Use either the form or links on the side to filter the list of publications. Browse other LAO products using the links at the bottom of the sidebar.
4,823 Publications Found
January 11, 2012 - The Governor’s proposed tax initiative is the cornerstone of his 2012-13 budget plan, which includes proposals to restructure education finance, reduce social services and child care programs substantially, and implement trigger cuts--primarily affecting schools--if voters do not approve the tax measure. The Governor’s plan would continue the difficult task of restoring the state budget to balance, but the difficulty in knowing how much taxable income will be attributable to high-income Californians makes the state’s revenue estimates an even bigger question mark than usual. With regard to the Governor’s major proposals, we think the Governor’s education restructuring proposals would institute lasting improvements to the system, and we observe that, while his social services and child care proposals have merit, they involve considerable drawbacks as well, given potentially severe impacts on affected families. Moreover, while the Governor’s tax initiative would improve the financial outlook of public education over the next several years, his trigger plan would create significant uncertainty for educational institutions in their planning for 2012-13. The Legislature needs to be very deliberate in structuring a workable trigger package and designing tools to help schools respond to potential trigger cuts.
January 11, 2012 - Who Pays Education Costs at California’s Public Colleges and Universities? (updated November 2009). This is one of a series of issue briefs examining important questions about higher education funding in California. For more information on this topic, or to request other briefs from this series, contact the Legislative Analyst’s Office Higher Education section at (916) 319-8349, or visit our Web site at www.lao.ca.gov/highered.
January 6, 2012 - Supplemental report language approved in the 2011 legislative session seeks the LAO's recommendations on the structure and duties of a statewide higher education coordinating body for California. The state currently has no coordinating body, following the Governor’s veto of funding for the California Postsecondary Education Commission in the 2011-12 budget. This report finds a need for robust and deliberate state oversight that enables policymakers to monitor how efficiently and effectively the postsecondary system is serving the state’s needs, and to make changes to improve its performance. This report includes both longer-term recommendations for creating a new state oversight structure as well as interim steps the Legislature could take to help guide the state’s postsecondary policy in the absence of a new agency. In the accompanying video, the LAO's Steve Boilard and Judy Heiman discuss the topic further.
January 5, 2012 - Letter to Assembly Member Dickinson regarding the 1) efficiency of small special districts, 2) accountability of small special districts, and 3) effectiveness of Local Agency Formation Commissions (LAFCOs).
January 3, 2012 - Over the past several years, the state has experienced waitlists in county jails to transfer those deemed incompetent to stand trial (IST) to state hospitals for treatment. In response to the waitlist, which averages between 200 and 300 individuals a month, the Department of Mental Health began a pilot program in San Bernardino County to treat ISTs in county jail instead of at a state hospital. This report finds that the pilot program has greater flexibility to hold down costs and has been able to restore ISTs to competency in a shorter amount of time than state hospitals. We find that if the pilot program is expanded, it has the potential to significantly reduce the waitlist, as well as reduce costs to the public sector.
December 5, 2011 - Presented to Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee
December 5, 2011 - Legislation in 2009 authorized a pilot program whereby college and university campuses could voluntarily administer certain Cal Grant programs that are normally administered centrally by the Student Aid Commission (CSAC). The CSAC developed regulations for the pilot in time for the 2010-11 academic year. No campuses volunteered to participate, however, due to cumbersome program requirements. This report provides background on the existing delivery model for financial aid programs; describes recent proposals for alternative delivery models; and chronicles the development, implementation, and outcomes of the pilot program. The report concludes with our recommendation, drawing on numerous studies over the last two decades, to decentralize Cal Grants through a process that includes a planning period but no pilot phase.
December 1, 2011 - Presented to Joint Oversight Hearing: Education Mandates
November 30, 2011 - How Will the California Dream Act Affect Higher Education Costs? This is one of a series of issue briefs examining important questions about higher education funding in California. For more information on this topic, or to request other briefs from this series, contact the Legislative Analyst’s Office Higher Education section at (916) 319-8349, or visit our website at www.lao.ca.gov.
November 29, 2011 - Presented to: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Resources and Transportation
November 29, 2011 - Presented to: Assembly Transportation Committee
November 23, 2011 - Presented to Legislative Staff
November 17, 2011 - Presented to CASBO
November 17, 2011 - Presented to theAssembly Select Committee on Government Efficiency, Technology and Innovation and the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4 on State Administration
November 16, 2011 - We forecast that General Fund revenues and transfers in 2011-12 will be $3.7 billion below the level assumed in the June budget package. Such a shortfall could result in $2 billion of “trigger cuts” to various programs—including all of the “Tier 1” trigger cuts and three-fourths of the “Tier 2” cuts. (The Director of Finance will determine the actual amount of such cuts next month.) In 2011-12, we project that the state will have a $3 billion deficit, including the effects of these trigger cuts. In 2012-13, the state will face higher costs due to expiration of a number of temporary budget measures, an increase in Proposition 98 school costs under current law, the repayment of its Proposition 1A property tax loan, and other factors. We project a $10 billion operating shortfall (the difference between annual revenues and expenditures) in 2012-13. The $3 billion “carry-in” deficit from 2011-12 and the projected $10 billion operating shortfall mean that the Legislature and the Governor will need to address a $13 billion budget problem between now and the time that the state adopts a 2012-13 budget plan.