backgroundfcmat.org/.../03/oakland-usd-ab-1840-letter1-3-1-2019.pdf2019/03/01 · august 15, 2017...

March 1, 2019

Honorable Keely Bosler, Director 915 L Street Sacramento, CA 95814

Honorable Phil Ting, Chair California State Assembly Committee on Budget State Capitol, Room 6026Sacramento, CA 95814

Honorable Holly J. Mitchell, Chair California State Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review State Capitol, Room 5019Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Director Bosler, Mr. Bell, Ms. Holmes, Chairperson Mitchell and Committee Members, and Chairperson Ting and Committee Members:

This letter is submitted for your consideration in accordance with FCMAT’s responsibilities under Assembly Bill 1840 with regard to the Oakland Unified School District.

Of note: On the evening of February 28, 2019, the district reached a tentative agreement with the Oakland Education Association. This report was finalized prior to the settlement, and FCMAT/Alameda COE staff will need time to analyze the impact of the settlement on the deficit calculation. An update to this letter will be done as soon as the data is available to incorporate.

Background

AB 1840Assembly Bill 1840 (Chapter 426/2018) (AB 1840) passed the Legislature on August 31, 2018 as a budget trailer bill and became effective on September 17, 2018. Among other provisions, AB 1840 provides for several changes in the oversight of fiscally distressed districts and sets forth specific require-ments for the Oakland Unified School District in exchange for providing financial resources under certain circumstances. This report is provided in accordance with Education Code Section 42160(d) as established by AB 1840 and outlined below.

2

AB 1840 shifts the former state-centric system to be more consistent with the principles of local control. Several duties formerly assigned to the state Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) are now assigned to the county superintendent, with the concurrence of the SPI and the president of the State Board of Education. While AB 1840 does not change the definition or trigger of fiscal insolvency, it does change the structure of how fiscally insolvent districts are administered once a state emergency appropriation has been made.

Under AB 1840, the state trustee assigned to the district now reports to the Alameda County Superintendent of Schools, and no longer reports to the SPI. If the current state trustee elects not to continue, or a determination is made by the county superintendent that the trustee should be replaced, the next appointment of the next state trustee would follow the provisions under AB 1840, namely: 1) be selected from a list of candidates identified and vetted by FCMAT, and 2) be appointed jointly by the county superintendent, SPI and president of the State Board of Education.

Additionally, AB 1840 established Education Code Section 42160, which provides:

(a) For the 2018-19 fiscal year, by March 1, 2019, the Oakland Unified School District, in collaboration with and with the concurrence of the Alameda County Superintendent of Schools and the County Office Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, shall do both of the following:

(1) Update or develop short- and long-term financial plans based on reasonable and accurate assumptions and current and past year expenditure data.

(2) Review and update school district facilities construction plans to ensure that costs are reasonable, accurate, and align with long-term financial plans for fiscal solvency.

(b) Beginning with the 2019-20 fiscal year, the Budget Act shall include an appropriation for the Oakland Unified School District, if the school district complies with the terms specified in subdivisions (a) and (c), in the following amounts:

(1) For the 2019-20 fiscal year, up to 75 percent of the school district’s projected operating deficit, as determined by the County Office Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, with concurrence with the Department of Finance.



(c) Disbursement of funds specified in subdivision (b) shall be contingent on the Oakland Unified School District’s completion of activities specified in the prior year Budget Act to improve the school district’s fiscal solvency. These activities may include, but are not limited to, all of the following:

(1) Completion of comprehensive operational reviews that compare the needs of the school district with similar school districts and provide data and recommendations regarding changes the school district can make to achieve fiscal sustainability.

3

(2) Adoption and implementation of necessary budgetary solutions, including the consolida-tion of school sites.

(3) Completion and implementation of multiyear, fiscally solvent budgets and budget plans.

(4) Qualification for positive certification pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 42130) of Chapter 6.

(5) Sale or lease of surplus property.

(6) Growth and maintenance of budgetary reserves.

(7) Approval of school district budgets by the Alameda County Superintendent of Schools.

(d) Funds described in subdivision (b) shall be allocated to Oakland Unified School District upon the certification of the County Office Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, with concurrence from the Alameda County Superintendent of Schools, to the Assembly Committee on Budget, Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, and the Department of Finance that the activities described in subdivision (c), as specified in the prior year Budget Act, have been completed. Additionally, by March 1 of each year, through March 1, 2021, the County Office Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, with concurrence from the Alameda County Superintendent of Schools, shall report to the Assembly Committee on Budget, Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, and the Department of Finance the progress that Oakland Unified School District has made to complete the activities described in subdivision (c), as specified in the prior year Budget Act.

(e) The activities described in subdivision (c) shall be determined in the annual Budget Act based on joint recommendations from the County Office Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team and the Alameda County Superintendent of Schools. These recommendations shall be submitted to the Assembly Committee on Budget, Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, and the Department of Finance by March 1 of each fiscal year, through March 1, 2021, in conjunction with the certification described in subdivision (d).

District OverviewLocated in the Bay Area of Northern California, the district serves approximately 50,231 students in 86 district-operated schools and 35 authorized charter schools. Just over 30 percent of the district’s students speak a foreign language at home. Eligibility for free and reduced-price meals is 74.4 percent. The district’s unduplicated pupil percentage is 77.4 percent. For fiscal year 2018-19, the district is expected to have a combined unrestricted and restricted revenue of $586 million and expenditures of $596 million. The district’s projected June 30, 2019 unrestricted ending fund balance is $20.8 million.

The district’s own self-assessment of its financial condition is as follows:

“Core to the mission of a school district is the need to maximize the resources afforded to that system by the taxpayers to the benefit of the students that educators serve on a day-to-day basis. Fiscal challenges are an unwelcome distraction that draws attention away from the primary mission and purpose of the educational institution.

“Unfortunately, this is the current circumstance for OUSD. Beginning in the winter of 2016, OUSD began exhibiting signs of fiscal distress that continued to progress through the end of the 2016-17 fiscal year and carried into the 2017-18 fiscal year.”

4

“Key drivers that were impacting the financial health of the District in the structural budget imbalance, revenues and expenditures are listed below:

• Structural Budget Imbalance and Cash Flow: A lack of sufficient controls in place to manage for long-term balance and sustainability following the large infusion of revenues from the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF);

• Revenues: Based on the use of roll-over budgeting, the District was unable to carefully review the multi-year impact of expenditure decisions and revenue changes; and

• Expenditures: Prior to the implementation of Escape, the financial and human resource management systems and procedures were inadequate to ensure there is a robust position control process in place.”

Emergency Appropriation, Loan Status and Payment TermsIn 2003, the district was unable to meet its financial obligations without the assistance of the state of California. Senate Bill 39 (SB 39) (Chapter 14/2003) was passed, which authorized a $100 million cash flow loan for the district. Consistent with practice, SB 39 directed that the Superintendent of Public Instruction assume all of the rights, duties, and powers of the district’s governing board. Full rights, duties and powers of the governing board were reinstated on June 28, 2009, and at that time a state trustee was appointed to provide specific oversight of the district’s continued recovery. The state trustee has stay and rescind authority over actions by the governing board.

In 2006, a portion of the state loan was refinanced by the sale of California Infrastructure Economic Development Bank (I-Bank) bonds of $59.6 million (principal and accrued interest). After the refi-nancing, the state general fund portion of the loan was $35 million. The California Department of Education (CDE) reports that as of July 1, 2018, the district owes $40 million. The payment schedule for the I-Bank portion of the state loan is monthly, July through January, totaling approximately $3.8 million annually through January 2023. The annual payment on the state general fund portion of the state loan is approximately $2.1 million, due in June through June 2026. Payments are made through a State Controller’s Office intercept of the district’s monthly principal apportionment.

The state subsidizes the interest payments on the I-Bank portion of the loan by approximately $1.7 million per year pursuant to Education Code Section 41329.57(a)(1), which establishes that the effective costs of the I-Bank financing provided to the district shall be equal to the cost of the original state general fund emergency loan.

Other FCMAT Reviews of the DistrictIn late 2017, Oakland USD petitioned the California Department of Finance (DOF) to defer its remaining current year and budget year payments on the outstanding emergency appropriation (state loan) originally authorized in 2003.

In response to the district’s petition for a deferral of payments on the state loan, the director of the DOF convened a meeting of stakeholders on December 14, 2017. FCMAT provided a brief overview of the August 15, 2017 fiscal health risk analysis review of the district conducted at the district’s request, in which FCMAT concluded that the district showed signs of fiscal distress.

Subsequently, on January 22, 2018, the Alameda County Office of Education and FCMAT entered into a study agreement for FCMAT to provide on-site technical assistance to the district wherein FCMAT was

5

charged with two phases of work. The first phase was to review the district’s 2017-18 general fund budget and develop a consensus about assumptions, including the values of mid-year reductions. From this base, FCMAT would update the district’s 2017-18 cash forecast to determine if it had sufficient cash resources to meet its obligations, including the June state loan payment.

The second phase was to develop a general fund multiyear financial projection. FCMAT issued reports relative to this technical assistance on May 31, 2018 and July 2, 2018. The May 31 report concluded the district would have a positive general fund balance and cash flow position on June 30, 2018. The July 2 report made 18 recommendations that would lessen the district’s risk of potential insolvency.

During the time a state administrator was in place (2003-2009) FCMAT conducted regular assessments of the district’s operations that were documented in written status reports. FCMAT issued its last comprehensive review report on December 5, 2008 – its sixth in the series.

As previously noted, at the request of the district, FCMAT conducted a fiscal health risk analysis of the district in August 2017.

Current Financial Status

Adopted BudgetThe district’s governing board adopted the 2018-19 fiscal year budget on June 27, 2018. This budget reflected a net increase in the general fund of $22,461,032. Beginning fund balance for the general fund was estimated to be $25,708,250, with an ending fund balance estimated at $48,169,282. The budget was built on revenue estimates driven by industry standard assumptions along with estimated funded average daily attendance of 35,340.

The multiyear projection showed a positive fund balance trend in 2019-20, increasing the estimated fund balance by $12,231,142, which resulted in estimated ending fund balance of $60,400,425. In the third year of the multiyear projection, 2020-21, a net decrease/deficit of $9,189,833 was estimated, bringing the estimated ending fund balance on June 30, 2021 to $51,210,592.

The Alameda COE performed the review and analysis of the adopted budget and on September 6, 2018, conditionally approved the district’s 2018-19 adopted budget, pending receipt and analysis of the 2017-18 unaudited actuals report. The letter of conditional approval cites uncertainty with the district’s overall fiscal outlook. Also, the letter discusses that the solvency of the district is “largely dependent on the District’s ability to implement approximately $30 million of ongoing reductions in 2018-19.” (Exhibit A)

On November 8, 2018, the district’s budget was approved by the Alameda COE, noting that the 2017-18 ending balance with the unaudited actuals report was higher than projected with the adopted budget. The letter states that the Alameda county superintendent “remains deeply concerned regarding OUSD’s fiscal health.” The unaudited actual ending general fund balance for 2017-18 was $56,587,852, which is $30,879,605 higher than estimated with the adopted budget. (Exhibit B)

First Interim ReportThe district board approved the 2018-19 first interim budget on December 12, 2018 and self-certified the district as positive, able to meet its financial obligations in the current and two subsequent years. This budget reflected a net decrease (deficit) in the general fund of $23,272,299. Beginning fund balance for the general fund was reported to be $56,587,852, with an ending fund balance of $33,315,553. The

6

budget was built on revenue estimates driven by industry standard assumptions along with estimated funded average daily attendance of 34,989.

The multiyear projection showed deficit spending of $4,643,090 in 2019-20, which resulted in an estimated ending fund balance of $28,672,463 at June 30, 2020. In the third year of the multiyear projection, 2020-21, a deficit of $669,683 was estimated, bringing the estimated ending fund balance at the end of June 2021 to be $28,002,780.

The Alameda COE performed the review and analysis of the first interim budget and on January 15, 2019, changed the district’s certification status from positive to qualified, indicating that the district may not meet its financial obligations for the current and two subsequent years. The letter cited that the primary areas of concern with the first interim report related to the handling of audit adjustments resulting in a one-time impact as opposed to having an ongoing effect. Also, the letter requests further detail about the calculations/assumptions used to create the first interim report. Without such details, the letter states that the county superintendent “cannot determine with accuracy the condition of OUSD’s financial position.” (Exhibit C) A case could be made that without sufficient data details and a determi-nation of accuracy, the county superintendent could have downgraded the certification from positive to negative or designated the district as a lack of going concern.

Status of Collective BargainingOn the evening of February 28, 2019, the district reached a tentative agreement with the Oakland Education Association. This report was finalized prior to the settlement, and FCMAT/Alameda COE staff will need time to analyze the impact of the settlement on the deficit calculation. An update to this letter will be done as soon as the data is available to incorporate.

Negotiations at the district remain unsettled for 2017-18 and beyond. For Oakland Education Association (OEA), the parties made their initial proposals public on February 8, 2017, commenced bargaining, and after 30 bargaining sessions declared impasse on May 18, 2018. The OEA filed a request for a mediator on May 23, 2018. An agreement was reached on five of 16 open articles, leaving 11 open for negotiation. Because mediation failed to produce a complete agreement, factfinding hearings took place on January 31 and February 1, 2019.

The neutral factfinder produced a report on February 15, 2019. This report recommends a three-year agreement to be negotiated for 2017-18 through 2019-20 with a 3% increase retroactive to July 1, 2017 and an additional 3% retroactive to July 1, 2018 on the certificated salary schedule, reopening the negoti-ations for the third year. (Exhibit D)

All units remain unsettled, and the potential of a “me-too” settlement costs the district far more than just settling with OEA alone.

The following chart demonstrates the full (across all units) settlement costs of the following proposals; factfinding, most recent district offer to OEA, and OEA request.

• Factfinding: cumulative effective rate 6.09%, 3% for both 2017-18 and 2018-19 with start dates of July 1.

• District offer: 1.5% for all of 2017-18 off schedule, 3% effective January 1, 2019, 2% effective January 1, 2020, 1% effective January 2, 2021 and 1% July 1, 2021.

• OEA request: 3% for 2017-18, 4% for 2018-19, and 5% for 2019-20 with start dates of July 1.

7

Factfinding

2017-18 (to be paid in 2018-19) 3% on salary schedule

2018-19 3% on salary schedule

2019-20 0%(reopen the contract for negotiation)

2020-21 0%

2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 Cumulative

Certificated $11,999,273 $5,934,501 $6,026,485 $23,960,259

Classified $5,697,961 $4,597,130 $4,637,125 $14,932,217

Benefits $4,551,214 $960,928 $1,212,173 $6,724,314

Total $22,248,448 $11,492,558 $11,875,783 $45,616,790

OUSD

2017-18 (to be paid in 2018-19) 1.50% off-salary schedule

2018-19 1.50% on salary schedule



2018-19 2019-20 2020-21

Certificated $5,911,978 $8,172,878 $11,507,478 $25,592,333

Classified $2,806,952 $3,817,402 $5,338,941 $11,963,296

Benefits $2,247,133 $1,242,562 $2,876,383 $6,366,078

Total $10,966,063 $13,232,842 $19,722,801 $43,921,707

OEA Request

2017-18 (to be paid in 2018-19) 3.00% on salary schedule



2020-21 0.00%

2018-19 2019-20 2020-21

Certificated $14,051,058 $25,103,502 $25,492,607 $64,647,167

Classified $6,663,312 $11,784,780 $11,887,308 $30,335,400

Benefits $5,364,183 $8,156,241 $8,892,568 $22,412,992

Total $26,078,552 $45,044,524 $46,272,482 $117,395,559

8

The district and OEA have 11 open articles that encompass more than compensation considerations. The cost of settlement data presented above represents only salary considerations and does not include the cost impact of any other terms being negotiated. The open articles include topics such as reducing class size, coun-selor staffing and increasing substitute salaries. The fiscal impact of these articles is unknown at this time.

District Actions Since Budget AdoptionOn August 8, 2018, the district governing board unanimously approved resolution 18-19-0041 (Exhibit E), which stated: “absent a material positive change in the District’s projected revenues or reduction in District expenses, the District will be required to consider and implement budget reductions in force beginning in FY 2019-20 of at least 234 FTE Certificated positions and 104 FTE Classified, Management and Confidential positions for approximately $26.4 million to be identified on or before February 28, 2019, books and supplies of $400,000 and $3.5 million services and operating expenses to address the District’s negative ending fund balance.” At this meeting, the district board also approved a revised multiyear projection for 2019-20 and 2020-21 reflecting the reductions contained in resolution 18-19-0041 as well as the 45-day revision to reflect the adopted state budget.

On August 22, 2018, the district governing board approved resolution 18-19-0007 (Exhibit F), which acknowledged insufficient funds in Measure J to complete all of the projected projects on the Measure J spending plan. The resolution revised the capital facilities spending plan, recommending reductions to specified projects to balance the spending plan.

On September 12, 2018, the board received an update on the Fiscal Vitality Plan sharing the outline of the work, progress to date and review of next steps. Also at this meeting, the board approved a final response to a grand jury investigation report. (Exhibit G) The 2017-18 civil grand jury report was titled “Oakland Unified School District: Hard Choices Needed to Prevent Insolvency.” A summary of the findings with district responses is included below:

Finding 18-6 Staff and Board efforts to circumvent established budgeting pol-icies along with board efforts to interfere in the administrative responsibilities of the superintendent invite financial instability and contribute to Oakland Unified School District’s financial problems.

District Response: District agrees with this finding with the clarification that it does not believe the efforts referenced in the finding are intentional.

Finding 18-7 Oakland Unified School District’s inability to control overstaffing and poor position control decisions have contributed to the dis-trict’s financial instability.

District Response: The District agrees with this finding. The District’s largest fiscal expenditures are salary and salary-driven benefit costs.

Finding 18-8 Lack of transparency related to Oakland Unified School District’s financial positions has led to mistrust between the district, the community, and labor organizations.

District Response: The District agrees in part with this finding but believes that other factors, including historical context in Oakland and negative media coverage of the District contribute to distrust even with greater access to information.

Finding 18-9 High turnover of key administrators has created an atmosphere of mistrust, destroying the continuity of the district’s educational mission, and crippling the district’s effectiveness in addressing its most pressing fiscal issues.

District Response: The District disagrees with this finding. Although the overall strategic plan, Community Schools, Thriving Students, has remained in place, each Superintendent’s initiatives and focal points within the plan have varied.

Finding 18-10 Financial instability and high staff turnover contribute to poor student performance.

District Response: The District agrees in part with this finding but qualifies its response based on the myriad of factors that may impact student performance.

Finding 18-11 Operating 86 schools is unsustainable and will lead the district to insolvency.

District Response: The District agrees with this finding in part. Assuming that all current conditions, including revenue, enroll-ment, class sizes, staffing levels, number of schools, and expens-es, remain the same, the District will continue to operate at a fiscal deficit and will become insolvent. Reducing the number of District-operated schools is one way to reduce expenditures.

Finding 18-12 Collaboration between traditional public schools and charter schools operating in the district benefit all students in Oakland Unified School District.

District Response: The District agrees with this finding in part. The District does not believe that expending precious, limited resources fighting with charter schools is beneficial to students living in Oakland.

9

On October 24, 2018, the board discussed AB 1840, received a Fiscal Vitality Plan update from the Fiscal Vitality Committee and approved a budget revision that would inform budgetary changes to be included in the first interim report.

On November 14, 2018, the board approved resolution 18-19-0013 from the Fiscal Vitality Committee (Exhibit H) that established three recommended guiding principles for budget development and priori-tization as the district defines the $30 million in reductions to be established per resolution 18-19-0041. Also at this board meeting, the board received a report outlining a timeline for the overall Citywide Plan and an update on the Citywide Map. (Exhibit I)

On December 12, 2018, the board approved the district’s first interim report.

On January 9, 2019, a 2019-20 fiscal year district budget reduction proposal was presented (Exhibit J) adopting principles from resolution 18-19-0013 and various scenarios with levels of reductions in staff.

On January 23, 2019, an update was provided to the 2019-20 fiscal year district budget reduction (Exhibit K) that refined the recommendations and incorporated the Governor’s January proposed state budget assumptions and the impacts of those assumptions on the district’s budget for 2019-20 and beyond.

On January 28, 2019, the district board approved resolution 18-19-0143 (Exhibit L) to approve the Coliseum College Preparatory Academy expansion and Roots International Academy closure, per the Blueprint for Quality Schools.

On February 6, 2019, resolution 18-19-0144 (Exhibit M), to be approved on February 11, was presented for a first reading. This resolution reduced the amount needed for 2019-20 budget reduction from $30 million (as determined in August 2018) to $21.7 million.

On February 11, 2019, the district board received reports based on 2019-20 fiscal year reductions:

• Changes to school allocations

• Staffing changes by FTE and resource

• Explanation of change to restricted funds as a result of reductions

• Program adjustments

• Resolution 18-19-0144 was not approved.

On February 19, 2019, the district board received feedback from staff and stakeholders about the restorative justice program, which was recommended at the February 6, 2019 meeting to be eliminated. Resolution 18-19-0144 was rescheduled to be approved on February 27, 2019.

On February 27, 2019, the board meeting was cancelled and approval of resolution 18-19-0144 was further delayed.

Deficit CalculationOn the evening of February 28, 2019, the district reached a tentative agreement with the Oakland Education Association. This report was finalized prior to the settlement, and FCMAT/Alameda COE staff will need time to analyze the impact of the settlement on the deficit calculation. An update to this letter will be done as soon as the data is available to incorporate.

10

FCMAT Analysis of MYP Deficit in 2019-20 and 2020-21To validate the calculations on the first interim multiyear projection (MYP), FCMAT, in collaboration with the Alameda COE, performed the following tasks:

• reconciled budget, payroll and position control

• created a new LCFF projection; updating enrollment and ADA calculations

• verified utilization of parcel taxes per each measure’s stated purpose

• verified audit adjustments and corresponding journal entries

• performed budget to actuals analysis for the current year

• balanced restricted resources for 2019-20 and 2020-21

Many updates were made to the current year (2018-19) and subsequent years to arrive at the projected deficit spending utilized in this report. These calculations are based on what is known at the time this report is being written and will likely change in the weeks ahead.

Using the assumptions below, FCMAT calculated general fund deficit for the three years of the MYP as follows:

• Salary settlement: no cost increases included for any bargaining unit settlement

• RDA revenues: $8 million classified as unrestricted

• Parcel tax: included parcel tax G1 contributions of $5 million

• Expenditure reductions per board resolution: no reductions included

• Books and supplies expense reduction to all three years of MYFP

• Routine Restricted Maintenance has been budgeted at the full contribution rate of 3% for all three years of the MYFP

Unrestricted Restricted Combined2018-19 $11,818,473 ($20,782,442) ($8,963,969)

2019-20 $2,013,453 ($8,382,342) ($6,368,889)

2020-21 ($5,929,608) ($9,775,069) ($15,704,677)

A copy of the MYP is included with this report as Exhibit N.

COE Intervention Costs to be Added to Deficit CalculationThe Alameda COE estimates a total of 7,320 hours for 2019-20 to provide support and intervention to the district to comply with AB 1840. The total cost for this support is $1,427,588. For 2020-21, the Alameda COE anticipates fewer hours of support, with a cost estimate of $1,204,400. (Exhibit O)

Other considerations added/subtracted from the deficit amounts listed above:

• Any settled salary increases or negotiated costs should be considered as an addition to the deficit calculation. Depending on the terms of any settlement, the salary values range from a low of $11,492,558 to a high of $45,044,524 for 2019-20, and a range of $11,875,783 to $46,272,482 for 2020-21 based on the data presented earlier in this report.

11

• Additionally, any costs associated with articles other than salary will need to be added to the deficit calculation. As stated above, those costs are undetermined at this time and could change as collective bargaining comes to a close.

Opportunities and Challenges to Deficit Calculation• The status of labor negotiations poses a significant challenge to the district’s deficit calculation.

The fact that the district is over 18 months beyond the expiration of the most recent collective bargaining agreement represents a fiscal liability for the district depending on settlement terms and effective dates. Uncertainty promotes instability and forces limitations on the projection of meaningful MYP surpluses/deficits. As indicated, costs of the various proposals can be found earlier in this report.

• Employee turnover, lack of capacity and training of staff in the business department and other key functions creates significant challenges to the production of accurate and timely data for decision-makers and stakeholders. This challenge also promotes a significant lack of trust and credibility in the district’s budgetary data, and as a result, a lack of acceptable and understanding of any fiscal challenges that may impact the district’s ability to provide services. This challenge should not be confused with a lack of staff. Ample staff exists to perform the necessary duties, but capacity to do so is limited.

AB 1840 Benchmarks

Required BenchmarksIn addition to the district established benchmarks, Education Code 42160(c) provides a list of bench-marks to be measured as a condition of apportionment of one-time funds to assist the district. The benchmarks are listed below along with a brief detail of district status with regard to each of these bench-marks:

1. Completion of comprehensive operational reviews that compare the needs of the school district with similar school districts and provide data and recommendations regarding changes the school district can make to achieve fiscal sustainability.

Status: Alameda COE has sought a contract with a fiscal consultant who will perform the following review by March 2019:

• Assess the district’s fiscal operations in the functional areas of accounts payable, procurement, payroll, and accounting. Provide a report of findings that focuses on the functional areas, listing their strengths and weaknesses, proposing recommendations for their improvement, and identifying impediments to their improvement. FCMAT believes the scope of this engagement is not sufficiently comprehensive because it does not include a comparison of the district’s organization and staffing structure with similar districts as required by 42160(c)(1).

• Collaborate with Alameda COE on district needs and provide leadership, mentoring, guidance and support to the district in school business and operations, accounting and budgeting as well as accounting, payroll, purchasing, accounts payable, maintenance

12

and operations, facilities, property liability, workers’ compensation and any other areas needed by duties as requested by the county superintendent.

• Provide guidance for budget development and monitoring to include the LCFF calculations, trend analysis, multiyear projections, income and expenditures projections as well as guidance regarding budget monitoring and accounting to ensure fiscal support. Provide support, as requested, for district interim financial reports as required by state statute.

• Review district financial reports, budgets, proposals, agreements and board policies as well as Alameda COE and state advisories to provide direction and advice as requested.

• Analyze state budget activities and Alameda COE budget advisories and assist in training the district business office leadership and staff on pertinent revenue projections and expenditure calculations.

• Collaborate with the Alameda COE on the form and frequency of reporting on status, updates and fiscal and operational findings and recommendations that may impact the district’s fiscal stability and financial health.

2. Adoption and implementation of necessary budgetary solutions, including the consol-idation of school sites.

Status: Budgetary solutions are provided by means of Fiscal Vitality Plan and district board resolution 18-0041. Implementation is still a work in progress. Budgetary solutions were intended to be provided by means of adoption of the Fiscal Vitality Plan and board resolution 18-19-0144, which was not acted upon by the district’s own adopted deadline of February 28, 2019 as established in board resolution 18-0041. Consolidation of school sites is addressed as part of the Citywide Plan.

3. Completion and implementation of multiyear, fiscally solvent budgets and budget plans.

Status: Details available in district benchmark Fiscal Vitality Plan below.

4. Qualification for positive certification pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 42130) of Chapter 6.

Status: As of first interim, the district self-certified positive but this certification was not supported by data, and the Alameda COE downgraded the certification to qualified based on a lack of information. Such absence of information could also be the basis for a negative certification or a lack of going concern (EC 42127.6).

5. Sale or lease of surplus property.

Status: Details available in district benchmark Citywide Plan below.

13

6. Growth and maintenance of budgetary reserves.

Status: With reductions as proposed in district board resolution 18-0041, the district could experience growth or maintenance of district reserves. However, subsequent action by the board to adopt the Fiscal Vitality Plan and proposed resolution 18-19-0144 to carry out the commitments of resolution 18-0041 have not been completed.

7. Approval of school district budgets by the Alameda COE.

Status: The Alameda COE initially conditionally approved the district’s 2018-19 budget; the super-intendent later gave unconditional approval.

District-Established BenchmarksCitywide PlanDistrict Board Policy 6006 (June 2018) titled Quality School Development: Community of Schools calls for the district superintendent to draft a Citywide Plan that “promotes the long-term sustainability of publicly funded schools across Oakland that represent quality and equitable educational options.” The district has recognized that there are 10,000 empty seats in 86 schools within district boundaries and is striving to become more efficient with facilities. The first strategy under this plan is to implement the Blueprint for Quality Schools action plan to identify four cohorts of school changes.

As a part of this plan, the district will identify on a citywide map the school sites that will be closing or merging with a nearby site. The following schools and properties will be included in the final citywide map:

1. Number and location of district-run schools

a. Traditional schools

b. Alternative schools

c. Specialized schools

2. District early childhood education (pre-K) locations

3. District special education programs

4. Charter school locations

5. Number and location of surplus properties

Cohort 1 was identified in June 2018. On January 28, 2019, the district board passed resolution 19-0095 (Exhibit L) to close Roots International School, which was initially to be part of Cohort 2.

The district is addressing the need to downsize the facilities footprint through the Citywide Plan, which was planned to be approved by the district board on February 27, 2019, as shown below:

14

The board did not approve the Citywide Plan on February 27, 2019, as the board meeting was cancelled.

Fiscal Vitality PlanThe district’s Fiscal Vitality Plan was introduced on December 13, 2017 and is organized into three segments: Stability (short term plans), Recovery (medium term plans) and Vitality (long term plans). The Fiscal Vitality Plan was created as a response to a FCMAT Fiscal Health Risk Analysis that demonstrated many areas of need or improvement for the district. There are 23 recommendations for action to help rectify the district’s current fiscal health. Alameda COE monitors the progress of the recommendations. The most recent evaluation for the 23 recommendations is dated February 7, 2019 (Exhibit P).

Below are the 23 recommendations and the status of each:Recommendation StatusRestore the ending fund balance and maintain the state-mandated reserve for economic uncertainty In Progress

Institute adjustments to existing central office positions In Progress

Maximize the use of restricted revenue sources In Progress

Evaluate central office-based contracts and books/supplies for possible freeze and capture of savings In Progress

Pursue capture of donated days and/or furlough In Progress

Adjust school per pupil allocations to capture savings In Progress

Institute closer monitoring of contributions to other programs In Progress

Update and implement budget forecast and projection practices In Progress

Review and update cash flow monitoring practices In Progress

Institute immediate protocols to limit and review spending among central office and school sites In Progress

Plan for and adopt a balance budget that avoids future deficit spending In Progress

Establish and conduct zero-based budgeting sessions with all central office practices In Progress

Research, engage and implement a central office reorganization In Progress

Institute and conduct monthly central office and school site budget monitoring practices Not Started

Review, update and implement effective position control practices Not Started

Develop a process for pre-approval of extra time employee payments In Progress

Review and implement revised contract approval, processing and management procedures Not Started

15

Complete transition to Escape technology system to manage finance and human resource information Complete

Review and execute on shifts in expense that maximize the use of restricted funds Making Progress over last year

Review and engage school district and school leaders to re-establish appropriate budget roles and responsibilities In Progress

Establish systems for the management and oversight of bargaining agreements In Progress

Consider and act on recommendations from the Blueprint for Quality Schools review In Progress

Future FCMAT Updates in Support of DOF and Legislative ActionFuture periodic letters will include updates on the various operational reviews, recommendations and plans to incorporate the recommendations in the fiscal stabilization plan, Citywide Plan and other applicable planning. The district is working on its second interim report. Additional periodic reports will be made once the 2019-20 budget is finalized (June 2019), when 2018-19 unaudited actuals are available (September 2019), and when other major milestones are reached.

FCMAT will provide updates and progress reporting on benchmarks upon the following occurrences including (but not limited to):

• Salary settlement

• Results of operational reviews

• Second interim report

• June 30 progress review of benchmarks; 2019-20 budget review

• Unaudited Actuals report

• October 1 progress review of benchmarks

ConclusionIn accordance with Education Code Section 42160, FCMAT has determined that the school district’s 2019-20 projected operating deficit is as follows, with the caveat that there are several unknows at this point in time (e.g., status of negotiations):

Fiscal Year 2018-19 2019-20Projected Deficit ($8,963,969) ($6,368,889)

COE Additional Support/Intervention ($1,427,588) ($1,204,400)

Projected Revised Deficit ($10,391,557) ($7,573,289)

As a reminder, any settled salary increases or negotiated costs, as well as any costs associated with articles other than salary need to be considered as an addition to the above deficit calculation. As stated above, those costs are undetermined at this time and could change as collective bargaining comes to a close.

Sincerely,

Tamara EthierFiscal Intervention Specialist

16

cc: L. Karen Monroe, Alameda County Superintendent of Schools Karen Stapf-Walters, Executive Director, California State Board of Education Nick Schweizer, Deputy Superintendent, California Department of Education Jeff Bell, Program Budget Manager, California Department of FinanceJessica Holmes, Assistant Program Budget Manager, California Department of FinanceChris Learned, State Trustee, Oakland Unified School District Gary Jones, Interim Associate Superintendent, Alameda County Office of Education Dr. Kyla Johnson-Trammell, Superintendent, Oakland USD

17

Exhibit A

19

November 8, 2018 Aimee Eng, President Board of Education Oakland Unified School District 1000 Broadway, Suite 680 Oakland, CA 94607 RE: 2018-19 Adopted Budget Approval Dear President Eng: As communicated in our letter dated September 6, 2018, the Alameda County Office of Education (ACOE) conditionally approved the Adopted Budget of the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) for 2018-19. The approval of the Adopted Budget was contingent upon OUSD’s closure of fiscal year 2017-18 and the resulting beginning fund balance for 2018-19. By statute, ACOE is required to make a final determination regarding approval or disapproval by November 8, 2018. OUSD’s Unaudited Actuals Report was received by ACOE by the statutory deadline of September 15, 2018, and ACOE subsequently conducted a review of the report as submitted. While ACOE noted that the subsequent ending fund balance was higher than OUSD projected at Adopted Budget, and that OUSD was able to meet the 3% required minimum reserve in 2017-18, ACOE also notes that possible revenue adjustments (reductions) to the 2017-18 year, and ADA reassessments for FY 18-19, may be necessary at First Interim. While the resulting beginning fund balance for 2018-19 is anticipated to be adjusted downward at First Interim, ACOE’s review has determined that OUSD has met the minimum conditions for approval, as outlined by ACOE. OUSD’s 2018-19 Adopted Budget is therefore approved. However, ACOE remains deeply concerned regarding OUSD’s fiscal health, and expect OUSD to continue its efforts to align revenues with expenditures in an ongoing and sustainable manner. The continued restoration and maintenance of OUSD’s financial stability must remain a top priority as OUSD moves forward to implement the required reductions as expected with the passing of AB 1840. While OUSD has met the minimum conditions for approval of the 2018-19 Adopted Budget, ACOE concurs with the Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) that OUSD develop short- and long-term financial plans based on reasonable economic assumptions to implement those plans with a commitment to attaining fiscal solvency. Accordingly, ACOE acknowledges OUSD’s business staff’s efforts as they conduct a thorough review of all fiscal and operational areas, with a specific focus on budgetary projections, Special Education expenditures and OUSD’s cash flow.

Exhibit B

20

I appreciate OUSD’s ongoing assistance during this process and look forward to reviewing the 2018-19 First Interim Report. Please feel free to contact me with any questions as we at ACOE continue to work collaboratively to ensure both fiscal and educational success. Sincerely, L. Karen Monroe Alameda County Superintendent of Schools cc: Board of Education, Oakland USD Kyla Johnson-Trammell, Superintendent, Oakland USD

Marcus Battle, Chief Business Officer, Oakland USD Sondra Aguilera, Senior Deputy Chief, Continuous School Improvement Chris Learned, State Trustee, Oakland USD Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, CDE Nick Schweizer, Deputy Superintendent, CDE Michael Fine, Chief Executive Officer, FCMAT Gary Jones, Interim Associate Superintendent, ACOE

Ingrid L. Roberson, Chief of Learning & Accountability, ACOE

21

Exhibit C

January 15, 2019 Aimee Eng, President Board of Education Oakland Unified School District 1000 Broadway, Suite 680 Oakland, CA 94607 RE: 2018-19 First Interim Report Dear President Eng: The Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) filed a POSITIVE certification of the district’s First Interim Report for fiscal year 2018-19 with the Alameda County Office of Education (ACOE). In accordance with Education Code Section 42131, ACOE reviewed the First Interim Report, based on standards and criteria for fiscal stability adopted by the State Board of Education pursuant to Section 33127. ACOE’s review determined that OUSD may not meet its financial obligations for the current fiscal year and two subsequent fiscal years. Consequently, the certification shall be changed to QUALIFIED. The revised certification is based on the following areas of concern discovered in ACOE’s review:

Reduced Prior Year ADA – Reduction in Fund Balance of $5,379,785 OUSD’s 2017-18 ADA was less than anticipated, reducing prior year LCFF Sources by $5,379,785. This amount is identified on Form 01I, Components of Ending Fund Balance – Assignments, as “Assigned-ADA Adjustments Prior Year,” rather than being accounted for as an Audit Adjustment. By accounting for the prior year adjustment to ADA as a one-year, 2018-19 Assignment rather than an Audit Adjustment, OUSD’s Beginning Fund Balances are not reduced in the two subsequent years by the $5,379,785. Therefore, the projected Ending Fund Balances for 2019-20 and 2020-21 on Form MYPI are overstated by $5,379,785. Audit Adjustment – Reduction in Fund Balance of $1,225,000 The OUSD 2017-18 Annual Financial Report (Audit Report) contains an additional prior year fund balance reduction of $1,225,000 identified as “Fiscal year 2018 expenditures recognized in the succeeding period.” This audit adjustment was unknown to OUSD prior to the submission of their First Interim.

22

Aimee Eng, President Page 2 January 15, 2019

Reduced Current Year ADA – Reduction in Fund Balance of $2,400,000 The revised 2017-18 P-2 attendance report and the decreased 2018-19 CALPADS enrollment (certified) causes OUSD’s 2018-19 projected LCFF revenue to decrease from what was anticipated in the First Interim Report. Based on ACOE’s LCFF projections, OUSD will be funded at 95.55% of the CALPADS enrollment, which decreases OUSD’s LCFF revenue by approximately $2,400,000, or 128 ADA from OUSD’s estimates. Assumptions The First Interim Report requires OUSD to submit a detailed accounting of the district’s assumptions. The SACS Form MYPI states:

ASSUMPTIONS Please provide below or on a separate attachment, the assumptions used to determine the projections for the first and second subsequent fiscal years. Further, please include an explanation for any significant expenditure adjustments…

Without the details of the First Interim Report’s assumptions, ACOE cannot determine with accuracy the condition of OUSD’s financial position. ACOE is concerned that OUSD’s Reserve for Economic Uncertainties in the two subsequent fiscal years may be insufficient to avert insolvency. My office remains committed to working collaboratively with the district to ensure its long-term fiscal health. If you have any questions or concerns regarding our review process, please feel free to call me at (510) 670-4140.

Sincerely, L. Karen Monroe Alameda County Superintendent of Schools cc: Board of Education, Oakland USD Kyla Johnson-Trammell, Superintendent, Oakland USD Marcus Battle, Senior Business Officer, Oakland USD Tony Thurmond, Superintendent of Public Instruction Christopher Learned, Fiscal Oversight Trustee Gary Jones, Associate Superintendent, ACOE Teresa Santamaria, Chief of District & Business Advisory Services, ACOE

23

Exhibit D

58

Exhibit E

OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT GOVERNING BOARD

RESOLUTION 1819-0041

CONFIRMING OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT’S COMMITMENT TO FISCAL SOLVENCY

WHEREAS, the Governing Board recognizes that the district is highly dependent on revenue from the State of California and that revenue source is dependent on the on-going stability of the California State economy; WHEREAS, the Governing Board recognizes that the Governor’s 2018/2019 Budget proposal projects out year increases tied to cost of living adjustments only, and that these budget components have a direct impact on the District’s multiyear projections; WHEREAS, the Governing Board further recognizes the impact of declining enrollment and increasing STRS/PERS pension costs on the District’s budget; WHEREAS, The Education Code specifies that on or before July 1 of each year each school district shall adopt a budget; WHEREAS, Education Code section 42127(c) provides, in relevant part, that the County Superintendent of Schools shall: “Determine whether the adopted budget will allow the school district to meet its financial obligations during the fiscal year and is consistent with a financial plan that will enable the school district to satisfy its multiyear financial commitments . . . [and] shall either conditionally approve or disapprove a budget that does not provide adequate assurance that the school district will meet its current and future obligations and resolve any problems identified in studies, reports, evaluations, or audits described in this paragraph.” WHEREAS, based on the District projections of revenue and expenditures and the District’s current fiscal challenges, it is projected that the District will not meet its required minimum reserves in the 2019-2020 and 2020-21 fiscal years, and the District will have a negative ending fund balance (currently estimated at approximately -20,300,000 and -$59,000,000 respectively); WHEREAS, the Governing Board desires to minimize the impact on the level of service and quality of staff and education programs for District students; WHEREAS, the Governing Board recognizes that the District’s health and welfare benefits package is a significant factor in the District’s ability to recruit and retain highly qualified teachers and staff, and the Governing Board is committed to minimizing the impact on the level of such benefits within the District’s fiscal constraints and without major disruption to plan benefits; WHEREAS, the Governing Board desires to avoid draconian budget reduction measures beginning in the 2019-2020 fiscal year;

59

WHEREAS, the Governing Board remains committed to collaboration with its employee representatives and bargaining units in addressing the District’s fiscal challenges in hopes of avoiding any draconian cuts to Reductions in Force; WHEREAS, the Governing Board recognizes that the current multiyear projection included in the District’s proposed budget projects a negative fund balance of approximately $20,300,000 in 2019-2020 fiscal year, and $59,000,000 in the 2020-2021 fiscal year, and further recognizes that the projections may increase or decrease depending on the final State revenue allocated to Proposition 98 as adopted by the State of California in the 2018-2019 and/or 2019-2020 state budget, or any other changes to the multi-year assumptions; WHEREAS, the Governing Board recognizes that if the District’s current fiscal circumstances do not change materially for the positive on or before January 31, 2019, then it will be necessary to either increase revenue and/or make appropriate expenditure reductions in order for the District to remain fiscally solvent beginning in FY 2019-20 and the two subsequent years fiscal as mandated by California State law; WHEREAS, the Governing Board has been advised of the risk in delaying reductions which may allow the projected negative ending fund balance (approximately -$59,000,000) by 2020-2021 to grow larger; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, based on the above recitals and in order to ensure that the Oakland Unified School District remains fiscally solvent, the Governing Board is committed to reducing expenditures in all budget areas including salaries, employee benefits, services and operating expenses, capital outlay, other outgoing and other financing sources; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, absent a material positive change in the District’s projected revenues or reduction in District expenses, the District will be required to consider and implement budget reductions in force beginning in FY 2019-20 of at least 234 FTE Certificated positions and 104 FTE Classified, Management and Confidential positions for approximately $26.4 million to be identified on or before February 28, 2019, books and supplies of $400,000 and $3.5 million services and operating expenses to address the District’s negative ending fund balance. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, given the District’s history of budget and fiscal miscalculations, the Board will require the District to establish a more conservative target for reductions to achieve a minimum of a 3% reserve beginning in FY 2019-20 in order to address unforeseen budgetary increases; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, during the 2018-19 fiscal year, the District will work in collaboration with the bargaining units and the Board to provide alternatives to reductions in force which would be enacted in the absence of new money or equivalent savings identified by January 31, 2019; and BE IT ADDITIONALLY RESOLVED that the Governing Board is committed to explore and pursue any and all options to increase revenue including local, state, federal grants, and additional remedies as provided by the State. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Governing Board of the Oakland Unified School District, Alameda County, State of California, on August 8, 2018, by the following vote:

60

Passed by the following vote:

PREFERENTIAL AYE: None

PREFERENTIAL NAYS: None

PREFERENTIAL ABSTENTION: None

PREFERENTIAL RECUSE None:

PREFERENTIAL ABSENCE: Josue Chavez (Student Director), Yota Omosowho (Student Director)

AYES: Jody London, Nina Senn, Shanthi Gonzales, James Harris, Vice President Jumoke Hinton Hodge, President Aimee Eng

NOES: None

ABSTAINED: None

RECUSED: None

ABSENT: Roseann Torres

CERTIFICATION

We hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Resolution passed at a Regular Meeting of the Governing Board of the Oakland Unified School District held on August 8, 2018.

