Folsom City Council
January 29, 2024

Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom
01/29/2024 06:00 PM
Open Session: 6:00 p.m.

Education Services Center, Boardroom / 1965 Birkmont Dr., Rancho Cordova, CA 95742
Phoenix Park Hotel / 520 North Capitol St NE, Washington, DC 20001 1 AGENDA

FCUSD BOARD OF EDUCATION

MEMBERS
Tim Hooey, President
Jennifer Laret, Vice President
David Reid, Clerk
Chris Clark, Board Member
Kara Lofthouse, Board Member
Matthew Mellijor, Student Board
Member
Van Merrill, Student Board Member

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA

COUNCIL MEMBERS
David M. Sander, PH.D., Mayor
Siri Pulipati, Vice Mayor
Garrett Gatewood, Council
Member
Donald Terry, Council Member
Linda Budge, Council Member

CITY OF FOLSOM

COUNCIL MEMBERS
Mike Kozlowski, Mayor
Sarah Aquino, Vice Mayor
YK Chalamcherla, Council Member
Rosario Rodriguez, Council Member
Anna Rohrbough, Council Member

Scan the above QR code with your phone to view this meeting agenda on your phone.

FCUSD VISION:

Empowering all students to thrive through educational excellence.

FCUSD MISSION:

FCUSD is committed to providing excellence in educational programs that carry high expectations for each student's success. In collaboration with our community, the mission of FCUSD is to ensure all students demonstrate high levels of learning through our commitment to continuous cycles of improvement, transformative social emotional learning, and engaging, culturally responsive instruction.

Protocol for Agenda Items:

(published agenda times are approximate and subject to change) 1 .

Staff Presentation
2 .

Board Questions of Staff
3 .

Comments from Public
4 .

Board Final Comments and Direction
For information, contact Rochelle Dagnall, Administrative Assistant @ 916-294-9001 A broadcasting is being made at the direction of the Board and that the broadcast may capture images and sounds of those attending the meeting.

Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
2 Zoom Video conference: The public may participate in the meeting and provide public comment via Zoom video conferencing. The link to the meeting will be provided no later than 15 minutes prior to the start of the meeting on the Districts website at:
https://www.fcusd.org/domain/5608(
https://simbli.eboardsolutions.com/SU/vpi9V4wEkvjWrkoahBbC3w== )
I.
6:00 PM OPEN SESSION
4 a.

Call to Order
5 b.

Pledge of Allegiance
6 c.

Broadcast Statement
7 d.

Roll Call
8 II.

ADOPTION OF AGENDA
9 III.

INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS
10 IV.

DISCUSSION
11 a.

Review of District Re-Organization and Feasibility Study Report 12 V.

ADJOURNMENT
133
Disability Information
If you need a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to participate in the public meeting, contact the Superintendent's Office at (916) 294-9025 at least 48 hours before the scheduled Board meeting so that we may make every reasonable effort to accommodate you. [Government Code § 54953.2; Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990,§ 202 (42 U.S.c. §12132).] -- Writings that are public records, part of this regular meeting's Open Session, and distributed to all or a majority of the Governing Board less than 72 hours prior to this meeting will be made available to the public during regular business hours at the Superintendent's office, 1965 Birkmont Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA, and may be posted on the District's website at www.fcusd.org.

Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
3 Quick Summary / Abstract
(Held in Boardroom)

I. 6:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
4 Quick Summary / Abstract
a
.

Call to Order
I. a. Call to Order
Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
5 Quick Summary / Abstract
a
.

Pledge of Allegiance
I. b. Pledge of Allegiance
Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
6 Quick Summary / Abstract
a
.

Broadcast Statement -
A broadcast and recording is being made at the direction of the Board and the broadcast may capture images and sounds of those attending the meeting.

I. c. Broadcast Statement
Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
7 Quick Summary / Abstract
a
.

Roll Call
I. d. Roll Call
Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
8 II. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
9 III. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS
Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
10 IV. DISCUSSION
Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
11 Speaker
Sean Martin, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services Rationale
At the January 19, 2023, Folsom Cordova Unified School District (FCUSD) Board Meeting, it was requested that staff report back on the cost and process of completing a study on the ability to reorganize Folsom Cordova Unified School District into two separate districts based upon the communities of Rancho Cordova and Folsom.

Staff contacted Schools Services of California (SSCAL) to present to the FCUSD Board an overview of the reorganization process and provide a cost estimate to complete a reorganization study.

At the March 23, 2023, FCUSD Board meeting, Brianna García, Vice President of SSCAL, presented the nine statutory criteria governing district reorganizations, the process, and the proposed scope and cost for completing a Reorganization Feasibility Study.

Additionally, staff provided a summary of the past reorganization activities that have taken place regarding FCUSD since 1994. The summary included District bonding information highlighted in blue.

The FCUSD Trustee consensus was to have a joint board meeting with both governing bodies, the City Councils of Rancho Cordova and Folsom, to review the re-organization presentation and discuss whether to move forward with the feasibility study.

At the June 8, 2023, FCUSD Joint Special Board Meeting with the City Councils of Rancho Cordova and Folsom, School Services of California presented information on the nine statutory criteria governing district reorganizations, the process, and the proposed scope and cost for completing a Reorganization Feasibility Study and answered questions.

While there was consensus to learn more from a feasibility study, opinions for separating the district were mixed, from favoring a separation to concerns a separation may create a negative impact. The takeaway from all was that a study would allow the data from the feasibility study to inform next steps.

At the June 15, 2023, FCUSD Board meeting, the Board discussed the cost and timeline for SSCAL to conduct a reorganization feasibility study. The cost for the proposal is estimated to be $72,500.00 from the general fund.

FCUSD staff confirmed with staff from the City of Rancho Cordova that they are willing to share one- third of the cost for the reorganization study.

On July 11, 2023, the Folsom City Council approved paying for one-third of the cost of the study.

IV. a. Review of District Re-Organization and Feasibility Study Report Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
12 At the August 10, 2023, Board Meeting the MOU between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom and the contract with School Services of California was approved.

Staff from Schools Services of California will present the completed report to the FCUSD Board, and the City Councils of Rancho Cordova and Folsom, and answer any questions from the three entities.

Supporting Documents

Folsom Cordova USD Reorganization Feasibility Study_Presentation _2024.01.29

Folsom Cordova USD Reorganization Feasibility Study_FINAL Report Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
13 Folsom Cordova
Unified School District
Presented By:

January 29, 2024
Brianna García
Vice President
Reorganization Feasibility Study
Matt Phillips, CPA
Director, Management
Consulting Services
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.

14 Purpose of Review
• Folsom Cordova Unified School District (District) contracted with School Services of California Inc. (SSC) to perform a Reorganization Feasibility Study (Study) on the proposed split of the current District into two separate unified school districts (USDs) • The proposed split would result in:
 A remaining Folsom USD—SFID1 2
 A new Rancho Cordova USD—SFID 1
• Boundaries would be approximately
coterminous with the cities’ boundaries
 Includes portions of unincorporated
Sacramento county and the census-
designated area of Mather in the case
of Rancho Cordova
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
1 Folsom USD
City of Folsom
Rancho Cordova USD
City of Rancho Cordova
Mather (census-designated
area)
1School facilities improvement district

15 Nine Statutory Criteria
• All the following conditions must be substantially met:
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
2 Adequate Number of Pupils
Community Identity
Equitable Division of Property
and Facilities
Discrimination/Segregation
No Substantial Increase in State Costs
1 2
3 4
5 Sound Educational Program
No Substantial Increase in
School Facilities Costs
Increased Property Values
Effect on Fiscal Status
and Management
6 7
8 9
Reference: Education Code Section (EC §) 35753(a)

16 Nine Statutory Criteria
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
3 Adequate Number
of Pupils
Criterion 1
The reorganized districts
will be adequate in terms
of number of pupils
enrolled
Community Identity
Criterion 2
The school districts are
each organized on the
basis of substantial
community identity
The reorganized
districts will be
adequate in terms of
number of pupils
enrolled
Equitable Division
of Property and
Facilities
Criterion 3
The proposal will result in
an equitable division of
property and facilities of
the original district or
districts

17 Nine Statutory Criteria
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
4 Discrimination/
Segregation
Criterion 4
The reorganization will
preserve each affected
school district's ability to
educate students in an
integrated environment
and will not promote
racial or ethnic
discrimination or
segregation
No Substantial
Increase in State
Costs
Criterion 5
Any increase in costs to
the state as a result of the
proposed reorganization
will be insignificant and
otherwise incidental to
the reorganization
Sound Educational
Program
Criterion 6
The proposed
reorganization will
continue to promote
sound education
performance and will not
significantly disrupt the
educational programs in
the affected school
districts

18 Nine Statutory Criteria
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
5 No Substantial
Increase to School
Facilities Costs
Criterion 7
Any increase in school
facilities costs as a result
of the proposed
reorganization will be
insignificant and
otherwise incidental to
the reorganization
Increased
Property Values
Criterion 8
The proposed
reorganization is primarily
designed for purposes
other than to significantly
increase property values
Effect on Fiscal
Status and
Management
Criterion 9
The proposed
reorganization will
continue to promote
sound fiscal management
and not cause a
substantial negative effect
on the fiscal status of the
affected district

19 Study’s Conclusions
• The Study finds the district reorganization substantially meets six statutory criteria and does not meet three statutory criteria that guide district reorganizations © 2024 School Services of California Inc.
6 1Criterion not substantially met
✓ Substantially Met or Not Substantially Met

1. Adequate Number of Pupils
2 . Community Identity

3. Equitable Division of Property and Facilities

4. Discrimination/Segregation1

5. No Substantial Increase in State Costs

6. Sound Educational Program1

7. No Substantial Increase in School Facilities Costs

8. Increased Property Values

9. Effect on Fiscal Status and Management1

20 1. Adequate Number of Pupils—Substantially Met
• Finding
 The projected enrollment for the remaining Folsom Cordova USD and the new Rancho Cordova USD show that both districts would meet the minimum enrollment © 2024 School Services of California Inc.
7 Actual Projection
2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Folsom Cordova USD
Total Enrollment 20,605 20,602 20,096 20,344 20,550 20,763 21,429 21,824 22,219 22,691 23,201 Percent Change 1.24% -0.01% -2.46% 1.23% 1.01% 1.04% 3.21% 1.84% 1.81% 2.12% 2.25% Folsom USD
Total Enrollment 13,626 14,022 14,431 14,916 15,389
Percent Change 2.91% 2.92% 3.36% 3.17%
Rancho Cordova USD
Total Enrollment 7,803 7,802 7,788 7,775 7,812
Percent Change -0.01% -0.18% -0.17% 0.48%
Source: California Department of Education (CDE) DataQuest for actual and District-provided data for projections

21 2. Community Identity—Substantially Met
• Finding
 Both Folsom and Rancho Cordova have existing
community identities to which residents are
integrated and which already rely on their local
schools for a sense of community
• Both cities are incorporated with distinct local
governments that provide their residents with
various services
 The city of Folsom was incorporated in 1946
and had a population of 80,454 per the 2020
census—encompasses approximately 30
square miles
 The city of Rancho Cordova was incorporated in 2003
and had a population of 79,332 per the 2020 census—
encompasses approximately 35 square miles
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
8 School Types Folsom USD Rancho
Cordova USD
Elementary (TK-5) 121 10
Middle (6-8) 2 2
High (9-12)
Comprehensive 2 1
Continuation 1 1
Alternative Programs - 52
1Alder Creek Elementary School is under construction
2Includes independent study, a nonclassroom-based charter school, and PreK special day classes

22 3. Equitable Division of Property/Facilities—Substantially Met • Finding
 The District’s assets and liabilities could be
equitably divided
• The law provides adequate methods for
equitable distribution and the
appointment of a board of arbitrators or a
sole arbitrator should the districts be
unable to arrive at an equitable division of
their own accord
• Each district would need to adjust its
operations and facilities to compensate
for the loss of property and/or
infrastructure due to the reorganization
Division of:
 Fund balance reserves, both restricted and
unrestricted, and liabilities—reasonable for
division to occur in accordance to how the
funds were generated
 Student funds and scholarships—funds
not restricted to a specific school site
would be divided based on enrollment
 Postretirement benefits—proportional full-
time equivalents employed, enrollment
and/or average daily attendance (ADA) are
reasonable basis for division
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
9

23 3. Equitable Division of Property/Facilities—Substantially Met  Real Property—Rancho Cordova would take
possession of public school properties and
buildings within its boundaries on the day
the reorganization becomes effective
• Automatically assumes a proportionate
share of the District’s outstanding
bonded indebtedness
 Personal Property—Personal property of
the District that is used for district-wide
purposes and not located at or designated
for use by a specific school site is subject
to division of property
Division of Property
 Real and personal property affixed thereto
will be the property of the district in which
the real property is located
 All other property, funds, and obligations,
except bonded indebtedness, are to be
divided pro rata among the districts
 The basis for the division and allocation
would be enrollment/ADA or the assessed
valuation of the part of the original district
that is included within each of the districts
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
10

24 3. Equitable Division of Property/Facilities—Substantially Met  The greater of:
• The proportionate share of the
outstanding bonded indebtedness
 The ratio that the total assessed value
of the transferring territory bears to the
total assessed value of the original
district
• The portion of the outstanding bonded
indebtedness that was incurred for the
acquisition or improvement of the real
property, or fixtures located thereon,
located in the new district
Division of Debt
 When property is taken from one district
and annexed to, or included in a new or
acquiring district, the new or acquiring
district will take possession of the real
property and the reorganized territory
ceases to be liable for the outstanding
bonded indebtedness of the district of
which it was formerly a part
 Automatically assumes its proportionate
share of the outstanding bonded
indebtedness of the district to which it
becomes a part
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
11

25 3. Equitable Division of Property/Facilities—Substantially Met • The residents in the remaining Folsom USD would cease to be liable for any outstanding bonded indebtedness attributable to the new Rancho Cordova USD and vice versa © 2024 School Services of California Inc.
12 Folsom
Cordova USD Folsom USD Rancho Cordova USD
2024 Projected Assessed Valuation $28,967,324,402 $18,971,054,005 $9,672,742,605

65.5% 33.4%
Bonded Indebtedness1 $481,456,231 $281,515,677 $199,940,553

58.47% 41.53%
Bonded Indebtedness as a Percent of
Assessed Value 1.66% 1.30% 2.76%
Available Bonding Capacity2 $724,183,110 $474,276,350 $241,818,565 Remaining Bonding Capacity $242,726,880 $192,760,673 $41,878,012 Source: District-provided data
1SFID 3 has been split 50/50

22.5% of assessed valuation

26 4. Discrimination/Segregation—Not Substantially Met
• Finding
 The reorganization could exacerbate existing racial and socioeconomic disparities and segregation already inherent in the communities being served • The reorganization appears it would limit students’ ability to access an integrated educational experience
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
13 36.38%

42.74%

25.74%

63.62%

57.26%

74.26%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Folsom Cordova USD
Folsom USD
Rancho Cordova USD
White Non-White
Source: CDE DataQuest, 2022-23

27 4. Discrimination/Segregation—Not Substantially Met
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
14 African
American
American
Indian or
Alaska
Native
Asian Filipino Hispanic
or Latino
Not
Reported
Pacific
Islander
Two or
More
Races
White
Folsom Cordova USD Enrollment 910 55 4,156 445 4,939 27 109 2,841 7,711 Folsom USD Enrollment 218 38 3,463 303 1,896 4 23 1,612 5,641 Rancho Cordova USD Enrollment 690 17 689 140 3,024 23 86 1,221 2,042

4.29%

0.26%

19.61%

2.10%

23.30%

0.13%

0.51%

13.41%

36.38%

1.65%

0.29%

26.24%

2.30%

14.37%

0.03%

0.17%

12.21%

42.74%

5.23%

0.13%

5.22%

1.06%

22.91%

0.17%

0.65%

9.25%

15.47%
-
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
Source: CDE DataQuest, 2022-23

28 4. Discrimination/Segregation—Not Substantially Met
• SSC staff reviewed free or reduced-price meals (FRPM) and unduplicated pupil percentage (UPP) data to get a better understanding of the socioeconomic status of the students © 2024 School Services of California Inc.
15 FRPM

32.74%

10.82%

69.36%
Folsom Cordova USD
Folsom USD
Rancho Cordova USD
UPP
Source: CDE DataQuest, 2022-23

37.00%

17.37%

61.05%
Folsom Cordova USD
Folsom USD
Rancho Cordova USD
Source: Calculated based on District-provided data

29 5. No Significant Increase in State Costs—Substantially Met • Finding
 The creation of a new unified school district would not:
• Impact either districts’ funding status since both would be heavily in “state-funded” status • Create substantial additional costs to the state for categorical programs • Create any Necessary Small Schools (NSS)
 School facilities will be discussed in Criterion 7
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
16 LCFF1
Revenues Property Taxes Difference
Folsom USD $157,261,808 $50,899,680 $106,362,128
Rancho Cordova USD $101,058,848 $25,954,951 $75,103,897 Source: Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team calculator with projected scenarios using enrollment as of October 2023
1Local Control Funding Formula

30 5. No Significant Increase in State Costs—Substantially Met • The state primarily funds categorical programs on ADA, UPP, or some combination thereof  The creation of a new unified school district does not change the statewide allocation, but would split the allocation between the two districts
 List of categorical programs below do not represent all, but the most significant programs funded by the 2022-23 Enacted Budget
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
17 Statewide Allocation Funding Calculation
Learning Recovery Block Grant $7,936,000,000 $/ADA x 2021-22 ADA x UPP Expanded Learning Opportunities Program $4,000,000,000 $/ADA x 2021-22 ADA Arts, Music and Instructional Materials Block Grant $3,561,000,000 $/ADA x 2021-22 ADA Mandate Block Grant $247,000,000 $/ADA x 2021-22 ADA

31 5. No Significant Increase in State Costs—Substantially Met • NSS are small schools and receive additional state funding using a different funding scale  NSS elementary school—ADA of less than 97 (EC § 42283)  NSS high school—ADA of less than 287 and 90% of the pupils would be required to travel 10 miles to the nearest other public high school (EC § 42285) • The proposed split into two unified school districts does not create any NSS  There are no NSS in the current district boundaries
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
18 Number of
Teacher(s) ADA LCFF Funding
1 1 to 24 $139,913
2 25 to 48 $279,827
3 49 to 72 $419,740
4 73 to 96 $559,653
Source: 2022-23 funding rates for an elementary NSS from the CDE website

32 6. Sound Educational Program—Not Substantially Met
• Finding
 The reorganization could
significantly disrupt educational
programs in the districts and have
a negative impact on the
educational performance of the
students, especially within the
smaller Rancho Cordova USD
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
19 The following sources were analyzed as proxies for
the strength of each district’s educational offerings:

California School Dashboard (Dashboard)—provides
information on how a district and its schools are meeting the needs of students based on a set of state and local measures California Assessment of Student Performance and
Progress (CAASPP)—includes Smarter Balanced
Summative Assessment system, which tests students in grades 3 through 8 and 11 on English Language Arts (ELA) and Math DataQuest—provides data and statistics about K-12 with
reports available for multiple subject areas, including several that are incorporated into the Dashboard

33 6. Sound Educational Program—Not Substantially Met
 The schools that would remain within Folsom USD outperform the schools that would be part of the new Rancho Cordova USD, as well as those within the existing Folsom Cordova USD © 2024 School Services of California Inc.
20 Folsom-Cordova USD Folsom USD Rancho Cordova USD
Student
Performance Status Change Student
Performance Status Change Student
Performance Status Change
Suspension
Rate (K-12) Green Medium Declined Green Low Declined Orange High Maintained

6.8% -0.1%3.4% -0.4% 1.3% -0.7%
English Learner
Progress (K-12) Orange Medium Declined Orange Medium Declined Orange Low Declined

46.8% -4.0% 49.8% -2.6% 44.2% -4.1%
Graduation Rate
(9-12) Green High Maintained Blue Very High Maintained Green Medium Increased

93.4% 0.5% 97.2% -0.2% 87.8% 2.0%
Chronic
Absenteeism Yellow High Declined
Significantly Green Medium Declined
Significantly Yellow Very High Declined
Significantly

15.4% -6.2% 8.2% -4.1% 25.8% -9.0%
ELA (G3-8) Green
Medium Declined
Green High Declined Orange Low Maintained

19.1 -3.50% -44.9 -2.66%57.2 -4.23%
Math (G3-8) Yellow Medium Maintained Blue Very High Maintained Orange Low Maintained
-75.02 -2.17%-8.40 -1.40% 32.99 1.73%
Source: 2023 Dashboard data—Folsom USD and Rancho Cordova USD calculated based on school-site data

34 6. Sound Educational Program—Not Substantially Met
 Smarter Balanced Summative Assessment System
• Similar to the Dashboard results, the schools in the remaining Folsom USD would outperform the schools in Rancho Cordova USD and those within the existing District © 2024 School Services of California Inc.
21 Source: 2022-23 CAASPP

23.31%

11.18%

44.66%

31.17% 29.26%

15.09%

52.00%

41.32%

18.27%

16.05%

21.45%

22.17% 22.52%

20.98%

24.74%

24.06%27.07%

30.45%

21.09%

25.93% 20.43%

24.38%

13.71%

17.48%

31.34%

42.32%

12.80% 20.73% 28.35%

39.56%

9.55% 17.14%
Folsom
Cordova USD
Folsom USD Rancho
Cordova USD
State Folsom
Cordova USD
Folsom USD Rancho
Cordova USD
State
ELA Math
Standard Exceeded
Standard Met
Standard Nearly Met
Standard Not Met

