Supervisors approve $26 million in student-success funds amid questions about SFUSD closures and oversight

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Sept. 24 approved a $26 million allocation from the city's Student Success Fund to support school innovation projects, readiness grants and districtwide supports, amid sustained questioning from supervisors about transparency at the San Francisco Unified School District and how the money will follow students if schools are closed or consolidated.

The board voted "same house, same call" to adopt the resolution after extended debate during which several supervisors — including Shamal Walton, Rafael Mandelman, and Matt Ronan — pressed Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families Director Maria Sue and her staff to explain how schools were selected, what safeguards were in place to protect vulnerable students, and how funds would be redirected if a school receiving grants were later closed.

City officials said the $26 million is part of a $35 million allocation for fiscal year 2024-25. Maria Sue told the supervisors that $26 million goes directly to the school district to fund three main "buckets": school innovation projects, grants to support schools becoming implementation sites, and districtwide efforts. She said a small portion remains at DCYF for technical assistance, capacity building and data analysis.

Supervisor Walton and others repeatedly asked why the board should release funding before the district publicly finalized and shared a list of schools that might be closed or merged. Maria Sue said the readiness grants and other funds target 58 schools identified as highest-need under DCYF's risk and target-population metrics, and argued some interventions'1ike reading specialists, math supports and mental-health staff'are needed immediately and would benefit students even if, later, a school undergoes a transition.

Director Sue and Chief of Staff Charice Dorsey Smith described contingency steps: if a school closes or merges, DCYF said it would analyze gaps, identify "welcoming" schools where families would move, and attempt to ensure continuity of services so supports "follow the kids." Officials said readiness grants emphasize planning and capacity building so sites can apply for larger implementation grants, and noted community school coordinator roles can be filled by district, nonprofit or Beacon program staff.

Several supervisors pressed for two kinds of assurances: (1) stricter, pre-approval performance measures and reporting so the board can track what the money accomplishes, and (2) clarity about whether the Student Success Fund will be used to "supplant" SFUSD core spending. Director Sue pointed to charter language and to recently added instructions requiring clearer outcome metrics and reporting and said that budget and legislative analysts will monitor allocations.

Supervisor Ronan, who has stewarded much of the Student Success Fund'related language in committee, said the fund was intended to drive academic achievement and social-emotional learning and that the board must be vigilant to ensure allocations are additive and targeted. Supervisor Mandelman and others asked that DCYF and the school district present more complete plans and data in follow-up hearings. Mayor London Breed and DCYF later announced a school-stabilization team to work with the district on budget, staffing and transition planning.

The board adopted the resolution after the exchange, with several supervisors noting they supported release of funds to address immediate needs but wanted continued oversight and a forthcoming special hearing to track implementation and the potential impacts of closures.

Clarifying details drawn from the meeting include: the Student Success Fund allocation for the current school year is $35,000,000, of which $26,000,000 is being released to SFUSD now; readiness grants include a $6,600,000 program intended to help sites become eligible for implementation grants; DCYF said readiness grants emphasize planning and capacity building and do not necessarily require hiring district staff immediately; the school list of potential closures had not been publicly finalized at the time of the vote.

What happens next: Supervisors asked DCYF and school-district staff for more specific reporting and performance measures and scheduled follow-up briefings. Several supervisors also requested a special committee hearing to examine fiscal and program safeguards. The board repeatedly stressed that any use of Student Success Funds must align with the voter intent to improve academic outcomes and social-emotional wellness, not to subsidize district operating shortfalls.

Speakers quoted in this article are drawn from the meeting record and include Director Maria Sue and Chief of Staff Charice Dorsey Smith of the Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families, Mayor London Breed, Supervisor Shamal Walton, Supervisor Rafael Mandelman and Supervisor Matt Ronan. No statements in this article were attributed to parties beyond these named speakers unless indicated otherwise.