__________________________ Aimee Eng

President, Governing Board

__________________________ Kyla Johnson Trammell

Secretary, Governing Board

Legislative File No. 18-1723Introduction Date: 8/8/18Enactment No. 18-1266Enactment Date 8/8/18 er

61

Exhibit F

RESOLUTION

OF THE

BOARD OF EDUCATION

OF THE

OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

NO. 1819-0007

District's Capital (Facilities) Program - Revised Spending Plan - August 2018

WHEREAS, in June 2012, Oakland voters passed Measure J, a $475 million School Facilities Improvement Bond;

WHEREAS, the Facilities Master Plan developed in 2012 identified that the Facilities needs cost more than the funding sought by the bond measure;

WHEREAS, as project scopes have expanded, construction costs have increased over time, and various circumstances have contributed to delays, there are insufficient funds in Measure J to complete all of the projected projects on the Measure J spending plan;

WHEREAS, it is estimated that an additional $160 million would be needed to complete all of the committed Measure J projects as currently scoped and within the timeframes committed;

WHEREAS, a framework was developed to determine which projects to reduce or defer to ensure that the District’s capital spending plan is balanced with resources; the framework recommends cuts that are: (1) furthest away from the classroom; (2) not yet in construction or furthest away from construction; (3) least harmful to the overall District and Facilities program,

WHEREAS, the District’s Capital (Facilities) Program – Revised Spending Plan – August 2018 (attached as Exhibit A) applies this framework to recommend reductions to specified projects to balance the spending plan,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Board hereby adopts the revised District’s Capital (Facilities) Program – Revised Spending Plan – August 2018 attached hereto as Exhibit A and authorizes the use of Measures B and J , Measures B and J Interest, Fund 25 (Capital Facilities ) and Fund 35 (County School Facilities) Funds, as stated in Exhibit A, as the funding sources for related expenditures for facilities projects subject to the Board’s approval of the contracts, or other Board required authorizations, if any, for such expenditures.


PREFERENTIAL AYE:

PREFERENTIAL NOE:

PREFERENTIAL ABSTENTION:

NoneNoneStudent Directors Chavez and Omosowho

62

PREFERENTIAL RECUSED:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAINED:

RECUSED:

ABSENT:

CERTIFICATION

We hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Resolution passed at a

Regular Meeting of the Board of Education of the Oakland Unified School District, held on

August 22, 2018.

Legislative File Info.

File ID Number: 18-1729

Introduction

Date:

8/1/18

Enactment

Number:

Enactment Date:

Exhibit “A” - Revised Measure J Spending Plan


___________________________________________ Aimee Eng President, Board of Education

___________________________________________ Kyla Johnson-Trammell Superintendent and Secretary, Board of Education

NoneJody London, Nina Senn, Roseann Torres, Shanthi Gonzales, President Aimee EngVice President Jumoke Hinton Hodge, James Harris

NoneNoneNone

18-1395

8/22/18 os

63

EXHI

BIT

D

12/

13/2

016

1C

alifo

rnia

Sol

ar In

itiat

ive

(CSI

) Pro

ject

35,0

00,0

00$

-$

-$

35,0

00,0

00$

31,0

00,0

00$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

31,0

00,0

00$

2G

lenv

iew

Ele

men

tary

Sch

ool -

Rep

lace

men

t47

,000

,000

$-

$-

$47

,000

,000

$37

,000

,000

$11

,800

,000

$-

$10

,000

,000

$

-$

-$

58,8

00,0

00$

3M

adis

on G

rade

Exp

ansi

on P

roje

ct (F

rom

6-9

to 6

-12)

27,0

00,0

00$

-$

-$

27,0

00,0

00$

15,5

00,0

00$

5,20

0,00

0$

-$

15,7

00,0

00$

-

$-

$36

,400

,000

$4

Gre

enle

af E

xpan

sion

Pro

ject

(Fr

om K

-5 to

K-8

)40

,000

,000

$-

$-

$40

,000

,000

$39

,480

,000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$39

,480

,000

$5

Sank

ofa

Expa

nsio

n Pr

ojec

t (Fr

om K

-5 to

K-8

)3,

000,

000

$-

$-

$3,

000,

000

$2,

500,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$2,

500,

000

$6

Frem

ont H

igh

Scho

ol -

Rep

lace

men

t80

,000

,000

$2,

000,

000

$-

$82

,000

,000

$11

7,00

0,00

0$

3,80

0,00

0$

-$

12,4

00,0

00$

-$

-$

133,

200,

000

$7a

Educ

atio

n Le

arni

ng C

ompl

ex (E

LC2)

38,0

00,0

00$

5,00

0,00

0$

-$

43,0

00,0

00$

14,6

20,0

00$

-$

2,88

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

17,5

00,0

00$

7bIn

terim

Hou

sing

6,50

0,00

0$

-$

-$

6,50

0,00

0$

14,4

80,0

00$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

14,4

80,0

00$

8M

cCly

mon

ds H

S In

tens

ive

Supp

ort S

ite2,

000,

000

$2,

000,

000

$-

$4,

000,

000

$2,

000,

000

$2,

000,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$4,

000,

000

$9

Cas

tlem

ont H

S In

tens

ive

Supp

ort S

ite4,

000,

000

$-

$-

$4,

000,

000

$4,

000,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$4,

000,

000

$10

Bro

okfie

ld E

S In

tens

ive

Supp

ort S

ite1,

000,

000

$3,

000,

000

$-

$4,

000,

000

$2,

500,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$2,

500,

000

$11

Fric

k M

S In

tens

ive

Supp

ort S

ite2,

000,

000

$2,

000,

000

$-

$4,

000,

000

$2,

000,

000

$2,

000,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$4,

000,

000

$12

Cen

tral

Kitc

hen/

Com

mis

sary

at F

oste

r Site

45,0

00,0

00$

8,00

0,00

0$

-$

53,0

00,0

00$

50,0

00,0

00$

21,0

00,0

00$

-$

-$

-$

-$

71,0

00,0

00$

13Sc

hool

Kitc

hens

l &

210

,975

,000

$17

,800

,000

$-

$28

,775

,000

$7,

750,

000

$25

,000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$7,

775,

000

$14

Roo

seve

lt M

oder

niza

tion

(Des

ign

Onl

y)-

$1,

000,

000

$-

$1,

000,

000

$-

$1,

000,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$1,

000,

000

$Su

btot

al34

1,47

5,00

0$

40,8

00,0

00$

-$

382,

275,

000

$33

9,83

0,00

0$

46,8

25,0

00$

2,88

0,00

0$

38,1

00,0

00$

-$

-$

427,

635,

000

$

15Se

curit

y C

amer

a Pl

an (D

esig

n O

nly)

500,

000

$-

$-

$50

0,00

0$

500,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$50

0,00

0$

16Se

curit

y Im

prov

emen

t Dis

tric

t Wid

e2,

000,

000

$4,

000,

000

$-

$6,

000,

000

$2,

000,

000

$2,

000,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$4,

000,

000

$Su

btot

al2,

500,

000

$4,

000,

000

$-

$6,

500,

000

$2,

500,

000

$2,

000,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$4,

500,

000

$

17Pr

op 3

9 En

ergy

Effi

cien

cy8,

625,

000

$-

$-

$8,

625,

000

$8,

625,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$8,

625,

000

$18

Educ

atio

nal T

echn

olog

y2,

000,

000

$1,

000,

000

$-

$3,

000,

000

$2,

000,

000

$1,

000,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$3,

000,

000

$19

Tech

nolo

gy a

nd C

omm

on C

ore

7,20

0,00

0$

-$

-$

7,20

0,00

0$

7,20

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

7,20

0,00

0$

20Te

chno

logy

Infr

astr

uctu

re U

pgra

des

2,50

0,00

0$

2,50

0,00

0$

-$

5,00

0,00

0$

2,50

0,00

0$

2,50

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

5,00

0,00

0$

Subt

otal

20,3

25,0

00$

3,50

0,00

0$

-$

23,8

25,0

00$

20,3

25,0

00$

3,50

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

23,8

25,0

00$

21Pa

ving

and

Infr

astr

uctu

re6,

186,

496

$-

$-

$6,

186,

496

$5,

863,

066

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$5,

863,

066

$22

Bat

hroo

m R

enov

atio

ns8,

049,

489

$-

$-

$8,

049,

489

$2,

800,

000

$-

$1,

700,

000

$-

$-

$-

$4,

500,

000

$23

Roo

fing

Proj

ects

1,56

4,64

7$

-$

-$

1,56

4,64

7$

1,56

4,64

7$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

1,56

4,64

7$

24Fr

uitv

ale

ES B

leac

hers

/Res

troo

ms

1,00

0,00

0$

-$

-$

1,00

0,00

0$

912,

740

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$91

2,74

0$

25C

hild

Dev

elop

men

t Cen

ters

Impr

ovem

ents

- La

urel

3,50

0,00

0$

-$

-$

3,50

0,00

0$

3,50

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

3,50

0,00

0$

26B

oile

r Rep

lace

men

ts-

$-

$-

$-

$1,

500,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$1,

500,

000

$27

DSA

Leg

acy

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

550,

000

$-

$-

$-

$55

0,00

0$

29M

obile

Mod

ular

Leg

acy

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

204,

000

$-

$-

$-

$20

4,00

0$

30AD

A U

pgra

des

-$

-$

-$

-$

1,00

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

1,00

0,00

0$

31H

ealth

Clin

ics

- Oak

land

Tec

h2,

500,

000

$-

$50

0,00

0$

3,00

0,00

0$

300,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$30

0,00

0$

32Jo

aqui

n M

iller

ES

Play

stru

ctur

e80

,917

$-

$-

$80

,917

$80

,917

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$80

,917

$33

Cla

rem

ont M

S K

itche

n Fi

re1,

500,

000

$3,

500,

000

$-

$5,

000,

000

$-

$3,

000,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$3,

000,

000

$34

Scie

nce

Cla

ssro

oms

and

Labs

12,7

50,0

00$

-$

500,

000

$13

,250

,000

$3,

000,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$3,

000,

000

$35

Play

mat

ting

and

Play

stru

ctur

es9,

000,

000

$-

$-

$9,

000,

000

$3,

000,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$3,

000,

000

$36

Man

zani

ta E

S Pl

ay A

rea

200,

000

$-

$-

$20

0,00

0$

200,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$20

0,00

0$

37B

ella

Vis

ta E

S Po

rtab

le R

emov

al60

0,00

0$

-$

-$

600,

000

$57

3,99

8$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

573,

998

$38

Skyl

ine

HS

Gym

Roo

f45

0,00

0$

-$

-$

450,

000

$45

0,00

0$

-$

200,

000

$-

$-

$-

$65

0,00

0$

Subt

otal

47,3

81,5

49$

3,50

0,00

0$

1,00

0,00

0$

51,8

81,5

49$

24,7

45,3

68$

3,00

0,00

0$

2,65

4,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

30,3

99,3

68$

39a

Turf

Fie

ld R

epla

cem

ent -

Sky

line

HS

2,03

5,00

0$

-$

-$

2,03

5,00

0$

1,92

9,46

3$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

1,92

9,46

3$

39b

Turf

Fie

ld R

epla

cem

ent -

Oak

Tec

h H

S Fi

eld

-$

1,85

0,00

0$

-$

1,85

0,00

0$

-$

1,85

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

1,85

0,00

0$

39c

Turf

Fie

ld R

epla

cem

ent -

Cas

tlem

ont H

S &

McC

lym

onds

HS

2,70

0,00

0$

-$

-$

2,70

0,00

0$

2,40

0,00

0$

1,00

0,00

0$

2,00

0,00

0$

600,

000

$-

$-

$6,

000,

000

$41

Car

ter @

Oak

land

Inte

rnat

iona

l HS

Turf

Rep

lace

men

t2,

500,

000

$-

$-

$2,

500,

000

$1,

800,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$1,

800,

000

$41

Bur

bank

ES

Site

Impr

ovem

ents

2,55

0,00

0$

-$

-$

2,55

0,00

0$

2,07

8,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

2,07

8,00

0$

42Pa

rker

ES

Astr

o Tu

rf In

stal

latio

n1,

762,

493

$-

$-

$1,

762,

493

$1,

733,

860

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$1,

733,

860

$43

Scor

eboa

rd a

t Fie

lds

100,

000

$-

$-

$10

0,00

0$

89,2

50$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

89,2

50$

44M

iddl

e Sc

hool

Fie

lds

5,50

0,00

0$

3,95

0,00

0$

-$

9,45

0,00

0$

5,52

5,00

0$

2,92

5,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

8,45

0,00

0$

45Em

erso

n Fi

eld

2,00

0,00

0$

-$

-$

2,00

0,00

0$

2,00

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

2,00

0,00

0$

Subt

otal

19,1

47,4

93$

5,80

0,00

0$

-$

24,9

47,4

93$

17,5

55,5

73$

5,77

5,00

0$

2,00

0,00

0$

600,

000

$-

$-

$25

,930

,573

$46

Lead

Aba

tem

ent

-$

-$

-$

-$

2,30

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

2,30

0,00

0$

47B

ond

Prog

ram

Con

tinge

ncy

-$

6,90

0,00

0$

-$

6,90

0,00

0$

7,00

0,00

0$

2,90

0,00

0$

-$

-$

2,00

0,00

0$

2,50

0,00

0$

14,4

00,0

00$

48B

ond

Prog

ram

Coo

rdin

atio

n41

,670

,958

$50

0,00

0$

-$

42,1

70,9

58$

58,2

44,0

59$

1,00

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

-$

59,2

44,0

59$

49Fa

cilit

y M

aste

r Pla

n2,

500,

000

$-

$-

$2,

500,

000

$2,

500,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$-

$2,

500,

000

$50

Linc

oln

Wat

er In

trus

ion

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

-$

2,21

0,00

0$

-$

-$

-$

2,21

0,00

0$

51Pr

ior B

oard

App

rove

d Al

arm

Pro

ject

s-

$-

$8,

480,

000

$8,

480,

000

$-

$-

$-

$-

$7,

480,

000

$-

$7,

480,

000

$

475,

000,

000

$65

,000

,000

$9,

480,

000

$54

9,48

0,00

0$

475,

000,

000

$65

,000

,000

$9,

744,

000

$38

,700

,000

$9,

480,

000

$2,

500,

000

$60

0,42

4,00

0$

FACI

LITI

ES P

LAN

NIN

G &

MAN

AGEM

ENT

Aug

ust 1

6, 2

018

Mea

sure

B In

tere

stTO

TAL

New

Pro

pose

d Fu

ndin

g Pl

an -

Augu

st 2

018

Mea

sure

JM

easu

re B

$65

MM

easu

re B

Inte

rest

TOTA

LFu

nd 3

5Fu

nd 2

5M

easu

re J

Inte

rest

Fiel

d Pr

ojec

ts

All

Cap

ital R

esou

rces

- Su

mm

ary

of

chan

ges

Mod

erni

zatio

ns a

nd N

ew C

onst

ruct

ion

Secu

rity

Proj

ects

Ener

gy a

nd T

echn

olog

y

Oth

er C

apita

l Im

prov

emen

ts

Boar

d Ap

prov

ed -

June

201

7

Mea

sure

JM

easu

re B

$65

M

Dist

rict's

Cap

ital (

Faci

litie

s) P

rogr

am -

Revi

sed

Spen

ding

Pla

n - A

ugus

t 201

8Ex

hibi

t "A"

64

Exhibit G

September 12, 2018

Presiding Judge Wynne Carvill Alameda County Superior Court 1225 Fallon Street, Department One Oakland, California 94612

Cassie Barner c/o Alameda County Grand Jury 1401 Lakeside Drive, Suite 1104 Oakland, California 94612 RE: Response to 2017-2018 Civil Grand Jury Report, “Oakland Unified School District: Hard Choices Needed To Prevent Insolvency” Dear Presiding Judge Carvill and Foreperson Barner: The Oakland Unified School District (the “District”) submits its Responses to the Findings and Recommendations from the 2017-2018 Civil Grand Jury Report, “Oakland Unified School District: Hard Choices Needed To Prevent Insolvency.” The District appreciates the Jurors' commitment to their role, thoroughness, and diligence in analyzing and understanding many of the complex and critical issues facing the District. The Civil Grand Jury exemplified the effectiveness of a panel of citizens to objectively analyze a component of the District’s operations and to provide thoughtful insight and recommendations to the District. The District appreciates the opportunity to raise awareness of these challenges, receive the candid feedback, and implement the recommendations. The District disagreed with some of the narrative preceding the Findings and Recommendations. However, since these facts did not materially change the District’s response to the findings and recommendations, the District only noted a few of the factual inaccuracies relating to the School of Language and Rudsdale Academy in its response.

65

Presiding Judge Wynne Carvill Foreperson Cassie Barner RE: Response to 2017-2018 Civil Grand Jury Report, “Oakland Unified School District: Hard Choices Needed To Prevent Insolvency” September 12, 2018 Page 2 of 2

Notably, at the beginning of the Civil Grand Jury’s service, the District began new leadership under the esteemed Dr. Kyla Johnson-Trammell, an Oakland native and long-time educator in the District. Dr. Johnson-Trammell engaged immediately to build a trusted, experienced team of business and fiscal experts to advise and implement improvements. In addition, the Board passed numerous new fiscal policies to help ensure that District staff was implementing the recommendations of the Fiscal Crisis Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) and to prioritize rebuilding fiscal reserves. The Board also reinstituted its Budget and Finance Advisory Committee and increased Board trainings and the number of board meetings focused on fiscal and budget topics. Although the hurdles are significant, the District believes it is on its way toward implementing the recommendations of the Grand Jury and becoming a fiscally sustainable, quality educational institution with students who are prepared for college, career and community success.

Sincerely,

Aimee Eng President of the Board

AE:lf

Attachment: Response to 2017-2018 Civil Grand Jury Report, “Oakland Unified School District: Hard Choices Needed To Prevent Insolvency”

_______________________________________ 9/13/18Aimee EngPresident, Board of Education

______________________________________ 9/13/18Kyla R. Johnson-TrammellSecretary, Board of Education

Enactment No.: 18-1505

66

OAKLAND UNIFIED RESPONSE TO FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Finding 18-6: Staff and Board of Education efforts to circumvent established budgeting policies along with board efforts to interfere in the administrative responsibilities of the superintendent invite financial instability and contribute to Oakland Unified School District’s financial problems.

The District agrees with this finding with the clarification that it does not believe the efforts referenced in the finding are intentional. One component of the District’s theory of action is to maximize school site-based decision-making regarding staffing, finances, calendars, and programs. As a result, there are numerous board policies supporting each principal’s and particular school community’s fiscal and programmatic autonomy to best meet the needs of its school community. There is considerable research highlighting some of the advantages of this method of budgeting. See, e.g., Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy. (October 2012). Smart School Budgeting: Resources for Districts. Cambridge, MA: Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy. Some of the advantages for these budgeting policies are: “Those who best understand needs have the authority to make decisions. Provides greater control/ reporting of school-level data and greater school-level accountability. Staff/community given a voice, generating public support.” Id. On the other hand, however, these policies require substantial training and deeper understanding and attention to financial matters than alternative ways of budgeting. In a district with significant administrator turnover and deep instructional needs, these responsibilities can be challenging. Also, it can cause an otherwise “unified” system to have internal discord through numerous parts working separately on individualized goals and accountability.

Some of the Board’s legislative proposals relating to creation of personnel positions tended to focus upon development of positions that could assist the Board in fulfilling its role in overseeing the District’s budget at a time when the District’s financial department was understaffed. These positions were proposed in adherence to the Board’s Bylaws and, ultimately, were not adopted by the majority of the Board. The Board has engaged in numerous trainings over the last 15 months to improve its governance.

Finding 18-7: Oakland Unified School District’s inability to control overstaffing and poor position control decisions have contributed to the district’s financial instability.

The District agrees with this finding. The District’s largest fiscal expenditures are salary and salary-driven benefit costs. To drive school improvement, the District has focused

67

on increases resources to schools, often in the form of staffing. In 2017, $419.2 million, approximately 80% of the District’s budget, was spent on employee salaries and benefits. During the same time, the statutorily required pension benefits for District employees continued to rise an additional 2% from the prior year’s increase without additional funding allocated for such purposes. In addition to increasing costs, in 2017, the District’s staffing at schools and District-wide support positions (such as substitutes, school security, custodial, nutrition services, and special education staff), increased by 621 general fund positions while central office general fund positions decreased by 383.

This finding highlights the complexity of the District’s budget and enrollment patterns, and the pressure placed on specific school communities and the Board when the enrollment upon which school budgets were based changes. Each of the District’s eighty-seven schools gets its following school year’s budget allocation in the spring based on projected enrollment. Schools develop their staff assignments, class lists, and master bell schedule/ class offerings accordingly. After schools, school communities, and students are assigned to teachers, it is programmatically and politically difficult to make changes to staffing and scheduling after the school year begins and to adjust a school’s budget downward. Also, the District also often receives immigrant students, newcomers, and/or transfer students during the school year and need to ensure sufficient staffing to meet these late enrollment needs. Given teacher shortages and recruitment challenges, the District risks being unable to meet these needs if teachers are separated from employment based on enrollment in the first weeks of school. Unfortunately, the state funding model which is based on student attendance rather than the fixed costs of staffing classrooms disparately impacts districts like Oakland Unified that have large numbers of late enrollees and absenteeism due to chronic health conditions.

Finding 18-8: Lack of transparency related to Oakland Unified School District’s financial positions has led to mistrust between the district, the community, and labor organizations.

The District agrees in part with this finding but believes that other factors, including historical context in Oakland and negative media coverage of the District contribute to distrust even with greater access to information. Also, the District’s prior financial system, data management, and generation of reports were inconsistent and unreliable. One issue facing the District is how to best communicate complex fiscal information to a wide audience. For example, in January 2016, School Services of California and the District fiscal team presented information in the District’s public board meeting about the expectation of a slowdown in revenue as the Local Control Funding Formula “gap” funding started to narrow to only a cost of living increase while pensions costs were increasing; subsequent budget presentations continued to note this data. Yet, the complexity of the overall budget shielded awareness of this issue.

68

The District’s utilization of and access to data surpasses most other districts. All minutes, videos, and actions taken by the Board since 1999, including all budget presentations and all financial decisions impacting the District, are available in an easily searchable database on the District’s website at https://www.ousd.org/domain/67. In our analysis of other school districts, few have this level of transparency and accessibility. In addition, the District’s Research and Development department maintain data dashboards (www.ousddata.org) relating to student demographics, performance, discipline and attendance, teacher data, attendance patterns, accountability, wellness, climate and culture data, and post-secondary readiness data for use by the public. In spring 2016, the District also added comprehensive data dashboards of fiscal information that is viewable by school, department, resource, or expenditure type to analyze multiple years of fiscal data. (https://www.ousd.org/fiscaltransparency)

Finding 18-9: High turnover of key administrators has created an atmosphere of mistrust, destroying the continuity of the district’s educational mission, and crippling the district’s effectiveness in addressing its most pressing fiscal issues.

The District agrees with this finding. After the Board regained governance following state receivership, the District had five different Superintendents (two of which were interim superintendents) in nine years. Although the overall strategic plan, Community Schools, Thriving Students, has remained in place, each Superintendent’s initiatives and focal points within the plan have varied. Without clear leadership and focus, work within District departments and schools seemed less aligned and targeted. Similarly, during leadership transition, retention efforts of other key staff became more difficult which increased costs.

Moreover, superintendent turnover required the Board to spend significant time and energy on recruiting, selection, and vetting of superintendent candidates rather than other important work of the Board. However, the investment in the selection process for Superintendent Kyla Johnson-Trammell has helped position the District on a new trajectory. As an Oakland native and acclaimed educator in OUSD, Dr. Johnson-Trammell has begun to rebuild the trust of the community and staff and is poised to stabilize and lead the District toward its vision.

Finding 18-10: Financial instability and high staff turnover contribute to poor student performance.

The District agrees in part with this finding but qualifies its response based on the myriad of factors that may impact student performance. The District believes that inadequate educational funding, even if stable, detrimentally impacts student performance. For districts like Oakland Unified, where schools must serve a variety of student’s physical, mental, social, safety, linguistic, and academic needs, incremental

69

cost of living increases to educational funding that are insufficient to cover increasing mandated costs, will continue to contribute to poor student outcomes.

Relatedly, research data reflects that high teacher and administrator turnover negatively impacts student performance, and adequate funding is a component of retention, particularly in the context of the current teacher shortage.

Finding 18-11: Operating 86 schools is unsustainable and will lead the district to insolvency.

The District agrees with this finding in part. Assuming that all current conditions, including revenue, enrollment, class sizes, staffing levels, number of schools, and expenses, remain the same, the District will continue to operate at a fiscal deficit and will become insolvent. Reducing the number of District-operated schools is one way to reduce expenditures. However, from prior experiences, the District believes that to reduce potential loss of enrollment (and corresponding revenues) and creating unintended consequences, school consolidations need to be thoughtful and focused upon increasing quality options for all students. As reflected in a comprehensive independent study, Oakland Unified School District New Small Schools Initiative Evaluation by Ash Vasudeva, Linda Darling-Hammond, Stephen Newton & Kenneth Montgomery The School Redesign Network at Stanford University, the Oakland community has indicated previously that it values small schools and many small schools were regarded as successful. These perspectives and outcomes must be balanced with the District’s resources and commitment to a City-wide system of high-quality schools.

Alternatively, if the District increased enrollment or other revenue options, such as optimizing under-utilized property, or decreased expenses, the current school portfolio may be more sustainable. The Board, through its special committee on Fiscal Vitality, is currently exploring a variety of options and combinations of ways to eliminate the structural deficit.

Lastly, there are some factual inaccuracies in the report relating to Rudsdale Academy and the School of Language (SOL). Contrary to the report, Rudsdale Academy is not a new school. Rudsdale Academy is an alternative high school that opened in 2001, prior to that it operated as a continuation high school and prior to that it was a traditional high school. Although SOL was a new school in 2017-18, there was a great deal of strategic planning, development, and community outreach for years preceding the formal Board vote to open the school. Oakland SOL was added to the District’s portfolio of schools in order to build a PK-12 multilingual pathway in alignment with the district’s strategic plan to “implement strategies that accelerate academic achievement while closing the opportunity gap” (OUSD Pathway to Excellence, 2014) and create strong pathways and feeder patterns in every Oakland neighborhood (OUSD Superintendent’s 2016-17 Workplan). The English Language Learner and Multilingual Achievement (ELLMA) office and the Office of Continuous School Improvement supported the launch of Oakland SOL middle school as a critical component of growing equitable dual

70

language/bilingual pathways in furtherance of the District’s 2015-2018 plan for improving outcomes for English Language Learners (ELL Roadmap for Success 2015-2018). This lengthy planning process and alignment to the District’s strategic plan, particularly for underserved students, was not captured in the grand jury’s report.

Finding 18-12: Collaboration between traditional public schools and charter schools operating in the district benefit all students in Oakland Unified School District.

The District agrees with this finding in part. The District does not believe that expending precious, limited resources fighting with charter schools is beneficial to students living in Oakland. The District agrees that collaborating with charters about school quality standards, enrollment and feeder patterns, professional development, placement of programs, special education, governance, fiscal transparency, equity and innovation would be beneficial to students in Oakland. However, there are some areas in which District schools and Charter schools have divergent interests and differential standards imposed by the Education Code. For example, California Charter School Association, on behalf of its Oakland charter school member(s), initiated and is currently pursuing litigation against the District which the District is vigorously defending.

In spring 2018, the Board worked diligently to debate and discuss various issues relating to District and charter schools and the number of schools in Oakland. The discussions culminated in a robust, visionary, and collaborative new Board Policy 6006 System of Schools (attached). The work to build a City-wide plan for a coherent system of schools is ongoing and a retreat on the issue is anticipated for November 2018.

Recommendation 18-7: The Oakland Unified School District Board of Education must participate in governance training, emphasizing that they are policy makers, not day-to-day administrators.

This recommendation has been partially implemented. In 2017-18, the entire Governing Board engaged in numerous governance training retreats and special meetings with Ron Bennett of School Services of California (10/5/17), Barbara Anderson and Allan Alson through Panasonic Foundation (10/5/17, 1/20/18, 6/7/18), and Victor Carey of the National Equity Project (10/5/17). In addition, numerous individual board members engaged in individual professional development to assist them in their roles, including attending conferences of the Government Finance Officers Association, Council of Great City Schools, and California School Board Association. The Board has committed to ongoing governance training in the 2018-19 school year, including a

71

governance retreat/ new board member orientation planned for January 2019.

Recommendation 18-8: The Oakland Unified School District Board of Education members must communicate with district officials through the superintendent.

This recommendation has been partially implemented. In a Board Retreat in August 2018, the Superintendent and Board discussed communication protocols in which the Board would direct its communications through the Superintendent and her “CORE Team” of direct reports with a copy or summary to the Superintendent. The consensus of the Board agreed to such communication protocols, but the protocol has not been formally adopted in the Board’s Governance Handbook.

Recommendation 18-9: The Oakland Unified School District must establish a position control system that tracks staff allocation and spending, and better interfaces with payroll systems.

This recommendation has been partially implemented. In July 2018, the District transitioned to a new financial management system, “ESCAPE”, which is fully-integrated with and hosted on the Alameda County Office of Education’s servers. As a result, the District anticipates that it will have enhanced controls, data, uniformity, and support from the County. In addition, the District hired a new chief business officer, Marcus Battle, who has extensive business, finance, and systems experience. The District also hired a new Chief Financial Officer, Ofelia Roxas, who is a certified public accountant with experience in school districts and county offices of education. In addition to the ESCAPE implementation, the new business and operations team are in the process of updating fiscal policies and administrative regulations and identifying training needs of the District.

In 2017-18, the Board passed a new reserve policy to help prioritize its reserves and ensure that the District was not overspending in staffing and also passed a resolution to monitor implementation of FCMAT’s recommendations.

Recommendation 18-10: The Oakland Unified School District must provide school site administrators with comprehensive training regarding position control and budgetary policies.

This recommendation has been partially implemented. In connection with the transition to a financial management system, ESCAPE, school site administrators, school support personnel, and central office staff were offered a series of trainings (April - August

72

2018) on how to use the new system. ESCAPE includes multiple levels of approvals for hiring, budget modifications, and purchasing transactions; greater keying error and omission safeguards; and more real-time, accurate information for users and supervisors to ensure compliance with budgetary policies. In addition, business leaders are reviewing and updating board policies and administrative regulations to recommend potential updates and improvements. As new policies are developed and training gaps identified, additional trainings and/or support for school site administrators will be developed.

Recommendation 18-11: The Oakland Unified School District must not hire any new staff or institute any new program unless there is money in the budget beforehand to fund them.

This recommendation has been implemented. Beginning in January 2018, any contracts that were submitted to the Board for approval were required to have a funding source with sufficient funds identified. Similarly, no position can be posted without the fiscal team identifying the budget and corresponding position code in the budget and no employee can be hired and begin work without a designated funding source. The District anticipates ongoing support and oversight from the Alameda County Office of Education, FCMAT and its state trustee to review budgeting and spending.

Recommendation 18-12: The Oakland Unified School District must develop a transparent budget platform that better informs the Board of Education and the public regarding long-term consequences of financial decisions.

This recommendation has been partially implemented. The District has a comprehensive, customizable database of its budget and historical budgets available on its website at https://www.ousd.org/fiscaltransparency. In addition, the Board has appointed a special committee for Fiscal Vitality that is charged with, among other things, making recommendations to reduce the structural deficit. The special committee anticipates holding approximately fourteen meetings from August to December 2018 and is engaging community to build awareness and understanding and to exchange ideas for solutions. The meetings, like the District’s Board meetings, are recorded and available online.

Although the historical and current information is available online, there are fewer resources available for the public regarding the potential future consequences of the District’s structural deficit. The Board is looking for ways to engage a broader, more diverse cross-section of the Oakland community beyond standard board meetings.

73

Exhibit H

MemoTo Board of Education

From Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality Shanthi Gonzales, Chair Aimee Eng James Harris

Board Meeting Date November 14, 2018

Subject Resolution No. 1819-0013 Recommendations For 19/20 Budget Development and Prioritization from Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality

Action Requested and Recommendation

Approval by the Board of Education of Resolution No. 1819-0013 Recommendations For 19/20 Budget Development and Prioritization from Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality

Background and Discussion

The Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality has met over the fall to review key board policies and the Governance Theory of Action. The Committee created a set of recommendations for budget development and prioritization for the 19/20 school year and is asking the Board of Education to consider adopting the following key recommendations:

1. Implement BP 3150 2. Redesign the District 3. Competitive Employee Compensation 4. Commit to Shared Decision Making and Multi-Stakeholder Teams

Fiscal Impact Reductions of $30 million

Attachments • Resolution No. 1819-0013 Recommendations For 19/20 Budget Development and Prioritization from Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality

www.ousd.org

Board Office Use: Legislative File Info. File ID Number 18-2385 Introduction Date 11/14/18 Enactment Number 18-1787

Enactment Date 11/14/18 er

74

1

RESOLUTION

OF THE

BOARD OF EDUCATION

OF THE


NO. 1819-0013

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 19/20 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT AND PRIORITIZATION FROM

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISCAL VITALITY

WHEREAS, the OUSD Board of Education is committed to the fiscal solvency of our School District; and

WHEREAS, the Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality has met over the fall to review our key board policies and ground ourselves in our Governance Theory of Action; and

WHEREAS, our learning and deliberations as a Committee have informed a set of recommendations for budget development and prioritization for the 19-20 school year for the consideration of the Board of Education.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by March 1, 2019, the Board will identify and make ongoing reductions of ~$30 million (coupled with savings measures and efficiencies). These reductions should:

align with the District’s Theory of Action; Board Policies (BP 3150, BP 3625, BP 6005, BP

6006); and Resolutions on Fiscal Vitality (Resolutions 1819-0041, 1718-0197A, and 1718- 0087A).

show evidence that staff have incorporated feedback from the Fiscal Vitality Committee as well as key stakeholders and engagements, and

comply with the Board adopted “Guiding Principles Regarding Budget Development and Prioritization”(Dec. 2017)

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, In order to achieve our goals, the Committee is asking the Board to consider adopting the following key recommendations for implementation in 2019-20.

1. Implement BP 3150. In establishing budget priorities and reductions for school year

2019-20, apply BP 3150's allocation scheme, including restricting Central District-wide Administrative costs to 12% of general unrestricted revenues. Our expectation is that the number of school- and district-level administrators – particularly classified

75

2

administrators -- will be significantly reduced to be more in line with comparable districts and that resources to school sites will be maximized.

2. Redesign the District. Many centrally funded and managed initiatives are not aligned to existing Board Policies. The Committee recommends we use BP 3150, BP 3625, BP 6005, and BP 6006, and a zero-based budgeting approach to guide the restructuring of the District, and eliminate initiatives and programs that do not show evidence to support the rapid acceleration of students’ academic outcomes and improved social emotional well-being. The District’s Theory of Action states that the District will operate a “central office and the number and type of schools that we can sustain over time.” The redesign process will include reimagining how the central office is currently organized and identifying strategies to reduce the total number of schools the District operates.

3. Competitive Employee Compensation. Prioritize funds to enable the District to remain

competitive in teacher compensation. Pursue and invest in strategies that show evidence of increasing teacher and leader retention. In order to do this, we recognize the need to reprioritize current investments in order to reallocate dollars.

4. Commit to Shared Decision Making and Multi-Stakeholder Teams. Direct

Superintendent to form consult a multi-stakeholder leadership team which includes site-based leaders (including students, families, teachers, classified staff, principals, and central staff) to provide input, accelerate the work and ensure quality and equity remain central pillars in the District’s redesign process. This committeeThe consultations will meet take place between December 2018 and March 2019.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of November, 2018, at a Regular Meeting of the Governing Board by the following vote:


PREFERENTIAL NO: None


PREFERENTIAL RECUSE: None

AYES: Jody London, Shanthi Gonzales, James Harris, Aimee Eng

NOES: Jumoke Hinton Hodge

ABSTAINED: None

RECUSE: None

ABSENT: Rose Ann Torres Yota Omosowho (Student Director) Josue Chavez (Student Director)

763

CERTIFICATION

We hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Resolution passed at a Regular Meeting of the Board of Education of the Oakland Unified School District, held on November 14, 2018.


Aimee Eng President, Board of Education

Kyla Johnson-Trammell Superintendent and Secretary, Board of Education

Legislative File Info. File ID Number: 18-2385

Introduction Date: 11/8/18Enactment Number: 18-1787

Enactment Date: 11/14/18 er

77


From Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality Shanthi Gonzales, Chair Aimee Eng James Harris

Board Meeting Date November 14, 2018

Subject Resolution No. 1819-0013 Recommendations For 19/20 Budget Development and Prioritization from Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality


Approval by the Board of Education of Resolution No. 1819-0013 Recommendations For 19/20 Budget Development and Prioritization from Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality


The Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality has met over the fall to review key board policies and the Governance Theory of Action. The Committee created a set of recommendations for budget development and prioritization for the 19/20 school year and is asking the Board of Education to consider adopting the following key recommendations:

1. Implement BP 3150 2. Redesign the District 3. Competitive Employee Compensation 4. Commit to Shared Decision Making and Multi-Stakeholder Teams

Fiscal Impact Reductions of $30 million

Attachments • Resolution No. 1819-0013 Recommendations For 19/20 Budget Development and Prioritization from Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality

www.ousd.org

Board Office Use: Legislative File Info. File ID Number 18-2385 Introduction Date 11/14/18 Enactment Number 18-1787

Enactment Date 11/14/18 er

78

1

RESOLUTION

OF THE

BOARD OF EDUCATION

OF THE


NO. 1819-0013

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 19/20 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT AND PRIORITIZATION FROM

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FISCAL VITALITY

WHEREAS, the OUSD Board of Education is committed to the fiscal solvency of our School District; and

WHEREAS, the Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality has met over the fall to review our key board policies and ground ourselves in our Governance Theory of Action; and

WHEREAS, our learning and deliberations as a Committee have informed a set of recommendations for budget development and prioritization for the 19-20 school year for the consideration of the Board of Education.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by March 1, 2019, the Board will identify and make ongoing reductions of ~$30 million (coupled with savings measures and efficiencies). These reductions should:

align with the District’s Theory of Action; Board Policies (BP 3150, BP 3625, BP 6005, BP

6006); and Resolutions on Fiscal Vitality (Resolutions 1819-0041, 1718-0197A, and 1718- 0087A).

show evidence that staff have incorporated feedback from the Fiscal Vitality Committee as well as key stakeholders and engagements, and

comply with the Board adopted “Guiding Principles Regarding Budget Development and Prioritization”(Dec. 2017)

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, In order to achieve our goals, the Committee is asking the Board to consider adopting the following key recommendations for implementation in 2019-20.

1. Implement BP 3150. In establishing budget priorities and reductions for school year

2019-20, apply BP 3150's allocation scheme, including restricting Central District-wide Administrative costs to 12% of general unrestricted revenues. Our expectation is that the number of school- and district-level administrators – particularly classified

79

2

administrators -- will be significantly reduced to be more in line with comparable districts and that resources to school sites will be maximized.

2. Redesign the District. Many centrally funded and managed initiatives are not aligned to existing Board Policies. The Committee recommends we use BP 3150, BP 3625, BP 6005, and BP 6006, and a zero-based budgeting approach to guide the restructuring of the District, and eliminate initiatives and programs that do not show evidence to support the rapid acceleration of students’ academic outcomes and improved social emotional well-being. The District’s Theory of Action states that the District will operate a “central office and the number and type of schools that we can sustain over time.” The redesign process will include reimagining how the central office is currently organized and identifying strategies to reduce the total number of schools the District operates.

