California’s Transitional Kindergarten (TK) program provides an additional year of schooling within the K–12 system that aims to prepare children for kindergarten. Launched a decade ago with limited eligibility, the program will be expanded to all four-year-olds by 2025–26. Little is known about TK’s longer-term impact—especially among multilingual students and students with disabilities, who might benefit from early identification. Taking stock of TK’s impact so far can help the state expand it successfully.

This article provides 10 recommendations based on the PACE report to help educators and district leaders provide high-quality instruction through distance and blended learning models in the 2020-21 school year. Despite the challenges of COVID-19, research can guide decisions about student learning and engagement. These recommendations can be used as a framework to prioritize quality instruction.

California is failing to identify and serve infants, toddlers, and preschoolers with developmental disabilities compared to national averages. The transition from infant/toddler services to preschool services is hindered by various factors such as the lack of a systematic screening and child tracking system, interagency coordination, and family/staff preparation for transitions. Significant investments are required to improve the state of early education for children with disabilities in California.

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 report discusses the challenges California faces in improving educational outcomes for students with disabilities (SWDs) and how inclusion in general education classrooms has positive benefits. It examines strategies used by Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Florida to improve inclusion rates and makes four recommendations for California, including implementing a data system, targeted support for districts with poor inclusion rates, and an inclusion tool for schools and districts to assess their practices.

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.

In the run-up to 2020 elections, where do California voters stand on key education policy issues? This report examines findings and trends from the 2020 PACE/USC Rossier poll. Key findings include rising pessimism about California education and elected officials, continued concern about gun violence in schools and college affordability, and negative opinions about higher education. However, there is substantial support for increased spending, especially on teacher salaries.

This report summarizes efforts to align California's K-12 and postsecondary education systems to address disparities in educational attainment. Based on district leaders' interviews and quantitative data, the report finds that rigorous academic preparation is crucial to college success, and that participation and performance on college admissions exams are key indicators of college readiness. However, substantial inequality exists across all measures of readiness, and district leaders emphasize the importance of engaging families and the community in supporting postsecondary success.

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.

American schools have long suffered from inequitable distribution of funding, resources, and effective teachers. The LCFF reform in California is a promising solution to address achievement gaps for high-need students, but successful implementation is critical. Research has found that stakeholder engagement, explicit equity frameworks, and evidence-based programs are crucial to ensure positive impact. Studies have also revealed challenges such as underspending funds and insufficient stakeholder engagement, highlighting the need for continuous improvement.

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.