BHPMEvidence · Partnership
Student 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.

El Dorado CountyLake Tahoe UnifiedSanta Clara CountyMount Pleasant · MilpitasSunnyvaleVentura CountyRio School DistrictSan Diego CountySan Diego Unified
6
Districts
4
Counties
18
Schools
$21M+
District BH Investment

Prepared For

Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission

Prepared By

Santa Clara County Office of Education, with Impacter Pathway

Contract

Standard Agreement #25BHSOAC019

Compiled

September 11, 2026 · Final

Led By The Santa Clara County Office of Education

Santa Clara County Office of EducationImpacter PathwayDeveau Burr GroupStanford UniversityBreaking Barriers CaliforniaASR
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education02Contents

Contents

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.

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care2 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education03Executive Overview

Overview 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.

6
LEAs recruited across four counties · 138,192 students district-wide
18
Schools selected · 14,059 students at participating sites
8 / 8
Readiness dimensions met at Competent or above by every LEA
6 / 6
LEAs with the full agreement set executed · all eighteen schools covered
18 / 18
Sites with a completed readiness assessment, all seven sections
18 / 18
Readiness determinations signed off at site, district and project level

From Recruitment To Implementation

01

Recruit And Select

Criteria set before outreach. Three networks in parallel. Six LEAs, eighteen schools.

02

Assess Readiness

Eight-dimension LEA rubric. Seven-section site assessment at all eighteen schools.

03

Execute Agreements

Three instruments per LEA. Eighteen signature paths. All six complete.

04

Establish The Cycle

Scheduled review of behavioral health data against goals, by a named owner.

Where The Cohort Stands, By LEA

LEACountySchoolsStudents At SitesAgreement SetReadinessRubric
Milpitas UnifiedSanta Clara33,724ExecutedComplete26/32
Mount Pleasant Elementary SDSanta Clara31,340ExecutedComplete26/32
Sunnyvale School DistrictSanta Clara32,122ExecutedComplete25/32
Lake Tahoe UnifiedEl Dorado32,214ExecutedComplete25/32
Rio School DistrictVentura31,881ExecutedComplete29/32
San Diego UnifiedSan Diego32,778ExecutedComplete27/32

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care3 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education04The Five Findings

Overview And The Cohort

The Five Findings The Commission Should Take From This Report

1

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.

2

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.

3

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.

4

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.

5

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.

$21M+
Board-adopted district behavioral health investment, per year
0
Sites where technology is the binding constraint
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care4 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education05The Five Findings

Overview And The Cohort · Continued

What Separated The Six LEAs That Joined From The Five That Did Not

ConditionThe Six That JoinedThe Five That Did Not
Behavioral health capacityPresent at all sixPresent at all five
CYBHI Fee Schedule participationFour of six participantsAll five participants
Settled superintendentAll sixTwo mid-search during the window
Named district behavioral health leadAll sixNot established at every one
Existing agreement relationship with a county officeAll sixNot at every one
Room in the June board calendarAll sixAgendas 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.

June 22, 2026Signed for SCCOE
June 23, 2026Signed for the Commission
September 21, 2026Recruitment window closes
June 30, 2028Term ends

Why Site-Level Attribution Could Not Be Documented

County SystemWhat The Public Record NamesSite-Level Attribution
Santa ClaraThe grant names the thirty-one Santa Clara County school districts collectively rather than enumerating them.Definitional
El DoradoThe executed county grant agreement names no LEAs at all.None available
VenturaThe 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 DiegoA 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care5 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education06The Cohort

Overview 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.

6·18·4DistrictsSchoolsCountiesSanta Clara CountyMilpitas UnifiedRancho Milpitas Middle SchoolMilpitas High SchoolCalaveras Hills High SchoolSanta Clara CountyMount Pleasant Elementary SDAugust Boeger Middle SchoolRobert Sanders ElementaryIda Jew Academy / Valle Vista Elementary (Co-located)Santa Clara CountySunnyvale School DistrictLakewood Elementary SchoolSunnyvale Middle SchoolColumbia Middle SchoolEl Dorado CountyLake Tahoe UnifiedBijou Community SchoolSouth Tahoe Middle SchoolSouth Tahoe High SchoolVentura CountyRio School DistrictRio Del Sol STEAM AcademyRio Lindo ElementaryRio Vista Middle SchoolSan Diego CountySan Diego UnifiedPacific Beach Middle SchoolMission Bay High SchoolClairemont High School

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

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care6 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education07Cohort Roster

Overview 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.

