetnary* West 1 William Howard Taft High School* North 4 *Coordinated Early Intervention Schools

28

Members, Board of Education -2- Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent

What are the terms of the proposed agreement? The agreement is for a one-year period beginning January 6, 2014 and ending on December 31, 2014. The contract value is not to exceed $249,600. This was calculated based on 52 total weeks at 40 hours per week (2,080 total hours) at an hourly of $120.00. Source of funding is 100% Bond Funds. If you have any questions, please contact me at [email protected] or (213) 241-4096. c: Michelle King Matt Hill David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t

George Silva Jefferson Crain

30

Board of Education Report No. 254-13/14 For 3/4/14 Board Meeting


Los Angeles Unified School District Procurement Services Division

INFORMATIVE

TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: February 11, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent of Schools FROM: George Silva, Chief Procurement Officer Procurement Services Division SUBJECT: CONTRACTOR: Union Bank, N.A. CONTRACT NOS.: 4400002159 (Crenshaw) & 4400002560 (Lincoln) CONTRACT AMOUNT: $0.00 Status Update On October 1, 2013, at the request of Tommy Chang, Instructional Area Superintendent, ESC Intensive Support & Innovation Center (ESC-ISIC), and Roberto Martinez, Instructional Area Superintendent, ESC East, the Board authorized the Procurement Services Division (PSD) to negotiate and execute agreements with Union Bank for the establishment of student-run bank branches on the campuses of Lincoln High School (Board District 2, ESC-East) and Crenshaw High School (Board District 1, ESC-ISIC). The Informative that accompanied the October 1, 2013 Board Report is attached as Exhibit A. This Informative will serve to provide a post-execution update to the Board. Overview Crenshaw and Lincoln High Schools look forward to entering into an innovative pilot partnership with Union Bank that will offer financial education for students, parents and the greater community. The partnership will establish banking and finance workplace simulation in existing improvements on the campuses. The current schedule anticipates a mid-March 2014 branch opening. If, following the initial term of the pilot, the District determines to pursue other similar opportunities, the District may, at that point, select other bank partners through a competitive solicitation and expand the program to other schools within the District. District business counsel, Facilities counsel, representatives of the Facilities Services Division, and the Division of Risk Management and Insurance Services assisted PSD in completing negotiations with Union Bank just before Thanksgiving. The contracts were executed by both parties on December 20, 2013.

31

Members, Board of Education -2- February 11, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent Key Provisions

• Term: three (3) years (until 12/19/2016) with two (2) one-year renewal options • Termination for Convenience: District can terminate immediately if the District

determines that the program adversely affects District students, property, operations or community standing

• Student Compensation: $500 for each student who successfully completes Union Bank’s summer training program plus at least $1,000 to each student for successful completion of the internship program

• District Monetary Obligations: none specifically, although the District does commit to provide HVAC electricity

• Branch Access: limited to authorized Union Bank staff, school students and staff and others provided written approval by both the District and Union Bank

If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at 213-241-1751 or at [email protected]. c: Michelle King

Matt Hill David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t Gerardo Loera

Jefferson Crain Tommy Chang Roberto Martinez

32

Members, Board of Education -3- February 11, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent

Exhibit A to Status Update Informative for Union Bank Contracts Nos. 4400002159 and 4400002560

33

Members, Board of Education Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent -2- February 11, 2014

�� !��"�

��

��

�� !��!� ��!�

"�#��$�%�&�� !��

'�� ! !��!� � �� !�

�� #��$��#�� $�%��!�"!� If you have questions or require additional information, please contact me at (213) 241-1751. c: Michelle King David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t Gerardo Loera Jefferson Crain Marc Monforte

39



Los Angeles Unified School District Office of Data and Accountability

INFORMATIVE TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: February 4, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent of Schools FROM: Cynthia Lim Executive Director, Office of Data and Accountability SUBJECT: AWARDED CONTRACTOR NAME: American Institutes for Research (AIR)

CONTRACT NO.: 4400002621 CONTRACT AMOUNT: $2,445,500 RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD The Office of Data and Accountability recommends the award of a contract to American Institutes for Research (AIR) for the evaluation of the Common Core Technology Project (CCTP). The CCTP will support student achievement and learning of the new Common Core State Standards. Students will develop 21st century knowledge, skills and abilities that will be needed to graduate high school and become college and career ready. Through the CCTP, LAUSD will equip classrooms with up-to-date technology and every student will be provided access to a personal computing device which will allow for a more individualized instruction. The evaluation will focus on Phase I, IL and II of the project. Why is this necessary? The evaluation of the CCTP from an outside evaluator is at the request of the Superintendent and Board of Education. Why do we need to do this now? The CCTP began implementation in August 2013. Implementation data needs to be collected for the 2013-14 school year on Phase I, IL and II so that the evaluation can inform future phases of the implementation of the project. The contract is scheduled to begin March 05, 2014. What would happen if this were not approved? LAUSD does not have the capacity to conduct a large scale evaluation of the CCTP implementation. Limited data regarding the implementation of CCTP will be collected in the 2013-14 school year which will provide an incomplete picture on the effects of the project. What are the terms of the proposed agreement? The evaluation will cover five broad research questions:

1. How are tablets/laptops/other devices being used? 2. What are the impacts of the technology on teachers, students, and schools? 3. What are the obstacles to full implementation of the CCTP?

40

Members, Board of Education -2- February 4, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent

4. What are promising practices in teaching and learning using technology? 5. What are promising practices in implementing Common Core with technology?

AIR will examine a broad array of data to investigate CCTP leadership, implementation, technology integration and outcomes. AIR will conduct quantitative and qualitative analyses to evaluate the CCTP in three distinct stages: I. Initiating (March, 2014 – July, 2014) focuses on the 47 Phase I, IL and II schools implementing in the 2013-14 school year. This phase encompasses formative evaluation results such as the District’s planning and support of the CCTP and other school-based technology integration initiatives; how technology is being used by teachers and students; and early activities, experiences and perceptions of teachers, students, principals and parents; and recommendations to the District on promising program designs, professional development and strategies for increasing program quality and sustainability. II. Developing (August, 2014 – July, 2015) encompasses the 2014-15 school year and will focus on promising practices identified in Stage I and fidelity of implementation. Research activities will include interviews, focus groups, observations, extant analysis of data and documents. Matched comparison groups for impact analyses and student outcomes for the 2014-15 school year will also be examined. III. Operating/Sustaining (August, 2015 – December, 2018) encompasses school years 2015-16 and beyond to focus on impact on student outcomes in both CCTP schools and a sample of non-CCTP schools. Research activities will include interviews, focus groups, observations, extant analysis of data and documents to examine the CCTP and non-CCTP effects on student achievement, attendance, behavior and mastery of 21st century skills. Funding will come from General Funds, Restricted, Common Core Implementation. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at [email protected] or at (213) 241-2460. c: Michelle King

Matt Hill David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t Jaime Aquino

Jefferson Crain George Silva

41

Board of Education Report No. 254-13/14

For 3/4/14 Board Meeting

INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Los Angeles Unified School District

Human Resources Division INFORMATIVE TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: February 3, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent FROM: Vivian K. Ekchian, Chief Human Resources Officer SUBJECT: AWARDED CONTRACTOR NAME and CONTRACT NO.:

Frasco, Inc. 4400002635 FU-GEN, Inc. 4400002636 G4S Compliance & Investigations 4400002637 Tactical Solutions International 4400002638

AGGREGATE CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION SOUGHT: $500,000.00

Why is this necessary? On April 16, 2013, the Board of Education approved by consent vote a resolution, Protect Children and Safeguard Due Process, which directed the Superintendent, in part, to create a team of trained investigators to take the lead and investigate reports of allegations of abuse and sexual misconduct and assist administrators with conducting the investigations thoroughly and in a timely manner. In January 2014, the resulting new Student Safety Investigation Unit (SSIU), under the Human Resources Division, was formed, to investigate allegations of employee sexual and non-sexual misconduct. The SSIU consists of an internal investigation team and the proposed pre-qualified outside investigation contractors, as needed. The pre-qualified vendors will provide alleged employee sexual and non-sexual misconduct investigation services through an “on-call” contractual relationship. The pre-qualified vendors have committed to being capable of responding to the District’s request for “on-call” investigations services within 48 hours. Why do we need to do this now? It is imperative that this request reach the Board of Education now in order to ensure the timely execution of the contracts, the timely processing of subsequent Work Orders and thus, the timely investigation and resolution of allegations of employee sexual and non-sexual misconduct. What would happen if this were not approved? If the qualified vendors are not approved and should the number of concurrent allegations of employee sexual and non-sexual misconduct exceed the capacity of the District’s internal

Members, Board of Education

42

Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent -2- February 3, 2014

Student Safety Investigation Unit (SSIU) to conduct the investigations in a timely manner, then the investigations may be compromised and/or the resolutions of such cases would be delayed.

What are the terms of the proposed agreement? The Human Resources Division is requesting that the Board of Education approve this newly formed list of Pre-Qualified Contractors as set forth in Board Report No. 254-13/14 to better prepare the District to investigate and resolve allegations of employee sexual and non-sexual misconduct in a timely manner. This list of proposed contractors underwent a rigorous and competitive procurement process. The vendors found to meet the requirements are now being submitted to the Board for approval. The vendor submittals were reviewed and rated by a Source Selection Committee comprised of representatives from the Los Angeles School Police Department, Office of Risk Management and Insurance Services, Office of the General Counsel, and the Human Resources Division. The vendor submittals were evaluated based on:

• Work Plan/Project Approach in providing investigation services; • Qualifications and Experience of Proposed Personnel in providing investigation

services; • Firm Qualifications and Experience in providing investigation services to a large

organization(s), California school district(s), and/or other public agency(ies); and • Price.

Once the contracts for the qualified vendors are approved, the Student Safety Investigations Unit will have a list from which to select pre-qualified contractors to conduct investigations of allegations of employee sexual and non-sexual misconduct, as needed, to resolve such cases in a timely manner. Funding Source: General Funds. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at (213) 241-6131.

c: Michelle King David Holmquist

Enrique Boull’t Jefferson Crain George Silva

43



Los Angeles Unified School District Procurement Services Division

Information Technology Division INFORMATIVE

TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: March 4, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent of Schools FROM: Ronald S. Chandler Chief Information Officer SUBJECT: CONTRACTOR: 4400002617 CONTRACT NO.: EPI-USE AMERICA, INC. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $855,000.00 REQUEST APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT TO UPDATE THE DISTRICT’S E-

RECRUITING SYSTEM The Information Technology (IT) Division is requesting Board approval to enter into an agreement with Epi-Use America, Inc. The contractor will upgrade the District’s online recruitment system (eRecruit), a system used by the Personnel Commission to solicit and process job applications from potential candidates. The existing system is at increasing risk of failure due to its age and is no longer supported by the vendor.

Why is this necessary?

The Personnel Commission has relied on the SAP (Systems Applications and Products) eRecruit 3.0 application since 2007 as the official online system for processing employment applications, managing eligibility lists, and pre-hire recruitment and processing. The system has been customized to meet the needs of the Personnel Commission’s recruitment requirements; however, as the system is past its life expectancy, it is at increasing risk of failure and costly to maintain. The proposed investment in upgrading the eRecruit system will solve this problem by reducing risk of failure and associated operating costs. The updated version of the application also includes new functionality that is not available in our current installation, including a more user-friendly interface; thus, migration to the new system would reduce training time needed to enable employees to utilize its functionality.

Why do we need to do this now?

Due to the age of the current eRecruit system (version 3.0), SAP has discontinued regular channels for technical support. Support therefore requires special handling and high maintenance fees that will continue to increase in the next two years. Support of the system—even at a higher cost—will be unavailable after two years. It is necessary to upgrade the eRecruiting module to the current version (6.0) in order to take advantage of the more cost-effective channels of ongoing support from SAP.

What would happen if there were not approved?

Without approval of the agreement, the current online recruiting system would be at increasing risk of failure, putting the Personnel Commission in danger of having to operate without an electronic system for managing application-processing and eligibility lists. This would have a devastating impact on the Personnel Commission’s ability to manage actions necessary to keep the District’s schools and offices

44

Members, Board of Education -2- March 4, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent adequately staffed. Software support costs would increase, and, should the system fail beyond repair, the costs to upgrade could potentially outweigh the cost of this proposed investment.

What are the terms of the proposed procurement?

The agreement is for a three-year period beginning March 5, 2014 and ending March 4, 2017 inclusive of one additional one-year option. The total aggregate value of the potential three-year period is not to exceed $855,000. Source of funding is a combination of General Funds (87%) and Certificate of Participation (13%).

If you have any questions, please contact me at [email protected] or at (213) 241-4096. c: Michelle King Matt Hill David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t


45

Members, Board of Education -2- March 4, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent the total net cost to the District is estimated to be less than $399,000. This will be funded via General Funds. If you have any questions, please contact me at [email protected] or (213) 241-4096. c: Michelle King Matt Hill David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t


47

Members, Board of Education -2- Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent What are the terms of the proposed agreement? The agreements are for a four-year period beginning March 5, 2014 and ending on March 4, 2018, including two one-year options. The total aggregate value of the potential four-year period is not to exceed $23,292,868. Based on estimated E-Rate discounts, the total net cost to the District is estimated to be less than $3,040,667. Source of funding is Bond Funds; No General Funds will be expended. Refer to the table below for additional information.

Contract No. Package No. No. of Schools E-Rate Portion District Portion 4400002625 1 60 $10,019,009 $1,572,242 4400002626 2 58 $10,233,192 $1,468,425

Total 118 $20,252,201 $3,040,667 If you have any questions, please contact me at [email protected] or (213) 241-4096. c: Michelle King Matt Hill David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t George Silva Jefferson Crain

49

Members, Board of Education -2- Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent

What are the terms of the proposed agreement? The proposed agreement is for a period of one-year beginning April 1, 2014 through March 31, 2015. No increase in the contract value is needed. Purchases are funded from individual school and office budgets and include various sources of funding. If you have any questions, please contact George Silva at 213-241-1751. c: Michelle King Matt Hill David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t

Jefferson Crain

51




Office of Curriculum, Instruction and School Support Integrated Library & Textbook Support Services

INFORMATIVE TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: February 3, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent FROM: Donna Muncey, Ph.D. Chief Intensive Support and Intervention SUBJECT: SALE OF SALVAGE TEXTBOOKS TEXTBOOK AGENCY CONTRACT NO.: PO 4500046853 CONTRACT AMOUNT: $24,500 RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD The Integrated Library and Textbook Support Services unit of the Office of Curriculum, Instruction and School Support is requesting the Board of Education to approve IFB 2000000111 for the salvage sale of obsolete and damaged textbooks. Why is this necessary? The sale of obsolete and damaged textbooks is an effective way to recycle those books. The funds generated from the sale are returned to the District’s textbook fund. Why do we need to do this now? To create needed room in the Textbook Distribution Center (located at the District’s warehouse in Pico Rivera) for additional surplus textbooks identified through the textbook inventory and barcode program currently in progress. What would happen if this were not approved? The District would have to arrange for the removal and recyling of textbooks from both school sites and the warehouse, probably at a cost. What are the terms of the proposed agreement? The awardee company is to pick up the obsolete and damaged textbooks within 10 business days from the date of Board approval and notification by Procurement Services Division If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Esther Sinofsky, Administrative Coordinator, Integrated Library & Textbook Support Services. c: Michelle King David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t Jefferson Crain George Silva

52

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'�� *�� &��

��

�� !� "#��!$�% �� &�'�(� �� !)!$"!�� !))! ��*� �� *� ��!+!�+�! � ��+��+�! ��,��- �-�� !&�� ) &��!� "��!./"� "&��#��!$��).)/��*1*�0�� $$ �� !��"�� #�� *� ��1�� !!$ .. )/ ��0��+(�� / � � $0��+#�� $ !� � ..2�� +3�� 2�� +*�� !." !!) ! $/

��

53

��

2�� +(�� !�! !!! � !2� �� "! � /"'�� +4��-2�� "$ )) "$ !..'�� +2�� !) � ! !�1 �� 5 !�/ $) .$ /

�51 �� 6��6�� &��#��#��$��#��%&��'(��)�% �� !"-�! ��6��&��$��* �$��#��#��%�)(�� 0��'��(0�'� 12�!"+! -�

�*��7�� 3�� 6�� 6�� 6�� 6�� 3� ��'�� &��+,��*�� 8��9�� &��-��.��4� �� /��'��6�� 6�� 6��6� ��6�� &�� 6�� 6+�� 6�� :�� (��2��3�� (��6�� 8�� #*0��0��*�� 0��'��(��'�� 0�� &��:��6�� 6�� &�� 6��(��2�� 6�� &�� 0��.�� 4� ��,��.�� 4��

��

54

��

��0� ��4� ��

��

55

CO

NFID

ENTIA

L INFO

RM

ATIV

E � RED

AC

TED

56

INFORMATIV

E65




Los Angeles Unified School District Human Resources Division

INFORMATIVE

TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: February 14, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent FROM: Vivian K. Ekchian Chief Human Resources Officer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF ROUTINE PERSONNEL ACTIONS The purpose of this informative is to provide additional details regarding the Routine Personnel Actions outlined in Board Report No. 272. There were 119 certificated new hires during the time period covered by this report. A detailed list of hires appears below. The 119 new hires are either former employees from the rehire list or certificated employees needed in hard-to-staff areas. Substitute teachers were hired into the substitute pool in order to provide ample coverage for teacher absences.

1. A Temporary Adviser, MST - Non-School Based 1

2. A Arts Education, Itinerant 2

3. A Assistant Principal, Secondary 1

4. C Counselor, Pupil Services and Attendance 1

5. E Elementary Teacher 13

6. In Instructional Coach, Elementary 1

7. OSchool Occupational Therapist, Special Education 4

8. S School Nurse 1

9. S Secondary Teacher 33

10. S Social Worker, Psychiatric 1

11. S Special Education Teacher 3

12. TCAdult Teacher, Day-to-Day Substitute, Rate 1 2

13. TCAdult Teacher, Academic Instruction 1

14. TCTeacher, Elementary, Substitute, Day-to-Day 24

15. TCTeacher, Regional Occupational Centers 1

16. TCTeacher, Secondary, Substitute, Day-to-Day 30 If you have any questions, please contact me at extension 16131. c: Michelle King Jefferson Crain David Holmquist John A. Brasfield, Jr. Enrique Boull’t

66

Board of Education Report No. 272-13/14 For 3-4-14 Board Meeting


Los Angeles Unified School District Personnel Commission

INFORMATIVE

� ��

TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: February 14, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent FROM: Janalyn W. Glymph, Ph.D. Personnel Director SUBJECT: NUMBER OF ROUTINE PERSONNEL ACTIONS This informative addresses the number of classified personnel hire actions on the Board of Education Routine Personnel Actions Report for March 4, 2014 meeting. The following table represents a breakdown of the new hire, reassignment, and rehire actions for the March 4, 2014 board report for the period of January 17, 2014 to February 7, 2014. Hire Data: As presented in the table below, the total number of classified hire actions for the period of January 17, 2014 to February 7, 2014 is 500, of which 325 (65%) are rehires or reassignments, and 175 (35%) are new hires. With the exception of 76 assignments, all of the actions are for positions which are school-based or provide direct support to the schools or their operations. Teacher Assistant positions, although unclassified, are included in the data as they are indicated as classified in the BTS system and they are processed by the Personnel Commission. All new hires to regular/permanent positions are for A or C basis positions. The new hires consist of a Computer Forensic Specialist, Electrician (4), Human Resources Specialist II (CPOS), Instructional Aide for the deaf & Hard of Hearing Students-Signing, Maintenance Worker (3), Microcomputer Support Assistant, and Police Officer (5). The following regular/permanent positions have been filled by promotional employees: Assistant Plant Manager I (5), Computer Technologist III, Early Education Center Office Manager, Food Service Manager II (3), Food Service Manager IV, Garage Assistant (2), Human Resources Specialist II (CPOS), Information Resource Support Assistant, Maintenance Worker, Musical Instrument Repair Supervisor, Plant Manager I (5), Police Officer (2), Principal Human Resources Specialist (2), Satellite Food Service Manager (3), School Administrative Assistant (2), Senior Assignment Technician, Senior Electrician, Senior Investigator, Special Education Assistant (5), and Transportation Router.

67

� Page 2 ��

Hire Data of All Classified and Teacher Assistant Employees From January 17, 2014 to February 7, 2014

By New Hire, Reassignment, and Rehire

Classification Prov Reg/ Perm Restr.

Return Retiree Subs Temp

Grand Total

NEW HIRE

Athletics Assistant 3 3 Building and Grounds Worker 1 1 Campus Aide & Restricted 18 18 Campus Aide (Female/Restricted) 1 1 Computer Forensic Specialist* 1 1 Early Education Center Aide I & (Restricted) 1 1 Electrician 3 3 Electrician* 1 1 Examining Assistant I* 1 1 Food Production Assistant 1 1 Food Service Worker 19 19 Human Resources Specialist II (CPOS)* 1 1 Instructional Aide for the Deaf & Hard of Hearing Students-Signing

1 1

Instructional Aide I & (Restricted) 4 4 Labor Compliance Technician* 1 1 Library Aide 1 1 Maintenance Worker 3 3 Microcomputer Support Assistant 1 1 Police Officer 5 5 School Facilities Attendant (Restricted) 1 1 Special Education Trainee 14 14 Teacher Assistant - Degree Track 93 93 New Hire Total 16 23 43 93 175

REASSIGNMENT Absence Coordinator 1 1 Accounting Technician II* 2 2 Administrative Analyst* 1 2 3 Administrative Staff Aide* 1 1 Area Bus Supervisor 1 1 Area Food Services Supervisor 1 1 Area Plumbing Supervisor 1 1 Assistant Administrative Analyst 1 1 Assistant Buyer* 2 2 Assistant Plant Manager I 7 1 8 Budget Technician* 1 1 Building and Grounds Worker 10 1 11 Buyer* 1 1 Campus Aide & Restricted 1 1 2 Carpenter 1 1 Cataloging Supervisor 1 1 Clerk 1 1

68

� Page 3 ��





Grand Total

REASSIGNMENT

Computer Technologist III* 1 1 Contract Administration Manager 1 1 Credentials and Contracts Assistant* 1 1 Deputy Environmental Health and Safety Director*

1 1

Early Education Center Aide I & (Restricted) 6 6 12 Early Education Center Office Manager 1 1 Education Aide II 1 1 Financial Manager 2 2 Food Production Worker 3 3 Food Service Manager I 3 2 5 Food Service Manager II 7 3 10 Food Service Manager IV 1 1 Food Service Training Specialist 1 1 Food Service Worker 14 2 16 Food Services Staff Aide 1 1 Garage Assistant 2 2 Health Care Assistant 3 1 4 Human Resources Representative* 1 1 Human Resources Specialist II (CPOS)* 1 1 Information Resources Support Assistant 1 1 2 Insurance Technician* 1 1 2 Investigator* 1 1 IT Electronics Communications Supervisor* 2 2 IT Electronics Communications Technician* 1 1 Job Cost Data Entry Operator 1 1 Library Aide 1 2 3 Locksmith 1 1 Maintenance Worker 2 1 3 Musical Instrument Repair Supervisor 1 1 Office Technician 19 2 21 Office Technician* 6 1 7 Parent Resource Assistant & (Restricted) 1 1 Payroll Technician* 1 1 Plant Manager I 5 3 8 Police Officer 2 2 Principal Human Resources Specialist* 2 2 Satellite Food Service Manager 12 5 17 School Administrative Assistant 4 1 3 8 School Facilities Attendant (Restricted) 1 1 Secretary & (Restricted)* 1 1 Senior Assignment Technician* 1 1 Senior Electrician 1 1 Senior Financial Manager 1 1

69

� Page 4 ��





Grand Total

REASSIGNMENT

Senior Food Service Worker 10 15 25 Senior Human Resources Representative 1 1 Senior Human Resources Specialist* 2 2 Senior Investigator* 1 1 Senior Office Technician 1 4 5 Senior Office Technician* 1 1 Senior Programmer Analyst (Filenet)* 1 1 Senior Secretary (CPOS)* 1 1 Senior Secretary* 2 1 3 Senior Tree Surgeon 1 1 Sign Language Interpreter 1 1 Special Education Assistant 24 1 25 Special Education Trainee 1 1 Teacher Assistant - Degree Track 7 7 Textbook Inventory Clerk 2 2 Transportation Router 1 1 Web Architect* 1 1 Reassignment Total 56 171 7 2 12 24 272

REHIRE Administrative Analyst* 1 1 Administrative Staff Aide* 1 1 Building and Grounds Worker 1 1 Campus Aide & Restricted 1 1 Customer Services Center Representative* 1 1 Early Education Center Aide I & (Restricted) 1 2 3 Educational Resource Aide (Restricted) 1 1 Employment Test and Training Proctor 1 1 Facilities Access Compliance Specialist* 1 1 Financial Manager 1 1 Food Service Worker 1 1 Human Resources Specialist III* 1 1 Insurance Representative I* 1 1 Library Aide 2 2 Maintenance Worker 1 1 Office Technician 2 2 Police Officer 1 1 Pupil Services and Attendance Aide 1 1 School Facilities Attendant (Restricted) 1 1 Senior Office Technician 1 1 Special Education Assistant 1 1 Special Education Trainee 7 7 Staff Assistant to Board Members I* 1 1

70

� Page 5 ��





Grand Total

REHIRE

Teacher Assistant - Degree Track 18 18 Textbook Inventory Clerk 1 1 Tree Surgeon 1 1 Rehire Total 16 2 17 18 53

Grand Total 56 203 32 2 72 135 500

*non-school based Summary Temporary and Substitute employees are often needed for short periods of time to assume responsibilities for regular employees when they are unavailable; they are not intended to replace regular employees for an extended period of time. Positions for several classifications, such as Education Aides and Instructional Aides, are typically filled by restricted status employees. c: Michelle King David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t Jefferson Crain Classified Unions JWG 3/4/14

71

CO

NFID

ENTIA

L INFO

RM

ATIV

E � RED

AC

TED

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'�� *�� &��

��

��

��

��

�� !"�� #�� $�� #�� $�� $�� !�� "�� !� �� %� �&+�'(�)+� �� $��%� ��$��

� �� " � �� "�� $�� $��%�� %� �)+�'(�)�

� � � � ��!� ��% ��

'� � � � � � �� " � �� !�� * ��"�� +��

�#�!!��

!��

0� �+�,0,')�� -�� !�� "�)+�'(�)�� %� �&+�'(�).�� %� �&+�'(�)�

��

)� �� $�� +��0'��'/�0+�,��0��0�� +�,01(),� �� !�� *� ��1+�'(�0�

��

72

��

�� +�,01(),� �� " � �� *� ��1+�'(�0�� "��

&� �� $�� +��(1(��'/�0+��'��'�� +�22'(0,� �� "�� '+�'(�'�

�� +�22'(0,� �� " � �� '+�'(�'�� "��

�� !��

,� �� $�� +��0'��'/�0+�,��0��0�� +�,02,1'� �� !� �� !�� %"�'�+�'(�0+�� *� ��1+�'(�0.�� *� ��1+�'(�0�

�� +�,02,1'� �� " � �� *� ��1+�'(�0�� !�� "��+� �� +� �� * �"�0(+�'(�)��

�� $��%�� +�� !��"�� "�� +�� "� ��"�� "�� "�� +��"/��+�� +� �� "�� +�� +��"+� ��$�� 34�#�+��#�+�� +�#�� !� �� +�!�� "�� 4 � +�#��11+�� !� �� "�� +�#�� /- �� $�� +�#�� !� ��!�� #�� 5�� "�� 3�� "5�� "+�� +�� "�� !�� +��!��

��

73

��

+�� ! � �� +��

��"�� !�� )&�'0�)&�'&+�)&�0&+� ��)&')(�)&0�0��

!�� !� ��% ��

� ��!�� 6�� !��

��

74

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'�� *�� *��+�� %,,��

��

��

�� !"�#��#��!"�#�� $�� %%�&#'"(%%�%&%)%%�%&%%(�""*)*&�"�#+)%(�"�#++*�$�� ,��!*��*)��&)�!&$�� -��.�� (��./�� ,�*+�!*)�)+%�!��0�� ,!�'�&+!�*!'�&'�� !"�#��#��!"�#��

�� $�� !"%+%%#!(!"%*"&+) !�"��"#�(!�"��#+*!"%*!%�*(!"%*#�#* !�"�#'#!(!�"�#+#*!"%*'%)*(!"%*)�!+ !�"�)+&)(!�"�)%&'!"%*%�'%(!"%*%##* !�"!"#&+(!�"!"#'!!"%%!"�'(!"%%!�%" !�"!#''#(!�"!#%!#!"%%')*!(!"%%)"!� !�"!)#+*(!�"!)&))!"%%%""+(!"%%%#)# !�"!*)�&(!�"!*%'%!�""�%*'(!�""!!&* !�"!%%'#(!�"#"�'�!�""'�*)(!�""'#*! !�"#"+!�(!�"#�"'*!�""*#�#(!�""*#�& �

��

115

��

��$�� ,�&'�&%*�)#*�)+$��.�� ,�%*�#%!�*!"�')�� ,#&#�*%��&'%�!#��,''%�#)&�!*&�)*�� !�� 1 �� 2�� 2��3��-��4��$��)"("+5"*��!""+/��,��&&'�""��6 ��!"+��!"%�� 7��!"�&��8�� 2��,��&&'�""��#��9��8�� :��;�� :�� :��3��6 ��

�� "�5�+5!"�&�� <�� ,&&�#��))�2�� (�4��=��A��0�� ;��!"(#"� �� !'� �� <��6�� "�5#"5!"�&�� 0�� -0��/�� ,#&��)+�!'2�� .�� 4��=��0��

�� !��

��

116

��

�� :!�� 1 �� 2��:��#��

�� (�� 1 �� "�� "�� "��

��

117

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'� ��*��

��#��

�� !�� "#!$� �� #�� "#!%�� !##� �� &��!��##��&'$�� (

�� )�*�� +�� !,�� "#!�� +�� - �� .� � $,/#��(� � �� 0�� 1�� -�� !$�� "#!$(� � 5 �� -�� -�� +�� *�� 2�� +�� (� 0�� -�� 3�� +�� 4�� 3��5�� !,��"#!$(�� .� $,/#�� -� �� (��

�� '�� -�� "� � �� 0�� 6��75�� 0�8� �� - �� ","�� 9(� :� � ��(� ;�� (� � 5 �� 4�� +�� "(� 5 �� -�� !##� �� &�� 3��##��&'$��"#!%(��

5 �� '�� '�� (�

5 �� -�� -�� )� �!�� 3�� <� �"�� -� �� 3�� <� �� -�� <�$�� '�� <� �� '�� (

��

118

��

5 �� '�� 8�� -�� (� 5 �� 8�� -�� =� �� (� 5� �� 2�� 4�� -�� -� �� -�� 3��(�

�� -�� 8�� 0�� 6��75�� 0�8(� B� �3�� 5�� +�� -�� -'�� %:C� ;�� !C� �� C� �� ;�� :$C� B�� D�� ;�� +��(� � �� -�� 0��6��75�� 0�8� �� -�� E�� ;�6�+(� 5 �� -�� (� � F�� -�� 8�� 8�� (� � D�� -�� =�� 0�� 6��75�� 0�8� ��(� 5�8�� -�� =�� -�� -�� -��(��5 �� 2�� 4�� F��(�� -� �� $$:� �� &'$�� "�� %$� �� (� 5 �� -� �-� � ��-�� 3�� ':(� � �� 3�� 2�� 4�� -8� �� -�� -�� (��

�� -�� "#!�� 2-� � �0F� �� :%$�� "#!"� 4�� 0F� �� D��8� �� :�� "#!"� 4�� 0F� �� D��8� �� !#(� �� "� � �� (� 4�� +� �� 3 �� 3�� (� 5� �� ;�� -��-�� ;��5��0��(

�� 4�� +�� (� �� -� �� 3�� *�� F�� 2��*F2�(� � �� -�� 4�� 8��

F�� -�� '��

��

119

��

�� !�� "#!$� �� #�� "#!%(� � �� +�� -�� (��5 �� +�� +��=��4��-��G ��)77�� (�7� ��H(

�� )�� 3�� -�� -�� (� 5 �� (

�� )�IJ��K� '� 5 �� -�� 4�� +�� !��"#!$�� #��"#!%(�

ILK� '� 5 �� -�� 4�� +�� ;�� 4�� 4�� (� � 5 �� 4�� D�� "�,�'� !�7!$� �� 4�� =�� -�� =��(��

�� )�5 �� (

� �� )�� +�� - �� +�� 3�� (� 6�� .� $,/#$�� =�� -�� (� 5 �� +�� -�� (� � �� =�� -�� -�� +�� (� 0�� (

�� ;�6�+� ��;0�� *�� "(� � 6�� ;�6�+� ��;0�� *�� "� �� 5*6�� =�� -�� "#C� �� +��=�� +�� - �� -�� =�� ;�� B�� B��(� � 5 �� -�� C� �� C(� � 5 �� -�� C�� =�� +��=��

��

120

��

�� (� � �� ;�6�+��;0�(

�� )�0�� 4�� -� �� 5�� 6�� 5*6�(� � � �� -�� 4��-��-�� -�� (�

��

121

of 3�

�� &��

��

��

�

�'()

*� ��

��

��

��

'()*

+),��

��'()

*��+

��

��

��'()

*��

��

� ��

��

�'()

*� ��

�'()

'��

��

�'()

'��

��

��

� �

�'()

'��

��

��

��

��

��

�-�!.�

��

��

-��

-� ��

�

-��

-��!��

-��

-�"

��

-��#��

��

-��

-�!��

�-��

��

-��#��

�-��

��

( ) **+* ,��-��(.��/�� 01�* 2 2 ) )34, �� 5��-��55.�5��6.5��.�( ��75/ 01�* )8+ ��) �5 �5 9), 98: ) 3 *3 :+ 9 *; )8 94 : 8 :3 8 : + :( ) 3)89 <��.��/�7��(.��/�� 01�* *3: ��* �5 �5 9;4 9;; 8 9 *; :+ ; 3: )3 ;; 3 3 ) ) + + +� ) *,;9 ��7/5��5�� =) 01�; 8:+ ��) �� ;44 ;** 9 :+ ,, :3 + 8+ 8) ,; + : + : + + +� ) )+:9 ��7/5��5�� 01�; 8)+ ��) �� 5 ;): ;)8 4 :+ ,, :+ + *; 3* ,; + : + + + + +� ) ):*9 ��7/5��5�(.��/��5>�3 01�4 *)+ ��) �5 �5 948 99, 8 * ,, :: + *; )+ ,; + : + + + + +( ) )*8) ��.��7��(.��/�� :1�* );; � �5 �5 99+ ;3* 4 :+ 99 , :+ ** 3: ,: : 8 : : + + +- ) ;;+: �7��5��/��.� 01:) :;;* �� 5 �5 4:9 43+ < < )* : 9 :* 38 9) ; :4 : : : + :( ) 3:,) �5��5/��.��/��(.��/�� 01�* **+ ��: �� ;*9 ;8; 9 :+ ;: :: :; 33 34 9+ : 4 , :3 + + + ) ),88 �5.5��(.��/�� 01�* );8 � �� 5 9)4 9): : ) 4+ 4 , 84 3) ,; + : + + + + +� ) 894* �5�/�5�/��.�� 01�; 348 ��* �� ;3; ;:* * , * * + ): *9 :++ + + + + + + +� : *::: ��>��5>��>��.��/ ��?�>@�-�7�/��/� 01�* 3,9 ��* �5 �5 944 994 3 ) 8: :+ 9 )) :; 9) : )3 : + : + )� ) ):*8 (��7�� 01�3 :,; � �� ;,8 ;4; ; :+ ,9 :: + )9 *) ,8 + 3 3 + : + +( ) )3;3 (��/A��(.��/�� 01�* 8,+ ��* �5 �5 498 4,, : ) 9, :3 9 4, :, ,4 + 3 + + + + +� : ):)* �� 7�!��5��.�� (.��/�� 01�* :;9 ��) �� 5 98: 93+ ) ) ;4 :) + 4 3 :* + ;8 + + + + : ) )3;* 6��"��/7/�� 5��5�/��-��5.� )1�4 4+) ��* �5 �5 984 9*: ) 9 9* :: :: *+ 33 ,8 : 3 + + + + :( ) 8*8; �5��<5�.�� (.��/�� 01�* **4 ��) �� 5 ;+; ;): 4 , *3 :4 )3 8: 39 ;8 + ) :: : + + :( ) 8*;, �55��-��(.��/�� 01�* 8,9 ��* �� ;:) 9;9 8 ; ;4 :; ; 4) ), ,9 + : ) : + + +� : *::3 ?5�/��>�#��!�(.��/�� 01�* )8; ��* �5 �5 9): 93; ) 8 *4 :* 4 3* )+ 9) : )* : + + + +� 8 89;3 "��5/�� 01�; *8* ��: �� ,+, ,)3 :+ :+ 3, :) 8 ) :* ): 8; :+ :* 8 : + :� : 9:*: "�/7�7��<>��(.��/�� 01�* *94 ��* �� 9*+ 98: ) 8 4, :: 4 )8 )3 9+ + ); : + : + :( ) )3;8 "�5�5.7�7�(.��/�� 01�* 848 ��* �5 �5 989 9*3 ) 8 ** , :) 8) 38 ,4 + : ) + + + :( ) 8,;) "5��/��.��(.��/�� 01�* *3, ��: �5 �5 9;9 9,9 8 9 84 :3 :+ 8; ); ,* + ) ) + + + :( ) )*88 #��!�(.��/��-��55.��5�� 01�* )84 ��) � � 9)* < �� ;: 8 , *3 33 ,* + ) : + + + +( ) *+** #��/5.7��/��(.��/�� 01�4 99* ��* �� 99+ 9+8 : ) 4) :3 :: *3 ); ,, + : + + + + +( ) 8,;3 #��7�5��1��7��7��/�� 01�) 9, �� 5 �5 9;, ;:+ * �� *8 ; 4 9; + ;) : 3 :3 + : + +� �� ))4* #��5��-��55. 01�* 2 2� ) )+)3 �>(>�>�� 5��-�7�/��/ �� 01�* :9+ � �5 �5 9,9 ;3; 9 :+ :++ , * 3, *8 :++ + + + + + + + ) 99;3 ��$��/��5�. �� 01:) ;83 ��3 �� 9)9 9+, : * *) :4 ; 8: 8+ ;* + 3 ; ) : + :( ) *4,, �5��55 �-��(.��/�� 01�* 8;8 ��* �5 �5 9), 9), ) 3 ;+ :9 :8 3, )) ,9 + 3 + + + + +� ) ):43 ��"5��7/5��1�(��.�/��/�6�� 01�: � ��) � � � � �� ( ) 439+ �5��5/��/��(.��/�� :1�* 8;) ��8 �5 �5 983 994 3 4 *4 :9 ; 3) 3+ ;+ : 3 * :+ + + :( ) 4*+9 -�/�� 5�-��(.��/�� 01�* 88) � �� 5 ;+, ;:* * :+ *; :3 , 39 8; ,, + + + + + + +( ) :,** -5��7��>�-�.�7/�-��7�.�( ��75/��/�� 01�; :99 �� 9,) ;+3 � � 8* == + 44 + 9* ) :4 3 3 + + :( ) 9+;) ��/��-��(.��/�� :1�* 4)+ ��* �� 9,* 9*; 3 4 ;8 :3 :: ** 33 ,; + : + + + + +� : 9:39 ��7��1-��5/ �-��%-��5��7/�� 01�; ,:, ��8 �� ;:8 ;+4 * ; ;8 4 )4 , 3+ 9+ * :9 * + ) + +( ) 9);; ��/��1(7��-��(.��/�� 01�* *33 ��* �5 �5 9:: 93* ) 3 43 :+ )+ 8; 3) ,; + ) + + : + + : 93+: ��/��1 5��-��(.��/�� 01�* 3,+ ��* �5 �5 443 44* : : 4+ :* 3 39 )) ;) : :4 : + + + : ) 99;+ %�"��5��/7�� 01:) 993 ��3 �5 �5 4;+ 4,9 3 3 *: :: :) 88 3, ;+ : ) :8 3 : + +( ) 93*4 %/75/��/��(.��/�� 01�* 4*9 ��* �5 �5 94) 94) 3 * 4: :3 ; 8) 3* ,* + : : ) + + +( : 989, ��5/��/��(.��/�� 01�* 8;* � �5 �5 9,+ ;+9 * , 8, :) , 38 3* ;; : , + + + + :

.��/5��B�-��55.��5��7��/��/5��5�:++� ��5��5/��5�B�5��@��.�7�.�@�5��/5/1��5/��>

• Background/Context about the Petitioner: The Equitas Charter Academy, Inc. Board of Directors

currently operates two LAUSD-approved charter schools in the Pico Union Area and aim to replicate by implementing a strong academic instructional program at this proposed third school – Equitas Academy #3 Charter School.

• Board of Directors: & Oliver Bajracharya & Pilar Buelna & Ranie Lambe & Katie Rosholt & Aarthi Sowrirajan & Brett Snyder & Alyssa Valentine

124

of 3�

• Description of Mission: Equitas Academy #3 provides a structured, achievement-based community that prepares students to graduate from four-year colleges and universities.

• Description of Vision: Equitas Academy believes students must have access to an achievement-oriented learning environment to ensure all students make a smooth transition to the demands of college preparatory middle and high schools with the ultimate goal of college graduation. Through the college preparatory focus in the youngest grades, Equitas Academy will develop the foundational skills necessary for success.

• Source of Core Money: Building Excellent Schools Inflexion Funding, Walton Family Fund, Public Charter School Grant Program

• 3-5 Top Leaders: o Malka Borrego, Founder and Executive Director o Karina DiGirolamo, Director of Curriculum and Instruction o Monica Gonzalez, Dean of Student and Family Life o Oliver Bajracharya, Board Chair

• Other charter schools currently operated by the Petitioner: Equitas Academy Charter School Equitas Academy #2 Charter School

• Other charter petitions pending before LAUSD: None. • Submission of this charter application to other jurisdiction(s) for approval: Not applicable • Innovative elements of the charter that could be considered “best practices” and replicated by

other schools: Equitas Academy #3 Charter School’s most innovative elements, replicable by other schools, include: (1) college preparatory curriculum that begins in kindergarten for a population with historical and continual under-representation in higher education; (2) slow growth model of growing one grade level each year based on highest achieving urban charter schools serving a similar population; (3) laser focus on the core content areas of literacy, math, science and social studies, character education/ethics; (4) intentional use of data to drive instructional decisions; and (5) leadership team of an Executive Director, Director of Curriculum and Instruction and Business and Operations Manager that allows the school to focus and meet our high academic standards of preparing K-4 students to graduate from college preparatory middle and high schools and college.