35 6. Sound Educational Program—Not Substantially Met
Graduation Rate
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
22 93.1%
Folsom
Cordova
USD

97.2%
Folsom USD

87.5%
Rancho
Cordova
USD
Suspension Rate

3.5%
Folsom
Cordova
USD

1.3%
Folsom USD

7.1%
Rancho
Cordova
USD
Chronic Absenteeism Rate

16.0%
Folsom
Cordova
USD

9.0%
Folsom USD

27.5%
Rancho
Cordova
USD
Teacher Assignment Monitoring1

90.7%
Folsom
Cordova
USD

93.1%
Folsom USD

63.4%
Rancho
Cordova
USD
1Clear credential

36 7. No Increase in School Facility Costs—Substantially Met • Finding
 There is sufficient capacity to house all students within the respective districts and, therefore, no substantial increase to school facilities costs
 Neither district has a single school site that is over capacity • Although this criterion is specific to school housing costs, Folsom USD would need to purchase, construct, modernize, or lease administrative facilities to account for the loss of the current district office
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
23 Enrollment Capacity Difference
Folsom USD 13,626 16,626 3,000
Rancho Cordova USD 8,173 12,420 4,247
Source: District-provided enrollment and capacity analysis

37 8. Increased Property Value—Substantially Met
• Finding
 The District’s Governing Board, along with the city councils of Folsom and Rancho Cordova, jointly elected to conduct the study to determine the feasibility of the nine criteria • No evidence was uncovered or provided that suggests the proposed reorganization is primarily designed to significantly increase property values © 2024 School Services of California Inc.
24

38 9. Effect on Fiscal Status and Management—Not Substantially Met • Finding
 If approved, the proposed
reorganization would have a substantial
negative impact on Folsom USD
• LCFF revenues would decline by
approximately 2.9% per ADA
• Personnel costs would increase by
approximately 2.9%
 The combination of the decline in
revenues and increase in
expenditures creates the substantial
negative impact
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
25 LCFF revenues represent
more than 90% of the
unrestricted resources
available for spending
Personnel costs represent
more than 80% of
expenditures

39 9. Effect on Fiscal Status and Management—Not Substantially Met • LCFF revenues per student would move in opposing directions  Change in revenues per student is primarily due to changes in the percentage of students identified as unduplicated pupils—students identified as eligible for FRPM, English language learners, or foster youth
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
26 UPP LCFF Funding
per Student
Folsom Cordova USD 37.00% $12,029
Folsom USD 17.37% $11,680
Rancho Cordova USD 61.05% $12,914
Source: District-provided data

40 9. Effect on Fiscal Status and Management—Not Substantially Met • Similarly, personnel costs per student would move in opposing directions  Although Rancho Cordova USD has more full-time equivalents (FTEs), employees working at schools in Folsom USD earn more annually
• Likely due to seniority as all employees are paid on uniform salary schedules © 2024 School Services of California Inc.
27 Total Personnel
Costs FTE Average Cost per
FTE
Folsom USD $150,922,897 1,526.77 $98,851
Rancho Cordova USD $113,721,390 1,228.00 $92,607
Total (Folsom Cordova USD) $264,644,287 2,754.77 $96,068 Source: District-provided data

41 Study’s Conclusions
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
28 ✓ Substantially Met or Not Substantially Met

1. Adequate Number of Pupils

2. Community Identity

3. Equitable Division of Property and Facilities

4. Discrimination/Segregation1

5. No Substantial Increase in State Costs

6. Sound Educational Program1

7. No Substantial Increase in School Facilities Costs

8. Increased Property Values

9. Effect on Fiscal Status and Management1
1Criterion not substantially met

42 Results of Previous Studies
• There have been four studies/analyses in the previous 23 years related to the proposed reorganization:
 March 2000—SSC analyzed Criterion 9 (Effect on Fiscal Status and Management)  June 2001—Education Research Consultants, Inc. analyzed four key objectives including special education costs, facilities needs, and development of potential budgets  November 2002—The Sacramento County Committee on School District Organization (SCC) recommended disapproval of the reorganization proposal based on an analysis completed by the Sacramento County Office of Education
 July 2004—The CDE analysis of the nine criteria
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
29 Conclusions
March 2000 Study Study found that criterion 9 was not met June 2001 Study No conclusion reached regarding criterion 9 November 2002 Findings1 SCC found that criteria 4, 5, 6, and 9 were not met July 2004 Study Study found that criteria 4, 6, and 9 were not met 1Per the State Board of Education Information Memorandum dated July 22, 2004

43 © 2024 School Services of California Inc.
30

44 Thank you!
Brianna García
[email protected]
Matt Philips, CPA
[email protected]
© 2024 School Services of California Inc.

45 Folsom Cordova Unified
School District

Reorganization Feasibility Study

January 16, 2024
(Data collected as of October 2023)
Prepared By:

Brianna García
Vice President

Matt Phillips, CPA
Director, Management Consulting Services

46 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 1 Summary of Major Findings ....................................................................................................... 1 Study Purpose................................................................................................................................ 3 Legal Requirements ...................................................................................................................... 3 Background ................................................................................................................................... 5 Study............................................................................................................................................ 7 Analysis of Nine Criteria .............................................................................................................. 8 Criterion Number 1: Adequate Number of Pupils ...................................................................... 8 Standard ................................................................................................................................... 8 Analysis and Comment ............................................................................................................ 8 Finding ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Criterion Number 2: Community Identity ................................................................................... 9 Standard ................................................................................................................................... 9 Analysis and Comment ............................................................................................................ 9 Finding ................................................................................................................................... 13 Criterion Number 3: Equitable Division of Property/Facilities ................................................ 13 Standard ................................................................................................................................. 13 Analysis and Comment .......................................................................................................... 13 Finding ................................................................................................................................... 22 Criterion Number 4: Discrimination/Segregation ..................................................................... 22 Standard ................................................................................................................................. 22 Analysis and Comment .......................................................................................................... 23 Finding ................................................................................................................................... 29 Criterion Number 5: No Substantial Increase in State Costs .................................................... 29 Standard ................................................................................................................................. 29 Analysis and Comment .......................................................................................................... 30 Finding ................................................................................................................................... 35 Criterion Number 6: Sound Educational Program .................................................................... 35

47 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. ii
Standard ................................................................................................................................. 35 Analysis and Comment .......................................................................................................... 35 Finding ................................................................................................................................... 48 Criterion Number 7: No Substantial Increase to School Facilities Costs ................................. 48 Standard ................................................................................................................................. 48 Analysis and Comment .......................................................................................................... 49 Finding ................................................................................................................................... 51 Criterion Number 8: Increased Property Values ....................................................................... 52 Standard ................................................................................................................................. 52 Analysis and Comment .......................................................................................................... 52 Finding ................................................................................................................................... 52 Criterion Number 9: Effect on Fiscal Status and Management ................................................ 52 Standard ................................................................................................................................. 52 Analysis and Comment .......................................................................................................... 53 Finding ................................................................................................................................... 58 Folsom Cordova Community Charter ....................................................................................... 58 Summary and Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 59 Appendix A—California Department of Education Flowcharts ............................................ 61 Appendix B—School Facilities Improvement Districts Map .................................................. 63 Appendix C—Course Offerings................................................................................................. 64 Appendix D—Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... 83

Copyright © 2024 by
School Services of California, Inc.
1121 L Street, Suite 1060
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 446-7517
FAX (916) 446-2011
www.sscal.com
All rights reserved. These materials may not be duplicated in any way without the expressed written consent of School Services of California, Inc., except in the form of brief excerpts or quotations or as a teaching guide to employees of the school agency or organization that contracted for this report. Making copies of this report or any portion for any purpose other than your own or as noted above is a violation of United States copyright laws.

48 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 1
Executive Summary
The Folsom Cordova Unified School District (District) contracted with School Services of California Inc. (SSC) to provide a Reorganization Feasibility Study (Study) on the proposed split of the current District into two separate unified school districts.

This Study discusses the nine statutory criteria that govern school district reorganizations and that a county committee and/or the State Bord of Education must review and determine have been substantially met prior to rendering a decision.

Summary of Major Findings
Criterion Number 1: Adequate Number of Pupils —The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met as the current enrollment of both districts meets the establishment minimum enrollment (i.e., exceed 1,501 pupils) and the proposed district reorganization would not result in a reduction below the minimum required enrollment.

Criterion Number 2: Community Identity —The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met as there is an existing community identity within each city to which residents are integrated and which already rely on their local schools for a sense of community.

Criterion Number 3: Equitable Division of Property/Facilities —The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met as the District’s assets and liabilities could be equitably divided. While each district would need to adjust its operations and facilities to compensate for the loss of property and/or infrastructure due to the reorganization, the law provides adequate methods for equitable distribution and the appointment of a board of arbitrators or a sole arbitrator should the districts be unable to arrive at an equitable division of their own accord.

Criterion Number 4: Discrimination/Segregation —The Study finds that this criterion would not be substantially met as the reorganization could exacerbate existing racial and socioeconomic disparities and segregation already inherent in the communities being served. While SSC staff recognize that the existing racial and socioeconomic distribution is largely a result of where students reside and that the Rancho Cordova community believe s that a reorganization would allow them to better serve their students, the reorganization appears to limit students’ ability to access an integrated educational experience.

Criterion Number 5: No Substantial Increase in State Costs —The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met, as the proposed reorganization would not result in a significant increase in state costs as it pertains to operational revenues. Potential increases in state costs attributable to facilities are addressed in Criterion Number 7.

49 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 2
Criterion Number 6: Sound Educational Program —The Study finds that this criterion would not be substantially met. The reorganization could result in a significant disruption to educational programs in the districts, especially to the smaller Rancho Cordova Unified School District (USD), and would have a negative impact on the educational performance of the students within Rancho Cordova USD based on the data analyzed within this Study.

Criterion Number 7: No Substantial Increase in School Facilities Costs—The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met. This is a split of a current district into two districts and therefore, there are no substantial concerns relative to additional state costs, bonding capacity, school capacity, or developer fees. While Folsom USD will need to purchase, construct, modernize, or lease administrative facilities for the remaining district—which would constitute a significant expense as a direct result of the reorganization— there is no pathway for Folsom USD to apply for state bond funds to construct replacement administrative buildings and the cost would therefore be borne entirely by Folsom USD. Further, there is sufficient capacity to house all students within the respective districts and therefore no substantial increase to school facilities costs.

Criterion Number 8: Increased Property Values—The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met, as the increase in property values is not the primary purpose for the proposed reorganization.

Criterion Number 9: Effect on Fiscal Status and Management —The Study finds that this criterion would not be substantially met. The reorganization would result in lowered revenues per average daily attendance and increased personnel costs per full-time equivalent (FTE) in Folsom USD which may lead to a substantial negative effect on the fiscal status . The lower revenues are due primarily to a shift in student demographics and the increase in personnel costs per FTE is due to more senior staff likely working in Folsom rather than in Rancho Cordova, though Rancho Cordova has more FTEs per student.

50 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 3
Study Purpose
The Folsom Cordova Unified School District (District) contracted with School Services of California Inc. (SSC) to provide a Reorganization Feasibility Study (Study) on the proposed split of the current District into two separate unified school districts.

This Study discusses the nine statutory criteria that govern school district reorganizations and that a county committee and/or the State Board of Education (SBE) must review and determine have been substantially met prior to rendering a decision.

Note that the S tudy provides an analysis based on a specific point in time. Enrollment, fund balances, obligations, personal property, etc.— all of these will ch ange between this analysis, including the data on which it is based, and the time the reorganization would become effective.

Therefore, the analysis included within this report is meant to address the nine statutory criteria in broad terms. If the reorganization proceeds, a revised analysis will need to be completed , particularly as it pertains to the division of property and the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) entitlements.

Legal Requirements
The California Education Code governs the process of school district reorganization. Commencing with Education Code Section ( EC § ) 35500, the code defines the various types of district reorganizations; describes the overall processes to initiate a district reorganization; specifies the duties and responsibilities of the county committee on district reorganization and other relevant public agencies and organizations; prescribes the timelines for public hearings, governing board actions, and voting; specifies the employment rights of district employees; and lists the criteria upon which the SBE must evaluate reorganization proposals.

There are four types of reorganizations that are most common: territory transfers, formations of new school districts, unifications with components, and lapsations of school districts. The potential split of the District would be considered a formation of a new school district defined as either the reorganization of entire, or portions of, elementary and high school districts into unified districts; or the reorganization or splitting of an existing unified district into two or more new unified districts.

Per EC § 35511, the formation of a new district is accomplished through one of, or a combination of, four ways. As it pertains to this analysis, it would be accomplished by “forming one or more new school districts of the same kind from all or parts of one or more existing school districts of that same kind.”

51 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 4
The District has two options as it considers the potential split of the District. It can either dissolve the existing unified school district and form two new districts or form a new district from parts of the existing district. This analysis assumes that the existing District would remain, with the name changed to Folsom Unified School District (USD) for ease of distinction between the various districts referenced in this report, and that a new Rancho Cordova USD w ould be formed. There are some distinctions in how the analysis would be carried out if it were assumed that the existing District would be dissolved and two new districts formed. SSC staff does not believe these differences would result in substantively different conclusions as it pertains to the nine statutory criteria.

Ultimately, the District remaining intact, albeit with a smaller footprint, and the creation of a new Rancho Cordova USD appears to be the easier path to reorganization as various structures would remain in place. For example, the Governing B oard of the District 1 and existing collective
bargaining agreements would remain in place. Were the District to dissolve and two new districts formed, new governing boards would need to be elected for both districts, existing agreements would no longer be effective, and the county superintendent would take on a greater responsibility for the affairs of the District until such time as the two new districts are formed and all assets and liabilities of the District were resolved.

Whether dissolving the District and creating two new districts or creating a new Rancho Cordova USD from portions of the District, the district reorganization would be initiated one of two ways:

1. Unification initiated by owners of uninhabited territory, a 25% petition, or district governing boards (EC § 35700)—in which case the majority of the members of the District’s Governing Board or 25% of registered voters within the territory proposed to be reorganized would initiate the reorganization; or

2. Unification initiated by 10% petition or local agency (EC § 35721)—in which case the majority of the members of the Folsom or Rancho Cordova city councils or 10% of registered voters of the entire school district would initiate the reorganization.

Appendix A includes flowcharts created by the California Department of Education ( CDE) and included in its District Organization Handbook (Handbook). As the flowcharts show, the process from initiation of a district reorganization to completion (e.g., the two new school districts open to students) is lengthy and can take several years. However, for the purposes of this report, the analysis assumes the reorganization will be effective beginning with the 2024-25 school year.

Lastly, the California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Section ( 14 CCR §) 15378(b)(5) states that “Organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment” are not projects under the California Environmental Quality

1Elections would be needed to replace Board members in those trustee areas no longer within the District’s boundaries.

52 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 5
Act (CEQA). That said, in 1982, the State Supreme Court ruled that the reorganization of school district boundaries is within the scope of CEQA; therefore, any environmental impacts must be taken into consideration.

Background
The District boundaries encompass two cities —Folsom and Rancho Cordova —located east of downtown Sacramento in the county of Sacramento. The District serves approximately 20,550 2 TK-12 students in 21 elementary schools, 4 middle schools, 3 comprehensive high schools, and 2 continuation high schools. In addition, the District offers preschool, adult education, independent study—including a dependent charter school, and other alternative programs.

Based on the 2022- 23 enrollment data, the District’s ethnic make -up was predominantly White (37.60%), followed by Hispanic or Latino (23.37%) and Asian (20.25%) (Figure 1). Of its student population, 33.14% were classified as socioeconomically disadvantaged , 13.13% were English learners, and 12.45% were students with disabilities (Figure 2).

Note that the charter school —the Folsom Cordova Community Charter ( FCCC)—is a nonclassroom-based charter school with an enrollment of 164 students in grades TK-8 as of 2022-

23. FCCC is what is colloquially referred to as a dependent charter school, meaning that it shares a Governing Board with the District and, while a separate entity for funding and accountability purposes, is effectively treated as a school of the district. Further, FCCC is a locally funded charter school. Meaning that it generates its ow n LCFF apportionment based on its student enrollment ; however, it receives its funding through its authorizer—the District—rather than directly from the county treasurer.

As a charter school, it is not limited to the District’s boundaries and, while it is housed within the District and has locations/meeting spaces on school sites within both Folsom and Rancho Cordova, it serves students regardless of their district of residence. Currently, FCCC serves students from Amador, El Dorado, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, Sutter, and Yolo counties. While charter schools are considered separate local educational agencies (LEAs) by the state, dependent charter schools are fr equently treated as schools of their authorizing districts and the district typically provides all supports and services. Further, the authorizing district typically aggregates the charter school’s data with that of the district. Given the small number of students enrolled at FCCC and that some of the district-wide data provided by the District includes FCCC students, in some of the analyses to follow, FCCC’s enrollment is included. For example, w hen splitting enrollment between the proposed Folsom and Rancho Cordova USDs , the students are allocated based on their district of residence . However, there are a number of instances whe re the charter

2CDE 2022-23 state certified enrollment data (DataQuest), including charter school students.

53 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 6
school is listed separately. Given the small number of students enrolled, the impact of inclusion or exclusion of the students should not be determinative or significant to the results of the analysis.

Figure 1: Enrollment by Ethnicity

Figure 2: Enrollment by Subgroup

African American
927

4.51%
American Indian or
Alaska Native
51 0.25%
Asian
4,162

20.25%
Filipino
502

2.44%Hispanic or Latino
4,802

23.37%
Not Reported
86 0.42%
Pacific
Islander
143

0.70%
Two or More
Races
2,150

10.46%
White
7,727

37.60%

0.15%
30 2.74%
564

12.45%
2,559

13.13%
2,699

33.14%
6,810
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000
Foster Youth
Homeless Youth
Students with Disabilities
English Learners
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged

54 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 7
Study
For a district reorganization, a proposal for the reorganization of school districts can be approved if a county committee and/or the SBE,3 when applicable, determine that all nine statutory criteria that govern school district reorganizations, as set forth in EC § 35753(a)(1 -9), have been substantially met. The nine statutory criteria are as follows:

1. The reorganized districts will be adequate in terms of number of pupils enrolled.

2. The districts are each organized on the basis of a substantial community identity.

3. The proposal will result in an equitable division of property and facilities of the original district or districts.

4. The reorganization of the school districts will preserve each affected district’s ability to educate students in an integrated environment and will not promote racial or ethnic disc rimination or segregation.

5. Any increase in costs to the state as a result of the proposed reorganization will be insignificant and otherwise incidental to the reorganization.

6. The proposed reorganization will continue to promote sound education performance and will not significantly disrupt the educational programs in the affected districts.

7. Any increase in school facilities costs as a result of the proposed reorganization will be insignificant and otherwise incidental to the reorganization.

8. The proposed reorganization is primarily designed for purposes other than to significant ly increase property values.

9. The proposed reorganization will continue to promote sound fiscal management and not cause a substantial negative effect on the fiscal status of the affected district.

Note that the nine statutory criteria are a minimum threshold.

3The SBE has greater authority and may approve a reorganization if it determines that it is not practical or possible to apply the criteria literally and that circumstances provide an exceptional situation sufficient to ju stify approval. It should also be noted that the SBE may, but is not required to, approve reorganizations even if all nine criteria are substantially met.

55 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 8
Analysis of Nine Criteria
Criterion Number 1: Adequate Number of Pupils
Standard
EC § 35753(a)(1) specifies that the reorganized districts will be adequate in terms of number of pupils enrolled. 5 CCR § 18573 expands on this and stipulates that the projected enrollment should be at least 1,501 pupils for unified school districts, 901 for elementary school districts, and 301 pupils for high school districts. The CCR further specifies that enrollment projections are to be included in the analysis. The intent of this section is to discourage district reorganizations that result in districts that, because of small size and reduced revenues, become more dependent upon the local county office of education (COE) or the state for administrative support or funding.

Analysis and Comment
The District’s enrollment for 2022-23 was 20,550 and it is projecting its enrollment will increase to 23,201 by 2028-29. The projected enrollment for the remaining Folsom USD and the new Rancho Cordova USD shows that both districts would meet the minimum enrollment established in 5 CCR § 18573 (Figure 3). Enrollment in both districts is projected to increase over time, though Rancho Cordova USD’s enrollment is projected to experience a small decline in the short term.

Figure 3: District Enrollment
Actual Projection
2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 Folsom Cordova USD
Total Enrollment 20,605 20,602 20,096 20,344 20,550 20,763 21,429 21,824 22,219 22,691 23,201 Percent Change 1.24% -0.01% -2.46% 1.23% 1.01% 1.04% 3.21% 1.84% 1.81% 2.12% 2.25% Folsom USD
Total Enrollment 13,626 14,022 14,431 14,916 15,389 Percent Change 2.91% 2.92% 3.36% 3.17%
Rancho Cordova USD
Total Enrollment 7,803 7,802 7,788 7,775 7,812
Percent Change -0.01% -0.18% -0.17% 0.48%
Source: CDE DataQuest for actual and District-provided data for projections

56 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 9
Finding
The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met as the projected enrollment of both districts would be well above the established minimum enrollment (i.e., exceed 1,501 pupils) and the proposed district reorganization would not result in a reduction below the minimum required enrollment.

