Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

 

Background

The Santa Clara County Office of Education (SCCOE) recognizes ten employees each year for outstanding service to students, parents, coworkers and customers.  Karen Larson, an Academic Technology Specialist for the Technology Services Branch, is being honored as the Employee of the Month for her outstanding skills and accomplishments on the job, dedication to exceptional service and commitment to excellence.

 

Today, December 14, 2016, we will honor Karen Larson as the December Employee of the Month.

 

 

Fiscal Implications

N/A

At this time, members of the public may address the Board on any issue within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board that is not listed on this agenda. Members of the public may also address the Board on an agenda item before or during the Board's consideration of the item.  No action can be taken on an item not on the agenda at this time, but may be referred to the administration or put on a future agenda.  In accordance with Board Bylaw 9323, individual remarks will be limited to 3 minutes each, unless otherwise stipulated.

 

 

 

The Board will hold a Closed Session to consider the following item:

 

Conference with legal counsel – Existing litigation  (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)) Ochoa v. Santa Clara COE, et. al.   Case #  5:16-cv-03283-HRL

Report of Actions Taken in Closed Session

At this time, members of the public may address the Board on any issue within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board that is not listed on this agenda.  Members of the public may also address the Board on an agenda item before or during the Board's consideration of the item.  No action can be taken on an item not on the agenda at this time, but may be referred to the administration or put on a future agenda.  In accordance with Board Bylaw 9323, individual remarks will be limited to 3 minutes each, unless otherwise stipulated.

Administrator

 

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

 

Background

 

The Board must approve certification of signature(s) of person or persons authorized to sign, in the absence of the County Superintendent of Schools, for orders drawn on the funds of the Santa Clara County Office of Education, notices of employment and contracts in accordance with the provisions of Education Code Sections 42632 and 42633.

 

Attached is a revised "Certification of Signatures for 2017" for the Board's review.  

 

Administrator

 

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

 

Background

 

The County Board shall hold an annual organizational meeting in accordance with law and the provisions of Board Bylaw 9100. At its organizational meeting, the County Board shall adopt a yearly calendar for its regular meetings. By Board action, the Board may deviate from its adopted calendar for the convenience of its members or for other reasons. (Education Code 1009.)

 

Regular meetings of the County Board shall be held at such time and place as members determine, but shall not be held less frequently than one meeting per month. The County Board shall generally hold two regular meetings each month, except for January, July, August, and December, when the County Board shall generally meet only once. Unless otherwise posted, regular County Board meetings shall be held on the first and third Wednesdays of each month, at 5:00 p.m., in the San Jose Room of the Santa Clara County Office of Education, 1290 Ridder Park Dr., San Jose. 

 

Below are the proposed meeting dates for 2017:

 

January 18

February 1, 15

March 1, 15

April 5, 19

May 3, 17

June 14, 21

July 19

August 2, 16

September 6, 20

October 18

November 1, 15

Dec 13

 

Background

 

Annually the Board President makes appointments to the standing County Board Committees in accordance with Exhibit E 9130.  Attached for your reference is the list of those advisory bodies.

 

Please submit your preferences (1st, 2nd and 3rd choices) for assignments to these committees.  Attached is a blank list for your submittal.  Please submit your preferences to the Board President by Friday, January 6, 2017.

 

 

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

 

Background

 

The Board will discuss the purpose of the JFYTF and information will be provided for members of the board who may wish to serve on the task force. 

 

On May 10, 2016, the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors approved the convening of the Joint Foster Youth Task Force (JFYTF) by the Santa Clara County Office of Education and the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. There is a shared desire to mitigate factors that can unduly impact foster youth. For example, children in foster care are more likely than other children to exhibit high levels of behavioral and emotional problems; to be suspended or expelled from school; to exhibit low levels of school engagement and participation in extracurricular activities; to be in poor or fair health; to have received mental health services in the past year; and to have a physical, learning, or mental health condition.

 

As foster youth grow older, they can experience additional challenges. Only about 50% of California foster youth have graduated from high school at the time of discharge from foster care. Nationally, less than ten percent of former foster youth graduate from college (Child Trends Databank, 2015 Foster Care Report); about 65% of youth leave foster care without a place to live; and 25% are incarcerated by age 20 (Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, 2014).  These conditions make a successful transition to adulthood difficult.

 

Once convened, the JFYTF will be tasked with delivering the following: 

1)  Producing a data book based on annual data that will include an inventory of foster youth services, related costs, foster youth data, outcome measures, and other pertinent information; and

2)  Developing a foster youth framework for success in education, employment, health, housing, independent living skills, foster family resources, and well-being; and

3)  Developing a five-year work plan with annual goals relating to foster youth, for possible implementation by the County and the County Office of Education; and

4) Collaborating with partners regionally and nationally to share information and strategies to ensure foster youth success.

 

To meet these deliverables, the JFYTF will meet no more than twelve times.  Periodic progress reports will be provided to the Board through the Children, Seniors and Families Committee.