10,192Students · 19 Schools · LCFFMilpitasMilpitas Unified School DistrictSanta Clara County · Suburban · Industrial & Technology Corridor3,724 In Cohort · 37% Of DistrictRed = Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Share Of EnrollmentMilpitas High2,92644.5% SEDRancho Milpitas Middle69344.6% SEDCalaveras Hills High10576.2% SED
SiteCDS CodeGradesEnroll.SEDELSWDTitle ITarget Population
Rancho Milpitas Middle43-73387-60476667–869344.6%16.7%8.1%Schoolwide7th
Milpitas High43-73387-43344709–122,92644.5%11.4%9.1%No9th
Calaveras Hills High (Alternative)43-73387-43310399–1210576.2%22.9%18.1%SchoolwideWhole school
1,497Students · 5 Schools · LCFFMount PleasantMount Pleasant Elementary School DistrictSanta Clara County · Urban · East San José1,340 In Cohort · 90% Of DistrictIda Jew Academy / Valle Vista63968.5% SEDAugust Boeger Middle39782.4% SEDRobert Sanders Elementary30478.9% SED
SiteCDS CodeGradesEnroll.SEDELSWDTitle ITarget Population
August Boeger Middle43-69617-60480376–839782.4%37.0%17.6%Schoolwide6th
Robert Sanders Elementary43-69617-6048078TK–530478.9%44.7%18.8%Schoolwide3rd
Ida Jew Academy / Valle Vista Elementary43-69617-6048045 · 6067227TK–8 / TK–563968.5%40.3%10.4%Split6th

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.

5,682Students · 10 Schools · Basic AidSunnyvaleSunnyvale School DistrictSanta Clara County · Suburban · Technology Economy2,122 In Cohort · 37% Of DistrictSunnyvale Middle1,05321.1% SEDColumbia Middle69740.5% SEDLakewood Elementary37241.4% SED
SiteCDS CodeGradesEnroll.SEDELSWDTitle ITarget Population
Lakewood Elementary43-69690-6049233TK–537241.4%27.4%15.9%Schoolwide5th
Sunnyvale Middle43-69690-60492586–81,05321.1%17.9%11.5%No6th
Columbia Middle43-69690-60492416–869740.5%28.4%16.4%Schoolwide6th
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care7 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education08Cohort Roster

Overview 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.

3,363Students · 8 Schools · LCFFLake TahoeLake Tahoe Unified School DistrictEl Dorado County · Rural Mountain · Seasonal Economy2,214 In Cohort · 66% Of DistrictRed = Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Share Of EnrollmentSouth Tahoe High1,07646.7% SEDSouth Tahoe Middle71650.3% SEDBijou Community School42259.2% SED
SiteCDS CodeGradesEnroll.SEDELSWDTitle ITarget Population
Bijou Community School09-61903-6005540TK–542259.2%35.1%12.1%Schoolwide3rd
South Tahoe Middle09-61903-60055656–871650.3%17.2%13.4%Schoolwide6th
South Tahoe High09-61903-09378059–121,07646.7%12.4%11.6%Schoolwide9th
5,208Students · 9 Schools · LCFFRioRio School DistrictVentura County · Agricultural Coastal Plain1,881 In Cohort · 36% Of DistrictRio Del Sol STEAM Academy83954.9% SEDRio Vista Middle63768.8% SEDRio Lindo Elementary40581.0% SED
SiteCDS CodeGradesEnroll.SEDELSWDTitle ITarget Population
Rio Del Sol STEAM Academy56-72561-0137018TK–883954.9%11.2%9.3%SchoolwideK, 3rd, and 6th
Rio Lindo Elementary56-72561-6055503TK–540581.0%40.0%20.2%Schoolwide3rd (Yr 1) · +5th (Yr 2)
Rio Vista Middle56-72561-01139776–863768.8%25.4%14.0%Schoolwide6th
112,250Students · 226 Schools · LCFFSan DiegoSan Diego Unified School DistrictSan Diego County · Large urban2,778 In Cohort · 2% Of DistrictMission Bay High1,24044.6% SEDClairemont High82357.5% SEDPacific Beach Middle71541.3% SED
SiteCDS CodeGradesEnroll.SEDELSWDTitle ITarget Population
Pacific Beach Middle37-68338-60596956–871541.3%4.6%13.4%Schoolwide6th
Mission Bay High37-68338-37344319–121,24044.6%3.1%12.8%Schoolwide9th
Clairemont High37-68338-37312139–1282357.5%5.6%18.5%Schoolwide9th
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care8 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education09Element 1

Element 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care9 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education10Element 1

Element 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.

Contract executed · 90-day window opensMayJuneJulyAugustSeptember
Early May 2026

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.

May 2026

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.

May – June 2026

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.

May – June 2026

One-on-one meetings and platform demonstrations. Prospective LEAs judged an operating system rather than a described one.

June 23, 2026

Contract executed; the ninety-day window opens. It closes September 21, 2026.

July 21 – September 11, 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.

6
LEAs, each signing the full set
3
Instruments per LEA: MOU, MSA, CA-NDPA
18
Signature paths, six times three
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care10 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education11Element 1 · Barriers

Element 1 · Recruitment Approach

Barriers And Challenges

1

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.

2

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.

3

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.

4

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.

5

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.

