Various Boc/cctp Meeting Materials

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND CITIZENS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
Stephen English, Chair L.A. City Controllers Office Pamela Schmidt, Vice-Chair Early Education Coalition Quynh Nguyen, Secretary LAUSD Student Parent Scott Folsom, Executive Committee Tenth District PTSA Stuart Magruder, Executive Committee American Institute of Architects Bill Brewington Thirty-First District PTSA Maria Cabildo LAUSD Student Parent Paul Escala CA Charter School Association Garrett Francis Assoc. General Contractors of CA Abigail Marquez L.A. City Mayors Office Ron Miller L.A. Co. Federation of Labor AFL-CIO John Naimo L.A. Co. Auditor-Controllers Office Barry Waite CA Tax Reform Assn. Susan Linschoten (Alternate) L.A. Co. Auditor-Controllers Office Elizabeth Lugo (Alternate) LAUSD Student Parent
Joseph P. Buchman Legal Counsel Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Thomas A. Rubin, CPA Oversight Committee Consultant
Gary C. Anderson, PhD Bond Administrator Daniel Hwang Administrative Analyst
RESOLUTION 2013-33 BOARD REPORT NO. 129-13/14 COMMON CORE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT PHASE 2 AND PHASE 1L WHEREAS, District staff is proposing the Board of Education adopt an amendment to the Information Technology Division (ITD) Strategic Execution Plan (SEP) to define and approve Phases 1L and 2 of the Common Core Technology Project (CCTP); and WHEREAS, Phases 1L and 2 are defined by District staff as follows: Purchase and equip 24,541 students at 38 schools with tablet devices, preloaded content, protective cases, and warranties as shown in Attachment B. Purchase and equip 48,741 physical keyboards in order to provide all grade 2-12 students and half of the students in kindergarten and 1st grade at Phase 1 and 2 schools for the purposes of a) accommodating completion of online adaptive assessments, and b) providing comprehensive knowledge on the academic possibilities of using physical keyboards in the classroom. Purchase and equip 28,385 school-based administrators, teachers, and other certificated staff at all remaining (non-Phase 1) LAUSD schools with a tablet device, protective case, preloaded content, warranties, and introductory professional development. Purchase and equip remaining (non Phase 1 or 2) schools with a total of 1,928 storage/charging carts and 67,480 tablets with physical keyboards (35 per storage cart) as needed to participate fully in field tests of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium scheduled for Spring 2014. A detailed list of numbers of carts and devices needed by schools is included in Attachment C.
Bond Oversight Committee

333 S. Beaudry Avenue, 23rd Fl. Los Angeles, CA 90017(T) 213.241.5183(F) 213.241.8354 bboc@laschools.org www.laschools.org/bond
RESOLUTION 2013-33 COMMON CORE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT PHASE 2 AND PHASE 1L PAGE 2 Purchase and equip every teacher and student at seven non-Phase 1 or 2 high schools with laptop devices for the purpose of analyzing the effectiveness of laptops relative to tablets as learning and assessment devices for high school students; and WHEREAS, The BOC established its Information Technology Task Force (IT TF), consisting of five of its Members, in June of 2013, and the IT TF Members have devoted many hours to meeting with staff, studying reports, visiting schools, attending CCTP training, meeting with students, parents, teachers, and principals, and using the Apple/Pearson devices, and WHEREAS, the IT TF has met and considered the Phase 2 and Phase 1L staff recommendation, and WHEREAS, the IT TF, after deliberation and discussion, prepared and submitted to the BOC members on November 18, 2013 a written report which stated, among other things that none of the members of the IT TF supported the staff recommendation and that a majority of the IT TF members supported a a scaled down roll-out of Phase 2 and 1L at this time, as described in the IT TF Report, attached hereto, and WHEREAS, The scaled down roll-out of Phase 2 and 1L recommended in the IT TF Report is a relatively small step that would enable the District to continue and better evaluate an important program, and WHEREAS, The selection of Phase 1 schools was driven in large part by considerations relating to the technological, i.e., digital wireless, capacity of the selected campuses and, in the selection of Phase 2 schools the District has given more attention to fulfilling its obligation to equity and access as mandated by the Office of Civil Rights consent agreement and the need to understand and evaluate the impact of classroom technology modernization among a wider spectrum of lower and higher performing schools, and WHEREAS, Through the roll-out to 38 Phase 2 schools, the District will be able to apply the lessons learned in Phase 1 and better determine the extent to which it has improved its operating plan as a result of the Phase 1 experience, and through the roll-out to seven Phase 1L high schools, the District will be better able to analyze the effectiveness of laptops relative to tablets as learning and assessment devices for high school students, and WHEREAS, on November 12, 2013 by Resolution of the Board of Education the District determined, among other things, that the District shall focus on Phase 1 and 2 of the Common Core Technology Project during academic years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, and the District will retain an evaluator to evaluate the use of iPads at Phase 1 and 2 schools, to analyze and evaluate the many programs that are being conducted across

RESOLUTION 2013-33 COMMON CORE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT PHASE 2 AND PHASE 1L PAGE 3
the District that involve other devices and supplemental and core curriculum, and to evaluate the use of laptops at Phase 1L schools, and WHEREAS, the BOC understands that the Districts decision as to further implementation of the CCTP beyond Phases 1, 2 and 1L will be guided by the evaluation, and WHEREAS, the BOC will consider the evaluation when it makes any further recommendations concerning the implementation of the CCTP beyond Phases 1, 2 and 1L WHEREAS, The estimated total investment for Phases 1L and 2 of CCTP, in accordance with the modifications proposed in the IT TF Report, is approximately $45 million. This project is being undertaken as part of the School Upgrade Program (SUP), and as such will be funded with Bond Program Funds allocated to the Common Core Technology Project "Category of Need" identified in the SUP - Spending Targets; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. The School Construction Bond Citizens Oversight Committee recommends that the Board of Education take the following actions with regard to District staffs proposal for Phases 1L and 2 of the CCTP as described in Board Report No. 12913/14, a copy of which is attached hereto in the form it was presented to the BOC: a. Do adopt an amendment to the ITD SEP to purchase and equip all students, teachers and school-based administrators at 38 schools with approximately 26,000 tablet devices, as shown in Attachment B of Board Report No. 12913/14. Direct District staff to return to the BOC at the BOCs December monthly meeting with additional information on how the 48,741 keyboards for tablet devices as shown in the staff report will be distributed and utilized. Do not adopt an amendment to the ITD SEP to purchase and equip 28,385 school-based administrators, teachers and other certified staff with tablet devices. Direct District staff to return to the BOC at an appropriate future date to request the BOCs recommendations concerning any proposed use of bond funds for the purchase of devices for advance distribution to principals and students at some Phase 3 schools before the evaluation process is completed. Do not adopt an amendment to the ITD SEP to purchase 68,470 tablets and 1,928 carts to equip computer labs, libraries, and/or classrooms at approximately 913 schools.
b.
c.
d.
e.

RESOLUTION 2013-33 COMMON CORE TECHNOLOGY PROJECT PHASE 2 AND PHASE 1L PAGE 4
f.
District staff should be directed to return to the BOC with a recommendation for tablets and carts to be used for the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium Field Test after staff performs a survey of District schools and determines the needs that cannot be reasonably met though other means, including the use of existing computer labs; libraries; existing laptop/tablet carts; schools sharing a campus, or nearby, sharing such resources; and moving carts between schools during the six-week testing period. Direct District staff to proceed to plan to purchase and equip every student, certificated employee, and other appropriate staff at up to seven non-Phase 1 or 2 high schools, to be known as Phase 1L schools, with laptops and associated software, equipment, and facilities changes as may be required; at an cost not to exceed $25 million for approximately 16,000 laptops and associated equipment.
g.
2.
The BOC recommends that the evaluation of CCTP be modified to include the recommendations in the IT TF Report, most specifically to assign the responsibility for the conduct of the report to the Office of Inspector General. This resolution shall be transmitted to the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education and posted on the Bond Oversight Committees website. That a written response as required by the Charter and Memorandum of Understanding between the Oversight Committee and the Board be provided to the Oversight Committee within 30 days, reporting either on action taken or proposed to be taken in response to this resolution and each recommendation herein.
3.
4.
ADOPTED on November 20, 2013 by the following vote: AYES: 9 ABSTAIN: 0
NAYS: 4
ABSENT: 0
Stephen English Stephen English Chair
Pamela Schmidt Pamela Schmidt Vice Chair
Attachment (BOC IT TF Report)

