Evidence · PartnershipStudent Well-Being
Deliverable 1 · Exhibit A Elements 1 To 7 · Section VI.F
Recruitment
Outcomes
Summary
A Smarter, Healthier System.
Recruitment, selection and readiness assessment of six local educational agencies and eighteen schools for school-based behavioral health performance management, inside the ninety-day window the executed contract sets.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education02ContentsContents
What Is In This Report
Seven Exhibit A elements and the Section VI.F written statement, in the order the contract sets them. Each section opens with the requirement it answers, quoted, so the response reads against the ask.
- 00Overview And The CohortExecutive summary, the five findings, the cohort roster3
- 1Recruitment ApproachRecruitment and selection of six LEAs and three schools each, with strategies, barriers and challenges9
- 2Selection And ReadinessHow readiness indicators were considered in recruitment and selection14
- 3Agreements And GovernanceExecuted formal participation agreements establishing roles, responsibilities, data governance and timelines18
- 4School CoordinationCoordination with LEAs in selecting three schools each, and the rationale21
- 5Baseline CapacityOrganizational profiles: demographics, regional context, populations served, capacity indicators26
- 6Readiness FindingsFindings and lessons learned from readiness assessment at all eighteen sites34
- 7Launch SupportsAnticipated implementation supports needed at project launch38
- §FDiverse ParticipationWritten statement: efforts undertaken to ensure diverse participants across California regions40
Compiled
September 11, 2026
Final
Due To SCCOE
September 16, 2026
Handoff
Due To The Commission
September 30, 2026
Submission
The Two Instruments This Report Applies
LEA Selection Rubric
Eight dimensions, each scored one to four against published level descriptors. It determined which districts entered the cohort, and it documents which of the four contract indicator categories each dimension answers. Reproduced in full at Element 2, with the cell-level evidence in the instruments record.
Site Baseline Capacity Matrix
Applied at all eighteen schools across seven sections: site identification, school profile, technology and data, privacy and agreements, behavioral health capacity, scheduling, and a readiness determination with conditions. Findings at Element 6; the assessments are in the site readiness record.
How To Read This Report
Every figure traces to the California School Dashboard, an executed agreement, a board-adopted LCAP, the contract, or a source read directly. Where a fact could not be established, the report says so and treats the absence as a finding.
The Record Behind It
Every district and school, and every agreement and instrument, is published at bhpm.care with the executed paper underneath it. This document is the summary; the Deliverable 1 reader is the record.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education03Executive OverviewOverview And The Cohort
Who Was Recruited, And What Is Now In Place
Six local educational agencies and eighteen schools across four California counties were recruited and selected for behavioral health performance management inside the ninety-day window the executed contract sets, June 23 to September 21, 2026.
Every participating LEA meets or exceeds the readiness threshold on all eight indicators the project applied. Readiness assessment is complete at all eighteen sites. Formal participation agreements are fully executed at all six LEAs.
From Recruitment To Implementation
Recruit And Select
Criteria set before outreach. Three networks in parallel. Six LEAs, eighteen schools.
Assess Readiness
Eight-dimension LEA rubric. Seven-section site assessment at all eighteen schools.
Execute Agreements
Three instruments per LEA. Eighteen signature paths. All six complete.
Establish The Cycle
Scheduled review of behavioral health data against goals, by a named owner.
Where The Cohort Stands, By LEA
| LEA | County | Schools | Students At Sites | Agreement Set | Readiness | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milpitas Unified | Santa Clara | 3 | 3,724 | Executed | Complete | 26/32 |
| Mount Pleasant Elementary SD | Santa Clara | 3 | 1,340 | Executed | Complete | 26/32 |
| Sunnyvale School District | Santa Clara | 3 | 2,122 | Executed | Complete | 25/32 |
| Lake Tahoe Unified | El Dorado | 3 | 2,214 | Executed | Complete | 25/32 |
| Rio School District | Ventura | 3 | 1,881 | Executed | Complete | 29/32 |
| San Diego Unified | San Diego | 3 | 2,778 | Executed | Complete | 27/32 |
What This Establishes
A diverse and complete cohort: four regional economies, a factor-of-twenty-eight enrollment range, and both LCFF and Basic Aid fiscal contexts, with every agreement executed and every site assessed.
What It Does Not Yet Establish
Fifteen of the eighteen sites hold no standing meeting at which behavioral health data is read against goals by a named owner. That cycle, not money or technology, is what this project has to supply.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education04The Five FindingsOverview And The Cohort
The Five Findings The Commission Should Take From This Report
Recruitment Succeeded On Availability, Not On Capacity
Every district contacted during the May to June window had behavioral health capacity, and all five that did not join are CYBHI Fee Schedule participants. What separated the six that joined from the five that did not was leadership stability and an existing agreement relationship with a county office of education. Two of the five non-joining districts were mid-superintendent-search. Capacity was abundant; availability was scarce.
Site-Level Attribution Of BHSSA Funding Could Not Be Established
The solicitation asked that participating schools be recipients of BHSSA funding. Every one of the six LEAs sits inside a county BHSSA or MHSSA-funded service system. Almost none can produce a document naming which of its schools the money reached. County offices and consortium structures distribute the funding without publishing site-level allocation. Current reporting structures provide visibility at the county and consortium level, and BHPM creates an opportunity to connect that investment information to the sites where implementation occurs. This is the project’s justification rather than its failure.
Technology Is Not The Constraint Anywhere
All six LEAs run a modern student information system with Clever single sign-on live in production. Device coverage is 1:1 at every site where it has been confirmed. Not one site’s readiness turns on infrastructure. What varies, and what determines whether an administration runs cleanly, is schedule: whether the site already holds a block of time it can give.
More Systematic Screening And More Developed Tier Routing Appear Together
The cohort points to a trend worth watching. Sites with an operating screener tend to route findings into a more clearly documented, multi-tiered system of support, while sites without a universal instrument tend to show a less formal connection between existing student supports and their tier structure. The two appear together rather than one clearly preceding the other, and BHPM creates an opportunity to test that relationship longitudinally as screening and routing are implemented across the cohort.
What Stands In The Way Is Scheduled Time And A Routine For Reading Results
Completed readiness assessments converge on the same two variables, and neither is money nor technology. Board-adopted behavioral health investment across the six districts exceeds $21 million a year, and every site runs a modern student information system with single sign-on live in production, so neither purse nor platform sets the pace. Across the cohort, most sites lack a formalized, standing structure for reading behavioral health data against goals under a named owner, and the sites projected to administer most cleanly are the ones that already hold a block of time they can give. A slot on the calendar and a structured routine for reading results are what this project has to supply, and they are what distinguishes a screener from a performance management system.
What The Five Findings Add Up To
Read together, the findings point the same direction. The inputs the field usually worries about are present. The practice that converts them into evidence is not.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education05The Five FindingsOverview And The Cohort · Continued
What Separated The Six LEAs That Joined From The Five That Did Not
| Condition | The Six That Joined | The Five That Did Not |
|---|---|---|
| Behavioral health capacity | Present at all six | Present at all five |
| CYBHI Fee Schedule participation | Four of six participants | All five participants |
| Settled superintendent | All six | Two mid-search during the window |
| Named district behavioral health lead | All six | Not established at every one |
| Existing agreement relationship with a county office | All six | Not at every one |
| Room in the June board calendar | All six | Agendas already crowded with LCAPs, SPSAs and budgets |
Contract Execution
Standard Agreement #25BHSOAC019 was signed for SCCOE by County Superintendent Dr. David M. Toston, Sr. on June 22, 2026 and for the Commission by Executive Director Brenda Grealish on June 23, 2026. The term runs from signature through June 30, 2028. The ninety-day recruitment window therefore runs June 23 to September 21, 2026.
Why Site-Level Attribution Could Not Be Documented
| County System | What The Public Record Names | Site-Level Attribution |
|---|---|---|
| Santa Clara | The grant names the thirty-one Santa Clara County school districts collectively rather than enumerating them. | Definitional |
| El Dorado | The executed county grant agreement names no LEAs at all. | None available |
| Ventura | The MHSSA partnership names five wellness-center districts. The county office operates wellness centers at all nine Rio schools under a program it credits to MHSA and MHSSA. | Unresolved |
| San Diego | A named Creating Opportunities in Preventing and Eliminating Suicide (COPES) partner with a $7 million four-year county award. | No published allocation |
The pattern is consistent: county behavioral health funding reaches schools through county offices of education and consortium structures that do not publish which schools received what. Every participating LEA is inside such a system.
Due Dates
Compiled September 11, 2026. Due to SCCOE September 16, 2026. Due to the Commission September 30, 2026.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education06The CohortOverview And The Cohort
How The Cohort Is Composed
Grade Bands
Four elementary, eight middle, four high schools, and two TK-8 campuses.
Fiscal Contexts
Five LCFF districts and one community-funded Basic Aid district, one of 139 statewide.
Regional Reach
Coastal agricultural, urban, suburban technology, large urban and rural mountain. Roughly five hundred miles.
Each arc is a county, each node a district, with its three participating schools named beside it. Ring color carries the county, not a ranking.
Four Counties, Four Regional Economies
Ventura on the coastal agricultural plain, Santa Clara across the urban and suburban South Bay, San Diego on the southern border, and El Dorado in the Sierra Nevada. The geography stretches roughly five hundred miles. Three LEAs sit in Santa Clara County, reflecting the prime contractor’s network; the other three were reached through partner relationships that extend beyond it.
Grade Bands And Funding Models
By grade band the eighteen sites divide into four elementary schools, seven middle schools, five high schools, and two TK-8 campuses. Five participating LEAs are funded through the Local Control Funding Formula. Sunnyvale School District is community-funded, operating on excess local property tax at $7,263 per pupil above its LCFF entitlement, which is what makes the cohort’s sustainability findings hold in both fiscal environments rather than only the more common one.
