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:

Public Employee Performance Evaluation/Update

Title:  County Superintendent of Schools

(Government Code Section 54957(b)(1))

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.

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.

Request Approval of Minutes of Regular Board Meeting of March 1, 2017.

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 February 2017 to the Board for review and approval on job-related expenditures.

Fiscal Implications

Funds have been incorporated into the 2016-17 budget.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Background

Women's History Month honors the important role women have played in the establishment of early charitable, philanthropic, educational, and cultural institutions in our nation. Hearkening back to the 1800s when women were largely excluded from academic discourse - to today, where despite progress in educational opportunities for girls and women, many women may experience disadvantages and exclusion in education systems throughout their lives. Women’s History Month encourages educators, students, and families to learn about the accolades and achievements of women in history.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Steve Olmos, Ed.D., Chief Schools Officer

Background

Per Education Code Section 32281 (b) (1), except as provided in subdivision (d) with regard to a small school district, the School Site Council established pursuant to former Section 52012, as it existed before July 1, 2005, or Section 52852 shall write and develop a comprehensive school safety plan relevant to the needs and resources of that particular school or the School Site Council may delegate this responsibility to a school site safety planning committee.

The 2016-2017 School Safety Plans for Santa Clara County Office of Education Schools (Santa Clara County Community Schools, Santa Clara County Court Schools, and Santa Clara County Special Education) outline site-specific programs and procedures required by Education Code Section 32280, et seq. These programs and plans are mandated by the state law and address issues regarding safety, emergencies, discipline, visitation, codes of conduct, and have been approved by School Site Councils in accordance with California statutory law.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Deputy Superintendent

Background

The SCCOE's Board Policy 3312(a) - Contracts, requires that all contracts for real estate purchases and leases be placed on the Board agenda for action. As part of our effort to ensure compliance with BP 3312(a), we have compiled the attached list of leased properties. These properties are primarily used for the operations for our student serving programs.

Fiscal Implications

Funds have been incorporated into the 2016-17 budget for the leases.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Steve Olmos. Ed.D., Chief Schools Officer

Background

The Office of Head Start (OHS), Administration for Children and Families, (ACF) Department of Health and Human Services funded a grant to SCCOE to increase dosage to 200 preschool children, this included facilities funds to begin implementation in program year 2017-18.  The initial application was approved by the Board on June 15, 2016 and Policy Council on May 17, 2016.

We are requesting approval for the following two projects:   

1. Head Start Carry Over Request:

           The Head Start Program is requesting Board approval to submit to the Regional Office a request to carry over start-up funds which include funding for staff development and facilities.  While these funds were awarded in 2016-17, the implementation will be for
           2017-18.  These funds will support services for 200 children.  The facility projects will be at the following sites:

• Calaveras Elementary
• Stonegate Elementary
• Meyer Elementary

Fiscal Implications

HEAD START CARRY OVER FUNDS for expenditures below are incorporated in the

Head Start FY 2017-18 budget.

1. Budget Revision for Early Head Start :

           Purchase 5 Vans at:  $ 32,014 ea.  X 5 = $160,070.  
            These vehicles will be use for the Home Visiting/Socialization Components of the program

Approved by Laurie Book

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

Background

The following donations were made to the Santa Clara County Office of Education:

Fiscal Implications

The above donations will be deposited in the respective program accounts.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

Background

The charter for Rocketship Alma Academy expires on June 30, 2017.  On January 20, 2017, Rocketship Education delivered to the Charter Schools Office of the Santa Clara County Office of Education a renewal petition for a Santa Clara County Office of Education (SCCOE) authorized independent, countywide charter school for the Rocketship Alma Academy.  Rocketship Alma Academy (RSA or Alma) is seeking approval for renewal of a public charter elementary school for county-wide benefit, serving students in grades K-5 for a renewal charter term of five years beginning in July 2017.  RSA currently serves 536 students and is located in San Jose Unified School District.  RSA was initially approved on November 16, 2011, as Rocketship 7, and opened in August of 2012.

On February 15, 2017, the County Board of Education held a public hearing on the RSA Charter Renewal Petition. 

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.”

During the public hearing and subsequent public comments, several board members requested information from RSA and Charter Staff, including but not limited to RSA demographic information on students and staff, additional information on CEQA requirements, teacher evaluation requirements, SELPA parent participation, and student cohort enrollment information.  RSA provided the demographic information, which is included as an attachment to this analysis.  Staff researched and reviewed the additional requested items: CEQA response is addressed in section 5 (E) of the staff analysis, teacher evaluation requirements are addressed in section 5 (F) of the staff analysis, SELPA parent participation is addressed in section A under special education, and the drop in student enrollment in the upper grades addressed in section A, paragraph 4.   

