SARC Report for San Joaquin Building Futures Academy · 2017-12-01 · Integrated Thematic Curriculum PLATO, Edmentum No 0.0 Visual and Performing Arts Integrated Thematic Curriculum

San Joaquin Building Futures Academy

Every school in California is required by state law to publish a School Accountability Report Card (SARC), by February 1 of each year. The SARC contains information aboutthe condit ion and performance of each California public school. Under the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) all local educat ional agencies (LEAs) are required toprepare a Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP), which describes how they intend to meet annual school-specific goals for all pupils, w ith specific act ivit ies to addressstate and local priorit ies. Addit ionally, data reported in an LCAP is to be consistent w ith data reported in the SARC.

For more information about SARC requirements, see the California Department of Educat ion (CDE) SARC Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa/.

View this SARC online at the school and/or LEA Web sites.

For more information about the LCFF or LCAP, see the CDE LCFF Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/.

For addit ional information about the school, parents and community members should contact the school principal or the district office.

California Department of Education

School Accountability Report CardReported Using Data from the 2013-14 School Year

Published During 2014-15

View Larger Map

Doug Silva, Coordinator IVPrincipal, San Joaquin Building Futures Academy

Welcome to San Joaquin Building Futures Academy Charter School. We are a charter school for 16-24 year olds who haveexperienced difficulty in complet ing their high school diploma and learning job skills. We offer small class sizes, mult iplesupport services, and opportunit ies to become cert ified in construct ion technology.

3100 Monte Diablo Ave. Stockton, CA95203-1108

Phone: 209-468-8140E-mail: [email protected]

About Our SchoolAbout Our School

ContactContact

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=3100+Monte+Diablo+Ave.%2cStockton%2cCA&t=m&z=16

mailto:[email protected]

Last updated: 1/23/2015


About This School

Contact Information - Most Recent YearContact Information - Most Recent Year

School

School Name San Joaquin Building Futures Academy

Street 3100 Monte Diablo Ave.

City, State, Zip Stockton, Ca, 95203-1108

Phone Number 209-468-8140

Principal Doug Silva, Coordinator IV

E-mail Address [email protected]

Web Site www.sjcoe.org/buildingfutures

County-District-School (CDS) Code

39103970121723

District

District Name San Joaquin County Office of Educat ion

Phone Number (209) 468-4800

Web Site http://www.sjcoe.org

SuperintendentFirst Name

James

SuperintendentLast Name

Mousalimas

E-mail Address [email protected]

School Description and Mission Statement (Most Recent Year)School Description and Mission Statement (Most Recent Year)

Mission We w ill transform all students’ lives through academic achievement and acquisit ion of 21st Century skills. We commit to using a comprehensive supportsystem to ensure this happens.

Vision Our school w ill be a caring, compassionate, safe learning environment where students and staff are inspired, mentored and realize their full potent ial as life-long learners. Our students w ill recognize that they have the knowledge and skills to set and attain goals, ident ify triggers that hinder progress, problem solve,and accept responsibility for their act ions. Our students w ill empower themselves to become better human beings and posit ive contributors to their community.

2013-14 SARC - San Joaquin Building Futures Academy

Page 2 of 22


www.sjcoe.org/buildingfutures

http://www.sjcoe.org




Student Enrollment by Grade Level (School Year 2013-14)Student Enrollment by Grade Level (School Year 2013-14)

Grade Level Number of Students

Grade 10 1

Grade 11 8

Grade 12 129

Total Enrollment 138

Grade 10 Grade 11 Grade 120

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Student Enrollment by Student Group (School Year 2013-14)Student Enrollment by Student Group (School Year 2013-14)

Group Percent of Total Enrollment

Black or African American 30.4

American Indian or Alaska Nat ive 0.7

Asian 4.3

Filipino 0.0

Hispanic or Lat ino 50.0

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 1.4

White 5.8

Two or More Races 7.2

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 76.8

English Learners 12.3

Students w ith Disabilit ies 8.7

Black or African American

American Indian or A laska Native

Asian

Filipino

Hispanic or Latino

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander

White

Two or More Races

30%

4%

50%

1%5%

7%


Page 3 of 22



A. Conditions of Learning

State Priority: Basic

The SARC provides the follow ing information relevant to the Basic State Priority (Priority 1):

Degree to which teachers are appropriately assigned and fully credent ialed in the subject area and for the pupils they are teaching;Pupils have access to standards-aligned instruct ional materials; andSchool facilit ies are maintained in good repair.