105 – 2,926
Enrollment range at participating sites, a factor of twenty-eight
21.1 – 82.4%
Socioeconomic disadvantage across participating sites
3.1 – 44.7%
English learner concentration across participating sites
16 / 19
Participating school entities holding Title I schoolwide status
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education07Cohort RosterOverview And The Cohort
The Cohort Roster · Milpitas, Mount Pleasant, Sunnyvale
Enrollment and demographics are the California School Dashboard 2025 release, Student Population panel. Every school name resolves to its own Dashboard report at bhpm.care.
| Site | CDS Code | Grades | Enroll. | SED | EL | SWD | Title I | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rancho Milpitas Middle | 43-73387-6047666 | 7–8 | 693 | 44.6% | 16.7% | 8.1% | Schoolwide | 7th |
| Milpitas High | 43-73387-4334470 | 9–12 | 2,926 | 44.5% | 11.4% | 9.1% | No | 9th |
| Calaveras Hills High (Alternative) | 43-73387-4331039 | 9–12 | 105 | 76.2% | 22.9% | 18.1% | Schoolwide | Whole school |
| Site | CDS Code | Grades | Enroll. | SED | EL | SWD | Title I | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| August Boeger Middle | 43-69617-6048037 | 6–8 | 397 | 82.4% | 37.0% | 17.6% | Schoolwide | 6th |
| Robert Sanders Elementary | 43-69617-6048078 | TK–5 | 304 | 78.9% | 44.7% | 18.8% | Schoolwide | 3rd |
| Ida Jew Academy / Valle Vista Elementary | 43-69617-6048045 · 6067227 | TK–8 / TK–5 | 639 | 68.5% | 40.3% | 10.4% | Split | 6th |
One campus, two CDS codes. Ida Jew Academy and Valle Vista Elementary are two CDS-coded entities on one shared campus, counted as one BHPM site. Title I status is split: Valle Vista is schoolwide, Ida Jew is not. It is the only site in the cohort with this structure.
| Site | CDS Code | Grades | Enroll. | SED | EL | SWD | Title I | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lakewood Elementary | 43-69690-6049233 | TK–5 | 372 | 41.4% | 27.4% | 15.9% | Schoolwide | 5th |
| Sunnyvale Middle | 43-69690-6049258 | 6–8 | 1,053 | 21.1% | 17.9% | 11.5% | No | 6th |
| Columbia Middle | 43-69690-6049241 | 6–8 | 697 | 40.5% | 28.4% | 16.4% | Schoolwide | 6th |
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education08Cohort RosterOverview And The Cohort · Continued
The Cohort Roster · Lake Tahoe, Rio, San Diego
Target populations follow the transition-year design described under Element 4. The exact roster for each is fixed with the site team during administration design.
| Site | CDS Code | Grades | Enroll. | SED | EL | SWD | Title I | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bijou Community School | 09-61903-6005540 | TK–5 | 422 | 59.2% | 35.1% | 12.1% | Schoolwide | 3rd |
| South Tahoe Middle | 09-61903-6005565 | 6–8 | 716 | 50.3% | 17.2% | 13.4% | Schoolwide | 6th |
| South Tahoe High | 09-61903-0937805 | 9–12 | 1,076 | 46.7% | 12.4% | 11.6% | Schoolwide | 9th |
| Site | CDS Code | Grades | Enroll. | SED | EL | SWD | Title I | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rio Del Sol STEAM Academy | 56-72561-0137018 | TK–8 | 839 | 54.9% | 11.2% | 9.3% | Schoolwide | K, 3rd, and 6th |
| Rio Lindo Elementary | 56-72561-6055503 | TK–5 | 405 | 81.0% | 40.0% | 20.2% | Schoolwide | 3rd (Yr 1) · +5th (Yr 2) |
| Rio Vista Middle | 56-72561-0113977 | 6–8 | 637 | 68.8% | 25.4% | 14.0% | Schoolwide | 6th |
| Site | CDS Code | Grades | Enroll. | SED | EL | SWD | Title I | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pacific Beach Middle | 37-68338-6059695 | 6–8 | 715 | 41.3% | 4.6% | 13.4% | Schoolwide | 6th |
| Mission Bay High | 37-68338-3734431 | 9–12 | 1,240 | 44.6% | 3.1% | 12.8% | Schoolwide | 9th |
| Clairemont High | 37-68338-3731213 | 9–12 | 823 | 57.5% | 5.6% | 18.5% | Schoolwide | 9th |
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education09Element 1Element 1
Recruitment Approach
Exhibit A Requirement
Recruitment and selection of six (6) LEA partners and three (3) schools within each LEA, including recruitment strategies, barriers, and challenges.
The Approach
Recruitment criteria were set before outreach began, as recorded in the solicitation and the invitation to participate, and deliberately prioritized LEAs meeting several readiness indicators at once rather than excelling on any one: current BHSSA-funded behavioral health programming, existing multi-tiered system of support infrastructure with counselor or wellness coordinator staffing, equity multiplier eligibility, and CYBHI Fee Schedule participation or demonstrated readiness for it.
That conjunction shapes how the cohort’s findings should be read. A district already inside CYBHI, already running MTSS, already receiving county behavioral health service is a district where performance management can be layered onto existing structure rather than built from nothing. It also means this cohort is not a random sample of California districts, and its findings are evidence about what performance management does in reasonably well-resourced systems.
Three Networks, In Parallel
SCCOE
Prime
Its superintendent network and its Bay Area county-office and district relationships. Announced the opportunity at the Santa Clara County Superintendents Meeting.
Deveau Burr Group
Reach Beyond The Region
CYBHI Statewide Capacity Building and Technical Assistance work supporting all fifty-eight county offices of education. The route by which El Dorado and San Diego entered a Santa Clara-led cohort.
Breaking Barriers California
State Systems
Engagement support and state-systems expertise. Impacter Pathway supported throughout and led the technology and readiness assessment work that followed selection.
The Demonstration Asset
Prospective LEAs were shown an operating system rather than a described one. The behavioral health screening platform was already deployed across seven California counties, supporting more than 200,000 monthly users at the time of recruitment. Three of the six LEAs recruited sit in counties where the platform was already running: Rio in Ventura, San Diego Unified in San Diego, and Lake Tahoe Unified in El Dorado.
The Participation Incentive
$120,000
Per LEA, $60,000 each year, $720,000 in total pass-through. It did not purchase interest: Milpitas alone budgets $4.7 million a year for mental health staffing. It purchased staff time through a monetary stipend, which in districts of this size is the genuinely scarce input.
SCCOE’s Recruitment Record
Prepared by Dr. Pilar Vázquez-Vialva, Director of Youth Health and Wellness.
SCCOE began recruitment in early May 2026 by first adhering to the criteria and eligibility requirements of the contract and identifying LEAs that were BHSSA school grant recipients with existing school-based behavioral health investments. Two eligibility questions were put to the Commission before outreach widened: whether schools receiving School Linked Services in partnership with a county behavioral health department could be considered, and whether small and rural LEAs, which generally have one or two schools, could participate as one LEA. Both mattered because the contract requires each participating LEA to identify three schools. The Commission confirmed that schools receiving School Linked Services in partnership with a county behavioral health department could be considered, and recruitment proceeded on that basis. The second question did not bear on the final cohort, which includes no LEA of that size.
In partnership with Impacter Pathway, SCCOE co-designed the invitation to participate ↗, describing the grant opportunity, the purpose of the project, the benefits of participation and the expectations for LEAs and schools. The County Superintendent announced the opportunity at the Santa Clara County Superintendents Meeting; it was carried to the California Student Health and Wellbeing Professional Learning Network; and it moved through the subcontractors’ statewide networks. SCCOE then met interested LEAs (superintendents, assistant superintendents, directors and behavioral health leads) one-on-one to review the project, discuss benefits and expectations, and assess readiness, and coordinated demonstrations so that prospective LEAs could see the behavioral health screener ↗, the entry point for every participating school, and how the project could support local behavioral health goals. Participating LEAs were told they would receive $120,000 ($60,000 each year) to be shared equally with the participating schools, with suggested uses such as stipends for participating staff, wellness supplies and other supports aligned with each school’s behavioral health needs.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education10Element 1Element 1 · Recruitment Approach
Recruitment Strategies And Timeline
Recruitment Strategies Used · SCCOE
·Identified BHSSA school grantee recipients and other LEAs with existing behavioral health investments.
·Confirmed eligibility questions with the Commission, including School Linked Services recipients and small or rural LEAs.
·Created and distributed an informational flyer explaining the purpose, benefits and expectations of participation.
·Elevated the opportunity through the Santa Clara County Superintendents Meeting.
·Connected with the California Student Health and Wellbeing Professional Learning Network to broaden statewide awareness.
·Reached current LEA partners directly and asked colleagues and partners across California for recommendations.
·Held one-on-one meetings with interested LEAs on fit, readiness, expectations and potential school participation.
·Coordinated Impacter Pathway demonstrations of the platform, the implementation support and the relationship to program goals.
·Intentionally sought LEAs across counties, grade levels, school models, student demographics and behavioral health system contexts.
Timeline Of Recruitment
May to September 2026. Each lane is one step; the coral mark is the contract, which opens the ninety-day window everything after it had to fit inside.
Criteria set and applied; BHSSA grantee LEAs identified. The criteria were set before outreach rather than during it, which is what makes the rubric a record rather than a rationalization.
Two eligibility questions put to the Commission. Whether School Linked Services recipients could be considered, and whether small and rural LEAs with one or two schools could participate. Both bear on a contract requiring three schools per LEA.
The county superintendents meeting, the statewide professional learning network, and partner networks. The route beyond Santa Clara County. Relying on SCCOE's own network alone would have produced six Bay Area districts.
One-on-one meetings and platform demonstrations. Prospective LEAs judged an operating system rather than a described one.
Contract executed; the ninety-day window opens. It closes September 21, 2026.
The six memoranda fully executed. Across eighteen signature paths: three instruments at six LEAs.
The Cadence Worth Recording
Board approval sits on a monthly calendar. Insurance review turns on the specific endorsements a district requires. Counsel review is its own queue again. None of these were disputes and every LEA signed, but the period an agreement set takes is a function of how many boards, counsels and insurers it has to cross.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education11Element 1 · BarriersElement 1 · Recruitment Approach
Barriers And Challenges
Leadership Availability Was The Binding Constraint
Five districts were contacted during the May to June 2026 window and did not join: Soledad Unified, Campbell Elementary School District, Santa Clara Unified, East Side Union High School District and South Bay Union. All five are CYBHI Fee Schedule participants, and each had the behavioral health capacity the project was looking for. What each lacked was a settled leadership team with room in the calendar. A district cannot commit to a multi-year data-sharing arrangement in the eight weeks before its chief executive changes.
Aligning Site Selection With BHSSA Investment In Practice
The solicitation seeks to build on existing initiatives by aligning this program with BHSSA-funded programs. Because BHSSA funding reaches schools through county offices of education and consortium structures that do not publish which schools received what, tracking that alignment to a named site is difficult in practice. Every participating LEA sits inside such a system. The project team addressed this by identifying district partners building comprehensive behavioral health response systems that include BHSSA dollars, even where those dollars cannot be traced directly to a participating site. That is the finding that justifies the project.
A Named Key Person Transitioned Mid-Recruitment
Dr. Deborah Gorgulho, named in the proposal to the Commission as Project Director, transitioned from SCCOE on July 1, 2026, with this project's thanks and every good wish in her new role. The Commission relationship for this deliverable sits with Dr. Pilar Vázquez-Vialva, Director of Youth Health and Wellness, who leads the project.
Agreement Execution Takes Time
Three instruments at six LEAs is eighteen signature paths, and each moves at the speed of a different signatory: a superintendent, a general counsel, a technology director, a governing board's agenda. Board approval sits on a monthly calendar. Insurance review turns on the specific endorsements a district requires, and Rio's package went through exactly that step. Counsel review is its own queue again. None of these were disputes and every LEA signed.