 

A comprehensive response is required to effectively meet the needs of foster youth, while improving their outcomes.  Accordingly, the JFYTF will be directed toward the following key areas:

1. Education

2. Career Development and Job Training

3. Health Services for Current and Former Foster Youth

4. Housing and Independent Living Skills for Transition-Aged Foster Youth

5. Foster Family Supports

6. Data Gathering

 

Each of these areas will be defined as a "project area." Each project area will define and respond to (a) known issues that need to be addressed, (b) the gathering of additional data that will focus future efforts, (c) the sources of funding and the history of such funding streams to (d) develop a framework of success and (e) develop a five-year work plan with annual goals relating to foster youth, for possible implementation by the County and the County Office of Education to achieve such successes.

 

Supervisor Chavez, co-chair of the task force, following consultation with the Santa Clara County Office of Education Superintendent, will make the recommendations for appointment, with approval of appointments agendized on a Board of Supervisors’ agenda.

 

JFYTF members shall not have alternates, and the term of members shall be for the term of the Task Force, through Fall 2018.

 

Membership

Co-Chairs

·              Santa Clara County Supervisor

·              Santa Clara County Office of Education Superintendent

 

County Departments and Agencies

·              Social Services Agency Director

·              Social Services Agency - Department of Family and Children’s Services Director

·              Chief Probation Officer

·              Behavioral Health Services Department Representative

·              Office of the County Counsel Representative

 

Education Advocates

·              Santa Clara County Higher Education Representative 

·              Santa Clara County Local School Board Member

 

External Advocates

·              Foster Youth Legislative Advocacy Group Representative

·              Foster Parent Advocacy/Support Group Representative

·              Youth Advocate (current or former foster youth)

·              Child Welfare Academic

·              Business and Philanthropic Community Representative

·              County of Santa Clara Child Abuse Council Representative

 

Court System Representatives

·              Santa Clara County Superior Court Dependency Court Judge

·              Santa Clara County Superior Court Juvenile Court Judge 

·              Law Foundation of Silicon Valley - Legal Advocates for Children and Youth Representative

·              Dependency Advocacy Center Representative

 

Community Representation

·              Biological parent who has successfully reunited with their child(ren)

·              Current Foster Parent 

·              Client from The Hub Community Center of Santa Clara County

·              Parent with Former or Current Experience with the Foster Care System (2 seats)

 

 

The SCC Board of Education shall designate one member to apply as a member of the task force in accordance with SCC Commission appointment processes.

 

 

 

The board will discuss on setting a date for a board retreat for early next year 2017.

Administrator

 

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

 

Background

 

Board Bylaw 9250 requires the Board to approve a list of routine travel items at its annual organizational meeting.  Once the list is approved, travel by County Board members to the meetings designated is considered pre-approved and members may receive reimbursement for their expenditures.  However, the Board must approve travel items not on this list before travel is initiated by members for travel reimbursement. 

 

The superintendent may give a report on any activities related to his duties.

The members of the Board may give reports on any activities related to their duties as members of the Santa Clara County Board of Education.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Steve Olmos, Ed.D., Chief Schools Officer

 

Background

Senate Bill 828 (Chapter 29, Statues of 2016) provides in the 2016–17 fiscal year an allocation of $200 million for the College Readiness Block Grant to provide California’s high school pupils, particularly unduplicated pupils, as defined in Education Code (EC) sections 42238.01 and 42238.02, additional supports to increase the number of students who enroll at institutions of higher education and complete an undergraduate degree within four years.

 

Preliminary funding is allocated to county offices of education, school districts, and charter schools (both local and direct funded) at a preliminary rate of $149.32 per unduplicated pupil in grades nine through twelve (9–12) attending a school that is currently accredited or in the process of obtaining accreditation from the Accrediting Commission for Schools, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) with no county office of education, school district, and charter school serving at least one unduplicated pupil in grades 9–12 during the 2015–16 fiscal year receiving less than $75,000

 

The SCCOE will receive $76,601.  These funds must be spent on specific areas during the 2016-2017, 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 school years.

 

These funds are specifically to be used for the follow:

 

• Provide professional development to teachers, administrators, and counselors to improve pupil A-G course completion rates, pupil college-going rates, and college readiness of pupils, including providing for the development of honors and Advanced Placement courses.
• Beginning or increasing counseling services to pupils and their families regarding college admissions requirements and financial aid programs
• Developing or purchasing materials that support college readiness, including materials that support high performance on assessments required for admittance to a postsecondary educational institution
• Developing comprehensive advising plans to support pupil completion of A–G course requirements
• Implementing collaborative partnerships between high schools and postsecondary educational institutions that support pupil transition to postsecondary education, including, but not limited to, strengthening existing partnerships with the University of California and the California State University to establish early academic outreach and college preparatory programs
• Providing subsidies to unduplicated pupils, as defined in Sections 42238.01 and 42238.02, to pay fees for taking advanced placement exams
• Expanding access to coursework or other opportunities to satisfy A–G course requirements to all pupils, including, but not necessarily limited to, pupils enrolled in schools identified by the department as high schools with 75 percent or greater enrollment of unduplicated pupils, pursuant to subdivision (g). These opportunities may include, but shall not be limited to, new or expanded partnerships with other secondary or postsecondary educational institution

• SCCOE must develop and adopt an expenditure plan on how the funds will be spent.  The plan must be presented in a public meeting of the Board, before its adoption in a subsequent public meeting. 