125

LOS

AN

GE

LES

UN

IFIED

SC

HO

OL D

ISTR

ICT

2012 BA

SE

AP

I AN

D 2013 G

RO

WTH

AP

I DE

MO

GR

AP

HIC

S

SC

HO

OLS

WITH

IN A

2-MILE

RA

DIU

S

Equitas Academy #3 Charter School

Near 1700 W

. Pico Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90015G

rades TK-4

ESCBD

Loc. Code

SchoolG

rade Span

2013 G

rowth API

Testing Enrollm

ent 2013-14 PI

Status

Met 2013 Sch-

wide G

rowth

Target

Met 2013

Subgroup Grow

th Targets

2013 G

rowth API

2012 Base API

2012 Base API State

Rank

2012 Base API Sim

ilar Schools Rank

% F/R

Lunch%

Sp Ed

% G

ATE%

EL%

RFEP

%

Latino%

White

% Af Am

er%

Asian%

Filipino %

Am

Indian%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or M

oreE

25505

9th Street Elementary

K- 5*

*XP

22369

Ambassador School of G

lobal EducationK- 5

240Year 2

No

No

729741

23

5310

758

2476

14

134

10

1E

23247

Betty Plasencia Elementary

K- 5531

Year 5N

oN

o786

7884

758

108

3123

883

32

20

00

XR2

5987Cam

ino Nuevo Academ

y #2K- 8

410Year 2

YesYes

866855

710

9913

040

4298

01

01

00

0XR

22017

Camino N

uevo Charter Academy

K- 8420

Year 2Yes

No

821824

610

9910

058

3598

01

00

00

0XR

22157

Camino N

uevo Elementary N

o. 3K- 6

520Year 2

No

No

764779

45

9911

058

2098

01

00

00

0E

22542

Charles White Elem

entary1- 5

288

No

No

770835

610

779

1055

3191

14

11

00

0XS

28801

City of AngelsK-12

1885

No

No

617630

BB

251

715

3472

816

11

10

1E

23192

Comm

onwealth Avenue Elem

entaryK- 5

550Year 1

YesYes

857848

710

8111

1833

3670

16

913

00

0XP

22944

Dolores Huerta Elementary

K- 5284

Yes

No

726721

12

606

946

3298

01

00

00

0XR

24765

Downtow

n ValueK- 8

364Year 5

YesYes

838815

59

55

021

57100

00

00

00

0W

15111

Dr. Theo. T. Alexander Jr., Science CentK- 5

397Year 5

No

No

766776

32

4110

722

1872

123

10

10

2XR

22154

Equitas Academy Charter

K- 3198

Yes

Yes894

8688

1097

110

2752

940

33

01

00

E2

2383Esperanza Elem

entaryK- 5

490Year 5

No

No

674699

12

7913

769

1996

03

00

00

0XR

12125

Frederick Douglass Academy Elem

entaryK- 5

187Year 2

YesN

o741

7302

286

120

63

150

840

00

01

XP2

2385G

ratts Learning Academy for Young Schola

2- 6602

Year 5N

oN

o746

7512

775

1111

5033

941

30

00

01

E2

4548Hobart Boulevard Elem

entaryK- 5

556Year 2

YesN

o808

8216

953

1623

4137

840

211

10

01

E2

4589Hoover Street Elem

entaryK- 5

497Year 5

YesYes

812787

48

8618

862

2997

01

21

00

0W

15113

John W. M

ack Elementary

K- 5248

Year 5N

oN

o721

7382

456

156

3520

721

251

00

00

XR4

4783Larchm

ont CharterK- 8

545Year 1

YesYes

909923

1010

3912

42

1521

4810

154

10

1W

17151

Lenicia B. Weem

es Elementary

K- 5576

Year 5Yes

Yes750

7412

469

116

2423

700

281

01

01

E2

2384Leo Politi Elem

entaryK- 5

464Year 5

No

No

747753

24

559

1242

3496

01

20

00

1E

24982

Los Angeles Elementary

K- 5539

Year 1N

oN

o787

7974

746

1310

4828

950

22

00

01

E2

2544M

acArthur Park Elementary School for the

K- 5246

Year 2

725

B

81

49

5333

950

21

00

00

E2

5055M

agnolia Avenue Elementary

K- 6775

Year 5Yes

Yes770

7041

262

1311

5328

990

10

00

00

E2

4983M

ariposa-Nabi Prim

ary CenterK- 2

79

No

No

789810

5

548

678

082

13

130

10

0XR

2265

Metro Chrtr School

K- 5*

*XR

22023

N.E.W

. Academy of Science and Arts

K- 5170

No

No

797838

710

1009

539

54100

00

00

00

0XP

27783

New

Open W

orld Academy

K-12843

Year 3Yes

Yes727

7091

552

168

4140

850

38

21

01

E2

5699N

orwood Street Elem

entaryK- 5

484Year 5

No

No

729729

23

8017

1439

2297

03

00

00

0XR

22163

Para Los Ninos - Evelyn Thurm

an Gratts P

K- 1

Year 2

E

26370

Rosemont Avenue Elem

entary1- 5

482Year 4

No

No

743776

36

5617

832

3080

13

510

00

1E

26507

San Pedro Street Elementary

K- 5442

YesN

o809

8155

1058

139

3748

990

00

00

00

E2

1955Sophia T. Salvin Special Education Cente

PK- 8177

792

803C

C45

1000

660

752

163

30

01

E2

7082Tenth Street Elem

entary1- 5

620Year 5

YesYes

795758

36

8413

1155

3398

01

00

00

0W

17137

Thirty-Second Street USC Perform

ing ArtsK- 8

919Year 4

YesYes

814806

58

846

269

3070

517

50

20

0E

27288

Twenty-Eighth Street Elem

entar yK- 5

533Year 5

No

No

711735

23

6310

2048

3298

02

00

10

0XP

17301

Twenty-Fourth Street Elem

entaryK- 5

390Year 5

No

No

663665

11

6015

337

2282

116

10

00

1XP

27780

UCLA Com

munity

K-12773

Year 3N

oN

o680

6973

351

1112

4439

801

214

31

00

E2

7356U

nion Avenue Elementary

K- 5657

Year 5N

oN

o762

7623

561

138

4235

950

11

20

00

E1

7479Verm

ont Avenue Elementary

K- 5485

No

No

790807

59

4912

934

3588

19

00

00

1

Please note: School Demographic percentages m

ay not sum to 100 due to responses of: other, m

ultiple, or non-response.

Span:Address:School:

School Demographic Characteristics

Office of D

ata and Accountability

* = The school was not opened in 2011-12 or 2012-13.

# = The school did not have a valid 2012 Base A

PI or ranks.

2/11/20141 of 2

126

LOS

AN

GE

LES

UN

IFIED

SC

HO

OL D

ISTR

ICT

2012 BA

SE

AP

I AN

D 2013 G

RO

WTH

AP

I DE

MO

GR

AP

HIC

S

SC

HO

OLS

OP

ER

ATE

D B

Y TH

E S

AM

E P

ETITIO

NE

R

Other Equitas schools

ESCBD

Loc. CodeSchool

Grade

Span

2013 G

rowth

API Testing

Enrollmen

t 2013-14 PI

Status

Met 2013 Sch-

wide G

rowth

Target

Met 2013

Subgroup Grow

th Targets

2013 G

rowth API

2012 Base API

2012 Base API State

Rank

2012 Base API Sim

ilar Schools Rank

% F/R Lunch

% Sp

Ed%

GATE

% EL

% RFEP

%

Latino%

White

% Af Am

er%

Asian%

Filipino %

Am

Indian%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or M

oreXR

22154


K- 3198

Yes

Yes894

8688

1097

110

2752

940

33

01

00

XR

5190Equitas Acad Chrtr 2

5-6*

*


Office of D


* The school is new or a prim

ary center.2/11/2014

2 of 2

127

G

^

$

G

G

#

G

#

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

^

$

G

#

G

G

G

G

^

#

#

^

#

G

G

G

G

#

G

#

G

G

G

G

G G

^

G

G

#

G

##

G

#

GG

GF

LarchmontChrtr

MetropolitanSkills Ctr

Clas PersSelctn &

Trng

N.E.W.Academy

- Sci & Arts

CA Liberal StudiesEarly College HS

AmbassadorSchoolof Global Ed

LA Highfor the Arts

Vista ChrtrMiddle

EquitasAcad Chrtr

CaminoNuevoES #3

CaminoNuevo Acad2-Harvard

Central CityValue

CaminoNuevoMS #3

Alliance College-Ready Acad

HS #16

Global EducAcad MS

AllianceCollege-Ready MS Acad #12

MetroChrtr

School

Equitas Acad Chrtr 2

NewDesigns

Chrtr

Secondary CDS

10th DistrictPTA Health Ctr

LA Acad ofArts and

Enterprise

AllianceSmidtTech

CrownPrep Acad Alliance

College-ReadyAcad HS #17

McAlisterHigh

Los AngelitosEEC

Civitas

Tri-C CommDay School

School forSoc Just

LA BigPicture High

CaminoNuevo

Chrtr Acad

DowntownValue

School

USCHybridHigh

LA GlobalStudies \

Rise KoHyangMiddle

School for theVisual Arts &Humanities

RomeroChrtr

Middle

CaminoNuevo High

LA LeadershipAcademy

AllianceGertz-Ressler

Academy High

AllianceDr. OlgaMohan HS

City ofAngels

AnimoJackieRobinson

NewVillageChrtr

CentralCont High

AcceleratedElementary

New OpenWorld Acad

AcademicLeadership

Community \

DouglassAcad

SynergyKineticsAcadSynergy

Chrtr

UCLA CommSchool

LA TeachersPrep Acad \

N.E.W.Academy

- Sci & Arts

Camino Nuevo HS #2Camino NuevoChrtr #4

HARBOR FRWY & TRANSITWY

HOLLYWOOD FRWY

S GRAND AV

PASADENA FRWY

SANTA MONICA FRWY

N MAI

N ST

NFIGUEROA ST

BEVERLY BLVD

SSAN

PEDR

OST

VENICE BLVD

W 4TH ST

E WASHINGTON BLVD

N GRAND AV

SFI

GUEROAST

S AL

VARA

DO S

T

SANTA ANA FRWY

E JEFFERSON BLVD

E 7TH ST

E

4TH ST

E 1ST ST

S OLIV

E ST

SC

ENTR

ALAV

EXPOSITION BLVD

EOLYMPIC

BLVD

RODEO RD

W 7TH ST

E 3RD ST

E 9TH ST

N AL

VARA

DO S

T

SAN JU

LIAN

ST

S H

OO

VE

R S

T

W 3RD ST

W PICO BLVD

S W

ES

TE

RN

AV

W TEMPLE ST

W OLYMPIC BLVD

W 1ST ST

S MAIN ST

S BROAD

WAY

S V

ER

MO

NT

AV

N

BRO

AD

WAY

W JEFFERSON BLVD

WSU

NSET

BLV

D

SA

LAM

ED

AS

T

W WASHINGTON BLVD

LOSANGELES

14th StAdminOffice

Yale StAnnex

17th StAdmin Off

BeaudryAdm Off

Mid-CityAdult BasicEducation

FriedmanOccup Ctr

EvansAdult

M & OArea C-3

Office

36th StEEC

ChildDev Div

Castellanos

KennedyCommunityof Schools

HobartEEC

Los Angeles

RosemontAve

MagnoliaAve

Nevin Ave

Weemes

AdamsMiddle

Castelar

LantermanHigh (Spec)

Salvin SpecEd Ctr

Harvard

Trinity St

Cahuenga

San PedroSt

WiltonPl

FoshayLearning Ctr

SanteeEd Cmplx

BerendoMiddle

LafayettePark PC

Hoover St

OlympicPC

10th St

28thSt

Lake St PS

Del Olmo

DowntownBus Mag

High

WidneyHigh

(Spec)

24thSt

OrthopaedicMed Mag HS

WilshirePark

Kim

ClintonMiddle

Maple PC

Plasencia

RoybalLC

West AdamsPrep High

BelmontHigh

LiechtyMiddle

Politi

White

UnionAve

20th St

CommonwealthAve

Mariposa-Nabi PC

NorwoodSt

Pio PicoMiddle

32nd StMag

Esperanza

VermontAve

Bright

Contreras LC

HobartBlvd

Huerta

CastroMS

Jones

CortinesSchoolof VPA

CisnerosLrng Acad

Para LosNiñosGratts

MacArthur ParkSchool for

the VPA

Gratts LAfor YS

NavaLrngAcad

KimAcad

Mack

AlexanderSci Ctr

Lee Med/HealthSci Mag

VirgilMiddle

9th St

L.A.U.S.D. FACILITIES WITHIN A TWO MILE RADIUS OF EQUITAS ACADEMY #3 CHARTER SCHOOL

LAUSD Facilities and Planned Projects

Prepared by Master Planning and DemographicsFacilities Services Division

Copyright © 2013. All Rights Reserved.The information contained herein is the proprietary property ofthe following owners supplied under license and may not be

reproduced except as licensed by LAUSD, Digital Map Products, andThomas Bros. Maps.

MPD-26861/8/2014

LAUSD Boundaries

Area Outside of LAUSD

LAUSD Boundary

East Educational Service Center AreaEAST

Area of Interest

Equitas Academy #3 Charter School(Located in Board of Education District #2)GF

2 mi. Radius ofEquitas Academy #3 Charter School

Equitas Academy #3Charter School

EAST

WEST

Charter SchoolG

# Elementary School

" Middle School

# High School

!( Planned EarlyEducation CenterPlanned ClassroomAddition_Planned PlaygroundExpansion[

_̂ Planned SchoolReconfiguration

#0 Planned ContinuationSchoolAdministrative Office$

Elementary SchoolMiddle SchoolHigh SchoolSpan School

Planned School(Color Indicates Grade Level)Closed School(Color Indicates Grade Level)

Special Education SchoolAdministrative Site

Opportunity School or Non K-12 School

Charter School(Fill Color Indicates Grade Level)

Magnet School(Fill Color Indicates Grade Level)

128

EQUITAS ACADEMY #3 CHARTER SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT 237 – 13/14

March 4, 2014 The following documents:

• Final budget • Final petition • Lottery/enrollment form

are available for perusal at the:

Charter Schools Division 333 South Beaudry Avenue, 20th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 241-0399

The final petition may also be viewed at the following link:�

http://www.laschoolboard.org/charterpetitions

129

INFORMATIV

E130

Board of Education Report No. 237 – 13/14

For March 4 Board Meeting


Charter Schools Division INFORMATIVE

TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: March 4, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent FROM: José Cole-Gutiérrez, Director SUBJECT: SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS FOR PROPOSED EQUITAS ACADEMY #3 CHARTER SCHOOL Attached please find supporting documentation for the proposed Equitas Academy #3 Charter School which will be presented to the Board of Education for action on March 4, 2014.

Documentation includes:

1. Map showing all LAUSD schools and charter schools within a 2-mile radius of the proposed charter school site;

2. Breakdown of enrollment and test score information for all LAUSD and charter schools serving similar grade levels within a 2-mile radius of the proposed charter school site. Also included are any other charter schools operated by the petitioner (if applicable).

Other LAUSD schools and charter schools within a 2-mile radius of the proposed charter school are:

ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS LAUSD CHARTER 10th St 24th St 28th St 9th St Castellanos Commonwealth Ave Esperanza Gratts Learning Academy for Young Scholars Hobart Blvd Hobart EEC Hoover St Huerta Lake St PS Los Angeles Los Angelitos EEC MacArthur Park School for the Visual and Perf Arts Mack Magnolia Ave Norwood St Plasencia

Alexander Science Center Camino Nuevo ES #3 Camino Nuevo MS #3 Douglass Academy Downtown Value School Equitas Academy Charter Metro Charter School N.E.W. Academy - Science & Arts N.E.W. Academy - Science & Arts Para Los Niños Gratts

131

Members, Board of Education Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent - 2 - March 4, 2014 �

Politi Rosemont Ave San Pedro St Union Ave Vermont Ave Weemes White Lafayette Park PC Mariposa-Nabi PC Olympic PC

MIDDLE SCHOOLS

LAUSD CHARTER Adams Middle Berendo Middle Castro Middle Clinton Middle Kim Academy Liechty Middle Virgil Middle

Alliance College-Ready MS Acad #12 Crown Prep Academy Equitas Academy Charter #2 Global Education Academy MS Rise Ko Hyang Middle Romero Charter Middle Vista Charter Middle

HIGH SCHOOLS

LAUSD CHARTER Academic Leadership Community Belmont High Central Cont High Civitas Contreras Learning Complex Downtown Bus Mag High LA Global Studies LA High for the Arts LA Teachers Prep Academy Orthopaedic Medical Magnet HS Roybal Learning Center Santee Ed Complex School for Social Justice West Adams Preparatory High

Alliance College-Ready Acad HS #16 Alliance College-Ready Acad HS #17 Alliance Dr. Olga Mohan HS Alliance Gertz-Ressler Academy High Alliance Smidt Tech Animo Jackie Robinson CA Liberal Studies Early College HS Camino Nuevo High LA Academy of Arts and Enterprise LA Big Picture High New Village Charter USC Hybrid High

SPAN SCHOOLS

LAUSD CHARTER 32nd St Mag Ambassador School of Global Ed Ambassador School of Global Leadership Kennedy Community of Schools New Open World Academy School for the Visual Arts & Humanities UCLA Community School

Camino Nuevo Academy 2-Harvard Camino Nuevo Charter Academy Larchmont Charter Larchmont Charter New Designs Charter

132

Members, Board of Education Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent - 3 - March 4, 2014 �

ADULT SCHOOLS LAUSD City of Angels Friedman Occupational Center Lanterman High (Spec) McAlister High Metropolitan Skills Center Mid-City Adult Basic Education Salvin Spec Ed Center Secondary CDS Tri-C Community Day School Widney High (Spec)

LAUSD Schools Under Construction None Other Charter Schools Operated by Petitioner

Equitas Academy Charter School Equitas Academy #2 Should you have questions or comments, please call me at (213) 241-0399 or e-mail me at [email protected].

c: Michelle King

David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t Jefferson Crain

133

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'� ��*��

��!�� >

��)>��> >?7*++?8,@> �-->*.��> *�> �/?> >?8?0��> *�> �/?> 7/�>�?>> �*>> ��@> �7�,?+�> �� !�� "#!$� �� %#��"#!&��$�#��'($��)�� *�+�� ,�� !-�� "#!%�� .�� /��//�� ,��)� � 0�� /�� //�� .�� .�� ,�� +�� 1�� ,�� )� 2�� .�� 3�� /�� ,�� 4��/��3��5��!-��"#!$)��6�� .�� $-7#�� $-7#-�� ,�� .�� .�� .�� .�� /�� *��

8� � � � � � �� 9�� /�� $-7#- �� /�/�� /�� /�/�� /��.��.��:�8� � � � � � ;��.� �� /�� /��:�� :� �� /��/��!7��:�8� � � � � � �� /�� <�� /�� /��:�8� � � � � � �� /�� ,�� 9�� ,��9��2��=��.��<)

��)

��

135

��

�� '(�� .�� '($� �� "#!$("#!�� 4�� ,�� "�� !-##� >�� 2�� 4��)�� ?�� &##!�)� 4�� ;�/�� ?�@,� 4�� ,�� /�� 9�� $$A)�0��/��)

�� .�� 4�� 5�� "$�� "##&�� %7#� �� '(�)� � +�� 5�� !%�� "#!"�� ?�@,4�� //�� 5�� ;�� /�� %7#�� $�#� �� '(�)� � 5�� =�� !!�� "#!$�� ?�@,� 4�� //�� 5�� ;�� /�� '(�� '($)� =�� /��/�� "#!$(!&� �� .�� /�� $�#��'($��)��

+�� !#�� "#!"�� ?�@,� 4�� //�� B"� �� (A)� � ,�� /�� /�� %��"#!%)�

,�� 9�� .�� /��)� � �� +�� "#!"� ��?2�,� �� 9�� /�� //��3�� &�C� ?�� "C� �� "C� ��)�6�� /�� /�� 9�� "#!#(!!� �� ?�� 9�� "#!!(!"� �� .�� ,��)� � ��?2�,�� ,�� ,��9�� ,�� C� �� .��<�� /�� ,�� )� � 0�� /�� /�� )� �� /�� .�� ?�� 5�� 2�� /�� //��,��)�� /�� .�� $-7#- �� .� �� 2��)� 6�� "#!%�� (.�� 1��.�� 26� �� A&$�� "7(/�� "#!"� 1��.�� 26� �� A7A)� � 0�� "#!%� ��.�� ;��<� �� A� �� ;��<� �� !#)� � �� /�� ,�� .�� /�� /�� 1��.�� 26� �� /�� /�� 0� �?�� 5��)� 0�� 26� ��.�� /�� )� 0�� .�� /� /�/�� ?�� ,�� ?�� .�� /� �� &7(!##C� �� 9�� /�� ?�� ?�� &A(!##C� �� /��5��)��

0�� ,��(.�� 2�� =��.��<� 2=�� .�� .�� .�� /��)� � �� "#!%� 2=��.��

��

136

��

�� /�� /��)� � 0�� 9�� /�� ?�� 5�� /�� 0�� /�� .�� /�� .�� ?�� (/�� .�� 5�� (�� 1��.�� +�� 0�� 10��)�� 6�� E�� /�� .�� /�� 2�� @�� )� � 4�� /�� .�� /�� .�� .�� <�� (/�� //��)� � 0�� (�� /��/� �� /�� 9�� )� 4�� /� �� <��.�� 9�� )=�� .�� 3/�� /��/�� /��)� � �� .� �� 9�� 3/�� <��.� �� /��)� � �� .�� >�� >��/��/��"#!$)��

�� D�� ?�@,� �� /�� /�� ?�@,� �� /� �� /�� )� � 0�� 3�� /�� /��*� � !�� 2��/� =�� (�� 9�� (/��/� �� <��)� �� .�� )�)<�� "##&� �� 0�� "#"7��)� � �� 3/�� /�� )� � �� )� � �� <�� /�� )"�� /��D�� =�� <�� (� 0�� /�� <�� .�� .� E�3�� 1�� )� � /�� /�� )� � 0�� /�� /�� /��*� � /��.��F/�� /�� .��)� � %�� @�� ,�� ,��6�� (� �� /�� /�� //�� (�� /�� )� � ��(��(�� /�� /� �� )� � 0�� /�� .� .�� )� � 0�� /�� .��<�� .�� D�� /� �� )� � 0��(��(��.��<��/��)�� 1�� 4�� /�� )��.��3��

��

137

��

�� /�� +�� 6��/�� 1�� +61�)� �� .�� 4�� <��//��/��)�� /�� 4�� //�� .��:� �� .�� 3�� ?�@,� �?2�� +/�� "� /�� 5+@�.�� //�� +/�� %� ��+/�� 2�� /�� ?�@,� �?2�� +/�� %�)� � @�� /�� /� �� ?�@,� �?2�� +/�� %� �� 3�� ?�@,��?2�� +/�� %� /�� 5+@�� 3�� ?�@,� �?2�� +/�� "� /�� 5+@� .�� )� � @/�� 9�� /�� ?�@,� �?2�� +/�� %� �� 3�� ?�@,� �?2�� +/�� %� /�� 5+@�� +/�� %� 5+@� .�� /�� /�� 3��+/��"�5+@)��0�� /�� /�� ,�� ,��9�4��.��G��/*FF��)��F��/��H)��$��!��*�� 3/�� /�� .�� .�� .�� /��)��0��<��/��)��!�� *��I�� (� 0�� //�� .�� .�� /�� .��/�� /�� !��"#!$)��E�� (� 0�� .�� .�� 3/�� %#�� "#!%�� //�� ?�� 4�� 4�� )0�� 4�� ;�/�� E�)� "%A� (� !%F!$� �� /�� 4�� 9�� /�� .�� .��/��)��"��*�0��/��/��)��"��*�� ,�� .�� ,�� /�� 3/�� )� @�� $-7#$ �� /�� /�� /�� /�� 9�� /��.�� /��)� 0�� ,�� .�� /�� /�� )� �� 9�� /�� /�� .�� /��.��,��//��/��/��)�2��//��

��

138

��

��/��)�� ?�@,� �?2�� +/�� ")� � @�� ?�@,� �?2�� +/�� "� /�� 5+@�� 9�� /�� /�� .�� "#C� �� ,��9�� /�� ,�� .�� .�� /�� 9�� ?�� =�� =��)� � 0�� .�� C� �� //�� /�� %�C)� � 0�� .�� %�C� �� 9�� /�� /�� ,��9�� )� � �� /�� /�� /�� /�� ?�@,��?2�)�"��*�6�� /�� /�� /�� /�� ?2�� 4�� +�� 1�� .��/��)

��

139

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

Bd. of Ed. Rpt. No. 238 – 13/14 Page 1 of 7 Board of Education

March 4, 2014

SUMMARY OF CHARTER SCHOOL PERFORMANCE EQUITAS ACADEMY CHARTER SCHOOL

BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT 238 – 13/14 March 4, 2014

The Charter Schools Division has analyzed the performance of the charter school using established criteria in the following four areas:

I. Student Achievement and Educational Performance II. Governance and Organizational Management

III. Fiscal Operations IV. Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program

I. Student Achievement and Educational Performance First, the Charter Schools Division must confirm whether the charter school has met at least one of the following minimum criteria set forth in Education Code §47607(b) for schools in operation at least four years:

1. Attained its Academic Performance Index (API) growth target in the prior year or in two of the last three years, both schoolwide and for all groups of pupils served by the charter school; or

2. Ranked in deciles 4 to 10, inclusive, on the API in the prior year or in two of the last three years; or

3. Ranked in deciles 4 to 10, inclusive, on the API for a demographically comparable school in the prior year or in two of the last three years; or

4. (A) The entity that granted the charter determines that the academic performance of the charter school is at least equal to the academic performance of the public schools that the charter school pupils would otherwise have been required to attend, as well as the academic performance of the schools in the school district in which the charter school is located, taking into account the composition of the pupil population that is served at the charter school.

(B) The determination made pursuant to this paragraph shall be based upon all of the following: (i). Documented and clear and convincing data.

(ii). Pupil achievement data from assessments, including, but not limited to, the Standardized Testing and Reporting Program established by Article 4 (commencing with Section 60640) for demographically similar pupil populations in the comparison schools.

(iii). Information submitted by the charter school. Note: If a charter school has not been in operation for at least four years, this section of Education Code serves as reference. The Charter Schools Division will present findings based on its analysis of the school’s performance data to date, and of the academic, operational, and fiscal soundness of the charter school based on Charter Schools Division oversight.

141



March 4, 2014

Equitas Academy Charter School has met the minimum statutory requirement as evidenced in the Data Summary Report. Student Discipline

Discipline and expulsion policies used at District schools must comply with the California Education Code. LAUSD charter schools must comply with the provisions related to suspensions and expulsions that are put forth in the Charter Schools Division’s Required Language for Charter Petitions. Equitas Academy’s grounds for student suspension and expulsion are aligned with those listed in Education Code Section 48900 et seq. As of the date of this report, the school reports 0 suspensions and 0 expulsions for the current school year. In 2012-13, Equitas Academy had 14 suspensions and 0 expulsions. The school reported 24 suspensions and 0 expulsions for the 2011-12 school year. Aligned with the District’s Discipline Foundation Policy, and School Climate Bill of Rights, Equitas Academy does not suspend for defiant behavior. The school’s Code of Conduct is based on preventing misbehavior with the appropriate incentives for following the school’s Code of Conduct. It is designed to ensure students engage in positive interactions with teachers and with one another, while providing the necessary tools to guide students’ decision making that lead students to success. Character education curriculum is developed by teachers on the school’s core values of curiosity, optimism, gratitude, grit, self-control, social intelligence, and zest. Behavior support plans are developed, data is used to collaborate with leadership and support staff to monitor misconduct, and the school works with parents to reinforce appropriate expectations and help change inappropriate behavior. Multidisciplinary team meetings (e.g. SST and COST) are used to evaluate and recommend solutions to behavior problems.

SUSPENSION/EXPULSION�

Name of School

Location Code

Suspension 2013-14

As of the date of this report

Expulsion 2013-14

As of the date of this report

Suspension 2012-13

Expulsion 2012-13

Suspension 2011-12

Expulsion 2011-12

Equitas Academy 2154 0 0 14 0 24 0

Special Education According to the December 2012 CASEMIS report, Equitas Academy Charter School enrolled Special Education students at a rate that is reflective of the District average. Equitas Academy had a special education enrollment rate of 8%, which is slightly below the Resident Schools Median (10%). The school is committed to continuing its efforts to identify and serve students with disabilities. Teachers implement a wide range of accommodations for students with disabilities. All teachers receive ongoing professional development on special education policies and strategies. Topics discussed during professional development sessions include: Early identification and symptoms of learning disabilities; Classroom accommodations for specific, observed behaviors; and what to do when a teacher or parent suspects a child may have a specific learning disability. Low incidence is a small percentage of the school’s population and thus difficult to outreach with a lottery. In response, Equitas Academy intends to conduct recruitment with schools that serve these students in the surrounding neighborhood. Equitas is able to accommodate low incidence students with services by contracting with LAUSD fee for services and/or by contracting with an outside provider.

142



March 4, 2014

OCT 2012

Enroll #

Sp E

d En

roll

#

Sp E

d En

roll

%

% H

igh

Inci

denc

e

% L

ow

Inci

denc

e

#AU

T

#DB

#DEA

F

#ED

#EM

D

#HO

H

#MR

#OH

I*

#OI

#SLD

*

#SLI

*

#TB

I

#VI

454 38 8% 8% 0% 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 13 20 0 0 English Learners The tables below represent the number of English Learners identified, served and reclassified by Equitas Academy Charter School. The school’s October 2012 CALPADS enrollment numbers indicate the English learner population of 42% was slightly lower than the LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median of 49%. The 2012-13 reclassification rate of 51% was signficantly higher than the LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median rate of 11%. Equitas Academy incorportates two literacy blocks each week that are specifically dedicated to English Language Development (ELD) for all English Learners, who are grouped by proficiency levels. This directed ELD instruction for 80 minutes each week enables targeted English Language instruction in the context of grade-level literacy development. In addition, professional development is focused on enhancing teachers’ knowledge of how to teach English Learners to read and write as well as how to address the achievement gap. Teachers receive training and support in the effective implementation of techniques such as Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE), Scaffolding structured immersion instruction, language development, and assessment of English Learners.

ESC BD Loc Code School

Tota

l En

roll

#

% F

/R

Mea

l

%

GA

TE

% E

L

%

Latin

o

%

Whi

te

% A

f. A

mer

.

%

Asi

an

% F

ili.

E 2 2154 Equitas Academy Charter School 454 95% 0% 42% 95% 0% 2% 2% 0% RECLASSIFICATION

2012-13 2012-13 # EL

2012-13 # Reclassified

2012-13 Reclassification

Rate

Change from Prior Year

Equitas Academy Charter School 141 72 51.1% 51.1% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 320 33 10.9% -4.5% Resident Schools Median 589 82 13.9% -1.9% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 594 91 15.3% -0.5% District 180,618 24,697 13.7% -1.7%

2011-12 2011-12 # EL 2011-12 # Reclassified


Rate Equitas Academy Charter School 141 6 4.3% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 305 48 15.4% Resident Schools Median 639 103 15.8% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 650 103 15.8% District 194,904 29,956 15.4%

Note: The data for 2011-2012 is being corrected in CALPADS.

143



March 4, 2014

2010-11 2010-11 # EL 2010-11 # Reclassified


Rate Equitas Academy Charter School 95 53 55.8% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 387 36 13.0% Resident Schools Median 678 57 10.7% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 678 35 5.2% District 205,312 26,080 12.7%

EVALUATION VISIT RESULTS Following are definitions of the School Performance Evaluation ratings: An evaluation of accomplished applies to operations characterized, overall, by strengths. There are very few weaknesses and any that do exist do not diminish the students’ experience. While an evaluation of accomplished represents a high standard of operating, it is a standard that should be achievable in all schools. It implies that it is fully appropriate for a school to continue its operations without significant adjustment. The school would always be expected, however, to continue to take advantage of opportunities to improve. An evaluation of proficient applies to operations characterized by a number of strengths. There are weaknesses, but neither singly nor collectively do these have a significant adverse impact on the student experience. An evaluation of proficient may be arrived at in a number of circumstances. The school may provide a productive student experience, but it may not provide consistent challenge for students. Typically operations will be characterized by strengths, but one or more weaknesses reduce the overall quality of the student experience. An evaluation of developing applies to operations characterized by weaknesses which require remedial action by the school. Some, if not all, staff responsible for the operation evaluated as inadequate require support from senior managers in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. There may be some strengths, but these are overshadowed by the impact of the weaknesses. An evaluation of unsatisfactory applies when there are major weaknesses in operation that require immediate remedial action on the part of the school. The student experience is at risk in significant respects. In almost all cases, staff responsible for operations evaluated unsatisfactory will require support from senior managers in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. This may involve working alongside effective peers in or beyond the school. I. Student Achievement and Educational Performance Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Student Achievement and Educational Performance at the school to be Accomplished. Areas of particular strength include:

• The School Performance Framework rating is Achieving.

144



March 4, 2014

• The school has met API Growth Targets for all subgroups, including the school’s Latino, English Learner, and Socioeconomically Disadvantaged statistically significant student populations.

• By achieving an API of 800 or above every year, Equitas Academy consistently met the growth target set by the California Department of Education (CDE). The school’s 2013 API of 894 demonstrates 26-point growth from the previous year.

• The school’s AGT in ELA is above predicted growth and significantly above the District average.

• The school reclassifies English Learners at a rate (51%) significantly higher than the District average.

The school attributes its success to certain key foundational beliefs and practices, including the following:

• College preparatory curriculum that begins in kindergarten • Slow growth model of growing one grade level each year • Laser focus on the core content areas of literacy and mathematics • Intentional use of data to drive instructional decisions

Areas recommended for improvement include:

• The school’s AGT in Math is within the range of predicted growth and not significantly different from the District average.

II. Governance and Organizational Management Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Governance and Organizational Management at the school to be Accomplished. Areas of particular strength include:

• The Governing Board regularly reviews and monitors the school budget and funding to inform and evaluate resource allocation and use consistent with the charter as evidenced from the regular agendizing of school finance issues. The Finance Committee provides updates to the Governing Board.

• The Governing Board comprehensively evaluates leadership. The evaluation of the school’s Executive Director is based on criteria provided in the High Bar Evaluation Report. All Board members, senior staff and self-evaluation ratings are submitted as part of this review. In addition, the school’s Director of Curriculum and Instruction is evaluated on criteria in multiple areas such as oversight of student and staff academic and behavioral culture; staff development; data analysis and oversight of SST and pre-referral processes; and professional responsibilities including accurate and timely reporting and record keeping. The Governing Board has implemented and continually monitors systems and procedures that maintain 100% compliance with applicable law, including but not limited to clearance requirements (DOJ and TB) and credentialing and assignment requirements.

• Moving forward, Equitas’ Governing Board and leadership are working to carefully plan capacity building, including adding key positions to the central office that will support all

145



March 4, 2014

schools. Two of the current seven Board members have been with Equitas Academy since prior to opening, and the Board has expanded to include new members with varied backgrounds and expertise in order to provide additional accountability and support.


• The CSD encourages the Board to regularly review and monitor student academic achievement as evidenced by Board agendas.

• The Governing Board is encouraged to build and refine its stakeholder communication system for gathering input, sharing information, and resolving concerns.

III. Fiscal Operations Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Fiscal Operations at the school to be Proficient. Areas of particular strength: 2012/13 Audit

• Cash and cash equivalents are positive at $286,309, a continuous positive trend since 2009/10. Cash and cash equivalents are generating a cash reserve of 7.6%, which is above the recommended 5%.

• Net assets are trending upwards for the fourth year. Net assets for 2012/13 are $1,268,014. • Net income is positive at $355,243, and continued to be positive since 2009/10. • The school is strong fiscally.

Areas recommended for improvement include: The 2012/2013 audit listed one finding.

• The Charter School has performed the verification of the free and reduced lunch applications but did not have the verification process completed by the required Federal due date of November 15th. � There are no questioned costs associated with compliance requirement.

Additional Information: 2012/2013 Audit

• The audit was issued with an unmodified opinion. IV. Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program at the school to be Achieving. Areas of particular strength include:

• Equitas Academy provides an achievement-oriented learning environment beginning in kindergarten. There is a college prep focus whereby students are immersed in literacy across content areas and are addressed as “scholars.” Classroom observations revealed research driven

146



March 4, 2014

practices being utilized, the frequent use of academic discourse, a positive school climate, and the calibration of practices across classrooms.

• Teachers receive weekly feedback and coaching sessions from the Director of Curriculum and Instruction, Dean of Students and Families, and Grade Level Lead teachers. An intensive 4-week summer professional development series is conducted with staff in order to strategically address the school’s strengths and weaknesses before the start of a school year. Peer observations, grade level team meetings/discussions, and grade level leads help provide feedback to the school leader (which informs professional development) and to each other (for coaching and support).

• School leaders shared that frequent assessments are used to monitor the efficacy of the instructional program and to inform decision making pertaining to instruction. Exit Slips are used on a daily basis to identify students who need to be re-taught the standard. On a weekly basis, students are assessed in ELA and Math; results are discussed at every Friday’s data meeting to continuously monitor how students are doing. The ongoing data of student performance is tracked using KICKBOARD.

• Teachers are supported with four weeks, 160 hours, of professional development in the summer. Areas of focus include the use of data-driven instruction, teaching strategies adapted from Teach Like A Champion, assessment, school culture, mission and vision, and building a team. Teachers also participate in weekly PD and full day monthly PD. Before every PD, teachers have data conversations based on weekly data. PD needs are identified through observations and staff surveys. All coaching sessions and observations are documented for both parties to increase clarity.

• The school has established and is implementing a plan for the California Common Core State Standards and Smarter Balanced Assessments, which addresses professional development, classroom implementation, and /or technology readiness. NWEA achievement assessments are given twice a year to monitor progress on national level. Students are tested every six weeks using RAZ assessments to provide in depth analysis of reading levels. Teachers have created scope and sequences, called FSA Maps, based on Common Core State Standards. Interim and weekly assessments are also based on CCSS. Houghton-Mifflin spiral bound books are being used to break down the CCSS in order to backward plan. Teachers have been provided training and exposure to Smarter Balance Assessments and are expected to use open ended questions that ask students to explain their thinking and prove their answers. School has four (4) laptop carts and one (1) iPad cart to support students’ use of technology.

Areas noted for improvement include:

• The school may benefit from including a teacher on the Modified Consent Decree team and in meeting more frequently.

147

119982

Schoolwide Academic Performance Index (API)

Base APIGrowth APIGrowth TargetGrowthMet Schoolwide Growth Target Met All Student Groups Target Base API State Rank Base API Similar Schools Rank

Subgroup APIGrowth Target

Growth Met TargetGrowth Target

GrowthMet

TargetGrowth Target

GrowthMet

TargetAfrican American or Black - - - - -- American Indian or Alaska Native - - - - -- Asian - - - - -- Filipino - - - - -- Hispanic or Latino - - A -10 Yes A 30 YesNative Hawaiian or Pacific Islander - - - - -- White - - - - -- Two or More Races - - - - -- English Learners - - - - A 27 YesSocioeconomically Disadvantaged - - A -14 Yes A 27 YesStudents with Disabilities - - - - --

2011 Base API

2012 Growth API

11-12 Growth

2012 Base API

2013 Growth API

12-13 Growth

Equitas Academy Charter 882 868 -14 868 894 26CDE Similar Schools Median 740 733 -7 733 736 3Resident Schools Median 764 786 22 773 795 23Comparison Schools Median 740 758 18 758 795 37

Basic, Below Basic & Far Below Basic

Proficient & Advanced

Basic, Below Basic & Far Below

Basic


Equitas Academy Charter 28% 73% 21% 80%CDE Similar Schools Median 61% 39% 52% 48%Resident Schools Median 56% 44% 29% 70%Comparison Schools Median 56% 44% 26% 74%

# Criteria # Met % Met # Criteria # Met % MetEquitas Academy Charter 17 14 82% 17 17 100%CDE Similar Schools Median 17 9 53% 17 11 65%Resident Schools Median 17 9 53% 17 13 76%Comparison Schools Median 17 9 53% 17 13 76%

Equitas Academy Charter Loc. Code: 2154CDS Code:

CRITERIA SUMMARYA charter school that has operated for at least four years is eligible for renewal only if the school has satisfied at least one of the following criteria prior to receiving a charter renewal: Attained its Academic Performance Index (API) growth target in the prior year or in two of the last three years, both school wide and for all groups of pupils served by the charter school; ranked 4 to 10 on the API statewide or similar schools rank in the prior year or in two of the last three years both schoolwide and for all groups of pupils served by the charter school (SB 1290). The academic performance of the charter school must be at least equal to the academic performance of the public schools that the charter school pupils would otherwise have been required to attend, as well as the academic performance of the schools in the school district in which the charter school is located, taking into account the composition of pupil population served at the charter school (Ed. Code 47607).

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

882 868870 868 894

B A A-14 26Yes Yes

2012-13 CST Comparison

Yes Yes9 8

10

Blanks indicates that the subgroup is not numerically significant; therefore will have not API score or target information.

API Comparison

English Language Arts Mathematics

AYP Comparison

2012 AYP 2013 AYP

Office of Data and Accountability 2/11/2014

148

ESCBD

Loc Code

School

2013 Enroll # on 1st Day of Testing

Conf 2012 Base API

2013 Grow

th API

2012 State Rank

2012 Sim

ilar Schools

Rank

Met 2013

Sch-wide

Target

Met 2013

Subgroup Targets

% Free/

Reduced Lunch

% Sp Ed

% G

ATE%

EL%

RFEP%

Latino

%

White

% Af.

Amer

%

Asian%

Fili %

Am

Indian

%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or

More

XR2

2154Equitas Academ

y Charter198

K- 3868

8948

10Yes

Yes97

110

2752

940

33

01

00

LAUSD Sim

ilar Schools from CDE

N6

7401Andres and M

aria Cardenas Elementar

363K- 5

703675

11

No

No

5412

455

1690

44

10

00

1

E2

2137Ann Street Elem

entary88

K- 6780

8144

8Yes

Yes77

1816

3332

950

02

00

20

N6

7404Carlos Santana Arts Academ

y381

K- 5657

6671

1Yes

No

5913

455

2688

26

31

11

0

E2

2383Esperanza Elem

entary490

K- 5699

6741

2N

oN

o79

137

6919

960

30

00

00

E7

2942Estrella Elem

entary336

K- 5725

7331

3Yes

No

619

644

3393

07

00

00

0

E7

3932Forty-N

inth Street Elementary

566K- 5

709676

12

No

No

768

742

3592

08

00

00

0

XR1

4069Garr Academ

y of Math and Entreprene

221K- 5

779803

48

YesYes

7010

712

29

087

00

01

3

S7

4425Harbor City Elem

entary369

K- 5817

8176

10Yes

No

5111

931

3281

39

41

02

0

E2

5055M


775K- 6

704770

12

YesYes

6213

1153

2899

01

00

00

0

S5

5301M

iddleton Street Elementary

10031- 6

763792

36

YesYes

8114

1132

4899

00

00

00

0

E2

5438M

urchison Street Elementary

370K- 6

732728

24

No

No

6316

1125

2998

01

00

00

1

W1

6644Seventy-Fourth Street Elem

entary343

K- 5849

8477

10Yes

Yes79

1018

86

290

700

00

00

S7

6795Sixty-Eighth Street Elem

entary566

K- 6733

7222

4N

oN

o74

1311

3525

820

170

00

00

E2


entary620

1- 5758

7953

6Yes

Yes84

1311

5533

980

10

00

00

W4

7534Vine Street Elem

entary394

K- 6758

7363

5N

oN

o56

168

3835

951

11

11

01

LAUSD Sim

ilar Schools from CDE M

edian381

-733

7362

4-

-70

139

3829

930

40

00

00

Resident Schools

E2


entary620

1- 5758

7953

6Yes

Yes84

1311

5533

980

10

00

00

E2

3192Com

monw

ealth Avenue Elementary

550K- 5

848857

710

YesYes

8111

1833

3670

16

913

00

0

E2


entary497

K- 5787

8124

8Yes

Yes86

188

6229

970

12

10

00

E2

2544M

acArthur Park Elementary School for

246K- 5

B725

814

953

3395

02

10

00

0

E2

5055M


775K- 6

704770

12

YesYes

6213

1153

2899

01

00

00

0

Resident Schools Median

550-

773795

47

--

8113

1153

3397

01

10

00

0

Comparison Schools

E2


entary620

1- 5758

7953

6Yes

Yes84

1311

5533

980

10

00

00

Petition Comparison Schools M

edian620

-758

7953

6-

-84

1311

5533

980

10

00

00

2012 BASE API AND 2013 G

ROW

TH API DEMO

GRAPHICS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO

LSThis page displays the 2012 Base API, school ranks, 2013 Grow

th API, and the demographic inform

ation from the 2013 G

rowth API reprt.