Criterion Number 2: Community Identity
Standard
The Education Code specifies that the districts must be organized on the basis of substantial community identity. The CCR expands on this requirement and states that to determine whether the new district is organized on the basis of substantial community identity, the following factors should be considered: (1) isolation; (2) geography; (3) distance between social centers; (4) distance between school centers; (5) topography; (6) weather; and (7) community, school, social ties, and other circumstances peculiar to the area.

The CDE further expanded on this criterion in its Handbook, which provides additional considerations to evaluate whether a proposed district reorganization meets the community identity criterion. Some of these considerations include topography and electoral boundaries; usage patterns for parks and school faciliti es for recreation; traffic patterns and public transportation routes; neighborhood and regional shopping patterns; and the architecture, size, and style of homes.

Analysis and Comment
As previously noted, this analysis assumes a remaining Folsom USD and a new Rancho Cordova USD. The boundaries would be approximately coterminous with the cities ’ boundaries and also including portions of unincorporated Sacramento county and the census-designated area of Mather in the case of Rancho Cordova.4 For the purposes of this report, the boundaries align with two of the District’s existing school facilities improvement districts (SFIDs)—SFID 1 (Rancho Cordova) and SFID 2 (Folsom) (see Appendix B for a map of the SFIDs) . Both cities are well established, adjacent to one another, and located along Interstate 50 in Sacramento county (Figure 4). Both are growing cities that experienced increases in population between 2010 and 2020.

The city of Folsom was incorporated in 1946 a nd had a population of 80,454 per the 2020 census.

It encompasses a total area of approximately 30 square miles and is located in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada. Folsom is the endpoint of the American River Bike Trail, which starts in Sacramento, and is home to 48 parks and 50+ miles of paved recreational trails . It has a sports

4Portions of the city of Rancho Cordova are currently served by several school districts.

57 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 10
complex featuring indoor batting cages, drop- in sports programs, and a selection of sports and fitness programs and leagues, as well as an aquatic center that is open year-round and provides a variety of swim lessons, specialty camps, and lifeguard courses.5,6 The city of Rancho Cordova was incorporated in 2003 and had a population of 79,332 per the 2020 census. It encompasses a total area of approximately 35 square miles, lies within the Sacramento Valley, and is part of the greater Sacramento Metropolitan Area. Per its website, “The community chose to incorporate to further improve its identity and quality of life, increase representation and accessibility of local government, provide greater control over local decisions affecting the community, and provide an increased level of service to residents.” The city website further notes that “Today, the city is an emerging urban center with a small -town feel. Our workforce of 65,000+ makes us one of the largest employment centers in the region, and our over 81,000 residents enjoy both new and existing homes for every budget and lifestyle.” 7 Wikipedia notes that Rancho Cordova “has a growing arts scene, a unique Barrel District, 26 miles of bike and pedestrian trails, 70 acres of creek channels and tributaries, and many free events.

Rancho Cordova has six miles of the American River, as well as Soil Born Farms and Rancho Roots, the only working urban farms in the region.” In 2010 and 2019, Rancho Cordova received the All-America City Award.8
Both cities are incorporated with distinct local governments that provide their residents with various services. They have sufficient resources around which to coalesce and the addition of individual school districts within their city boundaries would further support the community identify of each city.

5https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folsom,_California
6https://www.folsom.ca.us/government/parks-recreation
7https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/departments/about-our-city 8https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rancho_Cordova,_California

58 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 11
Figure 4: Map of Cities and Proposed District Boundaries

Folsom USD
City of Folsom
Rancho Cordova USD
City of Rancho Cordova
Mather (census-designated area)

59 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 12
The remaining Folsom USD would consist of 12 elementary schools (one of which is under construction), 2 middle schools, 2 comprehensive high schools, and 1 continuation high school.

The new Rancho Cordova USD would consist of 10 elementary schools, 2 middle schools, 1 comprehensive high school, and 1 continuation high school ( Figure 5). In addition, there are several alternative education programs that would be located within the boundaries of the new Rancho Cordova USD.

Figure 5: School List
District/School Grades District/School Grades
Folsom USD Rancho Cordova USD
Elementary Schools
Alder Creek Elementary School (ES)1 TK-5 Cordova Gardens ES TK-5 Blanche Sprentz ES TK-5 Cordova Meadows ES K-5
Carl Sundahl ES TK-5 Cordova Villa ES TK-5
Empire Oaks ES TK-5 Mather Heights ES K-5
Folsom Hills ES K-5 Navigator ES TK-5
Gold Ridge ES TK-5 Peter J Shields ES TK-5
Mangini Ranch ES TK-5 Rancho Cordova ES TK-5
Natoma Station ES K-5 Riverview STEM K-5
Oak Chan ES TK-5 White Rock ES TK-5
Russell Ranch ES K-5 Williamson ES TK-5
Sandra J Gallardo ES TK-5
Theodore Judah ES TK-5
Middle Schools
Folsom Middle School (MS) 6-8 Mills MS 6-8
Sutter MS 6-8 Mitchell MS 6-8
High Schools
Folsom High School (HS) 9-12 Cordova HS 9-12
Vista del Lago HS 9-12 Kinney HS (continuation) 9-12
Folsom Lake HS (continuation) 9-12
Alternative Programs

Innovations Academy2 K-12
FCCC3 K-8
Walnutwood HS2 7-12
Prospect Community Day School (CDS) 7-12
Cordova Lane Center PreK SDC
1Under construction
2Independent study
3Nonclassroom-based charter school

60 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 13
Note that as it pertains to the alternative programs, one of the programs is a nonclassroom -based charter school and two others are independent study programs. All three allow enrollment by and serve students from across the District and, as it pertains to the charter school, adjoining counties.

None are location dependent. Further, a number of the programs are co-located on sites with other District schools/programs and do not represent physical assets.

Finding
The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met as there is an existing community identity within each city to which residents are integrated and which already rely on their local schools for a sense of community.

Criterion Number 3: Equitable Division of Property/Facilities Standard
EC § 35753(a)(3) requires that proposed school district reorganization result in the equitable division of property and facilities. The CCR and the CDE Handbook suggest that an equitable division must include not only facilities, land, and other property, but also debt and monies due but not collected. Further, EC § 35565 states that if a dispute arises concerning the division of funds, property, or obligations, a board of arbitrators must be appointed to resolve the dispute, or the districts may mutually agree to the appointment of a sole arbitrator by the county superintendent of schools. This criterion applies when a school district reorganization results in the division of an existing district. The criterion does not apply when whole districts merge.

Analysis and Comment
If the reorganization were to proceed, there would be division of land and facilities between the two districts, which would require an equitable division of property, assets, liabilities, and fund balance reserves. It is important to note that, while the Education Code provides direction on how property, assets, and liabilities should be divided, and the county committee’s recommendation, if provided, is given weight, the ultimate decision on the division of propert y rests solely with the SBE.

Division of Property—EC § 35560 provides a general rule to guide how the division of property is to be carried out. Essentially, the Education Code provides that real and personal property will be the property of the district in which the real property is located. All other property, funds, and obligations, except bonded indebtedness, are to be divided pro rata among the districts. The basis for the division and allocation will be the assessed valuation of the part of the original district, which is included within each of the districts.

61 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 14
• Real Property
Based on the information provided by the District, the proposed reorganization would result in Folsom USD encompassing 17 school sites for a total of approximately 1.4 million square feet situated on 296 acres,9 and a total value, inclusive of buildings, land, and personal property, of $387.4 million (Figure 6).10
Figure 6: Folsom USD Properties
Property Address City
School Sites
Alder Creek ES Under construction Folsom
Blanche Sprentz ES 249 Flowers Drive Folsom
Carl Sundahl ES 9932 Inwood Road Folsom
Empire Oaks ES 1830 Bonhill Drive Folsom
Folsom HS 1655 Iron Point Road Folsom
Folsom Hills ES 106 Manseau Drive Folsom
Folsom Lake HS 955 Riley Street Folsom
Folsom MS 500 Blue Ravine Road Folsom
Gold Ridge ES 735 Halidon Way Folsom
Mangini Ranch ES 4640 Sparrow Drive Folsom
Natoma Station ES 500 Turn Pike Drive Folsom
Oak Chan ES 101 Prewett Drive Folsom
Russell Ranch ES 375 Dry Creek Road Folsom
Sandra J Gallardo ES 775 Russi Road Folsom
Sutter MS 715 Riley Street Folsom
Theodore Judah ES 101 Dean Way Folsom
Vista del Lago HS 1970 Broadstone Parkway Folsom
Rancho Cordova USD would encompass 17 school sites, as well as one closed school site and 2 District facilities for a total of approximately 1.0 million square feet and 254 acres, 11 and a total value, inclusive of buildings, land, and personal property, of $279.4 million12 (Figure 7).

9Does not include Alder Creek ES, which is under construction, as this information was not provided. 10Property replacement values as of December 2022.
11Does not include square f ootage or acreage for the new District office nor the Kitty Hawk school site as this information was not provided.
12Property replacement values as of December 2022.

62 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 15
Figure 7: Rancho Cordova USD Properties
Property Address City
School Sites
Cordova Gardens ES 2400 Dawes Street Rancho Cordova
Cordova HS 2239 Chase Drive Rancho Cordova
Cordova Lane Center 2460 Cordova Lane Rancho Cordova
Cordova Meadows ES 2550 La Loma Drive Rancho Cordova
Cordova Villa ES 10359 White Rock Road Rancho Cordova
Kinney HS 2710 Kilgore Road Rancho Cordova
Kitty Hawk School Site (closed school site) 4420 Monhegan Way Mather Mather Heights ES 4370 School Road Mather
Mills MS 10439 Coloma Road Rancho Cordova
Mitchell MS 2100 Zinfandel Drive Rancho Cordova
Navigator ES 10679 Bear Hollow Driver Gold River
Walnutwood HS 10850 Gadsten Way Rancho Cordova
Peter J Shields ES 10434 Georgetown Drive Rancho Cordova Rancho Cordova ES 2562 Chassella Way Rancho Cordova
Riverview STEM 10700 Ambassador Drive Rancho Cordova
White Rock ES 10487 White Rock Road Rancho Cordova
Williamson ES 2275 Benita Drive Rancho Cordova
Other District Property
District Office/Education Services Center 1965 Birkmont Drive Rancho Cordova Maintenance, Operations, and
Transportation 11458 Elks Circle Rancho Cordova
EC § 35575 and 35576 distinguish between the annexation/inclusion of territory containing no public school property or buildings and the annexation/inclusion of territory that does contain public school property or buildings. In this case, the re is clearly public school property that will need to be divided. As such, per EC § 35576, Rancho Cordova USD would take possession of its public school properties and buildings on the day that the reorganization becomes effective and will automatically assume a proportionate share of the District’s outstanding bonded indebtedness (see “Division of Debt” below for more detail).

While the personal property located on facilities that serve a district- wide purpose can be equitably divided (see “ Personal Property” below for more detail), the reorganization would result in the remaining Folsom USD no longer having a District Office nor maintenance, operations, and transportation facilities.

63 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 16
• Personal Property
Personal property of the District that is used for district- wide purposes and not located at or designated for use by a specific school site is subject to division of property pursuant to EC § 35560. For example, school buses are used district-wide and would therefore be subject to division, while desks at a school site would not. While a detailed list of district-wide personal property will need to be developed and an agreement reached between the two districts as to its division, the District has provided a list of all district vehicles as well as the value for contents on each property based on an appraisal completed in 2018.

The Education Code does not provide a specific method for how personal property should be distributed. The Handbook provides some methods that may be utilized to ensure an equitable division of personal property. First, the value of the property should be determined by means of an appraisal. Second, an inventory, by category, should be developed that lists the current market value of each item. Third, the property should then be distributed based on an agreed upon method that is deemed pertinent and equitable. Some examples are the ratio of assessed value that each proposed district bears to the total assessed value of the area, the LCFF entitlement per student in each proposed district, the number of school -age children residing within each proposed district, or the value and location of property.

Based on the information provided by the District, there are two locations that contain personal property which could be considered district -wide: the property that houses Maintenance, Operations, and Transportation and the District office. In addition, there are three school sites that contain programs, services, or equipment that support the District as a whole: 1) Vista de Lago High School—houses the District’s data backup center; 2) Cordova Lane Center—houses the District’s pre -K special education progr ams, the After School Education and Safety program, homeless services, and family engagement services; and 3) District office —houses the Education Services Center as well as the District’s central offices.

Figure 8 displays the two bases for allocating assets between Folsom USD and Rancho Cordova USD—enrollment and assessed valuation. On an enrollment basis, an estimated 7,803 students would attend Rancho Cordova USD representing 36.4% of the District’s enrollment.

On an assessed valuation basis, property within Rancho Cordova USD is valued at $9.7 billion compared to $19.0 billion remaining within Folsom USD.
13 The property in Rancho Cordova

13Note that calculating the assessed valuation for the proposed Rancho Cordova USD area is difficult due to the boundaries being utilized to estimate the two districts. The split between the two districts is imperfect as the total assessed value for the current District does not exactly match the proposed boundaries of the two districts. Therefore, approximately $320 million in assessed valuation that is counted within the District is not included (approximately

1.1%). As such, the value identified is an estimate based on best efforts to identify the affected areas and a more accurate analysis should be conducted if the reorganization proceeds and prior to the final division of assets.

64 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 17
USD, therefore, accounts for 33.4% of the assessed valuation of the property within the District.

Figure 8: Allocation of Assets—Enrollment and Assessed Valuation Basis Enrollment1 Assessed Valuation2
Folsom Cordova USD 21,429 $28,967,324,402
Value Percentage Value Percentage
Folsom USD 13,626 63.6% $18,971,054,005 65.5%
Rancho Cordova USD 7,803 36.4% $9,672,742,605 33.4%
1District-provided 2024-25 projected enrollment
2District-provided 2024 projected assessed valuation
As noted, the data provided did not include a detailed list of personal property, with the exception of the vehicles’ list, but it does list a total amount for the personal property contents at each location—totaling $9.1 million. Some of the items are likely site specific (e.g., furniture for these specific offices /school sites ) and would not be subject to division. However, to provide an estimate of the possible magnitude of a division, and assuming the full $9.1 million would need to be divided, approximately $5.8 million in personal property would be attributable to the remaining Folsom USD and $3.3 million to the new Rancho Cordova USD based on enrollment, and $6.0 million and $3.0 million, respectively, based on assessed valuation.

Division of Debt—As previously noted, EC § 35576 states that when property is taken from one district and annexed to, or included in, a new or acquiring district, the new or acquiring district will take possession of the real property and the reorganized territory ceases to be liable for the outstanding bonded indebtedness of the district of which it was formerly a part and automatically assumes its proportionate share of the outstanding bonded indebtedness of the district to which it becomes a part. The section further states that the new or acquiring district is liable for the greater of the following:

1. The proportionate share of the outstanding bond indebtedness of the original district (i.e., the ratio that the total assessed value of the transferring territory bears to the total assessed value of the original district).

2. The portion of the outstanding bonded indebtedness of the original district that was incurred for the acquisition or improvement of the real property, or fixtures located on the real property, located in the new district.

Therefore, the residents in the remaining Folsom USD would cease to be liable for any outstanding bonded indebtedness attributable to the new Rancho Cordova USD and vice versa.

65 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 18
As the portion of the bonded indebtedness that was incurred to acquire or improve property has not been calculated, this analysis is utilizing the proportionate share of outstanding bonded indebtedness. As noted in Figure 8, the District’s projected estimated assessed value for 2024 is $29.0 billion. The projected assessed valu ation of the remaining Folsom USD would be $19.0 billion, while it would be $9.7 billion for the proposed Rancho Cordova USD.

As it pertains to the District’s bonded indebtedness and bonding capacity, s ince 1997, the voters have approved a total of $1.3 billion in General Obligation (GO) bonds across five SFIDs (see Figure 9 for list of the SFID G O bonds approved). The SFIDs were created to align funding in specific areas of the District, which limits respective residents tax liability to improvements being completed within their SFIDs.

Figure 9: SFID General Obligation Bonds Approved
SFID Bond
Measure
Year
Approved
Amount
(in millions) Area Covered
SFID 1 Measure V 1997 $10.4 Rancho Cordova
SFID 1 Measure B 2002 $49.0 Rancho Cordova
SFID 2 Measure C 2002 $53.0 Folsom
SFID 3 Measure M 2007 $750.0 Folsom/Rancho Cordova
SFID 4 Measure N 2006 $125.0 Rancho Cordova
SFID 4 Measure P 2012 $68.0 Rancho Cordova
SFID 5 Measure G 2014 $195.0 Folsom
Total $1,250.4
Source: District-provided data
As shown in Figure 10, a s of June 30, 2023, the District had issued $481.5 million in G O bonds across the five SFIDs. The total amount of bonds a district is able to sell is determined by the total value of the property within the district’s boundaries. Based on the assessed valuation of the property to be located within its boundaries, Rancho Cordova USD would have a bonding capacity of $241.8 million, based on an assessed valuation of $9.7 billion and a statutory cap on bonding of 2.5% for unified districts. With the outstanding bonded indebtedness that it would assume, Rancho Cordova USD’s remaining bonding capacity would be $41.2 million. The remaining Folsom USD would have a bonding capacity of $474.3 million, based on an assessed valuation of $19.0 billion, with a remaining bonding capacity of $192.8 million.

66 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 19
Figure 10: Bonded Indebtedness and Bonding Capacity
Folsom
Cordova USD Folsom USD Rancho Cordova
USD
2024 Projected Assessed Valuation $28,967,324,402 $18,971,054,005 $9,672,742,605

65.5% 33.4%
Bonded Indebtedness1 $481,456,231 $281,515,677 $199,940,553

58.47% 41.53%
Bonded Indebtedness as a Percent of
Assessed Value 1.66% 1. 30% 2.76%
Available Bonding Capacity2 $724,183,110 $474,276,350 $241,818,565 Remaining Bonding Capacity $242,726,880 $192,760,673 $41,878,012 Source: District-provided data
1SFID 3 has been split 50/50

22.5% of assessed valuation
Lastly, EC § 35572 places a restriction on the taking of territory from a district if the taking would reduce the last equalized assessed valuation so that the outstanding bond indebtedness would exceed 5% of the assessed valuation remaining in the district on the date the reorganization is effective. Figure 10 shows that the proposed reorganization does not reduce the last equalized assessed valuation of the remaining Folsom USD to a point where the outstanding bond indebtedness exceeds 5% of the assessed valuation.

In addition to the division of existing debt, the District at any given time has unspent bond proceeds in its building fund(s). Per EC § 35560(a)(2), bond proceeds are funds that are subject to a pro rata division between the districts. Rancho Cordova USD is entitled to a portion of such unspent bond proceeds for use within the new unified district. Per the District’s 2022 -23 Unaudited Actuals Financial Report,14 the District had approximately $13.5 million in unspent bond proceeds, making Rancho Cordova USD’s proportionate share of these proceeds, based on assessed valuation, $4.5 million. Finally, EC § 35561 states that funds derived from the sale of bonds issued by the former district must be used “for the purposes for which the bonds were originally voted.” Therefore, the use of such funds received by Rancho Cordova USD would be restricted to projects consistent with the measure approved by District voters.

Division of Fund Balance Reserves and Liabilities—The District’s fund balance reserves, both restricted and unrestricted, and liabilities would be subject to division. The basis for the division would be either proportional average daily attendance (ADA) or assessed valuation. A reasonable basis upon which to divide fund balance reserves would be in accordance with how the funds were generated. Therefore, the General Fund unrestricted reserves and liabilities likely should be divided based on proportional ADA, while the capital project reserves should be divided based on

14Dated September 7, 2023

67 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 20
proportional assessed valuation. Special allocations may be made for other funds. For example, developer fee funds might be allocated based on where the levied property was located, while categorical funds might be allocated based on the location, enrollme nt, or ADA that generated those funds.

Figure 11 illustrates the District’s fund balances and liabilities as of June 30, 2022, as well as the proportionate share that would be attributed to Folsom USD and Rancho Cordova USD by both enrollment and assessed valuation. Rancho Cordova USD’s proportionate share of the District’s fund balances and liabilities, including postemployment benefits , ranges from $102.2 million to $111.4 million for fund balances and $241.0 million to $262.8 million for liabilities, depending on whether proportionate share is calculated on an enrollment or assessed valuation basis.

