Lake Elsinore

... Un-ified-Sc::l1ool-0-i-strict--
Governing Board
Susan E. SCott
President
HeidiMatthies Dodd
Clerk
Jeanie Corral
Member
StanCrippen
Member
Tom Thomas
Member
Administration
Dr. FrankW. Passarella
Superintendent
Gregory]. Bowers
Assistant Superintendent
Facilities & Operations
Dr. Alain Guevara
Assistant Superintendent
Instructional Support
Services
George Landon
Assistant Superintendent
Fiscal Support services
KipMeyer
Assistant Superintendent
Personnel Support Services
Dr. Kathleen Roberts
Assistant Superintendent
Student Support Services
Michael Taylor
Executive Director
Fiscal Support services
SamWensel
Executive Director
Personnel Support Services
(951) 253-7000
545 Chaney Street
Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
www.leusd.k12.ca.us
13 December 2011
Dear Mr. Kilmer:
This letter is in response to the November 30,2011, request by the California
Department of Education (CD E) to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD)
to investigate allegations related to a complaint received by tDE related to processes
and procedures used by the school district around the enrollrrlent and disenrollment
of students and subsequent reporting of students as continuously enrolled at the
district and school site levels for state accountability purposes.
The Lake Elsinore Unified School District takes very seriously all aspects concerning
testing security and accountability, accurate reporting of demographic student data,
and the integrity of the state and federal accountability systems. The LEUSD utilizes
the results of the STAR testing program to make high stakes decisions, on a continual
basis, to improve and adjust the academic program of our school system, to evaluate
programs, and to enhance the learning opportunities of all students in the district. It
is essential that those results arise from fully accurate data and the district takes all
possible steps to ensure that the regulations outlined in the STAR District and Site
Coordinator's Manual are followed.
The Lake Elsinore Unified School District has conducted a thorough investigation into
these allegations in an effort to resolve the complaint. This investigation included
detailed analysesand explanation of each of the six (6) areas outlined in the CDE
request to the LEUSD. Please find the district's analyses and findings enclosed.
This investigation included analysis of the districts CBEDS enrollment in October
versus the student enrollment and students tested during state testing in the spring.
We also reviewed and provided explanation of the district's enrollment and
disenrollment policies and procedures related to how the schools within the district
document and report students entering and exiting the schools and district. We
have evaluated and compared the rate of school and district mobility ofthe LEUSD to
other districts in Riverside County. We have also compared the mobility rates of
each of the school districts in RiversideCounty to the results of the 2010 United
States Census Bureau, which documents residential mobility at various levels,
including by school district boundary. Our investigation included a review ofthe
STAR District and Site Coordinator's Manual, Appendix K, and compared the
regulations outlined in that section to the district's practices in documenting and
reporting students as continuously enrolled at the school and district levels. The
district has also reviewed the STAR District and Site Coordinator's Manual regulations
regarding student participation in a migrant education program and provided
explanation as to why the LEUSD has not marked students as participants in such a
program. We also provided analyses of districts in Riverside County to determine the
number of students each district reports as migrant education program students.
Based on extensive analyses and review of student data, documentation, and district
practices and procedures, in relation to regulations outlined in the STAR District and
Site Coordinator's Manual, the Lake Elsinore Unified School District is able to verify
that the student data reported for state testing purposes, including that related to
student mobility and migrant education program participation, are consistent and
accurate with the reporting guidelines of student data used in the state and federal
accountability systems.
As Assistant Superintendent of Instructional Support Services for Lake Elsinore
Unified School District, I have found no misconduct on behalf of any LEUSD employee
or contracted testing consultant, related to STAR testing and accountability. Upon a
thorough investigation I have found that no district employee knowingly disenrolled
and then reenrolled students between the CBEDS reporting date and the first day of
testing without cause. All STAR testing guidelines and protocols were upheld.
If it would be helpful, we would be happy to come to the Department to fully discuss
and clarify our findings. Please note that the LEUSD district offices will be closed