Selecting Three Schools At The Largest LEA Took Longer Because More Wanted In
San Diego Unified enrolls 112,250 students across 226 schools, and interest in the project ran ahead of the three sites the project scopes at each LEA. The district asked whether it could bring more than three. Keeping participation narrow is what makes implementation lessons legible, so selection stayed at three, which meant choosing three from a field of willing schools rather than persuading three to volunteer. That is a longer conversation at a district of 226 schools than at a district of five.
End-Of-Year Timing, Board Calendars And District Size
SCCOE's account names timing as the most significant recruitment challenge. Many conversations fell in May and June, when LEAs were closing the school year and finalizing the annual approval of the Local Control and Accountability Plan and School Plans for Student Achievement. Several interested LEAs asked to resume in late July or August when staff returned. Small and rural LEAs presented a further challenge: some do not have three schools receiving BHSSA-funded services.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education12Element 1 · BarriersElement 1 · Recruitment Approach · Continued
Who Did Not Join, And What SCCOE Did About It
The Five Districts Contacted That Did Not Join
| District | County | CYBHI Fee Schedule | What Was In The Way |
|---|---|---|---|
| Soledad Unified | Monterey | Participant | Superintendent retiring. Finalist interviews May 8, successor appointed June 4 effective July 1. |
| Campbell Elementary School District | Santa Clara | Participant | Superintendent retired June 30 after six years. Interim named June 24, permanent successor effective August 13. |
| Santa Clara Unified | Santa Clara | Participant | Capacity present. No settled window inside the ninety-day period. |
| East Side Union High School District | Santa Clara | Participant | Capacity present. No settled window inside the ninety-day period. |
| South Bay Union | San Diego | Participant | Described in project records as very ready and did not convert inside the window. Expressed enthusiasm and executed agreements are different things. |
The criteria that predicted success were not the ones describing capacity. They were the ones describing availability: a settled superintendent, a named district behavioral health lead, and an existing agreement relationship with a county office of education. Every district contacted had the capacity. Fewer had the bandwidth.
Mitigation Strategies Used · SCCOE
·Flexible scheduling and individualized one-on-one meetings to lower the barrier to a first conversation.
·A concise informational flyer to support internal district communication and decision-making.
·Superintendent-level, professional learning network, partner and colleague outreach beyond existing SCCOE relationships.
·Impacter Pathway demonstrations so LEAs could judge the practical value of the project and assess fit.
·Framing participation as alignment with existing MTSS, behavioral health, community schools, CYBHI and fee-schedule readiness work rather than as a disconnected new initiative.
·Prioritizing LEAs able to commit by June while maintaining relationships with LEAs that needed more time or board approval.
·Documenting timing and participation barriers to inform future recruitment cycles and more realistic planning windows.
Outcome
Six LEAs and eighteen schools were recruited and selected within the contract window: Rio School District, Mount Pleasant Elementary School District, Milpitas Unified School District, Sunnyvale School District, San Diego Unified School District and Lake Tahoe Unified School District.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education13Element 1 · LessonsElement 1 · Recruitment Approach
Lessons For Statewide Scaling
Five lessons from a recruitment that closed inside its window, each stated so another county office can apply it without repeating the work.
Size The Agreement Period Separately From The Recruitment Period
Six LEAs were recruited comfortably inside ninety days. Executing three instruments at each of them is eighteen signature paths, each with its own board calendar, insurance review and counsel review. That period should be planned in its own right rather than assumed to fit inside the window that governs recruitment.
Superintendent Stability Should Be A Screening Question, Asked First
It is public information, it takes minutes to check, and it separated the districts that converted from the districts that did not more cleanly than any capacity indicator.
County-Level Familiarity Converts
Half the recruited cohort came from counties where the screening platform was already operating. An existing county relationship is the cheapest recruitment channel available.
Expect The Largest Districts To Have The Hardest Selection Problem
At San Diego Unified the difficulty was choosing three schools from more than three that wanted to take part, which is a good problem and a slow one. Build time for it.
Treat The Absence Of Site-Level Attribution As A Finding, Not A Gap To Close
No amount of additional recruitment effort would have produced records that county structures do not generate. It is the project's justification, and it belongs in the report.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education14Element 2Element 2
Selection And Readiness
Exhibit A Requirement
Documentation of how readiness indicators were considered in recruitment and selection, including, as applicable, existing behavioral health programming, MTSS infrastructure, equity considerations, and readiness to participate in behavioral health data collection and reporting.
Two instruments were applied. An eight-dimension LEA Selection Rubric determined which districts entered the cohort. A Site Baseline Capacity Matrix documented the eighteen schools inside them.
The Four Indicator Categories The Contract Names, And Where They Sit
| Contract Indicator | Rubric Dimensions Applied |
|---|---|
| Existing behavioral health programming | D1 · BHSSA / MHSSA system participationD7 · Existing behavioral health service and screening footprint |
| MTSS infrastructure | D2 · MTSS infrastructure |
| Equity considerations | D4 · Equity and high-need population |
| Readiness to participate in behavioral health data collection and reporting | D3 · CYBHI sustainability readinessD5 · Leadership commitmentD6 · Technology readinessD8 · Engagement capacity |
The fourth category carries four dimensions because readiness to participate in data collection and reporting is not one condition. It requires a district that can technically deliver the data, staff who can act on it, leadership that will sign for it, and a funding path that outlives the grant.
How The Rubric Was Compiled
The criteria were set before outreach began, as part of the recruitment approach. The rubric formalizes those criteria into a scored instrument, compiled from the recruitment record rather than scored live during outreach. It documents which indicators were applied and how each LEA stood against them, and the full cell-level evidence sits in the instruments record at bhpm.care.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education15Element 2 · RubricElement 2 · Selection And Readiness
The Instrument · Level Descriptors
The descriptors each LEA was scored against, reproduced so the Commission can see the instrument. Every participating LEA scored Competent or above on all eight.
| Dimension | 1 · Foundational | 2 · Developing | 3 · Competent | 4 · Advanced |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 · BHSSA / MHSSA System Participation | No connection to a county BHSSA or MHSSA-funded school behavioral health system. | County holds a BHSSA award; no documented service reaching this district's schools. | District's schools operate inside a county BHSSA or MHSSA-funded service system: wellness centers, school-linked services, or county behavioral health partnership. | District named as a BHSSA partner, or a funded service publicly attributable to a participating BHPM site. |
| D2 · MTSS Infrastructure | No tiered structure; need surfaces through referral only. | Tiering exists informally; flagging routes to a person rather than a documented process. | Documented MTSS or SST process on a regular cycle that screening data can route into. | Defined tier criteria, scheduled data review, and a named owner at each tier. |
| D3 · CYBHI Sustainability Readiness | No CYBHI participation of any kind and no documented preparation. | Stated intent or early billing infrastructure; no CYBHI-funded activity yet. | Approved Fee Schedule participant, or carrying documented CYBHI-funded workforce or service investment. | Fee Schedule reimbursement received: billing pathway demonstrated in practice, not only approved. |
| D4 · Equity And High-Need Population | No Title I sites; disadvantage indicators below county median. | Partial Title I coverage; moderate disadvantage indicators. | Majority of sites Title I; indicators at or above county median. | Nearly all sites Title I schoolwide, with SED, EL or SWD concentration materially above state averages. |
| D5 · Leadership Commitment | Interest expressed; no named lead, no agreement movement. | Named district lead; agreement set initiated but incomplete. | District lead engaged across multiple touchpoints; MOU executed; site leads identified. | District and site leadership engaged directly; full agreement set executed; site staff named and resourced. |
| D6 · Technology Readiness | SIS unknown or single sign-on unavailable. | SIS identified; rostering path or device coverage unverified. | SIS and SSO confirmed; device coverage adequate for the target grades. | Rostering, device coverage and audio hardware all verified for the target population. |
| D7 · Existing BH Service And Screening Footprint | No behavioral health service or screening presence at participating sites. | Service or screening at some sites, or in early implementation. | An operating service or screening footprint at participating sites, with a documented escalation path. | Standing service and screening, with results already driving intervention or an established referral relationship. |
| D8 · Engagement Capacity | No dedicated behavioral health staffing at participating sites. | Shared or partial staffing across sites; capacity strained. | Dedicated counselor or wellness staff at each participating site. | Dedicated site staff plus district clinical capacity and a named referral pathway. |
The two tinted columns are the range every participating LEA scored inside: yellow is Competent, green is Advanced. Not a single LEA in this cohort scored Foundational or Developing on any dimension.
Reading The Two Tinted Columns
What Competent Requires
Competent is not a low bar. It requires a district whose schools already operate inside a county-funded behavioral health service system, a documented MTSS or SST process on a regular cycle, approved Fee Schedule participation or documented CYBHI-funded investment, a majority of sites at Title I, an executed memorandum, confirmed single sign-on with adequate devices, an operating service footprint with a documented escalation path, and dedicated counselor or wellness staff at each site.
What Advanced Adds, And Why It Is Rare Here
Advanced on Dimension 2, MTSS Infrastructure, requires defined tier criteria, a scheduled data review and a named owner at each tier. Regularly scheduled review of behavioral health data is an emerging practice statewide: where it exists, it is not always implemented with fidelity or paired with a named owner. The instrument was built to surface that variability to inform investment and technical assistance support.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education16Element 2 · ScoresElement 2 · Selection And Readiness
How The Six LEAs Scored
Six LEAs against eight dimensions, each scored one to four. Read a column as a distribution across the cohort, not as a ranking of districts.
| LEA | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 | D5 | D6 | D7 | D8 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milpitas Unified | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 26/32 |
| Mount Pleasant Elementary SD | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 26/32 |
| Sunnyvale School District | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 25/32 |
| Lake Tahoe Unified | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 25/32 |
| Rio School District | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 29/32 |
| San Diego Unified | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 27/32 |
Green bars are Advanced, yellow bars are Competent. Every LEA clears Competent on every dimension, which is the finding the totals carry; the spread from 29 to 25 reflects depth of existing infrastructure rather than fitness to participate.
What The Distribution Shows
Where The Cohort Is Strong
Every LEA sits inside a county behavioral health service system, and two reach Advanced on that dimension: Milpitas Unified, whose high school hosts an SCCOE-operated wellness center, one of only three in Santa Clara County, and San Diego Unified, named as a county COPES partner. Four of six appear on a published CYBHI Fee Schedule cohort roster, and three of the six have drawn reimbursement, Milpitas among them though it is on no roster. Sixteen of nineteen participating school entities are Title I schoolwide.
Where The Cohort Can Develop
Across the cohort, MTSS infrastructure and engagement capacity are the two dimensions where districts most consistently land at Competent rather than Advanced. Regularly scheduled review of behavioral health data and consistently staffed engagement capacity are both emerging practices here, present in some form at most sites, but not yet formalized with a named owner or dedicated structures at every site. This is the clearest area of growth the cohort points to: the infrastructure and relationships exist, but the routines that would elevate them to Advanced are still taking shape.