Figure 11: Fund Balances and Liabilities as of June 30, 2022 Folsom
Cordova USD Folsom USD Rancho Cordova USD
Total By
Enrollment
By Assessed
Valuation
By
Enrollment
By Assessed
Valuation

63.6% 65.5% 36.4% 33.4%
Fund Balances
General Fund $65,763,895 $41,817,439 $43,069,577 $23,946,456 $21,959,820 Building $134,433,983 $85,482,846 $88,042,455 $48,951,137 $44,890,073 Capital Facilities Fund1 $57,739,751 $36,715,108 $37,814,467 $21,024,643 $19,280,405 Bond Interest and Redemption $31,417,297 $19,977,389 $20,575,571 $11,439,908 $10,490,835 Non-Major Governmental2 $16,709,467 $10,625,087 $10,943,234 $6,084,380 $5,579,610 Total, Fund Balances $306,064,393 $194,617,869 $200,445,303 $111,446,524 $102,200,744 Liabilities
General Obligation (GO) Bonds $592,757,999 $376,918,390 $388,204,442 $215,839,609 $197,933,212 Capital Leases $602,263 $382,962 $394,429 $219,301 $201,107 Compensated Absences $1,590,767 $1,011,525 $1,041,813 $579,242 $531,187 Net Pension Liability $115,801,739 $73,635,118 $75,839,971 $42,166,621 $38,668,411 OPEB Obligations $11,105,146 $7,061,455 $7,272,896 $4,043,691 $3,708,220 Total, Liabilities $721,857,914 $459,009,450 $472,753,551 $262,848,464 $241,042,138 Minus GO Bonds & Pension Liability $13,298,176 $8,455,942 $8,709,138 $4,842,234 $4,440,515 Source: District Audit Report for fiscal year ending June 30, 2022 1The District tracks developer fee revenues and expenditures for Folsom and Rancho Cordova in F unds 25 and 26, respectively.

The balances as of June 30, 2022, in Funds 25 and 26 were $43,696,610 and $14,043,141, respectively. 2Non-major governmental includes stores inventories, categorical and food service programs, capital projects, adult education, and deferred maintenance
If fund balances in the General Fund and Non-Major Governmental Funds are allocated based on enrollment, then these funds would provide almost $30.0 million to Rancho Cordova USD, while

68 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 21
the remaining fund balances —Building, Capital Facilities Fund, and Bond Interest and Redemption—would provide $74.7 million to the new unified district based on the assessed valuation allocation factor. 15 Based on these assumptions, Rancho Cordova USD would receive $104.7 million in fund balances from the District . However, given the District does separate the capital facilities funds, it would be more appropriate to utilize actual funds balances. In which case, the three remaining fund balances would provide Rancho Cordova USD with $69.4 million— approximately $5.0 million less than the assessed valuation method—for a total of $99.5 million in total fund balances.

Similarly, if liabilities from compensated absences , N et Pension Liability, and Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB) obligations are allocated based on enrollment, then Rancho Cordova USD would be allocated $46.8 million in liabilities, plus an additional $ 201,107 from capital leases based on assessed valuation, for total liabilities of $ 46.9 million, excluding GO bonds.

Division of Student Funds and Scholarships—All student funds and those scholarship funds not restricted to a specific school site would be divided based on proportional enrollment. District - wide property is usually divided pro rata, on the basis of assessed value in each district. In most cases, however, ADA is used as the basis for the division of non- real estate assets. Student funds are also generally divided on the basis of location but may be further prorated by students. The division of non-real estate assets and student funds would be divided by the ADA or enrollment.

Postretirement Benefits—EC § 35556 states that, when a portion of the territory of a school district becomes part of another district, the employees assigned to perform their duties in the affected territory become employees of the acquiring district. (Please note that, while the Education Code presumes employees currently assigned to the schools within the proposed new Rancho Cordova USD will automatically become employees of that district, seniority rights and other provisions of the District’s existing collective bargaining agreements could alter the specific individuals that will transfer to Rancho Cordova USD.)
Rancho Cordova USD would be responsible for its proportionate share of historic OPEB , and compensated absences offered by the District as employees of the District will be employees of Rancho Cordova USD should the reorganization proceed. Proportional full-time equivalents (FTEs) employed, ADA, or enrollment are reasonable basis for division. Benefits to retirees, as of the date of the proposed reorganization , would not be affected by the reorganization. Costs for future retiree benefits would be borne solely by the respective new employers and Rancho Cordova USD could negotiate different benefit packages. As shown in Figure 11, Rancho Cordova USD’s

15Assessed valuation was deemed the most appropriate distribution methodology based on the information provided and given the funds were raised through property taxes based on GO bond s. However, this methodology does not take into consideration for which SFID the GO bonds were sold nor on which projects funds have already been expended. Therefore, the proportion of the remaining fund balance attributable to a given SFID, and therefore attributable to one district or the other, should be ascertained should the reorganization proceed.

69 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 22
proportionate share of the District’s OPEB and compensated absences ranges from $4.2 million to $4.6 million, depending on whether proportionate share is calculated on an enrollment or assessed valuation basis.

Finding
The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met as the District’s assets and liabilities could be equitably divided. While each district would need to adjust its operations and facilities to compensate for the loss of property and/or infrastructure due to the reorganization, the law provides adequate methods for equitable distribution and the appointment of a board of arbitrators or a sole arbitrator should the districts be unable to arrive at an equitable division of their own accord.

Criterion Number 4: Discrimination/Segregation
Standard
The Education Code requires that proposed reorganizations preserve the districts’ ability to educate students in an integrated educational environment and “not promote racial or ethnic discrimination or segregation.” Title 5 regulations provide further guidance, calling for an assessment of (1) the relative proportions of the racial and ethnic groups in the district(s), (2) the growth rates of these populations, (3) the school board policies to address racial and ethnic segregation and discrimination, (4) the location and traffic patterns among schools that could affect efforts to integrate affected schools, and (5) the duty of the governing board to take steps, insofar as reasonably feasible, to alleviate segregation regardless of cause.

In addition, the CDE Handbook describes segregation as a condition in which a disproportionate percentage of minority students in a district or affected school(s) occurs as a result of a proposal, making it unrealistic to provide integrated educational experiences. It states that a promotion of segregation occurs when the reorganization “changes the minority enrollment in a district of affected schools from proportionate (balanced or slightly imbalanced) to “disproportionate,” as described by the California Supreme Court. “When a disproportion of minority students occurs, minority students are isolated and deprived of an integrated educational experience, according to the holding of the court.” It further states that “any change that significantly increases the percentage of minority group students could be the controlling factor in the determination of a promotion of segregation.” The CDE Handbook notes that in the review of reorganization proposals, all minority groups are combined into one numerical quantity for comparison with the White group and that this is consistent with the definition of segregation set forth by the California Supreme Court.

Lastly, the CDE Handbook notes that the CDE developed a definition for “integrated educational environment” following several desegregation cases before the California Supreme Court:

70 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 23
“Integrated educational experience” means the process of education in a racially and ethnically diverse school that has as its goal equal opportunities for participation and achievement among all racial and ethnic groups in the academic program and other activities of the school, together with the development of attitudes, behavior, and friendship based on the recognition of dignity and value in differences as well as similarities.

This definition, as well as the definition of segregation, looks to both a quantitative characteristic and a qualitative characteristic: “so disproportionate”—the quantitative element refers to grossly disparate numbers of minority group students, resulting in denial or absence of any realistic opportunity for “integrated educational experiences” —the qualitative element. The Handbook states that an integrated educational experience “can only be developed in schools that are racially and ethnically diverse; schools in which there is not a disproportion of minority students.” Analysis and Comment
The racial and ethnic composition of both districts post reorganization was analyzed and the percentage of students in specific racial and ethnic categories was determined. Both districts, similar to the current District, would be predominantly non- White ( Figure 12). However, the percentages between White and non-White shift significantly.

Figure 12: 2022-23 District Enrollment and Ethnicity (Aggregated By White and Non-White)

The District is currently 36.38% White and 63.62% non- White. After reorganization , t he remaining Folsom USD becomes more racially integrated with an increase in the White population of 6.36% . Rancho Cordova USD, though, is significantly more homogenous with a White population of only 25.74% and a non-White population of 74.26%—an increase of 10.64% above the current District.

36.38%

42.74%

25.74%

63.62%

57.26%

74.26%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Folsom Cordova USD
Folsom USD
Rancho Cordova USD
White Non-White

71 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 24
Figure 13: 2022-23 District Enrollment and Ethnicity
Source: CDE DataQuest
African
American
American
Indian or
Alaska
Native
Asian Filipino Hispanic
or Latino
Not
Reported
Pacific
Islander
Two or
More
Races
White
Folsom Cordova USD Enrollment 910 55 4,156 445 4,939 27 109 2,841 7,711 Folsom USD Enrollment 218 38 3,463 303 1,896 4 23 1,612 5,641 Rancho Cordova USD Enrollment 690 17 689 140 3,024 23 86 1,221 2,042

4.29%

0.26%

19.61%

2.10%

23.30%

0.13%

0.51%

13.41%

36.38%

1.65%

0.29%

26.24%

2.30%

14.37%

0.03%

0.17%

12.21%

42.74%

5.23%

0.13%

5.22%

1.06%

22.91%

0.17%

0.65%

9.25%

15.47%
-
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000

72 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
25 Further, when disaggregating the data by individual racial categories ( Figure 13), it shows that both the current district and the remaining Folsom USD would continue to be predominantly White, 36.38% and 42.74%, respectively. In the after condition, the population of Asian students increases from 19.61% to 26.24%, though the total number actually declines, and that of Hispanic or Latino and African American student decreases substantially—both in terms of total number and percentage—from 23.30% to 14.37% and 4.29% to 1.65%, respectively.

On the other hand, Rancho Cordova USD becomes a majority Hispanic or Latino district (from

23.30% to 38.12%) followed by White (from 36.38% to 25.74%), African American (from 4.29% to 8.70%), and Asian (from 19.61% to 8.69%). Thus, the reorganization would result in a less integrated educational experience for the students attending Rancho Cordova USD.

SSC staff recognize that the vast majority of students attending schools in either Folsom or Rancho Cordova are attending those schools in the communities in which they reside and that the racial and ethnic makeup of the students within the two communities, and therefore the racial and ethnic makeup of the schools, aligns with the racial demographics of the two cities (Figure 14).

Figure 14: Racial Demographics
City of Folsom City of Rancho
Cordova
White 62.50% 52.20%
Black or African American 4.50% 10.90%
American Indian and Alaska Native 0.30% 1.40%
Asian 18.50% 15.10%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0.30% 0.70%
Two or More Races 10.50% 11.20%
Hispanic or Latino1 14.80% 21.40%
White, not Hispanic or Latino 55.90% 46.10%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, July 2022
1Hispanics may be of any race, so are also included in applicable race categories In addition to racial demographics, SSC staff reviewed free or reduced -price meals (FRPM) and unduplicated pupil percentage (UPP) data to get a better understanding of the socioeconomic status of students within the District. In its current state, the District had 6,728 students (32.7%) that were eligible for FRPM during the 2022-23 school year (Figure 15). Post reorganization, the remaining Folsom USD’s number and percentage of FRPM -eligible students decreases to 1,363 (10.8%), while Rancho Cordova USD’s number and percentage would be significantly higher at 5,203 (69.4%).

73 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
26 Figure 15: FRPM
FRPM
District/School Enrollment
Used for Meals
Pupil
Count Percentage
Folsom Cordova USD 20,550 6,728 32.7%

Folsom USD 12,592 1,363 10.8%
Blanche Sprentz ES 378 94 24.9%
Carl Sundahl ES 332 34 10.2%
Empire Oaks ES 378 24 6.3%
Folsom Hills ES 493 29 5.9%
Gold Ridge ES 492 83 16.9%
Mangini Ranch ES 607 23 3.8%
Natoma Station ES 489 72 14.7%
Oak Chan ES 427 35 8.2%
Russell Ranch ES 618 36 5.8%
Sandra J Gallardo ES 358 15 4.2%
Theodore Judah ES 581 143 24.6%
Folsom MS 1,340 89 6.6%
Sutter MS 1,552 231 14.9%
Folsom HS 2,718 333 12.3%
Vista del Lago HS 1,745 91 5.2%
Folsom Lake HS 84 31 36.9%
Rancho Cordova USD 7,501 5,203 69.4%
Cordova Gardens ES 274 251 91.6%
Cordova Meadows ES 331 292 88.2%
Cordova Villa ES 448 402 89.7%
Mather Heights ES 316 71 22.5%
Navigator ES 400 200 50.0%
Peter J Shields ES 311 214 68.8%
Rancho Cordova ES 423 344 81.3%
Riverview STEM 343 35 10.2%
White Rock ES 385 347 90.1%
Williamson ES 464 402 86.6%
Mills MS 818 678 82.9%
Mitchell MS 805 495 61.5%
Cordova HS 1,931 1,355 70.2%
Kinney HS 88 74 84.1%
FCCC 164 43 26.2%
Alternative Programs 457 162 35.4%
Innovations Academy 171 59 34.5%
Prospect CDS 23 19 82.6%

74 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
27 FRPM
District/School Enrollment
Used for Meals
Pupil
Count Percentage
Walnutwood HS 199 63 31.7%
Non-public non-sectarian schools 64 21 32.8%
Source: CDE DataQuest, 2022-23
Further, the UPP, which is a percentage representing a three- year average count of unduplicated pupils—students that are (1) eligible for free or reduced-price meals; (2) English language learners; and/or (3) foster youth —follows a similar traje ctory. Currently, the District’s UPP is 37.00% .

Upon reorganization, the remaining Folsom USD’s UPP would decrease to 17.37%, while Rancho Cordova USD’s UPP would increase to 61.05% ( Figure 16). (Note that the UPP , how it is calculated, and its role in funding will be discussed in more detail in Criterion 5.) Figure 16: UPP
2023-24 UPP
Folsom Cordova USD 37.00%
Folsom USD 17.37%
Rancho Cordova USD 61.05%
Source: Calculated based on District-
provided data
Similar to the racial demographics, the socioeconomic status of and disparity between the students in the District align with the socioeconomic status of the two cities. Per the U.S. Census Bureau as of July 2022, the city of Folsom had a poverty rate of 5.3% with a median household income of $134,935. Rancho Cordova USD, on the other hand, had a poverty rate of 11.6% and a median household income of $85,099.

The reorganization in and of itself is not causing the racial and socioeconomic segregation that would be experienced in Rancho Cordova USD post reorganization; however, it could further isolate the students and limit opportunities to be educated in a more integrated environment.

Currently, the District provides for intra -district transfers. Per Board Policy (BP) 5116.1, parents/guardians of any student who resides within the District boundaries can apply to enroll their child in any D istrict school, regardless of the location of residence within the District.

Applications are accepted between January and March of each year preceding the school year for which the transfer is requested. The capacity of each school is calculated and students are admitted first per the priority list included within the policy and then through a random selection process, should the requests exceed a school’s capacity.

The District also has a policy (BP 5117) pertaining to inter-district transfers to allow students from outside the District to attend. This process requires an agreement between the District and another district for the interdistrict attendance of students who are residents of the districts. The student’s

75 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
28 district of residence would then submit a permit for transfer, or the parents/guardians would submit an interdistrict transfer application. The District then reviews the request and may approve or deny the permit subject to the terms and conditions of the interdistrict transfer agreement.

During the 2022 -23 school year, the District had 1,380 students on intra -district transfers who either transferred within or out of Rancho Cordova schools. The majority of these students were moving between schools within Rancho Cordova. However, there were 332 students that moved into one of the alternative programs or the charter school and an additional 277 that transferred to schools within Folsom (Figure 17).

Figure 17: 2022-23 Intra- and Inter-District Transfers
District/School Intra-District Inter-
District Net Total
Folsom USD In Out
Blanche Sprentz ES -66 124 13 71
Carl Sundahl ES -17 6 42 31
Empire Oaks ES -78 17 5 -56
Folsom Hills ES -49 79 13 43
Gold Ridge ES -101 64 14 -23
Mangini Ranch ES -45 38 1 -6
Natoma Station ES -91 12 9 -70
Oak Chan ES -41 39 3 1
Russell Ranch ES -82 16 1 -65
Sandra J Gallardo ES -102 33 2 -67
Theodore Judah ES -93 256 38 201
Folsom MS -169 110 17 -42
Sutter MS -117 215 66 164
Folsom HS -223 399 240 416
Vista del Lago HS -277 97 5 -175
Folsom Lake HS 0 67 1 68
Total -1,551 1,572 470 491
Rancho Cordova USD In Out
Cordova Gardens ES -33 80 6 53
Cordova Meadows ES -88 11 16 -61
Cordova Villa ES -79 53 19 -7
Mather Heights ES -18 53 26 61
Navigator ES -106 30 8 -68
Peter J Shields ES -111 28 6 -77
Rancho Cordova ES -101 64 9 -28
Riverview STEM 0 249 95 344
White Rock ES -59 33 11 -15
Williamson ES -89 50 9 -30

76 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
29 District/School Intra-District Inter-
District Net Total
Mills MS -169 49 21 -99
Mitchell MS -152 116 20 -16
Cordova HS -375 4 112 -259
Kinney HS 0 83 9 92
Total -1,380 903 367 -110
Alternative Programs In Out
Walnutwood HS 0 169 16 185
Prospect CDS 0 24 0 24
Folsom Rancho
Cordova
FCCC 63 52 52 167
Innovations Academy 60 87 23 170
Total 123 332 91 546
Source: District-provided 2022-23 transfers
The District also has a number of programs that are open to students across the District outside of the intra-district transfer process. While access to these opportunities may be limited and are not guaranteed, they are available to all students within the District. These opportunities would be reduced, and in certain instances, eliminated altogether were the reorganization to occur.

Finding
The Study finds that this criterion would not be substantially met as the reorganization could exacerbate existing racial and socioeconomic disparities and segregation already inherent in the communities being served. While SSC staff recognize that the existing racial and soci oeconomic distribution is largely a result of where students reside and that the Rancho Cordova community believe that a reorganization would allow them to better serve their students, the reorganization appears to limit students’ ability to access an integrated educational experience.

Criterion Number 5: No Substantial Increase in State Costs Standard
EC § 35753(a)(5) specifies that “any increase in costs to the state as a result of the proposed reorganization will be insignificant and otherwise incidental to the reorganization.” The CDE Handbook states that there are no current regulations on the subject; however, the following factors should be considered in evaluating this condition:
a. Whether implementation of the proposal would change one or more of the affected districts’ basic aid status. A change in basic aid could increase the amount of state apportionment funds required for either the proposed new district or one or more of the remaining districts.

77 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
30 b. Additional state costs for school facilities.
c. Other state special or categorical aid programs and any increased state costs if students transferring would qualify in the gaining district and not in the losing district. d. The additional costs to the state if costs per student for special or categorical programs are higher in the gaining district.
e. The effect on the districts’ home-to-school and special education transportation costs and state reimbursements.
f. Increased costs resulting from additional school s becoming eligible for “necessary small school” funding pursuant to EC § 42280 through 42289.

The CDE handbook explicitly states that any increase in state funding due to the recalculation of the LCFF entitlements as required by EC § 35735 and 35735.1 is not applicable to the analysis of this criterion.

Analysis and Comment
In 2013-14, the state enacted a historic reform of its school finance system. In the early 1970s, in response to the California State Supreme Court’s decision in the Serrano v. Priest case, the Legislature enacted a system of general purpose funding under revenue limits and need- based or program-based funding established through numerous categorical programs. Over time, per-pupil differences in general purpose funding narrowed considerably through the revenue limit system; however, funding differences related to categorical programs remained.

As part of the 2013 Budget Act, the Legislature passed the LCFF. This historic reform of the state’s school finance system eliminated revenue limits and more than 40 categorical programs. In its place, the state established a system of funding LEAs through base grants, add-on funding for K- 3 class size reduction and career technical education, and supplemental and concentration grants to provide extra funding to districts with students from low -income families, students who are English learners, and foster youth.

The model itself was enacted in June 2013 with the signing of Assembly Bill (AB) 97 (Committee on Budget, Statutes of 2013), and revisions and clarifications were enacted in September 2013 through Senate Bill 97 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Statutes of 2013), the “clean- up” measure to AB 97. The revenue analysis for the proposed district reorganization, therefore, reflects the LCFF system.

The state, under the minimum guarantee established by Proposition 98, allocates nearly 40% of the state’s General Fund revenues to the K-14 community on an annual basis. This is split between K-12 and community colleges at an approximate rate of 89% and 11%, respectively. The 2023-24

78 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
31 Enacted Budget estimates the minimum guarantee to be $ 108.3 billion, and after accounting for $1.8 billion in set asides, allocates approximately $94.9 billion to K-12. Of the $94.9 billion, more than $75.0 billion is designated to be distributed through the LCFF. For each LEA, t he LCFF is calculated based on a number of factors including ADA, enrollment, UPP, and property taxes.

The LCFF is comprised of three components: a base grant, inclusive of grade span adjustment s, supplemental and concentration grants, and three additional add -ons—Targeted Instructional Improvement Block Grant, Home -to-School Transportation, and Transitional Kindergarten. The base grants and grade span adjustments are predefined rates, by grade span, and are uniform for all school districts and charter schools.

The supplemental and concentration grants are calculated in two parts. Under the LCFF, LEAs are eligible to receive additional funding based on the percentage of students who qualify based on one of three criteria: (1) eligible for FRPM; (2) English language learner; and (3) foster youth. The percentage, known as the UPP, is calculated by dividing the unduplicated count of eligible students (meaning a student may qualify under more than one category, but is only counted once) by the total number of students enrolled in the LEA. For each eligible student, a 20% augmentation is generated based on the grade span and the grade span adjustment, as appropriate. Once an LEA exceeds a UPP of 55%, an additional 65% augmentation is generated for each student above the 55% threshold. Figure 18 summarizes each of these components using rates for the 2023-24 fiscal year.