Note: “Misassignments” refers to the number of posit ions filled by teachers who lack legal authorizat ion to teach that grade level, subject area, student group, etc.

* Total Teacher Misassignments includes the number of Misassignments of Teachers of English Learners.

Teacher CredentialsTeacher Credentials

Teachers School District

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

2014-15

With Full Credent ial 2 5 5 170

Without Full Credent ial 2 1 1 34

Teachers Teaching Outside SubjectArea of Competence (w ith fullcredent ial)

0 0 0 1

2012-13 2013-14 2014-150.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0Teachers with Full Credential

Teachers without Full Credential

Teachers Teaching Outside Subject Area of Competence

Teacher Misassignments and Vacant Teacher PositionsTeacher Misassignments and Vacant Teacher Positions

Indicator2012-

132013-

142014-

15

Misassignments of Teachers of EnglishLearners

0 0 0

Total Teacher Misassignments* 0 0 0

Vacant Teacher Posit ions 0 0 0

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0Misassignments of Teachers of English Learners

Total Teacher Misassignments

Vacant Teacher Positions


Page 4 of 22



Note: High-poverty schools are defined as those schools w ith student eligibility of approximately 40 percent or more in the free and reduced price meals program. Low-poverty schools are those w ith student eligibility of approximately 39 percent or less in the free and reduced price meals program.

Year and month in which data were collected: December 2013

Core Academic Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers (School Year 2013-14)Core Academic Classes Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers (School Year 2013-14)

Location of ClassesPercent of Classes In Core Academic Subjects Taught by

Highly Qualified TeachersPercent of Classes In Core Academic Subjects Not Taught by

Highly Qualified Teachers

This School 53 47

All Schools in District 69 31

High-Poverty Schoolsin District

69 31

Low-Poverty Schoolsin District

68 32

Quality, Currency, Availability of Textbooks and Instructional Materials - Most Recent YearQuality, Currency, Availability of Textbooks and Instructional Materials - Most Recent Year

Subject Textbooks and Instructional Materials/year of Adoption

From MostRecent

Adoption?

Percent StudentsLacking Own

Assigned Copy

Reading/LanguageArts Core: Glencoe Literature: California Treasures and Reader's Choice, Publisher McGraw-Hill

Companies, Inc. Supplemental: PLATO (Grades 9-12), Edmentum Publishers

Yes 0.0

MathematicsHolt - Algebra I (Grades 8-12) PLATO, Edmentum

Yes 0.0

ScienceGlencoe Biology: The Dynamics of Life (Grades 9-12) Glencoe Physical/Earth Science (Grades 9-12)

Glencoe Life Science (Grades 9-12)

No 0.0

History-SocialScience Glencoe: The American Journey Glencoe World History: Modern T imes Supplemental: D.C. Heath

World History Supplemental: Globe Fearon World Geography and Cultures Supplemental: PLATO,Edmentum

Yes 0.0

Foreign LanguageN/A

No 0.0

HealthIntegrated Thematic Curriculum PLATO, Edmentum

No 0.0

Visual andPerforming Arts Integrated Thematic Curriculum PLATO, Edmentum

No 0.0

Science LaboratoryEquipment (grades9-12)

NA/ No "Wet Lab" Equipment UsedNo 0.0


Page 5 of 22



School Facility Good Repair Status - Most Recent Year

Overall Facility Rate - Most Recent Year

School Facility Conditions and Planned Improvements - Most Recent YearSchool Facility Conditions and Planned Improvements - Most Recent Year

Maintenance and Repair The condit ion of the school site facilit ies, including grounds and restrooms, are rated “good.” The maintenance staff ensures that therepairs necessary to keep the school in good repair and working order are completed in a t imely manner.