The cohort was not selected for districts that had already solved performance management. It was selected for districts with the service capacity, the staffing and the technical infrastructure to make performance management possible, and without the scheduled data cycle that would make it unnecessary. That gap is what the project is designed to close.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education17Element 2Element 2 · Selection And Readiness
Site-Level Baseline
Beneath the LEA rubric, each of the eighteen sites was documented against a common baseline: enrollment and demographic profile from the California School Dashboard ↗ 2025 release, Title I status, behavioral health staffing, wellness center presence, MTSS maturity, existing screening instrument, and identifiable BHSSA-funded service. That matrix is the second instrument in the instruments record, and its site-level findings are summarized under Element 6.
Readiness As A Starting Point
The readiness findings establish implementation starting conditions rather than a pass or fail determination. Participating LEAs and schools enter BHPM with different combinations of established data routines, MTSS structures, staffing, technology, screening practices and implementation conditions. Those differences inform the emphasis and sequencing of training, technical assistance, coaching and implementation support in Deliverable 3.
The Dimension View, Counted
Green is Advanced, yellow is Competent. Not a single LEA in this cohort scored below Competent on any dimension, so every bar is full: what varies is the number of LEAs that scored Advanced.
| Dim | What It Measures | Distribution Across The Six LEAs | At Advanced |
|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | BHSSA / MHSSA system participation | 2 / 6 | |
| D2 | MTSS infrastructure | 1 / 6 | |
| D3 | CYBHI sustainability readiness | 3 / 6 | |
| D4 | Equity and high-need population | 2 / 6 | |
| D5 | Leadership commitment | 1 / 6 | |
| D6 | Technology readiness | 1 / 6 | |
| D7 | Existing BH service and screening | 3 / 6 | |
| D8 | Engagement capacity | 1 / 6 |
Three LEAs With Reimbursement Drawn
Four of six appear on a published CYBHI Fee Schedule cohort roster. Three of the six have drawn reimbursement, which is a materially stronger sustainability position than a list of approved billers.
Two LEAs At Advanced On System Participation
Milpitas Unified, whose high school operates an SCCOE-operated wellness center, and San Diego Unified, named as a county COPES partner.
One LEA At Advanced On MTSS Infrastructure
Rio alone, where screening practices are tied to defined tier criteria, backed by regularly integrated data review, response practices, and dedicated response teams at each tier.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education18Element 3Element 3
Agreements And Governance
Exhibit A Requirement
Completion and documentation of executed formal participation agreements with six (6) LEAs establishing roles, responsibilities, data governance, and timelines.
This element is a completion attestation, and it is met. All six participating LEAs carry the full agreement set, covering all eighteen participating schools. The memoranda were fully executed between July 21 and August 20, 2026.
What Each LEA Signs, And What It Establishes
Memorandum Of Understanding
LEA ↔ SCCOE
Roles, responsibilities and timelines. Participation scope, the three selected schools, the screening and data-review commitment, the project period, and the $120,000 participation incentive with the staff time it funds.
Master Services Agreement
LEA ↔ Impacter Pathway
Service scope and data governance. Platform deployment, student information system integration, rostering, training delivery and reporting. Its data terms establish that the LEA remains the data controller and Impacter Pathway processes on its instruction.
California Student Data Privacy Agreement
LEA ↔ Impacter Pathway
The statewide privacy standard, executed at LEA level and covering every site within it. SCCOE retains data governance authority and approval across the set.
Position By LEA
Three instruments at each of six LEAs. Every cell is executed, and each one links to the record behind it.
| LEA | MOU With SCCOE | Master Services Agreement | CA-NDPA | Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milpitas Unified | Executed | Executed | Executed | Brian White, Executive Director of Inclusive Services · fully executed July 30, 2026 · RM# 27-28-0330 |
| Mount Pleasant Elementary SD | Executed | Executed | Executed | Laurie Breton, Director of Student Support · fully executed July 30, 2026 · RM# 27-28-0333 |
| Sunnyvale School District | Executed | Executed | Executed | Gudiel R. Crosthwaite, Ph.D., Superintendent · signed for the district September 8, 2026 |
| Lake Tahoe Unified | Executed | Executed | Executed | Alan Reeder, Associate Superintendent · fully executed August 20, 2026 · RM# 27-28-0437 |
| Rio School District | Executed | Executed | Executed | Rebecca Rocha, Director of Student Services · fully executed August 12, 2026 · RM# 27-0374 |
| San Diego Unified | Executed | Executed | Executed | Marissa Allan, Senior Executive of Thriving School Communities · fully executed July 21, 2026 · RM# 27-0287 |
The Memoranda Of Understanding, As Executed
All signed for SCCOE by County Superintendent Dr. David M. Toston, Sr. Each runs July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028 and commits the LEA to three schools, a district project lead, quarterly collaborative learning, at least two screener administrations a year and regular data review.
| LEA | Signed For The LEA By | LEA Signed | SCCOE Signed | Fully Executed | RM# |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milpitas Unified SD | Brian White, Executive Director of Inclusive Services for All Learners | 7-23-2026 | 7-29-2026 | 7-30-2026 | 27-28-0330 |
| Mount Pleasant Elementary SD | Laurie Breton, Director of Student Support | 7-24-2026 | 7-29-2026 | 7-30-2026 | 27-28-0333 |
| Sunnyvale School District | Gudiel R. Crosthwaite, Ph.D., Superintendent | 9-8-2026 | – | – | – |
| Lake Tahoe Unified SD | Alan Reeder, Associate Superintendent | 8-17-2026 | 8-19-2026 | 8-20-2026 | 27-28-0437 |
| Rio School District | Rebecca Rocha, Director of Student Services | 8-4-2026 | 8-7-2026 | 8-12-2026 | 27-0374 |
| San Diego Unified SD | Marissa Allan, Senior Executive of Thriving School Communities | 7-16-2026 | 7-20-2026 | 7-21-2026 | 27-0287 |
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education19Element 3Element 3 · Agreements And Governance · Continued
Eighteen Signature Paths
Three instruments at each of six LEAs. The individual paths are short; what took the time is that there are eighteen of them, each crossing its own board calendar, insurance review and counsel review. That is the argument for sizing the agreement period separately from recruitment.
What Each Path Waits On
A superintendent, a general counsel, a technology director, a governing board’s agenda. Board approval sits on a monthly calendar, insurance review turns on the specific endorsements a district requires, and counsel review is its own queue again.
What The Signatures Attest
Each is an executed DocuSign record with its certificate of completion, and each carries an SCCOE records-management number, which is what makes the position above checkable rather than asserted. 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.
Recommendation For Statewide Scaling
Size the agreement period to the signature paths, not to the recruitment window. A deliverable that attests to executed agreements should fall due after a period sized for the number of boards, counsels and insurers the agreements have to cross. In a statewide design the recruitment period and the execution period should be planned separately, with the second sized from the count of instruments multiplied by the count of LEAs rather than assumed to fit inside the first.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education20Element 3Element 3 · Agreements And Governance
Behavioral Health Data Access, Configured Per Site
Three roles, three scopes, from the district down to the classroom. Each role sees the level it is responsible for and what sits beneath it, and the district level is where the LEA remains the data controller.
District
The LEA behavioral health lead
Every participating site in the district. This is the level at which the LEA remains the data controller and retains ownership of student records.
Site
School leadership, counselors, and other behavioral health practitioners
School-level data: results for the participating grades and the referral routing behind them, visible to school leadership, counselors, and other behavioral health practitioners.
Classroom
Teachers running an administration
Their own students, for the administration they are running, and nothing beyond it.
Each role sees its own level and the levels beneath it, and nothing above. Access is granted per site and configured by Impacter Pathway; SCCOE reviews and approves across the set.
Two Configurations This Cohort Needs
Role-scoped access granted per site does not follow a person across two of them, so every counselor working on more than one campus is configured deliberately. And the shared Ida Jew and Valle Vista campus carries two CDS codes, so coverage is applied to both entities rather than to the address.
Where Authority Sits
The LEA is the data controller and retains ownership of student records. Impacter Pathway processes only for the purposes the agreement names and configures the controls per site. SCCOE reviews and approves across the set, and retains data governance authority.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education21Element 4Element 4
School Coordination
Exhibit A Requirement
Coordination with LEAs in selecting three (3) schools within each LEA for participation, describing how schools were selected and the rationale for selection. Additionally, per Exhibit A Section VI.F: within each LEA, an elementary, a middle and a high school should be selected for participation.
How Coordination Ran
School selection was not handed to districts as a request for three names. SCCOE coordinated with each LEA’s superintendent, director of student services and behavioral health lead against a stated set of selection criteria: existing behavioral health programming or counselor staffing, willingness to participate in screener administration and data-review cycles, adequate technology infrastructure including devices and single sign-on, and sufficient enrollment for meaningful performance management analysis.
The intent was not to create a uniform cohort but to select a diverse set of LEAs and schools that could generate meaningful implementation lessons across different counties, grade levels, school models, student demographics and behavioral health system conditions, while ensuring that grant resources reached schools with demonstrated student need and implementation readiness.
Within those criteria, districts chose. That is the important structural point about this cohort, and it explains most of what follows: no LEA selected three interchangeable schools.
| Selection Consideration | Rationale |
|---|---|
| Student need and equity | Schools serving high-need student populations, including Title I schools and communities with significant behavioral health support needs or recently affected by behavioral health grants ending. |
| Diverse fiscal and local contexts | Inclusion of Basic Aid LEAs, where appropriate, so the cohort represents more than one funding and governance context for understanding how BHPM practices can be implemented and sustained. |
| Geographic diversity | LEAs from four counties (El Dorado, Santa Clara, Ventura and San Diego) rather than a single geography. |
| Grade-span diversity | Elementary, middle and high school participation. |
| School model diversity | Community schools and other models with existing integrated student support structures, including wellness centers and active behavioral health services. |
| MTSS and behavioral health readiness | Schools that understand and practice MTSS as a systems framework and want to deepen its alignment with behavioral health, positioned to use the project to strengthen how teams identify needs, monitor supports, review data and improve systems, rather than as a compliance activity. |
| Implementation readiness | LEAs able to identify three schools, designate leadership, engage in meetings and move participation agreements forward. |
| Sustainability alignment | LEAs connected to CYBHI, DHCS fee-schedule readiness, school-based billing or other behavioral health sustainability efforts. |
The Criteria Schools Were Selected Against
Four criteria, applied to every school each district put forward.
Existing Provision
Behavioral health programming or counselor staffing already at the site.
Willingness
To participate in screener administration and in data-review cycles, not only to be named.
Technology
Adequate devices and technology infrastructure.
Scale
Enrollment sufficient for meaningful performance management analysis.
The criteria set the floor; the composition was the district’s own. That is why the six accounts under Rationale By LEA read so differently from one another. One district spread its three sites across its own socioeconomic range, another paired schools that have the scaffolding against one that does not, and a third selected on a feeder pattern so a single population can be followed across a transition.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education22Element 4Element 4 · School Coordination · Continued
How The Cohort Meets The Grade-Band Expectation
Across the eighteen sites the cohort covers every grade band the contract names: elementary, middle, high, and TK-8 campuses that span multiple bands. All three bands are represented, and the two transition points the contract’s structure implies are each measured at multiple sites in multiple districts.
