This document provides an overview of becoming an autonomous school in the Los Angeles Unified School District. It discusses the three models of autonomy available - ESBMM, Pilot, and LIS - and summarizes their key features. The presentation reviews the history of autonomy in LAUSD and outlines the application process and requirements for each model, including engaging stakeholders, developing proposals, voting procedures, and accountability measures. The goal is for participants to understand the autonomy options and how to apply for one that best fits their school's needs.

1. 3rd Generation
Overview: Becoming an Autonomous School
Session 1
1

2. AGENDA
 Welcome, Introduction and Agenda Review
 Evolution of Autonomy
 Overview of the Models
 Available Autonomies
 Key Differences
 Wows, Wonders and Whoas Protocol
 Case Study Discussion
 Applying for an autonomy model
 Wrap Up / Next Steps
2

3. MEETING OBJECTIVES
By the end of this session, participants will have a better
understanding of:
 the history of autonomous schools in LAUSD
 the three autonomous school model options – ESBMM,
Pilot and LIS
 the autonomies available with each model
 the process and requirements for applying for each of
the models
3

4. EVOLUTION OF AUTONOMY IN LAUSD
Local School
Leadership Council
School-Based
Management
LEARN
ESBMM
PILOT
LIS
4

5. WHY AUTONOMY IN LAUSD?
“Autonomy initiatives rest
on a shared assumption
that increasing schools’
autonomy – generally
defined in policy designs
as authority over key
decisions about school
improvement – will enable
schools to develop and
implement approaches to
teaching and learning that
better build on their
strengths and address the
needs of their students
than if policy makers or
others outside schools
made those decisions”
• Tight accountability with flexibility in how
schools meet those accountabilities.
--Dr. John Deasy
• Those closest to the students—teachers,
parents, administrators—should be empowered
to have greater decision making authority.
--LAUSD, UTLA, AALA via LSSEI Agreement
• When schools own the means to their results,
they then own the results and are more likely
to improve. Autonomy is a way to engender
greater ownership at the school site.
--Rachel Bonkovsky
5

6. AUTONOMOUS SCHOOL MODELS
ESBMM
PILOT
LIS
• Expanded School Based
Management Model
• Pilot School Model
• Local Initiative Model
6

7. ESBMM: GENERAL OVERVIEW
 Established jointly between LAUSD and UTLA in April 2010 to
enhance flexibility, accountability and local control for
participating schools to promote academic excellence and full
engagement by the school community
 Set package of autonomies available to all approved schools
 Exempt from District policies and Board Rules, except those
necessary for legal compliance
 Subject to state and federal laws
 All provisions of the District-UTLA CBA apply to all members
 Remain part of the District; open to students in accordance
with student assignment plan
 Total of 23 ESBMM schools across LAUSD at all school levels
7

8. ESBMM: PRINCIPLES and PRACTICES
 Disperse Power
 Participation of many stakeholders, including parents, in the
governance of the school
 Established governance council and committees (including the SSC)
with identified roles and responsibilities such as setting the school
vision, approving the annual budget and selecting the school leader
 Emphasis on Professional Development. Support school
objectives to build capacity for change, create a professional community
and develop a shared knowledge base
 Disseminate Information. Information is shared consistently and in a
timely manner with all school stakeholders and is used to make informed
decisions regarding the organization and direction of the school.
 Effective Leadership. The principal promotes a school-wide
commitment to growth in skills and knowledge by leading,
delegating, dispersing power across the school and getting all
stakeholders to participate in the work of the school.
8

9. ESBMM: AUTONOMIES
 Financial Resources: site-based model funding determined by
the District-General Fund School Program
 Staffing: subject to restraints of CBA and District staffing policies
 Curriculum and Assessment: choose curriculum materials,
methodology or implementation that aligns with the state adopted
CCSS
 Professional Development: aligned with the instructional
program to best meet the needs school community
 Bell Schedules: maximize student learning and meets laws and
District requirements for minimal instructional minutes
9

10. ESBMM: ACCOUNTABILITY
 Accountability Metrics: establish clear accountability
measures for each area of autonomy
 Annual Review: ensure the school is on target to meet
annual improvement goals
 Formal Quality Review: in year three and every five
years thereafter unless the review reveals issues requiring
earlier follow up
10

11. PILOT: GENERAL OVERVIEW
 Created in LD 4 in February 2007, through a partnership between
LAUSD and UTLA to be models of educational innovation and to
serve as research and development sites for effective urban public
schools.
 Set package of autonomies available to all approved schools
 Subject to state and federal laws
 Stipulate the work conditions for the coming year via an Elect-to-
Work Agreement
 May waive parts of the CBA except for the following articles: IV, X, X-
A, XII, XIII, XVII, and XXVIII
 Remain part of the District; open to students in accordance with
student assignment plan
 Total of 48 Pilot schools across LAUSD at all school levels
11

12. PILOT: PRINCIPLES and PRACTICES
 Unifying Vision and Mission. Reflected in all school practices and
structures
 Equity. School communities are inclusive and ensure that practices
provide all students with opportunities to reach high levels of
achievement
 Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment. Teaching and learning
are characterized by the following attributes:

