March 14, 2024 - This report, prepared at the request of the Legislature, makes recommendations primarily intended to increase transparency of operations and activities at county offices of education.
April 20, 2017 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education
February 22, 2013 - The Governor proposes to restructure the way the state allocates funding to school districts, charter schools, and county offices of education. We believe the Governor’s proposed new formulas would address many problems inherent in the state’s existing K-12 funding approach, and we recommend the Legislature adopt most components of the proposal. Unlike the current system, the proposed formulas would be simple and transparent, fund similar students similarly, and link funding to the cost of educating students. We believe the proposed approach could be improved, however, with some notable modifications. We suggest a number of specific changes to better align funding levels with anticipated costs, eliminate irrational funding differences across districts, simplify the formulas, and ensure important state priorities are addressed.
March 7, 2017 - Presented to: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
November 28, 2023 - This post summarizes overall Proposition 98 funding and K-12 education spending in the 2023-24 budget package. It is part of our Spending Plan series, which contains posts focused on each major sector of the state budget.
March 19, 2015 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education
March 10, 2015 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
March 22, 2018 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education
May 10, 2011 - In 2010-11, several County Offices of Education (COEs) reported difficulties balancing their court school budgets. Partly due to the concerns they raised, the Supplemental Report of the 2010-11 Budget Act directed our office to (1) assess whether county court schools have access to an appropriate array of categorical funds and (2) compare court school funding with funding rates for other alternative programs. Our review indicates that COEs, which allot funding to county court schools, generally have access to an appropriate array of categorical funds. Although access to categorical funds does not appear to be a problem, we did identify local cost pressures that could explain why some COEs are having difficulty balancing their court school budgets. While the state’s options for affecting these local decisions are limited, the state could take actions to reduce cost pressures on court schools. We also recommend the state standardize per-pupil funding rates across its alternative education funding system, which could also help COEs manage their court school budgets.
July 6, 2016 - What Are Alternative Schools and How Does the State Fund Them? This is one in a set of issue briefs examining important questions about education funding in California. For more, see our EdBasics page.
January 21, 2015 - Presented to: Senate Education Committee
February 18, 2015 - The Governor's budget includes $7.8 billion in Proposition 98 funding increases for schools and community colleges, including $5 billion for programmatic increases and $2.8 billion for retiring outstanding obligations. In this report, we recommend the Legislature improve some of the Governor's specific Proposition 98 proposals and reject others. Most notably, though we recommend the Legislature adopt the Governor's proposal to provide $500 million for adult education consortia, we recommend making various programmatic improvements, folding some of the Governor's other proposed workforce funding into the adult education program, and rejecting a couple of the Governor's career technical education proposals. We also recommend rethinking the Governor's Internet infrastructure proposal. Additionally, we have various recommendations relating to the Local Control Funding Formula, county offices of education, and education mandates.
February 23, 2023 - This brief provides an overview and analysis of the Governor's proposals to (1) provide ongoing funding for the highest-poverty schools and (2) make several changes to the system of transparency and accountability.
February 26, 2014 - Traditionally, the state has reimbursed local educational agencies (LEAs) for performing mandated activities by requiring them to submit detailed documentation of their costs. In recent years, the state has tried to simplify this process by creating two alternative reimbursement structures. The reasonable reimbursement methodology (RRM) provides reimbursement for a particular mandate using a formula developed in a quasi-judicial forum. The education mandates block grants (one for schools and one for community colleges) provide reimbursement for all active education mandates using a per-student rate established in the budget. Whereas the rarely used RRM process has been very adversarial (once involving litigation) and resulted in long reimbursement delays, nearly all LEAs have chosen to participate in the block grants. Given their overlapping purposes and the comparative advantages of the block grants, we recommend the Legislature repeal the RRM for education mandates.
November 4, 2013 - The LAO’s annual California Spending Plan publication details the 2013-14 budget package, including legislative and gubernatorial actions through October 2013. (Our office released a preliminary electronic version of the report on July 30, 2013 that summarized legislative and gubernatorial actions through that date.) Major features of the 2013-14 budget plan include $2.1 billion for a new formula to distribute funding amongst schools, a state-based plan to expand Medi-Cal to cover more than one million additional low-income adults, and selected program augmentations.
August 10, 1994 - Community schools are operated by County Offices of Education (COEs) as alternative instructional placements for about 18,500 pupils in grades 7-12 who, for various reasons, have not been successful in traditional school programs. Pupils referred to community schools by a county probation department-often termed "Type C" pupil-comprise about three-fourths of all community school pupils. The COEs receive a level of funding for Type C pupils, that is about $1,200 per pupil higher than the average level of funding received by school districts. The basis on which the state should grant the higher Type C funding level has been the subject of legislation and budget control language for several years.
July 29, 2013 - The LCFF, enacted as part of the 2013-14 budget package, establishes a new uniform funding formula and a new system of academic accountability. The formula replaces revenue limits and most categorical programs with uniform base rates for all pupils and provides significantly more funding for English learner and low-income students. The new system of academic accountability requires school districts and charter schools to publicly report how they will use the funds provided under the formula, as well as establishes a new system of support and intervention support for underperforming school districts and charter schools. While the transition to the LCFF begins in 2013-14, it will take several years before all provisions are fully implemented and districts and charter schools are fully funded to formula targets. Moreover, a number of key decisions have yet to be made regarding the implementation of the new fiscal and academic accountability provisions.