An asterisk (*) indicates that the school does not have a valid 2012 Base API or 2013 Grow

th API.School Dem

ographic Characteristics

Office of D


2/11/2014

149

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolTotal Enroll

#%

F/R M

eal%

GATE%

EL%

Latino%

White

% Af.

Amer.

% Asian

% Fili.

% Am

Indian%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or M

oreXR

22154


45495%

0%42%

95%0%

2%2%

0%0%

0%0%

LAUSD Sim


N6

7401Andres and M

aria Cardenas Elementary

62088%

2%58%

91%3%

4%2%

0%0%

0%0%

E2

2137Ann Street Elem

entary135

97%8%

49%90%

0%6%

4%0%

0%0%

0%

N6


y599

87%2%

61%87%

4%5%

3%0%

0%1%

0%

E2

2383Esperanza Elem

entary774

81%4%

75%95%

1%3%

0%0%

0%0%

0%

E7

2942Estrella Elem

entary527

92%2%

54%93%

1%6%

0%0%

0%0%

0%

E7

3932Forty-N


86075%

4%50%

92%0%

8%0%

0%0%

0%0%

XR1

4069G

arr Academy of M

ath and Entrepreneuri a341

14%0%

9%15%

0%84%

0%0%

0%1%

0%

S7


entary588

95%3%

46%83%

2%9%

3%1%

1%2%

0%

E2

5055M


109489%

6%62%

99%0%

1%0%

0%0%

0%0%

S5

5301M


118484%

7%41%

99%0%

0%0%

0%0%

0%0%

E2

5438M


55994%

5%36%

98%0%

2%0%

0%0%

0%0%

W1


entary533

81%9%

10%29%

0%70%

0%0%

0%0%

0%

S7


entary808

76%5%

46%81%

0%19%

0%0%

0%0%

0%

E2


entary796

87%5%

64%97%

0%2%

0%0%

0%0%

0%

W4


entary575

95%3%

48%95%

2%1%

1%1%

0%0%

0%

LAUSD Sim


edian599

87%4%

49%92%

0%5%

0%0%

0%0%

0%

Resident Schools

E2


entary796

87%5%

64%97%

0%2%

0%0%

0%0%

0%

E2

3192Com

monw


77083%

7%47%

72%1%

6%8%

12%0%

0%0%

E2


entary807

90%4%

71%97%

0%1%

1%1%

0%0%

0%

E2

2544M


47783%

3%74%

94%0%

2%1%

0%1%

1%0%

E2

5055M


109489%

6%62%

99%0%

1%0%

0%0%

0%0%


79687%

5%64%

97%0%

2%1%

0%0%

0%0%

Charter Comparison Schools

E2


entary796

87%5%

64%97%

0%2%

0%0%

0%0%

0%

Charter Comparison Schools M

edian796

87%5%

64%97%

0%2%

0%0%

0%0%

0%


This page displays K-12 enrollment num

ber and percentages of select subgroups as of October 2012 Census Day. %

of English Learners (ELs) is calculated by dividing the total num

ber of ELs reported on the March 2013 Language Census by the O

ctober 2012 Census enrollment num

ber.

OCTO

BER 2012 CALPADS DEMO

GRAPHICS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO

LSEquitas Academ

y Charter

Office of D


2/11/2014

150

ESC BD Loc

CodeSchool

09-10 EL #

10-11 Reclass #

10-11 Reclass

Rate

10-11 EL #

11-12 Reclass #

11-12 Reclass

Rate

11-12 EL #

12-13 Reclass #

12-13 Reclass

RateXR 2 2154 Equitas Academy Charter 95 53 56% 86 0 0% 141 72 51%

LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE

N 6 7401 Andres and Maria Cardenas Eleme -- 4 -- 275 39 14% 320 33 10%

E 2 2137 Ann Street Elementary 74 7 9% 71 14 20% 62 3 5%

N 6 7404 Carlos Santana Arts Academy -- 9 -- 389 48 12% 371 59 16%

E 2 2383 Esperanza Elementary 642 82 13% 597 67 11% 591 33 6%

E 7 2942 Estrella Elementary -- 19 -- 305 45 15% 282 19 7%

E 7 3932 Forty-Ninth Street Elementary 645 86 13% 599 106 18% 531 76 14%

XR 1 4069 Garr Academy of Math and Entrep 24 3 13% 26 0 0% 27 0 0%

S 7 4425 Harbor City Elementary 273 36 13% 268 49 18% 254 50 20%

E 2 5055 Magnolia Avenue Elementary 914 98 11% 811 108 13% 743 103 14%

S 5 5301 Middleton Street Elementary 543 170 31% 501 102 20% 528 133 25%

E 2 5438 Murchison Street Elementary 231 53 23% 203 33 16% 196 21 11%

W 1 6644 Seventy-Fourth Street Elementary 38 7 18% 52 8 15% 46 5 11%

S 7 6795 Sixty-Eighth Street Elementary 458 58 13% 478 79 17% 450 20 4%

E 2 7082 Tenth Street Elementary 678 35 5% 650 103 16% 594 91 15%

W 4 7534 Vine Street Elementary 315 79 25% 280 40 14% 287 35 12%

LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 387 36 13% 305 48 15% 320 33 11%

Resident Schools


E 2 3192 Commonwealth Avenue Elementa 420 57 14% 464 95 20% 452 76 17%

E 2 4589 Hoover Street Elementary 690 92 13% 639 105 16% 589 82 14%

E 2 2544 MacArthur Park Elementary Schoo 156 0 0% 144 4 3% 152 11 7%

E 2 5055 Magnolia Avenue Elementary 914 98 11% 811 108 13% 743 103 14%

Resident Schools Median 678 57 11% 639 103 16% 589 82 14%



Charter Comparison Schools Median 678 35 5% 650 103 16% 594 91 15%

RECLASSIFICATION RATES WITH COMPARISON SCHOOLS

a


This page displays the number of English learners (ELs), the number of students reclassified since the prior Census Day, and the reclassification rate for each specified year. The numbers used are from the Language Census collected by the state each March. The reclassification rate is calculated by dividing the number reclassified by the number of prior year ELs.


151

2012-13 2011-12 # EL2012-13 #

Reclassified


RateChange from Prior

Year

Equitas Academy Charter 141 72 51.1% 51.1%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 320 33 10.9% -4.5%Resident Schools Median 589 82 13.9% -1.9%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 594 91 15.3% -0.5%District 180,618 24,697 13.7% -1.7%

2011-12 2010-11 # EL2011-12 #

Reclassified


Rate

Equitas Academy Charter 86 0 0.0%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 305 48 15.4%Resident Schools Median 639 103 15.8%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 650 103 15.8%District 194,904 29,956 15.4%

2010-11 2009-10 # EL2010-11 #

Reclassified


Rate

Equitas Academy Charter 95 53 55.8%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 387 36 13.0%Resident Schools Median 678 57 10.7%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 678 35 5.2%District 205,312 26,080 12.7%

Equitas Academy CharterRECLASSIFICATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH COMPARISON SCHOOLS' MEDIANS

This page displays the number of English learners (ELs), the number of students reclassified since the prior Census Day and the reclassification rate for each specified year. The numbers used are from the Language Census collected by the state each March. The reclassification rate is calculated by dividing the number reclassified by the number of prior year ELs.


152

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolO

CT 2012 Enroll #

Sp Ed Enroll #

Sp Ed Enroll %

% High

Incidenc%

Low

Incidenc# AU

T# DB

# DEAF

# ED

# EM

D# HO

H # MR

# O

HI*# O

I#

SLD* # SLI*

# TBI# VI

XR2

2154Equitas Academ

y Charter454

388%

8%0%

20

00

00

03

013

200

0

LAUSD Sim


N6

7401Andres and M


62085

14%10%

3%11

01

00

15

102

2233

00

E2

2137Ann Street Elem

entary135

1713%

10%2%

30

00

00

01

06

70

0

N6


y599

539%

8%1%

30

00

00

011

027

120

0

E2

2383Esperanza Elem

entary774

10614%

10%4%

190

00

01

54

425

480

0

E7

2942Estrella Elem

entary527

479%

8%1%

40

00

00

35

023

120

0

E7

3932Forty-N


86072

8%7%

1%7

00

00

02

51

2631

00

XR1

4069Garr Academ

y of Math and Entrepreneurial

34133

10%9%

1%2

00

00

00

20

209

00

S7


entary588

6010%

6%4%

160

00

00

12

725

81

0

E2

5055M


1094120

11%10%

1%13

00

00

20

170

6622

00

S5

5301M


1184127

11%8%

3%8

00

90

010

73

7812

00

E2

5438M


55970

13%10%

2%10

00

00

20

40

3519

00

W1


entary533

448%

8%1%

20

00

00

010

118

130

0

S7


entary808

8511%

7%3%

100

00

00

179

035

131

0

E2


entary796

8110%

6%4%

150

00

02

114

328

180

0

W4


entary575

8715%

12%3%

160

00

02

05

039

250

0

LAUSD Sim


edian599

7211%

8%2%

100

00

00

15

026

130

0

Resident Schools

E2


entary796

8110%

6%4%

150

00

02

114

328

180

0

E2

3192Com

monw


77076

10%7%

3%18

01

00

10

70

3018

10

E2


entary807

12115%

11%4%

280

00

01

015

140

350

1

E2

2544M


47729

6%6%

0%1

00

00

00

10

522

00

E2

5055M


1094120

11%10%

1%13

00

00

20

170

6622

00


79681

10%7%

3%15

00

00

10

70

3022

00

Comparison Schools

E2


entary796

8110%

6%4%

150

00

02

114

328

180

0

Comparison Schools in Charter M

edian796

8110%

6%4%

150

00

02

114

328

180

0


This page displays the K-12 enrollment total (as of O

ctober 2012) and the number of K-12 special education students in total, by incidence category, and by eligibility as reported on the Decem

ber 2012 California Special Education M

anagement Inform

ation System (CASEM

IS) Report. High incidence eligibilities are indicated by an asterisk (*).

K-12 SPECIAL EDUCATIO

N STU

DENTS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO

LS (DECEMBER 2012 CASEM

IS REPORT)

Office of D


2/11/2014

153

AESCBD

Loc. Code

School Nam

e# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

%

Below

Basic%

Basic%

Prof%

Adv%

B/BB/F

BB

% Prof

/Adv#

Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

%

Below

Basic%

Basic%

Prof%

Adv%

B/BB/F

BB

% Prof

/Adv

XR2

2154Equitas Academ

y Charter198

2%5%

21%35%

38%28%

73%198

2%3%

16%22%

58%21%

80%

LAUSD Sim


N6

7401Andres and M


34715%

22%36%

19%8%

73%27%

34813%

25%30%

19%13%

68%32%

E2

2137Ann Street Elem

entary79

4%10%

43%29%

14%57%

43%84

1%15%

26%33%

24%42%

57%

N6


y350

19%21%

31%20%

8%71%

28%348

9%21%

28%25%

17%58%

42%

E2

2383Esperanza Elem

entary469

19%22%

34%19%

7%75%

26%470

9%24%

20%21%

26%53%

47%

E7

2942Estrella Elem

entary310

11%18%

32%24%

15%61%

39%311

6%20%

26%23%

24%52%

47%

E7

3932Forty-N


54016%

24%37%

17%6%

77%23%

5449%

27%22%

25%17%

58%42%

XR1

4069Garr Academ


2054%

11%40%

28%17%

55%45%

2091%

12%20%

33%34%

33%67%

S7


entary339

4%12%

32%32%

20%48%

52%343

2%7%

16%38%

36%25%

74%

E2

5055M


7068%

16%37%

29%10%

61%39%

7103%

12%19%

36%31%

34%67%

S5

5301M


9014%

14%34%

30%17%

52%47%

9202%

12%24%

31%32%

38%63%

E2

5438M


33311%

16%37%

23%14%

64%37%

3397%

18%28%

29%18%

53%47%

W1


entary328

3%9%

22%32%

33%34%

65%329

1%10%

18%31%

39%29%

70%

S7


entary520

11%19%

32%25%

13%62%

38%520

9%20%

23%19%

29%52%

48%

E2


entary562

6%12%

38%27%

17%56%

44%572

2%9%

15%36%

38%26%

74%

W4


entary363

9%11%

36%26%

17%56%

43%366

6%24%

28%25%

17%58%

42%

LAUSD Sim


edian350

9%16%

36%26%

14%61%

39%348

6%18%

23%29%

26%52%

48%

Resident Schools

E2


entary562

6%12%

38%27%

17%56%

44%572

2%9%

15%36%

38%26%

74%

E2

3192Com

monw


5113%

9%23%

30%34%

35%64%

5151%

8%18%

28%45%

27%73%

E2


entary450

6%9%

30%32%

23%45%

55%453

4%9%

16%30%

40%29%

70%

E2

2544M


23713%

25%32%

24%6%

70%30%

2384%

21%18%

33%24%

43%57%

E2

5055M


7068%

16%37%

29%10%

61%39%

7103%

12%19%

36%31%

34%67%


5116%

12%32%

29%17%

56%44%

5153%

9%18%

33%38%

29%70%

Comparison Schools

E2


entary562

6%12%

38%27%

17%56%

44%572

2%9%

15%36%

38%26%

74%


edian562

6%12%

38%27%

17%56%

44%572

2%9%

15%36%

38%26%

74%


2012-13 CALIFORN

IA STANDARDS-TEST (CST) EN

GLISH LAN

GU

AGE ARTS AN

D MATH RESU

LTS A

2013 CST ELA2013 CST M

ATH

Office of D


2/11/2014

154

ESCBD

Loc. Code

School Nam

e# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

% Below

Basic

% Basic

% Prof

% Adv

%

B/BB/FBB

% Prof

/Adv# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

% Below

Basic

% Basic

% Prof

% Adv

%

B/BB/FBB

% Prof

/Adv

XR2

2154Equitas Academ

y Charter137

4%10%

18%32%

35%32%

67%137

1%9%

15%34%

41%25%

75%

LAUSD Sim


N6

7401Andres and M


31914%

21%30%

26%8%

65%34%

3199%

26%27%

25%13%

62%38%

E2

2137Ann Street Elem

entary101

1%18%

38%32%

12%57%

44%103

1%21%

27%34%

17%49%

51%

N6


y324

20%15%

38%21%

5%73%

26%327

13%26%

24%23%

14%63%

37%

E2

2383Esperanza Elem

entary527

16%20%

33%22%

8%69%

30%527

8%20%

21%25%

27%49%

52%

E7

2942Estrella Elem

entary299

11%18%

30%27%

13%59%

40%299

6%22%

22%26%

24%50%

50%

E7

3932Forty-N


59916%

19%32%

25%8%

67%33%

6048%

23%19%

28%22%

50%50%

XR1

4069Garr Academ


22512%

11%30%

29%19%

53%48%

2253%

16%20%

32%30%

39%62%

S7


entary292

6%13%

32%31%

18%51%

49%296

3%8%

21%37%

31%32%

68%

E2

5055M


77914%

21%32%

25%9%

67%34%

7798%

21%24%

26%21%

53%47%

S5

5301M


9927%

17%34%

28%14%

58%42%

10133%

14%24%

31%27%

41%58%

E2

5438M


36910%

17%33%

27%13%

60%40%

3716%

22%26%

26%20%

54%46%

W1


entary351

3%8%

21%37%

32%32%

69%350

2%11%

13%31%

43%26%

74%

S7


entary683

10%19%

32%24%

15%61%

39%681

9%22%

21%23%

25%52%

48%

E2


entary639

12%15%

32%26%

15%59%

41%642

6%14%

20%26%

35%40%

61%

W4


entary388

8%13%

32%30%

17%53%

47%393

6%18%

26%28%

22%50%

50%

LAUSD Sim


edian369

11%17%

32%27%

13%59%

40%371

6%21%

22%26%

24%50%

50%

Resident Schools

E2


entary639

12%15%

32%26%

15%59%

41%642

6%14%

20%26%

35%40%

61%

E2

3192Com

monw


6195%

8%25%

30%33%

38%63%

6223%

8%16%

23%50%

27%73%

E2


entary466

5%11%

36%32%

15%52%

47%469

3%16%

20%31%

30%39%

61%

E2

2544M


00%

0%0%

0%0%

0%0%

00%

0%0%

0%0%

0%0%

E2

5055M


77914%

21%32%

25%9%

67%34%

7798%

21%24%

26%21%

53%47%


6195%

11%32%

26%15%

52%41%

6223%

14%20%

26%30%

39%61%

Comparison Schools

E2


entary639

12%15%

32%26%

15%59%

41%642

6%14%

20%26%

35%40%

61%


edian639

12%15%

32%26%

15%59%

41%642

6%14%

20%26%

35%40%

61%

2012 CST MATH


2011-12 CALIFORN


GLISH LAN

GU

AGE ARTS AN

D MATH RESU

LTS

2012 CST ELA

Office of D


2/11/2014

155

a

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolSusp. Rate

2011-12Susp. Rate

2012-13Single Std.

%2011-12

2012-132011-12

2012-13%

Afr. Am

er.# Afr. Am

er.Susp. Rate

Single Std. %

% Stud. Dis.

# Stud. Dis.

Susp. Rate

Single Std. %

XR2

2154Equitas Academ

y Charter10%

3%2%

2414

5727

2%11

0%0%

9%39

18%5%

LAUSD Sim


N6

7401Andres and M


1%1%

1%4

46

64%

260%

0%12%

743%

3%

E2

2137Ann Street Elem

entary1%

1%2%

22

35

4%6

0%0%

11%15

7%7%

N6


y1%

0%0%

73

104

5%30

3%0%

8%49

0%0%

E2

2383Esperanza Elem

entary1%

0%0%

60

110

3%27

0%0%

12%97

0%0%

E7

2942Estrella Elem

entary1%

1%1%

37

713

6%29

14%14%

9%48

2%2%

E7

3932Forty-N


1%0%

0%9

417

58%

711%

1%7%

640%

0%

XR1

4069Garr Academ


0%0%

0%0

00

084%

2870%

0%9%

320%

0%

S7


entary0%

0%0%

00

00

8%52

0%0%

8%52

0%0%

E2

5055M


1%1%

1%12

616

81%

80%

0%10%

1100%

0%

S5

5301M


0%0%

0%1

23

70%

20%

0%10%

1180%

0%

E2

5438M


1%0%

0%7

211

22%

120%

0%12%

703%

3%

W1


entary1%

0%0%

31

152

71%397

0%0%

8%44

0%0%

S7


entary3%

1%1%

3811

7218

18%162

6%5%

8%69

4%4%

E2


entary0%

0%0%

20

30

2%14

0%0%

10%77

0%0%

W4


entary1%

0%0%

40

120

2%10

0%0%

13%84

0%0%

LAUSD Sim


edian1%

0%0%

42

104

4%27

0%0%

10%69

0%0%

Resident Schools

E2


entary0%

0%0%

20

30

2%14

0%0%

10%77

0%0%

E2

3192Com

monw


1%0%

0%8

29

76%

470%

0%10%

783%

1%

E2


entary1%

0%0%

80

100

1%7

0%0%

14%116

0%0%

E2

2544M


0%0%

0%0

20

32%

922%

22%5%

270%

0%

E2

5055M


1%1%

1%12

616

81%

80%

0%10%

1100%

0%


1%0%

0%8

29

32%

90%

0%10%

780%

0%

Comparison Schools

E2


entary0%

0%0%

20

30

2%14

0%0%

10%77

0%0%


edian0%

0%0%

20

30

2%14

0%0%

10%77

0%0%

EVENTS

DAYSAFRICAN

AMERICAN

SSTU

DENTS W

ITH DISABILITY


SUSPEN

SION

S WITH CO

MPARISO

N SCHO

OLS

This page displays the suspension events, days and rate for 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school year.

COM

PARISON

DATA (ALL)DISPRO

PORTIO

NALITY

Office of D


2/11/2014

156

EQUITAS ACADEMY CHARTER SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT 238 – 13/14





Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 241-0399



157

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'� ��*��

��

�� !��*��

��"� �� !"#$%�&��

'(�� &�� &� �� )�� * �� +� �� +� �� * ��

�,� (�� &��

�-� (�� &�� )��

�.� (�� &�� /� ��&��&� � � ��

�!� (�� &�� &� � � ��

�%� (�� &�� 0� 1�� !"#$%�&��%�2�3

4�� 5�� --+� -$,!+� �� &� �� (�� 6�7�� 8��&�� ,-+� -$,.+� �� &��/�� &� �� *� �� (�� )�� ,%$� �� *� �� #%$� �� 9:,-� &�� +� �� ;�� <�� 6��=>� � �� +� *� �� &�� ,� �� !� �� <��(�� ?�� .9��

��

158

��

�� !"#,!�� 4�� @�� *�� <� �� )��*�� A� �� &�� @�� +� �� A� ��/� �� *� �� A� ��+� �� &�� )�� &�� 1�� !"#$%��&��%��

?�� &�� )�� 1�� B�� *� �� 1 �� 1��+� �� ?�� *�)� ��?�� -$,.:,!+� �� C�1�� +3� �� C�� +3� �� C<��+3� � �� C�� +3� �� C��3� 4�� -$,.� �� ?�� 1+� �� *�� * �� &�� *�� +� �� 1�� @�*��?�+� �� *��

< �� +� �� *�� ;�� +� �� +� �� 1��+� �� (� �� +� �� &�� *�� &�� +� �� *�� &�� 1 �� 1�� A� ��C �� A ��3��

�� +� �� &�� D+�,$� �� ,!�� 1��+� �� /�� &�� +� �� 1�� A �� *��*� ��

�� &�� -$$9:-$,$� �� A� �� :E,9+"$9+.$.�� (�� (�� A� �� &��

#��

��-$$9:-$,$�:��:E,9+"$9+.$.�-$,$:-$,,�:��:9+!9#+%!,�-$,,:-$,-�:��:.+#9"+$..�-$,-:-$,.�:��F"+-D,+$%-�

��

159

��

� �� -$$9:-$,$�:��:E,.+#-.+-$"��-$,$:-$,,�:��:#+9D-+!!!�-$,,:-$,-�:��:!+!"#+.$.�-$,-:-$,.�:��:.+-#"+%"9�

��-$$9:-$,$�:��:E#+$D#+$9#�-$,$:-$,,�:��:-+%,!+$9"�-$,,:-$,-�:��F""9+-"$�-$,-:-$,.�:��F,$+%!D+#.,�

(� �� :�� &�� * �� +� ��+� �� &��

< �� +� �� *� �� +� ��+� �� 1 �� 1 ��

(�� &� � �� &��,,+�-$,!��

(�� &�� 6�7�� *�&� ��G��==��&��=�� M�

�$!��%�� * �� &� �� 6�7�� A��

�� %!��&��CN��3� :� (�� *�� &� �� +� �� &�� 6��

C8�3� :� (�� *�� 6�7�� A�� *�� /� �� )�� *� �� *�� *� �� +� �� &�� B�/� �� 6�� D+� ,$� �� ,!+� *� ��*�� )�� &�� /� �� &�� !"#$%�&��1�� &��>47��

��

160

��

��!��(��

��!��(�� &��

�� &��

��

161

1 of 4

ICEF VISTA BUSINESS & FINANCE ACADEMY Findings of Fact for Denial of Petition

By the Los Angeles Unified School District BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT 239 – 13/14

March 4, 2014

The charter review process requires the authorizer to evaluate whether the charter petition meets the criteria for approval. Education Code § 47605 (b) sets forth the required petition elements and grounds for denial. Education Code § 47605 outlines additional petition criteria. I. INTRODUCTION On January 22, 2014, ICEF Vista Business & Finance Academy (hereinafter “ICEF Vista BFA” or “Charter School”) submitted a charter school petition application to the Charter Schools Division of the Los Angeles Unified School District (“District” or “LAUSD”). The proposed school seeks to serve up to 650 students in grades 9-12 in the West Los Angeles/Mar Vista area. California Education Code § 47605(b) provides that a school district Governing Board shall grant a charter for the operation of a school under this part if it is satisfied that granting the charter is consistent with sound educational practice. Section 47605 (b) further provides that the Governing Board of the school district shall not deny a petition for the establishment of a charter school unless it makes written factual findings, specific to the particular petition, setting forth specific facts to support one or more of the following findings: (1) The charter school presents an unsound educational program for the pupils to be enrolled in

the charter school. (2) The petitioners are demonstrably unlikely to successfully implement the program set forth in

the petition. (3) The petition does not contain the number of signatures required by subdivision (a) of

Education Code § 47605. (4) The petition does not contain an affirmation of each of the conditions described in

subdivision (d) of Education Code § 47605. (5) The petition does not contain a reasonably comprehensive description of all required

elements. The petition for ICEF Vista BFA does not meet the criteria of Education Code § 47605(b). II. GROUNDS FOR DENIAL LAUSD’s analysis of the charter school petition application submitted on January 22, 2014, to the District by ICEF Vista BFA indicates:

162

2 of 4

A. The petitioners are demonstrably unlikely to successfully implement the program set forth in the petition for [Charter School] (Educ. Code § 47605(b)(2)).

• Inner City Education Foundation (ICEF), the independent non-profit charter management

organization that proposes to open and operate ICEF Vista BFA, has had a cumulative record of low levels of academic, fiscal, and operational performance at its existing charter schools and therefore is unlikely to successfully operate the proposed additional high school. o The State Board of Education regulations provide guidance in determining whether

charter petitioners are “demonstrably unlikely to successfully implement the program.” One of the factors considered is petitioners’ past history of involvement in charter schools or other education agencies and whether the history is one that could be regarded as unsuccessful. (5 CCR §11967.5.1 (c)(1).)

o Furthermore, the Board of Education’s Policy on Charter School Authorizing, pg. 8, provides that, when an organization “has at least one existing school in operation, as part of the evaluation process, District staff will assess the petitioners’ likeliness to succeed in implementing the program set forth in the charter petition based on the school’s/organization’s record of performance in [its] existing schools.” This record encompasses the areas of student achievement and educational performance; governance and organizational management; fiscal management; school operations; and fulfillment of the charter provisions. ICEF currently operates 10 charter schools (two high schools, four middle schools, and four elementary schools) authorized by the LAUSD. Additionally, at the end of last year, ICEF closed two LAUSD-authorized schools that were low performing academically and were fiscally weak. This group of 12 schools has struggled in recent years with both academic and operational performance. On the 2013 Academic Performance Index (API), only three of the twelve LAUSD-authorized ICEF schools met schoolwide and subgroup growth targets, and five experienced decreases in Growth API, including two of the three ICEF high schools then open. None of the 12 schools met their respective sets of 2013 AYP criteria through either standard or “safe harbor” methods. On the School Performance Framework (SPF) assigned in 2013-14, no ICEF school is classified as “Excelling,” one as “Achieving,” three schools as “Watch,” five schools as “Service and Support,” and one as “Focus.” Moreover, last year the LAUSD Board of Education issued academic benchmarks for all three renewing ICEF schools, which require improved student academic achievement in addition to the continuing fiscal benchmarks applicable to all ICEF schools. With respect to operations, ICEF has accumulated a record of systemic issues in Human Resources processing areas such as credentialing and assignments. Such issues were noted as part of several schools’ annual oversight reports for the two prior years. While issues were later corrected, the recurrence demonstrates the

163

3 of 4

organization’s need to develop and adhere to stronger systems and clearer procedures in these areas. In addition to its academic and operational problems, ICEF has confronted serious fiscal challenges in the last few years. Although ICEF has significantly improved its financial position and achieved positive net assets for its schools at the end of the 2012-2013 school year totaling over $10,000,000, ICEF as a Charter Management Organization, the central office exclusive of the schools, still faces negative net assets of over $3 million. The CSD continues to closely monitor the organization, including ongoing review of the fiscal benchmarks set for the ICEF Board in all renewals of ICEF schools within the last three years. As a part of these benchmarks, the ICEF Board of Directors has been and will continue to be required to meet at least monthly to review its fiscal position and must continue to provide monthly financial reports to the CSD.

B. The [Charter School] petition does not contain reasonably comprehensive descriptions of all required elements (Educ. Code § 47605(b)(5)).

• Admissions Procedures (Element 8)

The petition does not present a reasonably comprehensive description of admissions procedures. o The order of preference in the event of a lottery does not comply with Education

Code § 47605(d)(2)(B) which requires charter schools to provide first preference to students who reside within the District.

• Suspension and Expulsion Procedures (Element 10) The petition does not present a reasonably comprehensive description of student suspension and expulsion procedures.

o The petition does not contain maximum number of days a pupil may be suspended in

a school year.

o The petition contains an option for “Alternative to Suspension” that is vague and does not indicate what type of instruction the student will receive while out of the classroom.

o The expulsion procedures contain possible outcomes by the Administrative Expulsion Panel (AEP) that impinge on a student’s due process, including the following: � The AEP may support the school director’s recommendation for expulsion and

expel the student from all ICEF schools. As stated, each ICEF school is governed by its own separate charter and admissions procedures. Pursuant to Education Code § 47605(d)(2)(A), a charter school shall admit all students who wish to apply. Accordingly, if a student is expelled from one ICEF school, the student would not be prohibited from seeking admission to another ICEF school. ICEF

164

4 of 4

however may conduct a hearing to determine if the expelled student poses a continuing danger to pupils or employee and determine whether the student can be enrolled at another ICEF school.

o The AEP composition as described includes a parent from the ICEF Steering Committee. The inclusion of a parent may violate the student’s right to privacy under FERPA since the parent is not a school official.

• Dispute Resolution (Element 14) The petition does not present a reasonably comprehensive description of procedures to be followed by the charter school and the authorizing entity in resolving disputes.

o The petition contains provisions that state:

“Disputes arising from within ICEF Vista Business & Finance Academy, including all disputes among and between students, staff, parents, volunteers, advisors, partner organizations, and governing board members of the school will be resolved by the administration of the school, and if necessary the Director of Human Resources. LAUSD will not intervene in any such internal disputes without the consent of the Board of the Inner City Education Foundation, which is the governing body of the ICEF Vista Business & Finance Academy. LAUSD will refer any complaints or reports regarding such disputes to the administrative staff of ICEF Vista Business & Finance Academy for resolution, and if necessary the Board of the Inner City Education Foundation. LAUSD agrees not to intervene or become involved in the dispute unless the dispute has given the district reasonable cause to believe that a violation of this charter or related laws or agreements has occurred, or unless the Board of ICEF Vista Business & Finance Academy has requested LAUSD to intervene in the dispute.” Provisions prohibiting LAUSD from “intervening” or becoming involved in a dispute without the ICEF Board’s consent limit LAUSD’s authorization to oversee charter schools. Education Code § 47604.3 states that a charter school shall respond to all reasonable inquiries from its chartering authority which may include inquiries related to a complaint LAUSD received from ICEF students, staff, or parents. Further, Education Code § 47604.32 vests chartering authorities with the duty to oversee charter schools which cannot be limited by the provisions contained in ICEF’s dispute resolution process.

165

TAB 10

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'� ��*��

��'#��'��$��'��'��!�'��

�� !�"� �� #!�� !�$�� !!��$%� ��%��&�

��'�(�� #�� !�"�� )��*� �� )��*�� +��&� � ,�� +�� (�� -�� +�� &� � ,�� .!%�� /��0�� !�"&��

4�� 1�� "2.!�� "2.!2�� +�� '�

3 �� 4�� 1�� "2.!2�� 5

3 6�� 5� �� 7�� 5� �� .��5

3 8�� 9�� 5

3 �� +�� 4�� +��4��:��;�� 9&

��&

��

166

��

;�� !�"% !�$� �� $%� � �� <��0�� =�� 8�� 8� $!! .&� �� =8>�+� �� /��+�� 1�� 1�� 1&�&�&1&�&� �� #�!!� <� ,�� &� =�� 8�� 8�� $!! .� �� ? ��)��? *��0��&�

�� /�� 1�� 0�� $�� !!"� �� $�� !!@&� � ;�� !�"%�$� �� !!� �� $%� � �� %��&� � �� 4�� &8�� (�� !� � �8=:8+�� 4�� A�� $2B�=�� B� 8�� B� ;��&� � �� 1�� =��0�� :�� +��&�� A� �� 8�� 8�� !!!� �� :�� +�� &� ,�� 0(4�� #��.��&� �� '� �� 8�� C%@�� 8�� ? � �C%@�� 8�� ?#� �C%@�� 8�� ?"� �C%@�� ? � �$%� �&� ,�� D�� +��&�� 7�� 1�� "2.!2�� :�� 8:4� �� !� % �!#&� E�� 8:4� �� &� � 4�� %�� 8:4� �� 2�$� �� !!@%!$� �� 2$ � �� !� % !�#�� ##� ��&� ,�� !�!%�� !��%� � 8:4� �� !� �� A�� !%�� &� 4�� !�#�� 4�� 8:4� �� @! � �� 2$ &� ,�� !� % !�#� �� 6��9� �� 2� �� 6��9� �� !&� �� +�� -� � 8:4&� 8�� !� %�#� ��,� 1=8� �� . B� �� +��4�� " B&� =�� ,� �� @B� �� +��4�� $B� �� !� % !�#�� %�� @B�� !�#&��

,�� +��% �� :�� ;�� 9� ��:;�� &� � 8�� !��%� � �:;�� D�� )8��*� �� 1=8�� "� �� %�� 8��11� �� &� � 8�� !� %�#� �:;� �� :;� �� 9�� 8�� 4&� ,�� . B� �� 1=8�� %��%�� $"B� �� 9��8��11��&�8�� !�#%�"��

��

167

��

�� =�� :;� �� 9�� 8�� 7�� 9�� 8�� @� �� &8�� 8�� &� ��

8�� 7�� D�� =8>�+� �� =8>�+� �� &� � 8� �� :�F�� /�� =�� :/=�� G� �� 9�� F�� &� �� 8� �� ,�� 1�� 0��,10�� G� �� % ��%�� %�� &� ,�� A�� &� � #�� <�� H� �� 1�� G� �� 4�� &� �� A� �� <8�� %�� ;�� !�"&��

,�� 8�� -�� /�� 7�� &� � 8� �� A�� (�� 4�� -��(4-�&�� /��9��&

,�� +�� +��4��/��1�� I�'JJ��&��J��O&

�� '�� A�� &�,��9��&

�� !��'�)E��*� %� ,�� !�"&� � (�� 8�� D�� "!%�� )�� =�� 8��*� ��=8>�+�� !�#&�

)��*� %� ,�� A�� #!�� !�#�� =�� 8�� /�� 1�� /�� 1��&� ,�� /�� 6�� &� "!� %� �#J�"� �� /�� 1��4�� &� ,�� )�� =�� >�� 8��*��&�

��

168

��

�� "�# �� $,��&

��# ��$�� +�� +�� A�� &� >�� 1�� "2.!"�� 4�� &� ,�� +�� 8�&� 8�� 4�� 7�� +�� &� :�� 7��&

�� =8>�+� �1=:8� (�� &� � >�� =8>�+� �1=:8� (�� 1�� 0(>�� 4�� !B� �� +��4�� 8+8� �� 4�� =�� ;�� ;��&� � ,�� B� �� 7�� #�B&� � ,�� #�B�� 4�� +��4�� &� � 8� �� =8>�+��1=:8&

#��"� �$4�� 7�� 1=:8�� 7�� /�� (�� -�� &

��

169



March 4, 2014

SUMMARY OF CHARTER SCHOOL PERFORMANCE CAMINO NUEVO CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL






1. Attained its Academic Performance Index (API) growth target in the prior year or in two of the last three years, both school-wide and for all groups of pupils served by the charter school; or







171



March 4, 2014

Camino Nuevo Charter High School has met the minimum statutory requirement as evidenced in the Data Summary Report. Student Discipline

Discipline and expulsion policies used at District schools must comply with the California Education Code. LAUSD charter schools must comply with the provisions related to suspensions and expulsions that are put forth in the Charter Schools Division’s Required Language for Charter Petitions. Camino Nuevo Charter High School’s grounds for student suspension and expulsion are aligned with those listed in Education Code Section 48900 et seq. As the data below show, Camino Nuevo Charter High School had 23 suspensions and 0 expulsions for the 2013-14 school year. In 2012-13, the school reported 12 suspensions and 0 expulsions. As of the date of this report, the school reports 23 suspensions and 0 expulsions for the current school year. The school leadership also reported that an increase in suspension can be attributed to the school’s moving into a new building in a new community and onboarding new staff as to using constructive alternatives to suspension. The school leadership reports that it has recently revised the suspension and expulsion policies and procedures to ensure a more cohesive, clear, and effective process for all stakeholders. They have trained staff on these new policies, and are also working toward implementing a variety of alternatives to suspensions that comport with the new LAUSD policy.


Name of School

Location Code

Suspension 2013-14 As of the

date of this report

Expulsion 2013-14 As of the date of

this report

Suspension 2012-13

Expulsion 2012-13

Suspension 2011-12

Expulsion 2011-12

Camino Nuevo Charter High School

8570 23 0 12 0 11 0

Special Education According to the December 2012 CASEMIS report, Camino Nuevo Charter High School enrolled Special Education students at a rate that is reflective of the District average. Camino Nuevo Charter High School had a special education enrollment rate of 9%, which is the same as the LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median. The school is committed to continuing its efforts to identify and serve students with disabilities. According to the Special Ed Program described in the petition, the school has implemented the Dynamic Blended Inclusion model. This model is defined in the petition as “a data-based, proactive approach to identifying and addressing the dynamic learning strengths and needs of all students through strategic collaboration, targeted differentiation, and full inclusion. Support occurs in a maximized co-teaching model and/or an extended intensive Learning Center.” The petition goes on to say, “All students have maximized access to the general education curriculum and setting, with varying levels of support as needed.”

172



March 4, 2014

OCT 2011

Enroll # Sp

Ed

Enro

ll #

Sp E

d En

roll

%

% H

igh

Inci

denc

e

% L

ow

Inci

denc

e

#AU

T

#DB

#DEA

F

#ED

#EM

D

#HO

H

#MR

#OH

I*

#OI

#SLD

*

#SLI

*

#TB

I

#VI

783 45 9% 8% 1% 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 37 0 0 0 English Learners The tables below represent the number of English Learners identified, served, and reclassified by Camino Nuevo Charter High School . The school’s October 2012 (CBEDS) English learner population of 8% was 9% lower than the LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median of 17%. The school’s 2012-13 reclassification rate of 71.9% was significantly higher than the LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median rate of 12.2%.

Loc Code School

Tota

l En

roll

# % F

/R

Mea

l

%

GA

TE

% E

L

%

Latin

o

%

Whi

te

% A

f. A

mer

.

%

Asi

an

% F

ili.

8570 CAMINO NUEVO CHARTER HIGH 483 97% 0% 8% 97% 0 0 1 1 RECLASSIFICATION

2011-12 2011-12 # EL



Rate

Change from Prior Year

CAMINO NUEVO CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL 32 23 71.9% 12.2% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 127 27 12.2% 3.3% Resident Schools Median 285 36 14.3% 3.9% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 366 41 11.3% 1.1% District 180,618 24,697 13.7% -1.7%

2010-11 2010-11 # EL



Rate CAMINO NUEVO CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL 57 34 59.6% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 155 20 8.9% Resident Schools Median 277 24 10.3% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 419 46 10.2% District 194,904 29,956 15.4%

2009-10 2009-10 # EL



Rate CAMINO NUEVO CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL 59 16 27.1% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 205 15 10.4% Resident Schools Median 256 16 10.1% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 573 58 10.1% District 205,312 26,080 12.7%

173



March 4, 2014

EVALUATION VISIT RESULTS Following are definitions of the School Performance Evaluation ratings:

An evaluation of accomplished applies to operations characterized, overall, by strengths. There are very few weaknesses and any that do exist do not diminish the students’ experience. While an evaluation of accomplished represents a high standard of operating, it is a standard that should be achievable in all schools. It implies that it is fully appropriate for a school to continue its operations without significant adjustment. The school would always be expected, however, to continue to take advantage of opportunities to improve.

An evaluation of proficient applies to operations characterized by a number of strengths. There are weaknesses, but neither singly nor collectively do these have a significant adverse impact on the student experience. An evaluation of proficient may be arrived at in a number of circumstances. The school may provide a productive student experience, but it may not provide consistent challenge for students. Typically operations will be characterized by strengths, but one or more weaknesses reduce the overall quality of the student experience.

An evaluation of developing applies to operations characterized by weaknesses which require remedial action by the school. Some, if not all, staff responsible for the operation evaluated as inadequate require support from senior managers in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. There may be some strengths, but these are overshadowed by the impact of the weaknesses. An evaluation of unsatisfactory applies when there are major weaknesses in operation that require immediate remedial action on the part of the school. The student experience is at risk in significant respects. In almost all cases, staff responsible for operations evaluated unsatisfactory will require support from senior managers in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. This may involve working alongside effective peers in or beyond the school. Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Student Achievement and Educational Performance at the school to be “Developing.” Areas of particular strength include:

• The school-wide API exceeds 775. 2012-13 CDE Reports show Camino Nuevo Charter High School API at 792.

• The school reclassifies English Learners at a rate higher than the District average. 2012-13 CDE Reports show Camino Nuevo Charter High School at a 71.9% reclassification rate, which is significantly above District average of 13.7 %.

Areas recommended for improvement include: • While the school has met subgroup API growth targets in the past, it did not meet them for any subgroup

in 2012-13. • The school must continue to build on proficiency levels in ELA to increase AGT, which is below the

District growth average in 2012-13. While math levels are within the range of District AGT performance, improvements in this area must continue.

174



March 4, 2014

II. Governance and Organizational Management Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Governance and Organizational Management at the school to be “Accomplished.” Areas of particular strength include:

• The Governing Board has a highly effective stakeholder communication system for gathering input, sharing information, and resolving concerns. Documents available at the time of the visit as well as a discussion with various schools leaders served as evidence that the Camino Nuevo schools offer various avenues for parents to become involved in school decision-making and to receive information via workshops, newsletters, or presentations from CEO at all Camino Nuevo Schools. ��

Areas recommended for improvement include: • Camino Nuevo Governing Board is encouraged to complete their update to their current complaint

procedures into the formalized Uniform Complaint Procedure Policy soon and update the CSD upon completion.

III. Fiscal Operations Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Fiscal Operations at the school to be “Proficient.” Areas of particular strength: 2012/13 Audit

• Cash and cash equivalents are positive at $994,929, a continuous positive trend since 2009/10. Cash and cash equivalents are generating a cash reserve of 22.02%, which is well above the recommended 5%.

• Net assets are trending upwards for the fourth year. Net assets for 2012/13 are $3,286,171. • Net income is positive at $220,850, and continued to be positive since 2009/10.


• Establish a clear, separate accounting of monies received through fundraising apart from General Fund.

Additional Information: 2012/2013 Audit

• The audit issued an unmodified opinion. • The audit contained no findings or material weaknesses.

IV. Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program at the school to be “Proficient.” Areas of particular strength include:

• Internal assessment data and systems in place were shared by school leadership at the time of the visit serving as evidence that the school leadership from Camino Nuevo Charter HS regularly monitors the design and delivery of the instructional program described in the charter, including the implementation of intervention/differentiation strategies to address the learning needs of all students.

175



March 4, 2014

• The school consistently collects, monitors, and analyzes student level, grade level, and school level performance data to inform and evaluate instructional decision making based on the documents available and discussion with leadership at the time of the visit.