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND CITIZENS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
Stephen English, Chair L.A. City Controllers Office Pamela Schmidt, Vice-Chair Early Education Coalition Quynh Nguyen, Secretary LAUSD Student Parent Scott Folsom, Executive Committee Tenth District PTSA Stuart Magruder, Executive Committee American Institute of Architects Bill Brewington Thirty-First District PTSA Maria Cabildo LAUSD Student Parent Paul Escala CA Charter School Association Garrett Francis Assoc. General Contractors of CA Abigail Marquez L.A. City Mayors Office Ron Miller L.A. Co. Federation of Labor AFL-CIO John Naimo L.A. Co. Auditor-Controllers Office Barry Waite CA Tax Reform Assn. Susan Linschoten (Alternate) L.A. Co. Auditor-Controllers Office Elizabeth Lugo (Alternate) LAUSD Student Parent
Joseph P. Buchman Legal Counsel Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Thomas A. Rubin, CPA Oversight Committee Consultant
Gary C. Anderson, PhD Bond Administrator Daniel Hwang Administrative Analyst
BOC INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TASK FORCE REPORT November 18, 2013 TO: cc: LAUSD School Construction Bond Citizens Oversight Committee Dr. Gary Anderson, Joseph Buchman, Thomas Rubin
FROM: BOC Information Technology Task Force RE: The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal
A.Introduction The BOC Information Technology Task Force (IT TF) is composed of five members of the School Construction Bond Citizens Oversight Committee (BOC): Steve English (the Task Force Chair), Scott Folsom, John Naimo, Quynh Nguyen, and Stuart Magruder. The IT TF was formed on June 19, 2013, by the BOC Chair as an ad hoc subcommittee of the BOC, and directed to study the Districts proposals for implementation of Phase 2 of the Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) and to report back to the BOC with any findings and recommendations when the District presented Phase 2 of the CCTP. Since it was established, the IT TF has met seven times, most recently on November 13, 2013. During the IT TF meetings, each of which typically lasted several hours, the IT TF members heard presentations from most District offices involved in the CCTP, questioned District representatives extensively, and had lengthy and candid working discussions amongst themselves and with BOC staff and counsel after District representatives had been excused from the room. In addition, IT TF members spent many hours individually in the study of Districtprovided materials and in self-directed research. IT TF members also made many visits to schools that already had, or were undergoing transition to, digital education programs, talked
Bond Oversight Committee rd 333 S. Beaudry Avenue, 23 Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90017Phone: 213. 241.5183Fax: 213.241.8354www.laschools.org/bond
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 2 with parents, teachers, principals, and students, and participated in CCTP training sessions. Three IT TF members also attended and participated in meetings of Board of Education committees, specifically the BOEs Common Core Technology Project Committee; the Budget, Facilities and Audit Committee; and the Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment Committee wherein CCTP issues were extensively discussed. In its investigations the IT TF pursued a multitude of inquiries, either directly or through BOC staff, into a variety of subject areas, including the legal issues related to the use of bond funds for the tablets, pedagogy, actual device costs per unit, the Apple contract, student security, teacher and parent training, and post-implementation financing arrangements. The IT TF has also had the benefit of the very extensive knowledge that the BOCs staff, and to a much lesser extent the BOCs Chair, have accumulated about the CCTP and related programs since September 2012 when the CCTP was first announced. Most notably, Mr. Rubin, Mr. Buchman and the BOCs Chair have had numerous and extensive exchanges with the Districts Superintendent, the Office of the General Counsel, the Deputy Superintendent of Instruction, the Common Core Technology Project office; the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, the Information Technology Division, the Facilities Service Division, and the School Police. The BOC Chair and Dr. Anderson also made a day-long visit to the Riverside Unified School District where they were taken by the Superintendant of that district to see a number of schools that have implemented its take-home-device-for-every-student program. Throughout this process the District has been responsive to our requests for information, although as will be seen in our Statement of Concerns and Recommendations for the CCTP, in Section C of this report below, there are still important questions that --in our view-- should be more fully addressed before the District proceeds to a full scale implementation of its proposed $1 billion program. To its credit the District has also been responsive to many suggestions from the BOCs staff, particularly Mr. Rubin, and to a lesser extent the BOCs Chair, concerning the implementation of the CCTP over the last 18 months. Most notably, at our suggestion the District deferred its original district-wide implementation plans in favor of a phased roll out starting with a relatively small number of schools, and it agreed to postpone the final decision as to whether it should proceed with a full implementation until after the first phase was well underway. Also, the Districts current Five Year Plan for financing the CCTP owes much to Mr. Rubins detailed requests for long term financial information, although as we note below, a number of financial questions should be more fully addressed before the District proceeds to a full scale implementation. This report was written by the Task Force Chair. While it accurately reflects the IT TFs operative conclusions with respect to the Districts proposal, the individual members of the task force do not necessarily concur in every aspect of the report, except as expressly stated herein
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 3 B. Summary of District Proposal and Task Force Conclusions When the IT TF was established, it was anticipated that the District would seek the BOCs approval of plans for a full scale implementation of the CCTP starting in January 2014 at an approximate implementation cost of $1 billion. Recently, however, the District has changed course, and it is now requesting that the BOC approve a greatly scaled back plan to proceed with the project in the near future. The ultimate goal of a district-wide program remains the same, but instead of asking for approval of a full scale implementation program now, the District seeks for the near term only a modest expansion of the relatively small scale Phase I implementation that began last summer. In terms of bond funding this expansion, now referred to as the Phase 2 and 1L proposal, has four components: (1) the purchase of approximately 25,000 tablets to equip 38 schools for Phase 2 of the CCTP during the Spring Semester of the current academic year; (2) the purchase of approximately 49,000 physical keyboards for all students in grades 2 through 12 and half of the K-1 students at Phase 1 and 2 schools1; (3) the purchase of approximately 28,000 tablets for principals and certified staff at all remaining (non-Phase 1) LAUSD schools by April 2014; (4) the purchase of approximately 2,000 tablet carts and 67,000 tablets so that schools with inadequate technology can participate in field tests of a national Common Core assessment in the coming Spring Semester; and (5) the purchase of laptops sufficient to equip every teacher and student at seven non-Phase 1 or 2 high schools with those devices in the Spring Semester for the purpose of analyzing the effectiveness of laptops relative to tablets as learning and assessment devices for high school students. These seven high schools are referred to as Phase 1L schools. The District has also extended its project implementation timeline to allow for a comprehensive evaluation of the CCTP program to be based on information gathered from the Phase 1 and Phase 2 schools. The results of this evaluation will be reviewed by the District and the BOC before the District proceeds with any further phases of the program. Although the Districts proposal is not explicit on this point, we should insist that the BOC be provided with the results of the evaluation before the BOC is asked to approve the expenditure of bond funds for any aspect of this project beyond Phase 2.
1
This aspect of the Districts current proposal was not part of the Phase 2 plan submitted to the IT TF at its last meeting on November 13. Accordingly, this report does not address that aspect of the proposal.
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 4 At its November 13 meeting the IT TF members agreed that the decision came down to three basic alternatives: Recommend approval of the Phase 2 and 1L proposal as presented; Recommend against approval of any part of the Phase 2 and 1L proposal at this time; Recommend approval of a reduced version of the Phase 2 and 1L proposal. After extensive discussion, the matter was put to a vote, with the following result: Recommend approval of the Phase 2 and 1L proposal as presented: No votes Recommend against approval of any part of the Phase 2 and 1L proposal at this time: Two votes Recommend approval of a reduced version of the Phase 2 and 1L proposal: Three votes All of the IT TF members then agreed on the parts of the Phase 2 and 1L proposal that should not be recommended for BOC approval at this time. The parts not recommended for approval were: a. the purchase of approximately 28,000 tablets for principals and certified staff at all remaining (non-Phase 1) LAUSD schools by April 2014; and b. the purchase of approximately 2,000 tablet carts and 67,000 tablets so that schools with inadequate technology can participate in field tests of a national Common Core assessment in the coming Spring Semester. The reasons for the IT TF recommendation against these parts of the Phase 2 and 1L proposal are set forth below in Section D of this report. It is important to note that the IT TF is not opposed to these parts of the proposal in concept; rather, it believes that a. The proposed provision of tablets to principals and certified staff at all LAUSD schools by April 2014 is premature, and b. As presented to the IT TF on November 13, the proposed provision of tablets and carts to every school with inadequate technology so they can participate in national assessment field tests in the coming Spring Semester is not sufficiently detailed. It is the view of the IT TF that these negative aspects of the proposal may be remedied if they were brought back to the BOC at an appropriate time and with appropriate detail.
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 5 The Task Force unanimously concurred in the Statement Concerns and Recommendations in Section C,2 but some members had additional concerns and recommendations beyond the ones stated there. We believe it is appropriate for those members to express their views on these points at the BOC meeting on November 20. We also believe it is appropriate for all members of the Task Force to express their views on these recommendations at the same meeting. Accordingly we recommend that the BOC only approve two of the five proposed aspects of the Phase 2 implementation at this time (the addition of 38 schools and the parallel laptop program). We express no opinion with respect to the proposed keyboard purchase because it was not presented for our review. Also we support, but recommend some changes to, the program evaluation provisions contained in the Board of Educations November 12 Resolution concerning the Phase 2 and 1L proposal. Those recommended changes are specified in Part C 1 below. A copy of the BOE Resolution is attached as an appendix to this report. C.Statement of Concerns and Recommendations For the Common Core Technology Project Our five month review of the Districts CCTP program, as proposed and as implemented through Phase 1, has given rise to a number of concerns, which is to be expected for a new program of this scope and magnitude. Notwithstanding these concerns the members of the Task Force have been positively impressed with many aspects of the program, and the great -possibly revolutionary-- potential for technologically enhanced teaching and learning. We have not undertaken to list the many positive aspects of the program in this report we will leave that to the District and its professional educators so the absence of such a listing in this report should not be counted against the program. Rather, we list here only our concerns, which we understand to be our job. 1.Program Design. We appreciate that District staff has done a remarkable job in overcoming many challenges and adeptly handling a great many of the complex aspects of CCTP planning and implementation to date. Nevertheless, we are concerned that the academic and technical aspects of the program have been hurriedly structured, and not completely worked through and that reasonable alternative approaches have not been fully considered. To address this concern we recommend that the Board of Education transfer to the Office of the Inspector General the responsibility for the evaluation process described in the BOEs November 12 Except that paragraph 2, which pertains to certain legal questions, was with the consent of the Task Force Members- drafted by the Task Force Chair and BOC counsel based in part on materials received from the District s General Counsel after the Task Forces last meeting on November 13, 2013.