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

Staff reviewed the Petition using the criteria established in California Education Code 47605.6 (b), 47607, 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 found 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. Exclusive Employer

The petition contains a statement specifying that RSA/Rocketship Education shall be the exclusive employer of employees of the charter school for purposes of the Educational Employment Relations Act.

10. Other Criteria in Statute

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

REQUESTED ACTIONIt 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 Alma Academy, including and subject to each of the conditions set forth therein, for the period of July 1, 2017, through June 30, 2022.b

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

Laurie Book, Director, Internal Business Services

Background

This report reflects budget revisions for the month of February 2017.  If an expenditure budget is increased, it is supported either by an increase in revenue, a decrease in carryover (use of carryover), a decrease in fund balance or any combination of the three.  If an expenditure budget is decreased, the result could be due to a decrease to estimated revenue, or an increase to credit it back to fund balance.

During the month of February 2017, we increased expenditure budgets by $262,634, increased revenue by $187,634 and decreased fund balance by $75,000.

Requested Action

Approve the Budget Revisions for the Month of February 2017.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

Laurie Book, Director, Internal Business Services

Background

Education Code Section 1240(l)(1)(A)(B) requires that the County Office of Education submit two reports during the fiscal year to the County Board of Education.  The first report shall cover the actual revenues and expenditures of the County Office of Education for the period from July 1 through October 31, and update projections for the balance of the year.  The second report shall cover the period ending January 31, and update projections for the balance of the year.  Both reports shall be reviewed by the County Board of Education and approved by the County Superintendent no later than 45 days after the close of the period being reported.  As part of each report, the County Superintendent shall certify in writing whether or not the County Office of Education is able to meet its financial obligations for the remainder of the fiscal year and, based on current forecasts, for two subsequent fiscal years. 

This Second 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.

Requested Action

Administration recommends approval of the 2016-17 Second Interim Financial Report.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Background

On January 25, 2017, President Donald Trump (the “President”) signed an executive order that gives the President and his subordinate executive officers, including the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, the power to declare any “sanctuary jurisdiction” ineligible to receive federal funds (the “Executive Order”).

The County of Santa Clara has filed a complaint against the President and other officials for declaratory and injunctive relief from the Executive Order.  If enforced, the Executive Order will harm undocumented students, their parents, and ultimately, the school community.  In order to address the unique harm and extensive impact the Executive Order would have on schools districts if enforced, the District desires to file a brief, together with other school districts across the State of California, as friends of the court or “amici curiae” supporting the County’s complaint and sharing anecdotal evidence of the effect the Executive Order will have on students and the school community.  

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP is preparing and filing the brief pro bono, so it will be covering all of the fees and costs associated with the briefing.  

It is recommended that the Board of Education of the Santa Clara County Office of Education approve the attached resolution and in doing so authorize the Authorized Officers to join and sign the Amicus Curiae Brief, on behalf of the District, as a named amici subject to the Authorized Officer’s review.  

The attachment named Santa Clara County v Trump_Complaint is Exhibit A in the resolution.

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Mary Ann Dewan, Ph.D., Deputy Superintendent

Background

A Charter Schools Update is provided as a standing agenda item at each regular board meeting.

Special Education Local Planning Agencies (SELPA)

Background

At the 03/01/2017 Board meeting, the Charter Team was directed to provide information and clarification regarding the role of Special Education Local Planning Agencies (SELPA) and Charter Education Local Planning Agencies (CHELPA).  The Board expressed an interest in the eventual development of an SCCOE SELPA “Fact Sheet” that describes the roles and responsibilities of these entities in supporting the special education programs at the various SCCOE Board authorized charter schools.

Charter schools can choose to organize special education services in three different ways:

• As a school of its authorizing school district
• As an independent Local Educational Agency (LEA) member of a consortia of SELPA
• As a LEA member of the three Charter-Only SELPA  (Eldorado COE, Sonoma COE, LA COE)