Figure 18: 2023-24 LCFF Components
Grade Span Base Grant
per ADA
Grade Span
Adjustment
per ADA
Supplemental
Grant per ADA
(Up To)
Concentration
Grant per ADA
(Up To)
Grades TK-3 $9,919 $1,032 $2,190 $3,203
Grades 4-6 $10,069 -- $2,014 $2,945
Grades 7-8 $10,367 -- $2,073 $3,032
Grades 9-12 $12,015 $312 $2,465 $3,606
Source: CDE LCFF funding rates
The LCFF revenues for the District are listed in Figure 19 to illustrate that a significant amount of revenues are allocated through the LCFF.

79 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
32 Figure 19: LCFF Revenues
Fiscal
Year
Base Grant +
Grade Span Adjustment
Supplemental and
Concentration
Add-Ons Total LCFF
Revenues
2020-21 $170,223,914 $12,501,244 $1,726,111 $184,451,269 2021-22 $178,726,681 $12,721,765 $1,726,111 $193,174,557 2022-23 $201,515,852 $14,343,898 $2,233,211 $218,092,961 2023-241 $216,362,012 $15,660,283 $2,354,360 $234,376,655 2024-251 $227,387,047 $16,817,546 $2,417,597 $246,622,190 Source: District-provided LCFF calculators as of August 2023 1Estimated

The total LCFF revenues column in Figure 19 represents the amount the District is guaranteed to receive annually and the amount is comprised of three components—state funding, payments from the Education Protection Account (EPA), and local property taxes, which is summarized in Figure

20. Figure 20: Fund Sources for LCFF Revenues
Fiscal
Year State Funding EPA Property Taxes Total LCFF
Revenues
2020-21 $80,015,285 $34,958,118 $69,477,866 $184,451,269 2021-22 $72,136,437 $47,487,644 $73,550,476 $193,174,557 2022-23 $121,193,557 $16,359,649 $80,539,755 $218,092,961 2023-241 $98,612,335 $58,054,001 $77,710,319 $234,376,655 2024-251 $107,859,927 $61,052,828 $77,709,435 $246,622,190 Source: District-provided LCFF calculators as of August 2023 1Estimated
Because the District’s property taxes do not exceed total LCFF revenues, less the amount of state categoricals received in 20 12-13, the District is classified as state funded, rather than basic aid.

Figure 21 illustrates that the District is solidly identified as state funded.

Figure 21: Basic Aid Eligibility
Fiscal
Year
Total LCFF
Revenues
2012-13 State
Categoricals
Difference between
LCFF Revenues and
Categoricals
Property Taxes
2023-241 $234,376,655 ($14,008,455) $220,368,200 $77,710,319 2024-251 $246,622,190 ($14,008,455) $232,613,735 $77,709,435 Source: District-provided LCFF calculators as of August 2023 1Estimated

80 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
33 Given the large gap between property taxes and guaranteed LCFF revenues, less state categorical received in 2012-13, it would appear that the proposed reorganization resulting in a new district would also yield two state-funded districts.

To illustrate the potential impact on LCFF revenues and provide an objective analysis to support the state-funded conclusion, the analysis contemplates potential LCFF scenarios for the 2023-24 and 2024-25 fiscal year. The analysis utilizes enrollment projections as of September 2023 for both fiscal years, the district-wide ADA-to-enrollment ratio, and a projected split of property tax revenues to calculate what the LCFF revenues would be if the split was effective July 1, 2024.

Even if the full amount of the 2012-13 categoricals remained with one school district, the total of $14.0 million does not approach the differences between total LCFF revenues and property taxes noted in Figure 22 that would cause either district to become basic aid.

Figure 22: Projected LCFF Revenues
2024-25 Total LCFF Revenues Property Taxes Difference
Folsom USD $157,261,808 $50,899,680 $106,362,128
Rancho Cordova USD $101,058,848 $25,954,951 $75,103,897 Source: Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) calculator with projected scenarios using enrollment as of October 2023
Although the CDE Handbook explicitly requires any reorganization study to exclude the fiscal impact as it pertains to the LCFF as an increased cost to the state except for when a basic aid district may become a state -funded district, the following will ela borate on the potential fiscal impact on each district as required by EC § 35735(a). In general, LCFF funding changes as a result of district reorganization s will have a de minimis impact to the state. The two areas where exceptions may arise are related to the UPP of each district and/or whether either district is currently in basic aid status. As noted earlier, the District is not currently basic aid and a split using the proposed boundaries is unlikely to create a district in basic aid status.

Under the LCFF, the higher an LEA’s UPP, the more it will receive in supplemental and concentration grants to fund increased and/or improved services for the targeted students (i.e., students from low-income families, English language learners, and foster youth).

Using student enrollment and UPP counts from October 2023, Figure 23 summarizes the current UPP, as well as the projected UPP if the district were to split into two separate unified districts.

The analysis assumes that the students would remain at their current schools.

81 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
34 Figure 23: Projected UPP and LCFF Funding Per Student 2023-24 UPP LCFF Funding
Per Student
Folsom Cordova USD 37.00% $12,029
Folsom USD 17.37% $11,749
Rancho Cordova USD 61.05% $12,914
Source: FCMAT calculator with projected scenarios using enrollment as of October 2023
The primary cause for the change in funding per student is the growth/decline in UPP. Under the proposed split, Rancho Cordova USD would receive more supplemental grant funding and be eligible for concentration grant funding, whereas, under the current configuration, the District’s UPP of 37.00% is not high enough to generate concentration grant funding. Conversely, the decline in UPP for Folsom USD would result in a decrease in supplemental grant funding. The assumption that Rancho Cordova USD would be eligible for the concentration grant is based on student demographics in the near-term. It is conceivable that development south of Highway 50 and west of Prairie City Road could attract residents whose children would not be identified as unduplicated pupils, thus reducing the UPP of Rancho Cordova USD. However, the impact of any such developments is not imminent and it would be premature and inconclusive to attempt to calculate the impact of any future development on Rancho Cordova USD’s UPP.

As noted earlier, the number of categorical programs was reduced significantly with the advent of the LCFF in 2013-14. In each subsequent year, however, the total number of categorical programs has grown as the Governor and Legislature continue to target new , available Proposition 98 resources outside the LCFF. This occurs during prosperous times, but the state is beginning to experience some financial turbulence so there were no new, material categorical programs in 2023- 24, and there are unlikely to be any new, material categorical programs in 2024-25. However, the basis for allocating the resources for the categori cal programs is most commonly ADA, UPP, or some combination of the two. Figure 24 summarizes the most significant categorical programs funded by the state as part of the 2022-23 Enacted Budget.

Figure 24: 2022-23 State-Funded Categorical Programs
Category Statewide
Allocation Funding Calculation
Learning Recovery Block Grant $7,936,000,000 $/ADA x 2021-22 ADA x UPP Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELO-P) $4,000,000,000 $/ADA x 2021-22 ADA Arts, Music, and Instructional Materials Block Grant $3,561,000,000 $/ADA x 2021-22 ADA Mandate Block Grant $247,000,000 $/ADA x 2021-22 ADA
Total $15,744,000,000

82 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
35 This does not represent all the categorical programs available in 2022-23, but rather, illustrates that the majority of categorical programs are awarded based on ADA. The shift of students from one combined district to two separate unified districts would not have a material impact on costs to the state, but rather, would shift the allocation between the two districts, with more , on a per- student basis, going to the higher UPP district. While it is impossible to know how the state might allocate funds in the future, the recent history shows that an allocation based on ADA is most likely. It should be noted that while ELO-P, an ongoing block grant, does provide a higher funding per ADA. The threshold for the higher funding is a UPP of 75%, and it does not appear that the reorganization would yield a district with a UPP anywhere near 75%.

Another consideration for this criterion is whether state costs would increase because of “necessary small schools.” The reorganization would not create any new schools and would not cause any of the current schools to become necessary small schools. It is worth noting that under the current configuration, none of the schools in the District are necessary small schools.

Finding
The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met , as the proposed reorg anization would not result in a significant increase in state costs as it pertains to operational revenues .

Potential increases in state costs attributable to facilities are addressed in Criterion Number 7.

Criterion Number 6: Sound Educational Program
Standard
The Education Code specifies that “the proposed reorganization will continue to promote sound education performance and will not significantly disrupt the educational programs in the districts affected by the proposed reorganization.” Title 5 regulations further specify a duty of the CDE to describe district-wide and school site programs, in school sites excluded from the reorganization proposal, that could be adversely affected by a district reorganization.

Analysis and Comment
SSC staff are not instructional experts, therefore, established statewide systems —the California School Dashboard (Dashboard), the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP), and DataQuest —have been analyzed as a proxy for the strength of each district’s educational offerings.

Dashboard—California has adopted an accountability and continuous improvement system, as prescribed by the implementation of the LCFF, that provides information on how LEAs and schools are meeting the needs of California’s students based on a set of state and local measures developed to assist in identifying strengths, weaknesses, and areas in need of improvement. The

83 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
36 multiple measures are reported through the Dashboard, which illustrates the state’s accountability system by measuring the performance of LEAs at the district, school, and pupil subgroup levels.

The new multiple measures system replaces the former Academic Performance Index, which was based solely on test results, and measures progress by the use of state and local indicators that more closely measure a student’s school environment.

State Indicators ( collected through the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System) • Academic Performance (English Language Arts/Literacy [ELA] and Math) • Chronic Absenteeism
• College/Career Readiness
• English Learner Progress
• Graduation Rate
• Suspension Rate
State indicator performance levels are bifurcated into percentile cut scores —current status and change (year -over-year progress)—which creates a five-by- five grid that produces 25 results and 5 performance levels (blue [highest], green, yellow, orange, and red [lowest]) to make an overall determination for each indicator that provides equal weight to both status and change.

Local Indicators ( entered by LEAs)
• Basic Services and Conditions
• Implementation of Academic Standards
• Parent and Family Engagement
• School Climate
• Access to a Broad Course of Study
• Coordination of Services for Expelled Students (COE only) • Coordination of Services for Foster Youth (COE only)
Local indicator performance levels are ranked using three metrics: Met, Not Met, Not Met for Two or More Years.

As shown in Figure 25, 16 the schools that would remain with in Folsom USD outperform the schools that would be part of the new Rancho Cordova USD and even the existing Folsom Cordova

16The Dashboard provides data by LEA , school site, and pupil subgroup. For this analysis, performance against the metrics was weighted by schools’ enrollment in order to develop the hypothetical Dashboard for Folsom USD and Rancho Cordova USD post reorganization.

84 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
37 USD.17 With blue and green the highest and second highest performance levels, respectively, and with green being the state targeted performance level, Folsom USD would have more performance levels at and above the targeted performance level. Folsom USD would outperform Rancho Cordova USD in all indicators, with the exception of English Learner Progress, though it should be n oted that both districts showed improvement in reducing chronic absenteeism and either improved or maintained their efforts in reducing suspension rates and increasing graduation rates.

Rancho Cordova USD would start with higher suspension and chronic absenteeism rates, so any reductions would still have it trailing behind Folsom USD, though its reduction in chronic absenteeism was more than double that of Folsom USD.

The results summarized in Figure 25 illustrate that, as it pertains to the academic performance indicators, Folsom USD has higher performance levels in both ELA and Math. While both have an orange performance level, Folsom USD’s English learners are making slightly greater progress toward English language proficiency than those at Rancho Cordova USD.

Figure 25: California School Dashboard Summary

Folsom-Cordova USD Folsom USD Rancho Cordova USD
Student
Performance Status Change Student
Performance Status Change Student
Performance Status Change
Suspension
Rate (K-12) Green Medium De clined Green Low De clined Orange High M aintained

3.4% -0.4% 1.3% -0.7% 6.8% -0.1%
English Learner
Progress (K-12) Orange Medium Declined Orange Medium Declined Orange Low Declined

46.8% -4.0% 49.8% -2.6% 44.2% -4.1%
Graduation
Rate (9-12) Green High M aintained Blue
Very
High Maintained Green Medium I ncreased

93.4% 0.5% 97.2% -0.2% 87.8% 2.0%
Chronic
Absenteeism Yellow High Declined
Significantly Green Medium Declined
Significantly Yellow
Very
High
Declined
Significantly

15.4% -6.2% 8.2% -4.1% 25.8% -9.0%
ELA (G3-8) Green Medium De clined Green High De clined Orange Low M aintained

19.1 -3.50% 57.2 -4.23% -44.9 -2.66%
Math (G3-8) Yellow Medium M aintained Blue
Very
High Maintained Orange Low M aintained
-8.40 -1.40% 32.99 1.73% -75.02 -2.17%
Source: 2023 Dashboard data—Folsom USD and Rancho Cordova USD calculated based on school -site data CAASPP—The CAASPP system was established in 2014 and replaced the Standardized Testing and Reporting program. The CAASPP system includes the Smarter Balanced Summative Assessment system, which tests students in grades 3 through 8 and 11 on ELA and Math. The Smarter Balanced Assessment system is based on the Common Core State Standards and measures

17Independent study and charter schools are not included in either Folsom USD or Rancho Cordova USD results .

85 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
38 progress toward college and career readiness. Tests are scored on a scale —Standard Not Met, Standard Nearly Met, Standard Met, and Standard Exceeded.

A review of these results ( Figure 26) shows that, similar to the Dashboard results, the schools in the remaining Folsom USD would outperform the schools in Rancho Cordova USD.18 Folsom USD schools would have a higher percentage of students meeting or exceeding the standard and a lower percentage of students nearly meeting or not meeting the standard in both ELA and Math.

For both ELA and Math, the percentage of students meeting or exceeding standards increase s substantially for the remaining Folsom USD as compared to status quo at the existing District. For example, the District has 58.41% of students meeting or exceeding the standard in ELA, while Folsom USD would have 72.77% of students in that category. The impacts to Rancho Cordova USD are equally significant. Using that same example of 58.41% of students meeting or exceeding the standard in ELA, Rancho Cordova USD would have only 33.88% of students meeting or exceeding the standard.

Figure 26: Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments Results

Rancho Cordova USD would also have a lower percentage of students than the state as a whole who meet or exceed the standard in both ELA and Math and a higher percentage that nearly meet or do not meet the standard on both tests.

While test results are not the only factor that should be considered when determining the performance of a school or district, this data does provide some indication as to the educational programs available at the schools within the two areas . This data shows that the reorganization

18Independent study and charter schools are not included in either Folsom USD or Rancho Cordova USD results.

23.31%

11.18%

44.66%

31.17% 29.26%

15.09%

52.00% 41.32%

18.27%

16.05%

21.45%

22.17% 22.52%

20.98%

24.74%

24.06%27.07%

30.45%

21.09%

25.93% 20.43%

24.38%

13.71%

17.48%

31.34%

42.32%

12.80% 20.73% 28.35%

39.56%

9.55% 17.14%
Folsom
Cordova
USD
Folsom
USD
Rancho
Cordova
USD
State Folsom
Cordova
USD
Folsom
USD
Rancho
Cordova
USD
State
ELA Math
Standard Exceeded
Standard Met
Standard Nearly Met
Standard Not Met
Source: CAASPP—2022-23

86 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
39 could have a negative impact on the educational achievement of the students within Rancho Cordova USD.

DataQuest—Through DataQuest, the CDE provides data and statistics about K -12 for schools, districts, counties, and the state. The various data reports are available for multiple subject areas including a number that are incorporated into the Dashboard—graduation, suspension, and chronic absenteeism rates. The following is a comparison of these metrics as well as teacher assignment data for the existing District, the remaining Folsom USD, and the new Rancho Cordova USD. • Graduation Rate
The remaining Folsom USD would have had a four-year adjusted cohort19 graduation rate of

97.2% as compared to 87.5% for Rancho Cordova USD. With exclusion of the continuation high schools, Folsom USD’s graduation rate would have increased to 97.3 % as compared to Rancho Cordova USD at 90.8%. The same is generally true as it pertains to the number and percentage of students meeting University of California ( UC)/California State University (CSU) requirements and those earning a seal of biliteracy and/or a Golden State Seal Merit diploma.

Figure 27: Graduation Rate
District/School Cohort
Students
Regular HS
Diploma
Graduates
Cohort
Graduation
Rate
Graduates
Meeting
UC/CSU
Requirements
Graduates
Earning a Seal
of Biliteracy
Graduates
Earning a
Golden State
Seal Merit
Diploma
Folsom Cordova USD 1,618 1,507 93.1% 824 54.7% 224 14.86% 508 33.71%

Folsom USD 1,056 1,026 97.2% 723 70.5% 176 17.15% 423 41.23% Folsom HS 596 574 96.3% 385 67.1% 133 23.17% 205 35.71% Vista del Lago HS 427 421 98.6% 338 80.3% 43 10.21% 218 51.78% Folsom Lake HS1 33 31 93.9% - - - - - -
Rancho Cordova USD 440 385 87.5% 82 21.3% 45 11.69% 67 17.40% Cordova HS 392 356 90.8% 82 23.0% 45 12.64% 67 18.82% Kinney HS1 48 29 60.4% - - - - - -
Independent Study Program
Walnutwood HS 108 89 82.4% 19 21.3% 3 3.37% 18 20.22% Source: CDE DataQuest, 2022-23
1Continuation high school

19The four-year cohort is based on the number of students who enter grade 9 for the first time adjusted by adding any student who transfers in later during grade 9 or during the next three years and subtracting any student who transfers out, emigrates to another country, transfers to a prison or juvenile facility, or dies during that same period.

87 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
40 • Suspension Rate20
The remaining Folsom USD would have a lower suspension rate (1.3%) than both the existing District (3.5%) and Rancho Cordova USD (7.1%).

Figure 28: Suspension Rate
District/School Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Suspensions
Unduplicated
Counts of
Students
Suspended1
Suspension
Rate2
Folsom Cordova USD 21,749 1,242 757 3.5%

Folsom USD 13,215 245 174 1.3%
Blanche Sprentz ES 414 0 0 0.00%
Carl Sundahl ES 343 1 1 0.30%
Empire Oaks ES 400 11 6 1.50%
Folsom Hills ES 505 0 0 0.00%
Gold Ridge ES 544 1 1 0.20%
Mangini Ranch ES 635 1 1 0.20%
Natoma Station ES 527 9 6 1.10%
Oak Chan ES 442 2 2 0.50%
Russell Ranch ES 647 4 4 0.60%
Sandra J Gallardo ES 436 3 2 0.50%
Theodore Judah ES 601 13 6 1.00%
Folsom MS 1,401 19 14 1.00%
Sutter MS 1,624 103 65 4.00%
Folsom HS 2,815 51 42 1.50%
Vista del Lago HS 1,775 14 14 0.80%
Folsom Lake HS 106 13 10 9.40%
Rancho Cordova USD 8,245 940 584 7.1%
Cordova Gardens ES 336 16 10 3.00%
Cordova Meadows ES 2,083 301 219 10.50%
Cordova Villa ES 400 47 18 4.50%
Mather Heights ES 532 45 32 6.00%
Navigator ES 332 7 6 1.80%
Peter J Shields ES 438 9 2 0.50%
Rancho Cordova ES 354 21 14 4.00%
Riverview STEM 458 23 8 1.70%
White Rock ES 357 0 0 0.00%

20The total count of suspensions and an unduplicated count of students involved in one or more incidents during the academic year who were subsequently suspended from school.

88 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
41 District/School Cumulative
Enrollment
Total
Suspensions
Unduplicated
Counts of
Students
Suspended1
Suspension
Rate2
Williamson ES 449 28 14 3.10%
Mills MS 527 54 20 3.80%
Mitchell MS 915 150 106 11.60%
Cordova HS 885 213 113 12.80%
Kinney HS 179 26 22 12.30%
Alternative Programs 945 56 27 2.9%
FCCC 217 - - -
Innovations Academy 292 1 1 0.30%
Prospect CDS 76 55 26 34.20%
Walnutwood HS 360 - - -
Source: CDE DataQuest, 2022-23
1Students who are suspended multiple times are only counted once 2The unduplicated count of students suspended divided by the cumulative enrollment • Chronic Absenteeism Rate21
Students are considered chronically absent if they are absent for 10% or more of the days they were expected to attend school. Schools within the Rancho Cordova area have higher rates of chronic absenteeism than schools within Folsom. Post reorganization, Rancho Cordova USD would have a significantly higher chronic absenteeism rate (27.5%) than Folsom USD (9.0%).

Figure 29: Chronic Absenteeism Rate
District/School
Chronic
Absenteeism
Eligible
Enrollment
Chronic
Absenteeism
Count
Chronic
Absenteeism
Rate
Folsom Cordova USD 21,319 3,404 16.0%

Folsom USD 13,050 1,175 9.0%
Blanche Sprentz ES 404 72 17.8%
Carl Sundahl ES 343 14 4.1%
Empire Oaks ES 392 33 8.4%
Folsom Hills ES 502 38 7.6%
Gold Ridge ES 524 48 9.2%
Mangini Ranch ES 632 37 5.9%

21Total count of students who were determined to be chronically absent (Chronic Absenteeism Count) divided by the count of cumulatively enrolled students who were eligible to be considered chronically absent (Chronic Absenteeism Eligible Enrollment).