2
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 6 Resolution (and the procurement process related thereto) as soon as possible. The Inspector General should also be authorized to engage one or more independent consultants and prepare with their assistance a comprehensive evaluation of the program to be delivered to the Board of Education and the BOC no later than March 2015 (or such later date as the Inspector General may propose) with recommendations as to whether and to what extent it would be reasonable for the District to proceed with Phase 3 of the project, and whether and to what extent the plans for that Phase should be modified. We also recommend that within a reasonable time in advance of the Inspector Generals report, the District should take the following actions concerning the design of the program:3 a.The District should study and report its findings with respect to the available options for selecting additional types of devices and educational software for CCTP, including software that is commonly utilized in the business and academic worlds such as Microsoft Office. b.The District should report its plan to allow individual schools and/or teachers to modify the access filters on student devices to fulfill academic purposes. c.The District should study and report its findings concerning the desirability and feasibility of allowing students in the higher grade levels, to have a greater range of device options including take-home laptop devices instead of take-home tablets. d.The District should study and report its findings concerning the desirability and feasibility of loading onto each students device a digitized copy of that students textbooks (for example in PDF format). e.The District should develop and present its proposed policies and plans for students who lack internet access at home to assist such students families to acquire such access or to insure that such students are not disadvantaged by the lack of internet access at home. f.The District should study and report its findings concerning the feasibility of a bring-yourown-device option whereby (1) a variety of student and teacher owned devices are approved for classroom use; (2) the contents of approved student and teacher owned devices would be separated between, (i) LAUSD academic materials, which would be under District controls similar to District-owned devices, and (ii) personal content, which the District would not control or have access to, except in specified extraordinary
Subsequent to the IT TFs last meeting on November 13, 2013, the Districts Phase 2 and Phase 1L proposal was presented on November 16, 2013. Some of the recommended actions in this list have been incorporated into that the Districts proposal.
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 7 situations; and (3) the conditions for the use of software for personal applications and data permitted on-campus would be specified. g.The District should report its CCTP related plans for LAUSD Charter Schools, including, but not limited to, its plans to support different options to charter schools, and its plans for the sharing and exchange of CCTP curricular materials and best practices between charter schools and traditional schools. h.The District should outline its plans for digital education in its early and adult education programs. i. The District should study and provide a plan for training of and communication with teachers and parents, including: easily accessible feedback loop; continuing education beyond initial rollout; and recommendations on healthy levels of screen time and how to supervise appropriate usage. 2.Legal. On November 15, 2013, after months of discussions with the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) and many requests for a legal opinion supporting the Districts use of bond funds to pay for the majority of costs associated with the CCTP, the OGC issued a written reasoned memorandum opinion stating, among other things, that after performing its due diligence, including, but not limited to, conducting several telephone meetings with and reviewing past communications from the Districts bond counsel, in the OGCs opinion there is legal support for the use of bond funds to purchase devices such as tablets for the purpose of equipping schools with those devices, to purchase the software packages to be used on the devices, and to allow students, teachers and staff to take the devices home. We find this opinion acceptable. The IT TF remains concerned, however, that the law in this area is somewhat unsettled and that the purchase of these devices with bond funds, particularly for the purpose of replacing used, non-serviceable devices in 3-5 years, may not be permissible under California or Federal law. To address this concern we recommend that the District obtain an express and comprehensive reasoned opinion from the Districts bond counsel confirming the propriety of using bond funds, not only for mobile learning devices and educational software for CCTP purposes, but also for the cost of replacing these items in later years. Or, alternatively, the District should obtain an Internal Revenue Service Revenue Ruling on the federal tax law aspects of the bond funding of CCTP-related expenses. 3.Bond Repayment Schedule. We are concerned that the repayment schedule for any bonds issued to finance the CCTP be
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 8 reasonably related to the expected life of the assets acquired with the proceeds from such bonds. While this fits with established District practice, we believe that an express confirmation of the Districts intent to follow that practice here would be helpful to the public. 4.Bond Program Opportunity Cost. We are concerned that the District has not calculated or analyzed the impact that the CCTP would have on the Districts needs for other bond-funded projects. To address this need we recommend that: a. The District study and report back to the BOC no later than 30 days in advance of its next bond issuance concerning the impact of the bond-funded CCTP on the timing and the extent of non-CCTP bond-funded projects (we suggest that this be presented as a schedule of the availability of bond funding for non-CCTP capital projects by time period under two alternative scenarios: (i) CCTP proceeds under the most recent plan at the time of this analysis, or (ii) CCTP does not so proceed, but that non-CCTP enhancements comprehended by the Measure Q plan in 2008, as updated, are included); and b. The District adopt a School Upgrade Program in the near future sufficient to allow the District to proceed with planning, design, and execution of school modernization projects for the next three years. 5.Pearson Materials. We are concerned that the District has not yet received and reviewed all of the Pearson lessons for which it has contracted, nor has it been made clear to us whether the District is entitled to receive and use all of these lessons if it orders less than a set number of Apple devices. To address these concerns we recommend as follows: a. The IT TF has been advised that the Pearson contract for the second semester will be complete on January 1, 2014. We request that the District obtain and review all of the Pearson lessons for which it has contracted no later than March 1, 2014; and b. As soon as possible District should clarify, and if necessary renegotiate, the Apple/Pearson contract to specify that the District will have access to the full range of Pearsons CCTP curricular materials on district-purchased Apple devices when they are needed regardless of the number of devices the District elects to purchase in the future. 6.Post Implementation Costs.
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 9 We are concerned that the District does not have a clear and realistic funding plan for the district-wide implementation of this project beyond the initial rollout. To address this concern we recommend that before proceeding to Phase 3 the District augment its CCTP Five Year Plan so that it includes: a.A clear statement of the projected total and continuing annual and cyclical postimplementation costs of the CCTP including, but not limited to, the costs of (1) replacing used, non-serviceable devices in three to five years, and (2) the electronic curricular material the District will be acquiring to use for subjects not covered in the material to be acquired from Pearson under the present contract, and to replace or update the Pearson material when its current license to that material expires; b.More comprehensive, realistic provisions for covering the costs referred to in subparagraph a above, with year-by-year detailing showing the funds that will be available for non-CCTP expenditures with and without CCTP implementation. c.An analysis of the anticipated change in the amounts now spent for the purchase of traditional textbooks and digital media currently available outside of the CCTP; and d.An analysis of the effect of the proposed CCTP implementation on e-rate funding and spending. D.Recommendations Concerning the Districts Proposal for Our November 20 Meeting As set forth in Section 7.6 of our Memorandum of Understanding with the District, it is the BOCs responsibility to recommend against the expenditure of bond funds whena project or family of projects appears to be impermissible or imprudent. Although we do not find that any part of the Districts Phase 2 and Phase 1L proposal is impermissible, several parts of that proposal, as presented, seem to us to be imprudent. Imprudence in our view is something about which reasonable men and women should be able to agree and take the necessary steps to avoid. Thus, if reasonable men and women disagree as to whether one course of action or another should be followed, it is possible that neither course is imprudent. Accordingly, it is not the role of the BOC to substitute its judgment for the judgment of the District or the Board of Education on questions where reasonable men and women might be expected to disagree. Rather, when we recommend against a proposal because it is imprudent, we do so because we have determined that it is so inadvisable that reasonable men and women would generally agree that the proposal should be disapproved.
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 10 With respect to the specific aspects of the Districts Phase 2 and Phase 1L proposal,4 our determinations are as follows: 1. The proposed purchase of approximately 25,000 tablets to equip 38 schools for Phase 2 of the CCTP is not impermissible or imprudent. This is a relatively small step that would enable the District to continue and better evaluate an important program. The selection of Phase 1 schools was driven in large part by considerations relating to the technological, i.e., digital wireless, capacity of the selected campuses. In the selection of Phase 2 schools the District has given more attention to fulfilling its obligation to equity and access as mandated by the Office of Civil Rights consent agreement, and the need to understand the impact of classroom technology modernization among a wider spectrum of lower and higher performing schools. Also, through the Phase 2 rollout the District will be able to apply the lessons learned in Phase 1 and better determine the extent to which it has improved its operating plan as a result of the Phase 1 experience. 2. We urge the BOC to recommend against the proposed Phase 2 purchase of 48,741 tablets for remaining principals and certificated staff at all LAUSD campuses by April. A purchase of that magnitude seems imprudent. We appreciate that it may be useful for devices to be distributed to principals and teachers some months ahead of the time when they are to be given to students. Nevertheless, under the Districts current CCTP timeline, schools in Phase 3 may not get student devices until September 2015, and a large number may not get student devices until September 2016. If the District would like to use bond funds for the purchase of devices for advance distribution to principals and students at some Phase 3 schools before the evaluation process discussed in C.1 above is completed, we suggest that it apply to the BOC for its recommendations concerning that purchase at an appropriate future date. 3. We urge the BOC to recommend against the proposed Phase 2 purchase of 1,928 storage/charging carts and 67,480 tablets at this time. A purchase of that magnitude seems imprudent. The District has said that this purchase is needed so that schools with inadequate technology can participate in the field tests of Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium scheduled for Spring 2014. It is clear the District must participate in the test, but we question the calculation of the number of devices needed. It may be correct, but it has not been adequately explained to us. Nor does it appear that the District has considered how the size of the proposed purchase might be reasonably reduced through alternative steps such as the use of existing computer lab and library facilities, the use of existing facilities of other schools on colocated and nearby campuses, and the movement of devices between campuses during the We made no determination concerning the proposed purchase of keyboards for Phase 1 and Phase 2 schools because that proposal was not presented to us as of November 13, the date of our last meeting.
4