6

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care11 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education12Element 1 · Barriers

Element 1 · Recruitment Approach · Continued

Who Did Not Join, And What SCCOE Did About It

The Five Districts Contacted That Did Not Join

DistrictCountyCYBHI Fee ScheduleWhat Was In The Way
Soledad UnifiedMontereyParticipantSuperintendent retiring. Finalist interviews May 8, successor appointed June 4 effective July 1.
Campbell Elementary School DistrictSanta ClaraParticipantSuperintendent retired June 30 after six years. Interim named June 24, permanent successor effective August 13.
Santa Clara UnifiedSanta ClaraParticipantCapacity present. No settled window inside the ninety-day period.
East Side Union High School DistrictSanta ClaraParticipantCapacity present. No settled window inside the ninety-day period.
South Bay UnionSan DiegoParticipantDescribed 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care12 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education13Element 1 · Lessons

Element 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.

1

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.

2

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.

3

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.

4

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.

5

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care13 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education14Element 2

Element 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 IndicatorRubric 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.

8
Rubric dimensions, each scored one to four
4
Contract indicator categories the eight answer
6
LEAs scored
18
Sites documented on the baseline matrix
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care14 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education15Element 2 · Rubric

Element 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.

Dimension1 · Foundational2 · Developing3 · Competent4 · Advanced
D1 · BHSSA / MHSSA System ParticipationNo 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 InfrastructureNo 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 ReadinessNo 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 PopulationNo 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 CommitmentInterest 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 ReadinessSIS 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 FootprintNo 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 CapacityNo 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care15 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education16Element 2 · Scores

Element 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.

LEAD1D2D3D4D5D6D7D8Total
Milpitas Unified4343333326/32
Mount Pleasant Elementary SD3334343326/32
Sunnyvale School District3343333325/32
Lake Tahoe Unified3333334325/32
Rio School District3434434429/32
San Diego Unified4343334327/32

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care16 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education17Element 2

Element 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.

DimWhat It MeasuresDistribution Across The Six LEAsAt Advanced
D1BHSSA / MHSSA system participation2 / 6
D2MTSS infrastructure1 / 6
D3CYBHI sustainability readiness3 / 6
D4Equity and high-need population2 / 6
D5Leadership commitment1 / 6
D6Technology readiness1 / 6
D7Existing BH service and screening3 / 6
D8Engagement capacity1 / 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care17 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education18Element 3

Element 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.

LEAMOU With SCCOEMaster Services AgreementCA-NDPARecord
Milpitas UnifiedExecutedExecutedExecutedBrian White, Executive Director of Inclusive Services · fully executed July 30, 2026 · RM# 27-28-0330
Mount Pleasant Elementary SDExecutedExecutedExecutedLaurie Breton, Director of Student Support · fully executed July 30, 2026 · RM# 27-28-0333
Sunnyvale School DistrictExecutedExecutedExecutedGudiel R. Crosthwaite, Ph.D., Superintendent · signed for the district September 8, 2026
Lake Tahoe UnifiedExecutedExecutedExecutedAlan Reeder, Associate Superintendent · fully executed August 20, 2026 · RM# 27-28-0437
Rio School DistrictExecutedExecutedExecutedRebecca Rocha, Director of Student Services · fully executed August 12, 2026 · RM# 27-0374
San Diego UnifiedExecutedExecutedExecutedMarissa 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.

LEASigned For The LEA ByLEA SignedSCCOE SignedFully ExecutedRM#
Milpitas Unified SDBrian White, Executive Director of Inclusive Services for All Learners7-23-20267-29-20267-30-202627-28-0330
Mount Pleasant Elementary SDLaurie Breton, Director of Student Support7-24-20267-29-20267-30-202627-28-0333
Sunnyvale School DistrictGudiel R. Crosthwaite, Ph.D., Superintendent9-8-2026–––
Lake Tahoe Unified SDAlan Reeder, Associate Superintendent8-17-20268-19-20268-20-202627-28-0437
Rio School DistrictRebecca Rocha, Director of Student Services8-4-20268-7-20268-12-202627-0374
San Diego Unified SDMarissa Allan, Senior Executive of Thriving School Communities7-16-20267-20-20267-21-202627-0287
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care18 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education19Element 3

Element 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care19 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education20Element 3

Element 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.

3

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.

2

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.

1

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care20 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education21Element 4

Element 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 ConsiderationRationale
Student need and equitySchools 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 contextsInclusion 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 diversityLEAs from four counties (El Dorado, Santa Clara, Ventura and San Diego) rather than a single geography.
Grade-span diversityElementary, middle and high school participation.
School model diversityCommunity schools and other models with existing integrated student support structures, including wellness centers and active behavioral health services.
MTSS and behavioral health readinessSchools 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 readinessLEAs able to identify three schools, designate leadership, engage in meetings and move participation agreements forward.
Sustainability alignmentLEAs connected to CYBHI, DHCS fee-schedule readiness, school-based billing or other behavioral health sustainability efforts.
Source: SCCOE draft narrative for crosswalk items 1.1, 1.2 and 1.6 (Vázquez-Vialva, with Deveau Burr Group and Impacter Pathway, August 20, 2026), incorporated into this element.

