Ad Hoc Committee on Progress Monitoring

Over the course of the ad-hoc committee on progress monitoring, the committee learned about best practices for progress monitoring from other districts, other school boards, and the Council of Great City Schools. The committee drafted a recommendations document, which includes a gap analysis between best practices and current practices, as well as recommendations for improving the Board’s progress monitoring. At its May 19, 2026 regular meeting, the Board of Education discussed this document, including which recommendations might be prioritized for implementation.

Purpose

The purpose of this document is to provide recommendations for actions the Board and Superintendent can take to make progress monitoring more effective. This document also highlights the extent to which SFUSD’s progress monitoring is aligned to the expectations for effective progress monitoring as described by the Council of Great City Schools (CGCS).

Overview

Progress monitoring is an essential part of the Board’s student outcomes focused governance framework and the continuous improvement process. As discussed in this ad-hoc committee, effective progress monitoring has the following three major benefits:

• Monitoring is a formative evaluation of the Superintendent
• Monitoring is a culture creating opportunity
• Monitoring is a resource alignment activity

This document will focus on recommendations for various components of progress monitoring. Some aspects of progress monitoring are overarching and foundational, while other aspects focus on the process of monitoring for a particular meeting. To make recommendations for both of these levels, the document is structured in the following way:

1. Overarching / foundational components of progress monitoring
2. Progress monitoring components that are geared toward one cycle of progress monitoring
   • Before a monitoring meeting
   • During a monitoring meeting

Each section below includes a gap analysis which describes best practices for each component of monitoring and the current state of the component. The recommendations address the gap between the best practices and current state.

1. Overarching / foundational components of progress monitoring

Gap Analysis

Recommendations

1. Increase the time and frequency the Board spends on progress monitoring (e.g., splitting monitoring over two meetings in a month, celebrating students at one meeting vs. reviewing reports at another, conducting monitoring workshops where monitoring is the sole focus of the meeting, etc.).
2. Develop a monitoring calendar with the following characteristics:
   • Multi-year calendar for the duration of multi-year goals
   • Goals monitored as close to 4x per year (aligned to the availability of new student outcomes data)
   • Opportunities to monitor specific interim goals in a monitoring meeting (versus monitoring the full goal)
   • Consider if there are some Guardrail monitoring reports that could go on the consent agenda
3. Conduct annual trainings on student outcomes focused governance / progress monitoring practices for the board, staff, and community
   • Add these trainings to the monitoring calendar
4. During Spring 2026, lay the foundation for 2026-27 VVGG implementation, which would include:
   • Defining initiatives/strategies that operationalize the interim metrics
   • Review and recalibration of existing interim metrics
   • Align accountability structures
   • Establish routines for consistent and coherent implementation

2a. Before a monitoring meeting

Gap Analysis

Recommendations

1. Develop the progress monitoring report as a slide deck (instead of written report and slide deck) 
   • The deck includes the main monitoring presentation focused on strategy, as well as an appendix that addresses technical and tactical questions
   • Ensure that data visualizations are clear and accessible 
2. Identify a “neutral” chief of staff type role to coordinate cross-team development and quality of the report
   • This person would also be responsible for briefing the Superintendent so that the Superintendent is well-positioned to answer strategic questions about the report
3. The Board submits written technical and tactical questions in advance of the meeting (Board members may also ask strategic questions in advance)
   • Staff address these questions before the meeting
4. Conduct training and practice for Board members
   • Focus on the role of strategy in monitoring conversations, how to ask strategic and resource-alignment questions, and allow for practice