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 11 multi-week testing period. We suggest that the District reapply to the BOC at its next meeting with a well-supported proposal for a reasonably sized purchase of carts and devices sufficient to enable the District to fully participate in the field tests of Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium scheduled for Spring 2014. Considering that Phase 1, Phase 1L and Phase 2 schools will already be equipped for that assessment, and that the Phase 3 rollout may not occur until September 2015, after the District has made an extensive evaluation of the entire program, we suggest the District consider whether and to what extent it is prudent for the tablets purchased to enable participation in the assessment be loaded with Pearson educational content at this time. 4. The proposal to equip seven non-Phase 1 or Phase 2 high schools with laptops for the purpose of analyzing the effectiveness of laptops relative to tablets as learning and assessment devices for high school students is not impermissible or imprudent. It appears to be a modest step that would enable the District to continue and better evaluate an important program. Nevertheless, we have not been advised concerning the number of devices needed for this purpose or whether the proposal includes a reasonable amount of funding for other related costs, such as the provision of electrical power to desks, or additional batteries. We expect that this information can be provided to the BOC in time for its November 20 meeting.
In conclusion we wish to thank the many District staff members who have devoted many hours to providing the information we nave needed in our work. We have been much impressed by the dedication of these staff members. And we are very grateful for the opportunity to advise the BOC on these questions of great importance to the District, its students, teachers, support and administrative staff, parents and taxpayers.
Report Submitted by the Chair of the BOC Information Technology Task Force
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 12 APPENDIX BOARD OF EDUCATION CCTP RESOLUTION NOVEMBER 12, 2013 Ms. Ratliff Student Success Through an Evaluation-Based Common Core Technology Project Now, be it Resolved, That the Los Angeles Unified School District shall focus on Phase 1 and 2 of the Common Core Technology Project during academic years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015. All necessary policies, protocols, and practices related to the technology project shall be determined during Phase 1 and 2, including parental liability, the development of effective parent training modules geared to each school span (elementary, middle and high school), and a detailed procedure for school-based decision-making regarding whether to allow students to take the devices home (with the inclusion of a parental opt-out provision). The Governing Board of the Los Angeles Unified School District directs the Superintendent to bring the abovementioned policies, protocols and practices to the Board for review prior to the conclusion of Phase 2; Resolved further, That the Board directs the Superintendent to purchase a keyboard for every Phase 1 and 2 high school student, middle school student, and 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th grader that needs one to better inform us of the academic possibilities provided by keyboards and to allow the keyboards to be used during testing. The Superintendent shall go before the Bond Oversight Committee as necessary and appropriate regarding this clause within 45 days, and return to the Board in no less than 65 days with the necessary funding/allocation details for implementation; Resolved further, That the Board directs the Superintendent to contract with an evaluator to evaluate the use of iPads at Phase 1 and 2 schools, to analyze and evaluate the many programs that are being conducted across the District that involve other devices and supplemental and core curriculum, such as the use of laptops for students at Ivanhoe Elementary School, the use of Springboard supplemental curriculum at Francis Polytechnic High School, the use of Google Chromebooks at KIPP charter middle schools in South Los Angeles and East Los Angeles, and the use of ST Math at several schools; and to evaluate the use of laptops at Phase 1L schools described in the following Resolved; Resolved further, That in light of the fact that our ninth graders are now responsible for meeting the A-G college entrance requirements with a C grade or better, the Board directs the Superintendent to establish a separate pilot program, Phase 1L, which shall be developed in conjunction with key stakeholders, particularly parents, for up to seven non-Phase 1 and 2 high schools which shall serve as Phase 1L schools. Participation shall be voluntary and limited to
The Districts Common Core Technology Project (CCTP) Phase 2 Proposal Page 13 one high school per Board District. Office of Civil Rights consent decree high schools shall be encouraged to participate. The Phase 1L schools shall provide a laptop to every teacher and student; the laptop may go home if the parents agree; the program shall include Common Core aligned software in ELA and mathematics chosen by teachers and administrators at the school site; and Phase 1L shall include information regarding all free Wi-Fi locations in the school neighborhood and an investigation regarding the feasibility, cost, and possible benefit of providing home Wi-Fi access or subsidized home Wi-Fi access. The Board can then compare the lessons learned in iPad Phase 1 and 2 high schools with Phase 1L high schools as we move into future phases. The Superintendent shall go before the Bond Oversight Committee as necessary and appropriate regarding this clause within 45 days, and return to the Board in no less than 65 days with the necessary funding/allocation details for implementation; Resolved further, That the Superintendent provide the District and Board with an evaluation in the 2013-2014 academic school year, or some portion of the next school year as determined by the evaluator, related to Phase 1 and 2 comparing the 47 Phase 1 and 2 iPad schools, the District schools that use other forms of technology and supplemental and/or curriculum and the Phase 1L schools in the pilot described in Resolved 4. The District shall use the information learned from the evaluations to draft well-crafted, data-driven next phases that may or may not be a continuation of the Apple/Pearson contract and that may or may not involve devices in addition to iPads, if the research shows other devices are the best technology for our students at particular grades levels or schools; Resolved further, That the contract and contract evaluation process be undertaken through the appropriate vehicles; Resolved further, That the Superintendent be authorized to submit the Common Core Technology Plan, as outlined in Board Report 71-13/14 and revised to include the provisions of this Resolution, to the Citizens Bond Oversight Committee; and, be it finally Resolved, That the Administration, Office of General Counsel, and the Board undertake a quality review of the current Apple contract and bring all recommended revisions and edits to the Board for consideration as deemed appropriate.
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report
Report Number: Date: Subject: Responsible Staff: Name
129-13/14 December 10, 2013 Common Core Technology Project Phase 2 and Phase 1L Dr. John E. Deasy, Superintendent of Schools Dr. Jaime R. Aquino, Deputy Superintendent of Instruction Matt Hill, Chief Strategy Officer Ron Chandler, Chief Information Officer Mark Hovatter, Chief Facilities Executive Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Instruction 213-241-4822
Office/Division Telephone No.
BOARD REPORT Action Proposed: Amendment to the Information Technology Division (ITD) Strategic Execution Plan (SEP) to define and approve Phases 1L and 2 of the Common Core Technology Project (CCTP), defined as follows: Purchase and equip 24,541 students at 38 schools with tablet devices, preloaded content, protective cases, and warranties as shown in Attachment B. Purchase and equip 48,741 physical keyboards in order to provide all grade 2-12 students and half of the students in kindergarten and 1st grade at Phase 1 and 2 schools for the purposes of a) accommodating completion of online adaptive assessments, and b) providing comprehensive knowledge on the academic possibilities of using physical keyboards in the classroom. Purchase and equip 28,385 school-based administrators, teachers, and other certificated staff at all remaining (non-Phase 1) LAUSD schools with a tablet device, protective case, preloaded content, warranties, and introductory professional development. Purchase and equip remaining (non Phase 1 or 2) schools with a total of 1,928 storage/charging carts and 67,480 tablets with physical keyboards (35 per storage cart) as needed to participate fully in field tests of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium scheduled for Spring 2014. A detailed list of numbers of carts and devices needed by schools is included in Attachment C. Purchase and equip every teacher and student at seven non-Phase 1 or 2 high schools with laptop devices for the purpose of analyzing the effectiveness of laptops relative to tablets as learning and assessment devices for high school studentsidentified as Phase 1L schools.
Page 1 of 34 Board of Education December 10, 2013
Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14
Authorize the Superintendent or designee to execute all instruments necessary to implement Phase 1L of the CCTP pursuant to California Public Contract Code Sections 20118.1 and/or 20111.
Background:
The proposed actions will enable the District to comply with the Board of Educations directive to implement a second phase of the Common Core Technology Project (CCTP), advancing efforts to modernize classrooms to prepare students to master Common Core State Standards and proficient use of digital learning technology, equip educators with tools to advance student learning in the classroom, and further close the digital divide between those students who have and do not have access to the most advanced learning tools available. These actions will also enable the District to evaluate and analyze the impact of deploying multiple classes of classroom technologies thereby increasing understanding of how to modernize classrooms to maximize students potential for learning in the most efficient and cost effective way possible. Several factors drove the selection of schools to include in Phases 1L and 2, including, but not limited to, further meeting the Districts obligations to commit to equity and access as mandated by the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) consent agreement, the need to understand the impact of classroom technology modernization among a wider spectrum of lower and higher performing schools, and the need to prepare for a technology-enabled learning environment that can accommodate a wide range of different devices. It is important to note that in addition to the investment of capital funds needed to advance this project, there is an impact on the General Fund that is estimated to be $548,978 for Phase 1 (2013-14) and $11,200,000 (201415). In addition, we are working with Bond Counsel to determine if any additional phase 1 and 2 expenditures have a General Fund impact in 2013-14 (details of these estimates are included in Attachment D).
Expected Outcomes:
Approval of the proposed action and the subsequent investment in Phases 1L and 2 of CCTP, which will begin immediately upon approval. Supports the Districts revised plan issued prior to submission to the Bond Oversight Committee.
Board Options and Consequences:
Page 2 of 34
Board of Education December 10, 2013
Policy Implications: Budget Impact:
This action is consistent with the District's long-term goal to address unmet school facilities needs as described in Measures R, Y and Q. The estimated total investment for Phases 1L and 2 of CCTP is $134,934,915. This project is being undertaken as part of the School Upgrade Program (SUP), and as such will be funded with Bond Program Funds allocated to the Common Core Technology Project "Category of Need" identified in the SUP - Spending Targets. This item was considered by the School Construction Bond Citizens Oversight Committee (BOC) at its meeting of November 20, 2013. The BOC's adopted resolution, including the vote of the Committee, will be forwarded under separate cover. Staff has concluded that this proposed ITD-SEP amendment will facilitate implementation of the SEP, and therefore, it will not adversely affect the Districts ability to successfully complete the SEP.
Bond Oversight Committee Recommendations:
Attachments:
Common Core Technology Project Phase 1L/2 Budget - Attachment A Common Core Technology Project Phase 2 List of Schools Attachment B Common Core Technology Project Phase 2 List of Numbers of Carts and Devices Needed for Non Phase 1 and 2 Schools - Attachment C Detailed Estimates of Impact to the General Fund in 2013-14 and 2014-15- Attachment D
Informative Desegregation Impact Statement
None. N/A
Page 3 of 34
Respectfully submitted,
APPROVED BY:
DR. JOHN E. DEASY Superintendent
MICHELLE KING Senior Deputy Superintendent School Operations REVIEWED BY:
APPROVED & PRESENTED BY:
DAVID HOLMQUIST General Counsel Approved as to form.
JAIME R. AQUINO, PH.D. Deputy Superintendent Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Instruction
TONY ATIENZA Director of Budget Services and and Financial Planning Approved as to budget impact statement
Matt Hill Chief Strategy Officer Office of the Superintendent
Ronald S. Chandler Chief Information Officer Information Technology Division
Mark Hovatter Chief Facilities Executive Facilities Services Division