 

Fiscal Implications

SCCOE will receive $75,601 to implement these areas of work.   Approved by Laurie Book on 12/1/16.

 

Alternative Education Department’s Proposal for Expenditures

 

2016-2019 3 Year Budget
Professional Development	$45,297.45
Student fieldtrips to Colleges/UC	$10,000
Student Parent Education Classes	$7,000
Co-enrollment with SCVCTE/CC	$3,000
Materials	$2,000
Indirect costs	$8,303.55
Total	$76,601.00

 

Process for Developing Plan

 

The Chief of Schools, Director of Alternative Education, and counselors met to discuss the College Readiness Block Grant’s parameters, potential impact on program, student and staff needs, and developed a preliminary plan.  Thereafter, the emerging plan was shared with the site principals, teachers, and students to gain their participation and feedback. 

 

Process for evaluation of effectiveness of College Readiness Block Grant

 

On an annual basis the administration will review the level of implementation of the plan, the level of participation of staff, surveys, and review the expenditures.  The annual review will include but not limited to:

 

• Surveys will be used after each event professional development, student field trips, and parent education meetings to gain valuable feedback and to gauge the level of impact on program.
• During Instructional Rounds and collaborative meetings staff will identify AVID instructional practices and share best practices through feedback.
• Budget Review

Request Approval of Minutes of Regular Board Meeting of November 16, 2016 (#2193)

Policy Subcommittee Chairperson

Michael Chang, Vice President of the Santa Clara County Board of Education

 

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

 

Background

On November 2, 2016, the Policy Development Subcommittee met and approved the new Board Policy 3515.7 Firearms on School Grounds.  This policy is being brought for second reading and approval.

 

BP 3515.7 - Firearms on School Grounds
New policy addresses the issue of the Gun-Free School Zone Act and the new legislation from January 2016 regarding concealed weapons on school grounds, and the superintendent's authority on whether or not to permit guns on school property. 

 

Fiscal Implications

There are no fiscal implications

 

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

 

Background

The County Superintendent of Schools is submitting his financial activity report on travel/conferences and out-of county mileage expenses for November 2016 to the Board for review and approval on job-related expenditures.

 

Description	Justification/Details	Amount
Hotel	EdLeader 21 conference, Sept 27-29, 2016, Denver, CO	$822.75
Hotel	California County Superintendents Educational Services Association (CCSESA) conference, Oct 16-17, Kern County, CA	$512.96
Conference Registration	CCSESA, Jan 23-25, 2017, Monterey, CA	$350.00

 

Fiscal Implications

Funds have been incorporated into the 2016-17 budget.

 

Background

 

California Education Code 1090 provides that, "On an annual basis, the County Board of Education may increase the compensation of individual board members beyond the limits delineated in this section, in an amount not to exceed 5 percent based on the monthly rate of compensation.  Any increase made pursuant to tis section shall be effective upon approval by the County Board of Education."

 

 

Fiscal Implications

 

Increasing the board compensation, effective January 1, 2017, would increase current board compensation from $791.98 to $831.58 per month.  This is an increase of $39.60 per month per member and an increase of $475.20 per year per member.  If all board members elect to take the increase, it would be a budget increase of $3,326.40 per year for all seven members.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

 

Background

On September 24, 2016, the Charter Schools Office of the Santa Clara County Office of Education received a petition for a Santa Clara County Office of Education (SCCOE) authorized independent, countywide charter school from the Legacy Academy charter team.  Legacy Academy (Legacy) is seeking approval to establish and operate a public charter middle school for county-wide benefit, serving students in grades 6-8 for a proposed charter term of five years beginning in July 2017.  Legacy plans to begin operation with 60 - 6th grade students in 2017-18 and adding a new grade level each year, until capacity is reached at 180 students in 2019-20.  The petitioners plan on locating their site in the San Jose Unified School District during 2017-18 and relocating to a permanent site within the Franklin McKinley School District during the 2018-19 school year. Legacy Academy had previously submitted a petition for a county-wide charter middle school on November 20, 2015.  The public hearing for that petition was held on January 13, 2016, with the decision hearing held on March 2, 2016.  The Legacy Academy founding team members withdrew that petition at the March 2, decision hearing.