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care21 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education22Element 4

Element 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care22 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education23Element 4

Element 4 · School Coordination · Continued

The Eighteen Sites, By Transition

LEASiteGrade SpanTarget Population
Elementary Transition
Rio SDRio Lindo ElementaryTK–53rd (Yr 1), adding 5th (Yr 2)
Mount PleasantRobert Sanders ElementaryTK–53rd
Lake TahoeBijou Community SchoolTK–53rd
Middle Transition
Rio SDRio Vista Middle6–86th
Mount PleasantAugust Boeger Middle6–86th, plus counseling referrals
Mount PleasantIda Jew / Valle VistaTK–8 / TK–56th, plus counseling referrals
SunnyvaleSunnyvale Middle6–86th
SunnyvaleColumbia Middle6–86th
Lake TahoeSouth Tahoe Middle6–86th
San DiegoPacific Beach Middle6–86th
MilpitasRancho Milpitas Middle7–87th
Multiple Transitions At A Single Site
Rio SDRio Del Sol STEAMTK–8K, 3rd, and 6th
The Year Before The Transition
SunnyvaleLakewood ElementaryTK–55th
Secondary Transition
MilpitasMilpitas High9–129th
Lake TahoeSouth Tahoe High9–129th
San DiegoMission Bay High9–129th
San DiegoClairemont High9–129th
Whole School
MilpitasCalaveras Hills Alternative High School9–12 altEntire 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care23 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education24Element 4

Element 4 · School Coordination · Rationale By LEA

The Nine Schools These Three Districts Named

Selection RubricD1D2D3D4D5D6D7D8Total
Milpitas Unified4343333326/32
Mount Pleasant Elementary SD3334343326/32
Sunnyvale School District3343333325/32

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care24 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education25Element 4

Element 4 · School Coordination · Continued

The Nine Schools These Three Districts Named

Selection RubricD1D2D3D4D5D6D7D8Total
Lake Tahoe Unified3333334325/32
Rio School District3434434429/32
San Diego Unified4343334327/32

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care25 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education26Element 5

Element 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.

Milpitas Unified

Santa Clara · Suburban Corridor

10,192 students · 19 schools · TK–12 · LCFF

Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year

$4,700,005

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.

Mount Pleasant Elementary SD

Santa Clara · Urban East San José

1,497 students · 5 schools · TK–8 · LCFF

Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year

$198,655

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.

Sunnyvale School District

Santa Clara · Technology Economy

5,682 students · 10 schools · TK–8 · Basic Aid

Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year

$6,931,107

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.

Lake Tahoe Unified

El Dorado · Rural Mountain

3,363 students · 8 schools · TK–12 · LCFF

Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year

$1,713,138

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.

Rio School District

Ventura · Agricultural Coastal

5,208 students · 9 schools · TK–8 · LCFF

Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year

$2,859,585

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 Unified

San Diego · Large Urban

112,250 students · 226 schools · TK–12 · LCFF

Board-Adopted BH Investment, Per Year

$4,674,965

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care26 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education27Element 5

Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 1 Of 6

Milpitas Unified School District

Santa Clara County · suburban industrial and technology corridor
10,192 students · 19 schools · grades TK–12 · LCFF
Regional Context
Suburban district shaped by an industrial and technology corridor between San José and Fremont. Second-largest LEA in the cohort.
Populations Served
10,192 students district-wide; 3,724 at the three participating sites. Socioeconomic disadvantage 44.5–76.2%, English learners 11.4–22.9%, students with disabilities 8.1–18.1%. Two of three sites Title I schoolwide.
Funding Model
LCFF.
Board-Adopted BH Investment
$4,700,005 per year under LCAP Action 2.6, mental health staffing, funded from the Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant. Plus $324,398 under Action 2.10, “Site leaders will implement MTSS Tier 1–3 Social Emotional and Mental Health”, which names site leaders as accountable owners at each tier. LCAP ↗
Sustainability Note
The $4.7M is one-time state money. The Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant is expiring. Milpitas therefore carries the cohort’s largest behavioral health staffing investment on its least durable funding source, which makes it the clearest test case in the cohort for whether performance management evidence can support a transition onto recurring funding.
County BH Relationship
Santa Clara County Behavioral Health Services Department partner. Care Solace provides 24/7 care navigation for families and staff districtwide.
BHSSA / MHSSA Standing
Site-level attribution confirmed. Milpitas High hosts an SCCOE-operated wellness center, one of only three in Santa Clara County, opened November 2023, alongside $300,000 in SAMHSA Community Project Funding. SCCOE reports the center as BHSSA-funded and staffs the wellness coach in the 2026–27 school year, with the district contracting the other clinicians. The wellness center sits at Milpitas High, not at the district’s other two participating sites.
CYBHI Fee Schedule
Reimbursement received, per the DHCS participant list current to August 2026, the strongest CYBHI position available. Milpitas does not appear on either published cohort roster, which is a limitation of those lists rather than of the district.
BH Staffing (Sites)
Rancho: school psychologist, mental health counselor, counselor position in transition. Milpitas High: wellness center staffing plus a school social worker shared with Calaveras Hills. Calaveras Hills: two mental health counselors, the shared social worker, and a county alcohol and drug counselor, the densest staffing-to-enrollment ratio in the cohort.
Existing Screening
No universal screener documented at any of the three sites.
SIS And Access
Aeries · Clever single sign-on live districtwide · 1:1 Chromebooks and MacBooks.
Consent Model
Set with the district.
Reason For Participation. Milpitas is the cohort’s complete evidence chain: MHSSA funding attributable to a named site, CYBHI reimbursement actually drawn, a documented wellness center with published utilization, and $4.7 million a year in board-adopted staffing on expiring money. Its agreement set is complete: the memorandum with SCCOE, the master services agreement and the CA-NDPA are all executed. Rancho Milpitas serves grades 7 and 8 and screens 7th grade, the year ahead of the eighth-grade transition.