Cleaning Process and Schedule A scheduled maintenance and cleaning program is administered by San Joaquin Building Futures Academy to ensure that allclassrooms, restrooms, and facilit ies are well maintained and in good repair.

Deferred Maintenance Budget N/A Deferred Maintenance Projects N/A

Modernizat ion Projects N/A New School Construct ion Projects N/A

Data on School Facilit ies Data on school facilit ies was collected for SJBFA during July and August 2011. Facility Condit ions SJBFA takes great effort to ensure thatthe school is clean, safe, and funct ional. To assist in this effort, SJBFA uses a facility survey instrument developed by the State of California Office of Public SchoolConstruct ion. The results of this survey are available at the school office or the san Joaquin County Office of Educat ion. None of the eight emergency facilit iesneeds specified in Educat ion Code Sect ion 17592.72 (c) (1) exist at the school. The table below details the status of each.

Through a donat ion from Industry Partners, Teichert Construct ion and the Laborers Community Educat ion Foundat ion, the west parking lot was paved andstriped.

System Inspected Rating

Repair Needed andAction Taken or

Planned

Systems: Gas Leaks, Mechanical/HVAC,Sewer

GoodNA

Interior: Interior Surfaces GoodNA

Cleanliness: Overall Cleanliness,Pest/Vermin Infestat ion

GoodNA

Electrical: Electrical GoodNA

Restrooms/Fountains: Restrooms,Sinks/Fountains

GoodNA

Safety: Fire Safety, Hazardous Materials GoodNA

Structural: Structural Damage, Roofs GoodNA

External: Playground/School Grounds,W indows/Doors/Gates/Fences

GoodNA

Overall Rat ing Good


Page 6 of 22


B. Pupil Outcomes

State Priority: Pupil Achievement

The SARC provides the follow ing information relevant to the Pupil Achievement State Priority (Priority 4):

Statew ide assessments (i.e., California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress and its successor the Standardized Test ing and Report ing Program);The Academic Performance Index; andThe percentage of pupils who have successfully completed courses that sat isfy the requirements for entrance to the University of California and the CaliforniaState University, or career technical educat ion sequences or programs of study.

Note: Science assessments include California Standards Tests (CSTs), California Modified Assessment (CMA), and California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA).

Note: Scores are not shown when the number of students tested is ten or less, either because the number of students in this category is too small for stat ist icalaccuracy or to protect student privacy.

Note: Science assessments include CSTs, CMA, and CAPA in grades 5, 8, and 10.

Note: Scores are not shown when the number of students tested is ten or less, either because the number of students in this category is too small for stat ist icalaccuracy or to protect student privacy.

California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress/ Standardized Testing and Reporting Results for AllCalifornia Assessment of Student Performance and Progress/ Standardized Testing and Reporting Results for All

Students in Science – Three-Year ComparisonStudents in Science – Three-Year Comparison

Subject

Percent of Students Scoring at Proficient or Advanced (meeting or exceeding the state standards)

School District State

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Science (grades 5, 8, and 10) 19 23 22 60 59 60

California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress Results by Student Group in Science (School YearCalifornia Assessment of Student Performance and Progress Results by Student Group in Science (School Year

2013-14)2013-14)

Group Percent of Students Scoring at Proficient or Advanced

All Students in the LEA

All Students at the School

Male

Female


American Indian or Alaska Nat ive

Asian

Filipino

Hispanic or Lat ino


White

Two or More Races

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged

English Learners

Students w ith Disabilit ies

Students Receiving Migrant Educat ion Services


Page 7 of 22





Note: STAR Program was last administered in 2012–13. Percentages are not calculated when the number of students tested is ten or less, either because the number ofstudents in this category is too small for stat ist ical accuracy or to protect student privacy.