from December 19, 2011 through January 9, 2012. If you have additional questions
or require further information in order to resolvethe complaint made to the CDE,
please feel free to contact me at any time.
Sincerely,
Dr. Alain Guevara
Assistant Superintendent
Instructional Support Services
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
alain.guevara@leusd.k12.ca.us
951-253-7058 (office)
7 (cell)
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
_._. __... __ __ .... . .__._ __. .
Contents
1: Analysis ofthe difference between the annual district enrollment and the number tested for 2007 to
2011 2
2: Explanation of the district's disenrollment (and enrollment) procedures andany procedural changes
3 since 2007
3: Verification that the district followed all the procedures outlined in STAR District and Site
Coordinator's Manual Appendix K (Attachment One) 4
4: Analysis of the rate of school and district mobility (Attachment Two) 5
5: Comparison and analysis of the rate of school and district mobility between Lake Elsinore and
the other districts in Riverside County 5
6: Explanation why the district has not reported any migrant students from 2007 to 2011 14
Attachment 1: Student Mobility Tracking Form 15
Attachment 2: Completed Student Mobility Tracking Forms 16
Page 1 of17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
_______Bespanse_tQ.:.CQmRlaint Misconduct-Testing and Accountability
_W_, __ _ __... _
1: Analysis of the difference between the annual district
enrollment and the number tested for 2007 to 2011.
A few potential factors were noticed that likely account for the difference between what was reported
by the district to CBEDS in October and the number enrolled reported through STAR and CAHSEE testing.
Please see the narrative response and table below.
First, upon examining the district enrollment in CBEDS, it was noticed that the enrollment includes
Sycamore Academy for Science and Cultural Arts {SASCAL the district's independent charter. For
accountability purposes, scores from students testing at SASCA are not included in the district's API or
AYP, because they are not a dependent charter. The enrollment as of the first day of testing comes from
the AYP page of the Accountability Progress Report (APR) which would not Include SASCA students. This
accounts for a 195 student difference between the enrollment reported by the state through CBEDS and
the enrollment reported by the state on the (APR).
Additionally, the CBEDS enrollment includes all students, grades K-12. The enrollment reported by the
state on the APR only includes students in tested AYP grade levels (grades 2-8 and 10). When removing
the SASCA students and students in the non-tested grade levels, the difference between the October
CBEDS enrollment and number enrolled the first day of testing is 350 students. This difference is
accounted for by a decrease in district enrollment between October 2010 and April 2011 in the AYP
testing grades. Similar trends have been seen each year between CBEDS reporting in October and state
testing in the spring.
We would not necessarily expect the number of students reported to be enrolled at CBEDS versus
testing to be identical between October and when STAR testing is administered. When looking more
closely into our enters and exits, we found the district had 3,622 students enter the district between
CBEDS and testing and 4232 students left the district between CBEDS and testing. Thus, the difference
in enrollment from CBEDS to STAR testing was 610 students. Ofthe 610 students, 252 were in non
tested grade levels, leaving a difference of 358 tested students between CBEDS and STAR testing. Thus,
the difference between the CBEDS enrollment the enrollment the district had at the time of testing is
eight students. This difference of 8 students could be accounted for by students in non-public schools,
who would be included in the APR enrollment, but not in the district's enrollment.
Page2 of 17
December 8,2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
_______ _ __ n DJstric!-M due!=-Tes!i nd t a _
2: Explanation of the district's disenrollment (and enrollment)
procedures and any procedural changes since 2007.
The district disenrolls a student based on evidence of the following criteria:
The student died while enrolled in school.
The parent/guardian withdrew the student to enroll in another school or district.
The parent/guardian withdrew the student to home school.
The student was placed in the CAYouth Authority
The student was expelled from the district with no further particlpatlonln the district.
The student left the school and met the state criteria as a dropout.
While the enrollment and disenrollment policies of the district have not changed since 2007, there has
been a procedural change in how the district tracks students who enroll and disenroll from a school site
or the district. Beginning in the 2007-2008 school year, the district required all school sites to document