Selection Rubric · This District

26/32

D1

4

D2

3

D3

4

D4

3

D5

3

D6

3

D7

3

D8

3

Green 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

SchoolGradesEnrollmentTarget Population
Rancho Milpitas Middle7–86937th
Milpitas High9–122,9269th
Calaveras Hills Alternative High School9–12 alt105Whole school
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care27 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education28Element 5

Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 2 Of 6

Mount Pleasant Elementary School District

Santa Clara County · east San José · dense urban neighborhood
1,497 students · 5 schools · grades TK–8 · LCFF with concentration grant
Regional Context
Urban neighborhood district on the east side of San José. The smallest LEA in the cohort by enrollment, and the one where the participating sites represent the largest share of the district: three of five schools.
Populations Served
1,497 students district-wide; 1,340 at the three participating sites, 90% of the district. Socioeconomic disadvantage 68.5–82.4%, English learners 37.0–44.7% (the cohort’s highest), students with disabilities 10.4–18.8%.
Funding Model
LCFF with base, supplemental and concentration grant funding, per the 2025–26 LCAP.
Board-Adopted BH Investment
$198,655 per year under LCAP Action 1.6, “Additional Staff to Monitor Progress and Services for Our Most Vulnerable Students”, funding one additional FTE psychologist LEA-wide. LCAP ↗ The smallest figure in the cohort, at the district with the highest need concentration.
County BH Relationship
Santa Clara County Behavioral Health School Linked Services is named as a funder of family liaison and engagement work across all three Community School implementation plans.
BHSSA / MHSSA Standing
Within SCCOE’s MHSSA consortium of 31 districts, awarded July 2020. The grant names the thirty-one districts collectively rather than enumerating them, so district-level named-partner status cannot be asserted from it. DEFINITIONAL
CYBHI Fee Schedule
Cohort 4 participant. No reimbursement recorded on the DHCS participant list.
Community Schools
CCSPP implementation district. August Boeger and Robert Sanders are both designated Community Schools and both are BHPM sites: one of two cases in the cohort where the two initiatives meet at site level rather than district level.
BH Staffing (Sites)
August Boeger: wellness coach, school counselor, counseling resident. Robert Sanders: counselor (shared) and community school coordinator, with roughly 0.2 FTE county ARCC Tier 2 support. Ida Jew / Valle Vista: counselor (shared) and a community school coordinator with wellness coach certification.
Existing Screening
“Sown to Grow” weekly check-in: full implementation at August Boeger, second-year and inconsistent at Robert Sanders, and no universal instrument at Ida Jew / Valle Vista.
SIS And Access
PowerSchool · Clever single sign-on live districtwide · 1:1, iPads K–2 and Chromebooks 3–8.
Consent Model
Family consent platform ↗, with Robert Sanders additionally requesting paper forms.
Reason For Participation. Mount Pleasant is furthest along on service and furthest behind on measurement, and the district said so. August Boeger’s wellness center logged more than 10,000 visits against roughly 400 students last year with no instrument that says what those visits produced. The district selected two Community Schools and one campus with no screener at all specifically to see implementation with and without existing scaffolding. Screening dates are already fixed for October 1–2, the only LEA in the cohort with a confirmed administration date.