3. Competitive Employee Compensation. Prioritize funds to enable the District to remain

competitive in teacher compensation. Pursue and invest in strategies that show evidence of increasing teacher and leader retention. In order to do this, we recognize the need to reprioritize current investments in order to reallocate dollars.

4. Commit to Shared Decision Making and Multi-Stakeholder Teams. Direct

Superintendent to consult a multi-stakeholder leadership team which includes site-based leaders (including students, families, teachers, classified staff, principals, and central staff) to provide input, accelerate the work and ensure quality and equity remain central pillars in the District’s redesign process. The consultations will take place between December 2018 and March 2019.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of November, 2018, at a Regular Meeting of the Governing Board by the following vote:


PREFERENTIAL NO: None



AYES: Jody London, Shanthi Gonzales, James Harris, Aimee Eng

NOES: Jumoke Hinton Hodge

ABSTAINED: None

RECUSE: None

ABSENT: Rose Ann Torres Yota Omosowho (Student Director) Josue Chavez (Student Director)

80

3

CERTIFICATION

We hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Resolution passed at a Regular Meeting of the Board of Education of the Oakland Unified School District, held on November 14, 2018.


Aimee Eng President, Board of Education

Kyla Johnson-Trammell Superintendent and Secretary, Board of Education

Legislative File Info. File ID Number: 18-2385

Introduction Date: 11/8/18Enactment Number: 18-1787

Enactment Date: 11/14/18 er

81

Exhibit I

Com

mun

ity o

f Sch

ools

City

wid

e Pl

an:

Tow

ard

a Ci

tyw

ide

Map

Nove

mbe

r 14,

201

8Ky

la Jo

hnso

n-Tr

amm

ell,

Supe

rinte

nden

tSo

ndra

Agu

ilera

, Dep

uty

Chie

f, Co

ntin

uous

Sch

ool I

mpr

ovem

ent

82

Our V

ision

And

Miss

ion

Grou

nd U

sVi

sion:

All O

USD

stud

ents

will

find

joy

in th

eir a

cade

mic

lear

ning

exp

erie

nce

whi

le g

radu

atin

g w

ith th

e sk

ills t

o en

sure

they

are

carin

g, co

mpe

tent

, fu

lly-in

form

ed, c

ritica

l thi

nker

s who

are

pr

epar

ed fo

r col

lege

, car

eer,

and

com

mun

ity su

cces

s.

Miss

ion:

To b

ecom

e a

Full

Serv

ice

Com

mun

ity D

istric

tfoc

used

on

high

ac

adem

ic ac

hiev

emen

t whi

le se

rvin

g th

e w

hole

child

, elim

inat

ing

ineq

uity

, and

pr

ovid

ing

each

child

with

exc

elle

nt

teac

hers

, eve

ry d

ay.

Key P

rincip

les:

Qual

ity, E

quity

, Ac

cess

and

Fisc

al Su

stai

nabi

lity

2

83

Wha

t we

are

tryi

ng to

solv

e in

ord

er to

reac

h ou

r miss

ion

and

visio

n?Fi

scal

Vita

lity &

Sus

tain

abili

ty

We

need

few

er, b

ette

r res

ourc

ed sc

hool

s with

larg

er e

nrol

lmen

t

Qual

ity &

Equ

ity

We

need

bet

ter q

ualit

y pr

ogra

ms i

n ev

ery

neig

hbor

hood

for e

very

st

uden

t

Equi

ty &

Acc

ess

W

e n

eed

acce

ss to

qua

lity

scho

ols c

lose

r to

hom

e

We

need

regi

onal

feed

er p

atte

rns f

rom

pre

-K th

roug

h hi

gh sc

hool

3

84

Com

mun

ity o

f Sch

ools

Polic

y (B

P 60

06)

A Ci

tyw

ide

Plan

grou

nded

in p

olicy

: Ass

et M

anag

emen

t, Ch

arte

r Aut

horiz

atio

n, E

nrol

lmen

t, Eq

uity

, Res

ults

Bas

ed B

udge

ting,

Sch

ool G

over

nanc

e, a

nd Q

ualit

y Sch

ool D

evel

opm

ent

Defin

ed A

uton

omie

sE

Best

supp

ort c

ontin

ued

inno

vatio

nw

ithin

OUS

D sc

hool

s and

ac

cele

rate

the

num

ber o

f hig

h-qu

ality

scho

ol o

ptio

ns w

ithin

OU

SD

Acce

ss to

Equ

itabl

e &

Qua

lity

Educ

atio

n fo

r all

DSh

are

best

pra

ctice

s acr

oss a

ll Oa

klan

d pu

blics

scho

ols,

(e.g

., pr

ofes

siona

l dev

elop

men

t, re

crui

tmen

t and

rete

ntio

n of

ed

ucat

ors)

that

impr

ove

equi

tabl

e ed

ucat

iona

l acc

ess f

or a

ll Oa

klan

d st

uden

ts.

Char

ter A

utho

rizat

ion

CSt

reng

then

our

role

in o

vers

ight

and

acc

ount

abili

tyto

ens

ure

that

all

char

ter s

choo

ls op

erat

ing

in O

akla

nd a

re p

rovi

ding

a h

igh

qual

ity e

duca

tion

and

wor

king

to a

ddre

ss in

equi

ties.

Facil

ities

ABe

st le

vera

ge v

acan

t, un

deru

tilize

d, a

nd su

rplu

s pro

pert

iesa

nd

utili

ze fa

cility

use

agr

eem

ents

to st

rate

gica

lly e

ngag

e al

l Oak

land

pu

blic

scho

ols-

dist

rict o

r cha

rter

; ide

ntify

hig

h qu

ality

opt

ions

for

acad

emic

prog

ram

s

Enro

llmen

t & T

rans

port

atio

nB

Wor

k w

ith a

ll Oa

klan

d pu

blic

scho

ols d

istric

t or c

hart

er -

to

bett

er a

rticu

late

feed

er p

atte

rnsa

cros

s Oak

land

to e

nsur

e m

ore

pred

ictab

ility

for f

amili

es.

4

85

Com

mun

ity o

f Sch

ools:

A C

ityw

ide

Plan

Blue

prin

t for

Qu

ality

Scho

ols

Appr

ove

Coho

rt 2

in

May

Facil

ities

M

aste

r Pla

nUp

date

fa

ciliti

es d

ata

and

plan

for

port

able

re

mov

al b

y Ju

neCh

arte

r Pa

rtne

rshi

psId

entif

y Lo

ng T

erm

Le

ase

Crite

ria b

y De

cem

ber

Enro

llmen

t/Fe

eder

Pat

tern

sId

entif

y fe

eder

pat

tern

s and

en

rollm

ent p

lan

in 2

019

An In

terc

onne

cted

Com

preh

ensiv

e St

rate

gy

Facil

ities

Ass

ets-

Surp

lus P

rope

rty

7-11

Com

mitt

ee to

de

clare

surp

lus

prop

erty

by

June

5 Ye

ar C

ityw

ide

Map

Qual

ity Sc

hool

St

anda

rds &

De

fined

Au

tono

mie

sUp

date

exis

ting

guid

ance

doc

umen

ts

by Ju

ne

5

86

Outc

omes

for T

oday

1) T

o de

fine

the

timel

ine

for t

he o

vera

ll Ci

tyw

ide

Plan

, inc

ludi

ng a

ll co

mpo

nent

s in

dica

ted

in th

e Co

mm

unity

of S

choo

ls Po

licy

2) T

oday

’s Up

date

: Foc

us o

n th

e De

velo

pmen

t of C

ityw

ide

Map

De

fine

wha

t will

be

inclu

ded

in th

e Ci

tyw

ide

Map

to b

e ap

prov

ed in

Fe

brua

ry

De

velo

p a

shar

ed u

nder

stan

ding

of t

he a

naly

ses c

ondu

cted

thus

far

tow

ard

crea

ting

a Ci

tyw

ide

Map

6

87

Tim

elin

e of

Key

Boa

rd E

ngag

emen

ts fo

r the

City

wid

e Pl

an

Blue

prin

t Coh

ort 1

: M

et W

est E

xpan

sion

Appr

oval

Crite

ria fo

r Lo

ng T

erm

Le

ases

for

Char

ters

City

wid

e M

ap:

Data

Ana

lyse

s to

info

rm fi

nal

prod

uct

Asse

t Man

agem

ent

& F

acili

ties M

aste

r Pl

an U

pdat

e

City

wid

e (F

ootp

rint)

Map

(fi

rst r

ead)

Blue

prin

t Coh

ort 1

& 2

Up

date

(pre

view

)

Blue

prin

t Coh

ort 2

Pr

opos

al D

eep

Dive

(with

fis

cal i

mpa

ct a

naly

sis)

Blue

prin

t Coh

ort 2

(a

ppro

val),

Ass

et

Man

agem

ent &

Fac

ilitie

s M

aste

r Pla

n (a

ppro

val)

Sept

. 26,

201

8

Nov.

14, 2

018

Dec.

5, 2

018

Stud

y Se

ssio

n

Feb.

13,

201

9

Feb.

27,

201

9

April

24,

201

9

May

22,

201

9

Com

mun

ity E

ngag

emen

t & C

omm

unica

tion

with

Sta

keho

lder

s

7

April

17,

201

9St

udy

Sess

ion

City

wid

e M

ap

(app

rova

l)De

fined

Aut

onom

ies

(pre

view

)

Asse

t M

anag

emen

t Re

trea

t Sept

. 8, 2

018

88

Tow

ard

Defin

ing

the

City

wid

e M

ap

5 Ye

ar

City

wid

e M

ap

Wha

t will

be

inclu

ded

in th

e fin

al C

ityw

ide

Map

to b

e ap

prov

ed in

Fe

brua

ry?

-Nu

mbe

r and

loca

tions

of d

istric

t-run

scho

ols

Trad

ition

al sc

hool

s, al

tern

ativ

e sc

hool

s, sp

ecia

lized

scho

ols s

uch

as

dual

lang

uage

pro

gram

s-

OUSD

ear

ly ch

ildho

od e

duca

tion

(pre

-K) l

ocat

ions

-OU

SD S

pecia

l Edu

catio

n pr

ogra

ms

-Ch

arte

r sch

ool l

ocat

ions

-Nu

mbe

r and

loca

tion

of su

rplu

s pro

pert

ies

Wha

t will

be

inclu

ded

in th

e to

day’

s upd

ate

on th

e de

velo

pmen

t of t

he

City

wid

e M

ap?

-Tw

o in

itial

ana

lyse

s con

duct

ed to

info

rm th

e de

velo

pmen

t of t

he

City

wid

e Pl

an

8

89

Over

view

of I

nitia

l Ana

lyse

s

Wha

t is t

he m

inim

um n

umbe

r of

scho

ols w

e ne

ed b

ased

on

whe

re

stud

ents

GO

to sc

hool

and

the

seat

capa

city

of o

ur e

xistin

g fa

ciliti

es?

Whe

re a

re th

e op

timal

loca

tions

for

scho

ols b

ased

on

whe

re st

uden

ts

LIVE,

and

how

far a

way

are

our

ex

istin

g fa

ciliti

es?

1. Fa

cility

Cap

acity

Ana

lysis

2. Lo

catio

n Al

loca

tion

Anal

ysis

Note

: Res

ults

are

subj

ect t

o ch

ange

with

add

ition

al re

visio

n, a

nd d

o no

t re

pres

ent a

conc

lusio

n or

fina

l ans

wer

.

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

sLo

catio

n An

alys

is

9

90

Wha

t it i

s… W

hat i

t isn

’t ...

Thes

e tw

o an

alys

es ..

.

…

are

the

first

in a

serie

scon

trib

utin

g to

a C

ityw

ide

Map

.

…

are

sole

ly b

ased

on

anal

ysis

of d

istric

t-run

scho

ols.

...

are

not

iden

tifyi

ng w

hich

or h

ow m

any

sites

to cl

ose

or co

nsol

idat

e.

… a

re n

otye

t inc

ludi

ng a

ltern

ativ

e ed

ucat

ion,

spec

ial e

duca

tion

prog

ram

s, sc

hool

s with

spec

ializ

ed p

rogr

ams,

char

ter s

choo

ls; d

ata

on p

rogr

am ty

pe o

r qu

ality

, fac

ility

cond

ition

s; or

surp

lus p

rope

rty.

The

se co

nsid

erat

ions

will

be

addr

esse

d in

subs

eque

nt a

naly

ses i

n de

velo

pmen

t of t

he C

ityw

ide

Map

for

2023

and

bey

ond.

…

are

pre

limin

ary

and

may

chan

ge w

ith fu

rthe

r ite

ratio

ns.

10

91

Tow

ard

a Ci

tyw

ide

Map

Proj

ecte

d En

rollm

ent v

s. Fa

cility

Cap

acity

An

alys

is

Offic

e of

Enr

ollm

ent &

Res

earc

h As

sess

men

t & D

ata

(RAD

)Na

na X

u, S

usan

Rad

ke, K

aia

Vilb

erg,

and

Jean

Win

g

10-2

018

Part

1

Wha

t is t

he m

inim

um n

umbe

rof s

choo

lsw

e ne

ed b

ased

on

whe

re

stud

ents

GO

to sc

hool

and

the

seat

capa

city

of o

ur e

xistin

g fa

ciliti

es?

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

92

How

was

the

anal

ysis

cond

ucte

d?

Note

: Spe

cializ

ed sc

hool

s are

not

inclu

ded

here

and

will

be

cons

ider

ed in

sepa

rate

ana

lyse

s. Th

is an

alys

is al

so d

oes n

ot in

clude

dat

a on

cha

rter

scho

ols.

This

anal

ysis

assu

mes

that

at l

east

1

trad

ition

al e

lem

enta

ry, m

iddl

e, a

nd h

igh

scho

ol w

ill b

e ne

eded

in e

ach

regi

on.

With

in e

ach

of 5

Str

ateg

ic Re

gion

al A

naly

sis (S

RA) R

egio

ns, c

ompa

re:

# st

uden

ts e

xpec

ted*

to

atte

nd O

USD

scho

olsi

n ea

ch

regi

on in

202

3vs

.#

seat

s in

scho

ol fa

ciliti

es

in e

ach

regi

onCap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

*Pro

ject

ed e

nrol

lmen

t num

bers

wer

e pr

ovid

ed b

y Ja

cobs

/Coo

pera

tive

Stra

tegi

es. S

ee a

ppen

dix

for m

ore

info

rmat

ion.

12

93

Stra

tegi

c Reg

iona

l Ana

lysis

(SRA

) Reg

ions

Cen

tral

East

Nor

thea

st

Nor

thw

est

Wes

t

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

13

94

Curr

ently

, the

cent

ral r

egio

n ha

s*

7

elem

enta

ry sc

hool

s

1 K-

8 sc

hool

s

1 m

iddl

e sc

hool

1

high

scho

ol

CENT

RAL R

egio

nC

apac

ity A

naly

sis

*Dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

s onl

y

14

95

CENT

RAL E

lem

enta

ry &

K-8

The

tabl

e sh

ows t

he p

roje

cted

# st

uden

ts in

202

3, th

e se

at ca

pacit

y of e

ach

scho

ol, a

nd th

e su

rplu

s/sh

orta

ge (c

alcu

late

d by

com

parin

g #

stud

ents

with

# se

ats)

.

#Sc

hool

Nam

eTy

pePr

ojec

tion

Facil

ity

Capa

city*

Surp

lus/

Shor

tage

1Be

lla V

ista

K-5

413

479

66

2Cl

evel

and

K-5

397

410

13

3Fr

ankl

inK-

567

192

225

1

4Ga

rfiel

dK-

557

474

717

3

5Lin

coln

K-5

705

779

746 7

Man

zani

ta C

omm

unity

/M

anza

nita

SEE

DK-

5K-

549

441

21,

016

110

8La

Esc

uelit

aK-

846

854

274

Tota

l4,

134

4,89

576

1

*Fac

ility

capa

city

incl

udes

sea

ts in

bot

h te

mpo

rary

and

per

man

ent f

acilit

ies.

We

coul

d su

ppor

t K-5

and

K-8

pr

ojec

ted

enro

llmen

t with

up

to 1

fe

wer

OUSD

dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

.

We

coul

d al

so co

nsol

idat

e 1

shar

ed

elem

enta

ry ca

mpu

s in

the

regi

on.

K-5

+ K-

8 su

rplu

s =76

1 se

ats

15

Tota

l Red

uctio

n up

to 2

sc

hool

sCap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

96

CENT

RAL M

iddl

e &

Hig

h

#Sc

hool

Na

me

Type

Proj

ectio

nFa

cility

Ca

pacit

y*Su

rplu

s/

Shor

tage

1Ro

osev

elt

Mid

dle

506

607*

*10

1

*Fac

ility

capa

city

incl

udes

sea

ts in

bot

h te

mpo

rary

and

per

man

ent f

acilit

ies.

**P

orta

bles

that

will

be re

mov

ed in

sum

mer

201

9 ha

ve b

een

subt

ract

ed fr

om th

e to

tal

capa

city

her

e.

#Sc

hool

Nam

eTy

pePr

ojec

tion

Facil

ity

Capa

city*

Surp

lus/

Sh

orta

ge

1Oa

klan

d Hi

ghHi

gh1,

525

1,43

2-9

3

The

curr

ent m

iddl

e sc

hool

is la

rge

enou

gh to

supp

ort t

he p

roje

cted

enr

ollm

ent f

or th

e re

gion

. Pr

ojec

tions

for t

he h

igh

scho

ol e

xcee

d th

e cu

rren

t fac

ility

capa

city.

Mid

dle

scho

ol su

rplu

s =

101

seat

s

16

High

scho

ol sh

orta

ge =

93

seat

s

The

tabl

e sh

ows t

he p

roje

cted

# st

uden

ts in

202

3, th

e se

at ca

pacit

y of e

ach

scho

ol, a

nd th

e su

rplu

s/sh

orta

ge (c

alcu

late

d by

com

parin

g #

stud

ents

with

# se

ats)

.

Tota

l Red

uctio

n of

0 sc

hool

s

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

97

EAST

Reg

ion

Curr

ently

, the

Eas

t reg

ion

has*

20

ele

men

tary

scho

ols

2

K-8

scho

ols

7

mid

dle

scho

ols

3

6-12

scho

ols

2

high

scho

ols

17

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

*Dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

s onl

y

98

EAST

Elem

enta

ry a

nd K

-8

*Fac

ility

cap

acity

incl

udes

sea

ts in

bot

h te

mpo

rary

and

per

man

ent f

acili

ties.

**

Faci

lity

capa

city

exc

lude

s se

ats

that

use

d by

a c

o-lo

cate

d ch

arte

r sch

ool a

t the

tim

e of

ass

essm

ent.

Co-

loca

ted

char

ter e

nrol

lmen

t not

incl

uded

in p

roje

ctio

n to

tal.

#Sc

hool

Nam

eTy

pePr

ojec

tion

Facil

ity

Capa

city*

Surp

lus/

Sh

orta

ge1

Alle

ndal

eK-

536

556

019

52

Brid

ges

K-5

443

604

161

3Br

ookf

ield

K-5

276

560

284

4 5Co

mm

unity

Uni

ted/

Fu

ture

sK-

5K-

532

827

591

431

1

6Ea

st O

akla

nd P

RIDE

K-5

309

574

265

7 8En

com

pass

/ AC

ORN

Woo

dlan

dK-

5K-

529

930

680

620

1

9 10Es

pera

nza/

Ko

rem

atsu

K-5

K-5

341

353

784

90

11Fr

uitv

ale

K-5

387

600

213

12Gl

obal

Fam

ily/L

WL*

*K-

544

459

515

113

Hora

ce M

ann

K-5

335

433

9814

Mad

ison

Park

K-5

312

502

190

15M

arkh

amK-

531

659

628

016 17

New

Hig

hlan

d/RI

SEK-

5K-

534

323

592

034

2

18Re

ach/

Cox*

*K-

537

762

524

819 20

Thin

k Co

llege

Now

/ In

tern

atio

nal C

omm

unity

K-5

K-5

276

253

838

309

21Gr

eenl

eaf

K-8

578

456

-122

22M

elro

se L

eade

rshi

pK-

869

647

6-2

20To

tal

7,84

710

,843

2,99

6

18

We

coul

d su

ppor

t K-5

and

K-8

pro

ject

ed

enro

llmen

t with

up

to 6

few

erOU

SD

dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

s.

We

coul

d al

so co

nsol

idat

e 5

shar

ed

cam

pus O

USD

elem

enta

ry sc

hool

s in

the

regi

on.

K-5

+ K-

8 su

rplu

s =2,

996

seat

s

Tota

l Red

uctio

n up

to 1

1 sc

hool

s

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

99

EAST

Mid

dle

& 6

-12

We

coul

d su

ppor

t pro

ject

ed

enro

llmen

t with

up

to 2

few

erOU

SD d

istric

t-run

mid

dle

scho

ols.

We

coul

d al

so co

nsol

idat

e 3

shar

ed

cam

puse

s.

#Sc

hool

Nam

eTy

pePr

ojec

tion

Facil

ity

Capa

city*

Surp

lus/

Sh

orta

ge1 2

Allia

nce/

Elm

hurs

tM

iddl

eM

iddl

e31

736

486

918

8

3Fr

ickM

iddl

e23

667

644

04

Oakl

and

SOL

Mid

dle

225

238

135 6

Root

s/CC

PA**

Mid

dle/

6-12

324

456

1097

317

7 8Un

ited

for S

ucce

ss/

Life

Acad

emy*

*M

iddl

e/6-

1234

446

410

1921

1

9Ur

ban

Prom

iseM

iddl

e35

042

878

10M

adiso

n Pa

rk U

pper

6-12

727

606

-121

Tota

l3,

807

4,93

31,

126

**No

te th

at C

CPA

and

Life

are

6-12

gra

desp

an sc

hool

s tha

t sha

re ca

mpu

ses w

ith m

iddl

e sc

hool

s.

*Fac

ility

capa

city

incl

udes

seat

s in

both

tem

pora

ry a

nd p

erm

anen

t fac

ilitie

s. **

Note

that

CCP

A an

d Lif

e ar

e 6-

12 g

rade

span

scho

ols t

hat s

hare

cam

puse

s with

mid

dle

scho

ols.

19

Mid

dle

& 6

-12

surp

lus =

1,12

6 se

ats

Tota

l Red

uctio

n up

to 5

sc

hool

sCap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

100

EAST

Hig

h Sc

hool

s

*Fac

ility

capa

city

incl

udes

sea

ts in

bot

h te

mpo

rary

and

per

man

ent f

acilit

ies.

**

The

new

faci

lity

is p

lann

ed to

hou

se 1

,200

stu

dent

s so

that

# is

sho

wn

here

.

#Sc

hool

Na

me

Type

Proj

ectio

nFa

cility

Ca

pacit

y*Su

rplu

s/

Shor

tage

1Ca

stle

mon

tHi

gh83

31,

603

770

2Fr

emon

tHi

gh71

41,

200*

*48

6

Tota

l1,

547

2,80

41,

257

20

We

coul

d su

ppor

t pro

ject

ed

enro

llmen

t with

up

to 1

few

erOU

SD d

istric

t-run

hig

h sc

hool

.

High

Sch

ool s

urpl

us =

1,25

7 se

ats

Tota

l Red

uctio

n up

to 1

sc

hool

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

101

NORT

HEAS

T Re

gion

Curr

ently

, the

Nor

thea

st re

gion

ha

s* 7

elem

enta

ry sc

hool

s

1 K-

8 sc

hool

1

mid

dle

scho

ol

1

high

scho

ol

21

*Dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

s onl

y

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

102

NORT

HEAS

T El

emen

tary

& K

-8

#Sc

hool

Type

Proj

ectio

nFa

cility

Ca

pacit

y*Su

rplu

s/

Shor

tage

1Bu

rckh

alte

rK-

524

137

413

32

Carl

Mun

ckK-

518

853

835

03

Gras

s Val

ley

K-5

243

467

224

4Ho

war

dK-

522

040

718

75

Laur

elK-

548

056

181

6Re

dwoo

d He

ight

sK-

532

541

186

7Se

quoi

aK-

544

444

73

8Pa

rker

K-8

227

479

252

Tota

l2,

368

3,68

41,

316

*Fac

ility

capa

city

incl

udes

sea

ts in

bot

h te

mpo

rary

and

per

man

ent f

acilit

ies.

22

We

coul

d su

ppor

t K-5

and

K-8

pro

ject

ed

enro

llmen

t with

up

to 3

few

erOU

SD

dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

s.

K-5

+ K-

8 su

rplu

s =1,

316

seat

s

Tota

l Red

uctio

n up

to 3

sc

hool

sCap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

103

NORT

HEAS

T M

iddl

e &

Hig

hFa

cility

capa

city

is sh

own

belo

w b

y sc

hool

type

. Fiv

e ye

ar p

roje

ctio

ns fo

r the

regi

on a

re a

lso sh

own.

#Sc

hool

Na

me

Type

Proj

ectio

nFa

cility

Ca

pacit

y*Su

rplu

s/

Shor

tage

1Br

et H

arte

Mid

dle

489

863

374

*Fac

ility

capa

city

incl

udes

sea

ts in

bot

h te

mpo

rary

and

per

man

ent f

acilit

ies.

#Sc

hool

Na

me

Type

Proj

ectio

nFa

cility

Ca

pacit

y*Su

rplu

s/

Shor

tage

1Sk

ylin

eHi

gh1,

687

1,90

922

2

23

Both

the

curr

ent m

iddl

e an

d hi

gh sc

hool

s are

larg

e en

ough

to su

ppor

t the

pro

ject

ed e

nrol

lmen

t fo

r the

regi

on.

Mid

dle

scho

ol su

rplu

s =

374

seat

s

High

scho

ol su

rplu

s =

222

seat

s

Tota

l Red

uctio

n of

0 sc

hool

s

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

104

NORT

HWES

T Re

gion

Curr

ently

, the

Nor

thw

est

regi

on h

as*

10

ele

men

tary

scho

ols

1

K-8

scho

ol

3 m

iddl

e sc

hool

s

1 hi

gh sc

hool

24

*Dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

s onl

y

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

Gle

nvie

w

105

NORT

HWES

T El

emen

tary

& K

-8

#Sc

hool

Nam

eTy

pePr

ojec

tion

Facil

ity

Capa

city*

Surp

lus/

Sh

orta

ge1

Chab

otK-

554

059

454

2Cr

ocke

r Hig

hlan

dsK-

544

133

4-1

073

Emer

son

K-5

324

444

120

4Gl

envi

ew**

K-5

489

460

-29

5Jo

aqui

n M

iller

K-5

411

470

596

Kaise

rK-

525

528

328

7M

ontc

lair

K-5

691

616

-75

8Pe

ralta

K-5

301

356

559

Pied

mon

t Ave

K-5

312

414

102

10Th

ornh

illK-

538

547

691

11Hi

llcre

stK-

837

335

2-2

1To

tal

4,52

24,

799

277

*Fac

ility

capa

city

incl

udes

seat

s in

both

tem

pora

ry a

nd p

erm

anen

t fac

ilitie

s. **

Capa

city

as e

stim

ated

for n

ew fa

cility

und

er co

nstr

uctio

n.

25

The

curr

ent K

-5 a

nd K

-8 sc

hool

s hav

e su

fficie

nt ca

pacit

y to

supp

ort t

he

proj

ecte

d en

rollm

ent.

K-5

+ K-

8 su

rplu

s =27

7 se

ats

Tota

l Red

uctio

n of

0 sc

hool

s

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

106

NORT

HWES

T M

iddl

e &

Hig

h

#Sc

hool

Nam

eTy

pePr

ojec

tion

Facil

ity

Capa

city*

Surp

lus/

Sh

orta

ge1

Clar

emon

tM

iddl

e44

347

128

2Ed

na B

rew

erM

iddl

e78

978

2- 7

3M

onte

raM

iddl

e77

398

721

4

Tota

l2,

005

2,24

023

5

*Fac

ility

capa

city

incl

udes

sea

ts in

bot

h te

mpo

rary

and

per

man

ent f

acilit

ies.

**

Far W

est c

ampu

s ca

paci

ty (2

16) i

s in

clud

ed in

the

tota

l sea

t cap

acity

for O

akla

nd T

ech.

#Sc

hool

Nam

eTy

pePr

ojec

tion

Facil

ity

Capa

city*

Surp

lus/

Sh

orta

ge1

Oakl

and

Tech

High

1,86

71,

991*

*12

4

26

Both

the

curr

ent m

iddl

e an

d hi

gh sc

hool

s are

larg

e en

ough

to su

ppor

t the

pro

ject

ed e

nrol

lmen

t for

th

e re

gion

.

Mid

dle

scho

ol su

rplu

s =

235

seat

s

High

scho

ol su

rplu

s =

124

seat

s

Tota

l Red

uctio

n of

0 sc

hool

s

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

107

WES

T Re

gion

Curr

ently

, the

Wes

t reg

ion

has*

4

elem

enta

ry sc

hool

s**

2

mid

dle

scho

ols

1

high

scho

ol

**No

t cou

ntin

g Laf

ayet

te, w

hich

will

be

close

d as

of s

choo

l yea

r 19-

20.

27

*Dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

s onl

y

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

108

WES

T El

emen

tary

#Sc

hool

Nam

eTy

pePr

ojec

tion

Facil

ity

Capa

city*

Surp

lus/

Sh

orta

ge1

Hoov

erK-

531

248

016

82

Mar

tin Lu

ther

Kin

g Jr.

/ La

faye

tte

K-5

N/A

431

592

161

3Pr

esco

ttK-

521

547

025

54

Sank

ofa

K-5

223

336*

*11

3To

tal

1,18

11,

878

697

*Fac

ility

capa

city

incl

udes

sea

ts in

bot

h te

mpo

rary

and

per

man

ent f

acilit

ies.

**S

anko

fa p

orta

bles

that

will

be re

mov

ed in

sum

mer

of 2

019

are

subt

ract

ed fr

om th

e ca

paci

ty h

ere.

28

We

coul

d su

ppor

t pro

ject

ed

enro

llmen

t with

up

to 1

few

er O

USD

dist

rict-r

un e

lem

enta

ry sc

hool

.

K-5

surp

lus =

697

seat

s

Tota

l Red

uctio

n up

to 1

sc

hool

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

109

WES

T M

iddl

e &

Hig

hFa

cility

capa

city

is sh

own

belo

w b

y sc

hool

type

. Fiv

e ye

ar p

roje

ctio

ns fo

r the

regi

on a

re a

lso sh

own.

#Sc

hool

Nam

eTy

pePr

ojec

tion

Facil

ity

Capa

city*

Surp

lus/

Sh

orta

ge

1W

est O

akla

nd

Mid

dle

Mid

dle

176

760

584

2W

estla

keM

iddl

e35

596

260

7

Tota

l53

11,

722

1,19

1

*Fac

ility

capa

city

incl

udes

sea

ts in

bot

h te

mpo

rary

and

per

man

ent f

acilit

ies.

#Sc

hool

Nam

eTy

pePr

ojec

tion

Facil

ity

Capa

city*

Surp

lus/

Sh

orta

ge1

McC

lym

onds

High

399

780

381

We

coul

d su

ppor

t the

pro

ject

ed e

nrol

lmen

t with

up

to 1

few

erOU

SD d

istric

t-run

mid

dle

scho

ol.

The

curr

ent h

igh

scho

ol in

the

regi

on is

larg

e en

ough

to a

ccom

mod

ate

proj

ecte

d en

rollm

ent.

29

Mid

dle

scho

ol su

rplu

s =

1,19

1 se

ats

High

scho

ol su

rplu

s =

381

seat

s

Tota

l Red

uctio

n up

to 1

scho

ol

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

110

Elem

enta

ry &

K-8

Res

ults

Regi

onCu

rren

t #

Scho

ols

Min

imum

#

Scho

ols

Chan

ge in

#

Scho

ols

Cent

ral

8*6*

*-2

East

22*

11**

-11

Nort

heas

t8

5-3

Nort

hwes

t11

110

Wes

t4

3-1

Tota

l53

36-1

7

30

*Cur

rent

ly, 6

pai

rs o

f ele

men

tary

scho

ols s

hare

a ca

mpu

s.**

Min

imum

inclu

des c

onso

lidat

ion

of sh

ared

cam

puse

s (5

in E

ast

and

1 in

Cen

tral

).To

tal R

educ

tion

up to

17

scho

olsC

apac

ity A

naly

sis

We

curr

ently

hav

e an

el

emen

tary

seat

capa

city

of

26,0

99 se

ats,

but e

xpec

t to

have

onl

y 20

,052

OUS

D st

uden

ts in

202

3.

Elem

enta

ry/K

-8 se

at

surp

lus a

cros

s reg

ions

=6,

047

111

Mid

dle

& 6

-12

Resu

lts

Regi

onCu

rren

t #

Scho

ols

Min

imum

#

Scho

ols

Chan

ge in

#

Scho

ols

Cent

ral

11

0Ea

st10

*5*

*-5

Nort

heas

t1

10

Nort

hwes

t3

30

Wes

t2

1-1

Tota

l17

11-6

31

*Cur

rent

ly 2

pai

rs o

f mid

dle/

6-12

scho

ols s

hare

a ca

mpu

s.**

Redu

ctio

n in

clude

s con

solid

atio

n of

3 sh

ared

cam

puse

s. To

tal R

educ

tion

up to

6

scho

olsC

apac

ity A

naly

sis

We

curr

ently

hav

e a

mid

dle

scho

ol se

at ca

pacit

y of

10

,365

seat

s, bu

t exp

ect t

o ha

ve o

nly

7,33

8 OU

SD

stud

ents

in 2

023.

Mid

dle/

6-12

seat

surp

lus

acro

ss re

gion

s = 3

,027

112

High

Sch

ool R

esul

ts

Regi

onCu

rren

t #

Scho

ols

Min

imum

#

Scho

ols

Chan

ge in

#

Scho

ols

Cent

ral

11

0Ea

st2

1-1

Nort

heas

t1

10

Nort

hwes

t1

10

Wes

t1

10

Tota

l6

5-1

32

Tota

l Red

uctio

n up

to 1

sc

hool

sCap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

We

curr

ently

hav

e a

high

sc

hool

seat

capa

city

of 8

,915

se

ats,

but e

xpec

t to

have

on

ly 7

,025

OUS

D st

uden

ts in

20

23.

High

scho

ol se

at su

rplu

s ac

ross

regi

ons =

1,8

90

113

Sum

mar

y of

Par

t 1 R

esul

ts

Re

sults

are

a st

artin

g po

intf

or d

eter

min

ing

the

abso

lute

min

imum

num

bero

f di

stric

t-run

scho

ols n

eede

d to

supp

ort O

USD

stud

ents

in 5

yea

rs.

Th

is an

alys

is do

es n

otte

ll us

whi

chor

how

man

ysc

hool

cam

puse

s to

close

or

cons

olid

ate.

Elem

enta

ry &

K-8

Mid

dle

& 6

-12

High

Tota

l

Curr

ent

5317

676

Min

imum

3611

552

Chan

ge-1

7-6

-1-2

4

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

33

114

Tow

ard

a Ci

tyw

ide

Map

OUSD

Loca

tion

Allo

catio

n An

alys

is

Rese

arch

Ass

essm

ent &

Dat

a (R

AD)

Susa

n Ra

dke

10-2

018

Whe

re a

re th

e op

timal

loca

tions

for s

choo

ls ba

sed

on w

here

stud

ents

LIVE

and

how

far a

way

are

our

exis

ting

facil

ities

?

Part

2Lo

catio

n A

naly

sis

115

Wha

t is a

loca

tion

allo

catio

n an

alys

is?

•Us

ed in

the

publ

ic se

ctor

to id

entif

y th

e m

ost e

ffect

ive

loca

tion

for p

ublic

se

rvice

s suc

h as

scho

ols,

hosp

itals,

and

fire

stat

ions

whe

re a

n op

timal

lo

catio

n en

sure

s the

gre

ates

t and

mos

t equ

itabl

e ac

cess

to se

rvice

s.

•Us

ed h

ere

to d

eter

min

e th

e op

timal

loca

tion

of sc

hool

site

sbas

ed o

n th

e lo

catio

n of

stud

ents

.

•De

cisio

ns a

bout

scho

ol co

nsol

idat

ions

and

relo

catio

ns ca

n be

mad

e m

ore

effe

ctiv

ely

if w

e ac

coun

t for

whe

re st

uden

ts li

ve. T

his w

ill e

nabl

e us

to

prov

ide

qual

ity sc

hool

opt

ions

clos

er to

hom

e.

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

35

116

Wha

t inp

uts a

re n

eede

d to

bui

ld th

e m

odel

?

1.Ho

w m

any

scho

ol a

ge ch

ildre

n w

ill b

e liv

ing

in O

akla

nd in

202

3?

2.Ho

w m

any

of th

em w

ill a

tten

d di

stric

t-run

scho

ols?

3.W

here

will

they

be

livin

g in

Oak

land

in 2

023?

4.Ho

w m

any

scho

ol lo

catio

ns w

ill b

e op

timize

d?

5.Ho

w fa

r sho

uld

stud

ents

trav

el to

scho

ol?

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

36

117

1.Ho

w m

any

scho

ol a

ge ch

ildre

n w

ill b

e liv

ing

in

Oakl

and

in 2

023?

•Th

is an

alys

is us

es th

e US

Cen

sus B

urea

u pr

ojec

ted

popu

latio

n 5

year

est

imat

es

of sc

hool

age

child

ren

livin

g in

Oak

land

’s 33

6 ce

nsus

blo

ck g

roup

s (sh

own

on

map

) to

dete

rmin

e ho

w m

any

OUSD

stud

ents

will

be

livin

g in

Oak

land

in 2

023.

•Ad

ditio

nal a

naly

ses w

ill b

e co

nduc

ted

this

Fall

to d

eter

min

e th

e im

pact

of n

ew

Oakl

and

hous

ing

cons

truc

tion

on p

roje

cted

202

3 en

rollm

ent.

29,5

34 e

lem

enta

ry sc

hool

-age

d ch

ildre

n14

,610

mid

dle

scho

ol-a

ged

child

ren

18,5

53 h

igh

scho

ol-a

ged

child

renLo

catio

n A

naly

sis

37

118

2. H

ow m

any

of O

akla

nd sc

hool

age

child

ren

will

at

tend

OUS

D sc

hool

s?

Elem

enta

ry

& K

-8M

iddl

e &

6-

12Hi

ghTo

tal

Estim

ated

# sc

hool

age

child

ren

livin

g in

Oa

klan

d in

202

329

,534

14,6

1018

,553

62,6

97

2017

-18

OUSD

Dist

rict-R

un C

aptu

re R

ate

64.6

%48

.7%

53.6

%57

.6%

Estim

ated

# sc

hool

age

child

ren

livin

g in

Oa

klan

d ex

pect

ed to

atte

nd O

USD

dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

s in

2023

19,0

767,

111

9,95

136

,138

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

Her

e, th

e es

timat

es o

f the

# o

f OU

SD

stu

dent

s in

202

3 ar

e ba

sed

on c

ensu

s pr

ojec

tions

of w

here

st

uden

ts w

ill b

e liv

ing.

38

119

3. W

here

will

OUS

D st

uden

ts b

e liv

ing

in 2

023?

Each

blo

ck g

roup

is m

appe

d by

its s

hare

of

proj

ecte

d 20

23 O

USD

stud

ents

.

A ra

ndom

set o

f poi

nts w

as g

ener

ated

with

in e

ach

bloc

k gr

oup

to p

ositi

on in

divi

dual

pro

ject

ed st

uden

ts th

roug

hout

the

geog

raph

ic ex

tent

of t

he b

lock

gro

up to

mar

k “d

eman

d po

ints

” in

the

mod

el.

(zoo

m v

iew

)

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

39

120

*Ass

umin

g ea

ch e

lem

enta

ry sc

hool

is a

lloca

ted

502

stud

ents

; eac

h m

iddl

e sc

hool

is a

lloca

ted

771

stud

ents

; eac

h hi

gh sc

hool

isal

loca

ted

1,51

8 st

uden

ts.

The

final

num

ber o

f sch

ools

need

ed w

ill ch

ange

bas

ed o

n th

e ac

tual

capa

city

of e

xist

ing

scho

ol si

tes.

Elem

enta

ry

& K

-8M

iddl

e &

6-

12Hi

ghTo

tal

A ) E

stim

ated

# sc

hool

age

child

ren

livin

g in

Oakl

and

in 2

023

29,5

3414

,610

18,5

5362

,697

B ) 2

017-

18 O

USD

Dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

s “ca

ptur

e ra

te”

64.6

%48

.7%

53.6

%57

.6%

C ) E

stim

ated

# sc

hool

age

child

ren

livin

g in

Oak

land

ex

pect

ed to

att

end

OUSD

dist

rict-r

un sc

hool

s in

2023

(A

x B

)19

,076

7,11

19,

951

36,1

38

D ) #

stud

ents

allo

cate

d pe

r sch

ool

502

771

1,51

8n/

a

E ) #

scho

ol lo

catio

ns to

opt

imize

*(C

/ D)

389

653

4. H

ow m

any

OUSD

scho

ol lo

catio

ns w

ill b

e op

timize

d?Lo

catio

n A

naly

sis

40

121

5. H

ow fa

r sho

uld

stud

ents

trav

el to

scho

ol?

Excl

udes

stud

ents

att

endi

ng ci

tyw

ide

scho

ols a

nd st

uden

ts li

ving

out

side

Oakl

and.

The

mod

el st

arts

off

with

a “c

lean

slat

e” a

ssum

ing

ther

e ar

e no

scho

ols y

et in

Oak

land

.

•Th

e di

stan

ce th

at is

sele

cted

form

s a b

ound

ary

arou

nd e

ach

scho

ol lo

catio

n, a

nd st

uden

ts w

ithin

th

at b

ound

ary

are

allo

cate

d to

that

scho

ol.