 

On October 5, 2016, the County Board of Education held a public hearing on the new Legacy Academy Charter Petition.  On November 2, 2016, the County Board of Education started its decision hearing on the Legacy Charter Petition, but no decision was made at that time.  Direction was given by the Board to Legacy and Charter Department Staffs to work together to formulate a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to resolve the concerns regarding the Petition.

 

The Education Code requires that the County Board of Education “shall either grant or deny the charter within 60 days of receipt of the petition.  However, this date may be extended by an additional 30 days if both parties agree to the extension.”  No additional time was needed as we are still within the initial 90 days.

 

Legal Standards for Countywide Charters

Per Education Code Section 47605.6 (b) (1)-(7), a county board of education may grant a charter for the operation of a school under this part only if the board is satisfied that granting the charter is consistent with sound educational practice and that the charter school has reasonable justification for why it could not be established by petition to a school district pursuant to Section 47605. Additionally, a county board may approve a county‐wide charter pursuant to this part only if it finds that the educational services to be provided by the school will offer services to a pupil population that will benefit from those services and that cannot be served as well by a charter school that operates in only one school district in the county. The county board of education shall deny a petition for the establishment of a charter school if the board finds one or more of the following:

 

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).
4. The petition does not contain an affirmation of each of the conditions described in subdivision (d).
5. The petition does not contain reasonably comprehensive descriptions of all of the charter elements.
6. The petition does not include a declaration of whether the charter school shall be the exclusive public school employer of employees of the charter school for purposes of the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA).
7. Any other basis that the County Board finds justifies the denial of the petition.

 

Memorandum of Understanding

Through several meetings with Legacy, Charter Staff reviewed the fiscal, special education, facilities, and human resources issues contained in the Petition.  Additional considerations were also reviewed with regard to governance, discipline, transportation, conflicts of interest, dispute resolution, insurance, and other topics which are part of the standard MOU for charter schools which have been authorized by the SCCBOE.  Legacy has approved and executed this MOU, which is attached as Exhibit A to the proposed Resolution No. ____.

 

Conditions

Each of the following conditions constitutes an additional requirement beyond those specified in Education Code Section 47605.6 that Staff recommends be imposed as necessary to the sound operation of the Legacy Academy, a countywide charter school.  (Ed. Code § 47605.6(b).)

1. The Charter be revised to appropriately reference the requirements of Education Code Section 47605.6 rather than Section 47605.  This includes the necessary renumbering of references to the appropriate and applicable subdivisions of Section 47605.6 and the inclusion of the additional requirements of Section 47605.6.  All references and descriptions in the Charter narrative that rely on the requirements for a district-wide charter and/or that indicate that Legacy is a district-wide charter school or that the authorizing agency is a school district shall also be revised to reflect that it is a countywide Charter, that the SCCBOE is the authorizer, and to comply with the requirements and standard applicable to countywide charter schools. 
2. The Charter be revised to remove all references to “flexibility” in credentialing and any distinctions in the requirements for “core” teachers and other teachers.  A statement shall be added to the Charter acknowledging that there is no “flexibility” in credentialing at Legacy and that all teachers at Legacy are required to be credentialed in the same manner as are teachers at noncharter schools.
3. A revised copy of the Charter incorporating all of these required revisions and corrections shall be submitted to the SCCOE in both hardcopy (14 copies) and electronic (Word) format by January 31, 2017.  A hardcopy and electronic copy of a redline clearly illustrating all revisions that have been made must be submitted concurrently.

Staff further recommends that the SCCBOE specify all of the following:  A failure timely to comply with any of these conditions of approval shall result in the approval of the Legacy Academy Charter being automatically withdrawn and the Legacy Academy Charter being denied without further action by the SCCBOE.  As noted above, the SCCBOE finds that compliance with each and every one of these conditions, and the terms of the MOU, is necessary to the sound and lawful operation of the proposed Legacy Academy and the SCCBOE further finds a failure by Legacy timely to comply with any such condition justifies denial of the Petition, as provided for in Education Code Section 47605.6(b)(7). 

 

 

REQUESTED ACTION

Staff has worked with Legacy staff to resolve the concerns contained in the Petition and raised during the public hearing and staff analysis.  Through discussions with SELPA, special education, human resources, and fiscal, a memorandum of understanding was drafted and provides safeguards and clarifications so that Legacy can offer a program that may benefit the identified “At-Promise” students who have been dis-engaged from a traditional K-12 educational system.