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14 Page 4 of 34 Board of Education December 10, 2013
ATTACHMENT A Itemized Funding Needs to Implement Phases 1L and 2 Item Individual Computing Devices Device Carts Learning Management System Mobile Device Management Security Staffing Contingency (2.5%) TOTAL Amount $104,279,165 $7,000,529 $1,646,453 $654,242 $1,760,000 $16,303,431 $3,291,095 $134,934,915
Page 5 of 34
ATTACHMENT B - Schools Selected for Phase 2 of the Common Core Technology Project
Location School Name 3959 42nd St EL 3795 59th St EL 6644 74th St EL 8028 Audubon MS 8075 Burroughs MS 2945 Century Pk EL 3178 Coliseum EL 8245 Johnnie L Cochran Jr MS 8236 Mann MS 6158 Purche EL 4301 Griffin EL 4616 Humphreys EL 4982 Los Angeles EL 5438 Murchison EL 6370 Rosemont EL 2269 Balboa G/HA Mag 2753 Canoga Park EL 4110 Gault EL 6315 Riverside Drive Charter Sch 6699 Sherman Oaks Elem Chrtr Sch 7123 Bradley Global Awareness Mag 5014 Loyola Village EL 8493 Wright Eng & Design Magnet 4986 Los Feliz EL 8268 Nimitz MS 2378 Nueva Vista EL 6493 San Pascual EL 7589 Wadsworth EL 4055 Garden Grove EL 6068 Pinewood EL 5016 Sara Coughlin Elem School 8090 Carnegie MS 8112 Drew MS 8727 King/Drew Med Mag 8352 Peary MS 2925 Celerity Nascent Charter School 8654 Crenshaw Arts-Technology CHS (CATCH) 7756 Westside Innovative School House (WISH) Grand Total Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14 Page 6 of 34 BD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 1 1 4 ESC ISIC WEST WEST WEST WEST WEST ISIC WEST ISIC South South South South South South ISIC North North North North WEST WEST WEST South ISIC South South South North North North South ISIC South South ISIC WEST WEST Number of Devices 282 394 364 597 1,342 417 254 977 449 426 567 648 810 512 503 748 825 412 611 859 410 140 654 399 1,707 973 200 729 443 337 715 882 925 1,615 1,257 594 209 355 24,541 Board of Education December 10, 2013
ATTACHMENT C List of Numbers of Storage/Charging Carts, Tablets, and Keyboards needed for Non Phase 1 and Phase 2 Schools Summary
Population to be Tested (includes Grades 3-8, 11; and 9-10 for interim assessments) Total Number of Devices (with Keyboards) in Carts of 35
Carts Needed*
Phase 1 Phase 2 Other
23,080 18,316 382,456
0 0 1,928
67,480
*Based on calculation of 2 test hours/device; ELA and Math for total test hours of 8 per student over a six week window. Formula = # of students x 8 test hours/student 30 test days 2 test hrs/device per day.
School List
TOTAL TESTED POPULATION # (Grades 3-8, 11; and 910 for interim assessments) 200 247 199 157 184 203 207 310 109 145 222 76 320 218 180 203 118 157
School Name
# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1
Leichman Sp Ed Ctr J Miller Career/Transition Widney HS Riley HS-Cyesis Mc/Alister HS-Cyesis Lanterman HS Banneker Sp Ed Ctr Carlson Hsp Sch(K-12 Lokrantz Sp Ed Ctr Lowman Sp Ed Ctr Marlton School McBride Sp Ed Ctr Perez Sp Ed Ctr Salvin Sp Ed Ctr Ctr Adv Transition Skills Willenberg Sp Ed Ctr Lull Sp Ed Ctr Albion Elementary
Page 7 of 34
School Name
Aldama EL Alexandria EL Harvard Elementary School Allesandro EL Allesandro Coop Lrn Mg Alta Loma EL Amestoy EL Amestoy Trilingual Mg AnatoLA EL Andasol EL Angeles Mesa EL Studio School Ann EL Annandale EL Apperson EL Aragon EL Arlington Hts EL Arminta EL Ascot EL Atwater EL Avalon Gardens EL Acad for Enriched Sciences Bandini EL George De La Torre Jr. ES Obama Elementary School Porter Ranch Comm School Playa Vista Elementary Sch Lee Medical Health Science Magnet El Sch Ride Elementary School:A SMArT Academy Willow Elementary School South Region ES #10 South Region ES #11 Dr L H Moore Mth/Sc/Tch Aca Barton Hill EL Bassett EL Beachy EL Beckford Chtr Enrichd Studs
TOTAL TESTED POPULATION # (Grades 3-8, 11; and 910 for interim assessments) 338 315 269 115 115 292 341 71 241 203 220 64 57 176 238 216 330 272 450 213 193 158 204 378 318 553 98 209 244 258 262 310 403 398 391 278 297
# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2
Page 8 of 34
School Name Beethoven EL Ambassador Sc for Global Ed Ellen Ochoa Learning Center Hughes EL Hughes Math/Sci Mag #22 Maywood Elementary School Esperanza EL School Politi EL Gratts LA for YS Frank Del Olmo Elem School Huntington Park Elem School Olympic Primary Center Lake Street Primary School Belvedere EL Bertrand EL Blythe EL Bonita EL Braddock Drive EL Braddock ES G/HG/Hi Ablty Brainard EL Breed EL Brentwood Sci Mag Bridge EL Broad Ave EL Broadway EL Charles White Elem School Lafayette Park Primary Ctr MacArthur Park ES-Visual&PA Brockton EL Brooklyn Ave EL Bryson EL Bryson EL Math/Sci/Tech Buchanan EL Buchanan Mth/Sci Mag Budlong EL Wilshire Park Elem School Burbank EL
Page 9 of 34
School Name
Saturn EL Burton EL Bushnell Way EL Elementary CDS Cabrillo EL Cahuenga EL Charles H Kim ES Calabash Charter Academy Calahan Community Charter Calvert Charter for Enriched Studies Camellia EL Canfield EL Community Magnet Charter Sc Cantara EL Canterbury EL Canterbury G/HA Mag Canyon EL Capistrano EL Caroldale Lrng Comm Carpenter Community Center Carson EL Carthay Center EL Castelar EL Castle Hts EL Castlebay Ln EL Catskill EL Carson-Gore Aca of Env Stds Estrella Elementary School Quincy Jones Elementary Sch Dolores Huerta Elem School Chandler Learning Academy Chapman EL Charnock Road EL Chase EL Chatsworth Park Elementary Cheremoya EL Cienega EL
Page 10 of 34
School Name
City Terrace EL Clifford EL Clover EL Cohasset EL Coldwater Cyn EL Colfax EL Commonwealth EL Compton EL Madison Elementary School Corona EL Martha Escutia PC Plasencia EL Plasencia Mat/Sc Mag Crescent Hts ES L/A/S/J Mag Crestwood St EL Westside Leadership Magnet Christopher Dena EL Dahlia Hts EL Danube EL Darby Avenue Charter Dayton Heights EL Dearborn EL Del Amo EL Delevan Drive EL Denker EL Carmen Lomas Garza PC Dixie Canyon EL Dolores EL Dominguez EL Dorris Place EL Dyer EL Mid-City's PS-Enriched Sci Eagle Rock EL Eagle Rock HG EL Mag Eagle Rock G/HA EL Mag Eastman EL El Dorado EL
Page 11 of 34
School Name
El Oro EL Elizabeth Learning Ctr El Sereno EL Maurice Sendak ES Elysian Heights EL Rosa Parks Learning Center Bellingham Elementary School Emelita Academy Charter Enadia EL Encino EL Erwin EL Eshelman EL Euclid EL Euclid G/HA BIL Mag Evergreen EL Fair EL Fairburn EL Farmdale EL Fernangeles EL 15th St EL 52nd St EL Figueroa EL Broadous EL Broadous Math/Sc Mag 1st EL Fishburn EL Fletcher Dr EL Florence EL Ford Blvd EL 49th St EL 4th St EL Franklin EL Fries EL Danny J Bakewell Sr PC Fullbright EL Gardena EL Gardner EL
Page 12 of 34
School Name
Garvanza EL Gates EL Germain EL Glassell Park EL Gledhill EL Gledhill Math/Sci Mag Glen Alta EL Glenfeliz Blvd EL Glenwood EL Graham EL Granada Community Charter Grand View EL Grant EL Grape EL Gridley EL Gulf EL Arroyo Seco Museum Science Haddon EL Halldale EL Hamlin EL William R Anton ES Hancock Park EL Harbor City EL Harding EL Harrison EL Hart St EL Haskell EL Haskell Math/Sci Mag Hawaiian EL Haynes EL Hazeltine EL Heliotrope EL Herrick EL Hesby Oaks School Hillside EL Hobart Blvd EL Holmes EL
Page 13 of 34
School Name
Hooper EL Hooper Avenue Primary Ctr Hoover EL Hubbard EL Huntington Dr EL Walnut Park School San Antonio EL San Antonio M/Sc Mag Pacific Boulevard School Ivanhoe EL Harmony Elementary School Aurora Elementary School Justice EL Kennedy EL Kenter Canyon EL Kester EL Kester G/HA Mag Kittridge EL Knollwood EL Lanai EL Lane EL Langdon EL Prmry Acdmy For Success Sc Lankershim EL La Salle EL Lassen Latona EL Laurel EL Leland EL Lemay EL Liberty EL Liggett EL Lillian EL Limerick EL Lockhurst EL Lockwood EL Logan EL Loma Vista EL
TOTAL TESTED POPULATION # (Grades 3-8, 11; and 910 for interim assessments) 567 0 371 392 291 442 281 79 386 221 375 244 202 242 270 298 184 369 200 253 222 293 0 221 224 271 140 260 323 195 296 378 334 413 169 366 344 439
# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 3 0 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 0 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2
