Lynwood Unified School District Report

Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation Review August 16, 2024 Lynwood Unified School District Michael H. Fine Chief Executive Officer August 16, 2024 Guidiel R. Crosthwaite, Ph.D., Superintendent Lynwood Unified School District 11321 Bullis Road Lynwood, CA 90262 Dear Superintendent Crosthwaite: In May 2023, the Lynwood Unified School District and the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) entered into an agreement for FCMAT to conduct a review of the district’s Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation departments. The agreement stated that FCMAT would perform the following: 1. Conduct an organizational and staffing review of the Maintenance, Operations and Transportation (MOT) Department, including maintenance, grounds, custodial and transportation, and make recommendations for staffing improvements or reductions, if any. 2. Evaluate the current workflow and distribution of functions in the MOT and Facilities departments and make recommendations for improved efficiency, if any. 3. Review the operational processes and procedures of the MOT and Facilities departments and make recommendations for improved efficiency, if any. 4. Conduct an organizational and staffing review of the Facilities Department and make recommendations for staffing improvements or reductions, if any. 5. Review the coordination of bond-funded facilities projects and those eligible for funding from the Office of Public School Construction with Routine Restricted Maintenance Account funding and other locally funded facilities projects and make recommendations for improvements, if any. This report contains the study team’s findings and recommendations. FCMAT appreciates the opportunity to serve the Lynwood Unified School District and extends thanks to all the staff for their assistance during fieldwork. Sincerely, Michael H. Fine Chief Executive Officer Michael H. Fine • Chief Executive Officer 1300 17th Street – City Centre, Bakersfield, CA 93301-4533 • Tel. 661-636-4611 • Fax 661-636-4647 www.fcmat.org Table of Contents Table of Contents About FCMAT ...................................................................................................v Introduction .....................................................................................................vii Background ..........................................................................................................................vii Study and Report Guidelines ............................................................................................ix Study Team .............................................................................................................................x Executive Summary .................................................................................................xi Findings and Recommendations.................................................................1 Facilities Data .............................................................................................................1 Organizational Structure ........................................................................................3 Principles of Organizational Structure .............................................................................3 Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation Department Structure ..................................................................................................................................6 Work Order System .................................................................................................11 Ongoing and Preventive Maintenance ..............................................................12 Deferred and Major Maintenance .......................................................................14 Maintenance Services ............................................................................................16 Staffing ...................................................................................................................................16 Purchasing and Inventory ................................................................................................20 Uniforms and ID Badges ...................................................................................................21 Custodial Services .................................................................................................22 Cleanliness Standards and Staffing ..............................................................................22 Processes and Procedures ...............................................................................................24 Equipment Management ..................................................................................................25 Grounds Services ...................................................................................................26 APPA Levels of Attention and Staffing .........................................................................26 Pesticide Use.......................................................................................................................28 Tree Care Plan ....................................................................................................................29 Turf Care Plan ......................................................................................................................30 Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District ii Table of Contents Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services .............................32 Staffing ..................................................................................................................................32 Facility Master Plan and Capital Improvement Plan ..................................................36 Project Management ..........................................................................................................37 Contracted Program and Construction Management Oversight ..........................40 Facilities Funding Coordination and Efficiency ..............................................44 General Obligation Bonds ...............................................................................................44 California’s School Facility Program ..............................................................................45 Routine Restricted Maintenance Account ...................................................................46 Certificates of Participation .............................................................................................46 Capital Facilities Fund (Developer Fees) ......................................................................47 Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) ............................................................48 Transportation Services........................................................................................52 Staffing and Distribution of Duties .................................................................................52 School Bus Driver Certification Training Requirements ...........................................53 District Transportation Safety Plan ................................................................................54 Safety Drills ..........................................................................................................................55 Student Transport Services .............................................................................................55 Vehicle Fleet Management and Maintenance .............................................................57 Organizational Culture and Communication .................................................. 60 Subsequent Events .......................................................................................61 Appendices ....................................................................................................62 Appendix A ..............................................................................................................63 Subsequent Event Staffing Estimates ...........................................................................63 Custodial Unit Staffing Estimate Assumptions ...........................................................64 Grounds Unit Staffing Estimate Assumptions .............................................................65 Maintenance Unit Staffing Estimate Assumptions .....................................................66 Appendix B ..............................................................................................................69 Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation Department Organizational Chart .........................................................................................................69 Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District iii Table of Contents Maintenance Organizational Chart ................................................................................70 Custodial, Grounds and Transportation Organizational Chart .................................71 Custodial Unit Organizational Chart ..............................................................................72 Appendix C ..............................................................................................................73 Study Agreement ................................................................................................................73 Works Cited ...................................................................................................78 Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District iv About FCMAT FCMAT’s primary mission is to assist California’s local TK-14 educational agencies to identify, prevent, and resolve financial, human resources and data management challenges. FCMAT provides fiscal and data management assistance, professional development training, product development and other related school business and data services. FCMAT’s fiscal and management assistance services are used not just to help avert fiscal crisis, but to promote sound financial practices, support the training and development of chief business officials and help to create efficient organizational operations. FCMAT’s data management ser- vices are used to help local educational agencies (LEAs) meet state reporting responsibilities, improve data quality, and inform instructional program decisions. FCMAT may be requested to provide fiscal crisis or management assistance by a school district, charter school, community college, county office of education, the state superintendent of public instruction, or the Legislature. When a request or assignment is received, FCMAT assembles a study team that works closely with the LEA to define the scope of work, conduct on-site fieldwork and provide a written report with findings and recommendations to help resolve issues, overcome challenges and plan for the future. 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 FCMAT has continued to make adjustments in the types of support provided based on the changing dynamics of TK-14 LEAs and the implementation of major educational reforms. FCMAT also develops and provides numerous publications, software tools, workshops and professional learning opportunities to help LEAs operate more effectively and fulfill their fiscal oversight and data management responsibilities. The California School Information Services (CSIS) division of FCMAT assists the California Department of Education with the implementation of the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS). CSIS also hosts and maintains the Ed-Data website (www.ed-data.org) and provides technical expertise to the Ed-Data partnership: the California Department of Education, EdSource and FCMAT. FCMAT was created by Assembly Bill (AB) 1200 in 1991 to assist LEAs to meet and sustain their financial obligations. AB 107 in 1997 charged FCMAT with responsibility for CSIS and its statewide data management work. AB 1115 in 1999 codified CSIS’ mission. seidutS fo rebmuN About FCMAT Studies by Fiscal Year 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District v About FCMAT AB 1200 is also a statewide plan for county offices of education and school districts to work together locally to improve fiscal procedures and accountability standards. AB 2756 (2004) provides specific responsibili- ties to FCMAT with regard to districts that have received emergency state loans. In January 2006, Senate Bill 430 (charter schools) and AB 1366 (community colleges) became law and expanded FCMAT’s services to those types of LEAs. On September 17, 2018 AB 1840 was signed into law. This legislation changed how fiscally insolvent dis- tricts are administered once an emergency appropriation has been made, shifting the former state-centric system to be more consistent with the principles of local control, and providing new responsibilities to FCMAT associated with the process. Since 1992, FCMAT has been engaged to perform more than 1,400 reviews for LEAs, including school districts, county offices of education, charter schools and community colleges. The Kern County Superintendent of Schools is the administrative agent for FCMAT. The team is led by Michael H. Fine, Chief Executive Officer, with funding derived through appropriations in the state budget and a modest fee sched- ule for charges to requesting agencies. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District vi Introduction Introduction Background Located within the city of Lynwood in Los Angeles County, the Lynwood Unified School District serves 11,386 students [1] in transitional kindergarten through grade 12 (TK-12) at 12 elementary, two middle, two comprehensive high, and two alternative high schools.1 The district also operates an adult education pro- gram and a preschool program. As shown in Figure 1 below, the district’s TK-12 enrollment peaked in the 2003-04 academic year, with 19,658 students [1]. However, it has since experienced a steady decline, with only 11,386 students enrolled as of the 2023-24 academic year, the latest period for which certified enrollment data is available. This rep- resents a 42% decrease in enrollment over the past 20 years. Lynwood Unified School District Enrollment History, 2003-04 — 2023-24 Figure 1. District’s TK-12 enrollment from 2003-04 to 2023-24. Source: Adapted from “Enrollment by Subgroup for Charter and Non-Charter Schools” (California Department of Education [CDE]). Note: Enrollment data for 2009-10 was not available. The district’s 2023-24 unduplicated pupil percentage was 95.46% [2]. The unduplicated pupil percentage is the percentage of students who are eligible for free or reduced priced meals, are identified as English learners and/or who are foster youth. Each eligible student is counted only once, even if they meet more than one of these criteria. 1FCMAT used the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers style for citing sources outside of information obtained from district documents and interviews. These sources will be indicated by numbered square brackets, such as “[1],” which correspond to the full citations in the “Works Cited” section at the end of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District vii Introduction The district has undergone recent management changes in its Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation and Business Services departments. The district’s assistant superintendent of business ser- vices was hired in February 2023 and has six years of experience as an assistant superintendent of business at Lawndale Elementary School District. This district is also experiencing a decline in enrollment [3]. The senior director of facilities planning and development has served in this position for approximately one year, following nine years of service in various roles within the district. The previous assistant director of custodial, grounds and transportation services recently retired, and the district has yet to fill the vacancy. According to the district’s 2023-24 local control and accountability plan (LCAP), 94.3% of district students identify as Latino, 4.7% as African American, and 1.2% as Asian Pacific American and/or Caucasian. As shown in Table 1 below, the local community has passed three out of five proposed general obligation bonds since November 2002. Each bond was placed on the ballot as a Proposition 39 general obligation bond, requiring only a 55% majority to pass. In contrast, a non-Proposition 39 general obligation bond requires a two-thirds majority. Table 1 provides a summary of each general obligation bond election. Table 1. Lynwood Unified School District’s Bond Elections, 2002-16 Election Value Type of Bond Status Text of Measure Improve/maintain neighborhood schools by repairing/updating classrooms, science labs/technology, repairing leaky roofs, November 2016 bathrooms, plumbing/electrical, improving school safety with $65 million Proposition 39 Pass Measure N lighting, fences, fire alarms, earthquake retrofits, removing asbestos, replacing portables with permanent classrooms, and acquiring, renovating, constructing/equipping school sites/facilities. To improve and maintain neighborhood schools by repairing and updating classrooms, science labs and technology, repairing November 2012 leaky roofs, bathrooms, plumbing, and electrical, improving school $93 million Proposition 39 Pass Measure K safety with lighting, fences, fire alarms, and earthquake retrofits, removing asbestos, replacing portables with permanent classrooms, renovating, constructing, and equipping, modernizing school facilities. To improve education, make schools safe, complete essential health/safety repairs, fix roofs, shall Lynwood Unified School District November 2010 upgrade plumbing, electrical, sewer/heating/cooling systems, aging $45 million Proposition 39 Fail Measure L schools, science labs, install energy efficient lighting/windows, improve school safety, remove hazardous materials; repair, acquire, construct, equip schools/facilities/sites, upgrade fire safety. To improve student safety by upgrading school security systems and June 2010 alarms; upgrade classrooms with up-to-date technology; acquire $37.4 million Proposition 39 Fail Measure AA classrooms throughout the District; and provide more money for essential learning in the classrooms. To improve safety and relieve overcrowding in Lynwood schools, by acquiring land for a new elementary school, new high school, and November 2002 $20 million Proposition 39 Pass new interim classrooms, and to expand two elementary schools, and Measure C for furniture, fixtures, and equipment, and not for salaries or other administrative costs. Sources: November 2016 Measure N data from the California State “Election Data” (California State Treasurer). November 2012 Measure K data from “Lynwood Unified School District, California, Bond Issue, Measure N (November 2016)” (Ballotpedia). November 2010 Measure L data from “Lynwood Unified School District bond proposition, Measure K (November 2012)” (Ballotpedia). November 2010 Measure L data from “Classroom Repair, Job Training/Student Safety Measure Lynwood Unified School District” (Smart Voter). June 2010 Measure AA data from “Lynwood Unified School District bond proposition, Measure AA (June 2010) (Ballotpedia). November 2002 Measure C data from “Measure C School Improvement Bond Measure Lynwood Unified School District” (Smart Voter). The proceeds from the November 2002 and November 2012 bond elections are fully expended, while the proceeds from November 2016 proceeds are partially expended. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District viii Introduction Lynwood High School Campus In 1995 the district began building Lynwood High School’s Imperial campus. By 1998, construction was substantially complete, and the campus was opened to students. The construction was fully completed in 2000. In June 2020, amid the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent school closures, a section of outdoor ceiling panels collapsed, triggering a structural safety review of the whole campus. As a result of the review’s findings, the district closed the Imperial campus for the entirety of the 2021-22 school year and converted Lynwood Middle School on Bullis Road into the temporary Lynwood High School campus. Construction began in June 2021, and the Lynwood High School Bullis campus opened for in-person edu- cation in August 2021. The transition necessitated adjustments in enrollment across various schools within the district: Lynwood Middle School students were reassigned to the other two district middle schools, while incoming sixth graders were retained at district elementary schools to free up space at the middle schools. Teachers and staff were also relocated to different campuses alongside the students. Since then, outdoor sports activities have resumed at the Imperial campus, while classes and other indoor activities have remained at the Bullis campus. Study and Report Guidelines In May 2023, the Lynwood Unified School District and the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) entered into an agreement for FCMAT to conduct a review of the district’s Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation Department. FCMAT visited the district on October 23-25, 2023, to conduct interviews with district and school staff, collect data and review documents. Additional documents were collected through November 10, 2023. Following fieldwork, FCMAT continued to review and analyze documents. This report is the result of those activities. FCMAT’s reports focus on systems and processes that may need improvement. Those that may be func- tioning well are generally not commented on in FCMAT’s reports. In writing its reports, FCMAT uses the Associated Press Stylebook, a comprehensive guide to usage and accepted style that emphasizes con- ciseness and clarity. In addition, this guide emphasizes plain language, discourages the use of jargon and capitalizes relatively few terms. FCMAT used the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers style for citing sources outside of infor- mation obtained from district and documents and interviews. These sources will be indicated by numbered square brackets, such as “[1],” which correspond to the full citations in the “Works Cited” section at the end of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District ix Introduction Study Team The study team was composed of the following members: Andrea Ward Leigh Coop FCMAT Intervention Specialist FCMAT Consultant Brad Pawlowski Tim Purvis Assistant Superintendent, Business Services Pupil Transportation Information, LLC Paso Robles Joint Unified School District Cassady Clifton FCMAT Technical Writer Those members of this study team who are otherwise employed by a local educational agency were not representing their respective employers but were working solely as independent contractors for FCMAT. Each team member reviewed the draft report to confirm accuracy and achieve consensus on the final recommendations. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District x Introduction Executive Summary Executive Summary Facilities, maintenance, operations and grounds functions play crucial roles in supporting both students and their learning environment. These functions shape the current and future student learning experi- ence through student health, wellbeing, comfort, security and productivity [4].2 Moreover, the quality of school facilities affects teacher morale and retention [5]. Substandard physical environments, however, are strongly associated with higher chronic absenteeism and behavioral problems [5]. The Lynwood Unified School District has an active facilities, maintenance and operations program, sup- ported by diverse funding sources. These sources include special state funds allocated for the reconstruc- tion of Lynwood High School following the collapse of a section of its ceiling, as well as multiple bond mea- sures approved by the community for facility upgrades and maintenance. The district’s facilities vary widely in age, with some buildings dating back to the early 1930s and others having been constructed within the last few years. The Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation (FMOT) Department operates under the dis- trict’s Business Services Department, which is overseen by the assistant superintendent of business services, who is also actively involved in facilities operations. At the time of FCMAT’s fieldwork, the senior director of facilities planning and development, who heads the FMOT Department, had actively served in the role for less than a year. Additionally, the assistant director of custodial, grounds and transportation services position, responsible for supervising the transportation, grounds and custodial units, was vacant. The FMOT Department comprises an estimated total of 140 full-time equivalent positions, including man- agement but excluding the assistant superintendent of business services. Despite some custodial staff receiving direction from site management, the number of managers and supervisors within the FMOT Department is low considering the breadth of work and size of the staff. With one supervisor responsible for 29 positions and staff reporting a lack of recent performance evaluations, there is a clear need for the district to review management assignments within the maintenance unit to increase direct oversight of line staff. Furthermore, the district would benefit from considering the addition of one or two positions to its facili- ties staff. This expansion would allow the district to better plan for its facility needs, while also providing enhanced oversight of contracted program or construction management consultants. By better supporting these duties, the district can more effectively manage its facility resources. In addition, the district needs to consider adding a position to the transportation unit for communication and safety reasons. Doing so would help provide additional support to the transportation supervisor, who is responsible for supervising staff, managing the transportation unit, handling dispatch duties, and serving as a substitute bus driver. The district was very responsive to FCMAT’s document requests. The business office provided necessary reports from the district’s financial system, and the study team was able to access various documents on the district’s website, including job descriptions, citizens’ bond oversight committee documents, and governing board minutes and policies. However, the study team experienced significant delays in obtaining documentation from the FMOT Department. Some basic documentation, including the department’s organi- zational chart, had to be created. 2FCMAT used the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers style for citing sources outside of information obtained from district documents and interviews. These sources will be indicated by numbered square brackets, such as “[1],” which correspond to the full citations in the “Works Cited” section at the end of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District xi Introduction Executive Summary With few exceptions, such as an organizational chart needed to set the interview schedule, FCMAT requests that school districts provide existing documents rather than create new ones. This approach helps FCMAT in evaluating departmental operational efficiencies and adherence to defined processes and procedures. Unfortunately, the FMOT Department could not provide most of the requested documentation. Staff indicated that the documentation either did not exist or was not easily accessible. Additionally, the study team found that some of the district’s documentation was incomplete. A department cannot operate efficiently without access to essential documentation, including standards, checklists, inventory lists, and standard operating procedures. Moreover, effectively managing facilities, maintenance and operation services is challenging without essen- tial information such as the number of classrooms per site, average classroom size, or total square foot- age or acreage of each site. FCMAT could not conduct a staffing analysis of individual units by workload because of the lack of available information. However, this report includes guidance for calculating staffing for each affected unit so the district can perform a staffing analysis once the necessary data has been collected. The district's FMOT Department operates in a reactive manner because it lacks a comprehensive deferred maintenance plan that lists all facilities, construction dates, building systems, and their life expectancy. Such a document would facilitate the scheduling of preventive and routine maintenance at times that mini- mize or avoid disruptions to student learning and staff productivity. Developing and implementing compre- hensive maintenance plans, which encompass deferred maintenance, preventive maintenance and routine maintenance, would enable the strategic assignment of work to available and appropriate staff, reducing reliance on outside contractors. Additionally, it would help the district in accurately determining its budget- ary requirements for maintenance and replacement. The district lacks both a facilities master plan and a capital improvement plan, which has resulted in indi- vidual facilities projects being planned without a cohesive vision. The district would benefit from conduct- ing a facilities needs assessment and leveraging the findings to create a facilities master plan and a list of projects that identifies their priorities and funding sources. This proactive approach would help the district coordinate the use of funds, foster improved communication about outstanding project needs, leverage state facility funds, and build community support for future bond measures. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District xii Findings and Recommendations Facilities Data Findings and Recommendations Facilities Data Data-driven decision-making is essential for effective organizational management. This approach entails basing decisions on verifiable facts and logic that is openly communicated, defensible, and reasonable to objective third parties. To foster continuous improvement, school districts must measure current conditions or outcomes, implement strategic changes, and assess the impact of these changes to validate their effec- tiveness and inform next steps. FCMAT studies typically involve extensive data collection to help the study team make informed recom- mendations. FCMAT draws from multiple sources of data and cross validates information to ensure a com- plete understanding of the school district’s circumstances and the causes behind the conditions. Findings and recommendations rely on verifiable data to provide accurate analysis and meaningful information. At a minimum, a school district should have the following basic facilities data for each campus: • Number of classrooms. • Current year usage of each classroom space. • Square feet of each building. • Total acreage of each athletic field used for competitive sports. • Total acreage of each field used for recreation or sports practice. FCMAT requested this documentation during interviews and both prior to and following fieldwork. However, instead of providing the requested information, the district provided Facility Inspection Tool (FIT) reports for Rosa Parks Elementary, Washington Elementary, Hosler Middle, and Pathway Independent Study schools. These reports identify only a single campus and a single building square footage number for each school. The data does not represent all district schools, nor is the information sufficient for FCMAT to complete an analysis. The district’s ability to make informed decisions about basic facilities management hinges on collecting this data. For example, a lack of data on the number of classrooms on each campus prevents the district from making accurate decisions regarding campus capacity. Similarly, without basic data on grounds acreage, the district cannot create accurate schedules for its grounds workers. Additionally, the district cannot make informed custodian schedules without square footage and usage information. A lack of basic square footage data creates additional challenges for planning and budgeting purposes. Among other issues, it hinders the establishment of benchmarks for planning energy efficiency projects and undermines the district’s ability to substantiate the value of completed projects. In addition, most preliminary construction estimates are determined based on square footage or quantity. The district cannot make preliminary estimates for construction or renovation projects without this data. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 1 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Data Recommendation The district should: 1. Document the following minimum data points for each school to support making informed staffing allocation, capacity and facility project decisions: • The total number of classrooms. • The current year usage of each classroom space. • The square footage of each building and campus. • The total acreage of each athletic field used for competitive sports. • The total acreage of each field used for recreation or sports practice. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 2 Findings and Recommendations Organizational Structure Organizational Structure The purpose of an organizational structure is to help school district management make decisions to achieve organizational goals and objectives. The organizational design should outline the management process and establish the system of communication, authority and responsibility needed to achieve the school district’s goals and objectives. Principles of Organizational Structure A school district’s organizational structure establishes the framework of its leadership and the specific duties and responsibilities of its staff members. This structure should be designed to maximize resources and support organizational goals. Furthermore, as student enrollment increases or declines, the organi- zational structure should be adapted to ensure staffs’ duties and responsibilities continue to be fulfilled efficiently. Similarly, adjustments should be made to accommodate evolving strategies for student success and changes in workload. To establish an effective organizational structure, each school district should be staffed according to gen- erally accepted theories of organizational structures and standards used in other school agencies of similar size and type. These may include principles such as span of control, chain of command, and line and staff authority. It is best practice that the organizational structure specifies key areas of authority and responsi- bility, with clear and logical lines of authority and reporting established and communicated throughout the school district. Span of Control Span of control refers to the number of subordinates reporting directly to a supervisor [6].3 While there is no universally agreed-upon ideal number of subordinates, it is generally recognized that the span of control can be larger at lower levels of an organization than at higher levels. This is because subordinates at lower levels typically perform more routine duties and are thus easier to supervise. Conversely, a position over- seeing multiple departments would need a smaller span of control because of the heightened complexity arising from the issues that must be addressed and the diverse types of decisions that must be made. Similarly, dynamic conditions that require frequent schedule or assignment changes would reduce the span of control because of the increased need for communication between supervisors and subordinates. The fact that there is no universally applicable span of control range for every management position does not mean that appropriate span of control ranges cannot be estimated for specific positions. McKinsey & Company, a global management consulting firm dedicated to helping organizations innovate sustainably, improve their performance, and build thriving workforces, offers valuable insights in this area [7]. Their 2017 article “How to identify the right ‘spans of control’ for your organization,” provides a framework for estimat- ing recommended spans of control based on the type of managerial position [8]. McKinsey & Company’s span of control framework identifies five managerial archetypes that are applicable across various industries and organizations, providing recommended spans of control for each manage- ment archetype [8]. These spans of control are designed to be flexible, accommodating both new managers and those who are experienced. The framework categorizes each archetype based on four aspects of 3FCMAT used the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers style for citing sources outside of information obtained from district documents and interviews. These sources will be indicated by numbered square brackets, such as “[1],” which correspond to the full citations in the “Works Cited” section at the end of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 3 Findings and Recommendations Organizational Structure managerial complexity: the time a manager dedicates to their own tasks and to overseeing others’ work; the level of standardization in processes; the variety of tasks performed by subordinates; and the skills, experience and training required for essential job duties. FCMAT has summarized these archetypes in Table 2 below. Table 2. McKinsey & Company’s Five Managerial Archetypes Team Experience Time Allocated for Process Work Variety of or Skills Typical Managerial Archetype Individual Work Standardization Team Required Span Player/Coach High Nonstandard Different High 3-5 direct reports Coach High Standard Different Moderate 6-7 direct reports Supervisor Moderate Standard Similar Moderate 8-10 direct reports Facilitator Limited Standard Similar Low 11-15 direct reports Coordinator Low Standard Similar Low 15+ direct reports Source: Adapted from “How to identify the right ‘spans of control’ for your organization” (McKinsey & Company). FCMAT requested an organizational chart and a complete list of department positions, including vacan- cies and chain of command assignments. Although multiple staffing lists and an organizational chart were provided, the study team identified discrepancies among these documents. As a result, all analysis in this report is limited to FCMAT’s estimates of staffing and assignments. Full-time equivalent (FTE) data is derived from the district’s staffing lists, while chain-of-command assignments are based on the organiza- tional chart and information obtained through interviews. The information used for analysis is summarized in the organizational charts that are included in Appendix A of this report. When applying McKinsey & Company’s span of control framework [8] to the district’s existing structure, the role and responsibilities of the senior director of facilities planning and development position aligns most closely with the coach archetype. This is because the position requires a significant allocation of time for individual work in addition to management duties. Furthermore, the director’s direct reports adhere to general guidelines or structures while also undertaking complex tasks of more than type. It can take up to a year for the direct reports of a coach archetype to achieve self-sufficiency in their roles. The recommended span of control for the coach archetype ranges from six to seven direct reports. The supervisor archetype [8] is applicable to both the maintenance services, logistics and compliance supervisor and the assistant director of custodial, grounds, and transportation services positions. This is because of the diverse range of tasks performed by their direct reports. While building trades work has established standard industry practices that staff should follow, situations often arise that require manage- rial intervention. The recommended span of control for the supervisor archetype ranges from eight to 10 direct reports [8]. The transportation supervisor position, responsible for overseeing mechanics and bus drivers, aligns most closely with the facilitator archetype [8]. While mechanical work has standard industry practices that staff should follow, occasional situations may arise that require managerial intervention. Most bus driver work is scheduled in advance, routine and standardized. Staff typically achieve self-sufficiency within one to two months, as they either possess most of the necessary skills prior to starting the job or can quickly acquire the required skills. The recommended span of control for the facilitator archetype ranges from 11 to 15 direct reports [8]. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 4 Findings and Recommendations Organizational Structure The coordinator archetype [8] is applicable to the facilities operations manager positions tasked with overseeing evening custodial line staff. The majority of grounds and custodial line staff work is scheduled in advance, routine and standardized. Staff members can be trained to work independently within a matter of days or weeks. Consequently, a wider span of effective control is possible. The recommended span of control for the coordinator archetype is 15 or more direct reports [8]. At the time of fieldwork, the assistant director of operations, transportation and grounds position was vacant. The district had temporarily filled the position, and select applicants were in the process of advanc- ing to a final interview. Chain of Command Chain of command refers to the flow of authority within an organization [6]. It is largely governed by two principles: unity of command, in which a subordinate is accountable to only one supervisor, and the scalar principle, which suggests that authority and responsibility should flow in a direct vertical line from top man- agement to the lowest level. This results in a hierarchical division of labor. Line and Staff Authority Line authority refers to the relationship between supervisors and their subordinates within the chain of command in an organization [6]. For example, the district’s superintendent holds direct line authority over the assistant superintendent of business services, who in turn exercises direct line authority over the senior director of facilities planning and development, and so forth. In contrast, staff authority is advisory in nature. Staff members lack the authority to make and implement decisions; instead, they provide support to line personnel. The organizational structure of local educational agencies includes both line and staff authority. The distinction between line and staff authority is crucial when considering the roles of senior positions within an organization. While employees in senior positions may have some authority over tasks such as scheduling or assigning work orders, their line authority is typically limited. Specifically, they lack the authority to carry out progressive discipline when staff disregard their directions or perform substan- dard work. Instead, such issues must be escalated to their supervisor, who possesses the necessary line authority. In appropriately staffed organizations that are functioning well, senior positions are effective in expanding the functional span of control of supervisor positions. However, this is not the case for organizations that are not functioning well and/or are inadequately staffed, as issues frequently need to be elevated to super- visors for resolution. This means that senior positions in such organizations are ineffective at substantially expanding supervisors’ functional span of control. Put another way, in a well-functioning system where employees in senior positions handle communication from management and make schedule adjustments, they effectively expand the functional span of control of supervisors. However, when staff accountability and corrective discipline are required, senior position roles are not effective in expanding supervisors’ span of control. The district’s FMOT Department lacks established systems and strong organization. As such, the ability of senior position employees to expand the span of control of supervisors is limited. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 5 Findings and Recommendations Organizational Structure Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation Department Structure Facilities, maintenance, operations and transportation services operate under the district’s Business Services Department, which is overseen by the assistant superintendent of business services. For clar- ity, this report will refer to the entities responsible for these functions as the Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation (FMOT) Department, or by their individual units, such as the facilities unit, as appropriate. The FMOT Department manages facility maintenance, landscaping, playgrounds, custodial services, facility use permits, transportation, and bus and vehicle maintenance. It is also responsible for facility planning and development, as well as the planning, coordination and supervision of all bond and capital improvement projects funded through the district’s general obligation bonds, state facility programs, or developer fees. Based on interviews with staff, the study team determined that the structure of the FMOT Department aligns reasonably well with the organizational chart provided by the district. However, discrepancies were noted between the chart and the information gathered from staff interviews. Consequently, FCMAT adapted the district’s organizational chart into four distinct charts that incorporate this information, as shown in Appendix A of this report. These adapted charts do not include the outside consultants con- tracted for Williams Facility Inspections and construction and project management. FCMAT’s analysis is based on these adapted charts. The FMOT Department is led by the senior director of facilities planning and development, who oversees all facilities, bonds, maintenance and operations, custodial, grounds, and transportation maintenance services. The senior director also plays a pivotal role in supporting the district’s active facilities program by overseeing multiple projects at various stages of development and construction. They are also responsible for developing project scopes and budget estimates. This includes the major repairs and construction at Lynwood High School Imperial campus, which received funding from the 2022-23 enacted state budget. The senior director of facilities planning and development manages seven positions: one secretary; one office assistant II; one facilities representative/Williams liaison; one senior locksmith; one locksmith; the assistant director of custodial, grounds and transportation services; and one maintenance services, logis- tics and compliance supervisor. Additionally, a newly approved facilities project manager position, currently unassigned within the district’s Business Services Department, may become an eighth direct report to the senior director. Managing seven direct reports falls within the typical managerial span for the coach archetype [8]. However, the senior director of facilities planning and development has only been in the role for a year. This individual faces additional management demands because of the vacant assistant director of custo- dial, grounds and transportation position. As a result, the senior director’s span of control is too broad, and adding an eighth direct report will only exacerbate this issue. For additional analysis and recommendations, please see the “Staffing” subsection of the “Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services” sec- tion of this report. The maintenance services, logistics and compliance supervisor oversees nine trade groups consisting of 29 positions spread across 22 sites. The supervisor is often required to provide managerial support to their subordinates. Moreover, the dynamic nature of the work often necessitates frequent schedule or assign- ment changes, leading to a greater need for communication between leaders and subordinates. These communication needs decrease the effective span of control. Given that the recommended span of control for the supervisor archetype is only eight to 10 direct reports [8], the maintenance services, logistics, and compliance supervisor’s span of control is too broad for effective management. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 6 Findings and Recommendations Organizational Structure Among the 29 positions overseen by the maintenance services, logistics and compliance supervisor, four hold job titles containing the term “senior.” These senior positions are responsible for providing support and guidance to assigned workers to facilitate project completion. However, because these positions lack formal disciplinary authority, their capacity to direct work is limited. This reduces their effectiveness in the chain of command and hinders their ability to expand the span of control of the maintenance services, logistics and compliance supervisor. As a result, the 29 district maintenance staff receive minimal ongo- ing supervision and limited managerial support for escalating complex issues. The latter may explain why school leaders reported the recurrence or inadequate remediation of building maintenance issues, includ- ing plumbing problems and pest-related damage. As discussed earlier in this report, the assistant director of custodial, grounds and transportation services position was vacant at the time of fieldwork. This position is responsible for overseeing 16 direct reports, including one transportation supervisor, four facilities operations managers, and the grounds group, which comprises one senior gardener, one heavy equipment operator, and nine gardeners. While most grounds work is standardized, the incumbent will be new to the role and may require additional training, particularly in student transportation operations. In light of this and considering that the recommended span of control for the supervisor archetype is eight to 10 direct reports [8], the assistant director position’s span of control is too broad for effective management. The transportation supervisor position oversees 11 positions: an office assistant II, two mechanics, and eight bus drivers. Given that most transportation work is largely standardized, this number of direct reports is in alignment with the facilitator archetype’s recommended span of control of 11-15 direct reports [8]. Recommendations The district should: 1. Fill the assistant director of custodial, grounds and transportation services position.4 2. Review the management and oversight responsibilities within the maintenance unit and increase direct oversight of line staff in the maintenance and facilities units. Custodial Unit Structure The district’s custodial unit operates under the FMOT Department, which falls under the Business Services Department. Custodians are assigned to managers based on their schedule, with daytime custodians man- aged by school principals and nighttime custodians managed by facilities operation managers. During fieldwork, FCMAT observed that the level of direction or supervision provided to custodial staff varied depending on the site and department. FCMAT also noted confusion among school administrators and facilities operations managers regarding their responsibilities for supervising, evaluating, and man- aging custodial positions. This confusion stemmed from a lack of clear directives on the division of these duties. Furthermore, several school principals expressed discomfort in evaluating technical skills because they lack training or familiarity with the requirements of custodial operations. They felt ill-equipped to effec- tively assess performance or provide procedural guidance. 4Updated information on the hiring of an assistant director of custodial, grounds and transportation services can be found in the “Subsequent Events” section of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 7 Findings and Recommendations Organizational Structure Custodians present a unique challenge in establishing effective line authority [4]. They hold a dual nature of authority and responsibility. Custodians are hired and trained by the district office to perform services for school administration, who are responsible for the programs and personnel. This situation creates an environment where custodians, regardless of day or night assignment, must perform work that meets the expectations of the school administration while adhering to standards set by the district office. To address this issue, it would be beneficial for the district to implement a hybrid supervision model for custodial oversight. This model would involve a coordinated evaluation process between facilities opera- tions managers and principals. Under this hybrid model, facilities operations managers would evaluate the “technical” skills of custodial staff, such as cleaning methods, vacuuming, dusting, mopping, stain removal, and effective time management. Meanwhile, principals would assess the “people” or “soft” skills, including interactions with staff, students, and the community, as well as attendance, dependability, and work atti- tude. While this description is not exhaustive, it offers a framework for how a dual-input evaluation could be conducted. Implementing a hybrid supervision model would elevate the standard of care and increase accountability among custodial employees. Recommendation The district should: 1. Adopt a hybrid supervision model for custodial staff.5 Transportation Unit Structure The district’s transportation unit operates under the FMOT Department, which falls under the Business Services Department. The transportation supervisor reports to the assistant director of custodial, grounds, and transportation services. Positioning the transportation unit within an FMOT model aligns with standard practices observed in similarly sized school transportation operations across the state. This placement is appropriate in terms of scale and responsibility. Although the district’s organizational design outlines the chain of command, in practice, it is nearly non- existent within the FMOT Department. FCMAT found that the transportation unit operates independently and receives limited support. This is evidenced by the transportation unit making decisions to change processes without considering district or department goals, directives, or routine practices. As such, it is imperative to establish a clear chain of command within the FMOT Department to ensure effective man- agement. This chain of command should clearly delineate the flow of authority from the senior director of maintenance, operations and transportation to the assistant director of custodial, grounds and transporta- tion, and ultimately to the transportation supervisor. As discussed earlier in this report, the district was in the process of hiring an assistant director of custodial, grounds, and transportation services. The previous incumbent possessed limited knowledge of the legal requirements related to transportation, which affected various aspects of transportation and student trans- portation services. This included areas such as school bus operation, licensing requirements for vehicles and school buses, vehicle maintenance for district support vehicles, school bus safety inspections and routine maintenance intervals. This lack of knowledge compromises the support for transportation services that would otherwise be provided by the span-of-control structure. As such, individuals within the chain of command must possess a basic understanding of both the legal and daily operational requirements of the transportation program to support the transportation supervisor in fulfilling their responsibilities effectively. 5Updated information on the district’s implementation of a hybrid supervision model for custodial staff can be found in the “Subsequent Events” section of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 8 Findings and Recommendations Organizational Structure Lack of Support for Transportation Unit Management The FMOT Department leadership does not provide the transportation unit with the direction or support needed to address issues and resolve common operational challenges, nor do they hold regularly estab- lished leadership meetings. Moreover, the interim assistant director of custodial, grounds and transporta- tion and the transportation supervisor have limited communication and interaction, and they do not hold scheduled one-on-one supervisory meetings. To ensure operational efficiency and alignment with FMOT Department and district goals, the FMOT Department leadership needs to hold regular meetings. Further, it would be beneficial for the assistant director of custodial, grounds, and transportation services to schedule regular one-on-one meetings with transportation leadership. Recommendations The district should: 1. Ensure the FMOT Department adheres to the district’s organizational design. 2. Schedule regular FMOT Department leadership staff meetings and include transportation leadership. 3. Schedule one-on-one meetings between the transportation supervisor and the assistant director of custodial, grounds, and transportation services. 4. Provide training to the director of custodial, grounds and transportation services as needed to enhance their understanding of the legal and operational requirements pertaining to student transportation and vehicle maintenance. Administrative Support The FMOT Department is supported by one secretary and two office assistant IIs. The secretary works closely with facility management and performs department-level administrative ser- vices. They are responsible for reporting FMOT Department employee time for payroll, fulfilling requests to create purchase requisitions for specific funding sources, entering activity in work orders, taking minutes during facilities meetings, answering phones for the department, and other minor administrative duties. One office assistant II is primarily dedicated to supporting the maintenance and custodial units. Their responsibilities include creating and assigning work orders, coordinating substitute custodians, filing requi- sitions, and managing purchase orders. The other office assistant II provides nearly all the administrative support for the transportation unit, excluding payroll duties. They manage all work orders pertaining to activity trips (e.g., field trips and sport- ing events) submitted from schools and organize all field trip requests on the transportation supervisor’s calendar. Additionally, they assess whether requests meet the criteria for a chartered contract and arrange charter services accordingly. This individual also processes all vehicle maintenance requests from district drivers and generates work orders for them. The assistant then places the work orders in the mailboxes of the two district mechanics for completion. Furthermore, they communicate with parents as-needed. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 9 Findings and Recommendations Organizational Structure Cross-Training Cross-training involves training employees to carry out tasks beyond their designated job description or across various departments within an organization [9]. This practice offers numerous advantages that can improve a school district’s overall performance. For instance, it allows employees to contribute to multiple areas, leading to greater operational efficiency. Additionally, having multiple employees trained for the same tasks provides a built-in system of checks and balances, allowing for the detection and correction of errors or irregularities. Furthermore, cross-training promotes a deeper understanding of the roles and responsibilities within a school district, fostering collaboration and improving communication among employees [9]. It also contrib- utes to continuity during employee transitions because cross-trained employees can readily assume addi- tional responsibilities as needed. This mitigates the impact of turnover by empowering employees to adapt to changing demands and challenges. Moreover, cross-training plays a vital role in reducing turnover by providing opportunities for skill devel- opment and growth, thereby increasing employee retention over the long term [9]. Cross-training is not designed to make employees interchangeable or replace the need for specific knowledge, skills, and abilities. Rather, it enables school districts to sustain operations during crises and short-term employee absences. To implement effective cross-training, each employee needs to develop and document standard operating procedures for their major tasks and responsibilities, ideally in a desk manual format. This provides a step- by-step guide that allows others to perform the duties of an absent employee and offer additional support as needed to ensure the timely completion of tasks. During interviews, staff members reported challenges with the work order process whenever an admin- istrative support employee takes scheduled time off. The small team is expected to cover for each other, but documented processes either do not exist or are not shared among employees. As a result, staff were unclear about whether work orders were being assigned and completed in a timely manner during a recent period of scheduled time off. Documentation showed that several work orders were significantly delayed or outdated during this time. Recommendation The district should: 1. Implement cross-training for each administrative support position within the FMOT Department to ensure the continuity of essential tasks and functions during absences, vacancies, or when additional support is needed to meet deadlines. 2. Develop desk manuals and ensure that they are accessible to the other administrative employees in the FMOT Department. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 10 Findings and Recommendations Work Order System Work Order System For the past seven years, the FMOT Department has managed tasks through SchoolDude, an electronic work order system. This system allows FMOT Department, school, and other district staff to input work order requests. These requests are occasionally reviewed by either the assistant director of custodial grounds and transportation services or the maintenance services, logistics and compliance supervisor before they are assigned to the FMOT Department for completion. The office assistant IIs are then respon- sible for assigning these work orders to the appropriate employees. Upon assignment, FMOT Department employees receive printed copies of their work orders, which they manually complete to document their labor, materials and a description of the work performed. These completed work orders are then returned to the secretary, who enters the information in SchoolDude. This process not only duplicates effort but also introduces the risk of documentation errors. To enhance efficiency and minimize errors, the FMOT Department could consider using electronic tab- lets or similar devices to document and communicate maintenance services. Some staff expressed mixed feelings about transitioning to such devices because some personnel do not check their email. However, all staff members who were interviewed indicated that they use “smart phones” daily. Given that smart phones offer a comparable user experience to tablets, staff should find the transition relatively effortless. District and FMOT Department staff voiced concerns regarding a lack of training on SchoolDude. Neither staff nor administrators have been fully trained in all aspects of the system’s functionality. FMOT Department staff also reported considerable variation in the information recorded within SchoolDude, primarily influenced by personal preference. For example, some staff members choose not to include com- ments, while others provide detailed descriptions. During interviews, district staff generally expressed satisfaction with SchoolDude, believing it adequately meets the district’s needs. However, a few staff members felt some work orders had been ignored or closed without any maintenance work being carried out. The district does not track the aging history of work orders and did not provide detailed reports indicating the average turnaround time or the number of outstanding work orders. Furthermore, FMOT Department management lacks a method to regularly audit work order turnaround times and completion rates, hindering their ability to ensure timely resolution. The inconsistency in SchoolDude usage undermines the FMOT Department’s credibility. Implementing policies that mandate consistent levels of detail in work orders and regular reviews of aging requests will ensure that the SchoolDude system serves as a reliable source for tracking work orders, including their scopes and status. Recommendations The district should: 1. Consider issuing electronic tablets or similar devices to document maintenance activities within SchoolDude. 2. Provide training for all staff and administrators who use SchoolDude. 3. Establish policies and procedures outlining the required level of detail to be recorded within SchoolDude. 4. Develop a method for regularly auditing the turnaround time and completion rates of work orders, and ensure any outstanding work orders are addressed in a timely manner. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 11 Findings and Recommendations Ongoing and Preventive Maintenance Ongoing and Preventive Maintenance Implementing a comprehensive preventive maintenance plan is essential for ensuring the effective upkeep of school district facilities and systems. This involves creating a detailed list of facilities, structures and building components; scheduling regular maintenance tasks; and outlining responsibilities and costs. A comprehensive preventive maintenance plan not only helps prevent emergency response situations but also enhances facility functionality and reduces operating costs. Moreover, it improves safety and customer satisfaction and helps with budget planning. A comprehensive preventive maintenance plan typically lists all school district facilities, providing detailed information about the structures within each facility, as well as the various building components and sys- tems they contain. These components and systems can vary widely across facilities and may include roofs, gutters, floors, doors, plumbing valves, bleachers, and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) units. For each listed building system or component, the plan will outline a schedule of maintenance tasks to be performed monthly, quarterly, semiannually, seasonally, and yearly. The plan will also note whether these tasks are to be carried out by district staff or contractors, as well as estimates of the associated costs for each task. The district lacks a formalized preventive maintenance plan. Some staff members reported scheduling pre- ventive maintenance tasks independently, only to find that the tasks had already been completed by out- side contractors. This practice leads to duplicated effort and inefficient use of time and funding resources. Instead, the maintenance unit primarily operates in a reactionary mode, using a run-to-fail maintenance strategy. This approach entails allowing equipment to run until it fails, at which point remedial action is immediately taken. While this hands-off approach can be effective in select circumstances, such as with items that are difficult to access for maintenance or low-cost to replace and not critical, it becomes costlier in the long term when applied inappropriately. When equipment fails without warning, the need for immediate repairs results in higher costs due to chal- lenges in sourcing the best-priced parts and scheduling staff, and often leads to the hiring of outside con- tractors. In addition, equipment failures during critical times often incur unnecessary costs for mitigation or workaround solutions and can create an uncomfortable, inoperable, or potentially unsafe environment for students and staff. The district would benefit from developing and implementing a comprehensive preventive maintenance plan. At a minimum, the maintenance service logistics and compliance supervisor needs to create an annual calendar and document written procedures. This approach will enable the maintenance unit to manage the district’s preventative maintenance priorities in accordance with available funding sources. Recommendations The district should: 1. Develop a proactive preventive maintenance approach. 2. Create, or commission the creation of, a comprehensive preventive maintenance plan that includes all facilities for each site. Ensure the plan describes all building components and systems, details the maintenance requirements and timing for each, and specifies whether district staff or a vendor will perform each task. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 12 Findings and Recommendations Ongoing and Preventive Maintenance 3. Develop a process to annually update the district’s facilities and inventory list to document the changes resulting from maintenance, equipment replacement, and facility modernization, demolition, or construction. 4. Establish a financial plan, funding sources, and budget codes to track preventive maintenance expenditures. Meet with business services to identify or expand funding to support the work as necessary. 5. Use the work order system to manage preventive maintenance work assignments. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 13 Findings and Recommendations Deferred and Major Maintenance Deferred and Major Maintenance Deferred maintenance refers to the practice of delaying, postponing or rescheduling maintenance tasks, such as repairs to assets and infrastructure, due to resource constraints. A deferred maintenance strategy involves addressing specific building components and evaluating their life cycle costs to determine the optimal timing for replacement. Neglecting to perform timely maintenance can lead to asset breakdowns or damages, damage to other assets, and safety issues, all of which pose significant financial risks to the school district. Addressing these issues requires not only mitigating the effects of poor maintenance but also remedying the original problem. Failing to maintain assets also carries substantial opportunity costs. First, it adversely affects the learning environment, hindering student learning. Second, it disrupts the operational environment, prevent- ing staff from effectively performing their duties. The district lacks an actionable plan to address its deferred maintenance or major maintenance needs. During fieldwork, FCMAT observed deferred maintenance items at nearly every site visit, including worn carpeting; hardwood floors requiring refinishing; deteriorating interior and exterior paint on buildings; outdated lighting and lighting fixtures; missing or damaged ceiling tiles; signs of leaking roofs; broken door closers; cracked concrete; crumbling asphalt; and antiquated HVAC systems. Traditionally, information for maintenance tasks to be undertaken districtwide over the next five years was included on the State Allocation Board’s Form 40-20, titled Five Year Plan, Deferred Maintenance Program. This form was previously used to determine eligibility for grants for major repair or replacement projects. While this program has since been discontinued, many school districts continue to use this form to docu- ment their deferred maintenance plans. However, Form 40-20 is only a summary of a deferred maintenance plan. The district could not provide its most recent five-year major maintenance plan, its deferred maintenance program or an equivalent document. Often, these plans can be integrated into a school district’s facilities maintenance plan and/or modernization plans. A comprehensive deferred maintenance plan will contain, at a minimum, the following components: • A list of all facilities. • A list of all building systems for each facility. • The original construction or reconstruction date of each building system. • The typical life expectancy of each building system. • The condition of each building system. • The restoration or replacement tasks needed to ensure each facility functions as designed, along with the timing intervals for their execution. Some of these items are likely to mirror those used to develop the school district’s preventive maintenance plan. The Coalition for Adequate School Housing is a statewide organization that represents public and private sector school facility professionals [10]. It provides training and resources on a variety of facility topics, including deferred maintenance plans. School districts can visit cashnet.org for support with developing these plans. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 14 Findings and Recommendations Deferred and Major Maintenance The district lacks a resource allocation plan for large dollar maintenance items that require repair or replacement in the future. Education Code (EC) 17582 allows the use of special revenue Fund 14, known as the “District Deferred Maintenance Fund,” for the separate tracking of revenues that are restricted or com- mitted for deferred maintenance purposes. This section permits Fund 14 expenditures: For purposes including, but not limited to, major repair or replacement of plumbing, heating, air-conditioning, electrical, roofing, and floor systems; the exterior and interior painting of school buildings; the inspection, sampling, and analysis of building materials to determine the presence of asbestos-containing materials; the encapsulation or removal of asbestos-con- taining materials; the inspection, identification, sampling, and analysis of building materials to determine the presence of lead-containing materials; and the control, management, and removal of lead-containing materials. Beginning with the 2013-14 fiscal year, the deferred maintenance program entitlement was integrated into the base funding of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) [11]. At that same time, EC 17584 was repealed, eliminating the requirement for school districts to transfer a matching contribution as a condition of receiving the funding. While there is no longer a separate funding stream for deferred maintenance, the California Department of Education (CDE) advised school districts that they could continue using Fund 14 to account for district-funded deferred maintenance programs. This involves committing and recording a portion of LCFF revenues to Fund 14, with the specific amount left to the school district’s discretion. The district does not maintain Fund 14. It would benefit the district to consider its options for allocating rev- enue to Fund 14. This may involve committing an amount equivalent to: 1) the prior program entitlement of $798,925; 2) the prior program entitlement along with a matching contribution of $1,597,850; or 3) the prior program entitlement and a matching contribution, both adjusted for inflation. Any of these options would provide additional resources to support deferred maintenance of the facilities. The district has established and annually contributes to a routine restricted maintenance account (RRMA) within the general fund in accordance with EC 17070.75(b)(1) and (2). This account can serve as a coor- dinated resource to address ongoing maintenance needs. For more information, refer to the “Routine Restricted Maintenance Account” subsection of this report. Recommendations The district should: 1. Develop a comprehensive deferred maintenance plan listing all facilities; the building systems for each facility; the construction dates, life expectancy and condition of each building system; and the restoration or replacement tasks for each facility and the timing for their execution. 2. Develop a comprehensive five-year major maintenance plan and allocate funds in its annual budget to address its most significant deferred maintenance needs. 3. Identify funding sources to address ongoing maintenance needs, including RRMA and other available funding sources. 4. Consider committing a portion of LCFF funding to Fund 14. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 15 Findings and Recommendations Maintenance Services Maintenance Services The primary function of a maintenance unit is to ensure the optimal performance and reliability of school district buildings and building systems. This involves conducting inspections, repairs, and part replace- ments as necessary to meet the school district’s needs and operational requirements. The unit works to reduce and prevent failures of building components that could disrupt the school district's operations. Ultimately, the maintenance unit best serves the educational program by maintaining safe and fully func- tional facilities that support student learning and foster positive outcomes. The school district’s maintenance unit must be adequately staffed, and its employees need to be trained to quickly repair or replace components or systems. These include, but are not limited to: • HVAC. • Electrical. • Fire alarms. • Telephony. • Roofing. • Carpentry. • Locksmithing. • Painting. • Plumbing. • Glazing. Staffing In the 2023-24 fiscal year, the district had 31 FTE positions in the maintenance unit, as shown below in Table 3. Table 3. Maintenance Unit Staffing, 2023-24 Job Title Number of FTE Roofer 1 HVAC Mechanic 2 Senior HVAC Mechanic 1 Maintenance Worker II 7 Carpenter 2 Senior Carpenter 1 Plumber 2 Senior Plumber 1 Electrician 4 Painter 3 Welder 2 Senior Welder 1 Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 16 Findings and Recommendations Maintenance Services Job Title Number of FTE Glazier 1 Locksmith 1 Senior Locksmith 1 Irrigation Specialist 1 Source: District-provided data. Note: The senior carpenter position, one electrician position, two welder positions, and the senior welder position were vacant at the time of fieldwork. APPA Levels of Maintenance and Staffing APPA, formerly known as the Association of Physical Plant Administrators, is a globally recognized leader in educational facilities management [12]. The organization is committed to supporting educational excellence and offers a wide range of services and resources, including professional development programs, creden- tialing, networking and publications. Among these resources is the Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Maintenance (3rd Edition), which provides best management practices and guidelines to help develop staffing levels [13]. Included in APPA’s Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Maintenance (3rd Edition) are the Levels of Maintenance and Facility Characteristics for Evaluating and Describing Levels of Maintenance matrices [13]. School districts can use these matrices to identify their current facility maintenance and ser- vice levels, set improvement goals, track quantifiable benchmarks to monitor progress, and make informed financial decisions related to maintenance and service. APPA’s Levels of Maintenance Matrix outlines five levels of maintenance service [13]: • Level 1: Showpiece Facility. • Level 2: Comprehensive Stewardship. • Level 3: Managed Care. • Level 4: Reactive Maintenance. • Level 5: Crisis Response. The levels at each end of the scale represent the best and worst levels of facility maintenance and service responses [13]. FCMAT has summarized the breadth of this scale as follows: • Level 1: Showpiece Facility - Facilities at this level are regularly updated, and building equipment is in excellent operating condition [13]. Service and maintenance requests are addressed immediately. • Level 5: Crisis Response - Facilities at this level are inadequate to meet a school district’s needs due to being outdated or deteriorated [13]. Building equipment is routinely broken and inoperative, while service and maintenance requests are never addressed in a timely manner. Please refer to Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Maintenance (3rd Edition) for detailed descriptions of each maintenance level. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 17 Findings and Recommendations Maintenance Services APPA’s Facility Characteristics for Evaluating and Describing Levels of Maintenance Matrix identifies the following 13 maintenance characteristics [13]: • Customer service and response time. • Customer satisfaction. • Preventive/Predictive maintenance. • Maintenance mix. • Regulatory compliance. • Aesthetics, interior. • Aesthetics, exterior. • Aesthetics, lighting. • Service efficiency. • Building systems reliability. • Sustainability. • Facility maintenance operating budget as a percent of current replacement value. • Campus average facility condition index. APPA notes that these characteristics are not exhaustive and that organizations may need to identify and define additional characteristics to evaluate their maintenance level [13]. Most of these characteristics are directly connected, meaning that improvements in one will likely affect others. Please refer to Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Maintenance (3rd Edition) for detailed descriptions of each character- istic at each maintenance level. While Level 1: Showpiece Facility represents the highest maintenance standard, it is not a reasonable goal for schools due to limited funding [13]. FCMAT recommends that schools aim to maintain their facilities at Level 2: Comprehensive Stewardship, as funding permits. This level of maintenance supports func- tional learning and working environments. It also ensures that buildings and equipment are kept in good operating condition according to modern standards and usage. At Level 2, service requests are typically addressed within a week. Some schools operate at Level 3: Managed Care due to financial constraints [13]. At this level, work order responses times are generally around a month, and there are many emergency requests because of a lack of regularly scheduled preventive maintenance. Buildings at Level 3 are beginning to show signs of wear, such as minor leaks, blemishes, and a small percentage of nonfunctioning lights. FCMAT visited a random sampling of the district’s schools and observed that the level of care aligns with Level 4: Reactive Maintenance [13]. This assessment was corroborated through interviews with site adminis- trators, who cited persistent maintenance failures and the maintenance unit’s inability to resolve problems. Reported issues included ongoing plumbing and wastewater system failures, unresolved door or roof leaks, and recurring pest infestations. Some classroom ceilings showed evidence of minor leaks, and the lighting in some hallways and bathrooms was dim, with numerous lights either out or missing components. Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Maintenance (3rd Edition) provides several methods for estimating the workforce needed to support an organization’s needs [13]. One such method, the Aggregate FTE Method, involves using baseline staffing figures to determine an initial staffing estimate. Various adjust- Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 18 Findings and Recommendations Maintenance Services ment factors, such as campus size and age, are then applied to calculate a more precise staffing level. FCMAT adapted APPA’s baseline staffing figures to show the FTE per thousand gross square feet (GSF), which is comparable to the size of a standard classroom in the United States [14]. These baseline figures are shown below in Table 4 by maintenance level and space type. Table 4. Aggregate Trades Maintenance Staffing per One Thousand GSF for Each APPA Maintenance Level Staffing FTEs Maintenance Level Classroom Laboratory Office 1 .012 .015 .016 2 .010 .012 .012 3 .08 .010 .08 4 .06 .06 .05 5 .02 .03 .02 Figure 3. Adapted aggregate maintenance FTE required per one thousand GSF for each APPA Maintenance Level [13] across various building types. Source: Adapted from “Figure 3.1: Total Trades Maintenance Staffing per 1 Million GSF by Space Type” in Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Maintenance (3rd Edition, page 46) by J. T. Becker & T. J. Weidner, 2022. Copyright 2022 by APPA. Please refer to Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Maintenance (3rd Edition) for detailed information on the Aggregate FTE Method, adjustment factors, and examples. The district could not provide FCMAT with the total square footage for each school, which is the most common allocation method for staffing formulas. Without this information, the district cannot staff appropri- ately or compare its staffing levels to industry standards. It is imperative for the district to collect this data. Doing so will enable the district to calculate the appropriate level of staffing for its schools using APPA’s Aggregate FTE Method [13]. The level of staffing needed at a school district is influenced by a variety of factors, including available funding, the organization of its leadership, its preventive maintenance plan, and the level of service required to meet the needs of students, staff, and the community. Equally crucial is the skill set of the school district’s maintenance staff. As such, it would be advantageous for the district to have either the Human Resources Department or an independent reviewer conduct a thorough analysis of the positions within the maintenance unit. This analysis would assess whether staff and potential new hires have the skills necessary to perform the essential functions outlined in their job descriptions. Furthermore, the district could benefit from exploring the implementation of an extensive, trade-specific training program. Such a program could incorporate a variety of training resources, including offerings from local vendors, community colleges, and online platforms. This program would help ensure that the district’s maintenance personnel are equipped with the skills necessary to carry out the essential functions of their job descriptions. Recommendations The district should: 1. Compile a detailed and comprehensive facilities list for each building and site, including information on square footage, type, age, and systems and materials used. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 19 Findings and Recommendations Maintenance Services 2. Establish the desired APPA Level of Maintenance for its facilities, then calculate the required FTE using each building’s square footage and APPA’s Aggregate FTE Method [13]. Adjust maintenance staffing levels as needed to achieve the desired level of care.6 3. Evaluate the ability of staff to perform the essential functions outlined in their job descriptions. 4. Use trainings, resources and webinars from local vendors, community colleges, and online platforms to ensure that maintenance personnel have up-to-date knowledge and skills. 5. Ensure that the Human Resources Department screens maintenance unit candidates to verify that they hold relevant certifications and have adequate work experience and training for the specific position being filled. Purchasing and Inventory The FMOT Department’s purchasing process lacks a defined purchasing procedure, leading to inconsis- tencies in who approves procurement authorization requests and whether they are approved in writing or verbally. Additionally, there is disparity among tradespeople regarding material inventory management, with some maintaining excessive stock and others procuring items as needed. These erratic purchasing practices undermine timely, efficient, and cost-effective procurement. To address these issues, the district needs to develop a department policy outlining acceptable procurement procedures. It is also imperative the district ensure open and full competition, establish codes of conduct, clarify procurement authority, conduct thorough cost/price analyses, and maintain accurate records. It is industry standard and a best practice to maintain an inventory of equipment and parts. FCMAT noted various equipment and repair parts at the maintenance unit facility and in maintenance vehicles during the on-site visit. However, staff could not provide FCMAT with a detailed inventory list. As such, FCMAT could not conduct an inventory audit, which is critical for determining the maintenance unit’s efficiency. Without an estimated inventory value or stock report, the district risks purchasing additional equipment or tools that are not needed. While maintaining a warehouse of maintenance-related repair parts may seem cost-effective, the oper- ational costs, risks of theft, and potential obsolescence or damage to supplies can often outweigh the savings from bulk-rate purchases. Therefore, it is crucial for the district to identify materials and parts for inventory that offer the greatest savings and significant operational benefits. For other supplies, adopting a just-in-time inventory management approach could be beneficial. This process would allow supplies to be ordered and received only as they are needed. Vendors can provide competitive pricing on common inven- tory items and deliver them directly to the schools. When combined with appropriate approval and delivery controls, just-in-time options can limit the district’s risk of inventory obsolescence, damage and theft, while still offering the convenience of expedient delivery, despite potentially higher costs per item. Recommendations The district should: 1. Develop a department policy and procedure for procuring materials and supplies. 