In 2013–14, California enacted an ambitious—and essential—reform to improve educational equity by directing state resources to districts and schools that educate large numbers of economically disadvantaged students. The reform is called the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF); it allocates funding to school districts based on student characteristics such as socioeconomic status and provides greater flexibility to use the allocated funds than the previous school funding formula allowed. In addition to the LCFF, which is based on average daily attendance (ADA), districts receive funds based on the proportion of students they serve who are English learners, income eligible for free or reduced-price meals, and foster youth. The equity multiplier, a new policy passed in 2023, is designed to provide even more funding for disadvantaged students.
The aftermath of COVID-19 poses a serious threat to California's education, expecting a drastic decline in tax revenue. School closures will harm all students academically and emotionally, highlighting educational inequalities. Policymakers must reimagine the system as Governor Newsom's proposed budget investments face uncertainty amidst growing needs post-pandemic. The education funding system shifted in 2013 with the Local Control Funding Formula, providing additional funds for districts with high-need students. However, the pandemic has rendered the new support system, reliant on the California School Dashboard, irrelevant. Issues such as inadequate timing and inconsistent district identification for assistance surfaced in a pre-pandemic report. A revised support system should engage diverse expertise, span multiple years, involve stakeholders, and address emerging post-pandemic needs. Simply patching the existing system won't surpass pre-pandemic outcomes; policymakers must seize this disruption to overhaul California's education structures.
After an extensive and inclusive process involving eight hearings, numerous meetings, collaboration with stakeholders, a survey of over thirty organizations, and two years of deliberation by a diverse Commission that included community members and elected officials, the California Assembly Blue Ribbon Commission on Early Childhood Education (BRC) has unveiled its draft recommendations. The draft report, which references PACE's Getting Down to Facts II (GDTFII) report titled "Early Childhood Education in California," provides detailed recommendations across nine key areas. These proposals are informed by input from various sources, a thorough examination of current and past proposals, insights from other states, and existing models within California. The report outlines a comprehensive framework advocating for substantial reforms centered on equity, two-generation policies, and a targeted focus on children, families, and the early care and education workforce. The culmination of this rigorous process underscores the Commission's commitment to shaping meaningful and impactful policies in the realm of early childhood education.
Michael W. Kirst discusses the new federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and the CA overhaul of accountability based on local control of education policy. The federal law requires multiple measures for accountability, including some with state choice. Databases for English learners will change significantly. Federal requirements for teacher evaluation will be deregulated significantly. State assessments are all over the place and will be hard to summarize. California is building an integrated federal/state/local accountability system that includes 23 metrics, primarily for local use in Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAP) that focus on improving budget strategy. Longitudinal data bases from the past will be difficult to integrate with these policy shifts.
Within-School Disparities in Students’ Experiences of Safety, Support, and Connectedness
Commentary author
Adam Voight
Published
Summary
A new study delves into racial and ethnic disparities in academic achievement within California middle schools and their correlation with school climate, a concept encompassing safety, relationships, and participation opportunities. Analyzing data from the California School Climate, Health, and Learning Survey (Cal-SCHLS) across 754 middle schools, the research focuses on Black-White and Hispanic-White racial climate gaps. It identifies differences in students' perceptions of safety, relationships, and participation based on race within the same schools. Notably, Black students reported lower levels of safety and relationships compared to White peers, while Hispanic students experienced lower safety, relationships, and participation opportunities than their White counterparts. The study also links larger racial achievement gaps to corresponding disparities in perceived safety, relationships, and participation. It emphasizes the importance of considering subgroup-specific climates instead of a general school-level assessment. Particularly relevant for California's education system, which integrates school climate measures into its accountability systems, the study highlights the need for targeted action plans addressing diverse subgroup experiences to promote educational equity.
The primary aim of state finance systems across the U.S. is to achieve equalization, especially in states with local school funding under legal scrutiny. California’s current revenue limit and Governor Brown’s proposed formula both follow the traditional foundation state-aid model. In this structure, state aid per pupil is calculated as the foundation amount minus the required tax rate multiplied by assessed property wealth per pupil. Determining the foundation amount involves historical, political, and cost-based considerations. California’s current system heavily relies on historical expenditure levels from the 1970s, adjusted for inflation and equalization. Brown's proposal seems influenced by state average revenue limits after budget-induced cuts. Setting the foundation amount based on the actual cost of education remains a point of contention. California’s approach, compared to other states, tends to lag in per-pupil spending despite achieving equalization post-Serrano. States often adopt foundation formulas, aiming to increase spending in poorer districts ('leveling up'), yet California's spending remains lower on average. The ongoing debate emphasizes balancing actual educational costs, political feasibility, and historical context. Brown’s proposed base amounts, while lower than past estimates for California's educational needs, are not significantly different from those in other states using the foundation formula. However, comparing base amounts across states requires understanding that these figures represent the minimum cost to educate students without additional needs or district-specific characteristics.
"Getting Down to Facts" is a new research initiative commissioned by Governor Schwarzenegger's Committee on Education Excellence, state Democratic leaders, and Superintendent Jack O'Connell. Led by Susanna Loeb, a Stanford Graduate School of Education Professor and PACE codirector, this project seeks to explore California's school finance and governance systems. Its objective is to provide comprehensive insights essential for assessing the effectiveness of potential reforms. The initiative addresses three key questions: the current state of school finance and governance, optimizing existing resources for improved student outcomes, and evaluating the need for additional resources to meet educational goals. The studies from this project are expected to be available by January 2007.