Explicit high expectations for every member of the school community

Instruction is differentiated and teachers empower students to be responsible for their
own learning

Provide a rigorous core academic curriculum to all students

Students are assessed and demonstrate their understanding of key competencies in
multiple ways, including standardized tests, exhibitions and portfolios
 Commitment to Personalization. Optimal size is between 450-550
students to enable teachers and student to build strong relationships
and a safe environment
12

13. PILOT: PRINCIPLES and PRACTICES
 Professional Collaborative Culture
 Teachers share their practice to sustain a professional
collaborative culture
 Emphasis on shared decision-making through consensus-building
and shared responsibility for student achievement
 Leadership
 People closest to the students make the school and policy
decisions
 Governing boards have increased decision-making power over the
school’s vision, budget approval, principal selection/evaluation
and local policies
 Family and Community Engagement
 Focused on respect, trust and collaboration
 Families are expected to participate as partners
 Schools form partnerships with community organizations
13

14. PILOT: AUTONOMIES
 Financial Resources: funded through a lump sum per pupil dollar allocation to make
decisions based on what programs and services best meet students’ need
 Staffing: may select and replace staff to create a unified school community and the best
learning environment for students; the CBA is in place as it pertains to RIFs in selecting
staff
 Curriculum and Assessment: may structure their A-G Curriculum and assessment
practices as long as they are equal to in rigor or better than the District’s
 Professional Development: schools decide on the professional development in which
to engage
 Calendar: freedom to modify school days and calendar years for both students and
faculty provided they meet the (1) daily and annual instructional minutes and (2) number of
instructional days required by the state
 Governance: freedom to create a governance structure that takes on increased
governing responsibilities including (1) principal selection, supervision, evaluation, with final
approval by ESC supt. And (2) set their own policies that will best help students be
successful.
14

15. PILOT: ACCOUNTABILITY
 Accountability Process: based on three categories which
articulate the criteria for a high-performing quality school:
 Unwavering focus on academic achievement
 School Culture, Climate and infrastructure that support
personalization and academic achievement
 Leadership that supports high achievement for students and staff
 Annual Review: a self-reflection and a day of classroom
observation by a team of stakeholders who provide feedback to the
school community
 Full School Review: in year three and every five years
thereafter; involves all school community members in a self study
and an external team conducts a comprehensive school visit
15

16. LIS: GENERAL OVERVIEW
 Established through the LAUSD-UTLA Local School Stabilization and
Empowerment Initiative, LSSEI, of 2011 and provides for increased
decision-making authority and empowerment of the faculty, Principal
and parents to determine various aspects of a school’s educational
program and policies.
 Allows for deliberate adoption of specific autonomy from an array of
autonomy options for local empowerment
 Granted automatic waivers from District controls and parts of the
LAUSD-UTLA CBA as needed to implement matters subject to local
determination
 Local Initiatives are to be driven solely by the imperative of continued
improvement in student achievement and quality of instruction
 Remain part of the District; open to students in accordance with student
assignment plan
 Total of 11 LIS schools across LAUSD at all school levels
16

17. LIS: AUTONOMIES
Instructional Program Autonomy: offers the following
options from which to choose
 Methods of Improving Pedagogy: methods to improve
pedagogy and student achievement, such as articulation between
grade levels/departments, intervention strategies and support
programs
 Curriculum: instructional standards, objectives and emphases
subject to State and District minimum curriculum standards
 Assessment: Local interim benchmark assessments, tests,
pacing plans, aligned with and equivalent to District requirements
and complying with any State and Federal requirements
 Professional Development: aligned with the Single Plan for
Student Achievement except as to training related to
legal/compliance mandates
17

18. LIS: AUTONOMIES
Internal Organization and Operations: schools may
choose to exercise autonomy over the following areas
 Schedule: refers to daily instructional days/minutes, school
activities and events, and special schedules to accommodate
additional prep time for elementary teachers subject to District
mandated minimum number of school days, instructional
minutes and calendar requirements
 Internal Organization: such as division into academies,
SLCs, houses within the assigned student population
 Budget: provides general fund budget control pursuant to
District’s evolving site based funding system-General School
Fund Program
18

19. LIS: AUTONOMIES
Internal Organization and Operations: schools may
choose to exercise autonomy over the following areas
 Health and Safety: aligned with District-wide health/safety
mandates
 Re-adoption in the Local Initiative School Program:
any current special conditions/waivers already applicable to the
school pursuant to SBM, ESBMM, Pilot or other arrangements
 Adoption of Separate Waiver Plans: Pilot program or
ESBMM subject to each programs requirements
 Discipline & Code of Conduct: aligned with the District-wide
standards and rules governing student conduct, suspensions,
expulsions and transfers.
19

20. LIS: AUTONOMIES
Staffing: three available areas of autonomy in regards to the
staffing
 Mutual Consent: no district mandated priority placements at the
school site; schools must comply with the return rights or other
placement rights to the school
 Teacher Assignments: determine assignment of teachers to
grade levels, departments, subjects and classes, (looping, teamteaching, ungraded or multi-age classrooms)
 Staff Appointments: selecting grade level or department chairs,
coordinators, deans, instructional coaches, etc.
20