•Th

e m

axim

umdi

stan

ces u

sed

wer

e•

1.5

mile

s for

ele

men

tary

and

K-8

•2

mile

s for

mid

dle

scho

ols a

nd 6

-12

•3

mile

s for

hig

h sc

hool

s

•Fe

wer

scho

ols w

ill m

ean

bigg

er a

tten

danc

e ar

eas.

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

41

122

Prel

imin

ary

Outp

uts:

optim

al O

USD

elem

enta

ry

scho

ol lo

catio

ns

Inpu

ts:

19

,079

dis

trict

-run

elem

enta

ry

stud

ents

exp

ecte

d in

202

3 us

ing

a ca

ptur

e ra

te o

f 64.

6%

502

elem

enta

ry s

tude

nts

per s

choo

l*

1.5

mile

max

imum

dis

tanc

e tra

vele

d

38 e

lem

enta

ry s

choo

ls (1

9,07

9/50

2)

plac

ed

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

*The

max

imum

num

ber o

f stu

dent

s allo

cate

d to

eac

h sc

hool

was

ba

sed

on th

e m

edia

n of

seat

capa

city

for O

USD

scho

ols i

n th

at

grad

espa

n.

42

123

Dist

ance

was

mea

sure

d al

ong

Oakl

and

stre

et n

etw

ork

betw

een

curr

ent e

xistin

g sc

hool

facil

ities

and

clos

est o

ptim

al

scho

ol lo

catio

n(s)

.

Aver

age

dist

ance

of a

ll cu

rren

t ele

men

tary

/K-8

sc

hool

s to

close

st o

ptim

al e

lem

enta

ry sc

hool

lo

catio

ns: 0

.400

4 m

iles

Prel

imin

ary

Outp

uts:

optim

al O

USD

elem

enta

ry

scho

ol lo

catio

nsS

choo

l dis

tanc

e to

op

timal

loca

tion

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

43

124

Dist

ance

to O

ptim

al O

USD

elem

enta

ry sc

hool

lo

catio

ns -

CENT

RAL R

egio

n

SRA

Reg

ion

Scho

olD

ista

nce

(Mile

s)

Cen

tral

Bella

Vis

ta0.

4394

Cen

tral

Cle

vela

nd0.

4819

Cen

tral

Fran

klin

0.14

12

Cen

tral

Gar

field

0.05

55

Cen

tral

La E

scue

lita

0.39

86

Cen

tral

Linc

oln

0.14

06

Cen

tral

Man

zani

ta C

omm

unity

/M

anza

nita

SEE

D0.

3046

CEN

TRAL

Elem

enta

ry (a

vera

ge)

0.28

03

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

44

125

Dist

ance

to O

ptim

al O

USD

elem

enta

ry sc

hool

lo

catio

ns -

EAST

Reg

ion

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

SRA

Reg

ion

Scho

olD

ista

nce

(Mile

s)

East

ACO

RN

Woo

dlan

d/En

Com

pass

0.50

15

East

Alle

ndal

e0.

3570

East

Brid

ges

0.43

96

East

Broo

kfie

ld0.

6082

East

Com

mun

ity U

nite

d/Fu

ture

s0.

3186

East

East

Oak

land

PR

IDE

0.25

33

East

Frui

tval

e0.

2658

East

Glo

bal F

amily

0.17

61

East

Gre

enle

af K

-80.

0916

SRA

Reg

ion

Scho

olD

ista

nce

(Mile

s)

East

Hor

ace

Man

n0.

1049

East

Int'l

Com

mun

ity/

Thin

k C

olle

ge N

ow0.

2693

East

Kore

mat

su/E

sper

anza

0.39

02

East

Mad

ison

Par

k Lo

wer

0.29

61

East

Mar

kham

0.20

42

East

Mel

rose

Lea

ders

hip

K-8

*0.

4227

East

New

Hig

hlan

d/R

ISE

0.26

80

East

Rea

ch0.

2747

EAST

Elem

enta

ry (a

vera

ge)

0.30

84

*Mel

rose

Lea

ders

hip

is a

spe

cial

ized

dua

l la

ngua

ge im

mer

sion

sch

ool a

nd c

urre

ntly

ha

s a

city

wid

e at

tend

ance

are

a.

45

126

Dist

ance

to O

ptim

al O

USD

elem

enta

ry sc

hool

lo

catio

ns -

NORT

HEAS

T Re

gion

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

SRA

Reg

ion

Scho

olD

ista

nce

(Mile

s)

Nor

thea

stBu

rckh

alte

r0.

5793

Nor

thea

stC

arl M

unck

0.42

03

Nor

thea

stG

rass

Val

ley

1.63

39

Nor

thea

stH

owar

d0.

0799

Nor

thea

stLa

urel

0.45

05

Nor

thea

stPa

rker

0.33

21

Nor

thea

stR

edw

ood

Hei

ghts

0.31

56

Nor

thea

stSe

quoi

a0.

2738

NO

RTH

EAST

Elem

enta

ry (a

vera

ge)

0.51

07

46

127

Dist

ance

to O

ptim

al O

USD

elem

enta

ry sc

hool

lo

catio

ns -

NORT

HWES

T Re

gion

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

SRA

Reg

ion

Scho

olD

ista

nce

(Mile

s)

Nor

thw

est

Cha

bot

0.90

46

Nor

thw

est

Cro

cker

Hig

hlan

ds0.

3791

Nor

thw

est

Emer

son

0.21

92

Nor

thw

est

Gle

nvie

w E

lem

enta

ry0.

1349

Nor

thw

est

Hillc

rest

1.09

08

Nor

thw

est

Joaq

uin

Mille

r0.

9591

Nor

thw

est

Kais

er1.

4835

Nor

thw

est

Mon

tcla

ir0.

1515

Nor

thw

est

Pera

lta0.

2990

Nor

thw

est

Pied

mon

t0.

4087

Nor

thw

est

Thor

nhill

0.37

26

NO

RTH

WES

TEl

emen

tary

(ave

rage

)0.

5821

47

128

Dist

ance

to O

ptim

al O

USD

elem

enta

ry sc

hool

lo

catio

ns -

WES

T Re

gion

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

SRA

Reg

ion

Scho

olD

ista

nce

(Mile

s)

Wes

tH

oove

r0.

1123

Wes

tM

artin

Lut

her K

ing

0.26

17

Wes

tPr

esco

tt0.

3095

Wes

tSa

nkof

a0.

4419

WES

TEl

emen

tary

(ave

rage

) 0.

2813

All

Reg

ions

Elem

enta

ry (a

vera

ge)

0.40

04

48

129

Prel

imin

ary

Outp

uts:

optim

al O

USD

mid

dle

scho

ol lo

catio

ns

Inpu

ts:

7,

115

dist

rict-r

un m

iddl

e sc

hool

stud

ents

ex

pect

ed in

202

3 us

ing

a ca

ptur

e ra

te o

f 48

.6%

77

1 m

iddl

e sc

hool

stud

ents

per

scho

ol*

2

mile

max

imum

dist

ance

trav

eled

9

mid

dle

scho

ols (

7,11

5/77

1) p

lace

d

Aver

age

dist

ance

of a

ll cu

rren

t mid

dle/

6-12

sc

hool

s to

close

st o

ptim

al m

iddl

e sc

hool

lo

catio

ns: 0

.557

0 m

iles

Sch

ool d

ista

nce

to

optim

al lo

catio

n

Opt

imal

sch

ool l

ocat

ion

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

*The

max

imum

num

ber o

f stu

dent

s allo

cate

d to

eac

h sc

hool

was

ba

sed

on th

e m

edia

n of

seat

capa

city

for O

USD

scho

ols i

n th

at

grad

espa

n.

49

130

Dist

ance

to O

ptim

al O

USD

mid

dle

scho

ol

loca

tions

Lo

catio

n A

naly

sis

SRA

Reg

ion

Scho

olD

ista

nce

(Mile

s)

Nor

thea

stB

ret H

arte

0.87

64

Nor

thw

est

Cla

rem

ont

0.49

47

Nor

thw

est

Edn

a B

rew

er0.

1248

Nor

thw

est

Mon

tera

0.54

55

Nor

thw

est

Mid

dle

scho

ol (a

vera

ge)

0.38

83

Wes

tW

est O

akla

nd M

iddl

e0.

5105

Wes

tW

estla

ke0.

8227

Wes

tM

iddl

e sc

hool

(ave

rage

)0.

6666

All

Reg

ions

Mid

dle

scho

ol (a

vera

ge)

0.55

70

SRA

Reg

ion

Scho

olD

ista

nce

(Mile

s)

Cen

tral

Roo

seve

lt M

iddl

e Sc

hool

0.89

42

East

Alli

ance

Aca

dem

y/E

lmhu

rst C

omm

unity

Pre

p0.

5134

East

Fric

k Im

pact

Aca

dem

y0.

8178

East

Mad

ison

Par

k A

cade

my

6-12

1.03

29

East

Oak

land

Sch

ool o

f Lan

guag

es0.

4716

East

Roo

ts In

tern

atio

nal A

cade

my/

Col

iseu

m C

olle

ge P

rep

Aca

dem

y0.

2273

East

Uni

ted

for S

ucce

ss A

cade

my/

Life

Aca

dem

y0.

3376

East

Urb

an P

rom

ise

Aca

dem

y0.

1285

East

Mid

dle

scho

ol (a

vera

ge)

0.50

42

50

131

Prel

imin

ary

Outp

uts:

optim

al O

USD

high

scho

ol

loca

tions

Inpu

ts:

9,

951

dist

rict-r

un h

igh

scho

ol st

uden

ts

expe

cted

in 2

023

usin

g a

capt

ure

rate

of

53.6

%

1,51

8 hi

gh sc

hool

stud

ents

per

scho

ol*

3

mile

max

imum

dist

ance

trav

eled

6

high

scho

ols (

9,95

1/1,

518)

pla

ced

Aver

age

dist

ance

of a

ll cu

rren

t hig

h sc

hool

s to

close

st o

ptim

al h

igh

scho

ol lo

catio

ns: 1

.116

5 m

iles

Sch

ool d

ista

nce

to

optim

al lo

catio

n

Opt

imal

sch

ool l

ocat

ion

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

*The

max

imum

num

ber o

f stu

dent

s allo

cate

d to

eac

h sc

hool

was

ba

sed

on th

e m

edia

n of

seat

capa

city

for O

USD

scho

ols i

n th

at

grad

espa

n.

51

132

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

SRA

Reg

ion

Scho

olD

ista

nce

(Mile

s)

Cen

tral

Oak

land

Hig

h0.

8246

East

Cas

tlem

ont

0.99

32

East

Frem

ont

0.66

51

East

Hig

h sc

hool

(ave

rage

)0.

8291

Nor

thea

stSk

ylin

e2.

4411

Nor

thw

est

Oak

land

Tec

h0.

7667

Wes

tM

cCly

mon

ds1.

0087

All

Reg

ions

Hig

h sc

hool

(ave

rage

)1.

1166

Dist

ance

to O

ptim

al O

USD

high

scho

ol

loca

tions

52

133

Mai

n Ta

ke-A

way

s fro

m th

e Tw

o An

alys

es

W

e ne

ed fe

wer

scho

olsb

ased

on

how

man

y st

uden

ts w

ill g

o to

our

sc

hool

s.

Ou

r lar

gest

surp

lus o

f sea

ts is

in th

e Ea

st R

egio

n an

d in

Ele

men

tary

scho

ol

seat

s.

Loca

tion

Anal

ysis

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

M

ost O

USD

scho

ol fa

ciliti

es a

re a

lread

y clo

se to

an

optim

al lo

catio

n, g

ivin

g us

man

y op

tions

to u

tilize

curr

ent f

acili

ties a

nd in

form

the

City

wid

e M

ap.

Th

e av

erag

e di

stan

ce b

etw

een

curr

ent O

USD

scho

ols a

nd a

n op

timal

lo

catio

n ba

sed

on w

here

stud

ents

will

be

livin

g is

only

0.4

mile

s for

el

emen

tary

, 0.5

mile

s for

mid

dle,

and

1.1

mile

s for

hig

h sc

hool

s. 53

134

Next

Ste

ps fo

r the

City

wid

e M

ap A

naly

ses

Ad

d im

pact

of n

ew O

akla

nd h

ousin

gto

loca

tion

anal

ysis

to e

nsur

e w

e ha

ve

scho

ols w

here

we

need

them

.

Co

nsid

er w

here

to h

ouse

: alte

rnat

ive

scho

ols,

OUSD

pre

-K, s

pecia

lized

pro

gram

s an

d sc

hool

s (e.

g., d

ual l

angu

age,

Met

Wes

t), ce

ntra

l offi

ce, a

nd ch

arte

r pro

gram

s.

Id

entif

y w

ays t

o ex

pand

acc

ess t

o hi

gh q

ualit

ypro

gram

s, es

pecia

lly in

hi

stor

ically

und

erse

rved

com

mun

ities

.

Re

conf

igur

e at

tend

ance

bou

ndar

iesa

nd fe

eder

pat

tern

s acr

oss g

rade

leve

ls.

Id

entif

y su

rplu

s pro

pert

iest

hat c

an b

e us

ed fo

r rev

enue

gen

erat

ion,

and

for

cons

ider

atio

n in

the

upco

min

g 7-

11 co

mm

ittee

.

Co

llabo

rativ

ely

crea

te a

dat

abas

e of

OUS

D ca

mpu

s fac

ility

info

rmat

ion.

Qu

ality

prog

ram

s in

ever

y ne

ighb

orho

od.

54

135

1000

Bro

adw

ay, S

uite

680

, Oak

land

, CA

9460

755

136

APPE

NDIX

137

Appe

ndix

A Resu

lts fr

om P

art 1

The

follo

win

g sli

des s

how

add

ition

al in

form

atio

n re

gard

ing

the

anal

ysis

pres

ente

d in

Par

t 1 -

Capa

city

Anal

ysis.

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

138

Enro

llmen

t pro

ject

ion

met

hodo

logy

•Th

e lo

ng-te

rm e

nrol

lmen

t pro

ject

ions

at t

he sc

hool

leve

l (‘G

o’ p

roje

ctio

ns) t

hat w

ere

used

in

the

capa

city a

naly

sis w

ere

prov

ided

by

Coop

erat

ive

Stra

tegi

es in

17-

18.

•Th

ese

5 ye

ar p

roje

ctio

ns a

re b

ased

on

hist

orica

l cen

sus d

ay d

ata

and

wer

e ca

lcula

ted

by

appl

ying

the

coho

rt su

rviv

al m

etho

dolo

gy.

•Th

e co

hort

surv

ival

met

hodo

logy

use

s hist

oric

birt

h da

ta a

nd h

istor

ic st

uden

t enr

ollm

ent t

o tr

ack

how

stud

ent c

ount

s inc

reas

e or

dec

reas

e as

they

mov

e th

roug

h gr

ades

.•

Any

of th

ese

fact

ors c

ould

caus

e a

signi

fican

t cha

nge

in lo

ng te

rm st

uden

t enr

ollm

ent:

Bo

unda

ry a

djus

tmen

ts

Dist

rict s

choo

l ope

ning

s/clo

sure

s

Char

ter/

priv

ate

scho

ol o

peni

ng o

r clo

sure

Ho

usin

g de

velo

pmen

t

Chan

ges i

n pr

ogra

m o

fferin

gs

Chan

ges i

n gr

ade

conf

igur

atio

n

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

139

How

was

seat

capa

city

mea

sure

d?Fo

r eac

h in

stru

ctio

nal r

oom

, Jac

obs

mul

tiplie

d th

e 1)

max

imum

# o

f stu

dent

s th

at c

ould

be

assi

gned

to a

ro

om,*

by

2) a

n ad

just

men

t fac

tor f

or g

rade

-leve

l sch

edul

ing,

** a

nd 3

) a ro

om s

ize

fact

or.**

*

The

cam

pus

capa

city

was

then

cal

cula

ted

by th

en s

umm

ing

the

fact

ored

cap

acity

for a

ll in

stru

ctio

nal

room

s on

a c

ampu

s. N

ote

that

for c

ampu

ses

with

sm

alle

r cla

ssro

oms,

this

mea

sure

of s

eat c

apac

ity w

ill

unde

rest

imat

e po

tent

ial u

se.

*Max

imum

#s

of s

tude

nts

that

cou

ld b

e as

sign

ed to

an

inst

ruct

iona

l roo

m. A

val

ue o

f 0 w

as u

sed

for a

udito

rium

s, d

inin

g ha

lls, s

tora

ge ro

oms,

ad

min

istra

tive

room

s, o

r com

mun

ity-u

se ro

oms.

**

Sche

dulin

g fa

ctor

sw

ere

95%

for e

lem

enta

ries,

92%

for K

-8 s

choo

ls, 8

5% fo

r mid

dle

scho

ols,

and

75%

for h

igh

scho

ols

(in m

ost c

ases

).**

*Siz

e fa

ctor

sw

ere

set t

o th

e pr

opor

tiona

l siz

e of

eac

h cl

assr

oom

rela

tive

to it

s ta

rget

siz

e fo

r edu

catio

nal a

dequ

acy

(as

defin

ed b

y Ja

cobs

)onl

y w

hen

the

size

of a

n in

stru

ctio

nal r

oom

fell

belo

w 8

5% o

f the

targ

et. O

ther

wis

e it

was

set

to 1

.

Cam

pus

asse

ssm

ents

wer

e co

mpl

eted

in 2

017

by J

acob

s.

Roo

m fa

ctor

ed c

apac

ity =

max

# s

tude

nts

Xsc

hedu

ling

fact

orX

size

fact

or

Cap

acity

Ana

lysi

s

140

Appe

ndix

BAd

ditio

nal I

nfor

mat

ion

from

Par

t 2

The

follo

win

g sli

des s

how

add

ition

al in

form

atio

n re

gard

ing

the

anal

ysis

pres

ente

d in

Par

t 2 -

Loca

tion

Anal

ysis.

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

141

How

man

y of

Oak

land

scho

ol a

ge ch

ildre

n w

ill

atte

nd p

ublic

scho

ols?

•Bl

ock

grou

p co

unts

are

pro

rate

d by

curr

ent c

aptu

re ra

tes o

f sch

ool a

ge ch

ildre

n in

OUS

D sc

hool

s to

dete

rmin

e ho

w m

any

Oakl

and

child

ren

are

expe

cted

to a

tten

d OU

SD sc

hool

s in

2023

.El

emen

tary

scho

ol e

xam

ple:

•Cu

rren

t TK/

K-5

Oakl

and

publ

ic sc

hool

capt

ure

rate

(dist

rict-r

un &

char

ter):

84.

8%

•Cu

rren

t TK/

K-5

OUSD

capt

ure

rate

(dist

rict-r

un):

64.6

%

•Es

timat

ed n

umbe

r of e

lem

enta

ry a

ge ch

ildre

n liv

ing

in O

akla

nd in

202

3: 2

9,53

4•

Num

ber o

f ele

men

tary

scho

ol a

ge ch

ildre

n ex

pect

ed to

att

end

OUSD

scho

ols i

n 20

23: 1

9,07

9(2

9,53

4 *

64.6

%)

2017

Pop

ulat

ion

2017

-18 D

istric

t-Ru

n st

uden

ts20

17-1

8 Cha

rter

st

uden

ts

2017

-18 T

otal

st

uden

ts in

Oak

land

Pu

blic

Scho

ols

2017

Tota

l sch

ool

age

child

ren

in

Oakl

and

2017

Not

in

Oakl

and

Publ

ic Sc

hool

s

2017

-18 P

ublic

Sc

hool

Cap

ture

Ra

te20

17-1

8 OUS

D-DR

Ca

ptur

e Ra

te20

17-1

8 CHA

RTER

Ca

ptur

e Ra

te

#Stu

dent

s 201

7-18

36,9

0015

,977

52,8

77

Livin

g in

Oak

land

36,2

4114

,029

50,2

7062

,737

12,4

6780

.1%

57.8

%*

22.4

%

K-5

(5-1

0yrs

)19

,524

6,11

725

,641

30,2

284,

826

84.8

%64

.6%

20.2

%

6-8

(11-

13yr

s)7,

054

3,94

811

,002

14,4

933,

563

75.9

%48

.7%

27.2

%

9-12

(14-

17yr

s)9,

663

3,96

413

,627

18,0

164,

497

75.6

%53

.6%

22.0

%

TOTA

L36

,241

14,0

2950

,270

62,7

3712

,467

80.1

%57

.8%

22.4

%

Loca

tion

Ana

lysi

s

Tota

l dis

trict

wid

e ca

ptur

e ra

te is

slig

htly

hig

her h

ere

due

to in

clus

ion

of s

tude

nts

who

se O

akla

nd a

ddre

ss c

ould

not

be

geol

ocat

ed in

to a

ny o

f the

5 S

RA

regi

ons.

61

142

Tim

elin

e fo

r Blu

eprin

t for

Qua

lity

Scho

ols

2017

-18

2018

-19

2019

-20

2020

-21

2021

-22

2022

-23

Coho

rt 1

Scho

ol

Sele

ctio

nPl

anni

ngIm

plem

enta

tion

ONGO

ING

SUPP

ORTS

Coho

rt 2

Scho

ol

Sele

ctio

nPl

anni

ngIm

plem

enta

tion

Coho

rt 3

Scho

ol

Sele

ctio

nPl

anni

ngIm

plem

enta

tion

Coho

rt 4

Scho

ol S

elec

tion

Plan

ning

Impl

emen

tatio

n

City

Wid

e M

ap

Appr

oved

in 2

019:

W

ill id

entif

y all

scho

ol ch

ange

s ne

eded

by 2

023

143

Exhibit J

1

2019

-20

Budg

et R

educ

tion

Plan

Pr

esen

tatio

n

Janu

ary 9

, 201

9

Pre

sent

ed b

y: M

arcu

s B

attle

, Chi

ef B

usin

ess

Offi

cer

To: O

US

D B

oard

of E

duca

tion

V2

144

Disc

ussio

n To

pics

1.Un

ders

tand

ing

our D

efici

t2.

Prio

ritiza

tion

in B

udge

t Dev

elop

men

t3.

Reco

mm

ende

d Re

duct

ion

Scen

ario

s and

Po

tent

ial I

mpa

ct4.

Reim

agin

ing

OUSD

5.AB

184

0

2

145

Unde

rsta

ndin

g Ou

r Bud

get D

efici

t

Wha

t is o

ur p

roje

cted

ope

ratin

g de

ficit

over

the

next

thre

e ye

ars?

Wha

t are

the

Boar

d Fi

scal

Vita

lity

Spec

ial C

omm

ittee

Re

com

men

datio

ns?

Ho

w m

uch

do w

e ne

ed to

redu

ce o

ver t

he n

ext t

wo

year

s?

3

146

Wha

t is o

ur p

roje

cted

ope

ratin

g de

ficit

over

the

next

thre

e ye

ars?

4

147

Expe

nses

Out

grow

ing

Reve

nue

5

OUSD

’s Fi

nanc

ial C

halle

nge:

⇒Fl

at R

even

ue: B

egin

ning

20

19-2

0, U

nres

trict

ed R

even

ue

expe

cted

to fl

atte

n. O

USD

enro

llmen

t pre

dict

ed a

s mos

tly

flat.

⇒In

crea

sed

Expe

nses

: Lik

e al

l CA

Dist

ricts

, the

exp

ense

in

crea

ses a

re d

riven

prim

arily

by:

STRS

/PER

Spen

sion

rate

s -

spec

ial e

duca

tion

cost

gro

wth

Mul

ti-Ye

ar P

roje

ctio

ns*

Budg

et

Upda

te20

18-1

920

19-2

020

20-2

021

Targ

et A

mou

nt

Need

ed fo

r 2%

or

abov

e Re

serv

e by

20

/21

Adop

ted

Budg

et2.

61%

Rese

rve

4.59

%Re

serv

e3.

18%

Rese

rve

With

$30

M in

re

duct

ions

be

ginn

ing F

Y 19

-20

1st I

nter

im2.

25%

Re

serv

e2.

19%

Re

serv

e.7

0%

Rese

rve

With

NO

redu

ctio

ns

& N

O in

crea

se in

in

vest

men

ts

Appr

oved

1s

t Int

erim

2.25

%2.

48%

2.35

%$1

5 M

illio

n in

19-

20$2

8 M

illio

n in

20-

21( in

clude

s in

vest

men

ts)

*The

stat

e re

quire

s a 2

% re

serv

e. O

USD

Boar

d Po

licy

requ

ires a

3%

rese

rve

min

imum

as a

bes

t pra

ctice

in b

udge

ting.

148

Boar

d Di

rect

ives

Spec

ial C

omm

ittee

on

Fisc

al V

italit

y Re

solu

tion

$3

0 M

illio

n in

ong

oing

redu

ctio

ns st

artin

g in

201

9-20

*

Esta

blish

3%

Res

erve

for 2

019-

20 a

nd co

ntin

ue to

incr

ease

ev

ery

year

afte

r*

1.Im

plem

ent B

oard

of E

duca

tion

Budg

et P

olicy

315

02.

Rede

sign

the

Dist

rict

3.Co

mpe

titiv

e Em

ploy

ee C

ompe

nsat

ion

4.Co

mm

it to

Sha

red

Decis

ion

Mak

ing

and

Mul

ti-St

akeh

olde

r Te

ams

*(se

e al

so A

ugus

t, 20

18 R

esol

utio

n)

6

149

Budg

et P

riorit

izatio

n

Wha

t inf

orm

s our

bud

get p

riorit

izatio

n?

W

hat a

re w

e co

mm

itted

to n

ot re

ducin

g?

Wha

t is o

ur v

ision

for a

cent

ral o

ffice

rede

sign?

7

150

Wha

t inf

orm

s our

bud

get p

riorit

izatio

n?

8

151

Our M

issio

n an

d Vi

sion

Grou

nd U

sM

issio

n:To

bec

ome

a Fu

ll Se

rvice

Com

mun

ity D

istric

tfoc

used

on

high

ac

adem

ic ac

hiev

emen

t whi

le se

rvin

g th

e w

hole

child

, elim

inat

ing

ineq

uity

, and

pr

ovid

ing

each

child

with

exc

elle

nt te

ache

rs, e

very

day

.

Visio

n:Al

l OUS

D st

uden

tsw

ill fi

nd jo

y in

thei

r aca

dem

ic le

arni

ng e

xper

ienc

e w

hile

gra

duat

ing

with

the

skill

s to

ensu

re th

ey a

re ca

ring,

com

pete

nt, f

ully

-in

form

ed, c

ritica

l thi

nker

s who

are

pre

pare

d fo

r col

lege

, car

eer,

and

com

mun

ity

succ

ess.

Qual

ity -

Equi

ty -

Acce

ss -

Fisc

al Su

stai

nabi

lity

9

152

Our

The

ory

of A

ctio

n an

d Po

licie

s G

uide

Us

Teac

her R

eten

tion

&

Recr

uitm

ent

Lead

ersh

ip D

evel

opm

ent/

Scho

ol G

over

nanc

e

BP 5

032

Equi

ty P

olicy

Fisc

al V

italit

y Pla

n

AB 1

840/

AB12

00

BP 3

150

BP 6

006:

City

Wid

e Pl

an

OUSD

VIS

ION

& M

ISSI

ONW

here

are

we

goin

g an

d w

hy?

BP 6

005:

Qua

lity S

choo

l De

velo

pmen

t

LCAP

:Diff

eren

tiate

d As

sista

nce

ORGA

NIZA

TION

AL R

ESILI

ENCE

QUAL

ITY

COM

MUN

ITY

SCHO

OLS

FISC

AL V

ITAL

ITY

10

THEO

RY O

F ACT

ION

How

will

we

get t

here

?

153

Stak

ehol

der I

nput

Info

rms U

s

Stud

ents

(All-

City

Cou

ncil)

: Fou

r prio

rity

area

s: 1)

Stu

dent

Lead

ersh

ip

Prog

ram

s; 2)

Col

lege

Sup

port

Pro

gram

s; 3)

Tea

cher

Qua

lity:

Rec

ruitm

ent,

Rete

ntio

n an

d Re

latio

nshi

ps; a

nd 4

) Men

tal H

ealth

, Nut

ritio

n &

Wel

lnes

s.

Prin

cipal

s (PA

C Su

rvey

): Cr

itica

l Dep

artm

ents

are

Bui

ldin

gs a

nd G

roun

ds,

Cust

odia

ns, S

pecia

l Edu

catio

n, T

alen

t and

Link

ed Le

arni

ng; r

educ

e ot

her

dept

s tha

t are

less

criti

cal

Othe

r Sta

ff &

Com

mun

ity (C

omm

unity

Surv

ey):

Prio

ritize

staf

f ret

entio

n,

equi

ty a

nd cl

ass s

ize.

Rate

top

cent

ral f

unct

ion

as m

aint

aini

ng cl

ean

and

safe

scho

ol fa

ciliti

es. E

ncou

rage

max

imizi

ng p

erce

ntag

e of

fund

s dire

cted

to

scho

ol b

udge

ts

Inpu

t Hig

hlig

hts

11

154

BP 3

150:

Max

imizi

ng U

nres

trict

ed Fu

nds

Spec

ific S

ervi

ces t

o Sc

hool

sNa

med

Ser

vice

s:1.

Spe

cial E

duca

tion

2. C

usto

dial

and

Bui

ldin

gs &

Gr

ound

s 3.

Sch

ool P

olice

& S

choo

l Sec

urity

Of

ficer

s4.

Sch

ool N

urse

s5.

Sch

ool C

ouns

elor

s6.

Spe

cifie

d En

richm

ent R

esou

rces

(i.

e. su

mm

er sc

hool

, mus

ic, a

rt)

All R

emai

ning

Unr

estr

icted

Re

venu

e to

Scho

ol Si

tes

Base

d on

the

proj

ecte

d st

uden

t en

rollm

ent a

nd th

e fo

llow

ing:

1.

Gra

desp

an2.

Fre

e &

Red

uced

Lunc

h3.

Eng

lish

Lear

ners

4. F

oste

r Car

e5.

hig

h-st

ress

nei

ghbo

rhoo

ds

Lega

lly R

equi

red

Dist

rict-W

ide

Oblig

atio

ns

For e

xam

ple:

Sta

te Lo

an A

udit

Find

ings

, etc

.

12%

for D

istric

t-Wid

e Ad

min

istra

tive

Serv

ices

12%

= F

or e

xam

ple:

Indi

rect

adm

in

cost

s, bo

th m

anda

tory

exp

ense

s an

d co

mm

itmen

ts

12

155

Wha

t are

we

com

mitt

ed to

not

redu

cing?

13

156

BP 3

150:

201

8-19

Use

of U

nres

trict

ed G

ener

al F

unds

~$

413M

tota

l (in

cludi

ng ~

$77M

of S

&C

)

1. Le

gally

Ob

ligat

ed

Expe

nses

2. C

entr

al D

istric

t wid

e Ad

min

istra

tive

Cost

s (1

2% C

ap $

49.8

M)

3. S

pecif

ied

Cent

ral S

ervi

ces t

o Sc

hool

Site

s4.

Sch

ool S

ite

Budg

ets

~$29

MNo

Re

duct

ions

~$59

M(in

cl. ~

$17M

S&

C)Su

bsta

ntia

l Red

uctio

ns

~$98

.6M

( inc

l. ~$

22M

S&

C)No

Red

uctio

ns to

Ser

vice

s

~$23

0M(in

cl. ~

38M

S&

C)Lim

ited

Redu

ctio

ns

-Sta

te Lo

an

(~$6

.5M

)-A

udit

Find

ings

(~

$5.5

M)

-Rou

tine

Repa

ir &

M

aint

enan

ce

(~$1

7M)

e.g.

fina

nce,

hum

an re

sour

ces,

perfo

rman

ce m

anag

emen

t, in

stru

ctio

nal s

ervi

ces,

lega

l se

rvice

s, di

stric

t lea

ders

hip

1. S

pecia

l Edu

catio

n 2.

Cus

todi

al a

nd B

uild

ings

& G

roun

ds

3. S

choo

l Pol

ice &

Sch

ool S

ecur

ity O

ffice

rs4.

Sch

ool N

urse

s5.

Sch

ool C

ouns

elor

s6.

Spe

cifie

d En

richm

ent R

esou

rces

(i.e

. su

mm

er sc

hool

, mus

ic, a

rt, n

utrit

ion

serv

ices,

athl

etics

1. G

rade

span

2. F

ree

& R

educ

ed

Lunc

h3.

Eng

lish

Lear

ners

4. F

oste

r Car

e5.

Hig

h-st

ress

ne

ighb

orho

ods

NOTE

: Pre

limin

ary N

umbe

rs; S

ubje

ct to

revi

sion

14

157

Com

mitt

ed In

vest

men

ts

⟼Ce

rtifi

cate

d Cl

assr

oom

Tea

cher

s (Th

eory

of A

ctio

n)⟼

3150

-spe

cifie

d Ce

ntra

l Ser

vice

s to

Site

s (BP

315

0, S

urve

y Da

ta)

⟼Le

gal O

blig

atio

ns &

Man

dato

ry S

ervi

ces (

BP 3

150)

⟼$7

7M o

n Su

ppor

ts to

Stu

dent

s Ide

ntifi

ed in

LCAP

(Ed

Code

)

15

158

Brea

kdow

n of

315

0-Sp

ecifi

ed C

entr

al S

ervi

ce to

Sch

ools

(N

o Re

duct

ions

)

16

Cate

gory

Am

ount

Note

s

1. S

pecia

l Edu

catio

n ~$

78.0

M

inclu

des T

rans

port

atio

n

2. C

usto

dial

and

Bui

ldin

gs &

Gro

unds

~$

7.8M

Site

Cus

todi

ans i

nclu

ded

in S

ite b

udge

ts

3. S

choo

l Pol

ice &

Sch

ool S

ecur

ity O

ffice

rs~$

2.7M

(Site

SSO

s inc

lude

d in

site

bud

gets

)

4. S

choo

l Nur

ses

~$3.

0Min

clude

s add

ition

al h

ealth

serv

ices

5. S

choo

l Cou

nsel

ors

~$3.

6M24

in li

nked

lear

ning

bud

get,

14 in

ssc,

4 in

sc

hool

site

bud

gets

6. S

pecif

ied

Enric

hmen

t Res

ourc

es (i

.e.

sum

mer

scho

ol, m

usic,

art

, nut

ritio

n se

rvice

s, at

hlet

ics)

~$3.

5Min

clude

s Nut

ritio

n co

ntrib

utio

n; S

umm

er

prog

ram

s (93

7); a

nd a

thle

tics.

Tota

l~$

98.6

MUn

rest

ricte

d fu

nds o

nly

159

Brea

kdow

n of

315

0-Un

rest

ricte

d Di

stric

twid

e Ce

ntra

l Ad

min

istra

tive

Cost

s

17

Cate

gory

Bas

ed o

n Fu

nctio

n Co

des

Amou

ntNo

tes

Gene

ral A

dmin

istra

tive

Cost

s-Bu

sines

s Op

erat

ions

~$

29.5

M

Unre

stric

ted

Fund

s (Ge

nera

l Pur

pose

)

Gene

ral A

dmin

istra

tion

-Edu

catio

nal

Serv

ices

~$12

.6M

Un

rest

ricte

d Fu

nds (

Gene

ral P

urpo

se)

~$17

.4M

Un

rest

ricte

d Fu

nds (

LCAP

Sup

plem

enta

l and

Co

ncen

trat

ion

Fund

s)

Tota

l Cen

tral

GP

Avai

labl

e fo

r Pos

sible

Re

allo

catio

n &

Red

uctio

ns~$

42.1

MEx

clude

s 17.

4M o

f Sup

plem

enta

l &

Conc

entr

atio

n

160

Reco

mm

ende

d Re

duct

ion

Scen

ario

s and

Pot

entia

l Im

pact

W

hat a

re th

e cu

rren

t sum

mar

y of

the

redu

ctio

n op

tions

that

hav

e al

read

y be

en

iden

tifie

d?

W

hat a

re th

e po

ssib

le sc

enar

ios f

or b

udge

t red

uctio

ns fo

r 19-

20?

W

hat a

re th

e po

tent

ial i

mpa

cts t

o sc

hool

site

s and

cent

ral o

ffice

with

the

prop

osed

re

duct

ions

?

18

161

Wha

t is t

he cu

rren

t sum

mar

y of

the

redu

ctio

n op

tions

that

hav

e al

read

y be

en id

entif

ied?

19

162

Upda

ted

Mul

ti-Ye

ar S

umm

ary o

f Ide

ntifi

ed

Redu

ctio

ns to

Dat

e

20

Cur

rent

ly E

stim

ated

Ong

oing

Cos

t Sav

ings

, Red

uctio

ns &

Rev

enue

Incr

ease

sOp

tions

FY

201

9-20

(Yr.

1)FY

202

0-21

(Yr.

2)FY

202

1-22

(Yr.

3)FY

202

2-23

(Yr.

4)

Estim

ated

4 Y

ear C

umul

ativ

e Sa

ving

s Ca

tego

ry 1

: *In

crea

se R

even

ues

$1,3

00,0

00$1

,900

,000

$2,1

00,0

00$2

,300

,000

Cate

gory

2: *

Dec

reas

ed S

pend

ing

Cen

tral

Site

sO

ther

$7,0

00,0

00$3

,000

,000

$365

,000

$7,0

00,0

00$3

,000

,000

$1,5

70,0

00

$7,0

00,0

00$3

,000

,000

$1,5

70,0

00

$7,0

00,0

00$3

,000

,000

$1,5

70,0

00

Cate

gory

3:*

Cos

ts S

avin

gs$8

31,0

00$6

,750

,000

$8,1

50,0

00$8

,250

,000

Revi

sed

Tota

ls**

$12,

496,

000

$20,

220,

000

$21,

820,

000

$22,

120,

000

Not

e:*S

ee A

ppen

dix

for d

etai

ls

**Ad

ditio

nal C

entr

al A

dmin

istr

atio

n Su

ppor

t FTE

Red

uctio

ns h

ave

been

iden

tifie

d, if

nee

ded,

to m

eet t

he B

oard

’s J

une

27 R

esol

utio

n R

educ

tion

Targ

et o

f $30

Mill

ion

163

Prop

osed

Sta

ffing

and

Site

Disc

retio

nary

Red

uctio

ns

Cent

ral O

ffice

Dep

artm

ents

: $7

mill

ion

of re

duct

ions

to C

entr

al O

ffice

FTE

.•

Supe

rinte

nden

t Div

ision

:-$

1.4M

(~

11FT

E)•

Acad

emic

Serv

ices D

ivisi

on:

-$2.

8M

(~21

.5FT

E)•

Oper

atio

ns D

ivisi

on:-

$2.8

M (~

21.5

FTE)

21

Scho

ol S

ites:

$3M

of r

educ

tions

from

di

scre

tiona

ry fu

nds p

rovi

ded

to sc

hool

s.•

Scho

ols t

o de

term

ine

wha

t exp

endi

ture

s to

redu

ce•

Redu

ctio

ns to

disc

retio

nary

fund

s will

be

done

co

nsist

ent w

ith v

alue

s on

equi

ty.

The

maj

ority

of p

ropo

sed

redu

ctio

ns w

ill co

me

from

redu

ctio

ns/r

ealig

nmen

t in

cent

ral o

ffice

se

rvice

s and

redu

ctio

n to

disc

retio

nary

fund

ing t

o sc

hool

s.

Note

:Div

ision

lead

ers a

re le

adin

g re

alig

nmen

t w

ithin

thei

r Div

ision

with

cons

ulta

tions

acr

oss

divi

sions

to e

nsur

e th

at F

TE re

duct

ions

are

bas

ed

on a

reor

gani

zatio

n an

d no

t a p

erce

ntag

e cu

t per

de

part

men

t.

164

Scho

ol S

ite D

iscre

tiona

ry Fu

ndin

g Re

duct

ions

Grad

e Sp

anPe

r Pup

il Re

duct

ion

Elem

enta

ry($

58)

Mid

dle

($75

)

High

Sch

ool

($10

0)

K-8

($67

)

6-12

($88

)

The

redu

ctio

n ac

ross

all

scho

ol si

tes

tota

ls $3

mill

ion.

The

redu

ctio

n w

ill b

e m

ade

from

disc

retio

nary

fund

s pr

ovid

ed to

scho

ols a

nd ca

lcula

ted

on a

pe

r pup

il ba

sis.

This

redu

ctio

n m

etho

d is

the

sam

e as

us

ed in

rece

nt y

ears

in co

llabo

ratio

n w

ith sc

hool

lead

ers.

22

165

Wha

t are

our

scen

ario

s for

redu

ctio

ns th

at in

clude

the

boar

d di

rect

ive

to re

ach

a 3%

rese

rve

and

budg

et fo

r new

inve

stm

ents

for

the

next

two

year

s?