and submit, on a weekly basis, the names of all students who enter and all students who exit the school,
as well as the date the student is entering or exiting the school. The schools also submit where the
student has come from or is going to attend. This information is provided by the parent/guardian
enrolling or disenrolling the student. Attachment 1 is a sample of the district mobility tracking form
provided to the school sites and returned to the district each week. Attachment 2 shows two completed
student mobility tracking forms completed by the attendance clerks. These lists are ernailed or faxed to
the district office eachTuesday by noon. The district enters the information obtained weekly by the
school sites into a spreadsheet. Additionally, the district prints out the form from each site and retains
it. Data from the school sites are used for the STAR and CAHSEE pre-id files. Students who have entered
a school from a different district between the October CBEDS date and the first day of testing are not
considered continuously enrolled for state testing purposes. Students who enter a school from another
school site within the district are considered continuously enrolled at the district level but not at the
school level.
Page 3 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
------- Misconduct-Testing and Accountability
------_._-'------">_.-.. .. _-_.__ --- -_. ---_..._.. .._---_.,
3: Verification that the district followed all the procedures
outlined in STAR District and Site Coordinator's Manual
Appendix K (Attachment One).
The STAR District and Site Coordinator's Manual Appendix Krequires that districts mark "Yes" at the
school level if a student is continuously enrolled in the school from the CBEDS enrollment reporting date
in October through the first day of STAR testing and mark "No" if the student enters the school between
the CBEDS enrollment reporting date in October and the first day of STAR testing. At the district level,
Appendix K requires districts to mark "Yes" if a student is continuously enrolled in the district from the
CBEDS enrollment reporting date in October through the first day of STAR testing and mark "No" if the
student enters the district between the CBEDS enrollment reporting date in October and the first day of
l'
STAR testing. Appendix Kspecifies that districts evidence of withdrawl includes, but may not be limited
to, the following:
The student died while enrolled in school.
The parent/guardian withdrew the student to enroll in another school or district.
The parent/guardian withdrew the student to home school.
The student was placed in the CAYouth Authority
All such criteria are used by the district to withdraw students from enrollment. The Lake Elsinore
Unified School District documents students entering and exiting district schools on a weekly basis. The
documentation is obtained by parents/guardians providing information to the school sites and includes
the date of entry or exit, the students name and where the student is coming from (if entering the
school) or going to (if leaving the school). The primary source of withdrawal from the district is when
the parent/guardian withdrew the student to enroll in another school or district. The schools and
districts do not drop students due to extended absence caused by illness, vacation, or a temporary move
when the student does not enter in another school or district. Students are only recorded as entering or
exiting a school at the time of enrollment or disenrollment.
The documentation of students entering and exiting schools and the associated tracking allows the Lake
Elsinore Unified School District to verify that the district followed all procedures outlined in the STAR
District and Site Coordinator's Manual, Appendix K, related to CBEDS enrollment.
Page 4 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
____________. of District Misconduct- .__. . . _
4: Analysis of the rate of school and district mobility
(Attachment Two)
5: Comparison and analysis of the rate of school and district
mobility between Lake Elsinore usn and the other districts in
Riverside County.
Because Concerns 4 and 5 are related in terms of our analyses, we have combined the responses to
these two concerns. First, we provide background as to potential sources of errors and how the
district handles such errors. Next, we provide information as to our ongoing process for assessing
validity of our mobility tracking. The last two sections provide an analysis of our district mobility in
comparison to other districts in Riverside County and an analysis of our school mobility by site.
Accurate Demographic Data
In LEUSD, we pride ourselves on closely monitoring all data to increase the integrity of our data. In
addition to concerns with accuracy of mobility, we have noted that data inaccuracies in student
information systems are not uncommon, due in a large part, to human error. In LEUSD, we have found
