Fresno Rewrites Black Student Program: A4’s Future
By Darius Spearman (africanelements)
Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.
Fresno Unified School District (FUSD) recently made significant changes to its African American Academic Acceleration (A4) office. The department, once known for its specific focus on Black students, has been renamed the Advancing Academic Acceleration & Achievement department (latimes.com). This shift, driven by threats from the CURRENT Trump administration to cut federal funding and a discrimination lawsuit, causes concern among Black parents and advocates. Many in the community fear the restructuring could weaken the targeted support that was essential to the program’s success (latimes.com). The story of A4 is deeply rooted in a long history of addressing academic disparities and striving for educational equity for Black students.
A Legacy of Disparity: Why A4 Was Born
The American education system has historically presented numerous challenges for Black students, a legacy stretching back centuries. Before the Civil War, laws often barred Black people from classrooms, denying them basic literacy and educational opportunities (latimes.com). Following Reconstruction, “separate but equal” policies enshrined racial segregation, leading to grossly underfunded schools for Black children and perpetuating systemic disadvantages (latimes.com). Even today, housing discrimination continues to funnel Black families into under-resourced neighborhoods, resulting in underfunded schools that struggle to provide adequate resources (latimes.com). The journey towards educational equity has been a long and arduous one.
California itself implemented the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) in 2013, a major reform designed to direct more resources to districts with high concentrations of high-need students ((latimes.com), (csba.org)). Under this system, districts receive a base grant per student, with additional supplemental and concentration grants for students who are English learners, from low-income families, or foster youth (ca.gov), (ed100.org). This formula allows districts like FUSD to allocate funds based on the specific academic and social needs of these populations, provided they outline their spending plans in a Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) with community input (csba.org), (learningpolicyinstitute.org).
The urgent need for the African American Academic Acceleration (A4) initiative within FUSD became starkly clear from alarming statistics. In 2017, a staggering 79% of FUSD’s Black students failed to meet California’s reading standards, and 86% did not achieve math proficiency (latimes.com). Compared to their white peers, only 20.7% of African American students met or exceeded English Language Arts (ELA) standards, versus 52.5% of white students (latimes.com). In math, a mere 13.9% of Black students met or exceeded standards, while 42.3% of white students did (latimes.com). Beyond academics, Black students also faced disproportionately high suspension rates within FUSD, underscoring a broader issue of systemic inequity (latimes.com).
Therefore, the creation of A4 represented a “hard-won investment” for Black families, a crucial step towards addressing these deep-seated disparities (latimes.com). The FUSD school board initially allocated $4 million, an investment that eventually grew to $12 million, demonstrating a commitment to change (latimes.com). The program implemented a range of targeted initiatives, including year-round, summer, and after-school academic support for elementary students, alongside enrichment camps and peer groups for middle and high schoolers (latimes.com). A4 also focused on parental engagement, hosting workshops to empower parents with strategies for their children’s academic improvement (latimes.com). Crucially, the program emphasized culturally relevant education, using materials featuring diverse characters and content to teach students about their culture and history (latimes.com). A unique “HBCU Step Up” initiative allowed African American students to earn college credits from Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) while still in high school, preparing them for higher education pathways (latimes.com).
Federal Pressure and Legal Battles: Undermining A4
The progress made by A4 soon faced significant external pressures, forcing Fresno Unified to restructure the department. In February 2025, the CURRENT Trump administration, through the U.S. Department of Education, issued a “dear colleague” letter (latimes.com). This letter warned K-12 schools and universities receiving federal funds that they risked losing funding if they continued with race-based programming (latimes.com). The administration broadly interpreted the 2023 Supreme Court decision that struck down affirmative action in college admissions, signaling a clear stance against race-conscious initiatives (latimes.com). FUSD leaders stated that the district faced a potential loss of $250 million in federal funding if it did not make changes, illustrating the serious nature of this threat (latimes.com).
It is important for communities to understand the weight of such communications. A “Dear Colleague” letter from the U.S. Department of Education typically serves as policy guidance, clarifying existing regulations or statutes rather than establishing new legally binding rules . Nevertheless, these letters represent the Department’s official interpretation of the law and carry significant persuasive authority, often prompting institutions to adjust their practices to avoid potential compliance issues or investigations. The pressure on FUSD, therefore, stemmed from the risk of federal scrutiny, loss of substantial federal funding, or legal challenges if they were perceived as non-compliant . Beyond this letter, the Trump administration’s Department of Justice frequently initiated investigations into university admissions policies, creating a broader climate of scrutiny for all race-conscious programs . FUSD’s attorney, Mark Harris, specifically discussed federal pressures, including the impact of one of Trump’s executive orders, “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling” (fresnobee.com).