2. Complete an inventory of the maintenance unit facility and items stored in vehicles. 6Updated information on the calculation of maintenance staffing levels can found in the “Subsequent Events” section of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 20 Findings and Recommendations Maintenance Services Uniforms and ID Badges While maintenance staff are provided with standard uniforms, not all staff consistently wear them. Similarly, the staff do not regularly wear the district-issued identification badges. Requiring maintenance staff to wear their assigned uniforms and badges would readily identify them as district employees to students, staff and the community, and help signify their roles, responsibilities and authority. Uniforms also promote a unified look within a school district and foster a sense of unity among staff members. Moreover, they enhance safety by providing appropriate coverage for assigned tasks and protecting personal clothing from damage while mixing chemicals or working with machinery. Recommendation The district should: 1. Require maintenance staff to wear district-provided uniforms and identification badges. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 21 Findings and Recommendations Custodial Services Custodial Services The district’s custodial services loosely follow a site-based organizational structure. Daytime custodians are managed by their respective school principals. At Hosler Middle School and Cesar Chavez Middle School, the principals also directly manage the senior custodians. The evening custodians are overseen by one of four facilities operations managers, depending on their assigned location. The facilities operations manag- ers work evenings, and each oversees five to seven evening custodians. The facilities operations managers report to the assistant director of custodial, grounds and transportation services. At the time of fieldwork, the assistant director of custodial, grounds and transportation services posi- tion was vacant. The district was in the process of filling this position on an interim basis pending final interviews. Cleanliness Standards and Staffing In the 2023-24 fiscal year, the district’s custodial services were supported by 79 custodial FTE, including 76 FTE custodian positions and 3 FTE senior custodian positions. The district could not provide a clear count of positions that report directly to the custodial unit versus those reporting to school leadership. There is no nationwide standard for facilities’ cleanliness [15]. To help guide decision-making, the National Forum on Education Statistics convened a taskforce in 2003 that led to the early development of a five- tiered system of expectations for cleanliness in school districts. This effort contributed to the National Center for Education Statistics’ adoption of the 5050 Cleaning Standard [16]. The five-tiered system included estimates of the square footage a custodian can reasonably clean during an eight-hour shift [15]. However, these estimates are now outdated due to advances in cleaning supplies, tools, and building mate- rials. Nonetheless, the five-tiered system of expectations for cleanliness remains a useful tool for school districts and is shown below in Table 5. Table 5. National Center on Education Statistics’ Five-Tiered system of Expectations for Cleanliness Cleaning Level Description A spotless and germ-free facility as might normally be found in a 1 hospital environment or corporate suite. The uppermost standard for most school cleaning, generally 2 reserved for restrooms, special education areas, kindergarten areas, and food service areas. The norm for most school facilities, acceptable to most parties 3 and does not pose any health concerns. Not normally acceptable for a school environment. Classrooms 4 are cleaned every other day, carpets vacuumed every third day, and dusting occurs once a month. Can very rapidly lead to an unhealthy situation. Trash cans are 5 emptied, and carpets vacuumed on a weekly basis. Source: Adapted from “Establishing Expectations for Custodial Efforts” in Planning Guide for Maintaining School Facilities (page 82) by the School Facilities Maintenance Task Force, National Forum on Education Statistics, and Association of School Business Officials International. Copyright 2003 by the National Center for Education Statistics and the National Cooperative Education Statistics System. https://nces.ed.gov/ pubs2003/2003347.pdf Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 22 Findings and Recommendations Custodial Services School districts are expected to maintain a cleaning standard at Level 2 or 3 [15]. However, observations from FCMAT’s site visits and interviews with district staff indicate that the district is cleaning at a standard falling between levels 4 and 5. The lack of cleanliness appears to stem from departmental inefficiencies, and unclear, inconsistent cleaning expectations and standards. The district would benefit from establishing and implementing cleaning standards and expectations for custodial work in accordance with the National Forum on Education Statistics’ five-tiered system [15]. These standards should be developed collaboratively, involving employees ranging from cabinet-level members to site-based custodians. Once these standards have been adopted by the district governing board, the FMOT Department can create detailed work schedules to ensure sufficient time is allocated for completing required tasks. Interviews with district staff indicated a disparity between custodial staffing levels and operational needs. Staff reported that the district’s staffing calculation, which allocates 30 minutes per restroom and 15 minutes per classroom, is outdated and fails to account for the demands of other facilities, such as offices, locker rooms, gymnasiums, science classrooms, hallways, and cafeterias. The California Association of School Business Officials (CASBO) is a nonprofit organization committed to fostering excellence and professionalism across all facets of school business [17]. It offers a variety of resources tailored to professional development and the implementation of business best practices. Among these resources is a custodial staffing formula designed to achieve a baseline staffing level [18]. CASBO’s custodial staffing formula is based on industry standards and has been widely used to analyze custodial staffing levels in schools throughout California [18]. It averages four factors to determine the base FTE required for custodial services: • One custodian per every 325 students. • One custodian per every 13 teachers. • One custodian per every 13 classroom units. • One custodian per every 18,000 square feet of educational space. Once the base average FTE is calculated, the formula adds [18]: • .3 FTE for a school with less than 450 enrolled students. • A community use factor of .0625 FTE for an elementary school, .25 FTE for a middle school and .5 FTE for a high school. While the average of these factors provides a starting point for determining custodial FTE, school districts also need to consider other site-specific and district-specific factors that may warrant adjustments to the staffing figure, such as an extremely large campus. As discussed earlier in this report, the district could not provide FCMAT with the total square footage of each site. Without this data, the district cannot staff appropriately or compare its custodial levels to indus- try standards. Therefore, obtaining this information is paramount. Once acquired, the district would benefit from using CASBO’s formula [18] to estimate the appropriate custodial staffing level. Recommendations The district should: 1. Determine the square footage of each building and campus. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 23 Findings and Recommendations Custodial Services 2. Establish the desired level of cleaning for its facilities, then use CASBO’s custodial staffing formula to determine the required FTE. Adjust custodial staffing levels as necessary to achieve the desired level of cleaning.7 Processes and Procedures Various district sites and departments offer some level of direction or supervision to custodial staff, leading to a lack of standardization across the district. In interviews with custodial staff regarding cleaning times, procedures, and priorities, responses were inconsistent, as was staff knowledge of industry standards. Moreover, when asked about the allocated cleaning time per classroom, answers varied widely, ranging from five to 22 minutes. This disparity underscores the absence of standardized cleaning procedures or schedules within the district. Many custodial staff members have a wealth of historical knowledge after having been employed in the dis- trict for over 15 years. However, this institutional knowledge has not been captured in an up-to-date policies and procedures manual. The lack of documentation has led to fragmentation within the district, rendering it unable to maintain a unified cleaning standard. Moreover, the lack of procedures has led to inefficiencies in onboarding new employees and using substitutes, as both groups must often navigate their responsibilities with little to no formal training. During interviews, the senior director of facilities planning and development and the facilities operations managers shared that they have worked to improve standardized training and expectations for custodial staff by developing a custodial handbook. With such a handbook, the facilities operations managers and the assistant director could: • Provide training specific to industry best practices. • Conduct improved employee performance evaluations and implement disciplinary mea- sures as needed. • Audit work schedules. The handbook was still in draft format at the time of fieldwork. The district would benefit from finalizing and implementing a district-level custodial handbook. Recommendations The district should: 1. Develop and formally adopt written cleaning standards and expectations for custodial work, including daily, weekly and monthly duties. 2. Create work schedules that support the cleaning standards and allow for adequate time to complete the required tasks. 3. Direct the assistant director of custodial, grounds and transportation services to prepare a custodial handbook detailing the district’s expectations on cleaning times, procedures and priorities. 4. Provide custodial staff with training on the contents of the custodial handbook. 7Updated information on the calculation of custodial staffing levels can found in the “Subsequent Events” section of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 24 Findings and Recommendations Custodial Services 5. Review each custodial run using the National Center on Education Statistics’ levels of cleanliness [15], identify the desired level of care for each area, and ensure workloads are distributed evenly among custodial staff. 6. Develop and implement a site inspection tool to reinforce the district’s newly adopted standards. Equipment Management Effective equipment management is crucial for achieving operational efficiency and cost-effectiveness within school districts. It is important for school districts to recognize that equipment control is not a one- time job; rather, it requires ongoing monitoring and tracking. Regular maintenance checks to verify equip- ment is operational, combined with maintaining an equipment inventory list, are among the best ways to track equipment. As such, school districts should designate a certain time each quarter or year to conduct a thorough physical count of their equipment inventory. The district lacks an equipment inventory list, which suggests a significant breakdown in inventory man- agement practices. Interviews with staff highlight a widespread shortage of equipment, resulting in facility operations managers spending considerable time each evening transporting equipment to various sites to facilitate basic custodial tasks. Furthermore, interviews revealed inconsistencies in the type of equipment provided at each site and that employee preference influences the ordering and replacing of equipment. For example, the district uses both upright and backpack vacuums. This lack of standardization creates challenges when training substitute custodians and conducting equipment repairs, ultimately hindering operational efficiency. Moreover, the district’s lack of equipment standardization undermines its purchasing power because random equipment purchases prevent the consolidation of orders and the negotiation of bulk discounts and shipping costs. Consequently, the district would benefit from implementing an equipment replacement plan that prioritizes minor repairs until equipment reaches the end of its life cycle. It could then seek dis- counts through bulk purchases of standardized equipment. Staff indicated that the district has developed a standard list of cleaning products, but this list was not provided to FCMAT. While this approach has facilitated efficiency through bulk purchasing, the district lacks a standardized procedure for material requisitions. Rather than using a procedural-based ordering system with FMOT Department approval, schools rely on individual knowledge to place orders. Consequently, the schools maintain an irregular stock of chemicals and materials, which can result in waste. Recommendations The district should: 1. Develop and maintain an equipment inventory list. 2. Schedule and conduct regular physical counts of equipment inventory. 3. Create an additional layer of approval routing through the facilities operations managers when ordering supplies to support product and equipment standardization and potential cost savings. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 25 Findings and Recommendations Grounds Services Grounds Services Effective grounds management depends on well-trained personnel with skills in a variety of areas. However, staffing for grounds-related services can vary among school districts throughout the state, similar to other maintenance and operations functions. Several factors influence staffing levels for grounds crews at individual schools, the most common of which include: • School size in terms of acreage. • Number and types of outdoor spaces requiring maintenance. • Variety and extent of natural and hardscape features. • Involvement of grounds crews in unrelated tasks. By considering and addressing these factors, school districts can help ensure that grounds crews are ade- quately staffed and equipped to maintain a safe learning environment for students and staff. APPA Levels of Attention and Staffing Grounds crews should be adequately staffed to meet the desired level of service and attention. APPA has developed a Level of Attention Matrix that defines five levels of grounds service, designed to help school districts in establishing procedures and determining performance outcomes [19]. The matrix scale is defined by level of attention with level 1 representing the greatest amount of effort and level 5 representing the lowest level of effort. The five levels are: • Level 1: State-of-the-art Maintenance. • Level 2: High Level of Maintenance. • Level 3: Moderate-level Maintenance. • Level 4: Moderately Low-level Maintenance. • Level 5: Minimum level Maintenance. APPA’s Level of Attention Matrix describes 11 types of application areas for each level and a related sched- ule of tasks: turf care, fertilizer, irrigation, litter control, pruning, disease and insect control, snow removal, surfaces, repairs, inspections, and floral plantings and mulch applications [19]. Schools may have multiple areas identified for grounds maintenance, with each locally identified area requiring a different level of attention [19]. For example, a school district may designate a grassy area at the entrance of a school to be maintained at Level 2: High Level of Maintenance. APPA lists some tasks and appropriate scheduling to maintain this level as follows: • Cutting grass once every five working days. • Aerating grass no less than two times a year. • Reseeding or sodding grass areas when bare spots are present. • Providing weed control when weeds are visible or when they represent 5% of the turf surface. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 26 Findings and Recommendations Grounds Services Similarly, another area at the same school with less visibility and traffic may be designated for Level 3: Moderate-level Maintenance [19]. The same tasks and scheduling at this level would involve: • Cutting grass once every 10 working days. • Aerating grass only if the turf indicates a need or in anticipation of fertilizer. • Reseeding or sodding grass areas when major bare spots occur. • Providing weed control when weeds represent 50% of a small turf surface or 15% of the general turf. For complete definitions of the five levels of attention and application areas, please refer to APPA’s Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Grounds (3rd Edition). FCMAT visited a random sampling of the district’s schools and observed that the general level of attention within school grounds aligns with APPA Level 3: Moderate-level Maintenance [19]. This level is typically reserved for locations with moderate to low levels of development or visitation. FCMAT’s assessment was based on the study team’s observations and school staff comments. The lawn appeared to be cut once every 10 working days, some major bare spots were visible in the turf, and surfaces appeared to be cleaned on a complaint basis and repaired or replaced only as budget allows. Some of FCMAT’s observations at the schools include: • A safety hazard, coned off in a high-use grassy play area at an elementary school, which staff indicated had not been corrected for over a year. • Weeds over three feet tall in a small cyclone-fenced area adjacent to a student walkway. • Poor drainage creating boggy areas in a grassy audience space near a stage intended for high school student events. • Tree roots lifting grates and creating a walking hazard. APPA’s Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Grounds (3rd Edition) also includes workload metrics for particular grounds areas corresponding to the attention levels outlined in the Level of Attention Matrix [19]. Many of these metrics are defined by acres per person and include assumptions such as a 30-week season and the time required to perform specific maintenance tasks. APPA also provides adjust- ment factors for the frequency of maintenance tasks and the length of the maintenance season. APPA recommends that school campuses be maintained at a level 2: High Level of Maintenance to support the daily education and learning process [20]. Table 6 provides a sampling of staffing standards for three major types of grounds at this maintenance level [19]. Table 6. APPA Grounds Staffing for Level 2: High Level of Maintenance Level of Main Grounds Square Foot/ Open Area Acres/ Athletic Acres/ Attention Person Person Person 2 100,000 25.00 4.09 Source: Adapted from “Figure 3.5A: Football/Soccer Field Staffing Matrix,” “Figure 3.6A: Turf Maintenance – Open Area Staffing Matrix” and “Figure 3.7A: Turf Maintenance – Main Grounds Staffing Matrix” in Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Grounds (3rd Edition, pages 47, 49 and 51) by J.T. Becker, R. M. Fournier, & B. Rux. Copyright 2020 by APPA. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 27 Findings and Recommendations Grounds Services APPA’s metrics [19] are based on industry standards and serve as a starting point for determining the number of grounds crew positions. However, site-specific and school district-specific factors may also influ- ence the required staffing levels. Please refer to Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Grounds (3rd Edition) for detailed grounds staffing matrices and adjustment factors. In the 2023-24 fiscal year, the district had 10 FTE positions in the grounds unit, as shown below in Table 7. Table 7. Grounds Unit Staffing, 2023-24 Job Title Number of FTE Senior Gardener 1 Heavy Equipment Operator 1 Gardener 9 Source: District-provided data. Note: The heavy equipment operator position and one gardener position were vacant at the time of fieldwork. The district could not provide the total square footage or acreage of each site, which is the most common metric used for maintenance, custodial and grounds staffing formulas. Without this data, the district cannot ensure it is staffed appropriately or compare its staffing levels to the industry standards. To address this issue, the district needs to review and update site data so that it can accurately assess the number of staff required to maintain safe and healthy school grounds. Recommendations The district should: 1. Collect and compile detailed data on the composition of site grounds to facilitate assessment of the number of staff required to maintain safe and healthy school grounds.8 2. Implement task-based or needs-based scheduling for grounds staffing using accurate and detailed data for each site, and allocate sufficient staff to meet the identified needs effectively. Pesticide Use Effective pest control measures are important for maintaining a safe and healthy environment. While the decision to perform pest control in-house or outsource differs among school districts, it is imperative that districts periodically reassess this choice to ensure the best use of resources. Key factors influencing this decision include training and licensing requirements for in-house staff and the equivalence of FTEs and other resources expended. The district primarily relies on outside contractors for pest control services. A 2022-23 financial activity report provided to FCMAT shows that expenditures for these services exceeded $136,924. It would be ben- eficial for the district to assess the impact of reallocating this amount towards adding FTEs to the grounds unit. Doing so would allow the district to determine whether the contracted service provides more or less time than the FTE equivalent. 8Updated information on the calculation of grounds staffing levels can found in the “Subsequent Events” section of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 28 Findings and Recommendations Grounds Services Outsourcing pest control services does not absolve the district from its responsibility to meet report- ing and documentation obligations and to adhere to the regulations of the Healthy Schools Act of 2000, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, and the county agricultural commission. Information gathered during staff interviews, coupled with a lack of documentation, indicates that the district is not in compliance with the Healthy Schools Act. Furthermore, some leaders within the FMOT Department demonstrated an inaccurate understanding of the act’s requirements. To address these issues, the FMOT Department leadership team must undergo Healthy Schools Act training and ensure that all grounds unit employees have a sufficient understanding of these requirements. Recommendations The district should: 1. Assess the cost-effectiveness and benefits of outsourcing pest control services compared to hiring an in-house staffing equivalent. 2. Have the FMOT Department leadership team attend Healthy Schools Act training, and ensure all direct reports have a sufficient understanding of these requirements. Tree Care Plan The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) administers and coordinates the United States’ voluntary standards and conformity assessment system, known as the American National Standards [21]. ANSI does not develop standards itself [22]. Instead, it offers a framework for private and public sector experts and interest groups to collaborate in a neutral setting to develop high-quality standards that “protect the public and foster fair commerce and innovation.” According to the ANSI, a comprehensive tree care plan is essential for ensuring the health and safety of trees [23]. This involves cataloging and mapping all trees exceeding six feet in height or 1.5 inches in trunk diameter at chest height. The plan should include documentation and recommendations for each tree regarding the following aspects: • Tree species. • Irrigation needs. • Pest control needs. • Fertilization needs. • Frequency of inspections. • Frequency and type of trimming required. • Potential safety concerns. The American National Standards Institute also recommends that any trees posing safety risks due to size, age, or condition undergo an advanced tree risk assessment conducted by a certified arborist [23]. This assessment plays a critical role in protecting the safety of students, staff and the community. FMOT Department leaders reported that the district lacks a system for planning tree care or safety pruning. With numerous trees present at its school sites, including many large ones in close proximity to students, it is imperative for the district to implement a tree care plan. This plan should be developed by a certified arborist, who can also conduct any necessary tree risk assessments. Implementing such a plan will not only improve site safety and aesthetics, but also facilitate budget planning for the tree care and maintenance. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 29 Findings and Recommendations Grounds Services Recommendations The district should: 1. Solicit the development of a tree care plan by a certified arborist. 2. Have a certified arborist conduct all necessary advanced tree risk assessments. Turf Care Plan The grounds unit is responsible for maintaining a variety of turf areas, including ornamental lawns, athletic practice fields, and fields used for competitive sports and community events. However, FCMAT found that many of these turf areas are in poor condition and do not meet the community’s expectations. In some spaces, weeds were over a foot tall. Effective turf maintenance is crucial for ensuring the safety, aesthetic appeal and functionality of outdoor spaces in educational institutions. FMOT Department leaders indicated the use of a mowing schedule. However, site administrators reported that there is no systematic approach to turf maintenance. The district needs to solicit an outside expert to develop a comprehensive turf care plan tailored to each type of turf area. A well-crafted turf care plan will include all the following components: • Turf area. • Grass species. • Intended use (e.g., light athletics, heavy athletics, ornamental only). • Appearance requirements. • Irrigation requirements (in inches of water per week, per season). • Guidelines for seasonal mowing heights. • Aeration schedules. • Overseeding schedules. • Soil testing protocol. • Soil amendment schedules. • Fertilization schedules. • Use limitations. In addition to the plan’s written components, school districts need site maps that clearly identify which turf areas correspond to each turf care plan. These plans are especially important for school districts operat- ing with limited resources because they enable the strategic allocation of resources to priority areas. The district needs to implement a well-defined plan, or it will continue experience haphazard responses and degradation in turf conditions. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 30 Findings and Recommendations Grounds Services Recommendations The district should: 1. Have FMOT Department management provide training to staff on the correct application of weed control products. 2. Solicit the development of a turf care plan that addresses all the key elements for proper maintenance for each type of turf area maintained, and that is accompanied by site maps that clearly identify which turf areas correspond to each turf plan. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 31 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services The FMOT Department maintains a large, active facilities planning and development program dedicated to meeting the district’s complex needs. The district’s facilities span a wide range of ages, with the oldest dating back to the early 1930s. The construction methods used vary, with some facilities being portable while others are traditionally constructed. In June 2020, a section of outdoor ceiling panels collapsed at Lynwood High School’s Imperial campus, built in 1998. Following an inspection, the site was deemed unsafe for students. Consequently, the district initiated the conversion of Lynwood Middle School for high school instruction in June 2021. The converted campus opened for the school year in August 2021. The 2022-23 State Budget, enacted on June 27, 2022, allocated a one-time $250 million appropriation from the state’s general fund to support the reconstruction of Lynwood High School’s Imperial campus [24]. In addition to the one-time appropriations for the reconstruction of Lynwood High School, the district’s facilities program receives funding from various sources. One significant source is the Career Technical Education Facilities Program, which apportioned a total of $850,000 to the district. This included $250,000 designated for modernization and $600,000 for the construction of new career and technical education facilities. Another critical funding source for the district is Proposition 39 general obligation bonds. As shown in Table 8 below, the community passed Measure N in November 2016 and Measure K in November 2012. Together, these measures have collectively provided $158 million in local bond funds for facilities projects over the past 11 years. Table 8. Active District Bonds Measure Election Value Type of Bond Text of Measure Improve/maintain neighborhood schools by repairing/updating classrooms, science labs/technology, repairing leaky roofs, bathrooms, plumbing/electrical, improving school safety with lighting, fences, fire alarms, earthquake retrofits, removing asbestos, replacing portables with permanent classrooms, and acquiring, renovating, constructing/ Measure N November 2016 $65 million Proposition 39 equipping school sites/facilities. To improve and maintain neighborhood schools by repairing and updating classrooms, science labs and technology, repairing leaky roofs, bathrooms, plumbing, and electrical, improving school safety with lighting, fences, fire alarms, and earthquake retrofits, removing asbestos, replacing portables with permanent classrooms, renovating, Measure K November 2012 $93 million Proposition 39 constructing, and equipping, modernizing school facilities. Sources: Measure N data from “Lynwood Unified School District, California, Bond Issue, Measure N (November 2016)” (Ballotpedia). Measure K data from “Lynwood Unified School District bond proposition, Measure K (November 2012)” (Ballotpedia). Staffing The FMOT Department is under the Business Services Department, which is overseen by the assistant superintendent of business services. In the 2023-24 fiscal year, the district had 3 FTE positions in the facili- ties unit, as shown in Table 9 on the following page. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 32 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services Table 9. Facilities Unit Staffing, 2023-24 Job Title Number of FTE Senior Director of Facilities Planning and Development 1 Facilities Representative/Williams Liaison 1 Secretary 1 Source: District-provided data. The facilities representative/Williams liaison and the secretary report to the senior director of facilities plan- ning and development. Staff interviews indicated that the district is in the process of hiring a newly created facilities project man- ager position. However, at the time of fieldwork, it was undecided whether this position would report to the senior director of facilities planning and development or to the assistant superintendent of business services. According to the job description, the senior director of facilities planning and development position is responsible for the overall planning, organization and coordination of the district’s facilities planning, design, development, acquisition and construction programs. This role is tasked with providing direction to all facilities and construction employees, consulting with contractors, and ensuring fiscal accountability and cost effectiveness. The position’s duties include, but are not limited to, the following: • Analyzing data for facility planning and coordinating construction activities. • Coordinating and ensuring compliance with state agency requirements during site planning and execution. • Overseeing the bidding and awarding of contracts. • Managing the district’s facility services, which includes developing, managing and adjust- ing the facilities budget throughout the year. • Developing and implementing the facilities master plan. • Supervising record maintenance, preparing reports, and receiving, advising on and approv- ing work orders. • Managing and supervising facility planning, engineering and construction person- nel, including conducting performance evaluations and overseeing staff training and development. • Collaborating with maintenance, grounds-keeping and custodial staff on methods and pro- cedures of work, supply and equipment requirements, operational problems and conflicts, and determining future requirements of personnel and materials. Based on staff interviews, the senior director of facilities planning and development is also responsible for developing the scope and budget for new projects. Only after a project has been vetted, its scope agreed upon and a decision made regarding whether it will be performed in-house or contracted out, does the senior director transition the project to the facilities representative/Williams liaison to oversee the bidding and awarding of contracts. The district’s Purchasing Department then puts the project out to bid and man- ages the bidding process. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 33 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services The senior director of facilities planning and development’s time is divided between overseeing facili- ties activities and managing the FMOT Department. With the assistant director of custodial, grounds and transportation services position vacant, the senior director is required to dedicate additional management attention to the custodial and grounds units. The leadership and critical management responsibilities required to meet the demands of such a complex facilities program and large FMOT Department are not being carried out. For example, the district lacks a facilities master plan, and work orders are not being effectively managed. Additionally, budget planning for annual or longer-term needs does not accurately reflect the district’s needs. The last plan for the bond pro- gram, completed in 2016 by an outside construction management consultant, has yet to be revised. Except for night custodians, none of the FMOT Department staff reported having a current evaluation. Numerous employees within the FMOT Department reported issues concerning staff accountability. This includes maintenance unit staff, who stated that there is a lack of consistency in holding employees in like positions to the same standards. FCMAT observed such disparity during fieldwork, noting instances where some employees arrived ready to start their assigned tasks, while others were found watching television in dark rooms or even sleeping. During a group interview, FCMAT witnessed an incident of verbal and physical intimidation between two custodial staff members who disagreed on accountability issues within their unit. Other members of the custodial unit who were present ignored the incident, stating that the aggressor employee was “just being himself,” which suggests that such behavior is recurring and considered acceptable. Many FMOT Department staff members also expressed concerns about lacking the necessary equipment required to perform their job duties. For example, the grounds unit reported a shortage of vehicles for transporting employees to their assigned job sites. FCMAT also observed that one of the two vehicles used to transport these staff to the interview was missing a license plate, while the other lacked a current regis- tration sticker. The senior director of facilities planning and development is responsible for resolving operational prob- lems, conflicts, and issues, as well as identifying equipment, supply, and staffing needs. However, the substantial issues within the FMOT Department, coupled with numerous ongoing facilities projects and a broad span of control, have left the senior director with little time for project oversight and department management. According to the job description, the facilities representative/Williams liaison position is responsible for facilitating a better environment at campuses and workplaces. This involves: • Evaluating facility needs for new construction and repairs, including analysis of data and inspections performed under the Williams Act, as well as conducting general site inspections. • Coordinating and communicating with external contractors, reporting to outside agencies and groups, and assigning repairs, work directives and guidance to internal maintenance unit staff. • Estimating capital improvement project budgets. • Preparing or directing the preparation and maintenance of documentation such as reports, records, construction project tracking and repair project assignments. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 34 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services Based on interviews with staff, the facilities representative/Williams liaison’s time is primarily dedicated to supervising multiple construction projects. This includes those managed internally and those overseen by the Del Terra Group, a program and construction management firm contracted to handle projects funded by bond proceeds. The facilities representative/Williams liaison also maintains project documentation. However, these documents are kept either in a digital format accessible only to the facilities representative/ Williams liaison or on paper, making them inaccessible for easy review and future decision-making. The third position within the facilities unit is a secretary role. According to staff interviews, this position per- forms administrative tasks for the facilities unit and for the FMOT Department as a whole. For the depart- ment, the secretary is responsible for tasks such as reporting timecards for payroll, entering requisitions, inputting work orders for schools, writing memos, answering phone calls, and entering stock requisitions for custodians. This individual supports the facilities unit by inputting requisitions for construction and attending meetings with vendors and contractors to record meeting minutes. The district is in the process of hiring a new facilities project manager. Based on the job description, this position will involve overseeing and managing the reconstruction and rebuild of the Lynwood High School Imperial campus. The project manager will serve as a field liaison for the district, the construction man- agement team, architect, inspectors, and all contractors involved in the project. However, the role of this position after the Lynwood High School Imperial campus has been rebuilt is unclear. When a position is project-based and the project is expected to be completed within a short timeframe, such as a year or two, school districts usually opt to either hire an outside consultant for the project’s duration or create a new position and integrate other ongoing duties and projects into the job description. The position was not filled during the first round of applicants and has remained unfilled during part of the project’s active timeline. At the time of fieldwork, the district indicated it was in the process of evaluating a second round of applicants. Successful school construction projects are completed on time and within budget. They are also properly documented to demonstrate legal compliance and communicate project status with the community. It is common practice for school districts to hire a construction management firm to perform project manager duties, particularly when they lack the staff due to their small size or when projects are large, infrequent or short-term. However, every school district must maintain an oversight role to provide guidance and advocate for its best interests when changes to the project budget, scope or timeline are necessary. When hiring a contracted project manager, the school district’s oversight role should include setting up and main- taining the district’s documentation system and defining the expected report information and format from the construction management firm. In the Lynwood High School Imperial campus rebuild project, major tasks and phases were either com- pleted or in process without the assigned facilities project manager position being filled. These tasks and phases include preliminary budgeting; project scheduling; hiring of a construction management firm and architect; and the programming and planning, design and demolition phases. The delay in filling this position increases the risk that the project will not be completed on time or within budget. Given the high visibility of this project, it is important that the district retains control over all facets, including the budget, expenditures and scheduling. The district has enlisted the services of two external program/construction management firms: Del Terra Group and Huckabee. The Del Terra Group oversees the management of the district’s bond program. Until recently, this company handled procurement and independently selected architects and engineers. The district has since revised this process, establishing a pool from which its construction management firms can choose. The district hired Huckabee to manage the reconstruction of Lynwood High School’s Imperial campus. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 35 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services It is imperative the district ensures that the facilities unit is adequately staffed with employees capable of effectively managing the unit’s many functions and projects. Essential district tasks and monitoring are already being neglected. With the additional demands posed by facility maintenance, deferred mainte- nance projects, bond-funded initiatives, and the high school rebuild, the facilities unit’s workload will only continue to increase. The district could benefit from segregating the responsibility and duties of the facilities unit from the FMOT Department management. This could be achieved by creating one or two new positions: a facilities plan- ning position and/or a facilities director position. Doing so would enable the senior director of facilities planning and development to focus on FMOT Department issues, improvements and management. The new facilities planning position could be responsible for the comprehensive planning of all activ- ities and projects, regardless of their funding source. This role could facilitate the development of the facilities master plan and establish long-range planning and budgeting for the remaining bond funds. It could also work on all planning documents, such as developer fee reports, and collaborate with the city and county. The role could also help determine which projects qualify for funding from the RRMA versus bond funds and other facilities funds. Improved coordination in this regard would help inform the district about the need to place bond proposals on the ballot for future facilities construction and modernization improvements. A new facilities director position could have oversight of the district’s facilities and bonds programs. This could include managing both district facilities unit staff and outside vendors, such as architects, engineers, consultants and contractors. The position could also play a more active role in managing the district’s con- struction management firms to ensure they fulfill their contractual obligations, and that the district is doing the same. Recommendations The district should: 1. Consider developing and hiring a facilities director position and/or a facilities planner position. 2. Develop a process to track and monitor employee evaluations and hold supervisory staff accountable for performing them. 3. Conduct employee evaluations to ensure all staff are up to date and to communicate job expectations and goals. Facility Master Plan and Capital Improvement Plan A facilities master plan is a vital resource for a school district. It contains essential information regarding current and future facility needs, the condition of existing facilities, and the renovations required to support the school district’s educational and program goals. The plan also plays a crucial role in helping the school district assess funding requirements for capital improvements and explore its financing options. Similarly, a capital improvement plans is essential for implementing the facilities master plan. It serves to identify and communicate the school district’s priorities, funding sources, timelines, and cash flow projec- tion. A comprehensive capital improvement plan includes revenue projections and cost estimates by year, projected timing of cash receipts, project priorities and timelines, cost escalation assumptions, contingen- cies, hard and soft costs, and a cash flow projection. It should be updated as funding and costs change, enabling the school district to monitor and adjust accordingly. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 36 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services The district lacks an up-to-date facilities master plan. Staff shared that the last plan was developed in 2008, but the district could not provide FCMAT with a copy. According to the job description, the senior director of facilities planning and development is responsible for creating the plan. To address this issue, the district is considering issuing a request for proposal to commission the development of a new facilities master plan. The district is also without a capital improvement plan, which hinders the district’s ability to effectively align projects with available funds, communicate project priorities, manage cash needs, and oversee its facilities and maintenance programs. Recommendations The district should: 1. Develop a facilities master plan, in alignment with the CDE’s Master Planning resources, to outline the district’s overarching needs and vision for its facilities.9 2. Develop a capital improvement plan to effectively implement the facilities master plan. Project Management According to the senior director of facilities planning and development, the facilities unit’s level of respon- sibility for district projects varies based on their size and funding source. The senior director indicated that projects are categorized and managed as follows: • Bond-funded projects over $1 million: The Del Terra Group is the contracted construction management firm for bond-funded projects over $1 million. This group is responsible for developing the district’s project priorities, which are then submitted to the district’s bond project committee for approval. Although the committee typically meets once a month, it has not met recently due to the focus on rebuilding Lynwood High School’s Imperial campus. Comprising six members, the committee includes the superintendent, the senior director of facilities planning and development, two district governing board members, a legal representative, and a facilities planner. The decisions made by the committee are presented to the district governing board by a representative of the consulting firm and the assistant superintendent of business services, who serves as the internal liaison to the consulting firm. • Bond-funded projects under $1 million and other district projects: The assistant superin- tendent of business services, the senior director of facilities planning and development and the facilities representative/Williams liaison manage bond-funded projects under $1 million and other district projects. The senior director of facilities determines whether the project can be handled internally based on staff capacity and skill set or if it must be contracted out. The facilities representative/Williams liaison oversees the project following this deter- mination. The assistant superintendent of business services supports the other two posi- tions by selectively managing major projects, such as temporarily managing the rebuild of the Lynwood High School Imperial campus. • Lynwood High School Imperial campus rebuild: The district has selected Huckabee as the construction management firm for the Lynwood High School reconstruction project. The new facilities project manager position will serve as the internal liaison to this consulting firm. 9Updated information on the development of a facilities master plan can be found in the “Subsequent Events” section of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 37 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services • Routine maintenance projects: The district lacks a defined process for planning, approv- ing, budgeting and managing maintenance projects funded by the RRMA. • School-requested projects: School secretaries submit project request forms to their respective facilities operations manager, who collaborates with the principal for consider- ation. However, the senior director of facilities planning and development indicated that the use of this form is inconsistent across schools. The district also lacks standardized proce- dures for verifying budget availability for these projects alongside other planned projects, as well as for managing and assigning the projects. When asked to confirm the categorization and distribution of responsibilities as outlined above, the assis- tant superintendent of business services indicated they were unfamiliar with the categories and distribution of responsibilities. Moreover, the district does not appear to adhere to these guidelines consistently, as indicated by the management of bond projects under $1 million by the Del Terra Group. Recommendations The district should: 1. Develop and implement a consistent process to review, approve, assign and manage construction projects. 2. Develop a comprehensive annual project plan and list for the facilities unit, and regularly revise and update it as necessary. Communication Clear, consistent and open communication is essential for the smooth operation of a school district. Communication can take oral or written forms. Oral communication may occur through phone conversations or in-person interactions, either one-on-one or in group settings like meetings. Written communication encompasses a variety of formats, including memos, emails, policy and procedure manuals, board policies and administrative regulations, forms, handbooks, and desk manuals. Fostering an organizational culture that prioritizes open communication promotes knowledge-sharing, collaboration and transparency, all of which are vital to a school district’s long-term success. The district’s facilities unit lacks a standard process for sharing planned, current or historical project infor- mation among FMOT Department, Business Services Department and affected site staff. Facilities unit staff operate independently, working in isolation. The senior director of facilities planning and development and the facilities representative/Williams liaison communicate project updates only through informal “hall- way” conversations. School staff expressed frustration with the lack of information about the status of their requests and the timelines for completion. Facilities unit staff involved with facility planning, management and construction need to schedule and hold meetings regularly to address any problems concerning the project’s budget, timeline, or other relevant conditions. These meetings should include discussions of project reports, with the information then shared with the Business Services Department, district management, affected site management and related consultants. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 38 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services Recommendations The district should: 1. Conduct weekly facility staff meetings throughout the year to deliver updates on ongoing projects and planning activities. Memorialize these meetings with minutes or notes. 2. Arrange daily check-in meetings between the senior director of facilities planning and development and the facilities representative/Williams liaison to resolve issues in the field during active construction projects. Memorialize these meetings with minutes or notes. 3. Use the comprehensive annual project plan as a communication tool during meetings between the senior director of facilities planning and development and the assistant superintendent of business services. 4. Develop and implement a process to communicate project timing information with school principals in advance. Internal Documentation Internal documentation refers to the records maintained by an organization to guide decision-making [25]. By systematically documenting procedures, tasks, and project details in a centralized location and an orga- nized manner, school districts can significantly enhance efficiency, reduce duplicative work, and achieve consistent results. This practice not only facilitates knowledge sharing among employees, helping in their understanding of processes and typical project outcomes, but also enables them to reference past work for learning and improvement. Effective documentation promotes innovation and enables teams to work more effectively towards common goals [25]. It contributes to the collective knowledge of employees, fostering a culture of information shar- ing within the organization. This, in turn, increases transparency and cultivates a collaborative, strategic environment, which ultimately drives the school district’s success. Project records should be readily accessible to provide information needed for local planning and deci- sion-making. Past project plans, blueprints and files serve as valuable sources of information for manage- ment and staff when making repairs or conducting other maintenance. They also provide crucial insights for architects, engineers and design teams, enabling them to anticipate future needs and plan construction projects more effectively. Project files, including essential documentation such as district governing board approvals, required legal paperwork, and as-built plans, are not stored on a shared drive accessible to the appropriate unit staff or the business office. Instead, they are housed on the individual computers or external hard drives of either the senior director of facilities planning and development or the facilities representative/Williams liaison. Archived project records are maintained on paper rather than in an electronic format. Because of the decentralized organization of project documentation, the district could not provide FCMAT with documents indicating the status of projects or demonstrating the facilities unit’s processes and pro- cedures. This includes crucial documents such as contracts, program budget reports, and expenditure records. As such, FCMAT could not assess the health and status of the district’s facilities program. On October 27, 2022, the governing board approved a service agreement with Colbi Technologies to implement Account-Ability, a facility accounting, planning and management software tool. However, staff reported that the district has yet to implement this software due to a shortage of personnel. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 39 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services The district needs to develop and implement a process for electronically storing project records in a loca- tion accessible to the appropriate staff. Moreover, it is imperative that the district ensures these files are regularly backed up and secure. Desk Manuals Desk manuals are documents created for each position that include step-by-step procedures for job duties and workflow diagrams, providing employees with an understanding of each position’s responsibilities and timelines. Having an employee who is unfamiliar with the tasks test the manual’s written procedures can help with any necessary revisions and supports effective cross-training. These manuals: • Help with training gaps that can remain after employee turnover. • Provide guidelines for training (including cross-training), help preserve institutional knowl- edge, and eliminate dependency on a single employee. • Ensure employees follow the latest and most efficient procedures. • Effectively document and monitor segregation of duties. Desk manuals also facilitate efficiency, enhance output quality, promote consistent performances, and reduce miscommunication and noncompliance with policies and regulations. They are particularly important when employees leave the school district, are on vacation, or are absent for a long time because of illness. The district could not provide FCMAT with evidence of documented workflows, internal responsibility charts for managing or overseeing projects, or other meaningful processes and information for managing existing projects or performing project planning. The facilities representative/Williams liaison was able to speak to the workflow of a construction project, including her own responsibilities and those of the Purchasing Department. However, she could not provide any documentation from this workflow. Recommendation The district should: 1. Establish a shared location to store and retain project documentation. Ensure this information is secure and backed up. Contracted Program and Construction Management Oversight The district employs two external program/construction management firms, Del Terra Group and Huckabee. The Del Terra Group oversees the management of the district’s bond program, while Huckabee is responsi- ble for managing the reconstruction of Lynwood High School’s Imperial campus. The assistant superintendent of business services is overseeing the Lynwood High School Imperial campus reconstruction project until the new facilities project manager position is filled. Huckabee was chosen to manage the project through a selection process overseen by an outside consulting firm. An architectural/ engineering firm was also chosen for the project, but the district did not provide information about the selection process. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 40 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services At the time of fieldwork, the district was preparing to begin the demolition phase. Despite the project’s active status, the district could not provide the master summary schedule, detailed schedule, budget or expenditures for this project. The contract between the district and Huckabee provides for detailed project management, including this documentation. This situation underscores the importance of school districts being involved in the scheduling, budgeting, sequencing and other aspects of a construction project from the outset, regardless of staffing vacancies. The district needs this information to monitor the project’s status and guide subsequent project changes effectively. Since 2012, the district has contracted with the Del Terra Group to manage bond-funded projects costing over $1 million. However, the district does not appear to be actively managing the Del Terra Group’s project management work, as it could not produce deliverables such as project details, lists or project budgets and expenditures. These documents should be readily accessible and used by the district to oversee the Del Terra Group’s work. To assess the facilities program’s health and the school district’s ability to complete all committed projects, it is imperative that each districts track project budgets and expenditures in real time. To accomplish this, every school district should be capable of answering the following questions for each of its projects: • What is the estimated cost of the project from start to finish? This value is the preliminary and modified budget information. • What has been spent on the project so far? This value is the actual expenditure information. • Did the projected budget match the actual expenditures? This information provides the budget versus expenditure comparison. In a well-performing facilities process, this information is documented in individual project budget and expenditure reports, which are completed monthly and updated in real-time. The report should include every dollar spent on a project, with detailed categories such as construction, architects, testing, inspec- tion, specialized engineers, furniture and equipment, and bidding costs. Information from the individual project reports is then compiled into a master summary budget and expen- ditures report, which also includes program budget and expenditures. Program expenditures are costs that span multiple projects, such as legal fees specific to the program, administrative costs for setting up docu- ment templates, architect selection, consultant selection, and furniture and equipment procurement pro- cess setup. This master summary budget and expenditures report is used to evaluate the overall efficiency of the program’s management and operational processes. The district could not provide FCMAT with any past or current project budget and expenditure reports for review. As such, FCMAT requested that the district obtain one from the Del Terra Group. The report pro- vided for analysis pertained to a previous project, the Lincoln Elementary School secure entrance and fire alarm replacement project. Although the report’s format includes adequate detail, the budget and expen- ditures match exactly, indicating that the report was likely compiled after the project’s completion. This is misleading because it implies that the budgeting process was executed perfectly. Reporting after proj- ect completion fails to offer useful information, such as budget versus expenditure comparisons, that the district can use to inform its practices. Consequently, FCMAT could not determine the effectiveness of the district’s facilities program or whether this project was appropriately budgeted. Budgetary shortfalls can affect other committed projects. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 41 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services Similarly, the district was unable to provide a master summary budget and expenditures report for the bond program. To evaluate the efficiency of the bond program planning process, this report needs to include all projects since the inception of Measures K and N, along with summarized budget and expenditures infor- mation for each project. Ultimately, the district is accountable to voters for the effectiveness of its facilities program. The public voted to pay tax dollars to support a defined list of projects or proposed initiatives. While circumstances may change over the years, it is vital to maintain transparent communication with the public regarding the status of completed and outstanding projects. The district’s contract with the Del Terra Group, approved August 22, 2019, states the fee schedule is: • Program Management: The district will pay 3% of the bond funds of measures K and N, as well as any matching funds and related project costs, for program management services. • Construction Management: The district will pay 5% of construction costs paid from the bond funds of measures K and N, in addition to any matching funds and related project funding, for construction management services. FCMAT reviewed the budget and expenditure report for the Lincoln Elementary School secure entrance and fire alarm replacement project. The report shows that the construction management fees are 5% per the contract and are appropriately charged to the individual project in reporting project costs. However, FCMAT identified a discrepancy regarding the project’s program management fees, which appear to have been overcharged and are inconsistent with the terms of the district’s contract with the Del Terra Group. The budget and expenditure report indicates that the district was invoiced initially for project management fees based on the original project budget of $3.7 million. This amount is significantly higher than the proj- ect’s ending cost of $643,746. Approximately 30% of the project management fees were billed at the origi- nal budget cost. While these fees were adjusted to reflect the project’s ending cost, no settle-up amount is communicated in the documentation provided to FCMAT. As a result, the total amount invoiced for project management fees is more than double the agreed-upon contract amount. Based on the documentation provided, FCMAT could not determine whether the district actually paid this inflated sum. Rescoping, down-scoping and adjusting total project budgets are common occurrences in facilities pro- grams. However, it is imperative for the district to actively manage the consulting firm to ensure costs are approved, appropriate and accurate. While the district can contract out program and project management services, it retains the legal and financial responsibility associated with any expenditures. The district’s contract states that the Del Terra Group will provide several budgeting, expenditure and schedule reports to help the district manage its facilities program. These include: • Monthly program status reports for each project. • Project schedules for each project in narrative format. • Monthly budget, actual, forecast-to-complete, and budget available balances. However, the contract does not appear to require a master program summary budget of all budgets and expenditures for every project, detailing every dollar spent, as would be expected in line with best prac- tices for managing facilities programs. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 42 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Planning, Funding and Development Services The contract describes a detailed list of activities and responsibilities for both the district and the Del Terra Group. For example, it specifies that the district must provide all financial information, including budget goals, objectives and constraints, necessary for the consulting firm to develop project budgets for the campus projects. However, the district did not provide FCMAT with documentation showing that the ful- fillment of these duties in either the past or present. Furthermore, the district could not provide evidence, such as meeting minutes, to show it had been conducting the weekly or as-needed status meetings to coordinate all phases of the campus projects, as specified in the contract. In general, the district’s contract with the Del Terra Group provides for adequate management of the bond program by the consulting firm. However, there is no evidence to support that the district has fulfilled its responsibilities, which suggests that the Del Terra Group has been left to manage the bond program with- out adequate supervision of its performance. Recommendations The district should: 1. Identify and train the individual(s) responsible for overseeing the program and construction management consultants. 2. Obtain or develop and maintain a master summary budget and expenditures report for major facilities programs. 3. Acquire reports as specified in contracts from program and construction management companies. Retain this documentation on a shared drive with backup services. 4. Provide adequate district management and oversight for all consultant-managed projects to ensure contract compliance and to assess project performance and effectiveness. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 43 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Funding Coordination and Efficiency Facilities Funding Coordination and Efficiency General Obligation Bonds General obligation bonds are financial instruments that can be used to fund the construction, reconstruc- tion and acquisition of real property for school facilities. The taxes imposed to service the debt incurred by these bonds are determined based on the assessed value of properties within the school district. Typically, the issuance of general obligation bonds requires approval by a two-thirds majority of voters. However, since the passage of Proposition 39 in November 2000, school districts have been granted the option to lower the voter approval threshold to 55% [26]. While this option increases the likelihood of bond passage, it also entails additional accountability measures. This includes the establishment of a citizens’ bond over- sight committee. The citizens’ bond oversight committee must adhere to specific membership criteria and meet at least annually. Under EC 15278(b), the committee’s primary purpose is to inform the public about the expenditure of bond revenues by actively reviewing and annually reporting on the proper expenditure of taxpayers’ money for school construction. Typically, these committees report on their reviews of performance and financial audits, as well as other oversight activities, at governing board meetings. In recent history, the district passed two Proposition 39 general obligation bonds, known as measures K and N. Interviews indicated that the district has fully expended Measure K funding, while some Measure N funding is still available. The district is not in compliance with the legal requirement to maintain an active citizens’ bond oversight committee. According to the committee’s bylaws, it must meet at least annually but not more frequently than quarterly. Historically, the district has conducted regular meetings of its citizens’ bond oversight com- mittee. However, the most recent committee meeting was held in October 2022, and the meeting sched- uled for January 2023 was canceled due to the vacancy in the assistant superintendent of business ser- vices position. Consequently, interviews with district staff indicated that there is no up-to-date project list, and the committee had not conducted a review or reported to the public on the bonds’ performance and financial audits. As of the time of fieldwork, the committee had not scheduled any future meetings. The district is not in compliance with the legal reporting requirements of Proposition 39. Although the 2022-23 unaudited actuals report showed expenditure activity, the district did not provide FCMAT with evi- dence that the citizens’ bond oversight committee had presented the annual report to the district governing board by March 31, as mandated by the committee’s bylaws. Recommendations The district should: 1. Schedule and conduct at least one meeting of the citizens’ bond oversight committee annually.10 2. Identify the sites and projects to be funded with general obligation bond proceeds, and coordinate this funding with other available financing sources. 10Updated information on reconvening the citizens’ bond oversight committee meetings can be found in the “Subsequent Events” section of this report. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 44 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Funding Coordination and Efficiency 3. Complete and present the financial and performance audits for measures K and N to the citizens’ bond oversight committee. 4. Ensure that the citizens’ bond oversight committee annually reports at a public governing board meeting. California’s School Facility Program California’s School Facility Program provides school districts with various forms of state funding for school site acquisition and facility construction, modernization and reconstruction [27]. Participation in the pro- gram requires school districts to meet eligibility criteria outlined by the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) and to contribute a local matching share, typically 50% for new construction and 40% for modern- ization projects. Competition for funding is fierce and necessitates that school district staff have knowledge of the program. To help school districts with understanding and meeting these requirements, the OPSC has released a guide and a handbook. According to staff interviews, the district has recently contracted with Hancock Park and Delong, a consult- ing firm, to help file eligibility applications and other preliminary paperwork with the OPSC. At the time of fieldwork, the district did not have any pending applications and had not applied for matching funding from the School Facility Program since the passage of its last bond in 2016. Typically, new construction projects cannot be funded retrospectively. However, the district may qualify for reimbursement funding for past modernization projects that meet School Facility Program eligibility criteria. While it is common for school districts to enlist outside consultants for preparing and submitting applica- tions to the School Facility Program, it is imperative for the district to understand the program’s guidelines and procedures. As such, the district needs to identify an in-house expert who has a general working knowledge of the guidelines established by the Division of the State Architect, OPSC, CDE and other rele- vant state agencies. This individual should act as the primary liaison with external consultants and oversee their work to ensure compliance with the guidelines. Building this internal capacity could reduce the dis- trict’s reliance on external consultants. Career Technical Education Facilities Program The Career Technical Education Facilities Program, enacted through Proposition 51 on the November 2016 ballot, provided grants to eligible school districts to improve and expand their career and technical educa- tion (CTE) programs. The Career Technical Education Facilities Program applications, funding and opera- tions were separate and individual from the new construction or modernization funding under the School Facilities Program. Applications for this program are now closed with all funds having been allocated. In 2019-20, the district received an apportionment of $248,946 for modernizing CTE facilities at Lynwood High School Bullis campus [28]. It then received an additional $600,000 in 2020-21 for the construction of a new CTE health and biomedical sciences classroom and lab at Marco Antonio Firebaugh High. Recommendations The district should: 1. Determine eligibility for new construction and modernization under the School Facilities Program and submit applications when possible. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 45 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Funding Coordination and Efficiency 2. Assign an in-house expert who has a general working knowledge of the guidelines established by the Division of the State Architect, OPSC, CDE and other relevant state agencies to act as liaison and oversee the consulting firm’s activities to ensure compliance. Routine Restricted Maintenance Account Education Code 17070.75 mandates that school districts participating in the School Facility Program make all necessary repairs, renewals and replacements to maintain projects in good repair and working order. This is accomplished by the establishment of a restricted account within each school district’s general fund dedicated to funding and tracking costs related to the ongoing and major maintenance of school buildings. EC 17070.75 requires that school districts deposit 3% of selected general fund expenditures annually for 20 years upon receiving School Facility Program funds. The district’s 2023-24 adopted budget projects that the contribution to the RRMA will meet the 3% min- imum requirement. However, interviews indicated that the district had funds remaining at the end of the 2023-24 year. As a result, the district identified additional eligible expenditures during the fiscal year-end close process rather than following a comprehensive plan throughout the year that coordinates all funding sources. Although predicting necessary expenditures can be challenging, it is crucial for the district to develop a budget that accurately reflects historical expenditures and current needs. To support this effort, main- tenance unit staff must be trained to open purchase orders and monitor expenditures to date, including outstanding expenditure commitments, while also forecasting future needs. Recommendation The district should: 1. Provide budget training for FMOT Department leadership to effectively monitor expenditures and safeguard the district’s capital investments. Certificates of Participation Certificates of participation are a financing method used by government agencies for the construction or improvement of public facilities. Unlike general obligation bonds, certificates of participation do not gener- ate additional revenues and lack a defined source of repayment other than the general fund. While these certificates offer more flexibility because they do not require voter approval and can be obtained more quickly, they tend to be more expensive compared to other financing options. As of June 30, 2022, the district had approximately $16,050,000 in outstanding 2007 and 2016 certificates of participation, according to the latest annual audit report. The district makes annual debt service pay- ments of $1.4 million from the general fund. The debt service schedule shows that annual payments will continue to be made annually through 2038. The district did not express any interest in issuing additional certificates of participation. However, should the need for financing arise in the future, it is imperative that the district adopt a strategic approach. This involves incorporating the financing and associated projects into a comprehensive plan that coordinates all funding sources. By doing so, the district can minimize reliance on certificates of participation and mitigate their impact on the general fund. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 46 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Funding Coordination and Efficiency Capital Facilities Fund (Developer Fees) A developer fee is a charge that can be imposed on developers and property owners to offset the impact of additional students resulting from new development. These fees are levied by school districts on new residential, commercial and industrial construction projects to help fund the construction and reconstruc- tion of school facilities. Property owners and developers are responsible for paying these fees to the school districts. Each school district has the authority to decide whether to levy these fees and at what rate, within legal limits. The State Allocation Board adjusts the rates for inflation every two years. School districts are permitted to allocate up to 3% of the collected fees to cover administrative costs. Government Code (GC) 66001 requires that a school district adopt a developer fee justification study before adopting any new developer fee or increase to an existing development fee. A developer fee justifi- cation study will establish: • The purpose and intended use of the fee. • The relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project subject to the fee. • The relationship between the need for the public facility and the type of development proj- ect subject to the fee. Government Code 66001 also requires that a developer fee fund report be conducted once every five years, following the first receipt of funds, for any funds that are unexpended. The five-year developer fee fund report must detail: • The purpose of the unexpended fee funds. • The relationship between the unexpended fee funds and the project to be funded. • All other anticipated funding sources and amounts to complete financing the project. • Approximate dates when the other funding is expected to be received. Government Code 66006 outlines annual reporting requirements for developer fees to communicate the health and status of the account(s) or fund(s) and related projects. These annual developer fee reports must contain the following information: • A description of the fee and its amount. • The beginning and ending balances of the account or fund. • The amount of collected fees and accrued interest. • The improvements funded by the fee, including the amount spent on each improvement and the percentage of its total cost covered by the fee. • The status of projects previously reported, delayed or outstanding. Additional reporting requirements may apply. School districts should consult GC 66001 and 66006 and their legal teams for guidance. Failure to appropriately justify, track and report on developer fees could result in the school district having to refund the fees. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 47 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Funding Coordination and Efficiency FCMAT requested the most recent developer fee justification study and the annual developer fee report, but the district could not provide them. Upon reviewing the district’s most recent unaudited actuals report, FCMAT found that the district received $490,673.53 in developer fees during the 2022-23 fiscal year. The district recorded these funds in the capital facilities fund, Fund 25, which primarily accounts for developer fees and related projects. However, there were no recorded project expenditures or reimbursements, and the fund’s ending balance was $2,299,566.86 for 2022-23. Furthermore, the district’s 2023-24 adopted budget does not include any developer fee revenues, project expenditures, reimbursements, or interest on Fund 25’s balance. To avoid having to refund the unexpended developer fees, the district must provide a clear explanation as to why the fee is still necessary to achieve its original purpose and explain its plan for using the remaining fund balance to accomplish that purpose. The district could not provide evidence of coordination between available developer fee funding and other facility funding resources. It is imperative that the district integrates the use of developer fee funds into a comprehensive project funding plan that incorporates other sources of facilities funding. Recommendations The district should: 1. Locate and review past annual and five-year developer fee fund reports and developer fee justification studies to determine the purpose of collected developer fees and ensure legal compliance. 2. Regularly update the developer fee justification study, including a review of rates for inflation. 3. Develop, amend and publicly present the annual accounting report of developer fees for the capital facilities fund in accordance with legal requirements. 4. Develop, amend and publicly present the five-year developer fee fund report for all unexpended fees. 5. Integrate the purpose and use of developer fees into a comprehensive facility plan to coordinate with all capital facilities funding sources. Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) Each year, school districts are required to develop and adopt an LCAP or provide an annual update to the existing plan. The LCAP serves as a three-year strategic framework for establishing goals, outlining actions, detailing services and identifying expenditures that support improved, positive student outcomes in align- ment with local and state priorities, as outlined in EC 52060(d)(1)–(8), 52066(d) and 47605. The LCFF is the funding mechanism underlying these educational initiatives. It allocates funds to all local educational agencies based on the state priorities outlined in the Education Code. To help guide local educational agencies in developing LCAPs, the CDE has provided a summary of these priorities. Among the state’s priorities is the maintenance of school facilities, which has been designated as “Priority 1: Basic” and categorized as a “condition of learning” [29]. The maintenance, cleanliness and sufficiency of facilities can be considered a factor of other LCFF priorities, if the action is supported by research [30]. Although LCAP funds are usually allocated for operational purposes, they can be used for building needs if the local governing board adopts a priority in that area. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 48 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Funding Coordination and Efficiency Local educational agencies are required to engage the community during the development of their LCAPs. The district’s 2023-24 LCAP includes the findings of a community survey that received approximately 1,500 responses. Table 10 on the following page provides a description of the respondents and their percentage relative to the total number of respondents. Table 10. District Survey Respondents Education Partner Percentage of Total High School Students 45.9% Parents and Community Members 34% Certificated Staff 14.2% Classified Staff 5.6% Source: District’s 2023-24 LCAP. Note: Percentages are rounded. Table 11 below provides the survey prompts related to facilities and maintenance along with the corre- sponding responses. Table 11. Responses to District Survey Prompt Response Percentage of Total Choose the services you feel the district does well: Clean and well-maintained schools 36.1% Choose the services you feel are most important for the Clean and maintained schools 58.7% district to improve: Strongly agree 74.0% In order for all students to receive a high-quality instruction in Somewhat agree 16.0% school, they need clean and safe learning environments. Somewhat disagree 5.0% Strongly disagree 4.0% Extremely satisfied 30.0% How satisfied are you with how the district provides clean and Satisfied 33.0% safe learning environments? Somewhat satisfied 22.0% Extremely dissatisfied 15.0% In what area(s) do you feel the district needs to improve during Improving campus cleanliness 56.0% the 2023-2024 school year? Source: Adapted from district’s 2023-24 LCAP. Note: Percentages are rounded. The district’s 2023-24 LCAP includes a goal and corresponding action pertaining to the condition of its facilities. Goal 3 states that: All students will be taught by highly qualified teachers who are fully credentialed and appro- priately assigned in learning environments that are safe, drug-free, and conducive to learning. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 49 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Funding Coordination and Efficiency Action 3.6, titled “Basic Services – Clean and Safe Learning Environments,” details the actions the district will take to achieve this goal. It states: The district will develop and maintain facilities that promote the health, safety, and wellbe- ing of its occupants. The district will provide safety personnel at each school site during the school day and at events. The desired outcome for LCFF basic services conditions for learning states that all schools should meet state standards for safety, cleanliness, and adequacy. The Williams Facility Inspection report serves as the primary metric for measuring and reporting the results of Action 3.6. During these inspections, various aspects of facilities are evaluated, including whether they meet the criteria for being in “good repair” as defined in EC 17002. The 2023-24 LCAP states that the dis- trict’s goal is to have 100% of schools achieve a Williams Facility Inspection rating of Good or Exemplary. It has achieved this goal in each of the last two years. The 2023-24 LCAP explains the district’s achievement of this goal in the previous year, with the district attributing its success to “the additional custodial staff [who] worked to ensure that schools were clean and safe.” It further states, “Williams facility visits indicated that 100% of LUSD schools received a rating of Good or Exemplary as results [sic] of the additional custodial staff that was hired.” During fieldwork: FCMAT toured four schools: Wilson Elementary School, Washington Elementary School, Chavez Middle School and Firebaugh High School. During these tours, FCMAT observed several pest, cleanliness and safety issues, including: • The need to replace light bulbs in fixtures within stairways and bathrooms. • Nonfunctioning or missing bathroom stall doors. • Damage to school property in classrooms caused by cats and vermin. • Part of a playground’s grass area cordoned off due to an unresolved hazard, making it unsafe for children to play nearby. On-site staff reported submitting work orders for the issues noted above. However, they expressed uncer- tainty about the status of these requests and noted receiving little to no communication. Several items had been pending for months or even longer. The OPSC developed The Facility Inspection Tool (FIT) to help local educational agencies in determining if facilities meet Williams Act requirements [31]. Facilities must be in “good repair,” which the OPSC defines as meaning that the facility “is maintained in a manner that ensures it is clean, safe and functional.” Clean, safe and functional school facilities are crucial for safeguarding students’ health [4]. Research has shown that they have many other positive impacts on the learning environment, including student performance, teacher support, chronic absenteeism, social interactions and students’ sense of community [5]. Although the FIT is a required and appropriate statewide metric for assessing whether the district meets the basic standard for facilities, its results are subjective, relying on the opinions and observations of the inspector. Moreover, its effectiveness is constrained by the point-in-time nature of the inspection. This limitation is evident in the discrepancy between the ratings of Good or Exemplary received by all district schools during the FIT inspections and the contradictory feedback provided by educational partners and FCMAT’s own observations. Therefore, the district would benefit from developing one or more local metrics to continuously monitor and improve facility cleanliness, safety and functionality throughout the year. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 50 Findings and Recommendations Facilities Funding Coordination and Efficiency Recommendations The district should: 1. Continue to include facility goals and actions in the LCAP to improve the basic standard of cleanliness, safety and functionality of the learning environment. 2. Identify additional research-supported state or local priority areas where facilities have an impact and develop goals, actions and appropriate metrics to support improvement. 3. Develop one or more local metrics to continuously monitor and improve facility cleanliness, safety and functionality. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 51 Findings and Recommendations Transportation Services Transportation Services In the 2022-23 school year, the district either performed or organized approximately 334 activity trips. The district operates seven daily bus routes daily. Of these routes, six are dedicated to special education trans- portation, while one route provides shuttle service between the Lynwood High School Bullis and Imperial campuses for Lynwood High School students that participate in sports. Staffing and Distribution of Duties In the 2023-24 fiscal year, the district had 12 FTE positions in the transportation unit, as shown below in Table 12. Table 12. Transportation Program Staffing, 2023-24 Job Title Number of FTE Transportation Supervisor 1 Office Assistant II 1 Mechanic 2 Bus Driver 8 Source: District-provided data. Note: One bus driver position was vacant at the time of fieldwork. The district’s transportation unit is overseen by the transportation supervisor, who provides dispatch ser- vices and holds bus driver and behind-the-wheel instructor certifications. In addition to the 12 FTE positions within the transportation unit, approximately nine bus attendants/aides with varying contract assignments report outside the unit. At the time of fieldwork, the district’s transportation program had one vacant bus driver position and was operating with seven bus drivers for seven routes. The district also lacked an active pool of bus driver substitutes. The district has a significant absenteeism issue within its transportation program. According to staff, it is common for at least one bus driver to be absent on any given day. Management staff reported instances where up to 50% of the driving staff are absent simultaneously, which often leads to delays in service for some routes. The transportation supervisor is required to perform his regular duties, including dispatch responsibilities, in addition to covering for driving staff who are absent. As such, the supervisor drives a bus during peak morning, midday, and afternoon hours while simultaneously trying to monitor two-way radio communica- tions from the bus where he is providing substitute coverage. Staff estimated that the supervisor fills in for driving staff at least three times a week, which frequently results in the supervisor working beyond an eight-hour shift. This practice is not sustainable. The transportation supervisor routinely filling in for absent driving staff has resulted in a regular vacancy of dispatch duties, which poses operational and safety risks. First, this situation may result in decreased operational efficiency due to the supervisor’s inability to provide additional routing coverage and direction to bus drivers, as needed. Second, the absence of a dispatcher during emergencies could significantly compromise student safety. And third, the lack of a dispatcher means that phone calls may go unanswered, preventing the transportation unit staff from effectively responding to parents, guardians and school staff during an emergency or otherwise. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 52 Findings and Recommendations Transportation Services It is a common best practice to have licensed substitute school bus drivers or passenger vehicle oper- ators readily available. A standard industry norm is to maintain an approximate 10% spare or substitute driver pool based on the number of routes operated by the school district. Therefore, it would benefit the district to consider closing the vacant bus driver position and exploring the creation of either a dedicated dispatcher/router or a driver/dispatcher position. A dedicated dispatcher/router could provide necessary dispatch coverage should the transportation supervisor need to act as a substitute bus driver. Alternatively, having the transportation supervisor backfill as a dispatcher would enable him to remain in the office to address any immediate needs or emergencies, should the driver/dispatcher need to act as a substitute bus driver. The district must investigate the significant absenteeism occurring in the transportation unit and address it appropriately. Additionally, it is imperative for the district to promptly fill positions equivalent to the number of bus routes it operates plus a 10% substitute ratio to ensure coverage during staff absences. School Bus Driver Certification Training Requirements School bus driver training in California is highly regulated.11 In accordance with EC 40082, prospective school bus drivers are required to complete a minimum of 20 hours of classroom training and 20 hours of behind-the-wheel training, using a curriculum developed by the CDE’s Office of School Transportation. Typically, classroom training takes approximately 35 hours to cover all the units, and behind-the-wheel training requires a similar amount of time. Furthermore, in accordance with EC 40085, school bus drivers must complete at least 10 hours of annual classroom instruction, in-service training, or behind-the-wheel training. In the year before renewal, in lieu of these annual training requirements, school bus drivers must complete 10 hours of classroom instruction using curriculum developed by the CDE’s Office of School Transportation to renew their certification. All annual, classroom, and behind-the-wheel training sessions must be conducted by a state-certified school bus driver instructor. Behind-the-wheel training can also be administered by CDE Office of School Transportation-approved delegated behind-the-wheel trainers who operate under state-certified school bus instructors, as per EC 40084.5. All training activities must be documented by a valid state-certified school bus driver instructor on the appropriate form. Failure to adhere to training regulations can result in the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) canceling a school bus driver’s certificate. As discussed in the “Staffing and Distribution of Duties” subsection above, the district has not been able to fill the vacant bus driver position. Recruiting and retaining school bus drivers has become increasingly difficult, both nationally and locally, especially because the district is located within one of the state’s most competitive urban regions for recruitment. Compounding these issues is the lack of a state-certified school bus driver instructor on staff, which prevents the district from recruiting potential noncommercial driver can- didates suitable for original training as certified school bus drivers. Consequently, the district relies solely on recruiting already licensed, certified school bus drivers. Management acknowledged that this approach has been unsuccessful in filling all available bus driver positions, given the challenges in attracting and retaining school bus drivers in a post-pandemic economy. The district hosts a beginning-of-the-year orientation meeting for its bus drivers to establish expectations. It also provides occasional in-service trainings conducted by a contracted, state-certified school bus driver instructor and offers renewal classes for drivers seeking to renew their school bus certificates. School bus 11Refer to EC 40080 through 40089 for detailed information on the training requirements for school bus drivers, including initial certification and renewal. These sections also cover the training requirements for obtaining and maintaining a state-certified school bus instructor certificate and the requirements for obtaining behind-the-wheel trainer delegation approval. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 53 Findings and Recommendations Transportation Services drivers also participate in regional offerings organized by industry professional associations. The district’s school bus drivers are struggling to meet their annual required training, despite these efforts. As a result, drivers are sometimes required to seek out additional training from outside sources. The district’s transportation supervisor is an approved behind-the-wheel trainer. However, this individual cannot conduct the initial driver original training or renewal training because they are not a state-certi- fied school bus driver instructor. Additionally, this employee cannot provide ongoing required in-service program training without direct supervision from a state-certified school bus driver instructor. Interviews indicated that the district employs a school bus driver with this certification, but the related duties have not been assigned to them. As such, the district contracts externally for these services to meet the minimum training requirements. The district’s transportation program is not large enough to warrant a full-time position for a state-certified school bus driver instructor. In similar-sized districts, such responsibilities are often integrated into exist- ing roles. This could mean requiring the transportation supervisor to hold the certification or creating a combined position, like a dispatcher/state-certified school bus driver instructor position or a lead driver/ state-certified school bus driver instructor position. The district would benefit from developing and staffing one of these combined positions. Recommendations The district should: 1. Investigate the reported absenteeism issue and address it appropriately. 2. Close the vacant bus driver position and create and fill either a dedicated dispatcher/router position or a driver/dispatcher position. 3. Develop and fill a state-certified school bus driver instructor combination position that requires the incumbent to fulfill duties related to driver certification. District Transportation Safety Plan Education Code 39831.3 mandates that all school districts develop transportation safety plans outlining the procedures employees must follow to ensure students’ safety. A best practice is to review and revise these plans at least annually and whenever necessary. Senate Bill 1072, effective January 1, 2017, modified EC 39831.3 to require that transportation safety plans include procedures to ensure that students are not left unattended on a school bus. The district’s Transportation Safety Plan is not in compliance with this code because it fails to articulate the practices for checking buses for any remaining students. The district needs to develop a process to update its transpor- tation safety plan at least annually. This process should include procedures for reviewing new and revised legal requirements to ensure that district practices remain current. Recommendations The district should: 1. Create a process to annually review and revise the Transportation Safety Plan with new requirements and updated district practices. 2. Revise the Transportation Safety Plan to add the district’s practices to check for students who remain on the buses. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 54 Findings and Recommendations Transportation Services Safety Drills Education Code 39831.5 requires school districts to conduct school bus emergency evacuation drills annually. It also mandates school districts to maintain specific records for students in grades TK-8 who ride school buses and announce specific safety information before every field trip. Typically, emergency evacu- ation drills are scheduled and conducted within the first few weeks or months of the school year to ensure timely instruction as students begin riding school buses. According to interviews with staff, the district had yet to conduct annual school bus emergency evacuation drills or student safety instruction sessions for the 2023-24 school year. The district needs to develop a process to track and verify the timely completion of all required annual tasks, including procedures to fol- lowup on any outstanding tasks. Recommendations The district should: 1. Create a process to annually track and verify the timely completion of all required annual tasks, including procedures to followup on any outstanding tasks. 2. Conduct emergency evacuation drills and provide student safety instruction at the beginning of the school year. Student Transport Services The district provides transportation for student activities, such as field trips, club trips and sporting events, and between the two Lynwood High campuses for teams to use the sports facilities at the Imperial campus. The district also provides home-to-school transportation for students receiving special education services as required under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and school-to-school transportation for special education students who receive services at an assigned instructional program located at a district school site outside their school of residence. Special Education Transportation The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act mandates that students with disabilities be offered a free appropriate public education. This federal act requires that these students’ needs be assessed through Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), which are plans developed for each student that outline their learning objectives and the services that must be provided based on their abilities [32]. Transportation may be defined as a related service within students’ IEPs if needed to ensure access to their educational programs. When it is determined during an IEP meeting that transportation is needed as a related service, a staff member from the district’s Special Education Department creates a transportation request. These requests are then sent to the transportation unit, which arranges routes and communicates them to families. Typically, at the beginning of the school year or as required to support extended school year services,12 the Special Education Department technician submits new transportation requests for each student, incorpo- rating any adjustments needed due to changes in bell times or program locations. 12Extended school year services must be provided to students with “exceptional needs” who require special education and related services beyond the regular academic year due to their unique needs (EC 3043). These services may include retaining skills that are at risk of regression or developing skills necessary for achieving self-sufficiency goals. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 55 Findings and Recommendations Transportation Services At the beginning of the school year, the district scheduled eight routes. Due to a shortage of bus drivers, the transportation unit consolidated the routes to seven. Despite this consolidation, staff interviews indi- cated that one of the remaining routes serves only one student requiring morning transportation. The trans- portation unit could not provide documentation on the exact number of students identified to receive trans- portation as part of their IEPs, nor could it provide precise counts of students actively receiving service per route. Without an understanding of ridership, management cannot efficiently develop and right-size routes to serve the students safely and suitably. Therefore, the district needs to develop a process to maintain and monitor this information throughout the year and have it available to make informed decisions. Most of the district’s schools have similar start and end times, which limits the transportation unit’s ability to increase efficiency by developing routes with multiple runs. As part of the consolidation from eight routes to seven, one route was revised to include two runs: one for students receiving transportation as part of their IEPs and another for high school sports. Some staff reported instances in which students were released early from their programs to keep the transportation schedule running on time. According to EC 42607, there are minimum instructional minutes required by grade and a potential financial penalty if a school dis- trict fails to meet these requirements. To address this issue, the district needs to conduct a master school bell schedule assessment to determine if implementing a multitiered master bell schedule would improve routing efficiency and yield significant transportation savings. Recommendations The district should: 1. Develop a procedure to maintain records of students receiving transportation as part of their IEPs and use this information to maintain efficient routes. 2. Immediately audit student ridership on each run of the seven school bus routes to determine the average ridership per run and bus. 3. Perform a master bell schedule assessment to determine if a multitiered master bell schedule will improve routing efficiency and yield significant transportation savings. General Education Home-to-School Transportation California law does not require school districts to provide home-to school transportation for general edu- cation students [33]. However, school districts may elect to offer this service based on their local policies. The percentage of students transported for general education varies by school district, with rural districts typically transporting more students than urban districts. The district previously provided general home-to-school transportation, but it has changed its practice and no longer offers this service. However, it has yet to update Administrative Regulation 3541, which outlines the eligibility criteria for general education transportation services according to students’ school types, grade levels and the distance of their residences from their schools. This information is shown in Table 13 on the following page. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 56 Findings and Recommendations Transportation Services Table 13. Eligibility Criteria for General Education Transportation School Type Grade Number of Miles Elementary K-3 0.75 Elementary 4-8 1.0 Three-Year Junior High School 7-9 1.0 Four-Year High School 9-12 2.0 Source: District Administrative Regulation 3541, Transportation Routes and Services. Note: “K” is an acronym for kindergarten. The district needs to revise Administrative Regulation 3541 to show that general education transportation is not provided. Recommendation The district should: 1. Revise Administrative Regulation 3541 to show that general education transportation is not provided. Vehicle Fleet Management and Maintenance The district maintains a fleet of 87 support vehicles and 17 school buses, including five electric models. The district has been regularly replacing its school buses, primarily with electric models. However, this information is not shown on the district’s school bus fleet list, which requires updating to include the newer buses and remove those that have been scrapped or disposed. During interviews, staff members expressed significant distrust of the electric buses, with some refusing to drive them following claims of failure while in routine operation with students on board. While the dis- trict provides tools and diagnostic equipment to its mechanics, staff reported that they lack the diagnostic equipment necessary to address newer vehicle technologies and alternative electric vehicle technologies. The district’s mechanics also indicated that they have not received adequate training to handle these newer electric vehicle technologies. Because of the lack of tools and training, there are delays in servicing vehicles when issues arise that require assistance and services from the manufacturer. Therefore, the district needs to evaluate the neces- sity for mechanic tools and training to support new vehicle technology and alternative electric vehicle technology. Additionally, staff reported that three of the large transit-style coach-type buses are nonoperational and most likely beyond economical repair. Consequently, the district operates with fewer than two to three spare buses to support its seven daily routes. Considering that one to three school buses may be out of service at any given time for repairs or maintenance, the district may not have enough buses to cover all its routes consistently. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 57 Findings and Recommendations Transportation Services Recommendations The district should: 1. Update its school bus fleet list to include new vehicles and remove those that have been scrapped or disposed of. 2. Evaluate the need for mechanic training and tools to support new vehicle technologies and alternative electric vehicle technology. Preventive Maintenance Program Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 1232, mandates that every motor carrier implement a preventive maintenance program for its vehicles. A well-designed program entails scheduled maintenance and a clearly documented preventive maintenance plan outlining procedures for prioritizing and assigning routine repair tasks to maintenance staff. It will also ensure that the maintenance staff supervisor verifies the completion of these tasks. Neglecting preventive maintenance can lead to safety issues, premature vehicle failure, and hinder the school district’s ability to provide essential support services using its trade, delivery and passenger vehicles. The district lacks a clearly defined preventive maintenance program for its fleet of support vehicles, includ- ing those used extensively by maintenance, custodial and grounds staff. During interviews, staff members expressed concerns about the reliability of their assigned support vehicles. FCMAT conducted a visual inspection of a sample of the district’s support vehicles, which indicated that the district also lacks an effec- tive maintenance plan. Observed issues included missing license plates, registration stickers or registration cards; missing rear-view mirrors; chipped or missing paint; and rust and body damage. Additionally, the district could not provide any evidence that preventive maintenance is regularly performed on its support vehicles. The district also lacks a clearly defined preventive maintenance program and plan for its fleet of school buses. Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 1232, mandates that school buses be inspected every 45 days or 3,000 miles, whichever occurs first. The transportation unit relies on SchoolDude as its primary software for recording vehicle repair work orders. This software includes a vehicle maintenance module capable of tracking 45-day/3,000-mile inspections, documenting work orders, billing other departments for work on their support fleet vehicles, and managing parts inventory. However, the transportation unit is not using this module to its full extent and could not provide evidence that the required preventative maintenance is being conducted. While work orders are entered to indicate the need for future work, most completed work orders lack details on the parts and labor hours used. Because of its limited use of the vehicle maintenance module, the FMOT Department cannot generate reports commonly used in a school transportation shop, such as parts cost per mile, annual bus mainte- nance costs, and mechanic productivity reports. Fully leveraging SchoolDude could enhance the depart- ment’s ability to monitor and optimize its vehicle maintenance operations. It could also help provide the information needed to develop and maintain an effective preventive maintenance program and plan. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 58 Findings and Recommendations Transportation Services Safety Compliance Report/Terminal Record Update California regulations require all school buses to receive an annual inspection from the California Highway Patrol (CHP) Motor Carrier Safety Unit. Any problems must be repaired before placing the vehicle back into service. The CHP Motor Carrier Inspector Unit also inspects all records pertaining to vehicle maintenance, driver on-duty, driver timekeeping, and federal drug and alcohol testing. The unit produces a report of its findings entitled the “Safety Compliance Report/Terminal Record Update,” commonly referred to as the CHP terminal grade. The CHP Motor Carrier Safety Unit designates school districts as either “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory” on the Safety Compliance Report/Terminal Record Update. A satisfactory designation is the highest grade awarded to any motor carrier and indicates that the carrier is generally in compliance with the laws and reg- ulations governing school bus safety. Conversely, a grade of unsatisfactory indicates a serious deficiency or deficiencies. In such cases, the CHP explicitly warns that failure to correct these deficiencies may lead to severe consequences, including a recommendation to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to revoke the school district’s motor carrier operating authority, filing a complaint with the local district attorney for poten- tial prosecution, and seeking an injunction. Failing to correct these issues may result in criminal charges against the school district’s superintendent and governing board. Given its long history of earning satisfactory CHP terminal grades, the district is operating a safe and com- pliant school transportation program. It is important to recognize, however, that this grade is merely a snap- shot in time and does not necessarily confirm adherence to the best practices and processes expected within a robust vehicle maintenance program. Any deficiencies noted by a CHP Motor Carrier Unit Safety inspector could result in an unsatisfactory grade. This could lead to a significant number of the district's buses being taken out of service, which would severely affect the district's ability to provide school transportation services. School Bus Safety Inspections While this study’s scope does not include a detailed review of the district’s compliance with school bus safety inspections, interviews with staff indicated that the district may not be conducting the required inspections. The district is not taking the nonelectric buses out of service for inspections because of the bus drivers’ distrust of electric vehicle technology and the limited number of nonelectric buses available to cover routes. The district needs to develop a process to schedule, track and oversee inspections of all buses to ensure compliance with Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 1232. Recommendations The district should: 1. Take the necessary steps to establish a clearly defined preventive maintenance program for its school bus and support vehicles. 2. Consider fully using SchoolDude’s vehicle maintenance module and use the resulting data to improve vehicle maintenance operations. 3. Develop a process to schedule, track and oversee inspections of all school buses to ensure compliance with Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 1232. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 59 Findings and Recommendations Organizational Culture and Communication Every school district’s organizational culture is unique. Broadly defined, organizational culture is the system of shared assumptions, values, and beliefs within an organization that provides guidance to employees on acceptable and unacceptable conduct [34]. This system shapes employee behavior, influencing how they fulfill their job responsibilities. Organizational culture is dynamic and affected by numerous factors, includ- ing changes in leadership. Such changes often bring new perspectives and strategies that can reshape the organization’s values and behaviors. While the district’s leadership operates with a student-first mindset and prioritizes fostering a respectful and collaborative working environment among departments and peers, FCMAT observed several instances suggesting a cultural divide within the FMOT Department. Interviews with district staff indicated that the department functions with a certain level of complacency that has hindered it from becoming more efficient. Furthermore, some FMOT Department employees attempt to avoid work by claiming that certain assign- ments fall outside their job responsibilities, while others refer to themselves by job titles that differ from their actual job descriptions. These behaviors erode accountability and make it difficult to align expecta- tions with job descriptions. The resistance to change among some employees has hindered the mainte- nance and operations units’ ability to adapt to the evolving needs of their customers. The assistant superintendent of business services is attempting to make improvements and elevate the level of accountability across all operational divisions. The success of this endeavor hinges on several key elements: • A shared vision. • Effective leadership. • An organizational culture that supports change. However, interviews with FMOT staff indicated that these elements are not present. While line staff employ- ees generally agree with the assistant superintendent of business services’ goal to improve operational services, the rationale behind the proposed changes has not been clearly communicated, nor have staff been given an opportunity to provide input. The district needs to address the perceived gap between management and line staff employees. This can be achieved by improving communication, recognizing and rewarding staff accomplishments, foster- ing a sense of belonging, and prioritizing accountability and transparency across all levels of the FMOT Department. Such efforts could also improve the district’s organizational culture. Recommendation The district should: 1. Strengthen the trust among FMOT Department management and line staff employees by improving communication, recognizing and rewarding staff accomplishments, fostering a sense of belonging, and prioritizing accountability and transparency across all levels of the FMOT Department. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 60 Subsequent Events Subsequent Events Following FCMAT’s fieldwork, the district reported progress on the following items: • Assistant Director, Custodial, Grounds, and Transportation Services Position: The district hired an assistant director, custodial, grounds and transportation services, with an effective start date of November 13, 2023. This hiring was approved at the November 9, 2023 regu- lar board meeting. • Hybrid Supervision Model for Custodial Staff: The district adopted a hybrid supervision model for custodial staff. According to a presentation provided to FCMAT by the district, a principal’s meeting was held on February 12, 2024, where information on managing and supervising custodial staff was discussed. The presentation outlines principals’ responsibil- ities concerning custodial staff, which include collaborating with them to meet site needs, holding regular meetings to review daily work schedules and special projects, and evaluat- ing all custodians with input from the facilities operations manager. • 10-Year Facilities Master Plan: The governing board awarded a contract to develop a 10-year facilities master plan at its May 23, 2024 board meeting. Per the board action item, the plan will cover the years 2024 through 2034 and will be developed with services ren- dered between June 2024 through June 2025. • Citizens Bond Oversight Committee: The Citizens Bond Oversight Committee has resumed its meetings. According to the minutes from the February 6, 2024 meeting, the committee reviewed its bylaws, the ballot language for Measures K and N, and received updates on projects and remaining bond balances for these measures. At the March 14, 2024 governing board meeting, the assistant superintendent, business services reported that the committee had reviewed the latest financial audits related to Measures K and N and found them to have unmodified opinions. However, this action is not directly reflected in the committee’s minutes, and a written annual compliance opinion by the committee was not provided to FCMAT. The status of these efforts has not been assessed by FCMAT beyond the review of the supporting docu- mentation mentioned above. On August 8, 2024, the district provided FCMAT with site square footage, as well as the number of teach- ers, students and classrooms. District administrators reported that this data was collected for use in devel- oping the facilities master plan. Although the data was provided after the completion of fieldwork and FCMAT cannot verify its accuracy, the administrators requested that FCMAT apply the APPA maintenance and grounds and CASBO custodial staffing models to develop a staffing estimate for the district. Full details of the data used in the staffing models and the calculation results can be found in Appendix A. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 61 Appendices Organizational Culture and Communication Appendices Appendix A — Subsequent Event Staffing Estimates Appendix B — District Organizational Charts Appendix C — Study Agreement Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 62 Appendices Appendix A Appendix A Subsequent Event Staffing Estimates On August 8, 2024, the district provided FCMAT with data collected for the development of a facilities master plan. Because the data was provided after fieldwork was completed, FCMAT could not verify its accuracy. However, district administrators requested that FCMAT apply the APPA maintenance [13] and grounds staffing models [19], as well as the California Association of School Business Officials (CASBO) cus- todial staffing model [18], to develop staffing estimates for the district. The table below shows the results of these staffing models by school site, along with a districtwide total. Custodial full-time equivalent (FTE) staffing is displayed in two columns: one showing the results as orig- inally calculated, and the other showing the results rounded to the nearest quarter FTE to provide a practical allocation at each site. Grounds FTE staffing was calculated at APPA Level 3: Moderate-level Maintenance [19], while Maintenance FTE staffing was calculated at APPA Level 3: Managed Care [13]. Table 1. Staffing Estimates for the District’s Custodial, Grounds and Maintenance Units Custodial Grounds Maintenance Calculated Rounded Calculated Calculated District Site Results in FTE Results in FTE Results in FTE Results in FTE Abbott Elementary School 2.40 2.50 0.40 0.88 Keller Elementary School 1.92 2.00 0.52 0.55 Lincoln Elementary School 2.15 2.25 0.36 0.57 Lindbergh Elementary School 2.47 2.50 0.59 0.77 Lugo Elementary School 2.17 2.25 0.19 0.61 Mark Twain Elementary School 2.38 2.50 0.28 0.73 Marshall Elementary School 2.04 2.00 0.49 0.50 Roosevelt Elementary School 2.29 2.25 0.29 0.62 Rosa Parks Elementary School 2.30 2.25 0.68 0.77 Washington Elementary School 2.31 2.25 0.22 0.66 Will Rogers Elementary School 2.85 2.75 0.24 0.81 Wilson Elementary School 2.56 2.50 0.16 0.80 Cesar Chavez Middle School 4.54 4.50 1.19 1.59 Hosler Middle School 3.97 4.00 0.34 1.15 Firebaugh High School 8.30 8.25 1.17 2.93 Lynwood High School Bullis Campus 11.56 11.50 1.28 4.37 Lynwood High School Imperial Campus — — — — Vista High School 2.06 2.00 0.13 0.41 Lynwood Adult School 0.79 0.75 0.03 0.07 Lindbergh Early Childhood Education 0.30 0.25 0.10 0.05 Will Rogers Early Childhood Education 0.30 0.25 0.09 0.04 District Office 0.37 0.25 0.07 0.51 Service Center 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.34 Central Kitchen — — — 0.12 Total District FTE 60.03 59.75 8.84 19.85 Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 63 Appendices Appendix A Sources: District-provided data, CASBO custodial staffing model [18], and APPA maintenance [13] and grounds staffing models [19]. Note: Data was not provided for Lynwood High School Imperial or, except for maintenance, the Central Kitchen. For details on the data provided by the district, the assumptions used in the calculations, and the limitations and qualifiers related to these staffing estimates, please see the sections below. Custodial Unit Staffing Estimate Assumptions On August 8, 2024, the district provided FCMAT with the data shown in Table 2 below to estimate custodial staffing by site using the CASBO custodial staffing model [18]. Table 2. Number of Teachers, Students and Classroom Units and Square Footage of Education Space by District Site Number of Number of Square Footage of District Site Teachers Number of Students Classroom Units Educational Space Abbott Elementary School 21 457 20 86,389 Keller Elementary School 19 454 21 53,518 Lincoln Elementary School 17 575 28 56,054 Lindbergh Elementary School 24 563 24 75,752 Lugo Elementary School 18 348 18 60,746 Mark Twain Elementary School 23 504 25 72,826 Marshall Elementary School 22 574 23 48,580 Roosevelt Elementary School 26 481 26 61,910 Rosa Parks Elementary School 15 386 15 76,414 Washington Elementary 24 522 24 66,394 Will Rogers Elementary School 30 659 30 80,896 Wilson Elementary School 26 503 26 79,649 Cesar Chavez Middle School 36 840 36 162,765 Hosler Middle School 36 913 36 117,376 Firebaugh High School 66 1553 66 292,583 Lynwood High School Bullis Campus 87 1860 87 452,740 Lynwood High School Imperial Campus — — — — Vista High School 14 210 14 39,974 Lynwood Adult School — — 10 7,168 Lindbergh Early Childhood Education 6 100 3 3,600 Will Rogers Early Childhood Education 6 110 3 2,745 District Office 0 0 0 265,65 Service Center 0 0 0 — Central Kitchen — — — — Total 516 11,612 535 1,924,644 Source: District-provided data. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 64 Appendices Appendix A Note: The district provided only partial data for Lynwood Adult School and did not provide any data for Lynwood High School Imperial Campus or the Central Kitchen. Where data was not provided, FCMAT used a zero value in the calculations. In addition, FCMAT used the following assumptions to complete the staffing model: • A community use factor was applied to the following school sites: Abbott Elementary, Keller Elementary, Lincoln Elementary, Lindbergh Elementary, Lugo Elementary, Mark Twain Elementary, Marshall Elementary, Roosevelt Elementary, Rosa Parks Elementary, Washington Elementary, Will Rogers Elementary, Wilson Elementary, Cesar Chavez Middle, Hosler Middle, Firebaugh High School, Lynwood High School Bullis Campus, Vista High School and Lynwood Adult School. • A small site allowance factor for sites serving fewer than 450 students was applied to the following school sites: Lugo Elementary, Rosa Parks Elementary and Vista High School. Grounds Unit Staffing Estimate Assumptions On August 8, 2024, the district provided FCMAT with the data shown in Table 3 below to estimate grounds staffing by site using the APPA grounds staffing model [19]. Table 3. Square Footage or Acreage of Application Area by District Site Baseball/ Football/ Flower Shrub Softball Soccer Open Main Turf Beds Areas Fields Fields Turf District Site In square feet In acreage Abbott Elementary School 47,802 442 1,948 — — — Keller Elementary School 32,244 — 13,810 — — — Lincoln Elementary School 42,044 — 2,700 — — — Lindbergh Elementary School 75,348 — 2,490 — — — Lugo Elementary School 21,700 — 1,510 — — — Mark Twain Elementary School 21,970 — 2,830 — — 2.25 Marshall Elementary School 52,980 — 5,210 — — — Roosevelt Elementary School 35,736 — 1,350 — — — Rosa Parks Elementary School 70,610 — 8,073 — — — Washington Elementary School 25,490 — — — — 1.40 Will Rogers Elementary School 29,710 — — — — 1.00 Wilson Elementary School 14,210 — 2,150 — — 0.60 Cesar Chavez Middle School 87,188 8,073 10,880 — — — Hosler Middle School 10,860 5,200 2,000 — — — Firebaugh High School 42,200 — 9,610 1.00 2.75 — Lynwood High School Bullis Campus 31,800 — 8,280 2.30 2.10 — Lynwood High School Imperial Campus — — — — — — Vista High School 2,760 2,300 400 — — — Lynwood Adult School — 700 — — — — Lindbergh Early Childhood Education 10,048 750 — — — — Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 65 Appendices Appendix A Baseball/ Football/ Flower Shrub Softball Soccer Open Main Turf Beds Areas Fields Fields Turf District Site In square feet In acreage Will Rogers Early Childhood Education 12,000 — — — — — District Office 10,100 — — — — — Service Center 2,800 — — — — — Central Kitchen — — — — — — District Total 679,600 17,465 73,241 3.30 4.85 5.25 Source: District-provided data. Note: The district provided partial data for each site, except for Lynwood High School Imperial Campus and the Central Kitchen, for which no data was provided. Where data was not provided, FCMAT used a zero value in the calculations. In addition, FCMAT used the following assumptions to complete the staffing model: Grounds services will be provided at APPA Level 3: Moderate-level Maintenance [19]. • The growing season for the Los Angeles/Long Beach area is considered 52 weeks per year because the area does not typically receive frost. This is an increase from the general value of 30 weeks per year in the base APPA staffing model. • Supervision, administration and clerical support estimates are not included in APPA’s staff- ing model. • APPA’s base staffing model includes two hours of nonproduction time per day for travel, training, breaks and leave. The district’s actual production work hours per day may vary. Although the types of equipment and scenarios are finite, there are many combinations that can be exam- ined [19]. Estimates are based on a predefined set of tasks for each area, performed at a predefined fre- quency, either weekly or seasonally, as modeled in the APPA Grounds Guidelines Model. These predefined items form the foundation for a working management guideline. Additional analysis can be conducted with more customized data, including identifying specific areas of grounds requiring varying levels of attention. Maintenance Unit Staffing Estimate Assumptions On August 8, 2024, the district provided FCMAT with the data shown in Table 4 below to estimate mainte- nance staffing by site using the APPA maintenance staffing model, aggregate FTE method [13]. Table 4. Classroom, Laboratory and Office/Administrative Space Square Footage by District Site District Site Classroom Laboratory Office/Administrative Space Abbott Elementary School 86,389 — 2,556 Keller Elementary School 53,518 — 1,526 Lincoln Elementary School 56,054 — 1,220 Lindbergh Elementary School 75,752 — 1,734 Lugo Elementary School 60,746 — 1,220 Mark Twain Elementary School 72,826 — 1,236 Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 66 Appendices Appendix A District Site Classroom Laboratory Office/Administrative Space Marshall Elementary School 48,580 — 1,800 Roosevelt Elementary School 61,910 — 920 Rosa Parks Elementary School 76,414 — 1,428 Washington Elementary School 66,394 — 596 Will Rogers Elementary School 80,896 — 1,056 Wilson Elementary School 79,649 — 1,200 Cesar Chavez Middle School 162,765 — 2,200 Hosler Middle School 117,376 — 1,800 Firebaugh High School 292,583 11,120 5,753 Lynwood High School Bullis Campus 452,740 6,300 4,928 Lynwood High School Imperial Campus — — — Vista High School 39,974 — 1,927 Lynwood Adult School 7,168 — 352 Lindbergh Early Childhood Education 3,600 — 1,920 Will Rogers Early Childhood Education 2,745 — 915 District Office — — 59,128 Service Center — — 39,122 Central Kitchen — — — District Total 1,898,079 17,420 148,537 Source: District-provided data. Note: Figures shown in square footage. The district provided partial data for each site, except for Lynwood High School Imperial Campus and the Central Kitchen, for which no data was provided. Where data was not provided, FCMAT used a zero value in the calculations. In addition, FCMAT used the following assumptions to complete the staffing model: • Maintenance services will be provided at APPA Level 3: Managed Care [13]. • A general adjustment factor was applied to the reported gross square footage to account for various campus spaces. The modifiers used were: 1.50 for classroom square footage, 1.64 for laboratory square footage, and 1.70 for office square footage. The results may vary depending on the relevance of these generalized factors to the district. • A campus size FTE adjustment factor was applied to school sites with total square footage of less than 100,000, 250,000 and 500,000. • A Carnegie classification FTE adjustment factor of 0.05 was applied to all calculated FTE due to the district’s classification as a K-12 school district under the Carnegie system. • FTE adjustment factors were not applied for the following reasons due to limited information: • The age of individual campuses since last significant renovation. • The quantity of fundamentally different building systems at each site. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 67 Appendices Appendix A • Facility condition, based on cost of needed or outstanding repairs, renewals or upgrades, and the current replacement value. • An adjustment was applied to the resulting FTE to convert from the APPA general available productive hours per year of 1,760 to the district-specific value of 1,635 hours per year [13]. This district value was calculated based on 260 paid days per year, less 18 vacation days (assuming an average employee longevity of 5-10 years), 12 sick days, 15 holidays, and 30 minutes of break time per day worked. The aggregate FTE method is a simplified model that calculates an aggregated total number of trades per- sonnel required to staff a school district [13]. This FTE should be allocated among major trades as needed to best support the district’s facilities and equipment, considering factors such as building types, age, pur- pose, and system complexity. While more detailed calculation methods are available, they can be cost-pro- hibitive due to the extensive data required. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 68 Appendices Appendix B Appendix B Facilities, Maintenance, Operations and Transportation Department Organizational Chart Assistant Superintendent, Business Services Facilities Project 1 FTE Manager 1 FTE Senior Director of Facilities Planning and Development 1 FTE Secretary Office Assistant Facilities Maintenance Services, Locksmith Group Assistant Director of 1 FTE II Representative/ Logistics and Compliance Custodial, Grounds, and 1 FTE Williams Liaison Supervisor Transportation Services 1 FTE 1 FTE Senior 1 FTE Locksmith 1 FTE Trade Groups Transportation Unit Roofers 12 FTE HVAC Mechanics Locksmith Maintenance Workers 1 FTE Custodial Unit Carpenters 79 FTE Plumbers Electricians Grounds Group Painters 11 FTE Welders Glaziers 29 FTE   Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 69 Appendices Appendix B Maintenance Organizational Chart Maintenance Services, Logistics and Compliance Supervisor 1 FTE HVAC Roofer Maintenance Carpenter Plumber Electrician Painter Welder Glazier Mechanic Group Worker Group Group Group Group Group Group Group Group Roofer Senior Maintenance Senior Senior Painter Glazier 1 FTE HVAC Worker II Carpenter Plumber Electrician 3 FTE Senior 1 FTE 4 FTE Welder Mechanic 7 FTE 1 FTE 1 FTE 1 FTE 1 FTE Plumber Carpenter 2 FTE HVAC 2 FTE Welder Mechanic Irrigation 2 FTE 2 FTE Specialist 1 FTE     Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 70 Appendices Appendix B Custodial, Grounds and Transportation Organizational Chart Assistant Director of Custodial, Grounds, and Transportation Services 1 FTE School Sites, Principal Custodial Unit Facilities Operations Facilities Operations Facilities Operations Facilities Operations Manager Manager Manager Manager Plant Manager: 1 FTE 1 FTE 1 FTE 1 FTE Lynwood High 1 FTE Lynwood High at Bullis Roosevelt Elementary Abbott Elementary Firebaugh High 10 FTE 4 FTE 3 FTE Senior Custodians: 7 FTE Firebaugh High Lugo Elementary Mark Twain Lynwood High at Imperial 1 FTE Adult School 1 FTE 3 FTE Elementary 2 FTE 4 FTE Hosler Middle 1 FTE Will Rogers Elementary Cesar Chavez Middle Hosler Middle 2 FTE Wilson Elementary Cesar Chavez Middle 4 FTE 6 FTE 3 FTE 1 FTE Child Development Custodian Marshall Elementary Helen Keller Elementary 1 FTE Rosa Parks 2 FTE 2 FTE Elementary (day and midday) 3 FTE Lindbergh Elementary Vista High District Office 4 FTE 2 FTE 2 FTE Service Center/ Lincoln Elementary Unassigned FTE Central Kitchen Pathway High 3 FTE 6 FTE 1 FTE 1 FTE     Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 71 Appendices Appendix B Custodial Unit Organizational Chart Assistant Director of Custodial, Grounds, and Transportation Services 1 FTE School Sites, Principal Custodial Unit Facilities Operations Facilities Operations Facilities Operations Facilities Operations Manager Manager Manager Manager Plant Manager: 1 FTE 1 FTE 1 FTE 1 FTE Lynwood High 1 FTE Lynwood High at Bullis Roosevelt Elementary Abbott Elementary Firebaugh High 10 FTE 4 FTE 3 FTE Senior Custodians: 7 FTE Firebaugh High Lugo Elementary Mark Twain Lynwood High at Imperial 1 FTE Adult School 1 FTE 3 FTE Elementary 2 FTE 4 FTE Hosler Middle 1 FTE Will Rogers Elementary Cesar Chavez Middle Hosler Middle 2 FTE Wilson Elementary Cesar Chavez Middle 4 FTE 6 FTE 3 FTE 1 FTE Child Development Custodian Marshall Elementary Helen Keller Elementary 1 FTE Rosa Parks 2 FTE 2 FTE Elementary (day and midday) 3 FTE Lindbergh Elementary Vista High District Office 4 FTE 2 FTE 2 FTE Service Center/ Lincoln Elementary Unassigned FTE Pathway High Central Kitchen 3 FTE 6 FTE 1 FTE 1 FTE     Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 72 Appendices Appendix C Appendix C Study Agreement Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 73 Appendices Appendix C Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 74 Appendices Appendix C Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 75 Appendices Appendix C Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 76 Appendices Appendix C 5/9/23 Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 77 Works Cited Works Cited [1] California Department of Education, "2023-24 Enrollment by Subgroup for Charter and Non- Charter Schools," [Online]. Available: https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrCharterSub. aspx?cds=1964774&agglevel=district&year=2023-24&ro=y. [Accessed 9 July 2024]. [2] California Department of Education, "School District Unduplicated Pupil Percentage," [Online]. Available: https://ias.cde.ca.gov/apportionment/ApportionmentReport.aspx?schooly- earid=2023&RptType=P2&CertType=Non&Param1=65&Param2=3&Param3=272&Param4=19&P aram5=357&Param6=&Param7=. [Accessed 17 July 2024]. [3] California Department of Education, "2022-23 Enrollment by Subgroup for Charter and Non- Charter Schools," [Online]. Available: https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrCharterSub. aspx?cds=1964691&agglevel=district&year=2022-23&ro=y. [Accessed 17 July 2024]. [4] A. Kwok, M. Fretz, K. Van Den Wymelenberg, J. Seely, M. Coronado, J. Lee, A. Gottlin, S. Feinberg, N. Steeves and N. Pfeifer, "Impact of school facilities on student Engagement and Learning," Net Zed Case Study Lab, 2021. Available: https://netzedlab.uoregon.edu/ impact-of-school-facilities-on-student-engagement-and-learning/. [5] National Education Association, “9 Ways to Improve Educator Working Conditions,” 30 September 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.nea.org/resource-library/9-ways-improve-ed- ucator-working-conditions. [Accessed 19 July 2024]. [6] R. C. Wood, D. C. Thompson, L. O. Picus and D. I. Tharpe, Principles of School Business Management, Association of School Business Officials International, 1995. [7] McKinsey & Company., "About Us," 12 May 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.mckinsey. com/about-us/overview. [Accessed 12 July 2024]. [8] A. Acharya, R. Lieber, L. Seem and T. Welchman, "How to identify the right ‘spans of control’ for your organization," McKinsey & Company, 21 December 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www. mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/how-to-identi- fy-the-right-spans-of-control-for-your-organization. [Accessed 12 July 2024]. [9] A. L. Smith, "What are the benefits of cross training employees?," 1 March 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-benefits-cross-training-employees-aaron-l- smith-ph-d. [Accessed 15 April 2024]. [10] Coalition for Adequate School Housing, "cashnet.org," [Online]. Available: https://cashnet.org/. [Accessed 17 July 2024]. [11] California Department of Education, "SACS Minutes, October 2014, Attachment A," 6 May 2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/ac/ac/sacsminutes100714a.asp. [Accessed 12 July 2014]. [12] APPA, "APPA History," [Online]. Available: https://www.appa.org/about/appa-history/. [Accessed 15 April 2024]. [13] J. T. Becker and T. J. Weidner, Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Maintenance, 3rd ed., APPA, 2022, pp. 28-29, 34-37, 45. [14] California Department of Education, "Title 5, California Code of Regulations," 9 July 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/fa/sf/title5regs.asp. [Accessed 18 July 2024]. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 78 Works Cited [15] National Center for Education Statistics, "Chapter 5 Maintaining School Facilities and Grounds, Planning Guide for Maintaining School Facilities," February 2003. [Online]. Available: https:// nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/maintenance/chapter5.asp. [Accessed 15 April 2024]. [16] National Center for Education Statistics, "Chapter 4, Facility Data Elements, Facilities Information Management: A Guide for State and Local Education Agencies," July 2003. [Online]. Available: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/fim/ch_4_5.asp#t_5000. [Accessed 12 July 2024]. [17] California Association of School Business Officials, "About CASBO," 2023 April 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.casbo.org/casbo-you/about/. [Accessed 12 July 2024]. [18] California Association of School Business Officials, "CASBO’s Custodial Staffing Formula," 7 February 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.casbo.org/casbos-custodial-staffing-formula/. [Accessed 15 April 2024]. [19] J. T. Becker, R. M. Fournier and B. Rux, Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Grounds, 3rd ed., APPA, 2020, pp. 14-15, 31-51. [20] J. T. Becker, R. M. Fournier and B. Rux, APPA Custodial Guidelines Figure 2.1: Characteristics For Evaluating and Describing Levels of Custodial Service, APPA, 2020. [21] American National Standards Institute, "About ANSI," [Online]. Available: https://www.ansi.org/ about/introduction. [Accessed 17 July 2024]. [22] American National Standards Institute, "American National Standards (ANS) Introduction," [Online]. Available: https://www.ansi.org/american-national-standards/ans-introduction/over- view#introduction. [Accessed 17 July 2024]. [23] American National Standards Institute and Tree Care Industry Association, A300 Tree Care Standards, 2023. [24] California Department of Finance, "K-12 Education," 2022. [Online]. Available: https://ebudget. ca.gov/2022-23/pdf/Enacted/BudgetSummary/K-12Education.pdf. [Accessed 15 April 2024]. [25] Atlassian, "Importance of Documentation," [Online]. Available: https://www.atlassian.com/ work-management/knowledge-sharing/documentation/importance-of-documentation. [Accessed 15 April 2024]. [26] Ballotpedia, "California Proposition 39, Decrease Supermajority from Two-Thirds to 55% for School Bonds Amendment," [Online]. Available: https://ballotpedia.org/California_ Proposition_39,_Decrease_Supermajority_from_Two-Thirds_to_55%25_for_School_Bonds_ Amendment_(2000). [Accessed 15 April 2024]. [27] Office of Public School Construction, "School Facility Program Handbook," 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/-/media/Divisions/OPSC/Services/Guides-and-Resources/ SFP_Hdbk_ADA.pdf. [Accessed 15 April 2024]. [28] California Department of General Services, "Funding by Program," 30 June 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.dgsapps.dgs.ca.gov/OPSC/Dashboard/. [Accessed 12 July 2024]. [29] California Department of Education, "State Priority Related Resources," 24 February 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/statepriorityresources.asp. [Accessed 1 July 2024]. [30] California Department of Education, "LCAP Template Instructions," 2 August 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.cde.ca.gov/re/lc/templateinstructions.asp#Introduction. [Accessed 9 July 2024]. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 79 Works Cited [31] California Department of General Services, "State of California Facility Inspection Tool," April 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=- j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.dgs.ca.gov/-/media/Divisions/OPSC/Forms/Facility- Inspection-Tool---SAB-Approved-04-27-2022.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi2uqbz5IaHAxVSGDQIH- cv8AUsQFnoECBoQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1GAIHoveufrYqFiCTSnEKI. [Accessed 1 July 2024]. [32] EdSource, "Glossary," [Online]. Available: https://edsource.org/glossary. [Accessed 15 April 2024]. [33] Legislative Analyst’s Office, "Review of School Transportation in California," 25 February 2014. [Online]. Available: https://lao.ca.gov/reports/2014/education/school-transportation/ school-transportation-022514.aspx. [Accessed 15 April 2024]. [34] L. Sheppard, "12.2 Understanding Organizational Culture – Fundamentals of Leadership," PressBooks, 2010. [Online]. Available: https://opentext.wsu.edu/organizational-behavior/ chapter/15-2-understanding-organizational-culture/. Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team Lynwood Unified School District 80