• Camino Nuevo Charter HS has established and consistently monitors systems and procedures to comply with the Modified Consent Decree, to actively identify students with disabilities or suspected disabilities, assess them promptly, develop IEPs as necessary in a timely manner, and provide Special Education services and supports in accordance with students’ IEPs, and maintain records in Welligent.

Areas noted for improvement include:

• Camino Nuevo Charter HS is encouraged to continue to monitor and modify, as appropriate, its Master Plan for English Learners. Classroom visits served as evidence that school can benefit from overseeing the consistent and systematic implementation of the strategies listed in their Master Plan.

• Due to the higher than average suspension rates, it is recommended that school leadership continue to explore ways to implement the Discipline Foundation Policy and to apply alternatives to suspensions.

176

106435





GrowthMet

TargetGrowth Target

GrowthMet

TargetAfrican American or Black - - - - -- American Indian or Alaska Native - - - - -- Asian - - - - -- Filipino - - - - -- Hispanic or Latino 5 -7 No 5 21 Yes A -9 NoNative Hawaiian or Pacific Islander - - - - -- White - - - - -- Two or More Races - - - - -- English Learners 5 17 Yes 5 17 Yes 5 -23 NoSocioeconomically Disadvantaged 5 -3 No 5 18 Yes A -11 NoStudents with Disabilities - - - - --

2011 Base API

2012 Growth API

11-12 Growth

2012 Base API

2013 Growth API

12-13 Growth

Camino Nuevo Charter High 782 802 20 802 792 -10CDE Similar Schools Median 679 691 12 692 708 17Resident Schools Median 652 694 42 694 683 -11Comparison Schools Median 662 702 40 703 667 -36




Basic


Camino Nuevo Charter High 37% 62% 81% 19%CDE Similar Schools Median 59% 42% 82% 18%Resident Schools Median 66% 34% 84% 17%Comparison Schools Median 70% 31% 88% 12%

# Criteria # Met % Met # Criteria # Met % MetCamino Nuevo Charter High 18 14 78% 18 13 72%CDE Similar Schools Median 18 11 69% 18 12 69%Resident Schools Median 17 13 85% 18 10 57%Comparison Schools Median 18 8 46% 18 12 62%


AYP Comparison

2012 AYP 2013 AYP


No Yes No8 7 7

10 10 10


API Comparison

-7 20 -10No Yes No

783 802 7925 5 A

A charter school that has operated for at least four years is eligible for renewal only if the school has satisfied at least one of the following criteria prior to receiving a charter renewal: Attained its Academic Performance Index (API) growth target in the prior year or in two of the last three years, both school wide and for all groups of pupils served by the charter school; ranked 4 to 10 on the API statewide or similar schools rank in the prior year or in two of the last three years both schoolwide and for all groups of pupils served by the charter school (SB 1290). The academic performance of the charter school must be at least equal to the academic performance of the public schools that the charter school pupils would otherwise have been required to attend, as well as the academic performance of the schools in the school district in which the charter school is located, taking into account the composition of pupil population served at the charter school (Ed. Code 47607).

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

790 782 802

Camino Nuevo Charter High Loc. Code: 8570CDS Code:

CRITERIA SUMMARY


177

ESCBD

Loc Code

School


Conf 2012 Base API

2013 Grow

th API

2012 State Rank

2012 Sim

ilar Schools

Rank

Met 2013

Sch-wide

Target

Met 2013

Subgroup Targets

% Free/

Reduced Lunch

% Sp Ed

% G

ATE%

EL%

RFEP%

Latino

%

White

% Af.

Amer

%

Asian%

Fili %

Am

Indian

%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or

More

XR2

8570Cam

ino Nuevo Charter High

3599-12

802792

710

No

No

9911

09

7698

00

11

00

0

LAUSD Sim


E2

8729Abraham

Lincoln Senior High1076

9-12686

6932

4Yes

No

6311

1620

5273

00

251

00

0

XP2

7750Academ

y of Environmental &

Social Po251

9-12651

6772

2Yes

Yes43

68

2056

1000

00

00

00

XR2

8823Alliance Dr. O

lga Mohan High

3379-12

883895

1010

YesYes

986

015

6198

01

00

00

0

XR1

8825Alliance W

illiam and Carol O

uchi Acade443

9-12773

7726

9N

oN

o93

60

1352

860

140

00

00

XR2

8827Anim

o Oscar De La Hoya Charter High

4719-12

744738

58

No

No

966

016

6798

10

00

00

0

XR7

8504Anim

o Pat Brown

4479-12

795799

710

No

No

989

022

6397

02

00

00

0

N6

8609Arleta High

11549-12

689718

24

YesYes

7410

1014

4995

11

11

00

0

XR5

7733Aspire Pacific Academ

y475

9-11737

7414

8N

oN

o91

110

1165

990

00

00

00

S5

8536Bell Senior High

28209-12

690705

23

YesYes

7211

1421

5498

10

00

00

0

XP2

8606East Los Angeles Perform

ing Arts Acad373

9-12620

6421

1Yes

Yes57

912

1844

980

10

00

00

XP2

8774Los Angeles School of Global Studies

2849-12

656649

22

No

No

737

821

6491

11

32

10

1

S5

8882M

aywood Academ

y High954

9-12668

7052

2Yes

Yes83

1013

1958

981

00

00

00

XR3

8106N

orth Valley Charter Academy

1576-12

750742

59

No

No

7819

010

2978

155

10

10

1

XP6

7716Cesar E. Chavez Learning Academ

ies-So365

9-12727

7084

6N

oN

o81

1010

1354

951

30

01

00

S5

8881South East High

18559-12

678689

23

YesYes

6611

1321

5098

01

00

00

0

S5

8871South Gate Senior High

23669-12

693708

34

YesYes

8510

1119

5199

01

00

00

0

LAUSD Sim


edian459

-692

7083

4-

-80

109

1954

980

10

00

00

Resident Schools

XP2

7771Am

bassador School of Global Leadersh587

6-12655

6472

2N

oN

o57

1313

2741

750

413

42

10

XP2

8543Belm

ont Senior High797

9-12645

6681

3Yes

Yes68

129

3152

881

24

40

01

XP2

8501Los Angeles High School of the Arts (LA

3039-12

732705

48

No

No

618

1026

6490

02

61

00

0

XP2

7783N

ew O

pen World Academ

y843

K-12709

7271

5Yes

Yes52

168

4140

850

38

21

01

XP2

8206School for the Visual Arts and Hum

anit351

9-12690

6852

4N

oN

o57

89

2749

811

111

50

00

XP2

7780U

CLA Comm

unity773

K-12697

6803

3N

oN

o51

1112

4439

801

214

31

00


680-

694683

24

--

5712

1029

4583

12

104

10

0

Comparison Schools

XP2

8543Belm

ont Senior High797

9-12645

6681

3Yes

Yes68

129

3152

881

24

40

01

XR1

8654Crenshaw

Arts-Technology Charter Hig208

9-12703

6663

9N

oN

o89

110

04

60

910

00

01

XR7

8733Alain Leroy Locke 3 College Preparator

3619-12

B531

8214

021

2254

044

00

10

1

E5

8750John M

arshall Senior High1954

9-12738

7574

4Yes

No

6210

3014

4562

122

1013

10

0

E2

8462Virgil M

iddle1108

6- 8734

7453

8Yes

Yes77

1618

2553

841

34

80

10

XP2

8748W

est Adams Preparatory High

14359-12

632646

16

YesN

o62

147

2949

920

70

00

00


edian953

-703

6673

6-

-73

138

2347

731

52

20

01


ROW

TH API DEMO

GRAPHICS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO




rowth API reprt.

Camino N

uevo Charter High


th API.School Dem


Office of D


2/11/2014

178

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolTotal Enroll

#%

F/R M

eal%

GATE%

EL%

Latino%

White

% Af.

Amer.

% Asian

% Fili.

% Am

Indian%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or M

oreXR

28570

Camino N

uevo Charter High

48397%

0%8%

97%0%

0%1%

1%0%

0%0%

LAUSD Sim


E2

8729Abraham


87%16%

19%72%

0%1%

26%1%

0%0%

0%XP

27750

Academy of Environm

ental & Social Policy

34444%

7%19%

99%0%

0%0%

0%0%

0%0%

XR2

8823Alliance Dr. O

lga Mohan High

45898%

0%12%

98%0%

2%0%

0%0%

0%0%

XR1

8825Alliance W

illiam and Carol O

uchi Academy

54596%

0%12%

86%0%

14%0%

0%0%

0%0%

XR2

8827Anim


60197%

0%15%

98%0%

0%0%

0%0%

0%0%

XR7

8504Anim

o Pat Brown

58998%

0%21%

97%0%

1%0%

0%0%

0%0%

N6

8609Arleta High

156490%

10%15%

95%1%

1%0%

1%1%

0%0%

XR5


y593

95%0%

10%96%

0%0%

0%0%

0%0%

0%S

58536

Bell Senior High3720

75%13%

19%98%

1%0%

0%0%

0%0%

0%XP

28606

East Los Angeles Performing Arts Academ

y488

83%12%

18%99%

1%0%

0%0%

0%0%

0%XP

28774

Los Angeles School of Global Studies

36765%

8%23%

93%0%

1%2%

2%1%

0%0%

S5

8882M

aywood Academ

y High1279

83%13%

16%98%

0%0%

0%0%

0%0%

0%XR

38106

North Valley Charter Academ

y191

77%0%

11%77%

16%4%

1%1%

1%0%

2%XP

67716

Cesar E. Chavez Learning Academies-Socia

47176%

11%11%

95%1%

3%0%

0%1%

0%0%

S5

8881South East High

259385%

11%19%

98%0%

1%0%

0%0%

0%0%

S5

8871South G

ate Senior High3125

87%11%

18%99%

0%0%

0%0%

0%0%

0%LAU

SD Similar Schools from

CDE Median

59186%

9%17%

97%0%

1%0%

0%0%

0%0%

Resident SchoolsXP

27771

Ambassador School of G

lobal Leadership684

80%12%

24%75%

0%4%

12%4%

2%1%

0%XP

28543

Belmont Senior High

102085%

8%30%

88%0%

2%5%

4%0%

0%0%

XP2

8501Los Angeles High School of the Arts (LAH

41291%

10%26%

88%1%

1%7%

2%0%

0%0%

XP2

7783N

ew O

pen World Academ

y1085

89%6%

49%86%

1%3%

8%2%

1%0%

0%XP

28206

School for the Visual Arts and Humanitie

43183%

10%27%

85%0%

1%9%

5%0%

0%0%

XP2

7780U

CLA Comm

unity975

82%10%

51%80%

1%2%

13%3%

1%0%

0%Resident Schools M

edian830

84%10%

29%85%

1%2%

8%3%

0%0%

0%Charter Com

parison SchoolsXP

28543

Belmont Senior High

102085%

8%30%

88%0%

2%5%

4%0%

0%0%

XR1

8654Crenshaw

Arts-Technology Charter High265

96%0%

0%5%

0%94%

0%0%

0%0%

1%XR

78733

Alain Leroy Locke 3 College Preparatory463

90%0%

20%54%

0%41%

0%0%

1%0%

1%E

58750

John Marshall Senior High

268461%

28%14%

62%12%

2%10%

13%0%

0%0%

E2

8462Virgil M

iddle1102

78%16%

26%85%

1%3%

3%7%

0%0%

0%XP

28748

West Adam

s Preparatory High2068

94%7%

26%92%

0%7%

1%0%

0%0%

0%Charter Com

parison Schools Median

106188%

8%23%

74%0%

5%2%

2%0%

0%0%







ber.

OCTO


GRAPHICS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO

LSCam


Office of D


2/11/2014

179

ESC BD Loc

CodeSchool

09-10 EL #

10-11 Reclass #

10-11 Reclass

Rate

10-11 EL #

11-12 Reclass #

11-12 Reclass

Rate

11-12 EL #

12-13 Reclass #

12-13 Reclass

RateXR 2 8570 Camino Nuevo Charter High 59 16 27% 57 34 60% 32 23 72%


E 2 8729 Abraham Lincoln Senior High 707 45 6% 624 41 7% 472 41 9%

XP 2 7750 Academy of Environmental & Soci -- 9 -- 70 2 3% 76 4 5%

XR 2 8823 Alliance Dr. Olga Mohan High 79 15 19% 80 23 29% 73 27 37%

XR 1 8825 Alliance William and Carol Ouchi A 77 8 10% 86 17 20% 111 27 24%

XR 2 8827 Animo Oscar De La Hoya Charter H 116 12 10% 155 35 23% 142 43 30%

XR 7 8504 Animo Pat Brown 159 20 13% 174 0 0% 143 21 15%

N 6 8609 Arleta High 440 45 10% 387 35 9% 291 35 12%

XR 5 7733 Aspire Pacific Academy -- 8 -- 66 18 27% 69 23 33%

S 5 8536 Bell Senior High 1281 173 14% 1129 141 12% 990 120 12%

XP 2 8606 East Los Angeles Performing Arts A -- 10 -- 111 7 6% 108 10 9%

XP 2 8774 Los Angeles School of Global Stud 72 6 8% 57 3 5% 69 8 12%

S 5 8882 Maywood Academy High 251 37 15% 251 21 8% 242 33 14%

XR 3 8106 North Valley Charter Academy 39 0 0% 41 2 5% 37 2 5%

XP 6 7716 Cesar E. Chavez Learning Academi -- -- -- -- 17 -- 64 19 30%

S 5 8881 South East High 768 56 7% 798 71 9% 662 70 11%

S 5 8871 South Gate Senior High 798 100 13% 745 68 9% 714 88 12%


Resident Schools

XP 2 7771 Ambassador School of Global Lead -- 1 -- 133 14 11% 196 29 15%

XP 2 8543 Belmont Senior High 526 53 10% 413 42 10% 373 42 11%

XP 2 8501 Los Angeles High School of the Art 149 15 10% 121 8 7% 109 19 17%

XP 2 7783 New Open World Academy 351 46 13% 498 80 16% 526 61 12%

XP 2 8206 School for the Visual Arts and Hum 134 14 10% 140 21 15% 131 18 14%

XP 2 7780 UCLA Community 256 16 6% 450 27 6% 537 84 16%



XP 2 8543 Belmont Senior High 526 53 10% 413 42 10% 373 42 11%

XR 1 8654 Crenshaw Arts-Technology Charte 0 1 -- 0 3 -- 0 3 --

XR 7 8733 Alain Leroy Locke 3 College Prepar 365 15 4% 151 5 3% 140 7 5%

E 5 8750 John Marshall Senior High 630 62 10% 573 49 9% 442 39 9%

E 2 8462 Virgil Middle 620 87 14% 425 76 18% 358 90 25%

XP 2 8748 West Adams Preparatory High 964 133 14% 772 84 11% 758 90 12%



a

Camino Nuevo Charter High



180

2012-13 2011-12 # EL2012-13 #

Reclassified



Year

Camino Nuevo Charter High 32 23 71.9% 12.2%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 127 27 12.2% 3.3%Resident Schools Median 285 36 14.3% 3.9%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 366 41 11.3% 1.1%District 180,618 24,697 13.7% -1.7%

2011-12 2010-11 # EL2011-12 #

Reclassified


Rate

Camino Nuevo Charter High 57 34 59.6%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 155 20 8.9%Resident Schools Median 277 24 10.3%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 419 46 10.2%District 194,904 29,956 15.4%

2010-11 2009-10 # EL2010-11 #

Reclassified


Rate

Camino Nuevo Charter High 59 16 27.1%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 205 15 10.4%Resident Schools Median 256 16 10.1%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 573 58 10.1%District 205,312 26,080 12.7%

Camino Nuevo Charter HighRECLASSIFICATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH COMPARISON SCHOOLS' MEDIANS



181

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolO

CT 2012 Enroll #

Sp Ed Enroll #

Sp Ed Enroll %

% High

Incidenc%

Low

Incidenc# AU

T# DB

# DEAF

# ED

# EM

D# HO

H # MR

# O

HI*# O

I#

SLD* # SLI*

# TBI# VI

XR2

8570Cam

ino Nuevo Charter H

igh483

459%

8%1%

40

00

01

03

037

00

0

LAUSD Sim


E2

8729Abraham


17011%

8%3%

150

00

03

1913

3115

20

0

XP2

7750Academ


Social Policy344

257%

7%0%

00

00

00

00

025

00

0

XR2

8823Alliance Dr. O

lga Mohan High

45830

7%6%

0%0

00

00

20

60

202

00

XR1

8825Alliance W

illiam and Carol O

uchi Academy

54539

7%7%

0%0

00

00

00

10

361

01

XR2

8827Anim


60135

6%5%

1%4

00

10

00

30

270

00

XR7

8504Anim

o Pat Brown

58942

7%6%

1%1

00

00

20

50

330

01

N6

8609Arleta High

1564169

11%10%

1%9

00

20

42

232

1260

10

XR5


y593

6210%

9%1%

50

02

01

09

045

00

0

S5


3720395

11%9%

2%30

00

00

622

174

3151

00

XP2


ing Arts Academy

48843

9%6%

3%11

00

00

00

21

280

01

XP2

8774Los Angeles School of G

lobal Studies367

236%

6%1%

00

01

00

01

120

00

0

S5

8882M

aywood Academ

y High1279

12510%

8%2%

120

02

02

109

189

00

0

XR3

8106N


19135

18%16%

3%5

00

00

00

110

190

00

XP6


ies-Socia471

439%

8%1%

10

00

00

04

235

10

0

S5

8881South East High

2593257

10%8%

2%18

00

40

212

157

1961

02

S5

8871South G

ate Senior High3125

30510%

8%2%

200

01

01

2915

12223

21

1

LAUSD Sim


edian591

439%

8%1%

50

00

01

08

136

00

0

Resident Schools

XP2

7771Am

bassador School of Global Leadership

68482

12%10%

2%13

00

20

10

50

592

00

XP2

8543Belm

ont Senior High1020

14414%

10%4%

140

01

01

199

393

31

0

XP2


41237

9%7%

2%0

00

00

08

20

270

00

XP2

7783N

ew O

pen World Academ

y1085

12712%

10%2%

120

02

03

110

087

110

1

XP2


anitie431

399%

7%2%

40

01

01

13

029

00

0

XP2

7780U

CLA Comm

unity975

839%

6%2%

70

00

02

97

347

70

1


83083

10%9%

2%10

00

10

15

60

533

00

Comparison Schools

XP2

8543Belm

ont Senior High1020

14414%

10%4%

140

01

01

199

393

31

0

XR1

8654Crenshaw


2710%

9%1%

10

00

00

03

119

30

0

XR7

8733Alain Leroy Locke 3 College Preparatory

46376

16%15%

2%5

00

10

11

70

601

00

E5

8750John M


27610%

7%3%

240

02

07

2522

2161

44

25

E2

8462Virgil M

iddle1102

16415%

11%4%

320

00

02

611

3108

20

0

XP2

8748W


2068267

13%11%

2%30

00

00

310

224

1925

10


edian1061

15414%

10%3%

190

01

02

810

3101

31

0

Camino N

uevo Charter High




anagement Inform

ation System (CASEM



N STU

DENTS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO


IS REPORT)

Office of D


2/11/2014

182

AESCBD

Loc. Code

School Nam

e# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

%

Below

Basic%

Basic%

Prof%

Adv%

B/BB/F

BB

% Prof

/Adv#

Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

%

Below

Basic%

Basic%

Prof%

Adv%

B/BB/F

BB

% Prof

/Adv

XR2

8570Cam


3311%

7%29%

47%15%

37%62%

33612%

39%30%

18%1%

81%19%

LAUSD Sim


E2

8729Abraham


11%16%

32%26%

15%59%

41%936

27%33%

18%16%

6%78%

22%

XP2

7750Academ


Social Policy240

9%18%

45%23%

6%72%

29%240

36%42%

16%6%

0%94%

6%

XR2

8823Alliance Dr. O

lga Mohan High

3372%

9%20%

41%28%

31%69%

3361%

6%15%

44%33%

22%77%

XR1

8825Alliance W

illiam and Carol O

uchi Academy

4386%

15%36%

31%12%

57%43%

43617%

31%31%

17%4%

79%21%

XR2

8827Anim


4585%

14%37%

29%15%

56%44%

46218%

32%29%

18%3%

79%21%

XR7

8504Anim

o Pat Brown

4155%

13%32%

35%15%

50%50%

4175%

17%27%

35%16%

49%51%

N6

8609Arleta High

10037%

17%39%

29%9%

63%38%

90815%

40%30%

13%2%

85%15%

XR5


y425

6%11%

31%36%

16%48%

52%424

15%34%

31%18%

2%80%

20%

S5


26359%

15%38%

27%11%

62%38%

246319%

38%21%

15%6%

78%21%

XP2


ing Arts Academy

3427%

20%43%

23%6%

70%29%

34536%

50%11%

3%0%

97%3%

XP2


27211%

20%38%

23%7%

69%30%

27432%

45%18%

5%0%

95%5%

S5

8882M

aywood Academ

y High929

8%14%

36%30%

12%58%

42%877

21%47%

22%10%

1%90%

11%

XR3

8106N


1548%

16%42%

19%16%

66%35%

15410%

28%34%

23%5%

72%28%

XP6


ies-Socia346

3%13%

33%34%

18%49%

52%345

22%40%

29%8%

1%91%

9%

S5

8881South East High

16869%

14%34%

30%13%

57%43%

171524%

40%25%

11%1%

89%12%

S5


22336%

14%39%

30%11%

59%41%

214919%

43%22%

14%2%

84%16%

LAUSD Sim


edian432

7%15%

37%30%

13%59%

42%430

19%39%

24%15%

2%82%

18%

Resident Schools

XP2

7771Am

bassador School of Global Leadership543

14%16%

37%22%

10%67%

32%540

27%36%

19%14%

4%82%

18%

XP2

8543Belm

ont Senior High748

13%18%

37%23%

9%68%

32%715

27%38%

22%11%

2%87%

13%

XP2


2988%

15%35%

29%13%

58%42%

29212%

45%28%

13%2%

85%15%

XP2

7783N

ew O

pen World Academ

y751

6%15%

41%28%

11%62%

39%752

7%22%

28%26%

17%57%

43%

XP2


anitie332

8%17%

39%26%

9%64%

35%307

29%39%

22%8%

1%90%

9%

XP2

7780U

CLA Comm

unity720

12%19%

37%23%

9%68%

32%717

11%30%

28%21%

10%69%

31%


63210%

17%37%

25%10%

66%34%

62820%

37%25%

14%3%

84%17%

Comparison Schools

XP2

8543Belm

ont Senior High748

13%18%

37%23%

9%68%

32%715

27%38%

22%11%

2%87%

13%

XR1

8654Crenshaw


11%21%

39%22%

7%71%

29%189

26%47%

18%10%

0%91%

10%

XR7


31427%

31%26%

13%3%

84%16%

32945%

38%13%

4%0%

96%4%

E5

8750John M


8%11%

25%30%

26%44%

56%1720

18%37%

22%17%

7%77%

24%

E2

8462Virgil M

iddle975

8%14%

37%27%

14%59%

41%1000

8%21%

30%28%

14%59%

42%

XP2

8748W


124111%

20%40%

23%6%

71%29%

123021%

46%22%

9%1%

89%10%


edian862

11%19%

37%23%

8%70%

31%858

24%38%

22%11%

2%88%

12%

Camino N

uevo Charter High2012-13 CALIFO

RNIA STAN

DARDS-TEST (CST) ENG

LISH LANG

UAG

E ARTS AND M

ATH RESULTS

A


ATH

Office of D


2/11/2014

183

ESCBD

Loc. Code

School Nam

e# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

% Below

Basic

% Basic

% Prof

% Adv

%

B/BB/FBB

% Prof

/Adv# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

% Below

Basic

% Basic

% Prof

% Adv

%

B/BB/FBB

% Prof

/Adv

XR2

8570Cam


3401%

5%30%

40%24%

36%64%

34115%

31%34%

18%3%

80%21%

LAUSD Sim


E2

8729Abraham


14%17%

32%22%

15%63%

37%1270

27%33%

20%14%

5%80%

19%

XP2

7750Academ


Social Policy253

10%23%

35%25%

7%68%

32%242

39%43%

17%1%

0%99%

1%

XR2

8823Alliance Dr. O

lga Mohan High

3351%

6%30%

39%23%

37%62%

3352%

9%19%

41%29%

30%70%

XR1

8825Alliance W

illiam and Carol O

uchi Academy

4105%

18%36%

29%11%

59%40%

40816%

31%33%

16%3%

80%19%

XR2

8827Anim


4275%

11%33%

34%16%

49%50%

41714%

26%25%

24%11%

65%35%

XR7

8504Anim

o Pat Brown

4258%

12%35%

30%16%

55%46%

4266%

20%30%

34%10%

56%44%

N6

8609Arleta High

10818%

17%38%

27%10%

63%37%

105228%

44%20%

7%1%

92%8%

XR5


y430

5%12%

33%34%

17%50%

51%443

14%33%

29%22%

2%76%

24%

S5


311710%

18%38%

22%12%

66%34%

272119%

36%21%

18%7%

76%25%

XP2


ing Arts Academy

3564%

20%46%

25%5%

70%30%

34038%

45%15%

2%0%

98%2%

XP2


27413%

22%35%

22%8%

70%30%

27327%

45%23%

5%0%

95%5%

S5

8882M

aywood Academ

y High986

12%19%

35%24%

10%66%

34%938

31%40%

22%6%

0%93%

6%

XR3

8106N


1788%

20%27%

32%12%

55%44%

17612%

26%33%

25%4%

71%29%

XP6


ies-Socia336

5%14%

35%32%

14%54%

46%335

19%33%

31%15%

1%83%

16%

S5

8881South East High

197511%

17%35%

25%12%

63%37%

200627%

37%24%

10%2%

88%12%

S5


23749%

19%37%

24%11%

65%35%

229621%

40%25%

12%2%

86%14%

LAUSD Sim


edian426

8%18%

35%26%

12%63%

37%422

20%35%

24%15%

2%82%

18%

Resident Schools

XP2

7771Am

bassador School of Global Leadership548

10%18%

39%22%

10%67%

32%532

25%40%

21%12%

3%86%

15%

XP2

8543Belm

ont Senior High788

13%20%

37%21%

8%70%

29%737

27%38%

22%10%

2%87%

12%

XP2


2977%

16%39%

25%12%

62%37%

28810%

34%34%

18%3%

78%21%

XP2

7783N

ew O

pen World Academ

y747

10%19%

36%25%

11%65%

36%742

9%25%

26%23%

17%60%

40%

XP2


anitie311

8%20%

37%23%

12%65%

35%298

27%35%

23%12%

2%85%

14%

XP2

7780U

CLA Comm

unity682

12%15%

36%24%

13%63%

37%683

15%29%

25%19%

12%69%

31%


61510%

19%37%

24%12%

65%36%

60820%

35%24%

15%3%

82%18%

Comparison Schools

XP2

8543Belm

ont Senior High788

13%20%

37%21%

8%70%

29%737

27%38%

22%10%

2%87%

12%

XR1

8654Crenshaw


10%17%

41%27%

5%68%

32%196

20%45%

23%10%

2%88%

12%

XR7


36235%

26%25%

12%2%

86%14%

32729%

45%18%

6%2%

92%8%

E5

8750John M


9%14%

27%25%

25%50%

50%1845

21%34%

23%16%

6%78%

22%

E2

8462Virgil M

iddle1071

7%15%

36%29%

14%58%

43%1105

13%24%

25%23%

15%62%

38%

XP2

8748W


146215%

25%36%

19%5%

76%24%

145930%

41%18%

9%1%

89%10%


edian930

12%19%

36%23%

7%69%

31%921

24%40%

23%10%

2%88%

12%

2012 CST MATH

Camino N

uevo Charter High2011-12 CALIFO

RNIA STAN


LISH LANG

UAG

E ARTS AND M

ATH RESULTS

2012 CST ELA

Office of D


2/11/2014

184

ESC BD Loc Code School2012-13 Grade Span

2011-12 CAHSEE

Grade 10% Passed

Math

2011-12 CAHSEE

Grade 10 % Passed ELA

2012-13 CAHSEE

Grade 10 % Passed

Math

2012-13 CAHSEE

Grade 10 % Passed ELA

2011-12 Cohort

Graduation Rate

XR 2 8570 Camino Nuevo Charter High 9-12 94% 93% 96% 93% 94%


E 2 8729 Abraham Lincoln Senior High 9-12 80% 76% 83% 85% 75%

XP 2 7750 Academy of Environmental & Soc 9-12 70% 68% 64% 76% 89%

XR 2 8823 Alliance Dr. Olga Mohan High 9-12 97% 92% 99% 95% 100%

XR 1 8825 Alliance William and Carol Ouchi 9-12 91% 89% 89% 93% 92%

XR 2 8827 Animo Oscar De La Hoya Charter 9-12 86% 83% 84% 86% 93%

XR 7 8504 Animo Pat Brown 9-12 89% 84% 87% 82% 74%

N 6 8609 Arleta High 9-12 80% 82% 88% 82% 93%

XR 5 7733 Aspire Pacific Academy 9-11 83% 86% 87% 81% --

S 5 8536 Bell Senior High 9-12 82% 73% 83% 72% 78%

XP 2 8606 East Los Angeles Performing Arts 9-12 65% 68% 73% 74% 81%

XP 2 8774 Los Angeles School of Global Stud 9-12 80% 80% 80% 72% 86%

S 5 8882 Maywood Academy High 9-12 89% 87% 81% 76% 84%

XR 3 8106 North Valley Charter Academy 6-12 94% 94% 93% 81% 86%

XP 6 7716 Cesar E. Chavez Learning Academ 9-12 86% 88% 80% 84% 94%

S 5 8881 South East High 9-12 81% 80% 88% 83% 77%

S 5 8871 South Gate Senior High 9-12 75% 74% 79% 78% 82%

LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median -- 83% 83% 84% 82% 86%

Resident Schools

XP 2 7771 Ambassador School of Global Lea 6-12 84% 76% 57% 63% 64%

XP 2 8543 Belmont Senior High 9-12 77% 65% 79% 74% 71%

XP 2 8501 Los Angeles High School of the Ar 9-12 86% 87% 74% 72% 61%

XP 2 7783 New Open World Academy K-12 72% 76% 66% 67% 63%

XP 2 8206 School for the Visual Arts and Hum 9-12 79% 74% 81% 74% 81%

XP 2 7780 UCLA Community K-12 86% 78% 78% 73% 70%

Resident Schools Median -- 82% 76% 76% 73% 67%

Comparison Schools

XP 2 8543 Belmont Senior High 9-12 77% 65% 79% 74% 71%

XR 1 8654 Crenshaw Arts-Technology Charte 9-12 85% 87% 78% 79% 87%

XR 7 8733 Alain Leroy Locke 3 College Prepa 9-12 62% 54% 60% 47% 61%

E 5 8750 John Marshall Senior High 9-12 86% 83% 88% 83% 80%

E 2 8462 Virgil Middle 6- 8 -- -- -- -- --

XP 2 8748 West Adams Preparatory High 9-12 74% 74% 78% 72% 80%

Comparison Schools in Charter Median -- 77% 74% 78% 74% 80%

a

This page displays the CAHSEE pass rates and graduation rates of the specified school year as published by the California Department of Education (CDE).

HIGH SCHOOL DATA WITH COMPARISON SCHOOLSCamino Nuevo Charter High

Office of Data and Accountability * 10 or fewer Students 2/11/2014

185

a

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolSusp. Rate

2011-12Susp. Rate

2012-13Single Std.

%2011-12

2012-132011-12

2012-13%

Afr. Am

er.# Afr. Am

er.Susp. Rate

Single Std. %

% Stud. Dis.

# Stud. Dis.

Susp. Rate

Single Std. %

XR2

8570Cam

ino Nuevo Charter H

igh4%

2%2%

209

4118

--

--

9%44

7%5%

LAUSD Sim


E2

8729Abraham

Lincoln Senior High0%

0%0%

21

105

1%10

0%0%

11%167

0%0%

XP2

7750Academ


Social Policy6%

9%8%

2132

2735

0%1

0%0%

8%28

14%14%

XR2

8823Alliance Dr. O

lga Mohan High

1%2%

1%6

712

182%

70%

0%6%

293%

3%

XR1

8825Alliance W

illiam and Carol O

uchi Academy

7%3%

3%34

1546

1714%

754%

4%6%

353%

3%

XR2

8827Anim


6%5%

4%33

3270

88-

--

-5%

320%

0%

XR7

8504Anim

o Pat Brown

8%4%

3%46

22100

441%

825%

25%8%

454%

4%

N6

8609Arleta High

2%0%

0%32

152

21%

180%

0%10%

1670%

0%

XR5


y18%

8%6%

8545

16990

--

--

10%61

33%15%

S5


0%0%

0%10

820

240%

100%

0%11%

4111%

1%

XP2


ing Arts Academy

3%2%

1%17

919

110%

250%

50%9%

467%

2%

XP2

8774Los Angeles School of G

lobal Studies3%

2%2%

116

198

1%5

40%40%

6%23

0%0%

S5

8882M

aywood Academ

y High1%

0%0%

166

1718

--

--

10%125

2%2%

XR3

8106N


3%4%

4%6

817

304%

825%

25%18%

349%

9%

XP6


ies-Socia0%

0%0%

10

20

3%14

0%0%

9%43

0%0%

S5

8881South East High

1%1%

1%24

1557

381%

350%

0%9%

2410%

0%

S5

8871South G

ate Senior High3%

0%1%

10415

13420

0%6

67%67%

10%309

1%1%

LAUSD Sim


edian3%

2%1%

199

2419

1%8

0%0%

9%46

2%1%

Resident Schools

XP2

7771Am

bassador School of Global Leadership

2%0%

0%13

323

54%

300%

0%11%

771%

1%

XP2

8543Belm

ont Senior High2%

1%1%

2312

3924

2%17

0%0%

14%146

1%1%

XP2


0%0%

0%0

00

02%

70%

0%10%

390%

0%

XP2

7783N

ew O

pen World Academ

y5%

3%3%

5535

8358

2%21

5%5%

11%119

13%8%

XP2


anitie4%

0%0%

161

201

1%4

0%0%

8%33

0%0%

XP2

7780U

CLA Comm

unity2%

1%1%

188

2017

2%16

0%0%

9%85

5%4%


2%1%

1%17

622

112%

170%

0%10%

811%

1%

Comparison Schools

XP2

8543Belm

ont Senior High2%

1%1%

2312

3924

2%17

0%0%

14%146

1%1%

XR1

8654Crenshaw

Arts-Technology Charter High0%

0%0%

00

00

94%249

0%0%

9%23

0%0%

XR7


50%55%

28%285

253568

61641%

19098%

49%12%

57126%

67%

E5

8750John M

arshall Senior High4%

4%3%

119100

206139

2%60

15%7%

10%265

5%3%

E2

8462Virgil M

iddle9%

3%3%

11136

16562

3%30

3%3%

15%166

2%2%

XP2

8748W


6%0%

0%136

6208

187%

1431%

1%13%

2700%

0%


edian5%

2%2%

11524

18643

5%102

2%2%

13%156

2%1%

EVENTS

DAYSAFRICAN

AMERICAN

SSTU

DENTS W

ITH DISABILITY

Camino N

uevo Charter HighSU

SPENSIO

NS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO

LSThis page displays the suspension events, days and rate for 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school year.

COM

PARISON

DATA (ALL)DISPRO

PORTIO

NALITY

Office of D


2/11/2014

186

CAMINO NUEVO CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT 240 – 13/14





Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 241-0399



187

TAB 11

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'� ��*��

�� %� �� &��'�� %� �� %��

�� K��K��L� �//�� K� �K�K.�� K� ��K�� ;1�� !"#��$

� ��%�&�� '�� (�� )�� ))�� *��$� � +�� )�� ))�� (�� (� � �� *�� &�� ,�� *�� $� � +��!�" ��-�� )��#��$

4�� (�� . �� '!�� '!�'�� *�� (�� (�� (�� (�� )�� %�

/ �� 0�� )�� . �� '!�'�� )�)�� )�� )�)�� )�� (��(��1

/ 9��(� �� )�� )��1� �� 2�� 1� �� )�� )��!��1

/ 3�� )�� 4�� )�� )��1

/ �� )�� *�� 0�� *��0��5��(�4$

�� $

��

188

��

�� !"#� �� -�� *�� !��. �� 6�� .��6�� .� � �� 3�� 7�4��(� +�� 3� ��$� � +�� )�� !"#$� � +�� )��$�� (�� ))�� -�� . �� (� � �� (� � � �� $� � 5�� )�)�� "� � �� )�� !"#� �� $� � *�� 0�� (�� )��$� 3�� &�� *.� �� 0�� )�� ))�8�� 9� 7�� 9� 3�� 3�� 9� 5��)�� 9�3�� 4� �� 9� :��$� � +�� 9�� !9� 7�� 9� 3�� 3�� 9� 3�� 9� 5��)�� 9� 3�� 4� �� 9�:��$

�� )�� (��.�� 7�� )�� ))�� *��$�

+�� )�� (�� ;�� )�� (�� ))�� ))�� (�� "(� �� +�� .�� #�9� �� +�� 4�� 9� �� (�� 4�� 4�� 9� �� (�� )�� ))�� $� � +�� )�� )�� )�� )�� ))�� )�� )��$

�� )�� )�� ")�� ;��$� � +�� ;�� )�� (�� *��$� � �� )�� (�� 2�� . �� '!�'�� (� �� $4�� "(� �� ,�(�� 3�4� �� #!#�� ")�� -�� 3�4� �� #!'� 4�� "�� 3�4� �� (�� #� )�� 8�� ")�� "�� $� 3�4� ,�(�� +�� "�� "�� (�� 0�� 3�4� �8�� #��$� � +�� (� �� 9��4� �� #� �� 9��4� �� $� +�� 3�4��(�� )�� "�� $� 7�� )�� *�� (�� )�� )�� ,�(�� 3�4� �� )�� )�� +�.73�� $�

+��*��"(� ��5��(�4��5��

��

189

��

�� (�� (�� (�� )��$� � 3�� 5�� <.8��=� �� (�� )�� )��$� � +�� 0�� )�� .73� �� )�� +��$� +�� *��0�� 3�� ,�(�� &�� +�� 3,+�� )�� (�� (�� )��$� � 3,+� �� )�� (�� +�� +�$� � +�� 3,+� �� )�� 0�� )�� >�� (�� 8)�� )��$� � +�� 3,+� �� .73��"?�� 3�� ,�� "?�� 3�� 5�� 3�� 9�� *�� $� � +�� 0�� 3�� 3,+� �"?�� 3�� 3�� 9�� *��$

3�� 2�� ;�� 73��*� �� )�� )�� 73��*� �� )� �� )�� $� � +�� )�� )�� )�� )� � �� &��;��%� �� @9� 9�� +��"�� )�)�� (�4�� (�� (�� )�� )�� )�� $� ��A��"3 � � ��"�� )�� )�� $� �� "�� (�� 8)�� 8)�� )�� )�� 4�� $� �� .�� 7�� 9��"�� )�� .�� )�� ))��$

�� ,�� -�� )�� 2�� $� � 3� �� (� )�� &�� 4��)�� ,�� 0�� )��)�� "�� $��

�� -�� ))�� (�� 2�� &��)��. ��$�

+�� )�� )�� *�� *��0��-�� . ��(��B��)%>>�� $��>��)��C$

!��"��%�� 8)�� )�� (�� (�� (�� )��$��+��4��)��$

�� "�� #��%�<?��=� "� +�� ))�� (�� (�� )��

��

190

��

��(��)��)�� $��

<6�=� "� +�� (�� (�� 8)�� ))�� 7�� 3�� -�� . �� -�� . ��$� � +�� -�� 9�)�� 6�$� �� "� ��>�� )�� -�� . ��0�� )�� (�� (��)��$�

��$�� %�+��)��)��$

��$�� %�� *�� (�� *�� )�� 8)�� $� �� . �� '!�� )�� )�� )�� )�� 0�� )��(�� )��$� +�� *�� (�� )�� )�� 3��$� 3�� 0�� )�� )�� (�� )�� (�� 2�� *�� ))�� )�� )��$� �� ))�� )�� 2��$

�� 73��*� �.7�3� &)�� &)�� $� � �� 73��*� �.7�3� &)�� )�� . ��&�� 0�� )�� (�� 9� �� 0� 3-� !�� -�� &73�� ,�(�>*�� >�� )��>9��;� � �� 5� �� 4*.3� ��$� � +�� (�� )�� 0�� 7�� 5�� 5�� (�� ))�� 8�� *��"(� �� )�� ))�� $3�� 9� �� )�� (�� *�� 3 �� -�� "�)�� (�� )� �� "�)�� )�� $� � +�� (�� ))�� )�� "�)�� .7�31� �� )�� )�� ))�� (�� 1� �� )�� (�)�� $� � 3�� )�� )�� )�� )�� 73��*��.7�3$

$�� %�4�� )�� )�� 2�� )�� )�� .7�3�� 2�� -�� &�� ,�� (��)��$

��

191



March 4, 2014

SUMMARY OF CHARTER SCHOOL PERFORMANCE PUC COMMUNITY CHARTER MIDDLE SCHOOL













193



March 4, 2014

PUC Community Charter Middle School has met the minimum statutory requirement as evidenced in the Data Summary Report. Student Discipline

Discipline and expulsion policies used at District schools must comply with the California Education Code. LAUSD charter schools must comply with the provisions related to suspensions and expulsions that are put forth in the Charter Schools Division’s Required Language for Charter Petitions. PUC Community Charter Middle School’s grounds for student suspension and expulsion are aligned with those listed in Education Code Section 48900 et seq. As the data below shows, PUC Community Charter Middle School had (16) suspensions and one (1) expulsion for the 2012-13 school year. In 2011-12 the school reported 16 suspensions and no expulsions. As of the date of this report, the school reports three (3) suspensions and no expulsions for the current school year. According to data submitted by the charter school to the LAUSD Office of Data and Accountability, school-wide suspension rates for this school have steadily decreased during this charter term as shown below: 2008-2009 13.0% 2009-2010 8.6% 2010-2011 6.2% 2011-2012 4.7% 2012-2013 4.6% For the current 2013-2014 school year, the school reports As of the date of this report, the school reports three (3) suspensions and no 0 expulsions. for the current school year. Partnerships to Uplift Communities (PUC), the organization that operates the charter school, reports that it is revisiting and reviewing its suspension and expulsion policies and procedures to ensure a more cohesive, clear, and effective process for all stakeholders. There is a commitment from PUC senior leadership, for all schools within the organization, to adhere to their behavioral intervention plan as delineated in the charter which consists of a three tiered support approach with school-wide Targeted Early Prevention (80% of students), Targeted Intervention (15% of students) with increased family communication and involvement, and Intensive Intervention (5% of students) where mentoring and clinical counseling is provided, and family support team meetings occur. They have further addressed reducing suspensions through designing and facilitating professional development for all site leaders and staff members regarding prevention and supports, specifically on the use of alternatives to suspensions.


Name of School

Location Code


date of this report

Expulsion 2013-14 As of the date of

this report

Suspension 2012-13

Expulsion 2012-13

Suspension 2011-12

Expulsion 2011-12

PUC Community

Charter Middle School

8453 3 0 16 1 16 0

194



March 4, 2014

Special Education According to the December 2012 CASEMIS report, PUC Community Charter Middle School (PUC CCMS) enrolled Special Education students at a rate that is below the District average. PUC Community Charter Middle School had a special education enrollment rate of 7%, which was five (5) percentage points lower than the LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median (12%). The school is committed to continuing its efforts to identify and serve students with disabilities. The school provides both strategic and intensive targeted intervention as needed for students. PUC CCMS has implemented a system similar to the Collaborative Learning Model (CLM) of full inclusion to meet the unique learning and social needs of students with disabilities. This model includes regular collaboration between special education and general education teachers to embed instructional strategies in the weekly lessons to ensure access to the curriculum, specialized academic instruction, and ongoing progress monitoring on a biweekly basis.