21. LIS: ACCOUNTABILITY
The monitoring process and tools are in the process of
being developed.
21

22. 22

23. KEY DIFFERENCES IN MODELS
ESBMM
Pilot
LIS
Contract remains intact
Waive some articles of the contracthours, working conditions
Waivers from Article IX-A
(assignments)
May use non-District curriculum that
meets State requirements and
material approvals
May use non-District curriculum that
meets State requirements
Locally determined curriculum
that meets State & minimum District
requirements
Local School Leadership Council
School Site Council (Categorical)
Governing School Council
LSLC unless waiver requested
School Site Council (Categorical)
Bell schedule
School calendar & bell schedule
Bell schedule
General School Fund Program
General School Fund Program or
Lump sum allocation
General School Fund Program
“Mutual Consent”
Staff Selection via the EWA
“Mutual Consent” and internal
process for Teacher Assignments and
Appointed Positions
• Annual School Review
• Quality Review
• Annual Review
• Full School Review
Under Development
Superintendent
Pilot School Steering Committee and
LAUSD Board
School site through a petition and
vote
23

24. 24

25. 25

26. 26

27. ESTABLISHING AN ESBMM SCHOOL
Planning Phase
• Attend training to learn more about the ESBM model
• Develop an outreach plan that includes involvement and engagement of all
school community stakeholders in the decision to pursue the model
• Document all engagement efforts (e.g., meeting agendas, notes, etc.)
• Seek approval from the Leadership Council to pursue the ESBM model
Plan Development
• Identify a team who will support the writing and development of the proposal
• Submit a Letter of Intent and write the proposal
• Continue to engage all school community stakeholders in the development of
the proposal; must host a minimum of three (3) different meetings at various
times with parents and community members; document all meetings
• Periodically share draft proposal with all staff and gather feedback
27

28. ESTABLISHING AN ESBMM SCHOOL
Voting Requirements
• Share final proposal shared with all staff
• Conduct and document staff vote; Proposal is approved if 67% of UTLA
bargaining unit members who work at least 50% of the time at the site
vote in favor
Proposal Submission and Approval
• Submit plan for approval
• School receives written notification from the Superintendent or the
Designee regarding next steps relative to the proposal submitted
28

29. ESTABLISHING A PILOT SCHOOL
Planning Phase
• Attend orientation meeting hosted by the District
Plan Development
• Identify a team who will support the development of the proposal
• Submit a Letter of Intent and write the proposal
• Periodically share draft proposal with all staff and gather feedback
Voting Requirements
• Conduct and document staff vote; Proposal is approved if 67% of UTLA
bargaining unit members who work at least 50% of the time at the site vote in
favor
Proposal Submission and Approval
• Proposal reviewed by the Pilot School Steering Committee (PSSC)
• Teams may be invited by the PSSC to participate in a meeting to discuss
proposal or asked to re-write sections of the proposal
• Proposals approved by the PSSC go to the Board of Education for approval
• Receive written notification of the Board of Education decision
29

30. ESTABLISHING A LIS SCHOOL
 Attend autonomy workshops
 Submit a Letter of Intent
 Engage all school staff, parents and community in the






process
Conduct a Petition;
Secure principal concurrence
Write a proposal
Provide proposal to staff at least 10 days before the election
Conduct a faculty meeting to discuss the proposal
Hold election-requires 60% of the votes cast in favor of the
proposal
30

31. ESTABLISHING A LIS SCHOOL
Planning Phase
 Attend Autonomy workshops hosted by the Local Options Oversight
Committee (LOOC).
 Submit a Letter of Intent
 Review the current Single Plan for Student Achievement as well as other
relevant school data and proceed through a systematic analysis of the
existing data.
 Engage school staff, family and community members in the data analysis
process (ongoing) and collect documentation of that engagement, attaching
staff and parent meeting agendas. Sign-in sheets and other evidence.
 Inform staff, parents, community members, and students (in the case of
high schools) of the Autonomy options offered to LAUSD schools.
 Conduct the petition process and gain the concurrence of the principal.
31

32. ESTABLISHING A LIS SCHOOL
Proposal Development
 Develop and finalize the proposal
 Continue to engage all school community stakeholders in the
development of the proposal; document all meetings
Voting Requirements
 Submit final proposal to the faculty ten working days before a vote
 Convene at least one faculty meeting prior to the day of voting to
review and discuss the merits of the proposal
 Adoption of the LIS model requires an affirmative vote of 60% of the
votes cast. Voter eligibility is limited to the UTLA-represented
certificated staff assigned full-time to the school. The voting shall be
by secret ballot, supervised jointly by the Principal and the Chapter
Chair.
32

33. 33

34. WRAP UP AND NEXT STEPS
• Review materials included in the packet
– Agenda
– History of Autonomous Schools in LAUSD
– Timeline
• Feedback Form
• List of future Sessions
– Mandatory sessions
– Optional Sessions
• Salary Point Opportunity
34