Selection Rubric · This District

26/32

D1

3

D2

3

D3

3

D4

4

D5

3

D6

4

D7

3

D8

3

Green 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

SchoolGradesEnrollmentTarget Population
August Boeger Middle6–83976th
Robert Sanders ElementaryTK–53043rd
Ida Jew Academy / Valle VistaTK–8 / TK–56396th
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care28 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education29Element 5

Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 3 Of 6

Sunnyvale School District

Santa Clara County · suburban, technology economy
5,682 students · 10 schools · grades TK–8 · Basic Aid (community-funded)
Regional Context
Sits in the heart of the Silicon Valley technology economy, with the fiscal profile that follows. A TK–8 district with no high school.
Populations Served
5,682 students district-wide; 2,122 at the three participating sites. Socioeconomic disadvantage 21.1–41.4%, the cohort’s lowest range, with English learners 17.9–28.4% and students with disabilities 11.5–16.4%. Two of three sites Title I schoolwide.
Funding Model
Basic Aid: community-funded. Operates on excess local property tax at $7,263 per pupil above its LCFF entitlement. The only Basic Aid district in the cohort, and one of 139 statewide.
Board-Adopted BH Investment
$6,931,107 per year under LCAP Action 1.2, “Inclusive and Nurturing Environments Targeted Staffing”, of which behavior specialists represent 57.4%, school social workers 15.5%, and Mental Health and Wellness Associates 5.1%. LCAP ↗ The LCAP also records the district evaluating the sustainability and compliance requirements of mental health billing, weighing a more integrated internally supported service model.
County BH Relationship
SCCOE Youth Health & Wellness network. Lakewood Elementary hosts a wellness center that SCCOE Youth Health and Wellness previously operated and staffed. Operation has transitioned back to Sunnyvale School District, and SCCOE does not staff the center in the 2026–27 school year.
BHSSA / MHSSA Standing
Within the same SCCOE MHSSA consortium of 31 districts. Same definitional limit as Mount Pleasant. DEFINITIONAL
CYBHI Fee Schedule
Cohort 1 participant, reimbursement received.
BH Staffing (District)
A coordinated district model rather than site-by-site staffing: school social workers report to a lead social worker who supervises across all three participating sites. Both middle schools currently receive social work services.
Existing Screening
None documented at the three participating sites.
SIS And Access
PowerSchool · Clever single sign-on live districtwide.
Consent Model
Grade-split. 6th grade under active opt-in consent; 7th and 8th under passive opt-out. The only LEA running two consent processes in the same building.
Reason For Participation. Sunnyvale is why this cohort’s sustainability findings will transfer. Every argument about funding school behavioral health from LCFF supplemental and concentration dollars fails in a Basic Aid district, and 139 California districts are Basic Aid. Sunnyvale also scoped participation deliberately, taking one grade at one elementary school and expanding in later years based on results. That is a district treating this as multi-year systems change rather than a compliance exercise.

Selection Rubric · This District

25/32

D1

3

D2

3

D3

4

D4

3

D5

3

D6

3

D7

3

D8

3

Green 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

SchoolGradesEnrollmentTarget Population
Lakewood ElementaryTK–53725th
Sunnyvale Middle6–81,0536th
Columbia Middle6–86976th
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care29 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education30Element 5

Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 4 Of 6

Lake Tahoe Unified School District

El Dorado County · rural mountain, seasonal economy
3,363 students · 8 schools · grades TK–12 · LCFF
Regional Context
Rural mountain district in a seasonal-economy town in the Sierra Nevada. The cohort’s only non-metropolitan member and the only participating LEA outside the Bay Area, Ventura and San Diego axis. Its inclusion is the reason findings from this project can speak to rural California.
Populations Served
3,363 students district-wide; 2,214 at the three participating sites, two-thirds of the district. Socioeconomic disadvantage 46.7–59.2%, English learners 12.4–35.1%, students with disabilities 11.6–13.4%. All three Title I schoolwide.
Funding Model
LCFF. Not Basic Aid, an easy and consequential confusion, since neighboring Tahoe–Truckee Unified in Placer County is Basic Aid at $6,277 excess revenue per pupil.
Board-Adopted BH Investment
$1,713,138 per year across two actions funding counselors and structured wellbeing practice, with the LCAP documenting wellness coaches and site wellness center staff working on student referrals for mental and behavioral health needs. LCAP ↗ MTSS terminology itself is sparse in the plan.
County BH Relationship
El Dorado County Behavioral Health, under executed grant agreement #24MHSOAC008. Wellness center staffing at sites runs through this standing partnership.
BHSSA / MHSSA Standing
County holds a BHSSA Phase 3 award plus a Round 4 sustainability grant. The county agreement names no LEAs. Same attribution gap, at its most complete.
CYBHI Fee Schedule
Cohort 2 participant. No reimbursement recorded.
Community Schools
CCSPP Cohort 3 award, $4.7 million, whose implementation plan names Bijou Community School, a participating BHPM site. The second of the two cases in this cohort where Community Schools and BHPM meet at site level.
BH Staffing (Sites)
On-campus wellness clinic at South Tahoe Middle and a wellness center at South Tahoe High, staffed through the county partnership. Bijou is a designated community school under the CCSPP plan.
Existing Screening
None documented.
SIS And Access
Aeries · Clever single sign-on live districtwide.
Consent Model
Set with the district.
Reason For Participation. Lake Tahoe is the only LEA producing the exact grade-band composition Exhibit A describes, the cohort’s only rural context, and its only fourth county. It also brings the least prior behavioral health measurement infrastructure in the cohort: no universal screening instrument is documented at any of the three sites, against a complete agreement set and county-staffed wellness provision at both secondary campuses. Paperwork readiness and measurement practice are different things, and this district shows the difference clearly.