Within individual LEAs, composition follows district structure rather than a uniform template, because for most participating districts no other composition is possible. Rio, Mount Pleasant and Sunnyvale are TK–8 districts; they operate no high school to select. Milpitas contributed its comprehensive high school, its alternative high school and a middle school because that is where its ninth-grade transition and its highest-need population sit. Lake Tahoe Unified, the only district selecting across a full TK–12 continuum, contributes an elementary, a middle and a high school exactly as the contract describes.
The contract’s language is permissive on this point (should, not shall), and the cohort was built to satisfy the intent behind it. That intent is developmental coverage: a performance management system that works only in high schools tells the state nothing about when to intervene. This cohort measures the same competencies across multiple developmental stages, which is what makes cross-band comparison possible at all.
Why This Composition Is An Asset For The Evaluation
A cohort of six identically composed districts would produce cleaner tables and weaker findings. What this cohort supports instead is a set of questions the state cannot currently answer: whether behavioral health competency measured at one transition point predicts anything at the next; whether a TK–8 structure changes a transition relative to a separate middle school; whether a secondary transition looks different in a comprehensive high school than in an alternative placement.
Rio Del Sol is the clearest case. As a single TK–8 site screening multiple transition points, it holds school culture, staffing and community constant while varying the developmental stage, a comparison no two-school pairing can produce.
Grade Bands And The Transition Years
Site selection surfaced a trend the contract’s grade-band language points toward but does not name: behavioral health need appears to concentrate at transition. These transition years, third, sixth, and ninth grade, each mark a distinct developmental shift in how a student experiences school, and sites tended to be selected around those years rather than distributed evenly across grade labels. Within that frame, each LEA worked with its sites to determine a screening strategy suited to the specific transition it was designed to capture.
Elementary
The Instructional Transition
Around third grade, instruction shifts from learning to read to reading to learn, and a student's academic self-concept begins to harden. Socially, play is shifting too, from parallel play to more rule-based, cooperative games, which changes how a child navigates peer relationships and conflict.
Middle
The Structural Transition
One teacher who knows a student becomes several who do not, and a single classroom becomes a schedule. Multiple elementary schools often feed into a single middle school, so a student's peer group grows unfamiliar just as social cliques begin to form and students are navigating the onset of puberty.*
High
The Secondary Transition
It happens again at higher stakes, adding credit accumulation to a social reset. At comprehensive high schools especially, students arrive from many different middle schools at once, and school staff are working to identify and connect with students who may be harder to see in a much larger, less familiar environment.
*Individual screening strategies were determined by each LEA in collaboration with site leadership and behavioral health champions, with exact grades and timing varying by district structure. These strategies may continue to evolve as sites move into implementation.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education23Element 4Element 4 · School Coordination · Continued
The Eighteen Sites, By Transition
| LEA | Site | Grade Span | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| Elementary Transition | |||
| Rio SD | Rio Lindo Elementary | TK–5 | 3rd (Yr 1), adding 5th (Yr 2) |
| Mount Pleasant | Robert Sanders Elementary | TK–5 | 3rd |
| Lake Tahoe | Bijou Community School | TK–5 | 3rd |
| Middle Transition | |||
| Rio SD | Rio Vista Middle | 6–8 | 6th |
| Mount Pleasant | August Boeger Middle | 6–8 | 6th, plus counseling referrals |
| Mount Pleasant | Ida Jew / Valle Vista | TK–8 / TK–5 | 6th, plus counseling referrals |
| Sunnyvale | Sunnyvale Middle | 6–8 | 6th |
| Sunnyvale | Columbia Middle | 6–8 | 6th |
| Lake Tahoe | South Tahoe Middle | 6–8 | 6th |
| San Diego | Pacific Beach Middle | 6–8 | 6th |
| Milpitas | Rancho Milpitas Middle | 7–8 | 7th |
| Multiple Transitions At A Single Site | |||
| Rio SD | Rio Del Sol STEAM | TK–8 | K, 3rd, and 6th |
| The Year Before The Transition | |||
| Sunnyvale | Lakewood Elementary | TK–5 | 5th |
| Secondary Transition | |||
| Milpitas | Milpitas High | 9–12 | 9th |
| Lake Tahoe | South Tahoe High | 9–12 | 9th |
| San Diego | Mission Bay High | 9–12 | 9th |
| San Diego | Clairemont High | 9–12 | 9th |
| Whole School | |||
| Milpitas | Calaveras Hills Alternative High School | 9–12 alt | Entire student body (105) |
*Individual screening strategies were determined by each LEA in collaboration with site leadership and behavioral health champions, with exact grades and timing varying by district structure. These strategies may continue to evolve as sites move into implementation.
Why Calaveras Hills Alternative High School Screens The Whole School
Calaveras Hills Alternative High School’s enrollment of roughly 105 students is small enough to make universal, schoolwide screening feasible, rather than requiring a targeted grade or subgroup. The district selected the site on explicitly equity- and need-based grounds, and a school community event in spring 2026 heightened urgency around behavioral health support on that campus.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education24Element 4Element 4 · School Coordination · Rationale By LEA
The Nine Schools These Three Districts Named
| LEA | School | Grades | Enrollment | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milpitas Unified | Rancho Milpitas Middle | 7–8 | 693 | 7th |
| Milpitas Unified | Milpitas High | 9–12 | 2,926 | 9th |
| Milpitas Unified | Calaveras Hills Alternative High School | 9–12 alt | 105 | Whole school |
| Mount Pleasant Elementary SD | August Boeger Middle | 6–8 | 397 | 6th |
| Mount Pleasant Elementary SD | Robert Sanders Elementary | TK–5 | 304 | 3rd |
| Mount Pleasant Elementary SD | Ida Jew Academy / Valle Vista | TK–8 / TK–5 | 639 | 6th |
| Sunnyvale School District | Lakewood Elementary | TK–5 | 372 | 5th |
| Sunnyvale School District | Sunnyvale Middle | 6–8 | 1,053 | 6th |
| Sunnyvale School District | Columbia Middle | 6–8 | 697 | 6th |
| Selection Rubric | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 | D5 | D6 | D7 | D8 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Milpitas Unified | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 26/32 |
| Mount Pleasant Elementary SD | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 26/32 |
| Sunnyvale School District | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 25/32 |
Milpitas Unified School DistrictThe Secondary Continuum, With An Equity Case At The End Of It
Milpitas selected across its full secondary range: Rancho Milpitas Middle, Milpitas High and Calaveras Hills High, the district’s alternative high school. Rancho and Milpitas High are comprehensive campuses with established if still-developing behavioral health staffing. Calaveras Hills was selected on explicitly equity- and need-based grounds: its enrollment of roughly 105 is small enough to make universal schoolwide screening feasible rather than requiring a targeted subgroup, and a school community event in spring 2026 heightened the district’s urgency about behavioral health support on that campus.
These sites also give Milpitas a chance to evaluate and validate its existing contracted mental health model, led by the district’s lead social worker, overseeing a team of contracted associate marriage and family therapists and social workers deployed across sites by need.
Milpitas structured onboarding as individualized, site-specific planning sessions for each of the three schools rather than a single district kickoff, reflecting how differently the three sites are staffed and scheduled. Rancho Milpitas serves only grades seventh and eighth, the district’s elementary schools run K through sixth, so the school has just two years with each student. The district’s target is seventh grade, prioritizing the first year a student arrives so that staff can build relationships and establish a baseline early, within the limited window they have with that student population.
Mount Pleasant Elementary School DistrictInfrastructure Present Against Infrastructure Absent
Mount Pleasant selected three of its four schools, spanning grades TK through 8 across the district, and paired them deliberately. August Boeger (grades 6–8) and Robert Sanders (grades TK–5) are both designated Community Schools with existing behavioral health staffing and programming to build on, though the depth of that infrastructure varies between them. August Boeger is the more developed of the two: it operates a dedicated on-site wellness center and has the most consistent implementation of the district’s existing screening instrument. Robert Sanders shares the Community School designation and uses the same screening instrument, but implementation there is newer and less consistent, and the site does not have a comparable dedicated wellness space.
The third site, Ida Jew Academy (grades TK–8, co-located with Valle Vista Elementary, grades TK–5), was chosen as the contrasting case: one of the district’s largest school communities, carrying documented behavioral health need in its middle-school grades, and without the Community School designation, a wellness center, or the screening instrument the other two sites use in some form.
District leadership described the pairing as intentional: it allows the district to observe implementation across a spectrum of existing infrastructure, from most developed (August Boeger) to partially developed (Robert Sanders) to none (Ida Jew/Valle Vista), rather than a simple binary. For the project’s purposes this is the most analytically useful selection any LEA made, and it is discussed again under Element 6.
Sunnyvale School DistrictA Limited First Release, Scoped By The District
Sunnyvale is a TK–8 district with no high school to select, and its composition follows that structure: both of its middle schools and one elementary. The two middle schools qualified in part because both currently receive social work services, an existing-service indicator consistent with the cohort’s readiness criteria.
Lakewood Elementary was scoped to 5th grade only, and this was a district decision rather than a constraint. Leadership chose a deliberate limited release: begin with one grade in one building, expand in future years based on what the first phase shows. That is a district treating participation as a multi-year systems change rather than a one-time compliance activity, and the project records it as such.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education25Element 4Element 4 · School Coordination · Continued
The Nine Schools These Three Districts Named
| LEA | School | Grades | Enrollment | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lake Tahoe Unified | Bijou Community School | TK–5 | 422 | 3rd |
| Lake Tahoe Unified | South Tahoe Middle | 6–8 | 716 | 6th |
| Lake Tahoe Unified | South Tahoe High | 9–12 | 1,076 | 9th |
| Rio School District | Rio Del Sol STEAM Academy | TK–8 | 839 | K, 3rd, and 6th |
| Rio School District | Rio Lindo Elementary | TK–5 | 405 | 3rd (Yr 1) · +5th (Yr 2) |
| Rio School District | Rio Vista Middle | 6–8 | 637 | 6th |
| San Diego Unified | Pacific Beach Middle | 6–8 | 715 | 6th |
| San Diego Unified | Mission Bay High | 9–12 | 1,240 | 9th |
| San Diego Unified | Clairemont High | 9–12 | 823 | 9th |
| Selection Rubric | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 | D5 | D6 | D7 | D8 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lake Tahoe Unified | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 25/32 |
| Rio School District | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 29/32 |
| San Diego Unified | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 27/32 |
Lake Tahoe Unified School DistrictFull TK–12 Continuum, And The Cohort’s Rural County
Lake Tahoe selected Bijou Community School, South Tahoe Middle and South Tahoe High: one elementary, one middle and one high school, exactly the composition Exhibit A describes, and the only LEA in the cohort able to produce it because it is the only participating district operating a full TK–12 continuum. Lake Tahoe also contributes El Dorado County, the cohort’s only non-metropolitan member and the reason findings from this project can speak to rural California at all.