23

166

New

Inve

stm

ents

Wou

ld R

equi

re Fu

rthe

r Red

uctio

ns

1Ch

arte

r Offi

ce E

xpan

sion

~$30

0,00

0On

-goi

ng

2Bl

uepr

int S

choo

l Site

Sup

port

s~$

200,

000

One-

time

38

perio

d Da

y~$

8,80

0,00

0On

-goi

ng

4Te

ache

r sal

ary t

o m

edia

n~$

36,0

00,0

00+

On-g

oing

5As

set M

anag

emen

t Cos

t (Bo

nd E

lect

ion,

7-1

1 Co

mm

ittee

Sup

port

, Upd

ated

Fac

ilitie

s Mas

ter P

lan

~$1,

000,

000

One-

time

6Cu

stod

ial S

ervi

ces I

ncre

ase

up to

~$1

,000

,000

On-g

oing

24

Desir

ed n

ew in

vest

men

ts a

re n

ot co

ntem

plat

ed in

curr

ent r

educ

tion

targ

ets a

nd w

ould

requ

ire fu

rthe

r re

venu

e in

crea

ses a

nd/o

r spe

ndin

g re

duct

ions

with

cons

ider

atio

n of

whe

ther

it is

a o

ne-ti

me

or o

n-go

ing

allo

catio

n. E

xam

ple

inve

stm

ents

inclu

de:

Cons

ider

atio

n of

New

Inve

stm

ents

will

be

addr

esse

d as

par

t of t

he 2

019-

20 B

udge

t Dev

elop

men

t Pro

cess

onc

e OU

SD

has m

ore

info

rmat

ion

rega

rdin

g St

ate

budg

et d

ecisi

ons,

prop

osed

redu

ctio

ns a

nd fu

ndin

g av

aila

bilit

y

167

Redu

ctio

n Sc

enar

ios -

Assu

mpt

ion

for N

ew In

vest

men

ts

25

Assu

mpt

ions

2019

/20

Redu

ctio

n20

20/2

1Re

duct

ion

Scen

ario

A(C

urre

nt

Real

ity)

Le

vel o

f New

Inve

stm

ents

-m

oder

ate

18

-19

Rese

rve:

2.2

5%

19-2

0 Re

serv

e: 3

.17%

20

-21

Rese

rve:

3.0

6%

$17.

3M$0

Scen

ario

B

Le

vel o

f New

Inve

stm

ents

-m

oder

atel

y ag

gres

sive

18

-19

Rese

rve:

2.2

5%

19-2

0 Re

serv

e: 3

.52%

20

-21

Rese

rve:

3.0

1%

$21.

5M$0

Scen

ario

C

Le

vel o

f New

Inve

stm

ents

-ag

gres

sive

18

-19

Rese

rve:

2.2

5%

19-2

0 Re

serv

e: 4

.30%

20

-21

Rese

rve:

3.0

3%$3

0.2M

$0

168

2019

-20

Cent

ral R

educ

tions

Bas

ed o

n Th

ree

Scen

ario

s

26

Leve

l of N

ew

Inve

stm

ents

Sce

nario

sS

choo

l S

ites

Req

uire

d C

entra

l R

educ

tions

Sup

erin

tend

ent

(inc.

HR

, Fac

ilitie

s, E

quity

, C

omm

unic

atio

ns a

nd o

ther

)

@20

%

Aca

dem

ic

Sup

port

@40

%

Ope

ratio

ns

Sup

port

@40

%

Alre

ady

Iden

tifie

d$3

.0 M

$7.0

M$1

.4 M

(FTE

11.

6)$2

.8 M

(FTE

23.

3)$2

.8 M

(FTE

23.

3)

Scen

ario

A:

Mod

erat

e In

crea

se

(Cur

rent

R

ealit

y)

$3.0

M(n

o ad

ditio

nal

redu

ctio

ns)

$14.

3 M

$2.8

60 M

(F

TE 2

3.8)

$5.7

20 M

(FTE

47.

6)$5

.720

M(F

TE 4

7.6)

Scen

ario

B:

Mod

erat

ely

Agg

ress

ive

Incr

ease

$3.0

M(n

o ad

ditio

nal

redu

ctio

ns)

$18.

5 M

$3.7

M(F

TE 3

0.8)

$7.4

M(F

TE 6

1.6

)$7

.4 M

(FTE

61.

6)

Scen

ario

C:

Agg

ress

ive

Incr

ease

$3.0

M(n

o ad

ditio

nal

redu

ctio

ns)

$25.

1 M

$5.0

2(F

TE 4

1.8)

$10.

0 M

(FTE

83.

3)$1

0.0

M(F

TE 8

3.3)

169

27

Wha

t are

the

Trad

eoffs

bas

ed o

n th

e Pr

opos

ed N

ew

Inve

stm

ent S

cena

rios a

nd M

aint

aini

ng a

Pro

pose

d 3%

En

ding

Fund

Bal

ance

?

170

28

2019

-20

Redu

ctio

ns to

Cen

tral

Adm

in C

osts

Impa

ctAf

ter r

emov

ing

serv

ices e

num

erat

ed in

BP3

150

(e.g

. Cus

todi

al),

ther

e is

roug

hly

$42M

left

in

unre

stric

ted

cent

ral s

ervi

ces (

exclu

ding

S&

C).

A re

duct

ion

of o

ver h

alf o

f the

rem

aini

ng F

TE (a

250

+ FT

E re

duct

ion)

wou

ld b

e ne

cess

ary

to re

ach

the

$30M

targ

et.

Such

a re

duct

ion

wou

ld b

oth

elim

inat

e un

rest

ricte

d fu

ndin

g to

pro

gram

s cor

e to

our

Miss

ion/

Visio

n an

dse

vere

ly u

nder

min

e ou

r abi

lity t

o m

aint

ain

the

fisca

l and

ope

ratio

nal s

olve

ncy

that

is a

pur

pose

of r

educ

tions

. (se

e St

affin

g)

Core

serv

ices s

ever

ely

impa

cted

:

Pers

onne

l -re

crui

tmen

t, st

aff a

ssig

nmen

t, pa

yrol

l with

furt

her r

isk to

bas

ic st

affin

g an

d re

tent

ion

Fi

nanc

ial o

vers

ight

-bud

get d

evel

opm

ent,

spen

ding

com

plia

nce

& o

vers

ight

, fin

ancia

l rep

ortin

g fu

rthe

r del

ayed

, mor

e er

ror w

ith le

ss co

ntro

l on

over

spen

ding

or a

udit

findi

ngs

Te

chno

logy

-el

imin

atio

n of

softw

are

and

trai

ning

that

incr

ease

effi

cienc

y in

all

area

s of o

pera

tion

Miss

ion/

Visio

n-al

igne

d se

rvice

s sev

erel

y im

pact

ed:

Ac

adem

ic su

ppor

ts-s

tude

nt d

ata,

ana

lysis

and

curr

iculu

m su

ppor

t elim

inat

ed o

r und

erm

ined

as

wel

l as w

rap-

arou

nd se

rvice

s to

supp

ort s

tude

nt &

fam

ily e

ngag

emen

t in

educ

atio

n

Ne

twor

k su

ppor

ts-n

etw

ork

supp

orts

to sc

hool

s

171

28

2019

-20

Redu

ctio

ns to

Cen

tral

Adm

in C

osts

Impa

ctSt

atut

ory,

cont

ract

ual a

nd b

oard

-dire

cted

resp

onsib

ilitie

s cou

ld b

e im

pact

ed w

ithou

t effo

rts t

o pr

otec

t ne

eded

reso

urce

s fro

m cu

ts.

Each

of t

hese

is a

lread

y an

are

a of

pas

t or c

urre

nt st

rain

on

Dist

rict r

esou

rces

.

Man

date

d re

spon

sibili

ties:

Fi

nanc

ial r

epor

ting

-to

stat

e, co

unty

, aud

itors

St

aff a

ssig

nmen

t and

pro

cess

ing-

exte

nsiv

e ru

les a

bout

ass

igni

ng st

aff t

o te

mpo

rary

and

pe

rman

ent r

oles

, inc

ludi

ng a

djus

tmen

t in

hour

s and

pay

and

man

agem

ent o

f sup

port

of

pers

onne

l com

mitt

ees

Cu

rricu

lum

& te

xtbo

ok co

mpl

ianc

e -c

urric

ulum

ado

ptio

n an

d Williamsr

equi

rem

ents

St

uden

t Int

erve

ntio

n su

ppor

t-di

stric

t wid

e co

ordi

natio

n of

stud

ent a

cade

mic

and

beha

vior

al

supp

orts

St

uden

t tes

ting

supp

ort-

stat

e te

stin

g re

quire

men

ts, t

rans

crip

ts

En

rollm

ent s

uppo

rt -

adm

inist

ratio

n of

the

Dist

rict p

olici

es o

f sch

ool s

elec

tion

by fa

mili

es

172

Asse

mbl

y Bi

ll 18

40W

hat a

re th

e im

plica

tions

of A

B 18

40 a

nd ca

n w

e co

unt o

n th

is fu

ndin

g to

pro

vide

a b

ridge

or s

oft-l

andi

ng a

s we

impl

emen

t a lo

ng-

term

mul

ti-ye

ar p

lan

for b

udge

t red

uctio

ns?

30

173

AB 1

840

Ques

tions

and

Con

sider

atio

ns

Fram

ewor

k -W

hat i

s AB

1840

?

To a

chie

ve fi

scal

stab

ility

for O

USD,

the

Stat

e As

sem

bly p

asse

d AB

184

0 to

pr

ovid

e th

ree

year

s of r

elie

f fun

ding

to th

e di

stric

t.

Th

is fu

ndin

g is

inte

nded

to a

ssist

OUS

D in

add

ress

ing

its o

ngoi

ng d

efici

t, an

d to

pr

ovid

e tim

e an

d sp

ace

requ

ired

for i

mpl

emen

ting

stro

ng a

nd co

nsist

ent f

iscal

co

ntro

ls to

ens

ure

the

nece

ssar

y re

sour

ces t

o se

rve

the

stud

ents

of O

akla

nd.

Th

e pr

oces

s out

lined

in A

B 18

40 in

clude

s an

over

sight

par

tner

ship

with

the

Alam

eda

Coun

ty O

ffice

of E

duca

tion

(ACO

E), F

CMAT

, the

Cal

iforn

ia D

epar

tmen

t of

Edu

catio

n (C

DE),

Stat

e Bo

ard

of E

duca

tion

(SBE

), De

part

men

t of F

inan

ce

(DOF

), an

d St

ate

Legi

slatu

re.

31

174

Will

AB

1840

fix t

he d

istric

t’s st

ruct

ural

def

icit?

AB

184

0 is

desig

ned

to p

rovi

de a

one

-tim

e al

loca

tion

of fu

ndin

g ba

sed

on th

e di

stric

t’s p

roje

cted

def

icit a

t a ra

te o

f up

to 7

5% fo

r Yea

r 1 (F

Y 20

19-2

0), u

p to

50

% fo

r Yea

r 2 (F

Y 20

20-2

1), a

nd u

p to

25%

for Y

ear 3

(FY

2021

-22)

.

Th

e on

e-tim

e al

loca

tion

prov

ides

a b

ridge

of f

undi

ng so

that

OUS

D ca

n de

velo

p a

mor

e ba

lanc

ed, s

usta

inab

le, a

nd lo

ng-te

rm so

lutio

n to

our

fisc

al d

efici

t.

It

is th

e St

ate’

s int

ent t

hat o

ur b

udge

t will

be

bala

nced

onc

e th

is br

idge

fund

ing

expi

res.

AB 1

840

Ques

tions

and

Con

sider

atio

ns (c

ont.)

175

Is fu

ndin

g un

der A

B 18

40 G

uara

ntee

d?

Ba

sed

on th

e Di

stric

t’s n

umer

ous d

iscus

sions

with

Sta

te a

nd C

ount

y Of

ficia

ls, it

is

our u

nder

stan

ding

that

the

fund

s are

not

gua

rant

eed

and

are

subj

ect t

o an

in

tens

ive

revi

ew p

roce

ss.

Fo

r exa

mpl

e, in

Yea

r 1, t

he fi

nal f

undi

ng re

com

men

datio

n co

uld

be ze

ro fu

ndin

g to

the

full

75%

allo

catio

n.

In

a re

cent

Legi

slativ

e An

alys

t Rep

ort (

LAO)

, the

LAO

has r

ecom

men

ded

that

the

Stat

e Le

gisla

ture

resc

ind

the

auth

oriza

tion

of a

spec

ial g

rant

to O

USD

and

Ingl

ewoo

d US

D pr

ovid

ed b

y AB

184

0 an

d pr

ovid

e a

loan

def

erra

l as a

bet

ter

publ

ic po

licy

goal

.

AB 1

840

Ques

tions

and

Con

sider

atio

ns (c

ont.)

176

Reim

agin

ing

OUSD

W

hat i

s our

visi

on fo

r re-

imag

ing

our d

istric

t?

Ho

w d

oes t

he C

omm

unity

of S

choo

ls Ci

tyw

ide

Plan

influ

ence

our

fu

ture

visi

on?

Ho

w a

re w

e re

desig

ning

cent

ral o

ffice

in su

ppor

t of s

choo

ls?

34

177

Wha

t is o

ur vi

sion

for r

e-im

agin

g ou

r dist

rict?

Ho

w d

oes t

he C

omm

unity

of S

choo

ls Ci

tyw

ide

Plan

influ

ence

our

fu

ture

visi

on?

35

178

Our M

issio

n an

d Vi

sion

Grou

nd U

sM

issio

n:To

bec

ome

a Fu

ll Se

rvice

Com

mun

ity D

istric

tfoc

used

on

high

ac

adem

ic ac

hiev

emen

t whi

le se

rvin

g th

e w

hole

child

, elim

inat

ing

ineq

uity

, and

pr

ovid

ing

each

child

with

exc

elle

nt te

ache

rs, e

very

day

.

Visio

n:Al

l OUS

D st

uden

tsw

ill fi

nd jo

y in

thei

r aca

dem

ic le

arni

ng e

xper

ienc

e w

hile

gra

duat

ing

with

the

skill

s to

ensu

re th

ey a

re ca

ring,

com

pete

nt, f

ully

-in

form

ed, c

ritica

l thi

nker

s who

are

pre

pare

d fo

r col

lege

, car

eer,

and

com

mun

ity

succ

ess.

Qual

ity -

Equi

ty -

Acce

ss -

Fisc

al Su

stai

nabi

lity

34

179

Com

mun

ity o

f Sch

ools

Polic

y (B

P 60

06)

A Ci

tyw

ide

Plan

grou

nded

in p

olicy

: Ass

et M

anag

emen

t, Ch

arte

r Aut

horiz

atio

n, E

nrol

lmen

t, Eq

uity

, Res

ults

Bas

ed B

udge

ting,

Sch

ool G

over

nanc

e, a

nd Q

ualit

y Sch

ool D

evel

opm

ent

Defin

ed A

uton

omie

sE

Best

supp

ort c

ontin

ued

inno

vatio

nw

ithin

OUS

D sc

hool

s and

ac

cele

rate

the

num

ber o

f hig

h-qu

ality

scho

ol o

ptio

ns w

ithin

OU

SD

Acce

ss to

Equ

itabl

e &

Qua

lity

Educ

atio

n fo

r all

DSh

are

best

pra

ctice

s acr

oss a

ll Oa

klan

d pu

blics

scho

ols,

(e.g

., pr

ofes

siona

l dev

elop

men

t, re

crui

tmen

t and

rete

ntio

n of

ed

ucat

ors)

that

impr

ove

equi

tabl

e ed

ucat

iona

l acc

ess f

or a

ll Oa

klan

d st

uden

ts.

Char

ter A

utho

rizat

ion

CSt

reng

then

our

role

in o

vers

ight

and

acc

ount

abili

tyto

ens

ure

that

all

char

ter s

choo

ls op

erat

ing

in O

akla

nd a

re p

rovi

ding

a h

igh

qual

ity e

duca

tion

and

wor

king

to a

ddre

ss in

equi

ties.

Facil

ities

ABe

st le

vera

ge v

acan

t, un

deru

tilize

d, a

nd su

rplu

s pro

pert

iesa

nd

utili

ze fa

cility

use

agr

eem

ents

to st

rate

gica

lly e

ngag

e al

l Oak

land

pu

blic

scho

ols-

dist

rict o

r cha

rter

; ide

ntify

hig

h qu

ality

opt

ions

for

acad

emic

prog

ram

s

Enro

llmen

t & T

rans

port

atio

nB

Wor

k w

ith a

ll Oa

klan

d pu

blic

scho

ols d

istric

t or c

hart

er -

to

bett

er a

rticu

late

feed

er p

atte

rnsa

cros

s Oak

land

to e

nsur

e m

ore

pred

ictab

ility

for f

amili

es.

35

180

City

wid

e Pl

an C

onsid

erat

ions

Qual

ity &

Equ

ity

We

need

bet

ter q

ualit

y pr

ogra

ms i

n ev

ery

neig

hbor

hood

for e

very

stud

ent

W

e ne

ed to

iden

tify

qual

ity m

etric

s to

be u

sed

for d

istric

t and

char

ter s

choo

ls al

ike

W

e ne

ed to

pro

vide

ong

oing

supp

ort f

or sc

hool

impr

ovem

ent t

o al

l OUS

D an

d Ch

arte

r sch

ools

Equi

ty &

Acc

ess

W

e n

eed

acce

ss to

qua

lity

scho

ols c

lose

r to

hom

e

We

need

regi

onal

feed

er p

atte

rns f

rom

pre

-K th

roug

h hi

gh sc

hool

Fisc

al V

italit

y & S

usta

inab

ility

W

e ne

ed fe

wer

, bet

ter r

esou

rced

scho

ols w

ith la

rger

enr

ollm

ent

W

e ne

ed to

bui

ld su

stai

nabl

e re

latio

nshi

ps w

ith ch

arte

r sch

ools

in o

ur ci

ty

36

181

How

are

we

rede

signi

ng ce

ntra

l offi

ce in

supp

ort o

f sch

ools?

39

182

Purp

ose

of C

entr

al O

ffice

: Con

tinuo

us Im

prov

emen

t

To a

chie

ve th

e go

al o

f im

prov

ing s

tude

nt

outc

omes

and

incr

easin

g sc

hool

qua

lity

acro

ss th

e di

stric

t...

Cent

ral O

ffice

mus

t fo

cus o

n co

ntin

uous

im

prov

emen

t to

supp

ort s

choo

l site

ca

pacit

yand

impr

ove

the

qual

ity o

f se

rvice

sto

netw

orks

of s

choo

ls.

MEA

SURE

DEFI

NE

ANAL

YZE

38

183

Cont

inuu

m o

f Cen

tral

Offi

ce T

heor

ies o

f Ac

tion

for S

uppo

rtin

g Sc

hool

Site

s

39

Low

est S

ite B

ased

De

cisio

n M

akin

g

High

est C

entr

alize

d Co

ntro

l & S

uppo

rt

High

est S

ite B

ased

De

cisio

n M

akin

g

Low

est

Cent

raliz

ed

Cont

rol &

Sup

port

Man

aged

In

stru

ctio

n M

odel

Mos

t Sch

ool

Hom

ogen

eity

Mos

t Mod

el S

choo

l Di

vers

ity

Som

e Si

te B

ased

De

cisio

n M

akin

g

Som

e C

entr

alize

d Co

ntro

l & S

uppo

rt

Som

e M

odel

Sch

ool

Hom

ogen

eity

Grea

ter S

ite B

ased

De

cisio

n M

akin

g

Less

Cen

tral

ized

Cont

rol

& S

uppo

rt

Mor

e M

odel

Sch

ool

Dive

rsity

Man

aged

Pe

rform

ance

Em

pow

erm

ent

“ear

ned”

au

tono

my

Perfo

rman

ce

Empo

wer

men

t

“def

ined

” au

tono

my

Dive

rse

Mod

els

“com

mun

ity/ p

ortfo

lio

of s

choo

ls”

Appl

ied

to so

me

scho

ols

Appl

ied

to a

ll/m

ost s

choo

lsAp

plie

d to

man

y/m

ost/

all

Cent

ral O

ffice

focu

ses o

n sc

hool

INPU

TSCe

ntra

l Offi

ce fo

cuse

s on

scho

ol O

UTPU

TS

Adap

ted

base

d on

Kat

zir a

nd M

cAda

ms:

The

Rede

sign

of U

rban

Scho

ol D

istric

ts: C

ase

Stud

ies i

n Ur

ban

Scho

ol G

over

nanc

e (2

013)

184

Disc

ussio

nan

d Re

com

men

datio

n

42

Leve

l of I

nves

tmen

ts20

19/2

0Re

duct

ion

2020

/21

Redu

ctio

nFT

ELo

ssRa

tiona

le

Scen

ario

A(C

urre

nt

Real

ity)

Mod

erat

e

18-1

9 Re

serv

e: 2

.25%

19

-20

Rese

rve:

3.1

7%

20-2

1 Re

serv

e: 3

.06%

Adm

inist

ratio

n Re

com

men

datio

n

$17.

3M$0

119

-Al

low

s for

all

curr

ently

com

mitt

ed

inve

stm

ents

to b

e fu

nded

;-

Allo

ws f

or fu

nd b

alan

ce re

serv

e of

3%

be

ginn

ing

in FY

201

9-20

;-

Allo

ws f

or a

mor

e ba

lanc

ed a

ppro

ach

to

Cent

ral O

ffice

Red

uctio

ns;

-Ce

ntra

l Site

Supp

orts

will

be

stra

ined

bu

t man

agea

ble;

Scen

ario

BM

oder

atel

y Agg

ress

ive

18

-19

Rese

rve:

2.2

5%

19-2

0 Re

serv

e: 3

.52%

20

-21

Rese

rve:

3.0

1%

$21.

5M$0

154

This

optio

n w

ould

pro

vide

for s

light

ly m

ore

incr

ease

s in

inve

stm

ents

but

with

out a

de

cisio

n to

furt

her e

xpan

d re

duct

ions

to si

tes

and

othe

r hol

d-ha

rmle

ss su

ppor

t fun

ctio

ns,

Cent

ral S

ite S

uppo

rt fu

nctio

ns w

ould

bec

ome

dim

inish

ed, i

neffi

cient

, and

inef

fect

ive.

Scen

ario

CAg

gres

sive

18

-19

Rese

rve:

2.2

5%

19-2

0 Re

serv

e: 4

.30%

20

-21

Rese

rve:

3.0

3%$3

0.2M

$020

8

This

optio

n w

ould

pro

vide

for s

ubst

antia

l in

crea

ses i

n in

vest

men

ts b

ut w

ithou

t cut

s to

sites

or o

ther

hol

d-ha

rmle

ss fu

nctio

ns, m

ost

Cent

ral S

ite S

uppo

rt b

asic

func

tions

wou

ld b

e se

vere

ly d

eple

ted

and

in m

any

case

s bec

ome

non-

exist

ent.

All

Sce

nario

s in

clud

e th

e or

igin

al $

3 M

illion

in s

ite re

duct

ions

185

2019

-20

Budg

et R

educ

tion

Proc

ess T

imel

ine

(Key

Act

iviti

es)

Janu

ary 2

3, 2

019

Upda

te B

udge

t Red

uctio

n Ta

rget

Re

solu

tion

Base

d on

Firs

t Int

erim

an

d Go

vern

or’s

Prop

osed

Bud

get

Janu

ary 9

, 201

9Bo

ard

Revi

ews 1

st R

ead

of

Budg

et R

educ

tion

Reco

mm

enda

tions

Janu

ary 3

0, 2

019:

Spe

cial

Mee

ting

Boar

d Fi

naliz

es a

nd A

dopt

s Re

com

men

ded

Redu

ctio

ns

Febr

uary

201

9Bo

ard

Appr

oved

Re

duct

ion

Plan

Su

bmitt

ed to

ACO

E

43

Dec-

Janu

ary

Stak

ehol

der L

eade

rshi

p En

gage

men

t on

final

Bu

dget

Red

uctio

n Pl

an

See

full

Budg

et,T

alen

t an

d Sc

hool

Site

Pl

anni

ng

Tim

elin

e he

re.

Cent

ral O

ffice

Red

esig

n Pr

oces

s Jan

-June

186

1000

Bro

adw

ay, S

uite

680

, Oak

land

, CA

9460

744

187

APP

END

IX

45

188

Staf

fing

Info

46

189

Over

all S

taffi

ng O

verv

iew

*D

ivis

ion

Unr

estr

icte

d FT

Es

(Incl

udes

S&

C)

Res

tric

ted

FTEs

(E

xem

pt)

Sup

erin

tend

ent

447.

495

.5

Aca

dem

ics

347.

346

5.7

Ope

ratio

ns11

4.3

8.5

Sch

ool S

ites

2,23

7.4

904.

3

Tota

ls31

46.4

961.

0

*Bas

ed o

n Oc

tobe

r 201

8 in

form

atio

n sh

ared

with

the

Fisc

al V

italit

y Com

mitt

ee N

ovem

ber 8

, 201

8. S

ome

posit

ions

are

fund

ed b

y S&

C an

d ar

e tr

eate

d di

ffere

ntly

in a

sses

sing

pote

ntia

l red

uctio

ns.

27

190

Staf

fing

Over

view

–Of

fice

of th

e Su

perin

tend

ent 48

Site

Dep

artm

ent N

ame

901

Chi

ef o

f Sta

ff90

6O

mbu

dsm

an91

8Fa

cilit

ies

Plan

ning

929

Offi

ce O

f Equ

ity94

0Bo

ard

Of E

duca

tion

941

Offi

ce O

f The

Sup

erin

tend

ent

942

Labo

r Rel

atio

ns94

4H

uman

Res

ourc

es S

ervi

ces

-Tal

ent

946

Lega

l Cou

nsel

947

Cha

rter S

choo

ls O

ffice

(adm

in)

958

Com

mun

icat

ions

988

Build

ings

& G

roun

ds98

9C

usto

dial

Ser

vice

s99

4O

USD

Pol

ice

Dep

artm

ent

2018

-19

Pers

onne

lU

nres

tric

ted

FTE

Res

tric

ted

FTE

4.5

1.5

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

17.5

4.5

10.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

46.9

9.4

7.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

19.5

1.1

9.0

79.0

222.

00.

010

1.0

0.0

447.

495

.5

Cus

todi

al S

ervi

ces

and

Pol

ice

serv

ices

are

cor

e se

rvic

es

enum

erat

ed in

BP

3150

. W

hile

ef

ficie

ncie

s ar

e al

way

s w

elco

me,

no

redu

ctio

n is

sou

ght.

191

Staf

fing

Over

view

–Ac

adem

ic Se

rvice

s

49

Site

Dep

artm

ent N

ame

903

Offi

ce O

f Chi

ef A

cade

mic

Offi

ce90

9Ac

adem

ic In

nova

tion

910

Early

Chi

ldho

od D

evel

opm

ent

912

Link

ed L

earn

ing

921

Offi

ce O

f Pos

t Sec

onda

ry R

eadi

ng92

2C

omm

. Sch

ools

& S

tude

nt S

ervi

ces

923

Elem

enta

ry N

etw

ork

492

8O

psr C

ouns

elin

g93

2Jr

Res

erve

Off

Trai

ning

Cor

p93

3O

akla

nd A

thle

tic L

eagu

e (O

AL)

937

Sum

mer

Pro

gram

s94

8R

esea

rch

Asse

ssm

ent &

Dat

a95

4En

g La

ng L

earn

er/m

ultil

ingu

al A

ch.

961

Pre

K-5

Net

wor

k 1

962

Pre-

k-5

Net

wor

k 2

963

Pre-

k-5

Net

wor

k 3

964

Hig

h Sc

hool

Net

wor

k96

5M

iddl

e Sc

hool

Net

wor

k96

8H

ealth

Ser

vice

s (n

urse

s)97

5Sp

ecia

l Edu

catio

n

2018

-19

Pers

onne

lU

nres

tric

ted

FTE

Res

tric

ted

FTE

4.0

0.0

86.1

62.9

18.0

20.6

17.8

24.4

0.0

0.0

72.5

78.6

3.3

2.5

43.0

0.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

27.3

2.2

5.8

27.3

0.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

14.9

4.6

1.0

1.8

37.0

2.6

8.6

237.

234

7.3

465.

7

H

ealth

Ser

vice

s, C

ouns

elin

g S

ervi

ces

and

Spe

cial

Edu

catio

n P

olic

e se

rvic

es

are

core

ser

vice

s en

umer

ated

in

BP

3150

. W

hile

effi

cien

cies

are

alw

ays

wel

com

e, n

o re

duct

ion

is s

ough

t.

A

cade

mic

Ser

vice

s ha

s m

ore

posi

tions

fu

nded

by

Res

trict

ed th

an U

nres

trict

ed

Fund

s

192

Staf

fing

Over

view

–Op

erat

ions

50

902

Acco

unts

Pay

able

905

Offi

ce O

f Sr.

Busi

ness

Offi

cer

907

Stud

ent A

ssig

nmen

t91

3C

hief

Of O

pera

tions

936

Acco

untin

g94

9O

ffice

Of T

he In

tern

al A

udito

r95

0St

ate

And

Fede

ral P

rogr

ams

951

Budg

et97

9Pr

intin

g An

d M

ail S

ervi

ces

980

Chi

ef F

inan

cial

Offi

cer

983

Payr

oll

986

Tech

nolo

gy S

ervi

ces

987

Ris

k M

anag

emen

t99

0Pr

ocur

emen

t & D

istri

butio

n99

1Fo

od S

ervi

ce99

2W

areh

ouse

Dis

tribu

tion

995

Tran

spor

tatio

n

2018

-19

Pers

onne

l

Unr

estr

icte

d FT

ER

estr

icte

d FT

E6.

00.

02.

20.

015

.40.

70.

00.

09.

90.

40.

00.

00.

56.

515

.20.

63.

00.

02.

00.

010

.00.

036

.00.

01.

00.

03.

00.

00.

00.

38.

10.

02.

00.

011

4.3

8.5

Ope

ratio

ns h

as v

ery

few

pos

ition

s fu

nded

by

Res

trict

ed F

unds

as

man

y fu

nctio

ns a

re m

anda

tory

or r

elat

ed to

co

mpl

ianc

e w

ith la

w, c

ontra

ct o

r Boa

rd

polic

y.

193

Bud

get R

educ

tion

Plan

Det

ail

51

194

→In

crea

se R

even

ues (

Cate

gory

1)

→De

crea

se Sp

endi

ng (C

ateg

ory

2)→

Impl

emen

t Cos

ts S

avin

gs (C

ateg

ory

3)

43

Goal

: Mak

e ne

cess

ary a

djus

tmen

ts to

crea

te a

nd m

aint

ain

a ba

lanc

ed b

udge

t w

here

ong

oing

reve

nues

mee

t or e

xcee

d on

goin

g exp

endi

ture

s. A

ll ad

just

men

ts

inte

nded

to b

e on

goin

g.

Mul

ti-Ye

ar B

udge

t Red

uctio

n Pl

an

195

Cate

gory

1 -

Incr

ease

d Re

venu

es

44

Opt

ions

FY 2

019-

20(Y

ear 1

)FY

202

0-21

(Yea

r 2)

FY 2

021-

22(Y

ear 3

)FY

202

2-23

(Yea

r 4)

Faci

litie

s R

enta

l R

edes

ign

(NN

R)

$800

,000

$1,1

00,0

00$1

,200

,000

$1,3

00,0

00

Sat

urda

y S

choo

l Dis

trict

-w

ide

Opt

iona

l Im

plem

enta

tion

(AD

A)

(NN

R)

$500

,000

$800

,000

$900

,000

$1,0

00,0

00

Sub-

Tota

l Cat

egor

y 1

$1,3

00,0

00$1

,900

,000

$2,1

00,0

00$2

,300

,000

Note

: NR

= Ne

gotia

tion

Requ

ired

/ NNR

-Ne

gotia

tion

Not R

equi

red

Estim

ated

Ong

oing

Rev

enue

Incr

ease

s

196

Cate

gory

2 -

Decr

ease

d Sp

endi

ng P

lan

(con

t.)

45

Note

: NR

= Ne

gotia

tion

Requ

ired

/ NNR

-Ne

gotia

tion

Not R

equi

red

Opt

ions

FY

201

9-20

(Yr.

1)FY

202

0-21

(Yr.

2)FY

202

1-22

(Yr.

3)FY

202

2-23

(Yr.

4)

Red

uce

Ener

gy/U

tiliti

es C

osts

(N

NR

)$1

50,0

00$3

00,0

00$3

00,0

00$3

00,0

00

Con

solid

ate

Prin

ting

Cos

ts

Acro

ss th

e D

istr

ict (

Phas

e 1

–C

opy

Supp

lies,

Ton

er) (

NN

R)

$65,

000

$120

,000

$120

,000

$120

,000

Con

solid

ate

Prin

ting

Cos

ts

Acro

ss th

e D

istr

ict

(Dis

tric

twid

e Le

ase)

(Pha

se 2

) (N

NR

)

$0

$1,0

00,0

00$1

,000

,000

$1,0

00,0

00

Sub-

Tota

l Cat

egor

y 2

(con

t.)$2

15,0

00$1

,420

,000

$1,4

20,0

00$1

,420

,000

Estim

ated

Ong

oing

Spe

ndin

g D

ecre

ases

197

Cate

gory

2 -

Decr

ease

d Sp

endi

ng P

lan

46

Note

: NR

= Ne

gotia

tion

Requ

ired

/ NNR

-Ne

gotia

tion

Not R

equi

red

Estim

ated

Ong

oing

Spe

ndin

g D

ecre

ases

Opt

ions

FY

201

9-20

(Yea

r 1)

19-2

0(Y

r. 1)

FY 2

020-

21(Y

ear 2

)FY

202

1-22

(Yea

r 3)

FY 2

022-

23(Y

ear 4

)

Red

uce

Cen

tral

Sta

ffing

(N

NR

)$7

,000

,000

$7,0

00,0

00$7

,000

,000

$7,0

00,0

00

Red

uce

Site

Dis

cret

iona

ry

(NN

R)

$3,0

00,0

00$3

,000

,000

$3,0

00,0

00$3

,000

,000

Elim

inat

e Va

cant

Pos

ition

s D

istr

ictw

ide

(NN

R)

$150

,000

$150

,000

$150

,000

$150

,000

Sub-

Tota

l Cat

egor

y 2

$10,

150,

000

$10,

150,

000

$10,

150,

000

$10,

150,

000

(ong

oing

from

201

9-20

, not

add

ition

al

cuts

)

(ong

oing

from

201

9-20

, not

add

ition

al

cuts

)

(ong

oing

from

201

9-20

, not

add

ition

al

cuts

)

198

Cate

gory

3 -

Cost

Sav

ings

Pla

n

47

Note

: NR

= Ne

gotia

tion

Requ

ired

/ NNR

-Ne

gotia

tion

Not R

equi

red

Opt

ions

FY 2

019-

20Ye

ar 1

FY 2

020-

21Ye

ar 2

FY 2

021-

22Ye

ar 3

FY 2

022-

23Ye

ar 4

Dis

tric

twid

e Te

leph

one

Con

solid

atio

n (N

NR

)$5

00,0

00$3

,000

,000

$4,5

00,0

00$4

,500

,000

Supp

lem

enta

l Ear

ly

Ret

irem

ent P

rogr

am (N

NR

)$0

$1,8

00,0

00$1

,300

,000

$900

,000

Scho

ol C

onso

lidat

ions

and

C

losu

res

(NN

R)

$81,

000

$1,2

00,0

00$1

,600

,000

$2,1

00,0

00

Expl

ore

Opp

ortu

nitie

s to

Le

vera

ge R

estr

icte

d D

olla

rs

to S

uppo

rt G

F (N

NR

)

$250

,000

$250

,000

$250

,000

$250

,000

Sub-

Tota

l Cat

egor

y 3

$831

,000

$6,2

50,0

00$7

,650

,000

$7,7

50,0

00

Estim

ated

Ong

oing

Cos

t Sav

ings

199

Scen

ario

A -

Mod

erat

e In

crea

se($

17.3

Mil.

Red

uctio

n Be

ginn

ing

FY 2

019-

20)

48

Cur

rent

ly E

stim

ated

Ong

oing

Cos

t Sav

ings

, Red

uctio

ns &

Rev

enue

Incr

ease

s

Optio

ns

FY 2

019-

20(Y

r. 1)

FY 2

020-

21(Y

r. 2)

FY 2

021-

22(Y

r. 3)

FY 2

022-

23(Y

r. 4)

Estim

ated

4 Y

ear C

umul

ativ

e Sa

ving

s Ca

tego

ry 1

: In

crea

se R

even

ues

$1,3

00,0

00$1

,900

,000

$2,1

00,0

00$2

,300

,000

Cate

gory

2:

Dec

reas

ed S

pend

ing

$10,

365,

000

$11,

570,

000

$11,

570,

000

$11,

570,

000

Cate

gory

3:

Cos

ts S

avin

gs

$831

,000

$6,7

50,0

00$8

,150

,000

$8,2

50,0

00

Revi

sed

Tota

ls$1

2,49

6,00

0$2

0,22

0,00

0$2

1,82

0,00

0$2

2,12

0,00

0

200

Exhibit K

1

2019

-20

Budg

et R

educ

tion

Plan

Ja

nuar

y 23,

201

9 -F

inal

Pre

sent

ed b

y: M

arcu

s B

attle

, Chi

ef B

usin

ess

Offi

cer

To: O

US

D B

oard

of E

duca

tion

201

Disc

ussio

n To

pics

1.Ba

ckgr

ound

2.Up

date

d Re

duct

ion

Scen

ario

s &

Reco

mm

enda

tion

3.Up

date

on

Gov

Budg

et a

nd W

hat i

t Mea

ns fo

r Oa

klan

d4.

Next

Ste

ps

2

202

BACK

GROU

ND

3

203

INPU

TIn

form

s spe

cific

redu

ctio

ns

PRIO

RITI

ES -

THEO

RY O

F ACT

ION

How

will

we

get t

here

?

Our

Dis

tric

t Prio

ritie

s

Teac

her R

eten

tion,

Scho

ol

Gove

rnan

ce&

Equ

ity P

olicy

BP 3

150,

Fisc

al V

italit

y Pla

nBP

600

6 Co

mm

unity

of S

choo

ls,

LCAP

, Qua

lity S

choo

l De

velo

pmen

t

VISI

ON &

MIS

SION

Whe

re a

re w

e go

ing

and

why

?

ORGA

NIZA

TION

AL R

ESILI

ENCE

QUAL

ITY

COM

MUN

ITY

SCHO

OLS

FISC

AL V

ITAL

ITY

4

Stak

ehol

ders

: Stu

dent

s (Al

l-City

Cou

ncil)

, Prin

cipal

s (PA

C Su

rvey

), St

aff &

Com

mun

ity (C

omm

unity

Surv

ey):

Benc

hmar

ks: D

istric

t Com

paris

ons,

FCM

AT R

epor

t

204

Rece

nt B

udge

t Hist

ory

Sept

embe

r 201

8Cl

osin

g of

the

book

s for

20

17-1

8 sh

ows g

reat

er

than

exp

ecte

d sa

ving

s fro

m b

udge

t red

uctio

ns

and

fisca

l res

trai

nt

Augu

st 2

018

Boar

d Pa

sses

1st

Fisc

al

VIta

lity

Reso

lutio

nto

pla

n re

duct

ions

/sav

ings

of $

30M

in

201

9-20

to e

nsur

e so

lven

cy a

nd re

serv

es

Nove

mbe

r 201

8Bo

ard

pass

es u

pdat

ed F

iscal

Vi

talit

y re

solu

tion

to p

lan

redu

ctio

ns/s

avin

gs o

f $30

M

in 2

019-

20. t

o fu

nd p

riorit

ies

inclu

ding

com

pens

atio

n an

d re

serv

es

Janu

ary 9

and

23,

201

9Fu

ll Bo

ard

revi

ews

redu

ctio

ns/s

avin

gs p

lan

prep

ared

by

staf

f

5

June

201

8Pr

ojec

ted

defic

its in

20

19-2

0 an

d be

yond

at

curr

ent s

pend

ing

leve

ls an

d fla

tteni

ng

reve

nue

Dece

mbe

r 201

820

18 1

st In

terim

supp

ort

proj

ects

min

imal

def

icit i

n 20

19-2

0, b

ut n

o fu

nds f

or

inve

stm

ent o

r 3%

+ re

serv

e

Janu

ary 3

0, 2

019

Boar

d sc

hedu

led

to a

dopt

re

vise

d re

duct

ions

/sav

ings

pl

an a

fter s

econ

d re

view

Ja

nuar

y 23

rd

205

Sum

mar

y fro

m Ja

n. 9

Boa

rd P

rese

ntat

ion

6

Staf

f pre

sent

ed th

ree

redu

ctio

n sc

enar

ios

whi

ch:

The

Boar

d di

rect

ed st

aff t

o re

turn

with

sc

enar

ios w

hich

:

Al

ignm

ent w

ith B

oard

Pol

icy 3

150

Su

bsta

ntia

l red

uctio

ns to

cent

ral

adm

in

Lim

ited

redu

ctio

ns to

cent

ral

serv

ices t

o sit

es

Lim

ited

redu

ctio

ns to

scho

ol si

tes

Ha

d op

tions

with

var

ying

redu

ctio

n to

tals

(onl

y on

e op

tion

with

$30

M in

tota

l re

duct

ions

)

Id

entif

y fu

ll $3

0 m

illio

n in

redu

ctio

ns

Es

tabl

ish 3

% R

eser

ve fo

r 201

9-20

and

co

ntin

ue to

incr

ease

eve

ry y

ear a

fter

Ex

pand

rang

e of

opt

ions

cons

ider

ed a

nd

inclu

de ce

ntra

l ser

vice

s to

sites

Ex

plor

e re

allo

catin

g su

pple

men

tal f

unds

M

inim

ize n

egat

ive

impa

ct o

n sc

hool

sit

es

In

vest

igat

e re

duct

ions

to co

ntra

cts a

nd

class

ified

man

agem

ent

206

UPDA

TED

REDU

CTIO

N SC

ENAR

IOS

AND

RECO

MM

ENDA

TION

7

207

Grou

nd in

our

Miss

ion,

Visi

on a

nd V

alue

sOv

er th

e pr

evio

us m

onth

s, w

e ha

ve h

eard

from

Prin

cipal

s, Te

ache

rs, P

aren

ts, U

nion

s, Co

mm

ittee

s, an

d Co

mm

unity

abo

ut a

pro

pose

d re

duct

ion

plan

.

8

We

belie

ve th

e re

duct

ions

we

are

reco

mm

endi

ng a

re:

•pa

rt o

f the

har

d w

ork

and

trad

e-of

fs w

e ne

ed to

do

to im

prov

e te

ache

r ret

entio

n an

d st

uden

t per

form

ance

as p

er o

ur LC

AP g

oals

We

reco

gnize

that

thes

e re

duct

ions

will

:•

affe

ct p

rogr

ams w

e va

lue

and

empl

oyee

s we

deep

ly ca

re a

bout

; we

will

not

be

able

to

keep

the

curr

ent l

evel

of c

urre

nt e

mpl

oyee

s and

pro

gram

s.

