This brief discusses how California's System of Support uses differentiated assistance (DA) to provide support to districts and boost student group performance levels. It analyzes the districts eligible for DA in 2019 based on their students with disabilities' (SWD) performance on State Priority Areas (SPAs) and indicators. The findings show that over half of the 333 eligible districts were driven by SWD performance in SPAs 4 (Pupil Achievement) and 5 (Pupil Engagement), highlighting intersectional challenges facing SWD that districts can address through their continuous improvement process.

This brief outlines the necessary steps to integrate care systems and improve outcomes for California's children. It suggests forming a statewide interagency leadership council and recommends policy reforms to promote collaboration, integration, and service delivery. The goal is to create a "Whole System" approach that integrates child-serving agencies and organizations. A full commitment from the state administration is needed to achieve these solutions at scale.

County offices of education (COEs) must support districts to drive continuous improvement in California's education system while building their own capacity for improvement. This policy brief highlights three major shifts that COE superintendents identified, in partnership with CCSESA and PACE, including developing the necessary mindsets, skills, structures, and processes to build capacity for continuous improvement within their own offices and the districts they serve.

This brief summarizes findings from three surveys on county offices of education's (COEs) response to Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and Statewide System of Support (SSS) implementation. Most county superintendents are supportive of the state's policy direction, recognize the scale of change needed to implement LCFF and SSS, and acknowledge that full implementation is still in progress. They are also aware of the need for changes in their COEs' organization and operation, as well as in their relationships with other agencies.

This report updates previous research on California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) using a 2019 poll of California voters. Despite increased awareness, over half of voters are unfamiliar with LCFF. Support for the policy remains high but has decreased. Participation in LCFF engagement has increased but remains low, particularly among low-income voters. Low-income communities may not be meaningfully engaged in LCFF decision-making.

This brief analyzes the 2018 update of the California School Dashboard, examining improvements and areas for continued enhancement. Using data from the 2019 PACE/USC Rossier poll, the author characterizes use of and support for the Dashboard, finding low use, equity gaps, but high support and preference for the new Dashboard.

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's Local Control Funding Formula highlights low performance of special education students. Many districts allocate more base funding for all students into special education. A study found state funding growth has not kept pace with district costs, and the current formula inadequately funds preschool programs for infants and toddlers with disabilities. The study suggests better alignment between special education and the LCFF, and improved governance and accountability structures.

Charter schools serve 620,000 students in California, but their impact on traditional public schools is unknown. Charter schools have significantly better academic growth in urban areas and lower-performing groups. California's charter school authorization is decentralized with limited accountability and oversight capacity. Renewal processes are unclear, and the standards for renewal are low.

California's implementation of Common Core State Standards and Local Control Funding Formula requires new support systems for districts, including professional networks and the California Department of Education. Successful implementation requires multiagency cooperation and strategic management of relations with Washington.

California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) has increased per-pupil revenues, especially for low-income districts, and provided more flexibility in expenditures, leading to improvements in student outcomes. The funding was distributed based on the proportion of disadvantaged students, and expenditure increases were primarily allocated to teachers, pensions, and special education. The policy was implemented during a time of increased K-12 funding after the Great Recession and existing revenue distribution patterns.

California has implemented new academic standards for English, math, and science, and changed how school districts are funded and held accountable. Educators face challenges implementing these standards, requiring changes in teaching, learning, and instructional materials. Teachers need professional development, improved instructional support, and collaborative learning opportunities. School principals play a key role in implementation and depend on district support. Despite positive perceptions, progress requires staying the course to let the standards take root.

The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) shifts control of education dollars to local districts, enhancing resource allocation practices. However, inadequate base funds may constrain progress. Stakeholder engagement is evolving yet remains challenging, and school board involvement is typically modest. LCFF communication and accountability mechanisms receive mixed reviews. County offices of education have expanded their role but will need to increase their capacity. Public awareness of the LCFF lags, but it enjoys substantial support.

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.

The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) replaced categorical funding for schools in California in 2013, providing flexibility, targeted student funding, and local accountability. Two years in, research shows optimism and concern. The Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) faces challenges, stakeholders need more engagement, and implementation requires capacity and overcoming the emerging teacher shortage. Public awareness of LCFF lags at 65%.

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.

California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) represents a major shift in the state's education system by empowering school districts to allocate funding based on the needs of their students, with added funds for disadvantaged students. The LCFF eliminates categorical funding streams and promotes local democracy by requiring stakeholder engagement. The implementation of the LCFF is still in its early stages, and this study examines how school districts are using their newfound budget flexibility and engaging stakeholders, as well as identifying opportunities and challenges.

The passage describes the implementation of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) in California, which is expected to bring new revenues to school districts. The report suggests that strategic decision-making and goal-setting based on research-based strategies are crucial to realizing the potential benefits of the LCFF. Recommendations include an investment in four key areas that can produce real gains in school and student performance.

Common Core State Standards (CCSS) will impact many state education policies in fundamental ways. Before 1990, most states did not have uniform K-12 academic standards, and each state developed its own. To align policies with CCSS, CA must eliminate contradictions, look for gaps where no policy exists, and ensure sufficient breadth and depth of newly aligned policies. Common Core will transform instruction by focusing on fewer, higher, and deeper standards. However, current state assessment and accountability systems in CA are not aligned with the CCSS's specific instructional approach.

The LAUSD invested over $19B to build 130 new facilities to relieve overcrowded schools. A PACE policy brief analyzed its effects on student achievement and found robust gains for many elementary-school pupils who switched from old to new facilities. However, significant gains were limited to elementary school students and new high school facilities produced weak and inconsistent achievement gains. The report also tracked thousands of students who moved from overcrowded to new facilities over the 2002-2008 period.

California cannot afford to ignore or postpone questions of how to support the academic success of English Learners (ELs) in the state’s K-12 education system. Language-minority students already represent more than 40 percent of the state’s K-12 public education students, and their share of enrollment is growing. How well California serves these students will help determine the vitality of the state’s economy and society in the years ahead.

PACE has published a policy book to support informed debates about the issues facing California education. The book includes recommendations to improve education quality, targeting resources to those who need it most, giving local schools more flexibility, and designing policies for continuous improvement. While there's no one solution to fix public education, a series of good policies can bring about fundamental reform and improve outcomes for schools and students.

The Los Angeles Unified School District has undergone decades of reform, resulting in an unstable atmosphere rather than institutional stability. A recent book, "Learning from L.A.: Institutional Change in Public Education," identifies five policy levers that can create a more effective educational system and a new institutional structure for public education, both in LA and beyond.

This brief examines the use of student test scores in teacher evaluations in CA. It argues that current evaluation methods are not effective, and that alternative methods of measuring teacher effectiveness, such as peer evaluations and student surveys, should be explored. The brief also discusses the potential consequences of over-reliance on test scores, such as teaching to the test and neglecting non-tested subjects. It concludes that teacher evaluations should be designed to provide useful feedback for professional development, rather than being used solely for accountability purposes.

The brief discusses California's current school funding system and how it needs to be reformed to ensure equity and adequacy for all students. The current system is inadequate, unfair, and difficult to understand. The brief recommends a new system that is transparent, flexible, and based on student needs. The new system should also be aligned with state and local priorities, and provide incentives for districts to improve student outcomes. Finally, the brief emphasizes the importance of engaging stakeholders and building public support for the new funding system.