📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Santa Cruz County Grand Jury • 2000-2001

Review of the Organization and Structure of

Published: June 08, 2001 6 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 27 findings

F1 Page 50
School site councils are authorized under State Education Codes.
F2 Page 50
Education Code §52012 states, “A school site council shall be established at each school that participates in the school improvement program authorized by this chapter. The council shall be composed of the principal and representatives of: teachers selected by teachers at the school; other school personnel selected by other school personnel at the school; parents of pupils attending the school selected by such parents; and, in secondary school, pupils selected by pupils attending the school.” It also states the council shall be constituted to ensure parity between school personnel and parents/students.
F3 Page 50
Education Code §52012 states that the term and method of selection and replacement shall be specified in the school improvement plan. It also states that the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall provide examples of selection and replacement procedures that may be considered by school site councils.
F4 Page 50
Education Code §52011 states that the district governing board shall provide each principal with information regarding SIP and site councils and ensure that the information is provided to teachers, other school personnel, parents and in secondary schools, pupils.
F5 Page 50
Education Code §52034(c) states that the school district governing boards should adopt policies regarding the responsibilities of school site councils and establish communication procedures to ensure reasonable opportunities for each council or its representatives to meet with the governing body.
F6 Page 50
Specifications for site council membership are inconsistent within the statutes. For example, according to Education Code §52012 and §52852, SSC “shall be composed of parents of pupils attending the school selected by such parents.” Later these same codes define this segment of the site council members as “parents or other community members selected by parents.”
F7 Page 50
Education Code §52870 states, “It is the intent of the State Legislature that, to the extent possible, the members of the school site council represent the composition of the school's pupil population.”
F8 Page 50
As set forth in the Education Code, the School Improvement Plan and the School Based Coordinated Program receive numerous reviews resulting in approval or disapproval at the levels of site council, district governing body, and the State Board of Education. In addition, by statute, the principal is responsible for ongoing administration of the plan, and the district superintendent must, upon request, assist with the design and implementation of the plan.
F9 Page 50
The Education Code did not reveal any requirements for oversight of the school site council as a body. Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F10 Page 51
Process for nominating parents varied among schools responding. For example, responses from principals included: • “Membership seems to be for anyone who asks up until the number of parents is met.” • “We have a table at Open House in spring with educational materials and encourage people to nominate themselves.” • “Interested parents self-select to run for site council seats.”
F11 Page 51
The use of a nominating committee, a standard election practice, was not mentioned in any of the responses from site council chairpersons.
F12 Page 51
Twenty percent of the chairpersons’ responses stated they had received a personal invitation to serve on the site council.
F13 Page 51
Some principals stated that it was sometimes difficult to get enough parents to serve on site councils. Other principals enjoyed an ample number of volunteers for the required parent seats with additional volunteers to act as alternates.
F14 Page 51
Survey results indicated that the three most widely used methods in the election process were: • ballots returned by parents and students • hand vote at a meeting • ballots placed in a secure ballot box
F15 Page 51
Survey results indicated that 18 different methods were used to count ballots. The most common counting methods were: • by principal and secretary • by projects coordinator • by staff and site council • by a show of hands or a ballot vote at meeting
F16 Page 51
Of 63 respondents (35 Principals and 28 Chairpersons) only 21 reported using more than one method of encouraging individuals to join their school site council. Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F17 Page 52
Respondents were given the opportunity to indicate which method of communication was used. Six options included: • school newsletter • local newspaper • back to school night • school bulletin • student • other Some schools used more than one option. Methods were as follows: Communication Method Frequency School Newsletter 42 Back to School Night 25 School Bulletin 16
F18
Communication methods not widely used were: • A marquee at the front of the school • A flyer • Word of mouth • A notice to parents hand-carried during child’s pick-up • A parent newsletter • A faculty newsletter • At PTA meetings
F19 Page 52
Use of a local newspaper to encourage SSC membership was not indicated on any surveys.
F20 Page 52
After the formation of the SSC, the chairperson’s communications with parents showed a wider variety of communication techniques. Communication Method Frequency School Newsletter 16 Meetings 4 School Bulletin 6
F21 Page 52
According to the School Site Council Handbook, “After the SSC is first formed or new members are selected to ongoing councils, the school/district should provide training and ongoing in-service to the members to assist them in carrying out their responsibilities. The training provided to the SSC should be on a regular basis, and the training should be appropriate to the tasks at hand.” Training is not being provided to all site councils in Santa Cruz County.
F22 Page 52
In the committee’s interview with the County Superintendent of Schools, it was stated “We are now looking at doing training for participants.” Review of the Organization and Structure of Site Councils in Santa Cruz County Public Schools 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report
F23 Page 53
Upon request, training support is available through the County Office of Education.
F24 Page 53
Survey responses revealed that in many cases parity between school personnel and parent/student representatives was not achieved. Parity was reported by18 of 31 principals and 5 of 16 chairpersons.
F25 Page 53
Respondents stated that Hispanics and other minorities in many communities are under represented on school site councils.
F26 Page 53
Some of the methods used to count votes have the appearance of impropriety. While appearance does not constitute wrongdoing, it can still undermine the integrity of the voting process. Conclusions Communication to parents and the local community regarding the school site council, and nominations in particular, needs to be improved. Even though it is not required by education code, nominations to fill seats on site councils should be conducted in accordance with democratic principles. Security of the voting process is non-existent in some schools. • A secured ballot box is not utilized at each school. • Some parents are eliminated from the voting process by missing an election meeting. • Votes returned by students may get lost in transit or misplaced. • Voting process should be established in accordance with democratic procedures. Training should be provided annually to the school site councils. School site councils are not adequately publicized. Too much dependence is placed on the school newsletter for communication. Most schools indicated that they had difficulty obtaining new SSC members. Participation greatly contributes to the success of a school site council; therefore, in order to stimulate interest, more creative efforts should be used. While the Education Code provides for specific oversight of school plans, it is ambiguous regarding the structure and organization of school site councils.
F27
Since the establishment of the CPRB, the Internal Affairs investigation reports have increased from a typical 5-page report to a possible 25-page report. These reports must now be written in laymen’s terms for the CPRB members, rather than police terminology. Conclusions The number of complaints made to the Santa Cruz City Police Department is extremely low. The existing training provided to CPRB members does not involve adequate training in the Police Department’s practices and procedures. An established procedure is in place at the Santa Cruz Police Department to investigate citizen complaints and an additional level of review increases the complaint resolution time. The chief of police is not bound by the recommendations of the CPRB but agrees with their findings in most cases. A review board has the potential to provide a new perspective and serve as a checks and balances on the police department’s complaint review process. Page84 Review of the Citizens’ Police Review Board of the City of Santa Cruz 2000-01 Santa Cruz County Grand Jury Final Report

Recommendations 17

Conclusions 49

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

Santa Cruz County County