The three sites also give the district one campus at each grade band with behavioral health provision already in place. Bijou is named in the district’s $4.7 million Community Schools implementation plan under the California Community Schools Partnership Program. South Tahoe Middle operates an on-campus wellness clinic and South Tahoe High a wellness center, both staffed through the district’s standing partnership with El Dorado County Behavioral Health under grant agreement #24MHSOAC008.
Rio School DistrictDeliberate Socioeconomic Spread Within One District
Rio selected Rio Lindo Elementary, Rio Vista Middle and Rio Del Sol STEAM Academy, and district leadership described the distribution as intentional. Rio Lindo was identified at kickoff as the district’s highest-need site: the largest concentration of students with moderate-to-severe special needs and the lowest household-income profile of the three. Rio Del Sol is the opposite end of that range: a lottery and waitlist site described as the district’s most sought-after school and its most affluent participating population. Rio Vista sits in the middle.
The California School Dashboard ↗ confirms the spread the district described. Socioeconomic disadvantage runs 54.9 percent at Rio Del Sol, 68.8 at Rio Vista, 81.0 at Rio Lindo; students with disabilities run 9.3, 14.0 and 20.2 percent across the same three. The purpose is to observe implementation across meaningfully different socioeconomic contexts inside a single district, holding district policy, staffing model and leadership constant while varying who walks in the door. All three sites volunteered.
San Diego Unified School DistrictVertical Articulation And Continuum Of Care
San Diego’s selection developed over the recruitment period. The district first identified Creative, Performing and Media Arts, Innovation Middle and Madison High after the August 5 kickoff, on a vertical articulation rationale: both middle schools fed Madison High, so one student population could be followed across the transition. Those three were profiled and assessed on that basis, and Creative, Performing and Media Arts carried a comparatively high volume of existing mental health referrals.
The district then refined the selection to Pacific Beach Middle, Mission Bay High and Clairemont High. Vertical articulation carries forward: Pacific Beach Middle feeds directly into Mission Bay High, and that pair preserves the continuous view of one student population moving from middle school into high school. What the second selection adds is an established continuum of care. Each of the three campuses operates an on-campus wellness center with a wellness coordinator, and the district’s interest is in using screening data to measure how well services already running are working, rather than in standing up a first layer of support.
Clairemont High has administered a behavioral health screener before. Its multi-tiered system of support meets weekly, with the site administrator, the school counselor and the wellness coordinator at the table, and screening results route into that existing meeting rather than into one built alongside it.
More schools in the district wanted to take part than the three the project scopes at each LEA, and the district asked whether it could bring more. Participation was held at three so the cohort stays narrow enough for implementation lessons to be legible, which made selection at this LEA a matter of choosing among willing schools rather than finding them. The selection moving once before it settled is what that longer process looked like in practice.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education26Element 5Element 5
Baseline Capacity · Organizational Profiles
Exhibit A Requirement
Organizational profiles for selected LEAs and schools, including student demographics, regional context, populations served, baseline behavioral health capacity indicators, and reasons for participation.
Board-adopted behavioral health investment across the six LEAs exceeds $21 million a year, and none of it is BHSSA money. These are publicly documented commitments in Local Control and Accountability Plans: the districts’ own money, spent on counselors, wellness staff, psychologists and social workers. Set against that, county BHSSA and MHSSA service arrives without site-level attribution, so where BHSSA-funded and district-funded service reach the same student on the same campus, nothing currently distinguishes them.
Santa Clara · Suburban Corridor
10,192 students · 19 schools · TK–12 · LCFF
Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year
Existing screening. None documented at the three participating sites
County relationship. Santa Clara County Behavioral Health Services Department partner. Care Solace provides 24/7 care navigation for families and staff districtwide.
Reason for participation. The cohort's complete evidence chain: MHSSA funding attributable to a named site, CYBHI reimbursement drawn, and $4.7M a year of staffing on expiring one-time money.
Santa Clara · Urban East San José
1,497 students · 5 schools · TK–8 · LCFF
Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year
Existing screening. Sown to Grow at two sites; no universal instrument at the third
County relationship. Santa Clara County Behavioral Health School Linked Services funds family liaison and engagement work across all three Community School implementation plans.
Reason for participation. Furthest along on service and furthest behind on measurement. August Boeger's wellness center logged more than 10,000 visits against roughly 400 students.
Santa Clara · Technology Economy
5,682 students · 10 schools · TK–8 · Basic Aid
Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year
Existing screening. None documented at the three participating sites
County relationship. SCCOE Youth Health and Wellness network. Lakewood Elementary hosts a wellness center that SCCOE previously operated and staffed, now run by Sunnyvale School District.
Reason for participation. Why this cohort's sustainability findings will transfer. Every argument resting on LCFF supplemental dollars fails in a Basic Aid district, and 139 California districts are Basic Aid.
El Dorado · Rural Mountain
3,363 students · 8 schools · TK–12 · LCFF
Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year
Existing screening. None documented
County relationship. El Dorado County Behavioral Health, under executed grant agreement #24MHSOAC008. Wellness center staffing runs through this standing partnership.
Reason for participation. The only LEA producing the exact grade-band composition Exhibit A describes, the cohort's only rural context, and its only fourth county.
Ventura · Agricultural Coastal
5,208 students · 9 schools · TK–8 · LCFF
Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year
Existing screening. Panorama Level 1 districtwide, plus a March 2026 pilot at Rio Vista
County relationship. Ventura County Office of Education operates wellness centers at all nine Rio schools under its CYBHI School-Linked Partnership and Capacity Grant.
Reason for participation. Volunteered at all three sites and has moved fastest operationally: named counselor champions at every site receiving $2,000 stipends.
San Diego · Large Urban
112,250 students · 226 schools · TK–12 · LCFF
Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year
Existing screening. None documented at the three participating sites
County relationship. San Diego County Behavioral Health Services. A named partner in SDCOE's COPES suicide prevention initiative, Phase 2, a $7 million four-year award.
Reason for participation. Brings scale, a second county behavioral health system, and a vertical feeder structure tracking one student population from two middle schools into a shared high school.
Investment figures are board-adopted LCAP actions: Rio 3.5 Health & Wellness Student Services · Mount Pleasant 1.6 Additional Staff to Monitor Progress · Milpitas 2.6 mental health staffing, funded from the expiring Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant, plus 2.10 MTSS Tier 1 to 3 · Sunnyvale 1.2 Inclusive and Nurturing Environments Targeted Staffing · San Diego 1.1 District-Wide Wellness · Lake Tahoe two actions funding counselors and structured wellbeing practice. Each links to its plan at bhpm.care.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education27Element 5Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 1 Of 6
Milpitas Unified School District
10,192 students · 19 schools · grades TK–12 · LCFF
Selection Rubric · This District
26/32
D1
4D2
3D3
4D4
3D5
3D6
3D7
3D8
3Green is Advanced, yellow is Competent. Every dimension sits at Competent or above; the instrument and its level descriptors are at Element 2.
The Three Participating Schools
| School | Grades | Enrollment | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rancho Milpitas Middle | 7–8 | 693 | 7th |
| Milpitas High | 9–12 | 2,926 | 9th |
| Calaveras Hills Alternative High School | 9–12 alt | 105 | Whole school |
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education28Element 5Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 2 Of 6
Mount Pleasant Elementary School District
1,497 students · 5 schools · grades TK–8 · LCFF with concentration grant
Selection Rubric · This District
26/32
D1
3D2
3D3
3D4
4D5
3D6
4D7
3D8
3Green is Advanced, yellow is Competent. Every dimension sits at Competent or above; the instrument and its level descriptors are at Element 2.
The Three Participating Schools
| School | Grades | Enrollment | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| August Boeger Middle | 6–8 | 397 | 6th |
| Robert Sanders Elementary | TK–5 | 304 | 3rd |
| Ida Jew Academy / Valle Vista | TK–8 / TK–5 | 639 | 6th |
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education29Element 5Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 3 Of 6
Sunnyvale School District
5,682 students · 10 schools · grades TK–8 · Basic Aid (community-funded)
Selection Rubric · This District
25/32
D1
3D2
3D3
4D4
3D5
3D6
3D7
3D8
3Green is Advanced, yellow is Competent. Every dimension sits at Competent or above; the instrument and its level descriptors are at Element 2.
The Three Participating Schools
| School | Grades | Enrollment | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lakewood Elementary | TK–5 | 372 | 5th |
| Sunnyvale Middle | 6–8 | 1,053 | 6th |
| Columbia Middle | 6–8 | 697 | 6th |
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education30Element 5Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 4 Of 6
Lake Tahoe Unified School District
3,363 students · 8 schools · grades TK–12 · LCFF
Selection Rubric · This District
25/32
D1
3D2
3D3
3D4
3D5
3D6
3D7
4D8
3Green is Advanced, yellow is Competent. Every dimension sits at Competent or above; the instrument and its level descriptors are at Element 2.
The Three Participating Schools
| School | Grades | Enrollment | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bijou Community School | TK–5 | 422 | 3rd |
| South Tahoe Middle | 6–8 | 716 | 6th |
| South Tahoe High | 9–12 | 1,076 | 9th |
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education31Element 5Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 5 Of 6
Rio School District
5,208 students · 9 schools · grades TK–8 · LCFF with concentration grant
Selection Rubric · This District
29/32
D1
3D2
4D3
3D4
4D5
4D6
3D7
4D8
4Green is Advanced, yellow is Competent. Every dimension sits at Competent or above; the instrument and its level descriptors are at Element 2.
The Three Participating Schools
| School | Grades | Enrollment | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rio Del Sol STEAM Academy | TK–8 | 839 | K, 3rd, and 6th |
| Rio Lindo Elementary | TK–5 | 405 | 3rd (Yr 1) · +5th (Yr 2) |
| Rio Vista Middle | 6–8 | 637 | 6th |
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education32Element 5Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 6 Of 6
San Diego Unified School District
112,250 students · 226 schools · grades TK–12 · LCFF
Selection Rubric · This District
27/32
D1
4D2
3D3
4D4
3D5
3D6
3D7
4D8
3Green is Advanced, yellow is Competent. Every dimension sits at Competent or above; the instrument and its level descriptors are at Element 2.
The Three Participating Schools
| School | Grades | Enrollment | Target Population |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pacific Beach Middle | 6–8 | 715 | 6th |
| Mission Bay High | 9–12 | 1,240 | 9th |
| Clairemont High | 9–12 | 823 | 9th |
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education33Element 5Element 5 · Baseline Capacity
What The Six Profiles Show Together
Board-adopted behavioral health investment across the six LEAs exceeds $21 million a year, and none of it is BHSSA money. Rio budgets $2.9 million, Mount Pleasant $199,000, Milpitas $5.0 million across two actions, Sunnyvale $6.9 million, San Diego $4.7 million, Lake Tahoe $1.7 million. These are board-adopted, publicly documented commitments in Local Control and Accountability Plans: the districts’ own money, spent on counselors, wellness staff, psychologists and social workers.