 

It is the recommendation of the Charter Staff to approve the Petition with the conditions listed above and included in Resolution No. ____ and approve the Memorandum of Understanding and adopt the Board Resolution approving Legacy Academy, for a period of five years of school operation, commencing on July 1, 2017, and continuing through June 30, 2022.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

 

Background

The charter for Alpha Jose Hernandez expires on June 30, 2017.  This charter was initially denied by the Alum Rock Union School District in July of 2013, and was approved on appeal to the Santa Clara County Board of Education (County Board) on September 17, 2013.  In 2015, the County approved a material revision to the Charter, granting the school the ability to additionally serve students in fifth grade.   Alpha Jose Hernandez’s mission and vision as a charter school is to provide the rigor, structure, and support needed to guide students to academic success with the implementation of an excellent educational program that rests on best practices, quality professional development and a coherent instructional framework.  During the 2015-2016 school year, Alpha Jose Hernandez merged with Cornerstone Academy Preparatory School, a successful K-6 charter school located in the Franklin McKinley School District.  This merger has allowed Alpha Jose Hernandez to realize its commitment to parents in providing a long term educational relationship with their students.  Alpha Jose Hernandez is seeking a renewal of a Santa Clara County independent district appeal charter school serving students in grades 5-8 and extending those grades to include TK-8 for a term of July 2017 to June 2022.    

 

On October 14, 2016, the Charter Schools Office of the Santa Clara County Office of Education (County Office of Education) received a petition from Alpha Jose Hernandez seeking renewal of the charter.  California Education Code Section 47607(a) (1) requires that “each renewal shall be for a period of five years.”   If the charter was to be renewed by the County Board, the new term of the charter would begin on July 1, 2017, and end on June 30, 2022.

 

On November 2, 2016, the County Board held a public hearing on the charter school’s petition for renewal. During the public hearing, several board members requested information from Alpha, including but not limited to parent involvement information (SSC/ELAC) and demographic information on neighboring schools.  Alpha provided this information and it is included as attachments to this analysis.

 

California Education Code Section 47605(b) requires that “following review of the petition and the public hearing, the governing board of the school district shall either grant or deny the charter within 60 days of receipt of the petition, provided, however, that the date may be extended by an additional 30 days if both parties agree to the extension” (California Code of Regulations, Title 5, §11966.4).  On November 10, 2016, the charter school department and Alpha agreed to an extension of 30 days for the decision hearing to take place on December 14, 2016.

 

Analysis

 

Staff reviewed the petition renewal using the criteria established in California Education Code 47605(b) and County Board Policy 0420.4 (c) and noted the following:

 

1. Required Signatures

The signature requirement set forth in Education Code § 47605(a) is not applicable to a petition for renewal.

 

2. Affirmation that the charter school shall be nonsectarian

The petition for renewal contains the required affirmation.

 

3. Affirmation that the charter school shall not discriminate against pupils

The petition for renewal contains the required affirmation.

 

4. Affirmation that the charter school shall not charge tuition

The petition for renewal contains the required affirmation.

 

5. Reasonably Comprehensive Description

Staff found that the petition for renewal did contain a reasonably comprehensive description of the required elements with additional specificity and requirements governing AJH’s operations to be included in an MOU among AJH, its governing entity, Alpha, and the SCCOE.

 

6. Unsound Educational Program

Staff found no indicators of an unsound educational program.

 

7. Demonstrably Unlikely to Implement the Program

Staff found no facts that demonstrate petitioners are unlikely to implement the program.

 

8. Grade Level, Location, Students Served

The petition meets requirements to serve students in the grade levels offered by the Alum Rock Union School District.

 

9. Other Criteria in Statute

Staff found the renewal petition meets other criteria set forth in the statute, specifically including a statement specifying that Alpha will be the exclusive public school employer of employees of the charter school for purposes of the Educational Employment Relations Act.

 

 

Requested Action

 

Approve the petition renewal, and adopt the Board resolution for Alpha Jose Hernandez for the period of July 1, 2017, through June 30, 2022. 

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

 

Background

The charter for Rocketship Brilliant Minds Academy expires on June 30, 2017.  On September 30, 2016, the Charter Schools Office of the Santa Clara County Office of Education received a renewal petition for a Santa Clara County Office of Education (SCCOE) authorized independent, countywide charter school from the Rocketship Brilliant Minds Academy charter team.  Rocketship Brilliant Minds Academy (RBM or Brilliant Minds) is seeking approval for renewal of a public charter elementary school for county-wide benefit, serving students in grades TK-5 for a renewal charter term of five years beginning in July 2017.  RBM currently serves 619 students and is located in Alum Rock Union School District.  RBM was initially approved on November 16, 2011, as Rocketship 6, and opened in August of 2012.

 

On October 19, 2016, the County Board of Education held a public hearing on the RBM Charter Renewal Petition.  On November 10, 2016, RBM notified SCCOE of its intent to withdraw its petition due to technical issues.  On November 16, 2016, SCCBOE was formally informed of RBM’s notification of withdrawal and additional conversations which were occurring between Rocketship and SCCOE about potential resolution of the technical issues which could potentially eliminate the need for RBM to withdraw the petition.  Multiple conversations occurred between the County Superintendent and Staff and RBM regarding resolution of the technical issues for RBM and the retraction of the withdrawal. On November 28, 2016, Rocketship and SCCOE extended the renewal timeline up through and including December 14, 2016.