Page 14 of 34
School Name
Lomita Math/Sci Mag Lorena EL Loreto EL Lorne EL Lorne Math/Sci Mag Pio Pico MS Mariposa-NABI Primary Ctr Loyola Per Arts Mag Magnolia EL Main St EL Malabar EL Dr T Alexander Jr Sci CS Dr James Edward Jones PC John W Mack Elem School Marianna EL Orchard Academies #2B Orchard Academies #2C Marquez EL Lexington Avenue PC Nava LA-Sch of Bus & Tech Marvin EL Marvin Dual Lang Mag Mar Vista EL Walnut Park MS STEM Mayall EL Mayberry EL Melrose EL M/S/T Melvin EL Menlo EL Micheltorena EL Middleton EL Middleton Primary Center Miles EL Miles Math/Sci Bil Mag Miller EL Miramonte EL Monlux EL Monlux Math/Sci Mag
Page 15 of 34
School Name
Monte Vista EL Richard Riordan Primary Ctr Morningside EL Mountain View EL Mt Washington EL Multnomah EL Multnomah HG Mag Multnomah Env Sc Mag Napa EL Nestle EL Nevin EL Newcastle ES 9th Street EL 95th St EL 99th St EL 92nd St EL Charles W Barrett EL 96th St EL 93rd St EL Noble EL Panorama City Elementary Normandie EL Normont EL Norwood EL O Melveny EL 118th St EL 186th St EL Flournoy EL Flournoy Math/Sci Mag 156th St EL 153rd St EL 109th St EL Florence G Joyner EL Sc 107th St EL 107th St Math/Sci Mag 116th St EL 135th St EL 112th St EL
Page 16 of 34
School Name
122nd St EL Open Charter School Osceola EL Overland EL Oxnard EL Pacific Palisades EL Palms EL Park Ave EL Park Western EL Harbor M/Sc G/HA Mag Parmelee EL Parthenia EL Paseo Del Rey Nat Sc Mg Plainview Academic Chtr Aca Playa Del Rey EL Plummer EL Point Fermin ES Marine Sci Mag Pomelo Community Chrtr Sch President EL Purche ES Science/Tech Queen Anne EL Ramona EL Kingsley Elementary School Ranchito EL Raymond Ave Reseda EL Richland EL Hamasaki EL Rio Vista EL Ritter EL Rockdale EL Coeur D Alene EL Roscoe EL Roscomare EL Rosewood EL Rowan EL Amanecer Primary Center Russell EL
Page 17 of 34
School Name
Russell G/HA Mag San Fernando EL San Gabriel EL San Jose St San Jose HG Mag SF Inst of Applied Media San Pedro EL King Jr EL Hollywood Primary Center Saticoy EL 2nd St EL Selma EL Serrania EL 7th St EL 75th St EL McKinley EL Sharp EL Shenandoah EL Sheridan St Shirley EL Short EL Sierra Park EL Sierra Vista 6th Ave EL 68th St EL 61st St EL 66th St EL Solano EL Soto EL South Park EL Harry Bridges Span School Dr Owen Lloyd Knox Elem Sch S Shores Per Arts Mag Wisdom Elementary School Jaime Escalante Elem School San Miguel EL Sn Miguel Mat/Sc Mag Montara Ave EL
Page 18 of 34
School Name
Montara Ave EL M/S/T Independence Elementary Independence ES M/S/T Lucille Roybal-Allard ES Judith F Baca Arts Academy Stagg EL Stanford EL Stanford Primary Center State EL Hope Street Elem School Sterry EL Stonehurst EL Stoner EL Strathern EL Sunland EL Sunland ES Gifted Sunny Brae EL Sunrise EL Superior EL Sylmar EL Sylvan Park EL Taper EL Taper ES Technology Tarzana EL Telfair EL 10th St EL 3rd St EL 32nd/USC Perf Art Mag LAUSD/USC Mth/Sc Mag Weemes EL Birdielee V Bright EL Toland Way EL Toluca Lake EL Topanga EL Topeka Dr EL Towne EL Trinity EL Maple Primary Center
Page 19 of 34
School Name
Tulsa EL Tweedy EL 20th St EL 28th St EL 24th St EL 232nd Pl EL Meyler Ave Union EL Utah EL Valerio EL Valley Alternative Valley View EL Alta California Elem School Julie Korenstein EL Vista Del Valle DL Academy Andres & Maria Cardenas ES Stanley Mosk Elem School Carlos Santana Arts Academy Sylmar Leadership Academy Vanalden EL Van Deene EL Van Gogh EL Van Ness EL Columbus Avenue Elementary Van Nuys EL Vena EL Vena G/HA Mag Vermont EL Vernon City EL Victoria EL Victory EL Vine EL Vinedale EL Vintage Math/Sci Mag Virginia EL Walgrove EL Warner EL Washington Primary Center
Page 20 of 34
School Name
Banning HS Creative & Innov Sci Weigand EL Welby Way Elem Charter Sch Welby Way G/HA Mag The Incubator School Cesar Chavez Elem School West Athens EL West Hollywood EL West Vernon EL Acad of Med Arts@Carson SH Acad of Ed & Empt@Carson SH Sylmar Promise Acad@sylmar Legacy SH Visual and Performing Arts Hawkins SH CHAS Hawkins SH RISE Dymally SH Marquez SH Soc Jus Westminster EL Westminster Comp Sc Mg Chavez LA-Soc Jus Hum Acad Valley Region HS#5-ASE Marquez SH Libra Bernstein SH STEM Westwood EL Roosevelt SH Environmental&Social Policy Roosevelt SH Math/Science Magnet Hilda L Solis Learning Academy Lincoln SH LEMA Johnson CDS White Point EL Ambassador Sch-Glbl Ldrshp ELA Renaissance AC@Torres HS Eng & Tech Ac@Torres HS Wilbur EL Hum Aca-Art & Tech@Torres HS Soc Jus Ldshp Ac@Torres HS UCLA Community School Wilmington Pk EL
Page 21 of 34
School Name
New Open World Acad (K-12) Wilshire Crest EL Wilton Pl EL Winnetka EL Wonderland EL Wonderland G/HA Mag Woodlake EL Woodland Hills EL Woodlawn EL Yorkdale EL Adams MS Adams G/HA Mag Bancroft MS Bancroft Per Art Mag Sal Castro Middle School Belvedere MS Belvedere Media Mag Belvedere Lat Mus Mag Berendo MS John H Liechty MS Bethune MS Bethune MS Math/Sci/Tech William J Clinton MS Young Oak Kim Academy Burbank MS Burbank MS Math/Sci Magnet Burbank MS/Police Acad Nava LA-Sch Arts&Cultr Byrd MS Byrd Math/Sci Mag Jack London Comm Day School Sun Valley HS Carver MS Columbus MS Columbus MS Math/Sci Med Dana MS Portola MS Portola HG Mag
Page 22 of 34
School Name
Dodson MS Dodson G/HA Mag Edison MS Roy Romer Middle School Vista Middle School El Sereno MS El Sereno Math/Sc Mag El Sereno G/HA Mag Emerson MS Foshay Learning Center Frost MS Frost MS Comp/Math/Sci Fulton College Prep School Gage MS Gage MS Math/Science/Tech Southeast Middle School Gompers Int Griffith MS Griffith Math/Sci Mag George E Hale Charter Acad Henry MS Henry MS Computer/Math/Sci Hollenbeck MS Hollenbeck MS M/S/T Holmes MS Holmes Int Human Mag Irving MS Math/Mus/Eng Magnet Los Angeles Academy MS Sch-Visual Arts & Hum@RFK Acad Leadershp Community King MS Film & Media Magnet King MS G/HG/HI Achieving King MS Env Studies Mag LA Teacher Prep Academy Lawrence MS Lawrence MS G/HG/HI Ablty Le Conte MS Le Conte Int Hum Mag
Page 23 of 34
School Name
Maclay MS Madison MS Madison M/Sc/Med Mag Marina Del Rey MS Marina Del Rey MS Prf Arts Markham Int Markham Hlth Car Mag Millikan MS Millikan Per Art Mag Science Academy@Millikan MS Mt Gleason MS Mt Gleason MS Gftd/Hi Ablty Mulholland MS Mulholland MS Police Acad Nightingale MS Nobel MS Nobel Math/Sci Mag Northridge MS Olive Vista MS Pacoima MS Pacoima Tv/Th/FA Mag Pacoima Comp/Mth Mag Woodland Hills Academy Porter MS Porter G/HA Mag Reed MS San Fernando MS Sepulveda MS Sepulveda G/HA Mag South Gate MS So Gate Math Science Magnet Stevenson MS Stevenson G/HA Mag Walnut Park MS SJ/SL Sun Valley Eng & Tech Magnet Sun Valley Env Studies Magnet Sun Valley Sc En & Lead Magnet Sutter MS
Page 24 of 34
School Name
Mark Twain MS Mark Twain World Lang Mag Van Nuys MS Van Nuys M/Sc MS Mag Virgil MS White MS Wilmington MS Secondary CDS Civitas School of Leadership LA High Sch of the Arts@RFK CDS Aggeler Aggeler HS Northridge Academy HS Ramon C Cortines Sch of VPA Miguel Contreras Lrng Complex Harbor Teacher Prep Academy#D8 School of Social Justice Banning SH Banning CIP Mag Avalon HS Belmont SH Edward R Roybal Learng Ctr Newmark HS Daniel Pearl Journ/Comm Mag (NEW) Independence HS Canoga Park SH Canoga Park Envr Mag Canoga Park HS Foreign Lang Owensmouth HS Carson SH Eagle Tree Contn HS Central HS Chatsworth Charter High Stoney Point HS William J Johnston CDS Grover Cleveland Charter High Cleveland Human Mag John R Wooden High School
Page 25 of 34
School Name
Crenshaw STEMM Magnet Crenshaw VAPA Magnet Crenshaw BET Magnet Young HS Dorsey SH Dorsey Math/Sci Mag Dorsey Law/Gov Mag View Park Contn HS ELA Perf Arts Ac@Torres HS East Valley High School Arleta High School Panorama High School Mendez SH Cal Burke HS Eagle Rock SH Eagle Rock G/HG/HA Mg Wilson SH Wilson Police Academy Mag Wilson Adm/Law Mag Fairfax SH Fairfax Vis Art Mag Whitman HS Polytechnic SH Poly Math/Sci Mag Lewis HS Franklin SH Franklin Math/Sci Mag Highland Park HS Fremont SH Fremont Math/Sci Mag Hope HS Gardena SH Gardena for Lang Mag Moneta HS Richard A. Alonzo CDS Monterey HS Garfield SH Garfield Comp Sci Mag