Note: For 2014 and subsequent years, the statew ide and similar schools ranks w ill no longer be produced.

Note: “N/D” means that no data were available to the CDE or LEA to report. “B” means the school did not have a valid API Base and there is no Growth or targetinformation. “C” means the school had significant demographic changes and there is no Growth or target information.

Standardized Testing and Reporting Results for All Students - Three-Year ComparisonStandardized Testing and Reporting Results for All Students - Three-Year Comparison

Subject

Percent of Students Scoring at Proficient or Advanced (meeting or exceeding the state standards)


2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

English-Language Arts 7% N/A N/A 24% 24% 28% 54% 56% 55%

Mathematics N/A N/A N/A 18% 18% 18% 49% 50% 50%

History-Social Science N/A N/A N/A 11% 10% 14% 48% 49% 49%

Academic Performance Index Ranks – Three-Year ComparisonAcademic Performance Index Ranks – Three-Year Comparison

API Rank 2011 2012 2013

Statew ide 1

Similar Schools

Academic Performance Index Growth by Student Group – Three-Year ComparisonAcademic Performance Index Growth by Student Group – Three-Year Comparison

Group Actual API Change 2011 Actual API Change 2012 Actual API Change 2013

All Students at the School B


American Indian or Alaska Nat ive

Asian

Filipino

Hispanic or Lat ino


White

Two or More Races

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged

English Learners

Students w ith Disabilit ies


Page 8 of 22



Career Technical Education Programs (School Year 2013-14)Career Technical Education Programs (School Year 2013-14)

• Construct ion Technology

Explanat ion of CTE Program: San Joaquin Building Futures Academy staff members use an integrated project based curriculum designed to provide students w iththe opportunity to explore and experience a variety of career pathways, including: construct ion and green technology. It aligns w ith our Student LearnerOutcomes (SLOs), the California State Content Standards, and California Career Technical Educat ion (CTE) Standards and Region Occupat ion Programs (ROP)standards. Curriculum from the Home Builders Inst itute, the Resident ial Carpentry Standards from the Nat ional Associat ion of Home Builders, and apprent iceshipguidelines for the carpenters and laborers unions in San Joaquin County w ill also be used. The constant in each of these resources is that students are required tomeet specific performance based criterion for ROP or CTE cert ificat ion.

Career Technical Education Participation (School Year 2013-14)Career Technical Education Participation (School Year 2013-14)

Measure CTE Program Participation

Number of pupils part icipat ing in CTE 91

Percent of pupils complet ing a CTE program and earning a high school diploma 16.0

Percent of CTE courses sequenced or art iculated between the school and inst itut ions of postsecondary educat ion 0.0

Courses for University of California and/or California State University AdmissionCourses for University of California and/or California State University Admission

UC/CSU Course Measure Percent

2013-14 Students Enrolled in Courses Required for UC/CSU Admission 0.0

2012-13 Graduates Who Completed All Courses Required for UC/CSU Admission 0.0


Page 9 of 22



State Priority: Other Pupil Outcomes

The SARC provides the follow ing information relevant to the Other Pupil Outcomes State Priority (Priority 8):

Pupil outcomes in the subject areas of English, mathematics, and physical educat ion.

Note: Percentages are not calculated when the number of students tested is ten or less, either because the number of students in this category is too small forstat ist ical accuracy or to protect student privacy.