Concurrently, in February 2025, the Californians for Equal Rights Foundation (CFER) filed a discrimination lawsuit against FUSD (latimes.com). CFER is a non-profit organization advocating for equal rights, aiming to prohibit discrimination and preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin (cferfoundation.org), (causeiq.com)). Their ideology aligns with California’s Proposition 209, a 1996 ballot initiative that banned affirmative action in public employment, education, and contracting (cferfoundation.org). The lawsuit alleged that non-Black students were excluded from A4 programs, which were marketed as exclusively for African American students (latimes.com). CFER contended that A4 granted preferential treatment based on race, thereby violating Proposition 209 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
However, a federal judge dismissed the complaint in August 2025, citing a “lack of factual allegations that non-Black children were denied access based on race” (latimes.com). This legal phrasing means CFER failed to provide concrete, specific examples or evidence demonstrating that non-Black students were explicitly turned away or prevented from participating because of their race. Necessary evidence would have included specific denied applications, witness testimonies from excluded students, or official program policies explicitly stating racial restrictions for non-Black students . Without such direct evidence of intentional racial exclusion, the lawsuit could not proceed. Still, the lawsuit was cited by district leaders as a factor in the restructuring (latimes.com).
The 2023 Supreme Court decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard/UNC significantly influenced the legal landscape, even though it concerned college admissions. The Court ruled that race cannot be a determining factor in college admissions, arguing such policies violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ([TARGETED RESEARCH – SCOTUS]). The majority opinion emphasized that universities can consider how race has affected an applicant’s life, but cannot use race itself as a positive factor in admissions decisions. This decision is being broadly interpreted to influence K-12 programs, particularly those focused on specific racial groups, due to concerns that similar race-conscious considerations could be challenged under the same legal principles. This interpretation intensified the legal risks for programs like A4, pressuring FUSD to make changes.
Renaming and Restructuring: Diluting Black Support
In October 2025, FUSD officially renamed its African American Academic Acceleration department to the “Advancing Academic Acceleration & Achievement department” (latimes.com). District leaders stated this restructuring aimed to indicate support for “all marginalized racial and ethnic groups,” not solely African American students (latimes.com). This shift represents more than a cosmetic change; it is part of a larger reorganization to boost student achievement and align with district goals, according to Superintendent Bob Nelson (fresnobee.com). Internal emails, however, indicated officials were concerned about losing federal funding if they did not remove public references to DEI efforts (fresnobee.com).
The changes implemented under the new structure have generated significant concern among Black parents and advocates, who fear a “dilution” or “watering down” of targeted support. The primary concern arises from the program’s expansion from exclusively serving African American students to encompassing “all marginalized racial and ethnic groups.” This broader mandate causes fear that resources, funding, and specialized staff previously dedicated solely to the unique needs of African American students will now be spread thinner across a wider population, potentially diminishing the intensity and effectiveness of targeted support. Specific changes include promoting initiatives more broadly and combining middle and high school support programs that previously targeted African American students into one “narrowly focused program” (latimes.com). Furthermore, elementary reading support, which once included daily academic and enrichment activities, has been adjusted to four days of reading support and only one day of cultural enrichment (latimes.com). This reduction in culturally specific programming for Black students is a major point of apprehension.
The district also rebranded its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) department as the “Department of Culture and Student Inclusion” (latimes.com). This rebranding signifies a substantive shift beyond a mere name change. While DEI often implies a focus on addressing systemic inequities across various identity groups, the new name may signal a move towards a broader, more universal approach to creating an inclusive environment. This shift potentially de-emphasizes direct discussions of racial equity or specific interventions for marginalized groups, focusing instead on general cultural competency and student belonging. The previous chief of the DEI department’s position was reconfigured into a new role overseeing multiple departments, including the new “Department of Culture and Student Inclusion,” suggesting a broader, less targeted scope (fresnobee.com).
Many community leaders emphasize the critical need to preserve the core mission of A4, which includes academic acceleration, social-emotional support, and cultural affirmations specifically for Black students (latimes.com). Eric Payne, executive director of the Central Valley Urban Institute, voiced fears that the restructuring and name change could “dilute the focus on Black student equity” and “water down” the targeted support that was the hallmark of A4 (latimes.com). Programs like “HBCU Step Up,” which was specifically for African American students, and the emphasis on culturally relevant education for Black students, now face a strong possibility of being broadened or diluted rather than maintained in their original, targeted form. The concern is that resources and programmatic attention previously dedicated to the unique cultural and historical needs of Black students may now be diffused across a wider range of ethnic groups.