OCT 2012

Enroll #

Sp E

d En

roll

#

Sp E

d En

roll

%

% H

igh

Inci

denc

e

% L

ow

Inci

denc

e

#AU

T

#DB

#DEA

F

#ED

#EM

D

#HO

H

#MR

#OH

I*

#OI

#SLD

*

#SLI

*

#TB

I

#VI

348 25 7% 6% 1% 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 18 2 0 0

English Learners The tables below represent the number of English Learners identified, served, and reclassified by PUC Community Charter Middle School. The school’s October 2012 CALPADS Demographics with Comparison Schools shows an English learner population of 5% which is lower than the LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median of 8%. The school’s 2012-13 reclassification rate of 96% was higher than the LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median rate of 30.4%. The success of English Learners in their English language development is of the utmost importance to the school. The school is rigorous in their close monitoring of the progress of English Learners, providing targeted, differentiated instruction, and reclassifying students when they are ready. In addition, the instructional program for PUC CCMS is designed to promote language acquisition, oral language development and enriched learning opportunities. Students interact through cooperative learning activities, make oral presentations, and collaborate for group performances. Lastly, additional EL tutoring is made available in the extended day program. (The 2011-12 reclassification rate of 112% is the result of having 25 EL students in fall of 2010-11, enrolling three (3) more that year and reclassifying every EL student the following year in 2011-12.)

Loc Code School

Tota

l En

roll

#

% F

/R

Mea

l

% G

ATE

% E

L

% L

atin

o

% W

hite

% A

f. A

mer

.

% A

sian

% F

ili.

8453 PUC Community Charter Middle School 348 83% 11% 5% 91% 1% 4% 0% 1%

195



March 4, 2014

RECLASSIFICATION 2012-13 2011-12

# EL 2012-13 #

Reclassified 2012-13

Reclassification Rate Change from

Prior Year PUC Community Charter Middle School 25 24 96.0% -16.0% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 39 24 30.4% 20.4% Resident Schools Median 300 54 19.3% -0.3% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 251 47 13.4% 1.5% District 180,618 24,697 13.7% -1.7%

2011-12 2010-11 # EL


2011-12 Reclassification Rate

PUC Community Charter Middle School 25 28 112.0% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 33 6 10.0% Resident Schools Median 350 65 19.6% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 313 47 11.9% District 194,904 29,956 15.4%

2010-11 2009-10 # EL


2010-11 Reclassification Rate

PUC Community Charter Middle School 35 9 25.7% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 28 16 57.1% Resident Schools Median 442 71 15.4% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 347 39 13.0% District 205,312 26,080 12.7%

EVALUATION VISIT RESULTS Following are definitions of the School Performance Evaluation ratings: An evaluation of accomplished applies to operations characterized, overall, by strengths. There are very few weaknesses and any that do exist do not diminish the students’ experience. While an evaluation of accomplished represents a high standard of operating, it is a standard that should be achievable in all schools. It implies that it is fully appropriate for a school to continue its operations without significant adjustment. The school would always be expected, however, to continue to take advantage of opportunities to improve. An evaluation of proficient applies to operations characterized by a number of strengths. There are weaknesses, but neither singly nor collectively do these have a significant adverse impact on the student experience. An evaluation of proficient may be arrived at in a number of circumstances. The school may provide a productive student experience, but it may not provide consistent challenge for students. Typically operations will be characterized by strengths, but one or more weaknesses reduce the overall quality of the student experience. An evaluation of developing applies to operations characterized by weaknesses which require remedial action by the school. Some, if not all, staff responsible for the operation evaluated as inadequate require support from senior managers in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. There may be some strengths, but these are overshadowed by the impact of the weaknesses.

196



March 4, 2014

An evaluation of unsatisfactory applies when there are major weaknesses in operation that require immediate remedial action on the part of the school. The student experience is at risk in significant respects. In almost all cases, staff responsible for operations evaluated unsatisfactory will require support from senior managers in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. This may involve working alongside effective peers in or beyond the school. Charter Schools Division oversight for the 2013-2014 school year deemed Student Achievement and Educational Performance at the school to be Accomplished. Areas of particular strength include:

• The 2013 School Performance Framework rating is Excelling. • The school has met 2013 API Growth Targets for all subgroups. • The 2013 school-wide API is 868, exceeding the state target of 800. • The school’s 2013 AGT in ELA is far above the District average. • The school’s 2013 AGT in general Math and Algebra 1 is far above the District average. • The school reclassifies English learners at a rate higher than the District average.

II. Governance and Organizational Management Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Governance and Organizational Management at the school to be Proficient. Areas of particular strength include:

• There is clear, strong evidence that the Governing Board effectively evaluates school leadership and hold staff accountable to law and the charter as evidenced by the Teaching and Learning Framework implemented.

• It is clearly evident that the Governing Board has an effective stakeholder communication system and protocols for resolving concerns.

• The school has many relationships with community organizations that lead to enhanced resources for students. The school’s partnership with CSUN provides entering 6th graders a week-long orientation on the CSUN campus.


• PUC CMO leadership recognizes the need to revisit suspension and expulsion procedures with all PUC school administrators to ensure that appropriate systems and PUC policies are being adhered to. All schools within the PUC CMO are utilizing alternatives to suspension

• CSD staff have discussed and shared with PUC CMO leadership ideas on how to maximize stakeholder access and transparency for all related to Governing Board meetings. PUC leadership is exploring ways to refine these processes.

III. Fiscal Operations Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Fiscal Operations at the school to be Proficient.

197



March 4, 2014

Areas of particular strength: • Cash and cash equivalents of $1,607,923 are positive. This generates a cash reserve of 52.15%

which is well above the recommended reserve of 5%. This financial area has remained positive from 2009-10 – 2012/13.

• Net assets are positive, $1,830,520. Financial trend analysis shows the school’s net assets have continuously remained positive since fiscal year 09/10 to 12/13.

• Net income is positive $99,463. • The fiscal condition of the school is strong and there are no known fiscal issues.


• None noted. Additional Information:

• As per the 2012-13 Audit, the auditor’s opinion is Unmodified (Unqualified). • There are no deficiencies, findings or material weaknesses.

IV. Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program at the school to be Proficient. Areas of particular strength include:

• The school consistently analyzes individual student data and implements effective intervention strategies to address the learning needs of all students as evidenced by the PUC wide data analysis days. The school utilizes Data Director to analyze data and develop strategies to support students. Identify, Target, Plan, and Implement (ITPI) is the intervention plan for struggling students.

• The school is rigorous in their close monitoring of the progress of English Learners, providing targeted, differentiated instruction, and reclassifying students when they are ready The instructional program for PUC CCMS is designed to promote language acquisition, oral language development and enriched learning opportunities. Students interact through cooperative learning activities, make oral presentations, and collaborate for group performances. Lastly, additional EL tutoring is made available in the extended day program.

• There is clear, strong evidence in the instructional program of the innovative features described in the charter and their positive impact on student achievement can be documented as evidenced by the Learning Cycle implemented in all classes, MESH class, and Doug Lemov’s “Teach like a Champion” strategies.


• School leadership shared the need to continue supporting teacher practice in the development and use of the school’s agreed upon instructional strategies and raising the level of rigor in lesson development.

198

6116750





GrowthMet

TargetGrowth Target

GrowthMet

TargetAfrican American or Black - - - - -- American Indian or Alaska Native - - - - -- Asian - - - - -- Filipino - - - - -- Hispanic or Latino 5 98 Yes A 29 Yes A 7 YesNative Hawaiian or Pacific Islander - - - - -- White - - - - -- Two or More Races - - - - -- English Learners 5 99 Yes A 36 Yes A 5 YesSocioeconomically Disadvantaged 5 102 Yes A 26 Yes A -2 YesStudents with Disabilities - - - - --

2011 Base API

2012 Growth API

11-12 Growth

2012 Base API

2013 Growth API

12-13 Growth

Community Charter Middle 837 868 31 867 868 1CDE Similar Schools Median 800 805 5 805 843 38Resident Schools Median 672 711 39 718 716 -2Comparison Schools Median 673 692 20 691 709 18




Basic


Community Charter Middle 38% 62% 31% 69%CDE Similar Schools Median 34% 66% 41% 60%Resident Schools Median 64% 37% 65% 35%Comparison Schools Median 64% 36% 70% 30%

# Criteria # Met % Met # Criteria # Met % MetCommunity Charter Middle 17 17 100% 17 10 59%CDE Similar Schools Median 17 10 59% 17 12 71%Resident Schools Median 21 13 67% 21 11 52%Comparison Schools Median 18 10 59% 18 11 61%


AYP Comparison

2012 AYP 2013 AYP


Yes Yes Yes4 8 85 10 10


API Comparison

97 31 1Yes Yes Yes

837 868 8685 A A

A charter school that has operated for at least four years is eligible for renewal only if the school has satisfied at least one of the following criteria prior to receiving a charter renewal: Attained its Academic Performance Index (API) growth target in the prior year or in two of the last three years, both school wide and for all groups of pupils served by the charter school; ranked 4 to 10 on the API statewide or similar schools rank in the prior year or in two of the last three years both schoolwide and for all groups of pupils served by the charter school (SB 1290). The academic performance of the charter school must be at least equal to the academic performance of the public schools that the charter school pupils would otherwise have been required to attend, as well as the academic performance of the schools in the school district in which the charter school is located, taking into account the composition of pupil population served at the charter school (Ed. Code 47607).

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

740 837 867

Community Charter Middle Loc. Code: 8453CDS Code:

CRITERIA SUMMARY


199

ESCBD

Loc Code

School


Conf 2012 Base API

2013 Grow

th API

2012 State Rank

2012 Sim

ilar Schools

Rank

Met 2013

Sch-wide

Target

Met 2013

Subgroup Targets

% Free/

Reduced Lunch

% Sp Ed

% G

ATE%

EL%

RFEP%

Latino

%

White

% Af.

Amer

%

Asian%

Fili %

Am

Indian

%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or

More

XR6

8453Com

munity Charter M

iddle351

6- 8867

8688

10Yes

Yes85

79

555

912

40

11

00

LAUSD Sim


XR5

8154California Academ

y for Liberal Studies311

6- 8858

8518

10Yes

Yes82

122

630

903

11

23

00

XR5

7778Santa Rosa Charter Academ

y209

6- 8761

7874

3Yes

No

8616

118

4089

61

03

00

0

E5

8208Thom

as Starr King Middle

15046- 8

805843

67

YesYes

6510

349

3959

182

147

00

0

LAUSD Sim


edian311

-805

8436

7-

-82

1211

839

896

11

30

00

Resident Schools

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

8986- 8

698716

17

YesN

o67

128

2551

950

40

00

00

N6

8306O

live Vista Middle

12826- 8

733738

37

YesN

o86

1811

1846

952

11

00

01

N6

8321Pacoim

a Middle

15396- 8

726733

23

YesN

o59

1315

1943

942

11

11

00

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle957

6- 8709

6972

6N

oN

o67

169

2538

961

10

00

00

XP6

6501San Fernando Institute of Applied M

ed394

6- 8B

706

100

1314

1947

971

10

10

00


957-

718716

27

--

6713

1119

4695

11

00

00

0

Comparison Schools

XR6

8054Bert Corona Charter

3646- 8

691734

11

YesN

o81

140

1847

962

10

10

01

XS1

8602View

Park Continuation72

9-12559

483B

BN

oYes

186

319

1757

140

00

00

1

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

8986- 8

698716

17

YesN

o67

128

2551

950

40

00

00

XR6

8212Lakeview

Charter Academy

3506- 8

855843

810

YesN

o91

137

1352

951

10

11

00

XP6

8843San Fernando Senior High

18069-12

676671

26

No

No

6213

1419

4897

11

00

10

0

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle957

6- 8709

6972

6N

oN

o67

169

2538

961

10

00

00

XP6

8878Sylm

ar Senior High1697

9-12677

7092

4Yes

No

6612

1216

4694

23

00

00

0


edian898

-691

7092

6-

-67

138

1947

951

10

00

00


ROW

TH API DEMO

GRAPHICS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO




rowth API reprt.

Comm

unity Charter Middle


th API.School Dem


Office of D


2/12/2014

200

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolTotal Enroll

#%

F/R M

eal%

GATE%

EL%

Latino%

White

% Af.

Amer.

% Asian

% Fili.

% Am

Indian%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or M

oreXR

68453

Comm


34883%

11%5%

91%1%

4%0%

1%1%

0%0%

LAUSD Sim


XR5



80%2%

6%87%

2%2%

1%2%

5%0%

0%

XR5


y210

87%11%

8%89%

0%0%

0%2%

0%0%

0%

E5

8208Thom


152186%

34%9%

59%17%

2%14%

7%0%

1%0%

LAUSD Sim


edian315

86%11%

8%87%

2%2%

1%2%

0%0%

0%

Resident Schools

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

84789%

8%27%

96%0%

4%0%

0%0%

0%0%

N6

8306O

live Vista Middle

125789%

10%18%

96%2%

1%1%

0%0%

0%0%

N6

8321Pacoim

a Middle

155984%

14%19%

94%3%

1%1%

1%1%

0%0%

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle950

96%8%

25%96%

1%1%

1%0%

0%0%

0%

XP6


edia401

89%12%

19%97%

0%1%

0%0%

0%0%

0%


95089%

10%19%

96%1%

1%1%

0%0%

0%0%


XR6


36882%

0%17%

96%2%

1%0%

1%0%

0%0%

XS1

8602View

Park Continuation43

51%0%

60%42%

0%51%

0%0%

0%0%

0%

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

84789%

8%27%

96%0%

4%0%

0%0%

0%0%

XR6

8212Lakeview

Charter Academy

34588%

8%13%

95%1%

1%0%

1%1%

0%0%

XP6


257286%

12%19%

97%1%

1%0%

0%1%

0%0%

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle950

96%8%

25%96%

1%1%

1%0%

0%0%

0%

XP6

8878Sylm

ar Senior High2408

63%12%

15%94%

2%3%

0%0%

0%0%

0%


edian847

86%8%

19%96%

1%1%

0%0%

0%0%

0%







ber.

OCTO


GRAPHICS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO

LSCom

munity Charter M

iddle

Office of D


2/12/2014

201

ESC BD Loc

CodeSchool

09-10 EL #

10-11 Reclass #

10-11 Reclass

Rate

10-11 EL #

11-12 Reclass #

11-12 Reclass

Rate

11-12 EL #

12-13 Reclass #

12-13 Reclass

RateXR 6 8453 Community Charter Middle 35 9 26% 25 28 112% 25 24 96%


XR 5 8154 California Academy for Liberal Stu 28 16 57% 33 6 18% 23 7 30%

XR 5 7778 Santa Rosa Charter Academy 11 11 100% 27 0 0% 39 24 62%

E 5 8208 Thomas Starr King Middle 356 28 8% 250 25 10% 206 26 13%


Resident Schools

XP 6 8228 Charles Maclay Middle 347 39 11% 313 58 19% 251 54 22%

N 6 8306 Olive Vista Middle 425 85 20% 352 83 24% 265 76 29%

N 6 8321 Pacoima Middle 460 79 17% 348 72 21% 335 57 17%

N 6 8358 San Fernando Middle 458 62 14% 395 47 12% 375 47 13%

XP 6 6501 San Fernando Institute of Applied -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 24 --



XR 6 8054 Bert Corona Charter 99 14 14% 90 21 23% 74 15 20%

XS 1 8602 View Park Continuation 12 0 0% 8 0 0% 11 0 0%

XP 6 8228 Charles Maclay Middle 347 39 11% 313 58 19% 251 54 22%

XR 6 8212 Lakeview Charter Academy 32 18 56% 39 20 51% 48 21 44%

XP 6 8843 San Fernando Senior High 925 79 9% 783 51 7% 560 50 9%

N 6 8358 San Fernando Middle 458 62 14% 395 47 12% 375 47 13%

XP 6 8878 Sylmar Senior High 832 108 13% 686 56 8% 449 60 13%



a

Community Charter Middle



202

2012-13 2011-12 # EL2012-13 #

Reclassified



Year

Community Charter Middle 25 24 96.0% -16.0%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 39 24 30.4% 20.4%Resident Schools Median 300 54 19.3% -0.3%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 251 47 13.4% 1.5%District 180,618 24,697 13.7% -1.7%

2011-12 2010-11 # EL2011-12 #

Reclassified


Rate

Community Charter Middle 25 28 112.0%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 33 6 10.0%Resident Schools Median 350 65 19.6%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 313 47 11.9%District 194,904 29,956 15.4%

2010-11 2009-10 # EL2010-11 #

Reclassified


Rate

Community Charter Middle 35 9 25.7%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 28 16 57.1%Resident Schools Median 442 71 15.4%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 347 39 13.0%District 205,312 26,080 12.7%

Community Charter MiddleRECLASSIFICATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH COMPARISON SCHOOLS' MEDIANS



203

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolO

CT 2012 Enroll #

Sp Ed Enroll #

Sp Ed Enroll %

% High

Incidenc%

Low

Incidenc# AU

T# DB

# DEAF

# ED

# EM

D# HO

H # MR

# O

HI*# O

I#

SLD* # SLI*

# TBI# VI

XR6

8453Com

munity Charter M

iddle348

257%

6%1%

30

00

00

02

018

20

0

LAUSD Sim


XR5



3812%

11%1%

40

00

00

06

027

10

0

XR5


y210

3316%

12%3%

60

00

00

11

025

00

0

E5

8208Thom


1521148

10%7%

3%27

00

60

27

111

866

20

LAUSD Sim


edian315

3812%

11%3%

60

00

00

16

027

10

0

Resident Schools

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

847106

13%10%

2%18

00

00

00

133

657

00

N6

8306O

live Vista Middle

1257217

17%15%

3%10

00

00

318

212

1558

00

N6

8321Pacoim

a Middle

1559201

13%11%

1%12

00

70

00

143

1569

00

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle950

14215%

12%3%

50

00

02

146

3108

40

0

XP6


edia401

5113%

12%1%

30

00

00

09

039

00

0


950142

13%12%

2%10

00

00

00

133

1087

00

Comparison Schools

XR6


36849

13%12%

2%4

00

00

20

60

352

00

XS1

8602View

Park Continuation43

49%

9%0%

00

00

00

00

04

00

0

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

847106

13%10%

2%18

00

00

00

133

657

00

XR6

8212Lakeview

Charter Academy

34545

13%10%

3%6

00

00

12

60

291

00

XP6


2572329

13%10%

2%16

00

10

237

315

2333

01

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle950

14215%

12%3%

50

00

02

146

3108

40

0

XP6

8878Sylm

ar Senior High2408

30313%

11%2%

120

03

04

2236

3220

21

0


edian847

10613%

10%2%

60

00

02

26

365

20

0

Comm





anagement Inform

ation System (CASEM



N STU

DENTS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO


IS REPORT)

Office of D


2/12/2014

204

AESCBD

Loc. Code

School Nam

e# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

%

Below

Basic%

Basic%

Prof%

Adv%

B/BB/F

BB

% Prof

/Adv#

Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

%

Below

Basic%

Basic%

Prof%

Adv%

B/BB/F

BB

% Prof

/Adv

XR6

8453Com

munity Charter M

iddle344

1%8%

29%43%

19%38%

62%345

3%9%

19%38%

31%31%

69%

LAUSD Sim


XR5



2%6%

26%42%

24%34%

66%304

3%13%

25%41%

19%41%

60%

XR5


y189

5%13%

37%34%

11%55%

45%188

2%18%

21%42%

17%41%

59%

E5

8208Thom


14312%

7%24%

31%36%

33%67%

14455%

13%21%

33%29%

39%62%

LAUSD Sim


edian304

2%7%

26%34%

24%34%

66%304

3%13%

21%41%

19%41%

60%

Resident Schools

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

8188%

18%39%

28%7%

65%35%

8467%

26%32%

26%9%

65%35%

N6

8306O

live Vista Middle

11135%

16%36%

31%12%

57%43%

114110%

27%26%

26%11%

63%37%

N6

8321Pacoim

a Middle

14458%

16%36%

30%11%

60%41%

150310%

24%29%

28%10%

63%38%

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle850

9%18%

42%25%

6%69%

31%883

8%26%

36%26%

4%70%

30%

XP6


edia365

8%14%

42%28%

9%64%

37%369

4%30%

37%24%

4%71%

28%


8508%

16%39%

28%9%

64%37%

8838%

26%32%

26%9%

65%35%

Comparison Schools

XR6


3238%

10%46%

26%10%

64%36%

3404%

27%36%

27%6%

67%33%

XS1

8602View

Park Continuation63

50%27%

16%5%

2%93%

7%67

40%49%

10%0%

0%99%

0%

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

8188%

18%39%

28%7%

65%35%

8467%

26%32%

26%9%

65%35%

XR6

8212Lakeview

Charter Academy

3163%

7%29%

38%23%

39%61%

3202%

9%20%

36%34%

31%70%

XP6


168411%

17%36%

26%10%

64%36%

161323%

41%22%

12%2%

86%14%

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle850

9%18%

42%25%

6%69%

31%883

8%26%

36%26%

4%70%

30%

XP6

8878Sylm

ar Senior High1615

8%17%

38%27%

9%63%

36%1606

24%32%

21%18%

5%77%

23%


edian818

8%17%

38%26%

9%64%

36%846

8%27%

22%26%

5%70%

30%

Comm


2012-13 CALIFORN


GLISH LAN

GU

AGE ARTS AN

D MATH RESU

LTS A


ATH

Office of D


2/12/2014

205

ESCBD

Loc. Code

School Nam

e# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

% Below

Basic

% Basic

% Prof

% Adv

%

B/BB/FBB

% Prof

/Adv# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

% Below

Basic

% Basic

% Prof

% Adv

%

B/BB/FBB

% Prof

/Adv

XR6

8453Com

munity Charter M

iddle342

3%7%

24%41%

26%34%

67%342

1%8%

21%41%

28%30%

69%

LAUSD Sim


XR5



1%5%

27%39%

28%33%

67%299

1%11%

22%46%

19%34%

65%

XR5


y264

5%9%

37%30%

20%51%

50%258

5%25%

28%34%

9%58%

43%

E5

8208Thom


14324%

10%24%

28%34%

38%62%

14547%

17%22%

31%24%

46%55%

LAUSD Sim


edian301

4%9%

27%30%

28%38%

62%299

5%17%

22%34%

19%46%

55%

Resident Schools

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

7867%

17%41%

25%9%

65%34%

78711%

29%30%

24%6%

70%30%

N6

8306O

live Vista Middle

12356%

14%35%

31%14%

55%45%

12398%

29%27%

23%13%

64%36%

N6

8321Pacoim

a Middle

15386%

17%32%

31%14%

55%45%

159911%

30%26%

27%6%

67%33%

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle1280

11%21%

34%27%

8%66%

35%1346

9%27%

32%26%

6%68%

32%

XP6


edia0

0%0%

0%0%

0%0%

0%0

0%0%

0%0%

0%0%

0%


12356%

17%34%

27%9%

55%35%

12399%

29%27%

24%6%

67%32%

Comparison Schools

XR6


3409%

16%37%

23%14%

62%37%

35010%

36%32%

16%6%

78%22%

XS1

8602View

Park Continuation29

57%29%

14%0%

0%100%

0%26

19%58%

23%0%

0%100%

0%

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

7867%

17%41%

25%9%

65%34%

78711%

29%30%

24%6%

70%30%

XR6

8212Lakeview

Charter Academy

3154%

6%24%

35%30%

34%65%

3202%

6%16%

37%39%

24%76%

XP6


183014%

19%34%

23%10%

67%33%

168123%

39%24%

12%3%

86%15%

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle1280

11%21%

34%27%

8%66%

35%1346

9%27%

32%26%

6%68%

32%

XP6

8878Sylm

ar Senior High1691

10%19%

35%27%

9%64%

36%1664

28%39%

24%9%

1%91%

10%


edian786

10%19%

34%25%

9%65%

35%787

11%36%

24%16%

6%78%

22%

2012 CST MATH

Comm


2011-12 CALIFORN


GLISH LAN

GU

AGE ARTS AN

D MATH RESU

LTS

2012 CST ELA

Office of D


2/12/2014

206

a

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolSusp. Rate

2011-12Susp. Rate

2012-13Single Std.

%2011-12

2012-132011-12

2012-13%

Afr. Am

er.# Afr. Am

er.Susp. Rate

Single Std. %

% Stud. Dis.

# Stud. Dis.

Susp. Rate

Single Std. %

XR6

8453Com

munity Charter M

iddle5%

5%3%

1616

2527

4%14

7%7%

7%26

23%12%

LAUSD Sim


XR5


y for Liberal Studies10%

9%7%

3127

7639

2%5

40%40%

12%37

14%14%

XR5


y9%

8%8%

2717

7342

--

--

16%33

9%9%

E5

8208Thom


8%0%

0%117

4159

62%

290%

0%9%

1451%

1%

LAUSD Sim


edian9%

8%7%

3117

7639

2%17

20%20%

12%37

9%9%

Resident Schools

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

9%4%

3%83

3595

504%

3412%

9%12%

1067%

6%

N6

8306O

live Vista Middle

7%1%

1%97

10128

301%

120%

0%16%

2081%

1%

N6

8321Pacoim

a Middle

7%2%

2%118

33149

441%

200%

0%13%

2053%

2%

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle6%

2%2%

6117

9433

1%12

0%0%

16%149

5%4%

XP6


edia2%

1%1%

73

75

1%4

0%0%

12%50

0%0%


7%2%

2%83

1795

331%

120%

0%13%

1493%

2%

Comparison Schools

XR6


12%1%

1%46

4111

231%

30%

0%14%

500%

0%

XS1

8602View

Park Continuation0%

0%0%

00

00

59%39

0%0%

5%3

0%0%

XP6

8228Charles M

aclay Middle

9%4%

3%83

3595

504%

3412%

9%12%

1067%

6%

XR6

8212Lakeview

Charter Academy

7%3%

3%26

1153

201%

425%

25%13%

457%

7%

XP6


10%9%

7%273

240294

2971%

2143%

33%13%

32910%

7%

N6

8358San Fernando M

iddle6%

2%2%

6117

9433

1%12

0%0%

16%149

5%4%

XP6

8878Sylm

ar Senior High5%

0%0%

1276

1456

3%62

2%2%

12%291

1%1%


edian7%

2%2%

6111

9523

1%21

2%2%

13%106

5%4%

EVENTS

DAYSAFRICAN

AMERICAN

SSTU

DENTS W

ITH DISABILITY

Comm


SUSPEN

SION

S WITH CO

MPARISO

N SCHO

OL S


COM

PARISON

DATA (ALL)DISPRO

PORTIO

NALITY

Office of D


2/12/2014

207

PUC COMMUNITY CHARTER MIDDLE SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT 253 – 13/14





Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 241-0399



208

TAB 12

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'� ��+��

�� D

�� EDFGH��D ��D G��D �� G ��H�D H��2H�D ��D G��D �� !�"� �� #!�� !�$� �� %� �� &�� '(� ) * � �� #+�"� �� %�� ,� � -� �� %�� .�� %�� %�� /%�� ,�!��"��0�1�� 2�� !�#�� %��%%�� 3�� 4��,� � -� �� %�� %%�� 3�� 4�� 1�� 5�� 3�� 4�� ,� 6�� /�� %�� 4�� '��%��/�� !�",��

7�� 8�� 3�� "&�!�� "&�!&�� 3�� 4�� %�� 0�

9 3�� .�� %�� 8�� 3�� "&�!&�� %�%�� %�� %�%�� %�� :

9 (�� %�� %� ��:� �� ;�� :� �� %��%��:

9 �� %�� <�� %�� %� ��:

9 3�� %�� 3��4�� .��

��

209

��

4��.��6��=��<,

�� ,

�� *� �� '�� 4�� 8�� 3�� >�� 8�3>�� #&�"� 4�� 4�� ?�� 3�� $!!#"�� %�� ,� � 6�� 4�� !�#� �� 3�� %�� .�� "!� �� *,� � �� %%�� 6�%,#$,� 7�� %�� 6�%,� #$�� <� �� %�� %��%��,��1�� =�� !!*�� ?�@�4� '�� 8�� %%�� %�� !!$,� -� ��%�� !!$,� � =�� %�%�� !�"��$� �� %�� %�� &�� ,� 4�� !�#��"�� .�� %��,� � �� 1�� !� � 348� �� .�� %�� %%�/�� "$A� ?��:� �$A� >��:� ��A�� :� "A� ��:� �A� =��%��:� �A� �� 7��:� �A� 6�� 7��:� �� "A�-�� (��,� �� %�� 8� ��?��6��%��3��4��%%�� ,��

�� 8�� B� (�� =�� 6�� 6�� %�� C�� $$&,� �6�� <� �� 3�� %�� %�� -8�� %�� %� �� %%�� /��,� 7�� !! �� =�� D��E�� =�� F��,� �� =�� %�� %� �� 3�� C��?�@�4,

�� %�� ;�� 8�� 3�� "&�!&�� 6��,� � 7�� !�#�� 5�� 67� �� * *�� &�%�� '�� 67� �� *"�,� �� %�� !!$�� 67� �� *!!,� � � -� �� !�#� �� (��<� �� &� �� (��<� �� *,� � -� �� %�� 4�� %�� %�� 67� �� %�� %��3�-�8?��,

-� 4�� 6�� =��<� ��6=�� %��,� � �� !�#� �6=�� D�� B� ��%%��E� �� %�� %��,� � -� ��.�� %�� %�� 3�� -��,� � 7�� .��%��%��

��

210

��

%�� 0� � �� 6� �� ,� � � �� 6�� %�� ;�� <� �� G�� %%�� .� ��,� � �#�� -� �� %%�� %� ��,� �� 5�� 1�� -�� 5-� �� !�!��#�� .�� 8?��5-�� %�� ,�� ,��

-� �� %�� !� � �� ?�@�4� 1�� 7��%�� 5��,� � -� �� ;�� %�� C�� A,� � -� 3�1� %�� %%�� !� + !�#�� 3�1� �� &,#A�� ,� � 3�4� �� %�� %�� ,� =�� 1�� 7��%�� 5�� %� �� !� ��,�

�� ;�� C�� ?�@�4� �� %�� %�� ?�@�4� �� %� �� %�� ,� �� %�� 3�1�� %�� %�� <�� ,� �� H�� %�� .�� %� ��,� 8�� %�� ,� � �� %�� 0� �� 6� �� %� �� 3�-� �� ,� -� �� %� �� <� �� %%�� ,� �#�� %�� 1%�� 7�;��7�� %%�� %�� ,� � �"�� /�� -8�� .�� (�� %%�� %�� ,� � -�� %�� -��<� 3�� !�� %�� 6�� !�� %�� '�� !� �� 6�G��4�� !� �,�3�� 6�� 5�� '�� %�� ;�� ,� � �� %�� 1�� 7��%��5�� .�� %��%�� ,��

6�� '�� %%�� ;�� @�� 1@��%��8��,�

�� %�� '�� %%�� /�� ?�@�4� �8?6�� 1%�� %�� 8�� 1@� �� %%��1%��#�3��1%��

��

211

��

6� �� %�� 8�� ?�@�4� �8?6�� 1%�� #�,� � @�� %�� %� �� ?�@�4� �8?6�� 1%�� #� �� /�� ?�@�4� �8?6��1%�� #� �%�� 8�� 1@�� /�� ?�@�4� �8?6�� 1%�� %�� 8��1@� �� ,� � @%�� .�� %�� ?�@�4� �8?6�� 1%�� #� �� /�� ?�@�4� �8?6�� 1%�� #� �%�� 8��1@�� 1%�� #� �1@� �� %�� %�� /��1%�� 1@,

-� %�� %�� 3�� 4�� 4��.��'��8��I��%0++��,� +��%��M,�#$��%�� 0�� /%�� %�� %��,� � -� ��<�� %��,=�� 3�4� /%�� 3�1� %�� 3�4� ;�� %�� 5�� '�� %�� %�� ,� 7�� /%�� %�� %�� ,�!��%�� &�� 0�DN�E� �� -� �� %%�� %�� %�� %�� !�"�� %�� %�� %�� ,�� '�� 8�� %%�� '(�) * � �� #+�"�� %�� %�� #!!� �� %�� *� �� ,� �� %�� '�� 8�� %�� %�� %�� #!�� !�"�� .�� ,

D2�E� �� -� �� /%�� #!�� !�"�� %%�� ?�� 3�� '�� 8�� 3�� '�� 8��,�� %�%�� '(� ) * � �� #+�"��,� -�� '(� ) *!� �� #+�"� �� %�� '�� 8��.�� %�� %��,��'�� 0�-��%��%��,�!��'��0�� 4�� 4�� %�� /%�� ,� @�� 8�� 3�� "&�!"�� %��%��%��%��

��

212

��

�� .�� %�� %��,� -� 4�� %�� %�� 3�� ,� �� .�� %�� %�� %�� ;�� 4�� %%�� %�� %��,� 6�� %%�� %��;�� ,

�� ?�@�4� �8?6�� 1%�� ,� � @�� ?�@�4� �8?6�� 1%�� %�� 8�� 1@�� 3�� .�� %�� %�� !A� �� 4��.�� %� �4�� %�� 3�� .�� ?�� 3�� =�� =��,� � -� �� A� �� ;�� %%�� %�� #�A,� � -� �� #�A� �� 3�� .�� %�� %�� 4��.�� ,� � �� %�� %�� %�� %�� ?�@�4��8?6�,�' �� 0�7�� %�� %�� ;�� %�� %�� 8?6�� ;�� '�� 1�� 5�� 3�� %��,

��

213



March 4, 2014

SUMMARY OF CHARTER SCHOOL PERFORMANCE MAGNOLIA SCIENCE ACADEMY-6



I. Student Achievement and Educational Performance II. Governance and Organizational Management III. Fiscal Operations IV. Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program

I. Student Achievement and Educational Performance First, the Charter Schools Division must confirm whether the charter school has met at least one of the following minimum criteria set forth in Education Code § 47607(b) for schools in operation at least four years:





(B) The determination made pursuant to this paragraph shall be based upon all of the following: (i). Documented and clear and convincing data. (ii). Pupil achievement data from assessments, including, but not limited to, the Standardized Testing and Reporting Program established by Article 4 (commencing with Section 60640) for demographically similar pupil populations in the comparison schools. (iii). Information submitted by the charter school.

Note: If a charter school has not been in operation for at least four years, this section of Education Code serves as reference. The Charter Schools Division will present findings based on its analysis of the school’s performance data to date, and of the academic, operational, and fiscal soundness of the charter school based on Charter Schools Division oversight.

215



March 4, 2014

Magnolia Science Academy-6 has met the minimum statutory requirement as evidenced in the Data Summary Report. Student Discipline Discipline and expulsion policies used at District schools must comply with the California Education Code. LAUSD charter schools must comply with the provisions related to suspensions and expulsions that are put forth in the Charter Schools Division’s Required Language for Charter Petitions. Magnolia Science Academy-6’s grounds for student suspension and expulsion are aligned with those listed in Education Code Section 48900 et seq. Magnolia Science Academy-6 makes every effort to maintain low suspension and explusion rates throughout the school year. At the beginning of the year, the charter school meets with parents and students to discuss schoolwide behavorial expectations and consquences. The small school environment allows every adult on the campus to have a personal relationship with every student. As part of the school’s curriculum, the charter school offers “Get Ready for Life” as a program that addresses the following topics: “Conflict Resolution” and “Making Responsible Choices” which are designed for students to reflect on their behavior, and to make appropriate decisions. Further, the school has implemented a Postive and Negative system which monitors students’ behavior and rewards students for positive behavior. If students receive a number of negative points, the school intervenes and counsels with the students to address behaviors. As the data below show, in 2013-14, Magnolia Science Academy-6 reported 0 suspensions and 0 expulsions.In 2012-13, the school reported 8 suspensions and 0 expulsions. In 2011-12, the school reported 12 suspensions and 0 explusions.


Name of School

Location Code


date of this report

Expulsion 2013-14 As of the

date of this report

Suspension 2012-13

Expulsion 2012-13

Suspension 2011-12

Expulsion 2011-12

Magnolia Science

Academy-6

8013 0 0 8 0 12 0

Special Education According to the December 2012 CASEMIS report, Magnolia Science Academy-6 enrolled Special Education students at a rate that is reflective of the District average. Magnolia Science Academy-6 had a special education enrollment rate of 10%, which was 2 percentage points lower than the LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median (12%). The school is committed to continuing its efforts to identify and serve students with disabilities. The school provides both strategic and intensive targeted intervention as needed for students. Magnolia Pubic Schools has a Special Education Director who provides technical support and professional development to all schools relating to special education. The school implements both a pull-out and push-in model to support students with disabilities. The resource specialist (RSP) and the general education teachers collaborate throughout the year to embed instructional strategies within the lesson plans for all classes to support students.

216



March 4, 2014

OCT 2012 Enroll # #

Sp E

d En

roll

% S

p Ed

En

roll

% H

igh

Inci

denc

e

% L

ow

Inci

denc

e

#AU

T

#DB

#DEA

F

#ED

#EM

D

#HO

H

#MR

#OH

I*

#OI

#SLD

*

#SLI

*

#TB

I

#VI

136 14 10% 8% 2% 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 5 1 0 0

English Learners The tables below represent the number of English Learners identified, served and reclassified by Magnolia Science Academy-6 Charter School. The school’s October 2012 (CALPADS) English learner population of 6% is one percentage point lower than the LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median of 7%. The school has provided evidence of the following: In 2011-12, six ELs took the CELDT, and three were reclassified. In 2012-13, seven students took the CELDT, and five were reclassified. At the time of this report, the school indicated that the school reported the results to CDE; however, the school is investigating why it is not recorded. CSD is continuing to monitor this situation.


Tota

l En

roll

#

% F

/R

Mea

l

%

GA

TE

% E

L

%

Latin

o

%

Whi

te

% A

f. A

mer

.

%

Asi

an

% F

ili.

W 1 8013 Magnolia Science Academy-6 136 51% 0% 6% 49% 22% 14% 4% 7%

RECLASSIFICATION

2012-13 2011-12 #

EL 2012-13 #



Prior Year Magnolia Science Academy 6 5 0 0.0% 0.0% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 133 36 23.8% 1.2% Resident Schools Median 96 25 20.3% -2.5% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 132 26 14.8% -5.5% District 180,618 24,697 13.7% -1.7%

2011-12 2010-11 #

EL 2011-12 #


Reclassification Rate Magnolia Science Academy 6 18 0 0.0% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 132 22 22.7% Resident Schools Median 113 26 22.9% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 169 36 20.3% District 194,904 29,956 15.4%

2010-11 2009-10 #

EL 2010-11 #


Reclassification Rate Magnolia Science Academy 6 5 3 60.0% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 120 26 13.5% Resident Schools Median 132 20 11.9% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 228 25 12.9% District 205,312 26,080 12.7%

217



March 4, 2014

EVALUATION VISIT RESULTS Following are definitions of the School Performance Evaluation ratings: An evaluation of accomplished applies to operations characterized, overall, by strengths. There are very few weaknesses and any that do exist do not diminish the students’ experience. While an evaluation of accomplished represents a high standard of operating, it is a standard that should be achievable in all schools. It implies that it is fully appropriate for a school to continue its operations without significant adjustment. The school would always be expected, however, to continue to take advantage of opportunities to improve. An evaluation of proficient applies to operations characterized by a number of strengths. There are weaknesses, but neither singly nor collectively do these have a significant adverse impact on the student experience. An evaluation of proficient may be arrived at in a number of circumstances. The school may provide a productive student experience, but it may not provide consistent challenge for students. Typically operations will be characterized by strengths, but one or more weaknesses reduce the overall quality of the student experience. An evaluation of developing applies to operations characterized by weaknesses which require remedial action by the school. Some, if not all, staff responsible for the operation evaluated as inadequate require support from senior managers in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. There may be some strengths, but these are overshadowed by the impact of the weaknesses. An evaluation of unsatisfactory applies when there are major weaknesses in operation that require immediate remedial action on the part of the school. The student experience is at risk in significant respects. In almost all cases, staff responsible for operations evaluated unsatisfactory will require support from senior managers in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. This may involve working alongside effective peers in or beyond the school. Based on 2012-13 Oversight, the Charter Schools Division Reports the following: Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Student Achievement and Educational Performance at the school to be Proficient. Areas of particular strength include:

• MSA-6 has a school-wide Growth API of 828, a 17-point decrease from its Base API of 845. • MSA-6 met 10 of 11 AYP. • MSA-6 has an API state rank of 7. • MSA-6 has a similar schools rank of 8. • MSA’s ELA AGT (3 year) is 4.1 which is above predicted growth targets and significantly above

the District Average.

218



March 4, 2014

Areas recommended for improvement include: • (Math AGT (3 year) is 2.4 which is below predicted growth and significantly below the District

Average; Ensure the school provides support to students to address the low performance in math. • Develop an action plan to address the support needed for math scores and to address

improvement in the performance on student achievement for numerically significant subgroups. II. Governance and Organizational Management Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Governance and Organizational Management at the school to be Proficient. Areas of particular strength include:

• Board meetings, agendas, supporting materials and Board meeting minutes are maintained and posted as appropriate in accordance with the Brown Act.

• If parents cannot attend meetings, the school provides venues where parents may attend teleconference Board meetings.


• Ensure that teachers receive PD to develop deeper content knowledge since it was noted that 9 of 10 teachers have preliminary single subject credentials and 8 teachers are in their first year of teaching. Provide BTSA support to those teachers who are new to the profession.

• Ensure teachers are provided time to plan for instruction since it was noted that teachers have non-instructional demands that interfere with their duties to effectively prepare for lessons and collaborate with other teachers.

III. Fiscal Operations Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Fiscal Operations at the school to be Developing. Areas of particular strength: Per Audit 2012/2013 Report

• Unmodified (unqualified) opinion • No findings or material weaknesses • Magnolia Education and Research Foundation, the Charter Management Organization for the

Magnolia Schools, supports the charter schools financially. • The 2012/13 consolidated audit for Magnolia Education and Research Foundation and the

charter schools shows: • The net assets are positive, $4,791,707. • The unrestricted net assets are positive, $2,751,009 (included in positive net assets above). • Net income is positive, $3,773,354.

219



March 4, 2014

Areas recommended for improvement include: Per Audit Reports

• Change in net assets (net income) is negative at present. Net income is recommended to be positive and net assets are recommended to be positive.

• Per the 2012/2013 audit the net assets were negative $351,461. The first interim report for 2013/2014 projects net assets at the end of the year to be negative $346,119.

• Per the 2013/2013 audit the net income was negative $163,337. The first interim report for 2013/2014 projects net income at the end of the year to be positive $5,342.

• The cash reserve is below the recommended 5% of annual expenditures. The cash reserve, $886, represents less than 1% of the annual expenditures. The cash reserve should be increased to 5%. Recommend that enrollment increase to generate added revenue with limited expense increase. The school has projected increases in significant increases in enrollment but has not achieved an increase. 2013/14 enrollment decreased by nine students to 134, when compared to the 2012/2013 enrollment.

• We continue to monitor the implementation of the recommendations made in the August 20, 2012 Office of the Inspector General Audit Report of the Magnolia Science Academy – Charter Schools.

Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program at the school to be Accomplished. Areas of particular strength:

• The charter school offers students who are below basic and/or far below basic in ELA and math academic support through a Pull Out Schedule where a staff member works with no more than 3 students at a time during the instructional day.

• Students are offered after-school tutoring and mandatory enrichment classes for students who need additional academic support in ELA and math.