and fixed many errors that could impact accountability results and work diligently to correct such errors
to maintain the integrity ofthe accountability system. This is not done to specifically impact test scores;
the corrections to errors are made so we have an accurate depiction of how our district, schools, and
programs are performing in terms of student achievement. Without accurate data, we cannot know
where to provide support to better instruction and ultimately allow student achievement to increase.
Some errors that we have found and corrected include English learners marked as speaking English only,
R-FEP students marked proficient/advanced in language arts for three years after only one year,
students receiving special education services without a disability code, missing dates for students exiting
special education services, wrong or missing race/ethnicity codes, incorrect or missing parent education
levels, and incorrect student mobility information. These types of errors are not unique to LEUSD.
Because we have noticed errors both internally at LEUSD and we are aware of similar errors reported by
other districts, we believe it is important to take great measures to provide the most accurate data
possible. We make every attempt to provide the state accurate data by the time students take
assessments. We do this by working closely with Key Data Systems to merge external data, identify
errors, correct data, submit pre-IDs, continue to collect/verify student data after pre-IDs are submitted,
review each individual student's demographic record being submitted to the state, and utilize extended
data corrections window to update/correct data through the last day of testing in May.
Another way we attempt to provide accurate data is through tracking student mobility. We understand
that we track our mobility differently than most other districts. In fact to our knowledge, LEUSD is
Page 5 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
..__ of District Misconduct-Testing and Accountability
.. __ ._,__ * . . ,
possibly the only district that does not rely solely on its Student Information System (SIS) to gather data
about student mobility. Most districts rely on canned extracts from their SIS, which are typically the
source of data inaccuracies due to human error. As stated in our response to question 2, we rely on
simple, weekly reports that come directly from our attendance clerks to determine whether a student is
continuously enrolled or not (CBEDS Yes or 1\10).
Validation of LEUSD Mobility Rates
In addition to following our mobility trends within the district and across the county, we have taken
measures to verify the accuracy of what we report to the state both internally and through external
sources. We have interviewed school staff, including principals, teachers, and office staff as an informal
check-and-balance. When interviewing teachers, some have reported that theirdassrooms turned over
by half or more within a single school year. This has been echoed by principals other staff members
at schools who interact with their students on a daily basis. All staff interviewed stated their school
mobility rates were in line with what they expected considering their school site. Additionally, both the
principal and clerk providing the report sign off as to the accuracy of their mobility tracking report each
week.
We have also looked to outside sources, such asthe US CensusBureau, to examine the validity of our
mobility rates. Through many surveys, the Census Bureau reports data for a wide variety of geographic
types, including by school district (see diagram below for reporting structure). For the purposes of
validating our mobility rates, we examined results from the American Community Survey.
The American Community Survey (ACS) is an annual national survey collected monthly
which provides communities with reliable and timely demographic, housing, social, and
economic data every year.
Annual data on Migration is used to determine the extent of residential mobility of the
population for the U.S., states, metropolitan areas, and more specific geographical areas for the
given survey year. The US Census Residential Mobility is also disaggregated by school district
boundary. Data are available from 2000 to the present.
(http://www.census.qovlhheslmiqrationldatalacs.htmll
Survey results show the percent of people that live in the same house as they did the prior year. This is
similar to school districts' measures of mobility.
Page 6 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
Response to: Complaint and Allegations of District lVIisconduct-Testing and Accountability
Page 7 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
_____ Re.?-.ponse to: Complaint and Allegations of District and .
\ Lake El5inor.e untnee School OI5tr1et, Californii
sejecteo Social me Untied Stain; 2006-2009 0
OJlta 100&-2D09AmerlC1lI'1Community Survey s-teer fatlmllle&
Survey: American Communrty Survey
'...cIII.fQlXl'lllPll . .l.lJ/Vllil.ll.lI., . FlIl1Dly. .