California High School Exit Examination Results for All Grade Ten Students – Three-Year Comparison (ifCalifornia High School Exit Examination Results for All Grade Ten Students – Three-Year Comparison (if

applicable)applicable)

Subject

Percent of Students Scoring at Proficient or Advanced


2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

English-Language Arts N/A N/A N/A 19% 28% 27% 56% 57% 56%

Mathematics N/A N/A N/A 17% 28% 27% 58% 60% 62%

English-Language Arts Percent of Students Scoring at Proficient orAdvanced

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

Mathematics Percent of Students Scoring at Proficient or Advanced

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0


Page 10 of 22





California High School Exit Examination Grade Ten Results by Student Group (School Year 2013-14) (ifCalifornia High School Exit Examination Grade Ten Results by Student Group (School Year 2013-14) (if

applicable)applicable)

Group

English-Language Arts Mathematics

Percent NotProficient

PercentProficient

PercentAdvanced

Percent NotProficient

PercentProficient

PercentAdvanced

All Students in the LEA 73% 17% 10% 73% 21% 6%

All Students at the School 0% N/A N/A 0% N/A N/A

Male N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Female N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Black or African American N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

American Indian or Alaska Nat ive N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Asian N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Filipino N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Hispanic or Lat ino N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

White N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Two or More Races N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

English Learners N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Students w ith Disabilit ies N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Students Receiving Migrant Educat ionServices

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

California Physical Fitness Test Results (School Year 2013-14)California Physical Fitness Test Results (School Year 2013-14)

Grade level

Percent of Students Meeting Fitness Standards

Four of Six Standards Five of Six Standards Six of Six Standards

5 N/A N/A N/A

7 N/A N/A N/A

9 N/A N/A N/A


Page 11 of 22


C. Engagement

State Priority: Parental Involvement

The SARC provides the follow ing information relevant to the Parental Involvement State Priority (Priority 3):

Efforts the school district makes to seek parent input in making decisions for the school district and each schoolsite.

State Priority: Pupil Engagement

The SARC provides the follow ing information relevant to the Pupil Engagement State Priority (Priority 5):

High school dropout rates; andHigh school graduat ion rates.

Opportunities for Parental Involvement - Most Recent YearOpportunities for Parental Involvement - Most Recent Year

• Parents are considered a part of a team in promoting a student ’s success.

• Parents are involved in the enrollment process, held at the school site, to provide individual attent ion.

• Parents are included in Student Study Teams (SSTs) which are held on a regular basis to discuss student behaviors/pr0ogress. Translat ion is provided wherenecessary.

• Parents are involved in parent teacher conferences which are held at the school site quarterly.

Parental involvement in the LCAP Community Meet ings

Parental involvement in the recent WASC Accreditat ion process

Dropout Rate and Graduation Rate (Four-Year Cohort Rate)Dropout Rate and Graduation Rate (Four-Year Cohort Rate)

Indicator


2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Dropout Rate 53.5 59.6 59.4 18.7 15.3 12.0 14.7 13.1 11.4

Graduat ion Rate 11.63 5.77 3.13 74.28 76.18 80.3 77.14 78.87 80.44

Dropout/Graduation Rate (Four-Year Cohort Rate) Chart

70


Page 12 of 22


2010-11 2011-12 2012-130

10

20

30

40

50

60

70Dropout Rate

Graduation Rate


Page 13 of 22

Completion of High School Graduation RequirementsCompletion of High School Graduation Requirements

Group

Graduating Class of 2013


All Students 34 39 84

Black or African American 34 37 75

American Indian or Alaska Nat ive 66 77

Asian 9 32 92

Filipino 70 92

Hispanic or Lat ino 40 37 80

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 33 84

White 33 51 90

Two or More Races 33 13 89

Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 34 36 82

English Learners 8 13 53

Students w ith Disabilit ies 20 20 60


Page 14 of 22



State Priority: School Climate

The SARC provides the follow ing information relevant to the School Climate State Priority (Priority 6):

Pupil suspension rates;Pupil expulsion rates; andOther local measures on the sense of safety.