I. SELPA

1. Provide for the special education needs of children residing within the region’s boundaries
2. There are over 120 SELPAs in the state, with structures ranging from Multi-District SELPAs, Multi-District/County Office SELPAs, Single District SELPAs, Multi-District/Multi-Counties SELPAs, County SELPAs with Joint Powers Agreement, and Charter-Only SELPAs.
3. The SELPA and member local education agencies (LEAs) foster coordination between general and special education while ensuring a full complement of appropriate education services for individuals with disabilities. Each SELPA must have an Administrative Unit (also known as the Responsible Local Agency), which serves as the legal entity that receives funds.
4. Costs for SELPA operations and the Administrative Unit are provided by state funding, which may be augmented by local, federal and state funds. Each region determines the funds available for regionalized services and the responsibilities of the SELPA office. The SELPA policy-making body is designated in the Local Plan to make policy decisions, approve the SELPA budget and Allocation Plan, and direct SELPA operations.
5. Responsibilities of the SELPA include such things as:
   • Ensuring programs/services are available for all children with disabilities
   • Curriculum/Program Development, Professional Development, Program Specialists
   • Community Advisory Committee , Surrogate Parent Training, Community Awareness
   • Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), compliance and program concerns
   • Management Information Systems, Evaluation, Technical Assistance, State/federal reporting
   • Personnel Development, Interagency and/or Program Coordination
   • Budget Planning and Review Evaluation

II. Charter-Only SELPA

1. SELPA responsibilities reflect and include all those described in item “5” above.
2. Can include charter schools from across the state, providing support for “similar” schools
3. Provides one central SELPA for charters that are located across various districts
4. Service model typically differs since members are not from the same geographic region.
5. Individual members of Charter-only SELPA typically run their own special education services by hiring and contracting with qualified staff

    A. El Dorado County Office of Education (EDCOE):  CHELPA for 263 charter schools.

• 13/23 SCCOE authorized schools belong to this Charter-only SELPA
• 12 Regional Program Specialists
• 3 program specialists assigned to the Bay Area, providing immediate physical presence in supporting charters.
• Community Advisory Committee (CAC) meets three times/year, and parents can participate telephonically.

    B. Sonoma County Office of Education: CHELPA for 20 Charter Schools

• 2/23 SCCOE authorized schools belong to this Charter-Only SELPA

​

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Steve Olmos, Ed.D., Chief Schools Officer

Background

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) –January 2017
  Provides information on progress of services provided to children and families to meet required timelines as per specific indicators and thresholds
   
• Financial Report – HS Basic/EHS Basic Total Grant Award –January 2017

  Provides the status of program budget and financial oversight
   

• In-Kind Contribution Required

  Indicates the progress of required matching contribution required by grant ($6,676,866)
   

• Purchase Card Summary –January 2017

  Serves as an oversight check of program expenses
   

• California Child Food Program Summary Reports (USDA) – January 2017

  Serves as an oversight check of program expense
   

• Enrollment Report –January 2017
  Summarizes the year to date enrollment activity in the Head Start Program to comply with enrollment requirements

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 February 2017 from $100,000 up to $250,000.

Fiscal Implications

Policy Subcommittee Chairperson

Rosemary Kamei

Administrator

Jon R. Gundry, County Superintendent of Schools

Dr. Mary Ann Dewan, Deputy Superintendent

Background

On March 1, 2017 the Policy Development Subcommittee met and approved revisions to Board Policy 1160 Political Processes.

BP 1160 Political Process

Update policy to add language that is appropriate for County Boards of Education and to include relevant and necessary guidelines and citations.

1. Budget Study Committee,  May 2017 (Tentative)  (Superintendent Gundry)
2. Policy Subcommittee, April 5 (Trustee Kamei,Chair)
3. Joint Legislative Advisory Committee (JLAC), April 19 (Trustee Di Salvo, Chair)
4. Head Start Policy Council, March 21 (Trustee Green)
5. Santa Clara County School Boards Association (SCCSBA), March 22 (Trustee Kamei)
6. Joint Committee on Child Care (JCCC), June 21 (Trustees Green and Rossi)
7. Warmenhoven Inclusion Collaborative, March 17 (Trustee Di Salvo)
8. California School Boards Association (CSBA) Delegate, May 20-21 (Trustee Kamei)
9. California County Boards of Education (CCBE) Board of Directors, May 21 (Trustee Kamei)
10. Joint Foster Youth Task Force, March 23 (Trustee Di Salvo)

Upcoming Items:

1. Branch Reports (Trustee Mah)
   • Student Services Branch: Special Education, Apri l 19
   • Educational Services Branch: Curriculum and Instruction, May 3
2. Implicit Bias, April 5 (Trustee Mah)
3. Teacher Pipeline task force, April (Trustee Mah)
4. Discussion to have legal counsel at all meetings, May (Trustee Di Salvo)

Pending Items:

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)
4. Board Self-Evaluation (Trustee Mah)

The next Santa Clara County Board of Education meeting is schedule for April 5, 2017.  For Board agendas and meeting minutes, please see our web site at www.sccoe.org under the County Board of Education page.