Selection Rubric · This District

25/32

D1

3

D2

3

D3

3

D4

3

D5

3

D6

3

D7

4

D8

3

Green 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

SchoolGradesEnrollmentTarget Population
Bijou Community SchoolTK–54223rd
South Tahoe Middle6–87166th
South Tahoe High9–121,0769th
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care30 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education31Element 5

Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 5 Of 6

Rio School District

Ventura County · Oxnard plain · agricultural coastal community
5,208 students · 9 schools · grades TK–8 · LCFF with concentration grant
Regional Context
Agricultural community on the Oxnard plain in Ventura County. The cohort’s only Ventura member and its only coastal-agricultural context.
Populations Served
5,208 students district-wide; 1,881 at the three participating sites. Across those three, socioeconomic disadvantage runs 54.9–81.0%, English learners 11.2–40.0%, students with disabilities 9.3–20.2%. All three are Title I schoolwide.
Funding Model
LCFF with a concentration grant, per the 2026–27 LCAP. Not Basic Aid.
Board-Adopted BH Investment
$2,859,585 per year under LCAP Action 3.5, “Health & Wellness: Student Services”, LEA-wide and contributing to increased or improved services for English learners, foster youth and low-income students. LCAP ↗
County BH Relationship
Ventura County Office of Education operates wellness centers at all nine Rio schools, including the three participating sites, under its CYBHI School-Linked Partnership and Capacity Grant. Ventura County Behavioral Health is the county partner.
BHSSA / MHSSA Standing
Unresolved at site level. Ventura’s MHSSA grant summary names five wellness-center districts and Rio is not among them, yet VCOE operates centers at all nine Rio schools. Whether those centers draw MHSSA or general MHSA dollars is not resolvable from public sources, which is the attribution pattern described under Element 1.
CYBHI Fee Schedule
Not listed on the Cohort 1–4 or Cohort 5 rosters and not on the reimbursement list. Documented CYBHI connection is the county capacity grant, plus two CYBHI-funded associates working toward licensure on district staff.
BH Staffing (District)
4 mental health and wellness clinicians · 13 counselors · 5 parent liaisons · 2 CYBHI-funded associates in licensure pathway.
Existing Screening
Panorama, Level 1, districtwide. Rio Vista Middle additionally ran an Impacter Pathway pilot in March 2026.
SIS And Access
“Q” (Equitus Solutions) · Clever single sign-on live districtwide · 1:1 Chromebooks confirmed grades 3–5.
Consent Model
Informational notice with opt-out, districtwide. District rationale: this is a skills-based assessment rather than a mental health survey, and community concern is low.
Reason For Participation. Rio volunteered at all three sites and has moved faster operationally than any other LEA in the cohort: a full-team strategy session on September 2, individual site planning meetings across the following two weeks, named counselor champions at every site receiving $2,000 stipends, and a target population confirmed at each. The district’s stated interest is in seeing whether a rubric-scored instrument tells it something Panorama does not.

Selection Rubric · This District

29/32

D1

3

D2

4

D3

3

D4

4

D5

4

D6

3

D7

4

D8

4

Green 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

SchoolGradesEnrollmentTarget Population
Rio Del Sol STEAM AcademyTK–8839K, 3rd, and 6th
Rio Lindo ElementaryTK–54053rd (Yr 1) · +5th (Yr 2)
Rio Vista Middle6–86376th
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care31 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education32Element 5

Element 5 · Baseline Capacity · Profile 6 Of 6

San Diego Unified School District

San Diego County · large urban
112,250 students · 226 schools · grades TK–12 · LCFF
Regional Context
Among the largest urban school districts in the United States, on California’s southern border. The cohort’s only southern California member and, by an order of magnitude, its largest LEA.
Populations Served
112,250 students district-wide; 2,778 at the three participating sites. Socioeconomic disadvantage runs 41.3 to 57.5 percent across the three, students with disabilities 12.8 to 18.5 percent, and the cohort’s lowest English learner share sits at Mission Bay High, 3.1 percent. All three Title I schoolwide.
Scale Definition
CDE reports 112,250 students. The district reports 226 educational facilities, 103,024 students in district-managed schools, and more than 121,000 served. The difference is charter treatment. This report uses the CDE figure of 112,250 throughout.
Funding Model
LCFF.
Board-Adopted BH Investment
$4,674,965 per year in LCFF funds ($4,770,268 including federal) under LCAP Action 1.1, “District-Wide Wellness”, LEA-wide across 2025–27. LCAP ↗
County BH Relationship
San Diego County Behavioral Health Services. The district is a named partner in SDCOE’s COPES suicide prevention initiative, Phase 2, a $7 million four-year award.
BHSSA / MHSSA Standing
Named partner. The strongest documented BHSSA standing in the cohort, and still without published site-level allocation, which is exactly the attribution problem described under Element 1.
CYBHI Fee Schedule
Cohort 1 participant, reimbursement received. County CYBHI allocation of $12,825,000.
BH Staffing (Sites)
School counselors in place at all three participating sites, alongside an on-campus wellness center with a wellness coordinator at each, the stated reason they were priority candidates. The wellness coordinator is the designated behavioral health lead at each site.
Existing Screening
Clairemont High has administered a behavioral health screener previously, and reviews screening data in a weekly multi-tiered system of support meeting.
SIS And Access
PowerSchool · Clever single sign-on live districtwide.
Consent Model
Set at district level, on the program’s family consent platform, split by grade band: active consent for 6th grade at Pacific Beach Middle, passive notice with opt-out for 9th grade at Mission Bay High and Clairemont High.
Reason For Participation. San Diego brings scale, a second county behavioral health system, the cohort’s only southern California context, and a vertical feeder structure that lets one student population be tracked from a middle school into the high school it feeds. The three participating schools are Pacific Beach Middle; Mission Bay High; and Clairemont High, selected from a wider field of schools that asked to take part. Pacific Beach Middle feeds Mission Bay High, and each of the three operates an on-campus wellness center, which is what lets the project measure how well services already running are working.