Suspensions and ExpulsionsSuspensions and Expulsions


Rate 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Suspensions 13.90 6.20 7.80 16.90 14.10 4.20 5.70 5.10 4.40

Expulsions 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10

Suspensions

2011-12 2012-13 2013-140.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

12.5

15.0

17.5School Suspensions

District Suspensions

State Suspensions

Expulsions

2011-12 2012-13 2013-140.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12School Expulsions

District Expulsions

State Expulsions

School Safety Plan - Most Recent YearSchool Safety Plan - Most Recent Year

Each year the counseling staff creates a crisis file for every teacher in the program. Teachers are given the file at the beginning of the year, along w ithinstruct ions how they are to be ut ilized. The information is reviewed and updated as needed throughout the year. The files contain the follow ing information: - Acrisis prevent ion checklist . The checklist is completed by site teachers and posted at each site. It includes the locat ion of the fire ext inguishers and first aid kits.The emergency evacuat ion plan is also included. This information is displayed at each site. These items are in the school site safety plan - Direct ions to follow incase of an emergency, crisis or injury - A bomb threat checklist - List ing of emergency phone numbers- posted at the site - List of indicators of school violence -List of situat ions that may lead to a volat ile incident and/or atmosphere w ith students - T ips for de-escalat ing a conflict - Bullying information and t ips for dealingw ith bullying- Now a poster - Information and Ed Code references regarding dress code - Suicide intervent ion information, suicide hot line and San Joaquin CountyMental Health contact information - Resource numbers – posted at the site ie Runaway hot line, shelter and “safe house” contact numbers, Public Healthimmunizat ion and HIV/AIDS information, -Child abuse prevent ion information - CPS Report ing form - State laws pertaining to unlawful conduct and sexualintercourse w ith a minor -Smoking cessat ion resource list In addit ion the school site has completed a comprehensive school safety plan in accordance w ith theSafe Schools policy, which includes a specific emergency operat ions plan. In compliance w ith SB 187, the plan is reviewed and revised accordingly. The plan isaligned w ith the Nat ional Incident Management System (NIMS) and California Standardized Emergency Management Systems (SEMS) ut ilizing Incident CommandSystem (ICS). The document is prepared for the use of employees at the school site in the event of an emergency, disaster, or crisis situat ion. The plan review,scheduling of drills, pract ice and safety trainings occurs annually. The school possesses first aid kits and “grab and go” emergency packs in the event of anevacuat ion. The school nurse collaborates w ith parents/guardians of special needs students in order to provide medical emergency kits in accordance w ith theirIndividualized School Healthcare Plan (ISHP).

The SJCOE adopted the ALICE Model and the staff at BFA were trained for Act ive Shooter Scenarios.


Page 15 of 22


ALICE is an act ive shooter/intruder training. To make it easy to remember in a stressful situat ion, ALICE is broken up into five strategies: Alert; Lockdown; Inform;Counter and Evacuate.· The purpose of ALERT is to not ify as many people as possible w ithin the danger zone that a potent ially life threatening risk exists.· The purpose of LOCKDOWN is to secure in place, and prepare to EVACUATE or COUNTER, if needed.· The purpose of INFORM is to cont inue to communicate the intruder’s locat ion in real t ime.· The purpose of COUNTER is to interrupt the intruder and make it difficult or impossible to aim. This is a strategy of last resort.· The purpose of EVACUATE is to remove yourself from the danger zone when it is safe to do so.


Page 16 of 22



D. Other SARC InformationThe information in this sect ion is required to be in the SARC but is not included in the state priorit ies for LCFF.

Note: Cells w ith NA values do not require data.

* DW (determinat ion waiver) indicates that the PI status of the school was carried over from the prior year in accordance w ith the flexibility granted through the federalwaiver process.

Adequate Yearly Progress Overall and by Criteria (School Year 2013-14)Adequate Yearly Progress Overall and by Criteria (School Year 2013-14)

AYP Criteria School District

Made AYP Overall Yes N/A

Met Part icipat ion Rate - English-Language Arts Yes N/A

Met Part icipat ion Rate - Mathematics Yes N/A

Met Percent Proficient - English-Language Arts Yes N/A

Met Percent Proficient - Mathematics Yes N/A

Met Graduat ion Rate Yes N/A

Federal Intervention Program (School Year 2014-15)Federal Intervention Program (School Year 2014-15)

Indicator School District

Program Improvement Status Not in PI In PI

First Year of Program Improvement 2005-2006

Year in Program Improvement * Year 3

Number of Schools Current ly in Program Improvement N/A 1

Percent of Schools Current ly in Program Improvement N/A 100.0%


Page 17 of 22




* Number of classes indicates how many classes fall into each size category (a range of total students per class).