Page 26 of 34
School Name
Grant HS Grant Com Tech Mag London HS Hamilton SH Hamilton Mus Aca Mag Hamilton Human Mag Cheviot Hills HS Hollywood SH Hollywood Per Art Mg Helen Bernstein High School Huntington Pk SH Legacy SH International Studies LC San Antonio HS Early College Academy Hawkins SH C/DAGS Jefferson SH Santee Education Complex Jordan SH Rodia HS Kennedy SH Kennedy HS Arc/Digital Arts Addams HS Lincoln SH Lincoln HS Math/Science CDS West Hollywood Pueblo De LA HS Los Angeles SH LA Math/Sci Mag Downtwn Business Mg DBM/Electronic Info Mag LACES Mag Manual Arts SH Manual Arts HS Cllge Prp Mg West Adams Preparatory HS Marshall SH Marshall HS G/HG/HI Ablty Bravo Medical Mag Metropolitan HS
Page 27 of 34
School Name
Monroe SH Monroe Police Academy Mag Monroe Law/Gov Mag Police Orient & Prep Prog Einstein HS LA School of Global Studies Frida Kahlo High School Narbonne SH Narbonne Math/Sc Mag Patton HS N Hollywood SH N Hllywd Hg Mag NHHS/LA Zoo Bio Mag Earhart HS City of Angels School City of Angels Virtual Academy Ramona HS Reseda SH Reseda HS Police Academy Reseda Env/Phy Sc Mag Reseda HS Law/Public Svc Grey HS Boyle Heights HS Narbonne HS-Humnties&Artsof LA Sherman Oaks CES Mag San Fernando SH San Fernando M/Sc Mag Mission HS San Pedro SH San Pedro HS Police Acdmy San Pedro Mar/M/S Mg Angel's Gate HS Orthopaedic Hosp Med Mag HS Marquez SH HPIAM South Gate SH Odyssey HS Evergreen HS Sylmar SH
Page 28 of 34
School Name
Sylmar Math/Sci Mag Taft Charter High South East High School SEHS Tech & Media Magnet Maywood Academy High School Thoreau HS University SH University HS Digital Media Van Nuys SH Van Nuys Medical Mag Van Nuys M/Sc SH Mag Van Nuys Per Arts Mag Rogers HS Chavez LA-Teacher Prep Acad Venice SH Venice For Lang Mag Venice SH STEMM Magnet Phoenix HS Verdugo Hills SH Verdugo Hills HS Multimedia Verdugo Hills SH VAPA Magnet Mt Lukens HS Legacy SH Sci Tech Engineering Arts Math Washington Prep SH Washington HS Music Acad Washington M/Sc Mag Ellington HS Youth Oppor Unltd Alt HS CDS Tri C Central Adult School AEWC Belmont CAS AEWC Los AngelES Tech Center AEWC E LA Occ Ctr AEWC E LA Skills Ctr AEWC Harbor Occup Ctr AEWC Metropolitan Skills Ctr AEWC North Valley Occup Ctr AEWC Pacoima Skills Ctr AEWC
Page 29 of 34
School Name
Venice Skills Ctr AEWC Maxine Watrs Emp Prep Ctr AEWC West Valley Occ Ctr-AEWC Crenshaw-Washington CAS/AEWC Garfield Comm Ad Sch AEWC Hollywood Comm Ad Sch AEWC Thomas Jefferson AEWC Franklin Comm Adult Schl/AEWC Huntington Park CAS AEWC San Pedro CAS AEWC Van Nuys CAS/AEWC Gardena CAS - AEWC Westchester CAS-AEWC Bell-AEWC Roosevelt CAS AEWC Fremont CAS/AEWC Reseda CAS AEWC Bell SH Academia Moderna (2nd Site) Academic Performance Excellence Academy (APEX) Alain Leroy Locke College Preparatory Academy Alliance College-Ready Academy HS #16 Alliance Dr. Olga Mohan HS (C-RHS #4) Alliance Health Services Academy HS Alliance Tennenbaum Family Technology HS (PSC) Animo Charter Middle School # 3 (Clay Campus) (PSC) Animo Charter Middle School # 4 (Clay Campus) (PSC) Animo College Preparatory Academy (Jordan Campus) Animo Jackie Robinson Animo Venice SH Animo Westside Charter MS Apple Academy Charter Public Schools (AACPS) (2nd Site) Ararat Charter School
TOTAL TESTED POPULATION # (Grades 3-8, 11; and 910 for interim assessments) 79 51 132 90 107 74 57 87 95 84 21 44 65 88 75 70 62 2859 205 221 1447 262 345 386 301 617 606 349 441 478 353 174 0
# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 6 1 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 0
Page 30 of 34
School Name
TOTAL TESTED POPULATION # (Grades 3-8, 11; and 910 for interim assessments) 175 197 194 192 163 193 2520 432 273 238 411 113 64 252 245 122 57 457 47 0 128 0 139 414 2847 129 185 72 93 101 60 0 726
# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART)
Ararat Charter School (2nd Site) Aspire Firestone Academy (PSC) Aspire Gateway Academy (PSC) Aspire Inskeep Academy (PSC) Aspire Juanita Tate Academy (PSC) Aspire Slauson Academy (PSC) Birmingham Community Charter HS Bright Star Secondary Academy Camino Nuevo #3 ES (Jose Castellanos Campus) (PSC) Camino Nuevo #3 MS (2nd Site) (PSC) Camino Nuevo Charter Academy #4 (PSC) Camino Nuevo Charter HS Celerity Cardinal Charter School Celerity Nascent Charter School Celerity Octavia Charter School Celerity Palmati Charter School Celerity Troika Charter School (2nd Site) CHIME Institute's Schwarzenegger Community Citizens of the World Charter 2 (Silver Lake) Citizens of the World Charter 3 (Mar Vista) Citizens of the World Charter Hollywood City Charter Elementary School Crenshaw Arts-Technology CHS (CATCH) Crown Preparatory Academy El Camino Real Charter HS Endeavor College Preparatory Charter Endeavor College Preparatory Charter (2nd Site) Endeavor College Preparatory Charter (3rd Site) Equitas Academy Charter 2 Extera Public School Extera Public School (2nd Site) Extera Public School 2 Fenton Avenue Charter School
1 1 1 1 1 1 10 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 2 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 3
Page 31 of 34
School Name Gabriella Charter School Goethe International CS Granada Hills Charter HS HighTech LA Ingenium Charter Middle School Ivy Academia KIPP Empower Academy KIPP Iluminar Academy Larchmont Charter School Lou Dantzler Prep EL Magnolia Science Academy 2 Magnolia Science Academy 3 Magnolia Science Academy 4 Magnolia Science Academy 5 Magnolia Science Academy 8 (Bell) (PSC) Math and Science College Preparatory Monsenor Oscar Romero Montague Charter Academy N.E.W. Academy Canoga Park New Heights (2nd Site) New Millennium Secondary School Ocean Charter School (2nd site) Our Community School Pacoima Charter School Palisades Charter HS Para Los Ninos - E. Thurman Gratts Primary Center (PSC) Para Los Nios MS Charter PUC Early College Academy for Leaders & Scholars (eCALS) (PSC) PUC Triumph Academy PUC Triumph Charter High School Santa Monica Blvd. Community Stella Middle Charter Academy Synergy Charter Academy Synergy Kinetic Academy (PSC) Synergy Quantum Academy (PSC) Valley Charter Middle
TOTAL TESTED POPULATION # (Grades 3-8, 11; and 910 for interim assessments) 303 148 3309 308 90 0 99 0 521 150 416 419 187 236 492 101 338 531 239 251 193 203 305 644 2324 6 171 345 347 217 511 563 156 473 532 186
# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 2 1 13 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 3 9 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 1
Page 32 of 34
School Name Valor Academy Charter High School Vaughn Next Century LC View Pk Prep. Accelerated MS Wallis Annenberg HS Watts Learning Center Charter MS Westside Innovative School House (WISH)
TOTAL TESTED POPULATION # (Grades 3-8, 11; and 910 for interim assessments) 92 1702 361 406 349 135
# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 1 7 2 2 2 1
423,852 Total Devices in carts of 35
1928 67,480
Page 33 of 34
ATTACHMENT D Detailed Estimates of General Fund Impact General Fund Impact of Phase 1 Item Email/collaboration Tools Identity Management Upgrades Network Monitoring and Management Upgrade TOTAL Additional General Fund Impact 2013-14 We are currently in discussions with Bond Counsel to determine if a portion of the following expenses should be attributed to the General Fund for 2013-14 Portion of the budget for VLCs (after they support roll-out) Portion of the budget for MCSAs (after they support roll-out) Apple and Pearson Professional Development Evaluation for the laptops in Phase 1L General Fund Investment $132,000 $50,000 $366,978 $548,978
General Fund Impact starting in 2014-15 Item School-based Support VLC Facilitators School-based Technical Support Associates Non-school Based Technical Support TOTAL General Fund Investment $8,000,000 $1,800,000 $1,400,000 $11,200,000
Page 34 of 34

