Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Plans topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves 2025–26 school plans for court and community schools
Summary
The board approved 2025–26 school plans for court and community schools after a presentation outlining goals tied to LCAP and WASC, STAAR Renaissance assessments for court schools, CTE programming and supports such as school social workers and intervention teachers.
The Kern County Board of Education approved the 2025–26 school plans for the county’s court and community schools, voting in favor during the consent agenda after a staff presentation.
Assistant Superintendent Desiree Van Flew presented the annual plans, emphasizing alignment with the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) and WASC action goals. She explained that court schools cannot reliably generate CAST/CAASPP scores because the student population is mobile and rarely meets state testing windows; instead, staff use STAAR Renaissance assessments on a 60‑day cadence to track growth. Van Flew said court‑school students show measurable gains in reading and math on that shorter assessment cycle and that the plans allocate resources to school social workers, multi‑tiered staff training and expanded CTE and intervention supports.
Board members asked clarifying questions about CTE program funding, whether funding follows enrollment and options for volunteer involvement in RISE and community programs. Staff said most district funding is ADA‑based and that additional programs depend on available grants and local district allocations; workforce grants (WIOA) and other external grants were cited as funding sources for some CTE work.
A trustee moved to approve the plans; the motion was seconded and the board voted 'aye' with no recorded opposition. Staff recommended approval and will proceed with implementation steps outlined in the plans.
Implementation notes in the presentation included corrections to baseline year references on page four of the court‑school document (staff said those dates should advance by one year); staff also said they will continue to report on outcomes at the end of the school year.
No separate public hearing was held on the item beyond the earlier public‑comment period; the plans passed as presented.