 

The Education Code requires that the County Board of Education “shall either grant or deny the charter renewal within 60 days of receipt of the petition (California Code of Regulations, Title 5, §11966.4).  However, this date may be extended by an additional 30 days if both parties agree to the extension.”  As noted above, on November 28, SCCOE and Rocketship agreed to extend the renewal timeline through December 14, 2016.

 

During the public hearing, several board members requested information from RBM, including but not limited to demographic information on students and staff.  RBM provided this information and it is included as attachments to this analysis.

 

Legal Standards for Countywide Charters

Per Education Code Section 47605.6 (b) (1)-(7), a county board of education may grant a charter for the operation of a school under this part only if the board is satisfied that granting the charter is consistent with sound educational practice and that the charter school has reasonable justification for why it could not be established by petition to a school district pursuant to Section 47605. Additionally, a county board may approve a county‐wide charter pursuant to this part only if it finds that the educational services to be provided by the school will offer services to a pupil population that will benefit from those services and that cannot be served as well by a charter school that operates in only one school district in the county. The county board of education shall deny a petition for the establishment of a charter school if the board finds one or more of the following:

 

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).
4. The petition does not contain an affirmation of each of the conditions described in subdivision (d).
5. The petition does not contain reasonably comprehensive descriptions of all of the charter elements.
6. The petition does not include a declaration of whether the charter school shall be the exclusive public school employer of employees of the charter school for purposes of the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA).
7. Any other basis that the County Board finds justifies the denial of the petition.

 

Additional Criteria for Renewal of a Charter Petition

A petition submitted for renewal per Education Code § 47607 shall be considered by the governing board upon receipt with all of the following requirements (California Code of Regulations, Title 5, §11966.4)

1. Determination of Pupil Academic Performance.
2. A Copy of the renewal Charter Petition
3. Past performance of the school’s academics, finances, and operation in evaluating the likelihood of future success, along with future plans for improvement if any.

 

Analysis

 

Rocketship Brilliant Minds Academy’s Charter Renewal Petition was submitted and is seeking renewal as a countywide charter pursuant to the standards and requirements set forth in Education Code Section 47605.6.  However, the written Petition submitted by the Rocketship Brilliant Minds Academy makes references to the requirements of Education Code Section 47605 (which governs standard charters submitted initially to an individual school district) rather than Section 47605.6 throughout the document.  For purposes of Staff’s analysis and recommendation and the Board’s action on the request for renewal, all references in the Charter to Education Code Section 47605 shall be understood to be intended and interpreted as references to Section 47605.6, including revisions to reflect the appropriate subdivisions of that section, and the Charter has been considered pursuant to the standards and requirements of the correct code section.  If the Board were to approve renewal of the Charter, such approval should be subject to a condition that any and all references to Education Code Section 47605 in the approved Charter are mutually understood and agreed to be intended and interpreted as and shall be revised to be references to Section 47605.6, including the appropriate renumbering of references to the correct subdivisions of Section 47605.6.

 

Staff reviewed the Petition using the criteria established in California Education Code 47605.6 (b) and County Board Policy 0420.4 (c) and found:

 

1. Required signatures: The signature requirement set forth in Education Code Section 47605.6 (b) (3).

The signature requirement set forth in Education Code § 47605(a) is not applicable to a petition for renewal. (Cal. Code Regs., Tit. 5 § 11966.5(b)(2)(A))

 

2. Affirmation that the charter school shall be nonsectarian

Staff found that the Petition contains the required affirmation.

 

3. Affirmation that the charter school shall not discriminate against pupils

Staff found that the Petition contains the required affirmation.

 

4. Affirmation that the charter school shall not charge tuition

Staff found that the Petition contains the required affirmation.

 

5. Reasonably comprehensive description of the required elements

Staff believes that the petition for renewal did contain a reasonably comprehensive description of the required elements as modified through the proposed conditions recommended in the Staff Analysis and Proposed Findings of Fact and set forth in the Proposed Resolution No. _____.

 

6. Unsound Educational Program

Staff found no indicators of an unsound educational program.

   

7. Demonstrably Unlikely to Implement the Program

Staff found no facts that demonstrate petitioners are unlikely to implement the program.

   

8. Grade Level, Location, Students Served

The petition meets requirements to serve students in the grade levels and facilities offered across Santa Clara County.

   

9.Other Criteria in Statute

Staff found the renewal petition meets other criteria set forth in the statute.

 

 

REQUESTED ACTION

 

 

It is the recommendation of the Charter Staff to approve the Renewal Petition subject to the conditions specified in the Staff Analysis and Proposed Findings of Fact and adopt the Board Resolution for renewal of Rocketship Brilliant Minds Academy, including and subject to each of the conditions set forth therein, for the period of July 1, 2017, through June 30, 2022.

 

 

 

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Laurie Book, Director, Internal Business Services

 

Background

This report reflects budget revisions for the month of November 2016.