89 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
42 District/School
Chronic
Absenteeism
Eligible
Enrollment
Chronic
Absenteeism
Count
Chronic
Absenteeism
Rate
Natoma Station ES 517 48 9.3%
Oak Chan ES 435 31 7.1%
Russell Ranch ES 641 36 5.6%
Sandra J Gallardo ES 430 25 5.8%
Theodore Judah ES 596 51 8.6%
Folsom MS 1,384 75 5.4%
Sutter MS 1,600 182 11.4%
Folsom HS 2,782 291 10.5%
Vista del Lago HS 1,765 122 6.9%
Folsom Lake HS 103 72 69.9%
Rancho Cordova USD 7,916 2,176 27.5%
Cordova Gardens ES 315 117 37.1%
Cordova Meadows ES 2,017 556 27.6%
Cordova Villa ES 369 115 31.2%
Mather Heights ES 500 190 38.0%
Navigator ES 325 38 11.7%
Peter J Shields ES 429 106 24.7%
Rancho Cordova ES 341 98 28.7%
Riverview STEM 441 133 30.2%
White Rock ES 352 21 6.0%
Williamson ES 423 117 27.7%
Mills MS 498 151 30.3%
Mitchell MS 881 178 20.2%
Cordova HS 858 214 24.9%
Kinney HS 167 142 85.0%
Alternative Programs 860 305 35.5%
FCCC 202 9 4.5%
Innovations Academy 279 136 48.7%
Prospect CDS 53 36 67.9%
Walnutwood HS 326 124 38.0%
Source: CDE DataQuest, 2022-23
• Teacher Assignment Monitoring
Teacher assignment monitoring provides FTE data for each classroom -based teaching assignment compared against the California Commission on Teacher Credential ’s credential authorization data, which evaluates each assignment to determine if or how the teacher is authorized to teach the assigned course and the students enrolled in the course.

90 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
43 Schools within Rancho Cordova have a lower rate of teachers authorized by a clear or preliminary credential as compared to schools in Folsom. The proposed Rancho Cordova USD would have only 63.4% of it s teachers with a clear credentialed while those in the remaining Folsom USD would have 93.1% with a clear credential.22
Figure 30: Teacher Assignment Monitoring
District/School
Total
Teaching
FTE
Clear1

District/School
Total
Teaching
FTE
Clear1
Folsom Cordova USD Rancho Cordova USD
Total 986.0 894.0 Cordova Gardens ES 17.5 13.5
Percentage 90.7% Cordova Meadows ES 21.6 18.1
Folsom USD Cordova Villa ES 25.6 23.1
Blanche Sprentz ES 20.1 19.1 Mather Heights ES 18.9 18.4 Carl Sundahl ES 18.5 18 Navigator ES 22.1 21.1
Empire Oaks ES 20.3 18.8 Peter J Shields ES 17.3 14.8
Folsom Hills ES 24.4 23.9 Rancho Cordova ES 25.4 21.9
Gold Ridge ES 26.8 25.3 Riverview STEM 16.2 15.7
Mangini Ranch ES 14.4 13.9 White Rock ES 24.3 22.3
Natoma Station ES 23.2 20.7 Williamson ES 24.2 22.7
Oak Chan ES 24.6 23.1 Mills MS 33 29.1
Russell Ranch ES 31.9 31.4 Mitchell MS 38.7 35
Sandra J Gallardo ES 20.1 19.6 Cordova HS 99.9 85.3
Theodore Judah ES 27.7 27.2 Kinney HS 9.5 8.3
Folsom MS 51.5 45.4 Total 394.2 349.3
Sutter MS 60.3 55.3 Percentage 63.4%
Folsom HS 107.3 99.6 Alternative Programs
Vista del Lago HS 74.8 69 FCCC 10.3 10.3
Folsom Lake HS 5.2 2.6 Innovations Academy 14.8 11
Total 551.1 512.9 Prospect CDS 4.5 4.3
Percentage 93.1% Walnutwood HS 11.1 6.3
Source: CDE DataQuest, 2021-22
1Assignment were authorized by a clear or preliminary
credential or authorized by a local assignment option
Total 40.7 31.9
Percentage 5.8%

The DataQuest data shows that the trend revealed with the Dashboard and CAASPP data continues—the remaining Folsom USD would have higher scores and graduation rates, lower suspension and chronic absentee rates, and more assigned teachers with a clear credential as

22This does not take into consideration the effects of the reorganization as it pertains to which district teachers are ultimately employed. This information assume teachers would remain employed within the district and at the schools to which they are currently assigned.

91 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
44 compared to the District, while Rancho Cordova USD would experience the opposite across all measures.

Educational program s—The District appears to provide a diverse set of course offerings , programs, services, and extracurricular activities for its students as shown across the next several figures.

Figure 31 provides “district -wide” programs offered at elementary school sites and programs offered at secondary school sites are listed in Figure 32. Per District staff, district-wide means that these programs are offered at select school sites and available to students attending other D istrict schools through the intra-district transfer process. A review of the list shows that 1) Folsom schools generally have a greater selection and breath of programs than Rancho Cordova schools; and 2) many of the programs are offered at a single, specific and not across multiple school sites.

Therefore, availability of the programs is limited and were the District to split, programs would need to be duplicated at the other district . Otherwise, even the limited opportunity students currently have to attend these programs through intra -district transfers would be eliminated entirely.

Appendix C includes the list of courses offered at elementary, middle, and high schools within the District separated by Folsom and Rancho Cordova schools. 23 At the elementary schools, schools in both Folsom and Rancho Cordova offer essentially the same courses with the exception of classes for a Montessori program offered at Carl Sundahl ES. Distinctions begin at the middle school level. Though the total number of courses offered is similar, there is more differentiation in the programs—likely due to the numbers of students, available course slots, as well as the student demographics and needs. While this reasoning likely continues into the high schools, there is a greater distinction between the courses offered that takes on greater importance for students and their futures after graduation. For example, no advanced placement courses are offered at Cordova HS and are only found at Folsom HS and Vista del Lago HS —both high schools in Folsom. This would be detrimental to students attending the proposed Rancho Cordova HS were the courses to remain in their current state. Obviously, the new school district could and likely would offer these and other courses, though the number of interested students and schedule availability may not allow for all courses to be provided. Further, SSC staff assume that there are currently students residing within Rancho Cordova that are attending Folsom schools to access these advance placement and other programs not available within their schools. The loss of these students could also affect schools within Folsom USD as they could lose the critical mass needed to offer some courses.

23Excludes alternative programs, including charter school, independent study, and continuation high schools.

92 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
45 Figure 31: District Offerings by School Site—Elementary Programs Folsom Schools Rancho Cordova Schools
Carl Sundahl ES Cordova Gardens ES
Montessori Program Opportunity Program
STEM Program
Empire Oaks ES
Moderate Autism Classes Cordova Meadows ES
Dream Enrichment (Early engineers, scratch coding, LEGO robotics) Community School (facilitator on site)
Young Rembrandts Art Black Student Union
Youth League Tennis
Cordova Villa ES
Folsom Hills ES Special Friends
Preschool Language Development Program Math Bowl

Gold Ridge ES Mather Heights ES
EIBT preschool and inclusion Academy
Autism SDC
Peter J Shields ES
Mangini Ranch ES ASES/Student Care
Special Education
Rancho Cordova ES
Natoma Station ES Safe School Buddies
Sped Inclusion Piolet ASES
Green Team—students eco—recycling, gardening
PC Pals (Intel) Riverview STEM
Musical Theater Science Technology Engineering and Math

Oak Chan ES White Rock ES
Counseling Enriched Program (CEP) Extended Learning Opportunities (ELO) Class size reduction in 4th and 5th grade
Sandra J Gallardo ES CA Community School
Special Education K-5
Assistive technology/Student Support Services Williamson ES Student Care Spanish, Science and Art specialists come on campus

Theodore Judah ES Cordova Lane Center
Academy State and Federal Preschool
Source: District-provided data

93 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
46 Figure 32: District Offerings by School Site—Secondary Programs Folsom Schools Rancho Cordova Schools
Folsom MS Sutter MS Mills MS Mitchell MS
Music Programs Music Programs Music Programs Music Programs Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced Band Advanced band Drumline Beginning band Beginning, Intermediate, Advanced Orchestra Orchestra Advanced Orchestra Jazz Band Jazz band Advanced Band
Choir Other Other Other
Electives WEB Flex Spanish
Student Leadership Speech and Debate Farm to Fork (pre-CTE) Sociology classes Curriculum Support Robotics Spanish Counseling Enrich Program (CEP) Speech and Debate STEM Safe School Ambassadors IB-MYP-MIDDLE YEARS PROGRAM Robotics Game Design

Clubs Clubs
Hands4Hope After school coding club
Club Live
Math Club
Science Bowl
Equity for All
Save the Planet
Introductory Model UN

Folsom HS Vista del Lago HS Cordova HS
Music Programs Music Programs Ceramics
Jazz Band Contemporary Music Ensembles JROTC
Jazz Choir Guitar Video Production
Marching Band Choir Floral Design
Orchestra Orchestra Forensics classes
CTE Pathways CTE Pathways Ethnics classes
Manufacturing, Product Innovation and Design Animation

94 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc.
47 Folsom Schools Rancho Cordova Schools
Civil and Architectural Engineering Biotechnology
Technical Theatre in Design Child Development
Introduction to Engineering Engineering Design
Principles of Engineering Film/Video Production
Other Graphic Design
Global Perspective Studies Multi-Media Production
Lacrosse Product Innovation & Design
Software & Systems Design
Other
AP Program—20 AP Courses Available
4 x 4 Block Schedule—allows students to
take 8 classes/year (32 total classes
compared to 24 on a traditional schedule)

Alternative Programs
Walnutwood HS Kinney HS Prospect CDS Innovations Academy Medical Independent Study Metals and Welding Behavior Support for all students Virtual School Adolescent Parent Program Flextime

Home Hospital Independent Study 100% Co-teach Special Education

Dual enrollment with FLC Program
Math Lab
Credit Recovery through Direct Instruction
Projects

Active Community Transitional Training
916 Ink
5th year offer to students making progress
to graduation

Source: District-provided data

95 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 48
Finding
The Study finds that this criterion would not be substantially met. The reorganization could result in a significant disruption to educational programs in the districts, especially to the smaller Rancho Cordova USD, and would have a negative impact on the educational performance of the students within Rancho Cordova USD based on the data analyzed within this Study.

Criterion Number 7: No Substantial Increase to School Facilities Costs Standard
EC § 35753(a)(7) specifies that specifies that “any increase in school facilities costs as a result of the proposed reorganization will be insignificant and otherwise incidental to the reorganization.” There are no accompanying Title 5 regulations that provide further definition or guidance for this criterion. The CDE Handbook states that if the reorganization is creating a new school district, the school facilities must be adequate to serve all grade levels . The CDE Handbook suggest the following factors should also be considered in evaluating this condition:
a. Local bonding capacity —It should be determined whether the territory transfer reduces the assessed valuation of a district to a point where the bonding capacity might be impaired. b. Developer fees—An analysis should be made of how income from developer fees might be affected. Whether developer fees have already been paid, whether they have increased or decreased because of the district losing or gaining the territory, and the impacts of the territory transfer should be determined.
c. School property—If there is school property in the area to be transferred, the impact on each district should be determined. If a school is to be transferred, it should be determined how the district losing the school will compensate for the loss of facilities. If school sites are involved, it should be determined how each district’s facility plan will be affected. d. School capacity —The analysis should take into consideration whether the schools are operating on traditional, single track, or multi-track schedules. e. Condition of existing facilities —The analysis should distinguish between permanent and portable buildings, the age of the facilities, whether or not they have been well or poorly maintained or modernized, whether they have had technological upgrades, and the conditions of the mechanical systems on the school site (e.g., HVAC). f. State School Facilities Program—It should be determined how the loss and gain of pupils will affect school districts’ eligibility for state building funding.

96 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 49
Analysis and Comment
Due to the nature of the reorganization and the fact that two unified school districts will be created, a number of the factors that would generally be applicable are rather insignificant. The creation of a new Rancho Cordova USD from the existing District does not result in any changes in total student population, meaning that it is assumed that no movement in student populations will occur if the reorganization were to go into effect. The result is that no school capacity issues are generated by the split of the current district into two districts. Figure 33 summarizes the current capacity, by school, separated between schools in Folsom USD and Rancho Cordova USD , and shows that there is sufficient capacity within each district to support not only current students, but also future growth.

Figure 33: School Capacity
District/School Enrollment Capacity

District/School Enrollment Capacity
Folsom USD Rancho Cordova USD
Blanche Sprentz ES 345 457 Cordova Gardens ES 275 495
Carl Sundahl ES 364 442 Cordova Meadows ES 304 461
Empire Oaks ES 389 673 Cordova Villa ES 455 524
Folsom Hills ES 479 673 Mather Heights ES 275 486
Gold Ridge ES 498 624 Navigator ES 436 649
Mangini Ranch ES1 1,297 693 Peter J Shields ES 457 486 Natoma Station ES 547 649 Rancho Cordova ES 416 523
Oak Chan ES 384 558 Riverview STEM 346 376
Russell Ranch ES 557 721 White Rock ES 355 630
Sandra J Gallardo ES 320 721 Williamson ES 467 597
Theodore Judah ES 571 631 Mills MS 872 1,283
Folsom MS 1,550 1,924 Mitchell MS 872 1,483
Sutter MS 1,528 2,063 Cordova HS 1,917 2,903
Folsom HS 3,015 3,269 Kinney HS 99 442
Vista del Lago HS 1,717 1,992 Walnutwood HS 195 680
Folsom Lake HS 65 136 Innovations Academy2 271 -
Total 13,626 16,626 Prospect CDS 23 136
Source: District-provided enrollment and capacity
analysis
FCCC2 138 266
Total 8,173 12,420
1Alder Creek ES, which is currently under construction, will be opening in 2024- 25 and will house students from Mangini Ranch ES
2Located on Walnutwood HS campus

97 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 50
The three salient factors that need to be addressed are local bonding capacity, developer fees, and school property. First, the local bonding capacity and whether the bonding capacity would be impaired under a reorganization was addressed in Criterion Number 3 under “Division of Debt.” Certainly, the SFID that cross es the proposed boundaries of the two districts adds a layer of complexity. However, because SFIDs were utilized, it provides a much clearer picture of where the responsibility to repay the debt resides since the proceeds of the SFIDs were used on projects within the boundaries of each respective SFIDs. Further, also discussed in Criterion Number 3, the reorganization into two unified districts would not reduce the assessed valuation of the remaining Folsom USD to the point where bonding capacity might be impaired.

Developer fee income will be heavily weighted towards Folsom USD as the district is continuing to develop the southern side of Highway 50, east of Prairie City Road . As of June 30, 2023, the District held more than $73.0 million in developer fees ($59.0 million in Fund 25 and $14.0 million in Fund 26) and projects to receive an additional $14.3 million in the 2023- 24 fiscal year. Under the current organization, the District would be able to use all these funds to accommodate growth anywhere in the District. While both the remaining and proposed district s have tremendous opportunity to continue expanding south, the majority of the new development is currently occurring within the boundaries of Folsom USD. If the reorganization were to proceed, most of the $14.3 million and additional developer fee revenues in the future would be generated and used in Folsom USD. Conversely, Rancho Cordova USD would also generate some developer fee revenue (to a lesser extent than Folsom USD in the short-term) due to growth south of Highway 50 and west of Prairie City Road.

The transfer of school property, and the fiscal impacts of that transfer, is the most significant point of interest to determine whether this criterion is substantially met. However, the focus is not on the school sites, but rather, the buildings and physical locations of centralized services. As previously noted in Criterion Number 3, under the proposed reorganization, the following locations are of district-wide interest:

Other District Property
District Office/Education Services Center 1965 Birkmont Drive Rancho Cordova Maintenance, Operations, and Transportation 11458 Elks Circle Rancho Cordova The District Office/Education Services Center is a four-story office building that houses many of the centralized services needed to operate a school district. This include s, but is not limited to, education services, human resources, business services, and information technology. Additionally, the District’s governing board convenes its meetings in the building. While it is conceivable that the two reorganized districts could share the space, that solution is not likely to be viable long - term. Further, the number of administrative staff is likely to increase if the District is divided into two separate districts. At a minimum, each reorganized district is like ly to have its own cabinet team with a superin tendent and assistant superintendent -type positions for human resources, educational services, and business services. With a projected split in enrollment of more than

98 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 51
13,000 students in Folsom USD and more than 7,000 students in Rancho Cordova USD, the other supporting divisions (e.g., food services, information technology, facilities, maintenance and operations, etc.) are going to require department leaders. Although the additional personnel costs are contemplated within other criteria , the cost of housing those employees i s the crux of this criterion. It is unclear where Folsom USD would house those employees given the District Office/Education Services Center resides with in the Rancho Cordova USD boundaries , but the question must be addressed.

The state does not currently have any available bond funds to allocate to new construction projects, but assuming a state facility bond passes in the future, Folsom USD would not be able to apply for state bond funds for the purpose of constructing a new District Office/Education Services Center.

This is because the s tate determines eligibility , in accordance with EC § 17071.75(d), by determining the delta between housed and unhoused students using enrollment projections from a district. Any funding provided by the state must be used to construct facilities to house the students and a new District Office/Education Services Center does not meet this criterion. Rather, the cost of the building will be borne by Folsom USD —either through a local ballot measure , which increases taxes, or through unrestricted dollars received by Folsom USD. It is conceivable that an arrangement can be made between Rancho Cordova USD and Folsom USD to sell the building and provide remuneration to Folsom USD. The proceeds can then be used towards the purchase of a district office in the Folsom USD boundaries , as well as a replacement district office for Rancho Cordova USD.

A similar conclusion about state bond funds can be drawn for the Maintenance, Operations , and Transportation facilities which is located within the boundaries of Rancho Cordova. The state does not provide state bond funds to construct new support services buildings. An important distinction is that a reorganization into two unified school districts does not alter the number of schools, square footage, or students to be transported. There may be a pathway where the two districts enter into a memorandum of understanding to share the physical space, but each district would retain jurisdiction over their respective employees.

Finding
The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met . This is a split of a current district into two districts and therefore, there are no substantial concerns relative to additional state costs, bonding capacity, school capacity, or developer fees. While Folsom USD will need to purchase, construct, modernize, or lease administrative facilities for the remaining distric t—which would constitute a significant expense as a direct result of the reorganization—there is no pathway for Folsom USD to apply for state bond funds to construct replacement administrative building s and the cost would therefore be borne entirely by Folsom USD. Further, there is sufficient capacity to house all students within the respective districts and , therefore, no substantial increase to school facilities costs.

99 Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 52
Criterion Number 8: Increased Property Values
Standard
EC § 35753(a)(8) specifies that “the proposed reorganization is primarily designed for purposes other than to significantly increase property values.”
The CDE Handbook further suggests that the county committee should analyze the petition for reorganization to see if the rationale for the reorganization appears “questionable or not compelling.” If the rationale does not appear compelling, the H andbook suggests that the committee “should at least consider whether increased property values might be the primary reason for the petition,” and further suggests that the county tax assessor or local real estate firms be consulted for advice on whether a proposed transfer would affect property values.

Analysis and Comment
The genesis of this Study was based on a request from the District’s Governing Board to determine if the reorganization was feasible based on the nine criteria. The District’s Governing Board held a joint special board meeting with the city councils of both Folsom and Rancho Cordova to determine if the cities would entertain a study of the nine criteria. The result of the meeting was consensus amongst the governing bodies to move forward with the Study.

Based on a review of the proposed boundaries which follow the city lines between Rancho Cordova and Folsom and the fact that all governing bodies approved the Study, it appears that the reorganization is primarily designed for purposes other than to increase property values.

Additionally, the local newspaper —The Sacramento Bee—included quotes from residents in Rancho Cordova who noted that, “Whether it be facilities to support staff to even just the way the community perceives our schools, it is entirely clear there is a lack in Rancho Cordova ,” which supports the notion that the petition is not intended to raise property values, but to allow Rancho Cordova to operate independently from Folsom.

Finding
The Study finds that this criterion would be substantially met, as the increase in property values is not the primary purpose for the proposed reorganization.

Criterion Number 9: Effect on Fiscal Status and Management Standard
EC § 35753(a)(9) specifies that the proposed reorganization “will continue to promote sound fiscal management and not cause a substantial negative effect on the fiscal status of the proposed district

100
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 53
or any existing district affected by the proposed reorganization.” The CDE Handbook further suggests that the county committee consider components from the criteria and standards adopted by the SBE pursuant to EC § 32127.

Analysis and Comment
Figure 34 reflects the 2022-23 Unaudited Actuals and 2023-24 Adopted Budget which, at the time the analysis was complete, was the most recent financial information approved by the Folsom Cordova USD Board of Education.