• There was evidence of differentiated teaching strategies in the core content areas. • There was ample student work to demonstrate mastery of units of the standards in all content

areas. • The school uses an assessment called “MAP” to obtain student performance data in ELA and

math and the data is used by teachers to make informed decisions about curricular and instructional priorities in the the core content areas.

• School uses the web portal-COOLSIS- which is an interactive website that communicates to parents, students and teachers regarding course materials, homework assignments, projects, and the reporting of students’ academic grades.

• Home Visits are provided annually and this year, 25% of the teachers visited students. Areas noted for improvement include:

• None noted at this time.

220

117648





GrowthMet

TargetGrowth Target

GrowthMet

TargetAfrican American or Black - - - - -- American Indian or Alaska Native - - - - -- Asian - - - - -- Filipino - - - - -- Hispanic or Latino - - - - -- Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander - - - - -- White - - - - -- Two or More Races - - - - -- English Learners - - - - -- Socioeconomically Disadvantaged - - 5 55 Yes A -36 NoStudents with Disabilities - - - - --

2011 Base API

2012 Growth API

11-12 Growth

2012 Base API

2013 Growth API

12-13 Growth

Magnolia Science Academy 6 817 843 26 845 828 -17CDE Similar Schools Median 827 846 19 853 854 1Resident Schools Median 733 715 -18 729 715 -14Comparison Schools Median 782 788 6 787 781 -6




Basic


Magnolia Science Academy 6 38% 62% 64% 36%CDE Similar Schools Median 34% 67% 37% 63%Resident Schools Median 59% 41% 67% 33%Comparison Schools Median 51% 50% 45% 55%

# Criteria # Met % Met # Criteria # Met % MetMagnolia Science Academy 6 11 10 91% 13 7 54%CDE Similar Schools Median 29 23 79% 29 20 68%Resident Schools Median 25 14 64% 25 14 56%Comparison Schools Median 17 13 75% 17 11 61%

Magnolia Science Academy 6 Loc. Code: 8013CDS Code:


2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

842 817 845817 843 828

A A A-25 26 -17Yes Yes Yes


Yes Yes No8 7 7

6 8


API Comparison


AYP Comparison

2012 AYP 2013 AYP


221

ESCBD

Loc Code

School


Conf 2012 Base API

2013 Grow

th API

2012 State Rank

2012 Sim

ilar Schools

Rank

Met 2013

Sch-wide

Target

Met 2013

Subgroup Targets

% Free/

Reduced Lunch

% Sp Ed

% G

ATE%

EL%

RFEP%

Latino

%

White

% Af.

Amer

%

Asian%

Fili %

Am

Indian

%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or

More

XR1

8013M

agnolia Science Academy 6

1266- 8

845828

78

YesN

o49

100

314

4919

154

61

14

LAUSD Sim


N3

8217Ernest Law

rence Middle

15736- 8

819810

64

YesN

o56

1132

1026

5217

617

60

00

N3

8182O

liver Wendell Holm

es Middle

15736- 8

858856

89

YesN

o62

1330

730

6617

56

60

00

S7

8110Rudecinda Sepulveda Dodson M

iddle1815

6- 8853

8548

8Yes

Yes55

1038

421

6315

114

51

10

LAUSD Sim


edian1573

-853

8548

8-

-56

1132

726

6317

66

60

00

Resident Schools

W1

8028Audubon M

iddle781

6- 8729

6962

9N

oN

o79

1811

1215

360

621

00

00

W4

8235M

arina del Rey Middle

7496- 8

730743

23

YesN

o67

1419

1123

576

341

11

00

W4

8425M

ark Twain M

iddle693

6- 8718

7152

5N

oN

o66

1315

1438

737

161

11

00

W1

8340Palm

s Middle

15736- 8

881878

99

YesN

o54

846

523

4118

2611

30

00

W4

8481Daniel W

ebster Middle

6436- 8

726713

24

No

No

7225

915

2663

924

11

11

0


749-

729715

25

--

6714

1512

2357

726

11

10

0

Comparison Schools

E5

2027Aldam

a Elementary

448K- 6

760772

33

YesN

o46

1212

4024

923

02

21

01

E5

2151Annandale Elem

entary222

K- 6814

8045

7Yes

No

539

1816

1692

23

01

11

0

XP5

8643Benjam

in Franklin Senior High1241

9-12692

7133

5Yes

Yes65

1216

1646

901

13

41

00

E5

2603Buchanan Street Elem

entary374

K- 6781

7574

3N

oN

o49

1813

2217

873

12

51

00

N6

2329Beachy Avenue Elem

entary377

K- 5752

7502

4N

oN

o79

219

3127

941

21

10

01

E5

3507Eagle Rock Elem

entary671

K- 6875

8878

6Yes

Yes55

1435

1014

5017

211

191

01

E5

8614Eagle Rock High

21307-12

773776

62

No

No

6411

337

2559

102

722

11

0

E5

3877Fletcher Drive Elem

entary310

K- 6741

7462

4Yes

No

6214

733

3491

01

43

00

1

E2

4982Los Angeles Elem

entary539

K- 5797

7874

7N

oN

o46

1310

4828

950

22

00

01

E5

8189W

ashington Irving Middle

6106- 8

696729

12

YesN

o76

1615

1541

831

15

80

00

E5

8066Luther Burbank M

iddle873

7- 8792

7865

8N

oN

o77

1119

1240

911

22

31

00

E5

5384M

onte Vista Street Elementary

5022- 6

752748

24

No

No

6515

1236

3096

11

11

00

0

E5

5411M

t. Washington Elem

entary224

K- 6908

9079

5Yes

Yes17

1118

12

4135

710

61

00

E5

6329Rockdale Elem

entary194

K- 6849

8317

8Yes

Yes70

1812

147

718

25

112

01

E5

7178Toland W

ay Elementary

234K- 6

801790

55

No

No

4712

1112

2476

32

514

00

0

E5

7959Yorkdale Elem

entary250

K- 6813

7985

9N

oN

o82

1510

2025

902

01

40

20


edian413

-787

7815

5-

-63

1413

1625

902

23

41

00


ROW

TH API DEMO

GRAPHICS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO




rowth API reprt.

Magnolia Science Academ

y 6


th API.School Dem


Office of D


2/12/2014

222

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolTotal Enroll

#%

F/R M

eal%

GATE%

EL%

Latino%

White

% Af.

Amer.

% Asian

% Fili.

% Am

Indian%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or M

oreXR

18013


y 6136

51%0%

6%49%

22%14%

4%7%

1%1%

3%LAU

SD Similar Schools from

CDEN

38217

Ernest Lawrence M

iddle1567

58%31%

10%52%

18%7%

17%6%

0%0%

0%N

38182

Oliver W

endell Holmes M

iddle1590

59%29%

7%66%

17%5%

6%5%

0%0%

0%S

78110

Rudecinda Sepulveda Dodson Middle

185352%

37%4%

63%15%

11%4%

5%1%

1%0%

LAUSD Sim


edian1590

58%31%

7%63%

17%7%

6%5%

0%0%

0%Resident Schools

W1

8028Audubon M

iddle781

86%10%

12%36%

0%62%

1%0%

0%0%

0%W

48235

Marina del Rey M

iddle772

87%17%

11%56%

6%35%

2%1%

1%0%

0%W

48425

Mark Tw

ain Middle

71466%

14%13%

73%7%

18%1%

1%0%

0%0%

W1

8340Palm

s Middle

160054%

46%5%

42%18%

26%11%

3%0%

0%0%

W4

8481Daniel W

ebster Middle

63772%

9%15%

63%9%

25%1%

1%1%

1%0%


77272%

14%12%

56%7%

26%1%

1%0%

0%0%


E5

2027Aldam

a Elementary

65184%

7%45%

91%5%

0%1%

1%1%

0%0%

E5

2151Annandale Elem

entary310

91%13%

21%91%

3%2%

0%3%

1%0%

0%XP

58643

Benjamin Franklin Senior High

168262%

16%14%

89%1%

1%3%

4%1%

0%0%

E5


entary535

85%5%

28%89%

3%1%

2%4%

0%0%

0%N

62329

Beachy Avenue Elementary

59180%

5%37%

95%1%

1%2%

1%0%

0%0%

E5

3507Eagle Rock Elem

entary832

57%26%

13%51%

16%2%

11%18%

1%0%

0%E

58614

Eagle Rock High2615

65%31%

7%60%

9%2%

7%21%

1%0%

0%E

53877

Fletcher Drive Elementary

43187%

3%36%

91%0%

1%5%

3%0%

0%0%

E2


entary793

84%5%

55%95%

0%3%

1%0%

0%0%

0%E

58189

Washington Irving M

iddle613

83%15%

15%84%

2%1%

5%8%

0%0%

0%E

58066

Luther Burbank Middle

88987%

19%12%

90%1%

3%2%

3%1%

0%0%

E5

5384M


50695%

11%38%

96%1%

1%1%

1%0%

0%0%

E5

5411M

t. Washington Elem

entary364

17%9%

1%37%

38%7%

12%5%

1%0%

0%E

56329

Rockdale Elementary

27867%

6%13%

71%9%

2%6%

10%2%

0%0%

E5

7178Toland W

ay Elementary

36689%

6%24%

76%3%

2%4%

14%0%

1%0%

E5

7959Yorkdale Elem

entary348

84%4%

21%89%

3%1%

1%3%

1%3%

0%Charter Com

parison Schools Median

56384%

8%21%

89%3%

1%2%

3%1%

0%0%







ber.

OCTO


GRAPHICS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO

LSM


Office of D


2/12/2014

223

ESC BD Loc

CodeSchool

09-10 EL #

10-11 Reclass #

10-11 Reclass

Rate

10-11 EL #

11-12 Reclass #

11-12 Reclass

Rate

11-12 EL #

12-13 Reclass #

12-13 Reclass

RateXR 1 8013 Magnolia Science Academy 6 5 3 60% 18 0 0% 5 0 0%


N 3 8217 Ernest Lawrence Middle 192 26 14% 188 49 26% 151 36 24%

N 3 8182 Oliver Wendell Holmes Middle 110 29 26% 132 19 14% 133 36 27%

S 7 8110 Rudecinda Sepulveda Dodson Mid 120 7 6% 97 22 23% 91 19 21%


Resident Schools

W 1 8028 Audubon Middle 103 12 12% 91 14 15% 96 18 19%

W 4 8235 Marina del Rey Middle 163 15 9% 140 32 23% 123 25 20%

W 4 8425 Mark Twain Middle 168 20 12% 162 43 27% 121 29 24%

W 1 8340 Palms Middle 100 21 21% 113 26 23% 91 35 38%

W 4 8481 Daniel Webster Middle 132 21 16% 94 11 12% 96 17 18%



E 5 2027 Aldama Elementary 298 49 16% 294 62 21% 265 6 2%

E 5 2151 Annandale Elementary 73 13 18% 76 18 24% 73 9 12%

XP 5 8643 Benjamin Franklin Senior High 568 29 5% 463 52 11% 324 41 13%

E 5 2603 Buchanan Street Elementary 174 18 10% 165 40 24% 133 17 13%

N 6 2329 Beachy Avenue Elementary 267 48 18% 236 64 27% 214 33 15%

E 5 3507 Eagle Rock Elementary 160 17 11% 157 44 28% 118 21 18%

E 5 8614 Eagle Rock High 362 47 13% 335 18 5% 226 56 25%

E 5 3877 Fletcher Drive Elementary 340 42 12% 303 50 17% 241 62 26%

E 2 4982 Los Angeles Elementary 479 80 17% 471 95 20% 452 49 11%

E 5 8189 Washington Irving Middle 245 30 12% 167 21 13% 131 31 24%

E 5 8066 Luther Burbank Middle 277 23 8% 171 27 16% 122 33 27%

E 5 5384 Monte Vista Street Elementary 211 27 13% 254 53 21% 232 64 28%

E 5 5411 Mt. Washington Elementary 5 1 20% 7 0 0% 10 3 30%

E 5 6329 Rockdale Elementary 65 16 25% 49 10 20% 38 2 5%

E 5 7178 Toland Way Elementary 97 17 18% 90 13 14% 96 13 14%

E 5 7959 Yorkdale Elementary 157 12 8% 137 31 23% 99 14 14%



a

Magnolia Science Academy 6



224

2012-13 2011-12 # EL2012-13 #

Reclassified



Year

Magnolia Science Academy 6 5 0 0.0% 0.0%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 133 36 23.8% 1.2%Resident Schools Median 96 25 20.3% -2.5%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 132 26 14.8% -5.5%District 180,618 24,697 13.7% -1.7%

2011-12 2010-11 # EL2011-12 #

Reclassified


Rate

Magnolia Science Academy 6 18 0 0.0%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 132 22 22.7%Resident Schools Median 113 26 22.9%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 169 36 20.3%District 194,904 29,956 15.4%

2010-11 2009-10 # EL2010-11 #

Reclassified


Rate

Magnolia Science Academy 6 5 3 60.0%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median 120 26 13.5%Resident Schools Median 132 20 11.9%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 228 25 12.9%District 205,312 26,080 12.7%

Magnolia Science Academy 6RECLASSIFICATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH COMPARISON SCHOOLS' MEDIANS



225

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolO

CT 2012 Enroll #

Sp Ed Enroll #

Sp Ed Enroll %

% High

Incidenc%

Low

Incidenc# AU

T# DB

# DEAF

# ED

# EM

D#

HOH

# MR

# O

HI*# O

I#

SLD* # SLI*

# TBI# VI

XR1

8013M


13614

10%8%

2%2

00

10

00

50

51

00

LAUSD Sim


N3

8217Ernest Law

rence Middle

1567181

12%11%

1%8

00

10

11

244

1357

00

N3

8182O

liver Wendell Holm

es Middle

1590203

13%9%

3%33

00

00

216

272

11210

10

S7


iddle1853

17810%

8%2%

250

00

08

121

3113

60

1

LAUSD Sim


edian1590

18112%

9%2%

250

00

02

124

3113

70

0

Resident Schools

W1

8028Audubon M

iddle781

14418%

14%5%

240

02

01

631

271

60

1

W4

8235M


772108

14%11%

3%7

00

70

00

166

702

00

W4

8425M

ark Twain M

iddle714

8812%

11%2%

90

01

01

08

162

60

0

W1

8340Palm

s Middle

1600123

8%5%

2%23

00

20

110

241

564

11

W4

8481Daniel W

ebster Middle

637160

25%19%

7%19

00

70

010

325

815

10


772123

14%11%

3%19

00

20

16

242

705

00

Comparison Schools

E5

2027Aldam

a Elementary

65152

8%7%

1%3

00

00

10

20

3115

00

E5

2151Annandale Elem

entary310

4113%

10%3%

70

00

01

13

111

170

0

XP5

8643Benjam


22713%

11%3%

180

08

03

1610

1170

00

1

E5


entary535

8115%

11%4%

180

00

01

33

132

230

0

N6


entary591

9616%

13%3%

100

06

00

211

138

280

0

E5

3507Eagle Rock Elem

entary832

12415%

10%5%

230

14

00

1110

253

200

0

E5

8614Eagle Rock High

2615295

11%8%

3%41

00

70

419

187

1914

13

E5


entary431

4510%

10%1%

10

00

01

15

023

140

0

E2


entary793

11214%

7%7%

340

00

02

179

220

261

1

E5

8189W


61397

16%12%

4%6

00

10

23

60

641

014

E5


iddle889

9210%

9%1%

80

01

01

05

173

21

0

E5

5384M


50676

15%11%

4%12

01

00

03

21

488

01

E5

5411M

t. Washington Elem

entary364

277%

7%1%

10

00

01

04

110

100

0

E5

6329Rockdale Elem

entary278

3513%

10%3%

70

00

00

02

020

60

0

E5

7178Toland W

ay Elementary

36643

12%7%

5%16

00

00

11

00

1015

00

E5

7959Yorkdale Elem

entary348

4011%

6%5%

170

00

00

12

013

60

1


edian563

7913%

10%3%

110

00

01

25

132

120

0


y 6




anagement Inform

ation System (CASEM



N STU

DENTS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO


IS REPORT)

Office of D


2/12/2014

226

AESCBD

Loc. Code

School Nam

e# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

%

Below

Basic%

Basic%

Prof%

Adv%

B/BB/F

BB

% Prof

/Adv#

Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

%

Below

Basic%

Basic%

Prof%

Adv%

B/BB/F

BB

% Prof

/Adv

XR1

8013M


1262%

6%30%

34%28%

38%62%

1263%

26%35%

23%13%

64%36%

LAUSD Sim


N3

8217Ernest Law

rence Middle

15046%

10%26%

27%32%

42%59%

15275%

19%23%

25%28%

47%53%

N3

8182O

liver Wendell Holm

es Middle

14421%

6%27%

37%30%

34%67%

14853%

10%22%

40%25%

35%65%

S7


iddle1720

3%5%

23%29%

40%31%

69%1737

2%12%

23%31%

32%37%

63%

LAUSD Sim


edian1504

3%6%

26%29%

32%34%

67%1527

3%12%

23%31%

28%37%

63%

Resident Schools

W1

8028Audubon M

iddle669

10%19%

35%25%

11%64%

36%695

12%34%

31%17%

6%77%

23%

W4

8235M


6776%

12%34%

33%15%

52%48%

7069%

29%29%

26%6%

67%32%

W4

8425M

ark Twain M

iddle629

9%18%

38%27%

9%65%

36%638

10%26%

29%27%

8%65%

35%

W1

8340Palm

s Middle

15393%

5%18%

32%43%

26%75%

15462%

11%20%

32%35%

33%67%

W4

8481Daniel W

ebster Middle

5829%

14%36%

30%11%

59%41%

60211%

24%32%

28%5%

67%33%


6699%

14%35%

30%11%

59%41%

69510%

26%29%

27%6%

67%33%

Comparison Schools

E5

2027Aldam

a Elementary

4118%

15%33%

28%16%

56%44%

4154%

16%25%

29%26%

45%55%

E5

2151Annandale Elem

entary216

3%13%

35%36%

13%51%

49%220

1%13%

24%35%

28%38%

63%

XP5

8643Benjam


4%10%

38%31%

16%52%

47%1053

19%37%

23%16%

5%79%

21%

E5


entary343

8%13%

29%29%

21%50%

50%344

6%20%

21%25%

28%47%

53%

N6


entary327

9%14%

32%28%

18%55%

46%336

5%22%

20%24%

29%47%

53%

E5

3507Eagle Rock Elem

entary619

2%4%

17%29%

48%23%

77%620

1%6%

16%25%

52%23%

77%

E5

8614Eagle Rock High

20165%

9%25%

30%31%

39%61%

201312%

33%28%

21%6%

73%27%

E5


entary286

6%13%

40%26%

14%59%

40%285

7%17%

25%28%

23%49%

51%

E2


entary492

8%14%

33%29%

16%55%

45%491

3%11%

16%33%

36%30%

69%

E5

8189W


5519%

15%36%

27%12%

60%39%

5726%

20%32%

32%11%

58%43%

E5


iddle810

5%12%

33%36%

15%50%

51%808

5%16%

28%35%

16%49%

51%

E5

5384M


4568%

15%36%

26%15%

59%41%

4616%

18%21%

32%23%

45%55%

E5

5411M

t. Washington Elem

entary211

1%4%

12%33%

49%17%

82%214

1%4%

12%30%

52%17%

82%

E5

6329Rockdale Elem

entary175

1%7%

29%38%

25%37%

63%180

3%12%

26%26%

33%41%

59%

E5

7178Toland W

ay Elementary

2196%

8%33%

35%19%

47%54%

2194%

16%25%

32%24%

45%56%

E5

7959Yorkdale Elem

entary226

4%12%

34%29%

21%50%

50%227

3%14%

26%28%

29%43%

57%


edian377

6%13%

33%29%

17%51%

50%380

5%16%

25%29%

27%45%

55%


y 62012-13 CALIFO

RNIA STAN


LISH LANG

UAG

E ARTS AND M

ATH RESULTS

A


ATH

Office of D


2/12/2014

227

ESCBD

Loc. Code

School Nam

e# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

% Below

Basic

% Basic

% Prof

% Adv

%

B/BB/FBB

% Prof

/Adv# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

% Below

Basic

% Basic

% Prof

% Adv

%

B/BB/FBB

% Prof

/Adv

XR1

8013M


1541%

5%19%

39%36%

25%75%

1546%

18%37%

25%13%

61%38%

LAUSD Sim


N3

8217Ernest Law

rence Middle

15804%

9%24%

26%37%

37%63%

15945%

18%24%

25%27%

47%52%

N3

8182O

liver Wendell Holm

es Middle

14962%

6%24%

32%36%

32%68%

15152%

10%22%

37%29%

34%66%

S7


iddle1711

2%6%

22%28%

41%30%

69%1735

3%11%

24%32%

29%38%

61%

LAUSD Sim


edian1580

2%6%

24%28%

37%32%

68%1594

3%11%

24%32%

29%38%

61%

Resident Schools

W1

8028Audubon M

iddle689

8%17%

31%28%

17%56%

45%726

9%29%

27%25%

9%65%

34%

W4

8235M


7715%

15%32%

32%16%

52%48%

78510%

30%32%

23%5%

72%28%

W4

8425M

ark Twain M

iddle623

8%17%

31%29%

15%56%

44%644

12%27%

28%25%

9%67%

34%

W1

8340Palm

s Middle

16603%

6%16%

28%47%

25%75%

16652%

10%21%

33%34%

33%67%

W4

8481Daniel W

ebster Middle

6329%

17%34%

26%15%

60%41%

6408%

24%33%

28%7%

65%35%


6898%

17%31%

28%16%

56%45%

7269%

27%28%

25%9%

65%34%

Comparison Schools

E5

2027Aldam

a Elementary

42612%

17%30%

24%18%

59%42%

4315%

20%20%

27%29%

45%56%

E5

2151Annandale Elem

entary214

2%7%

45%29%

16%54%

45%218

0%12%

23%30%

34%35%

64%

XP5

8643Benjam


6%13%

32%31%

17%51%

48%1182

26%37%

21%13%

4%84%

17%

E5


entary337

5%14%

31%32%

19%50%

51%339

5%18%

24%27%

26%47%

53%

N6


entary321

9%13%

32%24%

21%54%

45%327

7%20%

23%20%

30%50%

50%

E5

3507Eagle Rock Elem

entary683

4%4%

17%29%

46%25%

75%688

3%11%

16%22%

49%30%

71%

E5

8614Eagle Rock High

19805%

10%25%

29%30%

40%59%

198115%

33%27%

21%5%

75%26%

E5


entary335

6%17%

34%30%

13%57%

43%335

6%23%

23%28%

20%52%

48%

E2


entary510

8%15%

25%29%

23%48%

52%510

4%13%

17%28%

38%34%

66%

E5

8189W


5889%

16%35%

28%12%

60%40%

60714%

36%28%

17%5%

78%22%

E5


iddle782

4%10%

32%37%

17%46%

54%783

5%19%

27%32%

17%51%

49%

E5

5384M


51110%

14%33%

28%15%

57%43%

5135%

17%25%

26%27%

47%53%

E5

5411M

t. Washington Elem

entary205

2%2%

16%24%

56%20%

80%208

0%5%

14%32%

49%19%

81%

E5

6329Rockdale Elem

entary166

1%8%

29%33%

29%38%

62%171

1%7%

25%33%

34%33%

67%

E5

7178Toland W

ay Elementary

2444%

10%32%

30%24%

46%54%

2445%

13%23%

30%29%

41%59%

E5

7959Yorkdale Elem

entary244

4%7%

36%36%

17%47%

53%248

0%15%

20%34%

30%35%

64%


edian382

5%12%

32%29%

19%49%

52%385

5%18%

23%28%

29%46%

55%

2012 CST MATH


y 62011-12 CALIFO

RNIA STAN


LISH LANG

UAG

E ARTS AND M

ATH RESULTS

2012 CST ELA

Office of D


2/12/2014

228

a

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolSusp. Rate 2011-12

Susp. Rate 2012-13

Single Std. %

2011-122012-13

2011-122012-13

% Afr.

Amer.

# Afr. Am

er.Susp. Rate

Single Std. %

% Stud. Dis.

# Stud. Dis.

Susp. Rate

Single Std. %

XR1

8013M


8%6%

5%12

815

1214%

1916%

16%8%

1118%

18%

LAUSD Sim


N3

8217Ernest Law

rence Middle

7%8%

6%122

130146

1786%

10314%

10%11%

17528%

14%

N3

8182O

liver Wendell Holm

es Middle

6%4%

3%101

58129

655%

817%

7%13%

2029%

6%

S7


iddle4%

2%2%

6432

7839

11%203

3%2%

9%174

3%3%

LAUSD Sim


edian6%

4%3%

10158

12965

6%103

7%7%

11%175

9%6%

Resident Schools

W1

8028Audubon M

iddle27%

13%11%

226104

309134

62%492

16%14%

17%135

13%11%

W4

8235M


8%5%

4%68

41122

10035%

2705%

4%14%

10617%

9%

W4

8425M

ark Twain M

iddle5%

3%2%

3321

5624

17%130

8%6%

13%96

5%4%

W1

8340Palm

s Middle

5%3%

2%93

42120

5826%

4195%

4%7%

1166%

4%

W4

8481Daniel W

ebster Middle

15%6%

5%107

38117

5325%

1589%

8%23%

1498%

6%


8%5%

4%93

41120

5826%

2708%

6%14%

1168%

6%

Comparison Schools

E5

2027Aldam

a Elementary

2%1%

0%12

512

80%

333%

33%7%

486%

2%

E5

2151Annandale Elem

entary4%

0%0%

141

191

2%7

0%0%

12%44

2%2%

XP5

8643Benjam

in Franklin Senior High9%

2%2%

17137

18946

1%20

5%5%

14%231

4%4%

E5


entary2%

0%0%

102

102

1%5

0%0%

14%76

0%0%

N6


entary0%

0%0%

21

64

1%6

17%17%

14%90

1%1%

E5

3507Eagle Rock Elem

entary1%

0%0%

71

122

2%17

0%0%

13%118

1%1%

E5

8614Eagle Rock High

6%2%

2%158

59215

812%

547%

6%11%

2813%

3%

E5


entary1%

1%1%

74

115

1%5

0%0%

10%42

2%2%

E2


entary1%

0%0%

90

110

3%26

0%0%

12%110

0%0%

E5

8189W


12%7%

6%81

47127

831%

813%

13%16%

10014%

10%

E5


iddle3%

2%2%

2715

3527

3%24

4%4%

10%94

0%0%

E5

5384M


1%1%

1%4

46

51%

714%

14%12%

673%

3%

E5

5411M

t. Washington Elem

entary1%

0%0%

30

50

6%23

0%0%

7%25

0%0%

E5

6329Rockdale Elem

entary0%

0%0%

01

01

2%7

0%0%

13%37

0%0%

E5

7178Toland W

ay Elementary

0%0%

0%1

01

02%

70%

0%10%

400%

0%

E5

7959Yorkdale Elem

entary0%

1%1%

12

12

1%3

0%0%

11%42

0%0%


edian1%

0%0%

82

113

2%7

0%0%

12%72

1%1%

EVENTS

DAYSAFRICAN

AMERICAN

SSTU

DENTS W

ITH DISABILITY


y 6SU

SPENSIO

NS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO

LS


COM

PARISON

DATA (ALL)DISPRO

PORTIO

NALITY

Office of D


2/12/2014

229

MAGNOLIA SCIENCE ACADEMY-6 BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT 280 – 13/14





Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 241-0399



230

TAB 13

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'� ��*��

�� ! ��"��#$$��"��

��%��&�� J��J� K� �� !� "� �� #� �� $�� #�� %� �� !� "�� #�� &'�(��)��!

'��(��"��*�+�� ,�� ,�� !� -�� . �,�� /�� $�� !�

"�� #�� 0&'� (�� )��1� �� #�� !

2�� +,�� 3�4�.� &�� 5�� ,�� !� "� � �� !� � +�� ,�� #�� !� �� &�� .�� 5�� /�� <�� 05�/<1�� .�� .�� 3�� /�� !�� -��!� � !� 6�� -��!� � �� #�� 7� �� !

�� ,�� 5�� 8� '�� +��#� � �� ,�� -�,�� 0�-�1�� ,�� !� �-�� #��7� �� /�� 0�"5�1�#��,��,�� #��

��

231

��

% �� !� 6�� +�� ,�� 09��:1�� +�� ;��!� �� +�� /��#� ��<��,��3�4�.!

�)��*"��*�� %� �� #�� #�� #�� !� 6�� %� �� #� �� !

'��*��+"��*�9=�:� �� "� �� #�� ,�� #� �� !"�� #�� 0&'� (�� )��1!� � �� &�� 5�� &'� (�� )�� #�� ,� �� !� �� #�� &�� 5�� ,�� $�� !

9>�:� �� "� �� #�� #�� &'� (�� )�� #�� !

%��,��*�"�� !

'"��,��*�� .�� #�� .�� ,�� %�� !� � 4�� 5�� /�� 0 1�� ,� �� ,�� ,�� ,�� ,�� $�� ,�� ,�� #�� ,��!� � "� .�� #�� ,�� /�� !� � �� $�� #�� #�� ?�� .�� !� �� ?��,�� !

�� ,�� 3�4�.� �53-�� 2�� !� � 4�� 3�4�.� �53-�� 2�� 5�� 24�� /�� $�� ,�� #�� ,� ��@� �� .�� $�� ,�� .�� #� � #�� ,� �� /�� $��3� ��/��+��+��!��"��#�� ,��

��

232

��

�@� �� ,�?�� ,�� @!� � "� �� #�� @� �� /�� $�� ,�� .�� $�� ,�� !� � �� ,� �� 3�4�.��53-�!

,"��*�6�� &�� 2�� A��/�� !

��

233

TAB 14

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'� ��*��

��

�� BCDEF��C ��C �� !" #� �� $"�� !" %�� !�"� �� &�'� �� #!�� &�(� �� )*� +!(#� �� $, #� �� -� .� � � �� /�� 0 �� -�

�� 1�2�� 3� �� '�� !" $� �� 4�� 5��-� � .� � �� 4�� 5�� 2�� 6 � �� 4�� 5�� -� 7�� 0 �� 5�� )�� 0� �� '��!" #-��

8�� 9�� 4�� #�'"�� #�'"�� 4�� 5�� 1�

: 4�� /�� 9�� 4�� #�'"�� ;

: * � �� ;� �� <�� ;� �� '� � � ��;

: �� = �� ;

: 4�� 4�� 5�� /��

��

235

��

5��/��7 �� >�� =-

�� -

�� &�� )�� 5�� $�� 9�� 4 �� 3�� 9�43�� ($�� *�� )��-�� 3�� 4�� % $!�� -��7 � �� 5 � �� !" $� 9� � �� 4�� * �� /�� $"!�� &��-��2�� > �� !'�� !""(�� )�� 9�� '� -� � � ?�� '� �� '� ��-� 2�� 3�� 6� �� )�� <� �� &�(� �� 7�� '� !� �� -� .� �� )�� 9�� !" "� �� !" "� �� &�(� ��-� � >�� !" #� %� �� #!�� &�(�� -��

5�� /�� -� � �� 2�� !" !� 459� �� /�� 0�� '!C� @�� !#C� ?�� $C� �� #C�>�� #C� .�� *�� -� � �� 9�� @ �� 7�� 4�� 5�� -��

�� 9�� A� * � ��>�� B>��C�� 7�� 7�� D�� %%�-� �7�� =� �� 4�� .9�� 0� �� -� 8�� !""!�� >�� B�� C�� > �� E�� -� �� >�� 4�� D ��@�F�5-�� <�� 9�� 4�� #�'"�� 7 �� -� � 8�� !" $�� 6�� 78� �� %"#-� � 8�� 78� �� (""-� � � .� � �� !" $� �� *��=� �� %-� >�� 2�� 5�� 459� �� *��=-� .� � �� 5�� 6�� 78� �� 4�.�9@�� -

.� �5�� 7 �� >�� =��7>��

��

236

��

�� -� � �� !" $� �7>�� B90� ��C� �� -� � .� � ��/�� 9@�� 4�� . �� 9�� @�� 6�� 2 � .�� 6.�� -� � .� � ��/��$�G �� 6.� �!" "� $�� 9@�� /�� $�G ��6.� �!" "� $�� -� � �� -�

.� � �� !" !� �� @�F�5� 2�� 8�� 6 � ��-� � .� � � �� <�� D�� C-� � �� H �� !" $,!" #� �� -�C� �� !" $,!" #� >�� 8�� * �� -� � .� � 4�2�� !" !,!" $� �� 4�2� �� -$C�� -��4�5� �� -�

�� <�� D �� @�F�5� �� @�F�5� �� -� �� 4�2�� =�� -� � �� I�� /�� -� 9 �� -��!�� 1� �� 7�� 4�.� �� -� .� � �� = � �� -� �$�� 2 �� 8�<��8�� -� � �#�� . �� =�� =��-

4� �� 7�� 6� �� )�� <� �� -� � �� 2�� 8�� 6 � �� /�� -��

7�� )�� <� �� F�� 2F�� 9��-�

.� � �� 4�� 5�� 5��/��)��9�� J��1,,��-��,�� O-

��1�� 0 ��

��

237

��

�� -� � .� � � ��=�� ->�� 4�5� 0 �� 4�2� �� 4�5� <�� 6� �� )�� -� 8�� 0 �� -

�� 1�BG �C� �� .� � �� !" #� �� -� � �� )�� 9�� )*� +!(#� �� $, #�� $""� �� &�� -� � �� )�� 9�� $"�� !" #�� /�� -��

B3�C� �� .� � � �� 0� � �� $"�� !" $�� @�� 4�� )�� 9�� 4�� )�� 9��-�� )*� +!(#� �� $, #��-� .�� )*� +!($� �� $, #� �� )�� 9��/�� -��

��1�.� �� -

��1�� 5�� 5�� 0 �� -� F�� 9�� 4�� #�'"#�� /�� -� .� � 5�� 4�� -� �� /�� <�� 5�� -� 7 �� <�� -

�� @�F�5� �9@7�� 2�� $� �4�� 2 �� 7��-� � F�� @�F�5� �9@7�� 2�� $� � �� 9�� 2F�� /�� "C� �� /� �)�'"!� �� )�� 42@�� 6��,5 �� 7�� ,* ��D �� > � �� 859�� -� .� � �� H�� /��

��

238

��

!" $� #-� .� � �� 5�� 7�� ,* ��D �� !" !� $� �� H�� 42@�-��.� � �� /�� @�� 4��>�� >�� 0�� 5�� -� � �� "C� �� 5�� )�� 4�� 7�� 4�� 7�� -� � .� � � �� 4�� 7�� 9@7�;� �� ;� �� -�� @�F�5��9@7�-

��1�8�� <�� 9@7�� <�� )�� 2�� 6 � �� 4�� -

��

239



March 4, 2014

SUMMARY OF CHARTER SCHOOL PERFORMANCE MAGNOLIA SCIENCE ACADEMY-7





I. Student Achievement and Educational Performance First, the Charter Schools Division must confirm whether the charter school has met at least one of the following minimum criteria set forth in Education Code § 47607(b) for schools in operation at least four years:








241



March 4, 2014

Magnolia Science Academy-7 has met the minimum statutory requirement as evidenced in the Data Summary Report. Student Discipline

Discipline and expulsion policies used at District schools must comply with the California Education Code. LAUSD charter schools must comply with the provisions related to suspensions and expulsions that are put forth in the Charter Schools Division’s Required Language for Charter Petitions. Magnolia Science Academy-7’s grounds for student suspension and expulsion are aligned with those listed in Education Code Section 48900 et seq. The school implements a consistent positive behavior program which includes rewarding students with “Caught Being Good” tickets and recognizing them during the Monday Morning Assemblies. Since this is a small charter school, teachers and administrators closely monitor the behavior of students and immediately consult with parents to seek a resolution to any issues dealing with students’ behaviors. At the time of this report, and as the data show below, there are no suspensions and expulsions reported for the following years: 2013-14, 2012-13 and 2011-12.


Name of School

Location Code


date of this report

Expulsion 2013-14 As of the

date of this report

Suspension 2012-13

Expulsion 2012-13

Suspension 2011-12

Expulsion 2011-12

Magnolia Science

Academy-7 8014 0 0 0 0 0 0

Special Education According to the 2012 CASEMIS report, Magnolia Science Academy-7 enrolled Special Education students at a rate that is reflective of the District average. Magnolia Science Academy-7 had a special education enrollment rate of 9% which is 9 percentage points less than the Resident Schools Median of 18%. The school is committed to continuing its efforts to identify and serve students with disabilities. The school provides both strategic and intensive targeted intervention as needed for students. Magnolia Public Schools has a Special Education Director who provides technical support and professional development to all schools relating to special education. The school implements both a pull-out and push-in model to support students with disabilities. The resource specialist (RSP) and the general education teachers collaborate throughout the year to embed instructional strategies within the lesson plans for all classes to support students.

OCT 2012

Enroll #

Sp E

d En

roll

#

Sp E

d En

roll

%

% H

igh

Inci

denc

e

% L

ow

Inci

denc

e

#AU

T

#DB

#DEA

F

#ED

#EM

D

#HO

H

#MR

#OH

I*

#OI

#SLD

*

#SLI

*

#TB

I

#VI

233 20 9% 7% 1% 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 6 6 0 0

242



March 4, 2014

English Learners The tables below represent the number of English Learners identified, served and reclassified by Magnolia Science Academy-7 school. The school’s October 2012 (CALPADS) English learner population of 18% was lower than the Resident School Median of 45%. The school’s 2011-12 reclassification rate of 24% was higher than the Resident School Median of 12%. Magnolia Science Academy-7 reports that the CALPADS data does not align to internal data results. The school has reported that, in the first two years of the school’s operation, the reporting was done at the Magnolia Public Schools’ home office. As of the date of this report, the reporting responsibility has been delegated to support staff at the school site. Based on evidence the school has provided, in 2010-11, the school reports 28 students took the CELDT, and 10 were reclassified. In 2011-12, the school’s EL population was 31, 31 students took the CELDT, and 4 were reclassified. In 2012-13, the schools EL popultion was 45, 45 students took the CLEDT, and 5 were reclassified. CSD will continue to monitor the situation.


Tota

l En

roll

#

% F

/R

Mea

l

%

GA

TE

% E

L

%

Latin

o

%

Whi

te

% A

f. A

mer

.

% A

sian

% F

ili.

N 3 8014 Magnolia Science Academy-7 233 74% 0% 18% 62% 24% 3% 3% 4%

RECLASSIFICATION

2012-13 2011-12 #

EL 2012-13 #



Prior Year Magnolia Science Academy 7 29 7 24.1% 24.1% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median Resident Schools Median 211 26 11.8% -5.4% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 415 45 14.7% -3.1% District 180,618 24,697 13.7% -1.7%

2011-12 2010-11 #

EL 2011-12 #


Reclassification Rate Magnolia Science Academy 7 23 0 0.0% LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median Resident Schools Median 199 38 17.1% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 423 67 17.8% District 194,904 29,956 15.4%

2010-11 2009-10 #

EL 2010-11 #


Reclassification Rate Magnolia Science Academy 7 -- 16 -- LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median Resident Schools Median 186 26 14.1% Comparison Schools in Charter Median 502 60 13.1% District 205,312 26,080 12.7%

243



March 4, 2014

EVALUATION VISIT RESULTS Following are definitions of the School Performance Evaluation ratings: An evaluation of accomplished applies to operations characterized, overall, by strengths. There are very few weaknesses and any that do exist do not diminish the students’ experience. While an evaluation of accomplished represents a high standard of operating, it is a standard that should be achievable in all schools. It implies that it is fully appropriate for a school to continue its operations without significant adjustment. The school would always be expected, however, to continue to take advantage of opportunities to improve. An evaluation of proficient applies to operations characterized by a number of strengths. There are weaknesses, but neither singly nor collectively do these have a significant adverse impact on the student experience. An evaluation of proficient may be arrived at in a number of circumstances. The school may provide a productive student experience, but it may not provide consistent challenge for students. Typically operations will be characterized by strengths, but one or more weaknesses reduce the overall quality of the student experience. An evaluation of developing applies to operations characterized by weaknesses which require remedial action by the school. Some, if not all, staff responsible for the operation evaluated as inadequate require support from senior managers in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. There may be some strengths, but these are overshadowed by the impact of the weaknesses. An evaluation of unsatisfactory applies when there are major weaknesses in operation that require immediate remedial action on the part of the school. The student experience is at risk in significant respects. In almost all cases, staff responsible for operations evaluated unsatisfactory will require support from senior managers in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. This may involve working alongside effective peers in or beyond the school. The report below is based on the 2012-2013 Oversight visit. Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Student Achievement and Educational Performance at the school to be Accomplished. Areas of particular strength include:

• MSA-7 attained an API score of 906, increasing by 50 points from the prior year. • MSA-7 has a statewide rank of 8. • MSA-7 met 5 of 5 AYP criteria. • MSA-7 earned a 2012 SPF classification of “Achieving.”

Areas recommended for improvement include: • None noted at this time.

244



March 4, 2014

II. Governance and Organizational Management Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Governance and Organizational Management at the school to be Proficient. Areas of particular strength include:

• Board meetings, agendas, supporting materials and Board meeting minutes are maintained and posted as appropriate in accordance with the Brown Act.

• If parents cannot attend meetings, the school provides venues where parents may attend teleconference Board meetings.


• Students noted the school should provide clean restrooms. III. Fiscal Operations Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Fiscal Operations at the school to be Developing. Areas of particular strength: Per the 2012-13 Audit

• Auditor’s opinion is Unmodified (Unqualified). • There are no deficiencies, findings or material weaknesses. • Net income is positive, $281,537. The 2013/2014 first interim report submitted by the charter

school projects net income of $453,078 at the end of the fiscal year. • Magnolia Education and Research Foundation, the Charter Management Organization for the

Magnolia Schools, supports the charter schools financially • The 2012/13 consolidated audit for Magnolia Education and Research Foundation and the

charter schools shows: o The net assets are positive, $4,791,707. o The unrestricted net assets are positive, $2,751,009 (included in positive net assets above). o Net income is positive, $3,773,354.


• The recommended cash reserve is 5% of annual expenditures. The 2012/13 audit shows a cash reserve of $45,720 which represents 2.4% of annual expenditures. It is recommended that the cash reserve be increased to 5% of annual expenditures. The 2013/2014 First Interim Report submitted by the school projects a cash balance for 2013/2014 to be 6.8% of annual expenditures. The reserve is improving.

• We continue to monitor the implementation of the recommendations made in the August 20, 2012 Office of the Inspector General Audit Report of the Magnolia Science Academy – Charter Schools.

245



March 4, 2014

IV. Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program Charter Schools Division oversight deemed Fulfillment of the Charter’s Educational Program at the school to be Accomplished. Areas of particular strength include:

• MSA 7 holds a monthly Family Breakfast on the first Saturday of the month. There is positive interaction between teachers and students.

• MSA-7’s instructional practices reflected appropriate group structures (pods of 4 and pods of 6 students), teachers asked cognitively demanding questions and students were engaged.

• Student to teacher ratio on average was within a range of 19:1 to 24:1. • MSA-7 uses data to drive curricular and instructional decisions and to inform the development of

differentiated instructional strategies. • MSA-7 adopted the Accelerated Reader program and students have shown significant gains in

reading comprehension skills. • MSA-7 holds after school tutoring for students who are performing below grade level and after

school enrichment to challenge students who are high performing. • MSA-7 has implemented a School Wide Positive Behavior Plan to reinforce positive behaviors

and school wide core values and themes that are embedded in the school’s culture.