 

During the month of November 2016, we decreased expenditures budgets by $3,808,891, increased revenue by $1,605,146 and increased fund balance by $5,414,037

 

Requested Action

Approve the Budget Revisions for the Month of November 2016

 

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Laurie Book, Director, Internal Business Services

 

Background

Education Code Section 1240.1(1)(A)(B) requires that two (2) financial reports be submitted to the County Board of Education during the fiscal year. The first financial report shall cover the actual revenues, actual expenditures, and budgetary status of the County Office of Education for the period from July 1 through October 31, and projects the balance for the remainder of the current fiscal year. This First Interim Report, following the Standards and Criteria as set forth by the State of California, reports that the Santa Clara County Office of Education is able to maintain a Positive Certification as to its financial condition.  Administration recommends approval of the 2016-17 First Interim Financial Report. 

 

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

 

Background

 

Per Board Policy BP 3312 (a), contracts from $100,000 up to $250,000 are to be provided as one information item at a regular meeting of the Board.

 

For your information, the table below lists the contracts processed in the month of November 2016 from $100,000 up to $250,000.

 

Fiscal Implications

 

Vendor	Description	Branch	Responsible Person	Contract Amount
Ron Paris Construction Company, Inc.	2016-17 Contract for remodeling of restrooms at Rouleau Center, 1875 Monrovia Drive in San Jose. Paris Construction (Bid# 10-15-16) was selected through the bid process to provide construction services for the Early Learning Services Department, Head Start Program.	Student Services	Steve Olmos, Ed. D.	$180,424

 

Requested Action

 

No action required

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

 

 

Background

 

Per Board Policy BP 3312 (a), contract agreements estimated to exceed $250,000 shall be placed on the agenda of regular County Board meetings as individual information items.

 

This is the second amendment to the 2016-17 contract with NOVA Health Therapies, Inc. The company provides licensed Speech and Language Pathologists (SLPs), Occupational Therapists (OTs) and Physical Therapists (PTs) for Special Education, in accordance with the students' Individual Education Plan (IEP). The original amount of the first amendment was $160,000. This amendment adds $110,000, which brings the total value of the contract to $270,000.

 

Fiscal Implications

 

Vendor	Description	Branch	Responsible Person	Contract Amount
NOVA Health Therapies, Inc.	Second amendment to the 2016-17 contract to provide licensed SLPs, OTs and PTs for Special Education	Student Services	Steven Olmos, Ed. D.	$270,000

 

Requested Action

 

No action required

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Philip J. Gordillo, Chief Human Resources Officer

 

Background

Education Code 1302(a) requires any salary increase of $10,000 or more to be discussed by the County Board of Education at a regularly scheduled meeting. Recent promotions and position reclassifications will result in excess of the $10,000 limit for two (2) employees.

 

Fiscal Implications

The following chart outlines the employee name, prior position title, new position title, reason for the salary increase, prior annual salary, new annual salary and the salary increase for each employee. These employees are slated to receive a salary increase of $10,000 or more.

 

 

	Last Name	First Name	Prior Position Title	New Position Title	Reason (See Legend)	Prior Annual Salary	New Annual Salary	Salary Increase
1	Arroyo	Erona	Office Coordinator	Senior Executive Assistant	H	$60,570.60	$85,338.36	$24,767.76
2	Raceles	Maripaz	Accountant II	Special Education Financial Analyst	C	$84,340.08	$98,789.64	$14,449.56

 

 

LEGEND:

A:  Interim promotion (temporary only)

B:  Increase in calendar

C:  Promotion

D:  Position reinstatement

E:  Promotion and increase in calendar

F:  Position change and increase in calendar

G:  Increase in FTE

H:  Position reclassification

 

Requested Action

No action required

 

 

 

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Steve Olmos, Ed.D., Chief Schools Officer

 

Background

1. As per the Head Start Act, all Head Start agencies are required to provide program information to the Board of Education.  Attached are the following reports:

        Program Information Report 2016-17 (PIR) –October 2016

 

Provides information on progress of services provided to children and families to meet required timelines as per specific indicators and thresholds 

• Annual Program Information Report 2015-16 (PIR)

Indicates program results in comparison to State, Regional and National levels

• Financial Report – HS Basic/EHS Basic Total Grant Award –October 2016

  Provides the status of program budget and financial oversight
   

• In-Kind Contribution Required

  Indicates the progress of required matching contribution required by grant ($5,459,138)
   

• Purchase Card Summary –October 2016

  Serves as an oversight check of program expenses
   

• California Child Food Program Summary Reports (USDA) – October 2016

  • Serves as an oversight check of program expense

• Enrollment Report –October 2016

  Summarizes the year to date enrollment activity in the Head Start Program to comply with enrollment requirements (fill vacancies within 30 days to maintain full enrollment)      

 

 

 

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

 

Background

At a special meeting on December 14, 2015, the County Board of Education requested a standing item regarding charter schools on every regular board meeting agenda to provide the board with information about issues and follow up to questions that have been raised by members of the board.