* Number of classes indicates how many classrooms fall into each size category (a range of total students per classroom). At the secondary school level, this information isreported by subject area rather than grade level.

Note: Cells w ith N/A values do not require data.

Average Class Size and Class Size Distribution (Elementary)Average Class Size and Class Size Distribution (Elementary)

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Grade Level Average Class Size

Number of Classes *

Average Class Size

Number of Classes *

Average Class Size

Number of Classes *

1-20 21-32 33+ 1-20 21-32 33+ 1-20 21-32 33+

K

1

2

3

4

5

6

Other

Average Class Size and Class Size Distribution (Secondary)Average Class Size and Class Size Distribution (Secondary)

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Subject Average Class Size

Number of Classes *

Average Class Size

Number of Classes *

Average Class Size

Number of Classes *

1-22 23-32 33+ 1-22 23-32 33+ 1-22 23-32 33+

English 33.7 0 2 1 23.0 2 2 22.0 4 1 2

Mathematics 50.5 0 0 2 23.0 2 2 28.0 2 1 2

Science 50.5 0 0 2 23.0 2 2 28.0 2 2

Social Science 33.7 0 2 1 23.0 2 2 28.0 2 2

Expenditures Per Pupil and School Site Teacher Salaries (Fiscal Year 2012-13)Expenditures Per Pupil and School Site Teacher Salaries (Fiscal Year 2012-13)

LevelTotal Expenditures Per

PupilExpenditures Per Pupil

(Supplemental/Restricted)

Expenditures PerPupil

(Basic/Unrestricted)Average Teacher

Salary

School Site $7,877 $7,877 $00 $59,173

District N/A N/A $00 $59,173

Percent Difference – School Site andDistrict

N/A N/A 0.00% 0.00%

State N/A N/A $4,690 $69,435

Percent Difference – School Site and State N/A N/A 0.00% -17.00%


Page 18 of 22


For detailed information on salaries, see the CDE Cert ificated Salaries & Benefits Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/cs/ .

Types of Services Funded (Fiscal Year 2013-14)Types of Services Funded (Fiscal Year 2013-14)

CAHSEE Tutoring

CAHSEE Writ ing Prep

NWEA MAP Test ing

PWA Test ing tw ice per year

PLATO (individualized online learning)

Full-t ime academic tutor

Teacher and Administrative Salaries (Fiscal Year 2012-13)Teacher and Administrative Salaries (Fiscal Year 2012-13)

Category District Amount State Average For Districts In Same Category

Beginning Teacher Salary $40,083 $31,438

Mid-Range Teacher Salary $58,997 $66,928

Highest Teacher Salary $77,910 $102,417

Average Principal Salary (Elementary) $00 $00

Average Principal Salary (Middle) $00 $00

Average Principal Salary (High) $00 $00

Superintendent Salary $260,725 $00

Percent of Budget for Teacher Salaries 10.9% 0.0%

Percent of Budget for Administrat ive Salaries 8.2% 0.0%

Teacher Salary Chart

80000

Principal Salary Chart

1.0


Page 19 of 22

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/cs/


Beginning Teacher Salary Mid-Range Teacher Salary Highest Teacher Salary0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

Average Principal Salary

(Elementary)


(Middle)


(High)

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.02013-14 SARC - San Joaquin Building Futures Academy

Page 20 of 22


Note: Cells w ith N/A values do not require data.

*Where there are student course enrollments.