Set against that, county BHSSA and MHSSA service arrives without site-level attribution. The consequence is precise: where BHSSA-funded service and district-funded service reach the same student on the same campus, nothing currently distinguishes them. Current reporting structures provide visibility into funded programs at the county and consortium level, and recruitment illuminated an opportunity to connect that investment information to the school sites where implementation occurs. That is not an accounting complaint. It is the reason a performance management layer is worth building, and this cohort was selected from exactly the districts where the entanglement is deepest.
Every participating LEA is spending its own money on behavioral health at scale. BHPM creates an opportunity to connect that spending to evidence of what it changed for a student.
Board-Adopted Behavioral Health Investment, Per Year
The districts’ own money, from their Local Control and Accountability Plans. Each figure links to the plan it was adopted under.
Milpitas UnifiedActions 2.6 and 2.10 summed
Lake Tahoe UnifiedTwo actions summed
Mount Pleasant is in coral because it is the argument. It carries the smallest board-adopted investment in the cohort at the district with the highest need concentration: 68.5 to 82.4 percent socioeconomic disadvantage, and the cohort’s highest English learner share. Spending and need do not track each other here.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education34Element 6Element 6
Readiness Findings
Exhibit A Requirement
Findings and lessons learned from technology, data systems, and implementation readiness assessments at all eighteen (18) selected school sites.
More systematic screening and more developed tier routing appeared together, rather than routing maturity preceding the instrument. Mount Pleasant produced that observation by the way it selected: three schools, one district, one leadership team, one set of policies, and the variable that tracks with tier maturity is which of them has an instrument.
Technology Is Not The Constraint At A Single Site
All six LEAs run a modern student information system (Aeries at Milpitas and Lake Tahoe; PowerSchool at Mount Pleasant, Sunnyvale and San Diego; Q at Rio) with Clever single sign-on live and in active production use districtwide. Device coverage is 1:1 at every site where it has been confirmed, and no site reports a network constraint outside the May state testing window, which falls clear of the October administration.
That inverts an assumption the field commonly makes. Not one of the eighteen sites is held back by technology. The readiness questions that remain are about people and time.
Schedule, Not Hardware, Determines Whether An Administration Runs Cleanly
The single best predictor of a smooth administration is whether a site already holds a block of time it can give. Rio Vista Middle has a 34 minute advisory period for all 6th grade students and few scheduling questions if at all. Rio Del Sol, in the same district with the same infrastructure and better staffing, has a genuinely open scheduling problem because its inquiry-led project-based structure has no equivalent block. Milpitas High operates a compressed advisory period of roughly twelve to seventeen minutes, weekly.
Districts adopting this model should be asked about their bell schedule before they are asked about their devices.
Audio Hardware Is The One Recurring Hardware Question, And It Is About Concurrency
Spoken-response administration requires headphones with microphones. Every site has them, because every site administers state testing. The question at each is not whether they exist but how many can be in one room at one time, which determines whether a grade level administers in one sitting or across three. It is the detail most easily assumed rather than counted, so it is recorded as an explicit count at every site.
Consent Varies By District And By Grade, Never By Site
Rio runs informational notice with opt-out districtwide, on the district’s reasoning that a skills-based assessment is not a mental health survey. Robert Sanders requested paper forms alongside the platform, the only site in the cohort to do so, for a family base where a magic-link email is not the reliable route.
Impacter Pathway operates a family consent platform ↗ for the program at consent.impacterpathway.com. It carries each district’s own family notice in English and Spanish, issues a magic link to each family, records opt-outs against the roster, and gives the LEA a live count of where consent stands. Consent design therefore stays a local decision, made district by district on local reasoning, while the record of that decision stays consistent across the cohort and can be reported the same way everywhere.
Two consequences follow. First, consent design belongs at LEA level, not site level. Second, where active consent applies, the make-up plan has to cover late-returning permission slips and not only absence, a distinction that determines whether a screening is a census or a sample.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education35Element 6Element 6 · Readiness Findings · Continued
The Infrastructure Behind Findings One To Three
| LEA | Student Information System | Clever SSO | Devices At The Target Grades |
|---|---|---|---|
| Milpitas Unified | Aeries | Live | 1:1 Chromebooks and MacBooks |
| Mount Pleasant Elementary SD | PowerSchool | Live | 1:1, iPads K–2 and Chromebooks 3–8 |
| Sunnyvale School District | PowerSchool | Live | Confirmed districtwide |
| Lake Tahoe Unified | Aeries | Live | Confirmed districtwide |
| Rio School District | “Q” (Equitus Solutions) | Live | 1:1 Chromebooks confirmed, grades 3–5 |
| San Diego Unified | PowerSchool | Live | Confirmed districtwide |
Six systems, six live single sign-ons, and no site held back by either. That inverts the assumption the field usually makes. The readiness questions that remain across these eighteen sites are about people and about time, which is what findings four to eight are all about.
More Systematic Screening And More Developed Tier Routing Appeared Together
This is the cohort’s most consequential observation, and Mount Pleasant produced it by design of selection. The pattern is an association across three comparable sites rather than an established causal relationship, and BHPM creates an opportunity to test it longitudinally.
August Boeger runs Sown to Grow with full fidelity, plus a wellness-center check-in that triages walk-ins by need and severity, and its referral pathway is documented and live. Robert Sanders runs the same instrument in its second year with less consistency, and its tier structure is described as developing. Ida Jew Academy / Valle Vista runs no universal instrument, and its referral routing and tier structure are correspondingly less formed. That contrast is precisely why the district selected the three together.
Three schools, one district, one leadership team, one set of policies. The variable that tracks with tier maturity is not staffing, funding or demographics. It is whether the school has an instrument that surfaces need at population level.
Universal screening ↗ and more developed tier-routing practices appeared together across these three sites, rather than routing maturity preceding the instrument. BHPM creates an opportunity to test that relationship longitudinally as screening, routing and service response are implemented across the cohort.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education36Element 6Element 6 · Readiness Findings · Continued
Chronic Absenteeism Is The Binding Constraint On Reach At Some Sites
Robert Sanders Elementary reports chronic absenteeism around 28 percent, well above district and state averages. At that rate a two-day administration window does not produce a census regardless of how well the technology works. The administration design there uses a make-up window rather than a single make-up session: a standing slot plus a second sweep, with the community school coordinator flagging chronically absent students for individual pickup, since the absence list and her existing caseload overlap heavily.
Reach is a distinct readiness dimension from capacity, and it does not appear in any standard readiness instrument. It should.
A Two-Period Pilot Retired More Implementation Risk Than Any Other Preparation
Rio Vista Middle ran an Impacter Pathway pilot in March 2026 in two class periods. It is the only site in the eighteen where student login, device suitability and headphone-and-microphone availability are demonstrated rather than expected, the only one where the administration environment has been tested for privacy, and the only one whose team has run the instrument before. Its assessment carries the fewest conditions in the cohort and the lowest projected first-day support need.
For statewide scaling the lesson is direct: a two-period pilot at one site retires more implementation risk than any amount of documentation about the same site.
Split Staffing Is A Capacity Fact The Readiness Rating Does Not Capture
Several participating sites are served by a counselor who also serves another campus. One school counselor covers Robert Sanders and Ida Jew Academy / Valle Vista, 943 students across two campuses. Rio Lindo has one counselor for 405 students. Rancho Milpitas is covered from Milpitas High during a staffing transition. Every one of these sites is staffed, and every one scores Competent on engagement capacity.
What the rating does not show is that administration at each depends on one person being present on one day. That is a scheduling fact about how the cohort is staffed, not a judgment about any school, and the whole of the remedy is naming a second trained proctor at each site before the administration window opens.
Consent, Decided District By District
Informational notice with opt-out
Districtwide, on the district's reasoning that a skills-based assessment is not a mental health survey and community concern is low.
The platform, plus paper at one site
Robert Sanders asked for paper forms alongside the platform, for a family base where a magic-link email is not the reliable route.
Two consequences follow, and they are the finding. Consent design belongs at LEA level rather than site level, because districts reach different and well-reasoned answers. And where active consent applies, the make-up plan has to cover late-returning permission slips and not only absence, which is the difference between a screening being a census and being a sample.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education37Element 6Element 6 · Readiness Findings
Lessons Learned, Stated For Reuse
Seven lessons out of eighteen site assessments, written so another county office can act on them without reading the assessments. Each one replaces a question the field usually asks with the one that turned out to predict the answer.
Ask about the bell schedule before the device inventory
Devices are solved statewide; time is not. The best single predictor of a clean administration is whether a site already holds a block it can give.
Instead of Asking about devices first.
Count audio hardware by concurrency, not by existence
Every site has headphones, because every site administers state testing. Whether a grade level can run in one sitting or across three is a different question.
Instead of Asking whether headphones exist.
Pilot one class period at one site before assessing eighteen
Rio Vista's two-period pilot is why that site's assessment carries the fewest conditions in the cohort. It turns expectations into findings faster than any instrument.
Instead of Assessing on documentation alone.
Treat reach as a readiness dimension of its own
Chronic absenteeism around 28 percent means a two-day window is not a census however well the technology works. No standard instrument asks this.
Instead of Reading capacity as reach.
Name a second trained proctor wherever one person carries a site
Several sites are served by a counselor who also serves another campus. This costs nothing at planning time and everything on the day.
Instead of Reading a staffing rating as coverage.
Run consent design locally and record it centrally
Districts reach different and well-reasoned answers, from districtwide notice to a grade split inside one building. One platform keeps the record comparable anyway.
Instead of Imposing a single consent model.
Do not assume a tier structure precedes screening
In this cohort more systematic screening and more developed routing appeared together. BHPM creates an opportunity to test that relationship longitudinally before MTSS maturity is treated as a precondition.
Instead of Requiring MTSS maturity as a precondition.
What The Seven Have In Common
None of the seven lessons are about money or equipment. Every one comes down to time, or to naming a specific person responsible. That is the real takeaway from Element 6: this cohort already has what the field usually worries about. What is missing is the practice of turning that into evidence.
Readiness As The Implementation Baseline
The readiness assessment provides the implementation baseline for the next phase of BHPM. The common capacity-building approach addresses needs identified across the cohort, while individual readiness profiles inform where support begins and which capacities receive greater emphasis at each participating LEA and site.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education38Element 7Element 7
Launch Supports
Exhibit A Requirement
Identification of anticipated implementation supports needed for participating in LEAs and schools at project launch.
Seven categories from the eighteen site assessments, sequenced by dependency. Items one to four land before October.
Governance And Access Configuration
The agreement sets are executed at all six LEAs and no site is waiting on paper. What the launch needs is configuration: role-scoped dashboard access set per site, explicit cross-site access for staff who work across two campuses, and coverage applied to both CDS-coded entities on the Ida Jew and Valle Vista campus.
