California does not use a student-level growth model to measure school performance, which is uncommon among states. This brief refutes common beliefs about growth models and provides evidence that they are inaccurate or unsupported. It suggests that California should adopt a growth model to replace the current "change" metric in the California School Dashboard, with student-growth percentiles and residual-gain growth models as two specific models that would more accurately identify schools that require support.

Governor Newsom’s first Budget Proposal increases funding for education in California. There are areas of substantive overlap in the Budget Proposal and research findings from the Getting Down to Facts II (GDTFII) research project, released in September 2018, which built an evidence base on the current status of California education and implications for paths forward. As the Budget moves from proposal to reality, it is critical that the evidence from GDTFII continues to inform the policy process.

California and the US are undergoing a cultural shift in school accountability policies towards locally-determined measures of school performance. Lessons can be learned from the CORE districts, which developed an innovative accountability system, emphasizing support over sanctions, and utilizing multiple measures of school quality. The CORE districts' measurement system and collaboration hold promise for improving local systems, but efforts to build capacity remain a work in progress.

This report examines the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and how schools can be identified for support and improvement using a multiple measures framework. The authors find that different academic indicators measure different aspects of school performance and suggest that states should be allowed to use multiple measures instead of a summative rating. They also find that non-academic indicators are not given enough weight and suggest a clarification in federal policy.

Policy changes in California create an opportunity to improve education for 1.4 million English learner students. Research suggests improving classification and alignment between services, systematic data collection and improving opportunities in schools. This could benefit large numbers of students without requiring large investments.

The California Academic Performance Index (API) is limited by demographics, instability, and narrow focus on test scores. Experts recommend tracking individual students' progress, measuring achievement growth over multiple years, and using alternative performance measures. Improving API could enhance accountability systems and target educational improvements.

This report advocates for a continuous improvement approach to education in California, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive data system to inform decision-making and evaluation at all levels of the education system. It also recommends the use of research-based practices and the development of partnerships between schools and community organizations to support student success. The report emphasizes the importance of equity and suggests strategies for addressing achievement gaps and providing more resources to under-resourced schools.

California's accountability system, PSAA, has been examined by three independent studies, revealing five key issues. The system established specific performance targets, rewards, and sanctions for schools, but budget constraints and differences with NCLB require changes. The STAR testing and school assessment system needs review, and Governor Schwarzenegger proposed simplifying the school finance system. The brief aims to inform policymakers, clarify complex accountability issues, highlight educators' views, and outline four major implications.