Figure 34: Folsom Cordova USD General Fund (Unrestricted and Restricted Funds)

2022-23
Unaudited
Actuals
2023–24
Adopted
Budget
Revenues
LCFF Revenues $218,610,934 $234,737,780
Federal Revenues $20,664,754 $12,079,180
Other State Revenues $79,898,280 $51,401,540
Other Local Revenues $10,214,416 $7,340,357
Total Revenues $329,388,384 $305,558,857
Expenditures
Certificated Nonmanagement $126,264,687 $127,198,303
Classified Nonmanagement $51,686,895 $58,471,953
Employee Benefits $70,534,316 $78,974,031
Books and Supplies $10,143,214 $12,203,858
Service/Other Operating Expenses $30,982,973 $32,641,677 Capital Expenses $9,357,587 $4,534,875
Other Outgo $1,718,471 $1,744,942
Transfer of Direct Costs -$419,820 -$415,359
Total Expenditures $300,268,322 $315,354,280
Other Financing Sources/Uses
Transfers In $110,850 $133,955
Transfer Out -$1,878,384 -$950,000
Fund Balance Change $27,352,528 -$10,611,468
Reserves
Beginning Fund Balance $65,763,894 $93,116,422
Ending Balance $93,116,422 $82,504,954
Source: District-provided data
In the 2023 -24 fiscal year , the LCFF revenues are projected to comprise more than 76% of the District’s General Fund revenues, which means that the remaining 24% is received from the federal

101
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 54
government, other funding provided by the state of California, and local revenues. Revenues from the federal government and other funding received from the state comprise 20% of the 24%.

Looking first at the projected changes to LCFF revenues, Criterion Number 5 extrapolated and analyzed the impact of a newly created district within the boundaries of Rancho Cordova . The analysis clearly showed that the new district would be the beneficiary of increased revenues per student under the LCFF due to the dramatic shift in unduplicated pupils. Figure 35 is provided to reiterate how dramatically the revenues per student would change. Although there would no adverse impact to the newly created Rancho Cordova USD , the remaining Folsom USD would experience a decline in LCFF revenues per ADA of approximately 2.9%. While the lost revenues may adversely impact the Folsom USD’s ability to increase spending in the short-term, the decline in revenues alone is not so material as to conclude that a substantial negative effect is present.

Figure 35: Projected UPP and LCFF Funding Per Student
2023-24 UPP LCFF Funding
Per Student
Folsom Cordova USD 37.00% $12,029
Folsom USD 17.37% $11,680
Rancho Cordova USD 61.05% $12,914
Source: FCMAT calculator with projected scenarios using enrollment as of October 2023
The material federal and state programs , with the exception of the Title I federal program , are allocated on a per-ADA basis which means that the creation of a new district will not impact the per student funding. For the 2023-24 fiscal year, the annual allocation for Title I is $3,163,594, or $150 per student. All Title I funds are currently being generated by schools that would be with in the boundaries of Rancho Cordova USD. However, a spl it of the District would result in both Rancho Cordova USD and Folsom USD receiving their individual allocations of Title I funding, as appropriate based on their eligibility. Assuming a downward adjustment of 20% (the change in UPP), the per student allocation in Folsom USD would be approximately $120. The net change in actual dollars would not be sufficiently material as to constitute a substantial negative effect , especially when considering that Title I funds are intended to provide additional or supplementary services to the core educational program.

The District’s 2023-24 Adopted Budget for the General Fund projects more the $264 million will be spent on personnel costs, which represents nearly 84% of the total expenditures. It is important to understand how the guidance in the CDE Handbook, while not binding unless a specific Education Code is cited, discusses the impacts of a reorganization on employee classifications.

Certificated employees cannot have their classification impacted by a reorganization and the new Rancho Cordova USD must offer employment as follows:

102
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 55
• Permanent employees assigned to a building located within the new Rancho Cordova USD must remain at the school or facility to which they had been previously assigned, unless they elect to remain with Folsom USD. (EC § 35555 and 44035) • Probationary employees assigned to a building located within the new Rancho Cordova USD must be employed by the new district unless the probationary employee is terminated by the district prior to May 15. If employment continues, the probationary status remains unchanged. (EC § 44803, 44949, and 44955)
• Permanent employees must select the district in which they choose to work before February 1 of the year in which the reorganization becomes. The request may be made to either the board of the new Rancho Cordova USD or the board of the remaining Folsom USD. (EC § 35555) • If permanent employees elect to stay with the remainder of Folsom USD in such numbers that the district does not have sufficient positions to accommodate all the employees, then the surplus employees may be dismissed in reverse order of their seniority. (EC § 44955) Classified employees cannot have their rights impacted relative to salary, leaves, and other benefits they would have enjoyed had the reorganization not occurred. Further, the following are general rules that would apply should the reorganization be successful:
• An employee of the District that is included in the new Rancho Cordova USD will become an employee of the new district. (EC § 35556[a])
• Employees of the District regularly assigned to the territory being lost to the new Rancho Cordova USD will become employees of the new district. Those whose assignments pertain to that territory, but who are not actually sited there, may elect to either remain with Folsom USD or become employees of the new Rancho Cordova USD. (EC § 35556[b]) • If a district’s territory is completely absorbed into two or more districts, regular employees will become employees of the district acquiring the respective territory. Employees not assigned to specific territory within the original district will join the district of their choice. ( EC § 35556[d])
o Note that this Education Code section does not apply under the scenario that the existing District will remain as Folsom USD and a new Rancho Cordova USD formed from portions of the District. However, should the District decide to proceed with the second option of dissolving the District and creating two entirely new school districts, then this section would be applicable.
• Employees regularly assigned to a particular school will be employees of the district in which the school is located unless the employee elects to remain with the Folsom USD .

103
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 56
(EC § 35556[e]) Certain conditions apply to the employee’s ability to remain with Folsom USD. (EC § 35556[c]) and 44035])
• In a new unified district, non-certificated employees will continue in employment for not less than two years. (EC § 45121)
The CDE Handbook also discuss the treatment of employee salaries in a new unified district. In Rancho Cordova USD, the new board has the authority to adopt salary schedules for its employees.

For certificated employees, this salary schedule may be lessor or greater than the current District’s salary schedule. However, for classified employees, the board of Rancho Cordova USD is prohibited from decreasing salaries and benefits for a period of two years (EC § 45022, 45121, and 45160).

If a dispute arises over the applicability of the remaining articles in the current collective bargaining agreement in the Rancho Cordova USD, the parties are advised to contact the Public Employees Relations Board who retains jurisdiction over employer-employee relations.

The fiscal impacts of these obligations to employees are significant. Figure 36 summarizes the breakout of personnel costs consolidated into three categories:
• Position control costs—personnel costs that are charged directly to a school site • Centralized costs —personnel costs for centralized services such as pupil supports, transportation, and maintenance and operations
• Additional costs—personnel costs that are not directly attributable to a school site, but are incurred as a result of day-to-day operation (e.g., substitutes, extra time, overtime, stipends and California State Teachers’ Retirement System On-Behalf) Figure 36: Personnel Costs
Position
Control Costs
Centralized
Costs
Additional
Costs
Total
Personnel
Costs
Folsom USD $98,158,299 $43,832,290 $8,932,309 $150,922,898 Rancho Cordova USD $83,522,783 $25,086,405 $5,112,202 $113,721,390 Total (Folsom Cordova USD) $181,681,082 $68,918,695 $14,044,510 $264,644,287 To assess the fiscal impact on each district, Figure 37 calculates the personnel costs per FTE in an attempt to translate the whole -dollar change into a percentage change based on the FTE at each district. The personnel costs associated with the position control report will remain relatively unchanged if a split were to occur as those staff work at specific school sites and the assumption is those staff will stay at their current sites. The centralized costs, additional costs, and related FTE,

104
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 57
assume a pro-rata split based on the enrollment of the two districts. I t is realistic to assume that a split into two districts will result in additional FTE in the Rancho Cordova USD. The creation of a new district will like ly require the duplication of administrative positions such as the Superintendent and department and division leaders (e.g., associate/assistant superintendents and directors), and related support staff for those positions . The additional FTE will impact the cost per FTE, but it is reasonable to assume that the additional positions will not materially alter the figures in Figure 37.

Figure 37: Personnel Costs per FTE

Total
Personnel
Costs
FTE
Average
Cost per
FTE
Average Cost
per FTE change
from current
organization
Folsom USD $150,922,898 1,526.77 $98,851 2.90%
Rancho Cordova USD $113,721,390 1,228.00 $92,607 -3.60% Total (Folsom Cordova USD) $264,644,287 2,754.77 $96,068 - Under the proposed split, the cost per FTE for Folsom USD would increase by 2.90%, while the cost per FTE for Rancho Cordova would decrease by 3.60%. These percentage changes are relative to the cost per FTE for the current composition. While the increase in personnel costs per FTE may adversely impact Folsom USD’s ability to maintain spending in the short-term, the increase alone is not so material as to conclude that a substantial negative effect is present.

The non-personnel costs make up the remaining 16% of expenditures and include costs such as instructional materials, utilities, property and liability insurance, and travel and conferences. For the purpose of this analysis, those costs have been prorated based on the projected enrollment in each of the districts and summarized in Figure 38. Because the costs are prorated on student enrollment, there is no percentage change in costs per student if a new district is created.

Figure 38: Non-Personnel Costs
Books and
Supplies
Services and
Other
Operating
Capital Outlay Total Non-
Personnel Costs
Folsom USD $7,761,654 $20,760,107 $2,884,180 $31,405,941 Rancho Cordova USD $4,442,204 $11,881,570 $1,650,695 $17,974,469 Total (Folsom Cordova USD) $12,203,858 $32,641,677 $4,534,875 $49,380,410 Individually, the changes in revenues and expenditures would not have a substantial negative effect on either district. In fact, Rancho Cordova USD’s financial outlook would improve due to increased revenues per ADA and lower personnel costs per FTE. However, the cumulative decline in revenues per ADA and the increase in personnel costs per FTE would have a substantial negative

105
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 58
impact on the Folsom USD and the district would likely need to be deliberate about budgetary solutions to offset the negative fiscal impacts.

While the regulations and CDE Handbook do not define a threshold for substantial negative effect, the Study considers that the state requires a minimum reserve of 3%. If Folsom USD maintained a minimum reserve, those reserves would be wholly exhausted in one year if the status quo continued due to the decrease in revenues per ADA and the increase in personnel costs per FTE.

Absent any changes in spending patterns, this would cause Folsom USD to file interim budgets using a “ negative” certification which means the district would not be able to meet its financial commitments in the current or subsequent fiscal year.

Finding
The Study finds that this criterion would not be substantially met. The reorganization would result in lowered revenues per ADA and increased personnel costs per FTE in Folsom USD which may lead to a substantial negative effect on the fiscal status. The lower revenues are due primarily to a shift in student demographics and the increase in personnel costs per FTE is due to more senior staff likely working in Folsom rather than in Rancho Cordova, as Rancho Cordova has more FTE per student.

Folsom Cordova Community Charter
While several of the criteria took FCCC into consideration, there are implications of the reorganization to both school districts and the charter school with regards to its oversight and current facilities.

As previously noted, FCCC is a dependent charter school of the District, who is its authorizer and, therefore, has oversight responsibility. EC § 47605(a) requires a charter school to operate within the geographic boundaries of its authorizer. Currently, FCCC’s main location is on the campus of Walnutwood HS in Rancho Cordova and, per its website, has satellite meeting spaces on both the Empire Oak ES and Folsom MS campuses . However, it is an independent study program that is not location dependent.

With the proposed reorganization, the property on which FCCC is located will transfer to the proposed Rancho Cordova USD. There is no provision in law to allow for the transfer of oversight responsibilities from one authorizer to another in the case of a district reorganization, or in any other instance. Therefore, upon the effective date of the reorganization, the charter school will be located outside of its authorizer’s geographic boundaries.

This raises two issues that will need to be addressed. First, FCCC will need to determine whether or not it will submit a new charter petition to the new Rancho Cordova USD. If the reorganization proceeds, the District may want to establish renewal of the charter school to coincide with the timing of the reorganization effective date to the extent possible —assuming it determines which

106
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 59
school district will authorize the existing charter school. The District should also contact the CDE to determine if the charter school will be treated as an existing or new charter school. Second is the issue of the facility itself should it be determined that the charter school will remain in operation and the remaining Folsom USD will be its authorizer. A new facility will need to be identified within the district.

While these items do not directly affect the nine criteria, it is important that the county committee, the charter school, the District, and representatives of the proposed Rancho Cordova USD are aware of these issues and that the charter school begin to work with the necessary parties on resolving these issues if the reorganization proceeds.

Summary and Conclusions
This Study concludes that the reorganization to split the District into two unified school districts substantially meets the following statutory criteria that guide district reorganizations, pursuant to EC § 35753(a)(1-9):
• Criterion Number 1: Adequate Number of Pupils
• Criterion Number 2: Community Identity
• Criterion Number 3: Equitable Division of Property/Facilities • Criterion Number 5: No Substantial Increase in State Costs • Criterion Number 7: No Substantial Increase to School Facility Costs • Criterion Number 8: Increased Property Values
However, the S tudy further finds that the proposed reorganization does not substantially meet , Criterion Number 4: Discrimination/Segregation, Criterion Number 6: Sound Educational Program, nor Criterion Number 9: Effect on Fiscal Status and Management.

Criterion Number 4: Discrimination/Segregation—The Study finds that this criterion would not be substantially met as the reorganization c ould exacerbate existing racial and socioeconomic disparities and segregation already inherent in the communities being served. While SSC staff recognize that the existing racial and socioeconomic distribution is largely a result of where students reside and that the Rancho Cordova community believe that a reorganization would allow them to better serve their students, the reorganization appears to limit students’ ability to access an integrated educational experience.

Criterion Number 6: Sound Educational Program —The Study finds that this criterion would not be substantially met. The reorganization c ould result in a significant disruption to educational

107
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 60
programs in the districts , especially to the smaller Rancho Cordova USD, and would have a negative impact on the educational performance of the students within Rancho Cordova USD based on the data analyzed within this Study.

Criterion Number 9: Effect on Fiscal Status and Management—The Study finds that this criterion would not be substantially met. The reorganization would result in lowered revenues per ADA and increased personnel costs per FTE in Folsom USD which may lead to a substantial negative effect on the fiscal status. The lower revenues are due primarily to a shift in student demographics and the increase in personnel costs per FTE is due to more senior staff likely working in Folsom rather than in Rancho Cordova, as Rancho Cordova has more FTE per student.

108
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 61
Appendix A—California Department of Education Flowcharts Josh – Can you
Source: California Department of Education (CDE) District Reorganization Handbook—Chapter 5, Page 16

109
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 62
Source: CDE District Reorganization Handbook—Chapter 5, Page 19

110
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 63
Appendix B—School Facilities Improvement Districts Map

111
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 64
Appendix C—Course Offerings
Elementary Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova Middle Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Homeroom 100 x x Academic Review x x
Homeroom 100 PK x x Adv Chorus x
Homeroom 1000 x x Adv Orchestra x x
Homeroom CA State Preschool Program AM x x Advanced Art 8 x x Homeroom CA State Preschool Program PM x x Advanced Band x x Homeroom Grade 1 x x Advisory x
Homeroom Grade 2 x x Advisory 6 x x
Homeroom Grade 3 x x Advisory 7 x x
Homeroom Grade 4 x x Advisory 8 x x
Homeroom Grade 5 x x Art 6 x
Homeroom Inclusive Preschool x Art 7 x x
Homeroom K Full Day x x Art 8 x x
Homeroom Montessori Kindergarten x Beginning Band x x
Homeroom Montessori Preschool x Beginning English Language Development x x Homeroom Montessori Transitional K x Beginning Orch x x Homeroom TK AM x x Chorus 6-7 x
Homeroom TK PM x x Computer Game Design x
Listening/Speaking 100/1000 x x Course 1 Honors x x
Listening/Speaking Grd 1 x x Course 2 Honors x x
Listening/Speaking Grd 2 x x Curricular Support and Study Skills x x Listening/Speaking Grd 3 x x Designated English and Trans Composition x x Listening/Speaking Grd 4 x x Drumline x
Listening/Speaking Grd 5 x x English 1000 x x
Listening/Speaking Grd K Full Day x x English 60 x x
Listening/Speaking Grd TK x x English 600 x x
Listening/Speaking Montessori K x English 70 x x

112
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 65
Elementary Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova Middle Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Listening/Speaking Montessori Preschool x English 700 x x Listening/Speaking Montessori TK x English 80 x x
Math 100/1000 x x English 800 x x
Math Grd 1 x x English Language Arts 6 x x
Math Grd 2 x x English Language Arts 7 x x
Math Grd 3 x x English Language Arts 8 x x
Math Grd 4 x x English Language Development 1 x x
Math Grd 5 x x English Language Development 2 x
Math Grd K Full Day x x Erth Science 600 x
Math Grd TK x x Exp Creative Write x x
Math Montessori K x Exp Drama x
Math Montessori Preschool x Exp Spanish x x
Math Montessori TK x Exp Technology x
Physical Education 1st x x Exploratory Art x
Physical Education 2nd x x Exploratory Art 6 x
Physical Education 3rd x x Exploratory Art 7 x
Physical Education 4th x x Exploratory Art 8 x
Physical Education 5th x x Exploratory C x
Physical Education Kindergarten x x Farm to Fork with STEAM x Reading 100/1000 x x Farm to Fork with STEAM YR x
Reading Grd 1 x x Garden and Forest x
Reading Grd 2 x x Hnr Language and Literature 6 x
Reading Grd 3 x x Hnr Language and Literature 7 x
Reading Grd 4 x x Hnr Language and Literature 8 x
Reading Grd 5 x x Honors English 6 x
Reading Grd K Full Day x x Honors English 7 x x
Reading Grd TK x x Honors English 8 x x
Reading Montessori K x Independent Living 1000 x x
Reading Montessori Preschool x Individuals and Societies 6 x

113
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 66
Elementary Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova Middle Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Reading Montessori TK x Individuals and Societies 7 x Resource Specialist RSP 5-6 x x Individuals and Societies 8 x Resource Specialist RSP K-4 x x Integrated Math 1 x x
Science 100/1000 x x Integrated Math 2 x
Science Grd 1 x x Integrated Science 6 x x
Science Grd 2 x x Integrated Science 7 x x
Science Grd 3 x x Integrated Science 8 x x
Science Grd 4 x x Intensive English 600 x
Science Grd 5 x x Intensive English 700 x
Science Grd K Full Day x x Intensive English 800 x
Science Grd TK x x Intermed Band x x
Science Montessori K x Intermed Chorus x
Science Montessori Preschool x Intermed Orch x x
Science Montessori TK x Jazz Band 6-8 x
Soc Studies 100/1000 x x Language and Literature 6 x
Soc Studies Grd 1 x x Language and Literature 7 x
Soc Studies Grd 2 x x Language and Literature 8 x
Soc Studies Grd 3 x x Life Science 700 x
Soc Studies Grd 4 x x Math 100 x
Soc Studies Grd 5 x x Math 1000 x x
Soc Studies Grd K Full Day x x Math 60 x x
Soc Studies Grd TK x x Math 600 x x
Social Studies Montessori K x Math 70 x x
Social Studies Montessori Preschool x Math 700 x x
Social Studies Montessori TK x Math 80 x x
Writing 100/1000 x x Math 800 x x
Writing Grd 1 x x Math Course 1 x x
Writing Grd 2 x x Math Course 2 x x
Writing Grd 3 x x Math Course 3 x x

114
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 67
Elementary Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova Middle Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Writing Grd 4 x x Math Lab x
Writing Grd 5 x x Media Arts MYP x
Writing Grd K Full Day x x Media Productions x
Writing Grd TK x x Phy Science 800 x
Writing Montessori K x Physical Education x
Writing Montessori Preschool x Physical Education 6 x x Writing Montessori TK x Physical Education 7 x x
Total 91 69 Physical Education 8 x x
PLTW Robotics x
Science 1000 x x
SDC DD Funcacad x
SDC DD Lang and Soc x
SDC DD Pre-Voc x
SED English 6 x x
SED English 7 x x
SED English 8 x
SED Exp 6 x
SED Exp 7 x
SED Exp 8 x
SED Math 6 x x
SED Math 7 x x
SED Math 8 x
SED Sci 6 x x
SED Sci 7 x x
SED Sci 8 x
SED Soc Sci 6 x x
SED Soc Sci 7 x x
SED Study Skills x
Soc Science 1000 x x

115
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 68
Elementary Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova Middle Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Soc Science 600 x
Soc Science 700 x
Soc Science 800 x
Social Science 6 x x
Social Science 7 x x
Social Science 8 x x
Social Skills 1000 x
Spanish 1A x x
Spanish 1B x x
Spanish 2 x
Spanish for Spanish Speakers B x
Strategic English ELL 6 x
Strategic English ELL 7 x
Strategic English ELL 8 x
Stu Asst Off x
Student Asst x x
Student Body Leadership x x
Study Skills 60 x
Study Skills 70 x
Study Skills 80 x
Training and Fitness x
Wind Ensemble x
Yearbook x
Total 102 102