We

know

that

our

com

mun

ity, e

mpl

oyee

s and

stak

ehol

ders

hav

e as

ked

us to

:

take

a d

eepe

r loo

k at o

ur co

nsul

tant

cont

ract

s and

man

agem

ent (

cent

ral o

ffice

ad

min

istra

tors

)

avoi

d im

pact

ing

serv

ices a

nd su

ppor

ts n

amed

by

stud

ents

, prin

cipal

s and

com

mun

ity

208

Our P

roce

ss to

Rec

omm

ende

d Re

duct

ions

In o

rder

to g

et to

our

reco

mm

enda

tion,

we

expl

ored

mul

tiple

scen

ario

s con

sider

ing

the

follo

w p

aram

eter

s:

Re

duct

ions

nee

d to

be

in u

nres

trict

ed fu

nds;

whi

ch in

clude

gen

eral

pur

pose

and

su

pple

men

tal &

conc

entr

atio

n fu

nds.

Re

allo

catio

n of

supp

lem

enta

l fun

ds n

eed

to co

mpl

y w

ith th

e pu

rpos

e of

the

use

of

the

fund

s and

be

appr

oved

by

the

coun

ty.

Re

duct

ions

nee

d to

be

guid

ed w

ithin

the

fram

ewor

k of

BP

3150

with

som

e fle

xibili

ty

to g

et to

the

desir

ed re

duct

ion

targ

et.

Re

duct

ions

to sc

hool

site

bud

gets

shou

ld b

e as

min

imal

as p

ossib

le.

Lo

ok in

to co

nsul

tant

cont

ract

s and

cent

ral o

ffice

man

agem

ent

9

209

Step

s Tak

en to

Get

to R

educ

tion

Reco

mm

enda

tion

Give

n ou

r par

amet

ers,

we

took

the

follo

win

g st

eps t

o co

nsid

er v

ario

us sc

enar

ios t

o ge

t to

our r

ecom

men

datio

n:

Step

1:E

xam

ine

the

impa

ct o

f onl

y re

ducin

g ce

ntra

l sta

ff fu

nded

by

unre

stric

ted

gene

ral p

urpo

se d

olla

rs. (

Deta

il in

app

endi

x)

Step

2:E

xam

ine

the

impa

ct o

f red

ucin

g ce

ntra

l sta

ff an

d st

aff h

ired

to p

erfo

rm ce

ntra

l se

rvice

s at s

choo

l site

s fun

ded

by u

nres

trict

ed g

ener

al p

urpo

se d

olla

rs; a

nd re

duce

sc

hool

site

disc

retio

nary

fund

s. (D

etai

l in

appe

ndix)

Step

3:E

xam

ine

the

impa

ct o

f red

ucin

g ce

ntra

l sta

ff an

d st

aff h

ired

to p

erfo

rm ce

ntra

l se

rvice

s at s

choo

l site

s fun

ded

by u

nres

trict

ed g

ener

al p

urpo

se d

olla

rs a

nd

supp

lem

enta

l fun

ds; a

nd re

duce

scho

ol si

te d

iscre

tiona

ry fu

nds

10

210

Step

3: E

xam

ine

the

Real

loca

tion

of S

uppl

emen

tal F

unds

The

real

loca

tion

of S

uppl

emen

tal f

unds

invo

lves

the

follo

win

g pa

ram

eter

s:

•Su

pple

men

tal a

re a

dditi

onal

fund

s giv

en to

scho

ol si

tes t

o se

rve

spec

ific

popu

latio

ns o

f stu

dent

s: En

glish

Lear

ners

, low

inco

me,

and

fost

er y

outh

.•

Supp

lem

enta

l fun

ds m

ust b

e us

ed to

supp

ort t

he a

cade

mic

outc

omes

of

the

spec

ific s

tude

nts l

isted

abo

ve a

nd m

ust b

e ba

sed

on th

e LC

AP g

oals,

m

easu

red

by o

ur st

uden

t out

com

es.

•Th

e Pa

rent

and

Stu

dent

Adv

isory

Com

mitt

ee is

requ

ired

to b

e co

nsul

ted

on re

com

men

datio

ns o

n ho

w w

e m

ake

inve

stm

ents

usin

g ou

r Su

pple

men

tal f

unds

.

11

211

Stud

ent-C

ente

red

LCAP

Goa

lsGo

al 1

:Gr

adua

tes a

re co

llege

and

care

er re

ady.

Goal

2:

Stud

ents

are

pro

ficie

nt in

stat

e ac

adem

ic st

anda

rds.

Goal

3:

Stud

ents

are

read

ing

at o

r abo

ve g

rade

leve

l.

Goal

4:

Engl

ish Le

arne

rs a

re re

achi

ng E

nglis

h flu

ency

.

Goal

5:

Stud

ents

are

eng

aged

in sc

hool

eve

ry d

ay.

Goal

6:

Pare

nts a

nd fa

mili

es a

re e

ngag

ed in

scho

ol a

ctiv

ities

.

FOCU

S ARE

AS

Cond

ition

s for

St

uden

t & A

dult

Lear

ning

St

anda

rd-B

ased

In

stru

ctio

n

Lang

uage

&

Liter

acy

12

212

Expl

anat

ion

of FT

E an

d Pr

ogra

ms i

n Su

pple

men

tal

Fund

s in

5700

“5

700s

” rep

rese

nt p

ositi

ons t

hat s

it in

cent

ral b

udge

ts a

nd

prov

ide

dire

ct se

rvice

s to

scho

ols;

how

ever

, sch

ools

have

de

cided

to p

urch

ase

thes

e se

rvice

s:

Rest

orat

ive

Just

ice F

acili

tato

rs (2

1 FT

E =

8.75

FTE

cent

ral a

nd 1

2.25

sit

es)

Af

rican

Am

erica

n M

ale

Achi

evem

ent F

acili

tato

r (5

FTE

site

fund

ed)

Co

mm

unity

Sch

ool M

anag

ers (

33.4

FTE

= 13

.9 ce

ntra

l-gra

nt fu

nded

an

d 19

.5 si

tes)

Co

llege

/ Ca

reer

Pat

hway

s (7.

5 FT

E= 6

cent

ral a

nd 1

.5 si

tes)

Co

unse

lors

(48.

5 FT

E= 3

3.2

GP a

nd 1

5.3

FTE

Supp

lem

enta

l)

Scho

ol S

ecur

ity O

ffice

rs (8

2 FT

E Su

pple

men

tal)

Cu

stod

ians

(210

FTE

pai

d fo

r by

gene

ral p

urpo

se fu

nds)

Co

unse

ling

Inte

rns (

1 FT

E Su

perv

isor;

Site

pur

chas

e of

serv

ice)

13

213

Cons

ider

atio

ns fo

r Prio

ritiza

tion

14

Cons

ider

ed St

akeh

olde

r In

put

Prio

ritize

d In

vest

men

ts

Chan

ges t

o im

plem

entin

g se

rvice

s

Stud

ent S

urve

yPr

incip

al S

urve

yCo

mm

unity

Sur

vey

Spec

ial E

duca

tion

Nurs

esCo

unse

lors

Teac

her R

eten

tion

Teac

her R

ecru

itmen

tTe

ache

r Com

pens

atio

nNu

triti

on S

ervi

ces

Cust

odia

ns

Com

mun

ity S

choo

ls St

uden

t Se

rvice

sLin

ked

Lear

ning

Acad

emics

and

Inst

ruct

iona

l In

nova

tion

Proc

urem

ent

Fina

ncia

l Ser

vice

sPo

lice

Serv

ices

Tech

nolo

gy

214

BP 3

150

Allo

catio

ns In

cludi

ng R

ecom

men

ded

Redu

ctio

ns

1. Le

gally

Ob

ligat

ed

Expe

nses

2. C

entr

al D

istric

t wid

e Ad

min

istra

tive

Cost

s (1

2% C

ap $

49.8

M)

3. S

pecif

ied

Cent

ral S

ervi

ces t

o Sc

hool

Site

s4.

Sch

ool S

ite

Budg

ets

~$29

M~$

59M

~$48

M~$

98.6

M~$

94.2

M~2

30~$

227M

-Sta

te Lo

an

(~$6

.5M

)-A

udit

Find

ings

(~

$5.5

M)

-Rou

tine

Repa

ir &

M

aint

enan

ce

(~$1

7M)

e.g.

fina

nce,

hum

an re

sour

ces,

perfo

rman

ce m

anag

emen

t, in

stru

ctio

nal s

ervi

ces,

lega

l se

rvice

s, di

stric

t lea

ders

hip

1. S

pecia

l Edu

catio

n 2.

Cus

todi

al a

nd B

uild

ings

& G

roun

ds

3. S

choo

l Pol

ice &

Sch

ool S

ecur

ity O

ffice

rs4.

Sch

ool N

urse

s5.

Sch

ool C

ouns

elor

s6.

Spe

cifie

d En

richm

ent R

esou

rces

(i.e

. su

mm

er sc

hool

, mus

ic, a

rt, n

utrit

ion

serv

ices,

athl

etics

1. G

rade

span

2. F

ree

& R

educ

ed

Lunc

h3.

Eng

lish

Lear

ners

4. F

oste

r Car

e5.

Hig

h-st

ress

ne

ighb

orho

ods

NOTE

: Num

bers

Subj

ect t

o Re

visio

n at

Inte

rim

Repo

rtin

g.

17

215

Fina

l Rec

omm

enda

tion:

Redu

ce C

entr

al A

dmin

and

Cen

tral

Ser

vice

s us

ing

Gene

ral P

urpo

se Fu

nds a

nd b

y Re

allo

catin

g Su

pple

men

tal

Fund

s, an

d re

duce

Site

Bud

get D

iscre

tiona

ry Fu

nds

15

BP 3

150

Redu

ctio

n Im

pact

Cent

ral

Adm

inist

ratio

n$1

1.2M

Redu

ce 8

4 FT

E (S

uppl

emen

tal &

GP

and

max

. res

trict

ed

fund

s)

Usin

g su

pple

men

tal r

eallo

catio

n an

d ge

nera

l pur

pose

fund

s to

mak

e re

duct

ions

allo

ws u

s to

mak

e m

ore

stra

tegi

c red

uctio

ns to

cent

ral a

dmin

istra

tive

serv

ices.

The

impa

ct is

still

gre

at a

nd

will

requ

ire a

cent

ral o

ffice

reor

gani

zatio

n an

d id

entif

icatio

n of

serv

ices a

nd fu

nctio

ns th

at w

ill

no lo

nger

occ

ur.

Cent

ral S

ervi

ces

$4.4

MRe

duce

68.

4 FT

E(S

uppl

emen

tal &

GP

and

max

.rest

ricte

d fu

nds)

The

use

of su

pple

men

tal d

olla

rs w

ill h

elp

prev

ent t

he e

ntire

elim

inat

ion

depa

rtm

ents

pr

ovid

ing

of se

rvice

s to

scho

ols f

unde

d by

gen

eral

pur

pose

fund

s (e.

g. cu

stod

ians

) How

ever

, th

ese

redu

ctio

ns w

ill ca

use

a re

orga

niza

tion

in h

ow w

e pr

ovid

e se

rvice

s.

Scho

ol S

ites

$3M

Scho

ol S

ite D

iscre

tiona

ry Fu

nds R

educ

tion:

Site

Bas

ed D

ecisi

ons t

o re

duce

(e.g

. som

e st

affin

g,

cont

ract

s for

serv

ices)

.

Oper

atio

nal S

avin

gs$2

MIm

plem

ent S

atur

day S

choo

l, F

acili

ties R

enta

l Red

esig

n, S

choo

l Con

solid

atio

ns, a

nd E

nerg

y Sa

ving

s, Co

ntra

cts

Tota

l$2

0.6M

All F

TE fi

gure

s are

bas

ed o

n cu

rren

t em

ploy

ees;

exclu

ding

vac

ancie

s

216

Gove

rnor

’s Bu

dget

Pro

posa

l -Po

tent

ial I

mpa

ct

to O

USD*

16

Fund

ing

Adju

stm

ent D

escr

iptio

nFY

201

8 -

19FY

201

9-20

FY 2

020

-21

LCFF

(C

OLA

Adj

ustm

ent -

Rev

ised

LC

FF C

alcu

lato

r)C

ost o

f Liv

ing

Adj

ustm

ent e

stim

ated

at $

343

per A

DA

(~

3.37

%) b

ased

on

3.46

% in

crea

se to

sub

set o

f LC

FF

Fund

ing

cate

gorie

s.

$

0$3

Mill

ion

$3 M

illio

n

STR

S Ad

just

men

t(E

stim

ated

One

-Tim

e R

ate

Savi

ngs

at $

50 p

er

ADA

)R

educ

tion

in e

mpl

oyer

con

tribu

tion

to S

TRS

retir

emen

ts

estim

ated

at 1

per

cent

age

poin

t 201

9-20

and

202

0-21

.

$

0$

1.7

Mill

ion

$ 1.

7 M

illio

n

Early

Chi

ldho

od E

duca

tion

(TB

D)

$2.4

Bill

ion

of ta

rget

ed in

vest

men

ts s

tate

wid

e$

-

$

-$

-

Mul

ti-Ye

ar E

stim

ated

Adj

ustm

ent a

t 2nd

Inte

rim$

0

$ 4.

7 M

illio

n$

4.7

Mill

ion

*Est

imat

ed im

pact

ass

umes

Gov

erno

r’s p

ropo

sal b

ecom

es la

w a

t bud

get a

dopt

ion

in Ju

ne 2

019.

Fun

ded

ADA

Estim

ated

at F

irst I

nter

im e

qual

s 34,

642

for F

Y 20

19-2

0 an

d 34

,483

for F

Y 20

20-2

1

217

Plan

for A

ddre

ssin

g th

e Im

pact

of R

educ

tions

Gi

ven

the

amou

nt o

f red

uctio

ns th

at w

ill h

appe

n in

one

yea

r, w

e ar

e ex

pect

ing

cons

ider

able

impa

ct o

n sc

hool

site

s and

cent

ral o

ffice

per

sonn

el a

nd p

rogr

amm

ing.

The

lo

ss o

f peo

ple

is ve

ry d

ifficu

lt an

d w

e w

ill d

o ev

eryt

hing

we

can

to cr

eate

a re

spec

tful

tran

sitio

n fo

r tho

se w

ho m

ay lo

se a

pos

ition

in th

is pr

oces

s.The

follo

win

g ar

e st

eps w

e w

ill

be in

corp

orat

ing

into

a tr

ansit

ion

plan

to a

ddre

ss th

e im

pact

of t

he re

duct

ions

:

•Ce

ntra

l Offi

ce R

edes

ign:

Cont

inue

to re

desig

n gr

ound

ed in

Boa

rd p

olici

es

3150

and

600

6 an

d re

ality

of s

taffi

ng re

duct

ions

to e

stab

lish

a ce

ntra

l offi

ce

that

supp

orts

our

LCAP

goa

ls an

d se

rvice

s to

scho

ol si

tes.

•Tr

ansit

ion

Plan

ning

–Pe

rson

alize

d su

ppor

t for

em

ploy

ee jo

b tr

ansit

ions

–Cr

eate

alte

rnat

ive

plan

s to

addr

ess r

educ

tions

in ce

ntra

l ser

vice

s to

sites

–Co

ntin

ue to

see

gran

t fun

ding

for p

rogr

ams a

nd se

rvice

s tha

t hav

e be

en re

duce

d

18

218

1000

Bro

adw

ay, S

uite

680

, Oak

land

, CA

9460

719

219

APP

END

IX

20

220

Oper

atio

nal S

avin

gs D

etai

l:

Cost

Sav

ings

Re

venu

e Ge

nera

tion

21

221

Oper

atio

nal S

avin

gsPl

anFY

201

9-20

Estim

ated

Sa

ving

s Fa

ciliti

es R

enta

ls Re

desig

n$4

60,0

00

Dist

rictw

ide

Satu

rday

Scho

ol -

ADA

Reco

very

Pro

gram

(m

inim

um 2

5 sit

es)

$1,2

65,6

25

Scho

ol C

onso

lidat

ions

and

Clo

sure

s $8

1,00

0

Redu

ced

Ener

gy &

Util

ities

Cos

ts

$150

,000

Tota

l Sav

ings

& R

educ

tions

$1,9

56,6

25

25

222

Furt

her D

etai

l on

Step

s Tak

en to

Exa

min

e Re

duct

ion

Scen

ario

s

23

223

Step

1: E

xam

ine

the

Redu

ctio

n to

onl

y Cen

tral

Sta

ff th

at a

re fu

nded

w

ith G

ener

al P

urpo

se D

olla

rs-N

ot R

ecom

men

ded

12

BP 3

150

Redu

ctio

n Im

pact

Cent

ral A

dmin

istra

tion

Redu

ctio

n of

208

.1 FT

E im

pact

ing

252

empl

oyee

s

$28M

(Gen

eral

Pur

pose

Dol

lars

)

Man

y of o

ur st

aff t

hat p

erfo

rm co

re fu

nctio

ns a

re fu

nded

by

gene

ral p

urpo

se

dolla

rs.

Our a

bilit

y to

hire

, sup

port

, pay

and

trai

n ou

r em

ploy

ees w

ould

be

elim

inat

ed o

r red

uced

by

60-8

0%.

Our a

bilit

y to

bala

nce

our b

ooks

, cle

an sc

hool

s, tr

ansp

ort a

nd p

rovi

de a

safe

lear

ning

env

ironm

ent f

or o

ur st

uden

ts w

ould

also

be

elim

inat

ed in

its e

ntire

ty o

r red

uced

by

at m

inim

um 6

0%.

Mos

t aca

dem

ic ce

ntra

l of

fice

serv

ices w

ould

rem

ain

mor

e in

tact

due

to su

pple

men

tal f

undi

ng, h

owev

er,

they

wou

ld la

ck su

fficie

nt in

frast

ruct

ure

from

our

core

serv

ices

to a

llow

them

to

func

tion.

Cent

ral S

ervi

ces

---De

part

men

ts th

at p

rovi

de ce

ntra

l ser

vice

s to

sites

wou

ld re

mai

n; h

owev

er, t

here

w

ould

be

less

cent

ral i

nfra

stru

ctur

e to

supp

ort t

he im

plem

enta

tion.

Scho

ol S

ites

---Re

ducin

g ce

ntra

l adm

inist

ratio

n w

ill h

ave

indi

rect

impa

ct o

n sc

hool

site

s; su

ch a

s de

laye

d or

disc

ontin

ued

serv

ices a

nd su

ppor

t to

sites

.

Oper

atio

nal S

avin

gs$2

MIm

plem

ent S

atur

day S

choo

l, F

acili

ties R

enta

l Red

esig

n, S

choo

l Con

solid

atio

ns,

and

Ener

gy Sa

ving

s

Tota

l$3

0M

All F

TE fi

gure

s are

bas

ed o

n cu

rren

t em

ploy

ees;

exclu

ding

vac

ancie

s

224

Step

2: E

xam

ine

the

Redu

ctio

n to

Cen

tral

Adm

in a

nd C

entr

al S

ervi

ces

with

onl

y Gen

eral

Pur

pose

Dol

lars

; and

redu

ce Si

te B

udge

t Di

scre

tiona

ry Fu

nds N

ot R

ecom

men

ded

13

BP 3

150

Redu

ctio

n Im

pact

Cent

ral A

dmin

istra

tion

$11M

Redu

ce 8

4 FT

E ou

t of

227.

5FTE

(G

ener

al P

urpo

se D

olla

rs

Only

)

Redu

cing

the

tota

l red

uctio

n to

cent

ral a

dmin

fund

ed b

y gen

eral

pur

pose

less

ons

the

impa

ct o

n th

e un

real

istic

redu

ctio

n of

dep

artm

ents

we

saw

in sc

enar

io 1

, ho

wev

er, o

nly

redu

cing

staf

f fun

ded

by g

ener

al p

urpo

se d

olla

rs d

oes n

ot a

llow

us

to b

e st

rate

gic i

n ou

r red

uctio

ns.

We

inst

ead,

use

d a

prop

ortio

nal r

educ

tion

for

each

dep

artm

ent.

Cent

ral S

ervi

ces t

o Si

tes

$14M

Redu

ce 2

40 F

TE o

ut o

f a

tota

l 294

.4 ft

e(G

ener

al P

urpo

se D

olla

rs

Only

)

Ther

e ar

e on

ly 4

dep

artm

ents

/pos

ition

type

s fu

nded

by

GP in

cent

ral s

ervi

ces.

Gi

ven

this

rest

rictio

n, th

ere

wou

ld b

e th

e el

imin

atio

n of

serv

ices t

o m

aint

ain

clean

an

d sa

fe sc

hool

s.

Scho

ol S

ites

$3M

Scho

ol S

ite D

iscre

tiona

ry Fu

nds R

educ

tion:

Site

Bas

ed D

ecisi

ons t

o re

duce

(e.g

. st

affin

g, co

ntra

cts f

or se

rvice

s).

Oper

atio

n Sa

ving

s$2

MIm

plem

ent S

atur

day S

choo

l, F

acili

ties R

enta

l Red

esig

n, S

choo

l Con

solid

atio

ns, a

nd

Ener

gy S

avin

gs

Tota

l$3

0M

All F

TE fi

gure

s are

bas

ed o

n cu

rren

t em

ploy

ees;

exclu

ding

vac

ancie

s

225

Boa

rd P

olic

y 31

50: R

esul

ts B

ased

Bud

getin

g

26

226

BP 3

150:

Max

imizi

ng U

nres

trict

ed Fu

nds

(Inclu

ding

Sup

plem

enta

l & C

once

ntra

tion

Fund

s)

Spec

ific S

ervi

ces t

o Sc

hool

sNa

med

Ser

vice

s:1.

Spe

cial E

duca

tion

2. C

usto

dial

and

Bui

ldin

gs &

Gr

ound

s 3.

Sch

ool P

olice

& S

choo

l Sec

urity

Of

ficer

s4.

Sch

ool N

urse

s5.

Sch

ool C

ouns

elor

s6.

Spe

cifie

d En

richm

ent R

esou

rces

(i.

e. su

mm

er sc

hool

, mus

ic, a

rt)

All R

emai

ning

Unr

estr

icted

Re

venu

e to

Scho

ol Si

tes

Base

d on

the

proj

ecte

d st

uden

t en

rollm

ent a

nd th

e fo

llow

ing:

1.

Gra

desp

an2.

Fre

e &

Red

uced

Lunc

h3.

Eng

lish

Lear

ners

4. F

oste

r Car

e5.

hig

h-st

ress

nei

ghbo

rhoo

ds

Lega

lly R

equi

red

Dist

rict-W

ide

Oblig

atio

ns

For e

xam

ple:

Sta

te Lo

an A

udit

Find

ings

, etc

.

12%

for D

istric

t-Wid

e Ad

min

istra

tive

Serv

ices

12%

= F

or e

xam

ple:

Indi

rect

adm

in

cost

s, bo

th m

anda

tory

exp

ense

s an

d co

mm

itmen

ts

27

227

Staf

fing

Info

28

228

OUSD

Sta

ffing

Hist

ory

-All

Gene

ral F

und

29

2018

-19

Sal

ary-

Driv

en a

nd

Hea

lth B

enef

it ac

tual

s no

t yet

ad

ded

229

OUSD

Sta

ffing

Hist

ory

-FTE

by

site

type

30

Ove

rall,

201

8-19

sho

ws

a re

duct

ion

in s

taffi

ng o

f 17

FTE

from

201

7-18

.

How

ever

, as

part

of b

udge

t cl

eanu

p in

201

8-19

, ex

pend

iture

s (in

clud

ing

FTE

) he

ld a

s D

istri

ct-w

ide

wer

e al

loca

ted

to s

choo

ls a

nd

Cen

tral d

epar

tmen

ts w

here

ap

prop

riate

.

2856

.73

230

OUSD

Sta

ffing

Hist

ory

-FTE

by

empl

oyee

type 31

231

Clas

sifie

d M

anag

emen

t

32

Publ

ic re

port

s sho

w O

USD

has m

ore

Clas

sifie

d A

dmin

istra

tors

than

mos

t dist

ricts

. OU

SD

iden

tifie

s pos

ition

s as C

lass

ified

Adm

inist

rato

rs a

t a h

ighe

r rat

e th

an o

ther

dist

ricts

, and

m

any

of o

ur C

lass

ified

Adm

inist

rato

r pos

ition

s are

fund

ed w

ith sp

ecia

lized

fund

s to

serv

e ou

r spe

cific

stud

ent p

opul

atio

n.

* Ca

lifor

nia

Depa

rtm

ent o

f edu

catio

n in

clude

s as “

Clas

sifie

d Su

perv

isors

and

Adm

inist

rato

rs”;

supe

rviso

ry p

erso

nnel

who

are

bus

ines

s m

anag

ers,

cont

rolle

rs, d

irect

ors,

chie

f acc

ount

ants

, acc

ount

ing

supe

rviso

rs, p

urch

asin

g ag

ents

, site

adm

inist

rato

rs, a

ssist

ant s

uper

inte

nden

ts,

and

supe

rinte

nden

ts.

Over

-Iden

tifica

tion

The

Dist

rict c

urre

ntly

has

mor

e po

sitio

ns

iden

tifie

d as

Cla

ssifi

ed M

anag

emen

t tha

n ot

her

dist

ricts

. Ba

sed

on st

ate

defin

ition

s, m

any

posit

ions

may

be

misi

dent

ified

as m

anag

emen

t (e

.g.,

Acco

unta

nts,

Exec

utiv

e As

sista

nts,

Coac

hes,

Fina

ncia

l Ana

lyst

s, RJ

Coo

rdin

ator

s, Co

mm

unity

Sc

hool

Man

ager

s).

Theo

ry o

f Act

ion

Over

hal

f of t

he C

lass

ified

Man

agem

ent

posit

ions

are

fund

ed b

y Re

stric

ted

or S

&C

fund

s al

igne

d to

OUS

D’s t

heor

y of

act

ion

and

the

spec

ial n

eeds

of o

ur st

uden

t pop

ulat

ion.

232

Clas

sifie

d M

anag

emen

t -Ge

nera

l Pur

pose

Fund

ed

33

12

0.3

FTE

of C

lass

ified

Man

agem

ent

posi

tions

are

fund

ed a

t Cen

tral i

n 20

18-1

9 w

ith G

ener

al P

urpo

se fu

nds

10

.6 F

TE o

f Cla

ssifi

ed M

anag

emen

t po

sitio

ns a

re fu

nded

at K

-12

scho

ols

in 2

018-

19 w

ith G

ener

al P

urpo

se

fund

s*P

ositi

ons

show

n fo

r Cen

tral a

re th

ose

with

2

or g

reat

er F

TE.

233

Clas

sifie

d M

anag

emen

t -S&

C, R

estr

icted

, Oth

er Fu

nded

34

15

1.9

FTE

of C

lass

ified

Man

agem

ent

posi

tions

are

fund

ed a

t Cen

tral i

n 20

18-1

9 w

ith N

on G

ener

al P

urpo

se

fund

s

14

.6 F

TE o

f Cla

ssifi

ed M

anag

emen

t po

sitio

ns a

re fu

nded

at K

-12

scho

ols

in 2

018-

19 w

ith N

on G

ener

al

Pur

pose

fund

s*P

ositi

ons

show

n fo

r Cen

tral a

re th

ose

with

2

or g

reat

er F

TE.

234

Con

trac

t Inf

o

35

235

Cons

ulta

nt &

Con

trac

ts

36

Rest

ricte

dUn

rest

ricte

dGr

and

Tota

lCe

ntra

l$2

6.5

$22.

5$4

9.0

Scho

ols

$13.

9$4

.5$1

8.4

Gran

d To

tal

$40.

4$2

7.1

$67.

5

Of th

e $6

7M*

in co

ntra

cts,

mor

e th

an $

40M

was

fund

ed b

y Re

stric

ted

dolla

rs.

Of th

e $2

2Mfu

nded

with

Cen

tral

Un

rest

ricte

d fu

nds:

→$1

1M+

fund

ed st

uden

t tr

ansp

orta

tion,

an

expe

nse

expe

cted

to ri

se in

201

9-20

.

→Th

e la

rges

t rem

aini

ngam

ount

s pr

imar

ily fu

nd so

ftwar

e to

run

exist

ing

prog

ram

s or d

irect

se

rvice

s to

stud

ents

and

teac

hers

(s

ee a

ppen

dix)

.

* 20

17-1

8 Co

ntra

cts e

nter

ed. N

ot a

ll co

ntra

cts w

ere

fully

com

plet

ed, s

o to

tal s

pent

was

less

. 20

18-1

9 w

as n

ot u

sed

as it

is o

nly

a pa

rtia

l yea

r.

236

Larg

est C

entr

al, U

nres

trict

ed C

ontr

acts

*

37

Vend

orAm

ount

ALA

ME

DA

CO

UN

TY O

FFIC

E O

F E

DU

CA

TIO

N$1

,129

,500

STR

EET

AC

AD

EMY

FOU

ND

ATI

ON

$768

,000

ESC

APE

TE

CH

NO

LOG

Y$5

45,2

05

PO

WE

RS

CH

OO

L G

RO

UP

,$4

01,9

87

GA

TEW

AY

TO C

OLL

EG

E$3

89,2

89

SPR

ING

BO

AR

D C

OLL

AB

OR

ATI

VE

$360

,855

BLU

EPR

INT

SCH

OO

LS N

ETW

OR

K, I

NC

.$3

03,0

99

RO

BER

T H

ALF

$287

,178

PU

BLI

C C

ON

SU

LTIN

G G

RO

UP

$281

,825

SH

I IN

TER

NA

TIO

NA

L C

OR

P.

$273

,244

MA

RC

US

FO

STE

R E

DU

CA

TIO

N IN

STI

TUTE

$250

,000

* 20

17-1

8 Co

ntra

cts e

nter

ed. D

oes n

ot in

clude

$11

.6M

in T

rans

port

atio

n co

ntra

cts.

See

full

list o

f 17-

18 co

ntra

cts h

ere.

237

Exhibit L

1000 Broadway, Suite 680, Oakland, CA 94607 510.879.8200 ph | www.ousd.org

Board Office Use: Legislative File Info.File ID Number 19-0095Introduction Date 1/23/19Enactment NumberEnactment Date


From Kyla Johnson-Trammell, SuperintendentYvette Renteria, Deputy Chief of Innovation

Board Meeting Date January 23, 28, 2019

Subject RESOLUTION NO. 1819-0143 -- Approving Coliseum College Preparatory Academy Expansion and Roots International Academy Closure – Work Plan - Blueprint for Quality Schools

Action

Background

Discussion

Adoption of Resolution No. 1819-0143 -- Approving Coliseum College Preparatory Academy Expansion and Roots International Academy Closure – Work Plan - Blueprint for Quality Schools

On February 28, 2018, the Governing Board passed Resolution No. 1718-0124 - Work Plan - Blueprint for Quality Schools to lead to the development of a phased work plan to support the District in increasing quality in school offerings. Board Policy 6006 provides that quality, equity, utility, sustainability, and community benefit are guiding principles and factors to be used during the redesign and reconfiguration process,

Resolution No. 1819-0143 authorizes: 1) Expansion of Coliseum College Preparatory Academy (CCPA), currently a 6-12 Grade School, by increasing its capacity over the next 7 school years by forming an additional 6th grade cohort in 2019-2020; an additional 7th grade cohort in 2020-2021; an additional 8th grade cohort in 2021-2022; an additional 9th grade cohort in 2022-2023; an additional 10th grade cohort in 2023-2024; an additional 11th grade cohort in 2024-2025; and an additional 12th grade cohort in 2025-2026, if needed; and 2) Closure of Roots International Academy (RIA) effective June 30, 2019 and, effectively immediately, support the enrollment transition for

19-01691/28/19 os

238

1000 Broadway, Suite 680, Oakland, CA 94607 510.879.8200 ph | www.ousd.org

2019-2020 of current RIA 6th and 7th grade students by providing priority placement at another middle school of parent, guardian or caregiver choice.

Fiscal Impact Anticipated increase in revenues through increased enrollment at a high-demand school; cost-savings over time through reduction of District’s school portfolio

Attachment Resolution 1819-0143 Presentation

239

RESOLUTION OF THE

BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE

OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 1819-0143

Approving Coliseum College Preparatory Academy Expansion and Roots International Academy Closure – Work Plan - Blueprint for Quality Schools WHEREAS, on February 28, 2018, the Governing Board passed Resolution No. 1718-0124 - Work Plan - Blueprint for Quality Schools; WHEREAS, Resolution No. 1718-0124 provides that criteria shall be identified and articulated in the selection of schools for reconfiguration. Such criteria shall be approved by the Board of Education prior to any efforts to implement the Blueprint for Quality Schools; WHEREAS, Board Policy 6006 authorizes the Superintendent to increase access to high-quality public-school options for the students and families of Oakland using quality, equity, utility, sustainability, and community benefit as guiding principles and factors during the redesign and reconfiguration of the OUSD that builds upon the current work of the Blueprint for Quality Schools process to create a Citywide Plan, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Board hereby adopts the following proposal for a segment of Cohort 2 of the Blueprint for Quality Schools: 1) Expand Coliseum College Preparatory Academy (CCPA), currently a 6-12 Grade School, by forming an additional 6th grade cohort in 2019-2020; an additional 7th grade cohort in 2020-2021; an additional 8th grade cohort in 2021-2022; an additional 9th grade cohort in 2022-2023; an additional 10th grade cohort in 2023-2024; an additional 11th grade cohort in 2024-2025; and an additional 12th grade cohort in 2025-2026, if needed; and 2) Close Roots International Academy (RIA) effective June 30, 2019 and, effectively immediately, support the enrollment transition for 2019-2020 of current RIA 6th and 7th grade students by providing priority placement at another middle school of parent, guardian or care giver choice; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, as an Exception to current Board Policy 5116.1 - Open Enrollment, for this particular situation of rising 7th and 8th graders [currently 6-7 grade pupils], who are at Roots now, and also the siblings of current Roots students, who are 5th graders right now [District wide, i.e., prospective 6th graders next school year], shall have priority enrollment over anyone else that may apply to Coliseum College Preparatory Academy; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Superintendent is authorized to take any and all steps to implement the reorganization of these schools and campuses to effectuate the goals outlined in the Blueprint, save an action that requires further authorization by the Board.



PREFERENTIAL NAYS: Josue Chavez and Yota Omosowho (Student Directors)



240

AYES: Jumoke Hinton Hodge, Shanthi Gonzales, Gary Yee, James Harris, Vice President Jody London and President Aimee Eng.

NAYS: Roseann Torres

ABSTAINED: None

RECUSED: None

ABSENT: None

CERTIFICATION

We hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Resolution passed at a Special Meeting of the Board of Education of the Oakland Unified School District held on January 28, 2019.

Legislative File File ID Number: 19-0095Introduction Date: 1/23/19Enactment Number: 19-0169Enactment Date: 1/28/19By: os


___________________________________________Aimee EngPresident, Board of Education

___________________________________________Kyla Johnson-TrammellSuperintendent and Secretary, Board of Education

241

Exhibit M

www.ousd.org

Memo To Board of Education

From Kyla Johnson-Trammell, Superintendent

Board Meeting Date February 11, 2019

Subject Resolution No. 1819-0144 – Budget Reduction Recommendation to Achieve Fiscal Year 2019-2020 3% Reserve for Economic Uncertainty


Adoption by the Board of Education of Resolution No. 1819-0144 – Budget Reduction Recommendation to Achieve Fiscal Year 2019-2020 3% Reserve for Economic Uncertainty from a reduction target of $30M to $21.75M.


At the November 14, 2018 Board Meeting, the Board discussed and approved Resolution 1819-0013 from the Board’s Special Committee on Fiscal Vitality (FVC). The FVC met over the fall of 2018 to review key board policies and the Governance Theory of Action. The Committee created a set of recommendations for budget development and prioritization for the 2019-20 school year. In addition reductions of ~$30 million (coupled with savings measures and efficiencies), key recommendations include: 1. implement BP 3150; 2. redesign the District; 3. competitive employee compensation; and 4. commit to shared decision making and multi-stakeholder teams.

Staff is recommending a revised target of $21.75M which is still projected to reach the 3% reserve due to the updated information in the First Interim Report. The reduced target also allows the Superintendent and staff to minimize the impact of budget reductions on the level of service, quality of staff and education programs for District students. The FY 2019-20 Reduction Plan includes: 1. reduction of $11.9M in central administrative costs; 2. reduction of $3.75M in central services to sites; 3. $1.47M in contract reductions and maximizing restricted resources; 4. $1.6M in additional operational cost savings; and 5. $3M in reductions to discretionary funds to school sites.

Fiscal Impact Reductions of $21.75 million to 2019-20 Budget to reach a 3.0% reserve and account for new investments, including employee compensation, recruitment, and retention.

Attachments Resolution No. 1819-0144 – Budget Reduction Recommendation to Achieve Fiscal Year 2019-2020 3% Reserve for Economic Uncertainty

Board Office Use: Legislative File Info.

File ID Number 18-2727

Introduction Date 1/9/19

Enactment Number

Enactment Date

242

1

RESOLUTION

OF THE

BOARD OF EDUCATION

OF THE


NO. 1819-0144

Budget Reduction Recommendation to Achieve Fiscal Year 2019-2020 3%

Reserve for Economic Uncertainty

WHEREAS, the Governing Board (hereafter “Board”) passed Commitment to Fiscal Solvency

Resolution 1819-0041 on August 8, 2018 to address the Oakland Unified School District’s

projected deficit which at the time was estimated to grow from an estimated $20,300,000 in

2019-20 fiscal year, and $59,000,000 in the 2020-21 fiscal year and provided for reductions of

at least $21,750,000 beginning in 2019-20 to address the budget shortfall and provide for a

minimum 3% reserve beginning in 2019-20 fiscal year; and

WHEREAS, this Resolution supersedes Resolution No. 1819-0041 and provides for all Board

reductions based on updated budget information at First Interim, release of the Governor’s

2019 Budget proposal, and a consideration of required employee investments; and

WHEREAS, the Board recognizes that the District is highly dependent on revenue from the

State of California and that revenue source is dependent on the on-going stability of the

California State economy; and

WHEREAS, the Board recognizes that the Governor’s 2019/2020 Budget proposal projects out

year increases tied to primarily cost of living adjustments only, and that these budget

components have a direct impact on the District’s multi-year projections; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors understands the increased costs of living to staff in the

Oakland Community and Greater Bay Area and the impacts on recruiting and retaining highly

skilled teachers and staff, and the Board is committed to increasing investments in staff

salaries;

WHEREAS, the Board further recognizes the impact of declining enrollment and increasing

California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) and California Public Employees’

Retirement System (CalPERS) pension costs on the District’s budget;

243

2

WHEREAS, the AB 1200 provides for the District to provide to the Alameda County Office of

Education a full disclosure of proposed impacts, costs, and multi-year projections to support

any negotiated salary investments; and

WHEREAS, Education Code section 42127(c) provides, in relevant part, that the County

Superintendent of Schools shall:

“Determine whether the adopted budget will allow the school district to meet its

financial obligations during the fiscal year and is consistent with a financial plan that will

enable the school district to satisfy its multi-year financial commitments . . . [and] shall

either conditionally approve or disapprove a budget that does not provide adequate

assurance that the school district will meet its current and future obligations and resolve

any problems identified in studies, reports, evaluations, or audits described in this

paragraph”; and

WHEREAS, based on the District projections of revenue and expenditures and the District’s

current fiscal challenges and commitment to staff salaries, it is projected that without

offsetting reductions, the District would not meet its required minimum reserves beginning in

the 2019-2020 and 2020-21 fiscal years, and the District would have a negative ending fund

balance which would vary based on the level of employee salary commitments and other

district drivers of revenue and costs; and

WHEREAS, the Board desires to minimize the impact of budget reductions on the level of

service and quality of staff and education programs for District students; and

WHEREAS, on November 14, 2018, the Board passed Resolution No. 1819-0013 providing

direction on the fiscal years 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 budget reductions, including desired

minimum reserve levels that achieve a maximum of $30 million in reductions for the 2019-20

year and focus on: 1. implementing BP 3150; 2. redesigning the District; 3. providing

competitive employee compensation; and, 4. committing to shared decision making and multi-

stakeholder teams; and

WHEREAS, the Superintendent presented information to the Board relating to the 2019-2020

budget on January 9, 2019 and January 23, 2019, which included potential options for budget

reductions, a recommendation for 2019-2020 budget reductions on February 6, 2019, for first

read, and a final vote on proposed budget reductions for the 2019-2020 budget on February

11, 2019; and

WHEREAS, the Superintendent recommends (1) a reduction $11.9M in central administrative costs, a total of 90.23 FTE to be eliminated or moved to restricted funding sources ; (2) a reduction of $3.75M in central services to sites, a total of 57.8 FTE to be eliminated or moved to restricted funding sources; (3) reallocation of supplemental funds to support educator

244

3

retention and compensation; (4) $1.47M in reductions to contracts and maximizing restricted resources, and (5) $1.6M in additional operational cost savings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Resolution supersedes Resolution No. 1819-0041 and

provides for all Board reductions based on updated budget information at First Interim,

release of the Governor’s 2019 Budget proposal, and a consideration of required employee

investments; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Governing Board hereby adopts the Superintendent’s

recommendation relating budget reductions to achieve its Fiscal Year 2019-20 3% Reserve for

Economic Uncertain and investments in educator compensation through: (1) a reduction

$11.9M in central administrative costs, a total of 90.23 FTE to be eliminated or moved to

restricted funding sources; (2) a reduction of $3.75M in central services to sites, a total of 57.8

FTE to be eliminated or moved to restricted funding sources; (3) reallocation of supplemental

funds to support educator retention and compensation; (4) $1.47M in reductions to contracts

and maximizing restricted resources; and, (5) $1.6M in additional operational cost savings; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby directs the Superintendent to initiate all

steps necessary to implement these budget reductions, including without limitation, statutory

notices relating to layoff or reassignment and to incorporate these budget reductions in the

proposed Fiscal Year 2019-2020 District Budget to be adopted by Board not later than June 30,

2019; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that given Board Policy 3100.1 and the District’s budget, the Board

requires the Superintendent to develop a conservative budget that achieves at minimum a 3%

reserve beginning in FY 2019-20 in order to address unforeseen budgetary increases.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of February, 2019, at a Special Meeting of the Governing

Board by the following vote:

PREFERENTIAL AYE:

PREFERENTIAL NOE:

PREFERENTIAL ABSTENTION:

PREFERENTIAL RECUSE:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAINED:

RECUSE:

ABSENT:

245

4

CERTIFICATION

We hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Resolution passed at a

Special Meeting of the Board of Education of the Oakland Unified School District, held on

February 11, 2019.