H/)lIJIlI;V.lt1I.n1 cern. UIillIJfI.,
6ufJ14 Raoi, 0rQIr..Hwsr'9 urss..
HOTE.A1tl1Wj1n ,,,. CorTVIJur.llY v.csJ 1"<0lIl ...
l'5I 1M- 6lt'aJl.Il Pw.bt>on E.ltll'nillfll !:hit dI5Hf\'I<'I.J1.i'1 tile
01 tM !>JoWl,?" J' r,JI.. r .Q,'!>l!! lIM"l i1r>;l cl r.rJ'4"-,,;

FDr morllrllJ)mUl.cm p'oUl;loor., .aim"""'; film!. 1M o'"nr<lof\S.ee
?,..-""I14lr.ocl9lCq\.


ncta Profile
t RnUlb
Source:
As can be seen in the screen shot from the US
Census Website below, the ACS shows that
80.8% of residents within the LEUSD
boundaries lived in the same house one year
prior (+/- 1.9%). When considering the ACS's
margin of error, LEUSD's reported mobility
(79%) is the same as what the residents
reported on to the US Census Bureau on the
ACS. While it is possible that some of the
movement was within the district boundaries,
the bulk of movement in the districts is outside
<
of the district (LEUSD reports 74% school-level
mobility, slightly lower than the census
number). Additionally, LEUSD has a significant
number of students who change schools
within the district during the school year for
various reasons (e.g., spots open up at
impacted sites, parental choice, move to
continuation school), which could explain the
slight difference between school mobility rates
and what the census reports.
When examining the ACS results for other
districts in Riverside County, LEUSD was the
only district that reported the same mobility
httn:!!factfinder.census.l!ov!servlet!ADPGeoSearchBvListServlet?ds name=ACS 2009 SYR GOO & lanl!=en& ts=34141526710SSource
RESIDENCE 1 YEAR AGO
Diiierelll '!lou:! il'l tile U.S.
Population 1 year and over
Same bouse
+/.1.38<11 1ll7.:994

,X
+/-1.S
Sam;;, +1-, .6
Dliierenl county
Sam'f state
+--_'_7.,--205
6.0051
+/-1,299 0.7%

+/-1.2
+i-U
-----,
_
O1fierent state _____________+_ +1-235,
Abmad
___, i
PLACE OF BIRTH
Total pOflulation 1'llB.74}3! +1-1,99;..:.7+,...=;=-c: (Xt
liati,':: W,7(57! +/-2.011 +!-,.O
Born"ir-,
,'>&,9,,41 +J-2,OZS! +i-:.'Ji
I
' .. ')1
Stat.:-of r-a;):)eJ1Da 70,1&>1 +,l_'I>JI'
.. 7"4/ Diiierenlstate .. o

B52! Borein Puerto Ri:x', U.S. ISP-Ild areas, or 'Omr, abroa-: to Arr,;,n:>ar, 'j:.arent(s} --t--,--:=t------'-'-=..:..-j---==?-- +/fJ.2! -j
1R!r'r.1 ...1-"101
Page8 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
- . Resnonse.to:__Cornp uc!=-Iestil}g and u . .... ._.
As can be seen below, districts in Riverside County report considerably less mobility (more continuously
enrolled) than residents within their district boundaries report moving in year. While these two sources
of data are not identical, there is reason to believe they should be similar. Nearly three-quarters of the
residents in Riverside County (73.6%) are families, thus they contribute largely to the reports of
residential mobility. In Lake Elsinore, 79% of residents are
families.
Reported Percent of Students Continuously Enrolled {CBEDSYes) Versus Census Data
from 2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates
I.D I.D I.D I.D \J:l
U'1 U'1 L!l W'l
'<t
crco O'l 01 O'l 01
100 01 01 O'l 0'1
01
co
90