 

 

1. Opportunity Youth Academy

 

On August 17, 2016, the Board of Education voted to approve the petition for Opportunity Youth Academy (OYA), a Santa Clara Office of Education (SCCOE) dependent, county-wide charter school for a period of five years commencing September 1, 2016, to June 30, 2021.  Stipulations accompanied the approval, and the Charter School Department has worked collaboratively with the Opportunity Youth Academy staff in addressing them. 

1. OYA has submitted documentation further delineating the scope and sequence of required mastery of core courses in meeting graduation requirements.
2. Charter School staff has worked collaboratively with OYA staff in validating that the SIATech online curriculum is appropriately adapted, and successfully implemented to address the educational need (objectives) for English Language Learners and Special education students. 
3. OYA has provided revised Professional Development plan reflecting specific sequence in training all staff with strategies unique to the SIATech online curriculum in addressing the needs of targeted student population.  Charter school staff has validated the cohesiveness of the embedded formative assessments in the online curriculum.
4. OYA has shared safety plans, as appropriate to specific site locations
5. OYA has provided 9/1 to 11/3 enrollment and Average Daily attendance numbers (191 enrolled, with 66% ADA).  Current enrollment and ADA information, along with revised revenue, staffing and expenditure calculations, indicate a projected SCCOE general fund contribution of $849,525 (SCCOE Budget Report dated 10/21/2016).  This amount reflects a significant decrease from the originally projected general fund contribution of $1.9 million (SCCOE Budget Report dated 7/25/2016) as described in the initial petition.

2. Silicon Valley Flex Academy

 

On July 25, 2016, Silicon Valley Flex Academy (SV Flex) notified SCCOE that they had decided to close their school effective immediately.  As part of the closure process, SV Flex is required to submit its unaudited actual report to SCCOE by October 15.  SV Flex missed this deadline.  Through much effort by K12 Education (SV Flex’s partner organization), SCCOE and California Department of Education (CDE), the unaudited actuals report was completed and correctly submitted to CDE on November 17.

 

3. Summit Public Schools: Denali

 

The Board was notified in August of this year that Summit Denali (housed in an industrial zone off Mercury Drive in Sunnyvale), because of its growing enrollment and current litigation with the city of Sunnyvale, had acquired an additional school site at Weddell Drive.  The Weddell site has undergone all of its construction and refurbishment, and is currently housing about 90 of Summit Denali’s grade 9 students.  The current Mercury site continues to house roughly 300 grades 6-8 students.  The County of Santa Clara tentatively ruled in August that Summit Denali had to vacate its 495, Mercury Drive location by December of 2016.  Summit had filed a “stay” to be able to continue in its current Mercury Drive location through the end of the 16-17 school year, however on November 18, 2016, Summit Denali was notified that the “stay” would NOT be granted and the Mercury Drive facility must be vacated in December 2016.  The transition to the 539 Weddell Drive site for all 6th-9th grade students will happen during Winter Break and all students will start at the Weddell site on January 4, 2017.  They are also adding two additional portable classrooms to provide additional space on the Weddell campus.  

 

4. Annual Review Visits

 

As of December 14, Charter Staff will have conducted all the annual site visits for the 21 previously approved SCCOE authorized charter schools.  OYA's annual site visit will be conducted no later than March 1, 2017 as it was approved on September 1, 2016. The annual reports for each school will be completed, and after review by the County Superintendent’s office, sent to the schools by April 1, 2017.

 

 

 

1. Budget Study Committee, December 16, 2016; Jan 24, 2017  (Superintendent Gundry)
2. Policy Subcommittee, TBD (Trustee Chang,Chair)
3. Joint Legislative Advisory Committee (JLAC), Feb 15, 2017 (Trustee Di Salvo, Chair)
4. Head Start Policy Council, Jan 21, 2017 (Trustee Mah)
5. Santa Clara County School Boards Association (SCCSBA), Jan 25, 2017 (Trustee Kamei)
6. Joint Committee on Child Care (JCCC), Dec 16 (Trustees Song and Di Salvo)
7. Warmenhoven Inclusion Collaborative, March 17, 2017 (Trustee Kamei)
8. California School Boards Association (CSBA) Delegate, next meeting:  TBD for 2017 (Trustee Kamei)
9. California County Boards of Education (CCBE) Board of Directors, TBD for 2017 (Trustee Kamei)

 

1. Best Practices and Roles of School Resource Officers (SROs) in Schools and Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) -- Study in progress. (Trustee Chang)
2. Equity for API students in higher education (Trustee Song)
3. Iteration of National Education Technology Plan--Equity Issues (Trustee Di Salvo)

The next Santa Clara County Board of Education meeting is schedule for January 18, 2017.  For Board agendas and meeting minutes, please see our web site at www.sccoe.org under the County Board of Education page.