Advanced Placement Courses (School Year 2013-14)Advanced Placement Courses (School Year 2013-14)

Subject Number of AP Courses Offered* Percent of Students In AP Courses

Computer Science 0 N/A

English 0 N/A

Fine and Performing Arts 0 N/A

Foreign Language 0 N/A

Mathematics 0 N/A

Science 0 N/A

Social Science 0 N/A

All Courses 0 0.0

Professional Development – Most Recent Three YearsProfessional Development – Most Recent Three Years

San Joaquin County Community Schools devote 4 full school days 4 half days and 34 one and a half to two hour sessions to professional development. Acomprehensive professional development plan is in place, which includes the follow ing elements:

· Quarterly review and training in District Adopted Curriculum

· Monthly meetings to support teachers w ith Subject Matter Competency and becoming Highly Qualified Teachers (HQT), through a partnership w ith ProfessionalDevelopment Department of the San Joaquin County Office of Educat ion to provide subject matter competency for all teachers through the Verificat ion Processfor Special Sett ings (VPSS). These subject matter consultants provide training to teachers once a month in the core content areas of mathematics,English/language arts, social studies and science. The consultants may observe individual teachers in the classroom and teach model lessons to provide peer-to-peer coaching that focuses on subject matter competency and engaging instruct ional strategies. Common Core Training is included in these trainings.

· Monthly Region Meetings where data, program issues and site concerns are ident ified and discussed.

· Rigor, Relevance and Relat ionships (RRR) training began in 2008. Consultants from the Internat ional Center for Leadership in Educat ion were brought in to trainthe teaching staff and administrators. The RRR focus was supported through monthly meetings led first by teams of administrators and teachers, then throughteacher leaders and cont inues w ith teacher leaders and our curriculum coordinator. The teachers have yearly professional goals that are t ied to RRR.

· Monthly English Learner training through the San Joaquin County Office of Educat ion Mult i-lingual Department is embedded into subject matter presentat ions.These trainings have included Structures and Strategies, along w ith A Look At Learning (ALL). Teachers were init ially trained in the concepts of Structures andStrategies. The follow ing year, the strategies were woven into our curriculum and lessons were modeled at the monthly meetings. In addit ion, the consultantswork w ith individual teaching using a coaching strategy. Teachers part icipate in CAHSEE WRITE training, and creat ion of curriculum, pacing guides andassessments for English Learners through the leadership of our consultants.

· On Site Collaborat ion t ime is provided to teachers to review curriculum and site goals w ith their teams.

· Teacher part icipat ion in textbook adopt ions, which includes review, pilot and subsequent program alignment training to ensure effect iveness of implementat ion.

· Site Data Team discussions occur the 3rd Tuesday of each month. A data team leader, who is trained in extract ing, examining and draw ing conclusions,facilitates the meetings. These trainings occur monthly. The sites examine best pract ice using mult iple measures to ensure student achievement. Goals are setand reviewed at each meeting.

· Professional development for teachers and administrators through Leadership Cadres sponsored by San Joaquin County Office of Educat ion. We current ly have a


Page 21 of 22


Reading and Writ ing Leadership Team, a Math Leadership Team, A Data Leadership Group, An Administrators Training in the Common Core and an English LearnerLeadership Team.

· Various workshops, conferences and training which include, but are not limited to:

· Great Valley Writ ing Project

· Northwestern Evaluat ion Assessment

· PLATO Online Learning Solut ions

· CTAP Regional Workshops

· CA Science Teachers Associat ion’s Annual Conference

· CUE Conferences

· 2012 Accountability Leadership Inst itute for English Learners and Immigrant Students

· Bully Proof your Classroom and School Safety Conferences

· GLAD Training

· Geogebra Training

· Common Core Trainings

Building Futures Academy staff has also been formally trained in Mockingbird Educat ion Strategies.


Page 22 of 22

Documents

SARC Report for San Joaquin Building Futures Academy · 2017-12-01 · Integrated Thematic Curriculum PLATO, Edmentum No 0.0 Visual and Performing Arts Integrated Thematic Curriculum