Technical Configuration
Clever rostering configuration, one engagement per LEA rather than per site: six conversations, not eighteen. Confirm grade-level rather than section-level sync, confirm device ratios where the district statement does not cover the target grade, and count audio hardware by concurrency at every site.
Site Training And Walkthrough
A 45-minute proctor walkthrough per site, against the behavioral health screening guide. Combine at LEA level wherever staff are shared: one session for Sunnyvale's three sites, one for San Diego's three, one for Lake Tahoe's TK–12 pathway, and Mount Pleasant's two paired so one counselor trains once.
Scheduling And Administration Design
The site-specific work. Rio Del Sol needs a schedule inside a project-based structure with no standing block. Milpitas High needs a design that works at 2,926 students against a 12 to 17 minute weekly advisory. Calaveras Hills takes a whole-school single sitting. Robert Sanders takes a make-up window rather than one session.
MTSS Integration And Referral Pathway
Where a pathway exists, route screening results into it rather than building a parallel process, which is Rio's explicit instruction to its sites. Where one is still forming, it is built alongside the first administration. Name the Tier 3 escalation contact at every site.
Data-Cycle Establishment
The support almost every site needs and none has requested. Fifteen of eighteen sites have no scheduled review that converts behavioral health data into goal-setting, and the absence holds across very different resources: Sunnyvale at $6.9 million a year in support staffing, Mount Pleasant at $199,000. It is not a funding gap but a practice gap, and establishing the cycle is the core of the Training and Technical Assistance Plan.
Sustainability And CYBHI Billing
Distinct arguments for distinct fiscal contexts. Milpitas has drawn Fee Schedule reimbursement and carries $4.7M of staffing on expiring one-time money. Sunnyvale is Basic Aid, where LCFF-based sustainability arguments do not apply at all. Rio and Lake Tahoe are participants who have not billed.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education39Element 7Element 7 · Launch Supports
Where Support Concentrates, And Why
The distribution is not even, and it does not track with district size or resources. It tracks with what already exists to build on.
Rio Carries The Lightest Load
Champions named, target population confirmed and consent settled at every site. One site has run the instrument. Only scheduling remains.
Mount Pleasant Carries The Design Work
At Ida Jew / Valle Vista the instrument is new rather than replacing one, so routing and review are built alongside the first administration. It is the cohort's clearest before-and-after case.
San Diego Carries The Most Coordination
Three sites in a district of 226 schools, with referral routing that runs to a district office rather than down a hall. Scheduling and routing are district-level questions, not site-level ones.
From Readiness To Implementation
The supports identified through Deliverable 1 become direct inputs to Deliverable 3. The common training and capacity-building curriculum addresses the behavioral health performance management capacities identified across the cohort. Readiness findings help determine where participating LEAs and sites begin, which supports receive greater emphasis, and how support is sequenced. Implementation conversations then adapt those supports to local operating conditions, including existing teams, data routines, staffing structures, schedules and related information systems.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education40Section VI.FExhibit A Section VI.F · Required Written Statement
Efforts Undertaken To Ensure Diverse Participation
Recruitment pursued diversity as a measurement requirement, not a representational one. A behavioral health performance management system intended for statewide use has to demonstrate that it measures the same competencies with the same meaning across genuinely different contexts: different community types, different languages spoken at home, different cultural expectations about what it means to ask for help.
A cohort drawn from one kind of place would produce an instrument validated for one kind of place. Behavioral health competency is competency across contexts. The measurement question is not which schools have more of it: it is whether the instrument reads it accurately wherever a student happens to be.
The Spread The Cohort Actually Carries
English Learner Concentration
Carries the most weight of the six. The screener reads what a student says and writes, so its accuracy has to hold in a classroom where two in five students are English learners and in one where fewer than one in twenty-five are.
Socioeconomic Disadvantage
Sixteen of nineteen participating school entities hold Title I schoolwide status.
Students With Disabilities
Rio Lindo Elementary carries the cohort’s highest proportion, at 20.2 percent.
Enrollment At Participating Sites
A factor of twenty-eight. A workflow that functions at Calaveras Hills, where the whole student body screens in one sitting, and at Milpitas High, where a ninth-grade cohort alone exceeds a thousand, is a workflow that will transfer.
The Efforts Undertaken
Recruitment Ran Through More Than One Network, On Purpose
Had it relied on SCCOE's own superintendent network alone, the cohort would have been six suburban and urban Bay Area districts. Deveau Burr Group's relationship with all fifty-eight county offices was used specifically to reach beyond that footprint.
Community Type Was An Explicit Selection Consideration
Rural inclusion was treated as a requirement rather than a preference, which is why a 3,363-student mountain district sits alongside a 112,250-student urban one.
Districts That Did Not Join Are Reported Alongside Those That Did
The five span the same range of community types as the recruited cohort, so the pool the cohort was drawn from was itself diverse. The composition is not an artifact of who was asked.
Linguistic And Cultural Diversity
Cultural context varies in ways raw percentages only partly capture. Rio Lindo serves a community that is roughly 95 percent Hispanic or Latino. Milpitas High serves a student body that is predominantly Asian and Filipino. South Tahoe High is close to evenly split between Hispanic or Latino and White students. Sunnyvale Middle is a genuine plurality with no group in the majority.
Bijou Community School combines a majority-Hispanic population with a substantial White minority in a rural mountain setting. These communities differ in what help-seeking looks like, in how families engage with schools, and in the language a student reaches for when asked how they are doing. Recruiting across that range is how the crosswalk methodology gets tested rather than asserted.
The premise this cohort is built to test. No school was selected because its racial or ethnic composition was expected to predict its behavioral health. What differs across these communities is how competency is expressed: the vocabulary, the register, the willingness to name a difficulty out loud. An instrument that mistakes a difference in expression for a difference in capacity produces exactly the disparate outcomes California’s accountability systems have spent two decades trying to correct. Recruiting across this range is how that failure mode gets caught during the project rather than after it.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education41Section VI.FExhibit A Section VI.F · Continued
Regional And Community-Type Diversity
The cohort spans four California counties across four distinct regional economies: Ventura on the coastal agricultural plain, Santa Clara in the urban and suburban South Bay, San Diego on the southern border, and El Dorado in the Sierra Nevada. The resulting geography stretches roughly five hundred miles.
Community type varies as widely as geography. Rio School District serves an agricultural community on the Oxnard plain. Mount Pleasant serves an urban neighborhood on San José’s east side. Milpitas is a suburban district shaped by an industrial and technology corridor. Sunnyvale sits in the heart of the technology economy with the fiscal profile that follows. San Diego Unified is among the largest urban districts in the United States. Lake Tahoe Unified is a rural mountain district in a seasonal-economy town, the cohort’s only non-metropolitan member, and the reason findings from this project can speak to rural California at all.
Socioeconomic And Fiscal Diversity
Socioeconomic disadvantage across participating sites ranges from 21.1 percent to 82.4 percent, and sixteen of nineteen participating school entities hold Title I schoolwide status. Students with disabilities range from 8.1 to 20.2 percent, with Rio Lindo Elementary carrying the cohort’s highest proportion.
The cohort also varies by fiscal context, which is less visible but consequential for sustainability. Five participating LEAs are funded through the Local Control Funding Formula. Sunnyvale School District is community-funded (Basic Aid), operating on excess local property tax at $7,263 per pupil above its LCFF entitlement. Sustainability arguments resting on LCFF supplemental and concentration dollars do not apply there. Including one Basic Aid district means the project’s findings about what it costs to sustain behavioral health performance management, and where that money can come from, will hold in both funding environments rather than only the more common one.
School Model Diversity
Participating sites include traditional elementary, middle and comprehensive high schools; a project-based STEAM academy; a locally funded dependent charter co-located with a traditional public school on a shared campus; designated Community Schools with established integrated support infrastructure; and a continuation high school serving 105 students. Enrollment ranges from 105 to 2,926, a factor of twenty-eight.
That range is a deliberate stress test of implementation feasibility. A screening and performance management workflow that functions at Calaveras Hills, where the entire student body can be screened in a single sitting, and at Milpitas High, where a ninth-grade cohort alone exceeds a thousand students, is a workflow that will transfer.
The Models In The Cohort
Six school models across the eighteen sites, from a continuation high school of 105 students to a comprehensive high school of 2,926.
Traditional Elementary, Middle And Comprehensive High
The bulk of the cohort, across four counties and three grade bands.
A Project-Based STEAM Academy
Rio Del Sol, whose inquiry-led structure holds no standing block for an administration to sit in.
A Shared Campus, Two CDS Codes
Ida Jew Academy and Valle Vista: one campus, one principal, two coded entities, split Title I status.
Designated Community Schools
August Boeger, Robert Sanders and Bijou, with integrated support infrastructure already in place.
A Continuation High School
Calaveras Hills, 105 students, small enough that the whole school screens in one sitting.
A Vertical Feeder Pattern
Pacific Beach Middle feeds directly into Mission Bay High, so one population can be followed across the transition.
The range is a stress test, not a catalogue. A workflow that runs at Calaveras Hills, where 105 students screen in a single sitting, and at Milpitas High, where a ninth-grade cohort alone exceeds a thousand, is a workflow that will transfer. That is a factor of twenty-eight between the smallest and largest participating site.
Recruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education42ColophonColophon
How To Cite This Report
Santa Clara County Office of Education & Impacter Education Corp. (2026). Deliverable 1: Recruitment Outcomes Summary. Behavioral Health Performance Management, BHSOAC Contract #25BHSOAC019. bhpm.care/deliverables/d1
Sources
·California School Dashboard, 2025 release, Student Population panel
·Executed memoranda of understanding and their DocuSign certificates of completion
·Board-adopted Local Control and Accountability Plans, per district
·Standard Agreement #25BHSOAC019 and Exhibit A
·SCCOE recruitment record, prepared by Dr. Pilar Vázquez-Vialva
·Site readiness assessments, all eighteen sites, seven sections each
·BHPM cohort tracker as of September 11, 2026
The Record Behind This Summary
Every district and school, every agreement, LCAP and instrument cited here is published, with the paper underneath it, at bhpm.care. The Deliverable 1 reader carries the same content under four lenses: Report, Cohort, Documents and Requirement.
What Is Published Underneath This Summary
The records this summary rests on, each published at bhpm.impacterpathway.com and linked from the page that cites it.
| Record | What It Holds | Address |
|---|---|---|
| Deliverable 1 Reader | Eight components under four lenses: Report, Cohort, Documents and Requirement | bhpm.care/deliverables/d1 |
| Implementation Workplan Crosswalk | Every contract workplan item against the deliverable that answers it | bhpm.care/record/crosswalk |
| Cohort Readiness Tracker | Readiness position by LEA and by instrument | bhpm.care/record/readiness |
| District And School Records | One record per LEA and per site, with agreements and LCAPs published underneath | bhpm.care/cohort |
| Resource Library | Executed agreements, instruments, the brand standard and this report as a PDF | bhpm.care/resources |










