From Participation To Preparedness.

This element is a completion attestation, and it is met. All six participating LEAs carry the full agreement set (the memorandum of understanding with SCCOE, the master services agreement ↗ with Impacter Pathway, and the California Student Data Privacy Agreement ↗), covering all eighteen participating schools. The memoranda were fully executed between July 21 and August 20, 2026; the master services agreements and the CA-NDPAs are executed at all six LEAs.

What Each LEA Signs, And What It Establishes

Participation is not carried by one instrument. Each LEA executes three, and each establishes a different part of what the contract requires this element to document. Data processing terms are not a separate instrument on this project; they sit inside the master services agreement.

Position By LEA

The Memoranda Of Understanding, As Executed

The SCCOE–LEA memoranda are executed DocuSign records, all signed for SCCOE by County Superintendent Dr. David M. Toston, Sr. Each runs July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028, commits the LEA to three schools, a district project lead, quarterly collaborative learning, at least two screener administrations a year and regular data review, and commits SCCOE to $120,000 per LEA ($60,000 each year) in four $30,000 payments tied to readiness assessment, initial training, learning-collaborative participation and screening administration. Either party may terminate on thirty days’ written notice.

Data Governance As Established

Across the executed agreements, governance is consistent in structure, and it is carried by the master services agreement rather than by a separate data processing instrument. The LEA is the data controller and retains ownership of student records. Impacter Pathway processes only for the purposes the agreement names. Dashboard access is scoped by role (classroom-level for teachers involved in administration, site-level for school leadership, district-level for the LEA behavioral health lead) and configured per site rather than granted globally.

Two governance details are specific to this cohort and are handled in configuration rather than in the standard instruments:

• Shared staff need explicit cross-site access. Several participating sites are served by a counselor who also serves another campus. One school counselor covers both Robert Sanders and Ida Jew Academy / Valle Vista; a Milpitas High counselor covers the Rancho Milpitas position during a staffing transition. Role-scoped access granted per site does not, by default, follow a person across two of them, so it is configured deliberately for each person who works across campuses.
• Ida Jew Academy and Valle Vista carry two CDS codes on one campus. They share one campus, one principal and one set of classrooms while carrying two CDS-coded entities and two funding structures. The CA-NDPA is executed at LEA level and covers every site within the district, and coverage at that campus is applied to both entities. It is the only site in the cohort with this structure.

Agreement Execution Takes Time

Each agreement moves at the speed of a different signatory: a superintendent, a general counsel, a technology director, a governing board’s agenda. It wasn’t that any LEA ran into resistance, every LEA signed, but the signature path at each site looked different, and that lack of uniformity across three instruments and six districts is what slowed the overall timeline, with each path carrying its own board calendar, insurance review and counsel review.