Various Boc/cctp Meeting Materials

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Various Boc/cctp Meeting Materials

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND CITIZENS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

Gary C. Anderson, PhD Bond Administrator Daniel Hwang Administrative Analyst

Bond Oversight Committee

Bond Oversight Committee

Bond Oversight Committee

ADOPTED on November 20, 2013 by the following vote: AYES: 9 ABSTAIN: 0

Stephen English Stephen English Chair

Pamela Schmidt Pamela Schmidt Vice Chair

Attachment (BOC IT TF Report)

Bond Oversight Committee

Gary C. Anderson, PhD Bond Administrator Daniel Hwang Administrative Analyst

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

Report Number: Date: Subject: Responsible Staff: Name

Office/Division Telephone No.

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

Board Options and Consequences:

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14

Board of Education December 10, 2013

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

Policy Implications: Budget Impact:

Bond Oversight Committee Recommendations:

Informative Desegregation Impact Statement

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14

Board of Education December 10, 2013

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

DR. JOHN E. DEASY Superintendent

MICHELLE KING Senior Deputy Superintendent School Operations REVIEWED BY:

APPROVED & PRESENTED BY:

DAVID HOLMQUIST General Counsel Approved as to form.

Matt Hill Chief Strategy Officer Office of the Superintendent

Ronald S. Chandler Chief Information Officer Information Technology Division

Mark Hovatter Chief Facilities Executive Facilities Services Division

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14

Board of Education December 10, 2013

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

Phase 1 Phase 2 Other

23,080 18,316 382,456

# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14

Board of Education December 10, 2013

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14

Board of Education December 10, 2013

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 1 1 4 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 0 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 1

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14

Board of Education December 10, 2013

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 3 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14

Board of Education December 10, 2013

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 0 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 0 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 3 2

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14

Board of Education December 10, 2013

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education Report

# CARTS NEEDED (35 DEVICES PER CART) 1 6 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 2 2 1 2 0 1 2 1

Bd. of Ed Rpt No. 129-13/14

Board of Education December 10, 2013