Selection Rubric · This District

27/32

D1

4

D2

3

D3

4

D4

3

D5

3

D6

3

D7

4

D8

3

Green 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

SchoolGradesEnrollmentTarget Population
Pacific Beach Middle6–87156th
Mission Bay High9–121,2409th
Clairemont High9–128239th
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care32 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education33Element 5

Element 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.

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care33 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education34Element 6

Element 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.

18 / 18
Sites assessed against the common instrument, all seven sections
18 / 18
Sites on a modern student information system with single sign-on live
0
Sites where technology is the binding constraint

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care34 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education35Element 6

Element 6 · Readiness Findings · Continued

The Infrastructure Behind Findings One To Three

LEAStudent Information SystemClever SSODevices At The Target Grades
Milpitas UnifiedAeriesLive1:1 Chromebooks and MacBooks
Mount Pleasant Elementary SDPowerSchoolLive1:1, iPads K–2 and Chromebooks 3–8
Sunnyvale School DistrictPowerSchoolLiveConfirmed districtwide
Lake Tahoe UnifiedAeriesLiveConfirmed districtwide
Rio School District“Q” (Equitus Solutions)Live1:1 Chromebooks confirmed, grades 3–5
San Diego UnifiedPowerSchoolLiveConfirmed 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care35 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education36Element 6

Element 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

Rio School 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.

Mount Pleasant Elementary SD

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care36 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education37Element 6

Element 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.

1

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.

2

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.

3

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.

4

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.

5

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.

6

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.

7

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care37 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education38Element 7

Element 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.

1Immediate

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.

All six LEAs
2Weeks 1–3

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.

All six LEAs
3Weeks 2–4

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.

All eighteen sites
4Weeks 2–5

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.

Four named sites
5Weeks 3–8

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.

Five named sites
6Ongoing

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.

Fifteen of eighteen sites
7Months 3–12

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.

Four named LEAs
Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care38 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education39Element 7

Element 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care39 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education40Section VI.F

Exhibit 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

3.1%44.7%

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

21.1%82.4%

Sixteen of nineteen participating school entities hold Title I schoolwide status.

Students With Disabilities

8.1%20.2%

Rio Lindo Elementary carries the cohort’s highest proportion, at 20.2 percent.

Enrollment At Participating Sites

1052,926

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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care40 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education41Section VI.F

Exhibit 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.

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care41 / 42
BHPMRecruitment Outcomes SummaryDeliverable 1 · September 2026 · Santa Clara County Office of Education42Colophon

Colophon

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.

9
Deliverables, 2026 to 2028
18
School records published

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.

RecordWhat It HoldsAddress
Deliverable 1 ReaderEight components under four lenses: Report, Cohort, Documents and Requirementbhpm.care/deliverables/d1
Implementation Workplan CrosswalkEvery contract workplan item against the deliverable that answers itbhpm.care/record/crosswalk
Cohort Readiness TrackerReadiness position by LEA and by instrumentbhpm.care/record/readiness
District And School RecordsOne record per LEA and per site, with agreements and LCAPs published underneathbhpm.care/cohort
Resource LibraryExecuted agreements, instruments, the brand standard and this report as a PDFbhpm.care/resources

BHPM · Deliverable 1

Final · For The SCCOE Handoff And The Commission Submission

Contract#25BHSOAC019
Scope6 LEAs · 18 Schools · 4 Counties
CompiledSeptember 11, 2026

Led By The Santa Clara County Office of Education

Santa Clara County Office of Education

Prime

Impacter Pathway

Delivery

Deveau Burr Group

TA

Stanford University

Research

Breaking Barriers California

Policy

ASR

Evaluation

Santa Clara County Office of Education·Behavioral Health Performance Management·bhpm.care42 / 42