January 17, 2014
On January 16, 2014, the State Board of Education (SBE) met for nearly eight hours, heard testimony from more than 300 speakers including 30 civil rights and community organizations, and in the end unanimously approved the proposed Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) emergency spending regulations and Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) template. Continue reading
November 7, 2013
Today the State Board of Education (SBE) held a lengthy hearing to discuss development of the LCFF spending regulations and Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) template, which must be adopted by January 31, 2014, and March 31, 2014, respectively. Christine Swenson (CDE) and Janelle Kubinec (WestEd, the contractor who is organizing stakeholder input) provided background material on the agenda item, which included draft emergency spending regulations and the LCAP conceptual framework. Janelle indicated that the intent is to present the LCAP template for adoption in January along with the spending regulations. The draft regulations propose an options-based policy framework, which provides three options to meet requirements to “increase or improve services for unduplicated pupils in proportion to the increase in funds,” per LCFF statute: Continue reading
October 23, 2013
The following article was originally posted by School Services of California, Inc. on October 22 in The Fiscal Report and is reprinted here with their permission.
[Editor's Note: Periodically, we publish guest articles that we think inform readers on topics of interest. With local educational agencies (LEAs) continuing to work to understand the fiscal implications of the newly enacted Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), we thought that additional attention should also be paid to the programmatic and fiscal implications of this new model. The guest article below by Jay Chambers, Mahala Archer, and Jesse Levin of American Institute for Research (AIR) addresses the new opportunities presented to school boards, local education leaders, and community members to shape educational programs to meet local priorities. Necessarily, the views and opinions of the authors are their own, but we think the article below is interesting and informative.]
What the New Funding Formula Means for LEAs?
As California moves toward a more equitable, rational, and efficient approach to allocating resources to school districts, this is an important time for LEAs to consider how well they are doing in achieving equitable allocations of resources and improving outcomes for all students. LEA leaders need to think seriously about how they can achieve a more equitable distribution of resources across schools and to determine what they can do to facilitate better ways for the central office and school sites to connect resources to goals, elevate accountability for performance, and improve transparency by engaging a wide range of stakeholders in the process. Continue reading
October 7, 2013
The following article is re-posted with the permission of the California Budget Project. The article was posted to their website in October 2013.
California’s K-12 schools face a unique set of challenges. Not only does California educate more students than any other state, but economically disadvantaged students and English learners (ELs) account for a larger share of students in California than in the rest of the US. Yet, even though California has more financial resources per capita than the rest of the US, the state spends far less of its total personal income on K-12 schools. As a result, CaliforniaK-12 education spending continues to lag the nation by a number of key measures. Although Proposition 30, passed by California voters in November 2012, is expected to increase state revenues and boost school spending over the next few years, this revenue measure alone will not provide California schools with sufficient resources to meet the challenges of educating the state’s students.
July 24, 2013
We reported to you previously that, as part of the enacted 2013-14 Budget, Routine Restricted Maintenance contributions and the Deferred Maintenance Program matching requirement local set-aside were eliminated. However, upon further analysis of the LCFF and its implications, it has come to our attention that the minimum requirements for Routine Restricted Maintenance Account contributions still remain in the law.