246

117655





GrowthMet

TargetGrowth Target

GrowthMet

TargetAfrican American or Black - - - - -- American Indian or Alaska Native - - - - -- Asian - - - - -- Filipino - - - - -- Hispanic or Latino - - - - -- Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander - - - - -- White - - - - -- Two or More Races - - - - -- English Learners - - - - -- Socioeconomically Disadvantaged - - - - -- Students with Disabilities - - - - --

2011 Base API

2012 Growth API

11-12 Growth

2012 Base API

2013 Growth API

12-13 Growth

Magnolia Science Academy 7 856 906 50 906 904 -2CDE Similar Schools MedianResident Schools Median 798 799 1 798 800 2Comparison Schools Median 771 784 13 785 766 -19




Basic


Magnolia Science Academy 7 26% 74% 13% 87%CDE Similar Schools MedianResident Schools Median 52% 47% 40% 60%Comparison Schools Median 58% 42% 42% 57%

# Criteria # Met % Met # Criteria # Met % MetMagnolia Science Academy 7 5 5 100% 13 10 77%CDE Similar Schools MedianResident Schools Median 19 13 76% 17 9 52%Comparison Schools Median 17 13 76% 17 8 47%

Magnolia Science Academy 7 Loc. Code: 8014CDS Code:


2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

856 906855 906 904

B A A50 -2Yes Yes


Yes Yes8 9


API Comparison


AYP Comparison

2012 AYP 2013 AYP


247

ESCBD

Loc Code

School


Conf 2012 Base API

2013 Grow

th API

2012 State Rank

2012 Sim

ilar Schools

Rank

Met 2013

Sch-wide

Target

Met 2013

Subgroup Targets

% Free/

Reduced Lunch

% Sp Ed

% G

ATE%

EL%

RFEP%

Latino

%

White

% Af.

Amer

%

Asian%

Fili %

Am

Indian

%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or

More

XR6

8014M


116K- 5

906904

9

YesYes

7516

114

2061

232

55

00

3

LAUSD Sim


LAUSD Sim


edian

Resident Schools

N6

2438Bertrand Avenue Elem

entary245

K- 5840

8187

9Yes

Yes43

1513

2634

8011

15

10

01

N3

2470Blythe Street Elem

entary287

K- 5739

7372

3N

oN

o54

146

4522

744

89

30

10

N6

2767Cantara Street Elem

entary378

K- 5828

8086

9Yes

No

4619

1337

2881

53

73

01

0

N6

4055Garden Grove Elem

entary279

K- 5798

8004

5Yes

No

4611

2031

2280

71

74

10

0

N3

4110Gault Street Elem

entary256

K- 5780

7634

4N

oN

o57

225

3918

817

52

40

00


279-

798800

45

--

4615

1337

2280

73

73

00

0

Comparison Schools

N3

2323Bassett Street Elem

entary519

K- 5785

7804

7N

oN

o55

1311

3830

865

42

20

01

N3

2959Chandler Elem

entary355

K- 5873

8478

9Yes

No

618

1717

1852

327

34

11

1

N6

7432Colum

bus Avenue362

K- 5776

7663

7N

oN

o52

127

4328

904

22

21

00

N6

4493Hazeltine Avenue Elem

entary468

K- 5785

7584

7N

oN

o59

147

4619

845

43

20

11

N3

4726Kester Avenue Elem

entary644

K- 5901

9139

9Yes

Yes46

825

1118

4631

78

51

00

N6

7027Sylvan Park Elem

entary549

K- 5723

7171

2N

oN

o51

107

4730

932

31

10

01

N6

7384Valerio Street Elem

entary641

K- 5774

7543

5N

oN

o77

1211

3028

872

33

30

01


edian519

-785

7664

7-

-55

1211

3828

865

43

20

01


ROW

TH API DEMO

GRAPHICS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO




rowth API reprt.


y 7


th API.School Dem


Office of D


2/12/2014

248

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolTotal Enroll

#%

F/R M

eal%

GATE%

EL%

Latino%

White

% Af.

Amer.

% Asian

% Fili.

% Am

Indian%

Pacific Island

% Tw

o or M

oreXR

68014


y 7233

74%0%

18%62%

24%3%

3%4%

0%0%

4%

LAUSD Sim


LAUSD Sim


edian

Resident Schools

N6


entary383

87%6%

44%84%

9%2%

4%1%

0%0%

0%

N3


entary465

84%3%

54%77%

5%6%

8%3%

0%0%

0%

N6


entary584

90%5%

51%82%

7%3%

6%1%

1%1%

0%

N6

4055G

arden Grove Elem

entary425

93%11%

32%80%

7%2%

7%3%

0%0%

0%

N3

4110G

ault Street Elementary

41186%

3%45%

80%8%

5%3%

4%0%

0%0%


42587%

5%45%

80%7%

3%6%

3%0%

0%0%


N3


entary865

88%6%

47%88%

4%4%

3%2%

0%0%

0%

N3

2959Chandler Elem

entary556

54%9%

20%50%

35%7%

4%3%

1%0%

0%

N6

7432Colum

bus Avenue582

88%4%

52%88%

4%2%

3%1%

1%1%

0%

N6


entary743

88%3%

55%85%

5%5%

2%1%

0%1%

0%

N3


entary938

43%13%

18%45%

32%8%

9%4%

2%0%

0%

N6


entary868

92%4%

58%94%

1%3%

1%0%

0%0%

0%

N6


entary979

80%5%

43%88%

3%3%

3%3%

1%0%

0%


edian865

88%5%

47%88%

4%4%

3%2%

1%0%

0%







ber.

OCTO


GRAPHICS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO

LSM


Office of D


2/12/2014

249

ESC BD Loc

CodeSchool

09-10 EL #

10-11 Reclass #

10-11 Reclass

Rate

10-11 EL #

11-12 Reclass #

11-12 Reclass

Rate

11-12 EL #

12-13 Reclass #

12-13 Reclass

RateXR 6 8014 Magnolia Science Academy 7 -- 16 -- 23 0 0% 29 7 24%


LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median

Resident Schools

N 6 2438 Bertrand Avenue Elementary 174 22 13% 182 38 21% 153 18 12%

N 3 2470 Blythe Street Elementary 220 42 19% 228 38 17% 234 19 8%

N 6 2767 Cantara Street Elementary 352 63 18% 322 59 18% 282 27 10%

N 6 4055 Garden Grove Elementary 185 26 14% 175 30 17% 156 26 17%

N 3 4110 Gault Street Elementary 186 16 9% 199 26 13% 211 37 18%



N 3 2323 Bassett Street Elementary 510 67 13% 502 102 20% 423 45 11%

N 3 2959 Chandler Elementary 117 19 16% 141 28 20% 125 30 24%

N 6 7432 Columbus Avenue 375 73 19% 286 67 23% 275 37 13%

N 6 4493 Hazeltine Avenue Elementary 502 60 12% 423 54 13% 415 61 15%

N 3 4726 Kester Avenue Elementary 187 43 23% 191 33 17% 170 36 21%

N 6 7027 Sylvan Park Elementary 545 59 11% 538 96 18% 487 57 12%

N 6 7384 Valerio Street Elementary 556 64 12% 529 92 17% 464 77 17%



a

Magnolia Science Academy 7



250

2012-13 2011-12 # EL2012-13 #

Reclassified



Year

Magnolia Science Academy 7 29 7 24.1% 24.1%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median Resident Schools Median 211 26 11.8% -5.4%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 415 45 14.7% -3.1%District 180,618 24,697 13.7% -1.7%

2011-12 2010-11 # EL2011-12 #

Reclassified


Rate

Magnolia Science Academy 7 23 0 0.0%LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median Resident Schools Median 199 38 17.1%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 423 67 17.8%District 194,904 29,956 15.4%

2010-11 2009-10 # EL2010-11 #

Reclassified


Rate

Magnolia Science Academy 7 -- 16 --LAUSD Similar Schools from CDE Median Resident Schools Median 186 26 14.1%Comparison Schools in Charter Median 502 60 13.1%District 205,312 26,080 12.7%

Magnolia Science Academy 7RECLASSIFICATION OF ENGLISH LEARNERS WITH COMPARISON SCHOOLS' MEDIANS



251

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolO

CT 2012 Enroll #

Sp Ed Enroll #

Sp Ed Enroll %

% High

Incidenc%

Low

Incidenc# AU

T# DB

# DEAF

# ED

# EM

D# HO

H # MR

# O

HI*# O

I#

SLD* # SLI*

# TBI# VI

XR6

8014M


23320

9%7%

1%3

00

00

00

50

66

00

LAUSD Sim


LAUSD Sim


edian

Resident Schools

N6


entary383

8221%

12%9%

210

07

04

47

013

260

0

N3


entary465

6815%

12%2%

80

00

00

07

135

152

0

N6


entary584

10518%

11%7%

400

00

00

06

126

320

0

N6


entary425

4811%

10%1%

50

00

00

03

118

210

0

N3


entary411

7418%

15%3%

80

00

00

17

047

90

2


42574

18%12%

3%8

00

00

00

71

2621

00

Comparison Schools

N3


entary865

9010%

8%2%

150

00

02

08

147

170

0

N3

2959Chandler Elem

entary556

8816%

6%10%

400

00

01

25

115

240

0

N6

7432Colum

bus Avenue582

6812%

7%5%

260

00

01

06

116

180

0

N6


entary743

8511%

9%2%

90

05

03

012

031

240

1

N3


entary938

778%

5%3%

230

00

00

48

020

210

1

N6


entary868

9110%

8%3%

210

00

01

07

217

430

0

N6


entary979

15316%

13%2%

190

00

00

211

151

690

0


edian865

8811%

8%3%

210

00

01

08

120

240

0


y 7




anagement Inform

ation System (CASEM



N STU

DENTS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO


IS REPORT)

Office of D


2/12/2014

252

AESCBD

Loc. Code

School Nam

e# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

%

Below

Basic%

Basic%

Prof%

Adv%

B/BB/F

BB

% Prof

/Adv#

Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

%

Below

Basic%

Basic%

Prof%

Adv%

B/BB/F

BB

% Prof

/Adv

XR6

8014M


1161%

0%25%

35%39%

26%74%

1161%

3%9%

37%50%

13%87%

LAUSD Sim


LAUSD Sim


edian

Resident Schools

N6


entary235

4%9%

33%36%

19%46%

55%235

2%11%

27%32%

28%40%

60%

N3


entary259

5%22%

41%23%

9%68%

32%258

6%17%

28%32%

18%51%

50%

N6


entary344

5%12%

32%31%

20%49%

51%349

3%10%

17%31%

38%30%

69%

N6

4055G

arden Grove Elem

entary274

5%10%

37%34%

13%52%

47%273

2%14%

22%28%

34%38%

62%

N3

4110G


2247%

16%32%

28%17%

55%45%

2263%

19%25%

35%17%

47%52%


2595%

12%33%

31%17%

52%47%

2583%

14%25%

32%28%

40%60%

Comparison Schools

N3


entary495

8%11%

37%29%

16%56%

45%499

3%13%

26%30%

27%42%

57%

N3

2959Chandler Elem

entary340

6%9%

25%30%

31%40%

61%340

1%8%

17%26%

48%26%

74%

N6

7432Colum

bus Avenue345

9%15%

37%27%

12%61%

39%345

3%16%

23%31%

26%42%

57%

N6


entary443

9%14%

38%31%

9%61%

40%442

5%16%

25%33%

22%46%

55%

N3


entary626

2%6%

12%30%

50%20%

80%630

1%5%

9%24%

60%15%

84%

N6


entary537

11%18%

35%24%

11%64%

35%537

8%23%

25%26%

18%56%

44%

N6


entary611

8%17%

33%28%

14%58%

42%612

5%14%

22%34%

25%41%

59%


edian495

8%14%

35%29%

14%58%

42%499

3%14%

23%30%

26%42%

57%


y 72012-13 CALIFO

RNIA STAN


LISH LANG

UAG

E ARTS AND M

ATH RESULTS

A


ATH

Office of D


2/12/2014

253

ESCBD

Loc. Code

School Nam

e# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

% Below

Basic

% Basic

% Prof

% Adv

%

B/BB/FBB

% Prof

/Adv# Tested

% Far

Below

Basic

% Below

Basic

% Basic

% Prof

% Adv

%

B/BB/FBB

% Prof

/Adv

XR6

8014M


711%

7%21%

32%38%

29%70%

711%

0%8%

45%45%

9%90%

LAUSD Sim


LAUSD Sim


edian

Resident Schools

N6


entary244

2%7%

35%32%

24%44%

56%249

1%11%

22%31%

35%34%

66%

N3


entary257

9%15%

34%32%

9%58%

41%261

7%15%

27%29%

22%49%

51%

N6


entary351

7%8%

27%36%

22%42%

58%361

4%9%

15%26%

46%28%

72%

N6

4055G

arden Grove Elem

entary271

6%13%

31%31%

19%50%

50%271

4%14%

18%29%

35%36%

64%

N3

4110G


2478%

9%35%

33%15%

52%48%

2514%

16%19%

35%26%

39%61%


2577%

9%34%

32%19%

50%50%

2614%

14%19%

29%35%

36%64%

Comparison Schools

N3


entary554

6%12%

29%33%

19%47%

52%556

4%15%

24%29%

28%43%

57%

N3

2959Chandler Elem

entary315

3%8%

20%34%

35%31%

69%315

1%7%

12%26%

54%20%

80%

N6

7432Colum

bus Avenue367

8%17%

30%33%

13%55%

46%366

4%17%

22%28%

29%43%

57%

N6


entary443

5%9%

33%38%

14%47%

52%444

4%11%

26%32%

27%41%

59%

N3


entary636

4%6%

13%26%

51%23%

77%640

1%6%

12%22%

58%19%

80%

N6


entary549

9%18%

37%23%

12%64%

35%550

6%24%

24%27%

19%54%

46%

N6


entary631

7%14%

35%28%

17%56%

45%634

3%15%

23%30%

29%41%

59%


edian549

6%12%

30%33%

17%47%

52%550

4%15%

23%28%

29%41%

59%

2012 CST MATH


y 72011-12 CALIFO

RNIA STAN


LISH LANG

UAG

E ARTS AND M

ATH RESULTS

2012 CST ELA

Office of D


2/12/2014

254

a

aESCBD

Loc Code

SchoolSusp. Rate

2011-12Susp. Rate

2012-13Single Std.

%2011-12

2012-132011-12

2012-13%

Afr. Am

er.# Afr. Am

er.Susp. Rate

Single Std. %

% Stud. Dis.

# Stud. Dis.

Susp. Rate

Single Std. %

XR6

8014M


0%0%

0%0

00

03%

60%

0%10%

230%

0%

LAUSD Sim


LAUSD Sim


edian

Resident Schools

N6


entary0%

1%1%

24

25

2%9

0%0%

17%79

4%3%

N3


entary0%

0%0%

00

00

7%33

0%0%

14%66

0%0%

N6


entary3%

0%0%

180

420

3%17

0%0%

15%93

0%0%

N6


entary3%

1%1%

143

173

1%7

0%0%

9%43

0%0%

N3


entary0%

0%1%

22

39

5%20

5%5%

15%63

3%3%


0%0%

1%2

23

33%

170%

0%15%

660%

0%

Comparison Schools

N3


entary2%

1%1%

236

248

3%27

4%4%

10%90

1%1%

N3

2959Chandler Elem

entary0%

0%0%

10

10

6%36

0%0%

14%80

0%0%

N6

7432Colum

bus Avenue2%

1%1%

95

105

2%14

0%0%

11%65

3%2%

N6


entary1%

2%2%

1118

1235

4%33

6%6%

11%79

15%10%

N3


entary1%

0%0%

110

170

9%82

0%0%

8%75

0%0%

N6


entary2%

0%0%

173

185

3%27

0%0%

9%86

0%0%

N6


entary2%

2%1%

2116

2621

3%30

7%3%

13%140

4%3%


edian2%

1%1%

115

175

3%30

0%0%

11%80

1%1%

EVENTS

DAYSAFRICAN

AMERICAN

SSTU

DENTS W

ITH DISABILITY


y 7SU

SPENSIO

NS W

ITH COM

PARISON

SCHOO

L S


COM

PARISON

DATA (ALL)DISPRO

PORTIO

NALITY

Office of D


2/12/2014

255

MAGNOLIA SCIENCE ACADEMY-7 BOARD OF EDUCATION REPORT 283 – 13/14





Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 241-0399



256

TAB 15

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'� ��*��

�� ! �"� #�� $� �%�� ! �"� �"� �� !� #�� &��'� �� "�� % ! ��

�� 1�� %%�� !" ��!� �� " ��!#$ %�� & �� '� �� &�� (�� $ %�� &��)*+��!�,!�$

�� ! ��-1� .�/�� 0" ��" �� &�� /� �� )�� 1�� 0�!!$ 6�� &�� 0�!!" �� &�� /�� 0�!! �� $1�� &�� 2��" �� 3�� )�� /�� 4�� /�� 5�/�� &�� 0�!� �� &�� $ %�� &�� /� �� )�� 1�� !�" ��!� �� & �� /� ��!� �� $ %�� !" ��!!" �� )�� 1�� $%��'��$

%�� &�� 6)* +�� !�,!�7 �� &�� $

�� )�� 8�� " 1�� 9�� 2�� 61927" �� !�� *�� )��$" 2��" 9 #!��" �� $%��'��$

�� /� �� 1�� : *�� .��6;.��<7 &�� /�� 5�/�� 6�57" � ��=�� /�� !##�$ �5 �� &�> �� 9��"��"

��

257

��

��" �� 6%1�7" &�� /��" ��/�� &�� (��$ ?� �� " �� .�� /�� " �� ! 6;� �!<7" �� .�� @��$ ��" �� .�� !! �� 9��"��&��=��/�A B8$

�"��#��-�� (�� &�� " ��" �� " ��&� �� &�� $ ?� ��" �� (�� & �� $

�� #��$��-;C��< � %�� &�� " �� " �� 6�7 �� /�� !" ��!� �� & �� $ %�� &�� 6)* +�� !�,!�7$ �� )�� 1�� )*+�� !�,!�" �� &�� /� �� $ �� &�� )�� 1�� /�� "��!�"��'��$

;2�< � %�� &�� &�� )* +�� !�,!� &�� $

��%��-%��$

��!��%��-�� 8�� &�� 8�� " �� /�� (�� $ B�� 1�� 9�� 0��6�7" � �� /� �� /�" � ��" � �� /�� /�� /�� '� ��/�� /�� &�� /��$ %�� 8�� &�� /�� " �� 9�� $ �� '� �� &�� &�� 4�� 8�� $ �� 4��/��$

�� /� �� A B8 1A5 1�� 69��1�� 5��7$ B�� A B8 1A5 1�� 1�� 1B" �� '� �� /�� &�� /� !�D �� ' )0��6��)��"91A "��3�&��,8��/��&��

��

258

��

5�� ,*��=�� 7 �� .�� ?81 ��$ %�� &��/� ��E�� '� �� /�� !��!�$%�� &�� /� �� 8�� 5�� ,*��=�� !��!� &�� /� &�� E�� 91A $ %�� /�� &�� /� �� '� �� A�� 9�� .��.�� &�� /� �� (�� 8��&�� $ � �� !�D �� &�� /�� /� �� 8�� /� �� )�� /�� 9�� 5��" &�� 9�� 5�� $ %�� &�� /� �� 9��5�� 1A5 F /�� &�� /��F ��" �� & �� $ � �� " �� /��A B81A5 $

%��-?� �� " �� " �� )�� " �� 1�� 3��9��$

��

259

TAB 16

��

��

��"��

��

��

��%&�'� ��+��

��

�� -�� #��#�� ! �� "

�� #��$�� %�� &��&��"��'�&&�(��))�'�(��"��"�� *+,�'��($��$�� '��($��-�� '-��(�� $��$�� .��#�� ! �� "�� /��! ��"��"��0��

1��! ��$�� 2��"��#��3��$��$�� '4��5( ��-��"�� "��#��3��"��$�� $��$�.�� '4��5( ��"�� "��

��6))*$��3��$��#��-�1�7 �� "$��#��"�� 8��#��$��6 �� 9��-�� $��-�� #�� $��$�� $�� .��

��#��/�� "��#�� "�� "�

��

261

��

#�/��.�� &��:��#�/��:; �

�� :��<$�6)�<$�#��3:�" �

��#.��#�� "��0�� $� �� $� �� 3��$��=��$�� $��

�� #�4>��5�3�� #�� 48�5�3��#� ��

�� #�8��

��#��?+��"��0�� #�� $��$��$��0��$�� ! ��?++��

�� #�� "��

�� #�-�� 2��;��

� ��!��'��(�3��

��

262

INFORMATIV

E263

Board of Education Report No. 285-13/14 For March 4, 2014 Board Meeting


Division of Intensive Support and Intervention INFORMATIVE TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: March 4, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent FROM: Dr. Donna E. Muncey, Chief of Intensive Support and Intervention Nader Delnavaz, Administrative Coordinator, College and Career Education SUBJECT: SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT (SIG)—COHORT 3

There are currently two cohorts of schools in LAUSD receiving funding through the School Improvement Grant program, which provides supplemental funding to the persistently lowest-achieving Title I schools in the state. On January 16, 2014, the California State Board of Education approved funding for a third cohort of SIG schools starting in SY 2014-15. Schools can receive up to $2 million per year for three years to create opportunities and implement strategies to improve teaching and learning at their schools. For Cohort 3, LAUSD seeks to forward applications from two elementary, two middle schools, five high schools, and two span schools (for a total of eleven schools) that are undergoing whole-school reform efforts to improve student achievement for all of their students. The application is due on March 14, 2014. School Improvement Grants, authorized under American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) section 1003(g) of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Title I or ESEA), are grants, through State Educational Agencies (SEAs), to Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) for use in Title I schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring. These grants are intended to support Program Improvement schools with adequate resources in order to substantially raise the achievement of students to enable the schools to make adequate yearly progress and exit improvement status. In 2009, the State identified 31 persistently lowest-achieving schools in LAUSD. They funded nine of those schools for Cohort 1 and eleven for Cohort 2. The remaining eleven unfunded schools from the original list are eligible for Cohort 3 funding, with the exact level of funding per school based on the model selected and the services to be provided. Not all schools may be selected to receive the grant. And, as in the past, annual renewal of the funding will be contingent upon each school’s progress and available funds from the USDE. Each of the eleven schools has participated in a collaborative effort with their stakeholders to conduct a needs analysis and determine which model best fits their school. They are currently working on their Implementation Plan and Budget. Schools choosing the Restart Model are working on the final selection of an EMO. School Improvement Grant requirements include the selection and implementation of one of four school intervention models: transformation model, restart model, turnaround model, and school closure. Below are the schools that have selected to participate in SIG:

264

Members, Board of Education Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent -2- March 4, 2014

Transformation Model: In this model, the LEA implements a reform that includes: using research based instructional support strategies, increasing leaders’ and teachers’ effectiveness, increasing learning opportunities for students and increasing operational flexibility and sustained support. The schools listed below will apply under this model:

� Robert Fulton College Preparatory School � Sun Valley Middle School � Sylmar High School

Restart Model: A model in which an LEA collaborates with the school to select an Educational Management Organization (EMO) or a Charter Management Organization (CMO) to work in partnership with the school. The schools listed below will have a Board Approved process or MOU that will be finalized upon the awarding of funding of the School Improvement Grant:

� Angeles Mesa Elementary School � Audubon Middle School � Carson High School � Legacy Senior High International Studies Learning Complex � Los Angeles High School � Miguel Contreras Learning Complex � San Fernando High School � Woodcrest Elementary School

Turnaround Model: A model in which an LEA uses locally adopted competencies to review and select staff for school (rehiring no more than 50% of existing staff). This model also includes researched based instructional support strategies, increasing leaders’ and teachers’ effectiveness, increasing student learning opportunities and providing operational flexibility and sustained support. No schools have selected this model. School Closure Model: A model in which an LEA closes a school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other schools in the LEA that are higher achieving. There are no schools recommended for this model. In past years, the SIG schools’ average API growth has matched or outpaced the District’s growth performance, so we are excited to bring this opportunity to a new cohort of schools. If you have any questions, please contact Nader Delnavaz at 213-241-2144 or [email protected]. c: Michelle King David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t Gerardo Loera Jefferson Crain

265

SIG Cohort 3 - Proposed Models (As of 2/12/14)

School ESC Principal Model Angeles Mesa ES W Haywood Thompson Restart Audobon MS W Charmain Young RestartCarson HS XP Windy Warren Restart Legacy Int'l Studies Learning Complex S Guillermina Jauregui Restart Los Angeles HS XP Helena Yoon-Fontamillas RestartMiguel Contreras Learning Complex XP Dalton Cole RestartRobert Fulton College Prep XP Raquel George TransformationSan Fernando HS XP Kenneth Lee Restart Sun Valley MS XP Roberto Lee TransformationSylmar HS XP James Lee TransformationWoodcrest ES XP Kery Jackson Restart

266

TAB 17

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'�� +��(��

�� !��"��@

��#@��@��@� ��@� �@��@�@��@��@��@�� %�� %�� %�� !"�#$%��#��&�� '��6�� (��)��*�� +�� %��%�� %�� %�� )�� %�� %�� $��&�� %�� $��%��&��&��,��,�� %�� %�� !��&�� -�� +�� %�� .��

��

267

��

��!��&�� %�� !"�#$%�� %��%��%�� !�� &�� +��+��%�� '�� $�� %��'�� .�'�� '�� %/��%01$�� '�.�� +�� .�� +�� )�+�� +�2��%��

��

268

ATTAC

HM

EN

T A -- BO

AR

D M

EM

BE

R PR

IOR

ITY

AN

D A

LTE

RAT

ION

IMPR

OV

EM

EN

T PRO

JEC

TS

Bd. of Ed R

pt No. 276-13/14

Page 1B

oard of Education March 11, 2014

BD

ESC

SchoolProject D

escriptionProgram

FundsProject B

udgetA

nticipated C

onstruction Start

3N

orthB

eckford Charter

Enriched StudiesU

pgrade the north parking lot entrance by providing a new

swing gate

A&

I Funds$9,952

Q2-2014

3N

orthC

hatsworth Park ES

Upgrade the south parking lot entrance by providing a new

sw

in g gateA

&I Funds

$8,786Q

2-2014

3N

orthLim

erick ESIncrease school's access to technology by providing laptop com

puters and media carts

BM

P Funds$27,670

Q2-2014

3N

orthM

elvin ESIncrease school's access to technology by providing laptop com

puters and cartsB

MP Funds

$42,200Q

2-2014

3N

orthC

olumbus ES

Increase school's access to technology by providing new

deskto p computers

BM

P Funds$81,564

Q2-2014

3N

orthG

ranada ESIncrease school's access to technology by providing new

deskto p com

putersB

MP Funds

$89,213Q

2-2014

3N

orthW

innetka ESIncrease school's access to technology by providing new

deskto p com

puters, smart board, and a printer

BM

P Funds$47,626

Q2-2014

4N

orth Encino ES

Upgrade exterior lighting in the parking lot and kindergarten

play yard to improve school safety and security

BM

P Funds$14,849

Q2-2014

269

ATTAC

HM

EN

T A -- BO

AR

D M

EM

BE

R PR

IOR

ITY

AN

D A

LTE

RAT

ION

IMPR

OV

EM

EN

T PRO

JEC

TS

Bd. of Ed R

pt No. 276-13/14

Page 2B


BD

ESC

SchoolProject D

escriptionProgram

FundsProject B

udgetA

nticipated C

onstruction Start

2East

Soto ES

Upgrade the cam

pus by installing air conditioning units in the food preparation/eating area and teachers lounge, install a roof covering in the food preparation/eating area

A&

I Funds$44,052

Q3-2014

2East

Belvedere ES

Provide electrical and safety upgrades by installing circuitry and cabling to pow

er new exit signs throughout the m

ain building that com

ply with fire code

A&

I Funds$34,331

Q2-2014

5East

Buchanan ES

Upgrade cam

pus lighting system by installing lighting around

the lunch shelter and south playgroundA

&I Funds

$21,014Q

2-2014

4W

estC

oeur D'A

lene ES

Upgrade physical security of the school by purchasing and

installing an electronic camera door entry system

at the main

entranceA

&I Funds

$27,484Q

2-2014

1W

est3rd St. ES

Provide security upgrades by providing a new chain link fence

and access control s ystem in school parking lot

A&

I Funds$15,313

Q2-2014

4W

estSelm

a ES



at the main

entranceA

&I Funds

$14,862Q

2-2014

7South

Am

bler ESU

pgrade security by providing new panic bar hardw

are and audible alarm

s ystems at various gates

A&

I Funds$19,423

Q2-2014

1South

Miller ES



at the main

entranceA

&I Funds

$19,219Q

2-2014

270

ATTAC

HM

EN

T A -- BO

AR

D M

EM

BE

R PR

IOR

ITY

AN

D A

LTE

RAT

ION

IMPR

OV

EM

EN

T PRO

JEC

TS

Bd. of Ed R

pt No. 276-13/14

Page 3B


BD

ESC

SchoolProject D

escriptionProgram

FundsProject B

udgetA

nticipated C

onstruction Start

7South

Graham

ES



at the main

entrance. Upgrade cam

pus by providing a new w

all mounted

mar quee

BM

P Funds$51,488

Q2-2014

7South

Gulf ES

Upgrade restroom

s by providing new hand dryers in the boys

and girls restrooms

BM

P Funds$14,896

Q2-2014

Total $583,942

271

ATTAC

HM

EN

T A -- BO

AR

D M

EM

BE

R PR

IOR

ITY

AN

D A

LTE

RAT

ION

IMPR

OV

EM

EN

T PRO

JEC

TS

Bd. of Ed R

pt No. 276-13/14

Page 4B


Anticipated

Construction

Com

pletion

Q3-2014

Q3-2014

Q2-2014

Q2-2014

Q2-2014

Q2-2014

Q2-2014

Q3-2014

272

ATTAC

HM

EN

T A -- BO

AR

D M

EM

BE

R PR

IOR

ITY

AN

D A

LTE

RAT

ION

IMPR

OV

EM

EN

T PRO

JEC

TS

Bd. of Ed R

pt No. 276-13/14

Page 5B


Anticipated

Construction

Com

pletion

Q4-2014

Q3-2014

Q3-2014

Q3-2014

Q3-2014

Q3-2014

Q3-2014

Q3-2014

273

ATTAC

HM

EN

T A -- BO

AR

D M

EM

BE

R PR

IOR

ITY

AN

D A

LTE

RAT

ION

IMPR

OV

EM

EN

T PRO

JEC

TS

Bd. of Ed R

pt No. 276-13/14

Page 6B


Anticipated

Construction

Com

pletion

Q4-2014

Q3-2014

274

TAB 18

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'�� *��(��

��

�� !"#�$ "��%�&��'��(�) ��!/) �� *��*�� +��,�� ,��-�� (�� .��(��+�� *��/��"�$0!�1"/�///�,�� *�� (�,��&��2��&2�� *�� 32�� 4��(�/�� 2��3�� (�� (��(�� .��(�� %�� ,�� ,��(�� .��(�� &��%� �3(��3��,��-�� ,��5�� ,��6��7��4��8��9��/�� ,�� ,��

��

275

��

�� %�� ,�� +�� ,��(�� %�� !"#�$ "�� ,��(��5�� (�� (�� %�/��(�� (��5��(��(�� :�� (��&�� ;��(��&�;��,�� ,��2��9��(� ��2�9 �� /�� ,�� (�� ,�� (��!�� ,�� (�� 2�� 2��-��+�&��2��&2��(�!"��!/) ��&2+�� 2��,��,�� ,�� ,��(�� +��(�� (� ��<� �� <�� 2�� 4��=��

��

276


Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 277-13/14 Page 1 of 2 Board of Education March 4, 2014

ATTACHMENT A

1. Leland Elementary School – Project to Address Deteriorated Arcade (West & North)Educational Service Center South, Board District 7

Project Background and Scope – The structural integrity of the arcade has been compromised by severe corrosion at the base of the vertical support members and studs. Replacement and/or alterations to the arcade are required to address this critical school repair need. Temporary shoring has been installed to provide limited access to the area until a permanent solution is in place. The project scope, schedule and budget is based on the expectation that the arcade and associated retaining wall, footings, flatwork and stairs are removed and replaced. Project Budget -- $668,650Project Schedule -- Construction is anticipated to begin in August 2015, and conclude in February 2016.

2. Bravo Medical Magnet – Project to Address Reoccurring Water Intrusion in the Main BuildingEducational Service Center East, Board District 2

Project Background and Scope – This project has been developed to relieve persistent site flooding issues. The scope includes the removal and replacement of drain pipes and damaged sidewalks, gutters, curbs, tree wells, and hardwood flooring at the main building; re-grading slopes, concrete, and sidewalks to prevent water intrusion; and providing a sump pump system for below grade-level drainage. Proposed improvements to the public right-of-way will be coordinated with the local government agency, including any necessary access and use agreements. Project Budget -- $ 2,943,082 Project Schedule -- Construction is anticipated to begin in August 2015, and conclude in February 2016.

3. Northridge Academy High School – Project to Address Failing Concrete Planter Boxes Educational Service Center North, Board District 3

Project Background and Scope – The concrete planter boxes (10) located throughout the school site are no longer able to sustain the weight of their contents of trees, shrubs and soil, which has created a potential safety hazard. The planter boxes have been secured with metal bands to prevent them from collapsing. The scope of work includes the demolition of the concrete planter boxes (10) and the associated water supply and waste lines; removal of the trees and shrubs contained within the planter boxes, and equipping the school grounds with tables, umbrellas and benches of a permanent nature, in place of the failing concrete planter boxes.Project Budget -- $99,328Project Schedule -- Construction is anticipated to begin in July 2014, and conclude in August 2014.

277


Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 277-13/14 Page 2 of 2 Board of Education March 4, 2014

ATTACHMENT A

4. Hillside Elementary School - Project to Address Deteriorated Upper Deck Concrete Walkway (Connecting Multipurpose and Classroom Building) Educational Service Center East, Board District 2

Project Background and Scope – The concrete membrane of the upper deck walkway connecting the Multipurpose and Classroom Building has deteriorated, which has created a tripping hazard. The scope of work includes completely removing and replacing the concrete membrane of the upper deck, and repairing the deteriorated areas of the connected stairwell and landings. Project Budget -- $81,794Project Schedule -- Construction is anticipated to begin on April 14, 2014, and conclude in late April 2014 (Spring Recess).

5. 93rd Street Elementary School – Project to Address Damaged Asphalt in Parking Lot and Path of Travel Requirements Educational Service Center South, Board District 7

Project Background and Scope – The asphalt in the parking lot is damaged and in need of resurfacing. The scope of work includes removing and replacing damaged asphalt pavement, and associated path of travel upgrades according to the Division of State Architect approved drawings. Project Budget -- $480,993 Project Schedule -- Construction is anticipated to begin in early July 2014, and conclude in September 2014.

278

TAB 19

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'�� +��(��

"#�� !�

� ��>?@A��>��>@ A@>@ �>�A�>�>��A@��>A��@>A>�� //� !��"��"�� 3�/�#�� //��"��$�� %��"��&�� 3 ��/��"� #�� /�/ �� '�3��(�� )�� !�� *��

�!�� +��+�� #�� 3� ��,��!�� +��+�� ,�!�� +��+�� #�� ,��!�� 3�� !�

# �� *��

��

279

��

�� !�� %�� !��# �� !��# �� -�� !�� $��!��$�� %�� !��"��%��&��'�� !�� !�� (�� # �� '�3��(��*�� "��!��"�� (��"��!��(��%��!�� )��%�� .��

��

280

1

NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO DEDICATE EASEMENTS AT 9th STREET SPAN SCHOOL

At a meeting of the Board of Education of the City of Los Angeles, Governing Board of the Los Angeles Unified School District, held March 4, 2014, the following resolution was adopted by at least a two-thirds vote of all its members: RESOLVED: That the Board of Education of the City of Los Angeles, in pursuance of the provisions of Sections 17556 through 17561, inclusive, of the Education Code of the State of California, does hereby declare its intention to irrevocably offer to dedicate easements for public street purposes at 9th Street Span School, to the City of Los Angeles, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter called Grantee) with regard to that certain real property situated in the County of Los Angeles, City of Los Angeles, State of California, legally described on Exhibits A-1 through A-4 and shown on Exhibits B-1 through B-4 attached hereto. The proposed dedication of easements to the City of Los Angeles will be for the construction of three new property line corner cuts for accessibility purposes and a vehicular drop-off on the west side of Stanford Avenue, bordering the east side of the 9th Street Span School campus. The dedications will be an Irrevocable Offer to Dedicate Easements legally described in Exhibits A-1 through A-4 and shown on Exhibits B-1 through B-4 attached hereto. Grantee shall be responsible for damage caused intentionally or by any negligent act or omission of Grantee, its agent or employees while exercising the rights granted herein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That a public meeting of this Board be held in the Los Angeles Unified School District Board Room, 333 South Beaudry Avenue, 1st Floor, Los Angeles, 90017, the regular place of meeting of this Board, at or about 1:00 p.m., on April 8, 2014 for a public hearing upon the question of such dedication. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That it is the intention of the Board at the time and place fixed for such public hearing or meeting, unless a petition protesting against the proposed dedication, signed by at least ten percent of the qualified electors of said Los Angeles Unified School District, as shown by the affidavit of one of the petitioners, be filed with this Board, to order such dedications and adopt a resolution authorizing the execution and delivery of the dedications for public street improvement purposes. Notice of the adoption of this resolution and of the time and place of holding said meeting shall be given by posting copies of this resolution, signed by the members of this Board or a majority thereof, in three public places in this Los Angeles Unified School District of Los Angeles County, not less than ten days before the date of said meeting and by publishing a copy of this resolution once not less than five days before the date of said meeting in a newspaper of general circulation published in the Los Angeles School District of Los Angeles County.

281

2

IN WITNESS of the passage of the foregoing Resolution as prescribed by law, we, the Members of said Board of Education, present and voting thereon, have hereunto set our hands the 4th day of March 2014. ______________________________________ _______________________________________ ______________________________________ _______________________________________ ______________________________________ _______________________________________

_____________________________________________ Members of the Board of Education of the

City of Los Angeles STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) I, _____________________________, ____________________________, Board of Education of the City of Los Angeles, California, hereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true, and correct copy of the Resolution of Intention to Dedicate Easements at Para Los Niños Middle School. By: ______________________________________ Name: ____________________________________ Title: _____________________________________ Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this _____ day of __________________, 20___, by ____________________________, proved to me on the basis of Satisfactory evidence to be the person who appeared before me. ______________________________________ Notary Public in and for the County of Los Angeles, State of California

282

-1

283

-2

285

-3

287

-4

289

TAB 20

��

��

��

��

��

��%&�'�� +��(��

**� �� !"#$/

�� &/��/��/� �/� �/��/�/��/��//��/�/��/�/��/��/�/��/?�� !��"��!��#�� $��%�� &$!��"��'��"�� "��(��)��!�� *��"�� +��%��&�� "��,��&�� %��*� �� (��-�� .��#��/�� 0�� )�� 1 �� )�� 0�� #��-�� (��%�� /��)�� %�� 1 ��%�� )�� )��1 ��

��

291

��

)�� ,�� #�� )��$��2��'�� (��"�� %�� /��)�� %�� (�� )��*��"�/�� "�1 �� %��*� �� (��-��0�� )��! ��%� ��"�� %�� /��)�� -��!�� "�(��

��+��,��(��%�� /��)�� )�� #��

��

292

1

NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO DEDICATE EASEMENTS AT SONIA M. SOTOMAYOR LEARNING ACADEMIES

At a meeting of the Board of Education of the City of Los Angeles, Governing Board of the Los Angeles Unified School District, held March 4, 2014, the following resolution was adopted by at least a two-thirds vote of all its members: RESOLVED: That the Board of Education of the City of Los Angeles, in pursuance of the provisions of Sections 17556 through 17561, inclusive, of the Education Code of the State of California, does hereby declare its intention to irrevocably offer to dedicate easements for sewer and storm drain purposes at Sonia M. Sotomayor Learning Academies to the City of Los Angeles, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter called Grantee) with regard to that certain real property situated in the County of Los Angeles, City of Los Angeles, State of California, legally described on Exhibits A-1 and A-2 and also shown on Exhibits B-1 and B-2 attached hereto. The proposed dedication of the easements to the City of Los Angeles will be for public sewer and storm drain access. The dedication will be an Irrevocable Offer to Dedicate Easements legally described in Exhibits A-1 and A-2 and shown on Exhibits B-1 and B-2 attached hereto. Grantee shall be responsible for damage caused intentionally or by any negligent act or omission of Grantee, its agent or employees while exercising the rights granted herein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That a public meeting of this Board be held in the Los Angeles Unified School District Board Room, 333 South Beaudry Avenue, 1st Floor, Los Angeles, 90017, the regular place of meeting of this Board, at or about 1:00 p.m., on April 8, 2014 for a public hearing upon the question of such dedication. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That it is the intention of the Board at the time and place fixed for such public hearing or meeting, unless a petition protesting against the proposed dedication, signed by at least ten percent of the qualified electors of said Los Angeles Unified School District, as shown by the affidavit of one of the petitioners, be filed with this Board, to order such dedications and adopt a resolution authorizing the execution and delivery of the dedication for sewer and storm drain purposes. Notice of the adoption of this resolution and of the time and place of holding said meeting shall be given by posting copies of this resolution, signed by the members of this Board or a majority thereof, in three public places in this Los Angeles Unified School District of Los Angeles County, not less than ten days before the date of said meeting and by publishing a copy of this resolution once not less than five days before the date of said meeting in a newspaper of general circulation published in the Los Angeles School District of Los Angeles County.

293

2

IN WITNESS of the passage of the foregoing Resolution as prescribed by law, we, the Members of said Board of Education, present and voting thereon, have hereunto set our hands the 4th day of March 2014. ______________________________________ _______________________________________ ______________________________________ _______________________________________ ______________________________________ _______________________________________

_____________________________________________ Members of the Board of Education of the

City of Los Angeles STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) I, _____________________________, ____________________________, Board of Education of the City of Los Angeles, California, hereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true, and correct copy of Resolution of Intention to Dedicate Easements at Sonia M. Sotomayor Learning Academies. By: ______________________________________ Name: ____________________________________ Title: _____________________________________ Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this _____ day of __________________, 20___, by ____________________________, proved to me on the basis of Satisfactory evidence to be the person who appeared before me. ______________________________________ Notary Public in and for the County of Los Angeles, State of California

294

TAB 21

��

��

��

��

�� *��

��

�� 34�� 5�� 3�654�7�849:5��59� �� &��

!�� "�� #�� $��%��&�� '�� (��)��*��*�� +��*��

!�� "�� ,��+��*�� 5 ��,�� %�� &��

��-��,�� (�� &��

�� 5 �� "�� #��$�� &��

�� .�� (��

��

299

��

��&��,�� /�� 0�� 1��

��!��5 �� &�� (�� 5 ��"�� &��

�� !��.�� ,�� /�� 0�� ,��

!�� 2��

��

300

INFORMATIV

E301

Board of Education Report No. 288-13/14 For 3-4-2014 Board Meeting



INFORMATIVE TO: Members, Board of Education DATE: February 14, 2014 Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent FROM: Vivian K. Ekchian Chief Human Resources Officer SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATIONS AND TIMELINE FOR NOTIFICATION OF

CERTIFICATED ADMINISTRATORS AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES

Background: At this time the District cannot anticipate all budgetary conditions and events that may impact staffing decisions for the 2014-15 academic year. In order to provide the Board of Education with maximum flexibility in planning staffing for student and school success, it is recommended that the District send the necessary notices as required by law to assure District staffing levels align with budgetary and organizational needs.