Legislative File Info.

File ID Number:

Introduction Date:

Enactment Number:

Enactment Date:


___________________________________________ Aimee Eng President, Board of Education

___________________________________________ Kyla Johnson-Trammell Superintendent and Secretary, Board of Education

246

Exhibit N

Oak

land

Uni

fied

Scho

ol D

istr

ict

No

Settl

emen

t

2018

-19

2018

-19

2018

-19

2019

-20

2019

-20

2019

-20

2020

-21

2020

-21

2020

-21

2/20

/201

92n

d In

terim

2nd

Inte

rim

Proj

ecte

dPr

ojec

ted

Pr

ojec

ted

Proj

ecte

d

UN

REST

RIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dUN

RES

TRIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dU

NRES

TRIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dFu

nded

AD

A35

,548

.64

0.

0035

,548

.64

34,9

53.9

1

0.00

34,9

53.9

134

,403

.96

0.

0034

,403

.96

Perc

enta

ge c

hang

e in

AD

A fro

m P

rior Y

ear

-1

.67%

-1.5

7%St

atut

ory

CO

LA %

1.02

711.

0271

1.03

461.

0346

1.02

861.

0286

Gap

Fun

ding

Per

cent

age

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

CPI

1.03

581.

0358

1.03

181.

0318

1.03

051.

0305

Lotte

ry p

er A

DA15

1.00

53.0

015

1.00

53.0

015

1.00

53.0

0

OBJ

ECT

A. R

EVEN

UE

1. L

CFF

Sou

rces

8010

-809

938

1,63

1,10

23,

278,

309

384,

909,

411

383,

808,

236

3,27

8,30

938

7,08

6,54

539

0,20

8,65

33,

278,

309

393,

486,

962

P

rior Y

ear A

djus

tmen

ts80

19/8

091

00

02.

Fed

eral

Rev

enue

s81

00-8

299

050

,569

,982

50,5

69,9

820

50,5

81,6

0350

,581

,603

050

,593

,175

1,28

6,61

03.

Oth

er S

tate

Rev

enue

s 83

00-8

599

14,6

83,1

8156

,626

,902

71,3

10,0

838,

182,

223

57,7

00,2

7165

,882

,494

8,21

9,58

458

,885

,908

67,1

05,4

92

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er L

ocal

Rev

enue

s86

00-8

799

13,5

93,7

5865

,768

,118

79,3

61,8

7613

,613

,217

65,7

68,1

1879

,381

,335

13,6

33,2

9765

,768

,118

79,4

01,4

15

Mea

sure

G1

- see

con

tribu

tions

00

00

00

0TO

TAL

REV

ENUE

409,

908,

041

176,

243,

311

586,

151,

352

405,

603,

676

177,

328,

301

582,

931,

977

412,

061,

534

178,

525,

510

590,

587,

044

B. E

XPEN

DITU

RES

B

ase

Sala

ries

1000

- 19

9913

3,56

0,74

565

,773

,785

199,

334,

530

133,

560,

745

65,7

73,7

8519

9,33

4,53

013

5,63

0,93

766

,793

,279

202,

424,

215

Ste

p &

Col

umn

1.55

%0

00

2,07

0,19

21,

019,

494

3,08

9,68

52,

102,

280

1,03

5,29

63,

137,

575

Off

sche

dule

18-

190.

00%

00

00

00

00

018

-19

0.00

%0

00

00

00

19-2

00.

00%

00

00

00

00

020

-21

0.00

%0

0To

tal C

ertif

icat

ed S

alar

ies

133,

560,

745

65,7

73,7

8519

9,33

4,53

013

5,63

0,93

766

,793

,279

202,

424,

215

137,

733,

216

67,8

28,5

7420

5,56

1,79

10

00

Base

Sal

arie

s20

00 -

2999

56,7

97,7

2036

,935

,464

93,7

33,1

8456

,797

,720

36,9

35,4

6493

,733

,184

57,2

91,8

6037

,256

,803

94,5

48,6

62 S

tep

& C

olum

n0.

87%

00

049

4,14

032

1,33

981

5,47

949

8,43

932

4,13

482

2,57

3O

ff sc

hedu

le 1

8-19

0.00

%0

00

00

00

00

18-1

90.

00%

00

19

-20

0.00

%0

00

00

20

-21

0.00

%0

0To

tal C

lass

ified

Sal

arie

s56

,797

,720

36,9

35,4

6493

,733

,184

57,2

91,8

6037

,256

,803

94,5

48,6

6257

,790

,299

37,5

80,9

3795

,371

,236

TOTA

L SA

LAR

IES:

190,

358,

465

102,

709,

249

293,

067,

714

192,

922,

797

104,

050,

081

296,

972,

878

195,

523,

515

105,

409,

511

300,

933,

027

3. E

mpl

oyee

Ben

efits

3000

-399

950

,321

,021

41,5

00,5

8991

,821

,610

54,5

27,9

0144

,285

,078

98,8

12,9

7958

,135

,027

46,3

34,8

7310

4,46

9,90

0

H

ealth

ben

efits

36,5

64,7

2921

,629

,758

58,1

94,4

8737

,661

,671

22,2

78,6

5159

,940

,322

38,7

91,5

2122

,947

,010

61,7

38,5

32

00

00

00

00

0To

tal E

mpl

oyee

Ben

efits

86,8

85,7

5063

,130

,347

150,

016,

097

92,1

89,5

7266

,563

,729

158,

753,

301

96,9

26,5

4869

,281

,884

166,

208,

432

4. B

ooks

and

Sup

plie

s40

00-4

999

6,86

2,78

529

,488

,552

36,3

51,3

376,

664,

693

26,9

78,0

4833

,642

,741

6,86

7,96

624

,727

,766

31,5

95,7

335.

Ser

vice

s, O

ther

Op.

5000

-599

9 36

,891

,295

54,8

47,5

2291

,738

,817

33,0

17,8

8852

,893

,474

85,9

11,3

6234

,273

,391

59,2

37,4

8793

,510

,878

6. C

apita

l Out

lay

6000

-699

912

5,88

77,

424,

565

7,55

0,45

212

9,38

51,

344,

659

1,47

4,04

413

2,84

71,

364,

265

1,49

7,11

27.

Oth

er O

utgo

7100

-729

90

9,89

2,65

29,

892,

652

06,

048,

291

6,04

8,29

10

6,04

8,29

16,

048,

291

8. D

irect

/Indi

rect

Cos

ts73

00-7

399

(4,0

14,8

03)

2,63

7,55

7(1

,377

,246

)(3

,213

,855

)1,

836,

605

(1,3

77,2

50)

(2,5

70,2

21)

1,19

2,97

1(1

,377

,250

)9.

Deb

t Ser

vice

7400

-749

96,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

6,64

9,56

60

6,64

9,56

66,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

TOTA

L EX

PEN

DITU

RES

32

3,75

8,94

427

0,13

0,44

459

3,88

9,38

832

8,36

0,04

625

9,71

4,88

758

8,07

4,93

333

7,80

3,61

326

7,26

2,17

560

5,06

5,78

8

C. E

XCES

S/DE

FICI

ENC

Y86

,149

,097

(93,

887,

133)

(7,7

38,0

36)

77,2

43,6

30(8

2,38

6,58

6)(5

,142

,956

)74

,257

,921

(88,

736,

665)

(14,

478,

744)

D. O

THER

SO

URC

ES

1.

Inte

rfund

Tra

nsfe

rs In

8910

-892

956

4,06

70

564,

067

564,

067

056

4,06

756

4,06

70

564,

067

2. In

terfu

nd T

rans

fers

Out

7610

-762

9(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

(1,7

90,0

00)

0(1

,790

,000

)(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

3. O

ther

Sou

rces

In89

30-8

979

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er U

ses

Out

7630

-769

90

00

00

00

00

5. C

ontri

b./R

estri

cted

Pro

gram

s89

80-8

999

(73,

104,

691)

73,1

04,6

910

(74,

004,

244)

74,0

04,2

440

(78,

961,

596)

78,9

61,5

960

0TO

TAL

SOU

RCES

/USE

S(7

4,33

0,62

4)73

,104

,691

(1,2

25,9

33)

(75,

230,

177)

74,0

04,2

44(1

,225

,933

)(8

0,18

7,52

9)78

,961

,596

(1,2

25,9

33)

Chan

ge to

Fun

d Ba

lanc

e11

,818

,472

.61

(20,

782,

442.

08)

(8,9

63,9

69.4

7)2,

013,

452.

70(8

,382

,341

.73)

(6,3

68,8

89.0

4)(5

,929

,608

.24)

(9,7

75,0

69.1

0)(1

5,70

4,67

7.34

)F.

FU

ND B

ALA

NCE,

RES

ERVE

S N

ET B

EGIN

NIN

G B

ALAN

CE:

17,9

74,9

6138

,612

,895

56,5

87,8

5623

,188

,649

17,8

30,4

5241

,019

,101

25,2

02,1

019,

448,

111

34,6

50,2

12(6

,604

,785

)(6

,604

,785

)0

0 R

ESTA

TEM

ENTS

00

0

END

ING

BAL

ANC

E:23

,188

,649

17,8

30,4

5241

,019

,101

25,2

02,1

019,

448,

111

34,6

50,2

1219

,272

,493

(326

,958

)18

,945

,535

COM

PON

ENTS

OF

ENDI

NG

BAL

ANC

E:R

EVO

LVIN

G C

ASH

150,

000

015

0,00

015

0,00

00

150,

000

150,

000

015

0,00

0PR

EPAI

D0

00

STO

RES

00

00

00

00

0R

EQU

IRED

RES

ERVE

2.00

%11

,913

,588

011

,913

,588

11,7

61,4

990

11,7

61,4

9912

,101

,316

012

,101

,316

Lega

lly R

estri

cted

17,8

30,4

5217

,830

,452

9,44

8,11

19,

448,

111

(326

,958

)(3

26,9

58)

Oth

er C

omm

itmen

ts0

00

00

0

00

00

00

0

00

00

0UN

APPR

OPR

IATE

D11

,125

,060

.72

0.00

11,1

25,0

60.7

213

,290

,602

.42

0.00

13,2

90,6

02.4

27,

021,

177.

180.

007,

021,

177.

18

AU

DIT

AD

JUST

MEN

T

247

Oak

land

Uni

fied

Scho

ol D

istr

ict

Fact

finde

r

2018

-19

2018

-19

2018

-19

2019

-20

2019

-20

2019

-20

2020

-21

2020

-21

2020

-21

2/20

/201

92n

d In

terim

2nd

Inte

rim

Proj

ecte

dPr

ojec

ted

Pr

ojec

ted

Proj

ecte

d

UN

REST

RIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dUN

RES

TRIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dU

NRES

TRIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dFu

nded

AD

A35

,548

.64

0.

0035

,548

.64

34,9

53.9

1

0.00

34,9

53.9

134

,403

.96

0.

0034

,403

.96

Perc

enta

ge c

hang

e in

AD

A fro

m P

rior Y

ear

-1

.67%

-1.5

7%St

atut

ory

CO

LA %

1.02

711.

0271

1.03

461.

0346

1.02

861.

0286

Gap

Fun

ding

Per

cent

age

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

CPI

1.03

581.

0358

1.03

181.

0318

1.03

051.

0305

Lotte

ry p

er A

DA15

1.00

53.0

015

1.00

53.0

015

1.00

53.0

0

OBJ

ECT

A. R

EVEN

UE

1. L

CFF

Sou

rces

8010

-809

938

1,63

1,10

23,

278,

309

384,

909,

411

383,

808,

236

3,27

8,30

938

7,08

6,54

539

0,20

8,65

33,

278,

309

393,

486,

962

P

rior Y

ear A

djus

tmen

ts80

19/8

091

00

02.

Fed

eral

Rev

enue

s81

00-8

299

050

,569

,982

50,5

69,9

820

50,5

81,6

0350

,581

,603

050

,593

,175

1,28

6,61

03.

Oth

er S

tate

Rev

enue

s 83

00-8

599

14,6

83,1

8156

,626

,902

71,3

10,0

838,

182,

223

57,7

00,2

7165

,882

,494

8,21

9,58

458

,885

,908

67,1

05,4

92

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er L

ocal

Rev

enue

s86

00-8

799

13,5

93,7

5865

,768

,118

79,3

61,8

7613

,613

,217

65,7

68,1

1879

,381

,335

13,6

33,2

9765

,768

,118

79,4

01,4

15

Mea

sure

G1

- see

con

tribu

tions

00

00

00

0TO

TAL

REV

ENUE

409,

908,

041

176,

243,

311

586,

151,

352

405,

603,

676

177,

328,

301

582,

931,

977

412,

061,

534

178,

525,

510

590,

587,

044

B. E

XPEN

DITU

RES

B

ase

Sala

ries

1000

- 19

9913

3,56

0,74

565

,773

,785

199,

334,

530

137,

766,

084

67,4

12,3

6620

5,17

8,45

013

9,90

1,45

968

,457

,257

208,

358,

716

Ste

p &

Col

umn

1.55

%0

00

2,13

5,37

41,

044,

892

3,18

0,26

62,

168,

473

1,06

1,08

73,

229,

560

Off

sche

dule

18-

190.

00%

00

00

00

00

017

-18

(18-

19)

3.00

%4,

205,

339

1,63

8,58

15,

843,

920

00

00

18-1

93.

00%

4,13

2,98

32,

022,

371

6,15

5,35

319

-20

0.00

%0

00

00

00

00

20-2

10.

00%

00

Tota

l Cer

tific

ated

Sal

arie

s14

1,89

9,06

769

,434

,737

211,

333,

803

139,

901,

459

68,4

57,2

5720

8,35

8,71

614

2,06

9,93

169

,518

,345

211,

588,

276

00

0Ba

se S

alar

ies

2000

- 29

9956

,797

,720

36,9

35,4

6493

,733

,184

60,2

74,6

2738

,016

,037

98,2

90,6

6460

,799

,017

38,3

46,7

7699

,145

,793

Ste

p &

Col

umn

0.87

%0

00

524,

389

330,

740

855,

129

528,

951

333,

617

862,

568

Off

sche

dule

18-

190.

00%

00

00

00

00

018

-19

(17-

18)

3.00

%1,

721,

336

1,08

0,57

32,

801,

908

18-1

93.

00%

1,75

5,57

21,

140,

481

2,89

6,05

3

19-2

00.

00%

00

00

0

20-2

10.

00%

00

Tota

l Cla

ssifi

ed S

alar

ies

60,2

74,6

2739

,156

,518

99,4

31,1

4560

,799

,017

38,3

46,7

7699

,145

,793

61,3

27,9

6838

,680

,393

100,

008,

361

TOTA

L SA

LAR

IES:

202,

173,

694

108,

591,

254

310,

764,

948

200,

700,

475

106,

804,

033

307,

504,

509

203,

397,

899

108,

198,

738

311,

596,

637

3. E

mpl

oyee

Ben

efits

3000

-399

953

,332

,266

43,0

40,5

5896

,372

,823

56,8

32,4

0545

,087

,597

101,

920,

001

60,6

04,6

0647

,193

,350

107,

797,

956

Hea

lth b

enef

its36

,564

,729

21,6

29,7

5858

,194

,487

37,6

61,6

7122

,278

,651

59,9

40,3

2238

,791

,521

22,9

47,0

1061

,738

,532

0

00

00

00

00

Tota

l Em

ploy

ee B

enef

its89

,896

,995

64,6

70,3

1615

4,56

7,31

194

,494

,076

67,3

66,2

4816

1,86

0,32

399

,396

,127

70,1

40,3

6016

9,53

6,48

74.

Boo

ks a

nd S

uppl

ies

4000

-499

96,

862,

785

29,4

88,5

5236

,351

,337

6,66

4,69

326

,978

,048

33,6

42,7

416,

867,

966

24,7

27,7

6631

,595

,733

5. S

ervi

ces,

Oth

er O

p.50

00-5

999

36,8

91,2

9554

,847

,522

91,7

38,8

1733

,017

,888

52,8

93,4

7485

,911

,362

34,2

73,3

9159

,237

,487

93,5

10,8

786.

Cap

ital O

utla

y60

00-6

999

125,

887

7,42

4,56

57,

550,

452

129,

385

1,34

4,65

91,

474,

044

132,

847

1,36

4,26

51,

497,

112

7. O

ther

Out

go71

00-7

299

09,

892,

652

9,89

2,65

20

6,04

8,29

16,

048,

291

06,

048,

291

6,04

8,29

18.

Dire

ct/In

dire

ct C

osts

7300

-739

9(4

,014

,803

)2,

637,

557

(1,3

77,2

46)

(3,2

13,8

55)

1,83

6,60

5(1

,377

,250

)(2

,570

,221

)1,

192,

971

(1,3

77,2

50)

9. D

ebt S

ervi

ce74

00-7

499

6,64

9,56

60

6,64

9,56

66,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

6,64

9,56

60

6,64

9,56

6TO

TAL

EXPE

NDI

TUR

ES

338,

585,

419

277,

552,

418

616,

137,

837

338,

442,

229

263,

271,

358

601,

713,

587

348,

147,

576

270,

909,

878

619,

057,

454

C. E

XCES

S/DE

FICI

ENC

Y71

,322

,622

(101

,309

,107

)(2

9,98

6,48

5)67

,161

,447

(85,

943,

057)

(18,

781,

609)

63,9

13,9

58(9

2,38

4,36

8)(2

8,47

0,41

1)

D. O

THER

SO

URC

ES

1.

Inte

rfund

Tra

nsfe

rs In

8910

-892

956

4,06

70

564,

067

564,

067

056

4,06

756

4,06

70

564,

067

2. In

terfu

nd T

rans

fers

Out

7610

-762

9(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

(1,7

90,0

00)

0(1

,790

,000

)(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

3. O

ther

Sou

rces

In89

30-8

979

083

,104

,691

83,1

04,6

910

00

00

04.

Oth

er U

ses

Out

7630

-769

90

00

00

00

00

5. C

ontri

b./R

estri

cted

Pro

gram

s89

80-8

999

(73,

104,

691)

73,1

04,6

910

(74,

004,

224)

74,0

04,2

240

(78,

961,

596)

78,9

61,5

960

0TO

TAL

SOU

RCES

/USE

S(7

4,33

0,62

4)15

6,20

9,38

281

,878

,758

(75,

230,

157)

74,0

04,2

24(1

,225

,933

)(8

0,18

7,52

9)78

,961

,596

(1,2

25,9

33)

Chan

ge to

Fun

d Ba

lanc

e(3

,008

,001

.77)

54,9

00,2

74.9

551

,892

,273

.17

(8,0

68,7

09.7

4)(1

1,93

8,83

2.70

)(2

0,00

7,54

2.43

)(1

6,27

3,57

1.24

)(1

3,42

2,77

2.31

)(2

9,69

6,34

3.54

)F.

FU

ND B

ALA

NCE,

RES

ERVE

S N

ET B

EGIN

NIN

G B

ALAN

CE:

17,9

74,9

6138

,612

,895

56,5

87,8

568,

362,

174

93,5

13,1

7010

1,87

5,34

429

3,46

581

,574

,337

81,8

67,8

01(6

,604

,785

)(6

,604

,785

)0

0 R

ESTA

TEM

ENTS

00

0

END

ING

BAL

ANC

E:8,

362,

174

93,5

13,1

7010

1,87

5,34

429

3,46

581

,574

,337

81,8

67,8

01(1

5,98

0,10

7)68

,151

,565

52,1

71,4

58CO

MPO

NEN

TS O

F EN

DIN

G B

ALAN

CE:

REV

OLV

ING

CAS

H15

0,00

00

150,

000

150,

000

015

0,00

015

0,00

00

150,

000

PREP

AID

00

0ST

OR

ES0

00

00

00

00

REQ

UIR

ED R

ESER

VE2.

00%

12,3

58,5

570

12,3

58,5

5712

,034

,272

012

,034

,272

12,3

81,1

500

12,3

81,1

50Le

gally

Res

trict

ed93

,513

,170

93,5

13,1

7081

,574

,337

81,5

74,3

3768

,151

,565

68,1

51,5

65O

ther

Com

mitm

ents

00

00

00

0

00

00

0

00

00

00

UNAP

PRO

PRIA

TED

(4,1

46,3

82.6

6)0.

00(4

,146

,382

.66)

(11,

890,

807.

40)

0.00

(11,

890,

807.

40)

(28,

511,

256.

64)

0.00

(28,

511,

256.

64)

AU

DIT

AD

JUST

MEN

T

248

Oak

land

Uni

fied

Scho

ol D

istr

ict

OU

SD

2018

-19

2018

-19

2018

-19

2019

-20

2019

-20

2019

-20

2020

-21

2020

-21

2020

-21

2/20

/201

92n

d In

terim

2nd

Inte

rim

Proj

ecte

dPr

ojec

ted

Pr

ojec

ted

Proj

ecte

d

UN

REST

RIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dUN

RES

TRIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dU

NRES

TRIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dFu

nded

AD

A35

,548

.64

0.

0035

,548

.64

34,9

53.9

1

0.00

34,9

53.9

134

,403

.96

0.

0034

,403

.96

Perc

enta

ge c

hang

e in

AD

A fro

m P

rior Y

ear

-1

.67%

-1.5

7%St

atut

ory

CO

LA %

1.02

711.

0271

1.03

461.

0346

1.02

861.

0286

Gap

Fun

ding

Per

cent

age

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

CPI

1.03

581.

0358

1.03

181.

0318

1.03

051.

0305

Lotte

ry p

er A

DA15

1.00

53.0

015

1.00

53.0

015

1.00

53.0

0

OBJ

ECT

A. R

EVEN

UE

1. L

CFF

Sou

rces

8010

-809

938

1,63

1,10

23,

278,

309

384,

909,

411

383,

808,

236

3,27

8,30

938

7,08

6,54

539

0,20

8,65

33,

278,

309

393,

486,

962

P

rior Y

ear A

djus

tmen

ts80

19/8

091

00

02.

Fed

eral

Rev

enue

s81

00-8

299

050

,569

,982

50,5

69,9

820

50,5

81,6

0350

,581

,603

050

,593

,175

1,28

6,61

03.

Oth

er S

tate

Rev

enue

s 83

00-8

599

14,6

83,1

8156

,626

,902

71,3

10,0

838,

182,

223

57,7

00,2

7165

,882

,494

8,21

9,58

458

,885

,908

67,1

05,4

92

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er L

ocal

Rev

enue

s86

00-8

799

13,5

93,7

5865

,768

,118

79,3

61,8

7613

,613

,217

65,7

68,1

1879

,381

,335

13,6

33,2

9765

,768

,118

79,4

01,4

15

Mea

sure

G1

- see

con

tribu

tions

00

00

00

0TO

TAL

REV

ENUE

409,

908,

041

176,

243,

311

586,

151,

352

405,

603,

676

177,

328,

301

582,

931,

977

412,

061,

534

178,

525,

510

590,

587,

044

B. E

XPEN

DITU

RES

B

ase

Sala

ries

1000

- 19

9913

3,56

0,74

565

,773

,785

199,

334,

530

135,

564,

156

66,7

60,3

9220

2,32

4,54

814

1,10

7,03

669

,490

,057

210,

597,

093

Ste

p &

Col

umn

1.55

%0

00

2,10

1,24

41,

034,

786

3,13

6,03

02,

187,

159

1,07

7,09

63,

264,

255

Off

sche

dule

17-

181.

50%

2,10

2,67

081

9,29

02,

921,

960

00

00

00

18-1

91.

50%

2,00

3,41

198

6,60

72,

990,

018

00

00

19-2

02.

50%

00

03,

441,

635

1,69

4,87

95,

136,

514

00

020

-21

1.50

%2,

149,

413

1,05

8,50

73,

207,

920

Tota

l Cer

tific

ated

Sal

arie

s13

7,66

6,82

667

,579

,682

205,

246,

508

141,

107,

036

69,4

90,0

5721

0,59

7,09

314

5,44

3,60

871

,625

,660

217,

069,

268

00

0Ba

se S

alar

ies

2000

- 29

9956

,797

,720

36,9

35,4

6493

,733

,184

57,6

49,6

8637

,489

,496

95,1

39,1

8259

,605

,019

38,7

61,0

4698

,366

,065

Ste

p &

Col

umn

0.87

%0

00

501,

552

326,

159

827,

711

518,

564

337,

221

855,

785

Off

sche

dule

17-

181.

50%

860,

668

540,

286

1,40

0,95

40

00

00

018

-19

1.50

%85

1,96

655

4,03

21,

405,

998

19

-20

2.50

%0

1,45

3,78

194

5,39

12,

399,

172

0

20-2

11.

50%

901,

854

586,

474

1,48

8,32

8To

tal C

lass

ified

Sal

arie

s58

,510

,354

38,0

29,7

8296

,540

,136

59,6

05,0

1938

,761

,046

98,3

66,0

6561

,025

,436

39,6

84,7

4110

0,71

0,17

7TO

TAL

SALA

RIE

S:19

6,17

7,17

910

5,60

9,46

430

1,78

6,64

420

0,71

2,05

510

8,25

1,10

330

8,96

3,15

820

6,46

9,04

411

1,31

0,40

231

7,77

9,44

63.

Em

ploy

ee B

enef

its30

00-3

999

51,8

06,9

1542

,261

,828

94,0

68,7

4356

,729

,465

45,4

95,2

2710

2,22

4,69

161

,389

,462

48,1

27,5

1310

9,51

6,97

5

H

ealth

ben

efits

36,5

64,7

2921

,629

,758

58,1

94,4

8737

,661

,671

22,2

78,6

5159

,940

,322

38,7

91,5

2122

,947

,010

61,7

38,5

32

00

00

00

00

0To

tal E

mpl

oyee

Ben

efits

88,3

71,6

4463

,891

,586

152,

263,

230

94,3

91,1

3667

,773

,877

162,

165,

013

100,

180,

983

71,0

74,5

2417

1,25

5,50

74.

Boo

ks a

nd S

uppl

ies

4000

-499

96,

862,

785

29,4

88,5

5236

,351

,337

6,66

4,69

326

,978

,048

33,6

42,7

416,

867,

966

24,7

27,7

6631

,595

,733

5. S

ervi

ces,

Oth

er O

p.50

00-5

999

36,8

91,2

9554

,847

,522

91,7

38,8

1733

,017

,888

52,8

96,4

7485

,914

,362

34,2

73,3

9159

,237

,487

93,5

10,8

786.

Cap

ital O

utla

y60

00-6

999

125,

887

7,42

4,56

57,

550,

452

129,

385

1,34

4,65

91,

474,

044

132,

847

1,36

4,26

51,

497,

112

7. O

ther

Out

go71

00-7

299

09,

892,

652

9,89

2,65

20

6,04

8,29

16,

048,

291

06,

048,

291

6,04

8,29

18.

Dire

ct/In

dire

ct C

osts

7300

-739

9(4

,014

,803

)2,

637,

557

(1,3

77,2

46)

(3,2

13,8

55)

1,83

6,60

5(1

,377

,250

)(2

,570

,221

)1,

192,

971

(1,3

77,2

50)

9. D

ebt S

ervi

ce74

00-7

499

6,64

9,56

60

6,64

9,56

66,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

6,64

9,56

60

6,64

9,56

6TO

TAL

EXPE

NDI

TUR

ES

331,

063,

553

273,

791,

898

604,

855,

451

338,

350,

868

265,

129,

057

603,

479,

926

352,

003,

577

274,

955,

705

626,

959,

282

C. E

XCES

S/DE

FICI

ENC

Y78

,844

,488

(97,

548,

587)

(18,

704,

099)

67,2

52,8

08(8

7,80

0,75

6)(2

0,54

7,94

9)60

,057

,957

(96,

430,

196)

(36,

372,

238)

D. O

THER

SO

URC

ES

1.

Inte

rfund

Tra

nsfe

rs In

8910

-892

956

4,06

70

564,

067

564,

067

056

4,06

756

4,06

70

564,

067

2. In

terfu

nd T

rans

fers

Out

7610

-762

9(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

(1,7

90,0

00)

0(1

,790

,000

)(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

3. O

ther

Sou

rces

In89

30-8

979

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er U

ses

Out

7630

-769

90

00

00

00

00

5. C

ontri

b./R

estri

cted

Pro

gram

s89

80-8

999

(73,

104,

691)

73,1

04,6

910

(74,

004,

224)

74,0

04,2

240

(78,

961,

596)

78,9

61,5

960

0TO

TAL

SOU

RCES

/USE

S(7

4,33

0,62

4)73

,104

,691

(1,2

25,9

33)

(75,

230,

157)

74,0

04,2

24(1

,225

,933

)(8

0,18

7,52

9)78

,961

,596

(1,2

25,9

33)

Chan

ge to

Fun

d Ba

lanc

e4,

513,

863.

95(2

4,44

3,89

6.45

)(1

9,93

0,03

2.49

)(7

,977

,349

.21)

(13,

796,

532.

35)

(21,

773,

881.

56)

(20,

129,

571.

97)

(17,

468,

599.

50)

(37,

598,

171.

47)

F. F

UND

BAL

ANC

E, R

ESER

VES

NET

BEG

INN

ING

BAL

ANC

E:17

,974

,961

38,6

12,8

9556

,587

,856

15,8

84,0

4014

,168

,998

30,0

53,0

387,

906,

691

372,

466

8,27

9,15

7(6

,604

,785

)(6

,604

,785

)0

0 R

ESTA

TEM

ENTS

00

0

END

ING

BAL

ANC

E:15

,884

,040

14,1

68,9

9830

,053

,038

7,90

6,69

137

2,46

68,

279,

157

(12,

222,

881)

(17,

096,

134)

(29,

319,

015)

COM

PON

ENTS

OF

ENDI

NG

BAL

ANC

E:R

EVO

LVIN

G C

ASH

150,

000

015

0,00

015

0,00

00

150,

000

150,

000

015

0,00

0PR

EPAI

D0

00

STO

RES

00

00

00

00

0R

EQU

IRED

RES

ERVE

2.00

%12

,132

,910

012

,132

,910

12,0

69,5

990

12,0

69,5

9912

,539

,186

012

,539

,186

Lega

lly R

estri

cted

14,1

68,9

9814

,168

,998

372,

466

372,

466

(17,

096,

134)

(17,

096,

134)

Oth

er C

omm

itmen

ts0

00

00

0

00

00

00

0

00

00

0UN

APPR

OPR

IATE

D3,

601,

130.

060.

003,

601,

130.

06(4

,312

,908

.15)

0.00

(4,3

12,9

08.1

5)(2

4,91

2,06

7.12

)0.

00(2

4,91

2,06

7.12

)

AU

DIT

AD

JUST

MEN

T

249

Oak

land

Uni

fied

Scho

ol D

istr

ict

OEA

20

18-1

920

18-1

920

18-1

920

19-2

020

19-2

020

19-2

020

20-2

120

20-2

120

20-2

12/

20/2

019

2nd

Inte

rim2n

d In

terim

Pr

ojec

ted

Proj

ecte

d

Proj

ecte

dPr

ojec

ted

U

NRE

STR

ICTE

DR

ESTR

ICTE

DC

ombi

ned

UNR

ESTR

ICTE

DR

ESTR

ICTE

DC

ombi

ned

UNR

ESTR

ICTE

DR

ESTR

ICTE

DC

ombi

ned

Fund

ed A

DA

35,5

48.6

4

0.00

35,5

48.6

434

,953

.91

0.

0034

,953

.91

34,4

03.9

6

0.00

34,4

03.9

6Pe

rcen

tage

cha

nge

in A

DA

from

Prio

r Yea

r

-1.6

7%

-1

.57%

Stat

utor

y C

OLA

%1.

0271

1.02

711.

0346

1.03

461.

0286

1.02

86G

ap F

undi

ng P

erce

ntag

e10

0.00

0010

0.00

0010

0.00

0010

0.00

0010

0.00

0010

0.00

00CP

I1.

0358

1.03

581.

0318

1.03

181.

0305

1.03

05Lo

ttery

per

ADA

151.

0053

.00

151.

0053

.00

151.

0053

.00

OBJ

ECT

A. R

EVEN

UE

1. L

CFF

Sou

rces

8010

-809

938

1,63

1,10

23,

278,

309

384,

909,

411

383,

808,

236

3,27

8,30

938

7,08

6,54

539

0,20

8,65

33,

278,

309

393,

486,

962

P

rior Y

ear A

djus

tmen

ts80

19/8

091

00

02.

Fed

eral

Rev

enue

s81

00-8

299

050

,569

,982

50,5

69,9

820

50,5

81,6

0350

,581

,603

050

,593

,175

1,28

6,61

03.

Oth

er S

tate

Rev

enue

s 83

00-8

599

14,6

83,1

8156

,626

,902

71,3

10,0

838,

182,

223

57,7

00,2

7165

,882

,494

8,21

9,58

458

,885

,908

67,1

05,4

92

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er L

ocal

Rev

enue

s86

00-8

799

13,5

93,7

5865

,768

,118

79,3

61,8

7613

,613

,217

65,7

68,1

1879

,381

,335

13,6

33,2

9765

,768

,118

79,4

01,4

15

Mea

sure

G1

- see

con

tribu

tions

00

00

00

0TO

TAL

REV

ENUE

409,

908,

041

176,

243,

311

586,

151,

352

405,

603,

676

177,

328,

301

582,

931,

977

412,

061,

534

178,

525,

510

590,

587,

044

B. E

XPEN

DITU

RES

B

ase

Sala

ries

1000

- 19

9913

3,56

0,74

565

,773

,785

199,

334,

530

143,

276,

728

70,1

08,8

6021

3,38

5,58

815

2,77

2,39

374

,755

,325

227,

527,

718

Ste

p &

Col

umn

1.55

%0

00

2,22

0,78

91,

086,

687

3,30

7,47

72,

367,

972

1,15

8,70

83,

526,

680

17-1

83.

00%

4,20

5,33

91,

638,

581

5,84

3,92

00

00

00

018

-19

4.00

%5,

510,

643

2,69

6,49

58,

207,

138

00

00

19-2

05.

00%

00

07,

274,

876

3,55

9,77

710

,834

,653

00

020

-21

0.00

%0

0To

tal C

ertif

icat

ed S

alar

ies

143,

276,

728

70,1

08,8

6021

3,38

5,58

815

2,77

2,39

374

,755

,325

227,

527,

718

155,

140,

365

75,9

14,0

3323

1,05

4,39

70

00

Base

Sal

arie

s20

00 -

2999

56,7

97,7

2036

,935

,464

93,7

33,1

8460

,859

,818

39,5

36,6

7810

0,39

6,49

664

,458

,763

41,8

74,6

7910

6,33

3,44

3 S

tep

& C

olum

n0.

87%

00

052

9,48

034

3,96

987

3,45

056

0,79

136

4,31

092

5,10

117

-18

3.00

%1,

721,

336

1,08

0,57

32,

801,

908

00

00

00

18-1

94.

00%

2,34

0,76

21,

520,

641

3,86

1,40

4

19-2

05.

00%

03,

069,

465

1,99

4,03

25,

063,

497

0

20-2

10.

00%

00

Tota

l Cla

ssifi

ed S

alar

ies

60,8

59,8

1839

,536

,678

100,

396,

496

64,4

58,7

6341

,874

,679

106,

333,

443

65,0

19,5

5542

,238

,989

107,

258,

544

TOTA

L SA

LAR

IES:

204,

136,

546

109,

645,

538

313,

782,

084

217,

231,

156

116,

630,

004

333,

861,

161

220,

159,

919

118,

153,

022

338,

312,

941

3. E

mpl

oyee

Ben

efits

3000

-399

953

,854

,574

43,3

31,2

1897

,185

,792

61,3

93,8

3847

,918

,918

109,

312,

756

65,4

54,6

1150

,218

,401

115,

673,

012

Hea

lth b

enef

its36

,564

,729

21,6

29,7

5858

,194

,487

37,6

61,6

7122

,278

,651

59,9

40,3

2238

,791

,521

22,9

47,0

1061

,738

,532

0

00

00

00

00

Tota

l Em

ploy

ee B

enef

its90

,419

,304

64,9

60,9

7615

5,38

0,28

099

,055

,509

70,1

97,5

6916

9,25

3,07

810

4,24

6,13

373

,165

,411

177,

411,

544

4. B

ooks

and

Sup

plie

s40

00-4

999

6,86

2,78

529

,488

,552

36,3

51,3

376,

664,

693

26,9

78,0

4833

,642

,741

6,86

7,96

624

,727

,766

31,5

95,7

335.

Ser

vice

s, O

ther

Op.

5000

-599

9 36

,891

,295

54,8

47,5

2291

,738

,817

33,0

17,8

8852

,893

,474

85,9

11,3

6234

,273

,391

59,2

37,4

8793

,510

,878

6. C

apita

l Out

lay

6000

-699

912

5,88

77,

424,

565

7,55

0,45

212

9,38

51,

344,

659

1,47

4,04

413

2,84

71,

364,

265

1,49

7,11

27.

Oth

er O

utgo

7100

-729

90

9,89

2,65

29,

892,

652

06,

048,

291

6,04

8,29

10

6,04

8,29

16,

048,

291

8. D

irect

/Indi

rect

Cos

ts73

00-7

399

(4,0

14,8

03)

2,63

7,55

7(1

,377

,246

)(3

,213

,855

)1,

836,

605

(1,3

77,2

50)

(2,5

70,2

21)

1,19

2,97

1(1

,377

,250

)9.

Deb

t Ser

vice

7400

-749

96,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

6,64

9,56

60

6,64

9,56

66,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

TOTA

L EX

PEN

DITU

RES

34

1,07

0,57

927

8,89

7,36

261

9,96

7,94

135

9,53

4,34

327

5,92

8,65

063

5,46

2,99

336

9,75

9,60

228

3,88

9,21

365

3,64

8,81

4

C. E

XCES

S/DE

FICI

ENC

Y68

,837

,462

(102

,654

,051

)(3

3,81

6,58

9)46

,069

,333

(98,

600,

349)

(52,

531,

016)

42,3

01,9

32(1

05,3

63,7

03)

(63,

061,

771)

D. O

THER

SO

URC

ES

1.

Inte

rfund

Tra

nsfe

rs In

8910

-892

956

4,06

70

564,

067

564,

067

056

4,06

756

4,06

70

564,

067

2. In

terfu

nd T

rans

fers

Out

7610

-762

9(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

(1,7

90,0

00)

0(1

,790

,000

)(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

3. O

ther

Sou

rces

In89

30-8

979

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er U

ses

Out

7630

-769

90

00

00

00

00

5. C

ontri

b./R

estri

cted

Pro

gram

s89

80-8

999

(73,

104,

691)

73,1

04,6

910

(74,

004,

224)

74,0

04,2

240

(78,

961,

596)

78,9

61,5

960

0TO

TAL

SOU

RCES

/USE

S(7

4,33

0,62

4)73

,104

,691

(1,2

25,9

33)

(75,

230,

157)

74,0

04,2

24(1

,225

,933

)(8

0,18

7,52

9)78

,961

,596

(1,2

25,9

33)

Chan

ge to

Fun

d Ba

lanc

e(5

,493

,161

.98)

(29,

549,

359.

99)

(35,

042,

521.

97)

(29,

160,

823.

59)

(24,

596,

125.

18)

(53,

756,

948.

77)

(37,

885,

596.

85)

(26,

402,

106.

88)

(64,

287,

703.

74)

F. F

UND

BAL

ANC

E, R

ESER

VES

NET

BEG

INN

ING

BAL

ANC

E:17

,974

,961

38,6

12,8

9556

,587

,856

5,87

7,01

49,

063,

535

14,9

40,5

49(2

3,28

3,80

9)(1

5,53

2,59

1)(3

8,81

6,40

0)(6

,604

,785

)(6

,604

,785

)0

0 R

ESTA

TEM

ENTS

00

0

END

ING

BAL

ANC

E:5,

877,

014

9,06

3,53

514

,940

,549

(23,

283,

809)

(15,

532,

591)

(38,

816,

400)

(61,

169,

406)

(41,

934,

697)

(103

,104

,104

)CO

MPO

NEN

TS O

F EN

DIN

G B

ALAN

CE:

REV

OLV

ING

CAS

H15

0,00

00

150,

000

150,

000

015

0,00

015

0,00

00

150,

000

PREP

AID

00

0ST

OR

ES0

00

00

00

00

REQ

UIR

ED R

ESER

VE2.

00%

12,4

35,1

590

12,4

35,1

5912

,709

,260

012

,709

,260

13,0

72,9

770

13,0

72,9

77Le

gally

Res

trict

ed9,

063,

535

9,06

3,53

5(1

5,53

2,59

1)(1

5,53

2,59

1)(4

1,93

4,69

7)(4

1,93

4,69

7)O

ther

Com

mitm

ents

00

00

00

0

00

00

0

00

00

00

UNAP

PRO

PRIA

TED

(6,7

08,1

44.8

7)0.

00(6

,708

,144

.87)

(36,

143,

069.

46)

0.00

(36,

143,

069.

46)

(74,

392,

383.

31)

0.00

(74,

392,

383.

