Skip to main content
Clown: Stop clowning around and finish that SARC report!

SDLA Compliance Resource

Check LCAP Content, Funding and Template Versions

Use an evidence checklist to test required LCAP content and funding alignment, and distinguish verified current requirements from pending next-cycle form changes.

  • LCAP & Accountability
  • Fiscal & Budget
  • Governance & Board Approval
  • English Learner Programs
  • Curriculum & Instruction
TimingDuring 2026–27 monitoring and 2027–28 development; confirm the final next-cycle template before adoption
Applies toLCAP-producing LEAs; conditional requirements depend on pupils, schools, funding and support status
Authority and scopeState LCAP content requirements and applicable review standards; this checklist is not a county-created filing

In Plain Language: Use an evidence checklist to test required LCAP content and funding alignment, and distinguish verified current requirements from pending next-cycle form changes.

Why this matters

An apparently complete template can omit conditional actions, student groups or funding explanations that apply to the LEA.

Primary ownership

LCAP and fiscal leads with EL, school-improvement, site, HR and data owners

Required distinctions and controls

  • Version control: record the template, instructions and action-table version. The current index covers 2024–27; do not represent the September 2026 revision draft or a future November meeting as a completed 2027–28 adoption.
  • EL/LTEL: under current instructions, 30 or more English learners and/or 15 or more long-term English learners trigger language-acquisition and teacher professional-learning actions. When both thresholds apply, address both groups.
  • Low performance and assistance: map required school/group actions to the governing Dashboard cohort; the current 2024–27 instructions use the 2023 Dashboard. Confirm the next-cycle cohort in the final instructions instead of simply copying that year forward. Include actions implementing applicable technical assistance.
  • Contributing actions: test required explanations of increased/improved services, intended student groups, action design and effectiveness; identify the required metric(s) for LEA-wide contributing actions. Reconcile proportionality, planned improvement percentages, concentration add-on and carryover to the action tables and fiscal evidence.
  • Equity Multiplier: identify every generating school and applicable focus goal, targeted-group metrics and educator issues. LREBG: link needs assessment, funded actions, research rationale, amounts and metrics; perform the statutory 2027–28 strategy-effectiveness review.
  • Review routing: district LCAP review belongs to the county superintendent, with the single-district-county exception. COE LCAPs follow SPI review. Ordinary charter submission does not create an authorizer LCAP approval requirement; CSI prompts have a separate applicable review pathway.

From source versions to a traceable LCAP content and funding check: the SDLA ITO workflow

A traceability matrix shows each requirement's applicability, plan location, evidence, and reviewer disposition. This SDLA ITO (Input, Transformation, Output) graphic shows how frozen source versions, conditional pupil, school, and funding triggers, and group and school data become the source and version register, the content matrix, and the funding reconciliation.

SDLA ITO: eleven steps from frozen source versions, conditional pupil, school, and funding triggers, and group and school data, through building a traceability matrix, reconciling narrative, tables, and budget, and testing the annual analysis, to the source and version register, the content matrix, and the funding reconciliation.
Read down each column, then move to the next: Input identifies what to collect; Transformation covers building a traceability matrix, reconciling narrative, tables, and budget, and testing the annual analysis; Output covers the source and version register, the content matrix, and the funding reconciliation. Run during 2026–27 monitoring and 2027–28 development; confirm the final next-cycle template.

Open the full-size workflow graphic

Recommended LEA workflow

  1. Freeze the applicable source versions and list conditional pupil, school and funding triggers.
  2. Create a traceability matrix: requirement, applicability, plan section/action, metric, amount, evidence, reviewer and disposition.
  3. Reconcile narrative, tables and budget; document why any item is not applicable.
  4. Check annual analysis against implementation, expenditure and outcome evidence and route unresolved content/funding gaps to the responsible owner.
  5. Before 2027–28 adoption, compare the package to the final SBE-adopted forms and current statutory review criteria, update the matrix and retain the approved version.

Evidence to retain

  • Source/version register
  • Applicability and content matrix
  • Group/school data
  • Funding and carryover reconciliation
  • Annual-analysis and reviewer disposition

Official guidance and help

Return to the Annual Compliance Calendar

Reviewed October 21, 2026. Confirm the current agency instructions, applicable funding year, recipient scope, local policy and final submitted or approved state before acting. Recommended preparation steps support the named requirement and do not create an additional statewide filing deadline.