Why California Should Retire the Free or Reduced-Price Meal Measure—and What the State Should Do Next
In 2013–14, California enacted an ambitious—and essential—reform to improve educational equity by directing state resources to districts and schools that educate large numbers of economically disadvantaged students. The reform is called the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF); it allocates funding to school districts based on student characteristics such as socioeconomic status and provides greater flexibility to use the allocated funds than the previous school funding formula allowed. In addition to the LCFF, which is based on average daily attendance (ADA), districts receive funds based on the proportion of students they serve who are English learners, income eligible for free or reduced-price meals, and foster youth. The equity multiplier, a new policy passed in 2023, is designed to provide even more funding for disadvantaged students.
In Pandemic’s Wake, California Needs to Rethink System of Support for Schools
The aftermath of COVID-19 poses a serious threat to California's education, expecting a drastic decline in tax revenue. School closures will harm all students academically and emotionally, highlighting educational inequalities. Policymakers must reimagine the system as Governor Newsom's proposed budget investments face uncertainty amidst growing needs post-pandemic. The education funding system shifted in 2013 with the Local Control Funding Formula, providing additional funds for districts with high-need students. However, the pandemic has rendered the new support system, reliant on the California School Dashboard, irrelevant. Issues such as inadequate timing and inconsistent district identification for assistance surfaced in a pre-pandemic report. A revised support system should engage diverse expertise, span multiple years, involve stakeholders, and address emerging post-pandemic needs. Simply patching the existing system won't surpass pre-pandemic outcomes; policymakers must seize this disruption to overhaul California's education structures.
Early Childhood Education in California Takes a Step Forward
After an extensive and inclusive process involving eight hearings, numerous meetings, collaboration with stakeholders, a survey of over thirty organizations, and two years of deliberation by a diverse Commission that included community members and elected officials, the California Assembly Blue Ribbon Commission on Early Childhood Education (BRC) has unveiled its draft recommendations. The draft report, which references PACE's Getting Down to Facts II (GDTFII) report titled "Early Childhood Education in California," provides detailed recommendations across nine key areas. These proposals are informed by input from various sources, a thorough examination of current and past proposals, insights from other states, and existing models within California. The report outlines a comprehensive framework advocating for substantial reforms centered on equity, two-generation policies, and a targeted focus on children, families, and the early care and education workforce. The culmination of this rigorous process underscores the Commission's commitment to shaping meaningful and impactful policies in the realm of early childhood education.
Michael Kirst on New Federal and State Policies
Michael W. Kirst discusses the new federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and the CA overhaul of accountability based on local control of education policy. The federal law requires multiple measures for accountability, including some with state choice. Databases for English learners will change significantly. Federal requirements for teacher evaluation will be deregulated significantly. State assessments are all over the place and will be hard to summarize. California is building an integrated federal/state/local accountability system that includes 23 metrics, primarily for local use in Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAP) that focus on improving budget strategy. Longitudinal data bases from the past will be difficult to integrate with these policy shifts.
The Racial School Climate Gap
A new study delves into racial and ethnic disparities in academic achievement within California middle schools and their correlation with school climate, a concept encompassing safety, relationships, and participation opportunities. Analyzing data from the California School Climate, Health, and Learning Survey (Cal-SCHLS) across 754 middle schools, the research focuses on Black-White and Hispanic-White racial climate gaps. It identifies differences in students' perceptions of safety, relationships, and participation based on race within the same schools. Notably, Black students reported lower levels of safety and relationships compared to White peers, while Hispanic students experienced lower safety, relationships, and participation opportunities than their White counterparts. The study also links larger racial achievement gaps to corresponding disparities in perceived safety, relationships, and participation. It emphasizes the importance of considering subgroup-specific climates instead of a general school-level assessment. Particularly relevant for California's education system, which integrates school climate measures into its accountability systems, the study highlights the need for targeted action plans addressing diverse subgroup experiences to promote educational equity.
School Finance 102
The primary aim of state finance systems across the U.S. is to achieve equalization, especially in states with local school funding under legal scrutiny. California’s current revenue limit and Governor Brown’s proposed formula both follow the traditional foundation state-aid model. In this structure, state aid per pupil is calculated as the foundation amount minus the required tax rate multiplied by assessed property wealth per pupil. Determining the foundation amount involves historical, political, and cost-based considerations. California’s current system heavily relies on historical expenditure levels from the 1970s, adjusted for inflation and equalization. Brown's proposal seems influenced by state average revenue limits after budget-induced cuts. Setting the foundation amount based on the actual cost of education remains a point of contention. California’s approach, compared to other states, tends to lag in per-pupil spending despite achieving equalization post-Serrano. States often adopt foundation formulas, aiming to increase spending in poorer districts ('leveling up'), yet California's spending remains lower on average. The ongoing debate emphasizes balancing actual educational costs, political feasibility, and historical context. Brown’s proposed base amounts, while lower than past estimates for California's educational needs, are not significantly different from those in other states using the foundation formula. However, comparing base amounts across states requires understanding that these figures represent the minimum cost to educate students without additional needs or district-specific characteristics.
Getting Down to Facts
"Getting Down to Facts" is a new research initiative commissioned by Governor Schwarzenegger's Committee on Education Excellence, state Democratic leaders, and Superintendent Jack O'Connell. Led by Susanna Loeb, a Stanford Graduate School of Education Professor and PACE codirector, this project seeks to explore California's school finance and governance systems. Its objective is to provide comprehensive insights essential for assessing the effectiveness of potential reforms. The initiative addresses three key questions: the current state of school finance and governance, optimizing existing resources for improved student outcomes, and evaluating the need for additional resources to meet educational goals. The studies from this project are expected to be available by January 2007.