116
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 69
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
2 Year Integrated Math 1A 10 x x
2 Year Integrated Math 1B 10 x x
2 Year Integrated Math 1C 10 x x
2 Year Integrated Math 1D 10 x x
3-Dimen Design 1A (P) x
3-Dimen Design 1B (P) x
3-Dimen Design 2A (P) x
3-Dimen Design 2B (P) x
3-Dimen Design 3A (P) x
3-Dimen Design 3B (P) x
Academic Review x x
Ad Drafting and Architecture (P) A x
Ad Drafting and Architecture (P) B x
Ad Product Innovation and Design A (P) x
Ad Product Innovation and Design B (P) x
Adv Algebra with Financial Apps A (P) x x
Adv Algebra with Financial Apps B (P) x x
Adv. Manufacturing and Product Design A x
Adv. Manufacturing and Product Design B x
Advanced Agriculture Floral Design A (P) x
Advanced Agriculture Floral Design B (P) x
Advanced Animal Science A (P) x
Advanced Animal Science B (P) x
Advanced Careers with Children A (P) x
Advanced Careers with Children B (P) x
Advanced Digital Video Production A x
Advanced Digital Video Production B x
Advanced Graphic Communications A (P) x
Advanced Graphic Communications B (P) x
Advanced Guitar A (P) x
Advanced Guitar B (P) x
Advanced Medical Biotechnology A (P) x
Advanced Medical Biotechnology B (P) x
Advanced Production Management A (P) x
Advanced Production Management B (P) x
Advisory 10 x
Advisory 11 x
Advisory 12 x
Advisory 9 x
Advisory 9-12 x
Aerospace Science Ldrship AFJROTC 1A x

117
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 70
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Aerospace Science Ldrship AFJROTC 1B x
Aerospace Science Ldrship AFJROTC 2A x
Aerospace Science Ldrship AFJROTC 2B x
Aerospace Science Ldrship AFJROTC 3A x
Aerospace Science Ldrship AFJROTC 3B x
Aerospace Science Ldrship AFJROTC 4A x
Aerospace Science Ldrship AFJROTC 4B x
Agriculture and Soil Chemistry (P) A x
Agriculture and Soil Chemistry (P) B x
Agriculture Leadership (P) A x
Agriculture Leadership (P) B x
Animal Science A (P) x
Animal Science B (P) x
Animation 1A (P) x
Animation 1B (P) x
Animation 2A (P) x
Animation 2B (P) x
AP 2-D Art and Design (P) A x
AP 2-D Art and Design (P) B x
AP Biology A (P) x
AP Biology B (P) x
AP Calculus AB A (P) x
AP Calculus AB B (P) x
AP Calculus BC A (P) x
AP Calculus BC B (P) x
AP Chemistry A (P) x
AP Chemistry B (P) x
AP Computer Science A (P) A x
AP Computer Science A (P) B x
AP Computer Science Principles A (P) x
AP Computer Science Principles B (P) x
AP Drawing A (P) x
AP Drawing B (P) x
AP Eng Lang/Comp A (P) x
AP Eng Lang/Comp B (P) x
AP English Lit A (P) x
AP English Lit B (P) x
AP Environmental Science A (P) x
AP Environmental Science B (P) x
AP Euro History A (P) x
AP Euro History B (P) x
AP French Lang A (P) x

118
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 71
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
AP French Lang B (P) x
AP German Lang A (P) x
AP German Lang B (P) x
AP Human Geography (P) A x
AP Human Geography (P) B x
AP Physics 1A (P) x
AP Physics 1B (P) x
AP Physics 2 A (P) x
AP Physics 2 B (P) x
AP Psychology A (P) x
AP Psychology B (P) x
AP Research A (P) x
AP Research B (P) x
AP Seminar A (P) x
AP Seminar B (P) x
AP Spanish Lang A (P) x
AP Spanish Lang B (P) x
AP Statistics A (P) x
AP Statistics B (P) x
AP US Government and Politics (P) x
AP US History A (P) x
AP US History B (P) x
AP Wrld History A (P) x
AP Wrld History B (P) x
App Psych 100 A x
App Psych 100 B x
ASB Govt/Ldrship A x x
ASB Govt/Ldrship B x x
Begin Comp A x
Begin Comp B x
Beginning English Language Development A x
Beginning English Language Development B x
Biology HL (P) 1A x
Biology HL (P) 1B x
Biology HL (P) 2A x
Biology HL (P) 2B x
Biology: The Living Earth A (P) x x
Biology: The Living Earth B (P) x x
BITA 1 Resident Commercial Constr A (P) x
BITA 1 Resident Commercial Constr B (P) x
BITA 2 Study of Mdrn Craftsmanship A (P) x
BITA 2 Study of Mdrn Craftsmanship B (P) x

119
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 72
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Business Communications Technology A (P) x
Business Communications Technology B (P) x
Business Marketing Concepts A (P) x
Business Marketing Concepts B (P) x
Business Professionals and Finance A (P) x
Business Professionals and Finance B (P) x
Careers in Adv. Mfg. and the Trades A x
Careers in Adv. Mfg. and the Trades B x
Careers with Children A (P) x
Careers with Children B (P) x
Catering Production A (P) x
Catering Production B (P) x
Ceramics 1A (P) x x
Ceramics 1B (P) x x
Ceramics 2A (P) x x
Ceramics 2B (P) x x
Ceramics 3A x
Ceramics 3A (P) x
Ceramics 3B x
Ceramics 3B (P) x
Ceramics 4A x
Ceramics 4B x
Ceramics and Sculpture 1A x
Ceramics and Sculpture 1B x
Ceramics and Sculpture 2A x
Ceramics and Sculpture 2B x
Chamber Choir A (P) x
Chamber Choir B (P) x
Chemistry of the Earth Systems A (P) x x
Chemistry of the Earth Systems B (P) x x
Child Development and Guidance A (P) x
Child Development and Guidance B (P) x
College and Career Preparation A x
Comm Service and Leadership Develop A x
Comm Service and Leadership Develop B x
Computer Applications 1A x
Computer Applications 1B x
Computer Science and Programming A (P) x
Computer Science and Programming B (P) x
Concert Band A (P) x x
Concert Band B (P) x x
Concert Choir A (P) x x

120
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 73
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Concert Choir B (P) x x
Construction Management A x
Construction Management B x
Contemp Music Ens A (P) x
Contemp Music Ens B (P) x
Course 3 - Weight Training A x x
Course 3 - Weight Training B x x
Course 3: Sports Specific Training A x
Course 3: Sports Specific Training B x
Course 4 - Yoga A x
Course 4 - Yoga B x
Course 4: Advanced Conditioning A x
Course 4: Advanced Conditioning B x
Course 4: CrossFit A x
Course 4: CrossFit B x
Credit Recovery x x
Critical Approaches to Cinema A (P) x
Critical Approaches to Cinema B (P) x
CSU ERWC 1 and 2 A (P) x
CSU ERWC 1 and 2 B (P) x
CTE Internship A x
CTE Internship B x
Culinary Arts 1A (P) x
Culinary Arts 1B (P) x
Culinary Arts 2A (P) x
Culinary Arts 2B (P) x
Designated ELD 1 A x
Designated ELD 1 B x
Dev Psych Child A (P) x
Dev Psych Child B (P) x
Digital Art 1A (P) x
Digital Art 1B (P) x
Digital Art 2A (P) x
Digital Art 2B (P) x
Digital Video Production A x
Digital Video Production B x
DP Environmental Sys /Societies SL A (P) x
DP Environmental Sys/Societies SL B(P) x
Drama 1A (P) x x
Drama 1B (P) x x
Drama 2A (P) x x
Drama 2B (P) x x

121
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 74
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Drama 3A (P) x x
Drama 3B (P) x x
Drama 4A (P) x x
Drama 4B (P) x x
Drawing and Painting 1A (P) x x
Drawing and Painting 1B (P) x x
Drivers Ed/Careers x
Drivers Ed/Safety x x
Drwng/Pntng 2A (P) x x
Drwng/Pntng 2B (P) x x
Drwng/Pntng 3A (P) x x
Drwng/Pntng 3B (P) x x
Dual Enrollment: Basic Life Support x
Dual Enrollment: Biolological Anthro. x x
Dual Enrollment: Classical Humanities x x
Dual Enrollment: College Success x x
Dual Enrollment: Intro to Health Occup. x
Dual Enrollment: Intro. to Music x x
Dual Enrollment: Medical Language x
E Business A (P) x
E Business B (P) x
Economics (P) x x
Economics APEX (P) x
Electronics and Robotics A (P) x
Electronics and Robotics B (P) x
English 10A Common Core APEX (P) x
English 10B Common Core APEX (P) x
English 1A (P) x x
English 1A 10 x
English 1A 100 x
English 1B (P) x x
English 1B 10 x
English 1B 100 x
English 2A (P) x x
English 2A 10 x
English 2B (P) x x
English 2B 10 x
English 3A (P) x x
English 3A 10 x
English 3A Common Core APEX (P) x
English 3B (P) x x
English 3B 10 x

122
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 75
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
English 3B Common Core APEX (P) x
English 4A (P) x x
English 4A 10 x
English 4A Common Core APEX (P) x
English 4B (P) x x
English 4B 10 x
English 4B Common Core APEX (P) x
English 9A Common Core APEX x
English 9B Common Core APEX x
English A 1000 x x
English B 1000 x x
English Foundations 1A 10 x x
English Foundations 1A 100 x
English Foundations 1B 10 x x
English Foundations 1B 100 x
English Foundations 2A x
English Foundations 2A 10 x x
English Foundations 2A 100 x
English Foundations 2B x
English Foundations 2B 10 x x
English Foundations 2B 100 x
English Foundations 3A 10 x x
English Foundations 3A 100 x
English Foundations 3B 10 x x
English Foundations 3B 100 x
English Foundations 4A 10 x x
English Foundations 4A 100 x
English Foundations 4B 10 x x
English Foundations 4B 100 x
English Language Development 1 A x
English Language Development 1 B x
English Language Development 2 A x
English Language Development 2 B x
Enriched Health Education A (P) x
Enriched Health Education B (P) x
Ethnic Studies (P) x
Ethnic Studies A x x
Ethnic Studies B x x
Exploring Computer Science A (P) x
Exploring Computer Science B (P) x
Film/Visual Lit A (P) x x
Film/Visual Lit B (P) x x

123
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 76
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Fine Art Photo 2A (P) x
Fine Art Photo 2B (P) x
Fine Art Photo A (P) x
Fine Art Photo B (P) x
Fitness 1A x x
Fitness 1B x x
Fitness 2 - Dance A x
Fitness 2 - Dance B x
Fitness 2 - Fit for Life A x
Fitness 2 - Fit for Life B x
Fitness 2A x x
Fitness 2B x x
Foods/Nutrition A (P) x
Foods/Nutrition B (P) x
Forensics A (P) x x
Forensics B (P) x x
French 1A (P) x x
French 1B (P) x x
French 2A (P) x x
French 2B (P) x x
French 3A (P) x x
French 3B (P) x x
French 4A (P) x
French 4B (P) x
French SL (P) 1A x
French SL (P) 1B x
French SL 2A (P) x
French SL 2B (P) x
German 1A (P) x
German 1B (P) x
German 2A (P) x
German 2B (P) x
German 3A (P) x
German 3B (P) x
Global Perspective Studies Eng (P) 4A x
Global Perspective Studies Eng (P) 4B x
Global Politics HL 1A (P) x
Global Politics HL 1B (P) x
Government (P) x x
Government APEX (P) x
Guitar A (P) x x
Guitar B (P) x x

124
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 77
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Health Education x x
Health/Sci A 1000 x x
Health/Sci B 1000 x x
High School Designated English 1A x
High School Designated English 1B x
High School Designated English 2A x
High School Designated English 2A 10 x
High School Designated English 2B x
High School Designated English 2B 10 x
High School Designated English 3A x
High School Designated English 3A 10 x
High School Designated English 3B x
High School Designated English 3B 10 x
High School Designated English 4A x
High School Designated English 4B x
Highlights of Calculus (P) A x
Highlights of Calculus (P) B x
Hnrs Chemistry of the Earth Sys 1A (P) x x
Hnrs Chemistry of the Earth Sys 1B (P) x x
Honors Biology: The Living Earth A (P) x
Honors Biology: The Living Earth B (P) x
Honors Civil Eng and Architecture A (P) x
Honors Civil Eng and Architecture B (P) x
Honors English 1A (P) x x
Honors English 1B (P) x x
Honors English 2A (P) x x
Honors English 2B (P) x x
Honors French 2 A (P) x
Honors French 2 B (P) x
Honors Manufacturing& Prod. Design A (P) x
Honors Manufacturing& Prod. Design B (P) x
Honors Physics in the Universe A (P) x
Honors Physics in the Universe B (P) x
Honors Principles of Engineering A (P) x
Honors Principles of Engineering B (P) x
Honors Spanish 2 A (P) x
Honors Spanish 2 B (P) x
Honors United States History MYP A (P) x
Honors United States History MYP B (P) x
Honors World Cultures (P) A x
Honors World Cultures (P) B x
Human Antm and Phy A (P) x x

125
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 78
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Human Antm and Phy B (P) x x
Humanities 1: Critical Thnk w Glbl (P) A x
Humanities 1: Critical Thnk w Glbl (P) B x
IB History HL (P) 1A x
IB History HL (P) 1B x
IB History HL (P) 2A x
IB History HL (P) 2B x
Ind Living A 1000 x x
Ind Living B 1000 x x
Integrated Math 1 Foundations 10 A x
Integrated Math 1 Foundations 10 B x
Integrated Math 1 Foundations A x x
Integrated Math 1 Foundations B x x
Integrated Math 1A (P) x x
Integrated Math 1A 10 x
Integrated Math 1B (P) x x
Integrated Math 1B 10 x
Integrated Math 2 Foundations A x x
Integrated Math 2 Foundations A 10 x x
Integrated Math 2 Foundations B x x
Integrated Math 2 Foundations B 10 x x
Integrated Math 2A (P) x x
Integrated Math 2B (P) x x
Integrated Math 3 Foundations A x x
Integrated Math 3 Foundations B x x
Integrated Math 3A (P) x x
Integrated Math 3B (P) x x
Inter Guitar A (P) x
Inter Guitar B (P) x
Intermediate Dance A (P) x
Intermediate Dance B (P) x
Intro TechTheatre B (P) x x
Intro TechTheatreA (P) x x
Intro to Engring Design A (P) x
Intro to Engring Design B (P) x
Intro to Innovation Product Design A (P) x
Intro to Innovation Product Design B (P) x
Intro to Kinesiology A x
Intro to Kinesiology B x
Jazz Band A (P) x x
Jazz Band B (P) x x
Jazz Choir A (P) x

126
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 79
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Jazz Choir B (P) x
Language and Literature HL (P) 1A x
Language and Literature HL (P) 1B x
Language and Literature HL (P) 2A x
Language and Literature HL (P) 2B x
Life Skills A x
Life Skills B x
Manufacturing and Product Design A (P) x
Manufacturing and Product Design B (P) x
Master Guitar Ensemble (P) A x
Master Guitar Ensemble (P) B x
Math A 100 x x
Math A 1000 x x
Math Analysis and Approach IB HL 2A(P) x
Math Analysis And Approach IB HL 2B (P) x
Math Analysis Approaches (P) IB HL 1 A x
Math Analysis Approaches (P) IB HL 1 B x
Math Apps and Interpretation IB HL 1B(P) x
Math Apps and Interpretation IB HL1A (P) x
Math Apps and Interpretation IB HL2A (P) x
Math Apps and Interpretation IB HL2B (P) x
Math B 100 x x
Math B 1000 x x
Medical Biotechnology A (P) x
Medical Biotechnology B (P) x
Multimedia Communications Intern A x
Multimedia Communications Intern B x
Multimedia Production A (P) x
Multimedia Production B (P) x
Orchestra A (P) x x
Orchestra B (P) x x
P1 Late Arrival A x x
P1 Late Arrival B x x
P2 Late Arrival A x x
P2 Late Arrival B x x
P4 Early Dismiss A x
P4 Early Dismiss B x
P5 Early Dismiss A x x
P5 Early Dismiss B x x
P6 Early Dismiss A x x
P6 Early Dismiss B x x
P7 Early Dismissal A x

127
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 80
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
P7 Early Dismissal B x
Patient Care Year 2 A (P) x
Patient Care Year 2 B (P) x
Patient Care Year One A (P) x
Patient Care Year One B (P) x
Peer Leadership A (P) x
Peer Leadership B (P) x
Personal and Prof Skills Yr 1 B (P) x
Personal and Prof Skills Yr 1A (P) x
Personal and Prof. Skills Yr 2A (P) x
Personal and Prof. Skills Yr 2B (P) x
Personal Business Finance 10 A x x
Personal Business Finance 10 B x x
Personal Business Finance A (P) x x
Personal Business Finance B (A) x x
Personal Strategic Plan x
Physics in the Universe A (P) x x
Physics in the Universe B (P) x x
Pre-Calculus A (P) x
Pre-Calculus B (P) x
Princpls of Engr A (P) x
Princpls of Engr B (P) x
Product Innovation and Design A (P) x
Product Innovation and Design B (P) x
Programming Algorithms using Python A(P) x
Programming Algorithms using Python B(P) x
Psychology (P) x x
Science Fiction in Literature (P) A x
Science Fiction in Literature (P) B x
Social Sci A 1000 x
Social Sci B 1000 x
Social Skills 1000 x
Sociology (P) x x
Sociology A (P) x
Sociology B (P) x
Spanish 1A (P) x x
Spanish 1B (P) x x
Spanish 2A (P) x x
Spanish 2B (P) x x
Spanish 3A (P) x x
Spanish 3B (P) x x
Spanish 4A (P) x

128
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 81
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
Spanish 4B (P) x
Spanish for Spanish Speakers 1 A (P) x
Spanish for Spanish Speakers 1B (P) x
Spanish for Spanish Speakers 2 A (P) x
Spanish for Spanish Speakers 2 B (P) x
Spanish for Spanish Speakers 3 A (P) x
Spanish for Spanish Speakers 3 B (P) x
Spanish SL (P) 1A x
Spanish SL (P) 1B x
Spanish SL 2A (P) x
Spanish SL 2B (P) x
Speech/Debate 1A (P) x
Speech/Debate 1B (P) x
Speech/Debate 2A (P) x
Speech/Debate 2B (P) x
Sports Medicine A x
Sports Medicine B x
Stat/Prob Solving A (P) x
Stat/Prob Solving B (P) x
Strategic Intensive Interv English A 100 x
Strategic Intensive Interv English B 100 x
Study Skills A x
Study Skills A 10 x x
Study Skills A 100 x
Study Skills B x
Study Skills B 10 x x
Study Skills B 100 x
Success 101 A x
Success 101 B x
Sustainable Agriculture Biology A (P) x
Sustainable Agriculture Biology B (P) x
TA Library A x
TA Library B x
TA Office A x x
TA Office B x x
Teacher Assist A x x
Teacher Assist B x x
Technical Theatre in Production A (P) x x
Technical Theatre in Production B (P) x x
Television Occupations 1A x
Television Occupations 1B x
The Art History of Floral Design A (P) x

129
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 82
High Schools Folsom Rancho
Cordova
The Art History of Floral Design B (P) x
Theory of Knowledge (P) A x
Theory of Knowledge (P) B x
Trigonometry A (P) x
Trigonometry B (P) x
US History A (P) x x
US History B (P) x x
US History B APEX (P) x
Video Production 1A (P) x
Video Production 1B (P) x
Video Production 2A (P) x
Video Production 2B (P) x
Video Production 3A x
Video Production 3B x
Visual Art HL (P) 1A x
Visual Art HL (P) 1B x
Visual Art HL (P) 2A x
Visual Art HL (P) 2B x
Visual Art SL (P) 1A x
Visual Art SL (P) 1B x
Visual Art SL 2A (P) x
Visual Art SL 2B (P) x
World Cultures A (P) x x
World Cultures B (P) x x
World History A APEX (P) x
World History B APEX (P) x
Wrld Geography (P) A x
Wrld Geography (P) B x
Yearbook 1A x x
Yearbook 1B x x
Total 401 328

130
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 83
Appendix D—Abbreviations
AB ...........................................Assembly Bill ADA ........................................Average Daily Attendance BP ...........................................Board Policy CAASPP ..................................California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress CCR .........................................California Code of Regulations CDE .........................................California Department of Education CEP .........................................Counseling Enriched Program CEQA ......................................California Environmental Quality Act COE .........................................County Office of Education CSU .........................................California State University Dashboard .............................California School Dashboard EC § .........................................Education Code Section ELA .........................................English Language Arts/Literacy ELO-P ......................................Expanded Learning Opportunities Program EPA .........................................Education Protection Account ES ............................................Elementary School FCCC .......................................Folsom Cordova Community Charter FCMAT ....................................Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team FRPM ......................................Free or Reduced-Price Meals FTE ..........................................Full-Time Equivalent GO ..........................................General Obligation Handbook ..............................District Organization Handbook HS ...........................................High School LCFF ........................................Local Control Funding Formula LEA .........................................Local Educational Agency MS ..........................................Middle School

131
Folsom Cordova Unified School District
Reorganization Feasibility Study January 16, 2024

© 2024 School Services of California Inc. 84
OPEB ......................................Other Postemployment Benefits SBE .........................................State Board of Education SFID ........................................School Facilities Improvement District SSC ..........................................School Services of California Inc.

Study ......................................Reorganization Feasibility Study UC ...........................................University of California UPP .........................................Unduplicated Pupil Percentage USD ........................................Unified School District

132
Quick Summary / Abstract
a
.

Adjournment
V. ADJOURNMENT
Special Joint Meeting Between FCUSD, City of Rancho Cordova, and City of Folsom 01/29/2024 - 06:00 PM
Printed: 01/25/2024 11:32 AM
133