The California Education Code and the AALA Bargaining Unit Agreement provide requirements for legal notifications, reductions, and reassignment of certificated administrators and contract management positions. Recommendations: Certificated and Classified Contract Management Employees

Notices should be sent to all certificated and classified contract management employees with expiring contracts, advising them that they will be released from their contract positions no later than June 30, 2014. Pursuant to Education Code 35031, if contract management employees with expiring contracts are not notified of release from their positions at least 45 days (or as specified in their contract) prior to the expiration of their contracts, their expiring contracts are automatically renewed for a term of the same length, with the same current salary and benefits. Contract management employees with expiring contracts have been sent notices of release each year, without exception.

302

Members, Board of Education Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent - 2 - February 14, 2014 Certificated Management, Supervisory, and Confidential Employees March 15 notices should be sent to all certificated administrators, supervisory employees, and confidential employees informing them that they may be released and/or reassigned due to reasons including, but not limited to, funding, restructuring, loss of confidence or for cause in accordance with Education Code 44951. This is a legal threshold notice that must be given by March 15; without this notice, these employees must be continued in their positions for the following school year. A tentative timeline is attached for your information. Please let me know if you have any questions or require additional information. Attachment c: Michelle King David Holmquist Enrique Boull’t Jefferson Crain

303

ATTACHMENT


TENTATIVE TIMELINE FOR CERTIFICATED AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT

MARCH 15 NOTICE PROCESS (2014) 1. Board Meeting for March 15 Layoff Notice Adoption and Authorization to release: Certificated Administrators and Contract Management Personnel

March 4

2. Letters mailed to Certificated Administrators and Contract Management Personnel with expiring contracts by certified mail (EC44951 and 35031)

by March 15

3. Board Communication approving contracts for certain Senior Management employees with expiring contracts (Office of the General Counsel)

June 10

4. Board Communication on Pre-July 1 Notice and Board motion to declare salaries and benefits indefinite

June 10

5. Letters mailed to all contract management employees as authorized by the Board of Education (Office of the General Counsel)

June 13

6. Letters mailed to all certificated management, supervisory, and confidential employees notifying them that they will be released/reassigned for the next school year (Human Resources Division)

June 13

VKE:yv 2-14-14

304

TAB 22

INFORMATIV

E307

RESOLUTIONS

313

TAB 23

��

��

��

��

�� *��

�� 3��

!��"�#!�$��$��%&��!�'� ��(��)��*��+��+��,�*++-�$��$��$��!��)!��)��$$��.��/��)!��"�� $��!��$$��$�� )!� ��"��$��!��)��)��.��$��.��!��)��)�� !��)��0

!��"��)��"�+��"��)��$�)��!��)��1��)�"��)��)��)!��)��.��.��!�)��.��0

!��"�+� �.�� )��)�$�� )��)!��!� ��)��.��)��!��)�� !� �� .��)��)��)�2$��)�0

!��"��)��$��.��!� ��)� �*��3�� 4��,*3��-��)��!��!��!��)��0��

!��"�'� ��5��!��)!��)��!� ��)��!��$��!�5��$��"�)��.��$�� )��$��$��!�5��6!��$��!��*++0��6"��!��"��

7�� "�#!��!��$��"��))��)�6��!��)��"�$��)��"�$��/��/��)!��"��!��$��$��!��*++�� !��)��!��$�� $��!�5��0�

7�� !�"�#!��!��$��.��!��6��$��)�$��!�� $��/��"��!��$��$��8

� ��)��)!� �� 5��!��)��6��!�� )��/"�)��"��"��)��)��)��0

� ��!��.��!�� $��.��6��1��

��

314

��

��$��.��$��0� ��)��"��)��.��.��)!��)��0�

� ��$��$��$��"��"��"��)��.��0�

7�� !�"�#!��!��$��$��/��)��.��$��.��!��*3��!�9&:9:%��)��.��6��1�6��!��$�� $��.��)�6�� 0��"��.

7�� "�#!��!��$��6��1�6��!�$��"��"�)��.�� $��$��.��)��"��!��)��*��+��+��!�9&:%:;��)!��.��

��

315

INFORMATIV

E316

INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Los Angeles Unified School District

Transmittal Form

TO: Michelle King, Deputy Superintendent DATE: 9/6/13

FROM: Tony Atienza, Director

Budget Services and Financial Planning SUBJECT: Investing Priorities for Equitable Learning Environments for all LAUSD Students:

BUDGET IMPACT STATEMENT Budget Impact Prioritize stabilizing schools, re-hiring staff to fill needed positions and restoring programs as the first round of LCFF funding is delivered to the District and the Superintendent delivers budget priorities to the Board No budget impact, since this resolve is only asking the Superintendent to prioritize the funding we receive. Increase student achievement and graduation No budget impact; the assumption is that we will use available funding to increase student achievement. Reduction of Staffing Ratios to National Averages:

National Averages

Change in Staffing Required to Achieve Ratio

Cost based on average salary + benefits

Elementary Class Size* 21.2 +2,368 FTEs $229.7 million Middle Class Size* 26.8 +477 FTEs $46.3 million High School Class Size* 26.8 +752 FTEs $72.9 million Counselor 470.9:1 +199 FTEs $19.7 million Administrator Ratios** 299.8:1 +1,194 FTEs $157.4 million Clerical Ratios*** Unknown Unknown Unknown Classified Ratios*** Unknown Unknown Unknown

Eliminate Statutory Rehiring Lists; Return Severed Employees Working in Temporary Status to Permanent Status Implementation time frame directly impacts the cost to eliminate current statutory rehire lists as normal employee attrition via retirements and other departures are backfilled with employees from the rehire list over time, thereby reducing the cost to rehire the remaining employees on the list. Assuming the current lists were retired today, the costs are reflected below: Estimated cost to eliminate current Human Resources rehiring lists is $95.9 million, restoring 1,013 positions. Estimated cost to eliminate current Personnel Commission rehiring lists is $411.1 million, restoring 7,190 positions. The cost to return severed employees working in temporary status is included in the costs above since

317

these employees are on the rehire lists being eliminated. There will be an unknown budget impact related to day-to-day substitutes as a result of teachers moving out of the substitute pool, while demand for substitute teachers across the district may remain constant, increase or decrease. Increase Student, Staff and Community Safety in and around school communities As a guiding principle, this item has no cost unless a specific action is taken to augment or enhance staffing or services. Those costs will be identified in the Budget Impact Statement attached to a resolution or Board Report when the action is taken by the Board. Incremental salary restoration, equivalent to 12-13 COLA of 3.24% and develop a strategy for district-wide restoration over time with bargaining unit partners. A 3.24% increase in salaries would cost approximately $129.6 million at full implementation, and would be an ongoing annual increase in operating costs. Incremental implementation of a compensation increase would incur a portion of the $129.6 million total cost each year, and ongoing, until full implementation of the total $129.6 million increase is achieved. The cost increase in each year of a phased implementation plan will depend on the timeline identified for implementation. Seek input on funding priorities from parents, students, staff, and community members and bargaining units. Develop immediate funding priorities should LCFF funding be ‘released” in FY 13-14 This information has already been gathered by Budget Services and Financial Planning in response to Board Resolution To Engage the Los Angeles Unified School District Community and Establish Fiscal Priorities. Contact Person: Tony Atienza

Telephone: 213-241-2100

Email: [email protected]

*Class size is available in the NCES 2011-12 data set, other ratios are currently available for 2010-11. **Includes only Principals and Assistant Principals ***A comparison to national clerical ratios is not possible because NCES data aggregate school district administrative support staff, school and library support staff, student support staff, and other support services staff into a single ratio, whereas LAUSD clerical ratios are solely school-level clerical staff ratios. A national average for classified staff to student ratio could not be identified. Source: National Center for Education Statistics, 2011-12 Table 209.30 & 2010-11 Table 92. http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_209.30.asp http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d12/tables/dt12_092.asp

318

TAB 24

��

��

��

��$��$�� $��%��

��&'�� (��)��

�� !"

#��$�� "��%�� 0�#��$��&��'�� (�� 0�#�� 0��#��$�� 0�� $��)��5�� *��(�� 0

�� $��5��(�� 0�

�� $��5�� 0�

�� $��5��(��5�� (��+�� 0��

��$��5��(��, ��

��

319

��

��

��

320

INFORMATIV

E321


Transmittal Form



Budget Services and Financial Planning SUBJECT: BOARD RESOLUTION: BUDGET IMPACT STATEMENT Resolution Title: Resolution to Examine Recruitment and Staffing Challenges within LAUSD Special Education and Early Childhood Divisions

Presented By: Board Member Steve Zimmer

Date Noticed: November 12, 2013

Date Presented for Action: Scheduled for Action at the December 10, 2013, Board Meeting

Budget Impact The resolution calls for a report in 90 days, which addresses staffing & recruitment strategies, training and tuition reimbursement, and training partnerships. There is no direct general fund budget impact resulting from this action. Subsequent Board action to implement strategies identified in the requested report are likely to have a fiscal impact, as identified within the report.

Contact Person: Tony Atienza

Telephone: 213-241-2100


322

TAB 25

��

��

��

��$��$�� $��%��

��&'�� (��)�� #��$��

-./012�� !��"#$%��&��' ��& �(��)�� *

+,� ��(� �� ) �-�.�� *�� '��'�� /��-��,�� '� ��0

+,� ��1,��'��'�� ,�� 2��/��0

+,� ��1,��-��-��,�� '��,��'�-,��,�� (�� 0

+,� ��1,��3��'��2��/��/��2��(��,��/�,��0

+,� ��1��3�� '��2��/�� ,�� (��,��,� ��,��'��-,��(��(� �� '�� ,�� 4��,�� 5��6�'��*��'� �,� �'��'��,�� -,� �� ,��,��'��,��'��'��,�� 5�� 6�� *0��

+,� ��4(� ��,��,��7��<��'��,��=�� (��'�/�� (�� ,�� ,� ��0��-��,� �'� ��/��

>��(��1,��,��(� ��)�� '��,��7��<��'��,��=�� -��(��'� ��(� �� ) �-�.�� 0

>��(��'� �,� ��1,��-,��'��,��=�� ,��'� ��'�5��6�'��5�� 6�� ,��-��'��-��,��,��,��,��0

>��(��'� �,� ��1,��,�� ,��''�-��/��3��?#��-��,��''� ��-,� ��,�� '��-��,��,��0

��

324

��

>��(��'� �,� ��1,��,��-��3�� ,��/��(��'�'��(� ��,�� (�(��, �(�� '�� 0

>��(��'� �,� ��1,��,�� -��/ ��/��3��,��)�� '� �� -,��,��/��(��'�'��0��/��'�'��

>��(��1,��,��/�(�� -,�� (�� '��,��.�/��'��-�� ,��

��

325

INFORMATIV

E326


Transmittal Form



Budget Services and Financial Planning SUBJECT: BOARD RESOLUTION: BUDGET IMPACT STATEMENT Resolution Title: Local Control Funding

Formula Strategy and Implementation

Presented By: Ms. Tamar Galatzan, Ms. Monica Garcia

Date Noticed: June 4, 2013

Date Presented for Action: January 14, 2014

Budget Impact There is no net General Fund impact as a result of this action.


Telephone: 213-241-2100


327

TAB 26

��

��

��

��$��$�� $��%��

��&'�� (��)�� #��$��

��$��

�� !��"��#��$�%&�

'(��)(��*��+��(��,��-��(��!��(��.��(��.��"��(��/

'(��)(��0��1��!��"��2�(��(��(��(��3�(��1��.��4��'��1��(�.��(��(��(��(��5.��(��.��/

'(��6��(��.��*��6��1��.��0�"�"��(/

'(��)(��+�� (��.��*��.��.��*��0��(��(��*��(��$�3��$�7��/

'(��8�� *��"��$�%��(��+��*��7��*��0��0��(�9(��(��)��(��9��:��(��/�

'(��,��*��(��(��*��.��9(��/��"��5.��.��.�.��:��*��0��(��.��%;��(��(��0��(��(��8��*��(��*��(�/��

'(��<��.��*��.��(�*��"��.��(��!��0��(�*��"��/��0��(��"��

��*��)(��(��*��+��(��,��-��(��!��(�� (��.��.��..��*��+�� *��"��$�%��(��)��(��9��

��

328

INFORMATIV

E329


Transmittal Form



Budget Services and Financial Planning SUBJECT: BOARD RESOLUTION: BUDGET IMPACT STATEMENT Resolution Title: Recommitting to 21st Century

Learning for Students Presented By: Ms. Monica Garcia, Ms. Tamar Galatzan

Date Noticed: December 17, 2013


Budget Impact The costs of this action are detailed in Board Report 129-13/14. As identified in the report, the total cost of the previously approved resolution is $114,858,983. While the largest portion of this expense will be funded using bond proceeds, there is a General Fund impact in 2013-14 of $548,978 and $11,200,000 in fiscal year 2014-15. The detailed analysis of costs is available as Attachment D to Board Report 129-13/14 which was part of the December 10, 2013 board book and is available online under tab 6 of this document: http://laschoolboard.org/sites/default/files/12-10-13RegBdPressPublic.pdf.


Telephone: 213-241-2100


330

TAB 27

��

��

��

��$��$�� $��%��

��&'�� (��)��

��

�� !"#�###��$��%

��&� �� '��(( �� (��$��)�� )�� $��%

�� *##+�� $��) � ��,��-�� )$�� .��$��*##/�� )��$��$��) � ��0�� (�� (��%�

��1�� )$ �� *##+�� $� ��2�� 1 �� -�� -�(($� ��3�$�� (��(��$�� (��(�� )$ ��%�

�� $� �� $��$��) � ��,��-��(%�

�� $��) � ��,��-��(�� (�� (� ��%��

��$��(($� ��(�()��0�� (��(�� (� ��(�� %��)��

,�� '��$�� $�� (�� $� �� $)( ��4$ �� (� �� *##/%

,�� $��'��$�� - �� $�� 4$ �� $�� 5

��

331

��

��0 �� (�� )��'��$�� 4$ �� (� ��)��$��) � ��,��-��)��(�� 3� �$�� 0��

��)��

,�� )�� -��$�� 6 ��7�� '��,$��8##+�

��

332

INFORMATIV

E333


Transmittal Form



Budget Services and Financial Planning SUBJECT: BOARD RESOLUTION: BUDGET IMPACT STATEMENT Resolution Title: Recommitting to 21st Century

Learning for Students Presented By: Ms. Monica Garcia, Ms. Tamar Galatzan

Date Noticed: December 17, 2013


Budget Impact The costs of this action are detailed in Board Report 129-13/14. As identified in the report, the total cost of the previously approved resolution is $114,858,983. While the largest portion of this expense will be funded using bond proceeds, there is a General Fund impact in 2013-14 of $548,978 and $11,200,000 in fiscal year 2014-15. The detailed analysis of costs is available as Attachment D to Board Report 129-13/14 which was part of the December 10, 2013 board book and is available online under tab 6 of this document: http://laschoolboard.org/sites/default/files/12-10-13RegBdPressPublic.pdf.


Telephone: 213-241-2100


334

TAB 28

��

��

��

��

�� *�� #��$��

9:;<9�� !�!�"��#��$��%��!��&'��(��

)!��*��%+�,��(��!��,(&-'.��%��/��!�0�1'2�.3-0��!��4��!��(��(��(5-�---��%��/�� /��!�!��6��%��!��7

)!��!��(8�,�!�0�%��!��,�� !��%�0�!��!��(��0��7

)!��!��!�!��!��%��0��!�� (%��(9��/9��!��(7

)!��(��,8��!��6��!�� 0�� !��%�� /��!��/��%��&'��(��0��%�!��%��%��(��7

)!��3.:�%��0��/!�!�0��8��!�0��!��!��!��7

)!��!��!��8��,��!��!��(!�0��%�!��7

)!��+��(��!��!��/!��!��;��,��&-'<�!��!��'=1�---+�>�;��/��!5=:��%��'.:!��!��!��!��0��%%��!��22-��%��7

)!��!�;��9��%%��5-!��!��!��%%��"��@��!��/��!�!�>��0��(�%��%��+��A��'<!��!��!��%%��0��#��7

B��0��!��!�*��%��%��!�&'��(,(�"��7

��

335

��

B��0��!��!��!�*��"��3-��(��/��!��!��

�A ��0��%��!�/�!�;��,��"��!��!��!��7

,A �"��!��/��!��0��%��!��7

�A ��%��%��/��!�"��7��

�"��!�/�!�;��"��(��!��

=>��

��

336

INFORMATIV

E337


Transmittal Form



Budget Services and Financial Planning SUBJECT: BOARD RESOLUTION: BUDGET IMPACT STATEMENT Resolution Title: Increasing Access to

Computer Science Education: Taking the Next Steps in Preparing and Educating Our Students for their 21st Century Careers

Presented By: Ms. Tamar Galatzan

Date Noticed: February 11, 2014

Date Presented for Action: To Be Determined

Budget Impact The resolution calls for a strategic plan within 90 days. There is no net General Fund impact as a result of this action.


Telephone: 213-241-2100


338

TAB 29

��

��

��

��

�� *�� #��$��

8��

��

�� !�� "��

�� #�� $� !��$�� $��

�� %� �� !��$�� $�� $��

�� #�� $�� &�� '�� ()*+�� ,�� -��"��

�� $� � �� .�� $��

�� $�� /�� $�� "��

�� 0�� $�� !��

�� %�� !��$ �� 1�� $�� $��

2�� #�� 3�� 4�� %�� &�� '�� 0��

��

339

��

2�� #��'��$��!�$�� $��

��

340

INFORMATIV

E341


Transmittal Form



Budget Services and Financial Planning SUBJECT: BOARD RESOLUTION: BUDGET IMPACT STATEMENT Resolution Title: Celebrating March as

Women’s History Month Presented By: Ms. Monica Garcia



Budget Impact The resolution recognizes March as Women’s History Month. There is no net General Fund impact as a result of this action.


Telephone: 213-241-2100


342

TAB 30

��

��

��

��$��$�� $�� %��

��&'�� (��)��

��

�� %!� �� "�� !��#�� $�� %&��'(&)�� !�� #�#$��#�� $! ��*�

��+��&,-'��!�� .�� /��#��0��.�� #�� "��0�� !�� # �"�� "��0��$�� !�� 1!��$�� #�"��0�� *�� !�� "��0�� $��$�� #� �� !��23��3��4!��5�$��# �"�� %!� ��#�� *�

��/��#�� !��$��0�� $�� !�� !�� !�� $�� 0�� #��*��!��6�� !�� #��#�� !�� #��!#��!��! ��#�� "�� !�� "��#�� $�� !#�� #�� # �� !�� !��#"��0�� !� ��*�

�� !�� 2��!� �� 5�� !�� $��!��$�� !�� !��!�� $��!��!�� 0��#�� #�0�� !��"�� $�! � �� ##!�� "��$��$��*��$�� !��#$� ��#!� �$��$��!�� !�� *��+��'(((�� 3�� $��%&� �� "�� ! � ��7��#��$�� $! ��#�� 3 � ��*�

�� 8��3��"�� !$�� #� �� ##!�� "��0��*�

��

343

��

�� &,,%��#��!�� %!� �� !�� *

��9��"��0�� #�� 9�0� �� #�� "� ��4�� 4�� /��#�� !��4�� :$�#�� ;� ��8��3��*��

��<��!��!�� #�� #��#��"��0��"��"��0��#� �� %!� ��*��"�� $��

��9�� <�� .��3��8�� $�� %&� ��8�� !�� 4�� ;� ��8��3��*

��!� ��9�� 3! �� !�� !�� #�� ##!�� #�#$�� # ��#�� %� ��$��"��0��!�� !�� 3 � �� $��8��3��*�

��!� ��9�� <�� ! �� 3! �� :��#�� ##!�� ! �� 4�� ! �� ;� ��8��3��*��$��

��9�� <�� .��3��8�� 3! �� #� �� !�� $�! � �� !�� 4�� ;� ��8��3��#�� $�� = �0� �� #>��?�

��

344

INFORMATIV

E345


Transmittal Form



Budget Services and Financial Planning SUBJECT: BOARD RESOLUTION: BUDGET IMPACT STATEMENT Resolution Title: Honoring the Life and

Legacy of Cesar E. Chavez Presented By: Ms. Monica Garcia and Ms. Monica Ratliff



Budget Impact The resolution recognizes March 31st, 2014 as Cesar E. Chavez Day at LAUSD. The resolution encourages students, staff, administrators, teachers and community members to recognize and celebrate the life and legacy of Cesar E. Chavez through service-learning projects, to urge the President to declare March 31st as National Service Day, and to communicate this resolution to Congress and the President in support of a National Day of Service for Cesar E. Chavez. There is no net General Fund impact as a result of this action.


Telephone: 213-241-2100


346

TAB 31

��

��

��

��

�� *�� #��$��

�"�� !� ��

53�� @A��

�� !"#�� $�� %�

��&�� $��

��'��$�� !(!"�� !()*��!%"�� +�� ,��$��+��

��-�.��/�� 0��1� ��2�3�$��4��3��5�� 6��$�� %��6�� 3�$��$�� ,�� +��!(7"��

�� !(8"��9��4�� &��5�� $�� $�� $��$��%�'��$�� !%8�� )�� &��

��4$� ��5��/�� :�� .�� :�� ;##�###��!�� !##�� 1��<� ��2�� )##*%�� $��

��

347

��

�� 0�� 0�� =�� 0��6�� $�� $��

�� !�"�#��$� ��%��&�� $�� %�'��#��"�� (��)�� **��$+��,��%��.**-.�

�� /� �0�1�� 2� ��#�� .��

4��'��,�� '��>"(�� $�� 2� ��+��3�� ,��4��#��

��

348

INFORMATIV

E349


Transmittal Form



Budget Services and Financial Planning SUBJECT: BOARD RESOLUTION: BUDGET IMPACT STATEMENT Resolution Title: Support of Assembly Bill 659

– Armenian Genocide Oral History Component

Presented By: Mr. Bennett Kayser



Budget Impact The resolution declares the Board of Education’s support for Assembly Bill 659 as currently written. There is no net General Fund impact as a result of this action.


Telephone: 213-241-2100


350

TAB 32

��

��

��

��

�� *��

��4�01��1��1��

��1�1��B��1��1�1��1��1�0�� 1�1��1�� 0 ��C��!��"1��1��1��1��#1��###��1��1#1��$�

��1�1��1�%��1�%��1��!��"��1�#��1�!��1��#&��'��#��0 ��$

��1�1��1�%��1�%��1��1�1��%�#��5��1��(�#��1��1��1��"��1#��1��1��#��1)��1��1*��#&��#�1��!1&��1�4��#&��4�&��&1�1��+4,-��#&��1#��11��$

��1�1��1��1��#��!1&��1��1�1��#&��1#��11��1#��1��&��1��1��./��#��1��6/-��1��6�788��1��-9�%��1��1��#�#�1�$

��1�1��0��1��:/��7-��#��%��*��%�###��%��1�1��1#��#��11�1��1��#�1��1��1��1��%��1#��1#&��1��1��1��1��1��&��11��#&#��&��1��$�

��1�1��;#&��##��&1��1��&�1��1#��!��#&��1��#��!��"$

��1�1��1��1��&1��1��#��&��#��1��#1��###��1��1#1��

��1�1��;�1��1��5&�#�*��1�#��1��1��4!��1��##��#1��1��#�1��<1��#1��1��1��1��&�1�#1#&1��1��$

��1�1��+4,-�!��&1��1��1��#&��1�#��1��1�1��1��1�!1&��1$�

��1�1��'��1�#�#��#��1��0 ��&1��1��1��#&��#��&��<��1��1��!��$��!��1�1��1�&1��=1��1��1��1��>��1�0�� 1�1��1��1��1��#�1��1��1��#��!��"�!��1��1�%��1�*��5��1��#��!��1�

��

351

��

�1?#1��1��1�1)��1��1*��#&��#�1��!1&��1��

��

352

INFORMATIV

E353

TAB 33

��

��

��

��$��$�� $�� %��

��&'�� (��)�� #��$��

��

�� !��"�� #� ��$

��%��&�� !��$�

�� '��(�� )*+,��-�� $��.��!��/��&��0+,+$��

��3��01��2303��(��4�� 5/��6��7��" ��(��8�� !��

6��%��'��(��/�� !��-��9��!��$�

6��%��(�� !��:�� !�� !��-��/��6��%��(�� -��3��;��<02��$��$��!��

6��%��'��(��/�� -��!��3��4��=��

��

355

��

��>��(�� /�� /��

��

356

INFORMATIV

E

TAB 34

��

��

��

��$��$�� $�� %��

��&'�� (��)�� #��$��

�� !�"��

#��$�%�� & �� $�� '��&��( �� &�( � ��()�� & &��*�� &�� +

#��$�,��-�� ./�(�� ()�� &��(�� -�� -�� &&��/��"��0+

#��$��1�$��$��*��)��(��)�� &�� &�� +

#��$��()� (��(/��2 ((��3��'��#��4!� ��5��(/��&��1$�� (�� 4��&*��*))�� 3��& ��*��(��&&�� +

#��$� �*� ��&�*�� ' �� *��/�� ( �� (��+

#��$�%��'��(� ��*� ��*��&��1�$��$�' ��/��& �� )�� 6��&��' ��7��+

#��$�%�� )��' �� &�� & ��(�� ' ��& &�� & ��(��*��+��

#��$�� 3��*��(��(�� (��/�� +��'$��&��/��

8��$�%��9�� &�:�*�� &�� & �� *��( � ��$�/�� *� ��$�)� �� )��$�)��$��((*� ��(�(/�� )�� )�� &&��/�� (��$� �� )��4��)��$�(�4 ��()*�� /��&�� *)��)*/� � 6 ��&&��)�� )��4��&�� ))��*� ��)�� &�( � ��' ��/��1�$��;

��

357

TAB 35

��

��

��

��

�� *�� #��$��

0�� !�� "��#��$��%��

�#��&��#��' �� $��%��#�� $��$�� #��(� �(��)��*��(��%�� #�� +��%��#�� +��"��#�� +��#��#��-,,��&

�#��&�� (��#��' �� &�-0.��%�� +#��+��"��#�� +��#�� #��%�� +��#��%�(�� &�� &��(��%��#�� #��+�� (��(�*�� %��#��%�� &

�#��&�� #�%��#��' �� /� � ��(� �� +��%��#�� +��"�� (��#��01,�� %�� &��(��#��&�� *�� %��#��%��#�� &�� &��(� �� #��%� �� (�� #��%��+��%��#�� +� �#� ��#��(��%�� %��&

�#��&�� #�(��+�(��#��#�� (�� (�� #��%��(��2,--�� #�(��3�#�� #��4(�%��(�#��#�� #��(�%%�� +�� #� (�%��%�� #��5,�#�� %��#��%�� (��(�� #� (�%��%�� #��-,�#�� 6��+�� +� �� #�� "+#�� #��7�4 ��(�%�� (��8��%��(��6&�

�#��&��#��(��%�� %��(�� #�� %��#��#�� (��(�� &��(�(�� +��#� �� %��#��%�� %��&�

�#��&�� +��#�� $�� (��)�� &��!� �+��(&�

��

358

��

��(��9�� #&�#�� (�� :�(��#�� (��#�� (�+��%�� #��#�� (��(��&�

�#��&��2,,1&��#�� $��$�� (�� +��(�� %��+��"�� (��#�� ;��(��2,,5&��(��(�� #��(��#��+��%�� &�� #��#��(�� %��%�� +�� %�� &��(

�#��&��#��#�� (��(��;�#�� (��#��(��#�� +��%��+��"��&��+&��#��%�� (&��#��#��<��9��(��%��#�� %��(�� #�� #��)��(��*��(��(��%��#�� $��$�� &��&��(��(�� *�� +��%��#�� +��"��#�� +��#��#��-,,��&��(��%��

�� (&��#��#��9��(�(�� #��(�� %��#�� %��#�� $��$��

��

359

TAB 36

��

��

��

��

�� *�� #��$��

�;��

�� !�� "�� #�� $�� %��"��&

��!�� '��'�� $�� "��'�"� �� %��"�� (�� &

�� '��)��)��*�� "�� $�� "�� '��+��+�� "�� "��,�� %��&�

�� '��)��)�� $�� "�� "� �� %��!�� -�� #��%�.��/�'�.0&�

�� "�� "�� #��(�� 1��!�� '��#��2��3��4��%��5��6��%�� "��&��%��#�� %(�� '�� &��"��%��'��'��"��%�7��'��'��%�'��7��8�"��&

��'�� '�� 9:��/�0� ��"�� %��(�� "�� !�� &

�� (�� "� � �� "��%��'))� ��"�� ;� ��%�� <��=��#�� "��"�� "� �� = �� !�� &�

��=��3�"��"��!�"�� /�3!0��

��

360

��

��%��#�� %��"�� "�� "��%� �� &

�� (�� #�� "��7�� "�� "�� (�� &��#��

��"��3�"��"��!�"�� /�3!0��>�'��C�� "��%D��"�� (�� '��'��"��7�� %�#%��7�� 7�� &

��"�� (�� #�� (��:�� %��&�

��"��E��%�� $��$�� !��7�� %�� "�� "� �� "�� !�� #�� "��"��%�'��7�� 4��#�� "�� &

��"��"��%��!�� !�� (��'�� &

��"��'��!�� #%� ��%��!�� "�� "�� 7��!�� &

��"��"��!�� "��"��#��'��7��4��#�� "��*�� 7��!�� &

��"��7�� "��%�7��4��#��#��:�/��F��0��%�� %��1�� 3!��E��%��!� �� #� 1��9��%�� 7��4��#�� #��%�� 7��4��#�� &

��"��3!��"�� 7��4��#��!�� "��'��%�� !�� ?��3!�� (��"�%�� '��&��%��#��

��

361

��

��"��'��7��4��#��#��#�� #%��7��#��"�� %�� #��%�� %�� %�� #%�� !�� #�� :�� %��#�%��?�

��

362

TAB 37

��

��

��

��

�� *�� #��$��

�9��@��

�� !��"��!��#��$�

��%��&''��!�� !!�� "��!��$

��(��"��!��$�

��)��*�� !!�� !��+��#�� !��,��$�

��*�� "��!�� !�� (�� "��"�,��!��!�� &��!�� $��

�� (��&-��!�� "��"��!��$��

��(��.��(� ��/��!��)��0��1��!��!�� +��!��!�)��)��2��3��$��!��

2��"��4�"�� *��!��.��(� ��/��!��

��

363

��

(�� &-�� $�

2��"�� !�� $��!��

2��"��*��

��

364

TAB 38

��

��

��

��$��$�� $�� %��

��&'�� (��)�� #��$��

��

�� !��"��#$%�%%%��&�

�� "�� &

�� '(��)��*�� *��&�

�� *��+#��,��,��-��.��',�-.�)�� &

��,�-.��+#��!��*��"�� !��*��&��!��

.��"��(�"�� !��,��

��

365

TAB 39

��

��

��

��

�� *�� #��$��

��

)��

�� !��"��#��"��"�� !��$��!�� !�� "�� ! ��%��"�� $�� $��&��'��#��"�� $��' �� '��! ��(�� )�� "��!��"��! � ��$�� '��$�� "��""��&��'�*�� '��"��!� �� '��"��!� (�� #��& �!�� '�$�� '��! ��!��"��!��"�� !�� !�%��+�� "��!��$�'��"��!�� ,��&�� "��!��&�� &��'��!��(�� -� �./��.003�� 1��!�� !��"��#��"��!�$� !�� 2"�� 3�� $�� #��"�4��"�� + $��! �� (�� $��' ��!��!��!��%��%��+�� "��"��%��! �� ,$ "� !�� !�5�!�� !��!� � �� (�� #��"��$��"� �� "�� !�� ! �� )�� !�$��! ��!�" ��!�$��" !�� $�� !6�� $�!��! ��! ��!��! ��!��! ��!��"��$��"��'$ ��&�� (�� #��"��$��"'�&�� &�� !�� "��$� � �� '��"��! �&�"+��!�� ! �� &�� $��!�"��$��$��" !�� "��! ��'�� "��!�� !�� " ��$ ��(�� " �� %�� $�� !��! ��! ��"�!�"�� !�"�" ��&�� #��"�4��$��" !�� $ "��"��&�� "�! ��"��"��'�� & ��(�� #��"��$��"� ��! �� !��$�� "�� $��"'��!�"��! ��'��'�� !�� !��"�! ��! ��! ��"�!�"�(��!�� #��"�4��" �� "��!�� 1��!��!�"��%��"��"��& ��+ �� $�� ! ��! �� (��%�� & �� !�� #��"�4��" �� $��! �� 1��!��!�"��%�� $��%��70�!�'�� !!��!�$ ��&� �� $�� #��"��!� �$��' ��"��+ �� $�� ! ��! �� !�& ��'�� !�� #��"�� "�� %��"�� '��! �� !��! ��$$��"�&� ��%��!��"��!��"��! ��

��

366

TAB 40

TAB 41

��

��

�� !!"

��$��$�� $�� %��

��&'��

(��)��

89��

��

Debt Report available online at �laschoolboard.org

368

TAB 42

��

��

�� !!"�

��$��$�� $�� %��

��&'��

(��)��

��

��

��

438

REPORT OF CORRESPONDENCE - 1 - MARCH 4, 2014

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES Governing Board of the Los Angeles Unified School District

MARCH 4, 2014 REPORT OF CORRESPONDENCE

The following correspondence addressed to the Board of Education is submitted with the recommended Disposition, “Refer to Superintendent for referral to Office of the General Counsel to take all steps necessary to protect the interests of the Board of Education, including assignment to outside counsel; Controller to draw warrants in such amounts as may be necessary for the payment of costs and fees upon invoices as approved by the Office of the General Counsel”: FROM LEGAL ACTION

1. Allie & Schuster Summons and Complaint for Breach of Contract; Common

Counts; to Enforce Stop Notice Claims, and For Recovery on Bonds. Case No. BC 533399; Los Angeles Superior Court of the State of California. First Fire Systems, Inc., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. Western Group, Inc., a corporation; Los Angeles Unified School District; Hartford Fire Insurance Company, a corporation; and Does 1 Through 100, Inclusive, Defendants.

2. Lanak & Hanna Summons and Complaint for: 1) Breach of Contract; 2) Goods Sold and Delivered/Agreed Price; 3) Open-Book Account; 4) Account Stated; 5) Enforcement of Stop Notice; 6) Claim Against Public Works Labor and Materials Bond. Case No. TC 027780; Los Angeles Superior Court of the State of California. Evans Sandblasting Corp., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. Environmental Construction Group, Inc., a California corporation; Los Angeles Unified School District, a public entity; Swinerton Builders, a California corporation; Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, a Maryland corporation; Zurich American Insurance Company, a New York corporation; Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, a Massachussetts corporation; and Does 1 Through 100, Inclusive, Defendants.

3. Law Offices of Robert F. Schauer Summons and Complaint for Breach of Contract; Work, Labor and Materials Furnished; Work, Labor and Services; Open Book Account; Recovery on Contractor’s State License Bond; Recovery on Stop Payment Notice; Recovery on Statutory Labor and Material Payment Bond. Case No. BC 534379; Los Angeles Superior Court of the State of California. Upland Contracting, Inc., a California corporation, Plaintiff, v. Suffolk Roel Inc., a Massachusetts corporation; Los Angeles Unified School District, a public entity; Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, a Maryland corporation; Federal Insurance Company, a New Jersey corporation; Safeco Insurance Company of America, a New Hampshire corporation; and Does 1 Through 100, Inclusive, Defendants.

439


4. Law Offices of Michael A. Taibi Summons and Complaint for Damages. Case No. 14K00092; Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California. Monique Powell, Plaintiff, v. Los Angeles Unified School District; and Does 1 Through 50, Inclusive, Defendants.

5. Rutan & Tucker, LLP Summons and First Amended Petition for Writs of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief. Case No. 34-2013-80001678; Los Angeles Superior Court of the State of California. City of Huntington Park, a municipal corporation; Huntington Park Public Financing Authority, a California joint exercise of powers authority; and Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission of the City of Huntington Park, a public entity organized and existing under California Health & Safety Code § 34173, Petitioners/Plaintiffs, v. Wendy L. Watanabe, in her official capacity as Auditor-Controller for the County of Los Angeles; County of Los Angeles Auditor-Controller’s Office, an agency of the Coutny of Los Angeles; County of Los Angeles, a political subdivision of the State of California; and Does 1 Through 50, Respondent/s Defendants, Michael Cohen, in his official capacity as Director of the California Department of Finance; California Department of Finance, an agency of the State of California; John Chiang, in his official capacity as Controller of the State of California; California State Controller’s Office, an agency of the State of California; and Roes 1 Through 50, Real Parties in Interest.

6. Trygstad, Schwab & Trygstad Summons and Verified Complaint for Damages and Injunctive Relief for: 1) Discrimination Based on Race in Violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code § 12940, et seq.); 2) Discrimination Based on Gender (Sex) in Violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code § 12940, et seq.); 3) Discrimination Based on Age in Violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code §12940, et seq.); 4) Failure to Prevent Discrimination in Violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code § 12940, et seq.); 5) Retaliation for Reporting Discrimination in Violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code § 12940, et seq.) Case No. BC 535774; Los Angeles Superior Court of the State of California. Robert Reider, Plaintiff, v. Los Angeles Unified School District, a California public school district; and Does 1 Through 20, Inclusive, Defendants

7. K&L Gates Summons and Complaint by Suffolk Construction Company, Inc., for: 1) Breach of Contract; 2) Implied Contractual Indemnity; and 3) Declaratory Relief. Case No. BC 536482; Los Angeles Superior Court of the State of California. Suffolk Construction Company, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation, Plaintiff, v. Los Angeles Unified School District, a public entity; and Does 1 Through 100, Defendants.

440


The recommended disposition of the following item is “Refer to Superintendent for referral to the Office of the Risk Management and Insurance Services”:

8. Law Offices of Richard A. Fisher Summons and Complaint for Damages. Case No. BC 532919; Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California. Hattie Sproule, Plaintiff, v. Los Angeles Unified School District; and Does 1 Through 20, Inclusive, Defendants.

9. Law Offices of Adrien Medvei Summons and Complaint for Damages: 1) Negligence; 2) Violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Case No. BC 533751; Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California. Destiney Maxie, a minor, by and through Lakeisha White as Guardian Ad Litem, Plaintiff, v. Los Angeles Unified School District; Dean Sanchez; Principal Roberto Lee; Mr. Olivas; and Does 1 Through 50, Inclusive, Defendants.

10. Komanapalli Massey Summons and Plaintiff’s Complaint for Damages for: 1) Negligence/Negligent Failure of Los Angeles Unified School District and its Co-Defendatns Employees to Train, Supervise or Protect. Case No. BC 535098; Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California. S.S., a minor, by and through her Guardian Ad Litem, Eric S., Plaintiff, v. Los Angeles Unified School District, a public entity; Dr. John E. Deasy, in his professional capacity; Laurent Hernandez, in her professional capacity; and Does 1 Through 25, Defendants.

11. McElfish Law Firm Summons and Complaint for Damages for: 1) Negligence; 2) Gross Negligence; 3) Negligent Hiring; 4) Negligent Supervision; 5) Negligent Retention of Unfit Employee; 6) Assault; 7) Battery; 8) Willful Misconduct; 9) Conspiracy; 10) Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress; 11) Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress, Bystander; 12) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; 13) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, Bystander; 14) Vicarious Liability. Case No. BC 526911; Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California. Meshach Betts, a minor, by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Nicole Brown; Nicole Brown, an individual; Jabari Betts, an individual, Plaintiffs, v. Los Angeles Unified School District, a governmental public entity; Peggy Baxter, an individual; Genevieve Shepherd, an individual; and Does 1 Through 200, Inclusive, Defendants.

12. Owen, Patterson & Owen Plaintiff’s Complaint for Damages: 1) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; 2) Negligence/Negligent Supervision; 3) Negligence; 4) Sexual Battery; 5) Assault; 6) Battery; 7) Liability Pursuant to Civ. Code § 1714.1; and 8) Parental Vicarious Liability. Case No. BC 534161; Los Angeles County Superior Court of the State of California. J.M., a minor, by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Michelle McCoy, Plaintiff, v. Los Angeles Unified School District; Theresa Wedaa; Jason (Doe); Jacob (Doe); Doe parents of minor perpetrators; and Does 1 Through 100, Inclusive, Defendants.

441


The recommended disposition of the following item is “Refer to Superintendent for referral to the Office of the Risk Management and Insurance Services”:

No.

Received From

Type of Damage

Claimant

Date of Damage

13. The Blackman Law Firm

Cesareo Cortez Damages Cesareo Cortez

Rosario G. Cortez 12/06/13

14. Law Offices of Robert M. Berger Robert M. Berger

Damages Samuel Nathan Berger 7/26/13

15. Law Offices of Loren M. Merlin Gary Gukassian

Damages Maria Cristina Lavadores Villanueva

12/19/13

16. Law Offices of Andrew Zeytuntsyan Jack Timourian

Damages Catalina Tellez-Pelcastre Roman Secundino

2012 to Present

17. Manly, Stewart & Finaldi John C. Manly

Damages Jane WIM Doe (2 Rec’d) 2011/2012

18. Manly, Stewart & Finaldi Vince W. Finaldi

Damages Jane WLJ Doe 2007-2008


Damages Jane WML Doe (2 Rec’d) 2011-2012

20. Manly, Stewart & Finaldi John C. Manly

Damages Jane WSC Doe 2007/2008


Damages Jane WVS Doe 2007-2008


Damages Jane WSC Doe (2 Rec’d) 2007-2008

23. Irma Perez Damages Danny Robles 12/12/13 24. Pete Taylor Damages Pete Taylor 9/16/13 25. Dannys Alvarado Vehicle Damages Dannys Alvarado 2/22/13

26. Stacey Arballo Vehicle Damages Stacey Arballo 1/24/14 27. Celia Avina Vehicle Damages Celia Avina 1/22/14

28. Paula Cabrera Vehicle Damages Paula Cabrera 12/12/13

29. Yolanda Guerra Vehicle Damages Yolanda Guerra 1/29/14 30. Insurlink Financial & Insurance

Mike Suh Vehicle Damages Mike Suh 1/13/14

31. Edson Karratti Vehicle Damages Edson Karratti 10/21/13 32. Pamela Newman Vehicle Damages Pamela Newman 9/04/13 33. Laura Parra Vehicle Damages Laura Parra 12/18/13 34. Margarita V. Rios Vehicle Damages Margarita V. Rios 12/16/13 35. Wawanesa Insurance

Nakisha Duniver Vehicle Damages Tsovinar Karapetyan 11/21/13

442


Respectfully Submitted JEFFERSON CRAIN Executive Officer of the Board

443

TAB 43

��

��

�� !!""

��

��

��

/0123��

�� !�� "�� #

��

444

LO

S A

NG

ELE

S U

NIFIE

D S

CH

OO

L DIS

TRIC

T C

HA

RTE

R S

CH

OO

LS D

IVIS

ION

(CS

D)

1 of 1

LIST OF N

EW C

HA

RTER

PETITION

S FOR

PUB

LIC H

EAR

ING

BO

AR

D O

F EDU

CA

TION

MEETIN

G M

AR

CH

4, 2014

PETITION

NA

ME

TYPE C

SD TEA

M

ASSIG

NM

ENT

BD

ESC

PR

OPO

SED A

REA

/LOC

ATIO

N

GR

AD

E LEVELS

# OF

STUD

ENTS

TERM

1. Scholars Learning Academ

y Start-up

Independent Johnson

7 S

North C

arson K-8

740 2014-19

445

TAB 44

��

��

�� !!"�

��$��$�� $�� %��

��&'��(��)�� #��$��

54467��

�� !��"� #��

��

446

TAB 45

��

��

�� !!"�

��$��$�� $�� %��

��&'��

(��)��

�$$��

�� !��"��#��$%�� &�� "�'(�� (�� "��#��(��

��

451

TAB 46

��

��

�� !!"�

��$��$�� $�� %��

��&'��

(��)��

�##��

�� !�� "

��

452