r-
80
70
50
<t 50
40
!!O
20
10
District
Oi<l: rict CBEDS NOfl'Mobile Ii census Non-Mobi<!
Sources:
Census Residential Mobility (Same House OneYear)
(http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPGeoSearchByListServlet7ds name=ACS 2009 5YR GOO & lang=en& t5=335276417580)
2011 District Mobility (http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/)
Page 9 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
. . .Re M nKa u 1:J.!!!!y.._._. .._.....__..._.__ ._
Below is a table that shows the 2010 and 2011 reported rates of non-mobile students and the residents
report of non-mobility in Riverside County, by district. It also shows the degree to which these two
measures are similar.
District Mobility Tracking
CBEDS Yes (Non-Mobile)
2010 2011
92 88
91 92
93 95
93 93
96 96
95 96
93 92
91 93
80 79
93 94
91 91
94 95
94 96
95 95
95 95
89 91
91 92
95 96
90 89
88 89
95 96
89 89
Census Bureau Mobility from
American Community Survey
(Non-Mobile)
Residential Margin of
Mobility Error -t-:
79.3 2.20
80.2 2.80
80.5 2.50
84.6 2.10
83.1 1.10
81.7 1.30
77.6 1.60
84.8 2.10
80.8 1.90
80.2 2.20
87.0 1.10
81.9 1.60
88.8 4.40
82.2 1.50
74.7 3.30
81.2 3.10
81.1 1.50
81.0 1.20
80.9 4.30
78.1 3.50
82.4 1.40
83.5 2.10
Alvord Unified
Banning Unified
Beaumont Unified
Coachella Valley Unified
Corona-Norco Unified
Desert Sands Unified
Hemet Unified
Uurupa Unified
Lake Elsinore Unified
Menifee Union Elementary
Moreno Valley Unified
Murrieta Vallev Unified
Nuview Union
Palm Springs Unified
Palo Verde Unified
Perris Elementary
Perris Union High
Riverside Unified
Romoland Elementary
San Jacinto Unified
Temecula Valley Unified
Val Verde Unified
Difference Between 2011
District Reported and Census
Mobility
Does the District Mobility
Match Census Mobility?
8.70 NO
I'
11.80 NO
14.50 NO
8.40 NO
12.90 NO
14.30 NO
14.40 NO
8.20 NO
1.80 YES
13.80 NO
4.00 NO
13.10 NO
7.20 NO
12.80 NO
20.30 NO
9.80 NO
10.90 NO
15.00 NO
8.10 NO
10.90 NO
13.60 NO
5.50 NO
*A margin of error is a statistic showing the amount of random sampling error survey results have when
the entire population is not given.the survey. They give the confidence to which the survey results are
accurate. For example, one could say we are confident that the residential mobility reported by the
LEUSD residents is anywhere between 78.9 and 82.7.
Page 10 of 17
----------
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
Res[.lonse to: Coml2laint and Allegations of District Misconduct-Testing and Accountability
-------------- -- -----------------. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .
Comparison of LEUSD to Other Riverside County Districts
Analyses comparing the mobility rates in Lake Elsinore Unified School District with the other districts in
the county have been performed each year since 2008 through the Riverside County Office of Education
and Key Data Systems. This is done to provide staff development and to encourage Riverside County
districts to look into the accuracy of their student mobility reporting, as well asthe accuracy of data in
other demographic fields. These reports have been shared in many public forums through the Riverside
County Office of Education. This school year, we have shared much of the information in this
explanation with various county-level groups.
Immediately following the adoption of rigorous tracking of student mobility at the site level and further
monitoring by the LEUSD district office, decreases in the reported mobility were noticed. When
comparing the mobility rates among the districts in Riverside County, LEUSD has had the second highest
mobility since 2008, following the Riverside County Office of Education, which by its nature serves a
highly mobile population. For example, in 2007, we reported 93% of students to be continuously
enrolled as opposed to 87% in 2008. As we became more efficient at implementing our mobility tracking
process, the percent of students who were reported to be continuously enrolled decreased. For the last
two years, our percent of students continuously enrolled has stabilized to around 80%. Over this same
period of time, the mobility rates for other districts in Riverside County remained relatively unchanged,
in spite of the economic downturn and the ever increasing foreclosure rates in Riverside County, which
leads to a more mobile population including parents and their children attending LEUSD schools. See
the chart below for 2010 and 2011 percent continuously enrolled by RiversideCounty District. In
Riverside County, the average percent of CBEDS yes reported is about 93%, as compared to the ACS for
the US Census Bureau report at 82% for the county.
Page 11 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
_____________ __ M . .
Reported Percent of Students Continuously Enrolled (CBEDS Yes) by Riverside
County District
-->I"l \D.D.n,D l"f'I'l"