Progress and Persistent Gaps: A4’s Tangible Impact
Before the A4 program’s inception in 2017, the academic performance of Black students in FUSD was significantly lower than their white counterparts across both English Language Arts and Math (latimes.com). Since its establishment, however, the A4 program has shown clear evidence of positive impact. In the 2023-24 school year, 35% of students participating in the after-school reading program improved by at least one grade level (latimes.com). Prior to that, in 2021, 67% of K-5 students in the A4 reading program demonstrated growth (latimes.com). “Improved by at least one grade level” typically refers to a student’s performance on a standardized reading assessment indicating a proficiency level equivalent to the next grade, while “demonstrated growth” signifies a measurable increase in academic skills over time.
Furthermore, the after-school reading program correlated with a 26% decline in chronic absenteeism among participating African American students (latimes.com). This figure compares favorably to a 12% decrease in non-participants, highlighting the program’s broader positive influence on student engagement and attendance (latimes.com). In math, a three-week camp in 2023 saw a notable increase in the percentage of African American students testing at grade level, rising from 14% to 24% (latimes.com). These statistics demonstrate A4’s effectiveness in directly improving academic outcomes and student well-being.
Although A4 demonstrated progress, the program and students faced significant setbacks during the COVID-19 pandemic. Post-pandemic data revealed a worsening of academic performance, with nearly 90% of Black students failing state math standards in 2021 (worse than 2017) and 75% below reading standards (similar to 2019) (latimes.com). The pandemic likely forced A4 to transition to remote learning, which disproportionately affected marginalized students due to inequities in access to technology, internet, and conducive home learning environments. Consequently, the program’s ability to provide in-person, targeted interventions, mentorship, and direct academic support would have been severely constrained, diminishing its intended intensity and personalized nature.
In the 2023-24 academic year, the Advancing Academic Acceleration & Achievement department (formerly A4) reported serving a total of 7,950 students of various racial and ethnic backgrounds (latimes.com). However, the data presents conflicting figures regarding Black student participation. One statement indicates that 1,212 were single-race African American/Black students, accounting for 23% of FUSD’s total African American/Black student enrollment of 5,200 (latimes.com). Another statement asserts that Black students comprised 45.9% of A4’s total enrollment, implying approximately 3,649 Black students out of the 7,950 total students served (latimes.com). These numbers cannot be reconciled without explicit clarification from FUSD on how “students served” is defined in each instance, suggesting different methodologies for counting participation. Despite past progress, significant disparities persist. In the 2023-24 school year, only 21.24% of African American students in FUSD met state ELA proficiency standards, and 13.21% met math proficiency standards (latimes.com). This contrasts with 34.72% and 25.14% for all students respectively, underscoring the ongoing need for targeted and effective interventions (latimes.com).
The Road Ahead: Sustaining Black Student Equity
The future of the restructured “Advancing Academic Acceleration & Achievement department” and its ability to effectively address the persistent academic gaps for Black students remains a critical concern. The original A4 program grew into a $12 million investment, but the current budget for the newly restructured department and its specific allocation across various racial and ethnic groups are not publicly detailed with the same clarity (latimes.com). Understanding the practical resources dedicated to equity efforts requires granular detail on the new department’s total budget, how it is broken down by program or initiative, and whether specific funding streams are still designated for particular racial or ethnic groups. Without transparent reporting from FUSD on these specifics, the exact resource dedication to specific equity efforts for different student populations remains unclear.
Despite the restructuring and broader mandate, community leaders and parents steadfastly emphasize the critical need for targeted and effective interventions to ensure equitable outcomes for Black students (latimes.com). The “hard-won investment” in Black student achievement, represented by the original A4 program, carries profound significance for the community (latimes.com). Therefore, the ongoing struggle involves ensuring that the spirit of that investment endures, even as the program adapts to external pressures from both federal administrations and legal challenges. The success of future equity initiatives will depend on how effectively FUSD can balance a broader inclusive mandate with the specific, historically rooted needs of its Black student population.
About the Author
Darius Spearman is a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College, where he has been teaching for over 20 years. He is the founder of African Elements, a media platform dedicated to providing educational resources on the history and culture of the African diaspora. Through his work, Spearman aims to empower and educate by bringing historical context to contemporary issues affecting the Black community.