31)

AU

DIT

AD

JUST

MEN

T

250

Oak

land

Uni

fied

Scho

ol D

istr

ict

2018

-19

2018

-19

2018

-19

2019

-20

2019

-20

2019

-20

2020

-21

2020

-21

2020

-21

2/20

/201

92n

d In

terim

2nd

Inte

rim

Proj

ecte

dPr

ojec

ted

Pr

ojec

ted

Proj

ecte

d

UN

REST

RIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dUN

RES

TRIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dU

NRES

TRIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dFu

nded

AD

A35

,548

.64

0.

0035

,548

.64

34,9

53.9

1

0.00

34,9

53.9

134

,403

.96

0.

0034

,403

.96

Perc

enta

ge c

hang

e in

AD

A fro

m P

rior Y

ear

-1

.67%

-1.5

7%St

atut

ory

CO

LA %

1.02

711.

0271

1.03

461.

0346

1.02

861.

0286

Gap

Fun

ding

Per

cent

age

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

CPI

1.03

581.

0358

1.03

181.

0318

1.03

051.

0305

Lotte

ry p

er A

DA15

1.00

53.0

015

1.00

53.0

015

1.00

53.0

0

OBJ

ECT

A. R

EVEN

UE

1. L

CFF

Sou

rces

8010

-809

938

1,63

1,10

23,

278,

309

384,

909,

411

383,

808,

236

3,27

8,30

938

7,08

6,54

539

0,20

8,65

33,

278,

309

393,

486,

962

P

rior Y

ear A

djus

tmen

ts80

19/8

091

00

02.

Fed

eral

Rev

enue

s81

00-8

299

050

,569

,982

50,5

69,9

820

50,5

81,6

0350

,581

,603

050

,593

,175

1,28

6,61

03.

Oth

er S

tate

Rev

enue

s 83

00-8

599

14,6

83,1

8156

,626

,902

71,3

10,0

838,

182,

223

57,7

00,2

7165

,882

,494

8,21

9,58

458

,885

,908

67,1

05,4

92

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er L

ocal

Rev

enue

s86

00-8

799

13,5

93,7

5865

,768

,118

79,3

61,8

7613

,613

,217

65,7

68,1

1879

,381

,335

13,6

33,2

9765

,768

,118

79,4

01,4

15

Mea

sure

G1

- see

con

tribu

tions

00

00

00

0TO

TAL

REV

ENUE

409,

908,

041

176,

243,

311

586,

151,

352

405,

603,

676

177,

328,

301

582,

931,

977

412,

061,

534

178,

525,

510

590,

587,

044

B. E

XPEN

DITU

RES

B

ase

Sala

ries

1000

- 19

9913

3,56

0,74

565

,773

,785

199,

334,

530

137,

766,

084

67,4

12,3

6620

5,17

8,45

013

9,90

1,45

968

,457

,257

208,

358,

716

Ste

p &

Col

umn

1.55

%0

00

2,13

5,37

41,

044,

892

3,18

0,26

62,

168,

473

1,06

1,08

73,

229,

560

Off

sche

dule

18-

190.

00%

00

00

00

00

017

-18

(18-

19)

3.00

%4,

205,

339

1,63

8,58

15,

843,

920

00

00

18-1

93.

00%

4,13

2,98

32,

022,

371

6,15

5,35

319

-20

0.00

%0

00

00

00

00

20-2

10.

00%

00

Tota

l Cer

tific

ated

Sal

arie

s14

1,89

9,06

769

,434

,737

211,

333,

803

139,

901,

459

68,4

57,2

5720

8,35

8,71

614

2,06

9,93

169

,518

,345

211,

588,

276

00

0Ba

se S

alar

ies

2000

- 29

9956

,797

,720

36,9

35,4

6493

,733

,184

60,2

74,6

2738

,016

,037

98,2

90,6

6460

,799

,017

38,3

46,7

7699

,145

,793

Ste

p &

Col

umn

0.87

%0

00

524,

389

330,

740

855,

129

528,

951

333,

617

862,

568

Off

sche

dule

18-

190.

00%

00

00

00

00

018

-19

(17-

18)

3.00

%1,

721,

336

1,08

0,57

32,

801,

908

18-1

93.

00%

1,75

5,57

21,

140,

481

2,89

6,05

3

19-2

00.

00%

00

00

0

20-2

10.

00%

00

Tota

l Cla

ssifi

ed S

alar

ies

60,2

74,6

2739

,156

,518

99,4

31,1

4560

,799

,017

38,3

46,7

7699

,145

,793

61,3

27,9

6838

,680

,393

100,

008,

361

TOTA

L SA

LAR

IES:

202,

173,

694

108,

591,

254

310,

764,

948

200,

700,

475

106,

804,

033

307,

504,

509

203,

397,

899

108,

198,

738

311,

596,

637

3. E

mpl

oyee

Ben

efits

3000

-399

953

,332

,266

43,0

40,5

5896

,372

,823

55,3

91,4

2044

,382

,487

99,7

73,9

0759

,183

,907

46,4

98,1

6610

5,68

2,07

3

H

ealth

ben

efits

36,5

64,7

2921

,629

,758

58,1

94,4

8737

,661

,671

22,2

78,6

5159

,940

,322

38,7

91,5

2122

,947

,010

61,7

38,5

32

00

00

00

00

0To

tal E

mpl

oyee

Ben

efits

89,8

96,9

9564

,670

,316

154,

567,

311

93,0

53,0

9166

,661

,138

159,

714,

229

97,9

75,4

2869

,445

,177

167,

420,

605

4. B

ooks

and

Sup

plie

s40

00-4

999

6,86

2,78

529

,488

,552

36,3

51,3

376,

664,

693

26,9

78,0

4833

,642

,741

6,86

7,96

624

,727

,766

31,5

95,7

335.

Ser

vice

s, O

ther

Op.

5000

-599

9 36

,891

,295

54,8

47,5

2291

,738

,817

33,0

17,8

8852

,893

,474

85,9

11,3

6234

,273

,391

59,2

37,4

8793

,510

,878

6. C

apita

l Out

lay

6000

-699

912

5,88

77,

424,

565

7,55

0,45

212

9,38

51,

344,

659

1,47

4,04

413

2,84

71,

364,

265

1,49

7,11

27.

Oth

er O

utgo

7100

-729

90

9,89

2,65

29,

892,

652

06,

048,

291

6,04

8,29

10

6,04

8,29

16,

048,

291

8. D

irect

/Indi

rect

Cos

ts73

00-7

399

(4,0

14,8

03)

2,63

7,55

7(1

,377

,246

)(3

,213

,855

)1,

836,

605

(1,3

77,2

50)

(2,5

70,2

21)

1,19

2,97

1(1

,377

,250

)9.

Deb

t Ser

vice

7400

-749

96,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

6,64

9,56

60

6,64

9,56

66,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

TOTA

L EX

PEN

DITU

RES

33

8,58

5,41

927

7,55

2,41

861

6,13

7,83

733

7,00

1,24

426

2,56

6,24

859

9,56

7,49

234

6,72

6,87

727

0,21

4,69

561

6,94

1,57

1

C. E

XCES

S/DE

FICI

ENC

Y71

,322

,622

(101

,309

,107

)(2

9,98

6,48

5)68

,602

,432

(85,

237,

947)

(16,

635,

515)

65,3

34,6

57(9

1,68

9,18

5)(2

6,35

4,52

8)

D. O

THER

SO

URC

ES

1.

Inte

rfund

Tra

nsfe

rs In

8910

-892

956

4,06

70

564,

067

564,

067

056

4,06

756

4,06

70

564,

067

2. In

terfu

nd T

rans

fers

Out

7610

-762

9(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

(1,7

90,0

00)

0(1

,790

,000

)(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

3. O

ther

Sou

rces

In89

30-8

979

083

,104

,691

83,1

04,6

910

00

00

04.

Oth

er U

ses

Out

7630

-769

90

00

00

00

00

5. C

ontri

b./R

estri

cted

Pro

gram

s89

80-8

999

(73,

104,

691)

73,1

04,6

910

(74,

004,

224)

74,0

04,2

240

(78,

961,

596)

78,9

61,5

960

0TO

TAL

SOU

RCES

/USE

S(7

4,33

0,62

4)15

6,20

9,38

281

,878

,758

(75,

230,

157)

74,0

04,2

24(1

,225

,933

)(8

0,18

7,52

9)78

,961

,596

(1,2

25,9

33)

Chan

ge to

Fun

d Ba

lanc

e(3

,008

,001

.77)

54,9

00,2

74.9

551

,892

,273

.17

(6,6

27,7

24.7

1)(1

1,23

3,72

2.95

)(1

7,86

1,44

7.66

)(1

4,85

2,87

1.93

)(1

2,72

7,58

8.86

)(2

7,58

0,46

0.78

)F.

FU

ND B

ALA

NCE,

RES

ERVE

S N

ET B

EGIN

NIN

G B

ALAN

CE:

17,9

74,9

6138

,612

,895

56,5

87,8

568,

362,

174

93,5

13,1

7010

1,87

5,34

41,

734,

450

82,2

79,4

4784

,013

,896

(6,6

04,7

85)

(6,6

04,7

85)

00

RES

TATE

MEN

TS0

00

END

ING

BAL

ANC

E:8,

362,

174

93,5

13,1

7010

1,87

5,34

41,

734,

450

82,2

79,4

4784

,013

,896

(13,

118,

422)

69,5

51,8

5856

,433

,435

COM

PON

ENTS

OF

ENDI

NG

BAL

ANC

E:R

EVO

LVIN

G C

ASH

150,

000

015

0,00

015

0,00

00

150,

000

150,

000

015

0,00

0PR

EPAI

D0

00

STO

RES

00

00

00

00

0R

EQU

IRED

RES

ERVE

2.00

%12

,358

,557

012

,358

,557

11,9

91,3

500

11,9

91,3

5012

,338

,832

012

,338

,832

Lega

lly R

estri

cted

93,5

13,1

7093

,513

,170

82,2

79,4

4782

,279

,447

69,5

51,8

5869

,551

,858

Oth

er C

omm

itmen

ts0

00

00

0

00

00

00

0

00

00

0UN

APPR

OPR

IATE

D(4

,146

,382

.66)

0.00

(4,1

46,3

82.6

6)(1

0,40

6,90

0.38

)0.

00(1

0,40

6,90

0.38

)(2

5,60

7,25

4.30

)0.

00(2

5,60

7,25

4.30

)

AU

DIT

AD

JUST

MEN

T

Fact

finde

r Lo

wer

STR

S

251

Oak

land

Uni

fied

Scho

ol D

istr

ict

OU

SD L

ower

STR

S

2018

-19

2018

-19

2018

-19

2019

-20

2019

-20

2019

-20

2020

-21

2020

-21

2020

-21

2/20

/201

92n

d In

terim

2nd

Inte

rim

Proj

ecte

dPr

ojec

ted

Pr

ojec

ted

Proj

ecte

d

UN

REST

RIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dUN

RES

TRIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dU

NRES

TRIC

TED

RES

TRIC

TED

Com

bine

dFu

nded

AD

A35

,548

.64

0.

0035

,548

.64

34,9

53.9

1

0.00

34,9

53.9

134

,403

.96

0.

0034

,403

.96

Perc

enta

ge c

hang

e in

AD

A fro

m P

rior Y

ear

-1

.67%

-1.5

7%St

atut

ory

CO

LA %

1.02

711.

0271

1.03

461.

0346

1.02

861.

0286

Gap

Fun

ding

Per

cent

age

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

100.

0000

CPI

1.03

581.

0358

1.03

181.

0318

1.03

051.

0305

Lotte

ry p

er A

DA15

1.00

53.0

015

1.00

53.0

015

1.00

53.0

0

OBJ

ECT

A. R

EVEN

UE

1. L

CFF

Sou

rces

8010

-809

938

1,63

1,10

23,

278,

309

384,

909,

411

383,

808,

236

3,27

8,30

938

7,08

6,54

539

0,20

8,65

33,

278,

309

393,

486,

962

P

rior Y

ear A

djus

tmen

ts80

19/8

091

00

02.

Fed

eral

Rev

enue

s81

00-8

299

050

,569

,982

50,5

69,9

820

50,5

81,6

0350

,581

,603

050

,593

,175

1,28

6,61

03.

Oth

er S

tate

Rev

enue

s 83

00-8

599

14,6

83,1

8156

,626

,902

71,3

10,0

838,

182,

223

57,7

00,2

7165

,882

,494

8,21

9,58

458

,885

,908

67,1

05,4

92

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er L

ocal

Rev

enue

s86

00-8

799

13,5

93,7

5865

,768

,118

79,3

61,8

7613

,613

,217

65,7

68,1

1879

,381

,335

13,6

33,2

9765

,768

,118

79,4

01,4

15

Mea

sure

G1

- see

con

tribu

tions

00

00

00

0TO

TAL

REV

ENUE

409,

908,

041

176,

243,

311

586,

151,

352

405,

603,

676

177,

328,

301

582,

931,

977

412,

061,

534

178,

525,

510

590,

587,

044

B. E

XPEN

DITU

RES

B

ase

Sala

ries

1000

- 19

9913

3,56

0,74

565

,773

,785

199,

334,

530

135,

564,

156

66,7

60,3

9220

2,32

4,54

814

1,10

7,03

669

,490

,057

210,

597,

093

Ste

p &

Col

umn

1.55

%0

00

2,10

1,24

41,

034,

786

3,13

6,03

02,

187,

159

1,07

7,09

63,

264,

255

Off

sche

dule

17-

181.

50%

2,10

2,67

081

9,29

02,

921,

960

00

00

00

18-1

91.

50%

2,00

3,41

198

6,60

72,

990,

018

00

00

19-2

02.

50%

00

03,

441,

635

1,69

4,87

95,

136,

514

00

020

-21

1.50

%2,

149,

413

1,05

8,50

73,

207,

920

Tota

l Cer

tific

ated

Sal

arie

s13

7,66

6,82

667

,579

,682

205,

246,

508

141,

107,

036

69,4

90,0

5721

0,59

7,09

314

5,44

3,60

871

,625

,660

217,

069,

268

00

0Ba

se S

alar

ies

2000

- 29

9956

,797

,720

36,9

35,4

6493

,733

,184

57,6

49,6

8637

,489

,496

95,1

39,1

8259

,605

,019

38,7

61,0

4698

,366

,065

Ste

p &

Col

umn

0.87

%0

00

501,

552

326,

159

827,

711

518,

564

337,

221

855,

785

Off

sche

dule

17-

181.

50%

860,

668

540,

286

1,40

0,95

40

00

00

018

-19

1.50

%85

1,96

655

4,03

21,

405,

998

19

-20

2.50

%0

1,45

3,78

194

5,39

12,

399,

172

0

20-2

11.

50%

901,

854

586,

474

1,48

8,32

8To

tal C

lass

ified

Sal

arie

s58

,510

,354

38,0

29,7

8296

,540

,136

59,6

05,0

1938

,761

,046

98,3

66,0

6561

,025

,436

39,6

84,7

4110

0,71

0,17

7TO

TAL

SALA

RIE

S:19

6,17

7,17

910

5,60

9,46

430

1,78

6,64

420

0,71

2,05

510

8,25

1,10

330

8,96

3,15

820

6,46

9,04

411

1,31

0,40

231

7,77

9,44

63.

Em

ploy

ee B

enef

its30

00-3

999

51,8

06,9

1542

,261

,828

94,0

68,7

4355

,276

,062

44,7

79,4

7910

0,05

5,54

159

,935

,026

47,4

11,2

5710

7,34

6,28

3

H

ealth

ben

efits

36,5

64,7

2921

,629

,758

58,1

94,4

8737

,661

,671

22,2

78,6

5159

,940

,322

38,7

91,5

2122

,947

,010

61,7

38,5

32

00

00

00

00

0To

tal E

mpl

oyee

Ben

efits

88,3

71,6

4463

,891

,586

152,

263,

230

92,9

37,7

3467

,058

,130

159,

995,

863

98,7

26,5

4770

,358

,267

169,

084,

814

4. B

ooks

and

Sup

plie

s40

00-4

999

6,86

2,78

529

,488

,552

36,3

51,3

376,

664,

693

26,9

78,0

4833

,642

,741

6,86

7,96

624

,727

,766

31,5

95,7

335.

Ser

vice

s, O

ther

Op.

5000

-599

9 36

,891

,295

54,8

47,5

2291

,738

,817

33,0

17,8

8852

,893

,474

85,9

11,3

6234

,273

,391

59,2

37,4

8793

,510

,878

6. C

apita

l Out

lay

6000

-699

912

5,88

77,

424,

565

7,55

0,45

212

9,38

51,

344,

659

1,47

4,04

413

2,84

71,

364,

265

1,49

7,11

27.

Oth

er O

utgo

7100

-729

90

9,89

2,65

29,

892,

652

06,

048,

291

6,04

8,29

10

6,04

8,29

16,

048,

291

8. D

irect

/Indi

rect

Cos

ts73

00-7

399

(4,0

14,8

03)

2,63

7,55

7(1

,377

,246

)(3

,213

,855

)1,

836,

605

(1,3

77,2

50)

(2,5

70,2

21)

1,19

2,97

1(1

,377

,250

)9.

Deb

t Ser

vice

7400

-749

96,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

6,64

9,56

60

6,64

9,56

66,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

TOTA

L EX

PEN

DITU

RES

33

1,06

3,55

327

3,79

1,89

860

4,85

5,45

133

6,89

7,46

626

4,41

0,31

060

1,30

7,77

635

0,54

9,14

127

4,23

9,44

962

4,78

8,58

9

C. E

XCES

S/DE

FICI

ENC

Y78

,844

,488

(97,

548,

587)

(18,

704,

099)

68,7

06,2

10(8

7,08

2,00

9)(1

8,37

5,79

9)61

,512

,393

(95,

713,

939)

(34,

201,

546)

D. O

THER

SO

URC

ES

1.

Inte

rfund

Tra

nsfe

rs In

8910

-892

956

4,06

70

564,

067

564,

067

056

4,06

756

4,06

70

564,

067

2. In

terfu

nd T

rans

fers

Out

7610

-762

9(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

(1,7

90,0

00)

0(1

,790

,000

)(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

3. O

ther

Sou

rces

In89

30-8

979

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er U

ses

Out

7630

-769

90

00

00

00

00

5. C

ontri

b./R

estri

cted

Pro

gram

s89

80-8

999

(73,

104,

691)

73,1

04,6

910

(74,

004,

224)

74,0

04,2

240

(78,

961,

596)

78,9

61,5

960

0TO

TAL

SOU

RCES

/USE

S(7

4,33

0,62

4)73

,104

,691

(1,2

25,9

33)

(75,

230,

157)

74,0

04,2

24(1

,225

,933

)(8

0,18

7,52

9)78

,961

,596

(1,2

25,9

33)

Chan

ge to

Fun

d Ba

lanc

e4,

513,

863.

95(2

4,44

3,89

6.45

)(1

9,93

0,03

2.49

)(6

,523

,946

.75)

(13,

077,

784.

76)

(19,

601,

731.

50)

(18,

675,

135.

89)

(16,

752,

342.

90)

(35,

427,

478.

79)

F. F

UND

BAL

ANC

E, R

ESER

VES

NET

BEG

INN

ING

BAL

ANC

E:17

,974

,961

38,6

12,8

9556

,587

,856

15,8

84,0

4014

,168

,998

30,0

53,0

389,

360,

093

1,09

1,21

310

,451

,307

(6,6

04,7

85)

(6,6

04,7

85)

00

RES

TATE

MEN

TS0

00

END

ING

BAL

ANC

E:15

,884

,040

14,1

68,9

9830

,053

,038

9,36

0,09

31,

091,

213

10,4

51,3

07(9

,315

,043

)(1

5,66

1,13

0)(2

4,97

6,17

2)CO

MPO

NEN

TS O

F EN

DIN

G B

ALAN

CE:

REV

OLV

ING

CAS

H15

0,00

00

150,

000

150,

000

015

0,00

015

0,00

00

150,

000

PREP

AID

00

0ST

OR

ES0

00

00

00

00

REQ

UIR

ED R

ESER

VE2.

00%

12,1

32,9

100

12,1

32,9

1012

,026

,156

012

,026

,156

12,4

95,7

720

12,4

95,7

72Le

gally

Res

trict

ed14

,168

,998

14,1

68,9

981,

091,

213

1,09

1,21

3(1

5,66

1,13

0)(1

5,66

1,13

0)O

ther

Com

mitm

ents

00

00

00

0

00

00

0

00

00

00

UNAP

PRO

PRIA

TED

3,60

1,13

0.06

0.00

3,60

1,13

0.06

(2,8

16,0

62.6

8)0.

00(2

,816

,062

.68)

(21,

960,

814.

57)

0.00

(21,

960,

814.

57)

AU

DIT

AD

JUST

MEN

T

252

Oak

land

Uni

fied

Scho

ol D

istr

ict

OEA

Low

er S

TRS

20

18-1

920

18-1

920

18-1

920

19-2

020

19-2

020

19-2

020

20-2

120

20-2

120

20-2

12/

20/2

019

2nd

Inte

rim2n

d In

terim

Pr

ojec

ted

Proj

ecte

d

Proj

ecte

dPr

ojec

ted

U

NRE

STR

ICTE

DR

ESTR

ICTE

DC

ombi

ned

UNR

ESTR

ICTE

DR

ESTR

ICTE

DC

ombi

ned

UNR

ESTR

ICTE

DR

ESTR

ICTE

DC

ombi

ned

Fund

ed A

DA

35,5

48.6

4

0.00

35,5

48.6

434

,953

.91

0.

0034

,953

.91

34,4

03.9

6

0.00

34,4

03.9

6Pe

rcen

tage

cha

nge

in A

DA

from

Prio

r Yea

r

-1.6

7%

-1

.57%

Stat

utor

y C

OLA

%1.

0271

1.02

711.

0346

1.03

461.

0286

1.02

86G

ap F

undi

ng P

erce

ntag

e10

0.00

0010

0.00

0010

0.00

0010

0.00

0010

0.00

0010

0.00

00CP

I1.

0358

1.03

581.

0318

1.03

181.

0305

1.03

05Lo

ttery

per

ADA

151.

0053

.00

151.

0053

.00

151.

0053

.00

OBJ

ECT

A. R

EVEN

UE

1. L

CFF

Sou

rces

8010

-809

938

1,63

1,10

23,

278,

309

384,

909,

411

383,

808,

236

3,27

8,30

938

7,08

6,54

539

0,20

8,65

33,

278,

309

393,

486,

962

P

rior Y

ear A

djus

tmen

ts80

19/8

091

00

02.

Fed

eral

Rev

enue

s81

00-8

299

050

,569

,982

50,5

69,9

820

50,5

81,6

0350

,581

,603

050

,593

,175

1,28

6,61

03.

Oth

er S

tate

Rev

enue

s 83

00-8

599

14,6

83,1

8156

,626

,902

71,3

10,0

838,

182,

223

57,7

00,2

7165

,882

,494

8,21

9,58

458

,885

,908

67,1

05,4

92

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er L

ocal

Rev

enue

s86

00-8

799

13,5

93,7

5865

,768

,118

79,3

61,8

7613

,613

,217

65,7

68,1

1879

,381

,335

13,6

33,2

9765

,768

,118

79,4

01,4

15

Mea

sure

G1

- see

con

tribu

tions

00

00

00

0TO

TAL

REV

ENUE

409,

908,

041

176,

243,

311

586,

151,

352

405,

603,

676

177,

328,

301

582,

931,

977

412,

061,

534

178,

525,

510

590,

587,

044

B. E

XPEN

DITU

RES

B

ase

Sala

ries

1000

- 19

9913

3,56

0,74

565

,773

,785

199,

334,

530

143,

276,

728

70,1

08,8

6021

3,38

5,58

815

2,77

2,39

374

,755

,325

227,

527,

718

Ste

p &

Col

umn

1.55

%0

00

2,22

0,78

91,

086,

687

3,30

7,47

72,

367,

972

1,15

8,70

83,

526,

680

17-1

83.

00%

4,20

5,33

91,

638,

581

5,84

3,92

00

00

00

018

-19

4.00

%5,

510,

643

2,69

6,49

58,

207,

138

00

00

19-2

05.

00%

00

07,

274,

876

3,55

9,77

710

,834

,653

00

020

-21

0.00

%0

0To

tal C

ertif

icat

ed S

alar

ies

143,

276,

728

70,1

08,8

6021

3,38

5,58

815

2,77

2,39

374

,755

,325

227,

527,

718

155,

140,

365

75,9

14,0

3323

1,05

4,39

70

00

Base

Sal

arie

s20

00 -

2999

56,7

97,7

2036

,935

,464

93,7

33,1

8460

,859

,818

39,5

36,6

7810

0,39

6,49

664

,458

,763

41,8

74,6

7910

6,33

3,44

3 S

tep

& C

olum

n0.

87%

00

052

9,48

034

3,96

987

3,45

056

0,79

136

4,31

092

5,10

117

-18

3.00

%1,

721,

336

1,08

0,57

32,

801,

908

00

00

00

18-1

94.

00%

2,34

0,76

21,

520,

641

3,86

1,40

4

19-2

05.

00%

03,

069,

465

1,99

4,03

25,

063,

497

0

20-2

10.

00%

00

Tota

l Cla

ssifi

ed S

alar

ies

60,8

59,8

1839

,536

,678

100,

396,

496

64,4

58,7

6341

,874

,679

106,

333,

443

65,0

19,5

5542

,238

,989

107,

258,

544

TOTA

L SA

LAR

IES:

204,

136,

546

109,

645,

538

313,

782,

084

217,

231,

156

116,

630,

004

333,

861,

161

220,

159,

919

118,

153,

022

338,

312,

941

3. E

mpl

oyee

Ben

efits

3000

-399

953

,854

,574

43,3

31,2

1897

,185

,792

59,8

20,2

8247

,148

,938

106,

969,

220

63,9

03,2

0849

,459

,260

113,

362,

468

Hea

lth b

enef

its36

,564

,729

21,6

29,7

5858

,194

,487

37,6

61,6

7122

,278

,651

59,9

40,3

2238

,791

,521

22,9

47,0

1061

,738

,532

0

00

00

00

00

Tota

l Em

ploy

ee B

enef

its90

,419

,304

64,9

60,9

7615

5,38

0,28

097

,481

,953

69,4

27,5

8916

6,90

9,54

210

2,69

4,72

972

,406

,271

175,

101,

000

4. B

ooks

and

Sup

plie

s40

00-4

999

6,86

2,78

529

,488

,552

36,3

51,3

376,

664,

693

26,9

78,0

4833

,642

,741

6,86

7,96

624

,727

,766

31,5

95,7

335.

Ser

vice

s, O

ther

Op.

5000

-599

9 36

,891

,295

54,8

47,5

2291

,738

,817

33,0

17,8

8852

,893

,474

85,9

11,3

6234

,273

,391

59,2

37,4

8793

,510

,878

6. C

apita

l Out

lay

6000

-699

912

5,88

77,

424,

565

7,55

0,45

212

9,38

51,

344,

659

1,47

4,04

413

2,84

71,

364,

265

1,49

7,11

27.

Oth

er O

utgo

7100

-729

90

9,89

2,65

29,

892,

652

06,

048,

291

6,04

8,29

10

6,04

8,29

16,

048,

291

8. D

irect

/Indi

rect

Cos

ts73

00-7

399

(4,0

14,8

03)

2,63

7,55

7(1

,377

,246

)(3

,213

,855

)1,

836,

605

(1,3

77,2

50)

(2,5

70,2

21)

1,19

2,97

1(1

,377

,250

)9.

Deb

t Ser

vice

7400

-749

96,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

6,64

9,56

60

6,64

9,56

66,

649,

566

06,

649,

566

TOTA

L EX

PEN

DITU

RES

34

1,07

0,57

927

8,89

7,36

261

9,96

7,94

135

7,96

0,78

727

5,15

8,67

063

3,11

9,45

736

8,20

8,19

828

3,13

0,07

265

1,33

8,27

0

C. E

XCES

S/DE

FICI

ENC

Y68

,837

,462

(102

,654

,051

)(3

3,81

6,58

9)47

,642

,889

(97,

830,

369)

(50,

187,

480)

43,8

53,3

36(1

04,6

04,5

63)

(60,

751,

227)

D. O

THER

SO

URC

ES

1.

Inte

rfund

Tra

nsfe

rs In

8910

-892

956

4,06

70

564,

067

564,

067

056

4,06

756

4,06

70

564,

067

2. In

terfu

nd T

rans

fers

Out

7610

-762

9(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

(1,7

90,0

00)

0(1

,790

,000

)(1

,790

,000

)0

(1,7

90,0

00)

3. O

ther

Sou

rces

In89

30-8

979

00

00

00

00

04.

Oth

er U

ses

Out

7630

-769

90

00

00

00

00

5. C

ontri

b./R

estri

cted

Pro

gram

s89

80-8

999

(73,

104,

691)

73,1

04,6

910

(74,

004,

224)

74,0

04,2

240

(78,

961,

596)

78,9

61,5

960

0TO

TAL

SOU

RCES

/USE

S(7

4,33

0,62

4)73

,104

,691

(1,2

25,9

33)

(75,

230,

157)

74,0

04,2

24(1

,225

,933

)(8

0,18

7,52

9)78

,961

,596

(1,2

25,9

33)

Chan

ge to

Fun

d Ba

lanc

e(5

,493

,161

.98)

(29,

549,

359.

99)

(35,

042,

521.

97)

(27,

587,

267.

94)

(23,

826,

145.

33)

(51,

413,

413.

27)

(36,

334,

193.

20)

(25,

642,

966.

56)

(61,

977,

159.

76)

F. F

UND

BAL

ANC

E, R

ESER

VES

NET

BEG

INN

ING

BAL

ANC

E:17

,974

,961

38,6

12,8

9556

,587

,856

5,87

7,01

49,

063,

535

14,9

40,5

49(2

1,71

0,25

4)(1

4,76

2,61

1)(3

6,47

2,86

5)(6

,604

,785

)(6

,604

,785

)0

0 R

ESTA

TEM

ENTS

00

0

END

ING

BAL

ANC

E:5,

877,

014

9,06

3,53

514

,940

,549

(21,

710,

254)

(14,

762,

611)

(36,

472,

865)

(58,

044,

447)

(40,

405,

577)

(98,

450,

024)

COM

PON

ENTS

OF

ENDI

NG

BAL

ANC

E:R

EVO

LVIN

G C

ASH

150,

000

015

0,00

015

0,00

00

150,

000

150,

000

015

0,00

0PR

EPAI

D0

00

STO

RES

00

00

00

00

0R

EQU

IRED

RES

ERVE

2.00

%12

,435

,159

012

,435

,159

12,6

62,3

900

12,6

62,3

9013

,026

,766

013

,026

,766

Lega

lly R

estri

cted

9,06

3,53

59,

063,

535

(14,

762,

611)

(14,

762,

611)

(40,

405,

577)

(40,

405,

577)

Oth

er C

omm

itmen

ts0

00

00

0

00

00

00

0

00

00

0UN

APPR

OPR

IATE

D(6

,708

,144

.87)

0.00

(6,7

08,1

44.8

7)(3

4,52

2,64

3.81

)0.

00(3

4,52

2,64

3.81

)(7

1,22

1,21

3.01

)0.

00(7

1,22

1,21

3.01

)

AU

DIT

AD

JUST

MEN

T

253

Exhibit O

AB1840 Estimated CostsACOE 2018-19 October November December January February March April May June Total Hours Days Rate CostCounty Superintendent 10 60 90 100 100 60 60 60 60 600 75.0 $1,575 $118,125Associate Superintendent 10 60 90 110 120 80 100 100 80 750 93.8 $1,375 $128,906Chief of Staff 10 60 80 100 100 90 60 60 60 620 77.5 $975 $75,563ACOE Staff (various) 5 10 30 30 15 15 15 15 15 150 20.0 $600 $12,000ACOE Contractor A 10 10 20 10 10 40 40 40 40 220 27.5 $800 $22,000ACOE Contractor B 10 10 20 10 0 0 0 0 0 50 6.3 $800 $5,000External Contractor A 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 400 50.0 $1,650 $82,500External Contractor B 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 400 50.0 $1,650 $82,500External Contractor C 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 400 50.0 $1,650 $82,500External Contractor D 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 400 50.0 $1,650 $82,500External Contractor E 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 400 50.0 $1,650 $82,500

Total $774,094

AB1840 Estimated CostsACOE 2019-20 July-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Total Hours Days Rate CostCounty Superintendent 80 60 60 40 240 30.0 $1,600 $48,000Associate Superintendent 120 120 120 120 480 60.0 $1,400 $84,000Chief of Staff 40 40 60 40 180 22.5 $1,000 $22,500ACOE Staff (various) 40 60 40 40 180 24.0 $625 $15,000ACOE Contractor A 60 60 60 60 240 30.0 $800 $24,000External Contractor A 300 300 300 300 1200 150.0 $1,650 $247,500External Contractor B 300 300 300 300 1200 150.0 $1,650 $247,500External Contractor C 300 300 300 300 1200 150.0 $1,650 $247,500External Contractor D 300 300 300 300 1200 150.0 $1,650 $247,500External Contractor E 300 300 300 300 1200 150.0 $1,650 $247,500

Total $1,431,000

AB1840 Estimated CostsACOE 2020-21 July-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Total Hours Days Rate CostCounty Superintendent 40 40 20 20 120 15.0 $1,625 $24,375Associate Superintendent 90 60 40 40 230 28.8 $1,425 $40,969Chief of Staff 40 20 20 10 90 11.3 $1,025 $11,531ACOE Staff (various) 40 30 30 20 120 16.0 $650 $10,400ACOE Contractor A 60 60 60 60 240 30.0 $800 $24,000External Contractor A 300 300 300 200 1100 137.5 $1,650 $226,875External Contractor B 300 300 300 200 1100 137.5 $1,650 $226,875External Contractor C 300 300 300 200 1100 137.5 $1,650 $226,875External Contractor D 300 300 200 200 1000 125.0 $1,650 $206,250External Contractor E 300 300 200 200 1000 125.0 $1,650 $206,250

Total $1,204,400

Projected Hours

Estimated Actual Hours Projected Hours

Projected Hours

254

Exhibit P

OUSD 2018-2020 Fiscal Vitality Plan Summary Fiscal Vitality Plan was introduced on Dec. 13, 2017 and is organized into three chapters - stability, recovery, vitality

Stability - short-term (one to six months) Recovery - medium-term (three to twelve months) Vitality - long-term (six to eighteen months)

FCMAT Risk Factors and Fiscal Vitality Plan-Responsive Recommendations

Risk Factor Rating Summary FCMAT Recommendations FVP-Responsive Recommendations

Deficit Spending No Adopt a plan to eliminate deficit spending 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4

Fund Balance No Monitor contributions and transfers to restricted programs

1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7

Reserve for Economic Uncertainty

No Develop a plan to restore and maintain reserve 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7

Enrollment and Attendance

Mixed Monitoring plan; new housing; industry, charter schools, birthrates, FTE changes

2.1

Cash Monitoring Mixed Plan for short-term cash flow needs; inter-fund transfers

1.9

Bargaining Agreement

No Bargaining beyond COLA must be supported by available fund balance

3.2

General Fund Mixed Track one-time revenues with one-time expenditures; plan for realignment or elimination of positions funded

1.3, 2.9

Encroachment No Special ed, nutrition and early childhood cost containment; evaluate transportation and bell schedules

1.7

Position Control and Human Resources

No Tracking, creating, and deleting positions; reconciling HR, budget and payroll systems

1.2, 2.5, 2.6, 2.8

Budget Development and Adoption

Yes Budget development timeline and procedures 2.1, 2.2, 2.3

Multi-year Projections Yes Zero-based budgeting 2.2

Budget Monitoring and Updates

No Budget exception framework 2.4

Leadership Stability No Culture and practices that promote and support systematic reform

3.1, 3.2, 3.3

Internal Controls and Audit Reports

Yes Ensure continuity and consistency in the application of internal controls

2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8

General Ledger Mixed Strengthen communication among financial services departments

1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 1.10

255

23 Recommendations for action to help rectify OUSD fiscal health Last available update online was March 14,2018

Stability - Short-Term (one to six months)

Rec # Recommendation Status

1.1 (Pg. 13)

Restore the ending fund balance and maintain the state-mandated reserve for economic uncertainty

Complete (OUSD Supt. email)

Date & Name: ACOE Updates

Date & Name: OUSD Updates

2/11/19GaryShirene

The district overestimated their ADA for the prior year, resulting in an audit adjustment of $5.4M. Therewas an additional audit adjustment of $1.2M. Both reduce the fund balance. The district over-estimatedtheir current year ADA for an additional reduction of $2.4M. Their REU is projected to be below 2% forcurrent plus two years.

256

1.2 (Pg. 15)

Institute adjustments to existing Central Office positions In Progress (3.14.18 report)



1.3 (Pg. 16)

Maximize the use of restricted revenue resources In Progress (3.14.18 report)



2/8/19various

ACOE is monitoring proposed reductions of Central Office positions, their funding sources, and effects onoperations. The current official document is available on the OUSD website, entitled "18-2727 2019-20Appendix Proposed Staff Reduction and Position Funding Reallocation Impact Analysis (First Reading -2619)." The document specifies reductions in Operations, Academics, and Superintendent functions,along with projected savings.

2/7/19GaryThomasHernan

ACOE has completed a detailed analysis of locally restricted resources with large revenues andbalances. These are resources 0002-1400 and resources that roll up to 9010. The parcel tax resources of9332 (G1) and 9334 (G) require better management. The big restricted resources of 3010 (Title I) and6500(Special Education) need extensive analysis, not completed by ACOE, in an effort to reduceunrestricted contributions.

257

1.4 (Pg. 18)

Evaluate Central Office-based contracts and books/supplies for possible freeze and capture of savings

In Progress (3.14.18 report)



1.5 (Pg. 20)

Pursue capture of donated days and/or furlough In Progress (3.14.18 report)



2/7/19GaryHernanThomas

ACOE has not completed a detailed analysis of contracts. The supplies budgets far exceed actualspending ($30M) and there is the possibility of large savings. The reason for the high balances is thedistrict budgets their ending balances to Object 4399, even in resources where these balances could beused differently.

258

1.6 (Pg. 21)

Adjust school per pupil allocations to capture savings In Progress (3.14.18 report)



1.7 (Pg. 22)

Institute closer monitoring of contributions to other programs, e.g., special education, nutrition, and early childhood




2/11/19Gary

The district has high interfund transfers to Fund 13 Cafeteria and contributions to special education.ACOE does not have the capacity to evaluate these programs in great detail. No analysis of Fund 12Child Development has been attempted and ACOE does not have the capacity. Help from consultantscould benefit ACOE and the district.

259

1.8 (Pg. 23)

Update and implement budget forecast and projection practices In Progress (3.14.18 report)



1.9 (Pg. 25)

Review and update cash flow monitoring practices In Progress (3.14.18 report)



2/11/19ShireneGaryThomasHernanTeresa

Since the conditional approval of the district's budget, ACOE has increased its involvement in trying togather data to justify the district's assumptions and projections: enrollment, ADA, LCFF sources, 1% costof raises to all units, step & column calculations, unspecified other adjustments, H&W costs, unauditedactuals to CY budget, actual expenditures and encumbrances to CY budget, use of parcel taxes,budgeting of MAA, Mandated Costs, and Lottery, budgeting and spending of supplies, and other outgo.

2/11/19GaryThomasHernan

ACOE conducted its normal review of cash flow during the technical review of First Interim (ShireneMoreira). ACOE continues to conduct extensive analysis of cash flow, comparing actual spending toprojected budget. ACOE has received information from the district that indicates any proposed raises arebeing analyzed with cash flow in mind.

260

1.10 (Pg. 27)

Institute immediate protocols to limit and review spending among Central Office and school sites




261

Recovery - Medium-Term (three to twelve months)


2.1 (Pg. 29)

Plan for and adopt a balanced budget that avoids future deficit spending In Progress (3.14.18 report)



2.2 (Pg. 31)

Establish and conduct zero-based budgeting sessions with all Central Office practices




No approved plan has been received from the district.

262

2.3 (Pg. 33)

Research, engage and implement a Central Office reorganization In Progress (3.14.18 report)



2.4 (Pg. 35)

Institute and conduct monthly central office and school site budget monitoring practices

Not Started (3.14.18 report)



2/8/19DanEricGary

Reviewing organization charts and responsibilities to determine how to assist the district in reorganizingits Central Office. Consultant groups and individuals are being evaluated to determine their ability toassist.

263

2.5 (Pg. 36)

Review, update and implement effective position control practices Not Started (3.14.18 report)



2.6 (Pg. 38)

Develop a process for pre-approval of extra time employee payments In Progress (3.14.18 report)



264

2.7 (Pg. 39)

Review and implement revised contract approval, processing and management procedures

Not Started (3.14.18 report)



2.8 (Pg. 41)

Complete transition to Escape technology system to manage finance and human resource (HR) information



Doug OUSD has completed the transition to the ACOE Escape Online 5 system. As of July 1, 2018, Escape Online 5 is OUSD’s system of record. ACOE is currently providing Escape support to OUSD for most areas of the software. OUSD is still working with Escape for payroll support. They are also working with Escape on some additional district specific customizations.


265

2.9 (Pg. 43)

Review and execute on shifts in expenses that maximize the use of restricted funds




Shirene The District has made progress since prior year in addressing the use of restricted funds. Some of thisdiscussion came up during their budget development during LCAP planning.

266

Vitality - Long-Term (six to eighteen months)


3.1 (Pg. 45)

Review and engage school district and school leaders to re-establish appropriate budget roles and responsibility




3.2 (Pg. 47)

Establish systems for the management and oversight of bargaining agreements




267

3.3 (Pg. 49)

Consider and act on recommendations from the Blueprint for Quality Schools review




backgroundfcmat.org/.../03/oakland-usd-ab-1840-letter1-3-1-2019.pdf2019/03/01 · august 15, 2017...

Documents