90
80
70
DistrIct
112010 1i12011
Page 12 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
__________ _
Site level Analysis of Mobility (Attachment Two)
When analyzing Attachment Two, our site level mobility rates since 2007, a similar trend was found as at
the district level; mobility increased at most sites when we implemented our mobility tracking. District
wide, our school mobility was 74% in 2011, five percentage points lower than our district mobility. Thus,
the majority of the movement we see in LEUSD is students moving outside of our district. This is not
surprising given the geographic location of LEUSD. LEUSD borders at least six other school districts, five
of which are in Riverside County. Some sites have more school mobility than others. This is a function
of several things. Some schools are situated in locations where more residential mobility is occurring,
such as in areas with more multi-family living residences. Other factors that impact-school mobility are
when students move to different schools without moving residences, such asattendance at a school
that is impacted at the beginning ofthe school year, and as spots open up from other students leaving,
the student is gained access to attend their school of residence; attendance at impaction overflow
schools; more intra-district transfers requested for certain sites, etc.
On each of the weekly mobility tracking reports, both the principal and clerk providing the report sign
off asto the accuracy of the report. Based on the analysescomparing our student mobility tracking
system and that of the US Census Bureau, the LEUSD mobility appears to be accurate to student
movement into and out of our schools.
Page 13 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
___ of District Misconduct-Testing and Accountability
---- .
6: Explanation why the district has not reported any migrant
students from 2007 to 2011.
The Lake Elsinore Unified School District does not operate a migrant education program and receives no
Title funds for such a program. Therefore, no students have participated in a district migrant education
program. It would not be appropriate to document any students as migrant education program
participants for the purposes of STAR testing or for any other purpose. In Riverside County, only seven
districts reported having migrant students, the majority of which are from Coachella Valley Unified
School District.
Page14 of17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
____.Respo M nduct- Testi ng and Aceoun ta biIity
__.. ----,-_._._-_._-- .._'-_._._._._..
Attachment 1: Student Mobility Tracking Form
;LakeOsinvr-eUnified SChvvlVistrict
Student Mobility Record
2(/1 (::--2V11
Please return this completedform to Instructional Support Services viadistrict mail or e
mail before 11001/ 011 Tr'1'5dny, October 26,1010
School: _
Time period: October 19, 2010 - Mondnr, October 25, 2010
Student, whoenteredthis site duringthe currenttime period, IndicateALL students who
have enteredthe site. regardless of reason. Please type or prim lIently.
Entered
Students who exited this site duringthe currenttime period. IndicateALL student, who
have exitedthe site, regardless ofreason, Please IJpe orprim
Exited
Important Note: Ifno students enter or exit yoursiteduring theindic-ated timeperiod,
pleasewrite Dane acrossthe paper and submit it to my officeor e-mail that
therewere no studentswho entered or exited your schoolsite.
Page 15 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
__. .__. _
Attachment 2: Completed Student Mobility Tracking Forms
return form to P/KlrJ Services via
I distric: mail or e-mailbe/on noon 011 Tuesday, Mtm:h 1, 2011
School: Wst s\ & St.l).ll,--- _
,_....... _y...... - ._.._.. _.. _.- ... - ....... - .. .. - ..... ,.- .. ...... _...... _.. _,._... _...... '" _.. _..... - ...... _._..... - .. _.- r_._.-.- .-1 ..

Students who enteredth.\R site duringthe current timeperiod. lndicate ALL students who
haveentered thesite. regardless of reason. Please fyJH or printlil1tltly.
Entered
Studentf; who exited this site dering fhecurrenrtimc period. Indicate ALL studentswho
have exited thesite, regardless of reason, Pleasetype or print ncatly.
&!ted
Page 16 of 17
December 8, 2011
Lake Elsinore Unified School District
_________.__ - T __ DbQ!lLtY.. ', _
i-P/{![Jse return this completedform 10 >ponSen-ires via
dis/riel mail or e-mail before noon on Tuesday, January 18. 2011
School: ".Raill'oad Canyon _
.... ,...... " ......... ,-.- _._-_ ............ - -, .. - _. .. _.-.-.... _.-._._.-.- --.-.,
: ' ..
Students who entered this site during the current lime period. Indicate ALL student" who
have entered the site, regardless of reason. Please type OTprint neatly.
." .. .. ..
Huntington Beach
. E-E5-----------l
---1----_.._._.-...._-------1
Santa Rosa Academy
....:...A...::.:.I-=a=_ba_=m;,.;.:..=a:..........__.._..._.__
Student': who exiled this site during the current lime period. Indicate ALL students who
nave exited the site, regardless of reason. Plea...e type or print neatly.
111T/n
1111111
1/11/11
1/12{tt
t/13hl
1/11ft1
1/12/11
1114/11
1/14111
1/14111
Texas
1/14/11

WES
Temecula
Texcs
LVS
I

Menifee
LV5
._--_..---_.-...---
ORlahoma
Artzono

Arizona
IF--- -
I .. ..__'_ .. "'. _______L__ 1--_. __-_..-...-.. +--_....._ .. -..-.-._._-.-
Page 17 af17